In Urdu there's a saying: "jitne moo, utni bathey," which translates to "as many mouths, as many opinions."
That applies to scholars these days when it comes to giving Muslims advice on how to free ourselves from endless wars, occupation, and dictators. Hadith are being cited left and right to encourage everything from armed revolt (in Muslim countries) to civil disobedience to doing absolutely nothing.
With no unified strategy on any political issue, it's no surprise that there is chaos and disillusionment in many quarters. What makes matters worse is that scholars are promoting this hotchpotch approach by glorifying it as the sunnah or tradition of the early Muslims. It didn't work then and it won't work now.
American scholar Omar Suleiman gave a khutbah around Ashura rightfully arguing that Islam has always encouraged political activism, whether it be speaking truth in the face of a tyrant or taking up arms to resist him.
Where Suleiman goes wrong is that he promotes the proliferation of opinions when it comes to political strategy. Instead, it is obedience to a single legitimate religious authority that was required then and is essential now.
"In perfection of Allah's wisdom, each one of these people actually challenged the tyrant in a different way," Suleiman said in his September 6 khutbah, referring to the "trials and tribulations" that befell Muslims soon after the death of Prophet Muhammad (S).
Prominent Muslims, says Suleiman, like Imam Hussain and ibn Zubayr took up arms in resistance. Others like ibn Omar condemned ruthless governor Hajjaj to his face and "actually drove him crazy." Even those who did not take action expressed their dissatisfaction by refusing to be the "mouthpieces" of the illegitimate rulers, Suleiman explained.
The problem is that to be politically successful, what is needed is OBEDIENCE to a legitimate religious leader (if no Islamic government is present then obedience to the highest religious authority). In order to attain a goal, there has to be a set vision, strategy, and course that everyone adheres to.
"O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if you do believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is best, and most suitable for final determination." (Quran 4:59)
Allah is NOT saying different strokes for different folks so go ahead and do whatever each of you think is strategically right.
What Allah is saying is that the leadership decides which action--from the arsenal of options available--to take depending on the situation, and the rest are to follow.
From the life of the Prophet (S) we have examples of differing strategies that the Muslims were ordered to adopt, including staying put (Battle of Uhad), leaving (Hijra to Medina), fighting (Battle of Badr and others), negotiating (Treaty of Hudaybiyyah), and amnesty (Conquest of Mecca). There was no room for personal opinions.
Muslims need to recognize the highest religious authority at this time and follow him in unison, without allowing personal opinions, nationalism, or sectarianism to get in the way. It takes knowledge, application of that knowledge, and correct political insight to lead Muslims and prevent them from falling into enemy traps, and everyone doesn't have it.
First thing scholars like Suleiman should do is build awareness about the need for political unity among Muslims through obedience to one legitimate religious authority (not to dictators, like some influential scholars are doing!) and stop glorifying the adherence to personal opinions.
Even ibn Umar warned us on his death bed that his biggest regret in life was following his personal opinion and not the authority of Imam Ali during the fourth caliph's rule.
"I regret that I did not join Ali and fight the rebellious group," ibn Omar is quoted as saying in Sahih Bukhari.
No comments:
Post a Comment