The Power of Peace
Non-violent activism, which should not be confused with passivity, is the perfect solution to problems in all spheres.
Whenever any problem arises between two groups, be it individual or social, one way to deal with it is to opt for the way of violence and confrontation. Another method is to make every attempt, by scrupulously avoiding the path of clash and confrontation, to solve the problem by peaceful means. There are many forms which peaceful means may take; it is, in fact, the exact nature of the problem which tells us which of the peaceful means is to be employed on which occasion.
Islam teaches us non-violence. The Quran tells us that God does not love disorder (The Quran, 2:205). This verse also clearly states what is meant by disorder. According to the Quran, disorder is that course of action, which results in disturbance in the social system incurring loss in terms of life and property (The Quran, 2:205).
We may put it differently and say that certainly God loves non-violence. He does not want people to indulge in such violence in human society as would result in death and destruction. This is also supported by other statements in the Quran, one of which tells us that one of God’s names is As Salaam, meaning Peace (The Quran, 59:23). Similarly, God’s desired religion is called ‘paths of peace’ (The Quran, 5:16). Paradise, the ultimate destination of God’s true devotees, is called the ‘home of peace’ (The Quran, 6:127).
The entire spirit of the Quran is in tune with this concept. For instance, the Quran attaches the greatest of importance to patience. Patience is the only Islamic act, which is promised reward beyond measure (The Quran, 39:10). Patience, in fact, is another name for peaceful activism, while impatience is another name for violent activism. Patience, in essence, is exactly what is called non-violence in modern times. Patient activism means non-violent activism.
This point has been clearly made in the Traditions. According to one Tradition, the Prophet of Islam observed: God grants to non-violence what he does not grant to violence. (Sahih Muslim, Hadith No. 2593)
In this tradition the word ‘rifq’ (gentleness) has been used as compared to ‘unf’ (violence). These words denote exactly what is called violence (unf) and non-violence (la unf) in modern times. It bespeaks the eternal superiority of non-violence over violence.
God grants to non-violence what he does not grant to violence. This is no simple statement. It tells us of a very profound reality. It tells us of an eternal law of nature. By the very law of nature itself, all bad things are connected with violence, while all good things are connected with non-violence. Violent activities breed hatred in society, while peaceful activities breed love in society. Violence is a source of destruction, while non-violence is a source of construction. Hostility flourishes in an atmosphere of violence, while amity flourishes in an atmosphere of non-violence. The way of violence gives rise to negative values, while the way of non-violence gives rise to positive values. The way of violence embroils people in problems, while the way of non-violence shows people the way to exploit opportunities. To put it briefly, if violence is death, non-violence, as compared to violence, is life.
Both the Quran and Hadith speak of jihad as a very superior act. What is jihad? Jihad means ‘struggle.’ This word is used for non-violent activism as compared to violent activism. One clear proof of this is provided by the verse of the Quran which says:
Do not yield to the unbelievers, but struggle with them by means of it (the Quran) most strenuously. (The Quran, 25:52).
The Quran is no gun or weapon of war. It is a book of ideology. In such a situation asking people to struggle by means of the Quran signifies to strive by means of ideology. That is to say, to work hard to conquer people’s hearts and minds by the superior ideology of Islam.
In the light of this Quranic explanation, it would be true to say that jihad, in fact, is another name for peaceful activism or non-violent activism, that is to say, if qital is violent activism, jihad is non-violent activism.
Peaceful Beginning
When the Quran began to be revealed, the first word of the first verse was iqra, ‘read’ (The Quran, 96:1). When we reflect on this verse, we find the starting point of Islamic action. It is to start from where there is no fear of violent reaction, from the point where it is possible to continue one’s movement along peaceful lines.
At the time when the command of iqra was revealed in the Quran, several options existed in Makkah regarding the starting point for the Islamic movement. One option was to begin by launching a movement to clear the Kabah of the 360 idols, which had been placed in it. This option would certainly have provoked a violent reaction on the part of the Quraysh. Another option was to find a seat in Dar Al Nadwah (Makkah’s parliament). The third option was to launch a movement to free Muslims from the domination of the Roman and Sassanid empires. This starting point again would have provoked a violent reaction on the part of these forces.
Leaving aside all these courses of action, the option followed was that of studying the Quran, about which it was certain that it could be continued peacefully, and that it would not provoke any violent reaction.
The Prophet of Islam adopted this principle throughout his life. His policy was to adopt a non-violent method rather than a violent method. It is this policy, which was referred to by his wife, Aisha: “Whenever the Prophet had to opt for one of two things, he always chose the easier one.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 6786)
The Benefits of Non-Violent Activism
What are the advantages of non-violent activism over violent activism? These are listed here in brief:
1. According to the Quran, each human being is endowed with two faculties: the ego, which is called nafs ammara (The Quran, 12:53) in the Quran and the conscience, which is called nafs law wama (The Quran, 75:2).
Violent methods arouse people’s egos, which inevitably results in some form of destruction. Conversely, non-violent activism awakens people’s consciences, which results in introspection in the people concerned. This brings about miraculous results, and, in the words of the Quran, the enemy becomes “your dearest friend.” (The Quran, 41:34)
2. One great benefit of the non-violent method is that people’s time is not wasted. In this way they have the occasion to exploit the opportunities existing in the prevailing circumstances to the ultimate extent. We find this in the case of the no war pact of Hudaybiya. This peace treaty made it possible for the energies of the believers to be expended in peaceful constructive activities rather than being wasted in armed confrontation. (Seerah ibn Khathir, Vol. 3, p. 324)
3. One tremendous harm resulting from violent activism is the breaking of social traditions in order to launch such movements, whereas the great benefit of non-violent activism is that it can be continued without any disruption of tradition.
4. Violent activism ultimately destroys the existing system, for the replacement of one system by another is not possible by this means. On the contrary, through non-violent methods it becomes possible to gradually replace one system with another. That is why movements based on violence end up by bringing about one political coup or another. True revolution cannot result from any movement launched on the basis of violence.
Success Through the Non-violent Method
All great successes or victories in the first phase of Islam and in the succeeding period were achieved by the non-violent method. Here we refer to some of these victories.
1. The first thirteen-year period of the prophethood is called the Makkah period. The method of non-violence, or pacifism, was adopted in the full sense in this phase. Many issues which presented themselves in Makkah could easily have led to confrontations. But the Prophet of Islam, avoiding all such issues, confined himself totally to the sphere of the peaceful propagation of ‘the word of God’. It was as a result of this policy that dawah work in this period could be effectively performed. One of the many benefits of this 13-year dawah work was that in this age all the best individuals who influenced Islamic history were brought into the fold of Islam, for instance, Abu Bakr, Umar, Usman, Ali, etc.
2. When the Makkan leaders wanted to wage war against him, the Prophet, declining to retaliate, quietly migrated to Madinah.
Hijrah, in its nature is without doubt an example of non-violent activism. This peaceful strategy enabled the Prophet and his migrant companions, about 200 in number, to build a powerful center of Islam in Madinah. If the Prophet had opted for the way of armed confrontation instead of peaceful migration, perhaps the history of Islam would have begun and ended in Makkah.
3. After the emigration, the Prophet’s antagonists waged war unilaterally. The outcome was the bloody pitched battles at Badr and Uhud. At that moment, the Prophet again negotiated a 10-year peace treaty by accepting all the conditions of the enemy. This pact is known in the history of Islam as the Hudaybiya peace treaty. This event is called a ‘clear victory’ in the Quran (The Quran, 48:1). It was this peace pact, which paved the way for that peaceful constructive activity which finally made possible the conquest not only of Makkah but the whole of Arabia.
4. At the end of the pious Caliphate, a bloody confrontation between the Banu Hashim and the Banu Umayyah took place. As a result, the advancement of Islam came to a halt for ten years. What re-opened this chapter of advancement was the retreat of Hasan ibn Ali (d. 50 AH) from the field of battle. This step was indeed a practical form of non-violent activism. This peaceful step taken by Hasan ibn Ali once again opened the doors of progress to Islam.
5. By the end of the Abbasid caliphate, Mongol tribes had attacked the Muslim world and destroyed the entire region right from Samarqand to Aleppo. Apparently, the history of Islam had come to a standstill. At that juncture Muslims had engaged in peaceful dawah work. As a result, the majority of the Mongols accepted Islam. How that miraculous feat occurred was expressed by an orientalist in these words: “The religion of Muslims has conquered where their arms had failed.”
6. Another important event of this nature concerns the scholars of Islam of the early phase. After the pious Caliphate, the political set-up had degenerated. The Caliphate had permanently changed into kingship, and apparently there had been developments that invited confrontation with the rulers. But according to the guidance of the Prophet, the believers totally avoided political clashes with those in power. A history of political corruption, starting from the time of the Umayyad caliphate, continued for centuries. Yet the great religious scholars known as tabiin, the disciples of the Prophet’s Companions, taba tabiyiin, companions of the tabiin, the traditionists, the jurists, the sufis, all the great religious scholars, refrained without exception, from setting themselves on a collision course with the rulers.
It was no simple matter to avoid the field of violent activism and opt for the field of non-violent activism. It was during this period, therefore, that on the one hand, peaceful dawah work was initiated in various countries, and on the other, the Quran, hadith, fiqh, and other Islamic sciences were compiled. All the precious books of classical Islamic literature that adorn our libraries owe their existence to this peaceful course of action.
For instance, Hadith is regarded as the second source of shariah after the Quran. These traditions, having been compiled, are available to us in the form of books. These are so precious that, without them, the very structure of religion could not have taken shape. During the respective reigns of the Umayyads and Abbasids, when the rot had set in in the rulers, most of these traditions were retained only in the memories of the traditionists of the times. Had these traditionists opted for the principle of violent collision with the oppressor-rulers of their time, all of them would have been done to death by the rulers. Then all the precious treasures of traditions, instead of becoming parts of the books, would have been lost to posterity.
It is the miracle of the choice of non-violence over violence that the precious treasure of the traditions is available today in printed form on our bookshelves. We are thus in a position to fully benefit from the guidance given to us by the Prophet.
Political Insurrection Unlawful
After the period of the pious Caliphate, corruption set in in the Muslim rulers. Still the religious scholars did not rise in revolt against the rulers, scrupulously avoiding any confrontation. They continued to expend their efforts in non-political fields. This was not simply a matter of chance, but the adoption of a policy based on the clear injunctions of the shariah. As we know, books of Hadith record the traditions in detail under chapters like al-Fitan (Trial).
The Prophet had clearly foretold that in later times all kinds of rot would set in in the rulers. They would become tyrants and unjust, but even then, the people should never take up arms against them. Instead the Prophet advised that when the believers found themselves being ruled by such tyrants, they should take to the mountains with their ‘camels and goats’ instead of launching campaigns against them.
‘Camels and goats’ signify those opportunities which existed in non-political fields, and which will always exist irrespective of the corruption of the rulers. The Prophet’s injunction meant that at such times what the believers have to do so is to peacefully exploit the existing opportunities in non-political fields by avoiding any confrontation in the political field. These injunctions of the Prophet were so clear that the religious scholars formed a consensus that, staging an insurrection against the rulers was unlawful, and therefore to be totally avoided in all circumstances.
In the commentary of Sahih Muslim, Imam an Nawawi, commenting on the traditions in the chapter ‘Al-Imarah: writes: “Do not adopt the way of confrontation with the rulers in the matter of their power. If you find them going against Islam, you should try to make the truth clear to them by sincere counselling. So far as launching campaigns and taking up arms against them to oust them from positions of power is concerned, that is unlawful by the consensus of Muslims, even if the ruler is evil and a tyrant.” (Sharh an Nawawi, Vol. 12, p. 229)
This injunction of the Prophet of Islam, as made clear above, was based on extremely important considerations. The truth is that in the first phase (and in later phases as well) a large number of academic, dawah and reform works outside the political field, had to be performed. Without this, the very history of Islam would have remained incomplete, for if the religious scholars had engaged themselves in confrontation with the political institutions, all these constructive activities could never have been carried out. Therefore, the Prophet of Islam gave express commands to avoid political confrontation with the rulers at the slightest pretext. This avoidance served as a guarantee that all the constructive activities outside the field of politics would continue uninterruptedly.
In every society two parallel systems exist side by side—one political and the other non-political. The latter governs a variety of institutions, which function independently of politics. According to the scheme of Islam, the non-political system established at the social level has to be always kept stable; all believers are expected to do their utmost to ensure that despite changes, rot or corruption in the political set-up, Islam should be firmly established on a non-political basis.
The Command of War in Islam
Certain verses of the Quran give the command to do battle (The Quran, 22:39). Here are a few points on this subject that we learn from our study of the Quran.
1. The first point is that to initiate aggression or armed confrontation is absolutely forbidden for Muslims. That is why the Quran clearly states: Fight in the cause of God those who fight against you, but do not transgress (The Quran, 2:190).
2. Islam allows only a defensive war. That is, when aggression is resorted to by others, Muslims may engage in war only in self-defense. The initiation of hostilities is not permitted for Muslims. Combat may be engaged in only when “they (the opponents) were the first to commence hostilities against you.” (The Quran, 9:13)
Furthermore, even in the face of aggression, Muslims are not immediately to wage a defensive war. Instead they are to employ all possible means to prevent a carnage from taking place. They are to resort to fighting only when it becomes totally unavoidable. All the battles that took place during the life of the Prophet provide practical examples of this principle. For instance, during the campaign of Ahzab, the Prophet attempted to avoid the battle by digging a trench, and thus successfully averted war. If, on the occasion of Hunain, the Prophet had to engage in battle, it was because it had become inevitable.
3. There was another kind of war, according to the Quran, which was temporarily desirable. That was the struggle to end religious persecution (fitna) (The Quran, 2:193).
In this verse ‘fitna’ refers to that coercive system which reaches the extremes of religious persecution. Prevalent all over the world in ancient times, this system had effectively closed the doors to all kinds of spiritual and material progress for man. Therefore, God commanded His devotees to put an end to the kings’ and emperors’ reign of terror in order to usher in an age of freedom in which man might receive all kinds of spiritual and material benefits.
This task was undertaken internally within Arabia during the life of the Prophet of Islam. Afterwards, the Sassanid and Byzantine empires were dismantled by divine succour during the period of the rightly-guided caliphs. Consequently, the coercive political system ended at the international level, and thus began an age of intellectual freedom.
In this connection we find a very authentic tradition recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari. When, after the caliphate of Ali ibn Abi Talib, Abdullah ibn Zubayr and the Umayyads engaged themselves in political confrontation, Abdullah ibn Umar (son of the second Caliph) and the senior-most surviving companion of the Prophet kept himself aloof from this battle. A group of people came to him and, referring to the verse (2:193), which commanded the believers to do battle in order to put an end to persecution, asked him why he was not willing to join the battle, Abdullah ibn Umar replied that ‘fitna’ did not refer to their political confrontation, but referred rather to religious persecution, which they had already brought to an end. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 4513).
This makes it clear that the war putting an end to persecution was a temporary war, of limited duration, which had already been concluded during the period of the rightly guided caliphs. Now justifying the waging of war by citing this verse is not at all acceptable. This verse will apply only if the same conditions prevail in the world once again.
Biographers of the Prophet have put the number of war campaigns at 80. When a reader goes through these biographies, he receives the impression that the Prophet of Islam during his 23-year prophetic period waged wars at least four times a year. But this impression is entirely baseless. The fact is that the Prophet of Islam in his entire prophetic period fought only three battles. All the other incidents, called ghazwa, or military expeditions, are in fact, examples of avoidance of battle, rather than of involvement in battle.
For instance, the incident of al-Ahzab has been called a battle in the books of seerah. Whereas in reality, on this occasion, 12,000 armed tribesmen of Arabia came to the border of Madinah in order to wage war, but the Prophet and his companions did not allow the battle to take place by digging a trench, which acted as a buffer between the Muslims and the aggressors. The same is the case with all those incidents, called ghazwa, or battles. Whenever the Prophet’s opponents wanted to involve him in battle, the Prophet managed to defuse the situation by adopting one strategy or another.
There are three occasions when the Prophet entered the field of armed combat—at Badr, Uhud and Hunain. But as proven by events, fighting had become inevitable on all these occasions. The Prophet had no choice but to do battle with the aggressors. Furthermore, each of these military engagements lasted for only half a day, beginning at noon and ending by sunset. Therefore, it would not be wrong to say that the Prophet in his entire life took up arms only for one and a half days. That is to say, of the entire 23-year prophetic period, except for one and a half days, the Prophet observed the principle of non-violence.
While giving the command of battle to the Prophet and his companions, the Quran clearly states that it was the other party, which had commenced hostilities (The Quran, 9:13). This verse gives conclusive evidence that there is only defensive war in Islam. It is absolutely unlawful for the believers to wage an offensive war. The Islamic method is entirely based on the principle of non-violence. Islam does not allow for violence in any circumstance except that of unavoidable defense.
The Present Age and Non-Violence
The greatest problem facing Islam in present times, to my way of thinking, is that Muslims have consigned the sunnah of non-violence to oblivion. In more recent times, when Muslims faced such problems as that of Palestine, the fall of the Mughal empire, and the Turkish caliphate, they fell prey to negative reaction on such a large scale that they completely forgot that the policy of Islam was that of non-violence and not of violence. It is as a result of this deviation from the teachings of Islam that even after a I00-year long bloody war, there has been no positive outcome. The outcome has, in fact, been the reverse. They have lost to an indescribable and unimaginable extent what still remained to them after losing their empires.
According to Imam Malik, this ummah will be reformed in its last phase just as was done in its first phase. That is to say, that just as the issues of the first phase of Muslims were settled by the non-violent method, so will the issues of latterday Muslims be settled likewise. If a violent course of action did not yield any benefit in the past, neither will it do so in future. The circumstances of present day Muslims resemble those that prevailed at the time of Hudaybiya. Today once again the unbelievers are guilty of bigotry (The Quran, 48:26).
The solution to this problem in the first phase lay in the Muslims’ refusal to display bigotry by not falling prey to the psychology of reaction but rather adhering strictly to the path of taqwa (righteousness) since that would entitle them to divine succour and a clear victory (The Quran, 48:26).
The Quraysh, who enjoyed the position of leadership in Arabia, were bent on waging war at the time of the Hudaybiya treaty. The Kabah was in their possession. They had expelled the Prophet and his companions from their own homeland. They had taken possession of Muslims’ homes and properties. They ceaselessly engaged in antagonistic activities against Islam.
Given this state of affairs, the Muslims had two options before them. One, to wage war with their opponents in the name of putting an end to persecution and securing their rights. This option would certainly have resulted in further loss in terms of lives and resources. The second option was to exercise patience on the question of political and material loss for the time being and to exploit the opportunities that still existed. The Prophet of Islam and his companions chose the second option. The result was splendid: within just a few years the history of the whole country underwent a revolution.
