More than a billion human beings on this planet are chronically hungry: every 24 hours some 40,000 die directly or indirectly from lack of food; a child starves to death every 2.5 seconds. In short, more people die every two years from hunger than were killed in the First and Second World Wars.

Yet, never before has the world produced more food per head of population. While there are places where huge numbers die because they have no crops or no money, there are other places (notably in the West) where the granaries are overflowing with all kinds of foods. While food is stockpiled in some areas, then dumped or wasted in huge quantities in order to maintain price levels, elsewhere, helpless mothers, starving and unable to produce milk, watch their babies die in their arms. Uneven distribution mocks the theoretical sufficiency of global food supply: there should be no world hunger problem but there is (UNO, 1989, p.3).

The ‘world food order’ is a scandal crying out for remedy. It arises within the context of the prevailing economic and political ideologies which are rooted in a crude laissez-faire mentality. According to this mentality, individuals are entitled to absolute ownership over whatever they have acquired lawfully, that is, they have the right to use, to transfer and even to destroy their property (Article 1 of the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1966) without being held legally accountable.

It is this mentality, entrenched in law, which prevents the right to food from becoming one of the binding principles of international human rights. Yet, without a right to food, all other human rights are of little value. Once starvation afflicts a people, the very human life for whose sake all human rights are proposed wastes (Alston, 1984, p.4).

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 provides that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family, including food…”. Since then, many international documents and most of other normative instruments aiming to secure the right to food of peoples have been agreed upon (Tomasevski, 1987, p.19; see also the 1974 Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition, and the 1986 Food Aid Convention). However, in spite of the enthusiasm and unanimity with which the right to food is endorsed, the amorality of the economic order encourages its constant, continual violation. Measures against world hunger are temporary palliatives in the form of ‘charity’ from governments politically embarrassed by crises (Alston, 1984, p.90).

The impotence of the present world order to eradicate hunger and starvation contrasts sharply with the Islamic world order which enshrines the right to food not only in its ethos but also in its positive laws. To begin with, the Qur’an teaches that all resources are put at the disposal of all human beings by God, the Sustainer. Human beings have no right of absolute ownership, but have right as just trustees (2.30). As God’s vicegerent (khalifah), man is enjoined to deal justly with everyone (not every Muslim) (5.8). To act with justice in the use and management of one’s resources requires the satisfaction of at least the subsistence needs of everyone in society: nothing is more closely connected with the concept of justice than “human rights” (Ahmad, 1991, p.15).

Once the close relationship between justice and human rights is recognized as a fundamental principle, it is a natural next step to base the right to food on the socio-economic teachings of Islam. The aim of the concept of trusteeship (khilafat) is to establish ‘global justice’ in the use of the earth’s natural resources. No discrimination is made between Muslims and non-Muslims, as humanity is a single creation of God, and all have equal right to sustenance from God’s bounty (ni’ma). If one group of the human brotherhood is unable to provide sufficient food to sustain life, for whatever reason, they have a right (haqq) to provision from the wealth of others (Ahmad, 1991, p.17).

The ‘right’ of the hungry is not merely a moral claim; it has a positive, specific counterpart in the corresponding legal obligation to satisfy that right. The authority for this legal obligation is the Qur’an itself whose precepts are binding upon all Muslims (Ahmad, 1991, p.15). The refusal to feed the hungry and to urge the feeding of the hungry is equated with a refusal of religion: Have you observed him who denies religion? That is he who rebuffs the orphan and urges not the feeding of the needy (107.1-3).

In other verses, (e.g. 2.29), the Qur’an specifies that resources be used equitably for the benefit of all mankind (see Chapra, 1992, p207). No people have the right to dump or waste the resources at their disposal in order to manipulate prices (Qur’an 2.205).

The concept of a right to food is explicitly embodied in the teaching and practice of the Prophet, upon him be peace. The civilization of Islam is dated to the Hijrah, the migration to Madina. One of the first measures instituted by the Prophet was to ‘spread peace and distribute food’ (Hamid, 1989, p.l56). He explained that poverty can lead to kufr (ingratitude and rejection of God), and emphasised the link between Muslim solidarity and the right to food: ‘He is not a (true) believer who eats his fill while his neighbour goes hungry’. In another hadith, duty to provide food encompasses animals as well as humans: ‘Whoever brings dead land to life, for him there is a reward in that, and whatever creature seeking food eats of it, shall be considered as charity from him.’ (For other ahadith which clarify the duty to feed and the accountability for failure in it, see Nadvi, 1969 and Ishaque, 1969). The importance of land cultivation in Islamic Law may be gauged from the right of the legitimate authorities to sequester land which is being left idle and apportion it to those who are willing and able to cultivate it: absolute ownership of land is not recognized by the Law.

The right to food is so important in Islamic practice that it is not denied to enemies even in time of siege and war. During the lifetime of the Prophet, upon him be peace, some of his companions blocked the supply of food to Makka, intending to maintain the blockade until Makka surrendered. However, when the hunger of the Quraish was reported to the Prophet he ordered the blockade to be lifted. Following that example, Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, sent Yazid ibn Abu Sufyan on a campaign with the specific instruction that he should not destroy the crops and livestock of the enemy. The same principle is seen in action when the Ottoman army, for example, besieged Vienna, and the city’s poor and sick came to its outskirts to get food from the besieging forces. (What a contrast with the Serbian and Croat militias who are at this time attacking and preventing relief supplies from reaching the Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina with the explicit intention of starving them to death.)

Islamic Law provides for each individual’s basic rights to life and food through zakah and usr, two compulsory annual levies on, respectively the general wealth and the crops and livestock of the better off. Zakah is fixed at one-fortieth and usr at one-tenth of disposable wealth. In the event of the state being unable to meet its commitment to the needy from this revenue, it may compel the rich to give more. The Prophet, upon him be peace, said: ‘God makes it an obligation for the rich of a country to provide for the needs of their poor. Authority must compel them when the resources from zakah are insufficient’. Ibn Hazm and other Muslim savants, on the basis of this hadith, declared that if a person dies of hunger the individual’s neighbourhood is responsible and must pay the bloodwit (diya) by way of atonement (Belkacem, 1979, p.144). (One is bound to reflect how near Somalia is to oil-rich Saudi Arabia.)

Refusal to pay the obligatory levies is equivalent to denying the rights of the needy and a reversion to the values of paganism. Abu Bakr was prepared to go to war in precisely this issue.

Sadaqat al-fitr, a charitable donation made either in money or in kind, at the end of the fasting month of Ramadan, is a further instance, in this case voluntary, of collectively meeting the sustenance needs of the poor.

There is a world of difference between the anthropocentric and egocentric philosophy which has taken such a firm root in the Western mind since the secularization of human rights in the 18th and 19th centuries, and the theocentric ethos of Islam. The latter sees the right to food as a duty, even a debt, owed by those who have a surplus to those who do not have the bare minimum. Further, Islam seeks to establish a social order which recognizes the essential community of all human beings. Without a feeling for that essential community, and a commitment to it in economic transactions, it is hard to see how solidarity can be realized even at a national, let alone an international level. Presenting human beings as objects of ‘charity’ cannot begin to address the problem-for, very soon, the rich become ‘fatigued’ by the demands made upon their compassion and their resources. For people to be dying of famine in a world of plenty, even of excess, is an intolerable scandal and shames us all (Bedjaoui, 1982, p.465). A new ‘world food order’ must be sought as a matter of urgency: if not, the threat of rumbling empty stomachs in Africa and Asia will disturb international peace in the post Cold War era rather more than the threat of nuclear war disturbed it during the Cold War.

References

• AHMAD, Z. (1991), Islam, Poverty and Income Distribution, The Islamic Foundation,Leicester
• ALSTON, P. (1984) ‘lnternational law and the human right to food’ in Tomasevski(ed.) 1984.
• BEDJAOUI, M. (1982) ‘Are the world’s food resources the common heritage of mankind?’,Indian Journal of International Law, 22, pp. 459-67, (Bedjaoui is a former president of the International Court of Justice.)
• BELKACEM, N,M.K. (1979) ‘The concept or social justice in Islam’, in GAUHAR (ed.) 1979, pp. 135-52.
• CHAPRA, M.U. (1992) Islam and the Economic Challenge, The Islamic Foundation, Leicester.
• FAO, 1985 The Hunger Project: Ending Hunger.
• GAUHAR, A. (ed) (1979) The Challenge of Islam, Islamic Council of Europe, London 1979.
• HAMID, A (1989) Islam: the Natural Way, IELS, London
• ISHAQUE, K.M. (1979) ‘Islamic laws ideals and principles’, in GAUHAR (ed.) 1979, pp. 155-75.
• NADVI, A.H.A. (1979) ‘Islam the most suitable religion for mankind’ in Gauhar (ed.) 1979, pp. 17-30.
• TOMASE VSKI, K. (ed) (1984) The Right to Food, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht. Extensive details and documents with regard to this right TOMASEVSKI, K(1987) The Right to Food. A Guide to International Law Documents. Martinus Nijboff, 1987.
• UNO (1989) Right to Adequate Food as a Human Rights, Centre for Human Rights, New York.

Western culture throughout the centuries has taught fear and contempt of racially and culturally ‘different’ people and in its languages has retained derogatory terms for these ‘others’. By contrast, the history of the Islamic civilization shows little evidence of racism. However, in recent times, some Muslims, under the impress of the Western example, have begun to develop feelings of racial prejudice. Following the retreat of Western imperial powers, Muslims have the opportunity to develop away from Western attitudes and ideologies. God willing, more Muslims will rediscover their Islamic heritage, and racist feelings will be removed from their hearts.

We must remember that in the days before Islam racism and slavery existed, but Islam effectively abolished the inferiority associated with slavery and integrated people of various ethnic origins into a single civilization. Muslims are one ummah and Islam is their culture and allegiance. God says in the Qur’an: Verily this brotherhood of yours is a single brotherhood (21.92). God has created us different so that we may know and distinguish one another: worth lies not in belonging to this or that nation but in belonging to God, in taqwa or consciousness of Him. Getting on with the differences in creation is a part of the trials of this life, a test of our kindliness and humanity towards those who are ‘other’.

Do you not see that God sends down rain from the sky? With it We then bring out produce of various colours. And in the mountains are tracts white and red, of various shades of colour, and intense black in hue. Similarly, among men, and crawling creatures, and cattle, they are of various colours (35.27-8).

We should rejoice in the variety of mankind and try to learn about the cultures and languages of others. We enjoy fruits of diverse kinds, and take pleasure in the differences in nature, so why not also take pleasure in the differences between peoples?

The Muslim world has never been afflicted with the intense problems which still affect the Western world. There still exist in the US groups of white supremacists who want to bring back racial apartheid and even slavery. Then, besides the problems of race, there are also problems arising from the discrimination of the rich against the poor. However, God does not judge human beings on the basis of their race or nationality or social class, but on the basis of their quality of worship and their actions.

In the first days of Islam, the pagan Arabs practised slavery. Many slaves liked the message of equality and, attracted to the truth of Islam, converted. The behaviour of the first Muslims tells us that they did not uphold racist attitudes. For instance, Abu Bakr rescued Bilal from torture by buying and then freeing him. Bilal was then honoured with the dignity of being appointed to make the call to prayer: he was the first muezzin. God commands in the Qur’an that to express remorse for certain sins a Muslim should emancipate a slave if financially able to do so. If a slave woman bore a child she was immediately considered free. Also, Islamic law provided legal means to enable slaves to purchase their freedom. Islam was thus the first civilization to gradually abolish slavery and, much more important, the attitudes of racial and cultural superiority which, in non-Muslim societies, have kept the descendants of slaves-even after a hundred years of emancipation-in positions of inferiority. In Islamic societies, slaves were considered a part of the household and fully integrated into the community, many attaining positions of great eminence- Harun al-Rashid was the son of a slave.

It is of the highest importance that Muslims should avoid becoming infected by Western ideologies. The Western nations have nowhere created a successful, stable plural society. Even between nations there is not so much peaceful co-existence as a cynical balance of power. Only Islam has ever succeeded in establishing and sustaining a feeling of common humanity among different peoples and cultures. Many verses of the Qur’an and the ahadith of the Prophet, upon him be peace, reiterate that all people are equal. A hadith qudsi related by Abu Dharr al-Ghifari records the words: ‘0 my servants, I have forbidden oppression for Myself and have made it forbidden amongst you, so do not oppress one another’ (Muslim). In another hadith in the Sahih of Muslim, Abu Huraira related that the Prophet said:

Do not envy one another; do not inflate prices one to another; do not hate one another; do not turn away from one another; and do not undercut one another; but be you, 0 servants of God, brothers. A Muslim is the brother of a Muslim: he neither oppresses him nor does he fail him, he neither lies to him nor does he hold him in contempt. Piety is right here-and he pointed to his breast three times. It is evil enough for a man to hold his brother Muslim in contempt. The whole of a Muslim for another Muslim is inviolable: his blood, his property, and his honour.’

As long as Muslims hold to the Qur’an and Sunna and make these sources a part of their lives, they shall be spared the social evil of this age. But, having practised what they have heard preached, Muslims must have the conviction to commend (by example as well as by word) Islam to others. Unless the Western peoples come to respect Islam and learn from it, they will end up destroying themselves because of their national and cultural separatism. Muslims need to work at getting rid of the racism in the world and promoting brotherhood and peace instead.

‘Islam appears to me like a perfect work of architecture. All its arts are harmoniously conceived to complement and support each other, nothing lacking, with the result of an absolute balance and solid composure. Everything in the teaching and, postulates of Islam is in its proper place.’( Islam at the Crossroads, p.5)

Most Western writers, especially under the influence of the Church, have never failed to accuse Islam of spreading by force of the sword. The causes of this prejudice lie mainly in the fact that the spread of Islam has often occurred at the expense of Christianity. While Islam has for centuries obtained numerous conversions from Christianity without much effort or organized missionary activities, Christianity has almost never been able to achieve conversions from Islam in spite of sophisticated means and wellorganized missionary activities, and it has always been at a disadvantage in its competition with Islam for fourteen centuries. The defeat of Christianity in the face of Islam has caused its missionaries and most of the Orientalists to develop an inferiority complex within themselves by depicting Islam and introducing it as a regressive, vulgar religion of savage peoples. (John Cogley, Religion of Secular Age; Muhammad Asad, The Road to Mecca). The same attitude has unfortunately been maintained toward the Holy Prophet of Islam. This is clear in the confessions of some unbiased writers of the West: According to P. Bayle:

‘Muslims, according to the principles of their faith, are under an obligation to use force for the purpose of bringing other religions to ruin [probably he means Jihad which is not for the purpose he suggests.]; yet, in spite of that, they have been tolerating other religions for some centuries past. The Christians have not been given orders to do anything but preach and instruct, yet, despite this, from time immemorial they have been exterminating by fire and sword all those who are not of their religion. We may feel certain that if Western Christians, instead of the Saracens and the Turks, had won the dominion over Asia, there would be today not a trace left of the Greek Church, and that they would have never have tolerated Muhammadanism as the ‘infidels’ have tolerated Christianity there. We (Christians) enjoy the fine advantage of being far better versed than others in the art of killing, bombarding and exterminating the Human Race. ‘(Bayle P., Dictionary, article Mahomed, 1850)

Islam is indebted for its unequalled spread to its religious content and values, which is admitted by all objective Western intellectuals:

‘Many have sought to answer the questions of why the triumph of Islam was so speedy and complete? Why have so many millions embraced the religion of Islam and scarcely a hundred ever recanted? Why do a thousand Christians become Muslims to one Muslim who adopts Christianity? Some have attempted to explain the first overwhelming success of Islam by the argument of the sword. They forget Carlyle’s laconic reply. First get your sword. You must win men’s hearts before you can induce them to imperil their lives for you; and the first conquerors of Islam must have been made Muslims before they were made fighters on the Path of God. Others allege the low morality of the religion and the sensual paradises it promises as a sufficient cause for the zeal of its followers: but even were these admitted to the full, no religion has ever gained a lasting hold upon the souls of men by the force of its sensual permissions and fleshy promises…

‘In all these explanations the religion itself is left out of the question. Decidedly, Islam itself was the main cause for its triumph. Islam not only was at once accepted (by many peoples and races) by Arabia, Syria, Persia, Egypt, Northern Africa and Spain, at its first outburst; but, with the exception of Spain, it has never lost its vantage ground; it has been spreading ever since it came into being. Admitting the mixed causes that contributed to the rapidity of the first swift spread of Islam, they do not account for the duration of Islam. There must be something in the religion itself to explain its persistence and spread, and to account for its present hold over so large of a proportion of the dwellers on the earth… Islam has stirred an enthusiasm that has never been surpassed. Islam has had its martyrs, its self-tormentors, its recluses, who have renounced all that life offered and have accepted death with a smile for the sake of the faith that was in them.’ (Stanley Lane-Poole, Study In a Mosque, pp. 86-9).

A. J. Arberry has also pointed out that the reason for the spread of Islam is Islam itself and its religious values. (Aspects of Islamic Civilization, p.12)

He writes:

‘The rapidity of the spread of Islam, noticeably through extensive provinces which had long been Christian, is a crucial fact of history. The sublime rhetoric of the Qur’an, that inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men to tears and ecstasy…and the urgency of the simple message carried, holds the key to the mystery of one of the greatest catalysms in the history of religion. When all military, political and economic factors have been exhausted, the religious impulse must still be recognized as the most vital and enduring.’

Brockelman, who is usually very unsympathetic and partial, also recognizes the religious values of Islam as the main factor for the spread of Islam (History of the Islamic Peoples, p.37). Rosenthal makes his point as follows: ‘The more important factor for the spread of Islam is the religious Law of Islam (Shari‘a, which is an inclusive, all-embracing, all-comprehensive way of thinking and living) which was designed to cover all manifestations of life.’ (Political Thought in Medieval Islam, p.21).

Besides many other reasons which are responsible for the spread of Islam, it is the exemplary life-style and unceasing efforts of individual Muslims to transmit the message of Islam throughout the world which lie at the root of the conquest of hearts by Islam. Islamic universalism is closely associated with the principle of ‘amr bi’l-ma’ruf (enjoining the good) for Islam is to be spread by Muslims by means of ‘amr bi’l-ma’ruf. This principle seeks to convey the message of Islam to all human beings in the world and to establish a model Islamic community on a worldwide basis. The Islamic community is introduced by the Qur’an as a model community: We have made of you an Ummah justly balanced, that you might be witnesses (models) for the peoples, and the Messenger has been a witness for you (2.143). A Muslim or the Muslim community as a whole thus has a goal to achieve. This is the spread of Islam, conveying the truth to the remotest corner of the world, the eradication of oppression and tyranny and the establishment of justice all over the world. This requires the Muslim to live an exemplary life, and thus the moral and the ethical values of Islam have usually played an important part in the spread of Islam. Here follow the impressions of the influence of Islamic ethics on black Africans of a Western writer of the nineteenth century:

‘As to the effects of Islam when first embraced by a Negro tribe, can there, when viewed as a whole, be any reasonable doubt? Polytheism disappears almost instantaneously; sorcery, with its attendant evils, gradually dies away; human sacrifice becomes a thing of the past. The general moral elevation is most marked; the natives begin for the first time in their history to dress, and that neatly. Squalid filth is replaced by some approach to personal cleanliness; hospitality becomes a religious duty; drunkenness, instead of the rule becomes a comparatively rare exception chastity is looked upon as one of the highest, and becomes, in fact, one of the commoner virtues. It is idleness that henceforward degrades, and industry that elevates, instead of the reverse. Offences are henceforward measured by a written code instead of the arbitrary caprice of a chieftain–a step, as everyone will admit, of vast importance in the progress of a tribe. The Mosque gives an idea of architecture at all events higher than any the Negro has yet had. A thirst for literature is created and that for works of science and philosophy as well as for the commentaries on the Qur’an.’ (Quoted from Waitz by B. Smith, Muhammad and Muhammadanism, pp.42-43)

The tolerance of Islam is another factor in the spread of Islam. Toynbee praises this tolerance towards the People of the Book after comparing it with the attitude of the Christians towards Muslims and Jews in their lands. (A Historian’s Approach to Religion, p.246). T. Link attributes the spread of Islam to the credibility of its principles together with its tolerance, persuasion and other kinds of attractions (A History of Religion). Makarios, Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch in the seventeenth century, compared the harsh treatment received by the Russians of the Orthodox Church at the hands of the Roman Catholic Poles with the tolerant attitude towards Orthodox Christians shown by the Ottoman Government and prayed for the Sultans (T. Link, A History of Religion).

This is not the only example of preference by the followers of the religions for Muslim rule over that of their own co-religionist. The Orthodox Christians of Byzantium openly expressed their preference for the Ottoman turban in Istanbul to the hats of the Catholic cardinals. Elisee Reclus, the French traveller of the nineteenth century, wrote that the Muslim Turk allowed all the followers of different religions to perform their religious duties and rituals, and that the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Sultan were more free to live their own lives than the Christians who lived in the lands under the rule of any rival Christian sect (Nouvelle Geographie Universelle, vol. 9). Popescu Ciocanel pays tribute to the Muslim Turks by stating that it was luck for the Romanian people that they lived under the government of the Turks rather than the domination of the Russians and Austrians. Otherwise, he points out, ‘no trace of the Romanian nation would have remained,’ (La Crise de l’Orient).

The Muslims’ attitude towards the people they conquered is quite clear in the instructions given by the rightly-guided Caliphs: ‘Always keep fear of God in your mind; remember that you cannot afford to do anything without His grace. Do not forget that Islam is a mission of peace and love. Keep the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) before you as a model of bravery and piety. Do not destroy fruit-trees nor fertile fields in your paths. Be just, and spare the feelings of the vanquished. Respect all religious persons who live in hermitages or convents and spare their edifices. Do not kill civilians. Do not outrage the chastity of women and the honour of the conquered. Do not harm old people and children. Do not accept any gifts from the civil population of any place. Do not billet your soldiers or officers in the houses of civilians. Do not forget to perform your daily prayers. Fear God. Remember that death will inevitably come to every one of you some time or other, even if you are thousands of miles away from a battlefield; therefore be always ready to face death.’ (Andrew Miller, Church History; Ali lbn Abi Talib, Nahj al-Balagha)

A historical episode which Balazouri, a famous Muslim historian, relates, tells about how pleased the native peoples were with their Muslim conquerors is of great significance:

When Heraclius massed his troops against the Muslims, and the Muslims heard that they were coming to meet them, they refunded the inhabitants of Hims the tribute they had taken from them, saying: ‘We are too busy to support and protect you. Take care of yourselves.’ But the people of Hims replied: ‘We like your rule and justice far better than the state of oppression and tyranny in which we were. The army of Heraclius we shall indeed, with your help, repulse from the city.’ The Jews rose and said: ‘We swear by the Torah, no governor of Heraclius shall enter the city of Hims unless we are first vanquished and exhausted.’ Saying this, they closed the gates of the city and guarded them. The inhabitants of other cities–Christians and Jews–that had capitulated did the same. When by God’s help the unbelievers were defeated and Muslims won, they opened the gates of their cities, went out with singers and players of music, and paid the tribute (Futuh al-Buldan).

To sum up, although most Western writers, under the instigation of biased Orientalists of the Church, have alleged that Islam spread by the force of the sword, the spread of Islam was because of its religious content and values, and ‘its power of appeal and ability to meet the spiritual and material needs of people adhering to cultures totally alien to their Muslim conquerors’, together with some other factors. Some of these factors are the tolerance which Islam showed to people of other religions, the absence of ecclesiastic orders and hierarchy in Islam, mental freedom and absolute justice which Islam envisages and has exercised throughout the centuries, the ethical values it propagates, and Islamic humanitarianism, universalism and brotherhood, and its inclusiveness. Sufi activities, the moral superiority of Muslim tradesmen, the principle of ‘enjoining the good’, and Islamic dynamism and the magnificence of the Islamic civilization contributed of their own to the spread of Islam.

The main religious qualities which attracted people to Islam were:

(i) the simplicity of the theological doctrines of Islam based on the Divine Unity;

(ii) rationalism of the Islamic teachings;

(iii) the complete harmony of the Islamic ideals and values with human conscience;

(iv) the inclusiveness and comprehensives of Islam, covering all aspects of physical, mental, and spiritual life of individuals and societies, hence the harmony of religion and life which it established;

(v) the lack of formalism and mediation;

(vi) the vividness, dynamism and resilience of the Islamic theology, and its creativity and universalism, and its compatibility with established scientific facts;

(vii) the cohesion and harmony of the Islamic principles, and

(viii) the shortcomings of other theological systems.

Further Reading

• Abu’l-fazl Izzeti (1976) ‘As Introduction to the history of the Spread of Islam,’ London, is mostly quoted.
• Ahmad, A. ‘Garbin Islam’dan Ogrendikleri’.(Turkish trans.) Istanbul.
• Al-Mas’oudi, A. (1964) ‘Muruj adh-Dhahab’, Cairo.
• AlguI. H. (1987) ‘Islam Tarihi’,Istanbul.
• Al-Tabari, L. J (1955) ‘Milletler ve Hukumdarlar Tarihi’ (Turkish trans.), Istanbul.
• Balazouri(1965) ‘Futuh al-Buldan’, Istanbul.
• Dursun, D. (1989) ‘Osmanli Devletinde Siyaset ve Din’, Istanbul,
• Fayda. M.(1989) ‘Hz, Omer Zamanında Gayr-i Muslimler’, Istanbul.
• Imam Abu Yusuf (1973) ‘Kitab al-Kharac’, Istanbul.
• Naumani, S. (1975) ‘Butun YonleriyIe Hz Omer ve Devlet Idaresi’ (Turkish trans.), Istanbul.
• Qutb, S. (1980) ‘Islam’da Sosyal Adalet’, (Turkish trans.) Istanbul.
• Said, E. (1983) ‘Oryantalizm’ (Turkish trans.) Istanbul.
• Tuna, O. (1969) ‘Selçuklular Tarihi ve Turk-Islam Medeniyeti’, Istanbul.

Together with massive campaigns to promote Western products, such story-lines and images, perpetuate the inferiorized stereotypes that used to be taught openly in the nineteenth century. Films especially can be seen as an arm of economic domination: ‘Because every film is a part of the economic system, it is also part of the ideological system… cinema and art are branches of ideology. None can escape; somewhere, like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle, all have their allotted place’ (Nicholls, 1976, vol.1, p.24).

Because the US got the edge over the Europeans in the mass-market film industry, Hollywood and what it stands for have often been accused, even by Europeans, of cultural imperialism. The English as well as the French often complain that the norms of popular culture in their countries have been ‘taken over’ by the Americans. But the fact is that the success of American styles has been largely due to their commercial skill and power relative to English and French products. In no sense can it be claimed that the American popular culture industry portrays the French or the English negatively. By contrast, it is true to say that Western cinema, particularly American cinema, portrays Orientals, especially Muslims, negatively as a matter of course. All easy, popular stories have goodies and baddies, but must the baddies so often be foreigners and need the foreigners be culturally foreign? In order to be popular, popular films reinforce popular stereotypes-it is a vicious circle, at least for its victims. For those who manage such images, popular cinema is a powerful instrument of cultural suppression and domination. As one writer maintains, the virtual monopoly Hollywood has enjoyed for the last quarter century has made it the single most powerful advocate and purveyor of a simplified, homogenized American culture (Collins, 1989).

Within this Hollywood style in particular, there has been a consistent Middle Eastern stereotype-Arab or Arab-Palestinian, or Turk or Iranian-with negative physical and moral characteristics- lustful, fanatical, irrational, cruel, scheming, unreliable, often cowardly, and always outwitted and defeated. The adventurer-hero, once in the Flash Gordon style of noble warrior on the side of the good (in simple contrast to arch-enemy Ming the Merciless, an Oriental tyrant), is now, typically, a morally imperfect figure, nevertheless worthy of the audience’s full sympathy. The ‘James Bond’ character of the sixties and seventies remains by far the most successful hero-formula. He was designed for British and American audiences to identify with: ‘he is worldly, has diverse but specialized expertise, and has a passion for excitement. He is self-reliant, proud, wedded to privacy, honest, candid, loyal, a man of honour…’ (Simon, 1989). This figure exemplifies, in a form appropriate to the genre of comic caricature, the virtues and ethos which are supposed to give the British and the Americans their directness and sense of humour, their get-up-and-go, their problem-solving success. The villain-figures altogether lack positive characteristics, even any energy or wit they have is of a mad, evil-genius type; their characters lack any exposition; they have no past, their only present is to pose the challenge to the hero. It follows that no audience, not even the non- British/American audience can possibly do otherwise than identify, through the momentum of the story, with the hero and the ethos he represents.

Among recent historical films which have to do with Muslim lands and people, the most popular have been Lawrence of Arabia, Death on the Nile, Midnight Express, and Robin Hood. Of these, only the first has any substantial claim to be a serious, well-made film. In it, Lawrence, a British army officer, stationed in Cairo during World War I, works to ally the Sharif of Makka with the British against the Turks. The Arabs are presented as bumbling, loud, unruly primitives with some barbarian dignity but, in the end, easily bribed, easily tricked. The Turks are utterly vile and disgusting with no saving qualities of any kind. Indeed, the Turkish Pasha in Egypt is, in addition to being, ugly, foul and aggressive, a sodomite- characteristics flatly contradicted by historical evidence (Kirkbride, 1956). The fact that Lawrence was a British spy with very British images about the desert, about Arabs, Turks and Muslims in general, never enters into the film or the consciousness of its audience-there is not the slightest hint that the events might be presented from another point of view and so tell quite a different story. For all the undeniable beauty of some scenes, this film well illustrates the general point made by Raymond Williams that, in spite of their being artistic, works of art still serve an ideological function, that is, serve as propaganda (Williams, 1982). Embedded in Lawrence of Arabia there are all the usual distortions, political and cultural, which less artistic films present also, but crudely.

Midnight Express has been widely and continuously shown since its production in 1978. Though shot mostly in a nineteenth-century British barracks in Malta, the film is set in Istanbul which comes over as a most depressing place – a shock surely for anyone who has actually visited it. David Putnam, the director, freely admits that the film is based on a ‘dishonest book’ (Shipman, 1984, vol.2, p.1103). It wholly misrepresents what really happened to Billy Hase who was sentenced in Turkey for drug smuggling: the story implies that he was innocent; it makes much of his escape, though he was released under an amnesty agreement’ (ibid.). The quality of the director’s attention to the Islamic setting can be judged from the scene in which hairy- eared Hamidou (the actor is in fact an American) is whipping Jimmy with a leather belt while some other Turks are praying to Allah – Jimmy’s yells of pain provide the ‘music’ to the praying chorus (Kael, 1980, p.498).

Much the same kind of attention (and the same intention) is evident in the opening scene of Robin Hood: in a gloomy atmosphere the call to prayer rises from a minaret in Jerusalem, then an abrupt ‘cut’ to a filthy prison where an executioner is chopping off the hand of a prisoner – an illustration for the audience of Islamic justice. The point of these and similar devices of narrative and plot of setting, colour, tone and music – many examples could be given – is not only to present an image of Islam and Muslims that is as negative and humiliating as possible. It is also intended to contrast that negative with the positive virtues of the Western characters portrayed within the same story: the audience are required (and expected) to conclude that ‘the Americans, and the Englishmen and the Swedes, are civilized and sensitive…’ (Kael, 1980, p.498).

References

• COLLINS, J. (1959) Uncommon cultures: Popular Culture and Post Modernism, Routledge, London.
• KAEL, P. (1980) When the lights Go Down, Holt, Rinehart & Wilson, New York.
• KIRKBRIDE, Sir As. (1956) A Crackle of Thorns: Experiences in the Middle East, John Murray, London.
• NICHOLLS, B. (1976) (ed.) Movies and Methods, University of California Press.
• SHIPMAN, D. (1984) The Story of Cinema, Hodder & Stoughton, London..
• SIMON, S.R. (1989) The Middle East in Crime Fiction, Lilian Barber Press, New York.
• WILLIAMS, R. (1982) The Sociology of Culture, Fontana, London.

having fixed their hearts upon the Light

they set out for eternity.

And wherever the journey led, they carried

their gift of radiance

Gleams of Beauty

unfading so entranced their souls,

they heard at night in their dreams

angels singing of bliss and the music

of other worlds.

More enchanted ,

more earnestly they searched in every place,

and cherished for their homeland the dream

of a beloved of matchless excellence, hero

or saint or both.

Without let our pause

they strove on in high, passionate hope;

some perplexities of life they unravelled

as they journeyed apace, and at last obtained

the promised happiness.

Lovers of the Light

are pledged to a long journey, its end Unseen;

the very roads are proud upon which they go;

the rhythm of their going is Certainty, and their rank

slaves of the King .

Whoever disdains

that rank, disdains his own good fortune,

exchanging hope for a regret everlasting;

he shall not attain, not ever, the further rim

of all that is.

Only the lovers,

passionate lovers of the Ideal, may behold

that far horizon, eternity itself impressed

upon their faces, and their names rehearsed

in hymns of praise.

They desire life

again only to be martyred again, hearts

forever surrendered to the Light, forever

remembered in our hearts. They raise now

light-filled eyes,

in their hands are translucent beakers

held aloft, at ease, filled to the brim from

rivers of Paradise.

***

This universalistic spirit is explicit in Article I/l of the 1967 Space Treaty: ‘The exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries… and [outer space] shall be the province of all mankind’. Two years after the Treaty was formally signed, the American astronauts broadcast the same message from the moon. When Neil A. Armstrong landed on the moon, he saw the new frontier as open not only to space-faring states, but to all mankind: ‘one small step for man, leap for mankind.’

In the quarter century since then, the rapid growth of aerospace technology, thanks to the Cold War between the then two super powers, has led to remarkable achievements and technological spin-offs. However, for most of that period space technology and science were largely focused or directed to the production of weapons of mass destruction. The end of the Cold War should herald a new era in which existing aerospace technology will only be used for ‘the benefit of all mankind’ and only ‘for peaceful purposes’ (Walter, 1985, pp.l20).

In the new post Cold War the Russians and the Americans, once rivals, have begun to pool their brain power and hardware with the aim of building space stations in orbit around the earth, then on the moon, finally on Mars (Time, 19 April 1993, pp.62-3). The European Space Agency (ESA) has already laid down its long-term space programmes that are to lead Europe’s space efforts into the 21st century (Von der Dunk, 1989, p.426). Japan, China, Brazil, India, Israel and even Australia have achieved significant satellite technology and launching capability through independent efforts (for an account of those programmes, see Gatland, 1989). They all aim to explore and exploit the natural resources and potential usage of space.

Within ‘peaceful’ uses and exploration of outer space, there are a wide range of possible activities related to scientific research and experimentation, remote sensing, telecommunications and commercial aerospace manufacturing (Tennen, 1979). It is worth considering the benefits that God, the All-Mighty, has made available to man in space.

A) Satellites

The first major benefit is satellite communication. Telecommunication and especially direct broadcasting satellites can only be located in an exceptional orbit known as the geostationary satellite orbit (the GSO). This orbit is a three-dimensional corridor lying on the equatorial plane, at a distance 36,000 km (22,300 miles) above the surface of the earth. The importance of this orbit is that satellites rotate in the same direction as the earth does every 24 hours. That is to say, if satellites follow an equatorial path in the direction of the earth’s rotation, they will appear to remain fixed at the same spot above the equator.

The GSO facilities those services such as direct broadcasting satellites, navigational aids and solar energy stations which require round-the-clock coverage of a given area of earth (Wihlborg and Wijkman, 1979, pp.2S-6). The great advantage of the GSO for communication purposes is that one satellite can observe approximately 40 per cent of the surface of the planet, which means that three satellites are enough for global coverage.

However, the GSO is a physically limited natural resource. Satellites located in orbital slots wander around 100 miles horizontally. Hence, once a satellite occupies a spot in the orbit, it precludes the use of the same slot by any other since slots are located in a three-dimensional tube with a total length of 150,000 miles, the GSO only has room for 1,500 such slots with a zero probability of collision.

However, no one knows exactly how many satellites can occupy the GSO. The orbit is expected, in the very near future, to be used for the gathering and transmission of solar energy from very large space objects to earth by microwave or laser beams (Christol, 1980-81). This will increase the problem of orbital slot scarcity and bring about contentious debates about use of the GSO. There are at present around some three hundred satellites in orbit so the congestion does not present a problem for the time being. However, in the decades to come the GSO will be saturated and there will be no ‘slot’ to locate a new satellite.

Since few states have satellites in the GSO, telecommunication via satellites is a very lucrative business. The overwhelming number of satellites are owned and run by the handful of technologically advanced states. Hence, they earn very significant amounts of money out of these activities. The full-time use of one single channel is around US$ 200,000 per month. A satellite transmitting 100 million message units, for example, earns $1 million each day.

Apart from broadcasting and communication satellites, there are observation satellites rotating vertically and horizontally around the world keeping their owners informed about weather, ocean conditions, catastrophes, pollution levels, atmospheric changes, the kinds and conditions of agricultural crops, the position of hidden minerals and fossil fuels (Schneider, 1986).

B) Mining

The samples collected by the Apollo showed that lunar soil contains, as percentages, 41.3 oxygen, 21.6 silicon, 15.3 iron, 5.4 aluminium, 6.8 magnesium, 0.1 potassium. There are also traceable amounts of sodium, sulphur, hydrogen, nitrogen, copper, zinc and lead in the samples collected (Bille, 1990, p.109). Out of these lunar materials, various minerals and metals, alloys, cement, electrical conductors, glass, silicone resins, rocket propellants and numerous industrial chemicals could be produced. One study concluded that hydrogen and oxygen, stored in lunar rocks, could be used to make air, water and rocket fuel. It is also said that the moon is rich in helium-3, which, almost non-existent on earth, may be usable as an ideal fuel for fusion power plants because of its low radioactivity (ibid., p.110).

Apart from the moon’s rich resources, asteroids are seen as extremely valuable celestial bodies. Scientists have found that there are dozens of mineral-rich asteroids circumnavigating the earth. These asteroids are on average 500 metres across and made of solid nickel-iron. Just one such asteroid could possibly meet years of global demand for these elements. Scientists reckon that asteroids within the vicinity of the earth contain abundant amounts of nitrogen, hydrogen and free metals. It is technologically feasible to process these asteroids on an industrial scale in outer space, more easily than exploitation of the moon’s resources. Such extraterrestrial production could avert earthbound pollution and potential conflicts over scarce earth resources (Condora, 1984, p.178). It was estimated in the 1980s that an asteroid could be worth five billion dollars. It is also projected that asteroids would be processed in outer space for extraterrestrial construction of space stations.

C) Space manufacture 

Although satellite communications and remote sensing are already very profitable commercial enterprises, space manufacturing is thought to have even greater commercial potential. As space is a relatively dust-free, micro gravity environment, it offers a unique laboratory setting for the development and processing of some complicated chemicals, pharmaceuticals, semi-conductor crystals, glass and metal alloys-indeed, production under micro gravity conditions is estimated to be up to 500 hundred times that possible on earth and with a degree of purity unobtainable on earth (Jericho and McCracken, 1986, p.802).The potential market sales for such products is reckoned at around $20 billion annually.

Additionally the relatively uncontaminated space environment is an ideal place for growing crystals used in computers, optoelectronics and ultrasonic equipment; for developing floride glass used in laser and fibre optic applications; and for producing new metal alloys as well as metals of higher purity and structural uniformity (ibid., p.803). In sum, the horizons for potential use of space are immeasurable.

The Islamic countries and space activities

Our concern is to find out what the Muslims are doing or not doing in the face of the continued progress of the space-faring Christians (NASA, ESA), the Jews (Israel), the Buddhists (People’s Republic of China, Japan), the Hindus (India). It was declared at the beginning of the ‘space age’ that space would be a province all mankind. However, it is apparent that it is only the technologically advanced non-Muslim states who are ploughing in huge sums of money into aerospace technology and enjoying the benefits of the outer space environment. Muslims in general seem unaware of the fact that it is enjoined upon them to keep abreast of the latest science and technology and to be as equipped as the non-Muslims. For example, in Sura al-Mulk, God directs our attention to the Heavens:

‘He who created the seven one above another: you will see no want of proportion in the creation of the Most Gracious, so turn your sight again: Do you see any flaw? Again turn your vision a second time; your sight will return to you dim and discomfited, in a state worn out’ (67.3-4. See also 7.54; 13.2; 21.33; 36.40;51.7; 81.15.)

In the light of this encouragement, the Arab Muslims, from very the beginning of Islamic civilization reached the highest degree in astronomy. While the pre-Renaissance Christians thought the world flat, Muslims realized that it must be round and that it rotates on its axis. The Muslims in the Abbasid period detected many stars and constellations and gave names to them which are still used (See, for more information, Sharh al-Mawaqif and Ma‘rifatname by Ibrahim Haqqi of Erzurum; also, al-Hayat by Nur al-Din Batruji,d.1185).

Until the decline of the Ottoman Empire, Islamic scholars had been for centuries at the leading edge of study in astronomy as well as other pure and applied sciences. Even as late as the last 19th century, astronomy was an essential subject in the curriculums of the Ottoman colleges. However, some narrow-minded Muslims decried the teaching of scientific knowledge in schools and prevented Muslims from education. Their efforts were one (though not the only) reason for the relative decline of the Oriental world. This attitude degenerated further into the sinister view that any non-Muslim knowledge or equipment makes a person an unbeliever.

Vestiges of this barbarism remain to this day. To give an anecdote: I know of an imam who was recently accused by some peasants of being an unbeliever simply for informing them during a sermon delivered in their village that human beings had landed on the moon.

On the other side, Western propaganda has persistently labelled Islam as ‘backward’ and ‘unenlightened’, and imposed a feeling of inferiority among many Muslims-so that they find themselves thinking-‘The non-Muslims have walked on the moon, while we still walk barefoot on the earth.’ For over a century and a half, Muslims have been deliberately kept behind Western achievements. But the trust (amana) that God has bestowed upon mankind is most particularly the responsibility of the believers, the Muslims. Are we ready to live up to it?

God declares in the Qur’an: Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses ): My servants, the righteous, shall inherit the earth. No one should doubt that one day this truth guaranteed by God’s oath will come true. An eminent Islamic scholar has read this verse to mean that the human stewardship will not be confined to the earth. Rather, those who become the trustees and masters of the earth will also rule over the remotest parts of the skies (Sahin, 1993). Naturally, such rule depends upon qualifications and quality. It is essential therefore that Muslims acquire the qualities demanded by the only Owner of the heavens and the earth. Even, this promise will come true to the degree that Muslims do acquire the requisite qualities (ibid.).

Are the Muslims indeed striving to get the requisite qualities? To a certain degree, yes. After the emancipation from the years of colonization, Islamic countries (particularly Indonesia, Pakistan, Iraq and Iran) began to educate their own experts in sophisticated technology. But colonization has been followed by a brain drain. Thus, it is reported that there are considerable numbers of Turkish scientists working in NASA’s space programmes.

With regard to space technology, there are incipient attempts by the Islamic countries. One such attempt is the Arab Satellite Communication Organization (ARABSAT). The Charter of the Organization was signed by twenty one Arab States in 1976. ARABSAT is intended to fulfil the aspirations of the Arabs have their own satellite system as a tool for socio-economic development of the region and for bringing about the transfer of technology. The ARABSAT space segment is composed of two satellites launched in 1985 and 1992, and located on the GSO at 19’E and 26’E respectively. But the organization does not have its own launching pads. Hence, it is dependent upon either the European Ariane or the US Space Shuttle. In addition to this, two Turkish Satellites will soon be sent to the GSO. TURKSAT project will be an important milestone in the communication of Turkic and Islamic countries.

Surely, the achievements of ARABSAT and TURKSAT are not promising in terms of scope and infrastructure. Islamic countries need to pool their scientific, technological and, more importantly, financial resources to set up an Islamic aerospace organization. Arab petro-dollars are wasted in Western banks when they could be channelled into this potentially lucrative area. The break-up of the USSR is an extremely good opportunity for the fledging Turkic Republics to collaborate with other Islamic states. The launch pads of the former Soviet Union were set up in Kazakhstan. Today the Kazakhs are waiting for customers. In the CIS, as Mikhail Osin said: ‘the pay of those who build spaceships is lower than that of a floor sweeper’ (Lemonick, 1993). The petrol-rich Arab countries could and should attract the space-engineers of Muslim states to work in the establishment of Muslim space programmes…

In conclusion, unless Muslims are prepared to face up to the necessities of the post-industrial era and to the requirements of a new century by investing their wealth on intellectual property and technology, never will the present Muslims walk on the moon, while the Christians will be left free to exploit the resources of the Universe not for the benefit of all mankind, but their own benefit at the expense of others. But, when God’s promised time due, the Crescent will surely embrace the stars.

References

• BILLE, M.A. (1991) ‘The law of space resources: exploiting the final frontier’ in Fauchnan and Mayniak (1991).
• CHRISTOL, C.Q. (1980-81) ‘International space law and use of natural resources: solar energy’, Revue Belge de Droit Internationale, 15, pp.28-52.
• CONDORA, C. (1984) ‘Outer space like the sea and air, whose frontier? Incredible potential with inscrutable obstacles’, Houston Journal of international Law, 6, pp.175-96.
• FAUCHNAN, B. and MAYNIAK, G. (eds) (1991) Space Manufacturing: Energy Materials from Space, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
• GATLAND, K. (1989) Space Diary, Crescent Books, New York.
• JERICHO, E. & MCCRACKEN, D.G (1986) ‘Space law: is it the last legal frontier?’ Journal of Law and Commerce, 51, pp.791-808.
• LEMONICK, (1993) ‘NASA’s plea: Help’ Time (April 19), p.63
• SAHIN, M.F. (1993) ‘Yeryuzu Mirascilari’ (The inheritors of the earth) Yeni Umit, 19, pp.l-2.(in Turkish)
• SCHNEIDER, A.R.H. (1986)’Remote sensing of the earth from space’ Environmental Policy and Law, 16 (2), pp.50-9.
• TENNEN, L.I. (1979) ‘Outer space: a preserve for all humankind’, Houston Journal of International Law, 1, pp.145-58.
• UNITED NATIONS (1992) ‘Space Activities of the United Nations and International Organizations’, UNO, New York
• Von der DUNK, F.G. (1989) ‘ESA and EC: two captains on one spaceship?’ Proceedings of the 32nd Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, pp.426-35.
• WELTER, D., (1985) ‘The peaceful purpose standart of the common heritage of mankind principle in outer space law’ ASILS International Law Journal, 9, pp.117-146.
• WHITE, W.N. (1991), ‘Mining law for outer space’ in Fauchnan and Mayniak 1991.
• WIHLBORG, C.G., & WIJKMAN, P.M. (1979) ‘Outer space resources in efficient and equitable use; new frontiers for old principles’ The Journal of Law and Economics, pp.23-43.

It was spacious but darkened by the shutters on the windows. The fluorescent lamps were on round the table in the middle of the room, but the rest of the room remained dark. There were already some students gathered round the table, talking in low voices, gesturing at the corpse draped in white. Some looked quite pale, other’s smiled coldly. Salih, his friend, seemed to be standing apart from the others, alone, so Selim took his place beside him. The room felt cold.

Laid out on the table, under a white cloth, there was the dead body which they were supposed to study. Selim realized that it was this corpse which made the room feel cold. The realization made him tense. He felt quite sick. In order to relax himself, he tried to say something to Salih, but the words would not come out.

Salih noticed and asked him: ‘What’s the matter? Are you frightened’?

Selim managed to find his voice, and said weakly:

‘No, no, I was just thinking…’

‘What?’

‘I was thinking,’ Selim answered, indicating the other students, ‘that here we are standing round a corpse… And we are unmoved. It’s just something ordinary. We are quite indifferent toward it.’

‘You are right,’ said Salih. ‘We are being trained that way. Death never becomes an occasion for us to understand the reality of our situation. As a scholar once put it, “Death is enough to warn people”. But we seem not to understand the warning.’

Meanwhile, the teacher had come in and started his lesson: ‘Today you are going to examine various parts of the body. You’ve looked at pictures and diagrams in your Anatomy Atlases-now you will see the real thing, as it were, in the flesh. Most of you will never have seen a corpse before. Don’t be alarmed or put off as I remove the cloth. You have to get used to such things. You will have to face them in the future as part of your job. There is nothing to be frightened about-what we have here is after all only a dead body.’

Soon the teacher was ready with his gloves on his hands and his mask on his face. As he moved to the head of the corpse and took hold of the cloth to remove it, a deathlike suspense prevailed in the room. Expressions were frozen on the students’ faces and, in the stillness, even seemed as if no one dared to breathe. Selim was still struggling with his thoughts when the teacher slowly pulled back the cloth from the corpse. When he saw what he saw, something like an explosion or a volcano erupting happened in Selim’s head and heart. The tears welled in his eyes, threatening to spill over. He was utterly confused and trembling all over. He was about to faint but with a desperate effort managed to rush from the room, spluttering, ‘No, no, no…’.

His fellow-students, unaware of what was going on, looked on bemused. They heard his footsteps in the corridor. One of them broke the silence: ‘He was frightened, I suppose.’ Then the others had some comment or other to make, except Salih who stood motionless, not sure what he should do.

Selim rushed out of the faculty building into the gardens outside. He stopped to lean back against one of the trees. He remained still for a moment, his eyes closed and his head pressed against the trunk of the tree. His muddled thoughts and feelings cleared as he slipped away from the present moment into childhood memories. As always, when he recalled his early years, he remembered his mother’s tears and his father’s shouting which was the cause of her tears and his father, for no reason at all, hitting his mother in the face. He remembered the mealtimes after which they still felt hungry. He was very young then, in the early years of school. Before that, what he could remember was happy and peaceful. His mother was a good, pious woman, brought up by a good family. His father was a teacher: they were considered well off on his salary. His father did his best to meet the demands of his family and everybody liked him. He hardly ever went to a coffee house to spend time with his friends, nor was he ever seen to quarrel with his wife at home

Unfortunately those happy days did not last long. The society was corrupting, and for some reason anything uncorrupted was to be rejected. Moral values were being made fun of and knocked down; good was considered bad and bad good. One had to struggle hard in mind and spirit to hold on to values and character in such a degenerating society. Selim’s father could not resist the pressures. He became used to attending coffee houses and made new friends who introduced him to harmful habits. Then he started to come home late and drunk. Sometimes, after he came back, he would wake his wife and demand a meal. Poor woman, when she would say, ‘But what can I cook? There is nothing in the kitchen,’ he hit her in the face. Selim hid under his blanket, sobbing as he heard the shouting and weeping. Once, when he took hold of his father’s legs and begged him: ‘Don’t, don’t do it, father’, he got a beating too.

After Selim’s father was banned from teaching he became an alcoholic. During that time, his mother did some work sewing clothes at home and, when the need was desperate, she even went out to clean houses for money. His father took this money by force to spend on drink. When his wife tried to refuse to give him the money, he hit her until she gave in. Over and over again, she would plead: ‘Give up drinking. Can’t you see that it is ruining us all? Can’t you see how unhappy we all are? Please give up drinking, then our old happy life will return. I can work to support the family until you are all right.’

The poor woman’s health was deteriorating day by day, and the mistreatment by her husband grew unbearable. So, one day, they left the house to go shopping and never returned. They went to live instead in the house of the widow of Selim’s grandmother’s uncle.

Selim finished school and wanted to go on to high school but he knew that his mother could not afford it. His mother wanted to get him an apprenticeship of some kind. For the time being, during the school holidays, he studied the Qur’an in the neighbourhood mosque and quickly learnt the Arabic alphabet. That did not take long. After that, Selim became an apprentice to a hair-dresser.

That was just before the schools opened. Selim was aware of the hardships his family faced. Even so, he really did want to attend high school. He said nothing to his mother. He only cried about it alone, to himself in his bed. One day, the imam of the mosque came to the hairdresser’s to have his hair cut. He was keen to find out if his former pupil whom he had taught how to read the Qur’an would go on to high school. Selim said quietly, ‘I would like to, but…’ He couldn’t finish the sentence. But the imam guessed from the tears in Selim’s eyes what the situation might be.

The imam asked where Selim and his mother lived and paid them a visit. In a long talk, Selim’s mother explained their story to the imam, weeping as she did so. Before he left the imam said: ‘Don’t worry! With the help of God, I will do everything I can to help Selim to attend school. Believe me! The only thing I need is your prayers.’ The mother and son were hopeful and happy.

The imam told his friends the circumstances and they all agreed to help. Together, they managed to get a place for Selim in a good boarding school whose aim was to bring up students dedicated to the service of their religion and their homeland. It was at this school that Selim met and made friends with Salih. Not many years later Selim sat for the university entrance examination. When he opened the envelope with his results, he gave thanks to God and hurried to give his mother the good news: he had won a place in the school of medicine. When he reached home he found his mother on her death-bed, drawing her last breaths. He held her hand and said nothing. She opened her eyes and looked at him. They were eyes full of a mother’s suffering and a mother’s love. ‘Well,’ she asked, ‘What happened? What were your results?’

‘I’ve won a place in the school of medicine. I will become a doctor and treat you. Believe me, mum! You will be the happiest woman in the world.’

‘I thank God that I have lived to see this day,’ his mother said, and wept a little with contentment and relief. Then, she went on: ‘I am so glad that I have a son obedient to God. Finishing school is nothing by itself, my son. Remember that your father was an educated man but his ignorance brought us to those bad days which we all suffered. It is ages since we heard anything of him. Who knows where he is drinking now, even if he is still alive? I don’t think you will be like him. Study, my son, study much and become a professor. But never lose your faith. Without it, you are nothing. I’d rather you had not gone to school if you end up following your father’s example, destroying both yourself and the ones around you, instead of being helpful to them. With the knowledge you have, feel the greatness of God. That is my wish.’

She held Selim’s hand very tightly. He kissed her again and again, and said: ‘You are very ill, mum. Don’t tire yourself! I will call a doctor.’

In a voice that grew ever weaker, she said: ‘I dont need a doctor now. You can stand up to any difficulty. I have always tried not to do anything bad, as God has warned us. I don’t feel any pain now. I hope I have managed to bring up a son who will pray for me after my death. Please don’t forget what I have told you. May God be of great help to you, God…!’ At this point, her voice failed her. She relaxed as if falling into a sweet deep sleep and so passed away.

Re-living these sad moments, Selim, leaning against the tree in the grounds of the faculty of medicine, shook with emotion. Absorbed in himself, he had not noticed Salih who had followed him from the lecture room.

‘Hey what happened to you?’ Salih asked, shaking him gently by shoulder. ‘I would have believed that you were frightened if I did not know you well. We believe in God and we know that death is certain. Why then did you run away like that?’

Selim looked up at Salih and spoke slowly and carefully: ‘You are my closest friend. We stayed in the same boarding school, we both won scholarships to this university and right now we have been living in the same house for two years. I don’t think I care much what other people might think, but I do care what you think. I know I can trust you to keep secret what I’m going to tell you. Do you remember saying to me today-“We are going to work on an actual corpse, a dead man. I wonder if he had any children, poor man!” Do you remember saying that?’

‘Of course, I remember,’ said Salih. ‘Why? Did I say something wrong?’

‘No, Salih,’ answered Selim ‘You said nothing wrong, but do you know who he was?’

‘How could I possibly know that?’

‘Well,’ said Selim with a sigh, ‘I don’t know if it is enough to call him “poor man” but I do know very well who he was. He was my father.’

My aim here is to describe the legal instruments under international laws and conventions, to see how far they do secure protection of individuals’ rights, and to compare them with corresponding Islamic notions which have been around for 14 centuries. I will focus mainly on the rights and protection available in Europe. Finally, I will compare the different perspectives of an Islamic approach and of modern international law on protecting individuals’ rights from abuse’ by police authorities and agencies. Some of the legal instruments mentioned are non-binding in character -they are nonetheless relevant in establishing the perspective of modern international law.

The Declaration on the Police affirms the necessity of rules of conduct for the police (Preamble para. 2) and condemns any police officers who have violated human rights as unfit to be police officers (Preamble para. 3). The commentary accompanying Article 2 of The Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979) clarifies the phrase ‘human rights’ as meaning those rights protected by national and international law. Article 3 provides that: ‘Law enforcement officials may use force only when strictly necessary and to the extent required for the performance of their duty.’ Article 5 prohibits the use of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Another instrument, Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (adopted by the 7th Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders) recognizes that ‘law enforcement officials’ must include all officials, whether appointed or elected, who exercise police powers (specially powers of arrest and detention), and regardless of whether a country is under civil or military rule. It is obvious from all of these declarations that effective limitations must be placed on arbitrary, lawless behaviour by the police, and that appropriate rules and training procedures be adopted to ensure that police behave professionally and protect individual rights and liberties. They are more likely to do so if the police are themselves well-versed in those basic rights and liberties.

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) seeks to balance individual rights and the public interest. In their case law, the Commission and the Court have sought to define the public interest and indicate the limits which authorities such as the police should not transgress even when obliged to restrict the individual’s rights and liberties. ECHR Article 2 addresses the question of what circumstances justify the use of force, and how much, by law enforcement officials.

In the Stewart case, the Commission stated that the principle that ‘everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law’ obliges governments not merely to refrain from taking life intentionally but also to safeguard life. The Commission further stated that ‘the use of force must be shown to have been absolutely necessary’ and to be ‘reasonable’ in the circumstances. But what is ‘reasonable’? The Commission, though avoiding any statement on the meaning of ‘reasonable’ force in the Stewart case, made it clear that the standard is to be rigorous: an assessment must be made as to whether the interference with the right is proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.

The Camargo and De Guerrero case is a clear cut instance of disproportionate force. The case was decided under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) by the Human Rights Committee. The Committee found no evidence that the action of the police was necessary in their own defence or that of others, nor that it was necessary in order to effect the arrest or prevent the escape of the persons concerned.

The doctrine of necessity (which can be likened to the concept of the ‘public interest’ in Islamic Law) is of central importance. It sees the restriction of individuals liberties as exceptional, as only justifiable in the wider interest: ‘If the necessity of uncovering the truth and of doing justice requires limiting some or all of these rights, an exception will be recognized to the principle but only if it does not go beyond the dictates of necessity’ (Bassiouni, 1982, p.100). Restriction of individual liberties is checked by restrictions on the authority of those investigating a particular case. Islamic Law does not set out a specific list of rights that may be restricted if necessary nor how far and under what conditions. It delegates the decision to those in government who may decide according to their perception of the public interest (Bassiouni, 1982, p.100).

The United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 1984 is binding on the signatories to it. The Convention provides that the signatories shall outlaw torture in their internal laws and explicitly prohibits using ‘higher orders’ or ‘exceptional circumstances’ as excuses for acts of torture (Article 2(2) and 2(3)). The Convention has two new elements. Firstly, it provides for extradition of alleged torturers for trial in any of the signatory states. Secondly, it provides for an international investigation in the state concerned of reports of alleged torture by a Committee against Torture to be established under the Convention. However, the fact that the signatories may withdraw from this latter provision is a weakness.

The Convention requires prohibition of torture to be part of the training of all personnel involved in law enforcement, detention, interrogation or general handling of prisoners or detainees (Article 10(1)). It also provides that the signatories shall ensure legal measures for protection and compensation of torture victims. Individuals are further protected against other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as defined under the Convention.

The European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment is, by contrast, an instrument of a more preventive nature. It supplements the protection already given by Article 3 of the ECHR, by providing a non-judicial mechanism to investigate the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty in order to secure or reinforce the proper protection of their rights. A committee is established under the Convention for this purpose (Article 1).

Articles 3 and 5 of the ECHR impose particularly rigorous restrictions. Article 3 puts an absolute prohibition on torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment by the police forces, terms defined in the judgement in the Ireland v UK case. Also, the conduct of the victim is not accepted as a justification for derogating from Article 3, however heinous it may be alleged to be.

Islamic Law explicitly outlaws torture, beating, and other cruel and inhumane treatment. The Prophet, upon him be peace, said: ‘God shall torture on the Day of Recompense those who inflict torture on people in this life’. The prohibition can be deduced also from practice of the early Caliphs and other Muslim rulers. Most jurists agree that no prisoner should be insulted, humiliated, beaten, tortured or chained, regardless of the offence. Islamic Law affirms that any confession obtained by coercion, torture or unlawful detention cannot be used to sustain a conviction. The Prophet set a practical example for treating the accused humanely and so enabling him to speak freely, when he addressed a defendant in these gentle words: ‘I do not think you stole. Did you?’

Article 5 of the ECHR, designed to protect individuals against arbitrary treatment, has generated a substantial body of case law. Anyone apprehending or arresting another person must respect due process of law. Not only compliance with national law, but also compliance with the principles of the Convention, as defined in the case law of the Commission and the Court, must be observed. Under Article 5(l), Suspicion must be reasonable to permit an arrest (Article 5(1)); the arrested persons must be told why they have been arrested (5(2)); detention should be of strictly fixed duration (5(3)) and, the detainee brought before a judge or other officer promptly and without having to ask. These provisions obviously have to do with police powers exercised under legal authority. In the Bozana case, the Court concluded that the expulsion of Bozana had turned into a ‘disguised extradition’ measure, designed to circumvent an appeal, and was therefore unlawful within the meaning of Article 5(1).

In the Brogan case, the Commission took the view that the struggle against terrorism may require some sacrifice of individual liberty for collective security ad so justify a flexible approach to the period of detention. The Court did not agree with this line of reasoning. It allowed that bringing to trial ‘promptly’ might be flexibly construed but insisted that there is a maximum period of detention compatible with the Convention. Tanca commented: ‘admitting longer police custody for those suspected of terrorist offences would alter the balance in favour of the police authorities, conferring on them more sweeping powers and the authority to decide when to use them’. The Convention also clearly requires that any officials with power to hold someone in remand must have judicial authority to do so. This position was further clarified in the Schiesser case in which the Court held that those officials must be independent of government and political parties.

Under Islamic Law, preventive detention is considered a serious restrictionof personal liberty and an exception to the general rule that no-one shall be deprived of their liberty except for the enforcement of a lawful sentence. Some Islamic jurists including Abu Yusuf opposed preventive detention on the grounds that neither the Prophet nor his immediate successors maintained a prison. One school of Islamic jurists, however, is of the opinion that it is permissible, under the proper conditions and with safeguards to balance the interests of the defendants and law enforcement authorities. (These jurists base their position on the teaching of the Prophet who detained a man accused of a crime.) But in any case, Islamic jurists were very cautious in its application and laid down very strict conditions as to duration, those authorized to impose detention and in what circumstances (Al-Saleh, 1982, pp.74-5).

Another police activity which infringes fundamental human rights is the search of private premises. Article 8 of the Convention guarantees the right to privacy of family life, of home and of correspondence. Any interference with this right must be ‘in accordance with the law’ and ‘necessary in a democratic society’. In an emergency, additional measures derogating from Article 8 may be taken, provided these are strictly required and respect the other procedural and substantive requirements of Article 15.

An individual’s home and private life are regarded as inviolable in Islamic Law, in accordance with the Qur’an (24.27-8) and the instruction of the Prophet, upon him be peace, in his ‘Farewell Sermon’. But that right is conditional on the absence of reasons requiring its restriction or suspension. It is significant that Islamic Law prohibits the search of person or home, and the invasion of privacy for the purpose of verifying the occurrence of a crime unless there is independent corroboration thereof. Any restriction of the right to privacy may not exceed the limits as determined by the purpose for which the exception is being permitted, namely to uncover the truth.

The Islamic perspective

The Qur’anic verse O mankind, worship your Lord who created you from a single soul … (4.1) is the ground rule which determines the Islamic perspective on this issue. It gives ‘Muslims a consciousness of their belonging to a broader, larger and all-encompassing universe, rather than to consider themselves a parochial subdivision of a greater part with which no intercourse is invited’. However, the development of international law remained totally alien to the Islamic Law of nations which preserved the ethical basis and moral source of its norms and statutes. In Europe, as a result of religious wars and distrust of the clergy, religion and morality were replaced by more pragmatic powers and necessities of state, though Christian concepts remained influential. The Treaty of Westphalia of 1648 was based on the concept of cuius regio, eius religio, which sealed the separation further. The Western view is that mechanical conformity to the pattern of conduct, prescribed by the law of the state or by international law, is sufficient to secure public order and universal peace. Western law aims ‘to proceed to influence from outside the inner condition of man and somehow it believes that institutions, social, economic, political etc., have a way of influencing the individual character… Islam, on the other hand, begins by inviting man to accept the paramountcy of the power of the Lord, his own servitude and bondage to the will of his Master who is the Sovereign Ruler of the universe; in the last resort it redeems him by prescribing upon him norms of behaviour by which he is to regulate his life’. The only real sanction for the moral law is, in the last resort, the authority of religion. Morality cannot be effective without religion. Morality tells us what is right and proper to do, while the law enforces those moral principles as have a direct bearing on the regulation of the individual vis A vis his fellow human beings. If the law is secular the enforcement of it can only be on the secular plane, whereas, if the law is religious, its enforcement takes note of deleterious consequences of criminal acts not only in this life but also in the life to come. International law may have come a considerable way towards urging the protection of individual human rights against abuse general. But the reality is that these instruments and mechanisms have not been successful on their own. Therefore, we tend to argue that any attempt or any solution on the protection of the individual against such abuses will only be successful, if there is a religious dimension to it. That is the function of the morality.

Sources

• AL-SALEH, Osman Abd-eI-Malek (1982) ‘The rights of the individual to personal security in Islam’. in Bassioni. M. C. The Islamic Criminal Justice System. Edited by Bassioni, M. C. London: Ocean. Publication, London.
• AWAD, A. M. (1982) ‘The rights of the accused under Islamic criminal procedure’, in The Islamic Criminal Justice System.
• BASSIOUNI, M. C. (1982) ’The rights of the accused under Islamic criminal procedure’, in The Islamic Criminal Justice System. Edited by Bassioni, M.C. London: Ocean. Publication, London.
• BASSIOUNI, M. C. (1982) ‘The Sources of Islamic Law and the Protection of Human Rights’ in The Islamic Criminal Justice System.
• BROHI, A. K. (1982) ‘The Nature of Islamic Law and the concept human rights’, in Human Rights in Islam, International Commission of Justice, Geneva, pp. 55-56.
• ICJ (1982) Human Rights in Islam, International Commission of Justice, Geneva.
• TANCA, A. (1990) “Human rights, terrorism and police custody: the Brogan case”, European Journal of International Law, 1, pp.269-77

First of all, it should be noted that there is no general statement or decree in Islam that those who live in non-Islamic countries will go to Hell. Rather, the decree is this: if those who heard the message and invitation of the Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace, and witnessed the truth and light of Islam, reject it out of spiteful obstinacy and shut their ears and turn away from it, they will go to Hell. To pretend to more mercy and compassion than the Compassion of God is the worst sort of impertinence. Whether those who have heard the Divine Message live in Islamic countries is less to the point than whether they heed and obey that Message: those who do not will indeed go to Hell and suffer eternally.

The question is one that has been treated at great length by the scholars of Islamic theology who have spoken and written fully on the import of Qur’an and Hadith on the subject. But why, when there are so many pressing issues today, do people dwell upon this sort of question? If they get the answer to it, how will it affect and change their lives? What will they gain concerning their life in the Hereafter? How will the answer affect the daily practice and lifestyles of those who ask it or of those on whose behalf it is asked?

Is there a difference between those who have gone into unbelief willfully and those who have had no opportunity to hear about Islam? Will the latter go into hell and suffer the same punishment? The answer will be given in the light of the views of the imams of Islamic theology.

The Asharis held that one who has not heard the name of God and has not been communicated to about Him, wherever and however he lives, will not be punished but rather ‘excused’: God, as He wills, rewards such people to the measure of the good they have done and they enjoy the blessings of Paradise.

The view of the Maturidis is somewhat similar to the Mu’tazilis. They hold that if one finds his Creator through the use of his reason, even though he does not now His Names or Attributes, he will be saved. But, if he does not find and know the Creator through his reason, he will not be saved. In fact, this position is not so different from that of the Asharis, although they do sound different at first hearing. According to the Maturidis, it does not matter where one lives. Whether a man lives in the mountains, in a desert or on an island, he can observe the rising and the setting of the sun and moon, the sparkling light of the stars, the balance and order of the creation, the splendour and regularity amid the enormous variety on the surface of the earth, the grandeur of mountains and the gentle, easing breezes on their slopes, the thrilling colours and movements of flowers, trees and animals. All these are signs of the Owner, Creator, Sustainer and Administrator of all things. One can thus observe and acknowledge the absolute existence, power and grace of the Creator without knowing His Names and Attributes, or His Books and Messengers. Such a person is among the excused. That is why, one should not rashly assert that people who live in non-Islamic countries will go to Hell if they do not believe in God. Rather, one must, at least, keep silence, given the views of the imams of Islam.

Imam Ashari deduces his judgement from the verse of the Qur’an: We would never visit our wrath on any community until We had sent a Messenger to give warning (al-Isra’, 17.15). So, someone may not be punished for a wrong until due warning has reached him through a true Messenger.

According to the Maturidis, reason (‘aql) is an important faculty capable of discerning good from evil, but it would be wrong to go too far and say that reason is able to work everything out by itself. That is why God commands the good and forbids the wrong, and never leaves the matter wholly to human judgement and experience which are fallible. He conveyed His commands and prohibitions to people through Messengers, and thus has never left them in obscurity. The Maturidi argument goes like this: ‘Aql can work out that adultery and fornication are evil, because genealogy and lineage are interrupted and lost, with consequent problems of, among other things, how to divide inheritances. ‘Aql can work out that theft is evil, because if it were normal to steal the belongings of one who acquired them by long hard labour, no one could live in any degree of security. ‘Aql may discover that drinking is evil, because it causes one to lose one’s consciousness, damages health and makes one vulnerable to many illnesses, and can even affect one’s offspring. The same is true for what is good. Justice, doing well by others, etc., are all recognized as good by ‘aql.

Faith in God is also a good that ‘aql can grasp because faith leads us to satisfaction and inward contentment. Even in this world, we begin to sense the contentment that we will have in paradise. The way to faith is not so difficult as to be inaccessible by ‘aql. As in the case of the Bedouin, who came to the Prophet and explained how he attained faith: ‘Camel droppings point to the existence of a camel. Footprints on the sand tell of a traveller. The heaven with its stars, the earth with its mountains and valleys, and the sea with its waves- don’t they point to the Maker, All- Powerful, Knowing, Wise and Caring?’ This bedouin attained faith in God through the use of his mind, therefore we must not underrate the role of reason and thinking in faith. Setting out from this point, Maturidi says that one may find the Creator through one’s reason. There are many good examples from pre-Islamic times. One of them is Waraqa bin Nawfal, cousin of Umm al-Mu’minin, Khadijah, the first wife of the Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace. Waraqa felt that the coming of the Prophet would be in his lifetime. When the first revelation came to Muhammad, upon him be peace, he saw the Angel Gabriel, filling up the horizon and the heavens with his grandeur. The Prophet came back to his home and, with still quaking heart, told Khadijah what he had seen and heard, begging her to cover him. Khadijah went to Waraqa to seek his advice, and he confirmed the truth of Muhammad’s mission and revelations. Waraqa was among those who knew and had felt many of the predicted signs of the Prophet’s coming, upon him be peace, which had already been fulfilled. So, understanding that no good would ever come from the idols, Waraqa ignored them, and through the use of his own judgement believed in the existence of the One God. Another such person was Zaid bin ‘Amr, the uncle of ‘Umar bin al-Khattab. He too did not incline to idols but worshipped the One God. He despised the idols and told people that they were false and no good could come from them. He knew that the coming of a Prophet was imminent. However, as God willed, he did not live long enough to see the prophethood of Muhammad, but intuitively knew of its coming. He called his son Sa‘id and ‘Umar and other family members to his death-bed, and said: ‘The light of God is on the horizon. I certainly believe that it will emerge fully very soon. I am already feeling its signs over our heads. As soon as the Prophet comes, without losing any time, go and join him.’ What human beings have themselves made cannot be God or answer their needs. For such things themselves need man. How can something which is itself in need and want, answer and provide the call of man? Through such simple reasoning a man can come to know of his need to know the Lord of the earths and the heavens. However, when a person gives the direction of his mind and reason to the Revelation, his need to know is itself met and the way to eternal bliss opened for him.

In sum, those who saw or have heard about the Prophet and the Qur’an, but have felt no need to investigate and learn about them will go to Hell. However, those who have remained in darkness involuntarily, and who have not had the slightest chance to hear and learn about the Qur’an and the Prophet, we may hope that they may benefit from Divine Grace, and not be blamed and punished for such wrongs as they may do in unwilled ignorance.

This question brings to mind the difference between the early and the present-day Muslims, and the duties of Muslims towards non-Muslims.

The first Muslims lived Islam fully, and represented and spread the Message revealed to Muhammad, upon him be peace, over a large area and awakened the collective conscience of mankind. Many centuries later, when we read their life histories, we can see such greatness in their Islamic thinking and living that it becomes obvious why people were not indifferent to the Message they brought. They were so fearless and indomitable, and so disregarded the concerns, the pleasures and sufferings of worldly life, that they made a lasting impression upon the world. Thanks to their sincerity and zeal, a great number of people heard the message of Islam within a very short time. They were so lofty, profound and thorough in their bearing and spirit that, by the time of Caliph ‘Uthman, the light of Islam had spread from the Straits of Gibraltar to the Aral Sea, from the stretches of Anatolia to the Great Wall of China. During the time of Mu’awiya, the Muslims reached the Atlantic Ocean. All of Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria were under the glorious flag of Islam. In less than 30 years, after the last revelation to the Prophet, Muslims reached these lands and laid the foundations of Islam there. Since they themselves lived Islam thoroughly, most people in those lands loved and respected them, and so admired and then embraced Islam. The Christians and Jews of those lands preferred government by the Muslims to that of their own people. When once the Muslims had to leave Damascus, the Christians together with their religious leaders gathered in the churches and prayed for them not to leave; then when the Muslims did go, the Christians promised them to live under their rule and pay the due tax if the Muslims were able to return in the future. Moreover, the sincerity of the Muslims brought a great number of people to enter Islam. Indeed, it is impossible to imagine how it could have been otherwise when those people saw the early Muslims so many of whom were each an ‘Umar in sincerity and commitment. They kept long vigils in the night and were legendary warriors on horseback during the day (rukhbanun fi l-layli wa fursanun fi n-nahar). They won over so many hearts and impressed people that all believed that the gates of the whole world would soon he open to them.

If we consider how people in the present age cannot successfully provide security even in a small area for even their own community, we begin to understand how great an achievement the early Muslim administrations were. In return for their security, reliability, wisdom, subtlety of mind and piety, the doors of many castles and cities were opened to them, not as honorary title-holders or visitors, but as governors and rulers.

When the Muslims took over Syria and Palestine, the commanders asked for the keys to the Masjid al-Aqsa. The Patriarch in charge of the keys told them that the description of the person who would take the keys was known to him, and that it was impossible to hand them over to any other person. While they were disputing, the Caliph “Umar set out from Madina. No one knew how he would be travelling. But it was known to the Patriarch and the priests how the one who would receive the keys would come. “Umar borrowed a camel from the treasury of the state (bait al-mal). He might have borrowed a horse, but he did not. He took it in turns to ride the camel with his servant who accompanied him on the journey. When the Muslims commanders heard about “Umar”s coming in that manner, they prayed that as they crossed the river of Jordan it would not be “Umar”s turn to walk. For the Byzantines were used to seeing pomp and magnificence in their rulers, and the Muslim commanders thought that it might be shaming for the Caliph to be seen by them leading a camel on which the servant rode while the Caliph held the reins with rolled-up trousers crossing the river. In fact, most of political pomp is injustice and inequity, and “Umar was trying to avoid it. However, everything was ordained by God, and what happened happened just as the commanders most feared. Moreover, “Umar” s garment, worn and battered by the journey, had many patches on it. When the Patriarch saw this figure, he cried out “This is the man whose description we have in our books. Now, I shall give him the key.”

Because of the special spiritual insight of their elders, the priests had already known how “Umar would look and how he would cross the river. The handing of the key and the Masjid al-Aqsa to the Muslims caused many to come into Islam. With whole hearted ardour, Uqba bin Nafi” was one of those who set forth to make other people hear about the Truth all over the world. The conquest of Africa fell to his lot. After successive victories, some people envied his fame and misinformed the Caliph about him. Thus, the Caliph was provoked and Uqba was dismissed from his post, arrested and kept from spreading Islam. Imprisoned for five years, his only sorrow and great longing were expressed thus: “I would like to have spread Islam all over Africa. I was prevented from achieving this. That is the only thing I regret”. Freeing and then appointing Uqba as the governor of Africa, Yazid did one good thing to counterbalance his many injustices. He reopened the way to the conquest of Africa and the spread of Islam in the region which had all but come to an end with the arrest of Uqba. Uqba reached the Atlantic Ocean in a single campaign. He could not help riding his horse into the ocean and crying. “O God! If this dark sea had not prevented me going further, I would carry Your Holy Name to overseas lands.” Had someone been there able to speak to him of the American continents, Uqba would surely have set about planning how to go over there. These are narrated just to make us think how Islam was represented in the past and how it is now. The early Muslims took the territories now called Azerbaijan, Iran, Iraq, North Africa, Bukhara, Tashkent, Samarkand—places which would produce Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Ibn Sina, al-Farabi, Biruni—within 25 years, less than a single generation. It seems to have been achieved almost in the saying of it, in a single breath. Those first Muslims carried the message of Islam to almost every part of the then known world and made the glorious flag of “There is no god but God, Muhammad is His Messenger” wave over many lands. As for ourselves we are scarcely able to speak the Truth to the people around us, let alone go to foreign lands and tell the people there. Some of the people around us may be willing to listen to us, but we, alas, are unable to persuade even them. Our words come back to us, as if from walls of ice, cold. Our words do leave our mouths but do not penetrate the hearts and souls of people. In saying this, it is not our purpose to express ingratitude for the blessings we do have; we mean only to draw attention to the great, indeed immeasurabIe, distance between ourselves and the quality of men who were the Companions of the Prophet. They conveyed the Message to all peoples, and held this task as the very reason for their existence; when they could not do so, they felt sorrow and pain for the lands and peoples unaware of the Truth. By contrast, we are unable to represent Islam fully in our individual lives, still less convey its message to multitudes abroad. We have not abandoned our personal needs and preoccupations; we have not given the highest priority to working on the way of God. We remember too well, alas, the ways to our homes and our jobs, our worldly lives. Those of us who did go abroad, to non-Muslim countries, did so to earn dollars, or pounds, or marks, or francs—not to take the name of God to those lands. That is why we are unable to make them hear about the great Truths. If today the non-Muslims live in deviation, corruption and unbelief due to our neglect, ignorance, inability, laziness and incompetence, we shall certainly be summoned to account for it. If a question is asked of them in the Hereafter; then definitely it is asked of us as well. Giving lectures and organizing seminars and panels are not the only way to spread Islam. Such activities can be considered as a movement in the direction of being on the way God, but they do not themselves constitute the true service to Islam. If true service to Islam is likened to a great palace, our efforts so far are just like wandering about around the first entrance to the palace: we have not yet entered upon the task.

Therefore, many people are going astray. Occasionally, we have gone to those people to speak of Islam, but we have not saved ourselves from futile disputes and conflicts amongst ourselves. We have definitely not yet come near to representing Islam at the level of “Umar, Uqba bin Nafi”, and others of that quality. Who knows how their opponents were struck with fear at seeing their determined courage, their indomitable devotion to God; or struck with wonder by their reliability, generosity, justice, and humanity, and so moved to wonder about, then to embrace, Islam. The fact that many of the countries in which the Muslims live now, except far a few, were conquered by these early Muslims is evidence enough of what absolute sincerity in the way of God can achieve. Looked at from this direction, the question about non-Muslims, especially those living in non-Islamic countries, takes on a different aspect. We need to see those non-Muslims with a greater tolerance, and say: “Shame on us! We have not been able to convey the message of Islam, and bring them to the light out of the darkness they live in.” It will help to narrate here the true story of a German family. A Turkish worker found accommodation in the house of this German family. He paid great attention to his religious duties and performed them sensitively. Except for working hours, he never omitted, when with the family, to tell them about Islam. After a while the owner of the house became Muslim. His wife said to him, as did the wife of “Amir ibn Tufail: “We have always been together so far. Let us be together in the future, too. Together on the Bridge Sirat and also in Paradise. If Islam really makes one reach heavenly realms, as you said, why should I stay back from such a blessing while you enjoy it?” She completed her words with the Kalima. With their children coming into Islam the family group of Islam was completed and the home an outpost of Paradise. Several days later the owner of the house came and said these startling words to the Turkish worker: “I could not express my love and gratitude to you, because you have been an honoured guest to us. However, sometimes, I get very angry and wish to beat you up. You came and the Qur’an, the Prophet and God followed you. My home became a heavenly abode. But I had a father. He was a very straight, good man. He passed away a few days before you came. Why couldn”t you have come a bit earlier and told him of Islam as well?” These words indeed represent the voice, the complaint, the rebuke, of the whole non-Muslim world. We have failed to take Islam to them. Even in our own countries we have not been able to exert enough effort or give enough support to the cause of Islam to make our own people know it properly. Another aspect of the question is this: Those who took us away from Islam have always promised a Western life of Western standard. 150 years later we are still beggars at the doors of the West. Little has changed and we cannot say that we have progressed, in any important sense. Throughout a century and a half, the West have considered and treated us as servants: servants who leave their countries in return for poor wages. Even if we took them the golden principles of Islam, the best of messages, which will open the gates of Paradise for them, the Christians and Jews, will not accept them from us, they will not recognize the quality and worth of Islam in us. In part this is because we are despised labourers at their disposal. As ever, the rich man has difficulty imagining that he is in need of something from the beggar at his door.

Today, the Muslim world has not proved itself a worthy model for the rest of the world. Quite the contrary, it has been defeated in many fields many times over and become dependent on the Western countries. Only if we live and represent Islam thoroughly, and go to the non-Muslims with a commanding confidence in our own honour, dignity and greatness, and do so only for the sake of God, as our forefathers and the first Muslims did, then only have we a right to hope that they will listen to and accept the call of Islam. We cannot like, still less approve, their regarding us in the light of servants and beggars, yet, while we do not regain our true Islamic identity, we continue to give them an excuse to regard us so. Certainly, if they will be asked to account for their attitudes and behaviour in the Hereafter, so shall we, also, who have failed to convey Islam to them, be questioned and chastised for that failure. So, the responsibilities of both Muslims and non-Muslims should be considered common and equal. Judgements about them should be made justly and uprightly. We are far from any understanding that condemns all non-Muslims to Hell simply for their being non-Muslim. Equally, we are far from such vain day-dreaming as to suppose that by stepping out one day and in a perfunctory manner, mentioning the worth of Islam, we shall get people to follow us. We believe that there will be changes in the balance of the world in the near future. Especially in Turkey, the Turkic countries, Egypt, Pakistan, and in some other places, Muslims will regain their consciousness and raise up strong persons able to turn away from pursuing worldly interests for the sake of establishing Islam and its high values among other peoples and other countries besides their own. Only through sustained, sincere efforts, will Islam be a major factor in the balance of the world and be respected, and the voice of Muslims calling non-Muslims to Islam be heard. That is not something impossible. Rather it will certainly happen. But those who will manage it will be men and women of good character whose very souls are bonded with Islam, not those inconsistent and inadequate people who are under the impress of their bodily needs and who concern themselves with Islam, as it were, only in their spare time.

Hibernators are intensely active in summer. A part of that activity is building temporary burrows for summer use only. Ground squirrels, (Spermophilus citellus) for example, can build hundreds of such temporary shelters over a single summer, on average 15 shelters in a 10m2 area of open field. These shelters have only the one nest compartment, usally between 30 and 50cm below ground level. By contrast, their shelters for hibernation, sometimes as much as 3m below ground level, are intended for long, repeated use and contain a number of compartments-one for storing large quantites of food (usally dry seeds), one for use as a ‘toilet’, and a third for sleeping.

Before hibernation, animals prepare themselves for the hardship of the very long period of cold by storing up large amounts of fat in adipose tissue under the skin, up to some 40 % of total body weight. These fats are composed of fatty acids which typically have ten or fewer than ten carbon atoms and are consturcted with some double bonds between the carbon atoms of the chain and their esters with glycerides. These compounds provide the ideal energy source needed during hibernation because lipids yield twice the energy yielded by carbohydrates and proteins. Moreover, these fatty acids need very little oxygen in their degradation/conversion to energy.

Blood circulation and homeostasis during hibernation are not well understood. The animal steadies body temperature at around 2°C to 5°C: in mammals the body temperature remains about 1°C above environmental temperature. Usally, when body temperature falls to this level, metabolic rate is increased or the animal awakes, but during hibernation this does not happen. Metabolic rate at 5°C is usually 2-5% of the rate at normal body temperature. For example, the active heart rate of the genus Myotis of bats is between 500 and 700 beats per minute. During hibernation the rate goes down to 20 beats per minute at 5°C, and 8 beats at -7°C. Two consistent and characteristic changes are found in blood during hibernation: an increased production of herapin, which may be contributing to a reduction in the risk of blood clotting during very slow circulation, and an increase in serum magnesium, for which there is no explanation as yet.

Many different types of respiratory patterns have been observed during the state of hibernation. We will mention only one example here: The hedgehog, at a body temperature of 5°C, does not breathe at all for an amazing 56 minutes.

In controlled observations, it has been found that animals which hibernate show improved retention of learned behaviour compared to non-hibernating animals. Again, it is not at all clear why this should be so.

Hibernation is not a prolonged period of constant torpor. There are periodic arousals during winter caused by the accumulation of metabolic end products or having a full bladder. The awakening process is often assisted by shivering, especially when the body temperature is very low. Awakening is a costly process because it takes as much energy to wake up as it does to stay in hibernation for ten days. The ground squirrel, Spermophilus citellus gains around 150-200 g of fat before hibernation. That is more than enough for the energy being used up during sleep; the excess is needed for the wakening up intervals which occur fortnightly.

A number of hypotheses have sought to explain how hibernation is triggered-changes in weather and climate, temperature, humidity and change of diet are among the suggestions. Apart from these causes, a protein was isolated from the blood of a hibernator bear in the USA in the 1980s which, when injected into rats appeared to induce sleeping behaviour in summer. Today it remains uncertain if this protein is the only stimulator of hibernation. If it is, we still need to know what other conditions are related to the protein level and its effect and how the level of protein is maintained at the right level during the animal’s life cycle.

What is already securely known about hibernation establishes it as a truly amazing physiological phenomenon. It tells us that the body temperature of some hibernators will passively adjust ambient tempeature from between 2°C to 32°C without causing awakening. The inevitable question is what advantage such behaviour affords the hibernating animals. Some small animals, because of their high metabolic rates are faced with an acute need for a continuously available supply of food and water. Controlled investigations show that dormant animals at cool temperatures lose much less weight than the non-dormant ones. It has also been shown that small animals can survive for at least a hundred days on the energy derived from ten grams of fat. Hibernation is, in other words, a survival technique, an adaptation to the conditions of poor or non-existent food supply during the winter months.

That is, however, something of a mechanical explanation which, even as a mechanical explanation, is far from satisfactory. The secondary question immediately arises of why this particular adaptation and not another-why not migration, for example, to areas where winter does not affect food supply so drastically? There are many birds and other animals which take this option.

A more satisfying explanation must surely consider what adaptability itself is, how it relates to the variety of life-forms, to the individuation of species and kinds, and to the overwhelming intution (which must touch any truly objective observer) that, at levels of subtlety and intricacy which defy comprehension, the survival and provision of each and every living form is minutely arranged and co-ordinated to create a whole that is thoroughly interconnected. The value of that whole is manifested in many different aspects-beauty, variety, efficiency, the rich warmth of life. Is it not impossible to resist the impression of a wonderful generosity within and behind the world of living forms?