In a world teeming with misconceptions, exaggerated statements, and terms whose meanings have not been clarified, and after these concepts, statements, and terms have moved beyond the realm of thought to incite and erupt into bloody violence affecting millions in many countries, it is imperative to take the initiative to define concepts, clarify statements, and elucidate the precise scientific meanings of terms. This is essential to guide thought and invite all parties from all religions, sects, and ideologies to a common word.
Here, we will strive to provide brief summaries that clarify and illuminate the precise meanings of the most important terms and statements that have caused and continue to cause intellectual confusion, leading some people into intellectual extremism and pushing others into the mire of bloody violence.
- The Term "Hakimiyyah" (Divine Sovereignty)
While we deeply believe in divine sovereignty: "The decision is only for Allah" (Al-An'am: 57), superficial and deviant thought creates a contradiction between the sovereignty of Allah and the sovereignty of humans who believe in divine sovereignty. Claiming this supposed contradiction ignores the theory of divine succession of humans to establish this earth for Allah and His sovereignty. Allah appointed David (peace be upon him) as a successor to judge among the people with truth, which is Allah's judgment: "O David, indeed We have made you a successor upon the earth, so judge between the people in truth and do not follow desire, for it will lead you astray from the way of Allah" (Sad: 26).
Human sovereignty committed to divine law is the embodiment of Allah's sovereignty. Imam Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi (994 – 1064 AD) said, "One of Allah's judgments is to delegate judgment to others."
This divine method of succession for humans applies to all fields of thought and life. All honor belongs to Allah, but the honor of the human successor derives from the honor of Allah and His Messenger (peace be upon him). Intercession belongs to Allah, but the human successor is granted intercession by Allah. All strength belongs to Allah, but a strong believer, who prepares strength to protect the truth, is more beloved to Allah than a weak believer. Wealth belongs to Allah, yet Allah has appointed humans as successors in life to invest, benefit from, and enjoy wealth and resources. Furthermore, some humans are those in authority; their obedience in righteousness is obedience to Allah and His Messenger. Thus, there is no contradiction between the sovereignty of Allah, the supremacy of His law, and the judgment of the nation, which is the source of authority.
- The Terms "Jahiliyyah" (Ignorance) and "Takfir" (Excommunication)
Extremists and deviant thinkers have created a false contradiction between divine sovereignty and human sovereignty, leading to judgments of ignorance and then to excommunication of societies that have accepted democracy as a tool of governance. They ignore that democracy, as mechanisms for managing state institutions, is the alternative to tyranny and dictatorship. Democracy, as mechanisms, translates into Islamic Shura (consultation), which is essentially participation in decision-making.
Therefore, benefiting from democratic mechanisms, despite their origins outside the Islamic world, is an inspiration of wisdom, which is the lost treasure of the believer, regardless of its proponents or the intellectual and political spaces in which it originated.
Furthermore, Islamic countries that have adopted democracy affirm in their constitutions that the principles of Islamic Sharia are the primary and main source of their legislation and laws. Thus, they are protected from any philosophical concepts contrary to Islamic Sharia that some Western democratic societies have known and still know.
With this understanding, human sovereignty has no relation to the ignorance that extremists speak of. These extremists have deviated from the linguistic and terminological meaning of "Jahiliyyah" in our Islamic civilization. In its precise meaning, Jahiliyyah is "the period between two messengers when polytheism is the axis of belief."
The presence of Jahiliyyah impurities in Islamic societies does not mean that these societies are entirely ignorant. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari, who was the most truthful of speakers under the sky: "O Abu Dhar, you are a man with ignorance in you." The presence of Jahiliyyah impurities, which reformers strive to cleanse these societies of, does not mean that these societies are entirely ignorant.
By clarifying the term Jahiliyyah, the judgment on our Islamic societies as infidel societies governed by infidel states is negated. Faith, the opposite of disbelief, is a heartfelt belief that reaches the level of certainty. The knowledge of this heartfelt belief is exclusive to Allah, who knows the secrets of the eyes and what the hearts conceal.
Disputes and differences that distinguish between factions in our Islamic societies are political and state-related. In the Sunni tradition, representing 90% of the Muslim nation, state and politics are secondary and jurisprudential issues, not doctrinal. Criteria for differences in policies and jurisprudence are "right and wrong" and "benefit and harm," not "faith and disbelief," which is reserved for differences in fundamental beliefs. Thus, pluralism in politics and jurisprudence is a divine law that does not change or alter, while there is no pluralism in fundamental beliefs.
Due to these facts, which extremists have either ignored or misunderstood, our civilization in our heritage and jurisprudence has been dominated by cautionary statements against excommunication. Imam Al-Ghazali (1058 – 1111 AD) said, "Excommunication is dangerous, and remaining silent about it is not dangerous. Errors in the fundamental issues of Imamate, its identification, conditions, and related matters (i.e., in all fields of politics) do not warrant excommunication. The tendency to excommunicate predominantly affects those inclined to ignorance. The prudent scholar should avoid excommunication as much as possible. Permitting the blood and wealth of those who pray toward the Qiblah, openly declaring 'There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah,' is an error. It is better to err by leaving a thousand disbelievers alive than to spill a drop of a Muslim's blood."
Those who have fallen into the mire of excommunication, who claim to follow Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (1263 – 1328 AD), are ignorant of his warnings against excommunication. He said, "We choose not to excommunicate anyone from the people of the Qiblah." "The people of innovation are those who innovate statements, not making them obligatory in religion, but considering them part of the essential faith, excommunicating those who disagree with them, and permitting their blood. As for the Sunnis, they do not innovate statements, nor do they excommunicate those who err in their jurisprudence, even if they oppose them, excommunicate them, or permit their blood. The Companions did not excommunicate the Khawarij, even though the Khawarij excommunicated Uthman, Ali, and their supporters and permitted the blood of Muslims who opposed them. Those who excommunicate opposing leaders are deserving of severe punishment to deter them and their likes from excommunicating Muslims."
In modern times, Imam Muhammad Abduh (1849 – 1905 AD) said, "It is well-known among Muslims and one of their religious principles that if a statement from someone has a hundred interpretations of disbelief and one interpretation of faith, it should be taken as faith, and it is not permissible to consider it disbelief."
- The Term "Caliphate"
Historically, the Caliphate in Islamic history was the political system that achieved three objectives:
- Unity of the Ummah (community). B. Integration—not unity—of the regions and provinces of the Islamic world. C. Application of Islamic Sharia in Islamic societies.
Since governance systems embody authority in societies, these systems—including the Caliphate—are civil systems, classified, developed, and changed by the Ummah to achieve the intended objectives. These systems are Islamic to the extent they achieve the purposes of Islamic Sharia. Therefore, any political system that achieves the unity of the Ummah, integration of the regions of the Islamic world, and application of Islamic Sharia is an Islamic system, even if we do not call it a Caliphate. The significance lies in the purposes and meanings, not the names and forms.
If the Islamic East had established, as the European West did, a common economic and commercial market, a customs union, joint defense, joint parliamentary institutions, a joint foreign policy secretariat, and a court for human rights, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation would have become the modern form of the historical Islamic Caliphate.
This concept was proposed in the reformist school since the second half of the 19th century. Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838 – 1897 AD), the pioneer of this school, combined the slogan "Egypt for the Egyptians" with "Islamic Unity." He wrote, along with Imam Muhammad Abduh, in "Al-Urwah al-Wuthqa" in 1884 about this concept: "From Edirne in Turkey to Peshawar in Pakistan, Islamic states have contiguous lands, united in faith, brought together by the Quran. Should they not agree to protect and advance as other nations have agreed? Agreement is one of the principles of their religion, and it will divert the floods pouring on them from all sides. I do not seek, by this statement, to have a single ruler over them all, but I hope that the Quran will be their common authority. Each ruler on his throne should strive to preserve the other as much as possible, for his survival depends on the survival of others. This, being the foundation of their religion, is a necessity dictated by current needs."
Thus, there is no contradiction between the existence of national, regional, and ethnic states and the solidarity and integration that unite them. Those who envision the Caliphate as a party that sees it as the magical solution to all problems, or as a "militia" that pledges allegiance to an unknown and wants to impose it on the nation through bloody violence, are merely playing with matters that should not be tampered with.
