-
Harsh Punishment For The Denial Of Truth
I would like to start by saying that Ghamidi Sahab has responded to the issue of eternal Hell and that answer satisfies me but I have another related issue:
I will present the argument that murder, rape, genocide etc are all horrible sins and Allah will bring justice for these crimes because human beings are being harmed in them and they need compensation while criminals need to pay for the harm they have caused.
But what about Shirk, Kufr/Sarkashi? Allah is invincible so what harm will He bring justice against these crimes? Sure, He can have a punish for them anyway since He is Just but it doesn’t seems to make sense to me that it has to be harshest one since again, Allah isn’t being harmed in the slightest nor is His Kingdom in danger like in the case of someone committing high treason against a country as Ghamidi Sahab gave an example of.
Allah could have left the punishment undecided and only announced a horrible fate but it seems He is threatening such people with very detailed punishment, which is a threat as Ghamidi Sahab said and it makes sense i.e He could choose not to execute it but Ghamidi Sahab also said if Allah execute His threat word to word, there would be no injustice at all. And this kinda causes concern for me because on what basis is Allah deciding this? How can we understand this? If it is beyond our comprehension, why give details of punishment at all? Or is it just a hyperbole and the reality of such punishments is something else?
-
37 Replies
-
Harsh Punishment For The Denial Of Truth
updated 3 years, 1 month ago
7 Members
·
37
Replies
-
Please see this discussion:
-
I already went through that discussion, it doesn’t really answer my question and the last comment in the discussion that was left unanswered only reinforces my concern/point.
-
One thing one must remember that Allah has given innate ability for tawheed and differentiate right and wrong. Before coming here, Quran tell us that we humans declared the Allah is one and we agreed for this test. Hence, the punishment.
-
Yes, I seen the Ghamidi’s view on the idea of why Allah punish Shirk/Kufr/Sarkashi.
But my concern is why does He punish it so sternly?
Take e.g people are made fully aware that murder, rape and torture is forbidden along with shirk. No room for error for every sin just like shirk in this example.
The people who knowingly commit murder, rape and torture are BIGGER criminals than those who knowingly commit shirk/kufr/sarkashi?
How can that be? Victim of murder/rape/torture suffer harm and the criminals should be punished for that harm. But a mushrik/kaffir/sarkash causes no harm to Allah and hence what harm should they be punished for?
Perhaps Allah may punish them for sake of punishing a crime but surely He shouldn’t punish shirk/kufr/sarkashi worse than murder/genocide/rape/torture based on above logic…..right?
-
-
I’m not sure how do you quantify ‘sternly’. Do we have any scale that tells us that when the magnitude of a punishment tips the scale to one side then it will be categorized as stern? Similarly, do we have any scale that tells us whether or not rape is a bigger crime than murder? None at all.
Only God can make these decision on the basis of absolute justice, and He has told us that He will not render any injustice in this regard.
-
I get what you are saying but I think I can safely tell you e.g that murder/rape/torture/genocide are bigger crimes than at least theft/bribery/zina. I would argue that the fitrah that Allah has put in me points to this otherwise we wouldn’t be able to build justice systems at all if we didn’t have some sense of scaling when it comes to justice. It is also how we recognize Allah’s attribute of being Just, right?
Similarly based on my above argument, I would say it doesn’t seem right to put shirk/kufr/sarkashi as bigger crimes than murder/rape/torture/genocide. Accurate scaling is up to Allah, sure but it seems to me since in crimes of shirk/kufr/sarkashi, there is no harm to the offending party (as opposed to murder/rape/torture/genocide) since Allah gets no harm nor needs compensation I don’t see why Allah would punish them more severely than those that do involves harm resulting in punishment and needs compensation for that harm. If shirk/kufr/sarkashi were just another crimes, I would agree with your argument but it seems Allah has specially singled these out and it makes you wonder why.
Ghamidi Sahab does usually conclude his talks on Hell that we will eventually go to Day of Judgment and see how Allah will do justice without any fear of injustice, that we might even request Allah not to give such stern punishment for the crimes in question. And that’s my default course of action, to hope that Allah will fulfill His promise but Allah detailed the punishment of shirk/sarkashi/kufr right now in the Qur’an so it creates a concern, my aql seems to find it unacceptable based on the above argument, maybe if Allah had left out the details then maybe it wouldn’t be an issue I guess since it is an issue that concerns Allah’s justice, which is the basis of our belief of Hereafter. I think this issue needs a satisfactory answer now rather than after death, especially since it is a major criticism of Islam for non-Muslims today.
-
-
Fitrah doesn’t answer the questions I raised above. As it’s glaringly evident from history, humans have always been shooting in the dark in regards to criminal law. For example, male rape has only been recently recognized as a crime by the humanity, with certain countries still having no laws in this regard. Even female rape had no laws in various parts of the world where anyone could rape anyone except a rich woman without the fear of any consequences. Marriage by kidnapping a woman has been legal and very common practice in certain parts of the world. Forced marriages are still legal in certain countries. Similarly, capital punishment has had a spotty history as well.
The answer to the question is satisfactory enough for those with insight. Those who make such baseless objections on Islam will first have to come up with answers to the questions I raised above before their questions can even be given any due consideration.
-
Do we have examples where theft/bribery/zina were punished worse than murder/rape/torture/genocide? If not then I think that is fitrah in work, no? That man is able to keep a distinguish between worst crimes from the lesser?
But accepting your point for the sake of argument that humans are not perfect at making criminal laws, I do believe they have a natural sense of justice right? If they see injustice, they will dislike it as Ghamidi Sahab said in Meezan that man doesn’t like tyrants (if I’m remembering correct). Issue is that people who criticize Islam, say that based of their natural understanding of justice, they find the treatment of mushrik/kaffir/sarkash to be not fair in the Hereafter. How do we respond to that? That they should ignore their nagging feelings?
-
-
I have already shared examples. If these aren’t good enough, one can put in the time and the effort to do their own research on the history of criminal law.
If someone’s understanding of justice is incorrect, they should figure out ways to get educated about it too.
It’s sheer ignorance to object to anything on the basis of a nagging feeling. In any field of knowledge, feeling is not the basis of an argument. This kind of nagging feeling is generally caused by lack of knowledge, and can be cured by researching and understanding the fundamental ideology of Islam, evidences for our beliefs, and our understanding of God. The example of people who raise trivial objections like this is of someone who rejects the theory of general relativity without having the fundamental knowledge of Physics.
-
That is a good answer. I will ponder over what you said and start a new question if I have any further queries.
-
-
Denial of truth is the root cause of all those heinous crimes that you have mentioned. If someone knowingly and willingly denies the truth he can never do justice in any other matter too. Those good citizens who deny God are those who are unable to infer existence of God out of the evidence they can appreciate — it could be due to lack of data or lack of mental processing power. In any case God will not punish them as this falls under ‘mazoori’ or inherent disability beyond their control.
-
Yeah kufr being root of all evil is how I initially understood it as well. That denial of truth in itself is not as important as the heinous crimes it gives birth to. But I think it is difficult to think that all kaffirs committed heinous crimes, like maybe some women that refused to believe in the prophets but never had the power to say, commit murder? Or in the case of Abu Talib that died a mushrik and supposedly a kaffir even though we can’t say he committed any heinous crime.
Only way to condemn kaffir for the their potential heinous crimes would be for Allah to judge them based on His knowledge alone (that a kaffir will always do heinous crimes in the future therefore his kufr is the ultimate sin) which is He wouldn’t do and hence put humanity through this test, where action will decide man’s fate, not Allah’s knowledge.
Or perhaps Allah might forgive some cases shirk and kufr if that is the only sin a person has? I.e a person that never committed any heinous crimes on top of shirk/kufr. Although it seems like Ghamidi Sahab insists that shirk/kufr in itself is enough of a crime to earn eternal Hell though so it does concerns me a bit.
-
It’s important to understand that denial of truth leads criminal mindset ONLY IF it is done knowing and willingly and this is when it becomes a sin. If someone denies something no matter true or false because he believes that is false (even though mistakenly) he is not a denier of truth. He is in fact a seeker of truth and his bad he could not find the truth but that is no reason to punish him. In fact all of us are truth seekers and whether or not we were able to find the truth is something that we would know only on the day or judgement. No worries we will not be punished if we are sincere in our truth seeking efforts.
Thats why people who we think have gone the wrong path may see us in Jannah
-
Yes, I know that kufr by definition is denial of truth willingly and knowingly. But consider the case of someone that rejected a prophet knowingly and willingly out of free will and then refused to become a criminal, again, out of their free will.
Like e.g not every kafir in Prophet’s (PBUH) time was a murder/rapist/torturer. Some kafirs just simply denied the truth but may not have committed any heinous crime. In case of such a “innocent kafir”, what would happen? Because Ghamidi Sahab seems to conclude that a kafir doesn’t need to become a criminal afterward to earn Hell, he is destined for eternal Hell for sole reason that he rejected the truth knowingly and willingly, that Allah will waste his good deeds because he denied the truth. What is your view on this?
-
Are we not assuming too much here to claim that the likes of abu talib denied the prophet knowingly and willingly?
If i give you a car to sell my product but you refuse to accept me as your employer and drive around my car even selling my product with other brands what kind of bonus you expect when you come back to me?
Now replace the car with freewill and sales targets with the good deeds, you can now figure out why God has made belief in God as the primary condition to accept other good deeds.
-
Well my initial argument was that Allah faces no loss in such scenario.
You won’t give me a bonus because I am refusing you as my employer even when I use your car. Ultimately, it wastes your time, your resources, you have been harmed and hence need compensation. So you do the just thing and not give me bonus.
But if I use Allah’s car/free will, not hit sales targets/good deeds, it doesn’t hurt Allah’s “profit” at all. If He still gives me bonus (or refuses) it doesn’t hurt Him at all.
Hence whether Abu Talib denied the truth innocently doesn’t matter. Him denying truth willingly and knowingly doesn’t matter either. Because Allah faces no harm from the denial.
You can be angry for one’s misuse of car, one rejection of your authority, because it hurts you so you refuse bonus.
But why is Allah so angry for one’s kufr when it doesn’t hurt Him at all? Sure, Allah can consider it a crime and hence give a punishment but the ultimate punishment of eternal Hell? Seems a little off, don’t you think?
-
-
So are you saying God should be indifferent of what people do on Earth? If he has no interest in what we do as he is got nothing to lose why would he give us the freewill? God is indifferent to animals no matter whether they wear cloths or not or kill each other God is not going to punish them right? So are you saying God should treat humans like animals?
This was possible if God has not assigned us an important mission on Earth of spending his resources on our disposal on the right things by using the freewill in a just and fair manner.
God says in Quran something like “Help God”. This clearly means God has goals that are dear to His heart. If we do not cooperate he can replace us with another people which he has done many times in the history and therefore he is not dependent on us but assuming He doesn’t care about his creation goals is not right.
-
No, I don’t think Allah, as a Creator, would be indifferent to His creation. I think being the Creator alone leads to Him caring about His creation and He should I suppose.
No, rather my point is that why Allah treats shirk/kufr/sarkashi so harshly? I can see why Allah want to punish murder/rape/torture/genocide etc because victim suffer harm and deserve compensation while the criminal is causing harm and deserves punishment.
But in case of shirk/kufr/sarkashi, Allah suffers no harm, doesn’t need compensation nor is the criminal causing any harm to Allah and hence wouldn’t deserve punishment.Therefore I assume, the punishment for shirk/kufr/sarkashi should be LESS than murder/rape/torture/genocide, right?
-
Now we are going in circles and i am losing interest. We have already agree that denial of truth behavior leads to crimes on Earth and God do not punish those who deny truth in error.
-
Right but to condemn denial of truth behavior just because it leads to other crimes would be to judge someone on what they can potentially do (crimes on Earth), not based on crimes they have done, hence that would mean that Allah is judging a denier of truth based on His knowledge (of his future crimes due to denial behavior) alone. Which I don’t think He would do for people of this life, right?
-
Punishment in hereafter is only a warning and not a promise. I am sure Allah will be generous and merciful in His forgiveness while dealing with those who refused to acknowledge him despite knowing and refused to be part of the organization of co-creators and co-designers Allah wanted to create on Earth to make progress on His creation agenda on Earth.
If someone who has gotten an advance payment against a promise to deliver something and later having consumed all the money tells me he does not recall the agreement i might forgive him but if he says he does remember the agreement and yet not willing to deliver his promise because he thinks I am very rich and the money i paid him is nothing for me and i can always hire others to get thIngs done, do you think i should forgive him and not file a case in the court? If i don’t do it what other workers who have been working hard to deliver their promise would feel about it? They might think working on the promise was not necessary.
If i keep hiring new people who do not work what would you think of me? A loser?
Thats why a stick and carrot system is essential to get things done no matter how rich you are.
-
I’m sure Allah will be most generous and merciful, perhaps even to the deniers of truth. We can hope for that I agree.
But Ghamidi Sahab said that suppose Allah isn’t generous nor merciful to deniers of truth, and execute His warning to the last letter, it would not go against Him being Just at all which I do find a bit concerning is all.
As for the filing a case example. Yes I agree that you should file a case against a problematic individual while rewarding the obedient ones but, my argument is not that you shouldn’t file a case at all nor that Allah should not punish a denier of truth at all. But rather that He shouldn’t punish them worse than any other crimes.
I want Allah to punish Hitler and the Pharoah but I’m not sure if I want a polytheist that used to do good deeds to burn in eternal Hell though. And you might say, “Well maybe he was a polytheist in error, Allah will forgive him.” Sure except Ghamidi Sahab say that Shirk is a sin that has no excuse, probably most of the polytheists, righteous and evil, both are going to Hell it seems.
-
-
I think it might be a good idea to put this question to respected Ustaz Ghamidi Sahib directly through “ASK GHAMIDI LIVE – Online Q&A With Javed Ahmed Ghamidi” as it seems like brother Saad isn’t yet satisfied. It’s just a suggestion though – thanks!
-
Perhaps but as brother Faisal explained above, it’s a question that can’t be answered by humans because Allah’s perfect standard of justice are beyond our comprehension and that all we can do is, hope that Allah is Just and Merciful in the end. I do not think Ghamidi Sahab will give a different answer from his student.
I am, however, discussing things with the other brother because they might have a different way of tackling the issue or that I am able to explain my issue more in details so others may understand why I am giving this issue so much importance.
-
-
Good question. My response is that obviously based on our intuitions (which you called nagging feelings; intuition is better word I guess) we think just for shirk/kufr/sarkashi at least there should be no eternal punishment whatsoever. But I think Ghamidi sb has addressed it by stating that the premise that – there will be eternal punishment for such sins at all cost – is not valid. Eternal punishment should be seen more of as a warning than it being enforced in reality. So, to me Ghamidi sb’s stance sounds logical. Allah is capable and completely just in even giving somebody eternal punishment (for which He himself will give you justification, and by default we will be convinced as He is all-knowing). But unless somebody is being subjected to eternal punishment in hell, you can’t raise this objection – again, look at eternal punishment as a warning.
So, your objection can be logically answered, at least to my understanding.
-
Yes, I suppose it is just a hyperbole in the Qur’an. That perhaps Allah is highlighting how bad such crimes are that they probably do deserve eternal punishments but perhaps He did not mean it literally.
Eternal punishment might just be a warning but perhaps never a reality. And when it is a reality, I’m sure Allah will be able to justify it.
However, it seems brother Faisal advises against intuitions/nagging feelings as you seen above. But if you were to accept answers based on intuitions then those non-Muslims raising objections against Allah’s concept of justice are just as valid as your answer, is it not? Because they won’t accept Allah as Just now based on their intuition.
-
Imagine this scenerio: If Allah did not emphasize on this point of eternal punishment multiple times, neither you nor I can predict what worst, best or neutral outcomes could have been as a result. Therefore, we do not know why it was mentioned several times. If we do a laboratory experiment in which we start a new universe, plan everything as it is now with the exception of the mentions of eternal punishment in Quran (lets say no mentioning of eternal punishment) and everything remains same, then your objection of hyperbole passes through, but if that does not turn out to be the case, the it might be worth mentioning. Again, we don’t know!
I will repeat again what you missed. You said: ‘Eternal punishment might just be a warning but perhaps never a reality.’ We both well within our sense of justice are unable to comprehend that if that happens in reality it will have to be injustice. For now, maybe you are right. But lets say when Allah is subjecting someone for eternal punishment, and He explains us why that person will have to suffer eternally, I am suggesting we will be convinced. And lets say, he never put somebody on eternal punishment, we won’t be able to raise this question. So, I think this argument I presented covers both aspects.
And I think after reading what I just wrote above, it seems to me that their (non-muslim’s) question or objection has been answered.
-
As a Muslim, I understand and agree with you. I am willing to wait, I am willing to trust Allah, I can believe that Allah can convince me in the end about His judgments, should He choose to give eternal punishment.
But I don’t think it will work for non-Muslims. They understand justice through intuition. They label Allah as not just based on their limited sense of justice now and they won’t become Muslims today just so they can find the justification of eternal punishment tomorrow, they won’t wait for Allah to justify it on Day of Judgment. They want the justification now otherwise they conclude Allah is not just and they won’t worship a god they think is not just.
And suppose we say that maybe Allah won’t give the eternal punishment so no one can raise the question, in which case they see it as Allah having a chance of being just in the future and again raise objections on the possibility of injustice.
-
Well, I thought my answer was goint to be satisfying to everyone irrespective of whether someone is muslim or not. Anyways, lets try to think if there is such a sin for which eternal punishment is justified. Perhaps we can’t think of any sin. But, can there be a sin for which eternal punishment is justified? It is possible, I guess. Who knows! AND if we get convinced that for this or that sin eternal punishment is justified, then the act will be just.
Someone can say that Allah specified eternal punishment for shirk/kufr/sarkashi. I would respond that it’s a warning. And giving warning is logical and not unjust. In order for this just warning to be called as unjust, this warning will first has to implimented in reality to be able to called unjust. Now lets say, if this warning really gets implimented in reality, we will raise objection and then if we don’t get satisfactory answer, we may call it unjust, but if we get satisfactory reply, we will have to call it just. So, warning is not unjust and nobody has to wait for anything to accept that warning for the sake of warning is justified.
You said: ‘One can raise objections on the possibility of injustice.’ Lets say, even if Allah did not mention eternal punishment. By your logic, there was still the possibility of injustice. I guess it does not matter whether this warning is mentioned or not in that case.
We are getting into circles.
-
I think that is a good answer to conclude on. Thank you.
-
-
-
Listen to 5:50 to 6:10. Ghamidi Sahab says that suppose Allah does give eternal punishment, it will still be totally Just. That is an issue. How we can understand, that what kind of crime this is that Allah is willing to give eternal hell for. Sure He might not give it because as your video suggests, it is only a warning but if He makes it a reality, it would be totally justified……but how is it justified? What harm kufr/shirk/sarkashi does do to deserve eternal hell?
-
-
Brother Saad, you pretty much summed it up in your statement (especially 2nd part of it): “Eternal punishment might just be a warning but perhaps never a reality. And when it is a reality, I’m sure Allah will be able to justify it.” As Ustaz Ghamidi Sb sometimes say, when we meet Allah on the Day of Judgement, we will ask Him……….
-
Yes, as Muslims, it is all we can do.
But non-Muslims arguing against Islam won’t wait until Day of Judgment. They see the eternal punishment as unjust today so they want the justification today to accept that Allah is Just and worthy of worship. They won’t wait until death to be convinced that Allah is Just, they want to be convinced now. So what do we tell them?
-
No need to answer the last question. I believe brother Faisal Ali has given a satisfactory answer above. Thank you.
-
-
Here’s an other point that has come to my mind:
Monotheism helps us filter out good ideas from bad ones. If we make a mistake in picking up ideas to work on, all other actions will go in vain or can even cause destruction, injustice or other forms of evil on Earth.
If we pick up right ideas to work on, all our resources will be spent well and help mankind progress in the right path.
We can pick up right ideas to work on only with a God conscious mind.
If non Muslims are doing good, they are following their monotheist nature that every child is born with. They are believer deep down in their hearts but they are not aware of their belief.
If Muslims are doing wrong things, or a mixture of good and bad, despite claiming to be monotheists, they do not understand the meaning and requirements of being a monotheist.
The crime of polytheism is so serious – someone is knowing and willingly spending time and other resources on evil projects totally disregarding the One who has given him the resources as a trustee to spend on good deed. This is why the punishment for polytheism is so hard.
Please bear in mind the difference between shirk and a sin. Sin is when you are doing something good but end up making a mistake. Shirk is when you don’t care about good or bad, you just do what you like by fair or unfair means.
-
Please refer to the following responses by Ghamidi Sahab:
Please refer to the link below from 28:30 to 36:26
Discussion 38044 • Reply 38047
Please also refer to the link below from 32:49 to 37:01
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
