Once I have read the article which asked religious scholars of different Muslim sects, how would they define a Muslim? This report has been published and is available. Some of these scholars refused to answer the question saying that they would need a lot of time and pages to answer it. The report said the following about them:

"Amongst these scholars even two did not have the same answer."

You guys don't have to accept this statement. But you can yourself ask the religious scholars of different Muslim sects the definition of "Muslim" and "Islam". The replies will themselves convince you of the correctness of the above answer.

It is imperative that when we say the Muslims have left Islam, we should establish a definitive concept of Islam. If we don't, it is meaningless to say that Muslims have left Islam. This is the primary reason that the Muslims all over are unable to adopt Islam in-spite of their agreeing that they are no longer good Muslims. They do not fully comprehend what they have left and what they should do to remedy the situation. We would like to clarify here that every Muslim sect may be able to define "Islam" as their sect considers it to be, but the Islam which should be common to the Muslim Nation and by virtue of which they are known as the Muslim Nation, none will be able to define.

We are sure, at this stage you must be wondering that although this question is of fundamental importance, you have never thought about it. Further, that you are an ordinary person and your knowledge of "Al Deen" (Islam) is limited and therefore you are unable to answer such a question. At the same time you must be wondering what has happened to our religious scholars that even they could not give a unified reply and in spite of it they have been able to keep their position in Muslim Nation. How come they have been able to satisfy the Muslims about Islam? It needs a special efforts and that is creation and use of certain terminology about which the people are convinced, that it is "Holy". These so called scholars keep these terms a little vague, a clear and concrete concepts attached to these terms are never defined. The reason being is that, mostly it will be their own decision which they have presented in the name of Islam or sometimes it will be the decision of their own sect. Of course the decision of any particular sect cannot be considered as the decision of Islam. They will always keep this aspect vague. Similarly there are terms like "Islam Shariat (Islamic Jurisprudence)" or "Shariat-e-Haqqa (True Jurisprudence)". Every day one hears statements such as "This is the order of Shariat" or "This decision is as per Shariat" or "This is not allowed by Shariat" etc. etc. You must be assuming these to be decisions as per Islam but actually these are decisions of any one of the sects. Every one of our sects have their own Shariat. The one which you may want to call "Islamic Shariat", that is, the one which all Muslims as one nation agree to be Islamic, does not exist today.

Another of these terms is the "Sunna of Rasool-Allah (p.b.u.h.)", which means the way the Last Messenger of Allah (p.b.u.h.) practiced Islam. You must be thinking that this has to be agreed upon by everyone to be the same since the Last Messenger of Allah, whose name was Mohammed (p.b.u.h.). was an individual, lived in this world only once and therefore practiced Islam only once. But it was not so, as a matter of fact each one of the sects have their own "Sunna of Rasool-Allah (p.b.u.h.)"; so much so that the definition of the term "Sunna" is also different among them.

Similarly there are many terms in use since centuries which have got similar treatment from these sects. Since politics have become very important in recent times, therefore instead of old terms, which are mostly associated with "Religion", new terms have been created. One of these terms is "Aqamat-e-Deen", meaning establishment of Deen. This term has been publicized a lot but nobody, has yet explained what does it mean in definitive words. If the flag bearers of this term explain what do they mean by this term, the religious scholars of the other sects will protest disagreeing with the definition of Deen and cause chaos. Therefore, the promoters of this term consider it in their interest to keep this term vague.

Now a days the word "Nizam", (system) has become more popular in place of "Deen". Based on it, a term "Islamic Nizam" has been floated. We have already seen that the term "Islam" itself does not carry a definite meaning, therefore the term "Islamic Nizam" has not been explained nor it can be.

The fact is that in modern day politics, creation and adoption of slogans has a purpose of its own. Our religious scholars use similar slogans for their purposes. The idea is to use words that do not carry a clear concept, but which could be made popular easily and thus could be used as a weapon against the opposition. If you ponder on it a little deeply you will realize that these slogans serve the same purpose as was served by the hocus pocus words such as "Abracadabra" in the ancient age of magic. The magical words did not mean anything by themselves but, they were supposed to carry hidden meanings. For example, if you repeat a word so many times, you were told that your enemy will be overpowered or things like that.

Just as a slogan looses its charm and magical powers after repeated use, so do the religious terms. The weight and effect previously carried by terms like "Aqamat-e-Deen", (Establishment of Deen), or "Hakoomat-e-Illahia", (Government of Allah), or "Islamic Nizam" is not carried by them any more. Therefore there was need for a new term; and that is "Nizam-e-Mustafa (p.b.u.h.)" (System of Mustafa p.b.u.h.)

"A system of virtuous equality.... a political system of security and justice ....an economic system of justice and provision .... a spiritual system of meditation thinking, and remembering Allah .... and a social system of brotherhood"