PREFACE
The Prophet Muhammad of Arabia (peace be
upon him), when assessed fairly, undoubtedly emerges as the greatest national
hero that any country ever produced.
His greatness, however, lies in masterfully exploiting the concept of
Prophethood, which, being an integral tradition of the Middle Eastern culture,
is less spiritual and more political.
Prophethood is based on the doctrine of revelation: it means that God, the
Creator, loves mankind so much that He wants to guide the human creatures to
save them from hell. In return for this favour, God demands absolute submission,
that is, man must worship the All-Mighty and live by His laws without ever
questioning their purpose, validity and relevance.
The medium of revelation i.e. the person through whom God is supposed to
reveal His will, is called the Prophet; he is God's Agent on earth. Since God
cannot be seen or contacted, the Prophet's word begins to rank as the Word of
God, and the Creator, for total lack of communication with people, recedes into
the background. As a result, the Prophet, who (apparently) claims to be God's
most humble servant, rises as the dominant force in God-Prophet relationship. It
is he who comes to hold the keys of paradise. Therefore, a person must believe
in the Prophet to qualify for heaven; he who believes in God alone, cannot rank
as a believer; he is an infidel and must go to hell, no matter how righteous he
may be!
This exposes the true nature of Prophethood. If its purpose is to glorify God
and guide people to righteousness, then how is it that salvation depends upon
believing in the Prophet, and belief in God counts for nothing? Again, if the
aim of Prophethood is to spread righteousness, then how can a righteous person
be thrown into hell just for not acknowledging the Prophet? Even more baffling
is the fact that God becomes powerless in relation to the Prophet because there
is nothing that He can do for those who believe in Him alone.
Since Prophethood seeks to elevate a Prophet at the expense of God, it has,
obviously, nothing to do with God or guidance. It is just a political device of
the Middle Eastern origin, which enables its operator to achieve his ambitions
under the pretence of spirituality. With a view to bridling the curious human
mind, the doctrine of Prophethood discourages free will, which is the fountain
of free-thinking, enquiry and social progress. Instead, it imposes complete
hegemony of fate on man to drive him as if he were an ass.
In fact, Prophethood is the tool of Dominance-Urge, which goads a person to
seek the highest possible position in a social or political hierarchy. All the
conquerors, heads of states, etc., however, represent ephemeral type of
Dominance-Urge because it expires with the demise of its possessor. However, its
spiritual counterpart is a lasting phenomenon because a Prophet commands his
followers from beyond his grave through the law that he laid down in his holy
book.
Since existence is subject to the Principle of Change, no social law is
eternal unless there is a body of people, who respects it and is willing to
enforce it. It is especially true in regard to a Divine Code, which is held as
sacred and true after a passage of centuries despite its total irrelevance to
human problems. This is why that religious enthusiasts are always fanatical,
utterly opposed to reason. Since a Prophet represents the most severe form of
Dominance-Urge, he seeks to create a band of national followers, blindly
dedicated and ready to glorify him through all ages. This is what makes a
Prophet a staunch nationalist, who knows that his divine status depends upon the
rise and fall of his own people. For this reason, he builds a strong nation
through a good deal of effort, making his own glory, the beginning and end of
this exercise.
The life of the Prophet Muhammad is a fascinating model of this truth. He
welded the fragmented Arab tribes into a unified nation and inspired them with a
great political ideal, leading to the establishment of a mighty Arab Empire,
which the misguided Muslims of the Indian subcontinent think of as the Islamic
Empire, despite the fact that the status of the non-Arab Muslims in it was no
better than that of Indians in the British Empire. The Prophet Muhammad was
essentially a nationalist. To make the Arabs a pure nation, he even
(successfully) carried out ethnic cleansing by massacring and banishing the Jews
from Arabia.
In fact, Islam is the most effective tool of imperialism; other nations,
usually acquire political and cultural glory through economic power or sword and
fire but Islam achieves this aim through the medium of faith-in- Muhammad, the
only source of paradise, replete with beautiful virgins, pretty boys and rivers
of wine, milk and honey. This lure of paradise has turned all non-Arab Muslims
into moths, eager to cremate themselves on the flame of the Arabian cultural
hegemony. So blinded are the non-Arab Muslims by the magnitude of the Arabian
glory, emanating from the Islamic faith, that the father will kill his own son
if he denies its spiritual, legal and moral suzerainty. What can be more
fantastic than the fact that Muslims all over the world prostrate towards Mecca
at least five times a day. The Prophet gained this singular honour for his
country through a spiritual mechanism, which, despite being phoney, appears
felicitous, fruitful and fitting. Yet it testifies, not only to the unique
political vision of the Prophet, but also offers an amazing study to someone,
wishing to engage in discovering the human skills of marvel, mystery and
manipulation.
It is not wishful thinking. I have burnt enough midnight oil to uncover the
reality of Prophethood. As this doctrine is an open insult to the dignity of
God, who is held as the Perfect and Creator, Islam cannot be a Divine religion.
Owing to its deep-rooted tendencies to benefit the Arabs at the expense of its
followers belonging to the foreign lands, it is reasonable to conclude that
Islam is nothing but the tool of the Arab Imperialism.
Is there anyone who can sincerely answer the points raised in this treatise?
Anwar Shaikh
Cardiff
1. 7. 1998
| 
