Author: Mufti Obaidullah Noorzahi
The Crises of Liberalism in the Contemporary World (Part One)
Introduction
I praise Allah, who granted me the honor and ability to praise Him, and I worship Him humbly in His greatness. There is no true deity but Him. Through His revelation, I have found no need for anyone who claims to be a representative of truth. I seek refuge in Him from making my intellect the guide to reaching Him—especially when He has addressed and admonished me as follows: “يَا أَيُّهَا الْإِنْسَانُ مَا غَرَّكَ بِرَبِّكَ الْكَرِيمِ” Translation: “O mankind, what has deceived you concerning your generous Lord?” [1] I ask Him for the gift of reflection, and I seek His refuge from blind imitation, which is a cause of intellectual ruin and neglect of transmitted knowledge.
Liberalism is known as a rational philosophy—it originates in reason and concludes with it. This philosophy proceeds within the capabilities and limits of human intellect and relies solely on reason for judgment in individual matters, social affairs, and systemic structures. In liberalism, reason is both the judge and the judged—it is deemed superior to all else, whether it is in authority or under it. Yet, reason too can err. Although the consequences of its errors are often borne by the soul and body—for they are the ones that may obstruct the path to truth—if reason commits a mistake, should it be punished? Just as we don’t punish a weighing scale for giving false measures, should reason be blamed?
This analogy aligns with the Qur’anic verses: “وَيْلٌ لِلْمُطَفِّفِينَ ﴿١﴾ الَّذِينَ إِذَا اكْتالُوا عَلَى النَّاسِ يَسْتَوْفُونَ ﴿٢﴾ وَإِذَا كَالُوهُمْ أَوْ وَزَنُوهُمْ يُخْسِرُونَ (٣)” Translation: “Woe to those who give less [than due], those who, when they take a measure from people, take in full—but if they give by measure or weight to them, they cause loss.” [2]
Despite this, the mistakes of reason are repeated, and its slips are continual. Allah, the Exalted, has sworn multiple oaths to convince the intellect and rescue it from misguidance, so that it does not fall into others’ errors: “وَالْفَجْرِ ﴿١﴾ وَلَيَالٍ عَشْرٍ ﴿٢﴾ وَالشَّفْعِ وَالْوَتْرِ ﴿٣﴾ وَاللَّيْلِ إِذَا يَسْرِ ﴿٤﴾ هَلْ فِي ذَلِكَ قَسَمٌ لِذِي حِجْرٍ (٥)” Translation: “By the dawn, and by the ten nights, and the even and the odd, and the night as it passes—Is all this ˹not˺ a sufficient oath for those who have sense?” [3]
That is, these are oaths directed at the person of intellect to deter him from stubbornness. Ibn Abbas said: “Is this not an oath for a person of reason, judgment, strength, and understanding?” [4]
Then, after these oaths, Allah reminds him of past mistakes so that he does not repeat them: “أَلَمْ تَرَ كَيْفَ فَعَلَ رَبُّكَ بِأَصْحَابِ الْفِيلِ ﴿١﴾ أَلَمْ يَجْعَلْ كَيْدَهُمْ فِي تَضْلِيلٍ ﴿٢﴾ وَأَرْسَلَ عَلَيْهِمْ طَيْرًا أَبَابِيلَ ﴿٣﴾ تَرْمِيهِم بِحِجَارَةٍ مِّن سِجِّيلٍ ﴿٤﴾ فَجَعَلَهُمْ كَعَصْفٍ مَّأْكُولٍ (٥)” Translation: “Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with the companions of the elephant (Ashab al-Fil)? Did He not make their plan go astray? And He sent against them flocks of birds, striking them with stones of hard clay, and made them like eaten straw.” [5]
Ideas can only approach truth when they are pursued with full awareness, intellectual care, and sincere truth-seeking. Those who lack these qualities may weaken in the face of obstacles—even imaginary ones—and may end up acting against their own beliefs.
To understand the vastness of liberal thought, it is enough to look at its foundational principle: the belief that every individual has the right to choose their religion, behavior, ideology, speech, and actions—no matter how far removed those choices may be from human nature or how much they conflict with others. Every person, it is believed, has the same right to accept or reject any idea as anyone else.
Thus, disagreements among liberals—when some reject certain ideas or beliefs—do not affect their foundational convictions, as long as they acknowledge the right of their opponents to choose, just as they claim for themselves the right to disagree.
This difference is only on the surface, not in essence, because liberalism generally disregards inner states and moral correction. Its focus is on outward appearances. It is a purely worldly ideology, uninterested in metaphysics, ignoring religious and afterlife concerns. Linking belief in the hereafter with worldly matters is seen as a threat to liberalism’s structure. Liberalism’s core principles are built on separating the two, reducing the importance of the afterlife.
Since many aspects of liberalism align with human desires, instincts, and rational philosophy, its ideas appeal to those who judge by appearances—without returning to foundational principles, analyzing outcomes, or comparing them with broader human values. Many people ignore contradictions until circumstances force them to confront them—usually only during crises or inner conflict. Only then do they begin to reassess and correct ideas they had once accepted without scrutiny.
Practical contradictions and conflicting situations may be rare, so belief in an idea can last a long time. The longer it endures, the more deeply it becomes rooted in society—even if it is fundamentally false.
Sometimes, the effects that certain ideologies have on people do not negate them—instead, they strengthen and affirm them. These effects are precisely what reason keeps revolving around, unaware of their reality, power, multiplicity, and consequences—free from exaggeration or illusion.
Continues…
References:
[1] Surah Al-Infitar, verse 6
[2] Surah Al-Mutaffifin, verses 1–3
[3] Surah Al-Fajr, verses 1–5
[4] Tafsir al-Tabari, vol. 10, p. 282
[5] Surah Al-Fil, verses 1–5
