Books and Documents

Islamic Ideology (09 Oct 2017 NewAgeIslam.Com)


  • Thanks Royalj for your comment.

    The Quran uses Kafirun, Zalimun and Mujrimun as synonyms. Zalimun translates as Tyrant/Oppressor/Unjust and Mujrimun as Sinner, and yet, our translators invariably translate kafir as disbeliever, even when such a translation renders the verse as false, and translating as Tyrant/Oppressor/Unjust/Sinner is correct!

    Since there are verses that refer to the believers also as kafaru/kafirin, if kafir means disbeliever, it equally means believer which is nonsense because disbeliever is the opposite of believer. What it therefore means is that the word is faith neutral and describes a certain behaviour. It could mean denial of a right or denial of God.

     حَقِّى ذ He denied, or disacknowledged, to me my right, or just claim. (A, Mgh, K.) Hence the saying of 'Ámir, إِِذَا أَقَرَّ عِنْدَ القَاضِى بِشَىْءٍ ثُمَّ كَافَرَ [When he confesses a thing in the presence of the Kádee, then denies, or disacknowledges: كَافَرَ being thus used in the sense of كَفَرَ]. But as to the saying of Mohammad [the lawyer], رجُلٌ لَهُ عَلَى آخَرَ دَيْنٌ فَكَافَرَهُ بِهِ سِنِينَ [A man who owed to another a debt, and denied to him, in the case of it, for years], he seems to have made it imply the meaning of المُمَاطَلَة, and therefore to have made it trans. in the same manner as المماطلة is trans. (Mgh.)

    An Arabic-English Lexicon. London. Williams and Norgate. 1863.

    See below: The dictionary merely says that Kafir to mean disbeliever has become more common in the present day. This is based purely on how people are using the word in the present day.

    اكفرهُ ذ , (S, A, Mgh, K,) and  كفّرهُ , (A, Mgh, Msb,) [the latter of which is the more common in the present day,] He called him a كَافِر [i. e. a disbeliever, an unbeliever,or an infidel]: (S, Mgh, K:) he attributed, or imputed to him, charged him with, or accused him of, disbelief, or infidelity: (S, A, Msb:) or he said to him كَفَرْتَ [Thou hast become an unbeliever, or infidel, or Thou hast blasphemed: in this last sense, “ he said to him Thou hast blasphemed,

    Since Kafir can be used for someone who denies the rights of another human being, it can be certainly used for those who deny the favours or benefits conferred by God including active rejection of belief from knowledge but not from ignorance.

    The classical Islamic scholars judge the “shirk” of the Mushrikin as denial of God and His favours and betray their bigotry when the Quran does not judge them so. It only judges the active deniers of God as Kafir such as those who actively oppose/hinder men from the path of Allah. To call the disbelievers Kafir is a judgement, and not the meaning.

    There is no verse of the Quran, that says that all the Mushrikin are kafir because to call all the Mushrikin as Kafir would be judging all of them as deniers of God and His favours which is a blatant falsehood. The Quran does not indulge in such falsehoods. It is the bigotry of man that heaps falsehood on the Quran which merely refers to those who are not such deniers as people without knowledge or as la yalamun (9:6).

    Chronologically, Surah was Al-Kafirun was the 18th Surah and there are 86 Surahs that were revealed during the Meccan period, which makes Al-Kafirun an early Meccan Surah revealed some 8 years before Hijra. If Kafirun is taken to mean all the Mushrikun and if it says “neither do you (kafirun) nor will you worship what I (Muhammad) worships” and if after this, even one of those Mushrikin accept Islam, the surah is rendered false. The fact is that the majority of the Mushrikin accepted Islam. The Mushrikin in general, are therefore not the Kafirun, and the Surah addresses only the active opponents of Islam as Kafirun.

    Also, Al-Kafirun ends with “To you be your religion and to be mine”. And if this is said to all the Mushrikin, then to do further dawa to them makes the Prophet a person who says what he does not practice. The kind of people who do that, are described in another Meccan Surah.

    (26:221) Shall I inform you, (O people!), on whom it is that the evil ones descend?

    (222) They descend on every lying, wicked person,

    (223) (Into whose ears) they pour hearsay vanities, and most of them are liars.

    (224) And the Poets,- It is those straying in Evil, who follow them:

    (225) Seest thou not that they wander distracted in every valley?-

    (226) And that they say what they practise not?-

    It is an evil thing that the “Classical Islamic Scholars” accuse the Prophet (pbuh) of by implication. You cannot have one yardstick to judge other people and another for Allah and His Messenger. The problem with the “Classical Islamic Scholars” is their lack of integrity and discipline coupled with their bigotry which makes them insensitive even to the clear meaning of the Quran. Their good sense is covered by their bigotry and we know what that means. It means they are kafir.

    The “Classical Islamic Scholarship” heaps blatant falsehood on the Quran from its bigotry. It is ironical that in this day, we must fight against the kufr of the “classical Islamic scholars” but fight we must to rid the Quran, Allah and the Prophet (pbuh) from their calumny.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 11/9/2017 1:47:10 AM

  • Naseer I have come across an exhaustive study of the word “Kafir” by a Kafir. I give  a gist of it. Hope this may be of some interest to you. This is a copy-paste.

    “Disbeliever” is, linguistically a mistranslation of “Kafir” since in strict (British) English grammar. A “disbeliever” would be “one who has ceased to believe” – ie an spostate. The Koran generally refers to apostates as “hypocrites” and groups them with those who do not fully hold to Islamic teaching – ie “heretics”. The phrase “those who reject faith” is little better than “disbeliever” due to its ambiguity: I can “reject faith” both by leaving a faith or by refusing to accept it in the first place.

     Thus the Koran uses “kaffir” words mostly about non-believers about 450 times in 6236 verses. That means that about 7% of all verses in the Koran contain the “kfr” words as applied to non-believers. The total number of verses related to kaffirs is much greater, some sources placing it as high as 64% of the entire text.

    If the use of these words (disbeliever / rejector) is intended to limit the meaning of “kaffir” to “apostate” this is not supported by the Koran text. An apostate, a “murtadd” is indeed a kaffir, but not all kaffirs are apostates – at least unless we take the Koran’s claim that everybody is born a Muslim (K7:172) literally and deny that people are incapable of preventing themselves being “led astray” by their parents. Such an interpretation of kaffir would be truly vicious since the penalty for apostasy is death this would mean that all non-Muslims, even the new-born, deserve to be killed out of hand.

    I should also point out that many translators are not consistent in how they translate “kaffir” words.

    Note: In K76:5, “kafooran” is rendered as follows: “the righteous shall drink of a cup whereof the mixture is of Kafur” (Shakir decides this is camphor!). This exact same word is rendered as “ungrateful” in 76:3. I can understand why no translator wants to suggest that the “cup of paradise” is mixed with ingratitude and/or non-belief, but this is surely taking a liberty with the text.

    “Kaffartum” is found in 3:106, 9:66, 14:7, 17:69, 40:12, 41:52, 46:10, 73:17. It is usually rendered as “ungrateful” or similar in 14:7 and by some translators in 17:69. In all other verses the usual rendering is “disbelieved” or “rejected” or denied”.

    34:17 shows a similar uncertainty about whether to use “ingrates” or un/dis-believers.

    Thus, it is clear that within the meaning of “kaffir” is the idea the Kaffirs are ungrateful and thankless to Allah/Mohammed because they have not seen the “light” of Islam and converted and/or they have no gratitude to Allah for the bounty of nature.


    The word “Kaffir” is best understood as meaning “those who do not believe” or, more succinctly, non-Muslims.

    “Kfr” words occur in some 7% of the Koran verses. Passages dealing with kaffirs account for a much higher percentage of the Koran.

    The term “al-kaffiroon” (the non-believers) is an umbrella term for all types and classes of non-believer.

    A “kaffir” is someone who has rejected Islam, generally in the sense of refusing to convert, though an apostate (“Murtadd”) is also a “Kaffir” since they are literally “disbelievers”. This rejection should be understood as an act of will, the person has chosen non-belief. Thus a Kaffir is a practitioner of “khufr” – the act of non-belief.

    As well as the concept of non-belief, the word carries within its meaning several other ideas:

    ◦That the “kaffir” has somehow “buried”, “concealed” or “hidden” his/her true understanding of the “beauty and truth” of Islam – thus it implies lying or deceit, since the implication is that the Kaffir “really knows” that Islam is right. (See also K.45:7-9)◦That the kaffir has “removed” him/herself from the influence of and obedience to Islam, a sort of quasi-apostasy,◦That the kaffir is an ingrate – s/he does not show to Allah the respect and worship due for his “beneficence” (if they did they would become Muslim – obviously) and thus impious also.◦That the Kaffir is in rebellion and opposition to Allah and Mohammed, thus they are “enemies of Islam/Allah/Mohammed”.◦That all of the above is linked to the kaffir’s proud, haughty nature.Thus to put it in a sentence: “Islam says that “the Kaffir” are haughty, lying, deceitful, ungrateful, impious, quasi-apostate, non-believing rebels against Allah and Mohammed, too proud to admit the truth of Islam.”

    – – –

    By Royalj - 11/8/2017 8:56:19 PM

  • GRD Sb,

    Kufr is a Relative Concept

    (33:72) We did indeed offer the Trust to the Heavens and the Earth and the Mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof: but man undertook it;- He was indeed unjust and foolish;-

    (73) (With the result) that Allah has to punish the Hypocrites, men and women, and the Unbelievers, men and women, and Allah turns in Mercy to the Believers, men and women: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

    Once God has sent His messengers and His revelations, it becomes incumbent upon God then to punish/reward man by judging his deeds in the light of the guidance provided through the revelations. Without the revelations, there is no believer, unbeliever, or hypocrite or punishment for the sins of kufr, shirk, nifaq etc.

    It is easy to understand now, that kufr is relative to the message received. For example, observing the Sabbath was prescribed to the followers of Moses and not to other people. For Muslims, since there is no Sabbath, there cannot be kufr through violation of the Sabbath and punishment for it. We know from the Quran, that the Jews were punished in a very exemplary manner in this world itself for violating their Sabbath.

    What was Kufr for the Meccan pagans?

    The Meccan pagans we are told by the Quran, were not a people to whom a messenger was sent before, nor did they have a Book of revelation like the Christians or the Jews. The Quran describes them as an ummi nation and their state as of Jahaliya or ignorance. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse but there was no divine law for them at all. For these people therefore, shirk, idol worship, adultery was not kufr.

    What was kufr for them was solely violating self-evident truths or what was accepted by their own society as a serious crime. The only deeds for which the Quran treats the Meccan pagans as kafir are for:

    1.         Persecuting the Muslims for no other reason other than for their faith

    2.         Fighting the Muslims for their faith and driving them out of their homes. Breaking peace treaties and aiding the enemy.

    The Meccan pagans  are uniformly referred to as the Mushrikin except those standing against the Muslims in battle, those that practiced persecution, or those who broke their treaties with the Muslims. These exceptions, who were the enemies of the new faith of Islam, are referred to as the kafaru among the Mushrikin, clearly implying that not all the Mushrikin are Kafirin.

    There are those who will not believe who are Kafir, and by the very nature of a kafir, these will oppose a faith such as Islam and by their deed get identified as kafir. The examples of such people are Pharaoh, Abu jahal, Abu Lahab and his wife, Qarun etc. The peaceful disbelievers remain disbeliever from either lack of knowledge, lack of capacity to understand, or fear of persecution from the leaders of Unfaith. The majority belongs to the "cattle class" and follow the trend. They also entered Islam in armies when the tide turned in favour of Islam. These disbelievers, who were not an enemy of Islam are not Kafir.


    Is shirk a sin for the Mushrikin?

     (4:47) O ye People of the Book! believe in what We have (now) revealed, confirming what was (already) with you, before We change the face and fame of some (of you) beyond all recognition, and turn them hindwards, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-breakers, for the decision of Allah Must be carried out.

    (48) Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed.



    (4:115) If anyone contends with the Messenger even after guidance has been plainly conveyed to him, and follows a path other than that becoming to men of Faith, We shall leave him in the path he has chosen, and land him in Hell,- what an evil refuge!

    (116) Allah forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right).

    In a single surah, there are the two almost identical verses 4:48 and 4:116 on the sin of polytheism. Why is there a repetition? Why not a single verse addressed to all mankind if polytheism is an unforgivable sin for all mankind? The addressees of 4:48 are the People of the Book and the addressees of 4:116 are the Muslims or the hypocrites among the Muslims. Polytheism is a grave unforgivable sin for the People of the Book and for the Muslims but not for the Mushrikin or not for all mankind since this verse is not addressed to all mankind. Usury is also kufr only for the Muslims (3:130,131) and the Jews (4:161) since the verses directly address these people and not for the Mushrikin etc. Consuming intoxicants, is similarly prohibited only to the Muslims. and kufr for them if they consume it.

    The Quran does not treat all the Mushrikin as Kafir even in Surah Taubah as discussed by me in detail several times. Should we go by the Quran or by the opinion of scholars who talk in the air and argue without reference to the Quran taking the verses out of their context? These worthies you quote, appear incapable of understanding the difference when a verse is addressed to all mankind and when it is addressed to only the Jews or the People of the Book or the Muslims!

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/25/2017 7:18:02 AM

  • Dear Naseer Ahmad sb,
     how do you deal with such theological underpinnings on the Kufr and Shirk?

    Someone asked Sheikh Al-Bani: 

    Is There a Difference Between Kufr [Disbelief] and Shirk [Polytheism]?
    Al-Albaani replies:

    "The reality is that the case with every beginner student of knowledge, and I was like that and probably still am, I used to read this hadith and it would be problematic, because in some narrations [there occurs], “There is nothing between a man and disbelief except abandoning the prayer. So whoever abandons the prayer has disbelieved,” and in some narrations, “… then he has committed shirk.”
    Interjection: Subhaanallaahil-Adheem.
    Al-Albaani: I used to ask how can he have committed shirk? Yaa akhi, this person who has left praying, especially the one who does so out of laziness, how has he committed shirk?
    I used to think that maybe there was a mistake on behalf of the narrator [of the hadith], I was a student of knowledge, then later our Lord granted me success in understanding, even if it was when I was older alhamdulillaah, [he granted me success in understanding it] such that I recognized that legislatively, as opposed to linguistically, there is no difference between kufrand shirk.
    So all kufr is shirk and all shirk is kufr there is no difference between them legislatively, linguistically there is, because in the language kufr means to cover. Shirk is to make something a partner of another, like the polytheists who make equals with Allaah.
    But later I came to recognise that every unbeliever, even if he wasn’t a polytheist linguistically, he was in reality. No unbeliever is free from being anything but a polytheist [mushrik], our Lord said, “Have you seen he who has taken as his god his [own] desire?” [Jaathiyah 45:23] He took as his god his own desires, so, everyone who follows his desires has made it a partner with Allaah, thus, any kufr–[for example] if someone were to reject a letter from the Noble Quraan it would mean that he has put his intellect in charge and has taken it as a god and it is from this angle that the shirk has come.
    So, the one who said that all disbelief is polytheism and all polytheism is disbelief spoke truthfully, not like the one who says that not all kufr is shirklike you heard from at-Tahawi.
    In reality this is knowledge which is very rare and is something through which many, many problems are resolved, from them being the verse, “Indeed, Allaah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills.” [Nisaa 4:48]
    I read [a mention of] a problem about this verse in the Al-Manaar magazine which Sayyid Rashid Rida used to publish.  An objection came his way which stated that the meaning of the aayah is that these unbelieving Europeans who believe in ‘nature’, they call it nature, i.e., that this universe has a creator and who do not know any more than that, it is possible that Allaah will forgive them because they are not polytheists. And so Sayyid Rashid Rida at that time was not able to give an answer like this one which if he had known then would have been the conclusive judgement, [i.e., that] all kufr is shirk and all shirk is kufr".

    (Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 341, also available in Fatawa al-Albani regarding faith, creed and transaction)

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 10/25/2017 3:47:32 AM

  • GM Sb may read:

    The title of "the best of creatures" is reserved for the vanguard Muslims. Those who believed knowing that they would have to suffer persecution for their belief and yet willingly suffered in patience and fortitude for 13 years, sacrificed all that they had, were driven out of their homes and forced to migrate, lost their businesses etc. and then had to fight against numerically superior forces who were better armed and did not lose heart. These are the best of creatures.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/25/2017 1:33:17 AM

  • Shahin Sb,

     If you consider closely, a peaceful, just and non-oppressive Kafir is an oxymoron but there are many peaceful, just and non-oppressive among those Islam may otherwise consider as “disbelievers”. The Quran maintains this distinction between those who are simply “disbelievers” and those that are Kafir, throughout the text. Those who will not believe are those who are oppressors and will therefore never accept a faith that comes down heavily on any form of oppression and injustice, and such people are bound to oppose such a faith with all their might and set themselves up as an enemy. Even, believers who are unjust oppressors or even simply niggardly or exploiters through usury, or those who do not spend on the needy from the bounties Allah has provided them, or spend only to show off, or insult the recipient of their charity, are categorized as Kafir. The standard applied to the believer is much higher. Disbelievers who consume usury or are niggardly, are not considered as Kafir only for these failings, since such verses are addressed only to the believers.


    As far as dawah is concerned, it is limited to “enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil”. The first level is through setting an example. Conversion is not necessary, the definition of a Muslim being (2:112) “Nay,-whoever submits His whole self to Allah (by any name and without associating other gods) and is a doer of good,- He will get his reward with his Lord; on such shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.”

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/25/2017 12:40:54 AM

  • Let us forget kafirs. Let us talk about who are the best of creatures in the Quran.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 10/24/2017 1:25:45 PM

  • Shahin Sb,

     Stick to the original meaning of kufr which is to “cover up”. Are all the disbelievers covering up the truth? Some are disbelievers because they are “la yalamun” or people without knowledge according to verse 6 of Surah Taubah although these people were the direct addressees of the Prophet and although the prophetic mission of Muhammad (pbuh) was in its closing stage. Some are disbelievers out of fear of persecution from the “leaders of Unfaith” (Immatul kufri) according to verse 10:83.


    Please read my definition of kufr/kafir in the temporal dimension and in the spiritual dimension. In the spiritual dimension, rejection/denial of belief is kufr and makes a person kafir but who this person is not known to other men. What is important to note is that the Quran never considered all the Mushrikin as Kafir even though it calls them disbelievers. Mere disbelief therefore does not make a person kafir.  In the temporal dimension, an oppressor is a kafir because he goes against even the accepted norms of civil society or against what have become self-evident moral principles. The excuse of “la yalamun” does not apply to an oppressor. What an oppressor is covering up with dirt is obviously an accepted moral principle which is what makes him a kafir.


    Kafir does mean “those who will not believe”. The Quran describes the characteristics of such people and the examples are: The Pharaoh, Abu Jahal (Surah 96 Al –Alaq), Walid ibn Mughiyrah (Surah 68 Al –Qalam), Abu Lahab and his wife (Surah 111, Al-Masad). The chronological order of revelation of the three surahs mentioned is 1,2 and 6 and the last four persons named, find a mention in their life-time itself. They are identified only by their title or description.  Those who will not believe are only a few and different from those who may believe who form the majority. Most of the disbelievers are therefore not kafir and only a few are.


    As far as argument is used to bring the disbelievers to belief, it can be used only with those who are not kafir because the kafir are those who will not believe. (2:6) “As to the kafaru, it is the same to them whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe.”


    In verse 98:1 and 98:6, these are the deliberate deniers of the truth after receiving the clear evidence. They are described as the worst of creatures. Who are they? They are a set of knowledgeable people from among the people of the Book and from among the Mushrikin who believed in the coming of a prophet from prophecies in the earlier scriptures or otherwise, but who rejected the prophet although they knew it was fulfilment of the prophecy and for what reason? Read the rest of the Surah and my article on the subject:

    Who Are The Worst Of Creatures In The Quran?


    The following is a comprehensive coverage of the verses that describe kufr/kafir


    Personal traits of a Kafir

    Kafir is an odious word and means a conceited person whose haughtiness makes him an ingrate rebel against God (2:34, 2:99, 16:83) and a rebel against his benefactors (26:18,19), steeped in self-glory (38:2). These are not the personal traits of every non-Muslim or even every disbeliever and includes some among the believers also.


    What is being covered up here if one wants to relate the meaning given by the Quran above to the meaning of the root word? The intellect, the knowledge of right and wrong and the nature for obedience is covered by an excess of conceit, haughtiness and selfishness. The Quran did not define the meaning of the root word but used it to define the Kafir in the context of the Quran. Neither the root meaning means a disbeliever nor has the Quran defined it as such nor did the Pagan Arabs have any concept of disbeliever.


    The behavior of a Kafir

    The Kafir being inclined to self-glory, self-indulgence and injustice, deny the Hereafter or in justice finding perfection in the Hereafter (12:37, 18:105, 23:33, 32:10, 34:3, 41:7). The Kafir therefore deny the prophets, scriptures and all the Signs of God (10:2, 13:27, 13:43, 34:31, 40:4, 40:14). The Kafir are opposed to any moral system and are an enemy of the prophets, of good people, of humanity and of God (8:36, 9:32, 9:40, 14:9, 14:13,15:39, 16:88, 18:56, 21:36, 29:47, 32:10, 34:7, 41:26, 47:32). A Kafir therefore fights in the cause of evil against those who fight for a good cause (4:76). They spread mischief and disorder and are high handed oppressors (2:11, 2:27, 2:205, 7:103, 8:73, 9:107, 10:40, 10:91, 13:25, 16:88, 26:183, 27:48, 28:4, 47:22, 89:12). They are also niggardly (4:37) and exploitative (3:130).


    These are not the behaviours that describe every non-Muslim or every disbeliever. Niggardliness and exploitative behaviour, as a matter of fact, covers only the believers since such behaviour is from knowledge of God and shows ingratitude to God for his bounties.


    Neither are all the disbelievers kafir nor are the kafir amongst the disbelievers alone and therefore kafir does not and cannot mean disbeliever. Just as terrorist cannot mean Muslim, Kafir cannot mean disbeliever for the same reasons.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/24/2017 2:16:11 AM

  • We should assert what we believe in our hearts. The Prophet lived in different times and faced mortal dangers. We, living in our times, should clearly say that non-believers are not our enemies. Words like 'kafir' have no current application and must be discarded. End of story.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 10/23/2017 1:15:48 PM

  • Dear Naseer Saheb, none of the so-called standard translations make sense if they translate kafir ad unbeliever or infidel, but if kufr is translated as religious oppression, the verse would again not make sense, as what kind of argument or evidence would an oppressor require to understand that what he is doing is oppression. Argument or evidence is used to bring unbelievers to belief. 
    I still don't understand. 

    By Sultan Shahin - 10/23/2017 4:27:02 AM

  • Correct translation in Urdu

      [98:1] وہ لوگ جنہوں نے اہل کتاب اور مشرکین میں سے کفر کیا، ہرگز باز آنے والے نہ تھے باوجود اس کے کہ اُن کے پاس کھلی کھلی دلیل آ چکی تھی۔

    The translation that treats all the Mushrikin as kafir

    Kitabi kafir aur mushrik  (kanzul  Iman, Raza Ahmad Khan, Barelvi)

      The translation that treats all the People of the Book as well as the Mushrikin as kafir

    Woh log jinhone kufr kiya hai yani ahle-kitab aur Mushrikin (dono hi) kabhi apnkufr se baaz rahne wale na the jab tak unke paas wazeh dalil na aajaati.

    1: جو لوگ کافر ہیں (یعنی) اہل کتاب اور مشرک وہ (کفر سے) باز رہنے والے نہ تھے جب تک ان کے پاس کھلی دلیل (نہ) آتی

    And why are all these scholars of Arabic unable to translate one verse correctly? It is not knowledge of a language that helps in the correct understanding of any text in that language but overall language skills and a methodical approach to the study.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/23/2017 3:06:17 AM

  • Yunus sb's choice of analogy is interesting and reveals why he erred in correctly understanding 98:1, 98:6. A robber is dishonest by the very meaning of robber and there is no concept of an honest robber. Scholars for whom Mushrikin are Kafirin by definition, will therefore misinterpret as they have done.

     The Quran read through such false beliefs acquired from outside of the Quran, will therefore be misunderstood and explains why the scholars err. The solution is to bring a rigorous methodology and discipline to exegesis that rules out such errors and keeps out prejudice.

     What is a standard translation? All the six translators can be shown to be error prone if not with this single verse then with other verses. Since all the translators have translated kafir as disbeliever which is not the meaning of the word in the Quran, by what standard can any of their translations be called a standard translation? We may cite the translation that we agree with and if there are other translations with significant variation in the meaning, explain why we agree with what we have cited. The last thing that I would expect from an exegete is to cite six “standard translations” to say that a Quranic verse can be interpreted in multiple ways! If an exegete does not have a methodology to rule out the wrong translations, and merely chooses what takes his fancy, then may God save us all from such exegetes. 

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/23/2017 1:18:04 AM

  • Yunus sb, says:

     "The dishonest among the traders and the robbers were all punished

     Some will say the adjective 'dishonest' applies to only the traders and some will say it applies to the robbers as well and thus classify robber in two categories - honest robbers - dishonest robbers.

    I hope you understand basic Arabic to see that the word 'min' (among) is used only once in the sentence and hence it can be applied to only one or both category of people referred to in the verse 98:1." 


    My response:

    Some of the rules of grammar and clear communication are common across all languages and I strongly disagree with what Yunus sb says. There is no ambiguity at all. A person who wishes to say that all the robbers were punished and only the dishonest among the traders, would say:

     The robbers and the dishonest among the traders were punished

     Now let us discuss 98:1

     لَمْ يَكُنِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَالْمُشْرِكِينَ مُنفَكِّينَ حَتَّىٰ تَأْتِيَهُمُ الْبَيِّنَةُ 

     Al-Bayyina / The Evidence  (98:1) The Kafaru, among the People of the Book and among the Mushrikin, were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them Clear Evidence,- (Yusuf Ali)

    The above verse is speaking of the kafaru among the Pople of the Book and from among the Polytheists from which it is clear that not all the People of the Book and not all the Polytheists are kafir. However, those who argue that it is impossible that the Mushrikin of Mecca among whom the Prophet lived and preached could be considered not kafir, translate the above verse as “The Kafaru, among the People of the Book and all the Mushrikin,………”

    We are not dealing here with the loose speech of fallible men but of the infallible speech of God in which not one word is out of its proper place. The least we may expect is some consistency. Let us look at another verse with an identical construction grammatically.

     رَبَّنَا وَأَدْخِلْهُمْ جَنَّاتِ عَدْنٍ الَّتِي وَعَدتَّهُمْ وَمَن صَلَحَ مِنْ آبَائِهِمْ وَأَزْوَاجِهِمْ وَذُرِّيَّاتِهِمْ ۚ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ

    Al-Ghaafir / The Forgiver (40:8) "And grant, our Lord! that they enter the Gardens of Eternity, which Thou hast promised to them, and to the righteous among their fathers, their wives, and their posterity! For Thou art (He), the Exalted in Might, Full of Wisdom.

    In this verse people have no problem accepting the meaning of the verse to mean:
    the righteous among their fathers
    the righteous among their wives
    the righteous among their posterity or children

    although the Arabic 'min' is used only once and not three times.

    Why do they then have a problem accepting in another verse with identical grammatical construction that it means:

    The kafaru among the people of the book
    And the Kafaru among the polytheists?

    The answer is because they are predisposed to think otherwise based on the fact that they have been brought up to believe that all the “disbelievers” are kafir. If people do not overcome such predisposition and rely on reason, logic and evidence, to accept the truth, it is a form of kufr.

    Now if Allah had intended to say what the scholars say the verse means, then there is a simple and direct way to do that with complete clarity and without any ambiguity. The verse would have been worded as follows:

     لَمْ يَكُنِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ مُنفَكِّينَ حَتَّى تَأْتِيَهُمُ الْبَيِّنَةُ

    Indeed the Mushrikin and the Kafaru, among the People of the Book, were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them Clear Evidence,-

    The correct meaning of verse 98:1 is that ‘kafaru’ refers to a sub group of the Mushrikin and not to all the Mushrikin who are guilty of the kufr described in the verse. Similar is the case with 98:6 and 2:105 which refer to the kafaru among the Mushrikin.

     I hope Yunus sb concurs with what I have said above, because he has run away from discussing 98:1 or a similar verse 98:6 several times in the past.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/22/2017 11:28:41 PM

  • grammar has never been allah's strong point.
    By hats off! - 10/22/2017 10:27:48 PM

  • Dear Sultan Shahin Sahab,

    Here are six standard translations of the verse 98:1 copied from Internet:

    Sahih International: Those who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists were not to be parted [from misbelief] until there came to them clear evidence -

    Pickthall: Those who disbelieve among the People of the Scripture and the idolaters could not have left off (erring) till the clear proof came unto them,

    Yusuf Ali: Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them Clear Evidence,-

    Shakir: Those who disbelieved from among the followers of the Book and the polytheists could not have separated (from the faithful) until there had come to them the clear evidence:

    Muhammad Sarwar: The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans disbelieved (in Islam) only after receiving divine testimony:

    Mohsin Khan: Those who disbelieve from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and among Al-Mushrikun, were not going to leave (their disbelief) until there came to them clear evidence.

    Arberry: The unbelievers of the People of the Book and the idolaters would never leave off; till the Clear Sign came to them,


    The issue as is simple as that of the following sentence:

    "The dishonest among the traders and the robbers were all punished"

    Some will say the adjective 'dishonest' applies to only the traders and some will say it applies to the robbers as well and thus classify robber in two categories - honest robbers - dishonest robbers.

    I hope you understand basic Arabic to see that the word 'min' (among) is used only once in the sentence and hence it can be applied to only one or both category of people referred to in the verse 98:1.' 

    By muhammd yunus - 10/22/2017 8:54:59 PM

  • It would be interesting to see how the traditional translators cope with expressions like kafaru minal mushrikoon wal ahlal kitab. How do they translate kafaru in such places? Do they say infidels, disbelievers, idol worshippers among i infidels, disbelievers, idol worshippers, polytheists and ahl e kitab? Unfortunately, I have very little access to internet these days and cannot check  these translations for myself.
    By Sultan Shahin - 10/22/2017 2:19:13 PM

  • The Verse regarding being militarily prepared against the known and the unknown enemies is equally applicable today.

    Iraq did not have WMDs and was attacked and destroyed. North Korea has WMDs and will not be attacked. Israel has WMDs and is safe etc. etc.

    The US believes in 8:60, so does Russia, China, GB, France and every other country.

    However, power must go with a sense of responsibility, justice and fairness and used in the right cause to end oppression and injustice and not to be used as an oppressive aggressor.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/14/2017 12:54:32 AM

  • 33% of the Quran, 33% of the Hadith and 33% of the Sira deal with non-muslims / kafir / Mushrik

    The medina hadiths and koran contents, 80% deal with non-muslims

    Just delete all references to non-muslims, and we will have peace

    The bible is even more violent than the koran, regarding disbelievers - Moses asks that they be raped and killed - but todays Jews and Xtians dont follow Moses any more

    Only Muslims still follow Moses even today

    By Shan Barani - 10/11/2017 5:12:11 PM

  • Shahin Sb,

    There is absolutely no doubt that the Quran is the best Book on practical psychology and motivation. The Quran motivated a timid and reluctant people to take up arms against a formidable enemy and fight them fearlessly promising them help from a thousand angels, three thousand angels and even five thousand angels. The Quran promises them victory or forgiveness and heaven. It promises that Allah and His Prophet will prevail. It pulls up those who malinger. Without such goading and motivation a mere 300 Muslims (the count of the battle of Badr) could not have taken on the entire population of Mecca which some people put as 10 lacs but may at least have been 50,000 if not more. Why is it surprising that the Quran goads the Muslims for war preparations to defeat the formidable enemy?

    None of this is a problem if your basic understanding is right. The battle was only against the aggressors and not against the peaceful disbelievers and for their aggression and not for their disbelief.

    Why will the Quran not guide the Muslims to defeat their enemy who persecuted them, drove them out of the scared mosque and drove them out of their homes and was now waging battle after battle against them? The battle of Badr and Uhud were close to Medina and at considerable distance from Mecca which establishes who was the aggressor and the battle of the Trench was a siege of Medina itself.

    The motivational verses are a source of inspiration to any oppressed people to fight back oppression. However the fighting cannot be in the form of civil war since the Prophet was not permitted to fight as long as he was in Mecca. The precedent of the Prophet and earlier of Talut (Torah) establish that war can only be waged by a ruler in control of a territory using the people residing in the territory under his political control and one who can protect his people. The verses on fighting in the Quran, also apply only to the people who were with the Prophet (pbuh) in Medina and exclude those who had stayed behind in Mecca. Muslims cannot therefore indulge in civil war or fight against their own ruler.

    The rules of war are clearly codified.

    (2:246) Hast thou not Turned thy vision to the Chiefs of the Children of Israel after (the time of) Moses? they said to a prophet (That was) among them: "Appoint for us a king, that we May fight in the cause of Allah." He said: "Is it not possible, if ye were commanded to fight, that that ye will not fight?" They said: "How could we refuse to fight in the cause of Allah, seeing that we were turned out of our homes and our families?" but when they were commanded to fight, they turned back, except a small band among them. But Allah Has full knowledge of those who do wrong.

    General command to fight against any oppression to protect the weak. The faith of the oppressed/oppressor is not relevant

    (4:75) And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!"

    As brought out in the paper, In Islam, the other is the Kafir, but they are not the non-Muslims but the unjust and the oppressors who could be professing any faith including Islam. The cause of Allah, identified from the Quran, is to end all injustice and oppression, and all those who stand up for justice and fight against oppression are from “the community of God” and the Muslims must form an “Ummat-e-Wahida” or a united front with all such people to end injustice and oppression in the world.

    As long there is oppression in the world, the command to fight to end it remains operative. One may choose to fight through diplomacy, treaty or war depending upon the situation and circumstances.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/11/2017 8:55:48 AM

  • Dear Sultan Shahin Sahab,

    8:60 must be read in conjunction with 8:61 which says:
    "And if they (the attacking army) incline to peace, incline to it also, and put your trust in God. Surely, He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing.And if they incline to peace, incline to it also, and put your trust in God. Surely, He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing."

    The historical setting of the verses is summarily captured in the Qur'anic account of the battle of Uhud as follows (p. 30)


    3.4.    Battle of Uhud (625)

    (The revelation had meanwhile urged the Muslims) to prepare  with whatever arms and cavalry they could muster, and to avert fighting if their enemies were inclined toward peace (8:60/61 against Note 64.)

    Read together the verses 8:60/61 is the irrefutable historical record that the instruction of 8:60 was to defend against an attacking army that had camped close to Medina where the Muslims lived some 9 days journey (200 or so miles) from Mecca from where the attackers came. 8:61 instructs to go for peace if the attackers agreed.

    The following Qur'anic allusions to this battle demonstrates that the attackers were very powerful - still the Prophet did not compel any Muslims to go to the battlefield with him:

    "(The revelation commanded Muhammad) to urge the believers to fight without compelling anyone (4:84). It reminded the believers) that at Badr also they were weak and helpless (3:123) and inspired them with God’s promise of sending down three thousand angels (3:124). It declared that if they stood firm and dutiful in the face of a sudden attack, God would assist them with five thousand angels, swooping down (3:125). (It, however, clarified that as in the battle of Badr) (8:10).  God had made this (promise) only to set their hearts at peace (3:126), and thus to enable them to overthrow their enemies and repulse their attack (3:127) . 

    "On way to the battleground a faction of Muslims, led by Ibn Ubayy, withdrew saying, if they knew how to fight, they would have followed the Prophet (3:167). They also divulged matters of secrecy or alarm to others, instead of informing the matter to the Prophet and those with authority (4:83) .

    So banning of 8:60 is meaningless as the verse has to remain in the Qur'an as part of its historical legacy. Those who quote 8:60 of the Q ur'an in isolation simply lie against its message like the Ulema of AIMPLB who made
     an affidavit in the Supreme Court that the Qur'an espouses instant triple talaq. These are the shameless traitors of Islam - God witnessing - no doubt about it 

    By muhammd yunus - 10/11/2017 7:51:22 AM

  • May I draw our attention, Naseer Saheb, to publications like the following, which is banned in India, but available to Muslims around the world, and is having a huge impact. How do we cope with the legacy of these verses that are quoted by Jihadists repeatedly to great effect. Has this verse been translated correctly in your view and if not, what should be its correct translation? Should we consider them applicable to us today?

    The title of this release is in reference to Qur’anic verse 8:60. Here it is in full: “And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of God and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom God knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of God will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.” 

    By Sultan Shahin - 10/11/2017 3:10:00 AM

  • The misinterpretation may have arisen because some ulema used the word "non-believer" as a short cut for a much larger concept. The quotations given by Naseersaab would sound very strange and alien to most modern day Muslims.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 10/10/2017 1:29:34 PM

  • sabrangindia.in/article/islam-kafir-does-not-mean-disbeliever-or-non-muslim

    By Javed Ahmed - 10/10/2017 5:34:53 AM

  • There is no need to think when data is available about who thinks what and covered in my following articles:

    The Story of the Prophetic Mission of Muhammad (pbuh) in the Qu’ran (Concluding Part) Summary

    The Ahadith That Distort The Message Of The Quran - Part I

    The Tafseer of Ibn Kathir on verses 2:191 to 193 and 8:36 to 8:38 quotes a Hadith collected in the two Sahihs of Bukhari and Muslim in which the Prophet (pbuh) is alleged to have said:

     «أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أُقَاتِلَ النَّاسَ، حَتَّى يَقُولُوا: لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللهُ، فَإِذَا قَالُوهَا عَصَمُوا مِنِّي دِمَاءَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ، إِلَّا بِحَقِّهَا، وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى اللهِ عَزَّ وَجَل»


    (I was commanded to fight against the people until they proclaim, `There is no deity worthy of worship except Allah.' If and when they say it, they will preserve their blood and wealth from me, except for its right (Islamic penal code), and their reckoning is with Allah, the Exalted and Most Honoured.)"

    How many Muslims refute/reject the above hadith which is classified as sahih by the two of the most prominent compilers? It is not enough to cite other verses and opinions to prove otherwise without categorically rejecting every other opinion/hadith which says the opposite. Too many Muslims swing both sides as the occasion demands.

    While translating verse 8:38, while the correct meaning of the verse is: “Tell those religious persecutors/oppressors (kafaru) that if they desist (from their religious persecution), that which is past (their various acts of persecution) will be forgiven…..”

    For 12 translators the meaning of kafaru is disbelievers, who must desist from their “Unbelief” or its equivalent. They are: Yusuf Ali (from Unbelief), Al'-Muntakhab (renounce infidelity, desist from evil purpose and turn to Allah), Ali Unal: (to disbelieve themselves and prevent others from entering the fold of Islam), Muhammad TaqiUsmani (from infidelity), Syed Vickar Ahamed (from disbelief),Farook Malik (from unbelief), Dr Munir Munshey (their skepticism),Dr. M Tahir ul Qadri (from their blasphemous acts),Ali Quli Qarai [faithlessness], Dr Kamal Omar (from their blasphemous acts),Thanvi (Kufr), Raza Ahmad Khan Barelvi(Kufr Se Baaz Aye Aur Islam Laye).

    How many Muslims will categorically reject the misinterpretation of say Raza Ahmad Khan Barelvi who says that the war was to keep fighting until the disbelievers accept Islam? The above is not a complete list of the exceptions. Even one of the most moderate scholars Javed Ghamidi thinks that the war was to punish all the disbelievers with death by the sword of the Prophet and his followers while in the case of the earlier prophets, the disbelievers were destroyed by an act of God. According to him also therefore, the war was against the disbelievers for their disbelief.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 10/10/2017 1:24:16 AM

  • I don't think any Muslim believes that the Prophet was fighting disbelievers. He was fighting the aggressors and the treacherous.  

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 10/9/2017 9:59:10 AM