he
fact of Muslim decline on almost all fronts is one that most Muslims
themselves would readily concede. The moral distinctions that once
characterised the early Muslims are no more and the only thing that
distinguishes them from others are external markers of religious or
communal identity. The ulema once provided moral leadership to Muslim
society, playing a central role in its formation and reformation. They
were meant to be the true guides of the community, in accordance with the
well-known saying of Prophet Muhammad: “The ulema are the inheritors of
the prophets (al-ulemao warasat al-anbiya).”
Throughout their history the Muslim masses have always
looked to the ulema for guidance. However, at times when rulers succeeded
in co-opting sections of the ulema to justify their oppressive rule, they
failed as a class to fulfil the duty entrusted to them by the prophet.
This also happened when sections of the ulema fell prey to worldly
blandishments and temptations and strayed from the straight path. It
cannot be denied however that in the early period of Islam the majority of
the ulema remained determinedly on the right path and fulfilled their
social responsibilities.
Today the crucial question of what role the ulema should
play in the reform of Muslim society remains hotly debated and is as yet
unresolved. In this regard, it is crucial that the ulema turn within and
seriously introspect to see how far they have been able to live up to
their responsibilities vis-ŕ-vis the wider society.
The ulema have a greater role to play in social reform
than other sections of Muslim society and hence the need for them to
introspect is perhaps greater. After all, according to the Koran and the
Hadith, the ulema have been accorded a more important role precisely
because of the responsibilities with regard to social affairs that have
been entrusted to them. If they shirk these responsibilities, they cannot
remain in their position and will inevitably be critiqued and even
condemned by others, as is common today.
The ulema claim that they have been given the role of
guiding and leading the Muslim community and so if they do not do so in an
appropriate manner it is obvious they will lose their relevance and
popular support. In countries such as India, the majority of the ulema are
economically dependent on the Muslim masses. This further requires that
the ulema remain accountable to the latter in terms of fulfilling the
roles required of them.
It is undoubtedly true that in general the ulema have
played and continue to play a central role in promoting moral
consciousness and religious awareness among the Muslim masses. At the same
time, it is also true that by and large the ulema have not really lived up
to the roles expected of them. Gradually, the ulema in most countries have
withdrawn from social affairs. Lacking the appropriate skills and
attributes of proper leadership, they are gradually losing the support of
the Muslim masses. The ulema regard this as ‘deviation’ and as an
‘un-Islamic’ tendency while the Muslim masses see the ulema as being
concerned solely with rituals and external markers of religious identity
and as no different, in terms of morals, from them. Indeed many ‘ordinary’
Muslims even view the ulema as responsible for a host of ills, including
that of seeking to provide sanction to heinous sins through sophistry and
trickery and wrong interpretations of the religious scriptures.
Two basic pillars of social reform are education and
morality. The Koran refers to these two in the following verse: “Our Lord!
Send amongst them a Messenger of their own, who shall rehearse Thy Signs
to them and instruct them in Scripture and Wisdom, and purify them: for
Thou art the Exalted in might, the Wise” (2:129).
There are different aspects of education, one of which is
the transmission of the tradition of Islamic knowledge from one generation
to the next. This task has been admirably undertaken by our ulema, who
have set up a vast number of madrassas and other Islamic institutions for
this purpose.
Another aspect of education is the intellectual formation
and development of the community. This is also a task for the ulema but
particularly after the departure of the British from India in 1947, they
have almost wholly ignored it. It does not need to be stressed how crucial
the intellectual development of a community is in its overall
civilisational progress. A community that fails to keep up at the
intellectual level with changing conditions and to keep up with other
communities on the intellectual plane will inevitably be pushed to the
margins of history.
It was the task of the ulema to intellectually train the
Muslim community by developing appropriate responses, from within the
broader Islamic paradigm, to the changing demands and conditions of the
times so as to enable Muslims to progress in an Islamically appropriate
manner. Lamentably however, they have failed to take up this crucial
responsibility.
Morality is the underlying spirit and basis of religion.
Promoting morality was the main objective of the mission of the prophets.
Prophet Muhammad is said to have remarked: “I have been sent to establish
the pinnacle of morality (bohithto li uttamima husn al-akhlaq).” In
this regard, it can be said without any hesitation that the ulema have
completely ignored the need for the moral development of the Muslim
community on several fronts and the baneful consequences of this in terms
of woeful moral standards are fully in evidence among both madrassa-educated
Muslims as well as those who have studied in secular institutions.
Indeed so shocking is this lamentable state of affairs
that managers of madrassas, who are meant to be the champions of morality,
are known to grossly exploit the teachers and staff employed in their
institutions, who are their fellow ulema, and, caring nothing for
democracy, exercise a dictatorial control over community institutions,
treating them as their own private properties. They splurge the money
entrusted to them by the community on setting up massive buildings and
lavish mosques or squander this money on useless things just for show and
fame while caring nothing for the desperately poor people who live in
their vicinity.
How then can people accord such ulema the lofty position
of ‘preachers of morality’? Many of the institutions run by the ulema are
torn by strife and internal conflict and characterised by lack of
transparency and rules, corruption, nepotism and gross inefficiency. Given
this, how can the ulema expect to be respected by the masses? How can the
masses consider them their moral guides?
The basis of social reformation is the moral development
of the members of a society. If those who claim to be the custodians or
enforcers of morality, as the ulema see themselves, are themselves
corrupt, to expect and hope for the community to develop is mere wishful
thinking.
Another major drawback of our ulema is their marked
tendency to ignore the demands of morality and the true spirit of religion
in matters related to relations with other communities. Often communal
prejudices overshadow the demands of morality and justice. Let me explain
this with the help of a single case.
In 2007 some Hindu policemen deployed in Jamia Nagar, a
Muslim-dominated locality in New Delhi, were alleged to have disrespected
the Koran. On hearing this, a huge crowd of Muslims gathered at the police
station and set it on fire. Several police posts in the vicinity were also
attacked. Later, every sensible Islamic scholar learnt that the whole
incident was the handiwork of some rabble-rousing Muslim elements and that
the policemen had not deliberately treated the Koran with disrespect, as
was alleged. However, I myself heard numerous ulema, who are
supposedly highly respected in Muslim circles, saying that while the fault
was actually that of the inflamed Muslim youth and not of the policemen,
due to political compulsions they must support the former.
This is a brazen case of narrow communal prejudice, so
sternly condemned by Prophet Muhammad, triumphing over morality and
justice. It would not be an exaggeration to say that in most matters
related to the community, our attitude is deeply coloured by this sort of
communal prejudice. One can cite almost no case in which our ulema have,
in such matters involving Muslims and people of other faiths, abided by
the demands of justice, morality and impartiality and have condemned the
wrongful actions of their co-religionists.
The ulema claim to be concerned about the reform of Muslim
society and often issue statements to that effect. However, their vision
of reform is extremely limited – confined simply to purging Muslim society
of non-Muslim influences. In actual fact, social reform is far more
comprehensive than that. It concerns a channelisation of energies at both
the individual as well as collective levels for the welfare and progress
of all sections of society and for overall peace and justice.
Certain other aspects of the social roles and
responsibilities of the ulema, and their negligence thereof, must also be
noted. For instance, sections of the ulema are now seeking to play a more
prominent role in politics. An unfortunate aspect of this is that all
sorts of ulema are now entering the political field, including many who
lack the capacity for proper leadership and some who are corrupt and for
whom politics is simply a means to feather their own nests. This has quite
naturally led to greater confusion and conflict, with many of these ulema
indulging in immoral politics that thrive on communal conflict and strife.
Many ulema rather unrealistically expect Muslim society to
reform itself simply by delivering long harangues about the need to abide
by the laws of the Shariah. Clearly, this is inadequate and indeed
impossible. One cannot expect to change people’s behaviour simply by
delivering fatwas on all sorts of matters. The only thing that can be done
in this regard is to clarify the Shariah position on various issues to
those people who are willing to abide by the rules of the Shariah. People
cannot be forced against their will to do what the Shariah expects of
them.
If the ulema seriously wish that in all matters people
abide by the Shariah, there is no alternative to gradually working for
their intellectual and moral reform. For this the ulema must be
far-sighted, basing their actions and programmes on the future rather than
simply harping on the past. It is not enough for them to constantly dwell,
as a means to exhort people to follow the right path, on how wonderful
their predecessors were. Rather, their focus must be on the future and
Muslims must be made aware that if they fail to reform, they will face a
miserable future. This means that the ulema must live in the present
rather than in the past and must plan for the future. In addition, the
ulema must realise that this task is not for them alone to bear and that
they must share this with other sections of Muslim society, with whom they
must work in tandem in a mutually respectful and meaningful manner.
In this regard, the issue of reforms in the madrassas,
where the ulema are trained, assumes particular urgency. In the past and
even today many social reformers among the Muslims were produced in the
madrassas. The time has now come for the madrassas, particularly the
larger ones, to set up specialised departments or centres for social work
through which they can train their students, would-be ulema, to engage in
social work and activism once they graduate.
Imams of mosques, who have close and daily interaction
with the Muslim masses, have a crucial role to play in this task of social
reform. Lamentably however, untrained imams, far from doing anything
positive in this regard, often become the cause of greater strife and
division among the people. It is thus essential that the imams of mosques
be given proper training for their additional role as community leaders.
Perhaps the centres of social work that I have suggested that madrassas
set up can provide them with the requisite skills. In addition, other
Muslim institutions could develop and conduct courses for this purpose.
It is clear – and most Muslims themselves will admit this
– that although Muslim society is today desperately in need of reform, the
pace of such reform is extremely slow. Among the many reasons for this is
the wrong and completely misplaced belief shared by many ulema that as
compared to other communities, Muslims are morally and intellectually much
better off. Needless to say, this belief is based on a completely false
and illusory sense of reality. The sooner the ulema realise this the
better it would be – for themselves and for the Muslims in general.