The Task at Hand
Now, I will outline what needs to be done based on the aforementioned interpretation of religion. Regarding Pakistan, I see the campaign led by Maulana Maududi for implementing Shariah law as fundamentally correct. Pakistan is a Muslim country, and in principle, after gaining independence, its people have the right to choose any way of life and social system they prefer. In this context, it becomes the duty of Pakistan’s Muslim community to establish an Islamic governance system and organize all aspects of life according to Islamic rulings and laws. However, it is vital that the campaign for implementing Shariah considers the principle of gradual progress.
But my opinion only concerns the form of this campaign; the underlying philosophy is flawed. This philosophical mistake has caused many issues within the campaign, with more problems developing over time. It has also led to serious practical shortcomings among the people involved, from the lowest to the highest levels. Therefore, I do not expect this campaign to succeed. However, even if it does, a lack of character of the people will soon turn it into a failure. If my prediction is wrong, I would be happy, but as with expressing my views, it’s natural to speak only about what I observe.
One example is the issue of the kiswaht al-ka’bah (the cloth that covers the Kaaba) in 1963.One example of this is the issue of the Kaaba’s covering (1963). The way the pieces of the covering were ceremoniously sent off to Makkah, and the manner in which they were taken to the airport in a grand procession of hundreds of thousands of people, almost like a tazia, may or may not be considered a innovation (bid’ah), but it is certain that it was merely a public spectacle with no real connection to genuine religiosity. (Similarly, the “Day of the Strength of Islam” in 1970). However, the very people who previously argued that gatherings and processions for Milad al-Nabi lacked Islamic spirit and love for the Prophet now issue the fatwa that the Ghilaf-e-Kaaba (The kiswah) procession was a “great good,” a magnificent display that took place on a grand scale in Lahore, and they call those criticizing it “flies” who ignore all positive aspects to focus on minor faults (Tarjuman al-Quran, April 1963, p. 55).
Without the right mindset, movements eventually reach this stage. At first, when such public events have no political significance for them, they criticize them. But as they move to later stages, when these events start to carry political importance, their language and judgments shift. What once seemed wasteful and flawed now becomes a “great good.”
I will divide the task that lies before us in India into several points and present them under separate headings:
1. First, we must fulfil the personal duties and responsibilities required of every believer. This includes genuinely becoming worshipers of God, fulfilling the obligations that God has placed upon our lives and wealth accurately, and observing all the moral and transactional restrictions related to personal life as outlined by Islamic Shariah.
2. The second duty that Muslims in India have as a religious obligation is organization. The Quran emphasizes this with the words, ‘Hold fast to the rope of Allah’ (3:103). Its importance is so high that even if three Muslims are in a remote place, they are instructed to form a group and select one of them as their leader (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith No. 6647).
Organization means that Muslims should not be divided into separate groups or scattered factions, but rather live as a united community. They should have an elected leader whom everyone obeys and a central institution from which they receive guidance. In the current situation, establishing an organization to the best of our ability is a Shariah obligation upon us, and Indian Muslims cannot absolve themselves of this duty until they practically establish such an organization among themselves and fulfill their Islamic responsibilities under its guidance. This organization is one of the unavoidable worldly needs of the believers. As stated in the hadith: Muadh ibn Jabal reported that the Prophet e said, “Satan is to man what the wolf is to sheep; he seizes the one that is isolated and away from the flock. So beware of separating into groups and divisions; hold fast to the community, to the masses, and to the mosque.” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith No. 22028)
Collective unity is essential in Islam. However, this command’s purpose is to foster unity among all Muslims. Claiming smaller types of collective unity as its fulfillment actually encourages division within the Ummah. This doesn’t mean that no form of collective organization should be present before true unity is achieved. Clearly, groups will be formed beforehand, but these are not substitutes for the ideal Islamic unity; rather, they are efforts aimed at reaching it—whether through individual or collective endeavors.
If there is ambiguity about the nature of this secondary unity, there is a serious risk that these collective efforts may be mistaken for the real Islamic unity, and that leaving such a group may begin to be treated as if it were an act of apostasy.
Given the current situation, our collective organization should aim to unify under a single structure to the best of our ability, ensuring that all religious and community tasks are carried out with shared interests in mind. We should have a Dar al-Qada (Islamic judiciary) and a Bayt al-Mal (Muslim public treasury), through which people can be informed about Shariah matters. Decisions on internal disputes should be made according to Islamic laws, and Zakat and other communal funds should be collected and used collectively. Preaching and outreach efforts should be organized systematically. Oversight of schools, mosques, and cemeteries should be established, and new Muslims should be protected and guided, among other responsibilities.
One principle in Islamic jurisprudence states that “in Shariah matters, the decree of a non-Muslim ruler over Muslims may be outwardly enforced but is not valid in essence.” For example, if a non-Muslim ruler annuls a Muslim’s marriage, then even if it is annulled outwardly by law, it is not annulled in reality under Shariah, nor is it permissible for the woman to marry someone else according to Islamic law. If she does remarry, that marriage will be invalid, and in the eyes of Islamic law, any children born from it would be considered illegitimate. Therefore, to obtain true Shariah rulings, an Islamic judge (Qadi) is necessary. Additionally, jurists state that when the people of a city pledge allegiance to a person’s authority, he becomes their ruler. However, the public cannot appoint a Qadi in the same manner. A Qadi can only be appointed by the Caliph.
Some people interpret these two points as meaning that it is impossible to establish Shariah courts under a non-Muslim government because an authorized Qadi is essential for Shariah judgments, and the general public cannot appoint a Qadi on their own. Only an Islamic government can do so. Therefore, they conclude that we have only two options: either accept de facto apostasy or change the authority and establish an Islamic government.
But this line of reasoning is based on a misunderstanding. When the jurists say that the entire Muslim community cannot appoint a qadi, it is meant in a specific sense. I will quote here a passage from the Hanafi jurist Ibn al-Bazzaz.
“If the people of a town gather together and appoint someone as judge, it is not valid because there is no necessity. But if their ruler dies and they make a consensus to have someone as ruler, it is valid because necessity requires it.” (Al-Fatawa al-Bazzaziyyah, Vol. 1, p. 489).
From this, it is clear that the difference between these two types of matters is in “necessity.” For appointing a ruler, the consensus of the Muslim community is required, and they choose him based on their collective opinion. However, for appointing a Qadi, their opinion is not needed, as the ruler himself is present to make the appointment.
Ibn Abidin, the author of Radd al-Muhtar, states after quoting this issue from Fatawa al-Bazzaziyah by Hafizuddin Muhammad:
“I say, this only applies when there is no necessity. Otherwise, the general body of Muslims also has the authority to appoint a judge.” (Radd al-Muhtar, vol. 5, p. 367).
This means that the ruling (that general Muslims cannot appoint a qadi) applies when there is no need. But if there is a necessity, then the principle is “they also have the authority to appoint a judge.” In other words, just as the general Muslims have the right to appoint a ruler, they also have the right to appoint a judge. When Muslims agree upon someone as a judge, he becomes a judge by their mutual consent:
Yaseeru al-qaadi qaadiyan bi-taraadi al-muslimeen. (Radd al-Muhtar by Ibn Abidin, Vol. 5, p. 369)
The principle is that the source and origin of all religious offices is, in fact, the entire Muslim community. In the presence of the Islamic caliphate, since the caliph exercises authority on behalf of the Muslims, he acts as their representative. If the caliph or governor appoints someone as a judge and this appointment is valid, it is because, once chosen, the caliph or governor becomes the representative of the Muslims. Through this representation, he gains, on their behalf, the authority to appoint a judge, and after such an appointment, the judge essentially becomes the deputy of the Muslim community itself.
Judges believe that if the caliph or governor dies, the judge they appointed stays in office because his position comes from the Muslims themselves, who still exist. Since the authority that grants his position still exists, the death of the caliph or governor does not end his term. (See Bada’i al-Sana’i, Cairo 1910, vol. 7, p. 16, section: bayan ma yakhruju bihi al-qadi ‘an al-qada’).
3. The third key responsibility can be described, following the earlier discussion under the title “Witnessing and Introducing,” as the task of presenting Islam to those who do not know about God and His plan of creation—standing before them as carriers of both warning and glad tidings. After the conclusion of prophethood, Muslims are understood in this framework to act as representatives of the Prophet, tasked with sharing God’s message with all people. Thus, for Muslims, their immediate audience is the community of the land into which they were born. In this view, the most important duty is to make Islam known among the people of one’s country so fully that, on the Day of Judgment, no one could claim ignorance of it.
This responsibility is framed as one requiring utmost sincerity and honesty: a long-term endeavor to articulate Islamic thought across many years, ensuring that the message is communicated widely and clearly. It is acknowledged as a difficult and demanding process, one that may involve challenges similar to those faced during the Prophet’s own mission. Yet, faith and perseverance are seen as essential, sustaining this effort until, by divine will, hearts are opened to the message or an alternative way forward becomes clear.
The responsibilities of Muslims in India, given their current situation, are based on the Quran and Hadith. This understanding is shared by scholars of the Ummah, and Muslims in similar circumstances have always aimed to fulfill their Shariah obligations in this way.
The tasks I outlined above serve two main purposes. First, they help us fulfill our responsibilities as Muslims, as commanded by God. Second, if we perform these duties correctly, it will attract God’s support. By following the commands of the Almighty, a servant not only meets his obligations but also becomes worthy of the blessings of the Lord of the heavens and the earth. Divine aid is bestowed upon those who obey, bringing empowerment in this life and inheritance of Paradise in the hereafter. Our true success depends on shaping our individual and collective lives in accordance with God’s will; only then can we find paths to success. Without this, no political campaign or revolutionary effort can truly solve our problems.
Another point to understand here is that the tasks I listed above do not mean that our practical and conveying efforts will follow a strict order. Practical and conveying efforts are flexible; they don’t follow a rigid, logical pattern but flow and adjust like a stream. The purpose of this list is simply to help us develop a clear understanding of our Shariah responsibilities so that our practical program is well-organized and each Shariah requirement is addressed properly.
This is an intellectual framework of the issue, not its preaching approach. If the intellectual side of an issue is clearly and accurately defined, then despite taking different outward forms, one’s efforts will stay aligned with the main goal and remain on the right track. However, if the intellectual basis is unclear or faulty, then one risks heading in the wrong direction. Sometimes, even correct actions may have flawed elements because the underlying understanding was not accurate.
