Contemporary Muslim leaders and intellectuals, constrained by an imitative mindset, have succumbed to an outdated mode of thinking. The figures they emulate from the past lacked the concept of peaceful methods or non-violent struggle. While these concepts are clearly outlined in the Quran and Sunnah, deriving rulings directly from these sources requires ijtihad (independent reasoning). Unfortunately, the door to ijtihad was long ago shut, to the extent that, as one scholar remarked, even the key to that door seems to have been lost.
The Quran articulates a timeless law of nature in these words: “Reconciliation is best” (4:128). This verse underscores the superiority of a conciliatory approach over a confrontational one, advocating non-violence in place of violence. Similarly, the Prophet Muhammad emphasized this principle in a hadith: “God is gentle and loves gentleness, and He grants to gentleness what He does not grant to harshness” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2593). This highlights that a peaceful approach yields results far more effectively than a violent one.
Despite such clear guidance on peaceful methods in the Quran and Sunnah, modern Muslim leaders and intellectuals, due to their imitative mindset, have failed to recognize these teachings. Instead, they have persistently pursued violent approaches, mistakenly perceiving them as acts of sacrifice and martyrdom.
This adherence to an outdated mindset has caused immense setbacks for Muslims in the modern era while providing no tangible benefits. For example, had the Arabs of Palestine embraced this principle after 1948, they might have avoided a destructive armed struggle. By adopting peaceful methods and utilizing the opportunities available in the modern age, they could have achieved a position of influence in Palestine akin to the Jewish community’s status in America—acquired through similar peaceful approaches.
Similarly, if the Muslims of Kashmir had understood this principle, they would not have resorted to the culture of guns and bombs that have come to define their struggle. Instead, they could have cultivated a culture of peace, harnessing modern opportunities within a framework of non-violence. This approach could have earned them a position of respect and influence not only in Kashmir but throughout India—a far more beneficial outcome than the so-called Azad Kashmir.
Additionally, present-day Muslim leaders, who continue to engage in “power struggles” across various Muslim nations, are inadvertently contributing to the destruction of their own societies. If they had embraced peaceful methods, they could have transformed their nations into flourishing societies. This is evident in the achievements of secularists in countries like Singapore, where peace-based principles have led to remarkable progress.
