The notion of
Ulema, the learned, is usually misunderstood. It does not refer to scholars or
those who have information, and not even to those who have understanding, but
learning means that a person has been modified by his knowledge and experiences,
these have become integrated into his being and his behaviour has altered.
(These three levels of knowledge - information, understanding and being have
been discussed in other articles.)
Learning of all
kinds, including religion, takes time. This depends on the inherent capacities
of the person, the amount of effort he makes and his circumstances, what they
provide and their quantity and quality. The intelligent thing to do is to learn
from those who are already learned. This is because they have already got
together and organized what took the experiences and effort of many people of
many years.
But learning in
this way depends on the humility of the pupil and respect and obedience he
gives to the teacher. If knowledge is valued then those who have it are also
valued. But it is generally necessary for the teacher to demonstrate not only
that he has knowledge, but that he can apply it and also that he can convey or
teach it.
Islam requires
us to be responsible for our own salvation. We can only learn and modify
ourselves by our own efforts. But how can the seeker who does not yet have
knowledge (or else he would not be a seeker) judge what is true and who is a
genuine learned person. Generally speaking we do have some powers of
discrimination and some discernment of qualities and knowledge higher than our
own - we do recognize expertise. However, it is necessary to be neither
gullible nor sceptical, to question but not to criticize. Though the Learned
Teacher is revered he must not be worshipped. This discernment and
discrimination will also develop as we learn.
"O ye who believe! Ye have charge of your
own souls; he who errs can do you no hurt if ye are rightly guided: unto Allah
will you all return, and He will declare to you the truth of that which ye
do." 5:105
"And follow (or pursue) not that of which
thou hast no knowledge; verily, the hearing, the sight, and the heart, of all
of these it shall be asked (to give an account)." 17:36
"They take for lords rather than Allah
their rabbis and their monks, and the Messiah the son of Mary; but they were
bidden to worship only one Allah. There is no God but He. Be He glorified above
all that they join with Him!" 9:31
"On the day when their faces shall be
turned back into the fire, they shall say: O would that we had obeyed Allah and
obeyed the Messenger! And they shall say: O our Lord! Surely we obeyed our
leaders and our great men, so they led us astray from the path..."
33:66-67
According to Hadith:-
"This knowledge is religion, so consider
from whom you receive your religion."
"Knowledge is of two kinds: Knowledge in
the heart which is the beneficial type; and knowledge on the tongue which is
Allah's allegation against a human being."
"The calamity which affects knowledge is
forgetfulness, and wasting it is to convey it to those who are unworthy of
it."
"He who goes out in search of knowledge is
in Allah's path till he returns."
"If anyone acquires knowledge to use it in
vying with the learned or disputing with the foolish or to attract men's attention
to himself, Allah will bring him into hell."
"If anyone acquires knowledge of things by
which Allah's good pleasure is sought, but acquires it only to get some worldly
advantage, he will not experience the odour of paradise on the Day of
Resurrection."
"Among the readers of the Quran who are
most hateful to Allah are those who visit princes."
"Disputation about the Quran is
infidelity."
But be warned: -
"Let him who interprets the Quran without
knowledge come to his abode in Hell."
"Let him who interprets the Quran in the
light of his whims come to his abode in Hell."
"But, verily, many are lead astray (or
will lead you astray) by their lusts (or fancies) through ignorance. Verily,
thy Lord knows best the transgressors." 6:120 See also 4:27, 5:48, 5:77,
13:36-37, 18:29, 19:59, 20:16, 28:50 etc.
And here is
something relevant to our times:-
"Allah does not take away knowledge by
removing it from men, but takes it away by taking away the learned, so that
when He leaves no learned man, men will take ignorant men as leaders. Causes
will be presented to them and they will pass judgment without knowledge, erring
and leading others into error."
As human beings
are not perfect, but are required to climb the ladder of Perfection, they are
at various rungs or at various stages on the Straight Way. We must not, therefore,
expect the Learned to be perfect. The likelihood that they might be right about
something depends on what they have studied and learned and how much of their
subjectivity they have recognized and controlled. The likelihood of their being
right may be greater than that of those who have made no such study but it is
not certain. There have been differences of opinion between the Learned who
created the various Madhabs, the Systems of Law. But in the past they were not
dogmatic and did not always claim infallibility.
But the fact
that the Learned can make mistakes and that this leads to differences of
opinion which, by obtaining a following, divide the community can be seen in
the following cases:-
The Status of Ali
Islam became
divided after the death of the Prophet (saw) into two major sects. This appears
to be based on two different versions of what the Prophet said. According to
one Hadith, the Prophet left his followers as guidance two things:- the Quran
and his Sunna (the traditions or sayings and doings of the Prophet). Another
variation says that the two things that he left were the Quran and his
descendants, the Ahl-ul-Bayt. This includes his daughter and her husband Ali,
their sons Hassan and Hussein and their descendants.
The Sunni follow
the Sunna as far as the authenticity of the Hadith can be established. Each
individual is responsible for his own salvation and has to establish a direct
link with Allah without mediation of any priesthood or organized Church. As
Muhammad (saw) is the Last of the Prophets, in whom religious guidance was
completed, mankind can be regarded as being no longer in childhood, must now,
like adults, learn from their own mistakes. The Shiah, however, believe that
there must always be a guidance through a succession of Imams, beginning with
Ali. They tend to have a priesthood. This makes them something like the
Christianity, or more like the Hebrews who had a succession of Prophets. They
justify this attitude on the basis of a number of Hadith in which the Prophet
(saw) extolled the virtues of Ali and point to a number of verses in the Quran
which they say refer to Ali.
The counter
argument is:-
The Prophet also
extolled the virtues of his other companions such as Abu Bakr.
The verses in
the Quran were revealed in groups when appropriate circumstances arose. They
were also triggered off, as it were, by events which involved other than Ali,
but that did not mean that they referred to that particular event or just to
the people involved, but had a more general meaning.
The Quran
mentions Allah, Muhammad and other Authorities. It mentions the righteous and
the saints in general. It does not mention Ali by name. In other words, he is
not selected by the Quran as having a special status. Muslims have no problem
accepting him as one of the righteous or saintly.
To narrow down
the meaning of the Quran is like Idolatry, which is essentially is a narrow
down of ones allegiances to what is less than Allah. This special status is given
to Ali by using what is called Aql (intelligence). In a similar manner the
Christians used their Aql to come to the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus, the
Trinity and Vicarious atonement. But Aql according to the Quran has been
corrupted through personal desires and fantasies.
We are told that
those who love Allah should follow Muhammad (saw). This implies that Muslims
should follow his Sunna. Even if Ali followed the Sunna, there is no reason why
it should be done indirectly. Though Ali may have corrected others when they
departed from the Sunna, it is still the Sunna of Muhammad (saw).
In the Muslim
prayer, Salat, we ask for the blessings and grace of Allah on the people of
Muhammad. This means not the physical descendants of Muhammad (saw) but all those
who follow him. The Fatihah tells us about the Straight Path which is the path
of the Righteous. (It is not the path of Ali and his descendants. But he may be
one of the righteous who is on the path).
In the sitting
position the prayer is "All reverence, worship and sanctity are due to
Allah. Peace be on you O Prophet and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
Peace be on us all and on the righteous servants of Allah. I bear witness that
none is deserving of worship except Allah and I bear witness that Muhammad is
His servant and Messenger."
No where is this
prayer do we find any mention of Ali or his descendants or the household of the
Prophet, but there is mention of the righteous in general. Worship is due only
to Allah. Perhaps Shiahs have a different prayer. If that is so then we must
investigate how the difference came about. Who introduced Ali into it or
removed him.
Some Shiah’s
claim that the Kaaba in Mecca
was chosen as the Qibla, the Spiritual Centre for Muslims because Ali was born
there. One might as well say that it was made the Qibla because it contained
Idols. This is not the reason given by the Quran. The reason was that Abraham,
the Father of Monotheism built it.
Although most
Shiahs probably do not replace Muhammad with Ali or Allah with Ali, individuals
differ. Some individuals belonging to the Ismaeli sect do appear to think that
Ali is Allah. I may be mistaken about this but no one has, in fact, denied that
this is so.
The mistake of
substituting a particular instance for a general term occurs also in the
following:-
Mut’a (Temporary Marriages)
Investigation
shows the following:-
1. Mut'a was
allowed by the Prophet (saw) under certain circumstances. But we get this
information indirectly through others, not from the Quran or his own words. Nor
is it stated in any Hadith that the Prophet (saw) said that this permission was
in the Quran.
2. The argument
of supporters of Mut’a is that 4:24 uses the word "Istamta'a" which
is derived from mut'a, and this establishes that it refers to "temporary
marriage". This is a type of rationalization, Psedo-Aql, which should be
rejected. If one accepts this then wherever such words occur, we could say that
it means "temporary marriage" when in fact it means something like
"taking benefit, enjoyment or pleasure from".
A person could
say "there are parables in the Quran." A person, PseudoAql-1 could
then say, "This word contains the root 'able'. Another word with that root
is 'fable'. Therefore, this refers to the stories of Aesop." Another
person, PseudoAql-2 could say "No, no. The other word is 'cable' and that
refers to telegraphic messages, in particular to the one received by so and
so." And then the two, satisfied with their Aql and righteousness, can
quarrel and shoot each other.
This kind of rationalization
became widespread among Muslims and accounts for their degenerate state.
But, it must
admit that there seems to have been widespread agreement in the past according
to Hadith that 4:24 does also apply to Mut'a. This is Ijma (consensus) rather than
Aql. One cannot find anything which indicates that the Prophet (saw) thought
so.
3. There is
controversy in Hadith about whether it was abolished or not. It continued to be
practiced even after the death of the Prophet (saw). Omar rather than the Muhammad
(saw) is said to have forbidden it. The reason he gave was "The Messenger
of God permitted it at the time of necessity. Then people regained their life
of comfort...". According to some Hadith Ali and others objected to this
ban.
Ali is said to
have said: "If Umar had not banned Mut'a, no one but the wretched would
practice fornication." But it is also related that Ali said: "Verily
the Prophet of God banned the Mut'a of temporary marriage and the eating of the
meat of domesticated asses on the day of Khaibar."
This seems
ambiguous. Was eating meat alone banned on the day of Khaiber or was Mut’a
banned on that day also. This last makes no sense.
Ibn Sabra father
told him: I came upon the Prophet of God who was leaning against the Kaaba. He
said: "O People! I commanded you to seek enjoyment (Istimta'a) from these
women, but now God has forbidden that to you until the Day of Resurrection. So
if you have a temporary wife, let her go her way; and do not take back anything
of what you have given her." But no one else reported this though many
should have heard it. Shiahs reject this Hadith.
Ibn al-Arabi
regarded Mut'a remarkable because it was permitted at the beginning of Islam,
then forbidden at the Battle of Khaibar, then permitted again at the war of Autas.
Finally it was forbidden and remained forbidden. This seems to indicate that it
was permitted only under certain exceptional circumstances and is an exception
to the normal rules.
The four Sunni
schools of law agree that temporary marriage is invalid. The Shiah retain it on
the grounds that their Imams approved of it because it is Sunna.
4. The
permission for it was given under the following circumstance:-
(a) It is
narrated in Sahih Muslim that: Jabir Ibn Abdullah and Salama Ibn al-Akwa'
narrated: There came to us the proclaimer of Allah's Messenger (May peace be
upon him) and said: "Allah's Messenger has granted you to benefit yourself
(Istamta'u), i.e., to contract temporary marriage with women."
This is a report
by one person about the report of another person about a report of still
another that Mut'a was permitted by the Prophet (saw). It is not clear whether
the words "to contract temporary marriage with women." are the
interpretations of any one of these intermediaries. Nor do we know what circumstances
and regulations were associated with this.
(b) Both
al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated the following tradition from Abdullah Ibn Masud
who was another companion of the Prophet: “We used to participate in the holy
battles led by Allah's Apostle and we had nothing (no wives) with us. So we
said: Shall we get ourselves castrated? He forbade us (to castrate ourselves)
and then allowed us to marry women with a temporary contract (Mut'a) .
Here we have a
third hand report. It seems that Mut'a was allowed because of the stresses and
separations of war, and to prevent rape and self-mutilation. So mut'a was
allowed to prevent a greater evil.
(c) This Hadith
has been narrated on the authority of Isma'il with the same chain of
transmitters (but the words are): "We were young so we said: "O
Allah's Apostle! Should we not have ourselves castrated? But he (the narrator)
did NOT say we were on an expedition."
This contradicts
the above by removing the condition of war. There does not seem to be any good
reason why one should be believed rather than the other.
(d) A side
comment states that, based on the above authentic traditions, masturbation is
forbidden, otherwise the Prophet would have ordered his companions to
masturbate instead of contracting temporary marriage!
One wonders why
acts of lust and debauchery were forbidden by 4:24
(e) It is
claimed that verse 4:24 was revealed with three more words "So those of
them whom you enjoy TO AN APPOINTED TIME (Ila Ajal Musamma). This indicates
that the verse also refers to Mut'a. But we do not find it in the Quran. The
Prophet (saw) would surely have rectified this oversight if it was one, or he
left it out deliberately for some reason. I do not think it was in order to
confuse us, but rather because Mut'a was not a permanent instruction.
(f) Quran 70:29
states:- "And those who guard their chastity, except in the case of their
wives or those whom their right hands possess - for on these surely is no
blame, but he who seeks to go beyond this, these it is that transgress beyond
bounds - ."
This does not
mention mut'a. But as it is a Meccan verse before mut'a was introduced in
Medinah, it would seem that the instructions in it are modified by a Sunna. But
this is not allowed. That is probably why it is insisted that 4:24 includes
Mut'a. On the other hand it is also argued that Mut'a is a form of marriage and
is not excluded by 70:29. So it is a matter of definition which could be
changed.
If Mut'a is
allowed in Islam then we could have the following scenario:-
As economic,
political and educational development continues Muslim countries will
westernize. This means that there will be co-education to learn the same
professions and both men and women will go out to work. The sons and daughters
will choose their own partners and parents will have no say in the matter.
Couples will agree on temporary trial marriages. They may, if things work out,
convert these to permanent marriages later. There seems to be an advantage in
this. The taking of mistresses would also cease to be clandestine and open to
abuse. Otherwise they will drift from one partnership to another. And this may
well slide into full scale lechery and debauchery. There will not be many
permanent marriages, because when marriages are seen as temporary, no permanent
commitment will be made or responsibilities taken. The fate and welfare of the
children and the next generation becomes problematic.
Some people will
suppose that, in so far as sexual relationships are concerned, Mut’a makes
Islam very modern and advanced because such practices exist throughout Europe
and America.
Others regard this as a sign of degeneration. No doubt Muslims will continue to
disagree about all this.
A more
reasonable opinion, based on Aql, might be that the Hadith are mostly about the
times and conditions in which the Prophet (saw) found himself and with which he
had to deal. We can learn from these how to apply the Quran to changing
conditions but we cannot simply imitate or transfer things to our own times and
the future. There are certainly things in the Hadith, which have a more
Universal significance such as the Hadith Qudsi but these have to be
distinguished from the others.
In any
case, it has to be remembered that Mut'a is not an instruction and not an
obligation but something allowed. Things which were appropriate or permissible
at one time are not necessarily appropriate or permissible at another. If there
is an alternative only between two evils then doing the lesser evil is good.
Even stealing was permitted in case of great hunger. If the practice is
permitted because it comes from a wiser source and has advantages, then clearly
banning it would be an evil because that would create evil.