Difference in Perspective
The first evident flaw resulting from this constructional error is that it changed the perception of Deen (religion) in people’s minds. Every entity has specific, minor aspects and an overarching essence. A mistake in understanding one of the minor aspects remains localized. However, a change in perspective regarding the essence alters the entire view of that entity. For instance, Aristotle believed that women have fewer teeth than men. Though this was a mistake, it was a minor, localized one, so it did not lead to a significant harm. In contrast, thinkers who proposed the theory of equality between men and women—assuming that women are inherently the same as men in terms of abilities—developed a mistaken view about women as a whole. This misconception altered their entire perception of women, leading to social and familial issues that the initial proponents of this idea could not have foreseen.
The error in the interpretation being discussed is similarly related to an overarching perspective. Consequently, those who embraced it began viewing the entire corpus of Deen from a different lens. When the view of the whole changes, so does the perception of all associated components. This school of thought has drawn a picture of religion in which, apparently, all the components of religion are present, but all of them have been displaced from their proper position. The arrangement of these components is such that, when one looks at it, Islam as a “system” appears very prominent, while its devotional aspect becomes weakened.
In this depiction, terms like Iman (faith), Shariah (piety), and Shariah (excellence) are all present.[1] However, these words do not truly describe the stages of a person’s relationship with God; rather, they are presented as the “moral foundations of the Islamic movement.” They function as standards for those specific expressions of one’s relationship with God that appear in the form of righteous leadership and the “establishment of the system of truth,” which, according to this interpretation, is “the real objective of religion” and the “ultimate goal of a Muslim’s struggle in this world.” In this view, these are stages in the expression of faith that indicate a person’s position in relation to the above-mentioned revolutionary struggle.
When Deen is understood in this way, it should not surprise you if the religious commitment of such individuals appears vibrant concerning the implementation of a specific political structure, yet the true essence of devotion, such as dhikr (remembrance of God), shukr (gratitude), and the qualities of humility and return to God (ikhbat wa inabah), is notably absent in them.
[1]. The terms Iman (faith), Islam, Taqwa (piety), and Ihsan (excellence), as used progressively in this literature, do not carry the same specific sequential meanings in the Quran. However, this is a minor technical point, so it doesn’t warrant criticism. While these terms may not appear in Quran and Hadith in these progressive stages, it remains true that Iman is indeed a developing reality, with stages and phases. We may use different words to describe these stages, but the concept remains valid.
