The Pious Rebel: Analyzing The Impact of ‘Ali ‘Abd Al-Raziq’s Work And Legacy Arooj Alam CUNY Graduate Center, United States In Islamic political theory, one of the most discussed topics remains the relationship between Islam and the State. Though a countless number of accomplished scholars, thinkers, religious elites and leaders have contributed to this discourse, none have left as contested a legacy as ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Raziq. An Egyptian Shariah court judge and thinker, ‘Abd al-Raziq in his best-known work, Islam and the Foundations of Governance, argued against the necessity of the caliphate institution. As an alternative, he urged the Muslim community to adopt any other form of governance, which would address the needs of modern times. This sentiment immortalized him as the father of Islamic reform and liberalism. Ninety years later, ‘Abd al-Raziq’s ideas continue to polarize various thinkers including; the Revivalists, Muslim Laicists, and Modern Liberals. This paper analyzes how modern political theorists along with the Revivalists, Muslim Laicists, and Modern Liberals have received ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Raziq’s ideas since 1925 and how his legacy has contributed to Islamic political theory overall. Keywords: Islamic, Political Theory, ‘Abd al-Raziq, Caliphate. Introduction Within modern Islamic political theory, few authors have left as contested a legacy as ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Raziq. His earliest and best-known work, al-Islam-wa-usul-al-hukm (Islam and the Foundations of Governance)1 immortalized him as the father of Islamic liberalism, and as a staunch opponent against re-instituting the caliphate in modern times. Ninety years after ‘Abd alRaziq’s death, his work continues to polarize the Revivalists, Muslim Laicists, and Modern Liberals. Revivalists believe that Islam is a solution to all the problems plaguing the Muslim community. One way of implementing this solution is through a revival of the caliphate. Adherents of Laicism maintain that a state should remain detached from the influence of religious institutions. In this paper, the term Laicists, as Dr. Luay Radhan adopts it, refers to Muslims who oppose the establishment of a caliphate in modern times, but base this opposition on Islamic grounds. Modern Liberal scholars wish to move beyond unproductive debates surrounding the caliphate. They believe that ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work highlighted how Islam could be compatible with democratic systems of governance, and the needs of modern times. 1 According to Butterworth, a more appropriate translation for the title would be Islam and the roots of governance instead of; fundamentals of government, sources of political authority, bases of power, or foundations of political power. Charles E. Butterworth, “Law and the Common Good; To bring about a virtuous city or preserve the old order?”, In The Mirror for the Muslim Prince: Islam and theory of Statecraft edited by Mehrzad Boroujerd, Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2013, p.218. In this paper, I analyze how political theorists along with the Revivalists, Muslim Laicists, and Modern Liberals have received ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Raziq’s ideas since the publication of al-Islam in 1925. First, I provide a summary of his educational background, political circumstances during his times, and his core arguments. Second, I highlight two hypotheses proposed by some political theorists, which attempt to explain the inspiration for ‘Abd al-Raziq’s provocative views. Third, I discuss critiques of the Revivalists, defense against such critiques by Muslim Laicists, and efforts of Modern Liberals to appreciate ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work from a new perspective. Finally, I present the impact of ‘Abd al-Raziq’s legacy according to contemporary thinkers and explain the significance of his work in Islamic political theory. Secular exposure and importance of the Caliphate The secular education ‘Abd al-Raziq obtained, profoundly impacted his ideas on Islam, the caliphate, and the future of Muslim community. Born into an illustrious Egyptian landowning family, ‘Abd al-Raziq attended the University of Al-Azhar for religious education, as well as, the University of Cairo for secular studies. The latter, according to Mona Hassan, influenced his stance on the caliphate debate.2 Guided by an Orientalist thinker, Carlo Alfonso Nallino, ‘Abd alRaziq immersed himself in understanding the history of Islamic law and judiciary, both of which led him to the concept of the caliphate.3 Thus, ideas articulated in al-Islam had been present for over a decade and well before the abolition of the Ottoman caliphate in 1924. The caliphate mattered to Muslims both historically and immediately after its downfall, because of what it represented. For most of its history, this institution represented unity, strength, and glory for Muslims; all united under the leadership of a caliph. Despite medieval political thinkers’ compromises to provide it legitimacy, the caliphate continued to function as a beacon of hope, “within which all grievances are resolved, and all aspirations are fulfilled.” 4 However after the Turkish Grand National Assembly voted to dismantle the caliphate, the Muslim community was left debating the relevance of caliphate and reconciliation of Islamic values with secular 2 Mona Hassan. Longing for the Lost Caliphate: A Transregional History. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 2016, p.225. Though Hassan does not explicitly support ‘Abd al-Raziqs’ critics, who maintain that his ideas were the promotion of Orientalist ideology, she does believe that western thought and methodology gradually inspired ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work on the separation of powers in Islam. 3 Ibid. 4 Madawi Al-Rasheed (ed.), “Introduction: The Caliphate: Nostalgic Memory and Contemporary Visions." Demystifying the Caliphate: Historical Memory and Contemporary Contexts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015, p.2. Al-Rasheed’s introduction adequately summarizes the significance of the Caliphate institution for Muslims throughout Islamic history and in modern discourses, especially how to reconcile this concept with models of modernity, liberalism, and secularism. discourses.5 As a result of this debate, different responses arose as Madwai al Rasheed presents, “while few Muslims insisted on its [the caliphate’s] centrality…many not only rejected it but contributed to its historical downfall.”6 Not all Muslims agree on what the caliphate signifies, as proven by ‘Abd al-Raziq’s al-Islam. His work insisted that instead of mourning for the caliphate’s loss, Muslims should rejoice. The caliphate was not a religious necessity and had outlived its utility. To support this radical claim, ‘Abd al-Raziq reinterpreted the role of Prophet Muhammad, secularized the image of his immediate successors, negated scholarly and communal consensus on the caliphate, and rejected the agreement on allegiance to a Caliph. Redefining the Islamic past: Main arguments in al-Islam Drawing mainly upon Meccan verses from the Quran, ‘Abd al-Raziq painted Prophet Muhammad as a religious leader, concerned only with spiritual salvation of his community.7 The Prophet was neither a king nor a statesman. Though ‘Abd al-Raziq begrudgingly acknowledged some political elements present within Prophetic leadership, he explained them away as superficial. Prophet Muhammad’s leadership had centered on conquering hearts and ended with his departure from earth. Since the last messenger was the seal of all Prophets and an apolitical leader, his successors did not derive any legitimacy from him, either political or religious.8 All of 5 Nafi, Basheer M. “The Abolition of the Caliphate in Historical Context." Demystifying the Caliphate: Historical Memory and Contemporary Contexts, edited by Al-Rasheed, Madawi, Carool Kersten, and Marat Shterin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015, p.40. See this reading for a detailed understanding of the role of various political actors in Turkey who advocated for the abolition of both the Sultanate and the Caliphate. In the aftermath of the last Turkish Caliph Abdulmecid II, see chapter 5 “In International Pursuit of a Caliphate” in Hasan’s Longing for the Lost Caliphate. 6 Madawi Al-Rasheed (ed.), “Introduction: The Caliphate: Nostalgic Memory and Contemporary Visions.” p.5. 7 David Sagiv. Fundamentalism and Intellectuals in Egypt 1973-1993. London, Routledge, 1995, p.148. According to Sagiv, ‘Abd al-Raziq strategically used only the Meccan verses of the Quran which emphasized forgiveness and accountability of actions on resurrection day, while Medinan verses offered explicit commandments detailing conditions under which Muslims must organize themselves religiously and politically. In these verses, the role of Prophet Muhammad expands from a humble, holy man to that of a statesman, and as a visionary founder of the first Muslim community in 7th century Arabia. For a fascinating discussion on holy men in Islam see Chase F. Robinson’s “Prophecy and Holy Men in Early Islam” in James Howard-Johnston and Paul Anthony Hayward (eds), The Cult of Saints in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages: Essays on the Contribution of Peter Brown (Oxford, 1999). 8 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989, p. 5. Binder offers a useful analysis of ‘Abd al-Raziq’s arguments, including a summary the first half of his book which was a refutation of both Ibn Khaldun’s and Rashid Rida’s theories of the caliphate. Professor Muqtedar Khan also does a fine job of presenting theories of Ibn Khaldun, Al Farabi, Ibn Taymiyyah, Al Mawardi, and Rashid Rida, in “The Islamic State” in Encyclopedia of Government and Politics, Volume 2, edited by Kogan, Maurice, and Mary Hawkesworth. Taylor & Francis, 1992, pg. 268-272. this implied that neither the rightly guided caliphs, nor the intellectual elites, or even the Muslim community, ever inherited Prophetic religious authority.9 The rightly guided caliphs (Rashidun) were purely political leaders despite their religiosity. In Sunni orthodoxy, Mu’awiya ibn Sufyan was the first caliph of the Umayyad dynasty, who transformed the caliphate into kingship. However ‘Abd al-Raziq declared, that kingship began even earlier than Mu’awiya, with the first rightly guided caliph Abu Bakr; the father-in-law and dear companion of Prophet Muhammad.10 Therefore the caliphate had always been a purely political model of rule, arising out of unique circumstances and necessity. To support this single argument, ‘Abd al-Raziq pointed towards the lack of textual evidence for the necessity of caliphate within the Quran and Prophetic tradition (Hadith). Additionally, if the caliphate had been Prophet Muhammad's religious legacy, ‘Abd al-Raziq argued, then the Prophet indeed would have appointed a successor. Moreover, each of the rightly guided caliphs was opposed by “some faction or segment of the Muslims,” which demonstrated, they did not inherit religious legitimacy.11 Through his inquiry, ‘Abd al-Raziq obliterated the concept of rightly guided caliphs, enshrined in Sunni orthodoxy as ideal leaders of the early Islamic community. ‘Abd al-Raziq thus far had argued that the first four caliphs were only political leaders and that their model of a caliphate did not necessitate imitation by future generations. His next step was to disprove that caliphs could derive religious legitimacy from the Muslim community (Ummah). ‘Abd al-Raziq, in Binder’s view, “exaggerates” the extent to which medieval Sunni jurists disagreed over the definition of the caliphate.12 ‘Abd al-Raziq asserted that communal census was a minority opinion and a later development within early Islamic political theory. The caliphate was such a human-made concept that even authentic prophetic sayings did not render it 9 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p. 132. If accepted, such a conclusion would shake and obliterate the foundation of Sunni orthodoxy which maintains that after the death of Prophet Muhammad, the community vis-a-vie the intellectual elites (Ulama) inherited the legal and religious authority to guide as well as encourage moral righteous, while forbidding wrong deeds amongst believers. Thus it is understandable why ‘Abd al-Raziq’s claim (among many others) would have deeply offended the conservative scholars of Al-Azhar. 10 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p.142. It is not clear if ‘Abd al-Raziq was familiar with certain works of Orientalist thinkers who held deeply skeptical views towards mainstream Islamic history such as; Patricia Crone and Wilfred Madelung. In her book God’s Caliph: Religious authority in the first centuries of Islam, Crone challenged the traditional view that elements of kingship in Islamic caliphate begun with the 5th caliph Mu’awiya. Instead, she advocated that religious authority and kinship both were initially part of the caliphate in and only after the advent of Mu’awiya, and succession conflicts among the community, did the educated elites separate religious authority from politics and assumed the former for themselves. For another skeptical revisionist account of Islamic history and origins of the caliphate see; Wilfred Madelung, The Succession to Muhammad: A Study of the Early Caliphate. Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1997. 11 12 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p.139. Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p. 135. To support his argument ‘Abd al-Raziq argued that medieval jurists in Islamic legal history have been unable to agree on the necessity of the caliphate and the few jurists who voiced disagreements were a minority. However, in the same section, Binder includes analyses of other jurists who clarified that Muslims agreed over the essential nature of establishing a Caliphate which would emulate and follow in the footsteps of the Rightly-guided caliphs. a necessity. Additionally, he challenged the concept of allegiance (bay’a) to a caliph and argued that Muslim support for a leader (Imam), usually arose from duress.13Muslims had lived in constant fear of retaliation from their caliphs, while love for power always motivated these men; the only exception to this fact were the first three rightly guided caliphs. Through this logic, ‘Abd al-Raziq showed, “if the community (Ummah) is not political and consensus (ijma) developed later, then caliphate is a purely political regime,” and could be criticized, abolished, and prevented from resurrection.14 After disproving orthodox claims for the caliphate, ‘Abd al-Raziq presented his solution in the absence of this institution. Since Islam is only concerned with the spiritual elevation of its believers and is indifferent to their political orientations, Muslim could choose any form of government which can be effective and empowering. However, Leonard Binder does not fully accept this proposal by stating how ‘Abd al-Raziq, “is at pains to deny that Islam seeks to unify the whole world in a single Islamic State.”15 ‘Abd al-Raziq reasoned that God made distinctions between humans and it was only natural to have different models of governance. This claim was both a rejection of pan-Arabism and pan-Islamism, as Mustafa Kemal applied in practice, by creating a modern Turkish republic.16 In summary, for ‘Abd al-Raziq the caliphate should not be revived because, it was a barrier to novel forms of organizations which could arise, through collective independent reasoning (ijtihad) of Muslims. Immediate reactions and the Caliphate debate hypothesis As History shows, ‘Abd al-Raziq’s views caused great offense to his peers. The Council of religious scholars at Al-Azhar, attacked his work using seven charges and revoked his judgeship license17. One wonders, to what extent was his work the result of political circumstances in the Muslim world during the 1920’s? Certain political theorists propose ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work was a political statement against King Fouad of Egypt and his religious supporters. Immediately after the fall of Ottoman caliphate, Muslim leaders around the world started competing for the caliphal 13 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p.138. 14 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p. 135. 15 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p. 142. In Arabic, the term to describe Islam as both a religion and a state is (Din wa Dawla). Conservative thinkers such as Pakistani scholar Mawlana Mawdudi supported this notion and laid the ideological foundation for an “ideal” Islamic state which observed and maintained God’s law on Earth since Islam was an all-encompassing way of life. Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi. “Chapter 6- First Principles of the Islamic State.” in The Islamic Law and Constitution. Second Edition. Edited by Khurshid Ahmed. Lahore: Islamic Publication, 1955, p. 216-270. 16 17 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p. 143. Charles E. Butterworth, “Law and the Common Good; To bring about a virtuous city or preserve the old order?” Though Butterworth is sympathetic to the consequences ‘Abd al-Raziq faced, “he has not been accorded the simple privilege of expressing his own opinion with impunity” (p.239), he is adamant that “Abd al-Raziq should have been more precise in his solutions and narrowed the scope of his work. “Had he simply started from the major event of his day, the abolition of the Caliphate and spoken to the modernizing reforms he wished to introduce, he would most likely have achieved his goal and would have found supporters as well as allies rather than detractors and enemies.” (p. 238) title. One hopeful was King Fouad, who would have gained considerable power if appointed caliph. The religious elites of Al-Azhar would also have received greater prestige if Egypt became the new seat of the caliphate. These were two things ‘Abd al-Raziq wished to prevent through his radical work, according to supporters of the first hypothesis. Binder mentions, ‘Abd al-Raziq wished to inform the King, that the caliphate was unworthy of Islam.18 Israeli scholar David Sagiv additionally states, ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work may appear to be an objective analysis; however it masked a political agenda to prevent the appointment of a Caliph.19 His solution in the absence of the caliphate was to elect any form of government, aside from the caliphate, given “the intellectual, social, and economic conditions in which we are found in.”20Overall, ‘Abd alRaziq wished to reformulate the caliphate debate taking place in Egypt by, adopting a political stance against the King and his supporters. Enduring legacy of Muhammad Abduh To what extent was ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work a product of secular-western education and influence of other Islamic liberal thinkers? To answer this, a few thinkers propose the second hypothesis; the foundation of secular education, the influence of Orientalist methods, and works of Muhammad Abduh, all played a significant role in the formation of ‘Abd al-Raziq’s political thoughts. As stated previously, ‘Abd al-Raziq was guided by Professor Nallino to trace the history of Islamic judiciary. By applying western historical criticism method ‘Abd al-Raziq was able to highlight gaps present within medieval Islamic political theory, often overlooked by religiously invested thinkers. In this context, his proposal to move beyond the caliphate model appears less shocking. As Hassan accurately mentions, “He positioned himself as a European 18 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p. 132. To claim that King Fouad or a particular person is unfit to assume the position of a Caliph is one thing. However to go as far as to deny the essential nature and significance of this institution is quite another. To his critiques, this exaggeration of his arguments gave the impression that ‘Abd al-Raziq had gone too far. The only logical explanation was that he [‘Abd al-Raziq] was either a pawn for the imperialists or genuinely inspired by their ideology, thus no longer “Muslim” or conservative enough for their tastes. 19 David Sagiv. Fundamentalism and Intellectuals in Egypt 1973-1993, p. 115. Sagiv like other political thinkers leans towards the political circumstances hypothesis to explain ‘Abd al-Raziq’s motivation for expounding such an unusual argument. Though it is possible that ‘Abd al-Raziq was concerned about King Fouad’s consolidation of further power, this alone cannot be accepted as his sole motivation. If ‘Abd al-Raziq wished to replace the King with someone who displayed qualities of a “good” leader, then he would have delineated characteristics of ideal Caliphs such as Umar I and Umar II. However to state, the entire institution was an anomaly seems to me, that ‘Abd alRaziq wished to break ties with this aspect of the Islamic past because he desired the Muslim community to reconsider their collective future seriously. He wanted leaders and thinkers to arrive at a new form of government which may be different from the Caliphate but still preserved the essence of justice, representation, commanding right, forbidding the wrong, along with elements of modernity. 20 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p. 131. The entire quote reads as; “The main part of the book, for which I have been condemned, is that Islam did not determine a specific regime, nor did it impose on the Muslims a particular system according to the requirements of which they must be governed; rather it has allowed us absolute freedom to organize the state in accordance with the intellectual, social, and economic conditions in which we are found, taking into consideration our social development and the requirements of the times." inspired enlightened intellectual above and beyond the discursive tradition of Muslim jurists.”21 ‘Abd al-Raziq’s attempted to objectively and logically investigate whether the caliphate still retained its relevance after Turkish Muslims had parted ways with it. Muhammad Abduh, “the most forceful advocate of Islamic liberalism in modern times," also inspired ‘Abd al-Raziq’s opinion on the caliphate.22 Abduh greatly disliked the monopoly of clerics over religion but had not assigned the institution of the caliphate to be irrelevant. Abduh preached for a revival of Islam in general, not specifically of a political system such as the caliphate.23 However, ‘Abd al-Raziq marched beyond Abduh’s thoughts and declared the entire institution as unnecessary. According to Professor Orit Bakshin, this was the genius behind ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work; his ability to rethink the political power of leaders by reinterpreting the Islamic past.24 Despite his unique solutions to the caliphate dilemma, ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work received fierce criticism. For his critics, the idea that Muslims had been wrong about the caliphate, all these centuries was unfathomable. Though Revivalists did not label ‘Abd al-Raziq as a nonbeliever, they firmly believed that he had left the realm of acceptable disagreement. Revivalist critiques and Rashid Rida’s alternative Revivalists propose a strict adherence to Sunni orthodox tradition. They reject debates on faith and view the caliphate as an essential symbol of Muslim communal memory.25What defines the Revivalists more than their views on caliphate, is their vehement rejection of Islamic liberalism. Islamic liberalism could never serve as an authentic alternative to Islam, since “it is a form of false consciousness and an abject submission of secular western capitalism," as held by the 21Mona Hassan. Longing for the Lost Caliphate, p.225. We can meet ‘Abd al-Raziq’s critics halfway and acknowledge that thanks to his secular education, and guidance of his mentor Professor Nallino, he was inspired to approach the future of the Caliphate in an objective and scholarly manner. But to his religiously invested counterparts, his arguments and approach appeared cold, detached, unemotional, and unlike his predecessors. 22 Souad Ali, A Religion, Not a State: Ali ʻAbd Al-Raziq's Islamic Justification of Political Secularism. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press, 2009, p. 57. For an insightful discussion on Muhammad Abduh’s ideology, his inspiration from Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, and the rivalry between ‘Abd al Raziq and Rashid Rida consult Peter Mandeville’s “Chapter 2-History and Key Concepts; Islamic Reform.” and “Chapter 3-State formation and the making of Islamism.” in Islam and Politics. Second edition. Routledge: New York, 2014, p. 58-69. 23 Souad Ali, A Religion, Not a State: AliʻAbd Al-Raziq's Islamic Justification of Political Secularism. p. 80. In “Chapter 8- The implications of ‘Abd al-Raziq’s study for the debate over Islam and Politics." Professor Ali visits Abduh’s arguments; “He [Abduh] faulted the jurists for not understanding politics and for depending on the rulers, thus failing to hold them (the rulers) accountable for their policies in government…the rulers were responsible for corrupting the jurists and using them to promote their benefits and agenda by making them produce fatwas (religious pronunciations) to vindicate the policies of their corrupt governments” (p.128). 24 Orit Bakshin, “Ali Abd Al-Raziq” The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought edited by Bowering, Gerhard, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt 1r2g6m. Professor Bakshin further states, “unlike Islamists today, or even the Wahhabis during his time, ‘Abd al-Raziq was extremely cautious in calling another Muslim murtadd, or apostate. His writings marked a clear separation between state and religion, which was reflected not only in his call for democratic regimes in the future but also in his interpretation of the Islamic past” (p.7). 25 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies, p.5. Revivalists.26 For these thinkers, ‘Abd al-Raziq was a stereotypical liberal, who made provocative claims against the caliphate, to promote western and secular ideology. From the Revivalists’ perspective, ‘Abd al-Raziq’s arguments were a distortion of a reality Muslims had agreed upon for several centuries. Muhammad Rashid Rida was one such Revivalist who forcefully rejected ‘Abd al-Raziq’s bold claims.27 A Syrian scholar, Rida was a student of Muhammad Abduh’s. Inspired heavily by Abduh’s ideas, Rida advocated a return to “true” Islam, from which Muslim countries and its leaders had deviated.28 Though Rida initially supported the Ottoman caliphate as a caliphate of necessity, he hoped for an ideal system to emerge eventually. Through a synthesis of Islam and western models, he aspired for Muslims to overcome the hegemony of the West. As Kerr elaborates, through this proposal, Rida desired to show that, “one’s principle were no less advanced than those of Europe as well as no less Islamic.” 29Kerr remains unconvinced by both Abduh's and Rida's theories on the Caliphate. He especially mentions that Rida's theory expounded in his work was only a thought experiment and could not have been applicable in reality. Surprisingly, Rida’s work on Caliphate shared some similarities with his object of criticism, ‘Abd al-Raziq. Both thinkers described the caliph as someone devoid of religious or spiritual power.30 Despite this similarity, Rida’s ideological differences led him to describe ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work as a “reprehensible innovation," and an attack on Muslim devotion.31 ‘Abd alRaziq was mistaken to propagate that the caliphate deserved abolition. Rashid Rida’s rebuttal to this claim was a revived caliphate which would fortify the Muslim community and successfully recapture their lost glory. Laicists’ defense and the threat of an Islamic State 26 Ibid. 27 Luay. Muslims against the Islamic State: Arab Critics and Supporters of Ali Abdarraziq's Islamic Laicism. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Academic Research, 2014, p. 254. For an intriguing argument regarding Rashid Rida's support for Arab nationalism, see; Mahmoud Haddad, “Arab Religious Nationalism in the Colonial Era: Rereading Rashid Rida’s ideas on the Caliphate”, Journal of American Oriental Society, Vol. 117, No. 2, (Apr.- Jun.,1997), pp. 253-277. 28 Souad Ali, A Religion, Not a State: AliʻAbd Al-Raziq's Islamic Justification of Political Secularism, p. 59. Professor Ali explains that “his [Rida’s] criticisms found expression in a lengthy treatise on the caliphate khilafatwa-imamte-al-uzma (The Caliphate and the Supreme Imamate) published when it had become clear that the caliph [Abdulmecid II] had become a mere figurehead without real power. The caliphate could be established in two stages: through the establishment of a “caliphate of necessity,” to unify the efforts of Muslim countries against foreign dangers, and then through the restoration of a genuine caliphate possessing qualifications for ijtihād (independent reasoning) when the time was ripe” (p.60). 29 Malcolm Kerr, Islamic Reform: The Political and Legal Theories of Muḥammad ʻAbduh and Rashīd Riḍā. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966, p.14. 30 Malcolm Kerr, Islamic Reform: The Political and Legal Theories of Muḥammad ʻabduh and Rashīd Riḍā, p. 154. 31 Mona Hassan. Longing for the Lost Caliphate, p.220. For Muslim Laicists, on the other hand, the notion of a caliphate could be rejected within the Islamic tradition, as proven by ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work. According to Laicism, states and political institutions should remain areligious and secular.32 Even though Muslim Laicists reject the concept of an Islamic State using religious reasons, they do not exclude the importance of Islam altogether. They believe that Islam and Sharia (religious law) will continue to guide Muslim communal life; however, the state should neither enforce Islam in general nor the Sharia specifically. Instead, a state should represent all cultures and groups regardless of their religious or lack of religious beliefs. 33 According to Muslim Laicists, ‘Abd al-Raziq supported this exact view, by denying the Egyptian government the right to re-constitute a caliphate. Through his work ‘Abd al-Raziq also emphasized liberty and protection of individuals against political elites, an attempt greatly appreciated by Sudanese Professor Abdullahi Ahmed al-Na’im. 34 To explore the opinions of other prominent but predominantly Arab and Egyptian thinkers, consult; "Chapter 4- Supporters of 'Abdarraziq's Islamic Laicism," pp. 179-313, in Dr. Radhan's book mentioned above. The most significant threat to Islam and the Muslim community is from an Islamic State; a claim Professor al-Na’im expounds in his work. He is a self-proclaimed Muslim Laicist who holds that “I need a secular state because Sharia cannot be coerced by the fear of the state.”35 In Professor al-Na’im’s opinion, Muslims can be both liberal and religious, using an Islamic framework as evidenced by ‘Abd al-Raziq’s masterpiece al-Islam. However several changes within the Islamic framework and the Sharia especially need to occur. As al-Na’im expresses, “if the Sharia shapes legislation then this implies the presence of some coercive authority," something ‘Abd al-Raziq greatly wished to prevent.36 Professor al-Na’im points towards the 32 Luay Radhan, Muslims against the Islamic State: Arab Critics and Supporters of Ali Abdarraziq's Islamic Laicism, p.4. Dr. Radhan includes this excerpt of an interview given by the prominent Egyptian thinker Nasr Abu Zayd in 2008 where he asserted, “we should, in the Arab and Muslim world, make this kind of distinction between the state as the apparatus, or the machine through which the society is organized, and the society…I cannot think that the religion of Egypt is Islam because the religions of the Egyptians are Islam, Christianity, and we still have a Jewish community in Egypt. So who claims that the state, which should represent all the citizens, should harbor only one religion to say “this is my religion or our religion?” This is what I mean by the separation between the state and religion. The state should not identify itself with any specific religion.” 33 Ibid. 34 Luay Radhan, Muslims against the Islamic State: Arab Critics and Supporters of Ali Abdarraziq's Islamic Laicism, p. 14. 35 Luay Radhan Muslims against the Islamic State: Arab Critics and Supporters of Ali Abdarraziq's Islamic Laicism, p. 261. To understand the full extent of Dr. al-Na'im's work read; "Towards an Islamic Reformation: Civil Liberties, Human Rights, and International Law," Syracuse, NY: Syracuse Univesity Press, 1990. And also find; Abdullahi alNa'im, "Sharia in the Secular State: A Paradox of Separation and Conflation." The Law Applied: Contextualizing the Islamic Sharia, edited by Peri Bearman, Wolfhart Heinrichs, and Bernard G. Weiss, New York: NY: I.B. Taurus & Co Ltd, 2008, p. 321. 36 Christian Donath, “Ali Abd Al-Raziq and the Politics of Secularism: Breaking the Islamist-Liberal Impasse." Beyond the Arab Spring in North Africa, edited by Daniel Křížek, and Jan Záhořík, Lanham, Maryland; Lexington Books, 2017, p. 163. Donath contributes a fresh perspective to the debate surrounding 'Abd al-Raziq's work by highlighting the ideas of Modern Liberals as discussed later in this article. absence of a single authoritative text on the concept of a caliphate, a fact ‘Abd al-Raziq also highlighted. Additionally, though Islam has political components, it should not be a reason to establish an Islamic State. The state has always been territorial, maintained a monopoly on violence, and recruited political elites to further its aims, in al-Na’im’s view. 37 Thus an Islamic State cannot be Islamic in essence, as Muslims disagree on how to interpret texts, and past consensus of ancestors is not indefinitely incumbent upon future believers. Making peace with the past: Modern Liberals’ solution Modern liberal thinkers believe that ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work has been misrepresented as promoting Laicism, though he simply wished to reconsider the significance of caliphate in modern times. Therefore, Modern Liberals reject rigid ideological categorization of their own and ‘Abd alRaziq’s views. Thinkers within this group contend, ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work does not fit neatly into the Laicism camp because he echoes some Revivalist concerns along with modern elements. His work was an examination of the relationship between state and religion, rather than complete secularization of the state. ‘Abd al-Raziq did not divide the Muslim community but made them aware of the necessity of this debate; something modern liberals also wish to do by offering “a mediating synthesis” between Revivalists and Muslim Laicists.38 For Modern Liberals, the question of whether Islam is a religion and a state is incorrectly formulated and leads to a denial of historical facts.39 Instead, Muslims should discuss whether Islam can accommodate a system compatible with modernity and modern needs. Professor Christian Donath is one Modern Liberal who encourages this perspective. Donath puts forth the possibility that ‘Abd al-Raziq was neither a Muslim Laicist nor opposed to Revivalist claims. The importance ‘Abd al-Raziq assigned to Sharia, places him closer to his Revivalist critics, then the latter would like to admit. As proven by ‘Abd al-Raziq’s admission, “Islam does not impose upon Muslims a particular type of government…but allows us to choose the form that can facilitate the application of the Sharia.” 40 Therefore it would be gravely incorrect to label his work an advocation for liberalism, secularism, or laicism, in Donath’s theory. Instead ‘Abd al-Raziq was a staunch defender of retaining the Sharia as a link between political and religious realms, “a point often ignored by his critics and supporters alike," Donath remarks.41 To summarize, ‘Abd al-Raziq merely pushed Muslim intellectuals and 37 Luay Radhan, Muslims against the Islamic State: Arab Critics and Supporters of Ali Abdarraziq's Islamic Laicism, p. 276. 38 Fahmi Jedaane, “Notions of the State in contemporary Arab-Islamic writings." The Arab State, edited by Giacomo Luciani, New York: Routledge, 1990, p.274. Dr. Jedaane also includes ideas of other modern Arab thinkers who either partially agree or disagree entirely with ‘Abd al-Raziq's work. 39 Fahmi Jedaane, “Notions of the State in contemporary Arab-Islamic writings.” p. 276. 40 Christian Donath, “Ali Abd Al-Raziq and the Politics of Secularism: Breaking the Islamist-Liberal Impasse.” p. 171. 41 Christian Donath, “Ali Abd Al-Raziq and the Politics of Secularism: Breaking the Islamist-Liberal Impasse.” p. 172. community to go beyond futile discussions on the caliphate, and support stronger models of governance which would lead to tangible changes. Impact of ‘Abd al-Raziq’s legacy Both Modern Liberals and Muslim Laicists agree, ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Raziq was the first of his kind to change the way Muslims thought about religion and state. His work not only posed an intellectual challenge to political, religious, and Revivalist thinkers but also offered an alternate solution; to exchange the institution of caliphate for any system of governance, such as a parliamentarian or a representative democracy. Modern political theorists also describe ‘Abd alRaziq as a brave, courageous, and revolutionary thinker. They use dramatic metaphors to capture the extent of his efforts; ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work sparked a debate, set in motion a ticking time bomb, and caused an uproar. David Sagiv precisely summarizes the impact of ‘Abd al-Raziq’s thoughts today, “All liberal intellectuals in Egypt explicitly reject the concept of the caliphate," and exclusively rely upon his work to support their arguments.42 Leonard Binder hails ‘Abd alRaziq’s work as far more authoritative than a simple synthesis of Islam and liberalism. 43 To restate, ‘Abd al-Raziq’s work offered an invaluable contribution to contemporary Islamic discourses; he re-drew the boundaries of power for political elites and empowered the Muslim community to embark on radical independent reasoning, for the advancement of the Muslim world. Conclusion ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Raziq’s contribution to modern Islamic political thought has been instrumental. He courageously analyzed Islamic past and encouraged the possibility of a collective future where any system of government could emerge. He identified the immediate threat to the Muslim community, not from imperialists, but from westernized political leaders who desperately craved religious legitimacy. Though ‘Abd al-Raziq’s arguments are not meant to be accepted in its entirety, especially the role of Prophet Muhammad, Muslims cannot ignore that the caliphate had outlived its utility. His ideas provided Muslim intellectuals and masses with much-needed encouragement to re-examine the relationship between state and religion, leaders and citizens, and Islam and modernity. His work is a testament that all Muslims do not unequivocally agree on re-establishment of the caliphate or creation of an Islamic State. A lot remains to be discussed within Islamic political theory, thanks to ‘Abd al-Raziq’s unwavering commitment to his opinions, best captured in this quote; “I do not revoke it (my stance). I have never revoked it.” 44 42 David Sagiv. Fundamentalism and Intellectuals in Egypt 1973-1993, p. 124. 43 Mark Wegner, Islamic Government: The Medieval Sunnī Islamic Theory of the Caliphate and the debate over the revival of the Caliphate in Egypt, 1924–1926, 2001, University of Chicago, Ph.D. Dissertation.Proquest, protesthttps://search.proquest.com/docview/304737827/, p.58. 44Luay Radhan, Muslims against the Islamic State: Arab Critics and Supporters of Ali Abdarraziq's Islamic Laicism, p. 184. Dr. Radhan presents; “a few months before his death, ʿAbd al-Rāziq told Maḥmūd Amīn al-ʿlim: ‘I do not revoke it (my stance), I have never revoked it. Yet I am not ready to get in trouble again because of this. I cannot do this anymore; I have had enough’.” References Ali, Souad T. A Religion, Not a State: AliʻAbd Al-Raziq's Islamic Justification of Political Secularism. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press, 2009, 55-138. Binder, Leonard. Islamic Liberalism: A Critique of Development Ideologies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989, 5-169. Bakshin, Orit. “Ali Abd Al-Raziq” The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought edited by Bowering, Gerhard, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1r2g6m. Donath, Christian. “Ali Abd Al-Raziq and the Politics of Secularism: Breaking the IslamistLiberal Impasse." Beyond the Arab Spring in North Africa, edited by Daniel Křížek, and Jan Záhořík, Lanham, Maryland; Lexington Books, 2017, 161-176. Hassan, Mona. Longing for the Lost Caliphate: A Transregional History. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 2016, 218-252. “Introduction: The Caliphate: Nostalgic Memory and Contemporary Visions.” Demystifying the Caliphate: Historical Memory and Contemporary Contexts, edited by Al-Rasheed, Madawi, Carool Kersten, and Marat Shterin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015, 2-30. Kerr, Malcolm H. Islamic Reform: The Political and Legal Theories of Muḥammad ʻabduh and Rashīd Riḍā. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966, 15-221. Jedaane, Fahmi, “Notions of the State in contemporary Arab-Islamic writings." The Arab State, edited by Giacomo Luciani, New York: Routledge, 1990, 247-283. Nafi, Basheer M. “The Abolition of the Caliphate in Historical Context." Demystifying the Caliphate: Historical Memory and Contemporary Contexts, edited by Al-Rasheed, Madawi, Carool Kersten, and Marat Shterin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015, 31-56. Radhan, Luay. Muslims against the Islamic State: Arab Critics and Supporters of Ali Abdarraziq's Islamic Laicism. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Academic Research, 2014, 4-285. Sagiv, David. Fundamentalism and Intellectuals in Egypt 1973-1993. London, Routledge, 1995, 110-149. Wegner, Mark. Islamic Government: The Medieval Sunnī Islamic Theory of the Caliphate and the debate over the revival of the Caliphate in Egypt, 1924–1926, 2001, University of Chicago, Ph.D. Dissertation. Proquest, protesthttps://search.proquest.com/docview/304737827/