SUMMARY OF TODAY’S LESSON

“Division In The Muslim World”

Syarifah Isnaini/19200013006

Religion and its practices live in the culture of each individual society. Islam as a
religion that is spread throughout the world will live in the culture of the Arabs,
Indonesia and all countries in the world. This fact is important and motivates
Muhammad Abid Al-Jabiri to write a book entitled al Aqlu as Siyasi al Arabi and al-Aql
al-Akhlaqi al-Arabi. Al-Jabiri insists that politics and morals are almost always related
to each other. For political reasons, there are many people who deny morality and even
hide behind religious reasons. This statement is not derived from the opinion of Prof.
Magdy B. Behman in today's class, but this arises from the historical facts of Islamic
culture. What lies behind my argument is the story of the Harun Ar-Rashid who is in
conflict with his two sons, Al-Amin and Al-Ma'mun. Political desires have blinded Al-
Amin and Al-Ma'mmun to the point of forgetting the moral propriety of their fathers.
This story was written by C. E. Bosworth under the title 'The History of al-Tabari: The
Abbasid Caliphate in Equilibrium'. Besides Bosworth, John A. Nawas also told this story in
his writing, All in the Family? Al-Muʿtaṣimʾs Succession to the Caliphate as Denouement to
the Lifelong Feud between al-Maʾmūn and his ʿAbbasid Family.

Political interests are not about moral annihilation, but also the emergence of
prolonged conflict. My question is : if Muslims love peace, why does conflict exist in the
history of Muslim leadership? Prof. Magdy explains what is named mentality. To
understand the behavior of a society, we must understand the mentality of that
community. Arab society is known for its mentality that is very hard, warlike and even
bigoted about their tribe. This was confirmed by Stephennie Mulder in a very good
article, 'No, People in the Middle East Havenn't Been Fighting Since the Beginning of Time'.
To identify my question, I take the case of the murder of Husain bin Ali by Yazid bin
Muawiyah as one example. Political interests motivated Yazid to claim that Husayn did
not have a fair attitude and did not deserve to be a caliph. Unfortunately, that Yazid’s
opinion legitimized him to kill Husayn. Ibn Khaldun in Muqaddimah explained that
Yazid's reasons for killing Muawiyah could not be justified. However, Yazid is no more
just than Husayn.

Prof. Magdy explained the three stages of group domination that caused a
conflict. The first stage starts from the minority, fifty-fifty, and finally the majority. Prof.
Magdy explains the three stages of group domination that cause a conflict. When a
group is still a minority, they will not fight. This condition changes when the number of
minorities is in balance with the majority, they will start to move actively. The climax is
when a group becomes the majority, they are not reluctant to oppress the minority
groups and eventually cause conflict. I agree with this concept because with this
concept the fall and rise of the Islamic empire can be logical. For example, as explained
by Gabriel Martinez in his article, The Fall of the Umayyads of Cordova: The End of the Arab
Caliphate that the struggle for the Umayyad dynasty by the Abbasid dynasty did not just
happen. This process began with the simplest step so that the Bani Abbasiyah
succeeded in seizing the Caliphate from the Umayyad dynasty.