In consequence of the Mad’habs establishment, while the even today continuing conflict at the time of the Prophet’s companions started, Shirk –ascription- was left an opened entrance to Islam. Even if shirk is the fundamental sin never to be forgiven by Allah, it wasn’t included as a topic of Theologian Principles and its studies. The truth of praying (ibadet) to Allah and no other was never an issue. Although a considerable number of the Qur’an verses deals with the fact that the most typical criteria of the untrue believers (Idolaters) is their praying and their expectations bound to any other beside Allah, nor the dua –plea- neither istiane were between the topics of theological teachings.

 

As everybody was convinced about the existence and the onenessof Allah, none of the prophets worked on the verification of Allah as a reality, their whole effort was focused on the fact that there is no other God but only Allah. In the books of theology the opposite was done, the attestation of Allah’s existence and oneness, in other words “Ispat-I Vacib” was one of the main topics. Finally, the “lailahe illallah; there is no God beside Allah” belief turned into the belief of Existence and Oneness which is the belief of the existence and oneness of Allah. As all over the world there is no one not acknowledging the existence of Allah and His oneness, an attitudinal dilemma broadened in the point of identifying the infidels (kafir) and demonstrating the differences of Islam.  

 

The untrue believers (idolater), acknowledge the existence and oneness of Allah, but identify or parallelize Him to worldly kings and consider Him distant from themselves. As to contact the king the mediation of one of the people close to him is needed, he chooses a mediator; somebody he believes to be close to Allah. This is what made the Christians see Jesus as the son of God; the idolaters of Mecca see their idols as the daughters of God[1] and some others to ask for help from the spirits of those who consider close friends of Allah.

The Glorified Allah about the Christians of today commands: “Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one God, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve.” (Al Ma’edah/ The Feast 5/72-73). Despite according to them Allah is the One; there is no other God alongside Him.[2] He is the Truth Himself. He is the One who created the earth and the skies on His own. He is the One to have regulated the creation and to rule the world[3]. He is in close proximity to the human[4] and sees everything.[5] His existence is unlimited[6]; He has no commencement and no end. Everything is obligated his/ her creation to Him. Everything in our possession, we owe to Him[7]. His own existence is out of Him[8]. God got the name Father as a result of His being the beginning of everything, of His love’s authority power and of the goodness and mercy that comes out of the same love for all His sons. God is nor a male neither a female; God is God.[9]    

In spite of this truthful declaration, the reason that makes them infidel is the fact that they between Allah and themselves involve somebody else; Jesus and the Holy Spirit to whom they give the attributions that belong only to God. Christians claim: “Jesus advocates the Christians to His Father. He is always alive to mediate between Christians and His Father. He is always ready for them, in the presence of His Father[10]. His power is more than sufficient in saving the ones that approach God with his sustenance.[11]”

Paul, in his letter to the Romans uses these expressions in relation with the Holy Spirit: “”[12]

 

The Qur’an informs us about what the idolaters of Mecca claimed about their idols: “We do not serve them save that they may make us nearer to Allah, surely Allah will judge between them in that in which they differ.” (Az-Zumar/ The Throngs 39/3). They even believed that their gods would be intercessor to them in relation to Allah. The Glorified Allah commands: “And they serve beside Allah what can neither harm them nor profit them, and they say: These are our intercessors with Allah. Say: Do you (presume to) inform Allah of what He knows not in the heavens and the earth? Glory be to Him, and supremely exalted is He above what they set up (with Him).” (Yunus/Jonah 10/ 17-18)

 

Can we say that the Christians or the idolaters of Mecca didn’t believe the existence and the oneness of Allah? The attitudinal dilemma that spread out of this, made the verses related to the shirk foggy in the translation and commentary of Qur’an and deg the path for the later-coming fallacy.

For example, both the words ‘ibadet’ and ‘dua’ are mentioned in the Qur’an. ‘Ibadet’ is the worshiping process, while ‘dua’ means to ask and aid demanding. In most of commentaries and translations of the Qur’an, the ‘ibadet’ has been given the meaning of ‘dua’ what has led to the loss of this word’s essential meaning. As ‘ibadet’ is the act accomplished for the ‘dua’ there is a very close relationship between the two words. Our Prophetclaims: “The ‘dua’ is the marrow of worship, its core.[13]” But when ‘dua’ is translated as ‘ibadet’, then the word losses one of its meanings and the call for help to anyone in any extraordinary way fails being understood as ‘ibabet’ (to this certain person or object). Let’s see what happens when meanings of the word ‘ibadet’ are given to ‘dua’ and where does this take us, by examining the 4^th, 5^th and 6^th verse of Sura Al Ahqaf. 

 

The Glorified Allah Commands: “Say: Have you considered what you call upon (dua) besides Allah? Show me what they have created of the earth, or do they have a share in the heavens? Bring me a book before this or traces of knowledge, if you are truthful. And who is more oblivious than he who calls (dua) besides Allah upon those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call? And when men are gathered together in the resurrection day they shall be their enemies, and shall be deniers of their worshipping (them).” (Al Ahqaf/ The Dunes 46/ 4, 5, 6)

 

When ‘dua’ was given the meaning of ‘ibadet’ the alteration of the meaning in the whole passage can be noticed. In fact, a previous mistake has led to a subsequent one and the true meaning of the verses is lost[14]. This diversity can be noticed in the translation of the Qur’an published by the Department of Religious Affairs of Turkey, the most popular translation in Turkey: “Say: Show me what have created on the earth those who you worship (ibadet) besides Allah? Or have they shares in the heavens? Bring me a book before this or traces of knowledge, if you are truthful. And who is in greater error than he who worship (ibadet) objects besides Allah, that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call? And when men are gathered together they shall be their enemies, and shall deny of their worshipping (them).” (Al Ahkaf/ The Dunes 46/ 4, 5, 6,)[15]

Instead of ‘dua’ ‘ibadet’, instead of ‘those who’, ‘object’ and ‘objects’ has been elucidated as ‘idols’, so that the whole meaning of the verses has been changed. ‘The ones praying to the idols’ is too far in meaning with ‘The ones that plea for help to those objects, who won’t respond until the Day of Judgment’! To give to the verses this meaning, five is the number of the inescapable mistakes that have been made. These are the mistakes:

a-      The ascription of the meaning of the word ‘ibadet’ to ‘dua’

 

b-     The ascription of the meaning of the word ‘ma’ to ‘men’

In Arabic ‘men’ means ‘the ones/ who’ or ‘the ones/ those who’ and is used only for reasonable beings; humans[16]. While ‘ma’ stands for ‘object’ or ‘objects’. In the 5^th verse of Ahkaf the word ‘men’ is stated three times. Those that gave to ‘dua’ the meaning of ‘ibadet’ had no other choice, but to translate the first two as ‘men’ and the third as ‘ma’.

Hum that is ‘these’ in Arabic is used for reasonable male beings; men. In Qur’an it includes the females- women- as well. But as ‘men’ has been replaced by the objects, the ‘hum’ pronoun inescapably had to be replaced by the ‘huve’ that is the noun itself or by the ‘hiye’ that is compatible in meaning. This, to be an important mistake.

The ‘gafilun’ translated as ‘oblivious’ is ‘cem’i muzzeker salime’ is used for reasonable male beings; men. In Qur’an it includes the females- women- as well. Giving to ‘men’ the meaning of objects has erased this word’s meaning too.

 

Mistakes of this type in different translations and commentaries have made such a belief spread out in relation to the visits of the tombs: “Allah has gifted these people with some competences, opportunities and attributions, they are our intercessor; as we are sinful we would be embarrassed to demand for anything and probably thanks to these people Allah would accept our wishes.[18]”

Due to the mistakes of this kind, the virus of considering a dead thinker of Islam friend of Allah, of attributing him unusual powers and of getting close to Allah with his mediation has infected Muslims as well.

---

76 → reads