Surah al-Ma'idah (The Table) 5 : 103

Overview (Verse 103)

Freedom for the Human Mind
 
We have already mentioned a report in which Mujāhid quotes Ibn `Abbās and Sa`īd ibn Jubayr’s comments on the immediate reason for revealing the verse instructing the believers not to put questions concerning certain matters which would cause them difficulty or distress should they be stated in detail. The same report mentions that their questions included things and practices known in pre- Islamic days.
 
We have not been able to determine which particular things and practices were referred to, but the fact that the sūrah mentions the dedication of certain types of cattle immediately after the instruction not to ask unnecessary questions of detail suggests that the two are somehow linked. This is all that we need to say before discussing the verse that refers to such idolatrous practices.
 
It was not God who instituted [superstitions like those of] a slit-ear she camel, or a she-camel let loose for free pasture, or idol sacrifices for twin-births in animals, or stallion-camels freed from work. It is unbelievers who attribute their own lying inventions to God. Most of them never use their reason. When they are told, “Come to that which God has revealed and to the Messenger, “they reply, “Sufficient for us are the ways we found our fathers following.” Why, even though their fathers knew nothing and were devoid of all guidance? (Verses 103-104)
 
The human mind finds itself at a crossroads: it either maintains its proper nature with which God has equipped it or takes a different route. Should it take this way, it will recognise its one Lord, God, the Lord of the universe. It will submit to Him and accept His legislation, rejecting all other types of lordship. This means that it will reject any law other than God’s. In this case, the human mind will find contact with its Lord to be so easy and worshipping Him to be so simple and clear. Alternatively, the human mind could lose its way in the maze of ignorance, facing darkness in every way and a myth at every junction. Tyrannical deities demand all sorts of worship rituals and sacrifices, which, in time, increase and multiply. An idolater will then forget their origins, but continue to offer them by force of habit. He will writhe under the demands of worshipping a multitude of deities, which will deprive him of all dignity that God has bestowed on man.
 
Islam declares that the authority to which all people must submit is the One God. In doing so, it liberates people from bondage to one another, restores man’s dignity and frees the human mind from the fetters of rituals offered to multiple deities. Hence, Islam fights to eradicate idolatry in all its shapes and forms, pursuing it wherever it settles or manifests itself: deep in the human conscience, in worship rituals, in social practices, or in government and political systems.
 
At this point, the sūrah pays attention to one aspect of idolatry in pre-Islamic, pagan Arabia. It brings it into focus so as to refute all legends surrounding it. It states the basic principles of rational thinking, as well as the principles of law and faith at the same time: “It was not God who instituted [superstitions like those of] a slit-ear she- camel, or a she-camel let loose for free pasture, or idol sacrifices for twin-births in animals, or stallion-camels freed from work. It is unbelievers who attribute their own lying inventions to God. Most of them never use their reason.” (Verse 103)
 
Superstitious Practices
 
There were certain types of cattle people consecrated for their deities on conditions based in their inherited myths and which people accepted blindly. What were these? Who made the regulations concerning them? We have widely differing reports explaining each type of cattle. We will mention only a couple of these definitions to give an idea of such practices.
 
Al-Zuhrī quotes Sa`īd ibn al-Musayyib who says that the baĥīrah, or “a slit-ear she- camel” was one whose milk was dedicated for deities. [Needless to say, the milk was taken and used by the custodians of the temples.] The second type, sā‘ibah, was a she- camel dedicated to deities and let loose to graze wherever it wanted. The third type, waşīlah, was a she-camel that gave birth to two she-camels consecutively. This they would sacrifice for their deities. The fourth type, hāmī, was a male camel kept for breeding. When he had ensured conception for a set number of she-camels, they said that his back had warmed and he was freed and let loose.
 
Linguists have similar definitions. The first type, baĥīrah, is a she- camel whose ear has been widely slit. When a she-camel has given birth five times, producing in the fifth a male camel, the Arabs would slit its ear as a mark of consecration, prohibiting anyone from riding or slaughtering it for food. It would never be turned away from pasture or water. Even when a man suffering from fatigue saw it, he would not ride it. The second type, sā’ibah, was a she-camel let loose. When a person wanted to make an offering as a gesture of gratitude after his recovery from illness or return from a long journey or the like, he would say, “My she-camel is free.” It would, thus, be consecrated in the same fashion as the first type.
 
According to a number of linguists, the third type of cattle, waşīlah, referred to a female sheep being a twin of a male sheep. The female would, then, be spared slaughter. Others say that when a sheep gives birth to a female, they took it. Should it give birth to a male, they would slaughter it as an offering to their deities. Now if she gave birth to twins: a male and a female, they would say that the female had spared its brother and they would not slaughter the male as an offering. The fourth type, hāmī, was a male camel when it fathered no less than ten different pregnancies. They would say that his back had warmed. Thus, he would not be used to carry anything, and he would be let free to drink and graze wherever he wanted.
 
Other reports give similar or different definitions but they are all of the same nature based in the same superstitious beliefs. It is clear that these are no more than idolatrous myths. When myth and personal desire are the ultimate arbiter, there can be no logic or proper limits. Rituals will soon diverge, with omissions and additions made at will. This took place in pre-Islamic Arabia and it can happen anywhere, at any time, once human conscience deviates from absolute, straight and clear monotheism. Appearances may differ, but the essence of ignorance remains, allowing guidance to be derived from any source other than God Almighty.
 
When we speak of the state of ignorance we are not referring to a certain period of time. We mean a state that may take different shapes at any time. There can only be belief in one God, with total submission to Him, acknowledging His total authority, addressing all actions, emotions, thoughts and intentions to Him and deriving all values, standards, concepts and laws from Him and setting all systems and situations on His guidance. Or else, there will be a state of ignorance, in cane form or another, characterised by submission to other people or different creatures, without limits or controls. The point here is that the human mind cannot, on its own, be the source of proper control, unless it is controlled by true faith. We see at all times that the human mind is easily influenced by desires. It loses its power of resistance when it is subjected to different pressures, unless it refers to a well-defined standard of control.
 
Today, 14 centuries after the revelation of the Qur’ān, we observe that whenever the bond that links the human mind to the One God becomes loose, the human mind finds itself lost in an endless labyrinth. It then submits to different deities and loses its freedom, dignity and strength. I personally have seen in the Egyptian countryside numerous forms of myth, in which certain types of animals are consecrated for alleged saints and shrines, in the same way as they were consecrated for false deities in olden times.
 
At the core of such rituals in any state of ignorance we find the basic question that sets the starting point: Who is the ultimate judge in human life? Is it God alone, as He has stated? Or are there other judges, as people may decide for themselves, setting their own values, standards, systems, laws and rituals? In other words: To whom does Godhead belong? To God alone, or to some of His creatures, whoever they may be?