God and the Muslim Problem with Religion

According to the famous tradition of Gabriel, Din, often translated as “religion” is

divided into three parts. As per the narration of Gabriel, upon whom be peace, its foundation is
Islam. The penultimate level is Iman. The final degree is termed Ihsan. Today many Muslims
express issues with religion, however, many of the problems described with religion have very
little to do with God.

The actions that other Muslims commit cover a large percentage of the gripes that many
make regarding religion to the point that those acts have caused some to leave Islam altogether.
However, those actions and the consequential decision to apostate cannot be blamed on God or
His religion. The creation has their activity and God has His own, to conflate the two is a grand
mistake.

The Quran demonstrates the responsibility that man has for himself very clearly in many
places. Amongst these various examples is, “And Allah would never have wronged them, but
they were wronging themselves.”1 Here the capacity to wrong one’s own self is mentioned
while God will never do so to a soul, though He obviously has such a capacity. The import,
however, for our purposes, is that the acts are clearly distinguished.

When reading the Quran, there are ayaat to be found that suggest that God’s actions are
very close to those of the creation and as such one cannot be blamed for making such
connections with regard to the acts of man and God. The Quran states, “You did not kill them,
but it was Allah who killed them. And you threw not, [O Muhammad], when you threw, but it
was Allah who threw”2

However, when one looks into the exegesis of this particular ayah as presented by al Jalalayn,
it’s interpretation reads:

You did not kill them [at Badr through your own strength]: it was Allah who
killed them [by His helping you]. And you did not throw [Muhammad] when
you threw [the pebbles thrown by a human being into the eyes of the enemy able
to reach the eyes of every soldier in a large army]: it was Allah who threw [by
making that handful reach it’s target, causing the overthrow of the unbelievers]3

Al Sawi [here in italics] extends the interpretation further in his super-commentary on al

Jalalayn:

You did not kill them [at Badr through your own strength] This ayah was
revealed as a result of the Muslims’ boasting after their return from Badr. One of

1
Quran 9:70
2
Ibid., 18:17
3
Jalalu'd-din Al-Mahalli, Tafsir Al-Jalalayn, ed. Abdalhaqq Bewley and Muhammad Isa Waley, trans. Aisha
Bewley (London: Dar Al Taqwa Ltd., 2007), 379.
 them said, ‘I killed like this! I captured like so! As a result, God taught them
proper comportment: it was Allah who killed them [by His helping you]. And
you did not throw [Muhammad] when you threw [the pebbles thrown by a
human being into the eyes of the enemy able to reach the eyes of every soldier in a
large army] seems to be an apparent contradiction as He combined between an
affirmation and negation. The answer is that the negated aspect of the archer is
meant with regard to his capacity to make the pebbles to reach their eyes. The
affirmed aspect of the archer is in his act as the exegete (al Jalalayn) indicates in
his saying,’ the pebbles thrown by a human being into the eyes”: it was Allah who
threw [by making that handful reach it’s target, causing the overthrow of the
unbelievers].4

Though both of these examples are merely interpretations, they both represent classic opinions
that enjoy universal credibility within Sunni scholarship.

Islam or Sacred Law can serve as an obstacle for many to God as they may perceive it as
an end and not a means to Him. As Islam represents the outward, and physical aspects of the
Lord-slave interaction, the external obligation for males serves as a prime obligation of the
conflation between ends and means within the community.

The message in the Friday sermon in many mosques far too infrequently mentions God,
Himself. Ironically, though the jumuah service may be the only opportunity to be reminded of
such a connection one is more likely to be prompted on such issues in a café or even on
Facebook provided they have good company. Of course, if one is devoid of such companionship
then where and when is He to be mentioned?

One may say that the sermon should address important issues in the society so as to deal
with the ills and problems that plague the community. If the message doesn’t take people to task
then whatever tribulations there are will eventually take over and lead us potentially to our doom.
What good is there to discuss “spirituality” and to dismiss the affairs of the world wholesale?

Nevertheless, a problem has its roots and if those origins are not addressed the fruits will
not change. Many of the scholars of the faith posit that the root of disobedience, which is the
greatest of trials, lies in heedlessness of God’s presence.5 After all, if one were continually aware
of Him, could they disobey Him? If one were to remind others of His proximity to His creatures
at least once a week, wouldn’t one expect for that message to affect the hearts? If the hearts are
moved the mind and limbs will be affected. If these two aspects of a person are corrected where

4
“Hashiya Al Sawi Ala Tafsir Al Jalalyn,” altafsir.com,
http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=96&tSoraNo=8&tAyahNo=17&tDisplay=yes&UserPr
ofile=0&LanguageId=1 (accessed January 30, 2013).
5
For more detail see: Hamza Yusuf, Purification of the Heart: Signs, Symptoms, and Cures of the Spiritual
Diseases of the Heart: Translation and Commentary of Imam Mawlud's Matharat Al-Qulub (Chicago: Starlatch,
Llc, 2004).
would the individual produce sin from? Is there then a greater ill or problem that plagues the
community?

All practicing Muslims would agree that polytheism is the most heinous of crimes.
However, if the message in the Friday sermons treats Islam itself as a goal, then how is that
communication not supporting the most scandalous of misconducts? If the discourse does one
not reminded one of God it would call one to other than God, but what if the reminder of other
than God is His own religion? What if the religion itself takes His place as a focus, becomes
God?

The reality is that if there be any discussion about God, it will generally be one based in
tenets of beliefs. These tenets are generally based around rational propositions; the necessary,
impossible and possible regarding what we believe regarding God’s attributes. However, a
quality is the characteristic of an entity and though knowledge about these conceptual features
regarding God are indispensable, memorizing a list of creedal propositions does not make God
any more real for one than a philosophical treatise does wisdom. In fact, anyone can put these
rational proofs to memory without the prerequisite of faith itself. This being the case, to claim
that all one needs to know with regard to religion, in terms of Iman, the area of faith as
mentioned above, also misdirects the Muslim away from his or her goal.

An objection to the above might come in the form of the question, ‘since God cannot be
known outside of His attributes, how can one approach Him in any way outside of that study?”
After all, one must know the object of worship before worshipping the object, so how can one
claim that Iman, in and of itself, is a dead end in the pursuit of worship?

The response would be to reiterate the point that theory and reality are two different
things. A theory is a detached analysis of an object of study and as such does not require any
intimacy with that studied. Ideas are formed by speculation; even if the speculations are rooted
in the Quran and Hadith. These notions are opinions based in incomplete information because,
after all, God cannot be completely described. There is a massive gap between a notion and an
experience, as the latter is what actually occurs to an individual while the former, at best, might
describe such a thing. Creed is a general study and therefore does not deal with subjective
happenings but aren’t individuals expected to use it as a springboard into such an experience?
Does doctrine serve its purpose if treated as the goal of religion; are ambitions spent well if given
entirely to its pursuit? If dogma does one not reminded one of God, but rather steeps one in hair-
splitting debates with others about correct speculation, is it not a means to other than God? Is it
inconceivable that theology, itself, might become someone’s end all of his or her religious
endeavor that dogma itself takes His place as a focus?

As one climbs the ladder of religious participation into the field of Ihsan one finds a yet
more subtle manifestation of the problem indicated thus far. The goal of this science is
considered by many to be the purification of the heart with the objective of gaining nearness to
Allah. Nearness to God however is a problematic consideration. If one were to attain nearness to
the Lord it implies that the slave is not far away in distance from God. How can the word distant
ever apply to God? How do such words as far and near apply to God, aren’t both words creations
in and of themselves? If these terms are meant in a metaphorical sense, it leaves the question as
to what then is the goal of purification of the heart? Does one purify their heart for the sake of
spiritual hygiene alone? So, what exactly would God have to do with tasawwuf if His
relationship to it is merely symbolic? It seems that many have also settled for other than God in
this science as well by making purification of the heart an end.

A feasible rejoinder to this assertion would be to say that one cleans their heart for God
as it is His property and, as such, should be maintained in pristine fashion; one returns a gift to
its owner in the same or if not better condition than when they found it in. The proximity and
distance mentioned is in regard to the slave who can experience the sensation of closeness and
distance when it comes to their Maker and, then, has to work hard to remove the obstacles
between themselves and His pleasure that would be determined by adherence to the Sacred Law.

This response is circular as it takes one back to the material world, beginning in Islam,
and, as a result, produces a never-ending circle of regress. The problem here is the same there,
namely, that the focus is yet again on some form of creation. The person’s heart, as object of
attention, is not God nor is purification of the heart. Though the Sacred Law and its obedience
are a given in religion, that God Himself as goal, even at the level of Ihsan, is still not given its
proper evaluation.

So far, we have strived to demonstrate that highlight a scenario common in each area of
Din, wherein Muslims have a tendency to mistake the means for the end. The common
denominator in all the areas of mentioned in this essay is the created obstacle in each level of
religion. The creation does not and is not meant to fulfill. This means, also, that the frustration
that many Muslims are expressing regarding religion, and its inability to satiate them, has to do
with creation and not God Himself. The obvious solution would be to connect the heart to the
creator of things and not the things themselves, even if they are provided as a means to the
Divine. Just how does one escape the retrogression that religion as a created thing can provide
while still being “religious”?

The Quran commands the Muslim to transcend all the aforementioned obstructions,
through, God-consciousness in stating, “O you who have believed, fear Allah and seek the
means to Him and strive in His cause that you may succeed.”6 The ayah literal commands the
God-conscious to pursue that means which will cause a direct meeting between Lord and slave.
The one who is aware of the infinite regress that is outlined above and recognizes the protracted
obstruction it presents may identify with the concept that the Lord created us for Himself and not
for any means that leads to Him. The means to a direct link with God are, like the religion itself,
comprised of three pillars according to the Book.

The first of these supports is in following the Prophet, peace be upon him as God states,
"Say! If you should love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your
sins. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."7 Here the instruction is clear, following the
Prophet, peace be upon him, in word and deed as it is the way out of subtle idolatry. According
to al Jalalayn, ‘This [ayah] was revealed when the idolaters [of Mecca] said, ‘we only worship

6
Q. 5:35
7
Ibid.,3:31
idols out of love of Allah so that they may bring us near to Him.’8 However, no thing can bring
anyone to God without God causing it to be so and if God was using these things to bring them
to Him they would have recognized the monotheism of the Prophet, peace be upon him, as their
own religion.

The second of these columns is good companionship with those pursuing the same Goal
as is in the Quranic statement, “And keep yourself patient with those who call upon their
Lord in the morning and the evening, seeking His countenance. And let not your eyes pass
beyond them, desiring adornments of the worldly life.”9 Al Jalalayn comments, “[this seeking
His face is] without any ulterior motive in the form of desire for things of this world.”10 As the
world is a created thing and to desire it is the ulterior motive it follows that one would not
worship God desiring the Paradise, alone, as it is also a created thing as are all those things that
would lead to it like all forms of outward knowledge and even intimacy with the science of
purification of the heart.

The third of these mainstays is the association with a Knower of God as found in the
Book’s dictation Quran, “and follow the way of those who turn back to Me”11 In order for the
Muslims to evade the hamster wheel of contemporary life a believer needs to have a correct and
objective sustained by an awareness ready to be refined. It is by these three poles and that kind
of aspiration that the house of applied God-Consciousness derives its fortitude, “So flee to Allah.
Indeed, I am to you from Him a clear warner.”12 Just as the Companions applied this fleeing
by going to the Prophet, peace be upon him, a person in our age would realize all the above by
the companionship of one of his inheritors in Islam, Iman and Ihsan for whom religion is not a
theoretical exercise but a reality wherein the scheme of the religion has very little to do with God
other than an indispensable means of arrival into His direct presence.

Muhammad Abdul Latif Finch

Berkeley, CA
2013

8
Jalalu'd-din Al-Mahalli, Tafsir Al-Jalalayn, ed. Abdalhaqq Bewley and Muhammad Isa Waley, trans. Aisha
Bewley (London: Dar Al Taqwa Ltd., 2007), 124.
9
Q. 18:28
10
Jalalu'd-din Al-Mahalli, Tafsir Al-Jalalayn, ed. Abdalhaqq Bewley and Muhammad Isa Waley, trans. Aisha
Bewley (London: Dar Al Taqwa Ltd., 2007), 124.
11
Ibid., 31:15
12
Ibid., 51:50
Bibliography

“Hashiya Al Sawi Ala Tafsir Al Jalalyn.” altafsir.com.

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=96&tSoraNo=8&tAyahNo=1
7&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 (accessed January 30, 2013).

Al-Mahalli, Jalalu'd-din. Tafsir Al-Jalalayn. Edited by Abdalhaqq Bewley and Muhammad Isa
Waley. Translated by Aisha Bewley. London: Dar Al Taqwa Ltd., 2007.