Regimes & Radicals

Expedience dictates that we turn a blind eye to the corruption that plagues governments that we consider are allied to our fight against terrorism. These governments often brutalise their own peoples and the resultant impetuosity provides the backdrop for radicalisation. Resentment of these governments is channelled by the radicals into a focused hatred of all that is perceived to be Western. These governments have a vested interest in instigating the radicals to rampage; compel Western governments to provide financial/material support.

Observation informs that in such countries there is a very fine line between the intelligence agencies and the radical groups. There is a seamless flow of personnel to and fro on the pretense of infiltration and the acquisition of intelligence. They collude in order to perpetuate a heightened state of anxiety and fear in the local population through innuendo and murder. The impact of this spurious war is felt on the streets of Western countries through the subterfuge activities of obscurantist fringe groups that claim to represent Muslim opinion.

Governments of these countries predicate their legitimacy on the premise of apprehending said radicals and maintaining regional stability. However, these very governments are acutely reticent to introduce the requisite political and economic reforms. They would have Western governments believe that their despotic regimes are indispensable to Western national security interests in the region. It is, in fact, an insidious endeavour at creating an alignment of interests with Western governments; the perception of a common thematic enemy.

Are we going to entrust our security in the West to governments that are extremely unpopular and endemically corrupt? Regimes whose sole ambition is to preserve their grip on power and who are willing to achieve this through patronage and/or coercion. Regimes that do little to improve the welfare of their own peoples and would sell them out at the drop of a dime: How long before they sell us out?

Advertisements

Afghanistan – Pakistan

The political scene in Pakistan is dominated by parties whose membership comprise primarily of the landed class. The rivalry between these political parties is not ideological but is based on ethnicity. The religious parties operate at the margin and as such they do not command any substantial following. However, through the proliferation of madrassas they have channelled the ignorance of their following into a focused hatred of the West. The true centre of power in Pakistan is its armed forces and the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence. The relationship between all of the state actors has inevitably been characterised by innuendo and confrontation.

Asif Ali Zardari is the current President of Pakistan and co-chairman of the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party. Nawaz Sharif is a former Prime Minister and currently President of Pakistan Muslim League(N). Notwithstanding the scandals that tainted these two individuals, the West relied on them to return Pakistan to democracy. The urgency of the ‘War on Terror’ being fought in Afghanistan against Al-Qaeda and Taliban took precedence over all else. The problem in Pakistan is that the politicians usurp the wealth of the country and have no commitment to the people. This endemic corruption amongst the ruling classes has done more to undermine political stability than the insurgency in Afghanistan.

When the International Security Assistance Force withdraws from Afghanistan in 2014, it’s likely that a resurgent Taliban will attempt to overthrow the Karzai government in Kabul. A dishonest government, kept in power with US/EU aid won’t be able to withstand the onslaught especially with an Afghan army that is ill-equipped and demoralised. It’ll then fracture along ethnic lines with the Persian speaking Northern Alliance pitted against the Pashtun speaking south; the civil war will have begun in earnest. A proxy war will once again be fought in Afghanistan with Iran/Russia materially supporting the Northern Alliance and Pakistan/Saudi Arabia inevitably supporting the Islamist Taliban.

Mocking Islam or the Prophet

‘If you ask them, they declare: We were only talking idly and joking. Say: Was it at Allah, and His Ayat and His Messenger that you were mocking?’ (9:65). ‘O distress on the servants! There comes not to them any Messenger but they mock at him’ (36:30)
Why is it that we Muslims are surprised at the derogatory ‘Films’ and ‘Cartoons’ about Prophet Muhammad. We know it not to be credible; it doesn’t damage his persona one iota in my opinion.

What really creates a stink is the blood lust as expressed by some in the community in the UK and the many overseas. Not just that but they back it up with ‘Hadith’ that they claim warrants violence against the perpetrators.
Ibn Taymiyyah says in ‘Mukhtasar As-Saram Al-Maslool Ala Shatim Ar-Rasool (Summary of The Drawn Sword Against the One Who Curses the Messenger) Pages 31-33: Whoever curses the Prophet (PBUH), Muslim or Kafir, must be killed. The methodology of the scholars is also listed.

These ‘Hadith’ were compiled some 200 years after the death of our beloved Prophet. How often we hear the expression ‘Authentic Hadith’; implicit that they have been corrupted. Anybody who has even briefly studied ‘Hadith’ will admit that there are contradictions. They are preposterous, misogynistic and an incitement to violence; at great variance with the Quran.

There is no justification in the Noble Quran for the violence condoned by proponents of ‘Hadith’.
‘Verily, those who believe then disbelieve, then believe and then disbelieve, and then increase in disbelief; Allah will not forgive them nor guide them to the path’ (4:137). ‘And already We have sent down on you in the Book that if you hear Allah’s Verses being denied and ridiculed, then sit not with them, until they engage in a talk other than that; verily, you will then be like them. Surely, Allah will collect the hypocrites and the disbelievers all together in hell’ (4:140).

It is the prerogative of Allah Subhana to deal with those who ‘Mock’ or the ‘Apostate’; their killing is most certainly not sanctioned in the Quran. However, the misguided amongst us think it their religious duty to impose what they call the ‘Shariah’ on everybody else. I believe that there is a latent hatred amongst them stemming from low self-esteem and an absence of credible role models.

The only ‘Authentic Hadith’

I often hear Muslims categorically state that we have to embrace the Noble Quran and Hadith in order to follow the Sunnah. They say that it is ‘Kufr’ to separate the revelations that Prophet Muhammad recited from his sayings and teachings. They insist that even when he was in conversation with the companions, the laity or the Ahl Al-Bait; God was speaking through him. I would like to remind these Muslims that our Prophet sought guidance from what was revealed to him by the Almighty. Whenever he felt the great burden of responsibility and was distraught, he would turn to the verses of the Quran for solace. ‘And we have sent down to you the Book as an exposition of everything, a guidance, a mercy, and glad tidings for those who have submitted themselves’ (16:89). ‘We have explained in detail in this Quran for the benefit of mankind, every kind of similitude but man is in most things, contentious’ (18:54). ‘We have neglected nothing in the Book’ (6:38).

At a more personal level, I do believe in the Noble Quran and in the perfect example of our Prophet. The Noble Quran is the touchstone, an intellectual measure by which we confirm the veracity of Hadith. ‘Say: if the mankind and the jinn were together to produce the like of this Quran, they could not produce the like thereof even if they helped one another’ (16:88). As the Quran was being revealed, the Prophet would commit it to memory and then recite it to his companions. During these recitations the companions would memorize the Revelations; scribes would record the same in writing. The scribes would then read what they had written back to the Prophet; he would in-turn correct their mistakes. With each new Ayah that was revealed, the Prophet would dictate its placement within the Quranic order. This effectual process of validation was resolutely adhered to during the period the Prophet received the Revelations. ‘We have without doubt sent down the message, and We will assuredly guard it’ (15:9).

‘This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed my favour upon you and chosen for you Islam as your religion’ (5:3). Does what the Prophet say in the passing after the revelation of this verse, still be considered ‘Divine’; and for how long. The question is that if the sayings and teachings of the Prophet are ‘Divine’ then why can’t we recite them during Namaz. Why did the companions not feel the need to compile these traditions during the lifetime of the Prophet or soon after? Even when many of the companions were killed in the Wars of Apostasy at the time of Caliph Abu Bakr, the concern was primarily with collating the Quran. From what I have researched to-date, I unequivocally believe that the Noble Quran is the only ‘Authentic Hadith’ – ‘He has taught man that which he knew not’ (96:5).

Ignorance in our midst

People I have spoken with often hasten to call Jews and Christians disbelievers. I am disconcerted at the ease with which people condemn whole communities. Are all Jews and Christians ‘Kafir’ and all those who call themselves ‘Muslim’, believers? The Arabic word ‘Muslim’ translates to ‘one who submits to God’ in English. By virtue of this those who submitted to what was revealed to the Prophets are all ‘Muslim’. Al Quran(3:52) “When Jesus sensed disbelief, he said: Who are my helpers toward Allah? The disciples said: We are the helpers of Allah; we believe in Allah, and bear witness that we are Muslims.” Al Quran(7:159) “And of the people of Moses there is a community who guide with the truth and act justly.”

The tradition-bound and the obstinately opinionated will state outright that Jews and Christians cannot be trusted. Al Quran(5:51) “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as friends; they are but friends of each other. And if any amongst you takes them as friends, then surely he is one of them. Verily, God guides not those people who are wrong-doers.” They will claim that Judaism and Christianity are not religions recognized by Islam. Al Quran(3:85) “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.”

But the Arabic word ‘Islam’ translates to ‘Submission to the will of God’ in English. Can we say with certainty that all Jews and Christians don’t submit but all who call themselves ‘Muslim’, do? Al Quran(5:69) “Surely, those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabians and the Christians – whosoever believes in God and the Last Day, and does righteous deeds, on them shall be no fear nor shall they grieve.” Al Quran(22:40) “And were it not for Allah restraining mankind through the act of some opposing others, pulled down would be monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques wherein the name of Allah is mentioned in great profusion.”

I am saddened by the ‘Jahiliyah’ of a people who have in their possession a beautifully written book of prose and poetry – The Noble Quran. Al Quran(29:46) “And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in a way that is good, except with those among them that transgress; and say: We believe in that which has been sent down to us and sent down to you; our God and your God is One, and we have to Him submitted.” The problem is that people in our community are often ill-informed; their prejudice mostly gets the better of them. Any attempt at dialogue/debate to rectify this imbalance is usually met with a volley of ‘Quranic’ rhetoric and threats of violence. Is it any wonder that our fellow citizens look at us with the greatest of suspicion; probably asking themselves what it is that we are doing in this country if we do not agree with its ethos.

An opinion on the ‘Schism’

I am trying to ascertain what exactly happened subsequent to the death of our beloved Prophet. From what I have researched I can summarise that there was a sudden and an acute power vacuum. The selection of a temporal leader turned into a battle of succession for the very soul of Islam. Clan/Tribal allegiances came to the fore as ground realities clashed with the naivety of the ‘Sahabah’. Sassanid Persia and Roman Byzantine were waiting in the offing and false prophets were raising their ugly heads.

It must be the case that the Prophet left no clear instructions as to who would lead the Muslims after his death. I believe he did this deliberately because an explicit appointment would have accorded sanctity to the individual/clan. This in turn would have set a precedence for the creation of a religious figurehead with the stature of a prophet. Our Prophet understood the pitfalls of leaving behind an institution that would have become a proxy for the Noble Quran.

What is surprising is that even those closest to the Prophet disagreed about who should lead the ‘Ummah’ after his death. It’s difficult to contemplate that if the Prophet did leave clear instructions, those closest to him would disagree so soon after his death. That’s my reason for insisting that power should’ve been devolved to the clans/tribes, not institutionalised in a Caliphate.

Religious institutions are inherently corrupt because they usurp power from the communities they claim to represent. The Caliphate by default would’ve acted as proxy for the Noble Quran and the Sunnah, creating resentment in sections of the ‘Ummah’. Those whose wealth and/or position had not dissipated in the struggle for Islam, would inevitably come to dominate the Caliphate.

Concentration of power mostly results in nepotism and sycophancy, suffocating the individuals’ aspiration to achieve through merit. Hence, the absence of an enlightened ‘Ummah’ through informed scholarship; instead a pervasive ‘Jahalat’ promoted by a leadership that only reflects the prejudices of the body politic.

The declaration of faith

I have often asked myself: What Shahadah did the Prophets and other ‘Muslims’ before Muhammad recite?

‘Allah testifies: La ilaha illa Huwa, and the angels, and those having knowledge – truthfully, equitably. La ilaha illa Huwa, the All-Mighty, the All-Wise’ (3:18).
‘And We did not send any Messenger before you [O Muhammad] but We revealed to him: La ilaha illa ana, so worship Me’ (21:25).
‘He has ordained for you the same religion which He ordained for Noah, and that which We have revealed to you [O Muhammad], and that which We ordained for Abraham, Moses and Jesus – saying you should establish religion and make no divisions in it’ (42:13).
‘The Messenger believes in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, and the believers. Each one believes in Allah, His Angels, His Books, and His Messengers. [They say:] We make no distinction between one another of His Messengers, and they say – We hear and we obey’ (2:285).
‘Muhammad is no more than a Messenger, and indeed Messengers have passed away before him’ (3:144).

The unity of the Godhead is at the core of that which was revealed to all of the Prophets. We believe that it is this God that revealed the Torah to Moses, the Psalms to David, the Gospel to Jesus and the Quran to Muhammad. Therefore, articles of faith as prescribed in these scriptures cannot contain contradictions. It would be inconsistent for each of the Prophets to have told their respective congregation to recite a different Shahadah.

‘When the hypocrites come to you [O Muhammad], they say: We bear witness that you are indeed the Messenger of Allah. Allah knows that you are indeed His Messenger, and Allah bears witness that the hypocrites are liars indeed’. ‘They have made their oaths a screen [for their hypocrisy]. Thus they hinder [men] from the Path of Allah. Verily, evil is what they used to do’ (63:1/2). ‘Have you [O Muhammad] not seen those [hypocrites] who take as friends a people upon whom is the Wrath of Allah? They are neither of you nor of them, and they swear to a lie while they know’. ‘Allah has prepared for them a severe torment. Evil indeed is that which they used to do’. ‘They have made their oaths a screen [for their evil action]. Thus they hinder [men] from the Path of Allah, so they shall have a humiliating torment’ (58:14/16).
The hypocrites do not bear witness that La ilaha illa Huwa, only that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. God acknowledges [does not bear witness] that Muhammad is His Messenger. Only then does He proceed to bear witness that the hypocrites are liars. An examination of the wording and sequencing of the statements in the verse allows for a better understanding.