ASK MAULANA

You have written so many books before on Islam and peace. Why did you feel the need for yet another book on the subject—The Age of Peace?

It is right that I have already written many articles and books on the subject of peace, but these writings are mostly in reference to Islam. Since quite some time, the idea that Islam is a religion of violence has become widespread. I therefore wrote extensively on Islam and peace to dispel the prevalent notion about the religion of Islam. For example, the term ‘jihad’ was taken to mean military action. Through my writings, I have explained that jihad truly means a peaceful ideological struggle.

The focus of the present book is not on Islam, but on the present age. The fighting that had happened during the time of the Prophet of Islam was due to the age factor. That is, the advent of Islam was in the tribal age. And, the culture of the tribal age is that of war and violence. Through my study, I realized that several changes have come about in the modern age. Whatever was earlier attainable through military power can now be attained with greater success through peaceful means. Therefore, no reason remains to indulge in fighting and war. This was the incentive behind the title of the book as The Age of Peace.

What new points have you highlighted in this book that you had not addressed in your previous books on Islam and peace?

In this book, I have written in detail on the concept of de-monopolization, expounded in the second chapter, which I had not dealt with in my earlier writings.

Although the word ‘de-monopolization’ exists in the dictionary, it has been given a reduced definition. I have defined de-monopolization in a new way in my book. I have shown that in the modern age, the word ‘de-monopolization’ has acquired a comprehensive connotation and we can say that the present age is an age of de-monopolization. In previous ages, might was considered to be most important—it was said ‘might is right’. A landlord, a political ruler or a person possessing any kind of power was believed to be in a position in which he could do anything. Such people had monopoly over things. But in today’s age,this concept of monopoly has become obsolete and another concept has taken its place—that is, ‘everything for everyone’.

In today’s age the most important thing is planning, and not political power. If a person knows how to do wise planning, he can, through peaceful planning, attain everything which in the earlier age was regarded as possible only through military power and force. For example, in previous ages, colonialism had held sway. The aim of colonialism was commercial exploitation, for which the colonial powers considered controlling other territories as necessary. The colonial nations were basically commercial exploiters.

But today this commercial gain can be achieved through other means, for example, outsourcing, investment, and so on. Today there are many big companies which gain their commercial interests at a global level, but do not own an army. The means that they have employed for carrying out their activities are outsourcing and investment. This is an example of the phenomenon of de-monopolization that has come to characterize the present age. In earlier times, powerful people could enjoy monopolies, but today the same advantage can be achieved by all through planning and organization.  

Can you please summarize the basic arguments of this book?

People generally live in anachronism. Although the age of war is over, people still continue to advocate for and engage in war. In this book, I have proved that such changes have been brought about in the present age that war has become totally futile. Today, we can achieve more successfully through peace what we could not have attained by taking to war in the previous age. 

In this book I have, directly or indirectly, tried to show that a process has been going on since past thousands of years in human history. This process, according to me, was to replace violence with peace or to make peaceful struggle the alternative for violent struggle. This process reached its culmination in the second half of the twentieth century. Those who now opt for the violent struggle to attain their goals are victims of the anachronistic way of thinking. The gist of the book is to make people aware of the spirit of the age and to re-engineer people’s minds along the lines of peace.

The benefit of this replacement of violence by peace is not only that violence would come to an end in society and peace would prevail, rather the greater benefit would be that after this re-engineering, people would no more have negative thinking and would develop 46 Spirit of Islam Issue 41 May 2016 positive thinking in the complete sense of the word. And, positive thinking is most important for one’s personality development.

The book is called The Age of Peace, but the reality might seem quite the opposite. Violence is so widespread today—not just in the form of war and terrorism, but also violence in society, in homes, in families, in people’s minds, maybe on a scale that did not exist before. So, on what basis do you call this the Age of Peace?

When I say that the present age is an age of peace, I mean it in terms of potential. If people are fighting, they are doing so on account of unawareness of the present age. I want to dispel this unawareness and make people aware of the potentials available to us to work peacefully in every field in the present age. When I say that today we are living in the age of peace, I do not mean it in the sense that someone says that we are in the age of machines. What I mean is that now by following the peaceful course of action all things are achievable for us, and in a much better way than by taking recourse to violence. I therefore, want to explain to people who are engaged in violence that their case is one of anachronism—of living with the mindset of war and violence in an age in which one can attain all of one’s goals through peaceful methods.

The modern age, in terms of the possibilities that exist today, is an age of peace. But due to people’s unawareness, they are unable to adopt the peaceful method. The opinion makers of society are unaware of the spirit of the age. They still speak as if even today violent struggle is as important for the attainment of a goal as it was earlier. Therefore, it is my experience that those who are explained the importance of peace and have realized it, have changed their thinking and methodology. Earlier people took to the way of war due to circumstantial compulsion, but if they do so now, it is out of unawareness. If this unawareness is removed, they will come to the path of peace.

Today, one of the greatest challenges to world peace are terrorist groups misusing the name of Islam and falsely claiming to be engaged in jihad. If this is truly to be the Age of Peace, how do you feel these groups and their ideology can be countered and defeated?

The violence in the name of jihad that we see today among Muslims is a result of the political interpretation of Islam. This interpretation was given in the twentieth century by certain Arab and non-Arab Muslims. Under the influence of this interpretation, Muslims came to think that they needed to change the political system to bring about reform in society. When they realized that they could not unseat those who Spirit of Islam Issue 41 May 2016 47 NOTICE Subscribers are requested to inform us about non-receipt of their copies, latest by 18th of the month providing their full name and address. SMS 8050202626 email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. A fresh copy will be promptly despatched. possessed political power, they began to fight against their rulers to bring about reform in the system. The solution to this problem is not counter-violence, but to prove through arguments that the political interpretation of Islam is a wrong interpretation. Islam, in reality, is a completely peaceful religion. The goal of Islam is not to bring about a change in system, but to bring about change in an individual. 

Irrelevancies

If a person allows himself to become upset by opposition,
taunts or other kinds of unpleasantness, he will never reach
his goals. He will simply become enmeshed in irrelevancies.