Modern Islamist Movements: History, Religion, and Politics (34 page)

Mawdudi on the Quran

In 1921, Mawdudi began studying classic areas within Islam (including the Quran, Quranic interpretation, the Hadith, law, logic, theology, and literature) in Delhi under the Islamic scholar, Mawlana (Abdu)ssalam Niyazi, who promulgated a strict interpretive stance, leaving little room for alternative opinions.5 This lack of openness to alternative viewpoints came to characterize Mawdudi’s approach to the Quran, Hadith, and Islamic history.6 During the 1920s and 1930s, Mawdudi expressed his Islamist views and his opposition to British colonialist rule in South Asia through magazines, pamphlets, books, and lectures, which were written in a clear and direct style that appealed to a mass audience of Muslims.7 In 1941, he founded the Jama(at-i Islami and played a major role in the movement’s leadership until his death in 1979.8

Mawdudi’s views on the Quran, Islamic history, and Sharia as well as his vision for Islam in the modern world had a substantial influence on Jama(at-i Islami and Islamism in general. In terms of the Quran, Mawdudi believed that with the proper faith in God and a strong education in the Quran and Islam, a Muslim could understand the Quran’s “plain meaning” and apply it correctly to one’s life and, ideally, to society.9 Mawdudi indicated that in all of his writings he tried to express “as faithfully as possible” the meaning which the Quran conveys.10 He believed that the Quran contains the complete and perfect revelation for all human beings at all times and that its single true meaning would become obvious to those who sincerely sought to understand it.

Mawdudi maintained that the Quran emphasized four related concepts, ila (divinity), rabb (lord), (ibada (worship), and din (religion).11 Mawdudi argued that these four terms could guide one in attempting to understand the Quran’s essential meaning. The concepts ila and rabb are supposed to be understood in terms of God’s characteristics, while (ibada and din are to be under- stood in terms of the duties which faithful Muslims must perform.12

Ila, among other things, refers to God’s holiness, sacredness, purity, and separateness from human beings, while rabb refers to God’s oneness (tawhid) and his complete sovereignty over the entire universe.13 Linked to these two terms are (ibada, which relates to the proper rituals done in obedience to God (such as offering the daily prayers, making the pilgrimage to Mecca, eating in accordance with Islamic dietary regulations, etc.), and din, which Mawdudi defines as the totality of the entire Muslim community’s obligations, including, but not limited to, the establishment of an Islamic state under Sharia.14 Thus, for Mawdudi the Quran is to be the guide for Muslims’ personal and communal devotion to God; it also provides clear injunctions for the establishment of Sharia and the proper structure of an Islamic state, since for him Islam made no distinction between the religious and political realms.15

The Quran, Mawdudi argued, was not only supposed to be recited, and reflected upon, but Muslims were to read and understand it at face value and implement its teachings. Since the Quran explained the “ultimate causes of man’s successes [and] failures,” if Muslims properly implemented its teachings, they would be able to solve their social, political, and cultural maladies.16

Mawdudi on Islamic History

Mawdudi’s understanding of Islam’s history is dualistic. In the words of Seyyed Vali Reza Nasr, “[t]he lines of demarcation that defined Islam [for Mawdudi] were perforce steadfast: there was either Islam, as it was understood and defined by Mawdudi, or there was un-Islam.”17 For example, Mawdudi believed that there has been one period in Islamic history which has embodied “true Islam” and that was the period of the Prophet and the Rightly Guided caliphs in the seventh century.18 After that initial golden period, “three-quarters” of Islam became defective and incorrect. Mawdudi does not specify which three-quarters came to represent “un-Islam.”19

This very long and deleterious phase within Islamic history (which has lasted, with a few exceptions, until the present time) was comprised of several characteristics: ignorance (or jahiliyya), atheism, and polytheism, all of which Mawdudi believed were utterly antithetical to Islam. The ignorance which pervaded much of Islamic history took many forms and in one of its forms it appeared to profess belief in the Unity of God and Prophethood, to perform pious acts of fasting and praying, and to show an eagerness to refer disputes to the Quran and Sunna.20 Thus, during the period of ignorance in Islamic history, the ignorant people who claimed to be Muslim often had beliefs and engaged in acts which projected the illusion that they were Muslim, while, in Mawdudi’s view, they were not. The combining of Islam and un-Islam in the same body politic, as a result of this ignorance, gave rise to great complications. Atheism took the form of people submitting to the authority of “kings” (probably a reference to the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs of the seventh through thirteenth centuries) and the emergence of various forms of philosophy and theology which resulted in unimportant hair-splitting and “the creation of a number of new sects.”21

While Mawdudi does not name these sects, he may have had in mind such groups as the Mu(tazilites, Twelver Shiites, Ismailis, Zaydis, and others who varied from Mawdudi’s strict view of Sunni Islam. For Mawdudi, polytheism primarily took the form of people worshipping saints’ tombs and confusing these saints for deities.22 In terms of Mawdudi’s rejection of saint worship, polytheism, and several ideas pertaining to the “purity” of Sunni Islam, his views were possibly influenced by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab.23

Although for Mawdudi much of Islamic history was marked by corrupt and disdainful un-Islamic beliefs and practices, there were certain individuals whose ideas represented “true Islam.” These mujaddids or “renewers” of the religion included the founders of the four schools of Sunni law, the medieval Muslim philosophers and legists al-Ghazzali and Ibn Taymiyya and the modern Muslim reformers Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi and Shah Waliullah. All of these great mujaddids were distinguished for their insight into problems which Muslims faced, for their reform of religious practices, for initiating an intellectual revolution, for defending Islam in the political sphere, for establishing the primacy of the Sharia, and for their opposition to the self- proclaimed orthodoxy of the ulema.24 Based in part on his interpretations of the Quran, Islamic history, and Sharia, Mawdudi developed his vision for Islam in the modern world. One significant aspect of Mawdudi’s ideas for Islam in the modern world relates to his conception of the Islamic state.

Mawdudi’s Vision of the Islamic State

One feature of Mawdudi’s vision for such a state is that he does not view it as being democratic. In his writings, he intentionally de-emphasizes the role of free elections. He maintains that God has absolute sovereignty within a Muslim polity and that the emir (as the chief executive would be called) should be given the primary responsibility of acting as God’s vice-regent on earth and enforcing Sharia in this capacity.25 He places great emphasis on the absolute authority of the emir, and of the Islamic state.26 Mawdudi also conceives of this Islamic state as having a legislature and judiciary and their functions would be limited to advising the emir, who would be vested with an enormous amount of power so as to apply God’s sovereign law in the earthly realm.27

Mawdudi states that the emir should be selected by public acclamation but, at the same time, he discourages the idea of free elections.28 For Mawdudi, one basis for determining the authenticity and authority of the emir is the extent to which his rule and decrees embody the essential teachings of the Sharia. He argues that the selection of the emir “albeit divorced from a free electoral process would provide a democratic state whose continuity would be guaranteed by a sacrosanct code of law which by definition was just and therefore required obedience.”29

Mawdudi argued that there were many examples throughout history which demonstrated that the will of the people contradicted Sharia and the sovereignty of God and, for him, one of the most salient instances of this was the secular government of Pakistan, which was in existence during Mawdudi’s lifetime. One way to help assure the implementation of Sharia in its most complete form was by vesting the emir with great power and avoiding electioneering in the process of his selection.30 In addition to criticizing free

election of leaders as a viable mechanism for selecting individuals for political office in an Islamic state, Mawdudi emphasizes that the emir and the state’s political apparatus must reserve the right to use coercive powers in order to maintain order and suppress the possibility of chaos or fitnah.31 There seems to be a bit of confusion and vagueness on Mawdudi’s part when it comes to his ideas related to the selection of an emir.

There are at least two reasons that Mawdudi is pro-authoritarian and anti-democratic. First, he believes that the Prophet Muhammad ruled the early Islamic community in a manner that was fair yet authoritarian. He maintains that while Muhammad was just, the Quran and Hadith convey the idea that Muhammad was the absolute final arbiter and that during the Prophet’s time there was no precedent for or appeal to a democratic process. Mawdudi believes that the Quran, Hadith, and Sharia (as properly formulated) contain one set of monolithic injunctions that are relevant for all times and places. These injunctions are clear and self-evident and it is the task of the emir and his Islamic government to understand these injunctions and implement them decisively and comprehensively.32

Second, Mawdudi was suspicious of democracy because he believed that during the colonial era the British had used a democratic system of govern- ment to favor the Hindus over the Muslims in British India.33 Related to this perception, before the partition of India and Pakistan, Mawdudi believed that if democracy became the system of government in India, it would ipso facto benefit the Hindus since there were more Hindus than Muslims in that country.34 Even after partition in 1947, one of the factors which discouraged Mawdudi from favoring democracy was his fear that a democratic system in Pakistan would give religious minorities and “wrongheaded Muslims” too much power in terms of directing the affairs of an Islamic state, which would be separated from the rest of India.35 The power of leading an Islamic state, in Mawdudi’s view, should be given to a powerful emir who fully understands the Sharia and knows how to implement it.36

Mawdudi on Gender Roles in an Islamic State

Another aspect of the Islamic state which is important in Mawdudi’s thought relates to the role of women and men. Mawdudi maintains, on the basis of various passages in the Quran and Hadith, that men have a “natural superiority” over women and that they are a “degree above women.”37 This presupposition serves to shape much of Mawdudi’s viewpoint on the role of women in Islam. He advocates men working outside the home to earn money and women staying at home and taking care of the various aspects of the domestic sphere, which includes the task of raising children.38 According to Mawdudi, wives are not only obligated to stay at home, but

they must ask their husband’s permission to leave the domestic sphere, and a husband should only grant his wife this permission under special circumstances, such as when she wants to go to the mosque, on the hajj (or pilgrimage to Mecca), and attend funerals or visit graves.39

Much like other Islamists in other contexts, Mawdudi takes a very traditional stance regarding the veiling of women. He interprets various passages in the Quran as meaning that women must veil themselves when they depart from home, but may leave their faces and hands uncovered if they wish.40 According to Mawdudi, the extent to which men and women must cover themselves relates to the specific prescriptions regarding male and female forbidden parts or satar.41 The parts of a man which are considered forbidden and must be covered extend from the navel to the knee, and for a woman this forbidden area involves the entire body, except for her face and hands.42 Thus, both men and women must cover certain parts of their bodies, but Mawdudi maintains that there is simply some variation regarding the degree to which men’s and women’s bodies should be covered.43 On the whole, Mawdudi’s prescriptions regarding men’s and women’s dress are consistent with some of the most traditional Muslim ideas about these issues.

Mawdudi on the Process of Islamic Revolution

For Mawdudi, how can the ideal Islamic state come into existence? In short, he believes that such a state can be established through what he calls a “process of Islamic revolution.”44 Specifically, for him the primary model Muslims must follow in engaging in the revolutionary process is that of the life of the Prophet Muhammad, who created the first Islamic community, which, for Mawdudi, represents the best Islamic state.45 Mawdudi believes the circumstances that modern Muslims face are, in some respects, similar to those which Muhammad confronted in the seventh century.46 For example, much as Muhammad was encircled on all sides by enemies, who had their own visions of an ideal state (which contradicted Islam) and who wanted to destroy Islam, so too modern Muslims are surrounded by enemies who have their own visions of an ideal state and seek to destroy true Muslims in the modern period.47 Modern enemies of Islam espouse notions of the ideal state which involve principles related to fascism, nationalism, democracy, Marxism, communism, socialism, totalitarianism, and secularism.48 These and other modern enemies of Islam seek to convince Muslims and others of the supremacy of their beliefs over those of Muslims. These enemies of Islam also want to use their ideologies as one method of oppressing Muslims or hindering the true Islamic states they may attempt to create.49 Mawdudi states that modern Muslims must realize the tangible threats they face and