PART FOUR

Muslims and the Obstacle of Dealing with the Contemporary Security Situation

Undoubtedly, the task of Muslims would have been easier and simpler had it been a task to take part in the remedy of the deteriorating security situation today.  That is because it would be dealing with an open world and with civilizations that have their gates wide open, compared with how the case was when that task coped with the security situation of the old world, its closed civilizations, and its isolated communities that were withdrawn, concentrating only on themselves and their interests.  Undoubtedly, Muslims are willing and even eager to rectify what afflicts certain aspects of the progress of their civilization and to contribute to the reform of and application of reason to what the human progress in general suffers from.

Muslims today, however, find themselves incapable of fulfilling this wish and this noble, lofty aim, and of taking the initiative to make a contribution to the effort to end the state of distress and the deterioration of the world security, which is, unfortunately, constantly worsening on all levels of the current stage of mankind development.  In fact and unfortunately, they are not only unable to contribute to the solution of current security problems, but they themselves have turned, in most of their communities, into a severe security problem, which is added to the security problems of the world.  It may even be the most serious and poses the greatest threat to the world’s security and stability.

As for the causes that have made them one of the world’s problems, this is certainly a complex subject that requires a detailed explanation which is not within the scope of this book and its subject.  It is, as already mentioned, a complicated thing and involves details related to the other’s role in squeezing Muslims into the corner of evil and backwardness.  It also involves details about the state of willingness of the Islamic nation to submit and respond to the goals, intrigue, and ambitions of the other.  Naturally, I myself do not support the conspiracy explanation of events, but at the same time I do not overlook or deny the existence of conspiracies and conspira­tors.  I firmly believe, however, that the influence of any conspiracy and of the intrigue of conspirators fades away when the nation is healthy and free from serious ailments.  It shatters against the sturdiness of its inner walls and weakens and rebounds when faced by the immunity it gains from its faith and civilization, and by the firmness of its belief in its identity and mission in life.  “Say, ‘It comes from you, yourselves’” (Al-Imran III: 165); “… So do not blame me; blame only yourselves” (Ibrahim XIV: 22).

Therefore, the reason behind the nation’s incapability to perform the obligation of its civilizing message, to resume its course of reform of the earth, and the revival of Islam’s values and its divine message to mankind, is the imprisonment of many of its members in the ornaments of their glorious past, and the distraction they find for themselves in repeating the stories of their past glory.  The reason, in fact, lies in their confused understanding of the rational factors and methodology that produces the edifices of that long-established great glory.  It lies in their failure to understand the message of renewal and development that is stressed and encouraged by Islam in order for construction to continue and improve through the ages.

In fact, some Muslims, in their best dispositions, remain prisoners of the ornaments of heritage, lost in the cupboards of that great wealth, without realizing that that great and old-established heritage was only the blessed fruit of lofty efforts and toil undertaken by the earlier generations of this nation in dealing with and examining religious texts; exploring the depths of their divine treasures; and exploiting these treasures in coping with the conditions of their time and place.  Those earlier generations excelled in their toil and built edifices of a great civilization, the remnants of which still stand high today both in the conscience of people and in the fields of their daily life.  Thus, they, in the name of the best nation that mankind has known, were truly able to offer an eloquent, live model.  On the other hand, we, in most cases, have not troubled ourselves with any effort or search to explore the aspects of religious texts, which is, beyond doubt, encyclopedic in their meaning and implications and highly efficient and capable to respond to what subjecting required in all centuries and generations.  “And He has subjected to you what is in the heavens and what is on earth from Him.”  Such efforts would have made the religious text valid for every age and location, as ordained by our Lord, the Most Sublime.

It is unfortunate that instead of endeavoring as earlier generations did and building on what they have built, a group within the nation besiege it with the pretext blocking rule and shield themselves with it.  Some of these have even amplified this rule excessively, and others have made keys for it that they alone can use to open it.  They have appointed themselves guardians of text comprehension, the only ones trusted with grasping the meaning and dealing with its implications, releasing what they will and curbing what they will.  They have made that principle a strong fortification behind which religious texts are kept with their mouths muzzled.  The texts utter only what they understand and reveal of their secrets only what they permit.  They regard themselves as the text doorkeepers, and only the unjust, they believe, would challenge their position.

There is another group of Muslims that have followed a different course, which, I believe, is the most dangerous in the life of this nation and the worst in impeding the effort to resume the progress of its civilization in contemporary history.  From the ribs of this nation, a bitter plant sprouted, causing dissonance in dealing with texts, unknown to the early generations and unacceptable to the scholars and jurists of later genera­tions.  They can deservedly be called the New Dissidents (Khawaarej).  This caused the nation very serious dilemmas while dealing with its internal affairs and more serious dilemmas while dealing with the affairs of life which it shares with the other.  I believe these dilemmas are among the most serious causes of the incapability of this nation to make a contribution that deals with the current world security situation, and to play a rational and wise role in ending its ill-omened causes and factors.  It has even turned some countries that belong to our nation and their cultural discourse into one of the world’s problems.  Actually, in some of their aspects, they are among the most tense and threatening centers in the world.  This incapability and failure on the part of our nation to contribute to the remedy of the world’s security crisis through the values and rational approach of Islam makes world communities face an imminent, far-reaching catastrophe, which nobody will escape from other than those who enjoy God’s mercy.  “Beware of temptation that does not lure, in particular, those among you who are wrongdoers” (Al-Anfaal VIII: 25).

I believe it is useful, before discussing some types of these dilemmas that impede launching a resumption of the civilization of our nation. to remind the reader of a number of questions repeatedly posed by people here and there, such as:

·        Did Islam come to set up a single world state?

·        Are Muslims exclusively supposed to be the world leaders?

·        Or are they supposed to be a rational leadership within the framework of human progress?

·        Are Muslims exclusively the world’s masters?

·        Does any party in the world have the right to claim that it has absolute mastery over it and that other people are its followers and subject to its authority?

·        Or are people partners in the mastery of the world for the sake of settling it and establishing justice and good in all its parts?

·        In other words, are we the guardians of mankind?

·        Or are we partners in leading it?

·        Is the normal relationship between Muslims and the other one of hatred, loathing, and war?

·        Or is it one of affection, benevolence, equity, and peace?

·        Who are we?  What do we want?  What is our approach to get it?

·        What is the area of the common ground we share with the other in regards to what we want?

·        What do we share in values and culture with the other?

·        Are we competing partners of the other? or are we squabbling and quarreling fellow travelers?

·        Is it true that, with Islam, the other has only three options:

1.     to embrace Islam,

2.     to pay a tribute Jiziyah), or

3.     to fight?

·        Or is there a room for opinion, various cases and conditions, and details and elaboration?

·        What do renunciation and allegiance mean?

·        What are the limits of the circle of renunciation and allegiance in a Muslim’s life?

·        Does renunciation of the other cover both religion and worldly affairs, or what?

·        Who has the right to take the decision of renouncing the other?

·        Is it the individual Muslim?

·        Or is it the nation, represented by decision makers and the people in authority?

·        Does the decision of renouncing the other entail animosity and war, or merely affective dissociation?

·        Or what?

·        Does struggle (jihad) means fighting exclusively?

·        Or is fighting an exceptional method of struggle (jihad)?

·        Who has the right to make the decision of engaging in fighting with the other and declaring a state of war?

·        Is it the individual Muslim? or a group of Muslims?

·        Or is it a decision for the nation to make through the people in authority?

These are some of the questions, and there are many others that people are raising and about which well-informed people engage in much controversy.  I want to remind readers of them, so we can recall, through them, the state of confusion in concepts and insights from which our nation suffers in dealing with the religious text and the resultant diversity and contradiction of rulings (fatwas).  That diversity is a basic source of the cleavage in the attitudes of members of the nation on every level.  It is also the prop that supports the state of bloody confrontation with the nation and with the other that some parties, unjustifiably, adopt.

Undeniably, these and other questions require doctrinal, intellectual, and political councils to deal with them seriously and objectively.  They are only cited in this question to throw some light on the diagnosing features of the nation’s internal security condition, which is one of the conditions of the security of humanity in general.  This study is not going to muddle through the attempt to provide answers. It is too great and serious a matter to be handled by an individual or few individuals.  As already mentioned, it is for great and specialized scholarly and jurisprudence (Fiqh) academies to give this matter the attention it deserves and to arrive at an applicable decision concerning it.  This study will restrict itself to what its title implies.  I shall, however, raise and deal with some preliminary views and concepts that touch upon some of those questions in as much as it will serve to clarify our vision in regards to the subject we are dealing with: Muslims and the dilemmas of responding to the security aspiration of mankind.

It is highly objective to start with a definition of the general framework within which the impediments and dilemmas of responding to regional security aspirations emerged.  Here, I assume that the confusion of concepts in dealing with the above listed questions is the framework and the soil in which the impediments that keep our nation from resuming its progress sprout, grow, and become aggravated, whether at the regional or international level.  I will discuss in this part the dilemmas that hamper the ability of Muslims to apply Islam’s values and principles in responding to the requirements of contemporary human security.  This discussion will be in several chapters as follow.

Prof. Dr. Hamid bin Ahmad Al-Rifaie

President, International Islamic Forum For Dialogue

    Assistant Secretary General, Muslim World League

From His Book (Partners ... not Guardians) Part Four

All Rights Reserved For The Author Prof. Dr. Hamid Al-Rifaie