Political Islam and Its Proponents

A terrorist is not created in his mother’s womb. It takes an environment of hatred, a whole jungle of hatred-to bring him into existence. The present-day community of Muslims has unfortunately provided such an environment. How did this jungle of hatred grow? For one it has been cultivated by the extensive proliferation of a particular ideology among Muslims, a political interpretation of Islam, which offered Muslim the status of God’s vicegerents on earth with the right to rule the entire world on His behalf.

Islam was the leading civilization of the world in the period between the decline of ancient civilization and the ascent of modern European ones. But ultimately, western colonial powers established their dominance over the Muslim world; it was in reaction to his domination that political movements began to be launched in the name of Islam. The objective of these movements was to free Muslim countries from western rule and to re-establish Muslim rule.

It was Syed Jamaluddin Afghani, born in Iran in 1838, who probably developed the concept of Islamic nationalism for the first time. During his lifetime, the colonial expansion of the west was at its peak and almost the entire Muslim world had, directly or indirectly, come under its rule. Jamaluddin Afghani made it his mission to bring down the colonial system and restore the political power of Muslim nations. Towards this end, he launched the movement know as pan-Islamism. It aimed at bringing together the Muslims of entire world to form a united international power, which would defeat western nation and set the Muslim world free from their clutches.

Jamaluddin Afghani failed to achieve his political target, but what he did successfully was to show the seeds of hatred for western nations in Muslims minds all over the world. As a result, Muslims in general came to regard western nations as their enemies. Almost all the Muslim leaders of his time began to think in negative and political terms. The more prominent of these were Sayyid Qutb and Amir Shaqib Arsalan in the Arab World, Muhammad Iqbal and Sayyed abul Ala Maududi  in the Indian subcontinent, and later ayatollah Khomeini in Iran.

Initially, the movement focused on the expulsion of western forces from the Muslims world. More appropriately, it was an initiative to gain political freedom. Thus, in the times of Afghani, this movement was more political than religious in nature, which its slogan being the east for easterners’’.

After Afghani, this revolutionary movement entered another phase. Now it was given an ideological form. The movement, which had been described in communal terms (with reference to the global Muslim community), was now given an Islamic hue. An attempt was made to Islamize their communal thinking by developing a complete ideology based on the political interpretation of Islam. If earlier the thinking had been that the western nations were usurpers and that a restitution of Muslims’political  rights must be demanded from them in the next phase ideologists developed the theory that Islam had a system covering the whole of human life and that this include politics. The Muslims were, therefore, duty-bound to capture political power b y force so that Islam might be implemented as a total system. The promoters of this movement held that so long as Islam was not adopted by the believers in toto, as a complete system, their faith would not be acceptable to God. It following that bringing about a political revolution became a binding obligation, like prayers and fasting.

In this second phase, two Muslim leaders figured most prominently: the Egyptian intellectual Sayyid Qutb (d. 1966) and Sayyed Abul Ala maududi (d.1979), a Muslim ideologue from the Indian subcontinent. Both these leaders found themselves in a very favorable environment- an environment  that now made it possible for their books to be translated into many language and thus for their ideas to spread over almost the entire Muslim world. As a consequence, Muslims in almost all part of the globe were directly influenced by their political ideology. Some became actively involved, while the thinking of others, shaped by this ideology, centred on political Islam. All dreamed of the political glory of Islam.

This movement, designed to establish political Islam, gave rise to various other movements. Two of these movements grew in to prominence: all Ikhwan al –Muslimun, or the Muslim Brotherhood, established in 1928 in the Arab world and the Jamat- e Islami established in 1941on the subcontinent. Both were highly organized movements and subsequently launched campaigns to establish Islamic rule in Muslim countries such as Egypt, Sudan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Algeria, Tunisia and Malaysia.  

At first these movements sought to establish Muslim rule by spreading their ideology of political Islam. When they failed on this score, they started taking part in the national election in the countries here they were active. When they failed on this front too, they resorted to militancy. This political movement of the Muslims intensified in the latter half on the twentieth country. It was during these days that the Jews established their rule in Palestine in the name of Israel. Now Muslims believe that they Jews are rejected by God, while the Muslims themselves are the chosen people. So finding the dominance of the Jews over the Muslims intolerable, they made a frantic bid to obliterate the Jews from the face of the earth. The pro-Islam movement of the first half of the twentieth century ultimately turned into an anti-Jewish movement in the second half century.

Events have demonstrated that, in spite of making every conceivable effort, Muslims have failed in their campaign against the Jews. On every front, right from the united nation to the Aqsa Mosque of Jerusalem, they have had total defeat inflicted upon them. It is the ensuing build-up of a defeatist mentality which has culminated perforce in the phenomenon of ‘Islamic terrorism’. Though ostensibly aimed at re-establishing Islamic rule. The political Islam movement actually grew as a political reaction to the circumstances in which Muslims found themselves at that particular point in time. Its inspiration and its impact were totally negative. The movement was the result of anti- western rather than pro-Islam feelings, and for precisely this reason it rapidly turned violent.

According to Islam, a truly Islamic movement arise out of feelings of benevolence for all the humanity. Its target being neither land nor power, it is always carried out through peaceful means. It never adopts violence. If Muslims movements of the modern age opted for the way of extremism, it was because they were not genuinely Islamic in nature. The truth is that these Muslim social movements, which had only the community agenda in mind, adopted the name of Islam purely as a means of self- Justification. If you read the Quran, nowhere in it will you find any mention of ‘political Islam’. They Quran contains neither information nor injunction which could lead to the setting up of a political system. The eighteenth- century French thinker Rousseau, who was greatly concerned with the human condition, wrote a treatise called the social contract (1762). He opened his book with this arresting statement: man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains.’

This is the language of a political book, a book which was to contribute to the ideas and policies of the leaders of the French revolution and which ultimately gained worldwide currency. But if you read the Quran, you will see that it begins not with a diatribe against human inequality with its implied criticism of wrong governance, but simply with praises of God, and it ends with the necessity to seek refuge in God against Satan. In the Quran and the Hadith, there is no mention of the system of state. Nor is there any mention of revolt against nay existing system neither is there any indication as to how a political ruler or khalifah is to be appointed or selected. No such principles are set forth in Islam, neither from an ideological nor from a practical point of view. In short, it is clear that no aspect of political Islam is dealt with anywhere in the Quran and the Hadith.   

At more than one place in the Quran we are told what the Prophet’s tasks were in accordance with the divine plan. These were recitation of the verses of the Quran; purification of man; teaching of the scriptures; and teaching of wisdom. In none of the verses are we told that the task of the Prophet was to establish Islamic rule in the world. Such verses of the Quran as presented by the champions of political Islamic in support of their cause were distorted to serve their own ends.

The truth is that giving a political interpretation to Islam is a despicable act and in no way serves the higher aims of the religion.

Islam & Political Extremism

The Quran teaches us not be extremist in our religion. Its exact words are: ‘People of the book! Do not go to extremes in your religion.’(4:171). We also learn from a saying of Prophet Muhammad that extremist tendencies have always been the chief reason for religious group going astray. That is why the prophet once observed: ‘Sedulously refrain from extremism, for the previous communities were destroyed only because of their extremist tendencies in religious matters.’

“Ghulu” meaning extremism is engendered in a religious community when it goes in to a state of decline, and I in fact, a sign of its degeneration. There is a tradition of Prophet Muhammad which forewarns his followers of the rot that can set in. he said that all those evils which had arisen in previous communities would also arise, but on a greater scale in his own community.  To make his meaning clear, he said:

‘Where previous communities were divided into 72 sects, Muslims will be divided into 73Sects.

There are innumerable cases of ideological extremism in Islamic history. But we also find among Muslims another kind of extremism which probably never existed in previous communities. When the prophet said that while the Israelites were divided into seventy-two sects and the Muslim would be divided into seventy-three sects, he was giving an example of this other kind of ghulu (extremism) which can be described as political extremism.  No previous community had ever been crowned by such political glory as was enjoyed by the Muslims for almost a thousand years after the emergence of Islam. Political glory was not however, a part of Islamic creed, but a part of history. But Muslims stressed this fact of political glory to such an extent that, for all intents and purposes, it became incorporated in their religious creed. The result of this political extremism is the violent jihad we experience in the Muslim world of today.

Ultimately, extremist concepts such as ‘Muslims are God’s vicegerents on earth and, as such, they have the right to rule over other communities ‘were developed. Religion came to be regarded as synonymous with a complete state. And a religion of this nature could not be fully observed unless it was established as the basis and framework of the state. Those promoting these ideologies and politicizing Islam believed that Muslims were a superior community, which the right to treat other communities as inferior. As a result, to this day, Muslims find it difficult to relocate any sort of dominance. They believe that their religious obligation can never be fully discharged just by performing prayers and observing fasting. They imagine it is incumbent upon them to strive to establish diving rule on earth.

A set of beliefs such as these has nothing to do with the religion as revealed by God. It is nothing but a case of political extremism. But present-day Muslims are largely under the influence of this extremist way of thinking – some consciously, others unconsciously.

Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, achieved considerable political success while he was still alive; and this was built on rapidly by his successors, the caliphs. Unfortunately, along with success comes the opportunity to abuse it, that is why, according to the hadith, the Muslims were divided, in terms of ideological extremism, in to seventy- two sects, while the seventy-third sects was concerned with the political extremism. Of course, the evil of ideological extremism is the found as much in Muslim as in other communities, but it is the former’s bent of political extremism that has aggravated this issue further.

Congregation led by earlier prophets did not achieve political success during their prophets’ lifetime. Their prophets only left them an ideological legacy. That is why we find political extremism absent in them. At the most, the can indulge only in ideological extremism.

According to the Quran (22:78) and the hadith, the greatest duty of Muslim community –shahadat ‘alannaas-is to spread the diving message of Islam peacefully among other nation. But because of their  extremist political approach, present –day Muslim have abandoned this missionary duty. The most dangerous  aspect of their labeling of non –missionary activities as missionary work, for instance, debates, political protest, Muslim- reform activities, community work are all  termed missionary work by today’s Muslim.

The most urgent task today is to inculcate this consciousness of the mission and to set up an educational system on the principals of this mission. Muslims should be raised as a missionary group- or witnesses (22:78) as it is called in the Quran- and should be prevented from indulging in non- missionary activities. Without taking such a step, missionary work cannot be effectively performed.

The Quran (5:67) tells us that the secret of protection from enemy plots lies in the performance of dawah. That is, if Muslims engage in dawah work, their lives properties and wealth will be protected by God. In short, the communication of the religious message is the responsibility of Muslim, while the protection of their worldly interests rest with God.

According to a famous tradition, our action are judge by our intention’. Intention here is the equivalent of what is generally called spirit. This means that although there are many actions which in form appear to be morally acceptable. It is to the spirit of these acts rather than their external form that Islam attaches real importance.

From a Hadith we learn the Prophet Muhammad speaking of the Muslim of the future, predicted that only the external spirit, and only the outer form of Islamic action would survive.

That is to say, the action of the Muslims of the future would be lacking in internal spirit, and only the outer form of their religious observance would persist. People will remain ignorant of the true spirit of Islam so long as they are conversant only with its forms and attach importance only to the externals.

It is easy to understand how extremism or ghulu stems from this flawed perception. In the early days of Islam, the spirit was alive and was accorded full attention. But when in later generation degeneration set in, external rituals began to be given more importance. This is a frequent occurrence.

Let me explain this with an example from the world of business, the phrase ‘customer- friendly behavior’ is often used in business jargon. It means if a businessman is to be successful, he must appear to be friendly to his customers. Now let us compare this with behavior in the family. You will not hear any parents say that their behavior towards their children is ‘child- friendly’. The reason for this difference is that the spirit of love for their children wells up naturally in parents, and so they do not need to talk about it or make a display of it.

The case of a businessman is totally different. A businessman has no love or compassion for his customers. It is solely the desire for commercial gain that inspires him to make a display of these qualities. Is human nature that wherever the internal   spirit is alive, no importance will be attached to the externals, while in the absence of spirit, the maximum attention will be paid to formal etiquette.

 This is the human mentality that produces the phenomenon called ghulu. It is a fact that ghulu, or extremism, is invariably relevant to externals and do not to internal realities.

When we look at the Muslim of today, we find that the prediction of the Prophet has come true. One kind of ghulu that has developed among Muslims is the one pertaining to ideology, for instance, the concept of spiritual leaders being intermediate between God and man, and the concept of sacredness of graves. Today, violent activities are going on in the name of jihad all over the world. There are some who are directly involved, while others justify these acts in their speeches and writings. A third group consists of those who are silent. But according to the sharing principal, they too are involved for silence is not enough- it is their duty to publicly condemn such un-Islamic acts.

This is political ghulu is the greatest weakness of Muslim; it has overridden all the human qualities that qualify a community for a position of honour and glory – qualities such as benevolence, universality of approach (that is, looking at all human being as gold’s family), positive thinking, keeping abreast of the changing times, thinking realistically, acknowledgement of others, fostering the dawah spirit, giving importance to the value of peace, and objective thinking.

The greatest harm done by political extremism is that it deters Muslims from emerging from the shell of the past. This is the cause of their failure to understand to present. In the past, war something which decide the fate of communities. But in modern times, peaceful resources have become much more powerful. Yet Muslims seem unaware of these resources. In the past, the economy was based on agriculture. Now it is based on industry. Electronic communications just did not exist in the past, whereas today, communications have become one of the greatest strengths of mankind. But Muslims are blissfully unaware of all these developments. That is why they have not been able to take advantage of all the blessing of the modern age. Moreover in the past, all resources were in the hands of the king, but today is the age of institutions.

 The violent jihad, prevalent in modern times, dates back to Tipu Sultan (d.1799). this has been a 200-year long jihad without any positive result, and with no real movement directed as yet at reassessment of values, aims or objective. The reason lies in the Muslims, lack of awareness. Today the greatest task is to remedy this shortcoming, without which there is no possibility of any positive change.

About seventy years ago, Amir Shakib Arsalan published a book titled our Decline: its Cause and Remedies. The author concluded that the reason for Muslim backwardness lay in abandoning jihad. He quoted an Arabic couplet in support. ‘I refrained from taking part in war, so that I might live. But I did not find in it life. Life was for those who went ahead and waged the war.

This point has been made repeatedly by Muslim leaders over the last two centuries. The result has been that this militant ideology has spread among Muslims all over the world. The jihadi model has become the sole inspiration for action. But when we take stock of the outcome, we find that this has proved to be counterproductive. In such a situation, it would be more appropriate to modify the couplet and say: ‘ I adopted the path of war for life and survival, but finally I learnt that life and survival are only for those who abandon the militant course in favour of a peaceful course of action.’