After seeing blasphemous arguments calling for the rejection of ahadeeth because ‘ they can’t be verified, they may be the words of others’ and a return to the origin of Islaam – the Qur’aan, it got me thinking.
The loudest Muslims are often one of two types ; the calmaani ( secularist) or mutadayyin
( lit. means religious, but in this context I use it to mean absolutist muslim).
The calmaani is one whose identity is rooted in cultural Islaam, having been born into a Muslim community, yet their source of self-esteem is in keeping up with the hipsters and thinkers. So when they come across polarizing verses of the Qur’aan or the ahadeeth, their initial reaction is to frown at it and reject it, as they do other people’s opinions and thoughts they deem beneath them. But then the repercussion of rejecting Islaam or criticizing it proves to be something they can’t afford as they would most likely be ostracized . So to deal with their cognitive dissonance, they create a bespoke Islaam that fits their frame of mind.
One such bespoke interpretation of Islaam is relegating the ahadeeth of the prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم to the realm of irrelevance or at least a secondary component.
In a similar vein, the mutadayyin has undertones of anxiety or OCD-like thoughts. In a world in flux and uncertainty, they flock to Islaam to act as a substitute for their identity. To them, everything is straightforward ; you do what you’re supposed to, you go to Jannah. You don’t do what you’re supposed to, you go to Jahannam. This world doesn’t matter anyway, so don’t worry about fear of failure. If bad things happen it’s because you’ve sinned – repent. If you see people different to you, condemn them as they are a threat to Islaam.
They, too, seek out a bespoke interpretation. One that employs purist principles with no room for tolerance or relativism.
In the face of any existential threat or doubt, these two types won’t hesitate to dump their anguish by rejecting something, condemning it, or blaming it.
These are on either extreme of the spectrum, and they are both fundamentally wrong.
Because Islaam isn’t meant to be a passive fixture, or a security blanket. It’s supposed to be integrated in WHO YOU ARE and make you think!
How can it affect you or transform you if you are shunning your own self? If you’re muffling the laments and grunts of your mind? If you’re painfully afraid of looking inwardly and discover that everything you sought comfort in or thought was true, WASN’T true?
Majority of humans shun the truth because it’s easier to remain in the unconscious and animalistic mind we are born with. The level of truth one believes in is in accordance to their consciousness and tolerance of uncertainty. Because faith connotes uncertainty, it’s believing in something without tangible proof. So if you’re dogmatic or absolutist, then that means that you are repressing certain truths from entering your mind because you’re not ready to give up your mindset or certainties. You can’t hold conflicting views in your mind without succumbing to either and rejecting the other.
And it’s for this reason that Tawheed in all its different manifestation depending on the prophet has been a polarizing element.
كان الناس أمة واحدة فبعث الله النبيين مبشرين ومنذرين وأنزل معهم الكتاب بالحق ليحكم بين الناس فيما اختلفوا فيه وما اختلف فيه إلا الذين أوتوه من بعد ما جاءتهم البينات بغيا بينهم فهدى الله الذين آمنوا لما اختلفوا فيه من الحق بإذنه والله يهدي من يشاء إلى صراط مستقيم
“Mankind were one community and Allâh sent Prophets with glad tidings and warnings, and with them He sent the Scripture in Truth to judge between people in matters wherein they differed. And only those to whom (the Scripture) was given differed concerning it after clear proofs had come unto them through hatred, one to another. Then Allaah by His Leave guided those who believed to the Truth of that wherein they differed. And Allâh guides whom He wills to a Straight Path.”
Mankind were one community, meaning in ignorance and collective unconsciousness. So the truth has always been iconoclastic. And those who rejected the truth and its proofs also rejected,hated and fought its adherents. And this is what I was alluding to earlier when I wrote that both the calmaani and mutadayyin will respond to cognitive dissonance by invalidating and rejecting the other person.