Wednesday, April 21, 2010

CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME

Sometime in 1998, when I first attended the Annual General Meeting of an Islamic NGO (RICOI), I was introduced to a Chinese-Muslim who a week later approached me in my office suggesting that I team up with him to carry out da’awah (missionary) work on our own and that I should forget about that Islamic NGO as such organizations hinder one from carrying out real and effective da’awah because of its structure and rigidity. I ignored his suggestion and in fact found it odd that someone who barely knew me and had recently met me at a function of an NGO should so shortly thereafter suggest that I should abandon that NGO.


Later, I asked around and was informed that this Chinese-Muslim had two wives and whilst carrying out da’awah work failed to cater to the needs or provide for both his families and frequently asked for monetary donations from others.

What do we make of such a person who ignores the needs of his family but ventures out daily to preach to others? Does not the maxim “Charity begins at home” apply in this case? What good does all his preaching do if he first fails to tend to the needs at home? Will God reward him for all the preaching he does when he fails to fulfil his responsibilities? I think the answers to these questions are obvious to anyone.

What exactly did this person fail in? He was performing creditable work in preaching to others but he failed in his primary duty to first “perform charity at home”, and in that way, as far as his own person was concerned, nullified all the good he was doing in preaching.

Why do I relate all this?

I do so because there is a fairly common perception amongst many that so long as one does good, one is fine so far as the Hereafter and one’s Creator is concerned---that it does not matter whether one relates to God and fulfils His commands and wishes, so long as one does good. In such a case is not then failing to heed God’s messages and wishes and merely contenting oneself with doing good works analogous to the instance of that Chinese-Muslim who also did good but ignored his family? Is not God owed more than any of us can ever owe our family? Has he not given us life and everything that we have or own? Do we not owe everything to him---our sight, our hearing, our ability to reason, our sustenance, the air we breathe, the water we drink---in short, everything?

So often I have heard it being asked, “But what of good people like Mother Teresa who dedicated her life for the poor and downtrodden? Her faith may not have been right but she did so much good”.

My answer will be that we would be no different from that Chinese-Muslim who by neglecting “Charity at home” nullified all his good works. Mother Teresa nullified all her good works by failing to do “charity at home” by ignoring Gods’ signs and messages and instead committed the one unforgivable sin in giving partners to Him.

In Surah Az Zumar verse 65 (39:65) Allah swt tells us:

“But it has already been revealed to thee, as it was to those before thee― "If thou wert to join (gods with Allah), truly fruitless will be thy work (in life), and thou wilt surely be in the ranks of those who lose (all spiritual good)."

How is it right or possible for us to ignore Him (to whom we owe everything) and assign partners to Him? How is it right to content ourselves with just doing good to others and ignore Him? Do we not then, in a manner of speaking, fail to do “charity at home” just like that Chinese-Muslim?

What does God tell us about persons who merely do good but otherwise ignore or fail to heed God’s signs and messages?

In Surah Al Kahf verses 103-107 (18:103-107) of the Holy Qur’an God makes the position abundantly clear. He tells us:

“Say: ‘Shall we tell you of those who lose most in respect of their deeds?(103)

‘Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life while they thought that they were acquiring good by their works?’ (104)

They are those who deny the Signs of their Lord and the fact of their having to meet Him (in the Hereafter): vain will be their works, nor shall We on the Day of Judgment, give them any Weight. (105)

That is their reward, Hell; because they rejected Faith, and took My Signs and My Messengers by way of jest. “(106)

In Surah Ibrahim verse 18 (14:18) Allah swt tells us:

The parable of those who reject their Lord is that their works are as ashes, on which the wind blows furiously on a tempestuous day: No power have they over aught that they have earned: That is the straying far, far (from the goal). (18)

Many will contend that they do not deny having to meet God in time to come and do not reject Him and therefore do not come within the ambit of those verses. If we examine the conduct of some of them however, it will not be far-fetched to arrive at the conclusion that when they espouse that they believe in their meeting with God and do accept Him, it is only words that their lips speak but not their ‘heart’ and therefore they do not truly believe.

How is it possible for one who says he believes in the meeting with God when he shall have to account to God for all his actions and inactions and accepts God to nonetheless live a life ignoring God’s commands, signs and messages? Does it not then smack of a person who is hypocritical who says one thing but does another? Does not action speak louder than words? Is it not analogous to a person who professes aloud that he certainly believes in the path to safety or salvation but nonetheless blissfully and without regret keeps walking towards the pit of fire?

To those who believe that merely doing good works without due acknowledgment to one’s Creator in the form of heeding His messages, it is plain that Satan has in fact deceived them into believing that good works alone do suffice and that one need not have faith. Having faith does not mean one merely professes it but means to live one’s life in accordance with such faith.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Why believe the Qur'an

Why believe in the Qur’an

1. The Qur’an challenges Man that if they doubt it is from God, look into it for discrepancies because God does not speak as such. This is a challenge still to be met.

2. God in the Qur’an challenges Man that if they doubt the Qur’an is from God, then produce a book like it, or even a chapter of it or even 10 verses and He says no man can. Indeed no one has succeeded, though not for want of trying.

3. The Qur’an speaks of many truths which was impossible for a man, who was illiterate and living in the 6th century in the desert to have known on his own. One example is that of the expanding Universe, which was unknown to Man until discovered recently by Stephen Hawkings.

4. God in the Qur’an has promised Man that He will ensure that it is safeguarded. No other Scripture makes such a claim.

5. Other Scriptures, if we know how to interprete it, foretells of the coming of Prophet Muhammad and his mission to bring Man to God. This is found, amongst others, in the Old Testament and New Testament of the Bible, and in the Vedas and Puranas.

6. The Qur’an from the time of the Prophet was perfectly preserved by scores of men in every generation memorizing the whole text so that no one could change it. No other Scripture is so memorized.

7. The Qur’an is preserved in the original language in which it was revealed. The same is not true of all other Scriptures.

8. The Qur’an prescribes a way of life for Man to lead. It prescribes a complete code of life. Other Scriptures leave Man to fend on his own.

9. The Qur’an reconciles all the different Scriptures and explains the differences by stating that Man had altered parts of earlier Scriptures. No other Scripture explains or even tries to explain the differences.

10. When reading the Qur’an, it is clear that it is worded in the fashion of God speaking to you directly and not of some narrative written by Man as is the case of other Scriptures.

11. The words of Man are not included in the Qur’an, not even the sayings of the Prophet are included. It is the absolute word of God. Every alphabet in it is God’s. The same cannot be said of other Scriptures.

12. The religion of Islam is not named after a person or a people, nor was it decided by a later generation of man, as in the case of Christianity which was named after Jesus Christ, Buddhism after Gautama Buddha, Confucianism after Confucius, Judaism after the tribe of Judah and Hinduism after the Hindus( which in its origins referred to people living across the river Indus).

13. The Qur’an teaches the purest form of monotheism, a clear concept of God. It teaches that God is one. God has no son.

It calls man away from worship of creation and invites him to worship only his Creator. False religions all have in common one basic concept with regard to God --- they either claim that all men are gods, or that specific men were God, or that nature is God, or that God is a figment of man’s imagination.

Thus, it may be stated that the basic message of false religion is that God may be worshipped in the form of His creation. False religions invite man to the worship of creation by calling the creation or some aspect of it God.

14. Universality of God’s religion--- the true religion of God cannot be confined to any one people, place, or period of time, as is the case of some religions.

15. No intermediaries in Islam.

16. The Qur’an secures consistency and rationality of belief through its logical and rational principles.

17. In Islam, there is no celibacy, because celibacy is against human nature. Islam urges the Muslim to get married as soon as he can, because it is difficult for normal people to be religious and unmarried at the same time. Islam, as a rule, organizes human nature, but never destroys or goes against it.

18. It does not humanize God nor does it deify man. Everything is carefully placed where it belongs in the total scheme of creation.

19.There may be many sects in Islam, but there is only one Qur’an. The same cannot be said of some of the other Scriptures.

20. Mathematical formula. There are numerous instances of the mathematical formulas in the Qur’an. One prime example is:

The word "land" (barr, yabas) appears 13 times in the Qur'an and the word "sea" (bahr) 32 times, giving a total of 45 references. If we divide that number by that of the number of references to the land we arrive at the figure 28.888888888889%. The number of total references to land and sea, 45, divided by the number of references to the sea in the Qur'an, 32, is 71.111111111111%. Extraordinarily, these figures represent the exact proportions of land and sea on the Earth today.
LAND ---13 times---13/45=28.88888889
SEA ---32 times---32/45=71.11111111
TOTAL---45 times---100

SEE HTTP://WWW.HARUNYAHYA.COM/MIRACLES_OF_THE_QURAN_P4_01.PHP#1

21. Unity of different timings of revelation---23 years. It was revealed bit by bit over 23 long years and yet when compiled into a single text bears consistency, order and carries with it a sublime message for Man devoid of discrepancies.

22.Reasons with reader. It does not command blind faith but explains and reasons things to Man before then asking him to believe.

23. Abu Lahab. One of the great enemies of the Prophet and Islam could so easily have disproved the Qur’an by simply stating that he believed in it and yet, as had been foretold by the Qur’an, he never did.

24. Accurate knowledge of past events

25. Iram. Until recent archaeological discoveries, no one in the history of Man knew what this word appearing in the Qur’an meant. Now Man knows of the ancient city of Iram.

26. Prophet reprimanded. If the Qur’an were the concoction of the Prophet, he would not have included within it the occasions when he was reprimanded and corrected by God. It would have been so simple for him then to have omitted those verses.

27. Never in the history of Man has anyone who has penned any prose containing messages as magnificent as the Qur’an go on to state that it is not his own work but that of another. It is not in the nature of Man to deny authorship of something magnificent that he himself created. On the contrary, Man is disposed to copying and plagiarising a thing of beauty and claiming authorship of it. Why would the Prophet then, if it were his own creation, deny authorship of something so magnificent?

28. Perfect balance of words. Dr Gary Miller, a Canadian Professor of Mathematics in the University of Toronto,recently with the help of computers discovered the perfect balance of words found in the Qur’an. When the Qur’an says that something is like another thing, then both words appear the same number of times in the Qur’an. For example when it says the Jesus is like Adam, we find that both names each appear an equal number of times in the Qur’an. When however it says that something is not like another, we find that both will appear an unequal number of times in the Qur’an, being different by the digit of one. Thus for example when it says that interest is not like trade, we find that both words appear an unequal number of times, being different by the digit of one. And so it is in all instances where the Qur’an says that something is like another or where it says that something is not like another.

Any alteration to the Qur’an by Man, bearing in mind that the perfect balance was only recently discovered, would have unwittingly destroyed this perfect balance and the perfect balance is hence testimony to God’s promise to perfectly preserve the Qur’an.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Let Common Sense Prevail

All the ongoing hullabaloo about the Catholic usage of “Allah” in their publication of the Bahasa Malaysia edition of the Catholic Herald is quite unnecessary.

The issues involved are actually quite straightforward and easily resolved.

Islam does not prohibit usage of “Allah” by non-Muslims. That is the correct theological stance of Islam. Hence one finds Arab-Christians referring to God as “Allah”.

“Allah” is however an Arabic word. If the Catholic Herald intends to come out with a Arabic edition, then certainly they have the right to publish using “Allah”. If however the intention is to publish in Bahasa Malaysia, then they ought to use the Bahasa Malaysia word for God, which is Tuhan. “Allah” is not a Bahasa Malaysia word.

Why then are Muslims here in Malaysia allowed to use “Allah” since it is an Arabic word and not a Bahasa Malaysia word? The answer is simple. Muslims pray in the Arabic language. They are required to do so. The call to prayer itself is in Arabic. It is standard throughout the world. Christians, except perhaps for Arab-Christians, do not pray in Arabic.

The argument however goes that “Allah” has been used by Christians in Sabah and Sarawak to refer to God for a few hundred years. Long usage of that word does not make it right. Something that is not right does not become right by long habitual use. The Sabahans and Sarawakians ought now to be taught that the correct Bahasa Malaysia word for God is “Tuhan” and not “Allah”, as they had mistakenly thought.

Islam holds as paramount peace and stability in the community. There have been numerous instances in the past where overzealous Christian missionaries have tried misleading Muslims, including Muslim children, by usage of words peculiar to Islam such as “Allah”. Allowing Christians use of “Allah” also opens up the likelihood of it affecting the sensitivities of Muslims, especially when the Christians speak of Jesus as Allah’s son or that Allah is a trinity. These are blasphemous to Muslims.

Holy Qur’an Sura 5 - Al-Maeda (MADINA) : Verse 73
”They disbelieve who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.”

Holy Qur’an Sura 5 - Al-Maeda (MADINA) : Verse 17
”In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His Will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all― everyone that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things."

The Catholics here ought to recognize the sensitivities of Muslims and to be respectful of the position of Islam in this country. They are urged to desist from usage of Allah in their Bahasa Malaysia publications which can lead to statements of blasphemy to Muslims being published. I trust that the Catholics too value peace and harmony in society. Should they wish to publish in Arabic therefore, then certainly they have the right to use the Arabic word for God, “Allah”. Since they wish to publish in Bahasa Malaysia however, then they should use “Tuhan”.