What is the role of Islam in Muslim society? Is it just a religion to be practiced privately, as Christianity is understood in the West? Or does it call for theocracy—governance according to the laws derived from it, also known as Sharia?
Dr. Ali Abdel Raziq, whose 1925 book arguing against the caliphate caused an uproar and got him fired from Al Azhar.
Dr. Ahmed al-Tayeb—currently Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar University and former Grand Mufti of Egypt—recently discussed this question on his television program. He did so in the context of discussing the efforts of Dr. Ali Abdel Raziq, a onetime professor at Al Azhar who wrote a highly popular but controversial book in 1925—one year after the abolition of the Ottoman caliphate. Titled, in translation, Islam and the Roots of Governance, Raziq argued against the idea of a caliphate, saying that Islam is a religion that should not be mixed with politics or governance.
While Raziq had his supporters among those Westward leaning Muslims, he was strongly criticized by many clerics, and even fired from Al Azhar. As Tayeb confirmed:
Al Azhar’s position was to reject what he said, saying he forfeited his credentials and his creed. A great many ulema—in and out of Egypt and in Al Azhar—rejected his work and its claim, that Islam is a religion but not a polity. Instead, they reaffirmed that Islam is both a religion and a polity.
The problem with this assertion is self-evident: to say that Islam demands theocratic rule, is to say that Islam demands rule according to Sharia, a body of rules and regulations that are fundamentally at odds with modernity—for example, by punishing apostates with death, as Tayeb himself recently made clear—and the source of conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims the world over.

John spielman says
Yup, islam is a fascist ideology that includes religion ( although an extremely EVIL one ), economic , judicial and political areas that totally subjugate every one into obey or die mentality. The unbelieving dhimmmi are most severely repressed into slave like sub culture.
And all this was brought into the world by that narcisstic demon possessed mass murderer thief liar rapist and pedophile false prophet who could do no wrong in muslim eye- muhammed pbuh*
pbuh* – perpetual banishment unto hell!
The world has been suffering from islamoreality for 1400 years and over 50 millions dead because of it
Ted Tyler says
John, Two points.
1. Muslims believe that Muhammad is the true prophet of Islam. So to label Muhammad as a false prophet would cause your entire statement to be rejected. Why not say: :Muhammad was a mass murderer, thief, liar, rapist, pedophile and the true Prophet of Islam. Here we get a strong association between Islam and bad behavior. That association may have more impact.
2. Don’t you mean: “The world has been suffering from a lack of Islamoreality….?
WorkingClassPost says
That’s a good point 1.
The true prophet of evil…
They should go for that, and it’s quite politically correct too.
Jay Boo says
I totally disagree with Ted.
Ted Tyler is saying that because Muslims accept Muhammad as a prophet that we must do the same.
He then goes on to capitalize the ‘P’ in prophet which is all rather bizarre. That Ted of all people would be proselyting in support of Muhammad as a “Prophet” sent from a deity is a contradiction to what he has previously claimed as his lack of belief in any god.
Ted Tyler says
I suspect that if David Wood had made a post similar to mine, you would find a way to praise it. But since I made the post, you twist my ideas into shapes that I would predict could not be attained.
Jay Boo says
David Wood has and would mock Muhammad’s onviously false clam of prophet-hood and he would never make such a claim.
Just to be perfectly clear, when I say that I totally disagree, I am referring in particular about acceptance that Muhammad is a prophet as shown in my comment. I have no issue with calling Muhammad the founder of Islam a mass murderer, thief, liar, rapist, pedophile owner of a talking donkey of course.
Sociopathic founder of Islam — no problem
Prophet — only by the sword
JOHN SPIELMAN says
I0 the truth about muhammed and islam must be told even if offensive to muslims. The Bible describes some one like muhammed as a false prophet and antichrist who listened to Satan masquerading as an angel of like(Gabriel ) and that any theology like islam is a lie and a doctrine of Satan and muhammed cursed.
2) it is the reality of islam that islam has been responsible for minimum 50 million murdered in the name of allah(Satan to nonmulsim) in the conquest of India alone and millions more in Europe and Africa, and elsewhere in Asia
we are not deceived into believing islam is a religion of peace but of death darkness and hell
JOHN SPIELMAN says
A true prophet speaks to the people on God’s behalf. A prophet who prophesies lies and falsehoods is by definition a false prophet who does not speak for God. muhammed spoke not for God but for the evil one-Satan because allah of the qur’an and hadiths of muhammed has the same attributes as Satan of the Bible
JOHN SPIELMAN says
that should read “angel of LIGHT”
Mirren10 says
Ted Tyler says:
”1. Muslims believe that Muhammad is the true prophet of Islam. So to label Muhammad as a false prophet would cause your entire statement to be rejected. Why not say: :Muhammad was a mass murderer, thief, liar, rapist, pedophile and the true Prophet of Islam. Here we get a strong association between Islam and bad behavior. That association may have more impact.”
I see your point, Ted, but I disagree the association ”may have more impact”. The reason being, is that to muslims, mohammed’s bad (evil) behaviour is perfectly halal; in fact, muslims are **encouraged to emulate it.**
What you have to understand is that muslims use words and concepts far differently from us. Whatever act, however heinous that *we* would consider it to be, to a muslim, if it advances the cause of islam, it is halal. Any action that prevents, or deters, the advance of islam, is haram, however benignant *we* might consider it to be.
Therefore, your suggestion that associating islam with bad behaviour might cause muslims to be pulled up short, and think, doesn’t hold water, I’m afraid. They just don’t think the way we do. Their thought processes are, in my opinion, very similar to those of the Hard Left. Hence the alliance.
Carolyne says
I don’t think that referring to Mohammed as the “TRUE” prophet of Islam is correct because I don’t believe in prophets, ergo no prophet.
Ted Tyler says
Mirren10, Yes, to couple Muhammad’s bad behavior with “Muhammad was a false Prophet” would have absolutely no impact on the Muslim mind”. Then to couple Muhammad’s bad behavior with “Muhammad was the true Prophet of Allah” – would also have no impact on the Muslim mind. Thinking that it might was evidently simply wishful thinking on my part.
However, there is a lot that we don’t know. We don’t know the intensity of the religious indoctrination that Muslims are subjected to and how variable that intensity is from place to place. Then there is the susceptibility of the individual to that indoctrination. Some people will readily accept what ever indoctrination is presented to them and others will question that indoctrination. So it should be possible to reason with some Muslims and not with others. I know that many Muslims have left Islam once they get an understanding of how evil the religion is; however, I fear that those who left Islam are a very small percentage of those remaining.
I suspect that most Muslims are trained to think that anything that advances Islam is good and anything that opposes Islam is bad. We should pay close attention to those who have left Islam to see if the factors that caused them to leave could be applied to those still remaining.
eagle says
Tell us something the American people didn’t know? The only people that can’t understand this is congress and those that do understand are too afraid to do something about it. The American people need to follow Japans lead. Congress allowed a Muslim to become president, the American Constitution states there will be a separation between church and state. Islam, a Muslim Cult, is both a religion and polity. Congress breaks Constitutional Law and allowed this Muslim to become president of the American people breaking constitutional law. The American people have a bunch of dopes in congress and Paul Ryan needs to go. This Muslim president makes by executive order a change in the pledge of allegiance oath to allow the Muslims by religious exception to disallow their allegiance to America. This means the Muslim refugees and anyone that takes this step towards citizenship are not citizens of America. What further proof does one need to send our dear Muslim president to Gitmo. There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim, same as saying I am little pregnant. He is only waiting for some Imam to say jihad time. All Muslims are the enemy of the United States and the American people need to follow Japans lead. God Bless America!!!!
Carolyne says
Eagle, I agree with you on every point you make. Obama is a Muslim and every action he takes is meant to drive the US further and further into the arms of the Caliphate. He should be sent to Gitmo and I can think of others inside the Beltway who should join him there.
eagle says
Carolyne, thank you, somehow we have to get the American people on the same page. The American people must implore congress to take steps to prevent the Muslim take over of America in spite of what the dear Muslim leader and his appointees do in government. It appears having a Muslim in the oval office is about to take America down. A Muslim president has no allegiance to America, by executive order Muslims do not have to pledge allegiance to America to become a citizen. Sharia Law is what the Muslim Cult wants for America. Sharia Law is not compatible with the constitution. A good Muslim follows the Quran, which clearly states killing all infidels and unbelievers. Having a Muslim president and Muslims throughout the government and schools will not keep separation between church and state, instead, the state or Federal government will interfere, interweave, promote or impose Sharia Law on the people. The Federal papers, not the Constitution says it all. Clearly this does not set well with the peaceful neighbors in America. Congress will stand up and remove this threat from the American people. Congress must act and soon.
Champ says
Indeed, great comment, John! …yeah islam is *wholly* evil!
citycat says
And the validity of the Qur’an being of higher spiritual origin, is to me a factor that underlies all of the shenanigans derived from the Qur’an.
underbed cat says
It’s like driving into a round about, if you cannot make a turn to the right, you are stuck. Hearing about the commands are slightly different than reading the words, thinking about the age of the doctrine, and the melodic sounds one can get caught up, and excuse …..until you see the effects world wide…which is hardly spiritual, but life ending.
Michael Copeland says
Islam is, in Arabic, a “deen”.
“Deen” is governance: it has rules for everything.
“Deen” is not restricted to private conscience.
duh_swani says
Islam…A hostile, violent, hegenobic, political system hiding behind religion,,,,,
Karen says
“… political system hiding behind religion”
Yes! A brilliant statement! This needs to be said endlessly.
Ren says
Islam is not both a religion and a polity. Islam is a polity disguised as a religion. Therefore islam is a phony religion. A religion does not incite to the murder of the infidels.
Gary says
Religion. Policy.
Or….. Is it a relationship.
“The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared” (Titus 2:11)
It sounds to me like it’s a choice. A choice muslims will have to make, before they stand in the presence of Holiness.
citycat says
I heard that in the Hindu religion that Krishna incited Ar Juna to kill his relatives because according to Krishna the relatives were already dead. I think because the relatives were not following Krishna.
duh_swani says
Rasulullah Obama to Nagound, about Islam…’You didn’t build that, you just hot lucky’…
duh_swani says
I could correct those typo’s, but you’re smart enough to get it without corrections…
Neville J. Angove says
The Koran does not demand society be ruled by Sharia. The theocracy and Sharia demand it, for the benefit of the theocracy.
Mirren10 says
”The Koran does not demand society be ruled by Sharia.”
No ? Then I suggest you read it.
There are two sources of sharia, the Quran and the Sunnah. The Quran is viewed as the unalterable word of God. It is considered in Islam to be an *infallible* part of sharia. It covers a plethora of topics, including God, personal laws for Muslim men and Muslim women, laws on community life, laws on expected interaction of Muslims with non-Muslims, apostates and ex-Muslims, laws on finance, morals, eschatology, and others.
The Sunnah is the life and example of mohammed.. The Sunnah’s importance as a source of sharia, is confirmed by several verses of the Quran (e.g. Quran 33:21) The Sunnah is mostly contained in the hadith or reports of mohammad’s sayings, his actions, and his tacit approval of actions.
People like you really annoy me. You pontificate on matters you obviously know nothing about, since it’s obvious you haven’t read the koran, the hadith, or any life of mohammed. So until you do, keep your vapid little aphorisms to yourself.
Mirren10 says
Chapter (33) sūrat l-aḥzāb (The Combined Forces)
Sahih International: There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.
Pickthall: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.
Yusuf Ali: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.
Shakir: Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.
Muhammad Sarwar: The Messenger of God is certainly a good example for those of you who have hope in God and in the Day of Judgment and who remember God very often.
Mohsin Khan: Indeed in the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad SAW) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much.
Arberry: You have had a good example in God’s Messenger for whosoever hopes for God and the Last Day, and remembers God oft.
mortimer says
Islam is officially theocratic fascism. There is no denying it now.
mortimer says
Grand Imam Ahmed al-Tayeb, leader of all Sunnite Muslims has clarified what Sunnite Muslims believe: Islam is a theocratic polity.
This removes ambiguity and brings Muslims into direct and irreconcilable conflict with modernity. This is a declaration of war on modernity.
Angemon says
Yeah, but what do leading Egyptian islamic clerics know about islam, right? RIGHT?!?!?!
Jaladhi says
I think he forgot to say that Islam is a criminal cult!1 LOL… Nah, I wouldn’t expect any truth coming out of a Muslim’s mouth!1
Thinking From First Principles says
Islam is the defining question for the American constitution. The constitution mandates protection for religions under the presumption that they are separate, non-political entities. How should a political religion be handled under the American constitution? Until we answer this, we will never make any progress.
Karen says
Exactly correct. This is perhaps the most important question of our time.
This is very similar to the position of those who feel membership in the Communist Party of America is neutral, reasonable, and unquestionable. Except that organization would extinguish all other rivals, and supplant the U.S. Constitution. Does an organization that would destroy the Constitution, and the country as we know it, have protection under the Constitution? No.
Can a parallel legal system exist on an equal basis with the U.S. Constitution for some citizens? No – the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Equal protection under the law is guaranteed because the Constitution is the Law and protector of all U.S. citizens.
RonaldB says
Let’s follow “Thinking from First Principles”.
The Constitution says Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion.
I would argue then that religious exemptions from the law are unconstitutional. One example we might not like is that kosher slaughter, if it goes against laws mandating certain methods of slaughter, should be illegal. It is the job of the religion to adapt itself to follow law enacted for secular reasons.
From that principle,it should be possible to enact laws mandating that behaviors we don’t wish to see are forbidden. Muslims will have to adapt halal slaughter in the same way. Laws against public face-covering are another obvious example of public safety that should have no religious exemption. Jehovah’s Witnesses will have to pledge allegiance in a classroom unless there is a non-religious exemption for those who don’t wish to pledge. In other words, the entire branch of law mandating religious exemptions is, in my opinion, unconstitutional.
I have two points. I’m not hostile to religion. I believe the Western religions, Judaism and Christianity, and the benign Eastern religions will be easily able to adapt to laws with no religious exemptions.
I also believe that it is Constitutional to bar the entry of Muslims as Muslims into the US or as citizens. Non-citizens do not have the rights of the Constitution, so there are no rights to go against by stopping any Muslims from becoming citizens.
John A. Marre says
Obvious to me. Should be obvious to all.
Carolyne says
Me too.
billybob says
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polity
A polity is any kind of political entity. It is a group of people that are collectively united by a self-reflected cohesive force such as identity, that have a capacity to mobilise resources, and are organised by some form of institutionalised hierarchy.
Yep – that sounds like Islam. Furthermore, I contend that without an external coercive force, Islam would disintegrate.
Coercion – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion
Coercion /koʊˈɜːrʃən/ is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner by use of intimidation or threats or some other form of pressure or force.
The discipline is so demanding, and goes so totally against instinct and common decency, that without laws against blasphemy and apostasy, I contend that Muslims would quickly drift off the path to salvation. Who can keep up with all those rituals? Not just the five daily calls to prayer, but the ablutions before each as well!
Today I noticed two young Muslim women in two different settings who had one thing in common. Both wore a traditional headscarf, and the both wore – get this – skinny jeans!. Imagine how swiftly these women would be dealt with in Iraq by the Morality Police. They would be sentenced to 80 lashes each for their brazen acts of immorality!
This is the danger to Muslims in free societies like the West. Without an external force to keep them in line, they start to drift dangerously, like a ship at sea with no rudder. I’m sure it is just a matter of time until they start skipping calls to prayer, and then cheating on their fast, and skimping on the zacat… and on it goes, until they are in mortal danger of losing their immortal souls. Then some awake with horror at the thought of spending eternity in Islamic Hell, and discover there is only one way out of the mess they have created for themselves – jihad, and preferably to die in the act.
On the other hand, a very few brave souls will actually apostatize. “There is more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents…”
Blangwort says
If you ever wanted to see what the polar opposite of the foundation of the United States looks like, you need look no further than any Islamic country such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and others.
We believe in freedom for the Individual. They believe that individuals are subservient to a theocracy.
We believe one should worship whatever one chooses. They believe there is only one religion: Islam. Worship it or die.
We believe in separation of politics and religion. They believe it is all the same.
Frankly, Islam isn’t just incompatible with Western thought, it is the very antithesis of it. Those who seek to limit immigration from Islamic countries need to state their cases better. This isn’t just a minor philosophical disagreement. It is everything we stand for.
Gramma says
Islam is a oppressive, totalitarian ideology DISGUISED as a religion. Muhammad raped, pillaged and plundered his way through large portions of the world 1,400 years back. He was a pedophile, sand pirate that raped, murdered, stole and enslaved.
I am so sick of the censoring disguised as “political correctness”. 1984 is alive and well.
Bring in the Christians being slaughtered and leave the damned muslims where they are.
We never belonged in the Middle East or Africa.
This current regime is sympathetic to Islam and anti-Christian.
Obama is a muslim and America is his Jihad.
Islam is satan’s kingdom manifest on Earth and muslims are his foot soldiers.
Carolyne says
Gramma, you had me there until your last sentence. I don’t believe in satan or religion in general, so therefore no “Satan’s kingdom.” I do not think that fighting Islam by quoting or adhering to a religious principle will defeat them. If one were obey absolutely Christ’s teachings, one would have to turn the other cheek. I am not prepared to do that to Islam or anything else for that matter.
Islamorefugee says
To citycat :
Krishna urged Arjuna to fight against the evil ,even if there are his blood- relateds in support of the evil . That was the spirit .The great Indian epic – The Mahabharata -has the whole background of that war . It was not that the opponents were against Krishna for any personal reasons/issues or Krishna had any personal scores to settle with them .The reason was that they were against humanity . The opponent’ Kauravas’ were treacherous, immoral to women,power hungry.indifferent to the people they ruled . They were liers in the same way the Left liberals use their falsehoods . It is an interesting reading, I swear . Krishna was on the side of ‘Dharma’ or righteousness. So the war was a’ Dhrmayuddha’ ,meaning a war to get back the righteous rules , much like the American Civil War of 1860s ,on the question of slavery. Krishna had the role of the president Abraham Lincoln .But he was neither the king or wanted to be one in that war The question over which it was fought had nothing to do with Krishna’s assuming power or such worldly interest. Krishna only wanted that the Pandavas get back their rightful and ethically deserving due , which the ‘Kauravas’ denied them steadfastly using treacherous ways like the Left liberals of this times . Krishna was the advisor of the ‘Pandavas’..
Krishna’s advices to Arjuna in such a bewildering condition in the battlefield is a chapter of the great Indian Epic The Mahabharata ,which comprises The Geeta ..
The world now needs a true leader-philosopher like Krishna to deliver us from the vile clutch of islamists and Left-liberals.
Carolyne says
Didn’t Krishna institute the custom of burning a widow on her late husband’s funeral pyre? I don’t think any religion is the answer. The answer is only brute force, not believing in cows being your ancestors or monkey gods.