Are We Building Our Faith on Knowledge or Superstition?

2 November 2023

On What Basis Do We Pronounce a Ruling?

Question: How do we know that a statement we make in the name of faith is true?

Because we were taught that way?

Because it is often repeated?

Or because we have truly investigated its basis?

Verses 143 and 144 of Surah Al-An’am question prohibitions asserted concerning animals.

They ask whether the males, the females, or what they carry have been forbidden.

These questions are followed by a request for an explanation based on knowledge.

The evidence people rely on when speaking in Allah’s name is brought to light.

This approach is a powerful standard for us too.

We may dislike something.

We may find it incompatible with our habits.

We may choose not to do it in our own lives.

But these are not the same as saying it is religiously forbidden.

We cannot present our personal displeasure as Allah’s ruling.

Similarly, we cannot declare an action right merely because we want it.

Our desire does not replace knowledge.

Our habit does not replace evidence either.

Sometimes people make this distinction for themselves and forget it for others.

They leave broad room for their own preference.

When it comes to someone else’s preference, they immediately issue definitive judgments.

Yet a standard is not used only to limit others.

It first limits our own speech and claims.

If we are going to pronounce a ruling, we must consider its responsibility too.

Being able to stop where we do not know means acknowledging the value of knowledge.

We do not have to answer every question immediately.

Sometimes the most honest answer is saying that we do not yet know enough.

An Old Fear, a New Tool

Imagine an elder encountering television for the first time and greeting this new device with fear.

There is a tool bringing sound and images into the home.

It does not resemble the life previously familiar.

What is unknown can easily be associated with something bad.

But something being new does not, by itself, show that it is wrong.

Just as being old does not, by itself, show that it is right.

When people judge an innovation without trying to understand it, they may replace knowledge with fear.

Here, we need to consider the question of use.

A knife can be used to cut bread.

The same tool can also cause harm.

What is done with a tool matters alongside what it is.

A phone is like this too.

People can use it to reach useful information.

They can learn about a subject.

They can communicate with someone in need.

But they can also waste time, spread misinformation, and hurt someone.

Carelessly placing all these uses under a single ruling makes the matter harder to understand.

Question: Are we assessing what we use, or our own fear of it?

This question does not ask us to accept every innovation unquestioningly.

It asks that questioning be based on knowledge.

If there is harm, it needs to be understood.

If there is benefit, it should not be ignored either.

Instead of swinging between fear and praise, we can examine what is used and how.

The same care is necessary when speaking in the name of faith.

If we present our generation’s habits as religion’s unchanging standard, we confuse different things.

Thus, we both burden people unnecessarily and make true responsibilities harder to understand.

Is Superstition Only in the Past?

We may see ourselves as far removed from the errors of earlier people.

We think we have access to more information and use more advanced tools.

But changes in tools do not automatically make every human thought sound.

Even today, people may seek lucky numbers.

They may believe those who speak with certainty about the future.

Fortune-telling and similar claims may occupy too much space in our decisions.

People are uncomfortable with uncertainty.

They want to know what will happen.

Sometimes this desire leads them to attach themselves to someone without sound knowledge.

If the words please them, they may forget to ask their basis.

If the words frighten them, they may take them seriously because of their fear.

In both cases, our emotion may take the place of the claim’s truth.

Yet a claim making us feel good does not prove it true.

Frightening us does not prove it true either.

Question: When assessing a statement, do we look at its evidence, or the effect it leaves on us?

Making this distinction is sometimes difficult.

Because a person’s expectation enters the words they hear.

They may find the person predicting their desired outcome more trustworthy.

They may listen more attentively to an account that confirms their own thinking.

So we should be careful not only of misinformation, but also of our own selective perspective.

Seeing someone else’s superstition is easy.

Asking for the basis of a claim we believe requires greater honesty.

Faith is not a reason to disengage reason.

It does not remove our responsibility, investigation, or thought.

On the contrary, the weight of speaking in Allah’s name requires greater care.

Imposing Prohibitions and Removing Limits Both Require Responsibility

Verse 145 of Surah Al-An’am explains prohibitions concerning certain foods.

Carrion, flowing blood, pork, and animals slaughtered in the name of anyone other than Allah are mentioned in this context.

The same verse also addresses necessity together with its limits.

What stands out here is that the ruling is not left to people’s whims.

Neither can unlimited prohibitions be produced from personal fears, nor can all limits be removed through personal desires.

The same problem appears in both directions.

People place their own wishes ahead of the standard.

One person may try to relax a ruling because it is convenient.

Another may add new burdens, thinking they will appear more religious.

But placing an additional prohibition on something is not automatically a more correct attitude.

Unnecessarily constricting people’s lives is also behavior with consequences.

Conversely, regarding everything we want as legitimate does not create a sound standard either.

What matters is not our own inclination, but our basis.

The historical ruling concerning a particular community in verse 146 of Surah Al-An’am should also be read within its context.

We cannot detach a verse from its context and turn it into a means of humiliating people today.

Knowledge should not consist merely of sentences we select to strengthen our prejudice.

We should try to understand what the text says.

Nor should we add to it, according to our own wishes, what it does not say.

Adherence to a standard also includes not adding our own ruling to it.

This care is not needed only in great debates.

It also matters in everyday conversations.

Before telling someone close to us, “This is definitely so,” we should consider what we truly know.

Passing on information we are unsure of in definitive language may affect another person’s life.

So let us look not at the ease of speaking, but at the responsibility the words carry.

What Does Our Knowledge Change in Our Lives?

We may speak a great deal about a subject.

We may move among fine details.

But if this knowledge is not reflected in our behavior at all, we face another question.

What are we learning all this for?

Do we want only to win arguments with knowledge?

Or to build our lives more rightly?

People’s research, work, and production are valuable.

They also need to bring what they learn together with everyday responsibilities.

Let us consider our relationships at home.

Let us consider our behavior at work.

Let us compare the responsibilities we place on others with those we undertake ourselves.

If we spend hours on a subtle debate while neglecting a clear duty, we should question our priorities.

Wanting to know every detail of a matter is understandable.

But continually postponing a simple truth we know is also thought-provoking.

We know we should speak truthfully.

Do we practice it?

We know we should care for what is entrusted to us.

How do we treat what we hold?

We know we should respect people’s rights.

Do we truly take this into account in our decisions?

The value of knowledge is not visible only in sentences we hold in memory.

Its expression in our lives also matters.

Moving away from superstition does not mean rejecting one claim and attaching ourselves to another baseless claim.

It means taking knowledge, thought, and responsibility more seriously.

Being more careful with words we speak in Allah’s name.

Not placing our own wishes in the position of religion.

We do not need to settle every debate today.

But we can begin asking for the basis of our own statements.

Sometimes, instead of increasing our knowledge, we increase our feeling of certainty.

We repeat the same claim more loudly.

We treat the number of people agreeing with us as evidence.

But repetition does not complete a missing basis.

Asking where a ruling comes from is necessary to understand it.

This question is not disrespect toward faith.

It is responsibly assessing the words of someone speaking in faith’s name.

We can preserve the same care when seeing behavior outside our own preferences.

First, let us distinguish what we truly know.

Then let us recognize where our interpretation begins.

In this way, we can move away from presenting an opinion as certain knowledge.

This attitude does not weaken the conversation.

It makes it more honest and understandable.

When people admit what they do not know, they make room for learning.

When they think they already know everything, they may try to force the knowledge they encounter into their own mold.

Unnecessary burdens added in religion’s name may overshadow people’s real responsibilities.

While a small habit is debated, an obvious injustice may become invisible.

While lengthy rulings are made about a tool, how it is used may not be discussed.

So let us not lose the main standard within the details.

Let us look at the basis of our claim.

Let us look at the result of our behavior.

Let us consider what our learning contributes to our lives.

Let the search for knowledge and everyday responsibility not become disconnected.

Let us try to practice the truth we know at home and at work.

In matters we do not know, let us not pronounce definitive judgments without investigation.

Thus, we can keep a more careful account of both our words and our actions.

Question: Do we carry the evidence for the idea we defend, or only the comfort of being accustomed to it?