World Dawah Quran & Sunnah through understanding of Salaf
Introduction
All praise is due to Allah, Lord of all worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and all his Companions.
To proceed:
The doubts and objections raised against Islam are not a product of the modern age, even though the means by which they are spread have changed, as have the words and expressions in which they are presented.
From the earliest centuries, Islam was subjected to attacks by people of deviant beliefs, heretics, and followers of other religions. Muslim scholars confronted these attacks with evidence and proof, exposing the ignorance, falsehood, and deception contained within them.
Today, however, the speed and reach of these doubts have increased dramatically.
The Spread of Doubts in the Modern Age
The spread of social media in our time has made it possible for a doubt to reach a Muslim within moments.
It may be presented in:
- a video lasting no more than a minute;
- a cropped image; or
- a short post.
Yet a proper response may require several pages.
This is because the person raising the objection may combine, in only a few words:
- a weak narration;
- a faulty interpretation;
- an out-of-context quotation; and
- a logical fallacy.
Addressing all of these issues therefore requires some detail.
Our Purpose at WorldDawah.com
For this reason, at WorldDawah.com, we have given particular attention to articles responding to doubts and objections.
In these articles, we have sought to comprehensively examine the objections raised against Islam and answer them in a scholarly and well-documented manner.
Our aim is not merely to refute the objection itself. We also seek to:
- teach Muslims the correct meaning of the Islamic texts in question;
- expose the flaws in the way these objections are constructed;
- provide the relevant evidence and sources; and
- help Muslims understand their religion with clarity and insight.
A Warning Against Seeking Out Doubts
The purpose of these articles is not to encourage Muslims to go searching for doubts or to engage in debates with every opponent.
The Salaf—may Allah have mercy upon them—warned against exposing oneself to doubts, sitting with the people of deviant beliefs, and listening to their arguments because of the danger this poses to the heart.
Rather, debate should only be undertaken when necessary and by those who possess sufficient knowledge and insight to do so.
The Purpose of These Articles
The purpose of these articles is therefore threefold:
1. Protection
To protect Muslims from doubts and misconceptions that may be presented to them.
2. Education
To teach Muslims the correct understanding of the Islamic texts and issues around which doubts are raised.
3. Refutation
To provide well-researched material, evidence, and sources that can be used by those who possess the knowledge and ability to respond to such objections.
Thus:
Whoever encounters a doubt can find its answer.
Whoever wishes to know the truth concerning an issue can find the relevant evidence and its sources.
Whoever possesses the knowledge and ability to respond to such objections can find material from which they may benefit.
What This Article Will Explain
For this reason, we have decided to explain two matters to the reader in this article:
- Where do these doubts originate?
- What methodology do we follow in our articles when responding to them?
Part One: The Origins of Doubts
If we examine many of the doubts and objections commonly raised against Islam, we find that, despite their great number and the variety of subjects they address, they generally stem from a limited number of sources.
Among the most important are the following.
1. Relying on the Statements of Islam’s Opponents
One of the most common sources of doubts is reliance upon the writings of Orientalists and those hostile to Islam, or upon certain writers who claim affiliation with Islam but have deviated from its fundamental principles.
Their statements are then repeated as though they were neutral descriptions of what Muslims actually believe.
This is an obvious methodological flaw.
A religion or school of thought is properly understood through its own sources and scholars. It is unreasonable to make an opponent’s interpretation of a religion authoritative over what the followers of that religion themselves say they believe.
For this reason, when examining an objection, we are careful to distinguish between what Islam actually teaches and what its opponents attribute to it.
2. Weak and Fabricated Narrations
One of the most common forms of deception is to cite a weak or fabricated narration and present it to the reader without explaining its authenticity, as though the mere presence of a narration in a book automatically makes it authoritative evidence against Muslims.
This demonstrates ignorance of the methodology of the scholars of Hadith.
Muslim scholars never regarded everything narrated from the Prophet ﷺ as authentic. Rather, they established an entire scholarly discipline devoted to distinguishing authentic reports from unreliable ones.
They critically examined narrators, chains of transmission, and the texts of narrations themselves, and they clarified the varying grades of transmitted reports.
For this reason, an entire objection may sometimes collapse upon asking a single question:
Was this report authentically established in the first place?
If the report is not authentically established, then Islam cannot legitimately be held accountable for it.
3. Quoting Texts Out of Context
Sometimes the original statement itself is authentic, but the person raising the objection extracts a single sentence while omitting what comes before and after it, thereby changing the meaning understood by the reader.
This may occur with a verse of the Qur’an, a Hadith, or the words of a scholar.
A small portion of a lengthy passage is quoted, and an entire objection is then built upon that isolated fragment.
For this reason, whenever possible, we do not limit ourselves to the quotation presented by the person raising the objection. Rather, we return to the original source and examine the complete passage and its context.
How many doubts have collapsed simply by restoring the portion of the text that the person quoting it chose to omit?
4. Presenting Irregular and Weak Opinions as Representative of Islam
Another method of deception is for an objector to discover an irregular opinion in one of the books of Muslim scholars, or a weak opinion that a scholar merely mentioned before refuting it, extract it from its context, and then proclaim:
“This is what the scholars of Islam say!”
Yet the reality may be entirely different.
The opinion in question may be irregular, weak, mentioned only for the purpose of refutation, or contrary to the position held by the overwhelming majority of Muslim scholars.
The mere presence of an opinion in an Islamic book does not make it the position of Islam, just as a scholar mentioning an opinion does not mean that he personally adopted it.
For this reason, in our responses we take care to precisely identify the actual point of dispute, clarify the authoritative position, and distinguish between what we believe before Allah Most High and affirm as our position, and opinions that are not binding upon us.
5. Misunderstanding the Qur’an and Sunnah
This is one of the broadest sources from which doubts arise.
An objector reads a verse or Hadith and interprets its wording according to whatever immediately comes to mind, without knowledge of:
- the Arabic language;
- the circumstances of revelation;
- the context of the passage;
- the other texts dealing with the same subject;
- the explanations of the Companions and their Successors; or
- the writings of the leading scholars of Qur’anic exegesis and Hadith commentary.
He then treats his own personal interpretation of the text as though it were Islam itself and proceeds to object to it.
This turns the proper scholarly methodology on its head.
The revealed texts are not interpreted according to personal desires and subjective impressions. Rather, they are understood according to the Arabic language in which the Qur’an was revealed, by gathering together all the relevant texts concerning a subject, and by referring to the understanding of the Salaf and the explanations of firmly grounded scholars.
For this reason, one of the most important objectives of our articles is not merely to tell the reader:
“This objection is false.”
Rather, we also explain:
“What, then, is the correct meaning of the text?”
6. Recycling the Doubts of Deviant Sects
Many objections presented by contemporary critics as though they were new discoveries are, in reality, not new at all.
They may simply have been taken from the arguments and doubts of earlier sects that opposed Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama‘ah, such as the Rafidah, Khawarij, Jahmiyyah, extremist Sufis, and others.
The objection is then taken from the writings of these groups, stripped of its original theological background, and presented to people as though its modern advocate had only recently discovered a problem that Muslim scholars had never previously encountered.
For this reason, identifying the origin and history of an objection is essential.
Knowing where a doubt came from often exposes much of the confusion and false reasoning upon which it was originally built.
Part Two: Our Methodology in Responding to Doubts
As for the articles responding to doubts and objections published on WorldDawah.com, we have sought, as much as possible, to follow a consistent methodology while taking into account the differing nature and subject matter of each objection.
The most important features of this methodology can be summarized as follows.
1. Precisely Defining the Objection Before Answering It
One should not begin answering an objection before first determining exactly what requires an answer.
For this reason, we first attempt to identify the central claim upon which the objection is built and separate it from any secondary claims attached to it.
What may initially appear to be a single objection may, upon closer examination, actually consist of several distinct objections gathered together in one place.
We therefore identify the core of the objection, break down the claims that branch from it, and give each claim the response appropriate to it.
2. Verifying the Authenticity of What Is Quoted
If an objection is built upon a Hadith or report, we do not simply accept its authenticity merely because the objector has quoted it.
If the Hadith is weak, we explain its weakness to the extent required by the discussion. If it is fabricated, we make that clear. If it is authentically established, we then proceed to explain its meaning.
If the Hadith is found in Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim, it is generally sufficient, as far as its authenticity is concerned, to attribute it to them.
As for narrations found outside the two Sahih collections, we may discuss their chains of transmission and grading in greater detail according to what the context requires.
The first stage, therefore, is always:
The authenticity of the text.
Only after that comes:
The meaning and implication of the text.
There is little purpose in engaging in a lengthy debate over the meaning of a narration that was never authentically established in the first place.
3. Returning to the Original Sources
As much as possible, we take care not to build our responses solely upon quotations that circulate online or in secondary sources.
Rather, we return to the original sources from which those quotations were taken.
If the objection concerns a verse of the Qur’an, we return to the works of Tafsir and the explanations of the scholars concerning it.
If it concerns a Hadith, we return to its original Hadith sources and the commentaries of the scholars of Hadith.
If it concerns a statement attributed to a particular scholar, we return to the scholar’s own words in their original source and examine their context and intended meaning, so that we do not attribute to him something he never actually said.
This is one of the most important methods for exposing quotations that have been taken out of context, textual errors, and inaccurate transmission.
4. Clarifying What Muslims Actually Believe Before Defending It
One methodological error is for a Muslim to allow his opponent to determine for him what he is required to defend.
An objector may say:
“Islam teaches such-and-such.”
Yet the claim he attributes to Islam may not actually be part of Islam at all.
For this reason, before entering into detailed discussion, we often begin by clarifying what we actually believe, what is established by the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and what is held by Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama‘ah.
If what the objector attributes to us is an irregular opinion, a weak narration, or a false interpretation, we make that clear.
We are only bound by what is authentically established as part of our religion, and no one has the right to hold us accountable for a position that we do not actually hold.
5. Responding from Multiple Angles
The methodology followed in many of our articles is to divide the response into several distinct angles.
A single angle may sometimes be sufficient to undermine the very foundation of an objection. Nevertheless, we do not always stop there.
Rather, we attempt, as far as possible, to comprehensively examine the various ways in which the objection can be answered, drawing upon textual, rational, linguistic, historical, and other forms of evidence according to the nature of the issue.
The purpose of this is not simply to make the response longer, but to address the matter thoroughly from its different aspects.
An objector may dispute one line of argument while another remains entirely independent of it. Likewise, one reader may require an answer to a particular aspect of the objection that another reader does not.
6. Explaining the Correct Meaning Rather Than Merely Negating the Error
Our aim is not for the reader to finish an article knowing only that the objection is wrong.
Rather, as far as we are able, we want the reader to leave knowing the truth that stands in place of that error.
If a verse of the Qur’an has been misunderstood, we explain its correct interpretation.
If a Hadith has been misunderstood, we explain its proper meaning.
If an Islamic concept has been distorted, we clarify what that concept actually means.
We consider this one of the greatest benefits of responding to doubts, because the primary objective is to teach Muslims their religion, not to chase after every objector.
The reader may eventually forget the details of a particular objection, but the sound knowledge that he acquired because of it may remain with him.
7. Giving the General Answer Before the Specific Answer
Some objections require us to establish a general principle in Islam before addressing their specific details.
An objection may concern women, prescribed punishments, Jihad, slavery, prophethood, Hadith, or another subject, while the underlying error originates from a fundamentally mistaken understanding of Islam’s entire approach to that subject.
Therefore, whenever necessary, we begin by explaining the general principle and what Muslims actually believe concerning the issue.
Only then do we proceed to the specific details of the objection.
In this way, we do not remain confined to the framework that the person raising the objection has attempted to impose upon the discussion.
8. Answering Secondary Objections
A primary objection may contain several smaller objections within it.
If we answer its central claim while leaving these secondary objections unanswered, some uncertainty may remain in the reader’s mind.
For this reason, some of our articles may become lengthy, as we attempt to trace the various claims branching from the main objection and answer them individually.
We therefore ask the reader to be patient with a degree of detail.
An objection may be presented in a single sentence, while exposing the numerous errors contained within that sentence may require several pages.
Destruction is easier than construction, and presenting an objection in vague and general terms is far easier than carefully investigating and answering it.
9. Benefiting from the Efforts of Those Who Came Before Us
We did not invent most of these answers ourselves, nor do we claim to have done so.
Muslim scholars, both classical and contemporary, have written extensively in defense of Islam and in response to its opponents.
We have benefited from their writings and scholarly investigations, gathered together the various lines of response that we believe conform to the truth, and left aside what appeared to us to involve unnecessary strain or weakness.
Wisdom is the lost property of the believer.
The objective is to arrive at the truth and convey it to the people, not to claim originality for something in which others preceded us.
10. Documenting Our Sources
In our articles, we strive, as far as possible, to reference Qur’anic verses, Hadiths, reports, and the statements of scholars to their original sources.
We do this to fulfill our responsibility, to properly document the information presented, and to assist those who wish to consult the original sources or conduct further research.
We do not claim infallibility in what we write. Error is part of human nature.
For this reason, the articles undergo review before publication, and we welcome the correction of any error when it is demonstrated with evidence.
The objective is to support the truth, and returning to what is correct is better than persisting in error.
11. Distinguishing Between Refuting an Objection and Challenging the Objector on His Own Principles
This is an important principle in our methodology.
Our defense of Islam must stand on its own. Its purpose should not merely be to tell an opponent:
“You have the same thing in your worldview as well.”
We therefore begin by establishing the correct understanding and refuting the objection against Islam on the basis of its own evidence.
Only after that may we turn to the objector’s own principles and standards, demonstrating that he himself does not consistently adhere to the standard by which he attempted to judge Islam.
For this reason, many of our articles include a short section, or several brief points, addressing atheists, liberals, or secularists on the basis of their own principles, depending on the nature of the objection.
This is particularly useful when the objection rests upon a philosophical or moral assumption that contradicts the very principles the objector claims to uphold.
However, this internal critique comes after the primary response and is never a substitute for it.
12. Our Particular Attention to Responding to the People of the Book
In many of our articles, we devote greater attention to responding to the People of the Book, particularly Christians, than we generally devote to supplementary arguments directed toward atheists, liberals, and others.
When necessary, we return to the scriptures and sources upon which they rely, examine the same objection in light of what is found in those sources, and demonstrate what follows from their own principles and authorities.
The reason we devote greater attention to this area is that the People of the Book trace the origin of their religion to revelation and to a divinely revealed scripture, even though alteration and distortion subsequently occurred.
This differs from the atheist, who rejects revelation altogether, and the secularist, who does not regard revelation as the governing authority in his worldview.
Furthermore, many of the objections circulating today pass from one ideological group to another.
The same objection may be raised by a Christian, repeated by an atheist, and then echoed by a liberal, even though each begins from a different set of assumptions.
Therefore, after first establishing the Islamic answer, we may demonstrate that an objector from the People of the Book can find within the very sources he appeals to something comparable to—or even more severe than—the matter for which he criticizes Islam.
In doing so, the inconsistency of the standard by which he attempts to judge Islam becomes apparent.
This does not mean that an error committed by others makes something true or acceptable in Islam. Such reasoning would itself be fallacious, and we do not rely upon it.
Rather, our methodology proceeds in the following order:
- Establish the truth.
- Refute the objection.
- Then, when necessary, challenge the objector on the basis of his own principles.
In this way, challenging the objector on his own principles serves as a completion of the response, not as its foundation.
Who Were These Articles Written For?
It should be emphasized once again that these articles were not written to encourage ordinary Muslims to seek out doubts and engage in debates.
Simply knowing the answer to a particular objection does not make a person qualified to debate atheists, Christians, or the people of innovation.
Debate is a field of knowledge in its own right. It requires knowledge of the Shariah, familiarity with the opponent’s beliefs and arguments, the ability to establish proofs and expose fallacies, and firmness when confronted with doubts.
The Salaf strongly warned against listening to the words of the people of desires and unnecessarily exposing the heart to doubts.
Nothing is equal to safety.
Rather, these articles were written for:
- those who encounter a doubt;
- those who wish to learn about an issue around which objections have been raised;
- those who need a documented answer to which they can refer; and
- those involved in knowledge and Da‘wah who may need material to assist them when the situation requires it.
Do not turn the treatment for poison into an invitation to taste it.
How Can You Benefit from the Articles on This Website?
If you encounter a doubt or objection, do not rush to accept the way in which the person raising it has presented the issue.
Instead, proceed carefully.
First: Verify the Text
Ask:
Is the text he cited authentic?
Second: Examine the Context
Then ask:
Did he quote it in full, or did he remove it from its context?
Third: Examine the Interpretation
Then ask:
Did he understand it as the scholars understood it, or did he interpret it according to his own assumptions?
Fourth: Examine the Attributed Position
Then ask:
Is the position he attributed to Islam actually an authoritative position, or is it an irregular or weak opinion?
After that, examine the response carefully and return to the sources cited within it if you require further verification.
Once the doubt has been resolved, do not allow that to become a doorway to seeking out ten more doubts.
The objective is to cure the disease, not to search for new diseases.
Instead, occupy yourself afterward with that which increases you in knowledge and faith: learning the Qur’an and Sunnah, ‘Aqidah, Fiqh, and the other sciences of the Shariah.
A Final Word
These articles, along with the research and refutations they contain on WorldDawah.com, were written in the hope of benefiting Muslims and defending the religion of Allah Most High.
Their purpose is neither worldly gain nor the monopolization of knowledge.
For this reason, we grant permission to anyone who benefits from them to publish them, reproduce them, quote from them, and reuse their material for Da‘wah, education, and the refutation of doubts and objections.
We claim no copyright over them.
We kindly ask only that proper credit be given to us as the original source.
Rather, we hope that anyone who finds benefit in them will contribute to spreading them and making them available to those who need them.
Perhaps a single word from which a Muslim benefits, a doubt removed from someone’s heart, or a truth conveyed to a sincere seeker may become a cause of ongoing reward.
These articles were written in the hope that they may be a Sadaqah Jariyah for the sake of Allah, the Most Generous.
We ask Him, Glorified and Exalted, to make them sincerely for His sake alone, to forgive whatever errors or shortcomings they may contain, to grant us sincerity in our words and deeds, to accept them from us with a good acceptance, and to benefit through them their writer, their readers, and those who spread them.
Whatever is correct within them is from Allah alone, and whatever is mistaken is from ourselves and from Shaytan, and Allah and His Messenger are free from it.
And Allah Most High knows best.
May Allah’s peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and all his Companions.