Understanding the Phases of Islamic Movement—II

The unfolding of Revelation in history gave rise to two distinct polities in Islam. The paths that gave rise to Sunni and Shia polities provide us an insight into the multiple possibilities of actualization of Revelation on the human plane; these inherent possibilities make the Divine message universal, allowing its widest possible application, yet remaining essentially the same in its core. Various social, political and economic particulars of these two polities have helped the developments of various branches of Islamic civilization in numerous ways.

For instance, after the fall of Baghdad in 1258, the greatest concentration of Islamic scientific activity re-emerged in central Asian and Persian lands because the temperament of that zone of Islamic civilization was conducive to hosting these sciences at that time in history. Likewise, the most important scholars of Qur’anic sciences of the post-Abbasid period -- such as Ibn Kathir and Jalal Uddin Sayuti -- lived, taught and wrote in Damascus and Cairo and the greatest revival of hadith studies in Sunni polity appeared in the Indian subcontinent in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. These are not merely chance developments; there is an inner scheme and dynamics of Islamic history that guides these developments.

In the post-colonial era, the greatest potential for quick recovery lay in Iran. This is because a certain political dimension of Islam, which was to serve as a spring board for revival in our own times, was cultivated in the Shia polity over centuries. Though this vibrant political dimension had been overshadowed for some time even in that polity, it could not be fully destroyed. It was this particular temperament of Shia thought that Imam Khomeini was able to nurture by removing the thin veil of political passivity and inactivity that had arisen in Persia in the post-Safavi period. Preserved in the inner folds of this polity and carried for centuries was the ability to regenerate a political philosophy uncontaminated by the secular worldviews; this regeneration led to a unique revolution in Iran.

Imam Khomeini, let us note, was the active agent of this change only because he was himself thoroughly rooted in the Islamic tradition and at the same time had a deep understanding of the forces that are shaping the modern world. This understanding, which is a product of an inner insight (baseerah) as much as of a diligent study of history and its mechanisms, was combined with the power of faith which made him a fearless leader. If one looks at the material resources at his disposal at the time of revolution and compares these with the resources and power of the Shah’s military, police, and other institutions, one can never draw the conclusion that a revolution was possible.

This is why the learned scholars of Islam in the Western academia were utterly shocked when the Iranian revolution occurred; it was beyond their wildest imagination and calculations. Their failure, however, was not merely because of the lack of information, analyses and scholarship; it was a failure of their methodology to understand the inner dynamics of Islam itself. This failure has, however, not caused them to re-examine the apparatus they use to study Islam and its history and civilization which may be a blessing in disguise for the current phase of the Islamic movement.

The Iranian revolution, like all revolutions, has its own shortcomings. These dictates of history notwithstanding, the sheer force of its coming into being against overwhelming material odds is a proof of the inner resilience of Islamic polity. There is a general trend in political thought that tends to minimize the importance of this revolution by isolating it from the rest of the Muslim polity. Iran had special conditions, the argument is made, which are not present in the rest of the Muslim world, hence Islamic revolutions are not possible in other lands.

This argument is flawed on two counts. First, while it is true that Iran had its own specific conditions at the time of revolution, this in no eliminates the possibility of Islamic revolutions in other lands because these other lands have their own peculiar local conditions. The second, and a much more important flaw is rooted in the fact that Iranian revolution cannot be isolated from the broader dynamics of the Muslim world because the peculiar factors which produced this revolution in Iran, are rooted in the inner dynamics of Islamic history itself and these are operative throughout the Muslim world regardless of local conditions.

It is true that in the Sunni polity, the religious leadership has, for the most part, failed to provide the leadership expected from them. It is also true that in most of the Sunni polity, the post-colonial era has witnessed various misplaced priorities, resulting in pseudo revivalist movements based on nationalism or other man-made ideologies. It is also correct that there have been at least two major pseudo-starts in the Sunni polity: the Ikhwan al-Muslimeen in Egypt and Jamat al-Islami in the Indian subcontinent. Both of these appeared promising, but failed to bring about a major revival of Islam in these lands.

But the failure of the Ikhwan al-Muslimun in Egypt and that of the Jamat al-Islami in the Indian subcontinent are failures only when they are viewed as an end in themselves. Seen in the continuity of historical process, these were inevitable stages of Islamic Movement. Both of these movements, let it be noted, were not wanting in sincerity; they did not, however, attain maturity because of certain flaws in methodology and in their leaders’ understanding of Islam’s internal dynamics of its own process of renewal and revival.

But like scientific methodology, in which failed experiments contribute as much to the investigation as successful ones, these two movements have contributed their own share in the advancement of Islamic Movement. What is needed now is to place the results of these failed attempts of regeneration in the wider context of Islam’s own sacred history and build upon these attempts.

Islamic Movement is not a fashion movement that emerges one day and disappears the next. A true understanding of our times cannot be achieved without understanding the permanence of the message of Islam, preserved in the Noble Qur’an and the way of the Prophet, upon whom be peace. Islamic polity is a living reality, it is like a biological being that reacts to its environment, and responds to external conditions and continues to exist because of its own inner force--which is none other than the agency of  wahy which began the historical existence of Islamic polity. This polity, through its own inner mechanisms, continuously realigns itself with its driving force. No matter how many dictators come and go, no matter how many client rulers arrive on the scene, the message of Islam will always continue to serve as the source of guidance and inspiration for those who have dedicated themselves to their Creator.

It is the men and women who continue to fight the Pharaohs of our times who will lead the way in the next phase of Islamic Movement. The choice before us is plain: either we join these valiant fighters who continue the struggle on intellectual, spiritual, political, economic, and military fronts or we remain passive observers to our own surrender; either we become witnesses (shuhada) to Divine Truth or remain mere bodies given to consumption and decay. The Islamic Movement continues to unfold, it continues to offer choices to Muslims at each stage, it is up to us to accept its invitation and join this struggle that promises great  rewards for those who wish an everlasting abode in Allah’s Rahmah.