|
Reviving a Society:
From Individual to the Society or from the Society to the Individual?
Mazhar Khan Pathan
Introduction
The recent history of the Islamic ummah is punctuated with numerous
tragedies and afflictions. From the loss of lands like Palestine and
Kashmir, to the slaughter of Muslims in the Balkans, Muslims from Morocco
to Indonesia are painfully aware of the ummah's dire condition.
It is not surprising
that the question at the forefront of its mind is that of revival. How can
this ummah lift itself from it’s present condition to that described by
Allah (SwT) in the Qur'an as 'The best nation
brought forth from mankind'. How can a society influenced by
non-Islam revert to being an Islamic society, like that of Madinah?
An idea held without
questioning is that the revival of a society begins by reviving only the
individual. This will lead to the revival of his family, his neighbourhood
and then ultimately the whole society. It is maintained that change occurs
from the individual and grows from there on, until the whole of society is
revived.
Changes in society
Societies are dynamic and change from time to time. History has witnessed
many societal shifts. The European states changing from theocracies to
secular nation states. Russia's change from a feudal system to a communist
system and then from Communism to Capitalism. Turkey's
change from an Islamic state to a secular republic
On close inspection none
of the above changes occurred as noted above. Communism did not spread
gradually from a man to the rest of society by changing individuals.
Rather the idea of communism was held by a group of people who took
control of the state and changed society to match their ideas. When the
Bolsheviks took control they were neither a majority nor a reflection of
the majority view. The change from communism to democracy again did not
come from the bottom up, but rather top down with peristroyka and
glasnost.
Likewise, Europe did not
emerge from its dark ages by change taking place from person to person.
Those thinkers and philosophers who were 'enlightened' struggled against
the clergy to remove its influence on the levers of power. It was a good
many years later that society was at one with the idea of secularism.
Turkey's transition from
an Islamic state to a secular republic did not occur by the young Turks
changing each and every individual. Rather the colonial powers gave them
support to take power. By doing so they changed the laws and structures of
the State which brought the change of mindset amongst the people to
sustain its existence.
In short we are hard
pressed to find any examples in society which reflect the idea that
society changes from the bottom up, that is by changing the individuals
alone.
Prophet's Example
The greatest change that has taken place in society is that which took
place in Arabia. Muhammed (SAW) changed the tribal society of the Arabs to
an Islamic society, which became a global force. We find no proof here of
change occurring from person to person, until the whole society became
Muslim. Neither were people affected by pious conduct alone.
Muhammed, prior to
becoming a Prophet up to the age of forty was renowned for his pious
conduct. This in itself did not cause a single person to follow him. Once
the responsibilities of Prophethood fell on his shoulders, he gathered a
number of people around him who were convinced of the vision the Prophet
(SAW) brought.
The Prophet (SAW)
addressed the society without having convinced all his family and
relatives to follow him, Abu Talib being and example in point. The Prophet
(SAW) began in Makkah, but did not wait for the whole of Makkah to revive
before going to Madinah. He established Islam in Madinah, but the majority
of the inhabitants of Madinah were not Muslims. This included four large
communities of Jews (Bani Quraydha, Banu Nadhir, Banu Qaynuqa and the Jews
of Khayber). Thus there is no evidence to say that the Prophet (SAW)
changed society by merely changing individuals one by one.
The Qadr of Society
The flaw in the idea outlined, stems from the incorrect understanding of
society. The individual does not influence the society, but the society
influences the individual.
A
person follows the deen of his companions. [Hadith]
Those
who keep the company of a blacksmith will smell like him and those who
keep the company of a perfume seller will smell like him. [Hadith]
The influence on the
Muslim youth who live in a non-Islamic society is ample evidence of this.
Thus the influence a society exerts on the individual is far greater than
the influence an individual exerts on society.
This reveals the qadr
(nature) of society. It is assumed that society is merely a collection of
individuals. This clearly is not the case.
Merely having a group of people gathered does not make them a
society. Fifty thousand people at a football stadium do not make them a
society. That constitutes a crowd. However, fifty thousand people living
in a town does. This differs from a crowd because such a collection of
people interact and have relationships based on some common understanding.
These interactions are regulated by an authority, which is based on the
same common understanding. Whether it be secular, tribal or feudel.
Thus a society is a
group of people that are held together by certain common thoughts and
sentiments. A society is labelled western, if the western values bind its
people and are used as criteria for resolving societal issues. Likewise a
society is labelled tribal if the tribal values bind its people and is
used for resolving societal issues.
In Pakistan to give and
take a bribe is easily done. A person entering into such a society soon
learns to play by the 'rules'. However when a person comes out of this
society and enters into Britain or America, he soon loses this behaviour,
but acquires others. He may start to openly date a person from the
opposite sex.
A deeply religious
person coming from a Muslim country does little to affect the Western
society as a whole. Even though many people may be turning to Islam and
many mosques may open, it does little to detach society from its belief in
secular ideals. Even 'devout' Muslims will turn to secular politics,
acquire capitalist traits and call for the ideals of a secular society,
whilst still remaining a Muslim.
Changing Society.
If society cannot be changed by merely concentrating on individuals, then
how do societies change from one state to another? It was shown above that
people in a society are bound together by certain thoughts and ideas that
the government protects and enforces. If these thoughts can be challenged
and another system put in its place, which moulds the people around
different thoughts, society would change.
Looking at the life of
the Prophet (SAW), we find that his method was in harmony with the qadr of
society. Muhammed (SAW) gathered people around him for three years. He
would take them to the house of Arqam to given them deep culturing in
Islam. This established a group of like minded people with the same
objective. After a period of three years Allah (SwT) ordered the Prophet:
Proclaim
openly! And separate yourselves from the Mushrik. [Qur'an]
From here onwards the
Prophet (SAW) began to address the common ideas of that society which they
lived by, like the burying of the daughters, cheating in the market place,
and taking of riba, imitation of their forefathers and so on. He also
challenged the existing authoirty.
It is important to note
that the Prophet (SAW) challenged the ideas and not merely the practices.
Burying of daughters was not prevalent. Had it been so, there would have
been a dearth of women in Makkah. Clearly this was not the case, since
some men had ten wives as well as there being prostitutes in Makkah..
However, all the above ideas were commonly accepted, even if they were not
widely practised. It is this fact that made them worthy of being attacked.
The verse 'Perish
the hands of the Father of Flame! Perish he!" was an attack on
the authority of Abu Lahab's rule. Hands being a metaphor for rule.
In 12th year
of his Prophethood, he (SAW) sent Musab ibn Umayr (RA) to Madinah. He
managed to change the general ideas of the society towards Islam. Unlike
Makkah, they were not anti Islamic. The Madani society was not perfect,
nor the majority of its inhabitants Muslims, but it became suitable to
accepting an Islamic government. The Prophet (SAW) then sought the
physical help from 12 prominent people from the Aws and Khazraj to give
him the pledge of war. They thus facilitated him coming to Madinah to
assume power, even though there were people like Abdullah ibn Ubay who
detested this.
Thus by changing the
general thoughts of the society and taking power, the Prophet (SAW) was in
a position to effectively remould society according to the beliefs and
values of Islam. Within 10 years of its establishment, tens of millions of
people embraced Islam. This brought about the compelte change of a scoiety
from non-Islam to Islam.
Conclusion
Change in a society cannot come by addressing only individuals, since
society is not made up of just individuals. Society is made up of
individuals who are bound together by certain thoughts and ideas that are
established and promoted by the government.
Adopting incorrect ideas
will not bring a revival in society. Allah (SwT) says in the Qur'an:
Allah
does not change the situation of a people until they change what is within
themselves. [Qur'an]
The Islamic ummah will
not rise out of the quagmire that it has found itself in, until it
jettisons incorrect ideas and embraces the correct ideas.
About the Author:
Mazhar Khan Pathan is actively involved in the field of Islamic dawah
and has work published on various websites and international
publications.
The writer writes, fi sabeelillah and expects no payment for published
works. All he asks for that articles are published unedited. If you wish
to edit, then please submit an edited copy for his approval to this
email address.
E-Mail: mpathan@onetel.net.uk
|