Mar 2004 - Issue 3

Read rest of the article » 1 2 3 4

Islamic Political Thought: Parallels or Anti-parallels?

Unleashing the myths and mysteries of western thought of Islam as merely a doctrine of religious beliefs, Faisal Idrees argues what he calls "Autonomous Sovereignty" within the limits of Quran and Sunnah.

Faisal Idrees

Faisal Idrees ...

2. Al-Mawardi

Al-Mawardi is considered the most learned theoretician of the orthodox political theory. In enumerating the qualifications of the caliph, beside the usual mention of Quraish descent, he points out that qualified electors, i.e, ‘those who loosen and bind’, should elect him. An out going caliph can also legitimately nominate his successor. The caliph should commit himself to strict adherence to the revealed law and promote general welfare. As long as he is not guilty of heresy, or a captive in the hands of the enemy, obedience was due to him from all Muslims. The idea of two caliphs was rejected. However, he was receptive to the altered balance of power in which the authority of the caliph had suffered at the hands of the emerging regional powers and representative sultans and amirs. He recognized their legitimacy in their domains, as long as they did not encroach upon the supreme position of caliph as the leader of the faithful.
Al-Mawardi’s time is the one when the authority of the Abbasid ca1iph was weakened.

3. Al-Ghazali

Writing, when the Sunni Seljuk Sultans had captured real power, tried to accommodate this erosion of central authority. He asserted that the caliph need not exercise political authority himself, he can delegate into a sultan. The caliph is advised to seek the advice of ulama and fuqa’ha in the interpretation of divine law. This advice further detracted from the effective power of the caliph, reducing him to a mere nominal spiritual leader of the ummah.

4. Ibn-e-Khuldun

An erudite scholar from Tunisia, applied sociological methods and criteria to explain the evolution of Muslim history. He wrote that in all societies there is an innate cyclical evolution. A martial tribe captures power, subjugates the surrounding tribes and establishes a civilization. That civilization reached its zenith and then decay sets in through the life of ease and indulgence. The appointment of Quraishite caliph was an expression of this natural law of social evolution.

Ibn-e-Khuldun accepted the necessity of a state, even one based on power, for civilization to flourish. He was positive to the role of religion as an essential factor in the civilization. He believed that even the states based on power can benefit from the shariah since its observance leads to public welfare, and no ruler can afford to ignore the public good.

5. Maududi

Maulana Maududi conceived of the term Al-hakimiya, a derivative of an Arabic word that means “to govern”. He introduced it in his work Al-Mustalahat alArba’a fi’l-Quran. The term Al-hakimiya has been used by Islamic political thinkers ever since to mean sovereignty. He argued that according to Islam, sovereignty belongs to God. He alone was the lawgiver and that believers could neither resort to totally independent legislation nor could they modify any law laid down by God. He saw the Islamic state as a political agency set up to enforce the laws of God. Herein lies the cardinal difference between the modern and Islamic conceptions. While modernity made the state a repository of sovereignty, in Islam the state was merely an agency of the sovereign. Thus the Islamic state is conceptually weaker than the modeen state.

Maududi also recognized the vicegerency of man and explained that each believer was a repository of the Khalifat (vicegerency). The Quran makes this explicitly clear (45:12,13). Maududi’s understanding of the Khalifat of Man is definitely in the popular sense but he does not explain it in conjunction with sovereignty. Thus sovereignty lies in God, state is an agency of the sovereign and every believer is God’s vicegerent on Earth.

Conclusion:

At the end of our discussion, we make some conclusions in the light of result we have reached upon. Sovereignty of the people of an Islamic state is not an idea alien to the teaching of Islam. Rather it is the very corner stone of Islamic Ideology. Allah entrusts his sovereignty to the people of Islamic state and not to any single person. Any such claim of single person without the consent of the people is an illegitimate act in the eye of Islam.
The rise of political Islam has made the concept of Islamic sovereignty central to Islamic political theory and often it is presented as a barrier to any form of democracy. Democracies are seen as system where human whim is the source of law where as Islamic principles are transcendental and cannot be undermined by popular whim. Unfortunately, what many of the Islamists fail to understand is that democratic institutions are not just about law. They are also about prevention of tyranny by the state. Regardless of where sovereignty is placed theoretically, in practice it is the state, which exercises it in their world and not God or his angels.
Sovereignty is a complex concept and any attempt to simplify it can only cause problems. Nevertheless, Muslims must understand that while sovereignty belongs to God it has already been delegated in the form of human agency (Quran 2:30).
Muslims as individuals and as an Ummah cannot be held accountable for what they do unless they have the freedom/agency/sovereignty to do as they please. The discretion and the judgment with which Muslims apply the given law not just to apply it but to achieve its purpose constitutes human sovereignty.