What i conclude is the thin line between kufr, zulm, and shirk should be well defined, but ofcourse May Allaah bless you and Hamdullillaah you have great art of explaining stuff through analysis.
Peace SlaveofAllaah
I see kufr, zulm and shirk in some special cases to be synonymous with one another. They are for example all crimes. These are traits of kaafir, zalim and the mushrik respectively. It is not to say that a Muslim will not exhibit kufr sometimes, or not exhibit zulm sometimes and even not exhibit shirk sometimes.
Also it is not to say only kaafirs commit kufr, because one who is a kaafir can also be a zalim, he will be referred to as zalim depending on his action in question. In the deeper probing actions those of intention and hidden forms the outward would seem to be resemble kufr but the inner could also be a form or minor shirk. This is all I was alluding to. So I do believe that these things are seperate from one another, but I also believe there can be two or three characteristics of the same crime perceived in slightly different ways.
And May Allah (SWT) protect me from all crimes ...
Allah (SWT) has gifted you brother and may He increase eloquence in us all. Ameen.
if people commit sins against Quran and sunnah and they say we dont believe for example
fasting and hajj etc is mentioned in the Quran and a muslim does'nt do it and says i dont believe it to be fard obligatory then he/she is no longer muslim
but if he/she does not do these actions and he/she says it is fard obligatory then he/she is still a muslim
I think you need to explain yourself.
My understanding is that all creation worships The God by doing what it is itended to do. Since al najamu wa al shajru yasjdaan ... do notice the preceding verse infers how, al shamsu wal qamaru biHusbaan ... in essence, all creation strives (tasbeeh) to do best what it is designed (Hsb) to do. We have been designed as social creatures that form societies and strive (tasbeeh) for progress/betterment. I am not sure how else to explain my understanding but I think you should be able to get my point.
Shirk - Associate with Allah SWT in his Oneness or worship.
Kufr - To hide the truth when it has become manifest to the you.
Jahil - One to whom the truth has not been made manifest.
Zalim - One who transgresses the limits set by Allah SWT.
Kufr is a form of zulm indeed. The only way I can understand an act of Kufr or Zulm being Shirk is when the trangression is regarding the Unity and Worship of Allah SWT.
Peace USResdient
I read your post again and I noticed that you have accepted that the three terms are interchangeable dependent on situation. JazakAllah Khair for pointing these out. Shrk as you rightly say is when the Unity or Worship of Allah (SWT) is being compromised. Part of the conditions of uloohiyya are that the obedience to the Word of God is done and recognising the Word of God as different to the word of man. So by obeying the words of the ones who change the Word of God we are actually worshipping them and bringing them in partnership to Allah (SWT) thus compromising Unity also. It is all so interconnected, but the deep probing of this issue demonstrates to us that shrk definitely has levels of apparency ranging from 'blatant shrk' to 'unknowing hidden shirk'.
I think we are generally agreeing though ... inshaAllah. If not then I renounce what I have said earlier and say that you are right.
My understanding is that all creation worships The God by doing what it is itended to do. Since al najamu wa al shajru yasjdaan ... do notice the preceding verse infers how, al shamsu wal qamaru biHusbaan ... in essence, all creation strives (tasbeeh) to do best what it is designed (Hsb) to do. We have been designed as social creatures that form societies and strive (Hsb) for progress/betterment. I am not sure how else to explain my understanding but I think you should be able to get my point.
Peace hypnotix-2000
I am glad you brought this dimension of the subject into play. Because it is essential that we understand that though Allah (SWT) has given us the freedom of choice, what this actually means is that we are seeking to do what we choose when choices present themselves to us and Allah (SWT) gives permission for those things to manifest for us, He has also provided for us a model to operate in accordance to. This model is accessible at many levels, the fitra, the Qur'an and Sunnah and pondering and investigation also.
When Allah (SWT) says Be it is, means that anything that can possibly happen does so because Allah has said Be. Which means everything is in total obedience to the Will of Allah (SWT). When we want to commit a crime in our lapse we do so by the Will of Allah (SWT), it would be impossible to commit that crime if Allah (SWT) did not Will it. Thanks for that brother hypnotix-2000.
What I meant earlier was ... is it wrong to say that we seek the pleasure of Allah (SWT)? If so, why is it wrong?
To explain my previous post ... There are two forms of the Will of Allah (SWT) ... one is legislative and the other is ordaining. The legislative Will we can choose to disobey but only to face consequences, but ordaining Will we cannot prevent, such as we cannot live off carbon dioxide instead of oxygen, etc. However, we should quickly realise that if we tried to break natural laws, such as trying to keep alive without breathing we can very quickly assess the dire consequences, the wise from amongst us will be able to draw the same conclusions from going against legislative laws of God, we surely bring calamity upon oursleves.
I am glad you brought this dimension of the subject into play. Because it is essential that we understand that though Allah (SWT) has given us the freedom of choice, what this actually means is that we are seeking to do what we choose when choices present themselves to us and Allah (SWT) gives permission for those things to manifest for us, He has also provided for us a model to operate in accordance to. This model is accessible at many levels, the fitra, the Qur'an and Sunnah and pondering and investigation also.
When Allah (SWT) says Be it is, means that anything that can possibly happen does so because Allah has said Be. Which means everything is in total obedience to the Will of Allah (SWT). When we want to commit a crime in our lapse we do so by the Will of Allah (SWT), it would be impossible to commit that crime if Allah (SWT) did not Will it. Thanks for that brother hypnotix-2000.
Yes, but when you say "Be", my understanding is that it "Be" a system with certain dynamics/systematics. So if we commit a crime, of course it is through Allah's will since it is He who gave us the choice to commit it (or to abstain from it) ... nothing is without the Divine System.
What I meant earlier was ... is it wrong to say that we seek the pleasure of Allah (SWT)? If so, why is it wrong?
It is not wrong, however it does make it a bit misleading, since limited beings that we are, we start thinking of God with our own standards; i.e. as a king or tyrant who demands to be respected/obeyed ... He does not need our obedience/worship. He is al-A'laa (the One who is above/beyond everything). His message is to give us eminence through our actions... a very just and fair requital.
"If a PIMP justifies his/her actions by interpreting the orders of God in such a way that it seems pimping is allowable then this is Shirk, because they have placed their nufs and reasoning above the law of God."
I am not talking about disobedience to the law, because to the criminal in his heart the law is true but the act is wrong, and through weakness it is done anyway.
Likewise, the one who says he does not pray he is sinful, but if he claims that we do not have to pray then he is committing kufr of the command to pray.
I have tried to base this on those people who obey the scripture knowing that it was changed by man. Likewise, *(a) if a person changes the meaning of scripture to suit his own requirements ... is this not a minor form of shirk? (b) The one who pimps knowing it is wrong is sinful ... the one who pimps thinking it permissible is not a Muslim *... in the sense of being a mutawahhid.
JAK for the reply.
I have categorized the emboldened part in two parts i.e. (a) and (b) for sake of discussion:
(a) This is exactly what the Quran tells us about the Jews or Christians. They changed their scriptures to suit their needs. The Quran does not call them Mushrik though or one who commits major Shirk. If this change involves changing the scripture in such a way to change or deny the Oneness of Allah SWT or associate a partener in worship with him AWJ, then that becomes a major form of Shirk. This has always been our difference with Christians. A minor form of Shirk is also a Zulm in many cases. I think our scholars have defined so many categories of Shirk that many muslims have lost its true meaning and often confuse Zulm with Shirk. If the riches of a person make a person so proud that he starts comparing himself with Allah SWT (Audhubillah) as in the case of Phiroan or Pharoah then that is major Shirk however if it only makes him proud and arrogant towards his other fellow humans then that is not major Shirk but a grave Zulm. I think the central theme to calling something shirk is when someone starts raising/considering himself or others above his God-conscienceness or dependence on Allah SWT.
(b) Since pimping is the example here, first case I think it is zulm since he does it knowingly and the second case is Kufr because he is denying it even though he knows it is right.
Yes, but when you say "Be", my understanding is that it "Be" a system with certain dynamics/systematics. So if we commit a crime, of course it is through Allah's will since it is He who gave us the choice to commit it (or to abstain from it) ... nothing is without the Divine System.
It is not wrong, however it does make it a bit misleading, since limited beings that we are, we start thinking of God with our own standards; i.e. as a king or tyrant who demands to be respected/obeyed ... He does not need our obedience/worship. He is al-A'laa (the One who is above/beyond everything). His message is to give us eminence through our actions... a very just and fair requital.
I read your post again and I noticed that you have accepted that the three terms are interchangeable dependent on situation. JazakAllah Khair for pointing these out. Shrk as you rightly say is when the Unity or Worship of Allah (SWT) is being compromised. Part of the conditions of uloohiyya are that the obedience to the Word of God is done and recognising the Word of God as different to the word of man. So by obeying the words of the ones who change the Word of God we are actually worshipping them and bringing them in partnership to Allah (SWT) thus compromising Unity also. It is all so interconnected, but the deep probing of this issue demonstrates to us that shrk definitely has levels of apparency ranging from 'blatant shrk' to 'unknowing hidden shirk'.
I think we are generally agreeing though ... inshaAllah. If not then I renounce what I have said earlier and say that you are right.
I think you right all three are very closely related depending on the situation. Its the hidden shirk that becomes confusing and the three terms tend to get mingled. This is probably why the Prophet SAW (paraphrasing from memory) said that he feared for his ummah the most regarding these small and hidden forms of shirk. I think the line gets very murky there.
JAK, I think you also have good understanding and like to analyze. Been a pleasure discussing with you.
I have categorized the emboldened part in two parts i.e. (a) and (b) for sake of discussion:
(a) This is exactly what the Quran tells us about the Jews or Christians. They changed their scriptures to suit their needs. The Quran does not call them Mushrik though or one who commits major Shirk. If this change involves changing the scripture in such a way to change or deny the Oneness of Allah SWT or associate a partener in worship with him AWJ, then that becomes a major form of Shirk. This has always been our difference with Christians. A minor form of Shirk is also a Zulm in many cases. I think our scholars have defined so many categories of Shirk that many muslims have lost its true meaning and often confuse Zulm with Shirk. If the riches of a person make a person so proud that he starts comparing himself with Allah SWT (Audhubillah) as in the case of Phiroan or Pharoah then that is major Shirk however if it only makes him proud and arrogant towards his other fellow humans then that is not major Shirk but a grave Zulm. I think the central theme to calling something shirk is when someone starts raising/considering himself or others above his God-conscienceness or dependence on Allah SWT.
(b) Since pimping is the example here, first case I think it is zulm since he does it knowingly and the second case is Kufr because he is denying it even though he knows it is right.
fasting and hajj etc is mentioned in the Quran and a muslim does'nt do it and says i dont believe it to be fard obligatory then he/she is no longer muslim
Correct, he is committing kufr or can be called a Kaafir then.
I think you right all three are very closely related depending on the situation. Its the hidden shirk that becomes confusing and the three terms tend to get mingled. This is probably why the Prophet SAW (paraphrasing from memory) said that he feared for his ummah the most regarding these small and hidden forms of shirk. I think the line gets very murky there.
JAK, I think you also have good understanding and like to analyze. Been a pleasure discussing with you.
It wasn't a secret ... we just wanted you lot to find out naturally. You rumpled my lay .. .well done! It was sort of my own fault though.
no porblem :) I didn't mean to say there was any motive behind this. Please don't misunderstand.
**Islam sees itself **as a continuation of earlier monotheistic faiths, so when Muslims talk about monotheism it is with the assumption that its the same monotheism of Judaism and whatever was before, including possibly Zoroastrianism. Non-muslim scholars may disagree about whether Islam is actually a continuation, but its really hard to figure on what basis they can claim that.
Because it is a totally different religion, with a different message, different emphasis, different scripture, different rituals, different prophet, different path to salvation, different historical facts, etc. Calling the previous versions, intepretation, scripture and practices of the Abrahamic religions corrupted; stripping prophets of divinity; and contradicting the teachings of that divine prophet do not add up to a 'continuation' in anyone else's book other than Muslims.
Because it is a totally different religion, with a different message, different emphasis, different scripture, different rituals, different prophet, different path to salvation, different historical facts, etc. Calling the previous versions, intepretation, scripture and practices of the Abrahamic religions corrupted; stripping prophets of divinity; and contradicting the teachings of that divine prophet do not add up to a 'continuation' in anyone else's book other than Muslims.
Semi, this post might deserve a separate thread for discussion. Would you like to?