Title: The Moral Position of the Muslim Community… Question: Why are Muslims in India (or in the world) more in extortions and other inhuman activities, even though Islam does not permit any such activities? Due to this today, Muslims or Islam, as a whole, is not view as a very good people or religion in the world. What is the solution for it? Danish Shaikh India Answer: It is indeed a great tragedy that those who were to become standards of morality have, themselves, lost all sense of morality; those, who were to give light to the world, are, themselves, wandering in the pit of night; those who were the bearers of the final guidance of the Merciful to the humankind, are, themselves, so easily lured by Satan into sin and transgression. Although a comprehensive study of the causes of the general moral degeneration of the Muslim community calls for an in depth analysis of the social, economic, political and psychological variables that effect the general moral standards of a people, yet in my response that follows, I shall try to give an overview of some of the socio-religious factors, which in my view have caused this tragic situation. Nevertheless, before mentioning these factors, I would first like you to appreciate the fact that when a person or a collectivity is oppressed to the extent that all paths to maintaining its existence, while adhering to the universal moral values are completely sealed (or when it perceives that these paths have been completely sealed), then it considers it justified to get its basic right of maintaining its existence, even if it requires resorting to any means - whether moral or immoral - which are available to it. To understand this point fully, take the example of a, generally, law-abiding citizen who has seen his children tortured and killed by another; who, like all civilized individuals, has tried knocking at the doors of the courts of law for justice; who, in his perception, has been refused justice because of his creed and background and who has to live the rest of his life with the glaring scenes of cruelty upon his children running through the back of his mind and the additional pain of being refused justice, by those who were custodians over it. Under these circumstances, if the individual has the opportunity to inflict the same kind of injury upon the cruel perpetrator or can arrange for such retaliation, then it would take much more than normal strength of character and sense of morality to refrain from resorting to illegal, immoral and uncivilized means of implementing 'his' justice upon an individual. The same holds true for a collectivity. If at anytime, the collectivity believes (or is made to believe) that it is being disallowed its rightful opportunities to progress and prosper and all the doors leading to progress and prosperity have been shut upon it, then maintaining moral and ethical standards is reduced to impractical ideals for the members of such a collectivity. Even though, in my opinion, an individual can, indeed, be faced with a 'no-option' situation, while a collectivity cannot be pushed into such a closed corner, yet, due to its poor and negatively bent leadership, it can very easily be lured into believing that all its misfortunes are, in fact, the result of another nation's oppressive policies about it. A positive and constructive leadership, even under these circumstances, does not allow a negative psychic to take hold of the individuals and directs all its efforts in finding paths of construction, progress and prosperity for it and leads and motivates its members to tread that path with commitment and resolve. One of the major causes for the general moral degeneration of the Muslims, in my opinion, is that their social and religious leaders have led them to believe - to the level of certainty - that they are subject to the oppression of the 'west', which has closed all doors for its progress, prosperity and even freedom to lead a life, which is in consonance with its values and beliefs. As a consequence, the concept of relative, rather than absolute, morality started making its roots among these Muslims. This concept was based upon the idea that Muslims are not bound to interact within the universally acknowledged moral principles with all individuals and collectivities. On the contrary, a Muslim should interact with others, in the same manner and on the same principles as these 'others' interact with Muslims [1] . As a further corollary of this idea another morally hazardous idea, which started developing among these Muslims was that they were not 'bound' even by any of their express contracts and agreements with these non-Muslim nations, as all these agreements were drafted, designed and forced upon the Muslims, by these non-Muslim oppressors [2] . After having been convinced about this idea, the 'street power', in these Muslim collectivities was first made to believe that due to the oppressive nature of the non-Muslim states, the Muslims were not 'bound' to follow any moral or ethical standards, while interacting with them. This deviation, subsequently, affected the standards of their mutual interaction as well as their interaction with their own rulers and administrators. The foregoing explanation provides a brief outline of the oppressed Muslim psychic, which is one of the major external contributors to the general deviations from moral standard among Muslims. In addition to these factors, certain incorrect philosophical interpretations of Islam, as a whole, have also significantly contributed to the stated effect. Some of these interpretations and their effects are briefly given below: 'Islam as a Law' Approach : The first among these incorrect interpretations is the presentation of Islam as a law. In this approach, Islam is presented as conformity with a set of laws or a code of life, considered to be Divine. This approach has all its stress on the explanation of what is allowed and what is disallowed in Islam. It requires Muslims to carry out what is 'obligatory' and to refrain from what is 'prohibited'. This approach would generally begin with the explanation of the 'obligatory' and the 'prohibited' for the individuals and end at explaining the same for the collectivity. This approach, even if unintentionally, generally ignores the infusion and the promotion of those values, which are even more basic than these laws, in fact, which provide the very bases of these laws. As a corollary, the basic and the universally acknowledged values, on which all Islamic laws are founded upon, take a backseat. As a result, the basic practical stress among the adherents of this approach is on following and implementation of laws, rather than on the adherence to universally acknowledged moral values. 'Islam as a Philosophy to Rule' Approach : As a step ahead of the previous approach, the second among these incorrect interpretations is the presentation of Islam as a 'philosophy to rule'. Under this interpretation, as in the first one, Islam is presented as a set of laws, with the addition of the idea that it is 'obligatory' upon the Muslims to implement these laws over the world. A Muslim, by this interpretation, must seek to implement these laws, first in the land of his residence and later in the rest of the world. This interpretation holds that without a rule, which implements the complete list of laws of the Shari`ah , a Muslim is 'guilty' of not practicing all the directives entailed in Islam (as Islam entails directives, which are to be implemented by the state - as for instance, the punishments). According to this interpretation, the target of every Muslim during the life of this world is to strive, by whatever means he can - to establish a rule, which implements the laws of the Shari`ah . As a corollary of this approach, gaining rule for a particular set of Muslims and disregarding the non-Muslim rules - and even those Muslim rules, which do not implement the laws of the Shari`ah , as interpreted by the proponents of this approach - is considered a Divine command. Furthermore, because the establishment of this rule is considered a Divine obligation, therefore, whatever measures and methods are adopted for this purpose are considered 'allowed' - irrespective of their moral and socio-moral implications - as they are perceived to be adopted for a Divinely ordained cause [3] . These are some of the important religious issues which has somewhat undermined the importance of basic morality and has, generally, resulted in careless attitude of the Muslims towards basic moral values like honesty, truthfulness, justice, compassion and the fulfillment of agreements and commitments. However, as stated earlier, a comprehensive analysis of the referred issue requires a much more detailed study of other economic, social, political educational and psychological factors that have directly or indirectly contributed to the situation. As far as the solution of this problem is concerned, in my opinion, three important variables in this respect are: Whoever targets the revival of the adherence to high moral values among the Muslims, must first realize the general psychic of oppression among the Muslims and its effects upon their adherence to moral values and then try to rebuild their psychic with a positive and constructive bent. Without the appreciation and realization of this psychic, the situation is not likely to be corrected; A comprehensive plan to instill the importance in which Islam holds moral values and the stress Islam places upon the adherence of these values under all circumstances, without any exception; A comprehensive plan to educate and train people on the complete and correct interpretation of Islam - in the light only of the Qur'an and the Sunnah - with a balanced stress on the moral values, which Islam promotes and the laws which it directs the Muslims to implement, if God bestows independent rule upon them. I hope this helps. Regards, Moiz Amjad September 14, 2001 [1] It should be noted that this idea is clearly against the express stipulations of the Qur'an. [2] This idea is also in clear contradiction of the express directives, relating to agreements, of the Qur'an. [3] As should be predictable from the foregoing explanation, in the eyes of some of the proponents of this approach, non-Muslims do NOT have a right to independent rule on earth and, therefore, adopting any measures to destabilize their rule, is considered allowed (sometimes even desirable).