Читать книгу Muhammad: Man and Prophet - Adil Salahi - Страница 8

Preface

PERHAPS THE WORLD was never in greater need of an accurate account of the Prophet Muhammad’s life than it is now. Interest in Islam has soared over the last couple of decades, and the trend continues after the turn of the century, but not always for the right reasons. Events, some of which were brought about by Muslims painting themselves as advocates of Islam, tended to give this last divine religion a tarnished image. Though alien to Islam’s very nature, extremism has been trying to impose its hard line attitude on Islam. It continued to play its eye-catching role, providing a fertile area for those who wish to detract from Islam and to show it in a negative light. World media, always quick to feed on sensational news, has kept Islam as a recurrent topic in its coverage of events, particularly those taking place in hot spots of the world.

The charge that is often laid at the door of Islam is ‘terrorism’. This has gathered much greater force after the tragic events of 11 September 2001, but certainly did not start with them. Several months earlier, news channels reported that an audience in the US were asked to state the first word that came to their minds when Islam is mentioned, and a substantial majority of the respondents said ‘terrorism’. We are reminded that when the Oklahoma City explosions occurred a few years ago, few media channels were prepared to show the willingness to wait for evidence before pointing an accusing finger at Islam. Needless to say, investigations soon proved that no Muslim had anything to do with that event. But the speed with which the media reacted and its unfounded accusations were indicative of an attitude of mind that certain quarters had helped to develop, fostering a false association between Islam and terrorism.

Nothing can be further from the truth. In fact, Islam considers terrorist action against civilians a very grave crime that must be punished. In Islamic law, punishment always looks at the nature of the offence and aims to deter offenders before they embark on a course of action leading to an offence. This deterrent element is seen, for example, in the fact that Islam requires that punishment of certain offences must be carried out in public. Thus justice is seen to be done, and prospective offenders are aware not only of the magnitude of the punishment they may have but also the publicity which their offences generate. Islam, then, deals with crime before it is committed, trying to reduce its incidence. At the same time, Islamic punishments serve a dual purpose of making the guilty pay for their crimes and deterring any future offenders. The Islamic attitude towards terrorism is an implementation of its approach to crime, aiming to achieve its dual purpose.

More recently we have been hearing louder voices speaking about a clash of civilizations, setting Islam in opposition to Western civilization and speaking about the inevitability of a destructive struggle between the two. Yet Islam does not seek to destroy any civilization. In its heyday, when Islam spread into many countries with divergent civilizations, traditions and sets of values, Islam interacted with them all, endorsing whatever was compatible with its aim of building a human society based on the central idea of God’s oneness. It was thus able to take the best that these civilizations had to offer, rejecting only what was of no use to human society, and what was incompatible with its central concepts. Even in Arabia, the birthplace of Islam, where idol worship was the norm, Islam accepted all good values that prevailed in that society, adopting them as its own. Thus Islam was able to incorporate into its civilization all the sound values human societies upheld, harnessing them together in a complete whole. Its approach remains the same. It is open to the best ideas and concepts people may have, rejecting only what is oppressive and false, and what stifles man’s free thought.

Nevertheless, the outcry about a clash of civilizations continues, with certain loud voices trying to pour petrol on the flames. Sweeping judgements by public figures, saying that Western civilization is superior to Islam, are often quoted in the media. Needless to say, such an outcry serves no real purpose. On the other hand, some politicians, mindful of the Muslim element in their constituencies, may try to cover up their unfavourable feelings with more diplomatic statements. Others speak in conciliatory terms and make friendly gestures, but these are often belied by their aggressive actions.

But why should there be any clash of civilizations when both Islam and Western civilization lay great emphasis on man’s freedom of thought, belief and expression? To my mind, erroneous perceptions on both sides have contributed to a polarization of attitudes that is unnecessary, harmful and potentially very dangerous. Unfortunately such erroneous perceptions have marred several aspects of Islam so extensively that these are often wrongly understood by both friend and foe. This has deepened mistrust and suspicion on both sides.

It only requires that both sides live up to their basic values of freedom for friendship and mutual cooperation to replace the underlying mistrust, fear and even hostility that have characterized relations between the two camps for centuries. Sadly, in the present circumstances, this is easier said than done. The attacks of 11 September 2001 and subsequent events will inevitably harden attitudes, rather than help to promote mutual understanding. When politicians try hard to defend the indefensible and justify what, deep at heart, they know to be unjustifiable, they can hardly hope to win over anyone who respects civilized values. Similarly, when those who profess to be advocates of Islam step far beyond the role God has defined for His messenger in advocating His message, the only results they can achieve are the opposite of the goals they set for themselves.

What is needed is a genuine reappraisal of preconceived notions so that we are able to determine what is right and stick to it. The West may pride itself on occupying the high moral ground, but it can only give credence to what it professes if it continues to adhere to its moral values in times of adversity, not shed them at the slightest temptation. And when advocates of Islam seek more than freedom to address other people and explain God’s message to them, they do a disservice to the very cause they want to serve.

The only task Islamic advocacy should set for itself is to deliver God’s message to mankind. Whether people accept or reject it is entirely their own business. No pressure should be put on them to try to bring them into Islam. Exerting such pressure is alien to the very nature of the Islamic faith. Addressing His messenger, God says in the Qur’ān: “If they turn away from you, know that We have not sent you to be their keeper: your only task is to deliver the message entrusted to you.” (42: 48)

This is the mission to which the Prophet Muhammad dedicated all his efforts, from the moment when he was entrusted with God’s message up to the point when his blessed life on earth was over. When studying his life, we find this clearly apparent, both at the time when his message was met with endless adversity that observed no values and when he wielded power which, had he wished, he could use to force his opponents into submission. The present work aims to present his blessed life in its true light. It covers the main events in the Prophet Muhammad’s life from childhood to old age. It is only natural that we give much greater attention to the events that followed the start of the revelation of the Qur’ān, God’s final message to mankind. In each event we recognize his role as a messenger entrusted with delivering a message, and we see the example he sets for us to follow. Following his example is part of the requirements of being a Muslim. To abandon his example in preference for some other practices is to negate the second part of the first article of Islamic faith, namely, the declaration that there is no deity other than God and that Muhammad is God’s messenger.

When reading about the Prophet’s life, one must put the military activity of the Muslim community under the Prophet’s leadership in true perspective. Was Muhammad a warrior, as a cursory look at his life may suggest? If so, how does this relate to the task outlined in the above-quoted, definitive Qur’ānic verse limiting his task to delivering God’s message?

In the present world climate, there are people who try to limit the scope of going to war in Islam, or for Islam, to an absolute minimum. I read recently in a British newspaper an article by a prolific Muslim author, saying that war during the lifetime of the Prophet totalled no more than one week in the 23 years period from the start of his message to the end of his life. Others try to justify going to war in Islamic history by saying that Islam approves of war only when it is defensive.

On the other hand, there are well-meaning advocates of Islam who place military means high on the list of Islamic requirements, considering jihād as a major Islamic duty that comes next to the five ‘pillars’ of Islam. Others are keen to show that Islam has a militaristic approach, pointing out that it calls for ‘holy war’ against unbelievers.

A proper study of the Prophet’s life shows us that none of these views is correct. The Prophet was engaged in full-scale military campaigns which, for the most part, took one day of fighting each, but the preparations and pre-battle engagement, and the states of siege mounted on certain occasions, took much longer than that. The Expedition of the Moat and the Siege of the Qurayẓah which followed immediately afterwards, took nearly two months, during which the Muslim state in Madinah was in full military mobilization, even though little actual fighting took place. Yet these events were the ones that turned the balance of power in Arabia irretrievably in the Muslim community’s favour.

It may be easy to describe the Islamic attitude to war as purely defensive, but there is nothing to be gained by that. Islam always takes a positive attitude and calls on its followers to adopt all necessary measures to ensure the safety of the Muslim community. If this means having to go to war, then so be it. We have to bear in mind, however, that Islam does not approve of waging war except in a situation where peaceful measures are of no use. This means that Islam does not approve of a military offensive, except to repel an aggression started or planned by an enemy. We see examples of this nature in the Prophet’s own actions as he took effective measures to consolidate his state in Madinah and ensure its security. Never did he start a battle or raise an army to attack any tribe or group that was willing to live in peace with Islam. Even when the Quraysh insisted on adopting a hard line just before the Battle of Badr, turning a deaf ear to the voice of wisdom emanating from some of its own elders, the Prophet was keen to avoid a military engagement. Whenever he tried to take an enemy by surprise, his strategy was to show the enemy that starting a fight was useless. Thus, bloodshed was largely avoided in such confrontations.

On the other hand, those who lay much emphasis on the role of jihād in the Muslim community, which is important indeed, often limit jihād to military fighting, showing that Islam resorts to military force to achieve its objectives. This is again an erroneous view, whether advanced by advocates or opponents of Islam. Jihād is an Islamic requirement, no doubt. But this applies in the proper and broad sense of the word jihād, which means ‘to exert one’s best effort’. Every Muslim is required to work for Islam, in his or her own place in the Muslim community, trying to serve God’s cause and further the interests of the Muslims throughout the world. All this is part of jihād, or the efforts we exert to make our belief a living reality.

The efforts we need to exert may, on occasions, take the form of a military engagement, but this is the exception, not the rule. It is to be noted that not once in the Qur’ān is the term jihād used in the sense of a military fight, although the Qur’ān comments on many battles that took place during the Prophet’s lifetime. When it refers to war, the Qur’ān invariably uses the term qitāl, which means ‘military combat’.

Those who claim that Islam calls for a holy war betray their ignorance of this great religion. Nowhere in the Qur’ān or the Prophet’s statements or in the writings of leading Islamic jurists does this term occur. In Islamic terminology, the adjective ‘holy’ applies to God only.

When we say all this, people are entitled to ask about the reason for the large number of expeditions that the Prophet sent out of Madinah, particularly in the first few years of his settlement there. A proper understanding of these may be gathered from reading this book that attempts to document the main events in the Prophet’s life. We may say here that a new state established in one city in the middle of a vast, hostile area where tribal warfare was an everyday event could only expect to be attacked. Indeed, attacks were expected from several quarters. Hence, it was necessary for the Prophet and the Muslim community to take every possible precaution, so as to be fully prepared to face any danger that could threaten its existence at any time. Such danger was indeed imminent, culminating in an alliance of all hostile forces moving forward with the declared aim of exterminating the entire Muslim community. That Islam could overcome all this danger was due to God’s help and mercy in the first place, the wise policy of the Prophet and the solid commitment of the Muslims to their cause.

It is impossible to document the Prophet’s life without giving due prominence to such military activities. Indeed, early historians who wrote about the Prophet Muhammad felt that these were the most important events, because they involved hostile forces. Hence, they called their histories, Al-Maghāzī, or The Expeditions. They might have felt that it was easy to gather the social and human dimensions of the society the Prophet had built, because these could still be seen in the Muslim community and the way it conducted its life. Later, a biography of the Prophet and a history of the period which witnessed the rise of the first Muslim community could not overlook the importance of the military aspect, because it was through such military events that the community could establish its right to exist and prosper.

For Muslims, studying the life of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is a duty that gives them an insight into how Islam is to be implemented in practice. Hence, putting the military element into proper perspective acquires, particularly in the present day, added importance. Is it possible to bring about a complete Islamic revival without waging war against existing society? Which society is to be considered hostile? Could a revivalist movement resort to a pre-emptive strike against an unfriendly society? What restrictions apply to the use of military force in the context of Islamic revival? The proper answers to these questions, and similar ones, are to be deduced from studying the Prophet’s life, as it provides the model to be followed in putting Qur’ānic teachings into practice. Such a study is bound to show that when the Prophet preached his message in Makkah and the Muslims suffered persecution, no military activity was allowed. Later, when the Muslims established their new state in the midst of hostile forces, war was allowed as the situation demanded. A few years later, when the Muslim community was able to wrest the initiative, war was avoided by all means. Even when the chance to wreak vengeance against those who for many years persecuted the Muslims and turned the Prophet out of his home town was there to grasp, every effort was made to shed no blood, and to make yesterday’s enemies today’s friends. The building of a closely-knit community based on faith, in which all maintain a bond of brotherhood, was the ultimate goal.

In our modern world, advocates of Islam want to see Islam guiding humanity again, because they believe that such guidance can only bring peace and happiness to a world that has suffered much injustice. In trying to achieve this, they must be guided by the Prophet’s example, realizing that their task, for the fulfilment of which they are accountable to God, does not go beyond delivering the message of Islam to mankind. If they try to go beyond that, they run the very real risk of making their efforts counterproductive. They should always remember that God has limited the Prophet’s role to this because He knows that it is the role that brings about the best results. It is not for them to try to extend their role beyond this point.

For the rest of mankind, a proper understanding of the nature of Islamic advocacy is most helpful in shaping their attitudes to Islam and Islamic revivalist movements. Such an understanding will tell them that all they need to do in order to live in peace with the advocates of Islam is to ensure that freedom of belief and expression is part of the real, not the ideal, world. After all, such freedom is an inalienable right of every human being. Islam gives it the highest rank among all human rights. It takes precedence over the right to life. Evidence in support of this is found in two Qur’ānic verses: “Persecution is even worse than killing.” (2: 191) “Persecution is an even greater crime than killing.” (2: 217) According to Dr M.H. Khayat, a contemporary scholar, “These verses give a clear principle that persecution, which means a ‘denial of freedom’ is a far worse and greater offence than killing, which is a ‘denial of the right to life’. This principle leads to a logical conclusion that freedom is more important than life. This is by no means strange, bearing in mind that the very humanity of man is the result of such freedom.”¹ With such emphasis on freedom, Islam treats its opponents with respect, provided that they respect people’s rights to free choice. From its own perspective, Western civilization could find no reason to quarrel with this attitude since it takes pride in guaranteeing such freedom to all people.

London	Adil Salahi
January 2002

NOTE

1. M.H. Khayat, Health as a Human Right in Islam, World Health Organization, Cairo, 2004, 41pp.