Accountability from a Muslims perspective: Reflection and Realizations

Accountability from A Muslim's Perspective:

Reflections and realizations

By Yusuf Roque Morales

Introduction:

Leaders, has been said to be the binding fiber of a society, it is in their hands that a community, a society or a country may either rise or fall. And yet, at times, we forget that indeed in a democratic society such as ours, sometimes, there are those leaders who fail to be accountable to their community in in fact the paradigm of al-Insan al-Khilafatul ard (Man is the custodian of the earth is forgotten and is barely remembered when the gavel of rulership is handed over to them.

Public Ethics and Accountability is indeed one of the most controversial topics ever to be discussed. This has always been the issue with many states and governments, whether Muslim, Christian or highly sectarianized .This may be so because corruption and lack of accountability have become something of a cancer eating into the fabric of society and uprooting every social value, structure and institution from its very foundations.

Many critics of Islam have pointed out that there is a clear disparity in practice of Muslim groups and individuals for condoning or ignoring acts of corruption. There is a need for us to affirm that the most effective response to all criticisms is calm, reasoned discourse and active practice of open accountability by Muslim groups and individuals.

Given the topic there can be said two be two angles where we can discuss this topic. The first is to assert, with all sense of self-righteousness, the truism that Islam preaches probity and accountability.

Discourse on Public Accountability and Ethics:

A typical lecture of this sort would involve citing of passages from the Holy Quran that would equate Accountability and Correct Leadership (Ai'immarah) with Piety including c itations from the Life and works of the Holy Prophet, anecdotes from the lives of the Khulafa al-Rashidin, the Sahaba, the Tabi'in and great pious rulers like ‘Umar ibn Abdul 'Azeez.

This would result to everyone applauding and feeling good after listening to a well-cited and well read speech and lecture.

But if one would engage in this it would only lead to an exercise best described as the giving in to the audience's collective egos and whims (if you forgive the term) . It states the obvious, avoids the difficult and in no way contributes to the purpose of such a gathering. To say that Islam teaches and advocates good leadership and accountability, and to try to prove it to a Muslim audience, is a useless intellectual exercise.

It will only serve the purpose of Tahseel al-haseel (attaining that which is already attained); for every Muslim surely knows that not just Islam, but every world-view or civilization worth its name, preaches accountability and probity. Even Godless systems do so as evidenced by the recent execution in Communist China of fourteen persons for acts of financial corruption. And as such we cannot say that only Islam has the moral ascendancy over the paradigm of Ethics and accountability.

However, one may apply a more logical,realistic, less palatable and certainly more offensive to certain sensibilities. It is an approach which asks a historically valid question which begs eternally to be answered: why is it that despite the fact that we all know, academically or intuitively, that corruption in all its forms is against Islamic Law, it remains a pervasive feature permeating Muslim communities?

A typical example is the present ruling regimes around the Muslim world that has leaders who have been in power for quite a long time already and that despite the length of service supposedly, there has been no notable changes in the life of the common man in these countries.

One would be posed to ask why do we have Muslim leaders, including those who have ruled in the recent past, not been a symbol of Public service and accountability? Why has the crime of corruption not engaged the Muslim mind with the same intensity as, say, the absence of the hijab among women or the exclusion of hudud (fixed punishments) from the Penal Code? In simple terms, why is it that over a long period and spreading over a large part of the Muslim world, the teachings of Islam on probity and accountability have been one thing, the practice of Muslim people and their leaders a completely different thing?It appears that there is a marked disparity in the way that leaders view social values.

This would mean that the answer to this question is to be found necessarily in a reasoned analysis of the anatomy of corruption, specifically (1) how it came to be embedded in the body politic of the Muslim Community (ummah) (2) how the Ummah's mindset was conditioned to tolerate it and (3) how an elaborate legal framework was set-up which,however ,effectively by-passes the menace, allowing it to thrive even where an Islamic legal system is, in theory, operational.

Perhaps it is about time to conduct an analytic probe into the history of Public service, administration and corruption as well as see the lessons we may have learned theirein.

The first point is an excursion into history, specifically the fitnah, the early conflicts and the end of the Khulafa Ar-Rashidun. (the righteous Caliphs, ie, Abubakr, Umar, Uthman (RTA) and Ali (Karamallahu wajah)).

The second is a look into the philosophy and particularly ethics, pointing out the misapprehension of the necessary connection between metaphysical theism and our morality which, I will argue, represents some degree of impairment to our conception of Tawhid, and our full belief in the absolute unity of Allah the One as the source of our existence and values;

The third is looking into Shariah law as we know it, and an examination of the limitations imposed on its scope by politics as well as the failure of scholars to rise to the responsibilities implied by the flexibility of its injunctions.

The paper therefore is a look into the discousre of Public accountability and the historical and philosopical antecedents during the early ages of islam hoping that they would serve as reminders and guidances to us Muslim and non-muslims in the 14^th century Hijrah.

This papermay appear to be uncomfortable to some, tumultuous to others, sickening to a few, but hopefully in the end worthwhile and enriching, opening before us new vistas in thinking, breaking old barriers and challenging the structures which served as mitigants to the progress of the Ummah in this regard.

Examples of Exemplary Leadership and Public Accountability of the Early Leaders of Islam

The coming of Islam and the establishment of the Madinatun-Nabi (also known as the prophetic state) marked a fountain of exemplary leadership in the area of Leadership and accountability. The spirit of Islam was trully watered with the the Sunnah of the Prophet (S.A.W.) was maintained throughout the reign of three out of the four caliphs of the early period and over a substantial part of the Caliphate of Uthman.

The shining examples set by Abubakar, Umar (RTA) and Ali(Karamallahu wajah) will not fit in the context of this paper,but we will try to do justice by noting some of their significant accomplishments.

After his election in Saqifah, the first khutbah of Abubakar (RA) set the tone for his leadership: "Now O People! I have been made your ruler though I am not the best among you. If I do what is right support me. If I do what is wrong set me right. Follow what is true for it contains faithfulness, avoid what is false for it contains treachery. The weaker among you shall in my eyes be the stronger, until, if Allah will, I have redressed his wrong; the stronger shall in my eyes be the weaker until, if Allah will, I have enforced justice upon him. Let the people not cease fighting in Allah's way lest He abase them; let not evil practices arise among the people, lest Allah bring punishment upon all of them. Obey me as I obey Allah and His messenger; if I disobey them, then do you disobey me". These are the words of a man changed neither his residence nor his mode of living when he became a ruler. He refused to take a salary until his companions forced him and even then, on his deathbed he commanded that all he had received from the treasury during his tenure should be counted up and repaid out of his property and his lands.”¹

Looking at the actions of the Second Caliph, Umar b. al-Khattab who said in his second sermon to his people: "O people! It is your duty, if I show certain evil qualities, to reprove me for them. You must see that I do not exact from you any tax or anything of what Allah has given you, except that which He allows. You must see that when I have control of the money nothing should be spent improperly…etc". This is 'Umar, who used to say: "The property of Allah has the same standing with me as that of an orphan; If I have no need of it, I will leave it untouched, and if I need it, I will take only what is right". Asked what his entitlement from the treasury should be, Umar replied: "Two sets of clothing, one for the summer, one for the winter. Enough to perform the Hajj and sufficient to provide me with food for myself and my household on the level of a man of Quraish who is neither overrich nor overpoor`. Beyond that I am an ordinary Muslim, and I share the lot of all Muslims"².

One cannot forget Ali (Karamallahu Wajhah), commander of the Faithful, who took over the caliphate at a time of great tumult, and who was grievously wronged by the dissent of some Companions? Ali who used to eat barley meal, hand ground by his wife, and who used to seal the meal-bag with the words "I like to know what is entering my stomach". Ali who as Amir used often to sell his sword to get money to buy food and clothing, who preferred living among the poor than stay in the capital of Kufah. 'Utba ibn 'Alqama once visited Ali and found him sitting with sour curds in front of him. Their sourness and dryness vexed 'Utba who said: " O Commander of the Faithful do you eat this stuff?" He answered " Abu Janub, Allah's Messenger used to eat it drier than this and used to wear clothes coarser than these" - and he pointed to his own clothes - "and if I do not accept what he did, then I fear I will not join him in the hereafter". The piety and asceticism of Ali are legendary.³

The leadership and governance of these three Companions were noteworthy, being both pious and steadfast.

The Umayyad Legacy of negative management.

It would be noted that we have skipped the third Caliph, Uthman (RA),also known as Zun-nurain, the son-in-law of the Prophet. Uthman, compiler of the Qur'an provider for the companions in times of need.

One cannot question the greatness of Uthman in Islam . But the truth, and the truth be said, is that no discussion of accountability and probity in Islam and how the Muslim Ummah lost these values is complete without a discussion of the reign of Uthman and, more profoundly, the rule of his clan, the Umayyads over the Muslim world.

The Caliphate was passed over to Uthman in old age and lasted for 12 years. The first six years were in keeping with the Sunnah of the Messenger and of the Shaykhayn (Abubakr and 'Umar). Then old age set in, and some of 'Uthman's greatest strengths became weaknesses - he loved his family, and in old age became hostage to them. He was generous in spirit and in old age allowed profligacy with public funds⁴. He held that as Imam he had the right to give public funds as gifts and allowances.

When Harith ibn al-Hakam married Uthman's daughter, the latter gave hin 200,000 dirhams from the public Treasury leading to a showdown with and removal of Zaid ibn Arqam from his position as treasurer. 'Uthman gave al-Zubair 600,000 dirhams one day, and Talha 200,000 and presented his cousin Marwan b. Hakam with one-fifth of the land tax of the entire province of Ifriqiyya. The Companions expostulated with him but he insisted that he had a duty to take care of his relatives and kinsmen.⁵

Most of the latter day actions of Uthman were carried out under the influence of his family, the Bamu Umayya. Abu Sufyan, the prophet's arch-enemy who refused to join Islam until the defeat of his forces in Makkah, and who even after joining Islam had nothing but contempt for Islamic values, especially the high esteem in which early Companions who he considered "slaves" like Bilal, Salman and Suhaib were held, was still alive. Like a mother-hen, he gathered his flock around him. He guided his son, Muawiya, his nephews Uthman and Marwan b. Hakam, and other Umayyads like al-Hakam b. al-As [who had been expelled by the prophet but rehabilitated by 'Uthman], Abdullah ibn. Sa'd ibn Abi Sarh, and so on. Marwan had unlimited control of the Treasury, he dispensed gifts as he wished, supported oppressive Umayyad governors and ruthlessly destroyed dissenting voices.⁶

Abu Zarr (RTA), the prophet's companion was exiled for his strident criticism of the prodigality of the Umayyads. At the end of the day, the excesses of Uthman's appointees led to the fitnah in which he was sadly killed. But the seeds of corruption had been sown. What was ironic in this period that became the trend for those who criticized abuse and holding these leaders accountable was either exile or assassination. This was the beginning of the fitnah (trials) that tested the Muslim leaders over accountability.

'Ali (Karamallahu Wajah) took over the Khilafah at a point when the Umayyads had been strengthened. They had control of armies and had amassed substantial wealth. Under the pretext of fighting for the blood of Uthman the Umayyads waged a war against the seat of Islamic power, the caliphate, but no sooner had Ali died than did it become apparent that all they wanted was power.

Muawiya appointed himself the "first of the Muslim Arab Kings", forced everyone to accept him and his conversion of the Khilafa into a hereditary monarchy with his son, Yazid as his successor. Muawiya fought Ali with the aid of the Kalbi Arab tribes and the old Syrian aristocracy and set up a new political economy which Nazih Ayubi describes as a "lineage/Iqta'i symbiosis". The Umayyads became feudal lords; their Jahili pride in Arab supremacy became once more ascendant and non-Arabs were gradually marginalized. All restrictions on the public treasury were removed and it became a legitimate source of public plunder for the kings, their courtiers and their sycophants.⁷

This was the system that lasted over one hundred years with the one exception of the Umayyad Caliph 'umar ibn Abdul-Aziz. So we see how in the formative period of Islam a corrupt aristocracy without regard for accountability and probity ruled the Ummah.

It is inevitable that the long reign of the Umayyads set the tone for how subsequent Muslim leaders would see themselves. The attitude continued throughout Islam's long history.

Even today, in the oil-rich sheikhdoms of the Muslim world, the Royal families are not accountable to the people in their management of the Treasury, to mince words, not exactly a paragon of accountability and probity.⁸

All of this has been made possible by an intellectual superstructure, a moral philosophy that encourages acquiescence to the rule of corrupt and despotic rulers. Although the Umayyads themselves were beneficiaries of a rebellion against Ali, it soon became standard Sunni doctrine that rebellion against unjust and corrupt rulers was unIslamic. In what follows I examine the nature of this philosophy, and then proceed to the legal superstructure to which it gave rise [in the name of the Shariah] before concluding.

Evolving Moral Ethics as Philosophy for Public Service and Accountability.

A system can not survive for a long time without conditioning the mind-set of the populace. The early Muslim monarchies, despite everything said above, played major roles in prosecuting Jihads and expanding the frontiers of the empire, providing the young faith with the political and military protection required for its survival.

Eventually as a process, people came to accept bribery and corruption as an acceptable feature of political leadership⁹.

This accommodation was attained partly by the genuine conviction that the benefits of political stability outweighed the costs of corruption; partly through the ruthless suppression of political dissent and denial of fundamental Human rights and freedoms¹⁰; but also largely through an elaborate philosophical framework, principally within Sunni Islam, which makes it an Islamic duty to "listen and obey" corrupt despots so long as they pray.

The question of ethics in public policy is a fundamental philosophical question, which is relevant to all states and societies. Islamic philosophy in all its dimensions ultimately goes back to the principle of Tawhid [Monotheism]. Allah is the source of all knowledge, all guidance, all existence and all morality. A truly Islamic epistemology, ethic, ideology or science must therefore find its locus within the Divine Reality, and fit into the essential unity of Allah, the One.

It seems to me that somewhere along the line, Islamic ethics in the area of public policy lost its essential contact with Divine Reality. The ulama, deliberately or by accident, gave prominence to certain hadiths which were interpreted in a manner that made it incumbent on people to and accept leaders who were lacking in ethics of leadership and accountability. This was the experience of Sunni Islam in a lot of the states that their leaders were elected or taken hold of positions.

Due to circumstances of history, a different trend occurs among the Shiites, due to a history of being oppressed by the ruling class and a history of martyrdom among its leaders the principle of 'Adliyah, [justice] like the Imamah, [leadership] is one of the Pillars of Islam according to Shii thought. ¹¹

Most of the philosophical discourse around Adl roots it squarely in the principle of Tawhid. Allah is a Just Lord, Who loves Truth and Honesty. It is therefore inconceivable that anyone who believes in Allah can perpetrate or tolerate injustice.¹²

It is in a similar vein that other sects like the Kharijites resisted the attempt by early Muslims to exclude certain groups from leadership on account of clan, tribe, race or even gender. It was considered inconsistent with Divine Justice as expressed clearly in the Qur'an.¹³

Bringing us to the question of ethics, which is a recurring debate in philosophy. According to Iris Murdoch,a British moral Philosopher, who believed in the metaphysical foundation of morality. She argues convincingly for the existence of a metaphysical reality, the Good, which we perceive by our very perception of the imperfection of our world. Yet having laid the foundation for a metaphysical ethics, Murdoch says the Good is not God - she accepts the existence of this transcendental Reality but denies the Reality a will and an effect. To the best of my understanding, this is the point of departure between Iris Murdoch and moral philosophers among Christian Theologians.

The debate in our own moral philosophy is similar. Our scholars [by which is implied Sunni Scholars and Theologians] have never gone to the extent of denying Allah a role in our lives. What they have done, in the context of the ethics of public officers is to build a shield between our morality and its source, the Divine presence¹⁴.

Our metaphysics is not in substance Murdochian, yet it effectively lands us in the same muddles as Iris Murdoch. A Muslim who believes in Allah the All-seeing [Al-Basir] does not lock himself in a room and turnout the light believing he can commit injustices and be impartial to his constituents and escape. The same with one who believes in Al-Sami' [the All-Hearing]. He does not speak things in private, which are prohibited by Allah. In exactly the same way, a Muslim who believes in Allah the Just can not stand injustice. Corruption, nepotism and abuse of office are manifestations of injustice.¹⁵

Corruption in the Muslim psyche has been facilitated by the severance of the organic link between our moral philosophy and its Metaphysical roots in the Divine Reality. A proper apprehension of Allah, His Beautiful Names(al-asma' al-husna) and His Exalted Attributes(as-sifat al-'ula) must necessarily transform our ethic such that we not only seek to imbibe or emulate the moral good, we actually are moved, compelled, to seek its enthronement.

As a result, the greatest tragedy in Sunni thought is its hatred of philosophy and philosophers and its enthronement of the legalistic rulings of jurists over all facets of our life. The priorities and constraints of the environment in which the jurists lived often conditioned these rulings.

The continued refusal of this Ummah to break away from the constriction of taqlid ("blind copying") and the closing of the door to ijtihad will only lead to a perpetuation of the social structures, priorities and value-systems of the environments in which the rulings were made.

Even the authenticity of hadiths and the validity of their interpretation must be established after accounting for the impact of the environment on the narrators and interpreters. Most fundamentally, the principles of Tawhid, an apprehension the Allah's Asma' [Names] and Sifat [Attributes], must continue to be the inspiration for our moral, political and other philosophies. We will now briefly touch on the Shariah and how the ascendant philosophical outlook has restricted its scope.

The Shariah and Public Sector Corruption.

In the time of the prophet [S. A. W.] the government was not a major economic force. The role of the prophet was largely that of a guide, a judge and a military commander.

The government treasury received zakat and fai' for distribution but the major revenue flows and expenditures on social welfare, defence and the bureaucracy that later came to typify the state were virtually non-existent - It is natural that the crime of public sector corruption should not be a major feature of such a society not just because of the limited finance of the state but also, and more fundamentally, because of the quality of persons managing these funds and the presence of the Prophet of Allah among them.

Thus although the Qur'an did come up with verses which showed the prohibition of corruption, its occurrence was rare and its punishment /deterrence was therefore not the pre-occupation of the Shariah at that stage . We find a greater focus on offences like theft, adultery, intoxication and slander - crimes of a largely personal nature, which was a reflection of the limited nature of public sector crimes.

With the passage of time and the conquest of the early empire, the coffers of the state were filled with treasures managed by human beings whose fear of Allah was decreasing by the day. Corruption became a cancer in public life, as we have shown.

The Umayyads established a hereditary kingship, nepotism and the appropriation of booty and property and profits.

Muawiya himself made it clear in his sermon in Kufa and Madinah that he had fought for power and would reap the benefits from it. The early Muslims did fight against this Umayyad mind-set. There was the great rebellion against 'Uthman. Then there was the rebellion of the Hijaz against Yazid ibn Muawiya.

There was the Qarmatian revolt. All of these and many more were directed against exploitation, arbitrary power, class distinction and other features of a system without accountability and probity.

The striking thing about all of this is that the fight against corruption was always waged by those outside the establishment. ¹⁶

Throughout the reign of the Umayyads, Abbasids, Fatimids etc, the Muslim world was governed by the Shariah, and by the system of civil and criminal Law recognised as distinctive of Muslim societies. Zakat was collected, the hands of thieves were cut off, and the courts continued to administer capital punishment for murder, apostasy and rebellion.

Yet those who supervised the implementation of Shariah were themselves corrupt - and, seemingly, above the law. This is the question that I hope to address.

We would like to contextualize that this form of corruption has not only existed only in our forebears , but also is prevalent in different parts of the Muslim world and even here in the Philippines, particularly in the ARMM areas.

A government can claim to be implementing Shariah, cut off the hands of a thief who steals a cow or money, force women to dress in a particular way, collect zakat for distribution etc, without coming out with strong sanction for corruption in public office. This has been the problem of the Taliban, although it had insisted that it was engaging in the implementation of Islamic law, it however was one of the biggest traffickers of illegal drugs and narcotics, having the largest opium poppy fields in the world.

This has led some people to the false impression that the Shariah is a law designed to punish the poor while allowing leaders to go scot-free. Nothing can be further from the truth.

We would like to impress that what is described above is inconsistent with Shariah, but its interpretation by society at different points in time in a manner consistent with the dominant world-view of the leaders and ulama in that society. It is not the eternal law revealed by Allah but its interpretation and crystalisation in time and space.

It is perhaps fair to say that the rudimentary nature of political structures in the Muslim world, the absence of effective checks and balances and the low political consciousness of civil society have contributed to this state of affairs. It is however, equally important to recognize fundamental flaws in our understanding of Islamic Law.

Criminal/Civil Law in Islam divides offences, from the perspective of sanction, into three categories. Hadd offences [jara'im al-hudud] are those which attract a fixed and non-negotiable punishment once established. These include adultery & fornication, apostasy, drinking, rebellion, slander and highway robbery. Qisas and Diyah offences [jara'im al - qisas wad-diyah] are those which are retributive in nature, but which can be substituted by some payment in kind as restitution, or forgiven by the injured party or his heirs¹⁷. These include murder, manslaughter and bodily harm. A third category, Ta'zeer offences [jara'im at-ta'azeer] refers to everything that is prohibited in the Qur'an or Sunnah but for which a punishment is not prescribed under Hadd or Qisas and Diyah. Understanding this point is critical to understanding Islamic Civil and Criminal Law. There has been a lot of polemic over the limits of punishment for ta'azeer offences. Abdul Rahman 'Audah has a detailed discussion of these including justification for including offences not specified in the Qur'an and Sunnah but which affect "general interest" of society, in his classic work on Islamic Criminal Law [at-tashri' al-jina'I al-Islami]¹⁸

What interests us here is that for all offences defined as Ta'azir offences the Shariah provides a range of sanctions.

These are:

a] threat of punishment

b] whipping or caning

c] humiliation

d] detention or jailing

e] crucifixion or execution

f] exile.

These offences have been extracted by scholars from the Qur'an, Sunnah and Ijma'.

Now we know that the Qur'an prohibits many things without specifying the punishment for the offenders. For example, we know that bribery is an offence, that nepotism, in the sense of appointing an incompetent person to office, is an offence, that consuming wealth of orphans is an offence, that spreading fasad [evil] and fahisha [obscenity] among the Ummah are offences etc. If the Hakim at a point in time chooses not to punish an offence severely [and we have said his options are as severe as the death sentence] it is not because the Shariah does not provide for it but because either the judge or the government does not consider it a problem.

As we live in an environment in which these offences bother all of us, [corruption, religious intolerance, destruction of places of worship, mediocrity in the name of quota system, tribalism and ethnic genocide etc.] we must remember that Sharia explicitly prohibits each of them and also allows the state to punish with a range of punishments including jailing and death. The choice however reflects our own values, not of the Shariah.

That corruption has for so long remained unpunished is a reflection of the underlying moral philosophy, which has come to permeate our collective consciousness, deadening the sense of outrage and revulsion against this heinous and cancerous crime.

Reflection:

The Qur’an calls for fair, open and ethical behavior in all dealings and transactions. As one example, Verse 2:282 requires that financial transactions be made through witnessed, written contracts. Numerous other verses exhort believers to fulfill their contracts faithfully and testify honestly (see, e.g., Verses 4:135, 5: 89. or 5:108). Honesty, accountability, reliable bookkeeping, and dependability should be the hallmarks of Muslim organizations.

Nonetheless, as the Quran asserts, the lapses of others do not offer any excuse for lapses on our own part (see, for instance, Verse 5:8 which teaches Muslims that hatred or prejudice are never a reason to swerve from justice). The standards of accountability and transparency laid out in the Qur’an are the standards we should aim for, whether or not we receive approbation from the greater community, and whether or not they have different standards for Muslim versus non-Muslim organizations.

Calm response to any criticism, whether or not that criticism is fair, is consistent with Qur’anic exhortations to gentle discourse, rational debate, and the Islamic tradition of courtesy (see, for instance, 6:125). Not only does rational discourse fulfill Qur’anic ideals, but it presents the community in a favorable light, and illuminates the hostility behind ill-motivated attacks.

These principles go far beyond organizational proprieties. They extend to our ability to address larger issues. Yes, the crisis in Darfur has roots in neo-colonialism and global warming; yes, female genital mutilation and so-called “honor killings” are cultural practices and not really Islamic; but whatever the cause or scope of the problems in the community of believers we must be responsible and accountable if we are ever to solve them.

Simply put, a problem involving Muslims, whether or not it is an Islamic issue, is a Muslim problem. It is never enough to neglect our internal housekeeping by making excuses or blaming others. We have a duty as Muslims to improve ourselves and our world. From the smallest problem to the most complex, we can only find solutions by being open and responsible.

We have attempted to cover in this paper the origin and nature of corruption in the public affairs of the Muslim Ummah, the philosophy which has nourished it and the legal superstructure which, elaborate as it is, has been seemingly designed by lawmakers to side-step it. We would like to emphasized that we have not yet exhausted all the issues relevant to this topic. It is hoped that this paper has given us all food for thought and contributed to our outstanding of Islamic history, philosophy and law.

If this paper may have sounded too critical of some aspects of Muslim thought, please accept this clarification: the writer has implicit respect and love for generations gone by.

However, no one is perfect and it is only by learning from mistakes of the past and questioning "received wisdom" that change is possible. "Allah does not change what is with a people unless they change themselves".

It should be self-evident that any and all public organizations should adhere to ethics of conduct that include transparency of responsibility and bookkeeping. We appreciate that such a simple, clear standard is complicated by mounting government secrecy, racism, Islamophobia, and xenophobia, but even with these considerations in mind, we affirm that organizational and financial transparency, and being open to constructive criticism are in the best interest of all organizations.

Selected Bibliography:

• Quranil Kareem, various commentators and editions

• Nahjul Balagha, various commentators and publishers

• Sahih Bukhari,_________________

• Sahih Muslim, _____________

• Al-Murajaat, by Abdul Husayn Sharafuddin Musawi

• Inna Maassadiqin, by Muhammad Tijani as-Samawi

• Shia, by Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr

• Teachings of Islam in Brief, by Allamah Hussein Tabatabai'e

• Introduction to Fiqah, by Muhammad Baqr As-Sadr

1Sahih Al-Bukhari 1/69;Sahih Muslim 1/306

2ibid

3Razi, Syed, Sharh Nahjul Balagha, Darul Iman, Beirut Lebanon

4Musawi, Abdul-Husayn Sharaffuddin, Al-Murajaat, Darul Liban, Beirut, Lebanon 1355 AH/1936 CE

5As-Samawi, Muhammad Al-Tijani, Inna Maasadiqin, Darul Liban Beirut Lebanon,1975

6ibid

7Ibid

8Speech of Usama Bn Laden, released August 21, 2003

9This became the rallying point of findamentalists that Muslim leaders have become corrupt and has lost taste for following Islamic Law and thus managed to get people into fundamentalism, thus causing more harm than benefit

10Speech of Usama Bn Laden, released August 21, 2003

11Nasr, Seyyed Hossein, Shi'a, Ansariyyan Publications, 1998, Qum, IRAN

12ibid

13Razi, Syed, Sharh Nahjul Balagha, Darul Iman, Beirut Lebanon

14ibid

15“Letter of Imam Ali to Malik Ashtar upon deputizing his as Governor of Egypt”, Razi, Syed, Sharh Nahjul Balagha, Darul Iman, Beirut Lebanon

16Tabatabaie, Allamah Husain, Islamic Teachings in Brief, WOFIS, 1985, Tehran Iran

17Baqr As-Sadr, Muhammad, Introduction to Fiqh, Darul Imaan, 1975, Beirut Lebanon

18

Reflections on the first to third chapters of Aqeedah Tahawiyyah

Reflections from Reading Aqeedah Tahawiyyah

I have recently been reading Aqeedah Tahawiyah prepared in English by Shaykh Muhammad bn Yahya Ninowy (may Allah prolong his life and bless him for his efforts). Aqeedah tahawiyyah is one of the simpliest and easiest manuals in explaining Islamic aqeedah without creating any conflicts.

It was Shaykh Ahmad (may Allah bless him) who forwarded me some materials and guides... I eventually started reading it alone and now am reading it with Sister Nur. She has been very supporting and guiding as to how the text is being read (studied with a teacher). We have been done last Saturday morning with chapters one to three. And I appreciate and am very glad with how I saw things .

I have decided to write my reflections and understandings of the first three chapters as a result of my readings.

It is important to note in the words of Shaykh Muhammad bn Yahya Ninowy that, “Aqeedah is Islam, as it constitutes our faith, must be found on unshakeable convistions and established beyond doubt, therefore Muslims are demanded to search for the indisputable truth, base their aqeedah on sound convictions and naturally...use their intellect and oppose blind imitation.”

As this being the basis of our path, I put my reflections on the feet of the illustrious scholars to see if indeed it is under the shade of the aqeedah of Islam.

One must understand that indeed Tawheed or the path of understanding tawheed is a knowledge acquisition process. Although basiocally worship for the laymen is learning by imitation (taqlid) of the scholars as taught through the chains of transmission). It must be emphasized that people ( Muslims in particular) become accountable to Allah for their actions and decisions on the basis of their knowledge ... and that belief must always be substantiated by knowledge. It would be best be put in the principle of : belief=knowledge+understanding and faith=belief+satisfaction. One must always consider that the main role of aqeedah is to teach tawheed in effect teach man the correct set of beliefs and valuesto prepare one's heart for the correct state of belief. (perhaps prepare him for yaqeen)

A lot of people conceive Monotheism as tawheed. Perhaps it may be so and it may not be so.Tawheed establishes what is the limitations and concepts when associated with understanding how to aproach things. How to know the gulf that separates the One who has created and the created. The verse in Surah ikhlas is the best parameter to use, “wa lam yakoon lahu kufuwan ahad”.

Reflecting on what are the basic prerequisites to studying Aqeedah tahawiyyah indeed it is but important that the following which I have found to be trully important among them was that worship and obedience is always the result of applying acquired religious knowledge. And that this acquired knowled is required to be put into action. Remebering that every act of worship must be firmly grounded on correct knowledge. Mere intentions are not enough.The path to faith must be based on the correct understanding and knolwdge of Faith, Islam and Tawheed.

There are 4 things that I have realize as a result:

1. To possess correct knowledge one must go back to the basics so that all succeeding efforts to acquiring knowledge will bebguided from the basics

2. Correct actions only will come from correct knowledge

3. Good intentions and acttions are not enough but must be firmly based on correct and accurate knowledge

4. We are mandated to acquire knowledge.

A very notable part of the discussion and reading is that one must acquire knowledge from a teacher and not mere books. One taking ones knowledge directly from a book is a suhufi, bereft of the guidance and teaching of a teacher. A good point to consider here also is that books can never answer back your questions in detail, and that teachers contain the sum of all his personal knowledge, experiences as well as that of the teacher who had preceeded him or her. Thus this is indeed one of the very important reasons why transmission of knowledge through teachers is needed. I have discovered in this process the five (5) criterias in acquiring knowledge:

1. Sincerity to Alah

2. Great effort must be exerted in this process

3. Take knowledge from someone who posesses it (a teacher not simply a book or a person who has learned through a book)

4. Students must employ proper etiquette with their teachers

5. Humility and kindness.

Tawheed is made up of two categories, one is fard/obligatory to be understood personally like the five pillar and 6 fundamentals of belief and second is the communal obligations wlike understanding the precepts and basis of Islamic teachings and the ability to refute those who are teaching the wrong concepts.

When one possess knowledge it is a divine task upon him to impart it to others like truth being told . And that finally ones words and speeches should never be without basis.

Wa salaatu wa salaamu alal ashrafil anbiya'ah wal mursalin wal hamdulillah hirabeel alameen.

Youth Views

Youth Views~ Taking dialogue to the next level Joshua M. Z. Stanton

Jerusalem - In recent years, peacebuilders have recognised the need for interfaith discussion. It is no longer difficult to find a medium for dialogue. Churches, mosques, temples and synagogues, as well as a myriad of non-profit organisations, offer programmes centred on dialogue between members of different religious traditions. Yet many of these well-intentioned initiatives succumb to an unproductive default: we are all really just the same. Fundamentally rooted in politeness, such notions overlook the differences that do exist between religious traditions and inhibit conversation about the topics that actually cause friction between communities. The real challenge in interfaith dialogue is finding a way to effectively engage difficult topics. Doing so holds the potential to bring a deeper level of understanding between religious communities and a significant reduction in tension. Recently, I had the chance to meet with Muslim and Jewish high school students participating in the Face to Face programme, sponsored by the Interreligious Coordinating Council in Israel (ICCI). The group is said to be the only inter-religious programme for youth in Israel that continued to meet regularly even after the outbreak of the recent conflict in Gaza. Their strategy for success was not to avoid feelings of anger and grief in the course of meetings, but to guide the expression of these sentiments. Some Muslim students in the group had relatives living in Gaza who were directly impacted by the war. Some of the Jewish students worried about siblings in the Israeli military and the threat of Hamas rocket strikes against civilian areas in Israel. Many of the group’s meetings during and after the war were tense, with voices raised and tears shed. But because of careful facilitation by the groups’ leaders – who provided simultaneous translations in Hebrew and Arabic and encouraged students to focus on issues surrounding the war rather than blaming one another for its occurrence – the group held together. Just a couple of months after the war, the students were able to sit together again and laugh over a meal of hummus and falafel. As one student proudly reflected, eliciting nods from other participants, “If we were able to get through those times without hating each other, nothing can keep us from being friends.” The recently-founded Journal of Inter-Religious Dialogue (www.irdialogue.org) hopes to follow the ICCI’s example by facilitating dialogue about social, political and cultural issues affecting religious communities around the world, including those most challenging to discuss. By approaching contentious issues in an academic manner, it will provide a new means of engaging on matters that often underlie inter-religious interaction but are seldom discussed. In so doing, we hope to provide a stronger basis for collaborative efforts and intellectual cross-pollination between religious communities. The journal began to take shape in June 2008, when I approached Stephanie Hughes, Student Senate co-Chair at Union Theological Seminary, with an idea for a kind of inter-religious publication that goes a step beyond the present literature on inter-religious dialogue. As a rabbinical student, I felt motivated to find a partner from another religious background equally invested in the ideas of mutual respect, learning and collaboration. Having formed a strong partnership, the two of us set off to found what became the Journal of Inter-Religious Dialogue Neither of us held a PhD, but both of us felt compelled by our traditions to contribute to inter-religious work and study. In recognising our own limited experience in formal academic scholarship, we found a niche as facilitators who could both encourage and guide discussions. While the first issue of the journal, scheduled for release on 1 May 2009, will be dedicated to the dynamics of dialogue itself, subsequent issues will address topics that participants in inter-religious dialogue often shy away from. Thus the second issue in October 2009 will be entitled, “Engaging the Taboo: Gender, the Body, and Sexuality in our Religious Traditions”, and the third issue in March 2010 will focus on the role that religion can play in both fomenting and preventing violence. The journal’s goal is to bring scholars together with activists and non-profit leaders to discuss these topics. By drawing members of all three groups together to learn, discuss and debate on a free online platform, we hope to promote innovative programming within the field. Moreover, because of its electronic format, the journal will be accessible to an international audience of seminarians, professors, and religious and civic leaders. The inter-religious dialogue, work and scholarship will often take place locally, but lessons learnt can be applied globally. By engaging with some of the most difficult, yet important, topics in interfaith dialogue, we know these lessons will be worthwhile. ### * Joshua Stanton is co-founder and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Inter-Religious Dialogue (www.irdialogue.org) and a rabbinical student at Hebrew Union College. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Can Sufi Islam be an alternative to Radical Salafism?

Can Sufi Islam counter the Taleban?

Some believe that Pakistan's mystic, non-violent Islam can be used as a defence against extremism (Photos: Kamil Dayan Khan)

a corner of the upper courtyard at the shrine of Baba Shah Jamal in Lahore, famous for its Thursday night drumming sessions.

It's packed with young men, smoking, swaying to the music, and working themselves into a state of ecstasy.

This isn't how most Westerners imagine Pakistan, which has a reputation as a hotspot for Islamist extremism.

Devotional singing

But this popular form of Sufi Islam is far more widespread than the Taleban's version. It's a potent brew of mysticism, folklore and a dose of hedonism.

Advertisement

Inside the Sufi drumming session at the shrine of Baba Shah Jamal

Now some in the West have begun asking whether Pakistan's Sufism could be mobilised to counter militant Islamist ideology and influence.

Lahore would be the place to start: it's a city rich in Sufi tradition.

At the shrine of Data Ganj Bakhsh Hajveri, musicians and singers from across the country also gather weekly, to perform qawwali, or Islamic devotional singing.

Qawwali is seen as a key part of the journey to the divine, what Sufis call the continual remembrance of God.

"When you listen to other music, you will listen for a short time, but the qawwali goes straight inside," says Ali Raza, a fourth generation Sufi singer.

"Even if you can't understand the wording, you can feel the magic of the qawwali, this is spiritual music which directly touches your soul and mind as well."

But Sufism is more than music. At a house in an affluent suburb of Lahore a group of women gathers weekly to practise the Sufi disciplines of chanting and meditation, meant to clear the mind and open the heart to God.

One by one the devotees recount how the sessions have helped them deal with problems and achieve greater peace and happiness. This more orthodox Sufism isn't as widespread as the popular variety, but both are seen as native to South Asia.

'Love and harmony'

"Islam came to this part of the world through Sufism," says Ayeda Naqvi, a teacher of Islamic mysticism who's taking part in the chanting.

"It was Sufis who came and spread the religious message of love and harmony and beauty, there were no swords, it was very different from the sharp edged Islam of the Middle East.

"And you can't separate it from our culture, it's in our music, it's in our folklore, it's in our architecture. We are a Sufi country, and yet there's a struggle in Pakistan right now for the soul of Islam."

Sufism is a mixture of music, chanting and meditation

That struggle is between Sufism and hard-line Wahhabism, the strict form of Sunni Islam followed by members of the Taleban and al-Qaeda.

It has gained ground in the tribal north-west, encouraged initially in the 1980s by the US and Saudi Arabia to help recruit Islamist warriors to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

But it's alien to Pakistan's Sufi heartland in the Punjab and Sindh provinces, says Sardar Aseff Ali, a cabinet minister and a Sufi.

"Wahhabism is a tribal form of Islam coming from the desert sands of Saudi Arabia," he says. "This may be very attractive to the tribes in the frontier, but it will never find resonance in the established societies of Pakistan."

So could Pakistan's mystic, non-violent Islam be used as a defence against extremism?

An American think tank, the Rand Corporation, has advocated this, suggesting support for Sufism as an "open, intellectual interpretation of Islam".

There is ample proof that Sufism remains a living tradition.

In the warren of Lahore's back streets, a shrine is being built to a modern saint, Hafiz Iqbal, and his mentor, a mystic called Baba Hassan Din. They attract followers from all classes and walks of life.

'Atrocities'

The architect is Kamil Khan Mumtaz. He describes in loving detail his traditional construction techniques and the spiritual principles they symbolise.

Huge crowds are attracted to Sufi gatherings

He shakes his head at stories of lovely old mosques and shrines pulled down and replaced by structures of concrete and glass at the orders of austere mullahs, and he's horrified at atrocities committed in the name of religion by militant Islamists.

But he doubts that Sufism can be marshalled to resist Wahhabi radicalism, a phenomenon that he insists has political, not religious, roots.

"The American think tanks should think again," he says. "What you see [in Islamic extremism] is a response to what has happened in the modern world.

"There is a frustration, an anger, a rage against invaders, occupiers. Muslims ask themselves, what happened?

"We once ruled the world and now we're enslaved. This is a power struggle, it is the oppressed who want to become the oppressors, this has nothing to do with Islam, and least of all to do with Sufism."

Sufi people are often actively engaged in social welfare programmes

Ayeda Naqvi, on the other hand, believes Sufism could play a political role to strengthen a tolerant Islamic identity in Pakistan. But she warns of the dangers of Western support.

"I think if it's done it has to be done very quietly because a lot of people here are allergic to the West interfering," she says.

"So even if it's something good they're doing, they need to be discreet because you don't want Sufism to be labelled as a movement which is being pushed by the West to drown out the real puritanical Islam."

Back at the Shah Jamal shrine I couldn't feel further from puritanical Islam. The frenzied passion around me suggests that Pakistan's Sufi shrines won't be taken over by the Taleban any time soon.

But whether Sufism can be used to actively resist the spread of extremist Islam, or even whether it should be, is another question.

Tariq ramadhan Comments on Meeting the Pope

Professor of Islamic studies and senior research fellow at St. Antony’s College at Oxford University and at Lokahi Foundation, Tariq Ramadan looks back at Pope Benedict XVI’s comments at Regensburg in September 2006, which were widely as being divisive between Muslims and Christians, and argues for a positive partnership between adherents of both faiths.

Why I went to meet the Pope
Tariq Ramadan

London - Now that the shock waves touched off by Pope Benedict XVI’s remarks at Regensburg on 12 September 2006 have subsided, the overall consequences have proven more positive than negative. Above and beyond polemics, the Pope’s lecture has heightened general awareness of their respective responsibilities among Christians and Muslims in the West.

It matters little whether the Pope had simply misspoken or, as the highest-ranking authority of the Catholic Church, was enunciating church policy. Now the issue is one of identifying those areas in which a full-fledged debate between Catholicism and Islam must take place. Papal references to “jihad” and “Islamic violence” came as a shock to Muslims, even though they were drawn from a quotation attributed to Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos.

It is clear that the time has come to open debate on the common theological underpinnings and the shared foundations of the two religions. The appeal by Muslim religious leaders, “A Common Word”, had precisely this intention: our traditions have the same source, the same single God who calls upon us to respect human dignity and liberty.

These same traditions raise identical questions concerning the ultimate purpose of human activity, and respect for ethical principles.

In a world that is experiencing an unprecedented global crisis, a world in which politics, finance and relations between humans and the environment suffer from a cruel lack of conscience and ethical integrity, it is a matter of greatest urgency that Christian-Muslim dialogue turn its attention to both theological issues and to those of values and ultimate aims.

Our task is not to create a new religious alliance against the “secularised” and “immoral” world order, but to make a constructive contribution to the debate, to prevent the logic of economics and war from destroying what remains of our common humanity.

Our constructive dialogue on shared values and ultimate goals is far more vital and imperative than our rivalries over the number of believers, our contradictory claims about proselytism and sterile competition over exclusive possession of the truth.

Those dogma-ridden individuals who, in both religions, claim truth for themselves are, in fact, working against their respective beliefs.

Whoever claims that he/she alone possesses the truth, that “falsehood belongs to everybody else…” has already fallen into error. Our dialogue must resist the temptation of dogmatism by drawing upon a comprehensive, critical and constantly respectful confrontation of ideas.

Ours must be a dialogue whose seriousness requires of us, above all else, humility.

We must delve deep into history the better to engage a true dialogue of civilisations. Fear of the present can impose upon the past its own biased vision. Surprisingly, the Pope asserted that Europe’s roots were Greek and Christian, as if responding to the perceived threat of the Muslim presence in Europe.

His reading, as I noted after the lecture at Regensburg, is a reductive one.

We must return to the factual reality of the past, to the history of ideas. When we do so, it quickly becomes clear that the so-called opposition between the West and the Muslim world is pure projection, an ideological instrument if you will, designed to construct entities that can be opposed or invited to dialogue, depending on circumstances.

But the West has been shaped by Muslims, just as the Muslim world has been shaped by the West; it is imperative that a critical internal process of reflection begin: that the West and Europe initiate an internal debate, exactly as must Islam and the Muslims, with a view to reconciling themselves with the diversity and the plurality of their respective pasts.

The debate between faith and reason, and over the virtues of rationalism, is a constant in both civilisations, and is, as such, far from exclusive to the Greek or Christian heritage. Neither is it the sole prerogative of the Enlightenment.

The Pope’s remarks at Regensburg have opened up new areas of inquiry that must be explored and exploited in a positive way, with a view to building bridges and, working hand-in-hand, to seek a common response to the social, cultural and economic challenges of our day.

It is in this spirit that I participated on 4-6 November in Rome, and in a meeting with the Pope on 6 November. Our task was to assume our respective and shared responsibilities, and to commit ourselves to working for a more just world, in full respect of beliefs and liberties.

It is essential, then, to speak of freedom of conscience, of places of worship, of the “argument of reciprocity”; all questions are possible in an atmosphere of mutual confidence and respect.

Still, it is essential that each of us sit down at the table with the humility that consists of not assuming that we alone possess the truth; with the respect that requires that we listen to our neighbours and recognise their differences; and, finally, the coherence that summons each of us to maintain a critical outlook in accepting the contradictions that may exist between the message and the practice of believers.

These are the essential elements to be respected if we are to succeed.

###

* Tariq Ramadan is a professor of Islamic studies and senior research fellow at St. Antony’s College, Oxford University and at Lokahi Foundation in London. He is also president of the European think tank, the European Muslim Network (EMN), in Brussels.

For more information about “A Common Word” please visit www.acommonword.com. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from the author.

Source: TariqRamadan.com, 4 November 2008, www.tariqramadan.com
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Pakistan's mystical Islam thrives

By Asim Butt, Karachi

The Abdullah Shah Ghazi shrine is a magnet for devotees

The mystical form of Islam espoused by Sufi saints for hundreds of years continues to thrive in Pakistan despite opposition from religious hardliners and the authorities.

As the sun sets on a Thursday evening, hundreds of working class people descend on a shrine to the eighth-century mystic, Abdullah Shah Ghazi, in Karachi.

The shrine is located on a hill in the upmarket Clifton district of Pakistan's financial capital, flanked by swanky shopping malls and the posh residential area of Defence.

In the grounds below the shrine gather electricians, plumbers, construction workers, vagabonds, transvestites, prostitutes. Encircled by a cheering crowd, men take turns in a weightlifting competition.

Another circle dances to the drumbeat of the shrine's dhol players.

Devotional singing, or "qawali", emanates from an enclosure adjacent to the open grounds, yet another crowd swaying under its spell.

Holy nights

The men, for this public space is overwhelmingly male-dominated, belong to all the ethnicities and sects that make up Pakistan, mixing freely in a city rife with divisions.

Many homeless people are drawn to the shrine's grounds

Food stalls, bonfires, stereo-players, huddles of ganja-smoking men, smaller ones of heroin users, others swigging local brews, make up this multi-ethnic weekly party that rocks into the early hours of the morning.

Although Thursdays are traditionally holy nights when devotees pray at Sufi shrines, the revelry at Shah Ghazi seems to have little to do with prayer.

Music, dance and drugs, though proscribed by orthodox Islam, are the traditional vehicles of devotion here - as they are at most shrines in Pakistan.

Sufism has historically provided Islam with an alternative to orthodoxy and has won it most of its converts.

Sufi saints created mass appeal through their merging with pre-existing faiths of the region and their ability to align themselves with popular interests.

The mass appeal of saints like Shah Ghazi and others persists in spite of 200 years of opposition from puritanical reformers and the state.

From the late 19th century on, reformers sought to purify Islam by rejecting elements they believe had crept in through Sufism.

Exiled

Under the colonial regime, although landed Sufis were used as intermediaries between government and subjects, ascetics were seen as a threat and criminalised.

The shrine is also a centre of entertainment

Similarly, while ancient Sufis were viewed as genuine agents of spirituality, living mystics were dismissed as frauds.

The 19th Century Sufi, Mewa Shah, also buried in Karachi, was jailed and eventually exiled by the British.

According to legend, Mewa Shah alighted the ship taking him into exile, said his prayers on the waves of the Arabian Sea and mounted a large fish which took him back to the shores of Karachi.

Post-colonial Pakistan has had a schizophrenic policy towards Sufi shrines.

By subsuming them under the Auqaf department, the state has sought to weaken the powers of the spiritual heirs of the saints.

Established under Ayub Khan in 1959, the Auqaf department received its charter from Javed Iqbal, the son of Pakistan's founding visionary poet, Mohammad Iqbal, who actually bemoaned the superstitions of Indian Muslims.

Karachi's dispossessed come for free food

The pamphlets published by the department expunged the miraculous from the legends, repainting the lives of Sufi saints in a modernist light.

The powers of the department were expanded further under the pseudo-socialist government of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in 1976 and have persisted through Zia ul-Haq's Islamist dictatorship and Pervez Musharraf's rule of "enlightened moderation".

Meanwhile, state functionaries and politicians have continued to seek legitimacy from the shrines by turning prayer visits into public appearances and photo opportunities.

Although tributes paid by devotees are siphoned through the Auqaf department, alms are also received by the dozen or so kitchens that run along the front of the shrine.

The money is used to provide two daily meals to anyone in need. The most destitute thus encamp outside the shrine, among them glue-sniffing runaway children, heroin addicts and other homeless men and women.

The Sufi shrines offer the underclass spiritual sustenance, a social valve of entertainment, and a safety net of free rations.

It is a bond that has not been loosened by militant Islam.

Islamic Pluralism as a tool for understanding others.

(a paper presented by Yusuf Roque Morales in the Interreligious conference held last August at the Dela Salle University Manila)

Introduction:

In the Name of God, Most Merciful and Most Compassionate, Lord of Humanity.

“The people were one community(Ummah); then God sent forth the Prophets, Good Tidings to bear and warning, He sent down with them the Book with the truth, that He might decide the people touching their differences.”

(Surah al-Baqarah :213)

I would like to quote words from a former Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Barrister Abdul Rehaman,”During my researches, false ideas about Islam are still popular... and that misunderstanding and misinterpretations has added to the further ignorance about Islam. Essentially a system of peace, Islam presents a non-antagonistic view of all religious systems.”¹

The Potential problems of Inter-Religious and intercultural Dialogue intensify in proportion to the exclusivity of the religious doctrine. Exclusivist Religious orientations and belief system can become divisive forces that can aggravate religious conflicts that can rip the fragile national psyche of a nation and in the context of multi-cultural societies retard the emergence of a national identity of a people. We have seen these things happen countless times.

We have seen that not only in the Muslim world alone that whenever religion permeates the national culture, Religious tradition maintains an active interest in issues of national politics and social justice. In the Muslim context the limit of strictly religious values in determining the national policies of a Muslim Nation state have never been fully explained or generally accepted by Muslim communities, thus creating a gray area in relating to current issues.

Currently there has been in existence Muslim nation states that seek to manifest the “Islamic or Muslim “ character of their country and thus in the process may seek to express their particular world-view on particularly religious moral precepts.

The Fear of Westoxification (Ghrabzadeghi) still exists around although this is manifested in diverse forms. And since classical Islamic Juridical thought is being taught still up to the present, the dual world-view of Darul Harb and darul Islam is still being perceived by the Western media as the dominant world-view of Muslims globally.

However it would be meritorious to note that although this is true to some extent that due to the existence of groups who try to fossilize Islamic thought, notably there are indeed evidences that indeed even in our own sacred texts, there are divine ordinances that order us to talk or do dialogue with other faiths, and that even the Beloved Prophet Muhammad (Salawatullahi alayhi) has conducted dialogue or has ordered his companions to do dialogue.

In the last three decade, religion has re-emerged as an important source of moral imperative needed to maintain social cohesion. Religious commitment has not only mobilized peoples sense of outrage in resisting abuses but it also has played a very constructive role in national reconciliation and nation building.

It is indeed in this tradition that we wish to lay a humble wreath of acknowledgement and that we would like to continue in that path of dialogue as well.

Because of the rise of the political doctrine of both the “clash of civilizations “ of Huntington and the “Preemptive strike doctrine” there was a rise of Islamic thinkers who have become alarmist, mistakenly possessing a conceptual continuity with the traditional views on Jihad and the increasing dangerous quandaries today. This has become the oft-cited” clash” with religiously inspired militancy massed against the liberal and democratic values of the West.

In the conventional view of the academe and the media (largely the media), not only are Muslims engaged in destabilizing the regional security arrangements they are also zealously opposed to anything that smacks of western liberal and democratic values.

This skewed viewpoint has been perpetuated by scholarship that treats Muslim fundamentalism as qualitatively distinct and irreducible to any common ground, representing an image of Islam in abstraction. Add to this the very vocal and visible image of minorities that present this idea.

Given the deepening global crisis arising from the misuse of religion by highly vocal minorities, it is indeed important for Muslim thinkers to rediscover and promote a common concern for peace with justice. No Muslim scholar could undermine the existing international order without taking a critical reassessment of the religious and ideological landscape that he lies thiamin. After all, in Islam, all human endeavours are distinct aspects of a total dialectic whose aim is the establishment of a global community under God.

Therein lies that distinct need for pluralism.

The Basis of Islamic Pluralism

Before justifying Islamic Pluralism, we may need to define it. What entirely is Islamic Pluralism?

Islamic pluralism is defined as the concept of maintaining peaceful relations between different religions, that is manifested in a number of related ways:

• Islamic Pluralism may describe the Islam's worldview that it is not only one's religion as not the sole and exclusive source of truth, and thus recognizes that some level of truth and value exists in at least some other religions.

• Islamic pluralism often is used as a Basis for interfaith dialogue. At a minimum, This leads promotion of unity, co-operation, or improved understanding between different religions, or denominations within the same religion

This is normally a synonym for religious tolerance, which is a condition of harmonious co-existence between adherents of different religions or religious denominations.

Beyond the particularist domains of the church, mosque, temple and synagogue, the ecumenical sensitivity of having pluralism as a common ground has drawn the attention of the people around the world, influencing their lives beyond the confines of their faith communities. It is the non-institutional of pluralism that has attracted a substantial majority of the world population. It manifests the universal social dimension of ones personal and private faith in order to project them in the world. This furthers inter-human understanding beyond an exclusionary and consequently intolerant institutional religiosity.

Islamic revelation presents a theology that resonates with the modern pluralistic belief that other faiths are not merely inferior manifestations of religiosity, but variant forms of individual and communal responses to the presence of the Transcendent in human life. All people are created in same divine nature (fitrah Allah) with a disposition that leads to the knowledge of God, the Creator to whom all worship is due simply because of the creation.²

This universal knowledge of the being in creation holds equally for the believer or non-believer, the worshiper of one being or of idols. More important, both a monotheist and an idolater can understand God by inspiring faith in divine mercy and forgiveness, can guide anyone who He wills to save.³

The term pluralism is one of the catchwords of a new order whose diversity of cultures, belief systems and values inspires both exhilaration at the endless shadings of human expression and dread of irreconcilable conflict.

This need to acknowledge the existence of the other may be due to the technological advances pushing the world into a global community where unlike before were nations isolated by physical , cultural and ideological boundaries. And this context they have been relatively isolated from one another and previous encounters with diversity were not as always friendly and warmly received. And in the end, conflicts and clashes occur as a result of cultural and civilizational differences, becoming a major source of dehumanizing others.

Recognition of religious pluralism within a community of faithful promises to advance the principle of inclusiveness, which would counsel accommodation, not conflict, among competing claims to religious truth in religiously and culturally heterogeneous societies. This could lead in a way to sense of multiple and unique possibilities for enriching the human quest for spiritual and moral wellbeing.

The Quran in recognizance of the universality of man has always been clear in its declaration that:

“O Humankind, We have created you male and female, and appointed you races and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely the Noblest among you in the sight of God is the Most Godfearing among you. God is All-knowing and All-Aware.”

(Surah al-Hujurat:13)

The Qur'an has used the word li Ta'arafu (you may know/comprehend) whose root word, arif means to fully understand. For by understanding yourselves only that you can talk with each other.

In looking at Pluralism in the Islamic tradition,we shall look at the context of the Qur'an, being the Primal source of Muslim creed and law.

The Muslim pluralist creed is further elucidated in Surah al-Baqarah Ayah 285 which states:

“The Messenger (Muhammad PBUH) believes in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, and so do the believers. Each one Believes in Allah, His Angels, His Books and His messengers.(they say) WE make no distinction between any of His messengers and they say 'We hear and obey.'”

(Surah al-Baqarah: 285)⁴

It is part and parcel of being Muslim to accept several general facts:

First, that before the advent of Muhammad (PBUH) there were other Prophets sent before him,

Second, and that some of these Prophets brought scriptures or revelation as a proof of their tasks.

Ans thirdly it is part and parcel of their faith that they must acknowledge these Prophets saying “La nufariqu bayna Ahadin min Rusulih” We make no distinction between any of them. What is clear therefore is that from the very start Muslims are ordered to be open and welcome to other faiths.

This ayah merely reinforces in an earlier ayah of the universality of revelation and that God has sent his mercy to all of mankind. As it runs states:

“The people were one community (Ummah); then God sent forth the prophet, Good Tidings to bear and warning, He sent down with them the Book with the truth, that He might decide the people touching their differences.”

(Surah al-Baqarah :213)

And of course the universality of prophets sent by God to all nations is mentioned many times in the Qur'an and among them I would cite these from the many l ayahs (verses) from the Holy Qur'an , :

“And verily We have sent among every Ummah (community/nation) a messenger (proclaiming) worship Allah (alone) and avoid (keep away from) Taghout (all false deities/beliefs)⁵

(Surah an-Nahl: 36)

“And for every Ummah (a community or nation) there is a messenger; when their messenger comes, the matter between them will be judged with justice, and they will not be wronged”

(Surah Yunus: 47)⁶

“And we have sent Messengers before you (O Muhammad) of some of them we related you (the Muslims) their story and some of them we have not related.”

(Surah al-Ghafir: 78)⁷

What is clear from these verses that God has sent Messengers to all peoples and communities which means that each community has a distinct part of the truth. According to Prophetic Traditions, God has sent 120,000 prophets and that in that Muslims acknowledge that they have been divinely sent.

As a part of the Abrahamic traditions the Qur'an speaks of a group of believers known as Ahlul Kitaab (people of the book) of which the Qur'an speaks of them and at certain times, God revelations in the Qur'an are addressed to them.

The Qur'an describes them in a manner as :

“And you will find nearest in love to the believers those who say “we are Christians” that is because among them are monks and priests and they are not Proud”

(Surah al-Maidah :82)⁸

The Qur'an also sets a standard on how dealings with People of the Book (Ahlul Kitaab) should be conducted:

“And argue not with the People of the Scriptures unless it be in (a way) that is better, save with such of them that do wrong: and say: We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you: Our God and your God is One, and unto Him we surrender. “

(Surah Ankabut:46)⁹

“And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires away from the truth which hath come unto thee. For each We have appointed a divine law and a traced-out way. Had Allah willed he could have made you one community. But that He may try you by that which He hath given you (He hath made you as ye are.) So vie one with one another in good works. Unto Allah ye will all return, and He will then by that wherein ye differ. ”

(Surah Al Maidah :48)¹⁰

We could go on and on, describing ayah after ayah that clearly mandates each and every particular rule that tells us that as Muslims, it is but part and parcel of our faith to be pluralism and open to dialogue but then what?What does this mean for us Muslims in today's globalized world?

There are several realizations to this questions. I would like to point out that the major argument for religious pluralism in Islam which is expressed in the Qur'an is clearly based on the relationship between private faith and its projection to the Islamic Polity.

1. It is clear that in matters of private faith, the position of the Qur'an vis-a-vis other faiths is non-interventionist. In the Public projection of that faith, Islam is based on the principle of peaceful coexistence, the willingness of a community(in a Muslim country) to recognize religiously independent communities to ruin their affairs and peacefully co-exist with Muslims. Though this may not find immediate acceptance in todays world but this principle has always existed from the time of our Prophet (SA).

2. The universal message of the Qur'an reveals that without subordination to a limited historical context, that the revelation therein accepts religious pluralism as given and even necessary, requiring Muslims to continually negotiate, transform and emphasize the fundamental unity of humankind in its origin and creation by the Divine Being. And despite the fact that there are gloomy predictions being circulated elsewhere in the name of theology and faith in a way that religious ideas are being used to promote hatred, destruction and mutual distrust in human societies the affirmation of diversity is one of the cornerstones in the creation narrative in the Holy Qur'an, and instead of regarding this diversity as a source of evitable tensions, it suggests that human diversity is indispensable for a particular tradition to define its common beliefs practices, values and traditions for its community life.¹¹

3. The idea that “The people are one community” is the foundation of a theological pluralism that presupposes that the divinely ordained quivalence and equal rights of all human beings.This unity may be justified theologically within the activity of the divine; it is best sought in the the sphere of ethics, which actually sustains people of faith. through this innate ethical nature, through “Fitra” (the primordial nature of every human being) which is given by Allah to all, humankind then acquires the ability to deal with others on the basis of equity and fairness. This as a result would allow the development of a global ethic that can provide the pluralistic basis for mediating interreligious relationships among peoples of diverse spiritual commitments, enabling them to build a working consensus of values and goals.

Whats therefore in the place of Islamic Pluralism in Dialogue?

What the Qur'an pushes forward as a paradigm is plain and simple; Islamic Pluralism is a process by which it could provide both a ethical,theological and spiritual basis for dialogue, mediation and the forging of interreligious relationships to build a global community of diverse spiritual traditions.

May this humble article be a wreath of flowers that I lay before my spiritual teachers Marhumin Prof Amilussin Jumaani and Mufti Abdulghani Yusuf, foremost teachers and pioneers in dialogue and peace in Mindanao and to my master, Hazrat Baqiyatullah Muhammad al-Muntadhar Ibn Al-Hassan Al Mahdi.

References:

Scriptural :

The Meanings of the Glorious Qur'an, Marmaduke Pikthall, Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an Inc.,New York,1994

The Qur'an: Arabic Text with corresponding Meanings, ed. by Saheeh International,AbulQaseem Publishing House, Riyad KSA,1997

Translation of the Meanings of the Holy Qur'an in The English Language,Hilali and Khan, King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur'an, KSA, 2000

Scholarly Books:

Islam in a Changing World, ed by Jerichow and Simonsen . Curzons press, Great Britain, 1997

Religious Freedom,Minorities and Islam: am inquiry into the Malaysian Experience. Yousif,Ahmed. Thinkers Library BHD,Selangor Malaysia,1998

The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism, Sachedina, Abdulaziz, ,Center for Strategic and International Studies,2001, Oxford University press.USA

“The Peace”; Rehaman, Abdul,Dubai Publishing. UAE, 1999