Law
and Justice
Islam
is an exhibition of peace and justice. It manifests
peace and harmony in many ways and forms: through
the removal of exploitation, injustice and mischief
and the promotion of mercy and forgiveness, assisting
the weak and the orphans, the traveler and the helpless,
by defending the oppressed and preserving the human
soul, in fostering graciousness and kindness to
family, neighbors and friends, and by promoting
mercy and forgiveness to both friends and enemies.
Justice
is an essential component in the philosophy of Islam.
It pervades every aspect of life and protects all
humanity. "God commands justice, the doing
of good, and liberality to kith and kin, and He
forbids all shameful deeds, and injustice and rebellion.
[and] He exhorts you [repeatedly] so that you might
bear [all this] in mind. (16:90). Some of
the attributes of God is The Just, The Judge, The
Giver of Peace, The Reliever and The Merciful.
Islam is heaven of social justice and gender equality.
Ingrained in its philosophy is the brotherhood of
mankind.
O humankind! We created
you from a single pair of a male and female, and
made you into nations and tribes, that you may know
and deal with each other in kindness (not that you
may despise each other). Verily the most honored
of you in the sight of God (is he who is) the most
righteous of you, and God is Knower, Aware.
Qur'an, 49:13.
And when
you judge between people that you judge with justice.
Quran 4:58.
Law and Justice
of Islam vs. Love of Christianity
An interesting discussion
was made by Karen Armstrong in her book, Muhammad,
A Biography of the Prophet, regarding the idea
of Justice of Islam and the idea of Love of Christianity.
Here is what she said:
"It is often said
that, where Christianity is a religion of love,
Islam is a religion of social justice. Loving your
neighbor is seen by Christians as the test of true
religion; the Qur'anic definition of the religious
spirit is less ambitious but arguably more practiceable:
'True piety is this: to believe in God, and the
Last Day, the angels, the Book, and the Prophets,
to give of one's substance, however cherished, to
kinsmen and orphans, the needy, the traveler, beggars,
and to ransom the slave, to perform the prayer,
to pay the alms (Zakah).' Qur'an,
2:172.
In Principle everybody
in the umma [nation] would be treated in the same
way: if love could neither prevail nor be enforced,
justice and equality could be legislated for. It
does seem as though the Qur'anic and, later, Islamic
Holy Law (shari'a) did help the Muslims to cultivate
a deeply egalitarian spirit. Not long after Muhammad's
death, an important Bedouin chief called Jabalah
ibn al-Ayham became a Muslim. One day a lowly member
of the umma struck him on the cheek. Islamic principle
did not require Jablah to turn the other cheek,
and he fully expected that an extremely severe punishment
would be imposed on the offender because of his
high rank. Instead he was simply told that he had
permission to strike his assailant once on the face,
to avenge the insult exactly and fairly. Jablah
was so outraged that he abandoned Islam and returned
to Christianity.
It is possible to see
the egalitarian ideal of Islam as practical way
of fostering brotherly love by reducing all men
to the same social and political level."
Muslims
believe in the promotion of good traits, which are
accepted by all people. This concept makes Islam
universal and does not clash with civilizations.
Here is the concept of Joining good (al-Ma'roof)
and forbidding bad (al-Munkar).
Al-Ma'roof
One of the Lesser Pillars
of Islam (Fardh Kifayah) is: al Amr bil Maroof
wa Annahi ahn al Munkar, commanding the doing of
what is globally-known right and forbidding what
is globally-known wrong. 'al Maroof'
is, 'Any thing known to all people as good,' and
'al Munkar' is, 'Any thing known to all people as
bad and unwanted.' Thus Islam accepts and promotes
what is known by all people to be good, such as
the safety measures at home, at the work place and
in traffic, penalizing the criminal, saying the
truth, etc., and it rejects what is known, to all
people, as bad or immoral, such as intoxication,
harming neighbor, steeling and lying. Allah said
in Chapter, 3, the family of Marry:
"Let there arise out of you a band of people
inviting to all that is good, enjoining al
Maroof, the doing of what is right and
forbidding al Munkar, the doing of what
is wrong. Quran,
3:104.
Law and the
Protection of the Five Essential Elements
The Islamic law, Shari'ah is build around the protection
of five basic things: People's blood, mind, honor,
property and religion. This protection is a transcendent.
It applies to all individuals irrespective of creed,
color, national origin, position or gender. To safeguard
the five human elements, Islam denounced violence.
God emphasizes in the Qur'an the sacredness
of the soul and condemns acts of terror and injustice.
"If anyone slays a human being unless
it be [in punishment] for murder or for spreading
corruption on earth it shall be as though
he had slain all mankind: whereas, if anyone saves
a life, it shall be as though he had saved the lives
of all mankind. Qur'an,
5:32.
Any act of safety and prevention of harm made for
saving a human life or any of the five essential
elements is therefore considered Islamic.
Islam
prohibits intoxication, prevents social diseases
and promotes safety regulations in traffic, industrial
and public places, supports medicinal child-proof-bottling
and other mind-harming or accident-preventing measures.
This principle of safety and prevention of harm
apply to the entire ecological system and establishes
a cleaner and healthier environment for all the
creations of God.
The
following article is from
www.guidedones.com
Social
Justice means equality in law, or justice for all.
Prior to the advent of Islam, this kind of social
justice was almost unknown either in theory or in
practice. It was Islam then that established equal
justice for the first time in human history.
This fact was acknowledged by non-Muslim thinkers.
For instance, Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) writes
in one of this letters.
'If
ever any religion approached to this equality in
any appreciable manner, it is Islam and Islam alone.'
(p. 379).
The
contribution of Islam in this respect can be placed
under three headings: first, the formulation of
a complete ideology of human equality and justice;
second the giving of powerful incentive to adopt
this ideology; and third, the establishment of a
living example of equality and justice in all walks
life.
THE CONCEPT OF EQUAL JUSTICE
In
ancient times the concept of human inequality, which
was prevalent everywhere, gave rise to social injustice
in every society.
For
example, the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, regarded
certain classes of individuals as natural slaves.
Although there were other thinkers who did not subscribe
to this view, slavery continued to be widespread
in Rome and Greece, and indeed, throughout the entire
world of antiquity.
In
modern times, this concept has been further strengthened
by Darwin's theory of evolution, according to which
mankind was regarded as having achieved differing
levels of development, the apex being white European
civilization.
The
superstitious concept of racial differences, handed
down to us from ancient times, paved the way for
social discrimination. And such discrimination found
an academic basis in modern times in Darwin's theory
of evolution, which purported to show that in the
evolutionary process, some groups had made distinctive
progress while many other groups had been left far
behind. That is to say that certain groups attained
a superior level, while others remained in a primitive
condition.
Thanks
to this theory of evolution, the European nations
came to regard other nations as being inferior to
them--hence the concept of 'the white man's burden'
according to which the white races considered themselves
invested with the natural right to subjugate the
rest of the world in order to civilize it. This
was the logic behind the colonialism of modem times.
These concepts, in some measure, are still extant.
The
world of today can be broadly divided into two parts--the
traditional and the scientific. The former appears
undeveloped and the latter developed. But from the
standpoint of social justice, there is no difference,
because in both, beliefs which form a permanent
obstacle to social justice still persist.
The
traditional world is influenced to a large extent
by believers in Karma, the theory that anyone born
today necessarily shoulders the burden of his past
deeds. As they see it, that is a law of nature,
as such, has to be submitted to unquestioningly.
A belief of this nature obviously stifles any possible
incentive for social justice. In the light of such
a belief 'injustice' simply becomes 'nature's verdict.'
The human being has to suffer in this world for
his misdeeds in his previous life cycle. Given this
state of affairs, it is just not possible for anyone
to alleviate human suffering. That being so, how
can there be any motivation to act out of a sense
of justice?
The
scientific world is likewise under the influence
of this concept of human inequality, but for another
reason--the general acceptance gained by the theory
of evolution. The concept of the biological evolution
of life seeks to explain the differences in the
existing species, advancing the theory that in the
process of evolution some have gone forward while
others have been left behind.
For
instance, Darwin claims that the female of the human
species remained at a primitive stage in the evolutionary
process while 'man has ultimately become superior
to woman'. By the same token, the blacks of Africa,
the pygmies and other dwarfish races have been 'left
behind.' Because of this theory, the scientific
world cannot be sympathetic to the supposedly backward,
or under-evolved races.
The
theory has been advanced that if people suffer a
variety of afflictions, it is 'their own fault.'
That is to say that those who are made to feel inferior
in the treatment they receive from others are, in
fact, suffering the consequences of their own shortcomings.
It is as if they were fated to be the victims of
injustice; the perpetrators are not, therefore,
to be blamed.
With
the advent of Islam, all such ideas based on an
inherent inequality lost ground. In different ways,
and with great persistence Islam presented to the
world the concept that, in spite of outward differences,
all human beings are equal. All are entitled to
equal social status and equal rights. No one is
inferior or superior. Here are two references from
the Qur'an and Hadith respectively.
"Men,
we have created you from a male and a female, and
made you into nations and tribes that you might
get to know one another. The noblest of you in Allah's
sight is the most righteous of you. Allah is wise
and all knowing". (49:13).
According
to this verse of the Qur'an, the differences of
color and race found among human beings is for the
purpose, not of discrimination, but of identification.
Men in essence are equal. What really distinguishes
one man from another is character. His superiority
can therefore be spoken of only in terms of the
degree to which a man is honorable. The truly honorable
man is one who is God-fearing and who recognizes
and fulfils the rights of God and his fellow men.
On
the occasion of the final pilgrimage, the Prophet
delivered his last sermon while sitting on his camel.
One of the things he said is recorded in these words:
'O
people, listen carefully, your Lord is one Lord,
there is no doubt about it. Your ancestor, is one
ancestor, there is no doubt about it. Listen well
to my words: no Arab has any superiority over a
non-Arab, and no non-Arab is superior to an Arab.
No black is superior to a brown or red, and no red
superior to any black. If there is any superiority
in anyone it is due to his God--fearing qualities.
Have I conveyed the message?' the Prophet asked
the people. The people answered from all corners,
'Indeed so! God be witness.' Then the Prophet said:
'Let him that is present tell it unto him that is
absent.' (Al-Jamili Ahkam al-Qur'an, 16:342)
This
declaration was made by the Prophet in the final
year of his life at a time when the whole of Arabia
had been conquered. As such, it was not the declaration
of a reformer, but of a ruler of the time. His definition
of human equality was not just listened to as a
theory, but was immediately put into practice--nay,
enforced in society.
In
his declaration, the Prophet told the people that
just as there is one Creator of this world so all
the human beings in this world were born of one
man and woman. All human beings were thus equal,
being each other's brothers and sisters. They might
differ in respect of appearance, but as to honor,
status and the right to legal justice, there was
no difference between them.
So
far as human status is concerned, Islam clearly
states that if people have been placed on different
rungs of the social ladder, this is not a matter
of having been favored with or deprived of social
distinction but of their being under divine trial.
God has created man in this world in order to test
him.
Worldly
goods and position (or the lack of them) are used
by God as instruments of this test. They are like
examination papers set by the Almighty. Opulence
and penury are both intended to be states in which
man is tested. He should, therefore, stop suffering
from inferiority or superiority complexes, and should
consider instead whether he is going to pass or
fail this test.
THE INCENTIVE FOR EQUAL JUSTICE
Modern
psychological and biological research on race has
clearly upheld the teachings of Islam, so that from
the academic point of view, other theories stand refuted.
Molecular
biology, too, has opened a whole new field of research
in modern times.
A team of genetic experts in the USA, convinced
by the evidence they already had that all of humanity
had common ancestor, have attempted to trace that
single progenitor across the millennia. Placed in
this perspective, all differences of color, physiognomy,
physique, etc. are purely relative, and do not necessarily
constitute different racial characteristics. All
modern research points to human beings as members
of one Great Family, all bound together by the same
biological brotherhood. (Newsweek, January 11, 1988).
As
well as enjoining justice, (16:90) the Qur'an holds
out the promise of reward for one's deeds. It also
informs us that a complete record is constantly
being made of human actions.
After
death, everyone will find himself standing in God's
court, where he will receive his just desserts.
No perpetrator of cruelty will escape God's punishment.
That time has to come when man will suffer the consequences
of his deeds. 'On that day mankind will come, divided
in terms of vice and virtue, into groups to be shown
their labors. Whoever does an atom's weight of good
shall see it and whoever does an atom's weight of
evil shall see it also.' (99:6-8)
This
concept of accountability alerts man to the necessity
of being extremely punctilious in his dealings with
others. He then sees how essential it is to be just
to everyone, if he is to save his own self. He avoids
wronging others so that he may not be punished by
God. In the absence of any concept of accountability,
social justice figures in our lives as a need felt
by others, not by ourselves. But once we recognized
that there is such a thing as accountability, social
justice becomes a prime necessity for everyone,
including ourselves. And who can neglect his own
needs?
The
concept of accountability is such a strong check
that it restrains one not just from oppression,
but from even any semblance of it.
Once
when the Prophet was at home with his wife, Umm
Salmah, he called the maidservant, who took some
time in coming. Seeing signs of anger on Prophet's
face, Umm Salmah went to the window and looked outside
where she saw the maid at play. When the latter
came in, the Prophet happened to have a misvak (a
stick used for cleaning the teeth) in his hand.
'If it wasn't for the fear of retribution on the
Day of Judgement, he told the maid, 'I would
have hit you with this misvak.'
In
ancient times the beating of slaves was considered
a natural right. But the mentality created by Islam
put a stop to this practice, whatever the faults
of the slaves. This was because the Muslims were
afraid lest they beheld accountable for this act
in the eyes of God.
The
Prophet once came across Abu Masood Ansari beating
his slave. "You should know, Abu Masood ",
he said, 'that God has more power over you than
you have over this slave.' Abu Masood trembled hearing
these words of the Prophet. 'Messenger of God,'
he said, "I am freeing this slave for God's
sake," 'If you had not acted thus, the flames
of Hell would have engulfed you," the Prophet
told him.
This
incident shows that Islam, by obliterating outward
differences, brings all men on the same footing.
Abu Masood had at first considered himself to be
on a different footing from his slave in a purely
material sense where he was respectable and powerful,
the slave was lowly and weak. But when the Prophet
reminded him that in the eyes of God he stood on
exactly the same ground as his slave, he immediately
humbled himself.
Material
differences in standing bring about social injustice.
When these differences are obliterated, social inequality
will, of necessity, disappear.
It
is undeniable that all incidents of oppression and
social injustice are the result of inequality between
man and man. Some are powerful, others are weak.
Some are rich, others are poor. Now what happens
is that the powerful and the wealthy come to regard
themselves as being superior to the weak and the
poor. They imagine they can oppress others with
impunity, their elevated positions being enough
to safeguard them from any attempt at retaliation.
But
Islam tells us that every man's fate is the concern
of God. All moral issues are finally to be judged
in the divine court. God being infinitely more powerful
than all of the powerful men in the world. He will
pronounce His verdict and enforce it with absolute
justice towards one and all. At that time no mortal
creature will be able to escape God's verdict.
In
this way, human affairs are no longer matters to
be settled amongst men. They become matters to be
settled between man and God. On the one side stands
God, and on the other side stands all of humanity.
So,
when faced with God, no one is powerful. Everyone
feels himself in the same state of humility as he
had supposed was the state of other human beings
'weaker than himself'.
When
this consciousness is created in a man, he dare
not, whatever the circumstances, be unjust to others.
This undoubtedly gives him the greatest incentive
to bring about social justice.
In
an atheistic society where people do not believe
in God, such a check is not possible. Where there
is no belief in God, human affairs must be settled
between man and man. And in that situation there
can be no conviction that all men are equal, for
the differences between them will remain all too
obvious. In the absence of a divine overlord, such
differences can never be leveled out, and if their
effects are to be negated, it can only be done by
taking matters between man and man and turning them
into matters between man and God. Everyone should
have the conviction that there is a God above all
men, that all issues must finally be settled by
Him, and that no one may challenge His verdict.
There
are other religions besides Islam which have the
concept of God. But, owing to human interpolations
in their scriptures, their particular concept of
God has, for all practical purposes, become ineffective.
For instance, in Christianity, God's son atoned
for the sins of humanity by his crucifixion. In
Judaism salvation is granted in advance to its adherents
as their birthright. In Hinduism, the monistic concept
of God serves no practical purpose.
In
terms of Islamic Monotheism, God is a separate being,
and all human beings are His creatures and His servants.
Such a belief arouses in man the feeling of humility.
Contrary
to the Hindu concept, God in Islam is the sole supreme
Being: man has no part in that divinity.
In
Hinduism, man is a part of God--a concept which
produces the opposite feeling of superiority. While
Islamic monotheism awakens in man the consciousness
of his being God's servant, Hinduism encourages
man to say, 'I am God.' The former creates the psychology
of humility, unlike the latter which fosters pride.
When the members of a society are flawed by pride,
it is well-nigh impossible to bring about an atmosphere
of social justice.
AN EXAMPLE OF EQUAL JUSTICE
Islam's
third great contribution to social justice was the
example it itself set in according to the same honor
and respect to all human beings, whether they were
weak or strong, kings or commoners, be it in family
circles, social life, positions of power or in the
government, by the same token, no one could escape
punishment for his sins.
The
history of Islam abounds in examples of justice
for all. Here only a few incidents are mentioned
in brief.
1.
In ancient times, it was unthinkable for a girl
of noble birth or even of any free person, to be
married to a slave. The Prophet, wishing to break
with this tradition, decided to arrange a marriage
between his own first cousin, Zaynab bint Jahash
(d. 20 AH), who belonged to the Banu Hashim, the
most respectable clan of the Quraysh tribe, and
Zayd ibn Haritha, a black slave. This most extraordinary
event served as an important example of Islamic
justice.
2.
The Ka'aba, the most holy place of worship, was
considered sacrosanct in all its parts. Therefore,
when the call to prayer had to be made from its
roof, it was only a person of noble birth who could
ascend it. A man of lowly birth performing this
religious duty was not be countenanced. After the
conquest of Mecca, the Prophet broke with this tradition
by asking a black slave, Bilal ibn Rubah to go up
on to the roof of the Ka'aba and give the call to
prayer (Azan).
This
was a unique event, not only in Arab history but
also in world history of ancient times. Had Islam
not become dominant, people would certainly have
killed Bilal for his 'arrogance'. They did, however,
voice strong reactions against this act, which is
an indication of how shocking it had appeared to
them. For example, Utaba ibn Usyad of Mecca thanked
God that his father was no more and could not, therefore,
witness this horrible sight on that day. Harith
ibn Hisham asked, 'couldn't Muhammad have found
someone other than this Black crow?' (Al-Jame Lil
Ahkam AL-Qur'an, 16/341).
3.
Ali ibn abi Talib, the fourth caliph, lost his coat
of armor. One day he saw a Christian of Kufa selling
the same coat of armor. This case was brought to
the then Qazi Shurayh bin al Alharith. Ali went
to his court like a commoner where he was asked
by the Qazi to produce two witnesses. Ali then brought
forward his son Hasan and his slave Qambar. The
Qazi rejected the evidence of his son on the grounds
that the evidence of a son in support of his father
is not acceptable. Thus the reigning Caliph lost
his case. However, the Christian was so greatly
impressed at the display of such equality in the
court of Islam between the king and commoner, that
he himself admitted that Ali was right. The coat
of armor did belong to him (Azmath-e-Sahaba, pp.
32-33).
4.
Once during the caliphate of Umar Faruq, the second
Caliph, Amr ibn al-Aas, who was the then governor
of Egypt, arranged a horse race in which his own
son was also to participate. His son's horse lost,
however to a young, native Copt. The son, Muhammed
ibn Amr, was enraged and lashed the Copt boy with
a whip, saying, 'Take that! That will teach you
to beat the son of a nobleman!' The Copt came to
Medina and complained to the Caliph Umar, who took
it upon himself to institute an inquiry. When he
found that the Copt had been beaten unjustly, he
immediately sent an emissary to Egypt to summon
the governor and his son before him forthwith. When
they arrived, he handed the Copt a whip to flog
them, just as he himself had been flogged.
In
the presence of the governor, the Copt started whipped
his son, stopping only when he was satisfied that
the punishment had been severe enough. Then the
Caliph addressed himself to the governor Amr: "
O Amr, since when have you enslaved people who were
born free? (Azmat-e-Sahaba, pp.40 - 41)
5.
Palestine was conquered during the Caliphate of
Umar Faruq. To sign certain agreements with the
conquered nation, he had to travel to Palestine.
When he left Medina, he was wearing rough clothes
and had only one servant and one camel. He said
to his servant, 'If I mount the camel and you go
on foot, it will not be fair to you. And if you
mount the camel while I go on foot, that will not
be fair to me. And if we both sit on the camel's
back, that will be an injustice to the camel. So,
it would be better if all three of us took turns.'
So
taking it by turns, Umar Faruq would ride and the
servant would walk, and vice versa, and then both
would take a turn of walking so that the camel should
be spared. Travelling in this manner, they reached
the gates of Palestine, where the inhabitants gaped
at the sight of the Caliph going on foot while his
servant rode the camel, for it was the latter's
turn to ride as they approached their destination.
In fact, many Palestinians failed to make out who
was the Caliph and who was the servant. (Taamir
ki Taraf, pp..56-57).
Through
its intellectual revolution and the practical examples
it set, Islam thus created a history which had an
impact on almost the whole of the inhabited world
of that time. This revolution was so powerful that
its effects could still be felt one thousand years
later.
After
the Prophet, the period of Sahaba (The Prophet's
companions) and of Tabiin, (the companions of the
Prophet's companions) is known as the golden age
of Islam. But the effects of the Islamic revolution
lasted far beyond this period, continuing to leave
its imprint on human society in various forms across
the centuries. Even Muslim kings dared challenge
it. Many examples of their submission to Islam can
be cited. An incident relating to Jehangir, the
Mughal emperor, has been very effectively portrayed
by Maulana Shibli Nomani in the form of a poem entitled,
'Adl-e-Jahangiri.'
Jahangir's
Queen, Noor Jahan, once inadvertently killed a poor
man. It happened at some hunt, when a washerman,
straying into her line of fire, was hit and mortally
wounded. When he died, the matter was brought to
court, where the Qazi passed the death sentence
on the Queen. Neither the king nor the Queen dared
refuse the Qazi's sentence. Finally, the issue was
resolved only when the washerman's wife pronounced
herself willing to accept the blood-money, as is
provided for under Islamic law. (If the victim's
next-of-kin refuses to accept the blood-money, the
culprit is sentenced to death-murder for murder).
Now
let us take an example of conduct which is the very
opposite in spirit. The British ruler, James I,
(1566-1625) a contemporary of the Indian ruler,
Jahangir (1569-1627), claimed that he was above
the law and could exercise his judgement independently.
The then British chief Justice, Sir Edward Cook,
(1552-1634) differed with him on this issues, so
that when John Beat, a British merchant, once refused
to pay tax on imported currants (an order given
personally by James I) because no law to this effect
had been passed by parliament, Sir Edward took the
side of Beat. Enraged, the King exclaimed, 'Am I
subject to the law? To say so, is treason!' Justice
Cook did not waver from his standpoint. As a result
he was removed from his post by the King. It is
a matter of historical record that legal differences
with the king eventually broke his judicial career.
When
the case of the King and Justice Cook came to the
British privy Council, the then Attorney General,
Francis Bacon, upholding the legal supremacy of
the king said: 'Judges should be lions, but yet
lions under the throne.' (1/92).
According
to time-honored legal traditions in Britain, there
were two kinds of law: common law and legal prerogative.
For the public there was one set of laws and for
the king and nobles quite another. The King was
above the law. His word, in fact, was law. It was
not until the advent of Islam that this division
was abolished and the same set of laws was enforced
for all. The rule of the King had perforce to give
pride of place to the law of the land.
THE IMPACT ON HISTORY
Shortly before his death on the eve of his last
pilgrimage, the Prophet of Islam gave a sermon which
came to be known as the sermon of the Final pilgrimage.
One of the historic declarations made in this sermon
was: 'Everything pertaining to paganism now lies
beneath my feet." 'With these words, the Prophet
announced the advent of a new age, an age freed
by him of all superstition and ushered in with the
special succor of God.
This
historic change was first wrought within Arabia,
then it spread beyond its frontiers, ultimately
making itself felt throughout the entire world.
This resulted in the eradication of the division
in society between free men and slaves and the inception
of the rule of law all over the world. It also caused
all such philosophies as sanctioned injustice and
social inequality to lose in influence. Now, any
philosophy based on human inequality finds no ground
on which to flourish.
It
is true that Christianity does not teach human inequality
or social injustice. But there was not a powerful,
historical example of human equality. The mission
of Christ did not reach beyond the invitation to
faith. It did not reach the stage of practical revolution.
The
Islamic system is totally different from those of
Hinduism and Christianity. In it, there exists a
complete ideology in favor of human equality, while
alongside it there exists a perfect, practical example.
On both counts, the first phase of Islam set the
course of Islamic history for all eternity. And
Islamic history will continue forever in the same
direction, for there is no influence powerful enough
in the world to alter its course.