Reposted from 2008

More Notes From Extremists to Other Extremists
regarding the nature of "stone" and "idol" worship
Generally speaking, having read the various apologistic explanations it is clear that many muslims do not understand the origin of their practices. This leads them into vulnerable straits where certain rituals are discussed, especially those of idolatry. Therefore I think redacted's point is an extraordinary one and most likely cannot be answered by many of the posters here.

The idea that mysteries are needed to explain all things is convenient but it is also the case that not "knowing" something does not constitute a "mystery" of Islam or the declaration of same. There are mysteries and there are mysteries. Going to Mecca on Haj is not of either type i.e. mysteries based on the actual "unseen" and not a mystery of religion of the type claimed by Christian theologians like the virgin birth (which to muslims is not a mystery at all).

If Allah states cirumambulate THIS stone and not THAT stone, it is not indicative that muslims are stone worshipers. That is in the eye of the beholder when it is clearly stated in the Quran that the notion of a Qibla is a clear one. Clear as mud to non muslims and when faced with those, attempting to explain it is about as good as conversing with a brick wall (also made of stone) because Allah made some people unable to hear, see and/or understand.

I am no expert particularly in the area of Haj ritual behavior but it is my understanding that the stones that are tossed at three objects in the same manner that Ibrahim (SA) smashed the stone idols which can represent a vast number of things including the rocks themselves. In one instance they are said to represent a dream that was experienced by three people (the prophet, Hajar and Ismael) on three consecutive nights. The whole ritual of Haj requires a person to have a guide. Few people actually go to Haj without one you know and those that do usually have already made at least one Haj or an Umra and "know the ropes".

It is one of the most critical points in all of Islam that only through "emulation of a practice" is that practice preserved. Formally it is referred to as the Sunna. Underestimating it, particularly by non muslims is common. Haj itself, in the Quran is the major distinguishment Islamic Monotheists have that defines them as a special class of Monotheism. It is the whole reason non muslims are not permitted into Mecca itself. Only a muslim NEEDS to go to Mecca...others need not go there if that is not what floats their boat.

It can be compared to the fact that in the initial days of the Last Messengers mission, muslims were told to dye their beards red with henna in order to distinguish which people had accepted Islam. After a certain period however the Messenger abrogated that ruling because after a certain critical number of the umma (muslim population density) had been reached, it was no longer possible to know that anyone in particular was especially "loyal" to the last prophet or to Islam. Some of the last submitters, Abu Sufyan in particular (the father or "thought to be" father of Mu'aw'iya), only submitted when it was clear that he was one of the only ones left in the area that hadn't. At that point, most people had already joined ranks with Mohamed and his Ahl Bayt (immediate family), Sahaba (Companions, disciples, friends), the Ansar(the hosts at Medina who protected and fed the Muhajirs) and Muhajirs (the migrationists who migrated with the prophet to Mecca). Having a red beard would make no difference and in fact, a large number of muslims at that time were not really believers but were incredibly good fakers. Which ones? Not my business of course. I will say however that the Shia ruling against persons such as the notorious Mu'aw'iya being included in the group known as "sahaba" is discounted by Jaffar Al Siddiq using a ruling in which the last prophet declared his Sahaba were a given few and that is all. That occurred at a specific place and time and there were no Sahaba to be included in that group after that and that would include the notorious anti Islamist Mu'aw'iya.

The whole point of "stoning" the devil is an attempt to do something that EMULATES what the great prophet Ibrahim did that extraordinary day when he basically outlawed human sacrifice from the law books of all humanity:

"This is where pilgrims perform the ritual of throwing stones at pillars that mark the spot where the devil is believed to have attempted to prevent the prophet Ibrahim - the biblical patriarch Abraham also revered by Muslims - from obeying divine orders. "

Why, the Kaaba itself "our Qibla" is that which is gone to, migrated to and migrated away from and even, sadly, not taken seriously by some muslims as that thing which was ordered by Allah to travel to. It was erected by Ibrahim and Ismail (May Allah be pleased with all of his apostles) and not by the other brother Ishaq (pbuh). It was erected in the exact spot where the sacrifice was to be made and then, it was abrogated by Allah and a sheep was substituted for a human being. Literally "a son" and it can be compared and contrasted with the mistaken Christian notion of a "son" being sacrificed to atone for the sins of others. It is the same story over and over and it is best defined from the beginning (Adam) who was told to follow the advice of Allah and not the Shaitan to the end of the story which is the whole basis for the last Messengers final order when he completed Islam for everyone, not just the Arabs. The whole point of it is contained allegorically in that safety of the boat upon which Nuh traveled during a storm and is one of the fundamental axis around which Shia teaching revolves. I cannot speak for Sunni Islam and wouldn't try.

Anything that one follows instead of following the advice of Allah can be considered to be idol worship and it is not limited to mere objects but to the things those objects represent. Afterall, we use money and not gold and we cannot even eat gold. If it was the case that what we "eat" could also be a subject for idolatry (it is) then our ideology would be gluttony. Eating is oft mentioned in the Quran because it is the one single thing that human beings consume and it becomes a "part" of their very own bodies. It is necessary (as is money) but when overdone, it becomes the source of our own suffering.

Like the spider who eats its own web and then takes it to "the next abode" i.e. and respins a new web. We carry those things within us much like the spider carries this immensely frail yet deceptively strong material called web fluid which is literally his next home AND his nourishment The Spider is basically a tafsir of the highest order in the Quran, one that allows the Quran itself to provide evidence for the premises contained within it. And really, what is a parable anyway except Allah's own tafsir?

The parable of those who take guardians besides Allah is as the parable of the spider that makes for itself a house; and most surely the frailest of the houses is the spider's house did they but know. -The Spider

Allah makes abundant the means of subsistence for whom He pleases of His servants, and straitens them for whom (He pleases) surely Allah is Cognizant of all things. -The Spider

And how many a living creature that does not carry its sustenance: Allah sustains it and yourselves; and He is the Hearing, the Knowing. -The Spider

And this life of the world is nothing but a sport and a play; and as for the next abode, that most surely is the life-- did they but know! -The Spider

As an interesting aside, it is very common in Arabic literature and media to liken the excesses of government and leaders to that of "eating" wealth, very common. Arabs often say, "He ate the money."

I'd like to add that the last part of redacted's question is perhaps the most intriguing to me because it is that act of leveling a charge as opposed to the real issue in Islam which is to gather adherents who share faith in Allah and perhaps even, a given approach to the demonstration and verbalization of that faith.

The Quran itself systematically defines various practices and you cannot find any single human practice not defined in there. They are categorized in various ways all the way down to categorizing the color of people versus their culture and way of life. Including the categorization of the animal kingdom.

The point being necessarily is that an individual "qualifies" themself for membership via whatever it is they practice and also, they can qualify themself to various nations based on ethnicity (the Jews being the prime example of that in the Quran).

A muslim does not pray ten times a day or once a week. A muslim prays five salaat per day and that is UNIVERSAL and not an act shared by any other religion. A muslim makes Haj and that is also not an act engaged in by any other type of believer.

Charity, good will, etc...those are things engaged in by many athiests worldwide and cannot be the basis for our assumptions. I don't think that it is the intent of most muslims i.e. to label anyone.

Fasting is engaged in by Catholics but it in no way makes them muslim.

Non Islamic Monotheism is Monotheism that does not accept the last prophet and everything that goes along with that aspect of the Shehada. It can be likened to "Deism" of the type Thomas Jefferson, et.al. advocated.


"Paganism" itself, like all other things can be of any variety and some even suggest that certain branches of Orthodox Catholicism engage in excessive amounts of it. Therefore, you can describe a Catholic believer as being polytheist if they hold that Allah is in three parts or pagan if it is they worship icons as some (not all) of the Orthodox Catholic traditions teach. It isn't about blame but rather, it is about description of the various groups to which all human beings belong, one way or another.

Muslims too can suffer the effects of Paganism and/or Polytheism. When they drink/take drugs or gamble, they in effect disqualify themself from the path i.e. no one does it to them but they do it to themself. They do this when they use "black magic" and it is alot more common that you think. No offense to anyone here but in Saudi Arabia it has become the norm, not the exception. Paganism can be a type of "superstition-ism" which can affect any believer of any type. It isn't necessarily just a person who bows to a crystal or a false deity. Native Americans still practice ritual paganism but many of them would argue with you if you thought that they didn't hold that there is a Creator and Sustainer of the entire system. Hinduism in all actuality was originally a monotheistic tradition and "polytheism" is noted in the Upanishads themselves as the eventual result of ignorance and in essence, the demise of original Monotheistic Hinduism:

"The central theme of the Upanishads is not Monism but Monotheism, the concept of an all pervasive, immanent supreme being. "

-from http://www.dvaita.org/shaastra/upanishad.html#section_2


..therefore some of what some have said here has an element of truth but one ought to provide direct evidence of that rather than mere opinion you know.

It's their problem and not ours especially if they themselves are perceiving their own problem right about now (and they most definitely are). Allah stated clearly that Islam was not in competition with any other thing. He stated clearly that it would be made superior to all other systems. I think it is important to take Allah at his word on that one and avoid playing the comparison games in which non muslims usually end up confusing muslims who aren't very clear about their Islam.