Religion is commonly defined as “a system of faith and worship.” It provides “the structure that organizes one’s devotion to something.” The component of faith in it “describes one’s inward belief in a teaching, based on personal conviction, trust and confidence in something or someone.” As such, based on belief, conviction and confidence from within, religion takes the shape of worship from without. This obvious dimension of religion is deemed nothing more than the organization and externalization of devotion. The component of teaching at best gives the expression of the inherent faith and conviction. Religion is thus deemed to be something which is more felt than understood after demonstration and inquiry.
However, the scheme of things devised by God vis-à-vis religion is totally different. Actually, the faculty of reason, rationality and conscience which humans have been bestowed with needed complete freedom to choose between right and wrong after understanding what both meant not only for her/him as an individual or collectively as society but for the whole cosmos as such. That is why God categorically declared: “Say, the Truth is from your Lord: let him who will, believe, and let him who will, reject.” (18:29).
Moreover, God also said: “We showed him the Way: whether he be grateful or ungrateful.” (76:3). This declaration, on the part of God, comes with complete explanation and elaboration of Truth and Falsehood so that humans could opt for any of the two courses after complete understanding and analysis. This is what the Qur’an says in this regard: “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error.” (2:256). Moreover, it has been made clear that coercion, on the part of God, could have turned human reason and rationality into an absurdity with no purpose to serve as such.
The Qur’an, in this regard, says: “If your Lord had so willed, He could have made mankind one People: but they will not cease to dispute.” (11:118) That is why the Last Prophet (SAW), like every Prophet (‘AS) of God was advised that he had not been commissioned to compel anyone to believe: “If it had been your Lord’s Will, they would all have believed, –all who are on earth! Will you then compel mankind, against their will, to believe?” (10:99)
The great struggle of Prophet Ibrahim (‘AS) is a proof of the fact that God didn’t want to enforce His will on humanity. What was intended is that the upholders of Falsehood should face the upholders of Truth not in physical duals but in ideological debates and argumentation. By doing so the ideological strength of Truth should be established once for all and Falsehood, in spite of numerical superiority, should be defeated in the ideological field. This job was done so nicely by Prophet Ibrahim (‘AS) that he was declared “a nation or a whole community in himself.”(16:120)
However, this dialogue and argumentation is so evident in the endeavour of Prophet Ibrahim (‘AS) that modern academia should in no way declare that “dialogue of civilizations, cultures or religions” is its brainchild or innovation. Actually, the Prophets (‘AS), throughout the ages, have made dialogue one of the modes of their communicating the message of God to the people. In this regard, the fact should be borne in mind that inquisitive minds have always de-conditioned themselves before embarking upon their mission through dialogue and argumentation. Dialogue, in its very nature, has been a multilayered and multidimensional enterprise. In the beginning of the process of dialogue, a person starts understanding one’s socio-cultural moorings and religious milieu by raising questions on its various aspects.
Prophet Ibrahim (‘AS) had been well acquainted with this capacity and ability so as to be able to confront his people who had a worldview of their own. This is how the Qur’an hints to this aspect of Ibrahim (‘AS): “We bestowed aforetime on Abraham his rectitude of conduct, and We were well acquainted with him.” (21:51) It is this “rectitude” which led him to question and challenge the whole pantheon of deities revered and worshipped by his people. This is how, according to the Qur’an, Ibrahim (‘AS) started checking the foundations of this pantheon: “When the night covered him over, he saw a star (and) he said: This is my Lord. But when it set, he said: I do not love those that set. When he saw the moon rising in splendour, he said: This is my Lord. But when the moon set, he said: Unless my Lord guide me, I shall surely be among those who go astray. When he saw the sun rising in splendour, he said: This is my Lord; this is the greatest (of all). But when the sun set, he said: O my people! I am indeed free from your (guilt) of giving partners to Allah.” (6:76-78) It is clear that Ibrahim (‘AS) didn’t accept, even for the sake of argument, the star, the moon or the sun as his deity. What he did was that he made the belief of his people the base of his argument and rejected it on the basis that none of these were eternal or everlasting, the quality of the True Lord.
As the common people failed to convince or frighten Ibrahim (‘AS) and dissuade him from his stand, the argumentation reached the royal court. Naturally, there were two reasons behind this move: one, Ibrahim (‘AS) could be frightened of the grandeur of the royal court, and two, he could be frightened of the consequences of the ruler’s displeasure. However, the whole exercise backfired as the ruler too failed to satisfy Ibrahim (‘AS). Thus, according to the Qur’an, continued the argumentation in the royal court: “Have you not turned your vision to one who disputed with Abraham about his Lord, because Allah had granted him power? Abraham said: My Lord is He Who gives life and death. He said: I give life and death. Said Abraham: But it is Allah that causes the sun to rise from the East: do you then cause it to rise from the West. Thus was he confounded who (in arrogance) rejected Faith.” (2:258) Again, it is obvious that Ibrahim (‘AS) knew the “art of argumentation” more than the king, because in spite of the fact that the king’s first response to Ibrahim’s (‘AS) challenge was incorrect, Ibrahim (‘AS) rounded off the argument by turning to such a universal fact which the king found impossible to respond. Thus was the unbeliever silenced!
Thus, it is clear that religion of monotheism is neither accepted without reason nor is it a blind imitation of one’s ancestors. It needs “conclusive proof” for acceptance and it is conveyed to the people through “wisdom, beautiful preaching and gracious argument.” (16:125) As God never compels people to accept the Truth, He says: “Then say to them: Allah’s is the conclusive argument. Surely, had He willed, He would have guided you all to the Truth.” (6:149) And, Prophet Ibrahim (‘AS) was the best “instrument of this Conclusive Argument of God!”
(Author is Assistant Professor, Islamic Studies, GDC Sogam, Lolab. Feedback: [email protected])
