The modern world insists that individuals wield the power to materially effect change and are in control of their destinies, reducing man from pursuing truths (truth-centric) to pursuing measurable goals (goal-centric).
This perception — steeped in the delusional ideals of freedom and empowerment — often leads to disillusionment when faced with situations beyond one’s immediate ability to halt or change, such as Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Frustrated by the lack of tangible results, many absorbed into this ideology have developed a resigned mindset, seeking refuge in ideologies that absolve them of responsibility altogether.
This has allowed such people to present their incapability as a conscious ideological choice.
Gazans not following the Sunnah?
Some have gone as far as to suggest that the Gazans — while at grave risk of extermination, and despite fighting against modern fascism and the culmination of human malevolence, kufr, and injustice — are “not following the Sunnah”.
Or that their resistance is not Islamically sanctioned. Or worse still, that the genocide results from their resistance and the like.
“Those who sat at home, saying about their brothers, ‘Had they listened to us, they would not have been killed.’ Say [O Prophet], ‘Try not to die, if what you say is true!’” [1]
Beliefs that lead to negligence
Rather than acknowledging their limitations — seeking Allah’s forgiveness for their ineptitude and inadequacy while doing what they can — these individuals have gravitated towards ideologies such as “Madkhalism”.
Such ideologies encourage docility, passivity, and inaction.
The thinking goes that if anything needed doing, they would have already done it — like the Makkan polytheists would say…
“Had it [i.e. Islam] been something good, they [the powerless Muslims] would not have beaten us to it.”
Gaza has highlighted significant religious matters over which they have had no influence — a cause so important to Muslims, it has become a litmus test for one’s religious credibility.
As a defence mechanism against accusations of abandoning such a significant cause, they simply claim that it was never theirs to begin with, protecting their self-image of righteousness, leadership, and exclusive “guidance”, or of being the “saved group” and the “true monotheists”.
The above mindset shares similarities with many non-Muslim, pro-Zionist voices.
Resemblances with Western cognitive dissonance on Gaza
In the West, Gaza has broadly revealed two groups:
- Those who always knew that values such as human rights, liberty, equality, justice, the rejection of genocide, and so on, were mere veneers for supremacism and colonial domination.
- Those who genuinely believed in these values, but were left totally disenchanted by their collapse (if they had ever stood), or else their fallaciousness.
Indeed, Gaza has shattered the false god of Western, civilisational, and moral superiority, but the first group — the “Abu Jahls” — should not be given any airtime.
Within the second group, many who aligned with Zionist narratives — of so-called self-defence, combating terrorism, protecting the Jews, and so on, did not do so because of their inherent support for Zionism (which is fascism).
They did it out of their inability to accept the failure of the values they effectively worshipped.
How one European power is similar to Madkhali groups
Germany’s stance, for instance, transcends mere “Holocaust guilt” and reflects this major European power’s deeper struggle to confront the ideological and practical failures of so-called human rights.
This shares interesting commonalities with those who forever claimed they were Islam’s only representative power.
Such behaviour becomes a type of cognitive dissonance, where one holds two widely conflicting positions:
- That they are the supreme models of humanity, the “saved group/sect”. Or in the case of the West, the superior race or pioneers of the superior system of humanism and rights.
- The failure to actualise the above notions when Gaza so clearly tested them to do so.
The fundamental issue, as discussed, is the inability to admit to one’s limitations or stand with what is right, even if such would not yield immediate, tangible results.
Interestingly, many of those who accepted the failure of Western humanism — being true to the timeless and transcendental values of justice — were actually guided to Islam!
A historical precedent
Historically, various Islamically attributed ideologies emerged as a psycho-emotional reaction to their inability to understand why suffering occurs, or why change often does not happen, even when those championing the change were of the foremost and greatest generations.
The emergence of various heretical schools can be traced back to the outcome of the Qurra’ Revolution, also known as the Revolt of the Qurra’.
Beginning in 699, during the reign of the Umayyad Caliphate, the rebellion was primarily led by the Qurra (Qurra’ literally means readers or scholars).
These were a contingent of early Muslim soldiers, known for their knowledge and righteousness, including many of the second generation — the Tābi’īn — disillusioned with the unjust policies of the Umayyad governors. In particular among them was al-Hajjāj ibn Yusuf.
Battle of Dayr al-Jamājim
The revolt culminated in the Battle of Dayr al-Jamājim in 701, marking the end of a long series of battles numbering more than 80, where the forces of the Qurra’, led by Abdul Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn al-Ash’ath, were decisively defeated.
The battles were full of instances of Prophetic gallantry.
One of the leaders of the Qurra’, by the name of Jabalah ibn Zahr al-Ja’fi, at one point exclaimed:
“People, no fleeing is worse than yours, so fight on behalf of your religion and your Dunya.”
It is said that the famous Tābi’ī, Sa’īd ibn Jubayr, said something similar to this, while al-Sha’bi would say:
“Fight them on account of their injustice, humiliating the weak, and killing off Salāh.” [2]
Though the motives were a noble endeavour to end political tyranny and social injustice, the revolt was crushed. It failed to see the end it had sought.
As a result, the defeat of the Qurra’ at Dayr al-Jamājim at the hands of al-Hajjāj put into question the effectiveness of armed revolt against tyranny and oppression.
It was a watershed moment in the general Sunni position on the matter.
The Jabriyyah and Murji’ah
This was when verdicts (fatāwa) were issued outlawing armed revolt against tyrannical leaders, fuelling the positions of two distinct groups, the Jabriyyah and the Murji’ah. [3] [4]
Both of these had defeatist viewpoints that diminished activism altogether against what they perceived to be unchangeable, fatalistic realities.
They shared a common thread regarding the concept of human actions and divine predestination (Qadr) as a reaction to the calamity they struggled to come to terms with.
Jabriyyah
This school taught that human actions are entirely determined by Allah, and humans have no free will.
Therefore, people are like puppets in the Hands of Allah, and their actions cannot change what is preordained.
And thus, their reality as passive bystanders to injustice was argued to be a matter of unquestionable pre-destiny, for which action is of no avail.
Murji’ah
This group emphasised that faith (īmān) alone is sufficient for salvation, and actions (good or bad) do not significantly impact one’s standing before Allah.
They believed that as long as a person has faith, their deeds, or lack thereof, will not affect their fate — including the deeds of a tyrannical authority.
The ironic situation we face today
In both of the abovementioned groups, there was a notion of resignation to Qadr and a minimisation of the significance of human actions. It led to the belief that efforts to change one’s fate or circumstances are unnecessary.
In their words, because actions cannot yield material results — as shown by the crushing of the revolution — they become Islamically pointless.
Again, it is clearly seen that the Qurra’ themselves did not forge these distorted, heterodoxical views. They would have seen their activism against injustice as the necessity, instead of measuring the validity of their actions by their material consequences or lack thereof.
Ironically, today, the same schools that teach passive resignation to the reality of the Zionist occupation and massacres in Gaza — arguing that it is the Gazans’ fault, and/or that there is nothing we can do — vehemently teach against the misguidance of the Jabriyyah and Murji’ah!
And in many ways, ideological elements of these historic groups are unfortunately prevalent in modern-day discourse among ordinary people concerning Gaza.
“Modern-day Murji’ah”
Madkhali groups are often termed “modern-day Murji’ah” for the very same reason.
Both ideologies raise the white flag from the outset, accepting the status quo as some sort of imperative and relegating action to futility. These ideologies are formed in a reactionary way.
In the case of the Madkhalites, most agree that the formalisation of the ideology of absolute obedience to the status-quo, including Zionism — or accepting everything for what it is, “as we can’t change it” — initially came about to justify the presence of US military bases in parts of the Muslim world.
A manufactured narrative
Accusations against these groups demanded the creation of a “legitimising narrative”, so to speak.
That is particularly in light of these groups having created a backdrop of being the unabated “people of Tawhīd”, the role models of the Muslims, or even “God’s chosen ones”.
Most interestingly, declaring themselves as “God’s chosen ones” shares a commonality with another peculiar group who have gone to considerable lengths to justify genocide — no less than an abomination — under the forged notion of being “God’s chosen people”.
Gaza has challenged all distorted notions
Pursue the path, not the outcome
The Gazan genocide has come to remind us that activism, i.e. struggling on the path of truth and justice, is inherently essential.
Such is not about seeing our desired milestones, be it the liberation of Palestine or the immediate end to Zionism.
Certainly, no Muslim doubts they will eventually arrive at the end goals mentioned, but it is the necessity of the Muslim — even if he is killed on that path — that no stone is left unturned in its pursuit.
Man was never the master of his destiny, contrary to the ideas espoused by countless self-help writers such as Napoleon Hill.
One such statement of Hill goes along the lines of:
“You can influence, direct, and control your own environment… You can make your life what you want it to be.” [5]
What really is success and what is failure?
The so-called modern world relentlessly venerates man, and through this befouls itself into thinking that “failure” — if its definition is failing to see a desired outcome — is always a consequence of “doing something wrong” or failing to follow “self-help” protocols.
By consequence, for one to see their desired outcome, they must have done something right, and their examples go on to form case-studies in self-help books.
This world reveres those who achieve the outcomes they desire, and disregards those who do not. In fact, it pushes them into despair.
Utilise the means to change, do not worship it
A man of truth utilises, rather than worships, the means to change. He will entrust the outcome to the Controller of Affairs, the Almighty.
Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al-Salām) did not manage to persuade his father through no fault of his own, but because his father was destined to err, and indeed insisted upon it.
That shows that wholesome, guided, and above all sincere efforts, may never yield one’s sought-after results. Man bears no control over his own destiny, let alone that of others!
Likewise, how would the modern world have seen Jonah — Yunus (ʿalayhi al-Salām) — for instance, whose message only reached and resonated across the far corners of Nineveh after he had departed from his people?
Consider, as well, Pharaoh’s sorcerers, whom — after having submitted to the Creator — were all hung and dismembered.
And what about the Companions of the Ditch, who all believed in the young boy’s message of truth, only for them to be thrown into a burning ditch?
Allah asserts their triumph, despite having been tormentingly set aflame:
“Those who persecute the believing men and women and then do not repent will certainly suffer the punishment of Hell and the torment of burning.
“Surely, those who believe and do good will have Gardens under which rivers flow. That is the greatest triumph.“ [6]
In fact, the measure of success is not to expect tangible outcomes
Like the Gazans, the measure is to embark upon the path of truth and justice, whether observable “milestones” are seen in this temporal, Earthly life or not.
Anything ephemeral that presents itself, whether victory, an agreeable crowd, or a vociferous enemy, becomes nothing but a test of one’s resolve on this noble journey.
Also read
- Here are 8 lessons Gaza has taught us
- Scholars that rebelled against tyranny
- What was in Gaza for the non-Muslims?
- Correcting the concept of victory after the ICJ ruling
Source: Islam21c
Notes
This article was originally published on sarim.blog.
[1] al-Qur’ān, 3:168
[2] al-Bidāya wa-l-Nihāya by Ibn Kathīr (d. 774AH)
[3] The belief that man has no choice and is driven to do what he does by an external force he has no control over.
[4] The belief that internal “belief” and the kalima are absolutely enough for one’s salvation, regardless of the sins a person commits.
[5] Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill
[6] al-Qur’ān, 85:10-11
May Allah destroy you for your distortions oh shaytaan.
The Madkhalite deception has endured for too long. May Allah inflict them with destruction in this life until they repent.
Ameen
I wish people like Qurra come back again to fight until liberation of whole humanity and globe….we are seeing complete ecological global damage (6th mass extinction) and extreme wealth inequality.