Category Archives: Idara Tolu-e-Islam

فرقہ اہلِ قرآن کی پھیلائی ہوئی گمراہیاں: پرویز

فرقہ اہلِ قرآن کی پھیلائی ہوئی گمراہیاں

قرآن کے نام پر ۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ قرآن سے دشمنی

میں شروع ہی میں اس حقیقت کی وضاحت ضروری سمجھتا ہوں کہ (۱) نہ میرا تعلق کسی فرقہ سے ہے، نہ ہی میں نے کوئی اپنا فرقہ کھڑا کیا ہے۔ میں قرآن کریم کی رو سے فرقہ بندی کو شرک سمجھتا ہوں۔ (۲) نماز، روزہ وغیرہ جملہ ارکان اسلام کی ادائیگی عام مسلمانوں کی طرح کرتا ہوں، کسی فرد یا فرقہ کو ان میں تغیر و تبدل کا مجاز نہیں سمجھتا۔ نہ ہی کسی نئے طریق کے وضع کرنے کا مختار۔ (۳) تحفظ ناموس رسالتؐ و عظمتِ قرآن کریم میرا جزوِ ایمان اور زندگی کا مشن ہے۔ جہاں ان پر کسی قسم کی زد پڑتی ہے، اس کی مدافعت میرا تقاضائے ایمان اور دینی فریضہ ہوتا ہے۔ (۴) ہمارے زمانے میں ناموس رسالتؐ کو سب سے زیادہ نقصان تحریک ‘‘احمدیت’’ نے پہنچایا اور عظمت قرآن کو (نام نہاد) اہل قرآن نے (۵)فرقہ اہل قرآن کو چنداں اہمیت حاصل نہیں۔ یہ چند گنتی کے نفوس پر مشتمل ہے۔ لیکن میں دیکھ رہا ہوں کہ اب یہ اپنی گمرہی کے دامن کو وسیع کرنے کی کوشش کر رہے ہیں۔ اس لیے میں نے ان کا نوٹس لینا بھی ضروری خیال کیا ہے۔ (۶)میرے اس مقالہ کے مخاطب، اس فرقہ کے ذمہ دار افراد نہیں کیونکہ تجربہ نے بتایا ہے کہ لیڈری کی ہوس انسان میں ایسا پندار نفس پیدا کر دیتی ہے جو ان کے سمجھنے سوچنے کی صلاحیت سلب کر لیتا ہے۔ میرے مخاطب و سعید افراد ہیں جو ان کی باتوں، پر نہایت نیک نیتی سے یہ سمجھ کر کان دھرتے ہیں کہ یہ قرآن کی طرف دعوت دیتے ہیںَ ان سے توقع کی جا سکتی ہے کہ یہ حقیقت کے سامنے آجانے کے بعد غلط راستہ چھوڑ کر، صحیح راہ اختیار کر لیں۔ (۷) میرا مقصد ان لوگوں سے کسی بحث میں الجھنا نہیں کیونکہ اس کے لیے میرے پاس فالتو وقت ہی نہیں۔ نہ ہی میں ذاتیات پر اتروں گا کہ علمی گفتگو میں ذاتیات پر اترنا پستی فطرت کی دلیل ہوتا ہے۔ میں ذاتیات پر اترا ہی نہیں کرتا۔ میں اپنی زندگی کے باقی ایام کو خدمت قرآن کے تعمیری مقصد کے لیے وقف رکھنا چاہتا ہوں۔ وما توفیقی اللہ باللہ اعلی العظیم

اس تمہیدی وضاحت کے بعد اصل موضوع کی طرف آئیے

اللہ تعالیٰ نے انسانوں کو پیدا کیا تو سفرِ حیات میں اس کی راہنمائی بھی اپنے ذمے لی۔ اس راہنمائی کے لیے طریق یہ اختیار کیا گیا کہ خدا اس کا علم، وحی کے ذریعے ، ایک برگزیدہ ہستی کو عطا کر دیتا اور وہ اسے دوسرے انسانوں تک پہنچا دیتی۔ اس برگزیدہ ہستی کو نبی یا رسول کہا جاتا ہے۔ اس راہ نمائی کا انداز کیا تھا۔ اسے سمجھنے کے لیے ضروری ہے کہ خود انسانی زندگی کے متعلق سمجھا جائے کہ وہ کس اصول کے تابع باقی رہتی ہے اور آگے بڑھتی ہے۔ یہ اصول ہے ثبات و تغیر کا امتزاج۔ اسے ایک مثال کی رو سے سمجھئے جس کا تعلق انسان کی طبعی (یعنی جسمانی) زندگی سے ہے۔

ثبات و تغیر کا امتزاج

یہ ظاہر ہے کہ انسان کی طبیعی زندگی کا دارومدار (منجملہ دیگر عوامل) غذا پر ہے۔ اسے زندگی کے پہلے سانس سے لے کر نفس آخرین تک غذا کی ضرورت ہوتی ہے۔ لیکن اس غذا کی نوعیت اور طور طریق حالات کے ساتھ بدلتے رہتے ہیں۔ زمان کے اعتبار سے دیکھئے تو تاریخ کے دور اول کے جنگلوں اور غاروں میں بسنے والے انسانوں کی غذا کی نوعیت کچھ اور تھی اور عصر حاضر کے انسانوں کی کچھ اور ۔ پھر ایک ہی فرد کی عمر کے مختلف ادوار اور جسمانی حالت کو سامنے رکھئے تو اس کی غذا کی نوعیت میں تغیر ضروری ہو گا۔ پیدائش کے بعد بچے کی غذا صرف دودھ ہوتی ہے۔ پھر کوئی زود ہضم ٹھوس غذا، جوانی میں غذا اور انداز کی ہوتی ہے۔ بڑھاپے میں اور انداز کی، صحت کی حالت میں اس کی نوعیت کچھ اور ہوتی ہے۔ بیماری کی حالت میں کچھ اور۔ ان تمام حالات میں آپ نے دیکھا کہ وہ اصول (کہ زندگی کا دارومدار غذا پر ہے) شروع سے آخر تک غیر متغیر رہتا ہے۔ لیکن اس اصول کے کارفرما ہونے کے انداز بدلتے رہتے ہیں۔ اسے کہا جاتا ہے کہ ثبات اور تغیر کا امتزاج، نہ یہ اصول تغیر پذیر ہو سکتا ہے اور نہ اس پر عمل ہونے کے طور طریق غیر متغیر۔ اگر غذا کی نوعیت اور اس کے طور طریق بھی غیر متغیر قرار دے دیئے جائیں تو زندگی چار قدم بھی آگے نہ بڑھ سکے۔

جو اصول انسان کی طبیعی زندگی کو محیط ہے۔ اسی کے مطابق اس کی انسانی اور عمرانی زندگی بھی روبہ عمل رہی ہے۔ اس کے لیے بھی ضروری ہے کہ کچھ اصول ہوں غیر متغیر اور ان اصولوں کی کارفرمائی کے لیے طور طریق ہوں جو حالات کے ساتھ بدلتے رہیں۔ خدا کی طرف سے وحی کے ذریعے جو راہنمائی ملتی رہی اس کا اندز بھی یہی تھا۔ اس کے اصول تک شروع سے آخر تک غیر متبدل رہے لیکن ان اصولوں کی کارفرمائی کے طور طریق تغیر حالات کے تحت بدلتے رہے۔ ان بدلتے ہوئے طور طریق کو ان اصولوں کی جزئیات کہا جاتا تھا۔ کہ يَا قَوْمِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّـهَ مَا لَكُم مِّنْ إِلَـٰهٍ غَيْرُهُ   (50/11) ‘‘اے میری قوم صرف اللہ کی محکومیت اور اطاعت اختیار کرو۔ اس کے سوا کوئی ہستی نہیں جو ذی اقتدار ہو’’ یہ دین کا صل الاصول اور بنیاد محکم تھی۔ یہی وہ دین کی اصل تھی جو شروع سے آخر تک ایک ہی رہی اور غیر متبدل رہی۔ چنانچہ قرآن کریم میں ہے۔

  شَرَعَ لَكُم مِّنَ الدِّينِ مَا وَصَّىٰ بِهِ نُوحًا وَالَّذِي أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ وَمَا وَصَّيْنَا بِهِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ  ۖ   أَنْ أَقِيمُوا الدِّينَ وَلَا تَتَفَرَّقُوا فِيهِ  ۚ   (13/42)

ہم نے تمہارے لیے وہی دین مقرر کیا ہے جس کا حکم نوح کو دیا گیا تھا اور جواب (اے رسولؐ!) تیری طرف وحی کیا جاتا ہے۔ اور جس کا حکم ہم نے ابراہیمؑ اور موسیٰ اور عیسیٰؑ کو دیا تھا (اور ان سے کہا تھا کہ) اس دین کو محکم اور استوار رکھو اور اس میں تفرقہ مت پیدا ہونے دو۔

یہ تھا دین کا ناقابل تغیر و تبدل اصول۔ جہاں تک اس اصول کو بروئے کار لانے کا تعلق ہے (یعنی دین کی جزئیات) سو شروع شروع میں چونکہ انسانی علم بڑا محدود تھا اس لیے وہ بھی بالعموم خدا ہی کی طرف سے عطا ہوتی تھیں۔ مثلاً حضرت نوحؑ کے زمانے میں انسانوں کو (یا کم از کم اس خطہ زمین کے لوگوں کو) کشتی بنانے کا ہنر بھی نہیں آتا تھا حضرت نوح علیہ اسلام کو یہ طریق بھی وحی کے ذریے بتایا گیا جب ان سے کہا گیاکہ وَاصْنَعِ الْفُلْكَ بِأَعْيُنِنَا وَوَحْيِنَا(37/11) ‘‘تو ہمارے زیر نگرانی اور ہماری وحی کے مطابق کشتی بنا۔’’جوں جوں انسانی علم بڑھتا گیا، وحی کے ذریعے جزئیات متعین کرنے کی ضرورت کم ہوتی گئی۔ چنانچہ ہر نئے رسول کے زمانے، میں یہ دیکھا جاتا رہا کہ سابقہ جزئیات میں سے کون کون سی ایسی ہیں جن کی ضرورت باقی نہیں رہی۔ یا جن میں تغیر و تبدل ضروری ہو گیا ہے۔ یہی وہ حقیقت ہے جسے سورۃ بقرہ میں ان الفاظ میں بیان کیا گیا ہے۔ مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا  (106/2) یعنی‘‘وحی اکا انداز یہ رہا ہے کہ کسی سابقہ رسول کی وحی کے ایسے احکام جو وقتی طور پر نافذالعمل رہنے کے لیے دیئے گئے تھے۔ انہیں بعد میں آنے والے رسولوں کی وحی کے احکام سے بدل دیا جاتا۔ اور یہ نئے احکام پہلے احکام سے بہتر ہوتے۔ جن سابقہ احکام کا علیٰ حالہٖ رکھا جانا مقصود ہوتا۔ خواہ وہ اس رسول کی امت کے پاس ہوں یا اس نے انہیں فراموش کر دیا ہو۔ ان کی جگہ انہی جیسے احکام جدید وحی میں دے دیئے جاتے ۔ یعنی اصولی احکام غیر متبدل رہتے اور ان کی جزئیات میں بہ تقاضائے حالات تغیر و تبدل ہوتا رہتا۔

خدا کی آخری وحی

خدا کی طرف سے ملنے والی راہنمائی کا یہ سلسلہ اسی طرح جاری رہا۔ تاآنکہ وہ زمانہ آ گیا جب مشیت خداوندی نے یہ فیصلہ کیا کہ جو کچھ وحی کی رو سے دیا جانا مقصود ہے اسے آخری مرتبہ دے دیا جائے اور اس کے بعد سلسلہ وحی کوختم کر دیا جائے ۔ یہ وحی، جو قیامت تک تمام نوع انسانی کی راہنمائی کے لیے کافی سمجھی گئی قرآن کریم کے اندر محفوظ کر دی گئی۔ چونکہ زمانہ وہ آ چکا تھا جب علم انسانی بڑی تیزی سے ترقی کرتا چلا جاتا تھاور خدا کے علم میں تھا کہ یہ اسی سرعت کے ساتھ آگے بڑھتا چلا جائے گا۔ اس لیے اس میں آخری وحی میں غیر متبدل اصول تو تمام کے تمام دے دیئے گئے لیکن ان کی جزئیات بہت کم کر دی گئیں۔ اس لیے کہ اگر جزئیات بھی تمام کی تمام وحی کے ذریعے دے دی جاتیں تو وہ بھی قیامت تک، تمام اقوام عالم کے لیے غیر قرار پا جاتیں۔ لیکن جب وہ زمانے کے بدلتے ہوئے تقاضوں کا ساتھ نہ دے سکتیں تو دین پر عمل پیرا ہونا مشکل (بلکہ بعض حالات میں) ناممکن ہو جاتا۔ان جزئیات میں تغیر اس لیے نہ ہو سکتا کہ وحی کا سلسلہ بند ہو چکا تھا۔ لہذا دین کے ہمیشہ کے لیے ممکن العمل رہنے کا طریقہ یہی تھا کہ ان اصولوں کی وہی جزئیات بذریعہ وحی دی جاتیں جن میں تغیر کی ضرورت نہ پرتی۔ قابل تغیر جزئیات وحی کے ذریعے دی ہی نہ جاتیں۔ اللہ تعالیٰ نے اپنی راہنمائی کو اس قرآن کریم میں محفوظ کر دیا۔ اور اس کے بعد اعلان کر دیا کہ۔ وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا  ۚ   لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ  ۚ   وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ   (116/6) خدا کی بات (دینِ خداوندی) صدق اور عدل کے ساتھ تکمیل تک پہنچ گئی۔ اب ان احکامت میں کوئی تبدیلی نہیں کر سکتا۔ کیونکہ یہ اس خدا کی طرف سے دیئے گئے ہیں جو سب کچھ سنتا اور سب کچھ جانتا ہے۔ جو کچھ قرآن میں نہیں دیا گیا تھا اس کے متعلق تاکید سے کہہ دیا کہ تم ان کی بابت خوامخواہ کرید اور کاوش نہ کرو کہ وہ کیوں نہیں بتایا گیا۔۔ خدا کا پروگرام یہی تھا کہ انہیں وحی کے ذریعے متعین نہ کر دیا جائے۔ اگر ایسا کر دیا جاتا تو کل کو جب ان میں تغیر کی ضرورت پڑتی تو تم مشکل میں پھنس جاتے کہ ان پر عمل کرنا ناممکن ہو جاتا اور ان میں تم تبدیلی کر نہ سکتے کیونکہ خدا کے متعین کردہ احکام میں تبدیلی تو صرف خدا کی وحی ہی کر سکتی تھی اور وحی کا سلسلہ اب بند ہو چکا۔ لہذا اسے اچھی طرح سمجھ لو کہ جو کچھ قرآن میں دیا گیا ہے وہ مکمل بھی ہے اور غیر متبدل بھی۔ جو اس میں نہیں دیا گیا وہ غیر متبدل نہیں۔

(دیکھئے سورۃ مائدہ آیات 102-101)

جزئیات کا تعین کیسے ہو؟

یہاں سے ایک اہم سوال ہمارے سامنے آتا ہے اور وہ یہ کہ جب تمام کی تمام جزئیات قرآن کے اندر نہیں دی گئیں تو باقی ماندہ (قابل تغیر) جزئیات کا تعین کس طرح سے کیا جائے گا اور کون ایسا کرنے کا مجاز ہو گا۔ ظاہر ہے کہ ان جزئیات کی ضرورت کسی ایک زمانے میں بھی لاحق ہو گی اور پھر زمانے کے بدلتے ہوئے حالات کے مطابق ان میں تغیر و تبدل کی ضرورت بھی لاحق ہوتی رہے گی۔ اس کے لیے کیا کیا جائے؟ اس کا جواب خود خدا نے دے دیا۔ (اور اسے ایسا کرنا بھی چاہئے تھا) اس نے کہا کہ دین خداوندی (اسلام) ایک نظام کی شکل میں کارفرما ہو گا۔ اسے دور حاضرہ کی اصطلاح میں مملکت یا نظامِ حکومت کہا جائے گا۔ اس نظام کا انداز مشاورتی ہو گا اور ان جزئیات کا تعین یا ان میں تغیر وتبدل اس نظام کی طرف سے ہو گا۔ اس نظام کے اولیں سربراہ خود نبی اکرمﷺ تھے۔ چنانچہ حضور ﷺ سے فرمایا گیا کہ شاورھم فی الامر (158/3) ‘‘یہ امور باہمی مشورہ سے طے کیا کرو’’چنانچہ عہد رسالتماب ﷺ میں ان جزئیات کا تعین اسی طریق سے ہوتا رہا۔ واضح رہے کہ مقصود بالذات تو دین کے اصولوں پر عمل پیرا رہنا یا انہیں نافذ کرنا تھا۔ جزئیات ان اصولوں کی تنفیذ کا ذریعہ تھیں، اس لیے یہ ہو نہیں سکتا تھا کہ یہ جزئیات ان اصولوں سے کسی طرح بھی ٹکرائیں۔ بالفاظ دیگر یوں کہیئے کہ یہ جزئیات قرآن کے غیر متبدل اصولوں کی چاردیواری کے اندر رہتے ہوئے باہمی مشاورت سے طے پاتی تھیں۔

یہ کچھ تو رسول اللہ حیات مبارکہ میں ہوتا رہا۔ اس کے بعد سوال یہ سامنے آتا ہے کہ حضور ﷺ کی دنیا سے تشریف براری کے بعد کیا طریق اختیار کرنا مقصود تھا۔ اس کے لیے بھی قرآن کریم میں واضح راہنمائی دے دی گئی ہے جب کہا گیا کہ

وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ  ۚ   أَفَإِن مَّاتَ أَوْ قُتِلَ انقَلَبْتُمْ عَلَىٰ أَعْقَابِكُمْ  ۚ   وَمَن يَنقَلِبْ عَلَىٰ عَقِبَيْهِ فَلَن يَضُرَّ اللَّـهَ شَيْئًا  ۗ   وَسَيَجْزِي اللَّـهُ الشَّاكِرِينَ  (144/3)

‘‘محمدﷺ بجز ایں نیست کہ خدا کا ایک رسول ہے۔ اس سے پہلے بھی بہت سے رسول ہو گذرے ہیں۔ سو اب یہ (کل کو) وفات پا جائے یا قتل کر دیا جائے تو کیا تم (یہ سمجھ کر کہ دین کا نظام تو حضورؐ کی ذات سے وابستہ تھا وہ نہیں رہے تو نظام بھی ختم ہو گیا)، پھر اپنے قدیم مسلک کی طرف پلٹ جائو گے۔ جو ایسا کرے گا وہ خدا کو تو کوئی نقصان نہیں پہنچا سکے گا۔ (خود اپنا ہی نقصان کرے گا) لیکن جو نظام کی قدردانی کرے گا تو اللہ اسے اس کا بدلہ دے گا۔’’

یعنی، یہ بتادیا گیا کہ دین کا یہ نظام رسول اللہ کی ذات تک محدود نہیں۔ یہ حضورﷺ کی وفات کے بعد بھی اسی طرح جاری رہے گا اور ان جزئیات کے تعین یا عندالضرورت تغیر و تبدل کے لیے طریق بھی وہی اختیار کیا جائے گا جس کا حکم خود رسول الہ ﷺ کو دیا گیا تھا۔ یعنی وَأَمْرُهُمْ شُورَىٰ بَيْنَهُمْ (38/42)یہ بھی ان امور کو باہمی مشاورت سے طے کریں گے۔ چنانچہ حضور ﷺ کے بعد بھی یہ سلسلہ بدستور قائم رہا۔ اسے خلافت علیٰ منہاج رسالت یا خلافتِ راشدہ کا دور کہا جاتا ہے۔ اس دور میں دین کی نئی جزئیات کا بھی تعین ہوا۔ اور جن سابقہ جزئیات میں کسی قسم کی تبدیلی محسوس ہوئی ان میں تغیر و تبدل بھی کیا گیا۔ اگرچہ اس کی ضرورت بہت کم مواقع پر پیش آئی ۔ کیونکہ وہ زمانہ کچھ ایسا لمبا نہیں تھا۔ چند سالوں پر مشتمل تھا۔

خلافتِ راشدہ کے بعد

کچھ عرصہ کے بعد یہ نظام ٹوٹ گیا اور قراان کریم نے جو پہلے وارننگ دی تھی کہ ‘‘کیا تم پھر اپنے سابقہ مسلک کی طرف پلٹ جائو گے’’ مسلمانوں نے ایسا ہی کیا۔ خلافت کی جگہ ملوکیت نے لے لی۔ اور اس کا پہلا نتیجہ یہ ہوا کہ دین مذہب میں تبدیل ہو گیا۔ یعنی انسانی معاملات دو حصوں میں تقسیم ہو گئے۔ ایک حصہ وہ جن کا تعلق امور دنیا سے متعلق سمجھا گیا اور دوسرا وہ جسے مذہبی امور کہہ کر پکارا گیا۔ یہی وہ ‘‘قدیم مسلک’’ تھا جس کے متعلق وارننگ دی گئی تھی کہ تم کہیں ایسا نہ کر بیٹھنا۔ اب امور مملکت (یعنی دنیاوی امور) سلاطین نے سنبھال لیے اور مذہبی امور مذہبی پیشوائیوں کی تحویل میں آ گئے۔ سلاطین کے لیے تو آسان تھا کہ وہ جس طرح چاہتے اپنے احکامات نافذ کرتے۔ مذہبی پیشوائیت کے لیے یہ مسئلہ دقت طلب ہو گیا کہ مذہبی امور کے فیصلوں کے سلسلہ میں کیا طریق عمل اختیار کیا جائے۔ مشاورت کا تو مذہب میں تصور ہی نہیں ہوتا۔ اس لیے قرآن میں جہاں شوریٰ کا حکم دیا گیا تھا اس کی تاویل یوں کر لی گئی کہ اس کا تعلق امور دنیا سے ہے۔ مذہبی امور سے نہیں۔ مذہبی امور کے لیے ‘‘شریعت’’ کی اصطلاح اختیار کی گئی اور کہا یہ گیا کہ اعتقادات اور نماز، روزہ، حج، زکوۃٰ، نکاح، طلاق وغیرہ سے متعلق مسائل دائرہ شریعت میں آتے ہیں۔ دین کے نظام میں، ہر دنیاوی کام جو احکامِ خداوندی کے مطابق سرانجام دیا جاتا، عبادت (یعنی خدا کی محکومت) قرار پرتا تھا۔ اب عبادت کا مفہوم پرستش قرار پا گیا اور اس کا دنیاوی امور سے کوئی تعلق نہ رہا۔

روایات کے مجموعے

ہم نے ابھی ابھی کہا کہ مذہبی پیشوائیت کے لیے یہ سوال غور طلب تھا کہ جو امور ان کے دائرہ اقتدار میں دے دیئے گئے ہیں ان کےمتعلق فیصلے کس طرح کیے جائیں۔ ظاہر ہے کہ ان امور کی جزئیات نہ تمام کی تمام قرآن کے اندر موجود تھیں اور نہ ہی دین کا نظام باقی تھا۔ اس پر مستزاد یہ کہ جس دور میں دین کا نظام قائم تھا (یعنی عہد رسالتمآبؐ اور خلافت راشدہ) اس میں نافذ العمل جزئیات کا کوئی مستند مجموعہ تحریری طور پر امت کے پاس موجود نہیں تھا۔ بنا بریں، اس کے سوال کوئی مشکل نہیں تھی کہ جو کچھ لوگوں کی زبانی معلوم ہو، اسے جمع، مدون اور مرتب کر دیا جائے۔ یوں روایات کے مجموعے مرتب کیے گئے۔ اور جو جزئیات ان میں سے ملیں انہیں احکامِ شریعت قرار دے کر ۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ امت کے لیے واجب العمل ٹھہرا دیا گیا۔ ظاہر ہے کہ جو روایات اس طریق سے جمع ہوئی تھیں ان میں بہت سے اختلافات اور تضادات تھے۔ ان اختلافات کی بنا پر امت میں تفرقہ پیدا ہو گیا اور مختلف فرقے وجود میں آ گئے۔ بالخصوص اس لیے کہ بے شمار روایات خود وضع کر کے انہیں رسول اللہ ﷺ کی طرف منسوب کر دیا گیا تھا۔

فِقہ

اس حد تک تو ان روایات نے کام دے دیا لیکن نہ زمانے کے تقاضے تو کسی مقام پر رک نہیں سکتے ۔ وہ آگے بڑھتے گئے اور ان کے لیے نئی جزئیات کی ضرورت پرتی گئی۔ اس سے یہ سوال سامنے آیا کہ اب کیا کیا جائے؟ فقہا نے اس کا حل یہ سوچا کہ جو کچھ شریعت کے نام سے موجود تھا اس پر غور و فکر کے بعد ایسے احکام مستنبط کیے جائیں جو زمانے کے ان بڑھتے ہوئے تقاضوں کو پورا کر سکیں۔ استنباطِ مسائل کے اس طریق کو اجتہاد کہا جاتا ہے اور جو احکام اس طرح مستنبط ہوں وہ فقہ کہلاتی ہے۔ چونکہ فقہ بھی ذاتی طور پر مستنبط اور مرتب ہوئی تھی (یعنی نظام کی طرف سے نہیں بلکہ مختلف آئمہ فقہ نے اسے ذاتی طور پر مرتب کیا تھا۔) اس لیے اس میں بھی اختلاف فطری امر تھا۔ یوں امت میں مزید فرقے پیدا ہو گئے۔ کچھ وقت کے بعد یہ فیصلہ کر لیا گیا کہ اجتہاد کی رو سے بھی جس قدر فیصلے کیے جانے مقصود تھے وہ سب کیے جا چکے ہیں۔ لہذا اب مزید اجتہاد کا دروازہ بھی بند ہے۔ امت پر یہ جمود صدیوں سے طاری ہے۔

آپ نے دیکھا کہ دین کے نظام کے باقی نہ رہنے سے اسلام کیا سے کیا ہو گیا؟ وحی کا دروازہ خدا نے بند کیا تھا۔ روایات جمع اور مرتب ہو گئیں تو یہ سلسلہ بھی آخری حد تک پہنچ گیا۔ کچھ آگے بڑھنے کے لیے اجتہاد کا طریق اختیار کیا گیا تو کچھ عرصہ کے بعد اس کا دروازہ بھی بند ہو گیا۔ اس کے بعد صورت یہ ہو گئی کہ یہ امت فرقوں میں بٹ گئی، اور قرآن کے الفاظ میں کیفیت یہ ہو گئی کہ ُکلُّ حِزْبٍ بِمَا لَدَيْهِمْ فَرِحُونَ (32/30) ہر فرقہ مگن ہو کر بیٹھ گیا کہ سچے اسلام پر وہی کاربند ہے۔ باقی سب باطل پر ہیں۔’’ حالانکہ یہ ظاہر ہے کہ ‘‘سچا اسلام’’ کہیں بھی باقی نہیں رہا تھا۔ سچے اسلام کے معنی تھے ایک امت۔ اس کا ایک نظام۔ نظام کی ایک مرکزی اتھارٹی جو باہمی مشاورت سے احکامِ خداوندی کو نافذ کرتی، جو ان جزئیات کا تعین کرتی جو قرآن میں نہیں تھیں۔ ان میں عندالضرورت اضافہ بھی کرتی اور تغیر و تبدل بھی۔ اس نظام کے نہ رہنے سے امت کا شیرازہ بکھر گیا۔ اسی تشتت و انتشار کی طغیانیوں اور فقدانِ مرکزیت کی تباہ کن حیرانیوں میں صدیوں سے امت گرفتار چلی آ رہی ہے۔ اس سے بعض (دین کی حقیقت سے ناآشنا ذہن) اس نتیجہ پر پہنچ گئے کہ وحی کا دروازہ بند نہیں ہونا چا ہیے تھا۔ چنانچہ اسی بنا پر بعض لوگ خود مدعی نبوت بن بیٹھے۔

اسی پریشانی فکر و نظر کا پیدا کردہ وہ فرقہ ہے جو ہمارے زمانے میں پنجاب میں نمودار ہوا اور اہل قرآن کے نام سے متعارف ہے۔ اسے اتفاق کہیے یا اہل پنجاب کی بدبختی کہ اہل قرآن اور احمدی دونوں خطہ پنجاب سے نمودار ہوئے اور کم و بیش ایک ہی وقت میں۔ یہ دونوں دین کے بہ حیثیت نظام کے تصور سے ناآشنا اور اسے ایک ‘‘مذہب’’ سمجھتے تھے (اور سمجھتے ہیں)

٭۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔٭

فرقہ اہل قرآن

فرقہ اہل قرآن کے بانی (مولانا) عبداللہ چکڑالوی (مرحوم) تھے۔ مرزا غلام احمد کے متعلق تو معلوم ہے کہ ان کی دعوت حکومت ِ برطانیہ کی مقاصد براری کا ذریعہ تھی اور اس لیے اس کے ہاتھوں کا لگایا ہوا پودا۔ لیکن (مولانا) چکڑالوی کے متعلق اندازاہ ہوتا ہے کہ ان کی نیت نیک تھی اور دل میں اسلام کا درد۔ انہوں نے دیکھا کہ فرقہ بندی نے مسلمانوں کو تباہ کر دیا ہے۔ فرقہ بندی کے متعلق انہیں معلوم تھا کہ اس کی بنیاد بالواسطہ یا بلا واسطہ روایات پر ہے۔ اس کا علاج انہوں نے یہ سوچا کہ کسی نہ کسی طرح مسلمانوں کو قرآن پر جمع کیا جائے۔ یہاں تک تو بات صحیح بھی تھی اور صاف بھی۔ لیکن اس سے آگے بڑھے تو انہیں الجھائو پیدا ہو گیا۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ اسلام پر عمل پیرا ہونے کے لیے خارج از قرآن کسی چیز کی ضرورت نہیں۔ اس طرح انہوں نے احادیث (اور ان پر متفرع فقہ) کو بالکلیہ مسترد کر دیا۔ اس پر مولوی صاحبان کی طرف سے سب سے پہلے وہ اعتراض وارد کیا گیا جسے وہ اسلام کے دین سے مذہب میں تبدیل ہو جانے کے زمانے سے وارد کرتے چلے آ رہے ہی۔ انہوں نے ان سے کہا کہ اگر اسلام پر عمل پیرا ہونے کے لیے قران کافی ہےتو بتائیے کہ ہم نماز کیسے پڑھیں۔ اسلام بہ حیثیت ایک نظام، کا تصور (مولانا) چکڑالوی کے سامنے تھا ہی نہیں۔ جس طرح معترضین اسے ایک مذہب سمجھتے تھے اسی طرح یہ بھی اسے ایک مذہب ہی خیال کرتے تھے۔ لہذا انہیں ضرورت لاحق ہوئی کہ وہ قرآن سے نماز کے جملہ جزئیات نکالیں، اس لیے کہ ان کا دعویٰ تھا کہ

اللہ تبارک و تعالیٰ نے نماز کی حقیقت و ماہیت، کیفیت و کمیت، طریقت وغیرہ یعنی جملہ افعال ، حرکات و سکنات وغیرہ وغیرہ تمام امور متعلقہ نماز بہ تفصیل و توضیح و تشریح قرآن مجید میں ہی بیان فرما دیئے ہیں۔

(ترجمہ القرآن۔ پارہ دوئم۔ صفحہ 207)

چکڑالوی صاحب نے قرآن کریم میں نماز کی جملہ حرکات و سکنات و افعال و افکار کی تلاش شروع کر دی۔ وہ صرف و نحو کے عالم نظر آتے ہیں اور قرآنی آیات پر بھی انہیں عبور دکھائی دیتا ہے۔ لیکن مشکل یہ تھی کہ وہ قرآن کے سمندر میں ان موتیوں کی تلاش میں غوطہ زن ہوئے جو وہاں موجود نہیں تھے۔ اس میں شناوری، غیر موجود کو موجود کیسے بنا سکتی تھ۔ لہذا وہ لگے ٹامک ٹوئیاں مارنے۔ فی طغیانھلم یعمھون ۔ اس سعی ناکام میں انہیں جس کھینچا تانی سے کام لینا، اور اس کی وجہ سے جس اضطراب و ہیجان حتیٰ کہ چڑچڑاہٹ اور جھنجھلاہٹ کا شکار ہونا پڑا، وہ ان کی تحریروں سے ظاہر ہے۔ بات چونکہ مناظرانہ دعویٰ کی تھی۔ اس لیے اعترافِ شکست بھی ممکن نہیں تھا۔ اس طرح یہ ‘‘جان مجنوں، دوگونہ عذاب میں مبتلا’’ ہو گئی۔ انہوں نے بزعم خویش، جو کچھ قرآن سے ثابت کیا، وہ پانچ وقتوں کی نماز ،نماز کی دو تین اور چار رکعتیں اور ہر رکعت میں دو سجدے تھے۔ یعنی مروجہ نماز ہی کے ارکان لیکن ان کے ثابت کرنے کا انداز اس قدر رکیک تھا کہ اس پر عقل شرمائے اور علم ماتم کرے۔ مثلاً وہ رکعتوں کی تعداد کے سلسلہ میں ‘‘بہ تحقیق انیق’’ پیش فرماتے ہیں کہ:

الْحَمْدُ لِلَّـهِ فَاطِرِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ جَاعِلِ الْمَلَائِكَةِ رُسُلًا أُولِي أَجْنِحَةٍ مَّثْنَىٰ وَثُلَاثَ وَرُبَاعَ   (1/35)

اس کا سیدھا سادھا ترجمہ یہ ہے۔

سب خوبی اللہ تعالیٰ کو ہے جس نے بنا نکالے آسمان اور زمین، جس نے ٹھہرایا فرشتوں کو پیغام لانے والے۔ جن کے پر ہیں دو دو اور تین تین اور چار چار چار۔’’

(ترجمہ مولانا محمود الحسنؒ )

(مولانا) چکڑالوی اس کا حسب ذیل ترجمہ لکھتے ہیں۔

پڑھا کرو اے ہر ایک اہل آسمان و اہل زمین۔ الحمد(یعنی پانچوں نمازیں) واسطے راضی کرنے اللہ تعالیٰ کے، کیونکہ وہ فطرت پاک کرنے والا ہے۔ تم تمام آسمان والوں (فرشتوں کی) اور تم تمام روئے زمین ولوں (جن و انس کی)۔ چونکہ تم فطرت اللہ میں تغیر و تبدیل کرتے رہتے ہو اس لیے نمازیں پڑھا کرو تاکہ جبرو نقصان ہوتا رہے۔ اور اللہ تعالیٰ وہ ہے جو کرنے والا ہے اپنے فرشتوں کو رسول تمہاری طرف۔ جو لانے والے تمہاری صلواتوں یعنی چھ ارکانوں کے ہیں ۔ جن کا حق یہ ہے کہ کسی وقت میں دو دو بار ادا کی جائیں اور کسی وقت میں تین تین اور کسی وقت میں چار چار دفعہ مطابق تعلیم کتاب اللہ۔ (یعنی جس وقت کہ اللہ تعالیٰ نے ان کو دو بار ادا کرنے کا حکم فرمایا، تم بھی اس وقت ان چھ ارکان کو دو ہی بار پڑھا کرو۔ اور جس وقت ان کو تین بار ادا کرنے کا حکم دیا ہے۔، تم بھی اس وقت میں ان کو تین ہی بار ادا کیا کرو۔ اور جس وقت میں فاطر السموٰت والارض نے تم کو چار بار ان کو ادا کرنے کا حکم دیا ہے اس وقت چار بار ہی پڑھا کرو۔

(ترجمۃ القران۔ پارہ پان صفحہ ۷۲)

اور اس کے بعد پانچ چھ صفحات میں قرٓان کریم کی مختلف آیا اور ان کی (اپنی) تشریح کرنے کے لکھتے ہیں کہ (یہ کچھ) اس بات کا قطعی اور یقینی فیصلہ کرتا ہے کہ نماز کی رکعتین اس طرح ہیں کہ فجر کی دو، شام کی تین، ظہر و عصر و عشا, میں سے ہر ایک کی چار (ایضاً۔ صفحہ ۸۳)

آپ غور کیجئے کہ یہ قرآن کے ساتھ (معاذاللہ) کھلا ہوامذاق نہیں تو اور کیا ہے؟

یا (مثلاً) انہوں نے قرآن سے (باندازِ بالا) یہ ثابت کیا ہے کہ نماز میں ہاتھ سینے پر باندھنے چاہیئں اس طرح کہ قرآن کریم میں ہے کہ جب حضرت موسیٰ علیہ السلام فرعون کی طرف گئے تو چونکہ معرکہ بڑا صبر آزما تھا، اس لیے ان سے کہا گیا کہ وہاں کسی سے ڈرنا نہیں۔ مضطرب و بیقرار نہ ہونا۔ پوری دلجمعی اور اطمینان سے اپنی بات پیش کرنا۔ اس کے لیے الفاظ یہ استعمال کیے گئے کہ إِلَيْكَ جَنَاحَكَ مِنَ الرَّهْبِ  ۖ (32/28) یعنی خوف کی حالت میں پھڑپھڑانا نہیں بلکہ اپنے بازو سمیٹ لینا۔’’ (مولانا) چکڑالوی فرماتے ہیں کہ

اس سے ثابت ہوا کہ حکم خداوندی یہ ہے کہ نماز میں اپنے ہاتھ کہنیوں تک ایک دوسے کے اوپر جمع کر کے اپنے سینے کے ساتھ ملائو۔ (ترجمۃ القرآن پارہ ۲۔ صفحہ ۶۰۲)

غرضیکہ وہ اسی طرح نماز کی جملہ جزئیات قرآن کریم سے ‘‘ثابت’’ کرتے چلے جاتے ہیں اور جو کچھ اس طرح ‘‘ثابت’’ کرتے ہیں اس کے متعلق کہتے ہیں کہ ‘‘یہ اللہ کا حکم ہے۔ اور ان کے خلاف ورزی کتاب اللہ کی سراسر مخالفت ہے’’ (ایضاً پارہ ۳۔ صفحہ ۲۳ ۔ ۲۱)۔ ان الفاظ کو اچھی طرح ذہن نشین کر لیجئے کہ ان سے ایک اہم نتیجہ سامنے آئے گا۔

حرکات و سکنات کے بعد وہ یہ بتاتے ہیں کہ نماز میں پڑھنا کیا چاہیئے۔ اس میں سوائے سورۃ فاتحہ کے سب کچھ مروجہ نماز سے مختلف ہے۔ اگرچہ و ہیں قرآن ہی کی آیا۔

ایک اہلحدیث کا ‘‘لقمہ’’

یہ ہے وہ طریق جس سے چکڑالوی صاحب نے نماز اور اسی طرح قرآن کریم کے دیگر اصولی احکام کی جزئیات قرآن سے ‘‘ثابت’’کیں۔ جب قرآن سے اثبات و تعین احکام کا انداز یہ ٹھہرا تو پھر اس میں کوئی روک کس طرح پیدا ہو سکتی تھی؟ چنانچہ خود (مولانا) چکڑالوی کی (غالباً)زندگی میں اور ان کی وفات کے بعد انہی کے ہم خیال ایسے لوگ پیدا ہو گئے جنہوں نے بھانت بھانت کی بولیاں بولنا شروع کر دیں۔ مثلاً چکوال کے مولوی محمد فاضل اور (مولوی محمد عالم۔ گوجرانوالہ کے محمد رمضان اکال گڑھ کے مولوی چراغ دین وغیرہ ان میں سے کسی نے ایک وقت کی نماز اور ہر نماز کی ایک رکعت بتائی۔ کسی نے دو دن کے روزے اور کسی نے نو دن کے۔ کسی نے فلاں چیز کو حلال قرار دیا اور کسی نے فلاں کو حرام۔ غرضیکہ ان کی ان کوششوں سے خدا کی اس کتاب عظیم کی (معاذاللہ) اس طرح دھجیاں فضا میں بکھریں کہ اس کی مثال کہیں نہیں ملتی۔ یہ تو اللہ کا شکر ہے کہ ان میں سے کسی کی بات پر بھی لوگوں نے دھیان نہ دیا۔ ورنہ جتنے فرقے، بہ ہیت مجموعی، مسلمانون میں اس وقت موجود ہیں ان سے کہیں زیادہ اس ایک نظریہ سے پیدا ہو جاتے۔ ان میں سے صرف ایک گروہ ( جو معدودے چند نفوس پر مشتمل ہے) اس وقت تک موجود ہے جس کا تعارف ان کے ترجمان، ماہنامہ بلاغ القرآن کے ذریعہ ہوتا ہے۔ سمن آباد (لاہور) میں ان کی ایک ڈیڑھ اینٹ کی الگ مسجد ہے جس میں وہ (بزعم خویش) تین وقت کی ‘‘قرآنی نمازیں’’ پڑھتے ہیں۔ ان تین نمازوں کا قصہ بھی بڑا دلچسپ ہے۔ ہم نے اوپر دیکھا ہے کہ (مولانا) چکڑالوی نے قرآن کریم سے پانچ وقت کی نمازیں ثابت کی تھیں۔ وزیرآباد (ثم گجرات) کے ایک اہلحدیث عالم حافظ عنایت اللہ صاحب نے ان کی تردید کی اور کا کہ قرآن مجید سے تو صڑف تین وقتوں کی نمازیں ثابت ہوتی ہیں۔ آپ پانچ وقتوں کی کس طرح ثابت کرتے ہیں۔ یہ (مولانا) چکڑالوی کی زندگی کے آخری ایام کی بات ہے۔ انہوں نے تو اپنے خیال سے رجوع نہ کیا لیکن ان کے بعد ان کے متبعین کے لاہور گروہ نے حافظ عنایت اللہ صاحب کی بات اچک لی اور کہا کہ قرآن کی رو سے نمازیں تین ہی ہیں۔ ادارہ بلاغ القرآن کی طرف سے ‘‘الصلوٰۃ’’ کے عنوان سے ایک پمفلٹ شائع ہوا ہے جس میں انہون نے (چکڑالوی صاحب کے طریق کے مطابق’’ ثابت کیا ہے کہ قرٓان مجید کی رو سے :

۱۔ نمازوںکی تعدادی تین ہے۔ (چکڑالوی صاحب نے پانچ نمازیں بتائی تھیں)

۲۔ ہر نماز کی صرف دو رکعتیں ہیں۔ (چکڑالوی صاحب نے دو ۔ تین۔ چار رکعتیں کہی تھیں)

۳۔ ہر رکعت میں صرف ایک سجدہ ہے (چکڑالوی صاحب نے ہر رکعت میں دو سجدے بتائے تھے)

۴۔ نماز کے لیے اذا ن کی ضرورت نہیں۔

۵۔ اللہ اکبر کہنا خلافِ قرآن ہے۔

۶۔ السلام علیکم کے بجائے سلامُ علیکم کہنا چاہیئے۔

نماز میں سینہ پر ہاتھ باندھنے کے یہ بھی قائل ہیں لیکن اس کا اثبات سورۃ الکوثر کی اس آیت سے کرتے ہیں۔ فَصَلِّ لِرَبِّكَ وَانْحَرْ (2/108) جس کا ترجمہ یہ کرتے ہیں کہ ‘‘پس اپنے رب کے حضور میں نماز ادا کیا کر اور سینے پر ہاتھ باندھ کر قبلہ رو کھڑا ہوا کر۔’’ (پمفلٹ مذکور صفحہ ۱۸)۔ مولانا چکڑالوی کی طرح ان کا بھی یہ دعویٰ ہے کہ جو کچھ انہوں نے کہا ہے وہ قرآن کریم کا قطعی فیصلہ ہے (ایضاً صفحہ 22)۔ اس کے خلاف کچھ ثابت کرنا ‘‘صریحاً’’ خلاف قرآن ہے۔ (ایضاً صفحہ 29) خدا نے اپنی تنزیلی کتاب میں یہی حکم دیا ہے۔ (بلاغ القرآن بابت دسمبر 1974 صفحہ 32) جہاں تک اذکار، صلوٰۃ کا تعلق ہے۔ دعائے قبل الصلوٰۃ سے لے کر سلام تک ان کی نماز بھی (بجز سورۃ فاتحہ) باقی مسلمانوں کی نماز سے بالکل الگ ہے۔ مثلاً انہوں نے کہا ہے کہ رکوع میں یہ دعا پڑھنی چاہیئے۔

رب اوزعنی ان اشکر نعمتک اللتی انعمت علیّ و علیٰ والدیّ وان اعمل صالحاً ترضٰہُ واصلح لی فی ذریتی۔ انی تبت الیک و انی المسلمین ربان علیک توکلنا و الیک انبعنا و الیک المصیر ربنا لا تجملنا فتن ۃ الذین کفرو۔ اغفرنا۔ انک انت العزیز الحکیم

اور سجدہ میں یہ دعا

سبحن ربنا ان کان وعدنا ربنا لمفعولا۔ الحمد اللہ الذی لم یتخذ ولدا ولم یکن لہُ شرک فی الملک ولم یکن لہُ ولی من الذل ربنا صرف عنا عذاب جہنم ان عذابہا کان عراما۔ انہا سائت مستقراً و مقاماً ربنا ہب لنا من ازواجنا و زریتنا قر ۃ اعین و جعلنا للمتقین اماماً (پمفلٹ مذکور صفحہ 51)

اس قسم کے دیگر افکار ہیں۔

٭۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔٭

قرآن کو سب سے زیادہ نقصان پہنچانیوالے

میں کہتا چلا آرہا ہوں اور اسے اب پھر دہرا دینا چاہتا ہوں کہ میرے نزدیک مسلمانوں کے تمام فرقوں میں سے قرآن کو سب سے زیادہ نقصان اس فرقہ نے پہنچایا ہے۔ سطح بین نگاہوں میں میری یہ بات بڑی تعجب انگیز سی دکھائی دے گی کیونکہ ان کی سمجھ میں یہ نہیں آئے گا کہ جو لوگ دین کے معمالہ میں قراان کو کافی تسلیم کرتے ہیں اور ہر بات کو قرٓان ہی سے ثابت کرتے ہیں وہ قرٓان کو سب سے زیادہ نقصان پہنچانے والے کس طرح ہو سکتے ہیں۔ لہذا یہ نکتہ ٹھنڈے دل اور گہرنے غور اور تدبر سے سمجھنے کے قابل ہے۔ قرٓان کریم میں ہے کہ

أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ  ۚ   وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ اللَّـهِ لَوَجَدُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافًا كَثِيرًا   (82/4)

‘‘کیا یہ لوگ قرآن میں تدبر نہیں کرتے۔ اگر یہ خدا کے سوا کسی اور کی طرف سے ہوتا تو یہ لوگ اس میں بہت سے اختلافات پاتے۔’’

یہ آیہ جلیلہ بڑی اہم اور بنیادی ہے۔ اس میں کہا یہ گیا ہے کہ قراان مجید کے منزل من اللہ ہونے کی دلیل ہی نہیں بلکہ ثبوت یہ ہے کہ اس میں کوئی اختلافی بات نہیں۔ اگر (معاذاللہ) یہ ثابت ہو جائے کہ قرآن ایسے احکام دیتا ہے جن میں باہمدگر اختلاف اور تضاد ہے تو اس سے قراان مجید کے من جانب اللہ ہونے کا دعویٰ باطل ہو جاتاہے اور دین کی ساری عمارت دھڑام سے نیچے آ گرتی ہے۔

مسلمانوں میں مختلف فرقے ہیں اور ان میں باہمی اختلافات بھی، لیکن ان میں سے کوئی بھی یہ نہیں کہتا کہ ان کے اختلافات کی بنیاد قرآن ہے۔ اہل حدیث کے اختلافات کی بنیاد روایات پر ہے۔ حدیث کے متعلق اگرچہ ان کے ہاں یہ عقیدہ بھی موجود ہے کہ ان کی بنیاد وحی خفی پر ہے۔ لیکن اس کے باوجود وہ قال الرسول کو قال اللہ سے الگ رکھتے ہیں۔ اس لیے ان کے اختلافات کی زد براہ است قرآن کریم پر نہیں پڑتی۔

اہلِ حدیث سے اگے بڑھیے تو اہل فقہ سامنے آتے ہیں۔ ان کے اختلافات کی بنیاد ان کے آئمہ کا اجتہاد ہے۔ ان کا دعویٰ یہ ضرور ہے کہ ان کے آئمہ کے اجتہاد کی بنیاد قرآن اور احادیث ہی پر ہے لیکن وہ اسے قال اللہ نہیں کہتے۔ اپنے ائمہ کے اقوال ہی کہتے ہیں۔ لہذا فقہی اختلافات کی زد بھی قرآن پر نہیں پڑتی۔

لیکن فرقہ اہل قرآن کا دعویٰ یہ ہے کہ جو کچھ وہ کہتے ہیں وہ خدا کا رشاد ہے۔ وہ قرآن کا حکم ہے۔ اب ظاہر ہے کہ اس عقیدے کو ماننے والوں میں سے جب ایک کہتا ہے کہ اس معاملہ کے متعلق قرآن کا حکم یہ ہے کہ اور دوسرا کہتا ہے کہ اس کا حکم یہ ہے جو پہلے حکم کے خلاف ہے تو اس سےثابت ہو جاتا ہے کہ ایک ہی معاملہ کے متعلق قرآن مختلف اور متضاد احکام دیتا ہے۔ اس سے قرآن کے منجانب اللہ ہونے کا دعویٰ یکسر باطل قرار پاجاتا ہے۔ دیگر احکام کو تو چھوڑیے اس طریقہ کے بانی (مولانا) چکڑالوی، اور ان کے متبعین (بلاغ القرآن والوں) نے صرف نماز کے متلق جو قرآنی احکام بتائے ہیں وہ ایک دوسرے سے مختلف ہیں۔ مثلاً

مولانا چکڑالوی کے مطابق قراان نے کہا ہے بلاغ القرآن والوں کے مطابق قرآن نے کہا ہے

۱۔ نمازیں پانچ وقت کی ہیں ۱۔ نمازیں تین وقت کی ہیں۔

۲۔ نمازوں کی رکعتیں دو دو،تین تین، چار چار ہیں۔ ۲۔ ہر نماز کی صرف دو رکعتیں ہیں۔

۳۔ ہر رکعت میں دو سجدے ہیں ۳۔ ہر رکعت میں صرف ایک سجدہ ہے

آپ غور کیجئے کہ یہ نماز سے متعلق محسوس اور مرئی احکام ہیں جو ایک دوسرے کی بالکل ضد ہیں اور ان دونوں کا دعویٰ یہ ہے کہ قرآن کریم نے ایسا کہا ہے۔ جو اس کے خلاف کہتا ہے وہ قراان کی مخالفت کرتا ہے۔ انہوں نے یہ نہیں کہا کہ ہم نے اپنی بصیرت کے مطابق قرآن سے یہ احکام مستبنط کیے ہیں۔ ان کا دعویٰ یہ ہے کہ قرٓن نے یہ جزئیات خود متعین کی ہیں۔ اب آپ سوچیئے کہ جب یہ چیز غیر مسلموں کے سامنے آئے کہ قرآن نے نماز کے تین وقت بھی بتائے ہیں اور پانچ بھی۔ اس نے نماز کی دو رکعتیں بھی مقرر کی ہیں اور فجر کی نماز کی دو، ظہر ، عصر اور عشا کی چار اور مغرب کی تین رکعتیں بھی۔ اسی قرٓن نے ایک رکعت کے لیے ایک سجدہ مقرر کی ہےا اور اسی نے دو سجدے۔ تو وہ قرآن کے متعلق کیا رائے قائم کریں گے۔؟ غیر مسلم تو ایک طرف، جب سمجھنے سوچنے والے مسلمان نوجوانوں کے سامنے بھی یہ بات آگئے گی تو ان کا قرآن کریم کے معلق کیا تصور ہو گا؟ اور یہ تو ابھی ہم نے صرف نماز کے متعلق بتایا ہے۔ دیگر احکام کے متعلق بھی ان کی تصریحات سامنے آئیں تو قرآن کے متعلق تصور یہ پیدا ہو گا کہ یہ تو ہے ہی اختلافات کا مجموعہ

اس کے بعد آپ سوچیئے کہ میں نے جو کہا ہے کہ قرآن کو سب سے زیادہ نقصان اس فرقہ نے پہنچایا ہے تو اس میں ذرا بھی مبالغہ ہے؟

اسے ایک دفعہ پھر ذہن نشین کر لیجئے کہ مولانا چکڑالوی اور بلاغ القرآن والے، دونوں کا دعویٰ یہ ے کہ نماز کی جزئیات خود قرآن کی متعین کردہ ہی۔ ان کی مستنبط کردہ نہیں۔ اور صرف نماز کی جزئیات ہی نہیں ۔ قرآن کریم نے تمام احکام کی جزئیات خود متعین کر دی ہیں۔ اس کے لیے ان کی سند اور دلیل یہ ہے کہ قرآن نے اپنے آپ کو ‘‘مفصل’’ اور تفصیل کل شئی کہا ہے۔ یہ ٹھوکر تھی جو مولانا چکڑالوی کو لگی اور جس کے پیچھے ان کے متبعین آنکھیں بند کر کے چلے آ رہے ہیں۔ لہذا یہ سمجھ لینا نہایت ضروری ہے کہ قرآن کریم کے ‘‘مفصل کتاب’’ ہونے کا صحیح مفہوم کیا ہے۔

کتاب فصل کا صحیح مفہوم

اللہ تعالیٰ نے قرآن کریم کو کہیں الکتاب مفصلاً (115/2) کہا ہے۔ کہیں تفصیل الکتاب (37/10)اور کہیں تفصیل کل شئی وغیرہ اردو زبان میں تفصیل، تفاصیل، تفصیلات (جیسے الفاظ) جزئیات کے معنون میں استعمال ہوتے ہیں۔ اور مفصل اسے کہتے ہیں جس میں کسی بات کو مجملاً بیان نہ کیا گیاہو۔ بلکہ اس کی جزئیات بھی دی گئی ہوں۔ انگریزی میں انہیں ( Details ) کہا جاتاہے۔ (مولانا) چکڑالوی کو یہ غلط فہمی ہو گئی کہ قرآن کریم میں بھی یہ الفاظ انہی معنوں میں استعمال کیے گئے ہیں جن معانی میں یہ اردو زبان میں استعمال ہوتے ہیں۔ چونکہ یہ بنیادی اینٹ غلط رکھی گئی اس لیے ان کے دعاوی کی دیوار تاثریا ٹیڑھی اٹھتی چلی گئی۔ عربی زبان میں مادہ (ف۔ ص۔ ل) اور اس بننے والے الفاظ ، ان معانی میں استعمال نہیں ہوتے۔ اس میں اس مادہ کے معنی ہیں۔ ‘‘الگ الگ کر دینا’’ ‘‘فصل الحدبین الارضین’’ کے معینی وہ حد فاصل ہے جو زمین کے دو قطعات کو الگ الگ کر دے۔ فصال بچے کے دودھ چھڑانے کو کہتے ہیں۔ یعنی بچے کو ماں سے الگ کر دینے کو۔ فصل اثلاۃ کے معنی ہیں قصاب نے بکری کے گوشت کے ٹکڑے ٹکڑے کر دیئے۔ تفصیل کے معنی ہیں کپڑے کے ٹکڑے الگ الگ کر دینا۔ فصول السنۃ سال کے چار موسموں (فصلوں) کو کہتے ہیں۔ فاصلہ اس منکے کو کہتے ہیں جو ہار میں پروئے ہوئے دو موتیوں کے درمیان پرویا جاتا جائے تاکہ اس سے وہ دو موتی الگ الگ متمیز ہو جائیں۔ ایسے ہار کو عقد مفصل کہا جاتاہے۔ الفاصل، جج کو کہتے ہیں۔ اور فیصلہ اس کے اس حکم کو جو جائز اور ناجائز، حق اور باطل غلط اور صحیح کو الگ الگ کر دے۔ فاصلہ دو مقدمات کو الگ الگ کر دیتا ہے۔ (یہ تمام معانی عربی زمان کی مستند کتب لغت میں موجود ہیں)

اس مادہ کے ان معانی کے لحاظ سے تفصیل کے معنی ہیں، واضح کر دینا۔ کھول کر بیان کر دینا (امام راغب) اور مفصل کے معنی، وہ کتاب جس میں ہر بات نہایت وضاحت سے نکھار کر، الگ الگ کر کے،بیان کی جائے۔ جس کے بیان میں کوئی ابہام نہ ہو۔ التباس نہ ہو۔ الجھن نہ ہو۔ ہر بات نہایت واضح نکھری اور ابھری ہوئی ہو۔ انگریزی میں اسے کہیں گے ( Distinctly Stated ) واضح رہے کہ قرآن کریم میں وضاحت یا واضح (یا اس مادہ سے اور الفاظ) نہیں آئے۔ اس میں وضاحت یا واضح کے لیے تفصیل یا مفصل (وغیرہ) الفاظ آئے ہیں۔

ان تشریحات کے بعد قرآن کریم کی طرف آئیے۔ اس میں اس مادہ (ف۔ ص۔ ل) کے الفاظ حسب ذیل معانی میں استعمال ہوئے ہیں۔

۱۔ و لما فصلت الغیر (94/13) جب قافلہ وہاں سے روانہ (جدا) ہوا۔

۲۔ فصالہ فی عامین (14/31) بچے کا دودھ چھڑانا دو سال میں ہے۔

۳۔ ان اللہ یفصل بینھم یوم القیم ۃ (17/22) و دیگر مقامات) اللہ تعالیٰ ان میں قیامت کے دن فیصلہ کر دے گا۔

۴۔ یوم الفصل (21/37) و دیگر مقامات) فیصلہ کا دن

۵۔ قول فصل (13/86) فیصلہ کن بات

۶۔ ہو خیر الفاصلین (57/6)

۷۔ سورہ انعام میں کارگہ کائنات کے مختلف عوامل و عناصر کی تگ و تاز کا ذکر کرنے کے بعد فرمایا۔ قد فصلنا الایاتِ لقوم یعملون (98/6 و 99/6) ہم نے اپنی آیات کی وضاحت ان لوگوں کے لیے کر دی ہے جو علم و بصیرت سے کام لیں۔

۸۔ اسی سورۃ میں ذرا آگے چل کر کفر اور اسلام قبول کنرے کے بنیادی اصولوں کی وضاحت کے بعد فرمایا قد فصلنا الایات لقوم یذکرون (127/6) ہم نے ان آیات کو اس قوم کے لیے واضح کر دیا ہے جو (خدائی راہ نمائی کو) اپنےسامنے رکھنا چاہے۔

۹۔ سورۃ اعراف میں اہل جنت اور جہنم کے اصولی امتیازات کی وضاحت کے بعد کہا۔ ولقد جئنہم بکتب فصلنہُ علیٰ علمٍ ۔۔۔۔۔۔ (53/7) ہم ان کی طرف وہ کتاب لائے ہیں جسے ہم نے ازروئے علم واضح کیا ہے۔

۱۰۔ سورۃ اسرائیل میں گردشِ لیل و نہار اور عدد السین (سالوں کی گنتی) وغیرہ بیان کرنے کے بعد کہا۔ وکل شئی فصلنہُ تفصیلاً (13/17) اور ہم نے ہر شے کی خوب خوب وضاحت کر دی ہے۔

۱۱۔ اسی طرح دیگر مختلف مقامات پر اپنی تعلیم کو واضح طور پر بیان کر دینے کے بعد فرمایا۔ وکذالک نفصل الایت (55/6، 32/7، 174/7، 11/9، 24/10، 28/30، 5/10، 13/2) ان آیات میں احکام کی جزئیات کہیں بھی نہیں آئیں۔ ان کی وضاحت ہی کی گئی ہے۔

۱۲۔ ان معانی کی روشنی میں سورۃ ہود کی پہلی آیت (1/11) کو لیجئے جس میں کہا گیا ہے کہ کتب احکمت ایتہ ثم فصلت من لدن حکیم خبیر ۔ وہ کتاب جس کے احکام کو نہایت حکم بنایا گیا ہے اور ان کی وضاحت خود خدا کی طرف سے کر دی گئی ہے۔

۱۳۔ سورۃ حٰم السجدہ میں قراناً عربیاً (واضح اور فصیح قرآن) کے ساتھ فصلت اٰیتہُ (3/41) آیا ہے۔مطلب بالکل واضح ہے۔ اسی سورۃ میں آگے چل کر کہا گیا ہے کہ ولو جعلنہُ قراناً اعجمیا لقالو لو لا فصلت اٰیتہُ (44/41) اگر ہم اسے عجمی زبان میں نازل کرتے تو یہ اعتراض کر دیتے کہ اس کی آیات واضح کیوں نہیں کی گئیں یہاں فصلت کا مفہوم نکھر کر سامنے آ گیا ہے۔

۱۴۔ سورۃ صٓ میں ہے کہ (حضرت) داود کی حکمت عطا کی گئی اور فصل الخطاب (20/38) معاملات کے فیصلہ کرنے کی صلاحیت

۱۵۔ سورۃ شوریٰ میں کلمۃ الفصل (21/42) آیا ہے جس کے معنی ہیں فیصلہ کن بات

۱۶۔ سورۃ یونس میں قرآن کریم کے متعلق ہے۔ تصدیق الذی بین یدیہِ و تفصیل الکتاب (10/35) اس کے معنی صاف ہیں۔ یعنی قوانین خداوندی کی وضاحت کرنے والی۔ سورۃ یوسف میں ہےتفصیل کل شئیٍ (111/12) یعنی جتنی باتیں اسے میں کہی گئی ہیں، سب واضح اور نکھری ہوتی ہیں۔ ان میں کوئی ابہام نہیں۔ سورۃ انعام میں یہی الفاظ کتاب موسیٰ کے متعلق آئے ہیں۔(155/6 نیز 145/7 میں)

۱۷۔ سورہ اعتراف میں حضرت موسیٰ کو دی گئی نشانیوں کو اٰیت مفصلاتٍ کہ کر پکارا گیا ہے (133/7) یعنی وہ نشانیاں جو حق کو باطل سے الگ کر کے بتادیں۔

۱۸۔ ان آیات کے بعد، آخر میں سورۃ انعام کی اس آیت کو سامنے لایئے جس میں کہا گیا ہے کہ   أَفَغَيْرَ اللَّـهِ أَبْتَغِي حَكَمًا وَهُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكِتَابَ مُفَصَّلًا  ۚ (115/6) کیا میں خدا کے سوا کسی اور فیصلہ کرنے والے کی تلاش کروں، حالانکہ اس نے تمہاری طرف ایسا ضابطہ قوانین نازل کر دیا ہے جو اپنے مطالب میں بالکل واضھ ہے۔ دوسری جگہ اس کی وضاحت تبیاناً لکلِ شئیٍ کہہ کردی ہے۔ یعنی یہ کتاب مبین بھی ہے۔ یعنی اپنے مطالب کو ابھار کر بیان کرنے والی۔ اور مفصل بھی۔ یعنی انہیں نکھا کر بیان کرنے والی۔ ( Clearly And Distinctly ) بیان کرنے والی (مولانا محمود الحسنؒ نے۔ شاہ عبدالقادرؒ کے ترجمہ کی بنا پر (کتاب مفصل) کا ترجمہ ‘‘کتاب واضح’’ کیا ہے۔ مولانا ابولاکلام آزادؔنے اس کا ترجمہ ‘‘کھول کھول کر باتیں بیان کرنے والی’’ کیا ہے۔ شاہ ولی اللہ ؒ نے ‘‘واضح کردہ شد’’ کیا ہے۔ ہم اردو زبان میں انتہائی وضاحت کے لیے کہتے ہیں کہ ‘‘وہ ایک ایک لفظ الگ الگ بولتا ہے’’

ان تشریحات کی روشنی میں یہ حقیقت واضح طور پر سامنے آ جاتی ہے کہ (مولانا) چکڑالوی کی بنیادی غلطی یہ تھی کہ انہوں نے قرٓٓن کریم ‘‘کتاب مفصل’’ ہونے کا مطلب یہ سمجھ لیا کہ اس میں دین کی تمام اصولی احکام کی جزئیات (اردو تفاصیل) بھی دی ہوئی ہیں۔ اسی سے ان کی سوچ کی گاڑی غلط پٹری پر پڑ گئی اور جب مولویں کے ساتھ ان کے مناظرے شروع ہو گئے تو جیسا کہ مناظروں میں ہوتا ہے۔ پندار نفس ضد اور تعصب، بغیاً بینھم (213/2) نے انہیں اس قابل ہی نہ رہنے دیا کہ وہ اپنے مسلک پر نظر ثانی کر سکیں۔ اور ان کی یہی لکیر ان کے متبعین پیٹے جارہے ہیں۔ (ان میں تو کوئی پڑھا لکھا آدمی بھی نظر نہیں آتا) ان کا دعویٰ ان کی زبانی سنیئے۔ کہتے ہیں۔

طلوع اسلام کا مسلک یہ ہے کہ قرآن میں صرف احکام ہیں اور باستثنا کے چندان کی تفصیلات اس میں موجود نہیں۔ مگر بلاغ القرآن کا مسلک یہ ہے کہ اللہ کی کتاب میں احکام معہ تفصیلات موجود ہیں۔

(بلاغ القرآن ۔ فروری 75، صفحہ 25)

قرآن کاتبئین احکام کا انداز

اس کے بعد آئیے آپ ان کے اس دعوےٰ کی طرف کہ قرآن مجید نے اپنے تمام احکام کی جزئیات خود متعین کر رکھی ہیں۔ اس سلسلہ میں آپ پہلے یہ دیکھیئے کہ احکامات کے سلسلہ میں قرآن کریم کا طریق اور انداز کیا ہے۔ اس نے اپنی آیات کو دو قسموں میں قایم کر دیا ہے۔ متشابہات اور محکمٰت (6/3)۔ متشابہات وہ فطری اور مابعد الطبیعاتی بسیط حقائق ہیں جنہیں اس نے تشبیہاً بیان کیا ہے۔ان کے متعلق ہم بعد میں گفتگو کریں گے۔ جہاں تک محکمت کا تعلق ہے یہ قراانی احکام و قوانین ہیں۔ جس طرح احکام و قوانین کی صورت میں ہونا چاہیئے انہیں اس نے بالکل واضح اور محکم انداز میں بیان کر دیا ہے۔ اگر کسی ضابطہ قوانین کے احکام واضح شکل میں نہ ہوں تو وہ ضابطہ قابل عمل نہیں ہو سکتا۔ ان احکام کی یہ شکل نہیں کہ زید ان سے کچھ سمجھے اور بکر کچھ اور۔ دو چار مثالوں سے یہ حقیقت واضح ہو جائے گی۔

۱۔ سورہ النسآ کی دو تین آیات میں اس نے ان رشتوں کی تفصیل دی ہے (یعنی وضاحت کی ہے) جن سے نکاح حرام ہے۔ آپ ان رشتوں پر نگاہ ڈالیئے اور دیکھیئے کہ انہیں کس قدر متعین انداز میں بیان کیا گیا ہے۔ اس قدر متعین انداز میں کہ حرمت علیکم امہتکم (تم پر تمہاری مائیں حرام ہیں) کے ساتھ یہ بھی کہہ دیا کہ ولا تنکحو ما نکح اٰباکم من النسا (23-22/4) ‘‘جن عورتں سے تمہارے باپوں نے نکاح کیا تھا، ان سے بھی نکاح نہ کرو’’ یعنی امھتکم (مائیں) سے چونکہ یہ بات واضح نہیں تھی کہ ان میں سوتیلی مائیں بھی شامل ہیں یا نہیں، اس نے اس کی بھی وضاحت کر دی۔ اس وضاحت کی موجودگی میں ہر شخص پورے حتم و یقین کے ساتھ کہہ سکتا ہے کہ خدا نے سوتیلی اور حقیقی مائوں (دونوں) سے نکاح حرام قرار دیا ہے۔ ایسا نہیں ہو سکتاہے کہ کوئی کہہ دے کہ سوتیلی ماں سے نکاح حرام ہے اور دوسرا کہہ دے کہ نہیں! قرآن کی رو سے اس سے نکاح جائز ہے۔ یہ ہے محکمٰت کا انداز۔

۲۔ سورۃ النسا ہی میں اس نے وراثت کے حصوں کا تعین کیا ہے۔ دیکھئے کہ اس نے کس طرح مختلف وارثوں کے چھوٹے بڑے تمام حصوں کی جزئیات تک کا تعین کر دیا ہے۔ فلاں کا نصف، فلاں کا تہائی، فلاں کا چھٹا، فلاں کا آٹھواں وغیرہ۔ یہ ہے قرآن کی رو سے جزئیات کا تعین۔ یعنی جن احکام کی اس نے جزئیات خود متعین کی ہیں ان جزئیات کی کیفیت یہ ہے۔

۳۔ سورۃ بقرہ (180/2) میں اس نے وصیت کا اصولی حکم دیا ہے ۔ اس کے بعد سورۃ مائدہ میں اس نے طریق کی وضاحت کر دی جس کے مطابق وصیت کو ضبط میں لانا چاہیئے۔ (108-106/5)ان آیات میں آپ دیکھئے کہ اس نے اس طریق کی جزئیات کا کس وضاحت سے ذکر کر دیا ہے۔

4۔ سورۃ بقرہ میں اس نے لین دین کے معاملات کو ضبط تحریر میں لانے کا حکم دیا۔ (83-282/2) ان آیات میں آپ دیکھیئے کہ اس نے کس وضاحت سے بتایا ہے کہ اسے کس طرح لکھا جائے۔ کون لکھے، کون لکھوائے، اس پر کس طرح گواہ مقرر کیے جائیں۔ ان کی شہادت کس طرح قلمبند کی جائے۔ اگر تم حالت سفر میں ہو تو کیا کرو ۔۔۔۔ یہ جزئیات اس قدر وضاحت سے اور متعین طور پر مذکور ہیں کہ آیت (282/2) قرآن مجید کی (غالباً) سب سے لمبی آیت ہے۔ یہ ہے تعین، تبیئنِ جزئیات کا قرآنی انداز۔

۵۔ اس نے نکاح، طلاق، مہر ، عدت وغیرہ سے متعلق احکام دیئے تو دیکھئے ان کی جزئیات کو کس متعین انداز سے بیان کر دیا۔ اس نے روزوں کے احکام دیئے تو دیکھے انہیں کس طرح متعین اندازسے بیان کیا ہے۔ ایک مہینے کے روزے۔ صبح کی سیاہ اور سفید دھاری کے نمایوں ہونے سے لے کر رات تک، کھانے پینے اور جنسی اختلاط کی ممانعت۔ مسافر اور بیار کی سورت میں التوا۔ جس کے لیے روزہ ناقابل برداشت ہو اس کی استثنا۔ یہ تمام جزئیات متعین طور پر بیان کر دیں۔

ان مثالوں سے آپ نے دیکھا کہ جن احکام کی جزئیات قراان کریم نے خود متعین کر دی ہیں ان میں انسانی قیاس آرائیوں کی کوئی گنجائش نہیں چھوڑی۔ ان میں کا ہر حکم واضح اور متعین ہے اور ہر شخص حتمی طور پر کہہ سکتا ہے کہ اس باب میں خدا نے یہ فرمایا ہے۔ نیز جو کچھ اس نے فرمادیا ہے، اس میں کوئی اختلاف نہیں کسی قسم کا تضاد نہیں۔

۶۔ اب آگے بڑھیئے۔ قرآن کریم نے اپنے تمام احکام کی جزئیات کا تعین خود نہیں کیا۔ اکثر اصولاً بیان کر دیئے گئے ہیں۔ ان میں بعض احکام ایسے ہیں جن کی جزئیات کا تعین قرآن ہی کے دیگر متعلقہ احکام کی روشنی میں کیا جا سکتا ہے۔ مثلاً قرآن کریم سے مطلقہ عورت کی عدت کے متعلق کہا گیا ہے کہ عام حالات میں وہ تین حیض ہے۔ (228/2) لیکن اگر وہ حاملہ ہو تو عدت وضعِ حمل تک ہے۔ (4/65)

بیوہ کے معلق ہے کہ اس کی عدت چار مہینے دس دن ہے۔ (234/2) لیکن بیوہ اگر حاملہ ہو تو اس کی عدت کے متعلق کچھ نہیں کہا گیا۔ اس کے لیے کہا جائے گا کہ مطلقہ حاملہ کی عدت پر قیاس کر کے کہا جا سکتا ہے کہ بیوہ حاملہ کی عدت بھی وضع حمل تک ہو گی۔ لیکن اس کے متعلق ہم یہ کہنے کے مجاز نہیں ہوں گے کہ یہ عدت خدا کی مقرر کردہ ہے۔ ہم یہی کہہ سکیں گے کہ یہ ہمارا استبناط یا اجتہاد ہے۔

۷۔ بعض احکام ایسے بھی ہیں جن کی جزئیات کو بطریق استنباط بھی متعین نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ مثلاً قرآن میں امت مسلمہ کے متعلق کہا گیا ہے کہ وَأَمْرُهُمْ شُورَىٰ بَيْنَهُمْ (38/42) ان کے معمالات ان کے باہمی مشورہ سے طے پائیں گے۔ یہاں مشاورت کا اصولی حکم دیا گیا ہے۔ اس کا طریق نہیں بتایا گیا۔ یہ طریق قرآن کی کی دیگر آیات سے مستبط بھی نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ لہذا طریقِ مشاورت امت خود متعین کرے گی۔ اس کے لیے یہ ضروری ہو گا کہ یہ جزئیات قرآن کریم کے کسی اصول، حکم یا قانون سے ٹرائیں نہیں۔ بالفاظ دیگر یہ جزئیات قرآنی حدود کے اندر رہتے ہوئے متعین کی جائیں گی۔

اس سلسلہ میں اس بنیادی حقیقت کا سمجھ لینا ضرور ی ہو گا کہ ۲۔ اور ۳۔ کی صورت میں استبناطِ احکام یا تعین جزئیات کا حق اور اختیار کسی فرد (یا کسی گروہ) کو نہیں دیا جا سکتا۔ خواہ وہ فرد کتنا ہی بڑا عالم، فقیہ، یا مجتہد کیوں نہ ہو۔ یہ حق اور اختار صرف نظام مملکت (خلافت علیٰ منہاج رسالت)کو حاصل ہو گا۔ وہی نظام ان جزئیات کا تعین کرے گا اور وہی ان میں عندالضرورت تغیر و تبدل کا مجاز ہو گا۔ اس کے فیصلے ساری امت کے لیے واجب العمل ہوں گے۔ کیونکہ ان کی حیثیت قوانینِ حکومت کی ہو گی۔ اس سے امت کی وحدت قائم رہے گی۔

خلافتِ راشدہ کے زمانے میں، کسی شخص کے اپنے طور پر فیصلے دینے کا تو سوال ہی پیدا نہیں ہو سکتا تھا۔ اس کے بعد بھی، اس بابت میں ارباب فکر و نظر کی احتیاط کا کیا عالم تھا، اس کا اندازہ ایک واقعہ سے لگایا جا سکتا ہے۔ امام اعظمؒ کا فقہ میں جو مقام ہے اس کے متعلق کچھ کہنے کی ضرورت نہیں۔ مورخ ابن خلکان نے لکھا ہے کہ ایک دن ان کی صاحبزادی نے کہا کہ ابا جان! میں روزہ سے ہوں۔ دانتوں سے خون نکلا اور تھوک کے ساتھ گلے میں اتر گیا۔ روزہ جاتا رہا یا باقی رہا۔ آپ نے فرمایا بیٹی! اپنے بھائی حمادؔ سے پوچھو کہ حکومت کی طرف سے فتویٰ دینے کے مجاز وہ ہیں، میں نہیں، ان حضرت کی احتیاط کا یہ عالم تھا۔ اور اب۔۔۔۔ہر بوالہواس نے حسن پرستی شعار کی۔ جس کا جی چاہا فیصلے کرنے کا مجاز بنا بیٹھا۔ مذہب میں ایسا ہی ہوتا ہے۔

٭۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔٭

اہل قرآن کی جزئیات

ان تصریحات کے بعد، فرقہ اہل قرآن کے مسلک کی طرف آئیے۔ ان کا دعویٰ یہ ہے کہ تمام احکام کی جزئیات قرآن کریم نے خود ہی متعین کر دی ہیں۔ یعنی ان کے نزدیک تصریحات بالا میں شق ۲۔ اور ۳۔ (اسلامی نظام کی طرف سے استبناطِ احکام اور تعین جزئیات) خلاف قرآن ہوں گے۔ اس مقام پر ہمارے سامنے ایک دلچسپ حقیقت آتی ہے۔ (مولانا) چکڑالوی نے اپنے ہاں اسلامی نظام یا خلاف علیٰ منہاج رسالت کا کوئی ذکر نہیں کیا۔ وہ خالص مذہب کی سطح پر سوچتے تھے اور مذہب میں نظام کا تصور ہی نہیں ہوتا۔ یہ یکسر انفرادی اور پرائیویٹ معاملہ ہوتا ہے۔ ان کی وفات کے بعد، ہمارے دور میں، اسلامی نظام کا تصور اجاگر ہوا۔ علامہ اقبالؒ نے اس کا تصور پیش کیا، علامہ اسلم جیرج پوریؒ نے اس کے تشکیلی خطوط کی وضاحت کی۔ اور اس کی عام نشرواشاعت کی سعادت طلوع اسلام کے حصہ میں آئی۔ دین کا یہ تصور اس قدر معقول اور اسلام کے آخری اور مکمل دین ہونے کی دلیل اور برہان تھا کہ قدامت پرست مذہبی پیشوائیت کی مخالفت کے علی الرغم، ارباب کر و نطر نے اسے اپنے قلوب سلیم میں جگہ دے دی۔ اس کے بعد محراب منبر بھی ان اصطلاحات کے اختیار و استعمال پر مجبور ہو گئے اور اسی مجبوری کے ماتحت (مولانا) چکڑالوی کے متبعین کو بھی ان الفاظ کو دہرانا پڑا۔ لیکن اس سے یہ عجیب کشمکش میں گرفتار ہو گئے۔ اسلامی نظامؔ کے نظریہ کے معنی یہ ہیں کہ ہم تسلیم کریں کہ جن احکام کی جزئیات قرآن نے متعین نہیں کیں۔ وہ انہیں اصولِ مشاورت کے مطابق متعین کرے گا۔ اہل قراان کا عقیدہ یہ ہے کہ جملہ احکمات کی جزئیات قرآن کے اندر محفوظ ہیں۔ اس سے یہ سوال سامنے آیا کہ پھر اسلامی نظام کرے گا کیا۔ قرآن نے جو مشاورت کا حکم دیا ہے اس پر عمل کس طرح ہو گا۔؟ دیکھئے وہ اس کشمکش سے نکلنے کی صورت کیا اختیار کرتے ہیں۔ کہتے ہیں۔

آنحضورﷺ کو حکم ہوا۔ شاورھم فی الامر (159/3) اور مومنوں کی صفت بیان ہوئی۔ وَأَمْرُهُمْ شُورَىٰ بَيْنَهُمْ (38/42)۔ دیکھئے! امرؔ میں مشاورت کا حکم دیا گیا ہے۔ اللہ کے حکم میں نہیں۔ حکم کے متعلق تو ارشاد ہوا ہے۔ ان الحکم الّا للہ (57/6، 47-40/12) حکم صرف اللہ کا ہے۔ لا یشرک فی احکمہِ احدا (26/18) اللہ اپنے حکم میں کسی ایک کو بھی شریک نہیں کرتا۔ اس لیے حکم اللہ کا اور جزئیات بندوں کی؟ (العیاز باللہ)

(بلاغ القرآن۔ بابت فروری ۱۹۷۵، صفحہ ۲۶)

اس کے بعد انہیں یاد آ گیا کہ خود لفظ امر کے معنی حکم ہیں۔ اس کا کیا علاج؟ کیا

لفظ امر کا معنی حکم بھی ہے۔ لیکن چونکہ اللہ کے حکم میں کوئی شریک نہیں ہو سکتا کہ وہ اس کی جزئیات متعین کرنے بیٹھ جائے، کہ نمازیں پانچ پڑھی جائیں یا تین یا دو ایا ایک۔ اس لیے شاورھم فی الامر(159/3) میں آمدہ لفظ امرؔ سے اللہ کا حکم مراد نہیں بلکہ وہ معاملات مراد ہیں جو آنحضورﷺ اور آپ کے جانشینوں کو داخلی یا خارجی معاملات میں وقتاً فوقتاً ہنگامی طور پر پیش آتے تھے۔

(صفحہ نمبر ۲۷)

آپ نے غور فرمایا کہ ان حضرات کی خالص مذہب پرستانہ ذہنیت کس طرح پھوٹ پھوٹ کر سامنے آ رہی ہے۔ ظاہر ہے کہ رسول اللہ ﷺ اور آپﷺ کے صحابہؓ نے حکومت خداوندی کو قائم فرمایا تھا۔ اور اس حکومت کے جس قدر معاملات تھے ان سب کا تعلق ‘‘حکم خداوندی’’ سے تھا۔ اس میں ‘‘عبادات’’ اور ‘‘امور مملکت’’ میں کوئی تمیز و تفریق نہیں تھی۔ صحنِ مسجد ہو یا ایوانِ حکومت (بلکہ میدانِ جنگ) ان میں کا ہر معاملہ ‘‘حکم خداوندی’’ کے مطابق طے ہوتا تھا۔ ‘‘عبادات’’ اور امور مملکت کی ثنویت اور مغائرت اس دور کی پیدا کردہ ہے جب حکومتِ خداوندی کی جگہ ملوکیت اور مذہبی پیشوائیت نے لے لی تھی۔ اور یہ حضرات (اہل قرآن) بھی اسی ذہنیت کے مالک ہیں۔ ان کے نزدیک بھی اسلام ایک مذہب ہی ہے۔

اور پھر اس پندار نفس پر غور کیجئے! اگر خلاف علیٰ منہاج نبوت ، یہ فیصلہ کرے کہ نمازیں پانچ پڑھی جائیں یا تین یا دو یا ایک، تو یہ شرک ہو گا، اور کوئی عبداللہ چکڑالوی یا ماسٹر محمد علی رسول نگری یہی طے کرنے بیٹھ جائے تو یہ عین مطابق قرآن ہو گا۔ ۔۔ کوئی بتلائو کہ ہم بتلائیں کیا! ۔۔۔۔۔

لیکن اتنا لکھنے کے بعد ان کے دل میں خود ہی کھٹک پیدا ہو گئی کہ یہ ہم نے کیا کہہ دیا۔ اس کے ازالہ کے لیے فرمایا:

جب خلافتِ الٰہیہ قائم ہو گئی وہ قرآن ہی سے فیصلہ دے گی اور اسے قرآنی جزئیات ہی کے نام سے بصمیم قلب تسلیم کرنا ہو گا۔ (بلاغ القرآن۔ فروری ۱۹۷۵ صفحہ ۲۹)

سوال یہ ہے کہ کیا وہ (خلافت الٰہیہ) نماز، روزہ کے متعلق بھی فیصلہ دے گی یا صرف امورِ مملکت کے متعلق ہی فیصلے دے گی؟ کیا نماز، روزہ، حج، زکوۃٰ وغیرہ ‘‘مذہبی امور’’ اس کے حیطہ اقتدار سے باہر ہوں گے؟ قرآن کریم نے تو ان اربابِ خلافت کے متعلق کہا ہے کہ

الَّذِينَ إِن مَّكَّنَّاهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ أَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَوُا الزَّكَاةَ وَأَمَرُوا بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَنَهَوْا عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ  ۗ ۔ ۔ ۔ ۔ ۔ ۔ ۔ (41/22) ‘‘جب انہیں تمکن فی الارض حاصل ہو گا تو یہ ‘‘اقامت صلوۃٰ’’ اور ایتائے زکوۃٰ ۔ امر بالمعروف و نہی عن المنکر کا فریضہ ادا کریں گے’’۔ لیکن اگر یہ حضرات اس وقت موجود ہوں تو ان سے کہہ دیں گے کہ تمہیں صلوۃٰ و زکوہٰ کو متعلق فیصلہ کرنے کا کوئی اختیار نہیں۔ اور امر بالمعروف و نہی عن المنکر کا دائرہ بھی امور مملکت تک محدود ہے۔ تم اگر اس سے تجاوز کر کے مذہبی امور میں دخیل ہو گے تو مملکت کے خلاف بغاوت کی جائے گی۔ کیونکہ تمہارا ایسا کرنا خلاف قرآن اور شرک ہو گا۔ ان للہ و انا الیہ راجعون

اگر مزید تفصیل میں جانا مقصود ہوتا تو میں بتاتا کہ قرآن کریم میں ‘‘امر’’ دین کے معنوں میں آیا ہے اور اسلامی مملکت دین ہی کی مظہر اور ذریعہ نفاذ ہوتی ہے۔ رسول اللہﷺ سے جب کہا گیا تھا کہ ثُمَّ جَعَلْنَاكَ عَلَىٰ شَرِيعَةٍ مِّنَ الْأَمْرِ فَاتَّبِعْهَا ۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ (18/45) ‘‘پھر ہم نے تمہیں امر کے ایک راستے پر لگا دیا سو تم اسی کا تباع کرو’’ تو اس سے مراد دین خداوندی تھا نہ کہ محض امور مملکت۔ دوسری طرف جب جماعت مومنین سے استخلاف فی الارض (حکومت و مملکت) کا وعدہ کیا گیا تھا تو اس کی غرض و غایت یہ بتائی گئی تھی کہ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَىٰ لَهُمْ (55/24) تاکہ اس سے اس دین کو تمکن حاصل ہو جائے۔ جسے خدا نے ان کے لیے منتخب فرمایا ہے۔ لہذا امر کو دنیاوی امور تک محدود سمجھنا دین سے بے خبری کی دلیل ہے۔ ان تمام امور کی جزئیات متعین کرنا جن کا تعین قرآن کریم نے نہیں کیا، اسلامی نظام پر چھوڑ دیا گیا۔

٭۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔٭

قرآن کے خلاف سنگین الزام

اسے پھر دہرا دیا جائے کہ ان لوگوں کا دعویٰ یہ ہے کہ قرآن کریم نے تمام احکام کی جزئیات خود ہی متعین کر دی ہے۔ قرآن کی متعین کردہ جزئیات کی کیفیت کیا ہوتی ہے۔ وہ کس قدر واضح، صاف اور متعین ہوتی ہے۔ ۔۔۔۔ اس کی مثالیں پہلے دی جا چکی ہیں۔ یہ اس قدر واضح اور متعین ہوتی ہیں کہ ان کے متعلق دو آراکا تصور بھی نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ مثلاً جہاں اس نے کہا ہے کہ فلامہ السدس (11/4) یعنی ماں کا چھٹہ حصہ ہے تو اسے دو نہیں، دو کروڑ آدمی بھی دیکھیں تو اس کے حصہ کو چھٹا حصہ ہی کہیں گے۔ یہ کبھی نہیں ہو گا کہ ایک شخص چھٹا حصہ کہ دے اور دوسرا آٹھواں حصہ۔ اس تصریح کے بعد اب نماز کی ان جزئیات کو لیجئے جسے ان حضرات کے نزدیک قرآن نے متعین کیا ہے۔ (مولانا) چکڑالوی نے قرآن کی آیات (114/11) اور (87/17) سے بتایا ہے کہ اللہ تعالیٰ نے پانچ وقتوں کی نماز کا حکم دیا ہے اور بلاغ القرآن والوں نے انہی دو آیتوں کو درج کرنے کے بعد کہا ہے کہ اللہ تعالیٰ نے ان میں تین وقتوں کی نماز فرض قرار دی ہے اور دونوں نے کہا ہے کہ یہ قرآن کا قطعی فیصلہ ہے۔ یا مثلاً مولانا چکڑالوی نے سورۃ النسا کی آیات (102-101/4) درج کرنے کے بعد کہا ہے کہ خدا نے ان میں حکم دیا ہے کہ نماز کی چار رکعتیں ہیں اور بلاغ القرآن نے انہیں آیات کے درج کرنے کے بعد کہا ہے کہ خدا نے نماز کی دو رکعتیں مقرر کی ہیں۔ اسی طرح مولانا چکڑالوی نے کہا ہے کہ خدا نے ایک رکعت میں دو سجدوں کا حکم دی اہے۔ اور بلاغ القرآن نے بتایا ہے کہ خدا نے ایک رکعت میں ایک ہی سجدہ کا حکم دیا ہے۔

سوچیئے کہ اگر کوئی شخص یہ اعتراض کر دےکہ کیا آپ کے خدا کو یہ کہنا بھی نہیں آتا کہ نماز کے کتنے اوقات ہیںِ کتنی رکعتیں اور کتنے سجدے ہیں۔ تو اس کا کیا جواب دیا جائے گا؟ اگر قرآن کی یہی حالت ہے کہ اس کی ایک ہی آیت سے پانچ وقت اور تین وقت یا چار رکعتیں اور دو رکعتیں یا دو سجدے اور ایک سجدہ ثابت ہو جاتا ہے تو ایسے قرآن کے متعلق (معاذاللہ) کیا تصور قائم ہو گا؟ لیکن ان حضرات کو اس سے کیا غرض کہ ان کی اس قسم کی حرکتوں سے خدا کے متعلق کیا تصور پیدا ہوتا ہے اور قرآن کی کیا حیثیت رہ جاتی ہے۔ انہیں تو ایک جدید فرقہ کی تشکیل اور اس کی امامت سے غرض ہے اور بس!

مندرجہ بالا آیات میں تو پھر بھی صلوۃٰ کے الفاظ آتے ہیں لیکن جب ہم ان کے بیان کردہ ‘‘اذکار صلوۃٰ’’ کی طرف آتے ہیں تو وہاں اس سے بھی زیادہ حیرت افزا اور تاسف انگیز صورت سامنے آتی ہے۔ سورہ نمل میں ہے کہ جب حضرت سلیمانؑ کا گزر وادی نمل پر سے ہوا اور اس قوم کی سربراہ نے اپنے لوگوں سے کہا کہ تم اپنے اپنے گھروں میں چھپ جائو ورنہ سلیمان کا لشکر تمہیں کچل دے گا تو حضرت سلیمانؑ اس کی غلط نگہی پر متبسم ہوئے اور اس کے ساتھ ہی خدا سے دعا کی کہ

  رَبِّ أَوْزِعْنِي أَنْ أَشْكُرَ نِعْمَتَكَ الَّتِي أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيَّ وَعَلَىٰ وَالِدَيَّ وَأَنْ أَعْمَلَ صَالِحًا تَرْضَاهُ (19/27) ‘‘اے میرے رب ! مجھے اس کی توفیق عطا فرما کہ تو نے جس نعمت سے مجھے اور میرے والدین کو نوازہ ہے اس کا شکر اد اکروں اور تیری پسند کے مطابق عمل صالح کروں۔’’ یہی الفاظ کچھ اضافے کے ساتھ سورۃ احقاف (15/46) میں مومنین کی زبان سے کہلوائے گئے ہیں۔ ان مقامات میں نہ کہیں صلوۃٰ کا ذکر ہے، نہ رکوع و سجود کا۔ لیکن ‘‘بلاغ القران’’ والوں کا ارشاد ہے کہ اللہ تعالیٰ نے اس دعا کو رکوع کی حالت میں پڑھنے کا حکم دیا ہے۔ ہم نے صرف ایک مثال پیش کی ہے۔ ورنہ انہوں نے دعائے قبل صلوۃٰ سے اذکار بعد صلوۃٰ تک اسی طرح سے مختلف آیتیں درج کی ہیں اور اس کے بعد کہا ہے کہ یہ قرآن کا مقرر کردہ صلوۃٰ کا طریق۔

اگر یہ حضرات یہ کہتے کہ ہم نے قرآن کریم یں غور و فکر کیا ہے جس کے بعد ہم سمجھتے ہیں کہ نماز میں اس قسم کی دعائیں پڑھنی چاہئیں تو یہ اور بات ہوتی۔ لیکن ان کا کہنا تو یہ ہے کہ یہ خدا کا حکم ہے کہ نماز میں حالتِ قیام میں یہ پڑھو، رکوع میں یہ پڑھو اور سجدہ میں یہ کہو۔ اپنے قیاس کو خدا کا حکم کہہ کر پیش کرنا اتنی بڑی جسارت ہے جس کا تصور بھی نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔۔ انہیں اس کا بھی قطعاً احساس نہیں ہوتا کہ جب کل کو اللہ تعالیٰ یہ پوچھے گا کہ میں نے کب کہا تھا کہ قیام میں یہ آیتیں پڑھو اور رکوع اور سجدے میں یہ آیتیں ، تو اس کا کیا جواب دیا جائے گا؟ قرآنی آیات کے ساتھ اس قسم کا کھیل میرزا غلام احمد کھیلا کرتے تھے۔ (مثلاً) وہ کہتے تھے کہ قرآنی آیت ۔۔ ھوالذی ارسل رسولہ بالھدٰی و دین الحق لیظھرہ علی الدین کلہ ۔۔۔ میں ، مجھے رسول کہہ کر پکارا گیا ہے۔ (براہین احمدیہ صفحہ ۴۹۵ و اعجاز احمدی) وقس علیٰ ذالک۔ لیکن وہ تو اپنے اس قسم کے دعاوی کی دلیل اور مسند یہ پیش کرتے تھے کہ انہیں اس کی بابت خود خدا نے بذریعہ وحی بتایا ہے۔ معلوم نہیں کہ بلاغؔ القرآن والوں کے پاس اس کی کیا سند اور ثبوت ہے کہ خدا نے بذریعہ وحی بتایا ہے۔ معلوم نہیں کہ بلاغ القرآن والوں کے پاس اس کی کیا سند اور ثبوت ہے کہ خدا نے حکم دی اہے کہ تم نماز میں فلاں آیات پڑھا کرو۔ قرآن کریم میں تو ایسا کہیں نہیں آیا’’

چونکہ قارئین طلوع اسلام کے دل میں یہ خواہش ابھرے گی کہ وہ کون سی آیات ہیں جن پر ان کی وضع کردہ نماز مشتمل ہے، ہم نے مناسب سمجھا کہ اس مقالہ کے آخر میں ان کے بیان کردہ اذکار صلوۃٰ درج کر دیئے جائیں۔ قارئین ان آیات قرآنی کو دیکھیں اور پھر سوچیں کہ کیا اللہ تعالیٰ نے ان کے متعلق کسی ایک جگہ بھی یہ کہا ہے کہ انہیں نماز میں یوں پڑھو۔ اس کے بعد آپ سوچیئے کہ ان کے متعلق یہ کہنا کہ یہ خدا کی مقرر کردہ جزئیات ہیں، کتنی بڑی جسارت ہے۔ قرآن کریم نے یہودی فقیہوں کے متعلق کہا تھا کہ يَكْتُبُونَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَـٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ اللَّـهِ (79/2) ‘‘وہ اپنے ہاتھوں سے کتاب لکھتے ہیں اور پھر کہتے ہیں کہ یہ خدا کی طرف سے ہے’’ کیا اسی قبیل کی جسارت ان اہل قرآن کی نہیں کہ یہ اپنے ذہن سے تجویز کرتے ہیں کہ فلاں آیات نماز میں پڑھی جانی چاہیئں اور کہتے ہیں کہ یہ خدا کی تجویز کردہ آیتِ صلوۃٰ ہیں۔ (عیاز بااللہ)

٭۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔٭

فرقہ سازی

قرآن کریم نے بالفاظِ صریح فرقہ بندی کو شرک قرار دیا ہے۔ (32-31/30) اور متعدد آیات میں اس کی سخت مخالفت کی ہے۔ ہماری مذہبی پیشوائیت ان ایات کو لوگوں کے سامنے نہیں لاتی۔ طلوع اسلام نے اسے شد و مد سے دہرایا اور ان کا اتنا چرچا کیا کہ لوگوں نے مولوی صاحبان سے پوچھنا شروع کر دیا کہ ان آیات کی موجودگی میں اسلام میں فرقوں کا کیا جواز ہے؟ اس اعتراض کا کوئی جواب ان سے بن نہیں پڑتا تھا۔ اس سے یہ بڑی ضیق میں تھے کہ کسی وسوسہ انداز نے ان کے کان میں پھونک دیا کہ یہ فرقے نہیں مکاتب فکر ہیں۔ اس سے ان کی باچھیں کھل گئیں۔ اور (یہ تو معلوم نہیں کہ انہوں نے اپنے آپ کو فریب دے لیا یا نہیں لیکن)لوگوں کو اس فریب میں مبتلا کرنا شروع کر دیا کہ ہمارے ہاں مذہبی فرقے نہیں، مکاتب فکر ہیں، عوام بیچاروں کو کیا معلوم کہ مکاتب فکر کیا ہوتے ہیں۔ اور مذہبی فرقے کیا۔۔۔۔ آج کل اس کا چرچا عام کیا جا رہا ہے اور اس طرح کبوتر آنکھیں بند کر کے مطمئن ہو بیٹھا ہے کہ بلی کا خطرہ ٹل گیا ہے۔

مکاتب فکر سے کیا مراد ہے۔

پہلے بتایا جا چکا ہے کہ قرآن کریم نے اپنی آیات کو دو اقسام میں تقسیم کیا ہے۔ متشابہات اور محکمات ۔۔۔۔ آیات متشابہات کا تعلق کائنات اور مابعد الطبیعات کے ان بسیط حقائق سے ہے جنہیں تشبیہی انداز ہی میں بیان کیا جا سکتا تھا۔ ان حقائق کا مفہوم ہر شخص اپنی اپنی فکر کے مطابق سمجھ سکتا ہے اور یہ ظاہر ہے کہ فکر انسانی، انسانی علوم کی وسعتوں کے ساتھ ساتھ وسیع اور بلند ہوتی جاتی ہے اس لیے ان آیات میں بیان کردہ حقئاق کا مفہوم بھی ہر دور میں وسیع ہوتا چلا جاتا ہے۔ ان حقائق ، نیز احکامِ قرآنی کے معارف و مصالح پر اس طرح غور و فکر کرنے والوں کو مفکرین کہا جاتا ہے۔ اس قسم کے فکری اختلافات کی بنا پر کوئی فرقہ وجود میں نہیں آتا۔ مسلم مفکرین میں ابن باجہ، ابن رشد، ابنِ سینا، ابن طفیل، ابن مسکویہ وغیرہ بہت مشہور ہیں۔ آپ دیکھیں گے کہ انہوں نے کوئی مذہبی فرقہ پید انہیں کیا۔ ہمارے دور میں سرسیدؒ اور اقبالؒ کا شمار بھی مشہور مفکرین میں ہوتا ہے۔ ان کے مکاتبِ فکر ( School of Thought ) تو اپنے اپنے ہیں لیکن یہ کسی فرقے کے بانی نہیں ہیں۔

اس کے برعکس فرقہ وجود میں آتا ہے محکمات میں اختلاف کی بنا پر۔ اس میں عقائد کے اختلاف بھی شامل ہیں اور عمال کے اختلاف بھی۔ یہی وہ فرقہ بندی ہے جسے قرآن نے شرک قرار دیا ہے کہا س سے امت کی وحدت ختم ہو جاتی ہے اور اس کے ٹکڑے ٹکڑے ہو جاتے ہیں۔ ان فرقوں کے نشانات تعارف تو الگ الگ ہیں۔ لیکن یہ محسوس طور پر نکھر کر سامنے آتے ہیں۔ نماز کے وقت سے پہلے مسلمانوں کا دو چار ہزار کا مجمع بھی کسی جگہ ہو، تو آپ پہچان نہیں سکیں گے کہ کون کس فرقے سے متعلق ہے۔ لیکن جونہی نماز کی اذان ہو گی تو یہ اٹھ کر الگ الگ مسجدوں کا رخ کر لیں گے اور آپ کو معلوم ہو جائے گا کہ کون کس فرقے سے متعلق ہے۔ مختلف فرقوں کی نمازوں میں بھی فرق ہوتا ہے لیکن تفرقہ کے لیے یہ فرق بھی ضروری نہیں۔ یہ ہو سکتا ہے کہ دو فرقوں کی نمازوں میں کوئی فرق نہ ہو لیکن اس کے باوجود ان میں بعد المشرقین ہو۔ مثلاً ‘‘احمدیوں’’ نے اپنی نماز وہی رکھی جو حنفی مسلمان پڑھتے ہیں۔ لیکن اس کے باوجود انہوں نے اپنی مسجدیں الگ بنائیں۔ نماز میں فرقہ بندی کی بنیاد یہ ہے کہ ایک فرقہ کے مسلمان دوسرے فرقہ کے ساتھ مل کر نماز نہیں پڑھتے۔ یا یوں کہیئے کہ دوسرے فرقہ کے پیچھے نماز نہیں پڑھتے۔ اس لیے ان کی مسجدیں الگ الگ ہوتی ہیں۔ اور جماتیں بھی الگ الگ۔ یوں نماز مختلف فرقوں کا تعارفی نشان بن جاتی ہے۔ امت میں تفریق کی جو پہلی اینٹ رکھی گئی تھی وہ مسجد ہی کی اینٹ تھی جسے قرآن نے ‘‘مسجد ضرار’’ کہہ کر پکارا اور کفر قرار دیا ہے۔ (107/9)

جس طرح باقی مذہبی فرقے، فرقے کے نام سے تلملا اٹھتے ہیں اسی طرح اہل قرآن کے لیے بھی یہ لفظ آتش بہ پیرہن ہو جات اہے۔ وہ بھی اٹھتے بیٹھے کہتے رہتے ہیں کہ ہم فرقہ نہیں۔ چنانچہ بلاغ القرآن نے اپنی اشاعت بابت فروری ۱۹۷۵؁ میں لکھا ہے کہ

طلوع اسلام نے جنوری ۱۹۷۵؁ کے صفحہ ۴۸ پر عنوان قائم کیا ہے ۔ ‘‘فرقہ اہل قرآن’’ اور وہ ہمیں فرقہ کہتے کہتے تھکتا نہیںَ حالانکہ ہم بارہا اعلان کر چکے ہیں کہ ہم فرقہ نہیں ہیں۔

(صفحہ ۲۲)

وہ دوسرے مقام پر لکھتا ہے۔

اگر طلوع اسلام الگ الگ درسوں، الگ کنونشنوں، الگ اسٹیجوں اور الگ بزموں کے باوجود فرقہ نہیں تو بلاغ القرآن صرف قرآن کی فرض کی ہوئی نماز کی ادائیگی کی بدولت فرقہ کس طرح ہو گیا۔

(بلاغ القرآن، بابت دسمبر ۱۹۷۴؁ صفحہ ۳۰)

نماز کے سلسلے میں وہ لکھتا ہے کہ

بعض لوگ کہتے ہیں کہ نماز فرقہ بندی سکھاتی ہے۔ ہر فقہ اپنی نماز سے پہچانا جاتا ہے ، گزارش ہے کہ اس سلسلہ میں انہیں غلطی لگ چکی ہے۔ کیونکہ فرقہ بندی عقائد کے اختلاف سے پیدا ہوتی ہے، نماز سے نہیں

(پمفلٹ۔۔۔ الصلوۃٰ ، صفحہ ۱۴-۱۵)

یہ تو ہمیں معلوم نہیں کہ یہ کون کہتا ہے کہ نماز فرقہ بندی سکھاتی ہے لیکن، جیسا کہ اوپر لکھا جا چکا ہے، ہر فرقہ نماز کی علیحدگی سے پہچانا جاتا ہے۔ یعنی فرقے کی پہچان یہ ہے کہ وہ دوسرے فرقوں کے ساتھ مل کر یا ان کے امام کے پیچھے نماز نہیں پڑھتا۔ اسی لیے ان کی جماعت بھی الگ ہوتی ہے اور مسجدیں بھی الگ۔ ہم پوچھتےیہ ہیں کہ کیا اہل قرآن کی نماز کی صوت یہی نہیں کہ وہ نہ دوسرے مسلمانوں کے ساتھ ملک کر نماز پڑھتے ہیں نہ کسی دوسرے امام کے پیچھے۔ کیا اسی بنا پر انہوں نےاپنی مسجد الگ نہیں بنائی۔ اور کیا اس میں اسی فرقہ کے لوگوں پر مشتمل الگ نماز کی جماعت نہیں ہوتی۔ اگر یہ فرقہ بندی نہیں تو پھر کیا فرقوں کے سر پر سینگ ہوتے ہیں؟ نماز میں علیحدگی کی کیفیت یہ ہے کہ (مثلاً) اہل حدیث اور حنفی فرقوں کی نمازوں میں اختلاف ہے لیکن وہ اختلاف ایسا معمولی سا ہے کہ اگر وہ چاہیں تو ایک دوسرے کے ساتھ مل کر یا دوسرے فرقے کے امام کے پیچھے نماز پڑھ سکتے ہیں۔ لیکن فرقہ اہل قرآن کی نماز کی یہ کیفیت ہے کہ وہ دعائے قبل الصلوۃٰ سے لے کر آخری سلام تک تمام مسلمانوں کی نماز سے یکسر مختلف ہے ٭ ۔ جیسا کہ پہلے بتایا جا چکا ہے (اور اس مقالہ کے آخر میں آپ دیکھیں گے) سورۃ فاتحہ کے سوا، ان کی نماز اور دوسرے مسلمانوں کی نماز میں کوئی چیز بھی مشترک نہیںَ حتیٰ کہ ان کی نماز جنازہ بھی الگ ہے۔ یہ عجیب دلچسپ بات ہے کہ مسلمانو ں میں پہلا فرقہ اہل تشیع کا وجود میں آیا۔ ان کی نماز، دوسرے مسلمانوں کی نماز سے اس قدر مختلف ہے کہ یہ اگر چاہیں بھی تو آپ میں مل کر نماز پڑھ ہی نہیں سکتے۔

٭ [ان کی نماز اور دیگر مسلموں کی نماز میں سورۃ فاتحہ اس کے بعد کوئی سی قرآنی سورۃ اور رکوع و سجود کی تسبیحات (تھوڑے فرق کے ساتھ) مشترک ہیں۔ باقی جزئیات اس قدر مختلف ہیں کہ شیعہ اور غیر شیعہ اکٹھے نماز پڑھ ہی نہیں سکتے]

اور اس کے بعد اب (سردست) آخری فرقہ اہل قرآن کا وجود میں آیا ۔ یہی کیفیت ان کی نماز کی ہے۔ یہ اگر چاہیں بھی تو دوسروں کے ساتھ مل کر نماز پڑھ ہی نہیں سکتے۔ نہ ہی کوئی دوسرا ان کی نماز میں شریک ہو سکتا ہے۔ کیفیت ان کی یہ ہے اور اس کے باوجود کہا یہ جاتا ہے کہ ہم الگ فرقہ نہیں۔ یہ بعینہٖ وہی شکل ہے جو ‘‘احمدیوں’’ نے اختیار کر رکھی تھی اور قریب سو برس سے کہتے چلے آ رہے تھے کہ ہم مسلمانوں سے الگ نہیں ہیں۔

طلوع اسلام کا ذکر

‘‘بلاغ القرآن’’ والے بار بار طلوع اسلام کا ذکر کر کے لوگوں کو دھوکہ دیتے رہتے ہیں۔ ان پر واضح ہونا چاہیئے کہ طلوع اسلام الگ اسٹیجوں، الگ بزموں، الگ کنونشنوں اور الگ درسوں کے باوجود کوئی فرقہ نہیں ہے۔ اس لیے اس نے نماز روزہ وغیرہ میں کوئی نیا طریقہ اختیار نہیں کیا۔ یہ خالص فکری تحریک ہے اس لیے اس میں فرقہ بندی کا شائبہ تک نہیں پایا جاتا۔ اس کے درسوں بزموں کنونشنوں میں ہر فرقہ کے مسلمان شامل ہوتے ہیں اور اپنے اپنے طریقہ پر ارکار اسلام کی ادائیگی کرتے ہیں۔ اس بات میں اس کی شدت احتیاط کا یہ عالم ہے کہ یہ اپنے اجتماعات میں نماز باجماعت کا کوئی اہتمام نہیں کرتا اور ان میں شامل ہونے والوں کو تاکیداً کہتا ہے کہ وہ آس پاس کی مسجدوں میں جا کر نماز پڑھیں۔ وہ ڈرتا ہے کہ آج کا نماز کا الگ اہتمام کل کو کہیں امت سے علیحدگی کا نشان نہ قرار پا جائے۔ ٭

٭ [ہم نے اس گفتگو کو ان لوگوں کی (بزعم خویش) نماز سے متعلق ‘‘قرآنی تفصیلات’’ تک محدود رکھا ہے۔ اسی سے آپ اندازہ کر لیجئے کہ انہوں نے دیگر احکام کی جزئیات کے متعلق بھی کیا گل نہیں کھلائے ہوں گے۔]

ملخص

داستان دراز ہو گئی۔ اس کے سوا چارہ ہی نہیں تھا۔ اس سے آپ نے دیکھ لیا ہو گا کہ اس فرقہ نے قرآن کو کس قدر نقصان پہنچایا ہے ان کے عقیدہ اور عمل کی رو سے:

۱۔ قرآن کریم کا یہ دعویٰ ہی باطل قرار پاجاتا ہے کہ اس میں کوئی اختلافی بات نہیں اور جب اس کا یہ دعویٰ باطل قرار پا جائے تو وہ خود اپنے بیان کے مطابق منزل من اللہ رہتا ہی نہیں

۲۔ قرآن کا دعویٰ ہے کہ وہ نہایت واضح اور روشن کتاب ہے۔ اس میں کسی قسم کا ابہام نہیں التباس نہیں، ریب نہیں، تشکیک نہیں۔ لیکن ان لوگوں نے جس شکل میں قرآن کو پیش کیا ہے اس سے اس کے یہ تمام دعاوی باطل قرار پا جاتے ہیں۔

۳۔ اس سے پہلے کسی فرقہ کے بانی نے بھی اپنے قیاس، اجتہاد یا استبناط کے متعلق یہ نہیں کہا تھا کہ وہ خدا کے ارشادات ہیں (بجز مدعیان نبوت کے) لیکن ان کی صورت یہ ہے کہ یہ اپنے ذہن سے ایک بات تجویز کرتے ہیں ، ویقولون ہذا من عنداللہ اور کہتے یہ ہیں کہ وہ خدا کا حکم اور قرآن کا فیصلہ ہے۔

۴۔ انہوں نے ایک ایسی نماز ایجاد کی ہے جس میں کوئی دوسرا مسلمان ان کے ساتھ شریک ہی نہیں ہو سکتا۔ نہ ہی یہ دوسرے مسلمانوں کے ساتھ مل کر نماز ادا کر سکتے ہیں۔ یہ فرقہ بندی کی شدید ترین شکل ہے۔

اس کے بعد آپ سوچیئے کہ قرآن اور ملت کے خلاف اس سے بڑی دشمنی کچھ اور بھی ہو سکتی ہے؟ اس دور میں قرآنی روشنی بہت دور تک پھیل جاتی اگر یہ لوگ اس کے راستے میں روک بن کر کھڑے نہ ہو جاتے۔

میرا نظریہ اور مسلک

آخر میں ، میں اس کی وضاحت بھی ضروری سمجھات ہوں کہ میں نے اپنی بصیرت کے مطابق ان امور کے متعلق کیا سمجھا ہے۔ واضح رہے کہ میں نے اپنے فہم قرآن کو نہ کبھی حرف آخر قرار دیا ہے نہ سہوو خطا سے منزہ۔ میں نے نہ کوئی الگ فرقہ قائم کیا ہے نہ ہی میں کسی فرقے سے متعلق ہوں۔ نہ ہی میرا، قراان کریم کا ایک ادنیٰ طالب علم انہوں نے کے سوا کوئی اور دعویٰ ہے۔ جو کچھ میں سمجھ سکا ہوں اور جس کی میں تبلیغ کرتا چلا آ رہا ہوں وہ حسب ذیل ہے۔

۱۔ قرآن کریم تمام نوع انسان کے لیے قیامت تک مکمل ، غیر متبدل اور محفوظ ضابطہ حیات ہے۔ اس بنا پر یہ خدا کی طرف سے آخری کتاب اور حضور نبی اکرم ﷺ اس کے آخری نبی اور رسول ہیں۔ وحی کا سلسلہ حضورﷺ کی ذات پر ختم ہو گیا۔

۲۔ قرآن کریم میں احکام و قوانین کے علاوہ کائناتی حقاق بھی بیان کیے گئے ہیں ان حقائق اور احکام قرآنی کے مصالح کو ہر فرد اپنے غور و فکر کی رو سے سمجھ سکتا ہے۔ مختلف افراد اور مختلف زمانوں میں اس فکر میں اختلاف ہو سکتا ہے۔ لیکن اس اختلاف کی وجہ سے امت میں کوئی تفریق نہیں پیدا ہونی چاہیئے۔

۳۔ جہاں تک قرآنی احکام کا تعلق ہے۔ انہیں اس نے نہایت واضح اور محکم انداز میں بیان کر دیا ہےا ن میں نہ کسی قسم کا اختلاف اور تضاد ہے نہ ابہام و التباس

۴۔ ان احکام میں بعض ایسے ہیں جن کی جزئیایت تک بھی قرآن نے خود متعین کر دی ہیں۔ یہ جزئیات بھی نہایت واضح ، روشن اور غیر مبہم ہیں۔ دوسرے احکام ایسے ہیں جنہیں اصولی طور پر دیا گیا ہے۔ اور مقصد اس یہ ہے کہ ان جزئیات اسلامی نظامِ مملکت خود متعین کرے، اس شرط کے ساتھ کہ وہ قرآن کے کسی اصول، حکم یا تعلیم سے ٹکرائیں نہیں۔ ان جزئیات میں زمانے کے تقاضوں کے ساتھ عندالضرورت تبدیلی ہو سکتی ہے۔ لیکن ان کا تعین ہو یا تغیر و تبدل، اس کا اختیار صرف اسلامی نظام کو حاصل ہے۔ کسی فرد یا کسی گروہ کو نہیں۔

۵۔ ان جزئیات کو سب سے پہلے نظام اسلامی نے عہد رسالتمابﷺ و خلافت راشدہ میں متعین کیا۔ امت کی بدقسمتی سے یہ نظام کچھ عرصہ کے بعد باقی نہ رہا۔ اور اس طرح امت کی مرکزیت ختم ہو گئی۔ اور دین مذہب میں بدل گیا۔ اس زمانے میں بعض حضرات کی ذاتی کوششوں کی بنا پر صدر اول کے ان فیصلوں کو زبانی روایات کی رو سے جمع اور مرتب کیا گیا۔ انہیں روایات کے مجموعے کہا جاتا ہے۔

۶۔ ان مجموعوں میں وضعی روایات بھی شامل ہو گئی ہیں۔ میرے نزدیک ان کے پرکھنے کا معیار یہ ہے کہ جو روایات کسی شکل میں بھی قرآن کریم سے ٹکرائیں، ان کے متعلق سمجھا جائے کہ وہ رسول ﷺ کے اراشات نہیں۔ انہیں حضورؐ یا صحابہؓ کی طرف غلط منسوب کر دیا گیا ہے۔ جو اقوال واعمال قرآن سے نہ ٹکرائیں، انہیں صحیح تسلیم کر لیا جائے۔ واجح رہے کہ میں احادیث رسول ﷺ کا منکر نہیں۔ میں صرف یہ کہتا ہوں خواہ جو روایات قرآن کے خلاف ہیں، رسول اللہ ﷺ کی طرف ان کی نسبت غلط ہے۔ وہ حضورﷺ کے ارشادات نہیں ہو سکتے۔

۷۔ مسلمانوں میں اس وقت متعدد فرقے پیدا ہو چکے ہیں اور یہ صورت قرآن کے خلاف اور دین کے منافی ہے۔ قرآن کا تصور وحدتِ امت کا ہے۔ لیکن امت میں وحدت صرف اسلامی نظام کے ذریعے پیدا ہو سکتی ہے۔ لہذا ہماری کوشش یہ ہونی چاہیئے کہ وہ نظام پھر سے متشکل ہو جائے۔

۸۔ یہاں سے یہ سوال سامنے آتا ہے کہ جب تک وہ نظام قائم نہ ہو ہم کیا کریں ۔ اس سللہ میں میرا نظریہ اور مسلک یہ ہے کہ مختلف فرقے جس جس طریق سے ارکان اسلام کی پابندی کرتے چلے آ رہے ہیں، ان سے کسی قسم کا تعرض نہ کیا جائے۔ نہ ان میں کوئی تبدیلی تجویز کی جائے اور نہ کوئی نیا طریقہ وضع کیا جائے۔ ایسا کرنے سے بجز اس کے کہ امت میں مزید انتشار پیدا ہو کوئی مفید نیتجہ مرتب نہیں ہو سکتا۔ جیسا کہ میں نے ابھی ابھی کہا ہے ، اس قسم کا اختیار صرف اسلامی نظام کو حاصل ہے۔ کسی فرد یافرقے کو حاصل نہیں۔ اپنے اس نظریہ کے مطابق میں خود بھی ارکان اسلام کی پابندی دوسرے مسلمانوں کی طرح کرتا ہوں اور جو لوگ میری بات سنتے ہیں، ان سے بھی یہی تاکید کرتا ہوں کہ وہ ان کی پابندی اسی طریق سے کرتے چلے جائیں، البتہ جو عقائد یا شعائر قراان کے خلاف نظر آئیں ان کی نشاندہی کر جائے اور ان کی جگہ قرآن کی صحیح تعلیم کو عام کیا جائے۔ میں قریب چالیس سال سے یہی کچھ کرتا چلا آ رہا ہوں۔ اور یہی تحریک طلوع اسلام کا مقصود و منتہیٰ ہے۔

۹۔ تحفظ ناموس رسالتﷺ میرے ایمان کا جز اور قرآن کریم کے بلند و بالا و منفرد مقام کا عام کرنا میری زندگی کا مشن ہے۔ جہاں ان پر کسی قسم کی زد پرتی ہے، اپنی استطاعت اور استعداد کے مطابق اس کی مدافعت کی کوشش کرتا ہوں ‘‘ٓاحمدیوں’’ اور فرقہ اہل قرآن کے خلاف میری جدوجہد کا جذبہ محرکہ بھی یہی ہے ارو مقصود و منتہیٰ بھی یہی۔ میری کسی سے نہ ذاتی دشمنی ہے نہ جذبہ انتقام، اس لیے میں ان بحثوں میں ذاتیات پر نہیں اترا کرتا۔

۱۰۔ آخر میں، میں اسے پھر دہرا دوں کہ امت میں دین کے قیام کی صورت قرآنی نظام کے قیام کے سوا کچھ نہیں، وہی امت میں وحدت پیدا کرے گا اور اسے ایک طریق پر چلائے گا۔ امت کا موجودہ انتشار گروہ سازیاں فر قہ بندیاں نئے نئے اختلافات کی نمود و نئی نئی نمازوں کی اختراع ، اردو میں نماز، یہ سب اس لیے ہے کہ امت میں قرآنی نظام باقی نہ رہا۔ وہ نظام قائم ہو گیا تو یہ سب افتراق و انتشار ختم ہو جائے گا۔

رات کے ماتھے پہ افسرہ ستاروں کا ہجوم

صرف خورشیدِ درخشاں کے نکلنے تک ہے!

تتمہ

فرقہ اہل قرآن کی نماز

۱۔ تین وقتوں کی نماز۔ اذان کی ضرورت نہیں۔ اللہ اکبر کہنا خلافِ قرآن ہے۔

۲۔ ایک نماز میں دو رکعتیں

۳۔ ایک رکعت میں ایک سجدہ

۴۔ اذکار صلوٰۃ۔ (جو ان کے شائع کردہ پفلٹ الصلوٰۃ میں درج ہیں)

دعائے قبل صلوٰۃ معہ تکبیر صلوٰۃ

بسم اللہ الرحمن الرحیم۔ رب ادخلنی مدخل صدق و اخرجنی مخرج صدق واجعل لی من الدنک سلطانا نصریا ۔ ان اللہ کان علیا کبیرا ہ ۔

اذکارِ قیام

اسما حسنیٰ اور تسبیح

ھواللہ الذی لا الہ الا ہو عالم الغیب والشہاد ۃ ھوالرحمن الرحیم ۔ ھواللہ الذی لا الہ الا ہو ۔ الملک القدوس السلام المومن المھیمن العزیز الجبار المتکبر ۔ سبحان الہ عما یشرکون ۔ ھواللہ الخالق الباری المصور لہ الاسما الحسنیٰ یسبح لہ ما فی السموٰت والارض و ہوا لعزیز الحکیم ۔

حمد استعانت و استغفار

بسم اللہ الرحمن الرحیم ۔ الحمد للہ رب العالمین ۔ الرحمن الرحیم ہ مالک یوم الدین ایاک نعبدو و ایاک نستعین ہ اھدنا الصراط المستقیم ۔ صراط الذین انعمت علیھم غیر المغضوب علیھم ۔ والضالین ۔ ربنا اٰتنا فی الدنیا حسن ۃ و فی الاٰخر ۃ حسن ۃ وقنا عذاب النار ۔ سمعنا و اطعنا غفرانک ربنا و الیک المصیر ۔ ربنا لا تواحذانا ان نسینا او اخطانا ربنا ولا تحمل علینا اصرا کما سمعتہ علی الذین من قبلنا ۔ ربنا ولا تحملنا مالا طاق ۃ لنا بہ ۔ واعف عنا ۔ اغفرلنا و ارحمنا انت مولٰنا فانصرنا علی القوم الکٰفرین ۔ ربنا لا تزغ قلوبنا بعد اذ ھدیتنا وہب لنا من لدنک رحم ۃ ۔ انک انت الوھاب ۔ ربنا انک جامع الناس لیوم لا ریب فیہ ۔ ان اللہ لا یخلف المیعاد ۔ ربنا اننا امنا فاغفرلنا و ذنوبنا وقنا عذاب النار ہ ربنا اغفرلنا ذنوبنا و اسرار فی امرنا و ثبت اقدامنا و انصرنا علی القوم الکٰفرین ۔ ربنا افرغ علینا صبرا و توفتا مسلین ۔ ربنا امنا فاغفرلنا و ارحمنا و انت خیر الراحمین ۔ رب اغفر و ارحم و انت خیر الرحمین ۔ مستقرا و مقاما ۔ ربنا وسعت کل شئ رحم ۃ و علمنا فاغفر للذین تابو و اتبعو سبیلک و قھم عذاب الجھیم ۔ ربنا و ادخلھم جنت عدن التی و عدتھم ومن صلح من ابآھم وازواجھم و ذریتھم انک انت العزیز الحکیم ۔ وقھم السیات ومن تق السیات یومئذ فقد رحم ۃ و ذالک ہھو الفوز العظیمہ

اذکار رکوع انابت الی اللہ

رب اوذعنی ان اشکر نعمتک التی انعمت علی و علی والذی و ان اعمل صالحا ترضہ و اصلح لی فی ذریتی انی تبن الیک فانی من المسلمین ربنا علیک توکلنا و الیک انینا و الیک المصیر ۔ ربنا لا تجعلنا فتن ۃ الذین کفرو واخفرلنا ربنا ۔ انک انت العزیز الحکیم

اذکار سجدہ۔ تسبیح اور حمد

سبحن ربنا ان کان وعدُ ربنا لمفعولاً ۔ الحمد للہ الذی لم یتخذ ولدا و لم یکن لہ شریک فی الملک و لم یکن ل ۃ ولیٰ من الذی ربنا اصرف عنا عذاب جھنم ان عذابھا کان غراماً ۔ انھا سائات مستقراً و مقاماً ہ ربنا ھب لنا من ازواجنا و ذریتنا قر ۃ اعین واجعلنا للمتقین اماماً ۔

اذکار بعد الصلوٰۃ

رب اعوذبک من ھمزات الشیٰطین ۔ وا عوذبک رب ان یحضرون ۔ ربنا ما خلقت ھذا باطلا ۔ سبحنک فقنا عذاب النار۔ ربنا انک من تدخل النار فقد اخزیتہ وما للظلمین من انصار۔ ربنا اٰتنا سمعنا منادیا ینادی للایمان ان اٰمنو بربکم فامنا ربنا فاغفرلنا و ذنوبنا و کفرعنا سیاتنا و توفت معہ الابرار ۔ ربنا و اتنا ماوعدتنا علی رسلک و لا تخذنا یوم القیم ۃ ۔ انک لا تخلف المیعادہ

رسولوں پر سلام

سلام علی المرسلین ۔ الحمد للہ رب العالمین ۔

حاضر مومنوں پر سلام

سلام علیکم کتب ربکم علی نفسہِ الرحم ۃ لا انہ من عمل منکم سو لجھال ۃ ثم تاب من بعدہٖ و اصلح فانہ غفور رحیم ۔

صلوٰۃ میت کے اذکار

ربنا اغفرلنا و لا خواننا الذین سبقونا بالایمان ولا تجعل فی قلوبنا غلا للذین امنو ربنا انک رئوف رحیم (10/59)

طلوع اسلام

ان لوگوں سے صرف اتنا پوچھیئے کہ ان میں سے کسی ایک ذکرؔ کے متعلق بھی خدا نے کہا ہے کہ اسے نماز کے قیام، رکوع، سجدہ وغیرہ میں پڑھا جائے۔ اگر اس نے ایسا نہیں کہا توآپ کس طرح کہتے ہیں کہ خدا نے ایسا حکم دیا ہے۔ یہ خدائی اختیارات کا حامل بن جاتا نہیں تو اور کیا ہے؟

لیکن ان لوگوں سے قطع نظر، ہم ان سادہ لوح مسلمانوں سے، جو ان کے اس چکر میں پھنس کر ان کی تجویز کردہ نمازؔؔ کو خدا کی مقرر کردہ صلوٰہ سمجھنے لگے ہیں دل کے پورے سوزو گداز کے ساتھ یہ کہنا چاہتے ہیں کہ آپ نے کبھی سوچا بھی کہ آپ کو ان لوگوں نے کس مقام پر لا کھڑا کر دیا ہے۔ آپ دنیا کے ستر کروڑ مسلمانوں سے کٹ کر رہ گئے ہیں۔ پاکستان ہی نہیں۔ آپ دنیا کے کسی ملک میں ، کسی مسجد میں بھی مسلمانوں کے ساتھ نماز میں شامل نہیں ہو سکتے۔ حتیٰ کہ حریم کعبہ میں بھی ان کے ساتھ مل کر نماز نہیں پڑھ سکتے۔ کیونکہ آپ کی نماز ہی دنیا جہان سے نرالی ہے۔ حتی کہ آپ نماز جنازہ تک میں باقی مسلمانوں کے ساتھ شریک نہیں ہو سکتے۔ سوچیئے کہ انہوں نے کس چابک دستی سے آپ کا رشتہ ساری امت سے منقطع کر دیا ہے۔ جو نماز جمہور مسلمان پڑھ رہے ہیں وہ کون سی کافرانہ اور مشرکانہ ہے۔ جو انہوں نے آپ یہ پٹی پڑھا کر شجر ملت سے کاٹ کر رکھ دیا ہے۔ ہمارے زمانے میں ‘‘احمدیوں’’ نے اپنا رشتہ مسلمانوں سے منقطع کیا تھا۔ لیکن انہوں نے مسلمانوں سے کٹ کر اپنی الگ امت بنا لی، سوچیئے کہ آپ مسلمانوں سے الگ ہو کر کیاکریں گے؟ لہذا، میری آپ سے درد بھری پکار یہ ہے کہ آپ اپنی حالت پر نظر ثانی کریں۔ اللہ کے حضور اپنے اس جرم عظیم کی معافی مانگیں (کہ اس کے ہاں تفرقہ شرک ہے اور شرک ظلم عظیم) اور شجرِ ملت سے پیوستہ رہیں۔ اس کی اولین علامت نماز میں شرکت ہے۔ جس فرقہ کی نماز بھی آپ کو آتی ہے اس کے ساتھ مل کر نماز پڑھہیں۔ اور دیگر فرقوں کے ساتھ نماز پڑھنے میں بھی کوئی حرج نہ سمجھیں، یہی سلامتی کی راہ ہے۔

میں نے یہ مقالہ آپ احباب کی بہی خواہی کے لیے لکھا ہے، ورنہ بلاغ القرآن سے کسی بحث میں الجھنے کی نہ مجھے فرصت ہے، نہ ضرورت۔

والسلام

پرویزؔ

1,118 total views, no views today

(Visited 310 times, 5 visits today)

What is the genuine End: The Individual or The State? – Ghulam Ahmad Parwez – Idara Tolue Islam

 

IMPORTANT NOTES

English-speaking readers may find the following explanation of terms used in this pamphlet useful:

Allah: It is the Arabic word for The One God. It is a misnomer as God has no names, only attributes.

Deity: A god/God or goddess, Divinity. From Middle English deite, from Old French, from Late Latin deitas (stem deitat-), from Latin deus, god.

Deen: It is a term with no exact English equivalent. It means “Way of Life”, and in the Islamic context, is a social system based on Qur’anic values.

Jagannath: It is also known as Jagannatha, Juggernaut, Juggernnath, and Juggernnatha. In Hinduism it is a title of the deity Krishna, a huge wagon on which an idol of the god Krishna is drawn in procession. [From Hindi Jagannath, from Sanskrit Jagannatha: Jagat-, world+nathas, lord.] In Hindu mythology the chariot of Jagannath is specifically a vehicle used in an annul procession in Puri Town, in the Indian State of Orissa and is a symbol used for the owner of the world.

Kaafir: Literally “unbeliever”. According to Sura 5, Verse 44, those who do not live by the Laws as revealed in the Qur’an are Kaafirs.

Muhammad: The name Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, is generally followed by the salutation “Peace Be Upon Him”. As this (“Peace Be Upon Him”) is not used in the Qur’an, and for the sake of brevity it is not used as such in this pamphlet; it has been indicated as PBUH or pbuh. However, it should be implicit that, as mentioned in Sura Al-Saaffaat 37, Verse 181, we do convey Peace Upon all the Messengers of Allah, and Praise be to Allah, the Originator and the Creator of the Universe.

Nubuwwah: It is the reception of the revelation of Divine Guidance by anbiya or rusul. It ended with Muhammad (PBUH). The Guidance revealed to him is preserved and enshrined fully and exactly in the Qur’an. But the function of risalah, or the delivery of the Divine Message to all mankind and the establishment of a social order in accordance with its principles, has devolved upon the nation or Ummah that believes in that Book, that is, the Qur’an.

Shirk: It is the only unforgivable sin in the Qur’an. It is the association of partners with Allah, whether it be the human world or the physical world or the obedience to laws in contradiction to those revealed in the Qur’an. This includes creating divisions within the Muslim community through sectarianism.


What is the Genuine End: The Individual or The State?

The history of mankind makes tragic reading. Down through the ages we come across a series of sequences of the rise, growth, decline and fall not only of nations but also of their civilizations and cultures. The basic but the most intriguing question of the general aspect of mankind has always been whether the Individual for the State or the State exists for the Individual. In other words, “What is the real aim and what are the means to achieve it?” Many renowned researchers and erudite thinkers have penned down their discourses on this subject. I a humble student of Qur’an, present here ‘what the Qur’an has said on the subject.

Man is a social being with the basic to live in the company of other men. He is gregarious by nature and, in the words of the renowned western thinker, Nietzsche, he can become human only when he is in the company of other men. Our experience also stands proof to this reality. If a human child soon after birth, is left in a jungle, without the supervision of any human, and some animals bring him up, he will remain animalistic in his behaviour for the rest of his life. He will never attain the posture and status of humanity, though he would be just like other humans in the pattern of his figure and form.

Look at another aspect of human life. Of all the punishments the human mind could devise, solitary confinement is the most severe, the most cynical, and the most ironical. The cruelest criminals of the strongest nerves, not afraid of the death sentence even, start crying when they are kept in solitary confinement, even though there be no physical suffering. Have you ever thought of the phenomenon that the concept of ‘chastisement in grave’ is more terrifying than that of the scene of the ‘resurrection day’? Its root cause is nothing but solitary confinement. In the grave the dead body is in a solitary state, whereas there are tens of thousands of men, lurking and hovering on the ‘resurrection day’. Supporting this contention, one of the sayings goes that “the crowd of the dead is nothing but rejoicing of a festivity”. Another old proverb says “man is the remedy of man”. The Urdu word for ‘society’ is ‘Mu’aashra’ which has the component ‘ashra’(the Arabic term for number 10) signifying the fact that it takes two digits to make number ten. The implication is that ‘society’ is formed by individuals coming together.

Tribal Life

Family was the stepping stone of collective life in the very early period of human life. Dependence on family satisfied the cultural and social needs of the individuals. When the family multiplied a bit, it took the form of a tribe. Tribal life was nomadic, wandering and traversing here and there, every day, every morning and every evening. Therefore, there was no question of any specific area reserved for tribes. When they first started keeping flock and then opted for agriculture economy, the question of specified and demarcated areas arose: this piece of land belongs to so and so a tribe, that meadow to such and such a clan. Thus developed the concept in the human mind that slowly and gradually took the form of a country or a land of birth. People started saying: “This is my country; that is our country.” Nature never demarcated such boundaries on the surface of the earth; these are man-made.

Prior to this demarcation of boundaries on the face of earth, self-preservation was the main urge of life; it was maximally extendable to the preservation of health, home and wealth. Now it has extended and has covered the safety and security of ‘land of birth’ or country. In other words, the question of preservation had not remained limited to safe guarding the individuals; nonetheless it has more intensely involved the safety and security of the country.  For deciding mutual disputes of individuals and for defending the country, the need of a collective full-fledged authority was a must. This produced the concept of governance or the idea of the State Authority. For a long time, the idea of politico-cultural life of the men remained restricted to country and its governance. Thereafter, Greek scholars, especially Plato (c. 428-347 BC) presented another idea, which is termed as State. If looked at generally (but nay, to me it is a fact that) State is but an establishment of governance in a country. But the political philosophy made such an addendum to it that it revolutionized its concept. Initially it was a simple issue: country meant a specific track of land, its defence meant the safety and security of the home and wealth of its inhabitants. This was achieved through a system, called rulership. When it was transformed into State, the questions arose:

  • What is the mutual relation of the State and the Individual?
  • Which of these two is the means and which one is the end?
  • And the like.

These questions generated various theories, such as:

  1. Monistic Theory, which means the individuals are the integral part of the State; they do not enjoy their own separate entity
  2. Monadistic Theory, through which it is accepted that State is nothing but a conglomeration of individuals
  3. Dualistic Theory, which means the individuals have their own separate distinct existence but they are dependent upon the State or Society for their betterment and welfare.

So far, so good. But later on another theory was put forth, which established the State as an end in itself. This theory is called Idealistic Theory or Absolute Theory. It is not my intention here to expose, elaborate and illustrate the Theory of State from the political science point of view. My concern in this discourse is the mutual relation of State with Individual, so I will not deliberate upon the details of the various theories of the State. After this brief introduction of the various theories, I want to move directly to my topic. Since the Idealistic Theory is basically related to the topic under discussion, a detailed description of it is necessary. Hobbes (1588-1679), an English political philosopher and thinker initiated the basic concept of this theory: individuals, in the real sense, are the slaves of the State. And Hegel, the German philosopher, provided a complement to this theory.

Hegel’s Theory of State

Hegel (1770-1831), a German philosopher, insists that “the State possesses an ‘organic’ unity, which ‘is dialectic’; a unity of contraries. It not only allows but requires the strongest tensions and oppositions.” It has its own separate entity and unique personality. Like every living and conscious being, it has its own aspirations, passions, and intentions. Its rights and obligations are finite. “There is no longer any moral obligation for the State. If there is any duty of the State it is to preserve itself.” If there is a clash between the individual and the State, the State will stand justified.

The State enjoys absolute rights. Cassirer, a renowned Americo-German thinker, has explained this theory of Hegel’s in the following words:

State is the self-certain absolute mind, which acknowledges no abstract rules of good and bad, shameful and mean, craft and deception. (Myth of the State, P. 264)

He also writes in the same book:

It is generally acknowledged and well known principle that the particular interest of the State is the most important consideration. The State is the spirit that dwells in the world and realizes itself in the world through consciousness, while in nature the spirit actualizes itself only as the other of itself, as dormant spirit. It is the course of God through the world that constitutes the State. When conceiving the State, not of particular institutions, but one must much rather contemplate the Idea, God as actual on earth, alone. (Myth of the State, P. 265)

Hegel propounded this theory in the 19th century (in 1801) and slowly it spread in the entire world. Rumelin, Chancellor of Tubingen University, wrote in 1875 that:

The State is autocratic. Self regard is its appointed duty; the maintenance and the development of its own power and well-being. Egoism – if you call this egoism – is the supreme principle of all politics. The State can only have regard to the interest of any other State so far as this can be identified with its own interest. Self devotion is the principle for the individual; self assertion for the State. The maintenance of the State justifies every sacrifice, and is superior to every moral rule. (R. H. Murray, The individual and the State, 216)

From the above-mentioned illustrations, it can be seen that, according to this theory, Divine Rights are given to the State. That is why this type of thought and this kind of procedure are known as Divinisation of State i.e., to make the State a god. In this way the State becomes a lord, and its individuals its worshipers. This has become a modern religion and has its own beliefs and code of conduct. In this religion, the State attains the status of god.

As has been said earlier, Hegel propounded this theory, which slowly and gradually spread in the world and now has attained the status of “religion” all over the world. The terms would be different, the words would also be variant, but politically the State, in the real sense, enjoys the same status every where. Every where the word State is talked of as if it is really a living personality, having the status of a deity, of a god or of a lord. It was the same concept of the present-day-fashioned deities about whom Dr. Muhammad Iqbal (1876-1938), the Muslim thinker, said that the concept of ‘country’ is the biggest deity of the modern day. The position of the Divinisation of State is that whenever it is said ‘it is the demand of the State’, no body dares object it or criticize it, not utter a single word against it. Compared to the superiority of its order or its demand, the individual’s interest, expediency, demand, aspiration, desire and passion carry no weight. The individuals come into being to be the slaves to the State, to be the means to accomplish its demands. Individuals hold no will. It is the State that enjoys universal will and supreme power. The individuals should be prepared to lay down their lives for it. Whenever the State should make a demand, it is the duty of the individual to accomplish it unhesitatingly. Whatsoever it demands, he should humbly present it to the State, even though it is life itself. Life is no exception.

For the last so many years, this position of the State has been so well propagandized that the thinking faculties of people appear to be paralyzed. Whenever it is said ‘it is the demand of the State ’or ‘it is the order of the State’, no one thinks or asks any one as to ‘where is that State which has issued this order? Where does it live? Where can it be found?’ Is there any possibility to meet it so that it could be asked whether it has issued this order? Neither any one asks, nor any one answers, but it is the State that continues implementing its orders. And it is the people that continue blindly following them. The Deity of the State and the concept of its absolute powers dwell sacredly in the hearts of the people. It is surprising that men demanding evidence for the existence of God unequivocally accept the ‘existence’ of the State. It is as if it is an established reality that they obey with no arguments, no reason or rhyme.

Reality of the State

If one calmly analyzes the elusive entity of State one has accepted without any reason or rhyme, one will come across the same phenomenon, which Sultan Mahmood of Ghazna, Afghanistan, found in the temple of Soumnat, a city on the western coast of India. When Mahmood conquered Soumnat in 12th century, varying supranatural fictions about the statue of Soumnat, were wide spread among the masses. The most amazing among them was ‘when people pray to it for their boons, it answers them and everyone can hear it answering’. Mahmood was a monotheist; he could not be trapped in such deceitful jugglery. He cast a deep eye at the form, structure of the temple and the statue. All of a sudden he perceived the reality and with one stroke he broke the back wall into pieces. He saw Hindu priests sitting there to answer prayers. Likewise when you remove the veil of the statue of the State, one finds a few authority-vested individuals sitting behind this curtain, holding the contract of the rulership as the legal basis of all civil power. Their orders are the orders of the State, their decisions and judgements are the decisions of the State, their interests are the interests of the State, and their demands become the demands of the State. These authority holders, in the name of Divinisation of the State, get themselves worshiped by individuals of society. With this kind of analysis i.e., removing the curtain of the State, you will find no separate existence of State in the world. It remains nothing but an abstract idea. The concrete reality is nothing except that it is a country and has a Governing body vested with power and authority. Look at it again and again and you will find these two solid things in this idol-temple of the State; there is no third thing in it. The fact of the matter is that when autocracy became notorious, the men’s lust of power and exploitation created another mode of governance and called it State, which had become notorious in the garb of dictatorship and monarchy. Under the imaginative piety robes, it was assigned the status of Divinisation of the State. Whatsoever be the system of governance, it will have the same character and essence of the will of monarchy. In the Dark Ages, the king used to issue orders in his name. And now in this age of modern civilization, the same orders are issued in the name of the State, which has no separate existence except the will of the ruling authority. The orders of those days were by the authority holders and the same prevails today. In both the systems the authority wielded the same status and position. The only difference is that when the orders were issued in the name of the king, he used to accept their responsibility and the subjects knew it well who was responsible for those orders. Now the orders that are passed in the name of the State, neither is there any one to accept their responsibility, nor can it be determined: who is responsible for them. In those days the king could have a bad name because of his wrong orders; now such orders do not defame any body because these are from the State, which is an abstract idea, has no external existence, and exists in the minds of people alone. In the dark ages, such a kind of elusive persona holding power was called deity or god, now it is called State. As neither can any one see these deities or gods, nor can any one criticize their orders, similarly neither can any one see the goddess of the State, nor can criticize its orders. The people, in those days, were crushed under the authority of the king, the chariot of Jagannath, and now are sacrificed on the altar of the goddess of the State. The objective is the same. It was the satisfaction of the blood-sucking passions of the priests of the goddesses, and now is the satisfaction of the State. The difference is of words and the terms used. Erich Fromm (1900-1980), a German born renowned American psychologist, in his book Escape From Freedom, has shed light on the effective use of language( words ) in modern times:

Never have words been more misused in order to conceal the truth than today. Betrayal of allies is called appeasement, military aggression is camouflaged as defense against attack, the conquest of small nations goes by the name of a pact of friendship, and the brutal suppression of the whole population is perpetrated in the name of National Socialism. (PP. 300-301)

We want to add to it that the monarchy of the ancient times now has been concealed in the term State. It has been made ambiguous to the extent that no clear conception of the State can come to mind. In spite of this fact, this deceitful doctrine has been made such a reality that individuals are unhesitatingly sacrificed for it. And it is all done on the basis that individuals exist for the State. The question is ‘what is the proof that individuals exist  for the State?’ Its answer lies in a simile of Aristotle’s.

Jugglery of Similes

Keep in mind that the wrong use of similes has wrought such a loss and harm to the world of humanity that no one can guess it. The wrong simile projects wrong as right. It can deceive even the most prudent of us. Since reality is abstract, it does not come perceptibly to mind. A simile is used with concrete examples, so it sticks quickly to mind. If it is right and relevant, it makes the abstract reality understandable but if it is deceitful, it makes right as wrong and wrong as right. The Qur’an calls the deceiving-idea-ridden similes as “poetry” and emphasizes not to use it. The concepts of mysticism are based on similes; hence “poetry” supports it. That is why Ali Hazeen, a Muslim Sufi (mystic), had said: “Mysticism is the best mode for poetry.” One or two examples will make it clear. One of the beliefs of mysticism is monotheism, which in simple and brief words means the things visible in the universe do not have their own existence; God alone has existence and is visible in various forms and patterns. These various names and patterns of things deceive us, otherwise reality is one and the same every where.

The root-cause of all intera-religious conflicts is the difference in terminology for the one and the same Reality (God), which stays the same in essence whether It is labeled Ram( Hindu) or Raheem( Muslim) or any other. It is evident that this idea or belief is  absolutely wrong. But look how beautifully does a wrong simile project such an open deception as reality! That simile is: “The ‘Ganges’ is one, but the ‘ferries’ are numerous; it is nothing but the confusion of the wits.” You see this simile outweighs tens of thousands of arguments. This simile sticks to mind and no reason works against it.

Or take another example. Mysticism has to pass on the concept that direct achievement of beneficence of God is impossible. When the refulgence and manifestation of Allah is achieved through the beneficence of the spiritual guide, it produces stimulating effect. In terms of a simile, it can be understood that if you ‘keep a cotton bud in the sun for the whole day, it will maximally become hot. But if the same rays of the sun pass through a converging lens, this flock of cotton will start burning within seconds.’ Similarly when the rays of Allah’s love pass through the converging lens of spiritual guide’s look, the heart of the disciple transforms within no time into a pirouetting flame and burns down every thing except Allah.

The Simile of Aristotle

This is what the wrong use of the similes does. Look, how the simile of Aristotle (384B.C. – 322B.C.), the Greek ethical, metaphysical, and political philosopher, presents pleasantly as reality the deception that the existence is only of the State and not of the individuals! He says as the State is to the individuals so is the human body to its organs. The human organs do not have their own separate existence. These are simply the integral parts of the body. Their life and death are tied to the life and death of the body. Their duty is to supply the provisions of life and means of health to the body. This garners the arrangements of their own life and health. No organ can survive without the existence of the body. The expediency of the body is the prudence of the organs. Hence the organs cannot have rules and regulations other than of the body’s. Nor do the organs become the integral parts of the body on their own wish and will. And likewise nor can they be separated from it on their own.

I shall speak of the weakness of this simile later on. You have seen here that on the basis of this body-organ relation, individuals have no separate existence. They become the means of establishment, solidarity, and promotion of the State. And the State becomes an end in itself. We have also understood that if the theory of the State is analyzed, it is nothing more than the body of a few members, who have authority. This is a deceiving veil, designed for concealing dictatorship and totalitarianism in its garb. As has been exposed earlier, Hegel (1770-1831) propounded this theory, Nietzche (1844-1900) made it grow, Hitler (1889-1945) provided it the mould of Nazism, and Mussolini (1883-1945) transformed it into fascism. And in the Social Republics, it was exposed as Dictatorship of Proletariat. The democratic countries proudly claim that they do not have dictatorship, they have democracy, the Government of the people, in their countries. But this is a deception too. These countries have the same concept of the State as do the dictator-ridden countries. Individuals have no importance there. Recently an American psychologist, Charles M. Fair, has published a sophisticated but myth-breaking book. Its very name, The Dying Self, brings forth its contents and the true picture of this unfortunate contemporary man. He has written a variety of tactics contemporary man has devised for crushing the ‘I-am-ness’ of the individual. He says leave aside the autocracy; even democracy is not less harmful. In support of his assertion, he has deduced much from DE – Tocqueville’s book: Democracy in America. A gist of one excerpt from his book is given below:

The shackles and the tyrants were the blunt tools, which the exploiters used to use in the past. It is as if the kings had physically actualized exploitation in those days but the democracy of the present time has made it out and out a mental problem. Now the master does not say: “Think in terms of what I think otherwise you will be killed.” Now he says: “You are free to have your own thinking. In spite of this disagreement your life, property, and the other possessions will all be safe. All that would happen is that you would be lonely in the society. You will live with the people, deprived of your human rights. Your fellows will hate you as a filthy thing is despised, even those who think you are innocent and faultless will sever relations with you, so that the people may not hate them.” The master says to them; “Go and be in peace; I have spared your life.” But this is the life, which is even worse than the death. (The Dying Self, P. 185.)

Such is the status of the individual in democracy. In this system snapping ties with the majority, the individual becomes wet paint; no one wants to develop relations with him. He remains lonely, deserted, dejected in the whole wide-world. What happens to the people left lonely in the living society can well be judged from the book “Lonely Crowd” published recently in America . With the help of the data and detailed observations of the individuals, the authors of the book  have presented the status of the American society. In such a society an individual lives along with other members of the society as the cogs of a machine. During the last two or three years, I have mostly been citing quotations from the various books of an American psychologist, Erich Fromm. In one of his books, Escape From Freedom, one reference from which I have already given, he writes on this topic:

The person who gives up his individual self and becomes an automation, identical with millions of other automations around him, need not feel alone and anxious any more. But the price he pays, however, is high; it is the loss of his self. (P. 209)

In another of his books, The Revolution of Hope, he writes ‘the society in which the man is dehumanized, his political freedom does remain no more freedom, but slavery’ (P. 91). The same author further writes that the obligation of society is to respect human life. The positive or the good act is the one that facilitates the development of the individual’s latent potentialities. The negative or evil act is one that strangulates the life and stagnates the human activities (P.93).

Ernst Cassirer, who has been mentioned earlier, is a world known philosopher. He died recently. His last book, The Myth of the State, is about the problem of State. Discussing on the rights of individual and State, he writes:

There is, at least, one right that cannot be ceded or abandoned: the right to personality . . . There is no pactum subjectionis, no act of submission by which man can give up the State of a free agent and enslave himself. For by such an act of renunciation he would give up that very character which constitutes his nature and essence: he would lose his humanity. (P. 175)

Discussing the rights and responsibilities of the individual and State, Professor I. MacIver, in his book The Modern State writes that the State governs to serve individuals. It controls the wealth of the country to repay the debt of individuals. It creates the rights, not to give charity as an upper hand on the basis of authority it enjoys, but as its agent. Keep it in mind that the individuals are the masters, not the slaves, of the State. It is clear the slave cannot enjoy a higher authority than the Master can. As are human rights determined and restricted in terms of their responsibilities, so ought to be the rights of the State (in relation to its responsibilities) (P. 480).

Right from here the weakness of Aristotle’s simile of body-and-organs relation becomes clear. It was this simile on the basis of which he called the State ‘the end’ and the individual  the means to that end’.

The Hollowness of Aristotle’s Simile

He said it is the body alone that has existence; the organs do not have their separate distinct entity. This assertion opposes reality. The existence, in fact, is of the limbs and the organs, and not of the body. The body is simply the collection of limbs and organs, mutually linked with co-ordination, co-operation, proportion, and regulation. You go on cutting separately the various organs of the body, the legs, the arms, the torso, the head etc., you will see these parts lying separately, but the body will disappear. The existence of the body is merely a mental and conceptual phenomenon. Intrinsically it does not exist outside. Health is a balanced proportion of the various limbs and organs. When any one or some organs lose this balanced proportion and fail to perform their operation, it is called disease. If any organ becomes deadly poisonous, it is generally said ‘in order to save the body, the essential thing is to cut it off’. This is said simply because of the general use of this word (body), otherwise, factually, it should be said ‘it is essential to cut it off for the sake of health and safety of other organs’. This makes it clear that the individuals have their own separate identity and existence. No State can come into being, if prior to it the individuals do not exist. If there is no existence of State as a distinct entity, there can still be individuals living. But if there are no individuals, the State can never be thought of. When the individuals determine to live with mutual agreement, discipline, co-operation, and balanced proportion; they also determine to gain power for their safety, and survival, then this way of life will be termed as society or State.

The simile of ‘individuals as organs and State as body’ was, in fact, coined for Plato’s theory of division. According to this theory slaves remain slaves forever, and the ruling class, he calls Guardians, always the ruling class and its example is like of organs of body. The foot always remains the foot and so is the head. The foot, by enhancing its potentialities, never replace the head and vice versa. Every organ has its own position determined by birth and there can be no change in it. Therefore, no organ should aspire to become another organ, and neither should it try it. Nor should the low-level organs rebel against their assigned duties only because these are of low level. With this simile, Plato said that the class division was by birth and was unchangeable. Aristotle, with this simile, made individuals the slaves of the State. It is clear how misuse of similes transforms the right into wrong and vice versa. Sir Mohammed Iqbal, the renowned Muslim thinker, interprets it as the magic spell of the ruling class.

Aristotle coined this simile; Hegel founded the entire edifice of politics on it. The result is that everywhere in the world there is autocracy, whatever name it is assigned. In this regard, there is no difference between dictatorship and western democracy.

This spell of the ruling class functions with the illusory concept of the State, which is an end in itself, and the individuals are the means to justify it. Erich Fromm makes this difference of dictatorship and true democracy clear in the following words:

Democracy is a system that creates the economic, political, and cultural conditions for the full development of the individual. Fascism is a system that, regardless under which name, makes the individual subordinate to extraneous purposes and weakens the development of genuine individuality. (Escape From Freedom, P. 301)

Bergson (1859-1941), a French philosopher, has explained this important point in the following words:

This will be sovereignty, not over men, but over things, precisely in order that man should no longer have so much sovereignty over men. (The Two Sources of Religion and Morality. P. 300)

Lust for Power

Cassirer says that this holistic, autocratic, comprehensive, and cruel concept of the State is the creation of people’s lust for love. About this lust, he writes:

Obviously we do not wish for the sake of wishing – we aim at a certain end and we try to attain this end. But the lust of power does not admit of any possible attainment. It is the very character and essence of the will of power that is inexhaustible. It can never come to a rest; it is a thirst that is unquenchable. Those who spent their lives in this passion are comparable to the Danaides: they strive to pour water into a leaking butt. The appetite for power is the clearest example of that fundamental vice that, in Plato’s language, is described as “pleonexia” – as the “hunger for more and more.” This craving for more and more exceeds all measure and destroys all measure – and since measure, right proportion, “geometrical equality” had been declared by Plato to be the standard of the health of private and public life, it follows that the will to power, if it prevails over all other impulses, necessarily leads to corruption. “Justice” and the “will to power” are the opposite poles of Plato’s ethical and political philosophy.

(The Myth of The State. PP. 74 – 75)

And when this lust for power is concealed in the sacred robe of “State Interest”, these lust hungry mongers lose the prick of their conscience, which often rises against the open tyranny. You make the other men means of consolation for satisfying your own passions of revenge, and torture them, then (even if your own conscience is dead) the other people will protest against it. But when this is said, “Doing it is in the interest of the State”, then in stead of opposing it, the people will generally extend support to it. You will be thought of as a patriot and well wisher of the State. Strangely no body will ask you whether doing this is really in the interest of the State. If any body raises a voice against it, he is told that the disclosure of this secret is not in the interest of the State. Nonetheless, as has been explained earlier, the existence of State is an imaginary concept. By eradicating this deceptive idea, if it is clarified in mundane terminology, then the end and standard of collective system of men will be the interest of the individuals. This is such a concrete standard where neither can any one be deceived, nor can any one deceive some one else. But the concept of State is an amazing show where the State is rich and the individuals are poor; where the State is strong and powerful and the individuals are weak, feeble, and frail. And where the wealth of the State increases and the individuals go on becoming poor to poorer to the poorest. (According to the erroneous simile of Aristotle) the organs become gaunt but the body is said to be growing strong and stout. The organs are crushed or cut off one by one, but it is understood that the body is being nourished. The development, prosperity, robustness, and energy are, in fact, of those with whom the authority is vested.

(As has been described) “State” is the name of these attributes; it does not have a separate distinct existence. If, anyhow, one has to acknowledge the existence of this “phoenix”, one must accept and make others accept the reality that the criteria of measuring the prosperity, the strength and the weakness of the State are the individuals of the State. If the individuals are prosperous, strong, stout, and dauntless, the State will also be rich and powerful. If the individuals are always prey to fear, pain, grief, and destitution, the State is dried-up and struck with poverty. That is why Mohammed Iqbal, the world reputed Muslim philosopher, has said, “Every individual is the glaring stroke of good fortune of the nation, of the State”.

From the aforementioned illustrations we have seen that by carving the non-existent idol of the State, how man’s lust for power has made wide pathways for tyranny! And how well it has justified them! How much blood of humanity has been sacrificed on the altar of the old hag, the black deity! How many sacrifices of man burnt on stakes are there, with which the sadistic nature of the tyrants is satisfied! The fact of the matter is that whatever the priests, in theocracy, do in the name of God, the same, in secularism, is done in the name of the State. Neither could any one ask God “Was whatever is done with us in Your Name really your demand”?. Nor can any one ask the goddess of the State “Are whatever sacrifices we are compelled to offer, really under your authority”? The God of theocracy was imaginary and conjectured; the deity of the State is also mental and imaginary. One was the deceitful idea conjectured by the Hindu priests, and the other is the spell-ridden concept knit by the Hindu bankers. The only difference between the two is: one was knitted at the looms of dark ages, so it was coarse and thread-bare; the other is made by the machines of modern civilization, hence is so fine and subtle that no eye is able to penetrate to the inherent deception it has.

Qur’an’s Truth-Revealing Message

The Qur’an was revealed. It exterminated all the man made idols from the mental horizon of humanity. The Qur’an brought the collective infrastructure of the man. But you will be taken aback to know that the word State is not found in it. It has given only two ingredients of this infrastructure: One is the country, a track of land and the other is man, the inhabitants of that country. It defines and determines the borders of the country for initiating its program. In other words, it starts its program from a track of land; it is the only possible and easy method, otherwise it has the entire globe of earth as its aim. It wants to spread this system in the entire world. It insists to protect this piece of land (which has to be the first lab of this program). It is because if it remains safe and secure, this experiment will be conducted peacefully. It also insists to make arrangements for protecting it from the earthly and heavenly calamities. It describes the events of the nations gone by and tells us that their abodes were destroyed by the floods, wind storms, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and the dilapidation of the dams. The purpose is to tell us to keep the country safe and secure from such calamities and catastrophes. It also emphasizes to protect the country from external dangers. In this regard, it says:

(8: 60)

Keep ready whatever force you can muster to meet your enemy together with strong cavalry with which you can strike terror in the hearts of those who are enemy to Allah and to you. And to those who are in your knowledge, and those besides them whom you do not know as yet. To do so, huge expenses are involved. For this purpose, whatever you expend in the cause of Allah shall be repaid to you justly. There will be no reduction in it -not even a bit.

The State was an imaginary concept. In contrast to it, country is the name of a track of land. When we say the country is in danger, its danger can be perceived, can be seen. No body can deny it. The magnitude and the nature of this danger can be judged on the basis of the information one acquires. But its relation pertains to the degree of perception; it is not imaginary like that of the State.

What is real End /aim?

Despite emphasizing the importance of guarding it, the Qur’an deems the State the means to an end not an end in itself.  A house merely serves as a residence for the people who live in it.  True that the condition of a house affects the welfare of its occupants but the real importance is for the residents not the residence.  To the Qur’an, Man is the real end of the existence of the country or the state or the entire Universe.  Everything has been created for Man’s benefit.  The concept is clearly stated in the following verse.

(2:29)

Whatsoever is there in this sphere of earth, God has created it for you. Not only in the earth but also:

(45: 13)

‘Whatsoever is there in the earth and the heavenly bodies, God has all harnessed for you’. In the words of Sir Muhammad Iqbal, the renowned Muslim philosopher:

You are neither for the earth, nor for the heavenly bodies

The entire universe is for you, and not you for it all

And further he adds:

With the warming activities of the man, is the entire tumultuous upheaval

Each and every body in the universe, the sun, the stars, is but spectators

This is the relation of Man with the Universe. But the topic under discussion pertains to the question of mutual relation of man with man. It is this mutual relation which gives birth to the concepts of civilization, culture, sociology, and politics; this generates various systems, rules and regulations. I have already mentioned that the Qur’an has not used the term ‘the State’; it has definitely given the idea of a country, and within this concept, it has also propounded the concept of governance. We have seen the flaw in the theory of the State which was, in fact, the flaw in the system of sovereignty. The Qur’an has termed the system of sovereignty as the governance, as the management of things. Now the question arises: what is the Qur’anic concept of sovereignty or of the system of governance? And what is the place and status of the individuals in it?

The Qur’anic Concept of System of Governance

Whatever the system of governance in vogue in the world, the authority of some men over others remains established in one way or another. The Qur’an considers this concept as humiliating to humanity. It does not allow some men to wield authority over other men. It calls it against the concept of equality of human beings and terms it opposite to the respect of manhood. It says that the governance of men over men is wrong because it deprives the individual of the freedom he gets as man.

No human society can be sustained without a system of governance.  So, what does the Qur’an suggest?  It says the sovereignty belongs to God alone not to any individual or group of individuals.  But, is it not theocracy/autocracy all over again, which vested sovereignty with some invisible forces beyond complaints or questions?  The Qur’an responds very reasonably to this very logical question.  Granting the existence of an invisible Sovereign in the Qur’anic system, there are laws which are real and visible.  God’s rule practically means following His Law, which is complete and unchangeable.  No one has the authority to make any changes in the Divine Code, not even the Messenger.  He addresses the Messenger

(5: 48)

‘Judge the matters of these people according to the Book of Allah’

And declare it openly that:

(10: 15)

It is not for me to make any changes therein according to my wishes.

What a great satisfaction have the individuals of the society (nay but the entire humanity) acquired that the governance over us will only be of this Book alone! Orders will only be of His to be executed. Other than Him, nobody will have the right to make us obey him. Even the one who makes us obey His Laws will himself first obey these Laws. From this point of view, there will neither be any ruler nor any ruled.

The End of Nubuwwah as Manifesto of Freedom

I have just said that the satisfaction (that no one among us will be able to exercise authority over others, the obedience will only be to this Book, the Qur’an) was not only restricted to the men of the time of the Messenger (pbuh). It will also be equally applicable to the last man on earth. It was because after the completion of Al-Qur’an, it was promulgated that the sequence of Nubuwwah has finally ended. Now nobody till the day of resurrection will be able to say that your Allah has ordered to obey him compulsorily. Whatever Allah had to say has finally said in this Book From now onwards neither will Allah say any thing else, nor will there be any change, amendment, and modification in it. It was our hard luck (and I will say it was the biggest controversy against Islam) that the End of Nubuwwah was made just a matter of belief. Otherwise, up to the day of resurrection, it was a manifesto of freedom, and the message of death for every kind of slavery, for manhood. Pause and reflect, what a great and magnificent promulgation it was that a man, a group of people, or a nation that intends to get freedom from the slavery of men may accept this Book, and understand it! Imposed on its freedom will only be those restrictions, which have been prescribed in this Book. Now, nobody will be able to say that not only him, but also Allah has imposed such and such additional restrictions on you or has made changes in these restrictions. This was the Universal Manifesto of Freedom, which the End of Nubuwwah has granted to the entire comity of human beings. In other words it was the surety that from now onward nobody, nor any group of people, will be vested with the authority to command obedience. Nor will any body or any group of people be vested with power to impose any restrictions that are not in this Book whether that is in the name of the State or in the name of God Himself. Could there be a bigger freedom than that ever conceptualized? Or can it be imagined?

The Purpose of These Restrictions

Now the question is what is the purpose of the limitations or the restrictions prescribed in the Book of Allah? The purpose of man-imposed restrictions on other men is either to decrease or to restrain the vested authority of those on whom these restrictions are imposed. In other words it targets to limit or to divest their freedom. But the Qur’an says that God-imposed limitations and restrictions never mean to limit or to divest human freedom. The aim is never to achieve that purpose.

On the contrary:

(2: 286)

‘The purpose of God-imposed restrictions is to further broaden the human personality.’

Enlarging and broadening the latent potentialities of the human personality is a psychological process, the discovery of which could have been possible (that too to a limited extent) with the development of the discipline of Psychology in the present times. Prior to this development, it was least understood. The psychologists say if the energy of the human personality that is operating for destruction is diverted to constructive pursuits, it multiplies two-fold for integration process. This process, in their terminology, is called sublimation. Fourteen hundred year ago, the Qur’an unfolded this reality. It says that the purpose of the restrictions imposed on the human personality is to broaden it by sublimation.

(2: 286)

By obeying the Divine Laws, the human personality is broadened. This may also mean that for the accomplishment of the task assigned, one should exert one’s capacities to the full. On the ordinary level, understand this phenomenon with the following example. When water in a canal starts flowing at a low ebb, a fall of stones is built in it. The purpose is not to impede the flow of water. When water bumps against it, its flow multiplies many folds. This is the purpose of imposing restrictions by the Book of Allah.

We have seen that it was said to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH): Establish system of governance according to the Book of Allah. One of its purposes was:

(7: 157)

‘To lift the burdens under which humanity groans it will make them free from the shackles, which bind them’. Humanity will be made free from the chains of slavery tied so long on  and this purpose in itself is great. But it is only the negative aspect. After shattering these shackles, and making humanity free from them, the Qur’an takes a positive step. For this purpose, the second aim of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) is told as:

(62: 2)

He (PBUH) works for the development of the personality of human beings. This responsibility was not restricted to the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). It had to move further, and it was the aim of the system that was established for the practical implementation of the Book of Allah. That is why it was said to the party of the people responsible for the establishment of this system:

(22:41)

“These are the people who will establish System of Salaat when they have the control of the country and ‘will give Zakaa”. I have no time to explain this aspect of the program of the Islamic system of governance that has so comprehensively been given in this brief verse. I will deliberate upon one aspect that is related to the topic under discussion i.e., the broadening of the individuality, the development of personality. In our system Zakaat generally means “at the end of a year, giving some amount of money from one’s wealth in the path of Allah”. ‘Giving some amount’ is not the end product of the Qur’an. The Qur’anic exposition of this term is much more broad. It has been said here that the responsibility of the Islamic System is Eetta-e-Zakaat, not “giving Zakaat” or “receiving Zakaat”. The word Zakaat means: “to grow, to develop, to bloom and blossom”. “Eetta-e-Zakaat” means providing the means of development to individuals. It includes physical as well as personality development as far as the physical development of humans is concerned, it pertains to the Qur’an’s system of economics. I have written quite extensively on this for the last 25 years. At this point of time I present the gist of this system through the saying of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH):

God’s responsibility of protecting a community ceases, where even  a single person goes to bed hungry,

It was the same responsibility that the 2nd caliph Hazrat Omar (RA) repeated in his well-known words:

If a dog dies of hunger by the Tigris (river in Iraq), I swear by God with Whom rests my life, Omar will be held responsible for it.

This very aspect of “Eetaa-e-Zakaat” is the obligation of the Islamic System that is related to satisfying the physical needs of individuals. As far as the development of the potentialities of the human personality is concerned, I may make it very clear that this is the ultimate end to be achieved by this system. The first article of this system is to create an atmosphere wherein is the state of

‘There is no fear and sorrow, no grief and anxiety, no agony and pain’. In other words the individuals of the society have neither any fear of external dangers, nor any grief and anxiety within their internal world. There is food for thought here.  This aspect of the (Qur’anic) system provides a solid foundation for realizing the human potential.  (2:38)

The system is obliged to carry out its responsibility, among others, of ( in reference to the Messenger)

Another obligation of this system with reference to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) is described in these words:

He (PBUH) makes arrangements to educate them in such a way that they may be able to understand the ‘why of law’ on one hand, and garnishes their intellect to enable them to grasp the depths of the mysteries of the universe on the other hand. He (pbuh) not only nourishes the human potentialities, but also makes them able to utilize these developed potentialities in consonance with Divine Value. It inculcates purity of character and beauty in conduct. It is called sublimation process of character and conduct.

The Ultimate End

It should be clear from these illustrations that the Qur’anic view of (a) providing the Divine System of Guidance, (b) sending the Messengers (Peace Be Upon Them), (c) revealing the code of Divine Laws, (d) prescribing restrictions, and (e) keeping the final Book of God perfect, unchangeable, and protected   -the logical consequence of which is the End of Messengerhood has an end to achieve. This end is the achievement of the following objectives:

  • To make all human beings free from the shackles of slavery
  • To develop the potentialities of humans
  • To utilize these developed potentialities in consonance with Divine Values.

This process is denoted as purity of character. But further thinking in the Qur’an makes this reality clear that individual’s growth and development is not the last stage of this process. Its next stage is to prepare a group of people, a nation whose end is the well being of human species. For such a kind of nation, it has been said that:

‘You are the integrated nation, equipped for the well being of the manhood. You are an Ummah raised for the good of all humanity’. (3: 109)

Judge the importance of this fact that the Qur’an has said of the individual:

If an individual desires to have a paradisiacal life, one has to join hands with other like –minded people ( 89:29-30)

Paradise is not created by retreating to the seclusion of monasticism and mysticism; it requires a social set up. In other words, individuals are an integral part of the group of people or of Ummah and the responsibility of the group or Ummah is the welfare and wellbeing of the universal humanity. For the welfare of humanity, the Qur’an does not use the unambiguous terms like “interest of the State” or public interest. It clearly says

(13: 17)

‘Always remember that which is beneficial for the humanity endures’; Everlastingness and permanence is only for the acts that are beneficial for mankind.

The Relation Between the Individual and the Party

I have presented the mutual relation between the individual and the State whatsoever I, with my own vision, have understood from the Qur’an. But we have a new terminology introduced in our times. It is Collectivism Theory. This theory is neither new, nor unique. It is, in fact, the changed name of Hegel’s Theory of the State. According to this theory: interest of the State is the most important consideration. . It possesses an “organic” unity. Existence is only of society or party, and not of the individual. With this exposition of Collectivism Theory in view, there is no need to add any thing to what has been said of the State Theory. The Qur’an lays stress on collective life. And the antagonists of Collectivism Theory, presenting it in support of their theory, term it exactly in accorddance with Islam. I thought it necessary to remove this confusion in a few words. Some of them have been heard saying that Iqbal, the great Muslim scholar, also held the same theory. It is ingeniousness of irony and undue criticism on Sir Mohammad Iqbal. Every one knows that Iqbal is a torchbearer of the philosophy of Self (I-am-ness). Self is another name of ‘individuality’. The sum total of Iqbal’s message is the development, preservation, and immortality of the individuality. He showers so much importance on the individuality of the human self that he does not allow this self to be absorbed in the Divine Self, let alone the State or the party s/he belongs to. He maintains its uniqueness. He wants to develop it so that it may emerge as an independent entity equipped with the facets of the Divine Self. He does not accept that it weakens, even at the cost of everlastingness of life. He says individuality cannot be strengthened in the solitude of mysticism; it develops and is strengthened while living in the company of people. That is why he lays stress on establishing link with the party, and not being absorbed in it; Ummah other than the individuals, to him, is nothing; it develops with the mutual link with each other. When these two synchronize with each other, it is called Ummah. ‘Individuals of the caravan’ and the ‘caravan’ itself is the most appropriate simile in his poetry. The caravan other than the individuals has no existence. The individuals with their mutual sync constitute it. But it is necessary that the individuals may remain with the caravan so that being in the state of protection, secure and safe from the dangers, they may reach the ultimate destiny. The Qur’an establishes this relation when it says:

O Jama’at-ul-Momineen, Allah’s Laws have reached you. Now you be steadfast yourself and cause others also to be steadfast, stand united and adhere to Allah’s Laws so that you may prosper. (3: 199)

This is the mutual relation of the individuals with the party. In other words, it means the mutual relation of the individuals among one another is the cause of their steadfastness and reinforcement. There is no annihilation of self like the one in mysticism where it is absorbed in water and ends its uniqueness. And nor is it the System of the State or the Collectivism Theory in which the State or Collectivism is the end and the individuals the means only. The life-giving message of the Qur’an roots out all these theories. It has comprehensively covered individuality in a few words so wonderfully. It says the collective life is so good and so fair but:

‘You will confront Us as individuals with your individuality and will be called to account for your thought and conduct as individuals’ (6: 94). This is the focal point of the Law of Requital. The individuals try to achieve the prescribed ends of Deen in an organized way. This organized structure of theirs is termed as party or Ummah. Its objective is nothing but:

the defeat of man-made system and the triumph of Allah’s system. The world has tried various systems of life and has failed to get consolation from any one of these systems. The Man is tired now and is in search of a system, he sees nowhere. But this system is in the process of being in his thoughts. (9: 40)

Erich Fromm sees its glimpse like the manner given below:

A society in which no man is a means towards another’s ends, but always and without exception an end in himself; hence, where nobody is used, nor uses himself, for purposes which are not those of the unfolding of his own human powers; when man is the center, and where all economic and political activities are subordinated to the aim of his growth. A sane society is one in which qualities like greed, exploitativeness, possessiveness, narcissism, has no chance to be used for greater material gain or for the enhancement of one’s personal prestige. Where acting according to one’s conscience is looked upon as a fundamental and necessary quality and where opportunism and lack of principles is deemed to be asocial; where the individual is concerned with social matters so that they become personal matters, where his relation to his fellow man is not separated from his relationship in the private sphere. A sane society, furthermore, is one which permits man to operate within manageable and observable dimensions, and to be an active and responsible participant in the life of society, as well as the master of his own life. It is one which furthers human solidarity and not only permits, but stimulates, its members to relate themselves to each other lovingly; a sane society furthers the productive activity of everybody in his work, stimulates the unfolding of reason and enables man to give expression to his inner needs in collective art and rituals. (241-42)

This thinker calls this type of society as The Sane Society. And this is the very name of that book from which the above reference has been given. Very broadly and intensively the Qur’an describes the characteristics of this society. It covers its ultimate end in a few words when it says:

‘Verily We have honoured every human being’. And protecting this honour is the end product of the society. If society or the system does not honour the prestige of the individual, it is a corrupt and cursed society, and is the root cause for deterring the accomplishment of the purpose of the creation of mankind. (17: 70)

The System, the State, the Society that deprives people of the individuality of a person, honour of mankind and allows grief-stricken life to pass has curse of Allah, of His Divine Forces, and of the Universal humanity. How alarmingly the Qur’an depicts such a life in the following verse:

(3: 87)

‘These people are deprived of Allah’s blessings as well as the support of the Divine Forces and the righteous persons’. In the course of ages, this idea slowly dawned on man and gradually crystallized that the world is not merely changing, but is developing towards perfection.

From the deliberations I have made about “State Or Individual”, it necessarily follows that the individual, and his personality is an end in itself. No man has the right to exploit another man or to use him as a means in furthering his personal interests. If society were organized on this basis, there would be neither rulers nor subjects. This is the second principle on which society in Islam is based. No man is permitted to compel others to obey him; Allah alone is to be obeyed through the Laws He revealed in the Qur’an.

****************

912 total views, no views today

(Visited 102 times, 1 visits today)

Why is Islam the Only True Deen – G A Parwez – Idara Tolue Isalm

(English Rendering by Prof. Dr. Manzoor-ul-Haque, Faculty of Education, University of Sind, Hyderabad)

The one significant issue, which rises in most of the minds and vexes the tender feelings of the heart, is that common moral values are identical in all the religions (especially in the widely accepted religions). All the religions assert not to tell a lie; not to steal; to be honest; not to deprive others of their rights etc. Islam. Also proclaims the same then what is that distinctive feature on the basis of which we assert:-

that Islam is the only true Deen;

that no other Deen is acceptable to God;

that salvation and auspiciousness is tied to Islam;

And therefore it is necessary that all followers of religions should accept Islam.

The Significant Question

If the specificity, on the basis of which Islam is entitled to make this claim, is the same values, then this privilege ought to be extended to every religion of the world. This would not be a reasonable attitude that the qualities on the basis of which we adjudge Islam as Deen-Ul-Haq (the right Deen), are ignored in case of claim of other religions.

Brahmo-Samaji Religion.

This is undoubtedly a difficult question. As mentioned above, this question springs up and causes confusion in the minds of the people at large. . This is the same question which emerged in the frontiers of knowledge at a time when the late Maulana Abu-ul-Kalam Azad wrote in his exegesis of Sura Fateha, “Universal truths are equally found in all the religions” therefore no one religion can claim superiority over others. This proclamation was, in fact, an echo of that Brahmo-Samaji Movement which had emerged earlier in Bengal. They summated the good points of the (so called) heavenly books, developed a system of education and projected it to the world with the contention that it comprises all the common truths found in all the religions. Therefore to bring consensus among all religions and to act in accordance with the truthfulness, the only mechanism would be that all followers of religions should believe in this system of education and make it the concept of their life. Such a common education comprised these very moral values long before this Brahmo-Samaji Movement. King Akber’s Deen-i-Ilahi was founded on this very concept; Its exponent was Dara Shikoah in whose mysticism there was no difference between Ram and Raheem; and the reflection of reality was equally found in the temple and the mosque. The same phenomenon, in the form of Bhajans (religious hymns) of Bhagat Kabeer and Kafees (Mustical Stanzas) of Shah Fareed and Sultan Bahu echoes in every nook and corner.

No Need of Religion even!

This brings forth another important question: if truth is the other name of theses moral values and acting in accordance with them is the purpose of human life, then why is any religion needed? Those, who are irreligious, and refute the very existence of God, also say the same i.e. telling lie is very bad; truth ought to be spoken; living ought to be honest; no one ought to be oppressed, so why to bring in the religion? It was this concept which gave birth to the movement of Humanism in Europe which projected itself with the assertion of “Religion without Revelation” in the world. If the ultimate aim and climax of religion is these moral values and the human life can reach its destiny through these values alone, then how can the claim of Humanism be rejected?

Have you realized how significant is this question and how imperative is it to give a satisfying answer to it? It is the importunity of this significance and need that it must be thought out seriously and understood with careful contemplation.

What Is Deen?

Basic misconception in this regard is that Deen is thought to be no more than an ethical code. Deen is not the collection of a few moral values; it is a comprehensive system of life covering all aspects of human life. The moral values become operative within this system, or in other words this system provides that sound base on which the edifice of these moral values is established.

Did you ever ponder over this phenomenon that the whole world says that telling a lie is bad; dishonesty is intensely opprobrious; deception is very contemptible misdemeanor but in spite of all this the whole world tell lies; corruption is rampant every where; cheating is in full swing. The question is why is this all happening? In spite of condemning and cursing all these things why has man taken to them? Considering these acts the most detestable and opprobrious why is he not refraining from them? Its reason is that either the people acknowledge these moral values just as of formality or they have their foundation on emotions alone. They know nothing as to why these values should be followed and why should they not be violated. You ask a person to satisfy you as to why you should not tell a lie. Going a little deeper than superficial talk, you would realize that he has no reasonable reply to this question. With all the reason and rhyme at his command, he would not be able to respond to the why of your question. He will not be able to explain to you rationally what would you loose by telling lies and which gain you would accrue by speaking the truth. And since man adopts only that which gives him gain and abandons that which causes him loss, therefore his acquiescence to this effect is either simply traditional or imitation or the product of emotional inclinations. He neither develops insight of these values nor rationally makes them the way of his life.

Deen provides those basic concepts, which conspicuously bring forth the purpose and ultimate aim of human life. The purpose of life defines the proper value of every thing and when these values are identified it can very easily be understood which one is profit bearing and which one is loss accruing; which one is higher and which one is lower on the continuum of values.

From Desire to Action.

Deen, along with these basic concepts, provides the practical system through which these theoretical values take the form of reality and then the man within their concrete results sees of his own, how gainful or harmful it is to act or not according to these values. Being affected by this, his emotions and feelings follow the proper channel for their own operation and since emotions are the impetus of actions, his life synchronizes with these higher values. This is called the exaltation of character and neatness of conduct.

Bear it in mind that human activities pass through three phases: – namely a desire takes birth in your heart; this desire awakes in the heart involuntarily, you have no reason, rhyme or rationale for it; it relates purely to the emotions; then you present it to the intellect. If your emotions are intense, your intellect thinks or the means to accomplish it and provide justified reasons for it. But if your intellect overpowers your emotions, it then makes comparison between gain and loss, and if it sees that the gain to be accrued is greater it decides to accomplish the desire. Now your desire transforms into your wish; then your will power comes in to play, and takes practical steps to actualize your desire. In this phase, your WISH takes the form of your WILL.

But the human intellect, even if not operating under the command of emotions can maximally decide the gain or loss of that person, it cannot decide whether the desire is fair or foul. In other words, the human intellect can only inform the person concerned as to which thing is profitable to him and which one will bring him loss. It can make no distinction between good and evil. This distinction can only be possible in the presence of values, and as narrated earlier, it is the concept of life that determines the values.

Impact Of the concept of Life

How does the concept of life (right or wrong) change the perspective of human vision and define the direction of his activities, we need not to go anywhere far to understand it. Every one complains today that falsehood; deception, cunningness, betrayal, corruption, bribery, injustice, oppression, extortion and exploitation are prevailing in the world. It looks as if, without any exception of zones or inhabitants, the germs of these diseases have spread all over the globe like an epidemic. Did you ever ponder over the cause thereof? Ills were also there in the days gone by, but these were not so general and comprehensive. With a little pondering, this reality will be established that its basic cause is the concept of life which, in the 19th century, emerged in the West and due to the general and global means of communication spread to ever nook and corner of the world. All these ills/miseries are the product of this concept. This concept of life was that the human life is only the physical life and laws governing the life and the death at the animal level apply to man also. Survival of the fittest is the immutable law of nature. According to this law, only the one wielding the maximal scepter of authority and power has the right to live. How was this authority and power acquired is no question. The poor and the weak and the powerless can be allowed to live only to become victual of the powerful. Every big fish devours the smaller one. Insects are born to be the food of the sparrows and the sparrows consequently breathe only to be the prey of the eagles. This is the law of nature, the constitution of life. It is according to this law that the decisions on the life and death of individuals as well as Nations are made. “Might is right” is the exigency of justice. Lion is the king of jungle, not the goat. If the lion eats the goat, the goat cannot make complain that it is the victim of oppression.

The animals live by instincts which, though many in number can generally be classified into three categories: Self-preservation, Self-assertion and Self-procreation. When the human life is not valued higher than that of the animal level, obviously every individual would work under these very instincts, and then there would be no room for the moral values.

Nationalism.

According to the civilization raised on this concept, national character would be regarded as highest character. Thinking deeply you would realize that the national character is, also, the product of animal instinct. Herd instinct is in the very nature of animals. Every animal finds its preservation in living with its herd. This is the only urge on which a nation comes into being and endures. Prosperity and well-being of one’s own nation becomes the highest values for the individual; the greatest patriot becomes the one who squeezes out the last drop of blood of other nations and decorates the magnificent edifice of one’s own nation with the gaudiness of this blood. For him, the question of being honest or dishonest or the question of falsehood and truth does never arise. The one who starts giving mind to these values cannot perform the affairs of the state. In the words of Walpole:

“No great country was ever saved by good men, because good men will not go to the length that may be necessary to save a nation.”

In this connection, what these patriots have to say, the reproduction of the words of the reputed Italian thinker, Cavour are sufficient. He says.

“If we did for ourselves what we do for our country, what rascals we should be.”

Did you observe how a change in the concept of life brings changes in the individual and collective life, and how does the concept of life influence every walk of life? The reason that the moral values are still being theoretically appreciated today is that the man has, up till now, not been able to erase his sub-conscience free from the binding effects of the past. If this concept pervaded any further into the next few generations, even the concept of these values will be wiped off from his mind and its verbal confession will also remain no more. Its signs and symptoms have started surfacing right from now. Our younger generation ridicules these values by calling them mere conservatism.

Islam provides such concepts on which the whole edifice of human life is raised and where every aspect of life is embodiment of higher values. These concepts are not found in any religion of the world leave aside atheism (religious ness). These are only the characteristics of Islam, which entitles it to become the system of life established on right lines and surety to human achievement and prosperity. These concepts fall into the following headings:-

Concept of God.

Relationship between God and Man.

Relationship between Man and Universe.

Relationship between Man and Man.

Relationship between Actions and their Consequences.

Concept of the ultimate object of life.

In the next pages, these concept will be discussed briefly and it will be explained as to what is the nature of these concepts in the well known religions (Hinduism, Judaism and Christianity) and what type of concepts the Holy Quran reflects; and what scenario of human life is established on these concepts. Be very clear that the comparative study of religions is not my aim at present; I’ll only narrate the fundamental tenets found on these concepts in these religions. This may also be clarified that our belief is that proper and true teachings were revealed to all the messengers of the Almighty God on their own turns but these teachings are now not found in their pristine form in the so-called heavenly books available among the followers of these religions. Whatever is described of these concepts will therefore be based on the existing documents of these religions and not on that pristine and real message which is not found now with any of them. The detail of this resume will be found in the first chapter of my book in Urdu Mairaj-e-Insaniat, in which, according to the researches of the followers of these religions, it has been dealt with at length, wherein it has been explained that according to researches of the followers of these religion the pristine message of those religions is not found among any one of them now; but since they lay down their existing message as the knowledge base of their religions, the current teachings about these concepts will be projected. Except this, there can be no other alternative left for us.

The Concept of God.

The Concept of God in Hinduism.

Among the three religions (Hinduism, Judaism and Christianity), Hinduism claims that it is the oldest religion in the world. The proof of its antiquity is provided by its existing religious books where each of its leaves bear testimony to the fact that these are the writings of that age when human mind was in its infancy. The infantile mind can never perceive the concept of an abstract reality in any shape other than its concrete form. How could the mind of that age have established the pristine concept of the personality of God? It transformed God on its own nature only with the difference that man (for example) has two hands, God was conceived to have eight, man has one head, God had ten; man can drink a cup of water, God can pour in the whole ocean. Three basic gods are accepted among Hindus: Brahmo, Shivji, and Vishnoo. They have their wives and children too; Shivji’s wife was Parbatti and son is Gnesh whose body is of man and head of elephant; Brahma’s daughter is Sarsooti. Earlier all these three were worshipped but now Brahma is not worshipped.. It is in the Para’ns that once Shivji saw Brahma intending to rape his daughter, there he stopped worship of Brahma.

(Hinduism by Govind Das,P:104).

About the creation of the universe, the following statement is found in the shivparana:

Shivji desired to create the world. He created Brahma. Brahma splashed a handful of water in the water; there raised a bubble; a man was horn out of this bubble. He said to Brahma: ‘O’ son! create the world.’ Brahma said: “I am not your son, You are my son” There was a quarrel between the two. Maha Dev (Shivji) thought that whom he had sent for creating the world were quarrelling between themselves, then a heavenly ling (male genital organ) was born out of the two; it ascended immediately into the sky Both were surprised to see it.

Listen to what happened later on:

Both started thinking that the beginning and end of ling should be found; the one who comes back first be the father and the one who comes later be the son. Vishnoo in tortoise-shape started going down. Brahma in swan-shape flew upward. Both continued their journey with lightning speed for two thousand years but could not search the utmost limits of the ling. Brahma thought: if wishnoo had com back with an inkling, l would have to be his son. He was just thinking of it when a cow and a tree of kaitkee descended. Brahma asked them: “Where do you live?” They said: “With the props of that ling we have been travelling since thousands of years” Brahma asked them whether or not ling had any extremity, they replied that it did not.

Brahma said: Come with me and stand witness that the cow used to pour strain of milk on the head of ling and that the tree used to shower flowers over it” They said: We’ll not bear false witness.” Then Brahma said angrily: “I’ll turn you into ashes if you do not stand witness.” Then both frighteningly said: “We’ll bear witness as you desire.” Then the three went downwards.

Brahma asked Vishnoo whether or not he had found out the utmost limits of ling. He replied in the negative. Brahma said:“ I have found our”; Vishnoo demanded: “Produce witness to this effect.” Then the cow and the tree bore false witness. Upon this the ling imprecated the Kaitkee: “You have told a lie. Your flower will never be used for offering either to me or to any other God. Whoever offers you will be terminated”; it imprecated the cow: “You will eat filth with the mouth through which you told a lie; no body will worship your mouth but your tail will be worshipped; cursed Brahma: “Since you have told a lie, you’ll never be worshipped” in the world”; it gave a blessing to Vishnoo “You have spoken the truth, so you’ll be worshipped every where”. Then both praised and eulogized the ling.

On hearing this appreciation and eulogy, there appeared a countenance with long matted hair from the ling and said: “I had sent you for generating creation, why did you indulge in wrangling?” Then Maha Dev took out a ball of ashes from the hair and said: “Go and germinate creation with it.”

(Ref: Satyareth Parkash-Sawami Daya Nand PP. 272-273)

The concept of God is the most sublime idea. It is now obvious that what would be the nature of the deeds of a nation which has this idea of God in its sight, Neither the mind of this nation can be free from the superstition, nor can their actions be based on knowledge and insight. God to whom they submit is never above the human countenance. Hence it is written in the Athur Veda that at the time of worshipping God, the following should be uttered:

“O’Swami Parmatma of the followers of Jain! obeisance be to thy mouth; obeisance is to thy eyes; obeisance is to thy skin; obeisance is to thy organs; pray is to thy belly; obeisance is to thy tongue; obeisance is to thy face; obeisance is to thy teeth; obeisance is to the stench of thy teeth.”

The Concept of God among the Jews.

After Hinduism, let us now turn to Judaism and see what kind of concept of God is found there. Probably it was Locke who had said: “If you tell me the kind of God any nation had proposed for its worship, I would let you know the nature of civilization and culture of that nation.” A critical appraisal of a Western researcher about the kind of concept that emerges about God through the study of the conventional Torah would be sufficient here. Joseph Whebs in his book “Is it God’s Words” writes that the God of Torah appears to be splashing around with the blood, shed by the numerous murderers. He is an assassin himself and a mischief monger, thief, perfidious, sanguinely revengeful, merciless, chastiser of the sinful and the innocent both, extremely dreadful and frightful, embodiment of oppression and prejudice, arrogant, braggart, promise-breaker, concoct, and a willful liar.

(Ref: M’airaj-e-Insaniyyat, P.22)

According to Torah, God created man on His own form. It is, now, evident that the God who has this kind of form, His created nation would also have the same form, But it is not the nature of God, it is the account of the conduct of that nation itself. After holding this type of concept about, the God, what would be the fate of moral values with that nation, does need no perspicuity and description of any kind.

Concept of God in Christianity

When we move on from Judaism to Christianity, the enigma of concept of God there cannot be comprehended. The following is the council of Trent’s theory of the basic belief of Christianity on the acceptance of which one becomes a Christian: We believe in (1) God, the powerful father who is the creator of the overt and the covert; and we believe in (2) Lord Jesus, the son of God, who is the only son of His father; who was born to the father i.e. the Lord before the whole of the universe and who is immanent and absolute deity. Father and His essence (the son) are one; it is through Him that all the things of the universe were created; his descendence and transmigration became our salvation. He descended as a human being, became victim to the sufferings, rose on the third day and ascended to the sky and, now, will again return to the world to maintain justice for the living and the dead.’

This was all about the belief of the Divinity of the Christ. About his revered mother, Mary, the tenet of the sacred church is that she is the most powerful near God; whatever she beseeches is bestowed to her. She is the main spring of good for us because she implores from God. Since she is the mother of God, He cannot reject her request, and since she is our mother too, she cannot refuse our intercession…. whatever, whatever benedictions we make for our salvation are accepted.

(Ref: Shoula-i-Mastoor, P.129, Catholic SchoolBook, and P.158)

As such very recently the Council of the Pope has decided that Mary be worshipped along with the Father, the son and the Holy Spirit.

Concept of the Holy Quran

After these concepts of God, now come to the Holy Quran. It first of all, refuted all these concepts by saying :-

“Allah is far above and free from all the concepts they attribute to Him from their own minds” (Al-Quran 23/92)

Then it said So far as the personality of God is concerned, you cannot conceive it, because you can only conceive the things, which are perceptible to senses, and the self of God is an exception to this phenomenon. Therefore. “Human eyes cannot perceive him, He can keep watch over the eyes. He is very subtle and All-knowing.” Al-Quran 6/104) His personality cannot be conceived with any example, because “He is analogous to none” (Al-Quran 42/11) “Neither He is himself the; son of any one, nor anyone else is His son” (Al-Quran 112/3) “Nor is any one else is equal in rank to Him. He is altogether unique, incomparable and unprecedented.” Al-Quran 112/4)

You cannot know anything about His personality; but a concept of God, more exalted, pure, dignified and elegant than the concept which appears forth from his attributes He has described of His own, is not possible.

Relationship of God and Man.

The question is: What is the advantage of believing in these attributes of God? One accepts that these are the attributes of God and the other rejects. What impact does this acceptance and rejection has on their lives? The Holy Quran answers this question. It says that every human is a carrier of “Divine energy” which is called the human personality. Every human personality is bestowed with the possibility of progressively actualising these attributes (within human limits). This is the hue of God beyond which no other hue is more elegant. (Al-Quran 2/138)

That is why these attributes are the objective standard for the nourishment of human personality it is this ideal to which man wants to mould himself. This is the standard, which he strives to come up to. Every moment, he measures his own self against this objective standard and evaluates rationally the extent to which his personality has developed and how far it still remain to be developed.

In addition to it, the Holy Quran also informs as to which attribute operates at what occasion so that the likewise facet may also operate in the like event on the part of the man. This also determines man’s reaction in the face of external events and occurrences. Remember, as is the upholding of the balanced attributes for the man a must, similarly the emergence of that attribute most appropriate to that occurrence is imperative. To let go with pity a merciless tyrant, who has no feeling of repentance or any desire for rectification in his heart, is the worst form of tyranny on the oppressed human beings; but to take revenge in a situation where remission and forgiveness bring pleasant consequences is also equivalent to tyranny. The bruise of muscles soothes slowly on massage but the fractured bones need tight binding in wooden splints. This is called Jabbariyat-holding things firmly together (The wooden splints which a surgeon uses are called Jaba’ir The Holy Quran expounds in full length the attributes of God and the eventful appearance and application their of, so that not only do these become objective standard for gauging the development of an individual but also the foreteller to the man for forming the type of reaction most appropriate to the kind of events.

The Law of God.

This brings forth-another significant reality. The concept of God in religion is that of an autocrat king and a dictator whose all decisions depend upon his own whims and where the law and rule have nothing to do; if pleased he bestows robe of honour to a criminal; if annoyed He sends the innocents to the gallows, Man can only save himself from His wrath by keeping his deity pleased with himself in any way that he can; he makes all possible efforts to seek His pleasure; makes offerings of gifts and oblations and seeks the mediation of His favourites. Obedience to law does not yield any gain to man, it only serves to attain pleasure of God. On the other side of it, is Christianity where the concept of God is that of a tenderhearted father; where rules and regulations have nothing to do; where the mercy of God is the only basis of salvation.

The Holy Quran refuted this concept and proclaimed that in spite of all His infinite powers and boundless authority, God has prescribed rules and regulations for all the matters and does every thing strictly in accordance with these laws. These laws are so immutable that no mutations can occur in them. (Al-Quran 35/43) The meaning of law is that every thing is tied to the chain of cause-and-effect’ i.e. if you do this, its consequence will be such; if you act against, it will draw to this end. It explained these laws to man; made him understand them fully, made it clear to him that obeying this law will bring him this gain and acting against will result in this loss. After narrating all this, left it to his choice whether to follow this prescribed right road or to make tracks of his own. “We have shown him the way; now who-so-ever wishes may accept it and who-so-ever wishes may reject it,” (Al-Quran 76/3) If he follows the right path, he will reap his own gain from it. We will not derive any benefit out of it. If he adopts a wrong path, he will suffer his own loss; it will not harm us in any way (Al-Quran 12/286) That is why God does not make any one acknowledge anything by compulsion and coercion. Whatever He says, is as a piece of advice. After He revealed the Holy Quran he asserted: “Say unto them, the truth has come from Your sustainer, now whoever wishes, may accept it, whoever wills may reject it.” (Al-Quran 18/29). It is evident that when accepting or not accepting of any thing, is left to the sweet-will of man, then if he is of sound mind, reason and intellect, he will make his decision discerningly. Therefore, according to the Holy Quran, belief is not a blind faith; it is the name of that mental and heart felt conviction which man acquires rationally. That is why it has attributed this conduct to the Momins. (believers) that: “They are the people to whom, even when the ‘verses’ of their Sustainer are presented they droop not down at them as if they were deaf and blind but accept them with intellect and insight”(Al-Quran 25/73) It too is crystal clear when the consequences of actions draw up in concurrence with rule and law, the question of being absolved from them either byway of paying ransom or intercession does not arise. If you put your finger in the fire and then you desire that the pain of burning may transfer to some one else in stead of you, though on payment of thousands of rupees, it will be impossible If you eat arsenic, you cannot, even on the recommendation of the highest echelon of the society, be protected from its ill effects. There is only one alternative and that is: You take a recourse to that law of God in concurrence to which relief in burning pain and protection against the harmful-effects of arsenic can be procured. Suffering and repose accrue to the man according to the law of God as a result of the natural consequences of his actions. “so that whoever is ruined is ruined according to the law and whoever remains alive does so according to the law (Al-Quran 8/42). Neither the innocent is chastised with the revenge and wrath of an authoritative dictator, nor the criminal gets off scot free, on ransom, atonement or intercession. That is why the humans have been told that “On the day of manifestation of consequences no one would be able to help anyone, nor shall any intercession be considered, nor shall any form of compensation be accepted, neither shall they be succoured.”(Al-Quran 2/44).

Did you seer how did the Holy Quran transform the religion to the discipline of Science by simply giving the concept of “Law- making-cum-law-abiding God”? What are the characteristics of Science?— In science (1) every cause has its own specific effect and no one can cause any kind of change and transformation in it, and (2) Science discovers the reality such that longings, wishes, purposes, gains and feelings of nobody have any impact on it. It is never influenced as such.

By virtue of the concept of God, the Holy Quran represents that the human actions bring forth the consequences in the like manner and the realities bear testimony to this effect in the same way: that is why God proclaimed that,” this message of Ours is not poetry.” Somewhere Coleridge has said: The Anti-thesis of Poetry is not prose but Science. The Holy Quran is no poetry but Science.

In connection with God and Man Relationship, the Holy Quran unravels another splendid reality. The laws of God, in the outer universe, are operative on their own. Accordingly every thing remains operative for the excellent performance of the duties assigned to it and the Universe, by evolution, is progressively moving forward in its evolution. In the human world, the laws of God are operative in the like manner with the exception that their cosmic speed is very slow whereas the human age demands that the result of actions may come to the forefront soon. If the human hands supports these laws and become helpful to accomplish them . their results may emerge according to the human count of time, place and circumstances. In this manner man becomes a companion to God in the complete accomplishment of His programme. This is the relation of God and Man of which not a glimpse is found in the religions of the world. (Since I’ve elicited much on this point, I need not make any more detailed discourse at present.)

Relationship of Man and The Universe.

After the deliberations on the relationship of God and the Man, there comes the question of the mutual relationship of the man and the Universe. When the human mind was at its infancy he was not able to comprehend the mystery of the forces of nature. He was afraid of them and could think of only one way to be safe from their rage and that was to implore humbly before them and appeal for their mercy. Hence the status of the man of that age was that he joined his hands in supplication, as soon as there was thunder of the clouds; he fell in prostration as there was lightning, he made obeisance to the sun as soon as it shone; he prostrated as soon as there was an earthquake; he called a ravaging river as his mother-goddess; he made the lion a God as soon as it roared. Hinduism is a compendium of these gods and goddess and proselytizes their worship.

Relationship in Hinduism:

It is found in Yajar veda, “obeisance be accepted by the snakes on the earth, even those which are either in the air or in the sky; our prostration to the snakes of the paddy fields; our bowing to those snakes also which are still in their burrows.” Our humble kneeling to them even.”These were, at the least, living forces. They even bowed to those inanimate things from which they apprehended any loss. Hence, there is also found in Yajar Veda that this stanza ought to be recited: “O’ye rezor, thou bringeth happiness and are made of good iron; our obeisance to ye be accepteth; please bring not trouble unto him the least”.

It is found written in the Ather Veda: “Our prostration to the winter fever, even to the summer fever I bow down. My prayer to the fever that comes daily, alternately and the third day.”

It is clear that in a religion where man accepts this type of status for himself, the question of human dignity and honour does never arise. There, if it is asserted “do not tell a lie; speak-the-truth” will this unravel the mysteries of the universe and solve the human problems ?

Relationship in Christianity:

Leaving this aside, now come to the other side where the material things, their adornment and comfort is thought to be most detestable and abominable; and where the mystery of human salvation is only through the renunciation of the world and its vanities— through the relinquishment of desires and the abandonment of pleasures. The farther one moves from the worldly affairs, the nearer one gets to the Deity. The teaching of asceticism and monasticism was the sine qua non of Christianity. Saint Benedict, transforming it into an organized institution, produced throngs of monks and nuns. As such in his Theological Dictionary, Bucks writes about the Monasticism in Egypt: “In a short span of time, the whole East was filled with groups of the slothful people who, setting aside the worldly affairs adopted a life of pain, distress, misery and anguish so as to be close to God and the Divine environs.”

It brought the same result as this type of life ought to bring. In this connection Buck writes: “But after some time their lasciviousness became proverbial. Besides, they started inciting riots and insurrections by exploiting the people at various places.”

A whole world was getting sick with these ascetics.

The clinging beggars were seen roaming in every street in the garb of hermits. All kind of vagrancy and cheating was their habit…. These people used to commit the incidences of havoc pillage under the veil of religious fanaticism.

(Progress of Religions Concepts. Vol. 3, P.240)

The people not committing such evil activities had strange mode of life as well. The condition of great saints among Christians was such that some swore not to take a bath in their whole life; some stood in marsh throughout their life; some saw the secret of spiritual development in fortifying in the enclosure of ordure; some lied down, life long, in a dark closet— This was all the result of self-abnegation and self-renunciation in Christianity.

According To the Holy Quran:

The Holy Quran was revealed and it made this very clear to man that your position in the universe is far above the forces of nature. We (God) have well strung this all in the chains of law so that you may put them to your use. “God is the one who has subordinated to you whatever is there in the heights of the heavens and the depths of the earth” (Al-Quran 45/13). It told the man that the position of man is that all the Malaika (forces of nature) be subservient to him and the position of a Momin is that he, by conquering these forces should utilize them for the benefits of the humanity. In the concrete universe, God alone enjoys the status over and above that of the man in concurrence of whose laws man ought to lead his life. Besides Him nothing is superior to man. All the articles of worldly adornment and comfort have been created for man; no one can declare these things abominable and forbidden for him. “Ask them who is he who can forbid the adornments and pleasant subsistence (rizq) which God has created for man?” (Al-Quran 7/32).

This status of the man and the relationship of the man with the universe—You will never find anywhere else in the domain of religions; there will either be bowing to or fleeing from the phenomena of nature. Conquering them for the benefit of the human being is only found in the Holy Quran.

Remember, when the Holy Quran ordains obedience to the laws of God, these (laws) include both the physical and the moral laws. Obeying the physical laws enables us to conquer the forces of nature (we obey nature to command it) and obeying the moral laws integrates our personality. In both these cases, obeying the laws promotes and augments our own power. Amassed from the compulsion is the choice.

Mutual Relationship of Man with Man.

In Hinduism:

After the relationship of man with the universe, we are faced with the question of relationship of man with man. Hinduism decided that the Brahmans were born from the head of Brahma, the khashataris from the arms, the vaish from his legs, and the shoodra from his feet. This is the eternal division which can neither be overthrown from the system of the world, nor can men’s own endeavours change it. The shoodra shall have to be untouchable all his life, his duty is to serve the Hindus, the highest class. The child born to the Brahman family enjoys the highest ranks and privileges from birth to death . The scope of his privileges (according to Rig-Veda and Athar Veda) is:

“If a woman has 10 non-brahman husbands before but if a Brahaman holds her hand, then he will be considered to be her husband alone because Brahaman is the proprietor and husband of the females not the Khashatari or the Vaish.

(Me’raj-e-Insaniyyat P.01)

This was the division of the humans inhabiting within India. The others residing out of India was not even considered human; they were simply taken to be insects. Please think of a religion which shackles its own followers with unbreakable fetters of such class division and labels those outside its fold as the most abominable and despicable; can the proselytization of ‘do not tell a lie and do not steal’ bring any moral reformation?

In Judaism:

Among the Jews, the religion was confined to the race of Bani-Israel. The one who is not born to the Bani Israel, can never be admitted to their Divine Religion. The Paradise was strictly particularized for Bani Israel; all the non-Bani Israel are the fuel of the Hell. They were fumed with the emotions of hatred and enmity against the people outside their race; and this was all the consequence of the teachings of the (conventional) Torah. They had one set of laws for the Jews and another for the non-Bani Israel.

In Christianity:

It is generally accepted about Christianity that it constitutes an eternal religion for the whole mankind. It makes no discrimination between man and man. This is not the teaching of Christianity, it is a later political expediency-oriented concept. That is why in the present day Bible (Which remains in the process of change off and on), it is still found written that when Jesus sent his followers for proselytization, he ordered them not to go to the other nations, not to enter into any of the cities of Samrees but go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

(Mathew, Cahpter 10, Verses 5-6)

Do not give the consecrated to the dogs; and do not lay your pearls before the pigs.

(Mathew, Chapter 7,verse 6)

The anathema of extreme nationalism that you find in Europe is unconsciously the end product of this teaching. They confined the religion to the four walls of the church but the effects of the teaching of their race-worship are still existent in their subconscious with the same intensity. They can never think of the concept of universal mankind. That is why the moral principles they hold for their own nation are different from those they hold for the other nations. It is just like the Romans whose law about stealing was: ‘Stealing from a Roman is a crime and stealing from a non-Roman is not!

According To the Holy Quran:

The Holy Quran on its revelation, smashed these man-made fetters and declared openly that the humans of the whole Universe are the branches of the same genealogy and the foliage of the same tree. By birth, there is no discrimination between man and man. “God has created all of you from a single life cell”. (Al-Quran 4/1) Therefore, the whole mankind constitutes a Universal brotherhood . “The whole mankind is one community”; (Al-Quran 10/19) and every human being is worthy of equal respect by birth. “We have created all human beings worthy of respect” (Al-Quran 17/70) There is no superiority of the black to the white; of the white to the black, of the Arab to the Non-Arab, of the Non-Arab to the Arab. In the world, there is neither any Brahmin, nor any shoodra; neither the superior, nor the inferior. So as are their ranks in the society, its measure of greatness is their personal virtue and meritorious deeds. “And to all will be (assigned) ranks according to their deeds.” (Al-Quran 46/19) and the most worthy of all will be the one whose conduct will be the most pure of all and whose character, the highest of all. “The God of the Holy Quran is equally the sustainer, the Authority and the Allah of the whole humanity” ( Al-Quran 49/13) and “ His book is a compendium of instructions for all” (Al-Quran 45/21); His Rasool equally the Messenger for the whole humanity “Say, O mankind, I am Allah’s Rasool sent to all of you.” (Al-Quran 7/158) The essence of its teaching is: “Only that action or theory, which is beneficial to the whole of humanity without any discrimination of colour race language country creed and nationality, shall endure in the land (Al-Quran 13/17)

As said earlier the Western concept of life gave the principle of “the survival of the fittest” i.e. only that which is the strongest can endure. On the contrary, the Holy Quran puts forth the principle, “the survival of the most beneficial” i.e. only that which is most beneficial to the humanity can survive. Did you consider how the various aspects of human life undergo transformation by just changing the concept of life and how life-inspiring and balance-augmenting changes occur in the world of humanity? This is the only concept of life by which man can understand fully the “Why” of his strivings for the well being of others. To gain immortality is the very desire of every human being, no one likes to die, and he wants to live forever. The Holy Quran says that if you want to live for ever, the only way is that you do the deeds which are most beneficial for the mankind; giving preference to others over your own self if their needs are more demanding than yours(Al-Quran 59/9) and doing all this without any thought of personal gain. It says: “When the Momineen perform the act of procuring supplies for the nourishment/development of others they make it very clear to them that: “We do not desire any reward from you, not even the gratitude instead thereof.” (Al-Quran 76/9)

Just think over it, with this concept of life in view how the moral values constitute an integral part of life!

The practical consequences of the concept of human equality is that it forms a society, wherein, leaving aside someone becoming slave to others, no one even becomes subservient to any one else—nor a dependent on any one else. This establishes a system in which all the people while remaining within the limits of the laws of God decide the affairs of their life by mutual consultation (Al-Quran 42/38)

The Quranic Order

This provides a guarantee to every individual that “We are responsible for (providing) your subsistence and the subsistence of your children.” (Al-Quran 6/152) Please, solicit! Is there any need of telling a lie or stealing or being corrupt in this order? The moral values automatically become operative in it. No one holds the Divine rights in this Order: neither the religious priest-hood, nor the autocrats, or the capitalists. There is absolutely no concept of any such system in any of the religions of the world.

Finality of Nabuwwat:

With the concept of ‘Order’, the Holy Quran has declared another sublime reality, which is the greatest revolution in the world of religions. It expounded that the unchangeable principles required for the guidance of the mankind have been given in the Holy Quran and the system of their safeguard has also been provided. Within the purview of these principles, the coming generations will solve their problems keeping themselves in line with the exigencies of their time, so there is no need of any more Nabi( the Divine Message). Hence the chapter of Nabuwwat is closed. Did you observe how the End of Nabuwwat was the announcement of a grand revolution in the world of religions! Along with it, this reality was also announced that having passed through its infantile period, the human mind has now attained maturity. The man is no more an infantile, it has grown up to be an adult, therefore, it needs no one to lap it up any more. He would have now, to get up and move forward and onward on his own. You must have seen how this creates self-confidence in man and how he becomes able to traverse his path with dignity in the world.

Every religion of the world is waiting for the arrival of some one who, on his coming, will make his religion prevail over others. Refuting this concept, the Holy Quran made it clear that the Order of life We have bestowed is capable of prevailing over all the systems of life.(Al-Quran 9/33) All you have to do is, practically implement this ‘Order’, it will overcome all the man-made systems of life; no other system will be able to stand against this Order.

The Holy Quran while laying stress upon the moral values enjoins strictly to establish this Order of life in which these values automatically prevail.

The Ultimate Goal of Human Life (Salvation)

After this, come to the question which is the last word in this deliberation: What is the purpose and climax of all the exertion and struggle of human life? This is a very significant and fundamental question and will automatically clear up a great number of relevant aspects.

In Hinduism:

Among all the religions of the world the climax of the trials and endeavours of human life can be stated in a single word: “Salvation.” What is the meaning of “Salvation? This warrants a thorough understanding. It is evident that when some one is entangled in a trouble and then gets rid of it, it is called salvation’ i.e. it is imperative for salvation that first of all a person is necessarily caught in a calamity. This is the very basic concept about man in the world of religion. Religious belief in Hinduism is that every living being (animates whether insects or animals and humans) comes in this world to complete one’s term of punishment of the deeds one committed in one’s previous life. For example, a person in his present birth is a human. If he did evil deeds, he will become a rat in his next life, knowing absolutely nothing of which crime it was made a rat. Now if the rat does good deeds —- the rat will do good deeds as if the animals, too, do good and bad deeds! —- it will perhaps be made a man in its next life; every human being is entangled in the whirlpool of transmigration. The name of getting rid of this circumambulation is “Salvation.” It looks obvious that this belief is either the produce of superstition and/or the creation of the astuteness of those people who captured the authority in the society by one way or the other and then desired this authority to remain within their own families and that the other people may not even think of acquiring this authority. Brahman and Khashatary were the ruling class and vaish and shoodra, their servants. It was thought to be possible that a vaish or a shoodra might think as to how could the children of Brahman or khshatary be good enough for acquiring the right to rule right from the inception of their birth and that they themselves befall in their servitude thenceforth. Therefore this belief was coined that those born in the family of a Brahman has done good deeds in their previous life and those born in the vaish and shoodra committed evil deeds likewise. Hence this division is effected in accordance with the nature of the deeds accomplished in the previous life and is not the product of any trickery; so they shall have to remain vaish and shoodra in this life; any how if they do good deeds (i.e. would continuously go on serving the higher breed} they would be transformed into Brahmans and Khashataries in their coming life. In this way these subordinate classes were made satisfied with this tenet that this was all the reward of their own doings. They were not oppressed, nor were they competent to change this division within the present life.

Whatever is the motive behind this tenet, how dreadful have been its human-inflaming result is crystal clear. Firstly, it makes the man a mere helpless being; whatever he may do, he cannot bring any change in his existing state and, thus, divides the society into such permanent classes, which cannot be eliminated, and then what eventually is the purpose of this exertion and struggle? — Only to get salvation from the whirling of Transmigration (the cycle of death and re-birth). How meaningless is the purpose of the creation of man and the cosmos?.

According to Hindu Mysticism:

According to Hindu mysticism the soul of man (Aatma) is a part of God (parmatma). It was separated from its source and got entrapped in the marsh of matter and is lamenting for its escape from it. The purpose of human life is that this soul, after getting salvation from the world of matter, be re-united with its source. The methods to achieve this are renunciation of the world. Did you reflect what is the end product of human exertion and struggle according to this tenet — the complete annihilation. It means God having separated man from Himself caused him to be entangled in the swamp of matter and told him. “Now, you go through the sufferings of hard labour and distress so that you may attain salvation from this quagmire.” Just think, according to this creed, what kind of concept about God Himself emerges and what becomes the incentive for obedience to the moral values.

In Judaism:

With a slight difference the concept of ‘Salvation’ is the end product of human life in Judaism also. As has been mentioned before, the basic belief of Jews is that the Bani Israel are the favourite children of God, hence the only heirs of paradise; a people not born to the family of Bani Israel have no entitlement for entry into paradise. At that time, the tradition of circumcision was in vogue exclusively in Bani Israeil, so their belief was that only the circumcised would enter paradise and the uncircumcised would go into the hell. According to Talmud:

Abraham would be sitting by the door of the Hell in the world hereafter and would never allow any circumcised of the Bani Israel to enter it. So far the dreadfully sinful of the Bani Israel are concerned, he would cut the fore skin of the children who had died uncircumcised and would stick this skin to the place of circumcision of those from Bani Israel and hence, making them uncircumcised ,would send them to Hell for a few days.

(Talmud , P.404 with Reference to Barqi-e-Toor, P.166)

But their entry into Hell would merely be the fulfillment of a formality. The blaze of the Hell would have no effect on them. (Ibid.P.405) The reason for it, as written in “Jewish Encyclopedia”, is:

The blaze of the Hell would not be able to touch the Israelite sinners because they would make confession of their sins by the door of the Hell and hence would return to the Lord.

(Volume- V , P. 583)

Not only for the ‘salvation’ in the hereafter, but also for the honour and exaltation in this world, the Jews hold this belief:

Some get honour by virtue of the good deeds of their forefathers and some by those of their coming generations.

(Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol VI, P.60)

According to the Encyclopedia of Britannica:

The centre of the aspirations of the Jews was the deeds of their forefathers, especially the creed that Abraham was their ancestral grandfather.

Similarly in the Encyclopedia of Religions and Ethics, it is written that.

In accordance with the belief of the Jews, all the deeds of their forefathers would be collected at one place and then divided among all the Bani Israel. In this way everyone will be entitled to salvation and auspiciousness.

(Vol.11,P.144)

Just reflect! Does any question of obedience to the moral values arise in the presence of these beliefs?

In Christianity:

The belief in Christianity is that every child is born bearing the burden of the sin of its first parents (Adam and Eve). Cleansing the ill effects of this sin from man is not possible in any way. For this purpose, the Lord had mercy on man and sent his only son (Jesus Christ) to the world to atone for this sin with his sacrifice on the crucifix. Those who believe in the atonement of Jesus Christ would get salvation, those who do not believe as such would enter Hell. For salvation there is no question of one’s deeds. Therefore in a letter to Ephesians, Saint Paul writes:

“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and not of yourselves; it is God’s gift. It is not by works…”

(Ephesians 2/8-9)

He also wrote to the Romans:

“ For we come to the conclusion that a man is justified by faith and not with the works of Law.”

Romans: (3/28).

In a letter to Galatians, this reality has been described in these words:

“Those who depend on the works of law live under the curse, for it is written “cursed is everyone who does not abide by all that is written in the book of law.” But that no one is made righteous in God’s presence through the Law is evident, for “He who is righteous through faith will live”. The law however does not rest on faith,…..Christ has ransomed us from the curse of the law in as much as He became a curse for us.

(Galatians- 3/10-14)

Just think, with this belief, are the moral actions left with any locus standi and contrarily the one who relies on the deeds is considered cursed. According to this belief of Christianity the distress the man gets entangled in is not the result of any of his crimes, but a chastisement of the sin of his first parents in which that poor fellow is implicated for no fault at all. The acquittal from this suffering is not attained as a recompense of any good action on his part, but the conviction on the belief on the atonement , which the Christ offered. So far as the belief of the “original sin” being fallacious is concerned, the scholars and researchers of Christianity are publicly declaring it to be a false belief, for example, R. F. Johsnon writes in his book “Confucianism and Modern China”,

The belief of the original sin, in fact, is the “original dilemma” for which we are displeased with every kind of good and are inclined to every type of evil.

For this belief, A.E.Taylor writes:

The belief is a refutation. I’ll welcome any scientific and God calling towards religion which may ward us off to believe in such a droll calumny of human nature.

(Mind- July 1912).

According to the Holy Quran:

This Scientific and inviting-to-God Religion is Islam which pronounced that neither any human comes to this world loaded with the sins of the previous birth, nor, is entangled in the contamination of the first parent’s faltering. Every child in the world is born with a clean slate and is worthy of respect. He has been bestowed with potentials as realizable possibilities for leading a life higher than that of the physical life at the animal level. The development of these potentialities is the goal of the human life. If man develops the potentialities of the physical life only, he gets the comforts and forces of the physical world but never does it come to his lot the higher life at the human level, which the Holy Quran denotes as the paradisiacal life.

“The one who seeks immediate gains of the physical life alone, according to Our Law, which we have formulated with Our Choice, We grant him with haste. But his (human) life is a life of crisis, which he leads with disgrace and ignominy. But the one who, along with the physical life develops the human life as well, he acquires the physical gains and his personality also keeps evolving”. (Al-Quran 17/18)

“And the one who desires the pleasantries of the future and puts forth efforts in proportion to what ought to be and believes in the truth of the prescribed higher-order values of God, his endeavours are recompensed in full.” (Al-Quran 17/19)

“We promote this group according to Our Law and also that group and shower our bounties in proportion to their efforts and actions. Always remembers, We have not built any dykes against our bounties for any one.”( Al-Quran 17/20)

This development of the human personality can take place in a system that is established on the foundations of PERMANENT VALUES. This development is the other name of ‘the natural consequences of actions.’ Good actions are those which promote stability and integration of the human SELF, the evil are those which cause it to grow weak and disintegrate. The result of each action draws up concomitantly on the human personality. This is its ROLL OF CONDUCT, which in the words of the Holy Quran, is hung around the neck of every one and opens up on the eve of manifestation of results. The human personality developed on a set criterion, will be able to pass through the next evolutionary stages of life…. This is called the paradisiacal life in the hereafter. That, which does not come up to that standard, will stop its development….. This is the life of Hell. The Holy Quran has interpreted it as measures ( of good deeds) being heavier or lighter

“so the one whose measure weighs heavy will have a pleasing life and the one whose measure weighs lighter, abyss will be his abode.” (Al-Quran101/6-9)

Have you observed that according to the Holy Quran the purpose of life is not liberation from any suffering but to achieve a higher position in life with proper development of the endowed potentialities and reach a higher and exalted stage of life as compared to the existing one. The Holy Quran has denoted it in terms of “achievement and success” and not salvation. You must have also observed from this that a satisfying and an elegant answer are obtained to the questions: ‘why should I abide by the moral values? What benefit does it accrue to me and what loss do I undergo by going against them. This is the only way on the basis of which man obeys these values rationally and follows them with complete satisfaction of the mind and the heart.

Ad-Deen:

You would have observed from the above explanations that the Holy Quran does not only specify a few moral values but also provides a comprehensive system of life raised on the basic concept of God-man-Universe-Law of Requital and purpose of life. The name of this comprehensive system is Ad-Deen and its practical implementation is called Al-Islam. The moral values only produce their results under this system and become rationally workable as well; besides, there is no other system through which the purpose of such type can be realized. That is why it is said:

“It is a fact that Ad-Deen (way of life) acceptable to God is only Islam.” Al-Quran 3/18)Therefore,

“If any body wants to adopt any system other than Islam, this system would not be accepted from him and he would eventually know how big a loss he has suffered.” (Al-Quran 3/04)

Ad-Deen will be adopted in totality:

The concept of the system brings forth this factor also that the results of its constituents can only be drawn up when it is adopted in its totality. The example of the system is like the doctor’s prescription. This prescription can only be effective if you use it wholesomely in accordance with the directions of the doctor. Taking one or two items of this prescription will not cure the ailment; but on the contrary partial use of this prescription may induce harmful effects. Hence the Holy Quran says :-

“Do you want to accept one part of this code of laws and refute the other? Whoever from amongst you do this, its result would be nothing except ignominy and disgrace in this world, and he will be returned to the most grievous suffering on the Day of Judgement.”(Al-Quran 2/85)

The constituent parts of this prescription are those characteristics of Allah which the Holy Quran terms as the “Balanced Attributes” Asm’aul Husna— Adopting some of these attributes and ignoring others can be of no avail. Always bear this fact in mined that Reality is an indivisible whole, it cannot be split up into its parts. The balanced Attributes of Allah are various facets of Absolute Reality. REALITY is the name of their sum-total. If some of these are separated, you cannot term these segregated constituents alone as the parts of that REALITY. For instance, if REALITY comprises one hundred aspects and you take up only ten, you cannot claim that you have adopted one-tenth of the REALITY, therefore you would be entitled to the proportional benefit. You cannot get one-tenth of healing by taking one out of ten medicines written in the prescription; so the Holy Quran says:

“And for Allah are all the Balance Attributes. (These are the various facets of that Absolute Reality) so call Him by all these facets and leave those people alone who deviate to one extreme in (emulating a few of) His Attributes.”(Al-Quran 7/180)

You would observe that with the people, who remain cut off from the Islamic System of life, the moral values on which emphasis is laid, are those values which pertain to the tender and delicate emotions of man, like sympathy; mercy; forgiveness; tolerance; humbleness; soft-speaking, to be silent even if some one abuses; to offer other side if some one gives a slap on one side of your check, to give over your waistcoat yourself if some one takes away your coat; to love even your enemy or go a bit further, feed the sparrows, the crows, to provide a drinking place for cattle etc. Justice, prevention of oppression and exploitation; preservation of universal human rights; a political system in which no one is subservient to anyone; a social set up which is based on respect for man; an economic order in which no one is dependent upon any one and every one’s necessities of life are guaranteed without any undue labour and ignominy; such a social contract in which every action progressively goes on producing its own rightful result— All these matters will have no moral significance with these people.

Result of the Teachings of Christianity:

About Christianity, which is the biggest upholder of the kind of moral values mentioned above,, go through the words of a well-renowned Spanish professor. Dr. Falta De Cracia quoted by Brifault in his renowned book “ The Making of Humanity.” He writes.

“The notion of justice,” says the famous Spanish Professor, “ is as entirely foreign to the spirit of Christianity as is that of intellectual honesty. It lies wholly out side the field of its ethical vision…. Christianity has offered comfort and consolation to men who suffered under injustice, but of that injustice itself it has remained absolutely incognizant. It has called upon the weary and heavy laden, upon the suffering and the afflicted, it has proclaimed to them the law of lover, the duty of mercy and forgiveness, the Fatherhood of God; but in that torrrent of religious and ethical emotion which has impressed men as the summit of the sublime, and been held to transcend all other ethical ideals, common justice, common honesty have no place. The ideal Christian, the saint, is seen descending like an angel from heaven amid the welter of human misery, among the victims of ruthless oppression and injustice, bringing to them the comfort and consolation of the Paraclete, of the Religion of Sorrow. But the cause of that misery lies wholly outside the range of his consciousness; no glimmer of any notion of right and wrong enters into his view of it. It is the established order of things, the divinely appointed government of the world, the trial laid upon sinners by divine ordinance. St. Vincent de Paul visits the living hell of the French galleys; he proclaims the message of love and calls sinners to repentance; but to the iniquity, which creates and maintains that hell, he remains absolutely indifferent. He is appointed Grand-Almoner to His Most Christian Majesty. The world might groan in misery under the despotism of oppressors, men’s lives and men’s mind might be enslaved, crushed and blighted; the spirit of Christianity would go forth and comfort them, but it would never occur to it to redress a single one of those wrongs. It has remained unconscious of them. To those wrongs, to men’s right to be delivered from them, it was by nature completely blind. In respect to justice, to right and wrong, the spirit of Christianity is not so much immoral as amoral. The notion was as alien to it as was the notion of truth. Included in its code was, it might be controversially alleged, an old formula,’ the golden rule.’ A commonplace of most literature, which was popular in the East from China to Asia Minor; but that isolated precept was never interpreted in the sense of justice. It meant forgiveness, forbearing, kindness, but never mere justice, common equity; those virtues were far too unemotional in aspect to appeal to the religious enthusiast. The renunciation of life and all its ‘ vanities,’ the casing overboard of all sordid cares for its maintenance, the suppression of desire, prodigal almsgiving the consecration of a life the value of which had disappeared in his eyes to charity and love, non-resistance, passive obedience, the turning of the other check to an enemy, the whole riot of those hyperbolic ethical emotions could fire the Christian consciousness, while it remained utterly unmoved by every form of wrong, iniquity and injustice.”

The Case of Irreligionists:

This, in a nutshell, is the wholesomeness of moral values upheld by the religionists. Now take the case of the people who do neither believe in God, nor in the continuance of human personality, nor in the revelation, nor in the life hereafter, but, on the contrary, stress upon the moral values. Ask any one of them: “ When you say that (for example) the poor should be helped; tell me, why should I help the poor?” You will observe that they give you strange answers: Some will say, “Helping the poor is a human obligation” ask them, “Sir, what do you mean by human obligation and who is he who has imposed this obligation on me? You’ll observe they would have no reasonable answer to these askings. Some will say that they ought to help the poor for if they become poor in the coming days, some one else may help them. Firstly, this reciprocity is of such a low caliber that you would never call it a character of any high order; then also keep this factor in mind, ‘ If the people become able to manage not to be in need of anyone at any time, how would you prevail upon them to help the poor?” You will observe they will out-rightly make an appeal to the human emotions; they will not be able to give you any reasonable answer based on arguments. If you think a bit deep, you would find that such feelings would be lying in their subconscious: that since the society values these matters, therefore these ought to be done for the sake of becoming respectable in the society; and/or some political motives would be operative behind this phenomenon, such as hospitals, schools and colleges of the missionaries or the non-violence of the Indian leader Mahatama Gandhi (late); or it would have been the result of traditional and inherited belief; and/or the weak nerves of the humans which have been termed as virtuous emotions. You will observe that none of these can work as the basis of the human character. So far as the question of national character is concerned, it has been discussed in the beginning of this discourse. By appealing to these emotions, you can get some one do good work provisionally but cannot make this work to be a routine of his life; you cannot produce permanence in it, while character is the very name of permanence and changlessness in behaviour. The surety of this permanence can be nothing but the belief in the true ‘concept of life.’ That is why the Holy Quran invites people who are already the followers of religions, as well as those who acknowledge any religion to profess Eiman, accept the concepts of life which are the very essence of its ‘ Order.’ It says about them that:

“If these people profess eiman as you have, then these people can follow the right path of life. If they repudiate, then make it a point that these people are opposing the truth and the rightful; they are not following that path.”( Al-Quran 2/137)

These are the very characteristics of Islam which are found neither in any of the religions of the world, nor in the world of thought and intellect. Therefore, there can be no true Deen (rightful way of life) other than Islam.

Warning to the Muslims:

I want to give necessary warning at this juncture. Our state of affairs at this stage is that we become very happy when we say: our Deen is superior to all the religions and then, sit back and believe that this makes us the best in the comity of nations and (that if we are no good in this world, it makes no difference, because this is only a transitory world and on its coming to an end) we will be the one to inherit the paradise in the world hereafter; the rest of the human beings will all enter the Hell.

Actions Make Life:

This is the biggest self-deception we are caught in. (The Holy Quran tells us this was exactly what the Jews used to say; this brought them to a state of life which is clear to the world today) Islam’s being superior can only be useful to us when we ourselves attain superiority by acting in accordance with it; leading a life of disgrace and objection, and remaining puffed up on the superiority of Islam is nothing but a stupidity. It is just like a person who consecutively propagates worldwide that he has a tested prescription — an elixir of life, a proved cure of all diseases — but for the cure of his own headache, he remains awfully busy searching for such a medicine from others. Please tell me: “What benefit can that prescription bring to such a person and his boasting of it can be of what use to him? This on the contrary, would make him a laughing stock in the world and no body would rightly admit his pretension. The foremost and basic proof of this prescription having been tested over times would be the very state of health of his family. Islam has presented the same proof of its truthfulness and preference when the Holy Prophet told the antagonists of this Deen that : (Al-Quran 6/136)

“You go on working according to your system; I shall keep working according to my own; very soon it would be known to whom does the success eventually belong. In this way my claim would come true that Zalimeen (Oppressors) can never prosper;”(Al-Quran 6/136)

and the sayer of such sayings, first of all, presented himself as a witness to the proof of the truthfulness of his claim. When his opponents asked him: “What proof of it you have that you are true in your claim: He answered in the words of Quran:

“I have dwelt amongst you all my life prior to it. Can’t you adjudge from it whether such a life is of the truthful or a liar?”(Al-Quran 10/10)

Remember, my respected and honoured comrades! Only that person can present Islam to the world as the rightful way of life (true Deen) who is, not only in the company of his friends but also in the big crowd of his foes, able to project his life in proof of his truthfulness and then no one has ever dared to oppose him. This is the only right mechanism for proselytization of Islam.

‘The Quran Affirms What You Hold’:

Now, at the end I deem it necessary to do away with one or two doubts which often emerge in the mind of the people in this regard. The first is that the Holy Quran tells the followers of other religions: ‘I affirm what you hold” i.e. the teachings you have, so the question is when the Holy Quran itself professes the teachings of these religions, how can it be asserted that the true teachings of God are found exclusively in the Holy Quran and not with other religions:

The objection indeed carries weight and merits necessary consideration. First of all see if it is the Holy Quran itself which demands the followers of other religions to pin their faith upon this claim, or do the Muslims present this assertion alone? The complete verse containing this affirmation reads as follows :

“Profess belief in this (Book) which I have (now) revealed (namely the Holy Quran) which affirms. What-thou-have’ and lead not in repudiating it.” (Al-Quran 2/41)

It is clear that the Holy Quran itself urges upon the followers of the religions to profess belief in it.

Secondly, there is explicit clarification in various places of the Holy Quran that the followers of these religions had made transpositions in their heavenly books; literal transposition ( Al-Quran 4/71) and additions in them on their own ( Al-Quran 2/79); and intermingling the truth with the falsehood ( Al-Quran 3/71); in this way numerous contradictions had crept in these books ( Al-Quran 11/110). The followers of these religions themselves stand in witness to these claim of the Holy Quran. Hence not a single non-Muslim today can make a claim based on reason that the book they present as heavenly is in its pristine and original form i.e. the same book which was revealed to their prophet. You will find the details of this resume in the first chapter of my book, ‘Mairaj-i-Insaniyyat’, in which the history of the so-called heavenly books of all the religions has been described. This makes it clear that:

“How can the Holy Quran stand witness to the truthfulness of these books, the followers of which themselves do not call them original and free from interpolation? And how, in spite of the interpolation and additions to such an extent, some moral values are still found in these books, the Holy Quran affirms these values but not the books in their totality. The fact is that the meanings of Mussadaq ( the affirmer) here are not the one that testifies the truthfulness,” its meanings are the one that proves the truth contained in them ” The Holy Quran says: “The moral values you hold are merely theoretical in nature. I give the system in which these values will emerge as the true realities and this is my special feature; for example, You also say the hungry should be fed and I too, you say this as a mere sermon and advise and insist on giving alms to the people; how is the hunger of the hungry cured with it, every one knows; I give such a practical economics system in which no individual can remain hungry; in this way I prove the truth of those moral values.”

The distinctive features of Islam are that with its practical system all these moral values are realized as truths. This is alone possible in Deen, not in “religion?” That is why Islam has been termed as Ad-Deen (the way of life)— and not religion, so its comparison should be made with other systems of life, not with other religions.

The second Doubt:

The second question that raised is that there are innumerable people to whom Islam has not reached yet; or (for example) a person is born to a Hindu family and obeys very honestly his religion thinking it to be truer, what is the fault of such a people due to which the avenues of prosperity (success) and achievement be closed to him? This questions confuses and perplexes many minds, therefore its thorough understanding is a must.

Had the matter of salvation and auspiciousness or reward and punishment been merely emotional, it would have been acceptable as to why a people who are not at fault be punished at all. But when reward and punishment pertain to law, and success and achievement be the name of the natural consequences of actions, the emotions cannot have any say in it, for example the children of the village with no school will remain illiterate and hence deprived of the benefits that the literate will get. This is the most severe punishment these children are inflicted to, though they are not at fault. How sympathetic you be to them, but the deficiency that has crept in by being illiterate is the one that cannot be made up even by your sympathies and subtle emotions. Here the question whose-fault-is-it does not arise. If a child does not go to school for one year complete due to illness, you do not promote him to the next class only on the pretext that he is not at fault. Only that child would be promoted to the next class who has developed ability. According to the Holy Quran, only that person would reach the next stage of life that has developed the potentiality to traverse these stages.

The same principle will also be applicable to those who, thinking their religions to be true, follow their religion all their life in good faith. Some one’s eating of arsenic as medicine in good faith, will not restrict its ill effects to him on the pretext that its eater had taken it honestly as medicine. The arsenic will produce its effects unequivocally whether some one has taken it advertantly or inadvertently. The nation that worships fire and water (Agni and Indar) cannot gain control over and run steam engines with this belief. It is clear that such a nation will remain deprived of all benefits liable to be attained with the power of steam. This deprivation of theirs is not a revengeful punishment inflicted on them by any one else. It is the natural consequences of the their ignorance; which no passion of sympathy can remove; it can only be possible if and when the nation recourses to the law of Allah, harnesses the forces of nature and then makes use of them for their benefit. According to the Holy Quran, this alone is the law prescribed for success and achievement. Neither any body’s aspiration has a play in it nor emotions. It has very clearly been proclaimed that

“The judgement will neither be made in accordance with your wishes, nor with the wishes of the “ people of Book”( judgements will be made according to Our Law)” (Al-Quran 4/123)

and that law is that whoever does wrong shall suffer the consequence thereof.

And the law ought to be as such. If the law starts following the wishes of the people, the system of the entire Universe would go into chaos :

“If the truth starts following whims and wishes (feelings) of the people, there would be chaos in the earth and the heavens and whatever is there in between,” (Al-Quran 23/70)

God can alone be the One who is over and above feelings. That is why the Holy Quran says about the nations which are ruined as the result of their crimes that:

“Their Rabb sent – the Road- Roller of the Law of Requital; which leveled them with the ground; and He feared not its consequences” Al-Quran 91/14-15)

He had no anxiety on their total annihilation. He did never throb and palpitate on it, so much so that :

“neither the sky wept on them nor the earth .” (Al-Quran 44/29)

But do not think that His Law has no provision for recantation and revival and if some one committed a crime any time, he became accursed forever. No, there is every opportunity of reforming after repentance:

“Tell them: O’ My men, those of you who have committed excess against themselves do not get disappointed from the blessings of God. He will protect you from the harmful effects of all your prevarication.” :(Al-Quran 39/35)

Its method is to do such good deeds, which put away the loss done to you with your faltering, because :

“The harmful effects of deeds creating unevenness can only be effaced by deeds creating beauty and consistency.”(Al-Quran 11/115)

Our Responsibility:

Now the last thing is that there are people who could not get the message of Islam. “Who is responsible for it? Obviously its responsibility lies on us, the claimants of the inheritance of the Book. If we are unable to shoulder our responsibility , the burden of wrong doings of those whom we did not convey the message of Islam lies on our shoulders. That is why the Holy Quran says that :

“They will carry their own burden as well as that of others.” :( Al-Quran 29/13)

Today in the absence of the system based on truth and righteousness, the nations of the world are committing inhuman crimes. A part of its chastisement lies on our own shoulders and our present condition is a clear proof of this phenomenon. God assigned to use the duty of superintendence of the comity of nations. Leaving the watchfulness of others aside, we are no longer capable of maintaining ours, therefore we today are paying (the penalty) for it. Whenever there is a theft any where, it is the sleepy guard that is always doomed forthwith, so we are suffering the chastisement of this negligence and our claim that Islam enjoy superiority over all other systems can not save us from this torment and will never save us till we prove ourselves worthy of its superiority by acting on it.

At the end, I deem it necessary to explain that whatever I have said in this treatise is neither desired to offend followers of any religion, nor intended to despise (God forbid us) any of the founders of these religions. So far as non-religious founders are concerned, according to the Holy Quran, we have Eiman (conviction) that God sent messengers to all the nations of the world. Out of them the Holy Quran has mentioned a few by their respectable names and the rest of them have not been mentioned by name. But whether the name of any one is given in the Holy Quran or not, we pay respect to these Messengers from the core of our heart, so much so that the confession of their Risalat (Divine Mission) is an integral part of our Eiman. The Holy Quran says that the truthful teachings of God were presented to them but later on these teachings were either reduced or added to; now these pristine and original teachings are only preserved in the Holy Quran. When we represent the reality that Islam is the only true Deen of God, then its teachings would have to be invariably compared with that of other religions and those found against the Holy Quran cannot be true from our point of view. Whatever I have described about the teachings of other religions is only in the perspective of this purpose. This reality should always be kept in view that Islam does not want to prove itself better by speaking ill of others; it represents its goodness rationally. and prevails upon others for its acceptance rationally. The Holy Quran enjoins us. “Do not call names to the idols of the polytheists”; it teaches to be respectful to the worthy – of – respect personalities of the whole world, but, of course, it shows the fallacy of teaching assigned to them. This should also be our mode of conduct.

*******************

Islam is not a religion in the conventional sense. According to the Holy Quran it is a way of life—a Socio Economic System. A detailed paragraph explaining what is Deen follows.

783 total views, no views today

(Visited 137 times, 2 visits today)

THE STORY OF PAKISTAN – IDEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE – Prof. Dr. Manzoor-ul-Haque

…….. And then the grandpa started telling “The Story of Pakistan”.

It is said that when the phoenix feels that its life is going to end, it gathers dried stalks and starts singing. Flames start coming out of its wings and burn its surroundings, and burn it too. It makes all a heap of ashes. Then rain pours and creates a new phoenix – a new base of life.

A NEW BASE OF LIFE FOR NATIONS

This allegory, whether true or not, equally applies to the nations who have a little spark of life left in them. It happens as such, even if the ups and downs of life reduce these nations to ashes. This interred spark comes out and creates a man who gives a new lease of life to the nation.

STATE OF AFFAIRS AFTER 1857

There was an 1857 Independence War in the Indo-Pak sub-continent. The British termed it “an act of revolt”. The Muslims became the victim. They lay threw down, bleeding at the feet of the conqueror, the British. They lost their rule, even their existence as a nation. The defeat put them reeling into a state of hopelessness. Bahadur Shah Zafar (1775 – 1862), was the legal body, the last reminisce of the great Mughal dynasty that was exposed as false, unreliable, and irrelevant. Queen Victoria (1819 – 901) became the Empress of India in 1877. Stage by stage Muslims were deprived of their political, military, civil, judicial and economic power. They were even deprived of their traditional educational facilities and resources. They were already a fallen nation, headed by an Emperor whose presence was not effective even within the four walls of the Red Fort in Delhi. He, as a pensioner of the East India Company[1], was found pleading helplessly for a rise in his pension.

The British applied pharaoh’s political strategy, humiliate the brave and uphold the coward. The Hindu co-operated with the British. The intention was to take revenge for 1000 years governance of the Muslim rule. The brave who survived were blamed for the “act of revolt”. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan wrote a book “Loyal Muhammadans of India” (Published 1860) which became a living proof of the Muslims’ state of decadence and dejection. They were termed as “the sole ingredients of every crime”, Sir Syed writes in this book. It was on the basis of the uncommitted crimes that Sir Dr. W.W. Hunter in his book “The Indian Mussalmans” (published 1871) suggested that the status of Muslims of India in future would be no more than that of woodcutter and of water-carrier. “A hundred and seventy years ago”, writes Sir Syed, “it was impossible for a well-known Mussalman to become poor, at present it is almost impossible for him to remain rich.” “The truth is”, he continues, “The Mussalmans were the superior race, superior not only in stoutness of heart and strength of arm, but in power of political organization and in the science of practical government.” And now “no calamity started from heaven, which before reaching the earth did not seek the home of the Mussalmans. In all the English newspapers and books that I saw during those days I invariably marked one thing, namely, none is wicked and mischievous except Muslims, Muslims, Muslims. No prickly tree was planted in those days which it was not said that its seed was sown by the Muslims and no fiery typhoon arose about which it was not alleged that it was raised by the Muslims”.

SIR SYED AHMED KHAN, THE PHOENIX (1817 – 1898)

Just at this time came Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, he was but an ordinary employee of the British Government. His childhood and adolescence, in his own words, remained buried in playing Kabaddi[2], flying kites and enjoying dance and music. In these circumstances, he sprang up as a spark from the ashes of the nation. He ran through its dried veins and paved way to create a new World.

Impact of his Inner Feelings

When Sir Syed Ahmed Khan felt the sense of creating awareness in the nation, there was a darkness of frustration all around. Expressing his inner feelings he says:
“I did never think the nation will ever come out of this morass and chaos to survive, to prosper, and to get respect any more. I could not bear to look upon the condition of the people. . . . Believe me, this grief made me old and turned my hair gray. … But then, the thought came to me that it would be very cowardly and unmanly to leave one’s country in ruins and enjoy a comfortable life in privacy. No! I ought to participate in that misery. It was national duty to try to relieve the miseries as much as I could. And so I … chose to work for my country.”

The Height of his Character

What was the height of character of this saviour of the nation? The following example makes it clear:

During the time of violent disturbances, he saved the lives of many English women and children just because they were human beings. The British Government, as reward, offered him the forfeited estates of the Chandpur’s chieftains along with a reasonable property. He refused to accept. His plea was that quenching thirst with the blood of a Muslim brother would not be agreeable to him in any way. He mentioned this event in one of his speeches to the Muslim Education Conference. He said, “Unto my own heart, I said ‘no one would be more stupid than me in the world, if I accept this reward and become an owner of the estate at a time when my own nation is in tatters’, so I flatly refused to accept it.” And then he became busy for the survival of his people.

Two-nation Theory

‘Let the Muslims live as a separate permanent nation’ was his slogan. Neither the British, nor the Hindu were ready to accept the idea of being a separate permanent nation. The British, at the most, were willing to accept the Muslims as a rebellious religious sect and the Hindu as if the Muslims were untouchable. At this juncture of time, it was Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, who proclaimed that the Muslims and the Hindu are the two separate nations. In 1867, in reply to a question of the Commissioner of Banaras, Mr. Shakespeare, he said:

“And now I am sure these two nations will never co-operate with each other in any endeavour. Nothing has happened till yet. As the time passes this opposition and enmity will mount from the so called educated Hindus, those who live by that time will see.”

The Muslim and the Hindu are two separate nations, so their states ought to be separate. This announcement was the first foundation stone, which Sir Syed Ahmed Khan laid almost 150 years ago. Addressing the students of Dar-ul-Uloom, he said:

“Remember, the truest ideology is the ideology of Kalemah: ‘There-is-no-god-but-God and Mohammad (570 – 632) pbuh is – the-Messenger-of-God.’ Believing in this ideology makes our nation really ours. If you did all at your command without committing yourselves to this ideology, you would no more remain members of our nation, how exalted though you may become out. I am confident you would be the character models of knowledge and Islam both. And then alone would our nation attain the real, the original, the genuine esteem.” He was the FIRST Architect of Pakistan.

His Pursuit of Excellence

The Indo-Pak history stands witness to the fact that up to the year 1930, The Muslims of British-India were like grains of sand, scattered and broken. They were like a camel without a nose-string. They were a convoy without a destination, without a guide, and without a leader. Their endeavours were short-lived like a gust of wind or a splash of seawater where Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was putting forth the best of his efforts. He was taking up the challenge with great courage, determination, and enthusiasm, the qualities that never failed him till the end of his life. He worked and worked hard, and there is hardly an aspect of national life that he did not touch and leave his impact on. Through his speeches, writings, meetings, and dialogues, he projected the idea of Muslims being a separate nation from others. And the foundation was Kalema, the Muslims’ Ideology. He embarked upon this new phase of his life in 1898.

DR. MOHAMMAD IQBAL, THE THINKER OF THE QUR’AN (1873 – 1938)

In the midst of this disorder and turmoil, there rose a man, whom Allah’s bounty had gifted not only with sound reason but also with vision. He attracted the scattered Muslims to their true destiny, predetermined for them by the Qur’an. He pointed out the way to achieve their goals in the context of affairs then prevailing in India. He analyzed the situation around them. It was Dr. Mohammad Iqbal, the Muslim philosopher and thinker of the Qur’an.

Common Ideology: The Base of The Nations

He made it very clear that ‘nations are built on the basis of common ideology. The geographical boundaries of the countries do not form them into a nation.’ He continuously spread this idea. When he sensed that the circumstances were favorable for this idea, in the city of Allahabad, he pronounced it in clear terms that

“An Islamic State was ordained for the Muslims in North West of India.”

Dr. Muhammad Iqbal’s Exposition: Islamic State

In his address, he made it clear that:
“From Islamic point of view a State is the end product of an effort to translate ideal concepts of Islam into realities of space and time. This is a task of converting these lofty concepts into collective human conduct”.

He also made clear that in this State:

1. “Worship” is placing one’s self in subservience to the Laws of Allah

2. “Establishment of Salat” means shaping a society to be in harmony with obedience to the Laws of Allah

3. “Giving of Zakat” implies providing sustenance to all people of the State, indeed to mankind at large

4. Promoting rightful deeds and prohibiting unlawful acts comprises promoting what the Qur’an decrees and prohibiting by law what the Qur’an forbids

5. “Shirk” (duality) means obeying man’s self-made laws

In the context of these items, Dr. Iqbal said:

“Islam does not require loyalty to a crown or a throne; it enjoins keeping faith with Laws of Allah”

Islam as The Muslims’ Magian Heritage

Dr. Iqbal’s efforts, through his visionary thoughts, were at the Deen, the way of life that Allah had given to mankind through the Prophet (pbuh), who had put it into practice. He wanted to bring back this Deen to the world in its original form. It was a treasure that had been lost by Muslims. He told Muslims that the Islam found in various countries of Muslims was not the one, which had been established by the Prophet (pbuh) in Medina. It is, in fact, the Islam fabricated and enforced by monarchies. And now it is being upheld and maintained by our clergy. Historically Zoroastrian Iran took revenge of its defeat not only from Arabs but also from whole of Islam, uprooting its very foundations. Dr. Iqbal summed it up in one sentence:

“The conquest of Iran resulted, not in Iran becoming Islamized, but Islam being Iranized” – (Islam and Mysticism-New Era 28th July 1917).

Dr. Mohammad Iqbal wrote in another letter, “Indian Muslims have been under Iranian influences since centuries. They are not familiar with the Arabic Islam or its objectives. Their ideals, literary as well as social, all are Iranian.” (Iqbalnama Vol.1, P.24)

He calls it Muslims’ Magian heritage and in extreme mental pain, he writes:

“This Magian heritage dried up Islam’s sources of inspiration and stalled -brought to a standstill – both the development of its spirit and the achievement of its objectives,” – (Ahmadiyat and Islam).

Renewal of The Original Deen

To renew the original Deen, he was saying, it is necessary that a piece of territory should be secured. This territory would be free of alien systems. Then an Islamic system based on the guidance from the Qur’an can be established in it. This was the objective, which he placed before the nation in 1930. He was clear in his mind that achievement of that objective would:

Enable Islam to free itself from the effects of monarchies and thus to break the shackles of inertia which has gripped the culture, education and sharia of Muslims for centuries. Because of this freedom, there will be a renaissance of the Deen. The revived Deen will be closer to spirit of the modern times (Presidential address at Allahabad-1930). This was only possible through the Qur’an’s Concept of Government.

Earlier, in his collection of “Lectures” – The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam -he had observed:

Under the present circumstances, the way out for us is to scrape away the stubborn layers of Un-Islamic influence from the mirror-face of Islam that have completely blocked its dynamism and evolution. (We should) renew the genuine values of liberty, integrity and equality and make such a renewal the base on which to erect our moral, social and political systems that should reflect the simplicity as well as universality of real Islam (Sixth address).

Parasites on Islam: Monarchy, Mullahism And Monasticism

He knew that the toughest opposition to Islam would be from the religious hierarchy. It is because religion had become a means of livelihood for the clergy. When it adjusts itself to the rulers, religion also becomes a means of wielding power, and influence. On the other hand, in real Islam, the institution of theocracy would lose its existence. If one reads Iqbal’s poetry from end to end, one will find him extremely critical of the Mullah. He holds the Mullah responsible for the ruin of Muslims. He is found emphasizing to Muslims:

You have lost your pristine quality,
O victims of Monarchy, Mullahism and Monasticism!

Dr. Mohammad Iqbal expressed his understanding in his presidential address to All India Muslim Conference meeting (held in March 1932) when he said:

The grandeur of our Deen is lying shackled by primitive superstitions of our Mullahs and Jurists and is begging to be let free. From spiritual angle we are in a prison house of emotions and situations, which we built around ourselves during centuries past. It is a matter of shame for us seniors that we could not prepare our young generation to withstand the economic, political, and religious crises that are going to unfold.

In his view the religious hierarchy would oppose the new State based on the original Islam because it would be based on the Laws of the Qur’an. For this reason it would need a lot of courage and determination to pursue the achievement of such a State. Hence he emphasized in his speeches that:

Sooner or later, the Islamic world is going to face the question whether there is room for evolution in Islamic laws. This is a very important question and would require strenuous mental effort for an answer. The answer should certainly be in the affirmative in case the Islamic world addresses this question in the spirit of Umar -that Umar who was the first and foremost freedom loving mind in Islam, and who, during the last moments of life of the Prophet (pbuh) had the courage to say, “For us the Book of Allah will suffice!”

Dr. Iqbal knew that the system based on pure Qur’anic concepts, values, injunctions, principles, commandments would be at the mercy of the blockheads who support every non-Qur’anic system. In the Qur’anic system, there would be no room for personal rule – whether in the form of monarchy, dictatorship, or even in the form of Western democracy. It would be opposed to Western Imperialism and to nationalism based on race or territory. It would accept neither Western capitalism, nor Soviet communism. For this reason, this modern Islamic State would be opposed not only by the religious establishment but also by other nations of the world. No nation will tolerate the establishing of the Qur’anic system in any part of the world. The criticism against the Western nations and their civilization that appears in Iqbal’s poetry is a warning to Muslims that the opposition to their plans (to implement the Qur’anic injunctions) would be from the entire world.

This has been proved by history. The toughest opposition to the Pakistan Movement did come from our theocratic establishment and the Peers (custodians of monasteries). This opposition is still continuing. The conflict has been raging from eternity. Dr. Iqbal describes institutions of theocracy, monarchy and monasticism as curses for humanity and a calamity from Allah:

There are four calamities in this land: The usurious moneylender – the moneylender’s practice of lending money at an extortionate rate, the monarch, the Mullah, and the Peer.

Dr. Iqbal’s Concept: Sovereignty is The Qur’an

It was because of the keen awareness of this state of affairs that Dr. Iqbal gave the concept of a modern State in which sovereignty rests in the Book of Allah, the Qur’an. He conceived that it would result only when Islam comes back on the world scene in its pristine form. Dr. Iqbal made it clear that in this new State, Laws of the Qur’an will be supreme.

As a philosopher, as a poet, as a writer, as a thinker, and above all as a scholar for the teachings of the Qur’an, he emphasized the establishment of Islam.

MOHAMMAD ALI JINNAH, THE QUR’AN’S PRAGMATIC ADVOCATE LEADER (1876 – 1948)

Here Dr. Mohammad Iqbal’s far-reaching vision put him in search of a person of perception and sincerity – a person who would wage a war to regain the lost status of the Muslim nation. In this context, his letter to the Quaid-i-Azam will help in understanding how he proposed a solution to the economic problems which occur in enforcing of an Islamic order. He wrote:

After a long, deep study of Islamic laws I have arrived at the conclusion that if this system of laws is promulgated appropriately, at least the economic rights of every individual can be safeguarded. However, the promulgation of Islamic Sharia is not possible without the establishment of one or more independent Muslim states. Do you not think that the time for such a demand has arrived? Letter dated May 28, 1938 (Reference “Quaid-i-Azam and his times” by Raees Ahmad Ja‘fri).

He succeeded in his search, and in 1938 he made over his brief to an advocate, who was endowed with integrity and sincerity as well as the vital experience for the mission. It was Muhammad Ali Jinnah on whom the Muslim nation conferred the title of Quaid-e-Azam, or the Great Leader.

Qur’anic Government and Religious Opposition
(No Theocracy)

This thin but wise leader presented the case entrusted to him with good judgment, integrity and devotion. The courts of the world were wonder struck with his performance. His sincerity in his fight for the independence of his nation earned him success. The question is how he contested the suit entrusted to him.

Dr. Iqbal left this world while still engaged in his campaign of establishing a modern and truly Islamic State. Quaid-i-Azam took over his mission. At the outset, he declared that the system of Government in the new State would be Qur’anic. He also reaffirmed Iqbal’s solemn promise that there would be no priestly monopoly. Addressing the young generation in Aligarh at Muslim University Students Union, he said:

Muslim League has done at least this much, that it has liberated you from clutches of the reactionary elements amongst Muslims and has shown that those who are pursuing the agenda of self-interest, are traitors to the national cause. I have no doubt in my mind that it has freed you from fetters of the so-called Maulvis or Maulanas (Speeches of Quaid-e-Azam, Part I, P.48).

The Quaid-i-Azam made a categorical declaration in The Muslim League Convention in Delhi on April 11, 1946 that:

Let us understand in clear terms what our war is about. What is our goal? Please remember our goal is not theocracy. We do not want a theocratic state.

After the establishment of Pakistan in 1947, as Governor General of Pakistan, in February 1948, he said in a broadcast to the American people:

In Pakistan, there will be no theocracy – a system in which the government is turned over to religious establishment for fulfilling its self-appointed divine mission.

The clear declarations of Dr. Mohammad Iqbal and Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah were a shock to the religious establishment. They had entertained fond hopes that when an Islamic system was established in this country, they would be the sole spokesmen and referees on matters pertaining to the Shariah. But the Quaid-i-Azam told them very clearly that the Qur’anic system did not accept the monopoly of any religious hierarchy.

Influence of The Qur’an

To what extent the Qur’an’s greatness and preciseness had influenced the Quaid-i-Azam can well be judged from many of his statements such as:

All except the ignoramuses, – ignorant persons – are aware that the Qur’an is a compendium – short but complete summary – of Muslim way of life encompassing all laws relating to faith, civics, trade, jurisprudence, armed forces, and criminal and civil codes. Whether it is religious ritual or everyday matters, is it the question of purity of the soul or cleanliness of the body, collective obligations or individual rights, it has laws on every subject. That is why the Prophet advised that every Muslim should have Qur’an with him and be his or her own guide in matters of faith (Message to the Nation on Eid in 1945).

The “Westernized” Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Quaid-i-Azam (the great leader), had such a faith in lucidity and greatness of the Qur’an!

Understanding of an Islamic State

Quaid-i-Azam had a very clear understanding of an Islamic State. In answer to a question by students of Usmania University, Hyderabad (Deccan), he said:

In Islamic Government the hub for obedience and loyalty is Allah and practical shape of the concept is obedience to the commandments and principles laid down in the Qur’an. Islam is not about obedience to a king or a house of parliament or any other person or institution. Commandments of the Qur’an lay down the parameters of our freedom and limits in political and economic spheres. In other words, an Islamic government is a rule of Qur’anic principles and commandments. For this rule to be enforced you need territory and a state (daily Inqilab, Lahore, August 2, 1941).

The above explanation demonstrates that Quaid-i-Azam had a crystal clear understanding as to what distinctively makes a state; an Islamic. Thus, the basic constitution of the State of Pakistan comes forth. Only the Qur’anic injunctions form the basis of the constitution and laws. No other source of laws would be acceptable for a modern state.

Just go back to the Indo-Pak history. You will see the Muslims of India were divided into parties and sects. In spite of these differences, what was the common factor that could make these entirely dissimilar elements converge on one point? He raised this question himself in the annual meeting of the Muslim League held in Karachi in 1943. First he asked:

What is the cord that would bind Muslims into one entity; which is the rock on which their Millat (nation) is founded; what is the anchor that provides stability to the boat of this Millat?

He, then, himself gave the answer:

That binder, that cord, that rock, and that anchor is the great Book of Allah, the Holy Qur’an. I have unshakable faith in our achieving ever increasing unity as we proceed. One Allah, one Prophet, one Book, one Ummah!

He further added:

I am neither a Maulvi, nor a Mulla, nor do I have pretensions – asserted claims – to mastery of theology. However, I have made an attempt to study the Qur’an and Islamic laws on my own. This great book has in it, guidance on all aspects of human life whether it is the spiritual or social dimension, political or economic aspect of life. In fact nothing is beyond the scope of Qur’anic guidance (Usmania University, Hyderabad Deccan, 1941).

Much more can be said on this topic. Anyhow, on the basis of his statements we are clear about the model that Quaid-i-Azam had before him. It was nothing but the great Book, the Qur’an, which is a complete compendium of life.

False And Fabricated Report

“Quaid-i-Azam and Economics” is a full-fledged field of study on which a lot can be said. There is a false and fabricated report that Pakistan was created for safeguarding the interests of capitalists and feudal lords. To exposing this fabrication we quote a couple of instances which reflect the true ideology of Quaid-i-Azam.

In 1943-44 the Movement of Pakistan was at the climax of its struggle. It was necessary for the Muslim League to take affluent people on to its platform. But look what the Quaid-i-Azam says at this critical moment. In his presidential address to a special meeting of All India Muslim League held in Delhi in 1943, he made it clear:

At this juncture I want to warn the zamindars (feudal/landlords) and capitalists, that they are living in luxury as part of a satanic system, which so intoxicates people, that they refuse to listen to reason. Lust for usurping fruit of hard-earned labour of the masses has become second nature to them.

Often I have visited villages. I have observed that there are hundreds of thousands of people who cannot afford one square meal a day. Is this what we should call civilization? Is this the destiny that is called Pakistan? If so, I wash my hands off Pakistan! If these capitalists have an iota of sense they should keep pace with changing times. If they fail to do so, we shall not be able to help them! (Speeches and Writings of Jinnah-P.554)

And he showered glad tidings to the poor when, while addressing Muslim workers on March 1, 1945 in Calcutta, he said:

I am an old man. Allah, in His mercy, has endowed me with means enough that I can spend my old age in comfort. Why should I keep running about day and night enduring hardship? My struggle is not for capitalists; I am doing this hard labour for the poor. I have witnessed scenes of painful poverty. We shall endeavour that every one in Pakistan should live a life of prosperity.

Our Hard Luck: The Worse Still Operative

It is from these facts that we can understand why majority of our religious leaders acted as tools of others in opposing the establishment of Pakistan. And why they still carry on their opposition by raising new and confused issues every other day. For the last almost sixty years they have been carrying out a campaign to establish theocracy as a means to grab power under the cover of An Islamic revolution. Had they not stirred turmoil in the name of religion, the nation’s ship of destiny would not have strayed so grossly off its course. It is due to the confusion spread by them that the general public has moved away from the objectives of the establishment of Pakistan, and is now in a state of doubt about the very rationale of Pakistan.

It is to our hard luck that when the time for drawing up the laws came, neither Quaid-i-Azam, nor Dr. Iqbal were there on the scene. Worse, after the creation of Pakistan our theocratic elements started demanding enforcement of Islamic laws, on the basis that “Pakistan was created in the name of Islam!” – However each sect’s version of Islam differed considerably according to Jurisprudence of their ‘school of thought’ mainly but not exclusively, in personal law related matters.

Hindus had willy-nilly accepted the partition of India but they were, in their heart of hearts, not reconciled to it. While Jawaharlal Nehru (1889-1964) was signing up the partition plan on behalf of the Congress, he was also telling his people that:

“Our scheme is that we should let Mr. Jinnah have his Pakistan and afterwards create such economic and other factors which would compel Muslims to beg us for rejoining India” (Pakistan Faces India, P.99).

G. A. PARWEZ, THE QUR’AN’S PURSUIT OF EXCELLENCE (1903- 1985)

Ghulam Ahmad Parwez was one of the fighters for the Movement of Pakistan. At the behest of the Quaid-i-Azam, he took up the cause at the forefront of the religious side and faced the “Nationalist Ulamas” – religious scholars. He made the concepts clear through his articles, and the Bazm-i-Iqbal meetings he used to arrange after the All Muslim League gatherings. He also brought out Monthly Tolu-e-Islam on the behest of Dr. Mohammad Iqbal in 1938. Among the freedom fighters, he was the only person who was allowed to meet the Quaid-i-Azam without making prior appointment.

His contributions are numerous. We’ll elaborate the salient features that fall within the purview of The Story of Pakistan.

Idea of Pakistan: The Forgotten Ideology

Elaborating the Idea of Pakistan, Ghulam Ahmad Parwez said:
“Before Partition, we asserted that the Muslims of the sub-continent had their distinct culture and way of life and needed a separate homeland where they could live and develop according to their own Ideology. The demand was conceded and Pakistan was established. The biggest Islamic State appeared on the map of the world.”

But what happened thereafter? G. A. Parwez says:

Pakistanis forgot completely that their State was created to give shape to their own Ideology. During the struggle for Pakistan our slogan of Islamic Ideology was not defined: It was not very necessary to do so then. After the establishment of Pakistan, it became absolutely necessary that the slogan should be determined and defined categorically otherwise even the first step towards achieving the objective of Pakistan could not be taken. But we ignored the objective, and meanly selfish gains near at hand took the better of us.

We had a Constituent Assembly from the day Pakistan came into being. It was the duty of this body to define our Ideology, and then, on the basis of the definition, to formulate our Constitution. It did neither. Apparently the members of the Constituent Assembly were themselves not clear about the Ideology, and the pity of it is that they made no attempt, none whatsoever, to get together material, which could help clarify their minds on the subject. May be it served their individual interests to drag out the discussions making them as long as they could.

Years rolled on, one after another, without producing a constitution. Every one talked of Islamic Ideology. We were engrossed in following foreign ways handed down to us by the past. It took nine long years for the Constituent Assembly to give the country a constitution. And the constitution it gave was a constitution of many compromises. It was adorned itself with the dignified name of “Islamic” but in fact it had nothing to do with the basics of Islam. According to G. A. Parwez, this was nothing except the “breach of the basics of Islam”. This “diseased constitution of 1956 met the fate it richly deserved and was abrogated in October 1958.”

Parameters of Islamic Ideology

Every one has continued talking of the Islamic Ideology. The question before us is “What is Islamic Ideology”? It was G. A. Parwez who defined this Ideology. He said:

Ideology is a philosophical term meaning the ‘Science of Ideas’. ‘Idea’ is again a subtle and very comprehensive term. It is unnecessary for our present purpose to go into the details of the term. Suffice it to say that ‘Idea’ means a basic concept, and that the basic concepts on which any ‘system’ is built constitutes its ‘Ideology’. Since Ideology pre-supposes the existence of a system, the question arises whether Islam is a ‘system’.

“Yes”, he held, “Islam is a system. Islam is not a ‘religion’ in the ordinary sense of the word. Religion is the English equivalent for the Arabic word Madhab, which does not occur even once in the whole of the Holy Qur’an. The Qur’an has, instead, used the word Addeen for Islam, which means a particular way of life”.

The Concept of God In Religion And The Implications

The basic idea of Madhab (religion) is that God – the god created by the figment of human imagination – is sitting somewhere away from the universe. He is like a king or a dictator. If someone incurs the king’s wrath, he is doomed and is subjected to all kinds of afflictions. The only way out is to humor the king by reciting his praises, flattering him, making offerings to him, seeking the intervention of those near about him. The moment the king is placated all the troubles vanish and are replaced by rich gifts, awards of honour, inclusion among the king’s trust worthies, and so on. Since the god created by man’s imagination is on the pattern of a king, the devotees of the god try to appease him by ‘means’ similar to those adopted for humoring a king. The ‘means’, so adopted, are given the name of religious ceremonies or rituals.

According to this concept of God, man does not require to lead a social or collective life. His relationship with his God is essentially an individual and a private affair. In seclusion he seeks, through worship, God’s forgiveness and bounties, and having done that, proceeds according to his sweet will, to engage in matters material and mundane. He is a religious person.

Tracing the history of religion, Parwez says: Religion came about at an early stage in human development. It was the time when man was still ignorant of the “how and why” of the working of the universe or the threatening forces of nature: lightning, clouds, floods, fire, disease, etc. He was quite unable to hold “his own” against them. In that stage man trembled at the sight of everything more powerful than him and in trying to appease it, made obeisance in complete surrender and submission.

The Qur’an’s Concept of God And The Implications

There is another concept of God, which has been granted to man through Divine Revelation. According to this revealed concept, God is a Being who controls the entire universe and moves it onto its final destiny in accordance with certain unchanging laws. According to these laws, everything in the universe from its initial stage, grows, develops, and, in time, attains its full stature. It is just like the seed which grows gradually into a huge tree. Man is no exception. There are God’s permanent laws that govern man’s development. According to the revealed concept of God – that concept of God, which He has given Himself – the relationship between man and God comes about through the laws which He has designed for man’s development. To understand the Essence of God and to know ‘what He is’, this is beyond the scope of human intellect. However, we can understand about Him through His Laws, which are important to our development. Such laws are contained in the Holy Qur’an. Those who follow them they nurture their personality and excel forward. Those who contravene them are deprived of growth like the seed which happens to be buried under hard soil. G. A. Parwez terms these laws as the Revealed Laws and wants to implement these laws. For this purpose he says: A person living alone by himself needs no rules or regulations to guide his conduct. Rules become necessary when people live together. Far away from habitation in a jungle, it makes little difference whether one keeps to the right or to the left. In a city, however, it does make a difference because if the rule of the road is violated, untoward consequences follow forthwith. The revealed laws help mankind as a whole to live together amicably and peacefully. People living together – not as they please – but according to some law, form an organized society, bound together by a system or an order. The order, which the Holy Qur’an conceives, is termed Addeen. In other words it means a system for living collectively within the boundaries of the revealed Laws of Allah.

How should one lead one’s life? What are the principles? For this purpose, G. A. Parwez refers the Qur’anic term Kalemah qualified with the word tayyib. The meaning of tayyib generally is pleasant. But when it is used to qualify a tree, it refers to a tree, which bears exquisitely fine fruit. Says the Holy Qur’an:

Kalema-e-tayyiba is like a shajar-e-tayyib, the roots of which hold the soil deep and firm, whose branches spread out in the sky high and wide and which bears fruit perpetually in conformity with God’s Laws” (14:24).

With this example in mind, G. A. Parwez says that Islamic Ideology consists of never-changing principles or concepts of life, which are capable of evolving, unhampered by the limitation of Time and Space, a universal social order for the good of humanity at large.

But human co-operation is necessary for this purpose. That is why G. A. Parwez says:
“The comparison of Islamic Ideology with a tree has another noteworthy aspect. To ensure its growth, a seed should be healthy and capable of taking root, growing, blossoming and bearing fruit. Then, it is necessary that it should be taken care of in matters like preparation of soil, manuring, watering, supplying heat and light, protecting it against seasonal changes and destructive effects of insects and animals. The Holy Qur’an points to this aspect in its own unique way. It says that the healthy concept of life Ideology or KaIema-e-tayyiba revealed by God has the capacity to rise high towards Him, that is, it can attain the heights, which He has destined for it. But it cannot rise high by itself: it is man’s co-operation, which helps it rise.”

In the Qur’an ideology makes up what we call Faith (Eemaan) and the means to give the Ideology a practical shape are termed A ‘maal-e-Saaleha. (i.e. good deeds) It follows, therefore, the Kalema-e-tayyiba or Ideology forms the objective of the Islamic Order and A‘maal-e-Saaleha constitute the program for attaining the objective. Applying this concept G. A. Parwez elaborates that in the present context you can say that Ideology provides the ‘Objectives Resolution’ of an Islamic State, its ‘Constitution’ gives political form to the Resolution and its laws prescribe the program for helping the people attain their destiny.

Two Concepts of Life And Implications

This brings us to two concepts of life: Material Concept – also called Mechanistic Concept of life – and Qur’anic Concept of life.

Material Concept of Life and the Implications

The Material concept of life is that man like other animals, is nothing but his physical body, which lives according to the physical laws of nature and, after a time, according to the same laws, its mechanism stops to function, bringing about its death with which the individual concerned comes to a final end. This is the mechanistic concept of life, and the social order, which is based thereon, aims at catering for the physical well being of the people living within the State. The provision for the individual’s need is met sufficiently with ease, this makes the state better.

This concept, in the view of the Holy Qur’an, degrades man to the animal level and is Kufr.

… … And those who reject (the Qur’anic concept of life) avail of material things and eat and drink, as do the animals, their abode is hell (whose fire reduces the dignity of man to ashes) (47: 12).

Qur’anic Concept of Life and the Implications

G. A. Parwez believes in the other concept of life, which he calls as “The Qur’anic concept of life”. He says that man is something more than his physical body. He has, besides a physical body, a Personality or Self, which no one else in the animal world possesses. Human Personality is neither the outcome of material evolution, nor is subject to physical laws. Every child at birth, gets Personality as a gift from God, whether born in a king’s palace or beggar’s hut, in the house of a Brahmin or an out-cast, or of Muslim or non-Muslim parents. The gift is, however, not in a developed form, but in a potential form with realizable possibilities. For the development of human Personality there are God-given laws, as there are laws for the growth of a man’s body. If Personality develops according to the God-given Laws, it begins to manifest, within human limits, what are in their highest and limitless form, called Divine Attributes. A developed Personality does not disintegrate with the death of man’s body, but lives on and on through further evolutionary stages of life. The purpose of man’s life is the development of his Personality.

G. A. Parwez brings forth the evidence of the Holy Qur’an at this point. The Holy Qur’an, according to him, says that for the development of human Personality man should:

1. Gain control over the forces of the physical world and keep open his achievements, according to the Laws of God, for the good and well being of mankind at large
2. Have all that is required to maintain life but without the egg-shell the embryo can never develop into a chicken
3. Lead a corporate life and establish a social order in which the physical needs of every individual shall be adequately met and he shall have full opportunity and means for the development of his Personality.

G. A. Parwez makes it clear that a social order functioning in this manner becomes an Islamic State, which makes itself responsible to see that every citizen is provided equitably with the basic needs of life as well as the means and opportunities for the development of his Personality. He also emphasises that the State is not an end in itself. According to the Holy Qur’an,

It is a means to an end, the end being the development of man’s Personality, which it is impossible to achieve except in an independent, welfare state. Therefore, the justification for the establishment of an Islamic State, nay, for its very existence, is that it makes itself responsible for the development of every citizen’s Personality as well as his physical body. The State, which fails to fulfil this responsibility, cannot be called an Islamic State.

In this State, G. A. Parwez identifies the relationship between the individual and the State. He further says that a glance at the history of man’s social life is enough to show that from the very beginning the one problem, which has frustrated man, has been that of the relationship between the State and the individual. Man has devised several social orders in which, when stress was laid on society or State, the individuality of the people went by the board, and when individuality received consideration, the State disintegrated. The Holy Qur’an has given a social order in which both become stronger and firmer day-by-day, man’s individuality in integration and the State in cohesion and solidarity. The secret of Qur’anic Social Order lies in this unique relationship where obedience is only to God.

According to G. A. Parwez, the Holy Qur’an has declared in clear terms that an individual, a society or a State has no right to claim obedience from any person. But we cannot see God, nor have we ever heard His voice. How can we then obey Him? The answer is that obedience is not to God personally. It is through the Laws He has revealed in the Qur’an. For securing obedience to Law, it is necessary to have some properly constituted Enforcing Agency. The Agency for Enforcing God’s Laws is the Islamic State and obedience to God means, in practice, obedience to the State, which enforces His Laws. This was the very justification which G. A. Parwez provided for the establishment of Islam in a country and particularly in Pakistan.

Modus Operandi in Islamic State

Now the question is: “Who will fulfill God’s responsibilities?”

God says to the Islamic State: since you take obedience from the people in “My name”, you should give them what I have promised to give, that is, fulfil the responsibilities which I have assumed in respect of mankind. If you fail to fulfil these responsibilities to the people, you lose your right to their obedience. The two go together. Therefore, in the Qur’anic Social Order (QSO), the relationship between the individual and the State is a two-sided affair. The individual obeys the Laws of God through the Agency of the State and the State honors the promises God has made to man. This constitutes a mutual contract between the individual and the State. The Holy Qur’an mentions this mutual contract in brief with very comprehensive terms:

Allah has bought from the believers their lives and what they have of material things so that He may give them Jannah (paradise) (9: 111).

Elaborating the meaning of this verse, G. A. Parwez says that the people entrust their lives and property to the State, which undertakes to enforce the Laws of God, and, in return, the State gives them Jannah (paradise). You know that there is a Jannah, which is to come after a man’s death, but the Holy Qur’an uses the term Jannah also for the Social Order established here, on this earth, in which every individual is assured, and he is actually provided with all that is required for the development of his body and his Personality, and is free from want, anxiety and fear. According to the contract referred to above, the individual submits to His laws, without any compensation, his life and property to the Islamic State. In return the State assumes full responsibility for providing him the basic necessities of physical life and all the means required for the development of his Personality. By this arrangement, the individual, even after surrendering his life and property to the State, preserves his Individuality or Self. In other words this helps him develop and gain in strength day by day. And on the other hand, the State gets established on firm and solid grounds. The Laws of God through their observance by the individual as well as the State, ensure both the above objects.

It is here that G. A. Parwez brings to the forefront that the State would be unable to discharge its huge responsibilities unless the sources of sustenance and means of production are placed under its control. There is nothing surprising about it. After the people surrender willingly their lives and all else to the State, the question of individuals owning anything ceases to exist. The means of production pass on silently to the control of the State to enable it to fulfil its responsibilities of providing the people with the necessities of life and means for development of their Personality. But by this control over the means of production, the Islamic State does not become on a par with a Communist State. There is a world of difference between the two. A Communistic State, or for that matter of any Secular State, has no permanent principles to guide or control its activities. An Islamic State is, however, bound irrevocably by unchangeable principles given by the Holy Qur’an. This makes G. A. Parwez unique in exposing the details of the working of an Islamic State.

There are, as stated above, laws governing the growth of the human body and laws for the development of his Personality. The Holy Qur’an calls the latter laws Kalemaat Ullah and says they are unchangeable. Kalemaat is the plural of Kalemah, a term which, the Qur’an uses for Ideology. Therefore, Kalemaat UIlah would mean the concepts of life which taken together, make up Islamic Ideology and admit of no change. In the words of the Holy Qur’an:

The Kalemah revealed by the Nourisher has been made complete in truth and justice. There is none who can change His concepts (6: 116).

In other words, Islamic concepts of life (ideology) are complete as well as unchangeable. They constitute Inviolable – safe from violation – Principles or Permanent Values and it is through observing them that the development and integration of human Personality comes about. Since the provision of the means of’ this development is the essential responsibility of the Islamic State, its entire activity will be guided throughout by the God-given Inviolable Principles or Permanent Values. Observance of Permanent Values results, in the life of an individual, in showing up, within human limits, Divine Attributes. For instance, God is Aleem (all knowing) and Khabeer (fully informed). A developing Personality will imbibe these qualities as far as possible within human limits, and become Aleem and Khabeer within the sphere of human activities. Similarly, in consonance with God’s Attributes of Robubiyyat and Razzaqiyyat a developing Personality must cherish the feeling for helping others in their development and in giving them preference over itself. The criterion for judging whether a Personality is or is not developing, is the extent to which it manifests those attributes, limited of course to man’s restricted sphere.

This modus operandi, according to Parwez, makes the State a symbol of Divine Attributes. It is because when a State bases itself and its program on Permanent Values; it manifests Divine Attributes much more prominently than an individual. The distinguishing feature of an Islamic State is that, within due limits, it brings out a manifestation of Divine Attributes here, there and everywhere throughout its activities. It means that the administration in an Islamic State is conducted on the basis of Permanent Values. The State becomes a symbol of Divine Attributes guaranteeing fulfillment of God’s promises and the individual remains always busy in striving hard to imbibe in himself through the Islamic Society, Divine Attributes as best as he can. And there is no difficulty in determining whether a State is Islamic or otherwise, since the Holy Qur’an has dealt at great length with Permanent Values as well as Divine Attributes.

Now summarizing it all in a nutshell, the final position is that

1. Islamic Ideology is another name for Permanent Values or Inviolable Principles elaborated in the Holy Qur’an

2. An Islamic State is established for the sole purpose of introducing Permanent Values in life

3. The first and the foremost duty of an Islamic State is to provide means for the growth and development of the human body as well as Personality

4. A State is known to be Islamic from its being a symbol of Divine Attributes detailed in the Holy Qur’an.

In order to make this entire working feasible, G. A. Parwez takes up, as example, some of the Qur’anic Permanent Values to make the process clear:

1. Respect man as man

Every human being, solely on account of his being a human being, deserves to be respected. Says the Holy Qur’an:

And verily we have made children of Adam deserving of respect (17: 70).

This verse makes no distinction between black and white, poor and rich, believer and unbeliever, caste or creed, but is of general application embracing all humanity.

What distinguishes man from other animals is the gift of human Personality, which every child gets at birth from God. The respect is, in fact, due to human Personality. Its basic characteristic is freedom and it is every soul’s freedom that has to be recognized and honored.

2. Humanity is one

The Holy Qur’an says:

The whole of humanity is one entity (2: 213).

What works against the oneness of mankind is its division into groups, tribes, parties, sects, and nations on the man-made basis of distinctive interests as opposed to the general interest of all. But it is the good of all, which has the capacity to endure. In the words of the Holy Qur’an:

That which benefits humanity as a whole endures on this earth (13: 17).

To bring about universal brotherhood of man, mere expressions of good will, amity and tolerance won’t do. It requires a dynamic social order, built on the basis of Permanent Values to realize it. And the first and the foremost objective, which the Qur’anic Social Order (QSO) or an Islamic State has in view, are the interest of all humanity and the molding of it into one indivisible whole.

3. Human freedom

No individual shall enforce his will on another. All will obey voluntarily the revealed Laws of Allah through the agency of an Islamic State, which undertakes to enforce those Laws.

The Holy Qur’an says:

No one whom Allah has given a code of law and authority to enforce the law and whom He has favored with Revelation, shall tell people ‘Obey me’ and not Allah, but will say that through obedience to the Book, which you read and study, you should help nourish one another (3:78).

Free is he who hasn’t to toe another’s line but obeys, out of his own free will, Laws of Allah and such of man-made laws as conform to those laws.

4. Co-operation

Man shall live a life of cooperation with fellow men and not a secluded life.

The Qur’anic injunction is:

Co-operate in what will add to life’s richness and help safeguard God’s Laws, and co-operate not in becoming less firm or going beyond those Laws (5: 2).

Co-operation will, however, be in matters, which help man’s development. Willing cooperation by one helps him integrate his Personality; working under duress disintegrates it. Unhealthy social order not only increases duress but also encourages compulsion by applying the lever of want. Islamic Social Order, on the other hand, makes itself responsible to see that no citizen is stranded by non-fulfillment of wants and is thereby exposed to duress.

5. Justice

The Holy Qur’an says:

Verily Allah ordains justice (16: 90).

Honoring of Rights is justice. Take what is your due and nothing more; give with full measure what is due to others; where there are more than one contestant, every one of them should get his due and nothing less. Justice gives confidence and security. Every citizen has a right to be provided with work, the basic necessities of life and the means of development of his Personality. Islamic Social Order assumes these three-fold responsibility and discharges them, as best as it can, with due regard to the unchangeable principle of justice.

6. Restoring disturbed proportions

The Qur’an ordains:

Verily Allah ordains justice and restoration of disturbed proportions (16: 90).

Ehsaan is derived from husn, which is beauty or proportion. In nature there is beauty and proportion everywhere; so it is necessary for man to see that his own self as well as things around him should not be heavier or leaning to one side. Proportion might be disturbed here and there. Islamic Social Order cannot withstand disturbance. It tries to restore proportion without delay in accordance with the Inviolable Principle of Ehsaan. Old age, illness, accident, additions to family, etc., strain the family income. Unless the deficiency is made good in time, suffering must follow. By assuming the responsibility for supplying the basic needs of citizens an Islamic State is always prepared to make up the deficiency and to restore the disturbed equilibrium in the life of the family concerned. The reaction of the State is equally prompt if and when similar disturbances of proportion might occur in national affairs.

7. Consultation

The Holy Qur’an says:

And they determine their affairs by mutual consultation (42:38).

In other words it is the consultation at all levels that matters, whether these are petty affairs concerning individuals or the matters of national or international importance.

Islamic Social Order is essentially democratic. But the discussions shall always uphold the Qur’anic principles. The Islamic Social Order never infringes the Qur’anic Principles.

The Holy Qur’an concerns itself mainly with broad principles of life and very little with detailed instructions. The underlying plan is, as explained by the Holy Qur’an itself, that Muslims in all ages and inhabiting different parts of the world should be free, within the ambit of the Qur’anic principles, to determine details to suit their particular circumstances.

Islamic State accepts Qur’anic principles as its basis and keeping them in view, frames by the method of consultation and discussion, whatever laws are needed to meet new situations as they develop from time to time in different ages and climes. Present day democratic legislatures are bound solely and wholly by the rule of the majority, which is liable to change with every change in the political atmosphere. Islamic legislatures, on the other hand, stand on the bedrock of Inviolable Qur’anic Principles and from that firm foundation set themselves whole-heartedly to the task of framing laws for serving the best interests of the people.

8. Pooling of surpluses

Pooling of individual surpluses for the good of all is a Permanent Value. The Qur’anic injunction is:

And keep open what is surplus for use in the way of Allah (2: 195).

Infaaq is derived from nafq, which means a tunnel or a covered passage with both ends open. Wealth comes in at one end, stays inside while it is being used to meet needs of the earner, but through the other end the surplus remains available for use for collective purposes.

Varying capacities for work result in bigger or smaller incomes leaving deficiencies here and surpluses there. Man-made social orders feel unconcerned or helpless and leave the situation to seek its own adjustment. The result is misery for many and luxury for a few, the latter trying always to perpetuate and even enhance the disparity. Islamic Social Order, on the other hand, tackles the situation boldly and rationally, pools the surpluses and uses them to bring about social equilibrium.

9. Islamic State

Says the Holy Qur’an:

You are a dynamic society drawn out for the good of mankind, you enforce the recognized (lawful) and prohibit the unrecognized (unlawful) and have faith in (the Laws of) Allah (3: 109).

The existence among mankind of a people, who will, subject to the Unalterable Principles of the Holy Qur’an, defend freedom of individual will, enforce respect for law, and stop unlawful activities with a stern hand, is one of the Inviolable Principles.

10. Universal brotherhood

Brotherhood of the human race is a charming idea. But verbal professions of high-sounding slogans, in the name of tolerance and religious friendship, cannot achieve it. The effective method for establishing universal brotherhood of man is that a social order should be created on the basis of universal principles, that it should adopt those principles in practical life and that it should then become a living nucleus for gathering people around and realizing the dream of the oneness of humanity. This dynamic social nucleus will generate centrifugal forces out of freedom of will and its achievements. It will recognize no criterion for merit other than what an individual actually is.

These, as examples, are some of the permanent Values taken from the Holy Qur’an. G. A. Parwez exposes them in the framework of an Islamic State to help form an idea of where and how far the Holy Book would take humanity in its evolutionary progress.

The summary of these considerations lead to the following three-fold conclusion:

• Islamic Ideology connotes the sum total of Permanent Values or Inviolable Principles, which have been preserved in their complete and final form in the Holy Qur’an.

• Islamic State is a state, which adopts Qur’anic Permanent Values as its ideal.

• Islamic Constitution is the document, which proclaims the above ideal and details the plan according to which the edifice of the State will rise solid and firm on the basis of Qur’anic Inviolable Principles.

The establishment of this state resulted from a long struggle and G. A. Parwez specifically makes it clear that Islam needs its Free State to become a living system of life. This is the condition, which, if not met, reduces it to the state of just another ‘religion’ where there is hardly any difference between Islam and Vedanta of Hindus, Monotheism of Christians and Zoroastrianism of Iranians. It is for this reason that Dr. Iqbal, in his essay “New Era”, had dubbed ‘Sufism (Myticism) a scaling ladder of the conjurer and an alien growth in Islamic soil’.

THE PRESENT HURDLES IN PAKISTAN

The change of Islam into a religion has provided new meanings to the concept of Islam, where the establishment of Salat has become just the saying of prayers. Zakat is reduced to only giving some money to the poor and to those who beg. Enjoining the merited has turned out to be preaching in the Juma (Friday) prayers. This implies that we do not need a free state for any of the above purposes. And we could easily perform these “obligations” under the British rule or the Hindus’. A Muslim in India, in spite of his present state of helplessness, can also carry these out.

Other hurdles in the form of “Schools of Thought or Sectarianism” have come in vogue. This has divided the Muslims Ummah into various sects, factions, and political and sectarian parties. The Qur’an terms this all a perfidy, a curse and shirk of a huge proportion. It was for this reason that the Prophet (pbuh) was told:

Those who create splits in their system and divide into sects, you have no concern with them, O Prophet. (6:160).

Getting rid of these political and sectarian parties is necessary for establishing Islam in Pakistan. That is why Dr. Mohammad Iqbal gave the idea of Pakistan solely for the establishment of Islam as a living way of life. The Quaid-i-Azam waged a multi-front war for ten long years with the Hindus, the British, the “nationalist” Muslims and the Maulvis and Maulanas. And G. A. Parwez defined the idea of Pakistan, brought forward the detailed descriptions of Islam as a living system of life for this purpose. Allah did gift us the promised piece of land, where despotism, theocracy, and capitalism were to be stamped out because these are foul systems. God’s own light, the Qur’an, had to become a manifesto in the State in accordance with the teachings of the Prophet.

What happened then? It is a sad story. Whatever had happened with Allah’s faith at the hands of nations that preceded Muslims -Jews and Christians – has also happened with Islam. Allah completed the Deen by means of the Qur’an and the Prophet gave this Qur’an to the Ummah. But shortly after departure of the Holy Prophet (pbuh), vested interests started asserting themselves. So this Deen also became a religion like the Deens that had been brought by earlier Messengers. There was one difference, however, that the Qur’an remained safeguarded in its original form, because Allah had Himself guaranteed its safeguarding, whereas the older scriptures had no divine protection. The hurdle is that Islam is still being propagated as religion in Pakistan.

History stands witness to the fact that Islam was first hit by the advent of monarchy, and then by capitalism. Religious hierarchy emerged as guardian to both these enemies of Islam: Monarchy and Capitalism. The trinity (i.e., monarchy, capitalism, and religious hierarchy) converted the Faith to a “religion”. The Faith is not compatible with the religion so the religious establishment left no stone unturned to eliminate the very Faith from the life of the Muslims. This still continues in Pakistan. The Holy Qur’an has practically been made of no account. The protagonists of the Holy Qur’an are the direct hit of the “Ulamas of Traditional Islam”.

ISLAMIC UMMAH’S SENSE OF OBLIGATION

BUT the Islamic Ummah is grateful to:

• Sir Syed Ahmad Khan – for enlightening the nation to the Qur’anic pursuit of excellence in terms of policy of peace in the political field and of religious and educational reforms in the social field and to his remaining stuck to what he spread till the last moment of his life as a Phoenix

• Dr. Mohammad Iqbal -for emphasizing that Islam we inherited from ancestors is not the Islam, which Allah gave us and remaining stuck to removing the deep crust of alien element on it till the last moment of his life through his poetic diction and prose writings and lectures as thinker of the Qur’an

• Quaid-i-Azam -for making the idea of Pakistan a living reality on the map of the world, exposing the fabrications that Pakistan was created for safeguarding interests of capitalists and feudal lords, shunning the theocracy, projecting the teaching of the Qur’an for the establishing Islamic State in Pakistan as a Qur’an’s ardent and pragmatic leader

• G. A. Parwez – for elaborating the Islamic Ideology, developing literature to understand the Holy Qur’an, setting paradigms to establish Islam in its pristine form, and projecting that Islam is:

1. Not a private individual affair but a collective system

2. Not a vehicle of personal salvation but of universal welfare

3. Not an adversary of reason but a liberator of human reason

4. Not a breeder of superstition but a radical challenge to all superstitions

5. Not a preacher of fearful conformity but a creator in man of courage and self-reliance

6. Not a call for rejecting the concrete and the real but an invitation to conquer and subjugate the world of matter.

At present the root cause of our malaise is that the Islam fashioned in the days of monarchies, especially in Abbasids dynasty (750-945), is being upheld and nurtured by the religious hierarchy.

“What to do now” is still a big question.

… This is the Story of Pakistan.

………. And then grandchildren listening to “The Story of Pakistan” from their grandpa went to sleep for the next day to come up afresh for the establishment of Islam.

———————————
Notes:

[1] Between the period of 1600-1658 – afterwards the administration of India was transferred to the Crown

[2] “Kabaddi” is a popular Indo-Pak game resembling prisoners’ base. A single opposition team player crosses over to the enemy line and tries to touch at least one opposite side team player by whatever means of physical trickery, agility and speed then runs back to his own-side without beings captured, in doing so he secures a point for his team.

———————————

4,625 total views, 2 views today

(Visited 3,216 times, 64 visits today)

Is Islam a Failure? (G A Parwez) – Idara Tolue Islam

TRANSLATOR’S NOTE (Dr. Manzoor-ul-Haque)

Pause and reflect; there are numerous questions that start puzzling the human mind right from the moment a babe draws upon the dawn of consciousness – what are the material things, life, consciousness and the allied matters? What is the ‘destiny of man’? Is there any supra-sensuous source of knowledge for human counselling and directing? What is the political system of Quran that has been hurled into the trash can of history? How does it help mould the human life today?

In recent times, fresh problems changing the mores and cores of human life have cropped up. They are ‘historical interpretation of Islam’; its economic system – producing a mishmash of confusion; and human reason. These measures stymie ones ambitions offering bauble and trinkets to make unlawful lawful and its likes.

Finally there is a battle with our History; the History of Islam; the achievements made during the First Era of Islam, the conspiracies of the foreign alliance against Islam. Where will the romping with ‘Deen’ (the system of Islam), lead us to in the comity of nations? What will come out of the pestilence – pernicious, evil influence – looming large on this threatened planet? Why is Revelation the need of the West? What is its future going to be? And finally what do we as Muslims have to do?

Seen with this background, this translation work is the embodiment of an Urdu pamphlet written forty years ago by late Mr Ghulam Ahmad Parwez (1903-1985), founder of Tolu-e-Islam Movement, Pakistan. It was a rebuttal to Late Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the then Federal Minister of Education, India, who asserted in his book ‘India Wins Freedom that Islam was a spent force’. The sole aim of projecting the vision through this pamphlet is that the ultimate basis of all life is eternal and reveals itself in variety and change. A society based on such a concept of ‘reality’ must reconcile, in its life, the categories of permanence and change. It must possess absolute principles to regulate its collective life.

But absolute principles when they are understood to exclude all possibilities of change tend to immobilize what is essentially mobile in its nature. The failure of Europe in political and social sciences illustrates the former principle; the immobility of Islam during the last five hundred years illustrates the latter.

I have no hesitation to acknowledge that my translation is, in no way, a substitute of the original Urdu pamphlet. Any misconception, ambiguity in meaning due to translation is my responsibility. It does not reflect upon the genius scholarship of the great scholar and intellectual giant of the twentieth century.

I thank profusely Dr Syed Mustafa Ali, lecturer at Open University, Coventry, England who did the editing work meticulously and made it worth publishing. I did wish to shower commendations on his contributions but there is a deep feeling, which restrains me from doing so. He, being a lover of Qur’an and devotee of a noble mission of delivering its ‘message’ to humanity, would not like such publicity, and would at once say (We have done this) for the good will of Allah, and desire no reward from you nor thanks (70: 9).

His feeling deserves respect and should, therefore, have preference over that of mine.

Last but not the least; I acknowledge the fact that. Maqbool Mahmood Farhat was the main motive force behind this pursuit of knowledge and the London Bazm for sponsoring this publication.

Prof. Dr. Manzoor-ul-Haque
Hyderabad,
Pakistan.


IS ISLAM A FAILURE? (G A Parwez)
1. Introduction

This question should worry every student of the rise and fall of the Muslim people. At their dawn they rose high and reached the far ends of the then known world with a speed unknown in history. Equally steep has been their fall, too steep for a recovery. Hard facts of history lead a group of students to the conclusion that while Islam undoubtedly infused a new spirit among the Arabs, enabling them to overthrow the Persian and the Roman empires and become masters of the world, it did not have the capacity to keep pace with the times. Islam lagged behind and the steep rise of the Muslims took a precipitous downward trend for good. The experiment has failed and it would, according to late M. Abul-Kalam Azad, minister of education Indian government be stupid to give it another trial [see his book, India Wins Freedom (page 227)]. There is another group of students, which though not so outspoken, finds it hard to reconcile the fact that if Islam sponsors eternal truth and is capable of keeping abreast of the times, why it should have, after only a while, come to a dead stop. Scepticism born out of the irreconcilable shakes the very foundation of their faith in the eternal truth of Islam. The question is important and deserves to be seriously considered and satisfactorily answered.

2. What Is Islam?

Everything in this wonderful universe is, on the face of it, bound firstly by Allah’s (swt) permanent and inviolable laws. The laws of Nature have never failed, nor have they ever ceased to operate. They work non-stop without let or hindrance: “you will see no imperfection in Allah’s creation” (67:3). On the same pattern there are inviolable principles and permanent values for mankind, made known to man through Revelation, which enable him, individually as well as collectively, to grow and develop in life and taste all the good that can be afforded here and in the hereafter. Unlike things in Nature, however, which must observe God’s laws, man is free to adopt or reject them and to follow whatever his desires might dictate. But whereas observance of God’s laws assures a rich and fruitful life, adoption of manmade laws offers no such guarantee and might, on the other hand, lead life to decay and destruction.

3. Struggle Between Right and Wrong

The way of life revealed by God and called Ad-Deen or Al-Islam insists that whatever gifts this beautiful earth of ours has in store or can produce should be made available to the whole of mankind in an equitable manner. There is a section of people, however, who reject this view and would, on the basis of might, assume control of the means of production, so that they might withhold God’s gifts from His creatures and avail of them personally according to their will. This group, opposed as it is to God’s way of life (Al-Islam), places all sorts of hindrances in its establishment among mankind, bringing about, what The Qur’an describes as a struggle between Right and Wrong. Whereas Islam has unquestioned sway in nature, it has to contend with stiff opposition in human society. Consider the example of a seed sown in the earth. Given the requisite means of growth a healthy and vigorous seed will sprout, the shoot will rise high slowly and a day will come for the tiny little seed to swing as a full fledged and robust tree. The seed has the capacity to grow and attain its destiny. Likewise the eternal laws and the permanent values which, as already stated, constitute Al­Islam, have the capacity to overcome impediments in the way of their materialisation and to attain their goals. In the words of The Qur’an, the “healthy concept of life, Kalema-e-Tayyib, has the capacity to go up to Him” (35:10), that is, to attain the heights which God has destined for it. In other words, Right has the capacity and power to grapple with and overcome Wrong and pursue its own course. Happenings in human society, past and present seem, however, to belie this conclusion. There is untruth everywhere, having full sway and giving no quarter to truth. Tyranny, exploitation, dishonesty, fraud are rampant. Appearances may, however, be deceptive. Let us clear the misunderstanding underlying the confusion.

4. Slow Speed

According to The Qur’an, the concepts of life revealed by God have the capacity and inherent strength to clear impediments and prevail but they do so at a slow speed as judged by man’s reckoning. “He directs the affair from heaven to earth” (32:5), that is, at His will, He formulates a plan in the high heavens, but initiates it practically at the lowest level, even as the live seed is buried under the earth to become a hung tree later on, “then it goes up to Him in a day whose measure is a thousand years of your counting” (32:5). God’s plans, based always on truth, must materialise. Impediments cannot hold them up. But they progress at a speed too slow to be visible. Abstract truths apart, even in the case of material things, the pace of evolution remains imperceptible. Scientists say that, in organic evolution, the smallest change in a species takes thousands of years to take effect. During this long period the change goes on taking shape gradually but unnoticed and becomes visible only at the end of a millennium. This should give an idea of the speed at which God’s plans materialise, whose day measures a thousand or even fifty thousand years (70:4) of our counting. One might sit by a plant day and night, for weeks or months or even years, but although it will be growing all the time, he will not perceive the change as it is occurring slowly, very slowly. Or consider the example of a clock. When the minute-hand drops and the hour hand moves on from one hour-mark to the next, the movement remains invisible to the naked eye.

5. Truth Prevails

In its struggle with untruth, truth must prevail ultimately although it may take a long time to do so. The Qur’an states: “We hurl truth against untruth and it crushes its brain and untruth vanishes away” (21:18), leaving the way clear for truth to pursue its normal course. It would be incorrect to expect a result of the struggle within decades; it needs centuries to determine the outcome of the struggle. The fact, however, is that a conflict between a divine principle and a manmade system has always ended in the victory for the former and a rout of the latter. Some examples will be given a little later.

6. Reiteration

The ground covered so far might be reiterated briefly:

1. Islam is a collection of inviolable principles revealed by God for the guidance of man to enable him to attain his destiny in life.
2. Those who would exploit fellow men oppose the divine code and give rise to the struggle between Right and Wrong.
3. Right has an inherent capacity to overcome Wrong and pursue its own course.
4. The process is a slow one, so slow that one of its days equals a thousand years of man’s reckoning.

7. Pace Can Be Accelerated

The process can, however, be quickened. The verse (35:10) already quoted, viz. “healthy concept of life, Kalema-e­Tayyib, has the capacity to go up to Him”, goes on to say, “and healthy action (of man) gives it a push upward”. That is, divine laws left to themselves, operate at their normal slow speed, but if at times people adopt them in giving shape to their social structure, their speed is accelerated and the results that would have normally taken thousands of years to produce, are achieved within a few days. Normally divine laws operate by evolution; man’s co-operation makes them work by revolution or, to use the scientific term, by emergent evolution. The process of normal evolution affords the human mind time to develop gradually and appreciate divine laws. The onset of emergent evolution brought on by man’s co-operation is, however, too fast for the human mind to keep pace with. The co-operating community itself is undoubtedly equipped to appreciate divine laws and assimilate their spirit, but those outside it lack the mental development needed for the purpose, and in consequence experience difficulty in taking ownership of them. A student brought up and educated normally to the final stage of his or her study will tackle difficult problems with ease; but such problems will baffle one who is in the middle of the course. To enable the latter to grapple with them, his or her education must be improved and special arrangements made for quicker mental development.

8. How Human Intellect Works

The modus operandi of human intellect consists in the method of trial and error. It formulates a theory puts it into practice and takes decades or even centuries to discover its weaknesses. It then devises another theory and repeats the process. In this way, it might take hundreds of years to arrive at the correct solution. The solution thus reached is then welcome, since during the intervening centuries the requisite mental development has already taken place.

9. What Revelation Does

Divine Revelation does away with the method of trial and error. It gives outright solutions without waiting for the normal mental development of mankind to take place. Special effort has consequently to be made to familiarise man’s mind with the principles revealed much in advance of the times. The introduction among mankind of eternal divine laws (Al-Islam) proceeded at the normal pace apropos man’s mental development – man accepted what was within his ken and remained a stranger to the rest. All of a sudden, Rasoolullah (PBUH) appeared on the scene in Arabia with a complete code of the laws revealed to him by Allah. Portions of the code that happened to be beyond the mental capacity of his audience aroused opposition. By his inimitable teaching and practice Rasoolullah (PBUH) tried hard to explain to them how the code guaranteed human dignity and welfare. Some of those who shed their prejudices and cared to understand, appreciated Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) message and co-operated with him. He gathered around him a concourse of believers and their healthy deeds greatly accelerated the normal pace of divine laws and in a short while produced most surprising results unparalleled in history. There was nothing extraordinary and supernatural about the achievement. It followed the eternal divine law that “healthy concept of life has the capacity to go up to’ Him and healthy action (of man) gives it a push upward” (35:10). Their deeds accelerated the pace of divine laws and achieved in the matter of days what would normally have taken thousands of years to materialise. Had the co-operation between divine laws and human activity been maintained, quicker achievements under the laws would have also maintained their pace, and who can guess what heights man would have attained by now! The co-operation ceased, however, after a while and the laws resumed their original speed. The short span of time during which quicker results were achieved, according to man’s reckoning of time, is the period during which, in the view of thinkers and historians, Islam was a success and hereafter it proved a failure. The bare fact, however, is that while moving at its normal pace of a day equal to a thousand years, Islam got extra help from man which accelerated its speed, but that later on the extra help was withdrawn leaving Islam to get along at its original normal pace. The process has been very much like the running of a stream of water, which as a result of a fall on the way, flows faster for a while and then, on the exhaustion of the impetus provided by the fall, resumes flowing at its original speed. To say that the stream flowed only while the movement of currents was visible as a result of the fall’s impetus and then it turned into a standing pool would be very short sighted indeed.

10. Four Questions

The foregoing gives rise to four questions, namely:

1. What was it that created in that particular period a body of people whose healthy deeds gave such a momentum to the operation of divine laws?
2. Why did that thing not prove lasting?
3. If the thing disappeared, why did the divine truth escape man’s mind as it had developed at the time?
4. What proof is there that the divine laws resumed their normal speed and continue to operate at that speed? That is, does the stream of divine laws continue to flow and has not turned into a standing pool deprived of all chances of resuming its flow?

First Question

11. Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) Training

As regards the first question, the programme which, in the words of The Qur’an, Rasoolullah (PBUH) followed, was: “To recite His verses to them, to help their development and to teach them the Book and the why thereof”, (62:2). The programme was threefold.

Firstly, Rasoolullah (PBUH) presented to his listeners The Qur’an, pure and simple, without allowing it to be mixed with man’s own thoughts, concepts, theories or beliefs. He offered them pure what he received by Revelation. His appeal was based on reason: “I call to God with sure knowledge, I and whoever follows me” (12:108). The presentation of the Qur’anic message was rational and based on true knowledge; there was no compulsion involved, neither mental through miracles, nor physical by the sword.

Secondly, those who accepted the message after due thought and conviction and without mental reservation were initiated into mastering it as best as they could. Rasoolullah (PBUH) explained to them the provisions of divine laws together with the purpose underlying them. He taught them how they should, in the light of the inviolable principles of Al-Islam, think out a solution to the problems, which might confront them.

Thirdly, an atmosphere of true freedom was created in which human personality (nafs) might ‘grow’ and man’s inborn capacities of head and heart develop. The shackles of man-made restrictions and conventions gripping them broke one by one and they felt that they were neither another man’s dependent nor his slave. True freedom prevailing in the Qur’anic Social Order provides the base for the development of human Personality.

This was the simple and straight-forward programme which enabled Rasoolullah (PBUH) to create a community of people whose healthy deeds gave a miraculous acceleration to the pace of divine laws and established a social order in no time to bear witness to the glorious achievements of Islam.

12. Difference in Training

Those who embraced Islam during the lifetime of Rasoolullah (PBUH), technically called his companions, did not all of them have equal opportunity of benefiting from his training. There were the Bedouins, who became converts towards the end of Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) life after seeing the rising power and prowess of the Islamic State. About them The Qur’an says, “The Bedouins say: ‘we believe’, Say you do not believe, rather say: ‘we surrender (to the Islamic State)’ for belief has not yet entered your hearts.” (49:14). Then there were The Qur’aish, who joined the Islamic fold after the armistice of Hodaibiyya or the fall of Makkah. About them The Qur’an says, “Not equal is he among you who spent and fought before the victory; those are mightier in rank than they who spent and fought afterwards; although God has promised all of them the good that follows from Islam” (57:10). The ‘mightier in rank’ are the ‘true believers’: “and those who believed and have emigrated and struggled in the way of’ God, those who have given refuge (to the ‘emigrants’) and help (the establishment of the new order), those are the true believers. For them there is protection against impairment and respectful/ provision” (8:14). And the ones “who spent and fought afterwards” have been described as “they belong to you” (8:75). The former are pioneers who have been called as “those who are with Muhammad (as), the messenger of God”, (48:29), and whose astounding effort in establishing the Islamic Social Order has been praised in the verse so lavishly. The foregoing is not a negation of the great worth of the believers who, though rather late in the day, joined the pioneers all the same. The Qur’an says about them: “God will be well pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him.” (9:100)

13. Real Conversion

The foregoing would show clearly that among the later adherents of Islam there were people whose conversion differed from that of the first pioneers and who had lesser opportunity of receiving training from Rasoolullah (PBUH). His first converts joined him after long and serious thought and after appreciating his message fully, at a time when conversion meant planting oneself against the concerted opposition of the whole of society and offering one to their unlimited torture and tyranny. Later on when the Islamic state got well established and extended its control far and wide, conversion became an easy affair and meant, to use the Qur’anic expression, just surrendering to the state. Besides this difference in the urge for conversion, the later adherents were also handicapped in the matter of receiving training directly from Rasoolullah (PBUH).

Second Question

14. Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) Personality

The second question is: Why was the programme adopted by Rasoolullah (PBUH) not pursued? An oft-repeated explanation is that it was the unique personality of Rasoolullah (PBUH) who brought about with his great ‘Spiritual’ power the tremendous revolution and it was not within the competence of ordinary mortals to carry on the great work he had initiated.

This explanation is based on a misunderstanding, which it is very necessary to remove. While it might provide an answer to the question, its logical and inescapable conclusion is that howsoever we might wish it we cannot revive the Islamic way of life. The answer leads to complete and continuous frustration leaving little hope for regeneration. The idea of a mujaddid (or ‘renewer’) coming after every century or of a mehdi (or ‘guided one’) appearing at the end of so many messengers following one after another is the direct product of this frustration. The concept that a revival is impossible without the guidance of a messenger is unwarranted and must be removed. There is no mention in The Qur’an of any promised one coming after Rasoolullah (PBUH).

15. What Rasoolullah (PBUH) Did Could Be Repeated

Rasoolullah (PBUH) was the last recipient of Revelation from God and in this respect he was unique among men. Revelation afforded him a ‘supernatural’ position. On the foundation of revealed guidance he raised the superstructure of the Islamic Social Order, not with the help of any supernatural power but as a man. The Qur’an makes no secret of the fact that apart from the Book he was not given any miracle. After his passing away, the process of Revelation stopped, but what he did as a mortal to give practical shape to the revealed message was carried on as before through the institution of Khilafat or succession, the sole purpose of which was to perpetuate his programme of advancing and extending the Islamic Social Order. The Qur’an states: “Muhammad is naught but a messenger; messengers have passed away before him. Why, if he should die or is slain, will you turn about on your heels (thinking that the message was for his lifetime only)?” (3:143). The programme did not end with his demise; it had to continue despite his demise and could be carried on without him. When he said: “I call to God with sure knowledge” (12:108), he added, “I do so and so also those who follow me”. The Qur’an says that “He (Rasoolullah) enforces the recognised (lawful) and forbids the unrecognised (unlawful)” and the same duty has been assigned to his followers: “You are a dynamic society brought forth for the good of humanity. You enforce the recognised (lawful) and forbid the unrecognised (unlawful)” (3:109). Hence, it is wrong to assume that the three fold programme of Rasoolullah (PBUH) of “reciting God’s verses to the people, helping their development and teaching them the Book and the why thereof’ was confined to him and was not to be pursued after him. It was, as a matter of fact, pursued and the fruits that the Islamic social Order had begun to bear during the lifetime of Rasoolullah (PBUH), continued to be harvested. Thereafter, the programme halted due to various reasons.

16. Why The Programme Halted

Rasoolullah (PBUH) began propagating his message among the Makkans and those around about them and subsequently among the people of Madina and its surroundings. Due to direct contact with Rasoolullah (PBUH), his immediate listeners understood and appreciated the divine message and Islamic conceptions gripped them and went deep into their hearts and souls. Later on, when the whole of Arabia became Muslim, the fresh converts to quote The Qur’an merely ‘surrendered’ to the Islamic State, without being subjected to any mental or moral change. The earlier Muslims were real converts, the later ones merely in name. The latter had little share of Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) personal contact and training because they were scattered far and wide, their number was very large, and Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) early demise had cut short the opportunity. After his passing away, during the khilafat (Caliphate) of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra), the Islamic State extended far and wide and covered an area of almost two and a half million square miles, embracing practically the whole of the Persian Empire and the greater part of the Roman Empire. The people inhabiting these vast areas could stick to their religion by making treaties with the Islamic State, but they preferred to become Muslims. As converts to a new social order, they were in an even less fortunate position than the Arabian converts referred to previously. The Arabian converts had the advantage of seeing Muslims round about them and of hearing about Islamic concepts and principles. The new converts had none of this facility. Their number was legion, the area they inhabited was immense, and the means of communication were extremely limited. All these factors made it well nigh impossible that their education and training in the new dispensation could be on lines approaching those on which the earliest adherents of Islam were brought up. The problem greatly worried Caliph Umar (ra) and he gave continued and very serious thought to it throughout his time in office. The situation answered very well the description in The Qur’an: “When the help of God and victory come and you see men joining His social order in throngs, let not complacency overcome you that your purpose has been achieved and your programme is over, but instead you should get determined to prosecute the programme with greater vigour and proclaim the praises of your Nourisher (by executing programme even more vigorously) and seek His protection for He turns to men (and brings them means of development)” (110:1-3). It was this feeling which, according to Ibn-Hazm(an historian), made Khalif Umar (ra) distribute a hundred thousand copies of The Qur’an throughout the length and breadth of the state. He had thought out further plans for the training of the new converts, but before he could execute them he was unexpectedly assassinated, leaving the ummah (community), as well as mankind at large, so much poorer and the new converts an uncouth mass of humanity. A mass conversion of the type that had occurred could be no more than political surrender to the new state, without any real mental change affecting old beliefs and conceptions. Education and training alone can bring about real change. Social influence might change external behaviour, but superficial change alone is a dangerous thing. The surrender of the masses was calm and quiet but it cut to the quick the wielders of authority and the intelligentsia. They were sore at defeat by the Arabs, whom they never took for more than wild brutes, which broke to pieces their extensive empire and destroyed their ancient culture and civilisation. No doubt, defeat forced them to surrender to the Islamic State, but they were never reconciled to it and feelings of revenge against the conquering Arabs raged furiously in their hearts.

The defeated elite took revenge, not on the battlefield, but through political intrigue and religious disruption. They realised that the secret of the overwhelming power of the Arabs lay in their adoption of the Islamic principles. When the Persian governor of the Eastern Provinces of Persia and military commander, Harmuzan, was brought in chains before Umar (ra), he asked him how is it that the Arabs who until recently dare not come near the Persian frontiers were now inflicting heavy defeat on them on all fronts? The answer Harmuzan gave was: “Before it was force pitched against force, of which we had more. Then God was neither with you nor with us. Now in our encounters there is God with you and no God with us”. Harmuzan’s answer repeats in other words what The Qur’an has stated: “That is because Allah is the protector of the believers and that the unbelievers have no protector” (47:11). The thinkers among the conquered knew full well that it was the eternal principles of Allah (swt) whose adoption had brought such a tremendous change among the Arabs and therefore they based their scheme of revenge on a plan designed to wean them from those principles. The plan consisted in introducing gradually in the body politic of Islam un-Islamic beliefs and concepts under an Islamic covering so that in the end the eternal divine principles would lose place to manmade laws and concepts. What we have now is, mostly composed of the ‘pseudo-Islam’ that was introduced under the ‘Ajami (alien) scheme of revenge. The Egyptian historian Muhammad Husain Haikal has described the situation aptly in his book, The Great ‘Umar. He has first quoted from the Historians’ History of the World and then made his own comments. The quotation is as follows:

“The reaction went still further, and the principles of political theology which had ruled ancient Persia returned to affirm their empire almost the day after the national ruin. According to Persian theory the power belonged to the King, the son of God, invested with divine glory by his super-terrestrial origin. Owing to political revolutions, Persia united on the head of Muhammad’s legitimate successor, the Arabian Ali, who had been excluded from the caliphate, all the splendour and sanctity of the old national royalty. The one she, had once called in her protocols, “the divine King, son of heaven”, and in her sacred books, the “lord and guide” – lord in the worldly sense, guide in an intellectual – she now called by the Arabic word Imam, “the Chief”. This was the simplest title imaginable and at the same time the most august, for in it was included all the sovereignty of the world and of the mind. In regard to the Caliphs, who were raised to power by the blind clamour of the masses, by crime and intrigues, she upheld the hereditary rights of the Imam Ali, the infallible and sacred of God.”

“At his death she gathered about his two sons, Hassan and Hussein, and afterwards about their descendants. Hussein had married a daughter of the last sassanid king, so that the imamate was fixed in his blood by a doubly divine right; and union of ancient Persia and Islam was sealed in the blood of Hussein on the plains of Karbala.”

“The revolution which overturned the Omayyad usurpers in favour of the Abbasides, nephews of the Prophet, was the Work of Persia. If she did not bring into power the favourite family for which she thought she was fighting, she at least caused her principle to triumph.” (pp.489-90, Vol. 24, 1907 edition).

Haikal then comments on the quotation as follows:

“The events recorded by the Historians’ History of the world, which are corroborated by all other historians, occurred after ‘Umar (ra). We have referred to them with a view to draw the attention of the reader to the fact that the Iranians never reconciled themselves to Arab domination and in fact resisted it from the very beginning. At first they revolted openly; but failure in the attempt turned their efforts to arrest power by other means. They succeeded here and obtained considerable power in the various spheres of life’s activities. They were so sore against Muslim domination that they decided to kill ‘Umar (ra). It has been said that the assassination of ‘Umar (ra) coming soon after the conquest of Khorasan was the result of Iranian conspiracy.” (p.420)

I hold no brief for Shias or Sunnis and am, therefore, unconcerned with sectarian beliefs. The criterion with me is that beliefs and conceptions opposed to The Qur’an can never be right and I am averse to looking at the point in issue from the sectarian angle. What I wish to stress is that the inhabitants of the conquered territories after becoming Muslim stuck to their old beliefs and after giving them an Islamic appearance, spread them in Islamic society, thereby weaning it gradually from Allah (swt) and His book, who helped Muslims in overcoming non-Muslims. Or, in the words of the Historians History of the world, “The Islam of Persia is not at all Islam; it is the old religion of Persia framed in Moslem formulas.” (p.489). It was the victory of mental swords over steel swords. The process got an unfortunate impetus from the fact that during the reign of the Abbasides, who had gained supremacy through alien (‘ajami) help, they could influence the whole of society. The Persians were a literary people and took good care to popularise the ‘New Islam’ through the written word. It is the books compiled during this period that today we teach in the name of religion. Islamic history, political as well as religious, is in fact the variegated story of alien (‘ajami) intrigue. The above facts explain clearly how the type of instruction and training begun by Rasoolullah (as) and followed during the earlier days of the Khilafat, not only came to a stop but gave place to the teaching of a ‘New Islam’.

17. Doubtful Strategy

Some say that had Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (ra) not fought these wars, Islam would have been saved the disfigurement which it had to suffer at the hands of the new converts. This opinion overlooks an important aspect of the situation, namely that the wars were fought not for grabbing land but in circumstances which might be summarised briefly as follows:

1. Islam is a way of life that can take practical shape only in a free Islamic State. This was the foundation on which Rasoolullah (as) built a state, the preservation of which became the sole object of the Khilafat.
2. The Persian and the Roman Empires did not, could not, accept the new Islamic State since it was a rival and a danger and had better be removed from the scene. It became incumbent that the Khilafat should take note of their evil designs and forestall them by advancing its armies for purposes of self-preservation. Their conquests would have produced no untoward results had the conquered territories entered into treaties with the conquerors and not become converts to Islam overnight. The situation was worsened by the untimely assassination of ‘Umar (ra) who would have undoubtedly taken steps for initiating the new converts into the Islamic social order on a sound and firm basis.
3. It is important to note that in addition to following a defensive strategy, an Islamic State has, at times, to adopt an offensive strategy also. If the subjects of a State are helpless against the tyranny and torture of their rulers it is the duty of an Islamic State to take whatever steps are feasible to succour them, even though they may be non-Muslims. At times armed intervention might become unavoidable in situations to meet which the U.N.O. is now being urged to have a force of its own which could move into territories when there is no other way to preserve law and order. Armed intervention by the Khilafat was in some cases resorted to with this motive. The foregoing would show the view that ‘the Khilafat should not have engaged in wars is ill informed.

Third Question

18. Why Did The Human Mind Fail To Assimilate Islamic Truths?

Now we come to the third question, namely that if the process of instruction and training introduced by Rasoolullah (PBUH) fell into disuse, why did human mind of its own, fail to adopt the Islamic truths which had been lucidly presented before it and instead adopt man-made laws? We have already seen that when eternal truths unfold themselves with their normal speed, the human mind gradually accepts them; however, the sudden appearance of such truths leaves the human mind perplexed unless by special training it is enabled to appreciate them. In other words, it is in the very nature of all revolutionary messages to arrive before their time. A ‘Revolutionary voice’ is an appeal to mankind to give practical shape to some eternal law of Allah (swt); it is ‘before-time’ in the sense that in its present stage of development, the human mind is unprepared to receive it. If it were so prepared, the voice would not be revolutionary, but would be product of the prevailing environment. A revolutionary voice seems always out of tune since its listeners have not yet developed the ear that could appreciate it. They find it hard to harmonise with it. To them the voice is strange and they oppose it. Leaving aside the appeal of a messenger of Allah (swt) which is always centuries ahead of time, the appeal of any genius falls on deaf ears and he passes away full of regret over the indifference of his audience. The nineteenth century Indian poet Ghalib (1797 – 1869) said “The world will appreciate my verse after me”. The Islamic philosopher Sir Muhammad Iqbal (1877 – 1938) said “After me they will recite my verse, appreciate it and say a self-knowing soul gave a new shape to the world”. Ghalib and Iqbal are not solitary instances. All over the world and throughout history, the luminaries suffered the same fate at the hands of their respective people. They had nothing to support them in life and most of them had to spend their days behind bars and in misery. They lived unknown and died unwept and unsung. But when they were no more, later generations unearthed the remnants and rags in which they had passed a miserable existence, adored with them museums and galleries, wrote every word of theirs in gold and weighed it against jewels.

19. High Level Of Qur’anic Revolution

A casual assessment of the plane of thought and the social, economic and cultural level attained in the age in which the revolutionising message of The Qur’an came would show that the message was much beyond and ahead of the times.

1. Man and God. In an age in which the people from the thoughtful down to the common man were overwhelmed with superstition surrounding places of worship, sacrificial forums and monasteries, and their minds were helpless captives in the hands of hermits, priests and soothsayers, who were believed to be the sole and accredited agents for enforcing the driving purpose, the Qur’anic voice proclaiming that between man and his God no third power intervened must have been a cry in the wilderness.

2. Co-operation not Subjugation. In an age in which the whole world believed and worshipped Raja as an incarnation of God, Caesar as the possessor of Divine Rights, and king as God’s shadow on earth, the Qur’anic call that no one has the right to thrust his will on another and that human affairs should be settled by mutual consultation must have sounded very odd indeed.

3. Relative Superiority. In an age in which racial superiority determined respectability, family and tribal connections formed the basis for greatness, heredity was accepted as the standard for leadership and political ascendancy, and in which every individual, every, tribe and every country felt the greatest pride in preserving such distinctions, even though the process might involve wide spread destruction, the Qur’anic message that by birth all persons are alike and the criterion for respectability and greatness is one’s personal attainments and not hereditary connections must have appeared very unnatural.

4. Ideology. In an age in which geographical boundaries and racial characteristics assessed distinction and in which laying down of one’s life for country and nation was considered to be a sacred duty, for The Qur’an to say that nationality should he based not on country, colour, race, language, etc. but on common ideology must have been altogether incomprehensible.

5. Cause and Effect. In an age in which man had a separate god for every natural phenomenon whose pleasure or displeasure determined whether coming events would bring happiness or sorrow, how could one believe that things in nature are controlled by a fixed law, that there is a chain of cause and effect in all happenings, and that there is an unchanging procedure governing them which admits of no exception? The Qur’anic conception must have been an extremely strange one and an altogether unacceptable proposition.

6. All Men Are Equal. In an age marked with paucity of knowledge in which a villager who could count beyond ten was believed to be superhuman, how could the human mind concede that a messenger of Allah (swt), who was the repository of the highest knowledge, could be a man like any other man?

7. Miracles. In an age in which piety was associated with doing astonishing things, how could anyone accept that a messenger of Allah (swt) did not perform miracles and that the yardstick for judging truth or falsehood was the verdict of knowledge and its concrete results? The proposition could hardly appeal to the then prevailing intellect which would spurn the idea that a prophet could perform no miracle, that religion was based on reason and that religious actions should be judged by their results.

8. Serfdom. In an age in which capitalism, and even serfdom, were accepted as normal features of society, the clarion call of The Qur’an that no man has the right to usurp another’s earnings must have sounded sheer lunacy.

9. Private Ownership. Finally, in an age in which a Qaroon’s(Q’arun) wealth was appreciated as god’s bounty, land-lordship as natures gift, and in which the placing of any limits on personal belongings was viewed as anti-religious. The Qur’anic proclamation must have sounded very strange indeed, that hoarding of wealth is a serious crime, that sources of production cannot belong to any individual, that the means of sustenance should remain open to all in an equitable manner and that it is the basic duty of the State to see that every one is provided with the necessities of life and whatever is required for the development of one’s latent potentialities.

20. Sixth Century Thought

The level of human thought in the sixth century of the Christian era, had not yet attained the height required to assimilate the conceptions underlying the new dispensation and the way of life it advocated. The conceptions being of a revolutionary character were far ahead of the times and the world was still unprepared for receiving them. The sixth century belonged to what are called the ‘dark ages’; even the twentieth century, the age of science and reason and civilisation and culture, finds it difficult to catch up with Qur’anic conceptions. Their great height makes it impossible to hazard a guess about the time when human thought would approach them. Therefore, there should be nothing surprising about the fact that the Qur’anic Social Order did not last; the real surprise is how some people got together who could assimilate conceptions far ahead of their time and give them a practical shape.

21. Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) Personality

It sends my soul into ecstasy when I think of the wonderful training which the great personality of Rasoolullah (PBUH) imparted to produce in that age a people who could bring about the establishment of the Qur’anic Social Order. Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) greatest miracle, in my view, is that in circumstances in which any genius would pass away regretting an indifferent environment and calling himself the man of the Future, he – Rasoolullah (PBUH) – should proclaim his environment to be ‘the best of all’ since it gave practical shape to a social order far above the mental level of the times. Rasoolullah (PBUH) occupies a unique position among the revolutionary leaders of the world standing far ahead of, and much higher than, anyone else. His miraculous achievement consists in placing before and bringing home to his people, ideas that are not fully appreciated even after the lapse of thirteen centuries. A teacher possessing his breadth of vision and sympathy could alone give a rational exposition of Allah’s (swt) book and achieve an unimaginable development of man’s potentialities. It was this marvellous performance of Rasoolullah (PBUH) which made Allah (swt) and His constructive forces (‘angels’) acclaim him with cheers and applause (33:56). They acclaimed his associates also (33:47), who cut themselves off from the rest of the world and, rising poles high above their contemporaries, helped the establishment in Madina of a social order far beyond the imagination of the times in which:

1. The big sardars (leaders) of the Qur’aish, a plebeian from Persia (Salman), a labourer from Rome (Shoaib), and a slave from Abyssinia (Bilal) not only ate from the same table but had matrimonial relations also;

2. Even when such a personality as Rasoolullah (PBUH) asked a slave boy or a slave girl to do something, he or she had the courage to question him whether his suggestion was based on Revelation or on his personal opinion and if it was the latter, to ask his pardon and to be allowed to do as he or she thought fit;

3. Affairs of State were determined by mutual counsel and the view of the head of the State – Rasoolullah (PBUH) himself – was at times ruled out by the view of someone else;

4. At Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) demise, Abu Bakr (ra) proclaimed before a huge crowd that he who worshipped Muhammad (may we glorify and obey his call) should know that his god is dead, but he who served Allah (swt) should know that his God is Living and Everlasting, that Muhammad (as) was merely His messenger, who lived his time and then passed away, making little difference to the order he had established;

5. After Rasoolullah’s (PBUH) demise, people chose their head on merit, discarding completely tribal or ancestral considerations;

6. At his death bed Rasoolullah (PBUH) declared that he had not a cent at home and that whatever odds and ends he was leaving would pass on to the people and not to any individual relation;

7. Abu Bakr (ra), as head of State, fixed his remuneration at an equivalent of the daily wages of a labourer and returned to the Exchequer even that pittance, fearing he might not have done full work for the sum;

8. Caliph Umar (ra) told his wife that the jewels she received from Caesar’s wife were in return of her gift of perfumes she sent to Caesar’s wife. These jewels were given to her in capacity of the wife of the head of the state (Caliph) not in her personal capacity. Therefore she must hand over the jewels to the Bait-ul-Mal. (Central Exchequer).

9. ‘Umar (ra) decided that the conquered lands shall not be divided among the soldiers but shall remain under the joint control of the ummah (community), so that the present as well as the future generations should be able to avail of them;

10. An old hag could tell the head of the State that if he could not evolve machinery for keeping himself informed of what was happening to the individual citizens, he should abdicate on grounds of inefficiency; and

11. ‘Umar (ra) would eat wheat bread only if he was assured that it was available to every citizen of the state, otherwise he would continue eating oats.

The creation of a society in which decisions of the kind indicated above could he taken normally and without special effort, was, on the face of it, an event far in advance of the age. Even after the lapse of thirteen centuries, the human mind still finds it difficult to assimilate the principles propounded by The Qur’an.

22. Human Mind Can Develop

When I say that revolutionary messages are ahead of their times, it does not mean that the messages are beyond the reach of the human mind. It can follow and appreciate them but with effort. Unfortunately, effort is what the human mind shirks. Following blindly (taqleed) requires no thought – in fact, thought is forbidden in taqleed – is automatic, and hence, is a practice that is readily adopted. The early history of Islam gives, however, an idea of the great extent to which man’s effort can develop the human mind.

23. Why Emergent Evolution

What is the good of sudden revolutionary changes? What does mankind gain by accelerating the working of eternal laws for a time and securing their extraordinary results if after a while the human mind and those results are to revert to their old level? In a concrete form the question might be “what contribution did early Islam make to the betterment of mankind?” The true answer is “an immense contribution”. Firstly, Islam gave the world Allah’s (swt) eternal laws in the form of a book – The Qur’an – so that one who so wishes might give them practical shape and obtain their good results.

Secondly, Islam showed the world that the laws are workable, that they are not mere utopia but a practicable code of life which was given a trial in a particular period of history and produced positive results. Emergent evolutions help mankind to advance. As explained previously, human intellect works by experimentation. It evolves a plan, executes it and then finds after centuries that the plan was defective and hence, a failure. Then it begins experimenting with some other plan. If, however, it can have the benefit of seeing the results achieved by a revolution, the precedent will help it in assessing the results of its own planning. A comparative study of pre- and post-Islamic history will show at once that the progress man has made during post-Islamic period is unparalleled. The progress would appear much more marked had the history of early Islam been available in its unalloyed form. A revolution gives the ever-moving vehicle of time a push forward which accelerates its speed and enables it to cover a lot of distance with the momentum gained. It was the momentum generated by the short-lived Islamic Social Order that enabled the Muslims to maintain for centuries their world leadership in the arts and sciences. At least some Western thinkers and historians admit the truth of this statement. In his book The Making of Humanity, Robert Briffault has devoted a whole chapter to this theme under the caption ‘Dar Al-Hikmat” and says,

“It was under the influence of the Arabian and Moorish revival of culture, and not in the fifteenth century, that the real Renaissance took place. Spain, not Italy, was the cradle of the rebirth of Europe. After steadily sinking lower and lower into barbarism it had reached the darkest depths of ignorance and degradation when the cities of the Saracenic world – Baghdad, Cairo, Cordoba, Toledo – were growing centres of civilisation and intellectual activity. It was there that the new life arose which was to grow into a new phase of human evolution. From the time when the influence of their culture made itself felt, began the stirring of a new life.” (p.188-189).

“It is highly probable that, but for the Arabs, modern European civilisation would never have arisen at all; it is absolutely certain that, but for them, it would not have assumed that character which has enabled it to transcend all previous phases of evolution.” (p.190) Briffault, Robert (1928). The Making of Humanity, London: George Allen & Unwin LTD.

The above extracts sum up nicely the benefits that accrued to humanity from the push given by the Islamic revolution.

Fourth Question

24. Islam Has Been Advancing

We may now take up the fourth and final question, namely, how do we know that the eternal principles of Islam have indeed been functioning at their normal speed and have not come to a halt. It is a question of history, the history of the times when The Qur’an was revealed and the history of mankind during the subsequent thirteen centuries. The study will settle the point whether in these thirteen centuries man has, after due experimentation, been adopting Qur’anic concepts or reverting to pre-Qur’anic concepts.

1. In the pre-Qur’anic period, the institution of kingship was believed to be an institution most suited to human ‘nature’. The Qur’an rejected it and advanced the method of mutual consultation for settling affairs because no one had the right to thrust his will on another. The new concept had little appeal at the time, but since then, the trend has been in which direction, towards monarchy or towards Islam?

2. Slavery was then believed to be an essential feature of society, and one that was perfectly in accord with the ‘natural’ division of mankind into classes. The Qur’an declared that by birth all men are equally deserving of respect and that therefore no one has the right to enslave another. The Qur’anic concept was then unacceptable, but since then, which has prevailed, the old slavish concept or the new Islamic concept of human freedom?

3. Human mind then thought that personalities help nations to glory and believed in hero-worship as something very natural. The Qur’an declared that the idea was archaic and primitive and that henceforth, common ideology would cement nations which would progress on the strength and efficiency of their social order. No-one agreed with it then; but do not present trends favour entirely the Qur’anic principle?

4. Against the then prevailing belief that ownership of land, feudalism and, capitalism were natural institutions, The Qur’an proclaimed that it is the duty of every individual to help the development of all, therefore, the means and sources of production must not belong to individuals and that individual control over land produce and hoarding of gold and silver were the most heinous crimes before the Supreme Court of Humanity. The Qur’anic idea was spurned initially but what about now? Is the world not restlessly yearning to assimilate and own the idea originally rejected with contempt?

5. The human mind then recognised families, tribes and nations, but could not conceive a universal brotherhood of man. The Qur’an declared that humanity is one and that the oneness can be brought about by having one law for all. The idea of oneness of humanity was not appreciated then, but since then what has been the position? Has appreciation grown for a compact mankind or for its divisions into smaller groups? That the world has grown sick of nationalism is the theme of a chapter on politics in my book What Man Has Thought.

Western thinkers then passed on to internationalism, but felt very soon that it could not achieve human destiny. They are now for universalism and wish to establish one world government without knowing exactly the base on which to raise the superstructure. When will they realise that the true basis for establishing a world government is provided by the Permanent Values of The Qur’an?

25. Islam Continues To Advance

I have cited the foregoing instances by way of illustration, otherwise there is no walk of life in which man has not after unsuccessful experimentation, followed the path indicated by The Qur’an for the achievement of man’s destiny, or is still busy discovering it. Of the truths revealed by The Qur’an, the world has adopted some, is impatiently anxious to adopt others, and the rest appear to be beyond the reach of man with his present mental development. The Qur’an is the final and complete code of life for mankind. As man advances he will appreciate more and more of the provisions of the code that fits with the freshly evolving features of life.

Says The Qur’an, “We shall show them our signs in the (changing) horizons and in themselves until it is clear to them that it is the truth” (41:53). The world witnesses the signs in the changing horizons, appreciates the Qur’anic eternal truths and is thus gradually becoming a convert to Islam.

26. Recapitulation

The ground already covered might be recapitulated as follows:

1. Islam is a collection of eternal truths, inviolable laws and Permanent Values revealed from time to time for the guidance of man and finally preserved in The Qur’an.

2. ‘Islam’ forged its way into human society at its own evolutionary slow speed, very slow indeed by our reckoning, until Rasoolullah (PBUH) appeared on the scene.

3. By persistent effort over a number of years, Rasoolullah (PBUH) brought together a body of men whose practical programme helped Islam’s normal speed accelerate and produce results quickly, that is, by our own reckoning. This is the period in history that is recognised as the epoch of Islam’s glory.

4. After a time, the modus operandi of Rasoolullah (PBUH) – calling people to Allah rationally and instructing them in the revealed book – fell into disuse, resulting in the withdrawal of the acceleration induced by him and his associates and leaving Islam to proceed at its normal, slow speed.

27. Islam and Muslims

Superficial vision sees in the phenomenon short-lived success and subsequent failure of Islam, confusing Islam with Muslims although the two are quite distinct from each other. The state of Muslims, good, bad or indifferent is one thing and success or failure of Islam quite another. But to avoid confusion the position needs to be clarified.

28. Islamic Truths

The truths represented by the term Islam are as old as creation itself. They began forging their way ahead gradually and on their onward march different people at different periods of history owned them and reaped a happy and hefty harvest. When they gave up the truths, the gains disappeared and they became subject to sundry hardships. Fourteen hundred years ago a people in Arabia who adopted the truths attained the greatest heights of glory, but when they turned their backs on the truths, they went into decline. However, their decline did not halt Islam from proceeding ahead unscathed and unaffected. The picture of how Islam went on and on and how different people caught up to it at different stages is painted on the background, not of Muslim history, but of the history of mankind. A study of mankind’s history will show clearly how man-made social orders have had a short-lived success whereas Islamic principles have continued to thrive.

29. Evidence of Man’s History

In the streets of France, when cremated kingship gave birth to democracy, it was a link in Islam’s history. In America, when battles were fought and blood was shed to put an end to slavery, it was a glorious chapter in Islam’s history. In India, when the movement to call ‘untouchables’ by the name of Harijan (one bestowed with God’s energy) was launched, it was a manifestation of Islam’s eternal truth. And now, in America, the struggle to do away with the discrimination between white and black is similarly a step towards Islam. When the United Nations Organisation (UNO) decided that conflicts between nations should be resolved by mutual counsel, it was nothing but the adoption of an Islamic precept. The current turmoil in man’s mind somehow to banish armament from society, follows strictly the provision in the Islamic programme framed fourteen centuries ago that wars are allowed only for so long as they (wars) do not “lay down their burdens”, that is, the reasons for their being fought. In short, any movement launched anywhere during the past fourteen centuries for the liberation and advancement of humanity, was no more than a ray from Islam’s shining sun; and conversely, whenever and wherever man-made schemes have failed, the situation has provided fresh proof of the truth of Islamic fundamentals. The history of mankind coupled with its struggle and search for knowledge proclaim aloud, to quote the Islamic Philosopher Sir Muhammad Iqbal (1877 – 1938):

“Wherever you come across a region full of colour and perfume,
Out of whose soil spring urges of ‘desire’, It owes its worth to the teaching of Muhammad,
Or it is still seeking after his guidance.”

30. Only Islam Advances

A study of human history from this angle should convince anyone that Islam did not fail at any stage, that systems that were not Islamic, without exception, did fail at one stage or another, and that after their failure, Islam always took their place. It was bare truth when The Qur’an stated, “He will make the Islamic way of life prevail over all other ways” (48:28). The Book tells us that man’s future is bright. In connection with the creation of man, the ‘angels’ (that is, the forces of nature) are said to have said to Allah (swt), “What, will you settle herein (on earth) one who will upset things and shed blood” (2:30), and received the reply, “Assuredly, I know what you know not” (2:31). This means that the ultimate destiny of man will be achieved when the stage of disruption and spilling of blood is over and when “there shall be no fear on them, neither shall they sorrow” (2:38). Islam is leading man to his destiny and will not rest until his destination is reached. it is a programme designed by The One who is the Nourisher of all being, and a Nourisher (Rabb) is one who takes care of a thing from its initial stage of coming into existence to its final stage of development. If a programme fails it could not have been designed by The Nourisher of all being.

31. Partial Adoption of Islam

The world has been adopting the Islamic system, bit by bit, but partial adoption cannot produce the promised result. A system is an indivisible unit and produces results only when adopted as a whole. It is very much like a medical prescription that will restore health only if it is carefully prepared with all its necessary ingredients. The people who adopt the Islamic System as a whole are called Momineen. They are the people who have “no fear on them, neither shall they sorrow”. Man has to reach that stage in any case. He may do so by the method of trial and error or by following revealed guidance. That guidance will help him traverse in seconds ground that experimentation might take centuries to cover.

32. Decline Of Muslims

A question arises as to why Muslims as a people should lag behind other nations? A detailed answer to this question has been furnished in my book ‘Asbaab-e-Zawal-e-Ummat’( Reasons for the decline of Muslims). Briefly, the reason for their lagging behind is that while the other nations have been adopting Qur’anic truths after due consideration of “signs in the changing horizons and in themselves”, the Muslims are clinging to an alien (‘ajami) pseudo-Islam which forbids thought and understanding outright. The day Muslims revive the programme of reading, understanding and adopting in life Qur’anic truths, they are bound to regain the leadership of the world. Goethe, the German poet, has likened Islam to a clear and transparent stream flowing smoothly towards its goal; nations that avail of its water for irrigating their fields will have a bumper crop. In an earlier epoch of history, the Arabs did it and “gathered a hundred grains for every one sowed”. But when they gave up drawing water from the stream their crops dried up. Did the stream dry up? No. It flows on and on and those who so wish may still avail of its water. “Each we succour, these and those, from your Sustainer’s gift and your Sustainer’s gift is not confined (to a particular people)” (17:20). The standing crop of the Muslims dried up because they would not water it from the ever-flowing heavenly stream. Allah’s (swt) ‘broadcasting station’ is busy and will remain so “till it is the rising of dawn”; if one’s radio set has become silent, the fault lies with the set itself.

33. Islamic Way Illustrated

The Qur’an has made use of an illustration for explaining the Islamic way of life. “Have you not seen how God has struck a similitude? A good word (healthy concept of life) is as a good tree whose roots are firm and whose branches are spread high all over” (14:24). The tree is fully capable of withstanding the worst storm and has its branches spread far and wide in all the four directions without being confined to any one country, “neither of the East nor of the West”, (2:43). “It gives its produce every season according to the laws of its Nourisher” (14:25). The Islamic way of life is confined neither by space nor by time. The same thing has been illustrated elsewhere by another example: “The likeness of paradise that is promised to those who guard against breaches of law, is that of a garden beneath which flow streams of water, whose produce is eternal and so is its shade” (13:35).

When Allah (swt) says that the tree of Islam will bear fruit forever, it would be wrong to suggest that the tree bore fruit at a particular period of history and then dried up. What actually happened at the time was that by their healthy tending of the tree, the believers helped it blossom quicker. This effort of Muhammad (as) – may we glorify and obey his call – the messenger of Allah (swt), assisted by his companions has been described by The Qur’an again in terms of a young sapling growing in a grain field, “as a seed that puts forth its shoot and strengthens it and it grows stout and rises straight upon its stalk, pleasing the farmers, that through them He may enrage the, unbelievers” (48:29). In other words, a tree which should have taken long to bear fruit was helped by this particular people to blossom earlier, but when their co-operation was withdrawn, they lost the fruit, although the tree continues to this day to grow, blossom and bear fruit in its normal sustained way.

34. Islamic Way and Gains Inter-Linked

The co-operating people gathered a rich harvest because of their attachment to the particular system. The moment they detached themselves from the system the gains simultaneously began to disappear. In continuation of the verse (14:25) already quoted, The Qur’an goes on to say that Allah (swt) confirms those who believe with the firm word, that is, with the firm way of life. So long as they follow it they remain firm; the moment they separate from it, they scatter and are reduced to a non-entity. Their glory and their fall are both determined by Allah’s (swt) Law, and not by anyone’s whim. It is the way that a people adopt which determines their fate. When they give it up, it is not the way (Islam) which fails; it is the people who fail. History shows that ways other than Islam have ultimately proved a failure. Chapter 103, Verses 1-3 of The Qur’an declare that history testifies to the fact that, by following ways of his own making, “man has surely been in the way of loss, save those who believe in Allah’s (swt) way of life and by their healthy deeds help the way” to produce its healthy results more quickly. But it is not an ad hoc programme such that you follow it and thereby ensure happiness and success for all time to come, even though the programme might have been deserted on the way. The programme requires that the process of “counselling each other unto its truth and to be steadfast” should continue ceaselessly. So long as Muslims followed the programme, they received all the good that accrues from following Allah’s (swt) Laws; when they gave up the programme, they deprived themselves of the fruit of those laws. The laws, however, continue operating as before.

Here ends my broadly stated answer to the question “Is Islam a failure?” After going through it the reader will, I hope, agree that Islam has never been a failure but that it has succeeded and will continue to succeed, evergreen in its pristine glory and ready to shower its blessing without discrimination on mankind, badly torn and tortured at its own hands.

Glossary of some Qurani terms
The reader may find the following explanations of Quranic terms useful:
Allah: Arabic/Quranic reference to the One God Who is the Lord God, the Creator and Sustainer of the entire universe and everything that is in it. Allah is not an exclusive name for a tribal deity of Muslims as some Christians, Jews and other non-Muslims erroneously believe. It is wrong to consider Allah as a name for God as God has no name, only Attributes.
As ‘alayhi Salaam (On him be peace)
Deen: (or Din) A term with no exact English equivalent, a ‘Way of Life’, and in the Islamic context, a social, political system based on Quranic Values. Deen is generally translated incorrectly in English as religion.
Eiman: According to the Holy Quran, the conviction that results from full mental acceptance and intellectual satisfaction. This kind of conviction gives one a feeling of amn – peace, inner contentment. In addition, a Momin is one who accepts the truth and acts in such a way that it ensures his own peace and helps him to safeguard the security of the rest of mankind. Amn, Eiman and Momin have a common root.
Halal: Permissible by Allah. Halal is the antonym of Haram. While mentioning the word Halal, Quran also used the word Tayyab- which means pleasant, pure, wholesome and nourishing.
Haram: Unlawful, prohibited according to the Quran.
Ka’ba: Derived from the Arabic word Ka’ab, which literally means cube. It is a cube shaped stone built structure wrapped in black cloth. Into one corner of its wall the Hajr-e-Aswad (Black stone) is laid. It was built by Abraham (PBUH) and his son Ishmael (PBUH).
Kufr/Kafir: Kufr (v.) is to reject; Kafir (n.) is thus a rejecter, non-Muslim, or non-believer according to the Holy Quran.
Makkah: The holiest of the holy cities is situated in a depression surrounded by barren stark hills. It is the birthplace of the last Messenger Muhammad (PBUH) and abode of the descendents of Ishmael, son of Abraham (PBUH).
Momin: One who accepts the truth in such a way that it ensures his own peace and helps to safeguard the peace and security of the rest of mankind. Alm’omin is one of the Attributes of Allah Himself. See also Eiman.
Muhammad: (PBUH), the final Messenger of Allah.
PBUH: When Muslims take the name of a Messenger in writing, they usually add the salutation PBUH (Peace Be Upon Him). This salutation is not used in the Quran. It should be implicitly understood that, as mentioned in Sura As-Saaffaat (The Ranks) (37:181), we do convey Peace upon all the Messengers of Allah, and Praise be to Allah, Sustainer of the Universe.
Nafs: It has many meanings, including intellect, Personality, or Self, which may be termed as mind, or psyche. Quran uses this word for a specific thing called Human Personality, which in religious parlance is referred to as the soul.
Quran: Holy Scripture of Muslims revealed by God Almighty to Messenger Muhammad (PBUH). Its literal meaning is collection, recitation. The Holy Quran is the last of the Divine books.
ra radi Allahu anhu (May allah be pleased with him)
Rabb: It is usually translated into English as the Lord, which does not convey the real meaning and significance of the Arabic word. It means one who provides nourishment, to process a thing with new additions, alterations or changes so that it should reach its goal, to bring a thing gradually to perfection. One of God’s Attributes means Nourisher, Cherisher and Sustainer.
Rabubiyat: The process by which Allah provides nourishment or sustenance (derived from Rabb)
Rasool: A person chosen by Almighty who receives Divine guidance and delivers this message continuously, gently and softly to mankind without the slightest change or modification. In this pamphlet the use of this term has been restricted for Muhammad (PBUH).
Razzakiyat: The process by which Allah provides nourishment, subsistence (derived from Rizq).
Rizq: The physical necessities of life according to the Quran; subsistence.
Shariyat: Islamic Law, Way of Life. Shariyat is synonymous with Deen.
Shirk: The only unpardonable offence according to the Quran. It is the association of partners with Allah (i.e. polytheism), whether it is anyone or anything in the human or physical world, or the obedience of laws that contradict those revealed in the Quran. People who do so are called Mushrikeen. This includes creating divisions within the Muslim community through sectarianism.
Swt Subhaanahu wata’aala (May He be Glorified and Exalted)
Wahi: Al-Wahiyo is a suggestion by a sign that is extremely quick and fast. It also means to inform quickly, to whisper, and also to write. Wahi (Revelation) therefore is the law that Allah has given everything in the universe to follow. Whilst animals have no choice in following the law, humans can choose whether or not to follow it. However, whilst everything else in the universe receives the Wahi directly from Allah, in humans He has only communicated the Wahi directly to the Messengers (as Revelation).
Note: With reference to Quranic verses cited in this booklet: The Sura number is written first followed by the verse number. For example, (4:6) means Sura No 4, Verse 6.
============

827 total views, 2 views today

(Visited 87 times, 2 visits today)

Why Do We Celebrate Eid? – G A Parwez – Bazm Tolue Islam London

Every tribe, people or race throughout the world celebrates a festival of one sort or another. Muslims also celebrate some festive occasions on some days of the year. But the festival of Eid is one that we are commanded to celebrate in festivity, joy and happiness by Allah Almighty Himself ! This in itself portrays its importance.

In Surah Yunus it is said:

“O mankind! There has come to you indeed an admonition from your Rabb and a healing for what is in the hearts; and a guidance and a mercy for the believers. Say: In the grace of Allah and in His mercy, in that they should rejoice. It is better than (all the worldly wealth) that they amass.” (10:57-58).

This is the occasion Muslims have been enjoined by Allah (SWT) Himself to celebrate with happiness and joy. This occasion is called JASHNE NUZOOLE QURAN, i.e. EID-UL-FITR DAY.

The Quran was first bestowed from on high in the month of Ramadaan as a guidance to man (2:185). Therefore the entire month of fasting is, in a way, a preparation for the celebration of this festival day called Eid. The question arises: what, after all, has Allah given us for which we are commanded to rejoice? The answer is given by the Quran itself that it (the Quran) makes man aware of his true status in this world. Allah says:

“Indeed there has come to you from Allah, a Light and a clear Book.” (5:15, 14:1).

Ponder for a moment what happens in the dark, and what happens to darkness when it is stabbed by light! In darkness, no object, article or a thing’s correct identity, position and location can be known; whereas in light every object’s true location and identity is before us. In darkness we mistakenly presume a rope to be a snake, and vice versa. But when light comes, we see the difference between a rope and a snake!

DARKNESS

Before the revelation of the Holy Quran, man was in utter darkness. He was ignorant of his exalted status in the universe, nor was he aware of the phenomena of nature. In short, he knew very little about the physical world and his own place in it. What kind of darkness was prevalent before the Divine revelation? It was the darkness of thought, of intellect, superstitions, and darkness of heart and mind. It was the darkness of being unacquainted with one’s own actual self. And the fact is that this darkness of being unaware of his own true position and dignity was the sum of all his darkness: it was the source and fountainhead of his darkness. Had man been aware of his own true self, then he would have eliminated all other darknesses. Thus the question arises as to what dignified position the Quran has given to man? If we seek a detailed answer to the question, then we have to go through the whole Quran. And this is not possible to accomplish within the confines of this short article. We shall touch briefly on a few aspects, but it will not be possible to understand them until it is not seen that before the revelation of the Quran, to what extent was man engulfed in darkness, and to what depth of degradation he had descended.

At the time of the revelation of the Quran, man had enslaved man. In some societies he was in abject bondage. The feudal lord was his god. Monasticism had completely stunted his intellect and senses. Capitalism was sucking the last drop of blood of the working classes like a leech. This was the state of “civilisation” at the time the Quran was revealed.

It declared that the mission of the Prophet Muhammad (S) was to destroy the chains in which mankind has been shackled (7:157). Of these chains, the very first was that of ignorance and superstition. Due to his lowly position, man was afraid of the natural forces. Menacingly dark clouds, eardrum and nerve-shattering thunder, lightning, and the roaring of mighty rivers instilled a terrible fear in his heart. Gale-force winds made him shudder. When he saw huge, sky-embracing mountains, he felt an unspeakable awe. He felt puny and helpless before these awesome powers of nature.

GODS OR GODDESSES

He came to realise that there is some inexplicable power behind each of these phenomena. In order to save and secure himself (in his own mind) from the wrath of such mighty powers, he could think of only one kind of escape: to take these forces as gods or goddesses and bow before them in worship. He would offer human sacrifices and other oblations to appease these angered deities. This is the position that man had established for himself against these physical forces.

The Quran came and addressed him:

“Seest thou not that Allah has made subservient to you all that is in the earth, and the ships gliding in the sea by His command? And He withholds the heaven from falling on the earth except with His permission. Surely Allah is Compassionate, Merciful to mankind.” (22:65, 45:12-13).

Everything is for man’s benefit. If you ponder for a moment, think and study the phenomena of nature, then your own standing vis-à-vis the universe will be made manifest to you. It will dawn upon you that you are not the subordinate, but the master of all things in the cosmos.

IMMUTABLE LAWS

These forces of nature are governed by predetermined laws made by Allah. These physical laws are unchangeable and permanent in their character and operation (33:62). There should thus be no doubt about the immutability of these laws. They can NEVER change suddenly and elude man’s control. Everything acts or happens according to these laws. Man has been given the faculty to understand and acquire the knowledge of these laws. The more he acquires the knowledge of these unchangeable laws of nature, the more they will unfold and continue to unfold as man progresses towards mastering them.

This was the mirror in which he was shown his true identity by Allah (SWT) through the Quran. Thus in one leap he became the Respected Master of all things that bowed down to him in submission. He gained ascendancy over the entire creation.

But the main, challenging obstacle in man’s forward march was the tyrannical subjugation of man by man. This cruel, pharaonic idea was so deeply ingrained in the human mind that he came to accept his serfdom as a natural norm and the right to be ruled by his dominating, enslaving masters – a sort of divine “birthright”! The Quran arrived and proclaimed that the right to exercise authority belongs only to Allah. He has enjoined that we should obey none but Him. Further the fundamental principle of Deen is that no human being – even though Allah may have given him a code of laws, a revelation (Nubuwwat), or the power to enforce it – has the right to say to others: “It is not meet for a mortal that Allah should give him the Book and the judgment and the prophethood, then he should say to men: Be my servants besides Allah’s; but (he would say): Be worshippers of the Lord because you teach the Book and because you study (it).” (3:78-79, 12:40).

It can thus be seen that by this one single declaration, the Quran has destroyed the shackles of all kinds of subjugation. It freed man from every mode and aspect of human slavery and entrenched him with Allah’s rule only.

SLAVERY OF MIND

The entire teaching of the Quran is the explanation of this one point alone. The obedience must be to the Laws of Allah only, and not of any man.; (12:40, 18:26). If he allows the rule of any other than Allah, it would be a negation of the very purpose of man’s creation.

The sadistic tyranny and domination by brute force could hold a man physically, but there was another kind of slavery that was far worse than the former. This was the slavery of mind and heart, controlled by the so-called “religious leaders”, priests, or “ulama”, the peers, saints and mystics who claimed to be intercessors between man and God. This class, vis-à-vis the pharaonic class, badly wanted to be loved, obeyed, revered and worshipped. They were in fact a god-head. The Holy Quran exposed their machinations and true colours to mankind: that in reality it is all an economic game these little tin gods play with the masses to hide the truth. They wish to live parasitically in luxury on the earnings of others and do nothing themselves. The fact is that the majority of them never earn an honest day’s living. (9:34, 43:23). They claim that they lead people to Allah’s path, but the truth is that they block people from treading the path of Allah. They themselves become gods and thus do not allow anyone to reach Allah, but stop them on the way. The reason is simple: if Muslims make Allah’s Quran their sole guide, then these pygmy tin gods would become redundant, irrelevant and non-existent!

The difference between secular and spiritual dominance is that the former disappears when a pharaoh, king or dictator dies, but the latter does not expire with the death of the dominance-seeker (wali, saint, sufi, etc.) Even from his grave he commands total obedience from the unthinking, gullible folk. In fact his stranglehold is powerful, his urge to dominate is overpowering. The living human is always in fear of the dead peer saheb’s “spiritual powers”. The peer’s brainwashing and magnetic “power” may be likened to the flame which proves irresistible to the moths who keep circling it until they burn themselves completely. Allah rebutted man’s fallacy and said to the living human:

            “And they take besides Him gods who create naught, while they are themselves created, and they control for themselves no harm nor profit, and they control not death, nor life, nor raising to life.” (25:3, 27:65, 46:4-5).

The question is: why are you afraid of them, and why do you pin your hopes and aspirations on them for worldly gains? This is extreme and abject humiliation for a man to be afraid of a corpse lying in the grave, and accept him as the granter and guarantor of all his needs.

SALAAT AND ZAKAAT

One effective way of making a man subordinate to another was to deprive him of the means of sustenance by sheer brute force, thus placing him in total servitude. The Quran declared in unequivocal terms:

“Say: Come! I will recite what your Lord has forbidden to you: associate naught with Him and do good to parents and slay not your children for (fear of) poverty – We provide for you and for them – and draw not nigh to indecencies, open or secret, and kill not the soul which Allah has made sacred except in the course of justice. This He enjoins upon you that you may understand.” (6:152, 11:6, 17:31).

Through the agency of the Mu’mineen a system of government (Salaat) should be established which ensures an economic system (Zakaat) wherein every soul is guaranteed the basic necessities of life. No one will depend on another for his survival and no one will rule over the other.

These are the Quranic concepts and doctrines that gave man an honoured status and superiority over other creations. (17:70). Allah reminds mankind that if it safeguards itself from the pitfalls of wrong paths and evils and watches imbalances in society, then there are glad tidings for it from Him of a blissful life Here, and in the Hereafter. No fear, no constant torment and insecurity will be suffered by them. (2:37-38, 7:35, 10:62-64).

In this Quranic society, everyone- irrespective of race, colour or creed-will be equal in the eyes of the law and have an equal opportunity to develop his or her latent potentialities. There would be no favouritism, no partisanship, no nepotism. Whoever wishes to progress in life by toil and endeavour, will achieve his aim; and whoever, owing to his own ineptitude and lethargy lags behind in this temporal life, then that will be to his own detriment. (46:19, 99:7-8).

In this just society there will be no distinction made between a child born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and a boy born in a poor family. In a Quranic society there will be no such thing that the former gets the best education and every luxury, whereas the latter cannot even get a rudimentary education because of poverty. This worldly hierarchical class division was created by Brahminism (priestcraft) that kept a section of society in its iron clutches. The Quran made mankind free from all this, and on this very basis proclaimed that:
“CELEBRATE AND REJOICE ON RECEIVING THIS CHARTER OF FREEDOM.”

 

1,089 total views, no views today

(Visited 227 times, 1 visits today)

Why Do We Celebrate Eid? by G A Parwez

Every tribe, people or race throughout the world celebrates a festival of one sort or another. Muslims also celebrate some festive occasions on some days of the year. But the festival of Eid is one that we are commanded to celebrate in festivity, joy and happiness by Allah Almighty Himself! This in itself portrays its importance.

In Surah Yunus it is said: “O mankind! There has come to you indeed an admonition from your Lord and a healing for what is in the hearts; and a guidance and a mercy for the believers. Say: In the grace of Allah and in His mercy, in that they should rejoice. It is better than (all the worldly wealth) that they amass.” (10:57-58).

This is the occasion Muslims have been enjoined by Allah (SWT) Himself to celebrate with happiness and joy. This occasion is called JASHN-E-NUZOOL-E-QURAN, i.e. EID-UL-FITR DAY.

The Quran was first bestowed from on high in the month of Ramadaan as a guidance to man (2:185). Therefore the entire month of fasting is, in a way, a preparation for the celebration of this festival day called Eid. The question arises: what, after all, has Allah given us for which we are commanded to rejoice? The answer is given by the Quran itself that it (the Quran) makes man aware of his true status in this world. Allah says: “Indeed there has come to you from Allah, a Light and a clear Book.” (5:15, 14:1).

Ponder for a moment what happens in the dark, and what happens to darkness when it is stabbed by light! In darkness, no object, article or a thing’s correct identity, position and location can be known; whereas in light every object’s true location and identity is before us. In darkness we mistakenly presume a rope to be a snake, and vice versa. But when light comes, we see the difference between a rope and a snake!

DARKNESS

Before the revelation of the Holy Quran, man was in utter darkness. He was ignorant of his exalted status in the universe, nor was he aware of the phenomena of nature. In short, he knew very little about the physical world and his own place in it. What kind of darkness was prevalent before the Divine revelation? It was the darkness of thought, of intellect, superstitions, and darkness of heart and mind. It was the darkness of being unacquainted with one’s own actual self. And the fact is that this darkness of being unaware of his own true position and dignity was the sum of all his darkness: it was the source and fountainhead of his darkness. Had man been aware of his own true self, then he would have eliminated all other darknesses. Thus the question arises as to what dignified position the Quran has given to man? If we seek a detailed answer to the question, then we have to go through the whole Quran. And this is not possible to accomplish within the confines of this short article. We shall touch briefly on a few aspects, but it will not be possible to understand them until it is not seen that before the revelation of the Quran, to what extent was man engulfed in darkness, and to what depth of degradation he had descended.

At the time of the revelation of the Quran, man had enslaved man. In some societies he was in abject bondage. The feudal lord was his god. Monasticism had completely stunted his intellect and senses. Capitalism was sucking the last drop of blood of the working classes like a leech. This was the state of “civilisation” at the time the Quran was revealed.

It declared that the mission of the Prophet Muhammad (S) was to destroy the chains in which mankind has been shackled (7:157). Of these chains, the very first was that of ignorance and superstition. Due to his lowly position, man was afraid of the natural forces. Menacingly dark clouds, eardrum and nerve-shattering thunder, lightning, and the roaring of mighty rivers instilled a terrible fear in his heart. Gale-force winds made him shudder. When he saw huge, sky-embracing mountains, he felt an unspeakable awe. He felt puny and helpless before these awesome powers of nature.

GODS OR GODDESSES

He came to realise that there is some inexplicable power behind each of these phenomena. In order to save and secure himself (in his own mind) from the wrath of such mighty powers, he could think of only one kind of escape: to take these forces as gods or goddesses and bow before them in worship. He would offer human sacrifices and other oblations to appease these angered deities. This is the position that man had established for himself against these physical forces.

The Quran came and addressed him: “Seest thou not that Allah has made subservient to you all that is in the earth, and the ships gliding in the sea by His command? And He withholds the heaven from falling on the earth except with His permission. Surely Allah is Compassionate, Merciful to mankind.” (22:65, 45:12-13).

Everything is for man’s benefit. If you ponder for a moment, think and study the phenomena of nature, then your own standing vis-à-vis the universe will be made manifest to you. It will dawn upon you that you are not the subordinate, but the master of all things in the cosmos.

IMMUTABLE LAWS

These forces of nature are governed by predetermined laws made by Allah. These physical laws are unchangeable and permanent in their character and operation (33:62). There should thus be no doubt about the immutability of these laws. They can NEVER change suddenly and elude man’s control. Everything acts or happens according to these laws. Man has been given the faculty to understand and acquire the knowledge of these laws. The more he acquires the knowledge of these unchangeable laws of nature, the more they will unfold and continue to unfold as man progresses towards mastering them.

This was the mirror in which he was shown his true identity by Allah (SWT) through the Quran. Thus in one leap he became the Respected Master of all things that bowed down to him in submission. He gained ascendancy over the entire creation.

But the main, challenging obstacle in man’s forward march was the tyrannical subjugation of man by man. This cruel, pharaonic idea was so deeply ingrained in the human mind that he came to accept his serfdom as a natural norm and the right to be ruled by his dominating, enslaving masters – a sort of divine “birthright”! The Quran arrived and proclaimed that the right to exercise authority belongs only to Allah. He has enjoined that we should obey none but Him. Further the fundamental principle of Deen is that no human being – even though Allah may have given him a code of laws, a revelation (Nubuwwat), or the power to enforce it – has the right to say to others: “It is not meet for a mortal that Allah should give him the Book and the judgment and the prophethood, then he should say to men: Be my servants besides Allah’s; but (he would say): Be worshippers of the Lord because you teach the Book and because you study (it).” (3:78-79, 12:40).

It can thus be seen that by this one single declaration, the Quran has destroyed the shackles of all kinds of subjugation. It freed man from every mode and aspect of human slavery and entrenched him with Allah’s rule only.

SLAVERY OF MIND

The entire teaching of the Quran is the explanation of this one point alone. The obedience must be to the Laws of Allah only, and not of any man.; (12:40, 18:26). If he allows the rule of any other than Allah, it would be a negation of the very purpose of man’s creation.

The sadistic tyranny and domination by brute force could hold a man physically, but there was another kind of slavery that was far worse than the former. This was the slavery of mind and heart, controlled by the so-called “religious leaders”, priests, or “ulama”, the peers, saints and mystics who claimed to be intercessors between man and God. This class, vis-à-vis the pharaonic class, badly wanted to be loved, obeyed, revered and worshipped. They were in fact a god-head. The Holy Quran exposed their machinations and true colours to mankind: that in reality it is all an economic game these little tin gods play with the masses to hide the truth. They wish to live parasitically in luxury on the earnings of others and do nothing themselves. The fact is that the majority of them never earn an honest day’s living. (9:34, 43:23). They claim that they lead people to Allah’s path, but the truth is that they block people from treading the path of Allah. They themselves become gods and thus do not allow anyone to reach Allah, but stop them on the way. The reason is simple: if Muslims make Allah’s Quran their sole guide, then these pygmy tin gods would become redundant, irrelevant and non-existent!

The difference between secular and spiritual dominance is that the former disappears when a pharaoh, king or dictator dies, but the latter does not expire with the death of the dominance-seeker (wali, saint, sufi, etc.) Even from his grave he commands total obedience from the unthinking, gullible folk. In fact his stranglehold is powerful, his urge to dominate is overpowering. The living human is always in fear of the dead peer saheb’s “spiritual powers”. The peer’s brainwashing and magnetic “power” may be likened to the flame which proves irresistible to the moths who keep circling it until they burn themselves completely. Allah rebutted man’s fallacy and said to the living human:

“And they take besides Him gods who create naught, while they are themselves created, and they control for themselves no harm nor profit, and they control not death, nor life, nor raising to life.” (25:3, 27:65, 46:4-5).

The question is: why are you afraid of them, and why do you pin your hopes and aspirations on them for worldly gains? This is extreme and abject humiliation for a man to be afraid of a corpse lying in the grave, and accept him as the granter and guarantor of all his needs.

SALAAT AND ZAKAAT

One effective way of making a man subordinate to another was to deprive him of the means of sustenance by sheer brute force, thus placing him in total servitude. The Quran declared in unequivocal terms:

“Say: Come! I will recite what your Lord has forbidden to you: associate naught with Him and do good to parents and slay not your children for (fear of) poverty – We provide for you and for them – and draw not nigh to indecencies, open or secret, and kill not the soul which Allah has made sacred except in the course of justice. This He enjoins upon you that you may understand.” (6:152, 11:6, 17:31).

Through the agency of the Mu’mineen a system of government (Salaat) should be established which ensures an economic system (Zakaat) wherein every soul is guaranteed the basic necessities of life. No one will depend on another for his survival and no one will rule over the other.

These are the Quranic concepts and doctrines that gave man an honoured status and superiority over other creations. (17:70). Allah reminds mankind that if it safeguards itself from the pitfalls of wrong paths and evils and watches imbalances in society, then there are glad tidings for it from Him of a blissful life Here, and in the Hereafter. No fear, no constant torment and insecurity will be suffered by them. (2:37-38, 7:35, 10:62-64).

In this Quranic society, everyone- irrespective of race, colour or creed-will be equal in the eyes of the law and have an equal opportunity to develop his or her latent potentialities. There would be no favouritism, no partisanship, no nepotism. Whoever wishes to progress in life by toil and endeavour, will achieve his aim; and whoever, owing to his own ineptitude and lethargy lags behind in this temporal life, then that will be to his own detriment. (46:19, 99:7-8).

In this just society there will be no distinction made between a child born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and a boy born in a poor family. In a Quranic society there will be no such thing that the former gets the best education and every luxury, whereas the latter cannot even get a rudimentary education because of poverty. This worldly hierarchical class division was created by Brahminism (priestcraft) that kept a section of society in its iron clutches. The Quran made mankind free from all this, and on this very basis proclaimed that:

“CELEBRATE AND REJOICE ON RECEIVING THIS CHARTER OF FREEDOM.”

***********

815 total views, no views today

(Visited 109 times, 1 visits today)

HOW CAN THE SECTS BE DISSOLVED? by Ghulam Ahmad Parwez

(Translated by Dr. Manzoor-ul-Haque)

The Quran completed Deen and told the Muslims: You hold fast all together this code of Allah and be not divided among factions. (3:103)

This is the very fountain spring of Deen and implies the secret of your life, wherein lies the durability, the establishment, and the stability of the Deen itself. (It means it is the code of life prescribed for you). Ponder over the various words of this illustrious verse, the reality will automatically unfold itself to you. The first and the foremost entity is that “the rope of Allah” is one  – and never more than one at all. The code of life is the Quran, and is the same (2:256), the fortified support, which can never crumble down. It is the most trust-worthy handhold, which can never let you down and is the only single most complete code of life for the entire humanity for all time to come.

The man-made systems of life are too fragile to withstand the onslaught of changing times but the one given to you by Allah is beyond the bounds of time and space, and far above the discrimination of any limitations or restrictions. Its principles are those Everlasting and Permanent Values, which can never undergo any change, any alteration or any transformation (10: 64).

DEEN IS A COLLECTIVE PHENOMENON

(2) The plural form of the word (you all) and the significance of the word in  3:103 make this reality self-exposed that Deen is not the name of any personal relation between the man and Allah by means of which every one, on one’s own “Religious discourse”, remains absorbed in meditation with God. And in this way seeks one’s (salvation) mukuti (i.e., deliverance of the soul from the body and exemption from further transmigration). Deen is the collective social order in which all individuals live as an indivisible whole and follow the same single prescribed way. The common denominator of Deen is the main spring of their collectivity and oneness. It is only this cohesion and harmony, which makes them one Ummat. (2:143)

“Thus we have made of you a justly balanced Ummat”

(3) The word  also made this reality evident that life can only be lived according to Deen, if the entire Ummah follows the same one way of life. But when different sects bog down into it, and each sect follows its own different way of life, the Deen can bolster no longer then. The injunction has made this reality further clear. And the other phenomenon is that imperative mood (order) has been used in the verse (3: 103) as: It means, “Do it”. And there is “Don’t do it” in the words (that is “Do not do like this”.) And it is evident that whatsoever is expressly encompassed within “Dos and Don’ts”, or within the “affirmative and negative” boundary lines, shreds no speck of any doubt in its certainty; and nor of any further emphasis or corroboration.

 

(3: 103) is a comprehensive principle of life and carries absolutely no disagreement or exception of any import.

 

IT’S NO NEW PRINCIPLE

 

(4) The Quran has also clarified that this is no more a new principle of life given to you the first time. It is the same principle showered to from the first day to date through every Nabi.

 

“Allah has opened to you the same way of Deen (System of life) He has enjoined on Noah. The same Deen is being revealed to you. The same was commanded to Abraham, Moses and Jesus.”

 

What was this Order? It was (42:13)

“You all establish the same Deen and never make any division of any import therein”. It was the same oneness of Deen and the avoidance of factionalism, which (irrespective of the diversity of time, space, and circumstances) made all the messengers of Allah, members of one single Ummat.

(23:52) “O ye, the group of Anbiya! This party of yours is one single Ummah. The main spring of your collectivity is that I am the Nourisher of you all”.

ONE SINGLE UMMAT

 

Hence you all obey My Laws alone. Here it has been made it abundantly clear that oneness of Ummat depends upon the oneness of the system of life and of the Laws of life. So far the Deen remains one, Ummat will remain one single entity. Or so far Ummat is one, its Deen will remain the same one single whole. When Ummat gets divided, Deen will also get divided, scattered and asunder. And since Deen is an indivisible whole, so the meaning of the divided, scattered, and asunder in “Deen” is that the real and the genuine Deen is no where extant today.

 

(5) How great and grave crime is the creation of any sectarianism in the rank and file of a Ummat (nation, group) can be judged from the incidence God has stated in Sura Taha. Hazrat Moses goes out for a few days and leaves Bani Israel under the surveillance of Aaron. When he (Moses) comes back, he notices that his followers have indulged in the worship of a cow. Whatever impact of this incidence could be on the temperament of Hazrat Moses is clear. He becomes upset, furious, and enraged. And asks his brother:

(20:92)

 

“(O Aaron) when you saw: “they are going astray”, what kept you back that you did not forbid them (from this way).”

Now listen to what Aaron responded to. But it must be remembered that Hazrat Aaron was also the Messenger of Allah. In response to it, he says: “Truly I feared that thou should say: “You have caused a division among the children of Israel and you did not wait for my word”. (20:94)

EVEN GREATER THAN ANATHEMA (SHIRK)

 

My brothers, did you pay heed to it as to what was there behind this matter? Hazrat Aaron said, “These people had started worshipping cow for some time on account of their ignorance; to me it was not such a great crime as was to create division and discord amongst them”. This answer is being given by a Nabi, and the second Nabi, on this answer, gets satisfied. As will be made clear in a few pages ahead, that the Quran has itself testified sectarianism (discord) as anathema. It is evident now that cow-worship was also anathema (Shirk) and the factionalism was equally too. But the anathema of sectarianism was such a heinous and dangerous crime that in order to get saved from it, the anathema of cow-worship could temporarily be assimilated. Hence the Quran stands witness to it that Tauba put away the crime of cow-worship

But when they created divisions amongst themselves and thereby got divided into different sects and factions (7:168)

they were trapped in the chastisement of destruction and devastation, disgrace and abjectness, deprivation and indigence, which remained them chasing every time like their own shadow.

(6) As has been told above, every Rasool had the message: “Establish Deen and never be divided amongst themselves.” In the light of this message, he used to form a party in the form of an Ummat. His Ummat remained united for some time but with the lapse of time, sectarianism and factionalism started emerging in it. Why did this happen?

 

The Quran says its cause is (42:14) i.e., after being provided with AL-ilm (Wahee) for the purpose of vaporizing all the divisions and differences, there remains no question of any sectarianism amongst themselves. But the inheritors of this Wahee used to form various sects within their rank and file with selfish envy for surpassing passion and bickering desire to have power over one another.

THE IMPETUS OF SECTARIANISM

The cause of this sectarianism and factionalism was not the phenomenon that they were mistaken in understanding the reality of Deen, nor was the fact that any item remained doubtful, obscurant and ambiguous to them. Doubt, suspicion, and ambiguity have nothing to do with the knowledge, God has revealed.

 

This sectarianism used to balk for satisfying the lust of power and authority. Those who had intense desire to emerge as leaders used to create their own individual sects. And then every sect wanted to surpass and dominate over the others. This used to start mutual conflicts leading to bickering and wrangling and thus the Ummat used to get divided into sects and factions. And then this made the Deen become shrouded in the mist of chaos and distraction.

 

This brought this reality to our forefront that appearance of sects does not come into existence on the basis of any knowledge and vision, nor on any arguments and reasoning. It is based on sentiments. It is a separate phenomenon that the followers of every sect look to be arguing in favour of their own faction. And which one is the sentimental decision for the support of which the deceitful intellect remains mired in the myth of projecting its argumentation?

 

PURPOSE OF THE REVELATION OF THE QURAN

 

(7) There was exactly the same situation prevalent in the world of religions when the Quran was revealed. (Be it known that Deen remains the same entity; but when it is fragmented into sectarianism, it metamorphoses into religion.) The Quran has narrated the aim of its revelation: “It will establish the Deen of Allah by vaporizing all the differences. And will transform all factional and sectional-ridden men into one single Ummat”.

 

“(O! Rasool) this Book has been sent to you for the express purpose that you may make clear to them, those things in which they differ”.  And there after, those who acknowledge the veracity of this one single Deen, this Book, will guide them to the right path of life and thus will become the main spring of Rahmat, the means of nourishment. (16:64)

“It means the exposition of reality would be uniformly equal to all, but the guidance and the means of nourishment  – Rahmat – would exclusively be for those who have conviction in its truthfulness.”

 

This made this reality crystal clear that the primary object of the Quran is the establishment of the oneness of Ummat by wiping out all divisions; and the eradication of division is the ‘Rehmat’ of Allah. At another place, the Quran has made this point clear when said:

“Had it been willed that the entire humanity be made to follow the same mode by compulsion, it would have never been difficult for God to do so”.  Like the way He has created the other animals that the member of every species leads its life within the fold of its own species and group and does never cause any dissension with it. (For example all the sheep lead the life on the same one pattern and all the loins follow the same mode of conduct.) (11:118)

 

ONENESS ON THE BREATH OF VISION

 

Likewise He would have instinctively compelled the entire mankind to follow the same conduct of life. But He has not done so. He has showered freedom of thought and action to the mankind. It means “if they wish, they may live the life of harmony and unity; and if they desire otherwise, they may create chaos and distraction.” But they were made this fact clear that the life of chaos and distraction is the life of chastisement and that of leading the life of one single Ummat is the life of Rahmat and auspicious prosperity. But this oneness can only be obtained and sustained if you make the Book of Allah the code of your life on the breath of your vision and from the deepest recesses of your heart and mind. If you do so, you clinch the goal of your life. That is why the next part of the above mentioned verse is

Except the people, who lead their life at par with the Revelation and thereby make themselves the true potential users of the results of the Revelation, the others will continuously go on indulging in division and disharmony though they were created to be one single Ummat (from within the recesses of their heart and mind). (11:119)

 

Thus, this Verse brought to bear upon this reality that:

 

  1. The object of man’s creation is to develop one single Ummat (universal brotherhood) amongst mankind and that they must not create divisions and factions amongst themselves;
  2. That the divisions and differences amongst mankind can be eliminated by following the Divine Revelation alone; and those who do that, theirs shall be the life of ‘Rahmat’;
  3. That those who do not lead their life in accordance with the Divine Revelation shall not be able to eliminate their divisions and differences and thus theirs shall be the life of misery and destruction.

 

NOT TO CREATE SECTARIANISM

 

(8) After making these points clear, the Muslims were told:

“But be not like those who are divided amongst themselves and fall into disputations after receiving clear signs.” (3:104)

“The people who divide into factions and start disagreeing with one another, for them is a dreadful penalty”. In the other two verses coming after this verse, the Quran has made it explicitly clear that “the life of disharmony and of sectarianism after conviction is the life of kufr and leads to misery and destruction. On the contrary, the life of harmony, familiarity and integration showers exoneration, success, triumph, victory, and Allah’s Rahmat”. (3:106-107)

 

It is evident from these verses that the life of division and mutual disharmony is the life of curse and chastisement. And Allah’ Rahmat showers on those who live as one compact Ummat and avoid disharmony and discord.

By the way, it may also be remembered: the Quran tells that the end product of disunity, discord, and disharmony is the greatest and the gravest chastisement. The Table of the Conjugations of the Arabic Verbs in which the word has occurred connotes the implied aspect of “permanence” and “uninterruptedness” in its process. It means the “chastisement” will neither be for the time being, nor be on emergency basis; but it will be of permanence and perpetuity in its scope and nature. This chastisement will continuously chase them till they keep sectarianism bolstering amongst themselves.

SECTARIANISM IS ANATHEMA (SHIRK)

 

(9) Going even a step further, the Quran told the Muslims: “Hark! Do not be anathematized (Mushrik) after believing the unity of God (Tauheed).” (30:31)

 

How wonder struck and  (ostensibly) incomprehensible was the phenomenon: “How can the Muslims become anathematized (Mushrik) again after believing in one God? Will they start worshipping the idols?” The Quran says, “No, anathema is not the worshipping of the idols alone.” As we have seen in the incidence of cow-worship in the Sura Bani Israel that idol-worship is “Shirk-e-Khafi” (i.e., an anathema of a lesser degree), “Shirk-e-Jali” is something else. While giving its illustration, it was told that becoming Mushrik (anathematized) means

(30:31-32)

 

“Be not among those who caused factionalism in their Deen and became factions.” For this factionalism, the Quran told:

 

(30:32) “Every sect remains absorbed in the frenzy that it is the only sect, which is on the right, and the others are fallacious and fictitious.” This is such a psychology of sectarianism, the phenomenon of which we can observe every time. Keep especially the words of this verse in mind because these words unveil an important but significant reality, which will be mentioned in the coming pages.

 

THE RASOOL (PBUH) HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SECTARIAN-MONGERS

 

Anyhow, the Quran openly made it clear to the “one unified Ummat”: ‘if you created factions in Deen, it would be anathema (Shirk). It would never be a belief in one God (Tauheed); and no one would become unaccountable simply by verbalizing that it is the only one that stands on the foothold of original and genuine Islam, while the other factions are fallacious and fictitious’. It was on the basis of this fact that Rasoolullah was told:

(6:159)

 

“Those who create difference in Deen and divide themselves into sects (O! Rasool) you have got nothing to do with them.” It means God has nothing to do with the sectarian-mongers (because they remain no more the believers in one God; they become anathematized), nor does the Rasool of Allah(PBUH) has any association with them. It is because the Rasoolullah(PBUH) established one-single Deen and one-single Ummat and they transformed it into varying segments and hence became the carriers of a parallel Deen (the system of life) in real sense; so what relation do they have with the Rasoolullah(PBUH)?

 

It is here at this point that an objection is raised: ‘The Rasoolullah(PBUH) formed an Ummat, which stood firm on the true Deen. A sect emerged out of it as a separate entity. It is evident that this new faction is anathema crime commuter and fallacious-monger.  Then adjudicating as a separate sect, how can the remaining Ummat, which stands firm on its way, be justified as the commuter of the same crime?’ This is an important objection. But its answer or more precisely the solution of this problem will come a bit later.

 

SALAT: THE FOUTAIN SPRING OF TOGETHERNESS

 

(10) In Surah Ar-rum (30:31), just before the words
there are the following words:
“Establish Salat and be never amongst the anathematized (Mushrekeem).” It means ‘be not amongst those who created sects in Deen’. It is clear that the system of Salat in Deen is the basic reality. As long as it follows the course, sects can not be created in Deen. That is why the Quran says; “When their Ummat gets divided into sects after the Anbiya, it undermines the purpose of Salat, and follows its own lust.” (19:59)

 

Our own position is its living evidence. Our state of affairs is that the Salat, which the Quran termed as the strong means of the oneness of Ummat, has become the symbol of discrimination and dissention amongst the different sects today. Hence, if you have to see “which sect such and such a person belongs to”, then see to it as to how does that person offer his prayer? (That is why when the antagonists launched a campaign of opposition against Tolu-e-Islam that it is a new sect, they had to coin the accusation in support of their contention that these people offer prayers of three times and that they think one prostration (Sajdah) in one Rak’et is necessary.) It was in this manner that they wanted to prove that their prayer is different from that of other factions’, so it is a new sect. But it was all slander-mongering and false accusing. Neither does Tolu-e-Islam propose any separate prayer, nor does it create any separate faction. (To whom formation of factions is anathema, how can it become a sect in itself?)

 

MASJID-E-ZARRAR

 

Anyway, it was a parenthetical sentence. We were saying that the Quran had adjudged Salat as symbol of unity and integrity for the united Ummat. It was because of this reason that during the time of the Rasoolullah(PBUH) himself, some faction-mongers constructed a new mosque. The intensity with which the Quran opposed this construction can be gauged from the relevant verses of the Sura Taubah. Pause and reflect for what the Quran says in this matter.

(9:107)

 

“Those who put up the mosque with this intention that loss be incurred to the Millat-e-Islamia and the Deen itself.”        “and kufr be favoured or the path of kufr be hiked.”                               (9:107) “ i.e., with the purpose that dissention be created in the Muslims.”  Do you think of it as a mosque?  No, it is not a mosque.

 

(9:107)                                                                            “It is

that ambush from which those who were the enemy of Allah and His Rasool (i.e., The Divine System) shall attack the Millat.” It means this is not a mosque; this is the fort where the enemies of Allah and His Rasool will lie in ambush to demolish the structure of Deen.
“They will indeed swear that their intention by constructing this mosque is nothing but good. We do never desire destruction of the Deen.”                                                              “Do not be taken in. God stands witness to this stark fact that they are out and out liars.” (9:108)

 

“O Rasool! Never take a single step into this mosque.” This mosque, so as to say, is just on the verge of hell. Whoso have constructed it or whosoever entered into it this will let all crumble down into the abyss of hell (9: 107-109). Hence history stands witness to this fact that Rasoolullah(PBUH) demolished this mosque through his associates.

 

Imagine from this incidence how heinous and horrendous the crime of sectarianism in Islam is! Even if the construction of a mosque casts any speck of factionalism, the demolishing of such mosque becomes imperative. Mosque can be demolished but the foundation of sectarianism can never be laid. It is because factionalism, in express terms, is anathema (Shirk), and is anathema of a conspicuous nature.

 

THE ORGANIZATION OF ONE COMPACT UMMAT

 

(11) These were the broad guidelines imparted to the Muslims for the organization of one compact Ummat. In the light of these guidelines, the Rasoolullah(PBUH) developed a united Ummat. This organization had a single code of life and a single objective: one Deen, a straight path to be followed with no division into sects. It was this class of the people about whom the Quran says:

 

(3:102) “Allah joined your hearts in love, and by means of Deen made you brethren to one another”. (9:100)

 

 

But what happened afterwards? This is a narration, tormenting and a story, stoke firing; so without going into its detail, just reflect over the following words of the Quran: (42:14)
Like the previous nations, ‘which after getting Revelation created factions in Deen on the basis of their passions wrought with mutual obstinacy and rebelliousness’, they too were divided into factions. In spite of the Quran’s clear, cogent, and outright injunctions, guidelines, warnings and emphatics, the division of Ummat into different factions is definitely an astonishing event. But this reality can not be refuted that the Ummat was divided into sects and that these sects are extant even today. The question arises repeatedly: “What justificatory reason to this mode of conduct would those-divided-into-factions eventually put forth?” Yes, they do put, and the justification for it is Ikhtelaaf-e-Ummatee Rahmah.

(DIFFERENCE AMONGST MY UMMAT IS A RAHMAT)

Now listen attentively to the justificatory reason they gush forth. They say that the Rasoolullah(PBUH) has said: “Dissention in my Ummat is Rahmat”. Did you think as to what the crux of the matter comes to? It means the dissension about which the Quran had explicitly said: “It is Allah’s chastisement; it is a cause of Kufr and a source of anathema (Shirk)”, now about this same dissension it is said that the Messenger of Allah (God forbid) has denoted it as a blessing of Allah, a fountain of His Rahmat. Whosoever has even a bit of know-how of the teaching of the Quran will unhesitatingly say that this sentence of the Arabic language cannot be the quote of the Messenger of Allah. The Messenger(PBUH) would have never told as such. How is it possible that Allah may call a thing as a chastisement and His Messenger may term it as His blessing, His Rahmat! You may go on arguing like this, but the sectarians would insist to it: “No, the Rasoolullah(PBUH) has told as such and had definitely told”. It is only because if this sentence is not termed as the Hadith of Rasoolullah(PBUH), there remains no implicit justification for sectarianism. But the Quran says those who do not accept the reality willingly, the reality makes them accept it unwilingly. We have an example before us as a proof to this effect. Sometimes back an allegation was levied against the Qadianees, that by creating a new sect, they had gushed forth the element of dissension in the Ummat. In response to it, they had said: “If any dissension has popped up in Ummat due to any of our actions, the Ummat should have acknowledged our thanks for this purpose   -without the least speck of any plaint-mongering. It is because the Messenger (pbuh) has said:

This new sect of ours is the additional Rahmat, showered on the Ummat”.

THIS IS NOT A HADITH

 

Now just pause and reflect: “What can be the reply to their answer-they-replied-to-the-question?” In response to this answer, the organ “Al-E’etasaam” of Jami’et Ahle Hadis had to say that’ “Dissension-is-a-blessing-in-my-Ummat” is no Hadith at all, so it can not be presented for the justification. But now what is the use of not adjudicating this sentence as the Hadith? Whatever flagrant devastation it had to wreck, it wrought in one thousand years. It hacked the Ummat to pieces. Dividing into outfits and sects, it paved way to the means of persistent, consistent and permanent killing and chilling in the Ummat. It destroyed their kingdoms, wrecked their grandeur and splendour; it devastated their world and the hereafter (future) both. After such large scale perdition and devastation, if this reality is acknowledged that ‘this is not the saying of the Rasool’ what compensation will it provide to those losses? Such are the spurious Ahadith for which Tolu-e-Islam says: These are the result of the conspiracies of the Persian thought hatched against Islam. And this is its crime for which it is declared as rebellion and maligned’.

 

The strange phenomenon ‘however’ is that in spite of adjudging this Hadith to be spurious, it is continuously and conspicuously being presented for the justification of sectarianism.

73 SECTS

 

Anyhow, it was a parenthetical sentence. I was telling that (“Dissension-is-a-blessing-in-my-Ummat”) was presented in justification to the sectarianism. But inherent defect in it is that all the sects are then judged to be Rahmat-inspiring and are hence acknowledged to be on truth. But sectarianism per se can not brook that every sect be understood to be true, and true in right earnest. Thus in order to cover it up, another Hadith was coined in which it was said that the Rasool(PBUH) had told: “There shall be seventy three sects in my Ummat and out of them only one shall be “Naji” (Salvationist) and all the rest shall be “Jahannumi” (infernal).” Did you ponder over it? How did it make all the outfits satisfied by making one exception; that it is on the right and all others are on the wrong. The Quran, about the sects, had said: (23:53)
Every sect is in this wrong presumption that it is on the right. In other words it means the Quran, with the words of              (all outfits), had closed all the back doors that pave way to the wrong satisfaction of sectarianism. But this spurious Hadith, with the exception of “one sect”, made this back door wide open. Now our history spread over almost 1000 years is a witness to the stark fact that in the garb of this exception, every sect is busy in the “Grand Jehad” (striving in the cause) of adjudging itself as ‘“Naji” and others as “Jahannumi”. And is considering the blood drops (shedding out in the bickering, wrangling, and brawling with other sects) as the fountain spring of its own success.

 

The prolonged practice of indicting fatwa (pronouncement of) kufr (apostasy) against one another is continues ad infinitum right from the first day. The news of the outburst of sectarianism are, daily, a constant source of vexation. The cause of these riots is mainly the “division” of the mosques. When the mutual bickering and brawling prolong, the police lock the mosques; the case goes to the court of law. And during all this tumult, riot and disturbance, every sect adjudicates itself as “Naji” and the opposite sect as the wooden block of “Jahannum” (Hell). The irony is that both the parties adjudge themselves as the followers of Islam, that Islam which adjudicated sectarianism as anathema (Shirk).

 

WHAT IS THE REMEDY?

 

(12) The question is: what to do in present situation? Sects are extant and no one amongst them is prepared to get itself dissolved. For the purpose of dissolving the sects, every sect gives the proposal that all the other sects may dissolve themselves into it. And it is evident that no one is prepared for it. The question is: “What is the solution of this issue?” This is a question, very important and very sensitive, hence warrants thorough and dispassionate thinking:

 

  1. The Quran claims that it has come to dissolve all the differences.
  2. We have belief in it.
  3. The Quran is present before us in its original form.

 

Now just think: if we still say ‘our differences can not be resolved and the outfits can not be dissolved’ to what loss does it lead us to suffer? It would mean that (God forbid) the Quran has, now, no potence left to resolve the dissension. I ask: “Can any one amongst you dare to say so?” But if we say ‘our sects can not be abrogated’, then its meanings are nothing except that ‘we practically confess that the Quran’s claim of dissolving the factions is not correct.’ If we are convinced about the truth of the Quran, we would have to empty our mind of the idea that ‘sects can not be eradicated in the presence of the Quran.’ Bear it in mind that every assertion of the Quran is true and it has the potential to vaporize the dissension. Then the only question that remains to be answered is: “What is the process by which the Quran can dissolve the differences?”

 

SECT OF AHL-E-QURAN

 

Some times back, (in Punjab) a group emerged which claimed that it would act upon the Quran alone and thus would bury the so-created differences and divisions among the Muslims. It was undoubtedly an innocent and praise-worthy objective. But the practical result which came to light was, however, quite contrary to the claim. Not to speak of dissolving the previous factions, it added one more sect -Ahl-e-Quran -to what we already had. Its reason was that it omitted the method and mechanism the Quran had suggested for eradicating the various sects. Hence its efforts not only ended in smoke, but also caused a great harm to the mission of the Quran itself. Now its consequence is that “whenever it is said that according to the Quran, our mutual differences and divisions can be wiped out,” it is said with a cold taunt: “This too has been tried out and has ended in failure”. It means the failure of the proponents of this idea, created an impression, that the Quran has no potential (God forbid) to curb the sects and fractions among the Ummat.

 

MECHANISM TO DISSOLVE THE DIFFERENCES

 

(13) Now the question is: “What method and mechanism does the Quran evolve to wash out these differences?” First of all make this a point that the Quran says:

“In whatever matter you have difference, its decision must be from Allah”. Here the word is worth consideration. It signifies that it is not an individual affair, where, if any difference erupts elating to any matter between two men, they may sit to get the decision from the Quran by themselves. Disputed matters are always decided and ordered by a third person, who is called                or Saalis (arbitrator). It was for this purpose that the Quran told the Rasoolullah(PBUH)”. (4:65)

 

“Your Rabb is witness to this reality that they can have no (real) belief, unless they make thee judge (Hukam: the one who gives decision) in all disputes between them and so they not feel heavy-hearted by your decisions but accept them with the deepest recesses of their heart.”

 

It means that decision from the Quran shall not be taken individually but this would require a living and concrete Saalis and Haakim (authority) to give decisions. This decision-making authority has been interpreted with a comprehensive term of “Allah and Rasool” in the Quran. Thus, a few verses before this verse, it is said:

 

 

O! you who believe, obey ‘Allah and  Rasool’ and obey those charged with authority (on behalf of ‘Allah and Rasool’) amongst you.” (4:59)

A  LIVING  AUTHORITY

 

 

“If there is dissension on any matter amongst you, (do not try to dissolve it on your own, but) refer it to ‘Allah and Rasool’, if you do not do so, it would be understood that you do not believe in Allah and the Last Day.”

 

Thus it clearly means that leaving aside the differences between two individuals but even if a party is aggrieved with the decision of sub-ordinate officers the matter has to be referred to the central authority of the Quranic System (‘Allah and Rasool’). This is the condition of conviction. If it were not acted upon in the similar manner, it would be kufr.

 

It has been stated earlier that the Quran has attributed the division and the dissension to “Kufr” (paganism). The practical way for protection against this Kufr was prescribed that there should be the Quran extant with the Ummat and the presence of Rasool(PBUH) as the decision-maker in the light of the Quran. The Quran, in Sura Al-imran, says:

 

 

(3:101)

 

“How could you practice “Kufr”? When the state of affairs is that:

 

  1. Allah’s Book is extant with you
  2. And along with it, His Rasool is present among you.”

 

It means so long the Quran and the Rasool (pbuh) are extant in the Ummat, factions can not be created.

 

This brought another issue to us: all these verses of the Quran indicated that during the presence (life) of the Rasool (pbuh), the Ummat had to remain scared of the outfits, but after he passed away, there was no way of being scared of the factions. It was because the presence of both ‘the Quran and the Rasool (pbuh)’ was necessary for warding off the factionalism. And when one of its parts, (the Rasool) did remain no more present, there remained no possibility of protection from sectarianism.

THE MEANING OF

 

The Quran says you did not understand the matter correctly. You are of the opinion that the presence of the Rasool(PBUH) means, so far as Muhammadur Rasoolullah(PBUH) is present among you, this system will remain operative. When he dies, the “Rasool(PBUH)” will remain no more present. This idea is incorrect. This operational mode is not conditioned with the physical life of the Rasool(PBUH). It will continue after him. That is why it was specified in Surah Al-imran in these words:

 

 

(3:144)

 

“Muhammad is no more than a Rasool of Allah; previously many were the Rasools who passed away (after shouldering their responsibility of disseminating the message). So if he (by tomorrow) dies or is killed, will you then (by thinking that this system was extended only to his life) turn back to your previous way of life?

 

“Whosoever (on the death of the Rasool) turn back to the previous way of life, not the least harm will he do to Allah (will render loss to himself alone).”

 

This made the matter absolutely clear. In other words it means that does not mean the physical life of Rasoolullah(PBUH). Even after his death, this arrangement could continuously be in force.

 

AFTER THE LIFETIME OF THE RASOOLULLAH (PBUH)

 

When the Rasoolullah(PBUH) died, there was lamentation and dismay all around in the Ummat. During the tumultuous surges of passions, an idea hued in the mind of some people that the system the Rasoolullah(PBUH) established has now come to an end.

 

was a condition for this system. For removing this misunderstanding, Hazrat Abu Bakar SiddiqueR came up to the pulpit and made the people understand the Quranic exposition of in such a way that there could be no better effective way of exposition than this. He said:

 

 

“O people! Those who had adored the servitude of Muhammad(PBUH) ought to know that their M’ebood (god) is dead. But those who had maintained the subservience to God, their M’ebood (God) is alive and will remain ever alive.” After this, he recited the above said verse (3:144) i.e.,   This made the reality pristine clear. The audience understood as to how this system would remain established after the death of Rasoolullah(PBUH). Thus immediately afterwards they stood up and elected Khaleefa tur Rasool (i.e., the successor to the Rasoolullah(PBUH) and so filled up the vacuum caused by his death of the Rasoolullah(PBUH). Thus it is evident that some one’s succession tantamount to his presence. In this way the Quranic system established by Rasool(PBUH) i.e. “Quran and Rasool(PBUH)” continuously remained in existence in Ummat.

 

THE STATUS OF KHALEEFA TUR RASOOL

 

However, it must be made clear that the responsibility of shouldering the duty to establish Islamic System lied on the entire Ummat. It is because the Quran had made it abundantly clear that (i) the entire Ummat is the inheritor of the Book of Allah, it is not any single individual that inherits it. In Surah Faatir, the Quran says:

 

 

“Allah is the one who, to you (O Rasool) revealed this Book, which is the one that makes the realities in front of you come true.” (35:31-32)

 

“After that He has selected amongst His men (this Ummat) for the inheritance of this Book.” It means the first is that the entire Ummat is the heir to the Quran. Now proceed further.

 

(ii) The responsibility of the Rasoolullah(PBUH) was:

(7:157)

 

He ordered for the recognized (just) and forbade for the unrecognized (evil). Now this same responsibility was shifted to the Ummat. That is why in Surah Al-imran, the Quran says:

 

“You are the best Ummat, created for the welfare of the humanity. Your responsibility is to command for the recognized (just) and forbid for the unrecognized (evil).”

 

REPRESENTATIVE OF UMMAT

 

Thus these facts make it clear that the entire Ummat is the successor of the RasoolullahPBUH. For the sake of convenience of practical management of its affairs, Ummat can choose the best person amongst it as representative of the entire ‘Umma’ for continuance of the established system/arrangement. In this way, “Quran and Rasool” continuously remain operative in the Ummat. In their presence, the possibility of the genesis of the dissension and the growth of the various sects and factions in the Ummat is not possible. The history stands witness to the fact that during the period of Khilafat, the caliphate, neither did any disunity spring up, nor did any faction come into existence. It is because there is not a single instance found during this period in which the individuals of the Ummat might have sprung up on their own for the decision of their disputed matters. The central authority was referred for the disputed matters and all had to obey its judgement. This same authority is called “KHILAFAT ALA MINHAJE NABUWWAT”.

 

ANSWER TO THE UTMOST IMPORTANT QUESTION

 

Right from here we also get the answer to the question I had pointed in the beginning. The issue is that the Ummat is established on a way of life; some people creating difference with this procedure make a separate sect. In this case, this makes the Ummat divided into two sects. Those who created a separate sect are definitely guilty. But the rest of the people who, remained stick to the first procedure can not be adjudged to be criminal. Quite right, this is the very argument, projected by every outfit with the words that “we keep our footing on the real Islam, and others have created the other factions.” But on such a saying, this reality is ignored that as long as the condition of is maintained, such a situation cannot arise. If such a situation occurs, where a group creates dissension with the Ummat, the Successor of the Rasool (pbuh) shall declare on the basis of:

(6:159)

“Those who create difference in Deen and break up into sects, (O! Rasool) you have got nothing to do with them”, that is, the Successor of the Rasool (pbuh) shall declare that the Ummat has nothing to do with this new sect. Henceforth that will never be called the sect of the Ummat; it shall have nothing to do with the Muslims; it shall stand out of the fold of Islam. Therefore, the Ummat will remain as one compact Ummat alone. In other words it means no outfit shall ever be created in the “KHILAFAT ALA MINHAJE NABUWWAT”.

 

Anyway, this was the practical arrangement of the unity of the Ummat the Quran had prescribed after the death of the Rasoolullah, and that was what was practiced after his death. But after some time, this state of affairs did no more remain in force. Kingship replaced Khilafat. The Kings for their own selfish ends separated Religion from Politics. According to this absolutely un-Quranic bifurcation, the Kings themselves used to decide the matters related to the politics. So far was the Shariat, there remained no other forum available and hence the people made decisions individually. In this regard, another difficulty popped up. The Quran had commanded to follow “Allah and Rasool”. And now there remained no room for the exposition of the concept of “Allah and Rasool” the Quran had prescribed. It was because this very system had become non-existent, so a new exposition of the concept of following “Allah and Rasool” became imperative.

 

For the obedience to Allah, it was considered that it meant the obedience to the Book of Allah. But, how to obey the Rasool (pbuh), was a difficult question. For the solution of this difficulty, there was no way except to turn towards Ahadith of the Rasool (pbuh). Because, the concept of “Allah and Rasool” practically existed during the days of Khilafat, need for the collection and compilation of Ahadith did not arise. But now, it became a necessity; so collections of Ahadith were compiled. Now the method for following “Allah and Rasool” was decided in this way: that the disputed matters be individually decided according to ‘the Quran and Hadith’. Dissension and discord in these individual decisions was a must. Thus the decisions of “the Quran and Ahadith” became different with different sects. For dissolving these differences verbal disputes and mudslinging against each other became a common and unending practice. The results, these could bring, are before us today. The more the disease was cured, the more it spread. Now the situation is that there are scores of sects that exist today, and every one of them poses to be the champion of the obedience to “Allah and Rasool” and the claimant of complying with the real Islam. And since there is no living authority for washing off the differences    -the condition of                                   is non-existent, no one can decide as to” who says right and who says wrong”.

Now I think we have reached a place where we may automatically get the answer to the question:” What is the way out for gaining unity of the Ummat?” The only way for it is that the same arrangement be re-established for the disappearance of which the sects had surfaced. The first step for it is, to make this thought public, that the presence of sects and the Islamic way of life are two different things, diametrically opposite to each other. Under no circumstances can they be brought together under the same umbrella. And the only method of generating Islamic way of life by vaporizing the outfits is the establishment of Quranic System (Khilafat-ala minhaj-e-Nabu-wwat). Tolu-e-Islam has this sole objective before it and is striving for its accomplishment.

 

But if some body is under the impression that there is no likelihood of bringing back the Quranic way of life, he must not keep himself under the false deception that our present way of life is Islamic in nature and scope. Or it can become Islamic in the presence of the sects. I am conscious of the fact that you will not be ready to accept this reality easily. You will never like to accept it that Islamic life can not be lived in the presence of the factions. The acceptable way to you would be that out of all the factions, only one is on the right. It gives you this satisfaction that the faction you belong to is on the right, hence living life according to this faction is Islamic. The concept that devours this satisfaction from you can not be acceptable to you. You will be furious against this concept. But this furor of yours should be against the Quran, which adjudicates sectarianism as anathema (shirk), and not against the one who presents this teaching of the Quran to you. Either you say that this is not the teaching of the Quran, and if you can not refute it, your being in a fit of passion does not change the reality of the Quran.

 

Always remember as long as you do not accept this harsh reality in unambiguous terms that the life of sectarianism is absolutely un-Islamic in its very nature, you can never come to the straight path the Quran has prescribed. According to the Quran, the straight path is one and one alone. When the Ummat starts following different ways and means, then that straight path of life does not remain in front of any one. In Surah In’am, this reality has been stated in these words in the Quran:

 

 

(6:153)

 

“Remember, this is the only straight path of Mine. So you all follow it; accept it, do not follow other paths, they will scatter you about from His path. Allah has commanded you so that you may be afraid of going the wrong way.”

 

We may summarize what has been said above:

 

  1. Only following the Islamic way of life can eliminate sects.
  2. The Islamic way of life means the establishment of the State which is governed under the Principles enshrined in the Quran and encompass the boundaries laid down by the Quran itself.
  3. The laws enforced by this State shall be equally applicable to all individuals of the State; there shall be the existence of neither any sect, nor of any separate Fiqh of any sect. It shall only be the Quranic code, which shall be applicable to all.

 

The circumstances are unleashing the fact that the establishment of such a Quranic State shall not be agreeable to the present day Muslims. It is because they all are divided into various sects, and none of the sects looks to be ready to abandon its Fiqh. This will definitely lead you to the conclusion: “Neither can such a system be established amongst us (the present day Muslims), nor can the sects be dissolved.”

 

Its pragmatic exposition is that the Islamic system of life shall be established only amongst those people who come into the fold of Islam by accepting the above mentioned principles,    -whether such people be the present day Muslims, or those who come into the fold of Islam later. Whatsoever has the Quran commanded the Muslims to believe is nothing but:

 

(4:136)

 

“O ye Muslims! you who believe, believe in Allah and His Rasool and the Book which He had sent to His Rasool.”

 

This renovation of belief anew, in fact signifies conviction in the belief that Islam is opposed to sectarian way of life as a first step towards the establishment of the Quranic system of life. This stage looks to be flagrantly hard, violent, and critical. But the revival of Islam is not possible without it. If we keep deceiving ourselves by calling our present day un-Islamic life as Islamic, it shall by no means become Islamic. For an Islamic way of life, the basic condition is the existence of one compact Ummat, (with no trace of Sectarianism) and this is possible only in the QURANIC STATE.

This is how the various sects can be dissolved today.

 

*************************

588 total views, no views today

(Visited 93 times, 2 visits today)

As-Salaat (Gist) – What Quran Says – Parwez

Introduction

The place and importance of as-salaa (obligatory prayer) – or, namaaz, as it is known in Persian – in the Muslim scheme of things cannot be overstated. It has been said that, on the Day of Judgement, the very first inquiry made by the Almighty of a Muslim is going to be about prayer; a Persian saying states: awwalleen pursish e namaaz bood. To offer prayer regularly and punctually is considered to be the first and foremost duty of every Muslim man and woman; it is illustrated in Prophetic Tradition (Hadith) by the incident when Ali ibn Abu Taalib missed his ‘asr (late afternoon) prayer and the Prophet miraculously instructed the Sun to roll back Time a little – which it duly did – so that Ali could perform his prayer at the right time. Also, great emphasis is laid upon performing and ‘acting out’ one’s prayer meticulously. In this regard, a number of points are discussed ranging from the geographical accuracy of qiblah (direction) to the precise gap between one’s feet while in qiyaam (standing position).

Despite all that, we are faced with the undeniable fact that the Quran, the Muslim Scripture, does not contain detailed, categorical instructions about this ritual of primary importance. At best, one finds somewhat vague information on the timing and certain body movements. There is certainly nothing to be found about the number of daily prayers neither is there any guidance about the changes this ritual may go through while a Muslim is travelling in space, living on planets other than Earth, or even certain regions of Earth itself, such as the Poles. To compound matters further, the term as-salaa has been used in the Quran for expressions and meanings which are very clearly other than the ritual obligatory prayer.

This state of affairs gives rise to a number of intriguing and nagging questions. Is as-salaa the equivalent of namaaz? Why is the Quran vague on this popularly the most important ritual? Is it a ritual, anyway? Or, is it an institution with a much wider context than being one of the personal rituals? What broader picture emerges if one considers various linguistic applications of as-salaa? In short, what is the Quranic concept of it as compared to the Islamic? These, among others, are the questions which have been dealt with in this translation of an excerpt from Lughaat al Qur’aan (‘Language od the Quran’), pp. 1034-46, the monumental Urdu work on the lexicon of the Muslim Scripture by the late Mr G A Parwez, the founder of the Tolu-e-Islam Movement, published in January, 1961, by Idara Tolu-e-Islam, Lahore, Pakistan.

Khalid Mahmood Sayyed


As-Salaat (Gist)

Salaat is one of the fundamental principles of Islam. In the Qur’an the word Salaat and its numerous forms, derived from verbal roots Sa’d lam waw and Sa’d, lam ya, have been profusely used. Al-musalli is horse, which occupies the second spot in a race but runs so close that its ears brush the rear portion of the winning horse-(the one in front). The basic meaning of this root is to follow a leader closely and constantly in every walk of life. So Salaat means:

  • To remain attached to the Laws of Allah, to remain within the parameters of the Laws of Allah and to remain devoted to the Book of Allah. As such, tasleah means to walk behind a person without overtaking him, but so closely that there remains hardly any gap between the two, and also to follow him by remaining devoted to him. On the basis of this, Raghib says, “The verse of the Qur’an lam naku minal-Musalliin (74:43) – we were not Musalliin -means that we were not the followers of the Ambia ( Messengers).”
  • To tread a balanced and straight path. This happens to be a du’a (entreaty), the Qur’an teaches us in its very first Surah (Al-Fatiha). A Muslim always desires to be on the straight and balanced path because he has to uncompromisingly follow Allah, Who continuously stays on a straight and balanced path – Sir’at-al-Mustaqeem(11:56). To follow Allah is to adhere willingly to His laws as enshrined in the Qur’an and to imbibe in one’s personality Allah’s most balanced attributes (called Asmaul Husna), of course, as closely as humanly possible.
  • The method to carry out the duties. In Surah Noor (24:41) Allah poses a question: “Have you not pondered over the fact that whatever is there in the universe, including the birds with wings outspread, is continuously accomplishing its assignments with utmost sincerity because it is well aware of its duties (tasbih) and the method (Salaat) to carry them out.” This obviously means that by instinctive drive everything and every being in the universe knows as to what its tasbih and Salaat are; the course it has to take and where it is destined for, and the cycle of struggle it has to undergo. This is called its tasbih and Salaat (For tasbih see siin ba ha – Lughat- ul-Quran vol. 2, p. 834). But Man has not been endowed with this instinctive know-how. He has been told of his duties and methods through wahi ( revelation). As far as man’s physical needs are concerned, he can gain knowledge about them through thought, consciousness, deliberation, intellect, experience and observation. But for the development of his personality and his needs of ‘humanity’ he has to rely on wahi. As such, for a man to know as to what his tasbih and Salaat are he has to know and to have faith in wahi. And in order to fulfil this objective it becomes essential to act as per the programme of wahi. This is, according to Quran, iqamat-e- Salaat– establishing the system of Salaat. To follow the Laws of the Quran is wa yuqiimuunas-Salaat (2:3). Surah Alaq (96:9-10) says, “When an obedient follower of Allah tries to discharge his obligatory duties then he (his enemy) puts obstacles in his way.” The scope of these obligatory duties is quite wide and they encompass all aspects of life. In Surah Hud (11:87) it is stated: “ The people of Shu’aib asked him: ‘Does your Salaat command you that we should forsake that which our fathers (used to) worship, or that we (should leave off) doing what we like with our own property?’’’ In other words they did not fully comprehend the structure of Salaat which encompasses even economic matters.
  • To establish a system in accordance with the Laws of the Quran. It is not possible for a person to individually act per the programme of the wahi (iqamat-e-Salaat). This can only be done collectively within a system. .That explains the Quran’s use of plurals in this context. Hence, it is the responsibility of an Islamic state to establish this order. The Quran says: “They are the ones who, when given power in the land, establish (the system of) Salaat and Zakat (see zay kaf waw Lugat-ul- Quran vol. 2 p 808-811). And they enjoin the right and forbid the wrong.” (22:41). Also (9:12) Elsewhere the people engaged in establishing the Divine Order are defined as people who do Rukoo (bow down) and Sajda ( prostrate or fully surrender before the Laws of Allah). (For rukoo see ra kaf ayn and for sajda see siin jiim daal, Lugat-ul-Quran p. 778 and 844-851). It is for this reason that at another place (42:38) iqamat-e-Salaat and mutual consultation for the State’s political affairs are discussed together: “They establish Salaat and (then) resolve their affairs through mutual consultation.” And since all the affairs of the Muslim community are resolved in the light of the Laws of Allah (Book of Allah) therefore in Sura Araaf (7:170) yummassikuu-na bil Kitaabi and aqaa-mus-Salaah are placed together. As such, iqamat-e- Salaat means to establish a system in which all participating persons are consistent in following the laws of the Quran, and in this way remain in harmony with the Quran. In order to highlight this objective the Quran has used the word tawallaa as an antonym of sallaa (75:31-32). Tawallaa means to deny and flout the correct path, to find ways of digression, to turn back, to refuse to acknowledge. Therefore, sullaa would mean to keep moving on the correct path in accordance with the Divine Laws, and to fulfil the duties determined or fixed by the Divine System. It is on this basis that Allama Hamiduddin Farahi in his ‘Mufrad-tul- Quran’ says that one of the meanings of Salaat is to turn towards someone, to look up to him, to be attentive, and to turn one’s face (towards someone) in attention.
  • To surrender completely before the Laws of Allah and not to follow one’s own desires. This meaning has been beautifully elucidated in Surah Maryam (19:59) where iqamat-e-Salaat and following one’s own vain desires have been placed as antonym of one another, “Such unworthy generations succeeded (the Messengers) that they ruined the system Salaat) and followed their own emotions and desires.” It means that to follow one’s own desire is to distort Salaat and to follow the laws of Allah is to establish and keep intact Salaat. In Surah Anam (6:93) it is stated that the guardians of Salaat (system) are no different from those who have Eiman (conviction) in the Hereafter and the Book of Allah. Ibn-e-Qutaiba (Al-Qurtain vol.1, p.13) says that indeed Salaat means ad-Diin and iqaamat-e-salaat means iqamat-ud-Diin.(economic and socio-political system) Moheet and Aqrab-ul-Mwadir).
  • To overcome one’s defects and shortcomings. The author of ‘Al- Minar’ asserts that Salaat is recognition of the fact, both verbally and practically, that in order to eradicate one’s imperfection one needs the Guidance of the Superior Authority, who is Perfect and without any deficiency. Owing to this Qurtabi says that Salaat, in fact, means to obediently follow Allah.
  • To tame, to subjugate, and to arrest someone’s attention. In this reference the exposition of Salaat would be to subdue and tame the forces of the Universe and make them obedient to Man. (Moheet-ul-Moheet).
  • Reverence and admiration. In other words As-Salaat means to demonstrate the Greatness of the Sustainer of this Universe with your realistic programmes, like establishing a socio-economic system. This shows that iqamat-e-Salaat and itaa-e-Zakat are correlated, i.e. to chalk out a programme in accordance with the Divine Laws, follow it practically and sincerely so as to give every person a chance to develop his personality and also provide means of nourishment.
  • To offer Namaz. The varying meanings of Salaat mentioned above clearly suggest that when an obedient Muslim follows the Laws of Allah in any sphere of life to discharge his obligatory duties he, in fact, is performing Salaat only. And for this no time, place or form is necessary. But in the Quran at certain places the word Salaat has been used for a particular act or ritual, commonly called Namaz (A Pehalvi language word not used in the Quran). For instance: verse 5:6 outlines the method of ablution, which is to be performed when you rise up for Salaat. Verse 4:43 prohibits a Muslim from attending a Salaat congregation when in a state of Sukr (inebriation or drowsiness). And neither recite your Salaat aloud nor recite it in an inaudible tone, but seek a middle course (17:110). So the purpose of Salaat is served only when one understands what one is saying. However, it should be noted that for a Muslim the use of all types of intoxicants is prohibited (5:90-91) According to verse $;101 0ne can curtail Salaat if one fears an enemy attack. Verse 4:102 gives the method of shortening of Salaat. And Surah Juma-ah (62:9-10) says, When the call is proclaimed for Salaat on Friday (or at the time of congregation), hasten earnestly to the Zikr of Allah, and leave off business (and traffic): that is better for you if you did but know. And when Salaat is over, you may disperse through the land and seek of bounty of Allah: and involve yourself in ‘Zikr of Allah’ frequently so that you may be successful.
  • At this juncture a significant point needs a short explanation. The superstitious instincts of Man concocted stories of the auspicious and the ominous. Similarly, for doing, and also for not doing, specific work he outlined certain hours of day and night with the belief that they were auspicious. The Quran, while eradicating other superstitions about time, also clarified that there is nothing auspicious or ominous about day and night and hours. As such, in Islam the very idea that things should be started at an auspicious hour is irrelevant. So even for Salaat the Quran says; “You can establish Salaat from early morning till late night” (17:78) This means that in order to establish ad-Diin (economic and socio-political system) the efforts of Muslims are not limited to any specific time or place. For example see Surah 3:190, 20:130, 50:39, etc. The whole life of a Muslim—his days and nights, his mornings and evening—is devoted in implementing the Laws of Allah. But in these efforts Salaat congregations also play a significant and essential role. The Quran calls them kitaabam-mawquutaa (4:103). One meaning of these words is: a specially prescribed duty. Another interpretation is a duty that has to be perfected on time. Thus the importance of adherence to time in congregation is obvious. The Quran specially mentions Salaat-ul-Ishaa. From this it is evident that during Rasoolallah’s (messenger) days at least these hours were fixed for the Salaat congregations.
  • To become subservient to Allah. This is an expanded interpretation of the word ibadat which is commonly but wrongly translated in English as worship. A close reading of the Quran unambiguously makes it clear that ‘ibadat of Allah’ is not worship or Pooja as the followers of different religions perform. According to the Quran ‘ibadat’ (see ain bad dal, page 1120 vol 3, Lughat-ul-Quran) means to follow the laws of Allah, or to become subservient to Him.’ Obviously this subservience has to be accepted willingly at every step in life and in every department of worldly affairs. Its practical form is a system of State, which is established in accordance with the Quranic values. About the supporters of this system the Quran says: “They are the ones who respond to their Sustainer, and establish (the Quranic system) Salaat, who (conduct) their affairs by mutual consultations; who keep open ( for the welfare of the humanity) that We (Allah) bestow on them for sustenance.” (42:38). In these verses the point to be noted is correlation between obedience to Allah, establishment of a system (iqamat-e-Salaat) and conducting affairs of the State by mutual consultations. Obviously, in order to implement the laws of Allah mutual consultations are necessary to arrive at workable decisions on essential affairs. Thus for consultations assemblies become imperative. If seen in a broad spectrum these assemblies would be part of an establishment and sustaining a system, (iqamat-e-Salat). But in these assemblies one more fact has also been taken into consideration – man’s nature of expressing his feelings through his limbs and other parts of the body (see ra kaf ain and siin jiim daal. Lughaat-ul-Quran page 778 and 844). In reverence one bows one’s head involuntarily. In submission ‘the head surrenders’. Although, the Quran keeps in view the spirit behind action and facts, and does not give weight to mere formalism, but when form is required to represent an emotion or reality, it does not prohibit formalism, provided the form is not considered an end in itself. In the context of Salaat or (Namaz) the practical aspects of sajda and qiyam etc, that have come before us are for this objective. It is essential that when these emotions are practically expressed in collective form they should be in rhythmic harmony, otherwise there would be a total chaos in the congregation. To maintain discipline, harmony and unity in expressing intense respect, veneration, submission and compliance is in itself a big exercise for the development of the human personality.

The above discussion makes it amply clear that in the Quran aqeemu-as- Salaat has been used both for Salaat or Namaz congregations and for aqamat-e-Diin (the establishment and stability of the whole system in accordance with the laws of Allah, willingly following the Laws and orders of Allah and accomplishing those obligatory duties, which an obedient momin is expected to perform). To find out this distinction one has to consider the whole verse and the context in which it is revealed to see what exactly is meant by aqamat-e-Salaat. Similarly, one has to see in what context the word musalleen has been used, for it has been used for jamat-e-momineen (as a whole) or for those participating in the Salaat congregation. The Quran also tells about those musalleen who are at the pinnacle of human excellence (70:22-35) and about those for whom there is perdition (107:4-7)

  • To respect, to bless, to encourage, to develop, to nourish, not to let decay or chaos to crop up. These are meanings that Raghib has given of Salle alaihe. By keeping them in mind one can easily understand the verses of the Quran in which this root occurs with ‘ala. For instance, “ Allah and His malaaika (forces of nature) encourage you; provide you with necessary means of growth, development and nourishment, and make your efforts bear fruits.” (33:43). This verse is about those momineen who when faced with difficulties in the enforcement and establishment of Diin do not waver or get disheartened, but instead remain steadfast and bravely fight against all odds.  Therefore, they become entitled to all the plaudits and encouragement from Allah (2:157) And with especial reference to Rasool-allah(PBUH) the Quran says: “Allah and all the forces of nature help and encourage the Rasool in the fulfilment of his programme. O jamaat-ul-Momineen: You should also help your Rasool in making his programme a success.  Support him so that his efforts bear fruits.(33:56). And the practical method to help him is to submit before him and follow him (48:9)”. Momineen are, (7:157) it is said at another place: “Those who corroborate and respect him, and help him (in such a manner that) they follow the Light (Quran) which is sent down with him (7:157).” So this is the method by which a Momin fulfills his duty of Salaat alaihe.

This, then, is the Salaat of Allah and His Malaaika on jamat-ul-Momineen and on Rasool-allah. And this is Salaat and Salaam of jamaat-ul-Momineen on Rasool-allah. Notice that the order of salluu alayhi wa sal-limuu tasliimaa (33:56) demands a great action-orientated programme. This means that by following the laws of Allah the Diin brought by Rasool-allah will prevail over all religions and philosophies of the world. On the other hand, it was said to the Rasool that when the members of jamaat-e-Momineen bring their earnings to donate in the way of Allah, he should accept them. And encourage them because encouragement and appreciation from you (Rasool) is an assuagement for them (9:103). They think that spending their earnings in the way of Allah is a means to be near to Allah and getting encouragement and appreciation from Rasool (9:99). (For the meaning of Qurb-e-Allah or to be near to Allah see the heading Qaf ra ba).

  • Jewish temples. According to the Hebrew dictionary Salawat (plural of Salaat) is synagogue or praying place of Jews. In verse 22: 40 this word has been used in this context or meaning.

=================

1,677 total views, 3 views today

(Visited 837 times, 13 visits today)

مومن کی زندگی: قرآن کے آئینے میں – پرویز

قرآن کریم کی تعلیم‘ انسان کو کیا بنا دیتی ہے‘ اس کی تفصیل میں جایئے تو کئی مجلدات درکار ہوں گی لیکن اگر اسے اجمالی طور پر بیان کرنا چاہیں تو اس سے بہتر‘ جامع اور حسین انداز میں کچھ اور نہیں کہا جا سکتا جسے علامہ اقبالؒ نے اس ایک مصرعہ میں سمو دیا ہے کہ
آنچہ حق می خواہد‘ آں سازد ترا
اِنسان اور حیوان میں فرق
’’قرآن کی تعلیم انسان کو وہ کچھ بنا دیتی ہے جو کچھ خدا چاہتا ہے کہ یہ بن جائے‘‘ یعنی جس مقصد کے لئے انسان کو پیدا کیا گیا ہے‘ وہ مقصد پورا ہو جائے۔ اس کے سفر حیات کے لئے‘ جو منزل مقرر کی گئی ہے‘ یہ اس منزل و منتہیٰ تک پہنچ جائے۔ انسان اور دیگر حیوانات کی تخلیق میں ایک بنیادی فرق ہے۔ دنیا کے ہر حیوان نے جو کچھ بننا ہوتا ہے‘ وہ ازخود وہ کچھ بن جاتا ہے۔ اس کے لئے اسے نہ کسی تعلیم و تربیت کی ضرورت ہوتی ہے‘ نہ سعی و کاوش کی حاجت۔ فطرت نے اس کے اندر جو کچھ بننے کے امکانات رکھے ہیں‘ وہ امکانات ازخود بتدریج‘ مشہود ہوتے چلے جاتے ہیں تاآنکہ ایک عمر تک پہنچ کر‘ وہ حیوانی بچہ‘ اپنی نوع کا مکمل فرد بن جاتا ہے۔۔۔ شیر کا بچہ شیر بن جاتا ہے۔ بکری کا بچہ بکری۔ لیکن انسانی بچے میں فطرت نے جو مضمر صلاحیتیں رکھی ہوتی ہیں‘ ان کی دو قسمیں ہیں۔ ایک حیوانی یا طبیعی صلاحیتیں۔ یہ دیگر حیوانات کی طرح ازخود نشوونما پا کر‘ ایک منتہیٰ تک پہنچ جاتی ہیں اور وہ بچہ بالآخر آدمی بن جاتا ہے۔ دوسری صلاحیتیں انسانی ہیں۔ یہ ازخود نشوونما نہیں پاتیں۔ انہیں مناسب تعلیم و تربیت سے نشوونما دے کر اجاگر کرنا ہوتا ہے۔ قرآن کریم وہ پروگرام دیتا ہے جس سے فرد کی وہ مضمر صلاحیتیں پوری پوری نشوونما پا کر مشہود ہو جاتی ہیں اور پھر وہ انہیں ان مقاصد کے لئے صرف کرتا ہے جو اس کے لئے متعین کئے گئے ہیں۔ جب وہ اس مقام پر پہنچ جائے گا کہ انسان وہ کچھ بن گیا جو کچھ بننا اس کے لئے مقصود و مطلوب تھا۔ قرآن نے ایسے فرد کو مرد مومن کہہ کر پکارا ہے اور انسان کی اس ہیئت کو احسن تقویم قرار دیا ہے -(95:4) یعنی ایسی ہیئت جو حسن و توازن میں انتہا تک پہنچ گئی ہو۔
مومن
جن خصوصیات کے مظہر یہ افراد ہوں انہیں صفاتِ مومنین کہا جاتا ہے اور جب یہ خصوصیات‘ محسوس شکل میں سامنے آئیں تو انہیں اعمالِ صالح سے تعبیر کیا جاتا ہے۔ یعنی ایسے کام جو اس فرد کی بھرپور انسانی صلاحیتوں کے اثمار و نتائج ہوں اور جن سے عالمِ انسانیت کے بگڑے ہوئے معاملات سنور جائیں۔ جو معاشرہ ایسے افراد پر مشتمل ہو‘ اسے قرآن نے خَیْْرَ أُمَّۃٍ (3:110) ’’بہترین قوم جسے نوع انسان کی بہود کے لئے پیدا کیا گیا ہے‘‘ قرار دیا ہے اور أُمَّۃً وَسَطاً (2:143) ’’یعنی ایسی قوم جسے عالمِ انسانیت میں مرکزی حیثیت حاصل ہو‘‘ کا مقام دیا ہے۔ سطحی نظر سے دیکھئے تو معاشرہ‘ جماعت یا امت‘ افراد ہی کے مجموعہ کا نام ہوتی ہے لیکن اجتماعی نفسیات پر نگاہ رکھنے والے جانتے ہیں کہ جماعت‘ افراد کی حاصل جمع (Sum Total) کا نام نہیں ہوتی۔ اس کی اپنی خصوصیات ہوتی ہیں۔
اُمّت کی خصوصیات
اس لئے قرآن‘ افراد کی خصوصیات کے علاوہ۔ جماعتِ مومنین کی خصوصیات کا ذکر بھی خاص طور پر کرتا ہے۔ یا یوں کہئے کہ وہ افراد کی تعلیم۔ تربیت اور نشوونما کے علاوہ‘ ان اصول و ضوابط کی بھی وضاحت کرتا ہے جن کے مطابق ان افراد نے اجتماعی امور سرانجام دینے ہوتے ہیں اور جن کی بناء پر وہ ایک منفرد جماعت بنتے ہیں اور حقیقت یہ ہے کہ یہی وہ مقام ہے جہاں قرآنی تعلیم کی انفرادیت اور بے مثالیت نکھر کر سامنے آتی ہے اور اسی مقام کے سامنے نہ ہونے سے‘ اچھے اچھے سمجھدار لوگوں کو بھی یہ دھوکا لگ جاتا ہے کہ ’’عالمگیر سچائیاں تمام مذاہب میں یکساں طور پر پائی جاتی ہیں*۔‘‘
نظام اور فرد
’’عالمگیر سچائیوں‘‘ سے ان کی مراد ہوتی ہے عام اخلاقی اصول۔۔۔ مثلاً جھوٹ نہ بولو۔ چوری نہ کرو۔ کسی کو ستاؤ نہیں۔ وغیرہ ۔وغیرہ جب وہ دیکھتے ہیں کہ یہی اخلاقی اصول قرآن پیش کرتا ہے اور یہی تعلیم دنیا کے دیگر مذاہب میں بھی پائی جاتی ہے تو وہ پکار اٹھتے ہیں کہ ’’عالمگیر سچائیاں تمام مذاہب میں یکساں طور پر پائی جاتی ہیں‘‘۔ لیکن وہ یہ نہیں دیکھتے کہ جس اجتماعی نظام میں ان اخلاقی اصولوں کے حامل افراد زندگی بسر کرتے ہیں‘ اس نظام کے اصول کیا ہیں۔ مثال کے طور پر سمجھئے کہ ایک برہمن جھوٹ نہیں بولتا۔ چوری نہیں کرتا۔ انسان تو ایک طرف‘ کیڑوں مکوڑوں تک کو بھی نہیں ستاتا لیکن جس اجتماعی نظام کا وہ فرد ہے اس کا اصول یہ ہے کہ پیدائش کے اعتبار سے انسان اور انسان میں اس قدر گہرا اور بنیادی فرق ہوتا ہے کہ برہمن کے گھر میں پیدا ہونے والا بچہ ساری عمر دوسروں سے اپنی پرستش کراتا ہے اور شودر کے ہاں جنم لینے والا بچہ‘ تمام عمر‘ دوسروں کی خدمت اور بیگار میں بسر کر دیتا ہے اور یہ فرق اس قدر غیر متبدل ہوتا ہے کہ شودرؔ کے گھر میں پیدا ہونے والے بچے کے جوہر ذاتی اور اس کی ہزار محنت اور کوشش اس فرق کو مٹا نہیں سکتی۔ آپ کہئے کہ جو معاشرہ اس اجتماعی اصول کے مطابق متشکل ہو‘ اس میں افراد کی اس قسم کی ’’نیکیاں‘‘ محدود سے انفرادی حلقہ میں قدرے سکون پیدا کر سکتی ہیں لیکن نہ تو یہ انسان کو اس کا صحیح مقام دینے کے قابل بن سکتی ہیں اور نہ ہی عالمگیر انسانیت کی فوز و فلاح کا موجب۔ حتیٰ کہ یہ اس باطل نظام کو تباہی سے بچا سکنے کے قابل بھی نہیں ہو سکتیں جس کے اندر وہ ’’نیک انسان‘‘ زندگی بسر کرتا ہے۔ یا مثلاً جس معاشرہ کا اصول یہ ہو کہ جو بچہ بنی اسرائیل (یہودیوں) کے ہاں پیدا نہ ہو‘ وہ نجات و سعادت حاصل نہیں کر سکتا۔ اس معاشرہ میں افراد کی اس قسم کی نیکیاں کہ وہ جھوٹ نہیں بولتے اور چوری نہیں کرتے۔ عالمِ انسانیت کے کس کام آسکتی ہیں؟ یا جس معاشرہ میں عقیدہ یہ ہو کہ ہر انسانی بچہ‘ پیدائشی طور پر گنہگار پیدا ہوتا ہے اور اس کے گناہوں کا یہ داغ‘ ’’خدا کے بیٹے‘‘ (حضرت مسیحؑ ) کے کفارہ پر ایمان سے ہی دھل سکتا ہے۔ اس کے سوا‘ اس داغ کے مٹنے کی کوئی صورت نہیں‘ اس معاشرہ میں لوگوں کا رحمدل‘ حلیم الطبع اور منکسر المزاج ہونا‘ شرفِ انسانیت کی دلیل کیسے بن سکتا ہے؟
باطل کا نظام اور انفرادی نیکیاں
دنیائے مذاہب سے الگ ہٹ کر دیکھئے اور سوچئے کہ کیا نظامِ ملوکیت میں‘ ایک بادشاہ کے لئے‘ جو کروڑوں انسانوں پر اپنی مرضی چلاتا ہے‘ یہ بات موجبِ فخر قرار پا سکتی ہے کہ اس نے ساری عمر تہجد قضا نہیں کی یا شراب نہیں پی؟ نظامِ سرمایہ داری میں‘ اگر ایک جاگیردار۔ زمیندار یا کارخانہ دار‘ جو ہزاروں محنت کش غریبوں کے گاڑھے پسینے کی کمائی سمیٹ کر لے جاتا ہے‘ یہ کہتا ہے کہ اس نے کبھی چوری نہیں کی‘ تو کیا اسے نیک انسان کہا جا سکتا ہے؟ اگر ایک مذہبی پیشوا‘ جو دن رات عوام کو اس قسم کے عقائد کی تعلیم دیتا رہتا ہے کہ امیری اور غریبی انسان کی تقدیر سے وابستہ ہے جسے خود خدا نے مقرر کیا ہے اور خدا کے لکھے کو کوئی مٹا نہیں سکتا‘ اور اس کے ساتھ کہتا ہے کہ اس نے ساری عمر جھوٹ نہیں بولا‘ تو کیا آپ سمجھتے ہیں کہ اس کی یہ انفرادی نیکی‘ انسانیت کی اجتماعی میزان میں کوئی وزن رکھے گی؟ ان مثالوں سے آپ اندازہ لگا لیجئے کہ جن انفرادی اخلاقی خوبیوں کو ’’عالمگیر سچائیاں‘‘ کہہ کر اسلام کو مذاہبِ عالم کی صف میں ہم دوش کھڑا کرنے کی کوشش کی جاتی ہے‘ غلط اجتماعی نظام میں ان کی حقیقت کیا رہ جاتی ہے؟ اصل یہ ہے کہ مذہب اور دین میں بنیادی فرق یہ ہے کہ مذہب‘ انفرادی ضابطہ اخلاق کا علمبردار ہوتا ہے اجتماعی نظام سے اسے سروکار نہیں ہوتا۔ اس کے برعکس‘ دین‘ اجتماعی نظامِ انسانیت کو سامنے رکھتا ہے اور افراد کی اخلاقی خوبیوں کو اس لئے ضروری قرار دیتا ہے کہ اس سے اس معاشرہ کا توازن قائم رہے جو عالمگیر انسانیت کی سلامتی اور ارتقاء کا ضامن ہے‘ اور یوں انسان وہ کچھ بن جائے جو کچھ بن سکنے کا اس میں امکان ہے۔
قرآن کی جامع تعلیم
جو کچھ اوپر کہا گیا ہے اس سے واضح ہے کہ:
(1) جس معاشرہ میں افراد‘ عام اخلاقی ضوابط کی پابندی نہیں کرتے‘ اس معاشرہ میں کسی کو امن اور سکون نصیب نہیں ہو سکتا اور خود معاشرہ کی بنیادیں متزلزل ہو جاتی ہیں۔
(2) جس معاشرہ میں‘ افراد عام اخلاقی ضوابط کے پابند ہوں‘ لیکن خود معاشرہ‘ غلط اجتماعی اصولوں پر متشکل ہو‘ اس میں عام معاشرتی روابط میں تو قدرے سکون حاصل ہو سکتا ہے لیکن نہ تو اس معاشرہ کی بنیادیں مستحکم ہوتی ہیں‘ اور نہ ہی اس کا وجود عالمگیر انسانیت کے لئے موجبِ رحمت بن سکتا ہے۔ اور
(3) جس معاشرہ میں افراد‘ عام اخلاقی ضوابط کے پابند ہوں‘ اور خود معاشرہ بھی صحیح اجتماعی اصولوں کا علمبردار ہو‘ اس میں‘ افراد معاشرہ کو حقیقی امن و سکون میسر ہوتا ہے۔ ان کی طبیعی اور انسانی صلاحیتیں نشوونما پا کر برومند ہوتی چلی جاتی ہیں اور اس کا وجود عالمگیر انسانیت کے لئے موجبِ فلاح و سعادت ہوتا ہے۔
قرآنِ کریم اسی قسم کا معاشرہ قائم کرنا چاہتا ہے‘ جس میں افرادِ معاشرہ عام اخلاقی اصولوں کے شدت کے ساتھ پابند ہوں اور جو معاشرہ ان افراد پر مشتمل ہو‘ وہ ان مستقل اقدار کا حامل ہو جو عالمگیر انسانیت کو اس کی منزلِ مقصود تک لے جائے اور یہ ہے قرآن کا وہ نظام جس کی مثال کسی اور جگہ نہیں مل سکتی۔ قرآنی تعلیم اپنی اس خصوصیتِ کبریٰ کی بناء پر بے مثل و منفرد ہے۔ قرآن میں مومنین کی ان انفرادی اور اجتماعی خصوصیات کا ذکر اس تفصیل‘ کثرت اور تکرار سے آیا ہے کہ اس سے افراد کی سیرت و کردار کا صحیح نقشہ اور جماعتِ مومنین (اسلامی معاشرہ) کا بیّن اور واضح تصور سامنے آجاتا ہے۔ اکثر مقامات پر ان انفرادی اور اجتماعی خصوصیات کا ذکر الگ الگ آیا ہے لیکن بعض مقامات پر یہ ایک دوسرے میں یوں سموئی ہوئی سامنے آتی ہیں جیسے ایک حسین و شاداب شجرِ طیّب کہ اگر اس کی شاخوں‘ پتیوں‘ پھولوں اور شگوفوں کو الگ الگ بھی دیکھا جائے تو پورے کا پورا درخت باعثِ شادابئ قلب و نظر ہو جائے اور اگر‘ اس سرسبز و شاداب درخت پر بہ ہیئتِ مجموعی نگاہ ڈالی جائے تو اس کی تمام پھول پتیوں کی نزہت و نظافت وجۂ نشاط روح بن جائے۔ آئندہ سطور میں‘ ان افراد کی بعض نمایاں خصوصیات کا ذکر کیا جاتا ہے جنہیں قرآن مومن کہہ کر پکارتا ہے۔ اس مقصد کے لئے کہ ہم ان خصوصیات کی روشنی میں‘ اپنی سیرت و کردار پر نگاہ ڈالیں اور دیکھیں کہ وہ کس حد تک ان کے آئینہ دار ہیں۔ اس لئے کہ جس طرح عرق گلاب اسے کہا جائے گا جس میں گلاب کی خوشبو اور خصوصیات ہوں۔ اگر اس میں یہ صفات نہ ہوں تو وہ عرق گلاب نہیں ہو گا پانی کا پانی ہو ا‘ خواہ اس بوتل پر کیسے ہی خوبصورت لیبل پر سنہرے حروف میں ’’عرق گلاب‘‘ لکھا ہو۔ اسی طرح مومن وہ کہلائے گا جو مومن کی صفات کا حامل ہو۔ یہی وہ معیار ہے‘ جس پر ہم اپنے مومن ہونے کے دعوے کو پرکھ سکتے ہیں اور ان صفات کے تذکرہ سے یہی مقصود ہے۔
تمسخر نہ اڑاؤ
سب سے پہلے معاشرہ کے روزمرہ کے معاملات اور روابط کو لیجئے اور دیکھئے کہ قرآنِ کریم ان امور کو بھی کس قدر اہمیت دیتا ہے جنہیں عام طور پر قابلِ اعتنا نہیں سمجھا جاتا لیکن جن سے معاشرہ میں بڑی خرابیاں پیدا ہوتی ہیں۔ وہ جماعتِ مومنین سے تاکید کرتا ہے کہ:
لَا یَسْخَرْ قَومٌ مِّن قَوْمٍ -(49:11)
کوئی جماعت‘ دوسری جماعت کا تمسخر نہ اڑائے۔
آپ جانتے ہیں کہ تمسخر‘ جسے ہمارے ہاں بڑا (Lightly) لیا جاتا ہے‘ کتنے بڑے فساد کا موجب بن جاتا ہے۔ تمسخر درحقیقت ایک گہری نفسیاتی کیفیت کا مظاہرہ ہوتا ہے‘ جو نفرت۔ حسد اور انتقام کے جذبات کی پید اکردہ ہوتی ہے‘ لیکن اس شخص میں اتنی جرأت نہیں ہوتی کہ وہ ان جذبات کا اظہا رکھلے بندوں کرے۔ وہ انہیں تمسخر کے فریب کارانہ پردوں میں چھپا کر پیش کرتا ہے۔ تمسخر کے تیز تر نشتر کی شکل وہ ہوتی ہے جسے کسی کا ’’نام رکھنا‘‘ کہتے ہیں۔ قرآن نے یہ کہہ کر اس سے بھی روک دیا کہ:
وَلَا تَنَابَزُوا بِالْأَلْقَابِ-(49:11)
ایک دوسرے کے بُرے بُرے نام مت رکھا کرو۔
(2) اس کے بعد ہے:
وَلَا تَلْمِزُوا أَنفُسَکُمْ -(49:11)
اور آپس میں ایک دوسرے پر الزام مت لگاؤ۔
الزام تراشی
الزام تراشی کس قدر سنگین جرم ہے اس کا اندازہ اس سے لگایئے کہ قرآن کی رُو سے زنا کی سزا سو کوڑے ہے اور پاک دامن عورتوں کے خلاف الزام تراشی کی سزا اسّی کوڑے۔ ہوتا یہ ہے کہ دوسرے پر الزام لگانے والا‘ خود تو معتبر بن جاتا ہے اور فریق مقابل کو خواہ مخواہ ملزموں کے کٹہرے میں کھڑا کر دیتا ہے کہ وہ اپنی بریّت ثابت کرے۔ اس سے اور کچھ نہیں تو اکثر لوگوں کے دل میں اس شخص کے خلاف بدظنی ضرور پیدا ہو جاتی ہے اور وہ یہ کہنے پر مجبور ہو جاتے ہیں کہ بھائی! بالآخر کچھ نہ کچھ بات تو ہو گی ہی جس کی بنا پر یہ الزام لگایا گیا ہے!
تانہ باشد چیز کے گویند مرداں چیز ہا
بدظنی سے بچو
قرآن کریم نے ایک طرف الزام تراشی اور بہتان بافی کی اس قدر سخت سزا مقرر کی‘ اور دوسری طرف جماعتِ مومنین سے تاکید کی۔
یَا أَیُّہَا الَّذِیْنَ آمَنُوا اجْتَنِبُوا کَثِیْراً مِّنَ الظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعْضَ الظَّنِّ إِثْمٌ -(49:12)
اے جماعتِ مومنین! بدظنی سے بہت زیادہ بچو۔ یاد رکھو! بعض بدظنی بدترین گناہ تک پہنچ جاتی ہے۔
اسلامی معاشرہ کے افراد کے دلوں میں ایک دوسرے کے متعلق ہمیشہ خیر سگالی کے جذبات ہونے چاہئیں۔ لیکن جس دل میں‘ کسی کے متعلق بدظنی پیدا ہو جاتی ہے‘ اس میں خیر سگالی کے جذبات باقی نہیں رہتے۔ اس کا علاج قرآن نے یہ بتایا ہے کہ (1) ہر شخص کے متعلق تمہارا پہلا ردِ عمل (First Reaction) نیک ہونا چاہئے۔ اس کا ارشاد ہے کہ: وَلاَ تَقُولُواْ لِمَنْ أَلْقَی إِلَیْْکُمُ السَّلاَمَ لَسْتَ مُؤْمِناً -(4:94) جو تمہیں سلام کہے اس کے متعلق‘ یہ نہ کہو کہ تم مومن نہیں ہو۔ اگرچہ یہ آیت‘ جنگ کے سلسلہ میں ایک اور اہم اصول کی وضاحت کرتی ہے لیکن جب اس کا اطلاق عام معاشرتی روابط پر کیا جائے گا تو اس کا مطلب یہی ہو گا کہ (تحقیق سے پہلے)‘ تمہارا پہلا ردِ عمل‘ ہمیشہ نیک ہونا چاہئے۔ قرآن کے اسی حکم پر مبنی عدل کا یہ اہم اصول قائم ہوتا ہے کہ جب تک کسی کے خلاف جرم ثابت نہ ہو جائے اسے بے گناہ سمجھنا چاہئے۔ اس سلسلہ میں اس نے کہا کہ جب کوئی شخص‘ تم سے کسی کے خلاف کوئی بات کہے تو تمہارا پہلا ردِعمل یہ ہونا چاہئے کہ: ہَذَا إِفْکٌ مُّبِیْنٌ -(24:12) یہ صریح جھوٹ ہے۔ ہَذَا بُہْتَانٌ عَظِیْمٌ-(24:16) یہ بہت بڑا بہتان ہے۔ اپنے دل میں ردِعمل یہ پیدا کرو اور پھر اس بات کا چرچا مت کرو۔ -(24:19) اگر بات ایسی ہے کہ وہ بالبداہت غلط نظر آتی ہے تو اس کے متعلق خواہ مخواہ کی کرید مت کرو۔ وَلَا تَجَسَّسُوا -(49:12) لیکن اگر اس کے متعلق کسی حتمی نتیجہ تک پہنچنا ضروری ہے تو اس کی تحقیق کرو۔ اس تحقیق کے متعلق قرآن نے خصوصیت سے کہا ہے کہ:
وَلاَ تَقْفُ مَا لَیْْسَ لَکَ بِہِ عِلْمٌ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ کُلُّ أُولءِکَ کَانَ عَنْہُ مَسْؤُولاً -(17:36)
جس معاملہ کی تم خود تحقیق نہ کرو اس کے پیچھے مت لگا کرو۔ یاد رکھو! تمہاری سماعت‘ بصارت‘ قلب (کان‘ آنکھ اور دل) ہر ایک سے پوچھا جائے گا (کہ آیا تم نے ان سے کام لے کر اس معاملہ کی تحقیق کر لی تھی یا نہیں)۔
غیبت مت کرو
اور اگر معاملہ ایسا ہے جس کا اثر جماعتی زندگی پر بھی پڑتا ہے تو اسے متعلقہ حکام تک پہنچاؤ لَعَلِمَہُ الَّذِیْنَ یَسْتَنبِطُونَہُ مِنْہُمْ -(4:83) تاکہ وہ تحقیق کر کے بات کی تہ تک پہنچ جائیں (نیز 49:6)۔ اسی سلسلہ میں قرآنِ کریم نے یہ کہا ہے: وَلَا یَغْتَب بَّعْضُکُم بَعْضاً -(49:12) تم ایک دوسرے کی غیبت مت کرو۔ کسی کی پیٹھ پیچھے اس کے خلاف کوئی بات نہ کرو۔ جو بات کرنی ہو اس کے سامنے کہو۔ اگر آپ سے کوئی شخص‘ کسی کی غیر حاضری میں‘ اس کے خلاف کوئی بات کہتا ہے تو آپ کا فریضہ ہے کہ اس سے کہو کہ چلو! یہ بات اس شخص کے سامنے چل کر کرو۔ آپ دیکھیں گے کہ اس سے آپ کتنے بڑے فساد کا رخنہ بند کر دیتے ہیں۔
اذیّت مت پہنچاؤ
کسی کے خلاف جھوٹے الزام لگانے‘ یا اس کی غیبت کرنے سے اسے جس قدر قلبی اذیّت پہنچ سکتی ہے‘ اس کا اندازہ لگایا جا سکتا ہے۔ قرآنِ کریم نے کہا ہے کہ مومن ایک دوسرے کے لئے قلبی سکون اور مسرت کا موجب ہونے چاہئیں‘ نہ کہ باعثِ اذیت و کوفت۔ اسی لئے فرمایا:
وَالَّذِیْنَ یُؤْذُونَ الْمُؤْمِنِیْنَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ بِغَیْْرِ مَا اکْتَسَبُوا فَقَدِ احْتَمَلُوا بُہْتَاناً وَإِثْماً مُّبِیْناً -(33:58)
جو لوگ مومن مردوں اور عورتوں کو بلا جرم و خطا‘ ناحق اذیّت پہنچاتے ہیں‘ تو وہ بہتان تراشی کے جرم کے مرتکب ہوتے ہیں اور کھلے ہوئے گناہ کا کام کرتے ہیں۔
اس نے تو یہاں تک کہہ دیا ہے کہ:
لاَّ یُحِبُّ اللّہُ الْجَہْرَ بِالسُّوَءِ مِنَ الْقَوْلِ إِلاَّ مَن ظُلِمَ -(4:148)
اللہ اسے بھی پسند نہیں کرتا کہ تم خواہ مخواہ کسی بات کی تشہیر کرتے پھرو۔ ہاں مگر جو مظلوم ہو اسے اس کی اجازت ہے کہ وہ اپنے ظلم کے مداوا کے لئے داد فریاد کرے۔
***
دِل کا شفاف ہونا
آپ نے غور فرمایا کہ قرآنِ کریم روزمرہ کی زندگی سے متعلق ان چھوٹی چھوٹی احتیاطی تدابیر سے‘ کس طرح ایسی خرابیوں کا سدِباب کر دیتا ہے‘ جو معاشرہ میں بہت بڑے فتنہ اور فساد کا موجب بن جاتی ہیں۔ حقیقت یہ ہے کہ اگر ہم‘ ان (بظاہر) معمولی سی تدابیر پر عمل کرنا شروع کر دیں تو معاشرہ میں کس قدر امن اور سکون پیدا ہو جائے! لیکن قرآن‘ ان چیزوں پر بھی محض میکانکی طور پر عمل نہیں کراتا۔ وہ افراد کے اندر ایسی نفسیاتی تبدیلی پیدا کرتا ہے۔ جس سے یہ تمام باتیں ان کے دل کی گہرائیوں سے ابھرتی ہیں۔ یہی وجہ ہے کہ اس نے جماعتِ مومنین کے جنتی معاشرہ کے متعلق کہا ہے کہ: وَنَزَعْنَا مَا فِیْ صُدُورِہِم مِّنْ غِلٍّ -(7:43) ان کے دل میں کوئی ایسی بات نہیں رہے گی جسے وہ دوسروں سے چھپا کر رکھنا چاہیں۔ آپ غور کیجئے کہ وہ معاشرہ فی الواقعہ کس قدر جنتی ہو گا جس میں افراد معاشرہ کے دل اس قدر آئینے کی طرح صاف اور شفاف ہوں کہ ان میں غبار اور کدورت کا نشان تک نہ ہو اور ہر ایک کا ظاہر و باطن یکساں طور پر سب کے سامنے ہو۔
اُلفت اور اخوّت
اسی کو قرآن نے ’’دلوں میں باہمی اُلفت پیدا کرنے‘‘ سے تعبیر کیا ہے اور جماعتِ مومنین کو جس نعمتِ خداوندی کی یاد دلائی ہے وہ یہی باہمی اُلفت ہے۔ چنانچہ اس جماعت کو مخاطب کر کے کہا گیا وَاذْکُرُواْ نِعْمَتَ اللّہِ عَلَیْْکُمْ إِذْ کُنتُمْ أَعْدَاء ۔تم خدا کی اس نعمتِ کبریٰ کو یاد کرو کہ تم ایک دوسرے کے دشمن تھے۔ فَأَلَّفَ بَیْْنَ قُلُوبِکُمْ۔ خدا نے تمہارے دلوں میں ایک دوسرے کی اُلفت ڈال دی۔ الفت‘ اس قسم کے تعلق کو کہتے ہیں جس میں ایک دوسرے کے دل یوں باہمدگر مدغم ہو جائیں جس طرح بادل کا ایک ٹکڑا دوسرے ٹکڑے کے اندر ضم ہو جاتا ہے۔۔۔ تاکس نگوید بعد ازیں من دیگرم تو دیگرے۔۔۔ اس باہمی الُفت کا نتیجہ یہ ہوا کہ: فَأَصْبَحْتُم بِنِعْمَتِہِ إِخْوَاناً۔ تم اس نوازش خداوندی سے‘ ایک دوسرے کے بھائی بھائی بن گئے۔ وَکُنتُمْ عَلَیَ شَفَا حُفْرَۃٍ مِّنَ النَّارِ فَأَنقَذَکُم مِّنْہَا۔ تم (اس سے پہلے) جہنم کے گڑھے کے کنارے پر پہنچ چکے تھے۔ بس اس میں گرنے ہی والے تھے کہ خدا نے تمہیں اس سے بچا لیا۔ کَذَلِکَ یُبَیِّنُ اللّہُ لَکُمْ آیَاتِہِ لَعَلَّکُمْ تَہْتَدُونَ -(3:103) اس طرح اللہ اپنے احکام کو واضح طور پر بیان کرتا ہے تاکہ تم جان لو کہ زندگی کا صحیح راستہ کون سا ہے۔ یہ ’’باہمی الفت‘‘ ایسی گراں بہا متاع اور نایاب جنس تھی‘ کہ نبی اکرمﷺ سے کہا گیا۔۔۔۔ کہ اگر تو چاہتا کہ ساری دنیا کی دولت خرچ کر کے‘ ان کے دلوں میں ایسی الفت پیدا کر دے‘ تو بھی ایسا نہ ہو سکتا -(8:63)
اعتصام بحبل اللہ
یہ متاع‘ باہر سے خرید کر دلوں میں داخل نہیں کی جا سکتی۔ یہ تو دلوں کے اندر تبدیلی سے پیدا ہوتی ہے۔ یعنی یہ نتیجہ ہوتی ہے قران کے ساتھ وابستگی کا۔ اسی لئے‘ اسے قائم رکھنے کے لئے فرمایا کہ: وَاعْتَصِمُواْ بِحَبْلِ اللّہِ جَمِیْعاً وَلاَ تَفَرَّقُواْ -(3:103) خدا کی اس رسی کو سب مل کر مضبوطی سے تھامے رہو اور تفرقہ مت پیدا کرو۔ یہی وہ رشتہ ہے جس میں منسلک ہونے کے بعد کہا کہ: إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِخْوَۃٌ -(49:10) مومن ایک دوسرے کے بھائی بھائی ہیں۔ بھائی بھی ایسے جن کی کیفیت یہ ہے کہ: رُحَمَاء بَیْْنَہُمْ -(48:29) آپس میں ایک دوسرے کے ہمدرد ار غمگسار أَذِلَّۃٍ عَلَی الْمُؤْمِنِیْنَ -(5:54) ایک دوسرے کے سامنے جھکے ہوئے۔۔۔
ہو حلقۂ یاراں تو بریشم کی طرح نرم
لیکن اس نرمی کے یہ معنی نہیں کہ کوئی غلط کام کرے تو اسے روکا ٹوکا بھی نہ جائے۔
بُرائی سے روکو
قرآن کریم نے یہودیوں کی تباہی کی ایک وجہ یہ بھی بیان کی ہے کہ: کَانُواْ لاَ یَتَنَاہَوْنَ عَن مُّنکَرٍ فَعَلُوہُ -(5:79) وہ ایک دوسرے کو بری باتوں سے روکتے نہیں تھے۔ جب جماعتِ مومنین کا عام فریضہ‘ امر بالمعروف و نہی عن المنکر ہے (9:71-72, 3:103-109) یعنی لوگوں کو ان باتوں کے کرنے کا حکم دینا جنہیں قرآن نے اچھا قرار دیا ہے اور ان امور سے روکنا جنہیں وہ ناپسندیدہ قرار دیتا ہے تو اس کے یہ معنی تھوڑے ہیں کہ یہ جماعت‘ دوسروں کو تو ایسا کہے گی لیکن خود اپنے معاشرے میں یہ کچھ نہیں کرے گی؟ وہ تو سب سے پہلے‘ ان امور کو خود اپنے ہاں عام کرے گی اور اس کے بعد انہیں دوسروں تک پھیلائے گی۔ اسی لئے جماعتِ مومنین کی خصوصیت یہ بتائی کہ: وَتَوَاصَوْا بِالْحَقِّ وَتَوَاصَوْا بِالصَّبْرِ -(103:3) وہ ایک دوسرے کو حقؔ (قرآنی احکام و قوانین) کے ساتھ تمسک اور استقامت پذیر رہنے کی تلقین کرتے ہیں اور اس طرح باہمی اصلاح کرتے رہتے ہیں۔۔۔
باہمی صلح کراؤ
اس لئے کہ: وَأَصْلِحُواْ ذَاتَ بِیْْنِکُمْ -(8:1) ان کے خدا کا ارشاد ہے اور یہ بھی ارشاد ہے کہ اگر سوء اتفاق سے ان کی دو جماعتوں میں کہیں لڑائی جھگڑا ہو جائے تو فَأَصْلِحُوا بَیْْنَہُمَا -(49:9) ان میں باہمی صلح کراؤ اور اگر ان میں سے کوئی پارٹی سرکشی پر اتر آئے تو اسے اس سے‘ بزور روکو اور جب وہ اپنی اس روش سے باز آجائے تو ان دونوں میں عدل و انصاف کے مطابق صلح کرا دو۔
توبہ کا مفہوم
یہیں سے ہمارے سامنے‘ ایک اور اہم اصول آتا ہے اور وہ ہے توبہؔ ۔ ایک شخص کا عام کردار اچھا ہے لیکن کسی وقت اس سے نادانستہ کوئی غلط حرکت سرزد ہو جاتی ہے۔ اس کے بعد اسے اس کا احساس ہوتا ہے تو وہ اپنے کئے پر نادم ہوتا ہے۔ اگر اس کی اس غلط حرکت سے کسی کو اذیت یا نقصان پہنچا ہے تو اس سے معافی مانگتا ہے اور آئندہ کے لئے اس کی پوری پوری احتیاط برتتا ہے کہ کبھی اس قسم کی حرکت سرزد نہ ہو۔ اسے قرآن نے تاب و اصلح سے تعبیر کیا ہے۔ یعنی جس مقام سے نادانستہ غلط قدم اٹھا تھا‘ اس مقام پر واپس آجانا اور اس کے بعد اپنی ایسی اصلاح کرنا کہ پھر ایسی غلطی نہ ہو۔ جیسا کہ اوپر کہا جا چکا ہے‘ اس کے لئے ضروری ہے کہ وہ حرکت‘ نادانستہ۔ غلطی‘ سہو اور خطا سے سرزد ہوئی ہو۔ عمداً ایسا نہ کیا ہو۔ چنانچہ قرآن کریم نے اس کی تصریح کر دی ہے کہ: إِنَّمَا التَّوْبَۃُ عَلَی اللّہِ لِلَّذِیْنَ یَعْمَلُونَ السُّوَءَ بِجَہَالَۃٍ ثُمَّ یَتُوبُونَ مِن قَرِیْبٍ فَأُوْلَءِکَ یَتُوبُ اللّہُ عَلَیْْہِمْ -(4:17) توبہ اسی کی ہے جس سے کوئی غلطی نادانستہ سرزد ہو جائے اور اس کے بعد‘ وہ فوراً اس کی تلافی کر دے۔ اس میں نادانستہ (بجھالۃٍ) اور فوراً (من قریبٍ) کے الفاظ غور طلب ہیں۔ یہی چیز قرآن کریم نے دیگر مقامات پر بھی بیان کی ہے مثلاً (16:119 میں)۔
عمداً جرائم
اس کے برعکس‘ ایک شخص دیدہ دانستہ‘ عمداً۔ ارادۃً۔ غلط حرکات کا ارتکاب کرتا ہے‘ جھوٹ بولتا ہے‘ دوسروں کے خلاف جھوٹے الزام لگاتا ہے‘ غیبت کرتا ہے۔ وغیرہ وغیرہ۔ اور جب وہ کہیں گھر جاتا ہے۔ اپنی مدافعت کی کوئی شکل نہیں دیکھتا‘ تو کہہ دیتا ہے کہ مجھے معاف کر دو۔ تو اس کا نام توبہ نہیں۔ اس کے دیدۂ و دانستہ ارتکاب نے یہ واضح کر دیا کہ یہ چیزیں اس کے کردار کا جزو بن چکی ہیں۔ یونہی نادانستہ سرزد نہیں ہوئیں۔ اس لئے‘ جب تک وہ اپنے کردار میں تبدیلی نہیں پیدا کرے گا‘ ان باتوں سے باز نہیں آسکے گا۔ وہ توبہ کرنے اور معافی مانگنے کے بعد بھی ایسا کچھ کرتا رہے گا۔ اسی لئے قرآن نے وضاحت سے کہہ دیا کہ: وَلَیْْسَتِ التَّوْبَۃُ لِلَّذِیْنَ یَعْمَلُونَ السَّیِّءَاتِ حَتَّی إِذَا حَضَرَ أَحَدَہُمُ الْمَوْتُ قَالَ إِنِّیْ تُبْتُ الآنَ -(4:18) توبہ ان لوگوں کی نہیں ہے جو بری حرکات کرتے رہتے ہیں تاآنکہ جب ان کے سامنے موت آکھڑی ہوتی ہے تو وہ کہتے ہیں کہ میں توبہ کرتا ہوں۔۔۔ ’’موت کے سامنے آجانے‘‘ سے مفہوم یہ ہے کہ جب اسے اس کا یقین ہو جائے کہ جو کچھ اس نے کیا ہے وہ بے نقاب ہو جائے گا اور وہ اس کے مؤاخذہ سے بچ نہیں سکتا تو پھر معافی مانگنے لگ جائے۔ یہ منافقت ہے اور بدترین کردار کی علامت۔ یہی وجہ ہے کہ جب فرعون ڈوبنے لگا اور اس نے کہا کہ میں خدا پر ایمان لاتا ہوں تو اس سے کہا گیا کہ اب ایمان سے کیا فائدہ؟ یہ بھی واضح ہے کہ ایسے شخص نے اپنی اس قسم کی حرکات سے جس شخص کو اذیت یا نقصان پہنچایا ہے‘ اگر و ہ اسے معاف بھی کر دے تو اس سے اتنا ہی ہو گا کہ اس سے کوئی انتقام نہیں لیا جائے گا۔ لیکن اس کی اصلاح تو اسی صورت میں ہو سکے گی جب وہ اپنے کردار میں خود تبدیلی پیدا کرے۔ یہی وہ حقیقت ہے جسے مغربی مفکر‘ نیٹشے نے ان الفاظ میں بیان کیا ہے کہ:
’’جو برائی تم نے میرے ساتھ کی ہے اسے تو میں معاف کر دوں گا لیکن اس سے جو برائی تم نے خود اپنی ذات کے خلاف کی ہے‘ اسے کون معاف کر سکتا ہے؟‘‘
***
چھچورا پن
اب آگے چلئے۔ مردِ مومن اپنے جوہرِ ذاتی اور بلندئِ سیرت و کردار کی بناء پر اپنے اندر وزن رکھتا ہے اور یہ وزن‘ ہر مقام پر اس کا توازن برقرار رکھتا ہے لیکن جب انسان میں یہ خوبیاں نہ ہوں اور اس کا ایغوؔ جھوٹی تسکین چاہے تو اس سے اس کے اندر غرور‘ نخوت اور پندار کے غلط جذبات ابھر آتے ہیں جس سے اس میں چھچورا پن پیدا ہو جاتا ہے۔ قرآن کی تعلیم مردِ مومن میں یہ چیز پیدا نہیں ہونے دیتی۔ چھچورے پن کا مظاہرہ انسان کی گفتار۔ چال ڈھال سے ہوتا ہے۔
نخوت و تکبّر
اس لئے قرآن اس کی تاکید کرتا ہے کہ: وَلَا تَمْشِ فِیْ الْأَرْضِ مَرَحاً -(31:18) زمین پر یوں ہی اکڑ کر نہ چلو۔ وَاقْصِدْ فِیْ مَشْیِکَ -(31:19) اپنی رفتار میں میانہ روی اختیار کرو۔ اسی طرح وَاغْضُضْ مِن صَوْتِکَ -(31:19) اپنی آواز بھی نیچی رکھو۔ چلّا چلّا کر مت بولو۔ بیجا تکبّر اور نخوت سے‘ لوگوں سے ترش روئی سے پیش نہ آؤ۔ وَلَا تُصَعِّرْ خَدَّکَ لِلنَّاسِ -(31:18) اس لئے کہ: إِنَّ اللَّہَ لَا یُحِبُّ کُلَّ مُخْتَالٍ فَخُورٍ-(31:18) خدا‘ خود پسند‘ شیخی خورے انسان کو پسند نہیں کرتا۔ یہ مومنین کی نشانی نہیں ہے۔
حسد نہیں
مومن کی صفت یہ بھی ہے کہ وہ دوسروں سے حسد نہیں کرتا۔ (4:54) بلکہ کوشش کرتا ہے کہ اس کے اپنے اندر زیادہ سے زیادہ خوبیاں پیدا ہوں اور اس باب میں وہ دوسروں سے آگے نکل جائے۔ اس لئے کہ اس کے خدا کا حکم ہے کہ: فَاسْتَبِقُواْ الْخَیْْرَاتِ -(2:148) بھلائی کی باتوں میں ایک دوسرے سے بڑھ جاؤ۔ ان کی یہ بھی خصوصیت ہے کہ: ہُمْ عَنِ اللَّغْوِ مُعْرِضُونَ -(23:3) وہ ہر قسم کے لغویات سے پرہیز کرتے ہیں‘ اور اگر کہیں اتفاق سے اس قسم کی باتیں ان کے سامنے آجائیں تو وہ ان سے دامن بچاتے ہوئے شریفانہ انداز سے آگے بڑھ جاتے ہیں۔ وَإِذَا مَرُّوا بِاللَّغْوِ مَرُّوا کِرَاماً-(25:72)
صاف۔ سیدھی بات کرو
ان سے یہ بھی کہا گیا ہے کہ: وَاجْتَنِبُوا قَوْلَ الزُّورِ-(22:30) ہر قسم کے مکر و فریب کی ملمع دار باتوں سے اجتناب کرو۔ قُولُوا قَوْلاً سَدِیْداً-(33:70) ہمیشہ صاف‘ سیدھی‘ واضح‘ محکم‘ دو ٹوک بات کرو۔ یَقُولُواْ الَّتِیْ ہِیَ أَحْسَنُ-(17:53) بڑے خوبصورت انداز سے اعتدال کے مطابق۔ اچھی اچھی باتیں کرو۔ لاَ تَلْبِسُواْ الْحَقَّ بِالْبَاطِلِ-(2:42) حق اور باطل۔ غلط اور صحیح۔ جھوٹ اور سچ کو آپس میں خلط ملط نہ کرو۔ وَتَکْتُمُواْ الْحَقَّ-(2:42) نہ ہی حق کو چھپاؤ۔
عزۃ الاثم
انسان کے اندر ایک بدترین جذبہ ایسا ہے جو اس کی تمام خوبیوں کو تباہ کر دیتا ہے اور اسے کبھی صحیح راستے کی طرف آنے نہیں دیتا۔ یہ ہے اس کے ایغوؔ کا جذبۂ پندار یعنی (False Prestige) کا احساس۔ اسے قرآن نے عزۃ الاثم کی جامع اصطلاح سے تعبیر کیا ہے۔ ایک شخص دل میں محسوس کرتا ہے کہ اس نے غلطی کی ہے لیکن اس کے ایغوؔ کا جذبۂ پندار اسے اس کے اعتراف پر آمادہ نہیں ہونے دیتا۔ وہ اس کے لئے اعذار باردہ (Justificatory Reasons) وضع کرتا ہے حالانکہ اس کا دل جانتا ہے کہ یہ دلائل جھوٹے اور یہ وجوہات وضعی ہیں‘ ایسے شخص پر سعادت کی راہیں کبھی نہیں کھل سکتیں۔ یہ چیز پارٹی بازی میں اکثر حق و صداقت کے راستے میں روک بن کر کھڑی ہو جاتی ہے۔ اپنی پارٹی کا فرد صریحاً غلطی پر ہو‘ لیکن ’’پارٹی بازی‘‘ کا تقاضا ہے کہ آپ اس کی بہرحال تائید اور مدافعت کریں۔ ایک ڈاکو ہر روز مسافروں کے گلے کاٹے اور غریبوں کو لوٹے۔ اس کی پارٹی کے دوسرے ڈاکو‘ اسے کبھی بُرا نہیں کہیں گے لیکن اگر وہ لوٹ کے مال میں کچھ خورد برد کرے اور اس کی تقسیم منصفانہ نہ کرے‘ تو پھر پارٹی والے اسے بے ایمان اور بددیانت قرار دیں گے۔ پارٹی بازی میں یہی کچھ ہوتا ہے۔ اپنی پارٹی کا آدمی جب تک دوسروں کے خلاف کچھ کرتا رہے اسے کبھی نہیں ٹوکا جاتا بلکہ اس کی حوصلہ افزائی کی جاتی ہے۔ اس سے رفتہ رفتہ اس کے دل کی حالت یہ ہو جاتی ہے کہ اس میں کسی بات کو (On Merit) پرکھنے اور عدل و انصاف کی رو سے فیصلہ کرنے کی صلاحیت باقی نہیں رہتی۔ یہ ہے وہ مسخ شدہ ذہنیت جس کے متعلق قرآنِ کریم نے کہا ہے کہ: وَإِذَا قِیْلَ لَہُ اتَّقِ اللّہَ أَخَذَتْہُ الْعِزَّۃُ بِالإِثْمِ -(2:206) جب اس سے کہا جاتا ہے کہ قوانین خداوندی کی نگہداشت کرو تو جھوٹی عزت کا احساس اس کا راستہ روک کر کھڑا ہو جاتا ہے۔ فَحَسْبُہُ جَہَنَّمُ -(2:206) نتیجہ اس کا یہ کہ اس کی انسانی صلاحیتیں جھلس کر راکھ کا ڈھیر بن جاتی ہیں۔
مومن‘ نفس (ایغوؔ ) کے اس فریب میں نہیں آتا۔ یہ اس کے راستے میں کھڑا ہوتا ہے تو وہ دامن جھٹک کر آگے بڑھ جاتا ہے۔
***
پابندئ عہد
اب مؤمنین کی مثبت صفات کی طرف آیئے۔ ان کے متعلق سورۂ المومنون میں کہا گیا ہے کہ: ہُمْ لِأَمَانَاتِہِمْ وَعَہْدِہِمْ رَاعُونَ-(23:8) یہ لوگ امانات کی حفاظت کرتے ہیں اور عہد کی پابندی۔ حفظِ امانت کے معنی یہی نہیں کہ جو چیز تمہارے پاس بطورِ امانت رکھی جائے اسے بحفاظت واپس کر دو۔ ہر وہ بات جسے کسی نے‘ تم پر بھروسہ کر کے تمہارے سپرد کی ہے وہ امانت میں داخل ہے۔ خواہ وہ اس کا کوئی راز ہو یا اس کی عزت و آبرو کی رکھوالی۔ جہاں تک عہد‘ معاہدہ کا تعلق ہے‘ اس کے معنی یہی نہیں کہ جو اقرار نامہ کسی کو لکھ کر دو اس پر قائم رہو۔ اس میں ہر قسم کا وعدہ بھی شامل ہے جو ایک انسان دوسرے سے کرتا ہے۔ یہ بڑی اہم صفت ہے اور ا س کی قرآن کریم نے بڑی شدت سے تاکید کی ہے۔ أَوْفُواْ بِالْعُقُودِ-(5:1) میں ہر قسم کا عہد اور وعدہ آجاتا ہے۔ آپ غور کیجئے کہ وعدہ کے معنی کیا ہیں۔ آپ کسی سے کہتے ہیں کہ ’’بھائی! اس وقت مجھے جانے دو۔ میں ٹھیک چار بجے آجاؤں گا‘‘۔ تو وہ آپ پر اعتماد کر کے آپ کی بات مان لیتا ہے۔ اگر آپ اپنے وعدے کے مطابق آتے نہیں تو آپ اپنا اعتماد کھو دیتے ہیں۔۔۔ اور یہ ظاہر ہے کہ دنیا میں بدترین قسم کا معاشرہ وہ ہوتا ہے جس میں کسی کو دوسرے پر اعتماد اور بھروسہ نہ ہو۔ ایسے معاشرہ میں ہر شخص عدم اطمینان کے جہنم میں رہتا ہے۔ بعض لوگ تو وعدہ کرتے ہی منافقت سے ہیں یعنی انہوں نے اسی وقت فیصلہ کر لیا ہوتا ہے کہ انہوں نے وعدہ پورا نہیں کرنا لیکن اکثر جذباتی (یا Impulsive) لوگ‘ شدتِ جذبات میں آگے بڑھ کر ایک وعدہ کر لیتے ہیں اور اس کے بعد‘ جب جذبات کی شدت ماند پڑ جاتی ہے تو اس وعدہ سے پھر جانے کی راہیں تلاش کرتے ہیں۔ اس سے جو نقصان دوسروں کو پہنچتا ہے اسے تو چھوڑیئے۔ خود ایسے لوگوں کی سوسائٹی میں کوئی عزت نہیں رہتی۔ مومنؔ کی یہ حالت نہیں ہوتی۔ وہ وعدہ کرتا ہے تو سوچ سمجھ کر اور جب وعدہ کر لیتا ہے تو پھر کچھ بھی کیوں نہ ہو۔ اسے پورا کرتا ہے۔
جذباتی لوگ
بَلَی مَنْ أَوْفَی بِعَہْدِہِ وَاتَّقَی فَإِنَّ اللّہَ یُحِبُّ الْمُتَّقِیْن-(3:76) جو اپنے وعدے کو پورا کرتا ہے اور یوں قانونِ خداوندی کی پاسداری کرتا ہے تو یہی لوگ ہیں جو خدا کے نزدیک پسندیدہ اطوار و کردار کے مالک ہوتے ہیں لہٰذا‘ وعدہ شکنی‘ خواہ وہ شروع ہی میں بدنیتی کا نتیجہ ہو۔ یا بعد میں پھر جانے کی وجہ سے‘ اس فرد کو ذلیل اور معاشرہ کو تباہ کر دیتی ہے۔ اسی لئے قرآن نے تاکیداً کہا ہے کہ: أَوْفُواْ بِالْعَہْدِ إِنَّ الْعَہْدَ کَانَ مَسْءُوْلاً-(17:34) اپنے وعدہ کو ہمیشہ پورا کرو۔ اس کے متعلق تم سے پوچھا جائے گا اور یہ پُرسش تو اسی و قت شروع ہو جاتی ہے جب وعدہ خلافی کرنے والے کو ہر نگاہِ حقارت اور نفرت سے دیکھنے لگتی ہے‘ خواہ وہ بظاہر کتنا ہی معتبر اور معزز کیوں نہ ہو۔
عَدل کے علمبردار
اب آگے بڑھئے۔ قرآنِ کریم نے مؤمنین کے متعلق کہا ہے کہ وہ قَآءِمَاً بِالْقِسْطِ(3:17) ہوتے ہیں یعنی ہمیشہ انصاف پر ڈٹ کر کھڑے رہنے والے۔ عدل و انصاف وہ بنیاد ہے‘ جس پر انسانی سیرت کی عمارت استوار ہوتی ہے اس لئے قرآن کریم اس باب میں مؤمنین کے سامنے ایسا بلند معیار رکھتا ہے جس پر پورا اترنے سے معاشرہ فی الواقعہ جنت میں تبدیل ہو جاتا ہے۔ وہ کہتا ہے۔۔۔ یَا أَیُّہَا الَّذِیْنَ آمَنُواْ کُونُواْ قَوَّامِیْنَ بِالْقِسْطِ۔۔۔ اے ایمان والو! دنیا میں عدل و انصاف کے علمبردار بن کر رہو۔ اس باب میں کسی جذبے کو اپنے اوپر اثر انداز نہ ہونے دو۔ یہ کچھ خالصتہً لِللّٰہ کرو۔ اس مقصد کے لئے شہادت دینی پڑے تو نہ مدعی کی طرف سے گواہ بن کر جاؤ نہ مدعا علیہ کی طرف سے۔ بلکہ شُہَدَاء لِلّہِ۔ تم خدا کی طرف سے گواہ بن کر جاؤ اور سچی سچی گواہی دو۔ وَلَوْ عَلَی أَنفُسِکُمْ۔ خواہ وہ تمہارے اپنے ہی خلاف کیوں نہ جائے۔ أَوِ الْوَالِدَیْْنِ۔ یا تمہارے والدین کے خلاف جائے۔ وَالأَقْرَبِیْنَ۔ یا تمہارے دیگر رشتہ داروں کے خلاف۔۔۔ إِن یَکُنْ غَنِیّاً أَوْ فَقَیْراً۔ وہ دولت مند ہو یا غریب ہو‘ اس کا بھی تم پر کوئی اثر نہیں پڑنا چاہئے۔ اس لئے کہ فَاللّہُ أَوْلَی بِہِمَا۔ اللہ کا حق ان دونوں سے زیادہ ہے۔ اس لئے یاد رکھو۔
فَلاَ تَتَّبِعُواْ الْہَوَی أَن تَعْدِلُواْ۔ تم اپنے جذبات کے پیچھے مت چلو۔ اس باب میں‘ اپنے قلبی رجحانات کو اثر انداز مت ہونے دو۔ ایسا نہ ہو کہ تمہارے جذبات تمہیں عدل کرنے سے روک دیں۔ وَإِن تَلْوُواْ۔ نہ ہی تم کوئی پیچدار۔ ذومعنی بات کرو۔ أَوْ تُعْرِضُواْ۔ نہ ہی اس سے اعراض برتو۔ پہلو تہی کرو۔ اس لئے کہ فَإِنَّ اللّہَ کَانَ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ خَبِیْراً-(4:135) جو کچھ تم کرتے ہو‘ خدا کو اس کی خبر ہوتی ہے۔ تم اس سے کچھ نہیں چھپا سکتے۔۔۔ یہ ہے عدل کا وہ معیار جو ایک مومن کے لئے مقرر کیا گیا ہے۔ ذرا سوچئے کہ جو معاشرہ ایسے افراد پر مشتمل ہو گا جو اس صفت کے حامل ہوں‘ اس معاشرہ کی کیفیت کیا ہو گی۔ اس میں یہ نہیں ہو گا کہ اپنی پارٹی کا آدمی ہے تو اس کے لئے میزان اور ہو گی اور دوسری پارٹی کے آدمی کے لئے اور۔۔۔ اس میں‘ تو دشمن سے بھی عدل کیا جائے گا۔
وَلاَ یَجْرِمَنَّکُمْ شَنَآنُ قَوْمٍ عَلَی أَلاَّ تَعْدِلُواْ اعْدِلُواْ-(5:8) دیکھنا! ایسا نہ ہو کہ کسی قوم کی دشمنی تمہیں اس پر آمادہ کر دے کہ تم اس کے ساتھ عدل نہ کرو۔ اس سے بھی عدل کرو۔ أَقْرَبُ لِلتَّقْوَی -(5:8) تقویٰ سے قریب ترین رَوش یہی ہے۔
قانونِ عدل
عدل کے سلسلہ میں اتنا سمجھ لینا ضروری ہے کہ اس کی ایک شکل وہ ہے‘ جسے عدالتی عدل کہا جاتا ہے‘ یعنی لوگوں کے متنازعہ فیہ معاملات کا فیصلہ کرنا۔ اس کے متعلق قرآنِ کریم کا حکم ہے کہ: إِذَا حَکَمْتُم بَیْْنَ النَّاسِ أَن تَحْکُمُواْ بِالْعَدْلِ -(4:58) جب تم لوگوں کے معاملات کا فیصلہ کرو‘ تو ہمیشہ عدل کے ساتھ فیصلہ کرو۔ عدالتی عدل کے معنی یہ ہیں کہ فیصلہ قانون کے مطابق ہو۔ لیکن قرآن کریم اس باب میں ایک قدم آگے جاتا ہے۔ وہ کہتا ہے کہ اگر وہ قانون جس کے مطابق فیصلہ کیا جا رہا ہے‘ خود ہی عدل پر مبنی نہ ہو تو اس کی رو سے کیا ہوا فیصلہ کس طرح مبنی برعدل کہلا سکے گا۔‘‘ لہٰذا‘ جماعتِ مومنین کے متعلق قرآنِ کریم میں ہے: أُمَّۃٌ یَہْدُونَ بِالْحَقِّ وَبِہِ یَعْدِلُونَ-(7:181) یہ جماعت ’’الحق‘‘ کے مطابق لوگوں کی راہنمائی کرتی ہے اور اسی (الحق) کے ساتھ عدل کرتی ہے۔ یعنی ان کے قوانین‘ الحقؔ پر مبنی ہوتے ہیں اور انہی قوانین کے مطابق یہ لوگوں کے فیصلے کرتے ہیں اور یہ ظاہر ہے کہ الحقؔ قرآن کریم ہے کیونکہ خود خدا کا ارشاد ہے کہ: وَمَن لَّمْ یَحْکُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّہُ فَأُوْلَءِکَ ہُمُ الْکَافِرُونَ-(5:44) جو لوگ معاملات کے فیصلے قرآن کے مطابق نہیں کرتے‘ سو وہی کافر ہیں۔
واجب حق
عدل کی دوسری شکل یہ ہے کہ ہر شخص کو اس کا واجب حق ادا کر دیا جائے۔ اس میں کسی قسم کی کمی نہ کی جائے۔ یہ وہ عدل ہے جو ہر شخص کی زندگی میں قدم قدم پر سامنے آتا ہے اور مومن اس میں ہر مقام پر پورا اترتا ہے۔ آپ سوچئے کہ جس معاشرہ میں ہر شخص کو اس کا حق‘ بلا کدو کاوش اور بلا پریشانی و تشویش ملتا چلا جائے۔ اس میں زندگی کس قدر خوشگوار گزرے گی۔ اس سلسلہ میں قرآن کریم نے ایسے جامع الفاظ استعمال کئے ہیں جنہیں پھیلانے سے زندگی کا ہر گوشہ اس کے دائرے کے اندر آجاتا ہے۔ اس نے کہا ہے: وَأَوْفُواْ الْکَیْْلَ وَالْمِیْزَانَ بِالْقِسْطِ-(6:152) ’’ماپ اور تول کو عدل و انصاف کے ساتھ پورا کرو۔‘‘ ماپ اور تول میں ہر قسم کے واجبات آجاتے ہیں۔
احسان
لیکن قرآنِ کریم عدل سے بھی ایک قدم آگے بڑھتا ہے اور اس کے ساتھ احسان کا حکم دیتا ہے جیسا کہ اوپر بتایا گیا ہے‘ عدل کے معنی ہیں جو کچھ کسی کا واجب ہے وہ ادا کر دینا لیکن اگر اس سے دوسرے کی ضرورت پوری نہ ہوتی ہو تو قرآن کی تاکید یہ ہے کہ اسے‘ اس کے واجب سے زیادہ دے کر‘ اس کی کمی کو پورا کر دیا جائے۔ اسے احسان کہتے ہیں جس کے معنی ہیں کسی کے بگڑتے ہوئے توازن کو برقرار کر دینا اور اس طرح معاشرہ میں حسن پیدا کر دینا۔
والدین سے احسان
اس ’’احسان‘‘ کی ابتداء اپنے گردوپیش سے کی جائے گی اور اس میں سرِفہرست والدین کا نام آئے گا۔ وَبِالْوَالِدَیْْنِ إِحْسَاناً-(4:36) آپ حیوانات پر غور کیجئے۔ آپ دیکھیں گے کہ وہاں‘ ماں باپ اپنے بچے کی پرورش تو کرتے ہیں لیکن بچے اپنے والدین کو پوچھتے تک نہیں۔ وہ انہیں جانتے پہچانتے بھی نہیں۔ یہ خصوصیت انسانی زندگی میں آکر پیدا ہوتی ہے کہ جب ماں باپ بوڑھے ہو جائیں تو اولاد ان کی خبرگیری کرے۔ والدینؔ کے بعد‘ دوسرے لوگ بھی اسی زمرے میں شامل ہوتے چلے جاتے ہیں۔ چنانچہ ارشاد ہے: وَبِذِیْ الْقُرْبَی وَالْیَتَامَی وَالْمَسَاکِیْنِ۔ یہی احسان دیگر اقربا سے بھی کرو اور ان لوگوں سے بھی جو معاشرہ میں کسی وجہ سے تنہا رہ گئے ہوں یا جو حرکت کے قابل نہ رہیں اور ان کا چلتا ہوا کاروبار رک جائے۔ وَالْجَارِ ذِیْ الْقُرْبَی وَالْجَارِ الْجُنُبِ وَالصَّاحِبِ بِالجَنبِ وَابْنِ السَّبِیْلِ۔ نیز ہمسایہ سے بھی‘ خواہ وہ قریب کا ہو یا دور کا۔ اپنوں میں سے ہو یا بیگانوں میں سے۔ نیز اپنے رفقائے کار کے ساتھ بھی اور ان مسافروں کے ساتھ بھی جن کے پاس زادِ راہ نہ رہا ہو‘ یا وہ ویسے ہی تمہارے حسنِ سلوک کے متمنی ہوں۔ وَمَا مَلَکَتْ أَیْْمَانُکُمْ-(4:36) اور ان لوگوں کے ساتھ بھی جو تمہارے ماتحت کام کریں۔ ان سب کے ساتھ عدل کرو۔ ان کے حق میں کسی قسم کی کمی نہ کرو اور اگر اس کے باوجود‘ ان میں کوئی کمی رہ جائے تو اس کمی کو بھی پورا کرو۔ اور اس کا دل میں خیال تک بھی نہ لاؤ کہ تم نے ان پر کوئی احسان کیا ہے‘ چہ جائیکہ اس احسان کی وجہ سے تم ان پر بارگراں بن جاؤ اور انہیں خواہ مخواہ قلبی اور ذہنی اذیت پہنچاتے رہو۔ اس لئے کہ مومنین کا شعار یہ ہے کہ: لاَ یُتْبِعُونَ مَا أَنفَقُواُ مَنّاً وَلاَ أَذًی-(2:262) وہ کسی کو کچھ دے کر اس کے سر پر سوار نہیں ہو جاتے۔ سر پر سوار ہونا تو ایک طرف‘ وہ ان سے کہہ دیتے ہیں کہ:
لَا نُرِیْدُ مِنکُمْ جَزَاء وَلَا شُکُوراً-(76:9) ہم تم سے‘ اس کا بدلہ تو ایک طرف‘ شکریہ تک کے بھی خواہاں نہیں ہیں۔ اس لئے کہ: ہَلْ جَزَاء الْإِحْسَانِ إِلَّا الْإِحْسَانُ-(55:60) اس کمی کی وجہ سے تمہارا توازن بگڑ رہا تھا۔ ہم نے اس توازن کو برقرار کر دیا۔ بس یہی اس کا بدلہ ہے۔ دوسروں کی کمی کو پورا کرنے کے سلسلہ میں وہ اس قدر آگے بڑھ جاتے ہیں کہ: وَیُؤْثِرُونَ عَلَی أَنفُسِہِمْ وَلَوْ کَانَ بِہِمْ خَصَاصَۃٌ-(59:9) وہ خود تنگی میں گزارہ کر لیتے ہیں اور دوسروں کی ضرورت کو اپنی ضرورت پر ترجیح دیتے ہیں۔
مقروض سے نرمی
یہ تو احسانؔ کی صورت ہے جس میں کچھ واپس لینے کا سوال پیدا نہیں ہوتا۔ وہ اگر کسی کو قرض دیتے ہیں اور دیکھتے ہیں کہ مقروض کی حالت سقیم ہے تو اس پر سختی نہیں کرتے بلکہ اسے اس وقت تک کی مہلت دیتے ہیں جب تک وہ آسانی سے قرض ادا کر دینے کے قابل نہ ہو جائے اور اگر ایسا ہو کہ وہ قرضہ ادا کرنے کے قابل ہی نہیں رہا تو قرض معاف کر دیتے ہیں۔ وَإِن کَانَ ذُو عُسْرَۃٍ فَنَظِرَۃٌ إِلَی مَیْْسَرَۃٍ وَأَن تَصَدَّقُواْ خَیْْرٌ لَّکُمْ إِن کُنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ -(2:280)
ناحق مال نہ کھاؤ
ظاہر ہے کہ جن لوگوں کی یہ خصوصیات ہوں وہ کسی کا مال ناحق کس طرح کھا جائیں گے اور جائز اور ناجائز کی تمیز کو کس طرح مٹا دیں گے؟ انہیں اس کی تاکید کی گئی ہے کہ: لاَ تَأْکُلُواْ أَمْوَالَکُم بَیْْنَکُم بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتُدْلُواْ بِہَا إِلَی الْحُکَّامِ لِتَأْکُلُواْ فَرِیْقاً مِّنْ أَمْوَالِ النَّاسِ بِالإِثْمِ وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ -(2:188) آپس میں ایک دوسرے کا مال ناجائز طریق پر مت کھاؤ۔ یا اگر معاملہ عدالت تک پہنچ چکا ہے تو ایسا نہ کرو کہ حکام کو رشوت دے کر ایسا فیصلہ کرا لو جس سے دوسروں کا کُچھ مال ناجائز طور پر تمہیں مل جائے حالانکہ تم جانتے ہو کہ جو مال اس طرح حاصل کیا جائے اس کا نتیجہ کیا ہوتا ہے۔
***
حفاظتِ عصمت
یہاں تک ضبطِ نفس کی ان حدود کا ذکر آیا ہے جن کا تعلق مال و دولت سے ہے۔ اس کے بعد جنسی جذبات میں ضبط و تحدید کی صورت سامنے آتی ہے۔ اس باب میں مومن انتہائی پاکبازی کا مظہر ہوتے ہیں۔ ہُمْ لِفُرُوجِہِمْ حَافِظُونَ-(23:5) وہ اپنی عصمت کی حفاظت کرتے ہیں۔ ہمارے ہاں عصمت و عفت کا لفظ صرف عورت کے لئے استعمال ہوتا ہے لیکن قرآن کریم اس باب میں‘ مرد اور عورت میں کوئی فرق نہیں کرتا۔ وہ مردوں سے بھی اسی طرح عصمت کا مطالبہ کرتا ہے جس طرح عورتوں سے۔ وہ کہتا ہے کہ مومنین‘ زنا تو خیر بہت دور کی بات ہے‘ فواحش (یعنی عام بے حیائی کی باتوں) کے بھی قریب تک نہیں پھٹکتے‘ خواہ وہ کھلی ہوئی بے حیائی ہو یا پوشیدہ وَلاَ تَقْرَبُواْ الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَہَرَ مِنْہَا وَمَا بَطَنَ -(6:151) خود بھی بچتے ہیں اور اس قسم کی تدابیر اختیار کرتے ہیں جن سے اس قسم کی باتیں معاشرہ میں پھیلنے نہ پائیں -(24:19) وہ اپنی نگاہوں کو کبھی بے باک نہیں ہونے دیتے کیونکہ ان سے کہا گیا ہے کہ: یَغُضُّوا مِنْ أَبْصَارِہِمْ (24:30)۔ اپنی نگاہوں کو بے باک مت ہونے دو۔ وہ جنسی بے راہ روی کے خیال تک کو اپنے دل میں نہیں آتے دیتے‘ اس لئے کہ ان کا ایمان ہے کہ: یَعْلَمُ خَاءِنَۃَ الْأَعْیُنِ وَمَا تُخْفِیْ الصُّدُورُ-(40:19) خدا‘ نگاہ کی خیانت اور دل میں پوشیدہ خیالات تک سے واقف ہے۔
خیالات کی پاکیزگی
علاوہ بریں‘ عام جذبات میں بھی ان کی کیفیت یہ ہوتی ہے کہ وہ انہیں کبھی بدلگام اور حدود فراموش نہیں ہوتے دیتے۔ اگر کبھی ان میں شدت پیدا بھی ہو تو وہ (تخریب کی بجائے) ان کا رخ تعمیری کاموں کی طرف منتقل کر دیتے ہیں۔ اسی لئے مومنین کی خصوصیت کَاظِمِیْنَ الْغَیْْظَ-(3:134) بتائی گئی ہے۔ اس کے معنی ’’غصے کو دبا لینے والے‘‘ نہیں۔ اس کے معنی ہیں‘ اس زائد قوت کو تعمیری کاموں کی طرف منتقل کر دینے والے۔
جذبات پر قابو
اس کے بعد ہے: وَالْعَافِیْنَ عَنِ النَّاسِ -(3:134) اس کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ وہ ایسے مقامات پر یہ نہیں دیکھتے کہ دوسرے ان کے ساتھ کیا برتاؤ کرتے ہیں (تاکہ وہ بھی ویسا ہی برتاؤ ان کے ساتھ کریں)۔ وہ ان کے برتاؤ سے قطع نظر کر کے‘ دیکھتے یہ ہیں کہ انہیں قوانینِ خداوندی کے مطابق کیا کرنا چاہئے۔ ان کے جذبات کبھی سرکشی اختیار نہیں کرتے۔ وہ انہیں ہمیشہ اپنے کنٹرول میں رکھتے ہیں۔ اسی حقیقت کو قرآن نے ان الفاظ میں بیان کیا ہے کہ شیطان ان پر کبھی غلبہ نہیں پا سکتا۔ إِنَّ عِبَادِیْ لَیْْسَ لَکَ عَلَیْْہِمْ سُلْطَانٌ -(15:42) حتیٰ کہ اگر کبھی اس قسم کا کوئی خیال یونہی گھومتے پھرتے ان کے دل میں آجائے تو وہ فوراً قانونِ خداوندی کو اپنے سامنے لے آتے ہیں اور اس سے یوں ہوتا ہے گویا ایک دم روشنی ان کے سامنے آگئی اور انہوں نے صحیح راستہ اختیار کر لیا۔ إِنَّ الَّذِیْنَ اتَّقَواْ إِذَا مَسَّہُمْ طَاءِفٌ مِّنَ الشَّیْْطَانِ تَذَکَّرُواْ فَإِذَا ہُم مُّبْصِرُونَ-(7:201) زندگی کے ہر شعبے میں‘ قانونِ خداوندی کو اپنے سامنے رکھنا‘ یہ ہے وہ سب سے بڑی قوت جس سے مومنین‘ غلط باتوں کے ارتکاب سے مجتنب رہتے ہیں۔ اس کو ذکر اللہ کہتے ہیں۔
خشیّتِ قلبی
ان قوانین کی خلاف ورزی سے جو تباہیاں آتی ہیں‘ ان کا احساس انہیں کپکپا دیتا ہے إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ الَّذِیْنَ إِذَا ذُکِرَ اللّہُ وَجِلَتْ قُلُوبُہُمْ مومنین کی خصوصیت یہ ہے کہ جب قوانینِ خداوندی کا مجموعی تصور ان کے سامنے آتا ہے تو ان کی خلاف ورزی سے جو تباہی آتی ہے اس کے احساس سے ان کا دل کانپ اٹھتا ہے۔ وَإِذَا تُلِیَتْ عَلَیْْہِمْ آیَاتُہُ زَادَتْہُمْ إِیْمَاناً وَعَلَی رَبِّہِمْ یَتَوَکَّلُونَ-(8:2) اور جب ان قوانین کی تفاصیل ان کے سامنے آتی ہیں تو ان پر عمل پیرا ہونے کے خوشگوار نتائج کے تصور سے ان کا ایمان بڑھ جاتا ہے اور وہ ان قوانین کی محکمیت پر پورا پورا اعتماد رکھتے ہیں اور یہی وہ‘ قوانینِ خداوندی پر اعتمادِ کلی اور یقین کامل ہے جس سے انہیں استقامت حاصل ہوتی ہے اور ان کے پاؤں میں کبھی لغزش نہیں آتی۔ اسی لئے انہیں الصَّابِرِیْنَ وَالصَّادِقِیْنَ وَالْقَانِتِیْنَ -(3:17) کہہ کر پکارا گیا ہے۔ یعنی مستقل مزاج۔ مصافِ زندگی میں جم کر کھڑے ہونے والے۔ اپنے دعویٰ ایمان کو اپنے اعمال سے سچ کر دکھانے والے اور قوانین خداوندی کا پورا پورا اتباع کرنے والے۔ اپنی تمام توانائیوں کو ان کے مطابق صرف کرنے والے۔
***
صاحبانِ عقل و بصیرت
جذبات کو کنٹرول میں رکھنے کا نتیجہ یہ ہے کہ یہ لوگ کبھی عقل و فکر سے عاری نہیں ہوتے۔ اپنا دماغی توازن کبھی نہیں کھوتے۔ ہر معاملہ پر نہایت ٹھنڈے دل سے غور و فکر کر کے صحیح نتیجے پر پہنچتے ہیں۔ اسی لئے قرآن نے انہیں أُوْلُواْ الأَلْبَابِ -(13:19)کہہ کر پکارا ہے یعنی وہ صاحبان عقل و بصیرت یَتَفَکَّرُونَ فِیْ خَلْقِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِجو کائنات کی تخلیق پر غور و فکر کے بعد اس نتیجے پر پہنچتے ہیں کہ رَبَّنَا مَا خَلَقْتَ ہَذا بَاطِلاً -(3:190) اے ہمارے نشوونما دینے والے! تو نے اس عظیم کارگۂ کائنات کو بے مقصد پیدا نہیں کیا۔ ان کے عقل و فکر سے کام لینے کی کیفیت یہ ہے کہ إِذَا ذُکِّرُوا بِآیَاتِ رَبِّہِمْ لَمْ یَخِرُّوا عَلَیْْہَا صُمّاً وَعُمْیَاناً -(25:73) اور تو اور‘ جب ان کے سامنے ان کے رب کے احکام و قوانین پیش کئے جاتے ہیں تو وہ ان پر بھی بہرے اور اندھے بن کر نہیں گر پڑتے۔ انہیں غور و فکر سے قبول کرتے‘ اور علم و بصیرت کی رو سے ان پر عمل کرتے ہیں۔ اس طرح وحئ خداوندی پر ایمان لاتے ہیں اور پھر اپنے جذبات کو اس وحی کے تابع رکھتے ہیں‘ کیونکہ قرآن کا ارشاد ہے کہ وَمَنْ أَضَلُّ مِمَّنِ اتَّبَعَ ہَوَاہُ بِغَیْْرِ ہُدًی مِّنَ اللَّہِ -(28:50) ’’اس سے بڑھ کر راہ گم کردہ اور کون ہو سکتا ہے جو خدا کی راہنمائی کے بغیر اپنے جذبات کا اتباع کرتا ہے۔۔۔ یوں‘ وحئ خداوندی‘ علم و عقل اور جذبات کے حسین امتزاج سے‘ مرد مومن کا قالب تیار ہوتا ہے۔
دلائل و براہین
اقبالؔ ؒ کے الفاظ میں
بتاؤں تجھ کو مسلماں کی زندگی کیا ہے
یہ ہے نہایت اندیشہ و کمالِ جنوں
عناصر اس کے ہیں‘ روح القدس کا ذوقِ جمال
عجم کا حسنِ طبیعت‘ عرب کا سوز دروں
اور ظاہر ہے کہ جب مومنین خود کسی بات کو سوچے سمجھے بغیر نہ قبول کرتے ہیں نہ تسلیم‘ تو وہ دوسروں سے اپنی بات کس طرح دھاندلی سے منوا سکتے ہیں۔ وہ اپنے ہر دعوے کو دلیل و برہان کی رو سے پیش کرتے اور علم و بصیرت کی رو سے منواتے ہیں۔ نبی اکرمﷺ سے کہا گیا کہ آپ اعلان کر دیجئے کہ: أَدْعُو إِلَی اللّہِ عَلَی بَصِیْرَۃٍ أَنَاْ وَمَنِ اتَّبَعَنِیْ -(12:108) میں تمہیں جو خدا کی طرف دعوت دیتا ہوں تو علیٰ وجہ البصیرت ایسا کرتا ہوں۔ میں بھی یہی کرتا ہوں اور میرے متبعین بھی ایسا ہی کریں گے۔ ہماری دعوت علم و بصیرت پر مبنی ہو گی۔ اسی لئے جماعتِ مومنین سے تاکید کی گئی کہ: ادْعُ إِلِی سَبِیْلِ رَبِّکَ بِالْحِکْمَۃِ وَالْمَوْعِظَۃِ الْحَسَنَۃِ وَجَادِلْہُم بِالَّتِیْ ہِیَ أَحْسَنُ -(16:125) تم لوگوں کو‘ اپنے رب کے راستے کی طرف اس انداز سے دعوت دو کہ ان کے دل اور دماغ دونوں کی تسکین ہو جائے۔ وہ اسے ذہن اور قلب کی پوری رضامندی کے ساتھ مانیں اور جو اعتراضات وہ پیش کریں ان کا جواب نہایت حسن کارانہ انداز سے دو۔ یوں ہی اندھا دھند مت جھگڑتے چلے جاؤ۔ فرعون جیسے سرکش اور متکبر کو بھی پہلے نرمی اور آشتی سے سمجھانے کی کوشش کرو۔ فَقُولَا لَہُ قَوْلاً لَّیِّناً لَّعَلَّہُ یَتَذَکَّرُ أَوْ یَخْشَی-(20:44) ہو سکتا ہے کہ اس طرح بات اس کی سمجھ میں آجائے اور وہ اپنی سرکشی کے تباہ کن نتائج سے ڈر جائے لیکن اگر واسطہ ایسے لوگوں سے پڑ جائے جو اپنی ضد اور جہالت پر اڑے رہنا چاہیں اور کسی بات پر دھیان دینے کی کوشش ہی نہ کریں‘ تو ان سے اعراض برتو۔ وَأَعْرِضْ عَنِ الْجَاہِلِیْن-(7:199) لیکن اس کے باوجود ایسے موقعہ کی تلاش میں رہو کہ وہ بات سننے پر آمادہ ہوں تو ان تک پھر خدا کا پیغام پہنچاؤ۔ وَذَکِّرْ بِہِ أَن تُبْسَلَ نَفْسٌ بِمَا کَسَبَتْ-(6:70) تاکہ وہ اپنی غلط روی کے باعث قرآن کی راہنمائی سے محروم نہ رہنے پائیں۔
اپنی اصلاح
لیکن دوسروں کو نصیحت کرنے سے پہلے ضروری ہے کہ کہنے والا خود اپنی اصلاح کرے۔ جماعتِ مومنین کا یہی شیوہ ہوتا ہے۔ وہ پہلے خود عمل کرتے ہیں اور پھر دوسروں کو اس کی دعوت دیتے ہیں۔ اس لئے کہ ان کے خدا کا ارشاد ہے کہ: لِمَ تَقُولُونَ مَا لَا تَفْعَلُونَ Oکَبُرَ مَقْتاً عِندَ اللَّہِ أَن تَقُولُوا مَا لَا تَفْعَلُونَ -(61:2-3) تم وہ بات کیوں کہتے ہو جسے خود کر کے نہیں دکھاتے۔ اللہ کے نزدیک یہ انداز بڑا ناپسندیدہ ہے کہ تمہارے قول اور فعل میں تضاد ہو۔ ایسی نصیحت جس پر انسان خود عمل نہ کرے‘ محض شاعری بن کر رہ جاتی ہے۔ اور اس قسم کی روش مومن کا شعارِ زندگی نہیں ہو سکتی۔
شاعری مت کرو
اس لئے قرآن میں آیا ہے کہ: وَمَا عَلَّمْنَاہُ الشِّعْرَ وَمَا یَنبَغِیْ لَہُ -(36:69) ہم نے اپنے رسول کو شاعری نہیں سکھائی۔ شاعری اس کے شایانِ شان ہی نہ تھی اور یہی وجہ ہے کہ قرآن نے شاعر اور مومن کو ایک دوسرے کی ضد بتایا ہے۔ چنانچہ سورۂ شعراء میں‘ شاعروں کی یہ خصوصیات بتائی ہیں کہ وہ اپنے تصورات کی دنیا میں مارے مارے پھرتے ہیں۔ کبھی اس وادی میں۔ کبھی اس بیابان میں۔ ایک ایسے اونٹ کی طرح جسے جھوٹی پیاس اِدھر اُدھر لئے پھرے اور ان کی ساری عمر باتیں کرنے میں گزر جاتی ہے اور وہ عمل کے قریب تک نہیں پھٹکتے۔ ان خصوصیات کا ذکر کرنے کے بعد کہا: إِلَّا الَّذِیْنَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ -(26:227) لیکن مومنین اس قسم کے نہیں ہوتے۔ وہ ابدی صداقتوں پر ایمان رکھتے ہیں اور ان کے مطابق کام کر کے دکھاتے ہیں۔ واضح رہے کہ قرآنِ کریم نے جب شاعری کی مذمت کی ہے تو اس کے یہ معنی نہیں کہ اگر کوئی شخص اپنی بات کلامِ موزوں میں پیش کرے تو وہ قابلِ مذمت ہے اور اگر وہ اسے نثر میں بیان کرے تو قرآن کی رُو سے مستحسن۔ بات نثر اور نظم کی نہیں بات اس ذہنیت کی ہے جسے قرآن نے ’’شاعری‘‘ سے تعبیر کیا ہے۔ اس ذہنیت کے معنی یہ ہیں کہ انسان کے سامنے زندگی کا کوئی متعین مقصد اور نصب العین نہ ہو۔ وہ اپنے جذبات کی رو میں جو جی میں آئے کہتا چلا جائے اور جو کچھ کہے اس میں بھی تصنع اور بناوٹ ہو اور دوسرے یہ کہ وہ ساری عمر باتیں کرتا رہے ان پر عمل کبھی نہ کرے۔ ذہنیت اس کی یہ ہو اور وہ اسے نوائے سروش سے تعبیر کرے اپنے آپ کو صاحبِ وجدان قرار دے۔ یہ ہے وہ ذہنیت جسے مومن کی ذہنیت کی ضد قرار دیا گیا ہے‘ خواہ اس ذہنیت کا حامل‘ نثر میں بات کرے یا نظم میں۔ مومن کے سامنے ایک متعین نصب العین حیات ہوتا ہے اور وہ جو کچھ کہتا ہے اس پر عمل بھی کرتا ہے۔
چھوٹی موٹی لغزشیں
اس میں شبہ نہیں کہ چھوٹی موٹی لغزشیں مومنین سے بھی ہو جاتی ہیں۔ یہ معصوم عن الخطاء نہیں ہوتے۔لیکن یہ لغزشیں ان سے سہو و خطا کی بناء پر نادانستہ سرزد ہوتی ہیں جن سے وہ فوراً تائب ہو جاتے ہیں۔ وہ بنیادی غلط روی سے‘ جسے قرآن نے کبائر سے تعبیر کیا ہے‘ ہمیشہ مجتنب رہتے ہیں۔ الَّذِیْنَ یَجْتَنِبُونَ کَبَاءِرَ الْإِثْمِ وَالْفَوَاحِشَ إِلَّا اللَّمَمَ -(53:32) مومن وہ ہیں جو بنیادی غلط کاریوں اور بے حیائی کی باتوں سے ہمیشہ بچتے ہیں۔ ہاں! یہ ہو سکتا ہے کہ ان سے کبھی کبھار‘ نادانستہ کوئی چھوٹی موٹی لغزش ہو جائے۔ لہٰذا مومن کا انداز یہ ہے کہ وہ جس بات کی دوسروں کو نصیحت کرتا ہے اس پر پہلے خود عمل کرتا ہے۔
اعتراض کی بجائے اصلاح
لیکن اس کے یہ معنی نہیں کہ اگر کوئی شخص کسی کو اس کی غلطی پر ٹوکے تو وہ اسے یہ کہہ کر جھٹک دے کہ میاں! پہلے اپنی اصلاح تو کرو۔ پھر دوسروں سے کہنا۔۔۔ نہیں! مومن کا یہ شعار نہیں۔ وہ کہنے والے کی بات کو توجہ سے سنتا ہے۔ پھر اپنا جائزہ لیتا ہے اور اگر دیکھتا ہے کہ اس میں واقعی وہ کمزوری موجود ہے تو اس کی اصلاح کر لیتا ہے اس لئے کہ وہ اس اصول کو پیشِ نظر رکھتا ہے جسے قرآن نے ان الفاظ میں بیان کیا ہے کہ: عَلَیْْکُمْ أَنفُسَکُمْ لاَ یَضُرُّکُم مَّن ضَلَّ إِذَا اہْتَدَیْْتُمْ -(5:105) ’’تم اپنی اصلاح کی فکر کرو۔ اگر تم صحیح راستے پر جا رہے ہو‘ تو غلط راستے پر چلنے والا تمہیں کچھ نقصان نہیں پہنچا سکتا۔‘‘ اس لئے جو شخص تمہاری غلط روی پر ٹوکتا ہے اس کی بات سننے سے یہ کہہ کر انکار نہ کر دو کہ جب تم خود اس پر عمل نہیں کرتے تو تمہیں دوسروں کو نصیحت کرنے کا کیا حق ہے؟ تمہیں تمہاری غلط روی کا نقصان پہنچے گا۔ اس کی غلط روی کا نہیں۔ اس لئے کہ: وَلاَ تَکْسِبُ کُلُّ نَفْسٍ إِلاَّ عَلَیْْہَا وَلاَ تَزِرُ وَازِرَۃٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَی -(6:164) ہر شخص اپنی غلط روی کا خمیازہ خود بھگتے گا۔ کوئی بوجھ اٹھانے والا‘ کسی دوسرے کا بوجھ نہیں اٹھائے گا۔
اپنی پاکبازی کی دھونس نہ جماؤ
لیکن اپنی اصلاح کرنے کے بعد‘ مومن کی یہ کیفیت نہیں ہوتی کہ وہ ہر ایک پر اپنی نیکیوں کی دھونس جماتا رہتا ہے اور معاشرہ میں بڑا پاکباز بن کر‘ اپنے آپ کو فریب دیتا اور دوسروں پر رعب گانٹھتا ہے۔ قطعاً نہیں۔ اس لئے کہ اس کے سامنے یہ اصول ہوتا ہے کہ: فَلَا تُزَکُّوا أَنفُسَکُمْ ہُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِمَنِ اتَّقَی -(53:32) یونہی اپنے آپ کو پاکباز نہ ٹھہراتے پھرو۔ اس کا فیصلہ میزانِ خداوندی کی رو سے ہوتا ہے کہ تم میں سے کون تقویٰ شعار ہے۔ مومن کا تو شعار یہ ہے کہ اس میں جس قدر زیادہ خوبیاں پیدا ہوتی جاتی ہیں‘ وہ اسی قدر (شاخ ثمردار کی طرح) اور جھکتا چلا جاتا ہے۔ وَعِبَادُ الرَّحْمَنِ الَّذِیْنَ یَمْشُونَ عَلَی الْأَرْضِ ہَوْناً -(25:63) اللہ کے بندوں کا انداز یہ ہے کہ وہ اپنے اندر جھوٹا تکبّر پیدا نہیں ہونے دیتے۔ خوبیوں کا وزن انہیں اور جھکا دیتا ہے۔
***
باطل کا مقابلہ کرتے ہیں
لیکن جھکنے کے معنی یہ نہیں کہ وہ ہر ایک سے دبتے چلے جاتے ہیں۔ قطعاً نہیں۔ وہ جھکتے ہیں حقؔ کے سامنے۔ لیکن جو حقؔ کی مخالفت کرتا اور اس سے سرکشی برتتا ہے‘ اس کا ڈت کر مقابلہ کرتے ہیں یہی وجہ ہے کہ جہاں محمد رسول اللہ والذین معہ‘ کو رحماء بینھم کہا ہے (یعنی آپس میں‘ ایک دوسرے کے ساتھ‘ بڑی محبت اور نرمی سے سلوک کرنے والے) وہاں انہیں أَشِدَّاء عَلَی الْکُفَّارِ -(48:29) بھی قرار دیا گیا ہے۔ یعنی حقؔ کی مخالفت کرنے والوں کے مقابلہ میں چٹان کی طرح سخت۔ مومن کی کیفیت یہ ہے کہ:
جس سے جگرِ لالہ میں ٹھنڈک ہو وہ شبنم
دریاؤں کے دل جس سے دہل جائیں وہ طوفان
منافق کی مخالفت
خود نبی اکرمﷺ کے متعلق قرآن میں ہے کہ ’’یہ خدا کی رحمت ہے کہ آپﷺ اس قدر نرم دِل واقع ہوئے ہیں۔ اگر آپﷺ سخت مزاج اور سنگدل ہوتے تو آپ کی جماعت کے افراد آپ سے الگ ہو جاتے‘‘ -(3:158) لیکن اس کے ساتھ ہی حضورﷺ سے تاکیداً کہا گیا کہ: یَا أَیُّہَا النَّبِیُّ جَاہِدِ الْکُفَّارَ وَالْمُنَافِقِیْنَ وَاغْلُظْ عَلَیْْہِمْ -(9:73) اے نبیﷺ! جو لوگ حق کی مخالفت کرتے ہیں۔ یا جو تمہارے ساتھ رہتے ہوئے‘ منافقانہ روش اختیار کرتے ہیں‘ ان سے جہاد کرو۔ اور ان کے خلاف شدت اختیار کرو۔ یعنی جو لوگ کھلے بندوں حق کی مخالفت کریں اور سرکشی اختیار کریں۔ یا جو لوگ منافقت برتیں‘ ان کے ساتھ نرمی کا برتاؤ نہیں کیا جائے گا۔ ان کی مخالفت یا منافقت کو سختی سے روکا جائے گا۔ یاد رکھئے! مومنین کے معاشرہ میں‘ منافقین کا وجود۔۔۔ یعنی وہ لوگ جو بظاہر کچھ اور بات کریں اور ان کے دل میں کچھ اور ہو۔۔۔ ایک زہر آلود پھانس ہوتی ہے‘ جس کا علاج نہایت ضروری ہے۔ اس کے لئے اگر نوکِ نشتر کی بھی ضرورت پڑے تو اس میں بھی تامل نہیں کرنا چاہئے۔ مومنؔ کی نرم مزاجی کے یہ معنی نہیں کہ وہ منافقین کے سامنے بھی جھک کر رہتا ہے۔ ایسا کرنا تو خود منافقت اور مداہنت ہو گی۔ وہ منافق سے برملا کہہ دیتا ہے کہ تم منافقت برتتے ہو۔ ہم تمہارے دوست نہیں ہو سکتے۔ اور دوسروں کو بھی اس کی منافقت سے آگاہ کرتا ہے تاکہ وہ کسی کو دھوکا نہ دے سکے۔ اس باب میں قرآن کی تعلیم بڑی واضح اور اس کی تاکید بڑی سخت ہے۔ اس لئے مومنین‘ حق کے مخالفین اور منافقین سے برملا کہہ دیتے ہیں کہ تمہارے ساتھ ہمارا کوئی تعلق نہیں۔ تم ہمارے دوست اور رازدار نہیں ہو سکتے۔ سورۂ توبہ میں ہے:
یَا أَیُّہَا الَّذِیْنَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَتَّخِذُواْ آبَاء کُمْ وَإِخْوَانَکُمْ أَوْلِیَاء إَنِ اسْتَحَبُّواْ الْکُفْرَ عَلَی الإِیْمَانِ وَمَن یَتَوَلَّہُم مِّنکُمْ فَأُوْلَءِکَ ہُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ-(9:23) O
اے جماعتِ مومنین! اگر تمہارے باپ اور بھائی بھی ایمان کے مقابلہ میں کفر کو زیادہ عزیز رکھتے ہیں‘ تو انہیں اپنا دوست مت بناؤ۔ تم میں سے جو کوئی انہیں اپنا دوست رکھے گا تو اسے معلوم ہونا چاہئے کہ اس کا شمار ان لوگوں میں ہو گا جو قوانینِ خداوندی سے سرکشی برتتے ہیں۔
ایمان کے معنی
اتنا ہی نہیں۔ عزیز سے عزیز دوست۔ قریبی سے قریبی رشتہ دار۔ بیوی بچے۔ مال و دولت۔ سامانِ زیست۔ متاعِ حیات۔ غرضیکہ دنیا کی کوئی چیز بھی‘ مومن کے نزدیک‘ ایمان اور اسلامی نظام کے مقابلہ میں عزیز نہیں ہو سکتی۔ یہ سب چیزیں اپنی اپنی جگہ
وجۂ جاذبیت ہیں لیکن جب ان میں اور ایمان کے کسی تقاضے میں تصادم ہو‘ تو ان میں سے کسی شے کو بھی ایمانی تقاضے پر ترجیح نہیں دی جا سکتی۔ یہی ایمان کا تقاضا ہے اور مومنین کا شعار۔ ان کے خدا کا حکم یہ ہے کہ: قُلْ إِن کَانَ آبَاؤُکُمْ وَأَبْنَآؤُکُمْ وَإِخْوَانُکُمْ وَأَزْوَاجُکُمْ وَعَشِیْرَتُکُمْ وَأَمْوَالٌ اقْتَرَفْتُمُوہَا وَتِجَارَۃٌ تَخْشَوْنَ کَسَادَہَا وَمَسَاکِنُ تَرْضَوْنَہَا -(9:24) اے رسولﷺ! ان سے کہہ دو کہ اگر تمہارے ماں باپ۔ بہن بھائی۔ بیوی بچے۔ عزیز رشتہ دار۔ وہ مال و دولت جسے تم اتنی محنت سے کماتے ہو۔ وہ کاروبار جس کے مندا پڑ جانے سے تم خائف رہتے ہو اور وہ محلات (وِلاز) جو تمہیں اس قدر پسند ہیں۔ اگر ان میں سے کوئی چیز أَحَبَّ إِلَیْْکُم مِّنَ اللّہِ وَرَسُولِہِ وَجِہَادٍ فِیْ سَبِیْلِہِ۔ تمہیں خدا اور اس کے رسول اور خدا کی راہ میں جہاد سے زیادہ عزیز ہو گئی۔ فَتَرَبَّصُواْ حَتَّیٰ یَأْتِیَ اللّہُ بِأَمْرِہِ ط۔ تو تم انتظار کرو۔ تاآنکہ خدا کا قانونِ مکافات تمہاری اس روش کا تباہ کن نتیجہ تمہارے سامنے لے آئے۔ تمہاری یہ روش مومنین کی روش نہیں۔ فاسقین کی ہو گی۔ وَاللّہُ لاَ یَہْدِیْ الْقَوْمَ الْفَاسِقِیْنَ-(9:24) اور خدا کا قانون یہ ہے کہ فاسقین پر۔۔۔ یعنی جو صحیح راستہ چھوڑ کر غلط راہوں پر چل نکلیں۔ کبھی کامیابیوں کی راہ کشادہ نہیں ہوتی۔
مال اور جان خُدا کے
مومن کی تو کیفیت یہ ہوتی ہے کہ اس نے اپنا مال اور جان‘ سب خدا کے ہاتھ بیچ دیے ہوتے ہیں۔ جس دن وہ خدا پر ایمان لاتا ہے خدا اس معاہدہ کا اعلان کر دیتا ہے کہ: إِنَّ اللّہَ اشْتَرَی مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِیْنَ أَنفُسَہُمْ وَأَمْوَالَہُم بِأَنَّ لَہُمُ الجَنَّۃَ -(9:111) سُن رکھو کہ اللہ نے مومنین کا جان اور مال‘ جنت کے عوض خرید لیا ہے۔ ان کی کیفیت یہ ہے کہ: یُقَاتِلُونَ فِیْ سَبِیْلِ اللّہِ فَیَقْتُلُونَ وَیُقْتَلُونَ-(9:111) وہ خدا کی راہ میں جنگ کرتے ہیں۔ پھر یا تو فاتح و منصور واپس لوٹتے ہیں اور یا میدانِ جنگ میں جان دے دیتے ہیں۔
مومنین کی صفات
ان مومنین کی صفات یہ ہیں کہ التَّاءِبُونَ۔ سفر حیات میں وہ جہاں دیکھتے ہیں کہ ان کا قدم غلط سمت کی طرف اٹھ گیا ہے‘ وہ وہیں رُک جاتے ہیں اور جہاں سے قدم غلط اٹھا تھا وہاں واپس آکر صحیح راستے پر ہو لیتے ہیں۔ الْعَابِدُونَ۔ وہ قوانینِ خداوندی کی پوری پوری اطاعت کرتے ہیں۔ الْحَامِدُونَ۔ وہ انفس و آفاق کی ہر شے پر غور و فکر کرنے کے بعد علیٰ وجہ البصیرت اس نتیجے پر پہنچتے ہیں کہ کارگہ کائنات کی ایک ایک شے اپنے خالق کی حمد و ستائش کی منہ بولتی تصویر ہے۔ السَّاءِحُونَ۔ وہ اس مقصد کے لئے دنیا بھر کا سفر کرتے ہیں۔ الرَّاکِعُونَ السَّاجِدونَ۔ وہ ہمیشہ قانونِ خداوندی کے سامنے جھکے رہتے ہیں اور دل کے پورے جھکاؤ سے‘ اس کے سامنے سرتسلیم خم کرتے ہیں۔ الآمِرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَالنَّاہُونَ عَنِ الْمُنکَرِ وہ ان باتوں کا حکم دیتے ہیں جنہیں قانونِ خداوندی صحیح تسلیم کرتا ہے اور ان سے روکتے ہیں جنہیں وہ ناپسندیدہ قرار دیتا ہے۔ وَالْحَافِظُونَ لِحُدُودِ اللّہِ۔ وہ ان تمام حدود کی نگہداشت کرتے ہیں جنہیں قانون خداوندی نے متعین کیا ہے‘ اور ان کے اندر رہتے ہوئے صحیح آزادی کی زندگی بسر کرتے ہیں۔ وَبَشِّرِ الْمُؤْمِنِیْنَ -(9:112) یہ ہیں وہ مومن جن کے لئے دنیا اور آخرت کی زندگی کی خوشگواریوں کی بشارتیں ہیں۔
مردوں اور عورتوں دونوں کی خصوصیات
یہ ہیں مختصر الفاظ میں‘ وہ صفات جن کے حامل انسان کو مومنؔ کہا جاتا ہے۔ واضح رہے کہ ان تمام صفات میں مرد اور عورت دونوں شامل ہیں۔ قرآنِ کریم میں مومن کی کوئی ایک خصوصیت بھی ایسی نہیں جو صرف مردوں کے لئے مخصوص ہو اور اس میں عورتیں شامل نہ ہوں۔ اگرچہ خود لفظ ’’مومنین‘‘ کے اندر مرد اور عورتیں ازخود شامل ہیں لیکن قرآنِ کریم نے ایک مقام پر مومن مردوں اور مومن عورتوں کا ذکر اس طرح شانہ بشانہ کیا ہے کہ مصافِ زندگی میں دونوں‘ ایک ہی صف میں‘ ساتھ ساتھ چلتے صاف دکھائی دیتے ہیں۔ سورۂ احزاب کی آیت (33:35) کو دیکھئے۔ اس میں کس وضاحت اور صراحت سے کہا گیا ہے کہ اگر مردوں میں یہ صلاحیت ہے کہ وہ قانونِ خداوندی کی اطاعت سے اپنی تکمیلِ ذات کر سکتے ہیں تو عورتوں میں بھی اس کی صلاحیت ہے (الْمُسْلِمِیْنَ وَالْمُسْلِمَاتِ) اگر مرد اس پارٹی (جماعت) کے رکن بن سکتے ہیں جو خدا کے قانون کے اٹل نتائج پر یقین رکھتے ہوئے امنِ عالم کی ذمہ دار ہو تو عورتیں بھی اس جماعت کی اسی طرح رکن ہو سکتی ہیں (الْمُؤْمِنِیْنَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ) اگر مردوں میں یہ صلاحیت ہے کہ وہ اپنی استعداد کو اس طرح سنبھال کر رکھیں کہ ان کا استعمال صرف قانونِ خداوندی کے مطابق ہو تو یہی صلاحیت عورتوں میں بھی ہے (وَالْقَانِتِیْنَ وَالْقَانِتَاتِ) اگر مرد اپنے دعوٰئے ایمان کو اعمال سے سچ کر دکھانے کے اہل ہیں تو عورتیں بھی اس کے اہل ہیں (وَالصَّادِقِیْنَ وَالصَّادِقَاتِ) اگر مرد ثابت قدم رہ سکتے ہیں تو عورتیں بھی رہ سکتی ہیں (وَالصَّابِرِیْنَ وَالصَّابِرَاتِ) اگر مرد اس خصوصیت کے حامل ہو سکتے ہیں کہ جوں جوں ان کی صلاحیتیں بڑھتی جائیں وہ شاخ ثمردار کی طرح قانونِ خداوندی کی اطاعت میں اور جھکتے چلے جائیں تو یہی خصوصیت عورتوں میں بھی ہے۔ (وَالْخَاشِعِیْنَ وَالْخَاشِعَاتِ) اگر مردوں میں ایثار کا مادہ ہے تو عورتوں میں بھی ہے (وَالْمُتَصَدِّقِیْنَ وَالْمُتَصَدِّقَاتِ) اگر مرد اپنے آپ پر ایسا کنٹرول رکھ سکتے ہیں کہ انہیں جہاں سے روکا جائے وہ رک جائیں‘ تو عورتوں میں بھی اس کی صلاحیت ہے (وَالصَّاءِمِیْنَ وَالصَّاءِمَاتِ)۔ اگر مرد! اپنے جنسی میلانات کو ضوابط کی پابندی میں رکھ سکتے ہیں تو عورتیں بھی ایسا کر سکتی ہیں (وَالْحَافِظِیْنَ فُرُوجَہُمْ وَالْحَافِظَاتِ)۔ اگر مرد قانونِ خداوندی کو شعوری طور پر سمجھنے اور اسے ہر وقت پیشِ نظر رکھنے کے اہل ہیں تو عورتوں میں بھی اس کی اہلیت ہے (وَالذَّاکِرِیْنَ اللَّہَ کَثِیْراً وَالذَّاکِرَاتِ) جب یہ صلاحیتیں دونوں میں موجود ہیں تو ان کے نتائج بھی دونوں کے لئے یکساں طور پر موجود ہونے چاہئیں۔فلہٰذا نظامِ خداوندی میں دونوں کے لئے حفاظت کا سامان اور اجرِ عظیم موجود ہے ( أَعَدَّ اللَّہُ لَہُم مَّغْفِرَۃً وَأَجْراً عَظِیْماً)۔ سورۂ توبہؔ میں مومنین کی جن صفات کا ذکر کیا گیا ہے (اور جنہیں پہلے بیان کیا جا چکا ہے) ان میں ایک صفت السائحون بھی ہے۔ یعنی دنیا کا سفر‘ یا سیر و سیاحت‘ کرنے والے۔ عورت کے متعلق جو نظریہ ہمارے ذہنوں میں راسخ ہے‘ اس کے پیشِ نظر خیال گزر سکتا تھا کہ کم از کم اس صفت میں مومن عورتیں شریک نہیں ہوں گی۔ قرآنِ کریم نے سٰئحٰت -(66:5) کا ذکر خاص طور پر کر کے‘ اس غلط فہمی کا بھی ازالہ کر دیا اور اس کی وضاحت کر دی کہ اس صفت میں بھی مومن عورتیں مردوں کے ساتھ برابر کی شریک ہیں۔
***
اقامتِ صلوٰۃ و ایتائے زکوٰۃ
یہ ہیں وہ صفات و خصائص جن کے حامل افراد سے قرآن وہ امت تشکیل کرتا ہے جو تمام عالم انسانیت میں مرکزی حیثیت رکھتی ہے۔ وَکَذَلِکَ جَعَلْنَاکُمْ أُمَّۃً وَسَطاً لِّتَکُونُواْ شُہَدَاء عَلَی النَّاسِ وَیَکُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَیْْکُمْ شَہِیْداً -(2:143) اس طرح ہم نے تمہیں ایک مرکزی امت بنا دیا۔ تاکہ تم عالم انسانیت کے اعمال کی نگرانی کرو (کہ وہ حق و انصاف پر قائم رہیں) اور تمہارا رسول تمہارے اعمال کی نگرانی کرے کہ تم نظامِ خداوندی کے مطابق چلتے رہو۔ دوسری جگہ ہے: کُنتُمْ خَیْْرَ أُمَّۃٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ۔-(3:110) تم ایک بہترین قوم ہو جسے نوعِ انسان کی بھلائی کے لئے پیدا کیا گیا ہے۔۔۔ یہ بھلائی کیا ہے؟ یہ کہ: تَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَتَنْہَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنکَرِ -(3:110) تم ان باتوں کا حکم دیتے ہو جنہیں وحی خداوندی مستحسن قرار دیتی ہے اور ان سے روکتے ہو جنہیں وہ ناپسندیدہ ٹھہراتی ہے۔ یعنی یہ لوگ (مومنین) پہلے اپنی زندگی وحئ خداوندی کے قالب میں ڈھالتے ہیں۔ پھر ایسا نظام قائم کرتے ہیں جس سے دوسرے لوگ بھی وحی کا اتباع کرتے جائیں۔۔۔ اسے قرآن کی اصطلاح میں نظامِ صلوٰۃ کہتے ہیں اور مقصد اس تگ و تاز سے یہ ہے کہ تمام افرادِ انسانیہ کو وہ ذرائع اور سامان میسر آتا رہے جس سے اس کی طبیعی زندگی اور ذات کی نشوونما ہوتی چلی جائے۔ اسے ایتائے زکوٰۃ کہتے ہیں۔ یعنی نوعِ انسان کو سامانِ نشوونما بہم پہنچانا۔ چنانچہ قرآنِ کریم میں جماعتِ مومنین کے ان ہر دو فرائض (ذمہ داریوں) کو بار بار دہرایا گیا ہے۔۔۔ وَیُقِیْمُونَ الصَّلاَۃَ وَیُؤْتُونَ الزَّکَاۃَ -(9:71) حتیٰ کہ ان کی مملکت اور حکومت کی غرض و غایت بھی یہی بتائی گئی ہے۔ سورۂ حج میں ہے۔ الَّذِیْنَ إِن مَّکَّنَّاہُمْ فِیْ الْأَرْضِ أَقَامُوا الصَّلَاۃَ وَآتَوُا الزَّکَاۃَ وَأَمَرُوا بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَنَہَوْا عَنِ الْمُنکَرِ وَلِلَّہِ عَاقِبَۃُ الْأُمُورِ -(22:41) یہ وہ لوگ ہیں کہ اگر انہیں ملک میں اختیار و اقتدار حاصل ہو گیا تو یہ نظامِ صلوٰۃ قائم کریں گے اور نوعِ انسان کی نشوونما کا انتظام کریں گے۔ ان باتوں کا حکم دیں گے جنہیں قرآن صحیح تسلیم کرتا ہے اور ان سے روکیں گے جنہیں وہ ناپسندیدہ قرار دیتا ہے اور ان کے تمام معاملات منشائے خداوندی کے مطابق طے ہوں گے۔ اس مقام پر‘ ایک نکتہ کی وضاحت ضروری نظر آتی ہے۔ ہمارے ہاں یہ خیال عام کیا جاتا ہے کہ اسلام میں‘ عورتوں کو نظامِ مملکت میں شریک نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ یہ نظریہ قرآنِ کریم کی تعلیم کے خلاف ہے۔ جو آیت ابھی ابھی آپ کے سامنے آئی ہے اس میں اسلامی حکومت کا فریضہ
امر بالمعروف و نہی عن المنکر بتایا گیا ہے اور دوسرے مقام پر اس کی وضاحت کر دی گئی ہے کہ یہ فریضہ مردوں اور عورتوں دونوں کا ہے۔ تنہا مردوں کا نہیں۔ سورۂ توبہ میں ہے۔ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتُ بَعْضُہُمْ أَوْلِیَاء بَعْضٍ یَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَیَنْہَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنکَرِ۔۔۔ -(9:71) مومن مرد اور مومن عورتیں ایک دوسرے کے دوست ہیں۔ ان کا فریضہ امر بالمعروف و نہی عن المنکر ہے۔
شمشیر زن مومن
بہرحال‘ کہا یہ جا رہا تھا کہ جماعتِ مومنین کا فریضہ ہے کہ وہ دنیا سے برائیوں کی روک تھام کا انتظام کریں۔ لیکن یہ روک تھام اندھی قوت کے زور سے نہیں ہو گی۔ وہ بھلائیوں کو اس قدر عام کرتے چلے جائیں گے کہ برائیاں خود بخود اپنی جگہ چھوڑتی جائیں‘ جس طرح تاریکی دور کرنے کا طریقہ یہ ہے کہ روشنی لے آیئے۔ وَیَدْرَؤُونَ بِالْحَسَنَۃِ السَّیِّءَۃَ -(28:54) البتہ جو لوگ نظام حق و صداقت کے خلاف سرکشی پر اتر آئیں اور ظلم و استبداد سے کسی طرح باز ہی نہ آئیں‘ تو خلقِ خدا کو ان کے جور و ستم سے محفوظ رکھنے کے لئے‘ قوت کا استعمال ناگزیر ہو گا۔ یہی وہ مقصد ہے جس کے لئے قرآنِ کریم نے کہا ہے کہ: لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا رُسُلَنَا بِالْبَیِّنَاتِ وَأَنزَلْنَا مَعَہُمُ الْکِتَابَ وَالْمِیْزَانَ لِیَقُومَ النَّاسُ بِالْقِسْطِ ج-(57:25) ہم نے اپنے رسولوں کو واضح دلائل دے کر بھیجا کہ وہ لوگوں کو علم و بصیرت کی رُو سے حق کی دعوت دیں۔ پھر ان کے ساتھ ضوابط قانون بھی نازل کئے کہ دنیا میں عدل قائم رکھا جا سکے۔ لیکن جو لوگ نہ دلائل و براہین کی رو سے مانیں۔ نہ قانونِ عدل و انصاف کی پابندی اور احترام کریں‘ تو ان کے لئے: وَأَنزَلْنَا الْحَدِیْدَ -(57:25) ہم نے شمشیرِ خاراشگاف بھی نازل کی ۔ جماعتِ مومنین‘ شمشیر کا استعمال مظلوم کی حمایت اور ظالم کے ظلم کی مدافعت کے لئے کرتی ہے۔
تعاون
اس مقصد کے لئے اگر دنیا کی کوئی اور قوم کسی قسم کی کوشش کرتی ہے تو جماعتِ مومنین ان کے ساتھ تعاون کرتی ہے۔ لیکن غلط کاموں میں کسی کا ساتھ نہیں دیتی۔ وَتَعَاوَنُواْ عَلَی الْبرِّ وَالتَّقْوَی وَلاَ تَعَاوَنُواْ عَلَی الإِثْمِ وَالْعُدْوَانِ -(5:2) ان کا شعار ہوتا ہے۔ اس لئے کہ وہ جانتے ہیں کہ: مَّن یَشْفَعْ شَفَاعَۃً حَسَنَۃً یَکُن لَّہُ نَصِیْبٌ مِّنْہَا وَمَن یَشْفَعْ شَفَاعَۃً سَیِّءَۃً یَکُن لَّہُ کِفْلٌ مِّنْہَا -(4:85) جو کسی اچھے کام میں دوسرے کے ساتھ کھڑا ہو جاتا ہے تو اس کی خوشگوار نتائج میں اس کا بھی حصہ ہوتا ہے اور جو کسی خراب کام میں کسی کا ساتھ دیتا ہے‘ تو اس کے مضر نتائج کی ذمہ داری اس پر بھی عائد ہوتی ہے۔
ربط باہمی
یہ ہیں وہ بلند مقاصدِ حیات جن کے لئے جماعتِ مومنین کے افراد ایک دوسرے کی بانہوں میں بانہیں ڈالے‘ زندگی کی متلاطم ندیوں کو ’’مردانہ وار‘‘ پار کئے چلے جاتے ہیں۔ اس لئے کہ انہیں تعلیم ہی یہ دی گئی ہے کہ: یَا أَیُّہَا الَّذِیْنَ آمَنُواْ اصْبِرُواْ وَصَابِرُواْ وَرَابِطُواْ وَاتَّقُواْ اللّہَ لَعَلَّکُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ-(3:200) تم اپنے مسلک پر نہایت استقامت سے جمے رہو اور ایک دوسرے کی استقامت کا موجب بنو۔ ایک دوسرے کے ساتھ جُڑ کر رہو اور ہر قدم پر قانونِ خداوندی کی نگہداشت کرو۔ یہی وہ روش ہے جس سے تمہیں سفرِ حیات میں کامیابی حاصل ہو گی۔ اس طرح ایک دوسرے کے ساتھ جڑ کر‘ کَأَنَّہُم بُنیَانٌ مَّرْصُوصٌ-(61:4) گویا ایک سیسہ پلائی ہوئی دیوار ہے کہ حوادثِ زمانہ کی سرکش موجیں اس سے آکر ٹکرائیں تو اپنا سر پھوڑ کر پیچھے ہٹ جائیں ان کے اس ارتباطِ باہمی اور باہمدگر پیوستگی کا ذریعہ‘ تمسک بالقرآن (خدا کی کتاب کے ساتھ وابستگی) ہوتا ہے کہ ان سے کہا گیا ہے کہ: وَاعْتَصِمُواْ بِحَبْلِ اللّہِ جَمِیْعاً وَلاَ تَفَرَّقُواْ -(3:103) تم خدا کی کتاب کے ساتھ‘ سب کے سب مل کر‘ پوری مضبوطی سے وابستہ رہو اور آپس میں تفرقہ پیدا مت کرو۔ اس لئے کہ باہمی تفرقہ۔۔۔ امت کا فرقوں میں بٹ جانا۔۔۔ توحید نہیں‘ شرک ہے۔
تفرقہ شرک ہے
وَلَا تَکُونُوا مِنَ الْمُشْرِکِیْنَO مِنَ الَّذِیْنَ فَرَّقُوا دِیْنَہُمْ وَکَانُوا شِیَعاً کُلُّ حِزْبٍ بِمَا لَدَیْْہِمْ فَرِحُونَ -(30:31) دیکھنا! تم کہیں (اسلام لانے کے بعد پھر) مشرک نہ بن جانا۔ یعنی ان لوگوں میں سے نہ ہو جانا جنہوں نے اپنے دین میں فرقے پیدا کر لئے اور خود بھی ایک گروہ بن گئے۔ اس سے کیفیت یہ ہو جاتی ہے کہ ہر فرقہ سمجھتا ہے کہ میں حق پر ہوں (اور باقی سب باطل پر ہیں) اور یوں امت کی اجتماعیت کا شیرازہ بکھر جاتا ہے۔
نزولِ ملائکہ
اس کے برعکس امت کی وحدت اور استقامت کا نتیجہ یہ ہوتا ہے کہ ان پر رحمتوں کے فرشتے نازل ہوتے ہیں۔ جو انہیں دنیا اور آخرت میں زندگی کی خوشگواریوں کی بشارتیں دیتے ہیں۔ إِنَّ الَّذِیْنَ قَالُوا رَبُّنَا اللَّہُ ثُمَّ اسْتَقَامُوا تَتَنَزَّلُ عَلَیْْہِمُ الْمَلَاءِکَۃُ أَلَّا تَخَافُوا وَلَا تَحْزَنُوا وَأَبْشِرُوا بِالْجَنَّۃِ الَّتِیْ کُنتُمْ تُوعَدُونَ۔ یہ واقعہ ہے کہ جو لوگ اس حقیقت پر ایمان لاتے ہیں کہ ہمارا نشوونما دینے والا اللہ ہے اور پھر اس دعویٰ پر جم کر کھڑے ہو جاتے ہیں۔ ان پر فرشتے نازل ہوتے ہیں جو ان سے کہتے ہیں کہ تم نہ کسی قسم کا خوف کھاؤ۔ نہ افسردہ خاطر ہو اور اس جنتی زندگی کی خوشخبری لو جس کا تم سے وعدہ کیا گیا تھا۔ نَحْنُ أَوْلِیَاؤُکُمْ فِیْ الْحَیَاۃِ الدُّنْیَا وَفِیْ الْآخِرَۃِ۔ ہم دنیا میں بھی تمہارے رفیق اور ساتھی ہیں اور آخرت کی زندگی میں بھی۔ وَلَکُمْ فِیْہَا مَا تَشْتَہِیْ أَنفُسُکُمْ وَلَکُمْ فِیْہَا مَا تَدَّعُونَ۔ -(41:30-31) تمہیں‘ دنیا اور آخرت میں‘ جو تمہارا جی چاہے گا ملے گا۔ جو مانگو گے‘ پاؤ گے۔ ہر قسم کی سربلندیاں اور سرفرازیاں تمہارے حصے میں آئیں گی اور یہ سب تمہارے اپنے اعمال کا نتیجہ ہوں گی۔۔۔ تِلْکُمُ الْجَنَّۃُ أُورِثْتُمُوہَا بِمَا کُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُون-(7:43) یہ وہ جنت ہے جس کے تم‘ اپنے اعمال کی وجہ سے‘ مالک بنائے گئے ہو۔
نیکی کا صحیح مفہوم
یہ ہیں وہ خصوصیات جن کے حامل انسانوں کو مومنؔ کہا گیا ہے۔ انہیں زندگی کی جن خوشگواریوں اور سربلندیوں کی بشارت دی گئی ہے‘ وہ انہی خصوصیات کا فطری نتیجہ ہوتی ہیں۔ محض مومنؔ کہلانے اور مسلمان نام رکھا لینے سے یہ نتائج حاصل نہیں ہو سکتے۔ لَّیْْسَ بِأَمَانِیِّکُمْ وَلا أَمَانِیِّ أَہْلِ الْکِتَابِ-(4:123) یہ نتائج نہ تمہاری خوش فہمیوں سے حاصل ہو سکتے ہیں نہ ان اہلِ کتاب کی خالی تمناؤں سے۔ یہ تو صرف ان خصوصیات کے پیدا کرنے سے حاصل ہوں گے جنہیں مومنین کی صفات کہہ کر پکارا گیا ہے۔ حتیٰ کہ اگر کسی میں یہ خصوصیات موجود نہ ہوں‘ اور وہ نماز‘ روزہ‘ حج‘ زکوٰۃ جیسے ’’دینی اعمال‘‘ پر بھی محض میکانکی طور پر کاربند ہو‘ تو بھی یہ نتائج حاصل نہیں ہو سکتے۔ قرآن نے نہایت واضح الفاظ میں کہہ دیا ہے کہ: لَّیْْسَ الْبِرَّ أَن تُوَلُّواْ وُجُوہَکُمْ قِبَلَ الْمَشْرِقِ وَالْمَغْرِبِ۔ نیکی یہ نہیں کہ تم اپنا منہ مشرق کی طرف کرتے ہو یا مغرب کی طرف۔ وَلَکِنَّ الْبِرَّ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللّہِ وَالْیَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَالْمَلآءِکَۃِ وَالْکِتَابِ وَالنَّبِیِّیْنَ۔ اس کے لئے پہلی شرط یہ ہے کہ تم ان بلند حقیقتوں پر علیٰ وجہ البصیرت یقین رکھو جنہیں اجزائے ایمان کہا گیا ہے۔۔۔ یعنی خدا اور اس کے قانونِ مکافات پر ایمان۔ زندگی کے تسلسل پر ایمان۔ وحی کی رو سے دیئے ہوئے ضابطۂ قوانین پر ایمان۔ انبیاء اور ملائکہ پر ایمان۔۔۔ نیکی اس کی ہے جو ان حقیقتوں پر یقین محکم رکھے اور پھر وَآتَی الْمَالَ عَلَی حُبِّہِ ذَوِیْ الْقُرْبَی وَالْیَتَامَی وَالْمَسَاکِیْنَ وَابْنَ السَّبِیْلِ وَالسَّآءِلِیْنَ وَفِیْ الرِّقَابِ۔ مال و دولت کی محبت کے باوجود اسے دوسروں کی پرورش کے لئے دے دے۔ وہ رشتے دار ہوں یا ایسے لوگ جو معاشرہ میں تنہا رہ جائیں یا وہ لوگ جن کا چلتا ہوا کاروبار رک جائے یا ان میں کام کاج کی استطاعت نہ رہے۔ یا ایسے مسافر جو زادِ سفر سے محروم رہ جائیں یا وہ لوگ جن کی کمائی ان کی ضروریات کے لئے کافی نہ ہو یا وہ دوسروں کے پنجۂ استبداد میں گرفتار ہوں۔ ان مقاصد کے لئے مال و دولت کا پیش کر دینا یہ نیکی ہے۔ مختصر الفاظ میں نیکی یہ ہے کہ:
وَأَقَامَ الصَّلاۃَ وَآتَی الزَّکَاۃَ۔ ایسا نظام قائم کیا جائے جس میں تمام افرادِ معاشرہ قوانینِ خداوندی کا اتباع کریں اس وقت فریضہ صلوٰۃ کی پابندی کریں اور نوعِ انسان کی پرورش کا سامان مہیا کریں۔ وَالْمُوفُونَ بِعَہْدِہِمْ إِذَا عَاہَدُواْ۔ نیکی ان کی ہے جو اپنے
عہد و پیمان کا احترام کریں اور قول اقرار کے پکے ہوں۔ وَالصَّابِرِیْنَ فِیْ الْبَأْسَاء والضَّرَّاء وَحِیْنَ الْبَأْسِ۔ اور جب مشکلات کا سامنا ہو تو نہایت ثابت قدمی سے ان کا مقابلہ کریں۔ أُولَءِکَ الَّذِیْنَ صَدَقُوا وَأُولَءِکَ ہُمُ الْمُتَّقُونَ-(2:177) O یہ وہ لوگ ہیں جو اپنے دعویٰ ایمان کو اپنے اعمال سے سچا ثابت کر دکھاتے ہیں اور یہی ہیں وہ جو متقی کہلانے کے مستحق ہیں۔ نہ وہ جو محض رسمی طور پر نماز روزہ کی پابندی کر کے اس فریب میں مبتلا رہتے ہیں کہ ہم پکے مومن ہیں اور بڑے نیک کام کر رہے ہیں۔
خیرات کے کام
یہی نہیں۔ بلکہ ایسے خیراتی کام جنہیں عام طور پر ’’کارِخیر‘‘ سمجھا جاتا ہے‘ وہ بھی نظامِ خداوندی کے قیام کے لئے جدوجہد کے مقابلہ میں کچھ حیثیت نہیں رکھتے۔ سورۂ توبہ میں ہے: أَجَعَلْتُمْ سِقَایَۃَ الْحَاجِّ وَعِمَارَۃَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ کَمَنْ آمَنَ بِاللّہِ وَالْیَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَجَاہَدَ فِیْ سَبِیْلِ اللّہِ۔ کیا تم سمجھتے ہو کہ حاجیوں کے لئے سبیلیں لگا دینے والا یا خانہ کعبہ کی زیبائش و آرائش اور آباد کاری کے کاموں میں حصہ لینے والا‘ اس شخص کے برابر ہو سکتا ہے جو خدا اور اس کے قانونِ مکافات اور حیاتِ اخروی پر ایمان رکھے اور نظامِ خداوندی کے قیام کے لئے مسلسل جدوجہد کرتا رہے!تم اپنی خوش عقیدگی کی بناء پر کچھ ہی کیوں نہ سمجھو۔ لاَ یَسْتَوُونَ عِندَ اللّہِ۔ میزانِ خداوندی میں یہ دونوں کبھی ہم وزن نہیں ہو سکتے۔ ایسا سمجھنا بڑی زیادتی ہے۔ وَاللّہُ لاَ یَہْدِیْ الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِیْن-(9:19) O اور خدا کا فیصلہ یہ ہے کہ اس قسم کی زیادتی کرنے والوں پر کامیابی کی راہیں کبھی نہیں کھلا کرتیں۔ یہودیوں کے متعلق قرآن نے کہا ہے کہ وہ اسی قسم کی خود فریبی میں مبتلا تھے۔ انہوں نے معاشرہ کا نظام ایسا قائم کر رکھا تھا جس میں کمزور‘ غریب‘ ناتواں افراد‘ اپنا گھر بار چھوڑ کر باہر نکل جانے پر مجبور ہو جاتے تھے۔ جب وہ اس طرح باہر نکل کر‘ غیر محفوظ ہو جاتے اور دوسروں کے چنگل میں پھنس جاتے تو پھر وہی ان کے ابنائے وطن‘ جن کی چیرہ دستیوں سے تنگ آکر وہ وطن چھوڑنے پر مجبور ہوئے تھے‘ خیرات کے پیسوں سے ان کا فدیہ ادا کرتے اور سمجھتے کہ ہم بڑا ثواب کا کام کر رہے ہیں۔ وَہُوَ مُحَرَّمٌ عَلَیْْکُمْ إِخْرَاجُہُمْ-(2:85) حالانکہ ایسا نظام قائم کرنا جس میں معاشرہ کے غریب اور کمزور افراد‘ مظلومیت کا شکار ہو جائیں‘ ایسا جرمِ عظیم ہے جس کا کفارہ اس قسم کے خیرات کے کام کبھی نہیں بن سکتے۔ جماعتِ مومنین اس قسم کی خود فریبی کا شکار نہیں ہوتی۔ وہ نظام ایسا قائم کرتے ہیں جس میں اس قسم کے انفرادی خیراتی کاموں کی ضرورت ہی پیش نہ آئے۔ قرآن تسلیم کرتا ہے کہ اہلِ کتاب میں بھی ایسے لوگ موجود ہیں جو انفرادی طور پر دیانتدار ہیں لیکن اس کے باوجود وہ انہیں نظامِ خداوندی کی طرف آنے کی دعوت دیتا ہے۔ اس لئے کہ ان کا نظامِ معاشرہ اس قسم کا ہوتا ہے جس میں ان کی انفرادی نیکیاں خوشگوار نتائج پیدا نہیں کر سکتیں۔ دیکھئے قرآن اس حقیقت کو کیسے واضح اور بلیغ انداز میں پیش کرتا ہے۔ وہ کہتا ہے کہ: وَمِنْ أَہْلِ الْکِتَابِ مَنْ إِن تَأْمَنْہُ بِقِنطَارٍ یُؤَدِّہِ إِلَیْْکَ وَمِنْہُم مَّنْ إِن تَأْمَنْہُ بِدِیْنَارٍ لاَّ یُؤَدِّہِ إِلَیْْکَ إِلاَّ مَا دُمْتَ عَلَیْْہِ قَآءِماً۔ ان اہلِ کتاب میں وہ بھی ہے جس کے پاس اگر چاندی سونے کا ڈھیر بھی بطور امانت رکھ دیا جائے تو وہ اسے جوں کا توں واپس کر دے اور ایسا بھی کہ اگر اس پر ایک روپے کا بھی اعتماد کرو تو وہ اسے کبھی واپس نہ کرے بجز اس کے کہ تم اس کے سر پر ڈنڈا لے کر سوار رہو۔ ذَلِکَ بِأَنَّہُمْ قَالُواْ لَیْْسَ عَلَیْْنَا فِیْ الأُمِّیِّیْنَ سَبِیْلٌ۔ یہ اس لئے کہ ان کا نظامِ معاشرہ قومی عصبیت کی بنیادوں پر قائم ہے جس میں یہ عقیدہ دل کی گہرائیوں میں راسخ کر دیا جاتا ہے کہ تم دوسری اقوام کے لوگوں کے ساتھ جو جی میں آئے کرو۔ اس سے تم پر کوئی الزام نہیں ہو گا اور تماشا یہ کہ ان کے مذہبی پیشوا انہیں یہ بتاتے ہیں کہ یہ شریعتِ خداوندی کے عین مطابق ہے حالانکہ وَیَقُولُونَ عَلَی اللّہِ الْکَذِبَ وَہُمْ یَعْلَمُونَ-(3:74) O یہ خدا کے خلاف صریح کذب و افترا ہے اور ایسا کہنے والے خوب جانتے ہیں کہ یہ جھوٹ ہے۔
قرآنِ کریم نے مثال تو یہودیوں کی دی ہے کہ وہ ایسا معاشرہ قائم کرتے تھے جس میں ان کے کمزور اور غریب بھائی گھروں سے بے گھر ہونے پر مجبور ہو جائیں اور اس طرح جب وہ دوسروں کے ہاتھوں گرفتار ہو جاتے تھے تو انہیں چھڑانے کے لئے فنڈ اکٹھا کرتے تھے اور اسے بڑا ثواب کا کام سمجھتے تھے لیکن اس سے اس نے اصول بہت بلند پیش کیا ہے یعنی ایسا معاشرہ قائم کرنا جس میں غریب لوگ محتاج سے محتاج تر ہوتے جائیں اور اس کے بعد ان کی طرف خیرات کے چند ٹکے پھینک کر یہ سمجھنا کہ ہم نے بڑا ثواب کا کام کیا ہے جرمِ عظیم ہے: فَمَا جَزَاء مَن یَفْعَلُ ذَلِکَ مِنکُمْ إِلاَّ خِزْیٌ فِیْ الْحَیَاۃِ الدُّنْیَا وَیَوْمَ الْقِیَامَۃِ یُرَدُّونَ إِلَی أَشَدِّ الْعَذَابِ۔۔۔-(2:85) جو قوم بھی ایسا کرے گی اس کا نتیجہ اس کے سوا کچھ نہیں ہو گا کہ وہ دنیا میں بھی ذلیل و خوار ہو گی اور آخرت میں بھی سخت عذاب کی مستحق۔
***
مومن اور مسلم کا فرق
المختصر‘ یہ ہیں وہ خصوصیات جن کے حاملین کو مومنؔ کہا جاتا ہے۔ قرآن کریم نے مومن اور مسلمؔ کے الفاظ اکثر مقامات پر ہم معنی استعمال کئے ہیں لیکن ایک جگہ ایسی تشریح بھی کی گئی ہے جس سے‘ بعض گوشوں میں‘ ان دونوں کا فرق سامنے آجاتا ہے۔ سورۂ حجرات میں ہے: قَالَتِ الْأَعْرَابُ آمَنَّا۔ یہ بدوی قبائل‘ جو اسلامی مملکت کے قیام کے بعد‘ مسلمان ہوئے ہیں‘ کہتے ہیں کہ ہم ایمان لائے ہیں۔ قُل لَّمْ تُؤْمِنُوا وَلَکِن قُولُوا أَسْلَمْنَا۔ ان سے کہو کہ یہ نہ کہو کہ ہم ایمان لے آئے ہیں اور اس طرح مومن بن گئے ہیں بلکہ یہ کہو کہ ہم اس مملکت کے سامنے جھک گئے ہیں: وَلَمَّا یَدْخُلِ الْإِیْمَانُ فِیْ قُلُوبِکُمْ۔ ابھی تک ایمان تمہارے دل کی گہرائیوں میں نہیں اترا۔۔۔ (49:14)۔ إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ الَّذِیْنَ آمَنُوا بِاللَّہِ وَرَسُولِہِ ثُمَّ لَمْ یَرْتَابُوا وَجَاہَدُوا بِأَمْوَالِہِمْ وَأَنفُسِہِمْ فِیْ سَبِیْلِ اللَّہِ أُوْلَءِکَ ہُمُ الصَّادِقُونَ-(49:15) O مومن کہلانے کے مستحق وہ ہیں جو خدا اور اس کے رسول پر‘ دل کی کامل رضامندی سے ایمان لاتے ہیں جس کا نتیجہ یہ ہوتا ہے کہ ان کے دل میں کسی قسم کے شک و شبہ کا گزر تک نہیں ہوتا۔ پھر وہ‘ اپنی جان اور مال سے‘ خدا کی راہ میں جہاد کرتے رہتے ہیں۔ یہ ہیں وہ جو اپنے دعوےٰ ایمان میں سچے ہوتے ہیں۔
نفسیاتی تبدیلی
اس سے ہمارے سامنے مسلم اور مومن کا فرق آجاتا ہے۔ یوں سمجھئے کہ مسلم وہ ہے جس سے احکامِ خداوندی کی اطاعت‘ قانون کے ذریعے جبراً کرائی جاتی ہے اور ان احکام کی اطاعت کا جذبہ جس کے دل کی گہرائیوں سے ابھرتا ہے اسے مومنؔ کہتے ہیں۔ مومن کی ذات (Personality) کی نشوونما اس طرح ہو جاتی ہے کہ وہ تمام صفات و خصوصیات جن کا ذکر گزشتہ اوراق میں کیا گیا ہے‘ اس کے مختلف گوشے (Facets) بن جاتے ہیں‘ اس لئے وہ ان صفات کا فطری مظہر ہوتا ہے‘ جس طرح سورج‘ روشنی اور حرارت کا فطری مظہر ہے۔ اسلامی معاشرہ کے اندر اگر ’’مسلم‘‘ ان قوانین کی اطاعت سے ان کے اثرات کو اپنے دل میں جذب کرتا جاتا ہے‘ اور یوں اس کی ذات کی نشوونما ہوتی چلی جاتی ہے۔ تو وہ بھی مقامِ مومن تک پہنچ جاتا ہے۔ اس لئے جہاں اعرابؔ سے کہا گیا کہ وہ ابھی اپنے آپ کو مومنؔ نہ کہیں کیونکہ ہنوز ایمان ان کے دل کی گہرائیوں میں نہیں اترا‘ وہاں ان سے یہ بھی کہہ دیا گیا ہے کہ: وَإِن تُطِیْعُوا اللَّہَ وَرَسُولَہُ لَا یَلِتْکُم مِّنْ أَعْمَالِکُمْ شَیْْئاً إِنَّ اللَّہَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِیْمٌ-(49:14) O اگر تم نظامِ خداوندی کی اطاعت کرتے جاؤ گے تو تمہارے اعمال میں کسی قسم کی کمی نہیں کی جائے گی۔ انکے نتائج مرتب ہوتے چلے جائیں گے۔ اس طرح تخریبی عناصر سے تمہاری ذات کی حفاظت ہو جائے گی اور اس کی نشوونما کا سامان بھی تمہیں ملتا جائے گا۔ بشرطیکہ تم نے یہ اطاعت‘ محض رسمی طور پر نہ کی۔ اگر ایسا کرو گے تو مسلم کے مسلم ہی رہو گے۔ مومن نہیں بن سکو گے اسلامی نظام درحقیقت‘ اس تبدیلی سے قائم ہوتا ہے جو جماعتِ مومنین کے قلب میں پیدا ہوتی ہے۔ اس قسم کی نفسیاتی تبدیلی کے بغیر‘ نظامِ خداوندی متشکل ہی نہیں ہو سکتا۔ إِنَّ اللّہَ لاَ یُغَیِّرُ مَا بِقَوْمٍ حَتَّی یُغَیِّرُواْ مَا بِأَنْفُسِہِمْ(13:11)۔۔۔ یعنی خدا کسی قوم کی حالت میں تبدیلی نہیں کرتا جب تک اس قوم کے اندر نفسیاتی تبدیلی نہ پیدا ہو جائے۔۔۔ یہ ایسی سنت اللہ (خدا کا اٹل قانون) ہے جس میں کبھی تغیر نہیں ہوتا۔ جماعتِ مومنین‘ اسی نفسیاتی تبدیلی کا مظہر ہوتی ہے اور یہ تبدیلی پیدا ہوتی ہے اس قرآن کے مطابق زندگی بسر کرنے سے جس کی خصوصیت یہ ہے کہ ؂
چوں بجاں در رفت جاں دیگر شود
جاں چوں دیگر شد جہاں دیگر شود
(یہ قرآن) جب ’’جان‘‘ کے اندر (سرایت کر) جاتا ہے تو ’’جان‘‘ وہ جان نہیں رہتی اَور ہو جاتی ہے۔ جب ’’جان‘‘ اور ہو جاتی ہے تو جہان بھی اَور ہو جاتا ہے۔ (ترجمہ از سلیم)
اس حقیقت کو ایک بار پھر سمجھ لینا چاہئے کہ یہ بات قرآن کریم کی صحیح تعلیم اور اس کے مطابق تربیت سے پیدا ہوتی ہے ایک چیز ہے اسلام کی دعوت کا فکری طور پر سمجھنا اور اس طرح ذہنی طور پر اس کی صداقت کا معترف ہو جانا۔ اس کا نتیجہ یہ ہوتا ہے‘ کہ انسان کے دماغ میں اس دعوت کے متعلق شکوک و شبہات پیدا نہیں ہوتے اور اس کے خلاف منطقی دلائل اور فلسفیانہ اعتراضات اسے ڈگمگا نہیں دیتے لیکن ایمان کا مظاہرہ اس وقت ہوتا ہے‘ جب اس دعوت کے کسی تقاضے (یعنی مستقل قدر) اور انسان کی طبیعی زندگی کے کسی تقاضے میں (خواہ وہ محض جذباتی بات ہو یا محسوس مفاد کا سوال) تصادم ہو اور وہ طبیعی زندگی کے تقاضے پر‘ مستقل قدر کے تقاضے کو ترجیح دے۔ یہ ہے وہ ایمان جو دل کی گہرائیوں میں جاگزیں ہوتا ہے۔ اسی کے حاملین کو مومن کہتے ہیں جن کے متعلق خدا کا ارشاد ہے کہ: أُولَءِکَ عَلَیْْہِمْ صَلَوَاتٌ مِّن رَّبِّہِمْ وَرَحْمَۃٌ وَأُولَءِکَ ہُمُ الْمُہْتَدُونَ-(2:157) O
میں اس حقیقت کو پھر دہرا دینا چاہتا ہوں کہ میں نے جو کچھ ابھی ابھی کہا ہے اس سے یہ نہ سمجھ لیا جائے کہ قرآنِ کریم نے مومن اور مسلم میں مستقل طور پر یہ تفریق کی ہے۔ بالکل نہیں۔ اس نے مومن اور مسلم کے الفاظ مرادف معنوں میں بھی استعمال کئے ہیں اور مومنوں کی عظیم ترین شخصیتوں۔۔۔ حتیٰ کہ حضرات انبیاء کرامؑ منجملہ نبی اکرمﷺ۔۔۔ کو مسلمؔ کہہ کر پکارا ہے۔ اس نے فرق یہ بتایا ہے کہ جو لوگ کسی مصلحت کی خاطر مسلمانوں کی جماعت میں شامل ہو جائیں یا محض مسلمانوں کے گھر پیدا ہو جانے سے مسلمان کہلائیں۔ انہیں اپنے آپ کو مومن نہیں کہنا چاہئے تاآنکہ ایمان ان کے دل کی گہرائیوں میں پیوست نہ ہو جائے۔ ورنہ‘ عام معنوں میں‘ مومن اور مسلم دونوں وہ ہیں: مَنْ أَسْلَمَ وَجْہَہُ لِلّہِ وَہُوَ مُحْسِنٌ فَلَہُ أَجْرُہُ عِندَ رَبِّہِ وَلاَ خَوْفٌ عَلَیْْہِمْ وَلاَ ہُمْ یَحْزَنُونَ(2:112) O جنہوں نے اپنی تمام خواہشات اور توجہات کو قوانینِ خداوندی کے تابع رکھا اور اس طرح نہایت متوازن زندگی بسر کی۔ سو اس کے اعمال کا اجر اس کے نشوونما دینے والے کے پاس ہے اور اس کا عملی ثبوت یہ ہے کہ انہیں نہ کسی قسم کا خوف ہو گا نہ حزن۔ لہٰذا‘ مومن اور مسلم وہ ہے جسے نہ خارج سے کسی قسم کے خطرہ کا خوف ہو اور نہ داخلی طور پر اس کے دل میں یاس و حزن کا گزر ہو۔ یہ ہے مقامِ مومن اور اندازِ مسلم۔ علامہ اقبالؒ کے الفاظ میں ؂
ہر لحظہ ہے مومن کی نئی شان نئی آن
گفتار میں‘ کردار میں اللہ کی برہان
قہاری و غفاری و قدوسی و جبروت
یہ چار عناصر ہوں تو بنتا ہے مسلمان
قدرت کے مقاصد کا عیار اس کے ارادے
دنیا میں بھی میزان قیامت میں بھی میزان
جس سے جگر لالہ میں ٹھنڈک ہو وہ شبنم
دریاؤں کے دل جس سے دہل جائیں وہ طوفان
(ضربِ کلیم)

2,088 total views, 7 views today

(Visited 892 times, 32 visits today)