MUSLIMS LEADERSHIP: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Perhaps, a random check on the history of muslims in general and that of the north will lead us to find the factors that have led us to where we are today. Records show that less than 30 years after the demise of the holy prophet of Islam, the muslim community got sharply divided politically into two camps. There was the minority Shi’ite who believed that the leadership of the muslim community must remain within specified bloodline of the prophet. Also there was the majority Sunni who thought it did not necessarily have to remain in the bloodline of the prophet. The two camps have had within their folds, people who crossed acceptable boundaries in dealing with their differences. Some, genuinely due to misinformation or error of judgment; some with less than noble intentions. The first recorded civil war among the muslims was fiercely fought. At its peak and in the year 680AD some family members of the prophet were attacked and almost wiped off the face of the earth. After the incidents, many groups among the majority Sunnites and minority Shi’ites began to reflect on some salient issues. A number of schools of theology appeared among the majority Sunnites trying to obtain the correct religious view on what happened: what is the truth in general sense? what is the nature of political power? who should have it? what informs human actions? how far is one responsible for their actions to the extent that they affect their own destinies and the destinies of others? what is the place of a perpetual sinner in Islam? what is the nature of good and evil? from where do good and evil come? what is the position of Qur’an and Sharia in all human social indices? Some of the ‘Ummayads’ who were in power, even though were not immediate relations to the prophet of Islam had belonged to a school known as Jabariyyah. They believed in absolute fatalism to the extent that all actions, bad or good flow from God. They killed those who upheld contrary views saying each individual is responsible for his actions. They saw them as rebels that had to be crushed or silenced. Subsequently, there appeared the Mu’tazila school that generally upheld reason over revelation in reaching divine truth. They admitted into the fold of Islam various Hellenistic thoughts and epistemologies. It theorised that one must begin by reasoning through issues first to arrive at the truth of the Qur’anic text. It saw the Qur’an as a divine creation whose content was not eternal with Allah; its interpretations limited by time, circumstances and in some cases geography. That was against the orthodox position that suggested Qur’an to be a word of Allah that is eternal with Him regardless of time; circumstances and geography. Talk about consistency and honour! Mu’tazila flourished between 8th to 10th centuries AD. On their part, the minority Shi’ites had much in common with Mu’tazilites, even though Mu’tazilites were Sunnites. This was why most of their ordained religious doctrines relied on the strength of scholasticism, than textual references from the Qur’an and Hadith. It is important here to note that the muslim political leaders who followed after Ummayads, the Abbasids, were closer in kin and relation to the prophet. Yet they were Sunnites that were very sympathetic to Mu’tazilites’ point of view. In fact one of their kings, Mamun the Great, instituted a ‘Mihna’, an inquisition, with the view of consolidating the Mu’tazili worldview as the most authentic orthodox reflection of Islam. The inquisition lasted through his successors for about 15years (833–848AD). It was said that one of his successors, Mu’tasim, was the one who put the famous Sunni scholar, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, the founder of one of the four Sunni schools of jurisprudence, Hanbali school, to serious torture, because he refused to agree with him on the notion that the Qur’an was a divine creation. In the 10th century AD, another school of theology that would later dominate almost all the later Sunni world appeared. It was the Ash’ari school. Unlike Mu’tazili school, it used limited reason as it placed Qur’anic text as the first point of reference. That is, instead of beginning from outside the text to try to interpret and understand it, one must start from the text to understand and reason through all realities. The school believed the human mind to be critical in understanding God and His attributes. Later, it won the debate about orthodoxy and established itself as the ordained lenses from which reality can be seen as Islamic truth. realnetbiz/aji/
Posted on: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 21:42:21 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015