Since the middle of the twelfth century Hijri (eighteenth century C.E.) the Islamic world has been rapidly declining from its correct position and sinking horribly to the abyss of decline. Numerous attempts have been undertaken to revive it, or at least to halt the decline, but to no avail. The Islamic world remains in a state of gloom, anarchy and decline, and it still suffers the consequences of such backwardness and disorder.

The reason for its decline is due to one single factor, the severe weakness that destroyed the ability of the minds in understanding Islam. The cause for this weakness was the detachment of the capacity of the Arabic language from the capacity of Islam when the Arabic language was ignored both in understanding and carrying Islam from the beginning of the seventh century Hijri onwards. Accordingly, unless the capacity of the Arabic language is mixed with the capacity of Islam by making the Arabic language the language of Islam as a fundamental and inseparable part of it, the decline will continue to drag the Muslims down. This is because it is the linguistic capacity that carried the capacity of Islam and consequently intermingled with it, such that the perfect carrying of Islam cannot be undertaken except by it; and if it is neglected, Ijtihad (deriving of AHkam from texts) in Shar’a (divine law) cannot be undertaken. Knowledge of the Arabic language is a fundamental condition in Ijtihad. Furthermore Ijtihad is necessary for the Ummah since progress within the Ummah cannot occur except by utilising it.

There are three reasons why the attempts undertaken to revive the Muslims with Islam failed; The first is the lack of an accurate understanding of the Islamic fikrah (idea) by those who assumed the burden of revival. The second is the lack of clarity of the Tareeqah (method) of Islam in implementing its fikrah. The third is the failure of those who assumed the burden of revival to link the Islamic fikrah with the Islamic Tareeqah tightly and inseparably.

With regard to the Islamic fikrah, many factors affected it which diluted many of its details for the Muslims. Such factors arose at the start of the second century Hijri and continued until the arrival of imperialism. Foreign philosophies, such as Indian, Persian and Greek had an impact on some Muslims, leading them to make attempts to reconcile Islam with these philosophies, despite the complete contradiction between the two. These conciliatory attempts led to erroneous interpretations and explanations that confused and eliminated some Islamic facts from the mind of the Muslims or at least weakened their understanding. Furthermore, some individuals who harboured ill feeling towards Islam embraced it hypocritically and began introducing concepts alien to Islam and even contradicting it. This led to an erroneous understanding of Islam by many Muslims. Additionally in the seventh century Hijri, the negligence of the Arabic language arose in the conveying of Islam. All of these factors announced the decline of Muslims. From the end of the eleventh century hijri (seventeenth century C.E.) up to the present day, the Islamic world has been subjected to cultural and missionary invasions, followed by the political invasion of the West, which added insult to injury and created further complications in the Islamic society. All this had an effective influence on the Muslims incorrect understanding of the Islamic fikrah, thus true crystallisation in the minds of the Muslims was lost.

Regarding the Islamic Tareeqah, Muslims gradually lost the clarity of its understanding. The Muslims used to understand their existence in life was for the sake of Islam, that the Muslims duty in life was to carry the da’wah of Islam, that the duty of the Islamic State is to implement Islam and execute its rules internally and carrying the da’wah for it externally, and that the method for this is Jihad, performed by the State. We say that then after the Muslims clearly understood this, they began viewing the main duty of Muslims as the acquisition of life firstly, and secondly preaching and giving guidance whenever the conditions permitted. The State began to see no fault or sin in its complacency in executing Islamic rules, and did not see any shame in abandoning Jihad fee sabeel lillah (in the way of Allah) to spread Islam. The Muslims after they lost their State - despite its weakness and shortcomings - saw the return of Islam in the building of masaajids, the publishing of books and the educating of morals (Aqhlaaq) whilst they kept silent over the domination of kufr on them and about its colonisation upon them.

With regards to the linkage between the Islamic fikrah and Tareeqah, Muslims started to study the AHkam Shara’iah related to treatment of the problems, i.e. related to the fikrah, and did not pay attention to the rules that demonstrate the manner of the treatment, i.e. demonstrate the Tareeqah. Thus, they studied the rules detached from their method of execution. They also concentrated on studying the rules of prayer and fasting, marriage and divorce, and they neglected the study of the rules of jihad, al-Ghanaim (spoils), Khilafah, the judiciary, land taxation (al Kharaj) and so on. Thus they detached the fikrah from the Tareeqah, which resulted in the implementation of the fikrah becoming inconceivable without its Tareeqah.

At the end of the 13th century Hijri (19th century C.E.) the misunderstanding of the Islamic Shari’ah and its application on the society became obvious. Islam was interpreted in ways incompatible with its texts in order to adapt to the present society, although what was required was to change the society to adapt with Islam, and not the other way round. For the issue was the corruption of society which needed to be reformed by an ideology (mabda’a), so the ideology had to be applied as it is, and the society had to be changed completely and radically on the basis of this ideology. Thus, it was necessary for those who attempted to reform the society to apply the Islamic rules as they are, regardless of society, era, time or place. However, they didn’t do this; rather they misinterpreted the Islamic rules to adapt them to contemporary life. The excesses of this error could be seen in the derivation of general and detailed principles. They derived general principles and detailed rules that agreed with this viewpoint. Thus, they established numerous erroneous general principles, such as; “It is not prohibited to change the rules according to the changing of the time”, and like, “Tradition is the arbiter” etc. They issued fatwas without any support or evidence from Shar’a, and some of them even contradicted the definite Qur’anic text. For example, they permitted a little usury (riba) on the pretext that it is not multiple, and by the excuse of its necessity for the funds of the minor (qassir). The judge who was called a Shar’ai judge came to judge with usury (riba) on the deposits of the orphans. The judge, whom they called the regular judge also ruled with usury (riba). They gave fatwa to suspend Hudood (penal code) and allowed the Hudood to be taken from a source other than Islam. Thus they laid down rules contradicting Shar’a using the excuse that these agree more with the time, and it is necessary that Islam suit every age, time and place. This resulted in the detachment of Islam from life. This erroneous understanding and incorrect rules was used by the enemies of Islam to introduce their laws and principles. The Muslims did not see in them any contradiction with Islam, due to what had been established in their minds based on the erroneous understanding that Islam suits every time and place. The misinterpretation of Islam to suit every school of thought, ideology, incident and every principle - even if the interpretation disagreed with the ideology of Islam and its viewpoint - became prevalent. This helped in the separation of Islam from life and consequently the failure of every reformist movement working according to this erroneous and poor comprehension was inevitable.

In the beginning of the 20th century C.E, a further problem was added that increased the obstacles that stand between Islam and life. This amplified the already existent problems that faced the Islamic movements. The Muslims, and in particular the scholars (ulema) and the educated people were characterised by three things:

Firstly, they studied Islam in a way different from the method of study required to understand it. Islam’s method of study is to study the Shari’ah rules as practical questions for application by the State in what concerns it, and by the individuals in their affairs as an individual. Scholars have defined jurisprudence (fiqh) as being,

“the knowledge of the practical Shar’ai matters that are derived from their elaborated evidences (aladillah al-tafsiliyyah)”

Such a study would produce knowledge for the student and action for the society by both the state and the individual. However, the ulema and educated people, even most Muslims, studied Islam for the purpose of mere theoretical knowledge as though it were a fanciful philosophy. Through this the juristic rules (AHkam) became hypothetical and impractical, and Shar’a came to be studied as a set of spiritual and moral matters, and not as rules to treat the problems of life. This is as far as the study is concerned. As to the Da’wah for Islam, the way of preaching and guidance as practised by the missionaries prevailed instead of the method of study required by Islam. Thus the people who studied Islam became either inanimate ulema, or guiding preachers who regularly preach the boring sermons (khutba) without producing any effect in society. They did not understand the meaning of culturing with Islam, teaching Muslims the matters of their Deen in a way that produces a change in their emotions, and reminds them of the punishment and wrath of Allah, so that a Muslim becomes a dynamic personality when his emotions are linked to his mind as a result of learning the verses of Allah and the method of its teaching. Indeed, they understood none of this, and they replaced this deep effective method of teaching by the method of “preaching and guidance” (wa’adh wa irshad), which is confined to the shallow sermons (khutba). Due to this, people perceived that there was a contradiction between the way the problems of society were addressed and Islam, and this required reconciliation. Consequently it became common among people to interpret Islam in a way to make it adapt to the contemporary life.

In addition to this, they misunderstood the verses of Allah (swt), for example,

“And the believers should not all go out to fight. Of every troop of them, a party only should go forth, that they (who are left behind) may gain sound knowledge in the Deen and that they warn their folk when they return to them, so that they may beware.” [TMQ At-Tawba:122]

They interpreted this Ayah to mean that some people of each group should set off to acquire knowledge and to return to their people to teach them. Through this, they made learning of the Deen fard kifayah (a collective duty), thus conflicting with the Hukm Shar’ai and the meaning of the Ayah.

As for the Hukm Shar’ai - it is an obligation that every sane adult Muslim acquires knowledge from Islam covering the matters of their daily life. This is because they are commanded to perform all his actions based upon the commands and the prohibitions of Allah (swt). There is no way to fulfil this except through the knowledge of AHkam Sharai’ah related to their actions. Therefore, acquiring comprehensive knowledge in the Deen about the rules necessary for the Muslim to follow in life’s affairs is an obligation upon every individual (fard ayn) not a fard kifayah. As for Ijtihad, that is to derive AHkam, it is a fard kifayah. With regards with their contradiction to the meaning of this Ayah - the verse is about jihad, which means that Muslims should not all go out to jihad. When a group sets out for jihad another group should remain to learn the AHkam at the hands of the Messenger (saw), so once the mujahideen returned back, those who stayed behind would teach them what they had missed of the rules of Allah in a way that would produce an effect on them. This is also indicated by the example of the Sahabah (ra), who were so careful to learn the AHkam of the Deen, and to be in the company of the Messenger (saw). Some of them would set out on an expedition for jihad, and some would stay behind to learn the AHkam of the Deen. When the mujahideen returned, those who remained would teach them the AHkam they had missed.

Secondly, the malicious West hateful of Islam and the Muslims attacked the Deen of Islam, defamed it, fabricated lies against it on the one hand and denounced some of its AHkam on the other, despite the fact that these rules are the correct solutions for the problems of life. So the position of Muslims, particularly the educated ones, was characterised by weakness in the face of this attack. Subsequently they allowed Islam to stand accused and became defensive, a matter which caused them to misinterpret the rules of Islam. For example they interpreted jihad as a defensive rather than offensive war. They contradicted the reality of jihad, for jihad is a war against anyone who stands in the face of the Islamic Da’wah whether he is an aggressor or not. In other words it is the removal of any obstacle standing in the face of the Da’wah, i.e. the call to Islam, and the fight for its sake; for the sake of Allah. When Muslims conducted Jihad against Persia, the Byzantine Empire, Egypt, North Africa, Spain and other places, they did so because the Da’wah required them to undertake Jihad to propagate Islam in these countries. So this erroneous interpretation of Jihad resulted from the weakness in not allowing Islam to be accused, and from defending it in a way that would satisfy the accuser. Similar to this is the question of polygamy, the question of cutting the thief ’s hand and other questions, which Muslims tried to respond to the disbeliever’s accusations. They tried to interpret Islam in meanings that would contradict the Islamic thoughts. Accordingly this distanced Muslims from understanding Islam which subsequently removed it from action.