The fallacy of disbelief(polytheism, agnosticism, atheism etc).

The fallacy of Shirk (Disbelief= polytheism, atheism, agnosticism).

By this I do not mean that Shirk doesn't exist, or that there is nothing wrong with it. 

The GOD of all things

Contrarily, Polytheism and not recognizing the transcendence of GOD (that GOD is High, above all things) is the root cause of all that is base in this World.  Precisely because the ultimate principle that underlies the whole of being is Creation, and then Nourishment.

To recognize ONE Creator is to do justice to that principle of the Oneness of Origin and Sustenance for all.

To fail to recognize HIM is to do injustice to all that is. And that is the source of all imbalance, and all injustice. 

Polytheism

And even when polytheism tries to take the mantle of an ethic, of a type, it gets the balance wrong and confuses justice and mercy.

This because essentially you choose to serve whichever god you wish, a self serving choice, from the wish to identify with a particular group to the wishes for prosperity. For whatever reason that choice is always taken without principle.

Atheism & Agnosticism

And the like argument applies to those who deny GOD, their lives are subsumed by an irresolvable conflict of interests, of passions and of tin-pan ethics. Because they deny the greatest of principles, they are without principle. 

Their ethics have been shown to be contradictory for whilst they often-times would claim for it to be universal and then in the same breadth their actions would deny it’s universality to some, on the false basis that they are undeserved. Time and time again, this is their politics and their ethics; two faced, spurious, driven by lust and money even whilst they deny. 

Thank GOD, I have been born in a Nation that has a long history of principled behaviour. That I can see with my two eyes the wavering fools who cast themselves as the leaders of this World. 

Now, look at me, I started on an vein and then been caught on another, never would I make a successful gold-digger. 

Is Islam any better?

But since we are here, I must press on with the manifold implications of this stance. What then, I hear you ask, of the non-believers living under the duress of Islam?

Freedom of conscience

The first thing to realize is that the concept of freedom of conscience that Europe holds so dear, it learnt from Muslims. For long before the laws of equality of humanity ever broached the shores of Europe, European Jews and Nestorian Christians, and other Christian sects, were flying to the Muslim lands so that they would have the freedom to practice their religion without fear of persecution.

Liberalism is Islam without GOD

But that does not mean that Liberalism is Islamic, contrarily the universal justice of Islam when taken out of the context of a unitary source of nourishment and origin, leads to just that but without the boundaries that define true justice.

This because the primary function of justice should be the prevention of injustice, and not the seeking of redress.

A universal Justice?

Islam provides for such boundaries whereby everybody's rights are balanced, and it does this through setting law firmly within an ethic surrounded by on the one hand gratitude and generosity and on the other through a real emotive fear not just of a punishment, but more importantly of Godly displeasure, couched in the wonderful words of a literary masterpiece- the Qur'an. For if a man displeases GOD, who is both his creator and nourisher, whom then can he turn to?

Whereas, the justice of liberalism will always be too late. And it's redress can never be enough, because it is not framed by an absolute source but by the vagaries of man's thought. And then it always fails in it's universality, being dependent on individual men, their judgments, whims and fancies. 

A universal freedom?

And furthermore Liberalism can not free man from the narrowness of his arrogance, but only confirm him in it.

I should not need to draw examples from the American bill of rights which extends to the rich few, whilst they rape the World of its people and resource. Nor of the European universal human rights which does not extend to the Palestinian children living under occupation. Two faced, giving the lie to all they espouse. 

Justice and Freedom in Islam

Returning to the question of a non-believer living under the law of Islam. He would never worry over recourse to justice, primarily because our law of protection would extend fully to him. Many a time the Qur'an recalls to us that GOD loves the justice-doers, and that is irrespective of belief or nationality. As happened previously in our history, the people of the Book would be judged according to their own law. And those who have no principle would have the safety of knowledge that in regards to their beliefs they would be free to do as they liked, but in regards to social and family law they would be bound by our law.

Rights and Obligations

And so in the Muslim society, the individual has rights but not so long as it is detrimental to the family, and families have rights but not so long as they impinge on the rights of society, and none can overstep the boundaries established by GOD as being His rights over us, and then our rights over each other. 

The body of text which is Islam speaks in dept on these rights. 

And it is instructive to note the depth of meaning that can be ascribed to the Basmallah. 

The Basmallah

For most these are the words of dedication to GOD, made whenever you perform any act, but they are most often used when beginning to eat most often translated as "In the name of Allah (God), most gracious, most merciful.". 

However the import of these words was understood by the first Caliph, Abu Bakr as Sidique (ra), to be far greater than that. For after the passing of Muhammad (saw), whilst Arabia rocked under successive rebellions, and the Romans threatened from the North, causing him to send of the Muslim army to meet them, which was headed by a young novice of a captain, he advised the young captain on the rules of war and it's etiquettes beginning with "Do not eat food, but that you mention the Basmallah over it..."

Some might argue that to emphasize the small, is to emphasize the whole edifice of the religion. Indeed when you are in the thrall of great deeds, it is the small rituals and habits that keep you sane and grounded. 

But at the same time the Basmallah carries within it's potency a rendering of the rights of all things, no matter how small the morsel. That you partake of it in and by GOD's leave. And that by not doing so, you do an injustice to both it and yourself.

That it has a right, and that you can only subsume that right through taking leave and the name of the One who created and nourished it in the first instance. 

That is the Basmallah, and whilst it is the smallest of our religion, it is potentially the greatest. 

And it is that saying of those words in that circumstance that marks Islam to be "The Modern Religion". That all things have a right over you, and that those rights are balanced through the belief in the One Merciful God who continually nourishes us all, believers and non-believers alike.

A belief that guarantees a universal justice.

A reality, both past and future, that no liberalism could ever replicate. 

The fallacy of Shirk part 2 to follow.

And we send our peace and blessings on the noble Messenger, Muhammad (saw), may ALLAH t’ala reward him abundantly for we never would have been Muslim save for him. And I bear witness that there is no GOD, save ALLAH t’ala (GOD, most High) and Muhammad (saw) is His last and final Messenger. And I bear witness that Muhammad (saw), by GOD’s mighty grace, has completed his task, that which was entrusted him by GOD, and we are the recipients of the message down through the ages. Ameen.