DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF FACTORS FOR INTEGRATION OF UMMAH, by Gulam Ali Gulzar

DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF FACTORS
FOR
INTEGRATION OF UMMAH

Ghulam Ali Gulzar

TAHFUZ PUBLICATIONS
Hassanabad, Rainawari, Srinagar, Kashmir
(November—2009)

Preface
The booklet entitled “DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF FACTORS FOR INTEGRATION OF UMMAH” is published with an intention of bringing forth, in brief, the causes and effects of disintegration among Muslims, manifested through the profiles of history and contemporary world today, in order to perceive reasonable course of action towards the integration of Ummah. The main topics of the article are:
1.    Brief dimension of nature and components of gap between two main sects among Muslims.
2.    Similarities and Diversities in concepts of Imamat and Khilafat.
3.    Scientific approach to fight hegemony of west and emerge as integrated bloc.

In the text (R.A.) has been used to express Rahmat-ul-Lahi Allahi, while (R.U.) for Razi-Allaho-Unhu. (pbuh) has been used as a short equivalent to recite Sallaho Aliehi-wassalum, while (A.S) for Aliehi-s-Salam. If any of the Muslim reader objects to the use of (A.S.) in reference to the context of the article (which corresponds to the narration of Abu Sayeed Khudri, R.U.) let that not be taken as a point of conflict, may that person recite (R.U.)
It is fervently hoped that the dear readers will try to reach the depth of pain felt for Ummah while composing the factors, responsible for centralization of Muslims, in spirit and action, with love for Islam and humanity.
       Ghulam Ali Gulzar
             Zul-Qauada 1430H—November 2009)
                                               Email: gulzarabid @ gmail.com

DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF FACTORS
FOR INTEGRATION OF UMMAH
I-    Brief Dimensions of nature and components of gap between two main sects among Muslims:-
1.    Shia and Suni are known to be the two main sects among Muslims. By Shia is literally meant, a loyal person, particularly attached to an ideology and character. By Suni is literally meant, ‘follower of a particular pattern’. Shia Muslims or Ahl-e-Tashayuh are interpreted as, ‘those who follow Quran and Ahlul-Bait’ while Suni Muslims or Ahl-e-sunat are interpreted as, ‘those who follow Quran and Sunnat. By ‘Sunnat’ Shia and Suni both mean the way shown/adopted by the last Prophet of Islam, Hazrat Mohammad (pbuh), through words and deeds.
2.    Shiat doctrine follows Sunnah revealed mainly through Ahlul-Bait viz Hazrat Ali (A.S.), Hazrat Fatima (S. A.), Imam Hassan (A.S.), and Imam Hussain (A.S.), whom the Holy Prophet called “My Ahlul-Bait”; together with the Holy Prophet the five are remembered by the name “Panjtan-e-Pak”. Suniat doctrine follows Sunnah revealed by Suhaba (R.U.). Shias are of the view that the best followers of Sunnah were Ahlul-Bait (A.S.). A general impression has been felt to have been created, through improper and ragged discourses that Shias exterminate Suhaba and the Sunis give least importance to Ahlul-Bait. Both the feelings do not stand to be correct; although throughout the course of long history, some extremist lobbies have been exhuming the burried misunderstandings from time to time, in various regions of the Muslim World, mostly due to their short vision having been exploited by the enemies of Islam. A section of rulers and scholars (Darbari Mullas) have generally and seriously committed acts of creating hatred and distrust between the two.
3.    Right from the ministerial authority of Marwan Bin Hakam and emperorship of Munawiyah Bin Abu Sufiyan upto Marwan Hemar, the last king of Umayyad dynasty (say 35 to 140 H) and then, after a small pause of about two decades, upto the end of Abbasid rule (beginning with-Safah) i.e. throughout the long period of about 300 years, Shias were largely made target of massacre, imprisionment and torture, except two small periods comprising of a couple of years, viz that of Umar Bin Abdul Aziz (R.A.) the just ummayid ruler and Muiz-ud-Dawlah (a reasonable Abbasid ruler, 350 H), when Shias had taken a breath of relief during the said three centuries.
4.    During the down fall of Ummayids and rise of Abbasids, i.e. the small pause of about 20 years as cited above, Madrasatul Islamia, which was founded by Imam Mohammad Baqir (A.S.) was modified and systematically organized by Imam Jaffer Sadiq (A.S.), where students from far and wide (ranging from Bukhara to Africa), happened to come, stay for short periods and learn. The scholars who secured knowledge there, included Nauman (Imam Abu Hanifa A.R.), Imam Malik (A.R.), Hashim (great scholar of Falsafa-e-Illahiyat), Jabbir Hayan (researcher in chemistry) and many others among a total of 18000 students, Imam Sadiq (A.S.) arranged faculties of Usool-e-Fiqh, Ilmul Tafseer, Ilmul Hadees, Ilmul Akhlaq, Asool-e-Hadees, Ilmul Kalam (Uqaid-e-Asasi/Illahi), Ilmul Rijal, along with Tib, Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry and other contemporary Sciences. 

Discourses were also organized with Greek Philosophers, Christians of Rome and atheists (Dahrees). The first compilation of Fiqh-e-Islami including verdicts of new issues and istifta-at was issued in early 148 H. The book was later introduced as fiqh Imamia. After 6th Imam (Jaffer Sadiq) every Imam from the descendents of Ahlul-Bait (A.S.) added replies to new issues (Masayil) by virtue of Istimbat from Quran and Sunnah upto 11th Imam (Hassanul-Askari (AS.). Thereafter Fiqh continued to get enriched through Naibeen and Mujtahideen. Answer to every issue (personal or social) being faced in the contemporary World has been keeping available vide systematized control of Ijtihad.

Imam Abu Hanifa (R.A.) who was happy to have spent two and a half years in the Madarasa of Imam Sadiq at Madina, had settled in Bagdad where he with a group of Muhadiseen and Fuqaha composed a book on Fiqh, which was released in 150 H and soon Fiqha Hanfia was spread far and wide in many Muslim countries, as no abstacle was faced from the government side for a couple of years. In later years of his life, Imam Sahib was forced to accept the post of Shahi Mufti/Qazi-ul-Quzat; to which he resisted and was imprisoned. In the course of time when Mansoor Abasi came to power, he kept close vigil over the activities of Imam Sadiq (A.S.), for   his growing popularity. Most of the time during Mansoor’s period, he was kept confined to Madina. Obstacles were also put in the way of Shias of Ahlul-Bait (A.S.) for Tableeg of Fiqh prescribed by Imam Sadiq (A.S.), however in spite of risks and difficulties, Muslim and non Muslim scholars visited him. Imam Malik (R.A.) also compiled his Fiqh which was spread in many countries particularly during the imprisonment of Imam Abu Hanifa (R.A.). Both had visited Imam Sadiq (A.S.) jointly at a number of occasions for clarification of ilmy conflicts. Later on Imam Shafie (R.A.) and about half a century after wards Imam Ahmad Bin Hambal (R.A.) revived the verdict of many Masayl and added reply to new issues by Ijtihad including delicate matters. There after no such centralized Ijtihad was found prevailing, but Muftis belonging to the said four schools would give their verdicts, in conformity with the trends of the respective schools.

II     Similarities and Diversities in the concepts of Imamat and Khilafat:
Literal meaning of Imamat is leadership and that of Khilafat is vicegerence. Widely spoken meaning reveals that man is vicegerent of God on earth. In particular sense, Khilafat is a quality related responsibility for implementation of social order based on Quran and Sunnah. “Imamat” is a term used in Quran, revealing the reward, bestowed upon Hazrat Ibrahim (A.S.) from Allah, after he was successful in the test of sacrifice and steadfastness. Virtually it is very difficult to derive and describe one meaning to get harmonized with various/different/significant grades and responsibilities pertaining to Imamat. The interpretation of Imamat, in totality, having been composed in the light of Hadees is leadership; be that with possession of state power or not, is not the matter of main concern. Allama Iqbal (R.A) has given a wider sense to the term in the light of present World scenario. It could be even a board of great scholars, centrally arranged, to lead the Ummah out of the contemporary global crisis. The tides of above perception do not take us towards a state of mind, where we would assume that Imamat is not a part of state; however to the best of concept (what could be interpreted after deep study and multidimentional analysis), ‘state is a part of Imamat’.

Shia Imamia scholars hold, vide Quranic quotations and Hadees from Suni and Shia source, that the Imamat of twelve Imams, last and twelfth of them being Imam Mehdi, as having been sorted out by the Holy Prophet (pbuh). This is also proved in history that those Khulafas who are known as ‘Rashideen’ as well as many of those who are proved to have been “Zalimeen” have approached and sought help from the eleven Imams, during their tenure, in the solution of controversies as regards basic Islamic concepts and principles, meanings in knowledge and even grave political/social crisis.

Criteria towards understanding standard and sentiment should be realistic. A section among Suni Muslims assumes that there was no difference of opinion among the companions of the holy Prophet (pbuh) i.e. “Ikhtilaf Bain-e-Suhaba”. Some others are of the opinion that even if it was proved according to the tenets of Quran and Sunnah that certain Suhaba had committed a mistake, it should be taken as a Maslahat (good purpose or policy). It has also been found that because of tidings of assumption, misunderstanding, suspicion and lack of deep vision towards assessment of a composite/complex situation, some of the areas in Suni and Shia thought have touched lowest or highest profiles. Muslims should change their mind set towards understanding each other. If a Suhabi committed a mistake during that prime tenure that might be kept confined to that particular phase or stage and not made to apply as a standard for ages to come. But good topography of seerat (esteemed character) depicting the profiles of Quran and Uswa-e-Hasna, should be referred to and applied for, without being captive of group syndrome. Similarly repetition of certain horrible events/occasions in public or on media does not serve any purpose, for instance, “The battle of Jaml”.

Analysis of effective approach:
The importance and nature of effective approach may be understood by the following examples:
A Kafir’s idol worship is quit contrary to Tawheed. For the sake of promoting National integration, in a country of composite communities, for example, with Hindu majority like India, Muslims can not at the same time accept Tawheed as well as worship Ansab (idols). But besides having diversity of belief, they need to live peacefully through the means of strengthening human values and promoting common cause. As Muslim this is their right to propagate Tawheed and abstain from idol worship; but at the same time they have to act with responsibility to the effect that they have been taught not to abuse and give bad names to their idols/Baghwans, as such not to hurt their sentiments. That was an example quoted in the case of a non believer, what about the behavior with believers. Quran makes us to realize by the command “INNAMAL MOUMINOONA IKHWAH”. Thus it may be one’s right to adopt Suni or Shia school, but it is one’s responsibility to preserve Islam!

Zealous Endeavour is required for coming closer to one another. Diversity of opinions and discard of views is found among Muslims about various concepts and interpretations, because of the biased approach towards understanding one another. To overcome this, positive approach is required. As regards Biduet and Shirk hasty remarks are passed on offensive and defensive fronts.

There are Biduat-e-Hassana and Biduat-e- Qabeeha. They should systematize their approach in Amar-bil-Maroof and Nahy-Anil-Munkar. Scholarly intellectuals should manage seminars and discourses and not stick to group formation. The approach of the holy Prophet (pbuh) towards modest and intense attitude in Dawah during Makki and Madni periods is a great lesson of Hikmah. World is fast changing with new patterns, systems and technologies; Muslims should be sharp, precise and vigilant in their presentation.

Suppose there is a Khankah or a tomb with allegedly or evidently a “Biduah” or “Shirk” being practiced; demolishing it would mean rising of more “Khankahs”. Firstly there should be consensus, in the light of Quran and Hadees, among known schools of Islamic “Fikr-o-Fiqh” on the substance and applicability of the article of “Shirk”, and then reform activity could be followed on positive track. Even on attempt of a “Shirk” in the totality sense, a Muslim can not be given a title of “Mushrik”; Tawheed being the basic component of “Iman”. Certain movements have actively participated in denouncing certain things/acts as Shirk or Biduat; but the more they press the denouncement, the more do those things flourish. This unfolds two secrets, one related to applicability of the article and the other to the approach of reform.

We have a grand example of Mir Syed Ali Hamadani (R.A.) who in eighth century Hijri, bought out a great social transformation and reform in Kashmir, eradicating peacefully the practices of Kufr and Shirk. He travelled from Iran with two packages, Deeni and Iqtisadi. There emerged great need of a community hall, where people from far and wide would attend craft training and social orientation interaction programmes, besides discourses with Brahmans, conducted by the scholars. He constructed a Khankah. If “Khankah” is systematized to strengthen the concept of Tawheed and components of welfare programme, what harm!

Khilafat issue and its side effects:
1.    Suni Muslims (Save some of the sections whose perceptions do vary) hold that   “Shaikhain” i.e. Hazrat Abu Bakr (R.U.) and Hazrat Umer (R.U.) were the most “Afzal” among Suhaba. While Shias are of the view that the most “Musharaf” after the holy Prophet (pbuh) were Ahlul-Bait (A.S) viz Hazrat Ali (A.S), Hazrat Fatima (S.A.), Hazrat Hassan (A.S.) and Hazrat Hussain (A.S.). Many books have been written on Fazilat and attribution thereof by the scholars of both sects with different views. Many others among both have classified “Sharaf” and “Fazl”, with diverse views as regards attribution of either of the two or both in case of Ahlul-Bait. Generally “Sharaf” has been regarded as “gift” and Fazl as “endeavourous achievement”.
2.     Suni Muslims largely hold the view that Hazrat Ali (A.S.) had accepted the Baiat of Shakhain (R.U.), while Shias deny it.  Many discourses between and among Suni and Shia researchers and expert Muhadiseen reveal that Shaikhain (R.U.), had not insisted for Baiat of Hazrat Ali (A.S.) except that of an initial attempt.
3.    There is an ijma among renowned Shia scholars that in spite of difference over the right of Khilafat and also in a few administrative issues, Hazrat Ali (A.S.) had fully co-operated with the Shaikhain (R.U.) in the implementation of Quran and Sunnah. Besides that, on certain occasions he had given opinion, which was different to their stand, but mostly such verdicts/opinions were accepted by them and adopted.
4.    On ‘FADAK’ there continued to be big controversy for long among followers on both sides; though a part of that was returned to the descendents by Hazrat Umar Bin Abdul Aziz (R.A.) which subsequently proved short lived.
5.    When Hazrat Ali (A.S.) accepted offer of Khilafat after Hazrat Usman (R.U.), he in a sermon while addressing to a grand gathering with large number of Suhaba at “Rahba” reminded of the Hadees, the holy Prophet (pbuh) had narrated at Gadeer, to which large number of the concerned Suhaba in the gathering gave confirmation. The Hadees is well known in the Muslim World, but largely not interpreted in the meaning of favour to the right of Khilafat of Hazrat Ali (A.S,) by the majority of Suni Muslims. Shia researchers hold that a good number of Suhaba did not favour the evident meaning with response because of sociological implications, while a section misinterpreted the meaning. But a small number boldly supported the right to Khilafat of Hazrat Ali (A.S.) from the very beginning.
Note:
i.          The parameters of poor response, when put to multi dimensional analysis, depict sociological implications rooted in the society of that era, which need not to be made a scale of application for every “Zaman-wa-Makan” (all ages or regions) in the course of working for higher values of social order, concerned to the cause of Islam and Muslims in general. Again such a situation can not by logic and reason be made a scale for disqualification or measuring magnitude of one’s worth.

ii.      The event of ‘Rahbah’ had been recorded by Zaid Bin Waleed jehni narrated by many Suhaba.
The faint reference here does not intend to open the debate of arguments and counter arguments that does not yield fruit. But the said event unfolds the sense and essence of difference between acceptance and co-operation. The situations of taking Baiat and giving hand for Baiat are different. Compulsion was not an instrument of Islamic Khilafat in principle. The historical evidences are overlapped; useless to discuss in masses, rather harmful. Shia researchers claim to have proved that the group of companions/Shias of Hazrat Ali (A.S.) was compelled to accept Baiat. If one peeps through the window of history from out side, it could be felt to have happened that the small group of Shiaan-e-Ali (Ashab) along with Bano Hashim first hesitated/objected, later abidedby or some of them stayed aloof, keeping the best interest of Islam and Ummah in view, in that very sensitive situation, however difference on Khilafat issue remained and was carried on.

    The multi dimensional study of such complex situations, conducted by sociologists, on the basis of human logic, ideological factors and sociological components (related to the sample society) could generally be classified in three magnitudes:-
1.    State of active participation or passive response.
2.    State of conditional co-operation or hesitation.
3.    State of Rebellion or agitation.
Some times assessment might fit between the two consecutive states.
    For a realistic and reasonable sociologist, it becomes very difficult to draw a hard/absolute line between the three, however in the situation under question; it would not be difficult to assume that the third state did not exist.
6. One thousand four hundred and twenty years have passed, since the event had happened and the Ummah has suffered a lot all along, in controversy. The history is recorded, the events speak and the silences express; even if globally the issue is proved far or against, no purpose of Ummah shall be solved in the contemporary World, except otherwise that the Ummah unites on fundamentals and fights the enemy together. Muslims should not keep them selves engaged in controversial issue of “Khilafat”.
Massive provocation pushed into whimsically and multi dimensional exploration pulled out intellectually are two different attitudes. “TAHQEEQ” and “KURAID” are two different instruments. Hark! Don’t cry out!

 Ordination of difference and conflict:-
Shaikhain (R.U.) were not Malooks. They did not let the state exchequer (Bait-ul-Mal) to be utilized for personal gains. They proved to be good administrators of great power, with simple living. It needs also to be kept in view that had Hazrat Ali (A.S.) been provided chance at that appropriate time, he could have been far more successful in comparison to the time of his Khilafat, when several damages had already occurred, mainly because of Marwan’s misconduct and agitation of Ummayids. One can imagine about the political and administrative capability of Hazrat Ali (A.S.) while going through the code of good governance, wrote to Malik Ashtar (see Nahjul Balagah) which has been termed as “Encyclopaedia for Islamic government” by many renowned Muslim and non Muslim intellectuals, like Dr. Taha Hussain (Egypt) and Dr. Karlayl.

Certain Suni circles/schools of thought measure the Khilafat of Shaikhan (R.U.) with Malookiyat of Muawiyeh Bin Abu Sufiyan with the same stick. This is sentimental approach and not wise and realistic.
Hazrat Fatimah Zahra (S.A.) “Khatoon-e-Janat” was dearest to the holy Prophet (pbuh), but he said, “Even if Fatima commits an act of stealing, her hand shall be cut off!”……..there are no double standards in Islam. Punishment (Hadd) was executed on Ashab as well. If a double standard ill conduct was tried to be saved by the instrument of a Hadith; then either that particular Hadith would have been carved out (which could be known on thorough screening) or should it be proved by Quran and Sunnah that a double standard character/hypocritic way of life is allowed in Islam? Some surface viewers have gone a step forward in terming/accepting Yazid as Khalifatul Muslimeen and Imam Hussain (A.S.) as a rebel against Khilafat-e-Islami, about whom the holy Prophet (pbuh) had said, ”Hussain is from me and I am from Hussain” (Muslim, Tirmizi).

For assessment about an event or analysis of a crisis, sociological factors and political situation of the concerned period are the parameters of great importance. Surface tidings do not contribute to the Ocean to ocean currents. Those were very hard days/horrible decades; mile stones of Nizam-e-Khilafat were smashed. Emperorship was established. Statesmanship was turned into mockery. The agreement drawn with Imam Hassan (A.S.), which guaranteed government according to Quran and Sunnah, was torn in public and trampled under feet. Ruffians were given authority. Islamic social character was damaged. Far forty years Ali and All Ali (R.A.) were abused on government platforms and Friday Khutbas, mostly under pressure, when Hazrat Umer bin Abdul Aziz (R.A.) stopped that practice. Those who resisted to the said abusing were tortured. A number of Ashab-e-Rasool (R.A.) and Tabieen like Hazrat Adi bin Hatam (R.A.) and Mathem-e-Tammar were killed and many others torcherd for praising Ali (A.S.). The rulers who came after short life span of Hazrat Umer Bin Abdul Aziz (R.A.) in power, also banned praising Hazrat Ali (A.S.), Imam Abu Hanifa (R.A.) could not also praise Hazrat Ali (A.S.), in public (more so in his early period) when he required to refer to Hazrat Ali (A.S.) be used to say, “qala-sh-Shaikh.” (said the learned man). During the middle of his life tenure he fully made avail of the opportunity, the time had provided for him. He screened thousands of Hadees and compiled Fiqh. It has been the policy of tyrant/hypocritical rulers in their so called statesmanship, to behave differently, tightly with some and dilutely with others; in order to create a multi layered situation for divide and rule. On the whole other wise God’s rule and humanity cult does not suit them. In his elderly days Imam Sahib praised the rise (Qiyam) of Hazrat Zaid bin Ali (R.A.) and criticized the policies of Hasham, the Umayid tyrant ruler.

The sociological parameters of “Jaml” and “Safeen” are different. ‘Jaml’ was an out come of sentiments, misconceptions, misinterpretations, provocations and misunderstandings. The unfortunate part of the battle of ‘Safeen’ is that a large part of Suni Muslims did and still do remain in a fix and hesitate to take a definite and decisive side; the indecision that has been prevailing, has paralysed most of the endeavourous and revolutionary movements in Ummah, from post Khilafat period till date, thus proved failure at many fronts. If Karbala would not have been there as “check to think” turning point; the concept of “Islamic state” would perhaps have changed the course of thinking. The double standard adopted towards understanding “Safeen” has damaged the spirit and essence of Islamic social character. Reformative movements have mostly brought out vast blood shed and achieved no purpose. The revolutionary movements have mostly ended in failure. Palestine, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Chechania, Iraq, Pakistan….every where crisis. The Ummah lacks Imamat; no centralized leadership.

Imamat has two aspects, one personality aspect and the other quality aspect. Muslims even today lay all the emphasis upon discussion about personalities; ignoring the importance of formulating the qualities and conditions, responsible for leadership on the basis of Quran, Sunat and profiles of Seerah. Muslims must come close to constitute guide lines for an Islamic revolution. They should frame bottom line for constitution of an Islamic government together, in the contemporary World today.

III     Scientific approach to fight hegemony of west and emerge as integrated Bloc:-
The physical location of the Muslim World stretching from North Africa to East Europe, all across South and Central Asia and parts of far East has remained for centuries, the cradle of the greatest of civilizations, abode for great Prophets and a laboratory for research and scholarship.
Having geographically a great importance, the discovery of oil and gas assigned new meanings to politics, friendship, values, ethics, war and peace. As such, if Muslim World was consolidated on the footing of Islamic values and brotherhood, it would have definitely been in possession of the power and vision, not to allow any body dictate terms and define the truths of humanity, ethics and freedom.

Unfortunately, the downfall of Ottoman caliphate due to internal hatred among various sects of Muslims, almost all across the Muslim lands, led the Western colonial powers and enemies of Islam to disintegrate and destabilize the Ummah; thereby fulfilling their malicious designs, making the historians record the end of Ottoman caliphate. The event generated chaos, confusion and sense of insecurity and fear all across the Muslim World.

The segregation and disintegration of Ummah began with the breath taking slogans of Nation and Nationhood. A wave of Nationalism which was once used by the Europeans against the tyranny of Church, among their own nations, now swept the Muslim World and was portrayed by the colonial players for Arabs, as a token of liberty from Non-Arab (firstly ottoman subsequently others) control and preservation of their Arab superiority over Non-Arabs.

The aftermath of Second World War was seen as the occupation of Muslim lands by the colonialists and the resistance movements against such occupations were not free from nationalistic ideals. If and when any Islamic movement emerged, was combated by national sentiments.

Amidst this chaos and confusion, one would blame another. Some scholars advocated secularism as a solution. Islam in their view was having no dynamics to respond to newly emerged challenges. In the course of time, the success of industrial revolution and renaissance in Europe put the Muslim World on receiving end. But in later part of 20th century, many scholars studying the reasons of decline came of with the concrete vision and formulae for reconstitution and restructuring of Ummah. Amongst them, Imam Hassan Al-Bana, Syed Qutub, Imam Musa Sadr, Syed Jamalu-ud-din Afgani, Allama Moudodi, Allama Iqbal, Imam Khomeini and Ayatulla, Baqir-us-Sadr took the lead and provided guidance for returning the Ummah back to the state of its glory and integrity.

In the light of their thoughts, it is useful to discuss some of the most important factors, which if taken as a bottom line, hope shall be generated for the consolidation of Ummah in near future.

Concrete principles are available for unity among various schools of Islamic thought and jurisprudence. On social and individual levels, they can provide guidelines on the basis of fundamental principles of Tawheed (Belief in only creator-Allah), Risalat-wa-Khatmi Nabw-wat ,(Belief in Prophet Hood and seal of Prophet Hood), Aakhirat (Belief in hereafter the day of resurrection), Quran and Sunnah (the tradition of Prophet Mohammad ‘saw).

There is need and scope for Mufasireen (commentators of Quran) and Muhadiseen (traditionalists) to sit together, where an analysis of the Prophet’s (SAW) traditions would be taken up and a multidimentional discourse could be arranged, in order to arrive at an agreement upon Sunnah guide lines, which could become a bottom line and provide parameters for framing constitution for an Islamic State.

In addition to the harmonized prime level of basic principles, secondary differences could be included and introduced as “social bylaws” and “personnel laws”, among the Muslims as a whole, and for the related schools of thought in a particular country.
Making the idea elaborative, let us propose the set of laws (constitution) in two parts:

1.    Constant factors:
These shall be comprised of two sets,
(A)    Articles of the constitution based on bottom line viz           (i) Fundamental beliefs and principles, (ii) Basic rights, guarantees and responsibilities.
(B)    Personnel laws, related to Fiqh (adopted by individual family).
[Main stream fiqhs among Muslims being four among Sunis viz Hanafia, Malikia, Shafiea, Hambalia (inclusive of Ahli Hadees pattern of fiqh application) and one vastly introduced among Shias viz Imamia (Jafferia).

2.    Variable factors:
Pattern and procedures of running the government, in reference to (i) nature of society (ii) cultural dimensions of the communities/community and country (iii) contemporary relations and issues (concerned to ZAMAN-WA-MAKAN).  This set of bylaws may be termed as “social bylaws”.

Now let us take a country, where Suni Muslims are in absolute majority say 90% or more, there the variable factors (social bylaws) could be introduced on the pattern of “Shaikhain” (R.U.) and the related experiences on that profile. Here reference to Shaheed Ayatullah Baqirus-Sadar of Iraq (R.A.) great mujtahid/writer of many Islamic books on basic Islamic issues like, Islamic Bank, Iqtisaduna, Falsafatuna etc) would be exemplary who had said about Egypt, “If they frame an Islamic Government there with a guarantee for basic principles and personnel (fiqh) laws, on the pattern of Hazrat Abu Bakr (R.A.) and Hazrat Umer (R.A.) we shall fully co-operate”. Similar instance will be followed in a country, where Shia Muslims are in absolute majority, in case of “variable factors”.

But such practice cannot practically be held responsive and effective in such countries/societies, where various sects are, more or less in good numbers, living in a composite society. There keeping the “constant factors” in tact, let various such schools, frame a set of ‘social Bylaws’ together (based on bottom line) through a constituting forum of ullamas and experts (from concerned constituent sects) by the instrument of “Ijtihad”.

Again, wherever it could be necessary among Ulema to enter into scholarly discussions and dialogue with an intention of constituting  bylaws or reform, the Quranic verdict should be adopted as real measure, specifying Hikmah (reasonable approach), Mouiza-e-Hassana (proper discourse) and Jidal-e-Ahsan (beautiful way of argumentation). In a country, where (absolute) majority adheres to a particular school of thought (as cited above under the definition of constitution), personnel laws in favour of minority school ought to be guaranteed, wherever the differences arise. (It is evident after going through the Fiqh of five connectively prevailing schools that about 50 to 70% umoomi Masail are similar or closely resembling between two or more schools). Non-Muslim minorities living in a Muslim state should be, as guaranteed in Islam, provided with religious freedom; however necessary laws, for safe guarding the basic human values need to be framed/implemented.

Islam provides a rational and logical manifesto for universal brother hood, global peace and security. Islam stands for providing solutions to any problem facing the mankind, but one has to have scholarly zeal to come up with a solution in the light of Quran and Sunnah, through Ijtihad.

It was during the time of the Holy prophet (SAW) that the motives for deriving the verdicts from Quran and Sunnah were encouraged. During the ‘Khilafat period’ many problems were solved by Ijtihad; the practice later on laid the foundation of four schools of Ijtihad viz Hanfi, Malki, Shafi and Hambli in ahli-Sunnah.
Among Shia Muslims, “Imamia” is the well organized and foremost introduced school of Ijtihad. It is well equipped to take any problem and come up with a solution, in the light of Quran and Sunnah. It is high time for Ulema/scholars among Suni Muslims to rearrange the doors for Ijtihad in systematized manner. Such that there must be a consensus upon a global body which could (centrally) be assigned the job for execution of the Fatwa (Decree), so as to check any division and dissent across the nations; otherwise a free hand is provided to the exploiters and enemies of Islam to fan any controversial decree when issued from different learning centres around the World. Be it from Alazhar, Madina, Deoband, Bareli, Malysia, Pakistan or any other place.

A global centre of Ijtihad is an urgent need of Ummah. There is every scope for coming closer among renowned Mujtahideen/Muftis of Suni School as the methodology of Ijtihad/Istimbat has resemblance and co-ordination. Even among Ahli-Hadees commonly a definite set of Ahkam-e-Fiqh is brought into practice as every body cannot derive Hukm (directly) from Quran and Hadees, especially in the present situation when new issues impart minute dimension. Some times a group of authorities on Tafaquh/Ijtihad deems fit to solve a complex issue, by shifting to adopt the verdict of another Imam, amongst the four schools. About three decades before a board of learned Mufties, in Jamiat-ul-Azhar (Egypt) had executed “Nikah Bil-Wakalat instead of “Bil-Asalat” which was prevailing there, when the situation had begun to go out of control as a result of co-education.

As regards socio-political issues of international magnitude, areas of understanding in fundamental beliefs, constant features of Islamic culture and morality, Dawah and defence of basic tenets and heritage, a co-ordination between Suni and Shia global centres of Ijtihad shall pave the way for integration of Ummah and global Islamic Imamat.
    There is no denying the fact that countless exercises of Muslim rulers to please Americans and British turned always futile. When they desired made Muslims (mostly) jockey as per their will and wish. One time favoured Jihad and the next day branded a resistance movement or demand of rights or freedom from occupation as what West loves to call as “Islamic terrorism”.  It is no doubt or truth in it self to differentiate between “Jihad” and terrorism”, whatever suits Uncle Sam and his allies, names are coined accordingly.

When these imperialist powers want to remove any hurdle, e.g. a nation or a religion from the way of their aim and interest, they frame a law, take international bodies for a ride and attack them in the guise of that law.
Today by will or fear, the majority of Muslim rulers act in accordance with the wishes of America; while Britain supports and follows the master in a hope to share the bounties by looting the Muslim societies. Iran, where an Islamic government was established following 1979 Islamic revolution figures first in America hit list. Imam Khomeini, the leader of the revolution had labelled America as real centre of Axis of evil. The problem with them is that they don’t want to see Iran as a country following Islam. Some regimes which are in power in a few Muslim countries neither establish Islamic governments in their countries nor do they want to see Iran, emerging a strong Islamic state. If they do so, the export of Islamic revolution shall develop an impact for constituting Islamic governments in those countries, which means an end to monarchy.

Saudi Arabia, by virtue of being custodian of Haramain has very important position in the Islamic World and a centrally located geographical location. Establishment of an Islamic government through democratic means in that country could send signals of change in the Islamic World. In case the present Saudi rulers change their attitude, the people of that country, in general, would preferably elect them as their representatives in the new set up.
The annual global grand gathering of “Hajj” would prove to be the means of mutual understanding, sharing of knowledge and technology; an opportunity to strengthen commercial ties among business people from across Muslim lands, thereby providing chance and encouragement for Muslim investors for joint ventures. The re-orientation of arrangements among Muslim countries and re-defining the magnitude of co-operation by free travel and people to people contact would reinforce the gulf belt Muslim countries, as a strong established block to strengthen the necessity of close economic co-operation with China and India, the strongly growing economies of future. The emphasis would be laid upon sharing the scientific know how, particularly in health care, water management, agriculture productivity and information technology. The monopoly of possessing nuclear energy would come to an end; in real sense the energy would be utilized for welfare and development.
The alternative option for the Islamic World other wise, in absence of zeal and sense of co-operation as Ummah, is to compromise with west in every thing (rational cum material areas) or to live in illusion as down trodden and backward.

So, it is high time to organize a strong power bloc in East, so as to emerge and get established as an integrated Ummah and thus the American hegemony will be fought back.  Let us come out of prejudice and not be befooled by enemies of Islam. Let us understand our role and play it, as it is urgently needed for the “Mustazafeen” of east and west. Unite we stand, divide we fall. No suspicion, No fear! No power on earth can crush us once we start taking concrete steps towards integration, towards Imamat of the World.
 (۝ ۝ ۝)