Asgment Jol

8/18/2019 Asgment Jol

1/15

There is hardly any difference among people of today that the world is facing a crisis asour civilization is being threatened. Some say that the problem is economic, social,technical or political which only emphasizing the symptoms of the problem rather thanthe real causes. We tried to indicate last time that at the heart of all of these problems

is basically a moral crisis. We also indicated that ethics and morality can either besecular or religious. The last program focused on secular morality and how it addressessome of the issues that are faced in ethical systems.

The points covered were mainly what is the ultimate good one should strive for, whatare the sources of knowledge for good and evil, whom has the right to sanction themoral or ethical code and finally what motivates the individual internally to follow themoral code. The thrust of the program was a discussion and critique of how secular morality answers these questions. For eample one answer was that happiness is theultimate good one should strive for. Some said that perfection and others said that dutyfor the sake of duty is ultimate good. Sources of knowledge of good and evil were

suggested to include human eperience or empiricism, intuition, inspiration or reason. !gain in terms of sanctions and motives for morality there are various eplanationsgiven as people may do it in pursuit of happiness, perfection or because of political or social pressure.

"n our basic critique of how secular morality answers these questions first of all weindicated that there is lack of clarity in defining what eactly is meant by happiness. Theanswer to any given question is never the same, thus there is no clear stable ethicalmoral system in the secular system. The main problem is that the secular system triesto establish a system completely separate from #od which is probably the heart of theproblem. $asically the difference between the two is that religious morality is based on

the belief in #od as the creator of the universe and second in the belief in the hereafter.The problem here is that the fundamentals of religious morality is not all the same for allreligions.

%ssentially a &uslim believes in absolute perfection, sovereignty and lordship of #od as

he is the only creator and sustainer of this universe. Some of the ma'or divine attributes

of #od include things like absolute perfection, absolute life, absolute knowledge,

absolute power, absolute mercy and absolute 'ustice. " would also like to indicate that

the emphasis in "slam on the absolute transcendence and perfection of #od goes hand

in hand with the emphasis on #od as a personal #od. This is important in relating to

some of the philosophical ideas about #od being so transcendent that (e is so different

and removed from this universe. &any philosophers like )lato and !ristotle believe in

the (ellenistic philosophy which believes that #od is impersonal. They believe that (e

is identical with the world or totally separate from it. This is not the view held by

&uslims, *ews and +hristians. The question of #od as a personal #od in "slam is a

relationship which is a loving conscious submission to the will of #od. The question of

closeness is reflected very succinctly in the uran -/0123 where #od says 4We are


2/15

nearer to him than -his3 'ugular vein.5 "n "slam we have both the absolute power and

transcendence of #od alongside (is direct relationship with mankind.

When we talk about religious morality we are talking about ultimate ideal, supreme goodand the highest model for human conduct. This is not a ma'or problem in "slam

because of the &uslim belief in one supreme and universal #od whose divine attributesare not shared by any of his creators which automatically leads us to a moral andethical system which is completely stable. This is the only plausible eplanation about#od which is consistent with the scientific mind of today.

!ny person whom observes the phenomena in nature can see that there are certainpermanent laws that the universe doesn6t work in a hap hazard way and there isdefinitely coordination between the different components of this universe. This in itself leads to the conclusion that there must be a single and uniform will behind creation.

Some people like to refer to this as the laws of nature, but as a believer one should putit as the laws that #od created in nature. "f we look at this issue using fair mindedscientific deductions of the universe we will come to the conclusion that there is a singlewill and creator behind it all. "f we compare this to polytheism we run into difficulties.$y definition polytheism believes in more than one ultimate will or sovereign which cannot be. The uran makes it very clear when it says -710773 4"f there were, in theheavens and the earth, other gods besides !llah, there would have been confusion inboth85 )olytheism covers all beliefs in more than one god, creators sharing some or allof #od6s divine attributes or the belief in minor gods who might intercede between manand #od.

The etent of difference between "slamic monotheism and the concept of #od asdepicted in the $ible is not as large as the difference between "slamic monotheism andother forms of polytheism which are totally re'ected on the part of the &uslim. There isa very common error that is repeated by authors that write about "slam that gives theimpression that the "slamic concept of monotheism is simply a kind of etension or based on the $iblical concept of #od.

There are many scholars -non9&uslim3 who have pointed out that among the early"sraelites the conception of #od was of a sort of supper human being. "f we look at the

book of #enesis it describes #od as needing rest after (e created the heavens andearth and that (e walked in the #arden and that !dam and %ve heard the sound of hisfeet. Sometimes (e was depicted as a #od who is 'ealous of the power of humans likein the famous story of $abble and when the humans began to build the tower of $abble#od said that they were becoming very smart and that is why (e changed the languageof some of them which his the eplanation of having different languages in the $ible. "nother places #od is depicted as someone who makes mistakes and of people correcting(im. &any times in the $ible the term #od of "srael is used giving the impression that


3/15

(e is more of a tribal #od. When we see these descriptions we can see the 'ustificationof the scholars who said that #od was viewed more as a super human which doesn6tmatch with the transcendence of #od and his total freedom from these human defects.

!lso, to contrast the idea that (e is only #od of "srael we find that the first chapter in theuran says 4:ord of the universe5 and the last chapter in the uran describes #od as

4:ord of mankind5 not of !rabs, &uslims, or any other group but of all of humanity. "nbetween the first and last chapter of the uran it is consistent that #od is of the wholeof mankind and not a specific group of people. We can conclude that the "slamicconcept of monotheism is definitely far from being a replica of what is found in the $ible.

"n the ;ew Testament we find certain passages are attributed to )rophet *esus -)$


4/15

or eample, eastern religions look at the pleasures of this life as something that passes

which is common in other religions but their conclusion is different. They conclude from

this that because they are passing pleasures there is no sense to try to get anything in

this universe. Their attitude is that the best thing to do in this life is to renounce the

body, physical eistence, and to focus on purifying the soul. Saving their soul means

getting it out of the shackles of material and leading a life of meditation becomes their

ideal way of living. This is not limited to eastern religions as we find in a book by %.F.

Scott called The Ethical Teachings of Jesus he indicates that some of the early

+hristians -of the first, second and third century3 tended to uphold similar views that

somehow the kingdom of #od is only going to take place in the future and that

denouncing this world would be an act of piety.

"slam teaches that the belief in the hereafter should not mean in any sense neglect of

this life. The uran says in -7>0??3 when addressing arun, one of the contemporaries

of &oses, 4but seek, with the -wealth3 which !llah has bestowed on thee, the (ome of

the (ereafter, nor forget thy portion in this world.5 "slam firmly holds the belief in life in

the hereafter but ultimate righteousness is not to renounce this world but rather that we

should coordinate this life with the life hereafter. @ne aspect of preparing for life

hereafter is to accumulate credit for salvation by struggling on this earth to achieve

'ustice right here on earth. Aes the kingdom of #od is partly in the hereafter but the

other part is right here.

The first thing we discussed was the difference between religious and secular morality.We said that in religious morality covers basic sub'ects like the concept of #od, belief inthe hereafter, nature of the human beings and a person6s role on earth. "n regards to

the concept of #od we saw how "slam insists on pure and perfect monotheism andre'ects the philosophical notion of #od as being an impersonal being that is so high or great that (e is totally separate from the universe or that he is totally identical with it.

We indicated also that &uslims believe in #od as a personal #od. We also said that"slam re'ects the polytheistic notion of #od, the belief in other gods beside #od or minor gods, which is contradictory to logic and science. The universe is ruled by one ultimatewill as there can be no two conflicting powers.

Third we said that when we compare "slamic monotheism with the concept of #od inthe $ible -in both The @ld and ;ew Testaments3 we find that there are differences. "n

The @ld Testament we are left with the impression that #od was perceived to be asupper human as (e is described as someone who walks and needs rest after havingcreated the heavens and earth and in The ;ew Testament it addresses the necessity of blood sacrifice in order for #od in order for #od to accept mankind. Similarly we haveindicated that the importance of this pure consistent belief in #od is essential andrelated to the ethical outlook of the believer."n a similar way we discussed the belief inthe hereafter. We said that "slam does not accept the notion of renouncing this world in


5/15

order to earn the hereafter and that both should be coordinated and harmonized inorder for the person to fulfill his duty on earth.

The first common view that addresses human nature views the human as an evolvinganimal. "n this view the basic nature of the human is materialistic that had no divine

plan for the creation of the human on earth. The second view is that the human is a

spiritual being. The soul is over emphasized in this view while the body is nothing more

than an illusion that should be neglected or tortured in order to free the soul from the

shackles of materialism. ! third approach regards the human as an intellectual being

with an over emphasis on the intellectual qualities of the human. This view regards

intellect as the master of everything and as the ultimate 'udge over revelation. Fourthly,

there is the view that a human is a sinful being. Sin in this case is essential in human

eistence, as mankind inherited sin and is desperately looking for salvation. Some

scholars refer to the writings of )aul who regarded sin as a universal tendency andhuman beings as people who are enslaved by their flesh6s nature. "n this view the

wages of sin is death and salvation is not through the law but only through blood

sacrifice.

First of all "slam re'ects the notion of regarding the human as an animal and that there isno divine plan behind creation. "n the uran in -B0BC3 4Derily, all things have Wecreated in proportion and measure.5 ! similar verse appears in -7073 4(e who createdall things, and ordered them in due proportions.5 Thus the notion of hap9hazardeistence is alien to the mind of a &uslim. The notion of regarding the human as an

animal is described in the uran as very erroneous as found in the uran in -B?01734those who re'ect !llah will en'oy -this world3 and eat as cattle eatE and the Fire will betheir abode.5 "n -?01?>3 it talks about those who over emphasize material eistence andforget about the eistence of the soul and how they are less guided than animalsbecause animals don6t have the spirituality and knowledge that we have.

"n regards to the human only being a spiritual being, we do believe in the soul, but theproblem again is the over emphasis of the spiritual aspect at the epense of the materialaspect. !n eample would be torturing the body because of the belief that the salvationof the soul is achieved by neglecting the body. This belief leads to celibacy andmonasticism which goes against human nature. There are a few people who can take

the discipline of this highly saintly type of behavior which can not be epected fromaverage people. !lso civilization would not be able to perpetuate itself. @nce peopleare pushed against their natural needs which are partly physical then they are alsobeing pushed to discard the law.

"f we look at the point that views the human as an intellectual being, we can see thatintellect is very useful but can be deficient. There are lots of sources of knowledge,intellect is a very important one but is not all. When we talk about intellect whose


6/15

intellect are we talking about= o we follow my intellect, your intellect, his intellect or her intellect= There is always a lack of an ultimate standard of right or wrong and assuch to over emphasize intellect is to worship it and forget that there are other sourcesof knowledge.

The fourth item regards the human essentially as a sinful being which contradicts with"slamic teachings which does not accept any notion of original sin. "slam does notregard the human as a falling being. &ankind is actually regarded as a special creaturewho is trying to rise above his or her shortcomings and to overcome the weaknessesthat might be inherent in his or her creation. !gain the whole notion of original sin is notinline with the "slamic idea of mankind.

There is no dispute that the story of !dam and %ve appears in the uran however theway it is interpreted is quite different. When the uran talks about the story of !damand %ve it does not present only as the story of the first man and woman but rather itdepicts the ethical eperience of !dam and %ve as well as every other human being.

%ach human being has within himself the spirit of #od but is also created from matter.(ow a person fulfills his spiritual aspiration and yearning with the limitations of thephysical body is in itself the eperience that !dam and %ve have gone through. Thephysical part of our eistence is what tempts us to disobey #od and our spirituality pullsus out of this. We fall make mistakes and our spirit is what helps us recover or overcome this. "n addition to this when the uran speaks about the story of !dam and%ve it addresses the fact that they committed their mistake, realizing their mistake,repenting and praying sincerely to #od who forgave both of them. !n eample of this isfound in the uran in -70G?3. There was no original sin as #od who created !dam and%ve knew their weaknesses, (e know that they could not help it at times so (e forgavethem when they showed a sincere attitude and as such it ended there. The uran is

very clear that sin can not be inherited and no soul can carry the burden of another soulor passed on to a future generation. "n "slam every child is born pure 'ust like a whitecloth. To say that a person is born with tendencies towards sin is a different issue thansaying that someone comes into this world a sinful person. The other thing is thathuman eistence on earth is not a punishment for what is so called original sin becausethere is no original sin.

:ife on earth was planned by #od as we were destined to live on earth. $efore thehuman being was created #od was telling the angels that (e is going to create trusteesthat will live on earth. So what happened with !dam and %ve was 'ust a lesson theyhad to go through before coming to earth.

So what do we do if we as humans have a tendency to sin= The "slamic approach isvery simple and direct. First acknowledge the sin, feel sorry about it, earnestly pray for forgiveness and have the determination not to fall into it again and if the sin involves theright of another person the fourth condition would be to return whatever was taken fromthem or to ask them for their forgiveness. "n a simple and direct approach the uransays -G01G3 4!nd those who, having done something to be ashamed of, or wrongedtheir own souls, earnestly bring !llah to mind, and ask for forgiveness for their sins,9 and


7/15

who can forgive sins ecept !llah.9 and are never obstinate in persisting knowingly in-the wrong3 they have done.5 !nother eample is found in -11011B3 4For those things,that are good remove those that are evil.5 "n a very moving citation in -7/0G73 4$ut,without doubt, " am -also3 (e that forgives again and again, to those who repent,believe, and do right, who,9 in fine, are ready to receive true guidance.5 This is a very

simple direct approach of sin and the redemption of sin.

! human being is regarded by "slam as the trustee of #od. "n the uran in -70G/34$ehold, thy :ord said to the angels0 4" will create a vicegerent on earth.5 They said04Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood=9 whilst wedo celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy -name3=5 (e said0 4" know what ye knownot.5 (ere the term khalifah, the trustee of #od, was very specifically mentioned as theessence of the human being. "n a very similar citation in -20123 it says 4it is (e Whohath made you -(is3 agents, inheritors of the earth.5 This does not mean that #odneeds our help but rather it shows the dignity that #od has endowed on mankind. Theessence of the khilafah starts with the notion that the human being is regarded as the

crown of creation as shown in the uran and even !ngels were commanded to bowdown in respect to man kind. The uran also says in -1?0?/3 4We have honored thechildren of !dam.5

The secret for the honoring of mankind is that only the human being has to integrateand harmonize the various components of his eistence by utilizing his physical body,intellect and soul. We find that the uran describes the human as having been createdfrom clay, the material part, in chapter two it talks about #od teaching mankind hisintellect, and in -107C3 it talks about having the spirit of #od within him and that #odbreathed into mankind of (is spirit.

The reason why human beings are dignified is that they have free choice, and thepotential for good and evil. "n -C/01/3 the uran states clearly that #od has 4shown himthe two highways5 of truth and falsehood. "n -?20G3 it says 4We showed him the Way0whether he be grateful or ungrateful -rests on his will3.5 "n -1>07C3 #od gives the humanbeing the choice when it says 4HThe truth is from your :ordH0 :et him who will believe,and let him who will, re'ect -it35 and each will deal with the consequences of their actions.

The fourth point of why a human is the trustee is the notion of responsibility.Iesponsibility goes side by side with freedom of choice. First of all, in the uran in-?0G23 it says 4oes man think that he will be left uncontrolled, -without purpose3=5Thus if there is responsibility and purpose on earth, it follows that one will be questionedabout this responsibly. !nother verse in the uran in -3 says 4id ye then think that Wehad created you in 'est, and that ye would not be brought back to


8/15

few days in -70>/3 4!nd they say0 4The Fire shall not touch us but for a few numbereddays05 Say0 4(ave ye taken a promise from !llah, for (e never breaks (is promise= or is it that ye say of !llah what ye do not know=5 !ddressing the &uslims themselves inorder to avoid the attitude of spiritual arrogance the uran says in -B017G3 4;ot your desires, nor those of the )eople of the $ook -can prevail30 whoever works evil, will be

requited accordingly. ;or will he find, besides !llah, any protector or helper.5 "t isessential when we talk about the trusteeship of mankind on earth that we realize that itis a big 'ob and we will be held responsible for our deeds.

The foundation of any ethical system raises the question of how a person views their own nature. We started by eploring and critiquing some of the common views of human nature. The first view was that man evolved from animals. We said that thisbasically denies the eistence of any purpose in life or that there is a divine plan thatmakes humans distinct. The net view over emphasizes the spirituality of mankind-which is important but sometimes overdone3. This view leads to denunciation of thisworld and going to the etreme that torturing the body is a virtue which will save the

soul. The third view over emphasizes the intellectual aspect of human nature whichleads to the worship of the mind and overlooking the fact that as humans we needsomething more than the intellect, we need something that is divine. The fourth viewsees the human as a sinful being. We sais that this blows sin out of proportion andleads to a kind of pessimistic view of life as if the person is constantly haunted by sin.We indicated that as far as "slam is concerned even though the story of !dam and %veappears in the uran there is no implication of original sin, or that the sin is inherited bythe descendents of !dam and %ve as #od who created them knew their weakness andnature as humans and forgave them when they repented. We also discussed the notionof repentance for sin in "slam.

Then we discussed the "slamic point of view on human nature. "t is summarized in onesentence as human nature for the &uslim is that #od has made us (is trustees onearth. First of all mankind is made as the crown of all other creations and the uranindicates that #od breathed into humans of his soulJspirit. Thus each one of us has thespirit of #od within him which makes us quite distinct from other beings. This viewleads to a balanced outlook on human nature without over emphasizing one element or the other as humans are made of matter, intellect and spirit. ! result of this dual natureof mankind having the spirit of #od which is from the highest and the fleshy nature fromthe lowest implies that humans have the freedom of choice and that mankind is a freeagent. With freedom of choice comes responsibility for ones deeds and whether or notthey follow divine guidance, on the ay of *udgment.

There are four basic areas under effectE the first one is self acceptance. "f the humanbeing realizes his or her nature and is quite realistic about weaknesses and strengthsthen the person would not be in a situation where he is not totally haunted by weaknessand sin nor too arrogant and haughty about his strengths.

The second point is that as trustees we have limits in the way we should behave whichare set be (e who gave us this trust. For eample "slam considers suicide as a moral


9/15

crime because "slam doesn6t accept the argument that the human body is ours and wecan do with it what we want. "n "slam the body is a trust in our hands which is given tous by #od and should not be abused, killed or destroyed but to be used to fulfill our mission on earth. $y the same token destruction of the environment or unwise use of itis morally wrong because it is not ours but rather a trust. We do not have the right to

misuse personal property and things we own, even though "slam recognizes individualownership it is all still a trust.

$oth acceptance and limits of trusteeship lead the individual to have a view of life whichis integrated as all aspects of life are put together. "n "slam there is no false distinctionof those people who are called religious because of their focus on the spiritual aspectsof life and those who are secularists whose concern are the non9spiritual aspects asthey should all be integrated. This way a person doesn6t waist time dividing life intodifferent 'urisdictions or spheres and would not get confused with the different rules thatapply to each area.

The fourth point is that with this kind of understanding of human nature life is regardedas a test. "t appears in the uran that life on earth is not 'ust something that we gothrough without a particular mission or sense of purpose. The nobility and dignity of thehuman race lies in the capability of humans to overcome their weakness andshortcomings and to do their best to fulfill the mission that is entrusted in them. !neample from the uran is in -2?01973 4$lessed be (e in Whose hands is ominionE and(e over all things hath )owerE (e Who created eath and :ife, that (e may try whichof you is best in deed0 and (e is the %alted in &ight, @ft9Forgiving.5 :ife itself is a testand the materials, intellectual or spiritual capabilities that we have are simply tools toaccomplish this particular mission. This kind of view enriches life as it provides for amore dynamic view and demands more active participation morally speaking on the part

of the human in righting the wrong and in struggling to achieve peace and social 'ustice. This is part and partial of morality as morality is not based on individualisticsalvation. !s a great scholar put it one of the great contributions of "slam to moraltheory is the socialization of moral laws and that moral law is not individual piety butrather individual piety and the struggle within society to do the right and forbid the evil.

The ethical outlook of the individual is not only connected to the view of nature but alsoto how a person views the world. &ore specifically "slam regards the universe as a toolaiding human kind to perform its function as trusteeship of #od on earth. This kind of view definitely contrasts other views of human nature which regard nature as anadversary to mankind. "n other words the view that "slam presents as an alternative tothe common view is that the entire universe is created to be subservient to mankind infulfilling their duty. This is why a &uslim would not use the terms victory over natureand subduing nature which give the impression that nature is an enemy. To a &uslimthe universe is a friend and a person should never feel out of place because the uranitself says that #od created the universe to be subservient and of use to mankind. Wealso find that the uran documents this in -1201B3 where it talks about #od making theoceans subservient to mankind. "n -707C3 it talks about #od creating the entire earth for human use.


10/15

)eople in the past and even after "slam came believed that if one studies the solar system or tries to eplore space that they might be encroaching on the powers of #odbut 1B// years ago the uran put it clearly in -B01G3 that not only is the entire earthcreated for the benefit of mankind but also #od had made subservient all that in theskies or heavens. This gives mankind permission to eplore and harness the powers of

nature. The uran even refers to the phenomena found in nature and that we arerequired -a moral obligation3 by virtue of belief to ponder on these creations as is foundin -?01>3 4o they see nothing in the government of the heavens and the earth and allthat !llah hath created=5 "t is quite clear that harnessing these natural resources is partand partial of the trusteeship and that the view of the &uslim of the world is quite open.

Worship is not mere ritual. When a &uslim use the term worship it does not imply theperformance of certain rituals, rights or acts of piety or devotion to #od. "n "slam anyactivity is a potential act of worship as long as two conditions are present, one that theintention behind the activity is wholesome and pure and second it should be done withinthe limits prescribed by #od. ! person6s whole life can be a constant and continues act

of worship. ! person6s learning, school, office, factory, shop and even recreation can allbe acts of worship. The uran says in -?0G13 4Say0 Who hath forbidden the beautiful-gifts3 of !llah, which (e hath produced for (is servants, and the things, clean and pure,-which (e hath provided3 for sustenance=5 Thus even recreation with good intentionand within the limits prescribed by #od can all be regarded as potential acts of worship.There is one key verse in the uran in -1023 4" have only created *inns and men, thatthey may serve &e.5 This verse can not be interpreted to mean that #od created us toconstantly pray but it means that our wholesome living in accordance to (is commandsis worship. %ven the pure act of worship such as the prayers which are totallydevotional acts is not necessarily something that #od wants or needs from us butultimately it is a kind of training for us on discipline and moral virtues which is ultimately

beneficial to us.

Knowledge and faith are not necessarily contradictory to each other like the thesis and

antithesis. The act of learning, as " mentioned earlier is an act of worship provided that

one is learning for a good cause. " think it would be interesting to remark here that the

very first verse and word revealed in the entire uran was Iqra’a which means recite,

proclaim and read. "n the first passage revealed from the uran it refers to teaching

twice and the pen as one of the tools of learning. There is no wonder then that the

attitude that is found in the uran and the )rophetic tradition are both very much in

favor of learning. @ne verse in the uran in -G07>3 4Those truly fear !llah, among (is

Servants, are given knowledge.5 "n other words people who have the right knowledgeand who have the openness to study this knowledge carefully and ob'ectively are more

cognizant of #ods power and mercy and more #od fearing than those who are

ignorant. "n the uran in ->0113 it says4!nd when ye are told to rise up, rise up !llah

will rise up, to -suitable3 ranks -and degrees3, those of you who believe and who have

been granted -mystic3 Knowledge.5 !ll types of knowledge that help mankind fulfill their

role as trustee of #od is a way of moving to higher degrees in the site of #od. The


11/15

same emphasis is placed on the sub'ect of knowledge in the )rophetic Tradition of

)rophet &uhammad -)$


12/15

humans it means then that knowledge is positive. The first word revealed in the uranwas Iqra’a, read.

We concluded the first four programs in the series by covering what makes the "slamicethical system distinct. We talked about the oneness of #od which provides the

ultimate ideal for man kind to strive for in terms of moral ethics. We talked about the lifehereafter in terms of human responsibility and the view of the human as the trustee of #od on earth. !nd the last point we covered was the fact that the universe issubservient to mankind. This was the conceptual foundation of the moral code of "slam.

The main ob'ective is to build or create an "slamic personality, a personality which lives

by its deep faith in #od and in loving, conscious submission and commitment to #od.

We want to create a personality which is nourished by divine love and restrained from

temptation by the fear of displeasing #od, a personality which understands and accepts

its role and mission on earth as trustee of #od. This would give the personality a sense

of responsibility, sense of direction, clarity of vision and meaning to their eistence on

earth. ;ow if we have a large number of people who meat this criteria or are close to it

we would form an "slamic community which is involved in ordaining the good and

fighting off the evil and in'ustice in society. "n other words it is not 'ust individual

salvation or individual moral elevation but something that needs to be done at a

collective level within society in order for the human race as a hole to participate in

fulfilling this responsibility of being the trustee of #od. There is no wonder that we find

that the last )rophet of "slam, )rophet &uhammad -)$0G3 4$ecause !llah will never change the grace which (e hath bestowedon a people until they change what is in their -own3 souls.5 This shows an interpretationof history and the rise and fall of different civilizations in the past and how many times,

'ust like our present civilization, where #od endows people with plenty of blessings,resources, richness and luuries that no previous generations en'oyed but it all can be


13/15

destroyed because this blessing can be changed if people change themselves andbecome ungrateful and disgraceful.

We find that )rophet &uhammad -)$


14/15

Fasting is another )illar of "slam and again the idea behind it is not only to temporarilyrestrain one6s self from food and drink from dawn to sunset. :ike the )rophet said thatsome people fast and the only benefit they get from their fast is hunger and thirst whilethe main moral lesson in fasting is training of the person to permanently restrain fromevil. This is why the uran in -701>G3 it says that 4Fasting is prescribed to you as it was

prescribed to those before you, that ye may -learn3 self9restraint.5

Finally, (a'' the pilgrimage is not about traveling and wearing specific clothing andgoing through certain rights. )ilgrimage is full of lessons of moral behavior, patients,and the meeting of roughly two million people in the same going through the samedifficulties and being patient with one another. The uran in -701C?3 requires there beno argument or indecency during the pilgrimage. "f we look at the acts of worship whichare purely acts of devotion and worship aside from the rest of a person6s life we find thatthe connection between worship and the moral codes is so strong that they are 'ustinseparable.

The uran does not separate belief from actions. From an "slamic point of view thelack of practice of the moral code in ones life is an evidence of week faith regardless of what the person claims to be. The real evidence of faith is its translation into actionsand real concrete behavior on the part of the individual. !nswers to this question canbe found in some of the beautiful sayings of )rophet &uhammad -)$


15/15

we are sinners but by good deeds we can reconcile ourselves to #od. !ctually inthis Hadith he was echoing a verse in the uran which says 4good deeds whip awaysins.5 The )rophet continues that 4bad character spoils good deeds 'ust like vinegar spoils honey.5 :ike " said earlier we are not saying moral character and good behavior is a substitute for faith as one can act nicely because of re'ection of faith or #od he

could be in trouble. ;either one is a replacement of the other but both should really gohand in hand.

"f what is meant has to do with updating the fundamental principals or foundations of the

moral code then the answer is definitely no. "f what is meant by this is the etension of

the application of the moral code or adapting the application not the principle then the

answer is yes. When we talk about the fundamental in'unctions as eplained in the

uran and the sayings and deeds of )rophet &uhammad the source of this information

is revelation which comes from #od. "f any human being says that we are more up to

date than #od this means they are claiming knowledge that eceeds the knowledge of

#od. The point that is to be made is that the basic principals that come from revelationare not bound to time. ;o human being, no institution religious or otherwise, no group

of scholars can meat in a convention and decide to do this or that. "ndeed if we open

the door for this kind of relativism of our moral principals then if people6s biases and

deviations go down a certain way then we the moral standards would follow the same

path and we would have nothing firm to stand upon. "slam tells us to leave the

revelation of #od as it contains ultimate wisdom and instead of lowering the morals lets

elevate people6s moral behavior so that they come close to these standards. "slam is in

no way against dynamic change in society but it means that if we start tampering

principles we will have no structure and no foundation to stand on.

Documents

Asgment Jol