(CHAKRA Blogs) Harih Om. It is not uncommon to be faced with the ageless, boring question: “If Bhagavan is formless why go to a temple and worship idols”. Ever so often, these are the queries posed by zealous Islamists on the internet, who make it their business to style themselves after a Wahabi mindset.
1) Because a form is a representation of all the qualities of Ishvara, in full Cosmic glory. Take for instance a mUrti of Shiva BhagavAn. The damaru (drum) represents the?k?sha (space), the gangA flowing in his hair represents the Apa? (water), his matted locks represent the vAyu (air) princple that blows and needs to be matted down; the moon on his head (hence he is called chandrashekhar, the one whose head is adorned by the moon) represents kala, time. The ajNa chakra (third eye) represents kAlAgni, the fire which decimates the universe, and finally, the vibhUti (ash) on his body represents the pRthvi (earth) element.
2) By looking at any single form of Ishvara, we are not just focusing on one entity, but on the WHOLE TOTALITY that exists. Hence though everything is Ishvara, there is nothing contradictory about doing pUjA to the forms of Ishvara
3) Unlike the Muslim obsession that Allah is formless, we are a bit more sensible than that. If Allah is formless, this world clearly has forms, and hence Allah must be separate from the world, and if Allah is separate from the world in some far-away place called heaven, then automatically he becomes a small, limited, tiny, being, because the entire universe of names and forms is different from him, and he exists in one small pocket of space called heaven. That makes Allah not very different from any other living creature. Moreover, if Allah is considered formless, why is he described as ‘sitting’ on a throne? How does the formless sit on a formed throne, does he have a tailbone with a form that allows him to do so? It’s very, very strange.
4) If, like the Muslim alluded, we don’t need temples, why then does the Muslim go to the Haj pilgrimage? If their god is so called ‘formless’, why do they need to bow down ONLY in the direction of the kaabaa, no matter where in the world they are?
5) Muslims worship forms, they just don’t know it. A form is anything that can be identified. The very Arabic inscription of ‘Allah’, is in itself a form. Certainly it isn’t formless. The very word ‘Allah’ is a form, because every Muslim who reads the inscription recognizes it as ‘Allah’. So truly, Muslims do worship forms, but in their ignorance and bias against vaidikas, they forget the definition of a form.
6) For Hindus, Ishvara is formless, and ALSO the sustainer of all forms. Every form that is there, is nothing but a manifestation of Ishvara alone, which means, unlike Allah, NOTHING is separate from Ishvara… he does not sit in some far off place in heaven like Allah; the very space, time, matter, energy, life- all of this is Ishvara- IshAvAsya idam sarvam- all that is here is only Ishvara, as taught in the IshAsyopanishad. The very material substance of the universe is Ishvara. Every form is Ishvara, and yet Ishvara is also distinct from the forms… just as every wave is water, but each wave appears different- some are big; like a tsunami, some are small; like a ripple. Does water have a form? Yes, in one sense it does, as a wave. And in another sense, water has no form, because every form is water alone. Same applies for Ishvara.
7) Hence we refer to Ishvara as saguNa brahman in the form-ful aspect, and nirguNa brahman as the formless aspect. This makes our philosophy complete, water tight, and definitely non-negatable by ANY person from other faiths who find the necessity to educate us, when their own philosophy is completely incongruent with logic and common sense.
Taking human birth is a rare incident, as VivekachUDAmaNi talks about, being born in a Vedic household where the highest truths that exist are unfolded is even rarer, and to be able to understand it and live by it is the rarest. I hope we all study our scriptures diligently and take stock in what we do
I’d like to make some points:
1> The Islamic point of view (to which I am not claiming to be an authority) against idols is not a wahibi one. It is derived from the Quran.
29:17 “For ye do worship idols besides Allah, and ye invent falsehood. (among others)
2> There is no need for you to refute this. Islam gives you the ‘saving face’ gesture in the Quran:
2:256 (Y. Ali) Let there be no compulsion in religion
109:1 (Asad) SAY: “O you who deny the truth!
109:2 (Asad) “I do not worship that which you worship,
109:3 (Asad) and neither do you worship that which I worship!
109:4 (Asad) “And I will not worship ~hat which you have [ever] worshipped,
109:5 (Asad) and neither will you [ever] worship that which I worship.
109:6 (Asad) Unto you, your moral law, and unto me, mine !”
In other words, if you choose to believe something else, fine. We can all live in peace and respect each other.
In other words, if you choose to believe something else, fine. We can all live in peace and respect each other.
———-
Harih Om. Yes, I agree, which is exactly why Muslims should be respecting the rights of Hindus to worship whatever they want in any way they want, and not force their religious beliefs of non-idol worship upon us.
As I said, even the name ‘allah’ is a form alone. No transaction can take place free of forms. I am sure you understand
You use “Muslims” as if all Muslims follow or understand their religion. Yes, Muslims, who follow their religion should respect the rights of all people.
While I have no idea what you mean by this form thing, I’ll respect that too.
Larry, perhaps you could shed light on the subject. Isn’t it an Islamic tenet to convert “non-believers” (Kafirs) to Islam?
No, it is part of Islam to do ‘dawah’ or outreach. In other words:
When the Prophet Muhammad (saws) was delivered his first verses of the Quran by the Angel Gabriel…
“Recite in the name of your Lord who created, created man from clots of blood! Recite! Your Lord is the most Bountiful One, who by the pen taught man what he did not know. (Surah 96.1-5)”
It wasn’t just a message to read, it was a a pronouncement to learn and then…
“Say, “O people, I am only to you a clear warner.”” (Surah 22:49)
And then a message to Muhammad to warn those to follow God. The surah continues…
“And those who have believed and done righteous deeds – for them is forgiveness and noble provision. But the ones who strove against Our verses, [seeking] to cause failure – those are the companions of Hellfire.”
God does not require of Muhammad conversion. Only warning. And if you read the Quran and Sunnah you know that he is both successful and not. Sometimes he was completely humiliated by individuals or the entire community.
But neither God nor Muhammad require the conversion of non-believers.
2:256 (Y. Ali) Let there be no compulsion in religion
I thought I would touch on another point in your article. I hope you don’t think I’m being rude. I love interfaith dialog and I do so out of respect.
“If, like the Muslim alluded, we don’t need temples, why then does the Muslim go to the Haj pilgrimage? If their god is so called ‘formless’, why do they need to bow down ONLY in the direction of the kaabaa, no matter where in the world they are?”
You are combing, I believe unnecessarily, two unrelated things. On the first, The prophet (saw) said “The world, the whole of it, is a Mosque.” “Wherever you turn, there is the face of God.” and this is true. You will see Muslims praying anywhere and everywhere when the time comes. Mosques traditionally serve a different purpose (beyond prayer) in the Muslims community. As the center of the community for social gathering, education, etc..
Hajj (or the pilgrimage to Makkah) has a deeper meaning and one that stretches back much further than Islam. But if you prefer to stick to the confines of Islam then (I assume you know that) it is one of the tenets (or pillars) of faith for a Muslim to perform Hajj if one is able. The pillars being Shahada (testimony of faith), Salat (prayer), Sawm (fasting, during Ramadan), Zakat (charity), and Hajj. God puts it this way in the Quran:
2:197 (Y. Ali) For Hajj are the months well known. If any one undertakes that duty therein, Let there be no obscenity, nor wickedness, nor wrangling in the Hajj. And whatever good ye do, (be sure) Allah knoweth it. And take a provision (With you) for the journey, but the best of provisions is right conduct. So fear Me, o ye that are wise.
God makes clear that Hajj is required in this and many verses and warns to plan properly and be mindful of God. But then…
3:97 (Y. Ali) In it are Signs Manifest; (for example), the Station of Abraham; whoever enters it attains security; Pilgrimage thereto is a duty men owe to Allah,- those who can afford the journey; but if any deny faith, Allah stands not in need of any of His creatures.
God shows mercy on those who cannot afford to make the journey. The prophet also speaks of Hajj:
The Prophet (p.b.u.h.) said, “There is no day on which Allah frees more of His slaves from Fire than the Day of Arafat, and He verily draws near, then boasts of them before the angles, saying: ‘What do they seek?’” (Sahih Muslim)
and
“Sound Hajj has no reward except Paradise” (Bukhari & Muslim)
Finally, in terms of the Kaba as a destination and prayer direction. This is an oft misunderstood thing for non-Muslims. But at it’s core it’s really about community. At the same time (by time zone) every day over a billion people stop whatever they are doing all over the world, perform their ablutions (wudu), turn to face Makkah and the Kaba, and pray to God. At that moment they are more than just individual (lowercase) muslims going about their day. They are (uppercase) Muslims joined in community prayer to the One God (Allah). And the Kaba is not a form of God but God’s house or mosque on earth. Not a single Muslim anywhere believes that they are praying to a form of God when they face the Kaba. That would be Shirk – a major sin.
I should point out that originally the Qibla, or prayer direction, was not Makkah – it was Jerusalem. God changed it to the Kaba:
2:142 (Asad) THE WEAK-MINDED among people will say, “What has turned them away from the direction of prayer which they have hitherto observed?” Say: “God’s is the east and the west; He guides whom He wills onto a straight way.”
2:143-144 (Asad) And thus have We willed you to be a community of the middle way, so that [with your lives] you might bear witness to the truth before all mankind, and that the Apostle might bear witness to it before you. And it is only to the end that We might make a clear distinction between those who follow the Apostle and those who turn about on their heels that We have appointed [for this community] the direction of prayer which thou [O Prophet] hast formerly observed: for this was indeed a hard test for all but those whom God has guided aright. But God will surely not lose sight of your faith-for, behold, God is most compassionate towards man, a dispenser of grace.
And herein lies the larger lesson for this entire fourth paragraph. “God’s is the east and the west..” Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus, all believers are free to pray to their God (in whatever form they know) wherever they are. But it is for God to judge. Because “God is the most compassionate towards mad, a dispenser of grace”.
Muslim kiss blackstone placed at Kaaba, Makkah. In torah (Jew’s book) God said,”Not to bow down to an idol, even if that is not its mode of worship (Ex. 20:5) (CCN11). In Muslim contest “not to bow down to Blackstone even if it is not worshipped” for more information you can visit wikiislam.net
Muslims also kiss their family members and friends. Are you suggesting that they are worshiping them too? Kissing is a demonstration of affection not worship.
Are you saying bowing down to the kaabaa is a sign of affection too, and not worship?
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you have not read any of the previous comments. If a Muslim is praying at home in front of their TV, are they praying to Samsung or Sony? At some point you need to use logic. No, Muslims are not bowing down to the Kaba. They are submitting themselves to God at the most sacred Mosque in Islam.
ha ha ha, Torah said, “Not to make a graven image; neither to make it oneself nor to have it made by others (Ex. 20:4) (CCN9).Not to set up a pillar (for worship/ or hating Satan) (Deut. 16:22) (CCN162). Praying at stone or house,or TV (samsung/sony) or tree or respecting them, or using them as tools for worship, this is nothing but idolism. One direction toward so called sacred place is not monotheism is monoidolism.
I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. By your logic, God would have to leave the earth completely barren to allow his servants to avoid praying in front of any object – to avoid it being considered an idol. Of course you might suggest that, well, there are planets or stars or the sun in the way of God. Is not the Muslim praying to one of those ‘objects’?
Once again. Muslims are not praying ‘to’ whatever they are in front of. They are praying to God. I’m not sure why this is such a hard concept to grasp. Common sense really must be brought to bare here. You can either accept it or not. In fact, as I’ve mentioned earlier: God says as much in the Quran:
2:256 (Y. Ali) Let there be no compulsion in religion
109:1 (Asad) SAY: “O you who deny the truth!
109:2 (Asad) “I do not worship that which you worship,
109:3 (Asad) and neither do you worship that which I worship!
109:4 (Asad) “And I will not worship ~hat which you have [ever] worshipped,
109:5 (Asad) and neither will you [ever] worship that which I worship.
109:6 (Asad) Unto you, your moral law, and unto me, mine !”
Islam came after centuries of idolatry at the Kaba by the Quraysh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Hashim) who profited mightily from it and disrupted it.
God said:
35:14 (Asad) If you invoke them, they do not hear your call; and even if they could hear, they would not [be able to] respond to you. And [withal,] on the Day of Resurrection they will utterly disown your having associated them with God. And none can make thee understand [the truth] like the One who is all-aware.
2:165 (Asad) And yet there are people who choose to believe in beings that allegedly rival God, loving them as [only] God should be loved: whereas those who have attained to faith love God more than all else. If they who are bent on evildoing could but see – as see they will when they are made to suffer [on Resurrection Day] -that all might belongs to God alone, and that God is severe in [meting out] punishment!
Muslims are perfectly clear on this subject. They don’t take objects as God. They don’t worship objects.
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you have not read any of the previous comments. If a Muslim is praying at home in front of their TV, are they praying to Samsung or Sony? At some point you need to use logic. No, Muslims are not bowing down to the Kaba. They are submitting themselves to God at the most sacred Mosque in Islam.
_____________
THAT is my whole point. When Hindus worship Ishvara, they are worshipping bhagavAn THROUGH idols, they are not idol worshippers, they are God Worshippers. And even if not, it is not anyone’s business how a Hindu worships or does not. If you agree with this then we are on the same page.
I am not pointing fingers at all muslims, and perhaps that is a caveat I should have added to the article, but I am pointing fingers at the one who find it their job to correct how others should worship.
It is not my place to judge how Hindus worship. That is up to God. In the end:
2:156 (Asad) … “Verily, unto God do we belong and, verily, unto Him we shall return.”
It’s funny how the most judgmental people usually have the loudest voices in society but they typically have the lowest numbers.
It seems to me that the primary difference between Hindus and Muslims (in this area) is that in Islam it is forbidden to have an intercessor between ‘man’ and God, or indeed to acknowledge more than the one God. But I would prefer not to concentrate on the things that separate us and instead find ways to bring us together. That was really the reason I commented in the first place. To bring down the tone from ‘refute’ to ‘dialog’.
With much respect and understanding.
“This makes our philosophy complete, water tight, and definitely non-negatable by ANY person from other faiths who find the necessity to educate us, when their own philosophy is completely incongruent with logic and common sense.”
Wow, that’s such a sweeping statement. With all due respect, let me presume to ask the author if before reaching such conclusions about Islamic philosophy, he read Al-Qur’an in the original Arabic (or at least several good translations), the Hadith literature, the Tafsirs of several Islamic scholars, and the works of major Muslim philosophers, both medieval and modern.
Larry, the grace and gentleness with which you have commented are truly commendable. You have won yourself an admirer! In one of your previous comments, you asked a commenter to think logically. Well, not all can be like you. In interfaith dialogue, you will find people who are respectful, open-minded, and make logical statements. And then there will be those who will obfuscate what you say. It’s better to ignore them. One more thing: I don’t know where you live, so I don’t know when you celebrated ‘Id, even so, ‘Id Mubarak!
Now I’m no Islamic scholar; I’m not even a Muslim, I’m a Deist. But I have a great deal of appreciation for the Abrahamic religions. So let me presume to make some points on the author’s arguments:
#1: Firstly, Al-Qur’an says: “Wa-Lam Yakun Llahu Kufuwan Ahadun.”, in Surat-al-Ikhlas (Surah 112) verse 4, which means, “And there is nothing comparable to him.” So using an idol would go against this verse. Secondly, iconography in Hinduism is not merely symbolic, it has a basis in the Puranas (Hinduism’s sacred histories). For instance, the Ganga in Shiva’s hair is not just a representation of water, it has more to do with the famous Hindu account of the descent of the river Ganga from heaven on the prayers of the King Bhagiratha. The story goes that Shiva gathered her in his hair. Similarly, his third eye is not a representation of Kalagni, but a real body part with which he burnt Kamadeva, the god of love (much like Cupid/ Eros; he too shoots love darts). Thirdly, an idol in Hinduism is not just a symbol, it is treated like a real person; it is woken up in the mornings, bathed, symbolically fed, dressed, ornamented, and put to sleep at night. It is also taken out in a litter like a king. Not things you would do if
it was merely a symbol.
#2: By focusing on just one form, one is NOT focusing on the totality. For instance, in medieval times, to the Turks, all Europeans were Franks. In fact, Frankistan was the name they gave to all Europe. Such an approach is undoubtedly flawed. Similarly with focusing on one form.
#3: There are different schools of thought within Islam which have differing views on whether Allah has a form or not. Some hold that He is formless, while others assert that He has a form, although the same is incomparable. And there are schools of thought between the first two. However, even if Allah has a form, it doesn’t mean He is in anyway small or limited. Al-Qur’an describes Allah as having knowledge of (Surah 6:59) and power over (18:45) all things in the universe. In fact, Allah’s Kursi or footstool extends all over the heavens and the earth, as is described in the grand and majestic Ayat-ul-Kursi (2:255). So He cannot be called limited or small.
#4: As for the Hajj, Larry has said enough about it; even so, here are my views: It is of course a ritual, and has much significance for the believer. Before embarking, the pilgrim wears Ihram, simple clothes, after which he must be in a state of spiritual purity. The pilgrimage is marked by the virtues of abstinence and repentance. As for the Ka’bah, it is, as Larry has pointed out, the Qibla, the indicator of the direction of prayer. The idea behind it is that praying in one direction fosters a sense of unity. Every community has a community centre, which is a symbol of the unity of the community. The Ka’bah and the Masjid-ul-Haram built around it serve as the community centre of all Muslims. There have been instances in history when the Ka’bah was destroyed. The Black Stone was also taken away from Mecca once. Even then, Muslims all over continued to pray in that direction. Thus, neither the Ka’bah nor the Stone are in any way idols.
#5: Muslims do not worship forms, they don’t inscribe the Name of Allah on a plaque, mount it on a pedestal, anoint it with oil, water, milk or clarified butter, burn incense to it, offer food to it, dress it, bathe it, take it on a litter et al. The Arabic inscription is just that: an inscription.
#6: The author states that “… The very material substance of the universe is Ishvara.” This is either monism (Dvaita) or qualified monism (Vishishtadvaita). However, Hinduism has dualistic schools of thought too. The Islamic view is similar to Dvaita, though there are differences too.
#7: I repeat my first point: I think the author’s statement on Islamic philosophy is unwarranted.
As I have said before, I am a Deist. I am not endorsing Islam, although I have a lot of appreciation for it. I am just giving my views on it.
Thank you Nahar for your kind words. And also for teaching me some very interesting lessons about Hinduism that I did not know.
I appreciate this discussion. As I said at the outset, my critique was not of ALL muslims, but the ones who think it is their right to tell others how to worship. As I already mentioned, that was a caveat I should have added more clearly, which I do thank Larry for pointing out.
Nahar says: ” So using an idol would go against this verse. Secondly, iconography in Hinduism is not merely symbolic, it has a basis in the Puranas (Hinduism’s sacred histories). For instance, the Ganga in Shiva’s hair is not just a representation of water, it has more to do with the famous Hindu account of the descent of the river Ganga from heaven on the prayers of the King Bhagiratha. The story goes that Shiva gathered her in his hair. Similarly, his third eye is not a representation of Kalagni, but a real body part with which he burnt Kamadeva, the god of love (much like Cupid/ Eros; he too shoots love darts). ”
I do not disagree with you, and am well aware of these paurANic teachings. The fact that the idol is a symbol of as many things as you wish to derive from it is testimony of the grandness of the culture. You can make it as meaningful as you wish to make it.
“Thirdly, an idol in Hinduism is not just a symbol, it is treated like a real person; it is woken up in the mornings, bathed, symbolically fed, ”
You just stated yourself it is symbolically fed. It is all symbolism. Going even further, even if people do treat the idol as their personal God, there is nothing wrong in it. The scriptures talk of Ishvara as the totality, whereas the idol is representative of that totality. This is discussed even in the Shiva purANa.
This quick writeup was the result of being caught amidst a heated debate where a group of Muslims (nothing like the gentle demeanor of Larry) entered a discussion forum of Hindus and started bad-mouthing our practices. My response is for that flavor of Muslims alone.
As Larry beautifully said, it is not up to us to judge how someone else connects with their God.
That said, thank you both. This has been humbling.
Om
Correction:– #6: …This is either monism (ADVAITA) or qualified monism… Dvaita is dualism. The typo is regretted.
More good stuff from the famous book of Imam Ghazali (Ihya Uloom Ed-Din)
p.1.190:
The Blackstone (of Ka’ba) is a jewel from Paradise. It will be raised on the resurrection day. It will have two eyes and one tongue with which it will speak. It will bear for everyone who kissed it and testified its truth. Allah made Ka’ba 2,000 years before He created Adam.
p.1.207:
Kissing of Black Stone is like kissing the hand of God. Muhammad said: “The Black Stone is the right Hand of God in the World. As a man handshakes with his brother so God handshakes with the people buy means of Black Stone.”
From IslamQA, on this Hadith (Fatwa #46543)
With regard to the hadeeth about the Black Stone being Allaah’s Right Hand on earth, the answer to that is that it is a false (baatil) hadeeth which is not proven from the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
Ibn al-Jawzi said in al-‘Ilal al-Mutanaahiyah: This hadeeth is not saheeh.
Al-‘Ilal by Ibn Al-Jawzi, 2/575. see also Talkhees al-‘Ilal by al-Dhahabi (p. 191).
Ibn al-‘Arabi said: it is a false hadeeth to which no attention should be paid. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: It was narrated from the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) with an isnaad that cannot be proven; based on that there is no need to discuss its meaning.
Moreover, not all Muslims accept the Ahadith. There is a growing movement within Islam of people who reject the Ahadith. They are called the Ahl-al-Quran (People of Al-Qur’an) or Quraniyun, similar to Qaraite Judaism and Protestant Christianity. These Muslims do not kiss or touch the Stone. So the above comment is invalid.
Dear Nahar,
This is Wahabi movement, they want to remove this black stone from kaaba as this is idolatry. Judaism it is idolatry, even if it is not worships.
Dear Nahar,
This is Wahabi movement, they want to remove this black stone from kaaba as this is idolatry. Judaism says it is idolatry, even if it is not worships.
Dear Anand,
I’m not sure whom you’re calling a Wahhabi movement. Is it the Islam QA website or the Qur’aniyun? The latter are actually progressive. You have a point with regard to Judaism though; judged by its standards, Christianity and Islam don’t seem to be that monotheistic or iconic. The Islamic veneration of Muhammad borders on worship; he has a position that even Moses does not get in Judaism. The monotheism of Judaism is purer than that of her daughters.
Sounds Interesting… It is very informative and I Like this Post….