Serve God as individuals

Since the time of Adam God has dealt with His servants as individuals. He created every person on the face of the earth, and each will come before Him as an individual on the Day of Judgement. He does not share His kingship with anyone and He has never allowed any of His servants – not even prophets – to forcibly impose any of His prescribed limits on anyone.

The religionists were not requested by God to build a building called ‘God’s house’. They built a cubical stone structure which began life as a temple and is now an idol in the middle of another temple – one which is no different from the temples the ‘Muslims’ regard as pagan.

No matter what we want to believe, we cannot go against the truth from God when He says the Arabs are the worst community. Translators are forced to exonerate the Arabs by saying the word a’robi mentioned in the Reading refers to the Bedouins or a special brand of the Arab race. God is explicit in everything. The word a’robi has nothing to do with the Bedouins. The Bedouins are called Baduu-na-fil-A’robi – a term which is also found in the Reading. The word a’robi means the Arabs in general including the city-dwellers.

And those who are around you from the Arabs are hypocrites and from the people of the City. They persist in hypocrisy and whilst you may not know them, We know them. (9:101)

The Reading was good on the day it was revealed; it is good at present and it will remain good until the Day of Judgement. When it refers to the Arabs it means just that: Arabs. The Arabs must solve the problem among themselves of identifying the guilty ones. Meanwhile nobody can change the truth in the Reading and none can abrogate the verses to say something nice about the non-believing Arabs. Unless they repent and believe in the Reading, God condemns these people forever. The question is: will they admit their wrongdoings and will they repent?

Perhaps the innocent Arabs may find the answer if they ask themselves the significance of an orderly way of life towards peacefulness with the following:

  • Is there a concept of the house of God for peacefulness?
  • Can they attain global peace by cherishing a rock structure and called it God’s house?
  • What has the stone house and a little black granite, two outcropping rocks, a copper block, and stone pillars got to do with God?
  • What kind of peacefulness towards mankind can they achieved when they perform the religious rites around a rock structure built by their own hands?

These ideas are not found in the Reading.

From being a reconstructed cubical house surrounded by sand forty years ago, the ‘Ka’aba’ is now a lavish building with Italian marble floor fitted with water pumps to channel the refrigerated ‘reverse-osmosis’ water from beneath the cube house (which they claim to be holy). On the Arab soil everything and anything is possible with a little bit of imagination. The rocks can be made divine and the desalinated seawater can be made sacred.

The religionists pronounced only two magic words – ‘Zam-Zam’ – without having to Houdinise the process to turn the sea water to become ‘Holy’. Today Muslims all over the world will include 20-50 litres of Zam-Zam water in their excess baggage to take home.

Only the religionists could come up with an idea as ridiculous as placing God’s house in Mecca and then making the Devil His neighbour in nearby Mina.

As far as the poor visitors are concerned, they are not interested in the true meaning of the word u’mro-ata or Haj because these words are in Arabic. They leave the language to the religionists. Their main concern is to perform the u’mrah and the Haj even if they have to bow and prostrate to the local mountain rocks.

Basic universal values

No court in the world accepts a plea of ignorance as vindication: ignorance of the law is no excuse. By the same token, we cannot plead ignorance on the Day of Judgement or blame someone else for the wrong things that we have done. Nothing could be clearer than the statement in the Reading when it says:

Ain-taqulu yaumal qiamati ain-na-kun-na ‘an-haza ghor-filin. (7:172)

So that you will not say on the Day of Judgement, “Indeed we did not know about this.” (7:172)

Muslims on the whole – and the modern Arabs in particular – are grossly ignorant of God’s message in the Reading. They read without comprehension, believing that they gain merit for just chanting the Arabic verses aloud. They leave the understanding to the u’lema. On the whole, they are sincere and simple people who feel that they need to serve their Lord and lead a righteous life. They have been born into a suffocating inheritance of religion. While it is easy to empathise with this situation, we all have to take responsibility for what we do. We cannot blame our parents for our lot on Judgement Day.

Or you may say, “It was our parents who set up idols, and as descendants we followed their footsteps. Will You punish us because they strayed?” (7:173)

Today, people depend on the u’lema for guidance, but more often than not, the u’lema misguides them. By their deeds, and words we know that these u’lema are agents of the same wicked religionists who invented the Arab religion. We have seen how these fanatics twisted the meaning of the words deen, ‘abd, and Sol-laa. They also twisted the word zakaa (so often mentioned with the word Sol-laa).

Understanding that the u’lema have more than a passing knowledge of the Arabic language, they are doubly guilty of abetting the non-believers and hypocrites to distort the effect of the Qur’anic message on the hearers. They have deviated from the true teachings of the Reading and continue to educate their followers not to understand the meanings of the message of the Book. If that were not enough, they impress upon their followers that salvation is contingent upon those who do not use their common sense or to question the religionists. It is strange that the u’lema rarely encourage their followers to perform charitable deeds according to God’s way in the Reading. This should be the cornerstone of God’s deen. They are, though, most diligent in the matter of collecting ‘zakat’1 which they deem to be a lawful religious tithe. Contributors, on the other hand must not question what they do with this money. According to the Arab culture, it is a cardinal sin to question the u’lema.

Anyone with even elementary Arabic must admit that there is no firm reason why zakaa should signify paying out money. In truth, there is not a single reference in the Reading regarding any such financial contribution or contributions in kind. On the contrary, the Reading advocates non-prejudiced charity and donation as the act of self-sacrifice by men and women towards their fellows in society.


1 In many countries these collections are made through compulsory deduction of salaries from workers – every month. The Vatican survives with such a system and many so-called Muslim countries are doing the same.