From the Caliphate to the Nation-State: How Islamic Law and Politics Have Changed

By Grace Mubashir, New Age Islam 10 June 2024 The Muslim Community Is Encouraged To Take A Proactive Role In Addressing The Challenges Posed By Extremist Groups. By Fostering Debates On The Relationship Between Islam And The State, And Promoting Rational Discussions, Muslims Can Counteract Radical Ideologies. It's Suggested That Reform In Islamic Thought Is Necessary To Meet Contemporary Challenges, And That Muslims Should Work Towards Promoting Religious Tolerance And Rejecting The Notion That The West Is At War With Islam. Major Points: 1. From its beginnings as an al-Qaeda cell in Iraq, ISIS has morphed into an entirely distinct entity. The group’s vision of reviving the caliphate has attracted extremists from different corners of the world, making it the new face of global jihad. 2. The rise of ISIS has significant consequences for regional stability, global security, and the future of the nation-state system. 3. The Muslim community must take the lead in addressing issues of extremism, fostering debates on the relationship between Islam and the state, and applying rationality in discussions about politics and religion. 4. Promotion of Tolerance: Muslims need to promote religious tolerance and counter the narrative that the West is at war with Islam, recognizing the reality of the nation-state system while maintaining Islamic values. ----- The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has become famous around the world for the horrible things it does in the areas it controls. ISIS started out as a breakaway group from Al Qaeda, but now it has a reputation for being just as dangerous as other terrorist groups. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the group's head, said that a caliphate had been established and that it covered about a third of both Iraq and Syria. Even after its annihilation from the Levant, it continues to inspire extremism propped on its idea of Caliphate. But what does a kingdom really mean? What does ISIS think the kingdom it wants to build will look like? The word "caliph" comes from the Arabic word Khilafah, which means "vicegerent," "deputy," or "successor." The caliphate (Khalifah) was set up when Abu Bakr was chosen to be the Prophet Muhammad's successor after he died. In Sunni theology, Abu Bakr, ʿUmar, Uthman, and Ali are known as the Rashidun (rightly led) caliphs. Theories about the caliphate that came after the Rashidun era were based on actions from that time. Islam On Administration When the caliphate was abolished in 1924, it caused a lot of discussion in the Muslim world as people tried to set up ways to organize and run their own governments. This argument is still going on, and ISIS is bringing it to the forefront by romanticizing the idea of the caliphate to make its actions seem right. The group says it wants to bring back a state like the one that existed during the time of the four wise caliphs. This makes me wonder if the caliphate is still useful as a way to run a government in the modern world. Is it fair to say that a caliphate is the same thing as an Islamic state? To answer these questions, we will look at the important points that ‘Ali ‘Abd Al-Raziq made in his book ‘al-Islam wa-Usul al-Hukm’, which means "Islam and the Foundations of Political Power." ‘Abd Al-Raziq looked into how Islam and the modern state are connected. As a lawyer and scholar from Al-Azhar University, he carefully studied the sīra (the life of the Prophet), the chronicles of Tabari, and the hadith (reports of the Prophet's words and deeds and those of early Muslims). He used reason to question religious dogma-based traditions. The main point of ‘Abd Al-Raziq's case was that the caliphate is not based on the Qur'an, tradition, or agreement. Muslims are free to choose their own forms of government because Islam doesn't say what kind of government should be used. He said that the caliphate is not a religious duty because political systems change over time. This means that Muslims are not needed to copy the political systems of the Prophet's time or the Rashidun period. Some people didn't like his ideas because they thought they were an attempt to hurt the plans of Middle Eastern monarchs, like King Fouad of Egypt, to bring back the title of caliph. ‘Abd Al-Raziq was put on trial for having ideas that were too radical. A special court at Al-Azhar said that his ideas were the same as telling Muslims to start a Bolshevik state. His diploma and job as a judge were taken away by another court of Al-Azhar experts. Although he was criticized and persecuted, many Muslim scholars still honour ‘Abd Al-Raziq's work. A lot of smart Muslim people praise him for being brave and smart enough to look again at the basic ideas of Sunni religion. His use of critical thinking in the study of Sunni theology paved the way for future researchers. The version of the text being talked about here was translated by Maryam Loutfi and was edited by Abdou Filali-Ansary. We use a constructivist method to look at ‘Abd Al-Raziq's ideas about the caliphate and government in order to see how the idea of the caliphate has changed over time and how it applies to today's state system. As an extension of the idea that the caliphate is not divinely appointed, it is good to think of it as a social construct that grew out of how people in that time period understood it. ISIS is trying to bring back the caliphate by using strong religious and cultural images from the past to support its goals. However, the caliphate is not the only way to live up to Islamic principles; Muslims are free to set up any kind of government they want. Any kind of government, including a caliphate, needs to be in line with the way things are in society and politics right now. ISIS is challenging the governments of Iraq and Syria by making new borders and declaring a caliphate. They are also giving an alternative to the Western model of the state. Some Muslims share the desire to go back to the time of the caliphs because they think that politics and religion need to be revived to fight Western effects. As a result, ISIS's vision of a caliphate has big effects not only in the areas it controls, but also on a world level, since it goes against the current Westphalian state system. One way to understand how the theory of the caliphate has changed over time is to look at the idea of "historicizing legitimation." This means that stories about how Islam came to be have changed along with the caliphate ideology. When looking at things this way, it's clear that many stories passed down about how the caliphate came to be are not based on the Qur'an and sunnah (the Prophet's deeds and words). Scholars call these stories "invented traditions" that have changed the way governments work in Muslim-majority countries and how Muslims remember the past, as Noah Feldman pointed out. In some ways, the caliphate was made up by the ideas, rules, and values that a group of people in a certain place and time had in common. This idea grew out of past events and the social and political climate at the time it was created. The idea that the caliphate came about through history and not from God makes it seem like a human organization. As a government system, the caliphate is mostly just a way for people to communicate with each other; it's something that people have made up. Because of this, the system can change if the players' thoughts and ideas do too. With the help of logic and reason, ‘Abd Al-Raziq said that the caliphate as an institution grew over time, going from a simple structure to a more complex one as the Muslim kingdom grew. As a result, the kingdom that was set up after the Prophet's death was not a must for Muslims. This means that different governmental systems can be set up in the future as long as the main ideas of Islam are kept, like prayer, fasting during Ramadan, and pilgrimage, and as long as the system doesn't allow what God has forbidden or forbid what God has allowed. As a lawyer, ‘Abd Al-Raziq was very interested in the past of Islamic law, which led him to study how political power works in Islam. He studied the caliphate and how it worked for many years. His work came out in 1925, one year after Kemal Ataturk got rid of the caliphate. ‘Abd Al-Raziq said that Muslims don't have to follow the same way of running the government that was in place in the early days of Islam (salaf), because political systems change over time. Muslims can set up their government however they want, taking into account the current intellectual, social, and economic situations. So, the role of the caliph changed over time, from the time of the Prophet to the end of the Ottoman Empire. In the time of the Prophet, the state was still in its early stages of growth. In the current sense, the Prophet was not a political leader. Instead, he was a religious leader. Even though the Prophet had some power and influence, it was not on the same level as that of modern politicians. ‘Abd Al-Raziq said that the Prophet had spiritual power, not physical power. He compared it to the power that Moses and Jesus had over their disciples. Also, ‘Abd Al-Raziq made it clear that the term of caliph means "caliph of the Messenger of God" and not "caliph of God." This means that the caliph acted like the Prophet did with the faithful. Many people thought that the caliph got his power from God, but experts couldn't find a verse in the Qur'an that supported this idea. Hadith also didn't support the idea that the caliphate is a religious doctrine. Instead, scholars focused on a legal thesis on which everyone agreed to support their stance. But ‘Abd Al-Raziq said that agreement—whether it was among the Prophet's Companions, their followers, or the whole Muslim community—never played a big part in choosing caliphs after the first four, so it couldn't be used as religious proof. The Qur'an and the Sunnah don't talk about or stress the problem of the caliphate. This is clear because religious experts can't point to a single story that supports their point of view on this issue. Since the Sunnah had any proof, it would have been used to support the idea of everyone agreeing. It was after the Prophet's time that some of his companions were given the title of caliph. Sunni Muslims believe that the caliphs were rightly led and deliberately did what the Prophet did. Ibn Khaldun thought that the caliphate really only existed during the Rashidun era. "The characteristic traits of the caliphate disappeared, and only its name remained" after that. The caliph's office turned into a ‘Mulk’ (kingship) under dynastic rule, and the people who led it became less religious. So, the Prophet's rule should be set apart from that of those who came after him. Being politically active was important for the Prophet to keep the new state running, but his main job was spiritual. Islam is a call to change the way people live, not a set of rules for how to run a government. From the time of the Umayyad dynasty through the Ottoman Empire, when a ruler was in charge, the caliphate looked different. It was possible for people to voluntarily follow the caliphate, but ‘Abd Al-Raziq said that the caliphate "has been a constant source of evil and corruption." He said that the caliphate only lasted because of force, since the caliph could not keep his position or rule without it. Because of this, the term of caliph and the situations in which it was used led Muslims to believe that the caliphate was a religious job. This made people think that those in charge of Muslims were on the same level as the Prophet, which was not true. In the name of religion, ‘Abd Al-Raziq said that rulers spread the idea that the caliph got his authority and power straight from God in order to stay in power and silence those who were against them. They worked hard to get everyone to believe this, telling people that obeying the masters was the same as obeying God and that rebelling against them was the same as rebelling against God. They even said that the king was God's representative on earth. Political players were able to justify their actions, even though they were cruel, by saying that their rule was divine. Muslims have held on to this idea for hundreds of years. Some said that the caliphate was important for following religion and making sure that the Muslim community was safe and healthy. "Neither the way we live our spiritual life nor the way we run our daily lives calls for the caliphate," ‘Abd Al-Raziq replied. People began to think of the caliph as the "Shadow of God" during the Abbasid dynasty, which made this view more popular. The dynasty's founder said he was God's sword and lock and ruled by divine Favour. ‘Abd Al-Raziq disagreed, saying that there is nothing stopping Muslims from tearing down an old and oppressive system and building a new one based on common sense and what other countries have learned. Caliphate In Nation-States Creating institutions in a society is based on a set of ideals that come from the relationship between the society and the state. When people study the relationship between the government and society, they mostly look at how state institutions and social groups interact as they try to figure out how to use public power. It's because different groups of people share understandings or meanings that bind them together that societies have their own forms and personalities. As a result, societies build states and governments based on the rules and ideals that people have internalized. ‘Abd Al-Raziq said that the Prophet didn't get involved in the politics of different groups and didn't try to change their ways of running their governments or their administrative or judicial systems. The Prophet told the people that they knew more about these things than he did, so he let them handle them. It was up to each group to set up its own government. The only thing that made them obligated was to follow the rules and principles of Islam, which led to the union. Also, ‘Abd Al-Raziq said that Muslims, like everyone else, need a government to run their lives because "such an institution is indeed necessary for the conduct of religious practices and the quest for the public good." He said that the caliphate is like a government, which can look different. The main points of ‘Abd Al-Raziq's argument stress that politics and government are not key to what Islam is all about. This is because the faith, not the way a religion is run, is what makes it universal. Setting up a state is important to follow Islamic values and principles, but Muslims are free to choose the type of government that will best protect their rights. He disagreed with the idea that religion and politics are one and the same thing in Islam. He said that Islam doesn't really connect politics with the caliphate or the cruel regimes that have existed in Muslim past. ‘Abd Al-Raziq came to the conclusion that even though many Muslims think that Islam requires them to form a governmental entity, this is not supported by religious texts, traditions, or even the Prophet's example. They also don't give the community anything that could be seen as a law or political guideline. He thought that the Prophet hadn't meant for his lessons to be closely linked to statecraft, which means letting people make decisions about politics and running the government. During the Prophet's time, this plan set the tone for the relationship between the state and society. It can also be used to build an Islamic state. In Islam, the nature of the state is still a controversial topic. Muslims still don't agree on how religion and the government should work together because the Qur'an and hadith don't say much about how to run a country. This lets Islamists control the argument and use violence to bring attention to their cause. ISIS wants to set up a caliphate in the Levant, which is similar to Al Qaeda's idea of an Islamic state: a unitary kingdom that covers all Muslim states. ‘Abd Al-Raziq brought up the issue of how Muslims should organize themselves, looking closely at Islamic religious practices to see if they were still relevant in modern times. But he didn't go far enough in his thinking about what a system of government should be like that is in line with Islamic values. States with a majority of Muslims can create an Islamic state on their land. This will help the Ummah (community of followers) stay united. Since the sovereignty principle is the most important thing, an Islamic state can work within the Westphalian state structure. The Islamic state doesn't have to follow the ideas of individuality, freedom, and equality that came with the founding of early European states. This is because the Islamic idea of state can't be understood without considering Tawhid (God being one), Ummah, ʿadālah (fairness or justice), and Qiyādah or imāmah (leadership). The nation-state system also recognizes the right to self-determination. This means that Muslims can choose their own political position and work on their own economic, social, and cultural growth. It is clear that an Islamic state is not secular since it is built on religious law. There are states like Iran and Saudi Arabia that show that the idea that the Westphalian order is based on keeping Church and state separate is not true. Most of these states' political systems are very different from one another. This shows that Muslims are not required to follow a specific model of state and government. People say that most Muslim states are full of corruption, cronyism, authoritarianism, and political violence. This shouldn't stop Muslims from working to create an Islamic state based on the Westphalian system, though. Muslims can do what God wants them to do in more ways than just the kingdom. Muslims can build a state and government that reflect the values and goals of the people they live with. The government's goals and methods must also be in line with the needs of society; otherwise, it won't be able to do its job if people are strongly against it. In Islam, oppression is not okay. According to the Tawhid philosophy, man is free from the rules of this world and can only serve Allah. People in power and the rest of society must follow this teaching to make sure that working together doesn't limit people's freedom but instead encourages them to work together to achieve Islamic goals. In order for an Islamic state to be made, there must first be a society that follows Islamic rules and beliefs. This is called the Ummah. Muslim societies that follow Islam must make rules based on the Shariah, so there is no need for them to bring back the caliphate system. Because of this, an Islamic state should be thought of as a political community that helps Islamic goals come true. The state's borders don't have to be the same as the Ummah because the state is held together by Ijma, which is political agreement on a set of principles and ideals that form the basis of society. The Islamic idea of an Ummah is for all Muslims to work together and be one, putting Islam above all other beliefs. Before modern times, Muslims were aware of differences in race, language, and region, but they were politically united under the caliphate and later empires and sultanates. These changing borders did not represent the lines of modern nation-states, but rather the authority of leaders who ruled in the name of Islam. When the Ottoman Empire fell and colonialism began, the Ummah was split up into areas controlled by different colonial forces. It is important to know that the Islamic state does not work to promote the interests of all Muslims. Instead, it is a government system that works to protect the peace, safety, and well-being of all its citizens, no matter what religion, nationality, or gender they are. Muslims also need to be aware of the need to move beyond historical models of how governments are set up and work toward an Islamic model of the state that stays true to the Islamic ideals that modern Muslim societies uphold. Things are very different in society and politics now than they were during the caliph's time. Muslim-majority states today are set up and run as independent countries with clear borders. A well-known Muslim scholar named Muhammad Abduh thought that the way a government is set up is not based on Islamic law, but on the needs of the people and the events of the time. Once Muslims got rid of colonial forces and became free, they had to accept that there were borders and that the state had the most power within its borders. But in Islam, sovereignty comes from God's will, which is shown in the Shariah, not from the state as a government body. So, a dictatorship or a theocracy is not the best type of Islamic state. Instead, a nomocracy, or government based on law, is better. Muslims get confused when they try to connect the qualities of the Ummah with the way a state is run. Inside the general limits of the law, the Ummah creates an environment that helps each person grow spiritually, while the state oversees the Ummah's actions and makes use of natural and human resources to help it grow. Muslims are also confused by the idea that the state is a Western invention and not Islamic. This idea comes from people who think that the Westphalian system is the same thing as Westernization and secularization. Radical Islamists think that the state system means Western control and dominance. Because of this, they think that Shariah must rule the Ummah under the leadership of a single caliph in order to fully uphold Islamic ideals. But the terrible things that extremist groups like ISIS do are also not Islamic. An Islamic state or kingdom that does wrong things does not make it possible for Muslims to live in line with Allah's law. One of the most important ideas in Islam is that people with different views and doctrinal commitments should be tolerated. Minorities who were not Muslims had full rights during the time of the Prophet. The Covenant of Medina was a historical document that was created during the Hijra (migration from Mecca to Medina) period between 622 and 624 CE. It spelled out the political rights and duties of the people who lived in Medina at the time, which included Muslims and Jews. The Covenant stressed how important it was for Muslims and non-Muslims to work together to create justice and protect Medina from outside threats. It made equality clear by telling Muslims they couldn't treat Jews unfairly and telling Jews they couldn't get back at their Muslim brothers. In the city-state of Medina, Prophet Muhammad led the Muslims and Jews to work together as a single governmental unit with equal rights and duties. However, each group maintained its legal religious independence. Some people may disagree with the beliefs that sovereignty is based on, but that doesn't mean it isn't valid. Since society is where the power of the Islamic state comes from, it is up to the state to make sure that social relationships are based on justice and human respect, and that the Quran's teachings about being fair, decent, and caring are carried out. Why ISIS Is a Lingering Threat? ISIS has changed into a completely different group since its start as an al-Qaeda cell in Iraq. Extremists from all over the world have joined the group because they want to bring back the kingdom. This has made them the new face of global jihad. ISIS is more like the Taliban in that it controls areas and tries to run them like a government, while al-Qaeda is a non-state player. Al-Qaeda also wanted to create an Islamic state, but it wasn't able to take over enough land. Some experts say that ISIS is more likely to be attacked by the military because it limits its activities to a certain area. ISIS's actions have huge effects on the lives and well-being of those who live in its wake, as well as on global security, regional peace, and the future of the nation-state system. Conclusion Muslims need to step up and do something about this problem. Starting a healthy conversation about the connection between Islam and the government can help settle unanswered questions like whether revealed holy texts should be the only or main source of political legitimacy and whether the government should enforce a certain religious teaching. Muslims are trustworthy and have a deep understanding of the complicated problems that come up with religious extremism. More Muslims should listen to scholars like Ali Abd al-Raziq who say that people should be logical when they talk about faith and politics. There is a big responsibility on scholars to spread the idea that Islam and reason can coexist and that Islamic thinking needs to change to meet the needs of today. Muslims should also work to support religious freedom and fight against extremist ideas that the West is at war with Islam. The nation-state is the most common structure in the real world. Muslims can organize and run their own government in this way without sacrificing their values and way of life, even though it comes from Europe and is a holdover from the colonial era. ----- A regular columnist for NewAgeIslam.com, Mubashir V.P is a PhD scholar in Islamic Studies at Jamia Millia Islamia and freelance journalist. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/caliphate-nation-state-islamic-law-politics/d/132907 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism