The Mental Slavery of Muslims and Its Causes

Governance, kingship, victory, and domination are of two kinds: the first is mental and moral domination, and the second is political and material. The first kind of domination occurs when a nation makes immense progress in thought, research, invention, and intellectual power, whereupon other nations naturally come to believe in its ideas. Its concepts, religious beliefs, and ideology overwhelm their minds and brains; their mentality is shaped in its mold. Its civilization becomes their own civilization. They accept its knowledge and sciences as their own. They even regard its standards of good and evil, and truth and falsehood, as the standards of good and evil, and truth and falsehood, for themselves. The second kind of domination occurs when a nation becomes exceptionally powerful in material prosperity, causing other nations to become incapable of preserving their political and economic independence in confronting it. In such circumstances, it comes to bear upon the economic and political systems of other nations, wholly or partially.

Slavery, or subjugation, is likewise of two kinds: the first is mental, and the second political. The definitions given above regarding the two classes of domination are precisely the opposites of these two classes of slavery.

In one respect, these two classes of domination are entirely distinct. The spread of mental supremacy somewhere does not necessarily mean that political domination will also be established there. Nor is there any fixed rule that the establishment of political domination will also establish mental supremacy. Yet the law of nature is that when a nation advances in thought, intellectual endeavor, the pursuit of knowledge, and the search for facts, it achieves material progress along with mental development. Conversely, when a nation falls behind in the competition of thought and intellectual research, its material decline begins alongside its mental deterioration. Moreover, since domination and power are the consequences of strength, while subjugation is the consequence of weakness, the more mentally and materially weak and enervated nations advance along the path of their weakness and enervation, the more they become victims of slavery and subjugation; while nations strong in both respects come to dominate their minds, brains, bodies, and very being.

Today Muslims are victims of both kinds of slavery. In some places both forms of slavery are fully present, while elsewhere political slavery may be somewhat less, but mental slavery is all the greater. Unfortunately, no Muslim land today is truly and completely independent, politically and mentally. Even where they enjoy political independence and the right of self-government, they are not at all free from moral and mental slavery. Their educational institutions, offices and courts, markets, meetings and associations, homes, and even their own bodies testify that Western civilization and culture, ways of thinking, and knowledge and sciences exercise complete domination over them. They think with the West’s brain, see with the West’s eyes, and follow the path prescribed by the West. Whether they realize it or not, the idea has taken hold in their minds that whatever the West considers true is true, and whatever it declares false is false. In their view, the standards determined by the West concerning truth, correctness, civilization, morality, courtesy, decency, and so forth are the only infallible standards. They even judge their own religion and faith, ways of thinking and concepts, civilization and decency, character and customs by those standards. Whatever fully passes these standards they consider sound; they become completely reassured about it and take pride in the fact that it has passed Western standards. Whatever does not pass judgment by these standards, they regard as erroneous, consciously or unconsciously. Some openly reject it; some feel inwardly disgusted by it; and some try, by dragging and forcing it in every way, to make it pass Western standards. [The author made this comment forty-one years ago. During this long period, the political slavery of the Muslim world has indeed eased somewhat, but their mental slavery has not diminished in the slightest.—Editor] When this is the condition of our independent nations, what benefit is there in discussing the mental slavery of Muslims subject to Western nations?

The question now is: what is the cause of this slavery? A separate book would be needed to explain it in detail. In brief, it may be stated as follows:

Mental and intellectual supremacy is founded upon thought, research, and the pursuit of knowledge. The nation that leads in this path occupies the seat of leadership and authority in the world; its way of thinking overwhelms the entire world. Conversely, the nation that lags behind in this regard is naturally compelled to remain a follower and imitator of others. Its thought and ideology retain no power capable of dominating people’s minds. The flood of powerful thoughts and convictions from a nation devoted to knowledge and the search for truth sweeps it away. It no longer possesses even the strength to stand its ground. As long as Muslims advanced along the path of seeking truth and pursuing knowledge, all the nations of the world followed and imitated them. Islamic thought had overwhelmed the thought and vision of all humanity. Islam’s standards concerning good and evil, virtue and vice, error and truth, whether consciously or unconsciously, had been recognized throughout the world as the only standards. And the people of the world, willingly or unwillingly, shaped their thoughts and actions according to those standards. But when the emergence of intellectual leaders and researchers among Muslims came to an end, when they abandoned reflection and the search for truth and grew weary in the fields of learning, thought, and research, they seemed to retire from the leadership of the world itself. Meanwhile, the Western nations advanced rapidly in all these fields. They put the power of thought and research to work; devoted themselves to uncovering the mysteries of the universe; and sought the sources of the forces inherent in nature. The inevitable consequence followed. The Western nations seized the seat of leadership and authority in the world. Just as the people of the world had once submitted before Muslim authority, so they now had to accept the authority of the Western nations. For four or five centuries Muslims slept soundly on the bed of ease prepared by their forefathers, while the Western nations were engaged in developing themselves. Then suddenly the Western powers rose, and within only a century they spread across the face of the earth. Opening their eyes from sleep, Muslims saw that Christian Europe was equipped on both fronts, with pen and sword; and with these two powers it was ruling the entire world. A small group tried to defend itself against it, but it possessed neither the power of the pen nor the force of the sword. Consequently, it suffered nothing but defeat. The remaining part of the nation—the majority—adopted the policy that the weak and cowardly have always adopted. The ideas, ideologies, and customs that came from the West, accompanied by the sharpness of the sword, the force of argument, the support of scientific evidence, and dazzling beauty, were granted by comfortable minds and defeated mentalities the status of faith itself. The old religious beliefs, moral values, and social laws that rested merely on conventional foundations floated away like straw before the current of this new and powerful flood. Along this path of unconsciousness, the notion became firmly rooted in people’s minds that whatever comes from the West is true, and is the sole standard of civilization and purity.

Among the other nations that came into conflict with Western civilization, some had no enduring and independent civilization at all. Some did possess an independent civilization, but it was not strong enough to preserve its distinctiveness in confrontation with another civilization. And with the civilization of some others, this newly arrived civilization had no major fundamental difference. Consequently, all these nations were easily colored by Western civilization, and no serious conflict was required. But the case of the Muslims was entirely different from theirs. They possessed a lasting, independent, and complete civilization. Their civilization had its own complete rules, principles, and system, extending over every sphere of life in both thought and action. The principles and foundations of Western civilization are wholly opposed to this civilization. For this reason, conflict and confrontation between these two civilizations have arisen at every step. And as a result of this conflict, destructive repercussions are being created in every sphere of the Muslims’ beliefs and practical lives.

The philosophy and science in whose lap Western civilization was nurtured have, for five or six centuries, advanced only along the path of atheism, irreligion, and materialism. From the very day this civilization was born, its conflict with religion began; indeed, it may be said that the conflict of reason and intellect with religion gave birth to this civilization. Although observing the signs of the universe, uncovering its varied mysteries, investigating its inherent laws and order, reflecting and researching its outward phenomena, and, by combining these, deriving conclusions with the help of inference and evidence are not in themselves contrary to religion, circumstances nevertheless led to intense opposition and conflict with Christian priests as soon as the new scientific movement began in Europe during the Renaissance. This was because the priestly community had established the foundations of its religious beliefs upon ancient Greek philosophy and science. They held the hope that if modern scientific research and intellectual inquiry caused even the slightest crack in this foundation, the entire edifice of religion would be reduced to dust. Driven by this mistaken notion, they opposed the new scientific movement and even employed force to resist it. They established religious courts and, through them, began inflicting harsh, merciless, and terrible punishments on the leaders and standard-bearers of this movement. But this movement was the product of an irresistible mental consciousness; therefore, instead of being weakened by oppression and persecution, it grew stronger.

In the end, the flood of free thought completely destroyed religious authority.

At first, this struggle was confined to the leaders of free thought and the priests. But since the priests were fighting independent thinkers in the name of religion, it very soon became a conflict between Christianity and the advocates of free thought. Thereafter, religion itself—whatever religion it might be—was declared to be the opponent of this movement. Thought according to the scientific method was declared wholly opposed to religious modes of thought. Anyone who thought scientifically about the phenomena of the universe was made obligated to reject religious doctrines and follow his own path. The fundamental basis of the religious view of the universe is that a power higher than this world must be declared the cause of all the signs and phenomena of the natural world. Since this was the doctrine of the enemies of the modern scientific movement, the leaders of this new movement considered it necessary to call every method that sought to uncover the mysteries of the universe without the concept of God or any supernatural being, and every method that viewed natural phenomena through the concept of God’s existence, unscientific. Thus a fierce hatred of God, the soul, spiritualism, and supernaturalism arose among the scientists and philosophers of the modern age. Yet this was not at all the natural consequence of reason and rationalism; rather, it was merely the result of an excess of emotion. They did not hate God because His nonexistence or absence had been established by evidence; rather, they were resentful of Him because He was the Lord (deity) of both them and the enemies of their free thought. In the next five centuries, this irrational emotion remained active at the root of whatever their reason, intellect, thought, and scientific movement accomplished.

When Western philosophy and science took their true course, their aim was directed entirely opposite to belief in God. Nevertheless, because they were surrounded by a religious environment, they initially carried naturalism alongside belief in God. But the farther they advanced along their chosen path, the more naturalism established its supremacy over belief in God. Eventually, even the concept of God’s existence, together with every concept of supernatural things associated with Him, completely disappeared from the philosophers’ and scientists’ minds. They reached such an extreme that, for them, nothing existed except matter and motion. They declared science to be a supporter of naturalism. The entire scientific and philosophical community came to believe in the doctrine that whatever cannot be measured or weighed has no existence.

The history of Western philosophy and science bears witness to this. Descartes (d. 1650), known as the father of Western philosophy, was on the one hand a profound believer in God’s existence, while on the other he acknowledged the soul’s independent existence alongside matter. Yet he also initiated the method of mechanically analyzing the phenomena of the universe. Not only that, the method of thought he introduced later developed into pure materialism. Hobbes (d. 1679) went a step further and openly opposed supernaturalism. He declared the universe and every object in it suitable for mechanical analysis and denied the possibility of any influential spiritual or incorporeal force in this material world; yet at the same time he believed in God’s existence. For, from the standpoint of intellectual reasoning, it was necessary to acknowledge such a causal force. At this time Spinoza (d. 1677), the greatest leader of seventeenth-century rationalism, appeared. He left no distinction between matter, the soul, and God. He fused God and the universe into one indivisible entity and denied God’s supreme power. Their successors, Leibniz (d. 1716) and Locke (d. 1704), believed in God’s existence. Yet both were mentally inclined toward naturalism.

It can thus be seen that in seventeenth-century philosophy, belief in God and naturalism proceeded side by side. Likewise, science had not become completely materialistic even by the seventeenth century. None of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, or the other pioneers of science disbelieved in God’s existence. But in uncovering the mysteries of the universe, they wished to set aside divine doctrine and investigate the forces and laws governing this system. In reality, setting aside divine doctrine was the seed of atheism and naturalism. This seed later grew into the tree of free thought. But the scientists of the seventeenth century had no awareness of this. They could not draw a line of distinction between naturalism and belief in God; rather, they thought that these two doctrines could proceed side by side.

By the eighteenth century, however, it became evident that a method of thought which, while disregarding God’s being, investigated the mysteries of the universe and its laws could not help eventually reaching materialism, irreligion, and physicalism. In this century appeared John Toland, David Hartley, Joseph Priestley, Voltaire, La Mettrie, Holbach, Cabanis, Denis Diderot, Montesquieu, Rousseau, and several other free-thinking philosophers and scientists of the same kind. They either openly denied God’s existence or, even when acknowledging Him, did not accord Him greater importance in rank than a constitutional monarch. In other words, the God they acknowledged set the universe in motion once and then retired from it. He now had no role in directing this system. Philosophers and scientists of this class acknowledged no existence except that of the universe, the material world, and motion. In their view, only those things subject to observation and experience were true. Hume strongly supported this method of thought through his empiricism and skepticism. He even declared experience to be the final standard for the validity of rational propositions. Berkeley, of course, made every effort to check the growing flood of materialism. But in the end he too was unable to stop it. Hegel then attempted to introduce idealism in place of materialism. But no one accepted subtle ideals in confrontation with solid matter. Kant devised a middle course. He said: ‘God’s existence, the immortality of the soul, freedom of the will, and the like are not comprehensible to us; therefore, it is not possible to accept them as knowledge. Yet faith may be placed in them, because our practical faculty of judgment demands that we believe in them.’ This was the final attempt to create a compromise between belief in God and naturalism. But this attempt also ended in failure. For after the errors of reason and thought had declared God’s existence to be a mere figment of imagination, or at most that of a passive and powerless being, to believe in Him, fear Him, and seek His pleasure merely to preserve morality was utterly irrational.

In the nineteenth century, materialism reached the summit of its development. Vogt, Büchner, Moleschott, Comte, and other scientists and philosophers rejected the existence of everything except matter and its properties. Mill introduced empiricism into philosophy and utilitarianism into ethics. Spencer then vigorously propagated philosophical evolutionism, the natural creation of the universe, and the idea of the spontaneous emergence of life. Furthermore, discoveries in biology, physiology, geology, and zoology, the supreme advancement of applied science and invention, and the abundance of material resources deeply rooted in people’s minds the notion that the universe had come into existence by itself; no one had created it; it operated by itself according to a fixed rule; it had no definite director; it passed through the stages of evolution and development on its own; and no supernatural being influenced this automatic machine. Life does not enter lifeless matter at anyone’s command; rather, life emerges as matter continues to evolve along its own course. Evolution, willpower, feeling, consciousness, and intellect are qualitative attributes of this evolved matter. Human beings and animals are all merely machines, operated by natural laws. They perform the kinds of actions corresponding to the way their mechanisms are arranged. They possess no ikhtiyar, or ‘free will.’ Death occurs when their order and regularity are disrupted and their vital force is exhausted. This death is merely another name for natural extinction. In other words, when the machine has been broken, its qualities and characteristics have also disappeared. There is now no possibility whatsoever of its resurrection or return to life.

Darwin’s theory of evolution played the most important role in stabilizing this naturalism and materialism and establishing it as an authoritative and coherent doctrine. His book entitled The Origin of Species was first published in 1589 CE. It was regarded as a book that caused a tremendous stir in the scientific world. The line of reasoning incorporated in this book was, to the scientists of the nineteenth century, the finest method of reasoning. From that line of reasoning, the doctrine received still stronger support: all the activities of the universe can proceed without God’s existence. The phenomena and processes of nature require no cause other than their own laws. The development and evolution of all things, from the lowest stage of life to the highest, are merely the result of the sequential operations of mindless and irrational nature. No wise and discerning being created human beings and other living creatures; rather, the living machine that once moved about as a worm ultimately manifested itself as a human being endowed with will, feeling, and understanding through the struggle for survival, the survival of the fittest, and natural selection.

Western culture and civilization arose from this philosophy. In it there is no place for fear of any wise and powerful God, nor is there any importance attached to prophethood, revelation (wahy), or inspiration (ilham). It leaves no room for the idea of another life after death, accountability for one’s deeds in this life, the question of personal responsibility, or the possibility of any goal or purpose higher than the biological purpose of life. This is a purely materialistic civilization. Its entire structure is free from the concepts of God-consciousness, simplicity, truthfulness, the search for truth, upright character, a sense of responsibility, trustworthiness, good works, modesty, piety, and purity. By contrast, Islamic civilization is founded upon all these concepts. In short, the entire Western ideology is completely opposed to Islamic ideology. Its path is wholly contrary to the path followed by Islam. The things upon which Islam establishes human conduct and civilization are precisely what this civilization seeks to uproot. Conversely, the foundations upon which this civilization wishes to build the edifice of individual character and social order cannot support Islam’s edifice for even a moment. In short, Islam and Western civilization are like two young women heading toward opposite goals. Whoever mounts either one must abandon the other. And whoever mounts both at the same time will be split in two.

Unfortunately, in the very century when this new civilization reached the extreme limit of its materialism, irreligion, and atheism, the entire Muslim world, from Morocco to the Far East, became trapped in the octopus of the Western nations’ political power and governmental supremacy. As a result, the West’s attacks by sword and pen were launched against Muslims simultaneously. For those whose minds and brains had been subjugated and intimidated by the political supremacy of the Western powers, it became difficult to protect themselves from the splendor of Western philosophy, science, and the culture and civilization it had created. The condition was even more precarious for those Muslim lands that had come directly under the rule of a Western empire. To preserve their worldly self-interest, they were compelled to acquire Western knowledge; and since this acquisition of knowledge was not merely the acquisition of knowledge, but rather ‘sitting humbly before Western teachers with a defeated mentality,’ the new generation of Muslims was deeply influenced by Western thought and scientific doctrines. Their outlook and mentality began to be shaped in a Western mold; their hearts and minds submitted to Western civilization. They did not even develop the discernment and inquisitiveness needed to distinguish good from evil and accept pure good! They failed to develop the capacity to think independently and reach decisions with the help of personal judgment and intellect. As a result, we see that the entire foundation of Islamic civilization and culture has now become shaky. The mental framework needed to think according to the Islamic method has itself been disrupted. Indeed, those who think in the Western manner and place their trust in the principles of Western civilization have a mentality of a peculiar nature. Islam’s principles can never fit that mentality. And when the principles do not fit, it is by no means unusual for all kinds of doubts and ever-new misgivings to arise over details and minor matters.

There is no doubt that most Muslims still believe in Islamic civilization and wish to live as Muslims. But under the influence of Western thought and civilization, their minds and brains are gradually turning away from Islam, and this aversion is increasing day by day. Even apart from political supremacy and domination, the influence and prestige of Western knowledge, science, and intellect have enveloped the minds of people throughout the world. As a result, people’s outlook has changed, and it has become difficult for anyone to see from a Muslim perspective and think in the Islamic manner. Therefore, this submissive condition will not end until independent thinkers emerge among Muslims. In reality, a new Islamic renaissance is needed today. The body of knowledge preserved by the early Islamic thinkers and investigators cannot be fruitful today, because the world has advanced a great distance. It is impossible today to push the world backward and make it pass again through the stages it passed through six hundred years ago. Today, whoever can move the world forward will be capable of providing leadership in knowledge and action.

Therefore, if Islam is once again to occupy the seat of leadership of the world, the only way is for thinkers and investigators to arise in Muslim society who, through thought, research and sustained inquiry, will be able to demolish the entire foundation of Western civilization. Following the method of thought and research prescribed by the Qur’an, they will observe the signs of nature, investigate its mysteries, and lay the foundations of a new philosophy on the basis of pure Islamic thought. They will build an edifice of a new natural science upon the outline drawn by the Qur’an. Rejecting Godless doctrines, they will establish the foundations of thought and research upon divine doctrine. Above all, they will construct this edifice of modern thought and research so firmly that it will envelop the entire world, and everywhere, in place of the materialistic civilization of the West, the truth- and justice-based civilization of Islam will shine forth.

What has been discussed above may be presented in summary by means of an analogy as follows: The world is like a railway train. It is driven by the engine of thought, research and investigation. Thinkers and investigators are the drivers of this engine. They drive the train wherever they wish, and it rushes in that direction. Those who are passengers are compelled, willingly or unwillingly, to go in the direction of its movement. If a passenger does not wish to go in that direction, then, while seated in the moving train, he can do nothing but turn his seat this way or that. But merely turning the seat does not change the direction of his movement; to do that, he must seize the engine of the train and turn its movement toward his desired destination. Only in this way can the direction of one’s movement be changed.

At present, those who control this engine are all averse to Allah and profoundly ignorant of Islamic thought. That is why the train, carrying its passengers, is speeding along the path of irreligion and materialism. Consequently, all the passengers are continually moving farther away from Islam’s destination. Therefore, to change the course of this train, efforts to take control of the engine must begin today. Until this is accomplished, the train’s movement cannot be changed in any way; rather, despite all our objections, annoyance and shouting, it will continue along the path indicated by drivers who rebel against Allah. (Tarjuman al-Qur’an, September 1934)

2

The Decline of Islamic Civilization in the Subcontinent

A review of history shows that most countries of the present Muslim world were conquered through the efforts of the mujahidin of the Golden Age. Those who conquered these lands did not leave their homes and stake their lives out of an obsession with territorial expansion or wealth; rather, they did so with the aim of raising Allah’s word high in the world. Instead of being absorbed in worldly pleasure, they were engrossed in the pursuit of happiness in the Hereafter. For this reason, they did not merely make the conquered peoples their subjects and taxpayers; they also arranged to color them with Islam. They incorporated all, or most, of their populations into the Muslim ummah. Moreover, through the pursuit of knowledge and active endeavor, they rooted Islamic thought and civilization so firmly among them that, in later times, those peoples themselves became standard-bearers of Islamic culture and civilization and teachers of Islamic knowledge and science. The remaining countries were conquered long after the Golden Age. By then, Islamic vitality had become dormant, and in the hearts of the conquerors the desire for territorial expansion had become far stronger than sincere jihad in the path of Allah. Nevertheless, the spread and establishment of Islam in those lands was largely successful. Indeed, in those countries Islam attained the status of an unchallenged national civilization and culture.

Unfortunately, the case of the subcontinent is entirely different from the two categories of countries mentioned above. During the Golden Age, only a very small part of this land was conquered. And even in that small part, whatever influence Islamic education and civilization had exerted was obliterated by the flood of so-called ma‘rifat. After that, the actual course of the Muslims’ conquest campaigns began here. But by then the conquerors no longer possessed the characteristics and distinctions of the Muslims of the Golden Age. Instead of devoting their strength to propagating Islam here, they expended all of it on expanding their dominion. They demanded from the people obedience and revenue to themselves instead of obedience to Allah and the Messenger. As an inevitable result, even after ruling the country for several hundred years, most of the inhabitants of the subcontinent remained non-Muslim, and Islamic culture and civilization could not become firmly rooted here. Furthermore, no special arrangement was made for Islamic education and training for those inhabitants who accepted Islam. Consequently, remnants, to varying degrees, of ancient Hindu thought, religious beliefs and customs remained among the new Muslims. Even the ancient Muslims who had come from abroad, through mingling with the inhabitants of this land, began to treat polytheistic politics leniently and to follow numerous ignorant customs.

A review of the history of Muslim India and its present condition makes it clear that even when the political power of the Muslims prevailed fully in this country, the influence of Islam was extremely weak. The environment here was not genuinely Islamic. Admittedly, the religion and civilization of the Hindus were also extremely enervated. Moreover, as the religion and civilization of a defeated and subjugated people, they had become still more feeble. Nevertheless, because they remained unrivaled in the atmosphere of the Muslim rulers’ tolerance and negligence, and because the Muslims did not receive fully Islamic education and training, a large proportion of the Muslims here could not become as mature and complete in their religious faith and culture and civilization as they could have become in a purely Islamic environment.

Finally, in the eighteenth Christian century, even that political power—the greatest support of Islamic civilization in India—slipped from Muslim hands. First, the Muslim empire broke apart and divided into small states. Then, one after another, the flood of the Marathas, Sikhs and English came and wiped out the existence of most of those states. Thereafter, naturally, political power in this country passed into English hands. In a country that Muslims had ruled for several centuries, they were expelled from the whole land and became defeated and subjugated within only a hundred years. And the forces through which Islamic culture and civilization had remained established to some extent in India began slipping from Muslim hands as soon as the English expanded their dominion. They made English, instead of Persian and Arabic, the medium of education. At the same time, they abolished the Islamic legal system, dismantled the Sharia courts, and introduced their own laws in civil and criminal matters. They even restricted the application of Islamic law for Muslims themselves to matters such as marriage and divorce, and this limited authority was entrusted to ordinary civil courts instead of qadis. Since the judges of these courts were generally non-Muslims, the so-called “Muhammadan Law” became increasingly distorted in their hands. Furthermore, from the very beginning, the policy of the English rulers was to eradicate, through financial deprivation and oppression, the sense of pride and dignity that had been cultivated and nourished in the hearts of Muslims for centuries as a ruling nation. Thus, within a single century, they succeeded in making this nation poor, ignorant, mean-spirited, morally corrupt, humiliated and disgraced.

The final blow fell upon this declining nation during the disturbances of 1857. That blow not only brought an end to the Muslims’ political power; it completely shattered their morale. A darkness of despair and inferiority descended upon their hearts. They became so spellbound by the prestige of English governing power that not a trace of national feeling remained among them. Indeed, after reaching the extreme limit of humiliation and disgrace, they were compelled to think that the way to peace and security was obedience to the English; the way to gain honor and dignity was to serve the English; and the way to advancement and progress was to follow and imitate the English—there was no other way. On the other hand, whatever wealth they possessed in knowledge, science, culture and civilization was regarded as the principal cause of their degradation and inferiority.

When the Muslims tried to rise again in the second half of the nineteenth century, they possessed two kinds of weakness. First, in thought and action they had never been mature in Islamic conviction and culture and civilization. Moreover, an un-Islamic environment, together with its ignorant ideas and civilization, surrounded them. Second, servitude, with all its defects, had settled not only upon their bodies but also upon their hearts and souls. Consequently, they were deprived of the forces by which a nation can preserve its culture and civilization.

Amid these two weaknesses, the Muslims opened their eyes and saw that the English rulers had very cleverly closed every door to their economic advancement and had left its key inside English schools and colleges. Now the Muslims had no recourse but to acquire an English education. Thus, under the leadership of Sir Syed Ahmad, a powerful movement arose. Through its influence, awareness of the need for English education awakened among the Muslims throughout the subcontinent. The opposition of the old-fashioned people on this matter proved entirely futile. For those who controlled the nation’s real strength in wealth, honor, status and influence welcomed this new movement and came forward to support it directly. As a result, the Muslims of India advanced rapidly toward English education. The useless and incompetent section of the nation was left to the old religious madrasas, so that it could perform the duties of leading prayers in mosques and teaching in maktabs and madrasas. Meanwhile, the best children of the prosperous and comfortable classes were sent to English schools and colleges, so that the imprint of foreign knowledge, science and arts could be engraved upon their pure minds.

This was the state of affairs in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. At that time, materialism had reached its greatest development in Europe. Earlier, in the eighteenth century, science had completely defeated religion. Under the leadership of modern philosophy and the new science, all the old doctrines of politics, economics, sociology and ethics were rejected and new doctrines established. In short, on the basis of these modern doctrines, a particular kind of culture and civilization arose in Europe. This great revolution did banish religion and the practices prescribed by religion from the practical activities of life, but some influence of religious conviction still remained in the world of thought and imagination. Therefore, a fierce struggle against it now began. Although not a single principle of knowledge and science had produced any evidence—evidence that could truly be called evidence—against the divine doctrine concerning the universe, scientists nevertheless, merely because of emotional impulses and without any proof or argument, continued to resent God and harbor hostility toward divine doctrine. And since they then occupied the seat of leadership in knowledge, science and intellectual life, the disease of aversion to God (Theophobia) spread under their influence like a widespread epidemic. Thus, denying God’s existence, regarding the universe as naturally created and governed according to natural laws, calling devotion to God superstition, describing religion as futile and religiosity as narrowness and blindness, and treating naturalism as synonymous with broad-mindedness and clear vision became fashionable. Even a person with no knowledge whatsoever of philosophy or science, who had made not the slightest effort to research or investigate these complex questions, would proclaim such doctrines merely out of a desire to be regarded in society as an enlightened person. Consequently, in those days, saying or writing anything in support of spiritualism or the supernatural was a crime tantamount to unbelief. Even if a renowned scientist expressed such a view, he would lose all standing among scientists, his entire reputation would be completely dimmed, and he would become unfit for a place in learned society.

In 1859, Darwin’s famous book The Origin of Species was published. This book served to pour oil on the fire of naturalism and atheism. To be sure, the evidence Darwin presented in support of the evolutionism he devised was extremely weak and remained open to proof. In his contrived chain of evolution, not only one stage but many stages before and after every existing stage were missing. Consequently, scientists could not at that time become certain about this theory. Even Huxley, its greatest advocate, could not place his faith in it. Nevertheless, Darwinism was accepted simply because of rebellion against God. Not only that, excessive propaganda was conducted in its favor, and it was used as a colossal weapon against religion. For this theory appeared to prove a major claim among the mistaken notions of scientists—although Darwinism’s own principal claim also remained open to proof—namely, that the entire universe operates according to ordinary natural laws without the assistance of any supernatural power. The religionists vehemently opposed this theory. At a meeting of the British Association, the bishops of Oxford and Gladstone delivered speeches against it with all their strength, but nevertheless they were defeated. Eventually, European religionists were so overcome before scientific atheism that when Darwin died in 1882, the Church of England bestowed upon him its highest honor: he was permitted to be buried in Westminster Abbey. Yet he was the foremost among those who prepared the grave of religion in Europe. He played the leading role in directing thought toward materialism, atheism and irreligion. The mentality he founded gave Bolshevism and fascism the opportunity to develop and grow in Europe.

It was precisely at this time that our young people were sent to English schools and colleges so that they might be favored with an English education and foreign culture. They were already untrained in Islamic education and immature in Islamic culture. On the other hand, they had been defeated before English ruling power and were dazzled by the splendor of foreign civilization. As a result, their mental structure changed as soon as they entered English schools. Their inclination and tendency turned away from religion. For the foremost effect of that atmosphere was that, whenever the name of any European writer or researcher was presented, it was accepted without question, whereas whenever anything was said on behalf of the Qur’an, Hadith or Islamic scholars, proof in its support was demanded. With this changed mentality, they studied Western knowledge and science, most of whose principles and branches were contrary to the principles and branches of Islam.

In Islam, religion means a system governing human life. In contrast, the Western concept of religion is that it is merely a personal belief, with no connection whatsoever to practical life. In Islam, the first principle is faith in Allah, whereas in the West Allah’s existence is not acknowledged at all. The whole culture and civilization of Islam is founded upon convictions concerning revelation and prophethood. In the West, however, there is doubt about the truth of revelation and uncertainty about the validity of prophethood. In Islam, belief in the Hereafter is the foundation of the entire way of life and code of conduct, whereas in the West this very foundation is considered baseless. The acts of worship and religious practices regarded as obligatory in Islam are regarded in the West merely as meaningless customs of the Age of Ignorance. Thus, the entire culture and civilization of Islam is wholly different from that of the West. In law, Islam’s fundamental principle is that Allah is the Lawgiver, the Messenger explains the law, and human beings are merely subject to it. In the West, however, no right of God is recognized in the making of laws. There, the legislature is the lawgiver and the people are the electors of the legislature. In state policy, Islam aims to establish divine rule, whereas the West aims at the national state. Islam’s objective is internationalism, while the West’s destination is nationalism. In economics, Islam emphasizes lawful earning, the payment of zakat and sadaqah, and the avoidance of interest, whereas the entire Western economic system operates on interest and profit. In ethics, Islam aims at success in the Hereafter, while the West aims at worldly welfare.

Similarly, in social matters, Islam’s path differs from that of the West in almost every respect. The differences between these two civilizations regarding veiling and dress, relations between men and women, plural marriage, laws concerning marriage and divorce, birth control, the rights of parents, the rights of husbands and wives, and many other such matters are so numerous and pronounced that it is unnecessary to describe them at length. The reason for these differences is that the fundamental principles of the two civilizations are distinct. When our young people, with their defeated and servile mentality and incomplete Islamic education and training, received Western education in knowledge and science and training under the influence of Western culture, the result was inevitable. They developed no ability to distinguish good from bad. Whatever they learned from the West, they accepted as the standard of truth and soundness. Then, with incomplete and defective knowledge, they began to judge Islam’s principles and laws by that standard; and whenever they saw a difference between the two in any matter, they could never perceive the error of the West. Instead, they considered Islam defective and became ready to revise and alter its principles and laws.

In short, however much modern education may have benefited the Muslims of the subcontinent economically and politically, the tremendous harm it inflicted upon their religion and civilization cannot be compensated for by any benefit. (Tarjuman al-Qur’an, October 1934)

3

The Diseased Nations of the Modern Age

Today everyone—Eastern and Western, Muslim and non-Muslim alike—has become entangled in the same danger. That danger is a civilization and culture nurtured in the lap of sheer materialism, which has come to weigh upon everyone. Thus, the edifice of both the civilization’s method of thought and its mode of action has been built upon false foundations. Its philosophy, science, morality, social order, politics, laws and every other aspect began from a false point and advanced along a false path. It has now reached a stage at which the final edge of its destruction has drawn very near.

This civilization began among people who in reality possessed no clear and pure source of divine knowledge and science. Religious leaders or priests certainly existed there, but they possessed neither intelligence, knowledge and science, nor divine law. The distorted religious doctrine they possessed was wholly incapable of guiding humanity along the straight path in thought and action, even if it wished to do so. Rather, it could only obstruct the advancement and development of knowledge and science—and that is exactly what it did. As a result of this obstruction, those who were eager for progress and advancement struck at religion and religiosity and set out along a different path. On this path there was no guide except experience, observation, conjecture and investigation. This guide was wholly unreliable and itself depended upon guidance and light. Nevertheless, it became their principal reliance. With its help, they strove greatly through thought, research, practice and the reconstruction of organization. But in every field they initiated error, and as a result the entire course of their progress became directed toward a false destination. They began from the center of godlessness and materialism. They viewed the universe as having no Creator or Controller (God). They looked upon the universe and the world of living beings in such a way that truth existed only in observation and sensory perception. Beyond this visible curtain, they believed, nothing else existed. Thus, with the help of experience and conjecture, they did become able to know and understand the laws of nature, but they could not reach the Creator of nature.

Similarly, they found the useful objects of the world subject to their control and used them according to their needs. But their minds were completely empty of the idea that, in reality, they were not the owners and controllers of those things, but merely representatives of the true Owner. This ignorance and unawareness made them unconscious of the fundamental concepts of responsibility and accountability. As a result, their entire culture and civilization was built upon false foundations. They abandoned Allah and became worshipers of the “self,” and the “self,” taking Allah’s place, cast them into severe temptation and misguidance. It is this worship of the false god that today drags them along a deadly path in every field of thought and action. Although the stages along this path may be terrifying and dazzling, its ultimate consequence is nothing but destruction. That false god has turned science into an instrument for the destruction of humanity. It has molded morality into the forms of self-worship, exhibitionism, disobedience and licentiousness. It has imposed selfishness and Satan upon the economic system. It has poured the poison of self-worship, love of luxury and egocentrism into the veins and arteries of social life. It has corrupted politics with nationalism, patriotism, distinctions of race and tribe, and the worship of power, making it one of humanity’s worst curses. In short, the poisonous tree whose seed the Western Renaissance actually planted became, within a few centuries, a vast tree of culture and civilization. Although the fruit of that tree is sweet, it is in fact poisoned; although its fruit looks beautiful and attractive, it is actually thorny; and although its branches are adorned with the beauty of spring, the poisonous air flowing from them continues to poison all humanity from within.

The Westerners who planted this poisonous tree with their own hands are now themselves disgusted with it. For that tree has created such confusion, complexity and distress in every aspect and department of life that every attempt to deal with it brings countless complications. Whenever they cut off one of its branches, countless thorny branches sprout from it. For example, they applied the saw to capitalism, and communism immediately arose. They struck at democracy, and dictatorship promptly appeared. They tried to solve social problems, and feminism and birth control immediately emerged. They attempted to enforce laws to remedy moral licentiousness, and lawbreaking and criminal tendencies rose up as a result. In short, from this poisonous tree of culture and civilization an endless stream of corruption and disorder is issuing forth, and the pain and torment of a vast abscess of suffering, distress and anguish is being felt throughout the veins, arteries and nerve centers of Western life from head to foot.

The Western nations are today crying out in agony from the intense pain of that abscess. Their hearts and minds have become agitated. Their souls are restless for some life-giving nectar. But they have no idea where that nectar can be found. Most of them are still under the illusion that the real source of the problem is merely the branches of that poisonous tree. Therefore, they have devoted all their time and effort to cutting off its branches. Yet they still do not understand that the corruption lies not in the branches, but in the tree’s roots. And expecting sound branches to grow from unsound roots is nothing but foolishness.

On the other hand, there is also a small group among them that has been able to perceive the fundamental defect in their civilization’s tree. But because they have been nurtured for several centuries in the shade of that tree, and their flesh and bones have been formed from its fruits, their minds are incapable of understanding that sound branches can spread from any roots other than its own. Thus, the condition of both groups has become the same. They are searching with extreme anxiety for something that will relieve their suffering, but they do not know what the object of their desire is or where it can be found.

Indeed, this is the proper time to present the ideals and conduct of the Qur’an and Muhammad (peace be upon him) before the Western nations. They should be told today: This is the very thing for which your hearts and minds are restless. This is the nectar for which you thirst like the chataka bird. It is a pure, sacred, mighty tree whose trunk and branches are both upright. Its flowers are fragrant and free of thorns; its fruit is delicious and life-giving; its breeze is soothing and cooling to the heart and mind. Here you will find sound practical judgment, an accurate focal point for thought and vision, and knowledge suited to the formation of the finest human character. Here you will find a spirituality not meant for monks and world-renouncers, but the sole source of spiritual peace and mental comfort for those who struggle in the arena of worldly activity. Here you will see such an advanced and robust system of morality and law as is founded upon complete knowledge of human nature and can never be altered by the demands of instinct. Here you will find such sound fundamental principles of culture and civilization as eradicate unlawful class distinctions and artificial racial divisions and organize human society on a purely rational basis. These principles create such a powerful and harmonious environment of equality, justice, generosity, charity, and good conduct that there is no room for conflict, confrontation, or strife among individuals, classes, and communities over interests, rights, and needs; rather, all can work gladly and contentedly for individual and social welfare on the basis of mutual cooperation. Therefore, if you wish to be saved from destruction, then before a tremendous blow shatters your culture and civilization and makes it one of the civilizations destroyed by history, wipe every hatred of Islam from your hearts. Abandon the hatred you inherited from the religious fanatics of the Middle Ages and have clung to until today, even after severing your connection with everything belonging to that dark age; learn with open minds about the sublime teachings of the Qur’an and Muhammad (peace be upon him), and accept them.

The condition of the Muslim nations is somewhat different from that of the Western nations. Their disease is different, and so is its cause. But their cure is the same as that of the Western peoples: to return to the knowledge and guidance that Allah sent through His final Book and His final Prophet.

The circumstances in which Islam has come into conflict with Western civilization are entirely different from its earlier conflicts with other civilizations. When Islam clashed with the Roman, Persian, Indian, and Chinese civilizations, it exercised full authority over the thought and energy of its followers. A powerful spirit of jihad and ijtihad was active among them. Spiritually and materially, they had attained the glory of a victorious nation in the world and had been crowned with the honor of leadership over all other nations. At that time, no civilization in the world could stand against theirs. Wherever they went and whichever nation they reached, they brought revolutionary changes to its thought, ideology, knowledge and sciences, character, and social system. Their power to exert influence was far greater than their capacity to receive outside influence. Certainly, they also adopted much from others; but the temperament of their civilization was so firm and powerful that whatever came into it from outside fitted perfectly with its nature, and no external influence caused the slightest alteration in its character. Conversely, the influence they exerted on others proved completely revolutionary. As a result, some non-Muslim civilizations were absorbed into Islam and lost their distinct identity. Even those with great vitality were so deeply influenced by Islam that their fundamental principles underwent many changes. But that was in the days when the flame of the ideal among Muslims remained bright and unextinguished.

After ruling for several centuries with the pen and the sword, the Muslims eventually became exhausted. Their jihad-inspired vitality grew feeble, and their ijtihad-inspired strength faded. The Great Book that had supplied them with the light of knowledge and the power to act was turned by them into nothing more than a sacred relic, wrapped and kept away. They abandoned the practice of the great leader whose principles had given their culture and civilization the form of a complete intellectual and practical ideal of life. As a result, the progress and advancement of their civilization came to a standstill. The flowing river suddenly reached an immobile valley, lost its momentum, and became a small lake. The Muslims were removed from the seats of leadership and authority. The hold of their thought, knowledge and sciences, arts and civilization, and political power over the other nations of the world loosened. Meanwhile, a different civilization arose in the West in opposition to Islam. The Western nations took up with their own hands the banner of jihad and ijtihad that the Muslims had cast aside. While the Muslims lay at ease, the Westerners advanced in knowledge, science, and action with their abandoned banner. They even occupied the very seat of leadership from which the Muslims had been removed. Their swords conquered most regions of the world. Their thought, ideology, knowledge and sciences, arts, and the principles of their culture and civilization spread throughout the world. Their rule and authority took possession not only of people’s bodies but also of their hearts and minds. At last, awakening from several centuries of sleep, the Muslims opened their eyes to find that the entire field had slipped from their hands and others had come and firmly established themselves upon it. Today, whatever exists in the name of knowledge and science, culture and civilization, law, and state power is in their hands; nothing remains in the hands of the Muslims. They possess only a light-bearing lamp devoid of radiance.

Today the conflict between Islam and Western civilization is taking a new course. Undoubtedly, Western civilization is in no respect capable of competing with Islamic civilization. Indeed, if a conflict arises with Islam, no power in the world can stand before it. But the question is: Where is Islam? Just as today’s Muslims possess no Islamic nature, disposition, or moral character, neither do they possess Islamic thought or motivation for action. There is no true Islamic spirit in their mosques, madrasas, or khanqahs. Islam has no connection with their practical lives. Islamic law is no more operative in their personal lives than in their social lives. No branch of their civilization and culture is administered on the basis of a genuinely Islamic system. Under these circumstances, the competition is not between Islam and Western civilization; rather, it is between a living, dynamic, knowledge-filled, active civilization and the Muslims’ stagnant, decrepit, backward civilization. The result of such an unequal competition is precisely what was to be expected. The Muslims are continually retreating. Their civilization is being defeated. Gradually they are dissolving into Western culture. Western ways are taking an ever firmer hold on their minds. A mental structure modeled on the West is being formed. Their thought and vision are being refined according to Western principles. Every aspect of their ideas, morality, economy, social life, and politics is being colored by the West. The minds of their new generations are becoming firmly convinced that the system received from the West is the true way of life. Thus, this defeat is actually the defeat of the Muslims, not the defeat of Islam. Unfortunately, however, it is being regarded as the defeat of Islam.

This grave danger does not surround only one country, nor is only one nation facing this crisis. Today the entire Muslim world is passing through this terrifying phase of revolution. In fact, from the very beginning of this revolution, it was the duty of the ulama to take an alert and conscious role, understand the principles and foundations of the civilization that was emerging, travel through the Western countries, and study its basic sciences and knowledge. They should have mastered, through the power of ijtihad, the effective scientific discoveries and practical methods on which the Western nations had advanced, and applied them appropriately to the educational and social life of Muslims in the light of Islamic principles. In this way, the losses caused by centuries of inactivity would have been made good, and Islam’s vehicle would once again have been able to keep pace with the movement of the age. But regrettably, the ulama themselves—with few exceptions—had by then moved away from Islam’s true vital spirit. They possessed neither the power of ijtihad nor the ability to think and conduct research. Their intelligence and capacity for action had also disappeared. They had no ability to derive Islam’s enduring and dynamic principles from the ideal and practical guidance of Allah’s Book and the Messenger of Allah and apply them to the changing conditions of the age. They had been completely infected by the disease of their forefathers’ blind and rigid taqlid. Consequently, they sought every answer in books that were not timeless Divine Books. In every matter they depended on people who, unlike the prophets, possessed no broad vision free from the constraints of time and circumstance. How, then, could they successfully lead the Muslims under completely changed conditions? At that time, such revolutionary changes had begun in the fields of knowledge, science, and practical endeavor that only God could fully perceive them. No ordinary human being possessed the vision needed to penetrate the coverings of ages and reach that far.

There is no doubt that the ulama made considerable efforts to confront the new civilization and culture. But they possessed none of the means, resources, or equipment required for the confrontation. For stagnation cannot confront dynamism. The movement of the age cannot be changed by the power of logic. Rusted, useless tools are of no avail before new weapons. There was no prospect of success in the methods by which the ulama sought to lead the nation. A nation surrounded by the flood of Western civilization could not, with blindfolded eyes and its senses rendered inactive, deny the existence of the flood or remain safe from its influence for long. How could a conquered and subjugated nation whose modern civilization and culture had imposed itself upon it together with state power protect its practical life from that civilization’s influence and dominance? In such circumstances, what was ultimately bound to happen did happen. After suffering defeat in the political sphere, the Muslims were also disastrously defeated in knowledge, science, and tahdhib and tamaddun. Today we see the storm of Westernization spreading through every country of the Muslim world with the force of an epidemic. Carried along by this flood, the new generations of Muslims are moving farther and farther from Islam’s center.

It is unfortunate that our ulama have not yet recognized their error. The very principle and outlook that caused the ulama to suffer the humiliation of failure at the outset still governs them in almost every Muslim country today. Apart from a few exceptional individuals, the general condition of the ulama is that they make no effort to understand the present course and character of the age or the new formation of its mentality. They are ready to express as much hatred as they wish toward the things that are drawing the new generations of Muslims away from Islam, but they are unable to take the risks needed to remedy that poison. They are repeatedly incapable of solving the complex scientific and practical problems that modern conditions have created for Muslims. The reason is that those problems cannot be solved without ijtihad, yet they have declared ijtihad haram for themselves. In fact, the method our ulama now adopt to propagate the teachings and legal system of Islam repels modern educated people instead of introducing them to Islam. Sometimes, after hearing their sermons and admonitions or reading their writings, people spontaneously exclaim from their hearts: May God prevent these meaningless ravings from reaching the ears of any non-Muslim or misguided Muslim! In short, our ulama have created around themselves an environment two hundred years old. They think within that environment, live within it, and speak according to it. There is no doubt that, through the efforts of these respected men, the priceless jewels of the world’s treasury of Islamic knowledge have been preserved to this day, and that Islamic education has spread as far as it has through their efforts. But the vast gulf they have placed between themselves and the contemporary age is what prevents any relationship from being established between Islam and the modern world. As a result, those who advance toward Islamic education become unfit for any work in the world, while those who wish to become capable of worldly work remain completely unfamiliar with Islamic education. This is why two wholly opposed groups now exist in the Muslim world. One group bears the banner of Islamic knowledge and science and Islamic civilization, but is incapable of leading Muslims in any sphere of life. The second group has indeed driven the vehicle of the Muslims’ knowledge, science, arts, literature, and politics, but is entirely ignorant, unfamiliar, and uninformed regarding Islam’s principles and foundations, the vital substance of Islamic civilization, and Islam’s social system and civilizational laws. There is a little light of faith in a corner of their hearts, but in every other respect there is no difference at all between them and non-Muslims. Yet since knowledge, science, and practical power are in the hands of this group, and its arms possess the strength to drive the vehicle, it is rapidly carrying the entire vehicle of the millat along the path of error and misguidance. Today there is no one even to turn them back from the road and show them the right path.

I am observing this situation and can see its terrible consequences with my own eyes. Although I possess neither the knowledge, intelligence, experience, nor ability required to provide leadership, nor the strength to reform so large a nation in such a distorted environment, Allah has placed a pain in my heart. He has granted me today a small measure of knowledge and discernment, and that pain has compelled me to use it to call those two groups of Muslims toward the true and original sources of Islamic education and culture, and to continue my own efforts without caring about success or failure. In view of the greatness of the task and my own weakness, this effort seems insignificant even to me; but success and failure alike are in the hands of Almighty Allah. My task is only to keep striving. Therefore, to the extent of my ability, I wish to broaden the scope of my efforts.

(Tarjumanul Qur’an: October 1935)

4

Human Law versus Allah’s Law

In December 1933, America’s Prohibition law was duly repealed. As a result, after nearly fourteen years, the inhabitants of the civilized world once again crossed the boundary of sobriety and entered the realm of intoxication. In reality, the inauguration of Mr. Roosevelt as President of the United States was itself the first announcement of intoxication’s victory over sobriety. In April 1933, a law legalized liquor containing 3.2 percent alcohol. Then, only a few months later, the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was repealed. Under that amendment, the purchase, sale, import, export, and illicit manufacture of liquor within the United States had been prohibited.

In fact, this was the greatest attempt in history to reform morality and society through law. No example of such a vast effort can be found in the history of the world. For several years before the Eighteenth Amendment, an organization called the Anti-Saloon League had tried to impress upon the minds of Americans the harmful effects of liquor through newspapers, speeches, statements, pamphlets, diagrams, magic lanterns, films, and many other means. The organization poured out money like water in this enormous publicity campaign. It is estimated that from the beginning of the movement until 1926, $65 million was spent on publicity alone, while the books published against liquor totaled approximately nine billion pages!

Moreover, the enormous cost borne by the American nation over fourteen years to enforce the Prohibition law has been estimated at approximately £650 million. In addition, statistics recently published by the United States Department of Justice for the period from January 1920 to October 1933 show that, in enforcing the law, a total of 200 people were killed, 534,335 were imprisoned, £16 million in fines were imposed, and property worth £404 million was confiscated.

This terrible loss of life and property was tolerated so that the ‘highly civilized’ nation of the twentieth century, whose sun of knowledge had reached the zenith, might be made aware of the immeasurable spiritual, moral, and physical harm arising from the source of vice. But the continuous efforts made for several years before and after Prohibition—efforts in which governmental power also participated—failed before the American nation’s determination regarding drinking, and ultimately the ‘greatest reform effort in world history’ proved fruitless.

The failure of the effort to prohibit drinking and the repeal of the Prohibition law were not at all due to the harmful effects of liquor having become beneficial, or to any scientific discovery proving the earlier view mistaken. Rather, on the basis of far broader and greater experience than before, it is now acknowledged as a fact that prostitution, adultery, homosexuality, theft, gambling, murder, and other such moral crimes are the closest relatives of this center of sin. It plays an enormous role in destroying the morality, health, economy, and social life of the Western nations. Yet the American government was compelled to withdraw its law and make the haram halal because the overwhelming majority of the American nation was in no way prepared to give up liquor. Thus, the American public opinion that had made liquor haram fourteen years earlier once again rose up to make it halal.

To our knowledge, not even the most ardent supporter of liquor has been able to deny the harm caused by drinking, nor have opponents of Prohibition been able to present any list of the ‘blessings of liquor’ that could be considered even remotely significant compared with its harms. When the Eighteenth Constitutional Amendment, supported by public opinion, was introduced in the United States Congress, every aspect of ‘a life without intoxication’ and ‘a sea of intoxication’ was examined in minute detail. It was with these harms and evils in view that Congress approved the amendment bill. Forty-six states supported the amendment, and the House of Representatives and the Senate passed the Prohibition law in accordance with it. All this was accomplished according to the will of the American nation, and as long as Prohibition remained confined to documents and public discussion, the entire nation supported it gladly. But as soon as the prohibition was applied in practice, the face of the entire American nation changed. After spending a single night without vice, the most civilized, learned, aware, truthful, and progressive nation in the world became completely mad and, overcome by the emotion of separation, began such antics that one might suspect this nation would actually beat its head to pieces like the imaginary lovers of Eastern poetry.

As a result, as soon as the licensed liquor establishments closed, countless secret drinking places were set up throughout the country. At these haunts, various methods were adopted to drink and buy and sell liquor while deceiving the eyes of the law. If someone informed a friend or loved one about these secret drinking places and their particular signals, it was regarded as a special favor. Previously, the government could monitor the number of licensed liquor establishments, the kinds of liquor used in them, and the condition of those who frequented them. But these haunts of vice lay beyond the government’s control. Their number was several times greater than that of the licensed saloons before Prohibition. Moreover, liquor of an inferior kind, extremely harmful to health, began to be sold in these places. The visits of young boys and girls increased greatly. The thoughtful circles of the United States became deeply concerned at these dreadful consequences. The price of liquor rose several times above its previous level. Selling liquor became an enormously profitable business, and millions of people devoted themselves to it. In addition to secret drinking places, countless mobile liquor sellers also appeared. These traveling drinking establishments began reaching schools and colleges, offices and courts, hotels and restaurants, amusement centers, and even people’s homes, selling liquor and seeking new customers. It is estimated that the number of liquor sellers in America increased by at least tenfold after Prohibition compared with before it. Moreover, the business spread beyond the cities into the countryside. Secret factories for producing liquor were established in homes everywhere. Before Prohibition, America had only 400 licensed distilleries. Within just seven years after Prohibition was declared, 79,437 factory owners were arrested and 93,831 liquor shops were confiscated. Despite this, the liquor trade did not decline in the least. A former commissioner of the Bureau of Prohibition stated: ‘We have managed to seize only one-tenth of all the factories and shops.’

Thus, the amount of drinking in the country increased abnormally. It is estimated that during Prohibition the American public became accustomed to consuming 200 million gallons of liquor each year. This amount was far greater than the amount consumed before Prohibition was declared.

The liquor consumed in such enormous quantities was extremely inferior in quality and harmful to health. Physicians’ opinion on the matter is as follows: ‘It is more reasonable to call this substance poison than liquor. As soon as it descends through the throat, its poisonous effects begin in the liver and brain. Those two organs remain affected by it for up to two days. Under its influence, a person is unfit for any sound thought or good action; rather, his disposition is driven toward disorder, indiscipline, and a tendency to commit crimes.’

As a result of the excessive use of this kind of liquor, the physical health of Americans was completely ruined. For example, statistics from New York City show that in 1918, before Prohibition, the number of people suffering from the effects of alcohol was 3,741, and the number of deaths was 252. In 1926, the number of sufferers had reached 11,000 and the number of deaths 7,500. Apart from these, it is impossible even to estimate the number of those who died or became permanently incapacitated after being directly affected by liquor.

Similarly, crime, especially the tendency toward crime among adolescents and young people, increased abnormally. A statement by American judges said: ‘Never before in our history have we found an example of arresting such a large number of adolescents while intoxicated.’ After criminal tendencies among adolescents and minors had increased excessively, an investigation was also conducted into young people. It proved that from 1920 onward, drinking and criminality in society had been increasing at a tremendous rate every year. In some cities, they had even increased by 200 percent within eight years. In 1933, Colonel Moss, director of the National Crime Council, disclosed this information: ‘At present, one out of every three people in America is a professional criminal. Moreover, the crime of murder here has increased by 300 percent.’

In short, the general account of the results produced by fourteen years of Prohibition in America is as follows:

– Respect for the law disappears from people’s hearts, and the disease of lawbreaking spreads throughout every level of society.

– The true objective of prohibiting alcohol was not achieved; on the contrary, after it was declared forbidden, it was consumed in greater quantities than before.

– The government on one hand, and the general public through secretly purchasing alcohol on the other, suffered immeasurable financial losses in enforcing the prohibition law, and thus the backbone of the entire country was broken.

– The prevalence of disease, deterioration of health, rising mortality, the collapse of public morality, the spread of vice and sin at every level of society—especially among the rising generation—and an abnormal increase in criminal activity all took place.

These were the moral and civilizational results of that law.

These results occurred in a country regarded as the most civilized nation in the enlightened twentieth century. Its inhabitants were highly educated and trained. Their minds were illuminated by knowledge, science, and intelligence. They were fully capable of understanding their own benefits and harms, and their gains and losses.

These consequences became apparent even though billions of dollars had been spent and hundreds of millions of newspapers and books had been published to warn the entire nation about the harmful effects of alcohol.

These results appeared even though a vast majority of the American people had felt the need for prohibition, and the prohibition law had been passed according to their wishes.

Above all, these consequences emerged even though a great state like America remained steadfast for a full fourteen years, with the aid of the finest governing machinery of the twentieth century, in eradicating alcohol consumption and its sale.

Indeed, until these results became apparent, the majority of both the government and the public agreed on prohibiting alcohol, and for that reason it was prohibited. But when it became clear that the people were in no way willing to give up drinking, and that forcibly making them abstain had made conditions worse than before, that same government and majority of the public again reached agreement on legalizing alcohol.

Now consider a country that existed thirteen and a half centuries ago, in an age of darkness regarded as the darkest age of all. Its inhabitants were uneducated. There was not the slightest trace of knowledge, science, or the arts among them. They knew nothing of civilization or culture. Perhaps one literate person could be found among ten thousand, and even his standard was so low that an ordinary person today possesses more knowledge than he did. The organizational institutions and means of the present age did not exist at all. The machinery of government was in an entirely primitive state, and only a few years had passed since it had been established. The people of that time were passionate lovers of alcohol. Their language had approximately two hundred and fifty names for it. Perhaps no language in the world has given it so many names. This was proof of their attachment to alcohol. Another proof is found in their poetry and literature. These show that drinking was habitual for them and was regarded as indispensable to their way of life.

In this situation, the question of alcohol arose. The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, was asked what the ruling of the Shariah was concerning it. He said that Allah’s command was as follows:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “They ask you about alcohol and gambling. Say: In them is great sin, though they also have some benefits for people. But their harm is far greater than their benefit.” (Surah al-Baqarah: 219)

This was not a ruling concerning alcohol; rather, it described the nature and qualities of alcohol, stating that both benefit and harm are present in it. However, the harmful aspect is stronger. As a result of this instructive declaration, one part of the nation immediately gave up drinking. Nevertheless, drinkers remained the majority.

Then alcohol was asked about again, because some people would make mistakes when going to prayer while intoxicated. In these circumstances, the Noble Messenger, peace be upon him, conveyed this command of Allah:

Meaning: “O believers! Do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated, until you know what you are saying.” (Surah al-Nisa: 43)

As soon as they heard this command, people set specific times for drinking. From then on, they generally drank between Fajr and Zuhr or after Isha, so that they would not have to pray while intoxicated or face the question of abandoning prayer because of intoxication.

But alcohol’s real harmful aspect had still not been disclosed. While intoxicated, people frequently caused disorder and turmoil, sometimes leading to murder and bloodshed. Therefore, it became necessary to announce a clear and final directive concerning it. Then it was declared:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “O believers! Alcohol, gambling, idols, and divining with arrows are filthy works of Satan; so shun them, that you may prosper. Satan only seeks to stir up hostility and hatred among you through alcohol and gambling and to prevent you from remembering Allah. Will you not then desist, even after knowing this? Obey Allah, heed the Messenger, and abstain. But if you disobey, then know that the duty of My Messenger is only to convey the message clearly.” (Surah al-Ma’idah: 90–91)

As soon as this command came, the connoisseurs and lovers of wine—who had been ready to sacrifice their very lives for it—became disgusted with it. Immediately after hearing the declaration prohibiting alcohol, wine vessels were smashed. A flood of alcohol flowed through the lanes of Madinah. Ten or eleven Companions were sitting in a gathering, drinking wine and deeply intoxicated. Meanwhile, they heard the voice of the announcer of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, declaring that alcohol had been made forbidden forever. Even in the midst of that intoxication, such reverence was shown for the divine command that the Companions immediately stopped drinking and smashed the wine vessels to pieces. A man was drinking wine somewhere. He had just raised the cup to his mouth when someone came and recited the verse prohibiting alcohol to him. At once the cup was pulled away from his mouth, and he could not swallow even a drop of alcohol.

After that, anyone who drank wine was punished with shoes, sticks, kicks, punches, and the like. Later, the punishment became forty lashes, and finally eighty lashes were prescribed. As a result, every trace of drinking disappeared from Arabia. Thereafter, wherever Islam went, it naturally made the various peoples abstinent and pious. Even today, despite Islam’s influence being extremely weak, millions upon millions of people throughout the world completely abstain from alcohol without any prohibition law or penal code. If the number of drinkers among the Muslim nation were counted, it might still be found more pious than the other nations of the world. Moreover, those among them who drink regard it as a grave sin. Their hearts feel remorse over it, and often they repent on their own and abandon this evil habit.

Indeed, in the realm of justice, ethics, and sound judgment, the final verdict depends on experience and observation. Their testimony can never be proven false. Here two experiences lie before everyone: one is America’s, and the second is Islam’s. The difference between the two experiences is clear. It is the duty of every intelligent person to compare these two experiences and learn from them.

For years, a campaign was conducted against alcohol in America. Billions of dollars were spent describing and publicizing its harms. Through medical science, statistical evidence, and argument, its physical, moral, and financial damage was demonstrated so conclusively that it could not possibly be denied. The harms of alcohol were made visible through pictures. Every effort was made so that the public would understand its harmfulness for themselves and become ready to renounce it. Moreover, the nation’s greatest representative body, Congress, adopted prohibition by an overwhelming majority and passed the necessary law. Above all, the government—which was then one of the world’s greatest powers—devoted all its strength to stopping its sale and purchase, illicit manufacture, and import and export. But the nation—which was then at the forefront of the educated and enlightened nations—did not agree to abandon it. Finally, within the short period of fourteen or fifteen years, they were compelled to make the haram halal again.

On the other hand, no campaign was conducted against alcohol in the Islamic state. Not a penny was spent on publicity or propaganda. No Anti-Saloon League was formed there. The Messenger of Allah merely declared, “Allah has made alcohol haram for you.” As soon as this command came from his lips, the entire nation—which was even more advanced than America in its love of alcohol, and whose technical knowledge and intelligence had no equal—abstained from drinking. They abandoned alcohol so completely that, within the bounds of Islam, it became impossible for them to return from “joylessness” to a “sea of pleasure.” Furthermore, they needed no discipline, interrogation, or penal code to keep them confined to this “joylessness.” Even in the absence of any coercive power, they would abstain from drinking. Above all, this was not a haram that could somehow be made halal again. Even if all the Muslims of the world unanimously voted in favor of alcohol, this haram could never become halal.

If the reason for this vast difference is examined, several important matters will become known. These matters apply not only to alcohol, but as fundamental principles to all questions of law and ethics.

The first point is that there is a fundamental difference between Islam and worldly legal systems in organizing and administering human affairs. A worldly legal system depends entirely on human opinion. For this reason, it must seek the opinions of ordinary or prominent people not only on broad and fundamental matters, but also on every minor detail. The condition of human opinion—whether that of ordinary or prominent people—is that it is constantly influenced by inner inclinations, external causes, and the changing dictates of knowledge and intellect, none of which are always accurate. As a result, thought and outlook continually change. The inevitable consequence is that the standards of good and evil, right and wrong, legality and illegality, and haram and halal continually change. Consequently, changes in law also become inevitable. Thus no permanent, firm, and unchanging standard of morality and civilization can be established there. Human diversity dominates the law, just as legal diversity dominates human life. An example is a novice driving a motorcar. With his inexperienced hands, he turns the steering wheel irregularly from side to side. As a result, the car’s movement will also be irregular and uncertain. It cannot proceed firmly along any particular road. And when the car travels erratically, the driver himself is affected. Sometimes it will go straight, and at other times along a crooked road. Sometimes it will fall into a hole, and at other times collide with a wall. At still other times, while traveling over uneven and rugged roads, it will stumble.

In contrast, the entire foundation and most of the details of Islamic law and ethics have been determined by Allah and the Messenger. Human opinion has not the slightest place there. However, in view of changing conditions in life, people have the right to formulate new laws in minor matters as needed, according to those fundamental rulings and detailed precedents. But such laws must necessarily be formulated in the light of the principles of the Shariah. Indeed, it is through this divine law that we possess a permanent and unchanging standard of morality and civilization. There is not the slightest trace of diversity or conflicting directions in our moral and social system. What was haram for us yesterday cannot become halal today and haram again tomorrow. What has been made haram here is haram forever, and what has been made halal remains halal until the Day of Resurrection. We have entrusted the steering wheel of our motor to a highly skilled and expert driver. We are confident that he will guide our motor along the straight path:

يُثَبِّتُ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِالْقَوْلِ الثَّابِتِ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَفِي الْآخِرَةِ ۖ وَيُضِلُّ اللَّهُ الظَّالِمِينَ ۚ وَيَفْعَلُ اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ

Meaning: Allah grants firmness in the life of this world and the Hereafter to the believers through a steadfast word, and He leads the wrongdoers and disobedient astray, so that they can find stability nowhere. (Surah Ibrahim: 27)

Another important matter is contained within this. In a materialist state, whenever regulations for human life are formulated or practical steps are taken to reform moral character, the social order, and the civilizational structure, it is necessary to await the people’s approval even in the most minor matters. The implementation of every clause of its laws depends on public opinion. Whatever reform or constructive law is implemented against the people’s wishes must ultimately be repealed. This is not merely America’s experience; the experience of the entire world bears witness to it. This proves that worldly law is completely incapable and unsuitable for reforming human character and society. For it seeks to reform a corrupted mass of people, while depending on that same public opinion for its approval or rejection, and for its reversal or withdrawal.

Islam resolved this complexity in another way; and on deeper reflection it will be seen that there is no other solution to this problem. Before raising questions of moral character, social policy, and civilization, and before demanding obedience to the rulings of the Shariah, it calls the entire human race to believe in Allah, His Messenger, and His Book. Whether or not to believe is, of course, left to human choice. But after believing, there is no longer any question of choosing or refusing. Thereafter, obedience to every command given by the Messenger on behalf of Allah, and to every law prescribed by Allah’s Book, becomes obligatory. Once this foundation has been established, the entire system of Islamic Shariah becomes applicable to the person. After that, neither in minor nor fundamental questions is there any place for his willingness or unwillingness. That is why what could not be accomplished in America despite the waste of hundreds of crores of rupees, unparalleled propaganda, and the immense efforts of state power was accomplished in the Islamic state through a single declaration by the Messenger from Allah.

The third instructive point is that no matter how brightly a human society may shine with knowledge, science, and the arts, or how high it may rise in intellectual advancement, it can never escape the grasp of its unrestrained impulses unless it obeys and follows divine laws and develops the strength of faith within itself. The overwhelming desires of its instincts will take hold of it. Consequently, when its impulses become attracted to something, even if its harmfulness is shown more brightly than sunlight, even if science—the deity worshiped by the idolaters of reason—is brought forward as a witness against it, even if statistical evidence is presented against it—which, in the eyes of scientists, can never be false—and even if its harmfulness is proven through knowledge gained by experience and observation, it will never abandon that beloved object. This clearly shows that instilling moral consciousness in people, directing their conscience and intellect, and creating within them the power to control their own impulses are not the tasks of philosophy, science, or intellectualism. This cannot be accomplished by any means other than faith. (First published: Tarjuman al-Qur’an, January 1934)

5

The Suicide of Western Civilization

The astonishing development and progress of the Western nations in politics, commerce and trade, the arts, and knowledge and science have left the minds of a certain class of people extremely frightened and alarmed. They have come to believe that the development and progress of those nations may be everlasting and indestructible. Their dominion and supremacy in the world have supposedly been established forever. In the matter of ruling the earth and controlling its resources, they have been given an outright “permanent settlement.” Their strength and power are founded on such firm bases that no one can overthrow them.

Indeed, this is not a new idea; similar views have been held concerning the powerful nations of every age. The Pharaohs of Egypt, ‘Ad and Thamud of Arabia, the Chaldeans of Iraq, the Caesars of Iran, the conquering heroes of Greece, the world-renowned emperors of Rome, the world-conquering Muslim mujahids, and the world-famous armies of the Tatars all displayed the same spectacle of grandeur and power on the stage of this world. In turn, each amazed the people of the world in the same way by displaying its own mastery of magic. Whenever a nation raised its head, it spread over the world in this manner. In this way it sounded throughout the world the drumbeat of its fame, glory, and valor, and people consequently assumed that its strength and power were everlasting and indestructible. But when their lifespans were complete and the Emperor who possesses everlasting and indestructible power announced the end of their rule, they fell so completely that most of those nations vanished from the face of the earth. Even where some trace of them remains in the world, they survive only as subjects of those they once ruled, slaves of slaves, and subjugated among the subjugated:

قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ سُنَنٌ فَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَانظُرُوا كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُكَذِّبِينَ

Meaning: Many ages passed before you. Travel through the earth and see what became of those who denied Allah’s law!” (Surah Al ‘Imran: 137)

Indeed, the entire system of the universe is characterized by the fact that there is no room here for permanence or pause. Unceasing movement, change, and rotation exist here. Nothing is allowed to remain in one condition. Creation and dissolution, breaking and rebuilding, rising and falling proceed hand in hand. The opposite process also operates. Today, a seed weighing a mash flies about on the wind; tomorrow, that same seed settles in the soil and becomes a massive tree with branches. The next day, it dries up and merges with the soil. Then nature’s life-giving forces abandon it and devote themselves to nurturing another seed. This is the law of life’s breaking and rebuilding, and of rise and fall. But whenever people see any one condition lasting somewhat longer, they assume that it is everlasting. If the condition is declining, they think it will remain so forever. If it is rising, they imagine it will continue rising forever. But the only difference here is between delay and immediacy; in reality, no condition is everlasting:

إِن يَمْسَسْكُمْ قَرْحٌ فَقَدْ مَسَّ الْقَوْمَ قَرْحٌ مِّثْلُهُ ۚ وَتِلْكَ الْأَيَّامُ نُدَاوِلُهَا بَيْنَ النَّاسِ وَلِيَعْلَمَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَيَتَّخِذَ مِنكُمْ شُهَدَاءَ ۗ وَاللَّهُ لَا يُحِبُّ الظَّالِمِينَ

Meaning: I make the rise and fall of time revolve among people.” (Surah Al ‘Imran: 140)

The entire environment of the world moves within a certain cycle. Birth and death, youth and old age, strength and weakness, winter and spring, dryness and vitality—all are merely different forms of this cycle. In this cycle, each thing in turn has its day of prosperity. Then its growth and development begin, its valor and strength become manifest, and it displays the full extent of its beauty and splendor. Eventually, one day it reaches the utmost limit of development and progress. At that point it becomes feeble, stunted, weak, and incapable, and the very forces that initiated its growth and development ultimately destroy it.

This is Allah’s ordained law throughout all creation. Like everything else in the world, this law fully applies to human beings. Whether considered individually or as nations, honor and disgrace, happiness and sorrow, progress and decline, and all other such conditions are distributed among different people and nations according to this cycle. No one here is completely deprived in this distribution, nor is any condition made everlasting for anyone. Neither prosperity nor adversity is an exception to this rule:

سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِي الَّذِينَ خَلَوْا مِن قَبْلُ ۖ وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا

Meaning: This was Allah’s way concerning those who passed away before. You will never find any change in Allah’s way. (Surah al-Ahzab: 62)

Throughout the corners of this earth, we see many relics of past nations. They left behind abundant traces of their civilization, culture, craftsmanship, and artistry. Looking at these remains, it seems that they were in no way inferior to today’s progressive and powerful nations; rather, their influence and authority over their contemporaries were even greater than those of these nations:

أَوَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَيَنظُرُوا كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ ۚ كَانُوا أَشَدَّ مِنْهُمْ قُوَّةً وَأَثَارُوا الْأَرْضَ وَعَمَرُوهَا أَكْثَرَ مِمَّا عَمَرُوهَا وَجَاءَتْهُمْ رُسُلُهُم بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ ۖ فَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيَظْلِمَهُمْ وَلَٰكِن كَانُوا أَنفُسَهُمْ يَظْلِمُونَ

Meaning: They were stronger than these people. They cultivated the land thoroughly and developed it more than these people have.” (Surah al-Rum: 9)

But what was their fate in the end? They were deceived by the intoxication of apparent prosperity. Wealth and luxurious indulgence cast them into the womb of arrogance. Comfort became a calamity (fitnah) for them. Intoxicated by prestige and political power, they became embodiments of corruption. Thus, through their own misdeeds, they began to oppress themselves:

فَلَوْلَا كَانَ مِنَ الْقُرُونِ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ أُولُو بَقِيَّةٍ يَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْفَسَادِ فِي الْأَرْضِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّمَّنْ أَنجَيْنَا مِنْهُمْ ۗ وَاتَّبَعَ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مَا أُتْرِفُوا فِيهِ وَكَانُوا مُجْرِمِينَ

Meaning: “The wrongdoers were engrossed in enjoying the things with which they had been lavishly provided, and they were great criminals.” (Surah Hud: verse 116)

Despite their rebellion and disobedience, Allah granted them respite:

وَكَأَيِّن مِّن قَرْيَةٍ أَمْلَيْتُ لَهَا وَهِيَ ظَالِمَةٌ ثُمَّ أَخَذْتُهَا وَإِلَيَّ الْمَصِيرُ

Meaning: “How many a town was there that was wrongdo­ing? I first granted it respite, then seized it.” (Surah al-Hajj: verse 48)

And this respite was not an ordinary respite; rather, various nations were given respite for centuries upon centuries. But every respite became a new calamity for them:

وَيَسْتَعْجِلُونَكَ بِالْعَذَابِ وَلَن يُخْلِفَ اللَّهُ وَعْدَهُ ۚ وَإِنَّ يَوْمًا عِندَ رَبِّكَ كَأَلْفِ سَنَةٍ مِّمَّا تَعُدُّونَ

Meaning: “But one day with your Lord is like a thousand years according to your reckoning.” (Surah al-Hajj: verse 47)

They thought that Allah was helpless before their cunning. Therefore, they believed that they, not Allah, now ruled the world. But ultimately, God’s wrath surged forth. His favor was withdrawn from them. In place of prosperity, adversity drew near. In response to their schemes, Allah too employed a grave stratagem. But they could not perceive Allah’s stratagem; how, then, could they resist it?

(Arabic)

Meaning: “They plotted a scheme, while We too had planned a scheme of which they were unaware.” (Surah al-Naml: verse 50)

Allah’s plan never comes directly; rather, its poison begins to take effect from within the human being himself—from the moment it penetrates his heart and mind. It attacks his conscience, reason, feelings, judgment, power of thought, and understanding. It blinds his inner vision. It does not blind his physical eyes, but it blinds the eyes of his knowledge:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “The truth is that it is not the eyes that are blind, but the hearts within the breasts that are blind.” (Surah al-Hajj: verse 46)

Blind! And when the eye of the heart becomes blind, whatever schemes he devises for his own welfare become harmful to him. The step he takes in hope of success leads him toward destruction. All his powers rise in rebellion against him. His own hand begins to throttle his own neck of its own accord:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Just look at the terrible outcome of their plot: We utterly destroyed them and their people.” (Surah al-Naml: 51)

We find a complete picture of these prosperous and adverse times in the story of the house of Pharaoh and the Children of Israel. When the Egyptians reached the pinnacle of progress and advancement, they girded themselves for severe oppression and rebellious acts. Their king, Pharaoh, claimed divine status. Some time before that, during the era of Joseph, peace be upon him, the Children of Israel had gone there and settled. Pharaoh turned this weak people into the target of oppression and persecution. Ultimately, the disobedience of the Egyptians exceeded all limits. Therefore, Allah decided to humiliate them and elevate that people whom they despised. At last, Allah’s decision took effect. Moses, peace be upon him, was born among that weak nation. He was raised in Pharaoh’s house, by Pharaoh’s own hand. Then he was appointed to free his people from the slavery of the Egyptians. He explained matters to Pharaoh gently, but Pharaoh did not desist. Pharaoh and his people were repeatedly warned by Allah. Famine and floods came one after another, and streams of blood rained from the sky. Locusts attacked their crops and laid their fields waste.

They were tormented by lice and frogs. Yet their arrogance did not diminish in the least:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “They were steeped in arrogance, and they were an arrogant people.” (Surah al-A‘raf: verse 133)

When all the arguments and proofs had been established one after another, the decree of divine punishment took effect. At Allah’s command, Moses, peace be upon him, left Egypt with his people. Pharaoh and his forces were drowned in the sea. As a result, Egypt’s state power was so devastated that it could not raise its head again for several centuries:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “We seized him and his army, then drowned them in the sea. Behold what the outcome was for these wrongdoers.” (Surah al-Qasas: verse 40)

Then it was Israel’s turn. After devastating the Egyptian nation, the Lord of the worlds granted that humiliated and disgraced people political power in the world:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “We made the oppressed people heirs to the eastern and western parts of the land which We had blessed abundantly. Thus your Lord’s gracious promise to the Children of Israel was fulfilled because of their patience.” (Surah al-A‘raf: verse 137)

And He granted them superiority over all the nations of the world:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “And I gave you superiority over the nations of the world.” (Surah al-Baqarah: verse 47)

But this superiority and political power were conditional upon righteous deeds and good conduct. It had already been stated through the words of Moses, peace be upon him, that you would certainly be granted vicegerency on earth; but attention would also be paid to what kind of deeds you performed (*****). In reality, this condition applied not only to the Children of Israel; it applies to every nation that is granted state power in the world:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Then We made you successors in the land to see how you would act.” (Surah Yunus: verse 14)

Therefore, when the Children of Israel disobeyed their Lord, corrupted His words and revelation, replaced truth with falsehood, adopted the practices of consuming what is forbidden, lying, dishonesty, and breaking promises, became materialistic, greedy, cowardly, and comfort-loving, began killing God’s prophets, became hostile to those who called toward the truth, grew displeased with righteous leadership and submitted to corrupt leadership, then Allah, Lord of the worlds, withdrew His favor from them. The leadership and authority of the earth were taken away from them. They were subdued by the formidable emperors of Iraq, Greece, and Rome. They were driven from their homes. Like wanderers, they were made to roam from country to country amid humiliation and disgrace. State power was taken from their hands. For two thousand years they became so enveloped in the curse that they could find no place of even the slightest honor anywhere in the world.

([Several years after this article was published, the State of Israel was established in Palestine. This may give rise to the suspicion that it contradicts the Qur’an’s prophecy concerning the future. In reality, however, this state was established not through its own power, but by relying on America, England, and France, and Jews from all over the world are gathering in this small territory to sustain it. But on the day these Western powers become involved in a major war and are unable to support Israel, a message of death will descend upon it, and the neighboring Arab states will pick up this wrapper of filth and throw it into the sea. In reality, with the assistance of the Western powers, the Jews have managed to establish their own homeland by force in Arab territory; outwardly, this appears to be their success. In truth, however, it is merely another name for their great punishment.])

(Arabic)

Meaning: “As a result, humiliation, abasement, and misery overwhelmed them, and they were surrounded by Allah’s wrath.” (Surah al-Baqarah: verse 61)

Today we are again witnessing the recurrence of the divine law. The Western nations have now become entangled in the very consequences of their deeds that surrounded earlier nations. Almost every possible warning has been given to them. The devastation of world wars, economic hardship, widespread unemployment, the spread of ugly diseases, and the collapse of the family system are vivid signs of this. If they had eyes, these things alone would have enabled them to understand the consequences of oppression, disobedience, self-worship, and the distortion of truth. But they have not learned from those signs; rather, their continued obstinacy in turning away from the truth has been evident. Their gaze has not reached the root cause of the disease. They can see only its symptoms and are expending all their efforts and care on treating them. Consequently, the more medicine is applied, the more the disease continues to grow. Judging from the present condition, it appears that the stage of warnings and proofs is ending and the time of the final judgment is very near.

The Almighty Allah has imposed two powerful devils upon the Western nations. They are dragging them toward destruction and ruin. One is the devil of exterminating the نسل, and the second is the devil of nationalism. The first devil has settled upon their individuals, while the second has settled upon their nations and states. The first has corrupted the reason and conscience of their men and women. It is making them exterminate their descendants with their own hands. It is teaching them the techniques of contraception, urging them toward abortion, and extolling sterilization. As a result, they are themselves destroying the strength they need. It has made them so heartless that they are killing their own children. In short, this devil is gradually inciting them to suicide.

The second devil has robbed their great statesmen and military commanders of the ability to adopt sound thinking and a correct course of action. It has produced among them the ugly dispositions of selfishness, rivalry, vindictiveness, hatred, hostility, greed, and lust. It is dividing them into various mutually disputing and hostile factions:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Or He will divide you into conflicting factions and make some of you taste the violence of others.” (Surah al-An‘am: verse 65)

It has incited them to make one another taste their strength and power. This too is a form of divine punishment. In short, it has prepared them for a tremendous act of suicide. This will not occur gradually; rather, it will happen suddenly. It has stockpiled ammunition throughout the world and established danger centers in various places. Now it is merely waiting for a particular moment. As soon as that moment arrives, it will set fire to one of the ammunition depots. Then, before one can realize it, such a conflagration of destruction will erupt that even the destruction of earlier nations will pale beside it.

There is no room for exaggeration in what I have said so far. On the contrary, seeing the extensive preparations for the impending great war in Europe, America, and Japan ([it should be remembered here that the article was written several years before the Second World War]), even their own farsighted leaders have been horrified, and they have become utterly bewildered at the thought of the consequences of this terrible war. Recently, Sergei Neuman (sergel neuman), a former member of the American military staff, wrote an article about the impending war. He stated that the coming war would not merely be a battle between soldiers; rather, it would properly be called mass slaughter. Women and children would not even be spared in this massacre. Scientists have taken the intellectual conduct of warfare from the hands of the armed forces and handed it over to chemical substances and lifeless machines. These weapons of death are completely incapable of distinguishing between military and civilian people. Moreover, the battle between the warring powers will no longer take place in fields or fortresses, but in cities, ports, and populated areas. For according to modern military strategy, the real strength of the enemy does not lie in its army, but in its population centers, commercial hubs, and factories. Therefore, all kinds of bombs will now be dropped from warplanes. Incendiary substances, poisonous gases, and disease germs will be released from them, simultaneously reducing millions of people to ruin. Among them is a type of automatic bomb whose single shell could shatter London’s largest building ([later, even more deadly weapons were invented under the names atomic bomb and hydrogen bomb, and a small sample of their devastation was presented at Nagasaki and Hiroshima]). One poisonous gas is known as green cross gas. Its nature is such that anyone into whose nose it enters will feel as though he has drowned in water. Another poisonous gas is called yellow cross gas. Its nature resembles snake venom. When it enters the nose, it produces a poisonous effect exactly like a snakebite. There are many other gases of this kind. These gases are almost invisible. At first, their effects are not felt at all. When they are finally felt, there is no possibility of counteraction or treatment. Among them is a special kind of gas that rises very high and spreads. If an aircraft passes through the area affected by it, its pilot suddenly becomes blind. It has been estimated that if one ton of certain poisonous gases were released over Paris, the entire city could be completely destroyed within an hour. Only one hundred aircraft would be sufficient to carry out this task.

Recently, an electrically ignited shell has been invented. It weighs only one kilogram. Yet this small shell contains so much power that when it collides with anything, it suddenly produces a temperature of three thousand degrees Fahrenheit, causing such an intense conflagration that it cannot be extinguished. Throwing water on it makes it act like petrol. Science has not yet devised any method of extinguishing it. It is believed that these will be dropped on large markets in cities and ports, so that fire will spread from one end to the other. Then, when people begin fleeing in terror, poisonous-gas bombs will be dropped from aircraft to complete the devastation.

On seeing the invention of these weapons of death, military experts have estimated that with the help of only a few bombers, even the world’s largest and most heavily defended capital could be reduced to dust within two hours. The homes of millions could be poisoned in such a way that they would go to sleep safely at night, but not a single person would rise alive in the morning. In this way, poisonous substances could poison the living resources of an entire country, destroy its livestock, and wipe out its farms and orchards. No effective method of defense against this all-destroying attack has yet been invented. The only possible result is that both warring sides may attack and destroy one another; no one can escape destruction.

This is a brief description of the preparations for the impending great war. For details, consult the book entitled What would be The Character of a New War. This book was published by the organization called the Inter-Parliamentary Union of Geneva after due research and investigation of the facts.

By reading it, you can easily understand how Western civilization has gathered the instruments of its own destruction with its own hands. Its lifespan now extends only to the date on which it declares war.¹ ([A sample of what happened during the Second World War—from 1939 to 1945—can be seen in the devastation of Nagasaki. For a more extensive example, read Lord Russell’s book Seourge of Swastika and observe how a godless civilization can turn an entire nation into beings more degraded than savage beasts.])

On the day war breaks out between the world’s two great states, one must consider the divine judgment for the destruction of Western civilization to have taken effect, because once two great states enter the battlefield, the war cannot help but become worldwide. And if the war becomes worldwide, destruction will undoubtedly be worldwide as well.

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Corruption has appeared throughout the land and sea because of what people’s own hands have earned, so that He may make them taste some of what they have done. Perhaps they will return (to the right path).” (Surah al-Rum: 41)

In any case, the time is now very near for a new arrangement to be adopted concerning leadership and authority in the world, for the wrongdoers and oppressors to fall, and for another nation (perhaps an oppressed nation) to be invested with the status of vicegerency on earth. Whom Allah, Lord of the worlds, chooses for this honor is now the matter to observe.

We have no way of knowing which people of the world will next be elevated. This is entirely a matter subject to Allah’s will. He takes authority away from whomever He wills and grants it to whomever He wills:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Say: O Allah, Owner of all sovereignty! You grant sovereignty to whom You will and take sovereignty away from whom You will.” (Surah Al ‘Imran: 26) But there is also an established law concerning this matter. He has stated it in His beloved Book. It is that He does not install a people who will be wicked and disobedient like that accursed nation.

(Arabic)

Meaning: “If you turn away, He will replace you with another people; they will not be like you.” (Surah Muhammad: verse 38)

For this reason, judging by outward signs, it appears that the weak, subjugated nations that are nowadays imitating Western civilization and, abandoning the virtues of the European nations (whatever little remains of them), have adopted their faults (which are the reason for their being accursed) have no possibility of succeeding in the coming revolution. (First published: Tarjuman al-Qur’an, October 1932)

6

The Lament of Western Civilization

(Lord Lothian’s Speech)

[The article was first published in the March 1939 issue of Tarjuman al-Qur’an.]

In the last week of January 1938, Lord Lothian delivered a speech on the occasion of the convocation (degree-distribution ceremony) of Aligarh University. His speech is particularly worthy of attention for the modernists and traditionalists among the educated community of undivided India. It contains a great deal of instruction for them. In this speech, a person has unveiled before us the inner workings of his heart and mind—a person who did not observe modern knowledge, science, and the civilization created by them from a distance; rather, he was born in the lap of that civilization and spent the long span of fifty-six years of his life engaged in its churning. By birth and lineage he was European, and he received higher education at Oxford. He was editor of the famous Round Table journal and served for approximately twenty-one years in major responsible positions in the British government. He is not a foreign observer; he is a man of Western civilization’s own household. Accordingly, he has described to us that household’s real corruption, how it functions, and what its members are currently thirsting for.

In one respect, this speech is especially instructive for our modern educated people. From it they will learn that Western knowledge, science, and the civilization created by them are not entirely an elixir of life; rather, they contain a considerable admixture of poison. Those who created this medicine and have tested it for several hundred years are themselves now warning you not to consume it in its entirety. They say: “This substance has brought us to the brink of destruction, and it will destroy you as well. We ourselves are hoping for a pure elixir of life. Although we do not know with certainty, we suppose that this elixir is present with you. Therefore, do not destroy your own elixir of life by taking up the taste of our poison-laden medicine.”

On the other hand, this address also contains abundant food for thought for our ulama and religious community. From it, they will be able to understand which aspects of Islamic teachings need to be highlighted before the world in which they currently live. This world has grown so exhausted today after experimenting with materialist civilization for several centuries. Several centuries ago, we supplied the Europeans with the invigorating nourishment of an inquiring outlook and free thought; through sheer ignorance, they mixed it with the poison of irreligion and materialism and produced a new civilizational elixir. That elixir did indeed raise them to the summit of progress through its own power, but its poisonous effects have remained active alongside it. Indeed, that elixir has now become completely poisoned. After thoroughly experiencing its bitter consequences, they are once again looking in every direction for a new elixir. They have understood what poisonous substances their elixir contains and what serious reactions these are producing in their lives. They can also now perceive what kind of elixir they need to remove those reactions. But they do not know that the elixir they are searching for exists nowhere in the world except with Islam, nor that the dispensary from which they obtained the first tablet is also the place where the final tablet will be found. Even after reaching this point, if they continue rushing about in search of the desired elixir and, failing to find it, continue poisoning the whole world with deadly venom, then our ulama will have to share equally with them in that great sin. Today is not a time for the ulama to remain engaged in debates and disputations over theology, supernaturalism, and minor points of religious law. Did the Messenger, peace be upon him, possess knowledge of the unseen? Can Allah tell a lie? Is any comparison with the Messenger possible? What is the shar‘i status of isal al-thawab and visiting graves? Should amin be said aloud and should raf‘ al-yadayn be performed? How much distinction should be maintained between the minaret and the pulpit of a mosque? Today our religious leaders are wasting all their strength and ability resolving such minor problems. But these problems have no importance in today’s world, and settling them cannot bring an end to the worldwide struggle between truth and falsehood, guidance and misguidance. Rather, the greatest need today is to properly understand the complex problems that have arisen through the progressive development of knowledge, science, society, and civilization on the foundations of Godlessness and irreligion over several centuries, and the real task today is to analyze them fully and present acceptable solutions to them in the light of Islamic principles. If our ulama do not make themselves qualified for this task and do not strive to accomplish it properly, then whatever fate awaits Europe and America will certainly come to pass, but the Muslim world itself will also be utterly destroyed. For the problems afflicting the Western countries are today emerging with equal intensity throughout the Muslim world and India. And because no correct solutions to them are being offered, everyone, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, is continuing to use the ‘prescriptions’ of those afflicted by these diseases. Therefore, the matter is no longer merely one of Europe and America; rather, it concerns our own home and our future generations.

For all these reasons, it is incumbent upon our modern educated society and the ulama community to study Lord Lothian’s address carefully. In order to help us grasp the substance of his বক্তব্য, we quote the address here from time to time with the necessary explanations.

Lord Lothian says at the very beginning of his address:

I wish today to draw your attention to another matter worthy of consideration. Can India escape the grave consequences of the scientific and intellectual education of the modern age that Europe and America are suffering today? The advancement of modern science has produced two great consequences in the West. On the one hand, it has greatly expanded human power to control nature and its forces. On the other hand, it has weakened inherited religious discipline among university-educated youth and, generally, throughout the world. At least half of the distortions of the modern world have arisen from these two causes. The civilized person of today is indeed intoxicated and beside himself with the forces discovered by science, but alongside the advancement of knowledge, science, society, and civilization, he has failed to achieve balanced progress in the moral sphere. Yet this could have ensured that scientific forces were employed for human welfare rather than for human destruction.’

In this introduction, Lord Lothian has in fact pointed toward the fundamental problem of human culture and civilization. Science, as science alone, is nothing more than an eagerness to pursue thought, research, and inquiry. By virtue of it, people become informed about the condition of the forces inherent in the universe and gather the means and instruments for putting them to use. When people begin to use the new powers they acquire through the development of this store of knowledge in everyday life, this is called the advancement of civilization. But neither of these two things can, by themselves, guarantee human welfare. They may be causes of welfare, just as they may be causes of destruction. Instead of working with their hands, people have begun to work with machines. Instead of traveling on animals, they have begun to travel by railway, motorcar, ship, and airplane. Instead of messengers, news is exchanged through electric telegraph and wireless. This does not mean that people have become happier and more prosperous than before. To the extent that these things may increase their comfort, they may also increase the possibility of danger and destruction. For the civilization that has placed machine guns, poison gas, aircraft, and submarines in human hands may be far more deadly than that of an age in which people possessed only weapons such as bows, arrows, and swords. Whether the advancement of knowledge, science, and civilization becomes a cause of welfare or destruction depends entirely on the civilization under whose influence knowledge, science, the arts, and culture develop. In reality, it is the responsibility of civilization to determine the direction of development, the aims of human endeavor, and the proper fields in which acquired powers should be used. It determines the nature of human relations and establishes the rules of social life and moral codes for personal, national, and international affairs. In short, it is this that equips the human mind to decide how the powers acquired through the advancement of knowledge and science are to be applied within civilization, for what purposes and in what manner they are to be used, and which among the various rules of use are to be rejected or accepted.

In reality, observing the material world and acquiring knowledge of the laws of nature cannot by themselves serve as the foundation of any higher civilization. For, in their light, the status of the human being is no more than that of an intelligent creature. With their help, only a materialist philosophy of life can be established. That is, for human beings, life in this world is the only life. Their supreme and ultimate aim is to fulfill their biological desires as far as possible. They accept as ultimate truth the laws operating in nature concerning the struggle for survival, natural selection, and the supremacy of the fittest, and the true field for the exercise of power is to crush all surrounding created things and establish their own authority over everything. This philosophy of life is the fundamental basis of the culture and civilization followed by Europe. As a result, whatever power the advancement of knowledge, science, and civilization has placed in human hands has begun to be employed for the path of destruction rather than for the welfare of humanity. Europeans themselves can now feel the need for a human civilization higher than their biological civilization. And the basis of that civilization can be nothing other than religion.

Proceeding further, Lord Lothian says:

There is no doubt that the scientific spirit—the inquiring outlook—has gradually removed the old superstitions from among people, broadened the scope of knowledge and science, and thus liberated men and women from many bonds of antiquity; but at the same time it has made people profoundly dependent on spiritual and religious truth. Yet it has been unable to show them any path to reach the truth. Most Westerners today are absorbed in childish frivolity, love of variety, and intoxication with sensual pleasure. Their capacity to live an unpretentious life has almost disappeared. In reality, they have no connection whatsoever with the primordial, infinite, and eternal truths presented by religion.

Religion is an indispensable guide for humanity. It is the only means of attaining the moral purpose, dignity, and significance necessary for human life. As its power of control has contracted, we see that the Western world has become addicted to political stratagems founded on hereditary and class bases, and has placed its faith in a science that declares material advancement to be the ultimate goal and makes life increasingly complex and unbearable. Moreover, establishing the unity between the spirit and life that is necessary for liberation from the grip of nationalism—the greatest affliction of the present age—has also become a difficult matter for Europe today. This too is a significant result of the decline of religious authority.

Thereafter, Lord Lothian raises the following question before India’s modern educated people:

Can India’s two great religions, Hinduism and Islam, confront the criticism and inquiring spirit of the modern age more successfully than the religious prejudice of the West? This is the most important question. If India is to be saved from the dangers that have befallen the West, the thinkers and religious leaders of this country should focus their attention on this question. There can be no doubt that the inquiring spirit will gradually eliminate the products of superstition and ignorance from among the people of India, and that will be a very good thing. But will this also remove the moral and spiritual principles of both religions from the minds of the future leaders of India’s political, cultural, and artistic life? I do not claim to be greatly familiar with the inner life of Hinduism and Islam. Nevertheless, I believe that these two religions contain elements that could qualify either of them to keep university-educated men and women under their influence. Christianity has failed in this respect because of certain bonds born of false beliefs that have concealed the very truth presented by the great founder of that religion.

Here Lord Lothian himself admits that, in reality, he knows little about Hinduism and Islam. He has merely observed from a distance certain noteworthy features in Hinduism and Islam. In his view, these features may succeed in keeping educated people established upon higher moral and spiritual principles in the face of modern criticism and the inquiring spirit. But to those who are acquainted with the inner condition of both these religions, and indeed of all the religions of India, it is by no means hidden that if any religion is to survive criticism and the inquiring spirit, only Islam can survive. Rather, to put it in the clearest terms, no religion except Islam possesses the capacity to move forward with its followers in the presence of such an outlook and to be recognized as the religion of the whole human race in an age of progress and enlightenment. Why has Christianity failed? Simply because it is not a social ideology; rather, it is bitterly opposed to social organization. It focuses only on the salvation of the individual, and even for that salvation it prescribes turning away from the world and depending on the heavenly kingdom as the sole path. For this reason, as the nations of Europe began advancing on the path of progress and development, Christianity became an obstacle instead of an aid. Consequently, they had to move forward only after breaking its bonds. The condition of Hinduism is similar. It too has no progressive philosophy of life, no rational moral code, and no expanding social system. Until now, the greatest force in binding Hindus within a social system and preventing them from accepting the influence of other civilizations has been their varna-ashrama system. But it is bound to be broken, and it will be broken. After that, nothing will be able to save Hindu society from disintegration. Its closed doors will consequently be opened to external influences. Moreover, it is also noteworthy that the ancient civilization and social laws of the Hindus, their old idolatrous superstitions, and their irrational and unscientific philosophical views cannot withstand the scientific advancement and social awareness of the modern age. Thus the Hindus are now drawing ever closer to an extreme turning point at which their destiny, and to a great extent the destiny of India, will be determined. They may, like the Christians of Europe during the Renaissance, become hostile and blinded by hatred toward Islam and adopt the path of materialist civilization; or they may continue to enter Islam in groups.

This verdict depends to a great extent on the conduct of the Muslims, especially the traditionally and modernly educated. For Islam cannot perform a miracle merely by virtue of its name. If its principles and ideals remain recorded only on the pages of books, it too cannot perform any miracle. Given the disunity, disorder, and inactivity in which Muslims are currently immersed, the inertia and stagnation that have enveloped their ulama, and the effeminate cowardice and shyness visible among their newly educated descendants, it cannot be hoped that the claimants to Islam will even be able to hold their own, let alone conquer the soul of India. It is impossible for any nation to stand firm in the face of the rushing current of revolution. It must either drift with the current or rise with full strength and turn the current in another direction. This second condition can arise only in the following way: first, the moral condition of the ordinary Muslims must be corrected and the fundamental spirit of Islamic life must be revived among them. Second, the ulama and newly educated Muslims must jointly understand the modern problems of life in the light of Islamic principles and present sound solutions to them from both the ideal and practical perspectives—so that every rational person, except the blindly hostile, is compelled to acknowledge that for a progressive society no foundation can be sounder and more faultless than Islamic culture and civilization.

The kind of conflict now taking place in India between religion and science existed in Europe fifty or sixty years ago. But the situation is soon going to change in India as well, which feeds on Europe’s leftovers. The day is therefore not far off when this hostility toward religion will no longer exist, at least from the standpoint of reason and knowledge. The condition, of course, is that we must prepare beforehand to make proper use of that opportunity. Lord Lothian has briefly pointed to this profound truth as well: sixty years ago, there was no hope of an end to the struggle between science and religion; rather, such doubt had arisen concerning the war between the spiritual and mechanical conceptions of life that it seemed impossible for the conflict to end until one of the two had died. But today both opposing sides have broken ranks. Neither the scientist nor the religious person is now firmly claiming that he has unraveled all the mysteries of the universe and resolved every complexity; rather, a doubt has arisen in the minds of both as to whether either of them knows anything at all about this mystery. Thus a possibility has appeared today that once seemed impossible amid the continual new advances of knowledge and science.

Lord Lothian is, of course, not free from the influence of Christian ideas about religion. Moreover, he has not discovered Islam’s rational conception of religion. For this reason, at most he can think that religion and science may now be reconciled. But we consider the reconciliation of religion and science entirely meaningless. If anything has stood in the way of Islam becoming the vital force of science today, it is not an inherent defect in Islam; rather, it is the boundless laziness of its followers and the ignorance and Jahili-like hostility of the standard-bearers of science. Once these two obstacles are removed, Islam will certainly remain a vital force within the domain of science.

Proceeding further, the learned speaker sheds light on another matter. It is this: can any kind of religion survive in the face of the scientific awakening and intellectual criticism of the present age? What characteristics should the religion sought by people in this enlightened age possess? And for what fundamental needs are people today seeking guidance from religion?

This is the most noteworthy point in the address under discussion. He said:

If my understanding of the situation is not mistaken, then it must certainly be acknowledged that religion in the present age is facing a severe test. It can pass this test successfully only when the younger generations examine its inherent system of laws and regulations and become fully convinced that the sound solution to all the practical problems, questions, and complexities of life lies within this religion. The age of personal religion is now over. That day has already passed. No one today needs a merely emotional religion. The age has also ended of a religion that can offer some guidance only regarding people’s moral conduct and behavior and, at most, promise salvation in the Hereafter. The rational person of the present age wants to examine everything—even truth—by the standard of tangible results. If he is to follow religion, then beforehand it must answer his question: what solution does religion offer to his practical problems? The hope of attaining nirvana after passing through many births and rebirths, or the expectation of reaching the heavenly kingdom after passing beyond the stage of death, is not something on which he will rely alone in order to accept a religion. Because of his philosophical inquisitiveness, religion must first provide him with a key by which he can arrive at a satisfactory solution to the hidden mysteries of the universe. Moreover, it must prove, by proper scientific methods, the direct relationship between action and cause, and between means and result, and show how he can bring under control the arrogant and unruly forces that now threaten the destruction rather than the welfare of humanity. Likewise, religion must explain how he will eradicate unemployment, irrational inequality, oppression and persecution, economic exploitation, war and conflict, and other social distortions, and how he will prevent mutual violence among people and the collapse of the family system. These are the matters that have robbed humanity of all joy. The sole reason people today have become so dependent on religion is that science, instead of solving their problems, has increased them. For this reason, they have never before been so anxious as they are today to have religion settle their doubts and problems. Therefore, if religion wishes to secure its sphere and restore its lost dignity, it must provide spiritual yet scientifically sound answers to the questions mentioned above—answers whose truth can be examined and tested by the standard of results while still in this world. In other words, those answers cannot be put aside for the world after death. We Westerners know that this is the greatest problem of our age. What answer can you people of India give?

After reading this part of Lord Lothian’s address, one truly feels as though a thirsty person is writhing in agony. He has no knowledge of water, but he properly feels the symptoms of thirst, and he clearly states what qualities the thing his heart’s fire desires must possess. If water were brought and presented before him in such a state, his nature would cry out, ‘It is for this very thing that I have been tormented by thirst.’ He would not even hesitate in the least to take the vessel of water and drink from it. This condition belongs not only to Lord Lothian; wherever people in Europe, America, and elsewhere in the world have been scorched by the fire of Western civilization, and after crossing the green belt along the edge of the desert of philosophy and science have arrived in the barren wilderness between them, they are all thirsty in the same way today, and like Lord Lothian they all desire a thing possessing the same qualities. None of them knows the name of water, nor does anyone know where it can be found; they merely cry out from time to time, ‘Bring quickly the thing that can quench the fire in our hearts!’

They have certainly heard the name of water, but they have never seen its real form; rather, from ignorant and hate-blinded ancestors they have also heard: ‘Beware! Do not even go near water; it is a poisonous and terrifying thing.’ That is why they have continued to fear this name. But today the situation has reached such a point that if the real thing is presented before them while its name is concealed, they will truly exclaim: ‘Yes, this is the very thing for which we were thirsty.’ Then, if they are told, ‘Gentlemen, this water is the very thing whose name you fear,’ they will say, astonished and stunned: ‘What a deception we have been living in all this time!’

The rational person of the present age has thoroughly examined Christianity. It has become as clear as daylight that this religion is no remedy for his illness. He is sometimes impressed by the enigmatic philosophies and historical reactionary character of Hinduism and Buddhism, but their failure becomes evident at the first assault of scientific criticism and analysis. Buddhism is, to a considerable extent, an Indian version of Christianity. Hinduism itself continues to create the very problems and complexities from which the rational person of the present age seeks release and because of which he feels the need for religion. Within its sphere, irrational inequality among human beings is most conspicuous. The worst form of economic exploitation—that is, moneylending and usury—has become an inseparable part of its system of laws and regulations. The root cause of war and conflict—that is, the division of humanity into tribes and mutual hatred—has entered into its very foundation. The social system it has established does not unite people; rather, it divides them into countless classes and tribes. Its social laws are so ancient and decrepit that, in the age of modern scientific and practical consciousness, even Hindus from families observing them for thousands of years are being compelled to violate them. For their foundation is not knowledge, intelligence, and reason, but hostility and superstition. Apart from all these worldly matters, it appears even more useless in the fields of jurisprudence and spirituality. It possesses no key capable of satisfactorily resolving the hidden mysteries of the universe. Its beliefs are merely imaginary matters, and no scientific or intellectual proof can be offered in support of any one of them. In matters of ethics, it does create a captivating web of imagination—as Mahatma Gandhi has also created such a web. But it is entirely devoid of reasoned proof and practical wisdom. It can therefore be stated with certainty that its failure will become apparent very soon in the age of present-day scientific consciousness.

After this, only Islam remains. In reality, Islam fully meets every criterion that the rational person of today has presented, or can present, for the religion he seeks.

The idea that religion is merely a personal matter and is related only to personal morality has become outdated. In fact, it is merely a peculiar whim of the nineteenth century. Yet even in the fourth decade of the twentieth century, a section of reactionary people in our country continues to propagate this doctrine. Although these people shout “progress, progress,” they are firmly determined always to remain fifty years behind the moving world. Today it may be said to be almost universally accepted that an individual cannot be considered apart from society. Every person in society is involved in countless relationships, large and small, with other persons. Society is, broadly speaking, like a body. Here the individual’s position is like that of the limbs and organs of a living body. If religion is needed at all, it is needed not merely for an individual’s personal satisfaction or salvation in the Hereafter, but for the organization of the whole of society and the conduct of all the affairs of earthly life. If it is not needed for this, then it is needed neither by the individual nor by society. To say that the rules and institutions of society will be one thing while an individual’s religious beliefs and practices will be something different is nothing but a childish assertion. If religious belief and practice have no relationship with social life, then such belief and conduct are entirely meaningless. Not merely meaningless: wherever they are unwilling to cooperate with the other parts of the social system, their disappearance is inevitable. Thus, of two paths, only one can be adopted: either the entire social system must be made completely irreligious and religion must be banished altogether from human life according to communist doctrine; or social life must be built entirely upon the foundation of religion, and, as Islam demands, religion must be accepted as the sole guide in both knowledge and science and culture and civilization. Humanity has been testing the first path for a long time. The poisonous results Lord Lothian has mentioned are what could be produced by it—and what it has produced. Nor will there be any exception to this rule in the future. In these circumstances, the world’s salvation lies only in the second path, and the possibility of implementing this path is becoming increasingly evident.

But, as I said earlier, whether Muslims make full use of this opportunity or lose it forever lies entirely in their own hands. Actual circumstances have brought the world—and our country, as part of the world—to a point from which its course may turn toward Islam, or it may reach the bottomless abyss of materialism and moral anarchy. So far, its course has apparently been toward the second path, because the world has been advancing along it for a very long time. Of course, frightened and apprehensive at the dangers and terrors of this path, it is also looking around to see whether there is any other way of escape. But no way of escape is visible to it. In reality, it is waiting for powerful leaders who can remove the veil from its vision and prove Islam’s simple, straightforward path to be the only path of salvation. If a group of such mujahids and mujtahids arises among Muslims, they alone will be capable of guiding the whole world. In that event, they may regain the position of honor to which they were formerly elevated and whose occupation by Western nations they now envy. But if the majority of this nation continues to sit in despair and discouragement as it does today; if its youth considers consuming the leftovers of others the height of achievement; if its ulama remain engaged in empty disputes over ancient fiqh and kalam; if the base mentality of its political leaders regards following the footsteps of foreign nations as the highest ideal of a “jihadist spirit,” and considers throwing their own nation into the trap of the twentieth century’s greatest deception a tremendous achievement and proof of intelligence—in short, if this vast nation, from head to foot, remains immersed in inactivity and incapacity, and if not even a few mard-e mu’mins among these hundreds of millions can come forward firmly to strive in jihad, ijtihad, and struggle in the path of Allah, then this nation too will one day be cast into the abyss toward which the world is rushing. Then Allah’s wrath will thunder once again:

(Arabic)

(Meaning: Perish the community of the ulama.)

7

Turkey’s Conflict between the East and the West

[The article was first published in the February 1936 issue of the monthly magazine Tarjuman-ul-Qur’an.—Editor]

Khalida Adib Khanum’s Address

[The Turkish pronunciation of the name is “Halide Edib Hanım.”]

The renowned Turkish scholar and activist, Khalida Adib Khanum, came to India in mid-1935 at the invitation of Jamia Islamia. The several addresses she delivered in Delhi were translated into Urdu and published by the Jamia professor Dr. Saiyid Abid Husain under the title “The Conflict between the East and the West in Turkey.” In this article, we shall shed some light on those addresses.

At present, two states in the Muslim world, from two different directions, have been elevated to the position of leadership of the Muslim world: Egypt intellectually and Turkey politically. The Muslim nation’s relationship with Egypt is comparatively deeper, because its language is our own international language—Arabic. Its books are circulated among Muslims throughout the world. Its intellectual influence extends from China to Morocco. In a word, Egypt is the sole link among Muslims for social intercourse, mutual understanding, and knowledge of one another. Turkey, on the other hand, has undoubtedly influenced the entire Muslim world through the Turkish nation’s life of struggle, its courageous defense against Western aggression, and its immense sacrifices for national dignity. That is why it occupies a position of leadership and authority in the Muslim world. But linguistic unfamiliarity and the lack of mutual contact and understanding have created a deep barrier between Turkey and most Muslim countries. As a result, our knowledge of the Turkish nation’s intellectual development, its intellectual formation, and its social, political, religious, and scientific progress is very limited. In particular, we have had very little opportunity to learn and understand the underlying causes and fundamental current of the great revolution that has taken place in Turkey during the past ten or twelve years. Many people are extremely dissatisfied with the Turks. Others hold a favorable opinion of them. Some have even taken their love of the West as conclusive evidence in favor of their own worship of the West. But none of them possesses authoritative and reliable information. Even where some have a little information, it is by no means sufficient to understand the vital spirit of modern Turkey.

In these circumstances, it is our great good fortune that one of the distinguished architects of modern Turkey has come here and described the internal condition of her own nation. She was not merely an actress on the stage of the recent revolution; rather, she was one of its prominent active forces. At the same time, by Allah’s grace, she possessed scholarly insight, philosophical understanding, and an intellectual power worthy of a great thinker. Consequently, she can understand the causes underlying the outward course of events and can explain them as well. From such an authoritative and reliable source, we have for the first time had the opportunity to know and understand Turkey correctly. She has attempted to unveil before us the vital spirit of modern Turkey—the nation that today is striving not only to provide political leadership to the Muslim world but also to attain intellectual leadership. What its internal condition actually is, what elements have formed it, what forces are working within it, what causes have brought it to its present position, and in what direction it is moving today—she has told us all this with complete honesty and fidelity. This authoritative source of information is extremely useful to us in many ways. Its sole benefit is not that the true condition of the Turkish nation has become clear before us; rather, one major benefit is that we can now better understand the fundamental current of the guidance our new generation is receiving from Turkey. In short, we have gained another opportunity to understand the internal causes of the revolution now taking shape in the Muslim world.

Of course, before understanding modern Turkey through Khalida Khanum, it is necessary first to understand her herself properly. There is no doubt that Khalida Khanum’s heart is wholly Muslim and filled with Islamic consciousness. Nor is this faith of an ordinary kind; it is worthy of envy, for it is the faith of a woman mujahid. [Unfortunately, as a result of later study, it was no longer possible for me to remain firm in this view (1943).]

Not even a trace of atheism or irreligion can be detected in her thinking. She has a profound attachment to Islam; it is the attachment of a genuine Muslim woman.

But although her heart is Muslim, her mind is not so. She was educated entirely in the Western tradition and studied only Western knowledge and science. She has viewed the world, Islam, and her own nation through Western spectacles, and all her thoughts and perspectives have been molded in a Western pattern. Of course, the latent Islam and love of the East in her heart resist to a considerable extent the intellectual and mental dominance of Westernism. As a result of that resistance, her thought displays a considerable degree of balance compared with that of the other revolutionary leaders of the Turkish nation. But that resistance has not been able to protect her completely from the dominance of her love of the West.

Her knowledge of Islam appears to be very limited. The time she has spent studying Western philosophy, history, and sociology was perhaps ten times the time she spent studying the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and Islamic history. For this reason, the glimpse of her thinking about Islam that has come to our attention in her addresses contains good intentions, certainly, but very little profound understanding or foresight.

In her final address she said, “Gandhiji’s personality is a complete example of modern Islam.” Only someone who has no knowledge at all of what Islam is, how much greater and more exalted it is than any comparison between the ancient and the modern, and what its complete example should be like, could say this. In the eyes of anyone who has even the slightest regard for the characteristics of Islamic character and has witnessed even a glimpse of that character, what significance could Gandhiji have? Even the great heroes of world history are worthless by comparison. This is not a statement arising from national hostility; rather, it is an undeniable historical truth. Place before you the characters of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him), Umar al-Faruq (may Allah be pleased with him), Ali al-Murtada (may Allah be pleased with him), Hasan ibn Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him), Ahmad ibn Hanbal (may Allah have mercy on him), Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (may Allah have mercy on him), and others. Then say fairly: excluding the Prophets, which personality in world history can be placed before these characters?

In the formation of the political society of the Ottoman nation, the influence of everything from the ancient hereditary characteristics of the Turkish nation to Greece, Byzantium, Rome, and even Plato’s democracy can be observed. But the influence of the Qur’an and the teachings of Muhammad (peace be upon him) alone cannot be seen. Yet it was precisely this that placed the torch of culture and civilization in the hands of the nomadic Turks of Central Asia, created in them the capacity for worldwide expansion and global renown, and transformed them from a destructive force for humanity into a well-organized force. At most, Khalida Khanum has perceived some influence of Islam’s equality and justice among the Ottomans. The situation is that when Sultan Salim wanted to propagate Islam among his subjects by force of the sword, Shaykh al-Islam Jamal Effendi ordered him to refrain from this, and even an autocratic ruler like Salim bowed before that order. But in this great event, instead of Islamic justice, Khalida Khanum noticed only a feeling of “Ottoman nationalism” and the motive of preserving “Ottoman principles of governance.” She does not understand that the spirit of “There is no compulsion in religion” was contained in Jamal Effendi’s fatwa.

It was the power of devotion to Islamic truth that gave him the courage to issue a fatwa before Salim. And it was the superiority and greatness of Islam that compelled Salim to bow before his fatwa.

Khalida Khanum appears to be dissatisfied with the secularism, oppression and persecution, coercive social organization, boundless love of the West, materialistic mentality, and attitude toward religion of Turkey’s present ruling group. She desires a balanced integration of Eastern and Western customs. She favors establishing harmony between “materialism” and “spiritualism.” She also acknowledges that the harmony Islam has created between these two philosophies of life is the best. But she herself does not possess complete insight into Islam. For this reason, she does not know the correct method of reconciliation according to Islamic principles or where the straight line of balance lies between the two extreme ends. Nevertheless, setting aside her personal opinions, in her addresses we can find a clear and accurate account of the mentality of modern Turkey, its intellectual current, and the historical causes of the recent revolution; and that is what we seek.

When the Turkish nation entered Islam, the moral and intellectual decline of the Muslims had already begun. [The Turkish nation here refers to Ottoman Turkey.] The spirit of jihad remained alive among them, but the spirit of ijtihad had died. Visionary thinkers and learned jurists in matters of Islam had by then disappeared. Islamic culture and civilization had become half-dead, and Islamic thought had become almost lifeless. Blind taqlid held sway in matters of the Shariah. Arab and Roman customs had penetrated society and civilization. Orientalism had become entrenched in Sufism, and Neoplatonism in philosophy. There arose a shortage of competent people capable of acquiring knowledge directly from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Most of the ulama became involved in intricate debates of kalam entangled in verbal sophistry, and unleashed storms of interpretation and analysis along the path followed by their predecessors. Most rulers were occupied with blindly imitating Caesar and Chosroes. The Sufi orders and spiritual leaders had abandoned the genuine Sufism of Islam’s golden age and were following monks and yogis. The Muslims’ progress in knowledge, science, and the arts had been blocked. Their progress in thought, research, and discovery had almost come to an end. In short, clear signs of decline after the period of rise had then become visible throughout the Muslim world.

Thus, the Turks appeared in Islamic history with fundamental weaknesses. The Ottoman Empire was founded almost at the very time when intellectual development and the scientific advance of Europe were beginning.

Certainly, during the first two and a half centuries, the Ottomans repeatedly defeated Europe and raised the banner of Islam’s victory. But in that same period, the Turks, along with the other Muslim nations, were gradually descending toward decline, while their Western rivals were advancing rapidly toward material and intellectual progress. In the seventeenth Christian century, the situation assumed an entirely different form. The military organization and material and human strength of the Franks had increased so greatly that, in the Battle of Saint Gotthard, they defeated the declining Turks disastrously for the first time. But even this did not open the Turks’ eyes. They continued to move toward decline, while the Franks accordingly continued to ascend to the summit of progress. By the eighteenth century, the Turks’ moral, religious, political, intellectual, and civilizational condition had reached the depths of decline, and the dominance of the Franks had become fully manifest.

At the beginning of the nineteenth century, Sultan Salim felt this overall weakness of the Turkish nation. He began reforming the system of government, promoting modern knowledge and science, organizing the military according to new methods, and introducing modern Western weapons of war. But the ignorant and foolish Sufi orders and the narrow-minded ulama, who were themselves ignorant of Islam’s teachings and spirit, opposed these reforms in the name of religion. They called military organization on the European model irreligious. They described modern military uniforms as imitation of the Christians. In their view, using bayonets was sinful. Moreover, hatred was spread against Salim on the grounds that, by introducing the practices of unbelievers, he had distorted Islam.

Shaykh al-Islam Ataullah Effendi issued a fatwa that a king who acts against the Qur’an is unfit to be king. Eventually, in the Christian year 1707, Salim was deposed. For the first time, the religious leaders, through their ignorance and blindness, created the notion that Islam was an obstacle to progress.

The circumstances of the age were changing rapidly, and compared with other Muslims, the Turks were affected by this change with exceptional force. They stood directly opposite Europe and were simultaneously at war with it. Their political, civilizational, and commercial relations were deepest with the Western nations. Even the European nations under their rule were rapidly adopting Western influence. But the Turkish religious leaders, free from expertise in Islamic knowledge and the power of ijtihad, and completely ignorant of Islam’s true teachings, were utterly indifferent to this change. As a result, they forced the Turkish nation not to advance even one step beyond the circumstances of seven hundred years earlier.

After Salim, Sultan Mahmud attempted reforms. The ulama and religious leaders opposed him again. After overcoming many obstacles, Mahmud succeeded in introducing the principle of modern military organization in 1826. But the ulama and the Sufi orders continued to proclaim that reforms of this kind amounted to bid‘ah and were distorting Islam; that the Sultan had become irreligious; and that Muslims’ faith would inevitably be destroyed if they enlisted in a modern-style army.

It was during this period that a general awareness of their national decline arose among Turkey’s thoughtful people. They reflected on the causes of the Western nations’ progress, studied their knowledge, sciences, customs, and methods, and examined their systems of administration closely; at the same time, they tried to introduce reforms and changes in the laws, administrative affairs, educational institutions, and military system of their own state so that they could progress on equal terms with the Western nations. In Khalida Khanum’s words, the life-current of Islamic thought flowed through the veins of these people. Both their hearts and their minds were Muslim. They certainly felt their own weakness, but they had no sense of inferiority at all in facing the West. They were not hypnotized by the West. They were not prepared to accept everything from it indiscriminately; rather, their sole aim was to remedy the weaknesses of their state and nation through the good things of the West and to compete with the Europeans on equal terms in every sphere of life. During the reign of Sultan Abd al-Majid Khan, they reformed the system of government and reorganized the armed forces. They breathed life into the culture and civilization of their nation. They established new schools and colleges. Thus, within only a few years, they built a new nation that possessed, along with all the jewels of Islamic civilization, advanced talent capable of thought and research. Until the deposition of Sultan Abd al-Aziz (1876), this group carried out the work of national reconstruction effectively despite countless internal and external obstacles. As a result, generals such as Umar Pasha, organizers such as Midhat Pasha, and genuine Muslim thinkers and writers such as Namik Kemal and Abdul Haq Hamid emerged.

But Sultan Abd al-Hamid came and suddenly changed the entire course. His reign lasted thirty-three years, from 1876 to 1909. During this period, another Eastern nation, Japan, climbed the ladder of progress and went from one position to another. This selfish Sultan, driven solely by his infatuation with personal power, spent his time obstructing the Turkish nation’s intellectual, mental, civilizational, political, and administrative development and enervating its vital spirit. There is no room here for an extensive criticism of this man’s deeds. Their brief summary, however, is that he spent the best period for constructive work—every hour of which was extremely precious—on destructive activities. He ruined the greatest talents of the Turkish nation. He even destroyed an incomparable personality such as Jamal al-Din Afghani. But the greatest harm caused by him, not only to the Turkish nation but to the entire Muslim world, was that he used the religious power of the Caliphate and the influence of reactionary ulama and religious leaders to uproot the foundations built by the Turkish reformers of the organizational era and to destroy their political and administrative reforms. His selfish and short-sighted conduct created a revolutionary reaction among the young Turks. As a result, they began to regard religion itself as an obstacle to progress. Their hearts and minds became rebellious toward Islamic teachings. The hatred and hostility that naturally arose in them toward the reactionary ulama and religious leaders, through the excesses of revolutionism, turned against religion itself. They thought—and the ignorant ulama and religious leaders forced them to think—that Islam was a stagnant and immobile religion. It had no capacity to keep pace with the age. Its laws and regulations could not adapt to changing circumstances. Apart from a few beliefs and doctrines, it contained nothing firm or powerful. During these thirty-three years, oppression and persecution—unfortunately given a religious color—created among the new generations of Turks atheism, materialism, fascination with the West, blind taqlid of Western thought, hostility toward their own heritage, rebellion against everything old, and intense hatred of the Caliphate and Islamic unity, which Sultan Abd al-Hamid had made instruments of his personal interests. Alongside this, they were firmly led to believe that, in order to achieve progress and prosperity in the world, it was necessary to demolish all the foundations of the past and build the edifice of Turkism entirely according to Western methods.

The Revolution of 1908 dethroned Sultan Abdul Hamid. As a result, absolute power over the state passed into the hands of overzealous and excitable young men possessed of a rebellious mentality. In Khaleda Khanam’s words, these men were different from the reformers of the Constitutional Era. Not one of them was the equal of the thinkers of the Constitutional Era in educational qualifications, intellectual inquiry, or refined intelligence. They had neither that lofty objective before them nor such firmness in their character. In courtesy, civility, and education, there was no comparison between them and us. They possessed neither that intense nationalism nor the discernment to understand the proper distinction between the ancient and the modern. This small group of young men was ignorant of Islamic knowledge and immature in Islamic education. Nor did they possess any profound understanding of Western knowledge. Their minds had become filled with intense hatred for their own religion, civilization, knowledge, sciences, customs, and ancient social institutions. The progress and advancement of the West had completely bewitched them. They had become restless to change everything of their own. When state power fell into their hands, the stagnant and polluted water of thirty-three years burst out as if in a flood. In this very period, the demons of patriotism and Turanian chauvinism mounted the Turks. [The word Turanian derives from the name ‘Tura’ or ‘Turan.’ It was the ancestral homeland of the Turks, located in Central Asia. It is possible that during the Mongol invasions, a branch of the Turkic tribes there settled in present-day Turkey, and that the ‘Ottoman Turks,’ or modern Turkey, emerged from them.] Indifference toward Islamic unity began to be displayed. The work of criticizing religion began in earnest. Immense efforts began to be devoted to fully embracing the ancient pre-Islamic civilization. A proposal was put forward to adopt the Latin alphabet in order to sever ties with the past and establish closeness with the West. A group of government ulama came forward to cast Islam in the mold of modern ideologies. Ziya Gökalp was the leader of this group. He vigorously propagated Turanian unity in opposition to Islamic unity. By arousing hatred and revulsion in the minds of the Turks toward the history of the Islamic era and its renowned heroic sons, he taught them to take pride in the ancient barbarous Tatars (among whom the figures of Genghis and Hulagu are the most notable). He tried to free the Turkish language from the influence of Islamic literature. He emphasized the complete imitation of the West in Turkish society, civilization, culture, customs, and every practice of daily life. A man with this outlook emerged as the leader of the modern revolutionary party. Along with his followers, he tried to interpret Islamic teachings in such a way that everything in Islam, except a handful of beliefs and moral principles, could be altered and cast in the mold of the West.

On the one hand, such a great revolution was beginning among the Turkish nation; on the other, the Turkish ulama and religious leaders were still unwilling to emerge from the atmosphere of the seventh century. Their incompetence, superstition, reactionism, and extreme unwillingness to adapt to the age continued just as in the time of Sultan Selim. They were still saying that the door of ijtihad had been closed after the fourth Hijri century. Yet before their very eyes, the door of apostasy was being opened. They were still occupied with studying books on philosophy and kalam that the march of the age had left five hundred years behind after casting them aside. In their sermons and admonitions, they continued to recite the old-style tafsir of the Qur’an and those weak hadiths which, though they might have made people of a hundred years earlier sigh, caused intelligent contemporary people to feel repugnance not only toward those exegetes and hadith scholars but toward the Qur’an and Hadith themselves. They still insisted on introducing among the Turkish nation the legal system written in the ‘Shami’ and ‘Kanz al-Daqa’iq’; even when this insistence led the Turks to abandon obedience to the laws prescribed by the Qur’an and Sunnah, they were not prepared to change their position.

In short, the ulama and religious leaders were following such misguided policies that, within only a hundred years, they had diverted the Turkish nation from the stage of constitutionalism and brought it to this stage of revolutionary radicalism. On the other hand, although the revolutionary leaders of the Turkish nation were Muslims in heart and soul, they were gradually moving away from Islam in the practical world of thought, intellect, and action. It was precisely at this time that the drums of the First World War began to beat. In it, the unfortunate Muslims of Arabia and India joined the enemies of Islam in cutting the throats of the Turks. Then, after the Great War ended, when the Turks engaged in a struggle to save their national life from utter destruction, their greatest opponents were the then Caliph and the Shaykh al-Islam. These final blows were devastating to the revolutionary movement and to the Turks’ half-dead Islamic consciousness. We can see their inevitable result in the limitless modernism of the new Turkey. The revolutionary outlook that had been immature in 1908, and whose maturation had been obstructed by the distractions of the Tripoli War, the Balkan War, and the Greek attack, suddenly matured after the Lausanne Conference and began to take completely practical form. Thus came the complete implementation of Western principles in society and civilization; the full reflection of nationalism in language, literature, and politics; and, after the fall of the Caliphate, the creation of a distinction between religion and the state which, in Khaleda Khanam’s words, freed the state from the influence of religion and made religion subservient to the state. Swiss law was introduced in place of Islamic law; even the Qur’an’s clear injunctions on such matters as inheritance, marriage, and divorce were changed; women were left to an unrestrained freedom entirely contrary to Islamic teaching and resembling that of European women after the Great War. All of this was the natural consequence of the incompetence of ignorant ulama, the errors of self-worshipping Sufis, the selfishness of sultans who illegally exploited the dignity of the Caliphate, and the revolutionary leaders’ dreadful ignorance of the Qur’an and Sunnah. It is a matter of regret that during this century the Turkish nation could not produce a single genius deeply versed in the Qur’an and Hadith and capable of grasping the fundamental spirit of Islamic teachings—someone who could keenly observe the changing conditions of the age, employ the power of ijtihad, apply Islamic principles to those conditions, and develop a well-balanced way of life founded on the Qur’an and Sunnah and suited to moving in step with the progress of the age.

Those who are unaware of this course of Turkish history are falling into a strange kind of error. People with old-fashioned religious outlooks continue to issue fatwas of unbelief and wickedness against the new Turks. But they do not know that the Turkish scholars and religious leaders were more sinful than those new Turks. The incompetence of these ulama and religious leaders pushed the mujahid nation that had fought alone for Islam for five hundred years from Islam toward Europeanism. If such incompetence were one day to push other Muslim nations in the same direction, there would be nothing surprising about it.

On the other hand, the progressives present every ‘revelation’ descending from Ankara before the Muslims as though the Qur’an had been abrogated and Muhammad’s prophethood had come to an end. If guidance exists now, they say, it exists only in Atatürk’s way of life; if a ray of knowledge exists, it is only in the ‘revelations’ descending from the heavens of Ankara. Yet the condition of poor Atatürk and his followers is this:

(Arabic)

(Yet they have no knowledge of this; they merely pursue conjecture. —Surah al-Zukhruf: 20)

8

The Deception of Rationalism

[The article was first published in the monthly Tarjuman al-Qur’an in December 1934]

I

The profound influence that Western education, culture, and civilization exert on the religious outlook of young men immature or entirely untrained in Islamic education can be inferred from the writings and speeches published by people of this class. For example, we recently came across an article by a Muslim graduate from the United Provinces. In that article, while describing his experiences of traveling in China and Japan, he wrote:

Our Chinese companions are extremely gluttonous and drunkards. Pork is dearer to them than life itself. Now I have understood the secret of Christianity’s progress. The Chinese regard adherence to their ancient religion as contrary to modern education. If they could understand this, they would have no difficulty accepting Islam. But Islam deprives them of all their favorite foods; therefore, they are compelled to accept Christianity. In such circumstances, there would be nothing surprising if Christianity were to become China’s official religion in the future. Regarding pork, I am inclined to grant some concession to the new Muslims of Europe and China. I even have doubts about its being explicitly haram according to the Qur’an. At most, perhaps it was forbidden to the Arabs for some special reason. But in a country where, without it, ‘fa-man idturra ghayra baghin wa la ‘adin’ (that is, survival becomes impossible), what harm is there in using it? In short, I have not understood the significance of this one rule of the Qur’an—that is, the reason for its general prohibition. Otherwise, although there is such a great gulf in principle between the stomach and the moral consciousness, if religion can prepare a dietary list for us, why should it not teach us ironwork, jewelry-making, tailoring, and so forth? In my opinion, the profound reason why Islam has not advanced and spread in the world is that it deprives people of all their human rights and turns them into lifeless objects and utterly ignorant children. As a result, they lose the path to their own worldly progress. Otherwise, our religion should be just as Christianity has understood it.

Then, while describing the condition of Shanghai, he writes:

When I see these countless happy and prosperous people created by God, my heart cannot accept that in only a few years they will become fuel for Hell—as though this were the sole purpose God had in creating them. Moreover, if all but a few of them are unbelievers and idolaters, is the fact that they have enriched and beautified God’s world to be counted as the offense for which they are cast into Hell? They do not kill pilgrims or commit highway robbery! They do not possess the depravity of the people of Lot. They do not seize anyone’s wealth, nor do they produce any argument to make it ‘lawful.’ They live their lives peacefully and orderly. Even so, why should they be deemed fit for Hell? The polytheistic notion is undoubtedly foolish and hollow. But tell me: if a person naturally believes that some being controls his life and death, but is just as incapable as we are of grasping its profound mystery, or does not believe that Arabic is God’s language—will you become his enemy and he yours for this reason alone? But no; in your view, even all this is unnecessary. All you require is that one wear a particular kind of pajama and a shirt of a particular cut. One must eat particular kinds of food. One must keep a beard four fingers’ breadth long on one’s face. One may not enter the country’s educational institutions, because religious languages and scriptures are not taught there.

Regarding the Japanese port of Kobe, he writes:

I spent two hours touring the port of Kobe. I did not see a single beggar anywhere, nor did I notice a poor person dressed in worn and tattered clothes. How advanced this nation is, even though it does not know the name of religion or God!

Then he himself began dispensing ‘good advice’:

Remember, ihsan is the essential thing in religion. But it is dependent on neither any language nor any scripture. Its natural aim is to make us responsible, in the life of the Hereafter or in this worldly life, for our own deeds. This is the true religion of Islam. Whatever else you have named religion is merely self-deception or mental derangement. On the day you confine religion to these two things and sever every bond of the Shariah, you too will be able to reach the pinnacle of progress alongside other nations; or rather, say that on that day you will awaken reason and conscience among the nations. If worldly sovereignty does not leave anyone’s hands, neither will ‘heavenly sovereignty.’ You are not yourselves a nation, but reformers of other nations. But, for God’s sake, do not allow anyone to say that a certain nation has reached the pinnacle of progress while the Muslims among it are in an extremely miserable condition. There is no doubt that their strange religion is responsible for this miserable condition.

This excerpt is a clear example of the general mental condition of our newly educated youth. They were born into Muslim families, raised as members of Muslim society, and bound to Muslims by the ties of society and civilization. For this reason, attachment to Islam, sympathy for Muslims, and the desire to live as Muslims are innate in them. This desire became firmly rooted in their minds without the influence of their willpower, intellect, or power of thought. Yet it should have been their foremost duty to transform this involuntary, unconscious Islam through education into a deliberate and conscious Islam; to fully understand Islamic teachings before identifying themselves as Muslims; and to develop the ability to practice Islamic rules, regulations, and laws in real life. But before that could happen, they were sent to schools and colleges for English education. There, amid wholly un-Islamic education, their minds, attitudes, and powers of thought developed. Western civilization and thought exerted a profound influence on their minds. As a result, they viewed everything from a Western perspective. They began judging every problem with a Western mentality. In short, it became impossible for them to think, reflect, or observe in any way free from this all-encompassing influence of Westernism. They did learn the lesson of rationalism from the West, but they possessed no reasoning of their own. Their reasoning was borrowed from Europe. Thus their rationalism essentially became European rationalism and was no longer independent rationalism at all. They also learned criticism from the West, but this too was not a lesson in independent criticism; rather, its substance was that Western customs and ways were to be regarded as infallible, everything in the East judged by their standard, while Western customs and ways themselves were to be considered beyond criticism.

After such education, when they crossed the boundaries of college and entered the arena of practical life, a vast gulf appeared between their hearts and their minds. Their hearts were Muslim, but their minds were non-Muslim. They lived in Muslim society. Day and night they conducted all their affairs with Muslims. They were bound to Muslims by the ties of society and civilization. All around them they observed the religious and cultural activities of Muslims. Their relationships of love and sympathy were connected with Muslims; but all their powers of thought, judgment, deliberation, and opinion-making had been molded by the West. They had no compatibility whatsoever with any Islamic custom or Muslim practice. Consequently, they began judging every aspect of Islam and Muslims by Western standards. Everything contrary to this standard—whether a fundamental principle or minor detail of Islam, or any practice of Muslims—they regarded as erroneous and in need of reform. Some of them even studied Islam to some extent for research and observation. But the standard of their criticism and research was likewise Western. How, then, could Islam’s straight peg fit through the crooked aperture of their mentality?

When gentlemen of this class express opinions on religious matters, their speech clearly gives the impression that they are delivering an unbroken lecture without any thought whatsoever. Their presentation is neither coherent nor arranged according to the rules of logic. They do not even make any effort to reach the correct conclusion. Most astonishing of all, they do not even determine their own position while speaking. In discussing the same matter, they casually adopt different positions—while speaking from one particular position, they suddenly assume another and begin arguing against their own earlier position. Loose thinking is a notable feature of their religious discussions. On any subject other than religion, they speak with great care and caution, because they know very well that if they say anything incoherent there, they will lose whatever standing they have in the eyes of the learned. But because religion has no value or importance in their eyes, they feel no need to exercise their minds when speaking about it. For this reason, they can speak completely incoherently here with perfect confidence. Their conduct suggests that, after a meal, they are merely reclining in an easy chair and engaging in some light banter; consequently, they feel no need to observe any rules concerning the manner of speaking on the subject.

The second thing clearly found in the writings of such people is the coarseness of their thinking and the poverty of their knowledge. They would not dare speak on any subject other than religion with such little knowledge and such meager thought. For fear of losing respect, they know that speaking without knowing the facts would be dangerous. But concerning religion, they do not feel any need to investigate, study, or think. On the basis of whatever they learn superficially, they reach a conclusion and state it without hesitation. For here they have no fear of being challenged. Perhaps the maulvis would challenge them; but it has already been deliberately assumed that the maulvis are blind, old-fashioned, and narrow-minded.

Both these characteristics are fully present in the article under discussion by the able writer. First, it is impossible to tell from his article whether he is speaking as a Muslim or as a non-Muslim. Yet anyone who speaks about Islam can have only two positions: either he adopts the position of Muslims, or he speaks as a non-Muslim. Whoever speaks as a Muslim—whether he is orthodox, free-thinking, or a reformer—must speak within the bounds of Islam. That is, he must unreservedly accept the Qur’an as the Final Authority and the religious principles and Shariah rulings established by the Qur’an. For if he does not believe in the authenticity of the Qur’an, or thinks that it is permissible to criticize anything proven from the Qur’an, he must leave Islam. After crossing this boundary, he can no longer speak from the position of a Muslim. Conversely, if he adopts the second position—that is, if he is an avowed non-Muslim—he may freely criticize the Qur’an’s principles and legal system, because he does not recognize the Qur’an as the final authority. But after adopting this position, he has no right to speak as a Muslim, pretend to be a Muslim while explaining the significance of Islam to Muslims, or offer guidance for Islam’s advancement. When an intelligent and conscious person discusses Islam knowingly and deliberately, he will also consider the logical conditions governing which of these two positions is acceptable for him. For identifying oneself as a Muslim while criticizing the principles and legal system established by the Qur’an, or questioning the Qur’an’s authenticity while dispensing advice to Muslims, cannot be the act of any intelligent person. It is merely a futile attempt to combine two contradictory things. It means that, at the same time, a person is identifying himself by both names, Muslim and non-Muslim—at the same time standing both within and outside the bounds of Islam.

We do not entertain such an unfavorable opinion of the author’s education and intelligence that, when speaking on a subject other than Islam, he would likewise adopt two mutually contradictory positions. Nor do we expect him to sit in the court of the Emperor of India [it should be remembered that the essay was written in 1934] and criticize the system of laws instituted by the Emperor of India himself. Nor do we expect such audacity from him that, after claiming allegiance to a religion or School of Thought, he would proceed to criticize the fundamental principles of that very religion. Yet the astonishing fact is that, regarding Islam, he has adopted two completely contradictory positions. He is not even aware that he repeatedly changes his position. On the one hand, he presents himself as a Muslim, identifies himself by the name of a Muslim, laments the plight of Muslims, expresses concern for Islam’s advancement, and offers Muslims ‘ihsan’—that is, advice concerning the ‘pure religion.’ On the other hand, he also recklessly criticizes the fundamental principles and legal system of the Book upon which Islam rests, and whose acceptance as the ultimate proof is an essential condition of being a Muslim. The Qur’an has explicitly declared pork unlawful in at least four places, not merely in one or two [see al-Baqarah, verse 173; al-Ma’idah, verse 3; al-An‘am, verse 145; and al-Nahl, verse 115]. Yet he favors giving people an exemption in this matter. The amusing thing is that this eagerness to grant an exemption is supposedly for the sake of ‘Islam’s advancement’! It seems that concern for Islam’s advancement has occupied him even more than the Qur’an itself. Or perhaps he has become impatient to advance some Islam outside the Qur’an! In reality, however, the Qur’an, like other matters, also prepares a dietary menu for human beings and distinguishes between lawful and unlawful, pure and impure foods. It even states plainly: ‘You have no right to declare anything lawful or unlawful according to your own desires’ [al-Nahl, verse 116]. Yet he insists on his own right in this matter and hesitates to acknowledge the Qur’an’s right. In other words, he is unwilling to accept any intervention by religion in matters of food and drink! In fact, unlike the followers of Saint Paul [he was one of the principal disciples of Jesus Christ. He died approximately in 67 CE. The Christian world today follows his doctrine.—Editor] (not Jesus Christ), the Qur’an has not confined religion to any particular sphere. Rather, it provides laws for every matter, including clothing, food and drink, marriage and divorce, inheritance, transactions, politics, courts, penal law, and so forth. Yet he regards this as an obstacle to Islam’s advancement and progress. He has complained that these laws turn human beings into lifeless corpses and ignorant children. Therefore, he has proposed that our religion should be exactly like Christianity as Christians understand it (in reality, as the followers of Paul understand it). The Qur’an itself has formulated the Shari‘ah laws and called them limits prescribed by Allah, commanding obedience to them. Yet he calls these limits of the Shari‘ah shackles. Like Saint Paul, he considers it necessary to break those shackles for the propagation and advancement of religion. In the Qur’an’s view, faith is the first and essential condition for salvation. Regarding anyone who does not believe in Allah, the Qur’an declares in clear terms that he will become fuel for Hell [al-Anbiya, verse 98]. Whether they are innumerable or few, affluent or poor, makes no difference. But his condition is that, seeing the innumerable unbelievers and idolaters living happily, comfortably, and prosperously, his heart cannot accept that they will become fuel for Hell after only a few years. He simply cannot understand what crime they have committed apart from enriching and beautifying God’s world! The question is: how can he remain a Muslim while holding such an openly conflicting view of the Qur’an? Or how can he, as a Muslim, oppose the Qur’an? If he is a Muslim, he should not disagree with the Qur’an. And if he wishes to disagree, he should do so only after going beyond the limits prescribed by Islam. A person who is not satisfied with the fundamental principles and legal system of a religion, whose heart does not accept the truth of that system, who is unable to understand its rationale and wisdom, and in whose view some or most of its matters are objectionable, has only two paths open to him: either he may leave that religion and acquire the right to criticize any of its rules and laws without restriction; or, if he wishes to remain within it despite his dissatisfaction, he should refrain from openly expressing resentment against it and, instead of pretending to be a ‘mujtahid’ and sawing away at its legal system, try to remove his doubts like a genuine student. According to sound judgment and reason, only these two courses can be rational. If a truly conscientious person faced such a situation, he would adopt one or the other. But the condition of the eminent author and many of his English-educated associates is that they lack the moral courage to take the first path, while they are also ashamed to follow the second. For this reason they have adopted an irrational middle course: on the one hand, they join the Muslims, wish for Islam’s advancement and progress, and express agitation over the suffering of Islam and Muslims; on the other hand, they say and do everything against Islam that only non-Muslims could do. They do not hesitate to criticize even the Noble Qur’an, let alone Hadith and fiqh. They continue to strike freely at every foundation of Islam. These gentlemen claim that they alone are the rational people in society; therefore, they cannot accept anything irrational. Their greatest accusation against the ‘mullahs’ is that they apply no judgment or reason to anything. Yet their own condition is that, in religious matters, they plainly make self-contradictory statements, adopt mutually contradictory policies, and refute one statement with another of their own. What kind of rationalism is this that progressive researchers have discovered and for which they claim distinction?

Now examine more closely the extent of their knowledge and the depth of their thinking.

For the advancement of Islam, the eminent author considers it necessary to abolish all Shari‘ah restrictions, as in Christianity, and reduce Islam to a religion consisting merely of belief. He has perceived the secret behind Christianity’s advancement to be that it has no limits between the lawful and the unlawful, and no concern with moral restrictions. There, human rights have not been taken away and human beings have not been turned into lifeless corpses and ignorant children; rather, they have been given freedom to do as they please while believing in Christ. But he has not thought deeply enough to realize that what is called Islam exists in the Qur’an. The Qur’an has designated both faith and righteous action by the collective name Islam. Moreover, it has established clear limits for righteous action, provided a system of laws, and prescribed a complete way of conduct for individual and collective life. Without such a system, Islam cannot possibly become established as a din (way of life) and a civilization. No Muslim has been given the right to abolish that system and those limits, because their abolition is simply another name for the abolition of Islam. And if Islam itself is abolished, what meaning can its advancement have? He may, if he wishes, invent a religion of his own and propagate it; but what right has he to pass off as Islam something contrary to the Qur’an and call its advancement ‘the advancement of Islam’?

He wishes to call merely one belief Islam, namely, that we are responsible for our deeds in this world and the Hereafter. Perhaps he has said this in the hope that Islam would thereby become limited, its nature would become simple and gentle, and it would continue to spread rapidly.

But if he had thought a little more deeply about the significance of this belief, he would have understood that even after being limited in this way, Islam could not satisfy him. For this belief to be called a religion, it first becomes necessary to believe in the life of the Hereafter. Moreover, accountability or a sense of responsibility depends on three things. First, determining the nature of the One before whom one must answer and accepting His sovereignty. Second, determining the nature of accountability and, accordingly, distinguishing in practical life between successful and unsuccessful actions. Third, determining the separate consequences of success and failure in accountability. For if success and failure had the same consequences, or if there were no consequences at all, accountability would become entirely meaningless. This is the logical implication of the belief that the eminent author wishes to call the ‘pure religion.’ Even if Islam were established upon this belief according to his proposal, the very problem from which he wishes to escape would inevitably return. It would again become necessary to believe in that God without whom Japan appears to have reached the summit of progress. Again, those Shari‘ah bonds and moral restraints would be created which he wishes to sever and within which he believes the secret of Islam’s failure to advance lies. Again, the issue of punishment and reward—of suffering and recompense—would arise, and, seeing the countless creatures of God living happily and prosperously without faith, his heart would refuse to accept that they would be cast into punishment after only a few years.

Therefore, after giving the matter some thought, let him instead call Islam something in which there are no restrictions of any kind, in which the ultimate fate of believer and unbeliever alike will be the same, in which enriching and properly ordering God’s world will be sufficient for success in the Hereafter, and in which, seeing the countless creatures who do not believe in it living happily and prosperously, his heart will be able to accept that after a few years all of them will be turned into nightingales of Paradise.

According to the Qur’anic injunction, the author does not regard the final unlawfulness of pork as established or authoritative. He suspects that perhaps it was declared unlawful for Arabs for some special reason. But before expressing this opinion, he could have dispelled his doubt simply by opening the Holy Qur’an and taking a look. The Qur’an states plainly:

(Arabic)

Meaning: O Prophet, say: In what has been revealed to me, I find nothing forbidden for any eater to eat, except carrion, flowing blood, and the flesh of swine—for these are undoubtedly impure—or an animal slaughtered in disobedience in a name other than Allah. Then whoever is compelled [to eat any of these], provided he is not disobedient or transgressing, your Lord is Forgiving and Merciful. (Surah al-An‘am: 145)

In this verse, pork has been made unlawful for every ‘eater’ (Arabic). The reason given for declaring it unlawful is that it is ‘impure’ (Arabic). The question is: does ‘eater’ here mean an Arab eater? Besides, can the same thing be pure for an Arab and impure for a non-Arab? Following this line of reasoning, would the author also like to grant an exemption to carrion-eaters? If he wishes to grant an exemption regarding pork, let him do so on his own behalf. But where did he acquire the right to say, against the Qur’an’s clear declaration, that its final unlawfulness under the Qur’an is not beyond doubt?

Today’s new mujtahids have invented a strange principle for ijtihad. One of their characteristic principles is that, concerning any Islamic rule they wish to oppose, they confidently declare that this particular rule was made for the Arabs. Although the Qur’an contains not the slightest indication of such restriction, nor any argument or example in its support, they feel no hesitation at all in making such statements. If this trend continues, perhaps in the near future they will even wish to designate the Qur’an itself as intended only for the Arabs.

Moreover, using (Arabic) (‘a person who is compelled, without being disobedient or transgressing’) as an argument is so laughable that one feels inclined to praise the knowledge and intelligence of the travel writer. Perhaps he has understood the verse to mean: ‘When a spontaneous desire to eat pork arises, eat it, but do not eat it while sitting in a garden, and do not make a habit of it.’

In fact, only someone who understands none of the words ‘compelled,’ ‘disobedient,’ and ‘habitual’ could extract from this verse an opportunity to grant Europeans and Chinese an exemption regarding pork. Otherwise, anyone who knows the meanings of these words could not display such audacity. The verse does not mean that all those who are addicted to eating carrion or drinking blood, who would give their lives for pork, or among whom eating animals slaughtered in a name other than Allah is generally customary, are included among the compelled. If that were so, the entire prohibition would become meaningless. For if the prohibition applied to those who consume these things, they would continue eating according to their habits by taking advantage of the exceptional circumstance; and if it applied only to those who already abstain from these things, there would be no need for the prohibition at all. In reality, the exception was created by attaching the condition ‘without being disobedient or transgressing’ to the word ‘compelled’ (****). This means that if a person is on the verge of dying from hunger and cannot obtain anything other than unlawful food, he may eat unlawful food solely to preserve his life, but on the condition that he does not exceed the limits of the permission. That is, he must not eat more than is essential to preserve his life, nor harbor the desire to violate the limits prescribed by Allah. This very point has been stated elsewhere regarding the prohibition of pork, carrion, and the like:

(Arabic)

That is, if someone becomes compelled because of the pangs of hunger, he may eat unlawful food in such a situation provided he has no inclination toward sin. Where is the Qur’anic injunction, and where is the author’s advocacy on behalf of Europeans and Chinese? Since the inhabitants of those countries would give their lives for pork, pork must be made lawful for them through the opportunity provided by (Arabic)—and that too in order to bring them into Islam. What an absurd argument! If, taking into account every nation’s addictions and preferences, this practice of granting concessions in Islam’s legal system begins, then wine, fornication, usury, and every other such prohibited thing will have to be made lawful one by one. The question is: what need is there to bring into Islam those who are not prepared to follow Allah’s commands, observe the limits He has prescribed, or even regard the unlawful as unlawful? When has Islam ever been dependent on such people that it must bargain in order to win their approval?

At first, the author simply failed to understand the reason why pork is unlawful. But after some reflection, he came to understand that, in principle, there is a vast gap between the stomach and the moral conscience. He therefore concluded that religion has no right to distinguish between lawful and unlawful among foods. His statement has also revealed the secret that he knows no more about physical science than he does about the Qur’an. Of course, ignorance of the Qur’an is not such a shame for an educated and enlightened person, but such profound ignorance of science is certainly a matter of great shame. To this day he does not even know what relationship the human soul has with the body’s constitution, and what relationship the body’s constitution has with food. It is not surprising that the substance which supplies the body’s depleted elements, through which all the body’s veins, blood vessels, and nervous system are formed, should have a natural influence on the heart and soul; rather, it would be astonishing if it did not. The scientific world was once generally indifferent to this truth, but recent research into dietetics has revealed that food certainly influences a person’s moral character and mental powers. Therefore, modern scientists are investigating what effects different kinds of food have on our souls and powers of thought. It seems that our graduate friend’s knowledge of science is by no means up to date. Otherwise, he could not have claimed with such tremendous audacity that, in principle, there is a vast gap between the stomach and the moral conscience.

9

The Deception of Rationalism

[The essay was first published in June 1936 in the monthly journal Tarjuman al-Qur’an.—Editor.]

Two

For the past two decades, Westerners have been vigorously propagating two things: Rationalism and Naturalism. Who can deny the power of propaganda? When something is repeatedly and continually placed before people’s eyes and made to enter their ears, how long can they protect their minds from its influence? Thus, through the glory of propaganda, the world has ultimately accepted that Western knowledge, science, and civilization are founded upon pure Rationalism and Naturalism. Yet a critical study of Western civilization makes it absolutely clear that its foundation rests on neither rationalism nor natural law; rather, the opposite is true: the entire structure of Western civilization is founded solely upon feelings, desires, and needs. In reality, the Western Renaissance was nothing more than a tremendous revolt against intellect and nature. That awakening abandoned sound judgment and proceeded along the path of sensual experience and materialism. It relied on feelings instead of reason. It rejected the dictates of conscience, rational proofs, and natural instinct, and declared perceptible material results to be the true and genuine standard. It treated the dictates of nature as mistaken notions and adopted desire and need as its guides. It regarded everything beyond the limits of measurement as hollow and baseless. It called useless and unnecessary everything that could not produce some perceptible material benefit. At first, this truth was concealed even from Westerners themselves. For this reason, despite proceeding against reason and nature, they believed that the new age of ‘free intellectualism’ they had inaugurated was founded on ‘Rationalism’ and ‘Naturalism.’ Later, of course, the real secret became evident. But they lacked the courage to acknowledge it. Thus, with supreme cleverness, they draped the cover of rational proof and Naturalism over their worship of matter, servitude to instinct, and enslavement to the senses. But, as the English proverb says, today ‘the cat is completely out of the bag.’ Irrationality and opposition to nature have become so conspicuous that it is no longer possible to cover them. For this reason, open revolt is now being proclaimed against both reason and nature. From the sacred horizons of knowledge and science to society, economics, and politics, the flag of revolt has been raised everywhere. Consequently, apart from a group of ‘reactionary’ hypocrites, all the leaders of the modern world have accepted only the authority of desire and need over their civilization.

The Westernizers and Anglophiles are still several steps behind their mentors. Naturally, the worship of sensual experience and materialism, and servitude to desire and need, were bound to arise in them as well, given the education and humane environment, and the culture and civilization, in which their intellectual development took place. And that is precisely what is happening. But they have not yet reached the stage at which the cat comes out of the bag. Through their speeches and writings, they still claim: we accept only the dictates of reason and nature. Present us only with rational proofs. We will accept nothing unless it is established by rational evidence and natural signs. But hidden inside this bag of grand words is a cat that is neither rational nor natural. An analysis of their writings will make it clear that their minds are wholly incapable of seeking and understanding rational proofs and natural instinct. If the meaning of what they call ‘rational welfare’ is examined, it will be found that it is actually ‘empirical welfare.’ Empirical welfare means something solid, weighty, countable, and measurable. They are not at all prepared to accept any benefit whose usefulness cannot be demonstrated by calculating it according to mathematical rules, weighing it on scales, or measuring it with a yardstick. Until its usefulness in this particular sense has been proven, believing in it and obeying it is, in their view, utterly ‘irrational.’ The secret of their claim to follow nature’s dictates also becomes clear upon closer examination. In their view, nature does not mean human nature; it means biological nature. In biological nature there is no place for reason or the faculties of the heart; it consists only of feelings, desires, and subservience to the senses. In their view, only those things are credible that can influence the human senses, satisfy desires, and fulfill physical and psychological demands. Only those things are reliable whose benefits can be readily tested, whose harmfulness is not visible, or whose benefits are more visible than their harmfulness. Conversely, things that are natural to human beings, whose importance people perceive through their own conscience, and whose benefit or harm is not material or sensory but spiritual and inward—these are superstition, meaningless, useless, and unnecessary.

To attach any importance to such things—even to acknowledge their existence—is blindness, superstition, and backwardness. On the one hand, they are so averse to reason and nature; on the other, they claim Rationalism and progressivism! Their intellectual bankruptcy has reached such a stage that they cannot perceive the contradiction.

From education, culture, and civilization, a person’s inner self ought at least to gain this benefit: that his thoughts, awareness, and concepts do not become scattered, incoherent, and disordered. He should adopt a clear and straightforward method of thinking. By arranging the sequence of events correctly, he should reach sound conclusions. He should avoid obvious errors resembling self-contradiction and meaningless raving. Yet, with a few exceptions, our generally educated gentlemen appear deprived even of these basic benefits of mental refinement. Before arguing about anything, they show no discernment in determining the correct position for themselves, understanding the intellectual consequences of that position, and, bearing those consequences in mind, adopting a line of reasoning consistent with their own position. If one converses with them or looks at their writings, it becomes apparent at first sight that their thoughts are terribly incoherent. After beginning a discussion from one standpoint, they change their position after proceeding only a short distance, and after going a little farther they adopt an entirely different position. They do not even select facts thoughtfully to establish their subject, let alone arrange them according to the principles of logic. What is their actual argument? What matter were they trying to determine as true or false, and what conclusion did they ultimately reach? Even after searching from beginning to end, no answer to these questions can be found. The underlying reason for this situation is that the principal aim of the present civilization and the modern educational system under its influence is directed toward sensualism and materialism. It arouses human greed and desire, stimulates the sense of need, and implants the importance of perceptible objects in the heart and mind, but it does not cultivate intellectual and mental excellence. It does create in people a conceit of judgment, discernment, and thoughtfulness, and that conceit encourages them to offer a ‘rational’ criticism of everything and to deny everything that, in their view, is not ‘rationally acceptable.’ But in reality, their minds are utterly averse to rationalism. They never acquire the ability to resolve a question through a sound chain of reasoning or to reach a decision on any matter.

The strongest evidence of this irrational “rationalism” of the modern educated is found in matters of religion. For Western doctrines conflict with the spiritual, ethical, social, and cultural foundations of this subject in every respect.

To prove the truth of this statement, engage an English-educated person in a discussion on some religious matter and, in order to assess his mental state, obtain from him an acknowledgment that he is a Muslim. Then present before him some injunction of the Shariah and offer proof in its support. At once the gentleman will shake himself awake and say, with an air of great intelligence: “This is nothing but mere ‘mullahism.’ Bring me reason and proof. If you have no reason and proof beyond mere description or quotation, I will accept nothing you say.” Well, these few words alone will reveal the secret: the breeze of rationalism has not touched the gentleman at all. Despite his long education, training, and study, the poor man has not realized what the intellectual consequence is of demanding reason and proof in every matter, or what the true status of the person making such a demand actually is.

In Islam, a person can rightfully have only two statuses: either he is a Muslim, or he is a non-Muslim, that is, an unbeliever. If he is a Muslim, this means that he has accepted Allah and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) with all his heart and soul. He has also acknowledged that whatever instruction the Messenger brings from Allah, he will obey without question. In such circumstances, he no longer has the right to demand reason and proof in support of each individual injunction. As a Muslim, his task is only to ascertain whether the Messenger of God has issued a particular instruction. Thereafter, even if that instruction cannot be substantiated by conventional reasoning, he should obey it at once. Of course, he may ask for reason and proof in order to attain peace of mind and insight. But this demand may be made only when he is prepared to carry out the instruction. To demand reason and proof as a precondition for obedience, and to refuse to obey if proof is not provided or peace of mind is not attained, means that he is in reality denying the authority of the Messenger of God; and this denial is tantamount to unbelief. Yet he had initially claimed to be a Muslim. If he now adopts the role of an unbeliever, then his proper place is not within the bounds of Islam, but outside them. First, he should have the courage to leave a religion in which he has no faith at all. Only then will he acquire the qualification to demand reason and proof, and his demand can be answered.

This is the rule dictated by sound judgment and reason. Without it, no system of law or governance in the world can be established. If the citizens of a state demanded justification for every government order and refused to obey orders without argument, that state could not survive for a single moment. If every soldier in an army asked the reason for every order of the commander and made personal mental comfort a precondition for obedience in every matter, no army could be formed at all. In short, no school, college, association—in a word, no social system—can be established on the principle that every person concerned must be satisfied and that no instruction will be obeyed until each individual has attained peace of mind. People generally join an institution with the basic and fundamental understanding that they have complete faith in the institution’s higher authority and recognize its authority. Thereafter, as long as they remain part of that institution, obeying the orders of the higher authority is their duty; even if they are not satisfied about some minor matter, they are still obliged to obey. Of course, deliberately violating an instruction as an act of defiance is another matter. A person may remain part of an institution while disobeying in minor matters; but if someone declares personal satisfaction a precondition for obedience even in the smallest matter, it must be understood that he is refusing to acknowledge the authority of the higher power. This amounts to open rebellion. If such a policy were adopted within a state, a case of treason would be brought against him. In an army, he would face a court-martial. In a school or college, he would be expelled immediately. If such a thing occurred in religion, a fatwa of unbelief would be issued against him. No one can be granted the right to demand this kind of reason and proof while remaining within an institution. The proper place of such a claimant is not inside, but outside. Therefore, he should first leave. Then he may raise as many objections and protests as he wishes.

This is a fundamental principle, indeed the foundation, of Islam’s organization. Islam did not first issue commands to people; rather, it first called them to believe in Allah and the Messenger. All reason and proof was presented in support of this one matter. Through every reasoned proof and natural sign, an effort was made to reassure people that Allah is their Lord and Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is Allah’s Messenger. You may examine this fundamental question through as much reasoning and debate as you wish. If no argument or proof satisfies you, you will never be compelled to accept Islam, nor will any of Islam’s laws be imposed upon you. But the moment you willingly accepted Islam, you became a “Muslim.” And the very meaning of the word Muslim is one who submits. Thereafter, there is no need to show you reason and proof for every instruction of Islam or to leave the matter of obeying the instruction to your mental peace; rather, whatever instruction reaches you from Allah and the Messenger, your foremost duty as a Muslim is to submit to it without question:

(Arabic)

Meaning: The duty of believing people is that when they are called to Allah and the Messenger, so that the Messenger may judge between them, they say, “We hear and we obey.” (Surah al-Nur 24:51)

Indeed, demanding reason and proof as a condition of faith and obedience is completely contradictory to them. Reconciling these two things is entirely contrary to sound judgment. No believer can demand reason and proof in this way. Conversely, it is impossible for a rationalist of this kind to be a believer:

(Arabic)

Meaning: When Allah and the Messenger have decided a matter, believing men and women have no right to make any independent decision concerning it. (Surah al-Ahzab 33:36)

The direct effect of this principle lay at the root of Islam’s tremendous success in reform and organization. Once the spirit of faith had been firmly implanted in the people, the entire believing community abstained from whatever it was forbidden to do. Conversely, whatever was commanded came into practice among tens of millions of people at a single indication. If it had been necessary to provide reason and proof for every matter, and if obedience to the law had depended on explaining the rationale and significance of every injunction and prohibition, then the reform and organization of human character and conduct accomplished by the Messenger (peace be upon him) in only twenty-three years would not have been possible even by the Day of Resurrection.

This does not mean that Islam’s laws are contrary to reason or that any of their details are without significance. Nor does it mean that Islam demands blind imitation from its followers and forbids them to seek the rational and natural foundations of its laws or to understand their significance. The actual situation is the opposite. To follow Islam properly, keen intellect and discernment are absolutely necessary. The more deeply a person understands the significance and rationale of Islamic laws, the more perfectly he can follow them. Islam does not forbid this kind of learning and insight; rather, it encourages it. But there is a world of difference between intellectual inquiry after obedience and deliberation as a condition prior to obedience. A Muslim first offers unconditional obedience. Thereafter, he strives to understand the significance and rationale of Islamic laws. But that does not mean that the rationale of every injunction will be comprehensible to him. In reality, he has complete trust and satisfaction in Allah’s lordship and the prophethood of the Messenger. Thereafter, seeking fuller insight, he wishes to gain greater satisfaction even regarding details. If he attains such satisfaction, he expresses gratitude to Allah; but if he does not, then on the basis of his complete satisfaction with Allah and the Messenger, he continues to obey Islamic law without hesitation. What comparison can there be between this and the demand for reason and proof made by someone who insists at every step, “I will proceed only if you satisfy me; otherwise I will turn back”?

Recently, a leaflet published by a Muslim group has come to our notice. This group is composed of highly educated Muslims. Its members are not opposed to religion; rather, in their own view, they are rendering great service to religion. Among the things they promote in the name of religious “reform,” one notable matter is forbidding Muslims to offer sacrifice every year at the time of Eid al-Adha. Alongside this, they advise Muslims to spend the money they expend on slaughtering animals on assisting national institutions, supporting orphans and widows, and providing employment for the unemployed. We have not obtained the full details of the objection made by a certain Muslim concerning this campaign. But in reply to his objection, it was said:

Apart from ritual observance and blind imitation, no one to this day has shed light on the rational and practical benefits of sacrifice. If someone informs us of the rationale behind sacrifice, he will earn our gratitude.

This is a sample of the writing of those who claim to be “educated” and “enlightened.” On the one hand, a loud claim to “rationalism”; on the other, such an extreme of “irrationality”! These two sentences issuing from a particular person’s “sacred pen” prove that he has not even determined his own proper role. If he wishes to speak as a Muslim, he should bow his head before the authoritative practice. Only then may he claim the right to ask for reason and proof—but not as a condition of obedience, rather merely for mental satisfaction. But if he demands reason and proof before obeying, and makes this a condition of his obedience, then he has no right to speak as a “Muslim.” Such a claimant to reason should first adopt the role of a non-Muslim. Only then will he have the right to object freely on any matter. But even then he will have no right to pose as a “mufti” and issue fatwas on religious matters concerning Muslims. He is playing two mutually contradictory roles at the same time, yet is fulfilling the intellectual responsibility of neither role. On the one hand, he is not merely a “Muslim”; he has even posed as “the mufti of Islam”; on the other hand, he considers authoritative practice pointless. When an instruction is established through authoritative practice, he refuses to obey it and first lays down the condition that its rationale and practical benefits be explained. In other words, he is not prepared to accept an order merely because it is an order of Allah and the Messenger; rather, he will accept it only on the basis of its rationale and practical benefits. If he cannot perceive such benefits, or if they do not prove beneficial by his own standard, he will reject the divine law and campaign against it. He will describe it as an “irrelevant,” “meaningless,” or “superfluous,” indeed harmful and wasteful practice. Not only that, he will employ all his strength to prevent Muslims from following it. Can anyone regard such self-contradictory conduct and mutually contradictory roles as sensible? There is no doubt that the eminent author’s demand for reason and proof is justified. But let him first prove that he himself is a man of sound judgment and reason.

Rational and experiential benefit is not the name of some particular and definite thing; rather, it is relative and qualitative. One person’s judgment considers something beneficial, while another person’s judgment takes the opposite view. A third person may acknowledge some benefit in it, but attach no importance to it at all; instead, he may regard something else as more beneficial. There is even greater disagreement concerning experiential benefit. This is because everyone’s idea of benefit is different. In accordance with that idea, each person determines something to be beneficial or harmful on the basis of his own or another’s experience. For one person, only apparent gain is desirable and apparent loss is to be avoided. His preference is bound to differ from that of a far-sighted person. Again, many things contain one kind of benefit and another kind of harm. One person accepts such things because he considers the harm insignificant compared with the benefit, while another avoids them because he considers the harm greater than the benefit.

Moreover, rational and experiential benefit sometimes conflict. Something may be harmful from the standpoint of experience, yet according to the judgment of reason this harm should be tolerated for the sake of some major, reasoned benefit. Another thing may be beneficial from the standpoint of experience, but conscience may dictate that it be avoided in order to escape some rational harm. While such contradictions or conflicts exist, it is impossible to reach a universally accepted conclusion about the “rational” and “experiential” benefit of anything. It is likewise impossible that everyone will agree about the benefit of something, leaving no opportunity for anyone to hold a different opinion or reject it. Why speak only of sacrifice? Among prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, zakat, and the other commands and prohibitions of the Shariah, has the rationale and experiential benefit of every matter become as clear as daylight, and have all people knowingly and understandingly accepted obedience? If that were so, not a single person who abandoned prayer or fasting, or disbelieved in pilgrimage and zakat, could be found in the world. This is why the legal system does not depend on every individual’s judgment and experience; rather, its foundation is faith and obedience. A Muslim does not place faith in rationale and experiential benefit; rather, his faith is in Allah and His Messenger. His religion is not that something may be accepted only when its rationale and usefulness have been established, and that it must be avoided as soon as its irrationality and uselessness become apparent. Rather, his religion is that whatever is established as an instruction of Allah and the Messenger must be obeyed, while whatever is not authoritatively established is not worthy of being obeyed.

Thus, the question now is whether the author’s faith rests on rationale and benefit, or on Allah and the Messenger. If the first is true, then he has no connection whatsoever with Islam. What right, then, does he have to speak while posing as a Muslim and advise the public to “abandon the so-called desert Sunnah”? And if the second is true, then rationale and usefulness should not be made the basis of discussion. Rather, he should ask whether sacrifice is merely a custom invented by Muslims, or an act of worship chosen by Allah and the Messenger—one that the Messenger of Allah himself instituted among his community?

10

The Empty Claims of Progressivism

[The article was first published in the June 1933 issue of Tarjuman al-Qur’an—Editor]

In the June 1933 issue of Nigar, Mr. Niaz Fatehpuri published an extensive critique of my edited journal Tarjuman al-Qur’an. I thank Mr. Fatehpuri for this. Ordinarily, it is not customary to engage in debate or offer a counter-critique concerning criticism of periodicals. However, the qualified critic expressed in his article certain opinions connected with the distinctive fundamental principles of his religion of progress, and one of the principal aims of Tarjuman al-Qur’an is to correct all these principles. For this reason, I consider it absolutely necessary to make proper use of this first opportunity to express my own views on the matter. He wrote:

The purpose of this journal is evident from its name: to disseminate the meaning, significance, and teachings of the Qur’an among people in their correct form. No one can deny the usefulness of this purpose. But, as the worthy editor himself has acknowledged, achieving this goal in the present age is by no means easy. For in the past, religion meant only the blind imitation of ancestors and backward-looking activities. At that time, it was not at all difficult for anyone to pose as a preacher or reformer of religion. But modern knowledge and science, and ever-new scientific discoveries, have given people’s “thought and action” an entirely new form; they have enriched their minds with “freedom of thought and expression.” Therefore, today it is no longer possible to preserve the existence of religion merely by presenting evidence from the conduct, practical principles, and thought patterns of one’s forefathers. In the past, people may have discussed or debated the oneness of Allah; but today the very existence of Allah is being considered utterly impossible. In earlier times, the Messenger’s (peace be upon him) guidance might have been proven with the help of miracles; but today, on the very basis of those miracles, “magnetic science” has set out to create countless prophets and messengers. In the past, a speaker could look toward the heavens and call upon Allah, the Possessor of the Throne and the Footstool; but today there is no such thing as the heavens at all. In such circumstances, doing this sort of thing cannot be beneficial in any way. In short, the age of “faith in the unseen” is now over; this is the age of faith in experience and observation. At such a critical time, coming forward to help religion is by no means easy. In particular, because the very idea of religion today is not especially acceptable to people, the task seems even more difficult.

Proceeding further, he wrote:

The Holy Qur’an is divided into three parts in terms of its meaning. The first part contains moral instruction. The second sets forth matters of creed and belief. The third consists of historical narratives and examples. There is no need to write much about the first part, nor is it necessary to present any documentary proof concerning it, because the moral teachings of all religions are almost identical. Everyone is obliged to acknowledge that the moral teachings of Islam are neither different from nor inferior to those of other religions. Greater attention should, of course, be given to the second and third parts, because modern knowledge and science and scientific discoveries have created doubt and ambivalence in people’s minds regarding these two parts. And, truthfully, if anyone can remove these doubts and misgivings, he will be recognized as the renewer of the present century. For this reason, I would advise opening a permanent section on this subject. Through this section, all Qur’anic verses relating to creed and belief and to narratives should be examined. Then, after determining the correct purpose and significance of these verses, it will be necessary to refute all the objections and protests raised by modern scholars and researchers.

In conclusion, he writes:

In the future, I first invite him to discuss the significance of revelation and knowledge. For understanding the Word of Allah depends on grasping this matter. Alongside it, the question of the Hereafter should also be discussed, because the question of religiosity and irreligion depends on its resolution. I wish to see what explanation he gives of the Divine Word and the Hereafter. Only then will I raise my doubts, misgivings, and objections; if his efforts dispel them, I will be extremely pleased. For many people today are afflicted by the terrible curse of “becoming Muslim under compulsion.” A major cause of this is belief in the afterlife.

Setting aside the minor matters to which the qualified critic has alluded in this quotation, I wish to shed light only on the fundamental issues.

He has divided the discussion of the Noble Qur’an into three parts. But we can readily divide it into two. The subject matter of the first consists of things beyond the limits of our knowledge, intellect, and judgment. We cannot definitively label any one of them either false or true. Therefore, concerning these matters, the Qur’an calls us to have faith in the unseen. The subjects of the second category are not beyond the limits of our knowledge, and it is possible for us to reach reasoned conclusions about them. Accordingly, in addition to such matters as Allah’s existence and attributes, the angels, revelation, the divine Scripture, the significance of prophethood, resurrection after death, and punishment and reward in the Hereafter, all matters mentioned in connection with historical narratives and examples that lie beyond the limits of knowledge, intellect, and judgment belong to the first category. It makes no difference whether these matters are beyond the ordinary human capacity for judgment or whether, at our present intellectual and scientific level, we are simply unable to reach a decision about their truth and validity. Conversely, the moral teachings of Islam, purification of the self, and all matters relating to human life belong to the second category.

According to the qualified critic, there is no need to discuss the second part, because Islam’s teachings concerning it resemble those of other religions. In his view, however, it is absolutely necessary to discuss the first part, because it is regarding the matters included in this part that doubt and ambivalence have arisen among people. But the question is: why are doubts and ambivalence arising regarding these matters? In answer, he has said that in the past people believed in unseen matters because of backwardness and ignorance. But today modern knowledge and science and scientific discoveries have given people’s thought and action a new form and enriched their minds through freedom of thought and conscience. That is why the age of “faith in the unseen” has now passed; instead, the age of “faith in experience and observation” has arrived.

This view is based on several misconceptions. The first of these is failure to understand the real difference between the past and the present. Unfortunately, Mr. Niaz is not alone; rather, a large group is immersed in the mistaken notion that the lamp of religion could shed light only in the darkness of bygone ages. But after the sunrise of modern knowledge and science, it is no longer capable of shining. Yet the rational sciences that they call rays of light are not any special possession of this age. Such knowledge and sciences had similarly dazzled people’s vision in the past. And those whose vision had been dazzled in the past also thought that the lamp of religion could no longer shine. The modern knowledge and sciences and the new scientific discoveries of those days, too, had, in their view, given thought and action a new form, and had so enriched people’s minds through the logic of thought and reason that there was no room in that luminous age for faith in the unseen. Was this not the situation from the second to the fourth century after the Hijrah? When the ideas of philosophers and scientists such as Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Zeno, Berkeley, Alexander, [These are ancient Greek philosophers.—Editor] Ferdowsi, Plotinus and others spread through the Muslim lands, thereby inaugurating a new age in philosophical thought and intellectual inquiry, did not a group of people still hold such views? Did the freedom of thought and intellect of that age, and the new forms of conduct and ideas, not similarly create doubt and ambivalence in people’s religious beliefs? But what happened afterward? Many of the philosophical doctrines and conjectural conclusions in which people of that time had placed their faith were later proved false. The intense sunlight of knowledge and science in which the lamp of religion had seemed to them to be flickering was extinguished altogether by a single turn of the age. Their ‘modern knowledge and science’ became antiquated. Their new ‘scientific discoveries’ lost the power to give thought and action a new form. What they had given a new form in various areas was declared old. Indeed, the greater part of the arguments and proofs they had advanced with complete faith and confidence in contemporary scientific discoveries, and the philosophical doctrines they had built upon them, could today be called meaningless and useless by even an insignificant student without the slightest hesitation.

In such circumstances, if anyone says that the lamp of religion could burn only in the dark ages of the past, but is incapable of burning today in this age of light, we shall be forced to conclude that history itself is repeating itself. We are certain that most of the things now being claimed, as in the past, to be the innovations of modern knowledge and science and new discoveries will meet the fate of the ‘modern knowledge and science’ and new discoveries of earlier peoples, and that the ‘ever-new forms of thought and action’ will become old and antiquated with the turning of the age. Let the critic take a deep look at all the knowledge, sciences and discoveries of which he is proud, and inquire of their original innovators and discoverers; only then will he understand that, like the knowledge and sciences of the past, very little within them is certain. There is hardly anything among these sciences about which one can say with complete confidence that it has no possibility of being proved erroneous. The rest are based only on conjecture, imagination, doubt, opinion and hesitation. It can be said with complete firmness and certainty that the further the course of the age advances toward progress, the more these ‘modern sciences’ and ‘ever-new discoveries’ will become ancient and antiquated things. Along with them, the new methods of thought and action dependent on these flimsy sciences and discoveries will also be compelled to make way for some other new method.

Since this is the state of affairs, no conscious person with a mature outlook has any reason to become alarmed about the future of religion. There is likewise no reason to be troubled by the thought, ‘Modern knowledge and science’ and ‘new discoveries and innovations’ have now created a new foundation for thought and action and enriched people’s minds through the ‘freedom of thought and intellect’; so God alone knows what will become of religion. A searching examination of all these sciences and discoveries will show whether the things that conflict with religion are established and beyond doubt. If they truly are established and beyond doubt, and a conflict with the fundamental beliefs of religion also appears, then he will certainly face the question: which of the two will he believe in, religion or scientific discovery? But if they are merely things that cast one into conjecture, imagination, doubt and ambivalence, there is no reason to be alarmed by their conflict with religion. For if religion is based on faith and conviction, conjecture, imagination, doubt and disbelief have no importance in opposition to it. Conversely, if religion is a conjectural and imaginary thing, then modern scientific doctrines too depend on conjecture and imagination. What reason, then, can there be to assess the difference between the two?

It is fitting for a person overwhelmed by modern knowledge and science and ever-new discoveries to cast a contemptuous glance at religion only when he has become firmly convinced that every new thing is a scientific discovery, and that accepting it or believing in it is absolutely necessary in order to keep pace with the march of the age. Even if it is merely conjectural and imaginary, and has not been tested by profound scientific foresight and an infallible standard, it must nevertheless be accepted. In fact, it is among people with this kind of outlook that there has arisen today an eagerness to ‘devise new methods of thought and action.’ Yet they do not even know how new methods of thought and action are devised, which method is rational and which is merely childish. Similarly, claiming to be enriched by the freedom of thought and intellect has become a characteristic of this class of narrow-minded people. But they are not at all aware that mere freedom of thought and intellect is a fitnah, indeed a terrifying thing. In particular, if it is not accompanied by broad and mature knowledge, profound and developed insight, and balanced and lucid thinking, it is bound to assume serious proportions. And nature has not bestowed these qualities as generously as people nowadays imagine.

The second view that has arisen from the first is that the age of ‘faith in the unseen’ has now passed. Rather, this is the age of ‘faith in experience and observation.’ Even after much thought and reflection, I have not understood what the speaker actually intends by these words. If their significance is that people in the present age do not acknowledge anything described as unseen or invisible, and accept nothing without experience and observation, then this is utterly false. In other words, it would mean that people today have decided to confine themselves within such a narrow sphere that only experience and observation can serve as their means of acquiring knowledge, and only the senses can remain operative. Humanity has abandoned thinking about matters outside this sphere and reaching conclusions about them through conjecture and investigation. But anyone who has even made a modest study of ‘modern knowledge and science and newer discoveries’ will not accept this claim at all. Leave philosophy and metaphysics aside, for the entire subject matter of both is the unseen. Consider material science and physics themselves, upon which the eminent critic relies when appealing to ‘faith in experience and observation.’ Is there any branch of this discipline whose research and investigation do not depend on accepting force, energy, natural laws, fundamental principles, causality and similar matters? Is there any physicist who does not believe in these things? Yet go to any eminent scientist and ask him: which of their hidden mysteries does he know? How much of any one of them has he understood? Which of them has he been able to perceive and observe directly, and for which can he produce genuine proof? In reality, what else can all these things be called except faith in the unseen?

A second meaning of these words might be that in the present age only things capable of being directly perceived by every person, and which the whole of humanity has directly perceived and observed, are accepted. But no intelligent person could utter such a statement. For it is perfectly clear that no individual possesses all human knowledge; rather, large areas of it are the special preserve of particular groups and individuals. Each branch of this specialized store of knowledge is directly accessible only to the relevant experts, and is unseen by all other people. In such circumstances, ordinary people must place unseen faith in those specialist individuals and groups.

A third meaning of the statement could be that people today accept only what they have personally experienced and observed, and believe nothing that is unseen by them. In reality, no notion more unrealistic than this could emerge from the human mind. For such people have never existed in the world, do not exist today, and there is no possibility that they will exist until the Day of Judgment. If such a person really exists anywhere, we should not delay even a moment in finding him, for he would be the most important discovery among ‘recent discoveries.’ In short, however the statement is examined, no trace of truth can be found in it. Experience and observation themselves testify that the present age, like the past, believes in the unseen, and that humanity can never escape this belief. In the overwhelming majority of more than 999 out of every 1,000 matters, each person is compelled to believe in the unseen. If he decides to place faith only in his own experience and observation, he will have to discard the vast store of knowledge he accumulated by trusting others. He will have to abandon every means and source of acquiring knowledge apart from his own experience and observation. In such circumstances, far from being able to carry out any worldly task, he would not even be able to preserve his own existence. In fact, just as it is impossible in this age to completely reject belief in the unseen and rely wholly on experience and observation, it is no more possible in any age brighter than this. In every age and under every condition, people are compelled to accept countless things by relying on others rather than on their own experience and observation. Some things must be accepted merely as conventional beliefs; for example, the accepted belief about aconite poison is that a person dies if he eats it. Yet not everyone has personally eaten it to test it, nor has everyone seen someone eat it and die. Other things must be accepted on the basis of the testimony of one or more reliable people. For example, the machinery of law cannot operate for even a moment if court testimony is not believed. In other cases, one must simply trust the word of a scholar or expert. This is, of course, the normal situation for school and college students. If they did not blindly trust the research, discoveries and views of scholars and experts in various disciplines, they could not advance a single step in knowledge and science. Consequently, they could never acquire qualifications for research and investigation comparable to those scholars and experts.

This proves that in matters about which we have not acquired knowledge through experience and observation, we are compelled to place blind trust in others. The only question that remains is: in what matters should we place blind trust in whom? Our decision depends entirely on this. In principle, everyone will acknowledge that in any matter we should trust only the person or group whom we come to believe possesses sound knowledge of it and has command of reliable means of acquiring that knowledge. According to this general rule, a patient does not seek a lawyer’s advice instead of going to a doctor. In matters of litigation, no one turns to an engineer while bypassing a legal expert. Yet disagreement appears only in questions of theology and spirituality. Only there does the question arise: should we accept the opinions of philosophers and logicians in these matters, or listen to religious and spiritual guides? Regarding unseen matters such as Allah, the angels, revelation, inspiration, the soul, resurrection, and punishment and reward in the Hereafter, should we listen to Kant, Spencer, Einstein, Bergson and others, or to Ibrahim, Musa, Isa and Muhammad, peace be upon them, and others? Those who claim ‘freedom of thought and intellect’ incline toward the first group. They continually judge the words of the prophets by standards collected by that group, accepting whatever passes this test. They do not acknowledge it as the word of the prophets; rather, they accept it only because philosophers and scientists have certified it as acceptable. (Unfortunately, matters of this kind are very few—indeed, they are practically nonexistent.) Conversely, they reject as unreliable whatever fails this standard. On the other hand, the ‘traditionalists’ and adherents of authority say: do not ask theologians and spiritualists about naturalism and rationalism, because their fields of work are entirely different; asking an expert in one discipline for an opinion about another is fundamentally wrong. However proficient philosophers and scientists may be in their own disciplines, their standing in theology and spirituality is no higher than that of an ordinary person. For the means of acquiring knowledge and information about these matters that they possess are no greater than those possessed by an ordinary person. In reality, this discipline is reserved exclusively for the prophets. They are its experts, and they alone possess the true means of acquiring knowledge and information about it. Therefore, in these matters, faith in the unseen should be placed in them. At most, one may ask whether they truly possess knowledge of the unseen and complete insight into theology. But once it has been proved that they genuinely possess the requisite competence, you must accept as true everything they have said according to their own insight and knowledge. To deny the truth they have proclaimed and raise arguments and proofs against it is the same as a blind man denying the existence of the sun and presenting documents against the sun’s existence in order to mislead a sighted person. No matter how great a philosopher such a person may consider himself, there is no need to explain what the person who has seen the sun with his own eyes will think of this blind man.

The critic may say that whatever the prophets said about unseen matters is not supported by ‘modern knowledge and science’ and ‘recent discoveries and innovations.’ For this reason, people have been cast into ‘doubt and ambivalence’ and have suffered the curse of ‘pretending to be Muslim under compulsion.’ But I say: what certainty is there within these sciences and discoveries that is contrary to Islamic principles? If there is any such thing, mention it, so that we too may consider which we should follow—the Holy Qur’an or modern scientific discoveries. If there is no such thing—and there certainly cannot be, as is also proved by your statements about ‘doubt and ambivalence’ and ‘pretending to be Muslim under compulsion’—then does the arsenal of modern knowledge and science and recent discoveries and innovations contain only weapons of notions, imaginings, guesses and conjectures, on the strength of which rebellion against religion is being declared? And merely dazzled by the glitter of these weapons, have the worshippers of ‘free thought’ hoped that religion will be forced to flee the field merely at hearing their name? However much importance you attach to that knowledge and those discoveries, remember that they are not at all conclusive regarding unseen matters. At most, their influence may cast you yourself into ‘doubt and ambivalence,’ leading you to say that we can reach neither a positive nor a negative conclusion regarding revelation, inspiration, resurrection, punishment and reward in the Hereafter, the existence of the angels, or even the existence of Allah. But these sciences cannot help you in the slightest to escape the curse of ‘pretending to be Muslim under compulsion’ or gain the blessing of ‘happily pretending to be an unbeliever.’ For these sciences cannot contain any argument or proof capable of decisively denying the matters mentioned. Moreover, to conclude that something does not exist, it is not enough merely to argue that ‘modern knowledge and science’ and ‘recent discoveries’ have brought you only to the extreme point of ‘doubt and ambivalence,’ which is intellectually and mentally the lowest possible position. Indeed, knowledge and science that cannot give people certainty, reassurance and conviction, that casts them wavering in a void and gives them no opportunity to attain even the slightest stability anywhere, and that leaves them in the disgraceful position of ‘do not become an unbeliever; become a Muslim under compulsion,’ is undoubtedly worse than ignorance.

Only ‘faith in the unseen’ can save people from this crisis. Once you accept someone as a prophet and also acknowledge that he possesses complete mastery of divine knowledge and never speaks falsely, there can be no room in your mind for doubt and ambivalence regarding unseen matters. As a result, your religious belief and conviction are established on such a firm foundation that no modern knowledge or new discovery, no new trend in thought and action, and no forceful impact of ‘free intellect’ can shake it. That is why the Qur’an has declared in clear language that this Book is a guide for the God-fearing. The first identifying characteristic of the God-fearing is that they believe in the unseen:

(Arabic)

Meaning: ‘This Qur’an is a guide for the God-fearing, who believe in the unseen.’

In reality, the entire edifice of religion is founded upon ‘faith in the unseen,’ or belief in the unseen. Thus, once this foundation is smashed, you can reach no firm conclusion about these fundamental religious beliefs, whose profound realities you have no means of knowing. Any conclusion reached in such circumstances will not command your own complete confidence in its validity, nor will you be able to make others confident of its truth.

The final question in this matter is: how can we know that a person is a prophet of Allah and possesses complete mastery of theology? How are we to understand that he is so truthful that, even when he speaks about unseen matters beyond the limits of our knowledge and intellect, we will believe him and firmly declare that he never speaks falsely? The resolution of this question depends on two things. First, we must examine his personal character by every possible means and according to the strictest standards. Second, we must examine those matters he presents that fall within the scope of our knowledge, intellect and judgment. If someone proves to be an unparalleled truth-teller in both these tests, and if no one is able to point out any flaw in the wise and beneficial system he has given for every aspect and sphere of human thought and action, then there is no reason not to accept him as truthful. Nor is there any rational basis for suspecting that, without investigation or knowledge, he fabricated a vast conspiracy involving Allah, the angels, the Throne, the Footstool, revelation, inspiration, resurrection, Paradise and Hell merely to deceive the inhabitants of the world (Allah forbid).

Thus, Mr. Niaz’s third error is that he does not consider the first part of the Qur’an (which we have called the second part) worthy of discussion; rather, he holds that ‘all religions are more or less alike in this respect, and the teachings of Islam are neither different from nor inferior to those of other religions.’ Our position, on the other hand, is that according to his analysis, in order to determine the truth of the second or third part of the Qur’an (or, according to our analysis, the first part), it is essential for us to examine the life and character of Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, and the matters beyond the unseen described in the Qur’an. Moreover, it is not enough merely to be satisfied with the notion that this part of Islamic teaching ‘is neither different from nor inferior to other religions’; rather, it is necessary to establish through argument and proof that it is superior and better than all non-Islamic religions. Therefore, it is fundamentally wrong to introduce other matters before reaching a conclusion on this subject of discussion. Furthermore, until this matter is settled, it is not possible to settle the other matters either.

Mr. Niaz wishes us to undertake an analysis and evaluation of the verses concerning the ‘Hereafter,’ the ‘Word of Allah,’ and matters of doctrine and history. In our view, this discussion has two aspects, relating to two different groups. The first group consists of those who do not believe in the prophethood of the Noble Messenger, peace be upon him, and who therefore harbor doubts about these matters. The second consists of those who accept his prophethood but are doubtful about unseen matters. The method of discussion with these two groups is also different. Therefore, until we know to which group the objector belongs, we cannot undertake a discussion with him.

Discussing the Hereafter, the Word of Allah and other unseen matters with the first group is completely meaningless. For when there is disagreement about the fundamental matter, it is impossible to reach a conclusion by discussing subsidiary details. The basis of our faith and conviction regarding the Hereafter, the Word of Allah, and even Allah’s existence and attributes is not that we have acquired final and certain knowledge of them through our own intellectual investigation or personal experience and observation, against which no argument or proof can be advanced. If that were so, a discussion of prophethood could certainly be undertaken. Rather, our firm and unshakable faith in these matters is actually founded on the belief that Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, is truthful. Everything he stated about his prophethood and the Word of Allah is infallible. For this fundamental reason, we are unwilling to discuss any subsidiary matter with one who disbelieves in Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, until he accepts this foundational question.

We do not recognize the second group’s right to accept the truthfulness of Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, and then raise questions about the truth or falsehood of the Qur’an and Muhammad’s, peace be upon him, descriptions of unseen matters. For as soon as they adopt such a position, they will join the first group. In order to remain among the second group, they must acknowledge that every word of the Qur’an is infallible and that everything presented by Muhammad, peace be upon him, is entirely free of error. Of course, they may raise questions in two respects. First, whether such matters are actually described in the Holy Qur’an, and whether the Messenger, peace be upon him, truly said such things. Second, what the correct meaning and significance of everything found concerning this in the Qur’an and Sunnah may be.

Finally, I must add one more thing. Mr. Niaz has requested that a debate section be opened in Tarjuman al-Qur’an. Along with this, he has expressed the intention of presenting all his doubts, questions and objections in that section. But I have always kept away from professional debates and polemics, and I still wish to do so. For I am not at all in favor of debates whose purpose is to exercise a great mind and display intellectual skill in order to win applause. However, I am always prepared for learned and substantive discussion, provided that its purpose is the search for truth and that both sides participate with such sincerity that, once the real truth is established, each will acknowledge it. Accordingly, whatever doubts and objections are published in Nigar, they will be restated in Tarjuman al-Qur’an, together with their answers. Similarly, I hope that if Mr. Niaz makes any comment on the response in Tarjuman al-Qur’an, he will also mention the original response alongside it, so that the readers of both journals may be informed of both sides of the discussion and reach their own conclusions. On the other hand, mentioning only one side and evading the other is, in my view, an acknowledgment of one’s own weakness.

[Note: Readers may be surprised to hear that, in response to this article, the exchange with the Nigar newspaper, namely, with Tarjuman al-Qur’an, was discontinued and remains suspended to this day. A certain class of people may be quite capable of misleading our immature youth with a few attractive slogans; but when they are properly invited to discuss matters on the basis of knowledge and facts, their utter hollowness becomes completely evident.]

11

The Correct Method of National Reconstruction

[The article was first published in the July 1934 issue of Tarjuman al-Qur’an. —Editor]

The aim of both reform and revolution is to change a distorted condition. But there is a fundamental difference between their motivation and their methods. Reform begins with reflection. A person calmly considers the situation, investigates the causes of distortion and disorder, measures its extent, devises means to remedy it, and employs only as much destructive force as is absolutely necessary to remove it. Revolution, on the other hand, begins with intense anger and fierce vindictiveness. One distortion is introduced in response to another. The excess that caused the distortion is confronted with another excess, which destroys not only evil but also good. There is no doubt that a reformer too must sometimes undertake actions suited to a revolutionary. Both operate on the diseased parts of the body. The difference is that the reformer first determines where the distortion lies and how extensive it is. He then uses precisely as much force as is needed to remove it. Moreover, before performing the operation, he prepares medicine to heal the wound. But the revolutionary, blinded by excessive anger, wields the knife indiscriminately, cutting away everything, good and bad alike. After much cutting and mutilation, when he has perhaps destroyed a perfectly healthy part of the body, he may finally realize his error and remember the need for medicine.

Generally, wherever distortion goes beyond all bounds, people lose their patience and composure. The suffering they endure in a distorted environment leaves them no opportunity to pursue reform calmly and thoughtfully. That is why, in such circumstances, revolutionary movements usually gain strength instead of reformist movements. Fierce conflict develops between the conservative and revolutionary groups. As a result, the fire of anger and vengeance receives still more fuel. Both sides reach the extreme limits of stubbornness and rashness. Both ruthlessly cut the throat of truth and honesty. One side exerts its utmost strength to defend falsehood instead of truth, while the other attacks everyone indiscriminately, without distinguishing truth from falsehood. In the end, when the revolutionaries prevail, they destroy everything belonging to the conservatives, without distinguishing truth from falsehood or good from evil. In reality, revolution advances with the force of a flood. It sweeps away everyone, good and bad alike, pushing them toward extinction. Then, after much destruction, when judgment regains peace and stability, the need for reconstruction is felt. But the revolutionary mentality discovers an ingenious method even here. It tries to reject everything belonging to the old conservatives. No matter how correct something may be, if it was connected with the old system, in the eyes of the revolution this is the greatest fault of all. Thus, for some time, efforts are made to build the edifice of life upon revolutionary principles. When the revolutionary mind becomes exhausted by new experiences, experiments, and failures, it is compelled to return by one route or another to the path of balance—the path that had been before the reformers from the very beginning. In other words, intelligent people do what fools also do, but only after making the water very muddy.

In the present age, the most striking example of this is the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. When the extremely distorted social system prevailing in monarchical Russia became utterly intolerable to its people, a revolutionary movement arose in reaction to it. Socialist and democratic doctrines from Europe began to develop in Russia. Meanwhile, the dynasty and its dependent classes used autocratic power to preserve their unlawful interests. As a result, fierce anger arose not only against royal autocracy and the unequal distribution of wealth, but also against the cultural system that had continued by inheritance for centuries. At last, the ghost of Karl Marx assumed the form of Lenin. Tsarist rule was uprooted completely. At the same time, all the political, economic, cultural, moral, and religious principles upon which pre-revolutionary society had been established were likewise obliterated. After this vast destruction, the work of building a new society on entirely new communist principles began. The new organizers devoted all their mental energy to ensuring that not a single discarded thing belonging to the bourgeois class could enter this new social edifice. Even Allah was given notice to leave Soviet Russia. But as time passed, constructive intelligence increasingly took the place of revolutionary frenzy. Thus the extreme Bolshevism active at the beginning of the revolution gradually began to return toward balance.

This kind of extremism also appeared during the French Revolution. Then too, in the exhilaration of revolution, efforts were made to eradicate everything from the past, and new revolutionary principles were devised and introduced. But because of this extreme revolutionary mentality, complete balance has never yet been established in France’s political, social, and moral character. Today, no aspect or department of its national life possesses the stability found in Britain.

Another example is the Turkish Revolution. There too, the same revolutionary mentality attempted, as if by magic overnight, to transform an entire nation into a different nation. In the course of this effort, along with operating on boils and sores, a quite healthy part of the Turkish body was also cut away, and some new limbs were borrowed from Europe and attached in its place. Even a new, hat-wearing brain was obtained to replace the old brain. But with the passage of time, the revolutionary Turks gradually learned that the general principle they had adopted—that every old thing is bad and every new thing is good—is by no means infallible. Therefore, after causing immense harm through experience and experimentation, they have had to turn back from the path of excess toward balance.

The reason for saying these things is that an extreme revolutionary mentality is currently evident among the Muslims of India. Before the evil consequences of this extremity appear, we wish to call upon both the traditionalists and the revolutionaries to reflect.

In fact, the distorted condition that prevailed, and still prevails, in Turkey and other Muslim countries is exactly the situation we face today. For the past several centuries, the group that has held religious leadership in our hands has turned Islam into an inert and inactive thing. Perhaps, for them, the progress of time came to a halt after the sixth or seventh Islamic century. In their discussions of philosophy and jurisprudence, they certainly read and taught that the world is changing and that every change produces something new. But in reality they have shut their eyes to changes in the world, the evolution of the age, the progress of time, and novelty. How far the world has changed and advanced; how many changes and transformations have occurred in its conditions, ideas, currents of thought, and ideologies! How much upheaval there has been in social matters and problems! Yet our religious leaders still imagine themselves to be living in the environment of five or six hundred years ago. They have made no progress along with the progress of the age! They have remained unaffected by continual new changes! They have maintained no connection with the new problems of life. They began trying to prevent their own people from moving forward with the age; indeed, they have been pulling them from the future toward the past. Such an effort could succeed only for a while, and so it did. But the success of such efforts forever is impossible. How long can a nation that interacts and maintains relations with the world remain unaffected by the world’s ideas and life’s new problems? If its leaders do not move ahead and guide it along new scientific, intellectual, and practical lines, it will naturally prepare to lift the yoke of their leadership from its neck and cast it away.

In reality, the root of this distortion lies in something else. Our religious leaders became so engrossed in details that, as a result, the very foundation slipped from their hands. Then details took the place of principles, and countless further details emerged from them; these came to be called true Islam. Yet they had no real importance in Islam. In fact, the edifice of Islamic nationality was founded upon this order: first the Noble Qur’an, then the Sunnah of the Messenger, and finally the ijtihad of scholars and thinkers. Unfortunately, this order was completely reversed, and a new order was established: first the ijtihad of the thinkers of a particular age, then the Sunnah of the Messenger, and finally the Noble Qur’an! It is this new order that is responsible for all the stagnation and impotence that have turned Islam into an ineffective and inactive thing.

No one can deny the learning and rank of the jurists, theologians, exegetes, and hadith scholars. But they were human beings. Their means and methods of acquiring knowledge were like those of ordinary people. Revelation did not come to them; rather, they reflected and conducted research on the Word of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger with the help of their own reason and learning. On the basis of the principles that appeared sound to them, they determined the details of laws and doctrines. Their ijtihads may assist and guide us, but they cannot themselves be the principles and foundation. Whether a person exercises ijtihad solely with the aid of reason or with information drawn from a revealed scripture, under no circumstances can that ijtihad acquire the status of a permanent law and immutable rule for the world. For human knowledge and judgment are always confined within the limits of place and time.

The only One above all the bounds of place and time is Allah, Lord of the Worlds. With Him lies the treasury of true knowledge. No change, even the measure of an atom, occurs in His realm of knowledge with the turning of the ages. The reflection of that knowledge is found in the verses of the Holy Qur’an and in the purified breasts of those who bear and convey it. In truth, this is a source of knowledge from which people of every age can continually derive knowledge, ideas, and systems of law according to their particular circumstances and needs. As long as the learned community drew knowledge from this source and foundation, and solved ideological and practical problems through ijtihad based on sound thought and judgment, Islam kept pace with the movement of the age. But from the day reflection and research concerning the Qur’an were abandoned, the investigation and critical analysis of hadith ceased, blind imitation of earlier exegetes and hadith scholars began indiscriminately, the ijtihad of earlier jurists and theologians was turned into rigid and eternal law, and the details devised by the elders were adopted as principles while the principles of the Qur’an and Sunnah were abandoned, Islam’s progress was halted. Instead of moving forward, it began to retreat. Its bearers and transmitters, instead of guiding the world in new fields of knowledge and action, became absorbed in interpreting and analyzing ancient subjects and sciences. They remained engaged in disputation over petty details. They continued creating ever-new schools of law and sects over minor controversial matters. As a result, fatwas of unbelief and wickedness were freely issued against Muslims, so that the people of the world saw the spectacle not of ——– (people entering Allah’s religion in multitudes), but instead of ———– (people leaving Allah’s religion in multitudes). On the other hand, instead of ————- (stern toward the unbelievers and compassionate toward one another), the scene everywhere became ————-(believers compassionate toward the unbelievers and stern toward one another). Finally, concerning the hypocrites and unbelievers, the condition described by ———– (you would think them united, yet their hearts are divided from one another) became the condition of the Muslims themselves.

This is the natural reaction to the conduct described above, which we can see today in the form of a terrible revolution. When Muslims saw that their religious leaders were not fulfilling their responsibility of leadership, but instead of taking them forward were dragging them backward, they broke free from their authority. They then began wandering here and there like a scattered army. One group placed all the errors and weaknesses of the standard-bearers of religion on religion itself. It declared religion the greatest obstacle to their progress. Rejecting religion, they began openly advocating blind imitation of the “progressive” nations. Another group made abuse of the learned community and religious leaders its habit, as though the key to Muslim welfare and progress lay in such abuse and loud rhetoric. Yet another group immediately began cutting and trimming religion. Some began composing slander against the imams and jurists. Others placed hadith on the same level as jurisprudence. Still others felt the need to reform Qur’anic instruction and the system of law. Some advocated separating religion and the world. According to them, religion should be concerned only with doctrines and worship, while in worldly affairs religion or religious law should have no authority.

Thus various groups and subgroups have arisen to change that distorted condition. But their interest is not in reform; it is in revolution. They have not calmly considered what the real distortion is, where its source lies, how extensive it is, or what the correct method of removing it may be. Merely on the basis of conjecture, they have assumed that distortion exists. To remove it, they are operating on the body of the ummah. They are not considering deeply enough the ruin that may result when, along with the disease, the patient is also destroyed.

In independent countries, it may certainly be said, and with some justification, that we have no alternative to revolutionary action. For there the governing power of the state is concentrated in the hands of a single party. If another party is to end that power, it may not succeed without a powerful revolutionary action. It should also be noted that when revolutionary leaders actually assume responsibility for governing the state, the experience of the age soon consolidates their judgment. Consequently, they are compelled to abandon excess and follow the path of balance. But we must not forget that at present[This refers to 1934. Many changes have taken place between the political structure of British India at that time and that of today’s independent Bangladesh and Pakistan-India. —Editor] we are living under subjugation. Our situation is entirely different from that of independent countries. First, no revolutionary action is necessary here. For there is no fear of such a formidable and powerful obstacle that a balanced reform movement cannot overcome it. Second, if revolutionary action is initiated and succeeds, there is no prospect of its returning to balance for a long time. The standard-bearers of the revolution will not be entrusted with any binding responsibility that could turn their extremism toward balance. Therefore, no revolutionary action is appropriate here. Indeed, to speak truthfully, if various revolutionary activities continue for long, their consequences will be extremely disastrous. The foundation on which Muslim society stands will consequently be shaken, and no firm foundation can be established in its place upon which a new social order could be built. Moreover, if the social system of a nation already living under subjugation and weakness is shattered in this way, it is also worth considering into what deep abyss of moral degradation it will be cast.

For this reason, we are sometimes compelled to confront the revolutionaries more sternly than the conservatives. Otherwise, we agree with them that the distorted condition needs to be changed. We too wish to transform the stagnation and inactivity introduced into Islam into dynamism. But in our view, clinging to foreign ways while abandoning Islamic customs is not a sound path to creating this dynamism; nor is it correct to begin blindly cutting and trimming religion without any research, knowledge, or reflection. Nor is it right to raze without cause the vast edifice that the mujtahids of earlier times built through hard work, struggle, and spiritual exertion; neither is it an infallible path to cast the entire treasury of hadith into the fire. Nor is it the true path to alter or amend the Word of Allah through human judgment. In reality, none of these is a path of reform; rather, each is a path toward a calamity more serious than the previous one. The only correct remedy is to straighten again the order that has been reversed. The Qur’an must be restored to the rank of leadership with which it was formerly invested. The hadith must be given the rank that the Companions of the Noble Messenger and his family gave to his words and deeds during the age of prophethood. We too must give the jurists, theologians, exegetes, and hadith scholars only the rank they themselves assigned to their own work.

In short, we must benefit from all of them. Whatever does not need to be changed should remain as it is. But it must never be assumed that everything the scholars wrote is an immutable and unalterable law; or that the written books have freed us from reflecting on the Noble Qur’an and investigating the truth of the hadith of the Messenger; or that the door to deriving knowledge directly from the Qur’an and Sunnah has been closed.

If this order is restored, Islam’s stationary vehicle will begin moving again. For the real cause of its immobility is that the engine was detached from the vehicle and left behind. The driver too was removed from the engine and seated in one of the rear carriages, while reliance was placed on the foremost carriage, in the expectation that it would move itself and pull the entire train along.

But there is no need for anger in this matter. Anger is justified only where someone has deliberately committed oppression. What happened here, however, was not deliberate. No one can say that the learned men held a conference somewhere and resolved to impose stagnation and inactivity upon Islam and obstruct its moving vehicle. In reality, this is merely the consequence of the continuous decline that began, from the sixth or seventh Islamic century, in the mental, scientific, and intellectual strength of the Muslim peoples alongside the decline of their political, military, economic, and cultural strength. That decline weakened the Muslims’ spirit of jihad, just as it rusted their historical and inventive consciousness. Their outlook on the whole range of life’s problems changed, and so did their outlook on religious and educational matters. Gradually, and unconsciously, the black shadow of death descended upon their entire mental power. Neither the learned community nor any of its followers can be blamed for this. At most, nature itself may be blamed. But such a complaint will produce no benefit, just as no good will come from the fire of anger and destructive impulses. The only sound method of welfare or reform is to determine calmly the cause and extent of the distortion, and then, intelligently, awaken virtue in place of distortion.

12

The Manifestation of Rebellion

[The article was first published in the February 1935 issue of Tarjuman al-Qur’an. —Editor]

A nation consists of two classes of people: one class is the common people, and the other is the distinguished people. The common people are vast in number, and the numerical strength of the nation depends on them. But this class does not possess the intellect needed for reflection and leadership. They are neither rich in knowledge nor possessed of financial strength. Likewise, they hold neither high rank nor state power. For this reason, directing the nation is not their task; rather, their task is to follow behind those who lead. They do not create or discover a path themselves; they continue along the path that has been made for them. Creating a path and leading the entire nation along it is actually the work of the distinguished people. For behind each of their words and actions stand intellect, knowledge, wealth, honor, and the support of state power. And the general populace, willingly or unwillingly, must follow in their footsteps. Thus it would not be inappropriate to say that the driving force of a nation is not its people, but its distinguished individuals. Its rise and fall, its construction and destruction, depend upon them. Their good conduct becomes the cause of the good conduct of the entire nation, and their sinful conduct becomes the cause of the sinfulness of the entire nation. When prosperous days come to a nation, many such distinguished individuals appear among it. Just as they themselves follow the right path, so they guide the entire nation along the right path:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “I appoint them as leaders, and they guide by My command. And I inspire them to do good deeds.” (Surah al-Anbiya, verse 73)

And when the time of a nation’s destruction draws near, its corruption begins with those distinguished individuals. As a result of their deviation and immorality, the entire nation eventually becomes involved in wrongdoing and sin:

Meaning: “When We intend to destroy a town, We command its wicked people to engage in transgression. Thus the decree concerning that town is fulfilled, and then We destroy it completely.” (Surah al-Isra, verse 16)

In the language of the Qur’an, these distinguished people have been called ————–. That is, they are people whom Allah has blessed with abundant favors. According to Allah Almighty’s testimony, it has always happened that these distinguished individuals first (———) begin wrongdoing, rebellion against God, oppression, and injustice in society. Then the entire town becomes entangled in corruption and wrongdoing.

Is there any room for doubt regarding the truth of this testimony? Just look at the condition of our own nation; was its degeneration not also initiated by our eminent people? It is these very people who abandoned the path of the pioneers devoted to divine law and began following the satanic path. It is they who, for the sake of worshipping their desires, began loosening the bonds of the Shariah. It is they who, like Pharaoh and Caesar, began enslaving the servants of God and accustomed their own nation to ruler-worship and bureaucrat-worship instead of devotion to Allah. It is they who taught people to bow before servants instead of Allah. It is they who, sitting in glittering clothes and magnificent mansions, made sin and wrongdoing glamorous. It is they who, consuming unlawful wealth, created the habit of consuming and providing unlawful wealth among their people. It is they who used knowledge and science for misguidance, intellect for wrongdoing, ingenuity for deception and conspiracy, wealth for purchasing faith, state power for oppression and persecution, and strength for arrogance. Moreover, it is they who closed most legitimate avenues through which people could secure their rights, welfare, and advancement, and forced them to achieve their aims through such despicable means as flattery, bribery, and false intrigue. In short, there is no corruption of moral character or conduct whose beginning was not made by these eminent people. They misused the bounties and wealth that Allah had granted them. Just as they themselves became corrupt, they corrupted the entire nation as well.

All this had been happening for several centuries, and the poison of moral corruption was eating away at the national strength of the Muslims from within. Yet the light of faith still remained, at least in people’s hearts. Although the commands of Allah and the Messenger were not obeyed, people still retained a sense of the supremacy of God and the Messenger. However much Islamic law was violated, respect for that law had not completely vanished from their hearts; however dissatisfied people might have been with the Islamic system of government, they had never dared to rebel against it. Rather, whatever Islam declared to be true was acknowledged as true. However excessive they might be in rejecting it and pursuing falsehood, no one had the audacity to call or regard the truth prescribed by Islam false, falsehood true, the obligatory an unnecessary excess, the lawful unlawful, the unlawful lawful, good deeds sins, or sins virtuous deeds. Sinful conduct certainly took place. People certainly engaged in crime and wrongdoing. The limits of the Shariah were violated in many matters. But people’s hearts still felt shame. Their heads bowed in remorse. At least their hearts acknowledged that they were disobeying Allah and the Messenger.

The reason is that, despite the weakness of faith and corruption of conduct, the edifice of Muslim civilization still rested on the foundation laid by Islam. Although the importation of Greek and Iranian thought had spread much misguidance, it never succeeded in changing the Muslims’ outlook completely or making their mental makeup hostile to Islam. It could never influence their intelligence, thinking, and power of judgment so deeply that they would entirely cease to see through Muslim eyes and think with Muslim minds. Likewise, although the development of culture and civilization had, owing to external influences, taken a course considerably different from the path prescribed by Islam, the principles on which that culture and civilization had been founded still remained at their root, and the principles of another culture and civilization had not taken their place. The Muslims’ educational system had greatly deteriorated, but theology still held a prominent place within it. No educated Muslim was entirely ignorant of at least the basics of Islamic beliefs, Shariah injunctions, and national customs. In the practical lives of Muslims, the restraints of Islamic law had become considerably relaxed, yet a single law still governed all their affairs—and that was Islamic law. In short, despite all the corruption, Islam’s profound influence remained present in the Muslims’ ideas, character, and conduct. They held unwavering faith in its principles; at least, no anti-Islamic principle had found entry within the bounds of their faith. Moreover, the values Islam had established for character and conduct had not been utterly overturned, nor had any change occurred by which another set of values opposed to them could take their place.

But after losing political power in the nineteenth century, the eminent people of our nation saw that, along with political power, status, honor, and wealth were all slipping from their hands, and that under subjugation there was no way to preserve these things and make up their immense losses except by mastering Western civilization and science. At this time another change began in their policy; in reality, it was not merely a change but a “revolution.” For change means being transformed, whereas revolution means being turned upside down. And in fact they performed such a somersault that their goal, mentality, outlook—everything—changed and came to lie in the exact opposite direction from Islam.

At first, the shame and remorse felt when Islamic law was violated gradually began to disappear after this revolution began; indeed, the very feeling that violating the rules of the Shariah was a sin and a crime began to vanish. Then, little by little, boldness and shamelessness appeared in place of shame and remorse. All kinds of laws began to be violated openly, and pride rather than shame began to be expressed about it. But the wave of the revolution did not stop there. What is now being heard and seen in Westernized circles displays signs that go beyond shamelessness to open rebellion against Islam. The situation has now reached the point where, despite openly violating Islamic law, a person not only feels no remorse for his offense but tries instead to shame the person who still follows that old law. It seems that the violator of Islamic law is no longer regarded as the criminal or sinner; rather, the criminals are those who follow Islam. Today prayer and fasting are not merely being abandoned; pride is being expressed in abandoning them. Propaganda is being spread among the public in favor of giving up prayer and fasting. Those who pray, recite the Quran, and fast are publicly mocked. Moreover, it is hoped that those who pray and fast—especially if they are educated—will themselves feel ashamed of their deeds. For a person, abandoning prayer and fasting is not considered blameworthy; rather, observing them is regarded as a faulty and shameful act. Indeed, if someone who prays happens to commit some objectionable act, it is said in a highly sarcastic manner, “Isn’t he a man of prayer?” In other words, the real reason for the person’s blame is an act that Allah has declared a means of restraining sin and indecency and that His Messenger has called the greatest of deeds.

This rebellion is not limited to prayer and fasting; rather, it has spread into almost every sphere of life. Today adherence to Islamic injunctions is called “mullahism.” In the language of our modern age, mullahism is another name for a vile mixture of narrow-mindedness, blindness, ignorance, backwardness, and stupidity. The intention is that the name “mullah” belongs to a steadfast Muslim devoted to the Shariah, while a “mullah” is supposedly someone with not even the remotest connection to civilization and enlightenment—someone unable in any way to fit into civilized society. This is only one insult among countless others. To express hatred and contempt, our “black firangis,” instead of using various indigenous words, have poured all their sentiment into the word “mullah,” making it the repository of every fault. [This article was first written in 1934. It is now 2002. In the meantime, many more labels have been imposed on genuine Muslims to subdue them, such as terrorist, extremist, fundamentalist, Taliban, al-Qaeda, and so on.—Editor.]

Today it is not accepted as evidence in support of any statement or action that it conforms to the Quran and Hadith. It is not only non-Muslims; unfortunately, even Muslims known as “educated and enlightened” casually dismiss the authority of the Quran and Hadith. They feel not the slightest shame about it; rather, they hope that the person presenting the authority of Islamic law will be the one who feels ashamed. Far from acknowledging the Quran and Hadith as authoritative, we have even witnessed a situation in which presenting something in the name of Islam immediately creates hostility toward it. Yet when the very same matter is presented with arguments and evidence, or described with a quotation from a Western writer, it becomes entirely flawless. In short, whenever Islam is mentioned, various kinds of doubts arise in the minds of our Westernized Muslims. The suspicion takes hold that there must certainly be some weakness in it. The impression is that, in their eyes, the authority of the Quran and Hadith no longer strengthens a matter; instead, it makes it even weaker and more in need of proof.

A few years ago this disease was confined to our men, while women were safe from it. At least concerning Islamic civilization, we can say that the inner quarters were its final refuge. Here Islam nurtures and protects its culture and civilization. One important reason Islam wishes to keep women within the Shariah veil is that at least the breast from which a Muslim child drinks milk must be illuminated by the light of faith. The lap in which a Muslim child is raised must at least remain safe from unbelief and misguidance, immorality and misconduct. Around the cradle in which the early stages of a Muslim child’s life pass, a purely Islamic environment must at least prevail. The four walls within which the first impressions of education and experience are drawn on a Muslim child’s innocent mind must remain protected from external influence. Thus the inner quarters are in fact the strongest fortress of Islamic civilization. This fortress too is now on the verge of being destroyed. The epidemic of firangi culture is rapidly entering our inner quarters as well. Our Westernized aristocrats are now dragging their wives and daughters out too, so that they may likewise be affected by the poisonous influence. The girls of our nation are now being sent to educational institutions to learn misguidance, disbelief, immorality, and firangi civilization—institutions that have already taught our boys these things and turned them against Islam.

In our view, this final step will bring the revolution mentioned above to its full fruition. This is not merely our supposition; unfortunately, we have also had occasion to see and hear signs of this revolution’s completion. The situation today is that a Muslim woman, openly violating the clear injunctions of the Quran and Hadith, displays her bodily beauty without hesitation; goes to English hotels and restaurants for “lunch and dinner”; sits among men in cinema halls; and shops openly in the markets. More regrettable still, instead of feeling ashamed and remorseful for doing these things in violation of Islamic law, they describe their conduct with even greater pride. Furthermore, they consider worthy of condemnation the poor woman who first refused, in accordance with Islamic law, to abandon the Shariah veil, and who, after being forcibly dragged outside by her husband, feels ashamed to display her body shamelessly among men; and, above all, who does not prefer roaming through markets, enjoying nightclubs, breathing the air of tourist resorts, and so forth to the joylessness within the bounds prescribed by Allah and the Messenger. This means that the rebellious attitude toward Islam is rapidly spreading among women as well, crossing the limits of men. Like men, they too regard not violating Islamic law but following it as shameful and a cause for remorse for a Muslim woman.

For Allah’s sake, let someone tell me: when this is the condition of women despite their having been raised in the laps of formerly religious women, what will become of the future of children raised in the laps of modern Westernized women, if the girls of these very households become unfamiliar with the honor of faith and leave the bounds of obedience to Allah and the Messenger? Can it be expected that a child who, upon opening his eyes, will see only signs of firangi culture around him; whose innocent eyes will not even witness a sign of Islamic culture and civilization; whose ears will never hear the name of Allah and the Messenger; and whose mind, like a clean slate, will from the outset bear the image of firangi culture—will grow up as a Muslim in his emotions, feelings, ideas, moral character, actions, or, in a word, in any respect?

The first stage of wrongdoing is that a person commits an offense but regards it as an offense and feels ashamed of it. Such an offense is considered punishable according to its intrinsic seriousness, but may be forgiven if one repents or feels remorse. For in this case the responsibility is attributed merely to human weakness.

The second stage of wrongdoing is that a person commits an offense and regards it as a virtue rather than a fault, and furthermore proclaims it publicly with pride. This means that the person concerned has not the slightest respect in his heart for the law that declares his conduct to be an offense.

The final stage of wrongdoing is that a person does not merely violate a law; rather, according to another law opposed to it, he regards his offense as justified and virtuous. Moreover, he mocks the law that declares such conduct an offense and considers its followers wrongdoers. Such a person does not merely violate the law; he positively scorns it and engages in open rebellion against it.

Anyone with even a little common sense will admit that when a person reaches this final stage, he can no longer remain within the bounds of the law against which he has declared open rebellion. Yet Satan, the sinful one, continues to give people the false assurance that they can mock and scorn Islamic law, declare violation of and opposition to it virtuous, and still remain Muslims. Thus, on the one hand, they call what Allah and the Messenger call good evil and evil good, regard their sins as rewards and rewards as sins, mock their commands, and instead of being ashamed of violating the law they prescribed, try to shame those who follow it; while on the other hand, they claim to have faith in Allah and the Messenger, to understand their honor and supremacy, and to follow the religion of Islam chosen by them. Can any intelligent person accept such a claim as valid alongside such conduct? If faith can coexist with disbelief, contempt with respect; if a person who takes pride in opposition and feels humiliated by obedience can be considered submissive and obedient, then rebellion must be called obedience, contempt respect, and disbelief faith. We would likewise have to accept the inverted logic that the one who strikes is the one who loves, the one who mocks is the one who truly respects, and the one who lies is the one proved truthful!

In reality, Islam is nothing other than submission, and true submission cannot be genuine without faith. The first demand of faith is that as soon as Allah’s and the Messenger’s command reaches a person, he must bow his head and never raise it in rejection of that command:

(Arabic)

Meaning: The response of the believers is that when they are called to Allah and the Messenger so that judgment may be given between them, they say, “We hear and we obey.” It is they who are successful. (Surah al-Nur: 51)

Moreover, this submission must not be made unwillingly or resentfully; it must be made willingly and eagerly. One must not even harbor in one’s heart any hidden resentment or discontent toward the command of Allah and the Messenger. The person who bows only outwardly while feeling resentment in his heart is not a believer; rather, he is a hypocrite:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Whenever they are told, ‘Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger,’ you see the hypocrites turning away from you. …By your Lord, they will never be believers until they accept you as judge in their disputes, then find no resentment in their hearts toward your decision and submit to it completely.” (Surah al-Nisa: 61–65)

But the person who openly disobeys Allah’s law, abandons the law of Allah and the Messenger to follow another law and regards that other law as true and correct, mocks the law of Allah and the Messenger while following a different law, and considers obedience to it objectionable, can never be a believer. It makes no difference whether such a person claims to be a Muslim, bears a Muslim name, or is recognized as Muslim in the census register. A person may remain a believer while committing sins, but the condition is that he must regard the sin as a sin and feel remorse for it. He must acknowledge that he committed an offense against the law merely because of moral weakness. But when sin is combined with shamelessness and audacity, pride and arrogance are displayed over it, and someone is condemned and reproached for refraining from it because it is considered a virtuous deed—then, by Allah, faith can never remain alongside such wrongdoing. Anyone wishing to enter this stage must first decide whether he wishes to remain a Muslim or wishes to abandon Islam and enter the bounds of obedience to the law whose following gives him a sense of honor.

By Allah’s grace, the Muslim masses have so far remained safe from this flood of firangi culture and unbelieving rebellion. Until now, respect for the commands of Allah and the Messenger has remained in their hearts. Some degree of adherence to Islamic law can still be observed among them. But just as the conduct of the aristocratic class previously influenced their character and behavior, there is also the danger that modern customs will gradually exert a destructive influence on their faith. The growing abandonment of prayer and fasting, wrongdoing and sinful practices, imitation of firangi customs, and interest among ordinary Muslims in the dazzling amusements that are the outer shell of firangi civilization are nothing but the tolling of the bell of this approaching danger. If the thinking and outlook of our aristocratic class are not purified, and their hostility toward Islam’s straight path continues in this way, the day is not far off when the entire nation will drown in this sea of sin and this sunnah of Allah will also be fulfilled:

(Arabic)

Meaning: When We intend to destroy a town, We command its affluent wrongdoers, and they commit transgression therein. Thus the decree becomes due against it, and We destroy it utterly. (Surah al-Isra: 16)

13

Causes of Social Collapse and Ways of Escaping It

[The article was first published in the March 1935 issue of Tarjuman al-Quran.—Editor]

The Quran Majid has stated this truth as a general principle: if a people are righteous, Allah will not destroy them without cause—for He is not a wrongdoer:

(Arabic)

Meaning: Your Lord would never destroy the towns unjustly while their inhabitants are righteous. (Surah Hud: 117)

Destruction and ruin do not mean merely laying towns waste and casting their inhabitants into death; one particular form of it is to scatter and divide nations, crush their collective strength, and make them defeated and subjugated, humiliated and disgraced. Yet, on the basis of the principle stated above, no form of destruction and ruin can befall a nation until it abandons the path of welfare and reform and continues along the path of harm, disorder, disobedience, and rebellion, thereby bringing oppression upon itself. In accordance with this principle, wherever Allah has mentioned casting a nation into punishment, He has also mentioned its crimes, so that people may clearly know that it is through their own misdeeds that their worldly life and afterlife have been ruined:

(Arabic)

Meaning: We seized each of them for their sin. Allah was not unjust to them; rather, they were unjust to themselves. (Surah al-Ankabut: 40)

The second point arising from this principle is that the cause of destruction and ruin is not individual sinfulness, but collective—namely, national—sinfulness. In other words, if corruption of belief and conduct appears sporadically among people, but the religious and moral standard of the people as a whole remains sound and its influence keeps individual wrongdoing suppressed, then no matter how bad individuals may be separately, the nation as a whole survives. In that condition no such disorder arises as could cause the destruction of the entire nation. But when corruption of belief and conduct goes beyond individuals and spreads throughout the nation, when the nation’s religious feeling and moral consciousness become completely distorted, and the growth of evil increasingly replaces the growth of good, Allah’s gracious gaze is entirely withdrawn from that nation. It then descends from the heights of honor to the lowest depths of disgrace. Eventually Allah’s wrath is kindled against it, and it is completely destroyed and ruined.

The Quran Hakim mentions many examples of this.

When corruption of belief and conduct took root among the people of Noah, spread all around, and all hope of obtaining sweet fruit from this poisonous tree disappeared, they were destroyed. In the end, Noah, peace be upon him, was compelled to pray before the Lord of the Worlds:

(Arabic)

Meaning: My Lord, do not leave a single disbeliever alive upon the earth. If You leave them, they will mislead Your servants and beget none but immoral and hardened disbelievers. (Surah Nuh: 26–27)

The people of Ad were destroyed when sinfulness had completely taken root among them, oppressive, wicked, and corrupt people had attained the status of their leaders and rulers, and no place remained in the social and collective order for people who sought welfare and goodness:

(Arabic)

Meaning: The people of Ad rejected the command of their Lord, disobeyed His messengers, and followed the command of every stubborn enemy of truth. (Surah Hud: 59)

The people of Lot were destroyed only when their moral consciousness had reached its lowest ebb and shamelessness had increased to such an extent that adultery was being committed even in public gatherings and marketplaces; indeed, people no longer retained the sensibility to regard adultery as adultery:

(Arabic)

Meaning: (Lot said,) “Why do you approach men instead of women, molest travelers, and commit adultery openly in your gatherings?”

(Surah Al-Ankabut: 9)

The punishment descended upon the people of Midian precisely when the entire nation had become dishonest, deceitful, and treacherous. Giving short measure and taking more than one’s due were no longer considered objectionable. The nation’s moral consciousness had vanished to such an extent that, when they were reproached for such objectionable acts, they would reproach the reproacher instead of lowering their heads in shame. They could not even understand that any of their actions might be worthy of reproach. They did not regard adultery as objectionable; rather, they considered anyone who called it evil to be misguided and blameworthy:

(Arabic)

Meaning: (Shu’ayb said,) “O my people! Give full measure and weight with justice, do not give people less than their due, and do not spread corruption in the land.” They said, “O Shu’ayb! We do not understand much of what you say. We see you as weak among us. Were it not for your tribe, we would have stoned you.” (Surah Hud: 85–91)

The decision to cast the Children of Israel into disgrace, humiliation, and the curse of divine wrath took effect when they began rushing toward oppression, wickedness, and consuming what was unlawful. The disease of opportunism spread among their national leaders. Among the common people arose an attitude of compromise with sin, and no group of people remained to call wrongdoing wrongdoing and restrain others from it:

(Arabic)

Meaning: You see most of them rushing toward sin, transgression of the limits set by God, and consuming what is unlawful. How vile were the deeds they used to commit! Why did their spiritual leaders and scholars not forbid them from speaking evil and consuming unlawful wealth? They were certainly committing vile deeds. (Surah Al-Ma’idah: 62–63)

(Arabic)

Meaning: Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongues of David and Jesus, son of Mary, because they rebelled and transgressed. They did not restrain one another from wrongdoing. (Surah Al-Ma’idah: 78–79)

The hadiths narrated from the Noble Prophet concerning the explanation of this last verse further clarify the purpose of the Noble Qur’an. Their substance is as follows—the Noble Prophet said:

When sin began to spread among the Children of Israel, the situation was that if a person saw his brother, friend, or neighbor committing wrongdoing, he would forbid him and say, “O man! Fear God.” Yet afterward that same person would continue associating and keeping company with him. Even after witnessing the sinful person’s wrongdoing, he would not refrain from associating with him or sharing his food and drink. When matters reached this point, each began influencing the other. Consequently, Allah colored them all with one color and cursed them through the tongues of their prophets David and Jesus, son of Mary.

The narrator says that, while delivering the sermon, the Noble Prophet reached this point, then sat down overcome by emotion and said:

By the One in Whose hand is my life! It is obligatory upon you to enjoin people to do good, restrain them from wrongdoing, prevent anyone you see committing an evil deed, guide him to the right path, and show not the slightest indulgence in this matter. Otherwise Allah will cause some of you to influence the hearts of others and will curse you just as He cursed the Children of Israel.

Indeed, corruption of belief and conduct is like an epidemic. Every epidemic first attacks a few vulnerable people. In such circumstances, if the weather is favorable, the health department works properly, adequate arrangements exist for removing dirt and refuse, and the afflicted are treated in time, the disease cannot develop into a widespread epidemic; rather, the public can remain safe from its attack. But if, in the same situation, doctors are lazy and irresponsible, the health department is negligent, and sanitation workers tolerate dirt and refuse, the germs gradually spread everywhere and mingle with the air, making the environment extremely unhealthy. As a result, it becomes favorable to disease rather than health. Eventually, when ordinary people in society find nothing—not air, water, food, clothing, or homes—in a state free of dirt and foul odors, their vital strength begins to weaken and the whole society falls prey to a widespread epidemic. In such circumstances, even a powerful person finds it difficult to protect himself from the disease. Indeed, doctors themselves, sanitation workers, and public-health officials may also fall victim to it. Consequently, even those who take at least the necessary health precautions for themselves and regularly take medicine do not escape destruction. For what remedy do they have against polluted air, filthy water, contaminated food, and tainted soil?

Against this background, one may understand the corruption of morality and conduct and the deviation of thought and belief. The scholars are the physicians of the nation. The rulers and the wealthy are responsible for its sanitation and health. The nation’s religious honor and society’s moral consciousness are like vital strength. The social environment corresponds to air, water, food, clothing, and homes. In national life, from the perspective of religion and morality, enjoining good and preventing wrongdoing is equivalent to sanitation and health-protection efforts from the perspective of physical well-being. When the scholars and ruling classes abandon their real duty—that is, preventing wrongdoing—and continue compromising with evil and corruption, disorder, sin, and immorality spread throughout the nation. Consequently, the nation’s religious honor gradually weakens. Eventually the entire social environment becomes corrupted. The nation’s living environment becomes hostile to welfare and good conduct and favorable to wrongdoing and corruption. People flee from good conduct and, instead of hating wrongdoing, become attracted to it. Their moral values completely change. Faults take the place of virtues, and virtues take the place of faults. In such circumstances, misguidance, misconduct, and immorality blossom luxuriantly. No seed of goodness or good conduct retains the power to flower and put forth branches and leaves. The soil and air alike refuse to nurture it, for all their strength becomes devoted to the growth and spread of the poisonous tree. Indeed, when the overall condition of a nation reaches this stage, it becomes fit to receive divine punishment. Such destruction descends upon it that no one can escape its grasp. Even someone who hides in a monastery and remains occupied day and night in worship and devotion receives no exemption. It is concerning this condition that the Qur’an says:

(Arabic)

Meaning: Fear the tribulation that will not afflict only the wrongdoers and sinners among you. (Surah Al-Anfal: 25)

Explaining this verse, Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said: “Allah’s intent here is that you must not allow wrongdoing to become firmly rooted before your eyes. For if you compromise with wrongdoing and give it an opportunity to spread, a widespread punishment will descend from Allah, and everyone—good and bad alike—will be cast into its grasp.” It is known from a hadith that the Noble Prophet himself explained this verse by saying:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Allah does not punish ordinary people for the deeds of distinguished people. But when they see wrongdoing before them and, despite having the power to resist it, do not come forward to resist it, Allah casts both the distinguished and the ordinary into punishment.”

The greatest means of preserving the nation’s moral and religious health is that religious honor and moral consciousness must exist within every individual. The Noble Prophet described this with the broad and meaningful word “haya,” commonly rendered as modesty. Haya is in fact a branch of faith. He said: (Arabic) Modesty is a part of faith. On one occasion it was submitted to the Prophet that haya was actually a part of the religion. He said: (Arabic)—rather, it is the whole religion.

The significance of the word haya mentioned in the hadith is that, as soon as people see wrongdoing and sin, a spontaneous urge to resist should awaken in them, and their hearts should express hatred for it. Whoever possesses this quality will not merely refrain from wrongdoing himself; he will not tolerate its existence in others either. He will show no indulgence toward wrongdoing. He will be unable to compromise with oppression and sin. Whenever an evil deed is committed before him, his religious honor will immediately be stirred. He will try to eradicate it with his hand or his speech, or at least his heart and mind will be agitated by the desire to eradicate it:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Whoever among you sees wrongdoing should eradicate it with his hand; if he is unable, then with his speech; and if he is unable even to do that, then with his heart—and that is the weakest sign of faith.” (Musnad Ahmad)

(Arabic)

A nation in which this quality is generally present will have its religion and faith protected. Its moral character will never decline, because every individual will be a guardian and questioner of others. Corruption of belief and conduct will find no avenue to intrude among them.

In reality, the Qur’an’s objective is to establish such an ideal society that every individual, impelled by sincere inclination, natural modesty and honor, and the demands of personal conscience, will fulfill the duty of supervision and accountability and serve as a divine law-enforcer without receiving any payment:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Thus We have made you a just and balanced community so that you may be witnesses over the people and the Messenger may be a witness over you.” (Surah Al-Baqarah: 143)

That is why Muslims have repeatedly been told that enjoining good and preventing wrongdoing are your national characteristics. These should be manifest in every believing man and woman:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “You are the best nation brought forth for humanity: you enjoin what is right, forbid what is wrong, and believe in Allah.” (Surah Al Imran: 110)

(Arabic)

Meaning: “The believing men and women are allies of one another; they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong.” (Surah At-Tawbah: 71)

(Arabic)

Meaning: “They enjoin what is right, forbid what is wrong, and preserve the limits set by Allah.” (Surah At-Tawbah: 112)

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Those who, if We establish them in authority on earth, will establish prayer, give zakat, enjoin what is right, and forbid what is wrong.” (Surah Al-Hajj: 41)

If the condition of Muslims is like this, they may be compared to a settlement whose every inhabitant possesses an awareness of cleanliness and health preservation. They do not merely keep their own bodies and homes clean; whenever they see dirt or refuse anywhere in the settlement, they remove it. They do not tolerate dirt, refuse, or foul odors anywhere. Clearly, the air of such a settlement must remain pure, clean, and wholesome. Disease germs will find no opportunity to arise there. Even if, by chance, someone becomes weak and falls ill, he will be treated in time; or at least his illness will remain a personal illness and will not spread among others to become a widespread epidemic.

But if the Muslim nation cannot maintain this elevated moral standard, then at least one group must certainly exist among them to preserve the religious and moral health of society. This group must always be prepared to perform this service and must continue removing the pollution from people’s thoughts and beliefs and the impurity from their habits and character.

(Arabic)

Meaning: “There must be a group among you that calls to goodness, enjoins what is right, and forbids what is wrong.” (Surah Al Imran: 104)

This group consists collectively of the scholars and the rulers. For them, engaging in enjoining good and preventing wrongdoing is just as necessary as it is for a city’s sanitation and health department to remain vigilant in carrying out its responsibilities. If these people neglect their duties and no group remains in the nation to call toward good and restrain from wrongdoing, then the nation’s destruction in religious and moral terms is just as certain as the destruction, in body and life, of a settlement without sanitation and health-protection arrangements. The reason destruction descended upon the ancient nations was that no group existed at that time to restrain them from wrongdoing and establish them upon good:

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Why were there not, among the generations before you, people of understanding who would forbid corruption in the land—except the few whom We saved from among them?” (Surah Hud: 116)

(Arabic)

Meaning: “Why did their scholars and spiritual leaders not forbid them from speaking evil and consuming what is unlawful?” (Surah Al-Ma’idah: 63)

Thus it is proven that the responsibility of the nation’s scholars, spiritual leaders, and rulers is of the greatest importance. They are responsible not only for their own deeds; rather, much of the responsibility for the deeds of the entire nation rests upon them. What more need be said about tyrannical, oppressive, pleasure-loving rulers and the scholars and spiritual leaders who flatter them? There is no need even to mention their fate before Allah. But those rulers, scholars, and spiritual leaders who sit in their own settlements, homes, and monasteries displaying the utmost piety, abstinence, worship, and asceticism will not escape accountability before Allah either. When storms of misguidance and immorality are rushing upon their nation from every direction, their task is not merely to sit with bowed heads in seclusion; rather, like brave men, they must leap into the field and, with whatever strength, capability, influence, and authority Allah has granted them, build a resistance against those storms. They are not responsible for dispelling the storms, but they are certainly responsible for employing all their available strength to confront them. If they show even the slightest negligence in this work, their personal worship, devotion, piety, and abstinence will not at all free them from accountability in the Hereafter. If an epidemic spreads in a city and thousands of people begin dying, and in such circumstances an employee of the sanitation and health department sits at home trying only to save his own life and the lives of his children, no one would ever call such an employee an innocent and responsible official. It is less objectionable if an ordinary citizen does this, but if an officer of the sanitation and health department does so, there can be no doubt that he is guilty.

14

Faith and Obedience

[The essay was first published in the December 1934 issue of Tarjuman-ul-Qur’an. — Editor]

Whatever the nature and purpose of a social system may be, two things are always necessary for its establishment, stability, and success. First, the principle and ideal on the basis of which a society is to be formed must be firmly rooted in the entire society and in each of its individuals, and every individual in the society must have the greatest possible attachment to it. Second, a spirit of obedience and compliance with commands must exist in society. That is, one must fully obey the commands of whoever is acknowledged as the authority, strictly follow the rules and regulations he prescribes, and never cross the boundaries he has set. These are indispensable conditions for the success of any system. Whether the system is military or political, social or religious and moral, without these two conditions it can neither be established nor reach its objective.

Examine the entire history of the world. No one will find a single example of a movement that succeeded with cowardly, hypocritical, disobedient, and insubordinate people and ultimately continued to exist. Nor is there any need to pore over history for this. Just look around you. What can one think of an army that is not loyal and obedient to its own state and chief commander, whose soldiers refuse to follow military rules, in which no soldier is ready to move from his place when the bugle sounds for parade, and whose soldiers disregard a command from the commander? Can anyone call such an assembly of soldiers an “army”? Can anyone expect such a disorderly force to win a war? What can be said of a state whose subjects have no respect for the law, whose regulations are openly violated, whose offices have no order or discipline, and whose employees refuse to carry out the instructions of higher authorities? Can any state with such subjects and such rulers survive long in the world? Before the eyes of the world today stand the examples of Germany and Italy [This refers to the period before the Second World War. — Editor]. The whole world knows of the immense power Hitler and Mussolini acquired. But do you know the main reason for their success? Those two things: faith and obedience. If the Nazi and Fascist parties had not held such firm conviction in their principles and ideals and had not been so strictly loyal to their leaders, they could never have become so powerful and successful.

There is no exception to this general rule. Faith and obedience are in fact the life force of an organization. The firmer its faith and the more complete its obedience, the more successful the organization will be. Conversely, the weaker its faith and the more averse it is to obedience, the weaker the organization will become, and correspondingly it will fail to reach its goal. It is completely impossible for hypocrisy, disbelief, disunity of thought, rebellion, disobedience, and disorder to spread through a society or organization while order and discipline nevertheless remain and it continues advancing toward progress in every sphere of life. These two conditions are wholly contradictory. From the time human beings began living in the world until today, they have never been reconciled. If natural law is unchanging, then this law is also unchanging: these two conditions can never be reconciled.

Now let us turn our attention to the nation that calls itself Muslim. What form of hypocrisy and disbelief is there that people can imagine which is not found among Muslims? Today the Islamic social system includes people who are not even acquainted with the basic teachings of Islam and still cling to the beliefs of the Age of Ignorance. There are also people here who harbor doubts about Islam’s fundamental principles and openly go about propagating those doubts. This society includes people who have openly expressed dissatisfaction and aversion toward religion and religiosity. It includes people who have given precedence to ideas and modes of thought received from the unbelievers over the teachings given by Allah and the Messenger. There are people here who give the customs and practices of the Age of Ignorance and laws of disbelief precedence over the commandments given by Allah and the Messenger. This society includes people who insult Islamic practices in order to please the enemies of Allah and the Messenger. It also includes people who are prepared to cause serious harm to the Islamic edifice for the sake of their smallest and most trivial interests—people who assist disbelief against Islam, serve the unbelievers against Islam’s interests, and by their conduct prove that Islam is not even slightly dear to them, for they cannot accept the loss of even a hair’s breadth for its sake. In short, apart from a small group of Muslims possessing firm faith and sound conviction, the great majority of this nation is filled with hypocritical and misguided people of this kind.

So much for faith. Let us now turn our attention to obedience. Any observer who visits a Muslim neighborhood will witness a strange scene. The call to prayer is being given, but among many Muslims there is no awareness of whom the caller is calling or what he is calling them to. The time for prayer comes and goes, yet apart from an insignificant minority, the rest of the Muslims are unwilling to abandon their business and amusements for Allah’s sake. The month of Ramadan comes every year, but in many Muslim families there is not even an awareness of what an important month it is. During this time, many Muslims eat and drink openly and feel not the slightest shame for failing to fast; on the contrary, they try to shame those who fast. Moreover, even among those who observe the fast, very few do so with a full sense of responsibility and duty. Some observe it merely as a custom, some because they consider it beneficial to their health, while others fast yet continue doing everything forbidden by Allah and His Messenger. Compliance with zakat and Hajj is of an even lower standard. The sense of the distinction between halal and haram, and between what is pure and impure, is on the verge of disappearing from among Muslims. Indeed, which thing forbidden by Allah and His Messenger are Muslims not making lawful? Which boundary set by Allah and His Messenger are Muslims not transgressing? Which system of law established by Allah and His Messenger are Muslims not violating? In terms of population, the number of Muslims runs into tens of millions. But among these tens of millions, not even one in a hundred or one in a thousand—how many per hundred thousand are faithful to the commands of Allah and His Messenger and truly observant of Islamic law?

Indeed, the fate that must befall a nation in which the disease of hypocrisy and weakness of faith spreads, in which no sense of responsibility and duty remains, and from which obedience and compliance with the law disappear—that very fate is now befalling the Muslims. Today the Muslims are subjugated and defeated throughout the world. Even where they possess their own political power, they are not free from the moral, mental, and material domination of others. Their illiteracy, ignorance, poverty, and misery are proverbial. Moral decline has brought them to the utmost limit of humiliation. Once, by virtue of such qualities as trustworthiness, loyalty, truthfulness, and keeping promises, they occupied the highest position; those qualities have now passed from them to others, while breach of trust, lying, deceit, breaking promises, and misconduct have taken their place. In terms of taqwa, piety, and moral purity, they are becoming almost hollow within. Their sense of social and national honor is gradually disappearing. They have not the slightest trace of order and discipline. Their hearts have filled with aversion and disgust toward one another. They no longer possess the ability to work together for any common interest or purpose. In the eyes of other nations they are utterly disgraced and humiliated. Other nations have lost, and are continuing to lose, their trust in them. Their national, social, and collective strength has weakened. Their national civilization and culture are on the verge of disappearing. They have become incapable of safeguarding their rights and protecting their national honor. Education has spread among them, and the proportion of graduates, postgraduates, and those educated in Europe is also increasing. The number of those living in modern-style bungalows, riding in motorcars, wearing suit coats, bearing grand titles, and holding high positions is indeed growing day by day; yet they are now entirely deprived of the lofty moral qualities with which they were formerly adorned. Not even a trace remains of the influence and prestige they once possessed over neighboring nations. None of the honor, esteem, strength, or capability they formerly possessed remains today, and in the future even more serious signs will become apparent.

With regard to any religion, civilization, or social system, only two courses of action can be acceptable to people. If a person belongs to it, he must have complete faith in its fundamental principles. He must fully follow its laws, rules, and regulations. If he cannot do so, he cannot belong to it; or, if he does belong to it, he must openly withdraw from it. No third course between these two can be reasonable. For a person to belong to a political system, be recognized as one of its members, and claim to be loyal to it, while at the same time wholly or partly rejecting its principles, acting against its prescribed laws, and freeing himself from compliance with its customs and regulations—this can in no way be a rational course of action. The inevitable result of such conduct is that a hypocritical character will develop among people. Sincerity and selflessness will depart from their hearts. No enthusiasm or firm resolve for any noble purpose can arise in them. A sense of responsibility, duty-consciousness, obedience to law, and discipline will leave them. Consequently, they will no longer possess the ability to become useful members of any society. With such weakness, incapacity, and defects, whatever society they belong to, they will become a great curse upon it. Whatever civilization they enter, they will prove to be like the germs of leprosy within its body. Whatever religion they follow, they will completely distort it. Rather than becoming Muslims with all these qualities, it would be a hundred times better for them to join the group whose principles and ideals appeal to them and whose course of action they wish to follow. Indeed, a kafir who sincerely believes in his religion and civilization and follows their customs and regulations is at least better than a hypocritical Muslim.

Those who regard Western education, modern civilization, economic prosperity, and the attainment of political rights as the remedy for the Muslims’ national ailment are undoubtedly mistaken. By Allah, even if every Muslim became an M.A., a Ph.D., or a barrister, grew wealthy, became splendidly dressed from head to foot in Western attire, and occupied all the offices of the state and government and all the seats in the councils [It should be remembered that this refers here to the government offices and council seats of British India. —Editor]

—and sat in possession of them, while the disease of hypocrisy remained hidden in their hearts, and they became accustomed to disobedience, rebellion, and unruly conduct instead of recognizing duty as duty, they would remain sunk in humiliation, disgrace, and weakness as they are today. Indeed, none of their education, manners, wealth, or political power can rescue them from the deep pit into which they have fallen because of their nature, character, and morality [Here, “pit” means subjugation]. If the Muslims are to attain advancement and progress and stand as a powerful and honored nation, they must first develop the qualities of faith and obedience to law. Without this, no strength can be instilled in their personal lives, nor can order and discipline return to their national life. Moreover, their collective strength can never become so formidable that they may rise high in this worldly life. For a scattered and disorganized nation whose people’s moral and inner condition is utterly miserable can never hold its head high in confronting the firm, powerful, and well-organized nations of the world. However large a heap of straw may be, it can never be regarded as a fortress.

Those who spread disbelief and disobedience among the Muslims are the worst enemies of Islam and the Muslims. They are the worst class of hypocrites; their existence is more dangerous to the Muslims than that of armed kafirs. For they never attack from outside; rather, sitting inside the house, they secretly keep laying dynamite. They wish to disgrace the Muslims in both the religious and worldly spheres. Regarding this class of people, the Noble Qur’an says that just as they themselves have become kafirs, they also wish to make you kafirs: (Arabic) “They wish that you too would fall into disbelief, just as they have fallen into disbelief, so that you would become like them.” (Surah al-Nisa: 89) The minimum way to protect oneself from their mischief is that those who are Muslims in heart and soul and wish to remain Muslims should sever relations with them—(Arabic) “Do not take them as friends and patrons”—otherwise the Qur’an has declared the extreme punishment for them: they must be fought.

(Arabic)

(If they do not accept this, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them.)

15

The True Meaning of the Word Muslim

[The article was first published in the November 1933 issue of Tarjuman al-Qur’an. —Editor]

In our everyday conversation, we frequently use certain words and expressions which everyone pronounces, but very few people understand their meaning. Because of their widespread use, only a general sense of them has become embedded in people’s minds. When speakers pronounce these words, they have that sort of meaning in mind. And when listeners hear them, they grasp that sort of meaning. But the broad and profound meaning for which these words were coined is unknown not only to the uneducated, but even to many highly educated people.

The words “Islam” and “Muslim” may be cited as an example. How extensively these two words are uttered, and how profoundly they have influenced our speech! But how many of those who pronounce them do so with understanding? And how many listeners understand their true meaning—the meaning for which they were coined? Let us set aside the non-Muslims. More than 99 percent of the Muslims themselves identify themselves as “Muslims” and use the word Islam to express their religious belief, but what does it mean to be a “Muslim,” and what is the true meaning of the word “Islam”? They do not know. Let us therefore offer here some explanation of these two words.

If we examine people’s condition with regard to religious belief and conduct, we generally find three classes of people:

1. The first class consists of those who claim freedom of opinion and action. They rely on their own views in every matter. They regard the judgment of their own conscience and intellect as infallible. They adopt whatever course of action they themselves consider correct. They have no connection with following any particular religion.

2. The second class appears to follow a religion, but in reality follows its own ideas. They do not turn to religion for creed, belief, and rules of conduct; rather, according to their own mental disposition, inclinations, interests, and needs, they firmly establish certain beliefs in their own minds, adopt some self-devised methods of action, and then try to mold religion accordingly—as though they are not followers of religion, but religion itself is their follower.

3. The third class does nothing with the help of its own judgment and intellect. They keep their conscience and reason inactive and blindly imitate others—whether their forefathers or other people of their own time.

The first group gives its life for the name of freedom, but does not know what its proper limits are. There is no doubt that freedom of thought and action is valid to some extent. But when it crosses its own limits, it becomes a cause of error. A person who relies on his own opinion in every matter and follows only the dictates of reason in every issue is, in reality, guilty of the delusion that his intellect and knowledge have mastered every subject in the world; that no truth or complexity is hidden from his view; that he knows the roads and paths to every destination; that he is fully acquainted with the logic of every doctrine; and that, just as he knows the beginning of every path, he also knows its ultimate end. This idea of knowledge and awareness is in reality merely a false notion. If a person truly makes his intellect his guide, that very intellect will tell him that he is not actually adorned with the qualities with which its blind follower imagines him to be adorned. Whoever regards it as his sole guide and wishes to walk only at its direction can never escape blows, stumbling, deviation, error, and destruction.

In fact, this kind of freedom of thought and action is dangerous to civilization and culture. The claim of freedom is that a person will hold only the religious belief that seems correct according to his own conception, and will adopt only the path that appears right to his intellect. In contrast, the demand of civilization and culture is that people subject to this social order agree on certain fundamental principles and ideas, and follow in their practical lives the particular rules, procedures, and regulations prescribed for organizing and conducting communal life. Thus, freedom of thought and action is plainly in conflict with civilization and culture. Freedom creates arrogance, lack of restraint, and anarchy in the individual. Civilization demands obedience, submission, compliance, and subservience from him. Where there is complete freedom, there can be no civilization or communal life. And where there is civilization, the individual must sacrifice a considerable portion of his freedom of thought and action.

The condition of the second group is even worse than that of the first. The first group is merely mistaken; the second is also mendacious, hypocritical, deceitful, and envious of others. If, within the reasonable limits of interpretation, a person can create harmony between his religion, his thinking, and his inclinations, then he can follow his religion even while exercising freedom of thought and action. If a person’s inclinations oppose religion, yet he still considers the religion correct and his own inclinations mistaken, then his claim that he truly follows the religion he professes may still be regarded as largely genuine. But if his beliefs and conduct are completely different from the clear

teachings and guidance of the religion, and he considers his own ideas true and the teachings of religion mistaken, yet still tries to mold the religious teachings according to his own ideas and customs in order to keep himself confined within the bounds of religion—then we will not call such a person foolish; for where could a foolish person perform such a cautious act? We are compelled to call him faithless. We must also conclude that he lacks sufficient honesty and courage to openly declare rebellion against religion; therefore he has pretended to follow religion by the path of hypocrisy. Otherwise, if the teachings of the religion contradict his intellectual conclusions and are wholly opposed to his actual thoughts and convictions, what has prevented him from abandoning that religion? And who has forbidden him to follow the paths he earnestly wishes to follow?

The third group is the most inferior from an intellectual point of view. The error of the first two groups is that they expect the intellect to do as much as it is incapable of doing. The error of this group is that they do not apply the intellect at all—or, even if they do, it is as good as not applying it! What could be more disgraceful for an intelligent person than to have no proof in support of the religion he believes in other than that his forefathers held the same belief, or that some progressive nation also believes in that religion? Similarly, a person who follows certain practices in religious or worldly matters merely because they have continued since the time of his forefathers, or adopts certain practices merely because they are prevalent among the influential nations of his time, actually proves that he has no ability in his head to distinguish truth from falsehood or right from wrong. He considers Hinduism correct simply because he happened to be born into a Hindu family. Likewise, had he been born into a Muslim family, he would have accepted Islam as the truth. And had he been the child of a Christian, he would have devoted himself to Christianity. Similarly, merely because circumstances made the customs of the Europeans prevalent in his time, he regards them as the standard of civilization. If the Chinese had been powerful, Chinese customs would certainly have been recognized by him as the standard of civilization. And today he would begin to regard the Negroes of the world as the measure of humanity.

The fact that something has been practiced in this way by our forefathers or is practiced in the world today is no proof that it is true and correct. Many foolish things were done in the world in the past, and are still being done today. It is not our task to follow such foolishness blindly.

Nor is it our task simply to close our eyes and continue following any practice, ancient or modern, or to move shoulder to shoulder with every traveler, whether he leads us toward a thorn forest or a vast pit. For Allah has given us intellect and understanding so that we may distinguish good from evil in the world, test the false against the genuine, and carefully observe where someone leads before accepting him as a guide. Islam considers all three of these groups misguided.

Regarding the first group, it says that just as they do not accept anyone who has received light as their guide, they also possess no light by which to travel. Their example is like that of a person groping his way through darkness by mere guesswork. Perhaps at one moment he will walk on the straight path, and at another he may fall into a pit. For conjecture is not something certain. It allows for both error and correctness; indeed, the possibility of error is greater:

وما يتبع الذين يدعون من دون الله شركاء ان يتبعون الا الظن وانهم ال يخرصون

Meaning: Do you know whose followers those are who regard others besides Allah as partners in divinity and call upon them? They follow nothing but conjecture and imagination, and proceed solely on guesswork.” (Surah Yunus: 66)

ان يتبعون الا الظن وان الظن لايغنى من الحق شيئا

Meaning: They follow nothing but conjecture, and the condition of conjecture is that it does not guide to the truth even by the slightest amount.” (Surah al-Najm: 28)

ان يتبعون الا الظن وما تهوى الانفس ولقد جاءهم من ربهم الهدى ط ام للانسان ما تمنى

Meaning: They follow nothing except conjecture and the desires of their own selves, although guidance has come to them from their Lord. Is it true for a human being that which he desires?” (Surah al-Najm: 23–24)

افرءيت من اتخذ الهه هوه واضله الله على علم وختم على سمعه وقلبه وجعل على بصره غشاوة فمن يهديه من بعد الله

Meaning: Have you seen the one who has taken the desire of his own self as his god? Despite his knowledge, Allah has led him astray, sealed his hearing and his heart, and placed a covering over his sight. Who, then, can guide him after Allah?” (Surah al-Jathiyah: 23)

ومن اضل ممن اتبع هواه بغير هدى من الله ط ان الله لا يهدى القوم الظلمين

Meaning: Who is more astray than one who follows his own desire instead of the guidance given by Allah? Allah never grants guidance to such unjust people.” (Surah al-Qasas: 50)

At the time of the Qur’an’s revelation, the representative of the second group was the Children of Israel. They claimed to be followers of Moses (peace be upon him) and adherents of the Torah. But most of their beliefs and conduct were contrary to the path followed by Moses (peace be upon him) and the teachings stated in the Torah. Moreover, the astonishing thing was that they felt not the slightest shame for such wrongdoing. Instead of molding their thoughts and conduct according to the teachings of the Torah, they altered the Torah itself, verbally and in meaning, and molded it according to their own thoughts and conduct. Concealing the true teachings of the Torah, they proclaimed their own ideas to be the teachings of the Torah. Because of these misguided and misleading practices, they abused Allah’s servants who warned them and called upon them to follow the Divine message against their desires; they called them liars and even went so far as to kill them. Thus, the Qur’an says about them:

يحرفون الكلم من مواضعه ونسوا حظا مما ذكروا به ولا تزال تطلع على خائنة منهم الا قليلا منهم

Meaning: They distort words from their proper places and have forgotten a large part of the admonitions given to them. You will continue to learn of some treachery on their part, except for a few of them. They have very few who have remained free from this treachery.” (Surah al-Ma’idah: 13)

يااهل الكتب لم تلبسون الحق بالباطل وتكتمون الحق وانتم تعلمون

Meaning: O People of the Book! Why do you mix truth with falsehood, and why do you knowingly conceal the truth?” (Surah Al ‘Imran: 71)

كلما جاءهم رسول بما لاتهوى انفسهم فريقا كذبوا وفريقا يقتلون

Meaning: Whenever a prophet brought them a message contrary to the desires of their own selves, they called some liars and killed others.” (Surah al-Ma’idah: 70)

Then they were told plainly:

(Arabic)

Meaning: You will not find the right path until you uphold the Torah and the Gospel and believe in the Book—that is, the Qur’an—sent down to you from your Lord.” (Surah al-Ma’idah: 68)

Regarding the third group, the Qur’an says:

(Arabic)

Meaning: Whenever they are told, “Follow what Allah has revealed,” they reply, “We will follow only the path on which we saw our forefathers.” What if their forefathers understood nothing, knew nothing, and had not found the right path—would they still follow their forefathers?” (Surah al-Baqarah: 170)

(Arabic)

Meaning: Whenever they are told, “Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger,” they reply, “The path on which we have seen our forefathers is sufficient for us.” What if their forefathers knew nothing and had not found the right path—would that path still be sufficient for them?” (Surah al-Ma’idah: 104)

(Arabic)

Meaning: If you follow most of those on earth, they will lead you away from Allah’s path; they follow nothing but conjecture. Their way is based entirely on guesswork and conjecture.” (Surah al-An‘am: 116)

The Qur’an has called those who do not use their own judgment and discernment, who do not distinguish the genuine from the counterfeit, but blindly follow others—in imitation—blind, dumb, and deaf:

(Arabic)

Meaning: They are blind, dumb, and deaf. Therefore, they understand nothing.’ (Surah al-Baqarah: 171)

They have been compared to animals, and indeed called even worse than them. For animals have no judgment or reason at all; but although these people possess reason, they do not use it:

(Arabic)

Meaning: Their example is that of animals; rather, they are even more astray, and they are heedless.’ (Surah al-A‘raf: 179)

After rejecting these three extremist groups, the Qur’an seeks to form a community of people who will wholly follow the middle course (Arabic). This community will always uphold justice and fairness’ (Arabic).

What is this middle course? It is to tear away the coverings that ancient customs and modern education have placed over people’s vision; to open one’s eyes to the clear light of sound judgment; and to examine deeply what is true and what is false. One must judge: Is atheism correct, or the divine doctrine? Is tawhid correct, or shirk? Is divine guidance necessary for people to walk the straight path or not? Were the prophets, peace be upon them, and Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, truthful—or, God forbid, liars? Is the way of life presented by the Qur’an straight or crooked? If people’s hearts testify that belief in Allah is a natural demand of human nature, and that in reality He alone is Allah, without any partner; if their consciences acknowledge that Allah-given light is absolutely necessary for people to follow the straight path, and that this is the light brought by the prophets, peace be upon them, as the true guides of humanity; if, seeing the pure life of Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, people become convinced that a man of such elevated character could never deceive the world, and that his claim to be Allah’s Messenger is unquestionably true; if, after studying the Qur’an, their judgment concludes that everything presented by this magnificent Book is the only straight path for human belief and conduct—then it is their absolute duty to believe in that reality whose truth their consciences affirm, undaunted by the world’s condemnation and opposition, and purifying their hearts and minds of every fear of loss and every lure of gain.

Furthermore, once sound reason has distinguished truth from falsehood and faith has been placed in the truth after rejecting falsehood, the work of intellectual examination, testing, and criticism has also ended. After faith is embraced, the authority to decide and command passes from reason into the hands of Allah, His Messenger, and His Book. Thereafter, it is not people’s task to make decisions; rather, their task is simply to accept every command of Allah and His Messenger with bowed heads. They may use their intellect to understand those commands, uncover their subtleties and rationale, and apply them to the details of their lives. But no one has the right to alter any divine command even slightly. Whether the rationale and propriety of a command are understandable to people or not, whether a command passes the standard of reason or not, and whether Allah’s command and the Messenger’s decree conform to the customs and traditions of the world or conflict with them—their duty is to submit to it unconditionally. Once they have accepted Allah, acknowledged the Messenger as Allah’s Messenger, and believed that whatever the Messenger presents comes from Allah and is not something he has invented himself (Arabic), then the logical demand of this belief and conviction is that they give Allah’s Book and the Messenger’s Sunnah precedence over their own intellect, and refrain from testing all the beliefs and injunctions explained by Allah through His Messenger against their own intellect, learning, experience, or the thoughts and actions of other people. A person who claims to be a believer while simultaneously disobeying divine commands contradicts his own claim. He does not know that faith and disobedience are clearly incompatible. Nor does he know that order and discipline (Arabic) are established only through acceptance and obedience. Disobedience is merely another name for anarchy. This balance and middle course is Islam. Those who follow this path are called Muslims.

Islam means submission, obedience, and acceptance. A person who accepts, without protest, the commands of the one who commands and the prohibitions of the one who forbids is called a Muslim. Thus, this name itself reveals the reason why, abandoning the three groups mentioned above and their ways of acting, this fourth group was established upon a new ideology: so that its members would follow Allah’s and the Messenger’s commands and bow their heads before them. It is not the task of this group to follow its own judgment in every matter. Nor may it accept only that portion of Allah’s law which suits its interests and reject whatever conflicts with them; nor may it abandon Allah’s Book and the Messenger’s Sunnah and indiscriminately follow all people, living or dead.

Indeed, the Qur’an’s explanation on this matter is exceedingly clear. The Qur’an says that whenever Allah and the Messenger issue a command concerning any matter, believers retain no choice of accepting or rejecting it:

(Arabic)

Meaning: No believing man or woman has the right, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, to retain any choice of deciding that matter themselves; whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has surely fallen into manifest error.’ (Surah al-Ahzab: 36)

It says that abrogating part of Allah’s Book is an extreme humiliation in this world and the Hereafter:

(Arabic)

Meaning: Do you believe in part of the Book and disbelieve in part? Whoever among you does this will have no recompense except that he will be utterly humiliated in the life of this world, and in the Hereafter such people will be driven toward the harshest punishment. Allah is not unaware of what you do.’ (Surah al-Baqarah: 85)

It says that judgment, whether pleasing to people or not, should be according to Allah’s Book:

(Arabic)

Meaning: So judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their desires by turning away from the truth that has come to you from Allah.’ (Surah al-Ma’idah: 48)

It says that whoever does not judge according to Allah’s Book is sinful:

(Arabic)

Meaning: Every judgment contrary to Allah’s Book is a judgment of the Age of Ignorance.’ (Surah al-Ma’idah: 47)

(Arabic)

Meaning: Do they seek the judgment of the Age of Ignorance? Yet who can give better judgment than Allah for people who have certainty?’ (Surah al-Ma’idah: 50)

It says: O believers! Obey Allah, His Messenger, and those entrusted with authority among you. If you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day, then whenever you differ over anything, refer it to Allah and His Messenger for judgment—this is the best path and the best in outcome. (O Prophet!) Have you seen those who claim to believe in what has been revealed to you and what was revealed before you, yet wish to make those who disobey Allah judges over their affairs, although they were commanded to reject them? Satan only desires to lead them far astray. When they are told, ‘Come to what Allah has revealed and come to the Messenger,’ you see the hypocrites turn away from you completely. … We sent no messenger except that he was to be obeyed by Allah’s command. … No, by your Lord! They are not believers until they make you judge in their disputes, then find no hesitation in their hearts concerning your decision and submit to it without reservation.’ (Surah al-Nisa: verses 59–65)

This explanation has made clear the rationale behind the names ‘Islam’ and ‘Muslim.’ Now all of us who have entered the census under the name Muslim should deeply consider how far the word Muslim applies to us, and how appropriate it is to call our conduct and way of life Islam.

16

The True Source of Muslim Power

[The article was first published in the January 1935 issue of Tarjuman al-Qur’an. — Editor]

This happened around the beginning of the second Islamic century. The ruler of Sajistan and Duhkhar

[The ancient name of present-day Afghanistan.]

—whose hereditary title was Rutbil—had stopped paying tribute to the representative of the Banu Umayyah. Consequently, military expeditions were repeatedly conducted against him. But he would not submit under any circumstances. Yazid ibn Abd al-Malik once sent an envoy to collect tribute from him. The ruler then asked the Muslim envoy: ‘Where have the people gone who used to come to collect tribute? Their bellies were pressed against their backs like those of starving men, black marks covered their foreheads, and they wore palm leaves.’

He was told, ‘They have passed away.’ Rutbil said: ‘Although your faces and appearance are more impressive than theirs, they were more faithful to their promises and stronger than you.’

Historians say that after saying this, Rutbil refused to pay the tax and remained independent of the Islamic state for nearly half a century.

This was the age when large numbers of the Tabi‘un and the followers of the Tabi‘un were still alive. It was the age of the imam-mujtahids. Only a century had passed since the death of the Noble Prophet, peace be upon him. Muslims prevailed in the world as a living and powerful nation. They had acquired rule over Iran, Iraq, Rome, Egypt, Africa, Spain, and other countries. In equipment, splendor, and wealth, no nation in the world was then their equal. All these things were fully present. Their faith was also fresh in their hearts. Their adherence to the Shariah’s rules was far greater than today. There was a system of leadership and obedience to its commands. Powerful discipline prevailed throughout the nation. Yet those who tested their strength against the hungry, poor desert dwellers of the Companions’ age perceived an enormous difference between these well-equipped people and those without such equipment. What kind of difference was it? Historians may wish to call it merely the difference between rural and ancient civilization. They may say that the ancient desert dwellers were more capable of enduring hardship, while later people became fond of luxury because of wealth and civilizational prosperity. But I say that in reality this was the difference between faith, sincerity, moral character, and obedience to Allah and His Messenger. The true strength of the Muslims lay in these things. Abundance of numbers, plentiful equipment, prosperity in wealth, excellence in science and the arts, and the means of civilization and culture—none of these was the source of their strength. They advanced relying only on faith and righteous deeds. This was what elevated them in the world. It was this that established them in a place of renown in the hearts of other nations. While they possessed this wealth of strength and honor, they were powerful and respected despite their small numbers and lack of equipment. When this wealth disappeared from them, they began to grow weak and dishonored despite their abundance of numbers and equipment.

What Rutbil said as an enemy is more instructive than a thousand sermons from friends and well-wishers. He in fact highlighted this truth: the true strength of a nation does not lie in its well-equipped army, weapons, skilled soldiers, and abundant resources; rather, it lies in its good nature, firm character, sound conduct, and elevated thinking. This is a spiritual power that exercises authority in the world even without material resources. It enables those sitting on the ground to defeat those seated on thrones. It makes them not merely masters of the land, but masters of people’s hearts as well. Through this power, sword-bearers wearing palm leaves, emaciated like dry skeletons, with dull faces and rags wrapped around them, can establish in the world a reputation, influence, valor, honor, dignity, and governing authority that even those wearing splendid clothes, possessing large and powerful bodies and radiant faces, commanding exalted courts, carrying great cannons, and enjoying tremendous might cannot establish without that power. Indeed, an abundance of moral strength can compensate for a lack of material resources, but an abundance of material resources can never compensate for a lack of moral strength. Even if prestige is attained through material resources alone without this power, it will be incomplete and temporary; it will never become perfect and firmly established. It will never humble people’s hearts—only their heads. And even that will be ready to rebel at the first opportunity.

No building gains stability through its variety of colors, ornamentation, beauty, flower-filled courtyards, or external splendor. An abundance of inhabitants, plentiful furnishings, and ample resources cannot make it strong. If its foundation is weak, its walls flimsy, and its pillars eaten by termites, then no matter how full it is of inhabitants, no matter how many millions’ worth of goods and furniture it contains, and no matter how its decoration dazzles people’s eyes and enchants their hearts, none of this can save it from collapse. People see only the exterior, and their vision remains confined to the visible surface. But the course of events comes to confront not the outward appearance but the inner reality. It tests the strength of the building’s foundation. It examines the firmness and maturity of its walls. It scrutinizes the arrangement and construction of its pillars. If these things are sound, strong, and stable, then the course of events will be forced to collide with such a building and retreat. Even if the building has no ornamentation or aesthetic beauty, it will certainly prevail over the course of events. Otherwise, the clash of events will ultimately crush it to pieces, destroying it together with all its inhabitants and adornments.

The condition of national life is the same. A nation is not made living, powerful, and elevated merely by its homes, clothing, vehicles, luxuries, fine arts, factories, and schools and colleges; rather, it is elevated and strengthened by the fundamental ideal of its civilization, the establishment of that ideal in its hearts, and the establishment of that ideal’s authority over its conduct. These three things—the purity of the ideal, firm faith in it, and its complete authority in practical life—are just as important in national life as a building’s strong foundation, mature walls, and sturdy pillars. Any nation in which these three things are fully present will prevail in the world. Its word will be exalted. Its authority will prevail in Allah’s world. Its fame will be established in people’s hearts. Their heads will bow before its commands. Even if it lives in a dilapidated hut, wears tattered clothes, has its stomach pressed against its back by fasting, has not a single college in its country, has not a single factory in its towns, and is completely backward in science and the arts, it alone will possess honor in the world. The things people regard as the means of progress are merely a building’s ornamentation, not its walls or pillars. Yet even plating a flimsy wall with gold cannot save it from collapse. This very point has been stated repeatedly in the Qur’an.

The Qur’an has said concerning the fundamental principle of Islam that Islam’s principle conforms to the steadfast and unchanging nature (Arabic) upon which Allah created human beings. Therefore, the religion established upon this principle is the ‘upright religion’ (Arabic)—that is, a religion which establishes all matters of this world and the Hereafter upon the correct basis:

(Arabic)

Meaning: So set your face toward this religion, inclining to truth. There is no change in Allah’s creation. That is the correct religion, but most people do not know.’ (Surah al-Rum: 30)

Then it says: Stand firmly upon this upright religion, believe in it, and act according to it. Its beneficial results will appear of themselves. You will yourselves be exalted in the world. You will be granted political power on earth. You will yourselves be invested with the dignity of the caliphate.

(Arabic)

On the other hand, those who have outwardly entered the bounds of Islam, but in whose hearts the religion has gained no place and Islam has not become their way of life, undoubtedly have a very impressive outward appearance;

(Arabic)

Their speech is also very sweet; (Arabic)

but in reality they are lifeless wooden figures.’ (Arabic)

They fear people more than they fear Allah.’ (Arabic)

Their deeds are like a mirage; they appear to be water, but in reality they are nothing.’ (Arabic)

Such people can never acquire collective strength. Their hearts remain divided from one another. They cannot participate unitedly and sincerely in any undertaking:’ (Arabic)

They can never possess the strength of believers and righteous people:’ (Arabic) They can never attain the position of leadership in the world:’ (Arabic) For them there is nothing in this world but humiliation and disgrace, and in the Hereafter nothing but severe punishment:’ (Arabic)

Many may be astonished by the fact that the Qur’an has declared faith and righteous deeds alone to be the only means for the Muslims’ progress, attainment of power and authority, and victory over all other nations. They will be surprised that nowhere are Muslims instructed to build universities, open schools and colleges, establish factories, build ships, set up companies, open banks, invent scientific machinery, or imitate advanced nations in clothing, social customs, and manners. On the other hand, the Qur’an has described hypocrisy as the sole cause of decline, degeneration, humiliation, and disgrace in this world and the Hereafter; nowhere has it identified the absence of the things regarded in today’s world as causes of progress as a cause of downfall.

But if the Qur’an’s fundamental spirit is understood, this astonishment will naturally disappear. The first thing to understand in this regard is that the foundation of what is called ‘Muslim’ is nothing but Islam. His identity as a Muslim can be determined only by Islam. If he believes in the message brought by Muhammad, peace be upon him, and obeys the rules and commands revealed through him, then even if he possesses nothing beyond Islam, his Islam will be complete. Conversely, if he is adorned with all the ornaments of worldly life but his heart bears no influence of faith and his practical life is free from obedience to Islamic rules, he may be a graduate, doctor, industrialist, banker, army commander, and everything else, but he cannot be a Muslim. Therefore, unless the essence of Islam first becomes firmly rooted in an individual or nation, none of its progress can be called the progress of a Muslim individual or nation. No matter how great such progress may be, it cannot in any way be regarded as Muslim progress. Clearly, such progress can never be Islam’s objective.

If a nation is not Muslim at all, and the fundamental basis of its thought, moral character, and social order is something other than Islam, that is a separate matter. Such a nation may certainly stand upon moral, social, political, economic, and sociological principles different from Islam, and may even reach the ultimate limit of the progress it seeks. But it is an entirely different matter for a nation’s thought, moral character, economy, and politics to be founded upon Islam while it remains weak in both conviction and conduct concerning Islam itself. No matter how abundantly such a nation gathers the means and resources of material progress, it is entirely impossible for it to rise as a firm and powerful nation and attain elevation in the world. For the very foundations of its nationality, morality, character, civilization, and culture are weak. The weakness of its foundations is so grave that mere external adornments can never remove it.

This does not mean that the true importance of knowledge, science, the arts, and other means and resources of material progress is being denied. Its real meaning is that, for a Muslim nation, these things are of secondary importance. The strength and stability of the foundation take precedence over all of them. Once the foundation is stable, all material resources compatible with it may—and should—be adopted. But if the foundation itself becomes weak, if its roots do not become firmly established in the heart, and if its control over practical life becomes lax, then the nation’s moral character, nature, and activities become distorted, disrupted, and disorderly both individually and socially; its social system becomes lax; its strength and capacity become scattered and fragmented; and its importance in international competition declines. As a result, other nations may even extend their dominance over it. In such circumstances, an abundance of material resources, a multitude of degree-holders and scholars, and the glitter of external splendor and beauty are of no use.

There is an even greater matter. The Wise Qur’an has declared with utmost firmness: “If you are believers, you will surely prevail”; “The party of Allah will be victorious”; and “Those who are adorned with faith and righteous deeds will surely gain the vicegerency of the world.” What is the basis of this firm assertion? On what foundation has such a great claim been made—that Muslims, relying solely on the strength of faith and righteous deeds, will triumph over other nations, no matter how much material means those nations possess?

The Qur’an itself has resolved this complex question:

(Arabic)

Meaning: O humankind! A parable is being presented, so listen to it attentively. Those whom you invoke besides Allah have no power even to create a fly, even if they all joined forces for this purpose. Moreover, if a fly were to snatch something from them, they would not be able to recover it from the fly. The supplicant is weak, and so is the object supplicated. They have not accorded Allah the honor due to Him. Yet Allah is truly Powerful and Exalted in honor.’ (Surah al-Hajj: 73–74)

(Arabic)

Meaning: Those who take powers other than Allah as their patrons are like the spider: it builds a house, but the spider’s house is the weakest of all houses.’ (Surah al-Ankabut: 41)

In other words, those who rely solely on material power rely on things that possess no power of their own. As a natural consequence of relying on such powerless things, they themselves become powerless. The impregnable fortress they build, in their own estimation, is as flimsy as a spider’s web. Those who are truly powerful and honorable rise by relying on Allah; no power capable of confronting them can ever arise among these people:

(Arabic)

Meaning: Whoever rejects the Taghut, the God-rebellious power, and believes in Allah has grasped a firm rope that will never break.’ (Surah al-Baqarah: 256)

The Qur’an has also firmly asserted that whenever believers and unbelievers confront one another, the believers will be victorious.

(Arabic)

Meaning: If the unbelievers fight you, they will surely turn their backs; then they will find neither a friend nor a helper. This is Allah’s established way, which has continued from time immemorial. You will never find any change in Allah’s way.’ (Surah al-Fath: 22–23)

(Arabic)

Meaning: We will cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers because they have associated with Allah things to which He has granted no authority.’ (Surah Al Imran: 151)

The reason is that when a person fights for Allah, Allah’s power supports him; and when Allah supports someone, no one can prevail against him:

(Arabic)

Meaning: That is because Allah is the Protector of the believers, while the unbelievers have no protector.’ (Surah Muhammad: 11)

(Arabic)

Meaning: When you cast, it was not you who cast; rather, it was Allah who cast.’ (Surah al-Anfal: 17)

This is the strength of believers and righteous people. On the other hand, it is also Allah’s eternal law that a person who is faithful and upright, whose conduct and deeds are free from the taint of selfishness, and who properly follows the law prescribed by Allah instead of the inclinations of desire and biological urges—such a person gains a place of affection in people’s hearts. People’s hearts are naturally drawn to him. Their respectful eyes turn toward him. He can be trusted with confidence in transactions and dealings. Friend and foe alike regard him as truthful and rely on his decency, justice, and trustworthiness:

(Arabic)

Meaning: Those who believe and do righteous deeds—the Most Merciful will create affection for them in people’s hearts.’ (Surah Maryam: 96)

(Arabic)

Meaning: Allah makes the believers firm through a steadfast word, in the life of this world and in the Hereafter.’ (Surah Ibrahim: 27)

(Arabic)

Meaning: Whoever does righteous deeds, whether male or female, while being a believer, We will surely grant him a good life and reward him according to the best of his deeds.’ (Surah al-Nahl: 97)

But what are these the result of? They are not merely the result of uttering “There is no deity but Allah” with the tongue, taking the name Muslim, adopting a few specified social customs, and observing a few calculated rites and practices. To bring these results about, the Wise Qur’an has stipulated faith and righteous deeds. Its aim is that its authority be established everywhere in their thoughts, ideas, moral character, and dealings. Their entire way of life will be molded according to the true pattern of this sacred formula; no idea contrary to it will find room in their minds, nor will they engage in any act opposed to it. In reality, uttering “There is no deity but Allah” must produce such an effect that, together with its utterance, a tremendous revolution will occur in people’s lives, and the spirit of taqwa will enter their veins and arteries. Their heads will bow before no power besides Allah. Their hands will be extended before no one besides Allah. Their hearts will fear no one besides Allah. Their love and enmity will be for no one besides Allah. No law besides Allah’s law will operate in their lives. They will always be ready to sacrifice their own inclinations, all their desires, and everything they want and cherish for the sake of Allah’s pleasure. Before the command of Allah and His Messenger, they will have no word or deed except to say, “We hear and we obey.” When such a state comes into being, their strength will not be merely the strength of their own bodies and lives; rather, it will be the strength of the Almighty before whom everything in the heavens and the earth bows. They will shine with the radiance of that Great Light, who is the true Beloved and Lover of the entire universe.

This was the very quality possessed by Muslims during the time of the Noble Prophet and the Rightly Guided Caliphs, and history itself bears witness to the results it produced. In that age, whoever uttered the words “There is no deity but Allah” was wholly transformed. He suddenly changed from base copper into pure gold, and such a power of attraction arose within him that people’s hearts were naturally drawn to him. Whoever looked at him felt as though he were seeing a living embodiment of taqwa and piety. He might have been uneducated, poor, fasting, dressed in torn clothing, and seated on a mat; nevertheless, such awe would take root in people’s hearts that even great, splendid rulers were not granted such honor. The existence of a Muslim was like an island: wherever he lived or went, his radiance spread all around. With the help of that lamp, millions of lamps would become illuminated. Yet he also possessed the power to burn to ashes anyone who refused to receive that light or sought to clash with it.

Such were the Muslims who possessed this strength of faith and character that, when their number was only about three hundred and fifty, they challenged all Arabia to confront them. When their number rose to several hundred thousand, they advanced with an irresistible resolve to bring the whole world under their dominion, and every power that stood against them was crushed to pieces.

As stated above, the true strength of Muslims is this strength of faith and upright character. This strength can be acquired only when the meaning of “There is no deity but Allah” becomes firmly rooted in the heart and mind. But if this meaning is not firmly rooted within, if the words are merely repeated by mouth and no revolution occurs in one’s outlook and practical life—if, even after saying “There is no deity but Allah,” a person remains exactly as before, fears things besides Allah as the deniers of this formula do, seeks their pleasure, and becomes attached to their love; if he becomes a slave to desires and impulses like them, abandons Allah’s law and follows human law or his own inclinations; if his thoughts, wishes, desires, and intellect remain tainted like those of a non-Muslim; and if his speech, conduct, deeds, and behavior are also like those of a non-Muslim—then on what basis will a Muslim gain authority over a non-Muslim? Without the strength of faith and taqwa, a Muslim is nothing more than a human being exactly like a non-Muslim. Consequently, the competition between Muslim and non-Muslim will take place solely on the basis of physical strength and material resources, and in that competition the stronger will prevail over the weaker.

The difference between these two conditions has appeared so clearly on the pages of history that it can be seen at a glance. At one time, a handful of Muslims defeated great state powers and extended Islam’s authority from the two banks of the Attock [a tributary of the Indus situated between Punjab and the Frontier] to the shores of the Atlantic. On the other hand, as we see today, millions upon millions of Muslims live in the world, yet remain subject to non-Muslim powers. Moreover, even in regions where millions of Muslims have lived for several centuries, the dominance of unbelief and polytheism still prevails.

17

Religion is for brave men, not for cowards

[The article was first published in the May 1936 issue of Tarjuman al-Qur’an.]

Repeated comments have been made after seeing my book (Interest and Modern Banking). They are to the effect that, in the present age, the capitalist system, supported by political power, dominates the financial world around us. The entire vehicle of the economy is being driven along the path dictated by capitalist principles. Capitalists alone are its directors, and with its help those nations are advancing along the road of progress that have no religious or moral restraints concerning the production and expenditure of wealth. On the other hand, our social and collective strength is now fragmented and scattered. Far from changing the world’s entire economic system, we are not even capable of fully establishing an Islamic economic system within our own nation. In such circumstances, if our religious restraints prevent us from fully participating in the economic system operating in our age, then our nation will have no outcome other than falling behind other nations in benefiting from the means of financial development and prosperity. As a result, we will continue to grow poorer while neighboring nations grow wealthier. Moreover, this financial weakness will also render us feeble and powerless morally, politically, and civilizationally. This is not mere speculation; we have been seeing this very condition in the real world for years. Nor are the signs of the fate we will face in the future so obscure that no one will notice them. So what benefit do we gain merely by formulating the laws of the Shariah? What advantage is there in merely stating Islam’s economic principles? Rather, in this situation, we want to know whether there is any way to remedy our financial hardship while following Islamic law and to advance toward continual progress. If there is not, then we must face one of two conditions: either Muslims will be completely destroyed, or, like other nations, Muslims will free themselves from the bonds of laws that cannot keep pace with the march of the age. But our point in this matter is that the question is not limited to interest alone; its scope is extremely broad. If, among all the aspects and divisions of life, an un-Islamic system existed only in the economic sphere, the matter might have been comparatively less serious. But the actual situation is different. Look at the world around you—examine your own condition. What aspect of life remains free from un-Islamic influence and authority? Do materialism and atheism, or at least doubt and skepticism, not predominate over religious belief, thought, and ideology? Does godlessness not dominate the educational system? Does foreignness not rule over culture and civilization? Is Westernization not deeply rooted in society? Is moral character safe from its influence? Is it free from its dominance in transactions? Are any of the laws and state policy, government policy and administration, ideology and activities free from its influence?

When the situation is this, why do you wish to restrict the question under discussion to only one of its aspects? Make it broader and more expansive, and extend it over the whole of life. Rather, say that the river of life has changed its course. At first it flowed along the path of Islam; now it is flowing along an un-Islamic path. We are incapable of changing its course. We do not even have the strength to swim against its current. Yet standing still also carries the terror of death. In such circumstances, let us remain Muslims while also setting our boats afloat in the current of this flowing river—show us some such path. That is, let us remain pilgrims to the Kaaba while also maintaining relations with the caravan bound for Turkestan. In our ideas, ideology, purpose of life, ideal of life, and course of action, let us be non-Muslims and yet remain Muslims. If no one can provide guidance for reconciling these contradictions, then the result will be that either we shall sit on the bank of this river, or one day tear off the label of Islam attached to our boat. Then our boat too will be seen moving along with the current of the river, keeping pace with the other boats.

When our enlightened and ‘progressive’ people discuss any problem, they present as their final argument—the argument they consider strongest—that this is the religion of the age, that the wind is blowing in this direction, and that this is what is happening in the world! So how can we oppose it? And how can we survive by opposing it? When the question of morality is raised, they say that the world’s moral standards have changed. This means: how can Muslims cling to those old moral standards? Regarding purdah, they say that the practice of purdah has disappeared from the world. In other words, can Muslims not abandon something that has disappeared from the world? When education is discussed, they present as their final proof that there is no demand for Islamic education in the world. The implication is: how can Muslim children become a commodity for which there is no demand in the market? Why should they not become the kind of commodity for which there is demand? Whenever objections are raised to interest, they say that the world cannot function without interest now. And how can Muslims avoid something that is absolutely necessary for conducting the affairs of the world? In short, in education, morality, society, civilization, economics, law, politics, and every other sphere of life in which they wish to abandon Islamic principles and follow foreign ways, the religion of the age, the direction of the wind, and the practice of the world become their incontrovertible proof. This proof is presented as a weapon in support of the legitimacy of following the West, or partially abandoning religion, and it is assumed that any portion of the Islamic edifice that can be attacked with this proof must be demolished.

We say: instead of presenting these proposals for dismantling piecemeal, why do you not combine them all into one comprehensive proposal? Preparing separate proposals to destroy each wall, each pillar, and each room of the house, and discussing every matter independently, is merely a waste of time. Why not say instead that the entire house must be demolished? Its color differs from the color of the age, its movement is contrary to the movement of the wind, and its structure is incompatible with the structure of the buildings customary in the world.

Discussion with those who truly hold such ideas is futile. The straightforward and clear answer for them is this: why have you undertaken the risk of demolishing this house and building another in its place? Go and live in whichever of the other beautiful, elegant, and splendid houses you prefer. If you wish to drift with the current of the river, why take the trouble of tearing off the label from this boat? Find a place in one of the boats that are already drifting. Those who are not Muslims in any aspect of their thoughts, morality, social life, economics, education, or any other part of life, and who do not wish to remain Muslims, gain no benefit whatsoever from remaining nominally Muslim; rather, the harm is greater. They are not worshippers of God but worshippers of the wind. If idolatry becomes prevalent in the world, they will certainly begin worshipping idols. If nudity becomes customary in the world, they will surely remove their clothes. If eating impure things begins in the world, they will undoubtedly call impurity purity and purity impurity. Their minds are enslaved, and therefore they yearn for servitude. Foreignness dominates their lives, and for that reason they wish to become foreign in every sphere, from the hidden to the public. If tomorrow the Abyssinians become dominant, they will naturally strive to become Abyssinian: they will blacken their faces, thicken their lips, curl their hair like Abyssinians, and begin worshipping everything that comes from the Abyssinians. Islam has no need for such slaves. If the names of these hypocrites and people with a slavish disposition were removed from the list of millions of people:

(Arabic)

Meaning: They love Allah, and Allah loves them. They are humble toward the believers and stern toward the unbelievers. They strive and struggle in Allah’s path, and they do not fear the reproach of any reproacher in this. (Surah al-Ma’idah: 54)

If only a few thousand Muslims of such character remained, Islam would be far stronger than it is today. The departure of those millions would be like the expulsion of impure blood from the body of a sick person.

(Arabic) “We fear that some calamity may befall us.” This is not a new cry. It has long been uttered by the hypocrites. This cry itself reveals the concealed hypocrisy in people’s hearts. Those who utter it continually look toward the camp opposed to Islam. They constantly regard the limits and prohibitions prescribed by Allah as shackles on their feet and a noose around their necks. Obedience to Allah and the Messenger has always been distasteful to them. They have always seen loss of life and property in obedience to Allah, and all the success of this worldly life in disobedience to Him. Therefore, Allah’s law has never been changed to please them, cannot be changed now, and will not be changed in the future. Allah’s law was not revealed for timid cowards. It was not sent down for slaves of the self and servants of the world. It was not revealed for straw blown by the wind, insects carried along by water, or colorless people who take on every color. It was revealed for audacious lions who firmly resolve to change the direction of the wind, who possess the courage to fight the waves of the river and turn its current. For those who love Allah’s color more than all the colors of the world and desire to dye the entire world in that color. A person who is a Muslim was not created to be swept away by the river’s current. His very purpose of creation is to direct the river of life along the straight and clear path indicated by his faith and conviction. If the river turns away from that straight path and he agrees to drift along the altered current, then his claim to Islam is entirely false. Indeed, the truly Muslim person will fight this misguided current and strive with all his strength to turn its course, without caring about success or failure. He will accept any possible harm arising from this struggle. Even if his arms break while fighting the river’s current, or his strength weakens and the blows of the waves leave him half dead and cast him toward some bank, his spirit will never accept defeat. His heart will not feel the slightest regret for this outward failure, nor will it harbor envy or approval of the success of the unbelievers and hypocrites drifting along with the river’s current.

The Qur’an stands before Muslims. The examples and life histories of the prophets stand before them. The lives and histories of Islam’s immortal standard-bearers, from the beginning until today, stand before them. Do they learn from all this that they should fly in whichever direction the wind blows? Drift wherever the water flows? Take on whatever color the age assumes? If this were the purpose, then what need would there have been for the revelation of any Book or the sending of any prophet? For their guidance, the wind and the waves; for their direction, the current of worldly life; and for teaching them the character of a lizard, the colorlessness of the age would have been sufficient. Allah did not reveal any Book for such impure teaching, nor did He send any prophet for this purpose. The message that came from the Exalted Being has precisely this purpose: to reject the false paths along which the world is advancing, construct a straight path, eradicate the paths opposed to it, and strive to turn the world away from those paths. A community of believers must be formed, and that community must not only follow the straight path itself; it must also strive to draw the world toward it.

The prophets, messengers, and their followers always struggled for this very purpose. In this struggle they endured not only hardship and suffering but also made limitless sacrifices—even giving their lives. Yet none of them, out of fear of danger or temptation of self-interest, ever took the course of the age as his standard. Now, if any person or group sees loss, difficulty, or danger in following the path directed by heavenly guidance, and, frightened by these things, wishes to follow a path whose travelers appear prosperous, successful, and progressive, then he may gladly follow the path of his choice. But what attempt is that foolish and covetous person making to deceive himself and the whole world by claiming to follow the Book of Allah and the way directed by the Prophet while abandoning them? Disobedience is itself a grave sin; what benefit can be gained by adding lies, deception, and hypocrisy to it?

The notion that once the river of life begins to flow in a certain direction, it can never be turned from that course is as erroneous from the standpoint of reason as it is contradicted by experience and observation. Revolutions have come in the world not once but countless times, and every revolution has changed the course of the river. The most brilliant example of this is found in the history of Islam itself. In what direction was this river of life flowing when Hazrat Muhammad (peace be upon him) appeared in the world? Was not the entire world then dominated by unbelief and polytheism? Had not the power of tyrannical and despotic rulers been established? Had not the oppressive inequalities of class distinctions stained humanity? Were immorality in ethics, self-worship in social life, oppressive feudalism and capitalism in economics, and the prevalence of injustice in laws and regulations not then evident? Yet a single man stood up and challenged the whole world! He abolished all the false ideas, doctrines, and erroneous ways of the world of that time; in opposition to them, by proclaiming an independent doctrine and waging jihad, he turned the course of the world and thus changed the color of the age.

Its most recent example is the Communist movement. In the nineteenth century, the dominance of capitalism had reached its extreme limit. No foolish or cowardly person could even imagine that a system established over the world with the support of such immense and formidable political and military power could be overthrown. Yet it was precisely in such circumstances that a man named Karl Marx began propagating communism. The governments of various countries opposed him. He was expelled from his own country. He wandered from country to country, facing deprivation, sorrow, and hardship. But before his death, he left behind a powerful Communist party. Within only forty years, this party not only overthrew the most formidable power in Russia; it also shook the foundations of capitalism throughout the world. At the same time, it presented such a powerful economic and civilizational system that the number of its followers in the world continues to increase day by day.

Even the laws of countries where the authority of capitalism is deeply entrenched are now being influenced by it. [It should be noted that this refers to the era of Communist rule’s triumph in Russia. The article was written in 1936.] But this revolution was accomplished through the influence of power, and power means molding, not being molded. In other words, turning something is called power—not being turned. Cowards and fools have never created a revolution in the world. In the history of humanity, those who have no principles of their own or purpose in life, no eagerness to sacrifice for a noble cause, and no courage to face suffering, hardship, and danger—those whose sole desire in the world is comfort and ease, whose nature is to be molded into any shape and bow under any pressure—have achieved nothing of significance. For history can be created only by heroic men. Through tireless striving, sacrifice, and jihad, they have altered the course of the river of life. They have changed the world’s ideas and perceptions. They have created revolutions in conduct and principles of action. Instead of being colored by the age, they have colored the age in their own hues.

Therefore, there is no justification for saying, ‘The world cannot be turned back from the path along which it is advancing; there is no alternative but to follow the spirit of the age.’ Rather than making the false claim of incapacity, one should acknowledge the truth of one’s own weakness. And when this is acknowledged, it must also be admitted that the world can have neither a religion nor any principles or laws for weak people. Such a person must bow before every powerful man and remain silent out of fear of every strong force. He can never adhere to any principle or law. And if any religion keeps changing its principles for his sake, then it is not a religion at all.

‘Islamic injunctions are an obstacle to prosperity and progress’—this too is nothing but a deception. The question is: which of Islam’s injunctions are Muslims observing? Which limits have they not violated? Of the things that are destroying them, which has Islam permitted? They are being ruined by extravagance and waste. Because of this, billions of rupees every year pass from their pockets into the moneylenders’ coffers. Property worth billions slips from their hands. Has Islam permitted them to do this? Their own bad habits are destroying them. Even amid this extreme poverty, cinemas and amusements remain filled with their people. Each of them spends beyond his means on clothing, adornment, and cosmetics. Millions of rupees leave their pockets every month on meaningless customs, ostentatious activities, and foolish entertainments. Which of these things has Islam made lawful for them? What is destroying them most is their negligence in paying zakat and their reckless attitude toward mutual assistance. Has Islam not made these things obligatory for them? The real fact, therefore, is that their economic distress is not the result of following Islamic injunctions; rather, it is the consequence of freeing themselves from them. Only the prohibition of interest remains—but where is that prohibition actually upheld? At least 95 percent of Muslims take interest-based loans without any genuine inability to avoid doing so. Is this what is meant by the injunctions of Islamic law? A large portion of wealthy Muslims take interest in one form or another. What difference does it make if they do not conduct a conventional moneylending business? Most wealthy Muslims consume the interest from banks, insurance, government bonds, provident funds, and similar sources! Then where is the prohibition concerning interest, which they blame for their financial hardship?

What is even more astonishing and amusing is that arguments are being made that the honor and national strength of Muslims depend on wealth, and wealth on the permissibility of interest! It seems that these rationalists do not even know what honor and strength actually depend on. In reality, mere riches have never made any nation honorable and powerful. Even if every Muslim became a millionaire or a multi-millionaire, believe me, if they possessed no strength of character, no one in the world would honor them. On the other hand, if they possess a genuinely Islamic character, are truthful and trustworthy, free from temptation and fear, steadfast on matters of principle, and honest in their dealings; if they regard truth as truth and duty as duty, and constantly observe the distinction between haram and halal; and if, because of their inherent moral strength, neither fear of loss nor the lure of gain can divert them from justice, nor can their faith be bought at any price—then they will establish a reputation in the world. They will occupy a place of honor in people’s hearts. Their word will be more important than the entire wealth of a millionaire. Even if they live in a thatched hut and wear patched clothes, they will be regarded with greater respect than those who sit atop heaps of wealth. As a nation, they will acquire such strength that they can never be defeated. How poverty-stricken were the Muslims in the age of the Companions! They lived in blankets, tents, and thatched huts. They were entirely unfamiliar with the splendor of urban civilization. Their clothing, food, and weapons were all inadequate, and they had no magnificent mounts. Yet the reputation and renown they possessed were attained neither by the Muslims of the Umayyad and Abbasid periods nor by Muslims of any later age. They had no wealth, but they possessed strength of character—and this strength firmly established the foundation of their honor and superiority. Later generations accumulated wealth and acquired state power, building magnificent cities and civilizations; but none of this could provide an alternative to their weakness of character.

Muslims have forgotten the lessons of Islamic history, but they can look to the history of any nation in the world. They will not find a single example of a nation that attained strength and honor through opportunism, love of ease, and self-worship. Nor will they find any honorable and exalted nation that follows no principle or discipline, cannot endure hardship, labor, toil, and austerity for a great purpose, and possesses no inspiration to sacrifice its desires and very being for the sake of principle and a goal. Everywhere they will find some form of discipline, adherence to principle, and renunciation of comfort and self-interest for a great objective. In Islam, this takes one form. Even if they leave it and join another society, they will necessarily have to follow some rules and regulations in another form. They will have to accept the bonds of some kind of discipline. They will certainly be bound by the chains of certain principles, and sacrifices will be demanded of them for the sake of some principle and goal. If they have no desire for this, if they thirst only for gentleness and sweetness and lack the strength to accept any austerity or bitterness, then they may leave Islam’s restraints and go wherever they please—but nowhere will they find a place of honor. From nowhere will they be able to gain strength. Islam states this general rule in only four words. The entire history of the world bears witness to the truth of these four words: (Arabic) (Indeed, with hardship comes ease). This ease is always connected with hardship. One who lacks the strength to endure hardship can never be adorned with the quality of ease.

18

The Disease and Its Remedy

[The article was first published in the December 1937 issue of Tarjuman al-Qur’an.—Editor]

Islam is not merely a belief, nor is it a collection of certain ‘religious’ ceremonies and customs. Rather, it is an extensive plan (Scheme) for the whole of human life. In it, religious belief, worship, and the rules governing practical life are not separate; rather, together they form one unified and indivisible whole, whose parts are related to one another exactly as the organs and limbs of a living body are related.

Cut off the hands and feet of a living person. Separate the eyes, ears, and tongue. Remove the stomach and liver. Separate the lungs and bladder. Take out some greater or lesser portion of the brain as well, leaving only the heart in his chest. Can this thing keep the rest of the body alive? And even if it keeps it alive, will it remain fit for any useful function?

Islam’s condition is exactly the same. Conviction, or faith, is its heart. The attitudes, philosophy of life, purpose of life, and values arising from that conviction are its brain. Worship is its limbs and organs. It stands and performs its duties by relying on these. The principles Islam has given concerning economics, social life, politics, and overall administration are like its stomach, liver, and other vital organs. It needs healthy, clear eyes and sound ears so that they can provide the brain with accurate information about the events of the age, enabling the brain to reach correct conclusions about them. It needs a language under its own control so that it can properly express its individual identity. It needs clean, wholesome air for breathing. It needs pure and wholesome food capable of producing good blood in harmony with its stomach.

In this entire system, the heart—meaning conviction—is indeed important, but its importance lies in the fact that it gives vitality to all the organs and limbs. When most of the organs and limbs have been cut away, separated from the body, or destroyed, how can the heart alone survive with the few remaining crippled and diseased organs? And even if it remains alive, what value can such a life have?

Now consider for a moment the condition of Islam in this Indian subcontinent (Bengal, Pakistan, and India). [It should be remembered that the article was written in 1937, with the era of subjugation in view; nevertheless, its message remains fully applicable in the present independent environment.—Editor] Here Islamic laws and regulations are almost entirely inactive. In morality, social life, economics, and every other sphere of life, Islamic principles are operative to no more than five percent. Non-Islamic education, training, and environment have made people’s minds and intellects completely or partially non-Muslim in different places. Their eyes can see, but their viewpoint has changed. Their ears can hear, but the screen has changed. Words come from their mouths, but their manner of speaking has changed. Because a poisonous environment prevails all around, their lungs cannot take in pure air. Since the entire food supply has become tainted, the stomach receives no pure and wholesome food. Of the organs and limbs of the Islamic body—that is, worship—sixty percent is paralyzed. Even if the remaining forty percent is healthy, its influence is not apparent, because it has no connection with the other organs. That is why the disease of paralysis has gradually spread among them. In such circumstances, can the thing before us be called complete Islam? Some of its organs have been cut off, some discarded, and some, though still present, are diseased and unable to function properly. Along with these, only a heart remains, and it too is afflicted. For just as it used to give vitality to those organs, it also drew strength from them. Thus, when the functions of the brain, lungs, stomach, liver, and so forth have been destroyed, how can the heart alone remain healthy and strong? Yet because of the tremendous power hidden within that heart, it is not merely alive; it is somehow keeping the remaining organs functioning as well. But does it possess the strength to establish its own influence in the lives of the people of the country? Indeed, God forbid, I want to ask whether, in the face of the flood of calamity advancing day by day with such increasing force, it can, in this condition, save the remaining organs from further mutilation and save itself from death. In fact, as a result, the disease of rebellion against and aversion to Islam—completely contrary to the (Arabic) (they enter Allah’s religion in multitudes)—is rapidly spreading through Muslim society today. Nowhere in India or its surrounding regions can the Islamic way of life be seen operating with its complete machinery. Consequently, people cannot observe its beauty and perfection or learn to recognize the tree by its fruit. They see only this dismembered Islam and think, ‘That is all Islam is.’ Seeing this, some openly declare, ‘We are not Muslims.’ Others do not deny their Muslim identity, but from what they say there is no difference between them and those who disbelieve in Islam. Many have already turned away in their hearts, but because open rebellion has not yet appeared, they remain among the Muslims through hypocrisy. Of course, so that they may stand with banners of their own when widespread disorder begins, they are secretly spreading the seeds of rebellion. Yet even if people do not say it openly, they are saying in subdued tones: ‘Prepare yourselves to dissolve into the new nationalism and newer civilization. For the corpse you are sitting with can do no good for you itself; rather, by dissolving into others, it prevents you from attaining even the benefits you might otherwise gain.’ According to some, the only solution to this problem is to break Islam into pieces. They say that one should remain Muslim only in religious activities. In the rest of life, we should accept what non-Muslims teach and the programs they follow. Whether these people are themselves deceived or wish to deceive others, I do not know. But they have forgotten—or wish to make others forget—the truth that after adopting a non-Islamic ideology in every sphere of life and becoming accustomed to non-Islamic rules, religious conviction and religious practices are bound to become completely weak. For conviction and worship are the real foundation; they were established precisely to build the whole structure of life. If this structure is built on a different foundation, how long will the pointless and unnecessary attraction of these ancient relics last? A child raised in a new way of life and reaching adulthood will certainly ask: ‘Why have the chains of certain senseless beliefs and customs been fastened around my neck? Why should I read the Qur’an, whose entire system of laws has become obsolete today, and why should I have faith in it? Why should I accept as Allah’s Messenger the man who departed this world thirteen and a half centuries ago? When he can give no guidance in my life, what benefit is there in verbally acknowledging his prophethood, and what harm is there in denying it? In the way of life I follow, what difference does it make whether I pray or not, whether I fast or not? What connection is there between this way of life and these practices? Why should such an incongruous attachment be maintained in my life?’ This is the entirely natural consequence of dividing religion from worldly life. When this division becomes complete in principle and in practice, such results must appear. Just as the heart becomes entirely useless after being separated from the body, conviction and worship retain no significance after being severed from practical life. Conviction and worship give vitality to Islamic life, while Islamic life supplies strength to conviction and worship. As I have said above, the relationship between these two things is essentially like that between the organs and limbs of a living body. If this relationship is severed, the death of both is inevitable. Moreover, joining Islamic conviction and worship to a non-Islamic way of life would be as bizarre as grafting a human brain or human hands and feet onto a gorilla’s body.

Let no one think that only a small group of the modern educated are being affected by Islam’s present condition; that is not the case at all. Today, all those who are sincere Muslims, whose hearts contain love and reverence for this religion, both old and young alike, are being affected by this condition to some degree. The collapse of the Islamic way of life is a general calamity—from its natural consequences no Muslim is safe, nor is it possible to remain safe. We are all receiving a share of it according to our respective capacities. In this, our scholars and pirs are equal participants, just like those educated in schools and colleges.

But the greatest calamity has befallen the tens of millions of ordinary people living across this vast area of sixteen hundred thousand square miles. For them, only the name of Islam remains, and they also cherish extraordinary love for it. Yet it can scarcely be said that they possess any intellectual awareness of the thing for which they are thus sacrificing themselves. Nor is there, in practical life, any way of life capable of protecting them from non-Islamic influence. Taking advantage of their ignorance, any misleading force can divert their faith, beliefs, and practical life from Islam’s straight path. It is enough to reassure them that the misguidance and deviation presented to them is the true path—or at least that it is not opposed to Islam. They can then be pushed wherever one wishes, whether toward Qadianism, communism, fascism, or anything else. For no effort is being made, amid the present disorder and confusion, to solve in the light of Islamic principles the problems arising from their growing poverty and terrible deprivation.

Today there is no organized group among Muslims capable of advancing Islamic economic and civilizational ideals in opposition to communism and presenting solutions to the extremely important problems of ordinary people. As a result, these tens of millions of poor and hungry Muslims have become easy prey for Communist propagandists. Among the bourgeoisie, those who are somewhat excessively daring and power-hungry are always seeking new schemes and devices for acquiring state power. After the Russian Revolution, people of this class discovered a new tactic: posing as sympathizers of peasants and laborers and taking the poor masses into their own hands; kindling within them the fire of selfishness, greed, and revenge; tempting them with the promise of more wealth than their rightful share; and promising to seize even the legitimate property of the wealthy classes and distribute it among them. In this way, by bringing most of the people of the country into their grasp, they seek to wrest state power from the emperors, directors, and magnates of the capitalist system. They are more hopeful about Muslim people than about non-Muslim people, because Muslims are more distressed financially. They are seeking to win their hearts by approaching them through their stomachs, for in the entire body of a hungry person this is the most sensitive part. They tell them: ‘Come, let us show you the way to erase the distinction between rich and poor and bring financial comfort.’ Hearing this, the poor hungry Muslim runs after them in hope of two pieces of bread and a handful of rice. They then advise him to adopt the religion of belly-worship instead of the worship of God. In other words, they try to create the idea that religion and faith are of no use; the real thing is food for the stomach. Whatever method provides it is his religion, and therein lie his salvation and welfare:

“The destitute, the poor, and slaves have no religion or civilization. Their greatest religion is a piece of bread. Their greatest civilization is a set of old clothes. Their greatest faith is to escape poverty and humiliation. For the sake of this bread and clothing, they are compelled to steal. In today’s world of poverty and slavery, they have no other religion.”

This is the first lesson of the religion of communism (Communism). While teaching this lesson, the poor, ignorant Muslim is also given false reassurance in these words: ‘We do not interfere with your religion. You may remain at ease:

Why should religion and religious belief fear these matters? What connection do they have with it? Religion has always remained alive and radiant through its own moral and spiritual strength. [These two passages have been quoted from an article by a Muslim writer. The article was published in a widely circulated Muslim periodical.]

Anyone familiar with the matter knows what influence communism exerted over Russia’s Muslim youth in twenty years. A similarly disastrous future is advancing toward the Muslims of the subcontinent with a grave threat. The fire of the stomach has spread a blazing conflagration to consume the wealth of their faith. Its opening is still small and can be closed with a single stitch. But if a few more years pass in this negligence, it will arrive with such a tremendous flood that even massive barriers will be swept away like bits of straw.

In this situation, merely going about preaching Islam in the manner of Christian missionaries is utterly meaningless. Even publishing not one but millions of pamphlets for the purification of belief will not change this condition. What benefit is there in praising Islam’s greatness merely by word of mouth or through writing? What is needed today is to establish and demonstrate the beauty of Islam in the real world. Simply saying that the solutions to our life’s problems lie within Islamic ideals will not automatically solve our problems. Whatever strength and beauty Islam contains must be put into effect. This world is a world of conflict and struggle. Its course cannot be changed by mere slogans. To change it, a revolutionary jihad is necessary. If the Communists, with their false ideology, can establish their influence and power over a vast part of the world within half a century; if the fascists can establish fame and renown in the world with an incompatible system; and if Gandhi’s doctrine of nonviolence, despite being an abnormal phenomenon, can emerge through mere effort and striving, then there is no reason why Muslims, bearers of the eternal ideals of truthfulness and justice, should not regain their position in the world. But this position cannot be gained through sermons, exhortations, and good advice alone. Practical effort and endeavor are necessary, and it is essential to work in the manner chosen by Allah.

“Revolutionary struggle” is an ambiguous expression. In practice, it has many forms, and many more forms may emerge. Whatever kind of revolution is desired, a process fully consonant with the nature of that revolution must be adopted. For the revolution we wish to create, there is no need to seek a new process, because this revolution has been created in the world before. The great man who first created this revolution was thoroughly familiar with its nature. Even today, this revolution can be created by following the path he pursued. The character of that great man is a remarkable phenomenon. Yet, from another perspective, it is also a flawless ideal. Who today can present such abundant examples of elevated character, piety, sound judgment, justice, powerful personality, and qualities worthy of a great man? Who could possibly create a revolution of such a high order? From this perspective, his character is truly astonishing, and there is no doubt that this wonder will continue to fascinate humanity until the Day of Resurrection. Yet the ideal that this great man left behind remains just as revolutionary in spirit and nature as it was thirteen and a half centuries ago. The more this ideal is followed and imitated, the more revolutionary its results will appear. Moreover, the more this result resembles the revolution achieved through the power of the original ideal, the closer it will become to it. In this respect, it is undoubtedly a flawless ideal. This ideal can be emulated by humanity until the Day of Resurrection. Following this great ideal, such a revolution can be created in any country and at any time—in the twentieth or twenty-fourth century, in this subcontinent, in America, or in Russia.

There is no opportunity here to describe in detail the process by which the Noble Messenger (peace be upon him) created a revolution in the world thirteen and a half centuries ago. My purpose here is merely to give this much indication: the plan for the Dar al-Islam institution [This institution was established in 1938. Later, when Jamaat-e-Islami was formed in August 1941, the institution was merged with it.] arose from a deeper study of that great ideal.

When the Great Prophet (peace be upon him) appeared, there was not a single Muslim in the world. In such circumstances, he presented his call before the world. Gradually, people began accepting Islam, one or two at a time, in isolation. These people possessed faith firmer than mountains. They were so devoted to Islam that history contains no equal example. Yet, because they were scattered and surrounded by unbelievers, they were naturally helpless and weak. Consequently, as they continually struggled against their environment, their strength was only being exhausted; but they and their great leader could bring about no change in the condition they were striving with all their might to transform. In this way, the Noble Messenger (peace be upon him) continued his uninterrupted efforts for thirteen years. During this period, he succeeded in organizing only a small group of devoted believers. Then Allah Most High instructed him to adopt a different process. That process was to leave the unbelieving environment with those devoted people, gather them in one place and create an Islamic environment, build a home suited to implementing the entire program through an Islamic way of life, establish a center for generating social and collective strength among Muslims, gather all the electrical power in one place and distribute it in a well-regulated manner, and construct a power station to illuminate every region of the world with it. For this purpose, he migrated to “Madinah the Pure.” All the Muslims who were scattered among the various tribes of Arabia were instructed to gather at this central place. Here, Islam was shown to be effective through practical training. In this pure and sacred atmosphere, the entire group was trained in the Islamic way of life so thoroughly that each individual became a living Islam. Anyone could understand what Islam was and why it had come simply by looking at them. They were dyed so deeply in the color of Allah:

(Arabic)

that they did not accept another’s color but dyed others in their own. Such strength of character was instilled in them that they would never be influenced by others; rather, anyone who came into contact with them would become influenced. The purpose of the Islamic way of life was made to penetrate their veins and arteries so deeply that it would be given priority in every act of life, while all other worldly aims would receive secondary importance. Through education and training, they were made capable of implementing the way of life given by the Qur’an and Sunnah at any cost, shattering every distorted condition and reconstructing it in their light.

Every part of this astonishing organization deserves deep study and reflection. Its entire program was divided into four major sections:

1. To form a group of people who would gain expertise in the religion of Islam and explain its laws and regulations properly to others:

(Arabic)

2. Some people must be prepared to devote their lives to embodying Islam’s code of conduct and to its propagation and expansion. It is the organization’s duty to relieve these people of the responsibility of earning a livelihood. But they themselves will not be concerned about this matter. Whether arrangements are made for their financial support or not, driven by their wholehearted enthusiasm and disregarding every hardship and distress, they will remain engaged in realizing the supreme goal of their lives:

(Arabic)

3. Such a spirit will be kindled among every member of the group that each regards propagating the word of Allah as the aim of life. They will continue to conduct their worldly affairs, but this aim will remain before them in every activity. The businessman will never forget it in his trade, the farmer in his farming, the industrialist in his industrial work, or the employee in his employment. They will always remember that these activities are for the sake of living, and that living is for the sake of this work. Whatever field of life they work in, they will observe the principles and ideals of Islam in their words and actions, character and conduct. If a conflict arises anywhere between worldly interests and Islamic ideals, they will trample their interests underfoot, but will not dishonor Islam by abandoning principle. Moreover, whatever time and wealth they can spare from their personal needs, they will devote to the service of Islam and will assist and support those who are dedicating their lives to this work: (Arabic)

4. To enable outsiders to come to Dar al-Islam, so that in its real Islamic way of life and environment they can understand the Qur’an more properly and return with a comparatively deeper impression:

(Arabic)

Thus, in the short span of only eight years, the power station of Madinah—the world’s greatest guide and pioneer—generated tremendous power, and before long that power illuminated the entire land of Arabia. Then those rays of light emerged from Arabia and spread in every direction across the world. Even after the passage of thirteen and a half long centuries, that power station remains full of power and resources.

After the Rightly Guided Caliphate, when various forms of disorder arose in the Islamic way of life, our Sufi community also established khanqahs in various places, following this process. Today the word khanqah has undergone such distortion in meaning that as soon as people hear it, an image arises in their minds of a strange place devoid of light and air. In reality, however, these khanqahs were merely an imitation of the ideal established by the World Prophet in Madinah. Whenever the respected Sufis found people showing some talent, they would isolate them from the outside world, keep them in a khanqah for some time, and train them there to a high standard in imitation of the Great Prophet and his Companions.

Those who wish to create a revolution of an Islamic kind today should adopt a similar process. If no independent environment outside this subcontinent can be found suitable for establishing a “Dar al-Islam” like Madinah, then at least such a training center should be established in this country, where a pure Islamic environment can be created; where Islamic character and social conduct will be reflected, practical thought in the manner of Muslims will develop, and Islamic ideas and forms will shine in every direction. There, only Allah’s and the Messenger’s permission or command will suffice to declare something sound, and Allah’s and the Messenger’s prohibition or dislike will be accepted as the sole criterion for judging something erroneous. There, this all-encompassing atmosphere of disobedience and rebellion and this un-Islamic surrounding will have no existence; rather, there will at least be the capacity to accept external influences favorable to Islamic thought and to protect one’s way of life, mind, and heart from adverse influences. There we will be able to create an environment suited to thinking like Muslims, developing Muslim insight, and nurturing the virtues that have nearly disappeared in the poisonous atmosphere of Dar al-Kufr. Above all, as a result of being born and raised in an un-Islamic environment, filth and impurity have entered our thoughts and actions—things we sometimes do not feel, and which, even when felt, stand before us with such overwhelming force that we cannot protect ourselves from them despite a hundred efforts. We will be able to go there and purify our lives. At such a training center, only those who sincerely wish to serve Islam will be gathered, and there they will be properly educated and trained for this service. The plan followed by the Noble Prophet must be adopted there. Similarly, the entire work must be divided into various sections, and in every section humanity must be reconstructed in the mold of Islam.

1. One section must include people possessing advanced qualifications. Those among them who are proficient in Islamic sciences must be introduced to Western languages and modern sciences. Those who have been educated in modern sciences must be taught Arabic and the Islamic sciences. Alongside this, they must study the Qur’an and Sunnah deeply and gain expertise and discernment in the religion of Islam. They must then be divided into different groups. Each group will take one branch of knowledge, incorporate Islamic principles and ideology into it through modern methods, understand the modern problems of life, and seek solutions to them in the light of Islamic principles. Furthermore, they will expel the Western outlook that has infiltrated the foundations of knowledge and science, reorganize knowledge and science from an Islamic perspective, and, through their own research and investigation, produce sound literature capable of creating an intellectual revolution in support of Islam.

2. In the second section, efforts must be made to prepare capable workers for the service of Islam. Only people of upright nature, firm character, resolute purpose, and readiness to sacrifice everything for their goal should be admitted. They will be organized as a powerful revolutionary group. Their way of life will be simple and unpretentious. They will possess endurance in hardship and complete discipline. Their actual lives will be like those of true Muslims. This group will advance with a program to establish a new social order and a new civilization based on Islamic principles. By presenting that program to the public, it will accumulate the greatest possible political power and ultimately take control of the machinery of the state in order to transform the prevailing oppressive system of government into a system of just rule.

3. The third section must admit people who will stay at the training center for some time and then return. They will be released after being given sound knowledge and moral training. Wherever they live, they will live as Muslims. Instead of being influenced by others, they will exert their influence over them. They will remain firm in principle and steadfast in their own convictions. They will never live aimlessly. A clear goal will remain before them under all circumstances. They will earn through halal means and remain ready to assist the people working in the second section by every possible means. They will provide them with financial assistance and also participate in their practical work. Moreover, they will try to make their own environment favorable to the revolutionary group.

4. The fourth section will be for Muslims and non-Muslims who wish to come temporarily to the training center to gain some educational benefit or observe its way of life. They must be given the greatest possible facilities so that they may return bearing a deep impression of Islam and its teachings.

This is a general plan. It is merely a draft of the system that we consider essential for creating an Islamic revolution. The success of this system depends entirely on its substance and qualities. To achieve the intended success, it must be made more closely similar to the ideal social system established by the Noble Prophet in Madinah.

Establishing similarity with Madinah the Pure does not mean that we favor similarity in outward form or wish to retreat from the present level of civilization and return to the level of civilization in Arabia thirteen and a half centuries ago. This notion regarding obedience to the Noble Messenger and his Companions is completely mistaken. Unfortunately, most of our religious people hold precisely this mistaken idea. In their view, wearing clothes and eating food like the ancient saints and sages is what is meant by following them. Similarly, they believe that preserving their family customs, civilization, and civic culture in an exactly antiquated, fossilized form until the Day of Resurrection, closing their eyes to changes outside their environment, building a wall around their own minds and way of life, and refusing to allow the passage of time and changes of the age to enter within it—this is the duty of their followers. In reality, this idea, which has influenced the minds of religious Muslims for several centuries during the age of decline, is entirely contrary to the Islamic outlook. For Islam does not teach remaining, while alive, as an ancient relic or turning life into a historical drama of an ancient civilization. It never teaches asceticism or reactionary conduct. It is not Islam’s purpose to create a nation in the world that will only try to resist change and development; rather, it seeks to create a nation that will try to turn change and development back from a false path and guide them along the right one. Islam gives us not the shell but the substance. It wants us, whatever different shells of life may arise until the Day of Resurrection as a result of changes in place and time, to continue infusing them with this very substance. As Muslims, this is our purpose in the world. The purpose of making us the best community is not that we should remain as a rear guard behind those advancing along the path of development; rather, our task is to provide guidance and leadership. We were created to be pioneers, and the secret of our being the best community lies within the phrase (Arabic).

The true ideal of the Noble Messenger and his Companions, which we are obliged to follow, is that they used the natural order in the light of the moral order and fulfilled the full right of God’s vicegerency on earth. Within the shell of the civilization that existed in their time, they infused the substance of Islamic civilization. They made the natural forces then under human control serve this civilization. In using all the means and instruments that the civilization of their time had gathered for progress and power, they were ahead even of the unbelievers and polytheists, so that in opposition to those who rebelled against God, the civilization of those obedient to God might prevail. Allah the Exalted taught this very thing in His Book (Arabic). They were taught that Muslims have more right than the unbelievers to use the creative forces of Allah; indeed, Muslims are their true heirs. Therefore, true obedience to the Noble Prophet and his Companions means striving, as in the earliest period, to make the means and instruments gathered today through civilizational development and the discovery of natural forces serve Islamic civilization. There is no filth or impurity in these instruments; rather, it lies in the unbelieving civilization that uses them. Radio is not an impure thing; what is impure is the civilization that has turned the radio director into an organizer of music and dancing or into a propagator of falsehood and untruth. An airplane is not an impure object; what is impure is the civilization that has employed this servant of the air according to satanic schemes instead of divine law. Likewise, cinema or films are not impure things; what is truly impure is the civilization that employs this power created by God to spread obscenity and shamelessness. [This applies equally to television today—editor.] The reason for the growth and expansion of the impure civilization today is that these forces are being used for its growth and expansion. To properly fulfill the duty imposed upon us to promote and expand God’s civilization today, we must use those very forces. In reality, these forces are like a sword: whoever uses it will succeed, whether using it for an impure purpose or a pure one. If someone with a pure purpose merely sits with the purity of his purpose and does not use the sword, that will be a serious crime, and he must suffer the punishment for it. For in this world of causation, the law established by Allah cannot be changed merely to accommodate anyone.

This explanation makes it clear that the movement I am about to present is neither a reactionary movement nor a progressive movement whose sole aim is material advancement. For the training center I envision, there is no model in Gurukul Kangri, Satyagraha Ashram, Shantiniketan, or Dayal Bagh [These are Hindu ashram-like institutions—editor]. Similarly, for the revolutionary group I envision, there is no model in Italy’s Fascists or Germany’s National Socialist Party. Its model exists only in the Hizbullah (the Party of Allah) formed by the Prophet (peace be upon him) in Madinat al-Rasul.

— End —