According to a tradition, the Prophet said: All of the land is tahur (pure). (Muslim) Therefore considering any particular part of the land superior to another is not right. Every part of the earth is worthy of being regarded as God’s gift to humanity. According to Islam, the whole of the planet Earth is a divine gift to mankind and without doubt a blessing from God.
The planet Earth is a unique place in the universe. It has a life-support system for man. There is no other place known to have conditions where humans can settle. Given this, it is natural for a person to consider the planet Earth as a divine gift. He must have gratitude and love for the planet Earth where he resides.
Love of one’s nation comes naturally to a human being. A person loves his nation just as he loves his mother. Hence calling the nation as one’s ‘motherland’ does not go against the spirit of religion. Referring to a piece of land as ‘motherland’ is an expression of one’s sentiments and has nothing to do with religion.
In the present age, nationhood is based on one’s homeland. This is the right concept. The opinion that nationhood is based on religion is an extremist concept. It is not an issue of the Shariah but is being made to appear as such.
No one needs any instruction in this. What we must avoid is conditioning ourselves with wrong ideas, which may lead to negativity for our nation. We need to keep our natural feelings alive for the development of a national character.
Source: Source: Spirit of Islam August 2021
A principle I would like to share for nation-building is: “Perform your duties, and you will automatically receive all the things that you want.” Mahatma Gandhi also gave this guiding principle for nation-building in these words: Duty before Right. It is not merely a Gandhian formula. Rather it is a historically tested formula applicable to every country.
The best society is a duty-conscious society. The worst society is a right-conscious society. This is a universal principle, and there is no exception in this regard.
Enjoying one’s rights does not happen simply by demanding them. Rather, obtaining ones rights is an outcome of hard work. If you demand or protest for your rights, your efforts will be in vain because there is no one to hear your protest and fulfil them. In such a situation, demanding your rights is bound to be useless. Complaining or protesting for your rights is like crying in a desert where there is no one to hear your voice.
On the other hand, when you perform your duties, you become deserving of obtaining your rights. Performing one’s duty is like sowing a seed in fertile soil. Such a seed is destined to produce fruit according to the eternal law of nature. Abiding by one’s duty always results in becoming able to accessing one’s rights, but merely demanding your rights cannot bring you any positive results.
Our world is based on natural laws. One such law can be referred to as the Give and Take Principle. Saint Francis of Assisi has rightly said in his famous prayer: “For, it is in giving that we receive.”
If you are a duty-conscious person, you give something to the society. And, according to the law of nature, you certainly deserve its return. But if you are a right's conscious person, you give nothing to the society. And so, you do not deserve to receive any favour from society.
All ‘super-achievers’ in history were the ‘super-givers’ of their times. Their ‘super-giving’ made them eligible for ‘super-receiving’. If you want to receive something from others without giving anything to them, you are living in a fanciful world of your own imagination. Your wishful thinking will not work in this world!
The best principle for a successful life can be expressed in these simple words: Give your best, and find the best. Your ‘best’ is like your money, and the world of opportunities is like a shopping centre. If you are ready to spend your money, you can obtain the things you desire from the shopping centre. But if you are not ready to spend your money, the doors of all shopping centres will remain closed to you. You cannot find entry into any shopping centre anywhere.
Source: Spirit of Islam January 2014
The work of nation-building is similar to planting an orchard. The growth and development of a nation is a lengthy affair, and there has to be a tremendous input at both the individual and national levels before it finally bursts into blossom and finds the position of honour and glory in the world.
If it takes a mighty tree one hundred years to reach its full stature, whoever wishes to possess such a tree has no option but to tend to it for that period. If instead of nurturing it with care and skill, people called for an ‘orchard meeting’, or people come out on to the streets and launch a strike campaign in the name of trees, or gather in some open place or march through the streets shouting slogans, they will never possess a single tree, less own an orchard.
The work of planting an orchard begins by obtaining seedlings and providing every single one with such favourable conditions as will enable it to develop its potential and grow into a fully developed tree. When one has done this with innumerable seedlings, one can then expect to have an orchard.
Build the individual and you build the nation. If hidden potential is to be developed, it takes education, encouragement and the provision of a proper environment at an individual level very early on in the whole process, just as a sapling must be put into well prepared ground and given the right type and quantity of nutrients, water, sunlight etc. If people are properly instructed, while they are still young and receptive and by people who adopt a caring, positive attitude, they develop a healthy awareness of what their commitments to society should be and what it means to be part of a nation.
Although we must accept the fact that this is a highly competitive world, there is nothing to prevent us from endeavouring to cooperate with and encourage cooperation from others. If we stand shoulder to shoulder with our fellow men in the face of the most challenging situations, there is no obstacle that we cannot overcome, no peril that we cannot face.
Thus, it is the individual temperament which plays the most crucial role in the making of a nation. It is important in nation-building in the way the bricks are important in any kind of construction.
Source: Spirit of Islam February 2019
I do not believe that ‘Islamophobia’ exists. The irony is that this term has not been coined by other communities—it has been so named by the Muslim community themselves. Thus, Islamophobia is simply an allegation and not a real phenomenon.
In Islamic terms, this is a case of ‘calling others by offensive nicknames’ and is forbidden by the faith. Thus, first of all, Muslims must abandon using this term for others for the Quran states:
Believers, let not some men among you ridicule others: it may be that the latter are better than the former; nor should some women laugh at others; it may be that the latter are better than the former; do not defame or be sarcastic to each other, or call each other by [offensive] nicknames. How bad it is to earn an evil reputation after accepting the faith! Those who do not repent are evil-doers. (49: 11)
The fact is contrary to what Muslims think. Why do Muslims say that the West has Islamophobia? The reason is that Muslims give a negative interpretation of an event involving Islam and the West. However, the West does not actually mean anything negative. In this case, the responsibility goes to the Muslims and not the West. So, in reality if there is something, it is Muslim-o-phobia. The resentment is not towards Islam but against the un-Islamic practices of Muslims. We must contemplate and become more introspective about our actions and their effect on others. If Muslims introspect and rectify their course of action, they would no longer remain a problem-community for anyone.
Source: Spirit of Islam July 2019
There’s no such thing as ‘Islamophobia’. This is a concept which only some Muslims have themselves innovated. There would have been Islamophobia if this term had been coined by the West describing their own attitude towards Islam. On the other hand, this term has been attributed to the West by the Muslim community. Thus Islamophobia is an allegation, and not a real phenomenon.
It is a common perception that Muslims become emotional very easily when it comes to controversial issues. This is why people have come to fear Muslims, while Hindu and Buddhist communities are tolerant in comparison. It is because of people’s perception of Muslims as being intolerant that there is fear of Muslims, but not of people of other faiths.
If the Muslim community embraces peace, cultivates tolerance, and avoids being over-sensitive on trivial issues then the so-called ‘Islamophobic’ perception shall also disappear.
Source: Spirit of Islam January 2018
The term ‘Islamophobia’ has come to denote prejudice against, hatred towards, or fear of the religion of Islam or Muslims. In my opinion, this term is a self-styled creation of Muslims and the real fact is contrary to what Muslims think. For example, if the bereaved family members of the victims of the recent killings in Manchester hold complaints about Muslims or Islam, it is but natural. It is not due to Islamophobia; their complaint is in fact a reason-based complaint whereas phobia is an irrational aversion and it develops without a reason. Therefore it is correct to say that there is no such thing as ‘Islamophobia’; it exists neither in the West nor anywhere else in the world. So, what is needed is for Muslims to reform themselves—then everything, including other peoples’ negative perceptions about Muslims and Islam, will be settled. It is a two-point formula: first, Muslims must admit that this phenomenon is ‘Muslim-phobia’ and not ‘Islamophobia’ as such. Second, they must correct themselves. It is the duty of right-thinking Muslims to educate other Muslims in this regard.
Source: Spirit of Islam November 2017
“Islamophobia” is a baseless rumour that Muslims have invented. It exists neither in the West nor anywhere else in the world. This is the age of opportunities, and today every person is busy in availing these opportunities; no one has the time to become an enemy to another. Muslims must realize that the victory of Mr. Sadiq Khan completely dispels the notion of “Islamophobia”. Muslims must accept that they were under the wrong impression until now while the reality is quite different. It is now the responsibility of Muslims to unilaterally come out of this negative mindset.
Besides living up to his other responsibilities as mayor of London, what do you think Sadiq Khan could do to improve relations between Muslims and others in the UK and the West more generally?
It is now the turn of Muslims to change their perception of the West. “Islamophobia” was a self-invented obsession that has no relevance. Muslims have not yet understood the spirit of the modern age, which invites everyone to adopt a “customer-friendly” attitude. It is only a friendly atmosphere that can allow the global economy to thrive, foster goodwill and sustain this era of professional development. In this modern age, no one can potentially remain an enemy to another.
Source: Spirit of Islam July 2016
Islam and secularism are fully compatible. As per the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, secularism is a policy of non-interference in religious matters. In a secular government, every religious community has the right to follow its own faith. This was demonstrated even by the Prophet Muhammad when he drafted the Madinah Charter, according to which different religious groups were allowed to have their own personal law.
The true meaning of secular personal law has been alluded to in the following verse of the Quran, according to which, people of other faiths could follow their own Holy Books to judge their matters:
“We have revealed the Torah, in which there is guidance and light. By it the prophets who were obedient to Us judged the Jews, and so did the rabbis and the priests, according to God’s Book which had been entrusted to their care; and to which they were witnesses.” (Quran 5:44)
“But why do they come to you for judgement when they have the Torah, which enshrines God’s own judgement?” (Quran 5:43)
The Quran and the life of the Prophet Muhammad make it clear that secularism and the teachings of Islam have the same spirit. Groups that claim otherwise are completely mistaken in promoting unIslamic ideas of religious superiority.
Source: The Seeker’s Guide
The modern age is a completely new age. The basis of the modern age is freedom of thought. Among the many results of the modern intellectual revolution is freedom of religion. Before this, human history was characterised by religious persecution. For the first time, religious freedom, including the freedom to propagate religion, has been recognized as a legitimate human right in the modern age. Through the human rights charter of the United Nations, this has been accepted by all the world nations. This development has made it possible for the first time in history to engage in the task of conveying God’s message to people without any obstruction whatsoever.
Among the several scholarly disciplines that the modern age gave birth to was anthropology, whose subject matter is human societies. Anthropologists made objective studies and proved that belief in God and religion have been present in all societies, thus. showing that such belief is natural to human beings and an answer to a universal human quest. This finding significantly boosted the possibilities for Muslims to convey God’s message to people, for it indicated that such belief is as indispensable for human beings as food.
The findings of modern science amazingly fit into what the Quran has revealed. They were a confirmation of this prediction of the Quran:
“We shall show them Our signs in the universe and within themselves until it becomes clear that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is the witness of all things? (41: 53)
In this way, modern science became a powerful potential academic tool in the hands of those engaged in conveying God’s message to people and sharing the message of Islam with them.
Source: Spirit of Islam September 2013
The modern age is, in every respect, a new age. If the previous age was a traditional one, the modern age is non-traditional. Islam is completely compatible with the modern age. In fact, it has a major role in ushering in the modern age. However, Muslims of the present times are not cognizant of this fact. This is why their planning, done along traditional lines, proves to be fruitless. In other words, the case of present-day Muslims is one of anachronism, that is, living in the present age while still clinging to the mindset of the previous age. Any kind of effort towards the revival of Muslims can be successful only if it affects a change in their way of thinking. It must make them emerge from the past and lead their lives in the present. It is due to the Muslims’ failure to take into account the compulsions of the age in their planning that their endeavours by and large have gone awry. Muslims need to discover the modern age as an age of opportunities. They need to bear in mind that in the present age, power and strength are determined not by fighting but through advances in science and technology. In this day and age, giving encouragement to the latter factors is the surest way to success.
Source: The Age of Peace
Antiquity was an age of superstition; today, we are in the age of science. Before reaching its present-day zenith, the modern, scientific age had to pass through three stages. The first was marked by the eradication of the superstitious mentality; the second stage saw the practical beginnings of scientific research; the third is the spectacular culmination of the scientific process in the second half of the twentieth century. In my book, Islam: The Creator of the Modern Age, I have examined the contribution made to the completion of the first two stages by Islam throughout its first millennium. Henri Pirenne has acknowledged this as a historical fact: “Islam changed the face of the globe. The traditional order of history was overthrown” (Henri Pirenne, History of Western Europe). The book examines the aspects of the Islamic revolution and how they were instrumental in creating the modern age.
Before the twentieth century, it was accepted that only what was observable was considered to exist. But after the splitting of the atom, in the first quarter of the 20th century, man’s conceptions about matter have been drastically altered. In fact, the advance of science in the past century has culminated in a knowledge explosion, the likes of which have never before been experienced in human history and in the wake of which many ancient ideas about God and religion have had to be re-examined.
Now science postulates that whatever events take place in the world of Nature happen in accordance with specific laws of Nature. Some people may take this argument to imply that there is no need for the existence of an ‘unknown’ God in order to explain these events since known laws already exist to explain them. Julian Huxley says this with great conviction: “If events are due to natural causes, they are not due to supernatural causes.” Analysing this argument, I concluded that science, which seeks to provide explanations for the laws of Nature, cannot replace religion, because, for this, it would need to discover the ultimate and absolute explanation, which it is not in a position to. The best answer to this argument is given by American biologist Cecil Boyce Hamann: ‘Nature does not explain, she is herself in need of an explanation’. The fact is that the entire body of modern scientific enquiry is concerned only with the question ‘What is it that exists?’ The question ‘Why does it exist?’ is far beyond its purview.
Now scientific argument proves, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that far from having a damaging effect on religion, modern knowledge has served to clarify and consolidate its truths. Many modern discoveries support Islamic claims made 1400 years ago that what is laid down in the Quran is the ultimate truth and that this will be borne out by all future knowledge. This has been alluded to in the Quran in these words:
“Soon We will show them Our signs in all the regions of the earth and in their own souls, until they clearly see that this is the truth.” (41:53)
From this, we can understand how science affirms the veracity of religious truths.
Source: God Arises
Present-day science includes in its ambit many things (such as electrons, the law of gravity, X-rays, etc.) which are non-material in nature. They cannot be observed by the human eye, but every scientist believes in their existence, for the simple reason that although we cannot see these things directly, we can see their effects—for example, a falling apple, in the case of gravity, and a photo film, in the case of X-rays. We believe in the existence of all these things, not by direct observation but by their results, or, in other words, by way of indirect knowledge or inferential argument.
This change in human knowledge also changed the theory of logic. It is now well established in science that the inferential argument is as valid as the direct argument. In the pre-Einstein era, unbelievers held that the concept of God pertained to the unseen world and that since no direct argument was available to prove it, belief in God was illogical. They considered all the relevant indirect arguments as scientifically invalid since these were inferential in nature. But now the whole situation has changed. As nothing is really observable, the existence of anything can be established only by means of the inferential argument, not the direct argument.
If the inferential argument is valid with regard to the unseen micro-world, it is also valid with regard to the existence of God and other religious truths. Bertrand Russell admitted the fact that the argument centering on design propounded by theologians seeking to offer evidence for the existence of God is scientifically valid.
The fact is that when there is design, there must also be a designer. We see that our world is well-designed. This should lead us to believe that there is a Designer of it—God Almighty.
Source: God Arises
So long as natural phenomena were attributed to supernatural causes, they were regarded as objects of worship. Natural phenomena and objects such as fire, water, the sun, and the moon were venerated and feared. The laws of nature, the application of which would enable man to reach the moon and make use of nature to one’s advantage, have existed throughout the universe since time immemorial, yet it took man centuries to discover them. Given the possibilities of nature, why did so many thousands of years have to elapse in the course of man’s development before he felt ready to conquer nature? The answer to this is the prevalence of a culture of worshipping nature. For instance, man considered the moon a deity. The moon, with its brilliant silvery light, inspired man to bow before it rather than try to conquer it. Holding the moon to be sacred was a major obstacle to even thinking of conquering it.
Islam in the 7th century paved the way for modern science by distinguishing between a Creator and the rest of the universe. The entire universe is created by one God. No creation possesses any form of divinity. This creed revolutionized human thought. Nature, which was once held to be the object of worship became an object of investigation. Observation and experiment replaced assumption and speculation. In a magnificent 5-volume work A History of Science by Henry Smith Williams and Edward Huntington Williams, it is mentioned that: “There cannot well be a doubt that the adoption of those broad principles of right and wrong which underlie the entire structure of modern civilization was due to scientific induction, in other words, to the belief, based on observation and experience, that the principles implied were essential to communal progress. (Vol. 1)
The role of Islam in the emergence and development of science is generally acknowledged. Dennis Overbye in The New York Times, dated Oct. 30, 2001, writes:
“Commanded by the Koran to seek knowledge and read nature for signs of the Creator, and inspired by a treasure trove of ancient Greek learning, Muslims created a society that in the Middle Ages was the scientific center of the world. The Arabic language was synonymous with learning and science for 500 hundred years, a golden age that can count among its credits the precursors to modern universities, algebra, the names of the stars and even the notion of science as an empirical inquiry."
“Nothing in Europe could hold a candle to what was going on in the Islamic world until about 1600,’’ said Dr. Jamil Ragep, a professor of the history of science at the University of Oklahoma.
It was the infusion of this knowledge into Western Europe, historians say, that fueled the Renaissance and the scientific revolution."
Science does not negate the Creator, as its goal is to understand and explain the natural phenomena. It makes no claim to account for the underlying reason for the events. This is a prerogative of the divine revelation to satisfy the natural urge of human beings to find meaning and purpose of the creation, including themselves. This is reiterated thus:
In the attempt to explain (the) fact of terrestrial gravitation Newton made no advance, and we of today are scarcely more enlightened than the man of the Stone Age. Like the man of the Stone Age, we know that an arrow shot into the sky falls back to the earth. We can calculate, as he could not do, the arc it will describe and the exact speed of its fall; but as to why it returns to earth at all, the greatest philosopher of today is almost as much in the dark as was the first primitive bowman that ever made the experiment. (A History of Science, Vol. 1)
The nature of human intellect and his urges demand that his mental prowess is guided by divine guidance. Islamic scripture, the Quran, is the preserved revelation from the Creator to guide man about the meaning and purpose of his existence.
Source: Spirit of Islam July 2020
The study of religion is what is termed, in general, beliefs pertaining to the unseen world. These are the beliefs that are beyond our known sensory world. That is the existence of God and the angels, revelation, Hell and Heaven, etc. In this other aspect of religion, direct observations do not exist. The study of religion must, therefore, be done in the light of that logical principle called inference on the basis of observation, that is, the same logical principle that the evolutionists employ in the second aspect of their theory.
Looked at in light of this principle, both religion and science are at par. Both have two equally different parts. One part is based on such scientific certainty as permits direct argument. The other part is based on scientific inference, to prove which only the principle of indirect argument may be used. Keeping this logical division before us, we can find no actual difference between the two.
It is true that the new facts regarding the universe discovered in the twentieth century have revolutionized the world of logic. The difference between religious argument and scientific argument which had been erroneously conceived has been eliminated. In respect of argument, the case of science too has reached exactly the same point as religion.
Both the Direct and Inferential Arguments are valid. Newton (1642-1727) made a special study of the solar system, discovering laws governing the revolution of planets around the sun. His study was, however, confined to astronomical bodies, which can be called the macroworld. It is possible in the macroworld to weigh and measure things. As a result of the immediate impact of these discoveries, many began to think along the lines that reality was observable and that the proper and valid argument was one based on observation. It was under the influence of this concept that philosophy generally known as logical positivism came into being.
However, the discoveries made in the first quarter of the twentieth century shook the very foundation of the preliminary theories. These later discoveries revealed that beyond this world of appearance, a whole world was hidden, a world that does not come under observation. It is only indirectly possible to understand this hidden world and present arguments in its favour. That is, by observing the effects of something, we arrive at an understanding of its existence.
This discovery altered the whole picture. When access to human knowledge was limited to the macrocosmic world, man was prey to misapprehension—that reality is only that which is observable. But when human knowledge penetrated the microworld, the academic situation underwent a paradigm shift.
Now it was revealed that the field of direct argument was extremely limited. New facts which came to the knowledge of man were so abstruse that indirect or inferential argument alone was applicable. For instance, in 1895, the German scientist Wilhelm Konrad Roentgen found during an experiment that on a glass before him some effects were observable despite the fact that there was no known link between his experiment and the glass. He concluded that there was invisible radiation, which was traveling at the speed of 186,000 miles per second.
Due to the unknown nature of this radiation, Roentgen named it X-ray. The twentieth century brought forth the discoveries of a number of things like X-rays which do not come under direct human observation. However, due to their effects having come to the knowledge of man, it was not possible to deny their existence. As a result of modern research, not only were different departments of science revolutionized but the science of logic too witnessed fundamental changes.
Now inferential reasoning was also accepted as a valid method of reasoning, for, without discoveries like X-rays, the scientific structure of the atom, the existence of dark matter, etc., could not be explained. After the extension of this method of reasoning in modern times, the argument on religious faith has become as valid as reasoning on scientific concepts. Differences in the criterion of logic have now vanished.
The same inferential logic that is employed to prove newly discovered concepts of science can be applied to prove the veracity of religious truths like the existence of God, and the Hereafter.
Source: God Arises
In the modern age, faith and belief can be placed on the same level of certainty as scientific theory. In its issue no. 134 (1992), the journal, Faith and Reason, from Manchester College, Oxford (England), published an article titled, ‘The Relationship between Faith and Reason’, by Dr. Paul Badham.
Paul Badham is professor emeritus of Theology and Religious Studies at St. David’s College, Lampeter, in the University of Wales. His paper in this issue had been presented at a Conference of the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Science in Moscow in November 1991.
Professor Badham’s paper can indeed be called thought-provoking and, as such, is worth reading, but he has made certain points with which I do not agree. He states that philosophical certainty should not be confused with religious certitude. He writes: ‘As a philosopher of religion I feel compelled to acknowledge that faith could never be placed on the same level of certainty as scientific knowledge’.
In contrast, I feel that faith and belief can indeed be placed on the same level of certainty as scientific theory. In the twenty-first century, there is no real difference between the two.
Source: Spirit of Islam May 2020
The Quran states, “This is a blessed Book which We sent down to you [ Muhammad], for people to ponder over its messages, and for those with understanding to take heed.” (38:29) Islam as presented in the Quran and demonstrated by the Prophet possesses the quality of being in accordance with human reason and human nature. Rational thinking and academic progress do not clash with the message of Islam. That is to say, at no stage does Islam and reason contradict one another. No believer is faced with the problem of accepting religious dogmas at the expense of science and reason. Acknowledging this characteristic of Islam, George Bernard Shaw writes:
When the Mohammedan reformation took place, it left its followers with the enormous advantage of having the only established religion in the world, in whose articles of faith, any intelligent and educated person could believe. It is due to this characteristic of Islam that people have been attracted towards Islam before as well as after the age of science. The modern educated mind when presented with the different aspects of Islam as it is, acknowledges that it is according to nature and appeals to one’s reasoning.
What George Bernard Shaw has termed an enormous advantage for the Muslims of the first phase, exists equally for the believers of today. But it is not being availed of. Instead of presenting the message of Islam peacefully, Muslims are putting up a violent and unfriendly image of Islam. If people create obstacles by resorting to general ill will, there will be a misunderstanding of religion. When this obstacle is removed, the Islamic goal of living in harmony society will be fulfilled.
The modern educated mind, when presented with the different aspects of Islam as it is, acknowledges that it is according to nature and appeals to one’s reasoning.
Source: Spirit of Islam June 2019
One of the objectives of Islam is to strive for a society in which spiritual, ethical, and human values are cherished. Islam advocates an atmosphere where peace, tolerance, love, and well-wishing are the order of the day, where controversies are resolved without the use of violence. This is the desired world of Islam and such a world can be established only through peaceful dialogue. This is the essence of Islamic teaching. No other way is possible in Islam.
One significant aspect of the culture of Islam is dialogue. It is mentioned thus in the Quran: “They conduct their affairs by mutual consultation.” (42:38). This verse indicates that Muslims should base their dealings on dialogue and mutual discussion.
Debate on the other hand is quite different from dialogue. Debate is conducted between two parties, each trying to prove its superiority over the other, while the essence of dialogue is mutual learning without any bias. In dialogue, there are also two or more parties, but no party tries to establish its superiority over the other. Everyone tries to learn from the other. Everyone tries, in the sharing of experiences, to increase their knowledge. Dialogue is a healthy practice, whereas debate is a kind of intellectual wrangling.
The practice of consultation (shura) was common among the Companions of the Prophet of Islam. For example, it is reported of Umar bin al-Khattab, the second Caliph, that he used to learn from everyone. This means that it was a general habit of his to engage in serious dialogue with everyone he met. He would thereby learn something new to enhance his wisdom and knowledge.
There is great benefit in mutual discussion as everyone gains some new knowledge or experience through this. When one conducts a serious dialogue with another person, both derive some benefit from this. Both enrich their minds and progress on the path of intellectual development.
The Quranic word shura is generally taken to be a political term but, in fact, it is not. “Political shura” may be a way of proceeding in Muslim society, but it is only an occasional occurrence. In this sense, it is only a small part of Muslim life. On the other hand, in general, non-political terms, shura is a daily part of Muslim life. In family life, in social life, and in national life, it is good to develop the habit of mutual consultation. It leads to intellectual development for everyone.
Source: Spirit of Islam September 2014
The method of Islam is that of peaceful dialogue. The Quran tells us that the way of peace is the best way. (4:128)
There is another verse, which tells us that the way of negotiation and arbitration should be adopted in controversial matters. (4:35) The Prophet said, “Do not desire or seek confrontation with the enemy, but rather ask for peace from God."
The objective of Islam is to bring about a divine revolution, to invite people to the worship of God, and to strive for a society in which spiritual, ethical, and human values are cherished. Islam advocates an atmosphere where peace, tolerance, love, and well-wishing are the order of the day, where controversies are resolved without the use of violence. This is the desired world of Islam and such a world can be established only through peaceful dialogue. The truth is that Islam is based on monotheism, with regard to God, and on peaceful dialogue, with regard to methodology. This is the essence of Islamic teaching. No other way is possible in Islam.
Source: Spirit of Islam April 2019
Another principle of dialogue can be drawn from the Hudaybiyyah Peace Treaty. This treaty was signed only after long negotiations between the Prophet of Islam and the Quraysh. It is a matter of historical record that the conclusion of this treaty was possible because the Prophet unilaterally accepted the conditions laid down by the Quraysh.
The principle of dialogue derived from this Sunnah (method) of the Prophet is that both parties should present their viewpoints supported by arguments, while remaining ever ready for give and take—a pre-requisite of a successful dialogue—rather than insisting on all demands being unconditionally met. In practical matters, Islam advocates flexibility to the ultimate possible extent.
We learn from a number of examples throughout Islamic history that Islam not only lays down principles of dialogue but also gives practical illustrations. In the Makkan period of his mission, the Prophet of Islam repeatedly practiced the principle of dialogue. For instance, once the Quraysh sent their leader, Utba ibn Rabiyya, as their representative to the Prophet of Islam so that an atmosphere of peace might be arrived at through negotiation on the subject of mutual differences. The traditions tell us that Utba heard the Prophet out patiently and with full attention, and then conveyed what he had said to the Quraysh. Similarly, at the invitation of his uncle, Abu Talib, representatives of the Quraysh gathered at the Prophet’s home and held negotiations there peacefully on controversial matters.
This principle of peaceful negotiations can also be witnessed in the negotiations held at Hudaybiyyah between the Quraysh and the Prophet of Islam that continued for about two weeks, culminating in the treaty of Hudaybiyyah. This event, without a doubt, is a successful example of peaceful negotiation. Again, in the presence of the Prophet of Islam, tripartite talks were held between representatives of three religions—Islam, Judaism, and Christianity, in the Prophet’s mosque in Madinah. This historic event, which took place in the sacred place of worship, shows the importance given to peaceful dialogue in Islam. These examples, which are many in number, relate to the golden age of the Prophet and his Companions. That is why; the practice of dialogue in terms of bilateral negotiation enjoys the position of an established principle in Islam.
Source: Spirit of Islam April 2019
