Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? Part-III

Continuing seamlessly from where Part-II left off, Mr. Spock probes deeper into the question guiding this inquiry using his new nomenclature: Determinate and Indeterminate. The key question guiding this inquiry is restated:
What are the inherent impediments for studying the message of the Holy Qur'an which make the Book so amenable to self-serving interpretation, socialization, and even bastardization by anyone?
The purpose in Part-III is to illustrate the inherent difficulties in comprehending the Speech of the Author of the Holy Qur'an due to its Indeterminates, and how to even begin to decipher the Message by logical reasoning from the Holy Qur'an itself without resorting to any outside sources, and without resorting to speculation and baseless interpretation that fly in the face of the prima facie meaning of the verses. Technically, this process of reasoning from the Holy Qur'an is sometimes referred to as “tawil” ( تَأْوِيلِهِ ).
And just like there is poor scholarship and outstanding scholarship, there is also poor “tawil” which indulges in baseless speculation and self-serving interpretation of the metaphorical verses ( آيَاتٌ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ) and even the categorical verses ( آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ ), and outstanding non speculative “tawil” which confines itself to the logical reasoning based on the prima facie meaning of the verses as demonstrated by Mr. Spock. This is mandated by the Holy Qur'an itself to the “men of understanding” ( أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ ) in Surah Aal-'Imran 3:7 for correctly deciphering the Determinates of its Divine Guidance System.
Mr. Spock will soon discover to what extent can that logical reasoning process of deciphering the Holy Qur'an take the inquiry after which matters become patently Indeterminate, and what sensible lessons may be drawn from this conspicuous limitation of the Divine Book that continually plagues all those among mankind who are not the “Ar-Rasikhoon-fil-ilm” ( الرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ ) referenced in the Holy Qur'an (3:7, 4:162).
The focus of exposition continues to remain the exploration of verses that have fueled sectarianism. The text draws on Part-II when making reference to verses already quoted, with the phrase “quoted above”.

Sociological Factors & Contextless Verses
Being a well-traveled science officer aboard the Starship Enterprise and having visited many different worlds and civilizations in their differing stages of sociological development throughout the traversable universe, Mr. Spock is well aware that the general knowledge of history and other sociological material can always lend some context to any matter when it pertains to living creatures.
But Spock is also well aware from the blood-drenched history of early civilizations that history is typically written by the victors of history. Only the works of those scribes typically survive in the libraries or in the cultural memory of the majority of the people, who either echo, or don't challenge, the core-axioms of the victors. All narratives consequently harbor a germ of untruth and falsehood in them even when they appear to narrate honestly, due to ingrained biases, vested interests, loyalties, infidelities, and other psychologically and sociologically induced tendencies of the living authors. (This is explored in more depth in Part-IV.) Mr. Spock also well understood that this characteristic was common to most if not all species in the universe he had visited. Even the history of his own planet, despite being all logic and event based, was not devoid of falsehoods and power-plays of hidden motivations of his peoples – for good and evil are merely tools for the superior intellect to achieve its end. Whether an end is noble or not is merely the moralizing semantics put on it by those who wish to see matters in that light. Whereas, in reality, these have no a priori moral and spiritual bounds put on them by creatures who lack the right-half brain function to feel, to empathize, and to moralize. (See Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement!)
In addition, human beings especially, are among the most subjective and highly malleable of cognitive creatures. Mr. Spock well knows after his lifelong sojourn among them that it is the race of mankind, more than any other cognitive race in the vast expanse of the universe, that most naturally espouses irrational feelings, uncalled for emotions, loves, hates, anxieties, fears, wants, sense of belonging, and are often driven by hidden subconscious motivations of which they themselves remain cognitively unaware of. These psychological forces and innate proclivity towards partisanship, tribalism, ethnocentrism, and ideological alliance shared with relevant political community, etc., naturally color their perception of events, epochs, and history which they record as its scholars, no differently than those who sanction or orchestrate those events, epochs, and history as the “history's actors”. No scientist, historian, sociological commentator and scholar is immune from these psychological forces.
Its undesirable consequence to accurate scholarship is that myths and falsehoods get easily amplified with successive generation of historians just as much as unpopular truths get easily attenuated. The truth of these words is beyond doubt. It is in fact self-evident. It can be witnessed in the scholarship of any people and any civilization among mankind. Just the straightforward observation that heroes of one civilization often turn out to be the villains of another, and vice versa, is sufficient to create caution in the mind of the non dogmatic student of both history and current affairs that even the most scholarly narratives minimally have to be studied with the forensic eye of scrutiny. Without awareness of psychological and sociological forces, the human student seeking understanding of history is as compelled to 'United We Stand' with the narratives due to “group-think” as the narrators themselves. Mr. Spock fortunately is not human.
For the case at hand, Mr. Spock discovers that no written records exist of the early period of the advent of Islam until after more than a century of the death of its Prophet. Several generations until then, as was noted by the first historians writing of that period some two centuries later, had carried the Sunnah of the Prophet of Islam, the Qur'anic directive “Obey the Messenger”, in their cultural memories, or word of mouth, and passed them from father to son, mother to daughter, generation after generation, due to the tyranny of the Muslim rulers who were crafting dynastic empires on Islam. These rulers, it was evident, had themselves sanctioned historical narratives and compilations of Sunnah which were not inimical to their own ruling interests.
Nevertheless, Mr. Spock also realized that facts are facts. And so he began searching the vast computer libraries of millions of books on Islam beginning from its earliest primary written works in search of what might be unarguable, reliable, and authenticated facts and events pertaining to the epoch of the Messenger of the Holy Qur'an and those that immediately followed, to lend some sociological context to his study. To further identify what is a real fact vs. merely a narrative which might or might not be true, Spock clarified his thinking thusly. He took the most shocking example of a fact to delineate what he considered incontrovertible fact vs. merely a historical narrative.
The following is an exemplar case study to illustrate the issues, the difficulties, and the forensic approach to resolving indirections using guidance from the Determinate verses of the Holy Qur'an which has called itself: Al-Furqaan, الْفُرْقَانَ (verse 25:1). Many other Qur'anic indirections and conundrums can similarly be examined using this exemplary approach.
An incontrovertible fact is of the following type: The historical narrative indicated that a Muslim ruler in the Ummayad Dynasty, in 680 AD, slaughtered Hussein ibn Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib, the revered grandson of the Prophet of Islam, along with many other male members of his family including children. And this act transpired despite the Author of the Holy Qur'an's remarkable and explicit commandment to Muslims to both honor the Author's Messenger, and to honor and love the Messenger's “near of kin”, which obviously includes his progeny:
'Say: “No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.”' (Surah Ash-Shura 42:23)
قُل لَّآ أَسْـَٔلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا إِلَّا ٱلْمَوَدَّةَ فِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ ۗ
Evidently, even to the untrained prima facie eye, never mind to the super-trained mind of a forensic detective of history like Mr. Spock, something major appeared to have gone systemically wrong after the death of the Prophet of Islam. Only within the passage of a mere sixty years, matters came to this criminal abhorrence of internecine Muslim upon Muslim state violence inflicted upon the family of the Messenger. And this despite the most lucid and clear-text commandment of the Holy Qur'an to the Muslim polity: 'Say: “No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.”'

Case Study: What does the Holy Qur'an say about the Ahlul Bayt?

Does the Scripture identify their composition?
The reasonable question arose in Mr. Spock's mind: why this commandment to honor and love the Exemplar's progeny, his “zurriyat”, those near of kin, فِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ ? What is so special about the Prophet of Islam's kin? And again, what is the purpose for loving them? Note that in this verse there is no command to obey them. It is to actually love them, ٱلْمَوَدَّةَ , with emotional content. Rather unusual to ask people to love someone else's progeny. What is the context for showing such love and faithfulness to them?
Indeed, much preference and affinity is shown for the family of the Prophet of Islam by the Author of the Holy Qur'an, by referring to them as أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ , Ahlul Bayt. and sanctifying them with a وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا , a thorough purification:
And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger.
And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless.” (Surah Al-Ahzaab, 33:33)
وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىٰ ۖ وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ

إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا
Caption Verse 33:33 Surah Al-Ahzaab – the Verse of Purification, the Verse of Perfect Cleansing. Incredible verse that hides a wellspring of semantics by employing the gender sensitivity of Arabic grammar in its second person pronoun to describe the composition of Ahlul Bayt. Another reason for misunderstanding the Holy Qur'an – its sophistication of using the Classical Arabic language constructs to hide a wellspring of secrets that none among the ordinary people seeking guidance from it shall fathom except those who are capable of understanding أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ (see verse 3:7) and having command of its unsurpassed natural language of exposition بِلِسَانِ قَوْمِهِۦ (see verse 14:4)! Verse 33:33 is a categorical example of why the Holy Qur'an is simply untranslatable, even syntactically, let alone semantically! Even the “Orientalism” jaundiced West is reluctantly forced to admit this characteristic of the Holy Qur'an: “The miraculous rhetorical quality that the Qur’an has for the reader is lost in translation, ... mistranslation usually occurs when translators retain Arabic terms or force a single meaning upon Arabic words.” (
Why is the Prophet's family so important to the Author of the Holy Qur'an, persisted Mr. Spock? Why is the Prophet's Ahlul Bayt given such preeminence based merely on their DNA, as it would appear?
Before we proceed further in hot pursuit of that question, this remarkable verse fragment of 33:33 ( إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ) bears closer examination as it is exemplary of the most commonly misperceived verses of the Holy Qur'an, especially when read in translation.
As was only briefly alluded to earlier, Mr. Spock had already noted of the difficulty of understanding the Holy Qur'an, that within a verse, a verse fragment could be speaking of some entirely different topic from the rest of the verse, as for instance in 5:3, 8:41, and 33:33. And that the profound subtleties of Arabic grammar and its gender specificity, enabled changing the point of reference suddenly within a verse by simply changing the gender of the verb, noun, pronoun, etc., as for instance in the verse fragment of 33:33 which refers to the purification of the Ahlul Bayt. Let's look at the complete verses preceding 33:33 which ostensibly establish the overarching context for that Verse of Purification of the Ahlul Bayt. But do they? Not if you read it in Arabic and know Arabic grammar. Whereas, when you read it in translation, you are easily misled unless the translator took the pains to accurately capture the gender change of the pronoun in a footnote or in parenthesis to clarify matters which could not be translated in a non-gender sensitive language. And, the publisher also continued to reprint the translation with footnotes un-modified until the time you got hold of that translation.[7]
The savvy Mr. Spock trenchantly noted the games played in translations, and also by publishers, for deliberate sectarian obfuscation of what was plainly manifest in the Qur'anic Arabic. From his ship's vast library collection, Mr. Spock compared editions of the same translations from different publishers and warily noted the remarkable dropping or subtle modification of the clarification footnotes posthumously in some subsequent editions even when the translator had taken pains to footnote the gender change and its implication in understanding the verse accurately in his original work.
The following table captures the complete context of the topic under discussion in Surah Al-Ahzaab, verses 33:28-34, using Yusuf Ali's translation.
O Prophet! Say to thy Consorts: "If it be that ye desire the life of this World, and its glitter,- then come! I will provide for your enjoyment and set you free in a handsome manner. (28)
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِىُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَٰجِكَ إِن كُنتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ ٱلْحَيَوٰةَ ٱلدُّنْيَا وَزِينَتَهَا فَتَعَالَيْنَ أُمَتِّعْكُنَّ وَأُسَرِّحْكُنَّ سَرَاحًا جَمِيلًا
But if ye seek Allah and His Messenger, and the Home of the Hereafter, verily Allah has prepared for the well-doers amongst you a great reward, (29)
وَإِن كُنتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُۥ وَٱلدَّارَ ٱلْءَاخِرَةَ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ أَعَدَّ لِلْمُحْسِنَٰتِ مِنكُنَّ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا
O Consorts of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment would be doubled to her, and that is easy for Allah. (30)
يَٰنِسَآءَ ٱلنَّبِىِّ مَن يَأْتِ مِنكُنَّ بِفَٰحِشَةٍ مُّبَيِّنَةٍ يُضَٰعَفْ لَهَا ٱلْعَذَابُ ضِعْفَيْنِ ۚ وَكَانَ ذَٰلِكَ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ يَسِيرًا
But any of you that is devout in the service of Allah and His Messenger, and works righteousness,- to her shall We grant her reward twice: and We have prepared for her a generous Sustenance. (31)
وَمَن يَقْنُتْ مِنكُنَّ لِلَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِۦ وَتَعْمَلْ صَٰلِحًا نُّؤْتِهَآ أَجْرَهَا مَرَّتَيْنِ وَأَعْتَدْنَا لَهَا رِزْقًا كَرِيمًا
O Consorts of the Prophet! Ye are not like any of the (other) women: if ye do fear (Allah), be not too complacent of speech, lest one in whose heart is a disease should be moved with desire: but speak ye a speech (that is) just. (32)
يَٰنِسَآءَ ٱلنَّبِىِّ لَسْتُنَّ كَأَحَدٍ مِّنَ ٱلنِّسَآءِ ۚ إِنِ ٱتَّقَيْتُنَّ فَلَا تَخْضَعْنَ بِٱلْقَوْلِ فَيَطْمَعَ ٱلَّذِى فِى قَلْبِهِۦ مَرَضٌ وَقُلْنَ قَوْلًا مَّعْرُوفًا
And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger.
And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless. (33:33)
وَقَرْنَ فِى بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ ٱلْجَٰهِلِيَّةِ ٱلْأُولَىٰ ۖ وَأَقِمْنَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَءَاتِينَ ٱلزَّكَوٰةَ وَأَطِعْنَ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُۥٓ ۚ

إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ ٱللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ ٱلرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ ٱلْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا
And recite what is rehearsed to you in your homes, of the Signs of Allah and His Wisdom: for Allah understands the finest mysteries and is well-acquainted (with them). (Surah Al-Ahzaab, 33:34) (Tr. Abdullah Yusuf Ali)
وَٱذْكُرْنَ مَا يُتْلَىٰ فِى بُيُوتِكُنَّ مِنْ ءَايَٰتِ ٱللَّهِ وَٱلْحِكْمَةِ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ لَطِيفًا خَبِيرًا
Caption Surah Al-Ahzaab, verses 33:28-34 – An illustrative case of how a translation fails to capture the semantics of the Qur'anic Arabic grammar accurately due to language limitations of English which does not have gender-specific second person pronouns and possessive pronouns. In this instance, it leads to the misperception that the interspersed verse fragment purifying the Ahlul Bayt in 33:33 is referring to the Messenger's wives just because the wives are being addressed by the Author earlier in that verse, and also in the preceding verses, and in the succeeding verse! This switch in topic for the verse of purification cannot be captured in a translated language which does not have gender-specific 2nd person pronoun with the same semantics as the Classical Qur'anic Arabic does, without explicit elaboration.
The following table completely decomposes verses 33:33 and 33:34 word by word. Please take a few minutes to study the switch in pronoun from 2nd person feminine plural possessive pronoun when referring to the houses of the wives, to 2nd person masculine plural object pronoun when referring to the Ahlul Bayt, and back to 2nd person feminine plural possessive pronoun when referring again to the houses of the wives in 33:34:
  • 2nd person feminine plural possessive pronoun
  • (33:33:3) بُيُوتِكُنَّ buyūtikunna your houses
  • 2nd person masculine plural object pronoun
  • (33:33:20) عَنكُمُ ankumu from you,
  • (33:33:24) وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ wayuṭahhirakum And to purify you
  • 2nd person feminine plural possessive pronoun
  • (33:34:5) بُيُوتِكُنَّ buyūtikunna your houses
The significance of this switch in pronouns is not lost on the super analytical Mr. Spock.
Having become an instant grammarian of the classical Arabic language, Mr. Spock knows that the 2nd person masculine pronoun كُمُ “kum”, and 2nd person feminine pronoun كُنَّ “kunna”, unambiguously represent the following semantics in order to be grammatically correct in their usage:
  • kum” when used with a plural object or possessive case represents a composition that must contain at least one or more males, and may contain zero or more females (it is equivalent of 2nd person pronoun “you”, “ تم ” and “vous” in gender neutral English, Urdu, and French respectively) ;
  • kunna” represents an all female composition (it has no equivalent in English, Urdu, French, et. al.; consequently, the same 2nd person pronoun “you”, “ تم ” and “vous” are respectively re-used causing a loss in semantics in translation).

Word by Word Decomposition of Surah Al-Ahzaab 33:33-34
Arabic word
Syntax and morphology
And stay
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
V – 2nd person feminine plural imperative verb
PRON – subject pronoun
الواو عاطفة
فعل أمر والتاء ضمير متصل في محل رفع فاعل

P – preposition
حرف جر
your houses
N – genitive masculine plural noun
PRON – 2nd person feminine plural possessive pronoun
اسم مجرور والكاف ضمير متصل في محل جر بالاضافة
and (do) not
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
PRO – prohibition particle
الواو عاطفة
حرف نهي
display yourselves
V – 2nd person feminine plural (form V) imperfect verb, jussive mood
PRON – subject pronoun
فعل مضارع مجزوم والتاء ضمير متصل في محل رفع فاعل
(as was the) display
N – accusative masculine (form V) verbal noun
اسم منصوب
(of the times of) ignorance
PN – genitive feminine proper noun → Al-Jahiliyah
اسم علم مجرور
the former.
N – nominative feminine noun
اسم مرفوع
And establish
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
V – 2nd person feminine plural (form IV) imperative verb
PRON – subject pronoun
الواو عاطفة
فعل أمر والتاء ضمير متصل في محل رفع فاعل
the prayer
N – accusative feminine noun
اسم منصوب
and give
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
V – 2nd person feminine plural (form IV) imperative verb
PRON – subject pronoun
الواو عاطفة
فعل أمر والتاء ضمير متصل في محل رفع فاعل
N – accusative feminine noun
اسم منصوب
and obey
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
V – 2nd person feminine plural (form IV) imperative verb
PRON – subject pronoun
الواو عاطفة
فعل أمر والتاء ضمير متصل في محل رفع فاعل
PN – accusative proper noun → Allah
لفظ الجلالة منصوب
and His Messenger.
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
N – accusative masculine noun
PRON – 3rd person masculine singular possessive pronoun
الواو عاطفة
اسم منصوب والهاء ضمير متصل في محل جر بالاضافة
ACC – accusative particle
PREV – preventive particle
كافة ومكفوفة
Allah wishes
V – 3rd person masculine singular (form IV) imperfect verb
فعل مضارع
Allah wishes
PN – nominative proper noun → Allah
لفظ الجلالة مرفوع
to remove
PRP – prefixed particle of purpose lām
V – 3rd person masculine singular (form IV) imperfect verb, subjunctive mood
اللام لام التعليل
فعل مضارع منصوب
from you
P – preposition
PRON – 2nd person masculine plural object pronoun
جار ومجرور
the impurity,
N – accusative masculine noun
اسم منصوب
(O) People
N – accusative masculine noun
اسم منصوب
(of) the House!
N – genitive masculine noun
اسم مجرور
And to purify you
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
V – 3rd person masculine singular (form II) imperfect verb, subjunctive mood
PRON – 2nd person masculine plural object pronoun
الواو عاطفة
فعل مضارع منصوب والكاف ضمير متصل في محل نصب مفعول به
(with thorough) purification.
N – accusative masculine indefinite (form II) verbal noun
اسم منصوب
And remember
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
V – 2nd person feminine plural imperative verb
PRON – subject pronoun
الواو عاطفة
فعل أمر والتاء ضمير متصل في محل رفع فاعل

REL – relative pronoun
اسم موصول
is recited
V – 3rd person masculine singular passive imperfect verb, subjunctive mood
فعل مضارع مبني للمجهول منصوب

P – preposition
حرف جر
your houses
N – genitive masculine plural noun
PRON – 2nd person feminine plural possessive pronoun
اسم مجرور والكاف ضمير متصل في محل جر بالاضافة
P – preposition
حرف جر
(the) Verses
N – genitive feminine plural noun
اسم مجرور
(of) Allah
PN – genitive proper noun → Allah
لفظ الجلالة مجرور
and the wisdom.
CONJ – prefixed conjunction wa (and)
N – genitive feminine noun
الواو عاطفة
اسم مجرور
ACC – accusative particle
حرف نصب
PN – accusative proper noun → Allah
لفظ الجلالة منصوب
V – 3rd person masculine singular perfect verb
فعل ماض
N – accusative masculine singular indefinite noun
اسم منصوب
ADJ – accusative masculine singular indefinite adjective
صفة منصوبة
Caption Surah Al-Ahzaab 33:33-34 Word by Word syntactical decomposition. (Arabic syntax and grammar courtesy of ; )

The following table captures some prominent English and Urdu translations of verse 33:33, all of them spectacularly failing to capture the gender switch of the 2nd person pronoun from feminine to masculine form of the original verse in Arabic when referring to the Ahlul Bayt. Whether or not this translated language limitation is footnoted in the original printed editions by their respective translators to draw attention to the significance of this switch in pronouns, is not known.
And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying. (Muhammad Ali Habib Shakir, House of Habib, Pakistan)
And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poorrate, and obey Allah and His Apostle; Allah only desires to take away the uncleanness from you, O people of the household! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying. (Maulana Muhammad Ali MMA 1917 PDF)
And stay in your houses. Bedizen not yourselves with the bedizenment of the Time of Ignorance. Be regular in prayer, and pay the poor-due, and obey Allah and His messenger. Allah's wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O Folk of the Household, and cleanse you with a thorough cleansing. (Marmaduke Pickthall)
Remain in your houses; and display not your finery, as did the pagans of old. And perform the prayer, and pay the alms, and obey God and His Messenger. People of the House, God only desires to put away from you abomination and to cleanse you. (Arthur John Arberry)
Stay at home, and do not deck yourselves with ostentation as in the days of paganism; fulfil your devotional obligations, pay the zakat, and obey God and His Apostle. God desires to remove impurities from you, O inmates of this house, and to cleanse and bring out the best in you. (Ahmed Ali)
And stay in Your houses. and display not yourselves! with the display of the times of former Paganism; and establish the prayer and give the poor-rate and obey Allah and His apostle. Allah only desireth to take away uncleanness from you, people of the house-hold, and to purify you with a thorough purification. (Abdul Majid Daryabadi)
And abide quietly in your homes, and do not flaunt your charms as they used to flaunt them in the old days of pagan ignorance; and be constant in prayer, and render the purifying dues, and pay heed unto God and His Apostle: for God only wants to remove from you all that might be loathsome, O you members of the [Prophet’s] household, and to purify you to utmost purity. (Muhammad Asad)
And stay in your homes and do not go about displaying your allurements as in the former Time of Ignorance. Establish Prayer, give Zakah, and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah only wishes to remove uncleanness from you, O members of the (Prophet's) household, and to purify you completely. (Abul Ala Maududi)
Stay in your houses and do not display your finery with the display of the former [days of ] ignorance. Maintain the prayer and pay the zakat and obey Allah and His Apostle. Indeed Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification. (Ali Quli Qara'i)
اپنے گھروں میں ٹِک کر رہو اور سابق دور جاہلیت کی سی سج دھج نہ دکھاتی پھرو نماز قائم کرو، زکوٰۃ دو اور اللہ اور اُس کے رسولؐ کی اطاعت کرو اللہ تو یہ چاہتا ہے کہ اہلِ بیتِ نبیؐ سے گندگی کو دور کرے اور تمہیں پوری طرح پاک کر دے
(Abul Ala Maududi)
اور اپنے گھروں میں بیٹھی رہو اور گزشتہ زمانہ جاہلیت کی طرح بناؤ سنگھار دکھاتی نہ پھرو اور نماز پڑھو اور زکواة دو اور الله اور اس کے رسول کی فرمانبرداری کرو الله یہی چاہتا ہے کہ اے اس گھر والو تم سے ناپاکی دور کرے اور تمہیں خوب پاک کرے
(Ahmed Ali)
اور اپنے گھر میں بیٹھی رہو اور پہلی جاہلیت جیسا بناؤ سنگھار نہ کرو اور نماز قائم کرو اور زکوِٰادا کرو اوراللہ اور اس کے رسول کی اطاعت کرو - بس اللہ کا ارادہ یہ ہے اے اہلبیت علیھ السّلام کہ تم سے ہر برائی کو دور رکھے اور اس طرح پاک و پاکیزہ رکھے جو پاک و پاکیزہ رکھنے کا حق ہے
(Syed Zeeshan Haider Jawadi)
اور اپنے گھروں میں قرار سے رہو اور سابقہ زمانۂ جاہلیت کی طرح اپنی آرائش کی نمائش نہ کرتی پھرو (باہر نہ نکلا کرو) اور نماز قائم کرو اور زکوٰۃ ادا کرو اور اللہ اور اس کے رسول کی اطاعت کیا کرو۔ اے اہل بیت! اللہ تو بس یہی چاہتا ہے کہ تم سے ہر قسم کے رجس (آلودگی) کو دور رکھے اور تمہیں اس طرح پاک و پاکیزہ رکھے جس طرح پاک رکھنے کا حق ہے۔
(Ayatollah Muhammad Hussain Najafi)
Caption various translations of Surah Al-Ahzaab verse 33:33 into English and Urdu, the non-gender sensitive languages, all spectacularly failing to capture the semantics created due to the gender change from feminine to masculine form of the 2nd person pronoun when referring to the Ahlul Bayt. (Translations are from the electronic versions at ; MMA 1917 PDF courtesy of ; Ali Quli Qara'i courtesy of )
In French, which is more gender sensitive than either English or Urdu but less so than Classical Arabic, the translation of verse 33:33 is given below. The 2nd person pronoun “vous” in French, like its Urdu and English 2nd person pronoun counterpart “ تم ” and “you” respectively, including the possessive case variations thereof, are unfortunately gender neutral and unable to distinguish between singular and plural object, leading to the same loss in semantics.
Restez dans vos foyers; et ne vous exhibez pas à la manière des femmes d'avant l'Islam (Jâhiliyah). Accomplissez la Salât, acquittez la Zakât et obéissez à Allah et à Son messager. Allah ne veut que vous débarrasser de toute souillure, ô gens de la maison [du prophète], et veut vous purifier pleinement. (verse 33:33 Tr. Muhammad Hamidullah)
Caption Translation of verse 33:33 into French. The second person pronoun vous is gender neutral just like in Urdu and English, despite French being more gender sensitive than either English or Urdu, therefore leading to the same loss in semantics.
In Spanish however, the matter is salvaged. Spanish enables expressing gender sensitivity of the object by addition of either “os” or “as” to the verb. Therefore, a correct semantic translation of verse 33:33 from Arabic into Spanish is possible by reflecting the 2nd person plural gender sensitivity of the pronoun in Arabic, to the correct conjugated form of the verb expressing the gender and plurality of the object. So, if “gente de la casa” (Ahlul Bayt) was referring to only the wives of the Messenger, the grammatically correct verb conjugation of the root verbs 'librar' and 'purificar' in Spanish would have been “libraras” and “purificaras” instead of “libraros” and “purificaros”.
¡Quedaos en vuestras casas! ¡No os acicaléis como se acicalaban las natiguas paganas! ¡Haced la azalá! ¡Dad el azaque! ¡Obedeced a Alá y a Su Enviado! Alá sólo quiere libraros de la mancha, gente de la casa, y purificaros por completo. (verse 33:33 Tr. Julio Cortes)
Caption Translation of verse 33:33 into Spanish. The loss of semantics in translation is prevented by reflecting the 2nd person plural masculine pronoun of Arabic on the correct selection of masculine or feminine verb conjugation, since both choices are available in Spanish to indicate object composition and its plurality.
That language limitation conundrum disclosed above, noted Mr. Spock, is yet another source of misunderstanding the Holy Qur'an – studying it in translation! The Holy Qur'an is simply untranslatable, in any language. Which is why the famous translator Arthur J. Arberry, in deep humility, called his excellent rendition into English: “The Koran Interpreted”. Even the “Orientalism” jaundiced West is reluctantly forced to admit this characteristic of the Holy Qur'an: “The miraculous rhetorical quality that the Qur’an has for the reader is lost in translation, ... mistranslation usually occurs when translators retain Arabic terms or force a single meaning upon Arabic words.” (see
Furthermore, a translation also lends itself easily to both Machiavellian as well as inadvertent perception management of the public mind. We can see this pernicious cognitive infiltration in the contemporary English translation of the Holy Qur'an titled: The Sublime Quran (see ).
To this day, countless generations of Muslims growing up in non Arabic speaking Muslim countries do not perceive what has so straightforwardly been demonstrated above, as the sophistication of the classical Arabic language to mask its secrets from the unwary by something so elegant as simply a gender change in its 2nd person pronoun. The syntactic as well as semantic limitations of any translation language in comparison to the intrinsic richness and succinctness of Qur'anic Arabic requires much reframing for the target language in order to preserve both literal as well as semantic accuracy, which, as in the case of verse 33:33, simply cannot be maintained without additional footnotes and parenthetical annotations.
These language limitations naturally create additional motivation to seek sources of explanation and exegeses outside of the pages of the Holy Qur'an, called “tafsir”, especially for those who do not speak Arabic, which is approximately 90 percent of the 1.6 to 2 billion Muslim public spread throughout the world in many different cultures and civilizations. That fact automatically leads to the very paradox being explored in this analysis: fallible hands, fallible minds, and fallible hearts, some clean and some unclean, some competent and some incompetent, none of them categorically known to be among the “Ar-Rasikhoon-fil-ilm” ( الرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ ) of verse 3:7 of the Holy Qur'an, expositing the pristine text of the Holy Qur'an according to their own perception and socialization bias – rather than the Word of its own Author explain itself. (See a detailed examination of the translation issue in: Critique: Laleh Bakhtiar and The Sublime Quran , )
At least with respect to this verse fragment 33:33, the native Arabic speaker has a leg-up on the non Arabic speaker. The former knows that Ahlul Bayt is being referred to with a masculine pronoun and therefore its composition, by definition, comprises one or more males, and cannot comprise only females, and therefore the verse fragment 33:33 is not necessarily referring to the wives, or even just the wives alone. If that verse fragment was indeed referring to only the wives, an all female group, then the feminine form of the pronoun would have been used to refer to the Ahlul Bayt as is done when referring to the houses of the wives before and after that verse of purification.
But that's also where the native Arabic speaker's advantage over the non-speaker ends. Neither knows the actual composition of the Ahlul Bayt beyond that prima facie information contained in that sequence of verses 33:28-34 reproduced above, that it is a Household of the Prophet, and comprises one or more males, and zero or more females, and it may or may not contain the wives of the Prophet, irrespective of the fact that the verse fragment is interspersed in between where the Author of the Holy Qur'an is commanding the wives of the Prophet of Islam what they are supposed to do. Whereas, in the purification fragment of verse 33:33, the Author declares what He Himself intends to do to the Ahlul Bayt. That change of “actor” from the wives to the Author and back to the wives is most conspicuous in the verse. In that interspersed switch, the Author pledged some abstract “perfect purification” to the Ahlul Bayt. What that “perfect purification” means remains as foreign to the native speaker of Arabic as to the non-speaker. It requires for both to indulge in much due diligence to uncover. Mr. Spock was finding that the Holy Qur'an is hardly the Book that is so easy to understand or so clear as claimed by its Author.

Returning to the thread of analysis before that closer look at verse 33:33, the same verse fragment of “perfect purification” begs the obvious question: Why are only the Ahlul Bayt chosen by the Author of the Holy Qur'an and sanctified so specially with such a profound divine benefaction: “Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless” ( إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ), and no one else is chosen for this benefaction from among the vast number of respected companions and close familial ties of the Prophet of Islam?
What did this unusual “purification” actually mean in the language of the Holy Qur'an such that it exclusively only applied to the Ahlul Bayt?
How should ( وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ) be accurately understood from its cipher-text form? Having witnessed the ease of straightforward obfuscation possible due to the gender-specific Arabic grammar cleverly employed in this verse to suddenly change the context, Mr. Spock is exceptionally vigilant for correct and un-careless decoding of the cipher text of the Holy Qur'an, and especially for this verse fragment which evidently is hiding some secret. It appeared to be another one of those bedeviling verses ( مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ) defined in verse 3:7 on the face of it. Perhaps it was an Indeterminate, and perhaps it wasn't. To further his understanding of what was meant by “purification”, Mr. Spock therefore pushes onto the ever growing evaluation stack the words “Tahira kum Tathira” ( وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ) of verse 33:33, and the related “Mutaharoon” ( الْمُطَهَّرُونَ ) of verse 56:79 (see Surah Al-Waqia quoted above).
Perhaps that held an important clue to the identity of who were being purified if what “purification” actually meant in the language of the Holy Qur'an could be correctly deciphered. Then its purpose, the why, would become known, which would in turn perhaps lead to the who, as in who could achieve that purpose. Even in the prima facie meaning, it obviously was not an exoteric physical purification, such as cleansing of the physical body. Rather, it implied some esoteric “religious” purification just from examining the verses 56:78 and 56:79 which a priori defined who could even access the Holy Qur'an: “In a Book well-guarded, Which none shall touch but those who are clean (purified).” ( الْمُطَهَّرُونَ )
To Mr. Spock's perceptive mind already attuned to different methods of access control for managing hierarchical access to privileged information, the concept of “purification” in the light of verses 56:78-79 appeared akin to the Author of the Holy Qur'an requiring a “security clearance” for access to His Message in the “Book well-guarded”. And the Book progressively revealing more and more of its inner secrets higher the “security clearance” of the seeker of its Guidance. Therefore, “perfect purification” would logically mean the highest level of “security clearance” and the complete revealing of all its deep secrets to those who possessed that rank – the “Ar-Rasikhoon-fil-ilm” ( الرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ ) described in verse 3:7 (already quoted above). Thus, the Author of the Holy Qur'an choosing the Ahlul Bayt for “perfect purification” appeared to harbor a far deeper context beyond what was superficially apparent from a careless reading of verse 33:33 which was in outright error. The matter demanded careful analysis and deeper study. The Holy Qur'an itself demanded such due diligence by straightforwardly asserting: “Do they not then reflect on the Qur'an? Nay, on the hearts there are locks.” (see 47:24 quoted below).
To Mr. Spock's observant mind, preference for a choosing a particular family and lineage, a particular strand of human DNA above all the nations, and continuing to choose from that strand generation after generation for the divinely appointed stewardship of man, لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا , appeared to play a principal role in the overall provenance and sequence of divine guidance by the Author of the Holy Qur'an:
Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran above the nations.
Offspring one of the other; and Allah is Hearing, Knowing.” (Surah Aal-e-Imran 3:33-34)
إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ ٱصْطَفَىٰٓ ءَادَمَ وَنُوحًا وَءَالَ إِبْرَٰهِيمَ وَءَالَ عِمْرَٰنَ عَلَى ٱلْعَٰلَمِينَ
ذُرِّيَّةًۢ بَعْضُهَا مِنۢ بَعْضٍ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ
And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them.
He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men.
Ibrahim said: And of my offspring?
My covenant does not include the unjust, said He” (Surah Al-Baqara, 2:124)
وَإِذِ ٱبْتَلَىٰٓ إِبْرَٰهِۦمَ رَبُّهُۥ بِكَلِمَٰتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ ۖ
قَالَ إِنِّى جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ
قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِى ۖ
قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِى ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ
Caption Verses of the Holy Qur'an laying out the Principle of Divine Appointment of leadership bestowed upon Apostles, Messengers, and Imams. The verses of Surah Aal-e-Imran 3:33-34, and Surah Al-Baqara 2:124, clearly and succinctly state that Allah chooses His Imams above the nations as Divinely Appointed guides for the people whom people can follow (the word “Imam” لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ), that these chosen people are offspring one of the other, and that it is not a democratic selection by the people! (See Principle of Inerrancy below as the co-requisite for Divine Appointment of leadership)
So, once again encountering a preference for a specific family, the Ahlul Bayt, which Allah chose in 33:33 for a thorough purification, and in 42:23 commanded the Prophet to tell the people to love his “those near of kin”, was not unusual to Mr. Spock's perceptive mind. It followed a consistent pattern, that the Author of the Holy Qur'an chose whomsoever as His Messengers, Exemplars, and Imams above all the other peoples. And verses 3:33-34 and 2:124 unambiguously and unequivocally indicated the Author's particular preference for a very specific lineage starting from Prophet Adam, “Offspring one of the other”, to choose Prophets and Imams from among that lineage only, to bring His Divine Message to all peoples among mankind (see verse 10:47 quoted above, and many others like 16:36 “And verily We have raised in every nation a messenger, (proclaiming): Serve Allah and shun false gods”). The Author's preference for the Prophet of Islam's Ahlul Bayt in verse 33:33 was from the same DNA strand of Prophet Ibrahim. Which, according to verse 2:124, قَالَ إِنِّى جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا ۖ قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِى ۖ قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِى ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ , was also going to spawn Imams of the people throughout the ages in Prophet Ibrahim's progeny.
Mr. Spock noted that verse 2:124 proffered an unambiguous criterion for such appointment. That, if there were to be any divinely appointed Imams among the people of Arabia, they had to emerge from the genetic seed of Prophet Ibrahim only, as per the Author's Promise to Prophet Ibrahim. That criterion was just as applicable to Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, as to his Ahlul Bayt. Mr. Spock ascertained from the historical record that Prophet Muhammad was considered a descendent of Prophet Ibrahim by the people of Arabia, coming from the distinguished prophetic lineage of Bani Hashim who had been the keepers of the pilgrims' structure called the Holy Kaaba for generations. The Author of the Holy Qur'an too attested to the fact that Prophet Muhammad was indeed a descendent of Prophet Ibrahim, by the act of choosing him over all others in Arabia as His Messenger – since the Author by His own admission only chose successive Prophets, Messengers, and Imams, from a single lineage as per His proclamation noted in verse 3:33-34.
Therefore, if there were to be any additional Imams as per the promise in verse 2:124 to Ibrahim, reasoned Mr. Spock, these Imams had to carry the seeds of Prophet Ibrahim or Prophet Muhammad in order to continue the Author's self-proclaimed modus operandi for conveying His Guidance to the people: “Offspring one of the other”.
Furthermore, the Holy Qur'an attested to the fact that Muhammad was not a father of any men among the people:
Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Apostle of Allah and the Last of the prophets; and Allah is cognizant of all things.” (Surah Al-Ahzaab, 33:40)
مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَآ أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَٰكِن رَّسُولَ ٱللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ ٱلنَّبِيِّۦنَ ۗ وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَىْءٍ عَلِيمًا
This automatically meant, reasoned Mr. Spock, that if such leadership as promised in verse 2:124 was to continue after the Prophet of Islam – Muhammad being the last of the Messengers according to the bold proclamation of the afore-quoted 33:40: رَّسُولَ ٱللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ ٱلنَّبِيِّۦنَ – as it evidently did by virtue of the Qur'anic commandment of 4:59: “obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you”, the latter “those charged with authority among you” could only emanate from either Prophet Ibrahim's seed of which Muhammad was himself a progeny, or Prophet Muhammad's own progeny.
The fact that Muhammad had a progeny is testified by the Holy Qur'an in the verse where its Author is evidently consoling His Messenger that it is the Messenger's enemies who will be without progeny (and not him):
Surely your enemy is the one who shall be without posterity.” (Surah Al-Kauthar, 108:3)
إِنَّ شَانِئَكَ هُوَ ٱلْأَبْتَرُ
Therefore, in order for the Holy Qur'an to not be falsified, verses 33:40 and 108:3 straightforwardly imply that Prophet Muhammad's progeny must be through his female offspring only as “Muhammad is not the father of any of your men”.
This criterion, adduced directly from the Holy Qur'an, automatically implied the composition of the Ahlul Bayt from which to search for Imams, leaving the straightforward identification of “Offspring one of the other” from the factual historical records by seeking out the Prophet of Islam's female progeny. Provided of course that such factual historical records are incontrovertible, reliably documented. Fortunately, history documents to the same degree of empirical veracity as it documents that Prophet Muhammad is a real figure of history, that lady Fatima Zahra is Prophet Muhammad's only seed to procreate, and her two sons, Hassan ibn Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib, and Hussein ibn Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib, are her only two male offspring, the latter being killed by the Muslim Ummayad ruler's army as noted at the beginning of this section. All recorded historical facts that remain incontrovertible.
However, the precise identity of the progeny is still held as an unknown variable in Mr. Spock's logical mind in this specific thread despite being fully aware of the sociological context and documentation of Muslim history. Because, as already noted, in this study Mr. Spock is keenly interested in separating what the Holy Qur'an has itself conveyed in the “criterion” of “no doubt”, without confusing it with the historical records or the narratives of doubtful scribes of history. The criterion, once adduced from the Holy Qur'an and correctly understood, can always be applied for extracting any valid signals from the partisan noise of history to understand that history itself.
The general problem Mr. Spock is wrestling with, in case the reader has lost track, is the enigma that instead of applying the criterion learnt from the Holy Qur'an to parse history recorded by fallible scribes in order to improve its signal to noise ratio, history is evidently necessary to understand the meaning of the text of the Holy Qur'an due to its Indeterminates. That's like putting the cart before the horse! Mr. Spock in this forensic study is sensibly trying to adduce the criterion first from the self-described “criterion” of “no doubt” revealed by the “Lord of the Worlds” on how to even go about selecting valid signals from the doubtful penmanship of history which could, in turn, perhaps enable deciphering the message of the Holy Qur'an to some degree of objectivity when at all necessary. In order to not lose sight of that primary motivation, Mr. Spock is explicitly holding what is an Indeterminate as an explicit variable (that is fixed from history by Muslims, often subjectively, based entirely on their socialization biases and/or vested interests), and what is Determinate as a known constant (which is lamentably often ignored by Muslims).
That is the main objective in Mr. Spock's search for identifying the Ahlul Bayt from the Holy Qur'an, by understanding the criterion established in the Holy Qur'an itself, the book that called itself the “Criterion”, for their identification. Otherwise, if Mr. Spock is to ask even a laity Muslim during any epoch at any place, who the daughter of the Prophet of Islam and her children are, the laity will unanimously rush to inform him with a single answer – another incontrovertible fact of recorded history which unites all Muslims in all civilizations across time and space. It is this universal unity among Muslims on the fact of the identify of the Messenger's progeny, just as their unity on the fact of the text of the Holy Qur'an being un-tampered by the hand of man, which lends more than just academic and existential veracity to the historical record documenting both. It is a component of the unshakable belief of a Muslim that has continued to be so throughout history right from the time of the Prophet of Islam.
Because of this unusual empiricism, the enigma posed in this section of the Prophet's grandson being killed so mercilessly by the Muslim Ummayad army despite the clear-text Qur'anic commandment of verse 42:23 to love them, and the Muslims of the epoch clearly recognizing the Messenger's progeny who weren't an unknown to the people, is being examined in such great depth.
To Mr. Spock's objective mind unsocialized into the Muslim ethos, just the fact that this violence upon the Messenger's immediate grandchildren could even transpire at the hands of a Muslim ruler, and the Muslims of the time even permitted it to transpire, is indicative that both, historiography by partisans of power, and hagiography by partisans of victims of that power, is the defining epistemology of Muslim scholarship. And therefore, the latter had to be examined with an acute forensic eye to improve its reality to myth ratio. It lent further substance to the paradox Mr. Spock is grappling with that how could the “perfected” ciphertext of the Holy Qur'an require itself to be decoded by such an epistemology of imperfect pens of history? This is taken up in more depth in Part-IV.
Mr. Spock, persistent in his study, continues to qualitatively observe that the remarkable show of preference for the Messenger's Ahlul Bayt was entirely self-consistent with the Author's overarching narrative in the Holy Qur'an for choosing some over all others for His special favors. This idea of granting special favors to some people over all others during the period of providing guidance to the people, Mr. Spock discovered, is almost over-emphasized by the Author of the Holy Qur'an, as for instance in:
And this was Our argument which we gave to Ibrahim against his people; We exalt in dignity whom We please; surely your Lord is Wise, Knowing.” (Surah Al An'aam, 6:83)
وَتِلْكَ حُجَّتُنَآ ءَاتَيْنَٰهَآ إِبْرَٰهِيمَ عَلَىٰ قَوْمِهِۦ ۚ نَرْفَعُ دَرَجَٰتٍ مَّن نَّشَآءُ ۗ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ حَكِيمٌ عَلِيمٌ
Caption The Holy Qur'an elaborating upon the Principle of Divine Appointment of leadership and disclosing the fact that the people are often unhappy or jealous with such appointment! Verse 33:36 of Surah Al-Ahzaab (quoted above) testifies to the pathetic existence of this fact even among the Muslim believing companions of the Prophet of Islam! Surah Al An'aam verse 6:83 further sets the principle that the Divine Appointment by fiat by the Lord of the Worlds is even accompanied by the Lord's Argument on behalf of His Appointee and against his people that is given to the Appointee. This verse lays out a hint to search in the Holy Qur'an for Divine Arguments when it comes to any question of Divine Appointment – since the Holy Qur'an speaks in its own explanation!
Mr. Spock recognizes that the continuation of verse 6:83 of Surah Al An'aam was further revealing of the Author's principal modus operandi of choosing some over others for special favors, especially verse 6:87 “And from among their fathers and their descendants and their brethren, and We chose them and guided them into the right way.”
And verse fragments 6:89-90 asserted a pertinent purpose which further explained why “those charged with authority among you” existed in addition to the Prophet of Islam: “We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it. These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance.”
And We gave to him Ishaq and Yaqoub; each did We guide, and Nuh did We guide before, and of his descendants, Dawood and Sulaiman and Ayub and Yusuf and Musa and Haroun; and thus do We reward those who do good (to others). (6:84)
وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُۥٓ إِسْحَٰقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ ۚ كُلًّا هَدَيْنَا ۚ وَنُوحًا هَدَيْنَا مِن قَبْلُ ۖ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِهِۦ دَاوُۥدَ وَسُلَيْمَٰنَ وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُوسُفَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَهَٰرُونَ ۚ وَكَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِى ٱلْمُحْسِنِينَ
And Zakariya and Yahya and Isa and Ilyas; every one was of the good; (6:85)
وَزَكَرِيَّا وَيَحْيَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ وَإِلْيَاسَ ۖ كُلٌّ مِّنَ ٱلصَّٰلِحِينَ
And Ismail and Al-Yasha and Yunus and Lut; and every one We made to excel (in) the worlds: (6:86)
وَإِسْمَٰعِيلَ وَٱلْيَسَعَ وَيُونُسَ وَلُوطًا ۚ وَكُلًّا فَضَّلْنَا عَلَى ٱلْعَٰلَمِينَ
And from among their fathers and their descendants and their brethren, and We chose them and guided them into the right way. (6:87)
وَمِنْ ءَابَآئِهِمْ وَذُرِّيَّٰتِهِمْ وَإِخْوَٰنِهِمْ ۖ وَٱجْتَبَيْنَٰهُمْ وَهَدَيْنَٰهُمْ إِلَىٰ صِرَٰطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ
This is Allah's guidance, He guides thereby whom He pleases of His servants; and if they had set up others (with Him), certainly what they did would have become ineffectual for them. (6:88)
ذَٰلِكَ هُدَى ٱللَّهِ يَهْدِى بِهِۦ مَن يَشَآءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِۦ ۚ وَلَوْ أَشْرَكُوا۟ لَحَبِطَ عَنْهُم مَّا كَانُوا۟ يَعْمَلُونَ
These are they to whom We gave the book and the wisdom and the prophecy; therefore if these disbelieve in it We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it. (6:89)
أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَاتَيْنَٰهُمُ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ وَٱلْحُكْمَ وَٱلنُّبُوَّةَ ۚ فَإِن يَكْفُرْ بِهَا هَٰٓؤُلَآءِ فَقَدْ وَكَّلْنَا بِهَا قَوْمًا لَّيْسُوا۟ بِهَا بِكَٰفِرِينَ
These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance. Say: I do not ask you for any reward for it; it is nothing but a reminder to the nations. (6:90)
أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ هَدَى ٱللَّهُ ۖ فَبِهُدَىٰهُمُ ٱقْتَدِهْ ۗ قُل لَّآ أَسْـَٔلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا ۖ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرَىٰ لِلْعَٰلَمِينَ
Caption Surah Al An'aam verses 6:84-90 elaborating upon the Principle of Divine Appointment of leadership for the continued guidance of nations among mankind from time immemorial.
Unless Mr. Spock was erroneous in his analysis despite applying his best reasoning and logic capabilities which had earned him the most difficult position as the solo science officer aboard the Starship Enterprise, application of straightforward logic to the study of the Holy Qur'an had been incredibly revealing thus far. It was heartening to Mr. Spock that the Holy Qur'an emphatically admonished the people who did not reflect on its Message, or treated it as “just foolish nonsense” ( مَهْجُورًا see verse 25:30 quoted above):
Do they not then reflect on the Qur'an? Nay, on the hearts there are locks.” (Surah Muhammad 47:24)
أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ أَمْ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبٍ أَقْفَالُهَا
Whereas, even rudimentary logical reflection on the آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ texts of the Holy Qur'an, the categorical foundational verses which formed the heart of the Holy Qur'an as per its Author's own declaration of أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ , automatically led the earnest detective to such inescapable logical deductions as demonstrated in the aforementioned reasoning process by Mr. Spock. But such reasoned deductions also begged the layman's foolish question, for what purpose? – As if it isn't already patently obvious by now.
Because, after all, it could also be argued that verse 5:3 had already categorically asserted that the Qur'an was completed in the Prophet's own lifetime: “This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.”
Therefore, wasn't Qur'an alone sufficient? Mr. Spock recalled the rebuke to Believers in Surah Al-Ahzaab verse 33:36, “It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.” (quoted above). It takes no speculation to infer from this shocking verse the presence of undercurrents of dissent and disputation with the Messenger among some Believers. Such disputing could easily lead to the suggestion that Qur'an alone is sufficient in order to suppress the decisions of the Messenger not contained in the Holy Qur'an which the Believers in his congregation did not like. Which, at least to Mr. Spock's intelligent mind gave an explanation for why the first Caliphs after the Prophet's demise forbid the documenting of the Messenger's verdicts and statements, called Hadiths.
It now becomes self-evident to Mr. Spock that:
  1. by the categorical statement of 4:59, that there existed some unnamed persons besides the Messenger, “those charged with authority among you” to whom obedience was made obligatory ;
  2. by the assertion of verse fragments 6:89-90 in full context that “We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it. These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance.”
  3. by the categorical directive of 5:35 to the Muslims: “O ye who believe! Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him,”
  4. and in the light of 5:3 that the religion of Islam had been “perfected” ;
there was a pretty clear logical reason for the presence of “those charged with authority among you” apart from the Messenger, and to whom obedience was made as obligatory by the Holy Qur'an as to the Messenger for all Muslims.
That, by the commandment “those charged with authority among you”, the Author of the Holy Qur'an had very clearly provided to the early Muslims, additional temporal Exemplars, Imams, besides the Prophet of Islam, “Offspring one of the other”, who were meant to continue teaching to the people the “perfected” religion which Prophet Muhammad had brought to them as the Messenger, even after the Messenger was no longer among them. This is a straightforward logical conclusion based upon its Author's own statements. Otherwise, the Holy Qur'an is falsified by verse 4:59 if there were no Imams after the Prophet of Islam!
That, dereferencing the indirect pointers given in the Determinate verses of the Holy Qur'an for the identity of these additional Imams:
  1. by the criterion of 2:124, that the Author promised to choose leaders and Imams only from the seed of Ibrahim after Ibrahim passed his “test”;
  2. by the fact that there is no verse in the Holy Qur'an to suggest that 2:124 is not an exclusive promise to the family of Ibrahim, quite the contrary, the assertion of 3:33-34 indicates the Author's sole criterion for choosing the Imams of mankind, from the limited subset of a single family: “Offspring one of the other” ;
  3. by the benefaction of 33:33, that the Ahlul Bayt were elevated above all others with a thorough spiritual purification ;
  4. and by the commandment of 42:23, that the people were asked to love (in its most superlative form) and honor the Messenger's near of kin ;
naturally lead to identifying them as being only from the Ahlul Bayt.
The above sensible reasoning applied to the verses of the Holy Qur'an to accurately infer their meaning as a system of guidance bequeathed by the Author to mankind, leads to the following straightforward logical deductions:
  1. That, there appeared to be no other competing, or even plausible solution based on the Determinate verses of the Holy Qur'an, to decipher this inquiry in any other direction for the straightforward logic of the matter that these Imams “whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance” had to be “Offspring one of the other”, and also possess the same degree of knowledge and understanding of the Holy Qur'an as the Messenger in order to continue the Messenger's mission of divinely guiding the Muslims as his successor exemplars of the Holy Qur'an without any disagreement or conflict of opinion among each other or with the Messenger. The logic of 4:59 asserted that the three entities can never disagree with each other and in order for that to be true, the successors had to have the same degree of knowledge and understanding of the Holy Qur'an and compliance with it as the Messenger.
  2. That, it appeared to be a sophisticated bootstrap process of Islam whose legal texts had been perfected and completely revealed, to guide a stubborn pagan civilization that had inflicted so much physical warfare upon the Prophet of Islam during his entire tenure of Prophethood, onto the straight path for at least some additional time period after the Messenger had passed away.
  3. That, just as Surah Al-Fatiha verses 1:6 and 1:7 informed the Believers how to beseech the Author to show them how to seek the path of divine guidance, the very narrow separation pointed out in 1:7 between the straight path ( ٱهْدِنَا ٱلصِّرَٰطَ ٱلْمُسْتَقِيمَ ) and wrong path ( غَيْرِ ٱلْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا ٱلضَّآلِّينَ ) of those who go astray – both paths being tread by Believers themselves and not the obvious unbelievers who were easily identified – was very clearly delineated for the early Muslims by bequeathing to them the Ahlul Bayt ( صِرَٰطَ ٱلَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ ) who alone were elevated above all others with a most unusual divine favor of perfect purification in verse 33:33 ( وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا ).
  4. That, the Ahlul Bayt was therefore the crucial differentiator as “The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors” of verse 1:7 given to the early Muslims to protect them from unwittingly following the other Believers who were reprimanded as “on a clearly wrong Path” (Surah Al-Ahzaab, 33:36 ).
  5. That, it was indeed the same protocol for Prophet Muhammad's succession as it had been the Prophetic tradition of all previous Messengers of the Author, to leave designated successors behind to protect and carry-on their mission. Which, in that early bootstrap phase of Islam, was to protect and safeguard the journey of reaching the common goal of forming a single Muslim nation: “Our Lord! make of us Muslims, bowing to Thy (Will), and of our progeny a Muslim nation, bowing to Thy (will);” (Surah Al-Baqara 2:128 )
  6. That, the Ahlul Bayt construct was an additional divine favor given by the Author of the Holy Qur'an to the early Muslims as fulfillment of the prayer that the Author had Himself taught the Believers in Surah Al-Fatiha, and for which the Author also emphatically declared in verse 76:3 “Surely We have shown him the way: he may be thankful or unthankful.”
  7. That, these self-consistent conclusions when applied to empiricism explained reality as it had principally unfolded, most accurately. The goal of verse 2:128 obviously never transpired. The Muslims instead killed the grandson of the Messenger after a tumultuous ad hoc political succession process which tied a Gordian knot on the process of transformation itself. Unless verse 33:36 is wiped off the pages of the Holy Qur'an by some fiendish technology, it is in perpetual Testimony by the Author Himself that some Believers who challenged the Prophet's decisions existed during his own time. The path of these same people so emphatically condemned by the Author in 33:36 as “clearly wrong Path” must have indeed taken over after the demise of the Messenger instead of the path of the rightful heirs from among the Ahlul Bayt, in order for the empirical reality to become manifested as it did. Otherwise, the Holy Qur'an is falsified if it is asserted that the right path was followed in the succession. The empiricism of the slaughtered grandson of the Prophet of Islam is prima facie testimony that this abhorrent destination was reached by only following the “clearly wrong Path”! Because, if this abhorrent destination was reached by following the right path, than the Holy Qur'an lied that such was a good path of “whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance” in Surah Al An'aam 6:90, as it still ended in that same abhorrence. In order for the Holy Qur'an to not be falsified by empiricism, abhorrence can only be reached by following “clearly wrong Path”!
As Mr. Spock well understands, empiricism is the only reality for a left-brained scientist. Any analysis, any model, any theory that goes against explaining reality is just imaginary and useless. Unless the analysis presented here is shown to be seriously flawed, the conclusions reached by the line of reasoning employed by Mr. Spock from the Determinate verses of the Holy Qur'an is remarkable discovery.
It sure explains empirical reality coherently, but most importantly, in self-sufficiency and self-consistency drawn solely from the Holy Qur'an and no other source!
For, as Mr. Spock ascertained perusing the historical record of early Muslim rulers and empires, few Muslims among the masses living under their dominions seemed to have been aware of this rather straightforward logical deduction regarding the Ahlul Bayt, despite knowing, respecting, and also loving the progeny of the Prophet of Islam as some sort of revered objects thought to bring them divine blessings if salutations were continually showered upon them in daily prayers. And despite the fact of this discovery being made only from the Determinate verses of the Holy Qur'an in its آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ texts requiring only a bare modicum of reflection to uncover the matter. And despite their daily recitation of the same Determinate verses of the Holy Qur'an with the most ardent religious fervor!
It was almost as if, observed Mr. Spock, this logically derived conclusion had been calculatingly masked off from the Muslim mind under the ruling paradigms of caliphs and dynastic empires.
Even today, lamentably, few Muslims are aware that this is a conclusion adduced directly from the straightforward statements and simple logic of the Holy Qur'an without making any recourse to vicarious outside sources and doubtful human scribes.
And that mass ignorance of the Muslim public, mused Mr. Spock, perhaps also explained the context for the Messenger's prescient but strange lament recorded in verse 25:30 of Surah Al-Furqaan (quoted above) after the ascent of Islam as the dominant religion of Arabia: 'Then the Messenger will say: “O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.”'
What more can be gleaned from other eligibility criterion established in the Holy Qur'an to better comprehend the attributes and characteristics of “those charged with authority among you” that might enable identifying them more precisely?

Method of Reasoning it out from the Holy Qur'an itself – Taking analysis one step deeper and further
Principle of Inerrancy
The Qur'anic eligibility criterion of 2:124 and 3:33-34 have come only one step closer in the direction of identifying “those charged with authority among you”. That eligibility criterion had indicated to Mr. Spock that the only persons even eligible for this divine appointment of leadership, “those charged with authority among you” to whom obedience is made as obligatory as to the Prophet of Islam, must come from the Ahlul Bayt and no where else. Because, only that singular family automatically includes both the seed of Prophet Ibrahim and the seed of Prophet Muhammad, “Offspring one of the other” as already reasoned by Mr. Spock. That reasoning also lends sensible context to why the people are commanded to love the Prophet's near of kin. Even the way it is propositioned to the people by the Author of the Holy Qur'an, and the choice of Arabic word employed which only loosely translates to “love” in English but is the superlative form of love in Arabic, ٱلْمَوَدَّةَ , is revealing of its motivation: 'Say: “No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.”'
The Prophet is asked by the Author of the Holy Qur'an to demand the love of his near of kin as a gratitude from the people – not as a favor the people are asked to do the Prophet, but in return for the favor done to the people by the Prophet of Islam of being God's Messenger among them!
In other words, it is an obligation put on the people to “love” the Prophet's near of kin in the most superlative degree that the semantic-rich Arabic language can convey for terms of endearment and affection to other human beings!
The logical connection among the many verses outlined above, and making the love and affection of Prophet's near of kin an obligation upon the people, thus making it psychologically easier for the people to accept Exemplars from among the Ahlul Bayt, conclusively indicated to Mr. Spock that “those charged with authority among you” could only emanate from among the Ahlul Bayt. But who among the Ahlul Bayt meets that criterion and are also “Offspring one of the other”?
Mr. Spock, solely on the anvil of pure reasoned logic applied to al-Furqaan (see discussion of verse 25:1, Surah al-Furqaan quoted above), could straightforwardly deduce still additional eligibility and rejection criterion to further narrow down the field for who could possibly meet the Qur'anic criterion to comprise the set of “those charged with authority among you”.
That, as per verse 4:59, any such persons to whom command obedience is extended from the Prophet of Islam as an Exemplar of the Holy Qur'an, must also be Exemplars of the Holy Qur'an themselves! That conclusion is simply inescapable. Because, as Mr. Spock reasoned, they couldn't be just any prominent persons occupying the throne or the pulpit, no matter how learned or respectable, for in order to have command obedience to them as per verse 4:59, they'd have to possess knowledge and understanding of the divine message of the Holy Qur'an to the same level of unerring comprehension as the Prophet of Islam! Otherwise, they could possibly misinform and misguide the people using their own interpretation (despite their best intentions to be accurate). Which, of course, also automatically implied that their teacher could be none among those whom they have been divinely chosen to guide! The logic of that sequence of impeccable deductions is also undeniable. Not surprisingly, the deduction is directly underscored by the Holy Qur'an itself, as in verse fragments 6:89-90 (quoted above): “We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it. These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance.” Allah is their teacher!
Therefore, Mr. Spock continued to reason, these could only be persons who were specially favored by the Author of the Holy Qur'an to also be unerring like the Messenger. Unerringness being the primary logical criterion to being an Exemplar of the Holy Qur'an in order to faithfully convey the message of the Author who claims to be the Creator of Mankind and the “Lord of the Worlds”, to the people without any alterations, additions and subtractions, in full and accurate context, in both letter and spirit. This deduction is also simply logical and straightforward. The verse of purification already analyzed in 33:33 arguably conveys at least some sense of bestowing unerringness, وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا , by keeping away all “rijis”, الرِّجْسَ , from the Ahlul Bayt.
Once again, the Arabic words employed by the Author of the Holy Qur'an to convey to the people what is being kept away from the Ahlul Bayt (all abominations) and for what purpose (purification) are far richer in semantics than can be captured straightforwardly in semantic-starved translated English. As already discussed earlier, and pending further discovery by Mr. Spock of the most accurate meaning of the concept of “Mutaharoon” , الْمُطَهَّرُونَ , of verse 56:79 as the bearers of the secrets of the Holy Qur'an, the reasonable metaphor of privileged access control to those with “security clearance” implied by that verse of Surah Al-Waqia (quoted above), also led to the comprehension that perfect purification from “rijis” of verse 33:33 would necessarily mean perfect unerring knowledge of the Holy Qur'an – knowledge that is necessary and sufficient to guide others only if the guides themselves are without error.
After all, not given to error is a declared gift bestowed by the Author and not an endeavor of man himself to acquire that state of perfect knowledge. Only the Author can confer perfect unerring knowledge of His Divine Message such that He can blithely command Muslims to: “Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you” on par with His own Word because He has also declared in Surah An-Najm: “Your companion does not err, nor does he go astray; Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed”!
I swear by the star when it goes down. (53:1)
وَٱلنَّجْمِ إِذَا هَوَىٰ
Your companion does not err, nor does he go astray; (53:2)
مَا ضَلَّ صَاحِبُكُمْ وَمَا غَوَىٰ
Nor does he speak out of desire. (53:3)
وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ ٱلْهَوَىٰٓ
It is naught but revelation that is revealed, (53:4)
إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْىٌ يُوحَىٰ
The Lord of Mighty Power has taught him, (Holy Qur'an, Surah An-Najm 53:5)
عَلَّمَهُۥ شَدِيدُ ٱلْقُوَىٰ
Verily this is the word of a most honourable Messenger, (81:19)
إِنَّهُۥ لَقَوْلُ رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ
Endued with Power, with rank before the Lord of the Throne, (81:20)
ذِى قُوَّةٍ عِندَ ذِى ٱلْعَرْشِ مَكِينٍ
With authority there, (and) faithful to his trust. (81:21)
مُّطَاعٍ ثَمَّ أَمِينٍ
And (O people!) your companion is not one possessed; (81:22)
وَمَا صَاحِبُكُم بِمَجْنُونٍ
And without doubt he saw him in the clear horizon. (81:23)
وَلَقَدْ رَءَاهُ بِٱلْأُفُقِ ٱلْمُبِينِ
Neither doth he withhold grudgingly a knowledge of the Unseen. (81:24)
وَمَا هُوَ عَلَى ٱلْغَيْبِ بِضَنِينٍ
Nor is it the word of an evil spirit accursed. (81:25)
وَمَا هُوَ بِقَوْلِ شَيْطَٰنٍ رَّجِيمٍ
When whither go ye? (81:26)
فَأَيْنَ تَذْهَبُونَ
Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds: (81:27)
إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرٌ لِّلْعَٰلَمِينَ
(With profit) to whoever among you wills to go straight: (81:28)
لِمَن شَآءَ مِنكُمْ أَن يَسْتَقِيمَ
But ye shall not will except as Allah wills,- the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Holy Qur'an Surah At-Takwir (81:29)
وَمَا تَشَآءُونَ إِلَّآ أَن يَشَآءَ ٱللَّهُ رَبُّ ٱلْعَٰلَمِينَ
Caption The Holy Qur'an establishes the Principle of Inerrancy very clearly and most categorically for the Prophet of Islam in at least two notable places in two Surahs. Surah An-Najm verses 53:1-5 unequivocally declaring the Prophet of Islam inerrant, infallible, and whose speech is naught but revelation that is revealed! And Surah At-Takwir verses 81:19-29 which similarly corrects the misconception among the companions of the Prophet about the utterances of the Messenger of Islam, unequivocally declaring that the Prophet is invested with special power and rank by Allah, that his speech are the words of a most honorable Messenger, and that his words are a Message to (all) the Worlds, to benefit from if they so choose to do so. Only on such categorical basis of inerrancy, is obedience commanded to the Messenger on par with the Author of the Holy Qur'an in verse 4:59 of Surah an-Nisaa', the Verse of Obedience. This same categorical inerrancy is extended to “those vested in authority over you” ( أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ) by the syntactical construction of verse 4:59. No Arabic language linguist with any command of Qur'anic grammar can deny this most profound construction of verse 4:59 which so succinctly extends the semantics of inerrancy from God, to Prophet, both of whom are commanded to be obeyed unequivocally, to some unnamed أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ . The extension of command obedience to the latter is made via the Prophet of Islam in verse 4:59, thus making the same characteristic of inerrancy bestowed upon the Messenger, also available to the “ulul-amar”. If not for the logic of this fact, the أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ would be subject to verse 16:25 of Surah An-Nahl (quoted below), thus making a mockery of verse 4:59. Only “These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance” of verse 6:90 of Surah Al An'aam can ever be exempt from the damnation of verse 16:25! And only these inerrant people whom Allah is asking Muslims to follow, for indeed these have to be inerrant if Allah has directly guided them, can be the “ulul-amar” of verse 4:59! For if these people are not inerrant, then it creates a double jeopardy: Allah is asking Muslims to follow them but since they can make mistakes, foolish people without knowledge will also follow them, and as per 16:25, these people whom Allah is commanding to be followed will be damned! Since that is an absurdity, ergo, Allah can only command inerrant people to be followed! This first subversive hijacking of the religion of Islam, to deny this inerrancy requirement so that anyone could acquire power to caliphate and demand obedience from the Muslim public in the name of verse 4:59, was not orchestrated by the “vulgar propagandist” Bernard Lewis; it was fabricated by the first Muslims themselves, aided and abetted by the Muslim pulpit, and quietly accepted by the public. This first subversion continues to this very day – and it quite pales everything else in comparison that the hectoring hegemons and vulgar propagandists have been able to wreck upon the Muslims!
Qualitatively, observes Mr. Spock, the concept of inerrancy is most clearly, most emphatically, and most unambiguously, asserted in Surah An-Najm verses 53:1-5, and Surah At-Takwir verses 81:19-29 (both quoted above). These are clearly Determinate verses, notes Mr. Spock, self-sufficient, clear, and without any indirections, allegories, and metaphors. To Mr. Spock's mind, it is the most obvious and applicable meaning behind “purification”, “Mutaharoon” , الْمُطَهَّرُونَ , of verse 56:79, and is the underpinning of the blanket command obedience to the Prophet of Islam on par with the Author of the Holy Qur'an in Surah an-Nisaa' 4:59.
Surah An-Najm 53:1-5 further preempts the questions: How is the Messenger communicating the Author's Word unerringly to the people; How is the Messenger being an unerring Exemplar of the Holy Qur'an; How can the Messenger's companions know when to believe and obey the Messenger and when to follow their own opinion on any matter?
Firstly, verse 33:36 has already made it clear that the Messenger's decisions have to be abided by at all times: “It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.”
Secondly, verses 53:1-5 categorically put to bed the capricious speculation that the Messenger is only inerrant in some speech and not in others and therefore people can follow their own opinions in the latter: “Your companion does not err, nor does he go astray; Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed,”.
If that absurd proposition were true, perceptively observed Mr. Spock, it would create a logical conundrum: How could the Messenger's companions ever know when is the Messenger errant and when is he inerrant? They'd obviously have to rely on the Messenger's own word to even know that in the first place. But if the Messenger is capable of making an error, he is also capable of making an error in that determination as well.
If the Messenger is not inerrant in every single matter, every single act, every single speech, every single thought, then even one errancy is sufficient to put his entire Messengership in doubt – due to transmission error for instance. If not infallible, the Messenger could have made an error in a hundred thousand different ways that would remain undetectable by the people and they would be misled by the Messenger masquerading his own fallible opinion for the Author's infallible Word. The Messenger's own word for instance, differentiating what is the Author's Words vs. his own word, could itself be in error if the Messenger is ever capable of even a single error – and that opens the Pandora's box: Is the Holy Qur'an error-free from transmission errors of the Author's Message?
One must not forget that it is the Messenger who is ab initio introducing the Holy Qur'an, and not vice versa. It is the belief of the peoples in the Messenger's truthfulness upon which the Holy Qur'an itself is predicated. Unless the Messenger of the Holy Qur'an is infallible, it puts the words uttered by the Prophet, who alone designated that the specified words belonged to the Author of the Holy Qur'an and not to himself, into jeopardy.
The logic implicit in the Verse of Obedience, verse 4:59, is elegantly simple. Its “AND” conjunction, وَ , to join the three entities to whom obedience is demanded, is at best a sixth grade grammar composition question. The verse is that straightforward in its syntactical parsing. Let's observe the elegance of immutable logic implicitly embedded in its pithy construction.
All three entities in that Verse of Obedience must always agree in order for the verse to not be falsified! The logic itself is straightforward. If the Prophet can make an error, then his will can differ from the Will of the Author of the Holy Qur'an. The Verse of Obedience asserts that that outcome is impossible, by making obedience to the Prophet of Islam akin, at the same precedence level, to obedience to the Author of the Holy Qur'an. The two cannot disagree or there will be a conflict as both must be obeyed; and if they ever disagree then there is no divine religion as God and His Messenger can't even agree on the Message! The same logical reasoning extends to the third entity in verse 4:59, the “ulul-amar”, who derive its authority from the authority of the Messenger due to the way the verse is grammatically structured. The command “obey” is not repeated again for the “ulul-amar”, but the clause is concatenated with the previous “obey” of the Messenger with the “AND” conjunction. If the will of “ulul-amar” ever differs from that of the Messenger, there is again a conflict as both are commanded to be obeyed. As per the semantics of the verse 4:59 implied from its straightforward syntax, the latter two cannot disagree with the Will of the Author of the Holy Qur'an and therefore the Messenger and the “ulul-amar” must also always agree.
Thus it follows that if the Author of the Holy Qur'an is Error-Free, there is no “Oops!” for Him, then so must His Messenger and “ulul-amar” be just as free from their own “oops”; they must not be touched by any “rijis” and always reflect the Will of the Author of the Holy Qur'an in both letter and spirit throughout their respective mission!
That semantic property of the Messenger having his own will exactly reflect the Will of the Author of the Holy Qur'an implicit in the syntactical composition of verse 4:59, is explicitly confirmed in Surah An-Najm verses 53:1-5, and Surah At-Takwir verses 81:19-29, by the Author of the Holy Qur'an! This is complete closure. If the reader is still unable to grammatically parse an “AND” conjunctive clause in a sentence in any language correctly, he or she better return to sixth grade – for that is the level of reading skills necessary to parse the syntax of the Verse of Obedience.
It is only after the trust in the Messenger's veracity and truthfulness is established among his contemporaries, that the people are invited to come to the Holy Qur'an. It is only at that point, after the Messenger has already established his veracity among the peoples, that the Holy Qur'an subsequently confirms, through the speech of the Messenger itself and not via some other independent source, that the Messenger does not even err, always exactly reflecting the Will of the Author of the Holy Qur'an. To not err in his role as the Messenger to mankind means that the Messenger is infallible! The Author of the Holy Qur'an, speaking through the mouth of the Messenger, explicitly confirms and extends the people's earlier adjudication of Muhammad's integrity, by first swearing some unexplainable oath: “I swear by the star when it goes down.” ( وَٱلنَّجْمِ إِذَا هَوَىٰ ), and then categorically confirming to the Messenger's contemporaries: “Your companion does not err, nor does he go astray; Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed”!
Fascinating”, murmurs Mr. Spock to himself at the finesse of this bootstrapping process for launching the Divine Guidance System to mankind with an infallible human Messenger. Once the delivery of the Guidance System is completed to perfection, the Messenger is simply recalled! And man is left to his own devices whether or not he is thankful (Surah Al-insaan 76:3, quoted above) for all that is left behind for him (Surah Hud, 11:86, quoted below).
Mr. Spock ponders on the obvious genius of this bootstrap process. If there is no belief in the Prophet, there is no belief in the Holy Qur'an! Once that belief is established, only then the Holy Qur'an has any meaning. And only at that point does the Author of the Holy Qur'an avers, putting no caveat to His Declaration of the Prophet's infallibility, making His Proclamation unequivocal, categorical, universal, not subject to any doubt or debate, affirming both the success of Muhammad's Messengership of having accurately delivered the Author's Message (Surah Al-Maeda 5:3, quoted above). And also Muhammad's Exemplarship of having accurately explained the Divine Guidance System to his companions and contemporaries for which complete obedience to him was mandated for the believers so that the Author's Message in its entirety would not get distorted or questioned (verse 33:36, quoted above). The lamentable fact, now preserved for all times in verse 33:36 in the Holy Qur'an, that not all believers among his companions were happy with some of the decisions the Prophet of Islam made, and for which they are categorically chastised as being “on a clearly wrong Path.”, makes the import of verse 5:3 increase in magnitude even further. That the Messenger completed his mission to perfection despite not just the opposition from the overt and hidden enemies of Islam respectively referred to as disbelievers and hypocrites in the Holy Qur'an, but also the undercurrent of opposition from among the believers themselves!
Therefore, returning back to the Verse of Obedience, by extending that command delegation authority of 4:59 from the Messenger to also obey “those charged with authority among you”, and for the foolish unthinking masses not ever to be misled by obeying them and the “ulul-amar” be held liable for misleading them as per verse 16:25 of Surah An-Nahl (quoted below), the وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ must logically share the same attributes, the same “security clearance” so to speak, as the Messenger! There is simply no escaping that equivalence logic.
Ergo, it follows that the وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ of the Verse of Obedience must also be inerrant like the Apostle. The Verse of Purification cleansing the Ahlul Bayt to “perfect purification” now delivers some meaningful context for its full understanding. Only the Ahlul Bayt are explicitly being favored with this most potent Divine Favor, of some blanket “perfect purification” no less, وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا , from all “rijis” as their spiritual conditioning for being obeyed without equivocation!
According to the Qur'anic criterion, only such specially favored “purified” persons, who also are the offspring of Ibrahim or Muhammad, can even be eligible to be the subsequent Exemplars, Imams, of the people, لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا , after the Prophet of Islam. Only these favored persons can guide the Muslims immediately after the death of their Prophet on the Straight path of Surah Al-Fatiha. The logical analysis from the criterion established by the Holy Qur'an now confirms that the أُولِي الْأَمْرِ are indeed from the Messenger's own Ahlul Bayt! For how long should they continue guiding the people in the way of the Messenger? The Holy Qur'an is silent on that question, making it an Indeterminate!
The successive application of Qur'anic eligibility criterions had narrowed down the search considerably for Mr. Spock to get him closer to identifying “those charged with authority among you” solely from their Divine characteristics deduced from the Holy Qur'an.
Remarkable what could be learnt from even a convoluted law book when one begins to decipher it accurately rather than rehearse it like a parrot or as the unwitting victim of socialization and perception management! All it had taken was a bit of reflection to tease it all out.
In equivalent terms, Mr. Spock now had the legal definitions, and the beginning of the understanding of what the letter and spirit of the Qur'anic law actually is. That law now needed to be applied to the empirical historical evidence in order to adjudicate, to separate the chaff from the wheat, the usurpers from the legitimate owners – which is the purpose of all law, both divine and man-made.
As Mr. Spock knew, meeting a criterion only determines eligibility. It does not necessarily indicate specific appointment – the specific “choosing”, or “charged”, or “entrusting”, as expressed in verses like: “We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it. These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance. Say: I do not ask you for any reward for it; it is nothing but a reminder to the nations.” (6:89-90 quoted above). The specific “entrusting” requires explicit evidence of appointment – some empirical evidence – not merely the general statements of law unless it specifically names the entrusted. Even the most logical deductions from law is merely theory in the absence of empiricism. Albeit, such reasoning of law and logic is surely necessary as a qualitative criterion; it helps one legally, i.e., objectively, without equivocation, exclude usurpers presumptuous enough to claim false entitlements.
While it may be argued by the learned doctrinaire that after everyone else is excluded by the accurate application of the criterion, those who remain standing are automatically selected as the bearers of that “entrusting”, empirical affirmation as well as commonsense of the laity both demand explicit evidence of specific appointment and clear identification. Especially, when the matter is made contentious and kept locked for centuries within the suffocating ambit of empires which ruled in the name of “God”, and which controlled all the dominant narratives and expositions on Islam. To this very day when Mr. Spock took up the study of the Holy Qur'an millennia later, their legacy evidently endured in the socialization of the Muslim public across cultures and civilizations.
Thus Mr. Spock pondered, if this matter is important to the Author, why aren't the names of “those charged with authority among you” explicitly mentioned in the Holy Qur'an? Why just give the criterion to establish their identity – why not also their names? How are people in subsequent generations to know their identity without relying on the doubtful and partisan pens of the scribes of history? Because, that is the only place to go seeking empirical evidence of such “entrusting” in all subsequent time and space!
Mr. Spock reasoned that unless the Messenger had shirked his duty to the Author of the Holy Qur'an, in which case verse 5:3 would not exist affirming the completion and perfection of the delivery of the message of Islam as a “deen” for mankind, the Messenger must have categorically informed the people of Arabia, the first Muslim generation, of all the unknowns noted above based on the explicit authority delegated to him in 4:59: “Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger,”. Specifically, the Messenger would have informed the people who had the entitlement to be included in that characterization of Ahlul Bayt, أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ , for whom “Allah only wishes to remove all abomination”, and the exact identity of “those charged with authority among you” whom the Muslims had to obey on par with himself.
The people of the time would have also naturally known who the Messenger's near of kin were whom they were asked to love as a mark of gratitude to the Prophet by divine commandment, by the simple virtue of the fact that the Prophet of Islam and his family lived among them his entire life. It is logical to presume, reasoned Mr. Spock, that the Messenger would have been asked by new Muslims coming from elsewhere, on hearing this verse, about the identity of who his near of kin were, and who “those charged with authority among you” were, and the Messenger of course would have hastened to inform them personally in order to discharge his duty faithfully as the Messenger.
How are we to know all that today when new Muslims, un-socialized into their new religion as an inheritance, similarly wish to inquire?
By leaving all this knowledge out of the pristine un-tampered pages of the Holy Qur'an, reflected Mr. Spock, why deny to subsequent generations of Muslims that certainty of knowing about this possibly momentous matter? What was the Author's wisdom in leaving them pitifully at the mercy of the doubtful scribes of history, their partisan pens, and cultural inheritance?
If in fact this was not important for subsequent generations to know, then why not just state so directly in the Holy Qur'an that this matter was only of temporal significance during that early epoch and not worth bickering about in subsequent times? And if it was important, why not just give the names of “those charged with authority among you” directly in the Holy Qur'an and be done with it?
These glaring omissions of the Author in the Holy Qur'an were evidently responsible for the flourishing sectarianism millennia later. And all indications still continued to lead to the same inescapable conclusion already noted earlier, that these ambiguities were deliberate and evidently well thought out by the Author as a system design of Islam for divine guidance to all mankind.
Mr. Spock muses how he could learn the precise identity of “those charged with authority among you” without the ease of reliance on the partisan narratives of history to which Muslims had fallen victim. Having browsed sufficient sociological context, Mr. Spock wanted to focus solely on what, and how much, did the Holy Qur'an itself communicate on the question which appeared to be an Indeterminate from the outset.
Were there other straightforward verses in the Holy Qur'an which enabled and assisted in their further identification? Without the correct context for the verses which spoke in indirections and in unknowns, as verse 4:59 did, how was one to even identify such verses that spoke to their identity? Perhaps there were some other incontrovertible facts in recorded history, despite the partisanship of scribes and imperial craftsmanship – like the incontrovertible fact of the slaughter of the Prophet's progeny by the Ummayad army already cited above to which there can be no doubt that it transpired in history – which assisted in unequivocally affirming their identity? It persistently begged the question that why had the Author of the Holy Qur'an relied on the doubtful scribes of history to complete their identification – if that identification was of any significance to subsequent generations after the first crop of Muslim?
Mr. Spock began to realize that this puzzle was almost akin to solving a system of linear equations with several unknown variables, but which could only be solved if the number of equations were at least equal to the number of unknown variables. However, as already explored in depth in Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization, and alluded above by verses like:
  • One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams”, (17:71) ;
  • If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.” (5:48) ;
  • And for every nation there is a messenger. And when their messenger cometh (on the Day of Judgment) it will be judged between them fairly, and they will not be wronged.” (10:47) ;
the operative principle “so strive as in a race in all virtues” arguably indicated many solutions, not just one, which could satisfy these equations!
It appeared to Mr. Spock that the Author had very astutely, and quite sensibly, accounted for socialization biases by offering mankind the core guidance: “so strive as in a race in all virtues”, and the conflict resolution principle when they differed: “The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.”
Mr. Spock realized that he had made substantial progress already, and thus makes the assumption that it must be true that this puzzle of pertinent guidance is completely soluble by man in its cipher form, taking the Holy Qur'an at its word. Otherwise, he reasoned, the entire edifice of the guidance system to mankind proclaimed by the Holy Qur'an falls flat on its face. It becomes relegated to mean whatever anyone in power wants it to mean, or can write the dominant narrative for it which survives through history.
As per the first classification of the Holy Qur'an by Mr. Spock, as a cipher message of the Author to mankind that had to be decoded correctly, and therefore, was not open to individual interpretation or the recovery of the singular plaintext could be in error, Mr. Spock saw it being self-evident, that the correct meaning, interpretation, and understanding of the verses of the Holy Qur'an, in addition from the Prophet of Islam, and from the Holy Qur'an itself, could only be taken from these designated but unnamed persons as per the Author's declaration of obedience to them in 4:59. And not from just any pretentious scholar gurgling Arabic, or legitimately or illegitimately occupying the throne or pulpit of Islam.
This logical conclusion, argued Mr. Spock, is most significant and the key to the entire matter.
However, if, “those charged with authority among you” had been thrust aside or ignored after the death of the Messenger, their guidance not sought, not recorded, and not followed, then all the evil which followed from that first transgression of the first few generation of Muslims fourteen centuries ago accumulated into the greater whole of sectarianism and dynastic empires that have existed ever since. In other words, their crime was not mere disobedience, but a supreme crime as it contained within it the seeds of all the evil that followed, leaving Muslims today, as yesterday, a pathetic people mired in rituals, schisms, sectarian blood-shed, kingdoms, and servility to empire.
The fact that hardly anyone among the Muslim public outside of their myopic socialization biases is even aware of there being some specially designated (but unnamed) persons in the Holy Qur'an in addition to the Messenger who are meant to be its Exemplars after the Prophet of Islam, and obedience to them is made as obligatory as to the Prophet of Islam, lends credence to the logical surmising that “those charged with authority among you” must have been shunted aside by those coveting the highest pulpit of Islam.
It explains the empirical observation that today each Muslim understands the same verses slightly differently. There are, and were, too many “imams” interpreting and explaining the Holy Qur'an by their own fancy and judgment, even vested interest, having lost or ignored the explanation and interpretation by its authentic stewards! Despite the plaintext warning to the people to be wary of such “imams”: “One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams” (see verse 17:71 quoted above). Mr. Spock recalled with marvel the foresight of the Author of the Holy Qur'an: “Surely We have shown him the way: he may be thankful or unthankful.” (see verse 76:3 quoted above)
Given the documented reality of the ensuing power-struggle immediately after the death of the Prophet of Islam which pitted the family of the Prophet of Islam against the first Muslim caliphs, and the sociological context surrounding the events of power and its vile inflection in the name of God which culminated in the slaughter of the progeny of the Prophet of Islam and the emergence of the most abhorrent dynastic empires that led the Muslim world to its seven hundred years of unsurpassed global ascendency among much internecine state violence, Mr. Spock realizes that objectively extracting incontrovertible evidence of the appointment of “those charged with authority among you” in order to establish their clear identity from the historical records of imperial craftsmanship and outright suppression for two hundred years, would be akin to extracting a weak signal from a vast sea of background noise in communication theory in electrical engineering!
Mr. Spock recognizes that he would have to be a forensic detective in order to recreate the fuller contexts for the understanding of the largely contextless verses of the Holy Qur'an. He also recognizes however that such a detective work would surely identify the principal first cause of dissension among the Muslims which had led to all the subsequent multiplication into sectarianism. Identification and extraction of that principal first cause could be key to uniting the Muslims once again as they once were under the single banner of أُمَّةً مُسْلِمَةً during the lifetime of the Prophet of Islam. Mr. Spock quickly pushes this overarching puzzle on his evaluation stack.
Mr. Spock's puzzle evaluation stack is growing rapidly with his increasing understanding of the complexity of the issues... For, indeed, the narratives which survived past those early period are clearly partisan, with scribes and rulers taking sides as already noted. Thus the richer context for the verses of the Holy Qur'an is now deeply mired in this blood-drenched early history of the Muslims and cannot be straightforwardly extracted merely by perusing the early literature.
As is the case for all such histories, even including the contemporary history examined in this volume under the orchestration of the Mighty Wurlitzer, myths get naturally amplified by successive generation of scribes, and facts and factors inconvenient to their narratives, or to their rulers, are naturally attenuated as already explained above leading to a crippled epistemology for those who study things on faith or without any forensic talent.

Impact Analysis
In summation of the aforementioned discussion before embarking on its impact analysis, so far, Mr. Spock, well-read in both the sociological histories of empires and their social engineering of the public, has recognized that all works outside of the Holy Qur'an (including the Holy Qur'an itself) have been composed in sociological contexts and not in an abstract or sterile vacuum free from the influence of the ruling paradigms. And that these sociological contexts are most essential to fully identify and perceptively comprehend, especially when the early history of the advent of religion of Islam after its Messenger's demise is soaked in so much internecine state violence and obfuscation. To understand those outside written works therefore, Mr. Spock ascertains that the full sociological context under which all these books on Islam were originally compiled, must first be understood – as facts in a void can convey any meaning its compiler wants.
Therefore, Mr. Spock decides that facts alone without the context that created them will not be sufficient to establish clues to resolving the Indeterminates of the Holy Qur'an. That it would also be necessary to cradle facts in the rich sociological context and the narratives of history which caused the strange paradoxical artifact: that the Author of the Holy Qur'an chose not to protect its Exemplar's Sunnah within the Holy Qur'an itself but to which it issued command obedience as per 4:59.
Furthermore, that such historical facts would have to be not just cradled, but forensically cradled in the sociological realities of realpolitik forces and often unrecorded motivations which gave birth to those facts, and to their narratives, in order to fully comprehend them.
And Mr. Spock immediately surmises that as the evidence of history in every civilization indicates, these narratives too are invariably the sectarian narratives of partisans taking sides. Historians, compilers, exegeses writers, essayists and poets, all taking sides, omitting and attenuating facts and contexts inconvenient either to their narrative, or to their socialization bias, or to the sanction of the rulers under whom they scribed, while amplifying myths and opinions conducive to their narrative and socialization outlook whereby the victors ruled creating the facts on the ground, and the victims mourned exaggerating and perhaps mythologizing the victimizing circumstances in cultural memory for centuries that might pale the Homer's Iliad by comparison. This natural cause and effect relationship of history, narrated by those most affected by it, on either side of it, becoming the de facto source of exposition and explanation of the Indeterminates of the Holy Qur'an as soon as one stepped out of its boundaries to figure out the unknowns.
The divine irony (or perhaps the divine comedy) poignantly strikes Mr. Spock's analytical mind: Mortal fallible pens seemingly completing a Book whose Author claims it is “Perfection” (5:3) and “A Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds.” (56:80).
To Mr. Spock's mind, prima facie logic alone would dictate not to use the fallible pens to parse the Infallible pen of the Author Who claims Itself to be Perfection Incarnate and the “Lord of the Worlds”. The Author of the Holy Qur'an is so assertive of the perfection of His Word that He asserts repeatedly, as in verse 2:2, that it is a Book in which there is no doubt, and a guidance to only those pious of heart who earnestly seek it. So why then use the fallible pen of scribes which is always full of doubt, to gain comprehension of the Infallible Words of the Author for which the Author asserts there is no doubt?
But the same Author has also, evidently by design, practically necessitated the very use of fallible pens by virtue of verses like 4:59 which create importance for the Sunnah of the Prophet of Islam on par with the Qur'an and to the obedience to it, but not recording those Sunnah within the pages of the Holy Qur'an and leaving the verses of the Qur'an as Indeterminates. This is a paradox in the Holy Qur'an.
This is why, Mr. Spock logically concludes, the Muslims from the very beginning had become preoccupied with the temporal, and often reactionary sociological contexts, deliberately drowning the holistic and timeless text of the Holy Qur'an by insisting on partisan hadiths, tafseers, and narratives of history penned in the fallible ink and cultural memories largely due to commandments like 4:59 which made the Holy Qur'an subject to easy abuse.
The Muslims, it became evident to Mr. Spock, through the subsequent generations after the first, had paradoxically become its unwitting victims because they had insisted on following the commandment 4:59 of the Holy Qur'an to the letter, without understanding its accurate import in the larger context of the entire message of the Holy Qur'an. And they used the scribes of history literally, along their own socialization axis, becoming putty in the hands of rulers who could trivially inflict internecine violence for political expediency upon those who fell out of favor.
The Muslims had not bothered to elevate themselves beyond the baggage of their respective narrow socialization which often leads to close-mindedness, and partisanship.
Their collective understanding of Islam in the successive Muslim empires and subsequent servile civilizations had therefore become ossified in the imperial narratives of history expounded from the “Roman pulpit”, and in reaction to it in its many “Protestant movements”, rather than become progressive and egalitarian based on the sublimity of its timeless doctrines principled in the Holy Qur'an. What had been intended as a sublime force of transformation for the evolution of societies from its barbarisms and exploitations to an enlightened state of mankind's existence over time, had become the force majeure for building absolutist enduring empires instead.
The Muslims had inexorably fallen victim to the same sort of corruption which was emphatically admonished by the Holy Qur'an about their cousins, the Jews and the Christians – the persistent distortion of the Author's message delivered to the Abrahamic seed!
Except, in the case of the Muslims, they continued to claim, in every epoch, to possess the Author's Message in its unadulterated most pristine cipher form. And demonstrably so. But Muslims could neither decipher nor implement it effectively because of the hijacking that the Holy Qur'an itself permitted by virtue of it being a cipher-text rather than a straightforward plaintext!
Of course, the aliasing of proper nouns in the Holy Qur'an into common nouns had been, and continues to be, the most common and obvious subversion of the Holy Qur'an by Muslims and Non-Muslims alike. For example, as already discussed in Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization, Muslims using the proper noun “Imam” as a common noun for anointing anyone with it, whereas the Holy Qur'an explicitly used لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا to anoint only the Author's own favored ones with that station of leadership among mankind. Similarly, as also already deconstructed in considerable depth in “Hijacking the word 'Islam' for Mantra Creation”, Western demagogues inimical to Islam, like Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington, overloading the proper noun “Islam” to designate a kitchen sink of semantics, whereas the Holy Qur'an used الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا to explicitly designate a “deen” which Allah “perfected”.
The use of Indeterminates in the Holy Qur'an had only facilitated such calculated hijacking, permitting the easy fixing of these values by anyone. The brilliant could subvert it easily for their power-interests to build empires. And the foolish remained socialized in it to find justification for whatever sect they grew up in!
Even its very first chapter, Surah Al-Fatiha, which Mr. Spock observed was parroted daily by all Muslims who reverently bowed in prayer, was a mini cipher (see its examination in Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization).
The Holy Qur'an was certainly turning out to be nothing like the plaintext Bible, the holy book of Captain Kirk of the Starship Enterprise, lamented Mr. Spock. He recalled the fluency and the ease with which his human captain sometimes quoted from it to teach him interesting lessons in selflessness of the most sublime in human endeavors. Mr. Spock had always found these lessons perplexing due to his logic-only rational mind. It is interesting to footnote in passing however, that in this 1960s' fable that was turned into movies in the 1980s and 1990s, Mr. Spock gave his own life selflessly in one of these episodes to save his spaceship in the Genesis project, making the rational irrefutable argument to his captain's chagrin and intense grief that in order for the Starship to continue its endless mission of discovery of the cosmos, the life of one over the life of many is a purely logical decision.
In any case, Mr. Spock pondered that how could this blatant self-contradiction, a macro puzzle, a paradox of the Holy Qur'an, of the Holy Qur'an ostensibly facilitating its own subversion, have escaped the acumen of Muslim sages throughout the ages?
More pertinently, why had it not been resolved all this time?

How Religion of Islam was Transformed into Empire
To Mr. Spock's logical mind, if conundrums and paradoxes borne of pure logic of the matter cannot be resolved with logic alone, they remain perpetual conundrums, and therefore, always ripe for subjective interpretation and harvesting for narrow interests. Here was the principal reason, within the text of the Holy Qur'an itself, which continually leads to seeking and following material outside the confines of the Authorship of the Holy Qur'an. And no Muslim sage is inclined to address it!
Perceptive as he is, the motivation to not solve this paradox, especially during the heyday of Muslim civilizations, is now readily apparent to Mr. Spock. This persistent puzzle of the Holy Qur'an to Mr. Spock is indicative of both, the deep sociological contexts which cradled the message of Islam from its earliest inception to the present day, and its pathological transformation into enduring empires. As Mr. Spock dispassionately observed, the religion of Islam had been morphed into an unsurpassed absolutist system for the exercise of imperial power by Muslim rulers. Anyone on the throne and the pulpit could interpret the verses of the Holy Qur'an any which way they liked simply by making recourse to any outside text written by themselves, or by their own favored scribes, or to their own favored narrative of history. By thus fixing values of its Indeterminates to suit their narrow self-interests, it was easy to hijack Islam to one's primacy advantage.
The intoxicating, almost mesmerizing, effect the Holy Qur'an has upon the Muslim masses makes it especially easy to manipulate and control them by distorting the largely contextless verses of the Holy Qur'an and giving these any meaning that is expedient. Promising the masses Heaven in After-life for their sufferance of hell right here in this life. A messiah in the future who would free them of their misery and establish justice and equity if only they were patient in their afflictions and injustices here, and relegated themselves to dutifully mind their religious rituals instead. And, instead of challenging, either participated in, or suffered in silence, the kingly opulence and tyrannical adventures of their rulers as it was indeed God who had appointment them the absolute sovereign of the lands. After all, didn't the Holy Qur'an unequivocally command Muslims to obey: “those charged with authority among you”, and “to be patient” in their suffering!!
While musing this pathocracy of social control, Mr. Spock recalled a global primacy strategist's rational observations of absolutist empires which most aptly captured the global ascendence of these despotic Muslim empires:
The earlier empires were built by aristocratic political elites and were in most cases ruled by essentially authoritarian or absolutist regimes. The bulk of the populations of the imperial states were either politically indifferent or, in more recent times, infected by imperialist emotions and symbols. The quest for national glory, "the white man's burden," "la mission civilisatrice," not to speak of the opportunities for personal profit—all served to mobilize support for imperial adventures and to sustain essentially hierarchical imperial power pyramids.”[8]
The Muslim empires, with their absolute sovereignty ruthlessly secured in the name of Islam's “God” from all domestic challenge, became great patrons of the arts, the sciences, and the humanities. They become the first to bring the translations of the works of the Classical civilizations into Arabic, from where it reached the Western shores centuries later. The enterprising and talented ones among the Muslim populations labored under the parallel personal motivations to impel empire forward as already explored in the Fable of the Bees for the modern contemporary times under Western empires. The pertinent verses from the Holy Qur'an that encouraged astronomy, the study of the cosmos, in fact the study of all creation (as in verses 67:3-4 of Surah Al-Mulk which were also quoted by Dr. Abdus Salam when receiving his shared 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics and which precisely underscores this very point), and indeed the boundless pursuit of all forms of knowledge ( “and say: My Lord! Increase me in knowledge.” Surah Ta-Ha, 20:114 , Arabic: وَقُلْ رَّبِّ زِدۡنِىۡ عِلۡمًا ), helped propel Muslim civilizations to the forefront of global supremacy on all fronts in their heyday just as it has done for American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives in this day and age. Except, in the development of political thought.
That necessary re-discovery had to await the Renaissance during the Middle Ages in the West, to finally end the reign of their own pulpit-led supreme Dark Ages that had principally been seeded in the hijacking of Christianity as the official state religion of the Roman Empire centuries earlier (in approx. 300 AD under Emperor Constantine).
Why had such Renaissance against the Muslim pulpit's hijacking of Islam likewise centuries earlier, right after the death of its Prophet, similarly not transpired in the Muslim civilizations despite their own un-challenged global supremacy of vast territories on Earth for a period far exceeding the Roman Empire? Considering that the Muslims were the first to be exposed to Greek classics and to their Classical Hellenic culture of political self-empowerment (such as republic, democracy), egalitarian ideas of social justice (such as Solon's, considered among the ten greatest law givers of Athenian antiquity according to Plutarch's Lives), etc., for these socio-political ideas to have never taken root in absolutist Muslim civilizations which likewise ruled dynastically with an iron-fist in the name of Islam's “God”, while they borrowed liberally from Hellenic math, sciences, and military warfare methods to become the supreme empires of their time, is revealing in and of itself. If one simply compares that state of affairs to the political indifference of the learned in society today, all matters become patently obvious.
Of the hundreds of living Nobel laureates in the sciences and humanities in America and the Western world, how many learned minds rose to challenge the empire's narratives of 9/11, or called it for its prima facie enactment, an inside job, or showed any skepticism when BBC reported the destruction of WTC-7 the very same evening a full twenty-five minutes before it nearly free-fall collapsed into its own footprints with no airliner ever hitting it, or forensically deconstructed the so called Catastrophic Terrorism of 9/11 to uncover and publicly protest that it was to launch imperial mobilization for one-world government?
These most brilliant high achieving minds of America, like the rest of the American masses caught between their daily bread and circuses, watched their beloved Western world descend into police-states, lose their vaunted civil liberties, stood meekly at airports first with their own shoes in hands, and subsequently with their private parts in TSA's hands, all in the name of outright idiotic and villainous absurdities. To this scribe's last count as of the year 2012 AD, exactly zero have arisen to call America's War on Terror for what it is, or handed in their vaunted Nobel prize in protest to its open barbarianism upon the 'lesser peoples'. This silence and show of political indifference of the supposed “learned” of Western society during the exercise and expansion of Western hegemony is not a singularity. It is the norm under every empire from time immemorial. One cannot stand tall against the tyranny of ruling interests and thrive at the same time.
Mr. Spock perceptively observed with the precision of a sociologist and science officer, that a revolutionary religion, intended primarily for the transformation of man – both men and women – into the perfectman submitting wholly to its Creator “bowing to Thy (Will)”, and society into the perfect egalitarian system of social justice and sublime morality (as for instance had been noted by Solon in Athens a thousand years before Islam (Ibid.), and most succinctly outlined in Surah al-Asr, chapter 103 of the Holy Qur'an), had been trivially transformed on the one hand into the opiate of the people waiting for Allah, and on the other into a natural force for imperial mobilization throughout the ages!
No system of absolute rule, marveled Mr. Spock, has been able to surpass this tortuous mass control of the public mind that could so trivially persuade people to accept and enjoy their own servitude with just the mere promise of the Hereafter which not even the rulers, but their almighty God had undertaken to fulfill. The rulers got a free ride with no promises of their own to keep! Whereas today, a lot more sophistication and technical expertise, not to mention considerable expense and talent, is brought to bear to achieve the same effect under “democracy” (see The Mighty Wurlitzer), and a hell of a lot of bayonets under Stalinist like dictatorship.
This has been the real prime-mover behind the villainous history of the oft glorified Muslim empires of the past, where the first caliphate came into existence after the death of the Prophet of Islam under a cloud of dissent from the progeny of the Prophet of Islam, where the first Ummayad Empire came into existence by killing the progeny of the Prophet of Islam, where the follow-on Abbasside empire came into existence on the pretext of rectifying the wrong done by the Ummayads but then took over the imperial mobilization from where the previous tyrannical empire had left off. The Mongols conquered Eurasia, assimilated with the local population, and spawned the two new Muslim Empires of the Ottomans in Central Asia, and the Mughals in Persia and India. This is what Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote in The Grand Chessboard of their precursors, the Mongols' phenomenal conquest of Eurasia which gave birth to these Muslim empires:
To find a somewhat closer analogy to today's definition of a global power, we must turn to the remarkable phenomenon of the Mongol Empire. Its emergence was achieved through an intense struggle with major and well-organized opponents. Among those defeated were the kingdoms of Poland and Hungary, the forces of the Holy Roman Empire, several Russian and Rus' principalities, the Caliphate of Baghdad, and later, even the Sung dynasty of China.
Genghis Khan and his successors, by defeating their regional rivals, established centralized control over the territory that latterday scholars of geopolitics have identified as the global heartland, or the pivot for world power. Their Eurasian continental empire ranged from the shores of the China Sea to Anatolia in Asia Minor and to Central Europe (see map). It was not until the heyday of the Stalinist Sino-Soviet bloc that the Mongol Empire on the Eurasian continent was finally matched, insofar as the scope of centralized control over contiguous territory is concerned.
The Roman, Chinese, and Mongol empires were regional precursors of subsequent aspirants to global power. In the case of Rome and China, as already noted, their imperial structures were highly developed, both politically and economically, while the widespread acceptance of the cultural superiority of the center exercised an important cementing role. In contrast, the Mongol Empire sustained political control by relying more directly on military conquest followed by adaptation (and even assimilation) to local conditions.
Mongol imperial power was largely based on military domination. Achieved through the brilliant and ruthless application of superior military tactics that combined a remarkable capacity for rapid movement of forces with their timely concentration, Mongol rule entailed no organized economic or financial system, nor was Mongol authority derived from any assertive sense of cultural superiority. The Mongol rulers were too thin numerically to represent a self-regenerating ruling class, and in any case, the absence of a defined and self-conscious sense of cultural or even ethnic superiority deprived the imperial elite of the needed subjective confidence.
In fact, the Mongol rulers proved quite susceptible to gradual assimilation by the often culturally more advanced peoples they had conquered. Thus, one of the grandsons of Genghis Khan, who had become the emperor of the Chinese part of the great Khan's realm, became a fervent propagator of Confucianism; another became a devout Muslim in his capacity as the sultan of Persia; and a third became the culturally Persian ruler of Central Asia.
It was that factor—assimilation of the rulers by the ruled because of the absence of a dominant political culture—as well as unresolved problems of succession to the great Khan who had founded the empire, that caused the empire's eventual demise. The Mongol realm had become too big to be governed from a single center, but the solution attempted—dividing the empire into several self-contained parts—prompted still more rapid local assimilation and accelerated the imperial disintegration. After lasting two centuries, from 1206 to 1405, the world's largest land-based empire disappeared without a trace.” --- Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, pgs. 15-17
Leaving behind their Muslim legatees, the Ottoman and the Mughal Empires. Little changed with their assimilation by the conquered peoples, as now these new absolutist regimes of the assimilated ruling class exercised ruthless power in the name of the same “God” of Islam, rather than formerly as the Central Asian Mongol barbarians.
The Ottomans and the Mughals took imperial suzerainty from where the Ummayads, the Abbassides, and the Fatimides had left off, abusing Islam exactly as their predecessors, to inflict social control upon the masses in the name of “God”, and to infect the public with their own 'la mission civilisatrice' which supported imperial objectives, now largely held in check by the burgeoning European empire. And it is now, the contemporary history in the making of the Anglo Saxon's drive for a world government empire.
All principally enabled by the fracture lines among the Muslims themselves because of their slightly different theological understanding of the Holy Qur'an due to the open-ended interpretation of the verses of the Holy Qur'an that is possible, leading to losing the original message intended by the Author for the guidance to man. Once the Author's message is lost to individual interpretation, all the evil follows when the fault lines thus created fall into the grubby hands of Supermen and Machiavelli who know how to diabolically harness them in the name of “God” and “imperial mobilization”.
One can see perfect contemporary examples of the West's harvesting of Islam in Zbigniew Brzezinski crafting the Afghan Mujahideens in yesteryear as already examined in Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization. And today, in the crafting of 'militant Islam' vs. 'moderate Islam' Hegelian Dialectic, to create the “revolutionary times” necessary to seed the transformation into one-world government empire as already examined in The Mighty Wurlitzer.
It is only that, the abuse of the religion of Islam as an unmatched force for absolute social control in the name of “God”, and not its lofty purpose, concluded Mr. Spock, which led the Muslims to dizzying heights of unsurpassed empires for over seven hundred years, from 700 AD to 1400 AD. Muslim empires limped along, often in the throes of mediocrity, in competition with the rapidly burgeoning Western hegemony in Europe for another five hundred years, until they were finally put out of their misery by an even more diabolical foe that had now surpassed the dynastic Muslim rulers in the arts and sciences of societal control and behavior manipulation.
The authority of “God” was replaced with that of “Democracy” (“We, the People”), and the pulpit by the Mighty Wurlitzer (wily mechanisms for the perception-management of “We, the People”).

Failure to Transform Society Towards Islam's Highest Ideals
Like spiritual Christianity, spiritual Islam has indubitably played a transformative role in the life of countless individuals. As captured most ably by the nineteenth century French novelist, Victor Hugo, for the metanoia inducing power of the Christian faith in his novel Les Miserable, the same narrative qualitatively captures the impact of Islam on the spirituality of Muslim individuals as well. Overcoming one's own inner demons, base desires, external tragedies and horrors that can easily transform man into a remorseless soul, “zulamat” in the Qur'anic language, is not only the purposeful guidance of the religion of Islam, but also its lofty attainment in every epoch Muslims have lived on earth. Despite living in the most enslaving societies under the most tyrannical governments made of despotic rulers and absolutist kings in the short fourteen and half century history of Islam, the faith undeniably created the bond of religious fraternity and socialization wherever it spread, fostering a common ethos borne of common religious rituals, giving different Muslim societies their distinctive common tenor often called “Islamic” civilization.
But that's not all there is to the religion of Islam. Why has the “deen” as “perfected” and “completed” in verse 5:3 of the Holy Qur'an, pondered Mr. Spock, failed to transform any Muslim society, without exception, into a just and egalitarian society as is advocated in the Scripture, rather than be continually hijacked by pious sounding despots for empire building and “imperial mobilization”? Ad hoc caliphates to dynastic kingdoms lasting centuries is also the undeniable official record of Muslim history. An absolute ruler always ruled the dominions where Islam was preached, with an iron-fist no less, and so long as his rule was not interfered with, and people paid their taxes and obeyed the throne in everything and anything it wanted, including making wars and peace, it was fine to pursue social, cultural, technical and scientific attainments by individuals. The throne even patronized such activities. And Muslims excelled in these in their seven hundred year dominance of earth, under full servitude to the ruling “gods” in power!
Mr. Spock recalled the statement of yet another twentieth century sociologist and political scientist, a “leading Western scholar of Islam”, professor Bernard Lewis of Princeton University, capturing the meteoric rise and dominance of “Islam” (see Hijacking the word “Islam” for Mantra Creation) in the following words, and it puzzled Mr. Spock why all that was even true despite there being no “empire” and no servitude to “gods” in the Religion of Islam:
It is difficult to generalize about Islam. To begin with, the word itself is commonly used with two related but distinct meanings, as the equivalents both of Christianity, and Christendom. In the one sense, it denotes a religion, as system of beliefs and worship; in the other, the civilization that grew up and flourished under the aegis of that religion. The word Islam thus denotes more than fourteen centuries of history, a billion and a third people, and a religious and cultural tradition of enormous diversity. ... For more than a thousand years, Islam provided the only universally acceptable set of rules and principles for the regulation of public and social life. Even during the period of maximum European influence, in the countries ruled or dominated by European imperial powers as well as in those that remained independent, Islamic political notions and attitudes remained a profound and pervasive influence.” --- Bernard Lewis, Crisis of Islam – Holy War and Unholy Terror, pgs. 1 and 13
The key to that puzzle is in the text of the Holy Qur'an itself.
The very concept of spiritual guidance in the Holy Qur'an is addressed to a very narrow audience, those who approach it with a “cleansed heart” (see detailed exposition in Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization). The rest are destined to be misled, as per the many admonishing proclamations in the Holy Qur'an.
But, as Mr. Spock already understood by way of considerable empiricism, no society, from time immemorial, possesses such wonderfully pious public with a “cleansed heart” in the majority! “Hegemony is as old as mankind”[9]; and so is its power to corrupt and to co-opt: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”[10] And their core instrument of extracting obedience from the public mind is Machiavellian political science. That succeeds primarily because, as is also an observed empirical fact, the general mass intelligence among human beings is rather low, irrespective of the civilization and epoch they belong to. A human philosopher had once captured this empiricism with wit: “Most people would rather die than think; in fact, they do so”.[11]
Therefore, questioned Mr. Spock, how is this guidance of the Holy Qur'an which is initially meant for only a small minority among the public who are required to both reason and think, and also bring a “cleansed heart” to bear upon the divine message, supposed to transform the majority of the people in any society?
One brimming with unbridled optimism may perhaps blindly speculate that the first seeds of moral enlightenment among the minority will eventually germinate and percolate to the rest of society – the evolution of societies under Islam to their more egalitarian and sublime state of equity, social justice, and spiritual ascendency – just like it arguably was on such a transforming path in the most backward piece of geography on earth at the time. In the desert of Arabia, when the Prophet of Islam established his ruling state in the small oasis called Medina during his own lifetime.
But not Mr. Spock, who had in fact been quite bored reading Pollyanna from the ship's library. He could already perceive that these are wonderfully lofty ideals of Islam no doubt, just like its predecessors' the Ten Commandments brought by Prophet Moses to the 'chosen peoples', and the 'love thy neighbor' Gospel brought by Prophet Jesus to their legatees subsequently known as Christians. None has transpired yet! But all have succeeded in leaving high-minded platitudes on elevated bookshelves of over 5 billion peoples who today claim to follow the Abrahamic creeds!
Practically speaking, reasoned Spock, if the masses are mainly unthinking creatures of habit, socialization, and driven largely by their own narrow self-interests, what does transformation really mean, apart from merely implanting new habits and rituals among the masses by social engineering – no cleansed hearts needed for that. Indeed, Islam had succeeded in mainly accomplishing the transformation of rituals. The fact that dynastic kingdoms had cropped up among Muslims within sixty years of the death of the Messenger of Islam, and the Muslims had become embroiled in internecine warfare within twenty years of his death, and even the immediate aftermath of his death saw ad hoc political successions in the rapidly developing new ruling state with the Muslim public accepting any and all travesty in silence, including the heinous killing of the family of the Prophet of Islam despite explicit commandment in the Holy Qur'an to love them (Say: “No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.”, Surah Ash-Shura 42:23), speaks of the Herculean task of reformation from darkness to light taken up by the Holy Qur'an and its religion Islam. The empirical record thus far appeared rather poor. And fourteen hundred years after the advent of Islam, the Muslims appeared to have become the most backward, the most easily manipulated, and the most easily colonized people. Just the fact that the ubiquitous “war on terror” in the twenty-first century is being waged at the expense of Muslims and Islam to create world police-state with much of the Muslim world bewildered at what's happening to them, brings veracity to these words.
Mr. Spock is well aware that according to sociologists' empirical study of human societies still existing in the twenty-first century, at best less than 2% of the people think, about 8% think they think, and 90% wouldn't be caught dead thinking! In fact, stupider the masses, more gullibly they are led to any destination by the Machiavelli with social engineering, and easily occupied with bread and circuses – and that has been a fact from time immemorial. Islam failed to alter that reality. That's just a fact, as unpleasant as it may be to swallow for Muslims.
Moreover, how can the Holy Qur'an even begin to counter that empirical reality among the wider populations of human beings with its platitudinous cleansed heart recipe? The way the Holy Qur'an is structured, that recipe principally requires the ability to think and to reason, like Mr. Spock's mind, while overcoming the chains of socialization and indoctrination inflicted upon the public from birth, in order to fully decipher the message of the Holy Qur'an.
But if not more than 2% of any human society realistically has such rational capacity at this stage of their human development on earth, as is empirically visible, genuine heart cleansing can only remain un-implementable. This automatically implies that holding diversity of views and remaining fragmented is the only practical outcome for such primitive societies, leaving the incredible statements of the Holy Qur'an to ultimately prevail to explain that empiricism:
  • If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people,” ;
  • (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.” ;
  • If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” ;
  • Surely We have shown him the way: he may be thankful or unthankful.” ;
  • One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams” ;
  • 'Then the Messenger will say: “O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.”' ;
  • This is a people that have passed away; they shall have what they earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to answer for what they did.” (all cited above)
As evidenced in the verses above, the Author of the Holy Qur'an asserts to have fully empowered individuals, societies, and civilizations from time immemorial with His Divine Guidance System whether they be thankful or unthankful. And will hold all human beings to account for its implementation in their own lives and their own times in the company of their respective Imams. Be that as it may, the implementation of the Author's Divine Guidance System is nevertheless made even more impractical by the meta paradox of the Holy Qur'an, that the hijacking of its understanding has been enabled by the Holy Qur'an itself. Even the smartest minds in sophisticated societies have to deal with the challenge of accurately deciphering the Holy Qur'an due to its Indeterminates!
But the twin of that paradox is still another paradox – that perhaps it was this first paradox which enabled the Holy Qur'an to even survive in its cipher form as a pristine un-tampered text through the vicissitudes of empires built upon the abuse of the religion of Islam as a force for social engineering, in the first place. When Muslim power-mongers at the very inception of Islam's ascendance did not hesitate from slaughtering the progeny of the Prophet of Islam to occupy its highest pulpits despite the clear Qur'anic commandment to Muslims that loving the Messenger's near of kin in gratitude is a moral obligation put upon them, 'Say: “No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.”', the verses of the Holy Qur'an themselves would surely not have survived un-tampered had they effectively got in the way of imperial mobilization.
By using open-ended statements and indirections in its verses, i.e., by becoming a cipher, and by encouraging its verbatim memorization and recitation on every occasion imaginable primarily as an oral message, the Author has certainly been able to safeguard the text of the Holy Qur'an from the villainy of human scribes and the vicissitudes of time. And here is the twin paradox – but who can decipher that pristine un-tampered cipher message of “no doubt” into its singular plaintext today without any doubt? Albeit, the Holy Qur'an has provided a cipher key for breaking this deadlock condition, to approach its cipher with a “cleansed heart” and all would be revealed: “In a Book well-guarded, Which none shall touch but those who are clean (purified)”, Surah Al-Waqia, 56:78-79, already quoted above.
Many millenniums later, despite the indirections and the unknowns, the pristine text of the Holy Qur'an has still enabled the solely left-brained Mr. Spock to reason through the cipher using only the Holy Qur'an itself as the criterion to adjudicate his reasoning. As should be readily apparent to the reader, validating the broad claims of the Holy Qur'an, Mr. Spock has certainly comprehended quite a bit already.
But the paradox of trying to comprehend in totality, the Infallible Words of the Author from the fallible words of the scribes of history persists. This paradox is deeply inherent in the Holy Qur'an and no amount of rationalization of how pristine and un-tampered the Qur'anic text really is, can wipe it way. While its words and verses may be intact and pristine, the meaning of those words and verses on the precise fault-lines of sectarianism is far from Determinate.
Mr. Spock pushes this macro meta puzzle on the top of his evaluation stack, realizing fully well that albeit a totality of understanding may be difficult to acquire, a reasonable, even if ultimately partial, understanding may still be achieved to finally resolve all paradoxes with logical self-consistency once he has dug his way to the very bottom of the Pandora's box.
Mr. Spock has also insightfully realized that unlike peoples of other religions, Islam and the Holy Qur'an evidently continue to play a much greater role in the daily lives of Muslim nations on earth in nearly all cultures and civilizations of the East. The West is also not immune to its intoxicating grip upon the Muslim peoples living there. The public's oral recitation of the Holy Qur'an, if not its penetrating study, is ubiquitous among the Muslim masses and comprises their essential Islamic ethos. It is a pathetic shame therefore, muses Mr. Spock, that they each understand the same text of their Good Book differently leading to needless fracture lines among them that are always ripe for harvesting by the vile and the villainous. Something really should be done about this – despite the potential of the Prime Directive adversely interfering with that lofty objective (Prime Directive: a social Darwinian concept to not have the highly evolved Star Trek folks in the fable meddle with primitive war-mongering civilizations in the galaxy, to instead afford them the opportunity to either evolve, or naturally die away and be replaced by a better civilization more eager and able to evolve).
Accurately unraveling the principal first cause of disunity among Muslims from which every schism, every empire, and every evil has followed, logically surmised Mr. Spock, would minimally lead to eliminating all sectarianism from among them; the Muslims already possess the common text of the Holy Qur'an which they are all already united upon, and mainly only differ in what it means. A rational elimination of these now very powerful fracture lines, a happenstance of history, would also eliminate the ease of abuse of Islam by rulers and empires who thrive on historical obfuscation, on aiding and abetting internecine violence, on fanning sectarian divides, pitting one narrative against the other among the ignorant partisans to assert their own primacy and its geostrategic imperatives. Eliminating just that singular source of global threat to other worlds and other civilizations, would be worth violating the Prime Directive for, reasons Mr. Spock.
Because of his long exposure to the exercise of hegemony and evolution of primitive societies, Mr. Spock well understands that a society often only evolves due to being conquered, or sometimes due to resistance to being conquered, and rarely voluntarily without a motivating force. Industrial and technological advancement had been a primal force of social evolution – but rather than evolve the mental styles of man, it had only principally evolved the living styles of mankind. No spiritual advancement had taken place over at least 5000 years of mankind's existence despite copious visitations by prophets. Therefore, Mr. Spock recognizes that if Muslim societies now under dire existential threat, are permitted or coached into evolving their comprehension of the real meaning of Islam and the sublime guidance to mankind offered in the Holy Qur'an, and if knowledge of this new egalitarian understanding of the religion of Islam is encouraged to percolate downwards to the Muslim masses and upwards to the Muslim pontiffs, that:
  • firstly, all such subversions for “imperial mobilizations” would automatically be thwarted (See exposition of Surah Al-Asr , Chapter 103 of the Holy Qur'an, to understand how the banality of evil is easily overcome once the implementation of Deen-ul-Haq is liberated from the clutches of pious rituals and pious mullahs) ;
  • and secondly, the concomitant societal journey towards a progressive more egalitarian state of spiritual as well as equitable material existence would become naturally organic and automatic.
But, Mr. Spock also lamentably ponders, which ruling class and threatened interests among them would ever permit such a positive transformation to occur on its own, without substantial use of a counter force, when it would kill the golden goose which lays the imperial egg? Especially, if such revolutionizing transformation could finally even unite the Muslims into one enlightened people who would be next to impossible to conquer for inimical interests.
However, a bent tree can hardly ever be straightened without breaking it, as Mr. Spock well knows. And that unfortunate empiricism may necessitate that the religion of Islam, as preserved in its un-tampered scripture, continually resuscitate itself in new cultures and new civilizations, among new peoples, each time for a better implementation of divine guidance, while leaving the corrupted and hijacked nations to naturally decay away into oblivion. There is no arresting, never mind curing, cancer in an already decaying society.
With that as the overarching backdrop of the import of his study, Mr. Spock decides to dig his electrified mind into a deeper more penetrating examination of the Holy Qur'an. His mathematical genius simply had to solve these puzzles and paradoxes of the enigmatic text which appeared to offer some sensible guidance for mutual co-existence in the stochastic process of mankind's existence – a random process which seeds natural diversity among mankind via socialization bias that only depends upon which side of the railroad tracks people are born, but offering them a breathtaking unity of purpose as expressed in Surah Al-Maeda 5:48.

Path Forward: Impacting Muslim Existence with Qur'anic Political Science
The Question of Rulership in Islam – What does the Holy Qur'an have to say about it?
As far as Mr. Spock has been able to ascertain from his study of the Holy Qur'an, there are no Imams (Guides, Leaders, Rulers to rule over the Muslim nation after the Prophet of Islam) mentioned in the Holy Qur'an by name, nor the fact of their number, as in how many, except for the sole fact of the veritable existence of some unnamed وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ to whom allegiance, obedience, is made as much compulsory for Muslims as is allegiance and obedience to the Prophet of Islam. That latter fact is categorical. The verse of obedience, 4:59, is categorical, blanket, general, and most clear. It cannot be denied (which is why, instead of denying it, the verse of obedience is resemantified, distorted and misinterpreted by the anointed experts from the clergy class to legitimize just about anyone's rule, including their own). Nor can it be denied that logical deductions from the verses of the Holy Qur'an have led Mr. Spock to the conclusion that these could only be from the Ahlul Bayt because of the requirement for being inerrant, infallible, if such absolute obedience commanded to any mortal man is made equivalent to obedience to God. And such perfect cleansing, from mistakes and errors, has only been afforded to the Ahlul Bayt in the entire Holy Qur'an, in the verse of perfect cleansing, 33:33 – and to no one else! The identity of who exactly comprise the Ahlul Bayt is not specified in the Holy Qur'an. Nor is it specified who these unnamed valih-e-amr ( وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ) are. Their precise identity therefore, if pertinence demands knowing who these are in future history, meaning outside of their own respective lifetime, requires adjudication from empirical data. Meaning, from the recorded pages of history, meaning going to sources outside of the pages of the Holy Qur'an – the first-cause source of pluralistic interpretations of Islam as already discussed in the preceding sections.
Beyond that, everything else on the subject of rulership of Muslims is shrouded in metaphorical verses of the Indeterminates. These are open to interpretation and historical fixing, and usually almost entirely by socialization bias. Neither the names of the members of the Ahlul Bayt, nor the names of the four Caliphs who took power in temporal succession after the Messenger's demise, nor the names of the Ummayad and Abbaside imperial rulers who came thereafter to create the Muslim dynastic empires, nor the names of the famous Hadith compilers and exegesis writers, nor the prominent jurists who formed their schools of jurisprudence by which Muslims identify themselves in sectarian affiliations, nor the names of any of the companions of the Messenger, nor the names of his wives, are mentioned in the Holy Qur'an. This silence is also a fact.
It begs the obvious question: Why is the Holy Qur'an not explicit in its own categorical verses on the question of Rulership of Islam after the Messenger of Islam? Why is there not a single verse in the Holy Qur'an which unequivocally identifies who precisely is to succeed the Prophet of Islam in the rulership and imammate of the nascent Islamic state after his demise? There is so much repetition of the mundane matters, including bedroom etiquette, and not one verse on guidance of how the Muslims are to be politically governed after the Prophet, let alone who is to take up his political and spiritual mantle? The Prophet of Islam, after all, had established the first Islamic state. What were the rules of successorship to be after him? And how were these to apply after that epoch, in future times? Instead, there are verses after verses on the concept of Imam, wilayat, valih, wasilah, etc., all forming a multiplicity of riddles couched in indirections and Indeterminates which must be solved, objectively and logically to say the least, in order to extract the Message contained in the Holy Qur'an accurately.
What bothers Mr. Spock is not that silence in preciseness itself, because his logical mind straightforwardly discerns that fact of omission itself to be part of the Message of the Holy Qur'an, and therefore only to be deciphered correctly by its proclaimed adherents, but the more fundamental question: Why is that question not asked by Muslims themselves? Mr. Spock is more perturbed by their illogical rush to the scribes and pages of history to assert their own myopic inheritance as the principal message of Islam, often exclusively by socialization bias, and of the sect and home each is born into. Hardly the most sensible way to understand a Book as momentous as the Holy Qur'an!
What the Holy Qur'an has instead specified is exclusively the criterion by which to judge, adjudicate, ascertain and affirm, all matters pertaining to the religion of Islam in its categorical verses. Some of these criterion have been used by Mr. Spock to figure out many things, some shocking, like the admonishment that some Muslims in the time of the Messenger were “on a clearly wrong Path” (Surah Al-Ahzaab, 33:36). Similarly, on the topic which principally divides Sunnis and Shias and from which all their other sectarian differences follow – was there, or was there not, appointment of an Apostolic Successor by Divine Decree and proclaimed by the Messenger? So judge by the Determinate criterion of the Holy Qur'an alone, to your own good heart's content, who is entitled to be وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ from among the distinguished players of history. Mr. Spock's path to understand the Qur'anic criterion is summarized in the Self Study section at the end.
But also observe that its relevance today is principally only of theoretical and academic interest from the point of view of the Determinate verses of the Holy Qur'an. Because, if it wasn't, these historically entitled وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ would have been identified in the Holy Qur'an by name and details about them would be contained in the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an for subsequent generations to follow categorically, until the end of time. The reason they are not identified by name, is arguably because they were clearly known to the peoples in the era they each lived in, and were principally meant for. Whereas, the theologies surrounding them which have reached Muslims some millennia later, are not to be found in the Holy Qur'an except by way of interpretation of the Indeterminates, largely drawn from the preferred penmanship of history. What would have happened if none of these scribes existed, or had written anything – just as nothing was written down for more than a century after the demise of the Prophet of Islam? On what logical basis, deduced from the criterion of the Holy Qur'an, are these fallible scribes predicates to the understanding of the infallible Holy Qur'an? Mr. Spock found no reference in the Holy Qur'an mandating the existence of these scribes. There is no mention in the Holy Qur'an of scribes who have been “perfected” for this task of faultless preservation of historical narratives that exist today as the primary written sources of Islam outside of the Holy Qur'an.
Every generation has the new opportunity to start afresh – for the natural cyclical process of birth and death can also have a beneficial cleansing effect upon the baggage of legacy. Why should a new generation born into their own times be shackled by what went before? Which is why the Holy Qur'an itself advocates starting afresh for every man and woman rather than remain shackled by the holiness of others who came before them:
That was a people that hath passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did, and ye of what ye do! Of their merits there is no question in your case!” (Surah Al-Baqara, 2:134, repeated again for emphasis in 2:141)
When the Holy Qur'an so clearly vouches for that separation from the people who went before without equivocation: “Of their merits there is no question in your case”, then how can it endorse the acceptance of their workmanship for you to follow for your merit? That would create a contradiction!
Indeed, the Holy Qur'an unequivocally confirms that conclusion with the following explicit warning:
(On the day) when those who were followed disown those who followed (them), and they behold the doom, and all their aims collapse with them. And those who were but followers will say: If a return were possible for us, we would disown them even as they have disowned us. Thus will Allah show them their own deeds as anguish for them, and they will not emerge from the Fire.” (Surah Al-Baqara, 2:166-167)
The Indeterminates of the Holy Qur'an weren't meant to be filled in by the imaginative scribes in pious robes, nor spawn Muslim empires by subverting their meanings from the pulpit, nor the latter day lucrative industry of madrassas, howzas, and seminaries which run into unaccountable billions of dollars of annual zakat, khums, and endowment funds. Like the financial secrecy enjoyed by the Papacy, no one has any accounting for these funds. No nation demands it. No accounting firm produces the balance sheet for the public for the funds harvest from the public in the name of religion. This holy industry feeds for lifetime, generations of savants who often cannot be gainfully employed in any competitive sector of society. In modernity, if you are a mental midget who cannot get into college, or are too poor to feed yourself, you become an “alim”. If you are more fortunate, you become a “revolutionary”, or acquire a Ph.D. to “bring reform to Islam”. The religion of Islam remaining in the clutches of the pulpit that feeds off of it, for profit, power, or glory, can never stand up to the hectoring hegemons. It becomes the stage for house niggers, useful idiots, and mercenaries of empire to rally the public mind to its agendas. We even empirically witness this in our own times. Caught between the Hegelian Dialectic of “militant Islam” and “moderate Islam”, with “revolutionary Islam” soon to be added to its mix to foment more “revolutionary times” of internecine violence, the sectarian pulpit spells worldwide national suicide for Muslims today.
Just as the ancient scribes fixed the Indeterminates of the Holy Qur'an to suit their narrow self-interests, we have the opportunity to rationally unfix the Indeterminates of their subversive bindings to suit our broader existential self-interests. We have the same ability to de-emphasize the Indeterminates in our religious ethos, or to treat them as options not to be fought or disunited over, just as the earlier times went in the opposite direction. We have the opportunity to actively build on what is common ground so easily forged by the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an, just as those who went before us differentiated on the basis of the Indeterminates.
Only that sensible path offers any coherent possibilities for Muslims to finally stop being puppets on a string. Only that approach permits the sectarianly divided Muslims to come together against common global predators whose only real leverage upon Muslims is their superior Machiavellian ability to divide and conquer the simpleton public mind.
Muslims in every new generation get the opportunity afresh to stop being simpletons. That is why man is given his own little “zulfiqar”, his intellect! But it is born dull just as man is born naked at birth. And just as we don't go prancing about in our birth-day clothes au natural for the rest of our lives just because we are born naked, and if someone did they'd be simply locked away in an asylum, those still prancing about in their birth-day mind au natural, are just as simply harvested for fodder by the Nietzschean superman.
Focussing on the Determinates effectively checkmates the hijacking of the religion of Islam from all pulpits. It helps overcome the sectarian divide among Muslims without either requiring anyone to give up their own socialization biases, nor requiring anyone to accept any particular sect's supremacy as the sole custodian of the religion of Islam some fourteen-fifteen centuries later.
Just acquiring that first crucial understanding, that Indeterminates by definition seed diversity of viewpoints, and those viewpoints that are inimical to the spirit of Islam expressed in its Determinates will always sow discord, is sufficient for this coming together of the Muslim public mind. Such common ground does not require a common pulpit. It only requires reaching a common understanding of the above principle so lucidly visible in the Holy Qur'an with even a modicum of reflection. All else will naturally follow with the realization that Muslims should abstain from building the core religious values of their faith upon the narratives of the scribes of history who fixed these Indeterminates according to their own logic and motivations pertinent to their own epoch, when today Muslims have the same pristine text of the same Holy Qur'an untampered by human hand also available to them to guide them in their own epoch!
Muslims today have that momentous benefit denied all other peoples none of whose sacred scriptures can stand that test of time. To then journey voluntarily on the path that peoples of other religions are involuntarily forced to adopt because they do not have such un-tampered sacred scriptures, and that path lead to disunity and infighting, is outright stupidity. Nay, asininity. When such foolishness leads to internecine warfare, it is outright criminal. And not to fight back that criminalist path when it perches a people on the very brink of existentialism, a national suicide!
Who can liberate the Muslim public mind so steeped in rituals, so manipulated from the pulpit in every sect, and so incestuously socialized into their respective sectarian ethos generation after generation? How to bootstrap that transformation of the Muslim public mind without wiping out that cultural history? How to fight back that national suicide?
If Mustafa Kemal Atatürk can ruthlessly separate a domineering people from their 300 year old Muslim heritage of Ottoman empire within a single generation to create Westernized Turkey, if Ayatollah Khomeini can wipe out 2500 year old heritage of monarchy in Persia in far less time than that to create a Revolutionary theological Iran, it surely can be done. But can it be done without bloodshed, internecine violence, and a forced separation from who we are? Both those cited transformations of the twentieth century came at the expense of that forced separation of a people from their heritage; and much spilled Muslim blood – mostly by Muslims themselves! Neither is necessary nor desirable in order to end the divisiveness of sectarianism.
All it takes is pulpits in all sects to perceptively understand, and judiciously promulgate, the concepts of Determinates and Indeterminates to their respective flock. The rest will naturally follow. That initial first step will surely take state power to affect at national and international levels – for, if the pulpit was ever so rational, it had the choice of addressing the problem in the previous centuries on their own. Just as it took state power to first preserve the Holy Qur'an, it will also take state power to first push its common Determinate meaning through. The rest will surely be organic once a new generation grows up learning the new understanding. Other principled measures can also be adopted by any state, such as mandating Determinate verse 5:48 of Surah Al-Maeda as the overarching mission statement of every Muslim sect under its suzerainty in order for the sect to be accorded state recognition and constitutional protection of rights as a legitimate Islamic sect.
There is no fundamental political problem in sowing beneficial ideas by a state irrespective of its national or ideological predicates – popular atheist philosopher and novelist Ayn Rand's twentieth-century theology of Objectivism and individual selfishness notwithstanding. Holy Qur'an is inimical to such ideas and therefore, to not accord ideas inimical to the religion of Islam any protection in a Muslim dominated state is rational and self-consistent with the theology that is espoused by the people of that state. It is no different than the United States not according space to Communist ideology in its state and global sphere of influence. In the same vein, fraternal ideas the Holy Qur'an engenders in its Determinate verses are both a spiritual as well as political constitution to live by for Muslims and therefore, there is no principal reason why certain key political principles extracted from the Good Book not be adopted as governing principles of a state even if it is a secular state. Just that one simple fundamental measure, like its Biblical counterpart known as The Golden Rule, will ensure that vitriolic sects whose entire raison d'être is ominously self-righteousness and exclusionary, declaring others “non-Muslim” their axiomatic enactment of their philosophy (takfirism), get naturally wiped out by making the soil infertile for their growth. That soil conditioning ingredient is categorically provided in the Holy Qur'an.
The power of political sagaciousness and beneficial mutual co-existence inherent in the Determinate verse 5:48 of Surah Al-Maeda both checkmates, and preempts, all internecine warfare among Muslims. No outside or inside Machiavelli can harvest Muslim cracks and lacunas with the universal adoption of verse 5:48 as part of the state constitution where diverse Muslim sects live in any substantial numbers and permitted to practice their religion with state protection of their rights. Those religious rights can be made contingent on the directives of the very religion that is being accorded state political rights. It is akin to making the Biblical Golden Rule “Do unto others as you have others do unto you” the cornerstone of all nations' constitutions by international law.
This line of reasoning is neither platitudinous nor theoretical. But straightforward Qur'anic political science to defeat Machiavellian political science. Take political science out of religion, out of the moral calculus of governance, and all a people are left with is the empty shell of banal rituals ripe for harvesting by Machiavelli to create hell on earth. That's how the Religion of Islam was principally hijacked, and that's also how it will ever be un-hijacked! And as in all battles between good and evil, between masters and slaves, between hegemony and servitude, between supremacy and equitable co-existence, between international law and aggression, this battle too needs to be fought. It needs its champions and its powerbase no differently than primacy needs its champions and its powerbase. Without their respective champions, neither side can dominate. The reason primacy continually succeeds to dominate is because it is not shackled by moral calculus and has instead made itself adept at shackling all others. Qur'anic political science is its antidote.
The world might pay attention to this if they care to rid themselves of the curse of the repeated diabolical harvesting of the religion of Islam for “imperial mobilization”. The world might also pay attention to the political evils spread in the name of “freedom” that is nipped in the bud with such cautious political adoption – even if it may sound exclusionary to the nihilistic advocates of unlimited freedom. This includes the so called avant-garde in political thought who want freedom to spread political evil in the name of political freedom, freedom to destroy with vile speech in the name of freedom of speech, freedom to belittle others' religion in the name of freedom of religion, and freedom to spread anarchy in the name of freedom of individualism. No civilization can exist for long with predators flourishing among them in the name of freedom and devouring its every moral civilizational construct in the lofty guise of liberté, égalité, fraternité.
The aforementioned solution-space is applicable even when the political governance system that Muslims live in is a theological state of any sectarian flavor. Today, these span the full gamut of defining governance characteristics that are not to be found in the Holy Qur'an but is presented as being part of the religion of Islam. Drawn entirely from the Indeterminates, it spans the gamut of extremes: from the strict orthodox Wahabi-Salafi Sunni sect that rules Islam's holiest places as a private kingdom named after their own ruling family which interprets ( وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ) of verse 4:59 as anyone vested in temporal power by any means (amply supported by their own preferred history's scribes and precedents); to the “virtuous philosopher-king” model of the Iranian Shia sect asserting a mandate for “Imammate by proxy” also based on the same verse 4:59 (and also amply supported by their own preferred history's scribes and precedents)!
The Iranian Revolution of Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini (imam in the ordinary sense of political and spiritual leader whom people followed, hence lower case usage) however was somewhat more creative and principled than the Wahabis pernicious takeover of Islam's sacred soil under the banner of the House of Saud.
The latter were largely an ignorant but locally powerful tribe, cognitively infiltrated by the Wahabi sect invented by the British empire as part of its ongoing subversive warfare upon the Muslim Ottoman empire, and brought to state power in the Hijaz by the interplay of victorious superpowers on the grand chessboard of the early twentieth century.
Whereas, the Iranian Revolution in the second half of the twentieth century was led largely by well-read scholars and theologians. Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini easily adapted Plato's “philosopher-king” for his “governance of the faqih” (vilayat-i faqih) model, seamlessly tying it to the Shia jurisprudence principle of “taqlid” to shepherd the flock. The philosopher-faqih and stoic antagonist of the despotic American imposed monarchy in Iran, equally easily sold the new franchise of “revolutionary Islam” to the Iranian public mind which had been readily primed for the revolution through the good graces of the ignoble Shah's CIA trained SAVAK. That, it was far nobler in the mind to be ruled by an enlightened clergy in the name of God under Divine Rule as the perpetual enemy of America (the Great Satan), rather than by America's own Shahanshah in his own royal name – without the conception of Hegelian Dialectic ever becoming part of the discourse space. The arc of crisis was lighted simultaneously on the Grand Chessboard by American President Jimmy Carter and his National Security Advisor with diabolical opposites: revolutionary Sunnis in Afghanistan as the sacred Mujahideens with “God is on your side”, and revolutionary Shias in Iran as the infernal enemy.
See respectively, “Selling the Carter Doctrine”, Time Magazine, February 18, 1980 ; and “IRAN: The Crescent of Crisis”, Time Magazine, January 15, 1979. Nothing is as it is made to appear in current affairs where beliefs based on half-truths and outright lies are diabolically implanted in the public mind – virtually everything the public is made to believe in international relations is myth. See “Unlayering the Middle East War Agenda: Making Sense of Absurdities” ( ). The same is true of the theological construct of valih-e-faqih that draws upon Divine Mandate to make the public mind. It bears closer scrutiny.

What does the Holy Qur'an say about Divine Rule of Valih-e-Faqih?
Is it Determinate in the Holy Qur'an?
A non hagiographic examination of the conception of vilayat-i faqih in both Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini's book: “Islam and Revolution” (translated by Hamid Algar, 1981), and how it has been enacted in post Revolutionary Iran, reveals that it is little different in terms of absolutist governance than what it replaced: both autocratic rules by those who ascribe to themselves the divine right of kings to rule and consequently, absolutely intolerant of dissenting ideology and dissenting politics. Both demonized their respective antagonists at home (never mind abroad) with the absolute righteousness of divine authority. Both asserting with unsurpassed oratory, and with the power of the state backing their oration, that the chosen elite, respectively themselves, is more entitled to govern the public than the public itself. And that, like the king's rule, the valih-e-faqih's rule too is absolute, with no limits, and no checks and balances, so long as he rules “justly”. The valih-e-faqih defines what is just and what isn't in all matters, including political matters of the state, as the imam (leader), and in theory can only be replaced if he leaves the bounds of Islamic Sharia. The absolute rule by the valih-e-faqih as the representative of the “hidden Imam”, is deemed by the jurist to be an obligatory religious duty as an integral part of the concept of “wilayah”, Divine Rule, prescribed by the religion of Islam for ruling the Islamic state.
Meaning, the Islamic state must be ruled by the jurist, and it is incumbent upon the jurist to create the Islamic state for Muslims and to rule it with absolute authority demanding absolute obedience just as the Prophet of Islam and his designated successor ruled with absolute authority.
In a 6 January 1988 letter to Iran's president and Friday prayer leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei on Determining the limitations of the authority of the Islamic government under the valih-e-faqih's rule, Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini addressing the president of Iran as “Hojjat al-Islam Mr. Khamenei” (and not as “Ayatollah Khamenei” as he is presently saluted and unquestioningly followed as the “marja taqlid”), and while paying elegant lip-service to accepting criticism as a “divine gift” in these pious words: “And of course we should not assume that whatever we say and do, no one has the right to criticize. Criticism, even condemnation, is a divine gift for the growth of humans.”, unequivocally asserted the principle of boundarylessness of “Absolute Divine Rule” vested in the ruler of the Islamic state:
I must state that governance, which is a branch of the Absolute Rule of the Prophet (PBUH), is one of the primary laws of Islam; and it takes precedence over all secondary Laws, even prayer and fasting and the hajj pilgrimage. The ruler can destroy a mosque or a house that sits in the route for a road, and avoid the money to the owner. The ruler can shut down mosques in times of necessity; and destroy a mosque belonging to pretenders [zerar], if a resolution is not possible without destruction. The government may unilaterally void Sharia-based contracts that it itself has made with the people in situations where that contract is contrary to the good of the nation and Islam. And it can prevent any action – be it devotional or not – that is contrary to the interests of Islam - as long as it continues to be so. The government can temporarily prevent the hajj pilgrimage – which is one of the most important divine practices – in situations where it deems it to be contrary to the interests of the Islamic country.” --- Translation via the Iran Data Portal at Princeton University, (link to Original Persian Text)
While one cannot vouch for the accuracy of this translation as it is the habit of orientalists to deliberately mistranslate and misrepresent the Iranian leadership, it is presumed to be accurate enough for the purpose of this analysis as it is consistent with the ideas put forth in “Islam and Revolution”.
All the aforesaid determinations by Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini underline the principle of Absolute Rule being the purview of the valih-e-faqih. And evidently, it is made noble and legitimate because these absolute determinations are in the name of Islam as “divine guidance”. It begs the obvious question to the discerning mind of Mr. Spock, that how is that absoluteness qualitatively any different from the divine king's self-ascribed right to absolute rule, absolute powers, absolute opinions, absolute directives, and absolute wisdom as the vicegerent of his gods on earth? The king does it to preserve his monarchy and makes recourse to his god as having received a mandate. The valih-e-faqih does the same thing to preserve his rule by making arguable reference to mandate given to him by his God. Both employ the same means: absolute control of the public mind, and absolute control of the state, both demanding absolute obedience from the people. Absolute Rule is evidently more endearing to the philosopher jurist of Islam if it is in his God's name. Why is it philosophically so, even if one ignores self-interest and conflict of interest – meaning, even if the valih-e-faqih is obviously making a case for acquiring state power and authority over the people of which he and his jurist class are the prima facie beneficiary?
Harken back to Plato and the “philosopher-king”. It is the primary axiom upon which valih-e-faqih is principally based – that the religious philosopher is closer to God than all the rest of mankind, and hence closest to truth and justice than all the rest of mankind, and consequently better able to (or more entitled to) govern the republic and its masses with truth and justice than anyone else among mankind!
Upon that priceless axiom which remains conveniently hidden in the prolific arguments made to dignify vilayat-i faqih, the verses of “wilayah” in the Holy Qur'an, namely those verses speaking of “wasilah”, “Imam”, and “obedience”, are interpreted by the jurist as being Exemplary of Divine Rule set forth in the leadership of the Prophet of Islam as the first head of the Islamic state in Medina, and in the short tenure of Imam Ali, the fourth Caliph, as the only legitimate Divinely appointed successor head of the Islamic state after the Prophet's death. Because they are both Exemplars of the Holy Qur'an and the system of governance espoused in the religion of Islam for all times, and not just for their own time, so argues the valih-e-faqih, how is the Divine Rule to continue in other times?
Specifically, under the Shia theology, during the absence (ghaibat) of the “hidden Imam”? The earth cannot be deprived of Divine Rule argues the brilliant faqih, otherwise tyrants will rule by enslaving the masses, and God's Guidance to mankind will remain un implemented, constricted, “mahjoor” (see Surah Al-Furqaan 25:30 quoted above). The core argument is principally laid out by Plato in The Republic to dignify state rulership by the virtuous “philosopher-king”. Plato argued 2500 years ago, a thousand years before the advent of the Holy Qur'an, that if the most virtuous philosopher is not king, the masses will be ruled by diabolical controllers who will enslave the public mind in far constricting invisible chains of perception management than mere physical chains can ever hold any man captive. These prisoners of the mind will actually come to love their own enslavement, and resist all attempts to be freed.
Plato illustrated that idea most poignantly in his famous allegory titled The Simile of the Cave. (See ) The philosophical etiology of virtually all discourses on voluntary servitude, behavior control, mind control, virtuous leadership, virtuous statism, shepherding the public mind, and even Nietzsche's Übermensch (see Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement!), ultimately anchor in Plato. As far as Mr. Spock can ascertain, none have surpassed Plato in their own derivatives. Some scholars are honest enough to acknowledge their ancient benefactor, while others merely plagiarize from him. But the audience of these latter demagogues does not know when Plato is being plagiarized in the garb of new theory because the public mind is at best only familiar with the name Plato, often in their own native language. Hardly anyone among hoi polloi, even among the college educated professional class, has actually read The Republic, let alone studied it for the due diligence it deserves to comprehend that foundational scholar of the Hellenic Civilization that became not just the cradle of Western civilization, but Muslim scholarship as well. Muslim scholars in Spain were the first to translate the Greek scholarship into Arabic, from where the Western Crusaders got their source material to translate into Latin and subsequently into English. Today, the neo-cons for instance, are all Plato scholars. All significant liars and aggressors today advocating military invasion of Muslim nations under the pretext of defending themselves from the tyranny of Islam also turn out to be Plato scholars in their background. (See )
Plato's characterization of mental chains through perception management from birth to death is so powerful that the diabolical superman, the state intelligence apparatuses, the military covert-ops, the Mighty Wurlitzer, Machiavelli, all harnesses it for themselves (see Virtually every Western philosopher of the age of enlightenment and onwards penning ideas on good and evil has borrowed at least something from Plato. The famous quotable statement of Goethe, the German philosopher, “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrong looks like right in their eyes.”, owes a great deal of inspiration to Plato just on the very face of it. It is a paraphrase from the Simile of the Cave.
Anything to do with deception and the control of the public mind, and conversely, shepherding the public mind to higher enlightenment in a virtuous state led by its most enlightened stewards, Plato expressed its philosophy so comprehensively 2500 years ago that it is hard to add anything new to its principles, or to the perceptive understanding he displayed of the frailty of the human mind and how it is harvested by unseen controllers in society. Edward Bernays, known as the father of modern perception management, also called advertising when selling soap, public relations when selling agendas, and propaganda when selling lies, opened his 1928 Book titled Propaganda, with these famous words which are again mere corollaries of Platonic description: “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.”
Muslim scholarship borrowing fundamental notions and key ideas of intellectualism for their own intellectual tradition when they were the dominant superpower in the world for 700 years, not just from Plato, but from the Hellenic culture of learning, is only to be expected, and is indeed what happened.
The entire realm of ilm al-Kalam, the wholly speculative intellectual discourse on topics of the Holy Qur'an, is fundamentally Platonic for instance, and is little different from Plato's Shapes --- entirely immanent, non-falsifiable, without any empirical reality-check possible. It is as rich as the human mind is fertile, and is freed from any bounds of reality and verification – an occupation of idle minds who do not have to strive to earn a living and can sit around all day in their seminaries (or ivory towers) eruditely discoursing important matters like how many angels can dance on a pin-head and whether the Holy Qur'an, as the Word of God, is created or uncreated! It is the contemporary Muslim scholarship today which plagiarizes more than just borrow with acknowledgment. The feeble intellectual mind unfamiliar with the genesis and etiological significance of ideas presented to him by the superman, never knows the difference. So forget about the public mind being any more the wiser just because collectively they are far greater in number. Plagiarized ideas can easily be ascribed to anyone, including to oneself as its inventor which is typically the case, but also to God to achieve some purpose. The latter takes an exceptionally clever mind to pull it off. In this exclusive club of the Übermensch, Nietzschean superman, one is arguably dealing with a most superior mind. To dismiss it as ignorant, short-sighted, or a stooge, is to not just not give the devil its due, but to also not recognize the formidable enemy for what it is. As Mr. Spock well knows, the sword of intellect can cut both ways. He is undeterred as he systematically unpeels the many layers of the question down to the very bottom of the Pandora's box. As that legend goes, opening the Pandora's box initially opens a can of worms but when you get to its very bottom, the entire mystery is solved.
With that overview of philosopher-king and the overarching impact of Plato on the world of intellectual thought, the responsibility for implementing Islam's Divine Rule too, it is argued, must consequently fall to those philosophers and virtuous scholars of Islam who know and understand Islam the best. Otherwise, the Muslim polity, as history bears witness, will always be ruled by tyrants and usurpers. Well, who is best fit for that leadership role of shepherding the plebeian mind away from the wolves, but the pious jurist!
Thus, Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini deemed his own clergy class the latter day “philosopher-king” ruling class since they presume to know Islam the best. They are closest to the mind of God, closest to truth and justice, and consequently make the best executors of His Divine Rule. The most capable jurist among this tiny coterie able to stand up to tyrants and falsehoods, able to exercise political and temporal leadership, is the “philosopher-king”. Ahem, the “wasilah” (already covered in Part-II, see Al-Wasilah): “O ye who believe! Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him,” (Surah Al-Maeda 5:35), “These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance” (Surah Al An'aam 6:90), the valih-e-faqih!
Since the Prophet of Islam and his designated successor implemented that Divine Rule with Absolute Authority, and since they demanded absolute obedience from the public as per the verse of obedience, 4:59, so must the valih-e-faqih who is only the heir to the third entity in the verse of obedience, ( وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ), the “ulul-amr”, also referred to as “valih-e-amr”, an unnamed third party to whom absolute obedience is also commanded by the Author of the Holy Qur'an! The valih-e-faqih therefore is only implementing God's prescription on his side of the elite fence as his religious duty as the heir to the noble Prophet's mantle, and the governed must implement its part and obey the noble valih-e-faqih in absolute terms on its commoner's side of the elite fence as its religious duty.
Here is that most dreadfully interpreted Verse of Obedience once again, from Part-II:
O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you.
If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” (Surah an-Nisaa'
4:59 )
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ۖ
فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا
Caption Verse 4:59 of Surah an-Nisaa', the Verse of Obedience, itself opening the door to sectarian schism, the source of fundamental bifurcation between Sunni and Shia sects during the Muslim expansion into world dominating empires after the demise of the Messenger. The Verse of Obedience specifically underwrites the Principle of Inerrancy as a requirement for holding any Apostolic office that demands obedience from the flock.
Once the mantle of Absolute Rule is claimed by axiomatic assertion, it inevitably leads to demanding absolute obedience as a self-evident matter, which further leads to the inevitable corollary that no one may even disagree with the valih-e-faqih once he has made up his mind just as no one may disagree with, or disobey, the Prophet of Islam once he has made up his mind as per verse 33:36 of Surah Al-Ahzaab “It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.” By extrapolating the proper noun Exemplar which singularly refers to someone specific, to the common noun exemplar, the same semantic construct in any language opens itself up to a group membership of ordinary peoples such that to disagree or to disobey this new plurality of exemplars of Divine Rule is also to be “on a clearly wrong Path”. To disobey the valih-e-faqih is to become a sinner! As a reminder to the forgetful mind, the hectoring hegemons who hijack the religion of Islam for waging world wars under the pretext of defending themselves against the corrupted Islam and its barbarian followers, routinely do the same resemantification: alias proper nouns into common nouns. Professor Bernard Lewis extrapolated the word “Islam”, a proper noun of the Holy Qur'an, into a common noun when he cunningly resemantified it to mean a kitchen-sink of semantics in his book: Crisis of Islam – Holy War and Unholy Terror (see Hijacking the word “Islam” for Mantra Creation). Here, a concept instead of a word is being aliased.
Indeed, to not follow and obey some marja-e taqlid from that elite set who deem themselves “worthy of emulation” – never mind the pompous title incestuously awarded among the clan by themselves under some unspecified and entirely subjective secret calculus of who is more learned in esoterica – is to be a sinner. To avoid that sin, an absurd set of restrictions is put upon the believer such that in practice she has little choice but to accept taqlid of someone from among that new divine set of exemplars. It does not matter whom she chooses from that elite set --- for she is now roped in for life into that church of taqlid and will pay her religiously mandated donations into those unaccountable coffers that run into sums higher than the GDP of many nations combined. But more importantly, the voluntary obedience is the foundational cornerstone of the fatwas issued by the marja-e-taqlid which define the halal and haram status not just in spiritual matters, but also in national, political, and temporal matters that the follower is now obliged to accept from her marja-e-taqlid.
The valih-e-faqih who is a grade above that station is like the Pope central, and his fatwa is binding upon all over whom he is a guardian, vali. The valih-e-faqih's canvas is far greater. He imposes upon the public mind of the far larger audience space what is permissible and what isn't by way of his own ijtihad at the threat of eternal damnation on the follower for disobedience and salvation for strict obedience. He defines and enacts national laws based on predicates of his personal divine ijtihad and imposes legal entitlements for breaking the law even in this life! Whereas the lower ranking marja-e-taqlid only govern the reward and punishment in the Afterlife by exercising behavior control of their flock in this life, the valih-e-faqih also controls reward and punishment in this life. While all governments do that too, define and legislate laws, and police them, none of them have the chutzpah to draw their mandate from God, unless it is the Jews in the Jewish state, and the Muslims in the Muslim states. Christians seem to have overcome that phase of their spirituality after their dark ages, with the Vatican today more an appendage of a narrow elite mired in antiquated rituals than for exercising spiritual or temporal control over its flock in comparison to its other monotheist brethren.
God”, from time immemorial, has always entered the political realm of mass behavior control through his proxy service providers. It is irrelevant that these service providers can produce no “certificate” from God in their own name. The topic of inquiry, as a reminder to the reader, is not whether God exists, Prophets exist, Divine Guidance exists, Divine Books exist (or not exist). That may be a topic of examination for another day and is beyond the scope of the present work. The topic of inquiry at hand is how is the religion of Islam hijacked so easily for self-interests by Muslims themselves who do believe in all the preceding presuppositions as an axiom of faith. It is demanded in the Holy Qur'an which defines both itself and its audience: “This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off (evil). Who believe in the Unseen, ...” (Surah Al-Baqara 2:2-2:3). So how do Muslims fall prey to evil if their Holy Book is only for those who ward off evil? In this instance, the inquiry has reached the threshold of logic which begs the question of where is the jurist's certificate from God as his holy emissary that he can define halal and haram by his own ijtihad and impose it upon the public mind not just as a spiritual matter, but also a legal matter as the state ruler?
Just making the claim however is evidently sufficient because there are always followers. Orators and demagogues both attract followers faster than trash bins attract flies. Human beings evidently find a compelling need for emotional and psychological security blankets. That natural need leaves the public mind wide open for any cognitive infiltration that comes suitably wrapped in relevant security guarantees by authority figures. The ancient man offered blood sacrifices to appease his god's anger under dispensation from their witch doctors. That was improved upon by the abstraction of an Afterlife in monotheism. Belief in the Day of Judgment is an axiom of faith required by the Holy Qur'an. Thus a successful jurist marja-e-taqlid now dispenses the certificates of do's and don'ts of daily life for essentially the same purpose as ancient priests but for the Afterlife.
The modern jurist no longer needs to sell God and its common axioms to his masses as they already believe in these axioms fervently by way of socialization and cultural acceptance. All the jurist has to do is carefully interpose himself in the public's path to Afterlife by drawing justification for his indispensability from the Indeterminates of the Holy Qur'an. With his learned confabulations in arcane subjects, he gets away with it in front of the modern busy man unfamiliar with ancient books that the jurist draws upon to impress the public mind. The truth of this timeless observation of the frailty of human psyche and how it is abused from time immemorial is without doubt. It is self-evident. That human frailty to be a follower is open game for anyone able to harness it. And especially because of the doctrine of “taqlid” already in place for centuries, the valih-e-faqih's mandate for Absolute Rule is made a practical political reality under the banner of “revolutionary Islam”.
Just as antisemitism has been the Zionist Jews best friend in founding the Jewish state, and oppression upon the Muslims of India through the Hindu-Muslim riots was the best friend of the Muslim League for founding the divine state of Pakistan, oppression upon the Shia Muslims is its latter day equivalent. Absolutely essential for the founding of revolutionary Islamic state. These ideologies only thrive under oppression of their own people and only come to fruition when the oppression is perceived as reaching cataclysmic proportions – whence divine help comes galloping on a white horse to end the tribulation period and all the bloodshed of innocent masses is justified and dignified as the reason for the new state. The people rejoice – momentarily, while the diabolical Hegelian Dialectic is birth-panged in Eurasia as the absolute sworn enemy of Oceania to carry on a perpetual war. One can't make this up except in a fable, but one sees it being enacted on the Grand Chessboard over and over again! All the revolutions of the twentieth century started in blood, and ended in blood, of innocent people. And they all exhibit the same common template – the creation of an enemy to wage world wars. The bibliography on this subject is vast indeed and it is not the intent to rehearse what is already been written elsewhere except to lend the aforesaid brief context. Here, Mr. Spock is keenly desirous of treading new ground in logical pursuit of the question at hand, suitably armed by the accumulated wisdom of what he has seen of man's history of waging wars by way of deception for the control of the public mind. From this first control, all evil naturally follows. Conversely, from its liberation, all else naturally follows too: “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”
The brilliance of the argument for Absolute Rule by the valih-e-faqih is without question. The political circumstances leading to it no more unprecedented and no less conspiratorial than what led to the creation of the Jewish state from partitioned Palestine and the Muslim state from partitioned India. The natural arguments posited by Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini for the raison d'être of an Islamic state that implements the real religion of Islam, asserted as being self-evident.
To Mr. Spock's logical mind always searching for unstated axioms and implicit presuppositions in supposedly “self-evident” arguments presented as concentric proofs, the problem is glaring. Apart from the despotism that absolute rule demanding absolute obedience can take even the best of ordinary mortals to, the core problem is also just as straightforward as it is glaring.
While the Author of the Holy Qur'an both explicitly and unequivocally vouched for the Prophet of Islam in that categorical verse of obedience as an obligatory religious command on Muslims, and the Prophet as the first head of the Islamic state which he founded in Medina may have veritably vouched for the sole father of the source of his prolific progeny, Imam Ali, as history books have recorded thus establishing a chain of explicit vouching that directly connects to the Author of the Holy Qur'an (even though that fact is not explicitly recorded in the Holy Qur'an and has thus become a source of partisan interpretation throughout the short history of Muslim dominance of the world by its despotic rulers vying to establish their Islamic legitimacy by employing the same clergy class to serve their own imperial interests), who vouched for Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini as the Divinely designated Imam sanctioned for Divine Rule?
On what Qur'anic Determinates specifically did Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini apply the verse of obedience to himself to legitimize his own Absolute Rule as the “valih-e-amr”?
As a most learned jurist and scholar of Islam, was the revolutionary imam who so boldly altered the destiny of an entire nation, watered its cemeteries with the blood of a generation of its finest youth in the name of God without showing much compunction, unaware of the logic of verse 4:59 which imparts certain implicit characteristics of unerringness as already analyzed in Part-II? No jurist worth his salt can be unaware of it if Mr. Spock can so trivially deduce it.
How can Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini claim to be the “valih-e-amr” of verse 4:59 with any more intellectual integrity and moral gravitas than the autocratic House of Saud, or any of the other past claimants to absolute rule demanding absolute obedience throughout the imperial history of despotic Muslim rulers, all of whom having occupied the seat of the Prophet of Islam with theological sanctions from the self-serving pulpits drawing upon the same verse?
In fact, the pulpit did not even shy from applying that verse of obedience to the British colonial masters of India as the Qadiani-Ahmadi pontiffs did at the turn of the twentieth-century; Maulana Muhammad Ali, laying its diabolical foundations in his seminal English translation of the Holy Qur'an, first in the Preface under the heading: Reverence for authority, pg. xv wrote: “But while teaching equality of rights, Islam teaches the highest reverence for authority. ... By those in authority are meant not only the actual rulers of a country, but all those who are in any way entrusted with authority”, then elaborated it further in his footnote number 593 for his English translation of verse 4:59 “The words ulul-amr, or those in authority, have a wide significance, ... among those in authority are included the rulers of a land, though they may belong to an alien religion,”! (see MMA 1917 PDF).
Just because someone else does the same gratuitous extrapolation, but applies it a tad more narrowly to the more holier than thou philosopher-king-jurist, and nominates himself as the vali-amr, the valih-e-faqih-e-muslimeen, and does it in the name of the Ahlul-Bayt because of his own convictions on the matter, and the people of Iran show their approval with an applause, hardly makes the assertion any more relevant, let alone applicable.
Is the concept of Absolute Rule by Valih-e-Faqih demanding absolute obedience even arguably sanctioned in the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an? See the examination of taqlid below which is the cornerstone of the theology of valih-e-faqih.
In the case of Revolutionary Iran in 1979, the Iranian public evidently did not think it necessary to ask for such a “certificate” of divine sanction from Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini as the “ulul-amr” of 4:59, never mind think of how they might have actually verified it had he presented one. Just being against the Shah of Iran, against the absolute tyrant working for the imperialist United States of America, was sufficient certificate for ushering in everlasting absolute rule by the valih-e-faqih in God's name; a divine provenance even gloriously fulfilled with the triumphant return of Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini to Iran on February 1, 1979, warming the hearts of the Persian masses to the miraculous divine intervention.
The Iranian people agreed to accept their new rebel imam's absolute rule as the “valih-e-amr” designate of verse 4:59 in an unprecedented public referendum which remains unsurpassed as a willing choice exercised by a fed-up people to be eagerly ruled by their clergy class brought to political power on a (Air France?) jet airliner flying safely through America's NATO controlled French skies to land in Tehran, instead of continuing to live under the suzerainty of the most tyrannical and narcissistic King of kings who had previously been brought to political power in Tehran by America's CIA.
It begs the patently obvious question: Why was the airliner carrying the renegade Grand Ayatollah to power in Iran not shot down by NATO military forces (and easily blamed on the Shah's military) if revolutionary Islam was such a great threat to the Western hegemons? Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini had been most vocal about his revolutionary ideology and the rule of the faqih throughout his exile years. His Shia ethos of Karbala was well-known. He had made no secret of the fact that he hated the Great Satan and all those who sided with her. It would have certainly nipped the problem in the bud for the West. The Americans have shown no qualms about shooting down passenger airliners, as they demonstrated a decade later by shooting down Iranian passenger Airbus plane, Iran Air Flight 655, over the Persian Gulf killing all 290 Muslim pilgrims aboard, “by mistake” of course. They could have made the same “by mistake” a whole decade sooner and spared the world a great deal of Muslim on Muslim violence witnessed in the Iran-Iraq war. Not only did the Western Alliance not do that, but the BBC gave away free air time to the speeches of Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini broadcast to Iran, the French government extended great hospitality to the imam, even hosted the media circus which surrounded the revolutionary imam for months until the very day he departed for his homeland after the Shah's ignominious exit, and on and on and on. The list is long and undeniable of how the West supported the revolutionary imam to power against the interest of the Shah who had formerly been brought to power as their own “policeman” of the Gulf.
The Iranian public was shown their revolutionary savior repeatedly calling for the overthrow of the despotic monarchy by revolutionary means by the Western press. Why?
Why did the West not support their own dictator as part of their collective antagonism against the revolutionary Islam in their former police-man's oil rich territory? Why was the Shah not setup in exile and immediately recognized as the de facto government of Iran to challenge and contain the threat of revolutionary Islam?
This fact of reality which anyone can observe by simply back reading and back watching the news coverage of the era, has put the entire antagonism of the West against Iran in question as deliberately manufactured, and Ayatollah (imam) Khomeini's own principled antagonism to the Shah given great press coverage only for the Iranian public's consumption to bring their new “enemy” into power as part of lighting the “arc of crisis” referenced above.
For the public mind, enemy of my enemy is my friend indeed, and more so when he claims an almost believable divine mandate for extracting absolute obedience from the masses consistent with the shared religious ethos of the people. The Catholic Pope and clergy draw on the same quality of shared ethos among the Catholic Christian flock to be accepted as their anointed spiritual leadership, and in not too distant a past, before the Reformation period tore their state powers asunder, also as their anointed political leadership. Shared ethos is a common denominator and without it, such a voluntary servitude of absolute obedience to the Popes of any religion cannot be implemented without brute force. This also means forcing valih-e-faqih upon non Shia Muslims who do not share that common ethos will only lead to more “revolutionary times”.
This is so obvious a political science truth that those who deliberately wish to create “revolutionary times” going forward in Sunni majority nations like Pakistan with a substantial Shia minority, can find great utility in creating the tortuous conditions of tyranny upon the Shia in which such a construct of “revolutionary Islam” can find its natural raison d'être for existence --- just as it transpired in Iran under the Shah with the help of his American trained secret police SAVAK!
Revealingly, the public in post Revolutionary Iran, just like in America, comes out to vote periodically to elect from among its respective ruling class who will govern them under their pre-established structures of administrative power. These structures implement the sacred ideologies and pre-determined state polices crafted by the real power behind the scenes, the valih-e-faqih, making it quite irrelevant whom the public elects as president in the much touted elections no differently than it is in the United States of America where its oligarchy holds all the key controlling cards.
The categorical fact remains that irrespective of whether a public makes their political choice with their ballot, or a “choice” is foisted upon a public with the bullet, theology, “democracy”, whatever, neither is “rule by kingdom” specified in the Holy Qur'an, nor is “rule by clergy” specified in the Holy Qur'an, and nor is “rule by parliament”, or “rule by Western power puppets and fabricated enemies of any flavor specified in the Holy Qur'an. A people are entitled to their choice of governance, or whether they wish to resist an evil one foisted upon them inspired by the moral platitudes, but they are not entitled to call whatever government they choose as exclusively sanctioned in the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an. Because it isn't.
There is no method of governance commanded, specified, or even outlined in the Holy Qur'an, at least not any that Mr. Spock has been able to discover in its Determinate verses, except the platitudinous guidance to build a righteous and just society in which no one takes unfair advantage of another, and where people do not suffer tyrants, false gods, exploitation, and pay their taxes on time. Mr. Spock notes that the key characteristics of a noble governance system for a just Islamic society are outlined as basic principles only, such as in waging wars of self-defence to not transgress limits, to protect the weak and the infirm, to manage state treasury for public good instead of private gain, to abstain from usury, etc., whereas other matters like its inheritance laws, moral code of conduct, rights and responsibilities of parents, individuals, social and business interactions, marriage rules, are spelled out in minute detail. Corollaries and theorems are easily derived from these basic principles which form the basis of what's come to be known as Islamic Sharia. However, the implementation structures of governance, the form and shape of government, the method of government, who rules, is left unspecified.
It is of course self-evident that intellectuals and scholars of Islam ought to have a leading role in crafting any just society that is based on the singular scripture of Islam, the Holy Qur'an, just as it is for any system whose intellectuals and scholars play important roles in defining their system. Scholars and intellectuals are the bedrock of any enlightened society that draws its foundation from intellectual and spiritual capital. Plato would of course have the philosopher be the rulers. But the Holy Qur'an has left it unspecified. Unarguably, the matter is left Indeterminate like many other matters. Ostensibly, one may reasonably surmise, so that the core principles of Divine Guidance remain timeless and people of all levels of talent and expertise in every epoch are able to implement these principles according to their own requirements and social genius.
To therefore speciously assert that the religion of Islam has given a specific Divine mandate to rule solely to a particular class of people, namely to the faqih, is to mislead the public mind. Yes the capable faqih is just as much entitled to govern, and to provide intellectual and spiritual capital, as any other capable person of his time as a citizen of a state. What he is not entitled to is to rule, claim to be the beneficiary of the verse of obedience, claim to have special authority from God, and demand absolute obedience.
The example of King David, Prophet Daud, an ordinary sheep herder who came to lead his people as their Imam because of his unmatched bravery in taking down “Jalut”, illustrates the point. Daud became the ruler of his nation as vouched in the Holy Qur'an, as a king no less, but he was hardly a theologian, or even an intellectual by his profession. He was surely very intelligent to have hit his enemy at his weakest point, and he ruled justly and with courage. Those qualities evidently were his qualifications to be anointed King of the Jews. This is quite contrary to Plato's philosopher-king and it is the Holy Qur'an that is making that assertion by retelling the story of Prophet Daud. As in all Qur'anic stories and parables, there is wisdom that is being conveyed.
The form of government is immaterial in the religion of Islam which lays a great deal of emphasis in its many verses on veritable moral principles as Divine Guidance to mankind. It is silent on what form the government should take, or who should become the rulers in future times.

Fixing Qur'anic Beatitudes
The Holy Qur'an instead affirms the lovely beatitudinous (from beatitude: supreme blessedness; exalted happiness) promise:
And We desired to bestow a favor upon those who were deemed weak in the land, and to make them the Imams, and to make them the heirs,” (Surah Al-Qasas 28:5)
وَنُرِيدُ أَن نَّمُنَّ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ ٱسْتُضْعِفُوا۟ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ وَنَجْعَلَهُمْ أَئِمَّةً وَنَجْعَلَهُمُ ٱلْوَٰرِثِينَ
Allah has decreed: "It is I and My messengers who must prevail": For Allah is One full of strength, able to enforce His Will.” (Surah Al-Mujaadila 58:21)
كَتَبَ ٱللَّهُ لَأَغْلِبَنَّ أَنَا۠ وَرُسُلِىٓ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ قَوِىٌّ عَزِيزٌ
Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): "My servants, the righteous, shall inherit the earth." (Surah Al-Anbiyaa 21:105)
وَلَقَدْ كَتَبْنَا فِى ٱلزَّبُورِ مِنۢ بَعْدِ ٱلذِّكْرِ أَنَّ ٱلْأَرْضَ يَرِثُهَا عِبَادِىَ ٱلصَّٰلِحُونَ
Caption The Holy Qur'an's equivalent of the Biblical Beatitude: “the meek shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5 Holy Bible KJV). Is the Holy Qur'an proclaiming Divine Rule as the natural culmination of Islam? Or, are these verses proclaiming that the ordinary human beings among mankind will eventually prevail; they shall eventually establish justice among mankind and reach the highest station of creation in accordance with Divine Teachings that have been revealed to mankind by messengers and prophets throughout the ages? The twain are not the same propositions semantically – obviously – despite the pious pulpits insistence upon the former interpretation of these verses! If Divine Rule is to be implemented by God's own appointed Imams, it is a tacit admission of failure of Islam to transform man upon his own volition! Only a foolish human author would set his own guidance system up for such an abject failure by predicating that no matter what man will do, mankind will still need divine intervention to reach Islam's culmination! Then what was the point of Islam? God could just as well have created the perfect man with Adam and Eve rather than the imperfect man who is destined to reach perfection by seeking Divine Guidance revealed in Islam's sacred scripture.
Straightforward inspection once again reveals that all these verses often brought up by the pulpits are prima facie Indeterminates. Like verse 4:59, verse 28:5 “who were deemed weak in the land,” is unknown. Perhaps it can be similarly qualitatively reasoned from other verses of the Holy Qur'an, but without specific context which is not in the Holy Qur'an, it would either remain temporal, meaning applicable only to the time of the Prophet when he was constantly under attack, or metaphorical and strictly Indeterminate. It can just as easily be argued by all oppressed to apply to themselves to encourage themselves with hope to continue in their perseverance! And it can also be argued by Machiavelli to apply to the oppressed to foment manufactured revolutions. However, a closer analytical examination also reveals that for the promise: “to make them the Imams, and to make them the heirs,” these heirs must logically also share common characteristics with the Imams the Holy Qur'an has referenced elsewhere. For instance, in Surah Al-Baqara verse 2:124 (already quoted above) where the Author proclaims that He alone makes Imams by Divine appointment: “He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He.”
When the Author of the Holy Qur'an appoints Imams as per his covenant with Prophet Ibrahim, the word “Imam” is used in a specific sense from its common meaning as the proper noun expressing Divine Appointment. The Arabic-English dictionary of the Holy Qur'an defines the common meaning of the word “Imam” thusly: “Leader; President; Any object that is followed, whether a human being or a book or a highway”. That common meaning of the word “Imam” for instance is prima facie evident in verse 17:71 of Surah al-Israa' (examined in Part-II): “One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams”. One word, two distinct meanings, by the very definitions present in the Holy Qur'an in the semantics of the verse. The problem arises when attempt is cunningly or perhaps unwittingly made to alias the proper noun version as the common noun version.
As Machiavellian as that aliasing is for successfully marginalizing Islam, far greater damage is done when the Muslim pulpit and the plentiful exegesis writers who become sanctified in history as the source to go to for understanding the meaning of the Holy Qur'an, do the same aliasing to serve their own narrow interests. And whether they do it wittingly at the behest of their masters, or unwittingly due to incompetence or bias becomes irrelevant, for the impact in either case is resemantification of the verse and distortion of its meaning. It is the easiest subterfuge – you can't change the syntax and wording of the Holy Qur'an because that is protected by systematic oral memorization of the entire Holy Qur'an by plain ordinary Muslims from generation to generation beginning from the very time of the Prophet of Islam, so change its meaning! Only the very learned turbans can accomplish that most successfully. Especially when the verses are even partly or fully Indeterminate. But this travesty of the holy pen is plenty observable even for what is Determinate and what is categorical in verses which does not suit the ruling genius. The best example of this travesty is the watering down of the Principle of Inerrancy as applied to the Prophet of Islam by the holy scribes. Its idiotic resemantification is visible in countless respected books of exegesis from antiquity to modernity. These exegeses have misinformed generation upon generation of Muslims who have reached for the Cliff notes on the Holy Qur'an.
This subversion of the Holy Qur'an is exactly identical to how the learned Jewish rabbis caveated their Ten Commandments from their universal form to exceptional form in order to claim moral exemptions for themselves so that actually doing the universal refrains to the goy was no longer forbidden to them. Thus, Thou Shall Not Kill, the First Commandment for instance, was changed to Thou Shall Not Kill (a Jew) in meaning. See Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement! for even more shocking contortions by the rabbis who superseded the spirit of the Torah with the spirit of the Talmud. The scribes of the Torah had already visited the same travesty upon the teachings of Prophet Moses. The Talmuds just took it ten steps further in perversity which today underwrites the Jewish ethos more than anything Prophet Moses ever taught. And the world amply sees this in Zionism which is but an expression of Jewish exceptionalism taught in the Talmud. The unequivocal condemnation in the Holy Qur'an of the Jews distorting their Good Book of Divine Guidance to suit their whim and fancy, is but a clear warning to the believers of the Holy Qur'an to refrain from doing the same. And yet, the Muslim turbans have visited the same travesty upon the Holy Qur'an and its religion Islam such that no two Muslims will necessarily agree on what something means. Each will bring their respective socialized understanding from the pens of these holy scribes to assert its meaning. The truth of these words is empirical, and without doubt. It is self-evident, except to those who are caught in its trap.
Therefore, keeping all that preceding clarity at the forefront of cognitive thinking, in the specific sense of Imam appointed by the Author in the context of 2:124, as opposed to just any ordinary leader that has a following in the context of 17:71, obedience is made obligatory for those for whom they are Imams, and the entire discussion of وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ of verse 4:59 in Part-II also carries over wherever and whenever obedience is made obligatory to any man by the Author. As already reasoned out in preceding sections, the Author of the Holy Qur'an cannot make obedience obligatory towards anyone who can make an error and not make a mockery of His Own divine Guidance System as the right path. Imam, obedience to the Imam, and the Principle of Inerrancy sort of go together as a package – in order for it to make any logical and rational sense to demand obedience to a man and still remain on the path of Divine Guidance which is proclaimed to be error free, infallible. Which is why, in its resemantification to serve self-interest, “ulul amar” is aliased as a common noun – and voilà, just about anyone can be it who can get away with it! That is the history of its corruption from the very day of the death of the Prophet of Islam until today where anyone has been able to become emperor, caliph, king, amir-ul-momineen, and today valih-e faqih, by including himself in that set and insisting on his entitlement by mere assertion and recourse to texts outside the pages of the Holy Qur'an. Why do they have to go outside for proof of their divine sanction? Precisely, because there isn't any in the Determinate verses of the Holy Qur'an. All one finds in its pristine pages is the categorical prohibition to being a follower, without caveat, as one can witness in the deconstruction of Taqlid below.
So, if the word “Imam” is used in verse 28:5 in that specific sense of 2:124, the verse is still only a Beatitude, an uplifting promise of some future time. The brilliant ability to harvest that theological concept for self-interest by the superman among both: the Shia pulpit to orchestrate “Imammate by proxy” to seed IRAN: The Crescent of Crisis as the birth of the uncompromising “Revolutionary Islam”, and among the hectoring hegemons to orchestrate the fiction of “Armageddon”, not withstanding. A contorted “doctrinal motivation” on two opposing sides for synthesizing the fear of “Clash of Civilizations” in order to continually lend credence to the threat of “End Times”. It enables manufacturing a brilliant Hegelian Dialectic which cannot be disputed by those caught in its web – as it is already written in the sacred books that more than half the world's population believes in. It promotes the fiction of the existence of a global existential threat, putting the entire world on perpetual crisis footing.[12]
And if the word “Imam” represents the common meaning of 17:71 as an ordinary leader, it is exactly akin to the Biblical Beatitude: “the meek shall inherit the earth” (Matthew 5:5 Holy Bible KJV). Once again no reason to obey the meek when they inherit the earth – for they could become the next tyrants as was amply witnessed in the French Revolution and in the military dictatorship and conquests of Napoleon that followed.
Even whether verse 28:5 is speaking of the Messenger's own contemporary epoch when Prophet Muhammad finally prevailed over his own oppressors of twenty three long years and conquered Mecca just before he died, or of some future time, is Indeterminate. As is verse 58:21 affirming: "It is I and My messengers who must prevail"; and verse 21:105 similarly affirming: "My servants, the righteous, shall inherit the earth". All remarkably akin to the aforementioned uplifting promise in the Biblical Beatitude, and all recipient of the preceding analysis in toto.
When will such bliss transpire on earth is of course an ageless open question. It has been the source of speculation and anticipation from time immemorial, and the principal argument for Divine Rule since the adoption of Christianity by the Roman Empire. As far as the Holy Qur'an is concerned, it is Indeterminate.
It is of course also extraordinarily utilitarian for any believer or their chief to claim that inheritance for oneself in any era – mostly to survive with hope and dignity through dark periods of tyranny – for who can challenge that presumption? No certificates are required!
Especially if one succeeds in acquiring state powers and engages a thousand scribes and orators to extol one's divine rights to that inheritance as the vilayat-i faqih. Since it is an Indeterminate, it can be posited any which way one wishes to dignify it, limited only by the fertility of one's imagination and foundation of one's eruditeness. The beatitude cannot be disproved from the Holy Qur'an because it is anchored as an Indeterminate! And it can certainly be proved to one's own audience by drawing upon one's own historical narratives that are collectively subscribed by the group. It is the empirical principle which seeds both group-think, conformity within a group, as well as diversity of thoughts and beliefs among different groups in mankind each exercising its own group-think.
"That which is left you by Allah is best for you, if ye (but) believed! but I am not set over you to keep watch!" (Surah Hud, 11:86)
بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ ۚ وَمَآ أَنَا۠ عَلَيْكُم بِحَفِيظٍ
Say: "Each one (of us) is waiting: wait ye, therefore, and soon shall ye know who it is that is on the straight and even way, and who it is that has received Guidance." (Surah Ta-Ha, 20:135)
قُلْ كُلٌّ مُّتَرَبِّصٌ فَتَرَبَّصُوا۟ ۖ فَسَتَعْلَمُونَ مَنْ أَصْحَٰبُ ٱلصِّرَٰطِ ٱلسَّوِىِّ وَمَنِ ٱهْتَدَىٰ
Caption Is the Holy Qur'an proclaiming a Savior?
Verses 11:86 and 20:135 of the Holy Qur'an are intriguing examples of Indeterminates along the same lines of allegorical Beatitudes, but which directly fall on the Shia-Sunni sectarian divide on how these are understood by the Muslim mind. One must in fact go to sources outside the Holy Qur'an to even get an inkling of who or what (the people in the past believed) is being spoken of by the Author: بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ . These exemplary verses, and a few more like these, are esoterically proclaimed by some of these outside sources to be about Imam Mahdi – the Awaited Savior of humanity who will rule in End Times --- that entire eschatology itself being only in pages outside of the Holy Qur'an. Why are these verses not categorical rather than metaphorical if the knowledge of eschatology is of pertinence to every people in every epoch? Speculation upon these verses is rife with absurdities.
Whereas, the prima facie meaning of verse 11:86 refers to some object ( بَقِيَّتُ ), a nominative feminine noun, which can mean anything including persons or thing or guidance, that Allah leaves for “you” ( لَّكُمْ , both male and female) as a gift or benefit or mercy that you need for your divine guidance ( خَيْرٌ ).
Straightforwardly, to the ordinary non doctrinaire mind, بَقِيَّتُ can represent the Holy Qur'an itself, which Allah has left those who believe ( مُّؤْمِنِينَ ), as being best for them. Or it could mean the أُولِي الْأَمْرِ of verse 4:59. Which one, if either, is not further disambiguated. The remaining part of the verse indicates Allah is not going to shepherd the believers beyond what He has already left them – it is entirely up to the believers to run with the remnant of Allah, بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ , and: “Surely We have shown him the way: he may be thankful or unthankful.” (see verse 76:3 quoted above)
The remnant of Allah, بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ , in this verse is just a common noun, a symbol, a placeholder variable waiting to take on the instance of the object, or objects it represents, and not the object itself. Surely the Messenger of Allah must have explained what it means – but that explanation is not contained in the Holy Qur'an itself.
Therefore, verse 11:86 is prima facie allegorical, metaphorical, and not categorical; it is آيَاتٌ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ and therefore Indeterminate. This verse, like all the other مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ , as a cynic would surely surmise, evidently exist only to sow confusion and discord among the Believers, perhaps to separate those who think ( أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ ) from those who do not: “and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.” In addition, to stochastically seed diversity of beliefs based on natural socialization, tribe and nation that one is born into – which it has also always succeeded in doing, in every era. That observation is empirical. The veracity of these words is beyond doubt. It is self-evident.
Notice that the Sunnis and the Shias each fill in the variable according to their respective sacred books. Being entitled to one's belief system whatever it may be as the most basic human right, the Sunni Muslims are not remiss if they think بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ might mean the Holy Qur'an, or the Caliphate; and the Shia Muslims are not remiss if they think it is the أُولِي الْأَمْرِ of verse 4:59. Since the latter today is the twelfth Imam, Imam Mahdi, according to the dogma found in Shia Ithna Ashari books of history, that's how that variable is fixed by them accordingly. Whereas the Shia Ismaili Muslim aren't remiss if some among them might believe بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ represents their Hazir Imam, the Aga Khan.
Believe whatever you want. However, unless it can be logically adduced from the Determinates alone who or what is being referenced by the Author in Surah Hud 11:86, it is categorically an Indeterminate. The Determinate verses at times provide an unequivocal rejection criterion for exclusion of what is willy-nilly fixed in the Indeterminates even when these Determinates may be silent on the acceptance criterion for the Indeterminates. The rejection criterion though powerful when applied logically and rationally, still leaves the door wide open for the acceptance of whatever that can be plausibly passed off by the boundless imagination of man in the Indeterminates! This is an undeniable problem that the Holy Qur'an has faced at the hands of the holy man. But it is a problem which it has itself enabled ab initio by the very presence of the Indeterminates. It is almost as if the Author of the Holy Qur'an wanted this to happen – why else would He leave that door wide open for it – thus laying the foundation of diversity of interpretations right there in the religion of Islam's singular scripture that the Author asserts he perfected: “This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.” (Surah Al-Maeda verse fragment 5:3) Well, if the Author perfected and completed the guidance system and the system itself plays out among its own audience in multiple themes using its own Indeterminates, what else to make of it? Tell a child not to do something, and what's the first thing he will do?
Similarly, in the case of Surah Ta-Ha 20:135 where the Author commands, Say: "Each one (of us) is waiting: wait ye,", the object noun for “wait ye” is noticeably absent, making the verse also an Indeterminate even on first reading. However, whatever that “wait ye,” might be for, the verse avers that it will unequivocally permit clear adjudication when that wait eventually does expire: “soon shall ye know who it is that is on the straight and even way, and who it is that has received Guidance." Once again we are immediately besieged by more imponderables. What does “soon” mean? How soon is soon? Is that the final Day of judgment? Or is that the arrival of the day of fulfillment of the promise made in the Qur'anic Beatitudes quoted above? Is that perhaps also what بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ refers to, the fulfillment of the divine promise which is the remnant of Allah: “That which is left you by Allah is best for you”?
Thus, whichever way one examines it, بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ is at best a metaphor whose semantics, never mind hidden meaning, is known only to Allah, (and as per the alternate parsing of verse 3:7 of Surah Aal-'Imran already discussed in Part-II) and to “Ar-Rasikhoon-fil-ilm” ( الرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ ).
All these inquiry questions are clearly Indeterminate, each one leading to more questions than answers, and thus entirely speculative to ponder upon. It is for this reason that these verses have been speciously speculated upon throughout the ages – an occupation of idle minds who perhaps never had to pursue a day's honest labor to earn their keep in their lifetime of paid employment from public funds as glorified theologians and scribes. The only function they ended up serving is causing needless differentiation to arise among Muslims based purely on speculative hearsay and verbal reportage centuries downstream – the “he said she said” which became known as the hadith literature – leading the foolish public mind deeper and deeper into the sectarian quagmire. Integrated over time and space, this socialized ethos has become a permanent and virtually unshakable part of religious beliefs of virtually all Muslims, in all sects.
Today, the same public mind will comply in voluntary servitude under the demand of absolute obedience to authority on matters entirely Indeterminate and drawn from pages outside of the Holy Qur'an. If its Author wanted the people in future times to know any matter of religion of Islam not already covered in the Holy Qur'an, He would have clearly stated it categorically in the foundational verses and made it clearly Determinate, Mr. Spock sensibly surmises, so that all peoples in all times would understand it straightforwardly without juristic misinterpretation and chance of being misled by what is erringly human, the pen of fallible man. The Holy Qur'an unequivocally prescribes the accumulating fortunes of such imams in Surah An-Nahl:
Let them bear, on the Day of Judgment, their own burdens in full, and also (something) of the burdens of those without knowledge, whom they misled. Alas, how grievous the burdens they will bear! (Surah An-Nahl 16:25)
لِيَحْمِلُوٓا۟ أَوْزَارَهُمْ كَامِلَةً يَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ ۙ وَمِنْ أَوْزَارِ ٱلَّذِينَ يُضِلُّونَهُم بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ ۗ أَلَا سَآءَ مَا يَزِرُونَ

What does the Holy Qur'an say about Taqlid?
Examining the Question of Following the Jurist
Verse of 16:25 of Surah An-Nahl quoted above is also stupendous in its overarching import. It straightforwardly exposes core lies which have become sanctified as “religion” in specious dogmas among Muslims. For one, it exposes “taqlid”, the practice of blind emulation and prescribed following of a jurist by the laity – a practice equally prevalent in both Shiadom and Sunnidom – as a master fraud for social control. Upon that master fraud is the edifice of the entire conception of sectarian Sharia laws, i.e., jurisprudence (religious legalisms that vary for each Muslim sect based on the opinions of its dominant jurists who have appointed themselves Interpreter of faith), constructed.
Expose its very foundation as being based on a core lie – and the entire sacred totem pole comes crashing down under its own weight!
The Holy Qur'an which daringly calls itself “Al-Furqaan” – the Author's Criterion by which to judge the truth or falsity of any proposition (or understanding) pertaining to His Own Revealed Guidance System for mankind ( مِّنَ ٱلْهُدَىٰ وَٱلْفُرْقَانِ ۚ ); which He even asserts He “perfected” and “completed” and named it “Islam” ( الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ۚ ), and therefore there is no further room in its specification for additions and subtractions – does precisely that. (Verse fragments from Surah Al-Baqara 2:185 and Surah Al-Maeda 5:3 respectively,)
Even a tiny bit of logical reflection on the concatenation of verses pertinent to the Qur'anic Principle of Inerrancy already examined previously with verse of 16:25 of Surah An-Nahl exposes “taqlid” as a fabrication of the pulpit!
Perhaps it is necessary to restate for the sake of completeness, that only “These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance” (Surah Al An'aam verse 6:90 quoted earlier), can ever be exempt from the damnation of this most electrifying verse 16:25 of Surah An-Nahl! Only the specific inerrant persons whom Allah is commanding the believers to follow – for indeed these have to be inerrant if Allah has directly guided them – can also be the “ulul-amar” of verse 4:59 already discussed earlier. No one else is permitted to be followed, and obeyed, in the religion of Islam! With that singular exception of obedience to the inerrant “imam” who is solely appointed by Allah (by His Own Declarations in the Holy Qur'an already examined above) and is not selected, elected, or anointed by the fiat of man, the entire concept of “following” and “followers” is unequivocally condemned in the Holy Qur'an. Most emphatically, in Surah Al-Baqara verses 2:166-2:167 (already quoted above). Due to its categorical significance, it is reproduced yet one more time to remind the reader of what the Good Book itself says categorically, in the clearest of terms, without caveats or exemptions:
(On the day) when those who were followed disown those who followed (them), and they behold the doom, and all their aims collapse with them.
إِذْ تَبَرَّأَ الَّذِينَ اتُّبِعُوا مِنَ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوا وَرَأَوُا الْعَذَابَ وَتَقَطَّعَتْ بِهِمُ الْأَسْبَابُ
And those who were but followers will say: If a return were possible for us, we would disown them even as they have disowned us. Thus will Allah show them their own deeds as anguish for them, and they will not emerge from the Fire.” (Surah Al-Baqara, 2:166-2:167)
وَقَالَ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوا لَوْ أَنَّ لَنَا كَرَّةً فَنَتَبَرَّأَ مِنْهُمْ كَمَا تَبَرَّءُوا مِنَّا ۗ كَذَٰلِكَ يُرِيهِمُ اللَّهُ أَعْمَالَهُمْ حَسَرَاتٍ عَلَيْهِمْ ۖ وَمَا هُمْ بِخَارِجِينَ مِنَ النَّارِ
So how can “taqlid” of the fallible jurist be part of the religion of Islam when the very concept of following itself, ab initio, is not only most clearly deprecated, but Surah An-Nahl verse 16:25 also most clearly apportions culpability to those who are followed?
If “taqlid” of a fallible jurist was a part of the religion of Islam, then the Author of the Holy Qur'an created an absurdity, a foolishness; the Author commanded Muslims to follow an ordinary mortal who is not infallible, but since the jurist is not inerrant, and neither does any respectable jurist ever claim to be inerrant, foolish and sheepish people among the masses, those without knowledge and understanding, will also follow him. In point of fact and reality-check, in actual sectarian practice of Muslims, obedience is extorted from the public mind at the threat of eternal damnation – otherwise why would the sheepish laity follow the anointed popes except for that irrational fear which is continually cultivated and harvested by the church of man?
If “taqlid” of a fallible jurist was sanctioned by the religion of Islam, then, as per verse 16:25, these persons whom Allah is commanding to be followed will be apportioned their measure of blame if they are followed in their errors and the people are misled! That is a patent absurdity; a Kafkaesque double jeopardy: follow and be damned (verses 2:166-2:167), don't follow and be damned (“taqlid”), and the imam is damned because he is not inerrant and is followed and obeyed as ordered even in his mistakes, confabulations, distortions, half-truths, innovations, Indeterminate fixing, etceteras, which of course no one can adjudicate or catch or challenge because only the ignorant laity follows him (verse 16:25)! This is the base reality of Muslim jurists and their blind followers since the inception of the church of jurisprudence!
The Author of the Holy Qur'an Who claims to be the most Just and the most Wise Creator of all creation, cannot command “imams” to be followed and obeyed, and when they are followed and obeyed as per ordered, the “imams” are apportioned blame for their blind following when they venture their fallible opinions dependent solely on their particular bent of mind, proclivity, psychological tendencies, socialization bias, natural talent (and un-talent), ability to think and reason, knowledge, understanding, etceteras, in their verdict! No two people think the same, never mind agree on any matter --- and yet they are commanded to be followed!
Indeed, if this absurd proposition of “taqlid” is true, then the Author has made a mockery of His own Guidance System! Whereas the Author is most sensitive about taking His Message lightly. He has repeatedly Admonished mankind to not mock the Holy Qur'an: “Is it such a Message that ye would hold in light esteem?” (Surah Al-Waqia 56:81 quoted in Part-II); that: “Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds” (Surah At-Takwir 81:27 quoted above); and: 'Then the Messenger will say: “O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.”' (Surah Al-Furqaan 25:30).
After all these straightforward admonitions to Muslims in the clearest of terms to take the Scripture seriously, the Author then ventures to mock His Own Message by mandating to the Muslim masses the “taqlid” of fallible jurists, and subsequently hanging these jurists for misleading the people because they are not inerrant and foolish people have inevitably followed them as commanded?
What a fickle-minded creator who damns if you do and damns if you don't --- only in the mind of man!
By reductio ad absurdum, when a proposition reduces to an absurdity, the premise it is predicated upon is false.
Since verses 2:166-2:167 and verse 16:25 are categorical, and presumed to be true ab initio as an axiom of faith that the Holy Qur'an has not been tampered with by the hand of man (no “tahreef”), therefore, Taqlid must be false as presuming it to be true in the presence of these verses leads to absurdity. If one still insists Taqlid to be true, then one also has to accept the consequent fact that the Holy Qur'an contains absurdities. No Muslim mind on planet earth will accept that outcome. It's easier for it to accept Taqlid as falsehood.
Directly from the Holy Qur'an.
Marja-e-taqlid: right!
Blind emulation, “taqlid”, of a fallible imam jurist who is incestuously proclaimed Marja-e-taqlid by his coterie of equally fallible peers in Shiadom, is an absurdity in the religion of Islam in no less a measure than blanket obedience demanded to a fallible imam caliph who is speciously anointed “ulul-amar” by the shenanigans of political power around him, is in Sunnidom! Both are weighty fabrications of the respective pious Muslim pulpits; vile slanders upon the religion of Islam. It is categorically proscribed in the Holy Qur'an. There is no room for any doubt or interpretation. The veritable logic of Al-Furqaan, so clear and simple in adjudication with its Determinate verses that even a sixth grader can straightforwardly follow its steps, coldly attests to that statement of fact. The previous examination of the Principle of Inerrancy which unequivocally established the singular prerequisite for complete obedience to “al-Wasilah” from the Determinate verses, also attests to that fact. “Alas, how grievous the burdens they will bear!”
Which is why, failing to find support in the Holy Qur'an, recourse is often made to pages outside the Holy Qur'an to legitimize this absurdity. Applying the same logic method of reductio ad absurdum recursively to every argument and every evidence presented from outside the Holy Qur'an, trivially demolishes them all. Sometimes evidence is presented from a recorded act of history, such as the Prophet or Imams of the Ahlul Bayt having appointed their own representatives and mandating the people over whom they exercised authority to obey their representatives on their behalf. Well, even philosophically, the burden of the acts and decisions of a representative ultimately still rests upon the one whom he represents, and who is still ultimately in authority to rectify matters if the need ever arose, to hear dissatisfaction, and to adjudicate. This is self-evident by definition of “representative” in this semantic context. Which is why it is a false argument of the self-appointed valih-e-faqih (or appointed by a consultative committee of self-styled holy jurists) for speciously conferring legitimacy upon himself because one, he can produce no certificate of such divine appointment, and two, he is now the highest authority next to God. No one can challenge his authority even legally. A throwback to the stone age to say the least, and no different than any vanilla don or king, including the King of kings the valih-e-faqih replaced with such fanfare in so much Persian blood tribute. Absolute rule which went away in the Age of Enlightenment in the West has been brought back with a new vengeance to the backward Muslims to help shape world order as proxy service providers of the West.
To be vigilant of false friends, false guides, false imams making false claims, is veritably underscored in Surah Al-Furqaan itself:
The Day that the wrong-doer will bite at his hands, he will say, 'Oh! Would that I had taken a (straight) path with the Messenger!' 25:27
وَيَوْمَ يَعَضُّ الظَّالِمُ عَلَىٰ يَدَيْهِ يَقُولُ يَا لَيْتَنِي اتَّخَذْتُ مَعَ الرَّسُولِ سَبِيلًا
'Ah! Woe is me! Would that I had never taken such a one for a friend!' 25:28
يَا وَيْلَتَىٰ لَيْتَنِي لَمْ أَتَّخِذْ فُلَانًا خَلِيلًا
'He did lead me astray from the Message (of Allah) after it had come to me! Ah! the Evil One is but a traitor to man!' 25:29
لَقَدْ أَضَلَّنِي عَنِ الذِّكْرِ بَعْدَ إِذْ جَاءَنِي ۗ وَكَانَ الشَّيْطَانُ لِلْإِنْسَانِ خَذُولًا
Then the Messenger will say: 'O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.' Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-Furqaan 25:30
وَقَالَ الرَّسُولُ يَا رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِي اتَّخَذُوا هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنَ مَهْجُورًا
Caption Surah Al-Furqaan 25:27-30 The ex post facto lament on the Day of Judgment by believers of having taken someone for a friend and being led astray by them, in the language of the Holy Qur'an is a categorical admonishment before the fact, referring to those who come posing as friends and not overtly as enemies. This is a warning to all peoples to be wary of their own kind betraying them, for one usually takes those whom one knows and trusts as one's friends, guardians, protectors, guides, and imams. Only friends can betray because the concept of betrayal is tied to trust. In other words, the Holy Qur'an, Al-Furqaan, is warning the simpleton mind in every age to be wary of false friends, false imams, Trojan Horse, Machiavelli, who win the public trust with cognitive infiltration, and all the rest of the techniques of deception used in betrayal where the ones being betrayed do not realize it then. The purpose of the warning is obvious – so that the believers can shrewdly protect themselves from that outcome rather than lament on the Day of Accountability that they did not know. If they still don't wakeup today to their false friends and false imams who often come wearing the garbs and turbans endearing to the public mind, then the Prophet of Islam's strong lament is also recorded. Referring to the misled people as “my people” to show his deep anguish, the Prophet of Islam cries out that they did not take the Guidance in the Holy Qur'an seriously, shackling its meaning down to idiocy, down to their own whim and fancy, making the Deen-e-mubeen “mahjoor”!
These verses of Surah Al-Furqaan, 25:27-30, also unequivocally strike down false notions fed to the masses to legitimize taqlid of the fallible jurist that the follower may claim exemption from condemnation in Afterlife if one's own intention is good and one followed an imam who leads one astray by honest mistake of his ijtihad: “Ah! Woe is me! Would that I had never taken such a one for a friend! He did lead me astray from the Message (of Allah) after it had come to me! Ah! the Evil One is but a traitor to man!”
Sadly, no Muslim mind ever believes that these admonishments can ever apply to it. These always only apply to all the other fools over there in the other sects! The Sunnis believe this of the Shia with as much divine conviction as the Shias believe this of the Sunni, both opening the door wide open to Dr. Machiavelli to come rape them both.
This characteristic of self-righteousness is itself an inherent part of the religion of man. The fear and discomfort of cognitive dissonance evidently inhibits its very occurrence. Without experiencing cognitive dissonance, the psychological state of inner mental conflict between two contrarian positions, no transformation can transpire. Which is why, when faced with contrarian facts or evidence, the degree to which a man violently resists giving up his prior beliefs is directly proportional to his inner insecurities and is an index to his desires (as philosopher Bertrand Russell observed of the frailty of the human mind). Desires of which he may himself be unconscious of, as its seat is in the subconscious mind. Freud established this as an empirical fact of the irrational mind at the turn of the twentieth century. It is what the multi-trillion dollar global advertising industry is built upon. It is why masses of human beings fall easy prey to anyone who can cater to their base desires and insecurities – the sine qua non for the mass success of both religion and marketing. Advertising professionals and Machiavelli understand this human frailty better than the common mind. It is the cornerstone of success for well-designed propaganda as well as marketing campaigns. It is why the ministry of truth (as Geroge Orwell termed it in Nineteen Eighty-four) all around the world have come into existence to more effectively make the public mind. So who is your imam now?
Which is why, at the risk of stating the obvious once again, in the matters of the straight path, the Author of the Holy Qur'an is categorically making each human being accountable for his every decision, including the decision to follow or not to follow others, to have one's mind made or not made by others. There is no exemption for “oops!” for anyone as these categorical verses of Surah Al-Baqara 2:166-2:167 and Surah Al-Furqaan 25:27-30 unequivocally assert. Neither in this life which becomes hellish not just for oneself but also for others when one follows false imams. Nor evidently in the Afterlife of Islam where everyone is called to account in the company of the “imam” they each followed: “One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams” (Surah al-Israa', 17:71). So if one followed a false guide and did not realize it, there is no “oops!” exemption!
After this analytical presentation, why should anyone still believe that the holy marja-e-taqlid is exempt from the condemnation of verse 16:25? That those who follow him are exempt from the condemnation of verses 2:166-2:167 and 25:27-30? Precisely, because of a socialized culture of religion rather than of learning that dominates the public mind.
If one was born a Hindu instead of a Muslim, one would be shouting the virtues of Krishna from the mandirs. Today, the Hindu mind is on safer ground because Machiavelli has found little use for it in fueling imperial mobilization. If for nothing else, then just for that reason alone this subject is of grave public concern. The “arc of crisis” like a spreading fire, as the world is continually witnessing, spares no one in its path. To put it out effectively takes getting the core fundamentals that are being harvested for this purpose in the name of Islam, better scrutinized in the public eye. Virtually all of these so called axioms of faith are the creation of Machiavelli, are not supported in the Good Book, and hence are not part of the religion of Islam expressed in it.
While much has been stated about both “militant Islam” and “moderate Islam” being alien to the religion of Islam, the third part of the trifecta for the recipe of creating perfect storm for Muslim on Muslim violence, “revolutionary Islam” and its enabling axiom of “taqlid”, has escaped forensic scrutiny by the more learned minds who surely have better “ma'rifat” (deeper understanding) of the subject. The analytical mind that goes on facts permits no room for absurdities and gratuitous assumptions of faith. Things have to make logical sense given all the facts, and all their linkages. Some linkages are directly visible, while others are made visible by the logic of adding two plus two correctly equal to four. This analytical deconstruction of “taqlid” without prejudice by a layman, is the product of that basic arithematic. A challenge directly to the valih-e-faqih du jour to respond, explain, and refute if there is any Qur'anic truth on his side. Silence is the domain of cowards. No one who claims Imam Ali as his guide has even a passing acquaintance with cowardice.
The controlling practice of “taqlid” as it has unfolded in Muslim civilizations, the underpinning of sects that were manufactured when the largely sheepish masses were encouraged to follow the anointed imam of their natural socialization by birth thus dividing into schools of thought, is a man-made divisive construct of the church of man. Its purpose is predatory social control of man by fellow man, be it among the Shia, the Sunni, the Ismaili, or any other group-think composition, in any religion. Like Christianity, the man of cloth as the interpreter of faith for the Muslims became a useful tool.
Is man so feeble minded, so inadequate in his talents, so corrupted in his heart, that he needs a fierce looking bearded shepherd until eternity to “Islamize” him? What an insult to God's creation --- and to God, that He Created such an absurdity in which imperfect man shall forever remain beholden to another imperfect man for guidance. Such an absurd God can only exist in the mind of Mephistopheles to enslave and control fellow man.
Any place where fallible man is anointed as the interpreter of faith for another, or obedience is demanded in the name of the divine, is a place where social control is being practiced in the name of the divine. Lift the pious robes and underneath one shall find, linked to the predatory social control, a bountiful and easy harvest of public's wealth being paid into the coffers of the pulpit, and empire. Perhaps this is why it is often hard to find clergy who is familiar with honest toil and labor. The bulging waist-lines alone testify to the vulgar empirical truth of virtually all priestly class living off of public donations in the name of religion.
The superman rulers have comprehended this vile modus operandi of social control far more perceptively than the sheepish public they govern! And the clergy class in every religion has served that ruling interest with an iron-clad regimentation from time immemorial. (Superman is reference to Nietzsche's superman and not to the Marvel comic book hero; the ubermensch, the uber alles, deems himself above all the others, is beyond good and evil, tells noble lies and thinks nothing of it, and strives with his own “will to power” instead of superstitious religions to achieve lordship over mankind who refuse to evolve past their sheep state.) But when the clergy class has itself become the state, the public has been reduced to intellectual servitude to fellow man in the name of divine. To have done that damage to the pristine religion Islam which its Author claims to have “perfected” as the Divine Guidance System revealed to free man from the clutches of fellow man, is an immodest and unpardonable travesty for which verse 16:25 of Surah An-Nahl plainly vouches: “Let them bear, on the Day of Judgment, their own burdens in full, and also (something) of the burdens of those without knowledge, whom they misled. Alas, how grievous the burdens they will bear!”
Unsurprisingly, no Muslim and his pope is going to give up their socialized interpretation of religion anymore than a socialized Zionist Jew is going to give up Zionism and a Brahmin priest is going to give up racism. And it is not because they each don't know or realize that their respective ideology is misanthropic and leads to the enslavement of the 'lesser peoples'. Knowing this general fact of obduracy about His Own Creation which, by His own Admission, “He fashioned him in due proportion” (see Surah As-Sajdah verses 32:07-32:09), is perhaps why the Author of the Holy Qur'an proffered that straightforward Admonition to people driven by self-interests and socialization bias even when truth has clearly been made manifest from error, of scores only being settled on the Day of Judgment. That, in this life, to wholeheartedly “strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.” (Surah Al-Maeda 5:48)
Therefore, as per the noble advocacy of this verse to eliminate conflict among mankind, one may hastily conclude that if “taqlid”, or any other harmonious system for that matter, leads to that wonderful race in all virtues, all power to it. That is the point – that any principled system can be made as virtuous in theory as it can be made evil in practice. The choice is evidently left up to man in the Holy Qur'an. The problem comes in when it is the latter and reduces an entire nation in willing servitude to the whims and ideas of one man, the self-anointed philosopher-king, with his subjects loving their state of bondage in the name of the Divine.
For those unfamiliar with the principal axiom of the Divine Guidance System of the religion of Islam, the topic is covered in the tutorial derived from this study: What does the Holy Qur'an say about Taqlid - Blind Following the Non-Infallible? ( The axiom of inerrancy is also extracted into a tutorial due to its enormous significance in understanding the exhortation to obey the Messenger and which cannot be extended to anyone else but the inerrant “ulul amar”: What does the Holy Qur'an say about Inerrancy of Prophet Muhammad?.(

What does the Holy Qur'an say about Government?
To resume and reach respectable closure on the earlier thread on the examination of Qur'anic Beatitudes and the pulpits' appeal to divinely sanctioned rule in its many different formulations by fixing the Indeterminates to suit their socialization bias, we can now appreciate that there are layers of meaning to these metaphorical verses not resolved by the Determinates, and hence are Indeterminate. And unless these do become resolved by Determinates, either by acquiring new understanding, or new knowledge that is discovered over time that makes comprehending the Indeterminates in the light of the Determinates better, these categorically remain Indeterminate and open-ended! Perhaps the Messenger had explained their hidden meanings to his contemporaries. Those who believe they still retain these explanations accurately in their socialization context, can of course believe whatever they like – they are socialized, nay entirely indoctrinated, into these belief systems anyway with little real choice exercised by them.
Indeed, the more honest ones among them openly proclaim their religion as an inheritance, especially the descendants of the Ahlul Bayt. They announce it publicly too --- by prepending “Syed” and similar appellation before or after their name to advertise to the world that their lineage descends directly from the Prophet of Islam. The pontiffs advertise it proudly too, by wearing the black colored turban tied in a specific way to indicate their special status as the children of the Prophet and his Ahlul Bayt. And the most open and bold admission is of course by the Western educated Aga Khan IV, who avers that he is the 49th continuous hereditary imam of the Ismaili Nizari Shia Muslims. A global imam without territory who exercises complete control as well as full responsibility over his flock from his one of a kind headquarters in France. He also represents the best spirit of the pluralism of Islam among all Muslim sects by his social welfare work worldwide, benefitting all peoples, as principally advocated in Surah Al-Hujraat 49:13 (see below). No other Muslim sect or imam can hold a candle to, or lay claims to, such demonstrated pluralism. However, the proverbial pound of flesh has equally been extracted from these long running hereditary imams as well. Witness the Aga Khan's most unusual level of co-option in working hand in glove with empire in: Ismaili Muslims and Aga Khan's Doctrine of Neutrality
( And further witness the exhibition of banal self-righteousness that is little different from all the other Muslim sects' despite genuine attempts at pluralism, in: The Amman Message ( A pluralism when it is not in conflict with self-righteousness!
When religion is an inheritance, and makes one self-righteous, one can at best acquire mastery and scholarship only upon one's inheritance.
We observe that fact in practice. It is foolish to require anyone to give up their inheritance --- it is what defines us like our gender, it is who we are, the tribe and nation we belong to.
O mankind! Lo! We have created you from male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. Lo! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Lo! Allah is Knower, Aware. (Surah Al-Hujraat, 49:13)
يا أيها الناس إنا خلقناكم من ذكر وأنثى وجعلناكم شعوبا وقبائل لتعارفوا ۚ إن أكرمكم عند الله أتقاكم ۚ إن الله عليم خبير
That empirical fact of the hard genetic structure which expresses itself in the plurality of strains that is mankind, has evidently been extended to its programming, i.e., religion, as well. That undeniable fact of empiricism too is categorically recorded in Surah Al-Maeda, 5:44-48 (See Islam and Knowledge vs Socialization,
However, the men and woman of understanding among them, ( أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ ), must also force their pulpits to publicly acknowledge to their own flock that their fixing of an Indeterminate is drawn from sources outside the pages of the Holy Qur'an, from their respective holy books and sectarian dogmas. If one is to stay within the pages of the Holy Qur'an, one is forced to leave these matters as the Author Himself counsels in verse 3:7, as metaphorical, and therefore, Indeterminate. Meaning, as unknowns, without feeling any inner compulsion to fix their meaning at all.
Observe that despite the arguable metaphorical allusions to divinely sanctioned rule in its Indeterminates, the Holy Qur'an does not categorically prescribe in its Determinate verses any kind of governance, never mind specify who must rule apart from أُولِي الْأَمْرِ of verse 4:59 previously analyzed, and which is itself left as an Indeterminate. It is arguably to transpire only in some unknown and unspecified epoch whence all the Qur'anic Beatitudes quoted above are finally realized: “It is I and My messengers who must prevail”. Thus far, that allegorical promise of both the Holy Bible and the Holy Qur'an have not been realized. We still live in a world of tyranny run by vile Hectoring Hegemons, now even more sophisticated than ever, employing diabolical instruments and philosophies to continually corral mankind from one misery to another under different Hegelian Dialectics. So who governs in the mean time? Sensibly, the people have to govern themselves! The Holy Qur'an has categorically prescribed its recipe that man must willingly stand up to these usurpers and exploiters of mankind among them (see However, the Holy Qur'an has not prescribed in its Determinate verses what such governance must look like that stands up to tyranny, except for some desirable general characteristics of righteous collectivism which it categorically prescribes for realizing the good Islamic society that is the harbinger of justice for all mankind.
In fact, these Qur'anic platitudes are not that much different in principle from what Solon, the ancient Athenian law-giver, advocated for social responsibility. When asked which city he thought was well-governed, Solon said: “That city where those who have not been injured take up the cause of one who has, and prosecute the case as earnestly as if the wrong had been done to themselves.”
For that matter, even the United States Constitution and its famous American Bill of Rights are not inconsistent with the Holy Qur'an. There isn't anything in that manmade republican governance principle that is intrinsically in conflict with the Good Book. In fact, it can be cogently argued to be implementing some of the principles of Islam itself. Unlike others claiming the divine right to rule through 4:59, the American Constitution however does not claim itself to be divine – but Declares itself to be self-evident for the spelled out inalienable rights of the people.
It is a travesty that all these lofty platitudes on lovely parchment have been instrumented in society with the same inimical zest for justice and fairness as any other lovely words in any Sacred text from time immemorial, including the Ten Commandments, and the Holy Qur'an. This topic has been examined in depth in Islam and Knowledge vs. Socialization (see
Rule in the name of divine went away during Christendom's reformation period. It was replaced by people choosing to govern themselves. Whereas, it has been the principal raison d'être of governance of all Muslim empires and Caliphates, including latter day Muslim oligarchic states. None of which is to be found in the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an itself; appeal is always made to its Indeterminates in every era to justify and sanction man's rule in the name of divine.
There is surely no name more abused for narrow self-interests than the name of Divine since the dawn of civilization. In the past it was to verse 4:59 that thirteen centuries of Muslim empires looked to justify their rule. In the contemporary present, the principle of vilayat-i faqih in the Islamic Republic of Iran has most imaginatively made that appeal inter alia to both 4:59 and 28:5, asserting that its clergy class are representatives of those inheritors of the promise made in 28:5, and therefore must be obeyed as per 4:59. The ubiquitous practice of “taqlid” (already examined above) helped secure that blind obedience to religious authority from the sheepish masses. While Iran today proudly boasts of being the only Eastern nation which disobediently stands up to the Western hegemons as the permanent enemy of the Great Satan, its majority public meekly bows their head in blind obedience to their popes in full conviction of eternal salvation.
One can see that the Indeterminates permit open interpretation – and that's the premeditated diversity engine of the religion of Islam. When diversity based on the Indeterminates does not sow discord, is in the spirit of Islam as categorically outlined by its Determinates, then it is theologically not deprecated in the religion of Islam as should be evident from all the preceding discussions. It is the sowing of discord by interpreting what is metaphorical and allegorical in the Holy Qur'an that is deprecated. If interpretation was in fact not expected by the Author despite His Counsel against it, arguably there'd be no Indeterminates in the Book which claims itself a Divine Guidance for all mankind. The ambiguity in its specification is prima facie evidence of its sophisticated and pragmatic engine to seed diversity because man, by the very nature of his construction (creation), will argue and dispute, be socialized and group-think: “If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.” (Surah Al-Maeda 5:48). The Qur'anic guidance system endeavors to take man from that disputative warring state of nascent creation, to willingly rising to a stature in which he will come to excel the angels. Only the journey on the road of “fuss-tabi-qul-khairaat” ( فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ ), “so strive as in a race in all virtues”, can take a disputative, ethnocentric, tribalistic, nationalistic, and fiqhilistic people to the heights of that station. It is self-evident that part and parcel of striving “as in a race in all virtues” includes standing up to tyrants and creating social justice. All people are capable of doing that. What further Divine intervention is needed?
To even begin the process of transformation of coming together on the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an, since no Muslim sect is going to give up their emotional and theological attachments to their historical legacy any time soon, if ever, the realities of the matter and the dangers of fratricide facing Muslims, call for immediate co-existence of sects as they are. Arguably therefore, so long as the interpretations and fixing of the Indeterminates do not sow discord among Muslims as per verse 3:7, why should any particular fixing by one sect be deemed any more holier than any other sect's? All fixing make recourse to material outside the Holy Qur'an anyway --- whatever may be deemed to be its sacredness by the socialization in the respective sect. It is still not in the Holy Qur'an.
That is the singular recognition which must finally be truthfully admitted from every pulpit in order to form any kind of coherence among the disparate Muslim sects.
The abstractions Determinate and Indeterminate naturally permit such realization to first be articulated, and then percolated inwards, outwards, upwards, and downwards. A bold public admission of just this reality of the actual sources of their beliefs, driven from all Muslim pulpits, either voluntarily, or through state power according religious rights to Muslim sects, is the first step of coming together as one Muslim nation – without coercing anyone to change their emotional attachments to their respective heroes of history or come under the stewardship of any one sect's ideology.
Consequently, regardless of which Muslim sect or political group defines their nation's philosophical and national characteristics, if they employ the Determinate verse 5:48 of Surah Al-Maeda as the cornerstone of their state's constitution ; if they espouse the fairness expressed in the Biblical Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you have others do unto you”, and adopt the powerful corollary that naturally falls out of it as their force majeure to preempt exploitation: “no one shall take unfair advantage of another” ; and make these worthy first principles of fairness and justice the very foundation of their governance structures whereby all civil, political, and religious rights are accorded to its citizens irrespective of their own theological beliefs with equality and without prejudice, both in theory and in practice, such a state would be sufficiently Islamic to legitimately call itself an “Islamic state” – even if it was entirely a secular state! It would be irrespective of the rest of its colorful artifacts, whether theologically drawn from the Indeterminates and therefore not something to be sown discord over as verse 3:7 clearly avers, or a separation of state and religion in terms of the philosophical outlook of the state itself! What does it matter to the ordinary man and woman what type of state it is if the state gives the public the liberty to better themselves in fairness, justice, is not exploitive, does not usurp, does not plunder, is not a vassal of foreign powers, and lends all its denizens the opportunity to believe and practice as a community what they each commonly hold sacred?
As one can immediately see, an almost infinite array of diverse governance systems are possible under that enlightened rubric – only limited by the creative energies of the people and their enlightened stewards. The stony silence of the Holy Qur'an on the governance structure, and its explicit categorical articulation of the general social principles to enact among Muslims in its Determinates, yields only this logical deduction, and no other!
This isn't a utopia. Many Muslim governments exist today – they can just as easily adopt the political recommendations noted above to eliminate fratricide and foster amity among Muslims in their own nations. That would of course only be possible if these states were themselves not part of this Machiavellian fratricide, state sponsored, both nationally and globally, as surrogate vassals of the hectoring hegemons.
Therefore, if any presumptuously “Islamic” state sheds the blood of Muslims in the name of Islam, sows discord, then it is clearly not an Islamic state by definition of the religion of Islam – but a tyrannical state no different than any other tyrannical state, Islam's lofty symbols proudly adorning its national flag notwithstanding.
What is perhaps of utmost most significance however, is the recognition that the Hectoring Hegemons not only perceptively understand these matters concerning the religion of Islam, they also understand the cracks, fissures, and lacunas among the Muslim sects, and how to both tickle these further, and how to harvest the subsequent fruits. They know how to invent new sects just as well as they know how to create revolutions by harnessing the indigenous discontent which they ab initio create in the first place.
As in recent past, internecine warfare is the unnatural destiny that has been planned for Muslims in the twenty-first century as well – and they had better wizen up before it is enacted on the scale which has been apportioned. To appreciate the urgency, and just how much of an existential necessity it is to immediately overcome sectarianism which continues to directly play into the hands of hectoring hegemons, see the excerpt from the political novel (or historical fiction) “Memoirs Of Mr. Hempher, The British Spy To The Middle East”
( It is sure to distress the naïve and the erudite mind alike to learn just how accurately the hectoring hegemons understand and exploit the cracks and lacunas among the two major sects of Islam comprising nearly 99 percent of the 1.6 to 2 billion Muslims on planet earth today.

This case study set out to examine the question posed at the beginning:
What are the inherent impediments for studying the message of the Holy Qur'an which make the Book so amenable to self-serving interpretation, socialization, and even bastardization by anyone?
If the reader's mind hasn't been entirely asleep through this long perusal, the discovery that the presence of Indeterminates in the Holy Qur'an which necessitates going outside of its pristine pages to resolve them, is primarily responsible for the paradox that the Holy Qur'an has itself contributed to its subversion, must be disconcerting to the honest mind. The Muslims, generation after generation, have themselves contributed to this state of affairs by remaining ossified in the narratives of history rather than progressively evolving their understanding of the principles of Islam as espoused directly in the text of the Holy Qur'an. That lamentable fact has arrested their evolution as a people, mired them in rituals and rites which dominate their socialization and their practice of religion, and opened them to sectarian schisms which has made them easy prey to the supermen and Machiavelli. The unfortunate truth of these observations is straightforwardly validated by the lamentable fact that even in today's modernity, one which is run exclusively by superior intellects who use game theory, psychology, social engineering, and political science to orchestrate “imperial mobilization” under the primacy imperatives of the new White Man's Burden for one-world government, even the best among the Muslim scholars and intellectuals, politicians and statesmen, poets and dreamers, pressmen and prostitutes, remain nonetheless wiser. In fact, many have become house niggers willingly carrying the White Man's Burden. And like the Muslim masses, many also offer their daily prayers on time, keep all their fasts, feed the poor, and perform their Hajj, preferably multiple times. And if one informs them that they are in fact destined for hell, hell right here on earth, they confidently reply that they are looking forward to Heaven elsewhere.

Solution Space
The ease with which the masters of religion divided the Muslims since its very inception, with even far greater ease the Muslims can become united on the Holy Qur'an by acquiring intimacy with the abstractions natural to the Holy Qur'an: Determinates and Indeterminates. The Muslims have been made victims by their own pulpits no differently than the Christians. Neither the Sunni nor the Shia pulpit is able to reason, nor logically prove their differentiating theology from the Holy Qur'an directly, blanket assertions with appeal to authority and historical sources being their only blunt instrument of argumentation. This is clearly visible among both the Shia and Sunni pulpits each of which have created their own sacred axioms that they each swear by, based exclusively on the scribes of history and selective fixing of the Indeterminates to suit their respective socialization bias. That has led to the senseless differentiation which is guaranteed to be irreconcilable under any one sect's ideological banner, remaining perennially ripe for a good harvest by Machiavelli in every era.
Adoption of the Qur'anic abstractions Determinate and Indeterminate in promulgating the understanding of the religion of Islam from both the Shia and Sunni pulpits, permits a mutual co-existence with greater amity and friendship among all the major Muslim sects. It simultaneously raises awareness of the actual sources of their own religion from which the Muslim mind draws its various beliefs. These simple abstractions lend a vocabulary and nomenclature to even begin sensible and rational discussions of matters that have previously often been steeped in blind faith, shrouded in ignorance, clothed in baseless assertions, and ripe for gratuitous cognitive infiltration into the religion of Islam.
It permits the Muslim mind to “legally” agree to disagree on matters which are Indeterminate without calling each other misguided or kafir, while automatically permitting rational agreements to be forged on what is Determinate. This also resolves forging agreement on matters that fall on the delicate boundary between what is Determinate and what is Indeterminate, as for instance is betrayed by the two different parsing of verse 3:7 along the Shia-Sunni sectarian divide. Which parsing is correct is itself an Indeterminate. Therefore, what is not categorically deemed Determinate by both pulpits is sensibly treated as Indeterminate by definition, rather than sow discord. That approach is counseled by verse 3:7 itself.
Only under that singular categorical banner of the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an, can Muslims ever forge themselves into one Muslim nation. The Determinates also easily permit expunging abhorrent ideologies, gratuitous doctrines, dogmas, and practices which have vilely infiltrated the religion of Islam as amply demonstrated by the examination of the question of “taqlid” above. Self-interest of both the pulpit and the throne is clearly brought to light in that examination because the question is a Determinate question, most emphatically and straightforwardly answered in the Holy Qur'an. Similarly, the Principle of Inerrancy is stated so plainly in the Holy Qur'an that the self-interest of the entire Sunni pulpit in asserting the contrary in service of the caliphates and Muslim empires is most clearly visible. Without vilely negating that first Determinate principle of the Holy Qur'an, the very first Caliph after the death of the Prophet of Islam could never have occupied the rulership of the nascent Muslims – and perhaps the history may have unfolded differently! These are clear examples of guile, deception, subterfuge, and hijacking, among both Shiadom and Sunnidom. If it is so easy for power to subvert the Determinates, just imagine how easy it is to fill the Indeterminates! By the same yardstick, sympathetic power can equally affect the alternate outcome. But why would power slaughter its own prized goose that lays the golden egg in every epoch?
The benefits of rational assemblage of the worldwide Muslim public mind on the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an today is so obvious that to even state it fourteen-fifteen centuries later sounds entirely platitudinous; sort of like rehearsing the lofty Ten Commandments in wonderment as if they were just revealed yesterday! Only narrow self-interests of both the pulpit and the throne preclude that assemblage!
Nevertheless, the lead principle to drive this Muslim umma unification process globally while retaining the rich diversity among Muslims, is the verse of unification, verse 5:48 of Surah Al-Maeda of the Holy Qur'an. Its rational adoption as the political and spiritual mandate of all Muslim sects, tribes and nations in its myriad civilizations from the East to the West, organically launches the Muslim public mind on that road to political and spiritual recovery without being under the headmastership of any sect and their specious dogmas. The rest will happen naturally, over time, by the natural system dynamics unleashed with the adoption and active promulgation of that simple political science first principle from the Holy Qur'an itself.
This evolution of the understanding of the religion of Islam among the Muslims is the only choice to survive in the coming age without both, internecine warfare that is diabolically crafted by Machiavelli, and losing the spirit of their religion further to the shell of empty rituals.
The Machiavelli in the meantime is active by way of divide and conquer to spread the scourge of Secular Humanism in all civilizations to wipe out all traces of theism. The religion of Islam, evidently, is its most resolute obstruction (see ). It is foolhardy to not capitalize on one's natural advantage in the art of war! The full spectrum capitalization of that asset is the principal raison d'être of this report.

Proposal to the Pulpits
As the first baby step towards better understanding their own differences – the Shia and Sunni pulpits are invited to proclaim their own beliefs at their own learned scholarly level, using these new abstractions. Then let's sit together to examine what each sect has itself determined to be Determinate vs. Indeterminate on matters that are differentiating between Shia and Sunni pulpits. It will surely surprise them both! Just as it has surprised this scribe how easy and straightforward the resolution is – its only obstruction being the hectoring hegemons and their insidious vassals throughout the Muslim world. It is perhaps for this insightful realization that a pen awarded to this scribe's little boy a score years ago by the Sunday School in California in the United States of America, for Qur'an recitation on stage at age 4 or 5, had inscribed on it the farsighted statement:
Those who differentiate between Shia and Sunni are neither of the Sunnis nor of the Shias.”

Self Study Guide for Seekers of Understanding
أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ )
Incestuous self-reinforcement is the bane of objective scholarship. This is why the scientific process came into existence to study any matter objectively. Putting the data and its analysis before others to scrutinize and adjudicate, enables defeating all forms of crippled epistemology and ingrained bias which are often a consequence of incestuous self-reinforcement. One has the opportunity to examine the same data, and examine the analysis performed on that data, conduct one's own experiments so to speak, and either substantiate or refute the thesis and conclusions so reached. This process, when honestly followed, itself advances not just the state of understanding, but enables new discoveries.
But the scientific process itself, carried out by human beings, is also beholden to the limitations of the human being in his subconscious ability to be perfectly objective on any matter. This means all the natural forces of bias that the human mind is unconsciously susceptible to that work their magic to co-opt the rational mind from seeing matters, reality, existence, the way it actually is, have to be overcome to ensure objectivity at the cognitive level and accuracy in the pursuit of understanding by the scientific method. A faulty method in implementation, or its deliberate corruption due to vested interests, will only lead to faulty results and false conclusions in the name of science and objectivity.
This is all the more crucial in social sciences where subjectivity is inherent and inescapable – the species is studying itself. And also because the social sciences can be diabolically harnessed to Machiavellianly foist unpopular political agendas on the public mind disguised as science, or, by appeal to suitably co-opted scientific authority, peddle propaganda and “religion” as science (see “Disambiguating Religion, Science and Psychological Warfare Operations”, There are many examples that illustrate the truth of this statement that span the gamut of engineering unpopular public policy, from the eugenics movement in the early twentieth century to limit immigration to selected races to global warming in the early twenty-first to usher in carbon credit for limiting growth. All based on appeal to pseudo science and deployed with the full force of perception management of the public mind!
Religion is the same way.
The forces of subconscious bias infecting the human mind include (the following breakdown is adapted from the more detailed examination of the forces of co-option in “The Art and Science of Co-option”,
  • (1) socialization bias (nurture, social programming, learning) ;
  • (2) perception bias (nature, hardware, DNA, limits imposed by the five perception senses and the brain capacity, natural inclination, propensity, hardwired intellectual capacity to think and reflect, IQ or Intelligence Quotient, hardwired psychological bent of mind, EQ or Emotional Quotient, hardwired spiritual capacity to transcend materialism, proclivity toward transcendentalism, awareness, consciousness, animatism, superstition, etc., SQ or Spiritual Quotient) ;
  • (3) data availability bias (what data is used, what books one reads for instance) ;
  • (4) confirmation bias (how data is used to preselect a desired outcome, narrowing the scope of data, massaging the data to confirm an a priori conclusion) ;
  • (5) presuppositional bias (culturally ingrained presumptions or prejudices or affinities, loves and hates, that transcend the individual and are rooted in the value system of the civilization one grows up in, such as: Orientalism – looking down upon the East, uber alles, master race, exceptionalism, superiority complex; and its opposites: inferiority complex, house niggers, Uncle Toms, Occidentosis – East looking to the West or to the white man for solutions thinking it superior; Triumphalism – aspiring to universalize one's own values and beliefs thinking all others inferior, Capitalism, Communism, Democracy, Christianity, Islam, Secular Humanism, Scientific Materialism, Dogmas of Science and Medicine, etc.).
All these factors underwriting incestuous self-reinforcement (reinforcing what is already believed whether consciously or instinctively), create an inescapable mind-lock from which cognitively escaping to objectivity and impartiality remains elusive for most people. These largely un quantifiable factors contribute to the formulation of one's worldview and instinctualize the subjectivity in perspective that man is irreparably plagued with for his fundamental loves, hates, beliefs, and sense of attachment that may span the gamut from tribal to civilizational. This subjectivity is hard to transcend as it colors the cognitive mind ab initio, subliminally, subconsciously, and overcoming it is akin to performing brain-surgery upon one's own brain. A self-referential problem that requires a great deal of wherewithal to get a handle on, and to attempt to rise to some level of objectivity by creating distance from self. The hard problem of Epistemology, the human limits to knowing despite the most accurate application of the scientific method, is examined further in Part-IV.
The question posed in Part-I is empirical and not rhetorical: “everyone quotes their favorite verses to justify their own narrow positions;”. However, has the author of this report done anything different, as far as the alert reader is concerned, when the report inter alia asserts in Part-III :
It sure explains empirical reality coherently, but most importantly, in self-sufficiency and self-consistency drawn solely from the Holy Qur'an and no other source!
How is the skeptical reader, and the seeker of understanding desirous of being counted among those addressed as أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ in the Holy Qur'an, to defend their levying that same charge of Part-I against this report beyond their own knee-jerk emotional reaction which the report is sure to induce in a Muslim?
Only by following the scientific process! And by being aware of the natural forces of bias infecting the human mind. This study is not about faith, or about questioning faith. It is about epistemology – how we know what we know. It is about rational examination of data and its analysis akin to what one might pursue in any academic science. Here, logical reasoning as the standard of analysis, “aqal ki kassoti” as one might say in Urdu, and not faith, is applied to the study of a complex Book whose author is named “Author” in this examination. What is the Author specifying in His Own Words? That is the primary yardstick driving this investigation of what the Author means and wants to convey in his own Words.
This endeavor of due diligence is as simple and as straightforward as the effort expended for any honest book report written by a college, or even high school, student, nay even elementary school student. The student can cheat and read the Cliff notes, seek other writers' opinions and commentaries, ask his parents, or he can faithfully read the assigned book directly and see what its own author is saying in her own words without projecting his own a priori conclusions and presuppositions upon it. This is so basic an academic value that even to state it in the classroom implies that there is a basic need for making this statement --- because all the students in the class are cheating! The Holy Qur'an itself condemns such short cuts taken by the lazy mind, or the mind prejudiced by all the artifacts of bias enumerated above, as not the best way of understanding its Message: “Do they not then reflect on the Qur'an? Nay, on the hearts there are locks.” (Surah Muhammad 47:24)
That minimal level of basic due diligence, the prerequisite to acquiring “ma'rifat” on any subject, makes it apparent what the Author of the Holy Qur'an in his own best wisdom has chosen to leave ambiguous, metaphorical, open ended, temporal, timeless, accessible only to the “Rasikhoon-fil-ilm” (3:7), and what He has chosen to state categorically, straightforwardly, without being colored by others projecting their own two cents worth on what the Author means from the tunnel vision and co-opting constraints of their own epoch, both time and space. For indeed, in comparison to any author's own words for what he wants to convey, everyone else's description of what that author wants to covey pale in comparison. Own words always trump others' explanations of it. The truth of that statement is universal and without doubt. It is self-evident. When that is a truism for even ordinary authors, it is a grotesque perversity and corruption beyond measure to not apply it sensibly to the Author of the Holy Qur'an. The fact that one see this travesty transpiring timelessly in virtually every Muslim microcosm where pulpit is big business, is the state organ, or the state itself, is its own self-incriminating condemnation.
The lazy mind, the foolish mind, the socialized mind, the undisciplined mind, the uninformed mind, the conformant mind, the parrot mind, and societies that nurture them, all lose for the simple want of individual due diligence. Co-option takes care of the rest who do try to overcome these mental chains. Co-option is a pivotal and defining constraint for not just honest intellectual scholarship, but also for the ordinary individual seeking to do the right thing but deeming “united we stand” the better part of valor. It permits the continuation of the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness! See The Art and Science of Co-option (
This author, an ordinary engineer in Silicon Valley California in a past life, well-versed in building systems that work and interoperate from initially incomplete or ambiguous specifications or merely wish lists, and in developing and writing specifications ab initio to create systems which work and solve customers' problems and for which customers paid real money to purchase, has explored the stated inquiry question from that analytical perspective, of a systems architect who is hypothetically tasked to engineer the system specified in the Holy Qur'an. In order to do so, the Qur'anic specification must first be understood by him. And understood in terms of what its Author has specified, and not what this author has imagined the Author has specified, interpreted, or what others have thought what the Author has specified. Compliance testing reins in the fertile imagination of an engineer to ensure that the specification is followed rigorously and accurately:
  • by “Functional Tests” (employing the electrical engineering parlance) which the Author will administer for pass or fail on the Day of Accountability (this means no interpretation, akin to understanding the DMV driver's manual correctly in order to pass the road test, or an engineering spec in order to build the product as specified by the authors of the spec);
  • by seamless interoperability with others pursuing similar mandate (this means being constrained to the Determinates, akin to driving on the public roads in harmony and without causing fatal accidents or discord with all the other drivers).
This study of the Holy Qur'an, and Part-IV that follows which looks at the primary sources of understanding the religion of Islam outside of the Holy Qur'an, have principally been conducted thus far with the left-half brain, logic-only mind, of a practical scientist engaged in existential battles like the metaphorical Mr. Spock (and not an ideologue ensconced in some ivory tower who has never lived in the real world, never competed for livelihood, never fought an enemy, never stood up to Machiavellian power with courage and fortitude, and never lived the hell on earth except on paper and on television).
Often called upon to make urgent split-second factual analysis of weighty matters – at times ambiguous with incomplete or probabilistic data, at times concrete with accurate data, and at times cloaked in layers of deception by the enemy where the data itself is misleading – on which depend the life and death survival decisions of his Captain, Mr. Spock cannot ever be wrong in his analysis, logical deductions, and recommendations. But his recommendations may or may not be acceptable to the Captain who steers his own decision making process by more than just his own left-half brain. The Captain can never refute Mr. Spock's analysis and deductions, and at times his right-half brain led decisions appear illogical to Mr. Spock. And yet, invariably turn out to be more effective in certain cases that require gut-feel, intuition, insight, faith, spiritual know-how; all esoterica that remain beyond the purview of empirical analysis and logical reasoning. The limitations of Mr. Spock and this approach to studying a divine text have already been addressed in the preamble of Part-II.
The fact that Mr. Spock classified the divine text as a ciphertext which must be deciphered correctly to a single plaintext, i.e., uncover the meaning intended to be conveyed by the Author of the Holy Qur'an as in a law book or the DMV driver's manual, rather than as a book of literature and poetry which may interpreted according to each individual's bent of mind and proclivity, is the first axiom that could itself be perceived as being in error by the right-brain dominant human mind that feels more than it is able to think and reason. Is the Holy Qur'an not intended as guidance for them too? They can neither reason effectively nor think clearly – but who is to say that they do not understand the spiritual essence of the Divine Guidance better than those empiricists who can think and reason? No reference decoding is available today to adjudicate! The Messenger and those designated “ulul-amar” of verse 4:59 are no longer living among us to tell us who is right, and who isn't.
Which is why a sensible and rational interpretation of remnant of Allah, “That which is left you by Allah is best for you”?, بَقِيَّتُ ٱللَّهِ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ , inter alia, is the verse 5:48. It is the categorical best for all of us: “so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.” It works for both types of people, those who think and analyze, and those unable to reason for themselves and follow by faith, sect, emotionalism, socialization, indoctrination, superstition, and whatever or whoever appeals to the insecurities of their own subconscious mind.
More importantly, as the rational protocol for understanding the message of the Holy Qur'an demands, it permits staying within the pages of the Holy Qur'an, solely referring to its Determinate verses for guidance in understanding what its Indeterminate are proclaiming, and therefore all sects and schools of thought among Muslims can easily come to agree upon such a first order common ground. These are the rational seeds for the making of the “Muslim Ummah” – one people, though divided in geography, race, culture, and civilization, wholly undivided in the core beliefs and core values, basing them exclusively on the Divine Scripture they each posses in common that they each unequivocally proclaim to be un-adulterated by human hand.
Of course, socialized Muslims following the schools of jurisprudence that assert in their respective eschatological doctrines that it refers to the Awaited Savior and the Last of the Divinely appointed Imams – who, for the majority of Shias is Imam Mahdi (AS) who is already born twelve centuries ago but in Occultation by Divine Command and waiting patiently for the right conditions before he reappears by the Will of God to fill the earth with justice; and for the majority of Sunnis is also Imam Mahdi (RA) but who is yet to be born in some future time by the Will of God for the same purpose – will remain socialized in their own inherited dogmas regardless of how rational, compelling, straightforward, natural, non convoluted, non supernatural, and self-empowering the resolution is in the Holy Qur'an itself when one let's it speak. This is why mullahs in every sect, often indistinguishable from their more learned brethren who call themselves “alim” and feel affronted if not given due deference as the “signs of God” on earth, are able to control the public mind so easily.
The feeble quality of the public mind that Adolph Hitler spoke of in Mein Kampf, and which he called for the press to exploit to engineer the public's consent to their own enslavement in the name of national education and enlightenment, is the same quality exploited by the leaders of religion. But with far greater authority and effectiveness due to the presumption of divine mandate!
Waiting for Allah, not just in day to day affairs, but to intervene in the Last Days to finally bring “haq”, justice, to mankind, is a dogma that has usually only worked in the service of primacy – and thus for good reason it cannot be found in any of the Determinates of the Holy Qur'an. For, if “haq” is only to be brought about at the End Time, and only through Divine intervention of sending yet another emissary Imam to lead mankind to institute justice among themselves, then what is the point of this profound religion of “haq” preaching truth and justice to mankind? That paradox alone invites reflection making the resolution obvious: Why is the Holy Qur'an not categorical about this subject? Why is it silent on this aspect of Eschatology? Why does it not use “ayat-e-muhkamat” ( آيَاتٌ مُحْكَمَاتٌ ), the foundational verses as per verse 3:7 whose meaning is straightforward and clear, for this topic? The answer really is obvious – except for socialization and the attendant biases that accompany it!
Honest intellectual pursuit of all these paradoxical questions taken up in this study, with competence and wherewithal, “ma'rifat”, permits exercising the left half-brain to counter the socialization into religion by birth, which, lamentably, is often indistinguishable from superstition. Where will that honest pursuit of reflecting on the Holy Qur'an as the singular unadulterated Scripture containing some Message by its Author, ultimately lead to --- it is foolish to presuppose an answer as that would only be theoretical at this time! Anyone can forge any theory of platitudes. The empirical reality is that fourteen centuries into the Holy Qur'an, and mankind still lives in the Age of Jahiliya. Progress today is empirically captured by the record of the past one hundred years and can be summed up in the great material progress, great world wars, great poverty, and great misery for the majority of mankind.
Let empiricism speak the loudest and with honesty for the Message of the Holy Qur'an if its mission is to guide mankind. The scorecard as of this writing, in the second decade of the twenty-first century, says little of the collective acumen of Muslims. Drowning in a surfeit of piety, they are subjugated, colonized, and bombed from continent to continent. Villainy is cunningly perpetrated in the name of Islam, from “militant Islam” and ISIS/ISIL on the one hand, to “moderate Islam” and “reform Islam” on the other, while the Muslim governments appear helpless before it all, running helter-skelter between competing narratives crafted for them by predatory minds far superior. That scorecard is not Mr. Spock's gratuitous thinking, but merely an empirical observation of the stoic validity until present, of the verse of the Holy Qur'an itself: “Then the Messenger will say: 'O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just foolish nonsense.'” (Surah Al-Furqaan 25:30)
Thus the import, nay mandate, for thinking afresh with new intellectual tools to forge a new direction is clear. The traditional scholars of Islam, both in the East and the West, have only taken us down the past. They are ill-equipped to take us into a future that is different for Muslims in a world as modern, sophisticated, and complex as the one that mankind is living in today. Minimally bringing the left half-brain to accurately decipher and comprehend the message of the Holy Qur'an minus the incestuous self-reinforcements, independent of what the mullahs, the ayatollahs, the exegeses writers, the hadith compilers, and the historical narratives penned a thousand years ago say it means, is the first step to heed that aforementioned drastic Qur'anic warning to Muslims.
One useful way to think about this abstraction for those who possess both half brains in some balanced non-zero quantity, might be:
  • the right-half brain feels a compelling need to climb a specific mountain but does not know how except to extol the virtues of climbing that mountain in verse and oratory;
  • the left-half brain comes up with the practical analysis for such a journey, the engineering and logistics plan to get there, and the battle plan to defeat the many anticipated obstructions lurking in the path including those that are unpredictable like the bad weather, flash floods, and robbers hiding in bushes;
  • the right-half brain sustains the human spirit with faith and fortitude throughout that agonizing journey to finally be able to climb that mountain with any kind of engineered plan rather than to merely have dreamed of climbing it.
One can no more engineer a plan with one's right-half brain than one can imagine success with one's left-half brain in the face of hopelessness and dark clouds. The reader's job is to verify the engineered plan, which means to first understand the specification in order to even be able to adjudicate, before he and she embarks on that arduous journey to climb that mountain with nothing but faith sustaining thine spirit, and nothing but shrewd planning guiding thine little “zulfiqar”[13]. Just another way to think about how to engage the human mind (intellect plus intuition – respectively the left and the right half brains) to its fullest potential.
Yet another useful way to look at this abstraction of the human mind and human intellect that encompasses both objective logic and subjective insight, is to recognize that cognitive reasoning based on the five perceptive senses that can be made fairly objective, and therefore falsifiable, is the contribution of a functioning left-half brain to human knowledge of the surrounding world. Intuitive reasoning, sense of the abstract, sense of beauty, sense of harmony, sense of insecurity, all of which is non-quantifiable and subjective, but which enhances insight, wherewithal, wisdom, commonsense, shrewdness, sophistication, street-smartness, deeper understanding, “ma'rifat”, creativity, etc., and which transcend the available empirical data and what is made visible to the five perceptive senses, is contributed by the right-half brain to human awareness. One without the other is incomplete. One can no more live without logic than one can live without insight and foresight, love and feelings. Those who do are reduced to being useful idiots and useless eaters. Without a functioning right-half brain, the human mind is reduced to a mere computational resource, devoid of any insight and feelings. Without a functioning left-half brain, the human mind becomes steeped in superstition and base desires; desires which may be unconscious, but which drive beliefs and actions like voodoo, without rhyme or reason.
The rational analysis presented here therefore, to be of any use to anyone, should be examined solely for what it is, and not with religious sentiments, beliefs, and socialization bias (right-half brain) interfering with the facts and logical analysis (left-half brain). The logic of inquiry here is only on what is objective, or can be made objective. Let the subjective insights be the reader's own contribution to her own deeper understanding; to be built upon what is objectively, and falsifiably (meaning, can be shown to be either true or false), reasoned here.
For the reader's convenience, the table below lists all the verses of the Holy Qur'an which appear in the examination of the question: Why it is easy to hijack the Holy Qur'an and the religion of Islam, and upon which the analysis and deductions of this report are based. But only to the best ability of this scribe who is obviously not Mr. Spock, is as socialized into his own ethos, and is as limited in his intellectual capabilities by virtue of being fully human, as anyone else. The only difference from other earnest seekers of understanding perhaps being, that this scribe has cognitively endeavored to rise to the many challenges outlined in this report; to remain aware of his own limitations in perfectly overcoming all the subconscious forces of bias working against the cognitive mind, cradling it, cajoling it, luring it, enticing it, towards comfort zones. The ancient adage: know thy self to know the world, has never been more true than in this endeavor to become objective about what pertains to one self. Anyone with even a modicum of seriousness in their disposition can surely rise to the same challenges of epistemology, how do we know what we know, and better the analysis!
Minimally, the profound scholar of Islam who claims a higher station by virtue of greater learning, the “muballig”, the ayatollah, the imam, the exponent of the religion of Islam as an authority figure claiming to be the inheritor of the Prophetic mission and its authority, is invited to demonstrate what he or she might believe is in logical error. Silence is not just plain cowardice, but also a bold admission of the inability of the pretenders who have seated themselves comfortably on the pulpit of the noble Prophet of Islam to engage intellectually once the aura of their untouchable robe is stripped off. Silence of learned scholars is an equal admission that “iss hammaam mein sub nungay hain” (every one is naked in the bath hall)!
Aal-'Imran 3:7
Al-insaan 76:3
Al An'aam 6:83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
an-Nisaa' 4:59
al-Israa' 17:71
Muhammad 47:24
Al-Maeda 5:48
Al-Ahzaab 33:36
Al-Maeda 5:35
Al-Baqara 2:2, 3
Al-Waqia 56:77, 78, 79, 80, 81
An-Najm 53:1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Al-Baqara 2:185
Al-Furqaan 25:1
Al-Fatiha 1:6 1:7
Ibrahim 14:1
Maryam 19:97
Ta-Ha 20:114
Al-Ahzaab 33:35
Ibrahim 14:4
Al-Baqara 2:134, 141
Al-Asr 103:1, 2, 3
Al-Baqara 2:166, 167
Al-Qasas 28:5
Al-Fajr 89:27, 28, 29, 30
Ash-Shura 42:23
Al-Mujaadila 58:21
Al-Maeda 5:3
Al-Ahzaab 33:28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34
Al-Anbiyaa 21:105
Al-Furqaan 25:27, 28, 29, 30
Aal-e-Imran 3:33, 34
Surah Hud 11:86
Al-Baqara 2:128
Al-Baqara 2:124
Surah Ta-Ha 20:135
Yunus 10:19, 47
Al-Ahzaab 33:40
Surah An-Nahl 16:25
Al-Hujraat, 49:13
Al-Kauthar 108:3
Surah At-Takwir 81:19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29
Caption Verses of the Holy Qur'an principally employed in Part-II and Part-III to examine the question: Why it is easy to hijack the Holy Qur'an and the religion of Islam. Click on verse number to listen to the Arabic recitation by Shaykh Mahmoud Khalil al-Husary. The verse in oral Arabic trumps the written version.
Given that there are 6236 total verses in the Holy Qur'an, and it is itself a deep bottomless ocean, this study has barely scratched the surface of acquiring an analytical understanding of the singular Sacred Scripture of Islam. But to the extent this study has dived into this ocean, its discoveries just on this one narrow question are before the reader to adjudicate, to validate, to refute, to enhance, or to remain indifferent.

Continued in Part-IV

About The Author
Please be advised that the author is not a scholar of Islam. Only its student.
The author, an ordinary justice activist, formerly an ordinary engineer in Silicon Valley, California (see engineering patents at ), founded Project in the aftermath of 9/11. He was, mercifully, most imperfectly educated in the United States of America despite attending its elite schools on both coasts. This might perhaps explain how he could escape the fate of “likkha-parrha-jahils” (educated morons) mass produced in its technetronic society with all his neurons still intact and still firing on all cylinders. He is inspired by plain ordinary people rising to extraordinary challenges of their time more than by privileged and gifted people achieving extraordinary things. He chose his byline to reflect that motivation: The Plebeian Antidote to Hectoring Hegemons. Bio at Email: Verbatim reproduction license for all his work at

[7] The contemporary and popular English translation of M.H. Shakir by TTQ, New York, has dropped all his footnotes in their hard copy edition (with posthumous apologies to the author!). The scribe possesses the original first edition with its sporadic footnotes intact. Similarly, the extensive footnotes in the English translation of Yusuf Ali have been openly doctored in posthumous reprints published by Amana Publications, Saudi Arabia. The scribe also possess a copy of the 1934 first edition with the unadulterated original footnotes intact.
[8] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, 1997, pg. 24
[9] Ibid. pg. 3
[10] Lord Acton
[11] Bertrand Russell
[12] David Ben-Gurion had lucidly explained the utility of crisis creation during the violent fabrication of the Jewish State in Palestine: “What is inconceivable in normal times is possible in revolutionary times; and if at this time the opportunity is missed and what is possible at such great hours is not carried out – a whole world is lost”. This diabolical political science principle was reiterated some three score years and ten later by Rahm Emanuel, American President Barack Obama's Jewish White House Chief of Staff (January 20, 2009 – October 1, 2010), whose father was part of the terrorist gang “Irgun” that had so successfully utilized the Ben-Gurion principle for the creation of Israel in Palestine. Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, Rahm Emanuel emphasized: “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.” Watch the news clip in: (at time 1m 3s)
[13] Name of the legendary double-pincer sword of Imam Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib before which no nemesis could stand for long in mortal combat. Legend has it that the sword was given to Imam Ali by the Prophet of Islam after (or during) the battle of Uhad in the second year of the Hijra, 614 A.D. The intellect, given to every individual in mankind by the Creator in varying amounts, called “aqal”, is akin to that famous sword. One need only learn to sharpen it, and to wield it with both skill and expertise, and no hectoring hegemon can ever prevail with their weapons of mass deception in any battle. It is the only effective antidote against the villainy of perception management.
Arabic Qur'an recitation by Shaykh Mahmoud Khalil al-Husary, audio courtesy of Verse By Verse Quran, acquired 8/13/2011 from
Arabic verses courtesy of the open source Qur'an Tanzil Project, acquired 8/13/2011 from
Most (not all) English translation of Qur'an verses are by Yusuf Ali, Shakir, and Pickthall, acquired 8/13/2011 from (archived Yusufali, Shakir, Pickthall).
French translation by Hamidullah acquired 1/18/2013
Spanish translation by Cortes acquired 3/2/2013
Arabic grammar decomposition courtesy of the open source Quranic Arabic Corpus project at Language Research Group University of Leeds, acquired January 24, 2013 from
English translation by Ali Quli Qara'i acquired January 24, 2013 from
Reference to Muhammad Hussain Tabatabai's parsing of verse 3:7 from
With most humble thanks to all!

First Published Friday, August 19, 2011, 19th day of Ramadan in the US, Muslim year 1432 | Extended April 2015 for 2nd Edition.
Last updated April 17, 2015 06:00 pm 52087

Part-III Islam: Why is the Holy Qur'an so easy to hijack? Zahir Ebrahim 122/122