Islam and Pakistan’s Political Culture
Page 15
The majority opinion must be respected and adhered to, irrespective of whe-
ther or not it was accepted by all. To disregard, or undermine, would entail
compromising on the principles of both ‘shura’ and ‘ijma’. That, then, would
ridicule how leaders are both accountable to those they hold authority over and
bound by the collective decisions that are made. The Prophet Muhammad has
corroborated this by stating that ‘If you two agree on a counsel, I shall not
dissent’.70 This weighty statement reaffirms the consultative decision-making process and the authority attributed to it. Moreover, it notes the manner
in which the Prophet participated in open consultations with others and then
reaffirmed that he would not meet their decisions with dissension. As a con-
sequence of being bound by consensus of the people, the ‘Khilafah’ leadership
is accountable to them. And, as mentioned earlier, no-one is above the law. This
accountability entitles the people to bring leaders to account for their actions. As the Prophet Muhammad has said, ‘nations prior to you were destroyed because
Downloaded by [University of Connecticut] at 18:26 09 January 2017
if a noble amongst them stole, they used to excuse him, and if a poor person
amongst them stole, they would apply Allah’s legal punishment to him’. 71
Here, again, is an unequivocal endorsement that no-one is above the law, not
even the leader. The Qur’an further attests to this by saying:
O you who believe! be maintainers of justice, bearers of witness of Allah’s
sake, though it may be against your own selves or (your) parents or near
relatives; if he be rich or poor, Allah is nearer to them both in compassion;
therefore do not follow (your) low desires, lest you deviate; and if you
swerve or turn aside, then surely Allah is aware of what you do. 72
Political values
65
Twelfth, both the Qur’an and Prophetic sayings mandate obedience to
those in authority over you. Both male and female are bound to the leader
and must pledge allegiance in the form of ‘bay’a’. This act involves pledging
allegiance to whomever one wishes to nominate or select as leader. As
the Prophetic sayings suggest, ‘We gave the pledge to Allah’s Messenger that
we would listen and obey him both at the time when we were active and at the
time we were tired’.73 This pledge of allegiance may not be violated without a just cause, as it is mentioned: ‘Verily, those who give the bay’a to you are
giving a pledge to Allah. The Hand of Allah is over their hands. Then who-
soever breaks his pledge, breaks only to his harm, and whosoever fulfils what
he has covenanted with Allah, Allah will bestow on him great reward’.74 One could reasonably conclude that the pledge of allegiance parallels voting, since
that, too, is a reflection of one’s individual preference in regard to leadership.
Here, emphasis is placed on the principle that people elect their leaders and
then offer their pledge of allegiance to the leader for as long as the leader
does not contradict the moral premise upon which his authority rests. The
specific age of offering a pledge of allegiance is left open, but evidence is given
of both females and children offering the oath of allegiance.75
Rashidun Caliphate – 632–61 AD
This section provides an analysis of the period immediately following the
death of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), in what is known as the ‘Rashidun
Era’. It does so with the objectives of understanding the application of
‘foundational’ political values in space-time by the first four caliphs: Abu
Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali. This important era, totalling thirty years, was
pivotal for the establishment of the emerging Muslim political community. 76
Of course, it is beyond the scope of this thesis to provide an in-depth analysis
of each leader. However, this section reveals how the ‘foundational’ political
values provide parameters of manoeuvrability implemented uniquely by each
caliph. Specifically, the following analysis examines the manner of political
succession and the principles of ‘shura’ and ‘bay’a’.
The first Caliph: Abu Bakr 632–34 AD
Downloaded by [University of Connecticut] at 18:26 09 January 2017
The Prophet Muhammad said: ‘If I were to take a friend other than my Lord,
I would take Abu Bakr as a friend’.77 In 634 AD, as the news of the Prophet Muhammad’s (pbuh) death spread, a number of tribes rebelled and refused to
pay the poor-due called ‘zakat’.78 Also, a number of impostors claimed that Prophethood had now passed to them, raising the standard of revolt. 79 Even worse, two powerful empires, the Eastern Roman and the Persian, both
threatened the fledgling Islamic state at Medina. Immediately disputes arose
concerning political succession, with various groups attempting to establish
the legitimacy of their claims. The people of Medina insisted that they wield
authority, considering their commitment to the Prophet Muhammad and the
66
Islam and Pakistan’s Political Culture
message of Islam.80 Contrarily, the Meccans claimed authority by virtue of their membership in the powerful Quraysh tribe, and, as such, claimed to be the
rightful heirs to political leadership. Also, the Prophet Muhammad’s daughter
Fatima, according to some interpretations of historical documents, made a
plea in favour of her husband Ali, Muhammad’s cousin.81
In this overwrought political setting, two important ‘foundational’ political
values were operationalized that managed the discontent: shura and bay’a. At
the Conference of Saqifa’ in Medina,82 Umar, one of the closest companions of the Prophet Muhammad, who was to later become the second caliph, stood
forward and offered the bay’a pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr; this gesture
was followed by those present.83 This was not considered sufficient by Abu Bakr, who later assisted in the gathering of Muslims the following day in the
Prophet’s Mosque in Medina. There, the people gave a general bay’a to Abu
Bakr that legitimized his authority.84 And, upon accepting the responsibility of caliph, Abu Bakr stated:
O people, even though I am not the best of you, I have been given the
responsibility of ruling you. I will consider the weakest among you strong
until I claim for them whatever is their due. And the strongest among you,
I will consider weak until I have taken from them whatever is due from them.
O people! I am a follower of the Prophet Muhammad, not an innovator.
So, if I do well, assist me! And if I deviate, straighten me out … then obey me
as long as I obey Allah! But, if I disobey Allah or his Prophet Muhammad,
you owe me no obedience. I really prefer that another one of you should
have been given this responsibility. And if you expect me to assume the
same role as the Prophet Muhammad in relation to ‘wahy’ [revelation],
I cannot do that. I am only human, so make allowance for me.85
Abu Bakr clearly advocated that people should follow him only so long as his
actions were in accordance with the Qur’an and Prophetic sayings. This act,
in and of itself, alludes to the concept of shura and political accountability, as
well as encouraging activism and political participation of the populace.
Moreover, by mentioning that he did not want pow
er, he supported a key
feature of Islamic leadership in which those who want it should not have it.
Abu Bakr died on 21 ‘Jamadi-al Akhir, 13 AH’ – 23 August 634 AD – at the
Downloaded by [University of Connecticut] at 18:26 09 January 2017
age of sixty-three, and was buried by the side of the Prophet Muhammad in
Medina.86 His caliphate was merely 27 months in duration. In this brief span Abu Bakr had managed to strengthen and consolidate his community through
‘shura’ by seeking their gathering after his nomination and concretizing by
bay’a – or a pledge of allegiance.
The second Caliph: Umar 634–44 AD
The Prophet Muhammad said: ‘God has placed truth upon Umar’s tongue
and heart’.87 Prior to his death, Abu Bakr conferred with notables in the
Political values
67
community and adopted a slightly different method of political succession,
though still utilizing the principles of shura and bay’a. Abu Bakr nominated
Umar as the next caliph, contingent upon ratification by the population in the
Prophet’s Mosque in Medina.88 The majority of people in the Prophet’s Mosque pledged their allegiance to Umar via bay’a, but a restive minority
opposed his nomination. Nevertheless, following more consultations and dis-
cussions with the vocal minority, all accepted Umar.89 It is interesting to note that political dissent was tolerated since the appointment was initially
opposed; but by way of mutual consultations, or shura, the matter was
resolved.
After taking charge of his office, Umar spoke:
O people, you have some rights on me, which you can always claim. One
of your rights is that if anyone of you comes to me with a claim, he
should leave satisfied. Another of your rights is that you can demand that
I take nothing unjustly from the revenues of the State. You can also
demand that I fortify your frontiers and do not put you into danger. It is
also your right that if you go to battle I should look after your families as
a father would while you are away. O people, remain conscious of God,
forgive me my faults, and help me in my task. Assist me in enforcing what is
good and forbidding what is evil. Advise me regarding the obligations that
have been imposed upon me by God.90
This declaration reveals Umar’s reaffirmation of his utmost responsibility,
which is to serve the people. And he encourages people to advise him and
become active participants in the overall well-being and structure of society.
In regard to principles of accountability and judicial independence, an
incident took place that involved a man, Ubbay, who brought a claim against
the Caliph Umar. When the Caliph Umar appeared in court, the judge
deferentially stood up. Reprimanding him, Umar said, ‘this is the first act of
injustice you did to this man’, pointing to his accuser. 91 Here, the Caliph was ordered to a court of law to defend himself against accusations by a citizen. He
was not above the law and as leader was held accountable, even for perceived,
albeit unfounded, wrongdoings.
Moreover, another incident reflecting Umar’s embodiment of ‘foundational’
Downloaded by [University of Connecticut] at 18:26 09 January 2017
political values occurred during the conquest of Jerusalem. He defined, by
precept and by example, the rights and privileges of non-Muslims, especially
the Christians of Jerusalem:
This is the protection which the servant of God, Umar, the Ruler of the
Believers, has granted to the people of Eiliya [Jerusalem]. The protection
is for their lives and properties, their churches and crosses, their sick and
healthy, and for all their coreligionists. Their churches shall not be used
for habitation, nor shall they be demolished, nor shall any injury be done
to them or to their compounds, or to their crosses, nor shall their
68
Islam and Pakistan’s Political Culture
properties be injured in any way. There shall be no compulsion for these
people in the matter of religion, nor shall any of them suffer any injury on
account of religion.92
In this official declaration, Umar guaranteed freedom of religion and the
rights of non-Muslims living under his jurisdiction, attesting to his commitment
to pluralism. Still, if further evidence was required, Umar’s commitment to
equality was evident when he entered Jerusalem walking his camel while his
slave was riding it. 93
Still, Umar’s leadership style resonated with a profound sentimentality for
people. With the expansion of the caliphate came considerable innovations.
One such being the pulpit, inside mosques, now called the ‘mimbar’. The first
instance of its use was recorded by Amr bin Al-As, when he built his mosque
in Egypt. The Caliph Umar, upon hearing it, wrote to him saying: ‘And now:
I have heard that you use a pulpit and thus raise yourself above the necks of the
Muslims. Is it not sufficient for you that you are standing while the Muslims
are at your heels? Therefore, I urge you to smash it to bits’.94 His magnanimity was such that he strove to empower people. And what better a testament then
urging the Governor of Egypt, at that time, to smash any symbol that reinforces
distance between leadership and people. Tragically, while on his way to lead
prayers in a mosque, Umar was severely wounded by Abu Lulu Feroze, who
had a personal grudge against him and stabbed him several times. 95 Soon after, he died on account of his wounds, in the first week of Muharram, 24
AH, and was buried by the side of the Prophet Muhammad.
The third Caliph: Uthman 644–56 AD
The Prophet Muhammad said: ‘Every Prophet has an assistant, and my
assistant will be Uthman’.96 Prior to succumbing to his wounds, Umar appointed a committee consisting of six of the ten companions of the Prophet
Muhammad about whom the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) had said, ‘they are
the people of heaven’ and that committee included Ali, Uthman, Abdul
Rahman, Sa’ad, Al-Zubayr, and Talha. 97 These individuals were to choose the next caliph from among them and, thereafter, seek approval for their
choice through a pledge of allegiance by the people. This procedure included
Downloaded by [University of Connecticut] at 18:26 09 January 2017
the principles of shura and bay’a, but differed from the methods of his
predecessors. Also Umar outlined the procedure to be followed if any differ-
ences of opinion should arise. Abdul Rahman withdrew his name as a
potential candidate for caliph and, as a result, was authorized to ascertain the
aspirations of the remaining committee members and the acceptance by the
people. After two days of discussion, the choice was finally limited to Uthman
and Ali. To finally decide, two questions were posed to each of them by
Abdul Rahman.
First, Abdul Rahman asked Uthman and Ali, separately: ‘Who should be
the next caliph? Both hopefuls responded by saying the other should be
Political values
69
caliph. To that, Abdul Rahman replied, ‘You are both correct’. Second, Abdul
Rahman asked, ‘Will you promise to act according to the commandments of the
Qur’an and the example set by the Prophet Muhammad and his two caliphs?’
To this,
Ali responded ‘To the best of my ability’, whereas Uthman answered,
without hesitation, ‘Yes’. 98 The quickness with which Uthman responded was considered most fitting for leadership. As a result, he was selected as caliph,
though the people’s approbation was required, and followed. From this
selection process, three ideas stand out clearly. First, those that want leadership
should not have it. Hence, in this circumstance, both Uthman and Ali
responded correctly to Abdul Rahman’s question when they preferred the
other to themselves. Second, in response to whether either would abide by the
Qur’an, the Prophetic example, and their predecessors, that readiness takes
precedence over hesitation. Third, the population at large, by some mechanism,
must ratify the final decision. The selection process, then, exemplified the
‘foundational’ principles previously discussed.
Upon being given the responsibility of caliph, Uthman issued a directive to
all civil and military officers. ‘He insisted that they should be just in their
dealings, honest in money matters, and tolerant toward non-Muslims. Further,
the officers were told to keep their word, even with the enemy’. 99 They were reminded that they were no more than the servants and guardians of the people,
not their masters and rulers. 100 In an event that tested Uthman’s leadership, a close friend and respected notable, Saad bin Waqqas, Governor of Kufa, took
a loan from the public treasury and was unable to pay it back when promised.
‘The Treasury Officer, Abdullah bin Masud, reported the matter to the
Caliph. As a consequence, overlooking his friendship and admiration for
Saad Bin Waqqas, Uthman dismissed him’. 101 This illustrates the importance Uthman placed on maintaining the highest standard of law, in which no-one
may be excused for even a late payment.
Last, and arguably the most important incident in his life, Uthman’s com-
mitment to peaceful conflict resolution was aptly displayed when an internal
uprising exploded in the last year of his leadership. 102 Some unruly people began conspiring against Uthman and were not only publicly airing their
grievances, but threatened his life. Despite this, Uthman refused to use force
on them. His commitment to peaceful methods of conflict resolution and his