umm Abdillah, Radio Islam Programming – 2014.04.23

 

UUCSA Secretary General, Moulana Yusuf Patel of Middelburg comments on questions regarding participation in a non-Muslim nation’s political process.

 

It is an overarching sentiment among many that our goal as Muslims is not integration, nor to become a minority player in a nation’s political structure. Rather, our Deen was sent for gracious domination and suppression of other corrupt and detrimental ways of life. This is evident from the tone of our past scholars when discussing this subject and from various explanations of the ayah:

 

“And He is the One who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the True religion so that it may overcome all other religions – even if the polytheists are averse to such.” [Qur’an 9:33]

 

Generally this has set our attitude towards the subject of political rule – that we should be in charge and be the major player in designing the system and running it.

 

As for the ruling to register to vote and joining the political process in a majority non-Muslim land, we have been taught by our scholars that it is not only permissible, but encouraged for the achievement of short-term goals: especially at local and provincial levels.

 

Some do however cite certain detriments to being involved in a majority non-Muslim nation’s political process. Among them:

 

1. Possible further fragmentation of the Muslims on debated political issues.

2. Draining of Muslims resources in costly political campaigns and lobbying.

3. Loss of true independent representation (as one will become one of many voices trying to influence a particular political leader).

4. Compromise of key values for harmonious integration with the non-Muslim system.

5. Being perceived as more of a threat by staunch non-Muslim political activists who already feel threatened by the dominance of Muslim activists. (They believe that in a xenophobic country, this would lead to laws which would further restrict Muslim political activism).

 

Response by Moulana Yusuf Patel:

 

Bismillah’ Arahman, Araheem

 

Integration versus Assimilation

 

The issue of participation in the political milieu of a non-Muslim country naturally evokes different views. Some believe it is forbidden and propose absolute abstention. Others assert a carte blanch attitude viz. total and absolute support for the political system. Then there’s the in-between view that subscribes to qualified political participation.

 

Let us begin with what is generally misconstrued, the statement right at the beginning: “our goal as Muslims is not integration” and draw a distinction between integration and assimilation.

 

Assimilation is to lose your unique identity, to dispense with your culture and values in favour of the identity, culture, values of the ‘other’. Integration is participation in the development of the country whilst retaining your religion, values, culture and identity. If we compare the European example to the South African example we’ll find a huge difference. Europe is plagued with unprecedented levels of Islamophobia because Muslims have refused to assimilate and adopt the identity, dress, habits and culture of the host country. This uncompromising demand for unity through uniformity has led to the ban on the hijab or the building of minarets etc.

 

South Africa on the other hand is very different. Our diversity is celebrated. South Africa promotes unity through diversity, which allows people to integrate without compromising their religious values, identity, culture, etc. Our country prides itself on not requiring assimilation by celebrating diversity. It is very important that we draw and understand those distinctions.

 

Working within the system

 

Let us consider a few examples from the Quran which my help us address the issue of Muslims participating in a non-Muslim political system.

 

The first is of Yusuf (as) [Quran 12:70-76], who served as a Minister in a regime led by a King. The Quran states: “It was not possible to detain his brother under the law of the King…” This clearly shows that Yusuf (as) served in an administration that was governed by the law of the King.

 

The inference from this incident is profound in that it highlights Yusuf (as), willingness to serve in a regime with the express intention of creating a better life for the citizens of the country.

 

The second example would be one mentioned in Surah Mu’minun. The lengthy incident where Firoun was afraid of Musa and ordered him killed. A ‘believing man’ within the establishment objected to the death sentence. He is mentioned in a rather praiseworthy manner in the Quran. He was a ‘believer’ who participated in the regime without revealing his identity.

 

The fact that Nabi (saw) asked a group of Muslims to seek asylum in Habasha, which was a Christian country, also suggests that Muslims need to adopt strategic alliances for the protection and betterment of the community.

 

Further, we have examples in Nabi (S) treaties at Hudaybiyya with non-Muslims. He also had a pact with the Banu Quraiza, Qaynuqa and Banu Nazir in Madina Munawara to safeguard the welfare of the young Muslim community in Medina.

 

The Contentions

 

As for the contentions listed above:

 

1.  Debating political issues and dealing with opposing views is an integral as life itself. It is not unique to the Muslim community. It allows for dynamism and growth and should never be translated as something negative. That we may be divided on the best approach need not be translated as a negative but it demonstrates the political maturity of leadership.

 

The fear we should have is of ‘asabiyyah’ – blind support of your clan or tribe or team. This is declared impermissible in our Faith.  Ahadith narrated by Abu Daud say: “he who calls or fights for asabiyya is not of us.” This would then mean our engagement and participation should always be a qualified form of participation and not blind allegiance to a party irrespective of whether they are right or wrong.

 

2. I cannot identify with this contention in a South African context. The Quran says: “Obey Allah and His Messenger and be on your guard”. If we fail to plan, we plan to fail.  Be on your guard means adopt the necessary measures to protect yourselves by being strategic in what you do.  

 

3. As for the third contention: what is the use of true independent representation when it provides no leverage for you to negotiate?  This is as effective as winking in the dark – only you know you are doing it with hardly any impact on those around you.

 

4.  The Quran gives us a beautiful verse (3:200) to illustrate this  – “O you who have believed, persevere and endure and defend the borders of your community.” This is a call for active defense of your deen and community not a passive and reluctant call to be at the forefront.

 

Ribaat is an Arabic term for a small fortification built along a frontier during the first years of the Muslim conquest of North Africa to house military volunteers, called the murabitun.

 

5. This is not the case in South Africa, as highlighted in the introduction in the differences between integration and assimilation. Active participation allows for us to challenge Islamophobic tendencies. We have enjoyed disproportional representation in parliament post-1994. Further, we have a Muslim-friendly local and foreign policy.

 

Image Credit

Radio Islam: Educating, Empowering, Mobilising.