Egyptian Grand Mufti Affirms Reform, Liberal Democracy, Rejects Caliphate
The Grand Mufti of Egypt recently wrote a post (translated from Arabic) on Newsweek’s blog.
He makes some interesting comments, like the compatibility of Islam and Liberal Democracy. Note the use of the word “freedom and human dignity” (coming straight from the liberal tradition when in fact he’s a Muslim traditionalist):
The principles of freedom and human dignity for which liberal democracy stands are themselves part of the foundation for the Islamic world view; it is the achievement of this freedom and dignity within a religious context that Islamic law strives for.
He adds that the Caliphate is not mandated:
This flexibility is present in the Islamic political sphere as well, but this is a point that is often missed. Many assume that an Islamic government must be a caliphate, and that the caliph must rule in a set and specific way. There is no basis for this vision within the Islamic tradition. The caliphate is one political solution that Muslims adopted during a certain historical period, but this does not mean that it is the only possible choice for Muslims when it comes to deciding how they should be governed.
He decries aggression and points out that at one point the Muslim world had 90 schools of law (therefore rebutting the Muslim orthotoxics who start lambasting anyone who doesn’t agree to limit the Islamic schools to four).
He finally says that Islamic Law needs to undergo a re-evaluation, thus affirming reform:
The change of the past 200 years, however, has made it necessary to re-examine how everything works. Meaning that the way in which Islamic law is applied must take into account this change.
Grand Mufti of Egypt. Him and Javed Ahmed Ghamidi in Pakistan are really pushing Islamic Reform in ways that all the pretend reformers could not.
More than a year ago I predicted that eventually Islam will look and feel a lot like secular-humanism (but with a religious gloss). The operative jump in that transformation will occur via liberal democracy, which is now being affirmed by ultra-traditional scholars like Gomaa.
You should shut down your blog and make tawba from all the nonsense, misguidance, and evil that you have been promoting.
Youre not an Islamic “progressive”, youre a regressive fool.
Comment by Abu-Usaama — June 12, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
If he’s regressive, then he must want society to “regress” to something that has existed in the past. When was this golden age of Muslim liberalism, pray tell?
Comment by DanielH — June 12, 2007 @ 9:06 pm
He is regressing towards liberalism, secularism, democracy, and all the false-idealogies that have no basis in revelation.
True progression is progression towards pure monotheism, trusting in Him , judging by what He reveals, fearing Him, and seeking one’s sustenance in Him.
Comment by Abu-Usaama — June 12, 2007 @ 9:17 pm
Abu, may Allah swt guide you to the right path.
Comment by D — June 12, 2007 @ 10:05 pm
Abu Usaama, way to promote the “correct” version of Islam with your insults. The irony is so thick I’m surprised you’re not choking on it.
Comment by Muse — June 12, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
I find it ironic that people want me to be nice to enemies of Islam like this kaafir(ali eteraz) here.
The scent of Nifaq and kufr in his posts are smellable from a mile away. He misleads the ignorant with his sihr. The Messenger of Allah sws said:
“Indeed some speech is but magic(sihr)”
He takes his testimony of faith s as a screen for the fitnah that he causes to Muslims. If anyone has a doubt that this man is a kaafir then goto his poem “I sin”
Comment by Abu-Usaama — June 12, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
Huh, Ali Eteraz was only quoting Sheikh Ali Gomaa. Go on, tell the Grand Mufti of Egypt he is a regressive fool too. *Shakes head*
Comment by Crab with a crutch — June 13, 2007 @ 12:07 am
“He is regressing towards liberalism, secularism, democracy…”
I’m slightly perplexed by this statement. I’ve read tons of muslims write how secularism has no place in Islam. Religion and government cannot be separated and blah blah blah. (Which I think is complete BS btw) I am, however, confused about democracy having no place in revelation (I’m assuming this means Islam). If you don’t have democracy what would the other government options be? A dictator, some type of council? And even then, how would you appoint the dictator (or caliph if you prefer). Its not like God will be pointing down from the heavens and declaring to mankind that “this man shall be my dictator” (I would say woman but Egypt has a problem with female judges being unislamic so I’m assuming this would be out)
Comment by L — June 13, 2007 @ 12:29 am
I think that people who advocate the type of thinking posed by Abu Usama in that one statement really seem to have no solutions.
Comment by L — June 13, 2007 @ 12:31 am
All Im simply advocating is sticking firm to what Allah has revealed.
Secularism has no place in Islam, why? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secularism
Secularism promotes the separation between religion and government, society etc. Secularism promotes that only the masjid belongs to God. Whereas Islam promotes that everything belongs to God.
Islam and governance can not be separated. Allah says in the Quran, repeatedly, to judge by what He has revealed. And He labeled those who do not judge by what He has revealed to be kaafiroon(unbelievers), dhaalimoon(wrongdoers), and faasiqoon.
AS for democracy, as the west understands it: It is based upon the idea that the rule should belong to men, and that man should be the obeyed one instead of Allah, which is polytheism and unbelief. Democracy stipulates that if Allah revealed a ruling upon a particular issue, if the majority state that this shouldnt be applied, then one should obey the majority, and not what Allah’s revelation stipulates.
The unbelief and polytheism is obvious.
Comment by Abu-Usaama — June 13, 2007 @ 1:34 am
If you want solutions, look to the Qur’an, sunnah etc.
Look to the scholars, and real Muslim thinkers like Sayyid Qutb who’s words and actions are purified from the falsehood promoted by the kuffar.
Comment by Abu-Usaama — June 13, 2007 @ 1:41 am
Hi, my name is Abu-Usaama Retardo and I’m like soooo stupid.
I like to throw insults at Ali Eteraz and all those who don’t worship the opinion of holy Sayyid Qutb instead of arguing against what the Grand Mufti has stated. Why? Because I’m a retardo!
Comment by Abu-Usaama Retardo — June 13, 2007 @ 10:46 am
Things always get more fun when the Guardians of Real Islam show up. Who needs Paris Hilton when you’ve got Abu-Usaama? ;)
Comment by Natalia Antonova — June 13, 2007 @ 12:49 pm
Abu Usaama… By what principle do you think that you have the right to call anyone who professes the shahadah a kafir?
Though I agree with Sheikh Gomaa in principle, I don’t think we should dispense with the concept of the Caliphate entirely. Obviously modern realities preclude a return to a medieval-style empire-Caliphate, but I think that a modern Caliphate in the form of a multinational organization is a goal worth working for. Close coordination on matters of foreign policy, military defense, economics, technological standards, social programs, etc. has obvious benefits and would provide a good balance between practical application of the concept of the Ummah and the reality of the modern nation-state.
Comment by Sabir — June 13, 2007 @ 1:09 pm
Abu-Usaama
Hopefully you will come back and read some more. Since you are the “superior Muslim,” you should be well-aware of how the Prophet advised Muslims to engage each other and what good conduct and character is.
Have you exhibited this?
What I notice is that you have called someone a bunch of names and thrown around your contempt for general ideological position without addressing even one topic of the post.
Are you angry at the western world, barking at the moon or do you have some legitimate gripe.
If so, make your point.
If not, please stop wasting time.
salaam
Comment by Buzz Kill — June 13, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
Sabir…what you are talking about is essentially an OIC that looks more like the EU. Why call it a caliphate? There aint no caliph.
Comment by Muse — June 13, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
Why does the term ‘Caliph’ need to refer to a single individual? In today’s era, powers that used to vest in a single person are now divided amongst several branches of government. The heads of each branch would have elements of Caliphal authority.
Alternatively, the head of such a multinational organization could be considered the Caliph and hold ultimate decision-making authority over matters of foreign policy and the armed forces (since declaring jihad and making treaties were traditionally two of the Caliph’s main roles), while the presidents/prime ministers of member nations could be considered ‘walis’ (governors) and retain all other aspect of sovereignty over their respective nations.
My point is that a Caliphate need not be a medieval-style empire with an all-powerful sultan as its head. We can apply general political principles articulated in the Qur’an and Sunnah within the context of modern norms.
Comment by Sabir — June 13, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
Yet another sign that AE is getting famous! lol.
Anyway people who have a level of respect while addressing other people even if they disagree with them.
Comment by Aliana — June 13, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
Just saw a typo, I meant to write:
Anyway, people SHOULD have a level of respect while addressing other people even if they disagree with them.
Comment by Aliana — June 13, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
[…] Be Clear About the Muftis Filed under: Uncategorized — eteraz @ 5:57 am As I noted a few days ago, Sheikh Gomaa of Egypt seemingly “validated” the ideas of […]
Pingback by Let’s Be Clear About the Muftis « Ali Eteraz — June 15, 2007 @ 5:57 am
Abu Usama is a wahhabi. Anyone who talks about “pure monotheism” is a wahhabi. Wahhabis believe all Jews and all Christians and 95% of Muslims are going to hell. They believe that the wahhabis are the saved sect.
They believe there are 3 types of monotheism, and they believe Muslims only follow one type.
Comment by mohamed — July 4, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
[…] Sheikh Ali Gomaa Affirms Liberal Democracy […]
Pingback by Huge News: Egyptian Mufti Kills Death Penalty for Apostasy « Ali Eteraz — July 24, 2007 @ 10:10 am