بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

اَلْحَمْدُ لِلّٰهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ وَ الصَّلاَةُ وَ السَّلاَمُ عَلَى سَيِّدِنَا مُحَمَّدٍ وَ عَلَى آلِهِ وَ صَحْبِهِ اَجْمَعِينَ

KUFR-UNBELIEF - 1

1 لاَ يَعْلَمُ الْغَيْبَ اِلاَّ اللّٰهُ , a ta’wîl of it must be as follows: the takkas2 , the places of dhikr and the madrasas, where the dhikr of “Allah! Allah! Allah!” is recited, will be closed, and a name other than the Name Allah will be used in the shaâ’er, such as the adhan and iqâmah. It does not mean that all mankind will fall into kufr al-mutlaq. Because denying Allah is as far from the mind as denying the universe. The mind cannot accept the occurrence of this denial, even in the majority of people, let alone all of them. The kâfirs do not deny Allah but are in error concerning His attributes.

The Fifth Ray- Fourth Matter

 

بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا اُنْزِلَ اِلَيْهِ مِنْ رَبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللّٰهِ وَمَلٰئِكَتِهِ

 وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ اَحَدٍ مِنْ رُسُلِهِ3

[to the end of the âyah]

An awesome ma’nawî question and a state arising from the unfolding of a vast Ilahî ni’mah were the causes of my explaining a universal, lengthy point about this comprehensive, elevated and sublime âyah. It was like this: it occurred to my rûh in a ma’nawî manner: why does one who denies a part of the haqiqah of îmân become a kâfir, and one who does not accept a part of them cannot be a Muslim? Whereas, îmân in Allah and the âkhirah should dispel the darkness like the sun. Also, why does a person who denies one of the pillars and haqiqah of îmân become a murtad and falls into kufr al-mutlaq, and quits Islam by not accepting it? Whereas if he has îmân in the other pillars of îmân, it should save him from kufr al-mutlaq?

The Answer: Îmân is a single haqiqah, which, composed of its six pillars, cannot be divided up. It is a universal that cannot be separated into parts. It is a whole that cannot be broken up. For each of the pillars of îmân proves the other pillars with the proofs that prove itself. They are all extremely powerful proofs of each other. In which case, a bâtil idea that cannot shake all the pillars together with all their proofs, in the view of haqiqah, cannot negate any one of the pillars, or even a single haqiqah, and cannot deny them. Under the veil of non-acceptance, one might only, by shutting his eyes, commit obstinate kufr. He falls into ‘kufr al-mutlaq’ by degrees and ruins his humanity, and goes to Jahannam, both physically and ma’nawî.” The Rays ( 256 )

 

If you say: While the whole Qur'an is one of the dharûriyyah of religion, there have been differences of opinion over its meanings?

You would be told: In every word of the Qur'an there are three propositions:

The First: This is Allah's Word.

The Second: The meaning intended by Allah with that word is the haqq.

It is kufr to deny these two.

The Third: The meaning intended by Allah is this.

If the word of the Qur’an is muhkamât or its tafsir was made by the Qur’an, it is wâjib to have îmân in it as soon as one is informed about it and to deny it is kufr.

If the word of the Qur’an is an âyah that has another possible meaning, a denial of it, which relies on an interpretation that is not based on personal whims, is not kufr. The disagreement of mufassirîn is in this part of the Qur’an.

Mutawâtir Hadiths are the same as âyahs in this regard. However, where there is a denial of the first proposition in connection with Hadiths, these rules should be considered carefully.

 Signs of Miraculousness-Sixth Âyah (137)

 

You know that it is different to know the existence of a thing than to know its quality and essence. Also, a single proposition comprises numerous judgements. Some of them are necessary (dharûrî), and some are secondary (nadharî) and controversial…

… From now on we shall distinguish between the necessary (dharûrî) and that which is not necessary. Thus, the necessary (dharûrî) statements understood from the Qur’an’s answer are not to be denied. It is like this: Dhu’l-Qarnayn was a person whose existence is corroborated by Allah. Under his arrangement and guidance, a barrier was constructed between two mountains in order to be protected from the corruption of dhâlims and nomads. And, Ya’juj and Ma’juj were two corrupting tribes. When the command of Allah comes, the barrier will be destroyed. And so on. According to this analogy, the statements indicated by the Qur’an are the dharûriyyah of the Qur’an. Denying even a letter of them is not possible. 

However, the Qur’an does not definitely indicate the limits of realities and details of circumstances for those subjects and their predicate. Rather, in accordance with the rule, “If a general statement is particular, it does not express any of the three types of signification (Dalalat salasah)4” and as is stated in the logic “It is sufficient to think a judgement with a cause of the subject and predicate”, it is established that the Qur’an does not indicate them but may accept them. It means that those details are from among the judgements of nadhariyyah. They are referred to other indications.5 The opinions for ijtihad arise from them. In those judgements of nadhariyyah, there is a scope for interpretation. The disagreement of muhaqqiqîn about them is a proof of their being nadhariyyah.

Rational Arguments (67)

 

…hadith comprises three propositions:

The First: This is the prophet’s word. This proposition is the result of — if there is — tawâtur.

The Second: The meaning intended by this word is haqq and right. As for this proposition, it is the result of the proof born from miracles. Both of these have to be agreed upon. One who denies the first proposition becomes an arrogant and a liar, while one who denies the second deviates into dhalâlah and falls into darkness.

The Third: The meaning intended by this word is this. And this is the jewel found in this shell; I am showing it. As for this proposition, it is the result of ijtihad, not the desires. In any event, someone who is a mujtahid is not obliged to follow other mujtahids. In this third proposition, disagreements boil up. All the “qâl u qîl”6 testifies to this. If it proceeds from an ijtihad, the person who denies it is neither an arrogant nor deviated into kufr. For a general matter is not extinguished through a particular thing being denied. Therefore, all houses should be entered by their own door since each has its own door and each lock has its own key.     

Rational Arguments (47)

 

“If you were to ask: Kufr is an attribute of the heart, so how can wearing the 'zunnar'7 and the hat, which has been compared to it, be kufr?

You would be told: The Sharî’ah acknowledges the outward signs of hidden matters. It even recognizes apparent causes that have no reason ('illah) as the reason. So since some girdles hinder rukû’ in salâh and some hats prevent full sajda, it deems the wearing of them a reason for kufr. For they both infer the renouncing of ‘ubûdiyyah and imitation of kâfirs, betokening appreciation of their outlook and nationality. Thus, so long as the hidden matter is not decisively disproved, judgement is made according to its outward signs.” Signs of Miraculousness ( 74 )

 

“Forty years ago, the year before the Proclamation of the Constitution, I came to Istanbul. At that time, the Commander-in-Chief of the Japanese army had asked the 'ulamâ of Istanbul some questions concerning religion. The Istanbul hojas asked me about them. They asked me many things in that connection.

For instance, they asked me about a Hadith which says: "At the âkhirzaman, a fearsome individual will rise in the morning and on his forehead will be written: 'Hadha kâfir.' 8   I told them: "This extraordinary person will come to lead this nation; he will rise in the morning, put a hat on his head, and make others wear it."

After receiving this answer, they asked me: "Won't those who wear it be kâfirs?" I said: "They will be made to wear the hat and be forbidden to sajda in salâh. But îmân in the heads of those wearing the hat will make the hat sajda, and Inshallah will make it Muslim." The Rays ( 381 )

 

 “Three courts of law have acquitted me on this matter; and as I pointed out forty years ago when elucidating the wondrous interpretation of a Hadith, the Shaykh al-Islam of men and jinn, Zembilli 'Ali Efendi, stated: "It is not permissible to put a hat on one's head, even as a joke," and all the Shaykh al-Islams and all the Islamic 'ulamâ considered it impermissible. The ‘awâm of Muslims were therefore in danger when they were forced to wear such hats (that is, they either had to renounce their religion or rebel); but since in one section of the Fifth Ray, which was written forty years ago, it says "The wearing of the hat will be enforced, and sajda in salâh will be forbidden. But îmân in the heads of those wearing it will make the hat sajda, Inshallah, making it Muslim," it saved the ‘awâm of Muslims both from rebellion and revolt, and from voluntarily renouncing their religion and îmân; and although no law at all can propose such a thing to those living in seclusion; and in twenty years none of six provincial authorities have forced me to wear it; and officials in their offices and women and children and people in the mosques and the majority of villagers are not compelled to wear it; and it has now been officially taken off the soldiers' heads; and in many provinces now berets and knitted hats are not prohibited; nevertheless, it has been put forward as a reason for the conviction of myself and my brothers. Could any law in the world, any principle, any good, consider this completely meaningless charge to be a crime?” The Rays ( 408 )

 

...this recluse man, who does not mingle with people, does not even see his closest friends during the noble Ramadhan to avoid preoccupying his rûh with such an unlawful and ugly thing and reminding himself of the world, despite being extremely ill, does not take medicine and does not call for doctors to avoid preoccupying his heart and rûh with his physical body, was forced to wear the hat to make him look like a foreign priest and threatened legally. This would disgust anyone who had any conscience at all. 

For instance, the one who forced him to wear the hat said, “I obey the order.” How can an order based on an oppressive arbitrary law be obeyed? Just as there is an âyah in Al-Qur’an Al-Hakîm that foremost prohibits resembling Christians and Jews, so the âyah يَا اَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اَطِيعُوا اللّهَ وَ اَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَ اُولِى اْلاَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ commands obedience to Uli’l-Amr9 . On the condition that it is not against obedience to Allah and His rasûl, one can act by claiming that he obeys the order.

Biography-668

 

In the riwâyât, it was mentioned that "a fearsome figure of the âkhirzaman will rise in the morning and on his forehead will be written "هذا كافر "10 .

اللّٰه أعلم بالصواب11 , its ta’wîl is as follows: Sufyan will wear the headgear of Europeans and make everyone else wear it. However, since he will generalise it by compulsion and law, that headgear will, InshâAllah, convert to Islam since it will go to sajda. Those who wear it  — only if it is unwillingly — will not be a kâfir.

The Fifth Ray-Second Matter

 

“Kufr is ignorance yet in the Qur'an it says: يَعْرِفُونَهُ كَمَا يَعْرِفُونَ اَبْنَٓاءَهُمْۜ اَلَّذ۪ينَ اٰتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ 12 How can these two statements be reconciled?

You would be told: There are two sorts of kufr. The first is due to ignorance; a person denies because he does not know. The second is obstinate rejection; a person knows but does not accept; he is certain but does not believe; he affirms but his conscience does not have idh'ân. Think carefully about this!” Signs of Miraculousness ( 74 )

 

Otherwise, saying “There is one Allah” but dividing His possession among causes and nature and attributing it to them, and — Hâsha — accepting causes as His endless shariks and originators and not knowing His irâdah and ‘ilm, which are present with all things, and refusing His strict commands and not knowing His attributes and the messengers and prophets He has sent, surely, the haqiqah of îmân in Allah is not present in it in any way.

Rather, he says such words to provide a degree of consolation for himself against the worldly torments of the ma’nawî Jahannam in kufr al-mutlaq.

Yes, not denying is one thing, but having îmân is entirely different.

Yes, no conscious being in the universe can deny Al-Khâliq Zuljalâl to Whom every particle of the universe bears witness. If he does so, he will be silent and indifferent since all universe will refute him.

But to have îmân in Him is confirming Al-Khâliq with all His attributes and names by heart, relying on the testimony of the whole universe as the Qur’an Great in Dignity instructs; it is to accept the commands He has sent through His messengers and to offer tawbah and feel regret in the heart when he sinned and violated the commands. Otherwise, committing great sins freely but not offering istighfâr and being careless is a proof that he has no share from îmân.

Emirdağ Addendum-1 (203)

 

The meaning of the non-mu’min Muslim and the non-Muslim mu’min is this: At the early period of the Freedom13, I saw irreligious people who penetrated among the members of the Party of Union and Progress14; they accepted that Islam and the Sharî’ah of Ahmad contain profitable and valuable sublime principles for the social life of mankind and particularly for the politics of the Ottoman and they were supporters of the Sharî’ah of Ahmad with all their strength. At that point, they were Muslims. That is to say, although they were supporters of haqq and had iltizâm of haqq, they were not mu’mins. It means that they deserve to be categorized as non-mu’min Muslims. But now, although he is a supporter of the European methods and the currents of bid’ah, which destroy the Sharî’ah under the name of civilization, he carries îmân in Allah, the âkhirah and the Prophet and knows himself as a mu’min. Since he does not have iltizâm and true support for the laws of the Sharî’ah of Ahmad, which are haqq and haqiqah, he becomes a non-Muslim mu’min. As Islam without îmân can not be the means of salvation, neither îmân can withstand without Islam knowingly. It can be said that it can not give salvation.

Barla Addendum-349

 

Question: In the previous Indications, you have proved that since the way of dhalâlah is easy and destruction and transgression, many take that way. Whereas, in other risales, you have proved with decisive proofs that the way of kufr and dhalâlah is so doubtful and arduous that no one should have entered it and it is not possible to follow it. And the way of îmân and hidâyah is so easy and clear that everyone should have entered it.

The Answer: Kufr and dhalâlah are two parts. Together with pertaining to actions and secondary matters, one part is negation and denial of the requirements of îmân; this kind of dhalâlah is easy. It is non-acceptance of the haqq, an abandonment, a non-existence and a non-existence of acceptance. Thus, in the Risale-i Nur, this sort has been shown to be easy.

As for the second part, it pertains not to actions and secondary matters, but rather is a judgement pertaining to belief and thought. It is not only a negation of îmân but rather pursuing the opposite of îmân and opening up a way. It is the acceptance of bâtil and proving the reverse of haqq. This part is not only the negation and naqîdh15 of îmân but is its opposite. It is not the non-existence of acceptance so it may be easy, but rather is the acceptance of non-existence. And can only be accepted by proving such non-existence. According to the rule اَلْعَدَمُ لاَ يُثْبَتُ 16, proving the non-existence is certainly not easy.

Thus, the kufr and dhalâlah shown in other risales to be arduous and doubtful to the degree of being impossible is this part that anyone possessing an iota of consciousness would not follow this way. As is certainly proved in risales, this way also contains such terrible pains and suffocating darkness that anyone possessing an iota of mind would not seek it.

If it is said: How do most people take such a grievous, dark and difficult way?

The Answer: They have fallen into it and cannot extricate themselves. And because the animal and vegetable powers (quwwa) in man do not see the consequence and cannot think of it and because those powers defeated man's subtle faculties, they do not want to extricate themselves; they console themselves with a present and temporary pleasure.17

Question: If it is said: There is such dismaying pain and fear in dhalâlah that the kâfir should not be able to live, let alone receives pleasure from life. Rather, he should be crushed by such pain and should die due to such fear. For, although regarding his humanity he is filled with the desire for innumerable things and loves life, how can a man live who, by means of kufr, constantly sees before his eyes his death in the form of eternal annihilation and everlasting separation and the fade of beings, deaths of his friends and those he loves in the form of annihilation and eternal separation? How can he receive pleasure from life?

The Answer: He deceives himself and lives through a strange argument devised by shaytan to lead one into a fallacy. He supposes he receives a superficial pleasure. We will indicate the reality of it with a well-known comparison. It is as follows:

It is related that they said to the ostrich 18: "You've got wings, so fly!" But it folded its wings and said: "I'm a camel", and did not fly. But it fell into the hunter's trap. It stuck its head in the sand lest the hunter saw it. But, it left its huge body in the open and made it the hunter's target. They later said to it: "Since you say you're a camel, carry loads." Whereupon it opened its wings and said: "I'm a bird", and was saved from the hardship of carrying loads. But having neither a protector nor food, it became a target for the assault of hunters.

In exactly the same way, the kâfir have given up kufr al-mutlaq before the samâwî proclamations of the Qur'an and reduced his kufr to a doubtful one. If it is said to him: "Since you consider death as eternal extinction; the gallows, which will hang you, is before your eyes… how can a person, who continuously looks at it, live? How can he receive pleasure?" Through the share he has received from the Qur'an's universal face of rahmah and its comprehensive nûr, the man says: "Death is not annihilation; there is a possibility of eternity." Or else he plunges his head in the sand of ghaflah like the ostrich so that the appointed hour may not see him and the grave may not look at him and the perishment of things may not shoot its arrows at him!

In Short: Like the ostrich, by means of such doubtful kufr, When he sees death and perishment to be annihilation, the certain news of the Qur'an and samâwî scriptures about îmân in the âkhirah gives him a possibility. That kâfir adheres to such possibility; he does not take that ghastly pain upon himself. If it is then said to him: "Since one will go to an eternal ‘âlam, to live good in that ‘âlam, one has to suffer the hardship of the religious responsibilities". Regarding such kufr al-mashkuk, the man says: "Perhaps there is not, so why would I work for something that does not exist?" That is to say, when he is saved from the pains of eternal annihilation regarding such a possibility of eternity given by the decree of the Qur'an and he faces with the hardship of religious responsibilities regarding the possibility of non-existence given by kufr al-mashkuk, against it, he adheres to the possibility of kufr and is saved from such hardship. That is to say, from this point of view, he supposes that he receives more pleasure in this life than the mu’min. For, with the possibility given by kufr, he is saved from the hardship of religious responsibilities and with the possibility given by îmân, does not take eternal pains upon himself. However, this argument devised by shaytan to lead one into a fallacy is extremely superficial, temporary and without benefit.

Thus, Al-Qur’an Al-Hakîm also has an aspect of a sort of rahmah for the kâfirs that to a degree it saves the life of the world from being Jahannam for them; it gives a sort of doubt so they live through doubt. Otherwise, in this world too, they would have suffered the torments of a ma’nawî Jahannam recalling the Jahannam of the âkhirah, and they would have been compelled to commit suicide.

Thus, O people of îmân! Enter believingly and determinedly under the protection of the Qur'an, which saves you from eternal annihilation and the Jahannams of this world and the âkhirah, and submissively and admiringly enter the sphere of his Sunnah as-Saniyyah so that you may be saved from both misery of the world and torment in the âkhirah!

The Thirteenth Flash-Eighth Indication

 

“KNOW, O FRIEND, that Islam is a universal rahmah. Islam enables even kâfirs to find some happiness in their worldly lives and ensures that their pleasure does not change into endless pain. Islam changes kufr al-mutlaq and denial, which cause despair and pain, into doubt and hesitation. Influenced by its clear announcements, kâfirs may come to regard eternal life as probable. This relieves them from suffocating and, since they are not convinced of eternal life, they consider themselves free of its obligations. Such people are like ostriches,19 that when told to fly reply: “I’m a camel, not a bird.” But when told to carry a burden, they answer like a camel: “I’m a bird, not a camel.” Deluded by shaytan, kâfirs and fâsiqs find a superficial happiness, in contrast to kâfir al-mutlaq and sincere mu’mins.” Al-Mathnawi al-Nuri (121)

 

“However your own particular world ends, you should renounce worldly pleasure. If it ends in happiness, you can attain happiness by renouncing pleasure. If it ends in misery, how can one waiting to be hanged get pleasure from decorated gallows? Even unbelievers who think they are headed for absolute non-existence by their kufr —Al-‘iyâzu Billah20 —should renounce worldly pleasure, for the continual disappearance of such pleasure brings a continual feeling of the pain of the absolute non-existence that suppose to follow death. Such pain is much more acute than the pleasure they find in life.” Al-Mathnawi al-Nuri (173)

 

“Yes, himself, Muhyiddin was rightly-guided and acceptable, but in all his works cannot be the guide and murshid. Since he very often proceeded in the haqiqahs without balance, he opposed the rules of the Ahl al-Sunnah and some of the things he said apparently express dhalâlah. However, he himself is free of dhalâlah. Sometimes, a word may appear to be kufr, but the one who spoke it is not a kâfir.” The Flashes ( 371 )

 

Introduction

بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

وَمَا خَلَقْتُ الْجِنَّ وَاْلاِنْسَ اِلاَّ لِيَعْبُدُونِ21

According to the mystery of this mighty âyah, the purpose and hikmah of human being sent to this world is recognizing Al-Khâliq of the universe and îmân (believing) in Him and performing ‘ibâdah to Him. Man’s duty of fitrah and the fardh incumbent upon him are Ma’rifatullah and îmân in Allah, to assent to His Being (wujûd) and wahdah by idh'ân and perfect certainty.

For man, who by fitrah desires living eternally and permanent life, who has unlimited hopes and boundless afflictions, any object or attainment must be regarded as lowly for man other than îmân in Allah, Ma’rifatullah and the means for attaining these, which are the fundament and key of eternal life. Indeed most of them have no value. Since this haqiqah has been proven with firm evidence in the Risale-i Nur, we refer exposition of it to that, setting forth here, within the framework of four questions, only two abysses that shake the certainty of îmân in this age and induce hesitation.

The means for salvation from the first abyss are these two Matters:

The First Matter: As proven in detail in the Thirteenth Flash of the Thirty-First Letter, in general matters, denial has no value in the face of proof and is extremely weak. For example, with respect to the sighting of the crescent moon at the beginning of Ramadhan the Noble, if two common men prove the crescent to have emerged by their witnessing it, and thousands of nobles and ‘ulamâ deny it, saying: "We have not seen it," their negation is valueless and without power to convince. When it is a question of proof each person strengthens and supports the other, and consensus results. But when it is a negation, there is no difference between one man and a thousand. Each person remains alone and isolated. For the one who affirms looks beyond himself and judges the matter as it is. Thus in the example we have given if one says "The moon is in the sky," and his friend then points his finger at the moon, the two of them unite and are strengthened. The one who engages in negation and denial, however, does not regard the matter as it is, and is even unable to do so. For it is a well-known principle that "a non-particularized denial, not directed to a particular locus, cannot be proven."

For example, if I affirm the existence of a thing in the world, and you deny it, I can easily establish its existence with a single indication. But for you to prove your negation, that is to prove the non-existence of that thing - it is necessary to hunt exhaustively through the whole world, and even to examine every aspect of past ages. Only then can you say, "It does not exist, and never has existed."

Since those who negate and deny do not regard the matter as it is but judge rather their own nafs, and their own mind and vision, they can in no way strengthen and support each other. For the veils and causes that prevent them from seeing and knowing are various. Anyone can say, "I do not see it; therefore, in my opinion and belief, it does not exist." But none can say, "It does not exist in actuality." If someone says this -particularly in questions of îmân, which look to all the universe- it is a lie as vast as the world itself, and he who utters it will be incapable both of speaking the truth and of being corrected.

In Short: The result is one and single in the case of proof, and every instance of proof supports all other instances.

Negation, by contrast, is not one but multiple. Multiplicity arises through each person's saying concerning himself, "In my opinion and view," or "In my belief," and leads to multiplicity of result. Hence each separate instance cannot support all other instances.

Therefore, with respect to the haqiqah with which we began, there is no significance in the multiplicity and apparent predominance of the kâfirs and deniers who oppose îmân. Now it is necessary to refrain from introducing any hesitation into the certainty and îmân of a mu’min, but in this age, the negations and denials of the philosophers of Europe have induced doubt in a number of unfortunate dupes and thus destroyed their certainty and obliterated their eternal felicity. Death and the coming of one's appointed hour, which afflict thirty thousand men each day, are deprived of their meaning of dismissal from this world and presented as eternal annihilation. The grave with its ever-open door constantly threatens the denier with annihilation and poisons his life with the bitterest of sorrows. Appreciate then how great a ni’mah is îmân, and the life of life.

The Second Matter: With respect to a matter subject to discussion in science or art, those who stand outside that science or art cannot speak authoritatively, however great, learned and accomplished they may be, nor can their judgements be accepted as decisive. They cannot form part of the learned consensus of the science.

For example, the judgement of a great engineer on the diagnosis and cure of a disease does not have the same value as that of the lowliest physician. In particular, the words of denial of a philosopher who is absorbed in the material sphere, who becomes continually more remote from the ma’nawî matters and cruder and more insensitive to nûr, whose mind is restricted to what his eye beholds - the words of such a one are unworthy of consideration and valueless with respect to ma’nawî matters.

On sacred and ma’nawî matters that concern Tawhîd, there is a total accord among the hundreds of thousands of the people of haqiqah, such as Shaykh Jilânî (KS), who beheld Allah’s ‘Arsh al-â’dham while still on the earth, who is a sacred genius, who spent ninety years advancing in ma’nawî matter, and who unveiled the haqiqahs of îmân in the form of ‘ilm al-yaqîn, ‘ayn al-yaqîn and haqq al-yaqîn. This being the case, what value have the words of philosophers, who through their absorption in the most diffuse details of the material realm and the most minute aspects of multiplicity are choking and dazed? Are not their denials and objections drowned out like the buzzing of a mosquito by the roaring of thunder?

The reality of kufr that opposes the haqiqahs of Islam and struggles against them is a denial, an ignorance and a negation. Even though it may appear to be an affirmation of some kind and a manifestation of being, it is in reality negation and non-being.

Whereas îmân is ‘ilm and pertains to existence; it is proof and judgement. Every negating matter of îmân is the title and veil of a positive haqiqah. If the people of kufr who struggle against îmân attempt, with the utmost difficulty, to prove and accept their negative beliefs in the form of acceptance and admission of non-being, then their kufr may be regarded in one respect as a form of mistaken ‘ilm or error judgement. But as for non-acceptance, denial, and non-admission -something more easily is done- it is absolute ignorance and total absence of judgement.

In Short: The belief in kufr are then of two kinds:

The First pays no regard to the haqiqahs of Islam. It is an erroneous admission, a bâtil belief and a mistaken acceptance peculiar to itself; it is a dhâlim judgement. This kind of kufr is beyond the scope of our discussion. It has no concern with us, nor do we have any concern with it.

The Second kind opposes the haqiqahs of îmân and struggles against them. It consists in turn of two varieties.

The First is non-acceptance. It consists simply of not consenting to proof. This is an ignorance; there is no judgement involved and it occurs easily. It too is beyond the scope of our discussion.

The Second variety is acceptance of non-existence. It is to consent to non-existence, and a judgement is involved. It is a conviction and iltizâm. It is on account of this iltizâm that it is obliged to prove its negation. The negation comprises two types:

The First Type says: "A certain thing does not exist at a certain place or in a particular direction." This kind of denial can be proved, and it lies outside of our discussion.

The Second Type consists of negating and denying those doctrinal and sacred matters, general and comprehensive, that concern this world, the universe, the âkhirah, and the succession of different ages. This kind of negation cannot in any fashion be proved, as we have shown in the First Matter, for what is needed to prove such negations is a vision that shall encompass the whole universe, behold the âkhirah, and observe every aspect of time without limit.

The Second Abyss and the means for escaping from it: This too consists of two matters.

The First: Minds that become narrowed by absorption in ghaflah or in sin, or materiality, are unable to comprehend vast matters in respect of sublimity, grandeur, and infinity; hence taking pride in such ‘ilm as they have, they hasten to denial and negate. Since they cannot encompass the extremely vast, profound and comprehensive questions of îmân within their straitened and desiccated minds in a ma’nawî manner, their corrupt and dead hearts in ma’nawî matters, they cast themselves into kufr and dhalâlah, and choke.

If they were able to look at the true nature of their kufr and the reality of their dhalâlah they would see that, compared to the reasonable, suitable and indeed necessary sublimity and grandeur that is present in îmân, their kufr conceals and contains manifold absurdity and impossibility.

The Risale-i Nur has proven this haqiqah by hundreds of comparisons with the same finality that "two plus two equals four." For example, one who does not accept the necessary existence, the pre-eternity, and the comprehensiveness of attribute of Janâb-i Haqq, on account of their grandeur and sublimity, may form a creed of kufr by assigning that necessary being, pre-eternity, and the attributes of Ulûhiyyah to an unlimited number of beings, an infinity of particles. Or like the foolish Sophists, he can abdicate his intelligence by denying and negating both his own existence and that of the universe.

Thus, all the haqiqahs of îmân and Islam, basing their matters on the grandeur and sublimity which are their requirement, deliver themselves from the awesome absurdities, the fearsome superstitions, and the tenebrous ignorance of kufr that confront them, and take up their place in sound hearts and mustâqim minds, through utmost idh'ân and submission.” The Rays (125 )

 

 “KNOW, O FRIEND, that since kufr is the opposite of îmân, kâfirs are hostile to mu’mins. Thus the love of kâfirs, with whom it is impossible to establish friendship, is useless. The Qur’an condemns kâfirs and their kâfirs ancestors to Jahannam’s eternal punishment. O people of the Qur’an, do not expect them to love and help you. Say: حَسْبُنَا اللّٰهُ وَنِعْمَ الْوَكِيلُ 22 Al-Mathnawi al-Nuri (135)

 

“Q: What is our formest need?

A: Truthfulness.

Q: After that?

A: To not lie.

Q: And then?

A: Sidq, loyalty, ikhlas, steadfastness and cooperation.

Q: Why?

A: The essence of kufr is dishonesty. The essence of îmân is sidq. Isn’t this proof enough to show that the continuation of our lives rests on the continuation of îmân, sidq and cooperation.” Biography (95)

 

“This indication testifies truthfully to the severe effects of the poison of lying, for lying is the basis of kufr; indeed, kufr is a falsehood and the worst sort of lying, and it is the chief sign of nifâq. Lying is to slander Ilahî Qoudrah and it is the opposite of Rabbânî Hikmah. Lying destroys high morals. It transforms great enterprises into putrefying corpses. Its poison has spread through the Islamic world. It has overturned the affairs of mankind, and held back al-‘âlam of humanity from attaining its perfections, and prevented its advance and progress. It has cast down the likes of Musaylima the Liar to the asfal sâfilîn. It is a heavy burden on man's back hindering him from achieving his aims. It is the progenitor of riyâ and artificiality. These are the reasons it has been specified by that which was revealed from above al-‘Arsh, and why it is execrated and made the object of threats. So you people, and especially you Muslims!” Signs of Miraculousness ( 101 )

 

Yes, the absolute majority of the Sahâbah were lovers of the haqq and filled with the desire for sidq and justice. Because in that era, the ugliness of lie and falsehood was shown in all its ugliness and the beauty of righteousness and sidq was shown in all its beauty in such a way that the distance widened between them from the ground to the ‘arsh. A division from the pit of Musaylima the Liar at the asfal sâfilîn to the degree of sidq of Hazrat Prophet ‘Alayhissalâtu Wassalâm at the a’lâ ‘illiyyin has been seen. Indeed, just as it was lying that causes Musaylima to fall into the asfal sâfilîn, so it was sidq and truth which raised Muhammad Al-Amîn ‘Alayhissalâtu Wassalâm to the a’lâ ‘illiyyin.

Thus, this is certain, definite, and necessary that the Sahâbah, who bore elevated feelings and illuminated with the nûr of the conversation of the sun of nubuwwah and who revered the beauty of good morals, did not willingly stretch out their hands to lying, which is so ugly and the cause of descent and is in Musaylima's shop of filth tainted with buffoonery, and they flee from lying, which is the companion of kufr, as they flee from kufr, and as far as they were able, they sought, loved and conformed to — especially in the tablîgh and transmitting the laws of the Sharî’ah — sidq, truth and haqq, which are so beautiful and are the cause of pride and glory, the steps of ascent and progress and the thing most demanded from the elevated treasury of the Glory of Messengership (asm) and which illuminate man's social life with their beauteous splendour. Whereas at this time, the distance between sidq and lying has so shortened that they have become quite simply shoulder to shoulder. It is extremely easy to pass from sidq to lying. Even, lying is preferred to truthfulness by means of the propaganda of politics.

Twenty-Seventh Word/The Sixth

 سُبْحَانَكَ لاَ عِلْمَ لَنَا اِلاَّ مَا عَلَّمْتَنَا اِنَّكَ اَنْتَ الْعَلِيمُ الْحَكِيمُ

حَسْبُنَا اللّٰهُ وَنِعْمَ الْوَكِيلُ نِعْمَ الْمَوْلَى وَ نِعْمَ النَّصِيرُ اَلْحَمْدُ لِلّٰهِ رَبِّ اْلعَالَمِينَ