ISLAM : What it is

By
Hassan S. Karmi

Conclusion

This book now presented to the reader has, as its object, the exposition of Islam from a new angle, namely its relevance to the modern world. For anything to be relevant in this world, it must answer its needs and be compatible with its trends, including secularism. To me, Islam is both theistic and deistic, and both religious and secular. To explain that, I should state at the outset that Islam is not mythical or primitive. It is not idolatrous, anthropomorphic, henotheistic, polytheistic, but purely monotheistic, quite different from any other religion. Secularism is not a threat to Islam, as it is to other religions.

Man is influenced in his thoughts by the fact that he is born in a world hostile to him. He always thinks in opposites; perhaps because he is confronted from birth by a situation fraught with dangers to his life, and he must live his life in fear. He grows up in fear, and his main concern is to know how he can get rid of this fear. In this attempt, man divided things and people into friends and foes, into those with us and those against us. The world is split into what is constructive and what is destructive. This way of thinking in opposites took a turn towards seeing people as good or bad, as elect or damned, or Chosen or Gentile. Those who are elect in Calvinism are divinely preferred for salvation and those who are Chosen in Judaism are the ones who are divinely preferred above others. They are therefore by divine dispensation the masters, the cream of humanity, while the others are slaves and the scum.

The division into chosen and gentiles tends to create tension in the human society, without anything as a check or a restraint to ease it. Here the direction is one-sided. In the Hindu religion, the conflict between Siva and Vishnu is under control by Brahma, and in the Chinese philosophy, the conflict between Ying and Yang is under control by the fact that the two are functioning as a team. The control in Islam is that human society, although constituted of different sectors, works as a team like a beehive, and every sector has its pace set by the other sectors. In this interrelated society, there is a drag, but this compassionate drag is thought to be better than a hell-for-leather rush into nowhere.

The intellectual and technological revolution in the West is unique. I think it started as a secular movement against the kind of religion presided over by the Papacy with its Inquisition and penalties on opinion. The two-fold theory of Averroes which spread in Europe from France as from the 13th century paved the way for this anti-religious movement, thanks to its insistence on the division of truth into science and theology and that the two should be kept apart. This intellectual revolution was given another boost by the Protestant revolution. It marked a breakaway from Catholicism, the seat of traditional and dogmatic way of thinking. The aversion to Catholicism made the Protestants feel lonely and eager to take any adventurous course. The only course that was open to them was colonisation, taking the same previous course of the Spaniards and the Portuguese, motivated by religion. Christianity had already been imbued with the Jewish cult of “Chosenness.” Colonisation created a need for trade and trade needed industry, and industry in its turn needed technology.

Therefore, the Western intellectual and technological revolution must have been motivated by anti-religious ideas, but also by religious ideas derived mainly from the Bible before anything else.

The question that comes to mind in this context is why did not the East go the same way as the West? Why the Muslims, for instance, did not do the same or initiate a movement of innovation to be an example for the world? To answer that, one should remember that Islam is egalitarian. The idea of Chosenness is anathema to Islam. Secondly, Islam has the view that the various peoples on earth are created to live peacefully together. Thirdly, supremacy or hegemony on the basis of wealth or worldly power is taboo. Fourthly, Islam is the religion of middle course. Fifthly, Islam regards Muslims as part of the universe, in unity, and this does not allow a people to behave independently, under the rule of one only god for all, and no prejudice on His part. Belief in fatalism may be an impediment in the way of progress, but in the case of Islam, the constriction put on this belief by religious interpreters caused a great harm because it was wrong. There is also the question of authority and innovation, another handicap.

Here, at the crossroads, one is forced to think whether the course taken by the West is better for the welfare of humanity. In the discussion of philosophy, scholars sometimes judge the West as partial to “becoming” in contrast with the East which is partial to “being.” This means, I think, that the West tends always to be dynamic always changing or developing, whereas the East is static. I must say here that Islam is neither dynamic nor static, but it is both, in conformity with the principle of “middle course”. I must also say that the Christian West, as from the 16th century, has been in constant development, changing all the time. The constant change in the West is creating a new civilization, entirely materialistic, every time, and very useful in innumerable ways. This Western civilization, however, has proved to be double-faced; constructive and destructive at once. It has also proved to be a drift to nowhere, without orientation. Some writers think that the West in its headlong rush has no time to think of the consequences to human beings, to the environment and to the world as a whole, and has no consideration for the backlash, very often catastrophic, like the nuclear and chemical weapons. In balance, the net result is that, like the ancient Chinese philosophy, to which reference was made before, the world was created by two twins, one of whom is constructive and the other destructive. This may lend colour to what C.E.M, Joad says about the present civilization, that it carries within it the germs of its own destruction. The present civilization is said to be a kind of open-ended marathon race in which every nation is taking part at top speed. Some nations fall by the roadside, others collapse from exhaustion, and others with stamina carry on until they collapse. This picture may be thought to be arbitrary, but it may not be so, considering that so many nations are already unable to cope because they are growing poorer and weaker. The present trend towards globalization points to that result. The trend is inequitous and the call for a halt has so far fallen on deaf ears. Perhaps, a call for a slow-down looks more likely to be heeded, even though the world has gone too far and, in the inertia, is too precipitate to be retarded. Therefore, the original speed in the race should be moderated, if possible, neither quick nor slow and the middle course from the start seems to be the best.

The human body and mind have a limit to their capacity to sustain pressure or stress. The present civilization weighs very heavily upon both body and mind, with the result that both will in the long run be impaired, or perhaps be compelled to accommodate themselves to every new situation in the long race. Again, the capacity to accommodate is also limited, as testified by the extinction of many creatures like the dinosaurs. Perhaps the human species is no exception.

The rate of the incidence of mental disorders is on the increase. This is partially shown in the erratic aberration of behaviour of man in his daily life. Man is less attached to morality than before, and is more lax in matters of sex. He is squeamish about honesty, and is more callous to the states of poverty and misery afflicting other people. He is likely to be corrupt and less interested in practising justice and giving every one their due. He is shamelessly double-faced, ambivalent and far from being fair-minded, especially towards the underdog. Man is not inclined to abide by any law, and nations, especially the superpowers, defy international law and flout United Nations resolutions. Man is now so unmindful of the horrors of wars that he has considered nuclear war acceptable.

   There appears to be a gradual increase in the number of the unemployed, of those dependent upon social security and of those who suffer from various diseases, curable and incurable, with a large proportion of man-made diseases. Food of all sorts, like vegetables and fruits, is no longer safe to eat because of contamination. Water is becoming in short supply, and not really safe to drink, unless chemically treated. Floods, earthquakes and eruptions of volcanoes have lately played havoc with cities and nature. There is a real danger to the whole globe from gases rising into the atmosphere from industry. This does not bode well for humans and other creatures, and it may be the last straw.

If we take all these eventualities into consideration, we shall see that the future is grim, and that the whole humanity upon earth is being exposed to a deadly danger. The West then must have taken the wrong course, with no return.

But what is to be done to save the situation, before it is too late? The ancient Greeks used to warn heroes and monarchs against hubris - excessive pride or self-confidence. The ancient Greek gods used to be jealous, and if the hubric hero or monarch persisted in his excessive pride, he was struck down. The punishment was inflicted on those excessively proud because of wealth or power. This is hegemony, and it is condemned in Islam. Nowadays, a nation which is hubric must be most powerful militarily and most wealthy, such as the United States. The American hubris will perhaps bring about the jealousy of other nations, and bring about a new arms race which may trigger off another world war. The horrific danger may be averted by moderation in building up an arsenal of mass destruction weapons and in amassing wealth. This moderation cannot be attained because of fear. Fear is at the root of the international situation of rivalry and hatred. But how can we root fear out of the hearts in the West? It is deep-seated, and originally religious. A Jew, for instance, is always afraid, and wants always to be rich, which is demonstrated in Israel’s hectic rush to possess all sorts of lethal weapons. I recall in this connection a verse in the Qur’an which says: “ Let them worship the Lord of this House who hath provided them with food against hunger and secured them against fear.” This verse is very relevant to the present world situation where nearly half of the world population is starving and the other half is cowering in fear.

There is another very important aspect of Islam which deserves consideration, and is really relevant to the present world situation. In Islam there is a tendency to think in opposites. But this opposition is checked by the principle of unity and by the principle of the middle course. Let us take egalitarianism as one of the tenets of Islam. This does not mean that all should be equal in all respects in a society, but it means that there should be no discrimination in that society on any account, such as poverty, colour, race, or status. Wealth and poverty are to be accepted as natural occurrences and wealth should not give a wealthy man the right to dominate a poor man. Both are members of the same society just as the organs of the one and the same body, each is doing its function in one unity, with no discrimination. The problem arises when discrimination sets in, which is the hallmark of Western civilization.

Take capital and labour in an industrial establishment. The establishment is the unity in which capital and labour cooporate. This cooperation becomes confrontation when capital becomes political capital in capitalism and labour becomes proletarianism. Islam accepts capitalism and labour equally as two forces working together in unity, not as two distinct and hostile forces. One can say that Islam, is unitive. In the West the rule is divisive, and a distinct tendency to split into pairs of opposites in everything. This situation of opposition will create confrontation, tension, turmoil and wars.