MORAL DECLINE

Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (1817–1898), an Indian Muslim reformer and educationist of nineteenth-century British India, was labeled a lackey of the British by his opponents. Similarly, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (1888–1958) was called an agent of the Hindus by his critics. Why was this? The reason was that these opponents noticed that the British respected Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. Likewise, they observed that Maulana Abul Kalam Azad enjoyed respect among Hindus. Out of their hostility, these opponents refused to acknowledge that the respect these individuals received among non-Muslims was due to their personal virtues. Instead, they falsely claimed that these titles implied they gained their status only through opportunism, not genuine merit.

Such statements may seem like criticism, but in truth, they are acts of baseness, and baseness is certainly the most contemptible form of immorality.

Criticism is a natural right of every individual. Everyone has the right to point out something wrong in another person and to voice it openly. However, this right is meant for rational disagreement, not for fault-finding and slander. Those who resort to meanness during disagreements actually reveal more about themselves than the accusations they aim to make against others.

Such characters have existed throughout history. Even during the time of the Prophet (e) and his companions, there were such wicked individuals. They still exist today, and they will continue to do so until the Day of Judgment, when people will no longer have the chance to falsely accuse or defame others.

Healthy disagreement is entirely beneficial, but slander is completely evil. A society in which slander becomes common, where people begin labeling one another with derogatory terms, soon becomes a breeding ground for moral decay. There is no worse state for any society than this.