Privatising religion was perhaps the biggest mistake of muslim rulers, which came back to haunt them later in the coming centuries. The separation of church & state did not happen until the french Revolution, which we all know wasn't a walk in the park. The frenchies did not give the clergy a free reign. The church clergy as much as our ulema had very clear and vocal ideas on how life should be governed in ALL its aspects which included politics and statecraft. Leaving them to their own devices to propagate religious dogma as they deemed necessary was never a sane or safe option. The clergy never believes or accepts that religion is a private matter which deals with personal issues only. They very much want it to govern public law and the State. The State cannot let the most powerful ideology known to humans i.e. religon to be manipulated by private individuals at will. Especially in a society which strongly believes in it. It is a recipe for sheer disaster to think that the State can afford to stay aloof on such fundamental beliefs. The State has to exercise power and control over religious discourse to ensure it doesn't challenge State authority and supremacy. The State simply cannot share sovereignty with any entity or grouping within its territorial borders or it shall not be the State of that realm. Basically there cannot be a duality of Power. This concept itself is derived from non duality of the divine. The mullahs in the muslim world have enjoyed this duality for far too long to consolidate power in society by generating a huge following. Now they feel they are in a position to directly challenge the State writ and overpower it to bend it to their own whims. So earlier in previous centuries the muslim rulers wanted to distance themselves from religious interpretation to show neutrality vis a vis doctrine or sect, which actually suited the Ulema, but now the same ulema want that neutrality to end because they have converted the masses to their school of thought or dogma. The Arabs in the 20th century understood this folly and rightly corrected it since they understand their own history and religion. Therefore you will see State management of religion in the arab countries and also in Turkiye which was initiated by none other than Ataturk. Erdogan for sometime has been trying to re establish some sort of "neutrality". But from hindsight we should be able to now understand quite well what that neutrality will germinate into.
Brilliant response Mr Kamal. Thank you for that excellent feedback and comment. I look forward to more such enlightening notes from you. I'm going to pin this note at the top of the comments section so that more people read it.
Thank you Sir! I had never previously understood the concept of Mutazalities. But when you explained that it was 'Seperation of Powers' similar to what happened in the Europe, that was a whole 'Aha moment' for me. Read so much on Islamic history but never had previously understood the concept. Wish i can enroll in your classes... though i already graduated in 2020
The names of books you would recommended in the lecture are not mentioned in lecture or in the description. list the books/sources to go through into them
Comrade you use etc quite a lot. it is kind of irritating for a person who is listening to you continuously and he has to listen etc etc etc etc many time so please try to avoid that excetra repetition
Firstly, Mutazila is not a legal school to be contrasted with the Hanafis. Secondly, it is not clear that Mamoon was Mutazila (since the created Quran view is basically a Jamiyahh view). Thirdly, these schools did not have such strict walls of separation. People often took things from contrasting schools. Last, his main focus was on how to resolve the Hashimite Shia differences.
Privatising religion was perhaps the biggest mistake of muslim rulers, which came back to haunt them later in the coming centuries.
The separation of church & state did not happen until the french Revolution, which we all know wasn't a walk in the park.
The frenchies did not give the clergy a free reign.
The church clergy as much as our ulema had very clear and vocal ideas on how life should be governed in ALL its aspects which included politics and statecraft.
Leaving them to their own devices to propagate religious dogma as they deemed necessary was never a sane or safe option.
The clergy never believes or accepts that religion is a private matter which deals with personal issues only.
They very much want it to govern public law and the State.
The State cannot let the most powerful ideology known to humans i.e. religon to be manipulated by private individuals at will. Especially in a society which strongly believes in it.
It is a recipe for sheer disaster to think that the State can afford to stay aloof on such fundamental beliefs.
The State has to exercise power and control over religious discourse to ensure it doesn't challenge State authority and supremacy.
The State simply cannot share sovereignty with any entity or grouping within its territorial borders or it shall not be the State of that realm.
Basically there cannot be a duality of Power. This concept itself is derived from non duality of the divine.
The mullahs in the muslim world have enjoyed this duality for far too long to consolidate power in society by generating a huge following.
Now they feel they are in a position to directly challenge the State writ and overpower it to bend it to their own whims.
So earlier in previous centuries the muslim rulers wanted to distance themselves from religious interpretation to show neutrality vis a vis doctrine or sect, which actually suited the Ulema, but now the same ulema want that neutrality to end because they have converted the masses to their school of thought or dogma.
The Arabs in the 20th century understood this folly and rightly corrected it since they understand their own history and religion. Therefore you will see State management of religion in the arab countries and also in Turkiye which was initiated by none other than Ataturk.
Erdogan for sometime has been trying to re establish some sort of "neutrality". But from hindsight we should be able to now understand quite well what that neutrality will germinate into.
Brilliant response Mr Kamal. Thank you for that excellent feedback and comment. I look forward to more such enlightening notes from you. I'm going to pin this note at the top of the comments section so that more people read it.
@@TaimurRahman-English Much appreciated Dr. Sahab.
Great lecture and great lecturer. Learned so much today. Inspired me into doing some more research in this historical period.
Thank you Sir!
I had never previously understood the concept of Mutazalities.
But when you explained that it was 'Seperation of Powers' similar to what happened in the Europe, that was a whole 'Aha moment' for me.
Read so much on Islamic history but never had previously understood the concept.
Wish i can enroll in your classes... though i already graduated in 2020
Iam currently reading the abbasid caliphate and then coincidently i saw your lecture on two famous khalifa of abbasid's❤❤
Nice.
Best wishes from Valencia Spain... Haroon Ul Rashid's story still live here and in Cordoba and Cadiz.
Sir you didn't mention the books....
The names of books you would recommended in the lecture are not mentioned in lecture or in the description.
list the books/sources to go through into them
I might do a separate lecture on those books. So holding on to that for later :)
Ohhh sir i look at the other channel again and again when will the political islam lectures started
And accidentally come on this channel
Because in wallpaper sir didn't put his beautiful picture
Comrade you use etc quite a lot. it is kind of irritating for a person who is listening to you continuously and he has to listen etc etc etc etc many time so please try to avoid that excetra repetition
True
Very true. It is a silly habit. I will try to fix it.
14:12 caliph al mamun was mutazili, not hanfi how can he allow muttah being Hanfi.
Firstly, Mutazila is not a legal school to be contrasted with the Hanafis. Secondly, it is not clear that Mamoon was Mutazila (since the created Quran view is basically a Jamiyahh view). Thirdly, these schools did not have such strict walls of separation. People often took things from contrasting schools. Last, his main focus was on how to resolve the Hashimite Shia differences.