RELIGION

RELIGION

1988 5 May 25 29 RELIGION (1907) Beyond the Limits of Nationalism And when We accepted your covenant that you would not slay one another nor drive your people from their habitations; then you confirmed it and you are witnesses thereto. Yet you are the ones who slay your people and drive a group of them from their homes, assisting others against them in a sinful and unjust way; but if they come as captives to you, you redeem them while their very expulsion was unlawful for you. Do you believe in one part of the Scriptures and disbelieve in another?

Of the Prophecies made by the Prophet Mohammad and recorded in books of Hadith literature, several point out that in latter times Muslims would follow the very same paths as the Jews and Christians, that is to say that they would profess Islam by word of mouth but would, in practice, conduct themselves in no better a manner than either the Jews or the Christians. We quote below one such prophecy as recorded by the Imams, Bukhari and Muslim in their compilations of Hadith:

It is reported by Abu Saeed al-Khudri that the Prophet said: ‘You will follow the ways of those who went before you, foot by foot and yard by yard, to such a degree that; if they entered the hole of a lizard, you would follow them straight in.’ ‘Oh, Messenger of God,’ we asked, ‘do you mean the Jews and the Christians?’ ‘Who else?’ replied the Prophet.

Many of these Jewish “ways” have been described in the Quran and are referred to in the following verses of Surah-al-Baqarah:

And when We accepted your covenant that you would not slay one another nor drive your people from their habitations; then you confirmed it and you are witnesses thereto. Yet you are the ones who slay your people and drive a group of them from their homes, assisting others against them in a sinful and unjust way; but if they come as captives to you, you redeem them while their very expulsion was unlawful for you. Do you believe in one part of the Scriptures and disbelieve in another? There is no reward for such people except disgrace in this world and On the Day of Resurrection they will be consigned to terrible torment; and God is not unaware of what you do. These are the ones who have purchased the life of this world in exchange for the Hereafter. Their punishment shall not be lightened, nor shall they be helped. (Quran, 2:84-86)

Let us take a look at the background of the verses. There were two polytheistic tribes, the Aus and the Khazraj, living in ancient Yathrib (Medina). At the same period, three Jewish tribes, the Banu Qainqa, the Banu Nadhir and Banu Qurayzah, had settled in and around Medina. The Aus and Khazraj, generally at war with one another, had formed certain alliances to ensure a positive outcome to their hostilities. The Jewish tribes, unable to remain aloof from these alliances, aligned themselves respectively with the opposing forces. The Banu Qainqa and Banu Nadhir entered into the Khazraj alliance, while the Banu Qurayzah threw in its lot with the Aus. There ensued a situation very similar to that of the present day, with one Muslim country in the Soviet Camp and another in the American Camp or like that which exists in India, where Muslims are to be found both in the ruling Congress Party and in the Opposition, the net result being that Muslims themselves are split into two opposing camps and continue to fight it out amongst themselves.

When one polytheistic alliance of Medina engaged in hostilities with the other, the members of these Jewish tribes joined in on both sides, and then Jews fought Jews, Jews killed Jews, and Jews expelled Jews from their homes. Such action ran directly counter to Jewish law, for the commandments which had been handed down to the Jews by their Prophets stated quite clearly that a Jew was to do no wrong to his Jewish neighbour, being duty-bound to honour his life and property.

When, in this particular situation, the Jews had fought each other, they were quite unmindful of their own Judaic law. But when the fighting was over, and they saw that a number of Jews had been taken captive by the idolators of the Aus and Khazraj, their national pride – albeit tardily – was strongly aroused, and they were quick to remember that their laws bade them ransom fellow-Jews when they had fallen into the hands of Gentiles. To this end, with much pious exhortation, they began collecting donations and, once they had freed their coreligionists, they announced with pride that they had performed this redeeming act in compliance with such-and-such a tenet of Mosaic law.

With regard to the contradictory and inconsistent nature of their behaviour, the Quran pointed but the existence of two important clauses in their law. One made it clear that no Jew should slay another Jew nor expel him from his dwelling. Yet they had been guilty of both these crimes on a massive scale, showing no regard whatsoever for the dictates of their law. The other stated that when a Jew was captured by a Gentile, his release should be secured by paying a ransom. The fact that they acted only on the second clause showed that they were motivated, not by religious fervour, but by nationalism. Had they been imbued with religious fervour, they would have acted in accordance with the first as well as the second clause. Such action is not acceptable to God, for He is concerned with the spirit in which an act is performed and not with any superficial form which it may take.

We may safely generalize in saying that those who choose to remain silent over the rights and wrongs of an issue when the opponents are both of their own community, but – on a similar issue are loud in support of their own side when another community is involved, are little better than Jewish in their behaviour. When the Jews had dealings with one another, they had no qualms about trampling the laws of God underfoot. And worse, this did not arouse any indignation on the part of their leaders, who failed to perceive any threat in this to their Mosaic law. However, the moment a Jew was persecuted by a Gentile, they saw this as a threat to their religion and, citing divine law in support of their action, launched fiery protest movements.

It is regrettable that this same streak is evident in the Muslims of today. They see their own co-religionists indulge in every kind of profanity and injustice, but they behave as if they are quite oblivious of and insensitive to such action. As a result, it has become impossible to launch any movement aimed at correcting the injustices which exist within Muslim society. The Muslims are, nevertheless, highly sensitive when it comes to the wrongdoing of others, and look with favour upon any movement launched in protest against them.

Our leaders, who proclaim with pride that they have brought together hundreds of thousands of Muslims over a single issue, forget that what has assembled such a large crowd is not the quest for justice per se, but the desire to see another community brought low. Were those very same leaders to call on the Muslims to arise against injustices within their own community, I am sure their complacency would soon be shattered. Used to packing huge marquees full of listeners just by reviling another community, these leaders would not even be able to find the funds to erect a marquee, let alone pack it full of people, if, as the subject of their oratory, they chose the injustices within the Muslim community.

Over the last fifty years, countless movements from those of the Muslim League to those of the Personal Law Board – have sprung up amongst the Muslims. At times the great masses of people who joined in these movements reached such colossal proportions that poetic onlookers were moved to write that:

The earth and the heavens Are at sixes and sevens.

Yet all these movements are ones which have been launched to counter the injustices of others. Not one of them was instigated by an urge to correct injustices within the Muslim community. Incredible as it may seem, the injustices committed by Muslims against Muslims – and such happenings are daily commonplace – are far greater than those committed against them by the adherents of other faiths.

An example worth citing is the treachery of a Muslim who had been put in charge of a building purchased by an Islamic Institute with a view to setting up its own branch there. Betraying the trust that had been placed in him, he had the building registered in his own name by means of a bogus registration certificate. This is a clear case of misappropriation and dishonesty, which soon reached the ears of Muslim leaders. But not one of them considered it necessary to intervene.

Happenings of this sort are daily occurrence in every town and village. Whenever a Muslim has the opportunity, he does not hesitate to lay hands on the property of another Muslim. This is continuing problem, but no Muslim – either from the rank-and-file or from the elite – is ever moved to rectify this state of affairs and ensure that those who are in the right receive what is their due. This not withstanding, this same Muslim rank-and-file will rise in indignation along with their leaders as soon as they hear, for example, that some non-Muslim has appropriated a building belonging to the Muslim community. Not even sickness can prevent them from joining in a movement launched to protest against such an act, for when the matter involves Muslims and non-Muslims, they cannot abide the slightest deviation from Islamic law. But, if the issue is between Muslim and Muslim, no matter how heinous the crime according to Islamic law, no indignation is aroused and no need to protest is felt.

It is for this very kind of behaviour that the Jews have been admonished in the Quran. By behaving in like manner, the Muslims are bearing out the prophecy uttered by their Prophet. By remaining silent over the internal affairs of Muslims, and launching campaigns of protest and complaint over issues involving non-Muslims, the Muslims are treading the same path as the Jews. This is a sign that the religion of the Muslims has ceased to be based on principles and has degenerated into an expression of their community interests. It is for this reason that, in the one instance, they are moved to action, whereas in the other, they remain passive. Were their religion been of a principled nature, they would, in both instances feel moved to correct situation. It would not have been solely when their sectarian interests were involved that they took a stand.

The Muslims should realize that God will look with favour upon their protests against the injustices of non-Muslims only when they show themselves equally indignant over the injustices perpetrated by Muslims. In the sight of God, there is no difference between the wrong done by one Muslim to another and that done to a Muslim by a non-Muslim. Both acts are equally abhorrent to Him. To ignore one and condemn the other may suit narrow, sectarian interests, but according to universal, divine law, such action is entirely reprehensible.