The Arabs: From the Margins of History to the Center of the Message, Then the Question of Destiny

Introduction: A Community Between the Message and Fragmentation

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ghazali is reported to have said:

Apart from Islam, the Arabs will devour one another, and then other nations will devour them.

Whether one agrees with the statement’s severity or regards it as an exaggeration, it opens up a profound historical question: what moved the Arabs from fragmentation to unity, and from the margins to influence? Was Islam merely a religion that came to them, or was it the principal factor in reshaping their historical existence?

Discussion of the Arabs before and after Islam should become neither unqualified glorification nor contempt for the past, but rather a balanced reading that sees the reality as it was and understands the transformation as it occurred.

The Arabs were not a people without an existence, but neither did they possess a universal project that united them and made them an influential force among nations. Then the message came and changed their entire trajectory.

First: The Arabs Before Islam — A Historical Existence Without a Unifying Project

It is mistaken to say that the Arabs before Islam had no history or impact; the Arabian Peninsula and its surroundings witnessed important kingdoms and political, commercial, and cultural experiences. These entities included the Kingdom of Saba, whose mention in the Qur’an is associated with the story of the queen and Solomon; the Kingdom of Himyar, which inherited Saba’s influence; the Nabataean Kingdom, which flourished through trade and architecture; the Ghassanid Kingdom; and the Lakhmid Kingdom.

The Arabs, then, were not outside history, but they did not constitute a unified community bearing a message or a universal civilizational project comparable to the great powers of the time, such as the Sasanian and Byzantine empires.

The most prominent feature of Arab life before Islam was political fragmentation. The tribe was the highest framework of allegiance, tribal identity took precedence over a shared identity, and group solidarity became the basis of social organization, politics, and war. Conflicts arose for reasons that might seem minor, yet continued for many years because of the logic of blood vengeance and retaliation.

Then there was the absence of a unifying central state. The Arabian Peninsula had no unified authority bringing all Arabs together under a single political system. There were local centers of power, but no project that united everyone.

Finally, there was a cultural presence without a universal message. The Arabs possessed important resources: a powerful language, poetry and oratory, extensive trade, and seasonal markets. Yet they did not bear an idea that transcended the boundaries of tribe and geography. Their influence therefore remained limited in comparison with the great empires.

Second: The Testimony of History — How Did Historians Describe the Arabs Before Islam?

When we discuss the Arabs’ circumstances before Islam, the aim is not merely to pass a religious judgment, but to offer a historical description. A number of historians noted that the Arabs lived in a condition of political fragmentation and lacked centralized unity.

Ibn Khaldun discussed the role of group solidarity in the rise and fall of states and held that, given their tribal character, the Arabs needed a higher bond to unite them. Al-Jahiz discussed the characteristics of Arab society, including eloquence, poetry, and valor, but did not depict them as possessing a unified state before Islam. Al-Mas‘udi likewise noted the diversity of the Arabs and the differences in their political and social circumstances.

These testimonies do not mean that the Arabs were without worth. Rather, they mean that the potential existed but had not yet been transformed into a unifying civilizational project.

Third: From Darkness into Light — The Qur’anic Transformation of Arab Destiny

Then came the event that changed the course of history: the descent of revelation upon Muhammad ﷺ. The Qur’an did not descend upon a community at the height of military or material power, but upon a fragmented society, to fashion it into a community bearing a message.

﴿وَاذْكُرُوا نِعْمَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذْ كُنتُمْ أَعْدَاءً فَأَلَّفَ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِكُمْ فَأَصْبَحْتُم بِنِعْمَتِهِ إِخْوَانًا وَكُنتُمْ عَلَىٰ شَفَا حُفْرَةٍ مِّنَ النَّارِ فَأَنقَذَكُم مِّنْهَا﴾ (And remember God’s favor upon you: when you were enemies, He brought your hearts together, and by His favor you became brothers; and you were on the brink of a pit of fire, and He saved you from it.) [آل عمران: ١٠٣]

The verse depicts the stages of transformation: from enmity to brotherhood, from group solidarity to community, and from aimlessness to a message. The Qur’an did not merely change belief; it rebuilt society itself.

﴿إِنَّ هَٰذِهِ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَأَنَا رَبُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُونِ﴾ (Indeed, this community of yours is one community, and I am your Lord, so worship Me.) [الأنبياء: ٩٢]

Before Islam, the highest bond was blood. After Islam, the highest bond became the message. Here the true transformation began.

Fourth: Empowerment Came Through the Message, Not Ethnicity

One of the greatest errors is to interpret the Islamic rise as an ethnic triumph of the Arabs, for the Qur’an did not link power to lineage.

﴿هُوَ الَّذِي أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُ بِالْهُدَىٰ وَدِينِ الْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُ عَلَى الدِّينِ كُلِّهِ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْمُشْرِكُونَ﴾ (It is He who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to make it prevail over all religion, even though the polytheists detest it.) [التوبة: ٣٣]

The verse speaks of guidance, truth, and the message, not of nationality or ethnicity. The Arabs succeeded because they possessed a unifying idea, a shared purpose, an ethical frame of reference, and a project that transcended the tribe.

For this reason, the message itself did not remain confined to the Arabs. Arabs and non-Arabs embraced it, and scholars from many peoples participated in building Islamic civilization, among them Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi, Ibn Sina, al-Farabi, and al-Biruni. The message thus developed from a project of Arab origin into a broad human civilization.

Fifth: Abandoning the Unifying Project — The Beginning of Decline

History does not follow a perpetually ascending line. After centuries of expansion and flourishing, factors of weakness emerged.

The first was the transformation of disagreement into conflict. Some intellectual and political disagreements became divisions that weakened the community’s unity, and disputation sometimes took precedence over larger purposes.

The second was the return of particularistic solidarities. Subsidiary identities once again competed with the shared identity: tribe, region, sect, and nationality. Unity gave way to rivalry.

The third was political disintegration. Authority fragmented, unifying centers weakened, and division became an opening for external intervention. Over time, political, economic, and intellectual dependence on foreign powers increased.

Sixth: The Arabs and Islam — A Special Historical Relationship, Not a Monopoly on the Message

Islam is not the religion of the Arabs alone, but it changed the Arabs more than any other people. Here two matters must be distinguished: first, Islam is a universal message; second, the Arabs were the first to bear it. The relationship is therefore not one of ethnic privilege, but of historical responsibility.

The last of the prophets arose from among the Arabs, the Qur’an was revealed in their language, and they were the first to convey the message. Yet the message transcended their boundaries to encompass humanity. The Arabs’ historical worth was therefore linked to the extent to which they fulfilled the trust, not merely to lineage.

Seventh: The Arabs Between Election and Trial

An important question remains: why did the last of the prophets arise from among the Arabs? Was this purely an honor, or a responsibility? The Qur’anic text suggests that election was not a permanent guarantee, but a responsibility.

﴿وَإِن تَتَوَلَّوْا يَسْتَبْدِلْ قَوْمًا غَيْرَكُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَكُونُوا أَمْثَالَكُم﴾ (And if you turn away, He will replace you with another people, who will not then be like you.) [محمد: ٣٨]

This verse does not concern the Arabs alone. It states a general principle: the message remains, but those who bear it may change. No community enjoys immunity, and no people possesses permanent privilege; the criterion is fulfillment of the trust. History has therefore witnessed the passage of power, learning, and influence among many peoples.

Eighth: The Lost Role — What Awaits the Arabs?

The question today is not whether the past will return, but whether the civilizational function can be restored.

The Arabs remain the people of the Qur’an’s language, the children of the land from which the message emerged, and the bearers of a profound historical legacy. Yet a return cannot be achieved through slogans. It requires restoring the centrality of the Qur’an, developing learning and knowledge, transcending particularistic solidarities, reviving justice, and turning faith into a project of action.

In the Islamic conception, the great tribulations and the events of the end times remain part of the test of faith, but they do not absolve anyone of striving, working, and reforming.

Conclusion: Either the Message or Aimless Wandering

The Arabs were not a nonentity before Islam, nor were they a people above history after it. Yet the message moved them from fragmentation to unity, from the margins to influence, and from tribe to community. When the unifying idea weakened, division returned and their role diminished.

﴿إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُغَيِّرُ مَا بِقَوْمٍ حَتَّىٰ يُغَيِّرُوا مَا بِأَنفُسِهِمْ﴾ (Indeed, God does not change the condition of a people until they change what is within themselves.) [الرعد: ١١]

The future is not made by lineage alone, geography alone, or the glories of the past. Rather, it is made by the message when it becomes consciousness, by knowledge when it becomes power, and by faith when it becomes action.

The issue is not Arabs or non-Arabs, nor East or West, but rather: who bears the trust? Who establishes justice? Who turns revelation into a project of renewal? Either the civilizational function is restored, or aimless wandering continues to dominate the scene.