More Awe-Inspiring Humility from Shaykh Abū Ādam al-Narūijī

The moral excellence of our beloved Shaykh Abū Ādam al-Narūijī seems to grow exponentially every minute. And, after every minute, we are just dumbfounded by the extraordinary heights to which our beloved Shaykh’s moral excellence has soared. Recently, St. al-Narūijī was asked the following question:

Also, one of my non-Muslim friends asked me this question: Is it possible for Allah (Subhan wa Ta`ala) to create a stone so large that he (Subhan wa Ta`ala) can not lift it? Could you answer that rationally and Islamically (according to the books of `aqeeda)?

To this, the humble Shaykh gave the following humble response:

This is the typical Satanic question, where a kaafir asks “Can Allah <insert impossible proposition>?” The answer to this particular question is that Allah is not a body, so the idea of lifting in the sense that Christians would think of it does not befit Allah, because He is not a body, unlike what those idiots think.

The rest of the response can be seen here. From the above, the following lessons here are very clear:

1) The Muslim questioner’s friend is a Satanic idiot.

2) The Muslim questioner’s friend is a Christian, because the Shaykh says so. (Never mind the possibility that he or she could be an atheist and never mind that a dutiful Christian just might also reject this question as a meaningless paradox.)

3) Apparently, only Christians ask questions with hidden assumptions that do not “befit Allah.” Christians can therefore be dismissed as “those idiots.”

4) Christians are Satanic idiots.

Great PR work, Shaykh! You’re making Islam look lovelier and more attractive each day!

Question: How can it be shown that the Prophet Muhammad was the best human being who ever lived?

Since getting officially banned from Sunni Answers, we decided to go undercover to continue our mission of posing important questions for the brilliant Shaykh Abū Ādam al-Narūjiī.

In a recent public service announcement about the Prophet Muhammad, the good Shaykh made the following claim:

“The best human beings are the Prophets (may Allah increase their honor), and the best Prophet is our beloved prophet Muhammad.

We recently sent special agent “Hossam Bokhari” (a.k.a. me) to pose the following question for our beloved Shaykh:

dear brother

how to answer the kuffaar who say that we moslem cannot show that prophet muhammad salalahu alihiwasalam was the BEST PROPHET and the BEST HUMAN BEING ever. how to show this to them?

hossam bokhari

To this question, we were given the following response

“I would not attempt this with non-Muslims, because if they are not convinced that Aļļaah is one and does not resemble His creation, then how would convince them of something that is not as obvious. In general you should avoid discussing anything but tawĥiid with non-Muslims, and even that should be avoided unless you are qualified to debate such an issue. Tawĥiid is the most obvious issue in the religion, and the most important. If they do not accept it, they won’t accept anything else, and they will still be non-Muslims even if you could convince them of other issues than tawĥiid.”

Of course! It is patently obvious that the Prophet Muhammad was the best human being who ever lived. Anyone who doesn’t already see that isn’t even worth talking to. The reasoning couldn’t be more pristine.

Thanks again, dear Shaykh, for that thoroughly enlightening response!

“Free Will” and “Accountability” in the “Thought” of Shaykh Abū Ādam al-Narūijī

I asked Shaykh Abū Ādam al-Narūijī the following question: In Islamic beliefs, is there a place for human accountability? If so, what does human accountability mean or entail in light of the doctrine of predestination?

I was given an answer here. However, the answer only generated more difficulties. He believes, for example, that human beings have a will, but that this will is itself willed by his god and that all human actions are the outcome of the will of his god. Somehow, though, he asserts that human beings, who have no control over their own actions, are still accountable and therefore liable to receive punishment for those actions.

Unfortunately, when I tried to present those difficulties to the good Shaykh, they weren’t posted. I’m sure it’s just a technical problem with their website. So, I’ve reproduced the comments below.

…..

“We call it will because this is how we refer to it in our daily lives.”

That is most certainly not “how refer to it in our daily lives.” When those who have not been taught to believe what you believe — that is to say, most everyone else on the planet — employ the term “will,” they do not mean a human will that was willed by God. They rather mean that an action can ultimately be attributed to the autonomous decision of a free and independent human agent.

Again, will implies autonomy. What you’ve described is something other than autonomy. It is something other than the ordinary use of the concept of will. If you want to call it “will,” then you are most certainly not employing the term in the ordinary sense. You are effectively redefining the term such that it is decidedly incompatible with the ordinary use of the term.

Hence, my point. If human actions are, as you say, the result of human desires, and if human desires are, as you say, created by your god, then the use of the term “will” is not only misleading, but superfluous.

It would be more straightforward and honest for you to say, “My god creates your desire to commit action X, something over which you have no control. You then carry out action X, something over which you have no control. X is a punishable action, something over which you have no control. My god therefore punishes you for committing action X, something over which you have no control.” Inserting the use of the term “will” is therefore entirely unnecessary.

In any case, if you want to insert the term “accountable,” too, then you would have to redefine it also, because the ordinary use of the term “accountability” is most certainly not consonant with what you’ve described.