Dilly Hussain – Nationalism & disunity of the Ummah Sheffield Uni
AI: Summary ©
The speakers discuss the origins of nationalism and how it is a way to define the state based on specific values and ideas centered around culture, language, ethnicity, race, and possibly religion. They also discuss the history of the Islamic Republic and its use of asabih, which is a way to define nationalism. The speakers emphasize the importance of pride and arrogance in Islam, the need for unity and peace, and the danger of nationalism. They also discuss the potential for a modern caliphate, which would unify the hearts and minds of Muslims upon what is most pleasing to Allah.
AI: Summary ©
Let me first begin by thanking Sheffield University
Islamic Circle as always
for giving me the great pleasure and honor,
to deliver a talk to you all on
nearly always a very pressing topic. I must
applaud
the Islamic Circle, mashaAllah, for always choosing some
very vital and relevant topics, and I will
accept it from you guys. I mean,
so today's
address is about nationalism
and the division
of the Muslim Ummah.
Now
whenever we talk about concepts and ideas and
philosophies and ideologies it's always
important, in fact imperative,
to first begin by establishing a definition.
Right? Or at least some kind of understanding
as to what we're referring to here.
So
when you speak about nationalism
or how it's widely understood, Oxford Dictionary as
well as Cambridge
and other dictionaries, they define it as following.
And I want you to listen to this
definition attentively.
And I want you to keep this definition
in mind throughout the entirety of my talk.
So nationalism is as defined,
identification
with one's own nation and support for its
interests,
especially
to the exclusion or detriment of the interest
of other nations.
So that's how nationalism is generally defined.
And
it's very,
interesting how
within this definition you have a number of
keywords,
identification,
interests,
exclusion,
detriment,
and other nations.
These are very important words that have been
included,
to define nationalism. I want you to keep
this in mind because each one of those
words are very important as to
what nationalism is, how it has manifested in
today's world, and most importantly while we're gathered
today, how it's affected the Muslim Ummah.
Now with regards to the origins of nationalism,
I don't want to spend too much time
on this because it's such a vast topic.
Right? There's entire studies and debates and literature
on this issue. The birth of nationalism.
But generally speaking, between historians,
they would either argue that it began in
the mid to late 18th century
with the American Civil War or the French
Revolution.
Whereas other groups say no.
Nationalism as we understand it today, it initiated
in the early to mid 19th century. That's
generally the debate between historians
but it's fair to say that was the
period where
there's a near consensus that nationalism began. Right?
So we're talking here 17 fifties to 18
fifties. That 100 year period is where this
idea of nationalism
was born.
It's also very important to understand that this
ideology is exclusively
European.
It is not something that was born,
from the eastern lands in Africa, in Asia,
in the Americas.
It is not an ideology or a kind
of thinking that was born from the tradition
of those people from those parts of the
world.
Rather, nationalism was an ideology which essentially
formulated
due to
various events,
events such as the enlightenment,
the industrial revolution,
the treaty of Westphalia,
many, many
things. Many, many, many events
and struggles,
and incidents which took place within Europe
and their respective struggle to define their identity,
to define their statehood to and their own
respective struggles with the pope and the and
the Roman Catholic establishment.
All of that together
contribute towards the the birth of this ideology
called nationalism.
It's important for us to understand
that it is exclusively European.
So when we talk about nationalism,
it's essentially a way to define
the state or a nation.
And many historians have also argued that
nationalism was an inevitable outcome as a result
of the decline of conventional
empires.
Right? That's debatable because that wasn't necessarily the
case with the British or French empire until
after World War 1 and World War 2.
It was definitely the case with the Ottoman
Caliphate.
But nevertheless, you know, that's a common explanation
that it was the natural outcome
towards the decline of empires.
And perhaps for the first time in history,
that identity
was strictly defined
around
new things.
Things which weren't necessarily,
attributed towards one's identity. Things like culture,
language,
ethnicity,
race,
in some cases, religion. Right? Not always, but
in some cases, religion. But generally, it was
culture, language, ethnicity, race, and values which emanated
from these things.
Now the reason why this can be problematic
is because
culture, language, ethnicity, and race, right, was never,
a defining aspect of a state.
Right? It it was never, you know, in
in when you look at human history,
states and civilizations never defined themselves based on
these things. They didn't define their state on
language or culture. Culture is something that's very
fluid. It just evolves. It's it's got a
lot of synergy. There's a lot of overlaps.
Right?
Same with race. It wasn't something that's necessarily
used to define a state.
Right? But this new ideology, this new movement
that was seeking a new type of statehood
was now using things like culture, language, ethnicity,
and race to define,
your nation.
And your loyalty and your sovereignty
to the state would be based upon these
things.
And nationalism is also,
a secular ideology. It has no real place
for religion,
Unless religion
conforms to the dominant,
identity of nationalism.
Right? And that was definitely the case of
let's say the Balkan states, who broke away
from the Ottoman Caliphate because they were generally
Christian. So,
their nationalism had to incorporate Christianity as part
of their identity because they were, for centuries,
part of the Ottoman state. So to break
away from them, they had to include Christianity
as being part of their national identity. This
is just an just an example.
And
therefore,
when we look at nationalism and how it
has manifested today so you have the movements,
which then become an ideology.
But then what was the outcome? What's the
actual practical living outcome of this ideology?
It is the birth of the nation state,
the countries which you see that exist in
the world today,
the 200 or so plus.
All of these countries, the vast majority of
these countries, anyway,
is as a result of this idea of
nationalism.
The nation state
is the model of stakehood
which has existed for the last 100 years.
And generally speaking, especially in Western academia,
it's basically regarded as the default norm.
To go against this the secular nation state,
many would question your own sanity too because
it's generally assumed that it's either the secular
nation state or nothing.
So when I say secular nation state here,
it includes every country from Bangladesh to Pakistan
to Britain to Saudi Arabia to Canada to
America to Ecuador, to Malaysia.
These are all nation states.
Now nation states can be socialist. Nation states
can be capitalists. Nation states can claim to
be Islamic republics.
Nation states can be monarchies.
But
the defining
aspect of a nation state
is that that respective polity
has defined its state
on a particular set of values and ideas
centered around culture, language, ethnicity,
race, and sometimes religion.
And it's secular because it doesn't have
a place
for religion to have a say in public
life or policies.
Now that's a very cursory understanding.
Right? There's so much more that can be
said,
and I'm sure I've missed out a number
of key things. But generally, it suffices to
just know that both things. Right?
Now when we
try to make sense of nationalism from an
Islamic perspective,
right,
and you look at,
the life of the prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam
and,
you look at the scholarly works of over
the period of 1400 years, both classical and
even contemporary works,
the closest idea,
perhaps the most accurate idea
to nationalism
in the Islamic tradition
is asabih.
Now Asabih
is commonly translated to
tribalism.
Right?
And during my research for in preparation for
this topic,
you that is the only kind of translation
I found. The most closest one that I
could find,
within the Islamic tradition
which equates to nationalism.
But generally, it's it's tribalism.
But then again,
is it not the case that once you
group people together around culture, language, ethnicity, and
race, that that too is a form of
tribalism.
Right?
It's a form of tribalism.
And the tribe
is the the tribe
is the masses
and the tribal leader and in some cases
the the kind of demigod
is is the state.
Right?
But asabia can also mean
tribalism in the way it's conventionally understood in
tribal societies.
Tribalism could be racism,
but tribalism,
or asabia,
its closest,
you know,
manifestation
has to be nationalism in today's time, I
believe anyway. And and and many contemporary scholars
have also argued this as well.
So when we look at this
concept of asabiha, we have to assess how
is it referred to? How is it understood
within the Islamic tradition?
How did the prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam speak
about this idea of asabiha?
Right?
And the reason why this is important
is because if
we accept
that asabih, whether you regard it as tribalism,
nationalism, racism,
that if this is something which the prophet
spoke about
and the ulama of the past and present
have spoken about, then we need to understand
how it was taken.
Is it something positive? Is it something negative?
Is it something which has good and bad
whenever it's supplied?
But I will humbly argue
that asabiyyah
unequivocally
is something which is haram.
And
I there is not a single positive reference,
not a single positive reference within Islamic source
text. All the works of the great scholars
of the past and present who speak positively
about
this time, Asabihyah.
And in fact,
whether it's tribalism,
whether it's racism, or whether it's nationalism,
if all those three things or one of
those 3, three things constitutes as asabihyah
is antithetical to Islam
unequivocally.
And I want to just go over
some of the some of the, prophetic statements
of how our beloved prophet sallallahu
alaihi wasallam
spoke about,
As Sabiyyah.
In a hadith, in Mishqat al Masabit, the
prophet said,
he who calls for asabiya
is as if he has bit his father's
*.
Right?
Very, very
harsh way.
Yeah. In another hadith
mentioned in Abu Dawood, the Prophet said, he
is not one of us who calls for
asabih,
who fights for asabih or who dies for
asabih.
In another hadith, the Prophet concluded his speech
with regards to
the practices of pre Islamic Arabia
and Asabih. He said, leave it. It's rotten.
In a more extended hadith mentioned in Atir
Midi and Abu Dawood, the prophet said,
there are indeed people who boast of their
dead ancestors,
but in the sight of Allah, they are
more contemptible than the black beetle that rolls
up in a piece of dung with its
nose.
Behold, Allah has removed from you the arrogance
of the time of Jahiliyyah
with his boast of ancestral glories. Man is
but a God fearing believer or an unfortunate
sinner.
All people are the children of Adam and
Adam was created out of dust.
In another hadith, also mentioned in Abu Dawud
and Thir Midi,
the prophet said, undoubtedly
Allah has removed from you the pride of
arrogance of the age of Jahiliyyah
and the glorification of ancestors.
Now people are of 2 kinds, either believers
who are aware
or transgressors who do wrong.
You are all the children of Adam, and
Adam was made of clay. People should give
up their pride in nations because that is
a coal from the coals of hellfire.
If they do not give this up, Allah
will consider them lower than the lowly worm
which pushes itself through dung.
Very strong,
very unequivocal
language
the prophet used in describing as Sabiha here.
Right?
And what's very interesting
about as Sabiha
is that it when you when you when
you read the prophetic statements, when you read
the works of the scholars,
it's synonymous with a number of things.
It's synonymous with pride.
It's synonymous with arrogance.
It's synonymous with Jahiliyyah.
Who knows what Jahiliyyah is here when he's
referred to in, in Islamic works? What what
what what does Jahiliyyah mean, Nakhi?
The period before Islam.
Absolutely.
So when the prophet speaks about Jahiliyyah, he's
speaking about the the the period before
Islam came to the Arabs.
And it's nearly always spoken about negatively.
The pagan
practices of the Arabian people before the dawn
of Islam.
And whenever Rasulullah speaks about Asabih, it's nearly
always to do with Jahiliya Jahiliya,
the bad times, before the message of Islam,
before the justice of Islam, before the liberation
of Islam. And it's always synonymous with pride
and arrogance.
One would then ask,
what is the opposite?
If Asabih is this bad and this condemned,
what then is the opposite?
The opposite is
foretold in the beautiful verse of the Quran
which our brother Abdul Athid beautifully recited.
Right? Where Allah
tells us in Surah Al Imran to hold
firmly to the rope of Allah altogether.
But before I elaborate on this verse,
there are some statements of the prophet, very
clear statements
which is opposing this concept of Asabih.
In the very famous hadith mentioned in Buhariya
Muslim,
the one where the prophet compares
and uses the analogy of the Muslim Ummah
to that of a body.
The parable of the believers in their affection,
mercy and compassion for each other is that
of a body. When any limb of it
aches, the whole body
reacts with sleeplessness and fever.
Mentioned in Bukhari a Muslim
in the farewell sermon of the Prophet.
He sallallahu alaihi wasallam said the Muslim is
a brother of another Muslim. He does not
wrong him nor does he surrender him. Whoever
fulfills the needs of his brother, Allah will
fulfill his needs.
Whoever relieves a Muslim from distress, Allah will
relieve him from distress on the day of
judgment. Whoever covers the faults of a Muslim,
Allah will cover his faults on the day
of resurrection.
Allah tells us in the Quran in the
verse that our brother recited at the opening
of this talk.
And hold firmly to the rope of Allah
altogether and do not become divided.
And remember the favor of Allah upon you
when you were enemies and you brought your
hearts together and you became by his favor
brothers
and you are on the edge of a
pit of the fire and he saved you
from it. Here Allah is talking about
the enmity which existed in Jahiliyah.
The Mufasileen
is saying that Allah here is talking about
when Islam bonded
the people of Arabia and made them brothers
when they were enemies before.
In Surah Al Tawbah, Allah says the believing
men and believing women are allies of one
another. They enjoin what is right and forbid
what is wrong and establish prayer and give
Zakah and obey Allah and his messenger. Those
Allah will have mercy upon them.
And in Surah Hu Jarrah, Allah tells us
the believers are about brothers. So make settlement
between your brothers and fear Allah that you
may receive mercy. These are just some of
the verses of the Quran and some prophetic
statements which clearly emphasize
the great value
of Islamic brotherhood and Muslim unity. And in
fact, this is not just the opposite of
Asabih,
but it is the solution to overcome Asabih,
whether whether you regard it as tribalism, racism,
or nationalism.
And those of you who have read
the life of the prophet
you know
that when he came
with the message of Islam to his people,
there were leaders from Quraysh
who knew he was speaking the truth, but
they rejected him because he was from Banu
Hashim, that he was not from their tribe.
There were some leaders of Quraysh that said
that why didn't God send a prophet from
our tribe? Our tribe is greater.
Right?
There were even some instances where some Sahaba,
in some cases, even after becoming Muslim, they
uttered some statements and the prophet's face would
go red and he'd and he say you
still have the traits and the remnants of
Jahiliya,
of tribalism.
The prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam came to
his people with the message of Islam
to unify
the disputing and divided tribes of Arabia
and then unified Muslims beyond the Arabian Peninsula
on the premise of Islam.
Now
when we look at
the manifestation
and the effects
that nationalism
or asabiyyah
has by the way, I'm gonna leave it
up to you guys whether you wanna whether
you wanna take asabiyyah as nationalism, tribalism, or
racism.
The truth is they're all connected.
Nationalism can lead to racism.
In fact,
in many cases when there's arguments and there's
debates between people of different nations, it can
nearly
it can very easily
descend into a type of racism.
And as already mentioned,
that just because when we think of tribalism,
we think of some kind of, historical,
set of indigenous people or some people in
some faraway land in Africa or Arabia or
in the mountains. No. Tribalism
exists even amongst modern progressive societies.
Right?
Tribalism has many manifestations.
The premiership football is a type of tribalism.
Right?
Wildcat cricket is a type of tribalism.
Right?
Many tribalism has many manifestations.
But let's look at how we affected
Muslims and the Muslim world in the last
200 years.
Nationalism
was perhaps one of the key reasons and
key factors
which led to the demise of the Ottoman
Caliphate.
The countries in the Balkans today,
Serbia,
Kosovo,
Albania,
Bulgaria,
Romania, Greece, Armenia,
Bosnia,
Croatia.
All these countries
all of these countries were part of the
Ottoman Caliphate for centuries,
and then they broke away.
They broke away as a result of nationalist
sentiments and rebellions, which were instigated by
the British, the French, and the Russian. But
nevertheless,
they broke away from the Ottoman Caliphate because
they wanted their own state
centered around their language, centered around their race,
centered
around, their religious identity of being Christians and
not wanting to be part of a Muslim
state.
Was it not nationalism?
That was the school that broke the camels
back in World War 1 with the Arab
revolt
against the Ottomans
and the Sharif of Makkah who sided with
the British and Lawrence of Arabia
who fought
the Ottomans.
Why?
And even the flags, when you look at
the flags of
Kuwait,
even Palestine,
many Arab countries, the the one with this
black, white, red, and green. You guys know.
Yeah. That that flag, that that is the
flag of the Arab revolt.
The Arab revolt against the Ottomans.
Right?
And that was
essentially
the straw that broke the camel's back.
Now
internally,
there was also a struggle.
There was a nationalist struggle.
Internally, within the Ottomans, there was a movement
growing that wanted to move away
from the centuries old pan Islamic worldview
where the Ottoman rulers saw themselves
as not just not Turkic rulers, but as
rulers of the Muslim world and the domains
of the great Islamic lands of Mecca and
Medina and and Jerusalem and Damascus.
Right? They wanted to move away from that
and make
the Turk, the Ottoman state more Turkic centric.
Right?
This was known as the Young Turk movement
as well as wanting secular reforms within the
Ottoman state. They too wanted to move away
from this kind of pan Islamic worldview.
This was the struggle of Khalif Abu Hamid
Throughout his reign, this was one of his
struggles.
If we look at the Ummah today
if we look at the state of the
Ummah today,
we have 57 or so
Muslim majority
secular nation states.
Generally speaking,
unfortunately,
they are very weak.
They are subservient to greater powers and authorities,
usually usually one or some of the 5
permanent security members of the UN.
They're very they they're dependent on these nations.
Their entire economies
run on aid and handouts
and loans from institutions like IMF and the
World Bank,
and they're divided amongst themselves.
Even though there are organizations
like the OIC
or the Arab League or the African Union,
generally speaking, when
an incident arises where they need to act,
very rarely, if ever, will you see any
kind of positive intervention
to assist
another group of Muslims who are struggling.
This is why
when we look at the situation of Palestine
and that for nearly 80 years,
neighboring Arab countries,
okay, fine. In their formative years, they may
have fought the Israeli entity,
right, for whatever causes,
or ideology which they felt was appropriate at
the time. But generally speaking,
the Arab head of states and the governments
that Saran Philistine have kind of abandoned the
Palestinian cause.
And the same can be said for Kashmir.
The same can be said for the situation
of our Uyghur brothers and sisters in China.
To the extent when prime minister Imran Khan
is is asked many times about the situation,
he says, I have very little to no
knowledge about it, but it's for China to
deal with.
Right?
To the extent where in Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina,
the prime minister, says that we don't want
Rohingya refugees. They're a burden on us.
Right? And these are people whose homes are
being torched. Women are being raped. Men have
been killed
to the extent where even we have
Saudi Arabia currently for the last 5, 6
years has been pounding Yemen
with the worst humanitarian crisis of our time.
And it was also crown prince Mohammed bin
Salman who said that if that's the way
China deems appropriate to deal with the Uyghurs
by putting them in concentration camps or reeducation
camps,
That's China's prerogative.
That's how they're gonna deal with this issue
of radicalization.
Or that when it comes
to Muslim governments and heads of states speaking
out,
forget about intervention.
Intervention is
long away,
but merely just speaking out
or expelling diplomats and ambassadors or cutting diplomatic
ties.
That when it comes to the pin drop
silence
of many, many, if not all Muslim countries
currently with the situation with the Uyghurs is
because they're so reliant in, Chinese funding.
That Chinese funding and infrastructure is essentially keeping
up a number of Muslim states.
So, therefore, they can't say anything.
When I speak to many genuine practicing Pakistani
brothers and sisters, when I speak to them
about this issue, a number of them have
said, look. Can't do nothing about the Uyghurs
because of CPEC,
because, you know, so many Chinese investments in
our country.
Right?
And these are just some examples,
but the examples are many,
and we know this.
And I also want to make a distinction
between governments and heads of states and the
general masses of the Ummla because, alhamdulillah, there
is goodness within the Ummla.
Because whenever you see a calamity, whenever you
see a natural disaster, whenever you see war,
oppression, or something, you will always see Muslims
take to the streets. They will protest. They
will raise money. They will raise awareness. They'll
hold events. They'll sign petitions.
So there is goodness.
There is goodness of Muhammad in the way
the prophet described as a body in their
mutual love, affection, and care for one another.
This is very evident. Very evident.
But the disease of nationalism has got to
the point. Remember the definition?
Identification
with one's own nation and support for its
interests,
especially to the exclusion or detriment of the
interest of other nations.
So the interest of your nation now dictates.
It now dictates
when you believe,
when your government or your leader should intervene
or not.
Forget about the bond of Islam, the bond
of Muslim brotherhood.
Forget about that. Now what dictates our interest
is the interest of this nation,
its economy,
its infrastructure,
its investments.
Now that's a very
macro example.
We know that nationalism
has affected
our very communities locally.
In the UK, there's around
1800 masajid and masala. Right?
But it's it's
not unheard of to hear, oh, that masjid
is a Pakistani mosque. That's a Bengali mosque.
That's a Somali mosque. That's an Egyptian mosque.
It's not unheard of. You hear it all
the time. And you go into these masa'ids
and entire mosque committees are made up of
that
ethnic demographic.
To the extent that when it comes to
events and talks, it is only catered for
that particular
demographic.
This is also a type of asabi.
Right?
I'm not necessarily saying
that these things may have happened organically or
circumstantially because of a majority demographic makeup of
a particular town or city. I'm just saying
that once you've established that and you refuse
to change it to accommodate for other Muslims,
hidden within your reason as to why you
wouldn't do that is because you feel that
this is the dominant group and we're gonna
cater for this dominant group.
Yeah.
Who's here is from Pakistan?
Who's here from India?
Okay.
You
know
that when India and Pakistan play cricket,
right,
that even Muslims from both countries would be
at one another.
We know that with the recent developments, the
unfortunate developments have been happening in Delhi with
the Hindutva riots,
It was so sad to see some
of our Pakistani brothers and sisters that their
reaction to seeing
such unfortunate incidents was to hashtag thank you
Jina.
Right? That when you are seeing such incidents
taking place that your first reaction
is not You Allah,
save our brothers and sisters. Make it easy
for them to overcome their struggles against the
oppressive Modi regime. It was to remind them,
we've got Pakistan or we've got Jina.
Who's here from Bangladesh?
What's a very common what's a very common,
grievance or stereotype of Pakistanis amongst Bengalis? Be
honest. Don't forget about political correctness. Yeah. That's
about what they did in the war. What
they did in the war. That they're racist.
They're they're not trustworthy. Yeah. You're our brother
until something goes wrong and then it's like,
yeah. You're an oppressor like what you did
in 71 or 73.
Yeah.
And then similarly, our brothers from Pakistan will
you know, you are brothers, but you guys
side you're with India.
Right? You guys got the brink of, of
apostating and becoming Hindus. So we had to,
you know
these things exist. They exist amongst Turks and
Kurds. They're they exist amongst Macrebi's and North
North Africans.
They exist amongst North Africans
and Khaleedis and those from the Levant, from
Ashan.
These these these these these,
racist and nationalist ideas exist amongst Asians and
blacks.
Right?
It happens on many levels.
It happens to the extent where I know
that you could be from the same country,
from the same region,
but marriage, it becomes a problem because someone
else is from another tribe.
Yeah? And that becomes an obstacle. Forget about
marrying outside of the country or the but
but just being from another cast or another
tribe is enough to not even entertain
a marriage proposal.
Right?
So
this is the way in which Asabih and
nationalism has affected our communities
on both a micro
and macro level.
Now
before
I conclude today's talk by looking at some
practical solutions and ideas as to how to
overcome this issue,
there are
some justifications
out there that I've heard and read
from some scholars as to why nationalism
perhaps is not contradictory to Islam.
It's not a widely held view, but I've
heard it from some prominent
speakers and scholars, namely from the US. I
won't mention their names. And they don't have
no malicious agenda or nothing. It's just the
way they understand, I would argue incorrectly,
this idea of nationalism, patriotism,
and and the way they've justified it to
be, you know, okay.
Some of the arguments include
to love your land,
to love the country of your birth, to
love the country of your parents' origin or
your origin, there's nothing wrong with that because
essentially it's your home,
and it's your home, your people.
Didn't the prophet love Makkah?
Didn't the prophet love Madina? Didn't the prophet
take great pride from being banu Hashim? These
are some of the
analogies that have been used. Let me respond
to some of these things.
Yes, the prophet loved Makkah.
He loved Makkah because the sanctity of Makkah.
He also fought the people of Makkah.
He came to change the society of Makkah
with radical reforms.
It was the people of Makkah who drove
him out.
It was the prophet who came with 10,000,
an army of 10,000,
and there could have been bloodshed, but he
chose not to.
Yes. He loved Makkah because it was a
it was the city of his birth public
mainly, and excuse because it was the sanctity
of that city.
He loved Madinah. Why? Because it was the
people of that great city who gave him
assistance at the most darkest time
when he needed it, and it was where
the first community of of Muslims was established.
Yes. The prophet did take pride from being
Banu Hashim. Why? Because Banu Hashim had a
great reputation for the hospitality they provided to
the pilgrims.
He also took pride from his lineage because
there's no zina, no adultery in his lineage,
but that was it.
You can't now apply that
to modern day nationalism.
You can't now
apply that to why a Muslim from Pakistan
and Bangladesh have issues with one another. Deep
* subconscious issues.
Or why a Bengali and a Pakistani have
some,
some complexes between one another, or why today
many Turks and Kurds are problems with one
another, or why Arabs and Turks are problems
with one another. No. No. No. No. That
can't be applied. The prophet loved Makkah because
of his sanctity. He loved the Madinah because
the the people of that great city assist
him and establish the first community, and he
took pride from his lineage because there's no
zina in it and the reputation of hospitality
to pilgrims.
That's it.
Let's also be clear brothers and sisters, there
is nothing wrong
with having an affinity
from your place of birth or your country
of origin. There isn't. We're human. We we're
in San. Naturally, we're gonna have some level
of affinity.
When I go to Bangladesh where my parents
are from, I like it because I'm subhanallah,
this is where my, you know, this is
where my forefathers are from. This is where
my ancestors are from.
But after 3, 4 weeks, I get homesick.
I wanna come back to the UK because
it's it's for now, it's where I understand
home to be.
Right?
But
having
an affinity with your home or your country
of origin
or the people of a respective society or
the people of your community,
those things are fine. It's pretty pretty normal,
but it becomes a problem.
And it will be haram if these things
now become a cause of division between Muslims.
This is when it becomes haram.
This is when it becomes something which we
cannot engage
When this love and pride, right,
or belonging becomes an obstacle for unity, for
a greater purpose,
this is when it becomes hollow.
This is when it's incorrect.
I'm not saying that one cannot have love
or affinity to your country of birth or
to where where you ethnically originate from. It's
smooth.
Right?
But I also want to posit this to
you all as well.
Someone can argue and say, well, look, you
know,
our countries, especially North Africa, narrow world, you
know, our countries were born out of fighting
the European colonialists.
So, you know, there's great pride to take
in the fact that, you know, we drove
the Europeans out after centuries of colonialism.
Okay.
Fine.
How are those states looking now?
Or is it a case that when the
Europeans left, they left stooges and traitors and
dictators to to to
basically resume
a new style of colonialism which doesn't require
thousands of soldiers. I've heard this as well.
Brother, you know, we're proud of being Algeria.
And, brother, we're proud of being Libyan. Brother,
we're proud of being because we fought the
European. You know? This is the land of
Muhammadu Muhladdah, etcetera etcetera. Yes. Fine. No problem.
But the point here is,
what did those states become after the Europeans
left? They still became proxies
for the same powers which you fought.
Right?
All I'm saying, brothers and sisters,
is that, yes, affinity,
belonging
to one's place of birth or where your
parents originate from or where you estimate to
originate is very normal.
But when these things become a cause of
division
and an obstacle towards unity as Allah and
his messenger said,
then it becomes a problem,
and it's haram.
One last justification
I've heard for nationalism,
or Asabih,
is that, oh, this was
this came to address a reality 1400 years
ago
because Arabia was a very tribal society.
So, therefore, when the prophet spoke about Asabihyah
and when these verses came down, they were
talking about a very tribal society in Arabia.
This is very dangerous.
Historicizing
and
basically
putting time limits
to Islamic source text
is a heretical practice.
We're not talking about verses of the Quran
which were abrogated by other verses that followed
it, But basically putting time limits
to Quran and sunnah is dangerous because basically
what you're saying that
these things which we take as sacred that
are from Allah and his messenger
were were are not timeless.
Right?
Just because the prophet spoke about asabih in
a very tribal society,
we are very tribal today.
The European referendum in the United Kingdom was
a very tribal affair.
Yeah.
The popular shift towards the right in the
entirety of Europe is a very tribal affair.
White supremacy is a tribal affair.
Yeah.
When the Arabs revolted
against the Ottomans, that was a tribal affair.
It was a racial affair.
When the Europeans and and when the when
the Brits approach the Sharif of Makkah, they
said, how can you let the Turks
claim to be the leaders of the Muslims?
Wasn't your prophet an Arab?
Right? When Ataturk,
established the Turkish Republic,
she see some of his statements about the
Arab people.
It's disgusting.
The point I'm trying to make is yeah.
Okay. Fine. We have this kind of false
notion that tribalism or tribal sign means, you
know, people with spears and shields and I'm
wearing, like, crazy clothes in in some, like,
faraway land. No.
Tribalism exists
within our communities,
within,
our localities,
within the progressive modern world.
So to say that, oh, asabi is an
outdated concept that was something that prophet was
addressing for her is incorrect.
It's incorrect. It simply, quite frankly, doesn't run
like that.
To conclude, brothers and sisters,
to conclude,
if we
can all accept and there can be a
consensus amongst us
that
nationalism
is something which
has had many negative impacts and has had
adverse
effects and ramifications for the Muslim world as
well as more diaspora communities.
And if nationalism is something that can be
coined
under Asabiyyah.
And we know how Allah and his messenger
spoke about this. Right? Those hadith are very
strongly worded hadith where the prophet condemned
Asabiyyah.
And we and we assessed very briefly how
Allah spoke very highly
of Islamic and Muslim unity.
Right?
Given all of that,
what then is the solution?
What is a practical solution?
A practical solution, brothers and sisters, is to
carry on having this conversation.
A practical solution is to look
at perhaps a policy or a system or
an idea that's been tried, tested, and worked
throughout our history.
Right?
Do not get it twisted.
Every single country that you see today,
at least 90% of there's about 207 countries
according to the UN.
About 180, 90 of them are barely a
100 years old.
This notion of
the nation state is new.
It's new. Do not take it as a
default.
Do not take it as this is how
statehood should be defined.
It's a new idea.
I remember it was an idea that was
not born out of the Islamic tradition.
It was not an idea that was born
out of our faith and our experiences
in those regions where we populated.
It was a it was a distinctly European
Christian experience which led to the formation of
this ideology, which then manifested in the secular
nation state.
So we need to have this discussion.
We need to have it.
You know?
And
it won't come as a surprise
that when we engage with both Muslims and
non Muslims on this topic,
that they will naturally just talk about statehood
as
we understand it today.
Right?
States that are part of the UN, of
NATO, of Arab League, of OIC, of African
Union, of EU, etcetera.
We need to break away from this from
this understanding that this is the only way
we define state.
Right?
So we have to then look how it
worked in the past.
Right?
And the only thing that comes to my
mind
is the institution of a caliphate.
Which for all its shortcomings,
for all its
issues that it had, it wasn't a utopian
society by any stretch of the mind. It
wasn't a utopian society when the prophet ruled
in Madinah. It wasn't a utopian society under
the Khalifa Arashideen.
May Allah be pleased with them.
Right?
And we should never present it as a
utopia,
but it existed.
It successfully existed for over a 1000 years.
Yes. There were feuds. Yes. There were civil
wars. Yes. There were struggles. Yes. There were
instances of oppressive and tyrannical rule. Yes. There
were instances of misapplication of of Islamic law.
Fine.
But it existed successfully for over a 1000
years. Nearly 14 centuries, it existed.
It managed to successfully
provide and deliver security and stability
to a plethora and diversity of races and
ethnicities.
Now if this is an institution
which worked
in those regions,
in those lands,
right, Because let's also be frank.
Where has the nation state successfully worked
beyond
Canada, US, Australia, New Zealand, and Europe?
Every other country that I've just mentioned outside
of those countries, they're struggling.
They're struggling economically with corruption, with political instability,
with war.
Right? That model only seems to work
for white Europeans, and that's fine.
Round of applause, it comes from your tradition.
Of course, it may work for you. It
may work for you. It won't work
in lands and regions who weren't used to
this model.
It won't work in in a region where
this did not come from their value system.
Right?
Now
the question then is, and perhaps this is
another conversation for another time,
is that if that is an institution we
successfully worked
and it was able to provide security and
stability for,
not just Islamic Muslims, but for Christians and
Jews and people of different ethnicities and races,
if that's the case, how would a modern
caliphate
manifest today? In the age of modernity, how
would it manifest?
And this is a discussion that's taking place
amongst ulama, amongst Islamic groups, amongst academics.
Would a modern caliphate,
look like a single centralized,
state with one single head with many many
governors?
Will it be like a confederation of a
number of Muslim states like the
EU? Will it be,
a far more fluid
kind of,
semi autonomous entity which just shares,
a certain amount of resources like, I don't
know, like like military,
and some limited resources. This is a discussion
that's taking place. How would such a modern
institution
look like?
Right?
But I posit this to you all.
If
Europe can unite
in the form of the EU
after
2 of the most bloodiest wars in human
history,
right,
Where no such wars with such death tolls
ever existed in any part of the world
like it did in World War 1 and
World War 2. Right? And even the wars
that followed after that.
If they can unite under a confederation of
European state with shared values, shared ideas, shared
resources.
Right?
It is not
unimaginable for the Muslim Ummah.
Right?
And we know this because the sentiment's already
there.
The sentiment's already there. When something happens in
Palestine, we act here. If something happens in
Kashmir, we act here. If something happens in
the Rohingya, we act here. This is a
sentiment
of the automatic paradigm. This is something that's
actually part of us.
Right?
And I guess the other conversation
is how would such an entity
come about?
What's the methodology of such an entity to
come about? Now that's not a discussion for
today's talk.
So how such an institution would look like
in today's time and today's world and how
it would be established are conversations that have
taken place among Islamic groups and movements and
scholars for the best part of 80, 90
years. And these conversations are still happening.
And that's perhaps another conversation for another lecture.
I pray to Allah
that every single person in this room today
is not a mere bystander for positive change
but a contributor
to the change that we want to see
in this world. Ameen. I pray to Allah
that he unites the hearts and minds of
the Muslims upon what is most pleasing to
Allah. Ameen.
And I pray to Allah
that we get to live.
We get to live to see a time
where such a unification
is happens in our lifetime and we had
a role to play in that. Ameen.
Brothers and sisters.