Abstract:
This paper explores the Quranic narrative of Iblis (Satan) as a foundational framework for understanding the origins of racism, supremacism, and other forms of hierarchical discrimination. It argues that Iblis’s rebellion against God’s command to prostrate before Adam represents the first instance of a superiority complex rooted in perceived differences—specifically, Iblis’s claim that his creation from fire made him superior to Adam, who was created from clay. This act of defiance, driven by arrogance and pride, is identified as the genesis of divisive ideologies such as racism, tribalism, casteism, and nationalism. The paper draws a direct line from Iblis’s proclamation of superiority to modern manifestations of discrimination, including imperialism, colonialism, apartheid, and Zionism. It posits that the “Iblisian attitude” of elevating oneself above others based on arbitrary distinctions has permeated human societies, leading to systemic oppression and division. The Quranic account, particularly in verses such as 15:33, 38:76, and 15:27, is analysed to highlight how Iblis’s curse and his subsequent role as a tempter of humanity underscore the moral and spiritual dangers of such supremacist ideologies. Ultimately, the paper serves as a critique of all forms of superiority and discrimination, urging a return to the Quranic ideal of equality and humility before God. It emphasizes that only the righteous, who resist the temptations of Iblis, can transcend these destructive attitudes and foster unity and justice in human societies.
The Quranic account of the rebellion of Iblis (Satan) sheds light on the deep-seated foundations of racism, communalism, and fanatical nationalism. This paper peels back the layers to reveal that the roots of the sense of superiority—whether rooted in tribe, race, nation, community, class, or caste—lie in the very nature and proclamation of Iblis. This Iblisian attitude, like a poisonous vine, has spread its tendrils into racism, tribalism, casteism, imperialism, colonialism, apartheid, and Zionism.
When God created Adam from dust and commanded the angels to prostrate before him after breathing life into him, the rebellious Iblis, blinded by arrogance, refused. He declared, “I am better than him. You created him from clay, and I was created from fire” (see Quran 15:33, 38:76, 15:27). This act of defiance and pride led to his curse. When Iblis sought permission to mislead humanity, God granted it, but with a caveat: he could not sway the righteous servants of God. These events are etched in detail in the Quran. (1)
Iblis, a member of the jinn (Quran 18:50), was created from smokeless fire (55:15). It was his arrogance of creation, a towering pride in his origins, that drove him to defy God’s command. (2) The Quran, shattering the illusion of racial superiority, declares that all humanity originates from Adam, and Adam himself was formed from dust. (3) The true measure of excellence, it emphasizes, lies in piety and fear of God (49:13). It is not the dust from which man was made that grants him superiority over the angels, but his God-given role as caliph on earth (2:30). This same toxic egoism of Iblis has been echoed through the ages in Brahmanism, Zionism, Fascism, Nazism, Islamic Supremacism, and Colonialism. The Quran unequivocally rejects all claims of superiority based on colour, religion, nationality, race, class, caste, or tribe. It warns that Iblis, cursed and relentless, is sworn to lead humanity astray (38:79-83). Iblis, therefore, sows the seeds of arrogance and pride in his followers (2:43), and his schemes will persist until the Day of Judgment (12:62-63). Unlike Iblis, Adam did not cling to his disobedience; he sought forgiveness and rose to righteousness (7:23).
Those enthralled by the ‘Iblis effect’ are loath to relinquish their grip on the rights of others and turn a blind eye to treating those beneath them with respect. This same corrosive egoism fuels communally-centered religious interpretations and totalitarianism.
Judeo-Christian Heritage
Racism, a blight on humanity, is the claim that one group is racially superior to another. Bertrand Russell cuts to the heart of the Judeo-Christian concept of ‘God’s chosen people’:
‘The chosen go to heaven. God makes them the objects of his mercy. They are good because they are chosen; they are not chosen because they are not good.’ (4) From ancient times, the Jews prided themselves on their perceived racial superiority. When Christianity became the state religion, the Gentiles too fell prey to an irrational belief in Jewish superiority. (5)
The concept of a chosen people, a double-edged sword, was also embraced by fascists. Historian Arnold Toynbee noted that this idea even cast its shadow over communism. (6)
For centuries, Europeans harboured a deep-seated hostility toward people of different skin colours. This racial pride, like a contagion, infected all the lands they colonized. History bears witness to how they uprooted people of different nationalities, confiscated their property, and subjected them to humiliation, assault, torture, and death. They looked down their noses at the native majority, deeming them intellectually inferior. This warped worldview later became the justification for oppressing the peoples of the colonies.
The New Testament declares that there is only one race of men (Acts 17:26). To counter Jewish racism, which claimed ‘an indisputable right to the kingdom of God’ as descendants of Abraham, John the Baptist declared that God could raise up children from stones (Matthew 3:1-12). Jesus Christ took a radical stand against Jewish racism, proclaiming that those who hear and obey his word are his true family. (7) However, Christianity took a turn, promoting the concept of ‘adoption’ (Romans 8:11-17). The Church called the new community the ‘community of saints’ (8) and portrayed Christians as children of God. (9) The Church also reinstated the idea of a chosen people, echoing the very concept he sought to transcend (10).
Although the Christian conscience was slow to embrace the colour black as anything but a symbol of inferiority, it eventually succumbed. Here lie the roots of the European attitude that Negroes were mentally inferior and their culture was devoid of value. Historians have pointed to the influence of Calvinist Christianity behind the apartheid systems in South Africa and Namibia, a dark chapter in human history.
In conclusion, the roots of racism, like a tangled web, stretch back to the arrogance of Iblis and the misguided notions of chosenness in religious and ideological traditions. To dismantle these structures, we must confront these deep-seated biases and strive for a world where all are judged not by their origins, but by their character and deeds.
The prophets who came to Israel did not consider God as their own, as if He were a mere possession to be claimed. However, Israel, like a child clutching a prized toy, made God their own tribal leader and their own private property. (11) They saw God as the father of the Jews and the Israelites as God’s children, a relationship that was as exclusive as it was possessive. (12) While moral values were to be strictly observed among the Hebrew people, they did not consider them to be applicable to other peoples, as though ethics were a garment to be worn only within the confines of their own tribe. They even justified the killing of innocent people from opposing groups, including the Assyrians, as if their lives were but straw to be burned in the fire of their divine mandate. (13) They massacred non-Hebrew peoples, enslaved them, and imposed heavy taxes on them, treating them as little more than chattel in their grand design. (14) The double standard in ethics was written into the Bible itself, like a stain that no amount of washing could remove. While the flesh of dead animals was forbidden to the Hebrew people, it was permitted to be sold to foreigners (Deuteronomy 14:21). While the Israelites did not involve interest in their financial transactions with one another, they were ‘permitted’ to impose interest on non-Hebrews, as though fairness were a currency only to be spent among themselves. (15)
The attitude of claiming superiority simply because God chose them, rather than on moral grounds, is inherently racist, a mind-set as old as time and as poisonous as a serpent’s bite. In the Middle Ages, when Christians and Muslims considered interest to be forbidden, the Jews prospered through interest-based trade, navigating the financial seas with a skill that others shunned. (16) Jewish rabbis preached that Gentiles were created as fuel for hell, a doctrine as harsh as it was divisive. (17) Biblical scholar J.B. Phillips has described orthodox Judaism as a religion that cannot accept Gentiles who are racially distinct from other peoples, a wall of separation as high as it was insurmountable. (18)
The creation of the Jewish nation of Israel (1948) is a living example of the racial oppression that continues to plague the Hebrew people after two thousand years, a shadow that stretches long and dark over the land. The indigenous Arabs are the worst people for Zionists, viewed through a lens of disdain and fear. Approximately 780,000 Palestinian Arabs were displaced in 1948 to create the state of Israel, a mass exodus that left scars as deep as the roots of ancient olive trees. There is also official discrimination between Jews and non-Jews in Israel, a divide as stark as night and day. Feelings of justice, realism, and compassion are never reflected in Israeli policy, as though these virtues were strangers in a foreign land. The Israeli government’s official policy of discrimination and humiliation against Arabs is racist and communal, a blight on the conscience of the nation. The United Nations was very accurate in declaring Zionism to be racist in 1975, a verdict as clear as the light of day.
Scholars have exposed the Jewish concept of God, which took a harsh stance against those outside its fold and a moral stance against those within its fold, a duality as sharp as a double-edged sword. (19) The Church described Christians as ‘a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession,’ a title as lofty as it was exclusive. (20) Biblical scholars themselves admit that the biblical concept of ‘chosen people’ has been used to promote prejudice, violence, and oppression among various groups of people, a legacy as heavy as a millstone around the neck. (21)
The Brahmanical Legacy
The social system of caste became deeply rooted in Indian society about two thousand years ago, a tree whose roots run deep and whose branches cast long shadows. Scholars trace its religious roots to the well-known Purusha Sukta of the Rig Veda (Rig Veda 10:9:11-12). According to this, the Brahmin was born from the face of Brahma, the Kshatriya from his arms, the Vaishya from his thighs, and the Shudra from his feet, a hierarchy as rigid as it was divinely ordained. (22) The Manusmriti supports this position (1:87, 10:3), a text as revered as it was controversial.
The caste system, based on tradition and occupation, became intertwined, and a hierarchical hierarchy and dominance emerged, a web as intricate as it was inescapable. As Max Weber wrote, without caste there would be no Hindu, a statement as profound as it was unsettling. (23) In his renowned work on caste, M.N. Srinivas, a great Indian sociologist, highlights the enduring influence of caste on Indian society. (24)
Even Gandhiji, in his early years, justified the caste system—a stance as surprising as it was disheartening. He defended it by asserting that a scavenger held the same dignity as a Brahmin, a sentiment noble in theory but deeply flawed in practice. (25) While it is true that he later revised his position, his initial support remains a point of contention. Similarly, Hindutva theorist Veer Savarkar championed the purity of racial blood within Hindu society and their unwavering devotion to their Vedic heritage, a vision as fervent as it was divisive. (26)
Like fascism, Hindutva is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, rooted in notions of racial and cultural superiority. The ‘others’ are painted as the villains of the piece, blamed for all the nation’s woes. Minorities and ‘others’ are scapegoats, bearing the cross for both ideologies. While fascism has no religious roots, Hindutva draws its lifeblood from spiritual and religious foundations, making it a more insidious and potent force. Hindutva is ten times more adept at turning its own victims into pawns than Nazi-Fascism ever was. It is a master of manipulation, using Dalits and backward communities as fuel to stoke its fiery engine.
The philosopher of Hindutva in India, M.S. Golwalkar, was a torchbearer of Brahminism and the caste system. He wrote:
‘The Brahmin is the head, the king the hands, the Vaishya the thighs, and the Shudra the feet. Thus, the Hindu people in the four-caste system are our God.’ (27)
Golwalkar’s words paint a chilling picture, equating the caste system to a divine hierarchy. It was only natural that Golwalkar found kinship with Hitler’s racial myths and the atrocities committed in their name. He declared:
‘Germany shocked the world by exterminating the Jews in order to maintain the purity of race and culture. Racial pride was reflected here in the highest degree. Germany teaches the lesson that races and cultures with different roots cannot unite. Hindustan has a lesson to learn from this.’ (28)
These words are a dark mirror, reflecting the dangerous alignment of Hindutva with Nazi ideology.
The Legacy of ‘Science’
History stands as a grim witness to how modern racism gained strength under the guise of ‘scientific’ data. The theory of survival of the fittest and the dog-eat-dog capitalist approach were cloaked in the garb of science. Technological and military superiority, coupled with the insatiable hunger for markets, turned Europeans into colonialists. Darwin accepted the ‘facts’ that there were racially ‘inferior’ groups of humans and that the Caucasian group was evolutionarily superior. (29) T.H. Huxley, a man of his time, had no doubts about this hierarchy. (30) Stephen Jay Gould observed that the tendency to associate biology with racism multiplied like wildfire after Darwin’s The Origin of Species. (31)
The Nazis’ persecution of Jews was built on a house of cards—myths that they were racially inferior, that interbreeding was dangerous, and that racial purity was noble. The so-called scientific arguments for this were rooted in the twisted branches of evolutionary theory. The social Darwinist interpretation of a people’s industrial and military backwardness became the smokescreen for colonialism and imperial expansion. (32)
Even as late as 1969, studies dripping with bias were published, providing ‘scientific evidence’ for racism. Dr. Arthur Jensen argued that Negroes were generally less intelligent than whites and that intelligence was hereditary. (33) Such claims are a house built on sand, ignoring the role of environment and opportunity. Many such statistical studies have been conducted before and since, but they crumble under scrutiny. What such ‘evidence’ conveniently sweeps under the rug is the fact that greater opportunities and favourable conditions can lift individuals and societies to new heights. For example, in recent years, the average intelligence of Japanese children has been found to be 10 points higher than that of American children. This is a testament to the power of the environment over heredity. If we acknowledge the role of environmental factors alongside genetic factors in personality development, we can cut the roots of the racism that has poisoned the well of human progress.
Quranic Rebuttal of Racism
The Quran unequivocally rejects all racial, tribal, and nationalistic notions of superiority, tearing down the walls of division and upholding only the dignity of humanity based on piety. It proclaims: “O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into tribes that you may know one another. The most righteous of you in the sight of God is the most honoured.” (49:13). Like a tree with many branches but one root, humanity’s diversity is a testament to its shared origin.
The Quran further equates the concept of taqwa (piety) with justice, a golden thread weaving through the fabric of its teachings: “O you who believe! Be steadfast in justice for God. And let not hatred of a people prevent you from dealing justly with them. So be just. That is the most righteous of you.” (5:8). Justice, in the Quranic vision, is the compass that guides humanity through the stormy seas of prejudice and hatred.
The Quran emphasizes the unity of humanity’s common origin, a symphony of souls echoing from the same divine source (10:19, 2:213). It reminds us that prophets have been sent to every land (16:36, 35:24), like rain nurturing diverse soils, each bringing the same message of truth. Salvation and ultimate victory are not the exclusive birth-right of any particular group: “They say that only the Jews and the Christians will enter Paradise. That is only their delusion. Tell them to bring their proof if you are truthful. Whoever submits to God and does righteous deeds will have his reward from his Lord. They will have no fear, nor will they grieve.” (2:111-112). The gates of Paradise are open to all who walk the path of righteousness, regardless of their earthly labels.
The Quran reiterates this universal truth: “Whoever believes, whether they are Jews, or the Christians, who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds, on them there is no fear, nor will they grieve.” (5:69). Faith and good deeds are the twin stars that guide humanity to its ultimate destiny.
From a single pair, a male and a female, mankind was created, a tapestry woven from the threads of shared ancestry (4:1). At the dawn of humanity, a covenant was made with the descendants of Adam (2:38), a sacred promise etched into the very soul of mankind. The teachings of the prophets, like lanterns in the darkness, remind humanity of this covenant and illuminate the path of justice and righteousness. These teachings form the essence of human religious experience (34).
The Quranic concept of one God (35) naturally leads to the vision of humanity as one community (36). Like a vast ocean fed by countless rivers, humanity’s diversity flows into the unity of its Creator. The Quran condemns those who walk arrogantly and boastfully, like peacocks strutting in pride, as transgressors (37). It also dispels the misconception that any language, including Arabic, holds inherent superiority, stating that divine revelations were made in various tongues (14:4). Diversity in language, culture, and colour is not a flaw but a divine sign, a mosaic of God’s creativity: “The creation of the heavens and the earth, and the differences of your languages and colours, are among God’s signs.” (30:22).
In contrast to narrow, tribal views such as ‘the God of Israel,’ the Quran presents a broad, inclusive concept of God as the Lord of the nations and the world (16:84, 114:1-4). God’s mercy is not confined to a single people but encompasses all of creation, like the sun whose rays touch every corner of the earth.
Righteousness is declared an attribute of God, and humanity’s highest calling is to bear witness to it. (38) Every individual is accountable for their actions (39), like a shepherd responsible for their flock. No saint, priest, or prophet can absolve individuals of this responsibility (55:21). The Quran reminds us that the origin and Creator of all human beings, regardless of the hues of their skin or the tongues they speak, is one (3:64, 23:52). In the eyes of the Creator, humanity is a single family, bound by the ties of divine love.
The Quran presents Pharaoh as a cautionary figure in history, warning against the division of citizens into groups and the systemic humiliation and oppression of one by another (28:4). Like a tyrant who thrives on sowing discord, Pharaoh’s legacy stands as a stark reminder of the moral and social evils inherent in division and hierarchical social structures.
The teachings of the Prophet Muhammad, a living embodiment of Quranic principles, further illuminate these ideas. He declared: “O people, your Lord is one. There is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab, nor a non-Arab over an Arab, nor a black over a white, nor a white over a black, except on the basis of piety.” (Musnad Ahmad, 22978). Piety, like a scale, measures worth not by outward appearance but by the weight of one’s deeds.
The Prophet also said: “All are the offspring of Adam, and Adam is from dust.” (Abi Dawud, 5116). From the same earth we arise, and to the same earth we return, a humbling reminder of our shared humanity. He warned against arrogance, describing it as “denying the truth and looking down on others because of one’s own superiority” (Sahih Muslim, 91). Arrogance, like a veil, blinds the heart to the truth of equality.
In a powerful metaphor, the Prophet urged obedience to a leader, “even if he is a black Ethiopian with a snub nose” (Bukhari, 7142). Leadership, in Islam, is not a matter of race or appearance but of character and capability. He also proclaimed: “O Lord, my Lord and the Lord of the worlds! I bear witness that all mankind is brothers.” (Musnad Ahmad, 23489). Brotherhood, in this vision, transcends all artificial barriers.
The Prophet’s teachings on mercy are equally profound: “Have mercy on those on earth, and He who is in the heavens will have mercy on you.” (Tirmidhi, 1924). Mercy, like a boomerang, returns to those who extend it to others. He condemned tribalism and racism, stating: “He who calls to asabiyyah (communalism, racism, tribalism, and favouritism) and dies for it is not from me.” (Abi Dawud, 5121) Tribalism, in his eyes, is a poison that corrodes the soul of the community.
The Prophet warned against supporting injustice, likening it to “a camel that falls into a well and is then pulled out by its tail.” (Abi Dawud, 3650). This vivid analogy underscores the futility and danger of aiding or perpetuating wrongdoing, as it only deepens the harm rather than resolving it.
Injustice, like quicksand, drags both the oppressor and the oppressed into ruin. He taught that even the oppressor must be helped—not by aiding their wrongdoing, but by preventing it: “Help your brother, whether he is the oppressor or the oppressed.” When asked how to help the oppressor, he replied: “Help him by preventing him from doing wrong.” (Bukhari, 2444). True help, in this vision, is not blind loyalty but a commitment to justice.
In conclusion, the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad paint a vivid portrait of a world united in diversity, where justice, mercy, and righteousness reign supreme. They call upon humanity to rise above the petty divisions of race, tribe, and nation, to see itself as a single family under the care of one Creator. This is not just a rebuttal to racism but a clarion call to embrace the beauty of our shared humanity.
The Quran begins by introducing God as the Almighty Creator and Sustainer, the Lord of all mankind and the entire universe, whose mercy is as vast as the heavens and whose wisdom is as deep as the oceans (1:2). The Quran fully supports the universal principles of the Old Testament and elevates Jerusalem as the Holy City, a beacon of divine light and spiritual guidance (17:1). It declares that the way of salvation is open to Jews, Christians, and others, like a river flowing freely for all who seek its waters (17:8, 5:72). It rejects the narrow tribal declaration of the divine message, breaking the chains of exclusivity and opening the gates of divine grace to all humanity. (40) The Quran makes it clear to Muslims: “If you turn away, God will bring in your place another people not like you,” a warning as sharp as a double-edged sword (47:38). The essence of religion is not merely a matter of ritualistic practices, such as turning to the east and west, as superficial as the changing winds, but of faith, good deeds for the people, and moral obligations such as keeping one’s covenant, the bedrock of a righteous life (2:177).
The Quran rejects the Jewish-Christian narrative that divine guidance was limited to the two tribes of Israel. The mission of guidance has been extended to the entire nation, like the sun rising over all horizons (48:10, 35:23-24). The Quran, which uses the word ‘Rabb’, a term as vast as the sky and as nurturing as the earth, far more comprehensive than the word ‘Father’, describes God and sees humanity as a single race, united like the branches of a mighty tree (10:19). The Quran also affirms that the ideas within it are the same as those in the books of Abraham and Moses, a thread of divine truth woven through the tapestry of time (87:14-1). A Muslim is obligated to accept all the scriptures, holding them as precious gems in the treasury of faith (3:3-4). The Quran opposes the Jewish tendency to disbelieve in non-Israelite messengers, a barrier as stubborn as a mountain yet shattered by the truth (3:73).
Prophet Muhammad never claimed to have come with a new mission. His was the same mission as Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, a chain of prophethood as unbroken as the stars in the night sky (2:136, 3:84). The unadulterated truths of all authentic religions will be ‘Islam’, a garden where every flower blooms in harmony.
Criticizing the Judeo-Christian concept of prophethood, which limits prophethood to the Israelite race, Eastern philosopher Radhakrishnan wrote: “It is contrary to divine justice and mercy to allow millions of people to live in darkness for thousands of years,” a condemnation as piercing as a thunderclap (41).
Islam’s anti-racist stance has gained support from scholars worldwide. Malcolm X (1925-1965), who once considered white people to be devils, saw the light of Islam and emerged from the shadows of hatred, embracing the unity of the human race after entering the philosophical realm of monotheism. (42) Comparative religion expert Edward Rice noted that Islam was the most successful of the world’s religions in overcoming race, colour, ethnicity, and nationality, a bridge spanning the divides of humanity. (43) K.M. Panicker observed that the idea of a casteless society had been ingrained in the minds of Indians since the time Islam first entered India, a seed of equality planted in fertile soil. (44) Jeffrey Lang, a mathematician at the University of Kansas who converted to Islam, observed that Islam was the most successful in combating racial prejudice, a shield against the arrows of bigotry. (45) The famous historian N.K.P. Sinha emphasized the fact that the democratic spirit of Islam does not recognize any class distinction, a flame of justice burning bright.(46)
Rejection of the Ibleesian Heritage
The influence of the hereditary factor on socio-cultural spheres and the related inequality between different racial groups were promoted by even great figures such as Voltaire and Thomas Jefferson, giants of intellect yet blinded by the shadows of their time. (47) After subjecting the biological interpretations that included racism to a critical examination, the modern biologist Ashley Montague wrote: ‘Humanity is descended from a single heritage. All belong to the species Homo sapiens,’ a truth as clear as the light of day.’ (48). The same idea was proclaimed by a conference of biologists and social scientists held in Paris in 1949 under the auspices of UNESCO. It is noteworthy that this was only a reinterpretation of the Quranic revelation, an echo of divine wisdom reverberating through the ages. (49)
Social scientists see ‘caste’ as a completely different Indian social phenomenon, a labyrinth of oppression and division. (50) The imposition of a hierarchical system of status under Brahmin rule had given new dimensions to social injustice, racism, and the oppression of the majority, a yoke too heavy for the shoulders of the oppressed. After analysing and studying the Indian scriptures, Sree Narayana Guru (1854-1928) declared that the construction of the ‘caste system’ was hypocrisy, deceit, and tyranny: ‘All men are of one class and caste. Man has one God, one race, and one religion,’ a cry for unity as powerful as a roaring river. (51) ‘Racial differences have no relation to reality,’ a truth as unshakable as the earth itself. (52)
The biblical prophecy about Noah’s three sons (Genesis 9:25-27) has been widely propagated as a racist interpretation of the three races: Hamitic, Semitic, and Japhetic. This interpretation, however, is a house built on sand, as it crumbles under the weight of the anti-racist ideals already embedded in the Old Testament. Eve is the mother of all (Genesis 3:20), a single root from which the vast tree of humanity has grown. The entire human race was formed from a single mate. (53) Israel was subject to the conditions of election, a chosen vessel, but not a superior one. (54) There is no partiality or injustice with God, for His scales are balanced with perfect equity. (55) Whenever the Israelites sinned, they were oppressed by their enemies, a reminder that divine favour is not a shield for wrongdoing. (56) God has compassion on the oppressed and downtrodden in every land (Psalms 140:12), His heart beats for the marginalized like a drum of justice. The Old Testament also consistently emphasizes the obligation to foreigners, a thread of hospitality and fairness woven into its fabric. (57)
The common origin of mankind and the equality of man are more clearly proclaimed in the New Testament, shining like a beacon of hope in a world often clouded by division. (58) The Scriptures and the Qur’anic messages are like two rivers flowing from the same divine source, both proclaiming the universality of human dignity.
Those who pretend to be better than other people are dancing to the devil’s tune, echoing his age-old lie of superiority. Every fascist, Hindutva, and Zionist continues to repeat the devil’s argument that ‘I am racially superior to him.’ Such claims are the seeds of discord, sprouting into the thorny bushes of nationalism and infallibility, which have caused wars and the most heinous mass murders in history.
People may differ in appearance, ability, intelligence, and character, as diverse as the colours of a rainbow. But we must accept equality among them in one thing: no one should dominate another. We are all threads in the same tapestry, woven together by the hand of the Divine. All are God’s creations; His servants. This Tawhidi (monotheistic) vision is a lighthouse guiding us away from the rocky shores of political, economic, and social hierarchies, illuminating the path to racial equality. Everyone should have equal opportunities, for the playing field of life should be level, not tilted by the weight of privilege. The reason for the backwardness of some groups is the social, educational, economic, and political deprivation experienced over time, a chain of neglect that must be broken. It is the responsibility of those at the top to give such people more consideration and bring them to the forefront, lifting them up as one would a fallen comrade, for in their rise, we all rise together.
Islamic Exclusivism as a Subversion
Despite being the bearers of the Quran, which shattered the chains of racial superiority like a hammer to glass, Muslims have not been completely freed from the insidious virus of racism. Sultan Ghiyasuddin Balban (1266-1287), a Turkic-origin sultan who wore his clan pride like a crown, considered Indians—whether Hindus or Muslims—as inferior, as if they were dust beneath his feet. Ziauddin Barani (1285–1357), a prominent court scholar during the reign of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, articulated ideas that many modern scholars interpret as foundational to racial and hierarchical ideologies in medieval South Asia. In his work Fatawa-i Jahandari, Barani argued that only certain groups, such as Persians, Turkmens, and Arabs, possessed a divine right to rule, as though they were uniquely anointed for leadership. He maintained that even if other groups converted to Islam, they would remain perpetually inferior and unfit for high positions of power. While Barani’s views reflect the socio-political context of his time, they have been critically examined as emblematic of exclusionary and elitist thinking. Scholars like Irfan Habib and K.A. Nizami has analysed his works, situating them within the broader discourse on caste, race, and power in medieval Islamic societies.
The lofty ideals of equality and brotherhood in Islam were conspicuously absent in this Turkmen scholar. Barani’s concept of god was as narrow as a tightrope, limited to a tribal deity who played favourites. His translator, Muhammad Habib, noted that Barani’s god was one who smiled only upon the upper castes, even among Muslims, as if divinity itself were tainted by prejudice. Despite the Quranic verse 49:13, which uproots racism like a weed from fertile soil, Barani twisted its meaning, arguing that there was no god for the impure and lowly, as if the divine light could not penetrate their shadows. His views stand in stark contrast to the universal message of Islam, which calls for unity and equality among all people. (59) Studies indicate that Muslims, like any other community in India, are part of hierarchical social relations similar to casteism. (60) A caste-like structure, as rigid as iron chains, developed among Indian Muslims, deeply rooted in the propriety of marriage (kafa’at) and family honor, where lineage was guarded like a treasure chest.
The belief that prophets had been revealed to all communities, like seeds sown in every soil, should have broadened the Muslim quest for knowledge, opening doors as wide as the horizon. After all, wherever truth remained, it was thought to have a connection to earlier prophets, like rivers flowing from a single divine source. Yet, instead of embracing this vast ocean of wisdom, Muslims often succumbed to a self-imposed narrowness, interpreting the Quranic perspective on prophethood and revelations through a keyhole rather than an open door. This tendency to assert communal superiority, like a peacock flaunting its feathers, has often overshadowed the potential for inclusivity and intellectual expansion.
The perspective presented, grounded in the Quranic text and enriched by the interpretations of Islamic scholars such as Fazlur Rahman, Farid Esack, and others, challenges the notion of exclusivism within Islamic thought. Rather than promoting division, it advocates for a vision of universalism that transcends rigid religious boundaries, emphasizing shared ethical and spiritual principles. This hermeneutic approach aims to uncover the timeless and universal truths embedded in the Quran, truths that resonate across diverse religious traditions and historical contexts, fostering a deeper understanding of unity and common humanity.
At the heart of this interpretation is the Quran’s recurring emphasis on the universality of divine guidance and the inclusivity of salvation. Verses such as Quran 2:62 and 5:69 explicitly affirm that salvation is not confined to a single religious community but is accessible to all who believe in God, uphold the Last Day, and engage in righteous deeds. This principle, as Fazlur Rahman argues, reflects the boundless mercy of God, which transcends human-made distinctions and sectarian divisions. Rahman asserts that the meaning of such verses is clear: “that those—from any section of humankind—who believe in God and the Last Day and do good deeds are saved.” (61) The Quran’s anti-exclusionary ethos, therefore, is not an incidental feature but a foundational aspect of its message.
Farid Esack builds on this foundation, critiquing the closed-mindedness of classical Muslim scholars who, in his view, overlooked the Quran’s broader ethos of religious recognition. Esack posits that the Quran’s references to “Believers” (mu’minun) encompass individuals across time and space, irrespective of their formal affiliation with Islam. (62) This interpretation aligns with the Quran’s admiration for the People of the Book—Jews and Christians—who embody righteousness, justice, and devotion to God (Q.3:113-114; Q.7:159). Such passages suggest that the Quran recognizes moral and spiritual excellence beyond the confines of Islamic identity.
The Quran’s distinction between “Believers” and “Muslims” further underscores this inclusive vision. As Donner highlights, the Quran predominantly addresses “Believers,” a term that appears nearly a thousand times, compared to only forty-five instances of “Muslims.” (63) This linguistic emphasis reflects the early community’s self-perception as a community of devout monotheists rather than adherents of a distinct religious faction. The term “muslim,” in its Quranic usage, denotes one who submits to God, a concept that transcends specific religious labels and encompasses all who align themselves with divine will (Q.3:67; 3:84). Donner further notes that early Believers did not see themselves as a new religious faction but as part of a broader monotheistic tradition that included pious Jews and Christians. (64)
The Quran’s universalism is further illuminated by its use of the root SLM (submission, peace) to describe the essence of true faith. Verses such as 2:112, 4:125, and 41:33 define Islam not as a rigid institutional religion but as a dynamic orientation toward God, characterized by submission and righteous action. This understanding is exemplified in the story of Abraham, who is portrayed as the archetypal submitter (muslim) to God’s will (Q.2:131-133). Abraham’s legacy, as articulated in the Quran, is not confined to a single religious tradition but serves as a model for all who seek to align themselves with divine truth.
The Quran’s pluralistic vision is also evident in its acknowledgment of diverse faith communities, including Jews, Christians, and Sabians, as potential recipients of divine reward (Q.2:62; 5:69). This inclusivity is grounded in the Quran’s recognition of the shared ethical and spiritual foundations of monotheistic traditions. The Constitution of Madinah, which includes Jews within the community of Prophet Muhammad, further exemplifies this inclusive ethos, highlighting the possibility of coexistence and collaboration across religious boundaries.
The Quran’s emphasis on “ma’ruf” (recognized good) and “munkar” (recognized evil) reinforces this universal ethical framework. These terms, which appear repeatedly in the Quran, underscore the importance of aligning human conduct with principles that are universally recognized as virtuous. This ethical universality transcends specific religious doctrines, pointing to a common moral ground that unites humanity. For instance, the Quran uses these terms in contexts ranging from marriage and divorce (Q.2:228, 2:232, 2:233, 2:234, 2:236; 4:19, 4:25) to parental relationships (Q.31:15), inheritance (Q.2:180), and social interactions (Q.4:5). Islamic scholars define “ma’ruf” as socially accepted good practices that align with common sense, further emphasizing the Quran’s commitment to universal ethical principles.
The Quranic perspective, as interpreted by scholars like Rahman, Esack, and Donner, challenges the notion of Islamic exclusivism by affirming the universality of divine guidance and the inclusivity of salvation. The Quran’s emphasis on belief in God, the Last Day, and righteous deeds, as well as its recognition of the moral and spiritual excellence of diverse faith communities, reflects a profound commitment to universalism. This vision aligns with the understanding of religion as a manifestation of timeless truths, accessible to all who seek to align themselves with the divine. The Quran, therefore, does not advocate for exclusivism but invites humanity to recognize the shared spiritual and ethical principles that unite us all. As Islamic scholar Cole notes, all individuals who submit to the one God and accept the tradition initiated by Abraham are, in the Quranic sense, “muslims.” (65) This universal faith of Islam, characterized by submission to God and the doing of good deeds, encompasses all faith communities and transcends the boundaries of any single religious tradition.
Notes and Bibliography
1. Quran 38:71-78, 7:11-18, 2:30-34, 17:60-65, 18:50, 20:116-117, 38:71-82, 15:28-35
2. Quran 2:34, 17:62, 38:74
3. Quran 15:28, 15:33
4. Bertrand Russell, Human Society in Ethics and Politics, Routledge: London, (1954), 1992, p.93
5. Bertrand Russell, Unpopular Essays, Simon and Schuster: N.Y., 1964, p.157
6. Arnold J. Toynbee, An Historian’s Approach to Religion, Oxford University Press: London, 1956, p.12-13
7. Mark 3:21, 3:31-35, Luke 11:27-28
8. 1 Cor 1:2,8, 7:14, 2 Cor 1:1, Galatians 3:6-9, 29
9. Acts 10:34-35, 17:26, 29; Romans 8:14,19; 9:26, 2 Cor 6:18, Hebrews 2:10, 12:5-8
10. 1 Peter 2:9-10. 12:1-2 Romans 9:4-5
11. Deuteronomy 14:2, 26:18, 1 Samuel 25:32, 2 Chronicles 6:4, Psalms 72:18, Exodus 19:5
12. Hosea 1:10, 2:2-13, Isaiah 9:6, 63:14-16, Exodus 4:22, Jeremiah 31:20, Hosea 11:1, Deuteronomy 32:5-6, 18-19
13. Joshua 11:14, 11:20
14. 1 Samuel 15:3, 1 Kings 9:20-21, Judges 1:28
15. Exodus 22:25, Leviticus 25:35-38, Deuteronomy 23:19-20, Psalm 15:5
16. Ninian Smart, The World’s Religions, C.U.P: Cambridge, 1998, p.269
17. William Barclay, The Letter of John and Jude, Theological Publication of India: Bangalore, 1995, p.45
18. J.B. Phillips, God Our Contemporary, Hodder and Stoughton: London, 1960, p.73
19. Matt Ridley, The Origins of Virtue, Penguin: Harmondsworth, 1997, p.192
20. Peter 2:9
21. Richard J. Middleton, Brian J. Walsh, Truth is Stranger than it Used to be, I.V.P: Illinois, 1995, p.84
22. S. Radhakrishnan, Charles A. Moore (eds.), A Source Book of Indian Philosophy, Princeton University Press: Princeton, 1967, p.19
23. Max Weber, The Religion of India, The Free Press: New York, 1958, p.29
24. M.N. Srinivas, Caste in Modern India and Other Essays, Asia Publishing House: Bombay, 1962, p.15-41
25. E. Zelliot, Gandhi and Ambedkar: A Study in Leadership, in J.M. Mahar (ed), The Untouchables, University of Arizona Press: Tucson, 1972, p.731
26. V.D. Savarkar, Hindutva: Who is Hindu? S.S. Savarkar: Bombay, 1969, p.84-85
27. M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts, Vikrama Prakashan: Bangalore, 1966, p.25
28. M.S. Golwalkar, We or Our National Defined, Bharat Prakashan: Nagpur, 1939, p.35
29. Getrude Himmelfarb, Darwin and Darwinian Revolution, Chatto and Windus: London, 1959, p.343
30. Thomas Henry Huxley, Lay Sermons, Addresses and Reviews, Appleton: New York, 1871, p.20
31. Stephen Jay Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny, Harvard University Press: Massachusseus, 1977, p.127
32. Alvin Toffler, The Third Wave, Bantam: New York, 1982, p.101
33. Arthur R. Jenson, How Much Can We Boost IQ and Intellectual Achievement? Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 39, Winter, 1969, p.1-123
34. Quran 16:116, 2:42, 2:79
35. Quran 7:40, 17:111, 18:26, 20:7, 12:54
36. Quran 67:1, 2:255
37. Quran 7:146, 17:37, 25:63, 31:8-9
38. Quran 4:135, 5:58, 16:90
39. Quran 74:36-38, 99:7-8
40. Quran 62:6, 2:94-95, 5:18.
41. S. Radhakrishnan, Recovery of Faith, George Allen and Unwin: London, 1956, p.192
42. Alex Heily, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, Grove Press: New York, 1965, p.419-420
43. Edward Rice, The Five Great Religions, Bantam: New York, 1977, p.173
44. K.M. Panikkar, Caste System and India’s Future, (ed: R.M. Pal), Selection from the Marxian Way and the Humanist Way, Ajanta Publications: New Delhi, 1999, p.53
45. Jaffrey Lang, Even Angels Ask, Amana: Maryland, 1998, p.154
46. N.K.P. Sinha, Islam in India: Synthesis of Cultures, Khunda Baksh Oriental Public Library: Patna, 1996, p.44
47. Thomas F. Gossett, Race: The History of an Idea in America, Southern Methodist University Press: Texas, 1963, p.42-53
48. Ashley Montague, Man in Process, New American Library: New York, 1962, p.34
49. Quran 49:13, 5:32, 4:1, 30:22, 7:189, 23:52-53, 10:9
50. Louis Dumont, Homo Hierarchicus: An Essay on the Caste System, (tr: Mark Sainsbury), University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1970, p.24
51. A. Ayyappan, Izharas and Cultural Change, Madras Govt. Museum Bulletin: Madras, 1943, p.155
52. P. Nataraja Guru, The World of the Guru: Life and Teachings of Narayana Guru, Paico Publishing House: Ernakulam, 1968, p.277
53. Genesis 1:27, 2:27, 2:22, 3:20, 9:19
54. Exodus 19:5-6, 21:43, Hosea 1:6-10
55. Micah 6:8 Deuteronomy 10:17, 32:4, Job 34:19, 2 Chronicles 19:7, Proverbs 3:2
56. Joshua 23:4-5, 12-13; Judges 2:11-15, 20-23
57. Exodus 22:2, 23:9, Leviticus 19:33, 24:22, 25:35, Deuteronomy 24:14, 24:17, Psalm 146:9
58. Acts 17:26, 10:34-35, James 2:9, Matthew 23:13-35
59. Mohamad Habib & Afzar Umar Salim Khan, The Political Theory of Delhi Sultanate (including a translation of Ziauddin Barani’s Fatawa-i-Jahandari Circa 1358-1359 AD), Kitab Mahal: Allahabad, 1961, p.134
60. Anwar Alam, Democratization of Indian Muslims, Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 46, November 15, 2003, p.48-81)
61. Fazlur Rahman, The Major Themes of the Quran, 2nd ed. Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1994, p.61
62. Esack, Farid, Quran, Liberation and Pluralism, Oxford: Oneworld, 1997, pp. 160–165
63. Fred M Donner, Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010, pp. 57–58
64. Fred M Donner, Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010, p.71
65. Juan Cole, Muhammad: Prophet of Peace Amid the Clash of Empires, New York: Nation Books, 2018, p.102
(V.A. Mohamad Ashrof is an independent Indian scholar specializing in Islamic humanism. With a deep commitment to advancing Quranic hermeneutics that prioritize human well-being, peace, and progress, his work aims to foster a just society, encourage critical thinking, and promote inclusive discourse and peaceful coexistence. He is dedicated to creating pathways for meaningful social change and intellectual growth through his scholarship. He can be reached at [email protected])
