

REVIVING THE UMMAH

A Diagnosis of Our Circumstance

Version 1.9S

By

**Meinhaj Hussain**

**Copyright © 2012 by Meinhaj Hussain. All Rights Reserved. **

GrandeStrategy

3rd Rajab 1433 Hijri

Smashwords Edition

Smashwords Edition, License Notes

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you're reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

**http://www.grandestrategy.com/**

**m.hussain@grandestrategy.com/**

All content, trademarks, tradenames, and other distinguishing marks, plus cover art and cover text, are the intellectual property of **Meinhaj Hussain**. Cover art and design by **Meinhaj Hussain**.

* * * *

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Bismillah-ar-rahman-ar-raheem. All praise to Allah, my Creator, my Sustainer, my Best Friend, my Forgiver, my Savior who has allowed this servant of His to write this book. To my honorable parents, my father and my mother, who have nurtured me with their love and care.

This book is built on the intellectual foundations of such thinkers as Allama Iqbal, Muhammad Asad, Alija Izetbegovic and Malek Bennabi and represents a synthesis of thought: my gratitude and acknowledgement to them. To the raw materials of history and general wisdom of Ibn Khaldun is also due a deep acknowledgement. To all the others that have helped proofread, comment and otherwise assist in making this book a reality.

# TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD

PREFACE

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 2: THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM

CHAPTER 3: TWO OPPOSING SIDES

CHAPTER 4: THE INCOHERENCE OF THE THEOLOGIANS

CHAPTER 5: A POLITICAL FRAMEWORK

CHAPTER 6: ECONOMIC MODEL

CHAPTER 7: EDUCATION

CHAPTER 8: THE LAW OF ISLAM

CHAPTER 9: THE HEART OF THE BREAKDOWN

CHAPTER 10: UNDERSTANDING PROBLEMS OF SEXUALITY & SOCIETY

CHAPTER 11: DEFENSE POLICY

CHAPTER 12: ISLAMISTAN

CHAPTER 13: AFTER THE REVOLUTION

CENTRAL PRINCIPLES

PROOF OF RIBA AND MONEY

GLOSSARY

# FOREWORD

Brother Meinhaj is an honest writer whose tenor of prose quickly reminded me of the opening scene in "The Gladiator', where Maximus (Russell Crowe) addresses his troops before scientifically decimating a Germanic horde. In a nut shell, the book is an oasis of sahih courage and refreshing common sense.

Our warrior casts a rough hewn stone at the Goliath of global perplexity, yet in the reading, divine grace transforms it to a javelin of synthesis that pins hearts to the backbone of unambiguous truth. Here's an example:

"... during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the sahabah, students would read a portion of a surah, reflect upon it, apply it, and lastly memorize it. Today, we have skipped all the steps except the last, destroying the value of our faith and turning it into a meaningless prattle . . . We need to ensure that the Chinese foot binding equivalent of brain damage on our children does not continue."

According to Meinhaj, Adam Smith or even Hadrat Umar would fail to qualify for a PhD in today's horrific educational system, and the sahabah would fail to acknowledge much of Muslim Education today as Islamic — in the true sense of the adjective. He states that education has advanced the repression of brain compression to Western mind-molding as purposely designed by elitists who prefer servants and slaves rather than fellows of global constituencies; a conclusion I myself came to during independent research.

I have attended and edited proceedings from many an Ibn Khaldun Seminar, all of which have been 'politically correct' celebrations of wheel re-invention taking no thought for application to roads of authentic reform. In addition to useless redundancy, they were marked by impotence and protectionism which the author also decries. However, his dismay allowed him to construct a bridge between deen and the dunya by actually destroying the illusion that one exists. His axe-wielding assault replaces mundane mimicry with an Islamically-correct and incredibly keen edge of forthright logic and erudition, minus the academic mumbo-jumbo. What a treat. Alhamduillah!

The alert reader will embrace the offerings of fresh solutions to surplus falsehoods, while bureaucrats of comfort-seeking adab will likely shun the book. They shouldn't however, because it's a mirror that would have been embraced even by Khalid after the chastisement of his vanity. Our non-indulgent guide gives correct admonitions married to well-considered restorative tonics.

This book honors the blood, sweat and tears of the common man but is not written by a skilled literary craftsman. Nevertheless, the prose flows like a coffee-shop conversation with a respected, well-read neighbor. The author also abstains from the offensive sanctimony that abounds in today's flailing Islamia. Never does he offend sober sense-makers with obscure passages that favor self-worship. In a sense, the book is like a lifebuoy thrown to those drowning in hopeless disorder.

From the 'Magian Crust' of Iqbal to Benabi's 'Colonizability' and Al'Attas's correction of adab, at times one must run and gasp as our host forges ahead to include Tariq Ramadan and Mahathir Mohammad, among others. His summary of relevant thought weaves throughout the chapters to reveal a tapestry that rewards the reader with conviction. But it is the hammer of Ibn Khaldun that is skillfully handled and best utilized, in my view, to bring the reader to the soberest of contemplations regarding the present day wherein Muslims are consigned to subservience, both knowingly and not; whereupon our guide forwards us to the pen of Mohammad Asad who also desired to 'un-complicate' fikh and return us to the simplicity of a unified, nass legal code. Indeed, brother Meinhaj clearly shows us how it can be accomplished by the humble, the willing, and the obedient.

In another vain, Meinhaj takes a broadsword to the ummah's mimicry of the Western Economic System and boldly announces the failure of IOK with regards to education and especially with respect to so-called 'Islamic Banking'. He provides unencumbered references to the Sunnah in order to "gradually transform today's banks from "caterpillars to butterflies" with a plausible plan and exquisitely poignant analogy. Our guide to much desired reforms limits himself to reason, practicality and the wise counsel of seers throughout; especially his recommendations for a systematic transition to 'sunnah money'.

His use of the 'Ferrari' as an economic analogy paradigmatically and shamefully illustrates vested incompetency and pretense. His discussion of riba is complete, concise, articulate as well as convincingly authentic and appropriately reproachful. As for the 'corporate personhood' of many economic sheikhdoms, any child worth his fitrah knows it is un-Islamic because "limited liability is haram" — so says the author. We must redesign corporations to incorporate halal liability, banks included. We have no choice but to remove the riba of fractional reserve banking and allow depositors to give the bank consent to invest their money: "People would have the option of storing or investing their savings, which is the Sunnah of course, but is now made impossible by those who pretend halal economics."

His approach devastates the present order and presents halal mandates that few Muslims—especially 'one-percent elitists'—would ever endorse or seek to maintain with their life's blood as did the sahabah. Brings to mind the 'black thread on the side of white cow' analogy doesn't it? Are there alternatives to GDP assessments as a measure of economic success? You bet, and the author boldly goes where Harvard, Chicago or London schools of thief-o-nomics have never gone; especially when indicting Muslim academics: those "men of no consequence" for "mimesis and small-minded intellectualism; the mindless reworking of Western economic models into so-called 'Islamic frameworks' because they've inherited a legacy that is fundamentally un-Islamic." Meinhaj is tough, brothers and sisters.

As for Islamic Education and Educators, I can sum his accurate assessment of the IOK movement in one phrase: 'it has miserably failed'. But I'll write a bit more on his analysis of Muslim education in general because it's superb, esoterically and historically sound, mercilessly frank, and needs to be taken seriously by the 'vassals' most readers have become: referring to those who "can recite, memorize and obey commands" of one-percent elitists but rarely offer the alms of authentic contemplation or comprehend an oft lip-synced parroting of faith – meaning the majority of ninety-nine per-centers.

His section on the significance of knowledge is nothing less than profound and brilliantly informative:

"In the great contemporary battle between the Wahabis/Salafis who nominally uphold tauheed and Sufis who nominally uphold tasawuf, both sides have missed the essential symbiosis of these poles with that of scientific enquiry . . . Genius does not need to be engineered; we only need to stop destroying it."

I wish I'd written that. His views on education and the present system's gross injustices are 'shocking' for the uninitiated, which, unfortunately, means most of you. Do not miss this.

He also supports Ibn Khaldun's poignant perception—as do I—that the self-centered guys and gals of Mysticism 'enjoyed killing the power of the brain'; so to speak, and most unfortunately so when what followed is that "the West took our light and went forward and through their hands, perhaps Allah is showing us how we have gone astray." The good brother then compares Muslim stifling of mental rigor and fruition to the torture of Chinese foot-binding or the head-binding of children sacrificed to idolatrous worship of rather peculiar "Sufi-saints". The reactionary superstition he cites had helped Muslims create a form of secularism even before the arrival of British Bayonets; notwithstanding the crass innovations that followed Al'Ghazali's misunderstood wake—ventrally giving birth to the impotent class of clerics that abound in today's mosques:

"They are today the equivalent of the priests, monks and rabbis of other religions ... this Muslim clergy never develops the ability to analyze and think critically and hence, cannot consequently address social problems effectively . . . Islam has to be lived, it cannot be parroted."

Going further, the author clearly demonstrates that Muslim "Scholars" have unnecessarily complicated matters of Islamic Law out of sectarian vanity and misplaced piety. He argues that the 'Interpretive' outlook has superseded, even obscured, the 'simplicity of the Law' as expressed by the first three generations of Muslims. Our 'neo-ulema' has since been worshipped becoming a kind of 'priesthood' of unqualified censors, something Islam forbids. The author's solutions are to be found in the works of Imran Hosein, Mohd. Asad, Malek Benabi, Tariq Ramadan and others whom he summarizes, expertly canonizes or de-canonizes, and remains bold enough to enhance to the detriment of 999 out of 1,000. ' The greater balance appears to be 'dyed-in-the-wool' sectarians for whom 'reform' is little more than a word they find suitable as long as votes come their 'manifestly evil' way.

In any case he convinced this reader that my opinion of the majority of Muslim Scholars, Mullahs, Imams and sundry academics is correct: they need to find real work.

Our Author even expands the science of sociology to give Goetherites a dose of gestalt Tauhid. The chapter is well worth the read, especially for those who seek understanding and real knowledge: a mix of the tender meat of authentic reform to antidote the rigidity of rigor mortis now confronting the ummah. His approach is systematic, demanding, at times difficult, but always promising what is delivered as a final course.

"... (Benabi) the point of failure comes in the overindulgence of its core; for Islam it is the overindulgence of mysticism and for the West it is the overindulgence of materialism."

On defense and related matters, Meinhaj runs the risk of losing the reader lest the latter be a military man or strategist. The chapter is saved when he comes full circle to the Koran and its wisdom in these matters, showing grave relevance for today's Muslim soldier. The author's thesis on a Khurasani force — even absent the Mahdi — comprises Pakistani cum Talibani plus Asiatic units and may be laughable to Westernized pundits of military chauvinism; nevertheless, his analysis is cutting edge and penetrates the popular veil. I'd place it at a 'Lt. Colonel level', and as such, only the arrogant senior would dismiss the perspective.

Make no mistake, the West and certain non-western 'entities' are at war with Islam. To think otherwise gives evidence of the 'Stockholm Syndrome' — a psychological estate that is haram.

In his approach to Revolution and the Medina ideal, Meinhaj remains undaunted by the threat of typical Muslim academic of governmental censorship when it comes to 'hard ball' tactics:

"It is of utmost importance to change the fundamental power equilibrium in the country. The first important measure would be to eliminate the power base of the old secular elite. It is of vital import to take drastic measures to ensure these elite, entrenched over ages, choose subservience or flight rather than their fight instincts."

Muslim "Robber Barons" best take heed, foreign NGOs, NGOs with foreign funding, and IMF/World Banksters may all jump in the lake of fire according to this warrior's blueprint for his prospective Islamistan . A bit harsh I'll admit, but not without merit or the due diligence of careful contemplation considering the subversive influences they've wielded historically. Still, one must be careful not to make the classic oriental error of inbred protectionism; after all, Islam is meant to universally correct these evils.

Our guide warns against Muslim civilization becoming an "appendix to the global order" and I agree; though it hardly seems a likely eschatological prediction. Even so, Muslims must 'act' and this tome presents a viable plan of action for truly Islamic conclaves of reformers, wherever they me be and whatever is their number.

As I can see it, the only major element missing from this effort is a descriptive of the Hanbali Imamate wherein Patriarchy is restored to its proper role of political, economic and social husbandry. Otherwise, there is much benefit found within these pages, May Allah be praised and both author and readers rewarded according to intention and effort.

Omar Zaid, M.D.

Chiang Khom, Thailand

August, 2012

# PREFACE

Bismillah-ar-rahman-ar-raheem. This book is written for Muslims who have woken up to the need for Islam, not as a passive force, but an active force that can transform society and deal with the present extreme circumstances of our peoples. It is written for those who seek to understand where we stand in history and how to make a workable and attainable plan to solve the problems that we face today.

The book is not targeted at non-Muslims, "progressive"-style Muslims, or extremists and those who condone violence against innocents. Nor is this book a public relations or propaganda effort intended to showcase Islam before the world. It does not represent an inter-religious dialogue or an inter-civilizational one. The thoughts and ideas expressed here are intended solely for our planning and analysis in dealing with the difficult and extreme circumstances that we face today. It is written not as a justification but a guide to how to not only deal with those circumstances but in doing so, revive the Ummah insh'Allah. I have no interest in pleading with the decadent intellects of our times. Rather, I see hope in those whose hearts can still see:

Have they not travelled in the land, and have they hearts wherewith to feel and ears wherewith to hear? For indeed it is not the eyes that grow blind, but it is the hearts, which are within the bosoms, that grow blind. (22:46)

As such, many unconvinced stalwarts of punditry will find this book of little relevance. So be it. The attempt in this book is to rather answer such questions as "What is wrong with us?" and "How do we fix our circumstance?" "How can we rebuild our civilization?" "How can we return to Medina?" "How do we deal with the rising non-Muslim world?" "How do we effectively compete against the West & Far East while being genuine to Islam?"

Some critical axiomatic assumptions this book makes include:

1. Islam is a complete way of life.

2. The Quran is relevant for all ages and not just a specific period in history.

3. The West is an enemy to our civilization but we are internally equally at fault for our circumstances.

4. That Islam is under threat and this threat is a very serious one.

5. That this threat is because of both internal and external factors.

6. That the traditional ulema are not capable of responding to this threat.

7. That an Islamic state can be a critical tool to meet this threat.

A list of "Central Principles" is also given at the end of the book that elaborates or adds to some of these axioms.

I have found that versions of my thoughts and ideas entailed in this book have invited the ire of numerous personages. The attacks, unfortunately, would have been welcome had they been on the topic at hand and against the ideas I have spoken of. However, the attacks have largely been personal attacks on me and I have been labeled with numerous ignominious titles. This is a symptom of our present circumstance, and the best I can do to help mitigate this prognosis is to give a personal account of how the germs of the ideas entailed in this book originated.

The backdrop is the winter of 2001, when the United States and its lackeys attacked Afghanistan and the Pakistani government keeled over and joined "the Allies". I was a young man and had made my first decisive move towards religion. It was Ramadan and I was at the Faisal Masjid doing ithekaf.

The details of how I managed to get into the Faisal Masjid for itheqaf are in themselves interesting in that you usually need to apply one month in advance, but somehow I managed to get in (by the Will and Grace of Allah) on the spot. It felt miraculous. In my heart, it was miraculous. To this day, that time spent in itheqaf then is remembered as one of the most important turning points in my life and some of the most miraculous. When I came out, I was visibly healthier and my skin had transformed and even the very nails on my fingers seemed more alive than I have ever known them to be. The spiritual glow I had was amazing. During the itheqaf I had a constant awareness of Allah. Praying, fasting, reading the Quran all day and all night. It was like living in His Presence, in line with the hadith about ihsan, the perfection of faith. The atmosphere and feeling was overwhelming, no words can explain how it is to live as if He is there with you at every moment. Thinking of it as I write still brings tears to my eyes.

At one point, a CIA operative showed up, pretending to be Italian without an Italian accent (probably new on the job). My guess would be lower middle class Irish-Italian stock from the great state of New York. He was disingenuously pretending to be travelling through from China. He asked me how was it that I could speak English with such fluency and seemed doubtful when I said that I had never been (till then) to the United States. However, since the Faisal Masjid had my passport this could have been easily verified, and All Glory to Allah that nothing further was heard concerning this, because at that point in time in Pakistan, the Americans could have you picked up over anything and everything, and I was of course a non-Pakistani in Pakistan at a sensitive point in time.

We spent nights doing special war prayers for the Taliban in Afghanistan. The atmosphere is not explainable with mere words. The spirit was palpable and we constantly had tears flowing down our eyes. I have never prayed like that since. One day, we did not have those prayers and the next day we found out that it was because the CIA requested that we don't pray against them. The next day we continued to pray for the Taliban.

It just so happens that I am someone who was born with a passion for weapons and the art of war. It was probably at the age of 6-7 that I was analyzing how one type of ants (red) would compete with another (black ants) by placing sugar solutions between their colonies. I was probably eight when I would day dream about dropping paratroopers or dream of some other maneuver warfare. By the age of 12-13, I was scoring through defense industry magazines such as Jane's from old book stores, a task made easy because I grew up in Islamabad and the generals that received these publications never read them, despite them costing a fortune to subscribe, and their servants would dispose of them at local old book outlets, in mint condition, sometimes with the very plastic covers still on them. At the age of fifteen I had contributed to a defense publication.

In short, I am a man born with a passion for war, someone who dreams about it and can spend all day dreaming about. It is not that men like me do not know how horrific war is, but it is that we are the ones that revel in meeting it when it becomes inevitable. Given the circumstances it was thus a tempting consideration for me to join the Taliban.

Now, I do not like how the Taliban interpreted Islam in certain cases, nor how they treated women, but given the circumstances, they stood head-and-shoulders above everyone else in their integrity and honesty to the cause of Islam. However, there was another issue: as someone relatively well-versed in the art of war, I understood clearly and without doubt that the Taliban was not the solution, that for the kind of war we need to engage in, it is not possible with the ideological or material resources available to the Taliban. That what we seek to achieve cannot be achieved by the means with which we are attempting to achieve them.

At the same time I could see the secularized and West-serving Pakistani elite (who I largely grew up with) pushing a separate agenda, and neither they nor the religiously conservative and anti-American side could stand each other. It felt clear in my mind that it was such a divide that was at the crux of the problem of the Ummah.

It was with these thoughts in mind that, sitting and discussing with a fellow itheqaf goer, in the Faisal Masjid, in the winter of 2001, being observed by the ISI, CIA and only Allah knows who else and yet in an amazingly deep spiritual experience, it was in these circumstances that I conceived the idea that we need to find a middle way between the two sides. While conversing, an older gentleman, my impression would be ex-military, congratulated us on our attempt to find a bridge. So it was perhaps there that this book was really born.

As someone who understands military science, I can say with great confidence that you cannot defend a people, let alone march from Khurasan to Jerusalem with the kind of force that the Taliban represent, or any other unconventional outfit represents. It was not the practice of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the Sahaba to leave their families and hide in caves, while non-Muslims oppressed their people. It is not a strategy that makes any sense to someone who understands modern conventional warfare.

To meet the West in battle, to march against them to Jerusalem, to fight them toe-to-toe in the manner of the Prophet (peace be upon him) requires much more. It requires effective air defense to ensure that your massed forces (or your communities) do not get ravaged. To march to Jerusalem we need a large number of men and materials to travel relatively predictable routes for a long and sustained war effort using conventional military forces. This in turn requires the collective will of a people, not rag-tag outfits of renegades. To galvanize the collective will of the people, you need to have a stable political system, again something we lack.

To fight a sustained conventional battle requires a military-industrial complex, again something not possible without political and economic stability. With no meaningful political system other than monkey versions of Western models, and no economic system other than that of riba, the point becomes moot. Furthermore, there is no unity in the community in the first place and our theology is in deep crisis; there is no way I or anyone else can march to battle against the West in a meaningful manner, in the given set of circumstances and Allah knows best.

This meant to me that for me to insh'Allah die in the battlefield fighting for Islam, some others have to do the background work of fixing our internal problems and building viable economic and political models, which would foster industrial development, which in turn would create a meaningful military-industrial complex. Coupled with a leadership that unites and galvanizes the people, the order can then be given to make meaningful war against the West and Israel, insh'Allah.

Until then, men like me are "unemployed" and "unemployable". Meanwhile, nobody (or very few) is doing that background work, and myself, being who I am, at some point decided to take up that very work, that the great intellects, thinkers, scholars and politicians should have been doing in the first place but are not. My intention, if you would believe me, is not in writing these books to be known to man and be some "great" "scholar" or other such variable. I am not doing this to gain fame. I am just interested in defending the lands of Islam against a foreign aggressor and I cannot do my job if "they" don't do theirs, and this book and my other non-military writings has been me doing their job because the job I thought I was set out to do is not possible otherwise.

However, this book and much of my work may never have been written. I was after all, not a man interested in writing such things, and like most Muslims I was lazy and lacked resolve; I needed an added push and I got this from the Federal Bureau of Investigations of the United States of America, Agent Tim Alexander, who grilled me for five hours in their head offices in Washington D.C., concluding that I may be a terrorist in my subconscious mind and attempting to blackmail me to become an informant and if I didn't, they may send me "in a box somewhere where they would take care of me". Having refused that attractive offer after asking about the remuneration package, somehow they let me go home. I awaited such fate, not knowing what day they would pick me up and send me in a box to be taken care of but this taking care never happened.

Meanwhile, I felt that there was a lot in my head that, if I didn't put down, may be lost forever if and when they did show up, so I started writing, and continued writing. And somehow now I am some kind of a writer, author, scholar, and I have even made it to the committees of a political party. Well, that's a bit of my story to help the reader to: either, label me appropriately, or better, not label me but consider and even argue against the ideas I have put down in this book and elsewhere.

*****

I have held from the beginning that I do not have the scholarship or wisdom to write this book. Certainly I am no Ibn Khaldun, Allama Iqbal or Malek Bennabi. In fact, it may not be possible for one person to write about the subjects and topics at hand as they are encyclopedic and require a grand synthesis. I have written it nevertheless as there appears to be a dearth of competent men who are willing to step up to the wicket and man up. Within these pages I have placed the best that I know, my very best effort spanning a decade of thinking; yet this book can be better written and more worthy ideas included or better ideas replace those that I have come up with. In this regard, I invite my brother Muslims to stop complaining about their problems and making grand statements and join me in finding an efficient and genuine solution to our problems, derived from the Quran and Sunnah. Blustering on and on about how Islam is a solution to all problems and not showing any relevance by example and implementation is hypocrisy. I urge my brothers and sisters to join me in showing that relevance and implementation of this miracle of miracles we call Islam.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Islam today has over 1.65 billion adherents with an enormous wealth of resources and a near-perfect geo-strategic position. More than anything else, our greatest strength is Islam itself, the values and guidance from the One True Creator, Allah and the active help from Him as He has promised, if we keep our duty to Him. And that Allah may help thee with powerful help. (48:03)

Islam came as a Mercy to mankind. It represents a shift in religious thinking and differs from all other belief systems, doctrines and philosophies preceding it, in that it advocates simultaneously living in the material world and the spiritual, and provides a synthesis of relating the two. Buddhism, Taoism and Catholicism are inclined to the interior life, in rejection of the exterior. Confucianism and Calvinism (or its many intellectual offspring), and political systems such as Marxism and Capitalism, focus on the exterior life and are belief systems that are focused on the external and the material world.

Islam provides a solution in a complete and comprehensive understanding of the human paradigm, encapsulating simultaneously and in balance, the interior and the exterior, the material and the spiritual, the social and individual aspects of man. Islam can thus be explained as "religion without mysticism and learning without atheism". It is not a question of one or the other, but a question of finding the right balance. The balance of Islam is a mercy from our Creator.

The success of this paradigm was exemplified in the rapid rise of Islam – moral, economic, political and military, as the central driving force in the world. Islam towered as the dominant civilization and political empire for over a thousand years. But today Muslims are in a steep political and economic decline. The world has been in a state of great turmoil and change and Muslims are at a final crossroad to either fade away as a political force or re-energize and rejuvenate. The Uthman Empire is no more and its tiny fragments are now weak and subjugated by various foreign powers.

Beyond armies and the force of arms, these foreign powers are using their ideologies and world views to secure themselves in our lands and to keep us economically, politically, militarily and spiritually starved and dependent.

Today's state of subservience is a highly unnatural position for the Muslim world, given our history, and to correct such a position is not outside the realms of possibility, but rather one that would represent a natural progression of events, and correction of balance.

Muslim thinkers have attempted to correct our course throughout history and this is yet one such attempt. This book is written in all earnest, given that the Muslim Ummah today is stateless and in the throes of extreme internal crisis and external attacks. No matter how hard our scholars have tried in the past to reform and rejuvenate, after brief successes, we have now reached close to rock bottom, with Malek Bennabi reminding us of our position with the following diagram:

Given also that the Prophet (peace be upon him) has warned us of the Final Days and the signs of its coming, and that those signs are being rehearsed to us in the most direct terms, the threat today must be considered even more elemental. Let us be warned by Ibn Khaldun what may happen to us if we continue to be dominated and subjugated:

A nation that has been defeated and has come under the rule of another nation will quickly perish. The reason for this may possibly lie in the apathy that comes over people when they lose control of their own affairs and, through enslavement, become the instrument of others and dependent upon them. Hope diminishes and weakens. Now, propagation and an increase in civilization (population) take place only as the result of strong hope and of the energy that hope creates in the animal powers (of man). When hope and the other things it stimulates are gone through apathy, and when group feeling has disappeared under the impact of defeat, civilization decreases and business and other activities stop. With their strength dwindling under the impact of defeat, people become unable to defend themselves. They become the victims of anyone who tries to dominate them, and a prey to anyone who has the appetite. It makes no difference whether they have already reached the limit of their royal authority or not.

Here, we possibly learn another secret, namely, that man is a natural leader by virtue of the fact that he has been made a representative (of God on earth). When a leader is deprived of his leadership and prevented from exercising all his powers, he becomes apathetic, even down to such matters as food and drink. This is in the human character. A similar observation may be made with regard to beasts of prey. They do not cohabit when they are in human captivity. The group that has lost control of its own affairs thus continues to weaken and to disintegrate until it perishes. God alone endures. (Al-Muqadimah)

Understanding this fundamental threat to our civilization, we must make the greatest effort to restore Islam to its proper place or risk losing what many of us may already have forgotten that we have inherited. Let us then, with all seriousness and the greatest effort, set about our work in reviving the Muslim Ummah, insh'Allah.

The solution in meeting this challenge lies within Islam; Islam has been and continues to be the most powerful and dynamic force in the Muslim World and the only pragmatic solution to our present crisis. What galvanized Muslim India to seek freedom as Pakistan? What inspired the Chechens, Bosnia and Afghanistan under Soviet occupation? What caused the emergence of Somalia's Islamic Courts and the Hezbollah in Lebanon? The answer remains the same throughout.

The contention here is that this primary force within us can best be articulated and come to its full expression through the Prophet's (peace be upon him) methodology. The methodology is of preaching about the solution, getting enough adherents, and then utilizing the political entity of Medina to implement that solution. This book attempts to define how such a methodology can be followed insh'Allah and the major issues that the Islamic state needs to resolve.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 2: THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM

If in fact, Islam is under threat, its empire vanquished, its culture and way of life being attacked at every level, and that this threat is an existential threat to our civilization of great magnitude, the question may be asked, what exactly is the nature of this threat and how has it reached such a critical and prominent position?

The West is of course, the first and most easily identifiable culprit. Their enmity against Islam is long standing and they had progressed rapidly, making our defenses against them obsolete. However, at a second glance, it becomes clear that this did not happen overnight. That it took them centuries to industrialize and create a renaissance, accompanied by a civilization. Yet, we Muslims were apparently unable to adapt to the challenge for all those centuries. To this day, the Muslim world remains backward and obsolete, unable to progress while many others have sped past us. Clearly, there is more to the problem.

Many scholars, thinkers, activists, religious groups, organizations and politicians have come and gone, each trying to grapple with what the fundamental problem is and how to fix it. While we cannot do complete justice to the thoughts of these thinkers in such a short space, let us attempt to summarize what some of them have said:

Muhammad Iqbal

Muhammad Iqbal considered Islam to be the key to uplifting Muslims and reviving us. However, he considered the Islam that we have today and preached by the religious scholars to be of little relevance to the Ummah. He uses the word "Magian crust" to describe the state of Islam being covered by something impure, a theological impurity over the purity of Islam. He advocated a complete rethink through ijtihad. He wrote famously "Khirad ko gholami sey azad kar, jawano ko peero key ustad kar" which translates to "free the mind from slavery, make the young masters of the old," perhaps to remove this crust. One can thus say that Iqbal was of the view that the fundamental crisis was within us – that we have to look beyond blaming the West – who surely have done their part in harming us – but that they would not have been put in that position had we not had another internal crisis within.

Ibn Khaldun

This arguably one of the greatest Muslim scholars spent his life studying why Muslims are declining. He considers a number of issues including:

1.The original group feeling was for Islam and later on this group feeling became tribal and finally even this group feeling would be lost in a particular dynasty. In simple words, solidarity and unity was lost.

2.That the scholars today are not like the scholars of yester years, but are salaried and "weak" individuals who are practicing a "craft" or a "trade". i.e. they have turned Islam into a business/subject and lost Islam as a way of life.

3.The proper way of educating our children has been lost.

He brings many other problems and issues, perhaps too many to list. We leave him here have already considered his warning earlier.

Syed Naqib Al-Attas

A Sufi-inspired scholar, Al-Attas thinks that Muslims lack adab (respect) today and particularly respect for knowledge. He believes that the West is the fundamental instigator of this lack of adab. He means to target those who do not show adab to the "great scholars" or to traditional Islamic knowledge. Implicit in his statements is blame of the Salafis, who for instance, have issues with many of Islam's traditional scholars such as Al-Ghazali.

Sufis in General

Blame materialism and lack of spirituality. Their very inception can be traced to the increasingly materialistic lifestyle after the ruler-ship of the four rightly guided Caliphs. They originally wished to correct this materialism that had crept into Muslim life.

Ulemas in General

A very wide range naturally but usually revolving around blaming akhlaq (character), lack of eman, adab (manners), lack of knowledge, lack of respect for the deen, lack of respect of the ulema (predictably), not praying, not reciting / memorizing Quran, "fasad", etc. And of course the West, secularism, politicians and more.

Muhammad Abduh

A prominent Egyptian scholar, Abduh blames not practicing Islam and not being willing to learn from the West. He talks about re-opening ijtihad, making Islam less restrictive to man. He famously says that he found Islam in the West but no Muslims and Muslims in the East but no Islam. His focus was on theological issues, reformation through ilm al Kalam, loosely defined as theological and philosophical argumentation for and against doctrines and dogmas. He was thus focused on reformation of dogma and doctrine as a means to reforming Islam. This is important in the sense that he was looking at the problem as an internal theological problem.

Hasan Al Banna

Al Banna blames the West and the secular elite in our countries that they have engineered. He saw revival through political activism, including through reviving the Caliphate and jihad.

Hizb-ut-Tahrir / Taqiuddin Nabbhani

Again, blames the West and the collapse of the Islamic caliphate. Finds solution in reviving the Islamic state, no faults are seen internal to Islam.

Malek Bennabi

Bennabi criticizes the above perspectives for blaming the West. He notes that Britain could colonize 400 million Hindus in India on the other side of the planet but could not colonize Ireland, a tiny populace living right next door. He coins a new word: colonizability. That is, Muslims are very easy to colonize, it is almost as if we were merely waiting to be colonized. As a vindication of this view, we note that even with nuclear weapons and a powerful military, Pakistan today behaves like a vassal state of the West...

He points out that if the West alone is the problem, why were Yemen and Mauritania, parts of the Ummah never invaded by the West, the least developed and the least progressive? He also notes that the problem is systemic and afflicts the entire Ummah - noting that for instance, snake charmers are found from Morocco to Central Asia, everywhere in the Muslim Ummah but nowhere in the West. The systemic nature suggests the problem cannot be answered by simple answers.

He found fault with Muhammad Abduh and other reformers in that theological questions and aqeedah were not the direct cause of the decline but he thought that rather, the social function of Islam had been lost and that Muslims were stuck in a world of things and people rather than living in a world of ideas. He thought that arguing about theology and dogma would harm the Ummah by creating divisions. Rather, he felt that the problem was more related to a "psychological problem".

Bennabi discusses a civilizational life-cycle where the world moves from things (such as idols in pre-Islam Arabia), to people, to ideas, and then as civilization wanes, back to people and finally again to things. He believes that returning to the world of ideas, and ideas derived from our core of Islam is the solution to be aimed to revive the Ummah.

Mahathir Mohamad

Mahathir notes that after the Mongol invasion, Muslims decided to separate "worldly" knowledge and "religious" knowledge and focus on the latter. He blames this, and those that caused this (ulema) for the decline of Muslims and our backwardness.

Muhammad Asad

Asad blames the complication of Islam (Ibn Khaldun also indirectly writes about this). He notes that Islam was complete when the Prophet (peace be upon him) recited the verses "This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion." (Qur'an 5:3)

However, various scholars have added to this, and over time fiqh has become increasingly complex, so that today it is only known and knowable by specialist scholars. Thus, Islam has been taken away from the people and become nearly impossible to implement because of its complexity and contradiction of views between various scholars' opinions. This also creates the well-known symptom of schisms and division within the Ummah. Muhammad Asad wants to restrict analogical reasoning and restrict the Shariah to the original injunctions clearly articulated in the Quran and Sunnah. Ijtihad is to be relegated more to a political and individual capacity. Everything is not to be turned into an issue of legal ruling on a subject. We shall look more closely on his views when we consider the Legal System.

Ibn Hazm

Ibn Hazm's views are similar to Muhammad Asad's as described above and opposed to the fiqh created by scholars through analogy. However, he also perhaps inadvertently adds a small amount of literalist interpretation of Islam to replace the theology of fiqh. This makes the Salafis consider him to be one of them.

Salafis

Salafis blame Sufis (and others) as those that have corrupted the religion and that a return to a pure and pristine form of Islam (as defined by them) will solve the problem of the Ummah. Internal problems they find are related to shirk (violation of Oneness of Allah) and poor aqeedah (basic tenets of the faith). They see the solution in a literal interpretation of the text based on the opinion of a given set of their scholars.

While Ibn Hazm wanted to go back to the original and then put a full stop but somehow managed to add a small quantity of his own literalist perspectives, the Salafis, go further and create a comprehensive literalist theology typically based on the teachings (and interpretations) of Ibn Taymiyya, Shaykh Bin Baz, Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, and Shaykh Al Albani.

However, like Muhammad Asad and Ibn Hazm, they are nominally against the fiqh of the scholars, yet, a literalist approach to Islam itself can be considered a form of fiqh, and they have gone ahead and refined that literalist approach to an entire theological construct. This contradiction and denial of the subjectivity involved has nevertheless resulted in multiple competing brands of Salafis, including Jami or Madkhali Group, Sururi Group, Ma'ribi Group and Jihadi Group, among others, where everyone is claiming they have the "correct" interpretation and implying that they are not creating subjective interpretations. Logic suggests they all can't be right. Some Salafi leaders of one group sometimes condemn another group of Salafis as deviant while at the same time are conscious of how this subject "hurts eman" or their belief in Islam and studiously try to avoid it, particularly to those outside their group.

Taha Jabir Al-Alwani

Al-Alwani and others are part of the Islamization of Knowledge movement which will be described later. For now, we want to note that Dr. Alwani considers that the problem must be seen as a sick man who needs to be diagnosed. Everyone is looking at the symptoms but not trying to figure out what is causing the symptoms. Thus, while a lack of eman, akhlaq, etc. are the symptoms, but the question still remains, what is causing this? He also puts the analogy that a medication such as an antibiotic can often mutate and create an even greater ailment. Thus, a medication can become a problem in and of itself.

Tariq Ramadan

Generally, there is a thought group such as Tariq Ramadan and Taha Jabir Al-Alwani and even certain ulema from Al-Azhar who recognize the need for a revision and they are trying to progress the shariah. Tariq Ramadan calls for, what in actual fact would be creating a new madhab. This has to be based on reflection of the world around us and thus different from the interpretations of early scholars. The factor to be considered important for this reformation of fiqh is contemporary and regional/cultural relevance.

The similarity between Ramadan et al, Muhammad Asad and the Salafis is that they all reject taqlid and want to review the theology created over and above the Quran and Sunnah's direct commands. The difference is that Ramadan et al and the Salafis want to return to the original and basic framework and then create a new theology. Ramadan et al want this theology to be reflective and attuned to the present circumstances of the world while Salafis want to pretend that they are not creating a theology above the original and that their literalist interpretation is part and parcel of the original. In practical terms, the Salafis want to severely restrict analogical reasoning and create a literalist viewpoint while Ramadan et al want to create a new fiqh with full use of analogical reasoning centered on maqasid al-Shariah (the purpose of the Shariah), making bold new analogies based on the present world circumstances.

Muhammad Asad et al on the other hand want to put a full stop after returning to the original Shariah and delegate the rest outside legal theology. We shall look at his views more closely in the chapter on the Law of Islam.

Modernist/Progressive/Secular Perspective

They see Islam in general to be the problem. They want to restrict Islam to the masjid in contravention to direct commands of the Quran which calls those who do not live by Allah's laws as "kafirun". They have a point that it is the more Islamic parts of society that are the most backwards, i.e. they see the systemic problem but blame it on "religion" openly or implicitly. They however have failed in their attempt to modernize the Muslim world for the last 50-60 years by copying from the West; given the experience of the secular states that litter the Muslim world today.

The Islamization of Knowledge Movement

This is the big thing among academics and has two dominant perspectives, namely Al-Faruqi and Al-Attas (as noted above). What they are basically saying is that the problem is a matter of bringing back a synthesis of Islamic and modern "worldly" education together and blending them in a mixer, essentially a solution to the problem earlier identified under Mahathir's views. What that mixer will be and how exactly the elixir will be administered is the point of dispute among the various scholars of this paradigm.

The problem basically is that even some of the leading scholars of this movement have stated what can be construed to mean that the movement has failed in the last over 30 years to make any real change and are stuck in the "pre-methodology" stage. This is a ridiculous situation and only academics can continue congratulating each other on a train journey that appears to never reach the next station and in fact, standing more or less stationary with the illusion of speed coming from other trains passing by.

The first such attempt was Aligarh University and the latest such attempt is the International Islamic University Malaysia (and various other International Islamic universities in the Muslim Ummah). The problem is, the entire Muslim Ummah is still producing very little actual research, and no discernible difference to the Ummah can be noticed from these efforts. They can more or less be summed up as a storm in a tea cup helping create and progress academic careers.

\------

All attempts thus far have been a colossal failure. We have reached a point where the situation is getting desperate. Bennabi notes: the Muslim world today is at a risk of being overwhelmed by the West, at the very moment that the West is in decline. He thinks that if we seek to follow in the footsteps of Europe, we will always lag behind the West as it has to go through the same steps that the West has already long passed; which is precisely the mistake the modernist leaders of the world have been making for the last half century or more.

This author thinks that all these perspectives have some valuable input: that at least some of these thinkers have a piece to contribute to the puzzle. At the same time, since each of them only has a partial solution, taking Al-Alwani's analogy, their antibiotics could not kill the virus, have mutated the problem and made it worse. And since we Muslims like to live within our own little schools of thought, way of thinking and comfort zones where 72 out of the 73 sects are going to go to hell and "we" are going to go to heaven, we are unable to compare notes and come up with a universal solution.1

1. Sheikh Totonji has an interesting take on the 73 sects hadith – that it is not an authentic hadith, that two other versions of the hadith say different things, including one which says that one will go to hell and the others to heaven and another hadith version which makes no mention of how many will go to heaven or hell. He notes that this hadith goes fundamentally against the Quran in that the Quran repeats in all but one Surah "In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful". Why would the Most Merciful send all but 1 of 73 sects to hell? We shall return to the problem of hadith classification later in the chapter titled The Law of Islam.

There is also two other issues, the political tact of implementing the solution and the sequence of the antibiotic administration to be followed. If for instance, we start by condemning the traditional theological structure, we would achieve nothing other than a spiteful reaction. If we try to implement an education system or an economic system without first having control over the state, we will fail miserably as our efforts will not have the scale necessary to compete against the alternative dominant systems.

This book is insh'Allah an attempt to create such a universal diagnosis. We will not attempt to make everyone happy or build a false consensus, but rather build a true synthesis, insh'Allah that finds an optimal solution. The first task it to assign primary blame and we will agree with both broad sides – that the problem is both an external threat and an internal mess simultaneously. We do not know which one is greater and will not go into a debate about it. Practically speaking, we need to deal with both of them simultaneously; our past generations have left us with no breathing room to deal with each at a time.

Dealing with the external problem, simply arguing with them, talking about how great we are and how evil they are will not do anything. It is mere stupidity to think otherwise. Our enemies are exactly that, our enemies. They are meant to be our enemies. They are not going to go away just because we burnt an effigy of some leader of theirs, told them how evil and uncivilized they are and how great we are / were. They are amoral and immoral, our moral arguments sound silly to them. They will only treat us right if we are strong and can hurt them back in case they hurt us; through viable deterrence. Our solution must therefore involve political and economic strength and military prowess. Through our models, particularly the political, economic and education models we intend to achieve the former and the chapter titled "Defense Policy" focuses on how the latter can be achieved. The chapter "Islamistan" is also related and linked to the vital importance of viable military technology and a military-industrial complex.

Coming to the second part – our internal problem – it is safe to say that we have multiple internal problems. Education, our theology, the control of our religion by a theologian class, lack of unity, lack of a viable political model, loss of the social function of Islam and living in a materialist, thing-based world rather than a world of ideas are all problems, not necessarily in that order of priority.

The solution is to first have a clear idea what each of these problems are and how to deal with each. It is then vital to, rather than keeping this as an academic exercise, to propagate and create awareness about the nature of these problems and their practical solutions. The methodology here should be the same as the method of propagation by the Prophet (peace be upon him). Share your ideas as far and wide as you can, practice them and call people to it, both organically and strategically. One of the fruits of the Prophet's (peace be upon him) dawah was Medina. We are today at a point in time where, because of the political conditions, we have a chance to do political dawah like at the time of the delegates from Yathrib. Pakistan is ripe for such dawah, both to the movement for reform led by Imran Khan and to junior military officers, insh'Allah. This has been the thrust of this author's activism to the best of his ability.

In terms of sequencing the solutions, the author believes that the economic model outlined in this book would be the easier to sell, given the global circumstances. The solutions outlined in the chapter "Revolution" should also prove most attractive to a frustrated Pakistan. The questions raised and the solutions sought in the legal system should be implemented only at a later stage otherwise they would prove most controversial as was demonstrated by other movements and thinkers who attempted to deal with these issues only to find controversy and a psychological firewall. They should only be implemented when an Islamic government is in power, the people have been taken into confidence and the entrenched theologians make a strategic blunder, which happens rather frequently.

Education is a vital reform factor that should be implemented on the first possible chance of an Islamic / friendly government, or at an individual level even before. This is the key tool for moving our world to a world of ideas and in correcting many of the problems we face. After all, a child can be taught the right way to do something from the get-go, but a grown adult is set in his or her ways and needs to unlearn before learning, and often our egos are too big to unlearn what we think we know.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 3: TWO OPPOSING SIDES

Purity, Piety and Dedication without Talibanism. Education, Technology & Industry without Secularism.

There are broadly two kinds of people that will stand in the way of an Islamic state and in Islam as not merely a religion. There will be what we can describe as Conservatives and Secularists/Progressives/Modernists. Conservatives thus labeled are those that would want to pull Muslims back to the past while Secularists would want to move Muslims to a secularized future, with Islam relegated to the mosque. They may regard each other as opponents, but they share an important idea - that Islam is a religion.

Islam is not merely a religion. As earlier stated, it is a complete way of life, centered on the belief in One God. Islam is the only belief system that does not enjoin blind faith; it combines faith with knowledge. Truth and evidence go together, as they should. Islam melds the spiritual and the natural worlds, in harmony and balance, a balance that is best known by our Creator.

The Progressive-Secularist approach, on the one hand, is an extreme reaction to the Conservative paradigm and to the dazzle of the Western civilization. Their approach is built on the ascendancy of the latter and in seeing all solutions to our problems in reflection to the West. Replication over reinvention is their motto. They see the greatness of the West and in America and see solutions in transplanting these values over a culture that to them is backward, and one that they do not understand or appreciate. They believe that the root cause of the backwardness is Islam and they seek to remedy this with the panacea of Western culture.

If that is so, how may they still label themselves Muslim? The very premise of secularism is un-Islamic; the Quran clearly states:

It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers. (5:44)

The similitude of those who were charged with the (obligations of the) Mosaic Law, but who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is that of a donkey which carries huge tomes (but understands them not). Evil is the similitude of people who falsify the Signs of Allah. And Allah guides not people who do wrong. (62:5)

Islam is a complete way of life and the Quran has guidance for everything:

One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring thee as a witness against these (thy people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims. (16:89)

And this guidance is the key to our success:

These depend on guidance from their Lord. These are the successful. (2:5)

It is clear to the discerning mind that there is little genuine basis for the Progressive-Secular approach without going outside the pale of Islam. Their secret recipe to a political voice is not in the genuineness of their ideas but to the effectiveness of their approach vis-à-vis the backward Conservatives. We concede this point, if you take your average English medium school boy and place him against your average madrasa educated lad the results are likely to be in favor of the former. However, the task of a people is not to compete within themselves but to compete with other peoples. This is where the Progressive-Secularists have failed: in the last 50 years, the newly independent and avowedly secular states of the Muslim world have failed miserably to be competitive in the global context.

It is a well-learned lesson that mimicking the West will not translate to success but rather lead to an inferior and forever backward people. We can only compare the Turkish model versus Japan –

Japan and Turkey provide two contrasting and diametric models of how to react to the rapid advancement of the Western civilization. Historically both Japan and Turkey faced the West and had to make a number of hard decisions as to how they can react, what to take and what to reject. They provide a classic case of comparison; ancient empires, facing a stark choice of change in a similar period in history, and yet made completely different choices.

Japan combined its tradition and progress in a way that reinvented its culture while Ataturk's Turkey threw out their culture and belief system to transplant a Western imitation instead. Our discussion and dialogue concerning the Islamic state will be set within finding the Japan Route for the Muslim world rather than the Turkey Route.

Furthermore, as Bennabi notes, mimesis is a pathological disease to civilization, whose only true foundations can be built from the world of ideas and not of copying others. In the case of the latter, the ideas copied wholesale can become "deadly" ideas that do more harm than good. Bennabi notes that we cannot make history by following beaten tracks; it is only possible to do so by opening new paths; making history will happen if we return to our genuine principles and derive from them efficient solutions for today. This requires us first to get out of our Jahiliyah, whether it is mimicking the archetypes set by "ancient" scholars or those of the Colonial West and for us to return back to the world of ideas in general, and the ideas and ideals of Islam in particular.

Let us now turn to Ibn Khaldun and see if mimicking has any historical basis for success, or is it a false utopia built upon an inferiority complex. Ibn Khaldun notes that the vanquished will always seek to imitate the victorious party in his distinctive characteristics, his dress, his occupation, and all his other conditions and customs.

He gives the explanation for this as follows:

"...that the soul always sees perfection in the person who is superior to it and to whom it is subservient. It considers him perfect, either because it is impressed by the respect it has for him, or because it erroneously assumes that its own subservience to him is not due to the nature of defeat but to the perfection of the victor. If that erroneous assumption fixes itself in the soul, it becomes a firm belief. The soul, then, adopts all the manners of the victor and assimilates itself to him. This, then, is imitation.

"Or, the soul may possibly think that the superiority of the victor is not the result of his group feeling or great fortitude, but of his customs and manners. This also would be an erroneous concept of superiority, and (the consequences) would be the same as in the former case.

Therefore, the vanquished can always be observed to assimilate themselves to the victor in the use and style of dress, mounts, and weapons; indeed, in everything.

"In this connection, one may compare how children constantly imitate their fathers. They do that only because they see perfection in them. One may also compare how almost everywhere people are dominated (in fashion) by the dress of the militia and the government forces, because they are ruled by them.

"This goes so far that a nation dominated by another, neighboring nation will show a great deal of assimilation and imitation. At this time, this is the case in Spain. The Spaniards are found to assimilate themselves to the Galician nations in their dress, their emblems, and most of their customs and conditions. This goes so far that they even draw pictures on the walls and have them in buildings and houses. The intelligent observer will draw from this the conclusion that it is a sign of being dominated by others."

Attempting to copy the supposed superior formula of the West can thus be counter-productive, and still evidence does not provide any basis that such transplantation would be successful. In fact, Ibn Khaldun notes that:

"A nation that has been defeated and has come under the rule of another nation will quickly perish.

"The reason for this may possibly lie in the apathy that comes over people when they lose control of their own affairs and, through enslavement, become the instrument of others and dependent upon them. Hope diminishes and weakens. Now, propagation and an increase in civilization (population) take place only as the result of strong hope and of the energy that hope creates in the animal powers (of man). When hope and the other things it stimulates are gone through apathy, and when group feeling has disappeared under the impact of defeat, civilization decreases and business and other activities stop. With their strength dwindling under the impact of defeat, people become unable to defend themselves. They become the victims of anyone who tries to dominate them, and a prey to anyone who has the appetite."

These words reflect precisely the state of the Ummah today. Clearly, the Progressive-Secular approach is neither genuine nor effective as a means of saving the Ummah; rather, it is indescribably hurting the Ummah, perhaps to become the most destructive element within – Bennabi's "Deadly Ideas".

Turning now to the Conservative banner, we note that it is held high by a class of people, strange as it may sound, are not supposed to exist in Islam: the clergy. Mullahs, Sheikhs, etc. are not sanctioned by any verse of the Quran or by any authentic hadith nor did the Sahaba give themselves such titles. Yet, they exist today, and have convoluted Islam to define themselves as the middlemen between Muslims and Islam. On any question of Islam, Muslims are now told to get a nod from the local Imam, Sheikh, Mullah, Mufti, etc.2 They give the adhan on our ear at birth, teach those of us who go to the madrasah, lead the prayers of the community, perform the marriage ceremony, and are there at your death. They control the money of the masjid, and in fact all affairs of the masjid. They lecture the community every Friday. They are today the equivalent of the priests, monks and rabbis of other religions, despite Islam forbidding such a layered structure of society.

_2. We shall come back to this point in greater detail in the chapter titled_ The Law of Islam.

It would seem to the rational observer that we have followed the Christians and the Jews into the same reptile's hole as the Prophet (peace be upon him) has said we would:

Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: You would tread the same path as was trodden by those before you inch by inch and step by step so much so that if they had entered into the hole of the reptile, you would follow them in this also. We said: Allah's Messenger, do you mean Jews and Christians (by your words)" those before you"? He said: Who else (than those two religious groups)? (Sahih Muslim, Kitab Al-Ilm)

These career theologians make their living out of Islam and yet stand by socially and politically silent to our disintegration. Other than empty slogans and sooth-saying, this class has shown itself to be completely incompetent at addressing any of the issues that the Muslim body-politic faces today. One of the central problems arises because the clergy – and all those who seek education from them– never develop the ability to analyze and think critically. They are taught to read, recite and memorize and the finest of them can reproduce the Quran, hadiths and even works of eminent scholars from memory, like a tape recorder or a computer program. But throughout their education, they are not taught to understand the Quran, to ponder over its meanings, to apply. They are shunned from questioning and inquiring. This leads to underdevelopment and even deterioration in their mental capacities to think, reason, classify and analyze issues. It leads to them not knowing how to argue constructively or to learn the etiquettes of argument. This is one of the central problems and why billions of Muslims today produce such few real scholars and thinkers.

Piaget, a pioneer of cognitive development studies bears testimony to the important developments taking place between the ages of 7-11. Research also shows that the mental capacities of children, whether in the jungles of Africa or in the most developed nations are similar until the age of 6. Instead of nurturing the cognitive faculties of our children during the critical stages of development, we have chosen to cause the maximum damage possible to them.

As a result, it is almost as if we have degenerated from human intellect to a near sub-human species. It is not that there is anything wrong with memorizing and recitation, it is that everything has its place and proportion. Reason, argument and critical thinking cannot be shunned, and is as important today as it was during the Prophet's (peace be upon him) time, when people actually accepted Islam on the basis of the same.

In addition to this self-zombification, our theological class prefers to read the works of their own schools of thought without reference to others, creating a very sectarian theology that dangerously brings society to blows against different points of view. This is alien to academia worldwide where a student of a subject studies widely various perspectives, even if he or she later narrows down to one. Yet these same hypocrites like to give the analogy of a doctor being the master of his field as an analogy to them having the authority to explain religion to the masses. The hypocrisy behind this is deeper yet for they have reduced Islam to a specialized field, in direct contravention to the Quran.

Islam is not a religion of theologians and doctors of law. Islam is universal as it reaches out to all, able to do so because its concepts are easy to understand for those who seek Allah.

To each among you have We prescribed a Law and an Open Way. (5:48)

To each one of us, for Allah's Mercy is such that he does not impose a burden greater than we can bear, and he has made Islam understandable to everyone, at least of average intelligence. A Muslim does not need to read obtuse works of scholars to understand Islam, for Islam is understandable by all and was completed long ago when the Prophet (peace be upon him) repeated the verses in his last Hajj: This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed my favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. (5:3)

Yet, the "ulema" today have added so much more that the original nass ordinances are now a minority in the totality of their compiled "fiqh". They have utilized this and their fake authority to serve their interests, often meaning separating people from the Quran3; The Egyptian ulema asked Marmaduke Pickthall to translate Tabari instead of the Quran; yet you do not need to read Tabari to know Islam, let alone memorize it.

3. This author knows Muslims who not only refuse to ponder over the Quran but believe they will go astray if they did.

We shall look more closely at the theological problem in the chapter on the legal system. For now it suffices us that neither of the above mentalities offers an adequate solution to the challenges of the Islamic world. The aim of this book is to focus on innovative approaches to the emerging challenges we face, outside of these paradigms. We seek to insh'Allah bring a third paradigm that broadly lies between these two positions, yet is not a compromise of the two, nor placed in a two dimensional plane between them, but rather a synthesis of thought and ideas built on an independent foundation.

A Note to the Reader:

I have attempted to balance my criticism of both sides. Various versions of what you have read have been put online and with a most interesting result: when I would reorder the criticism, the side that is criticized first would condemn me but the other side would stay silent! I have finally settled on criticizing the Progressive-Secularists first in this chapter but have another entire chapter exclusively on the Conservative paradigm, partly to balance the above "wrong" and mainly because, as far as I am concerned, the Secularists have been declared kafirun in the Quran, and there is hardly any further need to argue over the bankruptcy of their perspective. The lard is therefore spread for the Conservatives who continue blindly their claim of holding up the banner of Islam, when in fact they are a major cancer within us.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 4: THE INCOHERENCE OF THE THEOLOGIANS

They state that his[Al-Hajjaj, famous governor's] father was a schoolteacher. At the present time, teaching is a craft and serves to make a living. It is a far cry from the pride of group feeling. Teachers are weak, indigent and rootless. Many weak professional men and artisans who work for a living aspire to positions for which they are not fit but which they believe to be within their reach. They are misled by their desires, a rope which often slips from their hands and precipitates them into the abyss of ruinous perdition. They do not realize that what they desire is impossible for men like them to attain. They do not realize that they are professional men and artisans who work for a living. And they do not know that at the beginning of Islam and under the (Umayyad and Abbasid) dynasties, teaching was something different. Scholarship, in general, was not a craft in that period. Scholarship consisted of transmitting statements that people had heard the Lawgiver (Muhammad) make. It was the teaching of religious matters that were not known, by way of oral transmission. Persons of noble descent and people who share in the group feeling and directed the affairs of Islam were the ones who taught the Book of God and the Law of the Prophet, (and they did so) as one transmits traditions, not as one giving professional instruction. The Quran was their Scripture, revealed to the Prophet in their midst. It constituted their guidance, and Islam was their religion, and for it they fought and died. It distinguished them from the other nations and ennobled them. They wished to teach it and make it understandable to the Muslims. They were not deterred by censure coming from pride, nor were they restrained by criticism coming from arrogance. This is attested by the fact that the Prophet sent the most important of the men around him with his embassies to the Arabs, in order to teach them the norms of Islam and the religious laws he brought. He sent his ten companions and others after them on this mission.

Then, Islam became firmly established and securely rooted. Far-off nations accepted Islam at the hands of the Muslims. With the passing of time, the situation of Islam changed. Many new laws were evolved from the (basic) texts as the result of numerous and unending developments. A fixed norm was required to keep (the process) free from error. Scholarship thus came to be a habit. For its acquisition, study was required. Thus, scholarship developed into a craft and profession.

The men who controlled the group feeling now occupied themselves with directing the affairs of royal governmental authority. The cultivation of scholarship was entrusted to others. Thus, scholarship became a profession that served to make a living. Men who lived in luxury and were in control of the government were too proud to do any teaching. Teaching came to be an occupation restricted to weak individuals. As a result, its practitioners came to be despised by the men who controlled the group feeling and the government.

Now, Yusuf, the father of Al-Hajjaj, was one of the lords and nobles of the Thaqif, well known for their share in the Arab group feeling and for their rivalry with the nobility of the Quraysh. Al-Hajjaj's teaching of the Quran was not the same as the teaching of the Quran is at this time, namely, a profession that serves to make a living. His teaching was the kind practiced at the beginning of Islam, and as we have just described.

-Ibn Khaldun, Al Muqadimah

Centuries ago, the traditional ulema, led by Al-Ghazali defeated the philosophers. They gained such ascendancy that the books of the philosophers were banned and they were persecuted and unfortunately so too was any doctrine that did not match these now traditional theologians. Logical and scientific thought was itself brought to question when cause-and-effect was denied by Al-Ghazali, who stated that a piece of cotton burning was not caused by the cotton but by Allah. These "traditional theologians" then went on to separate "religious" and "secular" knowledge as noted by Mahathir Muhamad and bring to an end ijtihad and replace it with taqlid – blind following of these traditional gents. Logic thus was not needed and the teaching of mathematics, particularly geometry, so integral to logic and to scientific thought, became scarce.

Al-Ghazali and his followers then opened a new vestige – mysticism. This mysticism originally started just like other reform groups in the Muslim Ummah to revive what was seen as a very materialistic world, now became a major factor in the definition of religiosity. As we earlier noted, describing the connection of this mysticism with anti-intellectualism, Ibn Khaldun notes:

"The Sufis are very much concerned with achieving this great joy through having the soul achieve that kind of perception. They attempt to kill the bodily powers and perceptions through exercise, and even the thinking power of the brain. In this way, the soul is to achieve the perception that comes to it from its own essence, when all the disturbances and hindrances caused by the body are removed. (The Sufis) thus achieve inexpressible joy and pleasure."

And again:

"The arguments and proofs belong in the category of corporeal perceptions, because they are produced by the powers of the brain, which are imagination, thinking, and memory. The first thing we are concerned with when we want to attain this kind of perception is to kill all these powers of the brain, because they object to such (perception) and work against it."

The power hold of the professional and now "traditional" theologians that started from the time the political leadership of the Khalifa stopped being both the religious and the political head, now reached its final form. They have gone so far as to make laws in the garb of Islam that state that speaking against them designates the offender as "fasiq" and this was a law practiced even by the Uthman Empire, where anyone who spoke against the "ulema" where designated "fasiq" (rebellious) and his testimony in court would not be valid for the rest of his life.

However, before going forward let us consider defining more clearly the people we are describing, who I have used many different and perhaps confusing terms for throughout the book. Some terms I have used are "ulema", "mullahs", professional theologians, traditional theologians, traditional scholars, etc.

Some characteristics of this group that I have been describing are as follows:

1. They study religion in exclusion of "secular" knowledge, typically in madrassas.

2. They consider themselves "professionals" often describe themselves as similar to doctors or engineers and make a living out of their "profession".

3. They typically teach in masjids and madrassas and hold "traditional" positions of authority including being the Imam of the masjid, the teacher of students at masjids and madrassas, involved in zakat collection and distribution, employ in religious festivities and events such as birth of a child, marriage, death.

This group is being seen as a special interest group that has clearly identifiable vested interests and collective power in key institutions of Islam. They have in essence usurped the religious function of the leader of the people, which in the times of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the Righteous Caliphs were not separated from the political and social leadership of the community. Their iron grip on Islam has been firm and complete and remains only peripherally challenged by the Secularists who do not challenge them in their domain but try to negate their domain.

Now, when I begin this kind of conversation, I am of course labeled Salafi or Wahabi, if not Kharijite or something worse – even non-Muslim or an "agent of the West". Yes, I have been labeled all of these by my enterprising opponents. However, I want to note that even the Salafis have this same professional ulema and the exact same cartel-like structure. We will discuss later how we can free the legal system from the grip of these brothers. But in this chapter we look at some other aspects to understand this great internal enemy and evil upon the Muslim Ummah.

Education & Waqf Funds

Once upon a time, our education was the best education in the world and Europeans would come to Cordoba and other Muslim citadels to study. Cambridge and Oxford universities modeled themselves on Muslim universities. Under the power and supervision of our theologians, Muslim education has been stripped of all its vitality and, as we noted in the chapter on Education, has created a major handicap for our civilization.

Another impact is that of waqf (Muslim non-profits). The educational institutions that we are so proud of in our past, were run by waqf funds and these were the main vehicles for such institutions, and not government subsidies and financing. These waqf funds ran everything from schools, universities, masjids, hospitals and many great public amenities. Now, the big question is, why did these waqf funds flourish in these olden times and why are they today, despite every effort, completely inefficient and useless? I stumbled upon the answer inadvertently while studying at the International Islamic University Malaysia. Discussing funding with a department head, the uncharacteristically frank professor informed me that they (the university) was struggling to get non-ulema and business-competent men to get hold of the waqf fund of the university.

It transpires that men who have been fed on cotton burning is by Allah and not by the cotton catching fire and similar logics, with brains damaged from mindless memorization and no practical or "secular" knowledge incorporated in them, men who have pursued Islam as a "profession", such men have no clue about business or the practical world outside. They are marvelously incompetent at running waqfs and yet are the main power brokers and committee-men. If you want to know where a big chunk of Malaysia' waqf money has been "invested", it is in properties in or near Kuala Lumpur being used as parking lots. I then went about investigating this trend to the best of my ability and I realize that this is a global Muslim phenomenon. If we look at the scale and the length of the damage done to us, it is mindboggling; centuries of starving our institutions and destroying their vitality and dynamism – the damage is incalculable.

Brain Damage

The memorization and primitive education methods and the focus directly or indirectly of killing the intellect and spirit of students, as we shall comprehensively cover in the chapter on education, is another progrom of the theologian class. They damage the mind of our children to create servile zombies. If Malek Bennabi wondered how and why our children are unable to live in a world of ideas, if Imran Khan wonders why Pakistani and Afghan young children are willing to blow themselves up and kill fellow Muslims, we need not look further for the cause; a zombie can be programed for any simple purpose except to think effectively.

Here is what Ibn Khaldun has to note about how the human spirit is tamed and made docile by domination of the spirit:

"If the domination is kind and just and the people under it are not oppressed by its laws and restrictions, they are guided by the courage or cowardice that they possess in themselves. They are satisfied with the absence of any restraining power. Self-reliance eventually becomes a quality natural to them. They would not know anything else. If, however, the domination with its laws is one of brutal force and intimidation, it breaks their fortitude and deprives them of their power of resistance as a result of their inertness that develops in the souls of the oppressed, as we shall explain.

"When laws are (enforced) by means of punishment, they completely destroy fortitude, because the use of punishment against someone who cannot defend himself generates in that person a feeling of humiliation that, no doubt, must break his fortitude.

"When laws are (intended to serve the purpose of) education and instruction and are applied from childhood on, they have to some degree the same effect, because people then grow up in fear and docility and consequently do not rely on their own fortitude. ..

"Furthermore, those who rely on laws and are dominated by them from the very beginning of their education and instruction in the crafts, sciences, and religious matters, are thereby deprived of much of their own fortitude. They can scarcely defend themselves at all against hostile acts. This is the case with students, whose occupation it is to study and to learn from teachers and religious leaders and who constantly apply themselves to instruction and education in very dignified gatherings. This situation and the fact that it destroys the power of resistance and fortitude must be understood.

"It is no argument that the men around Muhammad observed the religious laws, and yet did not experience any diminution of their fortitude, but possessed the greatest possible fortitude. When the Muslims got their religion from Muhammad, the restraining influence came from themselves, as a result of the encouragement and discouragement he gave them in the Quran.

"It was not a result of technical instruction or scientific education. They laws were the laws and percepts of the religion that they received orally and which their firmly rooted belief in the truth of the articles of faith caused them to observe. Their fortitude remained unabated, and it was not corded by education or authority. Umar said, "Those who are not (disciplined) by the religious law are not educated by God." Umar's desire was that everyone should have his restraining influence in himself. His certainty was that Muhammad knew best what is good for mankind.

...

"Clearly, then, governmental and educational laws destroy fortitude, because their restraining influence is something that comes from outside. The religious laws, on the other hand, do not destroy fortitude, because their restraining influence is something inherent."

-Al Muqadimah

This very excessive strictness and forced acceptance of a long list of facts, rules and regulations without any opportunity to argue or think creates that very same docility and intellectual death that is observable in children studying in madrassas. Their greatness and potential is stripped of them bare before they ever had the chance to grow into the lions they were meant to be. As noted earlier, we shall cover this aspect in greater detail in the chapter on education.

Drama Queens

Islam has to be lived, it cannot be parroted. Yet, if you listen to these theologians in masjids giving sermons, prayers, talks, or recitation of the Quran, you overwhelmingly see no true conviction in their voice. You see instead a parody of Islam; words that should sound like mountains barely make it to a mole hill, emotions that are supposed to flow naturally, sounds like being rehearsed by a failed Broadway actor. Nothing matches, not the words, the voice, the facial expression, the body language, it is all out of tune.

One "great" sheikh from Al-Azhar tells us a story of another great of the same institution who studied "adab" of yet another great Azharite for 8 years and only studied the deen 3 years. He is said that if he could, in hindsight, he would have also studied adab those three years. This of course makes no sense to the outsider. However, it does make sense; because speeches and lectures are the bread and butter of the "craft" of this class of men and what people are supposed to be impressed with. Such speeches do not come from personal experience of the real world and thus they have to artificially put up a drama. Having seen a very large number of these acts I am convinced that this is so. The reader is advised to carefully study Azharite and other "scholars" with this aspect in mind.

The fact of the matter is that Islam is truth, revelation, knowledge (deen) from Allah to guide us in understanding and correctly interacting with the world around us (dunya). Now, to master our deen we need to have mastery of the revelation AND mastery of the world around us. Secondly, we need to have practical experience and hands-on-practice of applying the deen to the dunya. The problem is that neither the ivory tower "ulema" understand the dunya around them, nor the modern Muslim scientists, engineers and other professionals have the understanding of the deen. One has the deen, other has the dunya, and both are unable to thus make sense of the deen to understand the dunya. Nor do either have the proper experience in the practice of its application. Nor are either parties trained to have the manners to discuss issues in a civilized manner and thus exchange effectively their expertise.

This is also because these "scholars" of either category do not have real knowledge. Their knowledge in their own fields is often defective. There is a very important reason for this and one that Ibn Khaldun explains perfectly thus:

The easiest method of acquiring the scientific habit is through acquiring the ability to express oneself clearly in discussing and disputing scientific problems. This is what clarifies their import and makes them understandable. Some students spend most of their lives attending scholarly sessions. Still, one finds them silent. They do not talk and do not discuss matters. More than is necessary, they are concerned with memorizing. Thus, they do not obtain much of a habit in the practice of science and scientific instruction. Some of them think that they have obtained (the habit). But when they enter into a discussion or disputation, or do some teaching, their scientific habit is found to be defective. The only reason for their deficiency is (lack of) instruction, together with the break in the tradition of scientific instruction (that affects them). Apart from that, their memorized knowledge may be more extensive than that of other scholars, because they are so much concerned with memorizing. They think that scientific habit is identical with memorized knowledge. But that is not so.

-Al Muqadimah

As you can see, the culture of memorization has bred a host of problems that go to the heart of nipping at the bud the kind and quality of people we need to solve the problem in the first place.

Returning to our dear theologians in particular, Malek Bennabi succinctly notes the lack of both knowledge and the drama in their act in the following words:

"These ignoramuses, or call them pretenders to knowledge do not talk, but prattle like innocent and playful children. They do not acquire knowledge gradually like children, either. In their prattle are personified senility and disease, for they are, in fact, old children."

These old children then spend their lives playing their drama in the masjids of the Ummah, the next one will premier this coming Friday; pray do visit to see for yourself and judge.

Fake Plastic Trees

What is the best mango tree? Is it one that looks pretty, has the longest branches, and the shiniest and most perfect leaves? Or is it one that gives the best fruit? The best mango tree is one that gives the best mangos. It is not the one which looks perfect but gives no fruit or gives bitter fruit. Yet, are we focused in producing real mango trees, that benefit society or are we making fake trees that look and feel right, but do not bear fruit for society?

Consider the Sahaba – just a single verse or chapter of the Quran would completely and drastically change them into amazing individuals who would leave massive footprints upon their societies. But today, after years of memorization and academic study, we see people who are unable to be a tiny fraction of that footprint.

Creating fake plastic trees will not help the environment, they will not feed our hungry Ummah; they will do nothing good for us. We have to stop and think what we are doing.

*****

We have apportioned blame and marked out the main problem makers. Let us now go forward to build a framework for the solution to our problem, and discuss the issues in greater detail within that framework.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 5: A POLITICAL FRAMEWORK

Islam is a complete way of life. It is vital for Muslims to deal with all that takes place around them as is written in the Quran; enjoin good and forbid evil. Islam is not merely a passive religion that we keep in our personal lives. It is not "I", it is "we". We recite Surah Al-Fatiha at least 17 times a day, repeating again and again iyya qn'a budu (you we worship), wa iyya qn'asteen (you we ask for help). Ih dinus (guide us). That is a minimum of 3*17=51 collectives and not a single singular "I" in the entire Surah. That is, only if we read our fard and not our sunnah, or other optional prayers. And what duwah do we pray after the shahada in ikama? Allahuma...

And yet the Muslim today has predominantly become the singular – offering his prayers, saying "we", "we" and "us" but walking away alone, thinking he has done his "duty". How strange, how utterly ridiculous the situation stands.

Not only is there a very strong social and community focus but for every Muslim, there is a political component and, where appropriate, even a military component in the way of Islam. This is particularly true when we see oppression against Muslims. In such circumstances, a true Muslim, far from being a passive preacher, must have a more holistic approach to life. And this is reflected in the life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions, all of whose lives are exemplified by social and political struggle as much as a spiritual struggle illustrated in prayer and fasting. Yet, Muslims today have lost track of the need to strive socially and politically.

Where we stand today, Islam is being attacked, Muslims are being persecuted, and Muslim states are being dissected and neutered. This is a process that did not start now, but one that has steadily flowed throughout history, whenever our enemies found the opportunity, take for example, Spain in the 15th century, The Maghrib under France, British India, Uthman Europe after World War I, Occupied Palestine, just to name a few. More recently in Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, amongst others. Islam today, without doubt, is threatened.

From Morocco to Philippines, from Chechnya to Somalia, we are facing internal divisions and external threats that seem beyond the ability of the Ummah to cope. How things stand today is visible to everyone. The vivid images of mass murder and imprisonment in Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, Philippines, Iraq, Afghanistan and more brings tears to the collective Muslim eyes. Yet, somehow the need is to hold our emotions and think clearly to fight back and regain our faith, strength and unity. The perennial question remains: what can a Muslim do? Is it that Muslims must live under oppression and endure and hope that Allah (swt) will save us? Or is it that this is perhaps Allah's Will? Yet, Islam does not appear to be a passive religion:

And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah. But if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.

(Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #193)

A doctrine of passivity and fatalism does not seem to hold. If one takes this principle of fighting oppression, and sees oppressors in powerful countries such as the United States and Israel, which as individuals we Muslims cannot fight, a Muslim is faced with a moral quandary. Clearly, in the singular, Muslims today are quite helpless. As individuals, Muslims can be locked up, tortured or simply eliminated. But as a people, united in faith to the idea of Islam, we can fight them, insh'Allah. To do so, we need our collective strength. We need to be organized, creating a movement to establish a Muslim state that can project our collective will.

Looking at a world map, we see a host of Muslim states. One may wonder, why establish an Islamic state when there are so many that profess to be Muslim states? The problem is that there is no Islamic state today because we do not see any country today that reflects a state in the spirit of Medina, even remotely so. We cannot consider Saudi Arabia or Iran as Islamic states. To analyze the problem, let us look at defining an Islamic state today: This is a state that practices Islamic Law; whose government is not oppressive; that does not provide lip service to Islam but also practices it in letter and spirit and a state that is not a client state of non-Muslim powers, in particular those openly fighting against Islam and Muslims.

An Islamic state is one where the state is based on the principles of the Quran and Sunnah and reflects the spirit of the state of Medina. This is a state where justice prevails and where tyranny is banished. In an Islamic state, disagreements in government are not resolved through bloodshed but through enlightenment and wisdom built on the Quran and Sunnah. It is also a state where corruption is an outcast and not considered a daily fact of life. Some of the central principles that we believe are important for an Islamic state today are given near the end of the book under the chapter titled "Central Principles". Much of this book attempts to find one possible solution to some of the major issues including political model, economic model, education and various social issues.

The long and short of it is that today there is no state that comes remotely close to the ideal of a Muslim state as was established in Medina-tun-Nabyi. In some ways, perhaps Sweden is closer to a Muslim state than most professed Muslim states. It is plain to everyone with how much dignity Sweden treats its citizens, how it conducts itself in international affairs, and how it combines welfare and free markets, production and environmental consciousness, justice and freedom of speech.

To recap, there is no place on earth today where an Islamic state exists as in the spirit of the state of Medina during the Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) time. We would need to do the hard work, with our sweat and blood to create this Islamic state.

However, unlike the Hizb-ut-Tahrir, we cannot see the Islamic state as an end in itself; the Islamic state can only be a means to an end, a tool if you will, and one that can only be utilized effectively if we first change ourselves. For the Quran reads Because Allah will never change the Grace which He hath bestowed on a people until they change what is in their (own) souls: and verily Allah is He Who heareth and knoweth (all things).(8:53)

To change ourselves we would need to diagnose what is wrong with us, both at the individual and collective levels, and look beyond the symptoms and at the actual causes. The Islamic state would then be a tool, yet not an exclusive tool, nor the most important one, for us to utilize in correcting those illnesses we suffer.

We must remember however that such a state would need to be established while being under military threat by our enemies; countries that today attempt to control the world and would do everything in their power to stop us. Even if we, insh'Allah build a state, it is more likely than not that the United States or whoever else, would find some pretext to label us terrorists, twisting the truth and fabricating evidence. We have seen this course of events time and again most recently in Somalia. If Muslims attempted to, with the Grace of Allah, create an Islamic state, they would face the greatest military, political and economic might collected by the enemies of Islam today, applied to stop us.

Now, like ants we would labor away, toiling away at a colony, only to see it destroyed. Even if such a state can attain massive economies of scale and scope, creating such a state seems impossible and hopeless, because of the likely reaction we will face against us.

Thus, our choice of location would have to be careful; to fight oppression and defend herself, this Islamic State would need to have the capacity to do so, that is, the ability to project conventional military might. There are few countries worldwide that have this and even fewer Muslim countries that can compete.

Today, we are at a crossroad, with three choices before us. One road will take us to assimilating into the Western civilization and relegating Islam to the role that Christianity today plays in the West or that the religion of the Romans played in their age. The second road leads us to reviving Islam in its true spirit and meaning. The third choice is to decay and die where we stand.

What is certain is that if we are to take the second road, to revive Islam in its true spirit and meaning, it is clear that the way forward is together, as the entire Muslim Ummah rather than in separate nationalisms. Divided into different nationalisms and cut across our petty differences, racial, cultural and otherwise, we are bound to fail as we did in Spain. It is most striking to compare the similarities of Muslim Spain to the politics of Muslims today. Each little principality nearsightedly fixated on their proud "Me First" slogan. Some of these myopic states even joined Western powers to fight their brothers. Each of these states were taken down one at a time. Once Spain was conquered, Islam was razed out of every nook and corner of her. If we look at contemporary history, from Ataturk's "Turkey First", we now have "Pakistan First", "Bangladesh First", "Iraq First", "Egypt First" and more; we see the same pattern. Look, we can't all be first; we may all just end up last.

Spanish Muslims allied themselves with Christians to fight fellow Muslims to guard their narrow and myopic interests. How different from this folly is what we are doing today? See the Pakistan Army fight the Mujahideen and aid Western Allies in Afghanistan. Remember that without Pakistan's strategic, political and logistic support, NATO and the US would be hard-pressed to maintain the presence there.

The Quran reminds us that our Creator will not change our condition unless we change ourselves, as was mentioned earlier but let us recap this critical factor one more time:

Because Allah will never change the Grace which He hath bestowed on a people until they change what is in their (own) souls: and verily Allah is He Who heareth and knoweth (all things). (8:53)

This does not, however, mean that we must wait to first create perfect Muslims to build an Islamic state. Indeed, such a course is self-contradictory because a perfect Muslim does not ignore the social and political sphere but acts to change the world around him or her. The Prophet (peace be upon him) did not wait to create perfect Muslims to start the state of Medina. Medina in fact, included many individuals who had nominal faith, others who had little knowledge, yet others who were downright hypocrites and last but not the least, non-Muslims such as the large, powerful and influential community of Jews who opposed at every turn Islam and the state of Medina. The state was a work-in-progress application, not a final, tested and tuned production unit. Is there a better methodology than that methodology of the Prophet (peace be upon him)?

*****

The solutions presented in this book are held together within the framework of an Islamic state, duly noting that the Islamic state is not an end in itself but a means to an end, a veritable tool and framework for the real solutions.

One of the great stumbling blocks to creating an Islamic state is that there is a shortage of intellectual work done to clearly define how exactly such a state should operate; and there is a lack of consensus in the little work there is. The chasms of disagreement are so wide that excommunication is preferred over reaching out to the other side, a chronic problem given that we have forgotten the etiquettes and methods of civilized argumentation; it is either stony silence, precipitous personal attack or even violence. This is the sad state of affairs. The attempt in this chapter and in the following chapters will be to develop one possible framework within which insh'Allah a new consensus can be reached. The purpose here is to find a practical and efficient solution to how we can have a viable Islamic state today.

While doing so, we also seek to simultaneously diagnose specific ailments of the Ummah. After all, a diagnosis is useless without medication and vice versa. As we have noted earlier, the Secularists/Modernists want to relegate Islam to the masjid and transplant themselves to the western Weltgeist. Conversely, on the other side of the spectrum, we have people who want to reject the present world and recreate the period when Islam was ascendant.

While these two groups of people have hijacked the debate and become two colossi fighting a battle to the death against each other, the common man on the street does not necessarily agree with either side. The common man seems to know instinctively that the answer lies in between the ideologies of the two groups, yet have not articulated and rationalized a path between the two. After all, an ideological compromise built only around the premise of moderation and taking the middle path is at best weak and would not have the energy or detailed follow through to solve our problems.

What is in fact needed is a synthesis of ideas rather than a compromise and such a model is of essence to the present political situation within the Muslim World. We note that this model cannot be a closed system, in that we cannot hope to create the "perfect solution". There is no permanent cure for poverty, inequality, or a whole host of other evils in these pages. To attempt to create such a system is clearly beyond what has so far been achievable. If one attempts such a system and fails, it often results in a far worse result as amply exemplified in the former Soviet Union. This author will venture to say that there may be no perfect solution. One must aim to design a system that takes this into consideration, a system that can adapt and has adequate "safety valves" and a mechanism to bring in emerging factors as they develop. This can thus be considered as a contingency approach.

While this synthesis is a wider work and will involve considerable thought and time, this book will attempt to first build a skeletal structure. The areas to be addressed will include the political system, the economic system, the legal system, the military and other such important topics. We cannot be encyclopedic but will aim to cover the most important.

It must be stressed that all elements of the Islamic state given here are interlinked and cannot work independently, nor stand effectively on their own; they act together in unison and balance. Lastly, within each sub-system, adequate checks and balances are of vital import.

ISLAMIC MERITOCRACY

Let us start by building the foundations of a new political paradigm. Noting that while the dominant view of Islamic scholars is that we are not to discuss the differences of the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him), we set this ruling aside to fully understand and develop a political model of an Islamic state.

When Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) passed away, he did not leave us with a written roadmap for the future of the state of Medina. Thereafter, a split evolved as to whom and by what mechanism a successor was to be chosen. Rifts and disagreements developed even among the close companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him). These rifts continued to widen thereafter. Many questions remained unanswered. Should the Islamic state have remained in the hands of his closest relatives? If in fact, a new leader was to be elected, by what method was this to be achieved? How long should the Khalifah's (leader's) term be? If Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) didn't give out clear guidelines, then is Islam really complete?

These are important questions, and the last one is blasphemous. And Allah knows best. To be brief, what the Prophet (peace be upon him) meant when he said that our religion was complete and that Islam was a complete way of life, is perhaps not that all possible actions and issues have been cataloged like an encyclopedia or a computer program. Rather, that all the principles needed to address every action has been given. Applications of those principles are also given in the example of the Prophet (peace be upon him). Just as a student when he is working on his arithmetic looks at the relevant formula, and then if he has further trouble, looks at an example on how the formula is used, Islam gives us the principles and then an example on how it is to be applied. Our answer will not be the same every time we have a new problem. Rather, we will look at the "formula" (Islamic principles) and fashion our answer on the same pattern as the "example" (the life of the Prophet, peace be upon him).

This represents a break from the present hard line approach as well as the secular approach. The hard line approach takes the position where every problem has to come up with the same solution as the example and the ulema determine an encyclopedic list of "correct" actions. The secular approach rejects the formula itself and takes one out of the western textbook. The contingency approach on the other hand that this book adopts is one of the central cornerstones of our model.

To be fair, there is some flexibility in the hard line approach through limited ijtihad, ijma and qayyas. But these have been highly limited particularly since Al Juwaini, the teacher of Al Ghazali and by some account, Al Ghazali himself and several others who came after him all supported the idea of the termination of ijtihad. Taha Jabir Al-Alwani notes that by the sixth century Hijri, Muslims had been conditioned not only to accept the freezing of ijtihad but the banning of it altogether and its replacement with taqlid (blind imitation). This is in gross violation of the verse:

They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)! (9:31, Al-Quran)

And the explanation of the verse by the Prophet (peace be upon him) "They didn't worship them but (the worship was in the sense) whatever they made halal for them, they considered it halal, whatever they made haram for them, they considered it haraam."

(Tirmidhi Book of Tafseer-Surah Taubah, declared Hasan by Imam Tirmidhi, Tauheed ul Muslimeen pg. 272)

Similarly, to be fair to the Secularists / Progressives / Modernists, many of them attempt to stay within the Islamic framework by taking the most ambiguous rulings or the most lenient interpretations possible to fit their agenda. However, the point remains that both sides can broadly be categorized within the classifications prescribed.

The Quran and Sunnah give us the principles that can guide every facet of life. What Islam does not provide is a fixed economic, social and political system. This world is a test for Man, and while Islam guides us, it is not meant to reduce life to an endless list of rules and regulations set by x, y and z. Otherwise Islam would not be "an open way for every one of you". Islam is a framework for dealing with life, not taking the essence of life out of life itself. Allah knows best, but perhaps this political challenge is a form of intellectual quest for Muslims to collectively navigate. And perhaps Muslims of each age would find different solutions to these as the circumstances around them change.

Taking a step back, in the classical view of the world that we "inherited" from the Greeks, perfect and encyclopedic solutions of the world can exist but the modern world's theory (and the original Islamic point of view) was not of a static, unchanging world, but an expanding and changing universe. Allama Iqbal notes and explains this in great detail in Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam while responding to the allegations of Spengler. I reproduce a section from the same to illustrate and effectively explain this point:

"It now remains to eradicate a grave misunderstanding created by Spengler's widely read book, The Decline of the West. His two chapters devoted to the problem of Arabian culture constitute a most important contribution to the cultural history of Asia. They are, however, based on a complete misconception of the nature of Islam as a religious movement, and of the cultural activity which it initiated. Spengler's main thesis is that each culture is a specific organism, having no point of contact with cultures that historically precede or follow it. Indeed, according to him, each culture has its own peculiar way of looking at things which is entirely inaccessible to men belonging to a different culture. In his anxiety to prove this thesis he marshals an overwhelming array of facts and interpretations to show that the spirit of European culture is through and through anti-classical. And this anti-classical spirit of European culture is entirely due to the specific genius of Europe, and not to any inspiration she may have received from the culture of Islam which, according to Spengler, is thoroughly "Magian" in spirit and character.

"Spengler's view of the spirit of modern culture is, in my opinion, perfectly correct. I have, however, tried to show in these lectures that the anti-classical spirit of the modern world has really arisen out of the revolt of Islam against Greek thought. It is obvious that such a view cannot be acceptable to Spengler; for, if it is possible to show that the anti-classical spirit of modern culture is due to the inspiration which it received from the culture immediately preceding it, the whole argument of Spengler regarding the complete mutual independence of cultural growths would collapse. I am afraid Spengler's anxiety to establish this thesis has completely perverted his vision of Islam as a cultural movement.

"By the expression "Magian culture" Spengler means the common culture associated with what he calls "Magian group of religions", i.e. Judaism, ancient Chaldean religion, early Christianity, Zoroastrianism, and Islam. That a Magian crust has grown over Islam, I do not deny. Indeed my main purpose in these lectures has been to secure a vision of the spirit of Islam as emancipated from its Magian overlayings which, in my opinion, have misled Spengler. His ignorance of Muslim thought on the problem of time, as well as of the way in which the "I", as a free center of experience, has found expression in the religious experience of Islam, is simply appalling. Instead of seeking light from the history of Muslim thought and experience, he prefers to base his judgment on vulgar beliefs as to the beginning and end of time. Just imagine a man of overwhelming learning finding support for the supposed fatalism of Islam in such Eastern expressions and proverbs as the "vault of time", and "everything has a time!" However, on the origin and growth of the concept of time in Islam, and on the human ego as a free power, I have said enough in these lectures. It is obvious that a full examination of Spengler's view of Islam, and of the culture that grew out of it, will require a whole volume. In addition to what I have said before, I shall offer here one more observation of a general nature. Spengler says:

"The kernel of the prophetic teaching is already Magian. There is one God– be He called Yahweh, Ahuramazda, or Marduk-Baal– who is the principle of good, and all other deities are either impotent or evil. To this doctrine there attached itself the hope of a Messiah, very clear in Isaiah, but also bursting out everywhere during the next centuries, under pressure of an inner necessity. It is the basic idea of Magian religion, for it contains implicitly the conception of the world-historical struggle between Good and Evil, with the power of Evil prevailing in the middle period, and the Good finally triumphant on the Day of Judgment."

"If this view of the prophetic teaching is meant to apply to Islam it is obviously a misrepresentation. The point to note is that the Magians admitted the existence of false gods; only they did not turn to worship them. Islam denies the very existence of false gods. In this connection Spengler fails to appreciate the cultural value of the idea of the finality of prophethood in Islam. No doubt, one important feature of Magian culture is a perpetual attitude of expectation, a constant looking forward to the coming of Zoroaster's unborn sons, the Messiah, or the Paraclete of the fourth gospel. I have already indicated the direction in which the student of Islam should seek the cultural meaning of the doctrine of finality in Islam. It may further be regarded as a psychological cure for the Magian attitude of constant expectation which tends to give a false view of history. Ibn Khaldūn, seeing the spirit of his own view of history, has fully criticized and, I believe, finally demolished the alleged revelational basis in Islam of an idea similar, at least in its psychological effects, to the original Magian idea which had reappeared in Islam under the pressure of Magian thought."

This critical mistake is where this author believes Al Ghazali let us down in his implicit acceptance of the former worldview, despite his otherwise brilliant attack on the philosophers. The philosophers, learning from the Greeks, had precisely the same static worldview. But if their greatest critique could not see this blatant error, who would?

In this changing world, Muslims of every age need to find solutions to the problem-world around them, rather than copy-pasting the answers from the past. Muslims of our Age and time must rise up to the challenge, while understanding that these solutions can only be imperfect. They can also be of great value nonetheless, for these solutions would be built on those eternal truths and guidelines that Allah, in His Infinite Grace, has provided us, and that represents a miracle in itself as only the Creator could provide eternal principles in an expanding and evolving universe.

Meritocracy

Meritocracy as an idea implies that the basis of government is based on the merit of the candidate. The concept of meritocracy is not new, but was talked about as far back as Plato, whose work Republic illustrated his ideas of what meritocracy meant to him. While we earlier rejected the classical static worldview, which was a key feature of Plato's world, we share the idea of meritocracy with him.

The Islamic state of Medina was also run on the basis of merit under the Khalifa-e-Rashidun and it was a state where consultation took place between the learned, pious, wise and capable rather than on a one-man-one-vote basis. Leadership as a concept in Islam resides in the merit of the candidate4. An Islamic state is meant to be run on the principles of merit; the most able candidate should rule the country.

4. See Zafar Bangash, "The Concepts of Leader and Leadership in Islam," 2000, for a further discussion on why Islam and democracy are not compatible.

Democracy makes the assumption that all men are equal in their capacity to judge the most able candidate. However, while all men are equal, they are not equal in their knowledge and wisdom, either in Islam or in common experience, and therefore, Islam and democracy are fundamentally different from each other5. While there may be many possible solutions to build a political model based on merit, we look to create a balance between the quantity factor of universal participation and quality valuation of participants.

5. Ibid.

All men have some right to a say in government, yet our principles suggest this has to be weighed according to the wisdom and knowledge distributed in the populace. One of the earliest Western thinkers, Socrates, openly considered democracy as a flawed concept; that it required the wisdom of its leaders to be based on the opinions of all citizens held in equal weight6. Today however, democracy has become a sacred cow that the world must worship. We as Muslims need do no such thing; we do not need to hold on to foreign concepts to gain legitimacy. Our discussions need not be burdened by this modern, near-pantheistic religion.

6. See for instance, Isidor Stone, "The Trial of Socrates," 1998.

Dissecting Democracy

Taking a fresh look at the present political landscape, in the following pages some of the possibilities of a new system are fleshed out. Today, the overarching dominance of democracy makes political systems one dimensional. Instead, we look to break open the paradigm and look at the mechanism inside. We propose a multi-dimensional approach to the political mechanism. Once we open the straightjacket of democracy, we find that many of the mechanisms that are given as fixed can be made variable. Some of these mechanisms include:

1. One vote per voter

2. Batch process elections

3. Rule by majority within a first past the post voting mechanism

4. Checks and Balances

Let us look at each of these factors in turn.

Multiple Votes per Voter

Given that in our system, all men are not considered equal in their knowledge and wisdom and thus are not entitled to equality of vote; one vote per voter can be considered a redundant concept. Changing this variable, we find a range of new possibilities of weighted voting. Virtually any value we consider of worth can be worked into the system to be a merit. For instance, education level, age, marital status and religious knowledge can be made factors of merit.

Continuous Flow Process

In Operations Research terminology, voting systems today are essentially batch processes. A batch of votes is selected and counted, gaining the elected representatives a term until the next batch comes about. Today, this system presents many problems including the fact that while voters can influence their representatives once every election cycle, interest groups can influence them 365 days a year. This, in reality, can often lead to de facto disenfranchisement. Thus, the American Congress can give multiple standing ovations to Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu and send Israel billions of dollars in aid, while American soldiers die fighting enraged Muslims and millions of Americans remain homeless, some living in tent cities not dissimilar to the lower end of the Third World.

Instead, one alternative may be to look at elections as a continuous flow process. Here, instead of working in a batch, the process works continuously, with voting taking place piece by piece, with a few districts at a time, to cover a country, if necessary, over the same period as a batch process would.

The electorate would be able to influence and indicate approval continuously while greatly simplifying the logistics process. This also means that vote administration can be handled by a much smaller organization, a considerably important consideration in the Third World where elections represent a major economic cost and logistics challenge. Since our Islamic state will be located in the Third World, this issue is particularly relevant to our discussion.

Governments would also not constantly be changing as marginally, one (or a few) voting districts would not be enough to topple a government typically unless the majority was marginal. The system could also be fine-tuned by increasing or decreasing the number of elections in a given period of time.

Preferential Voting

Preferential voting systems are increasingly popular and are most well-known in Australia7. A preferential voting system over a first-past-the-post system can ensure that politics does not become polarized in a two-party duopoly, as most democratic countries today are. It would also allow the voting system is more efficient in indicating voter approval and produces a more accurate allocation of candidates. There are a variety of methods to express a preferential voting system. The choice of such a system is only limited by mathematics and the capability-limit of computing systems.

7. See Benjamin Reilly, "The Global Spread of Preferential Voting: Australian Institutional Imperialism?" 2004, Australian Journal of Political Science , 39 (2), 253-266

One example is of a preferential list of candidates ranked by each voter. For instance, if the candidate who was a voter's first choice is not among the two most popular candidates calculated by the voting system, his choice is automatically moved to the next candidate on the voter's list until he is voting for a relevant candidate and his vote is not wasted.

Thus, we may have a voting system where a citizen has one vote by default but progressively has more votes depending on a merit system. Voting takes place in a continuous flow electoral process with preferential voting for candidates.

Expanded Separation of Power

The best example and arguably the most successful check and balance mechanism among political systems have thus far been the United States' constitution. The US constitution works on the principles of division of power with a separate Judiciary, Executive and Legislature. If we seek to build a better system we can increase the separation of power to include incrementally more divisions. For instance, we may include a constitutionally separate central bank, central statistics and central audit, along with the judiciary, legislature and executive. Utilizing such an approach, we arrive at a six pillar division of power in comparison to the three pillars in the US Constitution. The figures indicate the difference graphically.

A separate government audit arm can ensure that government does not overstep its boundaries; that checks and balances are not ignored, that government corruption is effectively punished and that the government budget execution tallies. The discussion shall return later to the importance of some of these added arms of the government in more detail.

The Judiciary

Within the political model outlined, the legal system is envisaged to be an independent arm of the constitution. It must be tied to the educational system of the country and have a meritocratic basis on the level of Islamic education one has. Thus, the governing body of the legal system should be elected with a bias towards those who have religious knowledge. For instance, in our proposed political setup, a citizen who has taken Islam as a subject and passed exams at the high school graduation level may receive one vote, a citizen having done the same at a college level may receive 5 votes, and a citizen that has studied Islam at the graduate level may receive 10 votes. This voting for the legal religious governing body – that is independent of the other arms of the government – would take place parallel to the primary voting mechanism of our Medina. This voting could be less frequent, for instance every other election to give it more stability and continuity.

On the basis of the same political model, the mandate of the Judiciary may be restricted to those laws that are explicitly given in Islam, i.e. the nass ordinances (more on that later), to upholding the constitution and for implementing the laws passed by the legislature. The legislature should not have authority in those laws that are explicitly given to us by Allah and as described through the Nass ordinances, thus giving Islam meaningful and real primacy in the constitution. However, on all other issues the legislature may be ascendant and the advice of the judicial Islamic council may be sought but remain non-mandatory.

The police force may be directly subservient to the Judiciary. As such, the Judiciary may be able to fire and replace any officer of the law. Officers could maintain the Muslim equivalent of habeas corpus which, while a western term, is easily supplanted into the time of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Citizens of Medina were not unlawfully detained. Further, examples of the importance for the writ of the law abound in the example of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Examples of impartiality and fairness in the courts of Medina are also well documented. The Judiciary may thus stand as a strong, viable and independent pillar of our Islamic state.

The Masjid as Central

The masjid must be returned to its role as the central and basic administrative and political unit. The representative of the people leads the prayers and is available directly to them for interaction. This will bring real accountability and government to the community and will allow everyone the chance to participate in the decision making process. Thus, our system in a sense is a hybrid indirect-direct participatory form of government.

Further, this may also dissuade un-Islamic characters from seeking office as the task of leading the prayers may prove enough as an overbearing task and as an exposé of their claim to act as a barrier to their office.

Returning to the original system were women pray at the back row, children in the middle and men in the front will allow women to be enfranchised into the political and social system within our model, insh'Allah (more on gender related issues later).

Back to top

# CHAPTER 6: ECONOMIC MODEL

Glossary of terms used is provided at the end of the book.

I owe a debt of gratitude to Sheikh Imran Hosein for a proper understanding of riba and money from an Islamic perspective. Prior to this understanding, I had, indeed in earlier editions of 21st Century Islamic State did not consider the idea of fiat currency being haram. However, I have now made a 180 degree turn and accept with full conviction that this is the case.

Before we begin though, a point I wish to convey to the great challenge is not stating what is _haram,_ but rather finding a viable alternative to the present Western economic model, that can compete effectively against it, while staying genuine to Islam's principles. It is in this challenge that this paper is exclusively focused on.

Another issue at hand is that in the present Muslim world, we have, on the one hand, nominally Muslim economists who accept the Western model implicitly or explicitly, on the basis of a _fait accompli,_ that there is no other alternative for us, and we have on the other hand more traditional Islamic scholars that fail to understand the basic mechanics, advantages and characteristics of modern (Western) economic systems, and are thus unable to understand that the feeble "models" they put forward would not be able to compete against the West. This paper attempts to find a middle way that makes some sacrifices, the principle of which is the exclusion of the consensus and opinions of past Islamic traditional scholars. Instead we take our basis solely in the Quran and Sunnah.

The fundamental viability of any state is its economic system. The inability of the Muslim world to create viable economic models that are not cheap replicas of Western economies is perhaps the biggest challenge that we face. Riba (interest) is central to the western economy and for Muslims this is unacceptable. Any models we develop on the lines of their system are therefore fundamentally un-Islamic. We have to be brave in breaking new ground, in finding a viable alternative framework rather than conniving the latest trick in the book to put another name for riba, and somehow guise it as "rent", "fee", "resale" or the many other terms we play with. Riba is wrong; there is no going around this.

A Metaphor

A metaphor for the situation as it stands is that of a Ferrari. A Ferrari is a beautifully engineered machine that is designed to be driven in the roadways of Europe. Let us consider the Western economic system to be the equal of a red Ferrari and what we have as equal to a rickshaw, it is small wonder that we are overtaken and lapped frequently in the race, and in the event of an accident between the rickshaw and the Ferrari, it is the former that is worse off. Somewhere down the line the Muslim world wanted its own a Ferrari and imported a green coloured one from Italy. However, our rickshaw driver did not know how to drive a Ferrari. Nor did we consider whether the pot-holed roads of the Third World were appropriate for the low ride and suspension system of the Ferrari. And we did not even considered the high cost of maintaining the Ferrari, the poor fuel economy or the lack of spare parts and skilled technicians to maintain it.

Furthermore, the local mullah proclaimed rightfully that the Ferrari engine runs on petrol (riba) which is haram. Therefore, with our Green Ferrari imported from Italy, we decided to remove the engine.

Now, with the engine removed, the quandary came about, how we could generate kinetic motion for our Ferrari. In this regard, some brothers from the local masjid come along and start pushing the green Ferrari down the road and there thus was a jubilant round of nara-e-taqbirs. However, the Western Ferrari was still way faster, and no matter how hard the brothers pushed, there was a definite speed limit for our Green Ferrari.

While lapping the Green Ferrari multiple times, on one occasion, the Red Ferrari decided to rear-end the Green Ferrari, perhaps out of spite. The result was that the brothers from the masjid pushing the Ferrari all ended up at the hospital. Now, there was a Green Ferrari without an engine parked at the side of the road with no brothers brave (or stupid) enough to push the Ferrari forward.

In these circumstances, some academics from a local "Islamic university" then showed up, deciding that the Green Ferrari needs a new diesel engine. And these fine folks and their helpers have been trying to build and fit a diesel engine into the Ferrari ever since. However, there are some fundamental problems with this approach. Firstly, a diesel engine would be bulkier and heavier than a petrol equivalent. This would mean the space provided in the Ferrari engine compartment would not be enough. Even so, the mounts would not be strong enough to hold up the engine; and, the fuel pump, gearing and transmission would need to be changed. And in the end, all said and done, the balance of the Ferrari would be lost; and it is the balance of the Ferrari that is a key element to why people buy a Ferrari in the first place. In any case, it would be by far a very poor solution from an engineering point of view; you see, _a Ferrari is designed around an engine, not the other way around._

What we perhaps need is not replacing the Ferrari engine but in building our own car around a _diesel engine_ we have researched and developed. Yes, certainly we can take apart a Ferrari and take a good look at the internal mechanics and engineering. But the solution is not imposing diesel into a Ferrari but building a car that is optimal for our circumstances and our engine.

Perhaps the car that we come up with will not be a Ferrari but it would still be a far more meaningful solution than what we have today or what our misguided academics and other incompetents are leading us towards.

The Ferrari petrol engine is the equivalent of the riba-based financial system. Its main advantage is its ability to garner savings and convert those savings into efficient investments, at a huge scale unforeseen in history. To compete with this system, we need to build a savings-investment engine that does not run on riba but can compete with the Ferrari engine along the following lines:

1. Effectively gather and encourage savings

2. Convert savings into efficient investments

3. Do so at a scale and scope that can nurture, support and sustain modern industry, commerce and technological development.

We shall return to the savings-investment issue, but with this allegorical overview in mind, let us then start this discussion with a look at what is considered riba and how we can understand it today.

Perhaps the car that we come up with will not be a Ferrari but it would still be a far more meaningful solution than what we have today or what our misguided academics and other incompetents are leading us towards.

*****

With this allegorical overview in mind, let us then start this discussion with a look at what is considered riba. The discussions in the next section of this chapter are a summary of what I have learned from, and have been convinced by Sheikh Imran Hosein.

Riba and Money

In the first verse on riba, the Quran discusses riba in the following manner (30:39):

The above is given in the clearest possible word-for-word translation of the first ayat revealed regarding riba. Muhammad Asad in The Message of the Quran defines riba in the following manner:

"Roughly speaking, the opprobrium of riba (in the sense in which this term is used in the Qur'an and in many sayings of the Prophet) attaches to profits obtained through interest-bearing loans involving an exploitation of the economically weak by the strong and resourceful: an exploitation characterized by the fact that the lender, while retaining full ownership of the capital loaned, and having no legal concern with the purpose for which it is to be used or with the manner of its use, remains contractually assured of gain irrespective of any losses which the borrower may suffer in consequence of this transaction.

"With this definition in mind, we realize that the question as to what kinds of financial transactions fall within the category of riba is, in the last resort, a moral one, closely connected with the socioeconomic motivation underlying the mutual relationship of borrower and lender; and, stated in purely economic terms, it is a question as to how profits and risks may be equitably shared by both partners to a loan transaction. It is, of course, impossible to answer this double question in a rigid, once-for-all manner; our answers must necessarily vary in accordance with the changes to which man's social and technological development – and, thus, his economic environment – is subject. Hence, while the Quranic condemnation of the concept and practice of riba is unequivocal and final, every successive Muslim generation is faced with the challenge of giving new dimensions and a fresh economic meaning to this term which, for want of a better word, may be rendered as "usury"."

Having thus understood riba, let us now turn our attention to an important kind of riba, _riba al-fadl_ , which relates to riba in money transactions. After all, money is the fundamental financial building block, riba here is thus of extreme importance. We start with two principles:

1. What constitutes money should have intrinsic value either in the form of precious metals or commodities of staple food consumption that have a shelf-life.

2. These precious metals and commodities as given in Point 1 are prohibited from like for like transactions unless they are exchanged equal for equal and the transaction is a spot transaction (and not on credit).

The proof of these two points is given at the end of the book under "Proof of Riba And Money". Sheikh Imran Hosein, in The Prohibition of Riba in the Quran and Sunnah explains the issue with great clarity:

If one person gives a loan of one gold dinar to another, then the contractual obligation for repayment of the loan should not exceed one gold dinar. Secondly, just as we need to buy French Francs when we visit France, so too, in a market which uses real money, people need to buy money. Just as we may seek to buy the French Franks with US dollars, so too, in a market which uses real money, we may seek to buy gold dinars with silver dirhams. Or we may wish to purchase a dozen larger size gold coins with a weight of one dozen ounces, with smaller size gold coins (and this is like changing five US $20 currency notes for a US $100 currency note, - with the exception that paper money is itself riba). Such money transactions, i.e. in which money is exchanged for money, are required to meet the condition of equal for equal and hand to hand in order to avoid riba.

It is of crucial importance for us to carefully note that while like for like required an equal for equal transaction which was also a spot transaction, when gold, silver, dates etc., were being bought and sold, this was not so for camels:

'Hassan bin Muhammad bin Ali bin Abi Talib reported that Ali bin Abi Talib sold his camel, named 'Usaifir, in return for twenty camels (on credit).' (Muwatta, Imam Malik).

'Nafi' reported that Abdullah bin Umar bought a she-camel in exchange for four camels and arranged that those four camels should be delivered to the owner at Rabdhah.' (Muwatta, Imam Malik).

The reason for this was that camels were not used as money, while dates were sometimes used as money. And so four young camels could be exchanged for one adult camel, but two baskets of inferior quality dates could not be exchanged for one basket of superior quality dates.

To sum up:

1. Fiat Currency is un-Islamic

2. Transactions in a medium of exchange (i.e. any form of money) must have like-for-like and equal-for-equal, spot transactions

In addition, we have these principles:

3. That money cannot be created out of nothing

4. That someone seeking to keep another's money must have explicit permission to invest it elsewhere

Point 3 may be derived in a number of ways, including based on the intrinsic value necessary in Islamic money transactions. Money being created without effort and without risk are two key characteristics of riba and fractional reserve banking does both. Point 4 is self-evident. These two points imply that fractional reserve banking is un-Islamic.

Furthermore, corporate personhood did not exist until recent history and has no basis in Islam. Limited liability is itself another key characteristic of riba, both these implying that corporations as they stand today are un-Islamic. Thus we conclude that the following are un-Islamic:

1. Fiat currency

2. Interest-based lending

3. Fractional reserve banking

4. Limited Liability in any form

With this premise, let us now look at the economy today and the quest for an alternative system to the present interest-based system. We thus return to our discussion of the savings-investment issue we touched upon in the earlier section.

Savings-Investment

The fundamental question for an Islamic economy, or perhaps any economy for that matter, is in defining how savings-investment will work in an alternative framework. That is, how savings in an economy may effectively be transformed into investments. In our analogy of the Ferrari, the conversion of Savings to Investment is like the conversion of chemical to heat energy in the engine and thus, the Savings-Investment mechanism of the economy is like the engine that drives the Ferrari.

If we take out interest-based, fractional reserve banking and limited liability (thus corporations as we know them, stock flotation and leverage), we appear to be taking out this important link between savings and investment that economies today thrive on. It would be like our Ferrari not having an engine. In taking out this important feature, we need to find an adequate replacement.

This replacement insh'Allah can be an alternative venture capital centered investment economy. An additional policy may be to redesigning the corporation as we know it to incorporate liability. This would create a very different economic system.

The Unfair Advantage of Banks over Equity Financing

Let us look at why Venture Capital (VC) and other equity investment vehicles are not able to compete today with banking. One reason is that western economies subsidize loans over investment in equity because interest payments are not taxable while dividends are. This puts VC at a disadvantage and gives banking an unfair advantage. There does not seem to be any real rationalization for this without going into a "conspiracy theory", but suffice it to say for intended or unintended reasons, this is the case. VCs are also restricted to only receive funding from accredited investors, effectively barring the public. Another disadvantage is the VCs cannot create money out of nothing through fractional reserve banking, which again allows banks an unfair advantage.

As a result of these unfair practices, venture capital and other forms of equity investing suffer a double jeopardy. We see that venture capital is greatly marginalized in western economies both in quantity and in quality, focusing narrowly on the highest yield opportunities which also involve the highest risk. They tend to focus on industries that are "leftover" from conventional banking, such as volatile emerging industries in the technology sector.

Thus we note here the unfair and artificial advantage of banking in the investment economy.

Large Versus Small Business

This unfair advantage of banks has further implications for the investment economy; it is well-known that banks prefer large corporations to lend to, meaning that the natural investment order is skewed by firstly banks dominating savings-investment, and at the same time preferring large corporations, leaving out small companies.

Small companies also find raising capital through the stock market more difficult as the upfront and entry costs of gaining access to the stock market are often too great for smaller companies. Thus getting access to investment for smaller companies is difficult, as the savings-investment channels are dominated by a system that artificially works against them.

This has further implications because small companies are often family businesses while large corporations are more dependent on being limited liability entities. As we have noted earlier, limited liability is haram. This implies that a haram aspect of the economy is further skewing the order of savings-investment, allowing large limited liability corporations to flourish at the expense of smaller businesses; something that would have been less likely had limited liability not existed. Furthermore, only limited liability corporations are allowed to participate in the stock market; in fact, in the presence of limited liability, a rational investor would not seek to take on unnecessary risks, ceteris paribus.

An Alternative Savings-Investment Framework

If we Islamize banks along the lines advocated; such as if we incorporate limited liability into them and take away riba and fractional reserve banking from them, banks would have two choices before them in the context of the Islamic economy: become essentially deposit and storage companies, whose main work will be to protect and secure the assets of clients, or become investment institutions, that help people invest their money. People would have the option of storing or investing their savings.

In general terms we would be disabling the handicaps to private equity and enable handicaps on unfair money creation through the interest-based banking system. Our alternative savings-investment framework could include:

1. Venture capital firms;

2. Investment banks;

3. Restructured corporations; and

4. Restructured stock market.

5. Deposit and storage companies

5.3.1. Venture Capital Firms

Venture capital firms would need to play a key role in the economy, a role that will be far less restricted by regulation and would also not be restricted by the opportunity costs created by interest (riba) in Western countries. They will therefore need to be structured differently from the VC firms in western markets. They will naturally evolve, through the competitive process, to become larger, more "bank-like" in their investment decisions and willing to take on lower yield investments.

For VC firms becoming larger and taking more of the lower risk spectrum of the market should be a natural adaptation and evolution for them given that there will be no unfairly competing interest-based system to take the lower yield and lower risk side of the market. Like in the ecosystem, when the condition becomes favorable, such VC establishments will eventually take root and thrive, insh'Allah. The government may of course give a nudge or a point in the right direction, but it may generally be better to have a hands-off approach and allow the market to determine its course.

Investment Banks & Deposit & Storage Companies

We must note that banks cannot play the role of a venture capital firm because they lack the skills, training, organization structure and basic mindset. It is therefore not surprising that our attempts to turn banks into investment firms have met with limited success if not abject failure, as has been attempted in Malaysia. Consider the difference in the mindset of a typical banker and a businessman or an entrepreneur, and you have the wide gap between the kind of people we need and the kind of people we have running these aspiring investment houses. It will be up to banks on how they choose to evolve and if they can suffer the fundamental structural change of becoming equity investment businesses.

The financial system will not subsidize interest based lending (as in the west and discussed earlier) and there will be no "risk-less interest" to artificially raise yield requirements for risk-sharing investing.

The aim, eventually, is to move banking towards a theoretical 100 percent reserve ratio; depositors would have to give the bank consent to invest their money. One option would be that such banks would offer liquidity options with time horizons such as three days, one week, one month, etc. Investments would not have a fixed guaranteed return but rather a risk sharing return. Because of the nature of the investments, greater liquidity options would still generally yield lower returns and thus still maintain those natural patterns of investment that economists have come to consider almost equal to the law of gravity.

For those depositors seeking 100 percent reserve and complete liquidity, the banks should be allowed to charge a service fee for holding the money in safety. Charging a service fee for a clearly identifiable service in any case does not appear to be un-Islamic. After all, such a service would represent a clear service to the bank's customers with clearly identifiable costs to the bank.

The structure of a former-bank's offerings can thus be the following:

1. Deposit and storage for a fee

2. Time horizon liquidity options; for instance, two months, 6 months, 1 year, etc.

3. A partner in the bank's equity pool

4. Itemized investment options; for instance a monthly list of potential investments the bank is currently offering.

In sum, the balance the economies investing activities will be far more in favor of venture capital and equity investments, and banks will play a significantly smaller role, a stark contrast from their present overlord-ship of economies. This, at least in theory should be a more efficient Savings-Investment model than the Western equivalent.

5.3.3. Restructured Corporations & Stock Market

Corporations may be restructured to include liability. In that case however, it may be reasonable to pass responsibility that information is provided accurately by the management. If the company fails because the management was hiding information in any way then those responsible for hiding that information should also be liable.

Any stocks that are showing poor balance sheets, income statements and cash flow statements could be de-listed from the stock exchange mechanism and moved to pink sheets. Investors investing in these pink sheet companies will be fully cognizant that they are dealing with companies that could default and fail, resulting in them being held liable for losses. This is but one possible solution to restructuring corporations as we know them.

Derivatives need to be severely restricted and regulated by the markets to ensure that speculation does not reign. This is important to ensure that the financial system is subservient to the "real economy". The rules earlier discussed under Riba & Money would play the role of judging if a certain derivative is acceptable or not (largely not).

However, we have only considered the supply side of a wider equation. The demand for loans / equity in the West will be considerably different from the Islamic economy because:

1. Riba-based systems artificially inflate prices

2. The unique nature of land and property rights

3. The role of the community and family in an Islamic economy

Land and Property

By and large, the vast majority of humanity lives today as tenants to property owners. The rents they pay (or their mortgage payments) are a substantial portion of their income. It is small wonder that buying a house is such a major facet of people's lives. It is also an important salient that property booms and busts are of such critical importance to economies today. When the house of cards comes down, newspapers speak of this salient as defining their downturn: _homelessness_.

Yet, Islam does not allow man to claim property for himself perpetually. All land belongs to Allah, and according to Islamic Shariah, man cannot claim land that he has not been using productively. The land does not belong to some remotely located land owner; neither does it belong to a "nation state" or "government" without just cause.

An application of this Islamic law alone would liberate the common people. It would allow citizens of our Islamic state to live outside the oppression of either earning a wage or to live "homeless". It would, along with the artificial impact of the banking system, drastically bring down property prices.

Simultaneously, it would introduce new workers into the work force who are the unproductive landowners and government stewards. For an economy where a portion of the populace originally makes no effort to earn a wage, the productivity of the economy would increase.

Those owning the land would also more likely be users of the land; this could further increase productivity because of utilization incentive, as long as regulation is in place to ensure that agricultural land-holding size is adequate for economies of scale. However, on the other hand, from the perspective of the economy as a rat race were the "rats" work increasingly harder for the same quantity of cheese, productivity would go down. This then would be the price we pay for real economic freedom.

While Maududi has spelled out that any land not in use for 3 years is open for people to make use of or in fact a duty upon government to allocate efficiently, very few if any Muslim economists consider how critically different our economy will be when people are freed from the oppression of the landed and propertied classes, and land as an instrument of oppression; how much less financing would be required for acquiring housing and how this would impact the stability and dynamics of the economy as a whole.

Riba-based Systems Artificially Increase Prices

Economics is the study of supply and demand, imagine an Islamic economy where a man owns a piece of land and is not productively utilizing it:

1) He is afraid that it may be taken and is thus more pressured to sell.

2) In the market, people do not have banks and mortgages to fall back on, thus the bidding prices are significantly lower.

Now consider the Western economic system where not only does property get unjustly owned by a privileged class, but riba-based lending inflate the price by bidding up prices due to credit availability.

Bottom line: Property and housing will be significantly more affordable. The barriers to entry are low; one can simply find a piece of unused land, build a simple hut and own his own residence. Certainly, he or she is not homeless, even in the worst downturn.

Ignoring the economic revolution behind reformulating today's property rights is perhaps the biggest crime Muslim economists are doing today. We continue to assume Western property rights as if it were a sacred text.

Taxation

As things stand today, taxation is a major problem in Muslim states. It seems that people in there just do not like paying taxes, a tad bit more than other major nations. In fact, the government has largely been relying on indirect taxation (i.e. taxation of goods, services, utilities, import duties, etc.)

Yet indirect taxes are not particularly Islamic, in the sense that the market place of Medina during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the rightly guided Caliphs did not see such a thing. Furthermore, modern economic theory also notes how they distort the market and are technically worse than direct taxation of an equal amount. If we look more deeply, a lot of the people who are dissenting against the state, as well as the common people complain about the high price of electricity and other basic food items, a price that is largely due to these indirect taxes, which are often a requirement from the IMF, to pay off loans that were siphoned off in a hurry by corruption and safely returned the vaults of Western nations.

The Credibility Problem

To correct this fundamental lack of credibility of the state taxing the common people in such a way, an Islamic government has to deal with:

1. The problem of loan repayments to the West. Interest-based loans are haram in Islam, and the people are all too aware of how they are being milked by the West. However, if an Islamic government does this, then the country will be plugged out of the international lending market and will not in the future be able to access financing, except at even more exorbitant costs. This is a lose-lose or a win-win depending on how you look at it; if we want to get out of this haram system permanently, it's a win-win, otherwise it's the former.

2. An Islamic state collects Islamic taxes. It does not continue a tax system designed by non-Muslims six decades past independence. Secularism is very distinctly outside the pale of Islam:

_It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price._ _If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers (kafirun)_ _. (5:44)_

_The similitude of those who were charged with the (obligations of the) Mosaic Law,_ _but who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is that of a donkey which carries huge tomes (but understands them not)_ _. Evil is the similitude of people who falsify the Signs of Allah. And Allah guides not people who do wrong. (62:5)_

So, unless we see ourselves as _kafirun,_ we cannot continue this state of affairs, and if we consider how little credibility is left when we do this in the eyes of the common people, it becomes imperative that we wake up. After all, which Muslim in this planet is eager to pay kafir taxes to a kafirun state?

The Alternatives

With that red light in mind, let us consider the alternatives open to us. The average Muslim is generous and spends for the poor, and masjids are remarkably well-funded through private donations. Edhi has no problems getting funding from local donors, and does not need to beg foreign funds. As we have noted, the problem perhaps lies in that they do not trust that government will effectively utilize their tax money.

Muslims on average are more religiously inclined than many other nations, and they see zakat and other Islamic taxes as an important duty. Islam stipulates zakat as a wealth tax and the first Khalifa Hazrat Abu Bakr (r.a.) was adamant that everyone must continue to pay taxes to the state, after the Prophet (peace be upon him) passed away; he went to war over it and noted that he would fight even for the amount equal to a rope to tie a camel.

Connecting the dots, it would appear that moving to an Islamic model of taxation could help solve the perennial problem that Muslim states have faced: lack of tax revenue. It would bring a fresh breathe of legitimacy to the state and tax collection. It would also instill a deeper sense of duty on the tax collectors, who suffer from endemic corruption, working in conjunction with the other plans that can deal with the corrupt bureaucracy.

However, there are some problems that must be discussed. One such problem is that Shi'ite Muslims consider zakat to be voluntary and not involving the Islamic state. This became an issue during the time of General Zia, who decided that Zakat was to be charged directly from bank accounts, except for non-Muslims and Shi'ite Muslims. This in turn resulted in many people registering themselves in the banks as Shi'ite to save them the payment. This was obviously not an effective solution.

At the same time, we do not want to impose ourselves on our Shi'ite brothers. The solution is perhaps that we charge them an equal amount and instead of calling it by the religious terminology, we call it "tax". Since they already pay secular taxes, they would not be offended any more than they are presently. This way everyone can be happy, and we can move forward.

Transition

In the event of the establishment of an Islamic state, abolishing banking outright would be catastrophic. Money supply would shrink rapidly. Demand and investment would collapse and spiral the economy into recession. The knee-jerk reaction from the populace would be to increase savings, further reducing consumption and compounding the problem. Panic would set in, and the Islamic economic experiment would serve as a sniggering point for our detractors.

The correct solution perhaps would be to gradually impair banking. Gradual change is a prophetic methodology utilized during the advent of Islam. We see numerous examples of this, one of which for instance is the gradual process of the prohibition of drinking. Just as the Communists created a socialist state to attempt to achieve Communism, so too must the Islamic state act in staging itself through a transition. Staggered increase in the reserve ratio of banks and gradually changing the regulatory framework can go hand-in-hand in transforming today's banks from caterpillars to butterflies.

Monetary and Fiscal Impact of Transition

We have already touched upon how liquidity would dry up in transition. Even with the most gradual transition it would result in recession, and the more gradual it would be the longer the recession would last. Let us consider three possible policy options: increasing the reserve ratio, curtailing interest-based banking through regulation and restricting and regulating the stock market. All would result in a rapid reduction in the money supply, and a rapid downward projection of the economy towards an inevitable crash; ceteris paribus, deflationary pressures would reduce investment and consumption expenditures and reduce national income.

Is this a necessary pain to create an Islamic state? One, impoverished and destitute already, would he or she be willing to dip even deeper into unimaginable poverty and hopelessness? No. Insh'Allah there is a solution. It may in fact be an ideal opportunity. Let us consider the possibilities.

Keynesian economics dictates that an (un-Islamic, Western) economy can be revived by public spending to boost consumption and thus inject the system with new demand and new money.

Y=C+I+G+X-M

C▼ and I▼ is counteracted by G▲

Where:

Y is National Income

C is Consumption

I is Investment

G is Government Expenditure

X is Exports

M is Imports

Because an interest-based Western economy is inherently cyclical and dependent on an ever increasing GDP & Money Supply, the Keynesian solution is often the last resort when all monetary and information options have failed. That is, for instance, when simply expanding credit and the money supply either becomes ineffective or becomes untenable.

The great downside of Keynesian fiscal expansion is inflation. Yet, this may not be a downside in deflationary times. Here is the opportunity within our framework of a transitioning Islamic state: if we attempted fiscal expansion during our earlier described banking and stock market transition, we would be ideally placed to carry out our expansionary fiscal policies without paying the price of inflation!

However, as with most issues in this world, timing and proportion is crucial. A cricketer (or a baseball player) perhaps understands this better than an economist. Yet for the economist, that mistimed ball would result in far more damage than the cricketer can fathom. It is perhaps for a reason that Alan Greenspan played the violin; dreamers must be good and timely executioners, if their dreams are to play the tune they seek.

Sunnah Money in Transition

There are groups in the Muslim world who are in a heated debate concerning the gold Dinar. While I agree that fiat currency is utterly haram, I also want to note that Sunnah money is not only precious metals but can also be commodities used as food that have a shelf life, as we earlier discussed. This is important because initially, we may not have enough gold and silver to be used as a medium of exchange. Furthermore, copper and other metals may also be useful.

Furthermore, in transition, we will have to see both fiat currency and Sunnah money existing side-by-side. It is for the government to decide how fast (or slow) we can move towards Sunnah money.

As the government issues more dinars and dirhams, the problem then becomes one of Gresham's Law, that bad money will drive out good money. The solution is to ensure that the price of gold/silver/precious metal currency is exchanged at market rate with fiat currency, and not artificially set by the government. The problem encountered with Gresham's Law was with the government determining the value of the precious metal coins, which is circumvented by allowing the market to determine its true value.

In transition, it would be hoped that we, over time, increasingly move away from fiat currency and towards currencies that have intrinsic value. This will not only be superior from a theological perspective, but will also act as a check and balance against the central bank and foot-loose monetary policy.

Money Supply in Transition

While we are transitioning to a precious metal and commodity based monetary system, we would have a period of time where we need to manage the fiat currency, as it would be operating side-by-side with Sunnah money. The value of the fiat currency in this transition period may be maintained on the basis of:

1) A basket of goods and services that is reflective of the economy as well as;

2) The value of a basket of currencies that would be represented by their level of trade with the Islamic state.

Of these two factors, the former (a basket of goods and services reflective of the economy) should be weighted more than the latter (basket of currencies being traded with), given the importance of the Islamic state's own real assets and value to its citizens. This ratio would need to be determined and could perhaps be in the region of a 80:20 ratio, heavily in favor of maintaining the value of the currency for the local consumers.

Alternatively and more classically, the ratio could perhaps be equal to the proportion of foreign trade to domestic consumption, something discussed in conventional Western economic thought.

Conclusion

As a synopsis, our model makes a trade-off that enables us to have a more stable and less cyclic economic model at the expense of being able to inject massive liquidity relatively quickly. This implies that such an economy, while more stable, will _by design_ be unable to grow at spectacular rates as was observed with such countries as Japan, South Korea, China, etc.

In the judgment of this researcher, the upper limit cap on growth rate is in the region of 6-7%, lower than the 8-12% growth rate some economies have been able to achieve, yet reasonably effective. This is the downside of the model, but within a Solow Growth model context, would become less important in the long-run as we reach nearer saturation levels of income.

The upside is that our economic model would be significantly more stable, protecting people from busts, that it would have a more egalitarian and meritocratic economic order, and that it would stop the unjust ( _bey-insaf_ ) economic exploitation of man.

In fact, in the long-term, there is a clear advantage of our more stable economic order, in that there is less likelihood of permanent damage of busts on certain aspects of the economy such as increase in the long-term natural rate of unemployment. _Slow and steady wins the race_ , or so we hope insh'Allah.

Meritocracy as the Central Theme of our Model

Let us consider the central principles of our Economic Model. Centrally, we seek free enterprise within the constraints of Islam making it philosophically an effort towards a meritocracy and simultaneously a welfare state within that which has been prescribed in Islam given the Muslim obligations of zakat and alms giving.

We observe the salient of removing riba, fractional reserve banking, fiat currency, absolutist land ownership and inflation as a tax imposed by government. We find a defanged savings-investment system built around equity investing and freed from the injustices of regulation, double taxation and unfair competition that equity investments face today in the West, and an independent central monetary authority to have complete control over the money supply with the central purpose of maintaining a stable value of money.

A central theme of meritocracy inevitably plays out, given Muslim requirements for almsgiving and zakat (which incidentally is a wealth tax), Islamic redistribution laws on death, and if we are to pursue an endowment policy for the young. Linked with free education and a meritocratic political model, we see that the theme for meritocracy would become intrinsic to the Islamic state, politically, economically and spiritually; the Day of Judgment too will be meritocratic, each soul being rewarded by what it earned. That will be a Day of Perfect Justice.

Our meritocracy on the other hand, is a human meritocracy and flawed by our human limits, a point we must make great effort not to forget. For inevitably such ideas, if ever implemented successfully, would become dogmatic altruisms on their own, becoming yet another ideological oppression upon the people.

Economic Modeling & a New Science of Muslim Economics

Economic modeling will need to be rethought as many of the key models have interest (riba) as a key element in the models. Perhaps Tobin's Q could be a replacement for riba when the profit rate is insufficient or problematic. "Islamic Economics" needs to look beyond Microeconomic discussions of interest-free banking. We need to fundamentally rethink utilitarianism as an ideology and perhaps replace it with the conceptual foundations of Imam Shatibi's Maslahah. We need to see if GDP measurements make sense to the world, let alone to a non-materialistic Muslim state. We need to find alternative measures that make more sense. This author is presently investigating suicide rates as a better guide to measuring welfare over time or between nations. Surely, people who are happy and content are in aggregate less likely to kill themselves.

As for our academic efforts thus far, what started off as a pioneer spirit has, over the last 30 years fizzled into mimesis and small-minded intellectualism; mindless reworking of Western economic models into "Islamic" "frameworks". The central problem is structural – our universities as they stand today are not meant to create the kind of Islamic scholars we need, their structure inherits a legacy that is fundamentally un-Islamic. Consider for instance that students essentially come to universities to get certificates and find a job at the end of a large dose of memorization and regurgitation. This materialist paradigm cannot create the quality of intellectual work we need.

An education system designed to create obedient employees is not suitable for creating idea people and free thinkers. Without a critical mass of such people we will not be able to make any headway.

Academic scholars at universities, themselves products of this flawed system, work to meet research specifications which often mean they have to publish their work in Western journals, having to measure up to their expectations and thinking patterns. Again, they are living within a materialist paradigm of professional progression rather than altruistic intellectual jihad.

Endless conferences where the scholars of our time present yet another notch on their resumes; another conference: to condemn riba yet again or to claim again that there is no other option and that 'this is the best we can do'. Mindless chatter from men of speech-without-actions, men of no consequence: Such men are only to be pitied or reviled for their hypocrisy and incompetence. Curious still – many such 'academics', long on speech on how to reform the Muslim Ummah are not to be seen in masjids at the times of prayer. A point observed by the author while studying at a prominent international Islamic university.

Let us ask ourselves how many conferences the Prophet (peace be upon him) attended and from which university did he gain his PhD? When the very venue, the people, the method and the motives are non-Islamic, do we still wonder that 30+ years hence, we have still failed at the 'Islamization of Knowledge'?

Another issue is of the life-cycle of the science of economic theory. Adam Smith's landmark work would not have earned him a PhD in Economics today, for it lacked the manner of writing, the methodology and the emphasis on mathematics and statistics. A research supervisor would potentially laugh at his work and say "it's too broad, focus on something specific" or "it needs quantitative rigor". This is because the Western intellect is at a different stage of their journey, we cannot hope to find help in their present model to answer our quandaries; we would end up stuck in the minute, which is only relevant when the broader picture has been clearly established. Scientific fields develop from the broad to the specific, but with the present paradigms of mimeses, we are stuck on the minute, myopically copying the West.

We complain that we do not have the means to do jihad. Yet, no nation is stopping us from doing the intellectual jihad. Why then are we this way? Perhaps someday we will stop producing mindless trash and move to the actual work at hand, so critical to the Ummah.

"Because Allah will never change the Grace which He hath bestowed on a people until they change what is in their (own) souls: and verily Allah is He Who heareth and knoweth (all things)."

(Al-Quran, 8:53. Translation: Yusuf Ali)

Back to top

# CHAPTER 7: EDUCATION

We don't need no education

We don't need no thought control

No dark sarcasm in the class room

Teachers leave those kids alone

Hey, teachers! Leave those kids alone!

-Pink Floyd, We don't Need No Education

Are we still Muslims or have we returned to Jahiliyah?

It seems that when Islam came to us, we were wrenched from the world of Jahiliyah and pummeled into the world of enlightenment in a short span of 30 years. An enlightenment that allowed a desert people to overshadow the two superpowers of the time and inherit civilization. We left the world of objects, materials, idols behind and learned to worship the Eternal.

Our minds were captivated by the ideals emanating from the Creator. We saw in the Prophet (peace be upon him) the perfect ideal to strive towards. Our minds were filled with these ideas and we had long left the dismal world of objects such as the pagan Arabs lived for - well-bred horses, women, cattle, silk, armor and weaponry and more. We had left the world of our lives revolving around specific people - chiefs, tribes, families, mistresses, titles, social acceptance.

Yet today, we are once more captivated by the world of objects and have forgotten our enlightenment. Instead of worshiping Him who is Perfect, who is Eternal, who is All Powerful, Most Gracious, Most Merciful, we live in a world where we objectify the world around us. What do we do?

We spend a third of our lives studying. Not to explore the creation of Allah, but for more mundane ends of material well-being; building careers. This meaningless education serves two purposes:

1. Wastes valuable time and money so that at the end of our education we are desperate to recoup the time and resource deficit incurred and thus put ourselves at the mercy of employment.

2. The education serves to brainwash us to sit quietly in cages and take orders, both without complaint and asking why? Why do I need to know these facts?

Thus primed, for the next third portion of our lives we serve our material overlords, in gilded cuffs and golden cages. Somewhere down this line we lose our innocence, our spirit and our soul. And by the time we reach our final third portion of the cup of life, for those of us who have not gone insane, we enter the arena to a game we have already lost. For an arm broken can be mended, but a spirit broken is far harder to remedy. In our twilight, we may return to our prayers, but those are but prayers of our own funeral. We may attempt social good but the plant that is already dead cannot be revived with water.

Only if we could have trusted our own souls, our instincts, our minds. Was it not that we universally did not like school? Did we not distrust the doctrine and dogma of the mullahs? If we instead could have touched upon our yearning for the living Islam, the ideal that our hearts call to strive towards. The life that is an adventure and not a career or a tour. The learning as a means to an end of striving in that very adventure, not a meaningless list of facts and tests the purpose of which is not understandable.

Then will our revolutions bring real change rather than endless cycles of clouds but no rain. Repeated reruns of betrayal and tyranny. Then will our prayers come alive with purpose and our masjids be transformed into meeting places of revolutionaries and adventurers.

Then will the world again tremble at our feet and the tyrants, oppressors and usurers find no place on Allah's Earth to hide from those who worship the Eternal and strive towards the perfect ideal, rather than worship the world and the objects that it contains. And then will we have returned back to Islam and forsaken again the world of Jahiliyah.

*****

The Muslim World Today

There are three kinds of education that are being handed out to Muslims today. One created for the elite involving foreign-language, often English or French. This system is based on a Western education model. The education lacks any real substance in Islam, but instead replaces this with a history, philosophy and social science that propagate a world-view centered on the ascendancy of Western civilization. Evolution is taught as fact, served with fanciful diagrams of half man and half animals. And the conspicuous absence of Allah imprints an implicit denial. The education provides a secular view of the world and the subservience and abject inferiority of our own civilization.

From being dressed in Western attire at a young age every morning, sometimes tie and coat included, our children are being brainwashed into accepting an alien culture and serve to be transformed into an elite that neither understands nor respects its culture and roots and instead is in awe of the Western civilization. These elites then serve as the agents of the foreign power in keeping control over the country, a new and sophisticated form of vassalage, yet vassalage to the same or greater degree than ever before.

The second form of education is the diametric opposite – madrasah education given to the lower classes where the Quran is recited and memorized but without comprehension, reflection and analysis. People still are devoted to the Quran, but their love of the book is not one of reflection and understanding, but of formalistic and ritualistic reading, learning by heart and a complicated science of pronunciation. What are produced are people who can recite, memorize and obey commands, but neither understands Islam, their active role in Islam, or their position in the greater scheme of things.

The third form of education is government sourced and involves a heavy dose of rote learning similar to the madrasahs, but just enough practical curriculum to be able to function in various jobs and roles that any state and economy inevitably needs. These typically serve the middle classes.

Our education system is broken and astoundingly there is no government that is willing to fix it. For the 60+ years we have been without any fundamental rethink. How can we create an improved state of affairs when the fundamental building block of the system – the Muslim Individual \- is not educated, aware and enlightened but brainwashed to believe their inferiority? As with any system: garbage in, garbage out.

The Great Mistake – A Historical Perspective of the Degeneration of Islamic Education Systems

Our present education crisis did not start now; our particular garbage has taken considerable time to rot and perhaps coincides with our decline. Brother Mahathir Muhamad points out in his blog CheDet that in the 15th century we decided to separate worldly knowledge from religious knowledge and focus on the latter8. It was this that he attributes as a key element to our downfall.

8. Taha Jabir Al-Alwani writes similarly in his work Ijtehad, IIIT.

Perhaps the issue started even earlier when the Asharite School started using reason and logic only defensively and Imam Ghazali debated those influenced by Greek philosophers. However, the victory seemed one not only against the philosophers but against the use of reason and logic itself. Thus, the doors of ijtihad were closed and Muslims moved increasingly to taqlid, or imitation. Logic was carted off to be used only defensively in support of established theology. Ibn Khaldun in Al Muqadimah sheds much light upon the use of logic by what he describes as "recent scholars":

"In time, the science of logic spread in Islam. People studied it. They made a distinction between it and the philosophical sciences, in that logic was merely a norm and yardstick for arguments and served to probe the arguments of the (philosophical sciences) as well as (those of) all other (disciplines).

"(Scholars) studied the basic premises the earlier theologians had established. They refuted most of them with the help of arguments leading them to (a different opinion). Many of these were derived from philosophical discussions of physics and metaphysics. When they probed them with the yardstick of logic, it showed that they were applicable only to those (other disciplines and not to theology, but) they did not believe that if the argument were wrong, the thing proven (by the arguments) was also wrong. This approach differed in its technical terminology from the older one. It was called "the school of recent scholars". Their approach often included refutation of the philosophers where the (opinions of the) latter differed from the articles of faith, because, in most respects, there is a relationship between the opinions of the innovators and the opinions of the philosophers.

"The first (scholar) to write in accordance with the new theological approach was al-Ghazzali. He was followed by the imam Ibn al-Khatib. A large number of scholars followed in their steps and adhered to their tradition.

"The later scholars were very intent upon meddling with philosophical works. The subjects of the two disciplines (theology and philosophy) were thus confused by them. They thought that there was one and the same (subject) in both disciplines, because the problems of each discipline were similar.

"The theologians most often deduced the existence and attributes of the Creator from the existing things and their conditions. As a rule, this was their line of argument. The physical bodies form part of the existing things, and they are the subject of the philosophical study of physics. However, the philosophical study of them differs from the theological. The philosophers study bodies in so far as they move or are stationary. The theologians, on the other hand, study them in so far as they serve as an argument for the Maker.

"In the same way, the philosophical study of metaphysics studies existence as such and what it requires for its essence. The theological study (of metaphysics) on the other hand, is concerned with the existentia, in so far as they serve as argument for Him who causes existence.

"In general, to the theologians, the object of theology is (to find out) how the articles of faith which the religious law has laid down as correct, can be proven with the help of logical arguments, so that innovations may be repulsed and doubts and misgivings concerning the articles of faith be removed.

"If one considers how this discipline originated and how scholarly discussion was incorporated within it step by step, and how, during that process, scholars always assumed the correctness of the articles of faith and paraded proofs and arguments (in their defence), one will realize that the character of the subject of this discipline is as we have established it, and one will realize that (the discipline) cannot go beyond it. However, the two approaches have been mixed up by recent scholars. The problems of theology have been confused with those of philosophy. This has gone so far that the one discipline is no longer distinguishable from the other." (underlining is superimposed)

Further along in his book, he confirms that this mixing of the two is fatally wrong and a mistake:

"The only thing that caused the theologians to use rational arguments was the discussions of heretics who opposed the early Muslim articles of faith with speculative innovations. Thus, they had to refute these heretics with the same kind of arguments. This situation called for using speculative arguments and checking on the early Muslim articles of faith with these arguments.

"The verification or rejection of physical and metaphysical problems, on the other hand, is not part of the subject of speculative theology and does not belong to the same kind of speculations as those of the theologians. This may be known, so that one may be able to distinguish between the two disciplines, as they have been confused in the works of recent scholars. The truth is that they are different from each other in their respective subjects and problems. This situation called for using speculative arguments and checking on the early Muslim articles of faith with these arguments.

"The verification or rejection of physical and metaphysical problems, on the other hand, is not part of the subject of speculative theology and does not belong to the same kind of speculations as those of the theologians. This should be known, so that one may be able to distinguish between the two disciplines, as they have been confused in the works of recent scholars. The truth is that they are different from each other in their respective subjects and problems.

"The confusion arose from the sameness of the topics discussed. The argumentation of the theologians thus came to look as though it were inaugurating a search for faith through (rational) evidence. This is not so. (Speculative theology) merely wants to refute heretics."

This resulted in the use and understanding of logic to be confused, pushed aside by the political success of the theologians and philosophy itself removed to a portion merely of speculative theology. This is exemplified in Al Ghazali's rejection of the cotton on fire; that the fire was caused by Allah and not the cotton, confusing cause and effect.

The consequence of this was manifold, and like a dynamo through history, knocked down many pillars. Firstly, education increasingly discounted the teaching of logic, and subjects such as mathematics that develop that critical element of the brain. Instead, we started to focus on memorization. Secondly, our valuation of knowledge changed and this caused what we earlier described from Dr. Mahathir Muhamad as the separation of knowledge. With the end to ijtihad and an education that eliminated from the bud the intellectual capacity of the Ummah, the Muslim mind was chained, collared and imprisoned.

Mysticism aided this process, and it is interesting that it was also Al Ghazali who instituted the legitimacy of this practice. It was as if the traditional theologians and the mystics worked as a tag team to create a new artificial consensus. Describing the Sufi practice, Ibn Khaldun notes:

"The Sufis are very much concerned with achieving this great joy through having the soul achieve that kind of perception. They attempt to kill the bodily powers and perceptions through exercise, and even the thinking power of the brain. In this way, the soul is to achieve the perception that comes to it from its own essence, when all the disturbances and hindrances caused by the body are removed. (The Sufis) thus achieve inexpressible joy and pleasure."

And again:

"The arguments and proofs belong in the category of corporeal perceptions, because they are produced by the powers of the brain, which are imagination, thinking, and memory. The first thing we are concerned with when we want to attain this kind of perception is to kill all these powers of the brain, because they object to such (perception) and work against it."

The Muslim world thus entered an era that deeply discounted the intellect, in fact attempted to limit it or even kill it! Shortly after their victory against the philosophers, they believed themselves to have reached a stage that they wished to preserve and perpetrate in statis. In the arrogance of their triumph they called their age the "Golden Age". To perpetuate this "Golden Age" they brought an end to ijtihad and the beginning of taqlid, and created an education system to match. They created a theology that would emphasize their doctrines and control the religion. No doubt, they had good intentions, to preserve in perpetuity what they believed to be right. The Ummah was thus frozen and preserved to this rightness.

Centuries later, from the intellectual stupor of the Ummah, we can only guess that these great geniuses succeeded! Dissent was seen as an enemy, and the intellect was seen as the cause of the dissent. What better way than to create zombies to hold the Ummah in a perpetual state of conformity, and keep the world in a perpetual static relic of the past? But the rest of the world moved on unfortunately for the Ummah. The West took our light and went forward. And through their hands, perhaps Allah is showing us how we have gone astray.

Social-psychological diseases often manifest themselves in very peculiar ways. Confucianism erred towards perfectionism and, over the centuries showed itself in the degenerate form of Chinese foot binding; it was believed that women having small feet was a desirable quality and Chinese families started putting children into small wooden shoes that they would be forced to wear. It was said that every small feet required a bucket of tears. Thus a philosophical-theological error manifested itself in a ghastly manner that was clearly visible to the Chinese. For Muslims however, we cannot see the damage we are doing to our children, yet it is far more profound than the foot of those poor Chinese girls; for a brain is far more part of being human than a foot could ever be.

There is in fact one case where the full manifestation of this stranglehold on the intellect became clearly visible; in Pakistan there are Sufi shrines where people go to pray for various desirables to the dead "saint". In one such shrine, known as Dawlay Shah, people sometimes go to ask for children, in case they have fertility problems. Perhaps they have not heard about fertility clinics. If the couple then have children, they are supposed to give their first born to the shrine. The child's head is supposedly put inside a metal helmet-like enclosure and the child grows up with a small brain. Such small-brained individuals are then used to serve the shrine, begging and doing other income-generating activities. They are then known as Dawlay Shah dey Chuhay or Dawlay Shah's rats.

How else did this great blunder come about? Malek Bennabi in his book The Question of Ideas in the Muslim World points out that the impetus to the mysticism mentioned above came from a Muslim society that reacted to an increasingly materialist order within itself by an increasing indulgence in the rejection of the material. So the Sufis originally where attempting to balance an original imbalance in society. One pole of extremism attracted the other, and destroyed the middle way. The subordination of reason and logic and the mysticism that thus established a foothold has had cascading consequences upon our society. Muslim society has been trapped between the two poles of materialism and mysticism ever since.

Today we can see the results before us; the materialism-mysticism polarization and the anti-logic religious tendencies invariably leads to secularism, whose very core is the separation of "religious" and "secular" knowledge, to give each polarized group its own domain. One pole attracts the other, polarizing the Ummah. Yet, Islam is the Middle Way! Long before the bayonets of the British showed up to force this separation upon us, we created secularism for ourselves.

Worldviews and Education

Our education has to be based on our worldview. Bennabi explains that our core beliefs are fundamentally different from the West's in the following illustrations:

1. Man either looks at his feet or at the stars

2. Objects and forms, techniques and aesthetics, versus truth and virtue

3. Industrial time versus extemporized time

4. Positivism and dialectic materialism versus morality and revealed knowledge

The question that comes to mind is, given the completely different core viewpoints of the two worlds, can we attempt to Islamize Western knowledge in the manner we are attempting at present? As an example, consider the subject of Economics where the dominance of Economic theory in the West aligns with the dominance of the material; the very term "Econom(y)ics" resides in the material. Simply attaching "Islamic" to form a "new" "Islamic Economics" seems dishonest to our true principles, to our very different core principles.

It seems that the very aspect of Islamizing knowledge today does not reach out and spring forth from our core, but attempts to fit our principles into a Western worldview.

A respected author at an Islamic university wrote a book using such complex terms that the students (at least those for whom reading it is compulsory) are dumbfounded at what it means. A choice of wonderfully complex terms are put together in such a vague manner that you are left wondering what the author is saying, but give the benefit of the doubt that it must be truly profound. Yet another senior academic of the same prestigious Islamic university has titled a book as a "critical review" but reading the book finds it to be a summary based on the dominant themes being covered.

On the other hand, perhaps Bennabi's words were apt for this:

Islamic thought sinks to mysticism, to vagueness and fuzziness, into imprecision and into mimesis and craze vis-à-vis the Western "thing"!

We must ask ourselves what we are trying to achieve, or who we are trying to impress with this approach. And in the sixth chapter of his same book, Bennabi describes the issue of a lack of ideas or dead ideas leaving empty brains, helpless tongues and infantilism. He quotes Nicholas Boileau, a French literary critic from the 17th century thus:

That which is properly thought out is said clearly,

And the words to express it come forth easily.

Taking the concept of Islamization of Knowledge as illustrated by "Islamic Economics" – where the attempt to keep the Western Neoliberal framework and simply attempt to replace "Un-Islamic elements" – the very idea is perhaps fundamentally flawed in creating an Islamic revival. The learned scholars react by stating that we cannot go back and start from scratch. But such scholars miss the point that there is a big area between the dressing up of Western sciences to meet the Islamic hijab code on the one hand, and "starting from scratch" on the other. The wrong approach and the wrong people, but worse still that these people are acting as a roadblock for those actually seeking to find a way forward.

A Muslim Worldview of Acquiring Knowledge

But, what is the nature of knowledge and why is it important to us? Even before we can touch upon the question of Islamic Economics and Islamizing knowledge, we have to first identify the nature of the relationship between Islam, Muslims and knowledge because it appears as if we understand knowledge in a vacuum. It seems as if it was something merely necessary for the survival of the material world. Our universities churn out degree holders to feed our economies in the hope of competing with the West. We then Islamize our text to make them more palatable and to claim an Islamic revival.

Yet, this reaches out to a mimic of the West seeking its core in the material. Our focus on the reason, purpose and relationship of knowledge to us has to be fundamentally different. It has to reach out to our core – our religious and spiritual innards.

There may be many different means by which we can develop this connection. It is up to our intellectual endeavor to take up this challenge. This challenge has been taken up by the IIIT and the Islamization of Knowledge (IOK) movement. Thus far however, the IOK movement has failed with the Faruqi and Attas paradigms. Furthermore, the Faruqi and Attas paradigms are well-entrenched and unlikely to be superseded easily, creating yet another problem. As Bennabi notes, dead ideas lead to deadly ideas.

The IOK movement would have avoided the pitfalls had it discovered Allama Iqbal's and Malek Bennabi's work. However, they appear to have been too busy with plagiarism and appropriating each other's (and other's) work and making tall claims about how they were the first people to discover the problems with Western knowledge.

Returning to the question of rebuilding a meaningful connection between seeking knowledge and Islam, the connection is expressed in the following section based on this author's understanding. It is noted that these are but merely two ways of many to think about the issue. The first paradigm outlined below is similar to that given in Allama Iqbal's Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam.

A First Paradigm:

The story begins (and Allah knows best) when Adam was created and Allah (swt) taught him the "names of things" or "nature of things". And Adam was asked to tell the angels their "names" or "natures". And this was seen as the triumph of man and convinced all but Satan. All were told to bow to man – what an ultimate honour to be bowed to by Allah's creation!

At first glance it seems confusing. What is this term "names of things" or "nature of things" and why was it so special? For many people this would just be something they will not understand or contemplate over. Was it that the angels did not understand and simply start bowing to anyone that can take their name or show their nature? Moreover, what is the point being made by the Quran? Perhaps there is some real meaning in this.

However, it may be that for a student of psychology this bit of information may prove to be of interest. Consider the fact that studies of the human mind have shown that the mind has an amazing ability that other beings known to man do not have – the ability to classify things – both material and non-material (i.e. ideas). This ability to classify and organizing information is not shared with other creatures. If one reads about the philosophy and epistemology of science, we find that this quality of classifying and organizing data and thereby investigating their natures is perhaps the key factor to what science essentially is. In fact, it is what science is built upon; it's very fundamental building structure.

The reason a university has so many departments each focusing on a specific set of subjects, and within them sections focused on even more specific, and within them sub-sections and professors who specialize in even smaller focuses is because the information has been classified into these various branches, sub-branches, sub-sub-branches and so forth. This makes the investigation of the nature of things possible at a level unforeseen otherwise. So, what this author is crawling towards is that the event when Adam was created and thereafter was taught the names of things was not a meaningless event, but a very meaningful one and one that guides us as human beings to who we are, what we are, and our purpose. And Allah knows best.

To clarify, our purpose is to worship Allah (swt) as we all know. But does worship mean going to the masjid and banging our head to the floor a couple of times while thinking about our daily activities and then being on our way? As always, when in doubt, investigate the Quran. The Quran constantly, and repeatedly talks about reflecting, thinking, contemplating about the world Allah (swt) has created around us. One random example of many:

And all things We have created by pairs, that haply ye may reflect. (51:49, Al-Quran, Pickthall)

The second element that comes to our notice is that the Quran talks about the natural world (botany, zoology, evolution, etc), about the stars, planets, the beginning of the universe (Astronomy, Astrophysics), the mountains (Geology and Geography), and more. Again, it simultaneously (and repeatedly) tells us to think, reflect, and contemplate. Islam goes so far as to challenge man to find a fault or prove the Quran wrong.

Allah knows best, but the purpose of this can perhaps be best understood in the following manner:

Imagine that I make an acquaintance. I can say hello, ask his name and meet the individual repeatedly. But after a million hellos, I may not truly know him any better than the first day I met him. If I really want to know the individual in question, I could perhaps take another approach. If the acquaintance was a painter, I could go down to look at his painting and attempt to understand him through his works. My mind may wonder: what does my friend paint about – women, cars, landscapes or science fiction? What choice of colours does he use? Is he a cubist? What size are his paintings? What's so great about his work? What's not that great?

On the other hand, if the acquaintance was an engineer and had built a bridge, I could go down take a look at the bridge, see what it's like – is it mechanically efficient? Aesthetic? Both? Is it sporting a postmodern looking? Or does it look like it's out of the 18th century? What choice of materials did my friend use? By noting the works of my acquaintance, I could get to know him in a more meaningful way than having spent years saying hello and goodbye. Perhaps even more than if I chatted with him about the weather, the news, politics, religion, philosophy and had tea with him every weekend.

In a similar vein, if we wish to know our Creator, one critical method could be to contemplate, reflect, and think about His amazing creation (and Allah knows best). But to effectively do so, we need to understand the nature of the things around us. We need to have some idea of art to understand a painter and some idea of the engineering of bridges to appreciate our engineer friend who built one.

This brings us back to the parable of Adam. To really understand the nature (or names) of things, we need to be able to classify them and study them in depth; to be investigators, scientists, thinkers, theorists. We note that only humans have this ability to classify and organize data, that is to name them, and this is closely connected to understanding their natures. Because once you can classify data, you can begin to investigate the relationships between multiple classifications. This mental process may seem natural to us, but in fact is unique to humanity.

So a Muslim, who actually reads the Quran with understanding and contemplation, not mindless babbling while rocking left, right, forward and backwards, will inevitably become an investigator, a researcher, a thinker, a philosopher, a scientist. What is more, this is closely linked with tauheed and tasawuf.

Tauheed is often described as the understanding of the Oneness of Allah and knowing his attributes. Only by being an investigator, scientist, thinker, can we get a deeper understanding of the Oneness of Allah, which is constantly expressed in the creation. Otherwise, repeating the Names of Allah will neither yield a deeper understanding of those Names nor will it be sufficient in itself to attempt to understand our Creator with the full force of the resources and capabilities available at our disposal. Thus, our scientific endeavour is central to the goal of reaching a more meaningful and deeper understanding of tauheed.

However, charting the destination is different from walking the destination. When we begin our investigations, we quickly find that our mind gets involved with the specific and forgets the whole. If we take the example of the bridge used earlier, we start admiring the bridge, the materials, and the architecture and forget about the engineer who was the original purpose of our investigation, and who we had hoped to better appreciate. This is where the role of tasawuf begins; the constant remembrance of Allah; in our case, specifically during our investigation. Without this, we lose the purpose of our investigations and are lost again into the world of objects and people.

Thus, tauheed, scientific inquiry and tasawuf (or dhikr) are inextricably linked. None can bloom in their essence in isolation but are joined like a jugular vein to the other. In the great contemporary battle between the Wahabis / Salafis who nominally uphold tauheed and Sufis who nominally uphold tasawuf, both sides have missed the essential symbiosis of the three concepts. If anything, all sides consider the investigation of "secular" knowledge as beyond their realms and subject matter.

A Second Paradigm:

Another possible paradigm on how Muslims can relate themselves to knowledge is from the perspective of jihad. It is imperative for the Muslim world to overcome the external threat in order to revive and defend ourselves. Acquiring the necessary knowledge, technology and industrial capacity thus becomes a part of jihad.

Using this knowledge of the world, we can overcome our enemies or at least defend more effectively against them. It is this approach that allowed Pakistani scientists to overcome sanctions and a lack of a technological and industrial base, and build a highly competent nuclear industry at break-neck speed.

A Serious Word of Warning about these Paradigms:

Somehow it appears that we believe that building a theoretical bridge on why we need knowledge will change the Muslim world and everyone will go "Eurika!" but that is far from the truth. The truth of the matter is that this only happens in the minds of twiddle-dee academics that are so cut off from reality that they will believe anything that will keep them comfortable. Simply repeating these or similar paradigms of knowledge will not change our circumstance, nay not even if you name it "The Tawheedic Paradigm".

The fact of the matter is that children are born with a thirst for knowledge; this is in the innate nature of man, it needs no theological construct. The hard truth is that we make the greatest effort in destroying that thirst and turning that into abject hate. Genius does not need to be engineered, we only need to stop destroying it. Something we are doing at full pace.

The Validity of Gatto

From my early childhood I have been hostile to the education system, somehow convinced that it would make me dumb and kill my spirit. I spent a good part of my early education being absent from school, treating school books like the plague and thus considering it safer to not open my school bag when I went home. Attending madrasah was a worse experience of the same gnawing idea in my head that I was going to be turned into another zombie. Meanwhile, I spent much of my spare time studying and reading almost anything that interested me ranging from aerodynamics, diplomacy, history, philosophy, the Quran, literary classics and more. Between the fourth grade and eleventh, I had read a veritable library of books, sometimes spending all night reading.

Teachers had a hard time understanding how I managed to have a vast general knowledge but was so poor in my studies. It came as even a greater surprise when a year or so before the O Levels, I finally became more serious about my studies and suddenly was propelled to academic excellence, becoming one of the resident geniuses in college, which astounded beyond belief some of the people that knew me earlier. The introduction to this chapter was written in the International Islamic University Malaysia masjid while seeing, what to me was the heartbreaking decadence of how we were destroying learning. I put it up on the boards, these were promptly removed. I also put it up online and a blessed sister, much into Gatto's work read my work and shared with me what Gatto had to offer.

Reading Gatto was vindication of everything that I knew and understood to be true and yet far more – Gatto had researched and documented everything carefully so that what I knew but could not prove was now provable with hard documents, and fully extended to its complete idea-potential.

From an Islamic point of view, it is clear that our academics and intellectuals have swallowed the concept of education from the West both in the form of a poor rip-off and without any critical study of the origins, purpose and mechanisms behind Western mass schooling.

For one, when we talk about education today and how beneficial it is to the people we are making some fundamental assumptions and these may require a closer look. Firstly, what we are talking about is not education per se, but education as conceived originally in the Prussian state around the 1820s. This form of education spread throughout Europe and eventually to the United States with Horace Mann's "Seventh Annual Report" to the Massachusetts Board of Education. It thereafter became the world standard of "education", in fact we shall call it Mass Schooling.

Secondly, we are implying that this form of education is a universal and untainted "good" that must be accepted. This results in Mass Schooling being essentially a form of un-Islamic "religion" built on blind faith. In my reading of the educational programs and questions of reform throughout the Muslim world, these key fundamental questions about the origins, purpose and mechanism of the system are never raised and perhaps never even known. We are too busy trying to copy the circuit board without knowing what the board actually does.

Because of this gap in knowledge, some of the assertions made here will seem questionable. I do not have the space to provide every evidence for every single startling assertion, but to those who want to inspect the arguments further, I would highly recommend Weapons of Mass Instruction, a book by an American schoolteacher John Taylor Gatto who taught 30 years in public schools before resigning from teaching during the year he was named New York State's official "Teacher of the Year". He then spent 22 more years tirelessly talking about the problems of the present schooling system that has been replicated worldwide. He has travelled three million miles to lecture on the subject and his earlier book, Dumbing Us Down, has sold over 100,000 copies.

The Advent of Mass Schooling

As we noted earlier, the present global education system we are calling "Mass Schooling", started in Prussia and spread throughout Europe and thereby to the colonies of the Europeans and the United States, becoming a world standard to mimic by a progression of lesser nations. The system was designed to create a stable workforce that is technically competent to the degree required (and no more) and willing to sell their labour for wages. The system was also designed to provide mass consumerism to buy the products that centralized industrial mass production was designed to create.

In 1843, when Horace Mann helped propagate the system from Europe to the United States. This is the same Horace Mann who explicitly states that school is the best jail – "a jail you sentence the mind to is harder to escape than any iron bars". Orestes Brownson was publicly denouncing what he termed as the Prussianization of American schools as far back as the 1840s. Adam Smith's publisher, William Playfair, noted that "proper" schooling teaches "negatively" and only allows the poor "to read sufficiently well to understand what they do read". That if they were educated any better, the "ladders of privilege" would collapse and the children of the elite would not be able to hold their privileged positions. Even further back in history, a similar policy was pursued in China called "The Policy of Keeping People Dumb".

Perhaps one of the most influential people of the 20th Century, James Conant was president of Harvard for twenty years, WWI poison-gas specialist, WWII executive of the atomic bomb project, high commissioner of the American zone in Germany after WWII, and these are but some of his laurels among others. Gatto notes that Conant was one of the key individuals who brought Prussian Mass Schooling to its full bloom. In The Child, the Parent and the State, he noted that the modern school today was the result of a "revolution" between 1905 and 1930. He directs readers in his book to Principles of Secondary Education (1918) by Alexander Inglis where "one saw this revolution through the eyes of the revolutionary".

Inglis, after whom Gatto notes that an honour lecture in Harvard is named, makes it clear in his book that the purpose of this modern education was to act as a fifth column to the democratic rise of the lower classes who increasingly wanted to play a greater and more just role. Gatto summarizes Inglis' views in the following words:

"Modern, industrialized, compulsory schooling was to make a sort of surgical intervention into the prospective unity of these underclasses. Divide children by subject, by age-grading, by constant rankings on tests, and by many other more subtle means, and it was unlikely that the ignorant mass of mankind, separated in childhood, would ever re-integrate into a dangerous whole. Inglis breaks down the purpose - the actual purpose - of modern schooling into six basic functions, anyone of which is enough to curl the hair of those innocent enough to believe the three traditional goals of education listed earlier:

I. The adjustive or adaptive function. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. This, of course, precludes critical judgment completely. It also pretty much destroys the idea that useful or interesting material should be taught, because you can't test for reflexive obedience until you know whether you can make kids learn, and do, foolish and boring things.

2. The integrating function. This might well be called "the conformity function" because its intention is to make children as alike as possible. People who conform are predictable, and this is of great use to those who wish to harness and manipulate a large labor force.

3. The diagnostic and directive function. School is meant to determine each student's proper social role. This is done by logging evidence mathematically and anecdotally on cumulative records. As in "your permanent record" Yes, you do have one.

4. The differentiating function. Once their social role has been "diagnosed" children are to be sorted by role and trained only so far as their destination in the social machine merits – and not one step further. So much for making kids their personal best.

5. The selective function. This refers not to human choice at all but to Darwin's theory of natural selection as applied to what he called "the favored races" In short, the idea is to help things along by consciously attempting to improve the breeding stock. Schools are meant to tag the unfit – with poor grades, remedial placement, and other punishments - clearly enough that their peers will accept them as inferior and effectively bar them from the reproductive sweepstakes. That's what all those little humiliations from first grade onward were intended to do: wash the dirt down the drain.

6. The propaedeutic function. The societal system implied by these rules will require an elite group of caretakers. To that end, a small fraction of the kids will quietly be taught how to manage this continuing project, how to watch over and control a population deliberately dumbed down and declawed in order that government might proceed unchallenged and corporations might never want for obedient labor." (Gatto, Weapons of Mass Instruction)

All this is not some conspiracy theory but happened in full public view and is very extensively recorded in history, for those who are willing to spare the time to search. These are policies and decisions made by managers and executives of the West's education system and as such are documented in their writings and works. Some other big names of the time involved include George Peabody, Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller.

Space does not allow us to go further to provide evidence, I instead point you to John Gatto. To sum up, the Western education system we seem so enamoured with, has a horror movie back-end and a purpose and meaning that we must understand before we start replicating them wholesale upon the tender minds of our children, so full of potential, dreams, hopes. Even if we were evil enough to do this to our people (and I hope we are not), we must understand that the system is designed for a mass production society and not for the kind of Third World countries we Muslims live in.

The West mistakenly believes they are the first to have discovered education as a means of pacifying the people and turning them into a dumbed down human resource, but if the reader has read the section on our legacy of the Islamic education system then we can see a clear parallel. Our system may just have been even more effective; it managed to freeze history, if that is anything to be proud of. So many centuries later the West is now crawling towards a similar end – "The End of History".

I have described the problems of the Islamic and Western education systems. With these problems in mind, let us now look at how we can move our children to the world of ideas, to reach their full potential, instead of turning them into the jackasses Pinocchio and his friends were to be turned into by the circus, i.e. the mass education system.

Moving Our Children to the World of Ideas

Bennabi describes the great crisis of civilization as the cultivation of humanity moving from the world of people and objects to the world of ideas. He describes the critical age when our children begin to enter this world of ideas as starting from seven to eight years, as supported by cognitive development theorists such as Piaget and Case. We are doing the greatest harm to our children when we are forcing them to block out the development of the thinking process and instead make them memorize endless texts, whether in our religious schools or our "secular" ones. We may be producing zombies.

It may be that we are forcing our children into boxes out of which they cannot grow, as we earlier noted with the example of Chinese foot binding. Our situation may be worse for we cannot observe by sight the damage that we are doing to our children.

Pity the child whose mind is being raped by being forced to memorize endless text she does not understand. Who is banished from asking questions. Who is taught to detest what was to be loved. And who will face this whether in a madrasa or in the average school. If she is "lucky", and her parents are wealthy enough to send her to an elite Western school, she would be robbed of her Islam in all but name.

Such children can never have the energy, passion, intellectual strength to make a difference for the Ummah. They have been drained of these in a systematic manner. Severity to our children and strictness in instruction also zaps them from their spirit and energy, that vital power that can make them individuals that can change the world. Ibn Khaldun notes:

"Severe punishment in the course of instruction does harm to the student, especially to little children, because it belongs among (the things that make for a) bad habit. Students, slaves, and servants who are brought up with injustice and (tyrannical) force are overcome by it. It makes them feel oppressed and causes them to lose their energy. It makes them lazy and induces them to lie and be insincere. That is, their outward behavior differs from what they are thinking, because they are afraid that they will have to suffer tyrannical treatment (if they tell the truth). Thus, they are taught deceit and trickery. This becomes their custom and character. They lose the quality that goes with social and political organization and makes people human, namely, (the desire to) protect and defend themselves and their homes, and they become dependent on others. Indeed, their souls become too indolent to (attempt to) acquire the virtues and good character qualities. Thus, they fall short of their potentialities and do not reach the limit of their humanity. As a result, they revert to the stage of "the lowest of the low".

"That is what happened to every nation that fell under the yoke of tyranny and learned through it the meaning of injustice. One may check this by (observing) any person who is not in control of his own affairs and has no authority on his side to guarantee his (safety). One will thus be able to infer (from the observable facts) that things are (as I have stated). One may look at the Jews and the bad character they have acquired, such that they are described in every region and period as having the quality of khurj, which, according to well-known technical terminology, means "insincerity and trickery." The reason is what we have (just) said."

How can we create a nation of justice when the education system is creating people of "deceit and trickery", no desire to defend themselves and their homes, who accept tyranny and to boot: vote for them! Ibn Khaldun's words, written so many years ago, ring true as if written for Muslim society today.

And:

"When laws are (enforced) by means of punishment, they completely destroy fortitude, because the use of punishment against someone who cannot defend himself generates in that person a feeling of humiliation that, no doubt, must break his fortitude.

When laws are (intended to serve the purpose of) education and instruction and are applied from childhood on, they have to some degree the same effect, because people then grow up in fear and docility and consequently do not rely on their own fortitude..."

Losing this fortitude is where bending over to the US, allowing drone strikes and accepting the murder of Muslim citizens and soldiery is so critically damaging to the Muslim psyche. But the education system is also perpetrating this – students at madrassas or secular schools are punished severely by people who have no right to do so, nor are the students treated fairly during such punishments. This injustice or zulm is exactly against the principle of justice that we stand for. It is creating the greatest damage to our children. Furthermore, Islamic religious education originally did not have this impact. In this regard, Ibn Khaldun notes that:

"It is no argument that the men around Muhammad observed the religious laws, and yet did not experience any diminution of their fortitude, but possessed the greatest possible fortitude. When the Muslims got their religion from Muhammad, the restraining influence came from themselves, as a result of the encouragement and discouragement he gave them in the Quran. It was not a result of technical instruction or scientific education. The laws were the laws and percepts of the religion that they received orally and which their firmly rooted belief in the truth of the articles of faith caused them to observe. Their fortitude remained unabated, and it was not corded by education or authority. Umar said, "Those who are not (disciplined) by the religious law are not educated by God." Umar's desire was that everyone should have his restraining influence in himself. His certainty was that Muhammad knew best what is good for mankind."

Clearly, the pretended orthodoxy of the present religious institutions is in reality a monstrous deviation from Islam. We cannot bring our children into the world of ideas as long as these issues persist. As a basic premise, to think about ideas, one has not to be constantly afraid of whether the religious instructor with the stick will hit you if you break-off to think about what you're reciting.

Open Source Learning

Now that we understand the problems in great detail and had a glimpse of some solutions, let us look at a new paradigm for the education of our children built on what Gatto calls Open Source Learning. Incidentally, this form of learning is very similar to how Muslims learned in the early Islamic period. Let us look at a brief comparison of Open Source Learning and Mass Schooling:

Let us briefly explain a few of these points as brevity does not allow us here to go into all of them. Making mistakes is a central part of learning as it allows an individual to get real feedback and then experiment with correcting his or her actions. Imran Khan for instance, found that his style of bowling was not going to help him be a fast bowler and through his personal feedback loop, he corrected this bowling action, something many experts thought was not possible for him to achieve. This is a perfect example of the open source learning that Imran Khan mastered, knowingly or unknowingly.

Children learn through interaction with others, if these others are predominantly children, they will continue to remain children perpetually. A hundred years ago a man was made at age 13-16, today you have an increasing number of 30 year olds who are still living in childhood. This is a deliberate attempt and Gatto writes:

Dr. Inglis knew that if children could be cloistered with other children, stripped of responsibility and independence, encouraged to develop only the trivializing emotions of greed, envy, jealousy, and fear, they would grow older but never truly grow up. In the 1934 edition of his once well-known book Public Education in the United States, Ellwood P. Cubberley detailed and praised the way the strategy of successive school enlargements had extended childhood by two to six years already, and forced schooling was at that point still quite new. This same Cubberley was an intimate colleague of Dr. Inglis: both were in charge of textbook publishing divisions at Houghton Mifflin - Cubberley as chief of elementary school texts; Inglis of secondary school texts. Cubberley was dean of Stanford's influential School of Education as well, a friendly correspondent of Conant at Harvard.

This serves to not only create a docile and child-like populace that perpetually looks up to authority with child-like reverence, but also a population that is easy to market meaningless consumer products to. Open source learning will seek to keep the environment mixed-age and heterogeneous to enhance children's ability to learn and grow up, as is natural – a child always seeks to copy his or her elders, sons are frequently seen copying their fathers, this is natural and the way children learn to grow up and must not be artificially inhibited.

It is my belief that Pakistanis survived the full blast of the Mass Schooling system simply because of the dysfunctional nature of schooling in Pakistan and because of cricket. Cricket has taught Pakistanis what the Mass Schooling system has attempted to destroy. An interesting anecdote concerns Dr. Zafar Altaf, one of the key individuals behind Pakistan's Silent Green Revolution of the 1990s in agriculture and a long-term manager of the Pakistan cricket team. Dr Altaf, under whom I have studied, related to me how he was able to finish his PhD from the London Business School in 18 months, without having any academic background for decades. He noted that his ability to concentrate on the pitch (Dr. Altaf is a former test cricketer) allowed him to focus for long stretches, sometimes 8-18 hours at a time, something his tutors at the London Business School found astonishing. No doubt, it also helped him accomplish his feats at the Ministry of Agriculture.

Let us judge the impact of cricket on Gatto's Harvard, Cambridge campus brochure for nine qualities that students need to have to deal with the international economy of today:

1. The ability to ask hard questions of data, whether from textbooks, authorities, or other "expert" sources. In other words, do we teach dialectics?

2. The ability to define problems independently, to avoid slavish dependence on official definitions.

3. The ability to scan masses of irrelevant information and to quickly extract from the sludge whatever is useful.

4. The ability to conceptualize.

5. The ability to reorganize information into new patterns which enable a different perspective than the customary.

6. The possession of a mind fluent in moving among different modes of thought: deductive, inductive, heuristic, intuitive, et al.

7. Facility in collaboration with a partner, or in teams.

8. Skill in the discussion of issues, problems or techniques.

9. Skill in rhetoric. Convincing others your course is correct.

Points 7, 8 and 9 are self-evident and needs no further discussion. The Pakistani paradigm of cricket helps point 2, in that street cricket seeks to find innovative ways to look at specific issues. For instance the reverse swing or Saqlain Mustaq's "dusra" both looked to define the problem of defeating the batsman in a very different way than was conventionally understood in cricket. Such innovations are to be found in a great variety and to diverse degrees in street cricket throughout Pakistan. Point number 1 is shown in the example earlier of Imran Khan's bowling action, by which Khan, through a dialectic method evolved his action. Many similar processes are constantly taking place in the streets and gullees of Pakistan. If you want to know why Pakistan has nuclear weapons and other equipment that the rest of the Ummah, even those with far more resources do not, it is because of the Pakistani culture of cricket.

However, cricket is but an ad hoc manner in which Pakistanis are learning what schooling should have helped them learn. The question we come back to is how we can design a schooling system that can actually help rather than hinder our children.

Firstly, we must de-legitimize the system of credentials and certificates. Secondly, we must focus on activity-impact. Thirdly, we need to take the venom out of the poorly mimicked Mass Schooling system. By de-legitimizing the system of credentials and certificates, we mean to say that matriculation and FSC grades should not be the basis for college enrolment. Instead, colleges should have a basic test of mathematics, sciences and language that assess the minimum needed to cope with college-level education. The corridors of privilege and power that cause safarish can then be removed further by choosing randomly (via a computer) from those that pass such a qualification test. All such tests must ensure that they are not repeated with same or similar questions, a problem which perpetuates the route learning tragedy much of the Muslim Ummah so deeply suffers from. People will also not be rejected based on their age – whether it is a 9 year old or a 90 year old. We do not know where talent lies and when they bloom. Certificates and other paperwork need to be delegitimized at every level of the education system.

In focusing on activity-impact, I mean that the government must engage in what is of most importance to the country, with the highest impact. Norman Augustine, one of America's most distinguished leader in industry, in government, engineer, academic and business leader, who holds 23 honorary degrees and was selected in who's who of American Library of Congress of 50 great Americans, has the following to sum up in a talk titled Re-engineering Engineering about what had the most impact for the United States:

In America it's basic research that creates the new knowledge, then it's engineering that takes that new knowledge and translates it into useful products and services. It's the working together of engineers and business people that takes those products and services then through entrepreneurship, introduces them into the market where they create jobs for other people, not engineers or scientists or business people.

Indeed the race for prosperity today is really a race for leadership in science and engineering. There have been eight different studies that I'm familiar with conducted in recent decades that have indicated that public investment in science and technology produces a societal rate of return of between 20 and 67 percent. There have been a number of other studies that have shown that somewhere between 50 and 85 percent of the growth in gross domestic product in this country in the last half century is attributable to advancements of science engineering. And the Federal Reserve Board concluded that about two thirds of the increase in productivity in this country in the last two decades is attributable to advancements in science and engineering.

This has also been emphasized by many prominent individuals and institutions; including Alan Greenspan and brevity causes me to move on and accept the point that science-engineering is the key sector of importance for a Muslim state to take up, and for government to be involved in. Augustine wants innovative, creative engineers, not the route-learned, zombified beings we are churning out. And he notes the dependence of the US in importing such engineers to remotely keep its edge over other nations. Both Augustine and Greenspan note the internal crisis the US is facing in creating a good supply of innovative and creative engineers. If you've read the above section on Mass Schooling that is compulsory (by force of the police) in the US, you may know why that may be.

To emphasize science-engineering and technical education, the Ummah needs to focus on creating polytechnics and engineering colleges and universities and then properly funding research and development institutions. We need such colleges to provide the best possible and cutting-edge education to create not line-men but the kind of innovative, creative engineers that Augustine wants. Space does not allow us to go into exactly what such a cutting-edge engineering and scientific education should be and on what lines to reform the present, I instead point the reader to a close scrutiny of Norman Augustine's 16 Laws of Re-engineering Engineering.

Research and development is a critical element in then utilizing the graduates produced, unless our aim is to send them to the United States where they desperately need such men; it is vital to make sense of the entire Education-R&D-Development cycle. When a nation does not have money for engineers, it makes little sense to produce them in the first place. Managing an effective R&D effort is a very difficult program to master, however, and takes us beyond the scope of the subject matter at hand for this chapter. We shall rejoin that issue in the chapter on defense.

The reader will wonder why I am focusing on technical and scientific higher education. Another big portion of higher education is of course the human sciences and the managerial and actuarial sciences. I believe that the managerial and actuarial sciences are well established in the Muslim world. Managers are also not built in MBA factories but the best managers are made from practical experience. The problem of the Human sciences is one that the East has been unable to master effectively in contemporary history. Teaching and creating truly effective and competent Human Science graduates is a very complex affair and one well beyond the structural capabilities of public institutions, and requiring more than school taught learning, inexorably linked to the culture and upbringing of peoples. What ends up happening is creating graduates in the Human Sciences who have no real skills to speak of. We shall rejoin the human sciences issue in the chapter on social education.

Importance of K-12 Education

A vital and important part of any education to benefit national development is to focus on K-12 education, something spoken of by Ibn Khaldun, who in particular talked about early educational instruction. It is also emphasized by men such as Alan Greenspan who has focused a major portion of his effort in trying to make K-12 education more effective, particularly the kind of education that can produce good scientists and engineers. Gatto notes some important aspects that an education should be able to accomplish. He calls it the Real Learning Index. These include:

1. Self-knowledge

2. Observation

3. Feedback

4. Analysis

5. Mirroring

6. Expression

7. Judgment

8. Adding value

To this we add:

9. Excellence over mediocrity

10. Ethical and religious values

11. Synthesis, particularly synthesis of Islam and the contemporary world.

These eleven points should form the basis of any real education system. It is with great surprise that we sometimes find individuals supposedly religious but have very poor ethical and moral applied practice. This theme is endemic and a systematic problem, the evidence of the latter being that it is present across the Islamic Ummah. Perhaps the main problem lies in a distortion of the original practice of how Islam was taught; during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the sahaba, students would read a portion of a surah, reflect upon it, apply it, and lastly memorize it. Today, we have skipped all the steps except the last, destroying the value of our faith and turning it into a meaningless prattle. This has to be corrected both at the schools and at the madrassas. And in one stroke we can create an Islamic renaissance, insh'Allah.

Bringing proper Islam and replacing the mullahs at the local madrassas will take a lot of grit and determination to achieve, with "liberal" and US-backed groups trying to manipulate such reform to further their purposes, and at the same time ultra-backward groups trying to hold on to what they have. The best way to deal with this, in the event our Islamic state becomes a reality is to create a genuine committee of world-renowned scholars and Muslims. Men like Nouman Ali Khan, respected by all groups and sects (at least the major ones). Men like Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens) who single-handedly built the best Muslim educational school-chain in the UK, so much so that the demand for a place in his schools outstrips the supply. Men like Zakir Naik, who has done similar education projects in India and whose stature and argumentation can shut any dissenting voices. Some other names include Dr. Totonji (a founder of the MSA), Hamza Yusuf, Yusuf Estes, Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Hakim Murad, Abdur Raheem Green. Yes, they are from diverse backgrounds and this will make them possibly fight with each other, but as long as the platform is given, they should be fully capable of (insh'Allah) hashing out a compromise, which in theory should create the best, most balanced plan. Real consensus is always hard to build, but the payoffs are equally potent.

The big secret about education is that it is not trying to achieve some immense greatness; it is really about stopping damage and damage control. We need to ensure that the Chinese foot binding equivalent of brain damage on our children does not continue. We need to ensure that children are given proper schooling where they are encouraged to think, reason, understand, discuss and apply effectively and practically, whether it is the Quran or the sciences.

The earlier the age, the more critical the damage done and conversely, the more powerful and effective the impact of the education can be. The first aspect to learn for a child is language, whether an Islamic government decides that include Urdu, English, Arabic or even C++. Mathematics is the language of engineering and also must be taught, perhaps immediately after conventional language(s). The important aspect here is not to make children hate school and be taught language through painful classroom lessons in grammar and syntax. The progression and manner of early education is captured by Ibn Khaldun in the following words:

"In his Rihlah, Judge Abu Bakr b. al-'Arabi made a remarkable statement about instruction, which retains (the best of) the old, and presents (some good) new features. He placed instruction in Arabic and poetry ahead of all the other sciences, as in the Spanish method, since, he said, "poetry is the archive of the Arabs. Poetry and Arabic philology should be taught first because of the (existing) corruption of the language. From there, the (student) should go on to arithmetic and study it assiduously, until he knows its basic norms. He should then go on to the study of the Qur'an, because with his (previous) preparation, it will be easy for him." (Ibn al-'Arabi) continued: "How thoughtless are our compatriots in that they teach children the Qur'an when they are first starting out. They read things they do not understand and work hard at something that is not as important for them as other matters." He concluded: "The student should study successively the principles of Islam, the principles of jurisprudence, disputation, and then the Prophetic traditions and the sciences connected with them." He also forbade teaching two disciplines at the same time, save to the student with a good mind and sufficient energy."

Now, I am not certain if I want my children to study principles of jurisprudence, but the general lay-of-the-land that Judge Al-Arabi sketches seems astute and an effective early education. Certainly, poetry, rhymes and songs can work to make language so much more meaningful and fun for children, and mathematics is critical to develop a logical and analytical mind, not to mention its critical importance to the sciences and engineering.

Poetry, rhymes and classic literature would be far better than syntax for the early education of a child, as Judge Al-Arabi has noted. Here the great enemies are "children's editions" of books – books that are abridged mockeries of their originals. They are the bane of learning, uninteresting to read as the literature doesn't flow, and teach mediocrity, not excellence.

The last point to be raised is that the children's development should be seen more holistically, and focuses on Mind, Body and Spirit. Education should not merely be about the first, but be about each of them in balance. We have focused on the mind, more needs to be said about the body and spirit.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 8: THE LAW OF ISLAM

Analytical reasoning and comparison are well known to human nature. They are not safe from error. Together with forgetfulness and negligence, they sway man from his purpose and divert him from his goal. Often, someone who has learned a good deal of past history remains unaware of the changes that conditions have undergone. Without a moment's hesitation, he applies his knowledge (of the present) to historical information, and measures such information by the things he has observed with his own eyes, although the difference between the two is great. Consequently, he falls into an abyss of error.

– Ibn Khaldun, Al Muqadimah

Most Muslims today do not live under Islamic law. Those that do, are often living with laws and ideals that are far removed from those that Islam originally stood for, and Allah knows best. Some today say that Islamic law is too complicated and difficult to be implemented. In our proposed Islamic state, the legal system should of course be run according to the Shariah. For how else can we run it when:

It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah.s will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers. (5:44)

The similitude of those who were charged with the (obligations of the) Mosaic Law, but who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is that of a donkey which carries huge tomes (but understands them not). Evil is the similitude of people who falsify the Signs of Allah. And Allah guides not people who do wrong. (62:5)

Surely, Allah subhanahut'ala did not make Islam an impossibility and thereby condemn us to kufr, as the verses above clearly state regarding those who do not live by His law. It may instead make more sense to state that the problem may not be in Islam, but in us. The question then becomes one of _how do we deal with this?_

Reforming Our Legal System

Muhammad Asad in his book This Law of Ours describes in one of the central problems with the interpretation of our deen. He finds the problem routed in the interpretive outlook over accepting the laws given in the Quran and Sunnah as they are given and directly apparent. We shall call the two outlooks as Apparent Outlook and Interpretive Outlook. He calls for a reformulation of the shariah based on the nass ordnances and a codification of this law as the Living Constitution of Islam. Such a reformulation allows clarity of what is Islamic law, what the community as a whole can legislate as Muslim Law including through the political authority of the leader(s) and what is to be left to personal ijtihad. This line of thinking is not Asad's innovation but rather goes back to Ibn Hazm, Ibn Jarir at-Tabari and can even be argued to go back to the opinions of the Sahaba.

I am unable to do better than to recommend a read of Muhammad Asad. However, since his book is a rare find today, the rest of this chapter has been dedicated to a heavily borrowed rendition and summary of This Law of Ours. At least, that is how the rest of this chapter started out, we have ended up making incremental improvements, that have accumulated over time. I would still recommend his authorship over mine, for the lucidity and command of Asad's English is superior.

The deen of Islam is composed of two propositions:

1) There is no deity save Allah

2) Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.

In understanding the guidance from Allah, a Muslim is obliged to accept the example and guidance of Muhammad (peace be upon him):

Whatever the Apostle of Allah commands you, accept, and whatever he bids you, avoid (59:7)

This guidance can be found in the ahadith, the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him). The work of the great muhadithun (hadith scholars) has made it possible to distill the purity of hadith with as best a human effort as possible.

The laws given in the Quran and Sunnah together represent the Law of Islam; the Quran provides direct commandments and the hadith provides:

1) Additional laws – Sunnah laws

2) Amplification and elaboration of application of Quranic Laws

These laws together, called the nass ordinances, are simple to comprehend for every one of you...:

We have made a religious law and an open road for every one of you (5:48)

The law as defined here is of course not the sum total of Islam but deals with the outward aspect of man's life – to his actions and behavior – it does not include the spiritual aspect of Islam which also includes spiritual teachings from the Two Sources.

The Law Giver has constituted the Law in such a manner that it is neither too complex that it will elude the intelligence of the common man who is obliged to know the Law of Islam, nor overly simple that it cannot provide an effective ethical framework for man. For both over complexity and over simplicity would be detrimental and the balance is best understood by Allah.

No specialized erudition is needed to understand the Law of Islam as erudition (i.e. deductive reasoning and analogy) is not in everyone's ability and:

We have made a religious law and an open road for every one of you (5:48)

And...

God does not impose upon any soul a duty beyond its ability (2:286)

This, in essence, is the outlook that accepts the law as what is obvious and clearly stated which is opposed to the interpretive fiqi outlook dominant today. This general outlook, in various shades has been a minority opinion among scholars since the 3rd Hijri, although it has been held by prominent scholars such as Ibn Hazm and At-Tabari as well as (by argument) the early Muslims.

What the Apparent Outlook Does Not Mean

This outlook does not mean that every "man-in-the-street" should be able to twist Islamic Law through his own ijtihad but rather to remove every kind of ijtihad, analogical deduction, expert erudition, from the Law of Allah.

The elimination of ijtihad from shariah does not imply the elimination of ijtihad from our daily life. Allah's gift of free will, reason and creativity must be fully utilized within the framework of the Shariah.

Apparent versus Interpretive Debate

Interpretive Outlook Argument 1:

¤ The Law defined by the Apparent Outlook is not the total law but much greater, derived by the penetrating deductions of great imams of the past.

¤ These great imams were solely qualified to do this ijtihad.

¤ The rest of the Muslims are obliged to follow these deductions.

Apparent Outlook Response 1:

→ The Quran and Sunnah do not indicate that we are to follow other men's deductions.

→ These imams and scholars are not mentioned in the Two Sources.

→ Whatever Allah and His Prophet intended to be the Law of Islam has been clearly formulated as such in the Quran and Sunnah, which formulation, allowing for no alternative meanings we describe as nass. These are absolutely unambiguous by virtue of the wording and must be taken at face value only and no other value.

Interpretive Outlook Argument 2:

¤ The nass of the Quran and Sunnah are the basis of the Law but not the whole of the Law. More laws can be derived by implication.

¤ Great intellect and erudition (i.e. use of deduction and analogy) is needed to unearth the intention of the Law Giver.

¤ The Shariah must deal with all exigencies and problems of our life and this is the task of fiqh.

¤ The scholars of the first three centuries of Islam are exclusively qualified for this task of expounding the Law of Islam because of their piety, knowledge and nearness to the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

Apparent Outlook Response 2:

→ Nearness to the Prophet's (peace be upon him) time is not a special qualification as they did not have any more material to work with than us; the same number of Quranic verses and ahadith exist today.

→ We are more fortunate that it was only after their time that a critical study of ahadith took place.

→ It is not necessary to 'discover' such laws and to claim our discoveries as having Shariah validity.

→ It is not necessary to have such an all embracing legislation. Allah (swt) did not intend to make Muslims into a community of automata running like clock-work to the details of a most minute mechanical system covering every detail of our lives.

→ Rather, a Muslim is meant to be the highest type of man – freely obedient to the Eternal Law, disciplined in his actions and thoughts, courageous in the exercise of his intellect, ever bent on finding the deeper truth of Allah's message and on improving his social organization.

→ This implies the constant use of man's intellect. The Shariah was thus never meant to be a cage for human endeavor but a divine framework of law, aided by Man's intellect, it would allow him to rise to the greatest heights of knowledge and achievement.

→ According to the hadith of the Prophet's conversation with Muadh b. Jabal whatever is not clearly given as Law in the Quran and Sunnah is subject to one's independent judgment, which must follow the spirit of the Two Sources. It is clear from this and other hadith that every ijtihad is a matter of individual knowledge and conscience and cannot have legal force in any Shariah sense.

Interpretive Outlook Argument 3:

¤ Such a procedure was permissible in the case of a great companion such as Muadh b. Jabal or in the case of a recognized Imam but not in the case of ordinary mortals.

Apparent Outlook Response 3:

→ There is no evidence for this claim. I.e. the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not specify that this was only for Muadh b. Jabal.

→ The Faqih is evading the issue that the Law is immutable and final.

We did not neglect anything in the Book (6:38)

And:

Today I have perfected your religion for you (5:3)

And:

Whenever God and the Apostle have decided a matter, it is not for a faithful man or woman to follow another course of their own choice (33:36)

And:

Say: "What! Will ye instruct Allah about your religion? But Allah knows all that is in the heavens and on earth: He has full knowledge of all things. (49:16)

Quotes from Ibn Hazm

"And if (in order to justify their claims to qiyas and ta'lil) the upholders of these methods quote Traditions or Quran verses containing comparisons (i.e. analogies) between one thing and another, or declaring that God has ordained such-and-such a thing for such-and-such a reason – the answer is this: 'All that God and His Apostle have mentioned by way of comparison or cause, is truth absolute, and none may go against it: but this, precisely, is the nass on which we rely! But all your attempts at imitating Him in matters of religious legislation and at ascribing "causes" (to Shariah ordinances) beyond what God and His Apostle have made manifest by means of nass: All this is utterly wrong – a way which God has not permitted us to go....

"All upholders of qiyas contradict each other in their deductions; and you won't find a single problem in the law in which the qiyas of one group of scholars, claimed by them to be right, is not diametrically opposed to a qiyas evolved by another group. All of them agree that not each and every qiyas could possibly be sound, and not each and every ra'y true: but whenever we call upon them to produce an objective criterion which would enable us to discriminate between a sound qiyas, ra'y or ta'lil on the one hand, and a bad qiyas, ra'y or ta'lil on the other hand – they merely stutter in confusion. Whenever one presses them on this point, the futility of all their claims becomes manifest: for they are absolutely unable to give a sensible answer....

"And so we tell them: 'The nass (of Quran and Sunnah) is absolute truth; but what you are aiming at – namely, at arbitrary additions to the nass-laws by means of your personal opinions – is utterly wrong....

"The Shariah in its entirety refers either to obligatory acts (fard), the omission of which constitutes a sin; or to prohibited acts (haram), the commission of which constitutes a sin; or to allowed acts (mubah), the commission or omission of which does not make man a sinner. Now, these allowed acts are of three kinds: firstly, acts which have been recommended (mandub) – meaning that there is a merit in doing them, but no sin in omitting them; secondly, acts which have been disapproved of (makruh) – meaning that there is a merit in abstaining from them, but no sin in doing them, thirdly, acts which have been left unspecified (mutlaq) – being neither meritorious nor sinful whether done or omitted. For, God has said:

'He has created for you all that is on earth'; and He also said,

'It has been distinctly shown to you what you are forbidden to do.' Thus it has been made manifest that everything is lawful (halal) except what has been clearly described as forbidden (haram) in the Quran and in the Sunnah....

".... In one of his sermons the Apostle of God said: 'O people! God has made the hajj obligatory on you; therefore perform it.' Thereupon somebody asked, 'Every year, O Apostle of God?' The Apostle remained silent; and the man repeated his question thrice. Then the Apostle of God said: 'had I answered yes, it would have become incumbent on you (to perform a hajj every year): and indeed it would have been beyond your ability to do so. Do not ask me about matters which I leave unspoken; for, behold, there were (communities) before you who went to their doom because they had put too many questions to their prophets and thereupon disagreed (about their teachings). Therefore, if I order you anything, do of it as much as you are able to do; and if I forbid you anything, abstain from it.' (Sahih Muslim).

"The above hadith circumscribes all principles of the religious law from the first to the last. It shows that whatever the Prophet has left unspoken – neither ordering nor forbidding it – is allowed (mubah), that is, neither prohibited nor obligatory. Whatever he ordered is obligatory (fard), and whatever he forbade is prohibited (haram); and whatever he ordered us to do is binding on us to the extent of our ability alone...." Ibn Hazm, Al-Muhalla (Cairo, 1347 A.H.) vol. I, pp. 56 ff.

Ibn Hazm's views illustrate that these and similar views are not bida (innovation) but shared by many earlier scholars. This also includes Ibn Jarir At-Tabari who, commenting on surah 45:18, defines Shariah as all injunctions and prohibitions contained in the Quran and Sunnah including the laws of inheritance (faraid) as well as the restrictive ordinances regarding food, marriage, etc and the punishments to be inflicted on transgressors (hudud).

By argument, these views may even be extended substantively to the views of the sahabah including the Khalifa-e-Rashidun, who never attempted to do what these "great Imams" did. These Apparent Outlook viewpoints have been a minority view since the 3rd century Hijri, when the Interpretive Outlook gained its ground.

While these views are suppressed by the "traditional ulema" who went to the extent of having Ibn Hazm imprisoned and his books destroyed (and who knows how many unknown others we will never hear about because of their censorship), this author has himself found their approach questionable long before he read Muhammad Asad. Muhammad Asad in turn found this problem independently and only later discovered Ibn Hazm and others. This author has also found the same suspicion of wrong among numerous common people, in fact, it is commonplace among Muslims to disregard what their respective ulema say. Recently, the author was surprised to find Sheikh Imran Hosein sharing similar views. Sheikh Hosein quoted:

They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)! (9:31, Al-Quran)

And explained how the Prophet had explained this verse as to why and how rabbis and priests are stated to be being worshiped and explained how people who follow the ulema are falling into the same trap as the ulema are doing the same. He also quoted that 999 out of 1000 people will populate Hell and connected that hadith to this issue. The author, much shocked at finding someone with the same views as his, reiterated this point in the question and answer session, asking if we are not doing exactly the same today and Sheikh Hosein confirmed and praised the author.

Malek Bennabi also reflects this viewpoint when he writes about the early Islamic society in contrast to the juristic outlook:

"... _subscription to the Islamic ideal not merely as theoretical doctrines and ruling taught by the jurists, but as a dynamic and radiating_ truth which shapes the individual's actions and movements and inspires his motives and feelings. _" (Bennabi, On the Origins of Human Society)_

Bennabi then goes on to quote Abdullah Ibn Masud:

"We lived a long time during which we would be given eman before (the knowledge of) the Quran. (As soon as) a surah (of the Quran) is revealed to Muhammad, peace be upon him, each one of us would learn its halal and haram as well as its commands and prohibitions and the limits at which one should stop." (Abdullah Ibn Masud, as quoted in Tabari, Jami al bayan Fi Ta'wil Ayi'l Quran vol. I, p.64)

How the Interpretive Outlook Came About

There is a tendency to evaluate all aspects of life through religion. This tendency is in itself sound and caused some great early scholars to search beyond the nass ordinances. This was also influenced by their era which was defined by a heavy spiritual and esoteric backdrop.

These early scholars were however not aware of psychological factors which render every deduction subjective, thus only valid relatively.

This relativity and subjectivity is dependent on each generation's intellectual development and are time bound in their nature. To assume otherwise and to claim that these early scholars found answers in any final sense amounts to assuming that the level of the Quran and Sunnah is fixed at the time and peculiarities of these "early generations".

This would not make sense as the Two Sources are not time bound but provide answers for all times and all changing conditions. The Shariah, wisely formulated by Allah, provides a timeless framework and flexibility within that framework for changing times and circumstances.

This cannot be said of the ijtihad-based laws within the Interpretive Outlook.

Critical Importance to Our Future

The attempt, in multiple instances in the past, to unify the Shariah code of the major schools of Islam has failed. This has not been due to the lack of sincerity of effort. The various fiqhs and wide spectrum of interpretation is the primary cause of division among Muslims, who are now divided into sects and groups, each proposing their own interpretations and exactly in contravention to the Quran:

That He may make the suggestions thrown in by Satan, but a trial for those in whose hearts is a disease and who are hardened of heart: verily the wrongdoers are in a schism far (from the Truth): (22:53)

The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah--that which We have sent by inspiration to thee--and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: namely, that ye should remain steadfast in Religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him). (42: 13)

As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah. He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did. (6:159)

And hold fast, all together, by the rope which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves; and remember with gratitude Allah's favour on you; for ye were enemies and He joined your hearts in love, so that by His Grace, ye became brethren; and ye were on the brink of the pit of Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus doth Allah make His Signs clear to you: That ye may be guided. (3:103)

Be not like those who are divided amongst themselves and fall into disputations after receiving Clear Signs: For them is a dreadful penalty. (3:105)

How a reasonable Muslim can ignore the above dire warnings from the Quran is beyond the grasp of this author. The Prophet (peace be upon him) explained the following verse:

They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)! (9:31)

By noting that: "They didn't worship them but (the worship was in the sense) whatever they made halal for them, they considered it halal, whatever they made haram for them, they considered it haraam."

(Tirmidhi Book of Tafseer-Surah Taubah, declared Hasan by Imam Tirmidhi, Tauheed ul Muslimeen pg. 272)

And what are all these faqih's and "great scholars" doing? Are they not also qualifying what should be halal and haram? Are they not disagreeing about different interpretations and creating different groups thereby?

What else have the Jews and Christians done? Have they not incrementally over time added to the laws, and have they thereby not made following the deen tantamount to automating their lives?

Orthodox Judaism attempts to govern almost every tiny or large aspect of a Jew's life, there being 613 laws they have to meet on a daily basis, of which candid Jews will tell you, are nearly impossible to follow. They cannot live but with virtually every action of theirs being governed by some law or another.

Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: You would tread the same path as was trodden by those before you inch by inch and step by step so much so that if they had entered into the hole of the reptile, you would follow them in this also. We said: Allah's Messenger, do you mean Jews and Christians (by your words)" those before you"? He said: Who else (than those two religious groups)? (Sahih Muslim, Kitab Al-Ilm)

*****

And speak not, concerning that which your own tongues qualify (as clean or unclean), the falsehood: "This is lawful, and this is forbidden," so that ye invent a lie against Allah. Lo! Those who invent a lie against Allah will not succeed. A brief enjoyment (will be theirs); and theirs a painful doom. (16:116-117)

And it was Imam Malik himself, one of the very scholars that they draw upon, who stated "take only from me the Sunnah of the Prophet".

According to Muhammad Asad, who has spent over half a century pondering over our crisis as an Ummah, there is no other way forward for us than to codify the Law of Islam on what is clearly apparent from the Quran and Sunnah. He writes that our present dead-end in the fiqi outlook can only increase our disgust with ourselves, create defeatism, doubts and mutual animosity. This gradually leads to the abandonment of Islam as a practical proposition and destroys our culture. He writes:

" _I cannot see any other way to our recovery. If there is some such other way, I challenge those who claim to have found it to show it to us. Simply talking about the need for a "rebirth of faith" is not much more worth than bragging about our past and extolling the greatness of our predecessors. Our faith_ cannot _be reborn unless we understand to what practical goals it will lead us. Generalities won't help us either. It won't do us the least good if, for instance, we are glibly assured that the socio-economic programme of Islam is better than Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Liberalism, and God knows what other "isms" which the West has produced for its own good – its undoing. We ought rather to be shown, in unmistakable terms, what alternative proposals the shariah makes for our social life – what its true concept of society is, what views it holds with regard to individual property and communal good, labour and production, capital and profit, employer and employee, the State and the individual; what alternative it proposes to banking (which is an Islamic society is impossible because of the obvious prohibition of riba), what its practical measures are for a prevention of man's exploitation by man; for an abolition of ignorance and poverty ; for obtaining bread, blankets and homes for every man and woman...._

"Now, I do not mean to say that these material things of life are Islam's sole concern; certainly not: for this religion of ours would not be God's Message to man if its foremost goal were not man's growth towards God: but our bodies and soul are so intertwined that we cannot achieve the ultimate well-being of one without taking the other fully into consideration. Specious sermonizing about "faith" and "spirit" and "surrender to God" cannot lead to the establishment of true Islam on earth unless we are shown how to gain faith through a better insight into God's plan, how to elevate our sprit by living a righteous life, and how to surrender to God by doing His will by ourselves and by others. And all this, as far as Islam is concerned, can be gleaned from the Shariah alone.

"And the Shariah can never become effective unless it becomes an open book for every one of us."

The proposed revival is vital for:

1) Uniting the Ummah on common grounds.

2) Making the Law of Islam a practical proposition in our social life.

3) Making the Law of Islam accessible to every Muslim.

4) Benefit from the economic program of Islam.

Asad's Plan of Action

The first step for a Muslim community to live according to the tenets of Islam and to implement its social and economic program is to codify the Shariah in easily comprehensible form. This can be achieved through the following plan of action:

1) A small representative panel of "ulema" is entrusted with the codification of the nass ordinances.

2) The criteria for panel members are that they are fully conversant with:

a. The Arabic language

b. The methodology and history of the Quran

c. The science of hadith

3) Work must proceed on the clear and apparent lines as explained before and must exclude all kinds of "interpretation" handed down from previous times. Only such ordinances are to be considered that answer the full linguistic definition of nass: statements, injunctions and statutes that are self-evident in their wording with "a particular meaning, not admitting any other than it" where no difference of interpretation can arise.

4) Selection of nass ordinances from ahadith will require careful consideration of the riwayat against the historical background. Only traditions with the highest standards should be considered. Traditions with the slightest opening for legitimate criticism should be excluded. (This is only for constructing the Shariah code and not for the purpose of ijtihad where Traditions that are probably right should of course continue to be used).

5) Careful consideration should be taken to ensure that ordinances made that were time-bound in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) are sifted from those which have universal validity. These would reveal themselves by their particular wording, the explanations of the Companions or by another hadith. Otherwise, the ordinance is to be considered universally valid.

6) The entire context of a particular hadith or ayat is to be considered and not taken in isolation and in a disjointed manner. An Ayat which may not appear to have a nass ordinance may become of relevance when considered in conjunction with another ayat or hadith. Likewise, a nass ordinance may reveal itself when several traditions are placed together. The Two Sources form an integral whole.

7) The nass ordinances as described must be collected in book form and circulated among scholars nationally and internationally for suggestions and criticism, particularly on the treatment of hadith-based ordinances. Responses should then be treated on their merit.

8) A final Arabic original is to be made of the Code of the Shariah and Muslim scholars and institutions should collaborate to translate the code into any language necessary. Translations are to be closely scrutinized to remove "interpretive" translation through personal bias and arbitrary choice of words and phrases.

9) The codified nass ordinances, with the Arabic as the master copy, will then serve as the Constitutional Law of Islam.

Muhammad Asad's Position in Comparison to Other Positions

Sometimes the author has found that there is confusion as to what exactly Muhammad Asad is saying and how it is different from what others are saying. Below is a diagram that illustrates the difference.

The next few paragraphs explain this diagram. Tariq Ramadan does not reject the validity of the madhabs in the past but only finds that they are increasingly obsolete to the modern world. He notes that even the ulema are aware of this and try to give new rulings to stay abreast of the times but that this is not effective. He believes a new ijtihad building even possibly a new madhab using maqasid al-Shariah (by understanding the purpose of the various laws) is needed with special consideration of today's times. He believes that the principles of the Quran and Sunnah are eternal but their application must vary with changing circumstances and he wants the legal system to take this into cognizance.

The Salafis reject the madhabs and want to go back to the pure and pristine form of Islam of the "Salaf" or early Muslims that they are aware of and others don't know. However, some of them also claim to be Hanbali. Further confusing, Salafis are typically seen quoting scholars such as Imam Ibn Taymiyya, Shaykh Bin Baz, Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, and Shaykh Al Albani. None of these scholars are from the "Salaf" but their views are taken at the exclusion of other scholars. This then may be construed as a form of taqlid – accepting the position of these scholars as the correct position just the way any madhab does with their own scholars. Thus there are two faces to this rejection of taqlid and the ijtihad of the madhabs.

Now, all of the positions except Tariq Ramadam noted in the above diagram want to return to the mystical perfection of the original. Muhammad Asad's position is focused exclusively on the legal Shariah of the state while the Salafis are taking the far harder road of a comprehensive theology. Ibn Hazm states the view of Muhammad Asad but then also passes his own independent literalist judgments to a small extent. This can be looked as an inadvertent addition in the heat of his arguments against the theologians of his era.

Ibn Khaldun notes the difference between Ibn Hazm and the original Zahirite school:

"He [Ibn Hazm] turned to the Zahirite school and became skilled in it. He gave his own independent interpretation of their stated opinions. He opposed their leader Dawud and attacked most of the Muslim religious leaders."

This requires a bit more explanation and I shall here rely on Ibn Khaldun for this additional explanation. Ibn Khaldun holds three schools of Islam as valid – the Hanafi, the Maliki-Shaf'i-Hanbali and the Zahiri. However, he notes that the Zahiri school has died out and Ibn Hazm attempted to revive it from reading the works of the Zahiris but not properly understanding them (as noted in the quote above, Dawud ibn Khalaf Al-Zahiri being considered an authority in the Zahiri school, although earlier scholars are also quoted). He (Ibn Khaldun) considers Ibn Hazm's interpretations misguided, a clue to which is perhaps:

"He gave his own independent interpretation of their stated opinions... opposed their leader Dawud..."

So what is the Zahiri School? We don't know for sure because their school did not survive but what others say is that this school basically wants to restrict any erudition of scholars and thus expansion of the law of Islam, and stick to the original law given.

In sum, we want to codify that which is given clearly in the Quran and Sunnah as the law of Islam and be accepted for the legal functioning of the state. This I believe is the practical and pragmatic step for us. If you want to follow a madhab beyond this, please go ahead, if you want to interpret things literally in your life, so be your prerogative (as long as you don't blow up on our face or start murdering the rest of us), but let us all sit and agree that what is clearly given in the Quran and widely accepted Sunnah will be the law of the land, as is clearly stated and given. Anything beyond, the state will not sponsor or promulgate, allowing unity of the people. Anything that does not have a legal application relevant to the legal institution of the state will not be given any legal rulings about. Instead, that form of ijtihad will be made the prerogative of the political authority or the individual.

Thus ijtihad is clearly delineated into three types – legal ijtihad, severely restricted, but social-political and personal ijtihad duly expanded. Thus, if there is a social element to an issue, then the right decision making body is the political system. If it is a matter of individual impact, then the individual is free to utilize his judgment as he wishes. The individual is left free to pursue his individual ijtihad and the political authority is given a free hand to interpret the Quran and Sunnah on social and political issues keeping in mind the present circumstances of the world.

Let us take a case study here. There is a hadith that we should not urinate directly into the river. The Zahiri school (supposedly, we don't know definitively) want a literalist approach where someone can download into a cup and throw it in the river and that this is fine. Some others would make a fatwa that pissing into a cup and then throwing into the river is not acceptable according to their ijtihad and will ridicule the Zahiri madhab.

In our case, this is not an issue for a legal ruling. The Prophet (peace be upon him) did not give out any punishments for someone pissing into the river. It is a matter of personal advice and social impact. Personally, an individual may choose to interpret it as they like. However, the social and political authority must also decide to interpret the text in light of the present circumstances. It may be for instance that the society decides that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was truly brilliant (as he was), and that today our drainage opens straight into the rivers which have created enormous ecological and health problems for the people downstream, and this is a worldwide unsustainable phenomenon.

The political authority, after carefully considering the impact and taking into consideration the amazing wisdom of our Prophet (peace be upon him), may then choose to stop using our rivers as a human and industrial waste disposal system. It may set up laws and regulations including that you cannot urinate indirectly into the river, or let your drainage directly out into the river without treatment, but never claim that these are eternal laws with pseudo-claims that they are somehow sent to us from Allah through the wisdom of some great scholar's erudition.

With that we end the exposition of what makes reasonable sense to any Muslim who is not worshipping x, y and z but Allah alone. Who is not blindly following x, y and z because they know that x, y and z will have no authority in the Day of Judgment. Finally, any Muslim who has the sense to understand that turning the framework of our deen into an ever more detailed and restrictive legalized mockery of the original deen of Islam is exactly following the Jews, whose Rabbis did exactly that, and Orthodox Judaism remains stuck in this same issue to this day – almost every aspect of their life is now governed by the pseudo-wisdom of their Rabbis, who are in that sense the ones they worship, as is given in the Quranic verse earlier quoted.

An Additional Problem

There is however a small bit missing in Muhammad Asad's otherwise excellent plan. He writes:

"While a selection of nass ordinances from the Holy Qur'an is comparatively easy-because, one text only is to be considered-the application of this principle to hadith will necessitate a thorough examination of the various riwoyot against their historical background. In this respect, only Traditions which come up to the highest standards laid down by the great Sunni muhaddithiin need to be considered. Traditions which leave the slightest opening for legitimate criticism regarding their authenticity should be a priori excluded."

What does this mean? Does it mean we take Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari (and perhaps some other Sahihs, or not)? Further, the Salafis have started, under Al-Albani, their own classifications to some extent of what is Sahih and what is not. Closer inspection indicates that there are disagreements over what are Sahih and what are not and that this itself is a dividing line for the Muslim community. There are also now people who reject the traditional Sahih hadiths and these people point to contradictions in the Sahihs. Many of these contraditions and problems have been pointed out by earlier hadith scholars, but were hidden from view to the general Muslim public, who have been sold the idea that the Two Sahihs are perfect. How do we make sense of these issues that touch upon some critical areas of our faith? Have we reached a dead end?

One simple possible solution is to take Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari. Our Islamic state can set up a commission of Muslim scientists, hadith scholars and other relevant intellectuals to investigate any hadith that may appear contradictory or scientifically faulty, with criteria similar to Maurice Bucaille's where he used a falsification test of the Quran. Another approach may be to relook at the methodology of Bukhari and Muslim. They are humans and hadith scholars have on many occasion disagreed with them.

One example of many – when Bukhari took his work to the leading scholars of his time, they told him that they agreed with all but four of his hadith compilation. Hadith compilers continued their work long after Bukhari and Muslim again indicating they were not the final end-all-be-all of hadith compilation. Yet our so-called ulema continue to sell the idea to the Muslim public that Muslim and Bukhari are final and to disagree is blasphemy. It is as if that there is one Islam for hadith scholars and another for the Muslim public at large. This is manifest evil for any whose hearts can see.

Let me then expand on a re-thinking scheme.

Now, Al Shafi'i notes the criteria for Sahih in the following way:

"Each reporter should be trustworthy in his religion; he should be known to be truthful in his narrating, to understand what he narrates, to know how a different expression can alter the meaning, and report the wording of the hadith verbatim, not only its meaning. This is because if he does not know how a different expression can change the whole meaning, he will not know if he has changed what is lawful into what is prohibited.

"Hence, if he reports the hadith according to its wording, no change of meaning will be found at all. Moreover, he should be a good memorizer if he happens to report from his memory, or a good preserver of his writings if he happens to report from them. He should agree with the narrations of the huffaz (leading authorities in hadith), if he reports something which they do also. He should not be a Mudallis, who narrates from someone he met about something he did not hear, nor should he report from the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) contrary to what reliable sources have reported from him. In addition, the one who is above him (in the isnad) should be of the same quality, [and so on,] until the hadith goes back uninterrupted to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) or any authority below him."

Ibn al-Salah more concisely, defines a Sahih hadith in the following manner:

"A Sahih hadith is the one which has a continuous isnad, made up of reporters of trustworthy memory from similar authorities, and which is found to be free from any irregularities (i.e. in the text) or defects (i.e. in the isnad)."

Using this broad definition, we can perhaps construct a solution for a more selective compilation of Sahih as follows:

1. Accept all the hadith from the Golden Chain (Al-Shafi'i, Al-Malik, Nafi, Abdullah bin Umar)

2. Accept all the other hadith of Bukhari and Muslim based on the following criteria that at least two completely independent chains of narrations based on the criteria of Al-Bukhari / Al-Muslim going back to:

a. the Prophet (peace be upon him) or

b. The ten companions

c. Members of his household (such as his wives)

3. Simultaneously, a critical study of hadith from a scientific point of view on the basis of Maurice Bucaille's criteria used for his Quran analysis could help validate the actual purity of our hadith distillation.

*Point 1 and 2 are differentiated because there are the same hadith, even muthawathir hadith (those of the highest quality) that are reported somewhat differently by say, Muslim than is narrated in the Golden Chain. For instance, the Prophet's (peace be upon him) Last Sermon.

This solution would give us a distillation of a high grade of Sahihs which is also concise and thus easily accessible to secondary / high school students and the public at large. The compilation should be made as simple and easy to read as possible, with combining variations of a hadith in a simple manner or stating one authentic variation that conveys the meaning and noting a critical variation as a last resort and only if it is truly critical or conveying a significantly different meaning. Another easy-to-read solution would be to structure the layout of the hadith similar to Sahih Al-Muslim rather than the subject-based and repeating nature of Al-Bukhari's compilation. Yet another would be coding and indexing the isnad of each hadith in a simple and systematic way. For instance, a list of hadith narrators can be coded and indexed and then each hadith can simply have a code based isnad on top of the hadith. For example: A2-B4-C1-D5-E7.

The hadith thus coded should also be made available online and in soft copy with an emphasis to make them easily searchable and even perhaps compilable under different sets of criteria set by the software user.

The purpose is to distil the best of the hadith and to make it simple and easy for Muslims to access. The author has found in his own experience of studying hadith that the scholars that be, make it difficult and hard for you to access the hadith and try to make it look like something beyond the average mind to understand. The main stumbling blocks in understanding hadith and their compilation is not the subject but the way the subject has been presented to the people by those entrusted with this important aspect of Islam. Whether there is a vested interest in this or not I will leave the reader to decide.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 9: THE HEART OF THE BREAKDOWN

With this chapter we begin the central illness that has paralyzed the Ummah. This and the following chapter represent the heart of the diagnosis and is not my work, but broadly the thesis of Ibn Khaldun, Allama Iqbal, Muhammad Asad, Ali Shariati, Muhammad Abduh and Malek Bennabi, among others. Ibn Khaldun's study into the social cohesion of groups is the first basis, the foundation upon which students of his work, including Malek Bennabi and Allama Iqbal built their analysis. Malek Bennabi, who had also read Allama Iqbal has perhaps taken the diagnosis to its greatest maturity, is the biggest influence of this work and thus, while this diagnosis is indebted to the lifetime research of multiple great thinkers, it is essentially a summary and small-scale extension of Bennabi's viewpoint. Building upon each other, we have finally come to a clear picture and understanding.

Yet, there is an additional problem – understanding the diagnosis for those outside. The problem of the matter is that to even understand the diagnosis, we will need to first educate ourselves to a whole new science that these aforementioned scholars have implicitly or explicitly created. The foundations of this science were first created by Ibn Khaldun. The closest Western equivalent is Sociology. However, this science of ours is wider in scope and, in terms of the Western sciences be highly "interdisciplinary". Furthermore, many of the definitions used in the West are not helpful because, as Malek Bennabi notes, those definitions are normative in nature and rooted within their cultural context and worldview, thus cannot be readily understood or even effective for those outside that context. This science can perhaps be loosely defined as "The Science of Civilization".

To the reader familiar with Sociology, you will find that even the basic definitions here are different from the Western standard and Marxist perspectives, even for concepts such as civilization and culture. This is the only way forward for us to effectively grapple with our condition. I do not have the space to convince the critic, and as was noted in the Foreword, this book is not meant for the critic or the academic in the first place.

A Quick Background to the Science of Civilization

So, before we can get to the diagnosis, we will have to take a step back and delve into at least the basics of this science. In the following pages I shall rely largely on Bennabi, in particular On the Origins of Human Society, The Question of Ideas in the Muslim World and The Question of Culture. It may be considered that Bennabi's work is the most developed form of this science. I will not have the space to do this in detail, but will condense everything to the most concise possible.

A final note to consider before we start is as Bennabi warns – some things have simple definitions and these are like simple two dimensional drawings. However, what is at hand is a more complex drawing. This is like an engineering drawing that requires multiple drawings to fully explain the engineering of the object. It is this latter kind of complex definitions and explanations we are about to engage in.

Society & Civilization

Let us start with the basic unit we are studying – society. Bennabi notes that the term society is used for a wide variety of social phenomena but there are two fundamental types of society, natural or primitive society and historical society. The primary difference between the two is that in the former there is no fundamental change in its characteristics since its inception and the primitive society is essentially stationary, while the later transforms and evolves over time and is essentially dynamic. From here on end society will only mean historical society.

There are two origins of historical society, ones that evolve from a primitive state of nature organically and the historical society that is formed from elements of another historical society that is left over to create a new society. A historical society may be brought to its state of perpetual change by a challenge that is either a natural circumstance creating a geographical type society or by the appeal of a certain ideal, which creates an ideological society. Thus, two types of historical society:

1. Geographical historical society

2. Ideological historical society

The term society can then be described as:

"A group of human beings which perpetually changes its social features by creating itself the means of change, and which perceives the objectives it seeks to achieve through such a process of change." (Bennabi)

In addition, society is defined as an organism which has the following characteristics:

1. Perpetual movement; change and evolution

2. Generation of the means of movement

3. Purpose of movement

Both Bennabi and Allama Iqbal note movement as a central characteristic of society. Bennabi states:

"The human group acquires the quality of society when it starts moving, that is to say, when it begins changing itself in order to achieve its goals. This event coincides in the historical perspective, with the moment when a civilization emerges."

The key element of society is what he describes as the "social relations network". He notes that "the network of relations is the first historical task a society carries out upon its birth".

The Social Relations Network

Bennabi describes the social relations network both quantitatively and qualitatively. He notes that a community having N individuals, and K total number of relations for every individual, will have the following equation:

K = N – X

Where X = Index of development from the quantitative point of view

And: 1 < X < N

The total number of relations in the community is then L where:

L = NK = N(N-X)

In the peak of its development, society can be represented as:

L1 = N (N-1)

Society in its final state of disintegration, where social relations are dissolved would then be represented by:

L2 = N (N-N) = 0

The qualitative component of the social relations network is the efficiency of the network, and what Bennabi describes as the psycho-temporal level. Bennabi makes a convincing case that the birth of social relations takes place through moral values and through religious relationships; that religion plays a key role in building civilization.

Having thus put the study of society and civilization on a solid definitional foundation, let us consider some fundamental variables other than the social relations network through which we can study the complex phenomenon of civilization. These fundamental variables include:

1. The three realms of objects, people and ideas

2. Two worldviews

3. The civilization cycle

4. Culture

Before we move there however, to clarify the relationship of society and civilization, we here define civilization as synonymous with historical society once it is able to meet its challenge of either an ideological or geographical nature. Civilization is thus a state of being for historical society and it begins to decline when the challenges it faces in its environment begin to overwhelm it.

The Three Realms: Objects, People & Ideas

The world revolves around three key elements – objects, people and ideas. Of these three elements, the realm of people is the key realm that helps organize all three realms. It is the realm of persons that brings together the realm of objects and ideas. Bennabi makes this point by noting that Germany after WWII had lost all its objects but could regain herself because of its realm of persons and ideas. He notes on the other hand that the Islamic civilization declined catastrophically under the blows of such new nations as Spain, despite having the best libraries and thus realm of ideas, while these new nations had a relatively poor stock of ideas. Yet, in its early period, even with a vast scarcity of objects in relation to the two civilizations it faced in opposition, Islam was able to succeed. The fundamental importance of the realm of people, and the social relations network as we have defined, is spoken of at great length by Ibn Khaldun.

However, if the realm of people is the most important of the three realms, the realm of ideas is the development goal of civilization. If society is an organism, then its development can be described similar to the development of man; Bennabi describes the development of a child as he moves from recognizing objects to people and finally, to understanding ideas between seven and eight years of age.

Thus, as a child develops, he grows from first identifying objects, i.e. the realm of objects, then recognizing people, i.e. the realm of people and finally reaches the stage of understanding ideas. The cycle then reverses and at senility man returns to his original childlike stage of objects.

"A half-open mouth, ready to grab and suck anything, is a salient feature of the small child. However, as he grows older, his mouth closes as if driven by some internal springs. This morphological detail actually corresponds to a specific phase in the child's psychological development." (Bennabi)

He notes that these physiological differences are also observed between those who are educated and the illiterate. Bennabi notes that the three realms of objects, people and ideas hold different levels of strength over an individual depending on the individual and the society he lives in. If the society is object and people focused, the aggregate of individuals that it reproduces will share that balance. Bennabi points to the object and people focus of Muslim society today as the symptom of our decadence, i.e. that we are in the senility of our civilization cycle.

Bennabi writes that the conditioning power of ideas, the ability to effect changes in society, is not the same for different civilizations. He illustrates how the ability to effect change in the material world is harder for the West because of their cultural roots. He gives the example of the Prohibition in the United States and its ineffectiveness while for Muslims, it was a simple matter of the Prophet (peace be upon him) prohibiting alcohol, the drinking of which vanished overnight without any needs for extensive policing. Bennabi believes that this conditioning power varies within the Muslim civilization's passage through history, in its civilization cycle.

Impressed & Expressed Ideas

The power of ideas is dependent on how effective the impressed (or original, universal principles) are in their transformation to the expressed ideas (or derived ideas). In their original use, the impressed ideas are in their peak of potency. However, as time changes and the world around us changes, the ideas become less effective in their application. An attempt to create an effective new interpretation of the original ideas can often lead to the expressed ideas becoming betrayals of the original ideas. Betrayal can lead to vengeance from the original idea; an ill-constructed bridge will collapse and the tragedy that follows would translate to the vengeance of the betrayed ideas.

Society, civilization and empires fall in the same way. Dead ideas leave a void in the brain which in turn causes an inability for society (and individuals) to express themselves effectively. Dead ideas as attracting deadly ideas, which are ideas foreign to the host civilization that are harmful for the host because of their alien origins, just as in the case of an introduction of a creature into an ecology from outside can cause havoc in the host ecology. Dead ideas cause the basis for colonization and Bennabi expresses this state as colonizability.

Bennabi identifies three levels regarding the parameter of actions where ideas can be betrayed:

1. The political, ideological and ethical level concerning the realm of persons.

2. The logical, philosophical and scientific level concerning the world of ideas.

3. The sociological, economic and technical level concerning the world of objects.

The distortion of original ideas takes place on these three levels, over time and space.

Genuineness & Efficiency of Ideas

Bennabi makes the point that Europe has given primacy to efficiency in its colonial order. This has caused the secular elites in the Muslim world, who are impressed by the Europeans, to focus exclusively on the efficiency of ideas. Europe's other face is one of an inward ego and a peculiar ethical order. This is not visible to the secular elites who are impressed by the efficiency of her ideas and adopts wholesale all ideas in the belief of their effectiveness. Because they can only view this one side, they are unaware that ideas have another key aspect: their truthfulness or genuineness.

Ideas and Social Dynamics

Bennabi views the world of ideas as not merely an intellectual endeavor that does not impact the world, but rather one which is centrally important to reviving society. He states that the purpose of planning is to revive social dynamics and the methodology and formation of the plan must be honest to the intrinsic ideas of the civilization. He notes that this planning can only be effected from a wider viewpoint than Economics can provide; for the economist inevitably denigrates the non-economic aspects and does not have a holistic view of society.

He notes that our plans cannot be a mixture of planning methodologies because "any project conceived according to the ideas of one doctrine and implemented according to the means of another will lead nowhere". We have to look at the problem and build on our own methodology that is honest to our intrinsic principles if we are to have the desired effect on our society's problems.

Two Worldviews

Bennabi describes the solitude of man. He describes this as a cosmic void within man that he (Man) then attempts to fill. Two different ways to fill this void are described – either with the material or the metaphysical. Obviously, there are many other ways; for instance, filling oneself with the realm of people whose extreme can be seen in personality cults. However, all else tend to fit in between the two extremes – the realm of objects and the realm of the spiritual. The former is illustrated by the West and the latter by the Islamic civilization. Historically, perhaps all civilizations can be classified within these two categories, as the core Zeitgeist of any civilization.

Bennabi describes this setting beautifully with the following illustrations:

1. Man either looks at his feet or at the stars

2. Objects and forms, techniques and aesthetics, versus truth and virtue

3. Industrial time versus extemporized time

4. Positivism and dialectic materialism versus morality and revealed knowledge.

We do not have the space here to do justice to these illustrations but let us make a cursory note of the differing worldviews through the illustration of the classic folk stories of two individuals in isolation – Robinson Crusoe and Hayy ibn Yaqdhan. While Robinson Crusoe fills his days with his struggle against the material world, Hayy ibn Yaqdhan is shown to spend his isolation in the contemplation of the spiritual. Bennabi also makes the observation that for each of the two civilizations, the point of failure comes in the overindulgence of its core; for Islam it is the overindulgence of mysticism and for the West it is the overindulgence of materialism.

The implication of this is that any ideas, policies and actions that are not derived and true to our Islamic core and rooted in the Western materialistic worldview will not be helpful to us, and may in fact become another deadly virus for our civilization. The great challenge is to derive effective policies and actions from ideas that are genuine to our Islamic core. Thus, we must pass the test and criteria of genuineness to our core and effectiveness to the world around us if we are to avoid the pitfalls of dead and deadly ideas.

The Civilization Cycle

There are three stages to the cycle of civilization, these are namely:

1. Pre-civilized society

2. Civilized society

3. Post-civilized society

Allegorical Description

As we earlier considered in the context of the three realms, these three stages of historical societies can be correlated to three ages – the Things Age, where the focus in on material objects, the Persons Age, when society enters the "Realm of Persons" and the Ideas Age, the highest age, where Ideas are the most important element. We earlier discussed these stages within the allegory of a person growing up – a baby is focused on things, as he grows older he learns the world of persons, and finally he enters the world of ideas. He notes that while Islam took us from the world of things to the world of Ideas, we have degenerated back to the Things Age and thus post-civilized society.

Bennabi describes the post-civilized society as one that has reversed the direction of its movement and is now moving backwards, like our allegory of a person ageing. Bennabi considers the Islamic civilization to be a post-civilized society that has now regressed back to a world of objects and persons. Islam started in Jahili society were man lived in the world of objects and people. Islam broke this mold and brought the society into civilization and the world of ideas within three decades, through the catalyst of revelation and the transformative elements of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the sahaba.

Psychological Description

The three stages of civilization can also be described as:

1. Spiritual

2. Rational

3. Instinctive

The will and power of society gives civilization its objective character. Society's will and power differs depending on what phase society is in. He illustrates these stages by using a diagram similar to the one illustrated below.

Bennabi describes the stages through psychoanalysis thus:

"Looking at the individual at the zero point of the diagram drawn, we find him in the state which some Muslim scholars call "fitrah" (natural disposition). This means that he is fully "equipped" with all his inborn instincts thus being in the state of "homo natura". The function of the religious ideal manifests itself in subjecting those instincts to a process of conditioning and adaptation representing what is known in Freudian psychology as "Repression". Yet, this process is far from eradicating those instincts; instead, it regulates them in an integrated functional relationship with the imperatives of the religious ideal. Thus, the vital energy represented by the instincts is not abolished; it is rather channeled according to a specific order.

"In this stage, the individual is partly liberated from the natural laws which govern his biological structure in such a way that his being is almost totally under the control of the spiritual forces awakened in him by the religious ideal; thus, he leads a new life governed by the laws of the soul.

"It was according to such laws that Bilal, despite the severe torture inflicted on his body, was raising his finger, repeating in a defying manner "Ahad, Ahad". It is quite obvious that these words do not reflect the reaction of the natural instincts which were put under control, nor does it reflect the judgment of reason, for reason is unable to react in such a state of severe pain! It is nothing other than the voice of the soul which was liberated from the bondage of the instincts being now entirely subordinated to the power of the "faith" that had imbibed Bilal bin Rabah's self.

"Similarly, the Islamic society was undergoing the same process of transformation. Like Bilal, it was not expressing itself in the language of flesh and blood. The voice of reason was not as yet heard in that nascent society. Thus, all the language used at this stage was based on the "logic" of the soul for it was exclusively the manifestation of the spiritual forces inherent in the human being.

"This is the first stage of civilization, the stage at which all the instincts of man are "tamed" and integrated in a specific order that pulls their reins and restrains their drive." (Bennabi, On the Origins of Society)

When the society's social relations network expands even further and the conditioning power of religion weakens, the intellect rises in prominence as the integrating force. This is the age of reason, as labeled in the diagram. However, reason is a weaker force and does not fully control the instincts of man, and as civilization wanes, instincts play an increasingly more dominant role until they dominate. When instincts begin to dominate, the power of religion is weakened and morality fades, society begins to lose its integrity through a failing social relations network, which leads to the decline of civilization.

Historical Description

Describing the diagram in historical terms, the cycle of the Islamic Civilization began at the origin point in Ghar-e-Hira. Here was born our purpose, will and morality. Until 38 Hijri, we had a rapid rise as we remained faithful to our spirit, values and methods. In 38 Hijri, after the Treaty of Siffin and the division of the Islamic state, Bennabi notes that we lost our "soul". Thereafter, we continued in a plateau trajectory which Bennabi describes as "reason" with many scientific developments and a continuation of the intellect. Between point B-C we began to move away from Reason and move increasingly towards taqlid on the one hand and mysticism on the other. Bennabi marks the decline of the Muslim civilization with the fall of Grenada in the West and the fall of Baghdad to the Mongols in the East.

This then is the historical description of the cycle.

Bennabi describes the first spiritual phase as one where the newly formed society deals with its problems by suppressing needs and maximizing utilization and distribution of resources at hand. He describes this stage as the most beautiful forms of asceticism exemplified by the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the generosity of the Sahabah in giving their wealth to the greater cause.

As the resources of the society expand in conjunction with the spiritual and intellectual endeavor, the power of the society also expands, marking the dramatic rise of the initial state in Medina. Bennabi notes that the power of the will is kept intact because of the strength and vitality of the ideas that creates a tension within every Muslim. He notes that this is a distinguishing characteristic of the origin-to-A phase. In the A-B phase, gradually the power of the idea weakens and the realms of people and objects take increasing prominence until it takes hold, particularly in the B-C phase.

Culture

If society is an organism which is engaged in perpetual movement, generation of the means of that movement and has defined a purpose for its movement, culture is the conditioning of those functions, in line with a macro-definition of Pavlov's operant conditioning. A post-civilized society would also have a culture, but a static culture that enforces the singular state of that society and thus acts as an anti-civilizational element. In fact, such a culture would be highly resistant to any change, as is the present state of the Muslim Ummah. Both Bennabi and Allama Iqbal point to the need for movement and change in our cultural bearings but such words fall on deaf ears in the Ummah.

However, in a healthy civilized society culture plays a productive role of regulating the functions of society as noted earlier. Only in senility does culture become a straightjacket for society. It is thus that we define here the definition of culture within the context of this chapter.

Man is born with vital energies that derive from his original state of fitra. These include but are not exclusively derived from his instincts. The great task of civilization and of religions, and in particular of Islam is to condition and channel those vital energies for a greater purpose, for the good of society, for Man's role as the vice-regent on earth and for the ultimate purpose of worshiping Allah comprehensively. Conversely, the purpose of the Western civilization is to worship Man and to work for the greater benefit of himself. The task of culture is to transform those vital energies for those greater purposes. However, in post-civilized society culture stops fulfilling those functions and enters a state of rigid pathology.

*****

This then, in short, is how we here define our science of civilization. And in the process we have already explained enough for the smart reader to understand the problem of the Ummah. In sum, the diagnosis of the Ummah, her great sickness, is the breakdown in the social relations network, starting with the Battle of Siffin, the separation of religious and political functions, the establishment of madhabs and other divisions which were further hardened into place by taqlid, the separation of knowledge under secular-religious lines, and finally the hardening of that breakdown in social relations via a retrogressive culture. The task before us is to revive the social relations network both qualitatively and quantitatively and repair the mistakes made, reflecting on the original state of Islam and then finding solutions for today that are honest and genuine to the original principles.

Within the framework we can analyze:

1. Our Present circumstance, concluding that the Islamic civilization has come full circle and is now at a post-civilized state and looking to either be reborn or die

2. The fundamental indicators that can serve to analyze its future development

3. The fundamental variables that need to be effected to bring about change and the nature and identity of those elements that are degenerative and blocking its rebirth

I fear I cannot go into further length here and will leave the reader to think about the problem of the Ummah within the framework given. We now consider a social education program that can help bring about that rebirth, by encouraging the factors that bring about civilization, and discouraging the anti-civilizational elements.

Social Education

Muslim scholarship is defined by being meaningful and having solutions that are helpful in solving real problems particularly for Muslim society. If we are to attempt to effect and change the post-civilized society's culture through education, we must first understand the difference and interplay between the two. Bennabi notes that there is a misconception between the two terms in the Muslim world, and that this is a problem for the Ummah:

" _The dual role of culture [positive and negative renewal] will have no effect unless this grave confusion between the meanings of culture and education, widespread in the Muslim world, is abolished". (Bennabi,_ The Question of Culture)

He describes the difference between culture and education as one of a theory of behaviour rather than a theory of knowledge. Bennabi explains this difference between education and culture as:

"...thing more general than knowledge and more closely related to the character than accumulation of data..."

And:

"... a set of moral qualities and social values that influence the individual from birth."

Social education would thus attempt to bridge the gap between culture and education and seek "to influence the way of life in a given society as well as the behavior of its archetypes i.e., in order to construct an efficient system of social education it is imperative to have a manifest and clear-cut idea about the relations and reflexes that govern the utilization and orientation of the vital energy at the level of both the individual and the society." (Bennabi, _On the Origins of Human Society)_

Social education must transform our society by teaching people "the art of living with his fellow humans. That is how to be civilized." (Bennabi) The approach to teaching this social education should be non-mechanical and instead be an applied and practical education that teaches cooperation, the etiquettes of discussing, the importance of ideas and to specifically focus and target local cultural retrogressive elements. Islamic education, as it was conceived originally in its early period did all of this, but unfortunately today it has been reduced largely to memorization of texts.

# CHAPTER 10: UNDERSTANDING PROBLEMS OF SEXUALITY & SOCIETY

And she, in whose house he was, asked of him an evil act. She bolted the doors and said: Come! He said: I seek refuge in Allah! Lo! he is my lord, who hath treated me honorably. Lo! wrong-doers never prosper.

She verily desired him, and he would have desired her if it had not been that he saw the argument of his Lord. Thus it was, that We might ward off from him evil and lewdness. Lo! he was of Our chosen slaves.

(Surah Yusuf, Verses 23-24)

Muslim society today is being decimated with problems related to sex. Whether our young men and teenagers are sitting in front of the computer or mixing with the opposite gender in a manner that is inappropriate, these are major issues that define the lives of our children and parents are largely oblivious to them. The above quote indicates that even Prophet Yusuf (peace be upon him), a Messenger of Allah, had those basic urges and desires. When we leave our children at the mercy of these desires, believing them to be examples of excellence, we would do well to remember Prophet Yusuf (peace be upon him).

In Pakistan, homosexuality in the North West has grown to the extent that truck drivers feel pride in taking along with them a young and good looking boy and to display them sitting next to them in the truck. Gays and other perversions are rampant throughout most major Muslim metropolises. In Bangladesh, Qaris have been heard to petrol madrassahs at night with a stick, for the children go into each other's beds and fornicate. Imams, mullahs and other religion-based office holders are being caught at regular intervals sexually abusing children. Sexual problems litter the Muslim world from one corner to the other, whether in madrassas or elsewhere in Muslim society.

In Malaysia, a sizeable part of the populace have embraced what they call "third gender", neither male nor female. Incest and rape within the family is also widespread there, to the extent that national statistics related to incest is being considered publicly for state censorship. Yet, the "ulema" prattle on and on about "eeman", "akhlaq", "aqeedah" and any other of their standard "solutions", oblivious to the social causes of these problems. He who lives in an ivory tower cannot solve society's problems. To be a true momin, you must know Islam, but also the world around you, and know how to apply the former to the latter.

Our Islamic state would need to address this major problem of sexual desire, in line with the guidance of the Quran and Hadith. Women covering themselves appropriately are an often discussed topic in the mass media, yet the issues are far deeper and more vital.

The human physiology is no different from the natural world's animal kingdom. Our basic physical configuration, with bones, muscles, tissues, blood, nervous system, etc. is not unique in this planet. We too need to eat, sleep and drink, like all other creatures on God's Earth. Should sex then be held to a different standard? There is no reason to believe so. When a horse, a camel, a dog or cattle comes of age, they are not restricted by man-made laws on when and if they can copulate. Man should not impose upon himself artificial standards of when his kind can come of age. These rules are set by Allah, and relate to the natural biological process of menstrual cycles for women, and the awareness of sex for men.

This was no different than what was practiced before industrialization took place. As the complexity of the world required ever increasing amount of training and schooling, and the needs of labor and economics caused the employment of an ever increasing age limit, men and women pushed marriage further and further off. But what have been the adverse side effects of this? For when one changes the variables in any equation, those changes can have wide ranging effects on the ultimate outcome.

The first impact has been a fixation on sex, prizing it as one of the central concepts in society. The laws of Economics dictate that when supply is restricted demand does not go down but the value society attaches to the element being considered increases. In addition to this unnatural and artificial imposition of law, society bombards these young adults with all forms of obscenities and shamelessness. As a result, our teenage children and young adults are today disproportionately focused on sex, even perhaps above everything else in their lives. It is perhaps the issue that is most in their minds and central to many of their other wants and aspirations.

The gel on their hair, the car driven, the latest item in fashion, the clothes, being successful in sports and even down to the job that they can get: all become subservient to their sexual desire. As a result, man today is centrally focused on sex and is led around the world like a donkey is led with a carrot dangled in front of him. It is this that they then worship.

The second impact is that of fornication and masturbation. When an essential and natural element is restricted unnaturally by the laws and norms of an artificial society, such that sexuality, after the initialization of our natural inclinations, is repressed from anywhere between a decade to two decades, the result will be that man will develop pathologies to channel his natural urges.

Masturbation attempts to simulate the basic mechanism of a natural sexual release, but does not have the necessary level of stimuli to recreate the experience adequately. As a result, other aids become prevalent, psychological and visual such as pornography. But the worst impact is perhaps that the mind takes over part of the stimulus function. This brings the mind to seek fantasies and since the stimuli can never be as good as the "real deal", man consequently compensates by making those fantasies ever more extreme. This results in sexual perversion. David Morgan, a British psychologist, attests to this impact, that watching pornography leads to more extreme material.

This impact is fundamental in understanding the ever increasing number of gays and sexually perverted individuals. The most natural and innocent of feelings have been turned into the most grotesque and hideous elements in man.

Further research can validate or reject this hypothesis. One possible study may look at the level of perversion as measured by the number of gays and other perverted individuals, and to measure this against the average age of the initiation of actual sexual intercourse.

Suppression of sexuality is perhaps understandable from Christianity's perspective, where the concept of the "Original Sin" play a central doctrinal role. It is less understandable for us Muslims, where Islam can be considered to have encouraged marriage at a young age, and elevated marriage to an essential and integral part of being a Muslim.

So then, what is the solution? How can we get to a point where men and women can have sexual relations within marriage from an early age without restrictions from society, economics and the legal system? We can change laws, but to change norms is far more difficult. Only through an understanding of how Islam attaches importance to marriage and does not attempt to artificially restrict the age of participants, or to create meaningless social and economic burdens in terms of wedding and wealth accumulation requirements, can people begin to change their norms.

The problem of economics remains a particular problem combined with norms; a young couple is expected to live independently, or in some instances, to at least have room within the larger family household. Many parts of the Muslim world require massive financial expenditures to get married. Somehow, the Islamic state would need to delink economic and cultural expectations from marriage, allowing young individuals sexual freedom within marriage as a practical and acceptable option.

In the Prophet's Medina, great stress and effort was put to ensure everyone could get married. The community as a whole took it upon itself to help single individuals find suitable mates. Today, when the masjid has been taken over by simple minded theologians with a know-it-all attitude, the function has been replaced by mindless and endless qutbas of little relevance and no follow up actions.

To further compound the problem, Muslim men and women have been separated to an artificial extent, and far beyond what was the norm at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him). For instance, women would stand in the back of masjids, with men in the front and children between. This would allow a certain level of interaction that is now eliminated with women being placed in a separate room. This was how it was at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the Khalifa-e-Rashidun. Who are we to change the original?

All that is newly introduced into the faith are innovations

All innovations are deviation

All deviation is going astray

And all going astray is in the Fire.

It is not without meaning that the most homosexual part of Pakistan is the NWFP, which is also the strictest and most gender segregated part of Pakistani society. This is one place where the "ulema" are directly and clearly leading our people to the Fire.

Muhammad Akram Nadwi in his book Muhaddithat describes how Muslim women were active in study circles and gives examples of Muslim women who taught both women and men at the masjid in Medina, both during the early period of Islam and later. In Damascus, Basra and Cairo women scholars taught at madrasas and important masjids. We must ask who murdered eliminated our women scholars? We must not only ask but take affirmative action, even if we have to punish the miscreants that get in our way.

If the masjid is to again be the center of political and social revival, women cannot be dis-enfranchised by putting them in a separate box at a remote part of the masjid. They have to be returned to the masjid proper, as was the case when an old woman questioned Khalifa Umar as to why he received more cloth than the others. No woman today can question the Imam in such a manner, penned at the back of a masjid, this is very often a physical impossibility!

No women today can voice their questions because the theological tyrants have put them in a box at the back of the masjid. May Allah's curse be on them and may the readers here not sit silently but take action to put things aright and punish those who have robbed Islam of its justice and fairness for women as much as for men.

Ageism within matrimony is also a major source of friction and barriers to marriage. The Prophet (peace be upon him) married Aisha, a woman much younger than him. He also married Khadija, a woman much older than him. Yet age has become a major taboo in society as concerns marriage. In an age when Muslims are struggling to get married, and today's society has imposed major obstacles for young people to fulfill a major and essential human need, there is no reason for us to burden ourselves further.

We must be willing to marry our young women to older men, as much as to young men, and our young men to older women, as much as to young women. In fact, reversing ageism may partially reduce the economic barriers to marriage.

This is the example of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and is the solution to this day to drastically reduce our social burdens.

In our Islamic state we must return the masjid to the central social and political role that it once occupied and entrust the community of the masjid to deal with the social problems of the community. The masjid is the best and most appropriate place where these issues can be dealt with. This is perhaps one of the most critical factors to returning ourselves to Medina, where the masjid of the Prophet (peace be upon him) was where all social problems were dealt with, from marriage to poverty.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 11: DEFENSE POLICY

Glossary of terms provided at the end of the book.

Defense policy is a critical element to an Islamic state. As I stated earlier, without credible defense the enemies of Islam will find any and every excuse to declare us non-kosher and bomb us to "the Stone Age". A credible defense requires us to carefully consider what the ingredients of Western military supremacy are. All too often, we see only the shiny tanks, ships and planes, thinking buying these will give us military credibility. However, this is far from the truth.

Western military superiority is built on research and development combined with a viable military-industrial complex. This requires sustained investment in education and research. It requires effective and efficient project management of complex weapons systems. It requires savvy management to decide what programs are dead-ends and what programs need to be ramped up. One of the keys to such development is to have a large number of well-trained scientists and engineers.

However, many in the West know and understand that building that coterie of scientists and engineers require the right kind of education, particularly K-12 (kindergarten to grade 12). This education has to have credible and extensive mathematics and science subjects. It has to create students that are not rote learners but innovative free thinkers who can think outside the box. The education cannot all be theoretical but must have as extensive as possible, use of hands-on-practice.

A viable military industrial complex also means that sustained investments are needed in not only weapons development but in critical industries such as steel and metallurgy, information technology, synthetic and composite materials.

Presently Turkey, Pakistan and Iran are three countries in the Ummah that have the strongest such base. Interestingly enough, where one is lacking the other is proficient, so there is a lot to gain from mutual cooperation. For instance, Turkish combat ship building capability has significant competitiveness and capability. An example of this is the Turkish Milgem Corvette program. While Iran's weapons are generally not top grade compared to the global standard, they have the ability to manufacture a very diverse range of weapon systems indigenously. One example is the helicopter industry in Iran. Pakistan has a highly efficient and effective aircraft manufacturing industry as well as a key competitive capability in missiles and nuclear weapons. An example is of the Babur cruise missile that is nuclear capable and has a range of over 700 km.

The Future Ahead

However, we must look beyond and ahead rather than what is the present state of technology if we are not to forever lag behind. Malek Bennabi notes that if we seek to follow in the footsteps of Europe, we will always lag behind the West as we have to go through the same steps that the West has already long passed. He notes that we cannot make history by following beaten tracks; it is only possible to do so by opening new paths. Bennabi explains that making history will only be possible for us if we return to our genuine principles from Islam and derive from them efficient solutions for today.

In his seminal work, Alvin Toffler in his book The Third Wave suggests that the world is moving to a new era. He describes the First Wave as settled agricultural society, the Second Wave as industrial society. In his words:

"The Second Wave Society is industrial and based on mass production, mass distribution, mass consumption, mass education, mass media, mass recreation, mass entertainment, and weapons of mass destruction. You combine those things with standardization, centralization, concentration, and synchronization, and you wind up with a style of organization we call bureaucracy."

He considers a Third Wave to have started in the 1950s and that countries are in the process of transitioning to this new wave, which is based on information technology and can be construed as an Information Age.

If this is true and keeping in mind the drastic changes that took place with the industrial revolution, the world seems ripe for another major perhaps cataclysmic event. What this implies for warfare: just as war drastically changed from the agricultural to the industrial age, and those who were unable to progress to the new wave (including the Muslim world) were defeated, humiliated and consigned to subservience, a new Third Wave will again drastically change the social, political, economic and military structure of the world.

Those countries that are unable to adapt, to progress, to the new circumstances will suffer just as the Red Indians, Muslims, Indians, Chinese and much of the non-Western world suffered from the Second Wave. Let us consider the implication of this Third Wave to warfare, but before that, we define the importance of air defense within defense policy to better grasp the vital implication of air defense in the future.

Air Defense and the Future

In the contemporary world around us, Air defense is of vital importance and wars lost in the air translate to wars lost on the ground. This is an obvious statement and anyone can look at the turning points of WWII battles and virtually every major military operation that has taken place since. At the same time, Muslim armies have been most negligent in this key aspect of warfare and have lacked the technologies, the training and the sustained investments needed.

The most effective way to counter an enemy in the air is by air combat. Although a layered and integrated air defense with SAMs is potent, historically this has been, and this is likely to continue to be the case.

With the development of a first competent Muslim combat aircraft in the JF-17 the PAF has brought a new era of Muslim capability. The Iranians also have an F-5 based fighter which is still a capability even if it is not competitive against modern combat aircraft. The Turks are hoping to create a globally competitive fighter in the future, but this remains a long-term project. Yet, these capabilities only bring the Muslim world to the standard of what the West had achieved 20-30 years ago; an industrial age standard. If we forever mark our destination as the point the West is at, by the time we reach it, we will continue to be obsolete.

In a seminal book titled The Future of War: Power, Technology, and American World Dominance in the 21st Century, the authors George and Meredith Friedman argued that each category of strategic weapon systems have a life-cycle and noted that stealth manned aircraft, the pinnacle today of combat aircraft, represented a point of decline and senility for combat aircraft. The Friedmans argue that strategic weapons systems can be considered on the basis of a list of eight points. These eight points determine what stage a weapon system is in its lifecycle between strategically significant and "senile" or obsolete systems. They define a strategically significant weapon as "one that brings force to bear in such a way that it decisively erodes the war-making capability of the enemy," while a senile weapon is defined as "the primary strategic function of the weapon has been obscured by the need to construct expensive defenses against threats to the weapons platform." They conclusively show through the historical record that strategic weapons systems have this lifecycle. They conclude that stealth manned aircraft along with aircraft carriers have reached a point of senility. Augustine's Law Number 16 also suggests that there must be a peak and then eventually a break in aircraft acquisition costs.

Norman Augustine is one of the most respected thinkers in the US defense industry. He came up with a list of tongue-in-cheek laws based on his life-long experience in the US defense industry in some of the top positions. In Law 16 he suggests that the cost of combat aircraft increase exponentially while the budget for them increases linearly. He expresses this in a humorous manner:

In the year 2054, the entire defense budget will purchase just one aircraft. This aircraft will have to be shared by the Air Force and Navy 3½ days each per week except for leap year, when it will be made available to the Marines for the extra day.

He also notes in Law Number 12 that "It costs a lot to build bad products."

And:

"It is very expensive to achieve high unreliability. It is not uncommon to increase the cost of an item by a factor of ten for each factor of ten degradation accomplished." (#18)

The sum total of what he is suggesting is that the manned combat aircraft evolutionary path is not sustainable. This supports the thesis earlier by the Friedmans that stealth manned combat aircraft are reaching obsolescence and a new technology and military strategy paradigm is ripe to take advantage.

What that future will look like has been glimpsed and illustrated by a small number of highly influential authors; perhaps prime among them is Peter Singer in Wired for War. In this seminal work – I realize I have been using the term seminal all too frequently in this section, but the reason for this is that the information coming out in this new territory of knowledge is as critical to the field as Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations to economics. We are at the threshold of a revolution and the names you read now with amused curiosity will someday be written in gold in the pages of history, in fact they already are in those that are involved in this field. Continuing – in his seminal work, Singer shows that what we believe to be science fiction and a distant future is already here and in fact, some of this equipment is already manufactured and being used by the US military. Others are waiting to be operationalized. Yet others are hiding in secret black projects that are waiting to reveal themselves to the world. He describes this new world of breakaway military technology as built on information technology and particularly a world of automated robotics. Such robotics already in use by the US and Israeli militaries are revolutionizing warfare.

Coming back to air defense, the impending revolution in air combat is ripe to take advantage of this Third Wave. Drones are getting bigger, faster, and more capable in every way. They are taking on a vast array of roles and have / will take on the role of air defense and strike. Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAVs) are an emerging technology that has the potential to revolutionize air warfare. They can be drastically superior to manned counterparts and can impact warfare in the same way that the invention of guns affected war centuries ago. What is being suggested by experts in this field, and I myself have some expertise in this field, is that UCAVs and other Information Age weapons that are emerging in a new wave sweeping human history can make or break the destiny of nations.

Among those leading the curve of this new technology, particularly applied to the military are the United States and Israel. By some accounts Israel has a lead in some areas even over the United States. This is an alarm bell for the Muslims to wake up, if we continue to sleep as we have slept, this new wave will overwhelm us and Israel can and will dominate if not outright takeover the Middle East.

At the time of writing, it is the 3rd of May, 2012. I believe (and Allah knows best) that in a coming war against Iran very soon, my dear reader will see the first of this new wave of technology in play and how drastically these weapons will be able to alter the conventional military balance. It saddens me immensely to know what will happen beforehand but being unable to warn or take adequate actions to help my brothers and sisters who will soon face a great and terrible fitna. I hope my dear reader takes warning, insh'Allah.

Because Allah will never change the Grace which He hath bestowed on a people until they change what is in their (own) souls: and verily Allah is He Who heareth and knoweth (all things). (8:53)

A New Muslim Cavalry

As I noted earlier, we must be innovators and leaders in the field of military science rather than followers. I earlier looked at air warfare, following is the development of some ideas on strategy and tactics for ground combat. The ideas expressed below are qualified by necessitating an effective air defense first and foremost without which they will be most ineffective. Thus, I would suggest we look at building UCAVs and other modern air defense concepts first.

Light cavalry is a defunct concept in modern Western military doctrine. However, Muslim history indicates it was a central part of our doctrine. This author equates light cavalry, not with lightly armored vehicles, as the West is wont to do, but rather with a Close Air Support (CAS) component. CAS is in simple terms aircraft that provide fire support to troops on the ground.

To simplify to the casual reader, modern military doctrine has a concept of combined arms – combining various kinds of weaponry for maximum effectiveness. If we took a simple ancient army we would have:

1. Foot soldiers;

2. Heavy armored knights / war elephants / Roman cataphracts;

3. Archers; and

4. Light cavalry.

Foot soldiers are today your infantryman, heavy armor your tanks and archers your artillery. Today the predominant position is that light cavalry is defunct or is sometimes equated to light armored vehicles. In simple terms, I am disputing this point and saying that Close Air Support (CAS) should be considered light cavalry.

This implies logically that CAS should be organic to the combined arms available to the commander. This in turn means that the air force should hand over this function back to the army. This is in simple terms what this author has been shouting for the last few years. This may seem trivial to the casual reader but it has very important implications in actual operational impact.

Let me note a few of these problems in a cursory and simple manner for the ordinary reader. Typically in a war where both sides are more even, the air force will focus on winning the air war first and foremost because this is of critical importance to them. They will thus tend to neglect CAS for the army. However, the army is in dire need of CAS and does not understand the air force. Most modern armed forces have this rift between the two arms. The fundamental problem is an organizational theory case study. The services are separated on the basis of equipment being operated. Thus, combat aircraft will be operated by the Air Force and tanks and APCs by the Army. A better way to organize the services is on the basis of activity. Activity-based division would allow superior coordination in achieving the objectives of that activity.

Thus destroying enemy tanks, artillery, troops, and more on the battlefield is a task that is conducted by CAS aircraft, tanks, artillery, etc. This is a different activity than fighting enemy fighter aircraft for defending the national air space or striking strategic targets deep inside enemy territory. Since before, combat aircraft were multirole and each aircraft could do a wide range of tasks, this division was not clear. However, today, combat aircraft have evolved in a way that it does not make sense to use highly sophisticated, multi-million dollar aircraft to drop bombs on the battlefield. CAS is far more suited to a cheap, rugged aircraft operated by the Army.

Close integration of this component is vital as CAS aircraft operate very close to own troops, and could easily bomb them otherwise. Another important factor regarding close integration is that CAS aircraft can also play an important role for as a pair of eyes over the battlefield area for the ground commander. If the CAS pilot lives and works with the army officers, he or she will have a better understanding of what to look out for, how the game is being played and what in those given circumstances his or her role should be.

The conflict of interest created by different primary objectives is another factor. The air force is tasked with the safeguard of the skies. The army is tasked with the safeguard of the earthen territory. The air force as such is wont to utilize all its assets for its primary objective while neglecting CAS which is a secondary objective. Yet in modern warfare CAS is critical to army operations.

In short, without further boring my non-military-interest reader, we need to stop making the mistakes of the West by blindly following their operational doctrines. We can do better and combined arms operations can be rethought and better operationalized. My concept of a combined arms operation will have CAS aircraft, unmanned drones for reconnaissance, electronic warfare, in addition to the traditionally accepted elements of combined arms operations. They should all be seamlessly integrated within a single command such as a division or even an independent brigade, working in harmony and unity, sharing a single logistics base and operational deployment for maximum efficiency and effectiveness.

Light cavalry was the forte of Muslims. Cavalry, light or otherwise is even indicated in the Quran perhaps indicating its importance, and Allah knows best:

By the (Steeds) that run, with panting (breath),

And strike sparks of fire,

And push home the charge in the morning,

And raise the dust in clouds the while,

And penetrate forthwith into the midst (of the foe) en masse―

(100:1-5, Al-Quran)

Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides whom ye may not know but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly. (8:60)

An air assault was in fact utilized by Allah subhanahut'ala when Abraha attacked Makkah. The Quran reminds us of it thus:

Seest thou not how thy Lord dealt with the Companions of the Elephant? (1) Did He not make their treacherous plan go astray? (2) And He sent against them flights of Birds, (3) Striking them with stones of baked clay. (4) Then did He make them like an empty field of stalks and straw, (of which the corn) has been eaten up. (105:1-5)

And Khalid bin Waleed, the Sword of Allah, used light cavalry tactics as his principle weapon against all the enemies of Islam. We at that point faced two massive superpowers that no sane man would imagine we could defeat, that too nearly simultaneously. Yet it was the Sword of Allah, his rapid movements through the desert and his light cavalry tactics that brought unbelievable victory after unbelievable victory. Here is how Lieutenant-General A.I. Akram of the Pakistan Army so beautifully paints Khalid in his book The Sword of Allah:

"He sees a long, dark line of horsemen emerge from behind a rise in the ground and charge galloping at a body of Roman troops. The cloaks of the warriors fly behind them and the hooves of their horses pound the earth pitilessly. Some carry lances; others brandish swords; and the Romans standing in the path of the charge tremble at the sight of the oncoming terror, for they are standing in the way of the Mobile Guard, whom none may resist and survive to tell the tale. The line of charging horsemen is not straight, for it is impossible to keep it straight at such a mad, reckless pace. Every man strives to get ahead of his comrades and be the first to clash with the infidel; strives to get ahead of all but the Leader, for no one may, or possibly could, overtake the Leader.

"The Leader gallops ahead of the Muslims. A large, broad-shouldered, powerfully-built man, he is mounted on a magnificent Arab stallion and rides it as if he were part of the horse. The loose end of his turban and his cloak flutter behind him and his large, full beard is pressed against his chest by the wind. His fierce eyes shine with excitement-with the promise of battle and blood and glory- the glory of victory or martyrdom. His coat of mail and the iron tip of his long lance glint in the clear sunlight, and the earth trembles under the thundering hooves of his fiery charger."

...

I am the noble warrior;

I am the Sword of Allah

Khalid bin Al Waleed!

The purpose of putting up these verses from the Quran and the tactics of Khalid bin Waleed is not only to find verses to support my thesis about the importance of light cavalry but to also make you realize what you are missing. The Quran has all the principles and ideas needed for the answers to our problems yet we treat it so poorly. Wake up, what is wrong with you? We have had everything we ever needed to have conducted blitzkrieg long before Guderian and Rommel built those tactics, right here in the Quran and in the example of the Sahaba. There is much, much more, waiting for you to stop mumbling and start heeding. Yet, you refuse to heed. I myself have managed to find, and Allah knows best, a huge cache of hints on military strategy in the Quran. The Quran is guidance for all times. Again, the Quran is guidance for all times. Do you refuse to believe it? It is as if I am speaking to a wall.

Our Improvisation is Our Strength

The JF-17 has been a remarkable fighter plane that is perhaps the first competent combat aircraft designed (at least partially) and built in the Muslim world. It is a symbol of success not only as a weapon system but as a remarkably effective development paradigm. A truly remarkable feature of the FC-1 / JF-17 has been the willingness of its development team to improvise. Significant changes have been made mid-program and even at the very end of the program timetable.

This is in contrast to Western design houses where original frameworks are strictly maintained – notice the F-22 and the Eurofighter, where certain design parameters were doggedly followed when they could have clearly done better by changing course midway.

The Western style of planning is culturally different from the eastern style – objectives are fixed at the beginning while in the East, we are willing to move the objective around a bit. Obviously, neither is "better" than the other but each has its benefits and costs. However, I think the JF-17 benefited from this immeasurably.

The West is not flawless and they are not gods. There is no god but Allah and we have to stop worshipping them but worship Him. They have many inefficiencies and weaknesses that there is no need to blindly follow, in fact our advantage would lie in exploiting exactly those weaknesses.

Back to top

# CHAPTER 12: ISLAMISTAN

We have many worthy scholars writing about the coming of the Mahdi and an army from Khurasan, and that that time may be near. I will not dwell much on this aspect, not because I dismiss this thesis but there is little more I can add to what has already been said. I want to instead add another dimension to the discussion; one based more on rational argument.

The establishment of "The" Khilafah, as in the return of the Mahdi and the black flags, and the establishment of "a khilafah" are not necessarily one and the same. Perhaps we are focused on the first too much and we can do better with a two pronged assault rather than a single stroke. Muslim states were justice reigned, and that were capable of defending themselves against non-Muslim powers have existed before, perhaps famously for instance, during Salahdin's reign. It is not contingent upon even believing in the Mahdi prophecies to want to work towards rebuilding a Medinian political entity. This argument is particularly valid for those who dismiss or discount the validity of the Mahdi prophecies and their interpretation; they may still agree on the importance of founding an Islamic state. What is important is that there is convergence, rather than divergence. Can we bring everybody together?

Now, let me state my position clearly. It is my contention that, whatever the different theories are, if there is an army that will march from the direction of Khurasan to Iraq and Palestine has some connection to Pakistan. This is because any student of military affairs knows that a military force that has to take and hold territory, in other words, fight conventionally, as opposed to by hit-and-run forays, and one that has to do so against a modern (Western) force, would need to have, at the bare minimum, the basic wherewithal of doing so. Wars are fought today as much by logistics, military production and technology as strategy and tactics.

Yes sure, the Taliban, a worthy force can fight hit-and-run forays all across their homeland. Al-Qaeda or similar junk may be able to blow up a plane or, despite tightening security perhaps a ship or a building. But marching from Khurasan to Palestine is not possible with such forces. Not possible by a long shot. Marching to Palestine would require an ability to hold territory and project military force at great distances. It would mean supply and logistics. It would mean concentration of large number of forces along predictable routes. This by itself would require credible air defense. All of this would require a solid military-industrial complex, investment in technology....

The Uthman Empire lost World War I not because of a lack of men and will, but because of a lack in these aforementioned elements. When Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Syria attacked Israel in the Yom Kippur War, Americans aided Israel by sending not their greatest generals, or foot soldiers, but a massive airlift of military supplies of the finest quality available. The Arabs on the other hand, were dependent on the Soviets, who were controlled to a great extent by the Ashkenazim, and were unable to secure sufficient quality or quantity of weaponry to defeat Israel. This is not to even mention training and professionalism or the lack thereof.

Today, the Arab world's military arsenal mostly comes from foreign non-Muslim sources. As long as we do not have the industrial capacity, the technology, and the invested effort to build our own military-industrial capability, militarily, zero plus zero, will continue to equal zero*.

* These words were famously stated by Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, former Prime Minister of Pakistan regarding the reality of a Muslim Block.

For the first time since the collapse of the Uthman Empire we are at a point where this is remotely possible. Let us consider the following: When did Islam start falling behind the West militarily? Amongst other things, this started with the advent of industrialization, which enabled production of weapons at a dramatically greater scale and quality than was previously possible. As a result, technologies coupled with en masse production enabled Western armies to overwhelm Muslim ones.

The last "Muslim" power that could match the West conventionally was the Uthman Empire. After it fell, no Muslim country has been able to build or produce weapons that can match Western armaments. Iran today is somewhat of an exception, as they received massive technologies during the Shah's era, but has not been able to progress substantively further since. That is, their weapons are built on technology dating (broadly) to the 1960s-1970s and does not hold up to 21st century standards.

So, unless we can find a Muslim country that has the industrial capability to withstand the West and the technological prowess to look ahead, our position in the world will remain undermined. Even if we succeed in creating our beloved Medina, it will be overwhelmed and destroyed based on one pretext or another, or like Cuba, become an isolated island with little impact on the world.

To reiterate, there so far appears to have been no Muslim country that is able to produce its own weapons such as tanks, aircraft, ships, etc to remotely rival Western weapons. Industrialization in Muslim countries has been sub-par across the board. Meanwhile, as we noted in the chapter on defense policy, the West and Israel are moving on to a new wave that may prove as significant as the industrial revolution.

Two countries in the Muslim world have emerged that have built a viable military-industrial complex – Turkey and Pakistan. Turkey, however, has forsaken Islam since Ataturk, and is unlikely to return to our fold in a broad political and pragmatic sense, despite the AK Party and Erdogan, who must only be praised. There is also the prophecy of Istanbul being liberated by the Mahdi's men, what appears essentially without a fight. Pakistan thus is the state of prime concern.

Remarkably, Pakistan, without the benefits of long-term political stability, oil and petro-dollars or a clear plan to speak of, has somehow, almost miraculously achieved this feat of building a viable military-industrial complex. Today, it can build everything from nuclear warheads to combat aircraft to tanks to cruise missiles, as well as a whole host of other items. These are not crude weapons that are "monkey versions" of other weapons, as is sometimes the case with Iran. Pakistani nuclear weapons are significantly sophisticated and built on research and investment in-country. The country's Heavy Industries Taxila can build tanks that incorporate local technologies derived originally from France, Ukraine and China. Pakistan has recently opened a production facility manufacturing combat aircraft that rival US F-16s. The country is one of five powers in the world that produces its own cruise missiles. It is in the process of launching communication satellites that would enable true net-centric warfare. It has ballistic missiles with a CEP (Circular Error Probability) of less than 50m.

Beyond weapons, tactics and training play a key role. Pakistan has one of the world's best trained air forces. While Arab air forces were devastated by Israel, small numbers of Pakistani pilots have held a 4-0 score against Israel on deputation to Jordan, Iraq and Syria; Pakistani pilots shot down four Israeli aircraft without losing a single pilot to date to Israel. This is against the backdrop of Arab pilots being resoundingly thrashed by their Israeli counterparts, in one case 100-0. Here is an excerpt of how a senior USAF commander valued Pakistani pilots (from a US Commander during Gulf War I):

On one or two occasions, I had the opportunity to talk with Pakistani instructor pilots, who had served in Iraq. These discussions, didn't give me great cause to worry. The Russian domination of training prevented the Pakistanis from having any real influence on the Iraqi aircrew training program.

Still, there had to be a few Iraqi pilots, who had observed and listened to their mentors from France and Pakistan and not the useless guidance of their inept leaders. It was those few, I was concerned about - the ones with great situational awareness and good eyesight, who had figured out how to effectively use their aircraft and its weapons to defend their nation."

(Former US Air Force General, Chuck Horner, who commanded the US and Allied air assets during Desert shield and desert storm. He also served as Commander 9th Air Force, Commander US Central Command Air Forces, and Commander-in-Chief of SpaceCom. Book: Every Man A Tiger).

In fact, when on training in the United States, PAF pilots have been assessed to be a notch above their Israeli counterparts by their USAF IPs (instructor pilots) while on training in the United States. Israeli pilots are popularly considered "the best in the world". This author believes that, unlike Arab armies, Pakistani armed forces, along with the military-industrial complex and the incredibly well-trained air force are not far from being able to match Western military might conventionally.

The significance of this can be better appreciated if we consider that this has not happened since Uthman times. This progression is truly miraculous. Anyone with insight into Pakistan's political history will know that the country has had little long-term planning and resource allocation. Furthermore, Pakistan is an impoverished country, which has far fewer resources than many other Muslim countries. Yet, incredibly enough, it has come to be.

Thus, coincidentally, the only plausible Islamic state capable of viable opposition to the West has risen in the neighborhood of what can broadly be described as Khurasan. Now, if Pakistan and the Taliban join hands, there is little that can stop them from creating what I shall describe as Islamistan. Broadly, Pakistan-Afghanistan and any other Central Asian state that comes along. Combined with the infiltration and guerilla war fighting capabilities of the Taliban and the Hizb-e-Islami, Pakistani military forces would be unstoppable in the region.

This can be seen in light of the kind of tactics used by Rommel in Mount Matajur, where his soldiers used a form of maneuver warfare through infiltration and guerilla-like tactics; this kind of tactics can best be utilized by forces similar to the Taliban's, as long as they are backed up by proper conventional forces and a solid supply chain = Pakistan Army.

*****

How many of the prophets fought (in Allah's way), and with them (fought) Large bands of godly men? But they never lost heart if they met with disaster in Allah's way, nor did they weaken (in will) nor give in. And Allah Loves those who are firm and steadfast.

All that they said was: "Our Lord! Forgive us our sins and anything We may have done that transgressed our duty: Establish our feet firmly, and help us against those that resist Faith."

And Allah gave them a reward in this world, and the excellent reward of the Hereafter. For Allah Loveth those who do good.

O ye who believe! If ye obey the Unbelievers, they will drive you back on your heels, and ye will turn back (from Faith) to your own loss.

Nay, Allah is your Protector, and He is the best of helpers.

(AL Quran, The Family of Imran, versus 146-150)

Allah has promised us victory if we strive in His Way. The Mahdi prophecy says that an army is to come from the direction of Khurasan. It would seem, world events are matching Iraq and Afghanistan closely to what has been prophesied, and even if one takes them with a bit of salt, clearly, the possibility exists that this is a critical juncture, and as Muslims we should strive for that possibility. Even if these prophecies are false, their mere existence means that we need to guard against the possibility of them being true.

And what if we lose Pakistan to a balkanized group of states? If we lose Pakistan, Muslims, throughout the world, for generations to come, may be condemned to live in persecution, injustice and as the lowest class of people in the global village. If Pakistan is destroyed, we may not get another opportunity for at least another 100 years.

With that in mind, we note that, what would seem as in the nick of time, the Pakistani nation has risen up under the leadership of Imran Khan and the Pakistan Tehrike Insaf...

Back to top

# CHAPTER 13: REVOLUTION

Tala'al Badru 'alayna,

Min thaniyyatil Wada

Wajaba al shukru 'alayna

Ma da'a lillahi da'

O the White Moon rose over us

From the Valley of Wada

And we owe it to show gratefulness

Where the call is to Allah

Ayyuha al mab'uthu fina

Ji'ta bi al amri al-muta

Ji'ta sharrafta al Madinah

Marhaban ya khayra da

O you who were raised amongst us

Coming with a work to be obeyed

You have brought to this city nobleness

Welcome! Best call to God's way

The people of Medina welcomed the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) with this song over 1400 years old during his hijra. Medina, the first Islamic state, was one of the key turning points and perhaps marks the changing of the political landscape for Muslims from one of oppression to one of ascendancy. Perhaps someday, Allah will grant us our Medina and we can sing the same to our migrants from around the world.

What follows are some ideas on how such a state would react in the immediate aftermath.

Internal and external forces would attempt their best to sabotage such a state. We have seen this time and again by not only the United States, but also by Europe, Israel and others. It is imperative that such saboteurs are preempted. Drastic measures and policies will need to be adopted.

It is of utmost importance to change the fundamental power equilibrium in the country. The first important measure would be to eliminate the power base of the old secular elite. It is of vital import to take drastic measures to ensure these elite, entrenched over ages, choose subservience or flight rather than their fight instincts.

The biggest robber barons that have looted the country, having the biggest overseas bank accounts will need to answer for their deeds. They will have to return the money. Those that escape to their master foreign countries could possibly be renditioned, just as the Mossad renditioned Nazis that escaped WWII. Big or small robber, our secular elites will have to compensate for their deeds in some appropriate manner, including perhaps having to serve labor time, building roads, canals and planting trees for the country, as payment for their robbery of the common Muslim.

Nationalization & Privatization

Much of the industry is owned by local elites and multinational corporations. This needs to be changed. At face, a rather Marxist argument of gaining control of the means of production. Yet, at the same time, we do not want to hand these over to cronies of the new administration, nor do we want the government to keep ownership of industry, which would go against our free market principle and would result in great inefficiency.

One possible solution is to redistribute a portion, perhaps half of the equity to the employees of the company, in accordance with each employee's salary as a proportion of net company salary, a rather large equity bonus if you will. The other half of the company can by floated in the stock exchange, staggered over a few years so as not to flood the market. A small percentage, for instance two percent can be kept by the government to diversify its revenue sources.

The major companies as they stand today are often subsidiaries of foreign multinationals. As such they are not companies as we would understand them but rather neutered and genetically modified beasts that lack essential elements like R&D, certain key elements of manufacturing, branding, product development and marketing assets. All such companies must be made aware of these deficiencies and they can learn by trial and error to fix these issues on their own. The government cannot and should not fix these for them.

All foreign companies that seek to participate in the local economy beyond direct export would need to conclusively prove that their funding sources do not include riba. This is nearly impossible as virtually all foreign companies are geared with interest financing. However, that is not the fault of the Islamic state; one must play by the rules of the Islamic state to do business there.

Debt Unloading

Everyone gets a fresh start and all debts are considered null and void. Interest will be banned from the economy. As concerns our foreign trading partners, they can take back their loans from the beloved elite that siphoned off the money to Switzerland and other such places. The IMF and World Bank should not receive their money back from us. The Islamic State will not be a member of these organizations. All foreign NGOs will have to pack their bags.

All local NGOs with foreign funding will have to seek funding from elsewhere. If foreign countries wish to help us, they can open their economies to trade with the Islamic state rather than provide us with strings-attached charity. The only foreign nations that can legitimately seek their debt back will be those that have given honest and sincere funds for the benefit of the country and have remained friends and trading partners post-revolution. This could prominently include China. Even this may be restricted to the capital sums and not the interest portion.

In Conclusion

We are facing an acute internal and external civilizational crisis. If we do not shake free, we will not survive as a civilization, but as an appendix to the global order. It is therefore important for us to rethink and reconstruct, as so many scholars and thinkers have been asking us to. Millions of Muslims have been murdered wholesale, our natural resources are being fleeced off us, large sections of our lands lie radioactive with depleted uranium, our political systems are shams whose puppeteers sit in Western capitals.

We are about to hit a major crisis point in history that will remake the world. We must revive ourselves now, and meet the challenge, insh'Allah. You, reader, as you read this you may be convinced but unaware how you can make a difference. It may be that tomorrow you will lose your zest and this book would be a faint dream. Where you need to start is to pray, understanding what you are saying not mindlessly. You need to read the Quran, in a language you understand, and ponder over it. As you learn the different principles of Islam, you should strive to practice it. If you are alone, you need to migrate to where other Muslims live, not where zombified versions are living. If your life is irreconcilable, you need to find greener shores for "...Allah hath made the earth a wide expanse for you." (71:19) and:

Lo! As for those whom the Angels take (in death) while they wrong themselves, (the Angels) will ask: In what were ye engaged? They will say: We were oppressed in the land. (The Angels) will say: Was not Allah's earth spacious that ye could have migrated therein? As for such, their habitation will be hell, an evil journey's end. (4:97)

You need to practice and apply Islam, not merely mindlessly recite it in a foreign tongue you don't understand. You need to practice and apply Islam to every aspect of your life, starting with the most unIslamic, and progressing thence. You have to strive, seeking His Pleasure. As you do, you will find the amazing power of Allah in transforming your life, your mind, your body, even your looks. You may even experience miraculous events, and be able to see things you otherwise wouldn't. Allah Helps, those who seek His Pleasure. Act and be reborn.

And that Allah may help thee with powerful help. (48:03)

...

And Allah knows best!

I am striving to worship you the best I understand my Allah, so forgive me if I have failed you in anyway, in these writings and in all else that I do. May You guide me to the Straight Path, the path of those You have favored, and not the path of those who have gone astray.

Back to top

# CENTRAL PRINCIPLES

Example of the Sahaba

We will not take the example of the Sahaba blindly, noting that their interpretations may or may not be appropriate for all ages. We also note that many decisions were made on the basis of pragmatism and political expediency. More controversially, noting that the Sahaba disagreed with each other on points as to the nature of the state.

Quran & Hadith

We must be clear that our major principles must derive from the Quran and the examples of those principles must derive from the sahih hadith. We should only draw our examples and ancillary principles from the hadith. We must not make the mistake of taking our major principles from anything other than the Quran.

Reason over Blind Faith

We must be able and willing to take up the intellectual challenge of creating an Islamic state and not be afraid of fatwa's and opinions of the traditional ulema.

Open Over Closed Society

We must accept that the state in Medina was not an authoritarian regime. Rather, it was an open society where differing opinions were tolerated, people where not arrested without charges and people where not forced to pray. Many people from the Quraish and Mekkah accepted Islam when they saw the model state of Medina and how it was governed, with peace, justice and respect for all citizens, Muslim, non-Muslim and even the hypocritical.

Mechanism to Agree & Understanding Devolution

What is most important is not whether everyone agrees, but rather, it is finding a mechanism by which people can compromise. This has to be understood not only at the highest level but also at lower levels – at the level of the state, a province, a district, a city or village. The importance is of finding a mechanism by which each community can galvanize the collective will and intellect and implement them effectively. Thus, a community in X location may agree to certain policies and implement them, but one in Y location may think differently and implement their own interpretations and thoughts. We must be willing to accept that flexibility without being at each other's throats. The extent of devolution will be part of the debate but the recognition that devolution is an issue must be universally accepted.

The practical expediency is figuring out what the mechanism is for agreeing (i.e. voting) and how the decision making levels are to be rationed.

Understanding Fate

We must agree that fate does not call us to inaction but presupposes our actions. Fatalism needs to be addressed for it can and is used by the Muslim clergy to create paralysis and inactivity amongst the Muslim people. The concept of Fate and what is foretold does not call us to inaction. It presupposes our actions not necessarily because we believe in the prophecies but because as good Muslims witnessing now and openly before us, Palestine, Bosnia, Chechnya, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Kashmir, Philippines, Thailand and many more places, we need to act if we are to follow the example of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Prophet (PBUH) never believed in fate in such a way as to sit back and relax but rather the opposite: he actively and in great earnest went about fighting against all the problems and issues that he came across. We must follow that example.

A possible understanding of fate is as follows:

The First Thought:

That Allah subhanahut'ala decides, and has determined a specific route for history, which will be determined by supernatural intervention if He deems so. And Allah knows best.

The Second Thought:

Virtually every event or state has a statistical probability, a normal distribution. This is in statistics stated as the Normality Assumption. When the normal distribution of every event and every state is taken together as a whole, they form paths through which history will almost inevitably (or inevitably) flow. This can be visualized as a large number of bell curves, inverted to form valleys, through which the river of Time flows. Fate is the valley through which that river of Time will flow. As in the First Thought, Allah subhanahut'ala may intervene whenever he wishes, and it is He who has determined the natures of things, events and states, and invariably He knows how they will overlap and interact to reach their final outcome. And Allah knows best.

Japan versus Turkey

Japan and Turkey provide two contrasting and diametric models of how to react to the rapid advancement of the Western civilization. Historically both Japan and Turkey faced the West and had to make a number of hard decisions as to how they can react, what to take and what to reject. They provide a classic case of comparison; ancient empires, facing a stark choice of change in a similar period in history, and yet made completely different choices.

Japan combined its tradition and progress in a way that reinvented its culture while Ataturk's Turkey threw out their culture and belief system to transplant a Western imitation instead.

Our discussion and dialogue concerning the Islamic state will be set within finding the Japan Route for the Muslim world rather than the Turkey Route.

Dialogue with Civility

This dialogue must be held with the utmost civility. We do not want to be dishonorable in our conduct nor do we want to put a sword to the neck of those who disagree.

Free Market over Planned Economy

While the free market will be restricted by Islamic laws and regulations and with welfare obligations that are ordained, the essential nature of the economic system must be that of a free market, as was the case with Medina-tun-Nabi.

Non-Muslims Not Part of this Dialogue

No matter how well intentioned we would rather keep this discussion, so close to our hearts and so close to our religion, exclusively a Muslim affair. We thank all non-Muslims for their interest, but respectfully decline your contribution. Please allow us this space as a sign of mutual respect. As someone once memorably said, talking to a non-Muslim about an Islamic state would be like trying to convince someone that chocolate pudding is better than chocolate cake, when they dislike chocolate to begin with.

Back to top

# PROOF OF RIBA AND MONEY

This section provides the proof discussed in the chapter on the Economic Model. This is taken from Sheikh Imran Hosein's book The Prohibition of Riba in the Qur'an and Sunnah:

Ubada bin al-Samit reported Allah's Messenger as saying: Gold is to be paid for by gold, silver by silver, wheat by wheat, barley by barley, dates by dates, and salt by salt, like for like and equal for equal, payment being made on the spot. If these classes differ (i.e. if it is not like for like) sell as you wish if payment is made on the spot. (Muslim)

Abu Said al-Khudri reported Allah's Messenger as saying: Gold is to be paid for by gold, silver by silver, wheat by wheat, barley by barley, dates by dates and salt by salt, like for like, payment being made on the spot. If anyone gives more or asks more he has dealt in riba. The receiver and the giver are equally guilty. (Muslim)

Abu Said and Abu Huraira told that Allah's Messenger appointed someone as a governor over Khaibar. When the man came to Madina he brought him dates of a very fine quality called janib. The Prophet asked him: Are all the dates of Khaibar of this kind? The man replied: No! Oh messenger of Allah we exchange two s'as of bad dates for one s'a of this kind of dates (i.e. janib), or exchange three s'as for two. On that, the Prophet said: Do not do so, as it is a kind of riba. But sell the dates of inferior quality for money, and then buy janib with the money. The Prophet said the same thing about dates sold by weight. (Bukhari)

Abu Said al-Khudri said: Once Bilal brought barni (i.e. a kind of dates) to the Prophet and the Prophet asked im: From where have you brought these? Bilal replied: I had some inferior type of dates and exchanged two s'as of it for one s'a of barni dates in order to give it to the Prophet to eat. Thereupon the Prophet said: Beware! Beware! This is definitely riba! This is definitely riba! Don't do so, but if you want to buy (a superior kind of dates) sell the inferior dates for money and then buy the superior kind of dates with that money. (Bukhari)

Abu Saeed said that Bilal brought the Prophet some barni dates, and when he asked him where he had gotten them he replied: I had some inferior dates so I sold two sa's of them for one sa (of this). He said: Ah! The very essence of riba, the very essence of riba. Do not do so, but when you wish to buy, sell all the dates in a separate transaction, then buy with what you get. (Bukhari, Muslim)

Yahya bin Sa'id reported that Allah's Messenger ordered the two Sa'ads to sell off all gold and silver plates obtained in booty (enemy property seized in warfare). They sold three plates for four (or four for three). The Prophet said: You have taken riba. Annul the sales. (Muwatta, Imam Malik)

Malik reported that it reached him from Qasim bin Muhammad that Umar bin al-Khattab said: A dinar for a dinar and a dirham for a dirham and a sa for a sa. Do not sell cash for credit. (Muwatta, Imam Malik)

Malik bin Aus Hadthan al-Nasri reported: I had need for changing one hundred dinars into dirhams. He said Talha bin Ubaidullah sent for me. We agreed on it (barter of gold and silver for gold and silver). He took gold from me and turned it over in his hands and said: Wait until my cashier arrives from Ghabah. Umar bin Khattab heard of this and declared: By Lord, do not leave him until you take money from him. He then said, the Prophet had said that the exchange of gold for silver is riba except when it is a cash transaction, the selling of wheat for what is riba except when it is a cash transaction, and the selling of dates for dates is riba except if it is a cash transaction, the selling of barley for barley is riba except when it is a cash transaction, and the selling of salt for salt is riba except when it is a cash transaction. (Muwatta, Imam Malik)

Ibn Shihab reported that Malik bin Aus said: I was in need of change for one hundred dinars. Talha bin Ubaidullah called me and we discussed the matter, and he agreed to change my dinars. He took the gold pieces in his hands and fidgeted with them, and then said: Wait until my store-keeper comes from the forest. Umar ibn al-Khattab was listening to that and said: By Allah you should not separate from Talha until you get the money from him, for the Prophet said: The selling of gold for gold is riba, except if the exchange is from hand-to-hand and equal in amount, and similarly, the selling of wheat for wheat is riba unless it is from hand to hand and equal in amount, and dates for dates is riba unless it is from hand to hand and equal in amount, and barley for barley is riba unless it is from hand to hand and equal in amount. (Bukhari)

Abu Salih al-Zaiyat said: I heard Abu Sai al-Khudri saying: The selling of a dinar for a dinar, and a dirham for a dirham (is permissible). I said to him: Ibn Abbas does not say the same. Abu Said replied: I asked Ibn Abbas whether he had heard it from the Prophet or had seen it in the holy book. Ibn Abbas replied: I do not claim that, and you know Allah's Messenger better than I do. But Usama informed me that the Prophet had said: There is no riba (in money exchange) except when it is not done hand to hand (i.e. when there is delay in payment). (Bukhari)

Back to top

# GLOSSARY

Economic Concepts

Riba: Interest or usury

Fractional reserve banking: A widespread practice where banks only keep a fraction of the deposits made to them and lend out the rest.

Limited liability: where an individual's financial liability is limited, typically to the sum of the investment made.

Venture capital: A fund raising technique whereby a company receives financing typically in exchange for equity in the company.

Derivatives (financial): Is a financial instrument that is derived from some other asset, index, event, value or condition, as opposed to the underlying asset itself.

Risk-less interest rate: A theoretical interest rate that is free of risk, typically, government issued bills are considered riskless, particularly the United States' 3 month Treasury bill.

Monetary policy: The regulation of the money supply and interest rates of an economy by a central bank.

Fiscal policy: Economic policy that uses taxation and government spending to effect the economy.

Tobin's Q: Ratio of the market value of a firm to the replacement cost of the firm.

Military Concepts:

JF-17: A fighter aircraft built jointly by Pakistan and China.

Close Air Support (CAS): Air support by fixed or rotary winged aircraft provided in close proximity to friendly forces.

Mobile Guard: Elite light cavalry in Khalid Bin Waleed's army.

Theological Concepts:

Hijra: migration in the way of Allah, often from oppression.

Dawah: invitation to Islam by Muslims to non-Muslims.

Ummah: General Muslim body as a whole.

Original Sin: A Christian belief that humans are born in a state of sin because of the actions of ancestors rather than the sin of the individual.

Back to top

###

http:/www.grandestrategy.com/
