Society and History chapter2

 Society and History

Chapter2

3. Contradiction of Necessary Correspondence between Base and Superstructure:

According to the theory of historical materialism there is always a sort of correspondence between superstructure and base in societies, to the extent that one can identify the base by means of the superstruc ture and one

can know the superstructure by knowing the base.

When ever the base is changed, the correspondence between the base and the superstructure is affected, disturbing the social equilibrium and giving rise to crisis, followed sooner or later by a necessary deterioration of the superstructure. And if the base remains in its original state, the super structure also necessarily remains permanent and unchanged.

Contemporary historical events have practically disproved this Marxian thesis. Taking into consideration a series of economic crises from 1827 to 1847 accompanied with a series of social and political revolutions, Marx and Engels concluded that the social revolutions were necessary and inevitable consequences of economic crises.

But, in the words of the author of Rivisionism from Marx to Mao:

It is the irony of history that there has not been any economic crisis accom panied with a revolution in industrialized countries since 1848. In the very lifetime of Marx before his death four times forces of production rebelled against relations of production without bringing about any revolution... later, some economists like Joseph Schumpeter have gone to the extent of naming these crises caused by technical innovation as `gales of creative destruction,' and as safety valves for reestablishing economic equilibrium and economic growth.

Countries like England, Germany, France, and America have made great industrial advancement taking capitalism to its peak; but contrary to Marx's prophecy that these countries would be the first and fore most to experience the workers' revolution and to be converted into socialist states, they have not changed politically, legally, religiously or in other

p: 152

- Page152 - Society and History

aspects which are termed as constituents of superstructure. The baby whose birth Marx was awaiting has not been delivered despite the lapse of more than ninety years, and there is little hope of it in the future.

Of course, these regimes shall sooner or later be overthrown, but the revolution that is expected can never be the revolution brought about by the working class and the Marxist theory of history shall not be realized. The regimes of so‑called socialist countries of today shall also be overthrown, and would not remain as they are now. But the future regime will certainly be not a capitalist one.

On the other hand the countries of East Europe, Asia, and South America have become socialist despite the fact that they have not yet attained the stage of giving birth to a socialist state. We see that there are certain countries quite similar in respect to the (economic) base, but different from one another regarding their superstructure.

Two super powers, U. S. A. and the U. S. S. R. , are the best example of this pheno menon. America and Japan also have the same type of economic regime (capitalistic) but with regard to such aspects as politics, religion, mora lity, etiquette, manners, and art they are quite different.

In the same way certain countries having similar superstructure, i. e. political regime, religion, etc. , are different in respect of economic base. All these cases conclusively prove that the notion of necessary correspondence between superstructure and base as upheld by historical materialism is nothing but a mere illusion.

4. Nonconformity of Ideological and Class Bases

As

stated earlier, according to the theory of historical materialism, the superstructure cannot precede the base at any point of history. On the basis of this doctrine the consciousness of every epoch is necessarily associated with that age. With the lapse of every particular period, the corresponding consciousness also expires. Ideas, philosophies, plans, predictions, religions‑all are by‑products of needs of a certain period and cannot be applicable to those of other periods.

But practical evidence goes against this hypothesis. There are a number of philosophies, personalities, ideas and outlooks‑leave alone religions and religious ideologies‑which are ahead of their times and their own class interest. There are many ideas that were the pro ducts of the material needs of a specific period which still remain alive even after the passage of a considerable time, and shine as stars over the horizons of human history.

What is striking is that in this regard, too, Marx in some of his statements departs from Marxism. In German Ideology, he says:

Consciousness sometimes is seen to precede the contemporary empirical relations, to the extent that it is possible to find the evidence for the conflicts of a later age in the writings of theoreticians of the preceding age. [1]

5. Independence of Cultural Developments

According to the theory of historical materialism, cultural and scientific temperament of a society like all the other aspects, viz. political, legal, and religious, is related to its economic mode. It cannot develop in independence from economic development. The develop ment of science follows the development in the means of production and the

economic base of society.

First. of all, it should be noted that the means of production are not capable of developing automatically without human intervention. The means of production develop in the context of man's relationship with nature and his - Page155 - Society and History

 curiosity, inventiveness, and endeavor.

--------------------

[1]: Ibid. , p. 173.

The development in the means of production is accompanied by the growth of science and technology. But the question arises as to which of them comes first: Whether man first invents something and then utilizes it in practice, bringing industry into existence, or if industry comes into existence and then man tends to invent something. It cannot be denied that the second alternative is correct.

It is evident that the discovery of scientific laws and technological methods is made as a result of human inquisitiveness and experimenta tion. Without contact with nature, inquiry, research, and experimenta tion, man can neither discover any scientific law nor perfect any technique.

No one can challenge this view. The question arises only with regard to the priority of man's inquisitiveness, experimentation and growth of his scientific knowledge over tools of technology: whether man first develops his scientific knowledge and then exter nalizes his knowledge to invent technological tools or vice versa? The validity of the first part of the statement cannot be doubted.

Moreover, it is to be noted that meaning of expressions such as `evolution' and `growth' is literal in the context of human beings, and figurative in the context of technological and productive implements. `Evolution' and `growth' are literal in the case of a

p: 155

- Page155 - Society and History

real entity which passes from a lower to a higher stage.

The use of `evolution' in the figurative sense applies to an objective entity which does not go through actual evolutionary stages, but which becomes either non‑existent or obsolete and is replaced by another entity which is different from it.

In the process of the growth of a child, for example, the develop ment is real. Now, taking another example, if a teacher teaching a class is replaced by another more qualified and competent, in this case to say that the level of instruction has improved and developed, is a figurative application of the word `development. '

In fact the human progress in manufacture of production tools is a real progress. It is man who develops and progresses intellectually; but the term industrial progress is used in a figurative sense, when what is meant is that every year a more sophisticated, improved, and better equipped model of an auto mobile comes into the market.

In this type of development there is no objective entity that rises from a lower to a higher stage. The auto mobile of the last year has not become more developed and perfect, but is discarded and becomes obsolete, and a new automobile takes its place.

In other words, in this kind of development, a deficient individual or object becomes obsolete and is replaced by another which is better and improved; not that the same individual has attained perfection in the course of time. Wherever real development and figurative develop ment take place

p: 156

- Page156 - Society and History

side by side, it is quite obvious that the real develop ment is to be considered the principal development and the figurative development is secondary.

Moreover what we have said applies only to technical knowledge and know‑how. In other sciences like medicine, psychology, sociology, logic, philosophy, and mathematics, there is not even the possibility of such a unilateral correlation. Progress in these sciences depends to the same extent or more or less upon the material and economic conditions as the material and economic conditions depend upon the growth of sciences. K. Schmoller, in his refutation of Marxism says:

No doubt, the material and economic conditions are essential for the attainment of higher culture, but to the same extent it is also undoubtedly true that intellectual and moral development follows an independent course. [1]

If we ignore a defect in August Comte's point of view which con fines man and humanity to the mind, which is only a part of human faculties and only half of the essence of man, his theory regarding social development is far more valuable than that of Marx. August Comte claims:

Social phenomena are subject to a strict determinism which operates in the form of an inevitable evolution of human societies‑an evolution which is itself governed by the progress of the human mind. [2]

--------------------

[1]: Ibid. , p. 239.

[2]: Raymond Aron, op. cit. , vol. I, p. 78.

6. Historical Materialism Contradicts Itself

According to historical materialism, all thought, all philosophical and scientific theories, and all ethical systems represent certain material and economic conditions, and are inseparably connected with their own specific objective conditions. Hence their value and validity are not absolute,

p: 157

- Page157 - Society and History

but dependent upon a specific period.

With the lapse of a particular period and changes in the material, economic, and social conditions, which are necessary and inevitable, every idea or thought, every philosophical or scientific theory or ethical system is invalidated and is ultimately bound to be replaced by a different idea, thought or theory.

According to this principle, historical materialism, too, is subject to this universal law. Because if it is not subject to this universal law and is an exception, it would mean that there are some scientific and philosophical laws which are fundamental and independent of any kind of economic base; and if historical materialism is subject to the general law, its value and validity are confined to one period and it is applicable to that period alone which has given rise to it. It is not relevant to an earlier or later period. Thus, in both cases, historical materialism is con tradicted by itself.

It means that historical materialism as a theory, as a philosophical point of view or as a part of superstructure, either applies to itself or it doesn't. If it does not apply to itself, it contradicts itself. If it is governed by itself, it is valid for a limited period only; it cannot be applied to other periods from which it excludes itself.

This objection is also valid in the case of dialectical materialism, which considers the principle of dialectical movement and the principle of unity of opposites applicable to the whole reality including

p: 158

- Page158 - Society and History

scientific and philosophical laws.

In the Principles of Philosophy and the Method of Realism (Vol I, II) I have dealt with these problems. But it is clear that the claim that the universe is the playground of the forces of dialectical materialism and society that of historical materialism is absolutely baseless.

Certain other objections are also valid against historical mater ialism. For the time being we refrain from mentioning them. But I cannot conceal my amazement as to how such a baseless and unscienti fic theory could become famous as a scientific theory. The art of pro paganda is indeed capable of working wonders!

Islam and Historical Materialism

point

Does Islam accept the theory of historical materialism? Is the Qur’anic logic based on historical materialism regarding the interpretation and analysis of historical events? There is a group of people who claim that historical materialism was forwarded by the Qur’an at least one thousand years before Marx. Dr. 'Ali al-Wardi, a Shi'ite scholar of Iraq and author of several controversial books includ ing the one entitled Manzilat al- 'aql al-bashari, ("The Place of Human Intellect") , is most probably the first to raise this issue. It has become a fashion among a group of contemporary Muslim writers to analyse history in Islamic phraseology from this point of view, which is con sidered a mark of being an intellectual.

But in our view those who think in this way either do not correct ly understand Islam or historical materialism or both. A general review of the five fundamental principles of historical materialism and the six

p: 159

- Page159 - Society and History

conclusions discussed earlier is sufficient to tell anyone well acquainted with the logic of Islam that the logic of Islam and historical material ism are radically opposed to each other.

In view of the fact that this approach to the study of society and history-especially when it is tinged with Islamic colour and bears the stamp of Islamic acceptability for enhancing its authority and worth-is a grave danger for the thought and teachings of Islam, I consider it essential to investigate and analyse the problems which may otherwise lead to the misunderstanding that Islam considers economy as the basis of society and regards history as being materialistic in essence.

I would also like to remind that I have here discussed these issues in a more comprehensive manner than put forward by the proponents of this view themselves. The advocates of this view pick up two or three verses from the Qur’an or a few traditions of the Prophet (S) in support of certain points. I have dealt not only with their arguments, but also with those problems which they have not touched at all, but which, in my opinion, can be raised by them, thus making the whole discussion inclusive and comprehensive. Following are the arguments of those who imagine that the Qur’an believes in historical materialism.

1. The Qur’an has put forward various social notions, and I have already quoted about fifty sociological terms from the Qur’an while discussing sociology. The study of the verses having sociological implications, where these terms occur, may

p: 160

- Page160 - Society and History

lead one to infer that from the Qur’anic viewpoint societies are in a 'sense bipolar, i. e. , they are divided into two classes. On the one hand, the Qur’an points out a kind of polarization of society on the basis of material conditions, i. e. , on the basis of prosperity and deprivation of its people.

The Qur’an refers to one class by such names as, mala' (ruling clique). mustahbirun (the arro gant, oppressors, tyrants) , musrifiin (the extravagant, the wasteful) , mutrafiin (the affluent) , and refers to the other class by such names as mustad'afun (the oppressed, the weaken and deprived) , nas (mankind, masses) , dhurriyyah (the insignificant, the unnoteworthy-as opposed to the mala ') , aradhil or ardhalin (the vilest, the lowest). [1] The Qur’an regards them as two opposite poles. On the other hand, the Qur’an puts forward the notion of bipolarity of society in spiritual terms.

On the on~ side are the kafirun (infidels) , the mushrikun (idolaters, poly theists], the munafiqun (hypocrites) , the fasiqun (the corrupt) , and the mufsidin (mischief mongers) , and on the other side are the mu 'minun (the believers) , the muwahhidun (monotheists) , the muttaqun (the pious, the God-fearing) , the salihun (the virtuous) , the muslihun (correctors, reformers) the mujahidun (the warriors) , and the shuhada (the witnesses, the martyrs).

If we study and analyse the material and spiritual polarities in/the context of the Qur’anic verses, we shall observe a kind of correspon dence between the first material pole and the first spiritual pole and also between the second material pole and the second spiritual pole. That is, the

p: 161

- Page161 - Society and History

kafirun (infidels) , the mushrikun (idolaters) , the fasiqun (the corrupt) , and the mufsidun (corrupters) are the same people who are called the mala’ (the ruling clique) , the mustakbirun (the tyrants) , the musrifun (the prodigal) , the mutrafun (the affluent) and the taghuti ones.

They neither form a separate group nor draw other people into their fold to form a composite group. The mu’minun (the believers) the muwahhidun (the monotheists) , the salihun (the virtuous) , and the mujahidun (the warriors) are the same people as the mustad’afun (the oppressed) , the fuqara (the poor) , the masakin (the wretched) , the slaves, and the deprived. This pole does neither consist of a separate group nor is a combination of various other groups or persons. It means that society is not composed of more than two poles.

The opulent, the oppressors, and the exploiters, who are also the disbelievers are on one side and the oppressed, who are also the believers, are on the other side. It is quite obvious that the division of society into oppressors and oppressed is responsible for giving rise to two groups at level of faith viz. , the disbelievers and the believers. Oppression is the essential condition accompanying polytheism, disbelief, hypocrisy, inequity, and corruption; being oppressed is the condition accompanying belief, monotheism, virtue, goodness, and piety.

In order to be sure of the meaning of this correspondence, it is enough to study the verses of Surat al-'A'raf beginning from the verse 59 لقد أرسلنا نوحاً الى قومه.. (We sent Noah unto his people…) till

p: 162

- Page162 - Society and History

the end of the verse 13, و دمرنا ما کان یصنع فرعون و قومه و ما کانوا یعرشون (... We annihilated all Pharaoh and' his folk had done and that they had contrived. ). ln these forty verses, the stories of Noah, Hud, Salih, Lot, Shu'ayb and Moses are narrated. In all these stories (with the exception of the story of Lot) it may be observed that the class that followed the prophets was the oppressed class (mustad’af) , and the class that arose in revolt and negated them was the ruling class (mala') of the tyrants (mustakbirun).

This correspondence is explained by nothing except class consciousness, which is the requisite condition as well as the result of historical mate rialism. Thus according to the Qur’an the conflict between belief and disbelief reflects the corresponding struggle of the oppressed and the exploited against the oppressors and the exploiters.

--------------------

[1]: Raymond Aron, op. cit. , vol. I, p. 78.

The Qur’an clearly considers ghina (i. e. ownership, property and wealth) to be the source of man's rebellion, against God i. e. , the riches are contrary to the values of modesty, humility, and submission-the virtues to which the prophets called the people:

کَلَّا إِنَّ الْإِنسَانَ لَیَطْغَىٰ ﴿٦﴾ أَن رَّآهُ اسْتَغْنَىٰ ﴿٧﴾

Verily man is rebellious when he thinketh himself wealthy {and contented]. (96: 6,7)

Again we see that, in order to show the evil of property and ownership, the Qur’an narrates the story of Korah. Korah was not an Egyptian, but belonged to the tribe of Israel. He was one of Moses' people, the same oppressed people whom Pharaoh was exploiting. However this man belonging

p: 163

- Page163 - Society and History

to an oppressed people, after becoming wealthy, started exploiting his own fellow sufferers and rebelled against Moses. The Qur’an says:

إِنَّ قَارُونَ کَانَ مِن قَوْمِ مُوسَىٰ فَبَغَىٰ عَلَیْهِمْ

Now Korah was of Moses' folk, but he rebelled against them.... (28: 76)

Does it not show that the stand of the prophets against rebellion is actually the stand against the haves, the rich, and their wealth? The Qur’an 'has disclosed in some of its verses that the real adversaries of the prophets were the affluent class, the mutrafin: those who were immersed in the good things of life, being the pampered of history In Surah Saba’, verse 34, this view is developed in the form of a general principle and a universal law:

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا فِی قَرْیَةٍ مِّن نَّذِیرٍ إِلَّا قَالَ مُتْرَفُوهَا إِنَّا بِمَا أُرْسِلْتُم بِهِ کَافِرُونَ

And We have sent not unto any township a warner, but its pampered ones (the mutrafun] declared, 'Lo: We are disbelievers in that which you bring unto us. ' (34: 34)

All. this indicates that the confrontation of the prophets with their adversaries and the struggle between faith and infidelity reflect the hostility between two social classes: the oppressed and the oppressors.

2. The Qur’an calls Its addressees ‘nas’ (mankind). 'Nas' means the deprived and underprivileged masses. This indicates that the Qur’an acknowledges the concept of class consciousness, and considers the deprived masses as the only class capable of responding to Islam's invitation. This also indicates that Islamic ideology is class- oriented and it means that Islam is the religion of the oppressed and

p: 164

- Page164 - Society and History

underprivileged masses. The addresses of Islamic ideology are the underprivileged masses alone. This provides another basis for inferring that Islam regards economy as base and approves of the materialist conception of history.

3. The Qur’an makes clear that leaders, reformers (muslihun) , warriors in the way of God (mujahidun) , martyrs (shuhada) ' and ultimately the prophets, the apostles of God, arise from among the masses and not from the affluent, the wealthy, and the pampered class Regarding the Prophet of Islam (S) , the Qur’an says:.

هُوَ الَّذِی بَعَثَ فِی الْأُمِّیِّینَ رَسُولًا مِّنْهُمْ

He it is Who has sent among the illiterate (ummiyyu) a messenger of their own.... (62. 2)

The ummah (the religious community) is none other than the underprivileged masses. Similarly, the Qur’an declares about the martyrs in the way of God:

وَنَزَعْنَا مِن کُلِّ أُمَّةٍ شَهِیدًا فَقُلْنَا هَاتُوا بُرْهَانَکُمْ

And We shall raise from every nation {the same deprived masses] a shahid (martyr) and We shall say, 'Bring your proof forward....: (i. e. your martyr;) (28: 75).

The fact that leaders of revolutions and reform movements necessarily arise from the deprived masses also implies that there is a necessary correspondence between social and religious origin on the one hand and economic and class origin on the other. This necessary rela tion cannot be interpreted except on the basis of the materialist con ception of history and on the basis of assumption that economy is the real base.

4. The prime target of the mission of the prophets and their social movement is the base not the superstructure.

p: 165

- Page165 - Society and History

It is inferred from the Qur’an that the mission and the message of the prophets aimed at establishing justice and equity by implementing social equality and obliterating class distinctions and divisions. The prophets have always started their mission from the base and later on brought changes in the superstructure, not the other way round. The superstructures, i. e. doctrines of faith, dogmas, moral and behavioural reforms, always occupied a secondary place in prophetic missions, as they were attacked only after the base was transformed. The Prophet (S) said:

من لا معاش له لا معاد له

One who does not have a means of- subsistence does not have Hereafter either (which is a product of spiritual life).

This statement indicates the priority of the means of subsistence over the Hereafter, and the priority of material existence over spiritual existence. If stretched to its logical conclusion, it means that spiritual life is synonymous with superstructure and is based upon material conditions of human life. The Prophet (S) also said:

اللهم بارک لنا فی الخبز، لولا الخبز ما تصدقنا و لا صلینا

My God, bless our bread with abundance; for had it not been for bread we would not have been charitable, nor would we have offered prayers.

This statement also indicates the dependence of the spiritual superstructure upon the material base.

Nowadays, majority of people tend to believe that the prophets had set before them the task of reforming only the superstructure; that is they aimed at making men true believers and were interested only in the reform of their

p: 166

- Page166 - Society and History

beliefs, morals, and behaviour; they were not concerned with changing the foundation, or at the most they considered matters related with the base or economic activity merely secondary in importance. It is imagined that the prophets thought that once the people became true believers all the matters would automatically be set right; justice and equality would be established and the exploiters would come up on their own to surrender their privileges to the exploited and the oppressed.

To be short, it is believed that the prophets have used faith and belief as the weapon for attaining their goals, and their followers should follow the same path. This is nothing but deception and an illusion that the priests and clergymen associated with the class of oppressors and exploiters have invented and imposed on the society in order to render the teachings of the prophets ineffective and futile.

In the words of Marx, "The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, consequently also controls the means of intellectual production.... The material rulers are the intellectual rulers of the society arid rule over the social mind as well. " [1]

The approach and the method of work of the prophets were quite opposite to the view generally accepted by the majority of people. The prophets first delivered society from the evils of social polytheism social discrimination, injustice, repression, and exploitation which are the root causes of ideological polytheism, and moral, behavioural, and religious perversions. After socially emancipating the people they engrained

p: 167

- Page167 - Society and History

in their souls the faith in the unity of God (tawhid) , and taught them the methods of attaining moral and behavioural piety.

5. The Qur’an holds that the logic of the opponents of the prophets has always been opposed to the logic of the prophets and their followers throughout the entire course of history. The Qur’an explicitly explains that the Ideology of the opponents has been always conserva tive, obscurantist, traditional, and backward-looking, whereas the Ideology advocated by the prophets and their followers has been necessarily dynamic, anti- traditional, progressive, and futuristic.

The Qur’an clearly propounds the view that the first group practised the same ideology which according to sociological analysis is practised in a society divided into two classes of exploiters and exploited by the class of exploiters, who are the beneficiaries of the existing system and advocate the ideology of status quo. The prophets and their followers on the other hand followed and practised the ideology which socio logically speaking, is employed by the sufferers and deprived in human history.

There are frequent references in the Qur’an to the specific logic held by the opponents and the followers of the prophets, indicating what sort of philosophy these two groups followed. They are actually meant for pointing out that these two types of philosophies, like the two groups themselves, have always been opposed to each other. The Qur’an, by pointing out the logic of the opponents and that of the followers of the prophets, provides us with a criterion for today.

The Qur’an pictures several scenes

p: 168

- Page168 - Society and History

in which these two ideologies confront each other. Those who are interested may study the following Qur’anic verses. Surat al-Zukhruf, verses (40-50) ; Surat al-Mu 'min, verses (23-44) ; Surat Taha, verses from 49 to 71; Surat al-Shu 'ara, verses from 16 to 49: Surat al-Qasas, verses from 36 to 39. Here, for the sake of example, we quote verses from 20 to 24 from Surat al Zuhhruf with some brief explanatory remarks about their meanings:

وَقَالُوا لَوْ شَاءَ الرَّحْمَٰنُ مَا عَبَدْنَاهُم مَّا لَهُم بِذَٰلِکَ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا یَخْرُصُونَ ﴿٢٠﴾أَمْ آتَیْنَاهُمْ کِتَابًا مِّن قَبْلِهِ فَهُم بِهِ مُسْتَمْسِکُونَ ﴿٢١﴾ بَلْ قَالُوا إِنَّا وَجَدْنَا آبَاءَنَا عَلَىٰ أُمَّةٍ وَإِنَّا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِم مُّهْتَدُونَ ﴿٢٢﴾ وَکَذَٰلِکَ مَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِکَ فِی قَرْیَةٍ مِّن نَّذِیرٍ إِلَّا قَالَ مُتْرَفُوهَا إِنَّا وَجَدْنَا آبَاءَنَا عَلَىٰ أُمَّةٍ وَإِنَّا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِم مُّقْتَدُونَ ﴿٢٣﴾ قَالَ أَوَلَوْ جِئْتُکُم بِأَهْدَىٰ مِمَّا وَجَدتُّمْ عَلَیْهِ آبَاءَکُمْ قَالُوا إِنَّا بِمَا أُرْسِلْتُم بِهِ کَافِرُونَ ﴿٢٤﴾

And they say: 'If the Beneficent had so willed, we should not have worshipped them (the angels). (Now that we worship them, it means that it is the will of God-absolute determinism). They have no knowledge of whatsoever of that; they are only conjecturing (about the matter of determinism). Or have We given them any Scripture before (this Qur’an) to which they hold' (i. e. it is nothing of these two. neither a sound faith in determinism nor any Scripture which could serve as evidence).

Nay, for they say only 'We found our fathers following a religion, and we are guided by their footprints. ' And even so We sent not a warner before thee

p: 169

- Page169 - Society and History

into any township, except that men who lived at ease (mutrafun) said, 'We indeed found our fathers following a religion, and we are following their footprints. (And the warner) said: 'What! even though I bring you better guidance than that you found your fathers following? [i. e. although the path shown by me is more in accordance with correct logic? ] They answered, 'We disbelieve in that you were sent with. ' (43: 20-24)

We see that the opponents of the prophets sometimes utilize the idea of fatalism and predestination to impress upon people that we are not free to act according to our will. This idea, as sociologists point out, always suits the interests of the beneficiaries of the status quo, who do not want any change in the existing conditions and, therefore, take shelter in the doctrine of predestination as an excuse. Sometimes they lay emphasis upon following the traditions of ancestors and consider the past as something sacred and worthy of imitation. Everything related with the past is accepted as right and correct, and is considered sufficient for guidance. This is the logic preached by the champions of status quo and vested interests.

In opposition to this view, the prophets never supported tradi tionalism and fatalism. They upheld logic, knowledge, and emancipa tion, which represent the approach of the revolutionaries and the sufferers under the status quo. The adversaries, when they see that they cannot win the battle due to their weak logic and arguments, as a last resort, declare that whether we believe in

fatalism or not.

--------------------

[1]: Also refer to 18: 28, describing the followers of the prophets; 11: 27 and 26: 111 describing the followers of Noah; 10: 83 describing the followers of Moses; 7: 88-90 describing the followers of Shu’ayb; 7: 75-76 describing the followers of Salih, etc. There are many more verses of the kind, but we confine here to refer to the above-mentioned.

whether we respect tradition or reject it, we are against your message, your mis sion, and your ideology, because your message contradicts the present social reality and class structure.

6. The most obvious aspect of the Qur’anic teaching is its siding with the oppressed. The Qur’an promises, in accordance with the prophecy of historical materialism on the basis of dialectical logic, that in the struggle between the oppressed and the oppressors the final victory is on the side of the oppressed.

The Qur’an through this alignment really affirms the necessary course which history is determined to follow, because according to it the class which IS revolutionary in character ultimately emerges victorious in its struggle against the class which is reactionary and conservative due to its class situation, and is destined to inherit and rule the earth:

وَنُرِیدُ أَن نَّمُنَّ عَلَى الَّذِینَ اسْتُضْعِفُوا فِی الْأَرْضِ وَنَجْعَلَهُمْ أَئِمَّةً وَنَجْعَلَهُمُ الْوَارِثِینَ

And We desired to show favour unto those who were oppressed in the earth, and to make them leaders and to make them the inheritors. (28: 5)

Similarly the verse 137 in Sural al- 'A 'raj declares:

وَأَوْرَثْنَا الْقَوْمَ الَّذِینَ کَانُوا یُسْتَضْعَفُونَ مَشَارِقَ الْأَرْضِ وَمَغَارِبَهَا الَّتِی بَارَکْنَا فِیهَا وَتَمَّتْ کَلِمَتُ رَبِّکَ الْحُسْنَىٰ عَلَىٰ بَنِی إِسْرَائِیلَ بِمَا صَبَرُوا وَدَمَّرْنَا مَا کَانَ یَصْنَعُ فِرْعَوْنُ وَقَوْمُهُ وَمَا کَانُوا یَعْرِشُونَ

And We caused the people who were oppressed to inherit the eastern parts of the land and its western parts, thereof which We had blessed. And the fair Word of the Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel because of their endurance; and

p: 171

- Page171 - Society and History

We annihilated all that Pharaoh and his folk had done and that they had contrived. (7. 137)

This view of the Qur’an, that history moves in the direction of the victory of the oppressed, the exploited, and the enslaved, fully corresponds to I ill: principle derived from historical materialism, according to which reaction. md conservatism are the characteristics of exploitation which are opposed to till: law of evolution, and are, therefore, bound to face extinction. The essential character of the exploited is enlightenment, dynamism, and I evolutionary spirit, which being in harmony and agreement with the law of evolution are bound to be victorious.

Here it would not be inappropriate to quote a passage from an article lately published by a group of so-called Muslim intellectuals who have left intellectualism behind to embrace Marxism. There, under the above-quoted Qur’anic verse, the following explanatory remarks are made:

... What is greatly remarkable is the position of God and all the phenomena of existence with respect to the world's oppressed. It cannot be denied that the oppressed of the earth according to the Qur’anic teachings, are the underprivi leged, enslaved masses, who are forced not to play any role in determining their own fate... If we pay attention to this fact, taking into consideration the absolute will of God governing the course of being and all the phenomena of life, which tend to favour the oppressed, the question arises: Who are the persons that are instrumental in realization of the Divine Will? The answer to this

p: 172

- Page172 - Society and History

question is quite obvious.

When we evaluate the administrative organizations of societies as two poles of the oppressors and the oppressed, with the knowledge that the Divine Will can be translated into action, on the one hand, by bestowing the inheritance and leadership of the earth upon the oppressed, and on the other by destroying the institutions of exploitation and ultimately negating them, we find that the oppressed themselves and their apostles and committed intellectuals, who arise from within the oppressed class, act as the agents of the Divine Will in realizing this end.

In other words, they are these chosen apostles [1] and the departed martyrs from among the oppressed [2] who make the initial moves in the struggle against destructive taghuti regimes, moves which pave the road for establishing the leadership of the oppressed and enabling them to inherit the resources of the earth.

This view, in fact, represents our understanding of the Qur’anic interpretation of historical upheavals and the monotheistic revolutions in the sense that in the same way as monotheistic revolutions, [3] from a sociological point of view, revolve around the axis of the leadership of the oppressed and their inheritance of the earth, so also the leaders and the groups in the vanguard of this rnovement should necessarily arise from among the oppressed.

Their ideo logical and social views should also be derived from the intellectual attitude and social alignment of the oppressed and exploited masses.

There are several implications of this statement.

a. From the viewpoint of the Qur’an, society is

p: 173

- Page173 - Society and History

bipolar and is always divided into two classes representing the oppressors and the oppressed.

b. The will of God (according to the expression used in the article, 'the position of God and all phenomena of existence') with respect to the leadership and inheritance of the oppressed and the downtrodden is universal and applies without any discrimination whatsoever to believers and non-believers, monotheists and polytheists. It means that the relative pronoun (…) is used in a general sense applicable to all people.

The Divine promise guarantees the victory of the oppressed qua oppressed over the oppressors. In other words, the main conflict going on throughout history up to this date is between the exploited and the tyrants. The purpose 

 of the evolution of the universe dictates that the downtrodden should emerge victorious against the oppressors.

c. The will of God is executed through the means of the oppressed. The leaders, guides, apostles and martyrs necessarily arise from among the oppressed; not from the other side.

d. The ideological base is always in harmony and correspondence with the social base and class character.

Thus we see how certain Marxist principles regarding history are derived and inferred from the Qur’anic verse, and how it is claimed that the Qur’an, one thousand and two hundred years before Marx came into the world anticipated and echoed his thought and philosophy!

Well' now that such a view about history has been found in the Qur’an what conclusions can be drawn in its light while analysing contemporary history? These gentlemen have

hastily tried to draw conclusions from this so-called. Qur’anic principle, applying it as a test to the contemporary movement of the 'ulama'. They say that the Qur’an has taught us that the leaders and guides of revolutions should neces sarily be from the class of the oppressed.

On the contrary, nowadays we see that the 'ulama' who represent one of the three dimensions of the system of exploitation throughout history, have shifted their social base and have become revolutionary. How is this phenomenon to be explained?

The solution is simple. We can surely and with certainty conclude that there is an intrigue involved in this affair. When the ruling class finds itself in trouble, it asks the allied clergy to arrange a revolu tionary pageant to manage its own escape. This is another conclusion derived from this Marxist-excuse me, Islamic-view. It is quite clear who will pocket the profits yielded by such interpretations.

--------------------

[1]: Karl Marx, German Ideology

[2]: In the footnote, the verses 62: 2 and 2: 129 are referred to, to draw the conclusion that the prophets arise from among the “ummahs,” and the word “ummah” is taken to mean “the underprivileged masses. ” We shall examine this argument later on.

[3]: In the footnote, the verse 28: 75 has been referred to, and it is presumed that it means that the martyrs and those slain in the way of God always arise from among the “ummahs,” and the word “ummah” is taken to mean “the underprivileged masses. ” We shall examine this argument later on.

Criticism

All that has been said about the justification of historical material ism from the Qur’anic viewpoint may be regarded as being either basical ly wrong, or if correct the inference drawn from it is totally wrong. We have to critically examine the arguments given above.

1. The claim that the Qur’an has divided society materially and spiritually into two classes and that these two classes coincide with each other, is absolutely false. To say that according to the Qur’an the group consisting of the kafirun (unbelievers) , the mushrikun (idolaters) , the munafiqun (hypocrites) , the mufsidun (mischief mongers) , is the same as that of the

p: 175

- Page175 - Society and History

mala' (ruling clique) , the mustakbirun [1] (arrogant, oppressors) and the jabbarun (tyrants) , on the one hand, and on the other hand the group consisting of the mu'minun (believers) , the muwahhidun (monotheists) , the salihun: (righteous) , the shuhada’ (martyrs) is the same as the oppressed and the exploited class, and to say that the confrontation between the believers and the unbelievers reflects the basic conflict between the oppressed and the oppressors respectively, is not correct. This type of coincidence is not at all validated by the Qur’an. On the contrary we find that the Qur’an affirms the absence of such a coincidence.

In its treatment of the lessons of history the Qur’an cites the examples of believers who belonged to a tyrannical ruling class yet revolted against that class and its values. The believer of the family of pharaoh whose story is narrated in Surat al-Mu'min is an example of such individuals. The Qur’an also mentions Pharaoh’s wife, who, in spite of being his life partner and equally sharing his luxurious life style, was a true believer in God. [2]

The Qur’an, in several places, in a moving style recalls the story of Pharaoh’s magicians, and shows how the natural truth-seeking conscience of man, when faced with the truth, can rise on occasion against falsehood and error, setting aside all personal interests and ignoring with contempt Pharaoh’s threats:

لَأُقَطِّعَنَّ أَیْدِیَکُمْ وَأَرْجُلَکُم مِّنْ خِلَافٍ ثُمَّ لَأُصَلِّبَنَّکُمْ أَجْمَعِینَ

"I shall assuredly cui off alternately your hands and feet then I shall crucify you all together. " (7: 124)

Basically, the revolt

p: 176

- Page176 - Society and History

of Moses (A) as related by the Qur’an, contradicts historical materialism. It is true that Moses belonged to the tribe of Israel – he was neither an Egyptian nor a kinsman of the Pharaoh - but Moses was brought up since Infancy like a prince in Pharaoh's house hold. The same Moses who was brought up by Pharaoh revolted against the tyrannical system of his patron, a system in the midst of which he had grown up, renouncing him and preferring to work as a shepherd for the old man of Medina, until he was chosen by God for prophethood when he formally confronted Pharaoh.

The Holy Prophet (S) was orphaned in childhood and led a life of poverty until his youth. It was after his marriage with Khadijah that he became prosperous and rich. The Qur’an refers to this point when it says:

أَلَمْ یَجِدْکَ یَتِیمًا فَآوَىٰ ﴿٦﴾ وَوَجَدَکَ ضَالًّا فَهَدَىٰ ﴿٧﴾وَوَجَدَکَ عَائِلًا فَأَغْنَىٰ ﴿٨﴾

Did He not find thee an orphan; and shelter thee? Did He not find thee needy, and suffice thee? (93: 6,8)

It was in this period of prosperity that the Prophet (S) devoted his time to prayer and contemplation in solitude. According to the doctrine of historical materialism, during this period the Prophet (S) should have changed and assumed the role of a conservative advocate of the status quo. But it was during th. is period that he started to propagate his revolutionary message, rising in rebellion against the capitalists, the usurers, and the slavers of Mecca, and revolted against the practice of idolatry

p: 177

- Page177 - Society and History

which symbolized the corrupt life of those days.

As all the believers, the monotheists, and the monotheistic revolu tionaries did not arise from the oppressed class, the prophets also absorbed the good-natured and the relatively untainted natures from among the oppressor classes and aroused them to revolt against them selves (by way of repentance) or against the interests of their own class (by way of revolution). In the same way, all the oppressed people did not belong to the ranks of the believers and the monotheistic revolu tionaries.

The Qur’an pictures numerous scenes where the people belonging to the oppressed class are counted among unbelievers and included among the doomed subject to Divine chastisernent. [1]

Therefore, neither all believers belong to the oppressed class nor all oppressed are believers. The claim that there is complete correspon dence between them is absolutely absurd. Undeniably, the majority of the followers of the prophets have belonged to the oppressed class, or at least came from those whose hands were not stained with blood and repression. Similarly the majority of the opponents of the prophets belonged to the class of oppressors.

This is so because although the human nature which accepts the Divine message is common to both classes and exists in everyone, but the oppressors, the affluent, and the extravagant confront a great barrier because their souls are polluted and their habits are deeply entrenched in the evil existing system. There are few out of this class who are capable of freeing themselves from under the mountain load of these

p: 178

- Page178 - Society and History

evils. But the oppressed class has no such restraints.

Their nature not only responds readily to the Divine call, but they see in it the opportunity to recover their lost rights. Identifying themselves with believers has a double advantage for them. It is on this account that the majority of the followers of the prophets consist of the oppressed and individuals of the opposite group among the believers form only a minority. Despite it the notion that the group of believer and the class of the oppressed are one and the same is totally groundless.

--------------------

[1]: The Qur’an itself does not use these detracting words, but quotes the ruling clique which uses them to refer to the followers of the prophets belonging to the oppressed classes.

[2]: These gentlemen, without expressing their real intention of presenting historical materialism of Marx in an Islamic guise, pretend to have reinterpreted the Holy Qur’an.

[1]: The Qur’an, 66: 11.

There is an acute difference between the fundamental principles regarding the nature of history laid down in the Qur’an and the basic doctrines of historical materialism. In view of the Qur’an, the spirit is a fundamental reality, and matter in no way is prior to the spirit. The spiritual needs and urges are fundamental to human existence and are not dependent on the material needs. Thought is also independent of action and the psychological nature of man precedes the social makeup of his personality.

The Qur’an, since it believes in the fundamental nature of the human being, a nature which is found even within extremely de humanized persons like Pharaoh, who is a natural human being whose growth has been arrested, it also admits even for the most corrupt persons the possibility, however weak, of moving towards truth and self- realization. Accordingly the prophets were encharged to admonish the tyrant in the first place and perchance to liberate the

p: 179

- Page179 - Society and History

natural man imprisoned within the oppressor, arousing his inherent humanity against his evil social personality. We know that success was achieved in a great number of cases, and what is called "repentance" is the name of this phenomenon.

Moses (A) at the initial stage of his prophethood, was entrusted with the task of persuading Pharaoh and awakening in him the true human nature by means of admonition. He was advised to fight against him only if he failed in this attempt. In Moses' view Pharaoh had inter nally captivated and fettered the man within himself, and enslaved and imprisoned other human beings externally. Moses first attempts to arouse the man imprisoned within Pharaoh to revolt against himself. He endeavours to arouse the remnants of humanity left in him against his social personality, i. e. the Pharaoh forged and fabricated by perverse social conditions:

اذْهَبْ إِلَىٰ فِرْعَوْنَ إِنَّهُ طَغَىٰ ﴿١٧﴾ فَقُلْ هَل لَّکَ إِلَىٰ أَن تَزَکَّىٰ ﴿١٨﴾ وَأَهْدِیَکَ إِلَىٰ رَبِّکَ فَتَخْشَىٰ ﴿١٩﴾ فَأَرَاهُ الْآیَةَ الْکُبْرَىٰ ﴿٢٠﴾

Go to Pharaoh, he has waxed insolent. And say, ‘Hast thou the will to purify thyself, and that I should guide thee to thy Lord, then thou shalt fear? ’ (79: 17-19)

The Qur’an believes in the power and value of guidance, advice, admonition, reminder, argumentation and logical reasoning (in Qur’anic terminology, hikmah, wisdom). According to the Qur’an these devices can change a man, alter his course of life, transform his personality, and bring about a spiritual change in him. This approach is contrary to Marxism and materialism, which restrict the role of guidance to merely transforming the ‘class-in- itself’

p: 180

- Page180 - Society and History

into the ‘class-for-itself’ by bringing about consciousness of class antagonism and realization of class character.

2. It is claimed that the addresses of the Qur’an are nas (mankind, people) , and nas as a term is synonymous with the deprived masses. Hence Islam addresses itself to the oppressed class, and Islamic ideology is the ideology of the oppresses class; therefore, Islam recruits its followers and warriors exclusively from the underprivileged masses.

This whole line of argument is wrong. Of course the addressees of the Islamic message are nas, i. e. human beings, which include the whole mankind. No dictionary of Arabic language gives the meaning of the word nas as the underprivileged or oppressed masses, and this word does not refer to any particular class of men. The Qur’an says:

وَلِلّهِ عَلَى النَّاسِ حِجُّ الْبَیْتِ مَنِ اسْتَطَاعَ إِلَیْهِ سَبِیلاً..

…It is the duty of all men towards God to come to the House as pilgrims; whoever can afford to make his way there… (3: 97)

Does this verse refer to the underprivileged masses only? The phrase یا ایها الناس, “O, mankind! ” which repeatedly occurs in the Qur’an, nowhere refers exclusively to the underprivileged masses but to all mankind in general. The universality of the Qur’anic address is also derived from the principle of universality of human nature propounded in the Qur’an.

3. It is said that the Qur’an claims that the leaders, the guides, the prophets, and the martyrs arise exclusively from among the oppressed. This is yet another mistake regarding the Qur’an. The

p: 181

- Page181 - Society and History

Qur’an never makes such a statement.

The argument concerning verse 62: 2…هو الذی بعث فی الامیین that messengers of God arise from among the ummah (community) and the ummah is equivalent to the oppressed masses, is ridiculous. The word أمیین (ummiyyin) is actually the plural form of the word (ummi) which means a person who is unlettered. Furthermore أُمِّی is derived from أُم (umm) not from أمَّة (ummah). Morever, the meaning of the word أُمَّة is a society which is composed of different groups and occasionally different classes.

By no means can it be used to signify the ‘underprivileged masses. ’ Still more ridiculous is the argument regarding the verse 75 from Surat al-Qasas about martyrs: و نزعنا من کل امة شهیداً فقلنا هاتوا برهانکم. They have interpreted it (or rather distorted it) to mean this: “We shall raise from every ummah (the masses) a shahid (martyr in the way of God) ; i. e. We shall make him a revolutionary, then We shall ask every ummah to produce its proof, which is the same as its martyr – the revolutionary killed in the way of God. ”

Firstly, this verse follows another verse and both of them are related to the Day of Judgmenet, the day when God would address idolaters. The preceding verse is as follows:

وَیَوْمَ یُنَادِیهِمْ فَیَقُولُ أَیْنَ شُرَکَائِیَ

Upon the day when He shall call unto them. and he shall say, 'Where are now those whom you claimed to be My associates? ' (28: 74)

Secondly, نزعنا (naza’na) means that “We shall 

separate,” or

“We shall draw near. ” It does not mean “We shall raise” or “We arouse. ”

Thirdly, the word شهید (shahid) is not used here in the sense of martyr but in the sense of witness – witness to the actions of his people.

The Qur’an considers every prophet as a witness to the actions of his ummah (people). There is not a single instance in the Qur’an where the word شهید (shahid) is used for martyr as it is currently today, for one killed in the way at God. The word شهید was of course used by the Prophet (S) and the Imams (A) in this sense, but not in the Qur’an. Thus we see how the verses of the Qur’an have been distorted for the purpose of reconciling the Qur’anic teachings with an inconsistent philosophy like Marxism,

4. What was the principal aim of the prophets? Was their primary goal to establish justice and equality, or to strengthen the relation of man with God by means of faith and knowledge? Did they combine both the alms together and were dualist in approach? Do we require some other explanation? I have already dealt with this problem while discussing prophethood [1] and there is no need to repeat what we have said there. Here we shall deal with this subject only from the viewpoint of the prophets' methodology.

While discussing the practical implica tions of tawhid [2] (the principle of Divine Unity) , I have already explained that the prophets neither concentrated their efforts on reforming man

p: 183

- Page183 - Society and History

and liberating him from within by breaking off all bondages to the worldly things-as the Sufis maintain-nor did they devote all their energies to bringing about equity and reform in external human relations, considering this reform as sufficient for the reformation of man’s internal relations (with God and himself) - as advocated by some materialist schools of philosophy. The Holy Qur’an, in the same breath and in a single sentence says:

... تَعَالَوْاْ إِلَى کَلَمَةٍ سَوَاء بَیْنَنَا وَبَیْنَکُمْ أَلاَّ نَعْبُدَ إِلاَّ اللّهَ وَلاَ نُشْرِکَ بِهِ شَیْئاً وَلاَ یَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُنَا بَعْضاً أَرْبَاباً مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ...

…Come now to a word common between us and you, that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall lake others for lords besides God... (3: 64)

But the question is, from where did the prophets start their mission? From within or from without? Did the prophets initiate their work by transforming men from within by means of impregnating them with religious faith and spiritual fervour and after that people had undergone religious, moral, intellectual, and emotional transformation they made use of this change for attaining the aims of social unity, social reform, social justice and equality?

Or did they act other way round by first concentrating their efforts to change material conditions by calling public attention to deprivation, backwardness, and oppres sion and by mobilizing the people to eliminate social disunity, discrimination and injustice, and attending to the task of cultivating faith, correct doctrine and

p: 184

- Page184 - Society and History

morals only after this goal was realized?

A little study of the methods employed by the prophets and saints would reveal that they, contrary to the practice of so-called social reformers and the advocates of human welfare, started their work with emphasis on right thinking, correct doctrine, belief, spiritual fervour, love of God, and constant remembrance of the origin of the world (mabda’) and the Day of Resurrection.

A glance at the chronological order of the surahs and revelation of the Qur’anic verses with reference to the problems discussed in them and a study of the life of the Prophet (S) and his approach to the problems he dealt with during the thirteen years of his stay in Mecca and the ten years of his life in Medina, is sufficient to throw light on the methods employed by the prophets.

5. That the opponents of the prophets should have maintained a conservative logic is quite natural. If it could be deduced from the Qur’an that the opponents of the prophets, without exception, believed in this logic, one might justifiably say that all opponents of prophets belonged to the affluent, privileged, and exploiter class. But what can actually be deduced from the Qur’an is that this type of thinking is the logic of the leaders of the opponents, the mala' and the mustakbirun, whom Marx regards as owners and distributors of the society's intellectual products.

That the logic of the prophets should be a logic of dynamism, rationality, and indifference to custom and tradition

p: 185

- Page185 - Society and History

is also natural. But It is not justifiable to say that deprivation, exploitation, and oppression of the lower classes have been responsible for moulding their conscious ness in this manner, and that their thinking is naturally determined by their deprivations and privations.

The prophets have this logic because they have attained to a stage of human perfection with respect to their logic, reason, feelings, and emotions. In fact, the more a human being acquires perfection, the lesser is his attachment and dependence on his natural and social environment and material conditions, and greater is his independence. We shall talk more about it later. The independent logic of the prophets requires that they should not be tied to customs, habits, and traditions. On the contrary it requires of them to liberate the people also from the shackles of blind imitation of decadent customs and traditions.

6. Whatever has been said in the context of oppression (istid’af) is also unacceptable. Why? Because, firstly, the Qur’an has itself clearly explained the evolutionary course of history and its ultimate goal variously in several verses. These verses explain and interpret the meaning of the above-mentioned verse (28: 5) and are complementary to it, as they suggest that its contention is true only under certain conditions. Secondly, contrary to the common belief, the verse of istid’af (28: 5) cannot be interpreted as formulating any universal law in itself.

This is so evident that there is little need for any elaborate comparison with other related verses or any detailed interpretation 

--------------------

[1]: See verses 4: 97, 14: 21, 34: 31-37, 40: 47-50

[2]: See Wahy wa nubuwwat (Revelation and Prophethood) , the third book of the series, Muqaddameh bar jahan bini-ye Islami, of which the present book Jami’e wa tarikh is a part, pp. 35, 37-43.

explanation. This verse is related to the verse preceding it and the one following it. When these verses are read in successive order we find that this verse does not contain the universal principle which has been inferred from it. I would like to discuss this verse in two parts. The first part of our discussion is based upon the assumption that this verse may be separated from the ten verses preceding and following it and that a universal principle may be derived from it.

Then we compare this verse with other verses which propound another historical principle which contradicts the assumed principle, and see what conclusion can be drawn from this comparison. In the second part we shall show that this verse basically does not propound the universal' historical principle that has been inferred from it.

(i)

In several verses of the Qur’an the ultimate destiny and fate of history as well as its course of evolution is pictured as the ultimate victory of faith over faithlessness, victory of piety over uncontained lust, the victory of righteousness over corruption, and victory of good and godly conduct over perverse behaviour. The verse 55 of Surat al-Nur, reads thus:

وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا مِنکُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَیَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُم فِی الْأَرْضِ کَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِینَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَیُمَکِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِینَهُمُ الَّذِی ارْتَضَى لَهُمْ وَلَیُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّن بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْناً یَعْبُدُونَنِی لَا یُشْرِکُونَ بِی شَیْئاً

God has promised those of you who believe and do good works that He will surely make them to succeed in the earth, even

p: 187

- Page187 - Society and History

as He caused those who were before them to succeed [others}, and that He will surely establish tor them their religion which He has approved (or them, and will give them in exchange safety after their tear. They shall sense Me, not associating with Me any thing.... (24: 55)

In this verse the people who are promised final victory vice regency of God, and inheritance of the earth are no doubt the righteous believers. Contrary to verse 28: 5 which mentions the condition of being oppressed, deprived, and exploited as the main characteristic of the believers, this verse relies upon ideological, moral and behavioural characteristics. It proclaims the ultimate victory and' domination of a particular kind of belief, faith, and mode of behaviour.

In other words this verse promises the ultimate victory of the human being who has attained conviction of faith, realization of truth and sublimity of character. One of the implications of the promised victory is 'suc cession in earth,' that is, wresting of authority from previous rulers and powers. The other implication is regarding the establishment of the rule of Religion, that is realization of all ethical and social values of Islam, such as, justice, chastity, piety, courage, self-sacrifice, love, worship of God, sincerity, purity of soul, etc. Thirdly, it implies rejection of all forms of polytheism (shirk) either in worship (‘ibadah) or in obedience (‘ita’ah).

In Surat al-‘A’raf the verse 128 states:

قَالَ مُوسَى لِقَوْمِهِ اسْتَعِینُوا بِاللّهِ وَاصْبِرُواْ إِنَّ الأَرْضَ لِلّهِ یُورِثُهَا مَن یَشَاءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ وَالْعَاقِبَةُ لِلْمُتَّقِینَ

And Moses said to his people,

p: 188

- Page188 - Society and History

'Seek help in Allah, and be patient; surely the earth is God's and He gives it for an inheritance to whom He Will of His servants and ultimately to the God-fearing, [i. e. in the end the God-fearing would be the inheritors of the earth] (7: 128)

In Surat al-‘Anbiya, the verse 105 declares:

وَلَقَدْ کَتَبْنَا فِی الزَّبُورِ مِن بَعْدِ الذِّکْرِ أَنَّ الْأَرْضَ یَرِثُهَا عِبَادِیَ الصَّالِحُونَ

We have written in al-Zabur, after the Remembrance, 'Indeed the earth shall be the inheritance of My righteous servants. ' (21: 105)

There are other verses also relating to this subject.

What shall we do now? Should we accept the verse 28: 5 related with istid’af (oppression) or the verse 24: 55 concerned with the matter of istikhlaf (succession) and several other verses of its kind? Can we say that these two types of verses though apparently different in meaning express the same fact, that the oppressed are the same as the believers, the righteous, and the pious, and vice versa? Can we say that istid’af (being oppressed) is the social and class character of the same people who are ideologically identified as men of faith, righteousness, and piety? Of course.

As I have already argued, the theory of correspondence between the so-called ‘superstructural’ characteristics of belief, righteousness, and piety, and the so-called ‘infrastructural’ characters of being oppressed, exploited, and deprived is not justified from the point of view of the Qur’an. Form the Qur’anic viewpoint it is just as possible that a group of oppressed may not consist of believers. The Qur’an has

p: 189

- Page189 - Society and History

introduced both of these groups.

However, as I have pointed out earlier, whenever a monotheistic ideology based upon the Divine values of justice, self-sacrifice, and benevolence is presented in a class society, it is evident that majority of its followers should belong to the oppressed class; because they do not have to overcome the obstacles which block the way of nature as in the case of the opposite class. But it does not necessarily mean that the class of believers is exclusively comprised of the oppressed class.

Secondly, each one of the above-mentioned verses presents two different mechanisms of history. The verse concerning oppression (28: 5) identifies the course and movement of history with class struggle. The mechanism of movement is explained as being due to the pressures created by the oppressors and their reactionary character

on the one hand, and the revolutionary spirit of the exploited class on the other hand.

This struggle undeniably results in the victory of the oppressed class, irrespective of their commitment to the Qur’anic ideal of good conduct, and applies also to such peoples, for example, as that of Vietnam and Cambodia. If we try to interpret this verse from the religious point of view, we shall have to say that this verse expounds the principle of the Divine support for the oppressed. The Qur’an declares:

وَلاَ تَحْسَبَنَّ اللّهَ غَافِلاً عَمَّا یَعْمَلُ الظَّالِمُونَ

And deem not that God is unaware of what the wicked do.... (14: 42)

This is an affirmation of Divine justice. The verse concerned with

p: 190

- Page190 - Society and History

istid'taf (oppression) containing the notions of leadership (imamah) and inheritance (wirathah) is indicative of Divine justice.

But the verse relating to istikhlaf (succession) (24: 55) and other similar verses, expound a different mechanism operating in history as a natural process. From the religious point of view this mechanism implies a principle more comprehensive and inclusive than the principle of Divine justice, since the latter is included in it.

The mechanism expounded in the verse 24: 55, and other similar verses, can be explained in this fashion: Among the various kinds of struggles throughout the course of world's history, almost all of which have had waged for the sake of some material interest and gain, only that struggle which has been waged for the sake of God (lillah wa fillah) has been exclusively motivated by sacred values, free of any selfish material interest. This struggle, under the leadership of the prophets and the believers following them, has been instrumental in the advance ment of humanity and human civilization.

Only this type of struggle is worthy of being called the battle between good and evil. It were these battles which pushed forward history from the humanistic and spiritual point of view. The real motivating force behind these struggles was not the upsurge of a certain class but man's natural and instinctive urge for truth and understanding of the mystery of existence and his craving for justice, which aims at creating an ideal social order.

It was not the sense of deprivation and loss but the natural

p: 191

- Page191 - Society and History

urge for self-perfection that had been instrumental in man's progress.

The animal faculties in man have remained unchanged from the beginning of history until now; they have neither developed in any way nor can they develop now. But his human aptitudes gradually develop and blossom, so that in future, more than today, he will be able to emancipate himself from material and economic bonds and incline more and more towards faith and spiritual perfection. The ground on which history has developed and evolved was not the battles fought for class interests and material gains, but the ideological and spiritual struggles based on Divine faith. This is the natural mechanism of man's evolution which ensures the ultimate victory of the righteous, the pious, and the warriors of the Divine path.

Let us discuss the Divine view of this victory. Whatever participates in the process of history and undergoes gradual evolution, attaining its ultimate goal as history approaches its culmination point, is manifestation of God's Lordship (rububivvah. ) and Benevolence (rahmah) , which necessitate that creatures attain perfection. It is something more than what is is called Divine justice which necessitates only 'compensation. ' In other words, what has been promised is issuance and manifestation of the Divine Attributes of Lordship, Benevolence, and Bountifulness, and His His Attributes of Omnipotence and Vengeance [retribution].

Thus, we see that the verse 28: 5 concerning istid’af and the verse concerning istikhlaf (and other verses similar to it) , each has a specific logic of its own. They differ in import with respect to

p: 192

- Page192 - Society and History

the perspective of history, the class which is victorious, the course followed by history to ensure the promised victory, the mechanism or the natural process responsible for the movement of history, and with respect to the manifestation of relevant Divine Attributes.

Nevertheless, we see that the verse 24: 55 concerned with succession is more comprehensive than the other one in respect of the conclusions it yields. Whatever man obtains on the basis of the verse concerning oppression is only a part of what he attains on the basis of the verse concerning succession. The moral value we derive from the verse concerning oppression is deliverance of the oppressed from the tyranny of the oppressor, which implies that God is the Saviour of the oppressed (thus highlights only one attribute of God) , whereas the verse concerning succession embraces all the Attributes of God, including the one designated by the former.

(ii)

Now the second part of our discussion regarding the verse concerning oppression. The fact is that this verse is not meant to lay down any universal principle. It consequently, neither describes the course of history nor indicates the mechanism of history for the ultimate victory of the oppressed qua oppressed. The erroneous pre sumption that this verse lays down a principle is caused by separating it from its preceding and succeeding verses and generalizing the meaning of the relative pronoun الذین in the phrase الذین استضعفوا to deduce a principle which conflicts with the one deduced from the verse 24: 55 concerning succession.

p: 193

- Page193 - Society and History

Consider the following three verses:

إِنَّ فِرْعَوْنَ عَلَا فِی الْأَرْضِ وَجَعَلَ أَهْلَهَا شِیَعاً یَسْتَضْعِفُ طَائِفَةً مِّنْهُمْ یُذَبِّحُ أَبْنَاءهُمْ وَیَسْتَحْیِی نِسَاءهُمْ إِنَّهُ کَانَ مِنَ الْمُفْسِدِینَ{4} وَنُرِیدُ أَن نَّمُنَّ عَلَى الَّذِینَ اسْتُضْعِفُوا فِی الْأَرْضِ وَنَجْعَلَهُمْ أَئِمَّةً وَنَجْعَلَهُمُ الْوَارِثِینَ{5} وَنُمَکِّنَ لَهُمْ فِی الْأَرْضِ وَنُرِی فِرْعَوْنَ وَهَامَانَ وَجُنُودَهُمَا مِنْهُم مَّا کَانُوا یَحْذَرُونَ{6{

Indeed Pharaoh exalted himself in the earth and made its people into castes, Abasing one party of them, slaughtering their sons and sparing their women, surely he was of those who work corruption, And we desired to 

show favour unto those who were oppressed in the earth, and to make them leaders and to make them the inheritors, and to establish them in the earth, and to show. Pharaoh and Haman (his prime minister) and their hosts that which the) feared from them, (28: 4-6)

These three verses are interrelated and can be interpreted only when read together.

We see that the clauses وَنُمَکِّنَ لَهُمْ فِی الْأَرْضِ …'and to establish them in the earth,' and وَنُرِی فِرْعَوْنَ وَهَامَانَ …’and to show Pharaoh and Haman…’ in the third verse are related to the phrase أَن نَّمُنَّ,‘that We shall favour,’ in the second verse which is complementary to their meaning. Therefore, these two verses cannot be separated from each other.

Besides, the content of the second clause in the third verse, i. e. وَنُرِی فِرْعَوْنَ وَهَامَانَ is related to the content of the first verse, and makes an assertion -about the fate of Pharaoh whose tyranny is described in the first verse. Thus we cannot separate the third verse from

p: 194

- Page194 - Society and History

the first verse, as the third verse is related to the second verse and complements it. The second verse, also, cannot be separated from the first verse,

Had the third verse not been there or had it not dealt with the fate of Pharaoh and Haman, it would have been possible to separate the second verse from the first, and to consider it as independent, so that a universal principle could be deduced from it. But the inseparable connection of these three verses absolutely excludes the possibility of deducing any principle. What is meant is that Pharaoh indulged in acts of self-aggrandizement, discrimination, repression and infanticide, while God had determined to bestow leadership and inheritance of the earth upon those who were humiliated, oppressed, and deprived of their rights. Hence the pronoun الذین in the second verse should be taken in the restricted sense of reference to the people who were promised, not in a general sense applicable to all oppressed.

Moreover, there is another point in the verse to be noted. The phrase و نجعلهم ائمة ‘We shall make them as leaders…’ refers to the phrase أن نمن, ‘that We shall favour…’ It does not say بإن نجعلهم which would have been more proper if it was meant that the Divine favour involved amounted to bestowing of leadership and inheritance.

This is the general interpretation of the verse. However, the verse means to say, ‘We intended to show favour unto the oppressed through a prophet and a revealed Scripture (Moses

p: 195

- Page195 - Society and History

and the Torah) , through religious teaching and training, and through generation of monotheistic faith in them, making them righteous believers, and as a result the leaders and inheritors of the land [their own land]. Hence the verse intends to make this statement:

وَنُرِیدُ أَن نَّمُنَّ عَلَى الَّذِینَ اسْتُضْعِفُوا فِی الْأَرْضِ (بموسى والکتاب الذی ننزله على موسى) وَنَجْعَلَهُمْ أَئِمَّةً وَنَجْعَلَهُمُ الْوَارِثِینَ

We desired to show favour unto those who were oppressed (by sending Moses and the revealed Scripture) and to make them leaders and inheritors…

Therefore, though the verse 28: 5 concerning oppression (istid’af) bears a specific meaning, it is quite similar in import to the verse 24: 55 concerning succession (istikhlaf) , i. e. it partially conveys the general meaning of the verse. Furthermore, aside from the relation of the phrase أن نمن with و نجعلهم ائمة, basically we cannot presume that the verse intends to say that the children of Israel would have obtained the leadership and inheritance of their land by sole virtue of being oppressed whether Moses would have appeared as a prophet or not, irrespective of his heavenly teachings and regardless of their following those heavenly teachings,

Possibly, the advocates of justifiability of the theory of historical materialism from the Islamic point of view may raise another point. They may say that the Islamic culture in its essence and character is either the culture of the oppressed or of the oppressors, or it is a blanket culture. If the Islamic culture is the culture of the oppressed, it is bound to have the character

p: 196

- Page196 - Society and History

of its class: its audience, its message, its alignment, and everything must revolve around the oppressed class. And if the Islamic culture is the culture of the oppressors, as claimed by the opponents of Islam, besides having its class character and revolving around its interests, it should be a reactionary and anti-human culture and so necessarily of a non-Divine origin.

No Muslim would accept this point of view. Moreover, the entirety of this culture bears witness to the contrary. Now the claim that the Islamic culture is a blanket culture. A blanket culture is a neutral culture, a culture of isolation and indifference, without responsibility, and commitment, whose motto is, "Give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give back to God what belongs to God. " It is a culture which attempts to reconcile water with fire, oppressed with oppressor, exploited with exploiter, by bringing together all of them under the same roof, a culture that neither roasts the meat nor hums the spit.

Such a culture is practically a conservative culture which serves the interests of the oppressors and the exploiters. A neutral, indifferent, and noncommitted group, which does not participate in any social conflicts between the exploiter and the exploited, practically supports the exploiting class by not constraining its freedom. Similarly a culture whose spirit is neutral and indifferent should of necessity considered to be the culture of the oppressive class. Taking this into account, it is claimed that since the Islamic culture is neither neutral nor a

p: 197

- Page197 - Society and History

supporter of the oppressive class, it should be a culture of the oppressed with respect to its origin, its alignment, its message, and its audience, all revolving around the axis of this class.

This argument is totally fallacious. I think, there are two fundamental reasons for the inclination of this section of Muslim intellectuals towards historical materialism. Firstly, they presume that if Islamic culture is to be regarded as a revolutionary culture--or if Islam is to be equipped with a revolutionary culture--the recourse to historical 

materialism is inevitable. The rest of their talk and their claims that it is an idea inspired by the Qur’an and specifically derived from the verse 28: 5 about istid’af are nothing but excuses and devices to conceal this prejudgement. This is the reason for their outright depa'rture from the essence of Islamic logic, which makes them degrade the sublime, natural, Divine and human logic of Islam to the level of a materialistic philosophy.

These intellectuals have imagined that the only way open for a culture to be revolutionary is to identify it with the oppressed and the deprived class, to consider it bound to its interests, and as being exclusively related to it with respect to its source, alignment, and audience. Therefore, they think, all leaders and ideologues should arise solely from this class, the relation of this culture to all the other classes and groups being one of sheer hostility, antagonism, and conflict.

These intellectuals presume that the way to a revolutionary culture should necessarily end in

p: 198

- Page198 - Society and History

the stomach, and that all great revolutions of history, even those led by the prophets, were the revolutions of the stomach, for the stomach. For the same reason, out of the great Abu Dharr, the wise man of the urnrnah, a staunch monotheist, a sincere and honest supporter of Islam, a determined warrior in the way of God, a man who fearlessly fulfilled the duty of al-amr bi-al-ma’ruf wa al-nahy ‘an al-munkar, they have carved an Abu Dharr of the stomach, a psychopath remarkably sensitive to the pangs of hunger, who, for the sake of satisfying his hunger, considered in not only permissible but obligatory to draw the sword against all men.

The highest value attributed to his life, in their view, is his personal experience of hunger, due to which he could understand the agony of the hunger class. His sympathy with the hungry caused him to develop a complex against those who were fighting against them. That’s all there is to Abu Dharr. The whole personality of this Luqman of the ummah, this monotheist see, this ardent crusader, and one of the greatest personalities of Islam, is degraded to the level of a materialist.

These intellectuals subscribe to the view of Marx according to whom a revolution can originate only in a violent movement of the masses. [1]

They are unable to imagine that a culture, a school of thought and an ideology which has Divine origin and addresses all human beings, and III fact I he human nature itself,

p: 199

- Page199 - Society and History

through a universal and comprehensive message, aligned with the values of justice, equality, piety, spirituality, love, benevolence and struggle against tyranny, is ever capable of giving birth to a great revolution accompanied with profound changes. But it is a revolution guided by the Divine light and the human conscience, and is accompanied with religious fervour, spiritual ecstasy, Divine motives, and humanistic values, similar to those monotheistic revolutions which have been witnessed by history again and again. The Islamic Revolution is a clear example of such a revolution.

These intellectuals fail to conceive that it is not essential for a culture to necessarily originate in the oppressed class in order to be committed and purposive and not to be neutral and indifferent. They presume that a blanket culture is necessarily neutral and indifferent. They are unable to understand that it is impossible for a comprehensive school of thought and a blanket culture to be neutral, indifferent irresponsible, and noncommittal if it has a Divine origin and is addressed to the human nature.

That which creates the sense of responsibility and commitment is not affinity with the oppressed class but dedication to God and human conscience. Ignorance of this fact is the root cause of their misunderstanding regarding the relationship of Islam with revolution.

The other main reason for this misconception should be sought in the relationship between Islam and its social alignment. These intellectuals have observed that there is a clear inclination in favour of the oppressed in the Qur’an reflected in

p: 200

- Page200 - Society and History

its historical discourses about the movements led by the prophets. On the other hand, they have accepted with unquestioning credulity the validity of the Marxist doctrine of correspondence between the social base and ideological base, according to which the origin and alignment of an ideology correspond with each other.

Since it has never crossed their minds to question the validity of this doctrine, they have been forced to draw this inference that since the Qur’an clearly considers the goals of the sacred movements to be in alignment with the interests of the oppressed and oriented towards recovery of their rights, therefore, it means that the Qur’an regards all the sacred movements as originating from the oppressed and exploited class. This leads to the conclusion that the essence of history from the Qur’anic viewpoint is materialistic and economic, with economy as the base of the social structure.

From what we have said so far it becomes clear that the Qur’an believes in the principle of human nature and considers it to be the logic which governs human life. This logic, which may be called the 'logic of the human nature,' is diametrically opposed to the 'logic of profit,' which is the logic of the beastly and degenerate human being.

Accordingly Islam does not accept the doctrine of correspondence between the social origin and alignment of an ideology or the doctrine of correspondence between the social and ideological bases. Islam regards it as an inhuman doctrine applicable to semi-human beings who have not

p: 201

- Page201 - Society and History

received any human education or training, and so are devoid of any sense of higher values. Such stick to the logic of profit only. But it does not apply to human beings who have attained humanhood, having received human education and training; their logic is the logic of nature.

Aside from all this, to say that the alignment of Islam is in favour of the oppressed is a sort of loose statement. Of course, Islam is aligned with the values of equity, equality, and justice. Obviously the people who are benefited by this alignment are the oppressed and the deprived. Those who are adversely affected by it are the oppressors, the exploiters, and the despots.

--------------------

[1]: Jahan bini ye tawhidi (The World Outlook of Tawhid) , the second treatise of the Muqaddameh’I bar jahan-e Islami, pp. 62-81.

It means that Islam, even while striving for the rights of a certain class, its principal goal is realization of a value and promotion of a human principle. It is here that the extraordinary worth of 'the principle of nature,' clearly expounded by the Qur’an, becomes evident in the Islamic culture as the fountain-head of all Islamic teachings. [1]

Much that is said about nature [in other philosophies] fails to elucidate its depth and to comprehend its full dimensions. Even those who often talk about nature, since they do not pay due attention to the various aspects of its vast dimensions, ultimately come up with views which contradict this principle.

Another example of this error, which is more appalling, is the theory regarding the origin of religions. Whatever we have discussed till now concerns the nature and origin of historical

p: 202

- Page202 - Society and History

phenomenon from the viewpoint of religion (particularly Islam). Now we shall deal with religion as a socio- historical phenomenon, which has existed from the dawn of history up to the present time, and concerns with the origin and alignment of this social phenomenon.

We have recurringly pointed out that the Marxist doctrine of historical materialism believes in a correspondence between the origin of every cultural phenomenon and its class alignment. There is a universal principle generally believed in by Muslim mystics and philosophers, according to which the end of everything is a kind of return to its origin.

النهایات هی الرجوع الى البدایات

The ends return to the origins.

And Rumi has said:

جزئها را رویها سوى کل است بلبلانرا عشق با روی کل است

آنجه از دریا به دریا می‌رود از همانجا کامد آنجا می‌رود

از سرِ کُه سیلهای تیزرو وزتنِ ما جانِ عشق آمیزرو

The parts are forced towards the whole,

Nightingales are in love with the rose’s face;

What comes from the sea flows back into it,

And everything returns to its source;

Like the restless waves gushing from mountain-tops,

My soul burning with love, is restless to be free from the body.

Marxism holds a similar view with regard to intellectual, aesthetic, philosophical, and religious matters, and in fact all socio-cultural phenomena. This school claims that all ideas are directed towards the source from which they originate. The end of everything is directed towards its source and origin. There is no such thing as a neutral or non-aligned philosophy, religion or culture. There

p: 203

- Page203 - Society and History

is also no such thing as a philosophy or religion which seeks social reform that is not wholly to the benefit of the social class from which it arises.

According to it, every class has its specific intellectual and cultural manifestations. Therefore, in all societies divided into two classes from the economic point of view, there are two distinct types of emotional, philosophical, moral, artistic, literary, aesthetic approaches, and two different types of sensibilities and world outlooks, and occasionally even two types of scientific knowledge. Whenever the infrastructure and property relations are of two forms, this division leads to bifurcation in two cultural and intellectual patterns and systems.

Marx personally accepts two exemptions from this principle: religion and the State. According to him, these two are special creations of the oppressive class and are used by it as instruments of exploitation. Naturally, they are aligned with the interests of the oppressors. As for the exploited class, due to its social position it is neither the source of religion nor the State. Religion and the State are imposed upon them by the opposite group. Hence two systems of government or religion do not exist anywhere.

Certain Muslim intellectuals, contrary to Marx's view claim that religion can be also divided into two different systems. As morality, arts, literature and all other cultural phenomena in a class society represent two systems and each of them has a specific origin and orientation related to its respective class-one system is related to the ruling class while

p: 204

- Page204 - Society and History

the other is related to the ruled -so also religion is of two types: the religion of the rulers, and the religion of the ruled.

The religion of the rulers is polytheism (shirk) , and the religion of the ruled is monotheism (tawhid). The religion of the rulers is partisan and discriminatory, whereas the religion of the ruled advocates equity and equality. The religion of the rulers justifies the status quo, while the religion of the ruled demands revolution and condemns the status quo. The religion of the rulers is static and stagnant, and silences all criticism; whereas the religion of the ruled stimulates upsurge, dynamism, and protest. The religion of the rulers is the opium of the society, and the religion of the ruled is a tonic for it.

Therefore, Marx's theory, that the social orientation and align ment of religion is absolutely to the interests of the rulers, is true only for the religion of the ruling class, which is against the ruled and is the opium of the masses. This is the type of religion which has practically always existed and has been in vogue and power. But it is not true of the religion of the ruled, i. e. , the religion- of the truthful prophets, which was not tolerated by the ruling 

--------------------

[1]: Andre Peter, Marx and Marxism, Persian translation by Shuja’ al-Din Diyaiyan, p. 39.

class and was suppressed by all means.

These intellectua1s in this manner reject Marx's theory which considers all religions as an instrument employed in the interests of the ruling class, and presu. me that thereby they have rejected Marxism itself. They

p: 205

- Page205 - Society and History

do not realize that what they have said, in spite of its going against the views of Marx, Engels, Mao, and other Marxists, is nothing but a confirmation of the materialist-marxist interpretation of religion – something which is far more appalling. After all they accept that the religion of the ruled has a particular class origin.

Thus they approve of the principle of correspondence between a religion’s class origin and its class orientation and alignment. In others words, they have unconsciously affirmed the materialistic conception of religion and all cultural phenomena and hence the doctrine of necessary correspondence between the origin of a cultural phenomenon and its objectives. The only thing they have done is that contrary to the Marxist views, they have affirmed the existence of a religion which originates in the oppressed class and serves its interests. They have given an interesting explanation of the religion of the oppressed and its social orientation. But they ignore that this view in itself accepts the doctrine of materialist-economic character of religion.

Furthermore what sort of conclusions are drawn from this view? It is concluded that the polytheistic religion of the ruling class is the only religion that has played an objectively significant role in the lives of people throughout history. Due to the determinism of history, which supported it, and the economic and political power vested in its hands, the religion of the ruling class, which necessarily justified its situation, has been always the predominant religion. On the other hand,

p: 206

- Page206 - Society and History

since the monotheistic religion could not materialize and objectify its social objectives, it did not play any historical role in society, as the super structure can not precede the economic base or infrastructure.

According to this view, the monotheistic movements of the prophets, being the expression of the aspirations of the oppressed and the defeated, could not play any historical role and were bound to be defeated, The prophets preached the religion of unity of God and justice, but all their attempts proved to be short-lived, because the religion of the rulers under the mask of monotheism and prophetic teachings distorted the true religion and suppressed It. The religion of the ruling class flourished by drawing its nourishment from prophetic teachings while growing in power and using it for exploitation of the deprived class.

In fact, the truthful prophets of God strove to provide the people with bread, but brought disaster upon them, as their religion became a tool of the opposite class for tightening the noose further around the neck of the oppressed and the weak. The prophets could not achieve what they desired through their teachings; rather the outcome was contrary to their objectives, or, to use an expression used by Islamic jurisprudents, ما قُصِدَ لم یقعُ وما وقعَ لم یُقصد, ‘the intended did not happen, and what happened was not intended. ”

What the materialists and atheists say about religion, that religion, that opium of the masses, it stupefies them, bewitches them, causes stagna tion and passivism, justifies tyranny and discrimination, and

p: 207

- Page207 - Society and History

is con ducive to ignorance-all this is true but only for the religion of the rulers: the polytheistic religion of social discrimination which predominated throughout history. But it is not true of righteous religion, the religion of monotheism, the religion of the ruled, the oppressed, which was always suppressed and was driven out of the arena of life and history.

The only role played by the religion of the ruled has been one of criticism and protest. It was similar to the role of a political party with minority seats in the legislature. The party which obtains majority forms the cabinet out of its members, carries out its programmes and resolutions. The other party despite being more progressive, because of being in minority, is reduced to the role of a critic of the majority.

The party in majority does not pay any heed to these criticisms. Ruling the society according to its own desires, it may occasionally even utilize the criticism of the minority for strengthening its own position. If it were not for the criticism of the opposition, it may possibly collapse under increasing pressures; but the criticism of the opposition makes it more cautious and helps it to further consolidate its position.

The foregoing statement is not true on any account. Neither is it true in respect of its analysis of the nature of polytheism, nor with regard to its analysis of the nature of monotheism, nor in its treatment of the part played by these two religions in history. Undeniably religion

p: 208

- Page208 - Society and History

has always existed in the world, be. it in the form of monotheism, or polytheism, or both of them existing simultaneously. As for the priority of polytheism over monotheism or vice versa, the sociologists advance different views. The majority of them hold that in the beginning there was polytheism, and religion gradually evolved towards monotheism. Some sociologists hold the opposite view.

Religious traditions, or rather certain religious principles, confirm the second theory. But as to the question how the religion of poly theism came into existence, and whether it was invented to justify the acts of injustice and tyranny by the oppressors, or if there was some other reason, researchers offer other explanations; and one cannot naive ly accept the view that polytheism is a product of social injustice. The interpretation of monotheism as the outcome of the aspirations of the oppressed classes to uphold the values of equality, brotherhood, and unity, as against the philosophy of discrimination and injustice of the rulers, appears to be more unscientific as well as incompatible with the basic tenets of Islam.

The above-mentioned view presents the truthful apostles of God as "the acquitted failures;" failures, since they failed in the struggle against evil and were overpowered throughout history; their religion could not influence society nor could it play any role comparable to the one played by the false religion of the rulers. Its role was restricted to passive criticism of the religion of the rulers. And the 'acquitted,' for the reason that, contrary to the

claims of materialists,

p: 209

- Page209 - Society and History

they never belonged to the pole of exploiters and plunderers, and were not agents of stagnation and passivism. Their alignment was not with the interests of the ruling class. On the contrary, they belonged to the pole of the oppressed and the exploited, arose from among them, experienced their agonies, worked in their interest, and strove for the restoration of their rights usurped by the ruling class.

As the truthful prophets are totally exonerated with respect to their call, message and their alignment, they are also exonerated from any accusation of failure; they were not responsible for it. It was the determinism of history arising out of the institution of private property which supported and sustained the opponent, the ruling class. The existence of private property necessarily divided society into two halves: the exploiters and the exploited.

The half consisting of the exploiters, by virtue of its ownership of material production, necessari ly monopolized intellectual products also. One cannot oppose "deter minism of history"-which is a materialistic term for fate and predestination, predestined not by a god in heavens but on the earth, a deity which is material, not abstract, whose power represented by the "economic base of society" operates through the channels of the "tools of production. " Therefore, the prophets are not responsible for their failure.

However, though the above-mentioned interpretation exonerates the righteous prophets, it negates the notion of a system of creation which is all good, is governed by truth, and where the good pre dominates over evil. The Islamic metaphysician optimistically

p: 210

- Page210 - Society and History

maintains that the system of being is based upon truth and good, that evil, falsehood, and wickedness do not have a fundamental reality and do not exist independently; they are accidental, relative, and transitory. Truth and good form the axis of the system of being and the human society:

فَأَمَّا الزَّبَدُ فَیَذْهَبُ جُفَاء وَأَمَّا مَا یَنفَعُ النَّاسَ فَیَمْکُثُ فِی الأَرْضِ

…As for the foam, it passes away as scum [upon the banks], while that which is of use to mankind remains in the earth… (13: 17)

It is also said that in the struggle between truth and falsehood, truth emerges victorious:

بَلْ نَقْذِفُ بِالْحَقِّ عَلَى الْبَاطِلِ فَیَدْمَغُهُ فَإِذَا هُوَ زَاهِقٌ..

Nay, but We hurl the true against the false, and it invalidates it, and behold! Falsehood vanishes away… (21: 18)

It is further asserted that Divine providence has been with the truthful prophets all along:

إِنَّا لَنَنصُرُ رُسُلَنَا وَالَّذِینَ آمَنُوا فِی الْحَیَاةِ الدُّنْیَا وَیَوْمَ یَقُومُ الْأَشْهَادُ

Surely We shall help Our Messengers and those who believe, in the life of the world, and upon the day when the witnesses arise. (40: 50)

The Qur’an also asserts:

وَلَقَدْ سَبَقَتْ کَلِمَتُنَا لِعِبَادِنَا الْمُرْسَلِینَ{171} إِنَّهُمْ لَهُمُ الْمَنصُورُونَ{172} وَإِنَّ جُندَنَا لَهُمُ الْغَالِبُونَ{173{

And verily Our word went forth of old unto Our servants, the envoys; assuredly they shall be helped, and Our host-they are the victors. (37: 171-173)

But the view discussed above refutes these principles because although it exonerates all the prophets, messengers, and reformers of the past their God is held responsible.

All these conflicting views pose a ticklish problem. On the one hand, the

p: 211

- Page211 - Society and History

Qur’an presents an optimist view regarding the general course of the universe by repeatedly emphasizing that haqq (truth or right) is the axis of being and man's social existence. Theological philosophy on the basis of its particular principles claims that good invariably overcomes evil, right conquers wrong, and that evil is accidental, relative, and unreal, without any real and independent existence of its own.

On the other hand, a study of the history of the past and the present gives rise to a sense of pessimism regarding the laws governing the universe and appears to affirm that the view held by the pessimists that entire history is a cavalcade of catastrophes, oppressions, exploitations, and violations against right and truth, is not unjustified.

Is there any way out of this dilemma? Either our understanding of the system of realiy and human society is wrong, or we are mistaken in our comprehension of the meaning of the Qur’an by ascribing to it an optimistic world outlook. Or if we are not mistaken with respect to either of them, we have to accept an inherent, unresolvable contradic tion between the reality and the Qur’an.

I have discussed the doubts which arise regarding the system of existence in this context andhave solved them by the grace of God in my book Divine Justice. [1] The doubts which arise regarding the course of history and human society would be dealt with under the title “The Battle between Good and Evil. ” [2] God willing, there we shall state our views for

the resolution of this doubt. I will be delighted to learn the well-reasoned views of other scholars regarding this problem.

--------------------

[1]: Translator’s Note: The author emphasizes the importance of the principle of nature in the Qur’anic conception of man, and regards it as being central to Islamic teachings. The term he uses is “umm al-ma’arif. ”

[2]: Translator’s note: Martyr Mutahhari in his scholarly work “Adl-e Ilahi” (Divine Justice) has offered a convincing solution of this problem.

Islam's 'Philosophy' of History

Criteria

In order to discover the viewpoint of any school of thought regard ing the nature of history we may use certain criteria which help us to exactly determine its approach to different historic movements and events. For this purpose, here I offer some criteria which I consider proper for such a study. Of course, there may possibly be other criteria which I fail to perceive.

Before we take up these criteria and before we apply them for determining the viewpoint of Islam, it is essential to point out that, in our view, there are certain principles laid down in the Qur’an accord ing to which the spiritual and intellectual foundation of society is considered prior to its material bases. The Qur’an has clearly stated the following as a principle:

.. إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ یُغَیِّرُ مَا بِقَوْمٍ حَتَّى یُغَیِّرُواْ مَا بِأَنْفُسِهِمْ..

... God changes not the condition of a people until they change that which is in themselves.... (13: 11)

In other words, the destiny of a people is never changed unless they change their mental and spiritual attitudes. This verse clearly negates the theory of economic determinism of history.

Nevertheless, I shall give an account of the criteria I have deter mined and on their basis evaluate the viewpoint of Islam regarding the nature of history.

1. Strategy of the Call

Every school of thought that has a message for society and calls the people to accept it, has to adopt a

p: 213

- Page213 - Society and History

specific method which is related on the one hand to its principal aims and objectives, and on the other to its viewpoint about the nature of historical movements. The call of a school is meant, firstly, to awaken a particular consciousness in the people, and, secondly, to arouse and mobilize them by using certain specific means of motivation.

An example is the humanist school of Auguste Comte. Comte advocates a kind of "scientific religion," and considers the essence of human evolution to lie in the sphere of the human mind. He believes that the human mind has passed through two stages. The first stage is that of mythology and philosophy. The second is the stage of science. Naturally, he relates all the desirable forms of consciousness to science, and all the means of motivation required for attaining this objective are also related to the scientific spirit.

Another example is that of Marxism which is a revolutionary theory of the working class. The consciousness which it awakens is related to class antagonism. The means of mobilizing the working class lie in stirring its complexes and its feelings of deprivation and victimiza tion.

In addition to their points of view regarding society and history, various schools of thought differ from one another with respect to different types of consciousness they wish to awaken and different types of means employed for bringing about the desired change. Various ideologies, in accordance with their interpretation of history and the course of its development and their outlook of man, also

p: 214

- Page214 - Society and History

vary with regard to their target-audience, the reliance of their strategy on force and their view regarding its moral justifiability.

Some schools like Christianity approve only peaceful way of confrontation among human beings. Force or violence of all forms and under all conditions is disapproved of and considered immoral. Accord ingly, one of its commandments is: "Offer the wicked man no resistance... If anyone hits you on the right cheek, offer him the other as well; if a man tries to take your tunic, lawfully or unlawfully, let him have your cloak as well. "

On the contrary certain other schools of thought, such as the philosophy of Neitzsche, regard power as the sole moral value. To him human perfection lies in power, and his superman is the most powerful among men. According to Neitzsche, Christian morality is the morality of slaves, of the weak and the humiliated and is therefore to be blamed for the arrest of human progress.

Certain other schools of thought associate morality with power and violence, though do not consider every kind of force as moral. According to Marxism, the use of force by the exploiters against the exploited is immoral, because it is intended to preserve the status quo, and causes stagnation. But the application of force by the exploited is moral, for it is used for the purpose of transforming society, leading it to a higher stage.

In other words, there is a continuous conflict in society between two groups: one playing the role of 'thesis' and

p: 215

- Page215 - Society and History

the other working as 'anti-thesis. ' The force acting as 'thesis,' by virtue of its being reactionary, is immoral; the force acting as 'antithesis,' by virtue of being revolutionary and progressive, is moral. It is quite natural that the same force which is now regarded as 'moral,' at a later stage, after coming into conflict with its counter force, would become 'immoral,' as it would then play a reactionary role, and the new rival force would become 'moral. ' Hence morality is relative. What is moral at one stage, is immoral at a higher and advanced stage.

From the viewpoint of Christianity, its relation with the opposite group, judged by it to be opposed to progress and salvation, is that of softness and mildness. Only this kind of relation is morally right. According to Neitzsche, the only moral relation is the relation between the powerful and the weak. There is no moral value higher than power, and nothing more immoral than weakness. There is no sin greater than the sin of being weak.

According to Marxism the relation between two economically opposite classes is nothing but a relationship of antago nism translated into acts of violence. In this relationship, the acts of violence committed by the exploiting class are immoral for being anti progressive, and the acts of violence committed by the exploited are morally justified. The relationship between newly emerging forces and old forces is that of continuous conflict. tand in this conflict morality is invariably on the side of new forces.

All the above-mentioned ideas

p: 216

- Page216 - Society and History

are rejected by Islam. Islam does not confine morality to pacifism, persuasion through mild and peaceful manners, cordiality and love, as preached by Christianity. It holds that occasionally force and power are also moral. For the same reason Islam regards struggle against tyranny and injustice as a sacred duty and under certain conditions makes jihad, which means armed struggle, an obliga tion.

It is evident that Neitzsche's view is absurd, anti-human, and decadent.

The viewpoint of Marxism is based on the supposed mechanism operative in the development of history. Contrary to it, Islam regards violent confrontation with the opposing retrogressive group as a second alternative not the first. The first alternative consists of communication through rational persuasion (al-hikmah) and moral preaching (al-maw’idah):

ادْعُ إِلِى سَبِیلِ رَبِّکَ بِالْحِکْمَةِ وَالْمَوْعِظَةِ الْحَسَنَةِ..

Invite them to the path of God by appealing to reason and moral sense....

Confrontation with the retrogressive forces through acts of violence is morally approved only when the methods of intellectual, moral, and spiritual persuasion have been unsuccessful. That is why the prophets who waged war against their adversaries had tried initially to convey their message through persuasion and preaching and

occasional ly through theological debating. Only when they failed in these attempts, or could attain only partial success, they considered the path of violent confrontation, Jihad, and acts of force as morally justifiable. The main reason of this attitude is that Islam, since its approach is spiritual not materialistic, believes in the wonderful power of rational argument, logical demonstration, and moral persuasion. Just as

p: 217

- Page217 - Society and History

it believes-to use an expression of Marx-in the power of weapons for the purpose of criticism, it also believes in the power of the weapon of criticism, and makes use of it. However, Islam does not consider it the sole weapon that should be used everywhere. The fact that armed struggle against the forces of reaction is permissible in Islam only as a second alternative not the first, and the fact that Islam has a strong faith in the power of reasoning, persuasion, and moral teaching, both point towards the characteristic spiritual outlook of Islam regarding man, and, consequently, society and history.

Thus, we come to know that the relation of a school of thought with its adversaries-whether it is one of sheer persuasion or of sheer conflict, or a two-stage relation consisting firstly of persuasion and secondly of conflict- clearly reveals the faith of any school of thought in the power of logical persuasion, and moral preaching, their effective ness and their limits, and also reveals its outlook regarding history and the role of conflict in the course of history.

Now we shall discuss the other aspect. Let us see what kind of consciousness Islam strives to awaken and what means it employs to invite people for embracing its message.

Islamic consciousness attaches foremost importance to the belief in the Divine origin and resurrection (al-mabda' wa al-ma'ad) , This method of cultivating this consciousness has been used by the Qur’an and, according to it, also by the prophets of the past. The prophets awakened among

p: 218

- Page218 - Society and History

the people the awareness of their origin and goal:

Wherefrom have you come; where have you come; to where are you bound? From where has the world emerged, which course does it pursue, and in which direction is it moving? The primary concern in stilled by the prophets into people's consciousness is the concern and responsibility towards the whole creation and existence. The concern for social responsibility is only a part of the concern for responsibility towards the whole universe and being. It has been pointed out earlier that the Meccan surahs, revealed to the Prophet (S) during the first thirteen years of this mission, bring into focus little except the issues of creation and resurrection. [1]

The Holy Prophet (S) started his mission with the declaration:

قولوا لا إله إلَّا الله تفلحوا

Say, there is no god except God, that you may be delivered.

This was a religious movement which aimed at purifying human belief and thought. It is true that the principle of tawhid (Divine Unity) has many dimensions-if all teachings of Islam are analysed, they are found to be reducible to the principle of tawhid; in the same way, the whole system of Islamic ideas can be constructed on this principle [2] but it should be noted that in the beginning this declaration was meant for no purpose except changing the current polytheistic modes of thinking and worship into monotheistic belief and worship; nor if such a comprehensive objective was upheld would it have been comprehen sible for the people.

When this consciousness, whose roots go down

p: 219

- Page219 - Society and History

deep into the human nature, created a feeling of enthusiasm for defending and spreading this faith in a follower, he would not hesitate to sacrifice his life, property, social position, and children for its sake. The prophets started with what in our days is called "the superstructure," working towards what is called 'the base' or 'infrastructure. ' According to prophetic teachings, man is more committed to faith and ideology than to material interests. In fact, it is this faith and ideology which is the base, and labour, which is a relation with nature, natural resources or society, constitutes the superstructure.

Every religious call, in order to be effective, must be 'prophetic,' that is. it should be accompanied by persistent reminding of origin and resurrection. The prophets mobilized the society by awakening this awareness, and by cultivating this con sciousness, by removing all dust from the face of human conscience and by relying on the notions of God's good pleasure, His sovereignty, His reward and retribution. In thirteen places the Qur’an makes mention of the ridwan (good pleasure) of God. This shows the kind of spiritual motivation employed by Islam for mobilization of the society of believers. This awareness may be called Divine or cosmic consciousness.

Of significance at the second level in Islamic teachings is man's consciousness of his humanity, and realization of the nobility and honour of man's station. In the view of Islam man is not the animal who in the beginning was like all other primates for hundreds of millions of

p: 220

- Page220 - Society and History

years, who survives and has attained this stage of evolution by treacherously eliminating others in the struggle for existence.

On the contrary, he is a being who carries within him the light of Divine Spirit, before whom the angels prostrated, a being to whom are address ed calls from the Divine Throne. Despite all animal propensities toward lust, sensuality, corruption and evil, his being is endowed with a sacred spark which is essentially averse to wickedness bloodshed, falsehood, corruption, meanness, degradation, and humiliation and which resists repression and tyranny. That spark is a manifestation of Divine honour and majesty:

.. وَلِلَّهِ الْعِزَّةُ وَلِرَسُولِهِ وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِینَ..

…Honor belongs to Allah and to His messengers and the believers… (63: 8)

The Prophet (S) has said:

- Page221 - Society and History

--------------------

[1]: Translator’s Note: Martyr Mutahhari could not complete this book as he had originally planned. There is no such heading in the present edition of the book. See note No. 21 below.

[2]: Certain so-called Muslim intellectuals, in a number of commentaries they have written on various Surahs in the Qur’an, totally deny the presence of even a single verse in the Qur’an dealing with resurrection. They say that wherever the word “dunya” (the present world) occurs in the Qur’an it always refers to the lower level of social existence, i. e. the system of discrimination, inequality, and exploitation, and wherever the word “akhirat” (the Hereafter) occurs, it means a “superior system of social existence,” a system which permits no exploitation and discrimination, and which abolishes the institution of private property. If this meaning of “akhirah” is to be accepted, it means that the Qur’an, a thousand years before the emergence of Marx’s materialist philosophy, announce the death of religion and closed its file.

شرف المرء قیامه باللیل و عزه استغناؤه عن الناس

Man’s nobility is in his nightlong vigils, and his honour lies in his being in no need of people.

‘Ali (A) said to his fellowmen during the Battle of Siffin:

الحیاة فی موتکم قاهرین و الموت فی حیاتکم مقهورین

Life is to die victorious, and death is to survive in subjugation.

Al-Husayn ib ‘Ali (A) said:

لا أرى الموت إلَا سعادة و الحیاة مع الظالمین إلا برماً

I can see happiness only in death, and find nothing but agony and disgust in life in the company of tyrants and oppressors.

He also said:

هیهات منَّا الذلة

We and disgrace? How preposterous!

All these saying rely on man’s sense of honor and nobility which are inherent in human nature.

Of significance at the third level in Islamic teachings is awareness of one’s social rights and responsibilities.

p: 221

- Page221 - Society and History

There are several instances in the Qur’an which, by relying on the necessity of fighting for restoration for one’s rights or the rights of others, use this obligation as a means of motivation and mobilization. For an example, we may refer to the following verse of Surat al-Nisa:

وَمَا لَکُمْ لاَ تُقَاتِلُونَ فِی سَبِیلِ اللّهِ وَالْمُسْتَضْعَفِینَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالنِّسَاء وَالْوِلْدَانِ الَّذِینَ یَقُولُونَ رَبَّنَا أَخْرِجْنَا مِنْ هَذِهِ الْقَرْیَةِ الظَّالِمِ أَهْلُهَا وَاجْعَل لَّنَا مِن لَّدُنکَ وَلِیّاً وَاجْعَل لَّنَا مِن لَّدُنکَ نَصِیراً

How should you not fight for the cause of Allah and of the oppressed among the men, women, and children, who say, 'Our Lord, bring us forth from this city whose people are oppressors, and appoint to us a protector from Thee, and appoint to us from Thee a helper'? (4: 75)

This verse relies on two spiritual values for motivating towards jihad. The first value is necessity of struggling in the way of God; the second, human responsibility to. rescue helpless and defenceless human beings out of the clutches of oppressors. In Surat at-Hajj; God says:

أُذِنَ لِلَّذِینَ یُقَاتَلُونَ بِأَنَّهُمْ ظُلِمُوا وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَى نَصْرِهِمْ لَقَدِیرٌ{39} الَّذِینَ أُخْرِجُوا مِن دِیَارِهِمْ بِغَیْرِ حَقٍّ إِلَّا أَن یَقُولُوا رَبُّنَا اللَّهُ وَلَوْلَا دَفْعُ اللَّهِ النَّاسَ بَعْضَهُم بِبَعْضٍ لَّهُدِّمَتْ صَوَامِعُ وَبِیَعٌ وَصَلَوَاتٌ وَمَسَاجِدُ یُذْکَرُ فِیهَا اسْمُ اللَّهِ کَثِیراً وَلَیَنصُرَنَّ اللَّهُ مَن یَنصُرُهُ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَقَوِیٌّ عَزِیزٌ 40}} الَّذِینَ إِن مَّکَّنَّاهُمْ فِی الْأَرْضِ أَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَوُا الزَّکَاةَ وَأَمَرُوا بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَنَهَوْا عَنِ الْمُنکَرِ وَلِلَّهِ عَاقِبَةُ الْأُمُورِ {41}

Sanction is given unto those who fight because they have been wronged –and surely God is

p: 222

- Page222 - Society and History

able to give them victory-who were driven from their homes unjustly only because they said: 'Our Lord is Allah. ' Had it not been for Allah's repelling some men by means of others, cloisters and churches, oratories and mosques, wherein the Name of Allah is oft mentioned, would assuredly have been pulled down. Assuredly Allah helps one who helps Him-surely Allah is All-strong, Almighty-who, if We establish them in the land, establish prayers, pay the poor-due, and bid to honour and forbid dishonour. And to Allah belongs the issue of all affairs. (22: 39-41)

We notice in this verse that the sanction of jihad and defence begins with reference to the rights of those who are permitted to fight. But, at the same time, the underlying philosophy of defence is regarded as a matter over and above and more fundamental than the injustice done to certain people. This philosophy of defence is that if the believers and the faithful do not act and do not rise to wage war against unbelievers, the mosques and other places of worship, which form the heart of the spiritual life of a society, would be demolished, ruined and deserted. In Surat al-Nisa, the Qur’an says:

لاَّ یُحِبُّ اللّهُ الْجَهْرَ بِالسُّوَءِ مِنَ الْقَوْلِ إِلاَّ مَن ظُلِمَ

God likes not the utterance of harsh speech unless one has been wronged.. (4: 148)

Evidently this is a sort of encouragement of the uprising by the oppressed. In the Qur’an after censuring the poets for their extravagantly fanciful ideas, adds:

إِلَّا الَّذِینَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا

p: 223

- Page223 - Society and History

الصَّالِحَاتِ وَذَکَرُوا اللَّهَ کَثِیراً وَانتَصَرُوا مِن بَعْدِ مَا ظُلِمُوا

"Except those who believe, do good deeds, remember Allah much and vindicate (by means of poetry) themselves after they have been wronged. " (26: 227)

Although according to the Qur’an and the Sunnah (the conduct of the Holy Prophet) it is a grave sin to submit to tyranny and it is the duty of everyone to realize one's rights, these things have been mentioned as values having human aspect. The Qur’an does not rely on any psychic obsession nor does it excite jealousy or a carnal desire. For example it never says that such and such group is enjoying a lavish style of life, eating, drinking and making merry; why don't you take its place?

If an attempt is made to seize the property of someone, Islam does not allow the owner to keep quiet on the plea that material goods have no value. Similarly if an attempt is made to violate the honour of a person, it is the duty of that person not to take the matter lightly or keep quiet. According to a tradition, a person who is killed defending his honour or his property is to be regarded as a martyr who has laid down his life for the cause of Allah.

If Islam urges people to defend their property, that does not mean that Islam asks them to amass wealth or to be 

greedy. It only asks them to defend their rights. Similarly when it considers it a duty to

defend one's honour, it does so because it regards chastity as the highest social value and considers man to be the custodian of it.

2. An Ideology's Nomenclature

Every school of thought identifies its followers with a specific name. For example the racial theory is the distinctive mark of the adherents of that theory. When they say " We", they mean the whites. The Marxist theory is the theory of the workers. The followers of this school call themselves workers and identify themselves by this name. When they say "We", they mean workers. The Christians simply ascribe themselves to the person of Christ as if they have no doctrine nor any ideology. Their mark of identification is that they look for Christ and want to join him.

It is a characteristic of Islam that it has not chosen any racial, class, professional, local, regional or individual label to introduce its school and its followers. The adherents of this school are not known by any such designation as the Arabs, the Semites, the poor, the rich, the oppressed, the whites, the blacks, the Asians, the Easterns, the Westerns, the Muhammadans, the Qur’anians, the Qiblites etc. None of the above names represents the real identity of the adherents of Islam.

When the question of the identity of this school and its followers arises, all these names vanish. Only one thing remains, that is the relation between man and Allah. Islam means submission to Allah. The Muslims are an ummah that submits to Allah, to truth and to the

p: 225

- Page225 - Society and History

revelation and the inspiration rising from the horizon of truth and communicated to the heart of the most worthy persons. Then what is the nature of the identity of the Muslims? What label does their religion attach to them and under what banner does it want them to assemble? The answer is Islamic submission to truth.

The criterion of unity that every school approves for its followers is a reliable means of judging its aims and objectives.

It also helps us to understand the outlook of school regarding man, society, and history.

3. Favourable and Unfavourable Conditions for Acceptability

We have said earlier that different schools have different view about the mechanism of the movement of history. One school is of the opinion that the natural mechanism of this movement is the pressure of one class against another class. Another school holds that it is the friction between a reactionary class. Still another school maintains that the real mechanism should be looked for in the pure state of human nature, which is evolutionary and progressive.

Some other schools have some other opinions. Every school in its teachings enumerates such causes, conditions, obstacles and impediments of the movement of history. as are appropriate to its conception of its mechanism The school which believes that the mechanism of the movement of history is the pressure of a class against another, in order to mobilize society and bring it into motion tries to create such pressure if it does not already exist. Marx in some of his works has pointed out that the

p: 226

- Page226 - Society and History

existence of a subjugated and oppressed class is absolutely necessary for the emergence of a class of free people.

At the end of his study he says: " Where does the possibility of liberation for the German nation lie? Our answer is that: We must form a class which is decisively in chains. ' [1] Such an ideology regards reforms as an obstacle in the way of a revolution, because reforms reduce pressure and a reduction in pressure prevents the explosion or at least delays the revolution. In contrast, a school that believes that movement is an intrinsic and essential quality of society never suggests the creation of shackles for any class, for it does not regard pressure as a necessary condition of evolution, nor does it consider reforms as an obstacle in the way of progress.

What are the favourable and unfavourable conditions from the viewpoint of Islam? The Islamic interpretation of these conditions revolves around the nature of the human being. Sometimes the Qur’an stresses the condition of adherence to primordial piety هدىً للمتقین) …”guidance for the God-fearing” [2: 2]). Sometimes it mentions anxiety and apprehension arising from awareness of responsibility vis-à-vis the whole system of existence as a condition (الَّذین یخشون ربهم بالغیب “who fear God in the Unseen,” [21: 49]; or , و خَشِیَ الرحمن بالغیب “who fears the All-merciful in the Unseen,” [36: 11]). Sometimes it mentions the condition that the God-given nature within one should have remained intact and alive: لِینذِرَ من کان حیَّاً “to warn him who is

p: 227

- Page227 - Society and History

alive” (36: 70). Thus the essential conditions according to Islam for acceptance of its call are piety, anxiety and apprehension arising out of a sense of res ponsibility towards the system of creation, and intact survival of one's God-given nature.

In opposition to these conditions are such spiritual and moral vices as إثم القلب “sinfulness of the heart,” (2: 283) ; رَین القلب “rusting of the heart,” (83: 14) ; sealing of the heart (2: 7) , inner blindness or loss of sight (22: 46) ; deafness of the heart (41: 44) ; corruption of the book of the soul (91: 10) ; blind adherence to the practices of ancestors (43: 23) ; personality cult or hero worship (33: 63) ; reliance on surmise. and conjecture (6: 116) , and so on. Extravagance, affluence, and habitual luxury are also regarded as deterrents, because they strengthen the animal qualities in man and transform him into a beast and even a predator. According to the Qur’an, these factors impede advancement towards the welfare of the society and are injurious to its development.

According to the Islamic teachings, young people as compared to the aged, and the poor as compared to the affluent, are more receptive to the teachings of Islam; since the youth due to their young age escape psychological pollution and their nature is purer; and the poor also are purer because their souls are not distorted by luxury and wealth.

These positive and negative conditions for the acceptability of Islam affirm that the mechanism of social and historical change sugges ted by the Qur’an is more spiritual-psychological in nature than materialistic and economic.

--------------------

[1]: ‘Allamah Tabatabai, al-Mizan, see the commentary on the last verse of Surat Al-Imran.

4. Rise and Fall of Societies

point

Every sociological

p: 228

- Page228 - Society and History

school usually deals with the causes of the rise and progress of societies and reasons of their degeneration and decline. The viewpoint of a school regarding the main factors of progress or decline, indicates its approach to society and history and their movement towards development and decline.

The Holy Qur’an, especially with reference to the stories and anecdotes related to these matters, explains its view. We have to see whether the Qur’an interprets the causes of change in terms of the so -called infrastructure or in terms of the superstructure. To be more precise, we have to know what things' are considered by the Qur’an as the basis and what matters are regarded as constituting the superstruc ture. Does the Qur’an emphasize the material and economic factors as being basic, or does it attach basic importance to matters pertaining to faith and morality? Or does it consider all the factors combined to gether responsible for the rise and fall of a society without giving pri onty to anyone of them?

The Qur’an, on the whole, enumerates four factors influencing the rise and fall of a society. In passing, I will give a brief account of these factors.

A. Justice and Injustice

This notion finds reflection in many verses of the Qur’an. One of them is the fourth verse of Surat al-Qasas, which I have already quoted in the context of the 'verse of oppression':

إِنَّ فِرْعَوْنَ عَلَا فِی الْأَرْضِ وَجَعَلَ أَهْلَهَا شِیَعاً یَسْتَضْعِفُ طَائِفَةً مِّنْهُمْ یُذَبِّحُ أَبْنَاءهُمْ وَیَسْتَحْیِی نِسَاءهُمْ إِنَّهُ کَانَ مِنَ الْمُفْسِدِینَ

Verily Pharaoh exalted himself in the land and divided

p: 229

- Page229 - Society and History

its inhabitants into castes, oppressing one party of them, slaughtering their sons, and sparing their women. Verily, he was of those who work corruption. (28: 4)

This holy verse first describes Pharaoh's lust for power and superiority and his claim to divinity, which led him to treat others as slaves. His policy of discrimination had divided them into mutually conflicting groups. He had humiliated a particular group of his people, killing their sons and sparing their women (for serving Pharaoh and his clique). The Qur’an mentions him as a ‘mufsid’ (one who corrupts). Evidently the sentence إنَهُ کانَ من المفسدین ‘Verily, he was of those who corrupt,’ is intended to condemn such offences against society which demolish its very foundations.

B. Unity and Disunity

In the Surat Al 'Imran , the verse 103 lays down a clear command to unite on the basis of faith and to hold on to the bond of God, and prohibits disunity and division. In a following verse (3: 105) the believers are asked again not to behave like their predecessors [Jews and Christians] who quarrelled with one another and divided. Quite similar to it is the verse 153 in Surat al- 'An 'am. In the same surah, verse 65 states:

قُلْ هُوَ الْقَادِرُ عَلَى أَن یَبْعَثَ عَلَیْکُمْ عَذَاباً مِّن فَوْقِکُمْ أَوْ مِن تَحْتِ أَرْجُلِکُمْ أَوْ یَلْبِسَکُمْ شِیَعاً وَیُذِیقَ بَعْضَکُم بَأْسَ بَعْضٍ..

Say, He is able to send forth upon you chastisement, from above you or from under your feet, or to confuse you in sects and make you taste the violence of one

p: 230

- Page230 - Society and History

another… (6: 65)

In the Surat al-‘Anfal, the verse 46 declares:

.. وَلاَ تَنَازَعُواْ فَتَفْشَلُواْ وَتَذْهَبَ رِیحُکُمْ..

…Do not quarrel with one another for then you will be weak and your power will depart from you… (8: 46)

C. Practice or Neglect of the Principle of al-‘Amr bi al-Ma’ruf wa al-Nahy ‘an al-Munkar

The Qur’an puts great emphasis on the duty of of al-‘Amr bi al-Ma’ruf wa al-Nahy ‘an al-Munkar (enjoining right conduct and forbidding indecency). An evident inference that may be drawn from one of its verses is that negligence of this great duty on the part of a nation ultimately results in its destruction and doom. This is verse 79 in Surat al-Ma’idah which explains that one of the reasons for the denial of Divine mercy and compassion to the infidels of Bani Israel was their nonobservance of the duty to prohibit others from vices:

کَانُواْ لاَ یَتَنَاهَوْنَ عَن مُّنکَرٍ فَعَلُوهُ لَبِئْسَ مَا کَانُواْ یَفْعَلُونَ

They forbade not one another any dishonor they commited; surely evil were the things they did. (5: 79).

In reliable Islamic traditions there are ample references to the advantages of observance and perils of abandonment of the duty of enjoining right conduct and forbidding indecency. However, we abstain from quoting them here for the sake of brevity.

D. Moral Corruption and Degeneration

There are various verses in the Qur’an in this context also. In a series of verses luxury and opulence are regarded to be the cause of destruction and ruin. [1] There are also a number of verses in which the word "zulm” (cruelty, injustice, oppression, tyranny) occurs. In Qur’anic terminology this word does not specifically mean violation of the rights of an individual

 or group by other individual or group. It also includes injustice to one's own self', as well as injustice of a nation to itself. Actually the word zulm is used in the Qur’an in a general sense.

Any kind of deviation from the right path of humanness is injustice, and includes all acts of injustice to others as well as all acts of impro priety, corruption, perversion and immorality. This word is more often used in the Qur’an in the second sense (i. e. , moral deviation). Such verses which consider zulm in its general sense as the main cause of destruction and ruin of nations are very numerous. It is beyond the scope of the present work to discuss them here.

Taking in view all these criteria as a whole, we can grasp the view of the Qur’an regarding the basis of society and that of history. The Qur’an allots a decisive and determining role to most of the factors which some consider as superstructural.

--------------------

[1]: Andre Peter, op. cit. , p. 35 (the text and the footnote). Here we come to know that the viewpoint of Marxism which hols that only the acts of violence of the oppressed class are moral, because they accelerate the course of social evolution, while the same kind of acts by the oppressing class are immoral, because they cause stagnation, is not defendable. It means that, in accordance with the views of this school, the exercise of pressure by the oppressors is as moral and effective in the course of social evolution as violence by the oppressed. The only difference between them being with regard to their orientation: one is directed towards the past and the other towards the future – not with regard to their effective role in social development. Evidently the retrogressive or progressive orientation cannot solely determine the morality or immorality of an act, without considering the motivate behind the act, for judging its morality, and such a position, in the view of Marxism, amounts to a kind of idealism.

Evolution and Change in History

point

Whatever has been discussed so far concerns one of the two , most important problems of history, i. e. , nature of history whether it is materialistic or not. The other important problem concerns change and evolution in human history.

We know that social life is not confined to man alone. Some other living creatures also have social life to some extent. They organize their lives on the basis of cooperation, division of labour, and sharing of responsibilities according to set rules and regulations.

We all know that the honeybee is

p: 232

- Page232 - Society and History

such a creature. But there is a basic difference between the social existence of man and that of other animals; the pattern of their social life always remains fixed and static. Any evolution and change do not take place in the system of their existence, or in the words of Morris Metterlink, in their culture, if the term 'culture' can be used for animals. On the contrary, social life of man is ever changing and dynamic. There is not just a movement, but even an acceleration; i. e. the rate of movement increases with time.

Thus the history of human social existence has different periods which are dis tinguished from one another in various aspects. For instance there are different periods according to the means of livelihood: the period of hunting, the period of cultivation, and the period of industrialization. According to economic system the different periods may be classified as the period of communism, the period of slavery, the period of feu dalism, the period of capitalism, and the period of socialism. According to political system, we have the period of tribal rule, the period of despotic monarchy, the period of aristocracy, and the period of democracy; according to sex, the period of matriarchy, and the period of patriarchy. In the same way we may have other classifications from the viewpoint of other aspects.

Why isn't such a change exhibited in the social life of other animals? What is the secret of this change, and what is the main factor responsible for transition of

p: 233

- Page233 - Society and History

man from one social phase to another? In other words, what is that human faculty that propels human exis tence forward, and which is not possessed by the animals? How does this transition and advancement occur, what are the laws that govern it, and by what mechanism is it controlled?

There is a question which is usually raised at this point by the philosophers of history, whether evolution and progress are real? In other words, are the changes that have been taking place in the social life of man throughout history actually in the direction of progress and evolution? What are the criteria of evolution?

Some are skeptical that these changes may be regarded as progres sive and evolutionary, and their views are discussed in related books. [1] And some others regard movement of history as cyclic, claiming that history starts from a point and after passing through certain phases returns again to the same point. 'Once again,' in their view, is the eternal cry of history.

For example, in the beginning a coarse tribal system is established by certain venturesome and determined nomadic people, which gradual ly evolves into aristocracy. The monopoly of aristocrats results in a popular uprising and giving birth to democracy. The chaos and anarchy created by unlimited and unchecked freedom in the democratic system once again leads to the re-emergence of despotism, helped by a tribal spirit.

Here we do not wish to enter an elaborate discussion on this subject and postpone it to some other occasion. However, for the pur pose of the

p: 234

- Page234 - Society and History

present study, we assume that the movement and course of history are on the whole progressive, and proceed accordingly.

Nevertheless, it is essential to remind here that all those who consider the movement of history to be in the general direction of progress acknowledge the fact that by no means the future is better necessarily than the past for all societies under all conditions; neither do they say that the course of societies is always marked by progress without any interruptions or set-back. Undeniably, societies become stagnant, decadent, and retrogressive. They have the tendency of inclin ing towards the right or the left and consequently are subject to decline and fall. All that is meant is that the human society on the whole is passing through an evolutionary course.

In the books on philosophy of history the problem regarding the dynamics of history and the motivating factors responsible for social progress is usually formulated in a manner which is revealed to be defective on some reflection. In the following sections the views usually advanced on this issue will be discussed.

1. The Racial Theory

According to this theory, certain races are mainly responsible for the advancement of history. Some races have the ability of creating culture and civilization, while others do not possess such talents. Some races contribute to science, philosophy, arts, crafts, and morality, while others are merely consumers of these products.

It is concluded that there exists some kind of division of work between the races. The races endowed with aptitude for knowledge, learning, and statecraft, and

p: 235

- Page235 - Society and History

with ability to create arts, culture, crafts, and technology should be engaged in these higher, sophisticated and refined human activities; while the races not endowed with such talents should be excused from these activities and instead be engaged in hard physical labour and menial tasks which do not need refinement of thought and taste. Aristotle, who holds this view regarding racial differences, justifies the enslavement of certain races by other races on the same grounds.

- Page236 - Society and History

--------------------

[1]: Refer to 11: 116, 21: 13, 23: 33, 64.

Some thinkers believe that only particular races are able to lead the course of history. For example, the northern races being superior to the southern races have been responsible for the advancement of cultures. Count Gobino, the famous French philosopher who was for three years French ambassador to Iran about hundred years ago, believed in this theory.

2. The Geographical Theory

According to this theory, the main factor responsible for creating civilization and culture and for development of industry is physical environment. Moderate temperaments and strong minds develop in regions of temperate climate. In the beginning of his book, "al-Qanun," Ibn Sina has elaborately discussed the effect of physical environmental factor on the modes of thought, taste, sensibility and other psycho logical aspects of human personality.

According to this theory, the factor that directs the advancement of history is not of racial origin or heredity. It is not true that a certain race regardless of its region or environment is the maker of history and responsible for its advancement and a certain other race whatever its physical environment lacks such abilities. In fact,

p: 236

- Page236 - Society and History

the differences of races are caused by different environments. Moreover, with displace ment and migration of races capacities are also redistributed. Thus particular regional and geographical factors are responsible in the main for the advancement and revitalization of civilizations. Montesquieu, the French sociologist of the seventeenth century, supports this point of view in his famous book De l'ésprit des lois (The Spirit of the Laws).

3. The Theory of the Role of Genius or Heroes

According to this theory, all scientific, political, economic, technological, and moral changes and developments throughout history are brought about. by men of genius. The difference between human beings and other animals is that from a biological point of view all other animals are equal in respect of natural capacities. There is at least no remarkable difference among the individuals of a certain species.

In contrast, human individuals bear vast differences regarding their capacities and talents. The geniuses of every society are extra ordinary individuals of exceptional abilities endowed with extraordinary powers of intellect, sensibility, will, and creativity. Whenever such individuals emerge in a society they contribute to its advancement taking it ahead scientifically, technically, morally, militarily, and politically. According to this theory, majority of individuals lack initiative and creativity. They are simply followers and consumers of the Ideas and the products of the industry of others.

But there always exists a minority of creative individuals in almost all societies who act as leaders, forerunners, innovators, and inventors, who produce new Ideas, new methods, and new technologies. They are the people who steer society in the forward direction and enable it

p: 237

- Page237 - Society and History

to enter into a new higher phase. Carlyle, the famous English thinker in his well-known book Heroes, Hero worship and the Heroic in History, starting his book with the role of the Holy Prophet (S) , holds such a view.

In Carlyle's view, every nation has one or more historical persona lities in whom the whole history of a nation is reflected. Or more precisely, It may be said that the history of a nation reflects the personality and genius of one or more of its heroes. For instance, the history of Islam mirrors the personality of the Holy Prophet (S) ; the history of modern France mirrors the personality of Napoleon and certain other great men, and the last sixty years of the history of Soviet Russia mirror the personality of Lenin.

4. The Economic Theory

According to this theory, economy is the motivating factor of history. All social and historical modes of every nation, including the cultural, religious, political, military and social aspects, reflect the mode and relations of production of a society. Any change in the economic infrastructure of the society totally transforms it and steers it forward.

The men of genius, whose role was discussed earlier, are nothing but the expressions of economic, political, and social needs of society; and these needs in their turn are the effects of changes in the tools of production. Karl Marx, and in general all Marxists, and occasionally a number of non-Marxists, subscribe to this view. This is probably the most dominant theory of our times.

5. The Religious Theory

According to this

p: 238

- Page238 - Society and History

theory, all worldly incidents have Divine origin and are governed by God's consummate Wisdom. All evolutions and changes occurring in history are manifestations of the Divine Will and God's omniscient wisdom. Thus whatever moves history forward and transforms it is the Will of God. The drama of history is written and directed by the sacred Will of God. Bossuet, the famous historian and patriarch, who acted as the tutor to Louis the Fifteenth, supports this view.

These are the main theories that are usually discussed in the books of philosophy of history as the motivating forces or causes of history.

In my view this kind of formulation of the problem is not correct and there is a confusion of issues. Most of these theories are not prop erly related to the motivating cause of history, which we want to discover. For instance, the racial theory is a sociological hypothesis, which may be proposed in relation to the question whether or not all races have-or at least could have had-the same kind of hereditary talents and are of equal level. If they are equal according to natural talents, all the races have an equal share in directing the movement of history. And if they are not equally talented, only some races have played, and could have played, the role of advancing history.

Then it seems proper to mention this theory in this context. Nevertheless the secret of the philosophy of history remains in darkness: it does not make any difference for the purpose of

p: 239

- Page239 - Society and History

solution whether we suppose that only a single race has been responsible for the evolution of history or if all human races participated in the process of change and advance ment, because in both the cases it does not answer the question why man, or a race of men, undergoes this type of change and evolution while no such changes occur in the lives of animals. Where does the secret lie? Whether a single race is instrumental in the movement of history or if all the races participate in this process, makes no difference at all for answering this question.

Similar is the case with the geographical theory. It is useful in the context of the sociological problem regarding the role of regional environment in the development of man's intellectual, cultural, aes thetic and physiological faculties. Some environments hold the human being at or near the level of animals, but in other environments the distinction of man from animals is made more prominent and pro nounced. According to this theory, history's movement is confined to the people of a specific region; in other regimes life remains static and unchanged like that of animals. But the main question still remains unanswered, since the honeybee and all other gregarious animals living in such geographically superior regions and zones remain unaffected by the movement of history. Then what is the main factor responsible for this disparity in the lives of the two different types of living beings, one of which remains static and unchanged whereas the other

p: 240

- Page240 - Society and History

type under goes unceasing change from one phase to another?

The most irrelevant among these theories is the theory of the Divine origin of history, because it is not history alone which manifests the Divine Will. The whole universe, from its beginning to the end, with all its myriads of causes and effects and all positive and negative con ditions, mirrors the Divine Will. The relation of the Divine Will is the same with all causes and phenomena of the universe. In the same way as the ever-changing and ever- evolving life of the human being manifests the Divine Will, so also the static and monotonous life of the honeybee manifests the Will of God. Hence this theory fails to unfold the mystery why the Divine Will created and moulded human life in a pattern which is ever-changing and evolving, and why it created other beings according to a static pattern which makes them unable to change.

The economic theory of history also lacks in technical and methodical precision. It has not been formulated in a correct way. The way it is formulated, it merely throws light on the nature of history as materialistic and economic, and all the other social modes are regarded as the accidents of this substance of history. According to it, if any change takes place in the economic foundation of a society, the transformation of all other social modes is also accompanied. But the theory is based on "if". The main question, however, remains un answered.

Supposing that economy is the

p: 241

- Page241 - Society and History

foundation of society, "if" economic infrastructure changes, the whole society also changes with it. But the question as to when and under what circumstances and by means of which factors the infrastructure changes followed by changes in the superstructures, is not touched. In other words, to say that economy is the basis is not sufficient to explain the dynamic and changing character of society. Instead of saying that society is the base, the advocates of this theory may properly formulate their position in this manner: by stating that economy is the motivating factor of history, which is materialistic in essence; the contradiction between the economic infrastructure and the social superstructure (or between the two tiers of the infrastructure, viz. the tools of production and the relations of production) is the moving force that pushes history for ward.

There is no doubt that this is what the advocates of the above mentioned view mean when they say that economy is the moving force of history. What they mean to assert is that all changes in history originate from internal contradiction between the tools of production and the relations of production. But here we are only concerned with proper formulation of the theory, not with conjecturing the inner purpose and objective of its advocates.

The theory of the role of genius in history, regardless of its truth, IS directly relevant to philosophy of history and the question of motivating factor of history.

Thus until now we have arrived at two views regarding the moving force

of history. One is the theory of heroes, which considers history to be a product of certain individuals, and claims that the majority of members of society lack creativeness and power of initiative. If a society consisted of such individuals alone, even the minutest change is unlikely to occur in society.

But a few individuals with God- gifted genius, when they appear on the social scene take initiative draw plans, make bold resolutions, and demonstrate extraordinary resistance and force of will, drawing multitudes of ordinary folk behind them for realizing the desirable change. The personality of these heroes is purely a product of exceptional natural and hereditary processes. Social conditions and material requirements of a society do not play any effective role in creating and moulding these personalities.

The second is the theory of contradiction between the social infrastructure and superstructure, or the theory of economic causation which has been already referred to.

6. The Theory of Nature

There is a third theory which may be called 'the theory of human nature. ' According to it, man is endowed with certain inherent quali ties, which account for the evolutionary character of social life. One of such qualities is the capacity for collecting and preserving the expe riences of life. Whatever has been attained through experience is retained to provide the basis for subsequent experiences.

Another is man's capacity of learning through speech and writing. Experiences and attainments of others are communicated through speech and, on a higher level, through writing. Experiences of a generation, through oral narration and writing, are preserved

p: 243

- Page243 - Society and History

for the later generations. In this way, collective experience is accumulated with. the. passage of time. This is the reason why the Qur’an gives especial Importance to the gifts of articulate speech and the pen by making a prominent mention of them:

الرَّحْمَنُ{1} عَلَّمَ الْقُرْآنَ{2} خَلَقَ الْإِنسَانَ{3} عَلَّمَهُ الْبَیَانَ{4{

The Beneficent has taught the Qur’an. He created the human being and He has taught him articulable utterance. (55: 1-4).

اقْرَأْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّکَ الَّذِی خَلَقَ{1} خَلَقَ الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍ{2} اقْرَأْ وَرَبُّکَ الْأَکْرَمُ{3} الَّذِی عَلَّمَ بِالْقَلَمِ{4{

Read: In the Name of Thy Lord, Who created, created the human being from a blood-clot. Read: And thy Lord is the Most Bounteous, Who taught by the pen. (96: 1-4).

The third quality of man is that he is endowed with the power of reason and inventiveness. This mysterious quality bestows upon him the powers of creativity and invention which are the manifestation of Divine creativity. The fourth quality is' his natural tendency for innova tion. It means that man not only possesses the ability of invention and creation which he translates into -action whenever a necessity arises, but the urge for creation and invention is ingrained in his nature.

The capacity to preserve and store experiences, in addition to the capacity to exchange and communicate experiences with others, and the capacity for creation and his natural urge for invention and innova tion are the forces that continually drive man towards progress. The other animals neither possess the capacity of preserving experiences nor the capacity of transmitting and communicating their experiences [1] neither the

p: 244

- Page244 - Society and History

capacity to create and invent, nor the urge for innovation. None of these qualities which characterize the human intellect exist in the animals. It is because of these qualities that man advances and the animals remain static. Now we shall critically examine these theories in detail.

The Role of Personality in History

Some people have claimed that "history is a battle between genius and ordinariness. " It means that common and average people always favour the existing situation which they are used to, whereas men of genius want to alter the existing condition into a more developed and advanced one. Carlyle claims that history starts with the accounts of the lives of great men and heroes.

This viewpoint is actually based on two assumptions. First, that the society itself lacks any nature and personality. The composition of society is not a real synthesis of its members. Individuals are indepen dent of one another. The interaction among individuals does not create any social spirit; any real, synthetic entity which has its own specific nature, personality, and laws does not come into existence. There are merely individuals and individual psychologies.

The relation among human individuals in a society regarding their independence from one another is like the relation among the trees in a forest. Social phenom ena are nothing but the sum total of individual events in the lives of individuals. According to this view the causes which govern society are determined by accidents and conflicts taking place in individual lives; there are no general and universal laws of causation.

The second assumption is

p: 245

- Page245 - Society and History

that human individuals are created with different and divergent characteristics. In spite of the fact that human individuals are social beings or rational animals, almost all human beings lack originality and creativity. The majority are simply consumers of culture and not its producers. The only difference between animals and such people is that the animals cannot be even consumers. The spirit of this majority is one of imitating, following, and worshipping their heroes.

But a very small minority of human beings consists of heroes, geniuses, extraordinary supernormal individuals, who are independent in thought, creative and inventive, with a strong will power, who stand out distinct from the majority, as if they belong to a higher order of beings from a different world. Had it not been for the scientific intel lectual, philosophical, mystical, moral, political, social, technical and artistic geniuses, humanity would have remained in a primitive state and would not have taken a single step toward advancement.

I personally consider both of these assumptions as vulnerable. The first one is vulnerable for the reason mentioned earlier. In the discus sion' on society I have proved that society itself possesses its own specific nature, personality and laws according to which it functions. These laws in themselves are progressive and evolutionary by nature. Hence this hypothesis should be discarded. Now we have to see whether an individual can play any role in the development of society which has its own nature, personality and laws and pursues its course of evolution according to them.

We shall

 discuss this matter afterwards. Admitting the differences among individuals, the second assumption is also incorrect, as it is unjustifiable to say that only heroes and geniuses possess the power of creation and the majority of people are merely passive consumers of culture or civilization. All human individuals, more or less, possess innovative and creative talents; on account of these talents all individuals, or at least a majority of them, participate m creative, productive, and innovative' activities, however small their share may be as compared to that of geniuses.

--------------------

[1]: See E. H. Carr, What is History?. See also Will Durant, Studies in History, The Pleasures of Philosophy, pp. 291-312.

Contrary to this theory that personalities make history is another view which maintains that history makes personalities, not' vice versa. It means that the objective needs of a society are responsible for creat ing personalities.

Montesquieu has said, "Great men and important events are the signs and results of greater and lengthier processes. " Hegel said "Great men do not give birth to history but act as midwives. " Great men are 'signs' not 'agents. ' Some like Durkheim who believe in the independent essence of society hold that human individuals in themselves have absolutely no personality. They acquire their whole personality from society. Individuals and personalities are nothing but expressions and manifestations of the social spirit, and in the words of Mahmud Shabis tari, are just as "holes of a niche screen through which the social spirit emanates. "

Others like Marx put social labour at the centre of human sociol ogy, and consider society prior to man's social consciousness '. They regard the consciousness of individuals as the expression and

manifesta tion of material social needs. According to their view, personalities are manifestations and expressions of the material and economic needs of a society… [1]

--------------------

[1]: Among certain animal species, at the level of routine existence, not at the level of scientific consciousness, a kind of transfer of learning exists. For instance, the Holy Qur’an refers to the story of the ant and Solomon in verse 27: 18.

Note by the Publisher of the Book

It is a matter of obvious regret that the manuscript of Martyr Mutahhari ends at this point. It is obvious that the author had in his mind many other ideas which he could not enter. He achieved this cherished desire to obtain martyrdom in the way of God.

We hope, in future, to present a more complete discussion with the help of his scattered notes, added them to the future editions of the book.