What should a modern Islamic State look like ?
There seems to be some confusion about how a modern day islamic state will look like amongst the Muslims of today. In this article I will try to shed some light on this topic.
The examples we have so far are:
1) Kingship phase Islamic state aka the Caliphate
Here its basically a hereditary ruling system. The ruler does implement Islam according some madhab that he decides and everyone must accept it. This started when Muawiya forced the ummah to elect his son as the next ruler. Those who opposed this were killed unfortunately but it is strange that Muslims don’t normally object to this as Muawiya seems to be a revered companion.
By forcing rulership he abondoned the sunna of the rightly guided khalifs and again this isssue is not much spoken about despite the hadith of whoever goes against my Sunna and does an innovation is going to Hell (This may well be the biggest ever Bid'aa in Islamic history but again it is not critiqued very much due to reverance of Muawiya amongst many Muslims). This also tells us that there is something wrong with the intelligence of Muslims today as they are not able to call out an obvious major error and injustice but prefer to stay quiet on it. This then only reflects on their mindset and the state of health of their thinking.
From this bid'aa that Muawiya did he started a 1300 year rule of kingship , so he started his own deviant sunna. If Muslims even today are not able to aknowledge this issue then maybe they don’t deserve to been blessed with a true islamic state and Allah almighty may keep them under the control of the non muslims and their agent dictators until they decide to change the way they view their history.
This Kingship system is basically like a dictatorship but a softer type. There maybe times when good rulers do come but the problem is that they then pass it on to their children who then may squander all the good their father did as they compete against each other for the throne instead of look after the ummah, leading to infighting as the ummah then gets split through taking sides for which son should get power. Notice how Shura is completely out of the picture as the lust for power is too big for any ruler to bring that principle back to the ummah again. And despite generations of ruling families passing through, this bid'aa remained and could not be overcome.
Also due to the injustice that exists, those who criticise this bid'aa are branded Shia or Rejectors (Rawafidh) so that their criticism is silenced.
2) Righly Guided Caliphate
Here there was no inheritance of power and instead the Ummah would basically do the choosing and electing of its ruler. But this only lasted about 30 years I think after the Prophet peace be upon him's death. This selection process was implemented most clearly in the time of Omer (r.a.) when he set up a system whereby the ummah would select the person they wanted to rule after him. It ended up being between Otham (r.a.) and Ali (r.a.) and Othman won the final vote.
These rulers would rule by Islam , as this is what the Ummah wanted, and would also pass power to the next ruler via Shura (although there were some complications at the start and near the end) but Shura was never cancelled and replaced by Kingship.
Justice and Freedom of belief where implemented. Muslims with devaint beliefs where given their freedom to live and practice their beliefset (eg the Khawarij with Imam Ali r.a.) and they would not be fought except if they attacked Muslims. So pluralism in Muslim beliefsets and understandings were respected and allowed. The Khawarij even did Takfeer on Imam Ali (a very promiment companion) and he still let them live and practice within the state. Only if they were to become violent would he declare war against them. So peaceful protests and deviant beliefsets were acceptable, but violence on Muslims was not allowed.
The above links us with today where we have many Muslim sects. So clearly we have to have a state that allows all sects to live together and practice their beliefs no matter how much we may disagree with them. We still count them as part of the Ummah. And even doing takfir on Muslims does not get punished as long as no violence follows. This is clear , I believe, from Imam Ali's example may Allah be pleased with him. So one group ruling and requiring all other groups or sects to adhere to their understanding is not allowed in a proper Islamic state. Pluralism and freedom of thought and speech is allowed. But physically attacking Muslims (or even non Muslims) isnt allowed. This way the state operates in peace and only punishes those that cause real harm. I hope this is very clear in our mind as it is fundamental I believe.
And this goes against some teachings that exist today where if some scholar brands certain people as innovators (people of bid'aa) they are then branded mushriks (and then kafirs) and are then punished by the state. This is completely not allowed. And unfortunately a famous scholar that many revere today applied this kind of thinking. It is ibn Taymiya unfortunately. And this fatwa of his became very useful for rulers to use as through it they can get rid of opposition. And this maybe why he became very popular and famous. So a lot of our reverences to certain scholars may be actually out of political conditioning. Rulers have access to the media and they can make one scholar famous and make a truly great one (eg AlGhazalli r.a.) an apostate kafir and then try to get rid of him. We need to be aware of such moves if we are to become truly intellectual Muslims and be worthy of istikhlaf (vicegerency) on the earth. Otherwise Allah swt will simply not give us tamkeen (power). He will keep us under the power of non muslim rule until we learn. So us Muslims today we are not very mature in our understanding and appreciation of the political aspects of Islam ( and this is by design by the way, its not an accident, as it serves the rulers to keep the people ignorant), otherwise we wil never truly rise. We need to be mature and intellectual and politically savvy.
So if we imagine that we are able to set up a system that does allow freedom of throught and speech and implement justice over all then a secular system of ruling maybe suitable (here secularism is meaning separating religion from the state apparatus). Again many may have been conditioned to think that Secularism is haram and so on, but we need to really scrutinize and see what is haram (if there is any haram) and what isnt. The state apparatus is there to look after the citizens regardless of belief. And the citizens choose which party or group they want to represent them. Freedom of belief means people of any beliefset can set up their party and petition people to vote for them. Those whom the people select will rule. This is justice and this is fairness. Otherwise it will be the minority who rule over the majority and that is not fair unless the majority are happy for a certain minority to rule them. Those who reject and say no we must implement Allah's laws, yes Allah swt wants fairness and freedom of belief doesn’t He? Or does He want to deny these from people ? To me this type of system is fair. This secular mechanism I see as fair. If someone thinks it isnt then please show me how it is unfair or unislamic ? Just becuase Muslims didnt come up with it doesnt make it unislamic.
So if the majority choose an Islamic party to rule (and it can also be a presidential system if they want it as opposed to just parliamentary) and they can choose the president they want too, from which ever party is running. And this to me is basically what Turkey is on. And it seems to be very successful Alhamdulillah and is proof that Secularism does work as a mechanism of governance. The West still wanted to launch on coup on Erdogan despite having a secular system, so this should be a sign that secularism isnt anti islam and that Muslims can use it and be successful too. Its like Muslims using any halal thing eg a knife. Just because the West also use it doesn’t make it haram. But in the realm of politics we are not able to be so precise and savvy in our thinking unforutnately as there is so much vagueness in our islamic understanding in the realm of pollitics. We think that if the West have a certain system then it must be haram But the Caliph Omer r.a. used the Western govermential system to run the Khilafah state and people didn’t say this is haram. Bacuase they knew at which levels the haram comes in and and which levels it doesn’t. So in politics if you start implementing injustice and restrict freedoms then this should ring as haram for us. But if these are implmented then systems below these may be completely halal. But we need maturity in this and more light needs to be shed on these aspect of understanding I believe. No Maturity = No Success and return to dictatorship and Jahiliya (Ignorance), so please we really need to get moving in this sphere of understanding.
3) The Time of the Prophet Peace and Blessings be upon him
After the migration to Madina, the dear prophet pbuh set up the first Muslim state. But what does Muslim mean here? Did he apply Islam on the minorities too ? No. The minorities where allowed to practice their own religion however they had to enter the pledge of one state where all are equal citizens and would work to defend all the inhabitants regardless of their religion. Note there were no dhimees here as these are when conquests happen and other peoples are brought under the protection of the Islamic state. In Medina there was no islamic conquest and there was a contract that was entered into by all groups of citizens (Jews, Christians etc). And this contract was not entered into by force but by mutual agreement via negotations I believe. And this makes it similar to the current nation state concept except that the ruling was always to be in the hands of the Muslims. So one may ask , where is the fairness and justic then ?? Here one can argue it is because he came in as a prophet of God and not a normal individual. Also they themselves I think never asked about taking leadership. The idea then was that a new prophet of God had come about and that the world was about to change and a new religion to spread. So how can they take leadership of such a thing ?
However in our time, things are different. We don’t have a new prophet of God. But we do think that Islam will come back and spread once again, uniting the Muslims and inviting the rest of humanity to its way. We expect our enemies will obviosly try to prevent us (as they have already been doing so eg the Turkey coup attempt as well as stifling the Arab Spring), but we believe that Allah swt has a plan and His plan will win no matter how hard they plot against it. But for us we need to think well and plan well. Our situation is not really similar to that of the Prophet pbuh, so each Muslim country will have to think for itself. Turkey had its own struggle and path. Recently in Syria there was a certain path and doorway opened to them that brought about power to the Muslims and the quick ejection of the tryant there. Whilst writing , the Muslims in Gaza are also having their incredibly difficult struggle may Allah help them . So we can see that Allah's plan is coming into fruition regardless our enemies. Egypt I hope will be next and so on inshaAllah. Muslims in the West are also trying to think how they can influence politics and to strengthen their role.
To Conclude:
Following on from the above three sections we can see that the Ummah is currently moving forward and rising whilst the West has started its decline after its moral mask has been so clearly vanished by Gaza's struggle. We as Muslims need to have a vision of how a modern Muslim state will look like. I hope the notes made above will help inform this and lead to more crystalisation of this vision inshaAllah. For me personally, I don’t see any problem with a secular system like Turkey's one, but the main tenets are to have a Just system with freedoms. Avoid dictatorship and especially group dictatorship where one group decides only they know the Truth and only they have the right to enforce it. This arrogance is not allowed and should not find its way in the new Muslim state otherwise we are sure to be doomed once again !
Thankyou
Ali Twaij
5 Jan 25
Muslim Thinker
From Iraq originally but mainly living in the West.
I am in my fifties and have thought a lot about many Islamic political parties.
Feel free to comment below or email me :
Email alitwaij@gmail.com
Comments
Post a Comment