PIR06.

2 1

Islam and Politics: Theory and Practice

Two central questions:

Does Islam endorse the separation of religion and state?

Does Islam endorse a right to revolution for Muslims

when their government is bad or sinful?

I. Does Islam endorse separation of religion and state?

A. Conventional view: no!

B. Does this distinguish it from Western religious traditions? E.g.

Christianity?

Note: Separation of religion and state is a central pillar of Western

political thought -- it is the hallmark of liberalism
Famous teaching by Jesus: Give unto Caeasar what is Caesar's and
to God what is God's•••
But separation of church and state is not a very long-standing tradition
in the West
It is the relatively recent phenomenon,

and in most Western countries it is still shockingly incomplete.

It is the hard won product of years of bloody religious wars,

Numerous examples of church and state making common cause in the

West: e.g. the crusades; the inquisition

The separation of religion and state is still the subject of dramatic

contestation and political struggle even in the West

Although liberal democratic countries like the US do generally endorse

PIR06.2 2

the principle of separation ofchurch and state as an ideal to be strived

for.

C. Islamic Ideal: Islam din wa dawla

Islam is both religion and state.

Islam is different from Christianity in that in its earliest incarnations

it did claim competence to rule in the public sphere.

Mohamed was different from Jesus: not just a prophet, but also a ruler,
the founder and leader of a state.
The religious tradition he promulgated did not just limit itself to matters
of private conscience and intent and faith ...

it was designed to regulate all aspects of life ...public and private.

D. Historical reality:

i. Mohamed's state:
Integration of religion and state was achieved under the
leadership ofthe Prophet Mohamed in the 7th century.

Mohamed's state:

unified political and religious leadership in one person.

invested the state with moral purpose
(to spread the word of god•••and promote the
observance of god's law on earth)
ii. First Four Caliph's state:

Integration of religion and state was achieved during the rule of

the first four Caliphs (al-Rashidunl the "rightly-guided ones")

The early caliphs sustained the Islamic ideal of the unity of

religious and political leadership
PIR06.2 3

They also sustained the Islamic ideal of investing the state with
proper moral purpose..
iii. After First Four Caliphs:
Succeeding caliphs were chosen not on the basis of religious
probity

but rather on the basis of might and successful political

maneuvering.

Beginning of a long process of degeneration in the religious

aura of the caliphate

Caliphs henceforth chosen on the basis of two principles:

heredity and might (not religious probity)

Still Caliph remains responsible for a number of religious

functions:

- enjoined defend the territory of islam from infidels,

- enjoined to wage jihad (that is, enlarge the realm of
Islam where possible),
- enjoined to enforce Shariah (that is, Islamic law)

- enjoined to lead the people in prayer.

Caliph is seen as the "uardiap aDd enforcer of Islamic dogma."

not the formulator ofthat dogma
Religious authority...to interpret Islamic law, to codify and expand
Islamic law...

passed out ofthe hands ofthe caliph and into the hands of
a special class of learned men, the ulema
With this degeneration in the religious probity of the Caliph
PIR06.2 4

and with the emergence of a class of learned specialists

see development of a de facto split between religious

authority and political authority in Islam
Emergence of schools of law (aiming to codify the Shariah) emerge
during the late Omayyad period and early Abassid period (8th and
9th centuries)

They represented a religious authority independent ofand separate

from that of the state.

See the de facto separation of religion and state in Islamic history

(Even during the Golden Age of Islamic Civilization)

iv. By 10th and 11 th Century:

Further separation of religious and political authority:

Bi-cephalous rule
Military men took over the reigns of power/ serve as heads of state
(sultanlmalik)

Abbasid descendants are retained as Caliphs, though this is little more

than a religious figurehead

II. Does Learned class endorse this separation of religious and political authority?

A. At the level of theory, no!

B. In practice, they did not use their religious authority to force religious
leadership on the state.

At most: try to persuade the ruler to be more righteous/piour

Any attempt to dethrone an impious caliph was beyond their power

Did they call upon the people to revolt against impious leaders?
No. To the contrary. They were quite pragmatic.
PIR06.2 5

They adamantly discouraged the people against revolt.

Instead they preached political quietism, even in the face of an

impious ruler,

Why?

1. They acted out of self-interest (don't want to jeopardize the caliph's

patronage of religious instituions)

2. They had a horror of anarchy and titnal a horror of disorder and

civil war

Primary concern: to safeguard Islam

and the unity of the umma, the Muslim community.

al-Ghazali: "Tyranny is better than anarchy"

By the middle ages, the learned elite endorsed government by less than
righteous rulers
so long as the ruler met three criteria
He was a Muslim (at least nominally so)

He was powerful

He upheld Islamic legal norms at least in public

the state of his personal piety was irrelevant.

Hence the reputation of Sunni Islam for political quietism ...

III. Does Shia Islam have a different take on the relationship between religion and
state?

A. Different conception of who has has right to rule after death of Prophet
Mohamed

Shia argue for a a strictly hereditary principle of succession through

Mohamed's only surviving child, Fatimah and her husband Ali

Their defeat leads them to believe that all the caliphs who succeeded
Mohamed (except for the fourth Caliph, Ali) were illegitimate
PIR06.2 6

They propose an alternate line of leadership to succeed the Prophet

Mohamed, called the imamate (all direct descendants ofMohamed)

The Shia believed them to to be divinely inspired and infallible

interpreters of the Gods will.

Most Shia trace a chain of 12 imams,

the last ofwhich vanished mysteriously in the late 9th century without
leaving an heir.

The Shia believe he will return in the future to establish a just rule on
earth

But the Shia are defeated, militarily, by the SunnL

What did this mean for their relationship to politics in practice?

Did they counsel revolt against the Sunni?

No!

The Shia religious elite counseled their followers in two ways:

1. First: they counseled the Shia faithful to maintain a distance from

mainstream Muslim politics (which they saw as illegitimate)

2. Second, they counseled a policy of taqiyah •••dissimulation•.

that is, the Shia faithful were instructed to cover up their true dissident
religious beliefs in public

to dissimulate whenever that proved necessary for survival.

In this way: the Shia religious elite advocated a separation of religion and
politics...

they saw mainstream politics as illegitimate but unchangeable

...and so they counseled the religious faithful to stay away from it.
PTR06.2 7

IV. General Conclusions

1. The philosophical ideal of Islam (both Sunni and Shia versions)

acknowledges no separation of religion and state.

2. In practice: .Muslims resigned themselves to the defacto separation of

religion and politics.

In the Sunni case this meant accepting a caliphate whose religious

quality progressively degenerated

In the Shia case this meant living with regimes that were led by rulers
who were thoroughly illegitimate

3. Both Sunni and Shia elites counseled quietism in the face ofthis corruption
of the political ideal

The Sunni counseled general obedience to the Sunni ruler;

Tthe Shia counseled distance from politics and taqiyaldissimulation

Neither endorsed revolution!

In both cases this doctrine of quietism was rationalized on the grounds of

necessity and the higher goal of the survival of the Muslim community.

V. Important Observations:

1. The historical practice of Islam is not all that different from other
Western religious traditions (e.g. Christianity and Judaism) in its de
facto separation of religion and politics.

2. This historical separation of religion and politics in the Islamic

tradition makes the current demand by Islamist activists for piously

inspired govt and for political activism in pursuit of this goal a bit
surprising

Because it flies in the face of historical Islamic practice ...

PTR06.2 8

What this suggest is that these supposed traditionalists are in fact

highly revolutionary

they are in fact breaking with the traditional way Islam has been
practiced
for the past eight or nine centuries, if not longer