Islam and the Foundations of Political Power

by Ali Abdel Razek, Maryam Loutfi (Translator), Abdou Filali-Ansary (Editor)

Egypt, 1925: the Muslim world is in turmoil over Mustapha Kamal Ataturk's proposal to abolish the caliphate in Turkey. The debate over Islam and politics re-ignites as traditional political systems dissolve under pressure from European powers and most Muslim countries lose their sovereignty.
Into this debate enters Ali Abdel Razek, a religious cleric trained at Al-Azhar University, arguing in favour of secularism in his essay 'Islam and the Foundations of Political Power', translated here and published in paperback for the first time.
Scholarly features include
A substantial introduction that places the essay in its context and explains its impact
An appendix of Razek's sources with full publication details
Explanatory notes beside Razek's original footnotes
Additional notes about particular people, events or vocabulary that may be unfamiliar to modern readers

Genres: Politics

144 pages, Hardcover

First published July 1, 2012

Reviews

[Jonathan Brown · Rating 3 out of 5]

Among all the reactions to the 1924 abolition of the Ottoman caliphate, perhaps none was quite so iconoclastic and revisionist as Ali Abdel-Raziq's 1925 treatise, here translated for the first time into English. At the time, there was considerable agitation in the Muslim world over how to revive the caliphate, and in what form.

Abdel-Raziq took a different approach: Don't. Don't, because the caliphate is an unnecessary institution that would be harmful to attempt to revive, according to Abdel-Raziq. He argues that it has no warrant in Qur'an or Sunna, and that from Abu Bakr onward, "the institution of the caliphate has never ceased to provoke uprisings." He argues that Islam does not offer a specifically Islamic form of governance, and suggests that Abu Bakr and his successors should be understood as leaders of an Arab Empire; that allegiance to them was not a religious matter but a purely political one. Abdel-Raziq urges that Muslims should instead build their systems of government on other, healthier models.

Whether he makes a good argument to this end, it's tough for me to say, not being Muslim; but my strong suspicion is that, for the most part, he does not - at least, not as successfully as he seemed to think he did. The clean separation between 'religion' and 'politics' is certainly suspect; I have doubts whether at least the Rashidun Caliphate can be stripped of a crucial role in Islamic religious practice at the time; and I wonder if it's true that sahih hadith contain no caliphal material other than what Abdel-Raziq interacts with.

[Christopher · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a Catholic man with very little experience in the realm of Islam and Arabic history, this was an interesting book. I’ve wanted to step into this realm for some time now, and I’m not displeased with my first toe dip.

It’s a fairly short book, only just over 100 pages, but a ton of intellectually stimulating dialogue is jam packed into these pages. Who was Muhammad? Was he a prophet, a prophet king? Why did the Muslims struggle to develop political theories? What is a caliphate? All of these questions and more were posed, and then adequately answered.

I will absolutely be delving deeper into this world, and I am very pleased with the beginning!

[Ali]

An insightful discussion by abul razek in the separation of politics and religion in Islamic thought based on the Quranic understanding and from the life and sayings of the prophets and that of the caliphs who followed after him

[Will Corvin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this to be a good introduction to understanding the roots of Islamic political thought that can be found in primary religious sources such as the Quran and the Hadith. Allegedly this book had a paradigm-shifting impact on Islamic scholars at the time of its publication, but as only a beginner to the field I will need to revisit it later in order to appreciate exactly why it was so profound.