Beginning in July of 2019, the Brazilian Amazon rainforest has been up in flames, burning up the lush foliage and engulfing much of the wildlife, along with many Indigenous groups, in its fiery wake. Yet, it’s receiving little to no media coverage due to the global community’s seemingly unconcerned liability to take action. Greenpeace, the international environmental organization, is holding Brazil’s current government under President Jair Bolsonaro responsible as the primary cause of the fires due to negligence. They claim that mass deforestation has been taking place at an increasingly alarming rate, especially following Bolsonaro’s election, and farming and ranching that have also been taking place in surrounding areas have been contributing to the rise in destruction as well (Greenpeace 2019) [1]. These problems have not been addressed in a timely manner.

Various ideologies, such as Dualism, have been heavily promoted within the past few centuries have also shifted humanity’s conscious to one that is less ecologically friendly and more materially greedy. Without help from the international community and the government of Brazil, the Amazon will continue to be subjected to destruction [1].

The Amazon is a massive area, covering roughly 2,300,000 square miles of South American land. It is one of the most important and critical components of the Earth’s delicate ecological balance and to date 2,240,000 acres have been burned due to the 2019 wildfires (in addition to the great amount of damage that has already been done). It is responsible for atmospheric oxygen composition and cleanliness, maintaining the atmosphere’s water cycle, and for the preservation of many rare animal and plant species. Much of the vegetation in the Amazon also includes important medicinal plant species that can be used to cure a multitude of illnesses and diseases [7].

Deforestation, which has plagued the Brazilian Amazon for decades now, is utilized for the establishment of farms and ranches, which has tripled the number of cattle present in this area and surrounding regions (Dwyer 2019) [2]. Farming and ranching have caused more pollution and the poisoning of, not only the lands in these areas, but the entire well-being of our Earth and atmosphere as a whole. Production of methane from cattle and other pollutants are consequential of farming and ranching, and contribute greatly to fire susceptibility of the Amazon. The fires have spiked in these areas where deforestation and pollution are at their peaks (Dwyer 2019) [2]. When it comes down to it, the Brazilian government, in general, expresses lesser concern, even though they make it apparent that they “may look into measures to combat these fires” (Greenpeace 2019) [1], it seems politics is snaking its way into crisis affairs and impeding them once again instead of acting upon them with optimism. [2]

In the past, Brazil was much more involved in helping to prevent deforestation in both public and private lands of the forests. In 2006, the government passed the Public Forest Management law. This law established concessions and funding for forest conservation and regulations involving deforestation in public areas of the forest. Other organizations and institutions that were established following this law being passed included CONAFLOR (a civil society forestry board), IMAZON (an NGO that monitors deforestation), FUNBIO (an environmental fund that budgets financing towards protected lands and biodiversity), INPE (a Brazilian space observation company that also monitors deforestation), and lastly IPAM, a governmental research institution that focuses on deforestation, climate change, and natural resources in respect to the Brazilian environment (Yale 2019) [10]. Indigenous individuals and tribes within the Amazon, along with private property owners, have also gone to great lengths to prevent deforestation and have made the most difference and impact in doing so (Yale 2019) [10]. It was ultimately a grassroots movement of people standing shoulder-to-shoulder, and not a specific government agency, that was able to make the most progress to preserve much of the Amazon’s beauty and help stave off deforestation [5].

Despite the efforts that have been exerted into the establishment of laws, policies, and government organizations in order to protect the Amazon, protection of the Amazon has been much neglected for now and for future generations. Other countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, also believe that Brazil is not doing enough. But, President Bolsonaro seems to have many political reasons to continue to resist international help to halt the fires and stop deforestation. His outspokenness of his pro-deforestation views has ignited a wave of eager ranchers and farmers to continue, and even escalate, their destruction of the Amazon (Specht, 2019) [9].

Religion and environment

As for religious and spiritual views of the environment, some people have manipulated various religious teachings to promote negative ideologies and views of the environment rather than positive ones. These ideologies argue that all animal and natural life was created to serve mankind, and that humanity has no responsibility to take care of our planet or maintain a balance of life in the natural world. The Indigenous people of the Amazon, such as the Xingu tribe, view these perspectives as “predatory” and are in fear that everything they know and love will be taken away from them due to the utter destruction, negligence and lack of aide provided by the government. Many leaders of these tribes call these events the “destruction of Mother Earth” and the fires that have been set ablaze are Mother Nature’s calls for help (Johnson 2019) [5]. To provide more of a visual, there are roughly 817,000 individuals in Brazil who self-report themselves as indigenous, and there are 67 known tribes within Brazil that do not have contact with the outside world as of now. The Amazon serves as these tribes’ livelihood. Many individuals who are a part of these tribes were born in the rainforest, grew up in the rainforest, hunt in these forests, and make their living in these forests; Amazon is all they know and love [5].

In an article titled “Dualisms – Environmental Humanities”, Dualism is outlined as one entity being viewed as “genuine and superior” while all other life is categorized as “other”. This concept has had major impacts on the way we as humans view the products of our environment. Dualism fuels the idea that the environment, and all non-human living beings within it, are put on this Earth specifically to serve us as humans and us alone. This ideology allows people to infer that there is a distinct separation between humans and every other living being on the planet, and that these distinctions make it possible for humans to justify destructive actions towards the environment. In addition to these ideas, the concept of “ecological consciousness” is found to play an important role in the relationship between religion and in being mindful of our consumption of our environmental resources, as we continue to consume them faster than they can regenerate themselves (Andrew 2019) [3].

Christianity and Islam are two religions that promote ecological consciousness and believe that the Earth’s resources should be treasured and treated with respect. This places a strong emphasis on environmental protection and environmental rights, which thus encourages followers and believers of the religion to do the same. Religion provides us with morals and values that can be adopted when it comes to our views of all other living things whom also share this Earth with us; not only our views of these beings, but how we treat these beings as well. Finally, Christianity and Islam argue that “being a servant of God” also encompasses the idea that Man must protect what God has entrusted him with, the environment included (Pahl 2018). Specifically in regards to Islamic views, Tawhid, meaning the “oneness of God”, is a critical component that Islam bases itself upon. The religion of Islam, like Christianity and Judaism, is a monotheistic religion, meaning that these religions base their values and morals on the belief that there is only one God. All existence, including the human beings, are His creation, and in that sense they are part of the one same whole and exist interdependently [4][9].

Despite the disregard of public outcries, there are ways that everyday individuals, such as ourselves, may combat this issue head on and on our own without aide from government agencies. Our first mission should be to make this issue as public as possible. Share as much reliable news coverage as you possibly can and spread the word as far as it will go. If you are able, donate to wildlife conservation and forestation projects held locally or online. Spread knowledge and education. Call attention to higher powers. Other ways in which the everyday community can make a difference include supporting Indigenous groups and tribes residing in the Amazon; begin developing an allyship by using less paper and wood products, by consuming more ethically sourced foods, by voting, and by challenging large corporations who are impeding on the health improvement of the Amazon [8].

Let’s take action! The Amazon, its people, and its wildlife need the world’s cooperation, or they do not stand a chance against the ravenous gluttony that is deforestation. We can save the lungs of our Earth together.

References

1. Amazon Rainforest. (n.d.). Retrieved August 22, 2019, from https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/forests/amazon-rainforest/
2. Dwyer, C. (2019, August 21). Tens of Thousands of Fires Ravage Brazilian Amazon, Where Deforestation Has Spiked. Retrieved August 22, 2019, from https://www.npr.org/2019/08/21/753140642/tens-of-thousands-of-fires-ravage-brazilian-amazon-where-deforestation-has-spikeA.
3. UNSW Australia 2016. “Dualisms – Environmental Humanities.” FutureLearn, www.futurelearn.com/courses/remaking-nature/0/steps/57394.
4. Pahl, Justin. 2019. “Nature and Environment in Contemporary Religious Contexts.” The Fountain. Retrieved August 29, 2019 (https://fountainmagazine.com/2018/issue-126-november-december-2018/nature-and-environment-in-contemporary-religious-contexts).
5. Johnson, Jake. 2019. “Indigenous Tribes on Front Line of Amazon Rainforest Fires Vow To Resist Bolsonaro’s ‘Destruction of Mother Nature.’” Common Dreams. Retrieved (https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/08/27/indigenous-tribes-front-line-amazon-rainforest-fires-vow-resist-bolsonaros).
6. Saving the Rainforests. (n.d.). Retrieved October 16, 2019, from http://www.srl.caltech.edu/personnel/krubal/rainforest/Edit560s6/www/preserve.html.
7. Kessler, Robert. 2019. “The Amazon Is Burning.” EcoHealth Alliance. Retrieved October 18, 2019 (https://www.ecohealthalliance.org/2019/08/the-amazon-is-burning?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI59uAtoKm5QIVCNRkCh0_eAvsEAAYASAAEgI_q_D_BwE).
8. Specht, Doug. n.d. “Amazon Fires: 8 Ways You Can Help Stop the Rainforest Burning.” Public Radio International. Retrieved October 18, 2019 (https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-08-29/amazon-fires-8-ways-you-can-help-stop-rainforest-burning)
9. “Quick Links.” IslamiCity. Retrieved October 18, 2019 (https://www.islamicity.org/topics/tawhid-oneness-of-god/).
10. Yale University. (n.d.). Retrieved October 27, 2019, from https://globalforestatlas.yale.edu/amazon/forest-governance/brazil.

As recounted in the Qur’an (14: 34–41), Abraham left his wife Hagar and son Ishmael in the valley of Mecca on God’s command. There was the Ka’ba there, but it had been destroyed in time. When Ishmael was young, Abraham re-constructed the Ka’ba together with him. Because of the sanctity of the Ka’ba, people began to settle around it, and this is how Mecca appeared as a town and a center of pilgrimage and trade connecting merchants on caravans from Syria and Jordan, all the way to Abyssinia (Ethiopia). Organized in tribes, Mecca suffered from racial fanaticism and feudal warfare for centuries, leaving women without a value as they could not take part in wars.

In a larger context, the Byzantium and Persian Empires were in constant conflict and intermittently fought for over sixty years, which exhausted their respective peoples. There was a desperate need for a message that prioritized peace over war, a message that celebrated freedoms and rights for everyone regardless of color, race, or gender. And came the Prophet from Mecca, who taught and promised all of these. He was not alone in his mission, and his closest Companion was Abu Bakr.

Also called As-siddiq (“The Upright” in Arabic), Abu Bakr was approximately two years younger than the Prophet. Before embracing Islam, he was known as Abdul Ka’ba (the servant of Ka’ba), then the Prophet changed his name to Abdullah (the servant of God).

Among the youth, frolics, dissipations and frivolities were very common behaviors, but Abu Bakr was completely different. He had a very disciplined life. Once he was asked if he had drunk wine in his days of ignorance. He said he had never touched the wine because he had wanted to keep his reputation and respectability. This shows that he enjoyed a good reputation and respectability even before Islam (Ibn al-Athir, 1280).

He did not receive a formal education as many other Arab men, but he was a keen observer; he was continually observing what was going on around him. He had a very good memory. He could recite verses if he heard them only once. He attended poetical events (Ibn al-Athir, 1280).

Abu Bakr traveled to different countries including Abyssinia, Yemen, and Syria. These business trips brought him wealth, experience and broadened his outlook on life. He became one of the richest businessmen of Mecca. Accordingly, his social importance increased among people. He was hardworking, generous, friendly, truthful, committed. He had a lot of influence among his friends and acquaintances. As a trader, he was always fair, he never deceived people. He would visit the sick; he gave alms to the poor (at-Tabarî, 1987). One day the Prophet asked his people, “Is there anyone here who visited a sick one today?” Abu Bakr said, “I did.” “Is there anyone who fasted today?” Abu Bakr said, “I did.” “Is there anyone who participated in a funeral?” Abu Bakr said, “I did.” “Is there anyone who assisted someone who was poor?” Abu Bakr said, “I did.” Then the Prophet said, “Whoever does these four deeds in one day is counted among the people of heaven.”

While Abu Bakr was still young, he volunteered for an office which decided the blood money for the killed or injured. It was like a judge or magistrate’s office. He always satisfied both sides with his fair decisions. (at-Tabarî, 1987).

When God’s message was revealed to Muhammad, the first man to believe in him was Abu Bakr. On the day that he stated his belief, he gave his decision quickly and without hesitation showing he had complete trust in Muhammad. The Prophet admired his acceptance of Islam with the words, “Except Abu Bakr, everyone I have invited to Islam has experienced some period of hesitation. But Abu Bakr accepted my invitation without any hesitation” (Bukhari, 870). In fact, Abu Bakr had always doubted the validity of idolatry and had no enthusiasm for worshiping idols.

When Islam began to spread in Mecca, Meccan polytheists inflicted torture and intimidation on the believers, forcing many of them to immigrate to Abyssinia. Yet, Abu Bakr did not leave. He preferred to stay with the Prophet to support him in his time of need. And he was going to be the company to the Prophet in the Hijrah, his historic journey to Medina, which would transform the course of history forever.

Later when the battles of Badr and Uhud took place between Muslims and the Arab pagans, Abu Bakr, along with a few other companions, was entrusted with the Prophet’s safety. When Mecca was at last subdued in 630 AD, all the tribes of Arabia were convinced that Muhammad was a messenger sent to them by God. They stopped resisting and sent delegates to Medina proclaiming their allegiance to him. While he was busy receiving delegates, he entrusted Abu Bakr to preside over the pilgrims. This incident proved of vital importance later when a caliph was chosen after the death of the Prophet (Ibnal-Kathir, Isma’il, 1932).

His leadership

The Prophet made a pilgrimage two years after the conquest of Mecca. This would be called the “Farewell Pilgrimage,” as the Prophet became ill on his return to Medina and died two weeks after the illness. During the last days of his illness, he could not lead the prayers in the Mosque. He gave instructions to his wife Aisha to tell her father Abu Bakr to lead the prayers. This was taken by the Muslims as another sign to choose Abu Bakr to be their caliph after the Prophet’s departure (Ibn Hisham, 1992).

When the Prophet died in 632 AD, many people, among whom was ‘Umar bin al-Khattab, were shocked and refused to believe that he died. But Abu Bakr, steadfast as usual, addressed the bewildered masses and convinced them that Muhammad was no more than a Prophet like other Prophets who had died before him, and that there was no reason why they should not acknowledge his death. After much debate, in which both sides—the Medinans and the Meccans—expressed their opinions elaborately and freely, Abu Bakr was unanimously accepted to be the first Caliph. Soon there was a public meeting in the Mosque, and people from near and far flocked there to swear their oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr (Ibn Hisham, 1992).

The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, categorically rejected racism and tribalism. He also put an end to tribal wars. Sir William Muir makes the following comment:

The first peculiarity, then, which attracts our attention is the subdivision of the Arabs into innumerable bodies… each independent of the others: restless and often at war amongst themselves; and even when united by blood or by interest, ever ready on some significant cause to separate and give way to an implacable hostility. Thus at the era of Islam the retrospect of Arabian history exhibits, as in the kaleidoscope, an ever-varying state of combination and repulsion, such as had hitherto rendered abortive any attempt at a general union… The problem had yet to be solved, by what force these tribes could be subdued or drawn to one common center; and it was solved by Muhammad (Muir,1988).

Instead of tribalism and tribal attachment, the Prophet Muhammad instituted virtue and God-consciousness. He also instituted allegiance or public consent. People were free to elect their administrator. So after the Prophet’s death, his followers came together and discussed among themselves who would be their new leader. Since the one who would lead the newly-established Muslim community would succeed the Prophet in his leadership in all things except Prophethood, he was named the Successor. The Caliph means the one who succeeds. So the leaders of the Muslim community after the Prophet’s death were called Caliph.

1- The Wars of Apostasy

Abu Bakr had to struggle with apostates and false prophets. What elements caused the wars of apostasy? First, the death of the Prophet was a great shock to Muslims. For the first time in the lives of both the Meccans and the Medinans, they were united around a single religion. Their centuries-old customs and feudal or tribal values and understandings were abolished. Their absorption of the new system would not be easy. They accepted this system in the footsteps of the Prophet Muhammad. So his death was a great shock. Adoption of the new system was difficult especially for the newly-converted desert tribes. Some of them left the new religion and followed false prophets who appeared among them and called them back to their old customs.

Secondly, Islam instituted zakat (alms-giving or charity). It was collected from the rich and spent for the well-being of the poor and for the wayfarers left without money to complete their travel. It was also used for those who cannot pay their debts, and for those who strive in “God’s cause”. Some desert tribes refused to pay it after the Prophet’s death. This signaled their revolt against the new administration in Medina.

Thirdly, the influence of the Romans from the north and the Persians and the Abyssinians from the east and the south encouraged the distant tribes to return back to their own beliefs and customs. (As?m, 1981).

Abu Bakr succeeded in putting down the rebellions and re-instituted unity in Arabia. His good reputation among people, his character, and his wise measures were influential in surpassing the rebellions and re-instituting the unity. He sent military units against the revolting tribes. In the end, those tribes gave up their disobedience.

2- Usame’s punitive expedition

The changes brought about by the Muslims in Arabia drew the attention of the Roman (Byzantium) Empire. In order to prevent their growing strength, they sent armies. During the time of the Prophet, Roman and Muslim armies fought in Muta, on the border of Jordan. No side could overpower the other in this first encounter. One year before the Prophet’s death, Romans organized another powerful army. On hearing this, the Prophet left Medina with his army and went as far as Tabuk, in the far north of Arabia. However, the Prophet’s illness caused this army to stay in Madina without departing. After his death, due to the news of rebellions in some desert tribes, some Muslims wanted to cancel this expedition. But Abu Bakr, as the newly-chosen Caliph, firmly opposed the idea, saying: “I will never cancel anything initiated by the Prophet”. The curious thing about this army was that it was made up of mostly the early Companions of the Prophet, but its leader was Usame ibn Zayd, who was only 18 years old. During the lifetime of the Prophet, his old Companions objected, but they were given a heated sermon in which both Usame and his father were praised as competent leaders (At-Tabarî, 1987).

3- Compilation of the Qur’an

1200 Muslims were killed in the battle called Aqraba, among them were many who were committing the Qur’an to memory. Umar ibn al Khattab, whose brother Zayd was among the dead, thought deeply of what might happen if wars continued and more such people were killed. He reached the conclusion that if the Qur’an was to be preserved, it ought to be compiled into one volume. At that time, it was scattered among the companions of the Prophet, with each preserving certain portions of it. Methods of preservation differed. Some had it written on parchment; others on palm branches stripped of leaves; a third group was written on bones; and a fourth on stone tablets; a large number also memorized it by heart. If many of those who had memorized it were killed, then a part of the Holy Book might disappear. So Umar went to the caliph, who was then sitting in the Prophet’s grand Mosque. He discussed his idea with him, but Abu Bakr rejected it because it was not something done by the Prophet. A lengthy debate followed, after which Abu Bakr was convinced that Umar was right (Ezzati, 1978).

Abu Bakr’s compilation of the Qur’an is regarded by many as his most significant legacy. It was even more significant than the wars of apostasy and the conquest of Iraq and Syria. Ali ibn Abi Talib used to say: “May God have mercy upon Abu Bakr! He is worthy of being superbly rewarded because he was unique in compiling the Qur’an” (Ibn Hajar, 1988).

Harun Gultekin is a teacher at Pioneer Academy of Science, New Jersey.

References

• Al-Bukhari, Muhammad. 870. SahihBukhari. Haidth no: 4/1701.
• at-Tabarî. 1987. Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Jarir, Tarikh al-Umamwa al-Muluk, Beirut.
• Cevdet, Ahmed (Pa?a). 1976. K?sas-? Enbiya ve Tavarih-i Hulefa, Bedir Publishing, Istanbul.
• Ezzati, Abul-Fazl. 1978. An Introduction to the History of the Spread of Islam, London, News and Media Ltd.
• Ibn al-Athir. 1280. Usd al-ghaba fi ma’rifat al-sahaba, Cairo.
• Ibn al-Kathir, Abu’l-Fida’ Isma’il. 1932. al-Bidayahwa’n-Nihayah, Vol. 14, Beirut.
• Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani. 1988. Al-Isabah fi Tamyiz as-Sahabah, Daru’l-Bayan, Cairo.
• Ibn Hisham. 1992. al-Sirah an-Nabawiya, Dar al- Fikr, Beirut.
• Köksal, M. Asim. 1981. ?slâmTarihi, ?amil Publishing, Istanbul.
• Muir, Sir William. 1988. Life of Muhammad, Osnabrück: Biblio.

When the Prophet was forced to immigrate to Medina, the population was “a mixture” (akhlāt) of many different tribes (predominantly Arabic and Jewish), who had been fighting for nearly a century, causing “civil strife,” and it was for this reason that the Prophet was summoned there (Peters 1994, 4). Tribal fighting and a lack of governance in Medina (known as Yathrib) meant disputes were dealt with “by the blade” on many occasions, which deepened the divides and fueled conflicts. Karen Armstrong explains aptly the mentality and workings of the tribal system dispersed through war-torn Arabia, where the Prophet was striving for peace (Armstrong 2006, 19). “The tribe, not a deity, was of supreme value, and each member had to subordinate his or her personal needs and desires to the well-being of the group and to fight to the death, if necessary, to ensure its survival” (Armstrong 2006, 24). Such a system was, in a political sense, representative of the little cooperation between the tribes in the Yathrib. In this region reigned power hungry strategies, an emphasis on arms and strength in military, and a belief that clearly mediation was unachievable except by a trustworthy outsider who had no connections to the issues or the tribes. Not only did the Prophet fit these prerequisites, but his personal ambition as given to him by God was also one of spreading peace and unity, creating a community, or ummah, made up of diverse groups, through the teachings of the Quran and in the name of Islam.

The Quran states that the Lord “teaches by the pen” (96:1–5). This is indicative of the Medina Charter in that it is a reflection of these verses, which show that God is educating people and changing thought patterns through discussion. In this case, the discussion resulted in peace achieved through contemplation and through seeking agreements in which tribes felt they had benefited from the charter and had not been robbed of status or unresolved antagonism from the past. “Many Islamic rituals, philosophies, doctrines, [different interpretations of] sacred texts, and shrines are the result of frequently anguished and self-critical contemplation of the political events in Islamic society” (Armstrong 2006, 14). Islam places great emphasis on reason – the reasoning of the universe, of life, and indeed, of religion too. Al-Ghazzali (1058–1111) said, “Doubt is to find truth. Those who do not have doubt cannot think. Those who cannot think, cannot find truth.” Although this quote is more in reference to the philosophical side of Islam, it reverberates from the heart of reason – something that is central to Islam. Yetkin Yildirim writes about the use of one’s own knowledge and the absolute approach of reason. If the answer is neither in the Quran, Sunnah, or Hadith, then one’s own reasoning or ijtihad is required (Yildirim 2006, 109–117). So the Prophet, through the Medina Charter, was practicing Islam through action. For with reason, discussion, and contemplation, a peace treaty was created.

The mere formation of the Charter and peace were tremendous feats, and the content of the Charter itself reflects this magnitude. The formation of an ummah through respect and acceptance resulting in pluralism shows us one of the ways in which the Prophet combated jahiliyyah, or ignorance – the state of mind causing violence and terror (Armstrong 2006, 19). Examining some of the clauses in the Charter also shows how the Prophet managed to take leadership and create a lasting peace. The first clause, “They are a single community (ummah),” (Sajoo 2009, 94) depicts the ultimate message and goal of the rest of the charter. It marked the creation of a community, and the Charter served as a unifying document in a city of diverse groups, cultures, religions, and languages. The Prophet came to Medina with tolerance – an aspect of Islam which is fundamental to the manner in which the religion operates in foreign lands. “It is for this tolerance in the Islamic view that Muslims have looked at the religion of the people in the lands they conquered with respect; they did not intervene with their beliefs nor touch their churches” (Can 2005, 172). Clause 25 epitomizes the level of tolerance in the charter and also serves as an example of Islam in practice. “The Jews … are a community (ummah) along with the believers. To the Jews their religion (din) and to the Muslims their religion” (Sajoo 2009, 96) This statement ties in with the verse from the Quran (2:256) which says, “There is no compulsion in religion.” For in the eyes of God, as it says in the Quran “… those who believe … Jews, Christians, and Sabaeans … and does right – surely their reward is with their Lord” (2:62).

The Medina Charter reflects pluralism both in the content and in the history of the document. F. E. Peters explains that “the contracting parties, although they did not embrace Islam, did recognize the Prophet’s authority, accepting him as the community leader and abiding by his political judgments” (Peters 1994, 199). As there is no account of an uprising in history books and because the Prophet was there at the suggestion of the tribes, we know that he was never rejected. Because of the laws he introduced, the existing groups clearly did not feel threatened by his new presence or his new governance. The society was pluralistic, and it was not repressive. The Prophet – as clause 25 shows – never imposed Islam upon the people of Medina, which meant that they could still practice without disruption their religions and customs, aspects of life that were important to them. He did not create an ummah through denouncing all ways of life except for Islam or by recognizing Islam as the singular religion; instead he united all inhabitants of the city under one banner of ethical living and moral principles – commonalities between all humans and all religions.

The Prophet drew upon the essence of unity, respect, tolerance, and love to combine and create a pluralistic community. Clause 40 exemplifies this: “The ‘protected neighbor’ (jar) is as the man himself so long as he does no harm and does not act treacherously” (Sajoo 2009, 97). People were safe and respected and free to exert their beliefs and would be protected in doing so. This protection, however, could not shield them from treachery or wrong doing.

The Medina Charter is arguably the first constitution ever written incorporating religion and politics (Yildirim 2006, 109–117). And even though the politics of the region have changed since it was written – in recent times for the worst – Islam’s values have continued to spread and are lived throughout the whole Muslim world. Despite the hold of power that some governments still have over their people, the true face of Islam shines through in how people live, communicate, and approach life. I speak from personal experiences when I traveled through Iran, Turkey, and Northern Iraq in January, 2009. And despite what the media had to say about the people in those lands, my time there was spent in the houses of complete strangers, who showered me with hospitality that transcended any I had experienced before. Although the governing body has changed, the points of the Medina Charter and tenets of Islam preached by Prophet Muhammad still exist amongst the people. My heritage was accepted with curiosity and respect – just as the Prophet implemented in Medina between the tribes. My place in the society was welcomed with honest enthusiasm, and I felt a part of a community – like the community that Prophet implemented in Medina. I was exposed to mainstream Islam, which we hear so little about in the West due to the confusion which unjustly joins Islam and extremism together. I saw tolerant Muslims who saw me as another person who wanted peace and respect – not treachery. This is what the Prophet also accomplished in Medina – a community which was not based upon religion or ethnicity but one built on unity and acceptance. One built on tolerance. One built on peace. It seems the Prophet was aware that spirituality and faith cannot be governed, and for this reason alone, he sought unity and respect as opposed to discriminating between tribes and their beliefs.

In contemporary times, an analysis of the Medina Charter can give us insight into Islam and religious pluralism (Sachedina 2001). Medina marked the first real occurrence of coexistence between religions and groups in Islam and mirrors the Quran which “in its entirety provides ample material for extrapolating a pluralistic and inclusive theology of religions” (Sachedina 2001, 26). The Quran is the unquestionable and the absolute; therefore, it is the key to understanding religious pluralism in Islam. Clause 39 of the Medina Charter says, “The valley of Yathrib is sacred for the people of this document” (Sajoo 2009, 97). And so too is the universe, which is sacred to all of humanity. The Quran reveals that “the people are one community” (2:213), so if we are one (which we are) in the world, in the universe, then regardless of religion, it is God’s mercy and compassion which will save us. By differentiating between beliefs, we neglect that under one sun we all pray to a greater entity, a greater being. We were all created by God, so unity seems imperative and practical.

The Medina Charter is very relevant to current tensions existing between the Muslims, Jews, and Christians. Unfortunately, it seems that ignorance and fear, suspicion and disrespect plague the interaction and stereotypes that exist between these three great Abrahamic religions. In the post-September 11th era, a new wave of antagonism has arisen, and people around the Western world generally fear Islam. Sadly, people confuse the actions of nationalists and fundamentalists, who so unjustly hide behind a Holy Book claiming that their intentions are those of God, with what the actual religion promotes. As Rumi believed, the essence of all religions is the same, for they all teach love. The deep philosophical and even deeper spiritual teaching of Rumi is based on a state of mind that seeks mutual vision and dialogue, which I hope will be achieved one day, breaking down the polarized world of different religious thought. Another verse of the Quran emphasizes this need for dialogue, unity, and tolerance: “Surely this community of yours is one community, and I am your Lord; so worship Me” (21:92).

The Prophets action’s in Medina prompt us to use reason in our approach to the wide, diverse beliefs of the world – from Europe to Asia, North, Central, and South America to Africa and everything in between. It prompts us to understand how “the spiritual space of the Quran […] was shared by other religions” (Sachedina 2001, 23). Such an understanding reveals that Islam is a monotheistic religion that respects the rights of other faiths (Stewart 1994, 207). In a globalized world where we are connected so easily, unlike any other period in history, our mutual understanding of one another and our beliefs are the most important means to achieve peace and stability. It is in a contemporary sense, in a globalized world, that the Medina Charter is of such necessity. Inter-religious discussions took place with the Prophet in Medina, for Boase writes about a time when Christians performed their prayers in a mosque after a meeting with the Prophet during their visit (Boase 2005, 252). We can learn how in every country, a community, an ummah, is the single most effective way to produce a pluralistic state. The Medina Charter was a fusion of attributes which all world religions teach: peace, love, freedom, acceptance, and tolerance – resulting in stability.

Peace was achieved in Medina, not through the might of arms or the scale of wealth, but through the unyielding principles of Islam – tolerance, love, reason, and a belief in God – whether the God in the Bible, the Quran, or the Torah. The Medina Charter, arguably the first charter ever written, shows that Islam rejects the use of compulsion in religion and violence and that over centuries of human existence, the most effective way to resolve conflicts comes through mediation. The Medina Charter is an example that should be discussed and referred to in current conflicts. The creation of a community, or ummah, offers pluralism to everyone. For people are not judged on their beliefs, but on their actions. Persecution is the instigator of all tensions, and reason and tolerance is the essence of all peace. Just as in the streets of Medina, through tolerance and respect, we too may one day have a world-wide ummah, where a passing Christian will say, “Peace be upon you” to a Muslim, who will reply, “Peace be upon you too.”

Sean William White has a degree in Islamic history from Monash University, Melbourne.

References

• Armstrong, Karen. 2006. Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time, New York: HarperCollins.
• Can, Sefik. 2005. Fundamentals of Rumi’s Thought, New Jersey: The Light, Inc.
• Lecker, Michael. “Waqidi’s Account on the Status of the Jews of Medina: A Study of a Combined Report,” in Uri Rubin (ed), The Life of Muhammad, Great Yarmouth, 1998.
• Peters, F. E. 1994. Muhammad and the Origins of Islam, New York: SUNY.
• Ramadan, Tariq. 2007. The Messenger: The Meanings of the Life of Muhammad, London: Allen Lane.
• Boase, Roger. Ecumenical Islam: A Muslim Response to Religious Pluralism, in Roger Boase (ed.). 2005.
• Islam and Global Dialogue, England, Ashgate.
• Sachedina, Abdulaziz. 2001. The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism, New York: OUP.
• Saeed, Abdullah. 2006. Islamic Thought: An Introduction, UK: Routledge.
• Sajoo, Amyn B. 2009. Muslim Ethics: Emerging Vistas, London: Institute for Ismaili Studies.
• Stewart, P. J. Unfolding Islam, Lebanon, 1994.
• Yildirim, Yetkin. “Peace and Conflict Resolution in the Medina Charter,” Peace Review, UK: Routledge, Vol. 18, Issue 1. January 2006.

Notes

1. Muhammad B. Waqidi, ‘Umar al-Waqidi. Kitab al maghazi. Ed. M. Jones. London, 1966, as taken from: Michael Lecker, ‘Waqidi’s Account on the Status of the Jews of Medina: A Study of a Com- bined Report’, in Uri Rubin (ed), The Life of Mu-hammad, Great Yarmouth, 1998, p. 23.
2. www.ghazali.org

The Madina Charter is a constitution that essentially established the Madina city-state. The Charter was the first written constitution in Islam and arguably the first constitutional law in society. Before Prophet Muhammad’s arrival from Makka, Yathrib (later known as Madina) had a population of 10,000 that was organized into approximately 22 tribes. Approximately half the population was Jewish and half was Arab. Regardless of religion, tribes sought power through military dominance over other tribes, with the numerous alliances forged between warring tribes greatly contributing to the aggression. Constant warfare was taking a toll on the tribes. While some sought external military assistance for the conflicts, many were making preparations for the enthronement of a leader from one of the tribes. However, it was unclear whether each tribe would acquiesce to the leadership of a single leader from one of the tribes and if such a leader would be able to establish political organization, create military defense for the city, reconcile tribal hostilities, and define local rights and obligations as well as address the issues of the growing immigrant refugee population from Makka.

God’s Messenger was requested by the tribes in Yathrib to act as a third-party mediator to try and help resolve the on-going conflict between them. He had a reputation for being an able mediator as he had helped to resolve conflicts in Makka and was able to fill the leadership void that existed in the area. It was also common practice of Arabs at that time to refer their conflict to outsiders, and the Prophet had already been given the title, “The Trustworthy” by the residents of Makka. Finally, while drafting the Charter, he consulted the leaders of each tribe, thereby demonstrating his willingness to listen to the needs of all tribes.

The methods God’s Messsenger made use of in the creation of the Charter are similar to trends that have emerged in modern conflict resolution techniques. These methods provide an important source for understanding the concepts of mediation and conflict resolution in Islam, and subsequently, can also offer effective means with which to approach dialogue with and within Islamic societies and among non-Islamic societies.

The Charter, which was the first declaration of the area of Madina as a city-state, established rules of government and addressed specific social issues of the community in an attempt to put to an end the chaos and conflict that had been plaguing the region for generations. The Charter outlined the rights and duties of its citizens, provided collective protection for all citizens of Madina, including Muslims and non-Muslims, and provided the first means of seeking justice through the law and community instead of via tribal military actions.

The Madina Charter, which contains 47 sections in total, addresses the power structures that contributed to the conflict in Yathrib. The Charter expressly identified the parties involved in the conflict; the first 23 sections of the Charter address the Muslim immigrants from Makka and the Muslims of Yathrib, while the second half of the document is directed towards the Jews of the community. Prophet Muhammad also identified immediate physical issues in Yathrib. In the second section, the people of Yathrib are defined as one community to the exclusion of all others. Prior to this proclamation, the boundaries of Yathrib were indistinct, each tribe occupying a certain territory, with the whole of the tribal territories in the area not being considered as one, united city. Once Yathrib was established as an integrated community, The Prophet addressed issues of community justice and protection. The Charter established the course of law for Yathrib. The right to seek justice was shifted from individuals to the central community. The Prophet’s arrangements for community justice and protection encouraged collective responsibility. The Madina Charter was also the first acknowledgement of religious divisions within the Yathrib tribal system. Though he did little to change the organization of inter-religious tribes, the Prophet called upon the deeply instilled values of Islam and Judaism to fortify the agreement. These stipulations enabled the participants of the agreement to look once again beyond tribal alliances, thus making tribal lines indistinct.

Along these same lines, the Charter focused on relationships rather than group dynamics: the Madina Charter eliminated tribal hostilities by realigning residents, shifting the focus from militaristic rivals to allied religious followers. In the event of religious dispute, the document continued to decree that the participants of the agreement must act in good faith with one another Finally, interaction goals, including specific desires to maintain one’s sense of self-identity, were left intact by shifting the alliance from tribes (which were hostile) to religion, enabling participants to abandon tribal hostility without loss of face.

Before the Charter, Yathrib was a community of constant tension between independent, hostile tribes. The Prophet addressed these power struggles by establishing common goals that would serve the whole community. The Charter specifically advises mutual influence with the declaration that the Muslims and Jews “must seek mutual advice and consultation, and loyalty is a protection against treachery.” The Charter binds the parties of the agreement to helping one another against any attack on Yathrib. It dictates behavior for a specific instance of mutual influence. If the Jews “are called to make peace and maintain it they must do so; and if they make a similar demand on the Muslims it must be carried out.” Also, reference to a higher authority was repeated in both sections. The Charter also explicitly pronounces that future disputes “must be referred to God and to Prophet Muhammad.” The participants had placed a power that was external to their group that they would be able to draw upon in the event of their own power being or seeming insufficient. The power of the agreement was uniquely balanced due to its direction towards God. The Madina Charter addressed potential power complications by focusing the participants on their interdependence. The Madina Charter prohibited independent contention by participant groups that claim God’s protection, and states that the peace of believers is as one. Once again, the idea of being one community was emphasized and the participants of the agreement were made to recognize their power as a unit.

The solutions presented in the Madina Charter can be applied to questions concerning dialogue and conflict of today’s world: the Charter was created to address problems present in and created by a pluralistic society, the main characteristic of today’s globalized system. The constitution of the Charter created a federal-type structure with an authority that was centralized in matters of state security, yet provided the tribes a certain level of autonomy in social and religious issues. Prophet Muhammad only made final decisions in cases where tribes could not resolve disputes between themselves, and these decisions were based on the laws laid out by the Charter. The Madina city-state, while granting every citizen equal rights, protection against oppression, and a voice in the government, declared itself a brotherhood of believers, extending financial help to its citizens. Laws were also enacted to punish criminals, such as prohibiting help being given to a murderer. Finally, as prescribed in the teaching of the Qur’an, freedom of religion was guaranteed for each member of the community.

For a peaceful world, individuals must live within the boundaries of the lawfully created universe. In this modern age of science and technology, the Madina Charter could be a source for answers to questions about how to live together and how to solve and prevent conflicts between groups based on differences in culture and belief. The Madina Charter represents the principles of law and good and right reason, which is higher than any individual man. On the charter, God’s name comes first, as God represents the highest good and the highest principle of right reason. Thus, the Madina Charter can be a good model of ways to create and sustain dialogue in a pluralistic society, and of ways to build and conduct political and social relationships among different groups.