Wednesday, July 9, 2025

 God’s Mouthpiece or the State’s Mascot?

How the ‘Messenger’ Concept Was Engineered for Control

The central demand of Islam isn’t just to believe in God — it’s to obey the Messenger. The Qur’an repeatedly commands:

“Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah.” (Q 4:80)
“It is not for a believer to have any choice… if Allah and His Messenger have decided.” (Q 33:36)

Sounds noble — follow the man sent by God. But look closer, and the “Messenger” becomes one of the most effective authoritarian tools in history:

  • It cloaks any command in divine authority.

  • It shields power structures behind religious legitimacy.

  • It makes questioning a human equivalent to disobeying God.

In short: it turns a fallible man into an unquestionable proxy — then that proxy into a puppet for imperial ambition and legal tyranny.


1. “Obey the Messenger” — But Which One?

The Qur’an commands obedience to “the Messenger” but never defines:

  • Which actions are binding forever

  • Which commands were local and contextual

  • What to do when the Messenger is long dead

Muslim scholars filled this gap with hadith — the same contradictory, fabricated, politically manipulated literature that defines Islam’s law.

Suddenly, obeying “the Messenger” means obeying centuries of hearsay, jurists, caliphs, and a legal system Muhammad never explicitly created.

A vague Qur’anic idea became the foundation of an unquestionable religious-political complex.


2. From Revelation to Regulation: Muhammad as Legal Lever

In the Qur’an, Muhammad’s role was simple:

“Say: I am only a human being like you, to whom revelation is made…” (Q 18:110)
“Your duty is only to deliver the message.” (Q 5:99)

But after his death, his name justified anything:

  • Ban music? “The Messenger said so.”

  • Stone adulterers, despite Qur’an prescribing lashes? “Messenger did it.”

  • Execute apostates? “Messenger commanded it.”

The man who delivered a message became an all-encompassing legal and moral authority, whose every act was canonized.

This isn’t legacy; it’s ritualized micromanagement by proxy.


3. The Messenger as Shield for Tyranny

“Obeying the Messenger” became a euphemism for obeying those claiming to speak in his name:

  • Caliphs demanding loyalty

  • Scholars asserting authority

  • Judges enforcing control

  • Sectarian rivals anathematizing dissenters

Disobedience became rebellion against not just man — but God.

The genius of the “Messenger” concept? It turns dissent into blasphemy. And since the Messenger supposedly dictated everything — from state policy to personal grooming — no aspect of life escapes religious control.


4. The Posthumous Messenger: An Authoritarian Dream

No other religion bases so much law and practice on a prophet’s alleged words centuries after his death.

Why? Because a dead prophet can’t contradict you:

  • More war? Claim the Messenger endorsed conquest.

  • Silence critics? “He who insults the Prophet shall be killed.”

  • Control women? “The Prophet said they are deficient in intellect.”

  • Justify corruption? “Whoever obeys the ruler obeys Allah and His Messenger.” (Sahih Bukhari 7137)

The state just pins laws on Muhammad — and piety enforces them.


5. God’s Mouthpiece Becomes the State’s Mouthpiece

The bait-and-switch:

  1. Muhammad is God’s mouthpiece

  2. Hadith becomes Muhammad’s mouthpiece

  3. Rulers, clerics, jurists become hadith’s mouthpiece

  4. Disobey them = disobey God

By classical Islamic empires, political, judicial, and social rule was justified by divine command filtered through “the Messenger.”

This isn’t religion — it’s theocratic authoritarianism in prophetic robes.


6. The Fatal Problem: Islam Cannot Function Without the Messenger Cult

Modern Muslims may try to elevate the Qur’an above hadith — but it never works.

Everything refers back to the Messenger:

  • Qur’an says obey him

  • Sharia is built on him

  • Rituals imitate him

  • Ethics derive from him

Yet we have no contemporary record of Muhammad’s life, only:

  • Centuries-late oral chains

  • Politically biased transmitters

  • Contradictory reports

  • Fabrications admitted by early scholars

So you must either accept this shaky foundation — or reject the entire religion.

Islam cannot detach the message from the Messenger.
But the Messenger is a black box — written by others, for others.


Conclusion: Engineered Obedience, Not Divine Authority

Islam claims obedience to God — but in practice, it demands obedience to a mythologized man, manufactured by empires, codified by jurists, enforced by fear.

The “Messenger” is no longer a conveyor of divine will —
He’s a blank check.
A thought-stopper.
A control mechanism dressed in religious reverence.

And in the end, he’s not speaking for God —
He’s speaking for those who claimed him.

No comments:

Post a Comment

“Wait — Wasn’t Muhammad Illiterate?” If you’ve spent any time around Islamic teachings, you’ve probably heard this claim: “Muhammad couldn’t...