The Christian Faith and Worship [Muslim Perspective]

As discussed in the earlier pages the Gospels do not prove conclusively that Jesus Christ (peace be on him) ever preached any new religion. In fact, his mission during his three year prophetic period was aimed at convincing the Jews that they had gone astray much from the path of God due the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and scribes among them and that therefore they should go back to the folds of the true laws through repentance, mutual love, justice-and most of all by following the law in letter and spirit as preached by his Gospels revealed by God, which among others are highlighted in the ”Sermon the Mount” in Matthew, chapters 5, 6, and 7. No one can have any doubt that these had been the essence of the Law in the Commandments of the Old Testament records considered as the Five Books of Moses (peace be on him) and that those were amplified by the Gospel highlighting how committing of sins may be totally avoided by restraining ones thoughts, senses and actions in advance. Further, the New Testament records say that he used to pray in private and instruct his disciples “to pray by going into thine own room, shutting the doors and pray to the father who is in secret” (Matt. 6:6-13), and that whenever he used to preach before the Jews and his disciples, he always used to worship secretly, and alone. Is it appealing to sense and reason therefore to even imagine that this prophet of the One God could have ever committed the major sin of attribution of sonship of God to himself or oneness with God to himself or could have given himself any share in the exercise of the absolute power of God, which are acts punishable by death according to the Torah?

That until a few decades after the ascension of Christ (peace be on him) his followers had no separate place of worship and any separate identity of their own is proven from the fact that it was after the fellowship was thrown open to gentiles, mainly Greeks and heathens in Antioch, and after Barnabas had brought Paul also to Antioch that the followers of Christ (peace be on him) had been called as “Christians” for the first time (Acts 11:26). However, even after this epoch-making event about the fifth decade C.E as well as during their earlier first missionary journey, Paul, John and Barnabas “proclaimed the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews in Cyprus” (Acts 13:5). In Antioch of Pisidia too the same was the case (Acts 13:16-44). However, it was because the Jews reviled and contradicted Paul that they had to turn to the gentiles as the last resort under great opposition (Acts 13:45-50) from evangelists who had come from Judea to Antioch and therefore Paul and Barnabas had to go to seek the decision of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem on the matter (Acts 15:1-5). It is seen that the ascension that developed was on the questions of throwing the movement open to all gentiles who were not circumcised, whereas the Jews were, and the eating of foods that were forbidden in the Mosaic law as being unclean. Then it was the Council of Jerusalem under the advice of James that decided to exempt the gentiles from the act of circumcision and to permit them to eat anything except what was sacrificed to the idols, blood and what was strangled, and to refrain from unchastity (Acts 15:6-29) It seems that on these very issues, and possibly more too, Barnabas and Mark had to part their ways with Paul and Silas after “there arose a sharp contention” (Acts 15:36-40). After this incident, strange enough, the New Testament does not state any reconciliation between the two groups and Barnabas and Mark also do not get even mentioned thereafter. In any case, it is clear from the above that a the beginning of the sixth decade C.E., the Christian Church, which was formed only during the last few years, had already started dividing up doctrinally into groups as the result of deviation from the path shown by Jesus Christ (peace be an him) as to how and among whom the spread of the word of God was to be directed. In conclusion therefore, it is clear that Jesus (peace be on him) and his early apostles and disciples had neither shown nor directed any way of life, devotion and worship different from the ways of the real Torah nor a separate place of preaching other than synagogues of Jews. Thus, even as per the New Testament essentially it was only the question of repentance and mending the wrong ways in accordance with the Mosaic Law in letter and spirit that Jesus Christ (peace be on him) preached during his short prophetic period aimed at the children of Israel, alone.

As seen from the foregoing paragraphs, it was because of the fact that the fellowship of the disciples of Christ (peace be on him), which originally was confined to Jews only, was thrown open to gentiles after exempting them from circumcision that a separate church including place of worship exclusive for the Christians had to be established first in Antioch. Since then, on the basis of the Pauline deification of Christ (peace be on him) in the holy alliance of the Trinity, whereby Jesus Christ (peace be on him) acts as and on behalf of God though the concept of Father, Son and Holy Spirit in granting unconditional pardon of sins to his disciples, took firm ground as the linchpin of the Christian faith and worship through an initiation ceremony called, Baptism.

It may be important in this connection to mention that during the fourth century C.E., a. dispute also existed between the Antioch and Alexandrian schools of churches on the questions of “inspiration” and “incarnation” in respect of the “divine presence through the Holy Spirit” in churches. Earlier, during the latter part of the first century itself, the followers of Christ (peace be on him) had split into two main camps, one believing in him as “the son of man with no divinity attached to him other than a miraculous prophet of God” and the other believing him to be “the Son of God,” the last spearheaded by Paul. It is a matter of critical history how this split aggravated subsequently into a confrontation between them leading to the success of the propagators of the schism whose faith and belief – “God is one in essence but three in the person of the father, the son and the Holy Spirit” and the “uniqueness of God in Jesus Christ” – had come to stay ever since for tens of centuries as the indisputable doctrine of the Church as contained in the “Declaration of Creed” to be confirmed by all devotees at the time of the baptismal initiation into the Christian church in total deviation from the acute monotheism of the covenant and laws of the Torah preached by many a prophet of the children of Israel from Moses down to Jesus Christ (peace be on them).

Notwithstanding the above, no one may ignore another fact of history that a group among the Christians called the Hypsistarians, who considered Jesus (peace be on him) as a prophet of God alone and refused to believe in the Trinity or the assignment of sonship of God and divinity to Jesus (peace be on him) also did exist up to about the fourth century C.E. They considered God not as “The Father,” but as a mighty ruler of the world, being the highest with no one equal to Him. Prior to that, as the Gospel of Barnabas proves, he and Mark along with their followers also did not believe either in the divinity of Christ or that he was the son of God. In his Gospel, Barnabas even reports that Jesus (peace be on him) admonished anyone who attributed divinity to him and that he used to impress on all that he was nothing but a messenger of God like his predecessors Moses, Abraham and others (peace be on them).

It is also found that in later years Paul of Samosata who was the bishop of Antioch, was of the view that Christ (peace be on him) was not God, but only a holy man and prophet and that God could not have become a man. Again, Lucian, the bishop of Antioch, well known for his sanctity as well as a reputed scholar who was martyred in 312 C.E., was strongly against the belief in the Trinity. He is said to have deleted all mention of the Trinity from the Church canons because this, according to· him, was a later interpolation not found in the earlier Gospels. Further on, Arius, a disciple of Lucian (250-336 C.E.) and a Libyan by birth who had a large following, also believed that “howsoever much Christ may surpass other created beings, he himself was not of the same substance his God, but was a human being as any other.” In fact, he shook the very foundations of the Pauline Church. However, in 325 C.E., Emperor Constantine, being a supporter of Christianity without himself being actually a Christian, in the interest of carrying on with his own administration, having desired to unite the different factions and particularly the two contending strong factions of Christians, one under Arius and the other under bishop Alexander, called a conference of Christians of all opinions at Nicaea. Confused, but wanting to have the cooperation of Christians, Constantine backed the larger section of them under Athanasius, who had succeeded Bishop Alexander as the head of the Pauline Church, and banished Arius from the realm. Thereafter the belief in the Trinity became the official Christian faith of the Empire and was followed by the horrible massacre of Christians who did not believe in the concept. Also, the possession of any version of Bible not authorized by the· Church became a penal offense in the Roman Empire. It is said that over 270 different versions of the Bible including the Hebrew versions were then burned. The Nicaean Council had decreed that the New Testament as it is found today was the only authorized version of the Christian Church. Nevertheless, the course of events changed when in 336 C.E., consequent on the emperor accepting the faith of his sister Constantina and Arius. Arius too was recalled but soon he was murdered. The emperor having known of the plot, banished Athanasius and his two other bishops from the empire and himself accepted Christianity of the Arius faith, whereby monotheism became the official Christian religion of the Roman Empire. On the death of Constantine in 337 C.E., the new emperor, Constantius, who had also accepted the faith of Arius, called a Christian conference at Antioch in 341 C.E. in which again monotheism was accepted as the correct Christian faith. This decision was reconfirmed by another council held in 351 C.E. at Sermium. St. Jerome, however, wrote of this in 359 C.E. that “the whole world groaned and marveled to find itself Arian.”

The mutual killings of Christians still fresh in his memory, Pope Honorius wanted in the early seventh century to find a solution to the cause of dissension and he tried to support the doctrine of “one God” because he believed that if God had three independent minds the result would be chaos. Although this concept of one God was not challenged by any for a considerable time, in 680 C.E. in another Council of Churches held in Constantinople, Honorius was anathematized, a unique act in the history of the Papacy when a pope was denounced by a succeeding pope. Nevertheless, long after this incident, in 1547C.E., L. F. M. Sozzini, a native of Siena (1525-1565 C.E.) who having come under the influence of Camillo, a Sicilian mystic, challenged Calvin on the doctrine of the Trinity, amplifying the doctrine of Arius and denying the divinity of Christ as well as repudiating the doctrine of original sin and atonement. According to him, the only object of adoration could be the one and only One God. He was followed by his nephew F. P. Sozzini (1539-1604), who published a book on the gospel of St. John denying the divinity of Jesus. With the assistance and collaboration of others like him, such as John Sigismund, the ruler of Transylvania, who was an antagonist of the Trinity doctrine, and Bishop Francis David (1510-1579 C.E.), also an anti-Trinitarian, Sozzini formed in 1578 C.E. a sect known as ”Rocovian Catechism” after the city of Racow in Poland, which was a stronghold of the faith of Arius.

Today, there are a large number of men and women among Christians who believe in only One God, denying the divinity of Christ (peace be on him) as well as the doctrine of the Trinity. However, they are voiceless and helpless under the strong power of the Church. Even Athanasius, the champion of the trinity doctrine, is reported to have said that in spite of all his efforts to mediate in the divinity of Jesus (peace be on him), his toilsome and unavailing efforts recoiled on themselves, making him incapable of expressing his thoughts, which made him pronounce, “There are not three, but One God!” From his close association with many followers of Christianity, the author of this book has found that due to similar contradictions between the faith propagated by the Church and the inherent reasoning present in the individual particularly in the educated generation of today, many an enlightened modern man does not bother much about what the ecclesiastics of the church pressure him to believe, although he himself was born, named, baptized, brought up and would even call himself a Christian.

Source: A Comparative Study of the Religions of Today by Mohammed Ali Muhiyaddin. Pg. 57-61.

Weakness of Faith Due to Scandalous Conduct of Some Religious Scholars – Imam Al-Ghazali

There are three remedies for this sickness:

One of them is for you to say: “The learned man who, you allege, devours what is illicit, knows that such illicit things are forbidden just as well as you know that wine and pork and usury–to say nothing of backbiting, lying, and slander–are forbidden.  Now you know that, yet you do such things, not because of the lack of your belief that it is disobedience, but rather because of your desire which gets the better of you.  Well his desire is like yours, and it has indeed got the better of him.  So his technical knowledge of subtle questions beyond this prohibition, by which he is distinguished from you, does not necessarily involve a more severe warning against this or that specific illicit action.  How many a man who believes in medicine cannot abstain from fruit and cold water, even though he has been warned against them by his physician!  But that does not prove that they are not injurious, or that faith in medicine is unsound.  This, therefore, is the way to construe the faults of the learned.”

The second remedy is that the man in the street be told: “You ought to be believe that the learned man has acquired his learning as a provision for himself in the afterlife and supposes that his learning will save him and will be an intercessor for him.  So in view of that he may be negligent in his actions because of the merit of his learning.  And though it be possible that his  learning will be additional evidence against him, yet he thinks it possible that it will procure him a higher rank in heaven.  This may be the case for, even though he has given up good works, he can adduce his learning in his favor.  But you, common man that you are, if you pattern yourself on him and give up good works without having any learning, you will perish because of your evildoing, and there will be no intercessor for you!”

The third remedy, and this is the real one, is that the true man of learning commits a sin only by way of a slip, but will in no way stubbornly persist in his sins.  For true learning is that which leads to the knowledge that sin is a deadly poison and that the afterlife is better than this  life.  And anyone who knows that will not barter the better for something inferior.  This knowledge is not the fruit of the various types of knowledge with which most men busy themselves.  Hence the knowledge they acquire only makes them bolder in disobeying God Most High.  True knowledge, on the other hand, increases its possessor’s reverence, fear, and hope, and this stands between him and the commission of sins, save for those slips from which, in moments of weakness, no man is free.  But this is not a sign of weak faith, for the believer is tried but continually repentant, and he is far from stubborn impenitence.

Source: Deliverance from Error (al-Munqidh min al-Dalal) by Al-Ghazali (translated by R.J. Mccarthy, S.J.), pp. 79-80. Please note that the title given is of my own and not included in the actual work.

Guarding Our Children’s Faith: A Guide for Muslim Parents on LGBTQ+ Issues

Identity politics has become a huge part of our society and many Muslim parents are confused on how to navigate through it especially as it relates to their children, who are constantly being exposed and socially conditioned to accept ideas that directly contradict their religious values. Muslim kids face challenges today that many of us never came across growing up. One of these main challenges is the widespread acceptance of the LGBTQ+ lifestyle. It is constantly emphasized through the media, entertainment industry, school, and of course the internet.

There is no escaping it at this point. Our kids will most likely come across it one way or another especially in the West. The most important thing we can do, in addition to making lots of supplications, is talk to our kids by having meaningful discussions on the topic. We must teach them our own value system and prepare them for the real world. They must realize that they take their religious values from home and certainly not the irreligious society around them nor their peers.

I wanted to put together a short list of articles and videos that Muslim parents can use to understand what the LGBTQ+ philosophy is and how to navigate through it. And most important of all, how to protect your kids from it. If you go through all of the links below and comprehend the materials presented, then insha’Allah you will have a much better understanding of how to move forward with your kids. The list below is not complete and I plan to keep adding as I come across more relevant material that I feel may be helpful for Muslim parents in dealing with this issue.

The Modern World – This is an excellent lecture on the topic of what it means to have a “worldview” by Dr. Carl Sharif El-Tobgui. Whether we like it or not, there are competing worldviews struggling against each other in the modern world. Our religion, based on the Qur’an and Sunnah, is also presenting a particular worldview. Dr. Sharif discusses the differences between the Islamic worldview and the modern worldview. Whenever I talk to someone about modernity, I struggle to explain to them the concept of competing worldviews and how it impacts the way we perceive and build opinions about different matters because it requires more than just 10 minutes to break it down! However, Dr. Sharif has done a decent job in 1.5 hours breaking it down in this PowerPoint presentation.

Islam and LGBTQ: Gender, Sexuality, Morality, and Identity – This is probably the most detailed and comprehensive discussion of the topic from Dr. Carl Sharif El-Tobgui. It discusses the history, meaning, implications, and ways to counter the narrative.

The Gender and Gender Identity – This is a presentation by Mobeen Vaid who has done extensive research on the topic. In this presentation, he shares what it means to have a gender and gender identity and whether there is a difference between genders or not. He also gets into the LGBTQ+ agenda and their influence and ways to protect ourselves and kids from it.

Sunni Islam and Gender Nonconformity (Part 1) – An essay by Mobeen Vaid on the Islamic rulings and positions of various forms of gender nonconformity held by Sunni jurists.

Sunni Islam and Gender Nonconformity (Part 2) – This is the second part of the above essay. In it, Mobeen joins forces with Waheed Jensen, a physician, medical researcher, blogger, and the producer and host of “A Way Beyond the Rainbow,” a podcast series dedicated to Muslims experiencing same-sex attractions who want to live a life true to Allah and Islam and to helping Muslim families, communities, and institutions navigate questions related to Islam and homosexuality in the contemporary world. They discuss contemporary discourses surrounding the issue of gender identity (in comparison to biological sex), gender roles, and transgenderism with a focus on the multifarious ways in which modern discourses surrounding these topics can or cannot be accommodated given the legal, ethical, and moral boundaries established by Islamic law.

Straight Struggle – This is a short talk by Waheed Jensen, who struggles with same-sex attractions but has been able to manage his desires in order to live according to Allah’s laws. He shares his story. He also has a more detailed discussion on the topic here.

Sacred Activism – This is an article I wrote for those young Muslims who are involved in social justice work and may come across ideologies, especially LGBTQ+ lifestyles, that contradict their faith teachings. How do we navigate that space? What are our limits and restrictions? Can we work with such groups on mutual issues or no? I did a video podcast with Imam Dawud Walid on this topic as well which is available on YoutTube.

Response from Dr. Yasir Qadhi – A booklet on transgenderism was being distributed to Muslim students at his son’s university so his son brought it home to show it to him. Dr. Qadhi responds to the arguments being made in that pamphlet.

Fatwa on Gender Dysphoria – Fatwa given by Darul Qasim on gender dysphoria. It was given in response to the following questions: Would I be considered a male because of my brain, a female because of my genitals, or intersex because of the incongruence between the two? Would I be allowed to live as the opposite sex and seek HRT (Hormonal Replacement Therapy) and surgery? If I am not allowed to transition, would it be permissible for me to have my friends and family use male pronouns for me in private, or for me to use a chest binder?

When the State Comes for Your Kids – An essay by Abigail Shrier on how some U.S. states are changing laws in a way that they can come after your kids under 18 and take them away if you do not “affirm” their chosen gender even if they have a history of mental illness! They even permit sex change surgeries without parental consent as long as the child wants it.

The LGBTQ Movement – This is a discussion by Dr. Yasir Qadhi on the background of the movement, pronouns, gender fluidity, current conception, and the harms it has for the Muslim community.

Pitfalls of Engaging in Secular Liberal Politics & Activism – In this candid podcast of the Blood Brothers Podcast, Dilly Hussain speaks with Mobeen Vaid on the topic of Muslim groups unconditionally aligning themselves with the left and its negative repercussions. In addition, I would also recommend this discussion by Imam Marc Manley which is critiques ‘wokeness’.

One Contemporary Issues and Shar’i Perspectives – This is part I of a 2-episode series with Sh. Mustafa Umar addressing contemporary issues and Shar’i perspectives related to same-sex attractions and gender identity issues. How can parents, family members and friends support and embrace individuals with same-sex attractions and/or gender dysphoria without compromising their values and Deen? How do we deal with men or women in our families/circle of friends who have “come out” as part of the LGBT community and are living the lifestyle? From an Islamic legal perspective, what are the punishments of same-sex sexual behaviors and some of the common misconceptions surrounding that? Do same-sex sexual acts, the declaration of such acts as halal, or being in a same-sex marriage put one out of the fold of Islam? These and other relevant questions are explored in this episode. You can listen to part II here.

Muslims and LGBT Activism – Mobeen Vaid discusses the rise of LGBT in the West and its influence on the Muslim community.

Gender Roles – Dr. Yasir Qadhi discusses the issue of gender roles in Islam.

Last Stand Against Woke Liberalism – Dr. Ali Ataie discusses the weakness of the new postmodern woke movement.

How Muslim Families Can Navigate Pride Month – Islam recognizes the individual rights of every Muslim and gives high regard to the preservation of one’s dignity. That’s a fact that cannot be disregarded. But for a long time now, the Muslim community has tiptoed around the topic of homosexuality. The materials available are either outdated or too generic which results in further confusion and misinterpretation. Is homosexuality a sin? Is it an act against one’s faith? How do Muslim parents teach their kids about these various identities if they, themselves, are conflicted in their understanding of homosexuality in the Islamic context?

Pride in Islam? – Dr. Tahir Wyatt discusses dealing with LGBT lobby and their quest to normalize the abnormal.

Islamic rulings on transgenderism – Dr. Yasir Qadhi discusses rulings related to gender dysphoria, transgenderism, and how to deal with cases of this nature in accordance to Islamic law.

Islam and LGBTQ – A detailed discussion on the topic of LGBTQ from various Muslim academics and speakers.

Talking to Our Children About Gender and LGBT – A detailed discussion on the topic by Dr. Yasir Qadhi, Mobeen Vaid, and Dr. Carl Sharif El-Tobgui.

Other resources:

How to Taste the Sweetness of Faith

The Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) is reported to have said in a hadith:

ثَلَاثٌ مَن كُنَّ فيه وجَدَ حَلَاوَةَ الإيمَانِ: أنْ يَكونَ اللّهُ ورَسولُهُ أحَبَّ إلَيْهِ ممَّا سِوَاهُمَا، وأَنْ يُحِبَّ المَرْءَ لا يُحِبُّهُ إلَّا لِلَّهِ، وأَنْ يَكْرَهَ أنْ يَعُودَ في الكُفْرِ كما يَكْرَهُ أنْ يُقْذَفَ في النَّارِ

“Whoever possesses the following three qualities will taste the sweetness of faith: (1) The one to whom Allah and His Messenger become most dear than anything else. (2) The one who loves a person only for the sake of Allah. (3)The one who hates to return to disbelief just as he hates to be cast into the fire.”


In this hadith, the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) directs us towards three qualities, which if we possess, they will make us taste the sweetness of faith. Yes, faith has a particular taste which can be savored by the hearts in the same way the sweetness of foods and drinks can be sensed by the tongues. Just as the body cannot taste the sweetness of foods and drinks when it is sick and unhealthy, the hearts also cannot taste the sweetness of faith when they are afflicted with spiritual diseases, such as, forbidden desires, misguidance, lust, sins, etc. The hearts must be healthy just as the body needs to be healthy to sense taste.

What does it mean to taste the sweetness of faith? It means that whoever finds it will experience the following three things:

  • The person will take delight in all acts of obedience to Allah. He/she will no longer feel burdened or bored by Allah’s commands, rather, he/she will look forward to them and actually enjoy engaging in them. This means the person will enjoy going to the mosque, giving charity, praying, making supplication, doing dhikr, fasting, reading Qur’an, avoiding sins, etc.
  • The person will prefer his/her faith over low worldly aims. He/she will prefer to find opportunities to chase this sweetness rather than the temporary bitter worldly desires even if they may be sweet in the beginning. The person’s faith will become more important to him/her than anything else in the world.
  • The person will be able to bear the hardships that come along the way for the sake of Allah. He/she will not feel defeated nor lose hope. He/she would realize that this world is only a test from Allah and that we are here just for a short while and that any hardship a believer feels in this world, whether physical, emotional, or psychological, it will wipe away some sins from his/her record as the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) said, “There is nothing (in the form of hardship) that comes to a believer, even if it is the pricking of a thorn, except that Allah writes for him a good deed because of it or removes a sin” (Muslim). As long as such people have their faith by their side, they are strong enough to take on any challenge life throws their way because they realize that it is all coming from Allah, thus, they bear it with patience.

So what are these three qualities? Let’s delve into them a little deeper.

Allah and His Messenger Most Dear

The first quality means that such a person’s love for Allah and His Messenger is more than anything else. Whenever they are given a choice between what Allah and His Messenger want from them vs what others want from them, they will constantly choose to be with Allah and His Messenger over anyone else. For example, a person will refuse to earn his/her income in a prohibited manner, even though it may pay a lot more than their current job, because Allah and His Messenger forbade it.

The love of Allah can emerge in one’s heart by getting to know His Names and Attributes, reflecting over His creation, thinking about His favors and blessings, etc. All of this indicates Allah’s perfection, power, wisdom, and mercy. A person’s love for Allah will drive him/her to His obedience, abiding by His laws, and keeping away from His prohibitions.

The love of the Messenger (ﷺ) is a consequence of loving Allah. Loving the Messenger necessitates following and obeying him. It is obligatory on every Muslim to love the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) and this love must exceed the love of anything else in their life including their family as the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) said, “None of you will [truly] believe until I am more beloved to him than his father, child, and all of mankind” (Bukhari). One of the best ways to grow the love for him in the heart is to study his life.

Loving a Fellow Muslim Only for Allah’s Sake

The second quality is about loving one another solely for the sake of Allah. This is a form of love that believers have for each other, because they are all siblings of one another in faith and look out for each other as Allah states in the Qur’an, “The believers are but one brotherhood, so make peace between your brothers” (Qur’an 49:10). It is a type of no strings attached love. It is selfless. There are no expectations of some sort of worldly gains in return for it. It is purely for the sake of Allah.

When someone loves their brother/sister in faith solely for Allah’s sake, then this means that they seek to benefit each other, keep harm away from each other, advise each other, etc. If one of them sees another in trouble or going through something difficult, he/she tries to help and alleviate the difficulty to the best of his/her ability. They assist each other in doing good not just for the success of this life but also the afterlife, similarly, they assist each other in avoiding evil and sins. The Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) said, “A Muslim is a brother of [another] Muslim, he neither wrongs him nor hands him over to one who does him wrong. If anyone fulfills his brother’s needs, Allah will fulfill his needs; if one relieves a Muslim of his troubles, Allah will relieve his troubles on the Day of Resurrection; and if anyone covers up [the faults] of a Muslim, Allah will cover him [i.e. his faults] on the Day of Judgement” (Bukhari).

Hate to Return to Disbelief

The third and final quality is about the believer hating to return to a lifestyle of sin and disbelief just as he/she would hate to be thrown into the fire. When faith firmly takes root in the heart and the believer tastes its sweetness, then he/she cannot imagine being separated from it. The heart of such a believer cannot fathom leaving this sweetness for the bitterness of disbelief, disobedience, and sin that he/she used to engage in his/her previous days. This does not apply just to new Muslims, rather, it could also apply to Muslims who grew up non-practicing but then became close to their faith later on in life.

Some said that this last quality was stated by the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) as a warning to the companions because they were new to the faith and some among them still had love for their previous lifestyles. Therefore, the Prophet (ﷺ) is making it clear to them that returning to that old lifestyle of disbelief is just like being thrown into the fire because that is the actual consequence in the afterlife for those who disbelieve. Similarly, a Muslim who goes back to a lifestyle of sin and disobedience after having repented is like he threw himself/herself into the fire.

Source: Dorar