Dear Farzana Sahiba: 

This is in response to your post 57. 

Your Question 1: Does Islam require its adherents to constitute an Islamic state? 

My Response:

To my knowledge, there is no such compulsion in Quran. But, then, does Islam compel the Muslims to travel by air, drive a car, generate electricity, use a computer and a telephone and set up insurance companies? 

The Muslims are free to do what is needed, feasible, or required for a better life under the given set of circumstances with the pervasive social, economic and political culture. If Muslims want to call their state an Islamic state, its their choice. I fail to see what is all the fuss about?  

Regarding your question 2, and 3 of the same post, I will leave that for Rafi Aamer Sahib to respond to you as the questions are from his review of the book.  

In the mean while, however, Dr. Tahir Qazi Sahib has provided you with an excellent commentary as well as a few challenging questions regarding your explanation of Quranic teachings in terms of being temporal or eternal.  

Dr. Qazi Sahib has also included a thoughtful as well as thought provoking comments on Ijtehad.  

I will now come to the last question of your post 57, as it relates to my review of the book, ‘Chasing A mirage’. 

Your question is copied below, which is based on my statement (underlined) taken from my review (post #1), reproduced below:

 

The foundational and conceptual error that Mr. Fatah has made right from the outset is that he has mistakenly assumed that an Islamic state can only be set up by incorporating Sharia. Furthermore, he is also assuming that an Islamic state cannot be a secular states or a secular state cannot be an Islamic state.  

Your questions/comments: 

The above is an oxymoronic statement An Islamic state is an Islamic state not a secular one. Let us not kid ourselves into believing that when Islamists call for a global caliphate, they are hoping to establish secular governance. Not many people would have an objection to their calls if that indeed was their demand. The calls for a global caliphate are inspired by the principles of sharia, nothing else. In short they wish to take human civilization back to the norms of the seventh century.   

My Response:  

I totally disagree with your assertion that Islamic state is an Islamic State not a secular one.An important question arises here : What is an Islamic State?  

It has not been defined in Mr. Fatah’s book and you are also using the phrase in an ad hoc manner without defining the term. Without such a definition, your assertion is false and cannot be taken as support to your view.  

Islam is not a monolithic religion, it exists in many forms and variety of beliefs that all Muslims do not necessarily share. My Islam, for example, mostly revolves around the Quran. I am ready to accept principles handed down through Islamic history, traditions or Ahadith, only if they don’t contradict with Quran in and way or shape. Many other Muslims may not agree with it.  

As I have said elsewhere, the system of Islamic governance is limited to what has been revealed in the Quran. The whole infrastructure of the government can take almost any shape, as long as it ensures that the basic Quranic teachings are adhered providing security, justice, equality and fairness for all within the state.  

As we know, the Quran is silent about statehood details, and the Prophet did not leave behind specific instructions about succession, the only rationalization that I can advance is that it is up to us to run our business of the sate the way we want as long as we stay within the basic Quranic guidelines.  

Sadly, you are again bringing in (as used by Mr. Fatah) the derogatory and hateful term, ‘Islamist’, without telling us what exactly does it mean. Please leave that term for the Neocons and Zionists. Also, I do not care if some one out there is calling for a global caliphate. Why does any one need a Caliph ruling over the whole world? Would that be feasible or even desirable? There are all kinds of people making all sorts of gestures for almost every thing. It makes no sense for us to chase after every statement made by any one. Such statements do not deserve a serious thought. 

Strictly speaking, there is no state that exists today which can be considered a 100% secular states. The religion has some influence in some ways. The former soviet communist states may have been the closest to a total separation of religion and the state but they no longer exist under same structure.  

In order for any one to comment on establishing or opposing an Islamic State, it could have been instructive and should have been considered mandatory to set up an understanding in terms of its ideological and canonical boundaries. It makes no sense to write a book on a phenomenon that has not been fully understood and bounded through a rational definition. Hence my view that ‘Chasing A Mirage’ is a futile effort that serves no one, certainly not the Muslims or Islam. If any thing it adds to the confusion surrounding Islam. In that sense, it can only be considered yet another instrument in the hands of those who are bent upon maligning Islam and the Muslims. 

In the end, although not a part of your question or comments, please allow me to re-iterate and re-emphasize a huge negative and harmful impact of the constant and very severe interference from foreign powers, namely Britain and the US during the last 90 years that has caused a huge political backwardness and economical quandary of a sizable Muslim population around the world*. The importance of this point is felt essential to highlight that it is yet another area where the ‘Chasing A Mirage’ has statements contrary to the reality on the ground.     

Javed I. Chaudry 

*Note: Same applies to many Latin American nations as well, but we will concentrate on the Islamic World only for the time being.