Infidel!

In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful,

Amongst common discourse are voices of those that count everyone outside of their little clique as damned and those that think all religions are valid (perennialist) and all are saved.  Muslims pride themselves that Islam is the middle way (deen al wasata) between two extremes.  Therefore into this discourse I thought I might describe the mainstream Islamic view.

The Universal and Exclusivist religion

Islam is a universal religion:

{Say [Muhammad], ‘People, I am the Messenger of God to you all} [7:158]

In the eyes of Islamic Law the fundamental principle is social equality due to a shared humanity between all people: "All of you are the children of Adam" [Abu Dawud].  The rights for all people are considered equal and upheld except in matters relating specifically to religion for which the distinction between Muslim (muslim) and non Muslim (kafir) is made.  In other words people live, work and transact together in society on an equal footing, but when it comes to personal affairs such as prayer Muslims go to the Mosque and non Muslims go to their respective Synagogue, Church or Temple.  These are outward legal distinctions based on which community a person belongs to.

Islam is also exclusivist since the believer (mu'min) is destined for paradise (jannah) and the disbeliever (kafir) is destined for hell (jahannum).  God wants us to love Him, but He is not a tyrant and will not force us, so if someone desires nearness to Him then that is what they shall have and if someone desires distance from Him then that is what they shall have.

Belief is an inward state that only God knows. Whilst there are indications based on outward information, such as how someone identifies themselves, we can never truly know someone's state and eternal abode.  As such the word kafir to describe non-Muslims has two meanings; one is a member of a community that has a belief system contradictory to Islam and one is an internal state of disbelief.  Therefore not every non Muslim is an actual disbeliever (kafir) just as not every Muslim is an actual believer (mu'min) although only God knows.

Kafir

Kafir comes from the Arabic root KA FA RA and means to cover over.  So the farmer can be known as a kafir as he covers a seed with soil, and the night can be known as kafir because it covers the day with darkness. In reference to disbelief it means covering truth with falsehood and wilfully rejecting either in totality or in part: God, His Messengers and His Revelations.  It therefore requires a conscience rejection of the truth, not a mere unawareness of it, as the following verse suggests:

{We do not punish a people until a messenger comes to them} [17:15]

Accountability and punishment are only applicable once someone is aware.

Classic Works 

Abu Hamid Al Ghazali (d. 1111 CE), know by the title hujjat al islam (proof of Islam) - who is regarded as the most influential scholar of his century by consensus and often in all Islamic history - said:

"The divine mercy, however, will also embrace many of the bygone nations, even though most of them will be exposed to the Fire, either slightly—for a moment or for an hour—or a greater period of time, so that one may apply to them the expression “the denizens of the Fire.” I would even go as far as to say that most of the Christians among the Europeans and Turks in this time of ours will be embraced by the same mercy, if God most high wills. I mean specifically those who are among the remote inhabitants of Europe and Central Asia whom the call of Islam has not reached [will be embraced by this divine mercy]. Christians can be divided into three classes. One comprises those whom the name of Muhammad has never reached at all: they are excused [for their disbelief]. The second category comprises those who have heard his name and description, and [have heard] of his miracles. These people live alongside Muslims and interact with them or actually live among them. They are the disbelieving deniers (kuffar). The third category is the class comprising those in between the other two. The name of Muhammad s has indeed reached their ears, but they do not know his true description and his character. Instead, they heard from the time they were young that a deceitful liar named Muhammad s claimed to be a prophet, in the same way our own children hear that a liar named al-Muqanna claimed to be a prophet. As far as I am concerned, such people are [excused] like those in the first category, for while they have heard of his name, they heard the opposite of his true qualities. And hearing such things would never arouse one’s desire to find out [who he was]."

It is understood that people unaware of Islam or have a distorted view of Islam are innocent no matter what they do, which in Britain today probably accounts for most non-Muslims.  Therefore whilst we know all disbelievers are in hell we cannot say all non Muslims are.  They may attain salvation by virtue of Divine Amnesty, but not by virtue of their religion. 

An-Nawawi (d. 1278 CE) says in Rawla al Talibin: "Someone who does not believe that whoever follows another religion besides Islam is an unbeliever, or doubts that such a person is an unbeliever, or considers their sect valid, is himself an unbeliever even if he manifests Islam and believes in it."

This is echoed in all the major works of all Four Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence.  There is consensus on this point because to believe salvation is attained through other means than Islam is to deny the very position of Islam itself.

Two verses

Two verses that are used to justify both extremes of universality and exclusivity are the following:

{Surely, those who believed in God, and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabians, -whosoever believes in God and in the Last Day, and does good deeds - all such people will have their reward with their Lord, and there will be no reason for them to fear, nor shall they grieve.} [2:62]

{Whoever seeks a faith other than Islam, it will never be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.} [3:85]

The translations do not do justice to the potential meanings that can be understood.  Certainly there seems some sort of conflict between the verses.  In order to understand the Qur'an - a complex science know as tafsir - requires every verses possible meanings understood linguistically to be compared with every other verse and the Prophet's (peace be upon him) Sunnah to identify possible interpretations.

Classical Interpretation

Classically scholars have understood verse 2:26 to mean those who did believe from the past - as Taqi Usmani's translation cited suggests - combined with the apparent meaning from verse 3:85 that only the religion Islam is valid brings about the interpretation that other religions brought by a Prophet (like Christianity and Judaism) were once valid, but now they are no longer valid and have been abrogated by Islam.

Perennialist Interpretation

Prof. Abdulaziz Sachedina in his book The Islamic Roots of Democracy brings up some very interesting points, some of which will be discussed on another post, God Willing.  On his chapter on the Islamic ideal of the people as one community he argues that 2:62 is also in the present tense and that 3:85 refers not to Islam as the religion, but the literal meaning of islam; submission unto God.  Therefore he argues that these could be interpreted as if someone submits to God (islam) sincerely then irrespective of their background they will achieve salvation.  He goes on to say that these people are saved because of their religion, not in spite of their religion.  Ultimately he argues all religions that were valid - i.e. has a Divine source - are still valid.

Synthesis of both interpretations

Sachedina's interpretation has merit although is unsatisfying.  He does not interact with the classical view sufficiently and he ignores the Sunnah as a source of interpretation.  That said his linguistic argument is true; 2:62 can be understood in the present and 3:85 can mean islam as submission.  The scope of his interpretation, however, is more limited than he suggests since the classical interpretation cannot be rejected as a possible meaning.  I contacted Dar-alifta al Misrriyah (Fatwa Council of Egypt) with a possible synthesis of the two interpretations for which they agreed (#208359), which is as follows:

Islam the religion has all the means to reach God and attain salvation if followed correctly, other religions although beneficial have more limited means and therefore will ultimately veil one from God.  From this outward perspective Islam is the only valid religion and abrogates all others, it is the religion God has chosen for mankind.  However, salvation is not attained by mere outward actions; moving of the limbs five times a day or repeating the words of creed (a'qidah) on the tongue.  Salvation is attained through an internal sincere desire to be with God and please Him, not to please one's own desires and whims.  Therefore someone irrespective of their background can attain salvation due to sincere devotion to God; they need not necessarily be technically Muslim in the outward sense.  An informed rejection of Islam is what distances someone from God because it is rejecting Him.  Should someone sincerely seek God, Islam will be viewed positively for the truth within it.  However they may never know of Islam or only know of tales of suicide bombers and Ayatollah's, which is enough to divert any person of sound reasoning.   

Although we should make use of the definitions and formulas used by the scholars of Islam to help guide us to salvation, we should bear in mind that God transcends any such limitation and is beyond anything we can imagine.

Conclusion

The worst trait found amongst some 'religious' people is self righteousness. Such thinking completely inverts the purpose of religion because it is from arrogance and pride, which is the surest road to perdition, as the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "No one who has an atom's weight of pride in his heart will enter the Garden." [Muslim].  God is The Judge (Al A'dil) for He has perfect knowledge of the outward, inward and throughout all history, we do not and so cannot judge people, to do so is placing oneself as God; the very definition of kufr.

All religions also cannot be equally true. If all religions are seen as an attempt to try and understand the incomprehendable, then the suggestion is that they all equally fall short of understanding the Divine and so are all equally wrong.  Any religion is then interchangeable with any other and indeed with no religion at all, which leads to confusion and chaos and the Divine remains veiled once more.

We all stand before God and have to answer for our own selves not anyone else, so our primary concern is not someone elses station with God because we will not be asked about them, but our own: {No burdened soul will bear the burden of another} [35:18]

Further Reading

Who are the disbelievers by Hamza Yusuf in Seasons Spring 2008, see here