At the outset of the Islamic call to God's way, the Prophet (p.) faced the problem of people setting up partners to God. The problem manifested itself in the plethora of idols that were worshipped in accordance with a set of ceremonies and practices. Idol worshipping had permeated the entirety of people's lives and psyche. It was so ingrained in their hearts and minds that they considered it an absolute truth and, consequently, were dismissive of anything that might contradict that established belief, without any discussion or thought.
Their Psychological State
The following Quranic verses shed light on the psychological and mental state of the polytheists when they were invited to worship the One and Only God:
"Has he made the gods [into] one God? Indeed, this is a curious thing." And the eminent among them went forth, [saying], "Continue and be patient over [the defense of] your gods. Indeed, this is a thing intended. We have not heard of this in the latest religion. This is not but a fabrication."" (Surah Sād 38:5-7)
Thus, to their minds, the question was not one worthy of response or discussion; rather, it was a perplexing matter and nothing more. The discovery made them panic when it required them to show steadfastness and forbearance, as a response to something they had never heard of in their former faith, only to conclude that it was nothing but lies.
Theism and Polytheism in Conflict
In that situation, polytheism represented the greatest challenge to the progress of the prophetic mission, as it was the biggest hurdle preventing the message from reaching the people. It was not a transient aspect of their lives but a way of life and a social system. On the other hand, the Islamic message symbolized a great challenge to the polytheistic mentality, as it was the creed upon which polytheism would break, along with all norms of conduct and customs based on it, even the inner human feelings that encapsulated man's relations with others and with God. This is called hidden polytheism; one of its aspects is akin to the conduct of a hypocrite who goes about his business apprehensive of others as well as of God.
The opening salvos of the battle began with full force. Following the Prophet's style of dialogue and management of struggle, Islam did not start the battle in the way the polytheists had expected. This was because the sphere within which Islam's noble task was moving differed from the sphere in which polytheism operated. Formerly, the mission of Islam has started from the position of an ideology linked to the wider realities of the universe and life. Polytheism, however, was rooted in customs intertwined with the sentimentality of heritage and the concessions granted to the ruling elite.
It is obvious, therefore, that the difference in the nature of the challenge would leave its mark on the approach each side used in the progress of struggle.
Reason Versus Rage
The methods used by the polytheists in managing the struggle were characterized by tensions that left no room for meaningful intellectual exchanges. They resorted to provocative tactics such as swearing, insults, and manufacturing countless unjust accusations. They also whipped up public hysteria against the callers to theism. The result was that oppression and torture against them became commonplace. This, needless to say, has been the means tyrants employ when bereft of strong proof to counter their adversaries.
On the other side, Islam's mission adopted a calm approach capable of winning the hearts and minds of the polytheists to the cause of monotheism in both thought and practice. It sought to gradually free their conscience from all aspects of polytheism in a well-thought-out plan that accounted for all eventualities. Some situations called for jolting the minds of the idol worshippers to rouse them into thinking about their beliefs. At times, it was necessary to make the opponents poke fun at their own convictions after they had discovered the weaknesses within them.
This was the method the Prophet of Islam employed, guided by the Quranic approach to dialogue. He was firm in the knowledge that his argument was stronger than his opponents', and thus he was confident in the eventual triumph of his beliefs. Yet, his objective was not to score points but to guide his adversaries to a newfound common ground, having seen the strength of his argument. His approach never lost sight of the goal, even if the journey was long and arduous. This might have been induced by the struggle between man and his inner impulse toward rashness and chaos.
Polytheism Loses the Argument
The start was made from a very well-established position. The idea that had governed the position was one that was armed with proof and evidence, as well as knowledge. The Prophet asked his adversaries to provide all those things, should they wish to support their position, in the same measure as he required it from himself with all that he was calling them to, i.e., belief and ideology. He used to mount the challenge from the point where he could expose their position, by questioning their convictions and asking for evidence to prove that they were right. His questions were not affirmative, i.e., those of someone who wanted to acquire knowledge about their beliefs. Rather, they were posed in a negative mode, with a view to dismissing the allegations of the other party as baseless. This is succinctly captured in the following Quranic verses:
"Say, [O Muhammad], 'Do you see what you invoke besides Allah? Show me what they have created of the earth; or did they have partnership in [creation of] the heavens? Bring me a scripture [revealed] before this or a [remaining] trace of knowledge, if you should be truthful.'" Surah Al-Aḥqaf (46:04)
"Those who associated with Allah will say, 'If Allah had willed, we would not have associated [anything] and neither would our fathers, nor would we have prohibited anything.' Likewise did those before deny until they tasted Our punishment. Say, 'Do you have any knowledge that you can produce for us? You follow not except assumption, and you are not but falsifying.'" Surah Al-An’am (06:148)
The Holy Qur’an challenged their intelligence: If those they worshipped besides God were truly gods, they should be capable of creation. Conversely, being gods does not make sense; where is that which they have created on the earth, or in the heavens for that matter? Should the answer be in the affirmative, where would this leave the allegation? Should it be in the negative, where then is the evidence, i.e., be it a book or any piece of information, so that we can ponder it? In fact, they were helpless. In that situation, they had nothing to fall back on except conjecture and falsehood, and both were shallow and without substance.
Monotheism Proves the Inconceivability of Polytheism
As the dialogue progressed, Islam's argument gained momentum by rejecting polytheism through rational thinking and logical inference. Thus, the debate had become uniform in both the situation in accordance with the two philosophical principles as regards "negation", in that the non-existence of proof on something means that there is no way it can be proved. And furnishing the proof for "nothingness" turns "negation" into rationalistic determinism. Employing this approach, Islam had demonstrated the inconceivability of polytheism as an abstract nation, regardless of its proponents and the nature of their justifications for holding such views. Allah, the Most exalted says:
"Or have they taken gods from the earth who raise [the dead]? If there were in the heavens and earth gods besides Allah, they both would have been ruined. So exalted is Allah, Lord of the Throne, above what they describe." Surah Al-Anbiya (21:21-22)
"Say, [O Muhammad], 'If there had been [other] gods with Him, as they say, behold, they would certainly have sought out a way to the Lord of the Throne!'" Surah Al-Isra (17:42)
"Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken away what he had created, and some would have lorded it over others! Glory to God! [He is free] from the [sort of] things they attribute to Him!" Surah Al-Muʾminun (23:91)
The multiplicity of gods, the subject of the first verse, should assume that each of them has absolute power, for this quality is the most supreme that the gods could possess. This lends support to the Quranic assumption that each one of them could covet something the others desired, and thereby the conflict might erupt, in which case the orderly state of the universe might be put in harm's way. Reality points to the opposite, i.e. there is not disorder in the system of the universe. Consequently, we must reject the notion of the existence of more than one God.
The second verse takes issue with the exponents of the notion, using a different approach. The suggested existence of other gods, besides God, should assume that they are capable of competing with each other to reach Him, because sharing with the Lord should necessarily mean sharing His very characteristics. On top of these qualities is the attribute of absolute power, which would, as a consequence, give them the same capability to get to Him, do battle with and depose Him. This is not possible, as there is no trace of him in the universe.
As for the third verse, it discusses the two angles taken up by the other two verses and adds to the assertions the idea of the divisibility of the universe by virtue of every god taking away what he created, without any leeway for letting other gods share it with him. This contention breaks up on the rock of reality, as we can see that the whole of the creation is governed by a single system, which is both uniform and faultless.
From the Perspective of Scholastic Theologians
As is customary, scholastic theologians wished to tackle these Quranic verses from a philosophical perspective. They came up with a philosophical argument they dubbed "unobjectionability." In his commentary on the first verse, the author of Majma'ul Bayan fi Tafseeril Qur'an (a Quranic exegesis) offers this interpretation in expanding on this argument:
Should there be another god, besides God Almighty, they would have been eternal; timelessness is the most sublime of all characteristics; sharing this attribute would engender correspondence. It would then follow that both of them must be powerful, cognizant, and alive; in his own right, each of them can covet that which goes contrary to the wish of the other god, i.e., of causing death or life, stirring up or calming down things, causing poverty or prosperity, and so forth. On this supposition, their (contradictory) desires could materialize; this is impossible. Yet, should their wishes not come true, this would detract from their being all-powerful. If the desire of one of them were to materialize to the exclusion of the other, the one who could not make things happen, without justification as to why it was not possible for him, would be branded powerless. Consequently, it is conceivable that there is no god but One God.
However, if it is said that they do not object to each other's will being executed, in that they happen to want the very thing, the answer would be that what we are trying to prove is the validity of unobjectionability, not its incidence. Thus, the validity of unobjectionability is a sufficient proof that it is inevitable that the power of one of them is limited; consequently, it is inconceivable that he is god.
We can see that it is possible that the three Quranic verses, especially the first one, could lend themselves to the interpretation of scholastic theologians. However, the Holy Qur'an attaches more weight to the proofs it wants to establish, including rational ones, to those that have a bearing on the idea, away from all jargon or philosophical maneuverings. Thus, we can identify in this holy verse the recognition of a natural truth that is dictated by the issue of multiple power centers in any given field. This is akin to what we see in real-life situations. When each power center has absolute authority and independence, i.e., in thought, management, and movement, this leads to disagreements, then conflict, then disorder, then victory, and eventually to winner-takes-all.
Besides, the method espoused by this holy verse is in line with the tendency of providing the polytheists with answers to what they argue about their belief in the context of debate. This is done in order to prove a case for rejection, without satisfying oneself with the negative trend, i.e., non-existence of a proof to support the idea. Abiding by the negative side would not negate the possibility of the idea; rather, it would disprove the existence of proof that it happened, by virtue of the rational thought: "Non-existence of proof should not lead to the conclusion that something does or does not exist." So, should others be in need of a proof to prove something, you should be in need of a proof of non-existence.
Polytheism in Reality
A novel approach to conducting dialogue has been discussed in the Holy Qur’an. It required Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to adopt it in his dialogue with the polytheists. The method was that of relying on rational reasoning. For a start, he anchored his position on rejecting the supremacy of their gods by denuding them of the attribute of divinity, which signifies omnipotence, capability of creation, and eternity, etc. He then went further than that, by stripping their gods of all the qualities that might make people hold them in any regard. This was bound to set them up for mockery of their worth, not in a realm of divinity. This is beautifully depicted in the narrative of these Quranic verses:
"Do they associate with Him those who create nothing and they are [themselves] created? And they give no help, nor can they help themselves? And if you [believers] invite them to guidance, they will not follow you. It is all the same for you whether you invite them or you are silent. Indeed, those you [polytheists] call upon besides Allah are servants like you. So, call upon them and let them respond to you, if you should be truthful. Do they have feet by which they walk? Or do they have hands by which they strike? Or do they have eyes by which they see? Or do they have ears by which they hear? Say, [O Muhammad], 'Call your "partners" and then conspire against me and give me no respite.'" Surah Al-A’raf (07:191-195)
"And they have taken besides Him gods which create nothing, while they are created, and possess not for themselves any harm or benefit and possess not [power to cause] death or life or resurrection." Surah Al-Furqan (25:03)
To start with, it had been concluded that they could neither create anything nor be eternal. They were even unable to desire or ward off things like life, death, and resurrection. They were senseless for lacking any faculty. This is a vivid picture that can produce nothing but laughter and degradation; how, then, could such gods be elevated to the rank of objects of worship?
"O people, an example is presented, so listen to it. Indeed, those you invoke besides Allah will never create [as much as] a fly, even if they gathered together for that purpose. And if the fly should steal away from them a [tiny] thing, they could not recover it from him. Weak are the pursuer and pursued." Surah Al-Ḥajj (22:73)
This verse brilliantly illustrates the deep feeling of utter incapacity before one of the smallest and most vulnerable of creatures, where the ingredient of derision blends with the notion of divinity attributed to those gods whom the idolaters worshipped to the exclusion of God. Imagine the two scenes: The first is that of the gods trying to collaborate to create a fly yet failing despite the power they claim. The second is that of the fly, with all the weakness and insignificance it represents, forging ahead to those "great" gods to snatch away something they possessed. The gods are then depicted in a scene where they chase the fly to reclaim what it had taken yet prove unable to do so.
This skillful approach to dialogue was intended to denude those gods of the attributes of divinity on the one hand, and subject them to ridicule on the other. This would render untenable the position of those who believed in and worshipped them, for their belief stood on no solid ground, nor was it worthy of respect; rather the opposite—sarcasm, scorn, and contempt.
These are some Quranic examples of the approach espoused by the Prophet (p.) in his dialogue with the polytheists. This was in keeping with human reality when confronting divergent beliefs. The Islamic experience and application of this approach in a polytheistic society proved successful. Moreover, it remains relevant to other fields of faith and conduct in the battle of competing ideologies throughout life.