Why Do We Differ in Matters of Our Faith?
By Dr Aslam Abdullah
Fontana, CA
Our understanding of Islam largely comes from scholars. Not many of us make an individual effort to go directly to the Qur’an or the authentic sunnah of the Prophet. We rely on opinions passed on to us by learned people in our community or city. We have differences in our understanding of Islam.
These differences are in fact the differences among scholars. We wish if our scholars had come together to deliberate upon these differences and bring them to a closure as much as possible. But this did not happen.
By and large, we as Muslim are not trained to critically examine the ideas of scholars. It’s the scholars who critique other scholars. We have widespread religious illiteracy among us. We are dependent on scholars to understand our faith. Whatever a scholar we believe in says is accepted and practiced by us in general.
How do scholars develop their understanding of Islam? In fact, their understanding of Islam is dependent on the methodology they adopt to understand Islam.
Thus a methodology would determine the nature and scope of differences among scholars. On the basis of these scholarly differences we, the people, often fight among ourselves.
What are the different methodologies adopted by scholars?
1. The Qur’an
The Qur’an is sufficient to define because Islam is a divinely ordained faith and the guidance is revealed from God. Hence, Muslims must make the Qur’an the only source to understand and define Islam. The Prophet was divinely selected to communicate, preserve and live the message to a particular group of people in a particular context and he fulfilled his responsibilities with full integrity and honesty. There is no reason to believe that the prophet might have done or said anything that goes against the dictates of the Qur’an.
The divine guidance addressed several issues. Some of them were exclusive to the Arab society and others are relevant to all communities and nations. The responsibilities of making this distinction is upon the believers, otherwise they would be fossilized in the seventh century and would defeat the very purpose of the divine message. Scholars in this category are in minority even though they may echo the sentiments of a good number of Muslims well versed with the Qur’an.
2. The Qur’an and Sunnah
The Qur’an alone is not enough. The ahadith (sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad) compiled by Muslim scholars must be our guide to understand the Qur’an. There are six authentic compilers of ahadith who vigorously collected the sayings of the Prophet and some 250 years after his death. Their work is authentic and it must be the basis to understand the Qur’an.
But we must stick to the first three or four generations after Prophet Muhammad for that understanding. Anything that is not endorsed by them is either innovation or heresy. All the questions relevant to human beings have been raised and answered by these scholars. There is no need to corrupt the faith by giving newer opinions. Scholars in this category are in large numbers even though they may not echo the sentiments of Muslims knowledgeable in the Qur’an. They occupy important positions in Muslim centers and masajid and often assume the authority to issue religious decrees. They run religious seminaries and in fact are considered the gatekeepers of Islam.
3. School of Thought methodology
The Qur’an, ahadith and the opinions of early scholars are important, but one must choose one of the many existing schools of thoughts that have tried to interpret the Qur’an and the ahadith in a juristic sense. There is difference among Muslims about the number of schools of thought. Those who do not call them sunnis identify four schools. Others identify five or eight schools. The overwhelming majority of Muslims live in countries that are divided on these factional lines. They follow their schools of thought in matters related with worship, social interaction and politics. Scholars in this category are in large numbers and they ensure that their schools of thought get primacy in matters of life. In fact, most Islamic seminaries represent either of the above mentioned Muslim schools of thought.
4. Qur’an, Science and accumulated Islamic and human knowledge
The Qur’an is the main source, but other human efforts such as the collections of ahadith, the opinions of earlier or later scholars, the positions of various schools of thought as well as the science or empirical knowledge in a given time should be our guide. Scholars in this category are in a minority and a great majority of modern educated Muslims probably think along the same lines. The Qur’an was not a book for the seventh century Muslims. If its claim that it is for all time and people has to be taken seriously, it must take into consideration the developments that have taken place in physical and social knowledge.
Obviously, the four methodologies would produce different understandings of the faith itself. As long as there is no consensus among Muslims over the use of a methodology that is substantiated by the Qur’an, differences would continue to occur.
We should not daydream of having a united Muslim community under present circumstances. In order to have this unity, we must have a foundation in our methodology to understand the faith. Are Muslim scholars ready to sit down and discuss the possibilities of adopting a unified methodology to revisit their faith? It is wishful thinking that millions of Muslims have, and had, and would continue to have, because they do not want to see their community divided and ineffective.
Back to Pakistanlink Homepage
