This topic is quite problematic in the sense that it deals with the Islam’s relationship to secularism. Is this relationship one of conflict and disaccord or one of harmony and overlap? Related to this question are issuessuch as Islam’s relationship to governance, the relation between Islam andLaw, which are all contentious matters. It seems that when we speak of secularism and Islam, as if we are talking about evident and clear concepts. However, a non-negligible amount,of ambiguity and multiplicity of understandings surround these concepts in that we are not talking about ‘a’secularism but rather a multitude of secularisms as is the case with Islam, by virtue of what is proposed in thearena, we are faced with various understandings of what it means.
Although secularism seems as if it was a philosophy and the fruit of philosophical reflections and meditations which came to fight idealist and religious outlooks, it is not so. Secularism appeared, evolved, and crystallised in the West as procedural solutions, and not as a philosophy or theory of existence, to problems that had been posed in the European context.
Most of these problems emerged following the Protestant split in the West, which tore apart the consensus that had been dominant in the Catholic Church, and imposed the religious wars in the 16th and 17th centuries. It was thusthat Secularism and/orsecularisation began. This leads us to ask the following question: are we in need of secularism in its procedural aspect? Perhaps the most important idea in the ensemble of these procedures is the idea of the state’s neutrality i.e. towards religions and its abstention from interfering with people’s consciences. Whereas, the state’s scope or jurisdiction is limited to the ‘Public Domain’, religion’s scope extends to the ‘Private’.
In the United States religious interference in the public domain is evident, despite the differentiation that exists there remains a significant religious influence. Their leaders’ speeches are laden with religious content and references, and religion is debated in all electoral campaigns where it manifests itself in issues such as prayer in schools and abortion. This in reality is due to the fact that America was founded by evangelical pilgrims fleeing with their religion from the Catholic Church’s persecution in Europe. It is for this reason that the U.S. is looked at as thePromised Land, the land of dreams mentioned in the Torah and Gospels. As the Franco-American thinker Tocqueville once remarked that the Church is the most powerful party in the United States. This is by virtue of the huge influence that it enjoys, though this is not the case in Europe. Whereas the number of those who can lead prayer in the US exceeds 50%; in Europe it does not reach 5.
In the European context, also, there are differences in the state’s relationship with religion between the French heritage and Anglo-Saxon Islam, since itsinception has alwayscombined religion with politics, religionand state – one, whereby in the UK the Queen combines the temporal and the religious powers. The complete separation is the one that is associated with the French experience, which resulted from the clashes that took place in French history between the revolutionaries’ state and the Catholic Church.
Even in Europe, therefore, we are not dealing with one experience in secularism, perhaps for our purposes, since our elite is influenced by the particular French perspective (particular even for Europeans) where religion is totally excluded from the public sphere and the state considers itself the sole guardian of national identity.
This exclusion of the religious and its symbols from the public domain is what led France to be the only country that refused the covering of heads for Muslim women while we don’t see such a crisis in any other European country over the issue of headscarves. This is exclusively due to the particular nature of the relationship between state and religion in France which was the result ofa particular historical experience.
We in turn are not faced with one understanding; perhaps the most important procedure invented by the secular worldview on this level is the state’s neutrality. In other words, the state is the guarantor of all freedoms be them religious, political or otherwise. And the state should not interfere in favour of this or that party.
We pose the following question now: Is Islam in need of such a procedure? i.e. the state’s neutrality towards the variousreligions. Islam, since its inception, has always combined religion with politics, religion and state. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be to him) was the Messenger of the religion as well as the founder of the state. The first pledge of allegiance made by the group of Madinah who came to Makkah was a religious pledge to believe in Allah and His Messenger. But the second pledge was to protect the Muslims, even by sword, should al-Madina be attacked.
Al-Madina, and thisexpression is of the utmost importance, used to be called Yathrib beforebecoming Al-Madina (The City) which implies that Islam is not merelya religion but also carries a civilizational meaning. It is a transferring of people from Bedouin life to urban/civilizational life. This is why ‘Bedouinization’ was considered a great sin once urbanization had been achieved. No wonder then that wherever Islam went it established cities and our country hosts the oldest city built by Arabs in North Africa. Therefore, the City founded by the Prophet is a clear indication that Islam isa religion of civilization, whereby it shifted those warring tribes from aBedouin level to a civilized one and united them around a state.
The Prophet was an imam in the religious sense as he led prayers in mosques, and at the same time a political imam that arbitrated people’s disputes, led armies, and signed various accords and treaties.
Of relevance to us is the fact that upon his arrival to Medina he established a mosque and put in place a constitution that was called Al-Sahifah. This Sahifah, which is one of the oldest constitutions in theworld, contained a bundle of covenants regulating the relations between(Makkan immigrants and their hosts (these were considered one nation and the Jewish tribes of Madinah (also considered a nation). Al-Sahifa considered these two religious nations as comprising one political nation and entity that is distinct from others. The most important concept offeredby such scholars as Muhammad Salim Al ‘Awwa and Muhammad ‘Umar is the distinction between the religious and the political as correspondingto the separation between state and religion.
The distinction between that which is political and that which is religious is clear in the Sahifah in that Muslims are a religious nation (Ummah) and the Jews another, but the combination of the two plus other polytheists made up a nation in the political sense. This distinction can be witnessed in the Prophet’s dealings even if the boundaries were not always clear. Whereas the religious is the sphere of observance and obligation, the political is the sphere of reason and Ijtihad. At times when the (ambiguity confused the companions, they would ask the Prophet whether this is divine revelation (wahy) or a mere opinion. In the case of the former they would obey, and when it is the latter they may differ and offer alternatives. On more than one occasion did the companions differwith the Prophet in his capacity as the head of state, and SheikhTahar Ben Ashour has dealt in detail with the topic of what he called ‘Prophetic Statuses’.
One day the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be to him) passed by a group in Medinah cross-pollinating palm trees and said: ‘I do not see the benefit of doing so.’ The Medinan people thought that that was divine revelation and stopped treating their trees which made their harvest of that year of a lesser quality. They asked him why he ordered them to do so, and he replied: you are best placed toknow what is beneficial for you in your worldly affairs.Therefore, it is not the duty of religion to teach us agricultural, industrial or even governing techniques, because reason is qualified to reach these truths through the accumulation of experiences. The role of religion, however, is to answer the big question for us, those relating to our existence, origins, destiny, and the purpose for which we were created, and to provide us with a system of values and principles that would guide our thinking, behaviour, and the regulations of the state to which we aspire.
So, Islam since its inception and throughout its history has not known this separation between state and religion in the sense of excluding religion from public life. And Muslims, to this day, have been influenced byIslam and inspired by its teachings and guidance in their civic life, with the distinction remaining clear. This distinction between the religious andthe political is also clear in the thought of Islamic scholars/jurists. Theyhave distinguished between thesystem of transactions/dealings(Mu’amalat) and that of worship (‘Ibadat). Whereas the latter is the domain of constancy and observance i.e. reason cannot reach the truth, the former is the domain of searching for the general interest, for Islam came to realisepeople’s interests as confirmed by such great jurists as Al-Shatibi and Ibn ‘Ashour. These scholars have agreed that the highest objective of all divine messages is to establish justice and realise people’s interests, and this is done through the use of reason in light of the guidelines, objectives, values and principles provided by religion. Thus, there isa domain of transactions / dealings which is constantly evolving and represents the sphere of variables and there is the domain of creed, values, and virtues which represents the sphereof constants.
(to be concluded)