The Early Etymological Meanings of “Islam”

بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ 

The following is adapted from a paper by Shaykh ‘Abd al-Ghafur ‘Abd ar-Rahim.  One of the factors which stand against change and reform of Islamic law is the current rigid conceptualisation of some basic terms.  The development of fiqh led to the construing of the terms “diyn”, “islam”, and “shari’ah” in concrete fiqhi terms.  The underlying ethical principles which the concrete fiqhi values embodied became insignificant or of secondary importance.  Consciously or not, this in turn led to the equation of forms and principles, thereby making change extremely difficult.  Any proposed change came to be conceived as undermining the principles themselves embodied in the fiqhi forms. 

From the very beginning, the Prophet (s.a.w.) invited the Makkans to God and to islam.  After accepting the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) teaching, his closest friend, Sayyidina Abu Bakr ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Utsman asw-Swiddiq (r.a.)'began to invite people to God and to islam.   Invitation to God meant calling the pagan Makkans to renounce their shirk, idol-worship.  When proposing his religion to the different tribes, the Prophet (s.a.w.) asked from them, to worship God and not to associate anything with Him, and to renounce the rival gods which they worshipped.  The pagan Makkans referred to this as an insult to their religion when they complained to the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) uncle, Sayyidina Abu Thalib ibn ‘Abd al-Muththalib (r.a.): “O Abu Thalib, your nephew has cursed our gods and insulted our diyn.”  As for islam,  it meant the renunciation of those pagan Makkan practices which the Prophet (s.a.w.) considered as wrong.  This is seen in the pledge the Prophet (s.a.w.) took from the twelve nuqaba’, leaders, of Madina.  They pledged to the Prophet (s.a.w.) saying that they would abstain from shirk, theft, fornication, killing their children, slandering their neighbours and would render obedience to the Prophet (s.a.w.) in what was right.  It was to this renunciation of the pagan way of life that the pagan Makkans referred in the complaint just mentioned saying, “... he regards what we consider right as wrong”. 

The same dual elements of “belief in God” and “righteous action” are reflected in the early definitions of islam.  For instance, Imam Abu Khaththab Qatadah ibn Di’amah as-Sadusi (r.a.) explained “islam” in the following verse: 

سُوۡرَةُ المَائدة

… ٱلۡيَوۡمَ أَكۡمَلۡتُ لَكُمۡ دِينَكُمۡ وَأَتۡمَمۡتُ عَلَيۡكُمۡ نِعۡمَتِى وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ ٱلۡإِسۡلَـٰمَ دِينً۬ا‌ۚ … (٣) 

... This day have I Perfected your diyn for you, Completed my favour upon you, and have Chosen for you Islam as your diyn. … (Surah al-Ma’idah:3) 

He defined is as surrendering the heart and making it submissive to Him by accepting His] Oneness and by heeding to what He enjoins and what He forbids. 

According to this definition, islam comprises two things: belief in the Oneness of God and following God’s Commands and avoiding Prohibitions.  This definition resembles that of shari’ah in that it too constitutes God’s Commands and Prohibitions.  It suffices to say that heeding to God’s Commands and Prohibitions primarily meant doing good and avoiding evil.  The Qur’anic Usage of “islam”, as a term denoting righteous actions, was affected by post Qur’anic developments.  From the above, it was seen that these actions comprehended all good deeds.  However, this was narrowed down in the post Qur’anic period to certain specific actions. 

The beginning of the developments which changed the emphasis of righteousness in the meaning of the term “islam” go back to the Khwarij movement which appeared in the early first century AH.  The Khwarij were those who initially supported the fourth caliph, Sayyidina ‘Ali ibn Abu Thalib (k.w.) in his conflict with Mu’awiyah ibn Abu Sufyan, and later withdrew their support after the arbitration incident.  These Khwarij identified ma’swiyah, sin, with kufr.  Thus, they declared a Muslim as kafir if he were to commit an act of ma’swiyah.  It needs to be explained how they justified their position.  They seem to have understood islam as belief in God and self-surrender to Him.  This self-surrender manifests itself in righteous action.  The Khwarij appear to have understood this in an absolute sense; as self-surrender is manifested in righteous action, committing a ma’swiyah negates this self-surrender to God and thus annuls the islam of the believer.  This is, of course, contradictory to the Qur’anic Idea of righteousness, which sees this as something achieved gradually through a conscious effort, thus allowing for human weakness.  However, what it is important to note here is the Khwarij’s association of islam with “righteous action”. 

The Murji’ah reacted to the extreme position of the Khwarij.  Their contention was that islam denotes belief in God and that no one could be declared as having committed kufr on the basis of ‘amal, unrighteous acts.  The Murji’ah seem to point out that islam does not consist only of submission to God through righteous action but also belief in God which precedes this action.  Therefore, committing unrighteous acts does not necessarily negate the original belief in God.  The Murji’ah position is reflected in the meaning given to islam by some commentators of the Qur’an such as Imam Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Zakariya ar-Razi (r.a.) and Imam Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ash-Shawkani (r.a.).  They maintained that islam in “the diyn in the Sight of God is ‘islam’”, means iman, and does not include actions.  It is again important to note that the Murji’ah understanding of the term “islam”, is also associated with belief in God and acting righteously.  The Murji’ah, while taking the opposite extreme to the Khwarij by saying that “islam” means belief in God, do not seem to have said that righteousness is irrelevant to islam.  The Murji’ah only rejected the Khwarij association of absolute righteousness with islam.  The Murji’ah position was later interpreted as undermining the very essence of the Qur’anic Message of providing guidance as to what is right and what is wrong.  For instance, the theologian Imam Swadr ad-Din Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali ibn Abu al-‘Izz (r.a.) stated that the Murji’ah interpretation of islam as mere belief in God opens the way to fisq, disobedience, and ma’aswi, sins.  The Murji’ah understanding of islam, he said, is similar to saying that there is no harm in committing a sin so long as one has iman.  This implied that the Murji’ah were promoting licentiousness.  He did not try to see the Murji’ah interpretation of islam in the context of refuting the Khwarij claim that it meant absolute righteousness. 

This debate regarding the meaning of islam, which began, as indicated, with reference to whether it indicated absolute righteousness or not, was finally settled by giving the term a technical interpretation.  As Imam ibn Abu al-‘Izz (r.a.) indicated, this was done by resorting to the famous five-pillar ahadits.  As mentioned earlier, this ahadits elaborated on the meaning of the term, “islam” as consisting of proclaiming the shahadah, swalat, zakat, fasting, and pilgrimage.  The explanation of the term “islam” in terms of the five-pillar ahadits had many consequences.  First, ‘amal, which the Khwarij as well the Murji’ah understood as righteous acts in the context of the meaning of the term islam,  came to be explained in the light of this ahadits.  That is to say ‘amal became equivalent to the acts of shahadah, swalat, zakat, fasting and pilgrimage.  Thus, “muslim”, which originally denoted someone who believed in God and strove to live righteously, now became one who performed these acts.  Referring to the five-pillar ahadits and its relation to islam, Shaykh Taqi’ ad-Din Ahmad ibn ‘Abd al-Halim ibn Taymiyyah (r.a.) wrote, “The Ahadits Jibril shows that islam built upon the five is islam itself”.  In other words, these five pillars and the term “islam” are one and the same.  This resulted in interpreting the term, “islam” in terms of Islamic law, leading to the common interpretation of “islam” as surrender to the will of God, the final formulation of which, according to this interpretation, is in Islamic law.