Interpreting Islam to Conform to Capitalism and Western Legislation

The concept of Riba, Insurance, share companies were some of the thoughts and rules of Islam that were attacked by Capitalist thoughts and rules. As for the attack on the Islamic Shari'ah, they used the 'new' issues and issues which only exist in the Capitalist society to show that the Shari'ah is unable to solve new problems. The angle of the Western discussion was that they would give the opinion of the Capitalist system regarding a problem and then attack Islam by saying that such an opinion does not exist in Islam nor does it hold such a view. Thus they concluded that Islam has an inflexible legislation that is unable to comply with time and does not give solutions to the problems that exist in every age. It therefore fails to permit usury although the age has come to need it. It is also unable to clarify the rule on insurance despite the fact that the trade and industry that emerged in this age require it. In addition, it cannot explain the trade relations between states according to the requirements of the age. Therefore, it is not fit to be the legislation for a nation or a system for a state in this 'modern' age and in the new ages where there will be new problems and issues that arise with time. This is the basis of discussion that the Westerners lay down and carried the discussion with the Muslims on its foundation and challenged Islam with it. The Muslims proceeded with the discussion on this basis. That is why they became confused, because it was not permitted for the discussion to proceed on this level. Rather, confusion occurred due to the impossibility of carrying out the discussion and keeping it, at the same time, in harmony with its fundamentals and branches. When the basis of discussion differs, then the discussion becomes confused. The basis of discussion here should be as follows: Is the Islamic Shari'ah fit to be a field for thought such that it is possible to deduce all types of relationships between people from its evidences? Does it allow for a wide range of generalisations so that it is possible for the Mantouq (wording) and Mafhoom (meaning) of its evidences to encompass the new and diverse issues, such that the rules of the Shari'ah apply to them? Is it also a fertile soil for generating collective principles and general thoughts? Does it have the capacity to solve the problems of peoples from different backgrounds and nationalities? If this is so, then this Shari'ah is suitable, otherwise it is not. To prove this, the new issues are presented to it and its opinion is sought. Its texts are studied so as to examine the possibility of deducing the rules and principles and the possibility of classifying the various issues under it. This is the basis of discussion. As for requesting the Shari'ah to give opinions advocated by the Capitalist system or that which is prevalent in this age and held by the majority, this is not the basis of discussion, nor is it allowed to be so.
 

This is because the subject is the Sharee'ah's suitability for this and every age and not whether it has the capacity to give a specific opinion. Therefore, the origin of Western legislation and the basis on which it is established is studied. Then one studies whether it is fit to solve the problems of every age and remain consistent with its basis, or it is not fit except by interpretation, manipulation and explanation and deviation from its basis. The Islamic legislation and the basis on which it is established is then studied to see whether it is suitable to solve the problems of every age and remain consistent with its basis, without deviating from that basis. With this the reality of the true legislation is distinguished from the false legislation. Thus, the true legislation is the one whose basis is true by agreeing with the reality and natural disposition (Fitrah). This basis should be decisive and conclusive and not speculative , thus open to the possibility of being right or wrong. As for the fact that it is suitable for all ages, peoples and generations, this is apparent from its ability to give opinions regarding any problem man faces in any time and in any country. In other words, its broad guidelines from which every solution is deduced without deviating from the basis upon which the legislation is based, and without deviating from the broad guidelines themselves from which the solutions emanate. If these conditions are met in legislation then it is suitable for all ages. However, if it is unable to give an opinion except with manipulation and explanation deviant from the basis and the broad guidelines, then it will be a specific legislation for a specific people for a specific time. It will not be suitable for mankind. It will not be suitable even for this people except for a certain period of time, and its suitability will end and so the people will change it and bring another piece of legislation. Consequently, new issues should have been presented to Islam in terms of the reality of the problem and not in terms of the opinion of the Capitalist system regarding them. Then it will be examined to determine whether a solution can be deduced from its broad guidelines while it is still consistent with the basis upon which Islam is established, and consistent with the basis of the broad guidelines themselves.

When the Capitalist system challenged and attacked the Islamic system and its legislation claiming that it was unable to move with the times and could not provide solutions to the problems. The response of the Muslims was not to explain the problem in terms of what the detailed evidences indicate, but to try to find solutions from Islam that would conform to the Capitalist viewpoint. The reality is that it is not possible to find any such solutions in Islam, because of the obvious contradictions between the Islamic and Capitalist ideologies. This is why the Muslims were defeated when they tried to interpret Islam to conform to Capitalism and Western legislation.

This matter became widespread and many erroneous concepts emerged, such as 'Islam is flexible and adaptable', 'Islam must move with the times' and 'it is necessary to develop harmony between Islam and the modern world' and many others. Such concepts meant that Islam could be interpreted to provide opinions that would conform to the prevailing viewpoint amongst the people, even if this contradicted the fundamentals and values of Islam. This is what adjusting and moving with the times meant. It meant that it was wrong to proceed in a direction different to that being followed by the Kuffar. This is because the Kuffar hold the upper hand in the modern world, so the Muslims had to interpret Islam to agree with the situation of the Kuffar in order to create harmony between Islam and the modern world. Adopting such erroneous concepts would mean leaving Islam and following Capitalism, because Islam naturally contradicts the Capitalist way of life and therefore it is not possible to have harmony between the two. So, any call to an adjustment or the harmonising of Islam with Capitalism is a call to the abandonment of Islam and the adoption of Kufr. It is true to say that Islam came in the form of general principles and broad guidelines, and left to the human mind the responsibility of deducing the divine rules from these bases to deal with the problems that happen daily in society.

However, this does not indicate flexibility and development in allowing the person to derive any rule he wants to from these bases. These principles and guidelines only provide what is required within the limit of their wording or what meaning the words provide. So these principles will only provide meanings and rules in terms of the situation or problem that arise and need to be solved. These principles and guidelines do not mean that Islam agrees with any age or time. It means that these principles and guidelines can find solutions for the problems of any time and any era according to their viewpoint and what is indicated by the meaning of any phrase or term derived from these guidelines, but not according to the viewpoints held by the people of those ages and times. As for creating harmony between Islam and the modern world, this means leaving the Islamic call and conveying the Kufr thoughts and calling on the Muslims to adopt these thoughts. However, the modern world is not looked at in terms of its industry and inventions and its science and discoveries. It is clear that these factors are not a subject of conflict in the world, and there is no need to create harmony between these matters and Islam. Rather, the call to create harmony between Islam and the modern world was in terms of the ideology and system of life carried by the modern world. For the Muslims, this would mean living according to the Western way of life and using the Capitalist system to solve the problems that would afflict society. This is the image of the modern world generated to become the subject of conflict between the Muslims and the Kuffar of the West. The modern world means Capitalism, including Democracy, civil law and the like. The Islamic viewpoint means that all this is Kufr and it must be attacked and removed so as to establish the rule of Islam and make the Islamic system the sole reference point for solving the problems faced by man in the world today. As Muslims we must make what is seen as the ideology of Islam replace the ideology of the West. In this way, how is it possible for a Muslim to think of creating harmony between himself and the Kufr that he must fight to remove, so that it may be replaced with Islam?

This is the reality of what these concepts can lead to and their danger. With great sorrow, these concepts dominated the Ummah to the extent that she tried to interpret Islam in a manner that would ensure that it conforms to the Capitalist viewpoint. This was what led to the crushing defeat suffered by the Muslims and the vigorous victory gained by the Kuffar over the Muslims. Once the Kuffar had defeated the Muslims and destroyed the Islamic State, the direction and course of history changed. From this point also, the sovereignty of the world passed from the hands of the Muslims to the hands of the Kuffar i.e. from Islam to the Capitalist system. As a consequence of the defeats inflicted upon the Muslims by the challenge of the Kuffar, cracks and flaws began to appear in the confidence that the Muslims had held in the thoughts and rules of Islam. Queries also began to arise concerning the suitability of the Islamic Sharee'ah in solving the problems of the modern age and its ability to adjust to the present age. This was the beginning of the weaknesses that invaded the entity of the Ummah. This is because the Ummah is a collection of people united together by a rational creed from which emanates a system that regulates the daily affairs of the society and its people. The people within the Ummah are bonded together with a collection of concepts, criteria and convictions generated from the creed. So if doubts begin to appear in these concepts and convictions it would then lead to doubts in the entity of the State and eventually hit it with decline and destruction. This is exactly what happened, and the results of these doubts and uncertainties materialised within one century. When the Kuffar lost hope in defeating the Islamic State through military force, they developed the thought that the army of the Islamic State could not be defeated. So the Kuffar took a different direction and attacked the Islamic Ummah by using the Western thoughts to shake her confidence in Islam and infiltrate her body in order to destroy the Islamic State. By attacking the entity of the Ummah this would lead to the attacking of the entity of the State - which leads to the weakening of the entity of the State and makes her destruction more straightforward and inevitable. To achieve their aims, the Kuffar turned toward the intellectual struggle using missionary groups, secret societies, schools, hospitals, leaflets and books. In the beginning, the Kuffar took Malta as their centre of operations. In 1625CE they moved to Beirut and used it as a base for operations. They also started work in Istanbul and used it as another base for operations. The English and French embassies worked energetically and together with American institutions, such as the Protestant College, which later on became known as the American University of Beirut. It was the activity of the English and French embassies in Istanbul, Damascus, Beirut and Cairo that was the most frantic. They targeted all levels of society, but concentrated on the political and intellectual mediums, to the stage that many students who attended the colleges and universities, and many of the educated persons who held positions of authority in the army and the government were attracted to the West. This generated a love for the Western culture and Western legislation in the hearts of the Muslims, and at the same time raised doubts in the minds of the Muslims about the suitability of Islam to the modern ages. The Muslims wanted to benefit from the fruits of Western civilisation while claiming to maintain and preserve Islam. These issues began to eat away at the body of the Ummah while eating away at the State. The Islamic State began to change from a stage of expansion to a stage of stagnation and decline, and the role of the Ummah changed from that of carrying the Islamic call to the point where the Kuffar were carrying the call of Kufr to the Muslim Ummah. These were clear signs of the weakness that was spreading in the Ummah and the beginning of the downfall of the Islamic State. The intellectual and political circles played an effective role in this by following the instructions of the Kufr states. When these matters escalated and the leading Western nations, notably England and France were convinced that decay was now setting into the Muslim Ummah and was becoming widespread in the Islamic State, they began waging military campaigns on the regional provinces of the Islamic State and took pieces of it away from the State. Greed now prevailed in all the leading European states and Germany and Russia became involved in these campaigns. Despite differences between these states over how the division of the provinces of the Islamic State should be carried out, they all agreed on the removal and the destruction of the system of Islam. That is why they all gave serious consideration to the idea of forcing the Khalifah to abandon the system of Islam in affairs of ruling, society and politics, and forcing him to apply Western legislation to the judicial system, the Capitalist system in economics, and the democratic system in the affairs of ruling. For all these reasons the Berlin Conference was convened in 1850 between the leading Kuffar nations of Europe. Amongst them was the head of Kufr, England represented by her Prime Minister of the time, the Jew, Disraeli; and Germany, who was represented by her Chancellor Bismarck. The participants in the Conference agreed to send a memorandum to the Khalifah in Istanbul, demanding that he abandons the Islamic system and in its place adopts a system based on civil law. This memorandum was worded in very strong language and sent in a threatening manner. When this memorandum was handed over to the Khalifah in Istanbul, the educated people and the leading politicians started working actively for the call to establish a system of civic law that could move with the times. This affected the Khalifah, and public opinion appeared amongst the educated and political circles calling for the divine rules (al-Ahkaam ash-Shar'iyyah) to be abolished and replaced by Western legislation.