El Fadl’s The Place of Tolerance in Islam consists of three parts: the author’s essay on tolerance in Islam, rebuttals to the essay, and El Fadl’s reply. While emphasizing that Islam is a tolerant religion, El Fadl also acknowledges the existence of intolerant Muslims. For him, certain interpretations of Islam, particularly those of terrorists, imply a deviation from the true message of Islam. He stresses that the existence of problematic interpretations is not exclusively a characteristic of Islam. All religious texts provide rich “possibilities for meaning…[T]he text will morally enrich the reader, but only if the reader will morally enrich the text” (p. 15).

According to El Fadl, a major reason for the emergence and popularity of misleading interpretations of religions is the claim to be searching for the “pure” version of religions. Yet, by emptying the Qur’an both of its historical and moral context, the puritan trend ends up transforming the text into a long list of morally noncommittal legal commands” (p. 15). For El Fadl, the self-proclaimed Puritans, such as Osama bin Laden, who claim to “purify” Islam from traditional deviations, misunderstand and misrepresent Islam. For example, they misuse the term jihad. In Islam, war is never holy; it is justifiable or not. Contrary to what the Puritans claim, “the highest form of jihad is struggle waged to cleanse oneself from the vices of heart” (p. 19). Nevertheless, since there is a vacuum of religious authority in Islam, the marginal puritans, may find followers.

The puritan Muslims, El Fadl notes, are intolerant of other religions. That view is against the message of the Qur’an, which says,

“Those who believe, those who follow Jewish scriptures, the Christians, the Sabians, and any who believe in God and the Final Day, and do good, all shall have their reward with their Lord and they will not come to fear or grief” (5: 69, 2: 62).

El Fadl argues that the true message of Islam is open to diversity and tolerance. There is no compulsion in matters of faith in Islam. He refers again to the Quran:

“To each of you God has prescribed a Law and a Way. If God would have willed, He would have made you a single people. But God’s purpose is to test you in what he has given each of you, so strive in the pursuit of virtue, and know that you will all return to God, and He will resolve all the matters in which you disagree” (5: 49).

The rebuttals to El Fadl’s essay are written by several well-known scholars. Two of their critiques are worth mentioning. First, some critics argue that terror can only be explained by socio-economic reasons and El Fadl’s theological discussion is therefore pointless. Second, some other critics also find the theological debate irrelevant, since the real cause of terrorism in the Middle East is historically Western colonialism and currently Western domination in this region. In his “Reply,” El Fadl emphasizes that, although socio-economic conditions are also important, theology is crucial, since Islam “remains central to the dynamics of public legitimacy and cultural meaning” in many Muslim countries. In this regard, a critical view of theology is needed to search for solutions to the socio-political problems of Muslim societies. He also adds that simply blaming the West does not contribute anything to the solution. Muslims should preserve and respect the real message of Islam, even though they have been oppressed by colonizers. Muslims, El Fadl concludes, should avoid political myopia or losing the moral ground by embracing an intolerant interpretation of their religion. Instead, they must go back to the real message of Islam, which calls for tolerance and respects religious diversity.

Awaiting a savior at times when basic credo of belief is ignored, abandoning religious duties has become common, and proper conduct as enjoined by faith has been forgotten in the world, dates back very early in history. Jews, Christians, even many people before them all spent a lifetime with expectations of a savior, especially when they had to face injustice and suffer. Throughout the ages of prophetic mission that was represented by a chain of messengers, it was always a Prophet or a Messiah for whom the people waited. After the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, people no longer await a messenger; rather they are expecting a reviver or a savior, a guide or a mahdi from the lineage of the Prophet. This mahdi has been called Mahdi al-Rasul, due to the perception that the Mahdi will be sent like a messenger by God and that there are signs of his superiority over the Fuqaha al-Arbaa (four great jurists of Islam: Imam Azam, Imam Malik, Imam Safii, and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal), saints of all ranks, and even the Qutb al-Irshad.¹

Islam and anticipation of the Mahdi

In religions like Judaism and Christianity people have always awaited a Messiah or a Mahdi, who will save the believers from sufferings and teach the faith to others. Such anticipation consolidated the believers’ spiritual power and stimulated the believers’ determination for revival. It can even be argued that the popularity of prophets like Moses and Jesus were, to a certain extent, a consequence of this kind of anticipation. People who gathered around each of them said, “He is the powerful will and determination that the previous messengers gave glad tidings of!” According to the New Testament (Matthew 3:11) the Prophet John (the Baptist), said, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance; but he that comes after me is mightier than I; he is one whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.” Although he was also a prophet, when he listened to Jesus, the most glowing youth of Nazareth, who was also his cousin, he saw his enthusiasm and influence upon people, and he said, “This is the Messiah we have been awaiting!” John’s glad tidings gave rise to further enthusiasm and expectations in the community, and his testimony for Jesus quickened the process of the apostles’ faith in him, reinforcing their belief.

The Children of Israel have always anticipated a Messiah. When they noticed certain features of the savior described in their holy book, their anticipation became a fire burning inside, urging them toward further research. Nevertheless, during the translations of the scriptures, or as they were handed from generation to generation, some kind of a mist covered this very important issue, making it impossible to see what was behind. Lost in this overwhelming mist, the Children of Israel became lost in their viewpoint and got mired down in denial, although the savior for whom they had been waiting was standing in front of them. They denied the Messiah who embraced everyone with forgiveness and compassion, saying, “You are not him (the Messiah).”

After Jesus another savior was awaited. The coming of the Pride of Humanity, the Prophet Muhammad, was anticipated; all his attributes had been very well defined and sought after. The glad tidings of this were announced by Jesus and the messengers who came before him. Bahira, the Christian monk, expressed this longing for the coming savior when he told the following to the Messenger, who was partaking in a trade caravan to Damascus: “You will be the Last Prophet. I hope that I can live until the day when you will declare your mission, and that I will be able to serve you by carrying your shoes.” Zayd (Umar’s uncle and the father of Said ibn Zayd, a Companion who was among the ten people who were promised Paradise) voiced the same anticipation when he said on his deathbed, “I know a religion will come very soon, its shade is above your heads. But I don’t know if I can survive until that day.” However, there were also many others who failed to see the pit in front of them, denying him, saying, “You are not him.” There were others who did not accept his message either because it was against their interests or because he was not of their lineage. But the glad tidings, known for so many years, that a savior would come caused the first Companions to embrace Islam and the Helpers of Medina to pledge their commitment to the Messenger of God at Aqaba. Anticipation of a Messiah had a great influence in the formation of the bond between the Prophet and his Companions, despite so many provocations and attempts to discourage the followers by the polytheists. The believers stood firm at the reverse in the Battle of Uhud and at the Battle of the Trench. In addition to the Prophet’s personality, appearance, message, persuasion, confidence, devotion, loyalty, and intellect, we cannot deny the role this anticipation played in the spreading of his message.

The origins of the anticipation for the Mahdi-Messiah in religion

There are almost a hundred Traditions of the Prophet which point to the return of the Messiah at the end of time and how this return will take place. At least forty of these Traditions are authenticated (sahih) according to the criteria determined in hadith studies; they are considered to be reliable by experts. Another twenty of this hundred are listed as being hasan, i.e., although not as certain as the authentic Traditions, their chain of transmission is considered to be dependable. Twenty to thirty other Traditions have a weaker reliability for their authenticity. To cite an example, it is reported in Bukhari, Tirmidhi, and Musnad that the Messenger of God said, “By God in Whose Hand of Power my soul is, the descent of Jesus, son of Mary, who was a just sovereign, among you, is soon.” In another hadith, reported in Muslim and Abu Dawud, the Prophet said, “When Jesus, son of Mary, descends the ruler of the Muslims will ask him, ‘Come and lead the prayer for us.’ Jesus will say, “No, you are rulers to each other; this is a blessing of God to the Muslim community.”

There is no verse in the Qur’an that has an overt reference to this issue. However, some prominent scholars, like Kashmiri of India, who compiled Traditions related with this issue, selects four verses that are considered to indicate the descent of the Messiah toward the end of time.

He shall speak to the people in the cradle and in manhood. And he shall be of the righteous. (Al Imran 3:46)

And there is none of the People of the Book but will believe in him before his death. (Nisa 4:159)

And peace on me on the day I was born, and on the day I die, and on the day I will be raised to life. (Maryam 19:33)

And (Jesus) shall be a Sign (for the coming of) the Hour (of Judgment). (Zukhruf 43:61)

We can also give two examples from the Traditions about the Mahdi: “The Mahdi is from us, Ahl al-Bayt. God will give him victory in one night. The Mahdi is from the children of Fatima” (Ibn Maja, Fitan, 34; Darimi, Mahdi, 1). “Even if there will be one day left for the end of this world, God will send a person from Ahl Al-Bayt to fulfill justice in a world of tyranny” (Ahmad ibn Hanbal II, 117-118).

As a work of His Mercy, God Almighty, at various times of disunity, has sent a restorer, a reviver, a respected vicegerent, a saint, a perfect teacher, or other mahdi-like blessed people to us. Such people have eliminated disunity, restoring and protecting the faith. Bediuzzaman gives Mahdi al-Abbasi as an example in the political arena, Abd al-Qadir Jilani, Shayk Naqshbandi, aqtab al-arbaa (four great saints: Abd al-Qadir Jilani, Ahmad Badawi, Ahmad Rufai, Ibrahim Desuki), and twelve imams in the spiritual arena, saying, “As this is the way of God, He will definitely send a radiant person from Ahl al-Bayt, who will be the greatest jurist, the greatest reviver, sovereign, mahdi, teacher, and the greatest saint against a grievous mischief toward the end of time.” Bediuzzaman also answers questions about the weakness of the reliability of Mahdi-related Traditions: “Is there anything that cannot be criticized in some way or another? Some scholars report with indignity that even Ibn Jawzi, a great scholar of hadith, listed some authentic Traditions as fabricated (maudu’ ahadith). Every weak or fabricated hadith does not necessarily mean that it conveys a wrong message. A weak hadith means that its chain of transmission does not certify its authenticity; but its message might be the truth.”

The return of Jesus

Some Islamic scholars consider the descent of Jesus as a person would be contrary to the divine wisdom of God Almighty. They rather think that it will take place as a descent of a “collective spiritual personality.” Some other scholars have interpreted Qur’anic verses and Traditions in a different way. Bediuzzaman, on the other hand, while not discarding the possibility of Jesus’ descent as a person, stresses the spiritual personality more, and interprets this descent as the conformity of the Christian world to Islam. He also argues that the descent of Jesus as a person might not be a distant possibility: “The Glorious Sovereign, Who sends angels from heavens to the Earth at all times, Who sometimes transforms them into human form as did Gabriel into Dihya (a Companion of the Prophet), Who make the spiritual beings from the realm of spirits come to this world in the form of a man, or late saints in an imaginary body, would certainly dress Jesus in a human form who is alive and resides in the worldly sky, even if he had gone to the farthest end of the afterlife and was really dead, and would send him for such a substantial result.” Bediuzzaman never went further into these details which exist in certain reports.

Claiming to be the Mahdi is deviation

The Mahdi-Messiah issue is an issue that has not only long been abused, but also one that has been exploited by unbelievers who try to slander sincere believers. Some of those who make such claims are pushed to the fore by certain powers and they are used against Muslims.

I believe the descent of Messiah as a spiritual personality is not too distant a future. It may indeed take place that this spirit, or meaning, may descend, and nobody should oppose this possibility. The coming of the Messiah as a spiritual personality simply means that a spirit of compassion or a phenomenon of mercy will come to the foreground, a breeze of clemency will waft over humanity, and human beings will compromise and agree with each other. The signs of such a phenomenon are already present: Muslims are sometimes invited to churches to read the Qur’an, it is now an accepted fact that Prophet Muhammad is a Messenger of God, and that the Qur’an is a divine revelation. Some people as well may come to declare themselves as “Muslim-Christians.” It does not seem improper to me to regard these as an introduction to the spirit of Messiahhood.

Abusing the expectation of the Mahdi and the Messiah

Many individuals throughout Islamic history can be listed to have attained a rank near to that of the Mahdi. To cite an example, Mahdi of the Abbasids, may God’s mercy be upon him, can be considered as a mahdi in a sense if we take into account his significant reforms, the straight path he was following, his respect for his predecessors, his reverence for the Companions, as well as his moderate and upright ideas about religious issues. Among the Umayyads, Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz was a mahdi in this sense. It is also possible to refer to some prominent figures from Abu Hanifa to Imam Rabbani, Faruq al-Sarhandi, and from him to Imam Ghazzali and Mawlana Halid Baghdadi; for they are considered to have had the characteristics of the Mahdi. Such people served Islam sincerely, without making false claims or pursuing personal interests, and they never claimed to be the Mahdi. The people who noticed their virtues gathered around them, forming a circle of benevolence. However, there have always been some opportunists, who desired to exploit such considerations.

Even while the Messenger of God was still among us, many liars like Musaylima, Tulayha, Aswad al-Ansi, and Sajah claimed to be prophets. In addition, in every epoch some have asserted to be “the person who will come at the end of time.” Similar to the people mentioned above and to the eight Dajjals who uttered that “I, too, am a prophet” soon after the death of the Messenger of God, there have been some people with sick souls in every era who state “I am the Messiah” and go even further to produce the evil claim that the Messenger of God was sent to the Arabs, while they have been sent for the world community. Moreover, it is reported in the Traditions concerning the Mahdi that the Prophet said “Someone from my family will appear and his name will be similar to my own”; that is, it has been indicated that the Mahdi’s name will be similar to the names of the Prophet, for example, Muhammad or Ahmad; a number of people have changed their names to fit in with this fact.

According to what was reported by Shatibi for instance, Abu Mansur, the ruler of the sect called Mansuriya, honored himself with the name “Kisf,” which literally means “piece,” claiming to be the Messiah and that the Holy verse Were they to see a piece of the sky falling (on them), they would (only) say: “Clouds gathered in heaps!” is referring to himself (Tur, 52:44). Indicating this passage and claiming that he was the Kisf he soon gathered supporters around him, as if he had indeed descended from Heaven. Ignoring the actual meaning of the verse, and only taking into account the action of descending from the sky, he argued to be the Kisf mentioned in this verse thinking of himself as a stone that had descended upon humanity. Similarly to what Shatibi reported, Ubaydullah of the Rafizis, who thought of himself as the Mahdi, had two councilors, Nasrullah and Fath. Nasrullah in Arabic means the “help of God,” while Fath means “victory.” As if to justify his status, this so-called Mahdi assured them with the argument that “You are the ones the chapter Nasr in the book of God refers to; as the verse surely addresses us, the promise that Islam will be embraced by people in crowds will come true via our own efforts”:

When comes the Help of God, and Victory, and you see the People enter God’s Religion in crowds, celebrate the Praises of your Lord, and pray for His Forgiveness: For He is All-Forgiving.” (Nasr 110:1-3)

These two examples, reported by a man of significance like Shatibi, are sufficient in terms of providing evidence for how names and attributes can be abused, how they are used in the service of disorder, and how they cause bloodshed in a particular geographical area.

The issue of awaiting a savior and the abuse of this expectation has not remained restricted only to religious life. Some people, for instance, awaited a savior in economical terms while others did so in a social context. Those who awaited a savior for economy focused their attention upon Karl Marx during a chaotic time of Europe which was mired in blood by the uprising of workers. Such people have highly regarded his works Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto which he wrote with Engels, and thus regarding him as the savior of humanity, and in particular, the working-class (the proletariat). Dr. Ikbal stated the following words about Marx in Payam Mashrik (News from the East): “a prophet without a holy book (!), who is voicing the people”s viewpoint”; he further depicts Marx as an ignorant, impolite, and impious character who is after various kinds of expectations; and this Marx was indeed greeted by some as the Messiah. Likewise, from Lenin to Trotsky, many others have been applauded as saviors. At times in the Islamic world, too, some have been viewed as saviors in nearly every country: from Egypt to Sudan and from Syria to Somalia. Some have even gone to such an extreme in apostasy, ignorance, heedlessness and unbelief that they even said, “Muhammad was the Prophet of the Arabs, or Medina; yet, this one is ours.” Several mahdis emerged among the followers of the Rafizi thought throughout history. Similar to the argument that the person who founded the Muwahhideen State was the Mahdi, many political groups that emerged during the times of the Umayyads and Abbasids were convinced that their leaders were Mahdis. The first sovereign of the Shiite (Ismaili) Fatimid State, which was established in North Africa and exercised power over Egypt later on, was believed to be the Mahdi by those who founded and sustained this state. Placing a child on the throne, they would gather around this pseudo-savior whom they considered to be the grandson of the Prophet, thus abusing the Mahdi-Messiah issue. Furthermore, the Fatimids declared independence causing further disorder as well as segregation in the Muslim community during a phase in which the Muslims suffered at the hands of both the Crusaders and the Mongols. As for recent history, it is as if the Mahdi-Messiah issue has provided a playground in which disorder can frolic. It has been abused to a great extent by a number of people, from the Mahdi of Somali to the great Mahdi in Sudan; the latter was killed and cremated by the English and his ashes were then scattered on the Nile—Dr. Ikbal wrote a great deal about this matter. There is also Bahaullah, who was applauded as the Promised Messiah, and Gulam Ahmad, who was engaged in Hindu yoga and meditation, having a tendency toward revealing the power of the soul and seeing hallucinations when he felt dizzy, due to his asceticism. This last person called himself respectively a mujaddid (reviver of religion), the Promised Mahdi, the Expected Imam, and finally the Promised Messiah. Later came Elijah Muhammad, who declared himself to be a prophet. A particular case in point is the Shiite”s attempt to keep the idea of the Mahdi on their agenda by announcing that “One of the Twelve Imams has been hidden somewhere while still alive, so as to be able to appear at a later date.” It is very ironic that they expect the savior who kept cover from the evil of the Abbasids will suddenly make his appearance as if from a neverland, during the time of the Dajjal (Anti-Christ), which is a much greater evil than was present under the rule of the Abbasids. This expectation should be investigated in terms of the essentials of faith as well. The expectation of a perfect Heracles has always been an everlasting characteristic of the oppressed and victimized nations. Many lazy, passive, and weak souls, who have completely sealed themselves to abolishing false beliefs through their own efforts, are busy awaiting such a Heracles who is to descend from the sky. As a matter of fact, there exists such a reality and there is a tendency to await a Mahdi in Sunni thought as well; however, the Mahdi, as understood by the Ahl al-Sunna, has not been attributed supernatural features at all. On the contrary, he is believed to be a ruler who will lead the society to Islam, and a man of science, heart, and spirit

It is necessary to watch out for abuses

Having been subject to abuses throughout the history, the belief in the Messiah and Mahdi might still be open to exploitation, while liars who claim to be prophets as well as imitators of the Mahdi and so-called shaykhs may well spring up. If a person can claim to be the Messiah, as Gulam Ahmad did, it is, then, necessary to study and analyze the issue in terms of the essentials of faith. What does he mean by such a claim? If he is trying to say that the Messiah has entered into him, as have some people attributed divinity to Jesus, and that he regards himself in this way, this is unbelief according to Muslim faith; the word “deviation” is too mild a term for such a situation. Yes, such a claim is blatant unbelief. By this utterance and claim such a person may mean to say that he is on a spiritual journey in the orbit of Jesus the Messiah, and that those who observe him are able, in some way, to see a (kind of) Messiahhood through him, due to the level he has attained. If this is what is meant, it is a paradox, as a person who has actually reached that level would never make such a claim. In addition, claiming to be a person of such a spiritual rank is the height of vanity. Abd al-Qadr al-Jilani may have really been a Mahdi, though he had never claimed such a thing. Likewise, Muhammad Bahauddin Naqshbandi might also have been a genuine Mahdi; yet, he had never associated himself with that rank. Though he equally deserves to be addressed as Mahdi in this sense, Imam Rabbani did not even consider himself to merit the quality of being human. To speak more frankly, those who belong to the horizon mentioned above are surely the ones who avoid claims and quests for high spiritual rank and status. Perfect analysis is required for such claims: Is it a wrong association arising from sharing the same level of spirituality?² Is it an error which stems from an overestimation by society? Is it the voicing of the confusion of that same society? Or is it rather that this person truly thinks that he is a chosen one? If they really believe so and claim to be the Mahdi, then this is an obvious sign of vanity, deviation, and a groundless claim that should be refuted. If, in the same way, they argue that they are the Messiah, then this is nothing less than the worst kind of unbelief. Nobody can claim “I am the Messiah,” as Jesus the Messiah came, and took his leave of us, going as prophet. This being the case, anyone who claims to be the Messiah is without a doubt performing an action that is as grave as claiming to be a prophet, that is, they are blaspheming. If a person born of certain parents claims to be the Messiah, it means that they have been reincarnated as well, an idea that finds no place in Islamic belief, where such a claim is regarded as a deviation, or even unbelief. From this perspective, one would never attempt such an argument if following the way of Ahl al-Sunna and walking in the light of the Prophet. As I have mentioned earlier, Bediuzzaman Said Nursi put forth the idea that “If there is a need for Islam, the manifest religion, to express itself in various places in the world again, the Messiah will come back right away, even from the remotest corner of the other world.” However, in order to shed light upon his general outlook, he interpreted the descent of Jesus as a spiritual personality. He further stated that the Messiah would be represented by a group or a section of the society. Yet, in this context, giving a particular name, or perceiving the personality of Jesus epitomized in another person, or declaring that a specific person is the Messiah, be he the great Conqueror Mehmed II, or Imam Rabbani, are all in essence unbelief. It is an evil claim that genuine believers are afraid to utter; rather they are on constant alert to avoid it. Some nave people might easily call those whom they overestimate as “the Mahdi.” As we have tried to emphasize, however, even if the Messiah were to come and descend in person, he would not do so as a prophet. The fact that he will obey the current guide of Muslims in addition to the fact that the Messenger of God, Muhammad, was the last prophet, both indicate that he will neither descend as a prophet nor will his spirit pass into another. If he were to appear as spiritual personality, neither those involved in this spiritual personality nor the leading figure would never come up with such a claim. Similarly, the person in question, or rather the spiritual personality, who bears the attributes of the Mahdi, would not claim to be the Mahdi nor would they ever make such an assertion. Thus, even if they do not believe themselves to be the Messiah, if a person remains silent against the overestimation of others regarding him who proclaim him the Messiah or the Mahdi, this means that he is keeping silent against deviation or unbelief, depending on the gravity of the claim. Accordingly, such a person would deserve more to be called “a mute devil,” based on the statements of God”s Messenger. Indeed, if one is addressed as “the Messiah” but, on the other hand, remains silent purposefully, not attempting to warn others against making this deviation, then such a person is no less than a mute devil. If the person in question wanders around claiming that “I am the Mahdi,” they indeed float on misery, and have gravely deviated from the path. It is out of the question that a Muslim would approve of any such claims. This issue, which was destined to be abused throughout time, has unfortunately become a tool exploited by the enemies of the religion, used to defame sincere believers. Moreover, some other people are backed by certain powers to emerge with such claims to use against Muslims. Such cases may well come to the fore in the near or distant future, just as they did in the distant and recent past. Some deviated people, as well as those who do not believe at all, might well take advantage of the expectation of the Mahdi-Messiah and exploit the meaning of such a title on behalf of their plots. This will be done in the name of deceiving Muslims through the exploitation of Islamic concepts and by condemning sincere Muslims to annihilation. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that care and caution be adopted against such plots and against the exploitation of such concepts.

Notes

1. Qutb al-Irshad (Master of Teachers): It is a title given to very exceptional saints, and according to Imam Rabbani”s definition they appear only many centuries after a previous one. Their teaching of faith has a worldwide influence.
2. Here we can give the example Khidr, who is a beloved servant of God and an important figure in Sufism. He holds a high spiritual rank and those who reach this rank through spiritual journeying are sometimes confused with the Khidr himself.

Unfortunately, the biggest millennial issue was the Y2K syndrome. Instead of focusing on this temporary problem, we should have been concentrating on evaluating the century we so recently left, and devising ways to improve people’s mental and spiritual capacity. However the focus was Y2K, which showed once more that advances in technology and science are not enough to make us happy. Now that this particular “crisis” has passed, to what issue should we turn our attention? In our opinion, we should focus on our need for a new philosophy to unite our hearts and minds.

Science and religion have been separated for centuries, and religion has been accused of being implausible and superfluous. But during the last years of the twentieth century, we saw some new approaches to understanding religion and reconsidering human beings as believers. Despite this positive development, some futurists still claim that the next century will be one of religious polarization. The strongest answer to this claim is to understand the meaning and purpose of-life: “Altruism, beauty, and sincerity are the essentials of the world. No matter what happens, the world will come to those essentials.”

The continued call for interfaith and intercivilizational dialogue are strong indications that the next century will be one of mutual understanding. This is the position taken by the author of our first article, who writes: “I believe and hope that the world of the new millennium will be a happier, more just, and more compassionate place, contrary to the fears of some people. Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all come from the same root, have almost the same essentials, and are nourished from the same source. Although they have lived as rival religions for centuries, the common points among them and their shared responsibility to build a happy world for all creatures of God make interfaith dialogue among them necessary. This dialogue has now expanded to include the religions of Asia and other areas. The results have been positive.”

The second coming of Jesus is another factor for hope. Perhaps he is the one who will unite our hearts and minds, and remind us of the reason behind creation. In this issue, one of our authors deals with this topic from an Islamic point of view.

We sincerely hope that the new millennium justifies our optimistic expectations…

A team lead by Robert Costanza, the director of the Institute of Ecological Economics at the University of Maryland have determined the cost of services we receive in nature. Among the countless processes associated with the miraculous sustenance of life on earth, such as provision of water, air, nutrition from the soil and animals, maintenance of atmospheric composition at the optimal proportions and concentrations of oxygen, nitrogen and carbondioxide gas, the following are indispensable to our existence: 

• The hitherto undiscovered remedies to fatal diseases locked up in the leaves, petals or the bark of unrecognized plant species in the tropical forests.

• The continual succession of day and night whereby, during daylight, mass production of oxygen through plants provides the gas needed for respiration by animals.

• The apparent life-giving effect of rain, where once drought and famine stricken landscapes are transformed to magnificently lush greenery in a few days.

• Above all, the magnitude and rate of energy emanating from the sun cannot be priced since it is next to impossible to attain, if ever, a fraction of it on Earth.

If we stop and ponder for a moment about the services provided through the manifestation of life, we will realize that even our own bodily systems are a service at our disposal. Our bodies function, literally, without our voluntary intervention at any point from conception until our last breath. This is surely a marvel for those who see, but a miracle for those who understand. Certainly this obvious and aweinspiring fact of our state could not be ignored or even priced in monetary terms. A more crucial question we must address, however, is this: in the light of such priceless service for the maintenance of our lives what will be the repercussions for the abuse of such a valuable trust?

As stated by one marine biologist at Oregon State University: ‘This calculation is sufficiently startling that it should make us wake up and pay closer attention.’ (New Scientist, No. 2082, 17 May 1997).

Additionally, we must also ask why such gracious and extraordinary services are put at the disposal and under the dominion of mankind? If we consider ourselves to be the ‘most evolutionarily advanced species’, then the processes which we call ‘nature’ should have absolute power, knowledge and intelligence that is beyond our comprehension in order for them to be able to understand our needs, let alone provide for us. Can we claim that the trees we are able to cut down with such ease, have knowledge comparable to ours that they bear fruits which are not only a pleasure for our sight and taste, but also a dietary need? Or can we claim that the environment which is so vulnerable to human tampering is the direct source of life?

Hence, the so-called ‘natural phenomena’ are incapable of knowing how to support human life with its ultimate biological, social and psychological complexity. Therefore, these inanimate processes must be pre-programmed to exist and are reproducibly sustained with impeccable accuracy. Their existence is certainly out of our control.

The existence of man must therefore be for a very definite and special purpose. Man thrives and develops throughout his life through the means provided to him. These means, on which he is absolutely dependent, are also the means over whose function and disposal he has limited power. How should he then value these riches, and use them in the way they are intended to be used, for the purpose they have been created for?

Endowed with lofty faculties like the mind and the intellect, his essential duty entails his conscious obligation to take on the immense responsibility to recognise and understand the subservient world around him. Through disciplining and training himself he must express due respect and gratitude in direct response to the generous bounty representing his life, given to him by the One other than those processes. His responsibility is immense, but in which lies a huge recompense. He has been created in a way that he may deserve the benefits, but will he make himself deserving of it? 

The Western powers have no objection to the most ruthless tyrannies for as long as they can easily manipulate them. Their interest is really in stability in those areas of a country’s life which allow Western economic interests to function and flourish unopposed. And the same Western powers will give no respite to a democratic country if their interests are jeopardized in that country by its people’s will to political or cultural independence. They do not refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of other countries and claim to do so for democracy and freedom. Their own record of human rights is by no means good: leaving aside the past excesses of colonialism and its present excesses in different guises, racial, cultural and religious discrimination has by no means ended in their own territories, rather concessions are regularly made to extremist political parties (ostensibly in order to deny them greater popularity), the number of crimes and prisoners rises unstoppably, and physical torture, especially of activists on behalf of minority interests, is often enough reported to he unofficially tolerated. Yet, despite their known record, the Western powers unashamedly claim the right to champion democracy, freedom and human rights anywhere and everywhere – if it suits them. They do so in order to justify to their populations the resort to military or economic force abroad. They never tolerate ethnic or sectarian factionalism on their home ground, but they take advantage of such differences in other countries to divide their peoples against each other and from their authorities, thus destabilizing them. While they themselves will readily wage war thousands of miles away to assert their interests in an island, they do not allow others to use their right of guaranty in an island on their very borders. The operations Western intelligence agents carry out in other countries are invariably presented as heroic acts, whereas directly comparable, even identical, actions others attempt to maintain their independence and self-defence are equally invariably presented as barbarism and terrorism. They regard it as their right to determine a new order for the world, for which they are ready to mobilize and project huge armies equipped with the most lethal modem weaponry, while they include in the list of terrorist countries those that try to guard their territorial integrity against separatist movements whose terror the Western powers themselves have encouraged in the past or are encouraging now. In short, the moral or philosophical value of such concepts as democracy, freedom and human rights is utterly compromised by the naked and cruel cynicism with which they secure their dominion in the world. The cynical abuse of these concepts reminds us of the famous chant in Orwell’s Animal Farm: All animals are equal but some are some equal than others.

Nothing stands so effectively against the cynicism with which power is handled in the West than religious belief where such belief is both serious and sincere and can seriously inspire political thought and action. Therefore it is no surprise that, from time to time, political opinion-formers in the West will take swipes at religion, claiming quite absurdly that religion is responsible for inspiring killing. Thus, in one of its latest issues, Time Magazine presents the Divinely-inspired religion – whether it be Judaism or Christianity or Islam – as a way of life that encourages ‘killing for God’. We do not deny the misrepresentation of religion by some extremist groups who take religion as a narrow political ideology, making it a means of displaying their hardness or rigidity or of sublimating their inferiority or superiority complexes. However, it can never be justifiable to blame any order or system as such, specially for something it essentially condemns, because of the wrongs committed by some marginal groups or individuals who claim to act on behalf of that order or system.

Religion is a contract between God and man, all of whose conditions are in favour and for the benefit of man. As a complex, civilized being in need (besides innumerable other things material and spiritual) of secure co-existence with his fellow-men, man seeks peace and justice in his individual and collective life. Just as individual motives differ from one another to a great extent, so too the ‘collective reason’ of mankind is unable to comprehend the true nature of that peace and justice and how to realize it in practice. Therefore, there is a felt need for a ‘transcendent’ reason, and this was granted to man in the form of religion, which is, in fact, an assemblage of the principles laid down by God for the happiness and security of mankind in both worlds and for the realization of justice in practical life. Since, in terms of his essential nature and needs, man has never changed, nor will do so, all of the Prophets preached the same fundamentals of religion, although there were naturally some differences in secondary matters relating to the ever-changing circumstances of life. This religion, which God Almighty chose for man’s felicity, individual and collective, and in both worlds, and which He revealed through the Prophets, including Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. upon them all be peace, is Islam. Islam means belief in and submission to God and thereby peace and justice in man’s individual and collective life. Judaism and Christianity are the names given to its distorted forms by others after the Prophets Moses and Jesus respectively. No Israelite Prophet mentioned the word Judaism. Jesus never claimed to establish Christianity on earth and never called himself a Christian. The word Christian is mentioned only three times in the New Testament and first by pagans and Jews in Antioch about 43 AD, long after Jesus had left this earth (Acts, 11.26.).

Islam can be best summed up in the Basmala, the formula pronounced at the start of every good act: In the Name of God, the All-Merciful, the All-Compassionate. The word translated as the All-Merciful is al-Rahman, which denotes God as the One who, out of His infinite mercy for all His creatures with no discrimination of plant or animal or human, of sex or race, of believers or non- believers, protects, sustains and provides for all beings. The word translated as the All-Compassionate is al-Rahim denoting God as the One who has special mercy for his good, believing, devoted and upright servants in this world and the next. Al-Rahman guarantees the life and provision of all beings, whether Muslims or non- Muslims, believers or non-believers. In addition, the Qur’an plainly states that the Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace and blessings, was sent as a mercy/or all worlds [all species of beings] (21.107). A religion thus based on mercy and compassion aims at reviving not killing.

Unfortunately, materialistic thought, fed by the extreme positivistic and rationalistic attitudes on which science is made dependent in the West, views life reduced to the physical or material dimension. However, the spiritual domain of existence is much broader and of greater significance for life. The peace, harmony and contentment obtainable in the physical domain depend, first of all, on spirituality. One’s spiritual life, which is based on enlightenment of mind or intellect through scientific knowledge, and the enlightenment of the heart and refinement of feelings through belief, religious knowledge, worship, and inspiration, has an essential place in the preaching of the Prophets. For example, the Qur’an proclaims: Respond to the call of God and His Messenger when they call yell to what will revive you [spiritually and intellectually].

Islam is, in the words of Mohammad Asad, a Jewish convert to Islam, like a perfect work of architecture. All its parts are harmonious/v conceived to complement and support each other nothing lacking, with the result of an absolute balance and solid composure (Islam at the Crossroads, p.5). Therefore, it gives almost as much importance to man’s physical life as it gives to his spiritual life. First of all, Islam regards each individual as the representative of its kind. In other words, in the view of Islam, each individual human being is of the same value as humankind as a whole. For this reason, Islam has condemned Cain, the son of Adam, who killed his brother unjustly and, since he opened the way to murder in human history, holds him indirectly responsible for all killings until the end of time. Also, for the same reason, because of the gravity of the sin, the Qur’an declares that one who slays a soul unjustly is as if he had slain all human beings, and one who revives a human being spiritually or restores him to life physically, is as if he had restored all human beings to life spiritually or physically.

It is clear that a religion which attaches to life much greater value than any other thing and presents the life of each individual human as being as weighty as the lives of all human beings will never preach killing for its own sake nor glorify it. Furthermore, Islam does not approve of compelling people to accept any belief. Islam aims to remove all obstacles before man’s free choice; it seeks a climate where beliefs can be freely preached. Once this climate is guaranteed, it leaves the choice to individuals themselves, which is required by the fact that God has endowed man with free will and calls him in the Hereafter to account for all that he did in the world. The Qur’an declares: There is no compelling in religion, as right and guidance have been distinguished, from wrong and deviation (al-Baqara, 2.256).

His enemies waged war on the Prophet Muhammad, upon him be peace and blessings, many times and forced him to sometimes wage war on them. In all these wars, the casualties amounted to only around seven hundred on both sides. By contrast, let us ask: Is it religion which was responsible for the scores of millions of people killed in Communist Russia and China? Is it religion which caused the Russian massacre of Afghan and Chechen peoples and the brutal suppression of the freedom movements in Hungary and Czechoslovakia? Is it religion that caused the death of a million people while the French denied the Algerian people their freedom? Is it religion which urged the US to its adventure in Vietnam, which cost a million lives directly and many more indirectly since? Is it religion or modern civilization, which its founders vaunt as the most advanced and humane in history, which caused the death of more than 60 million people, the majority of them civilians, and countless millions homeless, widowed and orphaned, in the two World Wars? Is it religion which is responsible for using scientific knowledge to make nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction with which to intimidate the poor and weak nations?

If the new world order which Western powers are trying to impose, in the name of world peace, democracy and human freedom, but in fact strictly for their own political and economic advantage, gives them the right to commit atrocities in other countries, why may not those who claim to serve God in order to clear the world of such atrocities and to found true peace and realize true freedom in human life, why may not they also claim the same right? However, we do not claim, as Western political cynicism does in practice, that atrocities and war-mongering can be justified for merely political ends. Only those actions sincerely undertaken in the name of God, the All-Merciful, the All-Compassionate, without any other motive and without going beyond the limits God has placed on individual and collective action, can bring about a revival of truly humane values. 

As an example of the level of sincerity of motive we have in mind, we would recall this famous incident: during a battle, ‘Ali, a noble Companion of the Prophet, upon him be peace, and the fourth Caliph, threw his enemy to the ground and was about to kill him. However, at this moment the latter spat in ‘Ali’s face whereupon, to his enemy’s surprise, ‘Ali released the man. He later explained that the man’s spitting at him had made him suddenly angry and, therefore, fearing that his motive for slaying the man was now confused and sullied by that anger, he had released him. The man became a Muslim and was thus revived both spiritually and physically.