Muslim Social Philosophy
Dr.
M. Basharat Ali
In European languages, particularly in German, there are
sumptuous works on Muslim political thought. In English two books on the
Political Thought of the Muslims are available—one by Haroon Khan Sherwani and
a new one published by
Erwin I. J. Rosenthal but nothing is to be found in them
about the social philosophy and sociological contribution of the Muslims.
Islamic Social philosophy and the existential base of the Muslim sociological
thought contain unity of outlook through the common belief in God and His
Prophet (ﷺ) who had received a revelation in the form of the Holy Qur’an, which
is the first and the last source book of all sociological and sociologistic
thought. Islam is a way of life which comprises diverse elements all bound
together into one composite-whole. The exemplary life of the Prophet, his
Sunnah, combined with the Qur’an, served as sources of the development of
sociology and the social Philosophy among the Muslims.
The social philosophy and the sociological thought of the
Muslims offer a classic example of the power of Islam to develop a social
system and a theory of its own and to relate to these systems, theories and ideas
in multi variant forms to meet the specific requirements of the space-time
dimensions.
The Western scholars failed to appreciate the splendid
socio-cultural role played by the Muslim philosophers. In a very special way
they are the best qualified exponents of synthesis between various thoughts.
Their social philosophy represents the encounter of the foreign element with
that of the Qur’an, the sure foundation of all the Muslim thought. And again,
their philosophy is an integral part of their general philosophy, largely
conditioned by the Qur’an and the Sharia. In the formulation of their social
thought, they were certainly in need of critical study of the past systems of
thought, but they never adopted anything without a critical analysis. They were
Muslim philosophers first and last and one has to measure their ideas and
values by the impact they have made on the general run of human culture.
In the development of social philosophy and sociological
thought, theologians and jurists are to be included in the periphery of
philosophers. The critical study of the thought patterns of these scholars will
give an idea how misleading are the generalizations of the Western scholars in
their assumption that the antecedents of Islamic Philosophy are the combination
of ideas stemming from Greek and Hellenistic philosophy. The Qur’an has
categorically repudiated the Greecian and all those thoughts prevalent prior to
the advent of Islam in Suras Rum, Luqman and Bani-Israel etc., because all
these thoughts were either ideational or sensate and hence they were contrary
to the idealistic thoughts propounded by the Qur’an. As to the Jewish and Christian
thoughts, they were equally not in conformity with the Qur’anic thought
pattern, because of their dichotomous ideational nature. Social philosophy of
the Muslims is only a branch of their general philosophy; its great importance
is due to the religio-social, unitary character of Islam. Such unitary character
in all dimensions of the Muslims socio-cultural order, systems of knowledge, thought,
patterns, metaphysics and eschatology is due to the Qur’anic teachings which
recurringly say that there is no two or three gods (16:51, 4:171) but there is
One and only One God (2:163, 1/2).
The social philosophical thought may be divided into two categories,
united into one whole by their axiological existential base—the principle of
Tawheed.
1. Theological juristic by way of the political, historical
and the scientific realistic. historical and the 2. Scientific realistic.
Whatever may be their nature, the unique feature, as I have
pointed out above, is that the Muslims were always guided in their thinking and
investigations by the Qur’an and the Sunnah. There was no wide ranged disparity
between philosophy and the other sections of thought. As Muslims, they accepted
the masses as their equals in faith and they shared with them all aspects of
socio-cultural and religious life. The authoritative character of the Qur’an and the Sunnah as the ideal base of the ideal
society is an axiom with all the social philosophers and sociologists of Islam.
The social philosophy, owing to the unitary character of Islam, knows no
distinction between a spiritual and a temporal realm nor between religious and
secular activities in the society. Both realms form a unit under the
all-embracing authority of Qur’an and the Sharia. The main objective of the society
is the implementation of the Qur’an — the Eternal Law—by safeguarding the
welfare of the members of the society in this world and the world to come.
The social philosophy in Islam initially starts with the
quest for happiness. The Arabic all dimensional term is SA’A’DA (سعادہ) Ibn Miskawaih, in his book
Tahdhib-al-Akklaq, defines ‘happiness’ as practical and theoretical perfection
of a person. Both are interdependent. The latter is attained through knowledge
of the existing things, the former through ethical perfection. Political
Government is necessary while achieving all dimensional perfection. Moral education,
he stresses, should lead to obedience to God as our final welfare. I am
persuaded to what Fakhr-al-Razzi (d. 1209) has rightly formulated the philosophical
thought, when he states that only prophetic revealed law enables man to live in
society. Without political and social organization, he rightly opines, man
cannot achieve his destiny.
Rosenthal, without analyzing the depth and level meanings
involved in the above thought patterns and above all, without understanding the
idealistic cultural mentality and the integrated whole-view of life of the
Muslims has merely on the scene of superficial similarity compared the above
view with those of Thomas Aquinas, Maimoni des Jews and Christians: whereas the
views expressed by them all are not only ideational but also contradictory. The
central problems of Muslim social philosophy are faith and reason, law and
order. The Western scholars, without penetrating into the pages of the Qur’an and
the critical study of the Muslim thinkers like Farabi, felt a contrast between
revelation and reason. Such a question was out of place for the Muslims,
because the Qur’an has reiteratedly emphasized that blind faith is not
acceptable.
Reason has not properly been understood by the scholars of
the West. One of the ingredients of reason is the supra/super and hyper-rationality.
One of them is intuition, a fact recognized by the modern humanistic sciences.
From this enunciation it is clear that human reason is of course limited and
hence man is bound by nature to follow the Divine Guidance (l6:1-21, 51-60).
The Muslim social philosophy as an integral part of the
general philosophy was conditioned by revelation which prescribed its scope and
content and imposed limits on it. If the religious philosophers insisted on
revelation, it does not mean that contrary to the teachings of the Qur’an they
precluded reason. Revelation, no doubt, is an absolute truth, but this again
does not mean that one is not free to test it by reason. All the religious
philosophers are unanimous that reason can also arrive at the same truth, as
exposed by revelation. Imam Ghazzali is of this view and only two centuries ago
Shah Waliullah expressed the same views in his Tafhimat. He categorically
asserted that in the modern age reason, intuition and the Qur’an and Sunnah go hand in hand. Rosenthal all
through his analysis of the problem of faith and reason, has unwarrantedly
compared the Muslim thought with the Jewish, Christian and Hellenistic thought
which is diametrically opposed to the idealistic thought-pattern of the Muslims.
Not only that he has misrepresented the Muslim thoughts deliberately. There is
no contrast between faith and reason in Islam whereas this is the
characteristic feature of the Christian theology and philosophy. And again, in
the Islamic social thought, the assumed dualism of theology and philosophy is
not to be found. Philosophy in Islam is the best means for explaining by
demonstrative argument what it is within man’s rational faculty to grasp.
The axiological part of the Muslim social philosophy is
most important. All meanings and values are derived from the Names and
Attributes of God, which are conglomerated into one all-embracing category, the
principle of Tawheed. This forms the base of the assessment and evaluation of
the dimension of the society and this forms the existential basis of the
society, personality and culture in Islam.
To achieve a larger and larger unity, an expanding force is
needed which whould be capable of binding people and nations together. The
principle of Tawheed, the Qur’an and the
Prophet-hood are the constituent elements of such a cohesion.
The Muslim legal philosophy and the sociology of law are the
most important part of their social philosophy. The reference of the Qur’an and the Sunnah as the sources of the law in
synchronicity forms the axiological base of the Muslim social philosophy. The
entire society, the Jamaat and its various sectors, are equally important for
the sociology and the social philosophy of Islam, because they are the residual
force to them. From the point of view of the sociology of law they have evolved
from the Sharia i.e. the way of life or culture, leading to Allah:
“And your God is one God; there is no God but He! He is the
Beneficent, the Merciful” (2:163).
Fiqh is not only the source of our legal theory and practice,
but it is equally important medium for the study of the society’s dimensions,
with its causally related problems of legal and political institutions, leadership,
control and socio-cultural relationships between individuals and individuals,
groups and groups and institutions and institutions. These interpretations,
comments Rosenthal, were collected and codified in the Fiqh—books of four
legalistic schools, recognized as orthodox and named after their founders Hanfi,
Maliki, Shafii, and Hanbali. From books in Fiqh can be learnt the
constitutional law of Islam, as well as from special treatises emanating from
the four schools and devoted to the theory and practice of the Caliphate.
The term Sharia, constantly used in Islamic Literature is,
in its modern phraseology, equivalent to the systems of social order and
culture. The only difference between Sharia and the modern concept of social
system and culture is that Sharia, in its depth and levels, comprises systems
of meanings and values also.
Not only law but the entire system of society and culture,
like Sunnah, arose out of the Qur’an Hadith also represents the authoritative
interpretation of Sunnah based in the Qur’an. The most conspicuous feature of
the Muslim social philosophy is that it declared Sharia to be the Ultimate norm
and the only common socio-cultural standard to be applied to a life lived under
widely different circumstances of space-time causality and material cultural
dimensions. It was the task of the Muslim jurists, philosophers and
sociologists to integrate the political, social, economic and cultural life of
their age into the normative standard of the Sharia. In playing this socio-cultural
role the Muslims sociologists and social philosophers were guided by the Qur’anic
sociological law propounded in the Sura Al-Asr and the verse 3:6. By the first
they are guided to understand the space-time causal relativity with the human
life and the resultant spirit of the age. These forces, in majority of cases, disintegrate
the human socio-cultural life through changes in the value-orientation pattern
or meaning system. The dislocation from the existential axiological base is the
potential source of danger for the personality, society and culture, and hence
the scholars had persuaded to play their role, by incessantly interpreting the
systems of meanings and values in the light of the changing circumstances of life.
They are not to be made sub-serviant to the spirit of the age, but rather the
spirit and the space-time forces are to be made conformable to the existential,
axiological base of the society. The Qur’an explains:
“He it is Who has revealed the Book to thee; some of its
verses are decisive—they are the basis of the Book—and others are allegorical. Then
those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part of it which is allegorical,
seeking to mislead, and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. And none
knows its interpretation save Allah and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They
say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord. And none mind except men of
understanding” (3:7).
They had not only to watch over, writes Rosenthal, the
unimpaired authority to the Sharia, they had also to bring constitutional (and
socio-cultural) theory into line with political (socio-cultural) Reality. Reconciliation
is to be achieved incessantly between space-time and the existential meaning
systems. This is the basic tenet of the Muslim social philosophy.
The problems of sovereignty treated by the Jurists are
equally important for the sociological theories of control and leadership. It
is very difficult to differentiate between state and society or an Imam and a
social leader because, such a bifurcation is not permissible in Islam. In
practice the head of the state, equally the principal leader of the society often
delegated his temporal authority to an Amir or sectional leader of the society
who exercised it effectively, but recognized the spiritual authority of the
principal leader. This is a Juridico-social fiction; but it alone guaranteed
the unity of Islam under the over-all authority of the Sharia....the basis of
the Islamic society, personality and culture.
An independent political or social philosophy is not to be
expected in Islam. The existence of the state as the innate part of the
all-embracing society is taken for granted. They are concerned with the application
of Sharia to the body politic and the society. The greatest mistake committed
by the Western scholars is their attempt at dichotomizing politics and
sociology as two different entities, whereas under the influence of their
idealistically integrated cultural mentality, it cannot tolerate duality.
However, the two domains have always been treated by the Muslims as a totality.
Consequently their analysis of political thought is always given in proper
socilogism. This shows that the Muslims are the precursors of the modern sociology
of politics, an important sociological discipline in the modern periphery of
the general sociology. Rosenthal thus summarizes the situation :
The interpretation of the Sharia undertaken by Sunni
jurists of the four recognized schools is however, a compromise between the
ideal norm and political reality. Its aim was clearly two fold: to vindicate
and uphold the divine purpose of the Muslim state and to give support to the
Abbasid Caliphs in their struggle against both Sunni and sectarian (Shi’i in
the first place) challenges to and encroachments on their authority. A theory
of Government was evolved under pressure of rival claims to power. The
treatises of the Abbasid period must thus be read in the light of this constitutional
struggle; they reflect the existing political situation in the Islamic empire
notwithstanding their theoretical superstructure in defense of the valid teaching
of Qur’an , Sunna and Hadith. This is true of the Hanafi Abu Yusuf Yaqub’s (731-98)
introduction to his Kitab-ai-Kharaj which he wrote at the behest of the Caliph Harun—al-Rashid,
and also of two later authors contemporary with each other; the Shafai‘s
Al-Mawardi (991-1031) and Abu Mansur Abd-al-Qahir Tahir-al-Baghdadi (d. 1037);
also of their fellow Shafai’s-al-Ghazzali (d. 1111) and Badr-al-Din Ibn Jamma
(1241-1333) and of the Hanbali Ibn-Taymiya (d. 1328).
The ideal Muslim state was strongly upheld by the only
Muslim thinker who developed an independent political theory lbn Khaldun
(1332-1406) when he contrasted it with the Mulk as a man-made, exclusively this-worldly,
temporal state, leading on his predecessors, he nevertheless formulated the
difference in origin, development and purpose of the respective state within a
philosophy of history built around the power-state and power-politics. He did
this in a manner both concise and as far as the power-state is concerned novel,
reaching beyond his own age and Muslim civilization. He approached past and
contemporary history as an empiricist and was interested in the law governing history
and politics, unlike the Muslim jurists, especially Al-Mawardi, on whose
exposition of the Khilafa he drew extensively.
Al-Mawardi’s book Ahkam-al-Sultaniya has wrongly been
judged as a book on political science. It is a treatise on the sociology of
politics. Prof. Sir Hamilton Gibb has, to my mind, underrated the value of the
book when he says that the ‘Ahkam‘ was written to assert the authority of the
Abbassaid Caliphs.
Al-Mawardi’s theories are saturated with the existential
base and value system of Islam. The ruler is not as assumed by the modern
scholars, the political authority, but a leader of the community bound to lead
it in all dimensions of its life. If the rulers wanted to stay in power
unchallenged and unhindered they dared not ignore the fundamental principle
that the authority conferred by ljma (consensus) of the Umma or Jamaa, the
Muslim community, for the caliph was the only authority in law to which a
Muslim would and could submit. To be clothed with the mantles of legality was
worth a contract confirming their delegated authority and freeing them from the
stigma of rebellion or usurpation. Only in this way could be preserved the
unity of the community of the faithful under their commander. The task of the
Sunni jurists was thus not to formulate and interpret the doctrine of the Khalipha,
but to harmonize an existing historico-political situation with the Sharia by
interpreting the Quran, Sunnah and Hadith.
The qualifications laid down for the political leadership
are also applicable to the leadership in society. Ho distinguishes between the
two inter-dependent categories of leadership one based on reason and the other
on revealed law. The first merely guards against mutual injustice, strife,
discord and anarchy, while the other provides for the positive enforcement of
law and justice in mutual confidence and friendship. Most important of all, the
divinely revealed law enables the governor to administer religious affairs and
prepare man for the hereafter, the term Imam which is constantly used by Al-Mawardi
has been unnecessarily interpreted by the Westerners as political authority but
in Islamic concept, it is a multi-polaric term, covering all the fields of the
socio-cultural life must satisfy certain necessary conditions. The first
condition which is to be called the social determinant and the social equilibrium
is adala (عدالة) in strict conformity
with the Quran. In order of causal relativity, the second indispensable condition Ilm i.e. knowledge to make independent
decisions and pass judgements on the pertinent issues of the community Life,
political and otherwise.
Al-Mawardi’s theories later on were fully propounded and
worked out in detail analysis by Ibn Khaldun under new sociological concept
called Asabiya (عصبیة) the corporate sense
common not only to family but to the entire society with a specific cultural
mentality and individuality. According to Ibn Khaldun this gives the group
staying power and drive born of a common outlook. No doubt he is true in his
verdict that the coherence of a group is impaired by the weakening of the force
of Asabiya, to the point where common action finally becomes impossible. Not
only in law and politics but in all the fields of socio-cultural life, the
Muslim thinkers were guided by historical precedent. Almost all of them gave
rational and empirical interpretation to the actual historical situation and
have to rely on the authority of the historians of the Caliphate, like Ibn
Sa’d, Ibn Hasham, Ibn-Al-Athir, Tabari and others. The reasons of such reliance
are not far to seek. The period of orthodox caliphate is the existential base for
the ever new construction of the Muslim Society and the state.
Al-Mawardi’s contribution in the fields of sociology of
politics and law is valuable. He was of the opinion that law should be interpreted
from time to time, according to the requirements of the spirit of the age with
a view to preserving the unity of the Muslim community under the authority of the
Islamic systems of meanings—-Al-Quran and Hadith. The Muslims were the first
thinkers who recognized the validity of the space-time factors in the human
social and cultural life. Thus they stressed as the basic tenet of their social
philosophy that law and politics should be interpreted in the framework of Fiqh,
mainly because of its combined religious and legal aspects, embodied in the
constitutional law. Muslim constitutional law no doubt is the result of the confrontation
of the Sharia—the ideal, divinely revealed law —with the historical and
political reality of the Islamic state.
Al-Mawardi’s concepts of Ijmaa and Sharia are the definite
contributions in the fields of sociology, politics and law. The value judgement
of these concepts is, according to him, the Qur’an and Hadith, and hence his
socio-political and jural philosophy is the result of harmoneous and
logico-meaningful reasoning derived from the Quran, Sunnah, Hadith, Ijmaa and
Qiyas, with historical and socio-political deductions from the formative period
of Islam; supported by the view of the Salaf, and a realistic appraisal of the
contemporary social and political science. Another notable feature of his
philosophy is to be seen in his comparative procedure. In the enunciation and
analysis of his thought in the Ahkam-al-Sultaniya he discusses objectively
the—views of other scholars and jurists, not necessarily belonging to his own
Shafii Madhhab.
Much has been written about the political philosophy of the
scholars in general and more particularly on his views on Imamat, choice and
election of Imam, his duties and function etc. and it is not worthwhile to
reproduce them there. The only point which is awfully neglected by our scholars
is the fact that Al-Mawardi in his analysis of the political phenomena, has
taken full cognizance of their socio-cultural background. He has gone deep and
has clearly identified the depth and level meanings involved in them. Thus his
political ideas are not only socialized but are axiologically orientated. Not a
single thought is segregated from its system of meaning or axiological base—-the
Quran, Sunnah and Hadith. The problems of Imamate discussed by him are not to
be compared with the ever fluctuating Western thoughts which are not only
dichotomous self contradictory and meaningless. This can be clearly seen by the
student in the political and social philosophy of all the Western thinkers like
Roussean. Bodin, Austin and Laski etc. The sociological principles laid down by
Al-Mawardi for the ever-new construction of the Muslim society are summarized
below. Without adhering to these principles no leadership can play its role
adequately and meaningfully.
1. The first is to
guard the faith based on its established principles and on the consensus (Ijma)
of the first Muslims (al-Salaf al-Umma). This condition presupposes the quality
of Ilm to be understood as expert knowledge of the tenets and traditions of Islam,
and to expound and defend them against heretics.
2. He must execute and
preserve justice, in conformity with his own Adala.
3. The spiritual laws
of life, society politics, individual and culture. This element was given great
preponderance and emphasis by the Abbasids.
4. The emphasis on
justice and Jihad.
Al-Mawardi succinctly remarks that from the realm of
justice we move to that of military action.
The greatest meaningful relativity of Al-Mawardi’s theories
is to be seen in his documentation in two directions. In support of his
formulation he constantly cites, the Quran. The laws related above from the
periphery of the religious duties and this shows that religion cannot be
separated from politics, economics, culture and all what is called social life.
It has been shown clearly by Al-Mawardi that religion is the basis of human
life. It is related with the human life in all dimensions, horizontally and
vertically. Rosenthal rightly concludes that “they show quite clearly the unity
of religion and politics, of the spiritual and temporal or religious and
secular aspects of a life centred in and leading to God.
What has been stated about the head of the state or
political leader is equally true of the leaders in social and cultural life.
According to the Islamic concept so audaciously enunciated by Al-Mawardi,
whatever may be the nature of the leadership, a person can hold that office
only confirmed by the Ijma. The community is bound to act under Divine Guidance
and its agreed choice and recognition are, therefore, infallible. “My community
will never agree upon an error”, says the Holy Prophet (ﷺ).
Al-Ghazzali
In examining the social thought of Ghazzali consideration
must be taken of the space-time faces, because he was the first Muslim thinker
who was a staunch believer of phenomenology. Unlike Hurse, his phenomenology is
fully saturated with ideal and meaning. His important sociological thesis is
based on the idea of leadership which is constantly referred to by the Muslim
social philosophers in the generalized term Imama. The Imama is necessary
because it is of advantage and keeps away damage in the world. It is an
indispensable instituion of Muslim life demanded by the Ijmaa of the community
after the death of Muhammad (ﷺ) when the maintenance of religious and
political order made the immediate investiture of the Imam imperative. But the
Ijmaa of the ‘Umma is not sufficient, for “the good order of religion” is
obtained only “by an Imam who is obeyed”. In fact, “the good order of religion”
is possible only through “the good order of the world” which, in turn, is
dependent on an “Imam who is obeyed”. Religious and (temporal) power are twins.
Din is the foundation and the power is simply meant for the preservation and consolidation
of the Din. The stress on power is significant even though it is only a means
to an end the end being the good order of religion with Sa’ada Akhira or
Saadat-e-Quswa.
Ghazzali will remain conspicuous in the history of Muslim
sociological thought in view of his contributions in the fields of sociology of
war and the sociology of knowledge, the first being unknown in the modern
thought and the latter only coming into prominence after the Second World War. Ability
to wage Jihad is conditioned by the possession of powers and courage (Nnjda
Wa-Shajja). It has always been considered one of the foremost duties of the
caliph. Similarly his theory of Taqlid is equally very important. He stresses
Taqlid as far more useful in an age of crisis and wide disparity than Ijtihad,
leading to further disintegration. It was imitation and its causes and
consequences that gave Ghazzali the opportunity to review fundamental sociological
problems. If imitation is the key to social phenomena, Ghazzali argued, then
the typical social relation is that of “teacher-learner” in a variety of
situations. He takes the causes of imitation to be basically internal although
they are modified or supplemented by the group situation. His apparent emphasis
on imitation was essentially a conceptual base from which he was able to
explore a crucial sociological problem, the process in which the individual is
incorporated into groups and society. Thus Ghazzali explained social structure
in terms of individual behaviour or imitation reflecting common models or
values. He stresses more and more that in social developments complexity and
differentiation are to be, accompanied by increasing emphasis on beliefs,
values and organizational principles etc.
In his theory and classification of knowledge he lays
emphasis among other things on the predictive nature of knowledge. His
contention is that knowledge is for the sake of prediction, and prediction for
the sake of control. Such linking of prediction by Ghazzali is not accidental
but is rather inherent in scientific and knowledge pursuit. It is an exclusive
topic in itself requiring detailed analysis and research and hence we can do no
justice with the theory of knowledge of Ghazzali, except hinting at its salient
features.
Post a Comment