|
State of the Ummah
by Zafar Bangash
Director, The Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought, Toronto, Canada
Muslims must use their proximity to the Qur’an and the Sunnah/Sirah of the noble Messenger (saws) as a standard to determine their standing in the world.
Given the chaos and mayhem that has engulfed large parts of the Muslim world — Somalia, Sudan, the Central African Republic (CAR), Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Egypt, Palestine, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Pakistan — it is easy to feel despondent. The overriding narrative posits that Muslims are at each other’s throats; that there is something inherently violent in their nature.
This narrative, however, ignores a fundamental point: the gross interference of external players manipulating and disrupting Muslim societies. Can anyone deny that the US and its European allies as well as its puppets in the Muslim East are involved in stoking the flames of conflict in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan? Syria is not perfect and the people have a right to be dissatisfied with the government of Bashar al-Asad but external interference is a major source of instability.
The people of Syria like people elsewhere, have the right to choose their own government. At present they have not been given this right. But is the chaos that has engulfed large parts of the country the solution to this problem? Further, who should choose Syria’s rulers: the US, the illegitimate Zionist occupiers of Palestine, the equally illegitimate occupiers of the Arabian Peninsula, Turkey and Qatar on the one hand, or the people of Syria on the other? If it is the latter, then we must further ask, how are the wishes of the Syrian people to be determined? Is a foreign-backed and financed insurrection the answer?
Sufficient evidence exists to confirm that the people of Syria do not want to be ruled by murderers and cannibals. No amount of denial can obfuscate the fact that foreign mercenaries have committed egregious crimes against the Syrian people. Killing innocent people is forbidden in Islam. The noble Qur’an is very clear, “But whoever deliberately kills another committed Muslim, his requital shall be Hell, therein to abide; and Allah will condemn him, and will reject him, and will prepare for him spectacular suffering†(4:93).
On the political front, the Syrian National Coalition (NSC) consists of foreign-backed opportunists that have little or no support inside Syria. This explains why they insist on al-Asad’s resignation before they would agree to a political settlement. The SNC wants power on a platter.
It is interesting to note that the regime in Washington, flag-bearer of democracy worldwide, does not enjoy the support of a majority of Americans yet it wants to appoint rulers in other countries. The Saudi regime has threatened its citizens with death if they call for reforms in the kingdom. Despite all his rhetorical sophistry, Barack Obama’s approval ratings are very low. Nobody, however, would entertain the notion that he should resign much less be overthrown by foreign-backed mercenaries so that a popularly elected government can be established. The US political system is held hostage to moneyed classes where major corporations have the so-called elected officials in their pockets. “America has the best democracy money can buy†aptly describes this reality. If America does not have a government that represents the will of its people, on what basis do its rulers decide who should rule in another country?
The issue boils down to power, or “might is right.†It is the law of the jungle. No amount of sophistry about the will of the people will work. People under attack will fight back; this is natural. Survival is a powerful instinct.
But those who are struggling for their rights also have a responsibility to understand the nature of the forces alligned against them and the prevailing situation in their societies. Simplistic analysis or faulty assumptions will lead nowhere as the Ikhwan and their supporters in Egypt have found to their own detriment.
So what should struggling Muslims do? The first point to note is a proper understanding of the existing situation in Muslim societies. The imposed systems are illegitimate and must be uprooted and replaced by systems based on the model presented by the noble Messenger (pbuh) and the Khulafa’ al-Rashidun. Second, only muttaqi leadership above class or parochial interests must lead the struggle, not charlatans. Third, the leadership must set a clear directional course and the process by which this is to be achieved.
Muslims must evaluate their conduct on the basis of how central or marginal the Qur’an and the Sunnah/Sirah are in their political, economic and social lives. The more central they are, the more central the Muslims will be in the affairs of the world. Conversely, the more marginal the Qur’an and the Sunnah/Sirah are in their lives, the more marginal they will be in the affairs of the world.
Muslims between unity and disunity
At a time when takfirism deliberately promoted by the Saudi regime and its henchmen, is grabbing headlines, sincere Muslims of all schools of thought in Islam are working for unity. This reflects the view of a clear majority of Muslims worldwide.
At a time when the Muslim world is beset by so many problems, eruption of disunity based on takfirism (the practice of declaring other Muslims kafirs) is a self-inflicted wound that Muslims can do without. In the noble Qur’an, Allah (swt) refers to Muslims as one Ummah, “Verily, this Ummah of yours is one Ummah, and I am the Sustainer of you all; conform then, to Me [alone]. But men have torn their unity wide asunder, [forgetting that] unto Us they all are bound to return†(21:92–93).
Throughout his blessed life, the noble Messenger (pbuh) strived for unity not only among Muslims but also worked for understanding with others. In the Covenant of Madinah promulgated as part of establishing the Islamic State, he declared people of all faiths, including the Jews residing in Madinah, as one Ummah with the Muslims. Thus, the Islamic State the Prophet (pbuh) established accepted Jews as “Muslims†in the civic sense while recognizing their separate religious identity.
So how do some Muslims justify their behavior by hurling fatwas of takfir at other Muslims with whom they disagree on some fiqhi issue(s)? We have repeatedly stressed in these columns that takfirism is first and foremost a political rather than a theological issue. It is used by some Muslims to delegitimize those they disagree with in order to justify their own opportunistic and utilitarian political behavior. Even if the allegation of takfir were true, Islam does not give anyone the license to kill another human being. The sanctity of life is emphasized in the Qur’an as well as in the Farewell Khutbah delivered by the noble Messenger (pbuh) during his one and only Hajj. The noble Messenger (pbuh) said, “O people! Indeed, your lives, and your possessions, and your family honor [womenfolk] are sacrosanct until you meet your Lord…†He emphasized this again in another part of that final Khutbah, “O people! Indeed your Sustainer is One, and your common father [referring to Adam] is one. All of you belong to Adam and Adam was made up of earth [soil]. The most honorable of you in Allah’s sight is the one who is the most conscious of Allah’s power and authority…â€
There is no Muslim, even the most takfiri-minded, who can disagree with these directives yet many who call themselves Muslims indulge in behavior that is totally contrary to Qur’anic principles and prophetic precedents. We can trace this mindset all the way to the Khawarij who emerged during the khilafah of Imam Ali (ra). It was this group that carried out the criminal act of killing the fourth khalifah of the Muslims. The Khawarij had adopted a very narrowminded interpretation of Islam insisting they alone were right. Those that disagreed with them were considered legitimate targets for execution. This is precisely the mindset prevalent among takfiris as well.
While Muslims cannot ignore such un-Islamic behavior, they must not become despondent. Despite grabbing headlines, the takfiris and their sponsors are a tiny minority in the Muslim world. A survey conducted by http://www.worldpublicopinion.org last year found that more than 67% of Muslims worldwide wanted unity among Muslims. Even the 33% that appeared opposed to unity did so primarily because of misunderstanding. They were under the impression that Muslim unity meant they would have to abandon their particular fiqhi choices.
What does unity mean? It means fostering understanding between the different schools of thought without anyone claiming superiority over others. There have been numerous attempts by leading Muslim thinkers, scholars and activists to foster unity. Names such as Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (Asadabadi), Muhammad ‘Abduh, Shaykh Mahmoud Shaltut, Shaykh Kashif al-Ghita’, Dr. Mohammad Iqbal, Sayyid Qutb, Imam Khomeini, Dr. Kalim Siddiqui and Imam Seyyed ‘Ali Khamenei immediately spring to mind. There have also been institutional efforts to foster unity and understanding. For instance, on November 9, 2004 coinciding with the 27th of Ramadan, 1425ah, the Amman declaration was issued by King Abdullah of Jordan calling for tolerance and unity in the Muslim world. Subsequently, a three-point ruling was issued by 200 Islamic scholars from more than 50 countries in July 2005. The three points defined who a Muslim is, prohibited excommunication of Muslims (takfir) and outlined principles on which fatwas must be based.
The Amman Declaration said the following eight schools of thought (madhahib) were recognized in Islam. Among the Sunnis, the well-known four were included: Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki and Shafi‘i. Also recognized were the Shi‘i Ja‘fari (Ithna-‘Ashari and Isma‘iliyah), the Shi‘i Zaydi, the Ibadi (what survives of the Khawarij), and finally the Zahiri. Concurrent with this was the declaration that it is forbidden to pronounce excommunication (takfir) upon followers of the following creeds/practices/thoughts: Ash‘ari, Tasawwuf and the enlightened Salafi thought of scholars like Muhammad ‘Abduh and Muhammad Rashid Rida. The declaration forbade takfir upon others recognized as Muslims; and finally, it stipulated preconditions to issuing religious edicts, intended to prevent the circulation of illegitimate fatwas.
Unfortunately, some of the ‘ulama that had signed on to the Amman declaration later indulged in the very conduct they themselves had condemned. Such fickleness has caused irreparable damage to the Ummah.
In light of the re-emergence of takfirism in a virulent form in Syria and Pakistan, a conference of 300 scholars, ‘ulama and Islamic activists from 58 countries gathered in Tehran in January 2014 to reaffirm the unity of the Ummah. Present at the conference were Sunnis, Shi‘is, Ibadis as well as ‘ulama of other schools of thought. They unanimously adopted an 18-point charter that among other things forbids takfir as well as disrespect of the Sahabah and the wives of the Prophet (pbuh). It also pointed out that proximity did not mean converting Sunnis to Shi‘ism or vice versa; it meant each respecting the views of the other.
This effort was spearheaded by Majma‘ al-Taqrib bayna al-Madhahib al-Islamiyah, a Tehran-based organization that has worked for decades to strive for unity among Muslims. It is through such efforts that Muslims would be able to foster unity and remove some of the misunderstandings that have caused so much suffering in the Ummah.
|
