Once in a while the news are filled about a group of extremist Muslims who slaughter people and commit the most unthinkable crimes under the name of Islam. ISIS is a recent example. If you ask such people that why they are committing such obvious wrong deeds and still consider it the command of the God, they would answer that they are trusting a Muslim scholar and that they receive the commands of the God through him. Based on this trust they consider the scholar's commands equivalent to the God's commands and blindly follow the scholar's instructions to make the God happy. But does not this method sound too similar to shirk, the exact opposite of Islam's primary message, which is not following anybody except the God? How did this happen? How did that origin with the most clear message came to this obvious contradictory point?
In the "Belief vs. Trust" article, we show that similarly to all modern religions, in the current understanding of Islam also believing in God is interpreted as trusting a religious package preached by the local religious scholars. After analyzing the roots of such interpretation in all religions, the article shows that key element that legitimizes the incorporation of trusting scholars into islamic practice is considering Hadith as a pillar of Islam. The current Islam which is mixed with Hadith has become so complicated that leaves an ordinary Muslim with no solution but seeking the advice of some Hadith experts (or scholars) about "what Islam says". This blind obedience creates potential for extremism: if the religious scholar is extremist, the blind followers also apply the extremism in the name of religion.
Then in the "Islam without Hadith" article, we list the pros and cons of existence of Hadith in the current Islamic practice, and show that by eliminating Hadith not only we do not lose any of the core Islamic values but also we are given the chance to rediscover the Simple Islam, the religion which guides us to nothing but reasonable, beautiful deeds. In Simple Islam, which is free from the complexities of Hadith, there is no space for religious scholars to instruct their blind followers to such unbelievable crimes. In the "Scope" article, we then revisit some of the controversial topics in Quran, such as slavery and women rights, and observe a Quran very different from what the scholars have been preaching for years.
We are looking for volunteers to translate this article to Urdu, Hindi, etc. Use the contact form if you are interested.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ):
- Q1: Those are bad scholars. But I am obeying good scholars!
- Q2: Some extremists claim obeying no scholar and just following Quran!
- Q3: I read Quran myself. It says "kill the infidels"!
- Q4: Extremists are using perverted Hadiths. There is a huge science of telling which Hadith is reliable. I am obeying good scholars who know this science well!
- Q5: Why should I trust your article? are you a scholar?
- Q6: Without Hadith how could we know the details of rituals?
- Q7: Does not Quran itself tell us to follow Hadith?
- Q8: Ignoring Hadith is ignoring Muhammad (s.a.a.w.)?
- Q9: Can we understand Quran without Hadith?
- Q10: Did not Quran force conversion?
- Q11: How about Sharia?
This article is also on Facebook. Use this link to share directly from Facebook.