A revolution is an uprising against presiding government by the people. It may be led either by an individual or a group. In most cases, revolutions may be executed through protests as a result of public dissatisfaction on matters related to equity and social equity.
Additionally, revolutions have been taking ideological or religious since time immemorial. However, with divergent views and opinions on why revolutions take place, it is imperative to note that convergent reasons seems to have been put forward alongside various schools of thought. Differences in ideologies have resulted in various perspectives on revolutions.
For instance, political perspectives are nearly different from religious ones and in the same way, with differences in religious belief systems, it has been highly disputed in religious views that revolutions are appropriate. For example, Hindu’s views on revolution are different from those of Jainism’s (Smith 75). Similarly, this is the case with Christianity and other religions. This essay offers a comparative discussion of two Islamic thinkers on revolutions.
To begin with, Yousef al-Khattab is a famous Muslim residing in the United States of America. Born of American decency with Jewish background, Khattab is a transformed Muslim who believes that Islam is the only true religion in the face of the earth. All other religions are considered inappropriate and thus should be subjected to total elimination.
The fact that he was once a member and founders of Revolution Muslim which aimed at spreading Islam all over the world, Khattab believes that anf form of revolution should be about reinstating Islamic religion to all parts of the world. In a bid to comment on previous revolutions experienced in countries such as Tunisia, he observes that the kind of revolutions that went on there were merely not reflective of true Islam.
He believes that they are part of the western capitalist countries’ efforts in taking over total control of the world. According to beliefs held by Islamic fundamentals, leadership of any given nation or country is offered by Allah and thus should remain effective until part of the promise to Allah has been broken by such regimes (Razton 6). Unfortunately, he notes that this form of revolution is conspicuously missing and thus the effectiveness of the revolutions undergoing in the present world are politically instigated.
Citing terrorism as one of ruthless and gross human-violation organizations, he contends the idea that there exists Islamic terrorism noting that present named Islamic terrorisms are not actually existent but are there to foresee the reign and glory of Allah.
He states that law enforcement agents that present false information on Islamic gathering are of ill will and thus not effective in information dissemination. Since they present the information with intent of making consequent arrests, Khattab claims that they are anti-reformists and therefore do not stand fit for bringing up effective revolutions since the represented messages on the activities of Islam do not please Allah.
He progresses to saying that love and hate are solely Allah’s responsibilities and therefore Muslims should love or hate for the sake of Him. This is reflected in the comments he makes against the assistance for emerging revolution in Egypt. Quoting Allah as the source of love and hate, he believes that only Muslims have the ability to differentiate the two only with the help of Allah (Peterson 2).
In this regard, the assistance offered by western super powers to aid the removal of presiding governments with an aim of building a better Islamic society and yet they do not fall within the demands of Islam is a totally misplaced idea. When people decide what is good or bad, they have to take into consideration the presence of Allah and they shall fight for Allah and for His reign.
Therefore the premises of qualification of a revolution, according to Khattab, are that the presence of Allah shall be taken into consideration and the demands of Allah shall be given first priority (Peterson 6). Oppression is not a serious concern if the regime is observant of the demands of Allah and therefore no outcry should be made. Revolutions are only necessary when there have been serious violations of Allah’s demands and external help, from non-Muslims is of neglected importance.
Dr. Shariati is one of the most renowned and highly influential thinkers in matters of Islam and theory on revolution; he has had a reshaping of many people through his written and spoken works. He believes Islamic leadership is deliberated from the levels of Imams and that clerical presence is only as a result of collaborations with oppressive regimes in an attempt to fight the real Islamic leaders with intent of gaining their own selfish interest and thus impoverish the whole of the Muslim community.
Initially, as his argumentation continues, true Islamic leadership was descended by Allah and leadership was there to ensure that true worship services of Allah continue to dominate the universe. Recent uprisings against these stipulations of the wholly writings of Allah, in the name of revolutions, are just instigated by western and selfish powers with an intention of making gains out of lands of Islam (Smith 56).
Moreover, the thinker believe that in order to get rid of such demanding and unobservant systems out of Islamic regions, it is imperative for Islamic nations to regain consciousness in order to understand what would really happen if the external interruptions continue to haunt the faith of Islam.
Although there is frequent and conspicuous refrains from political works involved due to numerous political censorships that have been witnessed in the past, Shariati believes that true Islam should only reflect Mohammadan and Shiism ideologies citing them as the only acceptable messengers of disseminating salvation.
With further refrains from direct implications of the West’s involvements in revolutions across Muslim nations as depicted by smith (59), there is indication that such behavior is unwarranted for in any Muslim country and thus any avoidance by the Muslim community would reflect a re-awakening or spirit of consciousness as well as acquisition of true Islamic values.
In summing up, it is evident from the discussion that there are divergent views on revolutions with slight differences on why revolutions do take place (Razton 25). For instance, as argued by Khattab, external involvements in Islamic affairs are not welcome at all according to Islamic ideals.
The latter thinker states that they present the information with intent of making consequent arrests. In addition, Khattab claims that anti-reformists do not necessarily stand out as the best instruments of organizing effective revolutions since the represented messages on the activities of Islam do not please Allah.
On the same note, Dr. Shariati believes Islamic leadership is deliberated from the levels of Imams and that clerical presence is only as a result of collaborations with oppressive regimes in an attempt to fight the real Islamic leaders with intent of gaining their own selfish interest and thus impoverish the whole of the Muslim community.
Works Cited
Peterson, Richard. The declaration of the sovereignty of the people: Divergent views. Chicago: Routledge, 2010.Print.
Razton, Temple. Revolution Muslim’ A Gateway for Would-be Jihadis. New York: NPR Agency, 2006.Print.
Smith, James. Ideological views on revolutions: Islam. Boston: Wiley, 2009.Print.