Religious Authority and Corruption of Ulama

[ذو الفقار]

The question of religious authority and where exactly it intersects with secular, temporal authority is a fundamental one in Islamic thought. In normative, Sunni thought, religious authority rests solely with the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his family) and with the Holy Quraan – being the Word of God. This is based on the Hadith as reported in the Muwatta of Imam Malik:

تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ أَمْرَيْنِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا مَا تَمَسَّكْتُمْ بِهِمَا كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَسُنَّةَ نَبِيِّهِ

“I have left two matters with you. As long as you hold to them, you will not go the wrong way. They are the Book of Allah and the Sunna of His Prophet.”

In theory, the authority of the Prophet’s successors, the caliphs, is solely temporal, i.e., the leadership and administration of the affairs of the community of Believers. Thus there is no papacy, priesthood, or “church” in normative Sunni Islam. The role of the Ulama, the learned scholars of Islam, is advisory. The Ulama and other men of Religion may attain fame and popularity in the society, and thus wield a degree of influence due to their level of learning or their reputation for piety. Nonetheless, the authority of the State is supreme, unless where it clearly contravenes the Shari’a. Muslims are obliged to obey the temporal ruler so long as he is a Muslim and does not become an apostate, and even then only that command of his is to be obeyed which does not manifestly violate the Shari’a.

After the death of the Prophet (peace be upon him) his religious authority continues in the form of following his Sunna, i.e., his sayings and acts. But the interpretation and elucidation of the Quraan and Sunna, the authoritative sources of Religion, has traditionally been the job of the Ulama. In this way, a veneer of religious authority has been reserved by the Ulama, though technically their role is to interpret and elucidate, not to legislate.

The corruption or compromising of the integrity of the Ulama has historically been a result of their being co-opted and pressured by impious rulers and states. Institutions of religious learning, like al-Azhar University in Egypt, were nationalized and put under State control. The emergence of the Nation State and it becoming the pre-eminent force in society meant the State was too powerful to be challenged by Ulama, who had increasingly become nothing more than State functionaries in much of the Arab and Muslim world.

[ذو الفقار]

The contribution of Sufism was in replicating the Prophet – disciple relationship, but obviously substituting the Sufi “Shaykh” for the Prophet, since Prophethood was officially sealed through Prophet Muhammad – the Last Prophet. By successfully creating this strong bond and attachment between the disciples and their spiritual leader, the Shaykh or Murshid, Sufism was able to further decentralize religious authority – again the authority not to legislate in Religion but to interpret and elucidate. In much of the Muslim world, the Sufi shaykh and his disciples represented alternatives to the authority of rulers based on their personal charisma. The Sufi Shaykh’s appeal, based on personal charisma and piety, and being accessible to the public, unlike the ruler sitting in the citadel, and often not being particularly known for piety or religious learning, was often seen as a threat to the latter. Then in modern times, in the 20th century, a new form of religious organization, originally based on the Sufi brotherhood or order, emerged, first with the Muslim Brotherhood. The creation of political Jama’aat (groups) which represented Islamic causes and ideas, was another alternative and challenge to the State. The Amir or Murshid of such Jamaa’at, or whatever leadership structure it imposed on itself, were often seen as threats or challenges to the State. Likewise, independent but traditionalist Ulama also organized themselves, especially in the Indian subcontinent, to better protect their interests and institutions of learning – i.e., the Madrassa. Ulama also organized political organizations to participate in the politics of their respective nations, particularly in Pakistan.