What is the relationship between Arabness and the Arabic language with Islam?

The questioner : This leads us to the question. This is not really a question, actually.

The Shaykh : So, we are not recording this as a second question.

The questioner : No, I wanted it as an introduction. We want to be clear about our position regarding the status of the Arabs, Arabness, and what is called Arabness and the Arabic language in Islam. In truth, we are Arabs, but does this characteristic and this attribute give us something? What is the status of that thing in Islam? We know that there is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab except by piety.

The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.

The questioner : But given that the Qur'an is in Arabic, that the Qur'an is the speech of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), and that the Arabs carried this message, we want a clear line to show us where the overlap is and where the conflict is, so that we do not exaggerate in rejecting our Arabness, or rather, so that we do not completely reject what is called Arab. Consequently, do we clash or not with those who say that there is no difference between Arabness and Islam, considering that the Arabs truly had no existence, civilization, or history except through Islam, and that at their peak they reached the stage of peoples who lived in a certain area of land, coexisted with one another, and produced a type of relationships and what is called civilization, but did not reach the stage of a nation? And that the Arab nation only became a nation when Islam entered? In other words, the Arabs, at their historical peak, reached the stage of peoples, not a nation. Islam came and made the Arab a nation. So, in reality, to be clear about our position and clear in our relationships, and if Allah wills, following the guidance of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), we must understand how we should deal with the principle of Arabness and Islam?

The Shaykh : What I see, and Allah knows best, is that the superiority of the Arabs must be acknowledged by non-Arabs, for the reasons I mentioned earlier: that the Qur'an was revealed in their language and that the Prophet of Islam was sent from among them. Therefore, non-Arabs must believe in this truth. And the selection by Allah (Mighty and Majestic) to reveal this Islamic constitution, if that expression is correct, in the Arabic language, was not in vain. Consequently, His selection (Blessed and Exalted is He) of this Messenger, upon whose heart this Noble Qur'an was revealed, was also not in vain. As He (Mighty and Majestic) said, pointing to this truth: The Arabs do not need to be reminded of this truth, because they will believe in it. If they do not believe in it with faith, they will believe in it with nationalistic tribalism. But the Arabs, in turn, must remember another legal truth, which you referred to earlier: there is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab except by piety. And similar to that is his (peace and blessings be upon him) saying: After this, we must study the Arabs whom Allah (Mighty and Majestic) chose to reveal the Qur'an in their language first, and to send a Messenger from among them second. Why were they chosen for this selection, with the revelation of the Qur'an in their language and the sending of the Messenger from among them? Was it because they were characterized by the name "Arabs," or did they have qualities that qualified them for this selection? We say that the matter is not the name, but the reality behind the name. And so, when the Muslim Arab knows this truth, his belief in it, along with his belief in what came...

The questioner : Peace be upon you and Allah’s mercy.

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah. What came in the law of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is that differentiation before Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) on the Day He gathers them for the Reckoning is not by race, but by righteous deeds.
When the Muslim Arab remembers this truth, his belief that the ancient Arabs had this distinction does not harm him at that time. Rather, it will encourage him to be like the first Arabs, and not to be content with merely carrying their name without following their conduct and morals. And upon you be peace and the mercy and blessings of Allah. Therefore, we believe that the Muslim non-Arabs undoubtedly combined in the depths of their souls the acknowledgment of the virtue of those Arabs as a race, and combined with that the belief in what came in the Book revealed in a clear Arabic language. And the non-Arabs continued to acknowledge the virtue of the Arabs throughout these centuries, even to this day. And I say, with regret, that many of the non-Arabs who inherited their acknowledgment of the virtue of the Arabs think that the virtue of the Arabs is for their name, and not for their possession of the qualities we referred to, which divine wisdom necessitated for their selection to reveal the Qur'an in their language and to send the Arab Prophet from among them. They think that the Arabs are still so. And unfortunately, many of the Arabs, as you all know, have become like Abu Jahl in the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). They do not believe in the Shari'ah of Islam that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) revealed in their language. So they do not benefit from this virtue that Islam and all Muslims believe in, whether they are Arabs or non-Arabs. So if the Arabs deviate from the qualities of the first Arabs, their affiliation to the Arabs does not benefit them. If the Muslim combines the acknowledgment of this racial virtue of the Arabs, not as individuals but as a nation, and adds to that that it does not lead to delusion by lineage, as happened to the Arab nationalists with their pride in their Arabness and their attempt to prefer themselves over other peoples, then at that time they will become like the Jews who cast the Torah behind their backs, and in addition to that, called themselves the chosen people of Allah. So if the Arabs do not follow the path of the first Muslim Arabs, there is no benefit in their belief in their Arabness. Just as if the non-Arabs follow the path of the first Arabs who held fast to the Shari'ah of the Lord of the Worlds, they are undoubtedly better than the Arabs who cast the Book of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) behind their backs. But in my mind, I question what I heard earlier during your presentation of your question: is there not a conflict between those who speak of Arabness and Islam? Who are these people intended?

The questioner : The truth is, the nationalists, and after their ideas lost on the scene, they are looking for an ideological container, for a specific sectarian thought. They said that we, the nationalists, lost all our battles because the truth is they were looking for a specific theorization of their thought through imported ideas foreign to the Arab nation, through Marxism, and through the thought...

The Shaykh : From the right, Professor? From the right!!

The questioner : Understood, understood.

The Shaykh : This right here, just to take a new school of thought! Hahaha

The questioner : But the one who came before me, sir, may Allah be pleased with you.

The Shaykh : Hehehe.

The questioner : They said, “In our capacity as Arabs, we are truly lost, and we are searching for an ideological content for ourselves. We have moved away from Islam, and now they acknowledge that the sectarian ideology is the creedal thought that must belong to the Arabs, and that there is no conflict between the Arabs and Islam. Some go even further and say that Islam is one of the components of Arab nationalism, meaning that the components of Arab nationalism are language, shared history, shared pain, living on the same land, religion, and so on. They consider religion to be one of the components of Arab nationalism. Of course, these are the ones who exaggerate the matter. However, those who do not exaggerate the matter say that the creedal matter, or the sectarian ideology, or the ideology of the Arabs must be Islam, considering that Islam and Arabness are one and the same, and that even the Christian Arab finds Islam to be history, creed, and heritage, and so on. Therefore, there is no contradiction. Our identity is Muslim; Islam is our creed for us, and from this creed branch out answers to all the questions that the Muslim person needs through his relationship with his home, with himself, with his society, with the state, and with the system of governance. There is an answer to every question. What aligns with this matter, we accept, considering that Islam is the foundation, and that under the banner of Islam, the Arab, the foreigner, and the non-Arab are all gathered. What contradicts this matter, we reject. They are the exact opposite. They say that Islam and Arabness are one and the same. For example, in a book by 'Ismat Saif al-Dawlah, it is stated that the Arabs, when studying their history, were actually tribes with tribalism. Then they began to settle in a specific land and became disdainful of the issue of nomadism. Consequently, as a result of staying in the land, they transitioned from a family, tribal, and clan pattern to a type of people. Finally, when these people coexisted with the land and established relationships among themselves, they aimed to become a nation, but they were unable to become a nation until Islam came and gave them the creedal dimension. Through their interaction with this creed, they became a nation. Therefore, they view Islam and the Arabs as one and the same, and that Islam came to add to Arabness the dimension they needed. Thus, the history of Islam and the Islamic creed became what formed the Arab Islamic nation.

The Shaykh : So, what does this benefit them?

The questioner : It benefits them in that the new tune is that the Arabs and Islam are one and the same. Regardless of whether they held on to and practiced the rituals of Islam, or whether they did not practice Islam as a heritage, civilization, and history, the core and essence is that our creed is Islam, and we are Muslims, my brother. This Islam is a history that is not the exclusive property of anyone, and it is the right of everyone now to exert effort in this Islam and to take Islam as they wish. There is no guardianship by a specific party over Islam. And we, sir, it is true that I do not pray and I am negligent, but Islam is not just in prayer. Islam is history, Islam is heritage, Islam is provisions for me to draw from and take from as I wish, and this is even...

The Shaykh : May Allah have mercy on you, but is Islam a creed?

The questioner : Only?

The Shaykh : We do not merely say that, but we ask: is the head of Islam the creed?

The questioner : You are putting me in a trap. What do you mean?! ... There are those who hint to me that yes!!

The Shaykh : But the trap may be one in which a person is caught without realizing it. He does not imagine that he might fall into a trap. Let him imagine that he will escape the trap.

The questioner : Is that what you mean?

The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.

The questioner : Sir...

The Shaykh : If the head of Islam is the creed, is Arabness the same?

The questioner : There are those who define Arabness, yes...

The Shaykh : We say, regarding this Arabness whose effects we have not yet seen, of which we only hear something, does this Arabness have a creed?

The questioner : Now they say that their creed is Islam.

Another questioner : They claim the Islamic civilization, and from here came the merging of Arabness and Islam. This is a claim... and not a creed. If the creed were for the Christian, the matter would be different.

The questioner : They say civilization and heritage, correct. In their search for a sectarian ideology, for a creed, they discovered that Islam must be their creed, meaning...
Al-Halabi : The professor’s statement is more precise, and there are Christian Arab nationalists.

The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.

Another questioner : There are new movements of convergence, and they mean civilization, not creed. For the Christian, Islam is a civilization.

The questioner : I am speaking about a specific category... and this category, now, when they thought about the concept of socialism, or when they fell into a unitary, socialist, Ba'athist freedom, when they wanted to give meaning to their socialism, they began to search, for example, in ready-made applications, the Marxist right, for instance. Then it developed in various Arab countries into several concepts of socialism. In Algeria, they called it self-management. In Libya, they wrote the Green Book and tried to put... In Egypt, 'Abd al-Nasser proposed a socialist experiment, but all of it was drawn from something ready-made, which is Marxist-Leninist thought. Now, the Arabs, even the Ba'athists in their latest theses, have begun to strike the chord that, my brother, we have collided with Islam, and that Islam was always providing this Arab with a sectarian ideology, and he does not need to bring a sectarian ideology from outside. Now, Arab nationalism in general, and let us say the Ba'athists, even Salih Bitar in his last days, began to say that, my brother, this Islam with which we collided, in reality, provides us with a sectarian ideology and gives us many answers to our questions. Therefore, there is no contradiction between us and it. It is not just that I benefit from it as a civilization, history, and heritage. No, we are Muslims. The Christian says that he has read more than once that this Islam has become for him this history, which provides him with insights that give him material. This Christian, but the Arab Muslim says, no, the difference is that Arabness consists of components: language, shared history, and so on, and religion. They add religion as an element, not as a foundation. And this is the thesis they are speaking of, that there is no contradiction between us and Islam.

Another questioner : The Ba'ath message has become the eternal message. I mean, the eternal message. Was it 'Aflaq’s message or Islam’s message...

The questioner : For him?

Another questioner : For him.

The Shaykh : It appears that Abu Yahya is speaking about individuals among people whose creed has not yet formed, a creed without which they cannot do without Islam and its foundation. We have not yet known these people or found them. When they want to adopt Islam as a creed, it means they have forgotten Arabness, because the term Arabness does not contain a creed. It contains shirk, misguidance, absurdities, polytheistic practices, and idolatries. Islam is what purified the Arabs and saved them from those old idolatries that were represented on the back of the House of Allah, the Sacred. So now, if they want to adopt Islam because it does not differ from Arabness, this is not Islam and it does not benefit them. They must adopt Islam as a creed, a system, and a methodology. Not because it was revealed in the language of the Qur'an and their Prophet was from the Arabs themselves—this is a fact, as we said, that all Muslims acknowledge—but they do not be fanatical about Islam as a nationality, but they be fanatical about Islam as a religion. And this is the difference between the truly Muslim Arab and the truly Muslim non-Arab: he believes in this Islam and does not distinguish between the Arab and the non-Arab, the different nationalities between them. We have not yet found these as Arabs, because you know, if one fasts, we say to him, why do you fast? He says, by Allah, fasting is beneficial for health and we need it, and so on. This is not a Muslim. If they do not adopt Islam as a whole, as a creed, as a revelation descending from Allah, I do not think they enter into these details.

The questioner : I know some of them who actually pray, performing some of the rituals, and they are Muslims by birth and practice. But now, even in their conversation, they express their approval of man-made laws and firmly believe that these laws are beneficial. They say that even if some of them temporarily conflict with the Islamic Shari'ah, the problems of society have become so complex that we cannot apply the law of the Lord of the Worlds all at once. Therefore, there are man-made laws that can manage our life affairs, and even if we disapprove of them, neither the time nor the system allows us to amend them or demand their immediate amendment. My answer to them is that merely approving of this man-made law is, in reality, not permissible.

The Shaykh : Therefore, we say, may Allah bless you, that these people must rectify their creed above all else and take their creed from Islam. They should not mention anything called Arabism, because if we asked them what Arabism is, they would not be able to give us a comprehensive and definitive idea at all. Arabism is not a religion or a school of thought; rather, it is a nationalism.

The questioner : Even the concept of nationalism is a recent development, similar to the nationalisms that emerged in Europe.
Al-Halabi : A word that came from the speech of my brother Abu Yahya, may Allah bless him, and it is, of course, on their lips that they said Arabism or Arab thought has components, one of which is religion. This is a point, I mean.

The Shaykh : It is a very serious point. What formed the Arabs other than religion? It was religion that established them, gave them an entity and a state, and then the Arabs lost their state when they lost their religion.

The questioner : Arab nationalism, if you please, do not consider their civilization to be extending from Islamic history... thousands of years before Islam.

The Shaykh : But Abu Yahya, it appears he is talking about individuals with whom he discusses matters, not about the known groups like the group of 'Aflaq and his like. So, this is the first question.

The questioner : You are talking about things...

The Shaykh : So, this is the first question.