God Almighty has ordained differences between human beings in their mental capabilities, their languages, the color of their skin, and their perceptions and thoughts. All of this naturally gives rise to a multiplicity and variety of opinions and judgments. If our languages, the color of our skins, and our outer appearances are signs of God's creative power and wisdom; and if our minds, our mental capabilities, and the products of these minds are also signs of God and an indication of His consummate power; and if the populating of the universe, the beauty of being alive, and being able to live are also indications of God's power, then we can justifiably say that none of this exquisite beauty and variety among human beings would have been possible if they had been created equal in every respect. Every created being indeed has its own unique characteristics:

The differences which were common among our forebears in early Muslim history and which continue to be with us, are all a part of this natural manifestation of diversity. Provided that differences do not exceed their limits, and that they remain within the standard norms of ethics and proper behavior, this is a phenomenon which could prove to be positive and extremely beneficial.

As mentioned above, if differences are confined to their proper limits and people are trained to observe the proper ethics and norms of expressing and managing differences, this would result in several positive advantages.

If intentions are sincere, differences of opinion could bring about a greater awareness of the various possible aspects and interpretations of evidence in a given case. Such differences could generate intellectual vitality and a cross-fertilization of ideas. The process is likely to bring into the open a variety of hypotheses in tackling specific issues.

Such a process is likely to present a variety of solutions for dealing with a particular situation so that the most suitable solution can be found. This is in harmony with the facilitating nature of the religion of Islam which takes into account the reality of people's lives.

These and other benefits can be realized if differences remain within the limits and the ethical norms which must regulate them. If these limits and norms are not observed, differences could easily degenerate into disputes and schisms and become a negative and evil force producing more rifts in the Muslim Ummah, which already has more than enough of such fragmentation. In this way, differences of opinion can change from being a constructive force to being elements of destruction.

Disagreement may be prompted by egoistical desires to get personal, psychological satisfaction or to achieve certain personal objectives. It may be impelled by the desire to show off one's knowledge and understanding or cleverness. To cause this type of disagreement is totally blameworthy, in that egoism or selfish desire suppresses all concern for the truth and does not promote goodness. It was such egoism that beguiled Satan and led him into disbelief. God says in the Qur'an:

As a result of following egoistical desire, many people have swerved from dealing justly:

Following one's own desires leads to deviation and error:

Egoistical desire is the antithesis of knowledge. It seeks to stifle truth. It promotes corruption and leads to error:

The types of personal desire are various and stem from a multitude sources. In general, desire springs from the ego and love of self. Such desire gives rise to many misdeeds and deviations. But people are not easily trapped by it until every misdeed and deviation acquires a certain attractiveness in their eyes and they persist in straying. In this situation, truth appears as falsehood and falsehood appears as truth. The disputes among sects and propagators of misguided innovations of Muslims can be attributed to the stranglehold of vain desire.

Through God's blessings and care, people may be made aware of the extent of the impact of vain desires on their opinions and beliefs before they are totally caught in the snares of error. Such people may see the light of God's guidance and be made to realize that their opinions and beliefs —which stem from infatuation with their own vain desires — do not have any objective reality. They exist only in the mind and are illusory. They have been conjured up and made attractive by his own vain desires, however ugly and abhorrent they actually are. They are a source of affliction to the person thus ensnared.

There are various ways of detecting the effect of personal inclination on the formation of any opinion or belief. Some of these are external and some are personal. The external ways of doing so involve showing that the discordant opinion or belief is categorically opposed to a clear text of the Qur'an or the Sunnah. One would not expect a person who professes to be keen on upholding the truth to pursue an idea which contradicts the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

An opinion can also be shown to stem from personal caprice if it clashes with the considered assessment of persons with sound minds to whom people normally go for advice or arbitration. An opinion which calls for the worship of another beside God, or which rejects the application of the Shari`ah in people's affairs, or which advocates illegal sexual intercourse, praises lying, or urges extravagance can only come from personal caprice and can only be advocated by someone who is led by evil influences.

With regard to internal ways of exposing whether an opinion stems from egotistical desire, this can be shown by reflecting not only on the source of the idea but also by questioning the justification for adopting that particular idea to the exclusion of another. It is also important to assess the prevailing circumstances which might have affected the holder of the opinion and the degree of his commitment to it should these circumstances change. One should also inquire whether there were any pressures which unconsciously led to the adoption of that course. Finally, one has to analyze the idea itself. If it appears to be shaky and unstable, oscillating erratically between strength and weakness, we should then be in no doubt that such an idea stems from vain desire and is insinuated by evil promptings. Having come to such a conclusion, people must seek the protection of God and praise Him for helping them to see reality before they became bound by the shackles of egoism and personal caprice.

Some disagreements may indeed be motivated by the pursuit of knowledge and truth; selfishness and egoism may not be behind them. Such disagreements may also be spurred on by a striving for intellectual rigor and by the demands of faith. The differences between the people of faith on the one hand and disbelievers, polytheists, and hypocrites on the other is a necessary difference which no believing Muslim can shake off or attempt to reconcile. This is a difference required by faith and the preservation of truth. The same applies to the Muslim attitude towards atheism, Judaism, Christianity, paganism, and communism.

However, the disagreement with these ideologies should not hinder the call to remove the underlying causes of such disagreement. This is in order that the way may be left open for people to embrace Islam and abandon the mainsprings of disbelief, worshipping others beside God, hypocrisy, schism and immorality, atheism and innovation, and the promotion of beliefs which are destructive of truth and goodness.

Differences among Muslims are also fostered by apportioning praise or blame over minor issues, often with little regard for genuine sincerity. Rulings on these issues allow for alternative opinions or practices. Some examples of such disagreements concern the differences among the scholars with regard to the nullification of ablution by blood from a wound or by induced vomiting; about reciting the Qur'an aloud in salah after the imam; saying bismillahi ar rahmani ar rahim at the beginning of Al-Fatihah, the opening chapter of the Qur'an; and saying Ameen aloud after the recitation of Al-Fatihah. There are many other such examples.

Disagreement over such subsidiary issues are often quite sensitive and may lead people to confuse piety with their own personal inclinations, knowledge with conjecture, the preferable with what they themselves have chosen, and the acceptable with the unacceptable. Such disagreements are inevitable unless we have recourse to agreed-upon criteria for resolving them, disciplines to regulate the methods of deduction, and ethical norms which would govern the conduct of handling differences. Otherwise, there would be a drift to wrangling, schism, and ultimate failure. In such a case, both parties in any dispute would slip from a position of piety and God-consciousness to the abyss of egoistical desires. The floodgates of chaos and anarchy would be opened and Satan would thrive.