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.