- Bliv medlem
-
Du er ikke logget ind
Log ind Opret dig
Du er ikke logget ind
Beskrivelse
The umma is experiencing trauma because it turned from revelation to tradition. This showed a deficit of trust in revelation and and too much trust in tradition. But Allah says He loves those who put their trust in Him. To turn from revelation to tradition is to trade revealed knowledge for reports of mere persons. Allah said He does not change the condition of people until they first change what is in themselves (13: 11). The turn from revelation to tradition was triggered by an enchantment with tradition. The turn was assisted by the repression of reason. The turn was justified by the assertion that tradition, too, is revelation. However, the sharia is drawn from traditions, too. Accordingly, jurists do not treat tradition merely as wahy. They also treat tradition as tanzil, what Allah "sent down." But those who do not judge by what Allah "sent down" are identified as unbelievers, rebels, and wrongdoers (5: 44-45, 47). The prophet prohibited recording his sayings. But hawkish rulers, in defiance of the prophet's prohibition, asked different ulama to record the traditions. The effects were troubling. The Mongols erased the Abbasids when the Abbasid rulers acted according to the tradition which asserts that "the blood of the kafir is halal for the believers." Based on this tradition, the Abbasids murdered a group of Mongol traders, as well as the ambassadors sent by Genghis Khan to ask for justice. Abandoning the Book of Allah resulted in the deaths of a million persons in the reprisals that followed. Anti-rationalism resulted in the deaths of five thousand philosophers murdered by Musa al-Hadi in 786, during the mihna or inquisition. This was a "reign of terror," a persecution of philosophers by the followers of traditions. Anti-rationalism plunged Muslims into stupefaction and stagnation. Due to the resulting backwardness, anti-rationalism also rendered the umma vulnerable to external assaults. Reason was subordinated to tradition. Even revelation was subordinated to tradition. The relationship between revelation and tradition in Islam requires attention. For tradition eclipsed revelation. This was an aberration. Traditional jurisprudence teaches that revelation is the first root of legislation, followed by tradition. Yet in exegesis, the relationship between revelation and tradition is reversed. Tradition is placed above revelation. This reversal is expressed in the perceptions that "tradition judges revelation" and that "revelation requires tradition more than tradition requires revelation." These are troubling pronouncements. For they treat the rulings of persons as more authoritative than the rulings of God. They reflect scriptural shirk. The reversal of the relationship between revelation and tradition encroaches on the pre-eminence of revelation. It represents a breakdown of traditional exegesis and jurisprudence. Tradition went from being mere reports from the past to being treated as "revelation," a "judge" of the Book of Allah, "abrogating" and even "replacing" parts of the Book. The gradual elevation of tradition to being more authoritative than revelation is an expression of "creeping shirk." The result is a sharia where reports of persons in a few cases replace revealed rulings. This transpired with the punishments for adultery, apostasy and blasphemy. These punishments do not merely defy the Book of Allah; they result in miscarriages of justice, and attribute an unjustified aura of harshness to the sharia and Muslims generally. Hence, the relationship between revelation and tradition requires being reset. Tradition must be subordinated to revelation. The teaching of abrogation was used to transform the religion of reconciliation into an agenda of territorial expansion and global conquest. Shirk tainted exegesis as well as jurisprudence. The politicisation of research reduced it to the rank of political propaganda. These aberrations require attention
