The
perspective of Islam as regard the faith community and world order is not
merely a matter of theology. It is not deduction from the nature of God or
that of the faith. Nor is it an eschatological hope entertained in
space-time. It is not the "kingdom of God" conceived as
frustration to this-world which the religion declares to be fallen and
hopeless. Nor is it a messianic idea animating history while remaining
outside of it. Finally, a word order based on peace and justice is not an
ideal to be brought about by God's initiative and work with man passively
acquiescing and singing Halleluia! Islam regards the bringing about of a
world order based on peace and justice as man's supreme religious duty, to
be effected in this world, this space and time, and as soon as possible.
Moreover, the world order Islam envisages and actively seeks is to be
brought about by humans through ethical as well as efficacious action here
and now. It is does not depend upon the good will or diplomacy of any
ruler, of any bill legislation the ruler or the ruled may promulgate. The
law is God-ordained. It has its own methodology of interpretation. Its own
mechanism for self-renewal. And it is valid for all space, for all time.
A. The
Unity of Humanity:
Humanity, in the view of Islam, is one. God created all humans of a
single pair-Adam and Eve. He created them all equal in their
creatureliness; i.e., they are all His servants, charged with actualizing
all His will which He has revealed, and they are all capable and
responsible. Nobody is excepted; nobody is absolved; nobody is privileged
or chosen; nobody carries more or less of the burden than any other, or is
responsible for the performance of another. Responsibility on the Day of
Judgment is absolutely personal. This absolute egalitariansim and
universalism Islam understands as the direct implication of tawhid (divine unity, ultimacy and transcendence). To
claim the contrary, as ethnocentrism does, is to threaten the divine
unity. If humans were ontologically disparate, then God too, their
creator, must be more than one. It is inconceivable that God be absolutely
one, when his human creatures do not all stand to Him in exactly the same
relation. For God to have fav2orites is For Him to be unjust and
discriminating. But God is indeed God; hence, all human are one and equal.
God does choose the time and place to send his messages to
humankind. Those who receive the message are obliged to actualize it in
themselves and proclaim it to the others. If they do, they deserve merit
in God's eyes, if they don't, God will not be frustrated. He will exchange
them for another, different people who will fulfill the message in their
lives and those of others. [Q
2:143, 213; 40:9; 47:38]
If, despite all this, God constituted humans into tribes and
nations, he did so to help them identify one another. The circumstances of
our physical features, our languages and customs, our cultures and mores,
as well as our geographical distribution on earth (including our
distribution in houses, streets, villages, cities and provinces)- all
these are aids for mutual self-identification. "O
Humans, We have created you of a single pair and constituted you into
tribes and nations that you may identify one another Nobler in the eye of
God is the more righteous" [Q 49:13]. Or, it is possible
to understand this verse as meaning to say that purpose of ethnic
differentiation is mutual help and cooperation, an instance of the
opposite working for its opposite. Thus, Islam is at once free of the
limitations the doctrine of Chosen People imposes upon the Jews, or the
doctrine of the Imago Dei
imposes upon Christians. Islamic history knows of one attempt by Jahm ibn
Safwan (of Tirmidh) to introduce the idea of predeterminism, in the
second/eighth century. But he lost his case and his movement collapsed.
Naturally Islamic egalitarianism and universalism do not preclude
differentiation between human on the basis of knowledge and wisdom, of
capacity and patience, of piety and righteousness. But these are all
acquired and acquirable. No one may be ruled out. Competition in God's
vicegerency is free and open to all humans. And no man's knowledge or
righteousness may be judged apriorily.
For its universalism, Islam provides a base in its theory of man.
All humans, it holds, are born endowed with the sense for the sacred and
for the moral. All are innately equipped with the capacity to discern and
recognize God as one and Creator, as well as His will as the moral
imperative. Islam thus presupposes a religio naturalis with which all humans are equally endowed. It
relegates to history and nature all that separates man from man; and it
exhorts all humans to return to this primordial source of knowledge and
wisdom in which they all share. "Turn
your face to the primordial religion [religio naturalis] as a hanif [the pre-Islamic righteous person].
That is the natural endowment of God bestowed upon all humans by virtue of
birth; equally shared by all humans without discrimnation. That is the
true and valuable religion"
[Qur'an 30:30].
I n order to maintain the free highway to God open to all humans,
Islam abolished sacraments as well as all other priestly functions. To
reach God, humans need no medium. To receive His grace and forgiveness,
they need no sacrament. He is near, all too near, ever-ready to receive
anyone who comes to Him with a candid heart. So, no church and no priest
can ever monopolize the access to God, can rule out or condition anyone's
approach to Him [Qur'an 2:186; 11:61; 26:89; 37:84]. Likewise, it is every
Muslim's duty to call all humans to Islam, to invite and warn all humans
equally to enter into the community of faith. Islam cannot countenance the
tacit ethnocentrism of those who claim to carry more of God's burden than
others, restricting application of their law or rituals to themselves and
absolving other from same. Nor dose Islam tolerate the division of humans
into castes, and declaring one caste expected to be monotheist, the other
polytheist or idolatrous.
Contrary to both varieties of particularism, Islam is missionary
religion requiring its adherents to offer and teach the divine message to
all human and to invite them all to join the faith. According to the Old
Testament, the children of Jacob slew the Shechemites and robbed them of
their goods because the latter offered to convert to the religion of Jacob
(Genesis 34); and German racists would go to war if half a billion blacks
or a billion Chinese were to declare themselves German. To the Muslim, the
entrance of anyone or any group into Islam elicits one exclamation: Allahu Akbar wa lillah al hamd (God is Greatest! To Him be the Praise!).
Islam therefore condemns nationlaism and particularism as an evil
aberration, unworthy of the wise and righteous. It seeks the universal
community. Though it may start anywhere, the community and state of Islam
are to expand as to cover humanity and the whole of creation. This
expansion, however, may not be achieved by force and violence. "No
coercion in religion." God affirms in the Qur’an;
"the truth is manifestly other than error…Whoever wishes to believe
let him do so; and whoever wishes to disbelieve let him do so"
[Q 2:256; 18:29]. It must be achieved, if at all, by sound reasoning and
dialogue, by goodly exhortation [Q 16:125]. Jews and Christians are to be
invited by Muslims to rally with the Muslims around a fair principle,
namely, not worship but God, not to associate ought with him, and not to
lord it over one another [Q 3:64]. For what is sought is the moral - hence
free - acquiescence to God, and His will and Messenger. A forced
acquiescence is devoid of ethical value and merits for the enforcer the
punishment of Hell. No Muslim may ask for anymore than the freedom to
call, to present the case of Islam for the understanding. The freedom to
convince others of the truth and the freedom to be convinced of the truth
belongs essentially to humanity. Nobody may be deprived of this most basic
human right in the past, Muslims have gone to war- and rightly so - when
their emissaries carrying nothing but the message of Islam were attacked
or killed. Should the Jews and/or Christians reject the message of Islam,
no Muslim has the right to molest them in their practice of their
religions. Equally, the call to God must be made for His own sake, in
through candidness and honesty. The example of Christian missions
colluding with colonialism, whether naively or deliberately, to exploit
the sickness, poverty or weakness of Muslims must not only be stopped, but
also never imitated.
The universal community is the noblest ideal humans have
entertained for their association with one another. First, to be defined
and identified in terms of that which one holds precious - indeed, of
ultimate value - accords with human dignity and befits the cosmic role
humans are to play in space-time. To define oneself in terms of ethnic
entity, of one's geography or other necessary accidents of birth, is too
demeaning to humanity. Second, as adherents of their faiths, Jews,
Christians and Muslims stand under one and the same God whom they all
acknowledge. This, after all, is the foundation of the Abrahamic faith to
which they subscribe. Under that faith, God is the best knower, the
ultimate judge. A fortiori, they ought to lay themselves eternally open to
God's determination, acknowledge and tolerate one another in God's name.
And yet, whereas Christianity regards Judaism as a mere preparation for
itself and Islam as heresies. Only Islam regards both Judaism and
Christianity as itself. Viz., as religions of God and their scriptures as
divine revelation. Certainly Islam is critical of the two sister faiths,
but no more they have been of themselves. In their religious controversies
with one another, Islam is willing to let the best and true argument win.
Thirdly, in communication and spiritual intercourse between their
adherents is desirable, then there should be no curtains and no
censorship. To isolate a community from the truth under the pretext that
humans are unable to make up their minds intelligently and responsibly is
an insult to humanity at large. Equally, to subvert the free and
responsible exchange of ideas with bribes, to exploit the sickness and
weakness of humans in order to compel them to convert so as to receive the
desire aid. Is criminal. Fourthly, once is recognizes that human
association is to be based on faith, and that the faiths of mankind are
guaranteed by the constitution. There would be no justification for the
fragmentation of the world in nation-states in competition with one
another. Just as Caliph Umar ibn al Khattab
ordered all customs and immigration barriers removed from within the
Islamic world-state, the globe too could well be a place in which humans
may choose their residences in total freedom. Why may not the Jews reside
in Palestine, the Japanese in Berline, and the Chinese in Chicago if they
wish to and seek to establish such residence without aggression or
injustice? And why may they not import and export their wealth and other
goods as they please, and without customs?
Certainly, The demography and economy of the various regions will
change in consequence of such unification of the planet earth. Buy why
should they not do so? Only ethnocentrism, the egotistic pursuit of a
nation's welfare regardless of cost to humanity- indeed pereat
mundus - answer
that the national demography and economy should not change. But the
universal community is a sublime value, a value associated with the will
of the transcendent Creator, a value which ethnocentric particularism
cannot even understand.
B. The
world Order as Pax
Islamica:
Ethnocentrism and nationalism necessarily lead to war. In his address of yesterday, professor al Faruqi has made the distinction of ethnocentrism/nationalism from patriotism evidently clear. Ethnocentrism/ nationalism would not only be harmless if all it meant was patriotism, but it would even be a virtue. In fact, ethnocentrism/nationalism presupposes as an a absolute axiom that the good of the ethnic/national group has priority over the good of all others. This priority is the essential distinguishing characteristic. Without it, ethnocentrism/ nationalism would not be itself. It would not close its doors in face of those who wish to join the ethic group; nor would it define membership of the group in terms of birth and physical characteristics. Its law would be, at least as far as it is concerned, the law for all humans. It would be a free society open to whosoever wishes to subscribe to it. It would not differentiate between humans as to treatment and would treat the stranger who comes under its jurisdiction equally as the citizen/adherent. Discrimination between the members/adherents and others, preferential treatment by God, the state, or both of the "chosen," pursuit of the welfare of the members at the cost of others, are necessary practices of the nation-state. That is the meaning of priority axiomatically predicated of the members’ welfare. Priority is a comparative concept and would be meaningless without an “other” to whom the member is preferred, against whom the member’s welfare is sought. This is the core of all the nationalist and colonialist wars which characterized the nation-state from its origins to the present day. In a world populated exclusively by the members of one ethnic / national group, ethnocentrism/nationalism would be meaningless; and the nation-state would be indistinguishable from any other kind of state.
Islam identifies ethnocentrism/nationalism as the first and the
greatest source of social evil. It not only set nation against nation; but
within the same nation, it sets one class, one province, or one segment of
the people against another. The conflicts it generates are infinite, as
the occasions of life in which members of the ethnic/ national group may
be preferred to, or assigned priority over, the others are infinite.
Whether in their pursuit of physical subsistence and economic well being,
of cultural growth and development, of esthetic enjoyment or, finally, of
religious adoration and service, ethnocentrism/nationalism is bound to
aggress upon the rights of other humans, and incept hostilities. In so
doing, it violates the dignity of humans as well as God. Its eradication
from the earth would stop the major source of war, and open the way for
human unity.
The world order Islam envisages, therefore, is an order of peace
where no ethnic group or nation would be in conflict with another.
Humanity would continue to be arranged in continents, provinces and
ethnic/national groups; but none would have the power to aggress upon
another. Ethnicity/nationality would lose its importance because, in an
Islamic world order, it would play the insignificant role of
identification. "Territory" or province, language group and
community would in the Islamic world order be merely a geographic, at best
an administrative, category.
Under the Pax Islamica, humans would be categorized according to their
religious adherence, i.e., according to what they regard as ultimate
reality, ultimate meaning, ultimate function and place in space-time. Like
the other religious groups including the Muslims, the Jews and Christians
may order the lives of their members according to the dictates of their
own tradition, as interpreted by their own institutions, and adjudicated
by their own courts of law. Rebellion against Judaism and Christianity,
against their laws and institutions, their own legitimate representatives
and functionaries, will not be tolerated. Islamic law obliges the state to
support the integrity of all the religions and their communities. Barring
a few instances of mad rulers or governors, under whom Muslim suffered
more than either Jews or Christians, Islamic history knows of no case in
which the integrity of Judaism or Christianity was violated by the Islamic
State. Islamic law regards such violation, or interference, as injustice
and aggression. Any Islamic court of law has jurisdiction to look into any
case presented and deliver its verdict even if it indicts the Islamic
state itself.
The Pax Islamica is indeed an order of peace. Armed conflict
would be banned among its constituent religious communities, since their
competition can go only in ideational matters. The best argument should
and would win. Islam's world order is then a pluralistic order where
pluralism is in the matter really counts, namely, the laws by which human
lives or ordered. There can be no more significant pluralism than in the
laws. Unlike any other law, the shari’ah or law of Islam allows other legal system to
operate within its jurisdiction, without injury or prejudice to anyone,
making the Pax
Islamica sort of legal federalism. While governing the
lives of Muslim in all detail, the shari’ah
order within, of war and peace without, are governed exclusively by the shari’ah, thus maintaining the peace and integrity of
the Pax
Islamica.
Surely, humans may and will continue to sin, to plot and aggress upon one another. The world-state would interfere in order to put a stop to and undo the aggression. For this, a higher loyalty than to ethnic entity, person or interest group is necessary to animate, to inspire and drive the state. This cannot be other than faith in and loyalty to God alone. Likewise, in arresting aggression and undoing injustice, the whole universal community would support the world-state against the aggressor group. Under this kind of pressure, and devoid of the military power with which to defy the world- state, the aggressor group will have to give up its aggression.
C.
The Pax Islamica in History:
The first world- state which envisaged humanity as its citizenry,
which was given the first written constitution in history, and which was
based upon a divine law unchangeable by the whim of politicians, humans,
leaders or by majorities of the ruled, and where ultimately God was the
Basis and Guarantor, was founded in Madinah in 622. Upon its coming into
being, Muslims and Jews were its constituents. Later , Christians,
Zoroastrians, Hindus and Buddhist were added on equal par. It included
almost all the ethnicities of the world, at least in part and produced one
of the greatest civilizations of all times to which everybody contributed
and in which everybody participated- Jews, Christians, Zoroastrian, Hindus
and Buddhists by the millions. Under the Rashidun Caliphs, the Umawis and
Abbasis. It was for the most part an integral world-mass. It was divided
and very wide segments of it reconsolidate under the Mughuls, the Ayyubis,
the Fatimis, etc., and finally under the Uthmanis (ottomans)
Without a doubt, the Islamic universal state had up's and down's in
its long history. It has known great and small caliphs, great and small
sultans and administrators, It was and remained great despite them all.
Indeed, the political turbulence noticeable in the violent succession of
regimes was superficial and insignificant, precisely, because underneath
all the storms was the solid homogeneity of the faith. The lives of the
most ethnically diverse Muslims peoples were governed by one and the same shari’ah, the law of Islam. Whereas non-Muslim
communities governed their own lives by their own non-Muslim laws, all
citizens knew their rights and duties under the shari’ah
and pursued them with success. For Islamic justice was available to anyone
free of fees or charges. It was available at the local court in Islam has
jurisdiction over all matters, including those effecting the highest
executive office, the persons of the caliph and his viziers and the
constitution of the state. Moreover, Islamic justice was available even to
the non-citizen, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. For the shari’ah
recognizes as legal persons endowed with full rights under the law, both
the corporate bodies as well as individuals, the citizens as well as the
non-citizens.
Even the advent of colonialism and its tyrannical impositions upon
the Muslim world did not succeed in breaking up this unity. Each Western
colonial power introduced its own criminal, civil, procedural, commercial
and administrative laws into that part of the Muslim World in colonized.
The personal status laws, however, remained to this day and everywhere the
exclusive domain of the shari’ah in non-Muslim affairs. Christian and Jewish
courts continued to operate as before under British and French
colonialism; and Christian and Islamic courts continue to operate under
Israeli occupation.
The shari’ah was responsible for the public order and
security the countless millions of humans have enjoyed under its aegis,
from Dakar to Mindanao, Samarkand to Dar al Salam, during the
centuries-long political dominion of Islam. The change of leadership at
the top or of the political regime in the distant capital did not affect
the order of daily life with continued to be governed by the shari’ah.
The shari’ah prevented the various segments of the world-ummah from aggressing upon one another, the would be
aggressors being fully certain that the whole weight of the ummah would fall upon them if they carried out their
evil plans. And when aggression did take place, it was the authority of
the shari’ah that solved the dispute, restored order and
peace, and obliged the aggressor to withdraw and undo the damage.
Likewise, the shari’ah was responsible for safeguarding the peace
between the Islamic state and any other state, corporate body or alien
individual and with whom the Islamic state entered into a covenant of
peace. Were it not fore the shari’ah whose authority and source are divine, the
change of political regime or of the mood or whimsy of the ruler might
have revoke, denied or unilaterally rescinded any agreement or covenant
made. Concluded under the shari’ah, every covenant became a covenant whose witness
and guard is God. That is why at the height of its power, the Islamic
world-state honored its commitment to abide by any agreement made with the
least state or individual.
Finally, compared with the United Nations, the Pax Islamica is a far more efficient form of social organization. The Pax Islamica is based on immutable divine laws. Hence, entry into, exit from, and dealing with it could not be the object of ad hoc negotiation. The law of the shari’ah is one and the same; its jurisdiction, sources and applications are public, known to all, as well as immutable. The shari’ah has no countenance for any two states colluding for evil and aggression; nor for any ummah to use the right of veto to undo the agreement and cooperation of others to do the good. Backed by the Islamic state which is it servant, it has the coercive power to restrain and push back any aggression by the strong upon the weak. In every respect, the Pax Islamica is better than the United Nations. It is ethical, just and effective in brining the strong and the weak to follow the straight path of God.