What they call Islamic Fundamentalism is not Islamic Fundamentalism at all. It’s neither Islamic nor Fundamentalism. Because it does not pertain to Islam and does not pertain to Fundamentals either. Because they start this Fundamentalism, so-called Fundamentalism in Islam, from the Middle Ages. And they refer this always to some scholars of the Middle Ages. For instance, in case of some Fundamentalists, Imam Ghazali is the root. While among the Fundamentals of Islam, there is no such thing as Imam Ghazali. Either it has to be the Holy Quran or the Sunnah.
These are the only Fundamentals we know. So their Fundamentals always start from the Middle. And then again they distort what Imam Ghazali himself said, for instance. Or some other Imams which they follow. And create a new Islam with a completely new brand. Which has nothing to do with their so-called Islam, as traced back to some great Imam. So this is why this so-called Fundamentalism differs from country to country. It has a different interpretation in Sudan, or used to have. And a completely different interpretation in Iran. And a different mark altogether in Pakistan. And so on and so forth. In Libya, Fundamental Islam is Communism. And in Syria, it is a brand of Shiaism. And not all Shiaism, but a very particular brand of Shiaism. In Saudi Arabia, it is a completely different thing.
So as I told you, it is neither Fundamentalism nor Islamism. Because both these things are unchangeable. Fundamentals do not change. And Islam does not change. So in the name of Fundamentalism and Islam, whatever you have is at loggerhead with each other. It’s contradictory to each other. So it could be neither. And what, as you have also again rightly said, what they have to fear from this? I mean, this is not something to be afraid of. This is an infight. All that the present day Fundamentalism has produced is an infight between Muslim and Muslim.
So this is why I earlier suggested, and I believe in that, that this sort of Fundamentalism and this sort of Islam is created by the enemies of Islam, and fully supported by the enemies of Islam. Now in the first part of my statement I said created. It may not have been created directly, but those who created it, they have the full blessing and support.
So in a way that creation, the responsibility of that creation is transferred to the masters, who are not Muslims. You must remember the principle of benefit of crime. Whoever is the beneficiary of a crime, more often than not, he would also be the perpetrator of crime. So the beneficiary in this case is the non-Islamic world. And the fights the Fundamentalism is creating are always between Muslim and Muslim.
Show me a single fight where Islamic world has gone into a fight with a non-Islamic power, based on Fundamentalism, and if occasionally it has happened, they have always failed. All their successful fights are between themselves. Destruction of other sects, looting and burning of other sects’ houses, creation of hatred against others within Islam, and also fighting with each other.
So this Fundamentalism, as it’s so called Fundamentalism, has neither a base or foundation religiously, nor it is a Muslim movement at all. It is a non-Muslim movement, which has been organized and created indirectly, and supported directly by the non-Muslim powers.
