The Sublime Maturity of Shaykh Abū Ādam al-Narūijī, Part I

Our beloved Shaykh Abū Ādam al-Narūijī has done us all an enormous favour by providing us with an example of Muslim ethics in practice. In a piece elegantly titled, “Moderating Idiocity,” the good Shaykh has demonstrated the proper Islamic way to deal with a terrible evil: asking too many questions.

I first visited his website, Sunni Answers, hoping to learn how Muslims deal with certain issues, such as proof for the existence of the Muslim god, predestination and human accountability, and human evolution. I was less interested in hearing a statement of Islamic beliefs than in learning whether and how Muslims deal with certain obvious difficulties that arise for a person of the Islamic faith. For example, do Muslims have rational answers to these issues? Is Islam compatible with modern science? How does Islam deal with the modern scientific account of human origins? Do Muslims respect reason, logic, and evidence? Are Muslims committed to truth? Conversely, is it the case that Muslims are simply driven by fear to cling irrationally and obstinately to a certain catalogue of beliefs, regardless of whether those beliefs can be supported by logic, reason, or evidence?

I posed a number of questions on Sunni Answers. At first, I was treated with suspicion, then hostility, and finally censorship. It all happened so very fast.

I gather that Muslim ethics imposes a limit on the number and kind of questions you are allowed to ask. If you ask a question about, say, predestination and accountability in Islam, and if a Muslim scholar’s response only generates more questions, you should remain silent, be grateful that he even gave you a response (no matter how silly or pathetic), and resist the urge to ask more questions. Asking more questions is clearly being unruly and improper. Decency requires unquestioning acceptance of a Muslim scholar’s response (again, no matter how silly, incoherent, and utterly pathetic).

I made the mistake, however, of persisting. When I was told, for example, that human beings have a will, but that this will is itself willed by the Muslim god, I asked whether it even makes sense for a Muslim to speak of the former as a “will”. After all, what does it mean to say that human beings have a will, when they have no control over their own actions? This, however, was clearly a mistake. I overstepped my bounds. I was not acting like a humble questioner, whose duty is to accept the answer and to never, ever question the answer.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m sure the good Shaykh is exhibiting only the highest standards of ethics and maturity when he employs terms like, “idiocity.” I’m sure he has only the best of intentions when he insists that anyone who doesn’t accept his ridiculous “proof” for the existence of his god must, of necessity, practice “atheist/agnostic debating acrobatics.” It can’t possibly be on account of his pitiful intellectual shortcomings that anyone would be totally unimpressed by his “proof” for the existence of his god.

I’m also sure the good Shaykh is exercising sound judgment when he accuses me of not having read his “proof” for the existence of his god, even after I specifically asked questions about that “proof”.

“That being said. This person, who calls himself “Sign of Saturn” has appeared in one thread, where he wanted to start a debate about Kant. He was told that this is not important to us, or even the topic here. Then he said that someone lied about Kant by calling him an atheist, even though he had been told explicitly by the person who’s post he inferred it from that he had not meant to say that. Then he comes back and wants to debate whether Islam allows lies. Hello? Moderated”

You see, the good Shaykh has certain rights the rest of us don’t have. He has the right, for example, to misrepresent what others actually say and do. After all, accuracy isn’t required when speaking about the despicable kuffar. He also has the right to make accusations about others. He has the right, for example, to accuse others of sophistry, even though his “proof” for the existence of his god is itself a highly pertinent example of sophistry (though not a very good one, since it couldn’t possibly persuade anyone). He also has the right to dictate the terms of the discussion, dismiss questions he doesn’t like, answer questions you didn’t ask, and determine who is unruly and who is sufficiently obedient. Oh, and that, “Hello? Moderated” bit is classic! Great one, Shaykh!

“I felt the best choice in the end was to just block such sophistry, because it fills the website with confusing material for those who come here to learn. I won’t block anyone that has a serious question or is willing to at least try to understand what I am saying.”

Clearly, I’m unruly and not sufficiently obedient. Clearly, I’m guilty of “sophistry” and spreading “confusing material.” Clearly, by asking him questions for clarification, I’m not trying to understand him.

Oh, and “posters need to be courteous with Islam and Muslims, as this is Allah’s religion,” but Muslims apparently need not be courteous with non-Muslims, who can be generically accused of sophistry. Muslims apparently have no permission from Allah to let a mocking kafir be disrespectful to Islam or a Muslim,” but apparently nothing stands in the way of letting a Muslim be disrespectful to non-Muslims, especially when those non-Muslims are much-despised atheists and agnostics.

The good Shaykh also says, “Muslims who think it is praiseworthy to humble oneself for a kafir should remember this.” Oh, those despised kuffar! They must humble themselves towards us, not the other way around! (And, in case you are wondering, the idea of dialogue among equals must never cross our minds!)

As if to make it abundantly clear as to what warrants censorship, the good Shaykh has this to say:

“Our purpose is not to engage with people who want to side-track us from our stated purpose. If their questions and concerns fall within the general scheme of our stated purpose, then fine and good. If they detract us from that purpose, then they will be moderated. We can only handle so much in a given day”

Indeed!

Thank you, Dear Shaykh, for that lesson in Muslim ethics. There is no question that you are an inspiring moral example for the rest of us. Please keep up the good work and please continue to be a role model for our times.

Leave a Reply