Courtesy: Alislam.org
By Dr. Nasim Rehmatullah and Dr. Zia H Shah
With the political turmoil spreading from one Arab country to the next, during the last few weeks, several fears and demons have been reawakened. Could these changes herald development of a theocracy or establishment of Caliphate in some Muslim country? These speculations have served as a golden opportunity for some fear mongers. For example, Glenn Beck claims that Caliphate will result from the rebellions in Tunisia and Egypt. Rush Limbaugh and Donald Rumsfeld have also been tilting at windmills and have joined Glenn’s Jihad against presumed Caliphate. We label the commentary of Glenn and like as fear mongering, as there is no political tool available in the Muslim world to reestablish Caliphate.
What is Caliphate? After the demise of the Prophet Muhammad, Caliphate – spiritual, moral and political succession — was established in 632, akin to the Papacy in Catholic Church. Early on it was a democratic and beneficent institution, but, unfortunately, within a few decades it deteriorated into kingship, largely giving up the spiritual and moral dimension and providing only some political leadership to the Muslims, in some form, over the centuries. The consolation for the believers, as they look back on the history, is that they find the events followed the predictions of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, as he had said, “Prophethood shall remain among you as long as God wills. Then khilafat on the pattern of prophethood will commence and remain as long as He wills. A corrupt monarchy shall then follow and it shall remain as long as God wills. There shall then be a tyrannical despotism which shall remain as long as God wills. Then once again khilafat will emerge on the precept of prophethood.” Khilafat after prophethood can have two portfolios, mainly spiritual and moral and secondarily temporal. It was a special blessing of Allah for Islam that in the early history of Islam, after the demise of the Holy Prophet, the two portfolios were combined in one person during the tenure of the Rashidun Khulafa, the rightly guided Caliphs, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali, may Allah be pleased with them all. This helped tremendously in the early consolidation of Islam. This, however, is not the case after every prophet and was indeed not the case after Jesus, may peace be on him. His earlier followers did not enjoy any temporal influence for a long time to come. After the rightly guided Caliphs the title of Caliph was retained by the kings and temporal rulers but they largely lost moral and spiritual legitimacy and influence. This gulf was filled by the Mujaddids and Sufis, over the centuries, in various parts of the Islamic Empire.
Categories: Islamophobia, Sharia
Here I am linking an article from Economist as material on this issue. I do not necessarily agree with the ideas in this article. It starts:
THE statistics do not look very encouraging. Of the 50-plus countries where Muslims are in the majority, only two (Indonesia and Mali) enjoy political liberty as defined by Freedom House, a New York-based monitor of human rights and democracy. The Democracy Index, run by the Economist Intelligence Unit, adds Malaysia to that shortlist, rating the three countries as “flawed democracies”; other Muslim lands are put in a lower category.
With every year that has passed since al-Qaeda’s attacks on America in September 2001, it has become more fashionable to argue that something about Islam makes it hard to reconcile with full-blown liberal democracy—in the sense of a political system where all citizens have an equal right to vote, and are equal in other basic ways. And with equal vehemence, Muslims have retorted: there is nothing in their faith which precludes a liberal democracy, and much which works in its favour.
http://www.economist.com/node/21525400
Also linking an article by Harris Zafar from Huffington Post:
The term “Islamic caliphate” often stirs fear of an Islamic uprising where Muslims will acquire global political control. Some, like Sean Hannity, claim that giving control to al Qaeda will lead to an Islamic caliphate. And although caliphate is the English rendition of the Arabic term khilafat, the two terms have different connotations.
Since the revolution began in Egypt, many pundits have continually warned of a possible radical takeover in Egypt that will ultimately resurrect an imperialist caliphate. The system of caliphate is apparently obligated to wage war to bring the world under Islamic rule — and then to enforce Sharia law.
This is a far cry from the actual origins and significance of khilafat. Whereas caliphate implies a politico-religious Muslim state governed by a political leader, khilafat refers to the Islamic institution of spiritual successorship. The word khilafat means succession, and the khalifa is a successor to a prophet of God, whose goal is to complete the tasks of reformation and moral training that the prophet instituted. Therefore, khilafat can exist and flourish without a state, much like the papacy in Catholicism, which provides spiritual guidance and unity.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harris-zafar/demystifying-caliphate_b_843031.html