ISLAM AND ISLAMISM AN OVERVIEW BY ASJAD BUKHARI The marriage between power and divine (in different forms) is not something new to human society. Whether we read books on ancient Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Indian, Greek and Roman civilizations, or we study the history of organized biblical/monotheistic religions, the footprints of divine or sacred kingships are everywhere. Religion by itself, is an expedient and voluntarily scheme to set up morality, spirituality and social interaction. The synergy religion creates within society can contribute towards progress, but it also has potential to generate bigotry and hatred. Throughout human history, fanatics and extremists have exploited religion as a driving force for some of the worst atrocities. Conquerors, monarchs and warlords justified wars on the base of religious differences or sometimes in an effort to spread their faith. This religiously motivated adventurism has cost millions of human lives. In modern history, 14th to 16th century Renaissance Movements in Europe accomplished significant developments to respectable.” Parallel to that, American authors started using the term Islamic fundamentalism for politically motivated Islamic movements. In the mid-90s American authors like, Graham Fuller expressed their disagreement with the term fundamentalism and suggested that “this more recent phenomenon in the Muslim world is not so much of an old-fashioned theology but it is a current political ideology” and they suggested using the term ‘Islamism’. Because of this, a majority of scholars are now using this term to describe the inflexible ideology of Islamic movements and individuals they believe: ‘Islam (Islamic state) should rule personal, social and political life of every Muslim and wherever Muslims are in majority or they are in governing position, the law of the land must be in conformity with the Islamic Sharia. Moreover, they believe it is the core duty of every Muslim to spread this ideology all across the globe. The ultimate goal is to establish Caliphate (Islamic theocratic rule) in the entire planet.’ Upon the appearance of Islam, the social structure of Hijaz was based on tribal systems, where, every tribe was considered as a separate nation, with some variation in their traditions. In Mecca, the birth place of Islam, Quraysh was a powerful merchant tribe, that controlled the area and it’s Kaaba (the holiest shrine of the region). Prophet Muhammad was born into the Banu Hashim clan of the Quraysh tribe. When he was in his late 30s, he periodically went off in isolation to a cave in the surrounding mountains for days. At the age of forty, sitting in the cave, he reported receiving his first revelation from God. Three years after the first revelation, he started preaching these revelations publicly: God is one and submitting to Allah is the only way for salvation and he himself is a prophet and messenger of God, in the same vein as other prophets e.g. Noah, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Jesus etc. Monotheist theology and social values preached by Prophet Muhammad were progressive and different (in some areas), than the pagan tribal traditions of Hijaz. This new religious and social movement stressed the unity of the Quraysh and that caused division and discord. After decades of long struggle, by means of preaching and battles, in the end Prophet Muhammad and his companions managed to convert all Quraysh and other significant neighbouring tribes into Islam, they once again united. Although, Prophet Muhammad’s message brought a number of social reforms in Hijaz, it still remained a tribal society, where the status of an individual was determined by what tribe they were born into. On a socio political horizon, there was no other tribe wealthier or more powerful than the urban elite of Mecca, the Quraysh. Coincidentally, the most reliable and closest friends of the Prophet were also from Quraysh. Aftermath to the death of the Prophet, his closest companions prudently influenced followers that the caliph (leader/ruler after Prophet Muhammad) should come from Quraysh. This proposal was supposedly backed with the words of Prophet Muhammad. In fact during that time, the people of Hijaz were not aware of anyone’s political leadership except that of the Quraysh and they had the popular support of the masses, and no tribe could challenge this position. History witnessed that all four Caliphs of Rashidun and four major Muslim dynasties after that established their legitimacy on the basis of this. Evidently, this was not the divine rule to impose one ‘chosen’ tribe on all others. Rather, it was the pragmatic strategy for that time by the Prophet’s most reliable companions to avoid the battles for successors and to progress Muslim society after the Prophet’s death. Compared to tribal pagan rituals, Islamic monotheist theology with better social and moral norms became a great source for early Muslims to unite all tribes of Hijaz under one umbrella. Since, these early Muslims did not have a clear vision and examples of the institution of the state; their first model of the state was very much like a tribal honor-system, where the chief holds all of the sources of power. The honor-system developed by early Muslims to run the society worked for a couple of decades. The reason for their success could possibly be the lifelong companionships and direct inspiration by the prophet. But, how long this system survived and how it was destroyed by civil wars and monarchs – is a separate area of history and politics. What needs to be identified is, rather a 1400 year old tribal culture of the desert and power structure is the core value in the message of Islam. Or can this message be separated by tribal traditions and power structure of that time? In principle, the majority of Muslim scholars, whether they are Islamists or reformers, agree that values and guidelines of Islam are core, not the tribal culture. The differences begin when you identify, what is desert culture and what are the fundamental values and norms of Islam. Traditionalists perceive the majority of tribal traditions of that time as fundamentals of Islam, and they drive principles of an Islamic state from that tribal power structure. This is the source from where Islamists get the argument to justify amalgamation of power politics and Islam. Contrary to that, generally the subject of the Quran is not state or politics at all. Character building of individuals is the main topic of the Quran. It provides moral values for how humans should behave in family, as well as, in society. In Islam, the idea of blending politics with religion was initiated during the first Muslim dynasty. Although Muslim monarchs of 7th and 8th centuries were not considered as spiritual or religious leaders, with the help of early Muslim clergy, they systematically narrowed down the concept of Jihad into holy war. That was the time when under the influence of monarchs, Muslim clerics produced tons of literature that provided religious cover up for rulers to invade foreign lands as part of Jihad. Although, those hostile Jihadi ideas never went without criticism and disagreement, the opposing voices suffered persecutions and had a hard time reaching the masses, compared to the voices from the courtyards. Some opposing intellectuals argued on the bases of rationality and some tried to use mystic routes to highlight the tolerant and human side of Islam. After establishing the empire, those Muslims dynasties maintained certain distance between state matters and religion, but from time to time, they used Islam for their political purpose as well. However, in the beginning of the twentieth century, the concepts of modern state changed rapidly; capitalist democracies and socialist states became a reality. In reaction to this, some of the Muslim world authors like, Syed Qutab of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Syed Maududi of Jamat Islami in Pakistan went in search of a modern Islamic theocratic state. These authors not only produced the literature, but they also launched political movements to achieve the dream of an Islamic state. During the Cold War era, USA and other capitalist powers recognized these relatively unpopular Islamist movements, as useful barricades against the spread of communist political movements in the Muslim world. They supported and invested heavily on these Islamist authors and their movements, to suppress liberal and socialist Muslim thoughts. Afghan Jihad of 80’s, was the climax of that unholy marriage between capitalists and Islamists. After the climax of an unnatural friendship, in the start of new millennium, they become each other’s rivals. Establishment of an Islamic theocratic state to implement Sharia (figh) law is the main objective of Islamists. However, they have no direct support from the Quran to aspire this utopia. Other than a few general guidelines, the Quran is silent on politics and statecraft. It provides some fundamentals on which society may be built, with the assurance of equality and social justice. It doesn’t, however, endorse or sanction any particular form of government, including theocracy and neither does it demand to create an Islamic state. Contrary to that, it encourages individuals to follow the morals and values mentioned in the book. Islamists endorse Shariah law as divine and insist all Muslims to oppose man made laws and struggle to enforce this law. This is nevertheless fraudulent claim, as Shariah laws are also manmade and developed by Muslim jurists (Imams) gradually (in their personal capacity) in the centuries after the Prophet’s time. These laws are somewhat based on oral traditions of the Prophet’s time. These traditions (hadith) were documented from verbal history, after two to three centuries of the Prophet’s death. In these compilations, not only is the margins of errors high, but also most of them are 1400 year old tribal customs of that time, instead of divine laws. These laws are not written in the Quran. Most interesting is the fact that, there are dozens of versions of these Shariah laws. Some versions of these laws were adapted by Muslim rulers, and some were practiced by individuals in their personal lives, while some just stay in the books. This is the prevalent problem with Islamists; they greet the personal opinions of 8th and 9th centuries Imams as a divine and integral part of Islam, while completely ignoring the realities and needs of the different time and space, which makes these manmade Shariah laws irrelevant to the present time. The author is founding member of RSOP/social activist and information management professional, he can be reached via asjadb@gmail
Posted on: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:53:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015