Fragile: Handle with Care

When breakable goods are shipped, they are stamped with a distinctive sign--"Fragile: Handle with Care". Even though the Quran, the holiest book on Earth, does not carry the warning, Quran-maniacal Muslims do handle it with the same attitude, as if the holy book will shatter into pieces. Apparent respect shown towards this book is not because of its contents. Instead, it has become a religious mandate, propagated by extensive propaganda and it is an exhibition of a natural human instinct to worship something, whether it be an idol or a book. Muslims believe that thawab (a spiritual reward) is earned every time a portion of the book is recited. It's a kind of credit card that offers mileage on flying-the more you charge the card, the more points you earn.
Is the book that Muslims are holding in their hands today nothing but a replica of the master copy, which Allah has preserved in his sacred library? All Muslims of the world would unanimously vote for "Yes". Their assessment is not based on facts but on a Quranic verse that says, "This is a Glorious Quran, (inscribed) in a tablet preserved!" (Q85:21). So, did Allah use his gigantic copier machine, creating thunder and storm, to make copies of his Quran?
Not really!
In today's world, people would reject any attempt of initiating a new religion. If someone did try, he would immediately be put in a straightjacket and sent to a psychiatric hospital. The same rule applies to Muhammad; his claim of receiving commands from Allah is an outright lie. However, for the sake of this article, let's pretend that Allah revealed the Quran.
Whenever a verse was revealed to Muhammad, it was memorized by his associates and sometimes written on pieces of wood, deerskin, palm leaves, bones, etc.
Why were those verses written on wood, deerskin, bones and palm leaves?
Historical records show that Ts'ai Lun, a Chinese official, reported the invention of paper to the Chinese Emperor in 105 AD, 500 years before the era of Muhammad. Recent archeological investigations, however, claim the actual invention may have been around 140-86 BC in Gansu province of China. Although the word "paper" came from "papyrus", there is a significant difference between these two. Papyrus was a type of plant found in Egypt along the Nile River. Approximately 5000 years ago, Egyptians made flat and uniform sheets from these trees for writing purposes.
Maybe China was a little too far from Arabia and Allah was not able to help Muhammad with paper. How about using papyrus, which was available in Egypt? In another archeological discovery, a roll of papyrus more than 2000 years old was found in Egypt. This papyrus contains 112 short poems of a Greek poet and they are in good condition. Allah could have easily commanded, "O prophet! Get a bundle of papyrus and write down what's sent to thee!" But it did not happen.
People used to make false a Quran when Muhammad was alive. We read in verse 2:79,
"And woe unto those who write the scripture with their own hands and then say, 'This is from God,' that they may in this way obtain a small gain. Woe unto them for what their hands have written and woe unto them for what they gain thereby!"
Despite the possibility of creating a false Quran, Allah or Muhammad never thought about the importance of compiling the Quran and putting the verses in the form of a book. Apparently, the foremost method of preserving the Quran was memorization. Some verses were written on stones, bones and leaves, without realizing the fact that goats love to eat leaves. Yes, a darned animal with four legs known as a goat ate a piece of the all-powerful Allah's Quran. "Narrated by Hazrat Ā'ishah that ayat-e-Rajm and ayat Raza'at were revealed, they were written on something. I kept them under the cart, meanwhile the holy prophet died and we became busy and one GOAT came and ATE those ayyat" (Ibn-e-Maja).
A'ishah had a problem with domestic animals before. In another instance, in order to resolve a scandal, a slave girl, Barirah, testified (al-Tabari, p.1523), "The only fault I ever found in 'Ā'ishah is that, when I was kneading my dough and ordered her to watch it, she fell asleep over it, and the pet sheep (or a goat) came and ate it." It's very normal for a little child; however, a goat eating the Quran is a noteworthy phenomenon that will have an enduring effect on believers of Islam.

Statement of the International Islamic Conference - Eight Schools of Islamic Law

In accordance with the fatwas issued by the Honourable and Respectable Grand Imam Shaykh al-Azhar, the Grand Ayatollah Al-Sayyid Ali Al-Sistani, the Honourable and Respectable Grand Mufti of Egypt, the Honourable and Respectable Shi’i clerics (both Ja’fari and Zaydi), the Honourable and Respectable Grand Mufti of the Sultanate of Oman, the Islamic Fiqh Academy in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Grand Council for Religious Affairs of Turkey, the Honourable and Respectable Grand Mufti of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Respectable Members of its National Fatwa Committee, and the Honourable and Respectable Shaykh Dr. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi; And in accordance with what was mentioned in the speech of His Hashemite Majesty King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein, King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan during the opening session of our conference; And in accordance with our own knowledge in sincerity to Allah the Bounteous; And in accordance with what was presented in this our conference by way of research papers and studies, and by way of the discussions that transpired in it; We, the undersigned, hereby express our approval and affirmation of what appears below:
1) Whosoever is an adherent of one of the four Sunni Schools of Jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i and Hanbali), the Ja’fari (Shi’i) School of Jurisprudence, the Zaydi School of Jurisprudence, the Ibadi School of Jurisprudence, or the Thahiri School of Jurisprudence is a Muslim. Declaring that person an apostate is impossible. Verily his (or her) blood, honour, and property are sacrosanct. Moreover, in accordance with what appeared in the fatwa of the Honourable and Respectable Shaykh al-Azhar, it is not possible to declare whosoever subscribes to the Ash’ari creed or whoever practices true Sufism an apostate. Likewise, it is not possible to declare whosoever subscribes to true Salafi thought an apostate. Equally, it is not possible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims who believes in Allah the Mighty and Sublime and His Messenger (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and respects the pillars of Islam and does not deny any necessary article of religion.
2) There exists more in common between the various Schools of Jurisprudence than there is difference. The adherents to the eight Schools of Jurisprudence are in agreement as regards the basic Islamic principles. All believe in Allah the Mighty and Sublime, the One and the Unique; that the Noble Qur’an is the Revealed Word of Allah; and that our master Muhammad, may Blessings and Peace be upon him, is a Prophet and Messenger unto all mankind. All are in agreement about the five pillars of Islam: the two testaments of faith (shahadatayn), the ritual prayer (salat), almsgiving (zakat), fasting the month of Ramadan (sawm), and the Hajj to the Sacred House of Allah. All are also in agreement about the foundations of belief: belief in Allah, His Angels, His Scriptures, His Messengers, and in the Day of Judgement, in Divine providence - good and evil. Disagreement between the ulama’ is only with respect to the ancillary branches of religion (furu’) and not the principles and fundamentals (usul). Disagreement with respect to the ancillary branches of religion (furu’) is a mercy. Long ago it was said that variance in opinion among ulama’ “is a good affair”.
3) Acknowledgement of the Schools of Jurisprudence within Islam means adhering to a fundamental methodology in the issuance of fatwas. No one may issue a fatwa without the requisite personal qualifications which each School of Jurisprudence defines. No one may issue a fatwa without adhering to the methodology of the Schools of Jurisprudence. No one may claim to do absolute Ijtihad and create a new School of Jurisprudence or to issue unacceptable fatwas that take Muslims out of the principles and certainties of the Shari’ah and what has been established in respect of its Schools of Jurisprudence.
4) The essence of the Amman Message, which was issued on the Blessed Night of Power in the year 1425 H. and which was read aloud in Masjid al-Hashimiyyin, is adherence to the Schools of Jurisprudence and their fundamental methodology. Acknowledging the Schools of Jurisprudence and affirming discussion and engagement between them ensures fairness, moderation, mutual forgiveness, compassion, and engaging in dialogue with others.
5) We call for casting aside disagreement between Muslims and unifying their words and stances; reaffirming their mutual respect for each other; fortifying mutual affinity among their peoples and states; strengthening the ties of brotherhood which unite them in the mutual love of Allah. And we call upon Muslims to not permit discord and outside interference between them.

The Islamic Modest Dress - The Religious Edicts on These Issues

We have seen through these lessons that according to the precise and moderate precepts of Islam, in regard to the relations of a man and a woman based upon the reliable sources and practices of the Holy Prophet and pure Imams, it is documented that it is not obligatory to cover the face and hands as well as the fact that they strengthen the permissibility for men or women to look at each other upon the condition that it is not for lust (unless they are husband and wife) nor fear of deviation. Now we will briefly refer to the edicts of the religious jurisprudents because it is important to know how they have interpreted this issue from the beginning of Islam to the present. ⁸

To begin with, what is the opinion of religious jurisprudents as to the covering of the face and hands and secondly, what edicts have they issued in regard to looking?

As to the fact that it is not obligatory to cover the face and hands, there appears to be no difference of opinion among all of the religious jurisprudents, Shi’ite or Sunni. There was only one Sunni who disagreed. He was Abu Bakr ibn 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Hisham and it is not clear if his opinion related solely to the ritual prayer or if it included those people who were not mahram, as well.

There is no difference of opinion as to the face but some differences have appeared with regard to the hands to the wrist and the feet to the ankles as to whether or not they are included among the exceptions. Before mentioning what they have said, two points should be noted. First, the issue of covering is dealt with in two places in jurisprudence. One is in relation to the fact that it is obligatory in the ritual prayer for women to cover all of their body, whether or not a non-mahram is present. Here the question arises whether or not the face and hands must also be covered . The second place the issue is discussed is in relation to marriage and to what extent a suitor has the right to look at the woman he may decide to seek permission to marry. Here, there is most often a general discussion about covering and the permissibility or impermissibility of looking.

Thus, from the point of view of jurisprudence, we have two kinds of covering. One is the covering which is obligatory for the ritual prayer which has certain rules such as the clothes worn must be ritually pure, not usurped, etc. The other is the covering which is obligatory, other than for the ritual prayer, before men with whom a woman is not mahram and which does not have the special requirements of the covering for the ritual prayer. As we will later point out, there appears to be no difference as far as extent of covering before a mahram.

The second point to be noted is that the religious jurisprudents employ a term which refers to the body other than the face and two hands. This term is ‘aurah’, ‘exposed' or 'bare' or 'naked'. It is possible that this term appears unattractive to some people in the sense that nakedness may be considered to be unattractive. We then ask if a woman's body, other than her face and hands, be something which is considered to be ugly or unattractive from the point of view of Islamic jurisprudence?

The answer is that the word aurah in no way refers to something ugly or unattractive. In the first place, not every ugly or undesirable act is referred to as aurah and the opposite is also true. The word aurah is often used in reference to something which has nothing to do with ugliness.

In the Holy Quran, the word is used in verse 33:12, "Truly our houses are open "(exposed, vulnerable, aurah) ,by which excuse they hoped to be exempt from fighting. It is clear that no ugliness is referred to in relation to their houses. In verse 24:59, which will be referred to, three times are mentioned where even a mahram needs to seek permission to enter an area of another's privacy (except a husband or wife) and these are called the time of "three aurah".

In the Majma' al-Bayan the author, who is incomparable among the commentators in his ability to cleave apart the meanings of words in reference to the use of the word aurah in verse 33:14 says, "aurah refers to anything which can easily be harmed which one is concerned about like the borders or frontiers of a country or something related to a war. A bare or exposed or naked place or house is a house which is vulnerable and easily harmed." ⁹

Thus, it becomes clear that the word is not used by the religious jurisprudents to abase or weaken. The body of a woman is referred to as vulnerable because it is like a house which contains no walls and can be easily harmed and must be covered by some kind of an enclosure.

Now let us look at what the edicts say. Allamah in Tazkirat ul fuqaha' wrote, "The totality of woman's body is aurah (vulnerable) other than her face." All of the ulama in the various cities confirm this other than Abu Bakr ibn Abd al-Rahman Hisham who believes all of the body of a woman is vulnerable. His opinion is in the minority.

In the opinion of Shi'ite ulama, the two hands up to the wrist are like the face and are not considered vulnerable (aurah). Malik ibn Anis Shafe'i, Uwaz'i and Sugyan Thawri agree with the Shi'ite ulama because ibn Abbas had recorded from the Holy Prophet who said, "The face and two hands are included in the exception." But, according to the view of Ahmad Hanbal and Dawoud Zahiri, the two hands must be covered. The words recorded by ibn 'Abbas are sufficient to disregard this opinion.

Allamah refers to the two feet saying, "As can be seen, the religious jurisprudents refer to Surah Nur for the covering required for the ritual prayer yet it does not refer to the ritual prayer. That which must be covered in the ritual prayer is that which must be covered before a non-rnahram and if there is a difference of opinion, it is about whether or not more areas need to be covered for the ritual prayer. But, as to the fact that which is not obligatory to cover in the ritual prayers is the same as that which is not obligatory to cover with a non-mahram, there is no difference of opinion." ¹⁰

Ibn Rushd, the famous Andulusian religious jurisprudent, physician and philosopher wrote, "It is the opinion of the majority of ulama that the body of a woman, other than her face and two hands, is vulnerable, aurah. Ahmad Hanifah believes that the two feet are also not included. Abu Bakr Abd al-Rahman Hisham believes that the total body of woman is aurah without any exceptions.

Shaykh Jawad Mughniyah wrote in his book al-Fiqh ala Mazahib al-khamsah, "All of the Islamic ulama agree that it is obligatory for men and women to cover that part of the body for the ritual prayer which they cover outside of the ritual prayer. The difference arises as to how much needs to be covered. The question in regard to women is whether or not it is obligatory for her to cover her face and hands to the extent necessary for the ritual prayer and the question in regard to men is if it is obligatory for them to cover more than the navel to the knee." Then he says, "According to Imamiyah Shi'ite ulama, it is obligatory for women to cover that much in the ritual prayers which she covers before non-mahram other than during the ritual prayer."

What is strange is that some contemporary ulama have thought that the view of the ulama in the past was that it was obligatory to cover the face and this is wrong.

As to the permissibility of looking, Allamah wrote, "A man looking at a woman or a woman looking at a man is either necessary (like the look of a suitor) or not. If there is no necessity, it is not permissible to look at more than the face and hands and if there is fear of deviating, this much is also not permissible. If there is no fear of deviating, according to Shaykh Tusi, there is nothing to prevent it but it is disapproved. The majority of the Shafe'i believe the same but some believe that it is forbidden to look at the face and hands."

In regard to looking at the face and hands, there are basically three opinions. First, the opinion that it is absolutely forbidden according to Allamah and a few other people including the author of the Jawahir. Second, it is permissible to look once and what is forbidden is repeated looking. Muhaqiq in Sharae', Shahid Awwal in Lum'ah and Allamah in his other books hold this view. Third, it is absolutely permissible according to Shaykh Tusi, Kulayni, the author of Hada'iq, Shaykh Ansari, Naraqi in Mustamad and Shahid Thani in Masalik. Shahid Thani dismisses the reasoning of the Shafe'i which Allamah had accepted but he says at the end, "There is no doubt that caution should prevail."

The above were the views of the past jurisprudents. Most contemporary jurisprudents do not refer directly to these two issues and, most often, cover it over by means of 'caution'. But among the contemporary jurisprudents, Ayatullah Hakim in his recital Minhaj al-Salihin, ¹¹ in the section on marriage, gives a direct edict in which he states the face and hands are an exception. "It is permissible to look at a person one intends to marry as well as dhimmah women as long as there is no lust in the glance including women whom one cannot prevent from not covering and women who areb rnahram. It is forbidden to look at any other woman, other than their face and two hands to the wrist, and that only if there is no lust involved."

Theorizing the Politics of 'Islamic Feminism'

This article examines developments in 'Islamic feminism', and offers a critique of feminist theories, which construct it as an authentic and indigenous emancipatory alternative to secular feminisms. Focusing on Iranian theocracy, I argue that the Islamization of gender relations has created an oppressive patriarchy that cannot be replaced through legal reforms. While many women in Iran resist this religious and patriarchal regime, and an increasing number of Iranian intellectuals and activists, including Islamists, call for the separation of state and religion, feminists of a cultural relativist and postmodernist persuasion do not acknowledge the failure of the Islamic project. I argue that western feminist theory, in spite of its advances, is in a state of crisis since (a) it is challenged by the continuation of patriarchal domination in the West in the wake of legal equality between genders, (b) suspicious of the universality of patriarchy, it overlooks oppressive gender relations in non-western societies and (c) rejecting Eurocentrism and racism, it endorses the fragmentation of women of the world into religious, national, ethnic, racial and cultural entities with particularist agendas.

Journal of the Turkistan Islamic Party Urges Jihad in China

The latest issue of a journal entitled Turkistan al-Muslimah (Muslim Turkistan) was recently published by a jihadi web forum (muslm.net, March 26). The journal is identified as the work of al-Hizb al-Islami al-Turkistani (Turkistan Islamic Party - TIP). The first issue of the journal was originally published on July 2008 by al-Fajr Institute for Islamic Media, which usually publishes materials on the activities of al-Qaeda affiliated groups in regions such as Afghanistan, North Africa and “East Turkistan” (China’s Xinjiang province). The first issue was republished on jihadi websites in January, with the second issue following in February (almedad.com, January 26; al-faloja.info, February 20).

The three issues are similar to other jihadist journals such as Sawt al-Jihad (Voice of Jihad), published by al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia between 2004 and 2007, Sada al-Malahim (The Echo of Battles), produced by al-Qaeda in Yemen, or Qaddaya Jihadiyh (Jihadi Issues), published by al-Yaqeen Media Center.  Turkistan al-Muslimah follows the practice of dividing the articles between political and religious topics, serving as both “alternative” media and a recruitment tool for jihadis.

Turkistan al-Muslimah focuses on Chinese government discrimination against the Turkic Uyghur Muslims of China, while excluding mention of China’s Hui (Han Chinese) Muslims. The journal has the stated aim of revealing “the real situation of our Muslim nation in East Turkistan, which is living under the occupation of the Communist Chinese and to disclose the falsehood of the Chinese government, exposing its crimes [against Muslims] to the world… [we want the] world to understand our cause and rights, that we are seeking our freedom and independence and to be ruled by God’s Shari’a” (Issue 1).

Like other jihadi journals, Turkistan al-Muslimah publishes an obituary in each issue for a mujahid killed by the Chinese. The first issue devoted several pages to a profile of the late Hasan Mahsum (a.k.a. Abu Muhammad al-Turkistani - referred to in the journal as “Hasan Makhdoom”), leader of the radical East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) until his death at the hands of Pakistani security services in 2003.

The journal also published a multi-part interview with the leader of the TIP, Amir Abdul Haq. In the first part of the interview, Abdul Haq gave details of his early life and religious education and described his passage to Pakistan and then to Afghanistan. In the second part of the interview, the Amir spoke about the training camps he and his Uyghur colleagues attended in Khost, Bagram, Kabul and Herat in the late 1990s, when Afghanistan was still controlled by Taliban. He informed the readers that the Uyghur group was part of the military wing of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) led by the late Uzbek jihadi commander, Juma Namangani (Issue 3 pp 10-11). The TIP was unknown before it emerged last year to make unsubstantiated (and often implausible) claims of responsibility for various terrorist actions across China. It also issued threats of biological, chemical and conventional attacks on the 2008 Beijing Olympics, though the group apparently failed to carry out any operations during that period. Little has been heard from the movement since.

In the three issues published so far, the journal shows a proclivity for using the rhetoric favored by al-Qaeda and its affiliate Salafi-Jihadi groups. This can be noticed in the quotes from Salafi theological materials, in the publication of news of jihadi operations in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and in the political rhetoric the journal has adopted. In a section entitled: “Sayings of the Leader Hasan Makhdoom (i.e. Hasan Mahsum),” the second issue of the journal quotes the ETIM leader as saying “preparation for jihad” is an Islamic duty. [1]

The journal has also adopted al-Qaeda’s understanding of the global economic crisis. In an article about the crisis, “Abu Khaled Saifallah” wrote, “The causes of this crisis are: 1) the September 11 [attack] and the destruction of the World Trade buildings, which served as the treasury for the world, thus it speeded up the collapse of the capitalist system of free banking and the destruction of all banks and foreign investment; and 2) The riba [usury]-based system, which is called interest, and is prohibited in Islam” (Issue 2, p.32).

In an article written by an individual identified as Abu Ja’afar al-Mansour, the Qaeda style message appears to be more clear, with the writer issuing a warning to Beijing;  “China beware… take a lesson from those who preceded you, the Americans and [their] allies, who were defeated badly in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia. Do not walk on the same road and do not use the [same] approach in prejudices [against] God’s subjects and in looting their wealth and fortunes, and in shedding the blood of the children…as America is doing in Iraq and Afghanistan” (Issue 3).

The language of the journal is loaded with concepts and phrases used by al-Qaeda and affiliated groups. Abu Umar al-Farouq wrote an article in the third issue of the journal describing Hasan Mahsum as a jihad leader comparable to Abu Mus’ab al-Zarqawi and Omar al-Baghdadi in Iraq or Abdul Malik Droukdel (a.k.a. Abu Mus’ab Abdul Wadood) in Algeria. The existing issues of the journal show that either the “Turkistan Islamic Party” is trying to associate itself with al-Qaeda and allied Salafi-Jihadi groups or al-Qaeda is aiming to attract “Turkistanis” to their global jihadi movement.

THE CONCEPT OF ISLAMIC STATE

Islamic state is a most discussed subject both among supporters as well as among its opponents. Is there any such concept? Can we call any state an Islamic state? There are many claimants of course. Interestingly among the claimants are military dictators as well as monarchs. Can we legitimately call it an Islamic state? Is there any such criterion to judge the claim? If so, what is that criterion? Generally some ritualistic aspects of Islam like prayer, fasting, zakat etc. are imposed in addition to the Islamic punishments to lay claim to the Islamic state. Will it be enough of a criterion? 
        First of all we should know whether there is any concept of Islamic state in the Qur'an or Hadith literature. A thorough examination of the scripture and Hadith literature shows that there is no such concept of Islamic state. In fact after the death of the Holy Prophet the Muslims were not agreed even on the issue of his successor. The Muslims split on the question - a section maintaining that the Prophet (PBUH) never appointed any successor and another section maintaining that he did. 
        As far as the Qur'an is concerned there is, at best, a concept of a society rather than a state. The Qur'an lays emphasis on 'adl and ihsan i.e. justice and benevolence. A Qur'anic society must be based on these values. Also, the Qur'an strongly opposes zulm and 'udwan  i.e. oppression and injustice. No society thus based on zulm and 'udwan can qualify for an Islamic society. The Qur'anic values are most fundamental. It is thus debatable whether a state, declaring itself to be an Islamic state, can be legitimately accepted as such without basing the civil society on these values. We will throw more light on this later. 
        First of all it is important to note that the pre-Islamic Arab society had not known any state structure. It was a predominantly a tribal society which did not know any distinction between a state and a civil society. There was no written law, much less a constitution. There was no governing authority either hereditary or elected. There was a senate called mala'. It consisted of tribal chiefs of the tribes in the area. Any decision taken had to be unanimous and the tribal chiefs enforced the decision in their respective tribes. If a tribal chief dissented, the decision could not be implemented. 
        There was no taxation system nor any police or army. There was no concept of territorial governance or defense or policing. Each tribe followed its own customs and traditions. There were of course inter-tribal wars and all adult tribals took part in defending ones tribal interests. The only law prevalent was that of qisas i.e. retaliation. The Qur'an put it succinctly as "And there is life for you in retaliation, O men of understanding. " (2:179) The whole tribal law and ethic in pre-Islamic Arabia was based on the law of retaliation. 
        The Islamic movement in Mecca inherited this situation. When the Prophet and his companions faced severe persecution in Mecca they migrated to Madina also known as Yathrib. Madina was also basically a tribal city governed by tribal laws. Like Mecca in Madina too, there was no state and only tribal customs and traditions prevailed. In fact Madina was worse in a way than Mecca. In Mecca inter-tribal wars were not much in evidence as it was turning into a commercial society and inter-tribal corporations for trade were coming into existence. However, Madina, being an oasis, was a semi- agricultural society and various tribes were at daggers drawn. It was to get rid of the inter-tribal warfare that the people of Madina invited the Holy Prophet as an arbitrator.  
        The Prophet, a great spiritual and religious personality, commanded great respect and set out to establish a just society in Madina. First of all he drew up a pact between various tribal and religious groups known as Mithaq-i-Madina (i.e. the Medinese treaty) which guaranteed full autonomy to all tribes and religious groups like the Jews, the Muslims and other pagan tribes. Thus all religious groups were free to follow their own law and tradition and there was no coercion in such matters. The Holy Qur'an also declared that "there is no compulsion in the matter of religion" (2:256). The Mithaq-i-Madina was a sort of preliminary constitution of the `state' of Madina which went beyond a tribal structure and transcended the tribal boundaries in matters of common governance. It also laid down that if Madina is attacked by an outside force all will defend it together. Thus for the first time a concept of common territory so necessary for a state to operate, was evolved. Before this, as pointed out earlier, there was concept of tribal but not of territorial boundaries. 
        The Prophet, in a way, took a revolutionary step, in dissolving tribal bonds and laying more emphasis on ideological boundaries on one hand, and territorial boundaries, on the other. However, the Prophet's aim was not to build a political community but to build a religious community instead. If Muslims evolved into a political community it was accidental rather than essential. Hence the Qur'an lays more emphasis on values, ethic and morality than on any political doctrines. It is Din which matters most than governance. Allah says in the Qur'an that al-yauma akmaltu lakum dinakum (i.e. I have perfected your Din today, 5:3). Thus what the Qur'an gives us is a perfect din, not a perfect political system. The political system had to evolve over a period of time and in keeping with the needs and requirements. 
        One of the basic duties of the Muslims is "enforcing what is good and combating what is evil". This clearly gives a moral and spiritual direction to an Islamic society. The later emphasis on integral association between religion and politics is, to the best of my knowledge, totally absent in the Holy Qur'an. The Prophet was an enforcer of good par excellence and he devoted his life to eradicating evil from society. But he never aspired for political power. He was one of the great spiritual persons born on this earth. He strove to inculcate spiritual power among his companions. The following verse of the Qur'an enunciates the basic philosophy of the Muslim community. "You are the best ummah (nation, community) raised up for people: you enjoin good and forbid evil and you believe in Allah." (3:109)  
        Thus it will be seen that the basic task of the Muslim ummah is to build a moral society based on good and negation of evil. The unity of Muslims is possible only if they remain basically a religious community engaged in building a just society which has no elements of zulm (oppression and injustice), though there may be different ways of approaching the truth. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said that a society can persist with kufr (unbelief) but not with zulm (injustice). The Qur'an also describes Allah as Ahkam al-Hakimin (i.e. best of the Judges, 95:8). These are all value-giving injunctions and hence give a direction to the society. 
        Islam never required Muslims to evolve into a political community. Politics leads people basically to power-seeking projects and aspirations for power brings about division rather than unity. The Qur'an required Muslims to remain united and not entertain disputes weakening themselves. "And obey Allah and His Messenger", the Qur'an says, "and dispute not one with another, lest you get weak-hearted and your power depart, and be steadfast. Surely Allah is with the steadfast." (8:46) 
        When some one aspires for political power they dispute with each other and thus become weak which is what Muslims have been warned against. And in the history of Islam the dispute between Muslims arose on the question of political power. Who should wield political power and who should rule was the main question after the death of the Holy prophet. Thus Muslims began to divide on the question of power.  
        Various disputes arose between different groups of Muslims even leading to bloodshed during the thirty years of what is known in Islamic history as khilafat-i-Rashidah (period of the rightly guided rule). This thirty year period is full of conflict and bloodshed. Three rightly guided Caliphs out of four were assassinated. Why the spirit of unity was lost? Why wars broke out between different groups and parties? It was mainly on account of fights between different aspirants for power and pelf. The first signs of these aspirations appeared immediately after the death of the Holy Prophet. 
        The people of Mecca belonging to the tribe of Quraysh claimed their superiority over others and said that an Imam can only be from the tribe of Quraysh as they first embraced Islam and they were most cultured and cultivated with adequate experience. The supporters of the Prophet from Madina the Ansars, on the other, claimed that it is they who helped the Prophet when he was driven out of Mecca due to severe persecution by the people of Quraysh and hence they better deserve to succeed the prophet. the Imam or Caliph, they claimed should be from amongst the Ansars. The members of the family of the Prophet (PBUH) felt that 'Ali, the son-in-law of the Prophet and leader of the Hashimites, was better qualified to succeed the prophet. 
        Thus these fissures appeared as different groups aspired for leadership and consequently for power associated with the'nascent Muslim state. It is also necessary to stress here that a preliminary state structure came into existence because it was historical and not religious need. We would like to elaborate this a bit. 
        As every Muslim knows the religious duties of Muslims are to pray, fast, pay the poor due (zakat), perform Haj and believe in tawheed (unity of Allah) and not associate aught with Him. This is necessary for spiritual control over oneself. A Muslim can perform these obligations wherever he/she lives. There is no need for an Islamic state for this. A Muslim living in a non-Muslim society can perform these obligations without let or hindrance. And even when there is Muslim rule no ruler can forcibly enforce these obligations on Muslims. Matters of 'ibadat (i.e. acts of worship and spiritual exercises) cannot be coercively enforced by any authority. It is a matter between human beings and Allah. 
        However, it is different matter as far as mu'amalat (i.e. relations between human beings) are concerned. A state has to govern these mu'amalat and ultimate aim of the state is to set up a society based on justice and benevolence ('adl and ihsan in the Qur'anic terms). 'Adl and 'ihsan are most fundamental human values and any state worth its salt has to strive to establish a society based on these values. But for this no particular form of state is needed. Even an honest monarch can do it. It is for this reason that the holy Qur'an praises prophet-rulers like Hazrat Da'ud and hazrat Sulayman who were kings but Allah's Prophet's too. Even Queen Bilquis is praised for her just governance in the Qur'an though she was not a prophet herself. 
        But the Qur'an is also aware that such just rulers are normally far and few in between. The governance has to be as democratic as possible so that all adults could participate in it. If governance is left to an individual, or a monarch, the power may corrupt him or her as everyone knows absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is for this reason that the Qur'an refers to democratic governance when it says: "And those who respond to their Lord and keep up prayer, and whose affairs are (decided) by mutual consultation, and who spend out of what We have given them" (42:38). Thus the mutual affairs (those pertaining to governance) should be conducted only by mutual consultation which in contemporary political parlance will be construed as democratic governance. Since in those days there was no well defined practice of political democracy, the Qur'an refers to it as `amruhum shura' baynahum i.e. affairs to be conducted through mutual consultation which is very meaningful way of hinting at democracy. The Qur'an is thus against totalitarian or monarchical rule. 
           Here a problem may arise as far as the Shi'ah sects are concerned. They believe in the theory of imamah i.e. only an Imam from the progeny of the Prophet's son-in-law and his daughter Fatima can inherit the Prophet (PBUH). The Shi'ahs, in other words, reject the concept of khilafah i.e. succession to the Prophet through election by the people. The right to succession is confined only to the members of the Prophet's family and it is available to no one else. It is no doubt the very basis of the Shi'ah tradition and faith. 
        But this hardly changes the ethos of governance. The state in Iran is today a democratically elected one. The President of Iran and the Majlis (parliament) are elective in nature. In todays world there is no question of a ruler coming from the Prophet's family. It was a different matter when the controversy arose immediately after the death of the holy Prophet. A group of people then did feel that Hazrat Ali, the son-in law of the Prophet who was rigorously just, who had fought and won many an Islamic battle, who was one of the bravest and most honest person should have succeeded the Prophet. He was qualified for good governance in ways more than one. Apart from being just, honest and brave, he was most learned as well. The holy Prophet had described him as gateway to the city of knowledge, Prophet being the city of knowledge himself. He was also greatly confident of his knowledge. He often used to say saluni qabla tafquduni i.e. ask me before you loose me. 
        In such circumstances it is not surprising that many people felt that Ali was much more qualified to succeed the Prophet than any one else. His two sons Hasan and Husain were also eminently qualified as they too were inheritors of the virtues and qualities of the Prophet, they having been trained and brought up by the Prophet and Ali. No one else has such an excellent opportunity to have been so intimately connected to the Prophet and the whole Islamic atmosphere around him. 
        In fact the theory of Imamah was based on this certainty of correct religious guidance on one hand, and, a guarantee for good and just governance, on the other. It is this inner certitude which gave rise to the belief that the members of the Prophet's family are most suited to guide and govern. The Shi'ahs moreover believe that the imams were infallible and can do no wrong. But two things are again important to note here. The governance by imam also could not be absolute in personal terms, much less dictatorial or authoritarian. The Imam will also have to consult the representative of the people as per the Qur'anic injunction in 3:158 in which even the Prophet (PBUH) is required to consult them. 
        This verse i.e. 3:158 is very important verse in laying down the guidance for governance. It is a divine statement against dictatorship or authoritarianism. The verse reads: "Thus it is by Allah's mercy that thou art gentle on them. And hadst thou been rough, hard-hearted, they would certainly would have dispersed from around thee. So pardon them and ask protection for them, and consult them in (important matters)..." Thus a ruler has to be gentle, not hard-hearted and rough and has to act in consultation with the representatives of the people. This verse has been addressed to the Prophet and no imam from his family can deviate from this divine injunction.
        Thus even an imam from the Prophet's family cannot be absolutist and has to base his rule on democratic principles. Thus even the Shi'ah theory of imamah cannot lead to absolutist or purely personal rule. Also, an imam can be infallible in religious matters, in laying down religious rulings. But in all secular and worldly matters he will be bound by democratic structures of governance.  
        Secondly, the theory of imamah was much more relevant as far as the close relatives of the Prophet who lived either with him or very close to his period, was concerned. Today, more than fourteen hundred years after the death of the holy Prophet, no one can claim such physical closeness to the Prophet and its resultant benefits. And even within the first century of the Prophet's death there were many claimants for the office of Imam and the Shi'ahs were divided into number of sects and sub-sects what of today fourteen hundred years after the death of the Prophet who can determine the authenticity of the claimant to the office of the imamah? The twelve Shi'ahs and also the Isma'ili-Mustalian Shi'ahs believe in seclusion of their respective imams. No wonder than that Iran has adopted the elective principle of governance which is what is the ultimate aim of the Islamic scripture. 
           Also, once Islam spread to vast areas of the world outside the confines of Arabia new ethnic and racial groups were added to its fold. This proved both the strength as well as weakness of the Islamic society. Strength as far as rich diversity was concerned and weakness as far as complex problem and group conflicts it gave rise to. The group conflicts got greatly intensified even within the limited  period of Khilafat-i-Rashidah which lasted for slightly less than thirty years. 
        During this period number of groups came into existence. The most powerful group was of the tribe of Quraysh who were muhajirs (immigrants) to Madina to which they migrated along with, or after the Prophet, to avoid persecution in Mecca. They claimed to be the sabiqun al-awwalun i.e. those who responded to the call of Islam earlier than others and also belonged to the tribe of the Prophet. After the death of the Prophet they also came out with the doctrine that the Khilafat be confined to the tribe of Quraysh. However, the Quraysh were divided into several clans of which the clans of Hashim (to which the Prophet himself belonged) and of Banu Umayyah were at loggerheads. Among the Qurayshites the Hashimites and the Umayyads fought against each other for the leadership of the nascent Muslim state. Ali and his sons (particularly Hasan and Husain) who were claimants to the leadership all belonged to the clan of Banu Hashim.  
        Then there were Ansars i.e. those who belonged to the tribes of Aws, Khazraj of Madina and who had helped the Prophet by swearing allegiance to the Prophet and helping him (hence Ansars i.e. helpers) migrate to Madina and supporting him vis-a-vis his powerful opponents. The Ansars also claimed leadership of the state after the death of the Prophet on the basis that they had helped the Prophet and that without their help his mission would not have survived. But the Qurayshites strongly resisted their claim to the Khilafat. Then the leaders of the Ansars proposed a compromise and said let one from the Quraysh and one from the Ansars share the leadership but this was also turned down by the Qurayshites that it would lead to more conflict and confusion.  
        The third group was of those Muslims who embraced Islam from amongst the conquered non-Arab peoples of Iraqi or Persian or Egyptian or Syrian origins. The emphasis of Islam on justice and equality of all believers was great attraction for these non-Arab peoples. In course of a few years large number of non-Arabs, most of them belonging to weaker sections of society converted to Islam and demanded equal treatment. But despite strong emphasis of Islam on equality of all believers irrespective of their social status, nationality, colour or race, the ruling classes among Muslims were not prepared to accord equal treatment to them. Most of the Muslims were accepted Muslims only when they were made mawla (affiliate or associate) of a tribe. Kufa and Basra in Iraq, Egypt, Damascus etc. became centres of these non-Arab Muslims. Many of these non-Arab people were those captured in various wars.  
        As for the first group i.e. the Qurayshites, they wielded power with the second group of Ansars being their co-partners. These groups were contented to a great extent though some sub-groups were not. The Hashimites, for example, were a discontented group among the Qurayshites as the non-Hashimites had captured power. Similarly among the Ansars who were initially the allies of the Quraysh, the younger generation among them felt neglected.  
        The fact that the second Caliph was assassinated by a discontented non-Arab slave on the dispute about wages to be paid to him, showed the beginning of the dissidence in early Islamic society. It reached its peak during the period of 3rd Caliph Hazrat Usman when the non-Arab people from Egypt, Kufa and Basra surrounded his house and murdered him in presence of his wife when he was reciting the  Holy Qur'an. Dr. Taha Husain in his book Al-fitnah al-Kubra (The Great Insurrection) has dealt with this problem. This uprising against Hazrat Usman was result of deep discontent found among them as they felt completely neglected and found themselves discriminated against. 
        Islam had tried to usher in a just society based on compassion, sensitivity towards other fellow human beings, equality and human dignity. However, the well entrenched vested interests, though pay lip service to these values, in practice sabotage them in various ways and continue to impose their own hegemony. The weaker sections and the downtrodden attracted by the revolutionary thrust of Islam and its sensitivity towards them, felt disillusioned and revolted. This revolt brought about near anarchy in society and resulted in civil war in which thousands were killed. 
        There was yet another group of Bedouins who lived in desert and resented the hegemony of the urban elite. They considered the Khilafat as an urban rule imposed on them. They were not accustomed to submission to any authority. Thus in the Battle of Camel  fought between the fourth Caliph Hazrat Ali and Amir Mu'awiyah, the bedouins seceded from the army of Hazrat Ali and raised the slogan "al-hukmu lillah" (i.e. Rule of Allah). They adopted extreme postures and caused much bloodshed in the early history of Islam. 
        Ultimately the Umayyads captured power and Khilafah was converted into monarchy. Maulana Abul A'ala Maududi has thrown detailed light on it in his book Khilafat aur Mulukiyyat. Thus we see that the Islamic society went through great deal of turmoil and bloodshed and could not evolve a universally acceptable form of state. When the Abbasids overthrew Umayyads in the first half of the second century of Islam, there again was great deal of bloodshed. When the Abbasids captured power, some Umayyads fled to Spain and established their own rule there. Now there were two Caliphs simultaneously in the Islamic world. Earlier the theory was that there could be only one Caliph or Imam at a time. Now that theory had to be revised in view of the empirical reality and two Caliphs at a time were accepted. But still later at the end of 2nd century of Islam the Fatimid Imams established their rule in Egypt and now there were several rulers at a time in the Islamic world. The Abbasid Caliphs were also reduced to nominal heads of the state as the Buwayhids and Saljuqs captured powered and wielded real authority. They came to be known as Sultans, the real power behind the Abbasid caliphs. The Islamic political theory had to undergo change again. Now by and large non-Quraysh were wielding power and hence the theory of Quraysh alone becoming caliph had to be abandoned. Earlier the Kharijites (Seceders) who were mainly Bedouins and hence non-Qurayshites had rejected the theory that only a Quraysh could become the caliph.  
        Thus we see that the political theory of Islam had to undergo frequent changes to accommodate the empirical reality. It is, therefore, not possible to talk of an 'Islamic State' with a sense of finality. It is extremely difficult task to evolve any ijma' (consensus of Muslims) on the issue. Today also there are several Muslim countries with as varied forms of state as monarchical to dictatorial or semi-dictatorial to democratic. All these states, however, call themselves as 'Islamic State'.  
        The forms and structures of state are bound to vary from place to place and time to time. It would be very difficult, for example, to create a democratic state in a feudal society. Thus the Qur'an does not give much importance to the form of state but greatly emphasises the nature of society. While the state is contingent the society based on values like justice, equality, compassion and human dignity is a necessity in Islam. And needless to say in our time it is only a democratic state with widest possible power-sharing arrangement which can guarantee such a society.  Also, as per the Qur'anic teachings the Islamic state should guarantee equal rights to all ethnic, racial, cultural, tribal and religious groups. The Qur'an considers racial, national, tribal and linguistic differences as signs of Allah and indicative of identity (see 30:22). It also accepts the right of other religious  communities to follow their own religion and it also accords equal status to men and women (see 33:35 and 2:228). The Qur'an accepts plurality in society as will of Allah (5:48).  
        Thus in view of all this an Islamic state should have following characteristics: 1) It should be absolutely non-discriminatory on the basis of race, colour, language  and nationality; 2) it should guarantee gender equality; 3) it should guarantee equal rights to all religious groups and accept plurality of religion as legitimate and 4) lastly it should be democratic in nature whose basic premise will be human dignity (17:70). Only those states which fulfill these criteria can be construed to be Islamic in nature. Thus an Islamic state is the very epitome of modern democratic pluralistic state.