Islam and secularism
—that is, the separation of religion from civic affairs and the state—has been a controversial concept in Islamic political thought, owing in part to historical factors and in part to the ambiguity of the concept itself. In the Muslim world, the notion has acquired strong negative connotations due to its association with removal of Islamic influences from the legal and political spheres under foreign colonial domination, as well as attempts to restrict public religious expression by some secularist nation states. Thus, secularism has often been perceived as a foreign ideology imposed by invaders and perpetuated by post-colonial ruling elites, and is frequently misunderstood to be equivalent to irreligion or anti-religion.
Especially in the late 19th to mid-20th century, some Muslim thinkers advocated secularism as a way to strengthen the Islamic world in the face of Russian, British and French colonialism. Some have advocated secularism in the sense of political order that does not impose any single interpretation of sharia ; argued that such a political order would not/does not violate Islam ; and that combined with constitutionalism and human rights, is more consistent with Islamic history than modern visions of an Islamic state. Orthodox Islamic scholars and proponents of Islamism strongly oppose limiting Islam to matters of personal belief, and also strongly advocate for an Islam that encompasses law, politics, economics, culture and every other aspect of the lives of its citizens. Islamist pioneer Abul A'la Maududi claimed that the goal of secularists was not to ameliorate tensions and divisions in multi-religious societies, but to avoid the "restraints of morality and divine guidance",
and thus eliminate "all morality, ethics, or human decency from the controlling mechanisms of society".
A number of pre-modern polities in the Islamic world demonstrated some level of separation between religious and political authority, the loss of power of the caliphate being a major reason for that, even if they did not adhere to the modern concept of a state with no official religion or religion-based laws. Today, some Muslim-majority countries define themselves as or are regarded as secular. Many of them have a dual legal system in which Muslims can bring familial and financial disputes to sharia courts whose jurisdiction varies from country to country but usually includes marriage, divorce, inheritance, and guardianship.
Definition
Secularism is an ambiguous concept that can be understood to refer to a number of policies and ideas—anticlericalism, atheism, state neutrality toward religion, the separation of religion from state, banishment of religious symbols from the public sphere, or disestablishment. Secularism has been categorized into two types, "hard" or "assertive" and "soft" or "passive"—"hard" being irreligious, considering religion illegitimate and seeking to discourage and weaken religious faith as much as possible ; "soft" secularism emphasizes tolerance, and neutrality and seeking to exclude "the state from any involvement in doctrine", and exclude "upholders of any doctrine from using the coercive powers of the state.There is no word in Arabic, Persian, or Turkish corresponding exactly to the English term "secularism". According to Mansoor Alam, the "common and prevalent" translation of secularism in the four main languages of Muslims—Arabic, Persian, Urdu —is ladeenia or ghair-mazhabee and mulhideen which means "without religion" or "non religious". Alam protests that contrary to these translations, definitions of secularism found in "western languages" all indicate that secularism "does not mean anti-religious or anti-God", but has come to mean freedom of religion and non-interference by the state in religion and vice versa.
Nader Hashemi writing in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World, gives two more words commonly used as translations in Arabic : ʿilmānīyah and ʿalmanīyah. In Persian, one finds the loan word sekūlarîzm, while in Turkish both laiklik '' and sekülerizm are used to define the term; although both can differ in definitions within Turkish literature, due to the confusion caused by the uncertain and incorrect usage of these two words, the meanings differ depending on context and the source''.''
Scriptural basis
According to Mansoor Alam, Quranic verses that "clearly and unambiguously" support freedom of religion by assigning to the Prophet the job of "conveying the message of Allah" to humanity rather than imposing Islam on them; and that give each person personal responsibility "for his/her own acts and deeds" are:- Who respond to their Lord, establish prayer, conduct their affairs by mutual consultation, and donate from what We have provided for them; and who enforce justice when wronged.
- Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians and Sabians,, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does righteous deeds shall have their reward with their Lord. On them will be no fear nor shall they grieve.
- Say we believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Ibrahim, Ismail, Ishaq, Yaqub, and the tribes, and that which has been given to Musa and Isa and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them.
- La Ikraha fid Din; there is no compulsion in Religion.
- Say to these disbelievers; I worship not that which you worship, nor will you worship that which I worship, and I shall not worship that which you are worshipping, nor will you worship that which I worship, To you be your religion and to me my religion.
- Verily proofs have come unto you from your Lord, so whosoever sees, will do so for his own self, and whosoever blinds himself will do so to his own harm, and I am not a watcher over you.
- And as for those who take as guardians others besides Him, Allah is watcher over them, and you are not a guardian over them.
- Had Allah willed, they would not have taken others besides Him in worship. And We have not made you a watcher over them nor are you a trustee over them.
- To each among you we have prescribed a law and a clear way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you one nation.
History and overview
Early history
Scholar Bernard Lewis points out that during its "first formative centuries", Christianity was separate from and often oppressed by the state, while "from the lifetime of its founder Islam was the state... Islam was thus associated with the exercise of power from the very beginning".Evidence of separation of religion and state
A number of scholars have argued that a separation of religion and political power is not inconsistent with early Islamic history. The Sudanese-born Islamic scholar Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im has argued that a secular state built on constitutionalism, human rights and full citizenship is more consistent with Islamic history than modern visions of an Islamic state. Ira M. Lapidus notes that religious and political power was united while the Prophet Muhammad was leading the ummah, resulting in a non-secular state. But Lapidus states that by the 10th century, some governments in the Muslim world had developed an effective separation of religion and politics, due to political control passing "into the hands of generals, administrators, governors, and local provincial lords; the Caliphs had lost all effective political power". These governments were still officially Islamic and committed to the religion, but religious authorities had developed their own hierarchies and bases of power separate from the political institutions governing them:Lapidus argues that the religious and political aspects of Muslim communal life came to be separated by Arab rebellions against the Caliphate, the emergence of religious activity independent of the actual authority of the Caliphs, and the emergence of the Hanbali school of law.
According to Jakir Al Faruki, secularism was found "for centuries" under the "tolerant and liberal" reign of most of the Mughal rulers "in particular, Akbar's regime "
Researcher Olivier Roy argues that "a defacto separation between political power" of sultans and emirs and religious power of the caliph was "created and institutionalized... as early as the end of the first century of the hegira". Nonetheless, what has been lacking in the Muslim world was and is "political thought regarding the autonomy of this space." No positive law was developed outside of sharia. The sovereign's religious function was to defend the Islamic community against its enemies, institute the sharia, ensure the public good. The state was an instrument to enable Muslims to live as good Muslims and Muslims were to obey the sultan if he did so. The legitimacy of the ruler was "symbolized by the right to coin money and to have the Friday prayer said in his name."
The Umayyad caliphate was seen as a secular state by many Muslims at the time, some of whom disapproved of the lack of integration of politics and religion. This perception was offset by a steady stream of wars that aimed to expand Muslim rule past the caliphate's borders.
In early Islamic philosophy, Averroes presented an argument in The Decisive Treatise providing a justification for the emancipation of science and philosophy from official Ash'ari theology. Because of this, some consider Averroism a precursor to modern secularism.
Colonial and post colonial era
Muslim modernists and secularism
The concept of secularism was imported along with many of the ideas of post-Enlightenment modernity from Europe into the Muslim world, namely the Middle East and North Africa. Among Muslim intellectuals, the early debate on secularism centered mainly on the relationship between religion and state, and how this relationship was related to European successes in science, technology and governance. In the debate on the relationship between religion and state, separability of religious and political authorities in the Islamic world or status of the Caliph, was one of the biggest issues. Many Islamic modernist thinkers argued against the inseparability of religious and political authorities in the Islamic world and described the system of separation between religion and state within their ideal Islamic world.Muhammad ʿAbduh, a prominent Muslim modernist thinker, claimed in his book Al-Idtihad fi Al-Nasraniyya wa Al-Islam that no one had exclusive religious authority in the Islamic world. He argued that even the Caliph did not have religious authority over common Muslims because the caliph was neither infallible nor the person to whom divine revelation had been given. ʿAbduh argued that the Caliph should have the respect of the umma but not rule it; the unity of the umma is a moral unity that does not prevent its division into national states.
Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi, in his book Taba'i' Al-Istibdad, discussed the relationship between religion and despotism, arguing that "while most religions tried to enslave the people to the holders of religious office who exploited them, the original Islam was built on foundations of political freedom standing between democracy and aristocracy." Al-Kawakibi suggested that people can achieve a non-religious national unity, saying: "Let us take care of our lives in this world and let the religions rule in the next world." Moreover, in his second book Umm Al-Qura his most explicit statement with regard to the question of religion and state appeared in an appendix to the book, where he presented a dialogue between the Muslim scholar from India and an amir. The amir expressed his opinion that "religion is one thing and the government is another... The administration of religion and the administration of the government were never united in Islam."
The thoughts of Rashid Rida about the separation of religion and state had some similarities with ʿAbduh and Al-Kawakibi. According to the scholar, Eliezer Tauber:
Rida provided details of his ideas about the future Arab empire in a document titled the "General Organic Law of the Arab Empire". Rida argued that the general administrative policy of the future empire should be managed by a president, a council of deputies to be elected from the entire empire, and a council of ministers to be chosen by the president from among the deputies. There, the caliph must recognize the 'General Organic Law' and abide by it. He would manage all the religious matters of the empire. Rida's ideal Islamic empire would be administered in practice by a president, while the caliph would administer only religious affairs and would be obliged to recognize the organic law of the empire and abide by it.
As seen above, these arguments about the separability of religious and political authorities in the Islamic world were greatly connected with the presence of the Caliphate. Therefore, the abolishment of the Caliphate by the Turkish government in 1924 had considerable influence on such arguments among Muslim intellectuals.
A work even more controversial than those mentioned above is a 1925 tract, Al-Islam Wa Usul Al-Hukm by Ali Abd al-Raziq, an Islamic Scholar and Shari'a judge. He argued that there was no clear evidence in the Quran and the hadith, which would justify a common assumption—that to accept the authority of the caliph is a religious obligation. Furthermore, he claimed that it was not even necessary that the ummah should be politically united and that religion has nothing to do with one form of government rather than another. He argued that nothing in Islam forbids Muslims from destroying their old political system and building a new one on the basis of the newest conceptions of the human spirit and the experience of nations. This publication caused a fierce debate especially as he recommended that religion can be separated from government and politics; and he was later removed from his position. Franz Rosenthal argued that in Abd al-Raziq "we meet for the first time a consistent, unequivocal theoretical assertion of the purely and exclusively religious character of Islam".
Taha Hussein, an Egyptian writer, was also an advocate for the separation of religion and politics from a viewpoint of Egyptian nationalism. Hussein believed that Egypt always had been part of Western civilization and that Egypt had its renaissance in the nineteenth century and had re-Europeanized itself. For him, the distinguishing mark of the modern world is that it has brought about a virtual separation of religion and civilization, each in its own sphere. It is therefore quite possible to take the bases of civilization from Europe without its religion, Christianity. Moreover, he believed that it is easier for Muslims than for Christians, since Islam has no priesthood, and so in his view, there was no vested interest in the control of religion over society.