نوع مقاله : علمی-پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
Introduction
Islam has perpetually been simultaneously a religion, a culture, a civilization, and politics. However, the particular conditions of the contemporary era have imposed the term "Political Islam" upon global political discourse. Consequently, despite the knowledge and belief in this inherent principle, the use of this term in the title became necessary. This is to demonstrate, through citations, that although Political Islam is a new terminology, it existed within the essence of Islam prior to the Iranian Islamic Revolution and even before modernity. Furthermore, despite the West's insistence on the separation of religion and politics, if politics is defined in various ways and contexts, there can be no doubt about the solidarity between the religion of Islam and politics. Thus, the present article, by employing the novel term "Political Islam," has endeavored to show that the connection between Islam and politics is not a new phenomenon and has existed throughout all periods of the pre-modern era. Therefore, the question is: What was Political Islam like in the pre-modern era, and how did it evolve?
Materials & Methods
The answer to this question was achieved by examining Political Islam in the pre-modern era within the two main Islamic schools of thought, Sunni and Shi'a, utilizing the "Historical Sociology" method to provide a clearer picture of the formation of Political Islam in historical periods. This is a method that takes a prospective view of society rather than a retrospective one. In this method, history is not merely the "past" of an event but constitutes its "context" and not what came "before" it.Examining long-term historical periods using the historical sociology method also enables comparison and contrast. Therefore, examining the findings on Sunni and Shi'a Political Islam in the pre-modern era with the help of "Historical Sociology" and "comparing" the findings revealed fundamental differences between Sunni Political Islam and Shi'a Political Islam.
Discussion & Result
In Sunni Political Islam, political sovereignty can be separate from religious authority, whereas in Shi'a Political Islam, these two matters are inseparable, and an indissoluble link exists between religion and politics. Shi'ism considers the Infallible Imam both the political ruler and the religious authority, and in the era of occultation, it assigns guardianship to jurists simultaneously in political and religious affairs. In contrast, among the Sunnis, the theory of monarchy replaced the Caliphate. Sunni Political Islam emphasized the existence of government and its legitimacy, primarily based on consensus, appointment , and dominance, merely for maintaining the existing order. Whereas in Shi'a Political Islam, with its emphasis on the theory of the divine appointment of the Imamate, legitimacy is exclusive to the government of the Infallible Imams and, in the occultation era, belongs to the jurists.
Conclusion
A comparison of Sunni and Shi'a Political Islam in the pre-modern era, framed within four models of relationship with power among Sunni and Shi'a jurists—namely, consolidating-assisting, interactive-solidarity, prohibitive-threatening , and aggressive-radical—indicates that the majority of jurists from the four Sunni schools, accepted the Caliphate even in the form of hereditary monarchy, provided the appearances of Sharia were maintained. Often they appeared in the role of consolidating the government or interacting with power as the pro-government position . However, Shi'a scholars, especially Twelver Shi'a, believing in divine appointment, infallibility, and justice in governance, considered government without the Infallible Imam or his deputy to be imperfect or illegitimate and were always in a prohibitive-threatening or aggressive-radical relationship with power, being considered the opposition to the government. Therefore, the relationship of Sunni Political Islam and Shi'a Political Islam with power enabled strategic and tactical differences between these two schools towards political systems and showed that the relationship of Sunni Political Islam with power tended to be consolidating-assisting or interactive-solidarity. Hence, they generally accepted the legitimacy of the Caliphate, even in its non-ideal form. In contrast, the tendency of Shi'a Political Islam, primarily due to the non-acceptance of the Caliphate's legitimacy, has been mostly prohibitive-threatening or aggressive-radical, and thus, in most governments, they have played the role of opponents to the established government.
Explaining the logic of the historical behavior of Sunni Political Islam and Shi'a Political Islam clarifies why Shi'ites were often in a position of criticism or revolution, while Sunnis were more inclined towards interaction or, at most, gradual reform. In fact, by evaluating the impact of thought on action, it was demonstrated how theoretical foundations, such as the Imamate in Shi'a Political Islam or the Caliphate in Sunni Political Islam, led to different practical strategies. Therefore, in contemporary political analysis, this framework helps us to be able to compare the behavior of modern Islamic groups towards power with historical patterns in the future.
کلیدواژهها English
