Practical Requirements
Islam has opted for the system of politics based on consultation (shura). This is the same thing which has been called democracy in present times. After the death of the Prophet of Islam, the system of Khilafat was established on the basis of this principle. But about thirty years later, people felt that the system of Khilafat was not workable. In politics the most important thing is stability but, under the system of the Khilafat, this goal of stability could not be achieved. Therefore, after the rule of the fourth caliph, Hazrat Ali Ibn Talib, the dynastic system became prevalent in the Muslim world and in later centuries this system remained prevalent among the Muslims.
At the time this dynastic system was initiated, the companions as well as their disciples were present in large numbers. Then followed the age of traditionists, jurists, and the Ulama of earlier times. All these people in practice accepted this political change. What was the reason for this? The explanation is that in Islam the actual aim of politics is social stability. This social stability which was not sustainable under the Khilafat system was achieved by them under dynastic rule. Therefore, this dynastic rule came to be accepted following the principle of practical wisdom.
This was also a case of re-planning. In the first stage of Islam, the system of Khilafat was established but over time this system of Khilafat did not prove to be functioning as desired. The reason was that as a result of the history of the last several centuries, people had become conditioned to the idea that the right to rule belonged only to royalty. Because of the prevalence of this system, practical wisdom demanded that dynastic rule should be accepted so that, at least, the goal of political stability would be achieved. As such, this system of dynastic rule was adopted for practical reasons, rather than for theoretical reasons. This is an example of re-planning. The experience of history has shown that in this matter, the decision of re-planning arrived at in the first age of Islamic history was, in reality, absolutely right.
Re-planning does not relate to principle but rather to method and the method is never absolute; rather it is determined as a rule on the basis of pragmatism.
According to a well-known tradition of Hazrat Ayesha, when the Prophet of Islam had to choose between two options, he always preferred the easier one (aisar) to the harder one. (Sahih Muslim, Hadith No. 2327). Here aisar means the easier option, that is, the method which is easily practicable, that is, easily workable in a non-controversial manner without creating any problems.
With this Hadith we learn an important principle of successful planning, that is, only that planning is of real worth which is fully practicable, which is non-controversial, and result-oriented, rather than being just attractive in appearance but when implemented would only increase the problems. The truth is that first we have to see, as far as a plan is concerned, what is workable and what is not workable. In this way, we can save ourselves from futile activities.
One has to plan by keeping the result in view. That is, if the first plan did not show results then the second plan must be result-oriented. The goal, which was not achieved in the first plan, can be achieved in the second plan.
Accordingly, it would be right to say that the mistake or error in implementing the first plan is forgivable, but any mistake made in the second plan is not forgivable. In this respect, the right method of the second plan is that one should start by fully admitting one’s mistakes; the second planning is no planning at all, if it is to add to the already existing harm.
