seculartism is not alien or ghost to islam, infact secularism placed foundation of some integral part of islam.
Most politcial islamic organisation preach : Islam Good where as Secularism Bad. which from their perspective give a clear demarcation and diffrence between islam and secularism.
Religious states had always been exception in islam history. Umayyad and Abbassid empires were based on authoritative rules. obeisance to the religion was more in symbolic sense. you can call them semi secular states.
Fatimid state in Egypt and Syria the states which came into existence after this period were even more secularised.fatimadi were clearly fanatical Isma'ili but even they could not impose their faith on the state. sinc most of their state men were sunni. they decided to separate the affairs of the state from Isma'ili theological considerations
In Islam during the seventh to fourteenth century, there was one gigantic struggle between the Mutazalites and the Asharites. and there was the clear-cut victory of the Asharites that ensured that Muslim societies tended to see religion and politics as two sides of the same coin.
as said by Muhammad Iqbal:
"if religion is separated from politics you are left with the terror of Ghengis Khan."
Problem which stands here is that : secularism in the whole muslim world is taken in the shadow of oppression and suppression of tradition and religious people.
like in egypt muslim was brutally suppressed by the secular regime of Gamal Abdul Nasser. same in Syria and Iraq baathist were even more vicious. Constitutional Party in Tunisia and National Liberation Front in Algeria supported anti-religious policies and persecuted anyone who identified with Islam.
this made secularism a dirrection opposition to islam to muslim world.
another problem occured when many traditionalist muslims often equated secularism with Europeanisation. a alien from europe which keeps eurocentic core to itself. with secularism ideas of liberty and freedom become the only basis for the future of Muslim societies and cultures because they are seen as the only universal standard by which liberty and freedom are assessed and understood.
Kemal Ataturk in turkey presented secularism as superior ideology and pitted it in oppose to a perceived inferior religion. he said islam is problem to progress and no trace of islam should be left in turkey. he europanised school collages university, banning of turbam hijab or beard . calling european civilization as only civilization and it should be the only one left in world.
-----
muslim belief in islam changed with fall of theocratic state of iran. Most scholr relised there is something wrong and secularism should be embraced but for that secularism and religion have to be reformulated.
Indian scholar Asghar Ali said: Islam and secularism have to be liberalised. and koran provides support for 'liberal or non-theistic secularism'.
the thing is muslim secularist shouldnt be disrespectful to islam but he can be totally devoted to islam but at the same time respect other religion as well. secularism will comes not at the expense of religion , it will come as a method for reinterpreting and revisiting religion itself.
thats the only way to have a secular islam.
Hon sir,
Many Umayyad rulers except for Hazrat Omer bin Abdul Aziz can be considered semi secular as was the Umayyad Caliphate of Spain. However this is not true for Abbasids.
Abbasids justified their claim as successors to the holy Prophet (PBUH) expressed in a letter by Al Mansur to Imam Jaafar saying that Al Abbas (RA) was the uncle thereby closer in kinship to the Prophet (PBUH) than Hazrat Ali (RA) who was son of an uncle. Therefore he (AL Mansoor) was the rightful heir of the Prophets (PBUH) mantle. Sharia was applicable thru out the empire even though not rigorously applied (as in Dubai of today). Ruler was titled Amir ul Momineen and his word was the law. From 10th century onwards Abbasi Khalifas were being reduced to religious figureheads controlling area surrounding Baghdad only. With the coming of Mahmoud Ghaznavi, they had lost all temporal power and a new term Sultan was coined.
You cannot call Abbasi rule as secular by any stretch of imagination.
Dont understand what you mean by Secularized. Fatimid was again a Caliphate based purely on Ismaili beliefs. Islam does not force you to convert and Ismailies did not attempt to convert, but it was again based on religion. Ismaili Imams are alive to this day. Certainly not a secular state in any way.
There is no difference the way Mutazalites and Asharites view the religion and politics. Mutzalites were result of the rationalist movement in Islam. Main difference was whether the versus comprising the holy Quran were created by Allah as and when the need arose, or the entire Quran was Uncreate that is always existed and only revealed such as opening the relevant page of the book, as and when necessary.
Victory of Asharites did, however, start a movement for the elimination of Gnosticism from Islam which had made inroads thru the translation of the Greek books into Arabic. This movement was eventually responsible for the decline of original scientific research from the Islamic world.
The problem that you refer to actually started with Imam Ibne Taymiya (1263-1328). Salafi and Takfiri (those who declare other Muslims as Kaffirs) follow teaching of Imam ibne Taymiya and consider him as the 5th Imam.
Treating other religions with respect, safeguarding life and property of the non Muslims and treating them equally under the law are essential Islamic virtues; these are not limited to secularism.
Only difference is the application of the Jizya or poll tax. The concept is simple. All adult Muslims have to pay Zakat (2.5% Income Tax) and have to fight for the state in case of war implying that all able bodies Muslim adults must be ready to give their life as soldiers of the state. Non Muslims on the other hand are exempt from Zakat and military service, instead they are required to pay a poll tax. It was a kind of protection money.
There is no such thing as Secular Islam.
