Paranoia is a chronic spiritual illness that disrupts a person’s ability for reasoning, balanced thinking, and judgment. Paranoia is a symptom of psychopathy. People who exhibit signs of paranoia often display the following four symptoms:

1. They ascribe an extraordinary value to themselves, expect others to do the same towards them, demonstrate attitudes of egoism and egocentrism, and look down on others. Their ego is puffed up even more when others give them what they want;
2. Suspicious of everything, they are constantly distrustful and apprehensive about being wronged;
3. They always see alternative developments around them as conspiracies against themselves, and based on these presumptions they develop extreme strategies just to be cautious;
4. In fits of delirium, they cause social disharmony and see themselves as the only one behaving correctly.

Such people make paranoia one of their ingrained character traits. They are perpetually afraid of losing the things they have somehow obtained. They invent imaginary villains and rebels, and crush those whom they take as opponents, if they have the power. If they are weak, they side with those who were nothing but a nemesis the day before; they seek to cause perpetual discord and commit the gravest atrocities.

They don’t merely commit hundreds of evils; as if possessed by evil spirits and devils, they block the good deeds of those who walk on the path of the Prophets. They seek to make those good souls seem like rebels and bandits, while also turning the masses into pawns for their evil purposes. By doing such things they also seek to prevent a global revival of humanity sought by those who strive to represent universal human values in all corners of the world.

On account of what they commit under the urges of the carnal soul and passing fancies, such people disrupt society; ironically they also cannot obtain their goals, either. To the contrary, with their paranoia-based acts, they have turned their lives and the lives of those around them into Hell.

As a paranoid individual operates based on destruction, which is easily done, they also ascribe favorable outcomes to their own insight and sagacity. They see others as abnormal—like lunatics do—while continually exhibiting different kinds of insanity. By considering those who do not think like them as traitors and terrorists, they live in fear of losing what they possess. They order special troops to guard them, but they still don’t feel safe.

Paranoids who come from poor backgrounds and obtain important positions and titles later on with a turn of fate are especially seized by every kind of delirium—partially due to their inferiority complex—and a paranoia about losing their power and fortune to others. They are agonized by successions of misgivings. They see angels, and angel-spirited people, as if they are snakes and set about complimenting devils.

The Pharaoh was one such paranoid individual. Uneasy of the possibility that one day Moses (pbuh) and the Children of Israel could become stronger, he did not only make life a misery for himself and the unwise ones behind him, but also shed the blood of so many people—just like contemporary pharaohs do—and committed manifold atrocities. When his time was up, destiny removed him from the stage.

History gives us many such examples, and it marks a route of caution for those with insight. Although times have their relevant differences of color, pattern, name, and titles, within the cycle of historical recurrences, no era was free of such human-like creatures. From the Pharaoh to Haman, from Nebuchadnezzar to Shapur, from Stalin to Hitler, and to those like Yazid in their footsteps, so many paranoid individuals have come to the fore, performing the same evils and disgracing humanity. They built villas and palaces for themselves, employed the same wicked ways, and followed the same devilish path. They kept living with misgivings, were haunted by fears of losing the power they had, and to prevent this they defamed and persecuted thousands and millions of decent countrymen.

Recent history is full of examples. Hitler left behind ruins in Germany and killed millions of innocents. In Iran, the Shah – fearing the loss of his power – ruthlessly massacred dissidents. Saddam Hussein, afraid of facing the same fate as the Shah, mowed down those he thought-to-be his opponents. And Qaddafi was no different either. He ravaged his country, all to preserve his own power, in fear of an illusory opponent.

Other paranoids who emerged like hellish zaqqum trees in the Islamic world act no differently: people are thrown in prison for trivial reasons, mothers and their children are separated from one another, innocent people are killed by torture, law and justice are trampled underfoot. So-called “scholars” serve as henchmen to these modern-day pharaohs. Killings and torture go unpunished. Creatures in human form gawk at these, mute devils (who do not object to injustice) simply watching wicked atrocities without any emotion or action.

Now, what falls to those oppressed is to fix their eyes beyond the horizons and pray for God’s help to come and free them from their chains. Above all, if only we—as all oppressed and suffering believers—could learn to say “goodness lies in what God has decreed and brought to being,” and thus not complain about Divine destiny.… If only we could internalize the meaning of the prayer “we are pleased with God as our Lord,” as expressed in:

Even if it is a hardship from Your Majesty,
Or ease from Your Beauty,
For our soul, both are serenity
Your Grace is so good, and so is Your wrath.
Yunus Emre

If only we could feel this sentiment at every breath. If only we could have a deep respect for God and live satisfied with the creed of:

Whatever Divine Destiny decreed is surely bound to happen,
Commit your affairs to God; neither be grieved nor suffer any pain.
nderuni Vasif

If only we could see what we go through as pools of spiritual purification, as expressed in:

God lets those whom He loves be purified by means of troubles,
Just as pure waters wash away impurities

If only we could murmur with this consideration and find consolation. If only we said, “Every oppression and wicked act has a certain term until it incurs Divine retribution,” and as a respect to that appointed term, if only we said:

A day will come when God will make oppressors say,
God has indeed preferred you above us.”
(Ziya Pasha, with reference to Yusuf 12:91)

Then, we could commit everything to their true Owner. If only we could see the end but not the present, with the belief that, “Those who rise with oppression are bound to face a terrible end,” based on the truth, “unbelief will continue, but oppression will not.”

If only we could leave everything (beyond our capability) to the All-Knowing One with the belief expressed in:

For the oppression of a tyrant,
there is God for the oppressed
Tormenting people today is easy,
only to stand trial tomorrow on the Day of Judgment….

If only we did not complain while going through temporary misfortunes, and be reassured by the meaning of “God is sufficient for us; what a beautiful guardian is He.”

This was the very guideline and constant recitation of great personages; it must be ours as well. Let us say “these too will come to pass,” and without paying attention to the aspersions published by the oppressors’ media allies, we must turn our surroundings into fragrance centers with the rose gardens in our hearts and thus make everyone enraptured and elated.

May God the Kind, Caring, Bounteous and Favoring of infinite Mercy bless us with unshakeable will on this path, a resolute stance, and continuity in our resoluteness.

According to Al-Qushayri, fear forces a traveler on the spiritual path to hold back and refrain from displeasing God. As such, fear pertains to the future. Fear arises from one’s apprehension of being subjected to something displeasing, or uneasiness over not obtaining what is desired. In this sense also, fear pertains to the future. In many verses, the Qur’an points out the future results of one’s deeds and actions, and thereby seeks to establish a world that embraces the future, one in which it is possible to discern the future with both its good and bad elements.

Implanting fear in the hearts of its followers, fear concerning their end or whether they will die as believing Muslims, the Qur’an warns them to be steadfast in their belief and practice of Islam. Many verses cause hearts to tremble with fear, and are like threads with which to knit the lace of life. For example: Something will appear before them which they had never anticipated (39:47); and Say: Shall We tell you who will be the greatest losers by their works? Those whose efforts have been wasted in the life of the world while they thought they were doing good (18:103-4). How happy and prosperous are those who knit the “laces” of their lives with these “threads”! With such warnings, the Qur’an orients us toward the Hereafter and encourages us to consider it more important than anything else.

In His luminous Speech, God Almighty uses fear as a whip to force us to His Presence and honor us with His company.¹ Like a mother’s reproofs to her child that draws him or her to her warm, affectionate arms, this whip attracts the believer toward the depths of Divine Mercy and enriches him or her with the blessings and bounties of God; blessings and bounties that He compels humanity to deserve and receive out of His Mercy and Graciousness. For this reason, while every decree and command mentioned in the Qur’an and forced upon humanity originates in Divine Mercy and uplifts souls, they are also alarming and threatening.

One whose heart is full of fear and awe for the Almighty cannot be afraid of others, and is therefore freed from all useless and suffocating fear. In His luminous, hope-giving Speech, the Almighty tells people not to fear anything or anyone other than Him: Have no fear of them. Fear Me, if you are true believers (3:175); exhorts them not to suffer groundless phobias: Fear Me alone (2:40) and: They fear their Lord, overseeing them from high, and they do all that they are commanded (16:50); and praises those hearts that fear and hold only Him in awe: They forsake their beds to cry unto their Lord in fear and hope (32:16).

He praises such believers because those who arrange their lives according to their fear of God use their willpower carefully and strive to avoid sins. Such sensitive and careful souls fly in the heavens of God’s approval and pleasure. The following is an appropriate saying by N. ’Abd al-Rahman ibn ’Ahmad al-Jami, the author of Lujja:

If you are fearful of God’s wrath, be steadfast in religion,
For a tree holds fast to earth with its roots against violent storms.

The lowest degree of fear is that required by belief: Fear Me, if you are (true) believers (3:175). A somewhat higher degree of fear is that arising from knowledge or learning: Among His servants the learned alone fear God truly (35:28). The highest degree of fear is that combined with awe and arising from one’s knowledge of God: God orders you to fear Him in awe (3:28).

Some Sufis divide fear into two categories: awe and reverence. Although these terms are very close in meaning, awe connotes the feeling that leads an initiate to flee toward God, while reverence causes an initiate to take refuge in Him. An initiate who continuously feels awe thinks of fleeing, while one seeking shelter strives to take refuge in Him. Those choosing to flee make progress on the path difficult for themselves, for they live an ascetic life and suffer the pains of separation from the Almighty. However, those holding Him in reverence drink the sweet, enlivening water of nearness, which comes from taking refuge in Him.

Perfect reverence was a characteristic of all Prophets. When in this state, the Prophets fell down nearly dead, as if they had heard the Trumpet of Israfil and had been brought before the full Majesty and Grandeur of the Truth. They were always conscious of the meaning of: When His Lord revealed (His) glory to the mountain He sent it crashing down, and Moses fell down in a swoon (7:143). Among those brought near to God, the one nearest to Him and the master of reverence, upon him be peace and blessings, said:

I see what you do not see and hear what you do not hear. If only you knew with what the heavens creak and groan. In fact, they must do so, for there is not even the space of four fingers’ breadth in the heavens where angels do not prostrate themselves. I swear by God that if you knew what I know (with respect to God’s Grandeur), you would laugh little but weep much. You would avoid lying with your wives and cry out prayers unto God in fields and mountains.²

Here, the Prophet reveals his reverence that leads him to take refuge in God, and describes the awe of others that causes them to flee. Abu Dharr expresses this attitude of fleeing in his addition to this Prophetic Tradition: I wish I had been a tree pulled out by the roots and cut into pieces.

One whose soul is full of reverence and awe of God does not commit sins, even if he does not seem to feel fear. Suhayb was one of those overcome with awe of God. God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, praised him, saying: What an excellent servant Suhayb is! Even if he did not fear God, he would not commit sins.³

One who fears God sometimes sighs and sometimes weeps, especially when alone, in an attempt to extinguish the pain of being separated from Him, as well as the fire of Hell for him or her, which is the greatest distance between him or her and God. As stated in the Tradition: A man who weeps for fear of God will not enter Hell until the milk drawn (from a mammal) is put back into the breasts (from which it was drawn).⁴ Shedding tears is the most effective way of putting out the fires of Hell. A believer sometimes confuses what he or she has done with what he or she has not done and, fearing that the action has arisen from his or her fancy or carnal self due to a personal failure to resist temptation, feels great regret and seeks refuge in God. The description of such souls is found in the following Tradition:

When the verse: Those who give what they give while their hearts are in awe, because they are to return to their Lord (23:60) was revealed, ‘A’isha, the Prophet’s wife, asked the Prophet, upon him be peace and blessings: Are those (who are in awe because they are to return to their Lord) those who commit such major sins as fornication, theft, and drinking alcohol? The Prophet, the Glory of Mankind, answered: No, ‘A’isha. Those mentioned in the verse are those who, although they perform the prescribed prayers, fast, and give alms, tremble with fear that such acts of worship may not be accepted by God.⁵

Abu Sulayman Darani says that although a servant must always be fearful (that God may not be pleased and therefore punish him or her) and hopeful (that God may be pleased), it is safer for one’s heart to beat with fear and reverence.⁶ Sharing the view of Darani, Shaykh Ghalib expresses his feelings of fear: Open the eyes of my soul with a thousand-fold fear!

Notes

1. Fear is an essential ingredient in the stages of one’s relation- ship with God. When the person is able to remain between and balance fear with hope, true education and training in the way of God begin. While it may seem to us that we are being “forced” by God into His Presence, in reality we are not, for this is only one of God’s ways of reminding us of our true purpose. This is explained in the following hadith: “My relation to you is like a man who forces back those who are throwing themselves into a fire. You are throwing your- selves into a fire (by committing sins), but I am pulling you back.” This metaphor informs us that there are those who, although good-natured, believing, and inclined to good, cannot completely refrain from committing sins. To help them in their struggle to avoid sins, God, in His Mercy, may cause some misfortune to come upon them.
2. Tirmidhi, Zuhd, 9; Ibn Maja, Zuhd, 19.
3. Al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa’, 323.
4. Al-Tirmidhi, Fada’il al-Jihad, 8; Al-Nasa’i, Jihad, 8.
5. Al-Tirmidhi, Tafsir al-Qur’an, 24.
6. Al-Qushayri, Al-Risala, 128.

Western sociologists and criminologists have tried to explain away the gloomy statistics by claiming that the level of crime is much as it was–only the level of reporting of crime has gone up because, among other things, people have telephones! Or they have suggested that because people own more things (more goods in the house, more cars, etc), there is more opportunity to commit crime. And some have tried, without any objective proof, to accuse particular ethnic groups, especially blacks, of criminal tendencies. In the public imagination blacks are associated with mugging, violent theft, burglary, and all other sorts of crime. The implication of this view is that, somehow, non-black Westerners are, by nature, disinclined to commit crime!

Whatever the explanation for it, the crime figures are evidence of a problem that has to be tackled. The two main options address the problem preventatively or correctively. Preventive measures consist of increased security–better doors and windows, more locks and bolts, alarms, video surveillance, and the like. Such measures failed to address the crime figures because the crime was displaced to easier targets–to, for example, the houses of the poor who could neither afford the increased security nor move to ‘safe’ areas of town. On the corrective side, the policy (usually associated with ‘conservatives’)– tougher policing tactics, harsher sentencing, short, sharp shock treatment for young offenders–didn’t work either. Tough, military-style policing in certain urban areas provoked riots, looting, racial conflict and massively expensive disorder, and brought the police into disrepute. Neither longer sentences nor short, sharp shook treatments affected rates of recidivism: 60% of criminals still went back to a life of crime. New prison buildings had to be built at great cost, adding to the already considerable cost of keeping criminals locked up–an average of 2000 per individual per month.

Unable to resolve the problem, governments hastily adopted the ‘nothing works’ principle and handed over some of its responsibilities to local councils. Long sentencing and tough policing had to be abolished due to unpopularity and costs. New sentencing measures, probation and community policing were implemented. However, crime figures have continued to rise. The dilemma remains: long sentences mean unsustainable costs of running overcrowded prison services with a 60% recidivism rate; short or no custodial sentences mean letting the criminals onto the streets albeit with reduced opportunities–the poor being vulnerable whereas the rich buy security and/or insurance. 

The approaches so far tried are bound to fail because they do not attempt to identify the causes of criminality in a way commensurate with the complexity of the problem. They do not identify all the individual factors which, acting together, generate crime. The responses to crime have been simplistic: if the criminals were unemployed, try to get them work; if they were persistent offenders, lock them up; if some people were particularly vulnerable to crime, counsel them to get better security. But neither crime nor criminals act for motives as simple as that. If a criminal mind really wants to commit crime, giving the person a job or money may not be dissuasive. Consider the case of Robert Maxwell who was immensely wealthy but nevertheless stole his own employees’ pensions, or of the political dictators who have robbed their own people of millions each year. If poverty were the sufficient reason for crime, there would not be crimes like tax evasion, bribery, fraud, racketeering, price fixing, etc., which are usually done by the well-off. In fact none of the economic classes (nor any of the ethnic groups) in a society can be singled out as more liable to commit crime.

Existing theories do not adequately address the key questions: why some people commit crime whereas others, in very similar situations, do not; why patterns of crime differ in similar areas; why in the same family one member becomes a criminal but the others do not, or the other way round; and, finally, why some individuals, households, or businesses are more likely to be victims than others.

Conventional approaches look for answers to these questions dissuasire separately but none has ever tried to address them all together. The discipline of criminology is in a severe crisis as regards any competence to explain the causes of the phenomena it offers to deal with. Sadly, since Western society finds it very difficult to question its fundamental structures, it is most unlikely that Western criminologists will be persuaded to ask the right questions in the right way. Success and happiness, in modern Western societies, are defined in terms of individual buying power. Material expectations are constantly being increased with the majority of people having very little opportunity to catch up with them. At the same time, the system lacks the authority of moral norms–normlesness is the norm, individuals being encouraged to define their own norms as they go along. Offenders often say, for example, that property is insured anyway so there is no harm in stealing it. Meanwhile, the sense of insecurity and isolation deepens: in some urban areas, people do not even feel safe in their own homes.

The motivations to crime are diverse and complex. Some individuals, ambitious for success, are nevertheless industrious and law-abiding, others seek illegal short-cuts. Some may find no legal route to change their economic condition and accept it, others do not. And still others may not be ambitious at all and simply conform to the circumstances in which they find themselves. The question, here, is what factors lead particular individuals into several different behavior patterns. The answer is bound to be no less complex than in the case of disease where the susceptibility of a particular individual has many possible causes, not one.

Many conventional crime theories focus on a single cause and generalize the explanation to crime as such. Biologists may identify genetic defects in some criminals then deduce that all criminals are genetically defective (e.g. Lombrosso). But if human actions were all determined by our genes we would be like robots–and we are not. Besides, the latest researches show that brain activities are not controlled by genes. Or psychologists may identify a psychological disturbance among some members of the criminal population and, instead of localizing the results, claim that all criminals must be psychologically disturbed (e.g. Freud). Or sociologists may observe that the children of broken or ‘problem’ families are over-represented amongst criminals and infer a causal connection between poor family background and crime.

As against these approaches, it is essential to acknowledge the multiplicity of causes of crime and to differentiate offender types. A more credible analysis of causes must try to explain differentials in crime rates in different areas and the process by which specific individuals acquire criminal attitudes and/or behavior. The explanation must combine more than one factor on the sociological or psychological side of the question. It must, first, put the person in the centre of the investigation and then ask: How do people become the kind of individuals who commit crimes? What is it about the structure of a social system that determines the kinds of criminal acts that occur in the system and their distribution? What deters people from crime?

The individual must be placed at the centre of the investigation because only individualist theories can explain different patterns of crime in similar conditions. Class or social group theories cannot explain the only criminals in a family, given that all family members are exposed to the same economic, social or environmental conditions. Burglars are statistically expected to be young, school drop-outs and unemployed, but it is evident that not all the unemployed nor all school drop-outs commit crimes. That does not mean that social conditions are irrelevant, only that they are not deterministic. Social conditions of course do affect people and may even predispose some individuals towards crime. However, it remains true that most individual offenders choose to do what they do.

Having accepted that crime is not a product of single causes like poverty or social deprivation but of a complex of causes, any solution we seek must not rely on either preventative locks and bolts or corrective sentences in prison, but take a long term view. The long term solution is to bring up individuals with clear values of what is good and evil, as concerned for others as for themselves; who do not measure happiness in terms of buying power. At the same time we need a social environment in which the have-nots are not alienated from the haves, but all feel as if they belong together and are all cared for and protected by all. Cooperativeness and solidarity must replace individualism and competitiveness at the expense of others. If not, we encourage the cynicism of ‘might is right’, of crime as the clever individuals way of punishing the fool for being foolish.

The intensity and extent of crime in Western societies is an indicator that something is seriously wrong with them. There ought, in conscience, to be no evasion of the responsibility to question the principles and directions on which they are run.