Today, among Muslims, there are groups and organizations that claim Islam places special emphasis on monotheism (tawhid). Therefore, they argue that a party or organization should be formed around this consensual issue of tawhid. According to their understanding, these groups are working to uphold this principle. They present all the Quranic verses related to tawhid to the general public and declare: O people, adopt monotheism and abandon polytheism (shirk). In this universe, there is no giver, helper, fulfiller of needs, remover of difficulties, or ghaws al-a‘zam, etc., except the Lord of the universe.
In this way, they emphasize all Quranic verses condemning shirk and claim that since those who recite the declaration of faith but commit shirk have their deeds rejected, they—the monotheists—will neither pray behind these grave-worshippers (Barelvis, Shi‘as, etc.) nor perform their funeral prayers.
In view of such claims, a few questions are presented below. It is hoped that you will provide satisfactory answers:
1. If shirk continues after reciting the declaration of faith, should such a person be called a polytheist?
2. What is the definition of a Muslim and a polytheist? Can a Muslim be a polytheist?
3. Among Muslims, those who commit clear shirk—what is the evidence for offering prayer behind them, when it is also a fact that the deeds of a polytheist are not accepted?
4. If the prayer of a polytheist imam is not valid, how can the prayer of a monotheist follower be valid?
5. Many scholars of the Muslim ummah believe that, in the light of verse 106 of Chapter Yusuf, even those who recite the declaration of faith can be polytheists. Therefore, prayer should not be offered behind them.
6. If a person who drinks alcohol is called a drunkard, why should a person who commits shirk not be called a polytheist?
7. If, after reciting the declaration of faith, a Hindu continues to go to a temple, this act prevents him from being regarded as a Muslim, and he is still considered a Hindu. But if another person, after affirming the declaration of faith, continues to circumambulate graves, why does this act not prevent his Islam, and why is such a person not considered a polytheist?
8. In your literature and books, I have not seen as much emphasis on grave-worship and other aspects of shirk as is placed by those who describe themselves as “tawhid-oriented.” What is the reason for this difference, when you too oppose shirk—indeed, strongly oppose it? (Mr Abdul Latif, Karachi, Pakistan)
Answer
The evil of disagreement found among present-day Muslims is not due to the fact that Muslim groups are working on something other than monotheism. The real cause of disagreement is one, and that is extremism. Contemporary Muslim groups have adopted, in one form or another, an extremist approach. Some are caught in extremism in matters of belief, some in political extremism, some in legalistic extremism, some in sectarian extremism, and others in different forms of extremism. It is this extremism that is the root cause of present conflicts. In the Quran and Hadith, extremism is described as ghulu. The Prophet e said: “Beware of excess in religion, for those before you were destroyed only because of excess in religion” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 1851; Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith No. 3029).
What is excess or extremism? It is to take a matter to its final logical extreme and then issue extreme rulings on that basis. An example of this can be seen in your own question. Emphasizing monotheism is praiseworthy. But it is equally wrong to say that since Muslims who recite the declaration of faith commit shirk, and that because of shirk (polytheism) their good deeds are not accepted, therefore we—the monotheists—will neither pray behind these grave-worshippers (Barelvis, Shi‘as, etc.) nor participate in their funeral prayers.
This final claim is precisely what is called excess in the Hadith, and excess itself is destructive. If a person has acquired religious knowledge and, in its light, understands that monotheism holds the position of a foundational belief in Islam, then such a person has the right to convey the message of monotheism with sincere goodwill. But if, along with this reformative call, he begins issuing rulings declaring certain people to be polytheists, and thereby boycotts them—even to the extent of refusing their funeral prayers—then he himself is in the wrong in the sight of Islam, because he is committing excess, and there is no room for excess in Islam.
The reality is that the work of reform is an extremely delicate task. One of its essential conditions is that the reformer must know the difference between one thing and another. He must understand that his responsibility is to only peacefully convey the message; it is not his responsibility to issue definitive judgments about people or declare someone a polytheist. A reformer should leave the matter of who is a polytheist to God and confine himself to sincere advice. Those who lack this ability should not enter the field of reform at all, for doing so is itself a serious wrong.
The numbered answers to your questions are as follows:
1. The responsibility of a reformer is only to explain the issue of shirk with seriousness and goodwill. It is not the task of a reformer to declare a specific person a polytheist and attempt to enforce the rulings of shirk upon him. The first task is permissible; the second is not. Those who do the latter are corrupters, not reformers.
2. A polytheist is not the name of a community or a race. Any person may commit a polytheistic act. But the right to definitively declare someone a polytheist belongs only to God, not to human beings.
3. No follower prays the prayer of the imam. Every follower prays his own prayer. The imam does not make the prayer of any follower acceptable or unacceptable. Acceptance depends entirely on each individual’s intention. The purpose of congregational prayer is only collectivity. Any imam behind whom this objective is achieved is valid. This is stated in the Hadith: “The obligatory prayer is required behind every Muslim, whether righteous or sinful, even if he has committed major sins” (Sunan Abi Dawud, Hadith 594).
4. If someone raises the point that the Hadith mentions a sinful person or one who commits major sins, and does not mention a polytheist, then this too is another form of excess. Those who engage in such excess should remain silent rather than use provocative words that create discord within the ummah.
5. The authority to decide whose prayer is accepted and whose is not rests entirely with God. Those who issue judgments about acceptance exceed their limits, and exceeding limits is undoubtedly a grave sin.
6. Reciting the declaration of faith is only an announcement of entry into Islam. It does not mean that a person has become permanently immune from committing shirk. In this world of trial, anyone may fall into shirk. The task of a reformer is not to identify polytheists and pass judgment, but to explain the issue of shirk in general. The method of the Messenger of God e was that whenever he delivered a reformative address, he would ask: What is the matter with people that they do such and such things? (Rasa’il Ibn Hazm, Vol. 1, p. 383)
7. If a person drinks alcohol, the reformer’s task is not to declare him a drunkard and issue a ruling for punishment. The reformer’s task is only to advise with complete goodwill and continue advising. Similarly, if a person appears involved in shirk, the reformer should explain matters in a well-wishing manner. The reformer has no right to publicly and definitively declare someone a polytheist or issue rulings against him. All such acts fall under excess, and Islam strictly forbids excess.
8. In this matter, those who are Muslims by birth and those who became Muslims by choice have the same ruling: both are to be approached with a sincere focus on purifying their souls. However, no one will be declared an unbeliever or sinful with certainty.
The method of the Prophet was to concentrate entirely on reviving the spirit of religion. External actions are always the result of the inner spirit. It never happens that the inner spirit is automatically produced by external actions.
The practice of declaring people unbelievers (takfir) or sinners (tafsiq), which has been prevalent among Muslims for centuries, is completely false and has no connection with the Shariah. This practice emerged during the Abbasid period and continued under the label of “deviant sects,” until such verdicts threatened to declare no one in the Muslim ummah a believer. Eventually, scholars collectively decided to end this practice. With consensus, they declared: We do not declare anyone from among the people of the qiblah to be an unbeliever—that is, those who face the qiblah in prayer will not be called unbelievers by human decree.
This is the correct position. In the generations acknowledged for their goodness, such takfiri pursuits are absent. The practice was introduced by theologians in ancient Iraq during the Abbasid era, but later scholars rejected it unanimously. No sect will ever pray facing a temple or a church instead of the Kabah; over the past thousand years, no sect has done so. Therefore, the statement effectively means that anyone who calls himself a Muslim is regarded as such.
The prohibition of takfir (declaring a Muslim to be a disbeliever or kafir) and tafsiq (declaring a Muslim to be sinful or morally corrupt) does not mean people should become inactive or neutral in the face of wrongdoing. Rather, it means showing the correct direction of action: sincere advice. The rest is left to God.
The Messenger of God e prayed that his ummah should not be destroyed by famine, and God accepted this prayer. He also prayed that an external enemy should not be imposed upon his ummah, and God accepted this prayer. But when he prayed that they should not be divided into groups such that one group would dominate the other, God did not accept this prayer (Sahih Muslim, Hadith No. 2890).
This Hadith clarifies how to recognize an undesirable movement. The sign is whether the movement divides Muslims into groups that fight one another. Whenever a movement causes Muslims to split and clash, it is certainly undesirable and does not enjoy God’s support. Its spread will be with the support of Satan, not God.
Such division may occur under political, religious, or other labels. The real criterion for a Muslim movement being desirable is not its name or its claim of following the Quran and Hadith. The real criterion is whether it promotes unity among Muslims or discord. A movement that promotes unity is desirable in God’s sight; a movement that promotes division and discord is undesirable. (Al-Risala, May 2003)
