“Muhammad (PBUH) is no more than a Messenger and indeed (many) Messengers have passed away before him. If he dies or is slain, will you then turn back on your heels (as disbelievers)? And he who turns back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah, and Allah will give reward to those who are grateful.” Al-Quran (3:144)
No doubt, the sacred gleams of religious experiences were sparkling in the hearts and minds of the prophets keeping them like shining star. Such experiences, which are called divine revelation, pave the ground for reality. In other words, receiving the divine messages to convey them to the people was a religious experience. Now, the question is that will the sparkles of religion go off with the demise of the prophets?
Abdul Karim Sorosh, an Islamic intellectual, believes that the stepping of rationality in the realm of religion was a great historical adventure. Rationality opened the door to secularism in the realm of religion. Secularism transcended the simple and primary definition of separation of “church” from the “state”. In other words, there was no religious motive behind the secular practices, the secular worldview was totally based on irreligious concepts, and knowledge, policy, religion … were considered independent from one another. Hence in such a case, religion lost its authority in many sphere of human beings and stood as a rival against its emerging rivals.
Based on secular ideology, policy, knowledge, art, etc bear independent substance from religion and religion is not included in their definition. However, the said can shake hands with religion and be suggested by Holy Prophets, yet it does not mean to be substantially religious.
According to Sorosh, philosophers, specialists, scientists and the lawyers cut religion into pieces and each took their share with good intention to serve the religion. Therefore, religion was divided into many branches, such as philosophical, juridical and experimental parts. Moreover, he likens religion to a volcano which produced hot lavas, but when the lavas grew cold, the erudite separated and sculptured them into many shapes.
He further believes that philosophers did a great job in spreading the educational sphere of religion. Normally, prophets hardly ever argue philosophically regarding religious issues. The magnificence of their personality stands the only reason behind their words. For instance, one will hold words of the prophets in due respect and follow their instructions for their great personality no matter if the words are not analyzed or argued about. However, religious issues were philosophized, analyzed and interpreted vastly by philosophers. And religious laws and sharia were generalized in many other spheres of modern life by lawyers. Indeed, since we live in “demystified world” a philosophized religion will be more acceptable. It merits mentioning that no personality can be considered as a reason behind a claim other than the personality of the prophets and such a personality, Muslims believe, was finalized by the last Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Thus, we are supposed to follow only the religious experiences of the prophets. But have you ever thought about the concept of religiosity?
Religiosity revolves around the personality of the prophets. For instance, justice is a crying need for social life; however it is not a religious element unless it is said by prophets. If the same thing be said by someone who, though has religious/spiritual experiences yet he is not prophet, it won’t be considered religious. Or if one practices upon all the instructions of a prophet, but does not believe in prophet himself, do you think that he will be called the follower of the prophet? If one accepts Islamic instructions, regardless of the source and Messenger, he will not be considered Muslim in Islamic countries. Hence, one who claims piety cannot marginalize or deny the personality of the prophets otherwise s/he will not be called religious among the followers of that religion no matter whether Muslims, Christians, etc. In short, the religious elements are substantially secularized and will be religious only in attributing them to the prophets.
Sorosh believes that religiosity does not run in the blood of the religious elements, such as justice, policy, etc, rather they are like clothes which can be uncovered as the secularists do. Arguing that if prophets taught mathematics, philosophy, art, biology, etc, neither the definition nor the conception would change, then he concludes that religious teachings are naturally secular.
Christians believe that the way to salvation and prosperity is accessible through following Jesus Christ and Muslims believe that it is accessible through following Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Such claims come true when one believes that Christ and Muhammad were not only historical personalities who carried out their missions, like workers, and left. But it is only possible to practice the religious experiences of the Holy Prophets.
We are not supposed to be orphaned by the demise of the Prophets or be as dependent to them as a child to its mother. Prophets came to make independent nation so that nothing return to its primary state after their demise. No doubt, prophets were not given eternal life; they were doomed to pass away the same as we are. We will have to consider their teachings and guidance and they are to be the role model in our personal and social life. The instructions of the Holy prophets are like shining stars which beckon all the generations in every age.
Since the vacuum of the prophets are deeply felt in our age, let us learn and practice our religious beliefs in its true way and form a social fabric conducive to the realm of religion and morality. Otherwise, if we continue in the same way, the sanctity of religious rules and the value of moral standards will be violated without feeling a tinge of guilt. We need to revive the religious instructions more than ever before.