[search-in-place-form in_current_page="1"]



Praise be to God! There is no other god except God. Radicalism is the beliefs or actions of people who advocate thorough or complete political or social reform about a certain issue. One example of radicalism could be the “Just Stop Oil” movement. They want to completely stop the usage of oil, or petrol, or gas, because they think that it is destroying the climate, to the point where they sit and lie in traffic as a protest to stop traffic and grab the attention of the world. So, basically, they want to completely stop the usage of oil. Anyway, we are not against protecting the climate, but the “Just Stop Oil” movement is one example a radical approach.

  • Other radicals might be for example:
  • People against vaccines.
  • People who think that vaccines should be mandatory.
  • Black lives matter.
  • White lives matter.
  • People against circumcision.
  • People for circumcision.
  • In Iran for example, right now – women against hijab.
  • The Iranian state for mandatory hijab.
  • People who believe that the United States is the source of evil in the world.
  • People who think that United States is the bringer of freedom in the world.

And there are so many other examples of radicals. Now, unfortunately, a lot of half-submitters have become radicals about some of these issues, and subconsciously, that’s partly because they are aware that Rashad Khalifa had all the signs of a radical. He would interrupt people. He was one against many, and he had many other signs which give you the impression that he was a radical. However, what many people fail to understand is that Rashad Khalifa was a radical about one and one thing only – worshiping God alone. No one can show evidence that he was a radical against vaccines, or pro vaccines, or against white people, or for white people, or against circumcision, or for circumcision. He did not even talk about them. Even about things which he talked about, he was not a radical, unless it was about worshiping God alone. He was not a radical about any other issue except for worshiping God alone, and maybe he was half a radical about following Quran alone, and even about this he was only half radical, because he actually did use the Bible in a few circumstances, and he used Hadith for some historical purposes, but not for religious purposes. So, he was not even a full radical about the “Quran alone” idea. He was only a full radical about worshiping God alone. See, it really matters what he was a radical about. You can not use his radicalism about worshiping God alone, as an excuse to be a radical about other things.

And understanding this is very important. Let’s explain this from another perspective. We should not be against radicalism just because it is radicalism. The governments of today are against any kind of radicalism just because it radicalism, because it threatens their power. Radicalism in itself is not bad. The problem is that any person can truly be a radical about only one thing, maybe two things at the most. Because if you are a true radical about anything, it will not leave you energy, and time, and efforts, to be a true radical about something else. It’s not possible to be a radical about many things at once, because radicalism automatically implies that you are devoting most of your energy towards that cause, and if you spend most of your energy for that cause, you are left with less than half of the energy for any other cause. So, radicalism is possible only for one thing, two things at the most. Now, if you are a true strong believer, then you will be a radical about worshiping God alone, in which case it is not possible for you to be a radical about something else. And if you are a radical about anything else, that automatically implies that you are not a radical about worshiping God alone. And the Quran has something to say about those who are not radical about worshiping God alone.

In verse 72:15, it says, “As for the compromisers, they will be fuel for Gehenna.” Now, the question is, what kind of compromisers is it talking about here? Is it talking about those who reach a compromise, a middle way, about vaccines for example, or is it talking about reaching a compromise about worshiping God alone. And the answer is very clear in the following verses. This Sura does not mention vaccines at all, but just a few verses below, it talks about worshiping God alone. In verse 72:19, it says, “When GOD’s servant advocated Him alone, almost all of them banded together to oppose him.” So, this verse tells us, that it is talking about being a radical about worshiping God alone, and we never compromise about that, but compromising about other modern issues is not necessarily a bad thing.

Now, let’s take radicals against circumcision, as an example, to show why their radicalism about this issue does not make sense. So, they might tell you that about 100 babies die each year from medical complications after circumcision, which is true. (For example, the baby might suffer cardiac arrest from the sudden pain, or maybe the baby has a disease which does not allow the blood to coagulate, or something similar). The baby might have died in another case anyway, but let’s stick with this. Ok, fine, good argument. Now, let’s see how many people during your life will die from poverty? Not 100 people, not 1000, not 10,000, not 100,000, not 1,000,000, not 10,000,000, but 100,000,000 people will die from poverty during your life. So, surely, if you choose to be a radical, so you can save people, you have 1,000,000 more reasons to be a radical against poverty, then to be a radical against circumcision for example. So, now, what does it mean to be a radical against poverty? It means being a communist. Communists think that poverty should be eliminated completely. So, radicals against poverty are communists. So, you have more reasons to be a communist, than to be a radical about any other issue in life, except for worshiping God alone. So, the most excusable radicalism, after worshiping God alone, is communism, which is radicalism against poverty. But, let’s see whether the Quran allows radicalism against poverty, whether it allows communism –  and, of course, being against poverty is a good thing, but let’s see whether the Quran allows us to be radical about it.

Verse 17:29 says, “You shall not keep your hand stingily tied to your neck, nor shall you foolishly open it up, lest you end up blamed and sorry.”. So, here God is teaching us not to go all the way with distributing your wealth, your money to the poor, because it’s not worth being radical about it. So, if it is not worth to be a radical against poverty, then being a radical against anything else is even less worth it. It actually just shows that you are not willing to be a full radical towards worshiping God alone.

So, yes we are radicals about worshiping God alone, and we don’t believe that it is worth being a radical about any other issue. You may be pro or against some other issues, but it’s not worth being radical about them. And of course, many of these issues have a right answer and a wrong answer, and God willing, and the Quran tells you those answers, and some of those issues actually do not have a “yes” and “no” answer. However, even if those issues have the right “yes” answer, or the right “no” answer, it’s still not worth being radical about them.

Let’s take another example – alcohol. About 10 million people will die from alcohol related causes during your lifetime. Should we go on holding protests against it? No. Should we go and hold rallies against it? No. Should we turn it into a lifelong cause? No. And even though we as submitters never drink alcohol. It’s prohibited, but are we radicals against it? No. Because, God is not a radical against it. In the Quran, we see that He says that alcohol has bad things in it and good things in it, but the bad outweighs the good. See, the Quran is not even radically against alcohol. It’s clearly prohibited, but it’s not worth being a radical against it. And alcohol is much worse than getting vaccines, much worse than not getting vaccines, much worse than using too much oil, much worse than any of those ridiculous causes for which people become radicals. And they become radicals about those issues, either because they are naive, and will pick up any cause which comes their way, or they are simply not radical about worshiping God alone, so they have to fill that void in their heart. We can choose to call them “fools” to avoid calling them “idol worshipers”, because we are not sure whether half-submitters are idol worshipers. They hate it when they are called “fools”, but it’s better that they are called fools, as God calls them in the Quran, because this at least implies that they have a chance to repent, but if we called them idol worshipers for choosing to be a radical about causes which have nothing to do with worshipping God alone, then that would mean that they are really in irreversible trouble.

So, to conclude, radicalism is bad, not because it is radicalism, but because it automatically does not leave enough space to be a true radical about worshiping God alone.