Nation-state and Islamic Government Theoretical and Factual studies

The concept of nation state presented by the West at its core is the idea of humanism. In which man was given a central position and freed from the concept of God. Denied everything that was not observed. Therefore, man expelled religion in all matters of life. The logical consequence of which was that the head of human unity was scattered. The slogan of nationalism was used to unite man in the struggle for unity. Which eventually manifested itself in the formation of nation-states the western colonial powers ruled the world in the form of the United Nations change the way of life in the Western World and especially in Muslim society. Which has a profound effect on the Islamic system of government. Islam envisioned divine sovereignty in the system of government. Today the Muslim rulers have forgotten it, and the Western system considered its survival in democracy. The article explains what the core concern of the nation state and Islamic Government is and whether it is based on its own ideas in modern times has been considered.

Divine Sovereignty—Some Reflections

I offer some reflections here on the set of articles gathered in this special issue on divine sovereignty and further develop some thoughts first adumbrated in a piece published in JRAS 25/3 (2015).

Divine Sovereignty and State Authority in Israel and Iran

<p>This thesis investigates the relationship between religion and politics in Israel and Iran through examining the development of Revolutionary Messianism as the founding philosophy of these contemporary states. These states differ in their political history and structure. In both cases, however, Messianism has been the core religious ideology in their understanding of revolution and their religio-political identity in the contemporary Middle East. Revolutionary Messianism negates the existence of apolitical and apocalyptic messianic theologies and gives rise to the emergence of new state actors: theological politicians and political theologians. This thesis examines the transformation of messianic ideology in the context of Israel’s and Iran’s security politics, their political structures, their legal systems, and their social environment. In doing so, it demonstrates the lasting impact of the messianic ideas on religion and politics in these states. It argues that the transformation of messianism has resulted in political elitism, the rise of new forms of fundamentalism, and the de-sacralisation of theology. This thesis offers a new analytical model for studying the relationship between religion and politics in Israel and Iran by identifying three phases: Revolutionary Messianism, State Building Messianism and State Maintenance Messianism. This model allows us to not only analyse the development of Revolutionary Messianism during the Revolutionary Phase but it crystallises the relationship between religion and politics after the establishment of the post-revolutionary states. In addition, it explains how these states define secularism, secularity, and secularization. It clarifies the boundaries that each state determines between religion and politics and the impacts of the development of Revolutionary Messianism on societies. It argues that in both cases politics is not subordinate to theology, but in fact it changes theology, and consequently religion.</p>

Divine Sovereignty and State Authority in Israel and Iran

<p>This thesis investigates the relationship between religion and politics in Israel and Iran through examining the development of Revolutionary Messianism as the founding philosophy of these contemporary states. These states differ in their political history and structure. In both cases, however, Messianism has been the core religious ideology in their understanding of revolution and their religio-political identity in the contemporary Middle East. Revolutionary Messianism negates the existence of apolitical and apocalyptic messianic theologies and gives rise to the emergence of new state actors: theological politicians and political theologians. This thesis examines the transformation of messianic ideology in the context of Israel’s and Iran’s security politics, their political structures, their legal systems, and their social environment. In doing so, it demonstrates the lasting impact of the messianic ideas on religion and politics in these states. It argues that the transformation of messianism has resulted in political elitism, the rise of new forms of fundamentalism, and the de-sacralisation of theology. This thesis offers a new analytical model for studying the relationship between religion and politics in Israel and Iran by identifying three phases: Revolutionary Messianism, State Building Messianism and State Maintenance Messianism. This model allows us to not only analyse the development of Revolutionary Messianism during the Revolutionary Phase but it crystallises the relationship between religion and politics after the establishment of the post-revolutionary states. In addition, it explains how these states define secularism, secularity, and secularization. It clarifies the boundaries that each state determines between religion and politics and the impacts of the development of Revolutionary Messianism on societies. It argues that in both cases politics is not subordinate to theology, but in fact it changes theology, and consequently religion.</p>

The Sovereign’s Beatitude

Though it may sound awkward to ask whether the political sovereign is happy or unhappy, the question is relevant to political theory, especially within a political theological perspective. Because man was created in the image of God, human happiness needs to be a reflection of divine beatitude, and as divine sovereignty is, at least analogically, related to political sovereignty, the conceptual coherence is secured. The main argument is, however, that the analogy does not hold. I shall show how St Thomas Aquinas’s short treatment of God’s beatitude may mislead us about power, fame, riches, and dignity being essential to happiness, based on an analysis of Franz Kafka’s major novel, The Castle, and a few other writings by him. I shall argue that our tradition of political thinking and behavior remains ambivalent on this issue. The political sovereign is born out of our unhappy condition, yet its power, fame, riches, and glory suggests to us that it has appropriated our happiness. But for this very reason it cannot be happy, and it therefore suggests a false analogy between the divine and the political sovereign. It is fundamentally at variance with our happiness, which incites us to abandon, reject, and eventually, kill it.

Middle Knowledge: Human Freedom in Divine Sovereignty

In the last two or three decades, we have witnessed a renewed interest in spirituality in Christian academic circles. More recently, we have also seen a growing number of publi­cations on the mission and missional church—both on popular and academic levels. While one can easily find many quality works on Christian spirituality and some decent books on mission/missional church, one would only find a few works that combine both themes in a single volume. In this work, Charles Fen­sham, professor of theology at Knox College, Toronto, attempts to do just that—as one may discern from the book’s subtitle: A Missional Spirituality. As such, this book ad­dress­es those who have interest in spirituality and/or in mission but particularly to those who would like to see how biblical missional impetus shapes a particular understanding of Christian spirituality.

Conservative Anti-Colonialism: Maududi, Marx and Social Equality

Abul A‘la Maududi explicitly built on Islamic ideas of equality to critique nationalism and modern racism. How then could he reject the idea of social equality between men and women? This is particularly puzzling given his noticeable employment of a Marxist critique of the marketisation of society and liberal conceptions of freedom in his controversial 1939 book Pardah. Parsing out the structure of his argument in Pardah in some detail and emphasising the hitherto understudied engagement with Marxist ideas in his thought, this article shows that Maududi rejected a specific vision of social equality, where equality amounts to exchangeability. His use of Marxist ideas to non-Marxist ends was in large part a result of his assessment of Marx as a capable historian but a flawed philosopher, and more fundamentally a very different conception of society to the Marxist one. Maududi relied on his by then well-developed concept of divine sovereignty to carry much of the conceptual burden regarding his critique of, as well as alternatives to, social equality.

Divine Sovereignty and Clerical Authority in Early Shi‘i Islamism: Bāqir al-Ṣadr (1935–80) and Taqī al-Mudarrisī (b. 1945) on the Islamic State

Divine sovereignty (ḥākimiyya)—as conceived by Abū al-A‘lā Mawdūdī (1903–79) and popularised by Sayyid Quṭb (1906–66) - has been a central component of Islamist thought. This article investigates the reception of the concept within Shi‘i Islam. As case studies, the article choses two prominent actors in the formative period of Shi‘i Islamism in Iraq: Muḥammad Bāqir al-Ṣadr (1935–80) and Muḥammad Taqī al-Mudarrisī (b. 1945). By discussing their reflections on the nature of an Islamic state, the article pursues three objectives: first, it overcomes a trend in academic scholarship that disregards Sunni influences on the development of Shi‘i Islamism. Second, the article highlights the role that the Iraqi Shi‘i intellectual milieu played in incorporating key Islamist concepts into Shi‘i political thought. Finally, the article demonstrates the different receptions of ḥākimiyya. Bāqir al-Ṣadr uses the ideological repertoire of Islamism to explore in pragmatic terms the parameters that define the state as Islamically legitimate. In contrast, Taqī al-Mudarrisī uses ḥākimiyya to redefine the sovereignty of the state in Islamic terms. He operationalises the concept in a Shi‘i context by arguing that the state must be led by a just jurisconsult (al-faqīh al-‘ādil) who becomes the sole agent of divine sovereignty in the state.

A Direct Flight to Revolution: Maududi, Divine Sovereignty, and the 1979-Moment in Iran

This article explores the engagement of the Pakistani Jamaʿat-i Islami (JI) with the Iranian Revolution. I argue that the Islamist JI was drawn to the events because it reflected a core concern and signature idea of Abu ’l-Aʿla Maududi, namely to establish the sovereignty of God (hakimiyya) on earth. My analysis of various travelogues and JI publications from the 1980s demonstrates that JI observers were deeply familiar with internal revolutionary dynamics and Iran's Shiʿi identity. The prospect of seeing a proper Islamic system in action, with potentially global consequences for their cause, initially crowded out any sectarian concerns for the JI. At the same time, certain JI leaders began to voice criticism of what they perceived as rash revolutionary policies that differed from Maududi's careful, irenic understanding of a proper Islamic revolution. They also took note of sectarian messages that damaged Iran's ecumenical outreach. It was, however, the more general geopolitical climate in the Middle East and South Asia which forced the JI to publicly downplay its ties with Iran. By the late 1980s, being accused of harbouring affinities for the ‘deviant Islam’ of Shiʿism was a charge that had to be avoided at all costs in Pakistan and beyond.