Deconstructing Revisionist Methodology of Ahmad Parwez I

Bismillahi-Rahman ar-Raheem

I recently came across an article that was priginally produced in Urdu and has been translated into English. The article is entitled “Pause and Reflect” of a man who is famous among modernist, secularist, and the enemies of Islam and quite infamous for Muslims. His name, Ahmad Parwez, founder of the Parwezi sect. Ahmad Parwez is the actual founder of the entire Hadeeth rejection movement. After further research I recalled that Salafipublications produced a translation of an arabic work that was formed to address the deceptions of Parwezi thought that is basically alien to Islam, and therefore I will have to nickname this idea as “Parasite” thought somewhat coinciding with his name.

At any rate, I plan to decipher pretty much every misconception he got wrong, every deception he promoted, and clarify what he he stated truthfully but implied a false understanding because the basis of this article is pretty much quarantined within this framework and basically devoid of any actual truth.

Ahmad Parwez illustrativelybegins the introduction of his article with a dazzling display of painting the Qur’an with wondrous beauty in both eloquence and inner powerful meanings.

So this is what he says

One of the marvels of the Quran is its style. When dealing with a subject, whether facts about the universe or the deep mysteries of the human brain, the language is simple, clear, eloquent, and highly focused. As a result of this highly focused way of expression, this comprehensive revealed book of nature and complete code of conduct is so small that if it is printed in fine English type, it will not spread over more than a few pages.

Here is an example of this highly focused way of expression: Prophet Mohammad (P) had been preaching the Quranic way of living to the people of Mecca for quite some time, and they had been vehemently opposing it. Finally one day the Prophet (P) told them that instead of having lengthy discussions he wanted to have a very brief word with them. The Meccans did not mind listening to a few words. When the Prophet (P) found them willing, he told them the word is very important and worthy of their full attention, but if it is inconvenient for everyone to pause, then one or two people at a time can stop and listen. When the people became psychologically attentive he told them that all he had to say was, “Be in the habit of reflecting.” (34:46)

In these few words the Quran has brought to light many hidden facts of human life. The real significance and true import of these thought provoking words can only be appreciated by those people (nations) who are aware of the power and scope of human intellect and imagination. Suffice it to say that the Quran constantly exhorts Muslims to reason, think, reflect, and deliberate. It goes so far as to say, “the people who do not use these faculties are not human beings. They are living their lives on the animal level, even worse than that. These are the cursed people.” (7:179)

Usually, when I have a hunch on something, it turns out to be correct for the most part. Dissecting this article is one of those issues where my hunch turned out to be dramatically correct. Just in this brief introductory material I found a number of deceptions

Deception 1: Parwez claimed quite satanically that in essence, Muhammad just happened to manage to get the pagans one day together and just merely to tell them this. There is not a single incident reported in the prophets life where he just gathered the pagans just to state this “phrase” that Parwez claims and for which he deceitfully concealed the actuality of the verse which leads me to the second deception

Deception 2: The verse he quotes which he cites as “be in the habit of reflecting” is the worst Qur’anic citation I have ever come across in my entire experience of polemics. Lets merely breakdown the implicated depictions between this corrupt phrase of the verse vs the actual verse.

“Be in the habit of reflecting” signifies to the readers that the person dispensing this clause is exhorting the listeners to simply reflect all the time. This clause leaves a very general reality and does not define what to reflect about. The second implication is that it commands the listener to always be in a state of reflection.

Now, lets compare this with the Qur’anic ayaah

﴿قُلْ إِنَّمَآ أَعِظُكُمْ بِوَحِدَةٍ أَن تَقُومُواْ لِلَّهِ مَثْنَى وَفُرَادَى ثُمَّ تَتَفَكَّرُواْ مَا بِصَـحِبِكُمْ مِّن جِنَّةٍ إِنْ هُوَ إِلاَّ نَذِيرٌ لَّكُمْ بَيْنَ يَدَىْ عَذَابٍ شَدِيدٍ ﴾

Say: “I exhort you to one (thing) only, that you stand up for Allah’s sake in pairs and singly, and reflect, there is no madness in your companion. He is only a warner to you in face of a severe torment.”

How drastically an universally different do both statements signify. The actual verse gives an entirely difference meaning to its readers and it gives a much more straight forward viewpoint rather than the undefined viewpoint of Parwez. In this verse, its message implies the following reality

-Instead of the general implication given by Parwez, the verse actually confines to the reader what God Almighty was exhorting the pagans to reflect about i.e. the truthfulness of their prophet, Muhammad, who was sent to them. So the verse is telling them “what” to reflect about.

So what is the actual meaning of this verse.

Ibn Katheer states the following regarding the phrase “Reflect, there is no madness in your companion”

meaning, `stand sincerely before Allah, without being influenced by your own desires or tribal feelings, and ask one another, is Muhammad crazy. Advise one another,’

and reflect means, let each person look within himself concerning the matter of Muhammad , and ask other people about him if he is still confused, then let him think about the matter.

No, to state in clear terms the fundamental realities that took place that lead to the revelation of this verse was mainly because the Quraysh pagans ultimately confided in Muhammad to the point that he was nicknamed “al-Amin” i.e the trustworthy. So it completely blows anyone’s mind how in one instance, such people would declare Muhammad to be the most truthful in all matters. They knew his character to be in such a trustworthy state that to even think that Muhammad can lie was plainly unthinkable according to all of the Quraysh pagans. So this was their view of Muhammad, and so as I stated, it blows the mind for someone to have this viewpoint of Muhammad and then turn around and claim he is mad and a liar when what he speaks turns religious. And this is the fundamental point that God Almighty was addressing to these pagans because such a logic is in fact not logic at all and is therefore illogic and simply lack of any reasoning, hence the command to reflect. And this was the situational reality of his time which is that in one hand, they trusted and confided in Muhammad even to the point of their own lives and wealth, in everything, but when it came to the message of the Lord of the Universe, all of a sudden his truthfulness goes down into the drain.

Deception 3:

Since Parwez ORIGINALLY construed the actual wording and meaning of the verse into a fathomless ocean of personal opinion, then likewise, from that point, he went on into a tangent regarding his originally corrupted citation of the verse. Thus he began to expound on this originally baseless theory by stating how these words has brought out many hidden facts of human life. I say “no it hasn’t”. Allah was telling the pagans (not the believers) specifically who knew of Muhammad in a divine style of rhetoric of “stop being stupid and realize the plain and obvious reality, that this man is a messenger who came to warn you of a torment”. This is the higher underlying clause implied within the verse. There is nothing in the verse that tells anyone who actually utilizes their reason anything about being “habitually reflective”.

So he continues on in this tangent of his about this clause that he originally altered by stating that his conclusionary results are reached by all people of intellect who somehow have understood the “scope” and power of the human intellect. Likewise he claims that the Qur’an constantly calls on Muslims to reason, think, reflect, and deliberate with an undertone implying that such does not happen within the circles of Muslims which is only the result of his delusional views.

Deception 4:

Then he claims that people who do not use these faculties are not even human and then states

“the people who do not use these faculties are not human beings. They are living their lives on the animal level, even worse than that. These are the cursed people.”

Since Parwez radically altered the very statement of the first citation he brought inevitably due to the methodology he clings towards, it has to be understood that we have to check for every single verse he cites in order to clarify what he simply mistook, and such clarifications will serve as a clear explanation as to the erroneous deductions he formed as part of his view.

The actual verse in question states

﴿وَلَقَدْ ذَرَأْنَا لِجَهَنَّمَ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الْجِنِّ وَالإِنْسِ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ لاَّ يَفْقَهُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ أَعْيُنٌ لاَّ يُبْصِرُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ ءَاذَانٌ لاَّ يَسْمَعُونَ بِهَآ أُوْلَـئِكَ كَالأَنْعَـمِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ أُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْغَـفِلُونَ ﴾

And surely, We have created many of the Jinn and mankind for Hell. They have hearts wherewith they understand not, and they have eyes wherewith they see not, and they have ears wherewith they hear not (the truth). They are like cattle, nay even more astray; those! They are the heedless ones.

Now, from the outset, while the wording of both the verse and his citation are different, they both point to the same inherent meaning. However, the meaning is not what is objectionable within our sunni response. Rather what I would like to point out is how drastically different is Parwez’s conception of these faculties and their role compared to the intent of the Law Giver about the role of these faculties. To demonstrate my point I have to state that Parwez’s conception of these faculties is based on the concept that everything that pertains to religious guidance MUST  ipso facto be scrutinized by each person’s intellectual reasoning which basically stems from the methodology of the philosophers who also posited the notion that everything must be analyzed through the human intellect. In essense, Parwez’s theoretical approach is geared towards making the human intellect the sole criterion of judging the reality of a thing. This runs contrary to the Islamic model because within the context of the Qur’an and upon thorough review of these versus that people like Parwez bring, one ultimately finds and arrives at the true essence of what the Message was engaging the people to reflect about and which people it was addressing. I elaborately discussed the intricate details and the nature of this concept entitled The Role of Reason and Intellect Between Modern Western Paradigm and Islam.

In contrast to the Qur’anic outlook, the ultimate criterion for the discernment of truth and the reality of things is the Qur’an and the Sunnah and that the intellects are subservient to that. This is the very definition of a Muslim because in Islam, the meaning of a muslim linguistically and as a concept means the performance of “istislaam” which is the submission of a thing to another. So if Muslims are required to submit to Go, then the question is “what” are they submitting. The answer is that they are submitting what they have in mind for themselves, what they think is correct and the best judgment on any given matter, and surrendering that right to the One who they all know knows absolutely everything. And the reason why such people who submit their entire soul and thought to such a One (God) is because they inherently know that God is not going to reveal or enforce an idea or a practice that is a detriment to them or anyone else. Likewise, they know by default that God is not going to command an impossibility beyond the reach of man. This is the very definition of a Muslim and if soemone is going to completely alter the methodology of a Muslim and morph it into a methodology of a philosopher, then this is a subtle way of ultimately nullifying Islam

I will end it here as this is merely the introduction. There will be later parts in reply to this entire article, I will just try to break it piece by piece if God wills.