|
In the aftermath of September 11
when President Bush visited the Islamic Center of Washington DC, both
to reassure the Muslims in America and to create public awareness
against prejudice, he remarked: "The face of terror is not the
true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is
peace." Of course,
Bush is, first and foremost, a politician and therefore his remarks
should be taken with a grain of salt - actually, a lot of salt.
The President was quickly rebuffed
even by a number of his compatriots, who vehemently disagreed with the
President's diplomatic stance. A Bush-loving, pro-Israel, conservative
Daniel Pipes sermonized that Islam exemplifies intolerance, violence
and hatred.. If peace has anything to do with Islam or Muhammad, it is
merely a ploy to deceive the peace-loving adversaries. Feigning that
that he is against Islamism, not Islam, pipes writes: "Islam is
more than any other religion, deeply political, in the sense that it
pushes its adherents to hold power, and once Muslims do gain power,
they feel a strong impetus to apply the laws of Islam, the shari'a.
So, Islam does, in fact, contain elements that can justify conquest,
theocracy, and intolerance." [Fighting Militant Islam, without
bias," in City Journal, Autumn 2001}
In contrast to the above two
categories of non-Muslim stance, there are two parallel camps within
Muslims. One camp on the fringe has no qualms in taking a public
position that Islam enjoins fighting and subduing the non-Muslims, and
this is a sublime religious duty. Repudiating this group of extremist
Muslims, there is the broader Muslim community that finds an echo of
their own position in what President Bush said and they would like the
world to know that Islam means peace and Islam is peaceful. Period
So, is Islam essentially intolerant
and violent or is it essentially tolerant or peaceful? The fact of the
matter is that in presenting Islam as essentially peaceful or violent,
there is a false and an unacceptable reductionism, because trying to
cast Islam in such reductionist framework inevitably leads to either
misunderstanding or misrepresentation.
A few premises
At the center of this whole debate
are three aspects: the Qur'an, the life of the Prophet, and the
historical experience of Muslims. But first let me identify a few
pertinent premises.
-
Muslims hold the Qur'an as the
ultimate source of divine guidance. Even the Prophet could not
have contradicted the Qur'an, let alone anyone else.
-
The Qur'anic verses should not
be taken in isolation from other verses or from the Prophetic
experience.
-
The Qur'anic verses, commands or
otherwise, have different levels of priority; some are general in
scope and are to be treated or upheld as norms, while other verses
might be contextual, delimited or transitional.
-
Life is an integrated whole, and
Islam is a guidance for the whole life in a comprehensive or
holistic manner, where a sense or goal of balance is of supreme
importance.
-
And life needs to be treated as
life, which from the Islamic viewpoint should be understood as
based on Fitrah, the innate human nature.
Some
historical observations
The history of Muslims, similar to
that of many other communities, is not devoid of violence and warfare.
There have been almost perpetual wars, conflicts, and the attending
violence in the Muslim world. During the Prophetic era in the Madinah
period, the Prophet was at war with all those who fought the nascent
Muslim community and the Islamic polity. In the post-prophetic era,
the conflicts continued on two fronts. The Islamic polity, which from
the beginning was on a pluralistic foundation, continued to be drawn
to war with other great civilizations and lesser powers of the time.
The Islamic polity subsequently also found another front open:
internal schism and conflict.
The transformation from a
constitutional, participatory, and accountable form of governance
during the Rightly-guided Caliphs to the despotic anti-thesis
represented a counter-revolution to the revolution ushered in by
Prophet Muhammad. Since this counter-revolution, the establishment
persistently purported to preserve the status quo, and
oppositions--legitimate or illegitimate, right or wrong, just or
unjust--were at the receiving end of persecution and retribution. It
is important to note that the political institutions and culture in
the Muslim world that evolved subsequently are more rooted in that
counter-revolution than in the revolution and legacy of the Prophet.
The division of the world between
Dar al-Harb (home of war and conflict) and Dar al-Islam (home of peace
and security) was a concoction of the classical Muslim jurists to
contend with the problems of their time, but the reality was that on
one hand Dar al-Islam was no less an internal conflict than an
external conflict. Our contemporary generation of self-critical and
conscientious Islamic scholars, who are in tune with the challenges of
our time, are already reformulating their thoughts and positions,
discarding the practically untenable and Islamically unwarranted
framework of Dar al-Harb and Dar al-Islam.
Therefore, if from a cursory reading
of the history of Muslims makes people think that this religion is
quite violent, the impression can't be dismissed quite so easily, even
though drawing conclusions about Islam on the basis of such
impressions are simplistic and incorrect at best.
Peace and violence
in the Qur'an and the life of the Prophet
All killing, fighting, war and even
administration of law and order involve some type of violence.
However, the "wild, wild West" did not earn the United
States a reputation for violence; the two World Wars - the most
violent and the worst killings in human history - did not earn the
West in general and Europe in particular a reputation for violence
either. The virtual decimation of the Indian people in the United
States did not make the country barbaric or uncivilized. The European
colonization that ravaged, exploited and dehumanized various parts of
Asia and Africa, including the Muslim world, did not make Europe any
less civilized. The Spanish Inquisition and the Crusade did not make
Christianity violent and barbaric. Even the recent, organized torching
of Muslims in India by a Hindu mob does not make Hinduism a burning
example of violence and barbarism. Yet, these days there are people
who would like to identify Islam and the Prophet Muhammad as violent
or symbol of violence.
We have already mentioned above that
during the post-Prophetic era, there was plenty of conflict and
violence that occurred in the name of Islam, yet Islam did not
sanction it. Notably, for 13 years of Makkan period, Muslims were
strictly forbidden to reciprocate any violence to the persecutors of
the Quraish. Many people misunderstand Muhammad because when they
compare him with many other religious figureheads, such as Jesus and
Buddha, they find a stark and intriguing contrast. Jesus as portrayed
in Bible, appears to be an embodiment of unblemished peace and
compassion. Buddha appears to be an enlightened soul far removed from
the hustle and bustle of life. In both cases, it seems that many find
a message of non-violence. On the contrary, Muhammad appears to be
quite different. In the limelight of society, he is helping the
feuding Arabs make peace during his youth. He is also involved in a
social treaty (Hilf al-Fudhul) to form an alliance against any unjust
war and killing. He is an accomplished merchant, a family man,
forgiving all the adversaries during the conquest of Makkah, except
four murderers, mending his own shoes, foot-racing his beloved wife,
leading and motivating the believers to stand for justice and give
life in fighting, if necessary.
Such a comparison between Muhammad
on one hand and Jesus or Buddha on the other is both incorrect and
unfair. It is even worse when, to justify their conclusion about Islam
and the Prophet, some people try to find verses in the Qur'an or
references in Hadith, where the fighting and violence were so
prominently, unequivocally, and sternly mentioned.
To better understand this issue, one
needs to recognize that Islam does not teach that if anyone's one
cheek is slapped, he or she should turn the other cheek. As mentioned
in one of the premises above, Islam is based on Fitrah, the innate
human nature. As a society, if we all turn our other cheek in the face
of violence or open the door to the intruding burglars, or point to
our heart to give a killer's gun a more accurate target, it would be
simply against human nature and also against any viable, functional,
or healthy society. Anyone familiar with the Shaolin temples know that
even the Buddhists contributed toward the development of the Martial
Arts, as life's need for self protection so dictated.
There are times when fighting and
violence are indispensable even to seek or maintain peace. People -
individuals, groups, and nations - may need to fight for self-defense.
Even the so-called modern and civilized nations, who now are hell-bent
on branding Islam as barbaric and violent can't shun, discard, and
avoid fighting and violence. They can't, because there are times, when
war, fighting, and violence are essential means to seek and maintain
peace. Of course, not all the wars and fighting are for just reasons
or to seek/maintain peace. Sometimes, pursuit of a narrow, parochial
or unjust interest can be touted as a pursuit of peace, but humanity
knows better.
Add to the quest for peace the quest
of justice, and one can easily understand the logic and reality of
life on one hand and the Islamic guidance/norms and the life of the
Prophet on the other. Without justice, peace is an illusion. That is a
human reality. Islam urges and emboldens people to never succumb to
injustice. Rather, it instills courage and spirit to offer resistance
to any social injustice and work collectively, creatively, and capably
toward a just society. "O you who believe! stand out firmly for
justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your
parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for
Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts),
lest you swerve, and if you distort (justice) or decline to do
justice, verily Allah is well acquainted with all that you do."
[4/an-Nisa/135] This pursuit of justice is not parochial or limited to
only Muslims. Rather, Muslims are to uphold and defend justice,
whether the victims and perpetrators are Muslims or non-Muslims.
Therefore, yes, there have been wars
and killing during the life of the Prophet. He himself led many
expeditions, and in many battles he himself fought as well. But that
is because LIFE sometime makes such war and fighting necessary and
indispensable. Any war or fighting during the time of the Prophet must
be understood within this essential reality of life. That is not so
true in the post-Prophetic era, where sometimes non-Muslims as well as
Muslims faced violence in the hands of the ruling establishment in the
Muslim world. Muslims must acknowledge many such wrongdoings by Muslim
rulers throughout history, even though in a comparative sense it was
not necessarily any worse than under other religions or ideologies.
Now, let us take a look at some
verses of the Qur'an. First, consider the following verses: "Let
not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly):
they will never frustrate (them). Against them make ready your
strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to
strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your
enemies, and others besides, whom you may not know, but whom Allah
doth know." [8/al-anfal/59-60] Or, the favorite verse of
Islam-bashers: "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay
the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them (captive), and
besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush." [9/at-Tauba/5]
Based on these verses, if anyone
draws or "wants" to draw the conclusion that Islam is
violent and it preaches violence, they would be violating almost all
the premises listed earlier in this essay. Islam's guidance is to help
people find a balance between life's conflicting priorities. It is not
static or predefined, but a dynamic search for an equilibrium. Whether
in self-defense, to resist the evil of injustice and oppression, or to
struggle toward a more just society, Islam requires its adherents to
uphold certain norms and parameters. In the verse quoted above in
which Muslims are urged to make ready their "strength to the
utmost" of their power, one needs to take into account the verse
that comes after it. "But if the enemy inclines towards peace,
you (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah" [9/al-anfal:
61]. The importance of this later verse is that peace is the ultimate
goal. It ought to be the ideal and norm that a society should seek.
Islam insists that its adherents work and incline toward peace.
Those who want to harm Muslims or
cause general harm or injustice, Muslims (like any other people) would
deal with them to resolve the problems and, if necessary, fight them,
as the last resort. However, if the very same people desist and show
inclination to peace, Muslims are duty bound to reciprocate for peace.
The life and legacy of the Prophet Muhammad were guided by pursuit of
justice and peace. Whenever people, Muslims or non-Muslims, take a
verse in a fragmented manner, advertently or inadvertently, they
commit serious error, or worse. By dubbing Islam violent while it
guides us toward a balance in our life, we merely yield to and
validate those fanatical and extremist fringes that use or abuse Islam
for their extremist angles and agendas.
Peace and justice are amongst the
two most important pursuits for humanity and so are those for Islam
and Muslims. Islam is meant to guide its adherents toward peace and
justice. Here are some of the verses and the Prophetic narrations
(hadith) that should be treated by Muslims as norms, and the humanity
should hold them to these norms in accordance with the faith of
Muslims in the Qur'an and the Prophet.
"Let there be no hostility
except to those who practice oppression." [2/al-Baqara/193]
Muslims do not and cannot have any problem with adherents of any other
faith (be it Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism or even animism) or
ideology (communism, capitalism, etc.), unless there is oppression
committed by any. Of course, this assumes that Muslims themselves do
not engage in practicing any oppression or injustice.
"…if any one slew a person
unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land, it
would be as if he slew the whole people; and if any one saved a life,
it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people." [5/al-Maida/35]
Life - of ALL people- is sanctified and to be a Muslim is to show
utmost respect for it. The sanctity of life - of Muslims and of others
- was so important in Islam that the Prophet pursued an ingenious
strategy of reclaiming Makkah: the entire conquest was virtually
bloodless, a kind of feat unheard of in the blood-thirsty tribal Arab
society. Furthermore, even for war and conflict, strict guidelines
were set not to harm the life and property of any civilian, who are
not active party to any hostility or conflict, and women, children,
old men, monks, were to be particularly spared.
A person asked, O Prophet of God
(p), whose Islam is excellent or the best (afdal)? He replied:
"From whose tongue and hands the people (an-nas: irrespective of
Muslims or non-Muslims) are safe." [Musnad-i-Ahmad, #6762;
narrated by Abdullah ibn Amr] The entire life of the Prophet was
dedicated to help a conflict-ridden and blood-feuding society of
Arabia come to civilization and serve as an illustration of human
potential, where people do not give up hope for positive change and
are willing to make adequate sacrifice toward establishing a just
society for all people. The struggle of the Prophet was not an end
point, but rather a reference point for the entire humanity as a
source of guidance and inspiration.
Islam motivates people to seek a
balance, tempering the extremities in their lives. It instills courage
and valor in the weak and oppressed; at the same time, it humbles
those who hold power and authority. It emboldens the downtrodden,
while holds the oppressors and exploiters accountable. It urges the
other-worldly people to take this world seriously and dearly, while it
admonishes those who have forgotten about the life hereafter.
Thus, to say that Islam is peaceful
does not explain why it also seeks to awaken people to a struggling
spirit. And, to say that Islam is violent does not explain why it also
emphasizes peace so ardently. Even Rabindranath Tagore, a Nobel
Laureate in literature from India, recognized this aspect so
beautifully in his novel, Gora. Through the words of Gora, the central
character of the novel, in a conversation with a meek and abused
Muslim, Tagore states: "One who tolerates wrong is also
blameworthy, because he endorses wrongdoing in this world. You won't
understand me, but remember that religion is not merely being
good-natured, pleasant, humble, meek gentleman (bhalo-manushi). It
simply emboldens the bad ones. Your Muhammad had understanding of this
and that's why he did not propagate the faith merely as pleasant and
meek gentleman (bhalomanush)". [pp. 111-112]
Those who would like to pursue Jesus
or Buddha as a model, as perceived within their respective religious
tradition, would soon find that puritanical and absolutist peace and
acquiescence can rarely help us deal with and resolve the harsh
reality and nature of life. Those who are absolutist in regard to use
of force and violence for collective selfishness or arrogance would
find that they would be buried and overcome in history by the
collective decency of humanity and human civilization. Muhammad is one
such very special personality in human history that successfully
balanced the quest of peace and justice. Muslims in history has badly
failed in upholding that quest for balance in the footstep of
Muhammad. But it is only by valuing and upholding that Prophetic quest
for that balance can Muslims overcome their own failures and miseries,
and also serve the humanity in the path of God.
Aug/Sept
2002
|
