International relations are characterized by tensions. Different perspectives battle for preeminence. Justice is disregarded.
A few assert that ethics are subjective, that there are no discernible and reliable rules for action. Islam teaches ethics, the right way to relate to Allah as well as to persons. But Islam is not understood well, even by Muslims. Relations between Muslims and non-Muslims are marred by tensions, a shared Abrahamic heritage notwithstanding. There is corruption of knowledge. As a result of "explanation" by exegetes, Muslims became traditionalist as well as Islamist. This requires attention, a rehabilitation of knowledge from unwarranted accretions. The chief threat to the umma is a corruption of knowledge, particularly of tawhid. Militant ulama treat tradition as a "judge" of revelation, with the authority to "abrogate" and even "replace" parts of revelation. They justify these malpractices by asserting that tradition, too, is revelation. They buttress the proliferation of these misperception by the repression of reason. The repression of reason reflected in its subordination of reason to tradition was an "intellectual suicide," which triggered a "tradition of intellectual retardation." The turn from revelation to tradition, expedited by the repression of reason, prepared the way for a "political suicide." This entailed embarking upon wars of aggression, waged under the banner of religion, and in contravention of the teaching of revelation. At first, there was an emphasis on tawhid, reflected in following revelation, to be understood by reason, accompanied by justice and freedom. However, the turn from revelation to tradition entailed an encroachment on tawhid. The turn, expedited by the repression of reason, was justified by the treatment of tradition as revelation. The advent of authoritarianism and the proliferation of injustice were justified by recourse to the teaching of predestination. Treating tradition as "revelation," and treating books of traditions as "equal" to the Book of Allah is shirk. The traditionalist "interpretation" of revelation encroaches on tawhid. Transmitters of traditions are treated as "lawgivers" in derogation of Allah. The doctrine of abrogation requires kufr in all verses allegedly "abrogated" by the verse of the sword. In an Orwellian fashion, Islamist jurists, prodded by hawkish rulers, re-invented Islam as its reverse, a "religion of war" as Abu Bakar al-Baghdadi, the chief of the terrorist ISIS referred to it. The reinterpretation of revelation was expedited recourse to perceptions and practices contrary to the teaching of revelation. Islamist ulama divested the Book of Allah of its teaching of reconciliation by "abrogating" all verses that teach mercy and forgiveness. This was tampering with the Book of Allah. Islamists corrupted the knowledge of jihad by reinterpreting a fight in self-defense as a war of aggression. They also justified jihad al-talab, waged under the banner of Islam, by recourse to hawkish traditions. All this bellicosity brought pushback from aggrieved parties. Muslims were defeated in France in 732 by Charles Martel, by the Mongols in Baghdad in 1258, and at the gates of Vienna twice, in 1529 and 1683. Muslims were prominent when they followed the Book of Allah. But when it turned from revelation to tradition, the umma fell from grace. There no books in Bukhari on justice, ethics, reason or freedom. But there are plenty of traditions on where a person praying is to place his or her hands. Tradition divested Islam of ethics, replacing them with rituals. The truth of the Book of Allah was covered by traditions and jurists. Is the umma a casualty of a "coverup?" The Book of Allah states regarding the People of the Book: "They were expected to teach the Book to people but they threw it behind their backs." (Quran, 2:101 and 3:187). Is something similar taking place in Islam?
