The Quranic Concept of Deen
-
From http//takhlees.blogspot.com/2010/04/quranic-concept-of-deen-part-1.html
Salaam alaikum.
The word "dayn" comes from the root Daal-Ya-Nun which in 2/282 is used to mean a transaction
2/282 O you who believe! when you TRANSACT(taDaYaNtum) A TRANSACTION/DEBT(DaYN) for a fixed time, write it down; ...
The word "deen" also comes from the same root and, in the same manner, is also transacted
9/29 Fight those who believe not in God, nor in the Last Day, nor hold as unlawful what God and HIS Messenger have declared to be unlawful, nor TRANSACT(yaDEENoona) the DEENIL HAQQ, until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.
Therefore the nature of 'deen' is also that of a transaction or debt. And indeed, there is a LIFE-TRANSACTION between Allah and the believers
9/111 God Has PURCHASED from the believers their very lives/selves and their wealth, with that they will have Jannat/Paradise....
To understand what deen is, what it is based upon, we have to understand what basically changes with a change of deen. The Quran tells us that Firaun/Pharaoh was afraid of a change of the people's deen
40/26 And Pharaoh said "Leave me to kill Moses, and let him call upon his Nourisher. I fear that he may CHANGE YOUR DEEN, or that he will cause chaos to appear in the land."
But what was Firaun afraid would change with the change in their deen? Was he afraid that bani Israeel(Children of Israeel) would start regarding Allah as their ilah(the ultimate reference point/authority/one's "god" and rabb(nourisher/developer/lord)? No, because bani israeel already regarded Allah as their ilah and rabb
God/Allah, bani Israeel's ilah and rabb
10/86 So they(Bani Isra'eel) said, 'in God we put our trust; our RABB, do not make us a temptation for the oppressing people;
10/90 ... he(Firaun, while he was drowning) said, 'I believe that there is no ILAH except Him in whom the Children of Israeel believe, and I am of the Submitters/al-muslimeen'.
This dispels the misconception of deen being 'religion' or 'system of beliefs'. But then what would have changed with the change in bani Israeel's deen that Firaun was afraid of? The answer is
Firaun's position as their
(a) MALIK(King/Dominator/Owner/Controller) and
(b) MA'BOOD(receiver of ibadah/service, one who is served)43/51 And Pharaoh proclaimed among his people "O my people, is it not that I possess the Mulk/Power/Ownership/Kingdom of Egypt (i.e. 'am I not the MALIK of Egypt), and these rivers flow below me? Do you not see?"
23/47 So they(Pharaoh and his chiefs) said "Should we believe two mere humans like ourselves, while their people are AABIDOON/SERVANTS to us?" (i.e. we are their MA'BOOD)
Therefore, despite their faith in Allah/God alone as their ilah and rabb, Firaun occupied the position of their malik and ma'bood, i.e. their SERVICE/IBADAH was being DOMINATED/CONTROLLED/MADE 'MAMLUK' by him.
Such a person is described in 16/75 as "ABDAN MAMLUK(servant dominated/controlled), not having ability over anything".
This shows deen's irrelevance to religious beliefs, that despite having "religious freedom", bani Israeel's IBADAH(SERVICE) was being CONTROLLED by Firaun because of their participation in his DEEN. That despite having professed "LA ILAHA ILL ALLAH", they had not entered deenillah/al-islam. Again, this shows that the Quranic concept of deen is not that of a religion, or a set of beliefs, but of
A transaction/debt to do with
(a)MULK/power/dominance/ownership and
(b)IBADAH/subservience/service.This is also confirmed by the following verses
The Day of the DEEN(yaumaddeen) is described as the day when no soul will have MULK/POWER for another soul
82/17 And what will make you understand what the yaumiddeen/Day of the Deen is?
82/18 Again, what will make you understand what the yaumiddeen/Day of the Deen is?
82/19 The day when no soul will have any MULK/POWER over any other soul, and the Command on that day is for God.And in 10/104, the believers' DEEN/POWER TRANSACTION is described as giving their IBADAH/SERVICE to Allah alone
10/104 Say "O People, if you are in doubt as to what my deen/Power Transaction is, then (let it be clear to you that) I do not give my 'IBADAH/SERVICE to those other than God to whom you give yours instead, I give mine to God, Who causes you to die, and I have been commanded to be of Believers."
Ad-deen/deenillah therefore is the life-transaction, power-relation, and/or power-transaction between God and the believers(as well as all His creation), the relation between the Malik/Ma'bood and the abd/mamluk.
More later, inshaallah.
-
Salaam Fahad,
transaction has a depth of meaning even in English
Transaction - (Psychology) an interaction of an individual with one or more other persons, esp. as influenced by their assumed relational roles of parent, child, or adult.
Transaction - the published records of the proceedings, as papers read, addresses delivered, or discussions, at the meetings of a learned society or the like.
The act is Transact - to carry on or conduct (business, negotiations, activities, etc.) to a conclusion or settlement.
Deen within the context of the meaning transact demands action, while the dichotomy of this state would be religion, religion being non-action, as much as Deen is the directive of action.
You can look at it another way, trans denotes change, so a change of action, from what the society is doing to what the Deen guides us to establish.
-
Peace Fahad
Well said.
Imraan
-
Salaam Fahad,
transaction has a depth of meaning even in English
Transaction - (Psychology) an interaction of an individual with one or more other persons, esp. as influenced by their assumed relational roles of parent, child, or adult.
Transaction - the published records of the proceedings, as papers read, addresses delivered, or discussions, at the meetings of a learned society or the like.
The act is Transact - to carry on or conduct (business, negotiations, activities, etc.) to a conclusion or settlement.
Abdun Nur,
I take "deen" to have all these connotations, except for "published records".
-
Thanks Imraan, Wakas, nsws1988.
Wakas,
It is quite a common view, and can be seen in other verses also.
Yes, it is a common view that deen is not religion, but my point is that there is no deen without power, IMHO. Whoever has power(or is granted power by God), his is the deen.
-
salam
in my opinion is opposite to God's Deen,
I think we can say that.
which I don't find a good translation for it
2256you can find this word in 2256-257, 3917, 451, 460, 476, 560, 1636
Thanks. I have studied the concept of Taghoot.
I think Pharaoh's government was a good sample of
Firaun's was the archetypical Taghooti system.
-
Salam Fahad, all,
Thanks for your sharing, some pratical questions came to my mind
Taking your definition of Deen, this imply a lot of things like
case 1
- working for governments as policeman, soldier, teachers or even in administration makes us a "'ibad" of that "mulk" but we still need to feed our families. Taking into account in many states the % of people working in such administration is about 10-13% of population (education, health, security...)
case 2
- for the rest of the people usualy they pay to use the system to be allowed to work, e.g. you pay taxes so you can have a VAT number to setup a company and work.
You still bring fuel to the system by doing so!
case3
Doing nothing!
Depending where you live (3rd wolrd countries- emerging countries or developed countries) you can either die in poverty or suck the system by receiving their money as assistance.What can be the solutions
- bani israel vs Fir'awn had a solution Exode lead by Moses, what would be our solution today? I think Abd Nur already gave his solution some time ago, what is yours!
Peace
-
Salam Fahad, all,
Thanks for your sharing, some pratical questions came to my mind
Taking your definition of Deen, this imply a lot of things like
case 1
- working for governments as policeman, soldier, teachers or even in administration makes us a "'ibad" of that "mulk" but we still need to feed our families. Taking into account in many states the % of people working in such administration is about 10-13% of population (education, health, security...)
You are welcome, Herbman.
It is ok to serve someone as long as it does not contradict our duty towards God. In all things/topics that have been dealt with in the Quran, we have to serve God. If we follow someone else's orders that contradict Allah's orders, then we are committing shirk in our ibadat/service to Allah. Other than that, people can serve other people.
I am quoting a post from my blog http//takhlees.blogspot.com/2009/04/correction-ibadah.html
Quote
I have made a correction to the previous post. I wrote initially
"This equates exclusive ibadah/service of Allah(15/40-41) with walking the path of the Quran(36-60-61, 6/126), meaning that those who obey sources OTHER THAN the Quran are not among the 'ibaad al-mukhliseen'."
What I should have written is those who obey sources CONTRADICTORY TO the Quran are not among the 'ibaad al-mukhliseen'. Because the Quran informs us that the nabiyeen/"prophets" and the momineen also have/had 'ibaad'(male) and 'aabidaat'(female)
24/32 And marry such of you as are solitary and the pious of IBAADIKUM/YOUR MALE SERVANTS and female slaves. If they be poor, Allah will enrich them of His bounty. Allah is of ample means, Aware.
66/5 It may be that his Lord, if he divorced you (all), will substitute for him wives better than you (all),- muslimaat, mominaat, qanitaat, taaibaat, AABIDAAT/FEMALE SERVANTS, saaihaatin sayyibaat and abkaar.
But the important thing to note is that these ibaad serve and obey them only in matters other than those dealt with in the book of Allah
3/79 It is not (possible) for any human being unto whom Allah had given the Scripture and wisdom and the prophethood that he should afterwards have said unto mankind Be IBAAD/SERVANTS of me INSTEAD OF ALLAH; but (what he said was) Be ye faithful servants of the Lord by virtue of your constant teaching of the Scripture and of your constant study thereof.
Therefore it is OK to obey and serve someone as long as it is not done in Allah's stead i.e. as long as his orders are not contradictory to Allah's.
<<
-
case 2
- for the rest of the people usualy they pay to use the system to be allowed to work, e.g. you pay taxes so you can have a VAT number to setup a company and work.
You still bring fuel to the system by doing so!
Bani Israeel was also made to work, to contribute towards the Firaunic system. They were MADE TO. There is difference between those who willingly serve the Taghoot, and those who serve it unwillingly. See this thread http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601332.0
Check out the first article "House Muslims and Field Muslims".
- for the rest of the people usualy they pay to use the system to be allowed to work, e.g. you pay taxes so you can have a VAT number to setup a company and work.
-
What can be the solutions
- bani israel vs Fir'awn had a solution Exode lead by Moses, what would be our solution today? I think Abd Nur already gave his solution some time ago, what is yours!
The solution will be the same when the problem reaches Fir'awnic proportions.
-
Peace
herbman wrote
What can be the solutions
- bani israel vs Fir'awn had a solution Exode lead by Moses, what would be our solution today? I think Abd Nur already gave his solution some time ago, what is yours!
The solution is always dependent on the evolutionary stage in which a community finds itself. If we don't take into consideration such evolutionary stages, we may run into "apparent" contradictions in the Quran. The Quran must be able to facilitate the movement of any community from its current state towards the state where a community can achieve the Quranic ideal suggested in 1098.
Fahad wrote
24/32 And marry such of you as are solitary and the pious of IBAADIKUM/YOUR MALE SERVANTS and female slaves. If they be poor, Allah will enrich them of His bounty. Allah is of ample means, Aware.
66/5 It may be that his Lord, if he divorced you (all), will substitute for him wives better than you (all),- muslimaat, mominaat, qanitaat, taaibaat, AABIDAAT/FEMALE SERVANTS, saaihaatin sayyibaat and abkaar.
This demonstrates the kind of "apparent" contradiction that may appear when we don't take evolutionary stages into account. If we consider that Muhammad had slaves, and at the same time accept that the Quran brought an end to slavery and forbids slavery, there may appear to be a contradiction. This contradiction disappears when accepting that a society steeped in slavery is not required to outlaw slavery in one go. Slaves should be given more and more rights leading to its ultimate abolition. Different communities will achieve this at different paces.
There are other examples of these apparent contradictions in AQ. I'd like to hear the take on this from people here.
Imraan
-
Salaam Fahad,
Allah is the ONLY sovereign, a sovereign is a person, in whatever capacity, like head of state, council member, bank manger, whatever, that you confer your decision making ability to, so you make yourself subject to their dictates.
An example would be they decide to increase your burden of taxation, and you have to pay, as you are subjugated to their dictates, you believe you are powerless to refuse, making you their subject, as in you are subjugated to their will, not your own.
To do this would be in direct opposition to the guidance of the Qur'an, Allah is the ONLY sovereign, it is very clear.
Those your right hand possess does not indicate slaves, or servants, in fact anyone who could believe that slavery is condoned within the Qur'an, would to me, seem to be a strange Muslims.
Those you right hand possess is in reference to the people in your life you love deeply, it is used in several verse where this meaning is required, family members, friend or even women you fall in love with are all those your right hand possess.
If a woman loves a man deeply, he possess her, in a way no other can, if a man loves a woman deeply she possess him in a way no other can, it would not change if they were married to another or not, their love would exist as a far stronger bond than marriage, this is why, if they are NOT both single already, it removes the burden upon the woman or the man to suffer within an existing marriage, when they have developed a deep love for another, they must remove themselves from the marriage with compassion and unite with the person they love.
It is not lawful for you (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract you, except those right hand should possess. And Allah doth watch over all things. (Surah 3352)
Allah has even given provision for deep love within his guidance as he knows the torment and suffering a human being will experience if they are denied any chance of union. Merciful and generous as ever. -
Salaam Fahad,
Allah is the ONLY sovereign, a sovereign is a person, in whatever capacity, like head of state, council member, bank manger, whatever, that you confer your decision making ability to, so you make yourself subject to their dictates.
An example would be they decide to increase your burden of taxation, and you have to pay, as you are subjugated to their dictates, you believe you are powerless to refuse, making you their subject, as in you are subjugated to their will, not your own.
To do this would be in direct opposition to the guidance of the Qur'an, Allah is the ONLY sovereign, it is very clear.
Where does the Quran say that Allah is the only sovereign?
-
Salaam Farhad,
"It is not for any human being, unto whom Allah had given the scripture and wisdom and the office of a messenger of Allah, should say to people Be subservient to me instead of Allah." (Surah 3, 79)
(205-6) The most Merciful above the might or power; regal power; sovereignty; dominion reigns(Lanes V5 285)
To Allah belongs what is in the heavens and what is on the earth and what is between them and what is under the soil.This states firstly no man can have sovereignty not even a messenger of Allah, the second verse states Allah is infinitely above the criminals who force sovereignty upon any aspect of Allah's creation, its quiet clear and many other references litter the Qur'an, but you follow your sovereigns, Allah is aware of all you do.
-
Salaam Farhad,
"It is not for any human being, unto whom Allah had given the scripture and wisdom and the office of a messenger of Allah, should say to people Be subservient to me instead of Allah." (Surah 3, 79)
As I have quoted here, the nabi DID HAVE people subservient to him.
(205-6) The most Merciful above the might or power; regal power; sovereignty; dominion reigns(Lanes V5 285)
To Allah belongs what is in the heavens and what is on the earth and what is between them and what is under the soil.Yes, everything belongs to Him, but He grants power to whom He wills (3/26). So He is not the ONLY sovereign.
This states firstly no man can have sovereignty not even a messenger of Allah, the second verse states Allah is infinitely above the criminals who force sovereignty upon any aspect of Allah's creation, its quiet clear and many other references litter the Qur'an, but you follow your sovereigns, Allah is aware of all you do.
Criminals who CAN force sovereignty ARE sovereigns.
-
Salaam Farhad,
so you believe the Qur'an has a profound contradiction, Allah says not even a messenger of Allah can say to people 'be subservient to me', yet you say Muhammad went against this verse and did act as a sovereign upon the people?
Are you certain Muhammad acted in direct opposition to surah 3 - 79?
I'm afraid you fail to understand sovereignty even more than the verse Allah has presented, have you ever considered the Qur'anic business and community models, based on a sovereign free understanding?
I will give you an example of the sovereign free Islamic business showing the advantages over the sovereign based corporate scheme, take car insurance.
Corporate Car Insurance.
If you consider the ever increasing cost imposed by the monopoly of car insurance corporations upon the masses, and the obscene profits that this generates for the elite who instituted this system upon us, at present you have no choice but to suffer their sovereign based model.
The Islamic model of car insurance.
I will use simple figures to explain the outline of the model, so say on average a person pays ?500 a year to insure their car through the corporate system, and if they claim it would increase substantially the following year, this is to maintain the 80% profit margins the corporations have established.
So a collective of people is formed, wishing to insure the car, say a 1000 local people join, each of them, then pays ?500, the same as they would have paid the insurance company for a years insurance, you could alter the amounts based on the value of the car or the track record of the driver, but for simplicity we'll say they all pay ?500, that's a total of ?500,000.
On average a driver has an accident every 7 years, only half of these are the fault of the driver, so only half would be claimed from the Islamic insurance policy, this means out of 1000 drivers on average only 72 accidents will be claimed in the year, if you add in uninsured drivers this would rise to say 100 claims.
If each claim cost on average ?1000 it would mean that at the end of the year each member would still hold ?400 unused within their original premium, so they would only have to pay ?100 for the second years insurance, if they canceled their policy at any point they would be repaid the unused portion of their original investment, of say ?400.
Now you would say who would run such a scheme without taking a large profit, as people are greedy and selfish, I agree.
The original sum of ?500,000 is held within a repository, skilled and verified competent mechanics are found interested in working within an Islamic business model.
Say 2 local mechanics would be needed to maintain the claims of the 1000 policy holders, suitable local premises are found and paid for out of the premiums, say it costs ?200,000
The equipment required to run the garage would be found and purchased costing say ?100,000, a tow truck and two complimentary cars for policy holders to use while their car was repaired are purchased costing say ?50,000
So to establish the business it would cost a total of ?350,000, leaving ?150,000 to pay the wages and buy the materials the mechanics would require to fix the cars from the claims, ?50,000 could be then exchanged for pure silver to hold the value of the investment..
If the mechanics charged ?20 per hour for their labour they would claim ?15, ?5 of their labour would be given back to the original premium fund to reimburse the investors, until the ?350,000 was repaid in pure silver linked to the weight the money would have bought on the day of the loan.
Over time the interest free loan of ?350,000 would be repaid, at which point the mechanics would receive the full amount of their earned ?20 per hour.
If a mechanic wants to leave the business, another mechanic would have the same deal, the retiring mechanic would receive the investment back he had paid into the business, either from the investment fund of the premiums, or paid from the savings of the replacement mechanic, or combination of the two. Say he had paid back ?200 per week for 10 years, so he's paid back ?100,000, this would be the investment he had earned returned of course it would be linked to pure silver so would not be as precise a return, it would be more, as the link to silver removes the usury problem of inflation.
-
Salaam Farhad,
so you believe the Qur'an has a profound contradiction, Allah says not even a messenger of Allah can say to people 'be subservient to me', yet you say Muhammad went against this verse and did act as a sovereign upon the people?
Are you certain Muhammad acted in direct opposition to surah 3 - 79?
I am certain he had people serving him.(24/32, 66/5) Ain't you?
Don't you think there is any way of serving(or working for) people without contradicting 3/79?
Did you read the explanation in the post i quoted? Here.
