Rather, the Political Interpretation of Islam Is a Bridge to Secularism: A Response to Dr. Hakim al-Mutayri

By His Eminence Shaykh Dr. Abd al-Aziz ibn Muhammad al-Sa‘id
Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University

Praise be to God alone, and blessings and abundant peace upon the best of His creation, Muhammad ibn Abd Allah, his family, and companions.

To proceed: His Excellency Dr. Tawfiq al-Sudayri, Deputy Minister of Islamic Affairs, may God grant him success, participated in the scholarly symposium held at King Saud University on 18/5/1438 AH. His criticism of the benefit-oriented, political interpretation of religion was exceptionally frank and clear. He spoke the truth, revealed the reality, and drew attention to a dangerous cause of deviation in the activist discourse of the groups of what is called contemporary political Islam. May God reward him well and bless his efforts.

Dr. Hakim al-Mutayri, may God guide him, wrote an article entitled “Saudi Religious Discourse and Doctrinal Transformation”, in which he wronged His Excellency Dr. Tawfiq, indeed the Kingdom, its rulers, and its scholars, as the article’s title and contents indicate. He tried to mix truth with falsehood, mentioning matters from the life of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and his companions that lay outside the symposium’s intended subject, things that would not even occur to a fool. He did so to give the reader the impression that what Dr. Tawfiq established was, in the writer’s allegation, “secularism itself, which the West has imposed on the Islamic world from the fall of the caliphate until today!” He then repeated and reinforced this fabrication, saying: “Can such a great foundation of religion be unknown to the Saudi Deputy Minister of Endowments, so that his political grudges against Islamic groups lead him to deny the political system in Islam established by the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and the rightly guided caliphs after him, and to promote the secularism through which the West wants Islam excluded from the nation’s political reality in the Arab and Islamic worlds…?”

He also said that it was “a reproduction, in its entirety, of what Ali Abd al-Raziq wrote in his book on Islam and the system of government”, because of whose errors al-Azhar withdrew the academic qualification it had awarded him.

In response, I say:

First

Dr. al-Mutayri offered no evidence from Dr. Tawfiq’s words to substantiate the atrocious accusation of unbelief he leveled against him: “secularism and denying the political system in Islam”. It was as though his accusation were an accepted fact requiring no proof. In reality, only an ignorant person would accept such a statement, because it contradicts the principles of Islamic law requiring verification of reports. The writer nevertheless made his assertions without quoting anything from Dr. Tawfiq that would support this fabrication, so that he could interpret the words as he wished and mislead the reader with a picture other than the real one. Had he quoted the words as spoken at the symposium, the veil would have been lifted for the reader concerning these deviant groups, and their departure from truth would have become clear. Dr. Hakim wanted to turn people away from this reality by reinterpreting, indeed distorting, Dr. Tawfiq’s words.

Second

Dr. Tawfiq did not address the issue of applying Islamic law to politics, the state, and society, because it was neither the subject of his discussion nor a matter of disagreement and ambiguity. This is especially so given that he holds an official position in a state that applies God Most High’s law, has no constitution other than the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and has no humanly devised laws in its courts. Its rulers continue to affirm this principle and cling firmly to the foundation on which the state was established, despite every challenge and difficulty. The scholars of this country have a commendable legacy, appreciated efforts, and published works explaining the obligation to apply Islamic law. May God have mercy on those among them who have died and preserve the living upon monotheism and the Sunnah.

Their belief in this matter, which is the belief of every Muslim whose Islam is sound, is, in summary, that applying God’s law in all the affairs of the state, society, and individuals is a firmly established obligation. The Muslim implements it in obedience to God Most High’s command, in worship of Him and to draw near to Him, believing God’s judgment to be the most rightful, beneficial, good, just, wise, and perfect. Neglecting it is either unbelief, injustice, or transgression, according to the detailed distinctions established in the books of scholars, early and recent.

Third

The point of disagreement is making these legal rulings concerning government and politics the primary and essential end and purpose of religion, asserting that Islam’s pillars, prayer, zakat, fasting, and pilgrimage, are merely means not intended in themselves, and claiming that they are only “training courses and physical exercises” for reaching the intended purpose of religion and worship: developing the earth, reforming society, and establishing worldly justice and dominion. Many leading figures and symbols of these groups have stated this explicitly. Were it not for fear of excessive length, I would quote their words as evidence. Instead, I refer the reader to Wahid al-Din Khan’s The Political Interpretation of Religion, Abu al-Hasan al-Nadwi’s The Political Interpretation of Islam, with a study and introduction by our brother His Eminence Shaykh Abd al-Haqq al-Turkmani, and his book An Introduction to the Interpretation of Islam.

If readers wish to recognize the truth of this from the reality of these groups, they should consider four things:

  1. They make monotheism and the Sunnah a marginal matter on which neither allegiance nor disavowal is based. Allegiance and disavowal are instead bound to the group’s idea. Hence they do not condemn polytheism at graves or religious innovations and newly introduced practices. Some of their leading figures hold beliefs about graves like Abu Jahl’s and Abu Lahab’s beliefs about idols and defend proponents of the unity of existence. Many are immersed in innovations, besides mocking the Sunnah and its adherents, defending those who disparage the prophets, peace and blessings be upon them, maligning the righteous companions, and putting reason and opinion before the Book and the Sunnah. Anyone who reads the writings of al-Banna, Qutb, al-Mawdudi, al-Ghazali, al-Qaradawi, al-Suwaydan, al-Rashid, al-Ghannushi, and their like will recognize this.

  2. These groups explicitly state that they want government based on pagan ignorance rather than Islamic law: a political system founded on parliamentary legislation instead of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. They call this popular sovereignty. I explained it in my book Refuting the Theory of Popular Sovereignty. The clearest evidence is that, when the Muslim Brotherhood governed Egypt, Muhammad Morsi addressed the people after winning the presidency and made a statement many secularists had not dared utter: “No one is above the people”!! Where, then, is God, O you who magnify your Lord? Where is the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, O you who believe in him? This is besides denying that the prescribed punishments, for unlawful sexual intercourse, theft, slanderous accusation, violent banditry, drinking intoxicants, and so forth, are part of Islamic law.

  3. They distort religious proofs to accord with the party’s requirements rather than what God Most High intends. The nearest example is that many declared the regimes governing their countries unbelieving because they did not rule by what God revealed, and answered secularists’ objections to implementing Islamic law. When their parties assumed power in place of those regimes, ruling by other than what God revealed became permissible, and the unbelieving democratic system became just and true, indeed an individually binding obligation. Anyone objecting became an enemy of Islam and one of the nation’s hypocrites. They adopted secularists’ specious arguments as their own proofs, as interpretations of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and as grounds for diverting the evidence from its real meanings. Thus they suspended the law, distorted its proofs, and deceived Muslims. What secularization could be worse than this?

  4. The implementation of Islamic law advocated by many groups of what is called political Islam does not mean what many ordinary Muslims following them understand. These followers suppose they seek to implement the rulings and prescribed punishments contained in the Book and the Sunnah. Their actual meaning is that whatever legislation the elected assembly approves by a majority constitutes God’s law, even if it explicitly contradicts the Qur’an and the Sunnah. They invoke secularists’ specious arguments in support. I explained the invalidity of these arguments in my book Refuting the Theory of Popular Sovereignty.

When the Muslim considers these things, he recognizes that their displayed religiosity is artificial, that what they claim to be God’s religion is not such, that they have an outward and an inward face, and that they raise Islam’s banner to achieve their worldly aims. May God protect Muslims from their evil and misguidance.

Fourth

Once you, dear reader, understand the foregoing and hear what Dr. Tawfiq said, Dr. Hakim’s misunderstanding, or his wrongdoing and transgression in dispute, becomes apparent. Dr. Tawfiq did not adopt the secularists’ position, may God protect us and him from it. Nothing in his words indicates it explicitly or implicitly. By the political interpretation of Islam he meant using artificial religiosity as a bridge to power in pursuit of worldly purposes and making acts of worship means to that end, as is the reality of these groups’ theorists, as explained above.

Fifth

Dr. Hakim al-Mutayri and intellectuals like him concerned with thought, religious outreach, and Muslims’ circumstances must define their position on the foregoing. If they believe what these words imply, treating purely devotional acts as mere means not intended in themselves, let them state their belief explicitly and proclaim it openly. Let them then excuse us if we accuse them of following the religion of extreme philosophers such as al-Farabi and Ibn Sina, and say that their position in reality impugns revelation, prophethood, and the prophetic mission, as Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may God have mercy on him, explained in numerous places in his books.

If, however, they do not agree with those figures’ assertion that worship consists merely of secondary means for worldly endeavor, but their desires prevent them from warning against it, let them stop harassing sincere advisers who defend the foundation of Islam and its greatest reality. Let them not wrong them by accusing them of secularism. Rather, they must approve their position, even if only in their hearts, and that is the weakest degree of faith.

Sixth

Anyone who studies the theory of the political interpretation of Islam, recognizes its reality, and understands how it is connected to the doctrine of the extreme ancient philosophers through Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah’s explanations will understand well that the political interpretation of Islam as described above is in reality a bridge to secularism. It makes revelation, the prophetic mission, prophethood, worship, and Islamic law merely means to the intended end of establishing worldly justice and humanity’s happiness. Means, as is known, occupy a secondary position and may be replaced by others. Thus those philosophers declared that their philosophy enabled them to dispense with the prophets’ law.

After the recent revolutions and Islamist activists’ entry into politics in some countries, it has become clear that they have begun approaching this idea. They openly accept democracy, indeed secularism, and have begun dividing secularism into moderate and extreme forms to bring their followers closer to the former and improve its image in their minds. Some have declared from the Friday pulpit that the purpose of Islamic law is justice, that justice can be realized through any law whatsoever, and that any constitution or law achieving justice thereby realizes God’s intention and the purpose of Islamic law.

Dr. Hakim al-Mutayri is not free of this deviation, because his understanding of religion is also governed by the political interpretation of Islam. For this reason he attacked the call of the renewing imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, may God have mercy on him, and accused it of failure because it did not benefit from modern movements such as the French Revolution. He deeply admires that revolution, unlike the imam’s reforming, renewing call. He also admires the Khomeinist revolution, even though it was Rafidi, sectarian, and hateful. What matters is that it achieved, or sought to achieve, religion’s end: establishing the state! He has other deviations to which our brother His Eminence Shaykh Dr. Hamad al-Uthman drew attention in Demagoguery Is the Deluge, a response to Hakim al-Mutayri’s Freedom or the Deluge. That is what he called it, not Islamic Law or the Deluge. Yet today he dares accuse those known for steadfastness upon monotheism, the Sunnah, and Islamic law of affirming secularism and calling to it.

I advise him to repent to God Most High and adhere to the method of the Sunnah and the community. If he seeks power, let him say so explicitly instead of wrapping it in religion, which forces him into distortion, confusion, and deception.

Seventh

If Dr. Hakim is truthful in what he said, let him write an article reproducing Dr. Tawfiq’s words verbatim and explaining, with evidence, where he erred! I do not think he will do so. Anyone can make statements and accusations, but not everyone who does so proves his accusation and assertion. If he is sincere in defending truth, why has he refrained from responding to the leaders of groups and heads of misguidance who claim that freedom takes precedence over religion and call for implementing “democracy”, which in reality is pure secularism?

In conclusion, this article does not defend Dr. Tawfiq as a person, although his merit and standing make him deserving of such defense. It defends the idea he stated, which explains truth and refutes falsehood.

I ask God Most High to guide misguided Muslims and protect lands and people from their evil and the evil of unbelievers and hypocrites. He hears supplication. Praise be to God, Lord of the worlds.

Written by Abd al-Aziz ibn Muhammad al-Sa‘id
Faculty member, Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University
25/5/1438 AH