AGAINST THE IDEA OF AN ISLAMIC STATE

A palpable form of the discourse on secularization and secularism in Islam is manifested through the discourse on the relation between Islam and the state. This chapter will further elaborate the relation between Islam and the state—which has now become a thought-provoking topic among Liberal Muslim intellectuals throughout the Islamic World.²⁵⁵

Harun Nasution, a specialist in Islamic philosophy, asserted that the issue which triggered the first intellectual conflict in the history of Islam was the issue of the relation between religion and the state. Discussions over this matter are more focused on whether or not a well-defined borderline between the religious domain and the state was required. From the relation between the state and religion, the issue stretched out as far as to whether or not it was necessary to formulate and enforce what is later on called an “Islamic state”.²⁵⁶

255 Take a look at, Charles Kurzman (ed.), Liberal Islam (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), specifically Part I “Against Theocracy”. Several Liberal Muslim thinkers whom Kurzman call as supporters of the segregation between religion and the state include: ‘Ali Abd al-Raziq (Egypt), Muhammad Khalaf-Allah (Egypt), Mahmud Taleqani (Iran), and Muhammad Sa’id al-Ashmawi (Egypt). At present, so many Liberal Muslim thinkers support secularism—or segregation between religion and the state in the Islamic World, take a look at, Samsu Rizal Panggabean, “Din, Dunya and Dawlah” Ensiklopedi Tematis Dunia Islam, Volume 6 (Jakarta: Ichtiar Baru van Hoeve, 2002), p. 45-81.

256 Rusli Karim, Negara dan Peminggiran Islam Politik (Yogyakarta: Tiarawa Wacana, 1999) p. ix. Recently, there have been talks over a book which punitively criticizes the notion of an Islamic state based on the review of the history of the Islamic caliphates from the perspective of Farag Fouda, an Egyptian thinker. Fouda affirmed that there was no element of idealism in the Islamic caliphates—which is claimed to be the concrete form of an Islamic state in the past. He further stated that

In fact, the correlation between religion and the state in the past and today is not a novelty, and it is certainly not something only associated with Islam.²⁵⁷ However, one could say that discussions over the relation between religion and the state in Islam are the most impressive, expressive and complex ones in the history of mankind—particularly at present day in which discussions have developed so dynamically.²⁵⁸ Throughout the course of history, the relation between Muslims and Western non-Muslims (European Christians) has been intense. Set off by the military-political expansion of classic Islam which demerited the Christians, the relation topped with the release of Constantinopel and later the Crucifix War. It retaliated with the development of the global structure that was increasingly dominated by the imperialistic-colonialistic West wherein the Islamic World was most wounded. The traumatic relation between Islam and the West instigated the resentment embedded in the Islamic discourse concerning the state in which the

“West” is seen as “the enemy.”²⁵⁹

the conception of a secular modern state is far more constructive than the caliphates, which is no different than the feudal monarchy in Europe during the Middle Ages. The book prompted a convoluted debate in Egypt in 1992 and caused Fouda to be shot to death by a fanatic from Jamaah Islamiyah. Take a look at, Farag Fouda, Kebenaran yang Hilang: Sisi Kelam Praktik Politik dan Kekuasaan dalam Sejarah Kaum Muslim (Jakarta: Paramadina, 2008), translation by Novriantoni.

257 Take a look at the scheme problem between religion and the state that is well elaborated by Franz Magnis-Suseno in Etika Politik: Prinsip-prinsip Moral Dasar Kenegaraan Modern (Jakarta: Gramedia, 2003), p. 355-366.

258 Nurcholish Madjid, “Agama dan Negara dalam Islam: Telaah atas Fikih Siyasi Sunni” in Budhy Munawar-Rachman (ed.), Kontektualsasi Doktrin Islam dalam Sejarah(Jakarta: Paramadina, 1995), p. 588.

259 Nurcholish Madjid, “Agama dan Negara dalam Islam: Telaah atas Fikih Siyasi Sunni”, p. 588. “Although sharing the same theological roots, and interaction has been established for centuries, the relation between Islam and the West is often characterized by mutual ignorance, stereotyping, mockery and conflict” (John L.

Islam’s ironic experience regarding the relation between religion and the state in the modern age is symbolized by self-accusations among Muslims using various theological stigmas, such as infidel (kafir), apostate (murtad), and shirk (syirik), as witnessed from the incidents between the goverments of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Republic Islam of Iran during the early 1980s. Saudi Arabia, as the successor of the Wahabi orientation in the Hanbali school of Sunni Islam, directed harsh rhetorics towards Iran as the successor of Syiah Islam which has throughout history relentlessly been its political archenemy.

Outside the complexity and the dynamic thought that “split” Muslim thinkers into two categories, i.e. those who “agree” on an Islamic state, and those who

“disagree” on an Islamic state, the relation between religion and the state in Islam has been elucidated through the example given by the Prophet Peace Be Upon Him—heedless of the meaning hoped to be ascertained through it. Nurcholish, a Muslim intellectual who has recently influenced the Islamic perspective regarding the concept of state in Indonesia, for example interpreted that after the migration from Mecca to Medina (madinah: city, civilization), the name chosen by the Prophet to replace (the previous name) Yatsrib revealed the Prophet’s plan in carrying out his holy purpose which is to foster a high-cultured and civilized society, and later on a social-political entity based on the definition of nation-state in which the state is for everyone or for every citizen and is also designed for a common maslahat.²⁶⁰ The state of Medina under Muhammad serves as a “prototype for the relation between religion and the state in Islam”.²⁶¹

Esposito)—quoted by Abdul Rohim Ghazali, “Hubungan Islam—Barat dan Prospek-prospeknya” in Hery Sucipto (ed.), Islam Mahzab Tengah: Persembahan 70 Tahun Tarmizi Taher (Jakarta: Grafindo, 2007), p. 406.

260 Take a look at Nurcholish Madjid, Indonesia Kita (Jakarta: Gramedia and Universitas Paramadina, 2003), p. 48.

261 Muhammad Arkoun calls it the “Medina Experiment”. According to Nurcholish, the Medina experiment serves as an example of a social-political structure associated to the delegation of authorities—particularly authorities or power that are not under the

The debate on the relation between religion and the state—between those who agree of an “Islamic state” and those who oppose it—transpired in relation to the differences in interpreting the Koran and Hadith. Such differences occurred due to the multi-interpretative approach, and not a monolithic approach, used in viewing these two sources of Islamic teaching. In Islamic teaching, doctrines on the segregation of religion and the state remain debatable. This is not the same as, for example in Christianity, in which due to the reform movement that gave birth to Protestant Christianity, a strict doctrine on the segregation of religion and the state—

or secularism—was established. The doctrine on the segregation of religion and the state among Christians is final. This issue, however, continues to be a long and arduous debate that continues until today among Muslim thinkers. What is more, the

control of one hand, unlike the dictatorship system, but are delegated through discussions—and a constitutional life. This means that the chief constituent of authority and power does not lie within personal interests and decisions, but within a written document that contains principles that are jointly agreed on. The main idea of the Prophet’s Medina Experiment is a social-political structure that is not governed by personal interests, but jointly governed; not by ad hoc principles that may change from time to time depending on the leader’s will, but by principles that have been institutionalized in a document containing the basic agreement of all members of the society or known as the “constitution”. Arkoun’s and Nurcholish’s perspectives are characteristically similar to the perspective of Liberal Islam, and it will be further elaborated in this chapter. Take a look at, Nurcholish Madjid, “Agama dan Negara”.

In-depth elaboration on the Medina Experiment and how it inspired the governing system in Indonesia has been proposed by Deddy Ismatullah, Gagasan Pemerintahan Modern dalam Konstitusi Madinah (Bandung: SAHIFA, 2006). This book was initially a dissertation in the Doctorate Program of Faculty of Law University Padjajaran (2003).

debate on the problems of the relation between religion and the state during the 20^th century has increasingly intricated and stirred conflicts.²⁶²

In contemporary Islamic political thought, particularly regarding the study of religion and the state, there are at least three schools of thought: “secularists”,

“traditionalists” and “reformists”. The “secularists” believe that Islam only regulates the relation between human and God, and thus state affairs are entirely under the authority of humans. From this perspective, the secular thought that diametrically segregated political affairs and religion was born. This is because if these two authorities unify, absolutism will arise. Such unification would allow the state to intervene in religious matters, including making sure that religious rituals abide by the consent of the religious authority. On the other hand, religion will grant legitimacy to the ruling party and may even consent to the state’s use of religion for the legitimacy of power. In practice, religion will compel the state to exercise a certain wisdom. For this reason, a secular government aims to moderate reliance between the government and religion, and replace religious law with civil law, as well as eliminate unjust differences that could emerge due to religion.

According to this school of thought, the processes of secularization and even secularism can no longer be prevented no matter how much they are defied in discourse. Donald Eugene Smith, a theorist on modernization, asserted how secularization is an inevitable process. This means that the process of segregating the domestic sphere and the public sphere within Muslim communities can no longer be barred. It is bound to take place. It goes together with the processes of modernization and industrialization that will also transpire in developing states inhabited by Muslim citizens. When modernization transpires in these Muslim-populated states, that is when secularization will too transpire.

Although not based on the doctrine of Islam, the disposition to segregate

262 Take a look at Asghar Ali Engineer, The Islamic State (NY: Advent Books, 1980), particularly Chapter 6, “The Resurgence of Islamic State”, p. 147-198.

religion and the state in Islam is inevitable. Religion simply cannot cover all aspects of human life.

(Rachman 2009: 7910

Jajat Burhanudin, former Director of the Center of the Study of Islam and Society (PPIM) UIN Jakarta. He is a Lecturer of the Faculty of Adab and Humanities at UIN Jakarta where he is currently completing his undergraduate degree. He received his MA and Doctoral degree from Leiden University, the Netherlands.

In the Islamic World, the pioneer of this paradigm is ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Rziq, an ulema and thinker from Egypt. In his well-known book entitled Islam wa Ushul al-Hukm, he proposed that the shari’a of Islam is simply spiritually characterized and has no relations to the law and the practices of the physical world; Islam had no correlation whatsoever to the governing system during the time of the Prophet and al-Khulafa al-Rasyidun; The caliphates was not a religious or Islamic political system, but a system based on worldliness; It was not estabished on either the Koran or Hadith. ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Raziq strongly opposed the opinion that the Prophet once founded an Islamic state.²⁶³ His thesis liberated political institutions and many social, legal and political practices from the margins of the shari’a.²⁶⁴

263 Lili Romli, Islam Yes, Partai IslamYes: Sejarah Perkembangan Partai-partai Islam di Indonesia (Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2006) p. 25. ‘Ali ‘Abd al-Raziq’s book entitled al-Islam was Ushul al-Hukm (Cairo: Matba’ah Mishr Syirkah Musahamah Mishriyah, 1925).

264 Antony Black, Pemikiran Politik Islam: Dari Masa Nabi Hingga Masa Kini (Jakarta:

Serambi, 2006), p. 572-573. Regarding the thoughts of ‘Ali ‘Abd. Al-Raziq, take a look at “Message Not Government, Religion Not State” in Charles Kurzman, Liberal Islam.

Abdullah-I Ahmed an-Naim, a contemporary Muslim thinker born of Sudan, stated that the idea of a Muslim community abiding in a secular-liberal state is not a novelty; it is even a necessity. Throughout the course of history: from the early period of Islam during the time of the Prophet Muhammad, the fourth Caliph Rasyidun, the Ummayad Dynasty, the Abbasid Dynasty, the Ottoman Dynasty to the 21^st century all refered to the securlar oder. And so, the principle of shari’a will be bereaved of its authority and religious value when it is forced upon by the state.

Thus, a utilitarian segregation between Islam and the state is highly necessary so as to maintain the positive role of the shari’a in enlightening the Muslim community. The shari’a will remain important in shaping the attitude and behavior of the Muslim community, though not serving as the state’s public law.²⁶⁵ An-Naim calls this as

“the state’s neutrality toward religion”. In the context of Indonesia, in which the majority are Muslims, the state is “neutral” to all religions, and thus an-Naim’s thought becomes higly relevant and contextual.²⁶⁶

Such secular perspective also received verification from Abied al-Jabiri, a thinker from Morocco. His book entitled al-Din wa al-Dawlah wa Tathbiq al-Syari’ah illustrates on what would happen if Islam established a fixed formula for the governing systems, why the Prophet’s companions were left in uncertainty after the Prophet’s death, and how the problem was resolved through an agreement at Tsaqifah Bani Sa’idah. This not only proves, but also indicates that the government prototype post the Prophet was a form of reasoning or a result of negotiation (secular), and not a part of the divine law. For this reason, according to this “secular”

group, the state’s authority must be limited in order to prevent the state’s intervention

265 Abdullah-I Ahmed an-Na’im, Dekonstruksi Syariat: Wacana Kebebasan Sipil, Hak Asasi Manusia dan Hubungan Internasional dalam Islam (Yogyakarta: LKiS, 1994), p. 84.

266 Abdullah-I Ahmed an-Na’im in his research in Indonesia developed a solution on the relation between the Islamic shari’a and the state. Take a look at his latest book entitled Syariat, Negara dan Sekularisme (Jakarta: CSRC UIN Jakarta, 2007).

in nonnegotiable matters of akidah (the foundation of belief), religious rituals and shari’a.²⁶⁷

Conversely, the “traditionalist-revivalist” believed that Islam is not only a system of belief and rituals, but also a system of society and nation. Thus, it is more apt to be called a way of life. Islam does not differentiate sacred things with secular things.²⁶⁸ For this reason, it is the Muslim community’s obligation to establish an Islamic state and apply the shari’a of Islam in a comprehensive (kaffah) manner through the formalization of the Islamic law. Run the state based on a theocratic system—and not democracy—wherein sovereignty of the law is in God’s hand, and it is a teaching that has received legitimacy from the Koran.²⁶⁹

According to them, the appropriate law to govern humans is the law of God (the shari’a of Islam). The only legitimate authority is that of God’s (theocracy). This implies that the law or regulations that must be applied in the society are the regulations of God, and not those created by humans. In today’s contemporary age, such theocratic perspective, was followed by Imam Khomeini, an ulema and leader of the Iran Revolution in 1979. Khomeini—an example of an ulema who established an Islamic state in Iran in the form of a Republic Islam of Iran—noted, “In an Islamic state, the authority to establish the law lies in God. No one else has the right to

267 Imam Wahyudin, “Syariat sebagai Hukum Sekular”, www.web.uct.ac.za

268 From the results of the survey conducted by Sukron Kamil, “There is not a single specialist in the theory of classic and middle age Islamic politics who believes that Islam and the state are two separate entities” Take a look at Sukron Kamil,

“Pemikiran Politik Islam Klasik dan Pertengahan: Tinjauan terhadap Konsep Hubungan Agama dan Negara” in Refleksi, Journal of Religious and Philosophical Studies, Vol. VII, No. 2. 2005. P. 138.

269 Besides Sayyid Quthb, among the Sunnis, the figure who promoted the idea of an Islamic state is Abdul A’la al-Maududi. Take a look at Zafaryab Ahmed, “Maudoodi’s Islamic State” in Asghar Khan (ed.), Islam, Politics and the State (Petaling Jaya, Selangor: Ikraq, 1987), p. 55-57. A more moderate perspective can be seen in, Rifyal Ka’bah, Penegakan Syariat Islam di Indonesia (Jakarta: Khairul Bayan, 2004).

establish a law. And what is legitimate is only the law from God.”²⁷⁰ Thus, according to this “traditionalist-revivalist” group, Islamic teaching includes religious and state affairs (al-Islam din wa dawlah) because Islam does not recognize a segregation between religion and state. Islam does not recognize secularism.

Data reveals that there isn’t a single country that virginally applies secularization. This is because secularization is in fact a process of negotiation between two domains:

religion and the state. This case is similar to the negotiation process in legal issues, between religious law and positive law.

(Rachman 2009: 993)

Luthfi Assyaukanie, Koordinator of the Liberal Islam Network (JIL) and Executive Director of the Religious Reform Project (Repro) Jakarta. He completed his Undergraduate degree at Jordan University, Amman, Jordan, his Master’s degree at the International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and his Doctoral degree in Islamic Studies at the University of Melbourne, Australia.

Furthermore, Khomeini states that humans are part of the universe; the law that governs humans is not any different with the law that governs the universe. God is the Creator of the universe and humans. He is behind the creation of the universe and humans; humans’ obedience towards the law that governs the universe; the

270 M. Din Syamsuddin, Etika Agama dalam Membangun Masyarakat Madani (Jakarta: Logos, 2000), p. 59. Also take a look at, Khomeini, Sistem Pemerintahan Islam (Jakarta: Pustaka Zahra, 2002), p. 47.

establishment of the shari’a for human actions. Observing Khomeini’s and this traditionalist-revivalist group’s statement, we can conclude that they have a unanimous opinion regarding Islam governing all aspects, including the choice of the governing system. Besides Khomeini, Sayyid Quthb, from the “revivalist Islam”, believed that a state that does not establish its existence on the law of the shari’a of Islam cannot be called an Islamic government.²⁷¹ Quthb believed and was assured that Islam is a comprehensive way of life that departs from the principle of tauhid and religious rituals to Allah.²⁷²

From the spectacles of traditionalist-revivalists, the theocratic system is the most apt system legitimized by the Koran. The democratic system is considered to be troubled, as democracy is not an Islamic concept, but a secular product. The concept of the sovereignty of the people is against the concept of the sovereignty of the shari’a; Democracy’s collective leadership contests the concept of sole leadership in Islam; Freedom in democracy opposes the concept of bound to the shari’a law.²⁷³

The “reformists” affirmed that although Islam is not merely a religion that regulates the relation between humans and God, it is also not a all-inclusive religion that covers all aspects of regulations in a detailed manner, including regulations on statehood. According to this group, there are no theological arguments both in the Koran and the Sunna that obliges a state to implement a certain form of governance.

The “reformists” affirmed that although Islam is not merely a religion that regulates the relation between humans and God, it is also not a all-inclusive religion that covers all aspects of regulations in a detailed manner, including regulations on statehood. According to this group, there are no theological arguments both in the Koran and the Sunna that obliges a state to implement a certain form of governance.