Pujian Buat Ibn Abd al-Wahhab

Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradhawi dalam kitabnya Fiqh al-Awlawiyyat memuji Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab katanya: “Bagi al-Imam Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab di Jazirah Arab perkara aqidah adalah menjadi keutamaanya untuk memelihara benteng tauhid dari syirik yang telah mencemari pancaran tauhid dan dikotori kesuciannya. Beliau telah menulis buku-buku dan risalah-risalah dalam perkara tersebut. Beliau bangkit menaggung bebanan secara dakwah dan praktikal dalam memusnahkan gambaran-gambaran syirik.”

Dr. Wahbah al-Zuhaili memuji Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab dengan berkata: “Sesuatu yang tidak syak padanya, menyedari hakikat yang sebenar, bukan untuk meredhakan sesiapa, berpegang kepada ayat al-Quran yang agung (maksudnya) “Jangan kamu kurangkan manusia apa yang menjadi hak-haknya”. (surah Hud:85) bahawa suara kebenaran yang paling berani, pendakwah yang terbesar untuk islah (pembaikan) membina umat, jihad dan mengembalikan individu Muslim kepada berpegang dengan jalan salafus soleh yang terbesar ialah dakwah Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab pada kurun yang ke 12 hijrah. Tujuannya adalah untuk mentajdidkan kehidupan muslim, setelah secara umum dicemari dengan pelbagai khilaf, kekeliruan, bid’ah dan penyelewengan. Maka Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab ialah pemimpin kebangkitan agama dan pembaikan (islah) yang dinantikan, yang menzahir timbangan aqidah yang bersih.”

Islam vs. Secularism

Secularism is defined in the Webster dictionary as: “A system of doctrines and practices that rejects any form of religious faith and worship” or “The belief that religion and ecclesiastical affairs should not enter into the function of the state especially into public education.”

There is no doubt that secularism contradicts Islam in every aspect. They are two different paths that never meet; choosing one means rejecting the other. Hence, whoever chooses Islam has to reject secularism. In the following, we go in the details of explaining why.

First, secularism makes lawful what Allah has made unlawful. The Rule of Allah (Shari`ah) is compulsory and has basic laws and regulations that cannot be changed. Some of these laws are concerned with the acts of worship, the relations between men and women, etc. Secularism makes adultery lawful if the male and the female are consenting adults.

As for Riba (interest on money), it is the basis of all financial transactions in secular economies. On the contrary, Allah says (2:278): “O you who believe, fear Allah and leave what comes from Riba if you are believers. If you do not do so, then wait for a war from Allah and His Messenger.” As for alcohol, all secular systems allow the consumption of alcohol and make selling it a lawful business.

Second, secularism is clear unbelief (Kufr). Secularism is based on separating religion from all the affairs of this life and hence, it rules by law and regulations other than Allah’s laws. Hence, secularism rejects Allah’s rules with no exception and prefers regulations other than Allah’s and His Messenger’s. In fact, many secularists claim that Allah’s laws might have been suitable for the time they were revealed but are now outdated.

As a result, most of the laws governing the daily affairs of life in the countries ruled by secular systems contradict Islam. Allah says (5:50): “Do they seek a judgment of Ignorance? But, who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah?”

Ibn Katheer said in the Tafseer of this verse that Allah is denouncing those who reject His ruling and accept other rulings that are not based on the Shari`ah of Allah. Whoever does so is indeed a non-believer. Indeed, belief in Allah can never go with the acceptance of other than His rulings in one’s heart. Allah says (5:44): “If any do fail to judge by what Allah has revealed, they are non-believers.”

From the above, the status of secularism and its relation to Islam are clear. But the ignorance about the Islamic truth is still dominating the Muslim’s mind. Most secular systems repeat slogans like “no religion in politics and no politics in religion” or “religion is for Allah, and the state is for the people.” Such sayings portray their view of Islam as a religion to be practiced in the mosque only, and that it should not be allowed to rule life outside the mosque. Furthermore, they try to deceive people with democratic slogans like “personal freedom” and “people governing people.” That means that people come first and no place is made for the ruling of Allah. This is why secularism is clear Kufr, this is why secular systems have no legality and authority and should be rejected by Muslims.

Isu Agama Anak

PANDANGAN DR MOHD ASRI ZAINUL ABIDIN MENGENAI KEPUTUSAN KABINET YANG MENETAP AGAMA ANAK BERDASARKAN AGAMA ASAL KETIKA PERKAHWINAN

Berbagai pihak meminta saya menyatakan pendirian dalam isu agama anak yang ditetapkan oleh Kabinet Malaysia yang baru. Di sini saya sebut, ada beberapa masalah dalam isu ini yang mesti difahami dan dinilai, juga pendapat saya dalam hal ini;

Islam menganggap setiap anak lahir dalam keadaan fitrah iaitu dalam keadaan yang bersih dari pencemaran pemikiran dan akidah. Tiada nilaian dosa atau pahala buat mereka. Jika mereka mati sebelum mencapai umur mukallaf, mereka mati dalam keadaan bersih sekalipun ibubapa mereka tidak menganut agama Islam.

Ibubapa merupakan faktor utama dalam mempengaruhi fitrah anak yang bersih tersebut. Anak kecil biasanya akan terikut dengan agama ibubapanya. Justeru itu Nabi s.a.w bersabda: “Setiap anak dilahirkan atas ‘fitrah’, maka kedua ibubapanya yang menyebabkan ia menjadi yahudi, atau nasrani atau majusi (Riwayat al-Bukhari dan Muslim).

Para sarjana fekah ramai yang berpendapat bahkan ada yang mendakwa telah ijmak (sepakat), bahawa pengislaman bapa membawa kepada pengislaman anak yang masih kecil. Namun mereka berbeza pendapat tentang pengislaman ibu; apakah diikuti dengan pengislaman anak atau tidak. Di kalangan sarjana fekah ada yang berpendapat agama anak berdasarkan agama yang paling mulia dan sudah pasti mereka akan memutuskan jika bertembung antara Islam dan selainnya; maka agamanya dianggap sebagai Islam. Apa yang penting tiada nas Islam yang jelas dalam memutuskan hal ini. Ia lebih merujuk kepada soal ijtihad. Namun asas yang penting yang mesti ditegakkan adalah keadilan, di samping memelihara kemuliaan Islam itu sendiri.

Kepentingan membincangkan tentang status agama anak ini adalah untuk pengurusan jenazah, harta pusaka dan beberapa perkara yang lain. Bukan untuk menentu kedudukannya di syurga atau neraka seperti yang difahami oleh sesetengah pihak. Ini disebabkan anak kecil bebas dari nilaian dosa dan pahala sehingga dia menjadi mukallaf.

Saya berpendapat; tiada kemunasabahan yang cukup untuk Pihak Kabinet menentukan agama anak secara keputusan yang sedemikian. Lebih baik urusan ini diserahkan kepada mahkamah –sekalipun mahkamah sivil- untuk memutuskannya. Mahkamah mesti menentukan hak jagaan kepada pihak yang paling baik untuk kemaslahatan anak. Di sini datangnya peranan badan-badan Islam atau pihak pengurusan zakat umat Islam untuk memastikan kekuatan kewangan dan sebagainya dalam membantu ‘saudara baru’ melayakkan mereka mendapat hak jagaan. Jika badan-badan ini masih tidur atau sekadar sibuk dengan lawatan dan mensyuarat di hotel-hotel sahaja, jadilah apa yang terjadi sekarang.

Keputusan kabinet tersebut boleh merampas hak salah seorang ibubapa yang menukar agamanya dan bersifat tidak adil. Jika sudut kebendaan itu yang dinilai, kelayakan menjaga seseorang anak itu berbeza antara pasangan. Tidak mungkin dibuat keputusan yang tetap kerana setiap pasangan mempunyai keadaan yang berbeza. Biar mahkamah menentukannya secara adil. Sesiapa yang berhak menjaga anak, maka tidak menjadi masalah jika berlaku perselisahan agama anak berdasarkan pihak yang menjaganya atau jika anak itu sudah pandai menilai, dia mungkin boleh membuat pengakuan agama pilihannya.

Sepatutnya, isu agama anak tidak ditimbulkan melainkan ketika perselisihan antara pasangan sahaja. Anak sepatutnya diberi peluang untuk mengenai Islam setelah ibu atau bapa menganut Islam. Peruntukan zakat muallaf secara besar perlu diberikan untuk ini. Zakat bukan lawatan hujung tahun dan penukaran kereta baru para pegawai. Malanglah keputusan kabinet ini boleh menghalang dakwah seorang bapa atau ibu kepada anak berkenaan.

Ini kerana, anak itu bersih fitrahnya. Ibubapa mempunyai peranan mempengaruhinya. Itu adalah hak mereka untuk mempengaruhi anak mereka. Jika salah seorang ibubapanya menganut Islam sementara seorang lagi tidak, anak berkenaan mungkin akan dipengaruhi oleh salah seorang daripada mereka. Sekalipun jika mereka berpisah, peluang yang adil untuk anak bertemu dengan bapa atau ibunya hendaklah diberikan. Selepas itu terpulang kepada anak berkenaan dalam menentukan agamanya.

Saya berpendapat; keputusan kabinet lebih dipengaruhi oleh perkembangan politik kepartian dan undi tanpa melihat kepada sudut keadilan untuk semua. Ia adalah penindasan terhadap saudara baru dan boleh menakutkan mereka yang ingin menganut Islam. Dalam kegilaan mendapatkan undi, jangan digadai masa depan umat Islam dan keharmonian agama dalam negara.

Sekali lagi saya tegaskan, golongan ‘saudara baru’ dalam negara ini tidak mendapat layanan yang sepatutnya dan pihak yang bertanggungjawab terutama yang menguruskan zakat dan badan-badan agama kerajaan pusat dan negeri tidak menyibukkan diri dalam menjaga kebajikan mereka dan usaha dakwah dalam memahamkan rakyat Malaysia tentang Islam yang sebenar. Zakat tidak diuruskan dengan sepatutnya dan dana-dana untuk kemajuan Islam tidak dialirkan dengan cara yang wajar dalam menjaga kepentingan dakwah Islamiyyah.

Saya dengan ini meminta pihak Kabinet menilai balik keputusan tersebut dan juga pihak-pihak agama dalam negara kita memainkan peranan yang sepatutnya dalam memberikan keadilan kepada ‘saudara baru’.

Jika Fatwa Kebangsaan JAKIM boleh membuat sidang fatwa segera tentang ‘dakwat pilihanraya’ mengapa tidak Pengerusi Fatwa Kebangsaan tidak memberikan pandangan para mufti dengan segera dan jelas dalam hal ini. Malanglah jika isu penkid dan yoga digembar-gembur, tetapi isu keadilan hak saudara baru dilewat-lewatkan.

Saya ingin berpesan kepada diri sendiri, juga mengambil kesempatan berpesan kepada mereka yang berjawatan berkaitan agama agar jangan memikirkan tentang gaji, sambungan kontrak, gelaran menjelang harijadi sultan, elaun, rombongan dan urusan dunia yang lain melebihi kepentingan dan masa depan umat.



Dr Mohd Asri bin Zainul Abidin,
29.4.09

Lampeter, UK.

Are We Human?

Before we can speak of human responsibilities or rights, one must answer the basic religious and philosophical question, “What does it mean to be human?” In today’s world everyone speaks of human rights and the sacred character of human life, and many secularists even claim that they are the true champions of human rights as against those who accept various religious worldviews. But strangely enough, often those same champions of humanity believe that human beings are nothing more than evolved apes, who in turn evolved from lower life forms and ultimately from various compounds of molecules. If the human being is nothing but the result of ‘blind forces’ acting upon the original cosmic soup of molecules, then is not the very statement of the sacredness of human life intellectually meaningless and nothing but a hollow sentimental expression? Is not human dignity nothing more than a conveniently contrived notion without basis in reality? And if we are nothing but highly organized inanimate particles, what is the basis for claims to “human rights?” These basic questions know no geographic boundaries and are asked by thinking people everywhere.

Christianity in the West has sought to answer them on the firm theological basis that “human beings were created in the image of God” and it is the immortal soul and the spark of the Spirit within men and women that constitutes the basis for human dignity, the sacredness of human life, and ultimately human rights. In fact, many Christian thinkers, both Catholic and Protestant, as well as Jewish thinkers insist that human dignity is based on the Divine Imprint upon the human soul and that historically in the West the idea of human rights, even in its secularized version, is derived from the religious conception of the human state.

For Islam, likewise, human beings are defined in their relation to God, and both their responsibilities and rights derive from that relationship. As we all know, Islam believes that God breathed His Spirit into Adam and according to the famous hadith, “God created Adam in His form.” The word ‘form’ means the reflection of God’s Names and Qualities. Human being, therefore, reflect the Divine Attributes like a mirror, which reflect the light of the Sun. By the virtue of being created as this central being in the terrestrial realm, the human being was chosen by God as His vicegerent (khalīfat Allāh) as well as His servant (‘abd Allāh). As servants human beings must remain in total obedience to God and in perfect receptivity before what their Creator wills for them. As vicegerent they must be active in the world to do God’s Will here on earth.

The Islamic conception of insān, or man, as the anthropos encompassing both male and female sates, can be summed up as the wedding of these two qualities in him. But God has also given human beings free will, in which it means that they can rebel against their own primordial nature and become active against Heaven and passive to their own lower nature and the world of senses, so that not all human beings remain God’s servants and vicegerents. In fact, the perfection of these passive and active modes belongs to the prophets and saints alone. Nevertheless all human beings possess dignity, and their lives are sacred because of that primordial nature, which all the progeny of Adam and Eve carry deep within themselves.

Throughout Islamic history many philosophical, theological and mystical discussions have taken place about this issue, but one basic element with which all schools of Islamic thought and ordinary believers agree is the truth that God is our Creator, or, philosophically speaking, the ontological cause of our existence. It is therefore we who owe everything to Him and our rights derive from fulfilling our responsibilities towards Him and obeying His Will.

To understand our relation to God, we must first ask what God wants of us. The Quran makes this demand clear when it states, “I have not created the jinn and humanity except to worship Me” (51: 56); also “Verily I, I am God. There is no God save Me. So worship Me and establish prayers for My remembrance” (20: 14). The word “worship” (‘ibādah) in Arabic also means ‘service.’ To worship God is also to serve Him. Many interpretations have been given of the term ‘ibādah by commentators; its meaning ranges from ordinary acts of worship to loving and knowing God. The purpose of human existence is considered by Islam to be the worship and service of God, and only in carrying out the aim and purpose of our existence are we fully human. Otherwise, although we carry the human reality within ourselves, we fall short of it and live beneath the fully human state.

The Impacts of Secularism on Muslim Education

It seems that the affirmative stance of Islam on scientific inquiry and method created a basic attitude of receptivity to modern/Western influences in the spheres of education, the legal profession and the judiciary. Notwithstanding the many questions that were asked as to whether Western secular methods should be accepted in Islam’s traditional center’s of learning, that resistance has gradually diminished and significant changes have been made to educational curricula and methods in Islamic schools and universities. Reforms of this kind continued to be undertaken even decades after the end of colonial rule in some Muslim countries.

Public education in Muslim countries, including scientific education, was brought by colonial powers who replaced the Islamic educational system that prevailed earlier, or else the new methods were superimposed on an under-layer of the traditional system that still remained operative. The Western approach to education basically precluded religion from the purview of science and led to inevitable conflict with it. The product of that combination was duality and bifurcation between the old and the new, a colonial legacy which persists to this day in the educational system of many Muslim countries. It has proved difficult to blend the two systems into an integrated whole, despite the fact that policy makers in Muslim countries have often tried to achieve that.

The Western scientific approach to liberal education can be seen in the 1946 Harvard Committee Report entitled General Education in a Free Society, which divides knowledge into three categories: natural sciences, humanities, and social studies. General education is expected to develop certain capabilities of the mind which are “to think effectively, to communicate thought, to make relevant judgments [and] to discriminate among values.”

Effective thinking is described as having three phases: logical, rational and imaginative. Logical thinking is applicable to practical matters such as whom to vote for and whom to befriend; it is also the ability to extract universal truths from particular cases and infer the particular from the general. It is manifested in the ability to analyze a problem and recombine its relevant elements with the help of imagination.

By rational thinking, the Report means the ability to think at a level appropriate to a problem. The Report adds that making relevant value judgment involves the ability of the student to bear a whole range of ideas upon the area of experience. “Discrimination among values” means the ability to distinguish various kinds of values, aesthetic, moral and intellectual and then to commit oneself to such values in the conduct of life.

The Report excludes metaphysical knowledge and religious studies from the sphere of knowledge, and confines the attention of educationists to a concept of man for whom belief in God or even pursuit of knowledge beyond the domain of the senses does not have any special significance. One commentator noted that by ignoring religious studies the Report failed to appreciate the effect of religion on personality and the direction that effective thinking might take as a result of the impact of religion on the whole person.

The view that Islam subordinates science to the teaching of religion finds support in Professor Seyyed Hossein Nasr who wrote that by contrast to the Western world which views the science of nature to be mainly concerned with “quantitative aspects of things,” and science is closely identified with technology and its applications, Islamic science “seeks perfection and deliverance.” To understand it requires placing oneself within its perspective as a “science of nature which has a different end, and uses different means from those of modern science.” The ultimate aim of Islamic science, Nasr added, has always been to relate the corporeal world to its basic spiritual principle which seeks to unite the various orders of reality. “The arts and sciences in Islam are based on the idea of unity” and its aim is to show the inter relatedness of all that exists. In contemplating the unity of the cosmos, man may be led to the unity of the Divine principle, of which the unity of Nature is the image. Professor Nasr’s views have been met with some reservation, as one of his critics noted: “For me the true worth of science lies in helping us to understand nature ... We need science and technology not to make us more spiritual, moral and ethical...[but] to make us more productive” and enable us to subdue and manipulate nature. I also have some reservation over the statement that Islamic science has different ends and uses different means compared to modern science. For I started the basic theme of this essay with a hypothesis that the inductive method, being the principal means and tool of modern science, is equally accepted in the Islamic theory of knowledge, be it the arts, the natural sciences or medicine. Soroush is of the view that modern science explains the world as if it was not created by a god, not denying his existence, but rather finding no need to postulate it. It is thus assumed that even if there were a god, science would nonetheless be able to explain the world without relying on his existence. Soroush has thus acknowledged a degree of disharmony between religion and science but added that the tension which exists between them need not be exaggerated.

Secularism is widely regarded as one of the tools, and also a major contribution, of modern science, which stands at odds with spirituality and religion. Yet it is interesting to note that secularism has penetrated public education in the Muslim world especially during the colonial rule and ever since. Secularism is defined as the deliverance of Man “first from religious and then from metaphysical control over his reason and language.” Secularism and modernization both subscribe to a fundamental belief in rationality and scientific thought: Just as Nature is separated from the will of God, Man is ‘freed’ from the restrictive demands of religion. It would be difficult to claim that Islamic thought can accept secularism as such without some reservations. Yet certain aspects of secularism have been adopted in the Arab world and brought about considerable transformation in its institutions of learning, the judiciary and the status of religious scholars and ulama. It is also manifested elsewhere in the replacement largely of fuqaha’ by lawyers, and of religious teachers by trained teachers in modern schools, especially when the kuttab/maktab, the Qur’anic schools, were transformed into modern schools on the Western model, even though the process was gradual and uneven. One of the reservations that may be noted here is as follows: Muslims have adopted many of the premises of secularism without, however, isolating religion from public life. This may be said to be manifested in many of the formal constitutions of Muslim countries which recognize Islam either as the state religion or accord other forms of recognition to its validity and acceptance.

The changes that took place in public education and Islamic institutions of learning were on a wider scale in other parts of the Middle East compared to Egypt, where for various reasons, al-Azhar kept its control over primary education. In the Maghreb, French colonialism divided the education system into a modern sector closely modeled on the French system and another, older sector, based on the kuttab. The transformation was extended with the replacement of the madaris, which used to teach the fiqh, the Qur’an, the hadith and elements of Arabic, by universities applying modern curricula. Drastically revised curricula were later, and somewhat reluctantly, introduced by institutions like al-Azhar, and Zaytuna, perhaps less drastically in the former. But Zaytuna was transformed so much that reduced its status from a university to what is now a part of a modern university, known as the Faculty of Religious Studies. Changes in al-Azhar were not as radical as the new faculties, and their revised curricula still remained under the umbrella of the old al-Azhar principles and traditions.

Turkey under Kamal Ataturk had imported Western secular education without even attempting to reform the traditional system. Indonesia, and Malaysia, although Muslim majority countries, almost uncritically accepted secularism or else remained non-committal to the idea of a reformed Islamic educational system beyond retaining religious education as a subject in the curricula of their national schools. Both countries have in the meantime retained their traditional madrassas, some of which have been expanded, and to some extent reformed, in recent decades.

These changes led to a shift from a perception which saw public affairs, society and education through the prism of religion, to one that bore the imprint of modernity, or nahdah (awakening), that implied openness to further modernization. Changes were often accompanied by social upheavals that took place in Arab and Muslim societies far over a century that affected their education system and the judiciary more than most. The body of ulama was displaced from the leading places it had occupied in public life. The introduction of legal codes in many fields that were previously governed by the fiqh texts added to the marginalized status of the ulama. Formal constitutions introduced on the eve of colonialism in many Muslim and Arab countries were yet other instrument of secularism which articulated the ideas and foundations of the Western nation state in these countries.

Faith and Reason: A Qur’anic Perspective

The basic harmony of faith and reason is also manifested in the Qur’an through a series of exclusions which seek to clarify the correct from the misleading means and avenues of knowledge. These are manifested in at least four contexts, which may be summarized as follows:

(a) Rejection of conjecture (al-zann) vis-a-vis certitude (al-yaqin)

This is a basic guideline that the Qur’an advocates not only in religious disputation but also in the context of learning, testimony and adjudication, and indeed in most other areas of human relations. Although certainty remains the ideal standard of knowledge, conjecture that inclines toward probability is nevertheless accepted as a basis of judgment in practical human affairs (mu’amalat), such as in court decisions that are often based on zann, for want of certainty, in order to facilitate resolution of disputes among people.

The Qur’an precludes conjecture and probability as a basis of belief, as faith must be based in conviction, which precludes zann. To this effect the text takes its deniers to task, for their blind faith in what is no more than conjecture: “... they follow not aught but conjecture, and surely conjecture avails nothing against the truth” (al-Qur’an 53: 28). Conjecture in this verse, as in many other verses of the Qur’an (al-Qur’an 10: 36; 6:116), is used in contradistinction to knowledge (‘ilm, yaqin), and it is ‘ilm acquired through hearing, seeing and reason that command acceptance. This is what the believers are instructed in another verse to “...follow not that of which you have no knowledge ('ilm). Surely the hearing and the sight and the heart are all accountable” (al-Qur’an 17: 36).

(b) Rejection of passion and untrammelled desire (hawa’)

Qur’anic references to hawab occur in contradistinction to correct guidance and truth. Thus it is provided in an address to the Prophet-King David: “O David! We made you a vicegerent in the earth so that you judge among people with truth, and follow not the passion that sways you away from the path of God” (al-Qur’an 38: 26).

Confusion that can be caused by passion, whether consisting of love, hatred or anger etc., can be so powerful as to obfuscate rational judgment. The basic message of this verse is that the best qualified of judges, even prophets, are not immune to the influence of hawa’. Equally clear is also the point that knowledge and truth must be pursued and vindicated through reasonable methods that are not influenced by personal sentiment and passion. The extensive influence of hawa’ is elsewhere indicated in the Qur’an, which provided in an address to Prophet Muhammad: “Have you seen (the predicament of) one who chooses for his god his own passion? Would you then be a guardian over him?” (al-Qur’an 25: 43).

Passion can dominate a person’s outlook totally in which case truth and reason can have but little place in his order of priorities. The Prophet Muhammad has been repeatedly warned as to the little or no impact his teachings could make on such persons. This evidence sustains the conclusion that rationality is a means to knowledge, discovery of truth, and justice only when it is not tainted by the vagaries of hawa’.

(c) Rejection of blind imitation

Islam’s outlook on reason is also based on its intrinsic merit that is inspired by nothing less than conviction, as opposed to blind imitation of the custom and legacy of the past. The objectivity of reason is to be ensured by its independence from conventional practice which does not necessarily provide correct knowledge and guidance. The past must be judged in the light of reason and rejected if it is found misleading. To this effect, the Qur’an has recounted the attitude of its deniers and the typical response they have given to the Prophet Muhammad: “Nay, we follow the way of our ancestors- even if their ancestors did not know nor were they rightly guided” (al-Qur’an 5:104; also 2:170). This was also the response that Prophet Abraham and many other prophets received from idol-worshipers but the text retorted it in such terms: both you and your ancestors were clearly misguided (al-Qur’an 21:52; 7:70; 11:87). These references to past events and prophets are made with a view to underline certain continuity of values, and in this instance, also to confirm that knowledge and truth stand on their own merit independently of custom and convention of the past.

(d) Rejection of oppressive dictatorship

The Qur’an takes to task those who indiscriminately obey arrogant dictators who are themselves averse to enlightenment and truth. Thus it is provided that the plea of those who say on the Day of Judgment: “O our Lord! Surely we obeyed our princes and great men, but they misled us” (al-Qur’an 33: 66) will have no merit. This is because, as the text explains, they rejected the correct guidance when it was conveyed to them. In another verse, the text refers to the Pharaoh who misled his people: “We sent Moses with our signs and clear evidence unto Pharaoh and his chiefs, but they followed Pharaoh’s command which failed to give the right guidance” (al-Qur’an 11: 96). In another verse it is stated that the Pharaoh persuaded his people to make light (of Moses), and they obeyed him. They were none other but a wanton folk (al-Qur’an 43: 54).

People are thus advised to use their own judgment and distinguish between guidance and misguidance in the light of reason. This is because they themselves, and not their self-styled leaders, would ultimately be held responsible. The intrinsic value of truth and knowledge must therefore remain unaffected by the indulgent claims of oppressive men who often seek to subjugate others for their own selfish interests.

Muhammad ‘Abduh (d.1905) held that there is no necessary conflict between religion and science. Both are founded in reason, and both study natural phenomena, albeit from different angles. Since the Qur’an encourages the Muslims to study and investigate the universe, Islam should be considered as a friend, not the enemy, of science. ‘Abduh also observed that there was nothing against true Islam in modern civilization and science, provided that Islam was rightly understood and rightly expressed.

In saying this ‘Abduh emphasized those Islamic tenets and principles which are fundamental to Islam and are not meant to be of local and temporary application.

The Status of Women in Islam

In Islam there is absolutely no difference between men and women as far as their relationship to God is concerned, as both are promised the same reward for good conduct and the same punishment for evil conduct. The Qur’an, in addressing the believers, often uses the expression, ‘believing men and women’ to emphasize the equality of men and women in regard to their respective duties, rights, virtues and merits. It says:

“For Muslim men and women, for believing men and women, for devout men and women, for true men and women, for men and women who are patient and constant, for men and women who humble themselves, for men and women who give in charity, for men and women who fast, for men and women who guard their chastity, and for men and women who engage much in God’s praise, for them has God prepared forgiveness and great reward.” (Al-Qur’an 33:35)

This clearly contradicts the assertion of some of the Christian Fathers that woman does not possess souls and that they will exist as sexless beings in the next life. The Qur’an says that women have souls in exactly the same way as men and will enter Paradise if they do well:

“Enter into Paradise, you and your wives, with delight.” (Al-Qur’an 43:70)

“Who so does that which is right, and believes, whether male or female, him or her will We quicken to happy life.” (Al-Qur’an 16:97)

The Qur’an admonishes those men who oppress or ill-treat women:

“O you who believe! You are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should you treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the dowry you have given them - except when they have become guilty of open lewdness. On the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If you take a dislike to them, it may be that you dislike something and God will bring about through it a great deal of good.” (Al-Quran 4:19)

Considering the fact that before the advent of Islam the pagan Arabs used to bury their female children alive, make women dance naked in the vicinity of the Ka’ba during their annual fairs, and treat women as mere chattels and objects of sexual pleasure -- possessing no rights or position whatsoever, these teachings of the Noble Qur’an were revolutionary. Unlike other religions, which regarded women as being possessed of inherent sin and wickedness, and men as being possessed of inherent virtue and nobility, Islam regards men and women as being of the same essence created from a single soul. The Qur’an declares:

“O mankind! Revere your Guardian-Lord, who created you from a single person, created, of like nature, his mate, and from this pair scattered (like seeds) countless men and women. Revere God, through Whom you demand your mutual (rights), and reverence the wombs (that bore you); for God ever watches over you.” (Al-Quran 4:1)

The Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him, said, “Women are the twin halves of men.” The Qur’an emphasizes the essential unity of men and women in a most beautiful simile:

“They (your wives) are your garment and you are a garment for them.” (Al-Qur’an 2:187)

Just as a garment hides our nakedness, so do husband and wife, by entering into the relationship of marriage, secure each other’s chastity. The garment gives comfort to the body; so does the husband find comfort in his wife’s company and she in his. The garment is the grace, the beauty, the embellishment of the body, so too are wives to their husbands as their husbands are to them. Islam does not consider woman “an instrument of the Devil”, but rather the Qur’an calls her ‘muhsana’ - a fortress against Satan because a good woman, by marrying a man, helps him keep to the path of rectitude in his life. It is for this reason that marriage was considered by the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, as a most virtuous act. He said:

“When a man marries, he has completed one half of his religion.”

He enjoined matrimony on Muslims by saying:

“Marriage is part of my way and whoever keeps away from my way is not from me (i.e. is not my follower).”

The Qur'an has given the raison d'être of marriage in the following words:

“And among His signs is this, which He has created for you mates from among yourselves, which you may dwell in tranquillity with them; and He has put love and mercy between you. Verily in that are signs for those who reflect.” (Al-Qur’an 30:21)

The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was full of praise for virtuous and chaste women. He said:

“The world and all things in the world are precious but the most precious thing in the world is a virtuous woman.”

He once told the future Caliph, ‘Umar:

“Shall I not inform you about the best treasure a man can hoard? It is a virtuous wife who pleases him whenever he looks towards her, and who guards herself when he is absent from her.”

On other occasions the Prophet, peace be upon him, said:

“The best property a man can have is a remembering tongue (i.e. which remembers God), a grateful heart and a believing wife who helps him in his faith.”

And again:

“The world, the whole of it, is a commodity and the best of the commodities of the world is a virtuous wife.”

Before the advent of Islam women were often treated worse than animals. The Prophet wanted to put a stop to all cruelties to women. He preached kindness towards them. He told the Muslims:

“Fear God in respect of women.”

And:

“The best of you are they who behave best to their wives.”

“A Muslim must not hate his wife, and if he be displeased with one bad quality in her, let him be pleased with one that is good.”

And:

“The more civil and kind a Muslim is to his wife, the more perfect in faith he is.”

The Prophet, peace be upon him, was most emphatic in enjoining upon Muslims to be kind to their women when he delivered his famous sermon (Arabic: khutba) on the Mount of Mercy, at Arafat, in the presence of one hundred and twenty-four thousand of his Companions who had gathered there for the Hajj al-Wada (Farewell Pilgrimage). In it he ordered those present, and through them all those Muslims who were to come later, to be respectful and kind towards women. He said:

“Fear God regarding women. Verily you have married them with the trust of God, and made their bodies lawful with the word of God. You have got (rights) over them, and they have got (rights) over you in respect of their food and clothing according to your means.”

In Islam a woman is a completely independent personality. She can make any contract or bequest in her own name. She is entitled to inherit in her position as mother, as wife, as sister and as daughter. She has perfect liberty to choose her husband. The pagan society of pre-Islamic Arabia had an irrational prejudice against their female children whom they used to bury alive. The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, was totally opposed to this practice. He showed them that supporting their female children would act as a screen for them against the fire of Hell:

“It is narrated by the Prophet’s wife, ‘Aisha, that a woman entered her house with two of her daughters. She asked for charity but ‘Aisha could not find anything except a date, which was given to her. The woman divided it between her two daughters and did not eat any herself. Then she got up and left. When the Prophet, peace be upon him, came to the house, ‘Aisha told him about what had happened and he declared that when this woman was brought to account (on the Day of Judgment) about her two daughters, they would act as a screen for her from the fires of Hell.”

The worst calamity for a woman is when her husband passes away and, as a widow, the responsibility of maintaining the children falls upon her. In the Eastern World, where a woman does not always go out to earn her living, the problems of widowhood are indescribable. The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, upheld the cause of widows. Most of his wives were widows. In an age when widows were rarely permitted to remarry, the Prophet encouraged his followers to marry them. He was always ready to help widows and exhorted his followers to do the same. Abu Hurairah reported that the Prophet said:

“One who makes efforts (to help) the widow or a poor person is like a mujahid (warrior) in the path of God, or like one who stands up for prayers all of the the night and fasts all of the day.”

Woman as mother commands great respect in Islam. The Noble Qur’an speaks of the rights of the mother in a number of verses. It enjoins Muslims to show respect to their mothers and serve them well even if they are still unbelievers. The Prophet, peace be upon him, states emphatically that the rights of the mother are paramount. Abu Hurairah reported that a man came to the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, and asked:

“O Messenger of God, who is the person who has the greatest right on me with regards to kindness and attention? He replied, “Your mother.” “Then who?” He replied, “Your mother.” “Then who?” He replied, “Your mother.” “Then who?” He replied, “Your father.”

In another tradition, the Prophet advised a believer not to join the war against the Quraysh (i.e. the pagan disbelievers at that time) in defence of Islam, but to look after his mother, saying that his service to his mother would be a cause for his salvation. Mu’awiyah, the son of Jahimah, reported that Jahimah came to the Prophet, peace be upon him, and said:

“Messenger of God! I want to join the fighting (in the path of God) and I have come to seek your advice.” He said, “Then remains in your mother’s service, because Paradise is under her feet.”

The Prophet’s followers accepted his teachings and brought about a revolution in their social attitude towards women. They no longer considered women as a mere chattel, but as an integral part of society. For the first time women were given the right to have a share in inheritance. In the new social climate, women rediscovered themselves and became highly active members of society rendering useful service during the wars which the pagan Arabs forced on the emerging Muslim Ummah. They carried provisions for the soldiers, nursed them, and even fought alongside them if it was necessary. It became a common sight to see women helping their husbands in the fields, carrying on trade and business independently, and going out of their homes to satisfy their needs.

‘Aisha reported that Saudah bint Zam’ah went out one night. ‘Umar saw her and recognized her and said, “By God, O Saudah, why do you not hide yourself from us?” She went back to the Prophet, peace be upon him, and told him about it while he was having supper in his room, and he said: “It is permitted by God for you to go out for your needs.”

The predominant idea in the teachings of Islam with regard to men and women is that a husband and wife should be full-fledged partners in making their home a happy and prosperous place, and that they should be loyal and faithful to one another, and genuinely interested in each other’s welfare and the welfare of their children. A woman is expected to exercise a humanizing influence over her husband and to soften the sternness inherent in his nature. A man is enjoined to educate the women in his care so that they cultivate the qualities in which they, by their very nature, excel.

These aspects were much emphasized by the Prophet, peace be upon him. He exhorted men to marry women of piety and women to be faithful to their husbands and kind to their children. He said:

“Among my followers the best of men are those who are best to their wives, and the best of women are those who are best to their husbands. To each of such women is set down a reward equivalent to the reward of a thousand martyrs. Among my followers, again, the best of women are those who assist their husbands in their work, and love them dearly for everything, save what is a transgression of God’s laws.”

Once Mu’awiyah asked the Prophet, peace be upon him:

“What are the rights that a wife has over her husband?” The Prophet, peace be upon him, replied: “Feed her when you take your food, give her clothes to wear when you wear clothes, refrain from giving her a slap on the face or abusing her, and do not separate from your wife, except within the house.”

Once a woman came to the Prophet, peace be upon him, with a complaint against her husband. He told her:

“There is no woman who removes something to replace it in its proper place, with a view to tidying her husband’s house, but that God sets it down as a virtue for her. Nor is there a man who walks with his wife hand-in-hand, but that God set it down as a virtue for him; and if he puts his arm round her shoulder in love, his virtue is increased tenfold.”

Once he was heard praising the women of the tribe of Quraysh, saying:

“. . . because they are the kindest to their children while they are infants and because they keep a careful watch over the belongings of their husbands.”

The Shari’ah (Islamic Law) regards women as the spiritual and intellectual equals of men. The main distinction it makes between them is in the physical realm based on the equitable principle of fair division of labour. It allots the more strenuous work to the man and makes him responsible for the maintenance of the family. It allots the work of managing the home and the upbringing and training of children to the woman, work which has the greatest importance in the task of building a healthy and prosperous society.

It is a fact, however, that sound administration within the domestic field is impossible without a unified policy. For this reason the Shari’ah requires a man, as head of the family, to consult with his family and then to have the final say in decisions concerning it. In doing so he must not abuse his prerogative to cause any injury to his wife. Any transgression of this principle involves for him the risk of losing the favour of God, because his wife is not his subordinate but she is, to use the words of the Prophet, peace be upon him, ‘the queen of her house’, and this is the position a true believer is expected to give his wife. In contrast to these enlightened teachings of Islam in respect of women, Western talk of women’s liberation or emancipation is actually a disguised form of exploitation of her body, deprivation of her honour, and degradation of her soul! Wallahua’lam……

Crisis in the Muslim World

To understand our current crisis accurately, we need to return to the revelation of the Qur’an and its basic concepts of tawhid, istikhlaf, individual and communal responsibility, ‘umran, and pursuit of knowledge. This supreme and civilized message to humanity transformed the early Arab Muslims into a great people, the bearers of a great religion, and the creators of great civilizations and history. They sought guidance from the Qur’an and developed their means through reason and knowledge of Allah’s natural laws (sunan). For the first time in history they developed the foundations of scientific and experimental methods – the same foundations that gave contemporary materialistic civilization its power of science and technology.

However, Islamic civilization was not materialistic, for it was cantered on istikhlaf, responsibility, and action to create a balanced way of life: spiritually, morally, and materially. Islam and the early generations of Muslims represented a distinguished and dynamic power in the Ummah’s history. This powerful Islamic guidance remains responsible for preserving the Ummah and most of the goodness in Muslims’ lives and consciousness. Unfortunately, the Ummah has retained remnants of old traditions, philosophies, and racial and tribal practices that continue to impact the lives of its people. Over time, this caused the Ummah’s degeneration and influenced new Muslims, as they did before Islam, thus weakening the religious enlightenment. Over the centuries, separation and confrontation within the Ummah’s intellectual leadership developed – a truly disastrous result. In other words, Muslim scholars and the political and intellectual ruling elites confronted each other.

This development weakened both sides and caused serious harm to their social roles and to the Ummah. Thinkers and scholars were isolated from the everyday lives of ordinary people, and their dynamics and concerns became increasingly theoretical. This situation prevented the growth of the social sciences and gradually drove scholars (ulama) to pure imitation and memorization. Students of ancient and alien philosophies did not truly benefit from the early scientific, experimental, and action-oriented Islamic principles and methods, but continued to follow the theoretical path. This added further harm and confusion to the Ummah’s intellectual life. In their isolation, the ulama developed a distorted view of Islam’s universal vision, one that was no longer ummatic and positive. They were no longer concerned with the Ummah’s life, and its public institutions were no longer part of their agenda. This led to the marked deterioration of the Ummah and its public institutions. The ulama concentrated on Islam’s ritual (private) aspects (e.g., salah, siyam, and Qur’anic recitation), which they called ‘ibadat, although the Qur’anic terminology refers to them as dhikr. They called the jihad of life to pursue a halal lifestyle, the jihad to seek knowledge, the jihad to spread da’wah, and the jihad to defend the Ummah. They focused on mu’amalat, mere dealings and contracts almost devoid of spiritual value.

This distortion of Islam’s universal vision was largely responsible for distorting Islamic life and institutions and giving Muslims a negative attitude toward life and civilization. The Muslim masses and societies were no longer the strong muwahidin and mustakhlafin, but weak and submissive. In short, the average Muslim was transformed into a person that concentrated on survival and thus showed little interest in pursuing an important civilizational role in history. The isolation of intellectuals and scholars fragmented the sources of Islamic knowledge. The knowledge was either religious or therefore based on the Qur’an and Sunnah and supported with linguistic tools in a historical context. Or it was human knowledge, and therefore related to foreign cultures and civilizations, and alien to the Islamic worldview, values, and Muslim psychology and culture.

The opposition and confrontation between Islamic scholars and the corrupt political, tribal, and aristocratic elites weakened the rulers’ position in two ways. First, it continually raised doubts about the legitimacy of their rule. Second, they were deprived and alienated from the intellectual base that could provide the intellectual support and ability to deal with Ummah’s changing circumstances. As a result, due to the weakened state of the Ummah and the rulers, both the ulama and the rulers turned to the “lesser evil” of oppression and violence to control the people in order to avoid political and social chaos. The rulers and the political elites imprisoned or executed their opponents, while the ulama threatened spiritual and eternal punishment to suppress intellectual dissatisfaction and revolt against their arbitrary authority and interpretations of religious text. The crushing of intellectual expression and the oppression of corrupt rulers polluted the national culture and created a negative and superstitious mentality that finally influenced the development of the Muslims’ “slave mentality.” It is, therefore, not surprising that Muslims appear to be fearful, negative, and lacking in initiative and creativity. The end result was a distorted universal Muslim vision, deficient knowledge, a corrupt public life, a superstitious mentality, and a damaging slave mentality. After losing their scientific and creative mentality, Muslim scientists turned to memorizing scientific procedures or imitating and importing scientific and technological tools and systems. In so doing, they hoped to achieve the ability to carry out research and development that would help the Ummah to catch up with the developed nations.

But we must do more than this – we need to correct our mental, cultural, and psychological distortions; adjust our world vision in order to regain our ummatic outlook; rectify our epistemological view in order to reunite religious and human knowledge; cleanse our culture from all distortions and superstitions in order to restore our Islamic scientific mentality and methodology; and reform our parental and educational methods.

We need to return to the Prophet’s methods of child development and education. The Prophet used love, care, respect, patience, wise guidance, effective communication, and supervision when dealing with children. For example, when he spoke to children (such as Ibn ‘Abbas), he did not address them in the same way that the Qur’an addresses its enemies, nor did he threaten or frighten them. Instead, he created an atmosphere of love and mutual support between the children and God, and taught them courage. For example, he told Ibn ‘Abbas:

“Now, boy, care about God, for God cares about you. Remember God in your good times, for God remembers you in your hard times of need. If everyone wants to harm you with something that God has not decided would happen to you, they cannot harm you. Likewise, if they want to benefit you with something that God has not decided for you, they cannot benefit you. The pens have been dried, and the records have been closed.”

The Prophet used such words to teach Ibn ‘Abbas courage, because courage is the real basis of a strong character and all virtues. On another occasion, the Prophet addressed the mind and reason while replying to a man who asked him if he could leave his camel untethered and trust in God to protect it while he prayed. The Prophet told him to tether the camel and then trust in God.

The Prophet was very careful and thoughtful in dealing with his grandson, al-Hussain, who once climbed on his back while he was leading the prayers in the mosque. The Prophet made an unusually long sujud, which caused his companions to wonder if it was a revelation. He told them that he did not want to rise (from sujud) hastily, for that would not allow his grandson enough time to enjoy his ride. The lesson here was not that he loved his grandson, but that he was the grandfather of a small child who knew nothing about salah, sujud, or iman. All he could understand was that his grandfather was on the ground, so he climbed on his back to play. The Prophet had two choices: put him down in a hurry without saying a word to him because he was praying, or give him some time to play and enjoy himself and then put him down carefully and continue the prayer. His constant thoughtful and careful nature, which precluded his hitting a child, enabled him to succeed as a father and a grandfather.

Rethinking Anthropology and Islam

Anthropology has much for which to thank bin Laden. After decades of criticism, anthropology was on the ropes not long ago. Its founding father and mother were discredited: Bronislaw Malinowski for lusting after young natives and Margaret Mead for cooking up ethnographic accounts. Its own practitioners despaired and predicted “The End of Anthropology” (Worsley, 1966; Banaji, 1970). When the field appeared at its weakest, the powerful new voice of Edward Said emerged to denounce it as tainted by the dreaded word ‘Orientalism’ (Said, 1978). Perhaps the unkindest cut was that anthropology was not even seen as a bulldog in the service of the Western imperialists but rather as a mere puppy. Students of anthropology wandered aimlessly – sometimes into postmodernist literary conceit and sometimes into autobiographical excess. Like John Keats’s knight in ‘La Belle Dame Sans Merci’ anthropology appeared to be ‘ailing’. It appeared ‘alone and palely loitering.’

September 11 changed all that. The main interests of anthropology – ideas of ethnicity, group loyalty, honour, revenge, suicide, tribal code, the conflict between what anthropologists call the Great Tradition of world religions and their local practice or the Little Tradition – were being discussed everywhere. Perhaps people were not even aware that they were discussing these issues as they were identified with traditional, even ‘primitive’ societies, and therefore discredited; now they were front-page news. What was clear was the sense of hyper-asabiyya and the accompanying paranoia and uncertainty.

Ironically, most religions and communities across the globe felt they were under siege. American television broadcast its news and discussion under the title ‘America Under Siege’; Israelis felt that the Arad had besieged them; and Indian complains of being hemmed in by aggressive Muslim neighbours. The United States, Israel and India appeared paralyzed in the face of Muslim suicide bombers. They had no answer to the violence except more violence.

With each killing the siege mentality spread. State strategy appeared to be to use more brute power and inflict more pain on the opposite side. Where vision and compassion were required, the state was seen to kill and hurt people and destroy property. Its representatives did not even spare the mosque, the House of Allah.

The United States, Israel and India were compromising hard-won ideas of modern, thriving democracy. There were cases of illegal detention, suspension of civil liberties and unauthorized surveillance. The victim was invariably a Muslim.

Muslims, whether living as a majority or a minority felt especially vulnerable after September 11. The fact that all 19 of the hijackers were Muslim appeared to condemn by association every Muslim on the planet. Any expression of Muslim identity would risk the fear of being suspected as ‘terrorist’ activity. Muslims felt that their religion Islam was under siege…….

Seruan Untuk Kaum Muslimin.......

Terlalu banyak harapan yang diberikan kepada Presiden Amerika Syarikat yang ke 44, Barack Hossein Obama, dalam mewujudkan hubungan yang lebih harmonis antara Barat dan dunia Islam. Apatah lagi selepas peristiwa September 11, terlalu banyak sentimen anti-Islam lahir di Barat dek kerana kecetekan ‘ilmu dan pemahaman mereka tentang apakah ajaran Islam yang sebenarnya. Kebanyakannya menggambarkan Islam sebagai agama yang menyeru umatnya ke arah keganasan, dan Nabi Muhammad s.a.w adalah pengganas utama dunia. Sedihnya melihat perangai mereka ini…..

Harapan bahawa Presiden Barack Obama akan menukar hala tuju polisi AS mengenai isu Palestin-Israel serta hubungan AS dan dunia Islam hanyalah retorik dan mimpi semata-mata. Ketika berkempen di persidangan tahunan Jawatankuasa Hal Ehwal Awam Amerika-Israel (AIPAC) pada musim panas yang lalu, kedua-dua calon Demokrat yang berebut jawatan calon Presiden parti tersebut ketika itu iaitu Obama dan Hillary Rodham Clinton menyatakan sokongan yang tidak berbelah bahagi terhadap Israel. Obama berjanji “tidak akan bertolak ansur dalam soal keselamatan membabitkan Israel”, manakala Clinton menyatakan “hubungan baik AS dan Israel akan berkekalan selama-lamanya.” Jika ini diambil sebagai pertimbangan untuk membentuk polisi hubungan luar, apatah lagi kini Hillary Clinton mengetuai Jabatan Negara yang bertanggungjawab terhadap polisi luar AS, maka kita tidak boleh berharap akan berlaku perubahan. Dan jika kita melihat kepada barisan kabinet Obama, beliau dikelilingi oleh Zionis bermula dari Naib Presiden Joseph Biden hinggalah kepada Ketua Staf Rumah Putih (White House), Rahm Emmanuel yang merupakan seorang Yahudi yang pernah berkhidmat dalam tentera Israel. Polisi domestik akan ditentukan oleh anggota Zionis jua seperti Timothy Geithner, Lawrence Summers, Paul Volker, Peter Orszag, Jason Furman, dan tidak lupa Jamie Rubin, anak kepada pengasas Rubinomics. Kebanyakan penasihat Obama merupakan Yahudi dan terdapat komentar bahawa beliau merupakan Presiden pertama AS dari golongan Yahudi!

Dewan Perwakilan AS yang dikuasai Parti Demokrat telah meluluskan resolusi “membenarkan Israel mempertahankan hak mereka dari serangan pejuang Palestin di Gaza” dengan majoriti besar, 390 berbanding 5. Ahli Kongres dari Ohio, Dennis Kucinich yang mengundi menentang resolusi sebelum pengundian telah berkata bahawa, “saya tidak berharap kita tidak menyokong tindakan kejam yang telah dilakukan berulang kali oleh tentera Israel. Kita perlu mengambil pendekatan baru membabitkan Asia Barat dan pendekatan baru ini perlu mengambil kira keadaan tidak berperikemanusiaan di Gaza.” Dewan Senat AS mempertahankan resolusi yang telah dibuat untuk terus komited terhadap Israel. Ini termasuklah hak untuk Israel bertindak mempertahankan diri bagi memelihara nyawa orang awam serta menggesa gencatan senjata yang akan menghalang penduduk Palestin dari melancarkan roket ke wilayah Israel. Senator Harry Reid yang mengetuai Demokrat di Dewan Senat berkata selepas pengundian, “resolusi kami menunjukkan keinginan negara Israel dan penduduk AS.” Nah adakah Obama yang kini memerintah Amerika boleh dijadikan sandaran untuk umat Islam melihat dunia yang lebih adil terhadap Islam dan penganutnya?

Telah acapkali kita mendengar umat Islam menyalahkan orang luar, Yahudi dan Zionis, terhadap kehancuran, kelemahan umat Islam ketika ini. Mereka dituduh, dan dipersalahkan, kerana telah menyemai benih-benih nasionalisme dikalangan umat Islam, lantas melemahkan umat Islam yang satu ketika dahulu kuat dan bersatu dibawah sistem Khalifah. Natijahnya kini kita dapat melihat jumlah negara Islam yang agak besar tetapi mereka langsung tidak bersatu, malahan bercakaran sesama sendiri. Ya, fakta itu mungkin ada benarnya. Namun sampai bila kita hendak menuding jari kepada orang luar, meletakkan beban kesalahan kepada mereka? Kenapa kita tidak pernah menyalahkan diri kita sendiri kerana kita alpa, lalai dan leka ketika kita kuat satu ketika dahulu? Sudah sampai waktunya kita bangkit dari tidur yang lena, mimpi yang terlalu indah. Kita perlu bina kekuatan kita sendiri. Dan kekuatan ini hanya akan dapat dibina dengan kepercayaan yang tidak berbelah-bahagi terhadap Allah dan rasul-Nya, serta memahami agama yang suci ini berlandaskan nas-nas dan hadis-hadis yang sahih. Bukannya berpaksikan hadis yang penuh dengan unsur-unsur Israiliyyat! Pabila ketauhidan kita kukuh, pemahaman agama kita suci dari sebarang elemen-elemen yang mengotorkan kesucian agama Allah ini, barulah ketika itu kita dapat bangkit menguasai dunia. Dan untuk menguasai dunia, ianya perlulah bermula dengan penguasaan ilmu pengetahuan.

Untuk seluruh umat Islam: “Dan bangkitlah dari tidurmu yang lena.”

Dr. Juanda Mufti Perlis

KANGAR 27 Januari

Bekas Naib Mufti Sarawak, Dr. Juanda Jaya (gambar) hari ini disahkan sebagai Mufti Perlis yang baru bagi menggantikan Dr. Mohd. Asri Zainul Abidin yang mengosongkan jawatan tersebut sejak November lalu.

Menteri Besar Perlis, Datuk Seri Dr. Md. Isa Sabu ketika mengesahkan pelantikan itu berkata, Dr. Juanda, 37, yang juga Ketua Penolong Pengarah Bahagian Dakwah Jabatan Agama Islam Sarawak dipinjamkan oleh kerajaan Sarawak bagi memenuhi kekosongan jawatan Mufti Perlis untuk tempoh dua tahun.

Katanya, pemilihan bekas Naib Mufti Sarawak itu juga telah mendapat perkenan Raja Perlis, Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin Putra Jamalullail.
‘‘Beliau dijangka memulakan tugasnya sebagai Mufti Perlis awal Februari ini selepas urusan pemindahannya selesai dengan kerajaan Sarawak dan Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam (JPA).

‘‘Saya juga berterima kasih kepada Ketua Menteri Sarawak, Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud yang sudi meminjamkan Juanda bagi berkhidmat di Perlis,” katanya.

Beliau berkata demikian selepas Majlis Sambutan Tahun Baru Cina di Dewan Khoon Aik di sini hari ini.

Utusan Malaysia, 28 Januari 2009.

General Characteristics of Islamic Civilization

Islam was destined to become a world religion and to create a civilization which stretched from one end of the globe to the other. Already during the early Muslim caliphates, first the Arabs, then the Persians and later the Turks set about to create classical Islamic civilization. Later, in the 13th century, both Africa and India became great centres of Islamic civilization and soon thereafter Muslim kingdoms were established in the Malay-Indonesian world while Chinese Muslims flourished throughout China.

Global Religion

Islam is a religion for all people from whatever race or background they might be. That is why Islamic civilization is based on a unity which stands completely against any racial or ethnic discrimination. Such major racial and ethnic groups as the Arabs, Persians, Turks, Africans, Indians, Chinese and Malays in addition to numerous smaller units embraced Islam and contributed to the building of Islamic civilization. Moreover, Islam was not opposed to learning from the earlier civilizations and incorporating their science, learning, and culture into its own world view, as long as they did not oppose the principles of Islam. Each ethnic and racial group which embraced Islam made its contribution to the one Islamic civilization to which everyone belonged. The sense of brotherhood and sisterhood was so much emphasized that it overcame all local attachments to a particular tribe, race, or language – all of which became subservient to the universal brotherhood and sisterhood of Islam. The global civilization thus created by Islam permitted people of diverse ethnic backgrounds to work together in cultivating various arts and sciences. Although the civilization was profoundly Islamic, even non-Muslim “people of the book” participated in the intellectual activity whose fruits belonged to everyone. The scientific climate was reminiscent of the present situation in America where scientists and men and women of learning from all over the world are active in the advancement of knowledge which belongs to everyone. The global civilization created by Islam also succeeded in activating the mind and thought of the people who entered its fold. As a result of Islam, the nomadic Arabs became torch-bearers of science and learning. The Persians who had created a great civilization before the rise of Islam nevertheless produced much more science and learning in the Islamic period than before. The same can be said of the Turks and other peoples who embraced Islam. The religion of Islam was itself responsible not only for the creation of a world civilization in which people of many different ethnic backgrounds participated, but it played a central role in developing intellectual and cultural life on a scale not seen before. For some eight hundred years Arabic remained the major intellectual and scientific language of the world. During the centuries following the rise of Islam, Muslim dynasties ruling in various parts of the Islamic world bore witness to the flowering of Islamic culture and thought. In fact this tradition of intellectual activity was eclipsed only at the beginning of modern times as a result of the weakening of faith among Muslims combined with external domination. And today this activity has begun anew in many parts of the Islamic world now that the Muslims have regained their political independence.

A Brief History of Islam: The Rightly Guided Caliphs

Upon the death of the Prophet, Abu Bakr, the friend of the Prophet and the first adult male to embrace Islam, became caliph. Abu Bakr ruled for two years to be succeeded by ‘Umar who was caliph for a decade and during whose rule Islam spread extensively east and west conquering the Persian empire, Syria and Egypt. It was ‘Umar who marched on foot at the end of the Muslim army into Jerusalem and ordered the protection of Christian sites. ‘Umar also established the first public treasury and a sophisticated financial administration. He established many of the basic practices of Islamic government. ‘Umar was succeeded by Uthman who ruled for some twelve years during which time the Islamic expansion continued. He is also known as the caliph who had the definitive text of the Noble Quran copied and sent to the four corners of the Islamic world. He was in turn succeeded by ‘Ali who is known to this day for his eloquent sermons and letters, and also for his bravery. With his death the rule of the “rightly guided” caliphs, who hold a special place of respect in the hearts of Muslims, came to an end.

The Caliphates: Umayyad

The Umayyad caliphate established in 661 was to last for about a century. During this time Damascus became the capital of an Islamic world which stretched from the western borders of China to southern France. Not only did the Islamic conquests continue during this period through North Africa to Spain and France in the West and to Sind, Central Asia and Transoxiana in the East, but the basic social and legal institutions of the newly founded Islamic world were established.

Abbasids

The Abbasids, who succeeded the Umayyad, shifted the capital to Baghdad which soon developed into an incomparable centre of learning and culture as well as the administrative and political heart of a vast world. They ruled for over 500 years but gradually their power waned and they remained only symbolic rulers bestowing legitimacy upon various sultans and princes who wielded actual military power. The Abbasid caliphate was finally abolished when Hulagu, the Mongol ruler, captured Baghdad in 1258, destroying much of the city including its incomparable libraries. While the Abbasids ruled in Baghdad, a number of powerful dynasties such as the Fatimids, Ayyubids and Mamluks held power in Egypt, Syria and Palestine. The most important event in this area as far as the relation between Islam and the Western world was concerned was the series of Crusades declared by the Pope and espoused by various European kings. The purpose, although political, was outwardly to recapture the Holy Land and especially Jerusalem for Christianity. Although there was at the beginning some success and local European rule was set up in parts of Syria and Palestine, Muslims finally prevailed and in 1187 Saladin, the great Muslim leader, recaptured Jerusalem and defeated the Crusaders.

North Africa and Spain

When the Abbasids captured Damascus, one of the Umayyad princes escaped and made the long journey from there to Spain to found Umayyad rule there, thus beginning the golden age of Islam in Spain. Cordoba was established as the capital and soon became Europe’s greatest city not only in population but from the point of view of its cultural and intellectual life. The Umayyads ruled over two centuries until they weakened and were replaced by local rulers. Meanwhile in North Africa, various local dynasties held sway until two powerful Berber dynasties succeeded in uniting much of North Africa and also Spain in the 12th and 13th centuries. After them this area was ruled once again by local dynasties such as the Sharifids of Morocco who still rule in that country. As for Spain itself, Muslim power continued to wane until the last Muslim dynasty was defeated in Granada in 1492 thus bringing nearly eight hundred years of Muslim rule in Spain to an end.

Islamic History after the Mongol Invasion

The Mongols devastated the eastern lands of Islam and ruled from the Sinai Desert to India for a century. But they soon converted to Islam and became known as the Il-Khanids. They were in turn succeeded by Timur and his descendents who made Samarqand their capital and ruled from 1369 to 1500. The sudden rise of Timur delayed the formation and expansion of the Ottoman Empire but soon the Ottomans became the dominant power in the Islamic world.

Ottoman Empire

From humble origins the Turks rose to dominate over the whole of Anatolia and even parts of Europe. In 1453 Mehmet the Conqueror captured Constantinople and put an end to the Byzantine Empire. The Ottomans conquered much of Eastern Europe and nearly the whole of the Arab world, only Morocco and Mauritania in the West and Yemen, Hadramaut and parts of the Arabian Peninsula remaining beyond their control. They reached their zenith of power with Suleyman the Magnificent whose armies reached Hungary and Austria. From the 17th century onward with the rise of Western European powers and later Russia, the power of the Ottomans began to wane. But they nevertheless remained a force to be reckoned with until the First World War when they were defeated by the Western nations. Soon thereafter Kamal Ataturk gained power in Turkey and abolished the six centuries of rule of the Ottomans in 1924.

Persia

While the Ottomans were concerned mostly with the western front of their empire, to the east in Persia a new dynasty called the Safavids came to power in 1502. The Safavids established a powerful state of their own which flourished for over two centuries and became known for the flowering of the arts. Their capital, Isfahan, became one of the most beautiful cities with its blue tiled mosques and exquisite houses. The Afghan invasion of 1736 put an end to Safavid rule and prepared the independence of Afghanistan which occurred formally in the 19th century. Persia itself fell into turmoil until Nader Shah, the last Oriental conqueror, reunited the country and even conquered India. But the rule of the dynasty established by him was short-lived. The Zand dynasty soon took over to be overthrown by the Qajars in 1779 that made Tehran their capital and ruled until 1921 when they were in turn replaced by the Pahlavis.

India

As for India, Islam entered into the land east of the Indus River peacefully. Gradually Muslims gained political power beginning in the early 13th century. But this period which marked the expansion of both Islam and Islamic culture came to an end with the conquest of much of India in 1526 by Babur, one of the Timurid princes. He established the powerful Mogul empire which produced such famous rulers as Akbar, Jahangir, and Shah Jahan and which lasted, despite the gradual rise of British power in India, until 1857 when it was officially abolished.

Malaysia and Indonesia

Farther east in the Malay world, Islam began to spread in the 12th century in northern Sumatra and soon Muslim kingdoms were established in Java, Sumatra and mainland Malaysia. Despite the colonization of the Malay world, Islam spread in that area covering present day Indonesia, Malaysia, the southern Philippines and southern Thailand, and is still continuing in islands farther east.

Africa

As far as Africa is concerned, Islam entered into East Africa at the very beginning of the Islamic period but remained confined to the coast for some time, only the Sudan and Somaliland becoming gradually both Arabized and Islamized. West Africa felt the presence of Islam through North African traders who travelled with their camel caravans south of the Sahara. By the 14th century there were already Muslim sultanates in such areas as Mali, and Timbuctu in West Africa and Harar in East Africa had become seats of Islamic learning. Gradually Islam penetrated both inland and southward. There also appeared major charismatic figures who inspired intense resistance against European domination. The process of the Islamization of Africa did not cease during the colonial period and continues even today with the result that most Africans are now Muslims carrying on a tradition which has had practically as long a history in certain areas of sub-Saharan Africa as Islam itself.

The Rightly Guided Caliph

The word ‘Caliph’ is the English form of the Arabic word ‘Khalifa,’ which is short for Khalifatu Rasulil-lah. The latter expression means Successor to the Messenger of God, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him). The title ‘Khalifatu Rasulil-lah’ was first used for Abu Bakr, who was elected head of the Muslim community after the death of the Prophet.

The Significance of the Caliphate

The mission of Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), like that of the earlier messengers of God, was to call people to the worship of and submission to the One True God. In practice, submission to God means to obey His injunctions as given in the Holy Quran and as exemplified by Sunnah (the practice of the Prophet). As successor to the Prophet, the Caliph was the head of the Muslim community and his primary responsibility was to continue in the path of the Prophet. Since religion was perfected and the door of Divine revelation was closed at the death of the Prophet, the Caliph was to make all laws in accordance with the Quran and the Sunnah. He was a ruler over Muslims but not their sovereign since sovereignty belongs to God alone. He was to be obeyed as long as he obeyed God. He was responsible for creating and maintaining conditions under which it would be easy for Muslims to live according to Islamic principles, and to see that justice was done to all. Abu Bakr, at the time he accepted the caliphate, stated his position:

“The weak among you shall be strong with me until their rights have been vindicated; and the strong among you shall he weak with me until, if the Lord wills, I have taken what is due from them... Obey me as long as I obey God and His Messenger. When I disobey Him and His Prophet, and then obey me not.”

The Rightly-Guided Caliphs (Al-Khulafa-ur-Rashidun)

Those Caliphs who truly followed in the Prophet’s footsteps are called ‘The Rightly-Guided Caliphs’ (Al-Khulafa-ur-Rashidun in Arabic). They are the first four Caliphs: Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, Uthman and Ali. All four were among the earliest and closest companions of the Prophet (peace be on him). They lived simple and righteous lives and strove hard for the religion of God. Their justice was impartial, their treatment of others was kind and merciful, and they were one with the people - the first among equals. After these four, the later Caliphs assumed the manners of kings and emperors and the true spirit of equality of ruler and ruled diminished to a considerable extent in the political life of Muslims.

It should be clearly understood that the mission of Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), and hence that of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, was not political, social or economic reform, although such reforms were a logical consequence of the success of this mission, nor the unity of a nation and the establishment of an empire, although the nation did unite and vast areas came under one administration, nor the spread of a civilization or culture, although many civilizations and cultures developed, but only to deliver the message of God to all the people of the world and to invite them to submit to Him, while being the foremost among those who submitted.

The primary responsibility of an Islamic government is still the same as it was in the days of the early Caliphs: to make all laws in accordance with the Quran and the Sunnah, to make positive efforts to create and maintain conditions under which it will be possible and easy for Muslims to live an Islamic life, to secure impartial and speedy justice for all, and to strive hard in the path of God. Any government which is committed to such a policy is truly following the message delivered by the Prophet (peace be on him).

The First Caliph, Abu Bakr (632-634 A.C)

"If I were to take a friend other than my Lord, I would take Abu Bakr as a friend." (Hadith)

Election to the Caliphate

The Prophet’s closest companion, Abu Bakr, was not present when the Holy Prophet (peace be on him) breathed his last in the apartment of his beloved wife of later years, Aisha, Abu Bakr’s daughter. When he came to know of the Prophet’s passing, Abu Bakr hurried to the house of sorrow.

“How blessed was your life and how beatific is your death,” he whispered as he kissed the cheek of his beloved friend and master. When Abu Bakr came out of the Prophet’s apartment and broke the news, disbelief and dismay gripped the community of Muslims in Medina. Muhammad (peace be on him) had been the leader, the guide and the bearer of Divine revelation through whom they had been brought from idolatry and barbarism into the way of God. How could he die? Even Umar, one of the bravest and strongest of the Prophet’s companions, lost his composure and drew his sword and threatened to kill anyone who said that the Prophet was dead. Abu Bakr gently pushed him aside, ascended the steps of the lectern in the mosque and addressed the people, saying:

“O people, verily whoever worshipped Muhammad, behold! Muhammad is indeed dead. But whoever worships God, behold! God is alive and will never die.”

And then he concluded with a verse from the Quran:

“And Muhammad is but a Messenger. Many Messengers have gone before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels?” [3:144]

On hearing these words, the people were consoled. Despondency gave place to confidence and tranquillity. This critical moment had passed. But the Muslim community was now faced with an extremely serious problem: that of choosing a leader. After some discussion among the companions of the Prophet who had assembled in order to select a leader, it became apparent that no one was better suited for this responsibility than Abu Bakr. A portion of the speech the first Caliph gave after his election has already been quoted in the introduction.

Abu Bakr’s Life

Abu Bakr (The Owner of Camels) was not his real name. He acquired this name later in life because of his great interest in raising camels. His real name was Abdul Ka’aba (Slave of Ka’aba), which Muhammad (peace be on him) later changed to Abdullah (Slave of God). The Prophet also gave him the title of Siddiq - The Testifier to the Truth.

Abu Bakr was a fairly wealthy merchant, and before he embraced Islam, was a respected citizen of Mecca. He was three years younger than Muhammad (peace be on him) and some natural affinity drew them together from earliest childhood. He remained the closest companion of the Prophet all through the Prophet’s life. When Muhammad first invited his closest friends and relatives to Islam, Abu Bakr was among the earliest to accept it. He also persuaded Uthman and Bilal to accept Islam. In the early days of the Prophet’s mission, when the handful of Muslims was subjected to relentless persecution and torture, Abu Bakr bore his full share of hardship. Finally when God’s permission came to emigrate from Mecca, he was the one chosen by the Prophet to accompany him on the dangerous journey to Medina. In the numerous battles which took place during the life of the Prophet, Abu Bakr was always by his side. Once, he brought all his belongings to the Prophet, who was raising money for the defence of Medina. The Prophet asked “Abu Bakr, what did you leave for your family?” The reply came: “God and His Prophet.”

Even before Islam, Abu Bakr was known to be a man of upright character and amiable and compassionate nature. All through his life he was sensitive to human suffering and kind to the poor and helpless. Even though he was wealthy, he lived very simply and spent his money for charity, for freeing slaves and for the cause of Islam. He often spent part of the night in supplication and prayer. He shared with his family a cheerful and affectionate home life.

Abu-Bakr’s Caliphate

Such, then, was the man upon whom the burden of leadership fell at the most sensitive period in the history of the Muslims.

As the news of the Prophet’s death spread, a number of tribes rebelled and refused to pay Zakat (poor-due), saying that this was due only to the Prophet (peace be on him). At the same time a number of impostors claimed that the prophethood had passed to them after Muhammad and they raised the standard of revolt. To add to all this, two powerful empires, the Eastern Roman and the Persian also threatened the new-born Islamic state at Medina.

Under these circumstances, many companions of the Prophet, including Umar, advised Abu Bakr to make concessions to the Zakat evaders, at least for a time. The new Caliph disagreed. He insisted that the Divine Law cannot be divided, that there is no distinction between the obligations of Zakat and Salat (prayer), and that any compromise with the injunctions of God would eventually erode the foundations of Islam. Umar and others were quick to realize their error of judgment. The revolting tribes attacked Medina but the Muslims were prepared. Abu Bakr himself led the charge, forcing them to retreat. He then made a relentless war on the false claimants to prophethood, most of who submitted and again professed Islam.

The threat from the Roman Empire had actually arisen earlier, during the Prophet’s lifetime. The Prophet had organized an army under the command of Usama, the son of a freed slave. The army had not gone far when the Prophet had fallen ill so they stopped. After the death of the Prophet the question was raised whether the army should be sent again or should remain for the defence of Medina. Again Abu Bakr showed a firm determination. He said, “I shall send Usama’s army on its way as ordered by the Prophet, even if I am left alone.”

The final instructions he gave to Usama prescribed a code of conduct in war which remains unsurpassed to this day. Part of his instructions to the Muslim army was:

“Do not be deserters, nor be guilty of disobedience. Do not kill an old man, a woman or a child. Do not injure date palms and do not cut down fruit trees. Do not slaughter any sheep or cows or camels except for food. You will encounter persons who spend their lives in monasteries. Leave them alone and do not molest them.”

Khalid bin Waleed had been chosen by the Prophet (peace be on him) on several occasions to lead Muslim armies. A man of supreme courage and a born leader, his military genius came to full flower during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr. Throughout Abu Bakr’s reign Khalid led his troops from one victory to another against the attacking Romans.

Another contribution of Abu Bakr to the cause of Islam was the collection and compilation of the verses of the Quran.

Abu Bakr died on 21 Jamadi-al Akhir, 13 A.H. (23 August 634 A.C.), at the age of sixty-three, and was buried by the side of the Holy Prophet (peace be on him). His caliphate had been of mere twenty-seven months duration. In this brief span, however, Abu Bakr had managed, by the Grace of God, to strengthen and consolidate his community and the state, and to secure the Muslims against the perils which had threatened their existence.

The Second Caliph, Umar (634-644 A.C)

“God has placed truth upon Umar’s tongue and heart.” (Hadith)

Umar’s Life

During his last illness Abu Bakr had conferred with his people, particularly the more eminent among them. After this meeting they chose Umar as his successor. Umar was born into a respected Quraysh family thirteen years after the birth of Muhammad (peace be on him). Umar’s family was known for its extensive knowledge of genealogy. When he grew up, Umar was proficient in this branch of knowledge as well as in swordsmanship, wrestling and the art of speaking. He also learned to read and write while still a child, a very rare thing in Mecca at that time. Umar earned his living as a merchant. His trade took him to many foreign lands and he met all kinds of people. This experience gave him an insight into the affairs and problems of men. Umar’s personality was dynamic, self-assertive, frank and straightforward. He always spoke whatever was in his mind even if it displeased others.

Umar was twenty-seven when the Prophet (peace be on him) proclaimed his mission. The ideas Muhammad was preaching enraged him as much as they did the other notables of Mecca. He was just as bitter against anyone accepting Islam as others among the Quraysh. When his slave-girl accepted Islam he beat her until he himself was exhausted and told her, “I have stopped because I am tired, not out of pity for you.” The story of his embracing Islam is an interesting one. One day, full of anger against the Prophet, he drew his sword and set out to kill him. A friend met him on the way. When Umar told him what he planned to do, his friend informed him that Umar’s own sister, Fatima, and her husband had also accepted Islam. Umar went straight to his sister’s house where he found her reading from pages of the Quran. He fell upon her and beat her mercilessly. Bruised and bleeding, she told her brother, “Umar, you can do what you like, but you cannot turn our hearts away from Islam.” These words produced a strange effect upon Umar. What was this faith that made even weak women so strong of heart? He asked his sister to show him what she had been reading; he was at once moved to the core by the words of the Quran and immediately grasped their truth. He went straight to the house where the Prophet was staying and vowed allegiance to him.

Umar made no secret of his acceptance of Islam. He gathered the Muslims and offered prayers at the Ka'aba. This boldness and devotion of an influential citizen of Mecca raised the morale of the small community of Muslims. Nonetheless Umar was also subjected to privations, and when permission for emigration to Medina came, he also left Mecca. The soundness of Umar’s judgment, his devotion to the Prophet (peace be on him), his outspokenness and uprightness won for him a trust and confidence from the Prophet which was second only to that given to Abu Bakr. The Prophet gave him the title ‘Farooq’ which means the ‘Separator of Truth from Falsehood.’ During the Caliphate of Abu Bakr, Umar was his closest assistant and adviser. When Abu Bakr died, all the people of Medina swore allegiance to Umar, and on 23 Jamadi-al-Akhir, 13 A.H., he was proclaimed Caliph.

Umar’s Caliphate

After taking charge of his office, Umar spoke to the Muslims of Medina:

“...O people, you have some rights on me which you can always claim. One of your rights is that if anyone of you comes to me with a claim, he should leave satisfied. Another of your rights is that you can demand that I take nothing unjustly from the revenues of the state. You can also demand that... I fortify your frontiers and do not put you into danger. It is also your right that if you go to battle I should look after your families as a father would while you are away. O people, remain conscious of God, forgive me my faults and help me in my task. Assist me in enforcing what is good and forbidding what is evil. Advise me regarding the obligations that have been imposed upon me by God...”

The most notable feature of Umar’s caliphate was the vast expansion of Islam. Apart from Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Palestine and Iran also came under the protection of the Islamic government. But the greatness of Umar himself lies in the quality of his rule. He gave a practical meaning to the Quranic injunction:

“O you who believe, stand out firmly for justice as witnesses to God, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it concerns rich or poor, for God can best protect both.” [4:135]

Once a woman brought a claim against the Caliph Umar. When Umar appeared on trial before the judge, the judge stood up as a sign of respect toward him. Umar reprimanded him, saying, “This is the first act of injustice you did to this woman!”

He insisted that his appointed governors live simple lives, keep no guard at their doors and be accessible to the people at all times, and he himself set the example for them. Many times foreign envoys and messengers sent to him by his generals found him resting under a palm tree or praying in the mosque among the people, and it was difficult for them to distinguish which man was the Caliph. He spent many a watchful night going about the streets of Medina to see whether anyone needed help or assistance. The general social and moral tone of the Muslim society at that time is well-illustrated by the words of an Egyptian who was sent to spy on the Muslims during their Egyptian campaign. He reported:

“I have seen a people, every one of whom loves death more than he loves life. They cultivate humility rather than pride. None is given to material ambitions. Their mode of living is simple... Their commander is their equal. They make no distinction between superior and inferior, between master and slave. When the time of prayer approaches, none remains behind...”

Umar gave his government an administrative structure. Departments of treasury, army and public revenues were established. Regular salaries were set up for soldiers. A population census was held. Elaborate land surveys were conducted to assess equitable taxes. New cities were founded. The areas which came under his rule were divided into provinces and governors were appointed. New roads were laid, canals were lug and wayside hotels were built. Provision was made for his support of the poor and the needy from public funds. He defined, by precept and by example, the rights and privileges of non-Muslims, an example of which is the following contract with the Christians of Jerusalem:

“This is the protection which the servant of God, Umar, the Ruler of the Believers has granted to the people of Eiliya [Jerusalem]. The protection is for their lives and properties, their churches and crosses, their sick and healthy and for all their coreligionists. Their churches shall not be used for habitation, nor shall they be demolished, nor shall any injury be done to them or to their compounds, or to their crosses, nor shall their properties be injured in any way. There shall be no compulsion for these people in the matter of religion, nor shall any of them suffer any injury on account of religion... Whatever is written herein is under the covenant of God and the responsibility of His Messenger, of the Caliphs and of the believers, and shall hold good as long as they pay Jizya [the tax for their defence] imposed on them.”

Those non-Muslims who took part in defence together with the Muslims were exempted from paying Jizya, and when the Muslims had to retreat from a city whose non-Muslim citizens had paid this tax for their defence, the tax was returned to the non-Muslims. The old, the poor and the disabled of Muslims and non-Muslims alike were provided for from the public treasury and from the Zakat funds.

Umar’s Death

In 23 A.H., when Umar returned to Medina from Hajj, he raised his hands and prayed:

“O God! I am advanced in years, my bones are weary, my powers are declining, and the people for whom I am responsible have spread far and wide. Summon me back to thyself, my Lord!”

Some time later, when Umar went to the mosque to lead a prayer, a Magian named Abu Lulu Feroze, who had a grudge against Umar on a personal matter, attacked him with a dagger and stabbed him several times. Umar reeled and fell to the ground. When he learned that the assassin was a Magian, he said, “Thank God he is not a Muslim.”

Umar died in the first week of Muharram, 24 A.H., and was buried by the side of the Holy Prophet (peace be on him).

The Third Caliph, Uthman (644-656 A.C)

“Every Prophet has an assistant, and my assistant will be Uthman.” (Hadith)

Uthman’s Election

When Umar fell under the assassin’s dagger, before he died the people asked him to nominate his successor. Umar appointed a committee consisting of six of the ten companions of the Prophet (peace be on him) about whom the Prophet had said, “They are the people of Heaven” - Ali, Uthman, Abdul Rahman, Sa’ad, Al-Zubayr and Talha - to select the next Caliph from among themselves. He also outlined the procedure to be followed if any differences of opinion should arise. Abdul Rahman withdrew his name. He was then authorized by the committee to nominate the Caliph. After two days of discussion among the candidates and after the opinions of the Muslims in Medina had been ascertained, the choice was finally limited to Uthman and Ali. Abdul Rahman came to the mosque together with other Muslims, and after a brief speech and questioning of the two men, swore allegiance to Uthman. All those present did the same, and Uthman became the third Caliph of Islam in the month of Muharram, 24 A.H.

Uthman’s Life

Uthman bin Affan was born seven years after the Holy Prophet (peace be on him). He belonged to the Umayyad branch of the Quraysh tribe. He learned to read and write at an early age, and as a young man became a successful merchant. Even before Islam Uthman had been noted for his truthfulness and integrity. He and Abu Bakr were close friends, and it was Abu Bakr who brought him to Islam when he was thirty-four years of age. Some years later he married the Prophet’s second daughter, Ruqayya. In spite of his wealth and position, his relatives subjected him to torture because he had embraced Islam, and he was forced to immigrate to Abyssinia. Some time later he returned to Mecca but soon migrated to Medina with the other Muslims. In Medina his business again began to flourish and he regained his former prosperity. Uthman’s generosity had no limits. On various occasions he spent a great portion of his wealth for the welfare of the Muslims, for charity and for equipping the Muslim armies. That is why he came to be known as ‘Ghani’ meaning ‘Generous.’

Uthman’s wife, Ruqayya was seriously ill just before the Battle of Badr and he was excused by the Prophet (peace be on him) from participating in the battle. The illness Ruqayya proved fatal, leaving Uthman deeply grieved. The Prophet was moved and offered Uthman the hand of another of his daughters, Kulthum. Because he had the high privilege of having two daughters of the Prophet as wives Uthman was known as ‘The Possessor of the Two Lights.’

Uthman participated in the Battles of Uhud and the Trench. After the encounter of the Trench, the Prophet (peace be on him) determined to perform Hajj and sent Uthman as his emissary to the Quraysh in Mecca, who detained him. The episode ended in a treaty with the Meccans known as the Treaty of Hudaibiya.

The portrait we have of Uthman is of an unassuming, honest, mild, generous and very kindly man, noted especially for his modesty and his piety. He often spent part of the night in prayer; fast every second or third day, performed hajj every year, and looked after the needy of the whole community. In spite of his wealth, he lived very simply and slept on bare sand in the courtyard of the Prophet’s mosque. Uthman knew the Quran from memory and had an intimate knowledge of the context and circumstances relating to each verse.

Uthman’s Caliphate

During Uthman’s rule the characteristics of Abu Bakr’s and Umar’s caliphates - impartial justice for all, mild and humane policies, striving in the path of God, and the expansion of Islam - continued. Uthman’s realm extended in the west to Morocco, in the east to Afghanistan, and in the north to Armenia and Azerbaijan. During his caliphate a navy was organized, administrative divisions of the state were revised, and many public projects were expanded and completed. Uthman sent prominent companions of the Prophet (peace be on him) as his personal deputies to various provinces to scrutinize the conduct of officials and the condition of the people.

Uthman’s most notable contribution to the religion of God was the compilation of a complete and authoritative text of the Quran. A large number of copies of this text were made and distributed all over the Muslim world.

Uthman ruled for twelve years. The first six years were marked by internal peace and tranquillity, but during the second half of his caliphate a rebellion arose. The Jews and the Magians, taking advantage of dissatisfaction among the people, began conspiring against Uthman, and by publicly airing their complaints and grievances, gained so much sympathy that it became difficult to distinguish friend from foe.

It may seem surprising that a ruler of such vast territories, whose armies were matchless, was unable to deal with these rebels. If Uthman had wished, the rebellion could have been crushed at the very moment it began. But he was reluctant to be the first to shed the blood of Muslims, however rebellious they might be. He preferred to reason with them, to persuade them with kindness and generosity. He well remembered hearing the Prophet (peace be on him) say, “Once the sword is unsheathed among my followers, it will not be sheathed until the Last Day.”

The rebels demanded that he abdicate and some of the companions advised him to do so. He would gladly have followed this course of action, but again he was bound by a solemn pledge he had given to the Prophet. “Perhaps God will clothe you with a shirt, Uthman” the Prophet had told him once, “and if the people want you to take it off, do not take it off for them.” Uthman said to a well-wisher on a day when his house was surrounded by the rebels, “God’s Messenger made a covenant with me and I shall show endurance in adhering to it.”

After a long siege, the rebels broke into Uthman’s house and murdered him. When the first assassin’s sword struck Uthman, he was reciting the verse,

“Verily, God suffice thee; He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing” [2:137]

Uthman breathed his last on the afternoon of Friday, 17 Dhul Hijja, 35 A.H. (June 656 A.C.). He was eighty-four years old. The power of the rebels was so great that Uthman’s body lay unburied until Saturday night when he was buried in his blood-stained clothes, the shroud which befits all martyrs in the cause of God.

The Fourth Caliph, Ali (656-661 A.C)

“You [Ali] are my brother in this world and the next.” (Hadith)

Ali’s Election

After Uthman’s martyrdom, the office of the caliphate remained unfilled for two or three days. Many people insisted that Ali should take up the office, but he was embarrassed by the fact that the people who pressed him hardest were the rebels, and he therefore declined at first. When the notable companions of the Prophet (peace be on him) urged him, however, he finally agreed.

Ali’s Life

Ali bin Abi Talib was the first cousin of the Prophet (peace be on him). More than that, he had grown up in the Prophet’s own household, later married his youngest daughter, Fatima, and remained in closest association with him for nearly thirty years.

Ali was ten years old when the Divine Message came to Muhammad (peace be on him). One night he saw the Prophet and his wife Khadijah bowing and prostrating. He asked the Prophet about the meaning of their actions. The Prophet told him that they were praying to God Most High and that Ali too should accept Islam. Ali said that he would first like to ask his father about it. He spent a sleepless night, and in the morning he went to the Prophet and said, “When God created me He did not consult my father, so why should I consult my father in order to serve God?” and he accepted the truth of Muhammad’s message.

When the Divine command came, “And warn thy nearest relatives” [26:214], Muhammad (peace be on him) invited his relatives for a meal. After it was finished, he addressed them and asked, “Who will join me in the cause of God?” There was utter silence for a while, and then Ali stood up. “I am the youngest of all present here,” he said, “My eyes trouble me because they are sore and my legs are thin and weak, but I shall join you and help you in whatever way I can.” The assembly broke up in derisive laughter. But during the difficult wars in Mecca, Ali stood by these words and faced all the hardships to which the Muslims were subjected. He slept in the bed of the Prophet when the Quraysh planned to murder Muhammad. It was he to whom the Prophet entrusted, when he left Mecca, the valuables which had been given to him for safekeeping, to be returned to their owners.

Apart from the expedition of Tabuk, Ali fought in all the early battles of Islam with great distinction, particularly in the expedition of Khaybar. It is said that in the Battle of Uhud he received more than sixteen wounds.

The Prophet (peace be on him) loved Ali dearly and called him by many fond names. Once the Prophet found him sleeping in the dust. He brushed off Ali’s clothes and said fondly, “Wake up, Abu Turab (Father of Dust).” The Prophet also gave him the title of ‘Asadullah’ (Lion of God).

Ali’s humility, austerity, piety, deep knowledge of the Quran and his sagacity gave him great distinction among the Prophet’s companions. Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman consulted him frequently during their caliphates. Many times Umar had made him his vice-regent at Medina when he was away. Ali was also a great scholar of Arabic literature and pioneered in the field of grammar and rhetoric. His speeches, sermons and letters served for generations afterward as models of literary expression. Many of his wise and epigrammatic sayings have been preserved. Ali thus had a rich and versatile personality. In spite of these attainments he remained a modest and humble man. Once during his caliphate when he was going about the marketplace, a man stood up in respect and followed him. “Do not do it,” said Ali. “Such manners are a temptation for a ruler and a disgrace for the ruled.”

Ali and his household lived extremely simple and austere lives. Sometimes they even went hungry themselves because of Ali’s great generosity, and none who asked for help was ever turned away from his door. His plain, austere style of living did not change even when he was ruler over a vast domain.

Ali’s Caliphate

As mentioned previously, Ali accepted the caliphate very reluctantly. Uthman’s murder and the events surrounding it were a symptom, and also became a cause, of civil strife on a large scale. Ali felt that the tragic situation was mainly due to incompetent governors. He therefore dismissed all the governors who had been appointed by Uthman and appointed new ones. All the governors excepting Muawiya, the governor of Syria, submitted to his orders. Muawiya declined to obey until Uthman’s blood was avenged. The Prophet’s widow Aisha also took the position that Ali should first bring the murderers to trial. Due to the chaotic conditions during the last days of Uthman it was very difficult to establish the identity of the murderers, and Ali refused to punish anyone whose guilt was not lawfully proved. Thus a battle between the army of Ali and the supporters of Aisha took place. Aisha later realized her error of judgment and never forgave herself for it.

The situation in Hijaz (thc part of Arabia in which Mecca and Medina are located) became so troubled that Ali moved his capital to Iraq. Muawiya now openly rebelled against Ali and a fierce battle was fought between their armies. This battle was inconclusive, and Ali had to accept the de facto government of Muawiya in Syria.

However, even though the era of Ali’s caliphate was marred by civil strife, he nevertheless introduced a number of reforms, particularly in the levying and collecting of revenues.

It was the fortieth year of Hijra. A fanatical group called Kharijites, consisting of people who had broken away from Ali due to his compromise with Muawiya, claimed that neither Ali, the Caliph, nor Muawiya, the ruler of Syria, nor Amr bin al-‘Aas, the ruler of Egypt, were worthy of rule. In fact, they went so far as to say that the true caliphate came to an end with Umar and that Muslims should live without any ruler over them except God. They vowed to kill all three rulers, and assassins were dispatched in three directions.

The assassins who were deputed to kill Muawiya and Amr did not succeed and were captured and executed, but Ibn-e-Muljim, the assassin who was commissioned to kill Ali, accomplished his task. One morning when Ali was absorbed in prayer in a mosque, Ibn-e-Muljim stabbed him with a poisoned sword. On the 20th of Ramadan, 40 A.H. died the last of the Rightly Guided Caliphs of Islam. May God Most High be pleased with them and grant to them His eternal reward.

Conclusion

With the death of Ali, the first and most notable phase in the history of Muslim people came to an end. All through this period it had been the Book of God and the practices of His Messenger - that is, the Quran and the Sunnah - which had guided the leaders and the led, set the standards of their moral conduct and inspired their actions. It was the time when the ruler and the ruled, the rich and the poor, the powerful and the weak, were uniformly subject to the Divine Law. It was an epoch of freedom and equality, of God-consciousness and humility, of social justice which recognized no privileges, and of an impartial law which accepted no pressure groups or vested interests. After Ali, Muawiya assumed the caliphate and thereafter the caliphate became hereditary, passing from one king to another.