This excerpt is taken from the book compiled by Hakim Ajmal Khan Sahib "Recognize Jamaat-e-Islami" .
By: Maulana Abu al-Ridwan Muhammadi
Only the law of Allah can fulfill the natural demands of justice. Whatever law humans make will inevitably have flaws and weaknesses; therefore, human laws will necessarily involve injustice. Similarly, correct and reasonable guidance in all aspects of individual and collective human life can only come from the divine revelation sent by Allah (Quran and Sunnah). Since all worldly ideologies, systems, and thoughts are products of imperfect human intellect and limited knowledge, they cannot provide true guidance to humans. From this perspective, it is essential for human happiness and salvation that the system of revelation be implemented.
A person with true faith cannot oppose this belief, and anyone who considers another law better than Allah’s law or perceives weakness or defect in Allah’s law is undoubtedly a disbeliever according to any knowledgeable person.
However, based on this intellectual foundation, taking up arms against the ruling government under the slogans of establishing religion and divine governance, calling rulers apostates and disbelievers deserving of death, targeting them, and making the government the target of the call does not fully align with Islamic teachings.
The Prophets, peace be upon them, came into this world to raise the word of Allah so that people would leave the worship and slavery of false gods and become worshippers of the One God, and to save them from "Taghut" (false deities). No believer can deny that no prophet or messenger was negligent or lax in fulfilling their responsibility. All prophets fulfilled their calling and all duties of proof. Among the prophets mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah, only a few were given "government." Sayyiduna Dawood and Sulaiman were both prophets and kings. Zul-Qarnain was a man of power and authority (who, according to researchers in light of the Quranic context, was a prophet). Sayyiduna Yusuf (Joseph) became an assistant in another king’s government, and after migration, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, established a society in Medina according to the Islamic system. Certainly, in this system, the Prophet, peace be upon him, held the position of ruler and judge. He decided all matters according to divine revelation and implemented them. The majority of prophets did not have power; they did not establish religion at the governmental level. Were they then unsuccessful in their mission? Absolutely not. They were completely successful because they fulfilled their duty and responsibility well. The Quran calls this dominance of religion the completion of proof upon people, and every prophet completed the proof.
The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, never declared the establishment of government under the slogan of "establishing religion" during his life in Mecca, nor did he make it his goal. Similarly, no prophet’s call mentions the establishment of government; rather, every prophet told their people or nation, [فَمَا سَاَلۡتُکُمۡ مِّنۡ اَجۡرٍ ؕ اِنۡ اَجۡرِیَ اِلَّا عَلَی اللّٰہِ] "I do not ask you for any reward for this [call]; my reward is only from Allah."
Reference: Surah Yunus:72
They clearly said, [اِنِّیۡ لَکُمَا لَمِنَ النّٰصِحِیۡنَ] "I am a well-wisher for you."
Reference: Surah Al-A'raf:21
Thus, the Prophets, peace be upon them, demonstrated selfless and sincere guidance. Their sole aim was the pleasure of Allah. Now, if the acquisition of government and power is made the basis for the propagation of religion, this would not fully correspond to the method and character of the Prophets, peace be upon them. Especially in today’s environment, if any party or individual does some good and welfare work at the public and social level and is a candidate for government elections, the general tendency is to believe that all their good deeds are for gaining power. They will consider their work as a reward in the form of votes. Therefore, those who today want to work for the call of Islam under the title of "revival of the Caliphate" do not seem to follow the method of the Prophets, peace be upon them.The Prophets focused their primary strength from the beginning to the end on individuals. The Prophet Muhammad’s thirteen years of prophetic life in Medina was the result of his call, and Allah promised that if you fulfill the requirements of faith and righteous deeds, you will gain dominance. Allah will grant you power and authority on earth. This power and authority is Allah’s gift in return for faith and righteous deeds. It was not made the goal but rather the natural result of the call.
Then we see that those who, after the Caliphate, cursed Sayyiduna Amir Muawiyah, may Allah be pleased with him, for starting monarchy, do not consider that Amir Muawiyah himself was a noble companion. Many companions of the Prophet, peace be upon him, were among his assistants, and when Sayyiduna Hasan, may Allah be pleased with him, made peace with him, it was a general consensus; everyone agreed. Should all the companions and followers of that era be accused of supporting and aiding un-Islamic rule? That Islamic teachings were being violated, Islamic government was turning into a non-Islamic form, and all the great scholars of the time remained silent spectators? Certainly, only someone infected with the germs of rejection and Shi’ism, or dominated by them, would say this.
The world knows the determination and steadfastness of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah have mercy on him. When the ruling government, influenced by Mu'tazilite thought, declared the Quran as created and tried to enforce this by force, this great pillar of faith and resolve came forward. He was imprisoned, punished, but did not abandon the word of truth. Ultimately, he died due to the effects of the punishments. Someone asked him whether we should give zakat to the current rulers. He said yes. When asked, "We know they will misuse our zakat money," he replied, "Still give it to them." This is the Islamic thought. If the constitution of the government is the Book and Sunnah, then some mistakes and personal deviations of the ruler are tolerable. Islam does not debate who the government is or how it was established; rather, the Islamic viewpoint is that the ruler should implement Islamic laws and fulfill the duty of protecting and propagating Islam, even if the ruler has personal weaknesses.
The surprising thing is that those who today want to make the government Islamic by force and desire a so-called "revolution" seek success through the Jewish democracy or communism path. According to a person, "Those who discuss leadership change through Western-style elections and protest politics (both democratic methods), or conflict and struggle taught by communism, drag Islam into it, and in reality, power is in those hands only (although there the basic condition is prayer and the best leadership is preferred, but due to fitnah, jurists differ in priorities regarding caution and lack thereof). The result is that the implementation of Sharia in the state is dominant, and the minimum conditions in government are also acceptable."
Reference: (Muhaddith Lahore December 1992)
❀ Consider this matter from another angle! The Prophets, peace be upon them, centered their call on the belief that every individual holds personally. If a person and society are afflicted by some doctrinal error and a prophet is sent among them, he tries to correct their doctrinal error through collective call and individual address. If people commit any kind of shirk in belief and action, the first and full attack of the prophet’s call is to refute that shirk and devote full strength to the call of monotheism. Following the Prophets’ individual effort, or more correctly, following the prophetic method of calling, has been relatively easy and possible in every era, especially in today’s environment of freedom of expression. Now, if the order of the Prophets’ method is reversed—that is, instead of reforming individuals and then building collective strength, collective strength or government is obtained first and then religious rulings are imposed or even forced on individuals—the matter is reversed and so are its results. Because when gaining power becomes the goal, strength is necessarily required. For strength, unity and agreement are essential. If there is disagreement in belief and viewpoint among people, true unity is impossible, and followers of two different beliefs cannot walk far in the same direction. Walking a few steps together in collective disaster is not unity. Therefore, those who make government the goal will be forced to consider beliefs and fundamental differences as 'unimportant' for the sake of unity and agreement because, for them, the real purpose is establishing religion, whatever that religion may be. Hence, their call emphasizes walking together by combining monotheism and shirk, saying whether you recite Fatiha or not, celebrate Milad or not, but unite. No prophet ever tolerated any kind of shirk, and no prophet is sent to establish a religion that contains shirk.
Here arises the question: when you consider accepting any law other than Allah’s law in government as disbelief and want to stand against this Taghuti system, but individually this work is difficult and sometimes impossible, then in individual religious matters, do you not accept personalities, specific sects, and religious leaders as lawgivers against Allah’s law?
Just as accepting human law at the governmental level is disbelief, similarly considering any elder, jurist, imam, or non-prophet authorized to declare halal and haram and legislate Sharia is to make them a lord. It is to associate partners with Allah. [اِتَّخَذُوۡۤا اَحۡبَارَہُمۡ وَ رُہۡبَانَہُمۡ اَرۡبَابًا مِّنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ]
Reference: Surah At-Tawbah:31
and [اَمۡ لَہُمۡ شُرَکٰٓؤُا شَرَعُوۡا لَہُمۡ مِّنَ الدِّیۡنِ مَا لَمۡ یَاۡذَنۡۢ بِہِ اللّٰہُ]
Reference: Surah Ash-Shura:21
are Quranic and Hadith texts that testify to this. Obviously, reciting or not reciting Milad, offering or not offering needs, cannot be from Allah’s Sharia. One of them is a method made by others than Allah, and opposing what is made by others than Allah is the very demand of monotheism. Cooperation and unity in this are not religious, and thus establishing religion has no meaning. Reversing this order encourages many shirk and innovations to be considered permissible and many Sunnahs to be deemed "insignificant." If someone draws attention to them, the reply is, "Is religion only in this?" whereas in reality, religion is that a person fully submits to Allah and His Messenger, and this is the establishment of religion desired.One result of reversing the Prophets’ method is that where the work of call and reform is possible, those fronts are abandoned. For example, people are involved in grave worship, personality worship, innovations, and superstitions; here, reform can be done with strength. Government does not hinder this. But this possible and prophetic work is abandoned, and strength is used where chances of success are low and efforts face obstacles, whereas the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said and acted that when two options were present, he chose the easier one. Contrary to this, here the easy and important front is abandoned, and the difficult path is chosen instead of eradicating prevalent shirk.
Adopting an emotional approach instead of an Islamic methodology and scholarly tone in the slogan of establishing an Islamic government has caused many more problems, which also lead to the defamation of Islam and Muslims.
In the armed efforts of the Islamic movement, clashes and conflicts have continued between the armed leaders of the "movement" and government officials and forces in many countries of the Islamic world. Many individuals have been killed without hesitation simply because they were representatives of a "non-Islamic" government. The question is, were they truly deserving of death as disbelievers or not? Who will decide this? In the Islamic system, this decision is made by a judge based on evidence, proofs, and indications, and only the judge and the government are authorized to enforce Islamic punishments and limits. It is not the responsibility of any individual or organization. Moreover, there are differences in disbelief, and degrees of disbelief, just as there are degrees of faith. The famous statement of Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) is کفر دون کفر
Reference: (Mustadrak Hakim:3219)
. Now, if someone says that the Prophet of Allah said [سباب المومن فسوق وقتاله کفر] that insulting a believer is a sin and fighting him is disbelief, then would anyone kill a person who quarrels with a Muslim by saying that he has become a disbeliever and apostate? In this way, anyone could issue a fatwa of disbelief and start killing anyone. If the current Muslim governments deviate from Islamic constitutions and laws, the Islamic approach is to advise the rulers [الدين النصيحة] and for the scholars to guide them, as was the practice of the Salaf scholars. Also, the dominance of Islamic temperament and thought is in the public sphere; change comes from the bottom, not from the top. Recently, news came that a group in Pakistan planned to assassinate Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif because he is an obstacle to the establishment of an Islamic system. Similar conflicts and struggles between some Islamists and ruling figures and parties continue in many countries of the Muslim world. In Saudi Arabia, the constitution is the Book and Sunnah, and limits are enforced, yet some people oppose this and remain "democratically" active against it. They want the "monarchy" there to end and Western-style electoral politics to come in. They want the era of corruption and political evils to begin there as well. They desire this democratic and socialist model as the Islamic system. Moreover, they want that if a constructed building has some "flaws," instead of fixing the flaws, the entire building should be demolished, creating bigger problems than the current ones. They want the current government to fail in doing even what it is doing for Islam and Muslims. Is this a wise idea and an Islamic approach? Certainly not.
In Egypt, there is a rift between Islamists and the government; in Syria, Hafez al-Assad (Nusayri) killed the "Muslim Brotherhood" who challenged his power in large numbers years ago. (It is natural for any ruler to suppress "rebellious" elements and tendencies against his government. The activists should first work on awareness so that paths become smooth automatically). In Algeria, after the Islamic Front's certain victory in the 1992-93 elections, military rule was imposed, and anti-Muslim forces openly engaged in hooliganism. Since then, according to BBC London, 65,000 people have lost their lives in armed conflict there. In Afghanistan, after driving out the Russians, the Muslim factions who were Mujahideen are fighting among themselves. Obviously, this situation provides ample opportunity for global media organizations to label Islam, the religion of peace and its messengers, as terrorists, extremists, and militants. They even find faults in the virtues of Islam and Muslims. How can they miss the opportunity to defame Islam through such unwise and un-Islamic actions carried out in the name of Islam? Hence, the echo of "Islamic terrorism" is heard.
The armed efforts to establish an Islamic government have strengthened this accusation and false propaganda, and the callers of Islam have to exert relatively more effort and hardship to present the true picture.
The secret to the success of Islamic invitation lies solely in placing every matter in its proper place. Priority should be given to Tawheed (monotheism). Following should be given importance. The method of the Prophets should be adopted, and the blessed life and biography of the Holy Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is the best example for us. Personally, become a model of the character and morals of the Prophet ﷺ, and practically adopt the wisdom and admonition of the Prophet ﷺ. Do not compromise with shirk (polytheism) and innovations in any form. This was the practice of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and the Companions, and unity in ranks can be created only when everyone has the same belief.
By correcting faith and deeds, advance the program of invitation and reform according to the Prophetic method ﷺ. If there is sincerity, this effort will bear fruit. Allah’s promise will be fulfilled that you will be victorious as long as you remain believers. When righteousness and capability are developed, the inheritance of the earth will also be granted. [اَنَّ الۡاَرۡضَ یَرِثُہَا عِبَادِیَ الصّٰلِحُوۡنَ]
Reference: Surah Al-Anbiya:105
And also keep in mind this command: [وَعَدَ اللّٰہُ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا مِنۡکُمۡ وَ عَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ لَیَسۡتَخۡلِفَنَّہُمۡ فِی الۡاَرۡضِ کَمَا اسۡتَخۡلَفَ الَّذِیۡنَ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہِمۡ ۪ وَ لَیُمَکِّنَنَّ لَہُمۡ دِیۡنَہُمُ الَّذِی ارۡتَضٰی لَہُمۡ الآية]
Reference: Surah An-Nur:55
which means that Allah has promised those among you who believe and do righteous deeds that He will surely grant them succession in the land just as He granted it to those before them and will establish for them their religion which He has preferred for them and will replace their fear with security.Therefore, to achieve succession and dominance, focus must be placed on "faith and righteous deeds." Faith must be in accordance with the Book and Sunnah, and deeds must be according to the teachings of the Prophet ﷺ. Granting succession on the basis of adherence to this is the responsibility of Allah. Moreover, before raising the slogan of establishing religion, it is necessary to determine which "religion" is to be established. Is it the one presented by the Prophet ﷺ or the one adopted later by people, in which people’s opinions are given the status of Allah’s Shariah? Or is it a religion to be established that allows room for shirk and innovations? It is necessary that the movement for establishing the Islamic system adopts pure religion and pure Islamic methodology. In such a case, even if governance is not attained, the work of the dominance of religion is accomplished. This is the form of completion of proof that most Prophets have carried out. It is hoped that these sincere observations will be considered so that our power of capability takes the right direction.
