ISLAM: THE MISUNDERSTOOD RELIGION

Author(s): MAHATHIR MOHAMAD

Source: Islamic Studies, Vol. 36, No. 4 (Winter 1997), pp. 691-700
Published by: Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, Islamabad
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23076041
Accessed: 06-05-2016 05:16 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, Islamabad is collaborating with

JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Islamic Studies

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Islamic Studies 36:4 (1997)

DOCUMENT

ISLAM: THE MISUNDERSTOOD RELIGION*

MAHATHIR MOHAMAD

Prime Minister of Malaysia

I would like to express my appreciation to the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies
for inviting me to talk on Islam. I have chosen 'Islam: The Misunderstood
Religion1 as the title of this talk. I do not claim to be an expert or an 'âlim, an
Islamic scholar, but it would be fatal for me to say that I am not qualified.
Many who speak on Islam and claim to be 'ulama' are also not qualified. I do
claim that I have as much right to speak on Islam as many others who speak on
the subject.
Islam is perhaps the most misunderstood religion in the world today and
indeed throughout history. It is not only misunderstood by non-Muslims, but it
is also misunderstood by Muslims themselves. How else can there be so many
Muslim sects with beliefs and teachings which are so different and
contradictory? Some must be wfong, the result of not understanding or
misunderstanding Islam.
One of the missions of the Prophet of Islam was to bring peace and
unity to the feuding tribes, the Jähiliyyah or the ignorant Arabs of the pre
Islamic days. This he succeeded in doing, as is narrated in several verses of the
Qur'än.
The message of Allah was brought by one Prophet and recorded in one
Qur'än. There is no other Qur'än, or versions of it, or editions which carry
different texts. The Qur'än is not in the form of Gospels by Muslim saints or
'ulama'. The Qur'än is just the record of the message of Allah in the Arabic of
the period. Translations of the Qur'än may be different in minor ways, but they
are not accepted as the Qur'än. Only that in the original Arabic is accepted.

* Text of a lecture delivered by Mr Mahathir Mohamad, Prime Minister of Malaysia, at the Oxford
Centre of Islamic Studies, Oxford, U.K.

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Mahathir mohamad/lslam: the Misunderstood Religion

So there can be no differing texts or Gospels or versions which can

result in differences in the message or teachings of Islam. Yet clearly there are
differences, serious differences, so serious that Muslims are divided sometimes
into warring sects. Why is this so?
Actually people who are merely literate in Arabic cannot understand the
language of the Qur'än, or at least not the whole of it. To understand,
explanations must be made by those learned in Islam, the 'ulama', who
understand the language of the Qur'än and are knowledgeable about the
circumstances in which the messages were revealed to the Prophet. Most of the
messages were about or referred to events which occurred before or during the
life of the Prophet.
The 'ulama' felt a need to explain the verses in order to make them
clearer. These explanations are bracketed in translations of the Qur'än and are
clearly not part of the original message. They are necessary in order to make the
message clearer.
Although there is only one Qur'än, there are two categories of verses
in the Qur'än: the specific or muhkamdt and the general or mutasbâbibât. There
should be no mistaking the meaning of the specific verses, but in fact
interpretations differ due to elaborations by the 'ulamâ'. But the general ones are
more subject to differing interpretations. In Chapter 3 (ÀI 'Imrän), verse 7, the
Qur'än states:

He it is Who has sent down

To thee the Book;
In it are verses
Basic or fundamental
(Of established meaning);
They are the foundation
Of the Book: others
Are not of well-established meaning.

The general verses must necessarily be so, for they are intended to provide
guidance in different situations and for untold problems that Muslims have to
face not only during the life of the Prophet but for all times. The learned in
Islam, the 'ulama can refer to these verses for guidance on any and every issue
or problem.
The procedures for referring to the Qur'än and interpreting the verses
have been determined by the early Muslim jurists in order to prevent casual
interpretations. But since the procedures were made by mere men, however
learned they may have been, misinterpretations and wrong usage can and may
occur, leading to wrong teachings.
The procedures involve, first, reference to the Sunnah or Traditions of
the Prophet and, secondly, ijmâ' or consensus of opinions of the 'ulama' or
scholars. Where the Qur'än or ahâdîth are not clear, the scholars may express

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Islamic Studies 36:4(1997) 693

an opinion or ijrihäd, by qiyäs (analogy) or istihsän (the use of the capacity to

think), applying the Qur'än to the realities of the situation.
The Qur'än is comprehensive and provides guidance for all things at all
times; but clearly, if individual verses are taken in isolation, the teachings can
become distorted and contrary to the teachings of Islam as a whole.
Thus justice and the avoidance of injustice are stressed in numerous
verses of the Qur'än. Yet the tendency is to take just one verse and to interpret
it without concern for the result, justice or injustice. And so such justice can
become quite contrary to the claim that Islam upholds justice.
After the Qur'än, the next most important source of Islamic teachings
are the ahâdîth and the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him), that is his
sayings and deeds as related by those who had heard or seen them in his
lifetime. These must be good and truthful witnesses and these Traditions must
be passed on by word of mouth by reliable good Muslims over the years. With
the passage of time, identifying a series of good Muslims who related these
Traditions became more and more difficult. By the time Imám Bukhärl studied
and sifted through the 600,000-odd ahâdîth and Sunnah, two hundred years had
passed. The learned imam selected only about 7000 as sahîh or genuine, which
he recorded. His student, Muslim, verified an even lesser number. Other learned
theologians verified numerous others.
These collections of ahädfth and Sunnah are now accepted as genuine
by most Muslims of the Sunn! sect. The ShT'ites have their own verified
Traditions.

Since the learned imäms and scholars were not prophets but were men,
they too could be wrong. The Traditions which they reject may be genuine and
those they accept may not be genuine. Of course, many still quote unverified
ahadïth.

Sometimes the pronouncements of the religious authorities at a given

time and in a given situation are mere opinions or ijtihäd, based no doubt on
their wide knowledge of Islam and their understanding of the problem or the
situation. But again these are the opinions of merely human individuals and they
too can be wrong. In today's world, with the advances made by science and
technology, new problems often arise. In the medical world all sorts of
procedures and cures are being devised all the time. Some of these procedures
alarm even the agnostics. Yet Muslim 'ulama' are often asked to make a ruling.
To do so they must understand not just the injunctions of Islam but the
very complex nature of the subject requiring a ruling. The most learned 'ulama'
cannot possibly know everything about everything. They must rely on the
expertise of others. Even then they may still not understand all aspects of the
religious implications of the problem. They may reject simply because they
cannot understand or because they are dogmatic. And of course one 'älim or one
group of 'ulama ' may reach quite different conclusions from another 'älim or
group on the same subject. Both cannot be right, although both can be wrong.
It may require further consultations before an acceptable interpretation can be
made which is compatible with the realities of the situation.

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
694 Mahathir mohamao/Islam: the Misunderstood Religion

The 'ulama ' or the learned in Islam are admittedly indispensable to the
understanding of Islam. Even those laymen who understand Arabic and the
language of the Qur'än need them. For non-Arab Muslims the 'ulama' must also
be linguists in order to explain the Qur'än verbally or in written form. Such
translations of the Qur'än and ahâdîth invariably contain a lot of bracketed
words which help to interpret the particular verse but which are not a part of it.
The choice of words reflects the particular 'älim's understanding. It may also
reflect the views and opinions of the 'ulama'. Again, as the 'ulama' are not
prophets, they may be quite wrong.
Unfortunately, there is a tendency among Muslims to treat the
pronouncements of the 'ulama' as infallible. There are any number of people
who claim to be learned in Islam and call themselves 'ulama Some of these are
clearly charlatans and people with vested interests, including, of course,
politicians with very worldly personal ambitions. If all these people are
considered to be the successors of the Prophet and are qualified and infallible
in their interpretations of Islam, then it is easy to see why there is confusion and
misunderstanding of the teaching of Islam.
Thus not so very long ago Muslims considered even the printing of the
Qur'än as forbidden, harám. They claimed that the Qur'än must be handwritten.
For a long time the Turkish government, which bought a printing press, was not
allowed to use it. Electricity was considered as harám for use in mosques.
Makkah was lighted by oil lamps long after electricity brightened the cities of
the rest of the world. Turkish soldiers were forbidden to wear Western-style
trousers and peaked caps because these too were considered harám. Paintings
of humans or animals were banned until the advent of printing, photography,
and television rendered the ban impractical. Yet all these pronouncements had
been adhered to religiously for centuries by Muslims.
But these are trivialities. They do the Muslims no real harm, although
they may have retarded the progress of the Muslims in a fast-changing world.
Much more serious are the fatwäs which concern the relationships within the
Muslim community and between Muslims and non-Muslims.
Arab society at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) was given
to feuding, incessant wars between tribes, which weakened them and retarded
their progress. The feuds were the result of excessive tribal loyalties. Those
given to these excesses were said to be muta'assibün or fanatical. Islam
condemned this excessive tribalism or fanaticism and the Prophet (peace be upon
him) preached against it, promoting unity instead.
Thus in Chapter 3, verse 103, the Qur'än says:

And hold fast,

All together, by the Rope
Which Allah (stretches out
For you), and be not divided
Among yourselves;
And remember with gratitude

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Islamic Studies 36:4 (1997) 695

Allah's favour on you;

For ye were enemies
And He joined your hearts
In love, so that by His Grace,
Ye became brethren.

But after the Prophet passed away, the Arabs returned to their feuding ways.
Tribal loyalties returned. Disputes over which tribe had the right to succeed to
the leadership of the Muslim ummah after the death of the Prophet (peace be
upon him) eventually led to the most serious schism among the Muslims. The
followers of Sayyidinä 'AR, a nephew of the Prophet who became the fourth
Caliph, broke away eventually to found the ShT'ite sect, while the followers of
Mu'äwiyah, claiming to abide by the traditions, formed the Sunnï sect.
Subsequently both the sects divided up again and again as different imams and
'ulama' interpreted the teachings according to their own understanding or
sometimes their political affiliation.
The feuding between the Muslim sects and the Muslim nations is
obviously contrary to the teachings of Islam. Certainly the fanaticism and
violence with which they oppose each other, reminiscent of the pre-Islamic
Jähiliyya days of feuding, are not in keeping with Islamic teachings.

MUSLIMS AND NON-MUSLIMS

That there is a misunderstanding among Muslims regarding the teachings of
Islam on relations with non-Muslims is even more obvious. The Qur'än clearly
states that the Christians are the friends of the Muslims. Indeed, when the first
few converts to Islam were persecuted by the Quraysh idol-worshippers, they
were advised by the Prophet (peace be upon him) to seek refuge in Christian
Abyssinia. The Christian king of Abyssinia protected the Muslim refugees so
well that attempts by the Quraysh to extradite them failed.
If the Sunnls believe in the Traditions, surely being friendly with
Christians should be one of their beliefs. But we know that some Muslims do
not accept this. Some 'ulama' explain that the present-day Christians are not the
Christians referred to in the Qur'än, and therefore they are justified in regarding
all Christians as enemies.

All Jews are also regarded by some Muslims as enemies because the
Jews of Madlnah had been disloyal to the government of the Prophet (peace be
upon him). Yet the Qur'än states that only those who take up arms against the
Muslims are their enemies. In Chapter 2 (al-Baqarah), verse 190, the Qur'än
states:

Fight in the cause of Aliali

Those who fight you.
But do not transgress the limits;
For Allall loveth not transgressors.

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
696 Mahathir mohamad/lslam: the Misunderstood Religion

In Chapter 8 (al-Anfäl), verse 61, the Qur'an stresses:

But if the enemy

Inclines towards peace,
Do thou (also) incline
Towards peace, and trust
In Allah, for he is the One
That heareth and knoweth.
This means that the Zionists and their supporters who advocate violence against
the Muslims must be regarded as enemies. But when they sue for peace they
should receive a positive response from the Muslims.
Yet some Muslims regard all Jews as eternal enemies against whom
Muslims must for ever fight. This sounds very much like fanatical feuding and
is against the teachings of Islam. But woe betide anyone who suggests that the
Jews are not the eternal enemies of the Muslims.

MISUNDERSTANDING AMONG NON-MUSLIMS

If Muslims frequently misunderstand certain teachings of Islam, the
misunderstanding among non-Muslims, in particular Jews and Christians, about
Islam and Muslims today is even worse.
The clash between Muslims and Christians occurred quite early when
Byzantium was still a great empire and stood in the way of the spread of the
Islamic faith. But Christian Europe really worked up feelings against Islam
during the time of the Crusades. The Crusaders whipped up anti-Muslim feelings
to a frenzy. The persistence of this anti-Muslim feeling and the consequent
violence against Muslims can be described as a kind of feud.
And so the deliberate whipping up of anti-Muslim feelings has been
going on for centuries. Nothing good that Muslims do, in particular in their
relations with non-Muslims, is recognized. Thus the fact that Christians and
Jews could practise their religions in Muslim Spain was hardly ever mentioned
in European history books. The fact that the Christian reconquest of Spain led
to the expulsion of the Muslims and the Jews, or forced conversion or
execution, has never been condemned. That Jews actually preferred to migrate
to Muslim North Africa rather than stay in Christian Spain is regarded as of no
significance.
In the Balkans the mainly Christian Slavs preferred Turkish rule to that
of Christian Byzantium. They actually helped the Turks to defeat the Byzantines.
For the most part they were not converted to Islam, but remained Christian,
surely testifying to the liberalism of the Turks towards non-Muslims.
The misunderstanding of Islam by the West today is perhaps at its peak.
Forgetting that Christianity too had experienced extreme aberrations as
exemplified by the Spanish Inquisition and the burning of witches in Europe and
America, the West has made aberrations in regarding the practice of the Muslim
faith by a minority of Muslims as the true manifestation of Islam.

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Islamic Studíes 36:4 (1997) 697

No one, Muslim or non-Muslim, can deny that there have been a lot of
terrorist acts perpetrated by Muslims. But then a lot of terrorism has also been
perpetrated by non-Muslims. The difference is that, if a Muslim does it, the
deed is immediately attributed to his faith. When a non-Muslim commits the
most heinous of terrorist crimes, his deed is not linked to his religion. The
immediate reaction to the bombing of a government building in Oklahoma was
that it was another Muslim terrorist act. When it was discovered that it was not
a Muslim who did it, the fact that the bomber was a Christian was ignored. It
was not described as Christian terrorism. The bitter fighting in Northern Ireland
involves religious differences between two Christian sects. But at no time have
the bombings, killings, and maimings by the IRA and their Protestant rivals been
termed Christian terrorism or Catholic or Protestant terrorism.

But the terrorism by people of the Christian faith in Northern Ireland

pales into insignificance when compared with the brutality of the Christian Serbs
in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Tens of thousands of Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina
have been raped, starved, tortured, and massacred by the Serbs. Mass graves
are found everywhere. The Bosnian Serbs openly declared that they were
carrying out 'ethnic cleansing' in order to prevent the setting up of a Muslim
nation in Europe. Because of certain implications, Europe refuses to describe
'ethnic cleansing' as 'genocide', which is what it really is.
Yet at no time have the massacres and terrorism by the Christian Serbs
been described as Christian terrorism. Instead, European forces willingly handed
over safe havens for the Muslims to the Serbs who subsequently massacred
thousands of young Muslim men.
Supposing, just supposing, it was the Muslim Bosnian Slavs who had
the weapons and the numbers, and they were supported by Muslim countries,
and they had committed the atrocities, the world would be screaming Muslim
terrorism from the mountaintops. And NATO would have moved in and ended
the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina in no time.
But such is the perception of Muslims by the West that it is not even
noted that the victims of Muslim fanatics and the misnamed fundamentalists are
insignificant compared with the numbers of Muslims and Non-Muslims who
have been massacred by terrorists of the Christian faith. The misunderstanding
of Islam and Muslims is such that the West naturally assumes that terrorism is
a Muslim creed and is confined to Muslims. Evidence to the contrary is just
ignored.
There have been a few Western writers who have tried to be factual and
fair. But these writers are either ignored or condemned. Attempts by Muslims
to point out that the Muslims who are terrorists are a minority, and that Muslims
desire peace as much as anyone else, have also been brushed aside.

FUNDAMENTALISM
Fundamentalism is the most abused of words. It is equated with extremism. Yet
if the teachings of Islam are studied, it would be clear that the best Muslims are
the fundamentalists. The fundamentals of Islam are based on peace. Indeed,

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
698 Mahathir mohamad/lslam: the Misunderstood Religion

Islam means peace. The people who are usually described as fundamentalists are
far from following the fundamentals of the Islamic religion. On the contrary,
they are people who reject the teachings of Islam or who deviate from them.
Most of them have seemingly reverted to the pre-Islamic Jähiliyyah ways of
extreme loyalty to their groups, to fanaticism or ta'assub.
In calling these deviationists Muslim fundamentalists, the West has
displayed its lack of understanding of Islam. The West certainly fails to
appreciate the problem faced by many Muslims. When beliefs are strong and
widespread, whether they are right or wrong, it is not easy for anyone to differ.
To do so would be to risk accusations of heresy. The consequences can be very
unpleasant. People who go against these extreme deviationist groups risk
ostracism or even violence. For these reasons the majority prefer not to be
openly critical or to oppose. But when non-believers condemn all Muslims as
terrorists and plain bad people, they certainly are not being helpful. They are
simply pushing the good Muslims into the arms of the deviationists.
Islam is the religion of people who once dominated the world —
dominated it not only in terms of territorial size and political strength, but in
terms of the sciences, the arts, technology, exploration, navigation, and in trade
and industry. For almost eight hundred years the Muslim Arabs ruled the largest
empire known up till the fifteenth century, and then the Muslim Turks and
Mongols presided over an even bigger empire. Empires, of course, rise and
decline and the Muslim empires did not escape this cycle. But throughout, their
greatest foes were the Europeans. Having embraced Christianity, another Asian
religion, the Europeans were quite fanatical in their opposition to Islam. From
the very beginning there was a deliberate campaign to distort Islamic teachings,
to prevent the Europeans from understanding it and so risk their conversion.
It is not surprising that the fall of the Turkish Empire was largely due
to the machinations of European powers. Playing on Arab nationalist sentiments
and the promise of independence from Turkish rule, the European powers
obtained Arab co-operation to break up the Turkish Empire. But almost
immediately the Arabs found that they had exchanged domination by fellow
Muslims for European domination. All the Arab territories were occupied and
exploited by the Europeans.
Despite their enforced close association with the Muslims in their
Middle Eastern and North African empires and elsewhere, the Europeans made
no attempt to understand Islam and its influence on Muslim life and thought.
There was always that latent antagonism which the Europeans never manifested
against other non-Christian faiths. While many races which came into contact
with Islam accepted it to some extent, the Europeans almost universally rejected
it.

The people of European origin of today may not be so fanatically

Christian, but the attitude towards Muslims and Islam remains. And this is
manifested in very painful ways for the Muslims. Whole nations are isolated,
blockaded, and punished for the faults of a few. Muslims are allowed to be
slaughtered in full view of their so-called European protectors. Is it any wonder

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Islamic Studies 36:4 (1997) 699

that the Muslims are bitter and seek to avenge the wrongs visited upon them?
Is it any wonder that they resort to violence? But still only a few do so.
The Europeans should be able to understand this, for this is also the
European reaction to their real or imagined repression by their own people or
others. But no attempt is made to understand or appreciate the frustrations of the
Muslims. True, the fall of the Muslims and the deterioration in their practice
and interpretation of Islam can largely be blamed on them. But the anti-Muslim
propaganda and deliberate misunderstanding of the religion by the Europeans
have merely aggravated the frustrations of the Muslims.
Malaysia has a Muslim majority and the government is Muslim
dominated. Although the Muslims have sufficient majority to rule the country
on their own, they have chosen not to do so. Instead they deliberately chose to
share power with the non-Muslim minorities.
In 1969 race riots broke out in Malaysia, resulting in some two hundred
people, mostly non-Muslims, being killed. An emergency was declared and the
Muslim Malays took over the government. The Western press declared that
democracy was dead in Malaysia and wrote it off as another developing country
destined for the waste-basket of history.
Yet today Malaysia, still under a Muslim-dominated government, is
peaceful, stable, and prosperous, growing at 8 per cent per annum for almost
ten years. The Muslims of Malaysia are apparently not terrorists. Indeed, they
have proved themselves capable of living and working with non-Muslims to
create a united and progressive nation.
There are no feuds in Malaysia, either between Muslims or between
Muslims and non-Muslims. The official religion of Malaysia is Islam, but
Buddhist, Hindu, and Taoist temples and Christian churches are to be seen
everywhere. Religious festivals of the different races and faiths are celebrated
by everyone together. The non-Muslims in Malaysia do not. regard Muslims as
terrorists or Islam as a violent creed.

One would have thought that Muslims and non-Muslims would look to
Malaysia as an example of the practice of Islam. But the West and their media
refuse to recognize that the Muslims of Malaysia actually exemplify the
teachings of Islam. They prefer to regard Malaysian Muslims and their
behaviour as aberrations. They keep on asking about fundamentalism in
Malaysia and, when told that there are really no Islamic fundamentalists of the
kind they describe, they reject the claim. The prejudice against Islam and
Muslims remains even with Malaysia.
Islam is indeed a misunderstood religion. Such is the misunderstanding
and the prejudice against it that Muslim and non-Muslim alike often regard it as
an impediment, as a barrier to good peaceful relations between Muslims and
non-Muslims and even between Muslims and Muslims. Both regard this religion
that brought greatness to the Arabs and built a very progressive empire as being
responsible for everything bad that has happened between Muslims and non
Muslims.

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Mahathir mohámad/lslam: the Misunderstood Religion

Ignorant of the teachings of Islam, frustrated by the apparent failures

of Islam, and disenchanted with their own countries, some Muslims tend to
deride and even condemn the religion. Others, again due to frustration with the
Muslim communities in which they live and ignorant about the teachings of
Islam and its history, suggest that the Qur'än itself is at fault and needs to be
revised. When such frustrations are aired, the Western media, the principal
guide to Western intellectual thinking, would make heroes or heroines of these
religiously illiterate and untutored people. The Western countries would confer
upon them awards and make them out to be brave people fighting the injustices
of Islam.
The West would love to hear me condemn the religion of Islam for the
failures of Muslims and their nations. But 1 know that their concerns about Islam
and the Muslims are at best academic. I suspect that all they want to see is the
removal of Islam as a faith, the way that Communism was debunked. But that
will not serve the cause of good inter-religious or non-religious relations
between Muslims and the others.

The answer lies in correcting or abandoning the tendentious and

incorrect interpretations of Islam by some of the 'ulama'. These interpreters of
Islam, no matter how learned they may be in the teachings of the religion, no
matter how large their following or how well established their teachings, are not
prophets. There is only one prophet for the Muslims and he is Muhammad
(peace be upon him), the last of Allah's messengers, who brought and spread
the faith of Islam among mankind. Muhammad and the Qur'än cannot be wrong,
but the interpreters of Islam can be.
If Islam appears rigid and doctrinaire, it is because the learned
interpreters make it so. They tended to be harsh and intolerant when interpreting
during the heyday of the Muslim empires. And they and their followers would
brook no opposition to their writs once they were made. And so, long after the
Muslims have lost their pre-eminent position, long after the worldly environment
has changed, the Muslims are exhorted to adhere to interpretations which are no
longer adequate or relevant or practicable.
What Muslims must do is to go back to the Qur'än and the genuine
ahâdîth, and study and interpret them in the context of the present world. It is
Allah's will that the world has changed. It is not for man to reverse what has
been willed by Allah. The faithful musi look for guidance from the teachings of
the Qur'än and the Hadith in the present context. Islam is not meant only for
seventh-century Arabs. Islam is for all times and for every part of the world. If
we Muslims understand this, then there will be fewer misunderstandings among
us. If the non-Muslims appreciate the problems that the Muslims have in trying
to adjust to modern changes, then they will not misunderstand Islam and the
Muslims as much as they do now. And the world will be a better place if all
these misunderstandings are removed.

This content downloaded from 132.77.150.148 on Fri, 06 May 2016 05:16:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms