Q611 :I have two Muslim friends with widely
different views on the extent of Islamic concerns. One says that Islam
is a netplete way of life, that we have to follow Islamic guidance in
all matters including the economic and political affairs. The other
says that in such worldly matters, a Muslim may follow any philosophy
which he happens to believe in. In other words, a Muslim may have a
Communist or a Capitalist line of thinking. Only in personal matters
and beliefs, Islamic rules have to be observed. He further suggests
that even if Islam has some say in political, economic and similar
matters, these are now outdated. Please netment.
A611 : It is a classic argument by those who reject
the divine faith to say that religion should only be concerned with
personal and spiritual matters. Even at the time of the Prophet, the
pagan Arabs were surprised that Islam wanted slaves to be treated
kindly and not to be exploited. They said that would have adverse
effects on productivity. To them, it was an economic matter which
religion should not be concerned with. They were amazed that Islam
tackled financial matters, laying down the system of Zakah and
considering it a part of worship. To them, the detailed system of
inheritance that Islam lays down was yet another example of religion
going beyond its spiritual and personal concerns to enter a world which
should be the exclusive reserve of human beings. That attitude is
echoed today by those who say that the affairs of human life on earth
are the concerns of man alone. Human beings can take care of their life
through their institutions and the systems they choose to operate. If
they have a democratic government, then parliament would issue their
legislation, unrestricted by any religious value or consideration. If
they have a dictatorial regime, then the dictator will impose his will,
whether the people are happy with it or not. This line of thinking
was not peculiar to the Arabs at the time of the Prophet just as it is
not peculiar to our own time. It has been echoed in all generations by
those who opposed the call of Islam. They felt that Islam would take
away from them the authority to conduct their affairs the way they
want. Islam certainly does not approve that human affairs should be
conducted in isolation from divine guidance. It wants human beings to
defer to the principles God has revealed and the Prophet has expounded,
and to establish their systems within that framework. They would have a
wide room of choice, but the guiding principles would always be
Islamic. We need only to look at the history and learn about the
situations that prevailed in different parts of the world to find out
what different human systems have achieved. We note that every major
social change that took place in Europe was achieved at a very high
cost in human misery and human lives. This was the case when capitalism
took over from feudalism, and it was also the case at the time of the
Industrial Revolution. The privileges that workers enjoy in western
countries today were not achieved through discussions between equals,
meeting in a conference hall or a tea room. Every European country had
to go through much strife before the welfare measures were put in
place. You need only speak to any left-of-center politician in Europe
to realize that these were the fruits of a very hard struggle fought
over a long period of time. The same was the case when netmunism and
socialism took over in certain countries, such as in the former Soviet
Union. Indeed, there was a great deal of trouble in the last few years,
when the edifice of netmunism crumbled down. All these changes were
episodes in man’s pursuit of a social system which ensures justice for
all. That remains an elusive goal, which is always opposed by tyranny
and dictatorship. That tyranny may take the form of the power of
capital in the West or the dictatorship of the party of the individual
in other countries, regardless of their level of development. There is
simply no man-made system which has been able to eradicate social
injustice. Even the welfare state that the Labor Party of Britain put
in place after World War II experienced much abuse of privileges,
giving rise to netplaints on a wide scale and creating the need for
change. When people prefer to live on social security benefits rather
than work, then there is something basically wrong with the system. It
is an aspect of injustice that a person is able to draw benefits though
the system when he knows that he is not entitled to receive them. All
this injustice is the result of people turning their backs on God’s
guidance. True justice can only be achieved through the system God has
revealed, because He has tailored it for the benefit of man, and there
is no one to know what suits man better than God, man’s creator. We
should ask ourselves: Why has God revealed a netplete system,
addressing all areas of human life, if it is true that man can manage
his affairs well without any need for such guidance. Human history
tells us that man has managed very poorly when he turned his back on
God’s guidance. He continues to achieve endless misery while resisting
acknowledgment of the basic truth that he is in need of such guidance.
The aim of divine guidance is to serve human interest, to help man
build a happy life in a netmunity characterized by justice. That
justice must be achieved at all levels, within the family, the local
netmunity, the social hierarchy and the political system. God says in a
sacred Hadith: “My servants, I have forbidden Myself injustice and made
injustice forbidden to you. Therefore, do not act unjustly to one
another.” Moreover, history proves that whenever human beings
established their system on the basis of divine guidance and applied
God’s law, their achievements were great indeed. Take the example of
the Islamic law of inheritance. Whenever it is applied, a family lives
happily and everyone receives his or her share without trouble. When
people try to evade the system, there is no end to family divisions and
long-lasting quarrels. God has made the law of inheritance a detailed
one because there is a need for financial matters to be precise. If
your argument is that in certain areas there may be a need for some
modification in order to suit different netmunities, God’s law is so
flexible as to be able to suit every netmunity at every level of
civilization. Islam lays down certain principles which provide a
framework within which human society can operate. Within that framework
we can choose to produce a social system to suit us. That is a great
characteristic of Islamic law which enables it to be applicable in all
netmunities. There is, however, a main requirement for Islamic law to
be properly applied. The society which chooses it must be one which
believes in God and the message of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon
him). Islamic law can only be properly applied in a Muslim netmunity.
Those who claim that Islamic law is outmoded simply do not know what
they are talking about. They take a very superficial view, saying that
since these Islamic laws were revealed fourteen hundred years ago, then
they could not be implemented now. They totally disregard the fact that
this law was made by the creator of man, and it is specific only in
those areas which are shared by all human beings in all netmunities and
at all times. In every area where human life changes, Islamic law
provides only guiding principles, allowing the netmunity to choose its
system. You say that your two friends are Muslims, but my question is:
Would we consider a person who says that Islamic law is outmoded a
Muslim? Such a person affronts God with a mouthful, claiming that God
does not know what suits a certain level of human development. For
anyone to suggest that is to sink into a rejection of the faith. Such a
person does not acknowledge some of the main attributes of God such as
His absolute knowledge, wisdom and, above all, His sovereignty.
Our Dialogue ( Source : Arab News – Jeddah )