Social Responsibility in Islam

Social responsibility in Islam is understood to mean that the individual members of society work together to fulfill the general needs of society as well as the individual needs of its members and that they work together to protect society from harm. Each member of society is aware not only that he has rights, but also that that he has responsibilities towards others, especially those who are incapable of fulfilling their own needs. These responsibilities entail providing for the needs of these people as well as protecting them from harm.

The Scope of Social Responsibility in Islam

Muslim society is one that applies the belief system and laws of Islam, as well as the methodology, value system, and codes of behavior that Islam espouses. These are all articulated by the Qur’an and Sunnah and exemplified by the Prophet (peace be upon him), his Companions, and the Rightly Guided Caliphs.

When society adheres to these principles and values, social responsibility becomes a tangible reality, every aspect of which is fulfilled.

This is because Islam pays careful attention to society-building, providing a number of texts and legal injunctions to bring about the society described by Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) when he said: “The believers, in their affection, mercy, and compassion for each other, are like a single body; if one limb feels pain, the whole body becomes feverish and restless.”

Therefore, social responsibility in Islam is not based on material interests, even if such interests form an integral part of it. It extends far beyond such concerns to embrace all the needs of society and its members, whether they are material in nature, spiritual, intellectual, or otherwise.

In this way, all the fundamental rights of both the individual and society at large are attended to.

Likewise, social responsibility in Islam is not only with regard to other Muslims; it extends to all of humanity, irrespective of their different beliefs and ways of life. Allah says:

Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you because of your religion nor drove you out of your homes. Verily Allah loves those who deal justly.

This mutual responsibility exists because of the honor and dignity of every human being. Allah says:

And indeed We have honored the descendants of Adam and carried them on land and sea, and We have provided them with all the good things and have preferred them over much of what We have created.

The Domain of Social Responsibility in Islam

Islam considers social responsibility to be one of its fundamental objectives. It extends to all of humanity, believers and disbelievers alike. Allah says:

O mankind. We have created you from a male and female and made you nations and tribes so you could come to know one another. Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah are the most righteous.

Social responsibility encompasses everyone by degrees. It starts with the Muslim and his personal sphere of life, extends to his family, then to the society that he lives in, and finally to all the diverse societies that exist on Earth.

Responsibility to oneself:

Every person is responsible for himself. He is responsible to keep himself pure, cultivate good manners, reform his faults, do good, and refrain from evil. Allah says:

By the soul and Him who perfected its proportions; then He showed him what is wrong for him and what is right. Indeed, he who purifies himself succeeds. And indeed, he who corrupts himself fails.

Likewise, he is responsible to protect himself and to maintain his health. He must provide for himself in a lawful manner. Allah says:

Seek, with what Allah has bestowed upon you, the Hereafter, and do not forget your share of this world; and do good as Allah has been good to you, and seek not mischief in the land. Verily, Allah does not like the mischief makers.

A person is forbidden to kill himself, weaken himself, or inflict pain upon himself. Allah has prohibited suicide by saying:

And do not kill yourselves. Surely, Allah is Most Merciful to you.

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever kills himself with an iron blade will continually thrust it into his stomach for eternity in the fire of Hell.”

Likewise, it is prohibited for a person to take things that harm his health or impair his ability to think. Preserving life, reason, and property are among the most important objectives of Islamic Law.

Allah says regarding intoxicants:

O you who believe, wine, gambling, idolatry, and divination are all an abomination of Satan’s handiwork, so avoid them that perhaps you might be successful. Satan wants only to excite enmity and hatred between you with wine and gambling and hinder you from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer. Will you not, then, abstain?

Responsibility to one’s family:

Islam stresses mutual responsibility between family members, making it the solid foundation that protects the family from collapsing or splitting apart.

This responsibility starts with the husband and wife. They have a shared responsibility to carry out the obligations and duties of family life in the manner that Allah has made each of them naturally disposed to carry out. Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “A man is a guardian over his household and he is responsible for those in his care. A woman is a guardian over her husband’s household and she is responsible for those in her care.”

Household responsibilities are divided between the man and the woman in a way that guarantees the material and spiritual foundations of the family. Allah addresses the men and women who run their homes with the following words:

O you who believe, protect yourselves and your families from a fire whose fuel is men and stones.

This protection cannot happen except if the truth is made clear and proper education is provided that clearly shows the way to righteousness. The husband and wife share the responsibility for the education and cultural development of the family. Whenever either one of them finds the other negligent in these duties, he or she must bring this to the other’s attention and call the other to what is right. Allah says:

The believing men and women are protectors of one another; they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong.

Islam encourages the cultivation of love and affection between the man and woman in their marital life. Allah says:

And from His signs is that he created for you mates from amongst yourselves to find comfort in and he placed between you affection and mercy.

Islam has established a number of principles to bring this about:

A. Preserving the rights of the husband and wife: Allah says:

And they (the women) have rights (over their husbands) similar to (their husbands’) rights over them.

B. Choosing a good marriage partner: The family unit is where children are brought up. It is imperative that this unit is established on a correct foundation. Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “A woman is married for four reasons: for her wealth, her status, her beauty, or her religion. Marry the religious one or your hands will be covered with dust.”

With respect to what a woman should seek in a husband, Allah’s Messenger said: “If a man whose religion and conduct pleases you approaches you (to marry from your family), then let him marry. If you do not do so, then there will be a lot of mischief and moral degradation in the land.”

Allah says:

Do not marry the idolatrous women until they believe. A believing slave girl is better than an idolatress, even if she pleases you. And do not marry your women to the idolaters until they believe. A believing slave is better than an idolater, even if he pleases you. They call to the Fire, and Allah calls to Paradise and forgiveness by His leave, and He makes His signs clear to mankind so perhaps they might take heed.

C. Good conduct between the husband and wife: Islam encourages good conduct between the husband and wife. This is established in the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Allah says:

- Live with them on good terms.

- Retain them on good terms or release them on good terms.

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “The believers who have the most perfect faith are the best in conduct, and the best men among you are the ones who are best to their wives.”

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) was the best in treating his wives and was the kindest and most gentle husband.

He used to joke with them and help out with the housework. He was very forgiving and tolerant. Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “The best among you is the one who treats his family the best, and I am the one who treats his family the best.”

D. Providing for one’s family: Wealth is necessary to provide for the material needs of life. Since, the husband is responsible for his wife, he is responsible to provide for her. Allah says:

Let the wealthy man spend according to his means; and the man whose resources are restricted, let him spend from according to what Allah has given him. Allah does not put a burden on a person greater than what He has given him. Allah will grant, after hardship, ease.

Islam has made maintenance of the wife obligatory upon the husband. Even if he has divorced her, he must provide for her maintenance and housing for the full waiting period that the woman must wait – to ascertain whether she is pregnant – before she is allowed to marry another. Likewise, he must provide for the child’s nursing if the divorced woman has a child from him. Allah says:

Lodge them where you dwell, according to your means, and do not harm them to make their lives difficult (so they will be forced to leave your house). And if they are pregnant, then spend on them until they give birth. Then if they nurse the children for you, then give them their due payment, and let each of you accept the advice of the other in a just way. If you make difficulties for one another, then some other woman may nurse for him.

E. Caring for and raising children: Islam stresses the right of small children to be cared for and properly brought up, making it the most important duty of the parents. Islam does not consider it sufficient to rely on the parents’ natural inclinations. It reinforces these instincts with specific regulations that guarantee that the children will receive a proper upbringing and enjoy all of their rights. From the time of birth, the sacred texts discuss completing the period of nursing. Allah says:

The mothers shall nurse their children for two whole years if they desire to complete the term of suckling. The father of the child shall bear the cost of the mother’s food and clothing on a reasonable basis.

The right of proper upbringing is also clearly stated. Allah says:

O you who believe! Protect yourselves and your families from the Fire.

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “Order your children to pray when they are seven years old, and when they become ten, beat them if they fail to do so and separate their sleeping quarters.”

Responsibility to Society: Islam makes the individual and society responsible for each other. It requires each to fulfill its duties to the other. It brings public and private interests together in such a way that fulfilling individual interests becomes a means of realizing the general good and likewise, realizing the general good entails realizing the good of the individual.

The individual in Muslim society is responsible to help in preserving the general order and to refrain from any behavior that could harm society or work against its interests. Allah says:

The believers, men and women, are protectors of one another; they enjoin what is right, forbid what is wrong, perform prayer, keep the fasts, and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah will have mercy on them. Surely Allah is Almighty, All Wise.

The individual, moreover, is commanded to play an active and effective part in society. Allah says:

Help one another in righteousness and piety, but do not help one another in sin and transgression.

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “The believers, men and women, are like a building where every part of it supports the rest.”

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) explained the unity between the members of society and the feelings of mutual responsibility that they share in the following way: “The believers, in their affection, mercy, and compassion for each other, are like a single body; if one limb feels pain, the whole body becomes feverish and restless.”

From another angle, there are the rights and liberties of the individual. Society is responsible to protect the sanctity of the individual and ensure individual rights and freedoms. Allah says:

O you who believe! Let not a group of you belittle another; it may be that the latter are better than the former. Nor let some women belittle other women; it may be that the latter are better than the former. Nor defame one another, nor insult one another with nicknames. How bad it is to charge someone with iniquity after they have believed. And whosoever does not repent, such are indeed transgressors. O you who believe, avoid much suspicion; indeed some suspicions are sins. And spy not, nor backbite one another.

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) has given us a clear picture of these mutual responsibilities by saying: “The parable of one who stands in defense of the limits of Allah (meaning the one who works to protect the order of society and the individuals therein) is like a situation where a group of people board a ship, some settling on the upper deck and others on the lower deck. Those on the lower deck begin to feel thirsty and say: ‘If we drill a hole in our part of the ship, we will get water without bothering those on the upper deck.’ If those on the upper deck leave them to do what they want, all the people on board the ship will perish, and if they prevent them, all of them will be saved.”

As far as the mutual responsibility between all human societies is concerned, Allah says:

O mankind. We have created you from a male and female and made you nations and tribes so you could come to know one another. Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah are the most righteous. Verily Allah is All-Knowing All-Aware.

This verse sets down the principle of mutual responsibility between nations, placing all nations in a worldwide union that has the ultimate purpose of realizing universal welfare and preventing harm on a global scale, as well as fostering a beneficial exchange on all planes: material, spiritual, scientific, cultural, and economic. At the same time, each society retains its unique characteristics and identity. There is no threat that these unique qualities will be destroyed or abolished, because all are united by a sense that their origins and their ultimate destinations are the same.

This responsibility is not limited to the present generation. It must take into consideration future generations as well. Many of our present problems and those that are sure to face future generations could have been avoided or solved if this had been taken into consideration. Many of the world’s problems stem from the present generation running after its own interests without considering the future consequences of its behavior for humanity as a whole. These problems are many, among the most serious of these being the problem of the environment and that of dwindling natural resources.

We have in the policies of the Caliph `Umar b. al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), an example of one generation taking into consideration its responsibility to future generations. When the Muslims opened up Iraq, the soldiers wanted to divide the fertile agricultural land between them as part of the spoils of war. `Umar rejected this opinion, saying: “I want a situation that will be good for the people of the present and the future.” He decreed that the land should have a land tax levied on its produce and it should remain in the hands of its people who would pay the tax to the general state treasury.

This principle is derived from the following verse of the Qur’an that defines the relationship that one generation of Muslims has with other generations:

And those who came after them say: “Our Lord, forgive us and our brethren who have preceded us in faith and do not put in our hearts hatred for those who believe. Our Lord, you are indeed Most Kind, Most Merciful.”

The future generations should have a good impression of the present one, so they will uphold their honor, seek from Allah their forgiveness, and carry in their hearts good feelings towards them. This is, in turn, how the present generation should feel about their relationship with the generations to come and the effects that their actions will have on them. Thus, they will refrain from depleting the resources that are in their possession and squandering the necessities of life.

They should enrich the soil of the future so that a continuous progression of generations can be built on solid ground and inherit a rich and venerable legacy.

In this way, the present generation presents an ideal realization of its responsibility to those who are to come, and the next generation, in turn, looks back on them with love in their hearts and prayers on their tongues asking for their forgiveness. In this way, their mutual responsibility towards each other is fulfilled from the first generation to the last.

Manifestations of Social Responsibility in Islam

A general outline of social responsibility should be clear from what has already been said. When we turn our attention to specific manifestations of this responsibility, we find that Islam pays greater attention to the needs of certain classes of people who are more exposed to suffering and harm than others and who are more often the focus of social responsibility in its narrowest sense.

Responsibility towards the elderly Islam pays special attention to the elderly. It considers them to have a right to be cared for in repayment for the sacrifices that they have made to ensure the prosperity of the generation that they raised and nurtured. In Islam, the responsibility to take care of the elderly starts with the children. Allah says:

- And we have enjoined on man to be good and dutiful to his parents.

- And be dutiful and good to parents…

The responsibility of children to care for their parents and treat them kindly is compulsory, both religiously and in the court of Law. It is, first and foremost a religious commandment upon the children. Then, if they are neglectful in their duties to their parents, the courts can force the children to perform them.

It does not matter if the parents are of a different religion; their rights are still the same. Allah says:

And we have enjoined on man to be dutiful and good to his parents. His mother bore him in weakness and hardship upon weakness and hardship, and his weaning was in two years. Give thanks to Me and to your parents. Unto me is the final destination But if they both strive to make you join in worship with Me others of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not; but, in the world, behave with them kindly.

If elderly people do not have children, the responsibility to care for them is transferred to society in the form of mandatory state support.

This is further strengthened by the abundance of texts that encourage doing good to others, especially those who cannot take care of themselves like many of the elderly. This inspires a believing soul to naturally expend effort to do good voluntarily.

Caring for the elderly is not merely on the material level. Spiritual and emotional support, that the elderly desperately need, also come into play. Allah says:

If one of them or both of them attain old age in your lifetime, say not to them a word of disrespect, nor shout at them, but address them in terms of honor. And lower unto them the wing of submission and humility through mercy and say: “My Lord, bestow on them Your Mercy as they did bring me up when I was young.

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever does not show mercy to the young and honor the elderly is not one of us.”

Responsibility towards Children and Orphans

We have already mentioned in our discussion about responsibility towards the family that Islam stresses caring for small children and requires parents to care for and raise their children until they reach the age of discretion and are able to lead independent lives.

When children lose their parents, the responsibility to care for them is transferred to other close relatives who are able to do so. There is a legally prescribed order of succession for guardianship.

In the absence of relatives, the responsibility falls on society and the state.

There are a number of verses in the Qur’an that encourage taking care of the orphans and inspire the believer to do so. This is above and beyond the fact that this responsibility is a legal obligation that can be enforced by the state that acts on behalf of society. Allah says the following in the Qur’an:

- Therefore, treat not the orphan oppressively. And repulse not the beggar.

- And do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, the poor…

- …and gives his wealth, in spite of his love for it, to the kinsfolk, the orphans, the poor…

- Have you seen the one who denies the Judgment? That is the one who repulses the orphan, and urges not the feeding of the poor.

- And know that whatever you may gain of war booty, one fifth of it is for Allah, his Messenger, the Messenger’s near relatives, the orphans, the poor…

If we look carefully at Islamic history, we shall find that many of Islam’s most ingenious thinkers and creative inventors had been orphaned as children. This is merely one tangible result of Islamic direction and Islamic policies regarding the orphan, policies that the Muslims continued to carry out instinctively and voluntarily, even during the times when the state failed to fulfill its duties. Caring for the orphans never disappeared, because society always found a way to carry it out, setting up private welfare organizations in response to the orphans’ needs.

One manifestation of this care in Islam is the protection and investment of the orphans’ wealth. Every form of conduct that could be harmful to that wealth must be strictly avoided. Allah says the following:

- And come not near to the orphan’s property except to improve it until he attains the age of full strength.

- Verily, those who unjustly consume the property of orphans, they consume only fire into their bellies and they shall be scorched by the blazing Fire.

- And test the orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then you find in them sound judgment, release their property to them, and do not consume it wastefully and hastily, fearing that they should grow up.

- And give unto the orphans their property and do not exchange (your) bad things for (their) good ones. And do not consume their wealth by adding it to your own. Surely this is a great sin.

- And they ask you (O Muhammad) concerning the orphans. Say, “The best thing is to work in their property for their best interests, and if you mix your affairs with theirs, then they are your brothers. And Allah knows the one who intends mischief from the one who intends good.”

- …but feed and clothe them therewith, and speak to them words of kindness and justice.

Responsibility towards the Poor and the Destitute

The Islamic texts repeatedly encourage taking care of the poor and the destitute, commiserating with them, alleviating their difficulties, and giving them assistance, both material and otherwise.

Islam, when confronting the problems of society, sets a minimum that is needed for proper living. Beyond this, it encourages and paves the way for voluntary acts of charity by describing the awards that await the charitable in the worldly life and in the Hereafter.

Islam, we find, uses the same approach to combat poverty that it uses to deal with other problems of life and society. It encourages voluntary acts of good to help the poor while simultaneously prescribing the mandatory Zakah tax to ensure that society takes complete responsibility over those who cannot find work and do not have the resources to fulfill their needs. The rate of this tax is 2.5% of society’s wealth that is collected by the state each year for redistribution to the poor, the destitute, and other eligible recipients who are defined by Allah Almighty in the Qur’an. Allah says:

- The charity tax is only for the poor, the destitute, those employed to collect it, to encourage those whose hearts are inclined towards Islam, to free captives, for those in debt, for the cause of Allah, and for the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

- It is not righteousness that you turn your faces to the east and the west, but righteousness is the quality of one who believes in Allah, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book, and the Prophets; and who gives his wealth, in spite of his love for it, to the kinsfolk, the orphans, the poor, the wayfarer, those who ask, and to free slaves.

- You will never attain righteousness until you spend from what you love.

- So give the relative his due, and give to the poor and the wayfarer. That is best for those who seek Allah’s countenance, and those are the ones who will be successful.

Recognizing the rights of neighbors

One of the manifestations of social responsibility in Islam is the consideration that is given to the rights of neighbors. Islam places great stress on being kind to neighbors and maintaining good relations with them. It also emphasizes that one should try to help one’s neighbors and be careful not to abuse them in any way. Allah says:

…and do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, the poor, the neighbor who is near of kin, the neighbor who is a stranger…

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should honor his neighbor.”

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “By Allah, he does not believe. By Allah, he does not believe.” He was asked whom he was talking about. He said: “He whose neighbor is not safe from his abuse.”

He also said, defining the neighbor’s rights: “If he falls ill, visit him. If he has good fortune, congratulate him. If ill fortune befalls him, console him. Do not build your building in a way that would keep the breeze from reaching his dwelling except with his permission. Do not annoy him with the aroma of your cooking pot unless you serve him some of your food. If you buy some fruit, then give him a gift from it, and if you do not do so, then bring it into your home discreetly, and do not let your child take it outside to taunt his child with it.”

The rights of the guest and the stranger

Islam encourages honoring guests and giving good hospitality. Honoring one’s guest is considered a noble character trait that attests to the sincerity and strength of one’s faith. Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him): “Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should honor his guest.”

Islam emphasizes treating strangers and wayfarers kindly. The wayfarer is a traveler who is cut off from his home and unable to return to it. This person has a right to receive from the Zakah tax. Allah says:

The charity tax is only for the poor, the destitute, those employed to collect it, to encourage those whose hearts are inclined towards Islam, to free captives, for those in debt, for the cause of Allah, and for the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

The Means Employed by Islam to Achieve Social Responsibility

Islam legislates certain measures and regulations to assure social responsibility. Some of these measures concern the individual and some concern the state.

Measures connected to the individual:

Islam has charged the individual with a number of measures, some of which are compulsory while others are voluntary.

The following are among the compulsory measures that the individual is charged with:

1. The Zakah tax: This is among the most important of these measures. Allah has made it a religious obligation upon the Muslims and has empowered the state to collect it forcibly if necessary. The importance of Zakah comes from its general application to most of the population and from the quantity of the general wealth that it represents (2.5%).

This is a sufficient quantity of wealth, when managed properly, to solve the majority of society’s problems that stem from poverty. For this reason, it is a very effective means of upholding social responsibility.

This is above and beyond its more abstract effects, because it prevents the class hatred that always develops in society when there are haves who are ambivalent to the needs of others and have-nots who are deprived and neglected.

2. Expiations: These are the measures required by Islam to atone for prohibited acts committed by a Muslim or to compensate for obligatory acts that have been neglected.

There are many types of expiations, among them being the expiation for breaking an oath taken in Allah’s name and the expiation for intentionally breaking an obligatory fast in the month of Ramadan without a legitimate excuse.

Sometimes these expiations entail feeding a number of poor people, making them a means of assuring social responsibility. Allah says:

Allah will not take you to task you for what is unintentional in your oaths, but he will take you to task for your deliberate oaths. For their expiation, feed ten poor people in the manner that you would feed your own family, or clothe them, or manumit a slave. But whoever cannot afford that must fast for three days. That is the expiation for oaths when you have sworn.

3. The charity at the end of the month of fasting: This is an obligatory act of charity given on `Eid al-Fitr, the auspicious day marking the end of Ramadan. Its measure is roughly three kilograms of the staple food of the region. It must be paid on behalf of every Muslim man, woman, and child. Its purpose, as stated by Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) is to: “...make them have no need of asking on this day.”

4. Assisting the needy: If a person knows that his neighbor is hungry or has no food to eat, and he is able to assist him, then it is obligatory upon him to do so. Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “Whosoever goes to sleep satisfied while being aware that his neighbor is hungry does not believe in me.”

He also said: “Allah has no obligation towards a household where they let someone go to sleep hungry.”

Islam gives the person who reaches the level of severe hunger the right to steal from others enough food to satiate his hunger, even if he has to use a degree of force.

Islam does not only impose compulsory measures to ensure social responsibility, it opens the door for voluntary acts in many ways:

1. Endowments: Islamic Law provides for endowments and considers them to be among the most excellent of good deeds. Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “When a person dies, his good deeds come to end, except for three things: charity that continues to benefit others, knowledge that continues to be of benefit, and a pious child who prays for him.”

An endowment is where a Muslim gives some property in charity that will remain, for a period of time, available to certain other parties who are allowed to benefit from it and from its proceeds but are not allowed to dispose of it. The property in question might be a residential building, a profitable investment, agricultural land, or something else.

There have been numerous endowments in Islamic history of a wide variety. They have been established for many different purposes.

Endowments have been an active partner to Muslim society up to this day in addressing issues of general welfare and security and in assisting society in taking care of the needy.

2. Bequests: A person gives a bequest before his death to another party from his estate. This party could be an individual or an organization. A bequest can even be generally worded so that the recipients are those who meet certain criteria.

Islam encourages bequests. Allah says:

It is prescribed for you, if one of you approaches death and leaves behind wealth, to make a bequest to parents and relatives in a reasonable manner.

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “Allah has allowed you to bequeath a third of your wealth at the time of death.”

Islam, though, balances between the rights of the inheritors (who are solely responsible for the funeral preparations) and the rights of the recipients of bequests. For this reason, it does not allow a person to bequeath more than a third of his estate.

One of the Companions, Sa`d b. Abi Waqqas, asked Allah’s Messenger: “I am a wealthy man and have no inheritors except for my daughter. Should I make a bequest of two-thirds of my estate?”

Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) replied: “No, one third, and one third is plenty. Leaving your inheritors wealthy is better than leaving them dependent and begging.”

3. Loans: A loan is where one party allows another to utilize his property for free on condition that the property is returned. Islam encourages this activity as a positive means of assisting others and cultivating love between the individuals in society. It strengthens social relations and fosters cooperation. Islam discourages denying others the right to borrow as long as doing so poses no harm to the owner. Islam associates the one who refuses to lend to others with a person who is deficient in his prayers, prayer being one of Islam’s most important pillars. Allah says:

So woe to those who pray who are negligent while in their prayers and who only wish to be seen of men and who withhold even neighborly needs.

These needs would include any small everyday items, like dishes and hand tools.

Islam expects the borrower, in return, to treat what he borrows in the best possible manner, protect it, and return it on time. Allah says:

Verily, Allah commands you to render back the trusts to those to whom they are due.

Allah describes the believers as:

Those who are faithful in observing their trusts and their covenants.

4. Gifts: Islam encourages the exchange of gifts and makes mention of how it strengthens social bonds and spreads affection throughout society. Allah’s Messenger (may the peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) said: “Exchange gifts, it will cause you to love one another.”

The Responsibility of the State:

Though Islam pays close attention to social responsibility on the individual level, it does not stop there. Alongside the individual measures, it establishes general measures that the state is responsible to carry out.

Among these measures are the following:

1. Safeguarding natural resources: This entails assuring the proper utilization of the country’s natural environment, including the mineral resources of the land and sea as well as all other forms of wealth that Allah has placed in the Earth. Allah has made humanity responsible for these resources and has given mankind the power to turn such resources to his benefit in order for society to realize the highest standard of living possible for all of its members, not just for a select few.

If only every nation would fulfill its duty in this regard and distribute the benefits of these resources in a just manner – by providing general services and opportunities for work - then the world’s societies would surely enjoy phenomenal growth and development.

2. Creating opportunities for employment: This entails seeking out the best solutions for confronting unemployment and establishing constructive programs to contribute to general development.

Such programs can provide work for idle hands in a completely just manner that takes into consideration the general needs of society and gives preference to the poorer and more deprived sectors of society.

We should mention here an event that occurred at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him). A man came to Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) begging, so he gave him a silver coin and ordered him to buy an ax and go to the wilderness to collect wood and then return after a period of time. When the man returned, he informed Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) that he had earned enough to fill his needs and even gave some money in charity. Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) then said: “That one of you should take his rope and go collect wood is better for him than to go around begging people, whether or not they give anything to him.”

3. Organizing individual efforts: The state has the responsibility of organizing and regulating the efforts of individuals in fulfilling their social responsibilities in the ways that we have previously discussed. This is especially true for the Zakah tax and endowments. This entails enacting the necessary legislation to ensure that the objectives of these individual efforts are realized, like eliminating poverty and closing the gap between the haves and have-nots. In the context, the Qur’an comes with the following command for Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) and for all Muslim leaders who come after him: “Take from their wealth the charity tax.”

4. Utilizing the property of the wealthy when necessary: When society is faced with unusual circumstances whereby the division of wealth reaches an intolerable level of imbalance and the state with its resources is incapable of fulfilling its duties and responding to the needs of society, at this time it is permissible – and sometimes even necessary – to levy against the property of the wealthy what will restore a normal social balance. This is the opinion of the majority of jurists, provided that the state acts justly and solely in the interests of society and the general welfare.


(The Discover Islam Project)

Is Islam and democracy identical?

Islam and Democracy

Prof. Dr. Bunyamin Duran


In this lecture I will try to analyze the relationship between Islam as a religion and democracy as a political system. I will try to discuss some important questions about the possibility of an Islamic democratic system. Some questions are the following:

1-What is Islam?

2-What is democracy?

3-What is the nature and capability of human kind in the forming of politic systems?

4-Are there sufficient safeguards for human rights in the Islamic laws, which can make it possible to establish a democratic society?

5-Is Islam compatible with democracy or not?

6-Is it possible to establish an Islamic democracy in a Muslim society?

7-What is the Islamic tradition in democratic culture?

8-Can we find clear democratic lines, which go back to prophetic tradition?

To be able to answer to these questions we have to explain some of the aspect of Islam, which related to our studies.



Islam is an Arabic word, derived from a linguistic root, which means both ‘peace’ and ‘submission’. In the Qor’an the appellation ‘Muslim’ is applied to all the righteous. For instance, Abraham is described as ‘ever inclined to God and in submission to Him’ (3:67).



But this submission as pointed out by Kierkegaard, means not a masochistic but deeply conscious submission, as has been experienced in prophet Abraham. The conscious submission is a result of a strong identity, which reflects them as a critical thinking, expressing, reasoning, and behaving with wisdom.

The nature of the man in the Koran

The purpose of man’s creation is that he should receive the impress of God’s attributes and should, within the limits of his capacities, become a manifestation of them (51:56). To aid man in the achievement of this purpose he has been endowed with appropriate faculties and capacities. "Surely, We have created man in the best mould"(95:4).

The Qor’an teaches that man’s nature is pure, ‘the nature made by Allah; the nature in which He has created mankind’ (30:30). The Prophet said: Every child is born in according with divine nature…’

The Qor’an stresses the equality of mankind as deriving from the unity of its common creator, Who created man of one species and Whom all man owe allegiance and obedience.

In my opinion one of the basic aims of the Qur’an and is that a person attains a physiological balance in his or her behaviors. This position is stressed in de Qur’an as sirat al mustakim, (Koran, 1/6), this means in the terminology of psychology neither a sadistic nor a masochistic position, but a physiologically balanced position. Both sadistic and masochistic attitudes are pathological situations. We know that every person has more or less sadistic and masochistic tendencies. A masochistic tendency means a feeling of oneself as meaningless and worthless, this emotion brings about that a person eludes his responsibilities and ethical obligations. One of the destructive results can be the submission of oneself to the will of political or religious leaders, or disappearance of the identity of a person in idolizing actors, football players or movie stars. According to the psychologist Erich Fromm the religious protestant approach of the unimportance of the human will has favored the submission of the German people to the will of Hitler and the Nazi party.

Another aspect of mankind is the inclination to sadistic behavior connected with the feeling that man is comparable with God. A sadistic man considers himself as the centre of the universe and wants badly that everybody and everything is willing to serve and even to worship him. In this situation Divine Determining confronts him, saying: "Know your limits, you cannot be God, you are only a weak creature". Divine predestination and providence and man’s power of choice are the final degrees of belief to save the soul from pride and sadistic actions, and the latter, to make it admit to the responsibility.

Strong identity

Another attribute, which the Qur’an envisages, is a strong identity. Without achieving a strong identity a person could not fulfill a religious and political mission.

It is my conviction that religious thinking is man’s highest form of thinking. To be able to realize religious thinking one needs a well developed mind and a refined logical system.

Even an utmost developed human intellect is not necessarily able to understand adequately religious matters. For this reason, a lot of scientists could not understand religious subjects, although they had a highly developed intelligence. Intelligence is the ability of discovering materialistic aspects of every thing, while the mind is the capability of discovering the essence of things.

Religious faith and thought, in according to Kierkegaard is above the aesthetics and ethical thinking and thought. Thus an important question is raised, how can a strong identity be achieved?

Max Weber pointed out that true religion is the matter of city-dwellers, not the matter of peasants. According to Weber the essence of peasant’s religion is not true religion, which is based on scripture, but is archaic religion based on idolatry. In this theory the bearers of true religion must be city-dwellers; because the city is the sphere of freedom. A strong identity shapes well in city-dwellers. A strong identity requires a high economic level of prosperity and a most refined culture, as well as institutionalized freedom. (Turner, 1991, p.99)

Universal Ethical Principles

In many of his verses, Qoran indicates the most important of the universal principles on which Islamic ethics is based. I want here to remark some of the ethical principles. Islamic ethic is depending on justice, truth, freedom, mutual consultation, co-operation, solidarity, brotherhood, peaces and so on.

Justice is one of the bases of social life and important need for each individual, every society and all nations. The basis of justice is equality. The justice which is not base on equality there is no justice.

Another principle is freedom. We are all born free, which makes freedom our destiny. This is reflected strongly in the Qor’an’s understanding of human free will, which distinguishes man from the rest of God’s creation. The notion of free will necessitates freedom of choice, and this is why the Qor’an so emphatically states:

‘There is no compulsion in religion) (2:256).

To believe or not believe in God is left to the choice of man. Allah gave to man a capability of choosing between different alternatives. He can find through his intelligence the existence of God, even without messenger. Man is free in certain fields, for instance in making his actions without any divine interference.

The solidarity and co-operation are other important principles. For relations between Muslims and non-muslims are based on peace. Life, honor, and property are inviolable. They cannot be violated without a credible, accepted lawful reason. It rejects violence and terror in the name of jihad. Armed jihad in Islam may not be aggressive, it can only be defensive.

Capability of Islamic law to establish a democratic society

Another problem in the establishment of a democratic state under the structure of Islam is the capability of Islamic laws, which have been given by God. There is no doubt about the roll of Islam in attaining important rights to all mankind in the history. But the actual real problem is the capability of Islamic law to establish a modern democratic state.



We must analyze firstly the character of Islamic law to understand its capability to form a democratic system.

There are some basic principles, which are the essence of Islam, derived from the spirit of Qor’an: the protection of the soul, intellect, religion, property, and offspring. All regulations and laws must be harmonized with these principles. Otherwise they become invalid. There is a consensus among Muslim-scholars on their necessity. The rejection of one of them is accepted as a rejection of all of the Qor’an.

These are of course universal principles, but the main problem here is their applicability in different times and different places of the social, economical and political fields. How can these be actualized to different fields in different times and different places? Are there some sub-principles in the Islamic law, which are applicable to real daily life? Of course there are other sub-principles, the so-called al-maslaha al-mursala (the common good in Maliki law- school) and istihsan (individuel preference; in Hanafi law-school), which are accepted by some Muslim law-schools as important sources for legislation. At the same time they have given rise to numerous debates about the legality of both principles.



Maslaha occurs when there is no text: the Qor’an and the Sunna don’t confirm, but neither do they reject (a maslaha that became apparent after the age of revelation). For it allows the ulema to use their own analysis and personal reasoning in order to formulate a legal decision in the light of the historical geographical context, using their best efforts to remain faithful to the commandments and to the spirit of the Islamic legal body where no text, no ‘letter’, of the law is declared.

The maslaha as a source is close to the natural law in the western sense.

the common good can be used as a modern source of legitimacy. It can be said here that the establishment of a democratic system in our own time is clearly for the common good.

Thus, according to the spirit of the Qor’an, avoiding of the `common good`- principle is a great crime. For this reason, all Muslim societies have to look democracy as the spirit of Islamic governmental system and obligate their selves to establish a democratic system in their own country.

The rights of the individual in the Islamic state

The degree of the rights of the individuals in the Islamic state, particularly in the formation of a political system, is more important. Are the rights of man sufficiently safeguarded within the Islamic society to establish modern democratic institutions? What is the character of election right? Has a man the right to elect his/her rulers according to what he/she wants? Has a man also the right to remove a government, which fails to meet the demands of the people? Is the head of state appointed by God or selected by the people?

The rights of the individual in the Islamic state

The degree of the rights of the individuals in the Islamic state, particularly in the formation of a political system, is more important. Are the rights of man sufficiently safeguarded within the Islamic society to establish modern democratic institutions? What is the character of election right? Has a man the right to elect his/her rulers according to what he/she wants? Has a man also the right to remove a government which fails to meet the demands of the people? Is the head of state appointed by God or selected by the people?

The personality of the individual in the Islamic state is prominent. It does not vanish in it; rather it develops face to face with it.

In order to simplify this study we will divide rights of the individual in the state into two: political rights and public rights.

Political rights of the individual

The political rights according to legal experts are: The rights that a person earns by virtue of his being a member of a political organization, like the right to elect and nominate, to hold public positions in the government and the running of government affairs.

The first and foremost right of an individual is the right to elect a head of state. This right is based on the principle of mutual consultation, which is established by the Qor’an and on the principle of group responsibility to implement the laws and the management of its affairs according to these laws. In fact, the principle of mutual consultation is a significant fundamental institution of the Qor’an. The Qor’an reeds as follows:

‘They conduct their affairs by mutual consultation’ (42:38)

This text is clear about the fact that the affairs of the Muslim, particularly the important among them, are to be decided through mutual consultation.

Also the group is responsible for the implementation of the laws and for regulating its own affairs in accordance with these laws:

‘O ye who believe, stand out firmly for justice, as witness to God even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin."(4: 135)

This text and others clearly indicate the group-responsibility of the Muslims for the implementation of the Islamic laws. But the group cannot achieve the execution of its powers as a group. This is not possible in practice. That is why the concept has appeared for the execution of the authority of the group. The group selects someone to represent it for the execution of its authority, in order to implement what it is obliged to do by the Islamic law.

This delegation is its absolute right; because the master is entitled to delegate his powers to someone else in matters that belong to him.

In Islam, legitimacy of any power or institution is derived mainly from people’s acceptance of this legitimacy. In other words, one can’t gain legitimacy as a ruler unless people agree to not to have it imposed on them; the people are entirely free to choose their rulers. Islam does not accept a system, which involves any kind of dictatorship, nor does it accept a system of monarchy where the power is inherited within the same family. Indeed, one wouldn’t only point out to systems that call themselves monarchies, because there are many countries that call themselves republics, but indeed power seems to be circulated only within the elite.

The mutual consultation system is the source of parliamentary system in an Islamic democratic state. Thus we can clearly say that the community is the sources of power, the group of parliament and head of state and his/her cabinet is only representative. The head of state or cabinet derives his powers from the community.

Interestingly, a model exists in Islamic history for Muslims in using mutual consultation as a process of selecting a new leader. When the Prophet Muhammad was on his deathbed, many of his companions urged him to name a successor who would lead the community, but the Prophet refused to do so-a clear indication that he wanted the next leader to be chosen through mutual consultation rather than be imposed upon the community. As such, when the Prophet passed away, the most pressing issue for the community was to choose its next leader. Three Companions were nominated to take the post of khalifah (caliph) and in the end, the Prophet’s closest companion, Abu Bakr, was chosen to be the community’s new leader. Abu Bakr and his three successors, known collectively as the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs, were also chosen in a similar fashion that reflected popular consent. So the idea of choosing a leader in accordance with popular will is certainly not a new idea in the Islamic tradition. As such, the notion of elections is compatible with the idea of an Islamic democracy.

Accountability of Government

Free electing system of leaders is not enough to achieve an important Qoranik governmental system. The accountability of government is also an essential principle of Islamic government. There are a lot of verses in the Quran, which indicate necessity of accountability of government. First, the Qor’anic teaching of mutual consultation does not end in selecting leaders but forms an essential part of governance in which leaders must conduct their affairs in a non-dictatorial manner. Second, leaders are not left to govern, based on their own whims and desires; rather their governance must be in accordance with the teachings of the Qor’an and Sunnah (4:59), which form the Islamic State’s constitution. Third, the Qor’an mandates that leaders pay back their trusts to those entitled to it ( 4:59), meaning that leaders are responsible to the citizens of the land.

Both Abu Bakr and `Umar ibn Al-Khattab, second caliph of Islam, reflected this notion of accountability in their inaugural addresses when they said to their community, "If I follow the right path, follow me. If I deviate from the right path, correct me so that we are not led astray." So certainly the role and responsibility of the people within a society extends far beyond choosing a leader within the Islamic political system.





Is it possible to create an Islamic democracy?

It is important to understand here what exactly the idea of democracy entails because too often the notion of democracy is confused with Western culture and society. As such, analysts often dismiss the compatibility of Islam with democracy, arguing that Islam and secularism are opposite forces, that rule of God is not compatible with rule of man, and that Muslim culture lacks the liberal social attitudes necessary for free, democratic societies to exist.

Arguments that dismiss the notion of an Islamic democracy presuppose that democracy is a non-fluid system that only embraces a particular type of social and cultural vision. However, democracy, like Islam, is a fluid system that has the ability to adapt to various societies and cultures because it is built on certain universally acceptable ideas.

So, what is democracy? In its dictionary definition, democracy is "government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives." As such, elections that express popular consent, freedom of political and social mobilization, and equality of all citizens under the rule of law becomes essential components of a healthy, functioning democracy.

Is the Islam and democracy identical?

We couldn’t easily say that the Islam and democracy is identical, because while democracy is a political system, Islam is a religion, which involves all aspect of materialistic and spiritual dimension of mankind. However there are some fundamental principles of Islam and democracy are similar: first, the idea or notion of freedom of the people to choose the rulers they want. Another idea that is similar is that of participation in the decision-making process in some form or the other. The third similarity between democracy and Islam is the notion of the removal of some governments, which fail to meet the expectations of the people.

According to some Muslim scholars there are also some differences between the Islam and democracy. The first basic difference is that in democracy, the ultimate authority lies with the people. In Islam, however, the ultimate authority doesn’t belong to people; it belongs to God alone. But this idea must not exaggerate. Because the common principles, which are fundamentals both in Islamic and democracy, are not only religious principles that depend on revelation, but at the some time universal principles that depend on reason such as justice, trust, truth, believe, mutual consultation, transparency and so on. We can say depending on the last point of view that the importance and necessities of justice, mutual consultation and trust for example are double in the Islamic society than others. That means that both the ruler and the ruled in Islam are subject to a higher criterion for decision-making, that are, divine guidance and reason.

Therefore, democracy and the political system in Islam, although they may have some similarities, are not really synonymous.


http://www.islamicuniversity.nl/en/showarticlenews.asp?id=238

Democracy and Autocracy

Islamising democracy

Al-Ahram Weekly
21 - 27 September 2006
Issue No. 813

"There is no fundamental incompatibility between Islam and democracy", writes Moataz Abdel Fattah

One way to depict the cultural map of Muslim societies regarding the issue of democracy and autocracy is to say that there are two broad types of subculture in the Muslim world: the culture of "dictatorship, but ... " and the culture of "democracy-as- a-must." The former is the subculture of two groups of Muslims: traditionalist Islamists who argue that a just autocratic ruler who abides by Sharia law and defends its tenets is the most legitimate ruler of all; and statist secularists who argue in favour of an autocratic ruler who maintains the state's stability and defends it against foreign and internal enemies. In both cases, Muslims behave as rational actors who find that the advantages of having an autocratic ruler outweigh those of having a democratically elected one.

The "democracy-as-a-must" subculture is the one that is adopted by modernist Islamists and pluralist secularists. Modernist Islamists treat democracy, insofar as it does not contradict the principals of Islam, as a means to fight dictatorship and ensure pluralism in society. Pluralist secularists argue that democracy is the core component of modernity and should be adopted on secular grounds. Democracy has no future in Muslim societies unless the "democracy-as-a-must" subculture becomes the dominant culture. Democracy must triumph in theory before it can be realised in practice. Muslims must widely and clearly accept that Islam and democracy are compatible and that meaningful faith requires freedom.

For those who wish to help make the "democracy-as-a-must" subculture prevail, there are some practical steps to be taken. First, advocates of democracy in the Muslim world should try harder to Islamise democracy rather than democratising Islam. Islamising democracy is a philosophical, theological and juristic attempt that aims at finding Islamic roots for democratic norms and practices. Many sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad can be considered as the Islamic roots of majority rule, the moral and political equality of women and non-Muslims, obligatory shura (consultation) and the eradication of apathy and the "dictatorship, but ... " culture. This is one of the main conditions for pluralist democracies to surely grow.

Islam is widely known to be more pluralistic than many other religions. Muslim democrats need to rediscover their religion and know where the problems lie. Modernists and pluralists should talk to each other, learn from each other, and teach each other. Secularists, for their part, need to re- examine their self-defeating strategy to democratise/secularise Islam through distorting Islamists' image, debunking the role of the ulema (educated class), copying Western experiences, implanting secular solutions, and heightening the intellectual civil war. This approach has been perceived by many Muslims as a Western attack on their legacy and identity. Using Islamic teachings to reform Muslims' culture seems the most feasible strategy in most Muslim societies.

The process of Islamisation of democracy is based on three assumptions. First, democratic norms and practices are not entirely Western. They are humankind's shared efforts to fight dictators and tyrants anywhere and anytime. Muslims have made significant contributions to democratic philosophy by emphasising the values of unity, respect for order, equality, peaceful coexistence and pluralism, and have also worked for the abolition of slavery and the emancipation of humanity throughout Islam's history.

Second, "wisdom is the goal of the believer -- wherever he or she finds it, he or she should learn it," as most Muslims believe Prophet Muhammad said. Early Muslims did not find it anti-Islamic to learn systems of administration from the Persians, irrigation from the Egyptians, and philosophy from the Greeks. They can learn from others what they lack without necessarily finding it against Islam.

Third, many Muslims' setbacks in the form of poor governance have their roots in the Ottoman Empire and European colonialism. Democratic impulses began to escalate in Europe in the early 18th century onward, but this was also the period during which most Muslim countries began to fall under the colonial control of the Europeans who distorted the class structures and cultural priorities of Muslim societies. Thus, the best way to correct this historical fall is to catch up and learn what Muslims would likely have invented or developed if left to their own devices.

Up to this point, I have focused on changing the public mindset to create fertile soil for democracy. Another important component of democratisation is getting the backing of political elites. As much as the public and institutions matter for democratisation, one should not underestimate the importance of elites who have the commitment and skills to redistribute power in society without endangering the unity of the nation or the sustainability of democracy.

The effort of 80-year old Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi of Egypt is one of the most successful attempts to Islamise democracy. His book On the Fiqh of the Islamic State (2001) is a notable attempt to demonstrate the Islamic underpinnings of democracy in the Sunni Muslim world and is often quoted by other modernist ulema in their books, booklets and sermons. It has given informal permission to many ulema to use the originally alien word "democracy" .

Al-Qaradawi's attempt, along with those of others, has made democracy acceptable to many Muslims, but it is still not perceived as a must. Muslims still have a long road to travel until this happens.

-------

The writer is Professor of political science at Cairo University and Central Michigan University and the author of Democratic Values in the Muslim World (Lynne Rienner Publications, 2006).

The Democracy Trap

Towards an Islamic Concept of Democracy

Dr. `Abd Allah Nâsir al-Subayh


“Democracy” is a powerful and attractive word. This holds true for the people of the Middle East, since their societies have come heavily under the influence of Western ideas and cultural values. For many, democracy has come to represent freedom, advancement, peace, stability, and prosperity. For some, it represents the very embodiment of all that is good.

The media contributes greatly to this general positive attitude towards democracy. The media links the word “democracy” to a vast number of concerns, depicting it as a sort of magic potion with the power to cure a myriad of social ailments. As a result of the media hubbub, many people have fallen into what might be called “the democracy trap”, by which I mean their belittling and totally disregarding their own cultural context to clear the way for an abstract ideal that is completely divorced in practice from the cultural reality in which they live.

The way to avoid this trap is to fully understand and appreciate the critical analysis that is brought to bear by leading democratic theorists with respect to the shortcomings that exist in both the conceptualization of democracy and its practical application.

Democracy is not the embodiment of all that is good. Nor is it something bad. The problem is that some of those in the Muslim world advocate democracy are unable to see it except within the superficial confines of a single ideological pattern tied in their minds to a single mode of practice. In the minds of such people, democracy means nothing other than parliaments and elections. This line of thinking can only result in a charade – the mere outward trappings of democracy. Then there are those who oppose democracy, conceiving of it as the absolute rule of the people which must necessarily be rejected. Their rejection, however, can only result in the absolute rule of a single, oppressive dictator.

In practice – as well as in theory – democracy is not a monolithic idea with a single mode of practical expression. There is a variety of approaches to democracy that have come about as a result of the different philosophical backgrounds and particular circumstances of the various societies wherein it has been adopted.

When democracy first developed in Athens over two thousand years ago, it was the people choosing to govern their own affairs instead of letting a tyrant do it for them. Democracy was a way to for them to do away with tyranny so that the people could express their will as to how they would govern their city.

The democracy of Athens was known as “direct democracy”. The idea of democracy evolved since then into what we know as “representative democracy”. This is the form that democracy takes in our present era. It, in turn, conceptualized and applied in various different ways.

Many theorists make a distinction between the philosophy and values that form the basis for democracy and the machinery by which the will of the people is ascertained – in other words, the means by which governance is carried out. They see democracy on its own unable of realizing its social objectives. They speak about principles of democracy that need to be realized as well, such as: the rule of law, freedom of speech, separation of powers, transparency of government, and secularism.

Though these principles and others enjoy the general acceptance of democracy theorists, we find that a number of these principles have come under some serious discussion. Take, for instance, the principle of majority rule. This is an essential principle, without which there can be no democracy. The very purpose of democracy would be lost without it. Nevertheless, a good number of theorists have expressed concern over the possible tyranny of the majority. Some argue that the fear of mob rule was the central issue that preoccupied the American thinkers who drafted the United States Constitution. This is the reason why, at the outset, the right to vote was restricted to certain sectors of society. Women and slaves, for instance, were ineligible to vote.

The discussions and disagreements that exist among political theorists tell us as Muslims that we need to investigate these issues ourselves and work to develop a way to apply democracy in a way that is suited to our Islamic outlook. I suggest, for this purpose, the following:

1. Distinguishing between ideological frameworks and means of governance

We can accept democracy as a form of government and a means of expressing the will of the people without adopting ideological principles and values that are at variance with the teachings of Islam. One of these Islamic values is that the ultimate authority for legislation is the Qur’an and Sunnah. This is not at odds with the concept of democracy, since democracy, as political theorists have pointed out, is a means of governance that cannot exist outside the context of some philosophical framework. As the American political thinker Zbigniew Brzezinski pointed out, democracy might be basically a western idea, but it is a vessel that needs to be filled with something. We can, therefore, fill that vessel with contents that are compatible with our faith.

Those who promote democracy today are not content merely to speak about it on its own. They link it to liberalism and individual freedom and claim that any democracy that does not realize these meanings is not a true democracy. If they are permitted to link democracy with other philosophical precepts that they embrace, then others are likewise permitted to do so.

Some might object the authority of the Qur’an and Sunnah conflicts with the basic principle of democracy that the state must be a secular one. We can counter that claim by pointing out the following:

a. We do not have to accept every principle that is advanced as a principle of democracy. We can have our own vision. We can develop a form of democracy that is compatble with our identity.

b. Most forms of modern Christianity do not have a specific code of Law that it is considered a religious duty for Christians to uphold in the governance of their societies. Therefore, secularism on the level of the civic polity does not constitute a revocation of Christian sacred law, since such a law does not exist in principle. What secularism means to Christianity is the abolition of theocracy – the rule of the clergy, the rule of people who claim to speak on behalf of God and on the behalf of Christ (peace be upon him). The clergy in a theocratic system claim to receive direct divine insight and in turn require that other people submit to their direction and their command. The will and the welfare of the people is not a consideration.

Islam is opposed to the idea of a clerical class. Islam views what they practice as heresy, as a situation where a special group of people upon their own authority concoct lies against Allah and a misrepresent the religion.

c. Once it becomes clear to us that secularism poses no conflict for the Sacred Law as understood by Christianity, we need then understand that secularism itself takes many forms. In America the Constitution openly declares the separation of church and state. In Britain, however, we find a different situation, where the Queen is the head of the church and the country tends to the affairs of the official Christian faith.

d. In Islam, the jurists and scholars – people who are often misleadingly reffered to by non-Muslims as “Muslim clerics” – do not possess exclusive access to the truth. They are people who can be debated with, whose views can be contradicted. In Islam, religious authority does not rest with the scholar or jurist; it rests with the Qur’ân and Sunnah. These texts are independent of the people and are to be approached objectively.

There is no single concept of secularism that is accepted by all secularists. If we understand from it that the people are to be consulted and that they have the right to express their opinions and object to what they disagree with – and this is the democratic spirit – then this is one of the basic principles of our Law.

2. Recognition of the excellence of many of the principles of democracy

Among these principles are the primacy of the constitution, transparency of government, independence of the judiciary, separation of powers, freedom of speech, respect for human dignity, and the preservation of human rights. These principles embody the true essence and spirit of democracy. Without them, all that can exist is a farse, the mere outward trappings of democracy.

These are principles that Islamic Law calls us to uphold and commands our politicians to adhere to. Whoever wishes to adopt democracy should, first and foremost, embrace these principles. It is deeply regrettable that in many countries in the Arab world where we find the outward appearance of the democratic process, we do not find the reality of democracy.

3. Recognition that democracy is a culture and a social practice

Democracy is not merely a parliament and a ballot box. The practice of true democracy requires freedom of speech and open public dialogue.

4. Democracy cannot exist without public scrutiny

A democracy that cannot be monitored by the people is not a true democracy. Transparency in government administration is essential. All citizens must have equal access to information.

5. Muslims must exercise every effort to develop their mode of government

We must devise our own Islamic terminology that reflects our religion, our heritage, and the requirements of our faith.

Khilafah: Theo-democracy and State

"...paranoia which equates secularism with Westernisation... secularism is actually necessary for religions to thrive, facilitating the freedom to practice religion without persecution."


Why Secularism is Key to Islam

Faisal Gazi
AverroesPress.com


Secularism, as an ideal and a political assertion, has not had an easy ride in traditional Muslim history. But contrary to popular belief, secularist philosophy is not alien to Islam. In fact, a close reading of classical and modern Islamic history exposes an ongoing tension between the forces of secularism and theocracy since the medieval age.

Unfortunately, secularism and democracy have not fared much better in modern times for Muslim-majority societies either. Repressive state-sponsored secular fundamentalism has kept Muslims largely ambivalent, and in many cases wholly hostile, to the idea of secularism. The institutions of Islamic orthodoxy misunderstand, often wilfully, secularism to mean a Western recalibration of the religious and cultural norms of Muslim societies.

This need not be the case if secularism is understood to mean, first and foremost, a secular state not a secularised society.

To put it simply, secularism is the separation of state institutions and policies from religious institutions and beliefs. Unfortunately, this simple assertion has aroused, amongst Muslim thinkers, an undertone of paranoia which equates secularism with Westernisation.

In particular, the Enlightenment ideals of individual liberty and freedom, taken for granted in Western societies, are seen as anathema to Muslim societies which elevates the concept of community or Jama'ah to paramount importance. Absolute freedom of the individual is secondary to public interest and the concerns of the religious community in Muslim-majority societies.

Today a number of Islamist organisations exist, such as Hizb ut-Tahrir, Ikhwan al-Muslimeen (the Muslim Brotherhood) and Jamaat-e-Islami, whose ultimate aim is the re-establishment of the Caliphate or the Khilafa which was abolished in 1924. The Khilafah movement to which all these organisations subscribe, to a lesser or greater extent, supports the creation of a single totalitarian state encompassing the entire globe under the rule of one Caliph, whose function is to impose one interpretation of Shari'a as law, as opposed to a traditional understanding of Shari'a as a body of ethics. For the advocates of this ideology, the creation of the Khilafah is nothing less than a religious duty (fard).

The claim that Islam and the Khilafah, or religion and state, are inseparable is a debunked fallacy but this has not stopped Islamists such as the Muslim Brotherhood or Jamaat-e-Islami elevating it to the level of a dogmatic axiom. However the struggle to separate religion from politics is not alien to Islamic history, rather it is a fundamental part of its historical narrative which began some two hundred years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad.

In the eighth century a school of thought, founded by the philosopher al-Kindi, emerged in the Arab world known as the Mutazilites, or the Rationalists. This was a group of scientists, philosophers, and poets who stood against a legalistic dogma based solely on the Shari'a which was encroaching into Muslim societies.

The most well-known Mutazilites were Ibn Sina and al-Farabi who had come to be known as the Islamic Hellenistic philosophers because they had incorporated Aristotelian metaphysics and cosmology into their philosophy. The Mutazilites argued that it was possible to act morally with the use of rational thought alone. By corollary, they refuted the need to combine religion with the state.

The Mutazilites were opposed by another school of thought called the Asharites which was founded by the tenth century theologian, Ashari. The Asharites rejected rationalism, and argued that the human mind was not capable of understanding the nature and attributes of God. By extension, they maintained that the discernment of morality was beyond rational thought. The Asharites rejected this Hellenistic philosophy because they regarded it as alien and dangerous

The Asharites also argued that the state was representative of God's power on Earth as well as the sole adjudicator of the morality of its citizens. The Asharites represented the intellectual force which pulled the institutions of the Caliphate towards the institutions of religion. It boasted such giants as the polymath al-Ghazali, the mathematician Faqr-al-din Razi, and the formidable figure of the fourteenth century historian and sociologist, Ibn Khaldun.

For the next four hundred years the intellectual battle that waged between the Mutazilites and Asharites could be likened to a conceptual football match: the Scientists vs. the Theologians. The intellectual and philosophical history of this period was dominated by this contest: to find the exact point where the sovereignty of God (huquq Allah) ended and where the sovereignty of man (huquq ibaad) began. The greatest minds of the time were drafted into either one or the other side.

Al Ghazali was intimately adept in the nuances of both philosophical positions, but his conservative nature compelled him to side with the Asharites. He went on to write many treatises condemning the philosophers and scientists and went as far as accusing them with the charge of heresy. This did not stop him, however, from embedding Aristotelian logic into the principles of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh).

Ultimately the Asharites, the theologians, won the day, the legacy of which affects us to this day. Traditional Muslim societies would henceforth place less spiritual value on philosophy, rational thought, and free thinking, and, perhaps most unfortunately of all, the forces of absolute power began to regard religion and state as inseparable entities. Ironically, the orthodoxy of today reject the ideals of the Enlightenment such as personal liberty and freedom of speech in a kind of perverse echo of the Asharite position of medieval times.

Over the past two centuries, the Islamic world's stagnation was compounded by the rapid advance of post-Enlightenment Europe and, to add insult to injury, followed by the humiliation of colonisation. For the first time Muslims were politically subjugated by the European empires of Russia, Holland, Britain, and France. The weakened power-bases and the moribund institutions of the Caliphate was outmatched for a battle against the forces of colonisation. Islamic educational, legal, and economic institutions, not to mention the Islamic faith itself, was challenged by Christian missionaries and European imperialism. After WWII colonialism began to recede, but Islamic nation states were too weak to challenge the secular autocratic military regimes, which filled the vacuum left by Europeans.

Possibly the greatest disservice done to the concept of secularism in the post-colonial Muslim-majority world has not been through Western actors, and certainly not by Islamists, but at the hands of home-grown military regimes that emerged after the end of colonisation.

The concept of secularism is now not only misunderstood, but is increasingly abhorred by many Muslims worldwide. This is perhaps unsurprising, as recent post-colonial histories have seen the creation of brutal dictatorships ruled by so-called secular leaders who could be just as extremist and dogmatic as their unctuous religious counterparts.

In Egypt, Gamal Abdal Nasser's secular regime tortured and executed members of the Muslim Brotherhood. But his tactics backfired with horrendous consequences. Nasser's actions can arguably be held responsible for the popularisation of the extremist reactionary Islamist outfit which he so brutally repressed.

In the 1960s, the secular, nominally socialist Ba'athist regimes of Iraq and Syria were even more barbaric than Nasser's. Meanwhile in Algeria, the National Liberation Front, a secular political party, enjoyed massive support. But its secular mandate turned ugly when it stepped up a campaign of persecution of anyone who identified with Islam. It is no wonder that Islamist parties, in spite of their threatening totalitarianism, began to appeal to the Muslim peoples as a reaction to the corruption and viciousness of pseudo-liberal "secular" regimes.

Ironically, the greatest damage inflicted on secularism in the Islamic world was perpetrated by the Turkish despot Kemal Ataturk, who was probably the most successful leader to embark on a tyrannical campaign to overhaul the social norms of a Muslim society. Ataturk unilaterally abolished the Ottoman Empire, Europeanised schools and colleges, retracted the power and influence granted to religious institutions, and closed down all Sufi orders. He aligned Turkish society to his personal perception of European society by banning beards, turbans, hijab, even chappals. He made the Turkish military the enforcers of his secularism to ensure every Turkish man and woman at every level of society was turned out in ill-fitting Western clothing. Turkey was transformed but only at the cost of an unrelenting social engineering campaign, shoe-horned into public space by a slavish emulation of Western norms. What Ataturk got away with in 1927 cannot and should not be attempted in the 21st century.

However, there is a change in the air as more Muslim thinkers begin to re-evaluate democracy and secularism, pushing forward the idea that the two must go hand in hand in order for individuals to live freely and without persecution in their countries. The recent mass protests in Iran, the democratic electorates voting out Islamist parties in Bangladesh and Indonesia signal a desire for change. Muslim attitudes are, once again, coming round to revisiting the ideas originally argued and proposed by the Mutazilites. As Ziauddin Sardar, a prominent Muslim thinker in the West, says:

"Writers and thinkers in Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey began to argue that secularism had a role to play in Muslim societies. But if Muslims were to accept secularism, both secularism and religion had to be reformulated."

Some of these "reformulators," academic and political philosophers, include Sardar himself but also Abdul Wahab al-Effendi, Hamza Yusuf, Abdul Hakim Murad, Javed Ghamdi, and Abdullahi An-Na'im, to name a few. It is worth noting that these thinkers have all largely arrived at a similar conclusion on the efficacy of a secular state in spite of coming from diverse academic, theological, and religious backgrounds.

Modern Muslim secularist thinkers are agreed that secularism is not an ideology or a belief that can be injected into society like a "displaced" alternative belief system. Or in other words, a pseudo-religious doctrine applied, usually by force, into the public space, as Ataturk tried to do. Instead, they advocate secularism as a pragmatic social and political philosophy which influences democratic process along with other normative ideas such as pluralism and human rights. All of these underpin the ideals of the liberal, democratic state.

Notably, it is the Sudanese Muslim scholar, Abdullahi an-Na'im whose deep understanding of the dynamics of nominally "Islamic states" has demonstrated how secularism can inform aspects of law and governance in the Islamic context. In the social sense, an-Na'im argues for "public reason," a notion based on the liberal philosophy of John Rawls.

"Public reason" is applied to public decisions forcing public policy to be based on evidence and fact and free from religious influence. For example, if Bangladesh were legislating for equal inheritance rights for women, as is currently the case, secularism would ensure that the decision would be subjected to input from public debates, empirical data, social factors, anecdotal evidence, the opinions of non-Muslim minorities, as well as other forms of "public reason" and secular ethics, and not solely upon the reliance on divine law.

Secularism is simply a prescription of how the state conducts itself in relation to the individual. The state is a political institution not a breathing life form. Which is why it cannot be "Islamic" -- a quality peculiar to personal faith. The same applies to a "community." Neither the state nor a community can believe in God or practice a religion. Logically, it is the individual who believes and practices a faith and can only do so freely when the state is secular.

In this sense, the state must be neutral towards religious belief so as to ensure that the individual has complete free will to believe in religion or not. Coercion by the state does not guarantee that the individual would believe in a religion or not, which is why the state must in all cases maintain neutrality in order for religious pluralism and practice to develop and mature.

Secularism in Bangladesh, as in many other Muslim-majority nations, is misunderstood both by its supporters and its detractors. Far from being anti-religion, secularism is actually necessary for religions to thrive, facilitating the freedom to practice religion without persecution. Secularism explains why diverse Islamic creeds flourish in places like Britain and North America. The failure to adopt secularist principles also explains why Sufi shrines, like that of Shah Jalal, are bombed in places like Sylhet and Pakistan.

If democracy is to succeed in Bangladesh, secularism must become a non-negotiable principle of a healthy and thriving liberal democracy.

See also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/apr/09/religion-islam-secularism-egypt

Muslim Cultural Unity

By Maitham Al-Janabi (Iraqi political scientist)


Muslim cultural unity does not mean a standardization of culture, but rather the reasonable proportion of its basic components, because the spirit of order is what is most essential in Muslim culture. Order is moderation determined by a priority of justice. This makes justice the prism in which the socio-political and ethical values of community are refracted. The social, political, and military collisions of the first century of Hijra—a century of turbulent formation of the Caliphate—were related basically to the struggle around the ideas of justice. The early Kharijites and Shi’ites were the first people tested through the prism of the Islamic understanding of justice. These trends were formed originally in response to the perception of the deviation of authorities from the initial principles of Islamic justice, especially during the reign of the third Caliph Osman Ibn-Afan (d. 35 AH), in constant protest against the excesses and luxurious lives of the rulers. One of the famous disciples of the prophet Abu-Thar al-Gifari (d. 22 AH) proclaimed as his slogan the verse in the Qur’an that says: "One who accumulates gold and silver and does not spend them in the name of God, is awaited by a terrible punishment." Osman Ibn-Afan was assassinated by a rebellious community, which realized in practice the Islamic principle that declares: "There is no obedience to God." Obedience in this case is synonymous to justice. It is well known that all those who support and criticize the actions of the masses at the early stages of state formation, as a rule take the form of sharp disagreement, condemnation, and disobedience, reflecting the feeling of withdrawal from truth and justice. Therefore, the wide discussion of socio-political and ethical problems such as faithfulness and blasphemy, good and evil, sin and repentance, freedom of will and predetermination, etc., is not accidental. Accusations of blasphemy were closely connected to the question of "mortal sins" whose criterion was withdrawal from truth and justice. The Kharijites, for example, in the beginning of their activity considered it possible to name any person blasphemous when they commit the slightest evil. Later, they considered blasphemous any person who committed one of the mortal sins. Ibadites-Kharijites considered such a person an apostate (from blessings). The Kharijites were against the deliberate and cowardly separation of word and deed, belief and action. Azrakites condemned those who do not fight against the tyrants who were the real teachers of blasphemy. They deeply felt the value of the state and the function of supreme authority within it, which led the Baikhasites-Kharijites to the conclusion: "If the supreme ruler is blasphemous, then all the members of the community both present and absent are part of this act." Ibadites considered those Muslims who disagree with such rulers to be believers, whereas the governors were criminals. Nadjites, in general, supposed possibility a community without an Imam (governor), if its members observe practically the Qur’anic instructions. All this shows that the basic motive of the socio-political and ethical thought and actions of the Kharijites was justice.

We find a similar motive in Shi’ism, as an embodiment of the emotional aspect of justice and truth in the personification of the Imam, who appears as a sublime image of the Muslim self or identity. This conditions the transformation of the problem of the Imamate and Imam into a problem of fundamental beliefs (based on a creed), instead of a particular political issue. Shi’ism underscores that the Imam is an embodiment of Truth and the True, that is, the substantial value that glues together the order of our life.

Alongside Kharajites and Shi’ites, there appeared trends, such as Jahmites, Murji’ites, and others, each of which tried in its own way to substantiate ideas of justice as moderation and moderation as justice. The highest form of comprehension and realization of this idea among schools of Kalam was developed by the Mutazilites. For the first time in the Caliphate history, they created a comprehensive ideological system about justice, having transformed it theoretically and practically into a universal principle of their metaphysics, ontology, and ethics.

In building their doctrine, the Mutazilites proceeded from the principle of justice and ended with the principle of monotheism. From this followed their name: the "people of justice and monotheism." This name reflects their deep and all-round understanding of the essence of Islam. Mutazilites aspired to unite the physical and historical sense of Islam by identifying monotheism with justice and vice versa. In this light it is some kind of rational-ethical synthesis, which, in the general development of Islamic civilization, has promoted a deepening affirmation of the cultural spirit of Islam.

The monotheism of the Mutazilites aspired to prove the transcendental character of God, to detach the divine from the vulgar and the passing desires of opposing sides. According to the doctrine of the Mutazilites, the divine substance is a being with absolute essence, absolute reason, universal kindness, and perfect beauty. Such an ideal substantiation gives man an opportunity to improve his/her reason and will. A strong-willed reason, educated around the value of goodness and beauty, is capable of establishing a similar order and organizing it as a realization of justice. They recognized man’s free will as the creator of his goodness and evil; hence, God cannot be accused of evil, nor can injustice be the common denominator of the Mutazilites.

If God created injustice, He would be unfair; if He created justice then He is fair. According to all Mutazilite schools, God performs only what is good and perfect, because, according to wisdom, it is necessary to encourage and to protect all that is good and beneficial to people. All this is accessible to reason, for it is reasonable, and what is reasonable should be real: supreme reason is justice. The Mutazilte al-Nazzam (d. 231 AH) said in this regard that God is not capable of doing to people anything that contradicts what is virtuous for them. Al-Iskafi (d. 240 AH) asserted that God cannot do injustice to reasonable beings (people); hence, our world is the best of worlds and is accessible to rational comprehension. Man is capable of realizing justice in this world, for the existence of the world assumes the presence of justice, both from the point of view of its divine origin as a principle, and from the point of view of its reasonable continuation in human activity.

This conclusion, as a whole, was shared by the major representatives of Caliphate intellectual schools, including the Hanbalite. Ibn-Taymiyya (d. 728 AH), for example, focused attention on problems of justice, considering it as basic to his approach to state and society. His general conclusion states: Justice is the source of the material and moral immunity of the state and person from evil.

As to philosophers, they shared the view about the value of universal justice for all beings. Islamic philosophy, in general, put justice as the basis of its rational and moral understanding of the world, and on this developed its understanding of such problems as God and man, state and society, life and death, goodness and evil, perfect and ugly. Proceeding from this, al-Kindi (d. 252 AH) elaborated his notion of reason and justice; al-Farabi (d. 339 AH) the notion of the ideal city and happiness; Ibn-Sina (d. 428 AH) the system of being and knowledge; Ibn-Rushd (d. 595 AH) the synthesis of traditions and truth in their various forms and aspects. The cumulative achievement of Islamic philosophy facilitated the assertion of a vision of justice as the core of what is reasonable and proper for human existence as a whole.

The Sufis asserted a proportion between justice as an actuality and as something that is due or ought to be. According to the Sufis, God is absolute harmony, unity of contrasts, and live proportion that indefatigably pervades the universe. This is reflected in their name: "the people of Truth." Truth here means perfect proportion in all. This is defined as a living immanent proportion of ontology, metaphysics, and morals, expressed in the unity of the Way (Tariqat), Law (shari’a) and Truth (Haqiqah). This means that truth has its law and Way. Sufis embodied truth through the laws (Shari’a) of its culture (Muslim) and its Way, showing that the great truths are those of culture. The originality of these truths is inherent in them, for they represent the spirit and pursuit of justice and order. One finds ideal methods for this pursuit in the great systems of al-Ghazali and Ibn-Arabi.

About Shared Values

by Sheikh `Abd Allah b. Bayyih


The study of values comes under the broader field of ethics, which is the field of enquiry that looks into what is good and correct with respect to standards which may be personal or cultural, and which can be used as a normative standard for behavior.

Values can be defined as ethical principles that determine honorable and praiseworthy conduct, where acting contrarily is shameful and worthy of condemnation.

Philosophers have debated since time immemorial about whether there are such things as universal values. There is agreement that shared values exist on a cultural level. Specific societies all have norms and values that are derived from custom, tradition, or religious belief. The dispute is whether there are any values that transcend the confines of a particular society or culture and are shared by all of humanity.

The dispute hinges on the question of the true nature of values. Is there an absolute and objective standard of what is good? Is “good” something universal? Or is it always relative and subjective, dependent on the interests of an individual or group?

This is a point of fierce philosophical debate that has engendered numerous schools of ethical thought, including utilitarianism, pragmatism, and idealism, as well as a host of applications for economics, politics, and political science. I will not dwell on each of these schools of thought on its own. Rather, I will discuss two general philosophical tendencies, that of moral relativism and that of universalism. Then I will discuss what Islam teaches about this matter.

Moral relativists believe that there are no universal values. position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect absolute and universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social and cultural circumstances that vary according to time and place. Conditions for people living in the Arabian desert are different than those for people living in a valley in the Himalayas, or on the Chinese coast, or the Indian coast, or along a great river delta.

Then – the relativists argue – there is the obscurity and capriciousness of how moral standards are conceptually understood. There are various concepts of property, of family, of marriage, of reason, and of God. Norms of conduct that prevail one environment in a given historical era could very well be destructive if transplanted to another. Each society faces specific challenges at various times in its history. The ideal solutions to these challenges will necessarily differ.

Consequently – the relativists argue – the idea that there are universal normative truths that are suitable for guiding the lives of all people at all times is simply absurd.

Moral universalists hold the opposite view, that there is a single and timeless ethical standard. Some system of ethics applies universally to all people regardless of culture, environment, or historical era. The same standards hold true for someone in China, Spain, or Paraguay. They were the same for the people of Ancient Greece and Medieval Europe as they are for us living today and as they will continue to be for all times. What was evil in the past will remain evil in the future. Moral laws do not change with the times. Ethical standards are neither “Eastern” nor Western”.

The idea of moral universalism can be traced back to the revealed religions, especially those religions which claim to have a universal message. The Philosopher Hunter Mead expresses this idea in the context of Western Christianity, explaining that the idea that there is a single deity who governs the affairs of the world which He created is the basis for Western religious thinking.

This idea has also been defended on the basis of logic. This approach was taken by Kant, who may well be the most famous of all philosophers of ethics. He believed that analysis can consistently demonstrate that the violation of moral law is simultaneously the violation of logic. Anti-ethical behavior is always contradictory.

One of the examples that Kant gives to illustrate this point is making a promise. When a person makes a promise that he has no intention of fulfilling, his behavior is morally wrong. This is because his behavior is based simultaneously upon two contradictory principles. The first of these principles is that people should believe promises. The fact that I have broken my promise expresses another principle – that an individual has the right to break his promise. This is the case as long as we accept that moral law applies to everyone. However, if every person who makes a promise breaks it, then no one would believe a promise. This results in a principle that no one should believe promises, which is directly contradictory to our first principle.

The Islamic Perspective

As Muslims, our intellectual outlook supports the existence of shared values. The basis for this belief is as follows:

1. Islam establishes the idea of absolute equality between all human beings and that they are descended from a common ancestor. They have one Lord and they share one father. Allah says: “O humankind! We have indeed created you from a man and a woman and made you into nations and tribes to know one another.” [Sûrah al-Hujurât: 13]

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: “O humankind! Your Lord is one Lord, and you have one father. All of you are from Adam, and Adam is from dust. The noblest of you is the most God-fearing. No Arab has and superiority over a non-Arab, no non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab, no black person has any superiority over a white person, and no white person has any superiority over a black person – superiority is only through piety.” [Sunan al-Tirmidhî]

2. Islam asserts that all human beings are created with a natural inclination towards goodness, towards, truth, and towards faith in Allah. Allah says: “So set thy purpose (O Muhammad) for religion as a man by nature upright - the nature (framed) of Allah, in which He hath created the human being. There is no altering (the laws of) Allah’s creation.” [Sûrah Rûm: 30]

No matter how protracted and never-ending the debate might be among philosophers whether moral values are universal or relative, common sense tells us that shared values do exist. The best proofs for this are the human faculties of reason (which Descartes considered the greatest thing distributed among humanity) and of language.

Every rational mind recognizes justice and every language has a word for it – a word which is recognized as having a positive and noble meaning. The same can be said for “truth”, “liberty”, “tolerance”, “integrity” and many other concepts. These are praised by all cultures and expressed positively in all languages.

The opposites of these concepts are regarded with derision and rejected, like “tyranny” and “oppression”. If we were to address the most despotic person as a “tyrant”, he would take offense. He would prefer to be described as just. Likewise, even a liar dislikes to be named as such. “Deception” and “bigotry” are likewise words that people have an aversion to, regardless of what cultural background they have. Is this not evidence for the existence of shared values?

These shared values need to be actively promoted in the world today, and not just the essential human rights that are indispensable for human beings to be able to live with each other. Rather, these shared values are much more embracing, like mercy, kindness, and the generosity to help those who are in need regardless of their race, religion, or country of origin. We need to incorporate these values into our understanding of human relations, so that we will not only uphold the principle of human equality in a neutral way, but embrace the “other” with warmth, love, and a true sense of brotherhood.

An old Arab saying – which is found in one form or another in all languages – goes: “Treat others the way that you wish to be treated.”

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said in the hadîth: “No one truly believes until he wants for his brother what he wants for himself.”

The value of “human brotherhood” is being joined with that of “love” in these words of our Prophet (peace be upon him). Before somebody accuses me of reinterpreting this hadîth for my own purposes, they should know that this is the understanding of the scholars from centuries back.

For instance, the leading Hanbalî jurist, Ibn Rajab said: “The brotherhood referred to in this hadîth is the brotherhood of humanity.” [Sharh al-`Arba`în al-Nawawiyyah]

The same is asserted by al-Shabrakhîtî and many others.

Love is an essential value, since all people desire to be loved. It is extremely rare to find a person who desires to be despised by others.

When love is realized by both parties, hostilities come to an end. Love is an emotional state as well as a mode of conduct. The Prophet (peace be upon him) encouraged us to proclaim our love, saying: “If one of you loves his brother, he should let him know it.”

Love is a shared value, since all people are pleased with it, even those who do not act according to its dictates. This is the true test for a shared value – that everyone wishes to be regarded as possessing it. No one wants to be described as “unjust” or “intolerant”.

Such values, in spite of their universality, can wilt and become dormant if they are not nurtured and encouraged. An Arab poet once wrote:

These noble values grow like flowering plants
When they are watered from a noble spring.

One of the most important values that can solve the world’s problems is that of respecting diversity, indeed loving it – regarding it as a source of enrichment and beauty, as an essential element of the human experience.

When we navigate our differences successfully and aspire to conduct ourselves in a most noble manner above and beyond the legislation of human rights, then we establish a basis for applying our shared values to bring harmony from our differences and to bring love in place of enmity.

Allah tells us in the Qur’ân: “Repel evil with what is best, and then the one between whom and you had been enmity will become as your dearest friend.” The message of this verse is that goodness brings about goodness and love engenders love.

Can we not then hope to foster these shared human values by making our own conduct exemplary – by being tolerant, generous, honest, trustworthy and thereby convincing the “other” who is just as human and who shares the same love for these values? Good conduct results in reciprocal good conduct. Generosity cultivates generosity. Convincing others of the ways of goodness is the most important humanitarian issue. We wish to take from Plato his words when he said: “The morality of the world is an expression of the victory of the power to convince over the power of force.”

The values of humanity lie in their ability to have conviction – to convince and to be convinced by various means of substituting one thing for another. There are things which are better and others which are worse. Civilization is essentially the preservation of a mode of life by means of the inherent conviction to respond by choosing what is best.

The use of force, under any circumstances, is a failure of civilization, regardless of whether we are talking about society in general or the individual.

The harmony that we must aspire to is not just between various cultures and societies. We must bring about such harmony within the individual as well. People have a varied cultural heritage, which sometimes develops into a crisis of values within the individual, and which needs to be transformed into inner harmony and a source of personal enrichment. A person can be of Asian origin, Muslim by faith, and British by nationality and upbringing – all at the same time.

By cultivating the value of tolerance over violence and hate, we channel people’s energies into productive activity that contributes to the general welfare. No one should ever resort to warfare or to violence to further their goals.

Religious leaders need to do their part to promote these universal values. They should be part of the solution and not part of the problem, as we have unfortunately found to be the case for certain representatives of all faiths. Religious leaders should not stir up tensions in a hope to gain the approval of their followers at the expense of human solidarity and mutual understanding.

Likewise, the media, the universities, and civic organizations have their roles to play in fostering these shared human values. Political leaders also should do their part. They should find ways to alleviate poverty and oppression whenever they are found. They should look for solutions to the issues of our time, even if they can only achieve partial solutions and partial justice. Military means to solve these problems are unethical and they do not work.

I wish, finally, to call to three objectives that we, as Muslim scholars, need to focus on:

1. We need to present convincing lessons on these values to the people of the West, specifically to the Muslims living there, that will prevent them from ever committing acts of violence or terror.

2. We need to address the responsible agencies in the West to assure the Muslims their cultural rights, so that they can be a positive element in society whose particular identity does not contradict with European society in any essential way.

3. We need to invite the people of the West to take another look at their relations with the Muslim world in light of these values so that together we establish a world in which we all coexist to the benefit of us all. This is the way that is most ethical, most intelligent, and most rewarding.