← Back to Videos
This content has been automatically translated. View original in Arabic
Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah. This is an open advice to Dr. Tariq Al-Suwaidan.
This advice is prompted by the debate that followed his recent tweets and the frustration that ensued among many Muslims due to the disagreement between parties they love and consider well-intentioned. We seek to turn this frustration into familiarity and guidance, inshallah, hoping that the words of our Lord will apply: "Do not think of it as evil for you; rather, it is good for you." We also seek to close the door on those who harbor ill will towards Islam, who are pleased to see disagreement among those who claim to be part of the call and those who follow them.
The reason for this open advice is that Dr. Tariq, may Allah guide him and us to what is loved, had published problematic statements that could be understood to mean that Islam is not a condition for entering Paradise. I and many others objected to this. He then published a statement that was closer to the truth. We say, by Allah, O Dr. Tariq, we love your return to the truth. Your closeness to the truth in this matter gives us hope that you will reconsider other matters.
You have, O Dr. Tariq, an old merit in reviving the Islamic identity in Arab universities and in America. You have made many young people love their religion. You have taken stances against tyrants and stances in support of Muslim causes. We ask Allah to guide you with these deeds to return to what you once were.
I say clearly: despite the greatness of the mistakes we deny, I apologize to Dr. Tariq for the manner. I apologize for any hurtful word I may have deleted. I ask Allah to guide me to the best of manners. I apologize for the manner, not for considering what I have denied as a great sin.
Why not send this advice to Dr. Tariq privately? Because the mistakes were not private, and their negative impact was not private. Nevertheless, we hope that this advice will turn into a calm, open discussion from which many Muslims will benefit. We want the word of the Muslims to unite, but to unite on the truth, not on flattery at the expense of the truth.
Therefore, I will present my advice and await Dr. Tariq to discuss it with me, inshallah. I will present the arguments and evidence that I and others who disagree with you say, O Dr. Tariq, discuss them with us. Clarify the mistakes in understanding, and by Allah, I will then return to the truth as well. Or one of us will clarify his intention, or let one of us say, O Dr. Tariq, I have made a mistake and I will return to the truth in the matter. At that time, by Allah, we will rise in the eyes of Allah first and then in the eyes of people, and this will be a reason for the unity of the word of many Muslims for good in this month, the month of purification, and in this time when Muslims in Al-Aqsa and outside Al-Aqsa are exposed to what they are exposed to.
We owe it to you, O Dr. Tariq, to do our best to keep the discussion calm. It is not my habit to read all the comments or to delete all the comments that are offensive to me personally, as I do not have time for that. Often, I am ashamed to occupy the time of my brothers who are assigned to the page by asking them to do so. However, in order to prepare a calm and healthy atmosphere, I will ask, inshallah, some brothers to delete anything that contains offense.
What is the problem, O Dr. Tariq? The problem is not with a vague post that was misunderstood according to your expression, O Dr. Tariq. The problem is not a passing slip that we are holding on to, but rather we are trying to correct the concepts without mentioning the people as much as possible. I have had many fundamental criticisms for many years and have not published them, but the matter has reached a point that made me publicly object, me and many of the honorable brothers, to your statements.
The problem, O Dr. Tariq, is with the severe ambiguity and confusing expressions that carry faces of extreme danger in the most important matter, which is certainty and decisiveness in matters of faith, shirk, and kufr. This has been repeated in several posts, lectures, and in the program of moderation that you presented, O Dr. Tariq, for many years, and it is the one that gave birth to the recent posts that sparked the debate.
As evidence of the existence of this problem, I will take specific examples. You may say afterwards, O Dr. Tariq: "But you have misunderstood me even in these words. What I mean is the necessity that the Muslim be aware of his religion and be open-minded because he has nothing to fear because his religion is a solid religion. As for believing thus without knowing why he believes, this will lead to weakness of faith and fragility in the face of doubts and weakness of argument in calling others."
You may say this is beautiful. We agree on that. But when it is repeated that the people of knowledge and call object to your speech, it is not enough every time to blame it on suspicion and misunderstanding. You have a long experience in media and observing people's understandings, and this is not hidden from you. Therefore, let us take a serious stand to see if there is a methodological problem that has led to these differences?
For example, at the fourth Istanbul Book Fair in 2017 (are we going back to 2017? We and our brothers return to specific models to know the roots of the dispute so that we may discuss and agree on the truth, God willing). When you say, "Dr., because when I believe that I possess absolute truth, I have absolute truth, should everyone else who follows a different religion believe that they also have absolute truth? Is there a problem? And we demand of others that they come and study our religion because this is the true religion. The Prophet, peace be upon him, did not do this. Yes, the Prophet, peace be upon him, did not do this."
What is understood here is that Islam is not an absolute truth. Review yourself, Dr., to see how this contradicts what you believe. You believe in the many verses that say: "Indeed, the truth has come to you from your Lord." Is this truth called relative truth or absolute truth? And if it is absolute truth, what comes after the truth except misguidance?
You, Dr., believe in the saying of Allah the Almighty: "And indeed, those who were given the Scripture know that it is the truth from their Lord." Allah the Almighty did not say, "They do not know that it is the truth for you," but "They do not know that it is the truth from their Lord." There is one truth from their Lord. "The truth from your Lord, so be not of those who doubt." Does this mean the relative truth from your Lord, so do not be of those who doubt this relative truth that is not absolutely certain? The word truth and its derivatives are mentioned in the Quran no less than one hundred and seventy or one hundred and eighty times.
How, Dr., do we understand the saying of Allah the Almighty: "Only the believers are those who have believed in Allah and His Messenger and then did not doubt and struggled with their wealth and their selves in the cause of Allah. It is they who are the truthful." Then they did not doubt, meaning they did not doubt that what they believe in is the absolute truth, and they struggled for it with their wealth and their selves. "This is the Book in which there is no doubt," meaning there is no doubt that it is the absolute truth. If Islam is the absolute truth, what comes after the truth except misguidance?
You say, Dr.: "Because when I believe that I possess absolute truth and all other religions are misguided, we enter tyranny." We did not describe other religions as misguided; rather, this is the description of Allah for them, as in Surah Al-Ma'idah, Allah the Almighty said: "Say, O People of the Scripture, do not exceed limits in your religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclinations of a people who went astray before and led many astray and went astray from the even path." Ibn Kathir said its meaning: Do not exceed the limit in following the truth as you did with the Messiah, making him a god besides Allah, following the inclinations of your ancestors who claimed that and went astray and led others astray.
Do we not read in Surah Al-Fatihah: "Guide us to the straight path - the path of those upon whom You have bestowed favor, not of those who have evoked [Your] anger or of those who are astray"? Is it not the interpretation of the scholars that this is about the People of the Book or that they are at least included in the description between those who have evoked anger and those who are astray? And in the hadith that was authenticated by Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Al-Qayyim, Al-Albani, and others, the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: "The Jews are those upon whom Allah's wrath has descended, and the Christians are those who are astray."
You say, Dr.: "We demand of others that they come and study our religion because it is the true religion. The Prophet, peace be upon him, did not do this." Then you confirm and say: "Yes, the Prophet, peace be upon him, did not do this." The Prophet, peace be upon him, did not do this when he called the people and the polytheists and the People of the Book, saying to them: "Come to Islam because for me it is the truth, but I do not claim that it is absolute truth, and I respect your opinion that your religion is the truth for you."
Here, perhaps we can cooperate with the doctor to remove the confusion. You say in the same lecture, Dr.: "Do we want to cultivate a culture that enhances that we possess absolute truth and every other sect and religion has no good in it? Is this our culture?" When we say that our religion is the absolute truth, this does not mean that other religions have no good in them, nor does it deny that the People of the Book have something of the truth in their books, from the revelation that has not been distorted, but they mixed it with falsehood. Therefore, our Lord, glory be to Him, addressed them saying: "O People of the Scripture, why do you mix the truth with falsehood and conceal the truth while you know?" This does not negate the description of their religions as misguided, because when this truth is mixed with shirk and what is not befitting the attributes of Allah the Almighty, the religion is described in total as misguided.
The matter is not a binary division: either I respect shirk and kufr or I despise it to the point of not engaging with it. Belief in possessing absolute truth does not prevent me from arguing in the best manner, nor does it prevent me from trying to understand the other's perspective to engage with them.
When you say, Dr. Tariq, may Allah guide us and you to the truth: "It is a disaster that a person becomes arrogant about his religion, and the disaster with the days develops into tyranny because when I believe that I possess absolute truth and all other religions are misguided, we enter tyranny." When you say this, we say first: the certainty that Islam is the absolute truth is not arrogance about the religion, and certainty does not mean tyranny. When I am certain that my religion is the absolute truth, this does not make me tyrannical or oppressive. What we work on is turning the certainty in the hearts of Muslims about the truth of Islam and the falsity of other religions into mercy for the nations and calling them to Islam and saving them from the tyranny of their oppressors, not that the certainty turns into arrogance and tyranny.
What does this mean? Even if someone believes this, does their belief hold any value if it lacks evidence? If a person worships humans, cows, and stones and believes their religion is the absolute truth, does this give any weight to their claim? What you're saying, Dr., implies that if I say I have the absolute truth, he will say he has the absolute truth. So, let's close the door on this and say no one has the absolute truth. Instead, we should say let everyone claim what they want, and then the evidence and proof will either validate or refute the claim, as Allah the Almighty has guided us: "Say, 'Do you have any knowledge that you can produce to us? You only follow conjecture, and you only tell lies.'" (Quran 6:148)
You say, Dr.: "Let me ask you a slightly strange question. Who among you, and among all of us, if a better religion than Islam is discovered, is ready to leave Islam immediately and convert? Raise your hand. Look, only a very small minority raised their hand. Wait, wait, what is the difference between you and the Christian who is steadfast in his religion? What is the difference between you, forgive me, and the Christian who believes his religion is the truth and that there can be no better truth than his? Isn't that the case? Those who did not raise their hands said no, Islam is the truth, there is no other truth. I am sitting here telling you, if a better religion is discovered, how can you raise your hand? Of course, you won't raise your hand, of course, that's not the case? Because we are inviting all people, telling them there is something better than what you have, come and see it. If you deal with the majority like this, then no, there is nothing better than what we have, let's lock the door, we don't even want to hear it. Do you see where the flaw is?"
Examine yourself, Dr. Are you not afraid that your words might equate Islam, which aligns with innate nature and reason, with religions that contradict reason and innate nature? Islam is based on evidence and proof, while other religions lack any evidence or proof. "And they say, 'None will enter Paradise except one who is a Jew or a Christian.' That is [their] wishful thinking. Say, 'Produce your proof, if you should be truthful.'" (Quran 2:111) When we claim that whoever embraces Islam will enter Paradise and whoever disbelieves after the proof has reached them will enter Hell, we have evidence, evidence of the truth of Islam and evidence from the preserved revelation of Allah.
How, Dr., can you consider a Christian steadfast in his religion like a Muslim steadfast in his religion? I am ashamed for you to equate Islam with a religion whose book says Allah is one of three, that the Lord rested after creating the heavens and the earth, that He cried like a drunkard, that He wrestled with Jacob until Jacob almost overpowered Him, and attributes to the prophets, peace be upon them, the violation of prohibitions, the worship of idols, treachery, drinking alcohol, nudity, and other things.
Remind yourself, Dr., of Allah's words that explain that monotheism is an innate nature implanted in the souls. Allah says: "And [mention] when your Lord took from the children of Adam - from their loins - their descendants and made them witness against themselves, [His saying to them], 'Am I not your Lord?' They said, 'Yes, we have testified.' [This] - lest you should say on the Day of Resurrection, 'Indeed, we were of this unaware.' Or [lest] you say, 'Our fathers formerly associated others with Allah, and we were but descendants after them. Then would You destroy us for what the falsifiers have done?' And thus do We explain the verses in detail, that they might return." (Quran 7:172-174)
The ambiguity regarding absolute truth leads to a weakness in abhorring disbelief and polytheism, even to the point of abhorring the naming of polytheism as polytheism and disbelief as disbelief, as if the polytheists are excused because they see what they are upon as the absolute truth. Therefore, when you say, Dr.: "Methods of teaching religion filled with words of polytheism, haram, and apostasy produce a generation of terrorists and extremists in the name of religion," and the statement has been around for seven years.
We say to you, as some scholars responded then: The number of occurrences of the word "polytheism" with its derivatives in the Quran is one hundred and eighty-six times, the word "disbelief" is five hundred and twenty-five times, and the word "haram" with its derivatives is eighty times. Is the Quran a book of extremism and terrorism? Of course, I am not defending the educational curricula in Muslim countries, but we need a stop here, Dr., to note that the problem is not in the use of central Islamic terms from the Quran, and they themselves do not lead to extremism and terrorism. Polytheism must be called polytheism, and the apostate must be called an apostate, but we should educate the youth in the Islamic way of dealing with all kinds of people. Do you agree with us on this, Dr.?
Your reconsideration or clarification regarding your recent posts makes us hope that you will reconsider and correct yourself in these matters, perhaps Allah will expand your chest and the chests of your followers to what agrees with the evidence.
The ambiguity regarding absolute truth leads to strange talk about freedom, which unfortunately affects many, such as this statement: "People have the right to say what they want, as long as it is not moral corruption, calling for ideas, objecting to the state, objecting to the ruler, even objecting to Islam, I have no problem with that, even objecting to Allah and His Messenger."
Because Dr. Tariq himself, when he returned to this statement, said: "The first thing, if a person understands that I allow objection to Allah and His Messenger, I seek forgiveness from Allah, I do not allow this, this contradicts the Quran. Allah, glorified and exalted be He, has a clear and explicit text: "And it is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error." (Quran 33:36) We are not free in this matter. And whoever wears a religion other than Islam will not accept from him a matter that is already decided in religion." Praise be to Allah, that is beautiful.
However, Dr., the same ambiguity in the matter of freedom is present in your presentation, as in the program of moderation. Then you explain in this interview that you mean that people who have objections to Allah should be discussed and helped to rid themselves of these ideas, not that we prevent them from expressing to the scholars what is in their hearts, so they do not die as disbelievers. Well, since you do not mean that it is their right to object to Allah, this also applies to moral corruption. If someone has corrupt moral ideas, they should not be prevented from expressing them to the scholars for discussion. What is the benefit of your saying: "People have the right to say what they want, as long as it is not moral corruption, even if it is objection to Allah"? Are we mistaken in saying that Dr. Tariq did not mean this? No, but I repeat, there is ambiguity, Dr., which leads to this problematic speech and contradictory positions.
If we do not have certainty and decisiveness that Islam is the absolute truth, we may hesitate in our position regarding preventing those who object to it from among the Muslims. Imagine, Dr., if under the pretext of these important statements from you, everyone who wants to cast doubt and taste the religion objects in front of the world and says, "Is it not my right to ask?" Do you know we discuss with those who have objections to the rulings of Allah with wisdom and tranquility, and we dedicate series and episodes to that, but this does not mean that we see their objection to Allah as a right that the Islamic state preserves when it is established.
Do you agree with us, Dr., that the absolute governing value in Islam is not freedom but truth and justice, and therefore if freedom contradicts the values of truth and justice, it is null and void and oppression? If this principle is clear, it will relieve us all from any doubts in looking at the legislations of Islam.
By the way, regarding your statement, Dr.: "Did the hypocrites not speak ill of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and put this in the Quran?" I say: The hypocrites used to beat around the bush and go in circles, "{And if you ask them, they will surely say, 'We were only conversing and playing.'}" and they would hint without explicitly stating, "{And you will surely know them by their manner of speech}." And if they spoke among themselves in clear criticism of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and his Sharia, they would later deny it, "{They swear by Allah that they did not say it}." They did not openly object to Allah and to Islam and then leave it at that, saying that they have the right to object to Allah.
For all of this, Dr. Tariq, when you publish a post about a verse that suggests that everyone will enter Paradise, including Jews, Christians, and Sabians, do not be surprised if your post is understood in the context of previous ambiguity and the problematic repeated words, especially since the international tone, the media of the countries, and the educational curricula strike a chord in diminishing the distinction between truth and falsehood and diminishing the Muslim's pride in his religion as the absolute truth. I have explained the danger of that in an episode about the takfir of Muslims due to their psychological defeat. And this is what the international system wants, Dr. Tariq, which is the opposite of your intention, as we assess it.
Your Excellency advises people to refer to your book "Mukhtasar al-Aqidah al-Islamiyyah," which you wrote forty-five years ago, or to the program that was broadcast last year. Well, may Allah grant you success to ensure that your presentation is consistent and does not contradict itself so that people can benefit from these presentations.
When Muadh ibn Jabal prolonged the prayer, the Prophet, peace be upon him, said to him, "Are you a tempter, O Muadh? Are you a tempter, O Muadh?" So what about you, Dr., with posts containing ambiguous speech that may tempt people in this critical matter, the matter that the religion of Allah which we call to is the absolute truth.
We differ with you, Dr., on other matters that we will not elaborate on today, including your evidence in the matter of the absolute truth with the hadith of Suwayd and the story of the conquests in the lands of the Buddhists, and we have much to say about that. And from the call to the values of citizenship, the constitution, and the law instead of the legal terms that you consider do not suit our time. And from opening the door wide for people to reject the hadiths if they see that they do not agree with their minds. But we will not delve into more details in the hope that you will respond to this critical point from which the starting point is derived.
Our question to you is very simple, Dr.: Should not the Muslim believe that Islam is the absolute truth so that he can hold fast to his religion and strive to save humanity with it? And we hope to hear from you a scientific answer and discussion of what has been presented.
We ask Allah, the Great Lord of the Great Throne, to open our hearts to the truth and guide us all to the straight path, and to close the door on the envious who are pleased to see discord, and to cool the hearts of the believers. And our final invocation is praise to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.