BIOGRAPHY OF IMAM ALI IBN ABI TALIB (Translation of Sirat Amir Al-Mu Minin)

BIOGRAPHY OF IMAM ALI IBN ABI TALIB

(Translation of Sirat Amir Al-Mu Minin)

BY: MUFTI JAFFER HUSSAIN

TRANSLATED BY: SAYED TAHIR BILGRAMI

Ansariyan Publications

www.alhassanain.org/english

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. FOREWORD 6

2. BIRTHPLACE & ORIGIN 9

3. FAMILY & PEDIGREE 15

Adnan ibne udd 17

Ma’ad ibne Adnan 17

Nazar ibne Ma’ad 18

Mudar ibne Nazar 18

Ilyas ibne Mudar 19

Mudarka ibne Ilyas 20

Khazima ibne Mudarka 20

Kanana ibne Khazima 21

Nazar ibne Kanana 21

Malik ibne Nazar 22

Fahr ibne Malik 22

Ghalib ibne Fahr 23

Lavi ibne Ghalib 23

Kaab ibne Lavi 23

Mara ibne Kaab 24

Kalab ibne Mara 24

Qasi ibne Kalab 24

Abd Munaaf ibne Qasi 28

Hashim Ibne Abd Munaaf 28

Abd al Mutallib ibne Hashim 32

4. ABU TALIB IBN E ABD AL MUTALLIB 48

5. FATIMA BINTE ASAD 84

6. THE FELICITOUS BIRTH 87

7. NAME, APPELATION & FILIAL APPPELATION (Kunyat) 90

8. APPEARANCE, BEARING &LOOKS 92

9. HABITS & TEMPERAMENT 94

10. HIS SARTORIAL HABITS 96

11. FOOD HABITS 98

12. CHILDHOOD 101

13. EDUCATION & UPBRINGING 103

14. THE FIRST TO ACCEPT THE FAITH OF ISLAM 106

15. THE FEAST OF ASHIRA 113

16. HELP & ASSISTANCE TO THE PROPHET COMMENCES 116

17. THE QUREISH BOYCOTT 117

18. MIGRATION TO MADINA 121

19. THE EVENT OF BROTHERHOOD-MUWAQAAT 127

20. THE MATRIMONY 129

21. THE SONS OF THE PROPHET 132

22. ABOUT ABU JAHL’S DAUGHTER 135

23. WIVES & CHILDREN 138

Hazrat Fatima Zehra (a.s.): 138

Imama binte Abil Aas: 138

Umm al Banin binte Hazam Kalabia: 138

Laila binte Masood Darmia: 138

Asma binte Umais Khasamia: 138

Qaula binte jafar Hanafia: 139

Umm Shoaib Maqzoomia: 139

Maqbat binte Umra al Qais : 139

24. CONSTRUCTION OF THE MOSQUE & SEALING OF THE DOORS 140

25. THE PROPHET (s.a.)’S EXPEDITIONS (THE GHAZWAAT) 144

26. THE EXPEDITION OF BADR 147

27. THE EXPEDITION OF OHOD 159

28. THE EXPEDITION OF BANI NAZEER 174

29. THE EXPEDITION OF AHZAB 177

30. THE EXPEDITION OF BANI QARIZA 187

31. THE TRUCE OF HUDAIBIAH 190

32. THE CAMPAIGN OF KHAIBAR 200

33. THE LAND OF FADAK 208

34. THE CONQUEST OF MAKKA 210

35. PURIFICATION OF THE KAABA 217

36. THE DAY OF GHAMIZA 219

37. THE EXPEDITION OF HUNAIN 222

38. THE SEIGE OF TAEF 227

39. DISTRIBUTION OF THE BOOTY 230

40. PROPAGATION OF ISLAM IN YEMEN 232

41. THE EMIRATE OF YEMEN 233

42. SARIYA WADI AL RAMAL 234

43. SARIYA BANI TAY 236

44. GHAZWA E TABOOK 238

45. PROPAGATION OF SURAT AL BARA-AT 243

46. THE CALL FOR MUBAHILA OR IMPRECATION 245

47. SARIA BANI ZABEED 249

48. THE HAJJAT AL WIDA 251

49. GHADEER E KHUM 254

50. JAISH E OSSAMA - THE CONTINGENT OF OSSAMA IBN E ZAID 259

51. LEADING THE CONGREGATION 264

52. THE CALAMITY OF QIRTAAS 271

53. THE PROPHET (S.A.)’S LAST JOURNEY 275

54. COMPLIANCE WITH THE WILL 277

55. DENYING THE PROPHET (S.A)’S DEATH 279

56. AN OVERVIEW OF THE EVENTS OF SAQIFA 283

57. BAI –AT AND USE OF COERCION 291

58. AMEER AL MOMINEEN’S DISCREET SILENCE 295

59. ABOUT THE LAND OF FADAK 298

60. THE MISCHIEF OF APOSTACY 306

61. ISTEKHLAF OR NOMINATION OF THE SECOND CALIPH 312

62. SHURA OR THE COMMITTEE 314

63. THE BAI-AT OF HAZRAT AMEER AL MOMINEEN (A.S.) 323

64. AMEER AL MOMINEEN (A.S.)’S STYLE OF GOVERNANCE 328

65. THE NORMS FOR SELECTION OF THE FUNCTIONARIES 331

66. ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE FUNCTIONARIES 333

67. THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 335

68. PROTECTION OF BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS 338

THE RIGHT TO LIVE: 338

THE RIGHT OF THOUGHT: 339

THE RIGHT OF ACTION 340

RIGHT OF RACIAL EQUALITY 341

69. THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM 343

70. DISTRIBUTION FROM THE BAYT AL MAAL 349

71. THE SYSTEM OF ZAKAT 353

72. THE SYSTEM OF TRIBUTE 355

73. THE SYSTEM OF JIZIYA 357

74. CITIZENSHIP 358

75. MONITORING THE TRADING COMMUNITY 362

76. KINDNESS ON WIDOWS, ORPHANS & THE POOR 365

77. TREATMENT OF THE CAPTIVES 368

78. TREATMENT OF THE DIMMIES 369

79. THE TRUSTS & THE PROJECTS FOR PEOPLE’S WELFARE 370

80. UNREST &ITS CAUSES 372

81. DISMISSAL OF FUNCTIONARIES & REASONS THEREOF 375

82. MUAWIYA IBNE ABI SUFIAN 379

83. UMRO IBNE AAS 385

84. ABD ALLAH IBNE SAAD 387

85. WALID IBNE UQBA 390

86. SAEED IBNE AAS 392

87. QASAS FOR OTHMAN’S BLOOD 395

88. THE BATTLE OF JAMAL 398

89. TRANSFER OF THE CAPITAL 433

90. APPOINTMENT OF THE FUNCTIONARIES OF THE STATE 436

QAIS IBNE SAAD 436

SAHL IBNE HANIF ANSARI 438

MALIK IBNE HARIT ASHTAR 439

ABD ALLAH IBNE ABBAS 440

MOHAMMED IBNE ABU BAKR 440

ABU AYOOB ANSARI 440

MAKHNAF IBNE SALEEM AZDI 441

QARDA IBNE KAAB ANSARI 441

FATAM IBNE ABBAS 441

YAZEED IBNE QAIS ARHABI 441

KUMAIL IBNE ZIYAD NAQA-EE 442

RUBIAH IBNE KHAITAM ASADI 442

OMER IBNE ABI SALAMA 442

NOMAN IBNE AJLAAN 443

OTHMAN IBNE HANEEF ANSARI 443

SAEED IBNE MASOOD THAQAFI 443

OBAID ALLAH IBNE ABBAS 443

HISSAN IBNE HISSAN BAKRI 443

91. INVASION OF ZOHAK IBNE QAIS 444

92. DISMISSAL OF QAIS IBNE SAAD 445

93. THE BATTLE OF SIFFIN 449

94. THE AGREEMENT FOR ARBITRATION 499

95. THE REACTION OF KHAWARIJ AGAINST ARBITRATION 502

96. A LOOK AT THE KHAWARIJ 510

97. THE VERDICT OF THE REFEREES 513

98. THE BATTLE OF NAHRWAN 519

99. THE BATTLES OF THE KHAWARIJ 530

100. THE DEFEAT OF EGYPT 536

101. IBNE AAMIR IN BASRA 541

102. THE AGGRESSIVE ATTACKS OF THE SYRIANS 547

103. THE ATROCITIES OF BASAR BIN ARTAT 553

104. THE MARTYRDOM 560

105. THE BURIAL 566

106. SOME IMPRESSIONS 568

107. THE END OF IBNE MULJIM AND HIS COHORTS 569

108. SETTLEMENT IN NAJAF 570

109. CONSTRUCTION OF THE MAUSOLEUM OF HAZRAT ALI (A.S) 572

1. FOREWORD

Bismilla hir Rehman ir Raheem

Al hamdu lillahi wa kafa was-salato ala Mohammadin wa aalehil lazeena astafa

Ameer-al-Momineen, Ali ibne Abi Talib (a.s.), is a great and peerless personality whose qualities have been recognized by friends and foes alike. None could ever deny his sterling qualities. He was born in a distinguished family of the tribe of Qureish. He had the singular distinction of taking birth in the holy precincts of the Kaaba. He first opened his eyes in this world to see the radiant visage of the Prophet (s.a.). He grew and received upbringing under the tutelage of the Prophet (s.a.). Imam Ali (a.s.) followed the footsteps of his mentor and cousin from his very childhood. He was always with the Prophet (s.a.) like a shadow and derived felicity from the company. Imam Ali (a.s) accomplished the various stages of upbringing and training under the fond and watchful eyes of the Prophet (s.a.) His head and heart absorbed the actions and the exemplary character of the Prophet (s.a.).The purity of thoughts and excellence of upbringing elevated Imam Ali (a.s.) to such heights that the moon and the stars appear to be at lower elevations!

This is a common belief, and true to a certain extent, that the environment plays a major role in shaping the nature and thoughts of persons. But, in this world there have been august personalities who were not at all affected by the popular beliefs and superstitions. The thinking of these persons has always been different and their actions far apart from those of the populace. Ali ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) has been one such noble personality who, rather than falling in line with the mundane thoughts and habits of the people, left his mark on their thoughts and actions. With his vision, power of comprehension and Allah’s help he was able to draw a line between right and wrong and, therefore, laid the foundation of a new and unique culture and thought process. Instead of treading the beaten track, he left his own footprints for others to follow. Therefore, in that idolatrous period in the history of Arabia, he never bowed his head to anyone other than the Creator, Allah! He kept his radiant forehead safe from bowing to myriad idols installed in the Kaaba those days. Imam Ali (a.s)’s thoughts and actions were always in tune with those of the Prophet (s.a). It was the result of this unity of thoughts that no sooner the Prophet (s.a.) proclaimed his Message, Hazrat Ali (a.s.) accepted it and gave the proof of his adherence to the Truth by being the first person to join the Prophet (s.a.) in the prayers.

In his early days Imam Ali (a.s.) dedicated himself to the task of propagating Islam as a universal movement. He became a pillar of support for the Prophet (s.a.) to confront and fight against the enemies of the Cause. At the Feast of Ashira when the Qureish were dumbfounded at the Prophet (s.a.)'s Declaration, Imam Ali (a.s.) faced their piercing eyes and stood firmly to witness the Prophet-hood of Mohammed (s.a.). He publicly declared his support to the Prophet (s.a.) and remained steadfast in his resolve till the end. History bears witness to the fact that when the infidel Qureish exceeded all bonds of decency in torturing and ridiculing the Prophet (s.a.) and his followers, they had to take shelter in a cave. Imam Ali (a.s.) braved all these hardships and never left the side of the Prophet (s.a.) for a moment. He faced untold hardships but remained firm in his resolve. He was scared neither of the hardships nor the blatant threats of the enemies. He bore the difficulties with absolute equanimity. During the days in Medina, when the different tribes in Arabia kept aside their long drawn differences and joined together to confront and harm the Prophet (s.a.) and his Cause, Imam Ali (a.s.) stood firm as a wall of steel in the battlefield to vanquish and chase them away. He laid to dust the false pride of the infidels of Qureish, who in the end capitulated to lay down arms and hypocritically professed allegiance to the New Creed!

The atmosphere was not congenial for Imam Ali (a.s.) after the closing of the eyes of the Prophet (s.a.), the greed for power and pelf turned the Khilafat-e-Ilahiya into worldly rule. These circumstances forced him into self-imposed isolation. But whenever the greater interests of Islam were at stake, he came out of his seclusion and gave invaluable advice to the“powers-that-be” in times of important expeditions and economic or religious matters. During these years of seclusion Imam Ali (a.s.) busied himself in study of Islamic tenets and thoughts. He always preferred collective rights over individual desires. When at the ripe old age of fifty eight he ascended to the worldly Khilafat, he found the State in a turmoil. With the plunder of the foreign lands there was excess of wealth in the Nation that had changed the very nature of the Arabs for the worst. Instead of the proverbial simplicity, the life style of Arabs turned towards pomp and show of wealth. Although it was not an easy task to mend the fences, Imam Ali (a.s.) faced the intrigue of the adversaries to protect Islam and it’s moral values.

His services in this direction were selfless and his observations are a treasure- house in the annals of Islamic History. In the battle field and in the halls of debate he represented the cause of Islam with absolute valor and success. Whether it was the Feast of Ashira or it was the presentation of the Verse of Bara-at to the infidels of Mecca; whether it was the Capture of Mecca, Purification of the Kaaba, the expedition of Khandaq or that of Khaibar; Imam Ali (a.s.)’s services to the cause have a unique distinction enjoyed by none else in the comity of the Prophet (a.s)’s companions. His efforts are rated the highest in the protection, welfare, propagation and development of the Faith of Islam.

If his contribution is separated from the History of Islam, the history will appear wanting in content. His achievements are a dominant part of the annals of Islamic History. Although in every epoch efforts were made by his adversaries to put curtains of darkness over his achievement, and the establishments of those days were hand in glove with such historians, their enmity and hatred could not succeed in hiding Imam Ali (a.s)’s great contributions, and he continues to shine on the horizon of Islam like the brightest of stars!

Ameer-al-Mimineen (a.s), on the one hand patronized learning and knowledge to take the caravan of humanity forward and on the other he himself set brightest examples of virtuous action that became a beacon of guidance for the populace. It is necessary that people follow and emulate his way of life. They should draw light from his thoughts and beliefs. The norms of action should be devised on his teachings and actions. The society must be built on the foundation of unshakable principles. Then only the individual and collective lives will be compatible with the requirements of the Faith and will achieve the moral heights.

With this aim impressions of the life and achievements of Imam Ali (a.s) are being described in this work. Attempt has neither been made to make a colorful presentation nor to exaggerate any facts. We have abstained from the slightest element of bias in this work and all the facts are presented in the light of authentic historical references. They are arranged in such a way that chronologically the presentation has the interest of a biographical work. If any references have been made to the events of difference and controversy in the narrative, we have limited them to mere quotation of the source material without going into a discussion over the matter. We do pray to Allah that this work dispels the clouds of bias and helps people to understand the great personality. Wa ma taufiqi illa billa wa behistaeen!

2. BIRTHPLACE & ORIGIN

Arabia is situated in the south west of the Continent of Asia. It is the biggest peninsula in the world. In the north it has Syria, in the west is the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, in the south flow the azure blue waters of the Indian Ocean. The coastal area of the Red Sea is a barren desert. Away from the coast there are dry mountains, desert dunes and sandy stretches merging into the horizon. This desert land is called the Hedjaz. This area has no agriculture whatsoever nor are there any means of irrigation for crops to grow. If there is any rain, the water runs away into the valleys of the barren mountains or it gets accumulated in the low lying ditches. For miles and miles there will be no trace of water in the desert. In such a parched area where there are vast stretches of desert land and barren mountains, the likelihood of commercial activity and habitation are naturally sparse. However on the periphery of Kaaba the Amalaqa used to live a nomadic life. These nomads had no permanent habitation and the search for sustenance and water used to take them from place to place in the desert. Wherever they found some water and greenery, they would set their camps. When the water and the pasture for their animals were exhausted, they would move in search for new source of water.

In the Batha Valley of this vast desert habitation started with the progeny of Porphet Ibrahim (a.s.). Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) was born in Babylon 1081 years after the Deluge of Noah (a.s.). He lost his father during his early childhood and was brought up by his uncle who was known as Adaar. Adaar means the chief keeper of the temple. This word was later changed to Azar. Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) had his upbringing in an environment where idols were carved and worshipped. They also used to worship the sun, moon and the stars. The statue of the ruler of the time used to be revered and worshipped. In such depraved surroundings, Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) never had any wish for idol worship. To the contrary, he was against idol worship from his very childhood. He was very critical of the ways of his people and always invited them to worship one and only God. However, the people never paid any heed to his preaching. They continued thinking that all their affairs were controlled by their lifeless idols! When Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) felt that his people were incorrigibly adamant in their false beliefs, he thought of giving them a proof of the abject helplessness of the idols. For this he waited for an opportune moment. The opportunity came when the inhabitants assembled in the wilderness for celebration of a festival and there was not a single soul in the town. He headed for the temple and broke the biggest idol and many smaller ones. He left the hatchet used for breaking the idols near the neck of the biggest idol. When the people returned to the town, they found that the temple was in utter disarray and the pieces of the broken idols scattered all around. They looked at each other in disbelief and then said that this would be the doing of Ibrahim (a.s.) who always talked against the idols. They called Ibrahim (a.s.) aside and asked him if he had caused the damage? He replied:

This is the doing of their biggest idol. If they have the power of speech, do ask them!

When the people heard Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) say the impossible thing, they said,“O Ibrahim (a.s.)! Have the idols ever spoken?” He replied,“How could those who cannot even speak and defend themselves be of any help to anyone. You consider them your gods and bow to them!” The belief of the idolatrous people was that the idols bring the rains, they help in growing the crops, and give them the means of sustenance and protect them against calamities. Now they found the very idols helplessly shattered. They brooded over the matter and then presented Ibrahim (a.s.) at the court of Nimrod. He asked Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s),” How you dared to harm the idols? Pride has gone so much to your head that you have challenged my divine authority! “Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) replied, “What are your idols? They are the handiwork of human sculptors. They are weaker than the weakest creatures! Then how do you expect me to accept you as a god when you have no authority over your own life and death!“Nimrod was furious hearing these words from Hazrat Ibrahim ( a.s.). His own uncle threatened Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s) to crush him with the stones. Nimrod ordered Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) to be burnt on a pyre. For this purpose a big pyre was lighted. When the flames rose high, Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) was thrown into the fire. Not a single hair of his was burnt. It was as if the pyre was a blooming garden. Seeing this miracle, Nimrod was dumb-founded! But his flame of revenge was not extinguished. He ordered Hazrat Ibrahim’s assets to be confiscated and exiled him from the kingdom. When Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) heard this decree, he said, “You have no right to confiscate my animals and belongings!” Nimrod said,“You have acquired these things living in my realm!” Hazrat Ibrahim rejoined,“Then, return to me the years that I have spent living in your city and take my belongings!” Nimrod had no reply for this argument. He ordered that his belongings may not be confiscated but he must be banished forthwith.

Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) left Babylon along with his spouse Hazrat Sarah and nephew Hazrat Lot (a.s.)). Passing through Halb and Damascus this small group reached Palestine which, in those days, was called Kan-aan. In Palestine his abode was eleven miles away from Jerusalem. The locality is known as Hebron. Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) stayed here for sometime and then proceeded to Egypt to preach the people about the Unity of Allah. When the king of Egypt, Raqyoon, saw the pretty Hazrat Sarah, evil intentions passed through his mind. When he stretched his hand towards her, it instantly got paralyzed. Raqyoon repented his action and begged for Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.)’s pardon. He gave valuable gifts to the group and also presented a slave girl, Hajra, to Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.). This girl later on became the consort of Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.). The historian Tabari writes that Hazrat Hajra was the daughter of Alwan ibne Sanan, the Pharoh of Egypt. Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) returned to Hebron to make it his permanent place of residence. He prayed to Allah to give him off springs that could help him advance his Mission. His prayers were answered and, at the age of eighty-six, he was blessed with his first son Ismail (a.s.) through Hazrat Hajra. After sometime Hazrat Sarah too gave birth to Hazrat Ishaq (a.s).

When Hazrat Sarah presented a son to Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) she insisted that he should move away Hajra and Ismail (a.s.) from Hebron. Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) agreed and traveled with Hazrat Hajra and Hazrat Ismail (a.s.). With Divine Guidance they reached a desolate place in the wilderness of Hedjaz. Although the place was devoid of any human presence, Allah had earmarked it for the location of the Umm-al-Qura - The Fountainhood of Habitations. Therefore, with the hands of Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.), the foundation of habitation at the Holy Place was laid. He left Hazrat Ismail (a.s.) and Hazrat Hajra there. Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) had made a promise to Hazrat Sara, while departing from Hebron, that he would settle Hajra and Ismail (a.s.) at a safe place and return to her. Therefore he left them in the trust of Allah and started on his return journey with a heavy heart that he was leaving behind his beloved son and the faithful wife. When he reached the Mount Kada at some distance, he glanced back at Hajra and Ismail (a.s) and prayed to Allah:

Rabbana inni askanta man zurriati bawaad ghaira zi zara inda baitak al mahram Rabbana leyaqeemus salata faj-al afidat min al naas tahwi ilaihim warzaqhum min al qaraat la-allahum yashkuroon

O Sustainer! Near Your Holy Abode, where nothing grows, I have settled my progeny. O Our Provider! When my progeny establish Prayer, turn the hearts of people towards them and bestow them with sustenance of fruits that they are grateful to You..

Although Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) had faith in Allah’s Beneficence, this prayer gave satisfaction to his heart. He then took the way back to Hebron. Hazrat Hajra made a canopy of the sheet of cloth and sat under it with little Ismail (a.s.). Although it was quiet all around, the courageous lady was not scared at all. She had absolute trust in Allah. She had with her only one pitcher of water that was exhausted in a day or two. Now she worried about water. As the sun progressed on its journey, the intensity of thirst increased. She became restless looking at the parched face of the baby. She started searching for water in the environs. She climbed over the peaks of Safa and Marwa and made seven trips between the two peaks. When she came back totally exhausted, Hazrat Hajra noticed water oozing from the pebbles of sand. She removed the pebbles and stones from the spot and a spring of sweet and cool water spurted out. Hazrat Hajra’s happiness knew no bounds. She uttered,“Zam-Zam!” This word in the Hebrew language means,“Stay put!” This, thus has become the name of the spring. Hazrat Hajra quenched the thirst of her baby and herself with the cool water and then erected a parapet around the place with stones gathered from the surroundings so that it served as a cistern for the water. Looking at the water, birds started hovering around the place. In no time there were signs of life in the desolate wilderness.

At that time a caravan of Bani Jarham of Yemen passed that way,.going to Syria. When they noticed groups of birds in the horizon of the valley, they were surprised. They wondered what the birds had to do in the desolate, waterless desert. When the caravan descended from the heights of the mountain, they noticed a lady sitting with her bowed head and having a baby on her lap. Nearby they saw a spring of water. Finding the spring there, they asked the permission of Hazrat Hajra if they could settle down in the neighborhood. Hazrat Hajra was agreeable to their inhabiting the area, but she told them that without the consent of Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) she had no authority to give such a permission to them. She asked them to wait till Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) came back and made a decision about their request. When Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) arrived there, as promised, Hazrat Hajra obtained his consent and allowed Bani Jarham to make a settlement there. Thus a small colony of shacks was the first community of inhabitants there.

Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.), with Allah’s Wish, commenced construction of Khana-e-Kaaba in that wilderness. Hazrat Ismail (a.s.) helped his father in this work. He carried stones on his shoulders to the site and Hazrat Ibrahim (a.s.) sorted out the stones to erect the walls of the structure. Thus the team of father and son accomplished the construction of the Kaaba. It was the result of their sincerity and dedication that very soon Kaaba got the status of the most revered place of pilgrimage in the entire Arabian Peninsula. People started heading for the Kaaba from all directions. The population of the place thus increased by leaps and bounds. It became a bustling habitation in the heart of Peninsular Arabia and became known by the name of Bakka. This is its original name and Zaboor too refers to the place as Bakka. In the Holy Quran too, it is termed as Bakka when the Book mentions about the event of its construction:

Un awwal bayt waza lilnaas lil-lazi ba Bakkat mubaraka wa hudal lil aalameen

The First House that was made for the people is in Bakka which is felicitous (place) and a source of inspiration for the worlds.

The other name of Bakka which is in vogue is Makka al Mukarrama. Zohak says that the ‘baa’ of Bakka has been replaced with ‘maa’. He says that both are the names of the same place. Some traditions mention that the place where the Kaaba is located is Bakka and the habitation around it is Makka. There are several versions about the naming of the place but those that have been authenticated by the Infallible Ahl-al-Bayt are that the word Bakka has its root in the word ‘Buka’ that means lamentation. The reason for giving this name to the place is that whenever the Arabs from all over assembled there, they lamented and wailed loudly. Therefore Imam Jafar-e-Sadiq (a.s.) has said:

Sameet Makka Bakkat la-aan an naas kaanu yatabakoon fiha

- Alal al Sharaeh

- Makka has been named Bakka that people used to assemble there and do lamenting and wailing

- Mujahid too had a similar opinion. He says:

- Innama samyat Bakkat la-aan an naas yatabaakoon feehal rijaal wan nisa

- --Durr e Mantoor Vol 2, Page 52

- Makka was termed as Bakka because men and women used to assemble there and wail

- And also Makka is derived from the word ‘Mak-aa’ that means shouting and whistling. Therefore Imam Reza (a.s.) says:

- Sameet Makka Makka la an annaas kanu yamkoon beha- Amal al-Sharaeh

- Makka is called Makka because people there shout and cry:

This shouting and wailing too was considered as a sort of worship by the people there. Therefore Allah says in the Holy Quran:

Wa maa kana salatahum indal bayt al amkaa wa tasdeeh

Near the Kaaba their worship was whistling and clapping of hands

In the Holy Quran the city of Makka is also mentioned as Umm-al-Qura. The real meaning of the word Umm is origin or foundation. One reason for terming Makka as Umm al Qura is that a spate of human population originated from here and spread far and wide in the world. Therefore, when Hazrat Ismail (a.s.) married the daughter of Mazaz ibne Umro, the chief of the tribe of Bani Jarham, his progeny prospered and spread soon into Tihama, Najd and Hedjaz and as far as Palestine and Yemen. They also established settlements in other parts of the world. This holy land, besides being the foundation of human settlements also is the center for the Faith and Guidance of the humankind. On this very land the First House of Allah was constructed. The Message of Islam too was first given from these environs. The call for Tawheed (The Unity of Allah) was given from here and the foundation for the Last and Ultimate Faith of Allah has been laid here. The Revelation of the Holy Quran too commenced in Makka. The Prophet of Islam was born here and his radiance spread far and wide. It is here that Hazrat Ali ibne Abi Talib was born in the Holy precincts of the Kaaba. In Makka he spent his years from childhood to early youth.

It is a fact that different places in the world have effect on the life in consonance with the geographic location and the climate. Therefore, what thrives in one place, generally doesn’t in another clime. Similarly, the land in the same area has stretches that have different types of soil. Therefore, when something is grown on a fertile soil, it thrives. If the same crop is on an infertile piece of land, it will wither. The plants growing on soft soils are generally weak. The shrubs growing on rocky soils are hardy. The reason for this is that the roots of the plants growing on desert soils have to penetrate deep to draw the moisture from there. Therefore Nature has provided these plants the strength to contend with the harsh environment. Ameer-al-Momineen (a.s.) has also made an observation about such desert soils:

Alawan al shajarat al abrriaaslab awad awal rawaeh khazrat araq jalood wal nabataat al badawiah qawi wa qaud wa abta khamooda- Nahj al Balagha

Remember the timber of the trees in the wilderness is strong and the bark of fresh and fleshy plants is weak and puny. The wood from the trees growing in the wild burns well and the fire lasts longer.

Similarly the soil, the climate and the environment of a place have marked effect on the mental and physical built of the people there. The place of birth influences the character and habits of the people there. When there is a change of environment from the wilderness to urban conglomerates, then they slowly mould themselves towards adoption of the new ways.

If we take stock of the inhabitants of the hot desert lands, we find that they are more frugal, chivalrous and hard working than those living in more comfortable and salubrious climes. In the deserts people have to contend with harsh situations. Therefore, they have the capability to face these difficulties.

Hazrat Ameer al Momineen (a.s.) had the faculty of physical strength and equanimity of nature endowed by Allah in abundant measure. Even on human consideration too, the harsh desert environment too was responsible for his great faculty of resilience.

Society and Tradition

If society has real existence, it should naturally possess laws peculiar to it. If we accept the first theory about the nature of society (which we have already discussed) and reject the existence of society as a real entity, naturally we have to admit that society lacks laws which may govern it. And if we accept the second theory and believe in artificial and mechanical composition of society, then we would have to admit that society is governed by laws but that its laws are confined to a series of mechanical and causal relationships between its various parts, without the distinguishing features and particular characteristics of life and living organisms.

And if we accept the third point of view, we shall have to accept, firstly, that society itself has a comparatively more permanent existence independent of the existence of individuals although this collective life has no separate existence, and is distributed and dispersed among its individual members, and incarnates itself in their existence. It has discoverable laws and traditions more permanent and stable than those of the individuals, who are its components.

Secondly, we shall have to accept also that the components of society, which are human individuals, contrary to the mechanistic point of view, lose their independent identity-although in a relative fashion to produce an organically composite structure. But at the same time the relative independence of the individual is preserved because individual life, individual nature, and individual achievements are not dissolved totally in the collective existence.

According to this point of view, man actually lives with two separate existences, two souls, and two “selves.” On the one hand, there are the life, soul, and self of the human being, which are the products of the processes of his essential nature; on the other, there are the collective life, soul, and self which are the products of social life, and pervade the individual self. On this basis, biological laws, psychological laws, and sociological laws, together, govern human beings. But according to the fourth theory, only a single type of laws governs man, and these are the social laws alone.

Among the Muslim scholars `Abd al-Rahman ibn Khaldun of Tunisia was the first and the foremost Islamic thinker to discuss clearly and explicitly the laws governing the society in independence from the laws governing the individual. Consequently he asserted that the society itself had a special character, individuality, and reality. In his famous introduction to history, he has discussed this theory in detail. Among the modern scholars and thinkers Montesquieu (the French philosopher of the eighteenth century A.D.) is the first to discuss the laws which control and govern human groups and societies. Raymond Aron says about Montesquieu.

His purpose was to make history intelligible. He sought to understand historical truth. But historical truth appeared to him in the form of an almost limitless diversity of morals, customs, ideas, laws, and institutions. His inquiry's point of departure was precisely this seemingly incoherent diversity. The goal of the inquiry should have been the replacement of this incoherent diversity by a conceptual order. One might say that Montesquieu, exactly like Max Weber, wanted to proceed from the meaningless fact to an intelligible order. This attitude is precisely the one peculiar to the sociologist. 1

It means that a sociologist has to reach beyond the apparently diverse social forms and phenomena, which seem to be alien to one another, to reveal the unity in diversity in order to prove that all the diverse manifestations refer to the one and the same reality. In the same way, all the similar social events and phenomena have their origin in a similar sequence of analogous causes. Here is a passage from the observations on the causes of the rise and fall of the Romans.

It is not fortune that rules the world. We can ask the Romans, who had a constant series of success when they followed a certain plan, and an uninterrupted sequence of disasters when they followed another. There are general causes, whether moral or physical ....which operate in every monarchy, to bring about its rise, its duration and its fall. All accidents are subject to these causes, and if the outcome of a single battle, i.e. a particular cause, was the ruin of a state, there was a general cause which decreed that that state was destined to perish through a single battle. In short, the main impulse carries all the particular accidents along with it. 2

The Holy Qur’an explains that nations and societies qua nations and societies (not just individuals living in societies) have common laws and principles that govern their rise and fall in accordance with certain historical process. The concept of a common fate and collective destiny implies the existence of certain definite laws governing the society. About the tribe of Bani Israel, the Qur’an says:

وَقَضَيْنَا إِلَىٰ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ فِي الْكِتَابِ لَتُفْسِدُنَّ فِي الْأَرْضِ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَلَتَعْلُنَّ عُلُوًّا كَبِيرًا فَإِذَا جَاءَ وَعْدُ أُولَاهُمَا بَعَثْنَا عَلَيْكُمْ عِبَادًا لَّنَا أُولِي بَأْسٍ شَدِيدٍ فَجَاسُوا خِلَالَ الدِّيَارِ وَكَانَ وَعْدًا مَّفْعُولًا ثُمَّ رَدَدْنَا لَكُمُ الْكَرَّةَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَمْدَدْنَاكُم بِأَمْوَالٍ وَبَنِينَ وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ أَكْثَرَ نَفِيرًا إِنْ أَحْسَنتُمْ أَحْسَنتُمْ لِأَنفُسِكُمْ وَإِنْ أَسَأْتُمْ فَلَهَا فَإِذَا جَاءَ وَعْدُ الْآخِرَةِ لِيَسُوءُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَلِيَدْخُلُوا الْمَسْجِدَ كَمَا دَخَلُوهُ أَوَّلَ مَرَّةٍ وَلِيُتَبِّرُوا مَا عَلَوْا تَتْبِيرًا عَسَىٰ رَبُّكُمْ أَن يَرْحَمَكُمْ وَإِنْ عُدتُّمْ عُدْنَا وَجَعَلْنَا جَهَنَّمَ لِلْكَافِرِينَ حَصِيرًا

And we decreed for the Children of Israel in the scriptures: You verily will work corruption in the earth twice, and you will become great tyrants. So when the time for the first of the two came We roused against you slaves of Ours of great might who ravaged [your] country, and it was a threat performed.' [After you had regretted your sins and became pious again] Then we gave once again your turn against them, and we aided you with wealth and children and mode you more in soldiery.

[Saying] If ye dogood , ye do good for your own souls, and if ye do evil, it is for them. (I.e. Our laws and customs are fixed and constant, it is by this covenant that people are bestowed with power, might, honour and constancy or subjected to humiliation and abjectness). So when the time for the second [of the judgements] came, because of your acts of tyranny and despotism, we aroused against you others [of our slaves] to ravage you, and to enter the temple even as they entered it the first time, and tolay waste all that they conquered with an utter wasting. It may be that your Lord will have mercy on you [if ye mend your ways], but if you repeat [the crime] we shall repeat [the punishment], and we have appointed hell a dungeon for the disbelievers. (17:4- 8)

The last sentence, i.e. “But if you repeat [the crime] we shall repeat [the punishment]” shows that the Qur’an is addressing all the people of the tribe and not an individual.

It also implies that all the societies are governed by a universal law.

Determinism or Freedom

One of the fundamental problems discussed by philosophers, particularly in the last century, is the problem of determinism and freedom of individual as against society, or, in other words, determinism and freedom of the individual spirit vis-à-vis the social spirit. If we accept the first theory regarding the nature of society, and consider social structure to be merely a hypostatized notion, and believe in the absolute independence of the individual, then there will be no place for the idea of social determinism.

Because, there will be no power or force except that of the individuals, and no social force that may rule over the individual. Hence, in this theory, there is no room for the idea of social determinism. If there is any compulsion or determinism it is of the individual and operates through the individuals. The society has no role in this matter. Hence, there can be no social determinism as emphasized by the advocates of social determinism.

In the same way, if we accept the fourth theory, and consider the individual and individual's personality as a raw material or an empty pot, then the entire human personality of the individual, his intellect, and his free will would be reduced to nothing but an expression of the collective intelligence and the collective will, which manifest themselves, as an illusion, in the form of an individual to realize their own social ends. Accordingly, if we accept the idea of the absolute essentiality and primariness of the society, there will be no place left for the idea of the freedom and choice of the individual.

Emile Durkheim, the famous French sociologist, emphasizes the importance of society to the extent of saying that social matters (in fact all the human matters, as against the biological and animal urges and needs, like eating and sleeping) are the products of society, not the products of individual thought and will, and have three characteristics they are external, compulsive, and general.

They are considered to be external, because they are alien to individual existence and are imposed from without upon the individual by society. They existed before the individual came into existence and the individual accepted them under the-influence of society. Acceptance of the moral, social, and religious traditions, customs, and values by the individual comes under this category. They are compulsive, because they impose themselves upon the individual and mould the individual's conscience, feelings, thoughts, and preferences according to their own standards.

Because of being compulsive, they are necessarily general and universal. However, if we accept the third theory and consider both the individual and the society as fundamental entities-although admitting the power of the society as dominating that of the individual-it does not necessitate any compulsion or determinism for the individual either in human or social affairs.

Durkheimian determinism arises due to the failure to recognize the essential nature of the human being. Man's nature gives him a kind of freedom and liberty that empower him to revolt against social compulsions. On this basis, we may say that there is an intermediary relationship between the individual and the society that lies between the extremes of absolute freedom and absolute compulsion (amr bayn al-'amrayn).

Although the Holy Qur’an attributes character, personality, reality, power, life, death, consciousness, obedience, and disobedience to society, it also explicitly recognizes the possibility of violation of social law by an individual. The Qur’an in this matter relies on what is termed as the (Fitrat Allah) ‘Divine nature’.

In Surat al Nisa, The verse 97 refers to a group of people who called themselves “mustad'afun” (the oppressed and the weak) in the society of Mecca, and took shelter in their `weakness and being oppressed' as an excuse for shirking their natural responsibilities. In fact, they considered themselves helpless as against the social compulsion and pressures. The Qur’an says that their excuse cannot be condoned on any ground, because at least they were free to migrate from the Meccan society to another one better suited for the fulfillment of their aspirations. Elsewhere it states:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا عَلَيْكُمْ أَنفُسَكُمْ

لَا يَضُرُّكُم مَّن ضَلَّ إِذَا اهْتَدَيْتُمْ

“O believers! You have charge of your own souls. He who goes astray cannot injure you if you are rightly guided.”(5:105)

The famous verse (7:172) regarding human nature states that man is bound by the Divine covenant to believe in monotheism (tawhid), and it has been made inherent in human nature. The Qur’an says further that it is ordained in this way so that people should not say on the Day of Judgement that “our fathers were idolaters and we did not have any other alternative except helplessly adhering to the faith of our forefathers.” (7:173) 3

With such a nature gifted to man by God, there is no compulsion to accept any faith contrary to the Divine will and to human nature itself.

The teachings of the Qur’an are entirely based upon the notion of human responsibility man is responsible for himself and for society. The dictum al-'amr bil ma`rufwa al-nahy `an al-munkar (commanding others to do what is commanded by God and forbidding them from that which is prohibited by Him), is a command to the individual to revolt against social corruption and destructiveness.

This is the Qur’anic code of conduct prescribed for the individual to save society from chaos, disorder, and destruction. Tales and stories embodied in the text of the Qur’an deal mostly with the theme of the individual's revolt against a corrupt social order.The stories of Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Prophet Muhammad, the Companions of the Cave (Ashab al-Kahf), the believer of the tribe of the Pharaoh, etc. deal with the same theme.

The notion of social determinism is rooted in the misconception that society in its real composition needs complete merger of its constituent parts into one another and dissolution of their plurality into the unity of the `whole'. This process is considered to be responsible for the emergence of a new reality.

Either one has to accept that the personality, freedom, and independence of the individual are real, and so negate the reality of society and social structure (as in the case of the first and the second theories regarding the nature of society and the individual), or the reality of society is to be affirmed at the cost of the individual and his freedom and independence (as in the case of Durkheim's theory). Reconciliation between these two opposite viewpoints is impossible. As all the conjectures and arguments of sociology support the supremacy of society, the opposite view is necessarily rejected.

In fact, from a philosophical point of view, all forms of syntheses cannot be regarded similar. On the lower levels of nature, i.e. minerals and inorganic substances, which in philosophical terms are governed by a `simple force,' and as interpreted by the philosophers, act according to one and the same law, are synthesized in a way that they completely merge into one another and lose their individuality in the whole.

For example, in the composition of water, two atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen are merged together, and both lose their individual properties. But at the higher level of synthesis, the parts usually retain a relative independence with respect to the whole. A kind of plurality in unity and unity in plurality manifests itself at higher levels of existence. As we see in man, despite his unity, a unique plurality is manifested.

Not only his lower faculties and powers preserve their plurality to some extent, but, at the same time, there is also a kind of continuous inherent opposition and conflict between his internal powers. Society is the strangest natural phenomenon in which all its constituent parts retain their individual independence to a maximum possible degree.

Hence, from this point of view, we have to accept that human beings, who are the constituent parts of a society in intellectual and volitional activity, retain their individual freedom, and, therefore, their individual existence precedes their social existence. In addition to this fact, in the synthesis at the higher levels of nature, the generic character of the parts is preserved. The individual human being or the individual spirit is not determined by the social spirit; it rather preserves its right to think and act freely.

Notes

1. Raymond Aron, Main Currents in Sociological Thought, vol. I, p. 14.

2. Ibid.

3. Following verses are referredto :

وَإِذْ أَخَذَ رَبُّكَ مِنْ بَنِي آدَمَ مِنْ ظُهُورِهِمْ ذُرِّيَّتَهُمْ وَأَشْهَدَهُمْ عَلَىٰ أَنْفُسِهِمْ أَلَسْتُ بِرَبِّكُمْ ۖ قَالُوا بَلَىٰ ۛ شَهِدْنَا ۛ أَنْ تَقُولُوا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِنَّا كُنَّا عَنْ هَٰذَا غَافِلِينَ أَوْ تَقُولُوا إِنَّمَا أَشْرَكَ آبَاؤُنَا مِنْ قَبْلُ وَكُنَّا ذُرِّيَّةً مِنْ بَعْدِهِمْ ۖ أَفَتُهْلِكُنَا بِمَا فَعَلَ الْمُبْطِلُونَ

And whenyour Lord brought forth from the children of Adam, from their backs, their descendants, and made them bear witness against their own souls: Am I not your Lord? They said: Yes!we bear witness. Lest you should say on the day of resurrection: Surely we were heedless of this. [Or you should say: Only our fathers associated others (with Allah) before, and we were an offspring after them: Wilt Thou thendestroy us for what the vain doers did? (7:172-173)

Social Divisions and Polarization

Although society has a kind of unity, it is divided from within into different groups, strata and classes, which are occasionally opposite to one another. If not all, some of societies are divided into different and occasionally conflicting poles despite their apparent unity. Thus, in the words of Muslim philosophers, a specific type of `unity in plurality and plurality in unity' governs societies. In earlier chapters, while discussing the nature of the unity of society, we have elaborated what type of unity it is. Now we shall discuss the nature of its inherent plurality.

There are two well-known theories with regard to this problem. The first is the philosophy of historical materialism and dialectical contradictions. This theory, which would be discussed in detail later, is based upon the origin of private property. The societies in which the conception of private property does not exist are basically unipolar, such as the primitive communist societies or those communist societies which are likely to be formed in the future.

A society in which the right to private property. Exists is, of necessity, bipolar. Hence, society is either unipolar or bipolar. There is no third alternative possible. In bipolar societies, human beings are divided into two groups, viz. the exploiters and the exploited. Except these two opposite camps, i.e. the group of the rulers and the group of the ruled, any third group does not exist. All the social modes, such as philosophy, morality, religion, and art, may also be divided according to the class character of the two groups.

There are, therefore, two types of philosophy, morality, religion, etc., each of which bears the specific economic class character of each group. Hypothetically, if there were only one philosophy, one religion, and one morality prevalent in a society, it too represents the character of any one of these two classes and is imposed on the other. But it is impossible to imagine the existence of a philosophy, art, religion or morality without having a character independent of the economic structure of society.

According to the other theory, the unipolar or multipolar characteristic of society has nothing to do with the principle of private ownership. The social, ideological, cultural, and racial factors, too, are responsible for giving rise to multipolar societies. The cultural and ideological factors, in particular, play the basic role; they are not only capable of producing bipolar or multipolar societies with occasionally contradictory poles but can also create a unipolar society without necessarily abolishing the institution of private ownership.

Now we have to discuss the view of the Qur’an regarding the plurality of society. Does the Qur’an affirm or negate social plurality? And if it affirms, what is its point of view about the polarization of society? Does the Qur’an affirm the bipol4rization of society on the basis of ownership and exploitation, or does it forward some other view? The best or at least a good method for determining the Qur’anic point of view seems to be that we should first of all extract the social terminology used in the Qur’an. In the light of the nature and meaning of the Qur’anic idiom we can infer the position of the Qur’an concerning this matter.

The social terminology used in the Qur’an is of two types: some of the words are related with a particular social phenomenon such as, millah (community),shari `ah (Divine Law), shir`ah (custom), minhaj (method), sunnah (tradition), and the like. These terms are not relevant to the present discussion. But a number of terms which refer to all or some human groups may be taken into account for discovering the Qur’anic viewpoint.

These words can reveal the point of view of the Qur’an. Such terms as qawm (folk), ummah (community), nas (mankind), shu`ub (peoples), qaba'il (tribes), rasul (messenger, apostle), nabi (prophet), imam (leader), wali (guardian), mu'min (believer), kafir (unbeliever), munafiq (dissenter or hypocrite), mushrik (polytheist), mudhabdhab (hesitant), muhajir (emigrant), mujahid (warrior), sadiq (truthful), shahid (witness), muttaqi (pious), salih (righteous), muslih (reformer), mufsid (corrupter).

Aamir bil ma'ruf (one who orders to obey God's command), nahi `an al-munkar (one who forbids indecent or illegitimate deeds), `alim (learned), nasih (admonishes), zalim (cruel, oppressive, unjust), khalifah (deputy), rabbani (Divine), rabbi (rabbi), kahin (priest), ruhban (monks), ahbar (Jewish scribes), jabbar (tyrant), `ali (sublime), mustali (superior), mustakbir (tyrant, proud), mustad`af (tyrannized, oppressed), musrif (lavish, prodigal), mutraf (affluent), taghut (idols), mala ` (chieftains), muluk (kings), ghani (rich), faqir (poor, needy), mamluk (the ruled), malik (owner, master), hurr (free, liberated), `abd (slave, servant), rabb (master, lord), etc.

Furthermore, there are other words which are apparently similar to these words, such as: musalli (one who prays), mukhlis (sincere, devoted), sadiq (loyal, true), munfiq (charitable), mustaghfir (one who asks for God's forgiveness), ta'ib (penitent), abid (adorer), hamid (one who praises), etc.

But these words have been used only for the purpose of describing kinds of behaviour and not to refer to certain social groups, poles, or classes.

It is essential to study the connotation and meaning of the verses in which the terms referred to earlier are used, in particular the words related to social orientations. It is also to be seen whether the above mentioned terms can be divided into two distinct groups. And supposing that these terms refer to two distinct groups, it should be determined who are their referents.

For example, can all of them be classified in two groups of believers and unbelievers, according to a classification based on religious belief, or into two groups of the rich and the poor according to their economic position? In other words, it is to be analyzed whether these divisions are ultimately based on any one primary classification, and whether or not all the other sub-divisions are essentially secondary and relative. If there is only one principle of division, it has to be determined.

Some people claim that the Qur’anic view suggests a bipolar society. They say according to the Qur’an, society is divided into two classes: one is the ruling, dominating, and exploiting class, and the other consists of the ruled, exploited, and subjugated people. The ruling class consists of those whom the Qur’an calls `mustakbirun', i.e. the arrogant oppressors and exploiters. The subjugated class is of those who are called by the Qur’an `mustad'afun' (the weakened).

All other divisions, such as mu'min (believer) and kafir (unbeliever), muwahhid (monotheist) and mushrik (polytheist), salih (righteous) and fasid (corrupt) are secondary in nature. It means that it is tyranny and exploitation that leads to infidelity, idolatry, hypocrisy and other such evils, whereas, on the other hand, subjugation to oppression and exploitation leads towards iman (faith), hijrah (migration), jihad (struggle), salih (righteousness), islah (reform) and other such qualities.

In other words, all such things which are regarded by the Qur’an as deviation and aberration in religion, morality, and deeds are rooted in the practice of exploitation and the economic privileges of a class. Similarly, the source and root of the attitudes and acts morally, religiously, and practically approved and emphasized by the Qur’an, lie in the condition of being exploited. Human consciousness is naturally determined by the material conditions of life. Without changing the material life of a people, it is not possible to bring about any change in their spiritual, moral and psychic life.

According to this viewpoint, the Qur’an perceives social conflicts as basically class conflicts. It means that the Qur’an gives essential priority to social and economic struggle over moral struggle. According to this interpretation, in the Qur’an, infidels, hypocrites, idolaters, the morally corrupt and the tyrants arise from among the groups whom the Qur’an names as mutraf (the affluent), musrif (extravagant and wasteful), mala' (ruling clique), muluk (kings), mustakbir (arrogant) and so on. It is not possible for these groups to arise from among the opposite class.

In the same way, they say, the prophets (anbiya'), messengers (mursalun), leaders (a'immah), upholders of truth (siddiqun), martyrs (shuhada'), warriors (mujahidun), emigrants (muhajirun) and believers (muminun) emerge from among the class of the oppressed and the weak. It is not possible that they may arise from the opposite class. So it is mainly istihbar (tyranny and arrogance) or istid`af (weakness, or condition of being oppressed) that mould and direct the social consciousness of the people. All the other social modes are products and manifestations of the struggle between the exploiters and the exploited, and the oppressors and the oppressed.

According to this viewpoint, the Qur’an not only considers the two above mentioned groups of people as manifestation and expression of the division of society into two classes of the mustakbirun and the mustad'afun, but it also divides human attributes and dispositions into two sets.

Truthfulness, forgiveness, sincerity, service, insight, vision, compassion, mercy, pity, generosity, humility, sympathy, nobility, sacrifice, fear of God, etc. constitute one set of positive values on the other hand, falsehood, treachery, debauchery, hypocrisy, sensuality, cruelty, callousness, stupidity, avarice and pride etc. constitute another set of values, which are negative. The first sets of attributes are ascribed to the oppressed class and the second set is considered to characterize the oppressors.

Hence, they say, oppression and subjugation not only give rise to opposite groups, but they are also the fountainheads of conflicting moral qualities and habits. The position of a class either as oppressor or oppressed is the basis and foundation not only of all human attitudes, loyalties, and preferences, but also of all cultural and social phenomena and manifestations.

The morality, philosophy, art, literature, and religion originating in the class of oppressors always manifest and represent its character and social attitude. All of them support and justify the status quo, and cause stagnation and decadence by arresting social progress. On the other hand, the philosophy, art, literature, and religion originating from the class of the oppressed are dynamic and revolutionary, and generate new awareness.

The class of the oppressors, i.e. the mustakabirun, because of its hegemony over social privileges, is obscurantist, traditionalist, and seeks shelter under the shadow of conservatism; whereas the class of the oppressed is endowed with vision, and is anti-traditionalist, progressive, zealous, active, and is always in the vanguard of revolution.

In brief, according to the advocates of this theory, the Qur’an affirms the view that it is actually the economic structure of a society which makes a man, determines his group-identity and his attitudes, and lays down the foundation of his thinking, morality, religion, and ideology. They quote a number of verses from the Qur’an to show that what they teach is, on the whole, based upon the Qur’an.

According to this view, commitment to a particular class is the measure and test of all things. All the beliefs are to be evaluated by this standard. The claims and assertions of a believer, a reformer, and even a prophet or a spiritual leader, can be confirmed or rejected only through this test.

This theory is in fact a materialistic interpretation of both man and society. No doubt the Qur’an gives a special importance to the social allegiances of individuals, but does it mean that the Qur’an interprets all distinctions and classifications on the basis of social classes? In my view such an interpretation of society, man, and the world is not consistent with the Islamic world view.

It is a conclusion drawn from a superficial study of the problems discussed in the Qur’an. However, since we shall discuss this matter fully in a later chapter dealing with history under the title “Is History Materialistic in Nature?” I shall abstain from further elaboration at this point.

Nature of Society: Homogeneity or Heterogeneity?

An answer to this problem, too, as indicated earlier, is essential for every school of thought because only a discussion of this problem can throw light on an important issue whether all human societies can follow one and the same ideology, or if there must be a multiplicity of ideologies based upon various types of societies i.e. should each nation, community, civilization, and culture necessarily possess a particular ideology?

Ideology means the sum total of the general schemes and means which can lead a society towards the attainment of perfection and its summum bonum (the highest good). We also know that every species calls for specific qualities, conditions, and capacities; that which represents the `highest good' in the case of a horse is not identical with that of a sheep or a man.

Hence, if all societies assuming their objective existence--should share the same essence and nature, they could also, possibly, share a single ideology. Their mutual differences being like those among members of the same species, any living ideology can be applied to them, allowing within its framework adjustments for individual difference according to the varying aptitudes of its members. But if societies have different natures and essences, they naturally call for different programmes, plans, ideals, and varying summum bonum particular to each. In this case, one single ideology cannot be applied to all of them.

A similar problem applies to the changes and mutations of societies over long periods of time. Do societies change their nature and essence in the course of changes and mutations, in the same way as species are transformed in the process of evolution? Does such a process of transformation occur on the level of societies? Or if the social changes are like changes in the circumstance of an individual of a certain species, whose nature and generic characteristics are preserved in the midst of all changes and transitions?

The first issue is related to sociology, whereas the second one is connected with history. We shall discuss the first problem at present and postpone the discussion of the second until we take into account the nature of history.

Can sociological studies reveal whether or not there are some common characteristics among various societies? Are the differences among them only secondary and superficial, resulting from factors extraneous to the essence and nature of society, which itself remains unchanged? Or is it true that human societies are basically different in essence and nature, and even if supposedly similar from the point of view of external conditions, they function in intrinsically different ways? These alternative views are suggested by philosophy in its effort to disentangle obscurities surrounding the formal unity or plurality of things.

There is a shorter route also, and that is man himself. It is an established fact about man that Homo sapiens are the only species that has not shown any biological mutation from the very beginning of its emergence. Some thinkers say that as the process of evolution of living organisms culminated in the emergence of human being, nature altered its course and diverted the movement of evolution from the biological to the social course, and from the process of physiological evolution to that of spiritual and intellectual development.

In an earlier chapter, while discussing the question “Is man gregarious?” we came to the conclusion that man who is a single species is ordained by nature itself to be gregarious and sociable. That is man's intrinsic and inherent gregariousness that manifests itself in the form of society and the collective spirit, is derived from the essential nature of the human species. Man has social inclinations because through them he can attain the kind of perfection of which he is capable.

His gregarious propensity secures for him the ground for the collective spirit, which is itself a means to attain the end self perfection. Accordingly, it is human nature itself that determines the course taken by the collective spirit. In other words, the collective spirit serves human nature. As long as man exists, human nature would carry on its activity, supporting and encouraging his social spirit. The collective spirit is derived, therefore, from the individual spirit, which in turn is effused from human nature. Man is a single species, so human societies, also, have the same nature, substance, and essence.

However, as in case of individual, who can deviate from the course of nature and is occasionally even dehumanized, a society may also be diverted from its natural course and be dehumanized. The variety in societies is quite similar to diversity in individual morals, which are, in any case, not outside the sphere of human nature. Thus, societies, civilizations, cultures, and, finally, social spirits that govern societies, in spite of the differences in characters and forms, have ultimately a human character and not a non-human nature.

If we agree? With the fourth theory about the synthesis of society, and consider individual as only passive, receptive matter, an empty container without any content, it would be tantamount to a negation of the human nature. We may propound a hypothesis concerning diversity of nature and essence among societies, but this point of view in the form of Durkheimian theory is not at all acceptable; because it leaves the very fundamental question unanswered.

If the origin of the collective or social spirit does not lie inside individuals, and if it does not spring from the natural and biological aspect of human beings, then where does it come from? Does the social spirit come from absolute nothingness? Is it sufficient for the explanation of the social spirit to say that society has existed as long as man has existed?

In addition to this, Durkheim believes that social phenomena such as religion, morality, crafts, art etc. are the products of its social spirit, which have been, are and would remain the expressions of the social spirit, and thus have `temporal durability' and `spatial extensibility.' Thisitself is a proof that Durkheim implicitly believes that all societies have a singular essence and nature, which manifests itself in the social spirit.

The teachings of Islam emphasize absolute unity of religion, and consider difference in religious codes and traditions as secondary, and not essential and primary. We also know that religion is nothing except a programme for perfection of the individual and society. It also reveals that foundation of these teachings have been laid upon an assumption of the unity of societies. If there were various `species' of societies, then the ends of perfection and their respective means would have been also diverse, necessitating a diversity and plurality of religions.

The Qur’an repeatedly stresses that there is not more than one single faith throughout the world. There has been one religion in all regions, in all societies and at all times. According to the Qur’an, religions-in the plural form-have had no existence; only “Religion” (in its singular form) has existed. All prophets preached and taught the same faith, the same path, and the same purpose:

شَرَعَ لَكُمْ مِنَ الدِّينِ مَا وَصَّىٰ بِهِ نُوحًا وَالَّذِي أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ وَمَا وَصَّيْنَا بِهِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ ۖ أَنْ أَقِيمُوا الدِّينَ وَلَا تَتَفَرَّقُوا فِيهِ ۚ

“He has ordained for you the religion that He charged Noah with, and that we have revealed to thee, and that we charged Abraham with, Moses and Jesus, (saying), establish the religion and be not divided therein…..” (42:13)

The verses of the Qur’an which prove that the faith remains the same at all times, in all regions, and in the scriptures of all true prophets of God, are numerous. The difference lies only in certain rules and ordinances, according to the relative stages of development or backwardness of societies. The logic that there is essentially no more than one religion is based on the outlook about man and society that mankind is one and a single species and those men are not different in their human essence. In the same way, human society, as an objective entity, represents a single species, not a plurality of kinds.