Patience is the Secret of Success

One element of positive status-quoism is the “wait 

and see” policy. This means that whatever man is 

easily able to do at the present time should be done, 

while whatever he feels presents too many 

difficulties should be postponed until the situation 

seems more favourable. 

It often happens that whenever one is faced with 

difficult situations or one undergoes some bitter 

experience, out of sheer exasperation, one resorts to 

violence. But this kind of reaction is a result of 

deviation from nature. The truth is that the law of 

nature always favours those who adopt a realistic 

path. If such individuals or groups who stand by 

truth and justice do not act in an over-hasty manner 

and remain patient, such favourable conditions are 

ultimately produced for them that success will 

come to them on its own. 

In the most cases, failure awaits those who are so 

impatient that they act emotionally, without giving 

much thought to the repercussions. On the contrary,

those who opt for the way of patience are destined 

to be successful.  

When an individual adopts the path of patience, he 

is following the path of nature. And when he 

adopts the path of impatience, he deviates from the 

path of nature. And one who strays from the path of 

nature has no prospects of success in this world of 

God. 

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

Violence Unnecessary

Social violence is against real human nature. 

Violence, the greatest of all crimes, is lethal to 

humanity. In spite of this, why do people engage in 

violence? The reason is that they take into account 

only present conditions, and lack the ability to see 

future prospects. Then such people find self-styled 

justifications for engaging in violence. Their version 

of justification appears to them to be based on 

logical argument, but in actual fact their arguments 

are fallacious. In defiance of all rational opinion, 

they adhere to the notion that, in their own case, for 

such and such reason, engaging in violence has 

become morally justified.  

But the truth is that any so-called justification for 

violence is invalid. Whenever an individual or a  

group engages in violence, they have at one and 

the same time the option of a non-violent or 

peaceful method. This being so, why should 

violence be resorted to at all? When the 

opportunity to achieve one’s objective is available 

without having recourse to violence, why should 

everyone opt for violent methods? The truth is 

that violence must be in principle discarded 

absolutely and peace must be adopted absolutely. 

Therefore, man ought not to engage in violence on 

any pretext. He must adhere to a peaceful course 

of action in all situations.

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

Violence is the Result of Frustration

One advantage of positive status quoism is that it 

obviates the baneful effects of frustration that come 

from a sense of deprivation. Bright prospects are 

discernible in all situations, however unfavourable 

those situations might appear. The miraculous 

benefit of positive status quoism is that it gives 

human beings unlimited courage. It saves them in 

all situations from becoming so discouraged that all 

doors appear closed, and they fail to identify any 

viable course of action. 

Violence results from a feeling of deprivation, while 

peace results from a sense of discovery. Those who 

have the notion that they have been deprived of 

what is rightfully theirs suffer perennially from 

negative psychology. It is this negativism that 

frequently takes the form of violence. But those who 

live with the positive feeling that they have 

experienced the feeling of discovery enjoy mental 

peace. Their lives remain eternally peaceful. 

Those individuals or groups who feel hatred for 

others, and who stoop to violence in their dealings 

with them, prove by their behaviour that their 

grievances derive from a sense of deprivation. On 

the contrary, those individuals or groups who lead 

peaceful lives prove by their behaviour that they 

have experienced the feeling of finding what they 

truly desire in life. The mind of a frustrated person 

is always obsessed with the prevalent state of 

affairs. While a person whose mind is free from the 

psychology of frustration will be capable of 

thinking by rising above the immediate 

circumstances. Thus a frustrated person is a 

present–oriented person while a person free from 

frustration is a future oriented person. 

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

The Solution to the Problem of Enmity

People generally hold that so and so community or 

nation is their enemy. Then, for most people, 

enmity becomes both the cause of and justification 

for taking to a course of violence. They take up an 

aggressive stance, openly or covertly, ostensibly to 

put an end to the enmity. But this is as 

misconceived a plan of action as any could be 

which has been devised on the supposition that war 

can be any kind of solution.  

They fail to realize that the best solution to the 

problem of enmity lies in the way of positive status 

quoism, which facilitates dealing peacefully with 

the enemy. This is possible because positive status 

quoism is a psychological condition which enables 

us to deal with the enemy in such a cool-minded 

way that all animus will of itself disappear once and 

for all.  

It is imperative that we regard enemies as 

superficial rather than as integral parts of our 

existence, and we should recognize that the hostility 

of any foe can be brought to an end by positive 

strategy. The enemy can be likened to the dust 

sticking to glass. Such dust can easily be washed off 

with water. The real problem will arise only when 

we have no water (i.e. a positive strategy) to wash 

off the dust. 

It takes two hands to clap. One hand on its own 

cannot clap. Similarly, enmity is a two-sided matter. 

If someone turns your enemy, you should not 

respond to this with hostility. Not returning enmity 

for enmity is the most successful solution to the 

problem. Adopting positive behaviour towards the

enemy can yield such beneficial results that your 

former enemy could one day turn out to be your 

friend. 

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

The Benefits of Peace

It is a fact that all worthy feats in this world have 

been performed by peaceful endeavour. No great or 

noble task has ever been carried out by the power of 

violence. This applies equally to scientific

discoveries and technological progress. Neither 

educational institutions nor research institutes have 

ever been established by violent means. Iron’s 

conversion into machines and major city planning 

have all been done by the power of peace, not of 

violence. Right from ensuring social welfare to the 

setting up of the relevant infrastructure—all 

progressive measures have been carried into effect 

by peaceful strategies. 

Violence per se is destructive and no constructive 

result can ever come from a destructive act. This is 

the law of nature and as such is immutable.  

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

The Way of Non-Violence

One of the laws of nature is that non-violence is 

result-oriented, while violence is destruction-

oriented. Therefore, if the individual confines his 

activities to the field of gentleness and non-violence, 

his work will yield results, whereas one who opts 

for the way of violence and intolerance regresses 

instead of advancing. 

The truth is that whenever anyone opts for the way 

of intolerance and violence, his energies are 

unnecessarily divided between two fronts—internal 

construction and doing battle with the external foe, 

whereas one who opts for gentleness and non-

violence can devote all his available energy and 

resources to the one front of internal consolidation 

alone, and as a natural result, he can achieve a far 

greater success. 

This is the law of nature which is operative in our 

world. Here if one is to achieve any estimable goal, 

it will only be by adhering to this system of nature 

which is entirely based on the principle of peace 

and non-violence. Therefore, here one can be 

successful by adhering to, and not by deviating 

from this law. Non-violent activism can in fact, be 

equated with positive status quoism. 

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

Anger is a Weakness

Anger is the killer of peace. Anger often results in 

violence. Giving vent to anger is a sign of weakness, 

whereas the mastering of anger is a sign of power.

Anger, moreover, confounds one’s thinking 

capacity. The angry man can neither understand 

any issue in a clear-headed way, nor can he give a 

response which is adequate to the situation. What is 

worse is that when an individual is angry, he is all 

too prone to turn to violence. But the truth is that 

violence is no solution to any problem. For one who 

can prevent himself from succumbing to anger, 

there is no situation which he will not be able to 

turn to good account. He will seek a peaceful 

solution—the only sure way to solve any problem. 

Man’s mind has extraordinary potential. When he is 

not angry, he is in a position to utilize his 

capabilities to the best advantage. But when he is 

angry, his mental balance is lost. He is not in a 

position to make the full use of such mental 

capabilities as would be to his own benefit. In short, 

not becoming angry is victory, while becoming 

angry is defeat. 

It should be borne in mind also, that overcoming 

anger is not simply a matter of suppressing one’s 

emotions. It means being able to deal with the 

problem by rising above the negativism of anger.

One should be able to respond, uninfluenced by 

emotion in spite of being provoked. This principle 

applies not only to the individual but also to entire 

nations. Positive status quoism is undoubtedly the 

surest way to success, but only those can adopt this 

method who have the ability to think independently 

of the psychology of anger. 

The principle of positive status quoism can be 

adopted only by those who have the mental 

discipline not to resort to violence, despite facing 

unpleasant situations. Those who cannot curb 

violent tendencies will never be able to experience 

the benefits of positive status quoism. 

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

Aspects of Positive Thinking

Positive status quoism is undoubtedly the most 

successful strategy for the construction of a peaceful 

life. The essential condition for the utilization of this 

strategy, however, is for man to develop the kind of 

positive attitude which will enable him to rise 

above his circumstances. Even in the most adverse 

situations, he should be able to weather all storms 

as do the big birds of the storm. His thinking should 

not be the result of prior conditioning. He should 

rather think out and plan his actions without any 

prejudice. 

One of the obstacles to adopting positive status 

quoism is the tendency to give way to anger and 

vengefulness. Such an attitude so poisons man’s 

mind that he is no longer able to think objectively. It 

is this lack of objectivity which is the main reason 

for failing to adopt a positive stance.

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

A De-linking Policy

Positive status quoism can also be defined as a de-

linking policy, which entails finding ways of 

peaceful action despite the existence of 

controversies. This means that irrespective of there 

being a confrontational state of affairs or other 

adverse circumstances. Such strategies should be 

adopted as may prevent war being waged and 

violence taking place. Controversial issues must be 

set aside so that present opportunities may be 

availed of in an atmosphere of peace. In following 

this policy, two gains simultaneously accrue: one, 

the establishment of peace, notwithstanding the 

pernicious atmosphere created by controversies; 

and, two, the optimization of work opportunities, 

despite the presence of problems. One great benefit 

of this de-linking policy—in that it is the most 

felicitous natural formula for the establishment of 

peace—is that conducive circumstances for result

oriented actions are no longer a matter of the past, 

but become an actuality today. 

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

Flowers & Their Thorns

In our world there are flowers, but there are also 

thorns. It is therefore a common experience for 

one who wants to engage in any positive activity 

to feel that there are obstacles in his way, perhaps 

by the very law of nature. This applies to the 

individual as well as to the entire nation. Now 

one way of addressing such a situation is for him 

to set about removing all obstacles from the path 

and only then beginning to work towards his 

goal. This method is generally defined as 

radicalism. 

Radicalism greatly appeals to extremists or to 

those who are guided by their emotions. But it is 

impractical in so far as achieving any positive 

goal is concerned. While radicalism may be 

effectively used for the purposes of destruction, it 

is worse than useless when it comes to 

construction. Once the path of radicalism has 

been chosen, not only does the prevalent system

fall apart, but in the process of what are 

essentially ruinous activities, all those social 

traditions which had taken centuries to build, 

simply fall to pieces. Then as a result of 

bloodshed and violent confrontation, 

innumerable people fall victim to all kinds of 

afflictions. While experience shows that the 

method of radicalism is ideologically very 

attractive, in terms of its practical outcome, it is 

devoid of all merit. 

Another method is that of avoiding confrontation 

with the status quo and chalking out a plan for 

possible action within possible spheres. By 

temporarily accepting the status quo, current 

opportunities may then be availed of. This is the 

positive status quoism to which I referred at the 

beginning of this chapter. 

The method of radicalism invariably produces 

violence: on the contrary, positive status quoism 

fulfills its target by keeping the peace in society. 

While the former invariably aggravates the 

problem, the latter, by avoiding friction, proceeds 

smoothly, without creating any problems. If one is

the way to perversion, the other is the way to 

construction. 

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

Positive Status Quoism

PEACEFUL method in one respect, is another 

name for stat us quoism. The status quoism of a 

peace-loving person is not a form of inaction, it  

is rather a posit ive plan of action, in the real 

sense of the word. That is, the peace-love  

accepts the status quo to remove himself from  

the point of confrontation to other fields where 

he may proceed with constructive action. 

Instead of becoming embroiled in problems he 

looks to the fu t ure aid directs his energies  

towards the availing of opport unities. That is 

why the stat us quoism of a peace-loving person  

is indeed positive stat us quoism. 

In this world of diverse interests, positive status 

quoism is the optimal base for the conception and 

implementation of constructive projects. Taking 

up this position may call for special virtues such 

as insightfulness as well as the capacity for the 

most superior type of planning. Thus it brings 

twofold benefit. Firstly, no disturbance of the 

peace, and secondly and ultimately, the guarantee 

of success. This formula can thus be summed up: 

Avoid confrontation, adopt peaceful activism.

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

Terrorism - A Barbaric Course

The evil of terrorism has come to be a present-day 

affliction. It is widely condemned, but what 

terrorism is has not yet been clearly defined. After a 

great deal of thought on this subject, I have come to 

the conclusion that terrorism is definable as armed

action carried out by non-governmental 

organizations. Certainly, the public have the right to 

peacefully present their point of view, but on no 

consideration do they have the right to engage in 

militancy, for armed movements of this sort run 

counter to accepted national and international 

principles. What is known as terrorism in present 

times is the result of armed action by NGO’S. 

Moreover, war can be waged only by an established 

government. And even for an established 

government there are a number of essential 

conditions for launching armed campaigns. For 

instance, it can only fight a defensive battle. It 

cannot commit aggression. Similarly, even a lawful 

war can be fought only after making a formal 

declaration of war. There is no room for undeclared 

war in civilized society. Then, even in a lawful 

defensive battle, a government must issue strict 

orders that only combatants may be attacked. 

Killing or injuring non-combatants is not lawful 

even in a state of war. 

According to established humanitarian principles, 

only one form of war is acceptable and that is one

waged unavoidably in self-defence. Any other kind 

of war, for instance, aggressive war, proxy war, 

guerrilla war, undeclared war–are all totally 

unlawful according to international ethics. On no 

consideration can these wars be held lawful. 

According to the above definition, any movement 

based on terrorism is certainly unlawful. It cannot 

be justified simply by giving it a high-sounding 

name. Any attempt to achieve human objectives by 

engaging in terrorism, rather than using lawful 

means to do so, is to transgress all bounds.  

Modern terrorism must, therefore, be brought to an 

end. But this cannot be done through counter 

attacks. For one thing, this would be like trying to 

quell non-state terrorism by state terrorism. And for 

another, modern terrorism derives its strength less 

from guns and bombs than from its ideology. That 

is why a counter ideology rather than counter-

bombing would the more effectively put an end to 

terrorism. 

The terrorists’ self-styled ideology gives them the 

conviction that, by dying in battle, they become 

martyrs and that, as such, they will have a new and

far better life in paradise. It is this belief, which has 

made suicide bombing totally acceptable to them. 

Given this situation, it is only when their self-styled 

ideology is shown to be baseless by producing a 

counter ideology that their violent actions will ever 

come to an end. 

It should be appreciated, moreover, that the present 

terrorists, many of them very young people, would 

never be able to continue their efforts without the 

vast monetary contributions, public sympathy and 

adulation as heroes, which as “active militants” 

they receive from “passive” militants, that is to say, 

from those who are not actively engaged in violent 

activities. 

The passive militants are, so to speak, the second 

line of terrorism. Their role is an important one, that 

of providing infrastructure and logistic support. A 

war can be successfully waged only if the supply 

lines continue to provide all military requirements 

without any disruption. If they were to be cut off, 

war would automatically come to an end, just as a 

man would die if his oxygen supply were stopped. 

But, ideologically, passive militants regard it as

their duty to give full assistance to active terrorists. 

And if such terrorists are in their thousands, the 

number of their supporters runs into millions. This 

being so, the annihilation of known active terrorists 

would not suffice to put an end to the phenomenon 

of terrorism. 

It is essential, therefore, that the issue of the 

enormous support given by the world-wide 

network of passive terrorists be immediately 

addressed. Their minds must be changed. Their 

violent thinking must be transformed into pacifism. 

Only then will it be possible to rid the world of the 

menace of terrorism.

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

Formula For Social Peace

Peace is nature. In any society, peace is disturbed 

only when any violent activity causes man to 

deviate from his nature. The truth is that every one 

of us has his ego. It is a state of mind which, if 

provoked, takes no time in flaring up and wreaking 

havoc. But by nature, in accordance with the system 

of creation, it generally lies dormant. The easiest 

way, therefore, to have a peaceful society is to let 

this ego remain undisturbed. Social peace is 

disturbed by those whose egos have been 

provoked. If we refrain from such provocation, 

there will be no disturbance of the social peace. This

shows that the establishment and maintenance of 

social peace are within our control, and are not at 

the mercy of anti-social elements. This shows that if 

you do not provoke the ego of others, you will 

certainly remain safe from their violence. 

The possession of weapons is no guarantee of social 

security. The principle of social security is to 

become a peace-loving neighbour for others. 

Perpetrate no violence upon others and you will, of 

necessity, be safe from the evil and violence of 

others. If you hate others you will receive hate from 

them in return. If you have feelings of love and 

well-wishing for them, you will receive the same 

from them. In this world, peace is received in return 

for peace and violence is received in return for 

violence. 

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

From Revenge to Violence

It often happens that if one person is hurt by 

another, or one group suffers at the hands of 

another, revenge is perceived as the immediate 

goal. Those who are bent on revenge tend to forget 

the warning of history—a warning inscribed on 

every wall in silent language: Think before seeking 

vengeance, that vengeance will be met with 

vengeance. In this way a chain of violence is built 

up, continues, and is brought to a conclusion only 

when both sides are so depleted in energy and 

resources that they are no longer able to exact 

vengeance.

Whenever an individual or a group has any cause 

for complaint, the solution lies not in retaliatory 

activities, but rather in continuing to move forward 

by adopting a policy of avoidance of conflict. Such 

avoidance puts an end to the problem at the very 

outset, while refusal to ignore the problem leads to 

an unending chain reaction of hatred, revenge and 

violence. Thus, the policy of avoidance of conflict is 

the way of the peace-loving, while that of revenge is 

the way of the violent. 

Revenge is always directed against another but, in 

actual fact, the greatest victim is the one who opts 

for this course. The heavy price to be paid for this 

revenge policy is that his mind becomes a 

storehouse of negative thinking. Instead of 

expending his resources on building his life, he 

begins to squander them on the destruction of 

others.  

Say, an antagonist had caused him to use up fifty 

percent of his energies, resources, etc., he would 

himself, as a result of his policy of revenge, fritter 

away the other 50%.  

Taken to logical extremes, revenge would imply 

that after an attempt on one’s life, one would launch 

out on a course which would end in one’s own 

death! The truth is that revenge is an evil, whatever 

the circumstances, while refraining from revenge by 

ignoring the matter at issue is at all events a virtue. 

If the taker of revenge is your enemy, after 

returning revenge for revenge, you become your 

own enemy. And those who turn their own enemy 

cannot be saved from destruction by anyone.

Ref -The Ideology of Peace  

                                                    - by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan