The
Results of Deviation from the Prophetic Model
We have already discussed two
general issues, viz., the displacement of the Qur’anic and Prophetic term of Ihsan by a term of unknown origin, tasawwuf; and the Qur’anic and Prophetic
methodology of attaining Ihsan. The discussion will now move on to explore the consequences of
the deviation from the methodology of the Qur’an and Sunnah. I will divide this discussion
into two parts, viz., indifference to the Qur’an and abandonment of Jihad.
1. Indifference to the Qur’an
The most important point to note in
this regard is the fact that departure from the authentic Islamic terminology
and methodology in relation to Ihsan gave rise to an attitude of apathy and
indifference towards the Qur’an in Muslim thought and society. Soon after the
earliest period of Islamic history, we notice that the Qur’an was gradually removed
from its central place as being the axis and means of genuine dhikr (remembrance and reminder) of Allah (SWT). In
place of the Qur’anic ayaat, novel formulae and innovative incantations became accepted as
means of dhikr among the masses. The basic reason for the displacement of the
Qur’an from its central place was a natural and logical process of historical
development, as described in my paper “Qur’an and Jihad.” In addition, there were also
secondary factors that further contributed to this attitude of indifference
towards the Qur’an, as described below.
In the earliest stage of Islamic
history, the personality of a Muslim was shaped by two pivotal factors: the
Qur’an and Jihad. The Qur’an was the means to bring about the internal revolution
within the believer and to give birth to a living and vibrant faith — a faith
that would reach the level of certainty. The external manifestation of this internal
revolution was the struggle against the forces of tyranny, corruption, and
ignorance in human society — forces symbolized by idolatry in the pagan
society. However, when Islam passed through the phase of being an oppressed
minority religion to the dominant ruling force, it left the phase of mission
and movement and entered the phase of empire and government. This entry into
the phase of empire brought with it certain natural, logical, and inevitable
results. Indeed, the onset of these results was as inevitable as the onset of
old age after youth. During the phase of state and empire, the real concern and
emphasis began to be placed on law instead of faith. Consequently, the legal
dimension of Islamic teachings, which deals with the issues of government and
state, became the primary focus of religious scholars in this period.
Slowly but surely, the entire focus
shifted from faith to jurisprudence, from the esoteric dimension of Islam to
its exoteric dimension. The Qur’an itself could not remain immune from the
shift in focus that was taking place in society at large. Since the Qur’an is
primarily a Book of Guidance, the amount of legal directives that it contains
is relatively small in comparison to its discussion regarding the verity and
importance of the spiritual realities. Since the attention was now focused on
law, the Qur’an ceased to be the central focus of intellectual concerns for the
legal scholars of Islam. Instead, the fields of Hadith and Fiqh became their primary concern. Even
among the ahadith, the focus was on those traditions that had juristic
implications. It is important to keep this point in mind so as not to develop a
negative attitude towards our predecessors. This shift in emphasis was not due
to any ill-will on their part; instead, it was the inevitable and natural
outcome of the concrete historical circumstances in which they lived.
In addition to the emergence of
state and empire, there were other contributing factors responsible for pushing
the Qur’an into the background of Muslim consciousness. The onset of state and
empire brought with it feudalism, and the resultant social stratification of Muslim
society. This was a radical departure from the Prophetic community in Madinah
and the Islamic community that existed during the reign of the four Rightly
Guided Caliphs (RAA). With the social stratification of society, the
royal-feudal elite consciously attempted to keep the teachings of the Qur’an
hidden from the masses. They did so because it is difficult to study the Qur’an
even casually and not be struck by the intensity and bluntness with which it
condemns the unjust accumulation of wealth and its ostentatious display, and of
withholding what is due to the poor. These egalitarian teachings of the Qur’an
are revolutionary indeed, and the interests of the elite necessitated that such
teachings be kept concealed from the masses. Prof. Yusuf Salim Chishti has
written an excellent essay regarding the various reasons why the Muslims became
distant and detached from the Qur’an.
It has been mentioned that an
innovation in religion inevitably moves into the vacuum created by the removal
of an authentic Prophetic practice. In other words, a bid‘ah replaces a sunnah. By extension it can be stated
that whenever something genuine is removed, something counterfeit will take its
place. When the Qur’an no longer remained the primary focus regarding the dhikr (remembrance and reminder of
Allah), novel incantations and formulae were adopted to take its place. The leading
contemporary Sufi teachers themselves acknowledge the fact that many of the
incantations and formulae that have become common in Sufi circles during the course of
history have no basis in the Prophetic tradition. An argument is put forth that
there is nothing wrong with these novelties because their emergence is akin to
the emergence of new legal opinions due to ijtihad. But this argument is
transparently spurious because ijtihad can only be done when a new
situation emerges that was not present in the days of the Prophet (SAW) and a
legal verdict has to be drawn pertaining to that situation. The question is
what novel situation has emerged that calls for the introduction of these new
incantations or novel formulae into Islamic devotional practice? The declared
goal of these techniques is to achieve self-purification and spiritual enlightenment,
and this was also one of the goals before the earliest community of Muslims. It
is obvious that the instruments and practices that were used by the Companions
(RAA) under the guidance of the Prophet (SAW) to achieve this goal were quite
different from the instruments and practices that became popular among latter
day Sufis.
The fact that the goal is the same
in both settings but the instruments and practices used are different means
that something genuine has been removed and an innovation has been introduced
into the Prophetic religion.
The second point to note regarding
the displacement of the Qur’an by novel incantations and formulae for the
purpose of dhikr is the following: The volume and intensity of the novelties
inevitably increased. It is obvious that the impact of the Divine Word on the
human spirit cannot be matched by anything conceived by a human being — no matter
how enlightened that human being may be. From a qualitative point of view,
there is no comparison whatsoever between the majesty and grandeur of the
Revealed Word and the incantations and formulae adopted by the Sufis.
When the Qur’an was abandoned in
favor of these practices for the purpose of purifying the self and enlightening
the spirit, the only way to make up for the difference in quality was through increased
emphasis on quantity. Consequently, extremely arduous and lengthy courses began
to be prescribed in tasawwuf.
This created a vicious circle: The
Qur’an was removed from the center of spiritual concern due to certain
inevitabilities of the historical trajectory, and new techniques were adopted
to fill the vacuum in order to quench the spiritual thirst. Due to the
relatively low level of quality and impact of these new practices, emphasis had
to be placed on quantity and, as a result, less time and energy was available
for the Qur’an.
The most dangerous outcome of
removing the Qur’an from the center of the spiritual quest is the fact that the
Muslims became far removed from the philosophical and intellectual teachings of
the Qur’an. It is obvious that the Qur’an is not merely a Book of Remembrance
and Reminder, it also provides philosophical and intellectual guidance to those
who can appreciate these dimensions of the Divine Word. Just as this Book has
the capacity to quench the spiritual thirst of the soul, it also has the
capacity to satisfy the philosophical quest of the mind. Being the Final
Revelation to humanity, this Book addresses the human need for guidance at all
levels of intellect, and will continue to play that role for all times to come.
Once the intellectual and philosophical teachings of the Qur’an were no longer
apprehended and appreciated, Greek philosophy — especially its neo-Platonic
variant — moved into the vacuum and put its imprint on Muslim thought. The
entire legacy of classical and medieval Islamic thought shows obvious influence
of Greek philosophy. When as great a thinker as Shah Waliullah could not avoid
the influence of Platonic thought, what can one say about lesser minds? Similarly,
ethical theories among the Muslims were greatly influenced by Platonic and
Aristotelian ideals.
When foreign ideas filled the
intellectual and philosophical vacuum that was created by neglecting the
Qur’anic teachings, the gulf between the Muslims and the Qur’an widened
further. This gulf should not be understood in theological terms. The Muslims
continued to believe in the Qur’an as being the Final Revelation of Allah
(SWT), they continued to recite it faithfully, and it continued to be the
central axis of their liturgical practices. The gulf between the Muslims and
Qur’an concerns the intellectual and the spiritual quest of the human being.
During each epoch, the religious
mind is confronted with new challenges and questions that emerge as the result
of scientific and/or sociological development — and these challenges and
questions need to be addressed adequately. After the early Muslim community,
the role of the Qur’an in this particular capacity gradually diminished; in
other words, the Qur’an ceased to be a source of inspiration in relation to the
new challenges posed by the march of history. By the end of the classical age
of Islam, therefore, the relationship of the Qur’an to the intellectual and
spiritual pursuits of Muslim society was almost completely severed. The place
of the Qur’an in this regard was taken by books of incantations, sermons, and
the wisdom sayings of individual pious men. There is no doubt that some of
these books are masterpieces of literature, poetry, and oratory, etc. Upon
close inspection, however, it becomes clear that in terms of substance and
essence they leave a great deal to be desired. Iqbal has described this state
of affairs in the following couplets:
You complain and grumble about the
vagaries of your fate,
How low you have sunk, after
abandoning the Qur’an.
As scattered dew, you lie abject in
the dust,
Even though you have the Living
Book in your grip!
And again:
The Sufi in his garb of coarse wool,
Gets intoxicated by listening to
mystic songs.
His heart is inflamed by the fervor
of Iraqi’s poetry,
But the Qur’an does not find any
place in his circle.
The preacher, with his anecdotes
and legends,
Has grand speech but little truth
to offer.
On his lips are quotations from
unreliable narrators,
Like Khateeb and Dailami. He
delights in traditions,
That are weak, rare, or insecure.
In the above verses, Iqbal has
lamented that both the mystic and the preacher ignore the Qur’an. The Sufis enjoy mystical poetry but are alienated
from the Divine Word. Instead of the Qur’an, the sermonizers preach apocryphal
stories of the great saints of old, and quote fanciful sayings attributed to
the Prophet (SAW) that are of dubious historical authenticity.
In short, the first step that
removed the Qur’an from being the central axis of dhikr, in direct violation of the
Prophetic practice, produced results in later history that are all too obvious.
There are numerous people who are engaged in dhikr today, but their focus has been
totally removed from not only the Qur’an but from other directives of the
Prophet (SAW) as well.
Consequently, that which passes for
dhikr
today
has no basis whatsoever either in the teachings of the Qur’an or in the
practice of the Prophet (SAW) — and this is a fact that even some of the
contemporary Sufis acknowledge. In this regard, Maulana Allah Yar Chakralwi, the
spiritual guide of Maulana Muhammad Akram Awan, has acknowledged in his book,
titled Dalail Al-Salook, that the modern Sufi practices cannot be traced back to
the Prophetic Sunnah. He, however, argues that these practices are permissible because
they have been adopted as a result of ijtihad — but, as I have already
mentioned, these practices are more like innovations than authentic ijtihad.
When listing the various means to
achieve dhikr, or remembrance of Allah (SWT), I purposely did not mention one
specific form. There actually are four means of dhikr but I mentioned only three. It
would be appropriate to mention the fourth one at this point. As a means of dhikr, the Qur’an refers to itself as
“The Reminder,” then there is Salah (prayer) which is the most
comprehensive and all-encompassing means of dhikr, and then there are the
supplications which the Prophet (SAW) taught the believers. In addition to
these three means of dhikr, a fourth one consists of a special something that is assigned to
a particular person for specific reasons. This, in reality, is a prescription
for treating a disease of the nafs. Note that the nafs of each person has its own characteristic
weaknesses and maladies.
For example, some individuals are
overwhelmed by their carnal desires whereas others are preoccupied with a
craving for wealth. Some individuals desire recognition and fame while others
crave power and authority. A Sufi who is also an expert in human
psychology is able to study the personality of the person and pinpoint the
exact weakness. After having diagnosed the weakness, the expert can assign a
specific form of dhikr to that person in order to control and discipline the nafs. It is obvious that this specific
prescription is only that, a prescription for a specific individual. To take
this person specific prescription and generalize it for everybody is more dangerous
than taking a specific pharmaceutical prescription given to a certain patient and
then declaring it to be a panacea for everybody. The permanent and general status
can only belong to those methods, means, and invocations that have been taught by
the Prophet (SAW).
In this regard, it should be mentioned
that the Prophet (SAW) himself also prescribed certain invocations to certain individuals,
and they fall under this fourth category of dhikr.
2. Abandonment of Jihad
The second outcome of the departure
from the authentic Islamic terminology and methodology in relation to Ihsan is the following. The obligations
of da‘wah (calling people towards Islam), Iqamah Al-Deen (establishing Islam on the face of
the earth), and Jihad (or struggle) for the cause of Allah (SWT) became totally
irrelevant to the effort of disciplining the nafs.
The root cause of this was also
quite understandable. When Islam was in its initial historical stage, the struggle
to establish it in the face of overwhelming opposition was the primary
religious obligation of every Muslim. To spread the messages of Islam, to
maintain discipline in the face of provocation, and to engage in battle when
the situation so demands — all this was considered Jihad for the cause of Allah (SWT).
However, when the Islamic movement succeeded and Islam entered the phase of
state and empire, this comprehensive and all-inclusive definition of Jihad was replaced by a limited
conception of armed conflict.
Jihad was declared synonymous with qital or armed conflict, and even this
armed conflict was taken to mean the defense of the borders of the Muslim
empire and, if possible, to expand these borders. It is obvious that a limited
number of individuals were needed for any particular military campaign. If that
number became available, they would fulfill the obligation on behalf of
everyone else in society. Therefore, Jihad came to be understood as a
collective religious obligation (fard kifayah), instead of being a primary
individual obligation (fard ‘ain). This shift had already occurred even in the days of the Rightly
Guided Caliphs (RAA). It has always been my position that it is permissible to
engage in supererogatory acts of devotion in order to get nearer to Allah
(SWT), provided Islam is dominant. Indeed, this was the only means
available to most Muslims for the purpose of spiritual growth once Islam was
established as a state.
However, when the Rightly Guided
Caliphate ended and was replaced by a hereditary monarchy, the problem was
further complicated. Monarchy combined with feudalism gave birth to an
oppressive and tyrannical system. A number of early attempts to stop this
deviation failed. Afterwards, an ideological struggle was needed to bring back
the purity of Islam, but such a struggle did not materialize due to two practical
hurdles. The first factor was the opinion of many scholars that Muslims cannot
rebel against their ruler until and unless he explicitly orders them to break
the Shari‘ah. Short of that, rebellion against a Muslim ruler is forbidden
even if he himself is wicked or unjust.
Certain ahadith of the Prophet (SAW) also support
this position, and therefore this is the firm opinion of one school of thought.
In contrast, Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) has articulated a genuinely balanced and
authentically argued position that leaves open the possibility of rebelling
against an unjust Muslim ruler. However, the preconditions that he has set
forth which would make the rebellion permissible are so strict that it was practically
impossible to meet them in a feudal-monarchical setting.
Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) has argued
that rebellion (or khuruj) is permissible when significant material and human resources
have been gathered so that, in terms of worldly calculations, the success of
the rebellion can be deemed likely. In a time and place where the concepts of the
citizens’ rights, the right of assembly, the freedom of expression, and the
freedom of association did not exist, it was practically impossible to undertake
a struggle to replace the existing monarch. An ideological struggle against the
status quo could not be launched despite its permissibility in at least one
school of thought. The only way that was left open for the pious and the
courageous was to prohibit evil by raising their voice against it, and even
that was not always tolerated by the monarchy. Thus, these historical
circumstances were the second factor that forestalled the emergence of an
ideological challenge to the emergent monarchical-feudal order.
As a result of the two hurdles
mentioned above, the practical dimension of the Prophetic method for the
purification and disciplining of nafs — Jihad for the sake of Allah (SWT) —
became virtually untenable. It has already been mentioned that Jihad is an exceedingly important means
of countering the lower, libidinal instincts of the nafs — it requires the spending of
wealth, the loss of comfort and security, and overcoming the instinct of
self-preservation. During the monarchical period this important means of
self-purification became practically defunct.
An example from the world of nature
illustrates this point. When a tree is growing in its natural environment it
grows upwards, towards the sky. If a roof appears above the tree, however, it
will continue to grow but its direction will no longer be upwards. Instead, the
tree will bend and start growing sideways. Hereditary monarchy was that roof or
obstacle that had to be acknowledged and accommodated, willingly or unwillingly,
by the Muslims. This obstacle contorted the natural pattern of growth of the
inner impulses that urge the human being to search for the higher spiritual
realities. In other words, while the spiritual thirst and urge remained, the
Prophetic means of satisfying this quest — Jihad — was no longer possible. When the authentic
means were no longer possible, novel methods had to be invented in order to
pursue the same goal. The content and the character of these novel ways was
such that a situation developed in Muslim society where monasticism (or rahbaniyyah) appeared even though there are
clear Prophetic injunctions against such behavior. The Prophet (SAW) said:
“There is no monasticism in Islam, except Jihad for the sake of Allah (SWT).”
Despite this clear injunction, when
we look at the life histories of the Sufis we find many of them wandering in
the deserts and jungles for up to years at a time, as a matter of ascetic
retreat. We also find many of them leading a life of celibacy, once again in
clear violation of the Prophetic command to marry — the argument being that
spiritual enlightenment does not go hand in hand with the toils and travails of
family life.
In summary, the Qur’an and Jihad were the two most important realities
in terms of the spiritual and moral life of the Muslims during the first
century of Islam. The link between these two realities was the light of faith (Iman). The Qur’an produced Iman, and Iman led to a struggle for the cause of
Allah (SWT). When Islam moved from the phase of mission and movement to the
phase of state and empire, however, a significant shift took place as a result
of natural and organic processes.
On the one hand, the Qur’an ceased
to be the central axis of dhikr and novel incantations were adopted to fill the void thus
created. On the other hand, the practices of mission, struggling to establish
Islam, and Jihad for the sake of Allah (SWT) lost their significance as they
related to the process of purification of the nafs. These genuinely Prophetic
practices were replaced by extremely arduous and difficult exercises that are
not to be found in the Prophetic model.
To be continued....
