Invitation to Islam [Electronic resources] : A Survival Guide نسخه متنی

Setting
Goals for Spiritual Change and Achieving Them

"Mankind
was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and
warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in
matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book after the clear Signs
came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish
contumacy. Allah by His Grace guided the Believers to the Truth, concerning
that wherein they differed. For Allah guides whom He will to a path that is
straight." The
Qur'an, Al Baqara 2:213.

Once
we have established the spiritual profile, we are ready to set a goal and form
a strategy for attaining it. Each person will have to decide for him or herself
what the proper goal is. It is perhaps not enough to decide that the goal is
Islam. Islam ought to be clearly defined. I shall offer one such brief
description here, but it is possible to take another from someone with better
qualifications for defining Islam. I define Islam as follows: Islam is that
body of belief and practice which logically follows the act of reason which
takes place upon hearing the proclamation that there is no god but God. There
are several implications of this definition. First of all, it emphasizes that
Islam is fundamentally a reasoned response, rather than an emotional one.
Secondly, it presumes that all of Islam can be reasonably deduced from one
basic proclamation: There is no god but God. Thirdly, seeing the matter from
the negative view, any other approach than a logical and reasonable one is by
definition not Islamic, and any source of belief or practice other than the
proclamation that there is no god but God is also by definition not Islamic. In
sum, the final answer for any question of why this or that belief or practice
should be believed or practiced is the unicity of God. Any other reason for
believing or practicing such things is non-Islamic.

These
premises will exclude a good many missionary practices found among Christians
and Muslims. This matter should be understood clearly, because such practices
have been widely used without thinking about their foundations. Let us take two
examples, a Christian one and a so-called Muslim one. A feature of Christian
missionary work is to invite people to meetings where nearly all of the
activities appeal to the emotions. There is emotional, indeed, sensual music to
begin with. This creates a frame of mind open to accepting matters for their
emotional appeal rather than their cognitive content. Then there are sermons
which appeal to emotions. In older, traditional approaches there is an
emotional appeal to guilt, a feeling of having sinned. In modern approaches
there is always an appeal to love, often with the additional note that God
loves us even though we do not deserve it. Finally, there is the emotional
appeal that Jesus suffered a cruel death on the cross for me and you
personally, because he loved us so much. This act is supposed to make
everything right, and to accept this is faith. There is rarely a reasoned
explanation of why such a death is supposed to be necessary or how such a death
can set things right, but even when there is such an explanation, the reasons
put forth are nearly always allegorical rather than logical. Muslims who become
Christians are always caught by emotions.

The
second example is that of a modern Muslim approach. It is to make use of
science in a special way. In brief, passages from the Bible are taken to show
that the Bible is inconsistent with scientific fact, while other passages from
the Qur'an are taken to show that the Qur'an expresses scientific truths that
were unknown at the time of its writing. The conclusion to be drawn is that the
Qur'an is superior to the Bible, and therefore Islam is superior to
Christianity and shows evidence of divine origin. It must therefore be
accepted. What is good about this approach is that it uses reason. What is bad
about it is that the reasoning is false. First of all, Christians do the same
thing to show that the Bible is true and the Qur'an is false. Secondly, the
fact that scientific truths are expressed in the Qur'an, even though they were
unknown at the time of writing, only implies supernatural intervention. The
evangelical Christian will take this as evidence that the Qur'an was inspired
by Satan (istaghfiru Allah). Thirdly, the appeal assumes that scientific truth
is a criterion for judging the validity of the Qur'an. This is the area of
false reasoning. First of all, scientific truth is not absolute, but is
constantly under review. What is true today is shown tomorrow to be false. The
result of this type of Qur'anic interpretation will inevitably be the need to
revise. This whole process has been taken over from a Western point of view,
and is the very reason why Christianity got into trouble with science in the
first place. By accepting the Copernican theory of the universe to be reflected
in the Bible, the Church was forced to deny scientific evidence for a later
revision. This caused a conflict between religion and science which has not
been completely healed to the present day. Islam has generally been associated
with an enlightened, scientific approach, and thus has not naturally fallen
into this trap. But well-meaning people who wish to appear to young people who
have been trained in universities teaching Western-developed science have
engaged in this dangerous exercise. The result may be a temporary attraction to
Islam, but the results in the long run can only do to Islam what was done to
the detriment of Christianity in the Middle Ages. Scientific evidence is not a
criterion for judging the validity of the Qur'an. There can be no firm basis
for Islamic faith but the one already given: there is no god but God. Any other
basis, even a seemingly thoroughly scientific one, is false to Islam.

It is
my opinion that the basic goal must be to establish tawheed, the unicity of
God, on the basis of reason. Notice that the proclamation does not state that
God exists. It states that there is no other god but God. The existence of God
is an unending philosophical problem. The shahadat by-passes this difficulty.
It presents a binary equation, a negative and a positive, a working hypothesis.
Rather than asking whether God exists, we begin by stating All and Nothingness.
The logical implication is what we can call reality as an exclusive unicity.
This is philosophically much easier to maintain than the existence of God.

The
next step in logic is to note that an exclusive, unified reality cannot be
defined in parts. First of all, parts imply limitations or borders. But the
reality of our working hypothesis is limited only by Nothingness. Secondly,
parts imply internal limitations, which again is inconsistent with a
unicity. There are no parts.

The
next implication of this exclusive unicity is sovereignty. Considering that no
parts can be defined, this sovereignty must be impartial rather than partial.
Therefore, it is perfectly just, rather than arbitrary. Notice how an emotional
response to the concept of sovereignty will lead us to conclude arbitrariness
as evidence of sovereignty itself. As we relate emotionally to the events
around us, we will be drawn to classify them as pleasurable or painful, and
from this draw the inference that some events are good and others bad.
Beginning with the idea that God is sovereign, we will conclude that since He
is sovereign over both good and bad, He is therefore arbitrary. We shall see
this as a crowning evidence of sovereignty, and being blinded by our emotions,
fail to realize that the argument is inconsistent with the fact that there are
no parts and there is therefore no impartiality.

Having
established that unicity inevitably implies justice, we are faced with the
question of whether or not human beings can know justice. It would be not only
illogical but an insanity to claim that human capacity can attain justice. No
matter how much knowledge we have as humans, we can never come to the point
that we are absolutely certain that we possess all knowledge relevant to a
particular matter. A reasoned evaluation of human experience can come to only
one conclusion: human beings are incapable of coming to a knowledge of what is
right and wrong. We are capable of coming to the conclusion of reality as a
unicity and the implication of impartiality or justice, but we do not have the
capacity, if only because of the possible limitations on knowledge, of
determining what is right and what is wrong. Why then do we propose to know
what is right and wrong, even though it is clear that this is a human
impossibility? There are many reasons, all arising from our psychological,
social, and physical conditions. We experience the need to know what is right
and wrong and at the same time the incapacity of doing so.

There
are various ways of reacting to this situation. Having despaired of a coherent
understanding of reality, some come to the conclusion that there is no right
nor wrong. The best possible society in that case is the society in which the
greatest number of people can experience the greatest amount of pleasure at the
least possible expense of pain to others. The individual process involves the egotistical
approach to get all pleasure for oneself at the expense of all others, that is,
to become a despot over the rest of oppressed humanity. As many individuals
strive toward that goal, they compress into a conformist, honey-comb society,
forming an elite. To the extent necessary to preserve their position, they will
alleviate the pain of those who are excluded from the elite. This is basically
what we see around us. All of the liberal views of human rights, sharing of
resources, and environmental concerns are fundamentally the products of this
viewpoint, that there is no coherent reality and consequently no right nor
wrong. It goes without saying that economic, political and social
competitiveness are the result of the same outlook.

Taken
from a logical perspective, the implication of justice in reality must come to
the conclusion that human beings may, despite their inherent incapacity to
determine right and wrong, still come to know right from wrong. The process of
coming to know right from wrong in this view is what we call revelation. It is
logically deduced in principle from justice and consequently from unicity. We
find the process of revelation in two categories, which are not necessarily
mutually exclusive. The first is revelation through verbally expressible means,
which we call prophecy. The second is application of that verbal revelation by
extra-verbal means in particular situations, which we call divine guidance. The
final step of logic is that knowing through revelation what is right and wrong, human beings are accountable for what they
do, whether right or wrong. We call this the day of judgment.

We
noted in the last lecture that "the establishment of a spiritual profile is a
dynamic process involving the individual in several types of influencing
circumstances. Religious authorities, social and religious peers, and
individual characteristics integrate in an individual's experience to produce
and reinforce a religious identity, a
belief system, and a pattern of behavior." This is also true of the changing or
re-establishment of a spiritual profile. Despite the logical sequence that we
have just established, the true factors which come into play are other ones.
They are not necessarily logical, and yet they generally play the most important
roles in the lives of all of us. The particular challenge in both one's own
life and in relationship to others is how to relate the rational necessity of
Islam with the sociological and psychological realities with which we live. How
can we escape the unnoticed determinants and function in terms of that rational
necessity?

This
question is a practical one as much as a philosophical one. This is where
rational thought and practical existence intersect. The answer implicit in this
study at this point in that one should make a conscious decision to believe and
practice only what can be seen to derive from tawheed, or the unicity of God.
This answer lies as the end of a philosophical treatment of the matter and at
the head of a practical one.

The
facile response is that Islamic practice reinforces the experiential awareness
of tawheed. As such it in practice and reality does replace the determining
influences about us, both the positive ones and the negative ones. It
reinforces right-mindedness by going over the positive influences, such as the
verdicts of a mujtaheed or Islamic scholar, the opinions of Muslim peers, the
pressures of Muslim family members, and the weight of a personal psychology
already formed to conform to Islamic life. It counteracts negative influences,
such as the contact with people of other faiths or non-faiths who express
non-Islamic ideas and behave in non-Islamic ways.

This
being true, it is possible to suggest that Islamic acts are in themselves rich
tools for propagation. Contact with a non-Muslim may give the opportunity of
introducing him or her into specifically Islamic acts. While forming a close
relationship with such a person, it is possible to invite such a one to share
in an Islamic meal (at which time the concept of halal can be introduced, the
avoidance of alcoholic beverages, etc.), to share in the experience of fasting
during Ramadhan, and eventually to share in the experience of prayer in
prostration. Christian propagation often works through friendship, and this can
be turned in favor of Islam. Christians are advised to penetrate Muslim
societies in order to bring their faith to Muslims, but in so doing, they
become susceptible to Islamic spirituality.

The
same method can be turned on secularized people as well, or on those of other
religious traditions. The primary vehicle of propagation at this point is the
Islamic act itself rather than discussion and argumentation. In many cases the
first difficulty to be overcome is fear of Islam, and the proximity of an
Islamic act can raise the heart-rate and the galvanic skin response of a
non-Muslim. Exposure to Islamic acts in contexts of no violence is the best
form of da'wa or invitation to Islam. This can be enhanced by participating in
neutral activities in such a way that with growing familiarity the fear of
Islam will decline and the influence of the Islamic actions will grow.

If at
all possible, it is better to get people to read literature than to engage in
arguments. The problem is that most Islamic literature, for various reasons,
does not appeal to a Western audience. Part of the reason for this is that
Islam generally appeals to reason, whereas Westerners relate best to advertizement,
especially advertizement which leaves them unaware of the fact that they are
making decisions. But part of the reason is also failure to evaluate the
spiritual type of one's audience and take this into account in writing. Perhaps
one of the best ways of reaching some people is through a challenge to read a
translation of the Qur'an from beginning to end. It is my experience that those
who oppose the Qur'an have never actually read it. They have only searched
through portions of it, looking for specific things. An actual reading of the
Qur'an from beginning to end is an impressive experience. This is not limited
to the cultivated and educated. There are uneducated people who have embraced
Islam after reading even poor and biased translations of the Qur'an.

In
the way of literature, the Bible is a largely untapped source. Without denying
the allegations of scholars that the Bible is corrupted in a number of ways, it
can still be used effectively in support of Islam. It supports Islam far better
than it supports any of the various forms of Christianity, and Christians are
forced to use it in support of their own faith. Muslims are in a far better
position. The Bible is effective with people of all kinds. Nearly everyone
believes that the Bible supports Christianity. Those who have left the practice
of Christianity are often stimulated to a reawakened interest in the Bible when
they realize that the Bible actually supports Islam instead. According to the
Qur'an, one of the major uses of the Bible is in witness to the validity of the
Qur'an. A Muslim must only take care
not to give the impression that Islamic law is based on the Bible text, since
no school of Islamic jurisprudence uses the Bible in that way.

Many
people are more susceptible to brief articles than to books. It is therefore
necessary to provide answers to their questions with these, despite the fact
that many of them are deficient.

The
more rational Islamic approach often causes difficulty in discussing issues
with others. The normal situation is that a Muslim will bring forward a matter
armed with a reason. The response will be an irrational denial or a sentence
that turns on a completely different issue. The best way of dealing with this
is to repeat the rational argument, and then leave the matter. One can always
let the other have the last word. For some time the Christian will feel that he
or she is getting the best of the argument in that way, and this will result in
a situation in which he or she might be drawn into accepting rational thinking.
For the most part Christians rely on repetition of a statement rather that
rational argument. Constant repetition of a false statement wears down the
hearer to the point that eventually he will accept it, even without supporting
rational arguments. This is the major Christian means of communication. The
same weapon can be turned on the Christian, and in a Muslim's mouth may be even
more effective, since it has reason to reinforce it.

In
dealing with non-Muslims, Christian or otherwise, one has to be aware of their
use of illicit devices. Attempts at mental manipulation are almost universal.
Christian music often contains subliminal messages which by-pass the conscious
mental processes and influence decision-making. This is in addition to the highly
charged emotionalism and even sensualism in their music. In recent years
Christians have begun dealing in neuro-linguistic programming, which is a form
of hypnosis by which people attempt to control others. This can be identified
generally by the practice of imitating gestures of the person they are trying
to control, by their repetition of phrases taken from the person's speech, and
by their introduction into the conversation of irrational, unrelated topics and
stories without a point.

It is good to begin
a contact by showing an interest in the beliefs of the person in question.
People are generally more interested in answering questions about their own
beliefs than they are in hearing about yours. Of course it is not always
possible to ask such questions, and many people, especially those largely
disconnected from the traditional religions, consider their spiritual life to
be a private matter. That possibility must always be taken into consideration.
But showing at least an openness to such matters is often a good way to start,
and it is actually necessary in order to make an evaluation of that person's
spiritual type. Most people in Europe have a Christian background, with the
exception of certain parts of some large cities, where other traditions are better
represented. But among all of these, only a small percentage practice
traditional religions. All of them, however, are interested in some form of
spirituality, although they may not call it by that name. Once that interest is
identified, it provides a point of contact at which the Islamic message can
penetrate.

At this point, we
can make a summary of goals and means of achieving them. The goal is to change
the spirituality of an individual toward Islam, which is defined as a system of
belief and practice derived from a rational understanding of tawheed, or the
unicity of God. The means of doing so is first of all to use reason in the form
of literature and discussion to over-ride the negative social and religious
influences to which the person may be susceptible. The second means of doing so
is to make Islamic acts prominent and to get non-Muslims to be as closely as
possible associated with them to the point first of losing their fear, and then
through familiarity to find in them the source of an awareness of the unicity
of God. These two approaches correspond in type to the two forms of revelation,
prophecy (or verbal revelation) and divine guidance (active application). What
we are actually suggesting here as a form of da'wa or invitation to Islam is that
the Muslim take on in a small sense the role of prophet and divine guide toward
those to whom da'wa is being extended. The purpose of da'wa is to get the
message of revelation across. God Himself chose for that prophecy and divine
guidance. We can do no better than to apply the same principles.

Task Checklist
of Goals

The following
checklist should be filled out for each person. On the left side there is a
list of basic Islamic beliefs and practices. There is room for additional ones
at the bottom. Each practice should be evaluated for the beginning level of
acceptance (1=rejects completely; 2=doubts; 3=does not consider important;
4=considers valid for some people; 5=believes but does not practice; 6=believes
and practices). Work should be done for each point separately, giving the date
when you began to present the matter and the date when each point was accepted.
In the column of notes on progress, reevaluation can be made periodically using
the scale of 1-6, to document change.