It has been a concern for centuries that Muslims irrespective of the
sect, group or country they belong to, have left Islam. As a matter of
fact this is true for the whole MUSLIM Nation.
Of course it is true, but has any one ever thought about the reasons
for it? How come the whole nation has left Islam? It was not for a few
days, but centuries! why is all this? This much is clear that we have to
think about it and try to analyze the prevailing situation.
You ask a communist about the definition of "Communism", he will
answer you in clear, distinct, and definite words. You ask the question
repeatedly to several communists, every one will have the same
answer. In the light of their answers, it will not be difficult
to assess if somebody is a communist or not, and whether a nation is
still communist or not and whether a nation is still communist or has
Similarly you ask a socialist about "Socialism" , they will also give
you a definitive answer. In the light of their answer you
can easily judge if an individual or a nation is still socialist or
Likewise, if you ask a western democrat about "Democracy", he
will be able to give you a definitive answer.
Now if you ask a Muslim about Islam, he will give you a
certain reply. When you ask the same question to different Muslims you
will be surprised to note that every one's answer is different. This is
true even for religious scholars let alone the common person. Every one
of the scholars gives a different answer. This contention is not all
imaginary, it has been proven.
In 1953, in Punjab, a province in Pakistan, riots took place in
connection with "Tehrik Khatam-e-Nabuwwat" (Movement for Last Nabuwwat
of Mohammed p.b.u.h). An investigation committee was set-up by the
government which was commonly known as Munir Committee. It asked
religious scholars of different Muslim sects, how would they define a
Muslim. This report has been published and is available. Some of these
scholars refused to answer the question saying that they would need a
lot of time and pages to answer it. The committee report said the
following about them:
"Amongst these scholars even two did not have the same
(English Report pg. 218)
You don't have to accept this report. You can yourself ask the
religious scholars of different Muslim sects the definition of "Muslim"
and "Islam". The replies will themselves convince you of the correctness
of the Munir Report.
It is imperative that when we say the Muslims have left Islam, we
should establish a definitive concept of Islam. If we don't, it is
meaningless to say that Muslims have left Islam.
This is the primary reason that the Muslims all over are unable to
adopt Islam in-spite of their agreeing that they are no longer good
Muslims. They do not fully comprehend what they have left and
what they should do to remedy the situation. We would like to clarify
here that every Muslim sect may be able to define "Islam" as their sect
considers it to be, but the Islam which should be common to the Muslim
Nation and by virtue of which they are known as the Muslim Nation; none
will be able to define.
We are sure, at this stage you must be wondering that although this
question is of fundamental importance, you have never thought about it.
Further, that you are an ordinary person and your knowledge of "Al
Deen" (Islam) is limited and therefore you are unable to answer such
a question. At the same time you must be wondering what has happened to
our religious scholars that even they could not give a unified reply and
in-spite of it they have been able to keep their position in Muslim
Nation. How come they have been able to satisfy the Muslims about
It needs a special technique; and that is creation and use of certain
terminology about which the people are convinced that it is "Holy" .
These so called scholars keep these terms a little vague, that is, clear
and concrete concepts attached to these terms are never defined. On
certain occasions they would use a particular term and that will be
that. For example, one of the fundamental terms is "Islam"
itself. Every day you hear them saying "Islam orders you to do
this or that" or "Islam says this” or “Islam desires you
to do the following ......”. "Islam" is not a name of an individual
that one can attribute a saying to ... They must give reference to any
document from which one can find out who has given this order or whose
interpretation is it! They will never do that; they will mostly keep it
vague. The reason being that mostly it will be their own decision which
they have presented in the name of Islam or sometimes it will be the
decision of their own sect. Of course the decision of any particular
sect cannot be considered as the decision of Islam. They will always
keep this aspect vague.
Similarly there are terms like "Islam Shariat (Islamic
Jurisprudence)" or "Shariat-e-Haqqa (True Jurisprudence)". Every
day one hears statements such as "This is the order of Shariat"
or "This decision is as per Shariat" or "This is not allowed by
Shariat" etc. etc. You must be assuming these to be decisions as per
Islam but actually these are decisions of any one of the sects. Every
one of our sects have their own Shariat. The one which you may want to
call "Islamic Shariat", that is, the one which all Muslims as one nation
agree to be Islamic, does not exist today.
Another of these terms is the "Sunna of Rasool-Allah
(p.b.u.h.)”, which means the way the Last Messenger of Allah (p.b.u.h.)
practiced Islam. You must be thinking that this has to be agreed upon by
everyone to be the same since the Last Messenger of Allah, whose name
was Mohammed (p.b.u.h.). was an individual, lived in this world only
once and therefore practiced Islam only once. But it was not so. As a
matter of fact each one of the sects have their own “Sunna of
Rasool-Allah (p.b.u.h.)”; so much so that the definition of the term
“Sunna” is also different among them.
Similarly there are many terms in use since centuries which have got
similar treatment from these sects. Since politics have become very
important in recent times, therefore instead of old terms, which are
mostly associated with “Religion", new terms have been
created. One of these terms is "Aqamat-e-Deen", meaning establishment of
Deen. This term has been publicized a lot but nobody, has yet explained
what does it mean in definitive words. If the flag bearers of this term
explain what do they mean by this term, the religious scholars of the
other sects will protest disagreeing with the definition of Deen and
cause chaos. Therefore, the promoters of this term consider it in their
interest to keep this term vague.
Now a days the word "Nizam", (system) has become more popular in
place of "Deen". Based on it, a term "Islamic Nizam" has been
floated. We have already seen that the term "Islam" itself does
not carry a definite meaning, therefore the term "Islamic Nizam"
has not been explained nor it can be.
The fact is that in modern day politics, creation and adoption of
slogans has a purpose of its own. Our religious scholars use
similar slogans for their purposes. The idea is to use words that do not
carry a clear concept, but which could be made popular
easily and thus could be used as a weapon against the opposition. If you
ponder on it a little deeply you will realize that these slogans serve
the same purpose as was served by the hocus pocus words such as
"Abracadabra" in the ancient age of magic. The magical words did
not mean anything by themselves but, they were supposed to carry hidden
meanings. For example, if you repeat a word so many times, you were told
that your enemy will be overpowered or things like that.
Just as a slogan looses its charm and magical powers after
repeated use, so do the religious terms. The weight and effect
previously carried by terms like "Aqamat-e-Deen", (Establishment
of Deen), or "Hakoomat-e-Illahia", (Government of Allah), or "Islamic
Nizam" is not carried by them any more. Therefore there was need for
a new term; and that is "Nizam-e-Mustafa (p.b.u.h.)”
(System of Mustafa p.b.u.h.). Since all Muslims have a very special
regard for their beloved Nabi (p.b.u.h.) in their hearts, hence this
term is more attractive and effective for most of the people. You must
have noticed that even this term has been kept vague since the concept
attached to it varies from sect to sect just like”Sunna of Rasool Allah
(p.b.u.h.)". Leaving the different sects beside, the two major sub-sects
of Sunni Muslims in the Indian Subcontinent, Barelawi and Deobandi have
their own concepts of the Sunna. In the present turmoil (late 70' s ),
Barelawi sect is represented by Maulana Noorani and the Deobandi sect is
represented by Mufti Mehmood. They don't even agree on the personality
of Mustafa (p.b.u.h.), let alone "Nizam-e-Mustafa (p.b.u.h.)".
Therefore it is to the political advantage of both of these to keep the
term "Nizam-e-Mustafa (p.b.u.h.)" vague. Under these
circumstances, it is impossible to have a clear concept of this
"Nizam" which could be unanimously acceptable to all of the sects
As another examples, recently two articles have been published in the
daily Nawa-e-Waqt titled `What is Nizam-e-Mustafa (p.b.u.h.)".
One of these articles describes the Nizam as:
“A system of virtuous equality.... a political system of
security and justice ....an economic system of justice and
provision .... a spiritual system of meditation thinking, and
remembering Allah .... and a social system of brotherhood"
In the other article, the Nizam is explained as:
"Universal Knowledge........Godly Worship ..... Cleanliness of
Behavior..... Great Politics...... Knowledge due to fear of God......
and extreme intellect due to fear of God”
These words will give you an indication of the delicate and
superficial covers which are used, intentionally or
unintentionally, to hide the definitive concept of the Islamic System.
This is done, because by explaining the system in a clear
and understandable way, their claims that all of the sects are unanimous
in this respect, may be shattered. This unsuccessful trial to hide the
truth is very similar to the one that took place once before in
In 1951, twenty one Muslim religious scholars from different
sects passed a unanimous resolution that all Government laws
in Pakistan should be based on "The Book (Holy Quran)
and Sunna". After a lapse of twenty years one of the
main supporters of the resolution had to declare:
"It is impossible to make a set of public laws as per The Book and
the Sunna which all Muslim sects will unanimously accept as
This declaration broke up the so called unanimity of their demand,
which they have been presenting since 1951 as Islamic.
The past twenty five years or so have been generally spent
on theoretical discussions, it seems that now this issue
will be put to test practically. In the forthcoming elections in
October, 1977, if the government control is handed over to the flag
bearers of the “Nizam-e-Mustafa (p.b.u.h.)”, the foremost task will be
the formation of the unanimous set of public laws. Obviously these
different sects will not be able to agree on any such laws. One
wonders what will happen then ?
The Pakistan Movement was established on two principles :
1. The two nation theory
2. The Pakistan Ideology, that is establishment of an
independent state based on Islam.
The Congress party (the party in British India which opposed creation
of an independent Muslim State) and their supporters all over the
world used to say, that on these principles no one can
make a state, and that gone are the times when the states could be
created on religious basis; in today's world no one can do
this any more.
On the tragedy of fall of Dhaka, that is, the creation of Bangladesh
from what used to be known as East Pakistan, most of the leaders of the
Congress party and their supporters declared with a loud voice
that what they used to say proved to be correct, and that the two
nation theory proved to be wrong. Further, they claimed that in
due time one will see the failure of the notion of establishing a
state based on religion (Islam).
Now if the parliament made up of scholars of different Muslim
sects fails to make a set of Islamic Laws to which they could all
agree to, the same opponents of creation of Pakistan will get an
opportunity to say that their point of view has beer proved
correct once again.
Our fright of that dreadful day compels us to present, this
request to these gentlemen, that if they are under the wrong notion that
that whatever they are doing will result in stability of the country and
prosperity of Islam, the sooner they correct their misconceptions the
better. Their present attitude will result in shaking the foundations of
the country and Islam will become a laughing stock for the world. If
they really want that Islam should be reestablished, then they must
decide and declare how the laws which could be acceptable to all the
sects will be made prior to their becoming the law makers.
If these gentlemen are not willing to comply with the above, we will
request the nation that instead of following the slogans-of these
leaders blindly, they should demand that these slogans should be
explained in clear and concrete words.
The answer to this “Question” is not difficult. The readers are
requested to think and ponder while they are trying to understand.
1. As we have written before, the flag bearers of “Nizam-e-Mustafa
(p.b.u.h.)” belong to different Islamic sects. Each one of these sects
have their own Fiqah (jurisprudence). It is evident that as long as all
of these sects will consider their own Fiqah as unchangeable Islamic
Law, no set of laws could be made which will be acceptable to all. Their
differences are so deep that each one of them have declared the other
one “Kafir”, the non believer, at one time or the other.
2. Only one thing is common to all of them; and that is the Holy
Quran. Therefore for them to agree on any point, they have no choice
except to make the Holy Quran the only basis of law making and ignore
all their Fiqahs. Further they should consider the Holy Quran the judge
and the final authority.
3. The Holy Quran does not give slogans. It explains everything in
clear words. In Soora 16 “Al Nahal” verse 89, it says :
(the book which) clarifies and exemplifies everything.
4. The Holy Quran does not have any contradictions. The evidence
which Allah Himself has given for the Holy Quran to be divine is that it
does not have contradictions. In Soora 4 (Al Nisa) verse 82 it is said :
If it was from any one other than Allah, you would have found
many contradictions in it.
Therefore after accepting the Holy Quran as the common value, no
differences can sustain.
5. Al Deen, that is, the way of living as ordained by Allah means
that one should make Allah, the Hakeem (meaning the one who gives the
Hukum or order) and Hakem (the one who decides whenever there is a
dispute, that is, the judge). In Soora 12 (Yusuf) verse 40, it is said :
Allah is the only one whose orders should be obeyed.
He orders you not to submit to anyone other than Allah (that is,
one should not take orders from anyone else).
this is the established and definite Al Deen of Allah.
6. The practical way of making Allah, the Hakim or the
Hakam is to make His Book "The Hakam". In Soora 6 (A
Inam), verse 115, Rasool-Allah (p.b.u.h.) has announced the divine
message Which reads:
Do you want me to accept some one other than Allah as the
Judge; whereas He has revealed such a book which explains
This means that if you accept Allah's Book as Hakam, you have
accepted Allah as Hakam.
7. This is the only book which distinguishes Kufr, meaning the act of
non-believing, and Islam. In Soora 5 (Al Maeda), verse 44, it is
The ones who do not accept Allah's revelations as Hakam are the
ones who are Kafir.
8. Even Rasool-Allah (p.b.u.h.) was ordered in Soora 5 (Al
Maeda), verse 48:
You should make your decisions as per revelation from
9. This is the Deen of Allah (refer Soora 3, verse 82). This is what
should be called Al Islam; to accept Allah's Book as the Hakam.
In Soora 3 (Aal-e-Imran), verse 84 it is said:
Whosoever will adopt any system (Deen) other than Islam, that system
will not be accepted by Him (Allah).
It should be clarified here that since Allah has named Islam as His
Deen, it should always be called Allah's Deen. Since Allah's messengers
(p.b.u.h.) were destined to establish and deliver Allah's Deen and they
did not create one themselves, therefore it is not correct to call Islam
"Deen-e-Mustafa" (p.b.u.h.). It should only be called Allah'
10. The only problem, which must be addressed is the method by which
we can prove whether we have established Allah's Deen or
not. The first evidence about the nation where Allah's Deen is
established is that different sects can not survive in it.
Wherever are religious sects, Allah's Deen cannot be
there, nor that nation will have anything to do with Rasool Allah
(p.b.u.h.). In this regard Allah's message is very clear. In Soora 6 (Al
Inam) verse 16, it is said:
The people who create sects in Deen, and become a group, (O!
Rasool) you have nothing to do with them.
The people who proclaim "Nizam-e-Mustafa (p.b.u.h.)”,
and belong to any of the sects should think about the aforementioned
verse. As per this verse, as long as they have nothing to do with
Mustafa (p.b.u.h.), how can they proclaim the "Nizam -e- Mustafa
We appeal to the intelligentsia of the nation that they give due
consideration to the above mentioned verses of the Holy Quran, and think
how can the claim by different sects that they will establish "Nizam
-e- Mustafa", be considered as genuine.
This article was originally published in Urdu language, titled “Sirf
Eik Sawal” by Idara Tolu-e-Islam, 25-B, Gulberg II, Lahore, Pakistan in
The English translation has been done by the undersigned to enlighten
the non Urdu speaking readers. While translating quotations from already
translated English material, the meaning has been kept as close as
possible to the original text, although the words used may not be the
For the original article in Urdu and other Quranic literature, please
contact Idara Tolu-e-Islam at the above mentioned address.