Kwa wengi, mpasuko wa Sunni na Shi'ah ni ushahidi wa kutosha kwamba dhana ya Ummah mmoja haiwezekani tena katika ulimwengu wa kisasa. Ingawa historia ya Kiislamu imekuwa ikiongozwa na umoja, pamoja na mifarakano michache kati ya Waislamu, leo mipaka ya kitaifa imekuwa umoja mpya, na dhana ya Ummah ya Kiislamu imerudishwa nyuma hadi katika mfano uliokuwepo karne nyingi zilizopita. Mpasuko kama huo umewafanya Waislamu na wasio Waislamu kuona usekula kuwa njia pekee ya kushughulikia tofauti, huku wito wa umoja wa Kiislamu na Khilafah ukionekana na baadhi ya watu kuwa ni ndoto isiyowezekana.

For many the Sunni and Shi’ah fracture is sufficient evidence that the concept of one Ummah is no longer practical in the modern world. Whilst Islamic history has been characterised by unity with the odd schism amongst Muslims, today many national boundaries have become the new unity, with the Islamic concept of Ummah predated to a model that existed centuries ago. Such a schism has led to both Muslims and non-Muslims to view secularism as the only way to deal with differences, whilst calls for Islamic unity and the Khilafah are perceived by some to be idealistic.

Kwa kiini, mjadala huu unahusu jinsi Uislamu unavyoshughulikia tofauti, na je, kuwepo kwa makundi mengi, madhehebu na mataifa kunamaanisha kwamba dola ya kimataifa yenye umoja wa Waislamu haiwezekani?

In essence the debate is about how Islam deals with differences and does the existence of many groups, sects and nations mean a pan-global state with Muslim unity is impossible?

Ni muhimu kueleweka wazi kwamba ulimwengu wa Kiislamu si taifa la kwanza kuwa na tofauti za aina hii. Marekani ilipata Vita vya Wenyewe kwa Wenyewe mwaka 1861, mzozo mchungu wa kikanda kati ya Marekani na Mataifa ya Muungano wa Kikonfederesheni, yaliyoundwa na majimbo kumi na moja ya kusini yaliyoamua kujitenga na Muungano baada ya Abraham Lincoln kuchaguliwa kuwa Rais wa Marekani mwaka 1860. Leo hii Uingereza inakabiliwa na uwezekano wa Scotland kujitenga na kuwa nchi huru ifikapo mwaka 2013. Migogoro yote miwili haikuwahi kujadiliwa kuhusu uwezo wa usekula wa kuwaunganisha watu. Vita vya Wenyewe kwa Wenyewe nchini Marekani vinachukuliwa kuwa sehemu ya historia yake na vinafundishwa shuleni mwake.

In understanding this it must be clearly understood that the Islamic world is not the first nation to have such differences. The US suffered from a Civil War in 1861 which was a bitter, sectional conflict between the United States of America and the Confederate States of America, formed of eleven southern states which moved to secede from the Union after the 1860 election of Abraham Lincoln as President of the United States. Britain today is facing the prospect of Scotland separating and becoming an independent country by 2013. Both conflicts never saw any discussion on secularism’s ability to unify people. The civil war in the US is considered a part of its history and taught in its schools.

Uislamu haujawahi kuwa mgeni kwa watu tofauti, desturi, tamaduni, lugha na madhehebu mbalimbali ya kifikra. Dola ya Kiislamu ilipopanuka, watu wa madhehebu tofauti wote wakawa raia wa dola ya Kiislamu. Utawala wa Kiislamu chini ya Abbasi ulifika katika nchi ambazo wakazi wake wa dini nyingine walikabiliana na wanafikra na wanazuoni wa maeneo yaliyoshindwa. Ni mgongano huu uliopelekea kuendelezwa kwa elimu za kiakili, yaani kujifunza itikadi ya Uislamu. Maendeleo hayo pia yalitokana na haja ya kuithibitisha imani ya Kiislamu kwa dalili za kiakili. Matokeo yake, taaluma zikagawanyika katika matawi, na elimu za Kiislamu zikatofautiana kulingana na hilo.

Islam is no stranger to different peoples, customs, cultures, languages and different schools of thought. As the Islamic lands expanded people of different denominations all became Islamic subjects. Islamic rule under the Abbasids reached lands where the inhabitants of other religions clashed with the thinkers and scholars in the conquered territories. It was this clash that resulted in the development of the rational sciences, i.e. the studying of the creed of Islam. The development was also due to the need for presenting the Islamic belief with rational evidences. As a result, disciplines became divided into branches and Islamic disciplines became diversified accordingly.

Taaluma hizi zilishughulikia masuala mengi na zilikuwa zikiimarishwa kila mara ufalme ulipopanuka zaidi. Matokeo yake, Waislamu wengi katika dola walianza kujitolea kwa taaluma, elimu, masomo na utafiti. Utamaduni wa Kiislamu wenye pande nyingi ulijitokeza ndani ya ardhi za Kiislamu, hivyo watu walijitolea kujifunza utamaduni huo ili kuitukuza Khilafah. Kila msomi, bila kujali aina ya utamaduni aliobobea ndani yake, na kila mwandishi, bila kujali mbinu yake ya kifasihi, na kila mwanahisabati, mwanasayansi au fundi stadi, walijadili na kueleza Uislamu kutokana na mgongano huu.

These disciplines dealt with many issues and were enriched every time the conquests expanded further. As a result many Muslims in the state began to devote themselves to the disciplines, sciences, study and research. A multi-faceted Islamic culture took shape within the Islamic lands, so the people dedicated themselves to learning it to elevate the Khilafah. Every scholar, whatever type of culture he or she specialised in, and every writer, whatever their literary approach, and every mathematician, scientist or artisan, would debate and articulate Islam due to this clash.

Hii ilisababisha kuibuka kwa makundi mbalimbali, madhehebu na tofauti za maoni, ambapo machache tu kati yake yalichukuliwa kuwa yametoka nje ya jamii ya Uislamu. Hata hivyo, madhehebu kama hayo, ambayo yalifikia mamia, hayakuchukuliwa kuwa mgawanyiko miongoni mwa watu. Kwa kweli, chini ya Abbasid, Baghdad ikawa kitovu cha mawazo ya kielimu na ya kimapinduzi. Wanafikra kutoka asili na elimu mbalimbali walikaribishwa na kupewa jukwaa la kujadiliana. Hali hii ilizaa uelewa safi wa Uislamu miongoni mwa jamii, kwani Uislamu ulikuwa ukistahimili majaribio mbalimbali yaliyoukabili. Kwa hiyo, uwepo wa makundi na madhehebu mbalimbali ulikuwa ukiimarisha uelewa wa Uislamu badala ya kuwa chanzo cha matatizo. Hii ilitokana na ukweli kwamba tofauti zilihusu uelewa wa vyanzo vya Kiislamu, ambavyo vilikuwa vikipitia kipindi cha kuorodheshwa na kuwekwa katika mfumo maalum. Uwepo wa makundi na madhehebu mengi ulisaidia jambo hili kwa kweli.

This led to the emergence of a variety of groups, sects and differences of opinion, only a handful of which were considered to have gone outside the fold of Islam. However, such sects which went into the hundreds were not considered a division amongst the people. In fact under the Abbasids, Baghdad became a centre for intellectual and revolutionary ideas. Thinkers from various backgrounds and learning were welcomed and given a platform to debate. This resulted in a pristine understanding of Islam by society as Islam was withstanding the various tests thrown at it. Hence the existence of diverse groups and sects actually strengthened the understanding of Islam rather than being a source of problems. This was because the differences were on understanding the Islamic sources, which were going through the period of being catalogued and codified. The existence of multiple groups and sects actually aided this.

Mgawanyiko katika ulimwengu wa Kiislamu leo unatokana na mambo mawili. La kwanza ni udhaifu ulioingia kwa Waislamu katika kuelewa Uislamu, na la pili lilifupishwa na Profesa David Fromkin, mtaalamu wa Historia ya Uchumi katika Chuo Kikuu cha Chicago. Anaeleza waziwazi katika kitabu chake kwamba sehemu kubwa ya hali ya ulimwengu wa Kiislamu inatokana na enzi ya ukoloni. Anasema:

The division in the Muslim world today is down to two issues. The first is the weakness that overtook Muslims in understanding Islam and the second was encapsulated by Professor David Fromkin, expert on Economic History at the University of Chicago. He highlights very clearly in his book that much of the situation in the Muslim world stems from the colonial era. He says:

Mali nyingi za utajiri wa Dola ya zamani ya Ottoman sasa zilidaiwa na washindi. Lakini ni lazima tukumbuke kwamba Dola ya Kiislamu kwa karne nyingi ilijaribu kuiteka Ulaya ya Kikristo, na wenye nguvu waliokuwa wakiamua hatima ya watu walioshindwa walikuwa, kwa kawaida, wameazimia kwamba nchi hizi zisiwahi tena kujipanga na kuitishia maslahi ya Magharibi. Kwa uzoefu wa karne nyingi wa mfumo wa kiuchumi wa kibiashara (mercantilism), Uingereza na Ufaransa ziliunda mataifa madogo yasiyo imara, ambayo watawala wake walihitaji msaada wao ili kubaki madarakani. Maendeleo na biashara ya mataifa haya vilidhibitiwa, na yalikusudiwa kamwe yasiwe tishio tena kwa Magharibi. Mamlaka hizi za nje kisha zilifanya mikataba na vibaraka wao ili kununua rasilimali za Waarabu kwa bei nafuu, jambo lililowafanya wasomi wa kimwinyi kuwa matajiri kupita kiasi, huku raia wengi wakibaki katika umaskini.34

‘Massive amounts of the wealth of the old Ottoman Empire were now claimed by the victors. But one must remember that the Islamic empire had tried for centuries to conquer Christian Europe and the power brokers deciding the fate of those defeated people were naturally determined that these countries should never be able to organize and threaten Western interests again. With centuries of mercantilist experience, Britain and France created small, unstable states whose rulers needed their support to stay in power. The development and trade of these states were controlled and they were meant never again to be a threat to the West. These external powers then made contracts with their puppets to buy Arab resources cheaply, making the feudal elite enormously wealthy while leaving most citizens in poverty.’34

Kuundwa kwa mataifa madogo yasiyo imara ili kuleta mgawanyiko katika ulimwengu wa Kiislamu kulikuwa sera iliyopangwa kwa makusudi na wakoloni wa Ulaya, ili ulimwengu wa Kiislamu usiwahi kuungana. Kabla ya Vita vya Kwanza vya Dunia, Ufaransa na Uingereza tayari zilikuwa zimeugawa Mashariki ya Kati kati yao. Zilichora mistari kwenye ramani za karatasi na kuunda Transjordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq na Iran. Baadaye zikaundwa Pakistan, India na Afghanistan, ambazo ziliwatenganisha watu waliokuwa wameishi pamoja kwa mamia ya miaka. Ni sera hizi za kikoloni ambazo sasa zimezaa matatizo mengi. Kila taifa liliwekewa watawala waliokuwa watiifu kwa Uingereza na Ufaransa. Familia ya Saud kwa kweli ilishirikiana na Waingereza kuliangamiza Khilafah, kwa malipo ya uongozi wa Hijaz.

Creating divisions in the Muslim world by establishing ‘small, unstable states’ was a deliberate policy by the European colonialists to ensure the Muslim world never can unite. France and Britain prior to World War 1 had already carved up the Middle East amongst themselves. They drew lines on paper maps and created Transjordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq and Iran. Pakistan, India and Afghanistan were later created which separated people who had lived for hundreds of years together. It is such colonial polices which have now ballooned into multiple problems. Each nation was appointed with rulers who were subservient to both Britain and France. The Saud family actually collaborated with the British to destroy the Khilafah in return for leadership of the Hijaz.

Mipaka hii isiyo ya kiasili imekuwa leo ndiyo lenzi ambayo Waislamu wengi hutazama dunia kupitia. Kwa hiyo, tatizo lililopo katika ulimwengu wa Kiislamu kwa kiasi kikubwa lilikuwa ni jambo lililopangwa kwa makusudi na wakoloni, ambao kwanza waliwatenganisha Waislamu kimwili, kisha wakahakikisha kwamba mawazo yoyote ya umoja wa Waislamu hayatawahi kuibuka, kwa kuunda bendera za kitaifa, siku za uhuru wa kitaifa na nyimbo za taifa.

Such artificial boundaries have today become the lens through which many Muslims view the world. Hence the problem in the Muslim world to a large extent was an organised affair by the colonialists where initially they segregated Muslims physically, and then they ensured any ideas of Muslim unity would never arise by creating national flags, national independence days and national anthems.

Umoja wa zamani ulijengwa juu ya Uislamu, na ukazigeuza nchi za Kiislamu kuwa jamii zenye ustawi zilizowakaribisha wote na kufanya vizuri katika nyanja mbalimbali. Hivyo, kutokuwepo kwa Uislamu, ambako ndiko wakoloni walikokuwa wakifanyia kazi, ndiko sababu ya kuwepo kwa mataifa zaidi ya 50 mahali ambapo taifa moja lilikuwepo zamani.

Unity in the past was built upon Islam and it turned the Islamic lands into prosperous societies which welcomed all and excelled in various fields. Hence the absence of Islam, which is what the colonialists worked for, is the reason why over 50 nations exist where one nation once stood.

Si Uislamu ndio chanzo cha mifarakano, bali ni kutokuwepo kwa Uislamu ndiko kunakosababisha matatizo. Mfano unaofaa kwa hili ni majaribio ya ulimwengu wa Magharibi ya kulazimisha usekula kuwa mfano wa kushughulikia tatizo la Sunni na Shi'ah. Mbinu kama hiyo ni geni kwa watu wanaohusika katika mgogoro huu, na badala ya kutatua mgogoro, kwa kweli inauweka katika ulingo wa faragha, ikihakikisha kwamba hauna ushawishi katika sera za ulingo wa umma. Mzozo wa awali kuhusu mrithi wa Mtume Muhammad ﷺ unaweza kweli kutatuliwa tu kwa kutathmini ushahidi wa Kiislamu katika suala hili; kwa mtazamo huu, ni Uislamu pekee unaoweza kuwa suluhisho. Vitendo vya baadhi ya Waislamu wa zamani dhidi ya familia ya Mtume ﷺ, vitendo vya Mu'awiyah, na historia kwa ujumla si vyanzo vya fiqhi ya Kiislamu, na kwa hiyo haviwezi kuwa marejeo. Marejeo katika kesi hii yatakuwa Qur'an na hadithi, na kwa kawaida tafsiri tofauti zinaweza kutokea hapa, jambo ambalo ndilo hali ya fiqhi zote. Hata hivyo, ufafanuzi si mchakato usio na mipaka, na kuna kanuni za ufafanuzi.

It is not Islam that is the cause of divisions but the absence of Islam that causes problems. A pertinent example of this is the attempts by the Western world in imposing secularism as the model to deal with the Sunni and Shi’ah problem. Such an approach is alien to the people involved in the conflict and rather than solving the conflict it is in fact placing it in the private sphere ensuring it has no influence in polices in the public sphere. The original dispute over the successor to the Prophet Muhammad وسلم وآله عليه الله صلى can in reality only be solved by assessing the Islamic evidence in this regard, from this perspective only Islam can ever be the solution. The actions of some Muslims in the past against the Prophet’s وسلم وآله عليه الله صلى family, the actions of Mu’awiyah and history generally are not sources of Islamic jurisprudence and hence cannot be the reference point. The reference point in this case would be the Qur’an and the hadith and naturally different interpretations can occur here, which is the case with all jurisprudence. However, interpretation is not a limitless process and there are rules for interpretation.

Katika kila itikadi kuna tofauti za maoni kuhusu suluhisho zinazojengwa juu ya misingi ya kiitikadi. Katika nchi za kidemokrasia, madhehebu mengi ya fikra yameibuka kutokana na tofauti katika tafsiri.

In every ideology there exists difference of opinion on solutions built upon the creedal tenets. In democratic countries, numerous schools of thought have arisen due to differences in interpretation.

Nchini Marekani leo tuna Democrats na Republicans. Nchini Uingereza tuna Labour, Liberal Democrats na Conservatives. Kote katika ulimwengu wa Magharibi tuna wanaharakati wa neoconservative pamoja na libertarians, Fabians, wanamazingira na Christian Democrats. Wote wanatofautiana katika namna mawazo ya kiliberali yanavyopaswa kujidhihirisha, lakini wote wana usekula kama msingi wao – imani ya Kibepari. Uchumi pia unakabiliwa na tofauti kama hizo, ambapo shule ya Keynesian inatetea uingiliaji wa serikali, dhidi ya Monetarists. Ujamaa pia ulikuwa na shule kadhaa za mawazo zilizojengwa juu ya imani yao. Wafuasi wa Ujamaa waliona dhuluma iliyotokana na dhana ya ‘Uhuru wa Umiliki’ na wakahitimisha kwamba tofauti ya umiliki binafsi kati ya watu ndiyo tatizo lililohitaji suluhisho. Shule moja ya mawazo (shule ya kikomunisti)

In the US today we have Democrats and Republicans. In the UK we have Labour, Liberal Democrats and Conservatives. Across the Western world we have neoconservatives as well as libertarians, Fabians, environmentalists and Christian Democrats. All differ in the manner that liberal ideas should manifest themselves but they all have secularism – the Capitalist creed - as their basis. Economics is also prone to such difference with the Keynesian school, advocating government intervention, against the Monetarists. Socialism also had a number of schools of thought built upon their creed. Advocates of Socialism saw the injustice that resulted from the concept of ‘Freedom of Ownership’ and concluded that the difference in private ownership between people was the problem that required a solution. One school of thought (the communist school)

walitetea usawa wa vitendo katika kila jambo na kufutwa kabisa kwa mali binafsi. Shule nyingine ya mawazo (wanajamaa wa kilimo) walipendekeza kufutwa kwa mali binafsi katika ardhi ya kilimo peke yake. Kisha ikaja shule ya tatu ya mawazo ya ujamaa (inayojulikana kama ujamaa wa serikali) ambapo mali binafsi ilihamishiwa umiliki wa umma kwa jina la maslahi ya umma, yaani kutaifishwa katika kila hali ambapo maslahi ya umma yalihitaji hivyo.

advocated practical equality in everything and absolute abolition of private property. Another school of thought (the agrarian socialists) proposed abolishing private property in agricultural land only. Then came a third socialist school of thought (known as state Socialism) where private property was transferred to public ownership in the name of public interest i.e. nationalization in every situation where public interest called for it.

Wasomi na watafiti wengi katika nchi za Magharibi wameandika makala kuhusu mpasuko kati ya Masunni na Mashia, na wamelitumia kama msingi wa kudhoofisha dhana ya Ummah mmoja. Hata hivyo, vitendo hivyo vimechangia mchakato wa mabadiliko ambao umekuwa ukishika kasi kwa miongo kadhaa, na sasa unafikia kilele chake katika ulimwengu wa Kiislamu.

Many academics and researchers in the West have presented papers on the Sunni-Shi’ah schism and have used it as a basis to undermine the concept of one Ummah. However, such actions have contributed to a process of change that has been gaining momentum for decades and is just coming to the boil now in the Muslim world.

Tunashuhudia sasa Ummah ya Kiislamu ikikataa waziwazi Ubepari na ubinafsi kote duniani kama mwili mmoja. Hata Waislamu wa Palestina, wao wenyewe wakiwa chini ya ukaliaji wa kigeni, walifanya maandamano na mikutano ya mshikamano na Waislamu wa Afghanistan na Iraq. Ummah huhisi chukizo pale dhana ya ‘uhuru wa kutoa maoni’ inapotumiwa kushambulia Uislamu, kama inavyoonekana katika kisa cha katuni zilizochapishwa dhidi ya Mtume ﷺ huko Ulaya.

We are currently witnessing the Muslim Ummah openly rejecting Capitalism and individualism all over the world as one body. Even the Muslims in Palestine, themselves under occupation, held marches and rallies in solidarity with the Muslims of Afghanistan and Iraq. The Ummah feels revulsion when the concept of ‘freedom of expression’ is used to attack Islam, as can be seen in the case of the cartoons printed against the Prophet وسلم وآله عليه الله صلى in Europe.

Ummah duniani kote imeona wazi kwamba watawala wasaliti si wawakilishi wake. Kwa hakika, pengo linaloongezeka sasa limeundwa kati ya watawala na Ummah. Ukizingatia kipindi kirefu cha kudorora ambacho Ummah ilipitia, haijawahi kuwa na umoja kama sasa. Kilichobaki katika sehemu ya mwisho ya fumbo linalolinda umoja ni dola.

The Ummah globally has clearly seen that the traitor rulers are not representatives of her. In fact a widening gulf now exists between the rulers and the Ummah. Considering the lengthy period of decline the Ummah underwent she has never been so united. All that remains in the final part of the jigsaw which protects unity is a state.

Serikali iliyojengwa juu ya misingi ambayo jamii inaiamini huhakikisha umoja unaundwa na kulindwa. Masahaba walishughulika kwa ukali mkubwa na Khawarij waliouingiza mawazo ya kigeni katika Uislamu, mawazo ambayo yangezaa mifarakano. Leo, kurejea kwa Khilafah kunachukuliwa kuwa kunakaribia, huku wataalamu mbalimbali na taasisi za fikra, pamoja na Shirika la Ujasusi la Taifa la Marekani (CIA), wakitabiri kuibuka kwa Khilafah. Bila dola, umoja ni karibu jambo lisilowezekana. Bila serikali kuu, Vita vya Wenyewe kwa Wenyewe vya Marekani vingeweza kuzaa nchi mbili katika Amerika ya Kaskazini. Bila serikali, pasingekuwepo muungano kati ya Uingereza na Scotland. Ni dola inayoleta umoja miongoni mwa watu. Bila hiyo, umoja ni karibu jambo lisilowezekana. Kama historia ya Kiislamu imeonyesha, Uislamu una kanuni za kina za umoja na kuunganisha watu, na una rekodi iliyofanikiwa ya kuwaunganisha watu wenye asili tofauti. Mifarakano tunayoiona leo iliundwa na Magharibi na inaendelea kuchochewa nao.

A government built upon the ideals society believes in, ensures unity is created and protected. The Sahabah dealt very harshly with the Khawarij who introduced foreign ideas into Islam which would have created disunity. The return of the Khilafah is today considered well on the horizon, with various think tanks and experts including the CIA national intelligence have predicted the emergence of the Khilafah. Without a state it is virtually impossible to have unity. Without central government the US civil war would have resulted in two countries in North America. Without a government there would have been no union between England and Scotland. It is a state that brings unity amongst people. Without it unity is virtually impossible. As Islamic history has shown Islam has detailed rules for unity and integration and actually has a successful track record of uniting people from different backgrounds. The disunity we see today was created by the West and continues to be fed by them.