Islam in Present Age -1

In its issue of June 15, 1992, Time magazine has made Islam its cover story with this title on the front page: ‘Islam: Should the World Be Afraid?’ another title inside the magazine reads: ‘The Sword of Islam.’

The aggressive picture of Islam as presented in the magazine articles is no exception. Such references to Islam are common occurrences in modern times. Once during a journey to a European country, I met a Muslim youth who told me of an experience he had had during an interview, which started as follows:

          ‘Are you a Muslim?’

          ‘Yes.’

          ‘The you are a terrorist.’

This is a clear indication of what the image of Islam has become in modern times – that of a terrorist religion. For this reason, people have come to regard Islam as a constant threat to universal peace, co-existence and solidarity. This, however, is a complete misunderstanding, and is totally unrelated to the actual state of affairs.

The only acceptable way to determine the real position of Islam is to find out first of all what Islam sets out to achieve. Its goal is very clearly expressed in this verse of the Qur’an: ‘O believers, be worshippers of the Lord.’ (3:79). The word used in this text is rabbani, i.e. devoting oneself to God and to no other. That is to say that, your love and your fear should all be for God and God alone. The true goal of Islam is thus to form such devout individuals. Obviously, a human being of this kind cannot be formed through violence and war. This is entirely a matter of intellectual revolution and of a change of heart. And such a change of heart and mind can be brought about only by advice, counseling and da‘wah, and not by recourse to violence.

If one were to speak of a ‘violence merchant,’ this would be a contradiction in terms. This is because no true businessman can afford to depart from the norms of peace. Commerce, by its very nature, makes one peaceable and willing to adjust. The same is true of Islam, by its very nature it is a wholly pacific and conciliatory faith. At atmosphere of strife and brutality is anathema of the performance of Islamic da‘wah, which can produce result only in an atmosphere of peace. How then could Islam possibly approve of war and violence?

When Islam is, in truth, a peace-loving religion, how has it come to be portrayed as the very opposite? This is a complete misapprehension which is traceable to two sources, one past and one present.

Let us first consider past contributory causes. It is a historical fact that certain battles against non-Muslims did take place during the Prophet’s lifetime. These wars, however, were in no way related to the principle of Islam. They resulted rather from the external circumstances prevailing in the world of that time. These wars did not break out because Islam wanted to fight, but because others, by waging war against the Muslims had forced Islam to defend itself.

Islam came to the world one thousand four hundred years ago, in an age marked by religious persecution. It is a matter of historical record that, in those days, a man considered it his birthright to suppress by force all religions other than his own, or that of the State.

That is why in ancient times each religion experienced violent reaction from the adherents of other faiths. For instance, for about fifteen hundred years from the time of its inception, Christianity was continuously subjected to persecution. Everywhere its followers met stiff opposition and were even subjected to torture or killed outright. Whereas today, the proponents of that same Christianity are engaged in all-out missionary work without the slightest risk of victimization.

If Christians were persecuted in ancient times, it was not because of their adherence to any militant ideology, the tenets of Christianity being the same in those days as they are today. The hostile reaction of the ancient world, as compared to the complaisance or even indifference of today, was conditioned rather by the age in which it took place – one in which religious persecution was the order of the day.

The modern age is totally different in that it is one of religious freedom. That is why proselytizers now meet, not with persecution, but with open-mindedness. All over the world, they are now presented with opportunities to carry on their religious work with complete impunity.

The same is true of Islamic history, in which all the incidents of armed conflict were due to the circumstances prevailing in that age, rather than to Islamic teachings. Islam had launched its missionary activities using completely peaceful means, but, it being an age of religious persecution, adherents of other religions opposed it tooth and nail. In this way, incidents of armed conflict became an unavoidable part of Islamic history. Nowadays, with this factor eliminated, the possibility of such wars has also, in principle, come to an end.

Those who are unaware of this aspect of Islamic development tend to attribute early conflicts, quite wrongly, of course, to tenets of Islam; they fail to appreciate that they resulted from external circumstances rather than from the internal features of Islam itself.

In modern times, Islam’s aggressive image can be traced to the circumstances now prevailing in Muslim countries. In all Muslim countries, Muslims are divided into two broad categories, one called Islamists, and the other secular, or liberal.

With non-religious ideologies dominating people’s minds today all over the world, it often happens that when elections are held in Muslim countries, they are won by a secular or liberal group. Now if democratic traditions are to be upheld, the Islamists group should bear with the liberals who have come into power until the expiry of their term in office. But Islamists groups in every country consider political power a right that they alone should enjoy.   As such, whenever a liberal group is in control, the Islamists group assumes the role of aggressive opposition. Furthermore, whatever the activities of this Islamist group, they are all engaged in under the banner of Islam. As a result, its aggressive stance, whether ideological or practical, is attributed to Islam per se.

In actual fact, it is the self-styled Islamists who believer in militancy. And due to their misrepresentation of their own religion, other have come to think of Islam as a militant religion. This is simply a misunderstanding. The facts are quite the opposite.

There is a hadith to guide us on this subject. It says” ‘As you will be, so will your rulers be.’ That is to say that  it is society which produces the type of people it wants as its rulers. This ruling class then represents society.

That is why Islam has very specifically given us this injunction that when the rot sets in the rulers, or ruling class, we should not directly clash with them. We should rather devote all our efforts to changing society in a constructive manner. The day society  changes, the rulers will certainly change on their own. It is society which determines what type of ruler it wants. That is why the actual problem lies in changing society rather than in launching militant campaigns directed towards the unseating of rulers.

The so-called Islamist groups in Muslim countries has been engaged in ideological or practical campaigns directed against the rulers for the last fifty years. With no positive gain to date what has happened is that the image of Islam has been gravely distorted to that of a religion with violence as part of its creed.

A further error committed by the Islamist group is to suppose the whole world to be their enemies. Then, in order to counter these ‘enemy’ nations, they are continuously engaged in ideological and military warfare, depending upon circumstances. Indulgence in violence is thus to be found both on an internal plane, against the Muslim liberals, and on an international plane, against non-Muslim nations.

This supposition that the whole world is the enemy of Islam is entirely without foundation. In the highly competitive world of today, one group or community is always trying to be ahead of the others. This is a state of affairs which has continued since man’s advent on earth and it will continue until Doomsday. As such, it should be taken as a human challenge, rather than as a matter if enmity or opposition towards Muslims.

If we eliminate the erroneous impressions created by circumstances both in the past and the present, in particular by the Islamist’s politics, unguided as they are by the Qur’an and Hadith, the image of Islam that will emerge will be that of a religion based wholly on peace and mercy, which, in reality, is what it is. This is the real image as it evolves from Islamic teachings.