Wrote this way back around the ARAB SPRING. Just for the heck of it.

---

This academic year was my last, and hence I have been extremely busy. Studies haven’t been the reason. In hindsight, they never were. This happened to be our placement year, and as such, one of extreme significance. The direction that our lives were going to take from here onwards was going to be determined on those fateful days which corporate companies chose to bless us with a chance to work for them. They always stress it’s with them, but no one seems to buy it. In a sense, it would also determine how meaningful our education up till this point had been. Everyone says education should be for the purpose of education and becoming better human beings, that education should serve the higher ideals of life. I too know it sounds good. The good news is that I was placed, so were many others. Many weren’t. That’s how life is, and everyone knows and accepts it that way. So I guess it beats the purpose of my writing it. On some days it does feel a little odd that in spite of having a reasonable understanding of the ways of life, we somehow don’t behave in a manner that befits one who knows. But then again, everyone knows this as well and accepts it that way, so I guess it once more beats the purpose of my writing it.

There are many things associated with campus placements. One is definitely nervousness. Most of us were all nerves in the buildup to the day, or days for a few. Preparation is another aspect. It might not necessarily be studying and relearning the concepts that were forgotten once examinations got over. However, some preparation definitely is needed and indulged in by everyone before an interview. Many things have to be arranged before one is ready. Getting clothes ready, a little grooming, papers and documents like mark sheets and CVs and so on and so forth. A teacher once advised me not to use ‘etc.’ but rather go with ‘so on and so forth’. I don’t really heed this advice of his, but I did in this case. Preparations demonstrate seriousness. It suggests that the person concerned is serious and cares about what he is doing and attaches importance to it. Jobs are something we as human beings are serious about, and for apparent and good reason. Whether employed in some concern or having a private enterprise, a person always cares about the vocation that puts food on his or her plate. Hence, we too were extremely enthusiastic about our campus placements for reasons already mentioned.

Like I said, many things kept us busy. Like preparing CVs. Most would know the importance of preparing a good CV that will summarise the applicant’s entire life as required by the employer. Preparing a good, proper and professional CV is something whose importance can’t be stressed upon enough. Generally a good CV is around 3 pages, in good legible font and should capture all details that the prospective employer is looking for. More importantly, it should be completely true, because lies are always easy to catch and tell. Truth, if challenged, can be defended but the same is not true for a lie, no matter how well prepared the liar is. Honesty is the best policy. Most primary moral science books will vouch for this. I too spent a considerable time deciding what to put on my CV, getting my proofs in order, typing it out, pasting photographs and finally stapling the pages. (Yeah, this is where our topic actually begins)

Stapler pins are inconsequential tiny objects that generally don’t catch anyone’s attention. The stapler does. The pages that are stapled do. In a sense, one can find similitude between oneself and the stapler pins. Ordinary people like us too lead inconsequential lives that don’t really affect anyone else. We are born unsung, live unheralded and die unheard. We don’t catch anyone’s attention, like stapler pins. The main interest lies in the CV. Drawing a parallel with the real world, the CV might be seen as the actual world structure, the world as a whole. We are interested in the world, its luxuries and joys and the fame that worldly success brings. Our lives are intertwined with the desire to achieve popularity. Even in our ordinary but otherwise busy lives, we try and do things that will help us realize this goal. I admit my desire to blog and share my useless views with an imaginary audience too is my attempt to be, let’s say, important. We all want to be significant and important. Sometimes we fail to realize the importance of our ordinariness. We don’t understand, or rather don’t wish to understand, that the commonplace too has a place in the larger scheme of things. Just like the stapler pins that hold the CVs together, the ordinary holds this extraordinary world together. The world is more or less a holistic structure. The sum total of all simplicity is complexity. Our ordinary attributes add up to make an extraordinary world.

Stapler pins, like I said, are inconsequential. The last paragraph aimed to draw a parallel between their inconsequentiality and our own insignificance. However, their lack of material worth and value is not something that can be wished away. The insignificance of our own existence too cannot vanish, and I stand by this statement for even those who achieve a lot and become famous throughout the world for their deeds, or misdeeds. No one is granted life so significant that the world, or at least lives of a few, stop functioning without him or her. Certain children are orphaned at a very young age. They grow up and lead normal lives. The world doesn’t stop for them. All of us without exception must have experienced death up and close, if not necessarily personal. We all have suffered losses that at that point in time seemed irreplaceable. Life moved on from there and even if those people weren’t replaced, and are still missed, we learnt to live without them. This ability is one of the greatest gifts of lives. Death is a great leveller and time, a great healer. Time heals the loss of those that death snatches from us. The same is true for us. We all will die one day, and we won’t be missed for long. Our near and dear ones will miss us for some time, maybe months or years. However, that too shall pass. People never forget those who go away, but the pain lessens. Human life, like those stapler pins, is insignificant.

I was hearing a discourse one day. The scholar was talking about trading and business activities. He also talked about employers and employees and the way the business between them should be conducted. In the course of his talk, he talked about various activities that we do on a day to day basis without realizing their implications or the effects that they can have. A very interesting and important fact that he stated caught my attention. He said that taking even a stapler pin for personal use without the prior permission of the employer or authorized superior constituted theft in Islamic jurisprudence.

To be truthful, I was taken aback a little. It was quite startling and I do admit that I was slightly shocked. It was simply a little, should I say, disconcerting to think that something as small as a stapler pin could be so valuable that using it without due and prior permission would be considered a sin. Come to think of it, office stationary is often considered personal property by many. In fact, many people consider it to be more personal that personal property, if you understand what I mean. I, for one remember my school days quite vividly. Some of us broke chairs, twisted fan blades and mutilated lab equipment to vent our frustration over anything. Sometimes, we did it for pure fun. There were even reported incidents of things being stolen from the office or labs. Well, we weren’t really kids back then. Now that I think of it, kids generally don’t engage in such activities or display such behaviour. It’s generally adolescents that constitute the rebellious generation in any period. Sometimes, this streak of revolt remains unchecked and gradually metamorphoses into the revolutionary spirit, for better or for worse. The point that I want to make here is there is, by and large, a complete disregard for propriety in human beings. This attitude often has disastrous consequences, but more often than not, is completely neglected if the magnitude is small by the standards of the proprietor wronged. Stapler pins would be considered small by everyone, for they really are dirt cheap.

It was, like I said, a little surprising. This could be because it was something my base self, or nafs, wasn’t accustomed to. We have a habit of trying to find justifications for things that are wrong but we indulge in or know that our dear ones do, and most of us know that we ourselves or people close to us have indulged in acts that were wrong to do but we neglected them because we considered them small. It goes without saying that a vast majority of us isn’t free of sins. However, our justification of these sins and vices in our character as per our needs is something that needs a little introspection. Sins are contingently intrinsic to human nature in general. Hence, it is almost imperative that human beings will commit them. According to Islamic law, only prophets without exception have been created free of sins. Believing them to have sinned is considered blasphemy as they are leaders of humankind and any fault perceivable in their character would make people mock them and refuse to believe them. Pious saints too aren’t created free of sins. However, it’s possible for them to remain sinless by the grace of Allaah. This in essence means prophets are pure, or maasuum, whereas other sinless people are protected or mahfuuz. The general populace is but an embodiment of sins. Our lives are spent sinning. This is definitely a big problem and as human beings we should continually strive not to commit them and beg forgiveness for those that we do. The Almighty shall definitely forgive us if there is sincerity in our hearts. The bigger problem occurs when we try to deceive ourselves with justifications and excuses that have no rational backing. It’s what may be referred to as the devil’s deception, incidentally also the name of a book by Allama ibn al Jawzee. People tend to accept things that paint them in the right, even if they know deep down that they are in the wrong. Once this acceptance seeps into our subconscious, we no longer realize the consequence of our actions. Such actions can range from downright frugal to outright significant. However, the complete disregard of their gravity and acceptance of excuse makes us do them again and again without caring two hoots for them. It may lead to us leading lives full of sins and constitute, in some cases, misguidance or even blasphemy. It is the treachery of Satan at its most exuberant display.

Back to the issue at hand, stealing is perhaps a word we don’t generally associate with stapler pins. Stealing is reserved for things of greater magnitude and value. Our intellect refuses to acknowledge that anyone ever can steal stapler pins. As I discovered that day, one actually can. It’s not absurd; it’s just that we have preconceived notions about such things being absurd. Small deeds, good or bad, are as consequential, if not more, as the big ones. Hence, one should neglect them at his or her own peril. The world is a holistic structure, where all petty existences contrive together to come up with an artifice grand and majestic. ‘Stealing’ stapler pins is a sin; a small one maybe, but definitely a sin. This unique and beautiful concept of respecting the right of other people perhaps has great significance in today’s world. The world seems to be boiling over with despotic regimes being “replaced” with a democratic structure in some Middle Eastern countries and the desire of many people to impose a “dictatorial” figure, or an ombudsman, on a successfully malfunctioning democracy in our part of the world. The Jasmine revolution, as it has been poetically termed, swept through the Arab world, afflicting Egypt and other countries and is likely to cause more changes, if not outright upheavals. Similarly, in India, people marched streets demanding a lokpal, or an ombudsman. A similar desire for change was seen in the sweeping victory of Aung San Suu Kiy in Myanmar elections. These incidents demonstrate that the common people of today are fed up and frustrated. Let us try and seek the answers.

The president of Tunisia, Zine el Abidin Ben Ali (Zain al Abideen bin Ali) was forced to step down after a period of 23 years. The same thing was true for Hosni Mubarak, the premier of Egypt. Both of them had ascended presidency on a wave of good faith and hope amongst their countrymen. The question that begs to be asked here is what went wrong. A generation had put Mubarak on the pedestal with great hope and desire. Another generation gathered at Cairo’s most prominent landmark, the Tahrir Square and made him step down. Something somewhere had gone wrong. The youth wanted change from the existing system of pseudo-monarchy. The dictator who goes unopposed and whose ultimate will is the deciding factor on all matters was simply put, an idea repulsive to the fresh and young minds. Globalisation had its own part to play in inculcating ideas of democracy and egalitarianism amongst the youth that had modern education and access to social media via the internet. The reason behind both these movements and all the other movements that spread within a few months of each other in and around the Arabian peninsula was, as is reported, the discontent that people felt with their respective governments. There was a general feeling of corruption and nepotism running loose in these lands. The kings or leaders or presidents, as they have been variously called, after years in governance had grown immune to the needs of the governed. Favouritism had been favoured and those who were close to the ‘nobility’ benefitted tremendously. All the top positions were occupied by relatives or friends of the people in power. The general populace, by and large, felt neglected. The youth was particularly piqued. At an age when people around the world were ready to conquer the world, they felt their own system hung like a stone around their necks and brought them down. The Arabian peninsula, in spite of being a desert, has been blessed with riches. However, with the improper distribution of wealth and depreciation of wealth, the reason for discontent only got strengthened. Of course, it goes without saying that I personally have had no experience of it and all I rely on in saying all this are first person accounts that I read on the internet and the news report that filtered out of those lands and reached our shores. I refuse to believe, however, that all this is make-believe. The magnitude of this event and the clear visual proof aired across TV screens should be enough to put to rest all conspiracy theories and accusations of “foreign hand”.

The situation in India is different. We are not a failure at democracy. It is perhaps the most vital and functioning system of democracy present today where both federal as well as common interests are taken care of. However, our system too has given rise to its own clique culture and a lackadaisical attitude has found roots in the executive. We have what I will call a malfunctioning democracy. The same problems that plagued the Arab world also trouble our haven. India too has to battle with corruption in all walks of life. In fact, corruption is more widespread in India than in the Arabian world. Recently, I have also come to learn that this problem is not only present in India but also in the entire subcontinent. Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan too have to face this problem. All other problems like poverty and malnutrition can be attributed to the fact that corruption breeds improper distribution of wealth that in turn leads to poor getting poorer. The people in our part of the world too had grown disillusioned with the state of affairs but lacked the spirit to take initiative and spark change. India was also proving to be a success story in the world market and the Commonwealth Games were supposed to showcase India’s growing purchasing power on the high tables of the world nations. This was not to be however, as severe money laundering in the organisation of the Games exposed the already visible face of Indian polity. The 2G spectrum scam that was brought into the open angered the public further. At that point, the stage was ripe for someone to rise and take up the cudgels of a sustainable movement. The Jan Lokpal bill proved to be just that. In its essence, the lokpal is what is called an ombudsman in English. It is not alien to Indian polity either, with the already existing office of CVC functioning in the same capacity. The bill, however, sought to remove the influence of the politicians from the sacred office and wished to give it more autonomy. The bill had been tabled in the parliament and was the subject of interest of many social scientists at that point in time as well. The rise of Anna Hazare at the Indian political scene therefore, though not pretty obvious, wasn’t completely incredible. The point that worked in his favour was his apolitical background and the use of the term Gandhian that he attached to himself. We Indians have never taken time out time to study Gandhi even with the minutest detail. The maximum exposure that we have had with Gandhi is perhaps the primary school textbooks that most of us read. However, seeing his picture day in day out on our currency has given him a sacrosanct pedestal to stand on. Therefore the term Gandhian attracted people in droves and made him the leader of a movement that was unprecedented in the country in this millennium. Of course, I am not exaggerating. It has been only 12 years since the turn of the millennium and hence my statement. On second thoughts, you have already figured that out and thus it beats the purpose of my writing it.

I will digress for a moment and state that the purpose of this article is not to understand Gandhian philosophy and thought or try to analyse his personality. I am not an expert on Gandhi. My only experience with Mahatma Gandhi is “The story of my experiments with truth”, and that too stands incomplete at the point of writing this. I don’t want to criticise Gandhi and I also admit that I have nothing but respect for this tremendous human being. He led the country’s freedom movement and proved mentor to the great Indian statesmen who shaped India’s destiny in the troubled years after the independence. His views provided the fodder for great minds like Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. His adherence to his principles even in the face of strong opposition is an example for us to follow. I also don’t intend to waste your time praising Gandhi. He had many aspects in his character that I disagree with, and vocally. The first and foremost point of my disagreement with him is the philosophy of rigid non-violence that he advocated. His advice to Jews to commit mass suicide in the face of Hitler’s atrocities was complete idiocy. His slighting of people who disagreed with him suggests a personality not at ease with himself and his family life could be the fodder for gossip for the entire Indian gossip-mongering class. Then there were his women. It’s not clear if his relationship ever breached the limits of a Platonic relationship, but their nature was certainly something that doesn’t go down well with my system. My point in saying all this is to state that we Indians tend to see everything bearing the Gandhi tag as upright and correct. This intrinsic folly that is present in us can be misused or even abused, but that is beyond the scope of what I wish to say right now.

I would return to my topic here. The root of what we saw across the Arab-North African world and in India was the rampant corruption and misappropriation of public funds. As is evident, this evil is deep-rooted in many countries today and the public is fed up of such things. They want change, change that will seek to replace all evil with good and put in place a system or a procedure that tries to bring justice and equality in the society. The faceless generation of today found a platform in Facebook and other such social media that were above censorship, not legally but practically. Online forums (fora) and public chat-rooms became the hub of the so-called revolt and successfully weeded out the perennially corrupt governments from a few countries. I do not wish to go into deep details of the movement because of one reason – I simply do not know. The intricacies involved in analysing such significant matters require experts which I am not. What I have stated so far are hard facts as were presented on 24/7 news channels and newspapers. The Indian “revolution” began as an honest movement attacking the practice of corruption rampant in bureaucracy and the legislature. It was headed by a till-then nondescript septuagenarian who glided onto the collective mentality of the masses and garnered support from all quarters. But soon, it morphed into a giant circus where everyone was looking to cook his or her own goose and enjoy his or her time under the sun. All sorts of people like starlets and wannabe starlets started taking centre-stage and the real movement somehow got side-tracked. Allegations of partisanship, not entirely false, were levelled against the leader who did not shy away from calling the event a second war of independence. I read this in a newspaper and I feel it’s true and hence I shall share it here. The Arabian revolution produced a gallery of unsung heroes who even laid down their lives for the cause they believed in. The Indian revolution produced a bunch of narcissist jokers who don’t know the difference between Gandhian philosophy and a Gandhi cap. I don’t say all this because of petty political affiliations, but no one’s going to believe me, so I would like to move on.

The comparison that I wish to present here is the vast difference between the Islamic society at the time of the prophet of Islam and the modern world. We call ourselves a progressive society that has successfully left behind its rusticity and inhuman instincts. The ground reality seems otherwise. As the state of events suggests, human beings still believe in the caveman philosophy of might is right. The powerful don’t miss any chance of exercising the ‘privileges’ that come attached with power. Perhaps power does corrupt, and absolute power does corrupt absolutely. It was this absolute power that sowed the seeds of absolute corruption in numerous world leaders past and present, irrespective of caste, creed, culture, religion or sex. In contrast is an ideology that brands stealing stapler pins a sin and demands corrective and, subject to conditions, punitive action on the perpetrator of the sin. The society and civilization established by the benefactor of humanity was based on the principle ideals of equality and justice. It was a society that sought to establish representative democracy as its modus operandi. Anyone who tries to read about the society of Islam as founded by the prophet without any prejudice or bias will definitely not fall short of being impressed by the moral fibre that bound together a group of unlettered desert Arabs and helped them constitute a glorious ideology that spread through the known world and united the various people into one single community of global brotherhood. Without prejudice, I repeat.

In a world that claims to be extremely open-minded, a casual analysis would reveal that there is hardly any open-mindedness. It could be because of our understanding of what constitutes being open-minded. Generally, people think the acceptance of past taboos is being open-minded. This is the reason why many things that our elders despise of are brushed aside by us on the pretext of them being narrow-minded in their outlook and approach. This, though very much a part of, isn’t exactly what is meant by being open-minded. A person with a broad outlook is one who appreciates and acknowledges that alternative viewpoints can exist and investigates them rationally and with reason before accepting or rejecting them. Even in rejection or acceptance, he or she clearly understands that there will be people who won’t do the same as them and that they too would be having their own reasons for their approach to the issue at hand. Some issues are universally accepted, but most are contentious and have equally strong lobbies in their support and against them. Being open in outlook is not to be iconoclastic but to see the relative merits and demerits of both sides of the argument and try to find an arrangement which allows for peaceful co-existence of both. I again state that there are issues which are accepted universally and hence the acceptance of an alternative viewpoint is not feasible in their case. But for most issues, it is not so. My personal experience, however limited, has thrown enough examples at me to prove that today’s generation isn’t really as rational and balanced as it claims. People in our part of the world who follow cricket would only need to see as far the IPL where a cricketing issue was converted into an ego clash of a movie star and a cricketer. The altercation was based entirely on a cricketing perspective and there were strong arguments on both sides. It should therefore have been treated as such. What ensued however was a full blown war on the social media between self-appointed representatives and entailed a litany of idiotic comments, insulting statements and foolish morphed pictures. [I was immensely relieved to see the two people involved rise above all this and display camaraderie, maybe forced, to end the debate once and for all. This is the quality that has made men out of them and its lack has cast people like me into obscurity.]

Research in our world is synonymous with Googling. The results that the search engine generally throws when looking for Islam and the Islamic society and civilization focus on “exposing” it. The common complaints are usually the use of sword to spread the religion, terrorism or jihad, woman issues and multiple marriages and forced conversions. I don’t intend to answer all these here because it requires a pen and intellect greater than mine. Luckily there are enough people out there who have done it in the past and are doing it now. Perhaps, I will post some links someday to clear these issues. What I wish to suggest is not to fall for these propaganda artists but to look at both the sides of the coin. It was an attitude I found helpful when trying to understand the concepts of Idol-worship and reincarnations in the sanatan Dharma and trinity in Christianity. [For the record, I disagree]. Any useful and fruitful conclusion can be reached after hearing arguments of both the sides and forms the basis of the concept of fairness. It is for this reason that our judicial system mandates representation and has habeas corpus amongst its valued tenets. So anyone who intends to read about the prophet’s administration and the Islamic should seek writers from both sides of the divide for a comprehensive analysis.

The aspect that I wish to deal with here is the equality and fairness of approach in the judicial system set up during the prophet’s time and followed by the rightly-guided caliphs. The prophet was an embodiment of mercy for the entire world. An aspect of mercy is to be fair and just and not be partial to people closer to you if you are in a powerful position, for it may then mean a denial of rights to someone else. I would like to present here an event from the prophet’s life to show his just and fair nature.

“Before the advent of the prophet, the Jews in Medina were discriminatory in the dispensation of justice; a man of influence was leniently punished than a poor man accused of the same guilt. The prophet abolished this discrimination and established the system of even – handed justice. Like all perverted societies the Quraish were also used to make such discrimination in judicial matters and when at the time of the victory of Makkah a woman of Makhzoomi clan named Fatima was charged with theft, the Quraish wanted to persuade the prophet to judge her leniently and Usama bin Zaid was prevailed upon to speak to the prophet on the subject. But when Usama broached the subject before the prophet he was enraged and angrily asked Usama “Are you recommending the suspension of a Divine order?” Usama immediately appraised the situation repented and apologized to the prophet.

That evening the prophet addressed the gathering of Muslims as follows: “One of the causes of the decline and fall of nations preceding you was that when any prominent man committed theft it was overlooked but if a man of lower status committed the same crime he was duly punished. But for myself I swear to God that even if my daughter Fatima committed theft I will see that her hand is cut off ”.” – (The Benefactor of Humanity, Naeem Siddiqui)

This is just one example of the prophet’s just methods in jurisprudence. In contrast to today’s favouritism, the prophet’s family actually is not allowed to take charity even today and the prophet’s personal belongings did not pass on to his family through inheritance. The hard work and toil the members of his family put in for the society is exemplary, but the rewards that they received were always equal to all the others in worldly terms. His cousin and son-in-law, HaDHrat Ali (raDHi Allaahu anhu) didn’t become the first caliph even though some people felt it was his right. He personally acknowledged the right of HaDHrat Abu Bakr (raDHi Allaahu anhu) over himself. It’s not that they were denied entirely. HaDHrat Ali (raDHi Allaahu anhu) became the fourth caliph, but not due to lobbying or blood relations but out of sheer dint of merit and piety.

The prophet’s companions carried on his principles of justice and equality. I would like to narrate a short but significant event from HaDHrat Umar’s (raDHi Allaahu anhu) life that had a telling impact on me the first time I read it.

Once Hazrat ‘Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu) during his caliphate, was going on his usual rounds towards Harrah (a suburb of Madinah) with his slave Aslam, when he saw a distant fire in the desert. He said, “There seems to be a camp. Perhaps, it is a caravan that could not enter the town due to night fall. Let’s go and look after them and arrange for their protection during the night.”

When he reached there, he found a woman and some children. The children were crying. The woman had a pan of water over the fire. Hadhrat Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu) greeted her with salaam and, with her permission, went near her. (The woman didn’t recognize that it was Umar).

Hazrat Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu) asked, “Why are these children crying?”

The Woman said, “Because they are hungry.”

Hazrat Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu), “What is in the pan?”

The Woman, “Only water to soothe the children, so that they may go to sleep in the belief that food is being prepared for them. Ah! Allah will judge between Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu) and me, on the Day of Judgment, for neglecting me in my distress.”

Hazrat ‘Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu) (weeping), “May Allah have mercy on you! How can Umar know of your distress?”

The Woman, “When he is our Amir, he must keep himself informed about us.”

Hadhrat ‘Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu) returned to the town and straight away went to the Baitul Mal (House of Charity) to fill a sack with flour, dates, fat, and clothes, and also drew some money. When the sack was ready, he said to Aslam, “Now put this sack on my back, Aslam.”

Aslam, “No please, Amir-ul-Momineen! I shall carry this sack.”

Hazrat Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu) refused to listen to Aslam, even on his persistent requests to allow him to carry the sack, and remarked, “What! Will you carry my load on the Day of Judgment? I must carry this bag, for it is I who would be questioned (in the Hereafter) about this woman.”

Aslam most reluctantly placed the bag on Umar’s (raDHi Allaahu anhu) back, who carried it with a swift pace right to the woman’s tent. Aslam followed at his heels. He put a little flour and some dates and fat in the pan and began to stir. He blew (with his mouth) into the fire to kindle it.

Aslam says, “I saw the smoke passing through his thick beard.”

After some time, the pottage was ready. He himself served it to the family. When they had eaten to their fill, he made over to them the little that was left for their next meal. The children were very happy after their meal and began to play about merrily.

The woman felt very grateful and remarked, “May Allah reward you for your kindness! In fact you deserve to take the place of Khalifah instead of Umar.”

Umar consoled her and said, “When you come to see the Khalifah, you will find me there.”

He sat for a while at a place close by and kept on watching the children. He then returned to Madinah. On his way back, he said to Aslam, “Do you know why I sat there, Aslam? I had seen them weeping in distress. I liked to see them laughing and happy for some time.”

History would struggle to produce such examples. The same principle was carried on by the other caliphs who feared lighting official lamps when receiving personal guests. There are many accounts of the humility which the caliphs displayed on various occasions. The people of Damascus were shocked to see the Caliph of Islam, HaDHrat Umar (raDHi Allaahu anhu) enter their city upon its conquest wearing patched robes. A delegation of visitors that came looking for him saw a man wearing old robes sleeping on the dusty floor. This, however, isn’t something out of the ordinary. These men lived their lives with the prophet who slept on a mat that left marks on his back. The same prophet who is often called the raison d’être of creation tied two stones on his stomach so that he didn’t feel hunger pangs. The caliphs tried to emulate the blessed example in everything they did and for them to display such acts of humility and justice is more the norm than aberration. Islamic history kept producing kings in different parts of the world who did their best to emulate this glorious tradition. The much reviled figure of Aurangzeb used to feed off the money he earned out of sewing caps. Islam, as compared to today’s materialistic world, seeks to develop characters of such high values and ethics.

The concept of democracy and the charter of human rights, which today has been endorsed by the United Nations, were first put into practice by the prophet of himself when he established the state of Madinah and carried out the agreement with Jews for peaceful coexistence. His extraordinary forbearance in accepting the treaty of Hudaibiyah with the Meccans shows his preference for democratic and peaceful. It was this concept of democracy that made HaDHrat Abu Bakr (raDHi Allaahu anhu) the first caliph, for the democratic procedure is to choose the best man available for the job. The idea of having a group of responsible citizens of the society to constitute a council and involve all of them in the law-making process is today called parliament in a representative democracy. Thus we see that the two fundamental pillars of democracy, constitution and parliament, were present and functional during the prophet’s time. I categorically state that this wasn’t democracy as we know it today.

Democracy is a government of the people, for the people and by the people. All adults get a right to vote to select their own representatives. In an ideal world, this is perfect. Islam does not reject this type of democracy. However, such a system when put into practice, has its own flip side. The idea of putting power into the hands of the people is based upon the assumption that the people will make an informed and enlightened choice. The concept therefore is one that can be realised in its pristine glory only if the society is educated enough to select representatives who are honest and upright. The voters should not necessarily be literate, but they have to be aware of the social milieu and have the necessary foresight. This, as should be obvious is not always the case. If I remember correctly, Winston Churchill said these worlds – “The biggest argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter”. Churchill was famous for his wit and did not hesitate to take a dig at anything and everything, but the point that he makes is valid. I have been a witness to countless debates that sought to prove the superiority of one political party over the other. The determining factor that shaped opinions and ideologies in these debates was almost always bias. Prejudice against someone, which has been handed down to us by someone close, always makes us see merit and demerit even if they don’t exist. Thus, most people justify acts of their parties by latching onto weak arguments or even conspiracies. Such an environment is not conducive to the fruitful practice of democracy as intended. An uneducated and uninformed society which is unable to distinguish amongst the various ideologies and read between the lines will not be able to give the proper conditions that democracy requires for fruition. Such societies will almost always fall prey to demagoguery. Smart people will latch on to the cards of caste, creed, religion and such identities. The idea of best person for the job will get side-lined and people who can attract crowds will start ruling the roost. This is pretty much evident in the sub-continent. I will vouch for the fact that this definitely is what happens in India. Educated societies tend to be better. However, some world leaders from developed countries too are not what one expects a person holding such distinguished posts to be. I won’t take names, for they should be obvious. This indicates that it is not necessary that an educated and socially aware community will definitely uphold the high utopian ideal that democracy constituting universal adult suffrage wishes to abide by. The democratic method of the caliphs’ time constituted what can be called parliament or as-haab ash-shuraa. However, its members weren’t elected by the people but were chosen by unanimous consent of the leading members of the society. The members themselves were people of extreme piety and high moral character and the people they chose too were also of such thick moral fibre. Almost all classes of the society got represented and the only criterion was the virtue present in one’s nature. This system never led to the induction of people of corrupt and vile nature into the government and the administration was carried on the ideals of justice and honesty.

This system, however, will not be conducive to good governance today. It relies a lot more on the nature of the individuals of the society than democracy as is practised today. This became evident soon after the end of the caliphate of HaDHrat Ali (raDHi Allaahu anhu) and the nadir was hit with the tragedy of Karbala. In today’s world this system would invariably lead to oligarchy and nepotism. Hence, I don’t seek to advertise this method of governance as the ideal solution to all the world problems. Democracy with universal adult suffrage, as is practised in many countries, is today’s best hope. I don’t know if this model of democracy will hold fort for the ages that will follow, but it is definitely the need of today. It would be idiotic today to take away from the people the right to vote and thrust on them a select group of people who they can’t question or change. It was possible in those days because they were a people of a different kind. Let’s say those people today are a mirage, a chimera that cannot be found.

The need of the hour is to chase this chimera. Maybe we shall never find it. In fact, we shall definitely never find it. The chase however will be worth the effort. It is a vision that has to be realised, an ideal that has to be achieved. The lofty standards of good governance, free and fair, have to be replicated and those standards will be met only if people of intellect and character step forward and take up the cudgels. The success of the revolutions that I earlier mentioned was that they were able to bring normal people out of their comfort zones and put in efforts to do something for the society. The problem that may be encountered is the dearth of good leaders. A revolution’s success is dependent on the people who shape it. They have to be people of both thought and action. These are both rare qualities that surface in only a few individuals in a society. Almost all great people in this world who contributed to the society by means of bringing about some positive change had these qualities. Every society has to find its own visionaries and leaders. Each community has to develop its own model for bringing about a positive revolution in whichever aspect of life they need betterment. Societies will almost definitely try and look within their own cultures and traditions for inspirations. Even though more practical, this method should be interspersed with ideas from across the globe. The world today is too compact to allow an existence that is sequestered. So even though traditional heroes find a common connect, the leaders will have to adopt modern ideas for sustainable results.

The best example to follow as a role model in this quest is the prophetic example. All non-Muslims will definitely disagree. There might be ridicule as well. My advice in that case will be a subjective analysis of the prophetic life. No one is going to do that, however. Another doubt that will be raised is whether the political system of Islam, formalised and constituted fourteen centuries ago, will be feasible in today’s milieu. The reply is pretty simple. Islam requires one to adapt modern developments and see their validity in the light of the ways of the divine law. If there is no problem in allowing something new to become a part of the system, it can very readily be accepted. Some people might also dread the concept of “going back”. They might as well level allegations of rusticity and backwardness on those times and the people who lived in them. This in itself is a baseless argument, for society has progressed only technologically. And even then, in today’s world, of technological progress and so-called “civilization” and development of human intellect and thought, why does this problem of corruption persist and that too in such magnitude? Commentators would like us to believe that the society has progressed from the dark ages if barbarism and savagery. The general picture painted in history books is that civilization returned to the world after thousands of years via the Renaissance and the subsequent Industrial Revolution. Culture died with the fall of the Roman Empire at the hands of the Muslim invaders and the world, according to the “historians” plunged into dark ages and was finally restored back to normalcy in Italy. Indian historians haven’t adopted this attitude and recognise the contribution made by the Muslim empire, specially the Mughals. However, the western world refuses to do so and makes a great deal of noise about the superiority of its culture and has even labelled the Muslim rulers of Spain with the made-detestable title of Moors. Europeans, and by extension Americans, champion the cause of human rights when violated in other lands and claim to be the torchbearers of democratic society. They lay claims to the concept of constitutional democracy and good governance. The very idea behind writing this article is to make any readers aware that this is not entirely true. Careful analysis of history will definitely bring to light the fact that European historians have judged the Islamic civilisation with jaundiced eyes. The values and ethics of the society are no different than what they were ages ago. There might be a change in ideology, but there is no progress in terms of intellect and understanding.

In the words of our first prime minister, “Many people nowadays are apt to boast of our great civilization and of the wonders of science. Science has indeed done wonders. But… it is well to remember that in many ways man has not made very great progress from the other animals. It may be that in certain ways some animals are superior to him still. We look down upon the insects as almost the lowest of living things, and yet these tiny things have learnt the art of cooperation and of sacrifice for common good far better than man. If mutual cooperation and sacrifice for the good of the society are the tests of civilization, we may say that the white ant and the ant are in this respect superior to man.”