Neno "individualism" (ubinafsi wa kiitikadi / ubinafsishaji wa kifalsafa) linatokana na neno "individual" (mtu binafsi). Asili yake ni neno la Kilatini *individuum*, linalomaanisha kitu kisichogawanyika. Katika Magharibi, maana hii ya kifalsafa hutumika kwa kiumbe kisichogawanyika, yaani binadamu, katika sifa zake mahsusi kama mtu anayefurahia uhuru wa kufikiri, kuchagua na kutenda. Ni nadharia inayodai kwamba mtu binafsi ni bora kuliko aina zote za uhalisia, na ana thamani ya ndani kabisa ya juu zaidi. Neno individualism pia hutumika kinyume na utotalitarianism (mfumo wa kiimla) na ukomunisti wa pamoja (collectivism). Inatoa mtazamo wa kisiasa unaompa mtu binafsi na mpango wake binafsi nafasi ya kwanza, huku ikipunguza, au hata kukataa, nafasi ya dola. Pia inatoa mtazamo wa kijamii unaolenga haki za mtu binafsi badala ya jamii, huku ikifanya nafasi ya dola na taasisi za kijamii kuwa tegemezi kwa mtu binafsi na kuhakikisha maslahi yake. Dhana ya individualism inabeba uhalisia wa mapambano ya mwanadamu wa Magharibi dhidi ya tawala za kiimla na za kidhalimu, kabla ya Mwangaza (Enlightenment) na usasa (modernity). Inaashiria mtazamo mpya wa kidunia wa Magharibi, wenye vipimo vya kisiasa, kiuchumi na kijamii, ambamo watu binafsi wanakuwa mabwana na kitovu cha ulimwengu, wakidhibiti uwepo wa ulimwengu. Kila mtu binafsi ana uhuru wa kuchagua namna yake ya maisha na mwenendo wake, kwa kuwa yeye ndiye kiumbe kinachotangulia viumbe vya dola, jamii na jumuiya. Mtu binafsi huzaliwa na haki za asili anazopaswa kuzifurahia. Kwa hiyo, watu binafsi ndio lengo la dola, ambayo huhifadhi haki zao na kulinda uhuru wao (liberty). Ubinafsi pia ni lengo la jamii, ambapo jamii ni ile ambayo jumuiya inamtumikia mtu binafsi, na si ile ambayo mtu binafsi anaitumikia jumuiya.

The word individualism is derived from the word individual. Its origin is the Latin word individuum, which means an indivisible entity. In the West, this meaning in the philosophical sense, as the concept of individualism is applied on an entity that is indivisible, the human being, in the human's distinguished characteristics as one who enjoys independence to think, choose and act. It is the theory that asserts that an individual is superior to all forms of reality, with the greatest intrinsic worth. The term individualism is also used in contrast to totalitarianism and collectivism. It provides the political vision that lends preeminence to the individual and individual initiative, reducing, or even denying, the role of the state. It also provides the societal vision that focuses on the rights of the individual, as opposed to the community, whilst making the role of the state and societal institutions subservient to the individual and ensuring his interests. The concept of individualism encapsulates the reality of the struggle of the Western man against totalitarian and despotic regimes, before Enlightenment and modernity. It symbolizes the new Western universal view, with political, economic and social dimensions, in which individuals become both masters and the center of the universe, controlling the existence of the universe. Every individual has the freedom to choose his way of life and behavior, as he is the entity that precedes the entities of the state, community and society. The individual is born with natural rights which he must enjoy. Accordingly, individuals are the objective of the state, which preserves their rights and protects their freedom (liberty). Individualism is also the objective of society, where it is a society where the community serves the individual, and not where the individual serves the community.

Ukweli wa dhana ya ubinafsi (individualism) ni kwamba inatokana na usekula (secularism). Dhana hii iliibuka pale mwanadamu wa Magharibi alipojikomboa kutoka mamlaka ya Kanisa na wafalme, ambayo iliunganisha mambo yake yote ya kidunia na vitendo vyake na Akhera. Ndani ya mfumo huo, alijihisi kulazimishwa na kuonewa, na mapenzi yake pamoja na haki zake maishani zikiwa zimekandamizwa. Katika zama hizo, utambulisho wake uliundwa kulingana na mila na imani za jamii. Alipojikomboa kutoka mamlaka hiyo, uhusiano wake na Akhera ulikatika. Kisha alielekeza umakini wake wote kwenye mambo ya kidunia. Hivyo akaanza kuishi duniani humu na si nje ya dunia hii, kama wasemavyo. Badala yake, akawa bwana wa dunia hii. Umuhimu wa kati na mamlaka ya mtu binafsi uliimarishwa na nadharia ya haki za asili. Nadharia hii inasisitiza kwamba mtu binafsi ana haki zake zinazotokana na maumbile yake, wakati jamii haimpi haki kama hizo. Haki hizi ni zake za kudumu. Ni za ulimwengu wote, za msingi, haziwezi kuondolewa wala kufutwa.

The reality of the concept of individualism is that it emanates from secularism. The concept arose when the Western man rid himself of the authority of the Church and kings, that connected all of his worldly affairs and actions to the Hereafter. Within the system, he felt coerced and oppressed, with his will and rights within life, crushed. In that era, his identity was shaped according to the traditions and beliefs of the society. When he rid himself of this authority, his connection with the Hereafter was severed. He then turned his full attention towards worldly affairs. So he started living in this world and not outside of this world, as they say. Instead, he became master of this world. The centrality and sovereignty of the individual was reinforced by the theory of natural rights. This theory asserts that the individual has his rights derived from his nature, whilst the society does not grant him such rights. These rights are fixed for him. They are universal, fundamental, inalienable and cannot be repealed.

Hivyo basi, watu wanazaliwa na haki zao za asili, yaani kuwepo kwao pamoja na haki zao kunatangulia kuwepo kwa jamii, sheria zake, kanuni zake na vizuizi vyake. Kwa hiyo, uhuru ndio msingi wa kuwepo kwa mwanadamu. Watu ni sawa katika haki hizi. Hakuna hata mmoja wao anayenyima au kufuta haki za wengine. Kwa kuwa mtu binafsi, kwa asili yake na hali yake, si kiumbe wa kijamii, yuko katika hatari ya ugomvi, mgongano na machafuko pale anapojumuika na wengine. Kwa hiyo, katika hali kama hii lazima kuwepo na mpangilio, kwa kufanya maridhiano baina ya jumuiya ya watu binafsi. Lengo la jumuiya hii ni kuanzisha haki ya uhuru na usawa kwa wote, yaani mtu binafsi anakabidhi haki zake kwa matakwa ya pamoja, yanayowakilishwa na dola, kupitia mkataba wa kijamii. Kwa njia hii, kupitia mkataba wa pande zote, mamlaka tawala inakuwa taasisi ya kibinadamu inayopata sheria zake kutoka katika makubaliano ya kanuni baina ya watu. Dola kisha inasimamia haki na uhuru, yaani dola inatekeleza mambo kwa msingi wa matakwa ya kibinadamu na si kwa msingi wa matakwa ya Mwenyezi Mungu, ambapo matakwa ya watu binafsi ndiyo mzizi na msingi wa matakwa ya pamoja.

Thus individuals are born with their natural rights i.e. their existence with their rights precedes the existence of the society, its laws, legislations and constraints. Accordingly, freedom is the foundation of human existence. Individuals are equal in these rights. None of them deprives or repeals the rights of others. Since the individual is a non-social entity in terms of origin and nature, he is subjected to quarrel, conflict and chaos in the event of socialization. So there must be an organization in such a situation by making concessions with a community of individuals. This community's objective is to establish the right to freedom and equality for all i.e. the individual concedes his rights to the collective will, embodied by the state through social contract. In this way, through mutual contract, the ruling authority becomes a human institution that derives its legislations from the regulatory agreement between the people. The state then regulates the rights and freedoms, i.e. the state executes upon the basis of human will and not upon the basis of divine will, where the will of individuals is the root and basis of collective will.

Kulingana na wanafikra wa Magharibi, ubinafsi ni miongoni mwa nguzo bainifu za ustaarabu wa Magharibi. Katika kitabu chake, *Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence In the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950*, mwanasayansi wa siasa wa Kimarekani Charles Alan Murray anasema, “Madhumuni na uhuru binafsi vimeunganishwa na sifa bainifu ya kitamaduni ya ustaarabu wa Ulaya, ubinafsi.” Kwa hiyo, ubepari unaelezwa kuwa itikadi ya kibinafsi. Itikadi hii inaona kwamba jamii ni mkusanyiko wa watu binafsi. Ubepari unaiona jamii kama jambo la pili tu, ingawa unaelekezwa kwa watu binafsi. Kwa hiyo, ubepari unalazimika kuhakikisha uhuru wa mtu binafsi. Hivyo, uhuru wa imani ni miongoni mwa mambo unayoyatakasa. Uhuru wa umiliki wa mali pia ni mtakatifu na hauruhusiwi kuzuiwa, kulingana na falsafa yake. Dola hufanya vizuizi ili tu kulinda uhuru. Dola hutekeleza vizuizi hivyo kwa nguvu ya jeshi na sheria kali. Hata hivyo, dola ni njia tu ya kufikia lengo, si lengo lenyewe. Mamlaka kuu hatimaye ni ya watu binafsi, si ya dola.

According to the Western thinkers, individualism is amongst the defining pillars of the Western civilization. In his book, Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence In the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950, American political scientist Charles Alan Murray states, “Purpose and autonomy are intertwined with the defining cultural characteristic of European civilization, individualism.” Thus capitalism is described as an individualistic ideology. The ideology views that society is a collection of individuals. Capitalism views society only as a secondary consideration, whilst being orientated towards individuals. Accordingly, capitalism is obliged to ensure individual freedoms. Hence, freedom of belief is within what it sanctifies. Freedom of economic ownership is also sacred and must not be restricted, according to its philosophy. The state makes restrictions only to ensure freedoms. The state executes these restrictions with the power of the army and strict laws. Nevertheless, the state is only a means to an end, not an end in itself. Sovereignty ultimately belongs to individuals and not to the state.

Ubepari ni falsafa batili katika mtazamo wake kuhusu mwanadamu, jamii na dhana ya haki. Ushahidi wa ubatili wake ni mwingi, ikiwemo:

Capitalism is an invalid philosophy in its perception about man, society and the concept of rights. The evidence for its invalidity are many, including:

Kwanza: Katika kitabu chake Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes alifafanua haki za asili ambazo falsafa ya ubinafsi imejengwa juu yake, kwa kusema, "Haki ya asili, ambayo waandishi kwa kawaida huiita jus naturale, ni uhuru ambao kila mtu anao wa kutumia nguvu zake mwenyewe atakavyo kwa ajili ya kuhifadhi asili yake mwenyewe; yaani, maisha yake mwenyewe; na hivyo, kufanya lolote ambalo, kwa hukumu na akili yake mwenyewe, atalidhania kuwa ndilo njia inayofaa zaidi kufikia hilo." Katika kitabu Critique of Practical Reason, Immanuel Kant alizungumzia ukuu wa mtu binafsi kama mtu, kwa kusema, "Ni kwa yale ambayo mtu anayafanya bila kujali starehe, kwa uhuru kamili na bila kutegemea kile ambacho maumbile yangeweza kumpatia bila juhudi, ndipo anapolipa maisha yake, kama uwepo wa mtu, thamani kamili."

Firstly: In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes defined the natural rights upon which the philosophy of individualism is built, by saying, “The right of nature, which writers commonly call jus naturale, is the liberty each man hath to use his own power as he will himself for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life; and consequently, of doing anything which, in his own judgement and reason, he shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto.” In the book, Critique of Practical Reason, Immanuel Kant spoke of the preeminence of the individual as a person, by saying, “Only by what one does heedless of enjoyment, in complete freedom and independently of what nature could passively procure for him, does he give to his life, as the existence of a person, an absolute worth.”.

Wanachokusudia kwa hili ni kwamba mwanadamu amezaliwa na maumbile maalum. Ni maumbile haya, ambayo juu yake amezaliwa au anakutwa, ndiyo sheria yake ya mwenendo na tabia. Hii ina maana kwamba maumbile haya yenyewe yana kanuni zisizobadilika, yaani haki. Nadharia inasema kwamba mtu binafsi anamiliki haki za asili. Haki hizi za asili ni haki zinazotangulia siasa, au haki zinazotangulia mkataba, kama wanavyosema. Maumbile haya yanadhaniwa kuunda haki zinazotangulia jamii pamoja na mifumo yake, sheria zake na kanuni zake, kwa msingi wa dhana ya hali ya asili. Hali ya asili ni hali ya kidhahania na ya kufikirika katika akili za baadhi ya wanafalsafa kama Thomas Hobbes, John Locke na wengineo. Haina uhalisia wowote kwani imejengwa juu ya dhana, mawazo na mitazamo. Lengo la utafiti halihusiani na binadamu wa kwanza, ambaye uhalisia wake umebuniwa akilini mwao. Pia haihusiani na binadamu wa kabla ya historia wala wa kabla ya ustaarabu. Badala yake, inahusiana na binadamu kwa maana ya kuwa wa kuonekana na wa kuhisika, awe mtu binafsi au jamii ya pamoja.

What they intended by this is that man is born with a specific nature. It is this nature, upon which he is born or he is found, that is his law of conduct and behavior. This means that this nature is by itself of fixed principles i.e. rights. The theory is that the individual possesses natural rights. These natural rights are pre-political rights or pre- contractual rights, as they say. This nature is supposed to constitute rights that precede the society with its systems, laws and legislations, based on the idea of state of nature. State of nature is the virtual and imaginary state in the minds of some philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and others. It has no reality as it is based on speculations, assumptions and perceptions. The focus of study is not related to the first human being, whose reality is imagined in their minds. It is not related to prehistoric or pre-civilized humans either. Instead it is related to human beings in terms of being tangible and sensed, both as individuals or as a collective community.

Kwa hiyo hatuhitaji kudhania uhalisia wa binadamu ili kumsoma na kisha kutoa hukumu juu yake. Badala yake, lazima tuanzie kwenye uhalisia uliopo na kufanya kipimo cha mlinganisho kwa yasiyokuwepo, kwa kile kinachoshuhudiwa, si kinyume chake. Asili ya binadamu wanayoizungumzia ni kile kilichoumbwa au kinachopatikana ndani ya binadamu. Kiini cha mwanadamu kinaweza kusomwa kwa kuangalia vitendo vyake na tabia zake. Anapoangalia vitendo vya mwanadamu, mtu anaweza kuona ndani yake nguvu ya uhai. Nguvu hii ya uhai ina hisia za asili zinazomsukuma mwanadamu kuzitosheleza. Msukumo huu huzaa hisia na mihemko inayohitaji kutoshelezwa. Miongoni mwa hisia na mihemko hiyo zipo zile zinazolazimu kutoshelezwa. Zisipotoshelezwa, mwanadamu atakufa, kwa sababu zinahusiana na kuwepo kwa nguvu ya uhai, kwa maana ya kuwepo kwa binadamu. Kisha zipo hisia na mihemko inayohitaji kutoshelezwa, lakini si ya lazima kiasi hicho. Mtu asipozitosheleza, atapata usumbufu lakini ataendelea kuishi. Hii ni kwa sababu zinahusiana na mahitaji ya nguvu ya uhai, lakini si na kuwepo kwa nguvu hiyo. Kwa msingi huo, nguvu ya uhai ni ya aina mbili: aina moja inahitaji kutoshelezwa kwa lazima na huitwa mahitaji ya kiumbe, kama njaa, kiu na kukidhi haja za mwili. Aina nyingine inahitaji kutoshelezwa lakini si kwa lazima, na huitwa silika. Silika ni tatu: 1) Silika ya kujihifadhi, ambayo udhihirisho wake ni woga, upendo wa kumiliki, upendo wa kutawala na nyinginezo zinazotumikia kuendelea kuishi kwa binadamu. 2) Silika ya uzazi, ambayo udhihirisho wake ni mielekeo ya kijinsia, umama, ubaba na nyinginezo zinazotumikia kuendelea kuwepo kwa jamii ya binadamu. 3) Silika ya kutakasa, ambayo udhihirisho wake ni hisia za upungufu, kutokuwa na uwezo, haja na heshima. Ni heshima kuu ndani ya moyo kwa kitu fulani miongoni mwa vingine, ambayo humsukuma mwanadamu kutafuta kiini chake, kuwepo kwake na tatizo lake kubwa linalowakilishwa na maswali muhimu: tumetoka wapi? Tutaenda wapi? Kwa nini iwe hivyo?

So we do not need to assume the reality of a human in order to study him and then to make a judgment upon him. Instead, we must proceed from the existing reality to make analogy upon the absent, with what is witnessed. Not the other way around. The nature of humans which they discuss is what is created or found within humans. The essence of a man can be studied by looking at his actions and behaviors. When looking at the actions of a man, one can observe within him vital energy. This life energy has natural sensations that motivate man to satiate them. This motivation creates feelings and sensations that require to satiation. Amongst those feelings and sensations are those that mandate satiation. If they are not satiated, man will die because they are related to the existence of vital energy, in terms of the existence of humans. Then there are feelings and sensations that require satiation, but they do not mandate sensation. If a man does not satiate these, he will be agitated but he will remain alive. This is because they are related to the needs of the vital energy, but not the existence of the energy. Accordingly, life energy is of two kinds: one kind requires mandatory satiation and are called organic needs such as hunger, thirst and relieving the call of nature. The other kind requires satiation but not mandatorily and are called instincts. There are three instincts: 1) Survival instinct whose manifestations are fear, love to own, love to dominate and others that serve for the survival of humans. 2) Procreation instinct, whose manifestations are sexual inclinations, motherhood, fatherhood and others that serve for the existence of human species. 3) Sanctification instinct, whose manifestations are the feelings of deficiency, incapability, need and reverence. It is the ultimate respect in the heart for something amongst others that motivate man to search for his essence, existence and his greatest problem represented by the crucial questions, where are we from? Where shall we go? Why is it so?

Hii ndiyo tabia ya binadamu. Ieleweke kwamba mtu anapokimbilia kutosheleza mahitaji au silika zake, hufanya hivyo kwa msingi wa ufahamu wa kiakili, na hapo ndipo anapotofautiana na wanyama, kwani jibu lake si mmenyuko wa silika tu. Hivyo basi, mwanadamu anahitaji dhana mbili kwa tabia hiyo: dhana kuhusu kitu kwa mtazamo wa kama kinatosheleza au hakitosheleza, na dhana kuhusu maisha kwa mtazamo wa kama kitu hicho kinaruhusiwa kutumika kutosheleza hitaji hilo au hakiruhusiwi. Dhana kuhusu maisha hazitokani na asili ya vitu wala na asili ya binadamu. Badala yake, ni mambo ya nje yanayohusiana na mtazamo na kipimo cha vitendo vilivyochaguliwa. Kwa maneno mengine, yanahusiana na mfumo unaotokana na itikadi, unaobainisha haki na wajibu wa mtu kama mtu binafsi au kama jamii.

This is the nature of humans. It is to be noted that when a man rushes to satiate his needs or instincts, he only does that based on the rational comprehension, distinguished from animals in that it is not a merely an instinctive reaction. Thus a man needs two concepts for the behavior: The concept about a thing in terms whether it satiates or does not satiate, and the concept about life in terms of whether the thing is permissible to satiate with or not. Concepts about life are not derived from the essence of things and not from the essence of humans. Instead they are external matters connected to the viewpoint and criterion of adopted actions. In other words, they are connected to the system emerging from the creed that defines rights and obligations for a man as an individual or community.

Hakuna haki za asili zilizopo ndani ya mtu tangu kuzaliwa. Hii ni kwa sababu haki huamuliwa na dhana za kistaarabu na kitamaduni ambazo watu binafsi wamezipitisha. Ustaarabu hutofautiana kwa kila kitu ambacho umekipitisha katika dhana na mifumo, na uhalali wake hupimwa kwa kiwango cha kuafikiana kwake na maumbile ya binadamu (fitra). Kwa mfano, ustaarabu wa Ulaya ya Kati unapingana na maumbile ya binadamu kwa kupitisha wazo la utawa na ukandamizaji. Vivyo hivyo, ustaarabu wa kisasa wa Ulaya unapingana na maumbile ya binadamu kwa kupitisha wazo la ponografia na kuidhinisha ushoga. Kuhusu ustaarabu wa Kiislamu, unaafikiana na maumbile ya binadamu kwa kupitisha dhana ya kupanga na kutosheleza, bila kuukandamiza wala kuuachia kupita kiasi. Uislamu unakubali silika na kutosheleza kwake, huku ukipanga namna silika inavyojidhihirisha bila kuiachia bila mipaka.

There are no such thing as natural rights that exist within a person from birth. This is because rights are determined by the civilizational and cultural concepts, adopted by the individuals. Civilizations are distinct with regards to all that they adopt in terms of concepts and systems, whose validity is measured according to the extent of their agreement with the human nature (fitra). For example, Medieval European civilization contradicts human nature by adopting the idea of monasticism and repression. Likewise, Modern European Civilization contradicts human nature by its adoption of the idea of pornography and approving homosexuality. As for the Islamic civilization, it agrees with human nature by adopting the concept of organization and satiation, without repressing it or unleashing it to excess. Islam acknowledges the instinct and its satiation, whilst also organizing the manifestation of the instinct without unleashing it.

Pili: Tangu lini mwanadamu anajulikana kuishi katika jamii, akiishi katika hali ya kiraia, kama wanavyosema, yeye hayumo katika hali ya kiasili. Ukweli ni kwamba yeye ni kiumbe wa kijamii anayetiishwa na mfumo ndani ya jamii na dola unaofafanua haki zake na wajibu wake. Kuhusu dai kwamba mwanadamu hubadilika kutoka hali ya kiasili kuwa hali ya kiraia, aliyestaarabika katika jamii yenye ustaarabu, kupitia mkataba wa kijamii unaohakikisha haki za kiasili za kila mtu binafsi, dai hili ni batili kinadharia na kivitendo. Na kuhusu dai kwamba utashi wa mtu binafsi ndio msingi na chimbuko la jamii, hivyo ubinafsi lazima uhifadhiwe kwa kuiangalia jamii kama mkusanyiko wa watu binafsi, ambapo mfumo huweka thamani za watu binafsi na si za jamii, dai hili pia ni batili kinadharia na kivitendo. Ukweli wa jamii ni kwamba ni mkusanyiko wa watu wenye mahusiano ya kudumu. Hivyo, watu binafsi wanaweza kukutana hata kwa mamilioni ili kuunda kundi. Ni mkusanyiko wa watu binafsi unaounda kundi. Iwapo kuna mahusiano ya kudumu kati yao, basi wanakuwa jamii. Iwapo hakuna mahusiano ya kudumu kati yao, basi wanabaki kuwa kundi tu. Wanaweza kuunda jamii pale tu kunapokuwepo na mahusiano ya kudumu kati yao.

Secondly: Since when man is known to live in a society, living in a civil state, as they say, he is not in a natural state. The reality is that he is a social being subjected to a system within the society and state that defines his rights and obligations. As for the claim that man turns from the state of nature into a civil state, civilized in a civil society, through a social contract that guarantees individualized natural rights, it is invalid both theoretically and practically. As for the claim that the individual’s will is the basis and precursor of community and so individuality must be preserved by looking at society as a collection of individuals, in which the system establishes the values of individuals and not the community, this is also invalid both theoretically and practically. The reality of society is that it is a collection of people with permanent relationships. Thus, individuals can come together even in millions to form a group. It is the collection of individuals that forms into a group. If there exist permanent relationships between them, then they become society. If there are no permanent relationships, between them, then they remain a group alone. They can form a society only when there are permanent relationships between them.

Kile kinachofanya kundi la watu kuunda jamii ni kuwepo kwa mahusiano ya kudumu ('alaaqaat) baina yao. Mahusiano haya huibuka kama matokeo ya maslahi yao (maSaalaH) kwa sababu watu wanahitajiana ili kutimiza maslahi yao mengi na tofauti tofauti. Hivyo, maslahi ndiyo chanzo cha kuanzisha mahusiano, na kama hakuna maslahi, hakutakuwa na mahusiano. Hata hivyo, maslahi hayo huwa ni halisi au yamepotoshwa, kwa upande wa asili yake kama maslahi, kutokana na dhana ya mwanadamu kuhusu maslahi hayo. Kwa kuwa dhana ni maana za fikra, basi fikra ndizo huamua maslahi. Kwa hiyo, kuwepo kwa fikra na kuungana kwake miongoni mwa watu, ndiko huzalisha mahusiano yao.

What makes a group of people form a society is the existence of permanent relationships ('alaaqaat) between them. These relationships emerge as a consequence of their interests (maSaalaH) because people need one another to fulfill their many, varied interests. Thus, interests are the motive for establishing relationships and if there are no interests, there will be no relationships. However, such interests are only real or corrupted, in terms of their nature as being interests, by the concept of man about the interests. Since concepts are the meanings of thoughts, thoughts determine the interests. Thus the existence of thoughts and their unification amongst a people, generates their relationships.

Kwa kuwa lazima kuwepo na hisia (mashaa'ir) pamoja na mawazo, kama furaha, raha, hasira na nyinginezo, basi hisia hizo nazo lazima ziunganishwe kwa upatano na maslahi hayo. Lakini hata mawazo na hisia pekee haviwezi kuzalisha uhusiano wa kudumu. Lazima kuwepo na mfumo wa kuyashughulikia maslahi hayo, ili uhusiano huu uwepo kwa msingi wa kudumu. Kwa hiyo, umoja (wahdah) wa mawazo, hisia na mifumo lazima upatikane miongoni mwa watu, ili kuanzisha uhusiano baina yao. Ikiwa hakuna umoja wa mambo haya matatu miongoni mwao, basi hakutakuwepo na uhusiano. Hivyo, jamii ni watu pamoja na umoja wa mawazo, hisia na mifumo miongoni mwao. Jamii si kama wanavyodai wanaocapitalism. Si kundi tu la watu binafsi ambapo kila mtu anafanya kazi kutimiza maslahi yake binafsi. Kwa mujibu wao, jamii ni zao la jumla ya matakwa ya watu binafsi.

Since there must be emotions (mashaa'ir) in addition to thoughts, such as joy, pleasure, anger and others, such emotions must also be unified in harmony with the interest. Yet, even both thoughts and emotions are not sufficient to generate the relationship permanently. There must be a system to treat this interest, so that this relationship exists on a permanent basis. Accordingly, unification (waHdah) of thoughts, emotions and systems must be achieved amongst a people, in order to establish relationships between them. If there is no unification of these three matters amongst them, then there will be no relationships. Thus society is a people and the unification of thoughts, emotions and systems amongst them. Society is not as the capitalists claim. It is not merely a group of individuals in which each individual works to achieve his personal interest. According to them, society is a byproduct of the aggregate of the wills of individuals.

Maoni ya Magharibi kuhusu jamii hayakubadilisha ufafanuzi wa jamii kama uhalisia dhahiri unaopo. Badala yake, ni kazi ya jamii pekee ndiyo iliyobadilika miongoni mwao, kwani dhana ya mahusiano ilipakwa rangi fulani. Ubinafsi (individualism) unamaanisha ukuu wa mtu binafsi, huku mkazo ukiwekwa kwenye haki na uhuru wa watu binafsi. Hii inatokana na kumchukulia mtu binafsi kama kiumbe huru, kilichotengwa na jamii. Katika mtazamo wa Magharibi, maisha ya kijamii si chochote zaidi ya suala la maamuzi ya mtu binafsi na chaguzi za kimanufaa, ambamo miunganiko na mahusiano yamewekwa ili kuyafurahisha maslahi ya watu binafsi. Hivyo, jamii ya kibepari ni jamii iliyoundwa kwa mahusiano yanayotegemea maslahi, yanayoongozwa na manufaa (faida), na hivyo kusababisha kutengwa, kujitenga ndani ya nafsi, ubinafsi, kutojali, ukosefu wa ushirikiano, mahusiano ya kifamilia yaliyoharibika, na kupotea kwa maadili ya kifamilia katika jamii kwa ujumla.

Western views about society did not in fact change the definition of society as an evident, existing reality. Instead, it is only the function of society that has changed amongst them, as the concept of relationships was painted with a particular hue. Individualism constitutes preeminence of the individual, with a focus on the rights and freedoms of the individuals. This is upon the characterization of individuals being independent beings, separated from the community. In the Western view, societal life is nothing but an issue of individual decisions and utilitarian choices, in which connections and relations are conditioned to please the interests of individuals. Thus capitalist society is a society formed with relationships based on the interest, governed by utility (benefit), thereby resulting in isolation, introversion, selfishness, indifference, lack of cooperation and dysfunctional family relationships and the loss of family values within the society at large.

Hii ilipelekea kukua kwa ukosoaji wa ubinafsi hata Magharibi, na kuibuka kwa wito wa kufufua ujamaa na mshikamano, kama maadili kwa watu binafsi.

This in turn led to growing criticism of individualism even in the West and the emergence of calls to revive collectivism and solidarity, as values for individuals.

Zaidi ya hayo, mataifa ya Magharibi yenyewe yameanza kuingilia mambo mengi ya kiuchumi, kisiasa na kijamii, yakizuia ubinafsi kwa kisingizio cha kuleta usawa katika jamii. Hii ni kutambua kuwepo kwa maslahi ya umma, yanayotangulizwa juu ya maslahi binafsi ya kimtu mmoja mmoja, hadi tawala hizo zikaanza kufanana na tawala za kiimla.

Moreover, the Western states themselves have actually begun to interfere in many of the economic, political and social matters, restricting individualism on the pretext of creating a balance in the society. It is a recognition of the existence of public interests, preferred over the private, individualistic interests, until the regimes began to resemble totalitarian regimes.

Tatu: Falsafa ya ubinafsi inaona kwamba mtu binafsi yuko katika juhudi endelevu na za kudumu za kujihifadhi, kulinda uhuru wake na haki zake za kumiliki na kuamua mwenyewe, huku akiogopa kuyeyuka ndani ya utambulisho wa kijamii unaolazimishwa juu yake kwa nguvu. Hivyo, watu binafsi katika jamii ya kibepari ni viumbe vilivyojitenga, wanaoshindana wao kwa wao. Kwa hiyo kila mtu aliyejitenga ni adui wa mwingine kwa nguvu au kwa vitendo, jambo linalomaanisha kwamba ubinafsi unadhani kuwepo kwa mgongano kati ya mtu binafsi na jamii. Katika mtazamo wa Magharibi, mwanadamu lazima achague mojawapo ya chaguo mbili. Chaguo la kwanza ni ubinafsi ambamo mtu ana thamani kuu, akimwezesha kupanga hali yake ya sasa na ya baadaye kwa mujibu wa matamanio yake na mapenzi yake. Chaguo la pili ni ujamaa wa pamoja ambamo kikundi ndicho chenye thamani kuu badala ya watu binafsi, jambo ambalo bila shaka na kiotomatiki lingeunda, kwa kigezo fulani, matamanio na mapenzi ya jamii, kama inavyodaiwa na baadhi ya mafundisho ya kiitikadi, kama vile ujamaa.

Thirdly: The philosophy of individualism perceives that an individual is in a persistent and continuous effort to preserve himself, his independence and rights to own and decide by himself, with a fear of dissolving into a collective identity imposed on him by coercion. Thus individuals in capitalist society are separated entities or individual beings, who compete with one another. So each separated individual is an enemy to another by force or action, which means individualism supposes the existence of conflict between the individual and the community. In the Western view man has to choose one of the two options. The first option is individualism in which he is of supreme value, allowing him to formulate his present and future, according to his desire and will. The second option is collectivism in which a group is of supreme value, instead of individuals, which would inevitably and automatically shape, based on the criterion, the desire and will of the community, as claimed by some ideological doctrines, such as socialism.

Hata hivyo, kwa kuwa mtu binafsi hutangulizwa mbele ya jamii, kulingana na falsafa ya Ubinafsi (Individualism), mtu binafsi anastahili zaidi kushinda, kuwa wa kwanza katika upendeleo, na kuwa na thamani ya juu kabisa. Hili linadumisha tu hali ya migogoro katika jamii, ambayo inaendelea kuwepo kati ya watu binafsi na jamii pana.

However, since an individual takes precedence over a community, according to the philosophy of Individualism, one is more deserving to prevail, be first in preference and be of supreme value, this only maintains the state of conflict in a society, which continues to exist between the individuals and the wider community.

Ubinafsi hauzipangii mambo ya watu, wala hauzipangi ili kuhakikisha furaha na kuridhika kwa mwanadamu kwa kuwa mtu binafsi kama sehemu ya jamii. Badala yake, huwagawanya watu upande mmoja dhidi ya mwingine na kuiweka jamii ikiungua katika moto wa migogoro. Ukweli ni kwamba mahusiano ya mtu binafsi na jamii, yaani watu, wakiwa na sifa ya kuwa watu binafsi huku wakiwa sehemu ya jamii, lazima yapangwe ili kuhakikisha upatanifu, mshikamano, kutokuwepo kwa mgongano na kutokuwepo kwa kupingana kati ya matamanio na mapenzi, kwani hayo yangeleta mgogoro, kuvunjika na kusambaratika. Hivyo basi, jamii lazima itazamwe kama kitu kizima chenye sehemu, na mtu binafsi lazima atazamwe kama sehemu ya jamii hii, asiyeweza kutengwa na jamii kwa ujumla. Hata hivyo, hali ya mtu binafsi kuwa sehemu ya jamii haimaanishi kwamba sehemu hiyo ni kama fimbo tu katika gurudumu. Badala yake, inamaanisha sehemu muhimu ya kitu kizima, kama mkono ulivyo sehemu ya mwili. Hivyo ndivyo mtazamo wa Kiislamu kuhusu jamii ulivyo, ikiwemo uhusiano wa watu binafsi na jamii. Kwa msingi huo, Uislamu unamtunza mtu huyu binafsi kama sehemu ya jamii, si kama mtu aliyetengwa na jamii, jambo linalopelekea kuhifadhiwa kwa jamii. Wakati huo huo, Uislamu unaitunza jamii, si kama kitu kizima kisicho na sehemu, bali kama kitu kizima kinachoundwa na sehemu ambazo ni watu binafsi, jambo linalopelekea kuhifadhiwa kwa watu hao kama sehemu. Mtazamo huu wa Kiislamu ndio mtazamo pekee unaohakikisha kuanzishwa kwa amani, utulivu, upendo na huruma katika jamii. Nu'man bin Bashir alisimulia kwamba Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema.

Individualism does neither the affairs, nor are they organized to ensure happiness and contentment for a man, by being an individual as part of a community. Instead, it pits one party over another and keeps the society burning in the fires of conflict. The fact is that the relationships of an individual with the community of a society i.e. people, with the characterization of being individuals, whilst being part of a community, must be organized to ensure harmony, coherence, non-conflict and non-contradiction between desires and wills, which will lead to conflict, rupture and disintegration. So the community must be viewed as a whole having parts, whilst the individual must be viewed as a part of this community, inseparable from the community at large. However, the nature of an individual being a part of a community does not mean that it is a part is like a mere spoke in a wheel. Instead it means a significant part of the whole, like a hand being a part of the body. Such is the Islamic view about the society, including the relation of individuals with the community. Accordingly, Islam takes care of this individual as a part of a community and not as an individual separate from the community, which leads to the preservation of community. At the same time, Islam takes care of the community, not as a whole without having parts, but as a whole composed of parts who are individuals, which in turn leads to the preservation of those individuals as parts. This Islamic view is the only view that ensures the establishment of peace, tranquility, affection and compassion in society. Nu’man bin Bashir reported that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said.

Waislamu ni kama mwili mmoja wa mtu; jicho likiuma, mwili mzima unauma, na kichwa kikiuma, mwili mzima unauma." [Imepokewa na Muslim katika Sahih yake],

Muslims are like one body of a person; if the eye is sore, the whole body aches, and if the head aches, the whole body aches.” [Narrated by Muslim in his Sahih],