Salvific Exclusivity: The Islamic Position

Salvific exclusivity contends that salvation and eternal bliss in the hereafter are only granted to the believers in a particular creed. This discussion clarifies the nuanced Islamic position on this matter.

 The concept of salvific exclusivity, while not exclusive to Islam, causes many people to suspect it as a catalyst of hate and animosity. It seems that in Europe, the only way to move beyond hostilities between the different religious groups has been to undermine the place of religion or deny that any one of them may be superior to any other. This theological relativism is not accepted by Islam, and the concept of salvific exclusivity seems to be ingrained in the scriptures and tradition. I discuss here some nuances about it and explain why, when appropriately understood, it should not lead to hostility.

Dividing people into believers and non-believers is but a depiction of reality, not a construction of it. Let us keep in mind that the point of reference here is a particular religion. As for the claim that this division warrants oppression, there is nothing in the scriptures that justifies oppressing anyone, regardless of their religious affiliation. It is the role of enlightened scholars to transfuse the values of fairness and compassion into the consciousness of the public.

Also, most non-Muslims are not waiting for us to grant them visas to enter Paradise, nor do we possess that authority. Being kind, courteous, and ethical when dealing with the non-aggressive adherents of other faiths is an injunction of our religion, but treating them with kindness and justice does not require that we approve of their faith.

Moreover, if we feel that extending to the People of the Book the status of believers who are granted salvation is necessary for harmony in our homelands, the Muslims in India, China, Europe, and many African countries are probably no less in need of winning over the Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, and pagans in those lands. In that case, should we deny the existence of disbelief altogether? What would eemân (faith) be if no disbelief exists?

Recognizing the Existence of Disbelief

Every ideology and religion must have boundaries that separate it from other ideologies and religions. Whoever accepts them as truths and adheres to them becomes a believer in them, and whoever denies them becomes a disbeliever in them. Hence, disbelief in any particular thing is the opposite of faith in it, and the two concepts are interdependent.

Religion makes a claim to the ultimate Truth. While postmodern relativism made valuable contributions in relativizing human intellectual output, the same cannot be applied to religion. Without denying the presence of truths and the utility of dialectics in discovering them, humans should be humble about the output of their intellect. The Divine/Transcendent is not subject to this human fallibility. A religion that claims a Divine origin is either true or false (in its original version, although it might be thereafter adulterated by human error or intent). And while most of our interpretation of it is subject to error, some religious certainties are beyond reinterpretation. If they are false, the religion itself must be false. You cannot be Muslim and deny resurrection or Christian and deny Christ. As we recognize the existence of disbelief, we must also recognize the existence of heresy.

The difficulty in explaining salvific exclusivity within the currently dominant intellectual milieu of post-modernist relativism is understandable. However, doing away with Truth and certitude will impoverish the human experience and undermine Faith as the chief giver of meaning and purpose.

As for some people striving to describe every person with eemân, this is contrary to numerous proofs in the Quran and Sunnah, as well as the unanimous agreement of the Ummah. In fact, it has been agreed upon by every Divine Revelation. Allah the Exalted says,

“Indeed, those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers and wish to discriminate between Allah and His messengers and say: “We believe in some and disbelieve in others,” and wish to adopt a way in between – Those are the disbelievers, truly. And We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating punishment” [Surah al-Nisâ’:4;150-151]

 And,

“And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.” [Surah Âl ‘Imrân: 3;85]

 And,

“And whoever has not believed in Allah and His Messenger – then indeed, We have prepared for the disbelievers a Blaze.” [Surah Al-Fatḥ: 48;13]

 And,

“O People of the Scripture, why do you disbelieve in the verses of Allah while you witness [their truth]?” [Surah Âl ‘Imrân: 3;70]

The Prophet said,

“وَالَّذِي نَفْسُ مُحَمَّدٍ بِيَدِهِ لاَ يَسْمَعُ بِي أَحَدٌ مِنْ هذِهِ الأُمَّةِ يَهُودِيٌّ وَلاَ نَصْرَانِيٌّ، ثُمَّ يَمُوتُ وَلَمْ يُؤْمِنْ بِالَّذِي أُرْسِلْتُ بِهِ، إِلاَّ كَانَ مِنْ أَصْحَابِ النَّارِ “

“By the One in Whose Hand is Muhammad’s soul, no one of this nation (the nation that is to be called to Islam), Jew or Christian, will hear of me then die without believing in that with which I have been sent, but he will be one of the people of Hell.” [Muslim]

The proofs regarding this are beyond being accommodated here, but the ijmâ‘ (consensus) confirming the disbelief of anyone—from no matter which nation—who does not believe in the Messenger of Allah and follow him, was reported by many verifying scholars like Ibn Ḥazm in Marâtib al-Ijmâ‘, ‘Iyâd in al-Shifâ, al-Ghazâli in al-Iqtiṣâd¹الغزالي في الاقتصاد في الاعتقاد: الرتبة الأولى: تكذيب ‌اليهود ‌والنصارى ‌وأهل ‌الملل كلهم من المجوس وعبدة الأوثان وغيرهم، فتكفيرهم منصوص عليه في الكتاب ومجمع عليه بين الأمة، وهو الأصل وما عداه كالملحق به. and Ibn Taymiyyah in al-Fatâwâ.

If you are standing at a multifurcation with your fellow human beings, and you see the path to salvation and prosperity and see them seeking another, is it not mercy here to tell them of the loss that awaits them?

Islam is not the only religion that upholds the concept of faith and disbelief and that people are either believers or disbelievers. In fact, the Torah, the Evangel, and the scriptures before them all confirm this. However, what worries many people about the terms disbelief and disbeliever is that during an era of history, like that of the Crusades or the Thirty Years’ War in Europe, they implied “those whose blood can be spilled.” The history of Muslim nations, according to countless testimonies by non-Muslim historians, thinkers, and even “hawkish” politicians, reflects the tolerant ideology of this belief system—even if violations occurred as a result of human error or corruption in applying the Divine instruction.

People may still ask, doesn’t believing that another person deserves eternal damnation by God for their disbelief dehumanize them and harden the hearts against them, which leads to treating them with animosity and oppression? This is, of course, a fair question. As for the eternity of damnation, while this is the mainstream position of Muslim scholars, it is not a matter of consensus among all of them, and we find imams like Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim leaning toward its temporality. Imam Ibn Taymiyyah’s optimistic theodicy may have motivated him to reevaluate the evidence concerning this matter. It is also known that some of the main Sufi mystics did not believe in eternal torment. However, what may be more practically relevant here and more accepted by the mainstream views are other concepts that are important to grasp for a better understanding of this issue.

First, who is subject to punishment?

Only those who rejected the Truth after it was clearly presented to them in a way they can comprehend. Imam al-Ghazâli argued,

“The majority of the Roman and Turkish Christians in these times are included in the mercy [of Allah]—God willing. I mean those who are in the far away peripheries of the Roman and Turkish lands, whom the call [to Islam] did not reach. For there are three types: A type whom the very name of Muhammad saw] did not reach, so they are excused. A type whom his name and description reached, as well as the miracles manifested by him, and those are the ones who are close to Muslim lands and mix with Muslims, and they are the deviant disbelievers. A third type that is between the other two, the name of Muhammad reached them, but not his description and true qualities; they only heard from childhood that a deceptive liar named Muhammad claimed to be a prophet, just like our children hear that a liar called al-Muqaffa‘ claimed that Allah sent him and falsely asserted his prophethood. To me, these are like the first type, for those neither heard his name nor the false claims against him, and these heard the opposite of his true qualities, and such would not motivate them toward further investigation.”²Abu Ḥâmid Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazâli, Faiṣal al-tafriqah, ed. Maḥmood Biju (Beirut: Dâr al-Bayrooti, 1993), 84.

It is interesting that Sh. Muhammad Rashid Reda considered the people of America during his time of the first kind.³Muhammad Rasheed Riḍâ, Tafseer al-manâr (Cairo: al-Hay’ah al-Miṣriyyah al-‘âmmah li-l-Kitâb, 1990), 1:338. The fairest position on this is to recognize the concept and avoid any blanket statements, as Imam Ibn al-Qayyim stated,

“The establishment of the plea differs with times, places, and individuals. The plea may be established against the unbelievers in some times, not others, and in some places, not others, and it may be also established on someone, not another, either because of his lack of intellect and discernment, like the child and the insane, or his lack of understanding, like the one who does not understand the speech [language], and no interpreter was present to translate for him.”⁴Shams al-Deen Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Ṭareeq al-hijratayn wa bâb al-sa‘âdatayn, 2nd ed. (Cairo: Dâr al-Salafiyyah, 1394), 414.

Imam Ibn Taymiyyah speaks specifically here about the Jews and Christians whose scriptures—we believe—have been altered, and says that they will be judged based on what they received:

“As for those whose time is far from the time of Christ or Moses, and some accounts about them reach them, but not others, the plea becomes established against them concerning what has reached them only. Additionally, if they disagree on the interpretation of parts of the Torah or Gospel, whoever among them sought the truth and excelled in finding it should not be subject to torment, even if they were mistaken, far removed from the truth, and misguided, just like those who seek the truth from among the Ummah of Muhammad .”⁵Taqi al-Deen Aḥmad ibn ‘Abd al-Ḥaleem Ibn Taymiyyah, Al-jawâb al-ṣaḥeeḥ li man baddala deen al-Maseeḥ, 2nd ed., ed. ‘Ali ibn Ḥasan, ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Ibrâheem, and Ḥamdân ibn Muhammad (Riyadh: Dâr al-‘Âṣimah, 1419/1999), 2:301.

While we are confident that the truth of Islam will shine before a diligent, sincere seeker, we realize that many non-Muslims do genuinely believe in the truth and superiority of their religions. When we asked them to take an oath in a Muslim court, we requested them to swear by Allah who saved Moses if they were Jewish or let Jesus bring the dead to life if they were Christians. We even asked them to take the oath at a church or by the altar.⁶Manṣoor ibn Yoonus al-Buhooti, Sharḥ muntaha al-irâdât (Beirut: ‘Âlam al-Kutub, 1414/1993), 3:614-615.

 Second, Islam teaches us that people’s spiritual condition is more fluid than we think. The Prophet said,

“By the One beside Whom there is none other worthy of worship! One of you will do deeds of the people of Paradise, until there is between him and it but a forearm span, then he is overcome by what is written for him, and he is sealed off with the deeds of the people of the Fire, so that he enters it. And indeed, one of you will do deeds of the people of the Fire, until there is between him and it but a forearm span, then he is overcome by what is written for him, and he is sealed off with the deeds of the people of Paradise, so that he enters it.”⁷al-Tirmidhi, on the authority of ‘Abdullâh ibn Mas ‘ood.

While this hadith must be understood within the framework of Divine justice and compassion, it tells us that we cannot tell without Divine Revelation who goes to paradise and who does not. Imam al-Ghazâli said,

Even when he [the scholar] sees an unbeliever, it would not be allowed for him to treat him arrogantly for it is conceivable that the unbeliever accepts Islam and he concludes his life in a state of faith, and that [Muslim] scholar goes astray, and he concludes his life in a state of disbelief.⁸al-Ghazâli, Iḥyâ’ ‘Uloom al-Deen, 3:364.⁹الغزالي في إحياء علوم الدين: بل ‌لو ‌نظر ‌إلى ‌كافر ‌لم ‌يمكنه ‌أن ‌يتكبر ‌عليه إذ يتصور أن يسلم الكافر فيختم له بالإيمان ويضل هذا العالم فيختم له بالكفر.

Allah reminds us that we can never lose hope even for the worst of people. He said to the believers about the disbelievers of Quraysh who tortured them and condemned them without pity,

“Perhaps Allah will put, between you and those to whom you have been enemies among them, affection. And Allah is competent, and Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” [Surah al-Mumtaḥanah: 60;7]

If I am not one who receives revelation from God, I cannot predict my own destination, let alone that of anyone else. All I am required to do is be just with all people and kind to those who do not oppress me because of my religion. The knowledge of my and their final abodes belongs to God alone and has no bearing on how I should treat them.

Related reading:

– Salvific Exclusivity – Shaykh Yasir Qadhi

– A Critique Of Deism