Question:
If someone does not believe in God and does not believe in the Qur’an, how can such a person be invited to defend Islamic law? Is that appropriate?
Answer:
The response given is that, according to their perspective, this approach is not correct. They say that sincere Muslims believe the Qur’an cannot be altered under any circumstance. Even if all the Muslims of the world came together, they would not be permitted to change even a single letter of the Qur’an. Therefore, when there are political debates about introducing a single civil law for all of India or modifying certain aspects of Muslim personal law, Muslims sometimes organize conferences and protests to defend their religious laws. In some of those events, people who do not believe in religion are invited to speak in support of the cause.
According to the explanation given, this practice is considered problematic because it creates a contradiction. If someone does not believe in God or in the Qur’an, then their support for protecting Islamic law may simply be political rather than sincere. Therefore, inviting such people to speak about protecting the Qur’an or Islamic law can appear insincere or politically motivated.
The speaker explains that their own organization, rejects such practices. For example, during Ramadan some groups organize public iftar (fast-breaking) events and invite politicians from various parties such as the DMK, AIADMK, Congress, or other groups to attend. The criticism raised is that many of these politicians do not personally believe in the religious significance of fasting. They may attend such events mainly for political reasons, such as gaining support from Muslim voters.
Because of this, the organization claims that they do not conduct such political-style religious events. They argue that if someone does not believe in fasting, prayer, or Islamic teachings, then it is unnecessary to invite them to participate in religious ceremonies just for publicity or political advantage. Doing so may create the impression that religion is being used for political theatre rather than sincere belief.
Similarly, when issues arise about Islamic law, the organization states that they prefer to hold meetings involving Muslim scholars and believers who genuinely follow the religion. They say that if someone openly rejects the Qur’an or denies the existence of God, it does not make sense to invite that person to speak about defending the Qur’an. According to them, such participation would be based on political convenience rather than genuine conviction.
The speaker emphasizes that sincerity should be maintained in religious matters. A person should say openly what they truly believe rather than pretending to support something for political reasons. They argue that political leaders sometimes attend religious functions of different communities despite not believing in those religious practices themselves. This, according to the speaker, is a form of acting or political performance.
From their viewpoint, religious events should involve people who truly believe in the teachings being discussed. Inviting people who do not believe in those teachings simply for political appearance is considered insincere. Therefore, they argue that Muslims should remain genuine in their beliefs and avoid such practices.