ISLAMIC SOCIETY

[I prepared this summary around 1973 for class use. Much more could be said, but it remains a valid summary of the classical books (e.g. Māwardī, Ṭurṭūshi) on Islamic society, which enjoys some popularity today.]

Muslim society can be looked upon in its ideal form or in its practical historical realizations. The two are quite different, because the actual Muslim society of any one place or time always falls short of the ideal, and incorporates many non-Islamic features, such as the traditional customs of a place or imitations of foreign governmental models. Nevertheless, any Muslim society examines itself in reference to the ideal, and the ideal is the guiding force in making reforms or adopting new ways of organizing society.

The following are some important aspects of the ideal Muslim society as set forth in the Qur’ān the ḥadīth, and the systematisations of Sunni Muslim law books. Note that Ahmadiyya Islam does not agree with the necessity of jihād or an Islamic state. Other Muslims question the validity of the “ideal” set forth in the classical books.

Unity of religion and state

Traditional Sunni Islam has been dominated by the Ash`arite teaching that something is good or evil only because revealed law ( Sharī`a) has declared it so; there is no good or evil in nature which can be known by reason without revealed law. Therefore there is only one law for society, that revealed by god. Men need only to submit to God’s rule; for men to rule themselves by their own laws in idolatry. There is no separation of spiritual and temporal orders; it is nonsense in Muslim society to say “Give to God what is God’s and to Caesar what is Caesar’s.”

Christianity permits a separation of the spiritual and temporal orders, or of church and state, because it recognizes the capacity of human reason to know what is right and wrong, good and bad. Because human reason is autonomous, the state is autonomous. Nevertheless, Christian revelation supplies for the defects of human reason, and tells some things that human reason cannot know. Therefore the Gospel has much to say and command concerning justice and the social order, but it does not displace human reason or give a compete blueprint on how to organize a society.

Islamic government

Islamic government is theocratic, because God is the only recognized authority, and human leaders and institutions are only occasions through which God governs. Remember the Ash`arite principle that all causality belongs to God alone. While being theocratic, Islamic government is at the same time nomocratic, because God manifests his commands through Sharī`a, the law revealed in the Qur’ān.

Islamic government is also egalitarian, that is, based on the principle of equality of all believers. Since God alone possesses goodness and any perfection, and man possesses nothing (especially according to the discontinuous atomism of al-Bāqillānī, the extreme Ash`arite), men cannot claim any superiority over one another by nature or by office. The only difference among men is in piety towards God, whereby they accept God’s covenant ( mīthāq) made to men before the creation of Adam to reward those who serve God. The slave of God who is a faithful believer is entitled to every right of citizenship, whereas unbelievers, who have broken God’s covenant, does not have these rights. When believers band together and give allegiance ( bay`a) to a human leader among them, they are merely finding a social way of expressing their faithfulness to the covenant with God.

Let us examine in particular how Sharī`a works:

Legislation

The Qur’ān is supposed to contain God’s rule for every aspect of life. In fact, the Qur’ān is silent about many matters. The ḥadīth collections explain many of these matters on the basis of Muhammad’s authority. The ḥadīth do not have the same obligatory force as Qur’ānic injunctions, but are highly respected as explaining the meaning and spirit of the Qur’ān. Because even the ḥadīth do not explain what to do in every situation, principles of personal effort ( ijtihād) and consensus ( ijmā`) come into play. The important thing to remember is that neither of these is considered human legislation, but merely an effort to understand God’s revealed law.

As a matter of fact, modern Muslim countries for the most part have a secular code of law, following only the general spirit of the Qur’ān, and use Sharī`a law only for personal affairs, marriage, and inheritance. Traditional Muslim teaching (in classical works and more recently in works of Usman Ɗan Fodio) holds that Muslims must move (هجرة hijra) from the rule of unbelievers and set up their own state governed according to the norms of Sharī`a.

Perhaps the experience of other, fully Muslim countries will make Muslims in Nigeria realize that it is not merely the presence of Christians which hinders the setting up of a classical Islamic state, but the very nature of modern government in a technical and open world prevents it. They may be content to see the general legislation of the country set up on a secular basis, yet in harmony with the fundamental beliefs of both Muslims and Christians, while allowing Muslims to have their own laws and courts for personal and family matters.

Judiciary

By the judiciary can be meant either the growth of jurisprudence, that is, the development of fiqh, which is hardly distinct from legislative development. Or there can be meant the application of Sharī`a to particular cases. By right, any Muslim who is instructed in Sharī`a may deliver a verdict on a case. The whole authority for the judgement comes from God, the author of Sharī`a, and not from the individual and his caprices.

In actual history, however, certain qualified persons have exercised the office of judge, usually appointed by the acting government. The judge is called qadi in Arabic ( = “alkali” in Hausa). He is often advised by a mufti, a jurisconsultant who is familiar with legal literature and can give an opinion ( fatwa) concerning difficult points of law.

Executive

Executive power also belongs to God alone, who does not communicate a share in this authority to men (even civilly, much less establish a hierarchy), but merely uses certain men as occasions of carrying out his designs. All Muslims, in fact, are bound by the frequently reiterated Qur’ānic injunction to enforce good behaviour and deter from bad behaviour ( ). This obligation, says Muḥammad b. Yūsuf as-Sanūsī, holds even for those who are guilty of bad behaviour, since the neglect of the obligation to behave well does not excuse a person from the distinct obligation of enforcing good behaviour in others. (Therefore there is no worry about “throwing the first stone.”)

The obligation to enforce good behaviour and deter from bad behaviour is the foundation for the obligation of jihād. Jihād literally means “effort”. Authors, such as al-Ghāzālī, distinguish several senses of the word: There is:

  1. jihād of the heart, which includes:
    1. self-discipline and mastery over one’s own evil inclinations, and
    2. the disapproval in one’s heart of the evil behaviour of others and the desire to see them correct their ways
  2. jihād of the tongue, which includes verbal remonstrations of evildoers, and preaching and writing to promote Islam, and finally
  3. jihād of the sword, which is military effort to defend and to extend the rule of Islam. This third kind of jihād is the first and normal meaning of the word, but the other kinds are considered more meritorious.

The conducting of the third kind of jihād and the administration of Islamic territories is not an obligation of every individual, but demands a leader (imām), as is sanctioned by the Qur’ān verse (4:59): “Obey God; obey his Messenger and those of you who have the right to command.” This leader is also called the “commander of the faithful” ( ) and “caliph” (), that is, successor to the role of Muhammad as leader (not as prophet). He is commissioned by an oath of allegiance () made by representatives of the people, or, more usually, by the learned aristocracy “who are capable of binding and loosing” ( ). He may also be chosen by his predecessor.

The imām is supposed to possess a number of qualifications: to be

  1. a Muslim
  2. upright
  3. a male
  4. free from slavery
  5. an adult
  6. intelligent
  7. knowledgeable in matters of religion and law
  8. in good health
  9. able to lead both in war and in peace
  10. a member of the tribe of Quraysh of Mecca (The Khārijites, more logical to the principle of equality, permit anyone to become caliph.)

The duties of a caliph are listed by al-Māwardī ( , Cairo, 1960, pp. 15-16):

  1. to enforce orthodoxy of faith, refuting and penalizing heretics,
  2. to enforce the settlement of quarrels
  3. to ensure public order and the safety of everyone
  4. to ensure the defence of Islamic territories against enemy attack
  5. to wage jihād against those who resist Islam after being called to it, so that they either become Muslim or submit to a discriminatory dhimma pact under the supremacy of Islam
  6. to collect the fay’ (فيء property abandoned in war) and the ṣadaqa (tax levied upon Muslims) according to the manner stated in Sharī`a
  7. to make expenses from the public treasury
  8. to appoint good advisors and commissioners for public works and funds, and
  9. to keep a personal watch on all the affairs of state in order to ward off treachery.

    In historical fact, the Arab caliphs and many other Muslim sultans have been quite autocratic. Therefore al-Māwardī (speaking of the amīr al-jihād, ch. 4, section 3, p. 43), at-Ṭurṭūshi (ch. 10, p. 93 & ch. 27), and all modern writers insist on another duty of the head of an Islamic state:

  10. to take counsel ( shūrā), as recommended in the Qur’ān, 3:159 and 42:38.

Taking counsel is all the more important in view of the fact that Muslims respect the authority of God’s law alone, and are quick to over throw any aberrant chief whenever conditions permit. No ruler is sacred, or can be styled as “God’s anointed”. Respect for god’s law may move people to stage a coup, but respect also for God’s destining ( qadar) of the events of the world leads people to accept any outcome, whether a successful coup and a new leader, or an unsuccessful coup and the continuance of the old leader. Success is the indication of God’s will.

Brotherhood of Muslims

The Qur’ān (49:10) insists that all Muslims are brothers to one another. They form one community ( umma), and should help one another. This is a principle of supra-nationality or cosmopolitanism, but of uni-nationality. The territory of Islam (dār al-islām) is really one nation, and political divisions between Muslim countries are regarded as artificial, the result of sinful divisions among the Muslim community or of colonial partitioning. Theoretically, a Muslim is a citizen of any part of the Muslim world. He is first of all a member of the Muslim nation, and only secondarily and Egyptian or a Nigerian.

The equality of Muslims transcends racial or class barriers. This is shown dramatically during the pilgrimage to Mecca when all the men dress in the same kind of white cloth. Historically, however, the spread of Islam has meant the spread of Arab culture. Arabs are not considered superior people (except in the popular mind), but their culture and language are respected as the channel of God’s revelation for all men. Therefore many of the areas conquered by the Muslims were Arabized at the same time as being Islamized. This is the case in Syria and Iraq and the north of Africa. (There was no Arabic spoken in Africa before Islam.) Even non-Arabized Muslims tend to imitate Arabic culture. Recently, however, Muslims are reacting against Arab particularism, and are emphasising the wide diversity of cultures embraced by Islam.

In certain areas other cultural groups spread with the spread of Islam. For instance, it is common for a pagan in the north of Nigeria who becomes Muslim to renounce his native language and customs and adopt the language and customs of the Hausa.

Relations with non-Muslims

The constitutions of most modern Muslim states regard Muslim and non-Muslim citizens as having equal rights. But this is not true of traditional Islam, where believers ( mu’minūn) are not on a par with unbelievers ( kafirūn). Believers first of all have the obligation of extending the rule of Islam to parts where it has not reached (not in the interests of personal aggrandizement, but to extend the “rule of “God”). The world is distinguished into:

Within Islamic territories pagans have no rights but to become Muslim or accept death (or slavery). Members of religions recognized as having been instituted by God (for an epoch superseded by Islam) are allowed to keep their religion provided they accept Muslim supremacy and abide by certain conditions laid on them (See the document of at-Ṭurṭūshi). The religions usually recognized are Judaism, Christianity, Magism (= Zoroastrianism, in Persia), and Ṣābi’ism (a kind of Gnosticism). In practice, it seems some people were called Magi for convenience (such as the “Maguzawa”, the pagan Hausa). If members of these religions reject a Muslim ultimatum to accept Islamic rule, and are conquered by force, they may be put to death, enslaved or be pardoned.

The tendency of modern governments is to replace any sectarian supremacy with equal participation of all citizens in the life of the country. But the continued circulation of books expressing older, intolerant view shows that these views are by no means dead.

Other public functions (according to al-Māwardī)