The Gullibility Index

by Dr. M. Amir Ali, Ph.D

Primary Gullibility Index or PGI: The Gullibility Index represents the number of times a person allows a deceiver to deceive him. If a fasiq comes to you and tells you something, which you believe but it turns out to be a lie and a deception to get something from you, it represents a Primary Gullibility Index or PGI of one. If the same fasiq makes you believe the same or another lie and you believe him, your primary gullibility index or PGI is two. If the same fasiq tells you a lie for the third time and you believe him, your primary gullibility index or PGI is three. Higher the gullibility index the weaker is your Iman (faith) in Islam provided that you are a proven intelligent person with education and acceptable credibility in the society. Iman represents your understanding and knowledge of the Qur'an and Sunnah. Allah provides wisdom to those who are deserving of it and a wise person is expected to have a PGI of one or less because the Messenger of Allah said that a believer is never stung from the same hole twice. The Gullibility Index may also be used as an error index.

Applied Gullibility Index or AGI: Applied gullibility index or AGI is derived from the PGI by using a multiplier. The multiplier is derived from the number of people directly affected by the gullibility of one person. For an individual whose gullibility does not affect anyone but himself (or herself) has the same AGI as PGI because the multiplier is one. The head of a family with four other family members who are affected by his gullibility has a multiplier of five. His first gullibility would have AGI of five; and a PGI of two, that is, his second error of gullibility, would be converted into a AGI of 10, that is 2 x 5, two representing his PGI and five representing the number of people (his family members only) affected by his gullibility. For a boss in an office with 100 employees his PGI of one will become AGI of 100; and his PGI of 2 will become AGI of 200. For Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) leaders, such as President, Secretary General or member of its Shura, a PGI of 1 will be 30,000 because that many people are directly affected by one gullibility. The PGI of 2 of an ISNA officer will become AGI of 60,000. AGI is a hurt index.

Real Gullibility Index or RGI: The RGI is a much less precise index of the gullibility of a person because it takes into account how many people have been affected (or hurt) by the gullibility of this person. An individual without a family may indirectly influence his relatives and friends that will insert a multiplier. A company boss may influence bosses of other companies by his gullibility and they in turn influence their own employees thereby magnifying the multiplier. In case of a leader, such as an ISNA executive, his gullibility goes beyond the borders of the U.S. through the media and affects hundreds of millions of people around the globe adding a multiplier of hundreds of millions. RGI emphasizes that the bigger the leader the more careful he should be because his small mistake is not small but it has a multiplier and a magnifier.

Allowable gullibility index: A Muslim with in depth knowledge of the Qur'an and Sunnah is expected to have gained God-given gift of wisdom and is expected to have the PGI of zero. However, a PGI of one is tolerable for the most intelligent and wise person because imperfection of the human state of knowledge leads one to misjudge and err once in a while. However, it is worth remembering that a mistake of an ordinary person is small even if it may be a big mistake personally because it does not affect others. A mistake becomes bigger as it affects more and more people. A small mistake of a ruler is a big blunder because it affects a lot of people. The gullibility of Saddam Hussein in 1990 when he believed U.S. Ambassador Gillespie and invaded Kuwait, caused the death of almost 500,000 Iraqis. Iraq was bombed back to the stone age, the suffering of the Iraqis continues after ten years, the Gulf area governments became debtor countries with their economies shattered and the saga seems to have no end in sight. Saddam Hussein, the Fasiq believed another fasiq. Biggest tragedy of the Muslims is that we ignore the teachings of the Qur'an:

"O you who believe! If a fasiq brings you a news, verify it, lest you harm some people in ignorance and afterward repent of what you did. (49:6)

In the case of Farrakhan, the easiest thing to do is to verify from his weekly newspaper, The Final Call, whether has he sanitized his column on the inside back cover, WHAT THE MUSLIMS BELIEVE, items 5 and 12. No change means Farrakhan is a liar and a deceiver. All his fanfare is showmanship to deceive the Muslims in a grand way. Stay away from him and let the world know that the Muslims do not accept him as a Muslim and his organization, the NOI is abhorrent to the Muslims.

Lessons from the past: At the time of Prophet Muhammad there were hypocrites with their leader Abdullah ibn Ubai ibn Salool. He was always working against Islam while remaining among Muslims. However, he gave his pledge of allegiance to the Prophet, he prayed with them as Muslims prayed and he went out on various expeditions with the prophet. He was tolerated by the Muslims because he never contradicted the Muslims on aqeedah. However, the Muslims tolerated Abdullah ibn Ubai as one may tolerate a snake with great caution and keeping a clear eye on him.

Musailama declared his messengership after the death of the Prophet of Islam. Abu Bakr Siddique did not try to negotiate with him, he did not send a delegation to talk to him and teach him true Islam but he sent an army to crush him despite the fact that the Muslims had many other great challenges. Musailama's army was defeated and he was killed in the war. The war with Musailama cost great many lives of Sahaba.

Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani declared himself a prophet in the early 20th century. Muslim scholars talked to him, debated him and declared him an apostate. In America Qadiyanis have satellite TV and radio broadcasts and hold large conventions and conferences, claiming 10 million adherents, I do not see Muslims running to speak from a Qadiyani stage. The fact is that Muslims have their differences with Qadiyanis mainly on the one point of the finality of the prophethood. Whereas with Farrakhan Muslims have differences on all points of aqeedah, particularly the bedrock of aqeedah: Tawheed, Risalah and Akhira.

Louis Farrakhan prints his beliefs every week in his weekly newspaper THE FINAL CALL, which is distributed all over the country. The Muslim fundamental creed is tawheed, risalah and akhira. Every week Farrakhan makes a mockery of the Islamic creed when he prints that Allah came in the person of W.D. Fard in 1930 that means W. Fard Muhammad was God-incarnate. He makes a mockery of Islam when he publishes that there is no physical resurrection. He makes a mockery of Islam when he promotes that Elijah Muhammad was the Messenger of God and he himself became a Messenger of Allah in 1997. Islam is at variance with Farrakhan on all three components of basic creed. With Qadiyanis, Islam is at variance on one component of the creed, that is risalah. Farrakhan repeatedly declared his Shahadah and repeatedly made a mockery of Islam in front of big audiences, that he was going to bring thousands of his followers into Islam, which he never did. How many times does he have to break promises before ISNA and other Muslim leaders stop being beguiled? The gullibility of some Muslim leaders has no bounds.

May I request a Muslim mathematician or a statistician to develop a gullibility index? Parameters would include time, number of promises broken and number of times Muslim leaders believe in liars and deceivers again and number of people affected.

Reportedly, the Messenger of Allah said that a true Muslim is never bitten by the same snake twice. What can we say about those Muslim brothers who have been bitten by the snake Farrakhan three or more times and they run to him again?

What is your gullibility index? Know your gullibility index for your own good and good of the people you influence. Try keeping your PGI at zero.

Farrakhan deceives again: In his conference of deception held in Chicago, February 24-27, 2000 Farrakhan pulled wool over the eyes of seasoned leaders of ISNA, scholars from the East and Imam Warith Deen Muhammad. Regarding the Prophet Muhammad, Farrakhan said that Muhammad ibn Abdullah was the last prophet but Farrakhan never said that Muhammad ibn Abdullah was also the last Messenger of Allah. This is a semantic deception because Farrakhan never claimed that Elijah Muhammad and Louis Farrakhan were prophets. Farrakhan always claimed that Elijah Muhammad was the Messenger of God and Louis Farrakhan himself being God's Messenger. Some of the gullible Muslim leaders are rationalizing on behalf of Farrakhan that his claims of Messenger of God are metaphorical not real whereas Farrakhan never claimed that it was a metaphor. Secondly, Farrakhan never denied explicitly that W.D. Fard was God in person. His newspaper, THE FINAL CALL is not changing the section of WHAT THE MUSLIMS BELIEVE; items 5 and 12 remain the same that Farrakhanis do not believe in physical resurrection and that Allah appeared in the person of W.D. Fard in 1930.

Farrakhan's declaration is no different from Qadiyanis who believe that Prophet Muhammad was the last Messenger but not the last Prophet. Rashad Khalifa declared that Prophet Muhammad was the last Prophet but not the last Messenger. Qadiyanis claim that Mirza Ghulam Qadiyani was the Nabi (Prophet not Rasool or Messenger). Louis Farrakhan is playing the same game and our seasoned leaders are being duped. ISNA leader, Dr. Syyid Muhammad Syeed was reported to have paid $1,000 from his pocket and $5,000 from ISNA funds as a donation to help Farrakhan in his work; naively he is helping the work of deception. Gullibility, gullibility and more gullibility. Imam W.D. Muhammad proved to be smarter than the ISNA leader because he did not donate any money; he played with words in response to words.

Are the Muslims going to accept cosmetic changes by Farrakhan or are they going to demand real change of aqeedah to bring Farrakhanis (so called NOI) in harmony with Islamic aqeedah. Muslims may accept variations in fiqhi matters but cannot accept variation in aqeedah.


E-mail your comments to