“It is I, the King of Kings.” Gilgamesh was his name from the day
he was born, two-thirds of him god but a third of him human, from the epic of Gilgamesh.
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 separate religion from power politics, but still there are
miles to go. In some societies the distance is in hundreds of miles and in some
in thousands, but still we are far from better. Although in the developed world,
the Church has no authority to govern the state, it still has some influence
and involvement into power politics via political parties, pressure groups and
lobbies.
Islam is a monotheistic belief system articulated by the Qur'an, a
text considered by Muslims to be the words of Allah (God). It endorses certain
moral and ethical values to lead a person with the blend of spirituality and
morality. In Islam, believers (Muslims) need to shape their persona according
to the prescribed guidelines to progress their soul for the betterment of this
life and also to get the reward from the divine in life after death. According
to the Quran, this message is the complete and universal version of faith that
was revealed at many times and places including biblical prophets e.g. Abraham,
Moses, Jesus etc. In Islamic belief, Muhammad (c. 570 – 632) is not the author
of Islam, but instead is regarded as the last messenger of Allah.
Islamism: Historically, Western writers used the terms Islamism and Mohammedism
for Islam as a religion and Mohammedans
was an alternate to Muslims. By
the turn of the twentieth century, the term Islamism replaced by the Arabic
term Islam and by 1938, when Orientalist scholars completed The
Encyclopaedia of Islam, the term Islamism disappeared completely. The
Orientalist scholars removed this term as it offended Muslim writers and
readers.
The resurrection and redefinition of
Islamism, like its birth, took place in France in the late 70s as it started appearing
in titles of books and articles to describe new Islamic movements and Islam as a
political ideology. Retrieval of the term ‘islamisme’ never went without criticism and most
notably by a French historian of Islam Maxime Rodinson, stating "If one chooses this term, the reader
may become confused between an excited extremist who wishes to kill everyone
and a reasonable person who believes in God in the Muslim manner, something
perfectly 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 its 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 and 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 Muslims 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 socialists Muslim thoughts. Afghan Jihad of 80s 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 does not 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 manmade 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 error 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 that makes these
manmade Shariah laws irrelevant to the present time.
