Wakati wa mjadala mmoja, niliambiwa:

During the course of a discussion I was told:

"Wewe si mliberali."

“You are not liberal".

"Kwa nini?" nilimuuliza.

"Why?" I asked him.

"Je, unaamini kuwepo kwa Mungu?" alisema.

"Do you believe in the existence of a God?" he said.

"Ndiyo, nafanya."

"Yes, I do".

"Je, unamswalia na kufunga kwa ajili Yake?" "Ndiyo, nafanya hivyo."

"Do you pray and fast for Him?" "I do".

"Basi, wewe si mtu huru."

"Well, then you are not liberal".

Hapo nilimuuliza:

Thereupon I asked him:

"Unawezaje kusema kwamba mimi si mfikiri huru?" "Kwa sababu unaamini upuuzi ambao hauna uwepo wowote kabisa," aliniambia. "Na wewe? Ninyi watu mnaamini nini? Mnafikiri nini kiliumba ulimwengu na uhai?" niliuliza.

"How do you say that I am not a freethinker?" "Because you believe in nonsense that has no existence at all," he told me "And you? What do you people believe in? What do you think created universe and life?" I asked him.

"Asili!" "Lakini asili ni nini?" "Ni nguvu ya siri isiyo na mwisho, ambayo ina udhihirisho unaoweza kutambuliwa na viungo vya hisia," alisema. Nilimjibu: "Ninavyoelewa kauli yako hii, unanizuia kuamini nguvu isiyojulikana kwa sababu unataka niamini nguvu nyingine ambayo nayo haijulikani. Lakini swali ni hili: kwa nini nimkatae Mungu wangu kwa ajili ya mungu mwingine asiyejulikana na wa uongo, hasa ikiwa kwa Mungu wangu ninapata amani, utulivu na faraja, wakati mungu wa uongo wa asili haitikii wito wangu wala hanifariji?" Kwa ufupi, hii ndiyo hali ya wale wanaoendelea wanaozungumzia uhuru wa fikra. Kwao, uhuru wa fikra ni sawa na uhuru wa kumkana Mungu wa mtu. Hata hivyo, hii si uhuru wa fikra bali ni uhuru wa kutokuamini Mungu. Wakianzia kwenye msingi huu, wanaishutumu Uislamu kwamba unazuia uhuru wa fikra kwa sababu tu unakataza kutokuamini Mungu. Lakini swali ni: je, uhuru wa fikra na kutokuamini Mungu ni kitu kimoja, na je, kutokuamini Mungu ni sharti la lazima la uhuru wa fikra? Wakipotoshwa na historia ya uliberali wa Ulaya, wanashindwa kuona kwamba ikiwa hali fulani za kienyeji zilisababisha kuenea kwa kutokuamini Mungu huko Ulaya, hiyo haimaanishi kwamba jambo hilo hilo linapaswa kutokea kila mahali duniani.

"Nature!" "But what is Nature?" "It is the secret power that is limitless but has got manifestations which can be perceived by the sense organs," he said, At this I said: "I understand by this statement of yours that you prevent me from believing in an unknown power because you want me to believe in another equally unknown power. But the question is that why should I disown my God for the sake of another equally unknown but false god, especially when in the one I find peace, tranquility and comfort, whereas the false god of Nature neither answers my call, nor comforts me?" This in short is the case of the progressives who talk about freedom of thought. For them freedom of thought is synonymous to freedom of disowning one's God. This is, however, not freedom of thought but freedom of atheism. Starting with these premises they accuse Islam of restricting the freedom of thought simply because it prohibits atheism. But the question is: Is freedom of thought and atheism one and the same thing, and is atheism really a necessary precondition to the freedom of thought? Misled by the history of European liberalism they overlook the fact that if certain local circumstances necessitated the spread of atheism in Europe, this does not mean that the same thing should happen everywhere in the world.

Hakuna shaka kwamba taswira ya Ukristo kama ilivyowasilishwa na kanisa barani Ulaya, pamoja na ukandamizaji wake wa sayansi, mateso aliyopata wanasayansi, na kueneza seti ya uongo na khurafa kwa jina la neno la Mungu, ndiyo iliyowasukuma wanafikra huru wa Ulaya kuelekea kwenye kutokuamini kuwepo kwa Mungu. Wasomi wa Ulaya walilazimika kuchagua kati ya misimamo miwili isiyoweza kupatanishwa:

There is no doubt that the image of Christianity as presented by the church in Europe with its suppression of science, torturing of scientists and passing on a set of lies an superstitions in the name of the word of God drove the free thinkers of Europe to atheism. The intellectuals of Europe had to choose between two irreconcilable attitudes:

imani ya asili kwa Mungu au imani katika ukweli wa kinadharia na wa kivitendo wa kisayansi.

the natural belief in God or the belief in theoretical and practical scientific facts.

Wasomi wa Ulaya walipata katika Maumbile njia ya kujinasua kwa kiasi fulani kutoka katika mkanganyiko huo. Kwa hiyo wakaiambia kanisa: "Lichukue Mungu wako ambaye kwa jina lake mnatutumikisha na kututwika mizigo mizito ya kodi, na kututawala kwa dhuluma na kwa ushirikina.

The European intellectuals found in Nature a partial escape from the dilemma. So they said to the church: "Take back your God in whose name you enslave us and impose on us burdensome exactions and subject us to tyrannous dictatorship and superstitions.

"Imani kwa Mungu wako inataka sisi tuishi maisha ya kujitenga ya watawa na wanaojitenga na dunia, lakini sisi tunakataa kufanya unavyotaka. Kwa hiyo, tutakuwa na Mungu mpya ambaye anamiliki sifa nyingi za Mungu wa kwanza, lakini ambaye hana kanisa la kututumikisha, wala hatulazimishi wajibu wowote wa kimaadili, wa kiakili au wa kimali kama Mungu wako anavyofanya".

The belief in your God wants us to lead the ascetic life of hermits and recluses, we refuse to do your bidding. We shall, therefore, have a new God who possessed most of the qualities of the first God but who has no church to enslave us, nor does He impose on us any moral, intellectual or materialistic obligations as your God does".

Lakini katika Uislamu hakuna jambo lolote kama lile linaloweza kuwasukuma watu kwenye kutokuamini kuwepo kwa Mungu. Hakuna matatizo hapa yanayoweza kuchanganya akili. Kuna Mungu Mmoja tu; Yeye ndiye aliyeumba viumbe vyote, na vyote vitarejea Kwake. Ni dhana iliyo wazi na rahisi ambayo hata wanaasili na wasioamini kuwepo kwa Mungu wanaweza kuona vigumu kuikataa au kuitilia shaka.

But in Islam there is no such thing as may drive people to atheism. There are no dilemmas here which puzzle the mind. There is only one God; He has created all beings and all will return to Him. It is a clear and simple concept which even the naturalists and atheists may find hard to reject or doubt.

Katika Uislamu hakuna makasisi kama walivyokuwa wale wa kanisa la Ulaya. Dini ni mali ya pamoja ya watu wote, na kila Mwislamu ana haki ya kunufaika nayo kadiri uwezo wake wa kimaumbile, kiroho na kiakili unavyomruhusu. Watu wote ni sawa, na wanatendewa kulingana na wanavyostahili kwa mujibu wa matendo yao maishani. Watu wanaoheshimiwa zaidi kuliko wengine ni wale wanaomcha Mungu, awe wahandisi, walimu, wafanyakazi au mafundi. Lakini dini si mojawapo ya kazi hizi nyingi. Hakuna makasisi wa kitaaluma katika Uislamu, hivyo ibada za Kiislamu hufanywa bila kupatanishwa na kasisi yeyote. Hata hivyo, ni lazima baadhi ya watu wabobee katika utafiti wa fiqhi na sheria ambazo mpangilio wa umma unajengwa juu yake. Hadhi ambayo wataalamu hao wa fiqhi ya Kiislamu na sheria ya kikatiba wanayofurahia si kubwa zaidi ya ile ambayo wenzao katika nchi nyingine wanayo. Hawana mamlaka yoyote wala hadhi ya kitabaka juu ya watu. Wao ni wanafiqhi na washauri tu wa dola. Inafaa hapa kutajwa kwamba Al-Azhar ni taasisi ya kidini, lakini haina, kama walivyokuwa nayo makasisi, mamlaka ya kuwachoma moto au kuwatesa watu. Kile ambacho Al-Azhar inaweza kufanya ni kupinga na kukosoa ufahamu wa mtu binafsi kuhusu dini. Lakini kwa upande mwingine, mtu yeyote kutoka nje pia anaweza kupinga na kukosoa ufahamu wa Al-Azhar kuhusu dini, kwa kuwa Uislamu si mali ya mtu binafsi wala ya kundi lolote. Ni watu hao tu wanaochukuliwa kuwa mamlaka katika masuala ya dini ambao, kwa kuzingatia ufahamu wao wa kina wa dini, wanaitumia katika maisha ya kila siku bila kujali kazi zao wenyewe.

In Islam there are no churchmen such as the European church had. Religion is the common property of all and every Muslim is entitled to benefit from it as much as his natural, spiritual and intellectual equipment may permit. All people are equal and they are treated as they deserve in the light of their deeds in life. The more honored of all people are the God-fearing individuals whether they are engineers, teachers, workmen or craftsmen. But religion is not one of these so many occupations. There are no professional churchmen in Islam, so that Islamic worship is observed without the intercession of a churchman. But it is necessary that some people should specialize in the study of jurisprudence and Jaw on which public order is based. The status such specialists in Islamic jurisprudence and constitutional law enjoy is not more than that which their counterparts in other countries do. They are not entitled to any authority or class prestige over the people. They are just the jurisprudents and counsels of the state. It may be pointed out here that Al-Azhar is a religious institute but it does not have, as the churchmen did, the authority to burn or torture people. All that Al-Azhar can do is to challenge and criticize an individual’s understanding of religion. But on the other hand, anyone from outside can as well challenge and criticize Al-Azhar's understanding of religion, for Islam is not the monopoly of any individual or class. Only those persons are considered as an authority on questions of religion who in the light of their deep understanding of it apply it to practical life regardless of their own professions.

Wakati utawala wa Kiislamu utakapoanzishwa, "Ulama" (wanazuoni wa Kiislamu) hawatakuwa moja kwa moja magavana, mawaziri au wakuu wa idara. Mabadiliko pekee ni kwamba mfumo wa utawala utajengwa juu ya Sharia ya Kiislamu (Sheria) — sheria ya Mungu.

When the Islamic rule is established the "Ulama" (Islamic scholars) will not automatically become the governors or ministers or heads of departments. The only change is that the system of rule will be based on Islamic Sharia (Law)-the law of God.

Wahandisi wataendelea kusimamia kazi za uhandisi, madaktari watakuwa na jukumu la mambo ya kitiba, wachumi wataongoza maisha ya kiuchumi ya jamii, huku tofauti pekee ikiwa ni kwamba uchumi wa Kiislamu peke yake ndio utakaowapa miongozo.

The engineers will continue to be charged with the engineering works, the doctors will be responsible for medical affairs, the economists will direct the economic life of the community with the only change that the Islamic economy alone will then provide them with the guidelines.

Historia inathibitisha kwamba imani ya Kiislamu wala mfumo wake wa utawala haukuwahi kugongana na sayansi au matumizi ya nadharia zake. Hakuna mwanasayansi katika Uislamu ambaye amewahi kuchomwa moto au kuteswa kwa sababu ya kugundua au kutangaza ukweli wa kisayansi. Sayansi ya kweli haigongani na imani ya Kiislamu na imani kwamba Mungu ameumba kila kitu. Uislamu unawataka watu kuchunguza anga na ardhi na kutafakari uumbaji wake ili kugundua kuwepo kwa Mungu. Inapaswa kukumbukwa kwamba wanasayansi wengi wa Magharibi ambao hawakuamini Mungu walikuja kugundua kuwepo kwake kupitia utafiti sahihi wa kisayansi.

History bears witness that neither the Islamic faith nor its system of rule ever came into conflict with science or the application of its theories. No scientist in Islam has ever been burnt or tortured for discovering or announcing a scientific fact. True science is not in conflict with the Islamic faith and the belief that God created everything. Islam calls on people to study space and earth and to meditate on their creation in order to discover the existence of God. It should be remembered that many Western scientists who did not believe in God came to discover His existence through proper scientific research.

Hakuna kitu chochote katika Uislamu kinachoweza kuwasukuma watu kwenye kutokuamini Mungu. Wanaounga mkono kutokuamini Mungu Mashariki ni wafuasi vipofu tu wa mabwana zao wa zamani wa kikoloni. Wanataka kupewa uhuru wa kushambulia imani na aina zote za ibada, na kuwasihi watu waache dini yao. Lakini kwa nini wanataka uhuru wa namna hiyo? Barani Ulaya, watu walitaka kushambulia dini ili kuiweka akili zao huru kutoka katika ushirikina na kuwaweka watu huru kutoka katika dhuluma na udhalimu. Lakini ikiwa imani ya Kiislamu tayari inawapa uhuru wote wanaouhitaji au wanaouhitaji kwa kelele, kwa nini waishambulie? Ukweli ni kwamba hawa tunaowaita wanaharakati hawapendezwi na uhuru wa mawazo, bali wanapendezwa zaidi na kueneza uovu wa kimaadili na machafuko ya ngono yasiyodhibitiwa. Wanatumia uhuru wa mawazo kama kinyago cha kuficha nia zao duni. Ni kama kujificha tu katika vita vyao vibaya dhidi ya dini na maadili. Wanaipinga Uislamu si kwa sababu unazuia uhuru wa mawazo, bali kwa sababu unasimamia ukombozi wa binadamu kutoka katika utawala wa matamanio yao ya chini.

There is nothing in Islam which may drive people on to atheism. The advocates of atheism in the East are but blind followers of their erstwhile colonialist masters. They want to be given the freedom to attack the faith and all kinds of worship and to urge people to abandon their religion. But why do they want such freedom? In Europe, people sought to attack religion in order to liberate their minds from superstition and to free people from oppression and tyranny. But if Islamic faith already gives them all the freedom they need to have or they clamor for, why should they attack it? The truth is that these so-called liberals are not interested in the freedom of thought but are rather more interested in spreading moral corruption and uncontrolled sexual anarchy. They use freedom of thought as a mask to hide their base motives. It is no more than a camouflage in their hideous war against religion and morality. They are against Islam not because it restricts freedom of thought but only because it stands for the liberation of mankind from the dominance of its baser passions.

Wale wanaotetea "uhuru wa fikra" wanadai kwamba mfumo wa utawala wa Kiislamu ni wa kidikteta kwa sababu dola ina mamlaka makubwa. Kilicho baya zaidi, wanasema, ni kwamba dola inafurahia mamlaka na uwezo mkubwa mno kwa jina la dini, jambo ambalo lina mvuto mkubwa sana kwa watu. Hivyo, wanajisalimisha kipofu kwa utawala wake wa kidhalimu. Kwa hiyo, wanahitimisha, mamlaka haya makubwa yanaongoza kwenye udikteta, na watu wa kawaida wanafanywa watumwa wasio na haki ya kufikiri kwa ajili yao wenyewe. Uhuru wa fikra unapotea milele. Hakuna anayethubutu kuwapinga watawala, na yeyote anayefanya hivyo anashtakiwa kwa uasi dhidi ya dini na dhidi ya Mungu.

The advocates of "free thinking" allege that the Islamic system of rule is dictatorial because the state has vast powers. The worst of it, they say, is that the state enjoys immense power and authority in the name of the faith which has a very great attraction for the people. So they blindfoldly subject themselves to its tyrannical rule. Thus, they conclude, these vast powers lead to dictatorship and the common people are made slaves with no right to think for themselves. The freedom of thought is lost for ever. None dare challenge the rulers and he who does is accused of rebellion against religion and God.

Madai hizi za uongo zinakanushwa vyema kwa kurejea aya hizi tukufu za Qur'ani: 1. “Na mambo yao yanaendeshwa kwa kushauriana baina yao” (xlii: 38). 2. “Na mnapohukumu baina ya watu, mhukumu kwa uadilifu” (iv: 58).

These false accusations are best refuted by referring to these verses of the Holy Qur'an : 1 “And their government is by counsel among themselves" (xlii: 38). 2. “And when you judge between people you judge with justice" (iv: 58).

Abu Bakr, Khalifa wa kwanza, alisema: "Nitiini mimi mradi tu ninamtii Mungu na Mtume wake. Lakini nikimwasi Mungu au Mtume, hamna haja tena ya kunitii."

Abu Bakr, the first Caliph said: "Obey me so long as I obey God and His Prophet. But if I disobey God or the Prophet I shall no longer be entitled to your obedience".

Omar aliwaambia Waislamu: "Nirekebisheni iwapo mtagundua upotovu wowote ndani yangu". Mmoja wa wasikilizaji akajibu: "Kwa Mungu Mwenyezi, lau tungegundua upotovu wowote ndani yako, tungekurekebisha kwa panga zetu".

Omar addressed the Muslims saying: "Put me right if you discover any crookedness in me". One of the audience retorted: “By God Almighty if we had found any crookedness in thee we should have put you right with our swords".

Ni kweli kwamba dhuluma na udhalimu vilitawala kwa jina la dini. Pia ni kweli kwamba dhuluma kama hiyo bado inatawala katika baadhi ya nchi kwa jina la dini. Lakini je, dini ndiyo kinyago pekee kinachotumiwa na madikteta? Je, Hitler alitawala kwa jina la dini? Hata nchini Urusi sasa inakubaliwa kwamba Stalin alikuwa dhalimu na dikteta aliyetawala juu ya dola ya polisi.

It is true that oppression and tyranny ruled in the name of religion. It is also true that such oppression still dominates in some countries in the name of religion. But is religion the only mask used by dictators? Did Hitler rule in the name of religion? It is now admitted even in Russia, that Stalin was a tyrant and a dictator who ruled over a police state.

Je, Stalin alitawala kwa jina la dini? Je, madikteta wote na watawala wa kimabavu, wakiwemo Mao Tse-tung, Franco, Malan wa Afrika Kusini, na Chiang Kai-shek wa China ya Kitaifa, walitawala kwa niaba ya dini? Hakuna shaka kwamba karne ya ishirini, ambayo iliweza kuondoa utawala wa kidini, ndiyo iliyoshuhudia udikteta wa kutisha zaidi, ambao uliwadanganya wanadamu kwa majina ya kuvutia yasiyopungua utakatifu wa dini.

But did Stalin rule in the name of religion? Do all tyrants and dictators including Mao Tse-tung, Franco, Malan in South Africa, Chiang Kai-shek in Na’ionalist China, dominate on behalf of religion? There is no doubt that the twentieth century which has managed to get rid of religious domination has witnessed the most monstrous dictatorships which beguile mankind by attractive names no less sacred than religion.

Hakuna mtu anayeweza kutetea udikteta; hakuna mtu mwenye akili huru na dhamiri safi atakayeuunga mkono. Lakini kanuni yoyote tukufu inaweza kutumiwa vibaya na kufanywa kama kinyago cha kuficha tamaa za kibinafsi. Mapinduzi ya Ufaransa yalishuhudia uhalifu mbaya zaidi ukitendeka kwa jina la uhuru. Lakini hilo halipaswi kuchukuliwa kama kisingizio cha kupigana dhidi ya uhuru. Mamia ya watu wasio na hatia walifungwa, waliteswa au kuuawa kwa jina la katiba. Je, basi katiba zote zifutwe? Dhuluma na ukandamizaji vilitawala katika baadhi ya nchi kwa jina la dini. Je, basi tuziache dini zote? Ingekuwa sahihi kuiacha dini iwapo dini yenyewe ingehimiza dhuluma na uonevu. Hilo haliwezi kusemwa kuhusu Uislamu, ambao ulianzisha mifano tukufu zaidi ya haki safi na usawa, si tu miongoni mwa Waislamu wenyewe bali pia kati ya Waislamu na maadui zao wakubwa.

No One would defend dictatorship; no man of free intellect and conscience would approve of it. But any noble principle can be exploited and used as a mask to hide personal ambitions. The French Revolution witnessed the most heinous crimes being committed in the name of liberty. But this should not be taken as a pretext for fighting against liberty. Hundreds of innocent people have been imprisoned, tortured or murdered on behalf of the constitution. Should all constitutions be annulled then? Oppression and tyranny dominated some countries in the name of religion. Should we, therefore, abandon all religions? It would be right to abandon religion if religion as such were to advocate oppression and injustice. This cannot be said of Islam which established the noblest examples of pure justice and equity not only among the Muslims themselves but between Muslims and their fatal enemies as well.

Udhalimu unapaswa kupingwa vyema kwa kuwafundisha watu kumwamini Mungu na kuheshimu uhuru, ambao unalindwa na kuhifadhiwa na dini. Watu kama hao hawataruhusu mtawala kufanya dhuluma, bali watamzuia ndani ya mipaka ya mamlaka yake ya kisheria. Sidhani kama mfumo wowote umewahi kulenga kuanzisha haki au kupinga udhalimu kama Uislamu ulivyofanya. Uislamu uliwafanya watu kuwa na wajibu wa kumrekebisha mtawala iwapo ni dhalimu. Mtume ﷺ amesema: "Yeyote kati yenu akiona uovu, na auondoe kwa mkono wake; asipoweza, basi kwa ulimi wake; asipoweza, basi kwa moyo wake, na huo ndio udhaifu wa imani." Pia amesema: "Neno la haki lililosemwa mbele ya mtawala dhalimu ndilo jihadi kubwa kabisa."

Tyranny is best fought by teaching the people to believe in God and to respect freedom which is defended and safeguarded by religion. Such people would not allow the ruler to commit injustice, but will keep him within the limits of his legal powers. I do not think that any system has ever aimed at the establishment of justice or the opposition of tyranny as much as Islam did. Islam made it a duty of the people to put the ruler right if he is unjust. The Prophet Says: "He who witnesses any vice should change it". He also says: "A word of Justice uttered before all unjust ruler is the greatest of Jihad (holy war)".

Ilikuwa kwa sababu ya kanuni hizi hizi ambapo watu waliasi dhidi ya Othman, Khalifa wa tatu, walipoamini kwamba alikuwa amepotoka kutoka katika njia iliyonyooka, ingawa uasi wenyewe ulileta upotofu mkubwa zaidi.

It was due to these very principles that the people revolted against Othman, the third Caliph, when they believed that he had deviated from the straight course though the revolution itself brought about even a greater deviation.

Kwa kumalizia, tungependa kutoa neno la ushauri kwa hawa "wanamaendeleo wanaofikiri huru". Njia ya kweli ya ukombozi si kuacha dini, bali ni kuwapa watu roho ya kimapinduzi inayochukia dhuluma na kuirekebisha dhalimu. Roho hii kwa msingi wake ni roho ya watu wa Kiislamu.

In conclusion we would like to drop a word of advice to these "progressive free thinkers". The true way of liberation is not the abandonment of religion but in giving people the revolutionary spirit which abhors injustice and rectifies the unjust. This spirit is essentially the spirit of the Islamic people.