Who Are People of the Book (ahl al kitab)?

The Quran refers to Jews and Christians as People of the Book (ahl al Kitab) which is an honorary title given to those who previously received Divine scriptures. As the Muslim world expanded, it encountered other religions and Muslim scholars questioned what was the status of people from non-Abrahamic religions. The Quran taught that God sent prophets and guidance to every nation on earth (see Quran 13:7). Some of the most credible Muslim scholars like Imam Abu Hanifa [1], Imam al-Shafi'i [2], Ibn Hazm [3] and others understood the term ahl al-Kitab (People of the Book) more literally or broadly as any people (ahl) with a sacred scripture (kitab) including the Zoroastrians in Persia and other religious groups. Interestingly, when 'Ali was caliph, he was asked by Ash’ath ibn Qays why he accepted the Zoroastrians tax payments for protection (jizya) when such protection should only be offered to People of the Book (Jews and Christians). The caliph replied, 

“It is not as you perceive! They [the Zoroastrians] had a holy book and Allah sent them a Messenger…” 
Source: Abd Ali ibn Jumah Arusi Huwayzi, Tafsir Nurul-Thaqalain, vol. 3, p. 457.


This incident is well known in the Shi'ite tradition but we also have Sunni scholars like Imam al-Baghawi mention 'Ali رضي الله عنه referring to the Zoroastrians as people who received a sacred scripture (see Imam al-Baghawi tafsir, verse 9.29). Most scholars accept that the Zoroastrians are the people referred to in the Quran as Majus [22:17]. This is quite remarkable considering the typical perception of Zoroastrians as fire-worshippers or pagans. Compare this to the Christian attitude towards the Native Americans and all non-Christian groups as heathens put to the sword. 

Some Muslim scholars took a middle ground so they accepted Zoroastrians and other non-Abrahamic traditions to be People of the Book but refused to provide legal support for marrying their women and eating their meat which they restricted to Jews and Christians.  

In India, there were some ulama who included Hindus and Buddhist as People of the Book [i.e. People of Previous Scriptures]. We even have a prominent Salafi scholar, Shaykh Rashid Rida (d. 1922) accept that some among Hindus and Buddhists can be included as People of the Book [4]. The Muslim scholar al-Biruni (d. 1050) mastered Sanskrit and sat with Hindu pandits to learn their scriptures and traditions. He argues that the "educated" Hindus were clearly monotheists. Below are two quotes from their sacred books which support his claim,

"There is only one Brahman" 
(Ek am brahm)
    - Rig Veda, Brahma Sutra

"Truth is One, God is One. Sages call him by many names; there are many attributes given but no definition or images for God" 
    - Rig Veda, Book One

What distinguishes the Hindus from the Meccan idolaters is that the former believe in an afterlife and possess sacred books (e.g. Vedas, Upanishads etc). The Quran constantly asks the idolators in Mecca for evidence or scriptural support for their beliefs and practises which they do not possess.     

It is a Quranic teaching that every nation on earth has received guidance and prophets who bought the essential message of Divine Oneness. For centuries, many Muslims have inquired whether figures such as the Buddha or Confucius may have been prophets. Ultimately, only God really knows (Allahu 'Alam) and that is the appropriate response to such questions. What we can say is that the sign of a true prophet is that his message will last for centuries and will attract a great sector of humanity. A false prophet can only attract a small group and his message does not survive the test of time. This is usually known as a cultic phenomenon opposed to authentic religion.

Notes

* Professor Pandit Vaid Parkash is a Hindu scholar who released a book in 1998 claiming that Muhammad ﷺ is mentioned in the Vedas (sacred Hindu books). Some of his findings are remarkable and Muslims have promoted his work. By accepting his evidence as true, Muslims would also have to conclude that these are revealed scriptures if Muhammad ﷺ is prophesised in them. 

As Islam spread to the Far East, scholars like Hamka, founder of MUI (the council of Indonesian Ulama), argued that the teachings of Chinese Taoism are a true expression of Islamic tawhid (Divine Oneness).5   

References

1. Al-Mawsu’at al-Fiqhiya, Ministry of Awqaf and Religious Affairs, Kuwait, vol.7 p.140
2. Muhammad bn Idris al-Shafi’i, al-Umm, vol.4, p. 173 (cited in Fiqh al-Aqaliyat al-Muslima p.29)
3. Ali bn Ahmad bn Said Ibn Hazm, Al-Muhalla bi al-Aataar, Dar al-Fikr, vol.9, pp.12,17,18, and 144
4. Muhammad Rashid Rida, Tafsir al-Hakim: Tafsir al-Manar, 9 vol., Beirut, Dar al-Ma’rifah, n.d., 6:187-190
5. Approaches to the Quran in Contemporary Indonesia by Abdullah Saeed, page 219.


Two Muslims Discussing the Status of Native Americans in Islam 


Zahir: Are Native Americans People of the Book — people who received Divine Revelation?

Basir: Possibly, yes.

Zahir: What evidence do you have? They don’t even have a Sacred Book.

Basir: The Qur’an says every nation has had a prophet (13:7; 35:24). The absence of a written Book does not mean the absence of prophecy or Divine guidance. They may not have had a Book because they were a pre-literate culture, carrying truth in heart and memory rather than on parchment.

It is said the Red Man’s Book was virgin nature itself — the forests, the rivers, the animals, the open sky. No one has known that Book more deeply than them.

Zahir: Then isn’t that a contradiction? On the one hand, you argue that a Divine Book distinguishes People of the Book from pagans, yet now you say those without a Book — like the Red Indians — could be considered People of the Book.

Basir: Not a contradiction at all. The Native Americans had no Book because they were a pre-literate culture, but they must have had prophets. The Quraysh, on the other hand, had neither prophet nor Book until the coming of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. Before him, they were pagans in the truest sense, whereas the Red Indians and the Hindus of India were probably not. Wallahu A‘lam.


Notes


* In pre-literate cultures, known as oral cultures, you will find that the language spoken is actually more impressive and majestic, and the spiritual presence more real and palpable. Ananda Coomaraswamy’s in 1949 titled The Bugbear of Literacy makes these points with great clarity, showing that even the lower classes spoke elegantly and recite poetry. Plato famously warned about the dangers of literacy in Greece, arguing that it would weaken both memory and wisdom - even though many were saying the opposite. In an oral culture, the written word can be more of a hindrance than an aid — like crutches forced upon those already walking upright.

The Perennialist argue that the confrontation between the Red race and the white European settlers was nothing less than a meeting of opposites: one of the most noble and spiritually chivalrous peoples against one of the most depraved and materialistic civilisations imaginable — a clash in which innocence met avarice, and reverence for the Sacred met the hunger to possess and consume. The Perennialist author, Ananda Coomaraswamy remarked in astonishment that such an extraordinary people could have existed in the latter days.


* Professor Pandit Vaid Parkash is a Hindu scholar who released a book in 1998 claiming that Muhammad ﷺ is mentioned in the Vedas (sacred Hindu books). Some of his findings are remarkable and Muslims have promoted his work. By accepting his evidence as true, Muslims would also have to conclude that these are revealed scriptures if Muhammad ﷺ is prophesised in them. 

As Islam spread to the Far East, scholars like Hamka, founder of MUI (the council of Indonesian Ulama), argued that the teachings of Chinese Taoism are a true expression of Islamic tawhid (Divine Oneness).5   

References

1. Al-Mawsu’at al-Fiqhiya, Ministry of Awqaf and Religious Affairs, Kuwait, vol.7 p.140
2. Muhammad bn Idris al-Shafi’i, al-Umm, vol.4, p. 173 (cited in Fiqh al-Aqaliyat al-Muslima p.29)
3. Ali bn Ahmad bn Said Ibn Hazm, Al-Muhalla bi al-Aataar, Dar al-Fikr, vol.9, pp.12,17,18, and 144
4. Muhammad Rashid Rida, Tafsir al-Hakim: Tafsir al-Manar, 9 vol., Beirut, Dar al-Ma’rifah, n.d., 6:187-190
5. Approaches to the Quran in Contemporary Indonesia by Abdullah Saeed, page 219.

No comments:

Post a Comment