Rediscovering Islam-2

The original message of God for guidance of humanity conveyed by the messengers of God sent to each community form time to time, got distorted with the passage of time only to be revived by another messenger. Once humanity developed to a certain level, Allah sent the final messenger Muhammad (Pbuh) with the final scripture Quran, which is protected by Allah. Even after 1400 years Quran is available in its original revealed form but with the passage of time people lack in understanding the spirit and indulge in practice of undesirable activities; Hence periodically the scholars of Islam make effort to rediscover the original message of Islam for practical application.

We are living in the age of the media, it is difficult to find people unaware of message of Islam. In previous ages it happened that wherever Islam spread people were so impressed with it that most of them accepted it as their religion. That is why today we find more than one billion Muslims throughout the world. Strangely enough the present day publicity given to Islam has produced only a negative effect. People are now generally allergic to Islam rather than being interested in it writes, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan in his book “Islam Rediscovered”. The theme of his book ‘Islam Rediscovered’ is being reproduced here with minor editing is evident from its title, Discovering Islam from its Original Sources. He has made a distinction between Islam as presented by the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, and his companions (information about which is available to us in the Qur’an and the Sunnah) and Islam as represented by later Muslim generations — both in theory and practice. This is what he calls the scientific approach.

Islam is the religion of nature. If it were to be presented in its original form, people would turn to it quite naturally. Unfortunately, a section of Muslims is engaged in violent and aggressive activities, wrongfully indeed, in the name of Islam. It is such news as, through the media, has a great impact upon the general public and creates serious misunderstandings. People have come to take Islam as a militant religion. Since modern man is in search of peace, he finds no appeal in a religion which, as presented by the media, is one of hatred and violence.

Maulana Wahiduddin Khan in this book attempts to introduce Islam as it is. It calls for a distinction to be made between Islam and the practices of Muslims. Taking a scientific attitude, you have to see Islam in the light of the Islamic scriptures and not judge it by Muslim conduct.

The Muslims of modern times are engaged in violence everywhere in the name of Islam. Violence, however, is not limited only to Muslims. It is found in every community and in every group. But there is a basic difference between the two. When the adherents of other religions engage in violence, they do not do so in the name of their religion. But the violence engaged in by the Muslims is being done in the name of Islam.

The aim is to present Islam as it is enshrined in its sacred scriptures, so that it may be brought before the people in its true form. The authentic source of information about Islam is the Qur’an. The Qur’an, according to Muslim belief, was revealed by God to the Arabian Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him. The second source of knowledge about Islam is the Sunnah, i.e., the words, deeds and sanctions of the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him. The lives of the companions of the Prophet provide another later source. Then, there is a full stop in this matter. No other person or historical record enjoys the status of source of Islam.

However, this write up does not claim to be a comprehensive introduction to Islam. That is something which can be had only by studying Islam directly through its basic scriptures, that is, the Qur’an and Sunnah. This effort thus presents a fundamental introduction for those who want to understand Islam as it is. Its aim is to provide a proper background in the light of which the original sources of Islam may be studied.

It is hoped that this information will be useful for those who want to know about the original Islam, as opposed to the “religion” represented by certain self-styled Muslim leaders introduced to us by the media.

In Part -1, discussed Islam under following headings:

1. SEARCH FOR TRUTH

2. FAITH AND REASON

3. THE CONCEPT OF GOD

4. RELIGION

5. ISLAM IN BRIEF

6. THE CREATION PLAN OF GOD

7. DISCOVERY OF ISLAM

8. THE MAN ISLAM BUILDS

Now the Part-2

9. The Islamic Way of Life
The Islamic way of life, in a word, is a God-oriented life. The greatest concern of a Muslim is God Almighty. The focus of his whole life is Akhirah [Hereafter], that is, the ideal world of God. The believer always obeys divine injunctions in every aspect of life. His life becomes a practical expression of the Qur’anic verse:

“Take on God’s own dye. And who has a better dye than God’s? And we are His worshippers”. (2:138)

‘Taking on God’s dye,’ means being of a ‘godly character’ in all the personal, social and economic affairs of one’s life. Various aspects of this ‘godly’ character as personified in a Muslim individual whose words and deeds in family matters, or with respect to earning one’s livelihood and whose dealings with other members of society, always seem to be distinguishably ‘dyed in the divine hue are as follows:

Iman (Faith)
By accepting Iman one enters the fold of Islam. But Iman is not simply a recitation of kalima (creed of Islam). According to the Qur’an, it is ma‘arifah (5:83) that is, realization. Thus realization of truth is the door to Islam. When one discovers that Islam is truly God’s religion and that it is the same truth one has been seeking all along, one undergoes a unique experience of realization which is known in Islamic terminology as ma‘arifah.’ Making any kind of discovery revolutionizes a person’s life but when this discovery is of the truth with a capital ‘T’, this intellectual revolution becomes synonymous with the emergence of a new life in the individual.

This kind of intellectual revolution is no simple event: it turns a man into a superman, and gives him the greatest mission of his life. It regulates his life in such a way that no part of it remains unaffected. He begins to see all of humanity as his family and the entire universe as his abode. Such a discoverer becomes a maker of history rather than a product of history.

This is the stuff of Iman. And it was this Iman which enabled the Prophet and his companions to produce, as one historian remarked, “the most miraculous of all miracles.”

Ibadah (Worship)
Ibadah, or worship, is not simply the observation of a set of rituals. It is more a profound kind of religious experience. In fact, it is the physical and spiritual expression of the human personality on a higher plane of consciousness.

Addressing man, the Qur’an says, “Prostrate yourself in adoration and bring yourself closer (to God)” (96:19). The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, was once asked ‘What is the essence of Ibadah? He replied: “The worship of God as though you are seeing Him. Or if you are not seeing Him, He is seeing you.”

There are two kinds of Ibadah, or worship, in Islam, the first kind of Ibadah have been prescribed at specified times—Salat, Sawm, Zakat, Hajj, (Prayer, Fasting, Almsgiving, Pilgrimage) These forms of devotion are called the pillars of Islam. Then there are unspecified forms of Ibadah, which consists of Dhikr and Fikr (3:191), meaning to remember God with feelings of fear and love.

This second form of Ibadah aims at mental activation of the human soul so that he may be enabled to see God’s signs in everything he comes across in his daily life. This is the ibadah or worship, which is obligatory for every Muslim throughout his life.

Akhlaq (Morality)
What is morality? It is to live among one’s fellow men according to the moral teachings of Islam. The essence of Islamic morality is thus set forth and given in a Hadith: “Behave with others as you would like them to behave towards you” (Al-Bukhari). By nature everyone knows what sort of conduct he approves of and of what sort he disapproves. So to follow this generally accepted moral criterion in relation to others is essentially Islamic morality.

Islam differentiates between social manners and social character. Social manners are based on the principle ‘Do as they do.’ But Islamic morality is based on the formula of unilateral and unconditional positive conduct. ‘Do good to others, even if they are not doing good to you.’ (al-Tabarani)

The Qur’an portrays Muslims as individuals who “repel evil with good.” (28:54)

Similarly, the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, advised a Muslim to “do good to those who harm you” (al-Tirmidhi). The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, was the true embodiment of the finest moral character. Addressing the Prophet, the Qur’an declares: “Surely you have a sublime character.” (68:4)

So great an importance has been attached in Islam to moral character that it has been set up as a criterion by which to judge all other Islamic virtues. If one is good in relation to other human beings, that will serve as evidence that one also is good in relation to God.

The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, puts it thus: “One who is not grateful to man cannot be grateful to God either.” (Al-Bayhaqi)

Social Relations

a. Individual Responsibility
To preserve society from instability and keep it in a perpetually reformed state, Islam has given a basic commandment, which has been mentioned at many places in the Qur’an. One such Qur’anic verse runs: “(Believers are those) who enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil.” (9:112). The same point has also been repeatedly made in a number of traditions such as the following: “A believer ought to open the gate of good and close the door of evil.” (Musnad Ahmad)

This commandment has been misrepresented by certain self-styled advocates of Islamic revolution as being political in nature. But this is not so. It is entirely non-political. It only indicates that every member of society should have a strong sense of his responsibility towards society. No one should remain indifferent on seeing the perpetration of evil or injustice. He should feel the pain of others in his own heart. He should rise in support of the rights of the oppressed. When one sees someone engaged in the calumny and slander of others, he should attempt to stop him from doing so. He should make the iniquity known to other people, so that the culprit may be compelled by means of public pressure to desist from indulging in such evil acts.

Every member of society should consider the upholding of virtue to be an essential duty. The greatest concern of every individual should be to see that goodness flourishes in society and that evils are uprooted from it. Before any evil takes roots, it should be nipped in the bud. This task of enjoining good and forbidding evil has to be performed with the utmost gentleness and well wishing rather than with harshness and violence. That is why this social responsibility has been linked with acts of worship in Islam. For instance, with reference to prayer, the Qur’an says: “Surely, prayer keeps (one) away from indecency and evil.” (29:45)

b. Family Life
A sane society, from the Islamic point of view, is but an extension of a sane family. Even human society at large is nothing other than a single family gradually extended throughout history. That is why Islam has greatly emphasized the significance of family life being disciplined and well organised so that it may play its part in maintaining social stability.

A family begins when a male and a female decide as members of society to live together under one roof. However, Islam does not allow such a relation between a man and a woman, unless it is based on a legitimate marital contract which is basically meant to be a guarantee of a life-long partnership of rights and duties, and not merely a temporary entertainment. Hence, there is no room in Islam for what is known, as pre-marital or extra-marital affairs between the two sexes. And this is one of the reasons that we do not find in Islamic society, broken homes, illegitimate children, neglected or abandoned parents, etc.—phenomena that are prevalent in secular societies.

Through the institution of marriage Islam aims at building a society free from anarchy, instability, indecency, violence and crime, especially in relation to youngsters. Marriage, when conducted and maintained on the lines laid down in the Qur’an and Sunnah, provides an organised unit in the form of a ‘home.’ In that way, the succeeding generations are brought up and nurtured physically, morally and mentally in a healthy atmosphere and under the supervision of loving and concerned parents. This training at home helps the children enter society equipped with a deep sense of responsibility, respect for human values and other qualities, such as sincerity, which are essential for the better construction and development of any social system. A society composed of such homes or training units, will never suffer from the chaos and destructive instabilities from which modern societies are suffering nowadays.

Guidelines for a healthy, happy and meaningful marital life, along with the rights and duties of parents and other members of the family, occupy a considerable space in both the Qur’an and Hadith. A few references in this regard are given below:

1. “Men should approach women with the sincere intention of entering into wedlock with them, not committing fornication.” (4:24)

2. “And your Lord had commanded you to serve none but Him, and to show goodness to your parents. If either or both of them reach old age with you, show them no sign of impatience and do not rebuke them, but speak to them a generous word. Treat them gently and with compassion, and say: “O my Lord! Have mercy on them as they brought me up when I was little.’” (17:23-24)

3. “No parents have ever given to their children any gift better than a good moral education.” (Al-Adab al-Mufrad)

4. “My Lord has enjoined me to do nine things,” the Prophet once said, and one of them, he stressed was “keeping on good terms even with those relatives who cut off ties of kinship.” (al-Hakim)

C. Legitimate Livelihood
So many social evils can be directly attributed to either some members of society having an insufficient means of livelihood or others having an excess of wealth. Islam urges that one earns one’s livelihood by all possible but lawful means, so that one’s essential needs are properly met on the one hand, and one does not remain dependent on others, on the other. According to the Qur’an and Hadith, the greed for more and more, niggardliness, holding money back to centralize it in one or a few hands, are the main roots of all criminal and destructive tendencies in human society. That is why virtues such as contentment, moderation, simplicity, altruism, spending on charity and sharing one’s happiness with others are so highly and repeatedly recommended in Islam.

Conversely, vices like extravagance, selfishness, monopolistic practices, exploitation, usury and all unfair means of money-making are strongly condemned and prohibited. How to deal with the problems of earning a livelihood in accordance with the Islamic way of life? The answer to this question may be summed up in the following points:

(a) Avoidance of transgression: God Almighty has declared in the Qur’an: “Eat of the good things we have given for your sustenance, and do not transgress with respect to them.” (20:81)

(b) Self-reliance: One should try one’s utmost to earn one’s daily bread by one’s own efforts, without being dependent on anybody else. The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, is reported to have said repeatedly: “The best food one has ever had is that which one has earned with one’s own hands.” (Abu Dawud)

(c) Avoidance of niggardliness and spending in charity: When one is fortunate enough to earn even more than it takes to meet one’s own needs, one should not try to be parsimonious with one’s earnings. Instead, one should rather extend a supporting hand to less fortunate or even destitute members of society. Otherwise, one’s wealth will become a curse for oneself rather than a blessing. Hence, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, used to say in his regular prayers: “O God, give a good compensation to one who spends in charity and cause destruction to one who holds his wealth back.” (Nasai)

(d) Contentment: To attain inner peace and real happiness, one has to remain content with what one has been able to earn independently and lawfully. The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, says in this respect: “Indeed, he has attained eternal success and prosperity who accepted Islam, and God has filled his heart with contentment towards whatever he was given.” He also said: “A little that suffices is much better than a surfeit that causes disturbance.” (Al-Bayhaqi)

(e) Simplicity: Last, but not least, an important Islamic principle concerning one’s livelihood is simplicity. The Prophet’s own life style was a unique example of simplicity. In one of his sayings he has even considered it one of the signs of true faith (Ibn Majah). In another hadith, he warns his companions: “Stay away from the luxurious life. For the servants of God do not indulge in luxury.” (Musnad Ahmad)

10. ISLAM AS IT IS
Islam is a religion of peace in the fullest sense of the word. The Qur’an calls its way ‘the paths of peace’ (5:16). It describes reconciliation as the best policy (4:128), and states that God abhors any disturbance of the peace (2:205).

The root word of Islam is ‘silm’, which means peace. So the spirit of Islam is the spirit of peace. The first verse of the Qur’an breathes the spirit of peace. It reads:

“In the name of God, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate”.

This verse is repeated in the Qur’an no less than 114 times. It shows the great importance Islam attaches to such values as Mercy and Compassion. One of God’s names, according to the Qur’an, is As-Salam, which means Peace. Moreover the Qur’an states that the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, was sent to the world as a mercy to mankind. (21:107)

A perusal of the Qur’an shows that most verses of the Qur’an (and also the Hadith) are based on peace and kindness, either directly or indirectly. The ideal society, according to the Qur’an is “Dar as-Salam”, that is, the house of peace (10:25).

The Qur’an presents the universe as a model which is characterised by harmony and peace (36:40). When God created heaven and earth, He so ordered things that each part might perform its function peacefully without clashing with any other part. The Qur’an tells us that “the sun is not allowed to overtake the moon, nor does the night outpace the day. Each in its own orbit runs.” (36:40)

For billions of years, therefore, the entire universe has been fulfilling its function in total harmony with His divine plan.

These are only but a few references to show what great importance Islam attaches to peace. In fact, Islam cannot afford not to be in a state of peace because all that Islam aims at—spiritual progress, intellectual development, character building, social reform, educational activities, and above all Da’wah — can be achieved only in an atmosphere of peace and harmony.

According to Islam, peace is not simply an absence of war. Peace opens doors to all kinds of opportunities which are present in any given situation. It is only in a peaceful situation that planned activities are possible. It is for this reason that the Qur’an says ‘reconciliation is the best’ (4:128). Similarly the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, has observed: “God grants to gentleness (rifq) what he does not grant to violence (unf). (Sunan Abu Dawud 4/255)

Some people bracket justice with peace, but Islam does not subscribe to this notion. Islam believes in peace for the sake of peace. According to Islam, justice is not the direct result of peace. Peace only provides a framework within which we may work towards justice. There are so many examples in the life of the Prophet which prove that, Prophet never bracketed justice with peace. He always took peaceful circumstances as an opportunity to work for justice and did not attempt to derive justice directly from peace. One such clear example is provided by the treaty of Hudaybiyya, between the Prophet and his opponents. From the details of the peace treaty it is clear that no clause regarding justice was included. Obviously the conditions of this treaty was quite against justice. But the Prophet accepted this treaty, not because it was giving them justice, but because it was paving the way to work for justice.

Because of the importance of peace, the Qur’an has clearly declared that no aggressive war is permitted in Islam. Muslims can engage themselves only in a defensive, not in an offensive war, irrespective of the circumstances (2:190).

According to Islam, peace is the rule and war is only an exception. Even in defensive war we have to see the result. If the result is doubtful, Muslims should avoid war, even in a defensive situation. Stray acts of aggression are not enough for Muslims to rush into war. They have to assess the whole situation and adopt a policy of avoidance when war is not certain to achieve a positive result. There are several examples of this kind in the early period of Islam. In Islamic history, one such example is that of the battle of the trench. In this event there was clear-cut aggression on the part of the antagonists, who travelled as far as 300 miles from Makkah to Madinah only to attack the Muslims. But the Prophet dug a trench in order to prevent an armed confrontation and thus avoided engaging in a defensive war.

It is true that jihad is one of the most important teachings of Islam. But jihad is not synonymous with war. In Islam another word is used for war and fighting. This word is ‘qital.’ When the Qur’an refers to war or fighting, it uses the word qital and not jihad.

Jihad literally means to strive or to struggle. So jihad actually means peaceful struggle, especially for Da’wah work. The Qur’an says: Do great jihad with the help of the Qur’an. (25:52)

The Qur’an is simply a book, and not a sword, “so do great jihad with the Qur’an” means ‘do great jihad with the ideological power of the Qur’an. In fact, jihad is only another name for peaceful activism. And peaceful activism is the only weapon by which Islam wants to achieve all its aims and objectives. The Qur’an has this to say of the mission of the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him: We have not sent you forth but as a mercy to mankind. (21:107)

In the Qur’an and the Hadith, there are many such references which go to prove that Islam is a religion of peace, love and human brotherhood. However, it is also a fact that in later times the image of Islam has altered drastically. Now Islam has come to be regarded as a religion of violence rather than as a religion of peace. This transformation in the image of Islam has not simply been produced by the media. The responsibility for this falls on latter-day Muslims, who have failed to maintain the original image of Islam.

In actual fact, the mission of all the prophets right from Adam to Christ was one and the same—of establishing the ideology of monotheism in the world, so that man might worship one God alone. As we know, there came a large number of prophets in ancient times, but the message of monotheism remained at the initial stage; it could not culminate in revolution. This state continued up till the time of Christ, the last but one Prophet. The reason being that in ancient times, the system of monarchy was entrenched throughout the world. The kings, in order to secure their political interests, adopted the course of religious persecution. These kings suppressed all religious movements, which were different from the state religion. They would nip all apostasy in the bud, since they saw religion as a matter of affirming one’s loyalty to the state. If a person adhered to a religion other than the state religion, he was regarded as a rebel.

That is why in ancient times prophetic movements could go no further ahead than the stage of Da’wah. No sooner would a movement based on monotheism arise than the coercive political system would be activated to pull it out by its roots. The reason for the absence of any historical record of prophets (besides the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him) in antiquity is traceable to the intense opposition of these coercive political systems. All the Prophets of ancient times, historically speaking, were like mythical beings, rather than real human beings accepted as historical figures. The Prophet Jesus was the last link in the chain of these persecutions faced by the preachers of monotheism. Then God decreed the abolition of this coercive political system, even if it entailed the use of force in order that the age of religious persecution might be brought to an end forever, and replaced by the age of religious freedom. This divine plan was brought to completion through the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, and his companions. This is the command given in the Qur’an:

“Fight them until there be no persecution and religion be wholly God’s” (8:39).

Therefore the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, received special divine succour in the form of a powerful team consisting of one hundred thousand individuals. Equipped with this team the Prophet waged war to end this coercive system of religious persecution, and it was in Arabia that it was first of all overthrown. Then within a very short span of time, they advanced to abolish the coercive system established by the Sassanid and Byzantine empires. In the wake of this Islamic action, the coercive system was abolished forever in the major part of the inhabited world of the time. This war waged by the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, and his companions was not a war as is commonly understood, but rather a divine operation, which was carried out by a people who possessed a high standard of moral character.

However, this operation was certainly only temporary in nature. Its goal was to put an end to the age of religious persecution and usher in the age of religious freedom. This end was fully achieved during the early period of Islam, the age of the pious Caliphs. Afterwards the time came to keep the sword in its sheath and engage in Da’wah work, that is, the call to God, which was the real and permanent goal of Islam. According to the explicit command of the Qur’an, the call to God is the true and eternal mission of Islam, whereas war is only temporary and allowed only in exceptional cases.

Here it would be pertinent to refer to a great companion of the Prophet. After the period of the pious Caliphate, a group of Muslims once again engaged in war. At that time some senior Companions were present in Makkah and Madinah. But they did not join these wars, one prominent name being that of Abdullah ibn Umar ibn Khattab. He did not approve of these wars, therefore he remained away from them. Some of those involved in these wars came to him and said: God has commanded us in the Qur’an to fight against Fitna (persecution). Then why do you not join with us in these wars? Abdullah ibn Umar replied that “the command of the Qur’an to fight against Fitna is not what you hold to be Fitna. Fitna meant religious persecution and we have already fought and put an end to this Fitna (qad fa‘alna). Therefore now after the removal of this obstacle, we have to engage ourselves in peaceful Da’wah work, rather than initiating hostilities and creating new Fitna once again, which is akin to creating new obstacles for peaceful Islamic Da’wah (al-Bukhari, Sahih, Kitab at-Tafsir, under al-Baqarah and al-Anfal).

Abdullah ibn Umar had made an extremely pertinent point at the most appropriate time, but this point of view was not forcefully taken up by others. Afterwards when the Islamic sciences were developed, this important point made by Abdullah ibn Umar could not be highlighted, with the result that history took the course of wars and conquests, while in terms of the real teachings of Islam, history should have taken the course of Da’wah and the propagation of Islam.

It is no exaggeration to say that Islam and violence are contradictory to each other. The concept of Islamic violence is so obviously unfounded that, prima facie it stands rejected. The fact that violence is not sustainable in the present world is enough to convince one that violence as a principle is quite alien to the scheme of things in Islam. Islam claims to be an eternal religion and such a religion cannot afford a principle in its scheme which will not be sustainable in later periods of human history. An attempt to bracket violence with Islam amounts to casting doubts upon the very eternity of the Islamic religion.

No wonder, then, that the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, so earnestly used to entreat his Lord in his daily prayer: “O God, you are the original source of Peace; from You is all Peace, and to You returns all Peace. So, make us live with Peace; and let us enter paradise: the House of Peace. Blessed be You, our Lord, to whom belongs all Majesty and Honour!”

11. Non-Violence and Islam
Non-violence should never be confused with inaction or passivity. Non-violence is action in the full sense of the word. Rather it is more forceful an action than that of violence. It is a fact that non-violent activism is more powerful and effective than violent activism. Non-violent activism is not limited in its sphere. It is a course of action which may be followed in all matters. Whenever individuals, groups or communities are faced with a problem, one way to solve it is by resorting to violence. The better way is to attempt to solve the problem by peaceful means, avoiding violence and confrontation. Peaceful means may take various forms. In fact, it is the nature of the problem which will determine which of these peaceful methods is applicable to the given situation.

Islam is a religion which teaches non-violence. According to the Qur’an, God does not love Fasad, violence. What is meant here by Fasad is clearly expressed in verse 205 of the second chapter. Basically, Fasad is that action which results in disruption of the social system, causing huge losses in terms of lives and property. Conversely, we can say with certainty that God loves non-violence. He abhors violent activity being indulged in human society, as a result of which people have to pay the price with their possessions and lives. This is supported by other statements in the Qur’an. For instance, we are told in the Qur’an that ‘Peace’ is one of God’s names (59:23). Those who seek to please God are assured by verse 5 of the sixteenth Surah (Chapter) that they will be guided by Him to “the paths of peace.” Paradise, which is the final destination of the society of God’s choice, is referred to in the Qur’an as “the home of peace” (89:30), etc.

The entire spirit of the Qur’an is in consonance with this concept. For instance, the Qur’an attaches great importance to patience. In fact, patience is set above all other Islamic virtues with the exceptional promise of reward beyond measure. (39:10). Patience implies a peaceful response or reaction, whereas impatience implies a violent response. The word Sabr exactly expresses the notion of non-violence, as it is understood in modern times. That patient action is non-violent action and has been clearly expressed in the Qur’an. According to one tradition, the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, observed: God grants to rifq (gentleness) what he does not grant to unf (violence). (Abu Dawud, Sunan, 4/255)

The word rifq has been used in this Hadith as an antithesis to unf. These terms convey exactly what is meant by violence and nonviolence in present times. This Hadith clearly indicates the superiority of the non-violent method.

God grants to non-violence what He does not grant to violence is no simple matter. It has very wide and deep implications. It embodies an eternal law of nature. By the very law of nature all bad things are associated with violence, while all good things are associated with non-violence. Violent activities breed hatred in society, while non-violent activities elicit love. Violence is the way of destruction while non-violence is the way of construction. In an atmosphere of violence, it is enmity which flourishes, while in an atmosphere of non-violence, it is friendship which flourishes. The method of violence gives way to negative values while the method of nonviolence is marked by positive values. The method of violence embroils people in problems, while the method of non-violence leads people to the exploiting of opportunities. In short, violence is death, non-violence is life.

Both the Qur’an and the Hadith have attached great importance to jihad. What is jihad? Jihad means struggle, to struggle one’s utmost. It must be appreciated at the outset that this word is used for non-violent struggle as opposed to violent struggle. One clear proof of this is the verse of the Qur’an (25:52) which says: Perform jihad with this (i.e. the words of the Qur’an) most strenuously. The Qur’an is not a sword or a gun. It is a book of ideology. In such a case performing jihad with the Qur’an would mean an ideological struggle to conquer peoples’ hearts and minds through Islam’s superior philosophy. In the light of this verse of the Qur’an, jihad in actual fact is another name for peaceful activism or non-violent activism. Where qital is violent activism, jihad is non-violent activism.

Peaceful Beginning
When the Qur’an began to be revealed, the first verse of the revelation conveyed the injunction: ‘Read!’ (Iqra) (96:1). By perusing this verse we learn about the initiation of Islamic action. It begins from the point where there is hope of continuing the movement along peaceful lines, and not from that point where there are chances of its being marred by violence. When the command of ‘iqra’ was revealed, there were many options available in Makkah as starting points for a movement. For instance, one possible starting point was to launch a movement to purify the Kabah of the 360 idols installed in it. But, by pursuing such a course, the Islamic movement at that juncture would certainly have had to face a violent reaction from the Quraysh. An alternative starting point could have been an attempt to secure a seat in the Dar-al-Nadwa (Makkah’s parliament). At that time almost the whole of Arabia was under the direct or indirect influence of the Roman and Sasanid empires. If the freeing of Arabia from this influence had been made the starting point, this would also have been met with an immediate violent reaction on the part of the Quraysh.

Leaving aside these options, the path followed was that of reading the Qur’an, an activity that could be, with certainty, continued along peaceful lines: no violent reaction would ensue from engaging in such an activity.

The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, followed this principle throughout his life. His policy was that of adopting non-violent methods in preference to violent methods. It is this policy which was referred to by Aishah, the Prophet’s wife, in these words: Whenever the Prophet had to opt for one of two ways, he almost always opted for the easier one. (Fath al-Bari, 6/654)

What are the advantages of non-violent activism over violent activism? They are briefly stated as under:

1. According to the Qur’an there are two faculties in every human being which are mutually antipathetic. One is the ego, and the other is the conscience called respectively nafs ammara and nafs lawwama (The Qur’an, 12:53; 75:26). What the violent method invariably does is to awaken the ego which necessarily results in a breakdown of social equilibrium. On the other hand, non-violent activism awakens the conscience. From this results an awakening in people of introspection and self-appraisal. And according to the Qur’an, the miraculous outcome of this is that “he who is your enemy will become your dearest friend.” (41:34)

2. A great advantage of the non-violent method is that, by following it, no part of one’s time is wasted. The opportunities available in any given situation may then be exploited to the fullest extent—as happened after the no-war pact of Hudaibia. This peace treaty enabled the energies of the believers to be utilised in peaceful constructive activities instead of being dissipated in a futile armed encounter. One great harm done by violent activism is the breaking of social traditions in the launching of militant movements. Conversely, the great benefit that accrues from non-violent activism is that it can be initiated and prolonged with no damage to tradition.

Generally speaking, attempts to improve or replace existing systems by violent activism are counter-productive. One coup d’état is often the signal for a series of coups and counter-coups. The truly desirable revolution is that which permits gradual and beneficial changes. And this can be achieved only on the basis of non-violence.

Success through The Non-Violent Method
All the great successes of the first phase of Islam as well as the succeeding periods were achieved by non-violent methods. Listed below are some examples of these successes.

1. Of the 23-year period of prophethood, the initial 13 years were spent by the Prophet (pbuh) in Makkah. The Prophet fully adopted the way of pacifism or non-violence during this time. There were many such issues in Makkah at that time which could have been the subject of clash and confrontation. But, sedulously avoiding all such issues, the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, strictly limited his sphere to peaceful propagation of the word of God. This resulted in Da’wah work being performed in full force throughout this period. One of the great gains during these 13 years of Da’wah work was the entry into the Islamic fold of men of the highest moral calibre, who were responsible for forming the history of Islam, for instance, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali, etc.

2. In Makkah when the Quraysh leaders were set to wage war against the Prophet, even then, instead of opting for the way of reaction and retaliation, what the Prophet did was to secretly migrate to Madinah. Migration, by its very nature, was a clear example of non-violent activism. This peaceful strategy enabled the Prophet and his followers, about two hundred in number, to form a powerful centre of Islam in Medina. Had they adopted the path of confrontation instead of peaceful migration, the history of Islam might have been buried right there in Makkah shortly after its inception.

3. After the emigration, his antagonists took the unilateral decision to wage war against him. Consequently such bloody encounters as those of Badr and Uhud took place. Then the Prophet made a 10-year peace treaty known in history as Sulh al-Hudaybiyya, by accepting all the conditions of his opponents. This has been called a ‘clear victory’ in the Qur’an. It is this peace treaty, paving the way for peaceful constructive activities which ultimately made possible the conquest of Makkah and the whole of Arabia.

4. By the end of the pious caliphate, a bloody encounter took place between the Banu Hashim and the Banu Umayyah. This stopped the advance of Islam for a period of ten years. What set this process in motion once again was the voluntary withdrawal of Hasan ibn Ali (R.A, d. 50 A.H.) from the battlefield. This was undeniably a practical form of non-violent activism. This peaceful move on the part of Hasan ibn Ali (R.A) reopened to Islam the locked doors of progress.

5. During the last days of the Abbasid caliphate Mongol tribes attacked the Muslim world and right from Samarkand to Aleppo destroyed the entire Muslim world. The history of Islam had apparently come to a standstill. At that moment the spirit of Da’wah work was born within the Muslims. As a result, the majority of the Mongols converted to Islam. And that miracle took place which has been described by an Orientalist in these words: “The religion of Muslims has conquered where their arms had failed.”

6. Islamic history took a crucial turn when, in the years succeeding the pious caliphate, rot had set in the system of the government, and the caliphate had turned into monarchy. At that juncture, many factors emerged which would have resulted in clash and confrontation between the ruler and the ruled. But, following the guidance of the Prophet (Pbuh), the Muslims totally avoided political confrontation. This history beginning with the Umayyad caliphate, continued for several centuries. This was possible because the tabi‘un (companions of the Prophet’s companions) and their succeeding generations, consisting of traditionists, jurists, ‘ulema, Sufis and other great religious scholars, all scrupulously avoided any clash or confrontation with the rulers.

It was during this period that on the one hand peaceful Da’wah work was started in various countries while on the other, disciplines of Hadith, Fiqh and other Islamic sciences came into existence on a large scale after a long period of great struggle. All the precious books which adorn our libraries, all the classical literature of Islam are the result of these peaceful activities.

For instance, the Hadith as a source of Shari’ah is second only to the Qur’an in Islam. These traditions now exist in the form of printed books. These books are so precious that, without them, it would not have been possible to develop Islam into a complete system as it exists today. During the Umayyads and Abbasids, when the political system had begun to deteriorate, where were these tens of thousands of traditions? All of them existed in the memory of the religious scholars, whose names are mentioned in the books as chains in the link of authorities who have handed this legacy down to us. Had they adopted the principle of violent activism and clashed with the ‘oppressive’ rulers, they would all have been slaughtered by them and the entire legacy of traditions, instead of finding a place on the pages of books, would have been buried along with them in the graveyards. It is by the miracle of having adopted non-violence instead of violence that the precious sources of traditions have survived in book form and, till today, adorn our libraries.

Political Revolt Unlawful
Despite the blatant perversion in the Muslim rulers after the pious caliphate, the Muslim ulema did not lead an insurrection against these corrupt individuals. For about a period of one thousand years they remained detached in this matter and continued to engage all their efforts in non-political fields. This was not a matter of accident but in obedience to the express injunctions of the Shari’ah. As we know, in the books of Hadith detailed traditions have been set down in the chapters titled Kitab al-Fitan. The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, observed in plain words that in later times perversions would set in in the rulers, they would become tyrannical and unjust, but that Muslims should not wield their swords against them [unless they display open Kufir, non belief, discontinue, Aqamat as Salah, preyer]. They should rather move to the mountains with their goats and camels. By ‘goats and camels’ are meant the opportunities in non-political fields which exist, even when the political institutions are corrupted. This injunction given by the Prophet meant that the Muslims should avail of such opportunities by avoiding clash and confrontation in the political field. In short, by ignoring the political problem, they should avail of the non-political opportunities. These injunctions of the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, were so clear that the Muslim ulema of later times formed a consensus to make insurrection against the rulers unlawful.

Imam An-Nawawi, commenting upon some traditions as set forth by Sahih Muslim (Kitab al-Imarah) observes: “You should not come into conflict with the rulers in matters of their power. Even if you find them going against express Islamic injunctions, you should attempt to make the truth clear to them solely through words of wisdom and advice. So far as revolt and war against them in order to unseat them is concerned, that is totally unlawful according to the consensus of the ulema, even when the rulers are zalim and fasiq (tyrants and corrupt).” (Sahih Muslim, bi sharh an-Nawawi, 12/229)

This command of the Prophet, as clearly expressed above, was based on extremely important considerations. In actual fact, in the early phase of Islam (as well as in the later phase) Da’wah and reform works had to be performed, without which the history of Islam would not have been complete. If the ulema of the Muslim community had tried to pose a threat to the political institutions, certainly all this constructive work would have been left undone. That is why the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, expressly prohibited any clash with political institutions. This avoidance of strife guaranteed that non-political constructive work would continue to be performed without any break.

In every society there are always two systems side by side, one political and the other non-political. The latter is established through various non-political institutions. According to the scheme of Islam, non-political institutions established at the social level have always to remain stable. In this way there is a continuing endeavour—even when the political institutions have become corrupt, or keep changing—to keep Islam firmly established at the level of the non-political system.

The Command of War in Islam
It is a fact that certain verses in the Qur’an convey the command to do battle (qital) (22:39). What the special circumstances are which justify the issuance of and compliance with this command we learn from our study of the Qur’an.

1. The first point to be noted is that aggression or the launching of an offensive by the believers is not totally forbidden. It is permissible, but with certain provisos. We are clearly commanded in the Qur’an: Fight for the sake of God those that fight against you, but do not be aggressive. (2:190)

2. Only defensive war is permitted in Islam. Such a war is one in which aggression is committed by some other party so that the believers have to fight in self-defence. Initiating hostility is not permitted for Muslims. The Qur’an says: “They were the first to attack you.” (9:13)

Furthermore, even in the case of the offensive being launched by an opposing group, the believers are not supposed to retaliate immediately. Rather in the beginning all efforts are to be made to avert war, and only when avoidance has become impossible, is battle to be resorted to inevitably in defence.

3. According to the Qur’an, there was one form of war which was time-bound strictly in relation to its purpose. This was to put an end to Fitna. ‘Fight against them until Fitna is no more.’ (2:193) In this verse Fitna signifies that coercive system which had reached the extremes of religious persecution. In ancient times this coercive political system prevailed all over the world. This absolutism had closed all the doors of progress, both spiritual and material. At that time God commanded the believers to break this coercive system in order to usher in freedom, so that all doors of spiritual and material progress might be opened to man.

This mission was undertaken and brought to a successful conclusion at the internal level within Arabia during the life of the Prophet. Later, during the pious caliphate, the Sassanid and Byzantine empires were dismantled with special divine succour. Consequently, intellectual oppression at the international level was replaced by intellectual freedom.

In this connection those traditions are worth noting which are enshrined in Sahih al-Bukhari. When, after the fourth Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib, political conflict ensued between Abdullah ibn Zubayr and the Umayyads, Abdullah ibn Umar, one of the senior most companions of the Prophet held himself aloof from the battle. People approached him and, quoting the verse of qital-al-fitna, asked him why he was not joining in the battle. Abdullah ibn Umar replied that ‘fitna’ as mentioned in the Qur’an did not refer to political infighting, but rather to the religious coercive system, that had already been put to an end by them. (Fathul Bari, 8/60)

From this we learn that the war against Fitna was a war of limited duration, temporary in nature, meant to be engaged in only until its specific purpose had been served. Invoking the Qur’anic exhortation to do battle against Fitna in order to validate acts of war which had quite other aims is highly improper. This verse could be cited only if the same state of affairs as existed at the time of its revelation, were to prevail once again.

The biographers of the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, have put the number of Ghazwa (battle) at more than 80. This gives the impression that the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, in his 23-year prophetic career waged about four battles in a year. But this impression is entirely baseless. The truth is that the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, in his entire prophetic life, engaged in war only on three occasions. All the other incidents described as Ghazwat were in actual fact examples of avoidance of war and not instances of involvement in battle.

For instance, in the books of Seerah, the incident of Al-Ahzab is called a Ghazwa (battle), whereas the truth is that on this occasion the armed tribes of Arabia, twelve thousand in number, reached the borders of Medina with all intentions of waging war, but the Prophet and his companions dug a deep trench between them, thus successfully preventing a battle from taking place. The same is the case with all the other incidents called Ghazwa. The opponents of the Prophet repeatedly tried to get him embroiled in war, but on all such occasions, he managed to resort to some such strategy as averted the war, thus defusing the situation.

There were only three instances of Muslims really entering the field of battle; Badr, Uhud and Hunayn. But the events tell us that on all these occasions, war had become inevitable, so that the Prophet was compelled to encounter the aggressors in self-defence. Furthermore, these battles lasted only for half a day, each beginning from noon and ending with the setting of the sun. Thus it would be proper to say that the Prophet in his entire life span had actively engaged in war for a total of a day and a half. That is to say, the Prophet had observed the principle of non-violence throughout his 23-year prophetic career, except for one and a half days.

The Islamic method, being based totally on the principle of non-violence, it is unlawful for believers to initiate hostilities. Except in cases where self-defence has become inevitable, the Qur’an in no circumstance gives permission for violence.

The Modern Age and Non-Violence
The greatest problem facing Islam today is, as I see it, that Muslims have almost totally forgotten the Sunnah (Prophet’s way) of non-violence. In later times when the Ottoman and Mughal empires disintegrated and problems like that of Palestine have had to be confronted by the faithful, Muslims all over the world have fallen a prey to negative reaction on a colossal scale; they have failed to remember that the policy of Islam is not that of violence but of nonviolence. It is the result of this deviation, that despite almost a 100-years of bloody wars, Muslims have achieved no positive gain. Rather whatever they already had has been lost by them.

According to Imam Malik, later generations of this Ummah (Muslim community) will be able to settle matters at issue in the same way that earlier generations had done, i.e. non-violent methods. Similarly, Muslims of modern times must likewise resort only to non-violent methods. Just as no gain could accrue from violent methods earlier, no gain can accrue from violent methods today.

The state of affairs of Muslims in modern times resembles that which prevailed at the time of Hudaybiyya. Today once again—only on a far larger scale—this hamiyat al-jahiliya, prejudices prevailing in pre-Islamic Arabia (48:28) is being displayed by the other party. In the first phase of Islam its solution lay in Muslims sedulously avoiding an equivalent display of prejudice, and in holding firmly kalima at-taqwa (the word of piety) they became entitled to the succour of God and were granted a clear victory (48:26).

At the time of the Hudaybiyya peace treaty, the Quraysh, who had secured the leadership of Arabia, were bent on waging war. The Kabah was in their possession. They had expelled the Prophet and his companions from their home-town. They had taken possession of Muslims’ homes and other properties, and spared no effort in disseminating negative propaganda against Islam.

Given this state of affairs, there were only two options before the believers. One was to attempt to put an end to tyranny and launch an outright war on the other party in the name of securing their rights. The result of such a move would certainly have been further loss in terms of lives and property. The second option was to remain patient in the face of immediate loss, be it political or material, and, in spite of the losses avail of whatever opportunities are already available. The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, and his companions chose this second course. The result was that the entire history of Arabia was revolutionized in just a few years time.

The same state of affairs is widespread in modern times. Although today Muslims have suffered great losses, political and material, at the hands of other nations, however there still exist a great number of opportunities on a far larger scale. If availed of wisely, we can rewrite the history of Islam in magnificent terms.

The Manifestation of Religion
The modern age is regarded by Muslims as being fraught with problems for Islam. But this is quite contrary to the actual situation. The modern age was in fact the age of Islam, just as the period of rainfall is the period of farmers. But Muslims, lacking in understanding and awareness have failed to understand this; hence their failure to convert this potential into reality. What is called izhar ad-din in the Qur’an does not refer to something which is temporary in nature. It, in fact, refers to an eternal ideological ascendancy of Islam. It means that in the world of ideology, such a revolution would be brought about as would establish the ideological supremacy of Islam forever. God has already brought it into existence potentially, the believers have only to tap and convert this potential into reality. The aim of the revolution brought about by the Prophet and his companions in the seventh century is stated to be izhar ad-din in the Qur’an: “‘They desire to extinguish the light of God with their mouths: but God seeks only to perfect His light, however much the infidels may abhor it” (9:32-33).

Izhar in Arabic means dominance/ascendancy/ supremacy. Here izhar ad-din signifies intellectual and ideological dominance, not political dominance. This means that in intellectual and ideological respect, God’s religion assumes ascendancy over all other ideologies and religions for all time. Granting ideological ascendancy to God’s religion was no simple matter. It amounted to the writing of history afresh. For although God’s religion had always been in a superior position ideologically, it had become obscured by false and misguided ideas. The reason being that in ancient times people were heavily under the influence of superstitious thinking. Their arts and learning in general had all become fettered by superstition and idolatry. This had led to a veil being thrown over true religion, which was the only vehicle for God’s truth.

God desired that through the final Prophet an intellectual revolution be brought about which would alter this unfavourable and artificial state of affairs. That human sciences themselves become supporters of the true religion so that according to the established academic standard itself, the religion of monotheism may be made an established religion for the people.

By izhar ad-din in this verse is meant this same divine plan being brought into a revolution by the Prophet and his companions. This revolution set a new process in human history. Its purpose was to unravel all the veils of superstition which clouded human judgement, and to lay bare the scientific proofs hidden in nature, so that the truth of monotheism could be brought to light for all humanity. In modern times this revolution has reached its culmination. There were two main aims of this izhar ad-din. One, that the system of religious persecution be put to an end, so that a propitious atmosphere could be created for the performance of Da’wah of the true religion. In ancient times this task could only be performed in a very adverse atmosphere. The second purpose was to rally all arguments in support of God’s true religion, so that all other religions might be shown to be totally lacking in the sound base of arguments. Both these tasks have been performed on a large scale in present times. A brief mention of these is made here.

In ancient times the monarchical system prevailed all over the world. And individualistic system like monarchy could be established by force alone. That is why a coercive system of governance was established by the monarchs. They inevitably crushed any sign of intellectual or religious freedom found among their subjects. This state of affairs posed a permanent obstacle to the general development of human thought or to the spreading of any religious mission. Ultimately this coercive political system was destroyed by the revolution brought about by the Prophet and his Companions.

This abolition of oppressive systems and the freeing of peoples’ minds from superstition ushered in an era of freedom and democracy. The effect of this revolution in human history set in motion a process. Later on western nations contributed greatly towards this revolution in human thought. Now this process has culminated in the unparalleled scientific achievements of the present day. In consequence, it has become possible for the task of Da’wah of truth to be performed in an atmosphere of freedom, which was earlier seriously hampered by the oppressive atmosphere.

Idolatry is another name for a religion of superstitions. In ancient times this Shirk (idolatry) dominated the minds of the people, having rendered the progress and development of science impossible. The Prophet and his companions made great sacrifices to put an end to this superstitious system. In this way the age of science had its beginnings. The changes wrought by it influenced the course of history over the centuries.

The scientific revolution, which was in actual fact a by-product of the Islamic revolution, gave us modern communications. The advent of this new age made it possible for the first time in human history for the propagation of Islam to be carried out on a universal scale. According to a Hadith a time was to come when God’s words would enter all the homes in the world. (Musnad, Ahmad) This was indirectly, a prediction of the modern age of communications.

One outcome of the modern scientific revolution is that we have at our disposal a number of new arguments in support of Islamic beliefs. Prior to this revolution the Da‘is [evangelist] of Islam could resort only to traditional arguments in support of the truth of Islam. But today it has become possible to measure up Islamic realities by the highest standards of human knowledge and to establish its authenticity by purely logical arguments. In ancient times the study of religion could be done only as something sacred and as a matter of dogma. That is why established and un-established religions had not academically been distinguished from one another. In modern times, owing to the influence of the scientific revolution the study of religions can be done as objectively and as critically as any other matter which comes under scientific scrutiny.

Such critical study has proved, purely academically, that by historical standards, there is only one reliable religion, and that is Islam. All other religions are lacking in this historical credibility. After this intellectual revolution it has become possible to establish the truth of Islam vis-à-vis other religions purely on the basis of human knowledge. That Islam is the only authentic version of divine religion may be fully supported by arguments.

These modern development in our times have taken Islam to the point of unopposed victory. Now the need of the hour is for Muslims to put an end unilaterally to all violent activities against mad’u (invited) nations, so that a normal relationship may be allowed to grow between Da‘i (preacher, inviter to Islam) and mad’u, (invited) only then the message of Islam can be conveyed in a normal situation. Now, in the wake of the scientific revolution it has become possible to begin a serious and beneficial dialogue between Islam and non-Islam, the result of which will necessary be in favour of Islam.

A Great Opportunity

1. Since direct argument cannot be applied to religious beliefs pertaining to the unseen world, these can be supported only by indirect or inferential argument. Educated people had therefore come to believe that religious realities belonged only to the domain of dogma, and that they were not academic or scientific realities. But after the breaking up of the atom the science of logic has undergone a change, and it has been accepted that inferential argument too, in its nature, is as valid and reliable as direct argument. It has subsequently become possible for religious realities to be established on an academic level, i.e. exactly on the same level as material or non-religious theories.

2. In ancient times when man observed the world, it appeared to him that in nature there existed things which were very different from one another. This observation of appearance produced the mentality of idolatry. People began to think that in view of the great diversity of things in existence, their Creator too ought to be more than one. But scientific study has shown that this variety is only that of appearance. Otherwise, all things in nature are different expressions of the same matter. In this way Shirk (idolatry) lost its intellectual base while monotheism gained the solid support of logic.

3. According to a statement of the Qur’an, the signs of God lay hidden in the earth and the heavens. The study of science has made it manifest to all that the universe is a great storehouse of divine arguments. “We will show them Our signs in all the regions of the earth and in their own souls, until they clearly see that this is the Truth.” (41:53)

4. After the new discoveries of science, many such things have come to the knowledge of man as have rendered it possible to prove with new arguments those events which are of important religious significance. For instance, carbon-dating has made it possible to determine the exact age of the mummy of Ramses li, thereby providing scientific proof for the statement of the Qur’an that the body of Pharaoh was saved by God, so that it might become “a sign to all posterity.” (10:92)

Islam in the Present Age
Now the question arises as to whether an Islam which teaches non-violence can be of relevance in the present age, and assume a superior position once again in new situations. The answer is entirely in the positive. The truth is that Islam’s being a peaceful religion shows that it is an eternal religion. Had it been a religion of violence, it would not have been eternal. For, in modern times, the way of violence has been totally rejected by contemporary thinking. Now only that system is worthy of consideration and acceptance the teachings of which are based on peace and non-violence. Modern thinking, for example, has rejected communism. One of the major reasons was that communism had to be sustained by violence. And under no circumstances is violence acceptable to the modern mind. Nazism and Fascism too have been rejected on similar grounds. Modern man, therefore, disapproves of both religious and non-religious extremism, because they lead man ultimately to violence.

But Islam is a religion of nature. It has held violence as inadmissible from the outset. Islam has been an upholder of peace, not violence, from day one. In the past, Islam played a great role in the development of humanity, as a result of which human history entered a new age of progress and development. The time has come today for Islam to play a great constructive role, leading human history once again into a new age of progress.

What is called scientific or technical progress is the result of the discovery of some of the great secrets of nature. But if nature and its mysteries have always existed in our world, why has there been such a long delay in their discovery? Why could not the scientific advancement of the last few hundred years have been made thousands of years ago?

The reason was that in ancient times religion and science (divine knowledge and human knowledge) were linked with one another. Religious persecution had become an insuperable obstacle to the progress of science. Scientific enquiry was anathema to men of religion. What Islam did was separate religion (which had become, in essence, a set of irrational beliefs) from scientific research and investigation. For instance, eclipses of the sun and moon had been linked with human destiny. The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, declared that eclipses had nothing to do with the lot of human beings. These were astronomical events, not events pertaining to the fate of mankind. (Fathul Bari, 2/611)

In this connection, an incident of the pollination of dates is recorded in the books of Hadith. The Prophet of Islam observed that in worldly matters such as these, “you should act according to your experience, as you know these matters better.” (Sahih Muslim bi Sharh An-Nawawi, 15/117).

This meant delinking religion and science from one another. In this way scientific research acquired an atmosphere of freedom for its functioning. For the first time in human history, science (human knowledge) could be developed freely without the intervention of religion. And advancing gradually, it culminated in the attainment of the modern age. But today, man is again facing an even greater problem. That is, despite the extraordinary progress made in the field of science and technology, human beings are confronted with various kinds of problems, without there being any solution in sight. All these problems have resulted from not knowing the limit of freedom.

Modern man aspired to freedom as the highest good, but once having reached this goal, he was unable to set reasonable limits to freedom. In consequence, unrestrained freedom descended into anarchy and lawlessness. This is the actual cause of many of the problems which are emerging in modern times in western society. Now man requires an ideology which delimits his freedom, drawing the line between desirable and undesirable freedom. And it is only Islam which can provide him with such an ideology.

Now is the time for this ideology to be presented to man, who is ready and waiting to accept it. After the fall of communism (1991), the world is faced with an ideological vacuum. This vacuum can be filled by Islam alone. In the present world the developed countries have become economic or military superpowers, but the place is vacant for an ideological superpower, and that, potentially belongs to Islam.

There is only one obstacle in converting a great potential into a reality in favour of Islam. And that is the repeated recourse to violence by Muslim movements in modern times. Such action has presented Islam before the world in the guise of a violent religion. For this reason the man of today shies away from Islam. He fails to study Islam objectively. If this barrier could be removed and Islam once again brought before the world as a non-violent religion, or as a peaceful social system, then once again humanity would accept it, recognising it to be the voice of its own nature.

Modern man is in need of a new religion or a new system, based on peace. It should be free from superstitious beliefs, and should provide the answers to deep psychological questions. Its principles should not clash with scientific realities, and it should be supported by a victorious history.

Today no religion but Islam can lay such positive claims to acceptance, for it is Islam and Islam alone which fulfills all these conditions. Individually, there are many men and women today who, after having studied Islam, have acknowledged these unique qualities in Islam. Some have acknowledged them in theory while others have gone ahead and accepted Islam in practice.

Da’wah Activism
Islamic activism in respect of its method is based on non-violence and in respect of its target is based on Da’wah. Da’wah, in fact, is another name for a peaceful struggle for the propagation of Islam. It would be true to say that Islamic activism in fact is Da’wah activism. The task of Da’wah is no simple one. It enjoys the status of a key factor. If this task is fully performed, all other objectives will be automatically achieved.

Here are certain references from the Qur’an in this connection.

1. Through Da’wah the believers receive God’s protection against the mischief of the opponents. (5:67)

2. Through Da’wah even the direst of enemy turns into a dearest friend. (41:34)

3. Da’wah proves Islam’s ideological superiority. And without doubt nothing is greater than the superiority of ideology. (10:32)

4. Through Da’wah a positive mentality is inculcated within the Ummah. This is called ‘honest counsel’ in the Qur’an. (7:68)

5. The mission of Da’wah is performed by human beings but the conducive conditions for it are provided by God. Just as the farming is to be done by the farmer while the rains come from God. In modern times favourable conditions have been fully provided to man. Now the believers’ duty is to refrain from expending their energies in futile activities. They must exert their entire energy in Da’wah work. All the best results will ensue from this act.

6. The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, along with about two hundred of his companions left Makkah when the Makkan leaders had made it impossible for them to stay there. The Makkans had even decided to kill the Prophet. But the first speech the Prophet made on reaching Madinah had no taste of bitterness, neither did it contain any mention of vengeance on or violence against the Quraysh.

On reaching Madinah, first priority was given to the task of entering into peace treaties with the tribes in and around Madinah, for instance with the Banu Khuza‘a, etc. According to their pact neither would they fight against the Muslims nor would the Muslims fight against them. Most of the tribes in Arabia joined in these truce agreements. But the Quraysh did not desist from aggression, and even engaged in certain military forays against the Muslims. Finally, in the sixth year of Hijrah, the Prophet succeeded in making a peace treaty with the Quraysh as well at a place called Hudaybiya, albeit on acceptance of all the conditions laid down by the Quraysh.

Muslims Displaced
It is an incontrovertible fact that Muslims have not been able to join the mainstream in modern times. At all places and in every department they are leading their lives as if driven into a corner. This is undoubtedly an extremely critical problem, for it has relegated Muslims to second class positions all over the world. The greatest reason for this is the violent attitude of the Muslims. Today’s Muslims are easily provoked and become violent at anything which is against their way of thinking. It is true that not all Muslims become involved in acts of violence. Yet all Muslims would be regarded involved in this matter. This is because that section of Muslims—in fact, the majority—who are not personally involved, neither disown those members of their community who are engaged in violence, nor even condemn them. In such a case, according to the Islamic Shariah itself if the involved Muslims are directly responsible, the uninvolved Muslims are also indirectly responsible.

It is Muslims’ religious and secular leaders who are actually responsible for this violent approach on the part of Muslims today. In modern times when Muslims have had to undergo the experience of defeat, almost all the religious and secular scholars as well as intellectuals followed one single line, that of awakening the spirit of jihad (in the sense of Qital) among Muslims. The entire Muslim world reverberated with such slogans as ‘jihad is our way and Jihad is the only solution to our problems!’

The entire world has witnessed a great number of large and small movements in violent response to the problems faced by Muslims. If you go to Palestine, you will hear the youth singing a song, no doubt taught to them by their elders:

Let’s make war, let’s make war, For war is the way to success.

In modern times, the violent approach of our intellectuals and leaders of movements, is the sole reason for the present violent mentality among Muslims all over the world. It is as a result of this mentality that, if anyone writes a book against Islam, Muslims are prepared to kill the writer. If any procession raises anti-Muslim slogans, Muslims start stoning the procession instead of killing the evil by observing silence, which, as Umar Faruq advocated, would be the best strategy in such a case. If there is any monetary or territorial controversy with any nation, they immediately take up arms against it, rather than adopt a peaceful strategy to solve the problem.

This violent mentality of Muslims is responsible for having alienated them from their neighbours everywhere. Their conduct clearly shows that they no longer cherish the ideal of universal brotherhood. Everywhere they are looked upon with aversion and dread. One can even see notices on walls which say ‘Beware of Muslims’, instead of ‘Beware of dogs.’ And if these words are not inscribed on walls, they are certainly inscribed on the hearts and minds of the people. The resulting dissociation has left Muslims a backward group in modern times. Even in advanced countries like America they remain backward as a community in comparison with other immigrant groups.

The only way to alleviate the tragic plight of Muslims is to bring them back to non-violent Islam, by helping them to understand that their violent version of Islam is not the true one. As soon as Muslims take to the path of non-violent Islam, they will be able to become equal partners with other communities. They will have joined the universal mainstream, and will consequently be able to participate in all activities, in all institutions. People, instead of dreading them, will welcome them in every field. They will become a part of the universal brotherhood. Their issues will be looked upon with justice. Their equal partnership will be certain in all institutions ranging from the social to the educational.

Peaceful interaction will give Muslims the kind of intellectual stimulation and variety of experience which they must have if they are to tread the path of progress. Interaction will also facilitate the task of Da’wah on a large scale. The natural result of this vast interaction of Muslims and non-Muslims will be that everywhere dialogue on Islam will be started, formally as well as informally. In modern times, because of the extremist and violent attitude of Muslims, serious dialogue between Islam and non-Islam has almost come to an end. Now when peaceful interaction between Muslims and non-Muslims takes place in a normal atmosphere, serious dialogue will ensue on its own. The beginning of serious dialogue between Islam and non-Islam is, without doubt, a very great success from the point of view of Da’wah.

The Qur’an describes Sulh al-Hudaybiyya, [Peace Treaty] in the early period of Islam as a ‘clear victory’. It was a ‘clear victory’ in the sense that it established peace between the believers in Tawhid [monotheists] and believers in shirk [polytheists], thus making it possible for a serious dialogue to be held between the two on religious matters.

In modern times if Muslims abandon the path of violence and fully adopt the path of non-violence, this will be for Muslims like reviving the Sunnah of Hudaybiyya. And they will start receiving those great benefits which Islam and Muslims had gained after the event of Hudaybiya in the first phase.

Peace and Justice
One great problem for Muslims is that peace does not necessarily guarantee them justice. This has caused Muslims to become violent and to neglect opportunities for Da’wah. In modern times Muslims want a peace which brings them justice. But according to the law of nature, this kind of peace can never be achieved, that is why Muslims the world over are in a state of physical and mental unrest. Distressed in their minds, they have become violent in their thinking and in their actions.

The truth is that peace does not automatically produce justice. Peace in actual fact simply opens up opportunities for the achievement of justice. At the time of Hudaybiyya the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, had not found justice. He had achieved peace but only by delinking it from justice. The Prophet had made this peace not to extract justice but to receive the opportunities. And great opportunities for Da’wah action did open up with the establishment of peace. The Prophet exploited these opportunities in full measure. Therefore, in just a few years’ time the Prophet not only ensured justice, but set Islam upon a much more solid footing.

The Muslims of the present day have to understand this secret of nature. Only then will it be possible for them first to find peace, then ultimately their desired goal of justice.

Wrapping up
In October 1997, the author met a 36-year old European, Leon Zippo Hayes, who was born in the city of Christchurch in New Zealand. After having studied Islam, he has changed his religion. His Islamic name is Khalilur Rahman. Passing through Muslim countries he is going to perform Hajj by land. During the conversation he said that in modern times Muslims are engaged in bloody war at many places, at some places with others and at other places among themselves. This had led him (like many others) to conclude that perhaps Islam was a religion of violence. Later, he studied the Qur’an with the help of translations, and when he reached this verse in the Qur’an: ‘Whoever killed a human being should be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind (5:32),’ he said that he was so moved that he could not believe that it was there in the Qur’an.

This incident is broadly indicative of the thinking of non-Muslims on Islam. On seeing the actions of Muslims, people today find it hard to believe that Islam may be a religion of peace. But if Muslims stop engaging in violent activities and give people the opportunity to appreciate Islam in its original form, then certainly a great number of people would realise as they never before had that Islam was a peaceful religion and they would rush to it, saying that it was exactly the religion which their souls had been seeking all along.

12. ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM
Islamic fundamentalism is a recent phenomenon. While studying it we must first of all understand that the term ‘Islamic fundamentalism’ has not been derived from the Islamic scriptures, nor does any group of Muslims approve of being given the appellation of ‘Islamic fundamentalists.’ This term is somewhat similar to that of ‘Uncle Sam’ as applied to Americans by non-Americans. Americans do not identify themselves with this term. Though this term was given to Muslims by non-Muslims, the phenomenon for which the term Islamic fundamentalism is used is indeed a reality. There is a considerable number of Muslims in the world of today whose thinking and actions add up to what is meant by the term fundamentalism.

That is why a detailed study of its principles and practices must be made in order to evaluate this way of thinking and the movements spawned by it, which are highly active all over the world under one name or another.

Let us first of all find out what is commonly meant by fundamentalism. It is preferable to call this phenomenon ‘Islamic extremism,’ rather than ‘Islamic fundamentalism,’ although those engaged in extremist activities would, like the fundamentalists, prefer not to be called extremists. However, what is important in this connection is that the phenomenon of Islamic extremism can be explained from a Quranic verse. It says: “Do not transgress the bounds of your religion (4:17).” One modern form of transgression, as forbidden in the Quran, is what is now called Islamic fundamentalism.

There are certain Muslims who say: “Yes, we are fundamentalists. And what is wrong with being fundamentalists?” They take the word “fundamentalist” in its literal sense of laying emphasis on the basic teachings of Islam. Thus, attaching importance to the basic teachings of Islam is to fulfil the very demand of Islam. So why should anyone have any objection on this score? But herein lies a fallacy. That is, if one takes fundamentalism in its literal sense, then it should be the same basic teachings of Islam as are emphasized in the Islamic scriptures themselves. This cannot mean that any individual may declare, through personal interpretation, some self-styled teachings to be the basic teachings or the fundamentals of Islam, and then launch a violent movement aimed at establishing these so-called Islamic fundamentals. Unfortunately this is what these fundamentalists are doing.

Now what are the basic teachings of Islam? The principle concern of Islam is monotheism. According to an Orientalist, “the central focus of Islam is Allah. That is to believe in one God; associating all one’s feelings of love and fear with Him; and worshipping Him alone. Then adhering strictly to justice in one’s dealings with other human beings, returning good for evil, and so on.

In Islam, according to a Hadith, actions are judged by their intentions. That is why Islam lays the greatest of stress on the subjection of human beings to greater and greater degrees of purification. According to a Hadith the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, observed: “Listen, there is a part made of flesh in the human body. If that is purified and therefore in good order, the whole body is in good order. And if rot sets in in this part, the whole body is defiled. Listen, this piece of flesh is the heart.” (Al-Bukhari, Muslim).

Through this symbol of the body, the example of Islamic reform has been expressed. This means that just as through the reform of the heart the human body is reformed, similarly, if a man’s thinking and his intentions are virtuous, in respect of his whole existence, he will acquire that character of virtue which is seen as desirable by Islamic standards.

What is Fundamentalism?
Fundamentalism is the laying of emphasis on strict adherence to the fundamental principles of any set of beliefs. The term was originally applied to a particular group of Christian theologians who gained prominence in the United States in the nineteenth Century. They published a series of booklets between 1909 and 1915 called The Fundamentals: Testimony to the Truth. In these booklets they defined what they believed to be the absolutely fundamental doctrines of Christianity. The core of these doctrines was the literal inerrancy of every word of the Bible. Those who supported these beliefs during the debate of the 1920s came to be called fundamentalists.

The term “fundamentalism” began to be applied to Islamic resurgence by the final quarter of the twentieth century. However this term was not used for Muslims in exactly the same sense as it was applied to Christians. There is also some difference of opinion on this point among scholars. However, without going into the details of this, I would like to say that the term Islamic fundamentalism is applied to two different kinds of movements. One is like that of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwanul Muslimun) which rose to bring about a political revolution. The other is the type which advocates a return to the pristine fundamentals of the faith, for instance, those defined by Ibn Taimiya in the fourteenth century. This latter aim is still the driving force behind the Salafia and Wahabiya movements.

Now the aim of the second form of the Islamic fundamentalism, that of Ibn Taimya is to put an end to additions and innovations (bid‘a) in religious matters and to replace them with the Sunnah, the original form of the Islamic Shari’ah. The aim of the other form of fundamentalism is to put an end to non-Islamic political set up and replace that with an Islamic political set-up. Both the forms of fundamentalism are totally different from one another. The sphere of the struggle against innovation (bid’a) is confined only to matters of belief and worship.

Violence does not, of necessity, accompany movements of this nature. Furthermore, it is aimed at and concerned with the internal reform of Muslims. Thus, in the relevant activities, there is no possibility of coming into conflict with non-Muslims. But so far as fundamentalism of the other kind is concerned, it has been directed from the very outset against political rulers, and whether the inevitable confrontations have been with Muslim or non-Muslim rulers, by its very nature such a movement has demanded the use of violence.

This is where the principle of jihad has been distorted and bent to political ends. It must be stressed that the word “jihad” has nowhere been used in the Quran to mean the waging of war. The Quran is imbued with the spirit of peace and tolerance. Its culture is not that of war but of mercy.

On Islam and Jihad
At the very beginning of the Qur’an, the first invocation reads: “In the name of God, the most Merciful, the most Beneficent.” Throughout the Qur’an, this verse is repeated for no less than 114 times. Even one of God’s names is As-Salam (Peace). Moreover, the Qur’an states that the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, was sent to the world as a mercy to mankind (21:107).

The word ‘jihad’ has nowhere been used in the Qur’an to mean war in the sense of launching an offensive. It is used rather to mean ‘struggle.’ The action most consistently called for in the Qur’an is the exercise of patience. Yet today, the ‘Muslim Mujahidin’ under unfavourable conditions have equated “God is Great” with “War is Great.”

In the light of on-going conflict, we must ask why so great a contradiction has arisen between th principles of Islam and the practices of Muslims. At least one root-cause may be traced to historical exigency.

Since time immemorial, military commanders have been accorded positions of great eminence in the annals of history. It is a universal phenomenon that the hero is idolized even in peace time and becomes a model for the people. It is this placing of heroism in the militaristic context which has been the greatest underlying factor in the undue stress laid on war in the latter phase of Islam’s history. With the automatic accord in Muslim society of a place of honour and importance to the heroes of the battlefield, annalists’ subsequent compilations of Islamic history have tended to read like an uninterrupted series of wars and conquests.

These early chronicles having set the example, subsequent writings on Islamic history have followed the same pattern of emphasis on militarism. The Prophet’s biographies were called ‘maghazi’, that is ‘The Battles Fought by the Prophet,’ yet the Prophet Muhammad in fact did battle only three times in his entire life, and the period of his involvement in these battles did not total more than one and a half days. He fought, let it be said, in self-defence, when hemmed in by aggressors, where he simply had no option. But historians—flying in the face of fact—have converted his whole life into one of confrontation and war.

We must keep it in mind that the Prophet Muhammad was born at a time when an atmosphere of militancy prevailed in the Arab society. But the Prophet always opted for avoidance of conflict. For instance, in the campaign of Ahzab, the Prophet advised his Companions to dig a trench between them and the enemies, thus preventing a head-on clash.

Another well-known instance of the Prophet’s dislike for hostilities is the Hudaibiyyah peace treaty made by accepting, unilaterally, all the conditions of the enemy. In the case of the conquest of Makkah, he avoided a battle altogether by making a rapid entry into the city with ten thousand Muslims—a number large enough to awe his enemies into submission.

In this way, on all occasions, the Prophet endeavoured to achieve his objectives by peaceful rather than by war-like means. It is, therefore, unconscionable that in later biographical writing, all the events of his life have been arranged under the heading of ‘battles’ (ghazawat). How he managed to avert the cataclysms of war has not been dealt with in any of the works which purportedly depict his life.

Ibn Khaldun, the celebrated 14^th century historian, was the first to lay down definite rules for the study and writing of history and sociology. He followed the revolutionary course of attempting to present history as a chronicle of events centring on the common man rather than on kings, their generals and the battles they fought. But since war heroes were already entrenched as the idols of society, the caravan of writers and historians continued to follow the same well-worn path as had been trodden prior to Ibn Khaldun. When people have come to regard war heroes as the greatest of men, it is but natural that it is the events of the battlefield which will be given the greatest prominence in works of history. All other events will either be relegated to the background or omitted altogether.

Ideological Hatred
Hatred is a crime and ideological hatred is the greatest crime. The so-called Islamic fundamentalism, if judged by its result, is the greatest crime of this kind against humanity. Any thing can be eliminated, but what is impossible to eliminate is the hatred produced by a sacred ideology: Hatred generates violence and ideological hatred generates unlimited violence. It can kill all of humanity without suffering any feelings of remorse or repentance. Hence the self-styled Islamic fundamentalism turns into an un-Islamic theory.

One type of movement is that which is based on love. Its aim is to reform human beings. Such a movement awakens in its adherents, feelings of well-wishing towards other human beings. Its exponents strive peacefully to pass on the truth that they have discovered for the benefit of their fellow men. Such a movement, far from causing harm to society, becomes a driving force towards the moral and social uplift of people in all walks of life.

The other type of movement is one which is based on hatred. The adherents of this movement consider those who are not like-minded to be enemies. They have an overriding desire to wipe them off the face of the earth. They hold that these ‘‘enemies’’ are obstacles to their success and that it is therefore necessary to destroy them altogether. Only then can a system of their own choice be set in place. Islamic fundamentalism—so-called— is a movement of this second type. As a result of this negative thinking they divide humanity into two camps, one consisting of their enemies, and the other of their friends. Once having made this division, they allow their aversion for their ‘‘enemies’’ to grow into virulent hatred. If the incentives for the members of the movement based on love are well-wishing and the goodwill of the people, the incentives for the members of the movement based on hatred are ill-will and animosity. Owing to this negative attitude, all the activities of Islamic fundamentalism take a pernicious direction.

To make matters worse, the hatred felt by the Muslim fundamentalists has become inseparable from their ideology. They hate others who think differently from themselves because they hold them to be ideologically in error. Experience shows that of all kinds of hatred, that based on an ideology is the most rabid. Personal hatred, on the other hand, arises from temporary factors, and seldom takes long to dissipate in the ordinary course of events. But there is little chance of ideological hatred abating. And its target is the obliteration of enemies. Not until this end is achieved will it ever die down. This is the reason that ideological hatred takes no time in assuming the shape of violence. When it is found that peaceful means of persuasion are showing no results, arms are then resorted to, so that all enemies may be removed from its path.

Terrorism in the Name of Islam
At the present time, Muslim fundamentalists are responsible for actions resulting from hatred and marked by violence taking place in the name of Islam. A justification of what they are engaged in is presented in the following couplet by the famous poet: “To every vein of falsehood every Muslim is like a surgical knife.” Conversely, however, we find a different picture in the Quran: “When it is said to them: ‘Do not commit evil in the land,’ they reply: ‘We do nothing but good.’ But it is they who are the evil-doers, though they may not perceive it.” (2:11). They hold that the aim of Islam is to establish an ideal society and an ideal state. But since, by their lights, this task cannot be performed without political strength, they feel justified in fighting against those who have captured the seats of power. Violent movements with this aim were launched on a large scale during the second half of the twentieth century. Their targets were either the non-Muslim rulers or the secular Muslim rulers. But despite great losses in terms of life, wealth and resources, these movements failed to produce any positive results. Their having become counter-productive is in itself a proof that their activities were disapproved of by Islam. This is quite expressly stated in the Quran: “God does not love the transgressors” (2:205).

The fact is that the terms ‘ideal state’ and ‘ideal society’ have a wonderful resonance, but their use in the name of Islam is sheer exploitation of Islam. Quran says: “God enjoins justice, kindness and charity… and forbids indecency, wickedness and oppression.”(16:99) Even more specifically the Quran says that God loves the charitable (2:195). And indeed idealism and perfection are highly desirable virtues in Islam, but the direct target of Islamic idealism is not society, and not the state, but the individual. The perennial objective of the Islamic movement is to strive to make each single individual an ideal human being. Each individual has to be urged to become an example of the ‘sublime character’ as projected by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and described in the Quran (68:4). So far as the ideal society or the ideal state is concerned, it is in no way a direct goal of Islam. Society and the State are not in themselves independent entities, each being dependent on the mettle of the individuals of which they are constituted. According to a tradition, the Prophet observed: “As you will be, so will be your rulers” (Mishkat al-Masabih, 11/1097).

If the establishment of an ideal State were the actual target of Islam, there should, accordingly, be express injunctions to this effect in the Quran and Hadith. For instance, there should be verses of this type in the Quran: “O Muslims, you are enjoined to establish an ideal State.” But there is no such verse and neither is there a single Hadith which could lead to this conclusion. The references put forward by the upholders of this concept are all inferential in nature, whereas according to Islamic jurisprudence, on the issue of any basic Islamic injunction, inferential argument is in no way valid. Such argument is for peripheral matters and not for basics.

There is another important point in this connection. Those who uphold the establishment of an ideal State to be the goal of Islam ought to learn this lesson from the early period of Islam that this aim was neither achieved in this ideal period nor was it achievable. Those who present the first phase of Islam to be that of an ideal society or an ideal State have fallen prey to a fallacy. They present the example of ideal individuals, equating them with the ideal society or the ideal State. The truth of the matter is that both are totally different from each other.

It is undeniable that in every period of Islamic history, we find large numbers of ideal individuals, and this is true even today. But the ideal State is in no way the goal of Islam and neither has such a State ever existed in the ideal sense of the word. For instance, the first and foremost matter in the setting up of a state is the appointment of the head of a state. But there is no prescribed procedure for such an appointment. The Prophet was succeeded by four rightly guided Caliphs, but every one of them was selected by a different process, for the simple reason that no prescribed method existed at all. This also explains why no tradition could be established for the appointment of the Caliphs.

This does not mean, however, that there is something lacking in Islam, or in Islamic principles. The truth is that this very point serves as a proof of Islam being a divine religion, and not of human invention. Islam, according to its own claim, is a religion created by God, which is completely in consonance with nature. (30:30)

The Quran tells us that one proof of its being a book of God is that there is not the slightest inconsistency in its teachings. (4:82). Another proof of this claim is that the target of the Islamic mission set forth by it is the building of ideal individuals and not ideal state.

In fact, man has been created in this world for the special purpose of being put to the test. According to the Quran, the present world is a trial ground and the Akhirah (the Hereafter) is the place of reward. As a necessary prerequisite, man has been given total freedom of action (33:72). That is to say that he is entirely at liberty either to submit to God or to become a transgressor. (18:29)

According to the creation plan of God, freedom, or free will is every man’s birthright, and even if he misuses this power, it will not be taken away from him. It is not part of God’s plan of creation ever to abrogate this free will. And it must be conceded that it is this freedom which is the ever-recurring stumbling block in the establishment of an ideal society or an ideal State. For even a handful of men, by misusing their freedom, can disturb the whole of society. That is why the target set by Islam is exactly in accordance with nature, that is, the reform of the individual.

If, on the contrary, the Muslims had been given the mission of establishing an ideal society, or an ideal State, that would have been so unnatural as to be quite impossible. Islam has, therefore, given Muslims a target which is practicable and which, in consequence, does not oblige them to come into conflict with nature. The violence which marks the activities of Muslim fundamentalist groups is the result of not keeping in mind this wisdom of Islam. If you aim at the reform purely of the individual, you will not need to resort to violence for the achievement of your goal. For the task of reforming the individual can be carried on, from beginning to end, in an atmosphere of peaceful persuasion. Whereas the struggle to change the system of the State, being a subversive activity, necessarily leads to war and violence.

Well-known examples of peaceful persuasion are the movements launched by the Sufis, the target of which was not the state, but the individual. Their task involved the spiritual reform of people’s hearts and minds, so that they might lead their lives as new, transformed human beings. Thanks to their adherence to this wise policy, the Sufis did not need to resort to violence. Another example in our times is provided by the Tablighi Jamaat, which has been working peaceably on a large scale in the sphere of individual reform.

Since Islamic fundamentalists target the Islamization of the State rather than the reform of individuals, their only plan of action is in the very first instance to launch themselves on a collision course with the rulers who hold sway over the institution of the State. In this way, their movement takes the path of violence from day one. Then all the other evils creep in which are the direct or indirect result of violence, for instance, mutual hatred and disruption of the peace, waste of precious resources, and so on. It would be right and proper to say that Islam is a name for peaceful struggle, while the so-called Islamic fundamentalism is quite the reverse. From the foregoing details it is quite clear that violence, far from arising from the teachings of Islam, is a direct product of Islamic fundamentalism.

Fundamental Principles of Islam
If we are to put ‘fundamentalism’ in the correct perspective, we should be clear about what actually constitutes the fundamental principles of Islam. There is a Hadith which gives us clear guidance on this subject. The Prophet observed that Islam is founded on five pillars: Bearing witness that there is no god but the one God and that Muhammad, may peace be upon him, is God’s Messenger; the regular saying of prayers (salat); alms-giving (zakat); performing a pilgrimage to the Kabah, the House of God in Makkah (hajj); and fasting for the month of Ramadan (sawm).

These then are the fundamental principles, or pillars of Islam. The rest of the teachings fall into the category of detailed explanations of and elaborations upon the five basic principles. Holding any other precept besides these to form part of the basic tenets of Islam is misguided and unacceptable. On further investigation, we find that these five basic teachings have a spirit as well as a form and, what is of real significance is that the true essence of Islam resides not in its outward forms but in its inner spirit. That is why our actions, according to a Hadith, must be judged by their intentions alone. (Sahih al-Bukhari).

Let us take the first of the above principles, which is the article of faith (kalima). The form it takes is the utterance of certain words, expressing one’s faith. But this verbal expression is not in itself sufficient. It is essential that at the same time, the concerned person should be imbued with the actual spirit of the words he utters. As we find in the Qur’an: “The Arabs of the desert say, “We have believed.” Say to them, “You have not believed yet; say rather, “We have submitted,” for faith has not yet entered into your hearts. But if you will obey God and His Messenger, He will not detract anything from your good deeds. God is most forgiving and ever merciful.” The believers are only those who have faith in God and His Messenger and then doubt not, but strive, hard with their wealth and their persons for the cause of God. Such are the truthful ones. (49:14-15).

This shows that to God, the real faith (iman) is that which reaches into the deepest recesses of the heart; which awakens human consciousness in such a way as to bring to the individual the realization of God. That is to say that the concept of form here is relative, while the concept of spirit is what truly matters.

In the case of prayer (salat) too, we know that prayer has a fixed form and is to be observed at stipulated times. But here too it is not the adherence to form in the repetition of prayer, or the postures adopted, but the spirit pervading the performance of these rites which is of overriding importance. That is why the Quran says: “Successful indeed are the believers who are humble in their prayers” (23:3). It is essential, therefore, that the ritual of prayer be imbued with the proper spirit.

The third pillar of Islam, alms-giving (zakat), that is, the payment of a fixed amount from one’s earnings to others who are in greater need, is again apparently an act of pure formality, but according to the Quran, the inner spirit of zakat is fear of God. The Quran describes the believers as “those who dispense their charity with their hearts full of fear….” (23:60)

As we know, the pilgrimage to Makkah (Hajj), the fourth pillar of Islam, is organized along particular lines, according to the rites and rituals of hajj. But believers are made aware at all times that it is not just mere presence in Makkah and the physical accomplishment of the rites which really matter, but the circumspect conduct accompanying each act, the restrained and disciplined behaviour which reveals the earnest intentions of the pilgrim to lead a righteous life then and throughout the rest of the year. Again it is the spirit of the thing which counts.

The fifth pillar of Islam, fasting (sawm) for the whole of the month of Ramadan, is not concerned merely with abstinence from food and drink during each day from sunrise to sunset, but with the devotion and gratitude to God which self-denial teaches (2:183). Thus the essence of fasting is to produce the spirit of piety. In the words of the Hadith, a fast without this spirit is only the experience of hunger and thirst. As such, it is not a true fast in the religious sense of the word (Mishkat al-Masabih).

That these are the five fundamentals of Islam has been made quite clear by the Prophet himself. Furthermore, what is desirable in the observance of all of these five pillars is the internal spirit and not the external form. Now if certain people take it upon themselves to revive these five fundamentals of Islam, their endeavours will be confined to an entirely peaceful sphere of activity. At no stage would they ever reach the point of resorting to violence and aggression. The inner spirit which is meant to pervade all actions stemming from the observance of these principles can only be inculcated by advice, counselling and well-reasoned argument. There is no other viable way of achieving this objective save that of peaceful striving.

Islam and Politics
In making an assessment of Islam in relation to politics, one crucial point must be taken into consideration, which is that, politics is only a relative and not the real part of Islam. This difference between a real and a relative feature is that what is essential is relevant in all circumstances and at all times, whereas the relative is required only in relation to particular sets of circumstances. Wherever such circumstances do not exist, relative features lose their relevance and therefore their desirability. This difference between the real and relative is illustrated by the Quranic injunction to perform the Hajj pilgrimage: “Pilgrimage to the House of God is a duty to God for all who can make the journey” (3:97). The wording of the command to perform Hajj shows that it is not obligatory for all believers in any absolute sense. It is obligatory rather for those who have the means and the resources, and who are in good enough health to reach the place of pilgrimage. Neither does this injunction even imply that those who do not have the means should make superhuman efforts to find the wherewithal for the journey, so that they may perform this ritual worship. This injunction means that those who have the means should perform the pilgrimage and those who have not will not only be exempted, but will not even be held to account for having failed to do so.

The same is true of politics. That is, if a group of Muslims find themselves in a position to establish the political system of Islam by peaceful methods, and without any violence, then the Shari’ah will require them to do exactly that. But for those who do not find themselves in such a position, it is not their bounden duty to establish an Islamic political system, nor are they required to set in motion political initiatives calculated to create opportunities to do so. That is why the Quran at NO point gives the following command: “O Muslims, establish the political system of Islam.” On the contrary, the Quran makes such clear statements about government and politics as prove that they are relative and not the real parts of Islam. For instance, addressing the believers the Quran says: God has promised those of you who believe and do good works that He will make them masters in the land as He had made their ancestors before them, in order to strengthen the faith He chose for them, and to change their state of fear to a sense of security. Let them worship Me and no other gods besides Me. Wicked indeed are those who after this deny Me. (24:55)

From this it is abundantly clear that political power is a gift from God and is far from being a matter of a goal to be attained by human efforts. That is, it is not the Islamic way to launch movements with the aim of achieving political ascendancy. On the contrary, the objective of the Islamic struggle is to inculcate in people the Islamic character and the true spirit of Islam. And then, if, in any given society, a large number of people were to become imbued with this true spirit, a time might come when God in His wisdom saw fit to invest them with political authority.

Similarly, the Quran says for the benefit of the believers: “God is powerful and mighty: He will assuredly help those who, once made masters in the land, will attend to their prayers and pay the alms tax, enjoin justice and forbid evil.” (22:41).

From the following verse also, we learn from God’s injunction to the Prophet that the matter of political power rests entirely in the hands of God: “Say, Lord, Sovereign of all sovereignty, You bestow sovereignty on whom You will, and take it away from whom You please” (3:26). That is why political power cannot be the goal to which believers direct their efforts. The first and foremost duty of the believers is for all of them, as individuals and without exception, to fulfil their personal obligations to the utmost extent. Afterwards, if circumstances are conducive, and they receive political power purely by the grace of God, the responsibility of moral governance will fall upon them, as is mentioned in the above-quoted verse.

It must be conceded that the establishment of an Islamic State is the responsibility not of individuals but of the society to which they belong. In Islam there are certain injunctions of an individual and personal nature, such as ritual fasting, which depend solely upon the will of the individual for their accomplishment. But the establishment of a political system on the basis of Islam depends upon the will of society as a whole. Only if there is a Muslim society possessed of the collective will to accept and institute Islamic government, can a political system based on Islam with all its social caveats, be established.

The Challenge of Fundamentalism
With reference to the Muslims of the present day, the news most highlighted in the media relates to Muslim fundamentalism. Experience has shown that there is nothing more destructive than fanaticism—the driving force of Muslim fundamentalism. However, it is not generally appreciated that Islamic fundamentalism, launched in the name of Islam, has been dealing a death blow to the image of Islam as a religion of peace and mercy. For it is this Muslim fundamentalism which, today, has converted the image of Islam into one tarnished by violence.

Let us place this form of extremism in a historical perspective. At the time of the emergence of modern western civilization, the greater part of the world was politically dominated by Muslims. The Ottoman empire at the western extremity and the Mughal empire on the eastern border had become symbols of glory for the Muslim Ummah. These Muslim empires came into direct conflict with the western empires and, in the long run, the Muslim empires were vanquished. This brought to an end 1000 years of their political supremacy. People in general tend to accept what they see on the surface, so that Muslims all over the world came to hold that, in the break-up of their empires, the upholders of western civilization were the oppressors, while the Muslims were the oppressed. However, in actual fact, the internal degeneration of these Muslim empires had reduced them to the state of wood infested with white ants. It would only have been a matter of time before they collapsed on their own. It was only by a fortuitous concatenation of events that the military might of western civilization was ostensibly the cause of their fall.

Be that as it may, the upshot of this was that the entire Muslim world became averse to western nations. At an earlier period this aversion had already manifested itself towards the British and the French, and then somewhat later towards the U.S.A., for, in actuality, it is the Americans who have been leading the western since the end of the second world war.

Let’s identify and analyse the origin of the present extremist aspect of Islamic fundamentalism, which has made such a rapid descent into violence. The principal reason for it having come into being in this virulent form has its roots in a certain defeatist mentality which has, unfortunately, been developing in the Muslims since the loss of their empires. A defeatist, or a besieged mentality inevitably opts for a negative course of action. The possessors of such a mentality consider themselves as the oppressed, and those whom they see as setting themselves up against them as the oppressors. With this bent of mind, they are willing to engage themselves in any activity whatsoever, no matter how damaging to humanity or contrary to religion it might be.

What made matters worse—as a direct result of this negative psychology—was the emergence of certain Muslim leaders in the first half of the twentieth century, who expounded their own political interpretation of Islam, according to which Islam was a complete system of State and Muslims had been appointed by God to fulfil the mission of establishing this Islamic state throughout the world. Some well-known names associated with this interpretation are the following: Syed Qutub in Egypt, Ayatullah Khomeini in Iran and Syed Abul Ala Maududi in Pakistan.

This political view of Islam, in spite of being a grave misinterpretation, spread rapidly among Muslims. The only reason for this was that Muslims, owing to their defeatist mentality, saw nothing incongruous in its negativity. Given the circumstances of their past history, this political interpretation was in total consonance with their psychological condition. Thus, due to their negative mindset and not due to Islamic reasoning this false interpretation soon gained currency among them, and the activities which were an offshoot from this—paradoxical as this may seem—were backed by funding from America in a bid to stem the rising tide of Communism.

Prior to 1991, when the Soviet Union had assumed the position of a super power, and posed a continuing threat to America, one of the strategies adopted by America was to set off the Muslim fundamentalists against the Communists, because these fundamentalists were persistently writing and speaking against Communism as being the enemy of Islam. America also gave all kinds of help, to the fundamentalists. It provided them with weapons to set themselves up against the Soviet Union and assisted in the dissemination of their literature all over the world. But this enemy-of-my-enemy-is-a-friend formula ultimately proved counter-productive, in that it virtually amounted to replacing one enemy with another. The waging of this proxy war turned out to be only very temporary in its benefits.

Those who at a later stage felt the impact of extremist fundamentalism, took this to be a case of violence against them. So they opted for a policy of gun versus gun. But subsequent events proved this policy to be a total failure, the reason being that the issue was not that of conducting a purely physical struggle, but of exposing and scotching the fallacies of a flawed ideology. You can win a fight with arms, but to defeat an ideology, a counter-ideology is a sine qua non. Without that nothing can be achieved.

There is no doubt about it that Muslim fundamentalism is a threat to peace, for, due to their fanaticism, its proponents do not stop short of resorting to destructive activity, even if it should prove suicidal. Now the task we must undertake is to make use of the media on all fronts in order to make people aware of the fact that this political interpretation of Islam is totally without basis either in the Quran or in the examples set by the Prophet in thought, word and deed. As opposed to this erroneous interpretation, the true values of Islam, based on peace, brotherhood and well-wishing should be presented to the public. If this correct interpretation of Islam could be brought to people’s attention, I should have high hopes that the majority of the people who have been misguided would abandon the path of hatred and violence and come back to Islam—“to the home of peace” to which God calls us in the Quran.

It is true that in these violent activities only a small group is involved. But this small group has the indirect support of the majority, who are no less swayed by the political interpretation of Islam. According to Khalil Gibran, “not a single leaf falls from the tree without the silent consent of the whole tree.” If then the majority were to withdraw its indirect support and condemn Islamic militancy, these fringe groups would lose their moral courage. That would be the first step. Then the time would come when the fundamentalists who are directly involved in violent activities would abandon the path of violence altogether.

[Note: The non traditional, views expressed by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan provide an other angle, food for thought]

[To be Continued…..]

References
http://Aftabkhan-net.blogspot.com