-1Whitener 1

Introduction

In this essay, I wish to examine the origins of the Islamic political community. In doing

so, I will argue that the religio-political structures out of which Islam grew after the death of the

Prophet Muhammad, were the byproducts of his efforts to establish a united community of men

in the city of Medina following the hijra. I will offer a treatment of the Medina Charter and the

social conditions that preceded and followed its promulgation and offer evidence to support the

following: (a.) the tenets of the Charter reflect not only the fusion of theological and political

ideologies, but also indicate a desire for political unity and socio-economic prominence within

the Arab lands, (b.) the Charter itself established the embryonic socio-political institutions from

which the Islamic “state” emerged after the death of the prophet Muhammad, and in turn (c.) that

its principles gave rise to both the presence and necessity of religious law (sharia) in the state’s

emergence. In order to offer an effective analysis of the early Islamic polity, we would do well

to begin by examining the conditions that necessitated its development.

The Origins of Communal Relations

Prior to his inclusion in a united and civilized community, man lived his life only in

accordance with the principles of natural law. His continued existence was wholly dependant

upon his ability to achieve it, without recourse to either his fellow man or normative principles of

right conduct. The regulatory mechanisms of man’s actions were nothing more than power,

cunning, and strength of arms. His only hope of achieving an existence that was neither nasty,

brutish, or short, was to ally himself with the resources of his fellow men and conspire against

that

Whitener 2
which they collectively deemed deleterious to their interests. Each would surrender a portion of

his freedom to a sovereign community and, in turn, receive the protection and prosperity that a

supra-individual, “state” regulatory mechanism could afford. The political community (politea)

was then, an outgrowth of humanity’s quest for prosperity—first at the

individual, then the familial, next the local, and finally the societal level of group existence.

To provide for and protect the prosperity sought by the community, the state must possess

certain means with which it may ensure its subsistence. The most basic of which, is the presence

of a legitimate governing body, the actions of which must be an extension of the general will of

the people. There must also exist a legislative branch of government which serves to craft and

adjudicate the laws of civil society. The state must possess supplemental power structures which

safeguard the position of the governing body, ensure civility within its jurisdiction, and enforce

its legislative maxims. In order to finance its activities and the persons who perform them, the

state must have a mechanism for the collection, management, and distribution of revenue.

The bureaucratic components of a civil society must be complimented with certain

ideological elements which function as the guarantors of its continued existence. The state

must--whether in one or in all--exude an unquestionable sovereign authority. It must serve as an

omnipotent regulatory mechanism to uphold the laws of society, promote the general welfare,

and protect the rights of its inhabitants; moreover, it must function as an autonomous bastion of

civility for those persons upon whom its authority is based. The sovereignty of the state is

Whitener 3

dependant upon the decisions of its inhabitants to cede certain natural freedoms, and the proper

functioning of the bureaucracy to formulate and enforce the laws according to which the
inhabitants have pledged to live.

An evaluation of the early Islamic polity would be incomplete without a word on the

social conditions which necessitated its establishment. I would like, therefore, to speak briefly

about the geo-political atmosphere which immediately preceded the Muslim flight from Mecca

to Medina. Medina is located approximately two hundred miles to the north of Mecca. Its

inhabitants were predominately Pagan Arabs, but there also existed a significant Jewish

population. The Jews probably differed little either racially or culturally from their Arab

neighbors, and were distinguished only by differing religious beliefs.1

In 618, the Arabs and Jews waged engaged in battle against one another at Bu ‘ath. The

conflict owed its origins to a lack of bureaucratic institutions and regulatory mechanisms that

could arbitrate the affairs of the community. The power vacuum was palpable and the

inhabitants of Medina sought an inspired, impartial religious leader to to guide them through the

turbulent water of geo-politics.

In 620, six men from Medina encountered a man named Muhammad at the Meccan

Pilgrimage. So impressed with his revelatory experiences and pseudo-Messianic capacities, that

in the following year, the Medinese envoys expressed their desire to accept Muhammad as

Prophet.

Whitener 4

This event has come to be known as the First Pledge of al-‘Aqaba.

Reluctant to abandon the political protection and social standing that the hegemonic

Meccan economy had fostered, Muhammad initially proceeded cautiously. He sent personal

agents to survey the Medinese socio-political climate and encouraged them to spread the new

religion among its inhabitants. Soon, Muhammad had developed a small, but loyal following of

1 The Cambridge History of Islam.

supporters who pledged themselves to fight on his behalf. This so-called Second Pledge of al-

A‘qaba was significant in that it convinced the prophet that certain conditions requisite for the

spread of the faith were now present outside of Mecca. He furthered this notion by encouraging

his Meccan followers to emigrate to Medina and further establish their faith within the Medinese

populace. Under cover of the night, Muhammad fled from the city of Mecca and reached

Medina on September 24, 622. This event, the hijrah, is the effective basis of Islamic

chronology; it is significant for our purposes because it represents the beginning of a

fundamental shift away from the politically disparate, tribal structures which had theretofore

dominated the Arabian peninsula, to politically united, communal systems which would prove

persistent in subsequent Islamic history.

Aziz Al-Azmeh holds it be an anachronism to contend that the primitive proto-Muslim

polity at Medina, and later briefly at Kufa, had “produced statutes and forms of state and of

kingship of any determinative or definitive character that informed the later crystallization of

Whitener 5

Muslim polities.”2 Al-Azmeh’s thesis is not completely inaccurate, but, in my view, it fails to

treat adequately the role played by the Constitution of Medina in the formation of the early

Muslim polity, and ultimately, that of the Islamic faith itself. I should like, therefore, to offer a

treatment of this document so that we may better understand its formative capacities, and their

attending religio-political developments.

The text of the Medina Charter, though perhaps misleading, suggests an alarming degree

of civil and religious discord antecedent to the hijra and immediately thereafter. The

2 Aziz Al-Azmeh: Muslim Kingship.

Charter’s official pronouncement of the conditions under which justice, peace, and harmony

could flourish would not have been necessary had those conditions existed theretofore. Since

they seemed not to exist to the extent that their implementation would not be superfluous, the

Charter attempted to establish the conditions necessary for their creation. In this respect, it is

quite analogous to a Social Contract.

The Dustur al-Madinah was promulgated in the name of “God the Compassionate, the

Merciful,” by the earliest converts to Islam upon their flight from Mecca to Medina. The

document appears to be the conflated product of two or more sources compiled some five years

after the hijra. The Charter sought to advance the conditions under which a united community of

believers (umma) shall live, so that order and harmony, rather than chaos and discord, would

prevail. Though comprised of several diverse tribal sects, the umma was to be composed of one

Whitener 6

true body of believers, each of whom was to live under the absolute sovereignty of One God.

The community of the faithful was organic, and depended upon the faith and goodwill each of its

members to ensure collective prosperity.

The charter is explicit in articulating the providential mandates requisite for the health of

the umma: (1) each citizen was obligated, in so far as his means would allow, to prevent

destitution among fellow believers; (2) conspiring against or allying in opposition to one’s fellow

believer was expressly forbidden; (3) the community of believers must never have sought to

propagate injustice, sin, animosity, or corruption and remain ever-vigilant against those who do;

(4) all believers must have united together as one body in service to God and one another.

We should go no further without a brief exposition of the above. It must be noted that the

overarching desire for unity both in themselves and with the almighty, is indicative
of a general desire to homogenize the theretofore disparate elements of the early community.

Moreover, unification was but an initial step in the pursuit of social concord and divine

providence. Once living together as one community with common goals and united interests, the

citizens were obliged to live their lives for the benefit of all.

The Medina charter pronounced the city of Yathrib3 to be a sanctuary for both the

believers and persons of differing faiths. Together, its residents would act as one to repel any

Whitener 7

attack on the city to which they owed their allegiance. The Quraysh4 and the inhabitants thereof

were to be boycotted and denied the protection that the community of believers so tirelessly

sought to advance. Conversely, the peace that existed among the believers was absolute and

indivisible. Its disruption would only be brought about by the transgressions of the individual,

never the actions of the society. The umma was an inclusive entity, which attempted to solidify

the bonds of unity that existed among the believers and extend them to the inhabitants of Yathrib.

Just as each member of the umma looked to God in search of eternal happiness, so too did

he look to his fellow citizen(s) in pursuit of earthly tranquility. The protection that God afforded,

however, was ultimate and not provided to those whose actions transgressed the terms of the

Charter or threatened the cohesion of the community; for “Those who swear

fealty to thee [Muhammad] swear fealty by that very act unto God. The hand of God is over

their hands.”5

So that its sanctity would remain absolute and its ideals respected, the Charter provides

3 The original name for the city of Medina (Madīnat al-Nabī), the translation of which is rendered “city of the

Prophet.”

4 The tribe to which the Prophet Muhammad originally belonged before the hijra.

5 Q. 48:10
for the administration of justice. The umma would act as one, in service to God, in all matters

which impugned the inviolability of the sacred relationship between believers and the almighty.

The redress of wrongs was to be enacted not through human, but rather, divine agency; this

principle also extended itself to armed conflict.

Whitener 8

Muhammad, as the culmination or “seal” of the Prophets was to possess absolute

authority in sanctioning warfare. When the need arose to defend the sanctity, integrity, and

honor of Islam, the faithful Muslim was required to subvert all personal commitments to the

service of the umma and Allah. This situation constitutes Holy War (jihad); the Charter requires

that all peace requests be obliged, except in circumstances constitutive of jihad. Any

ambiguities in the juridical process were to be directed to, and resolved by, God and the Prophet

Muhammad.6

The jurisprudence articulated in the Medina Charter suggests the presence of rational,

peaceful methods of dispute resolution among diverse peoples living together, as one people. It

is also indicative of the distinctly theological approach to juridical affairs in the Muslim

community. The ostensible forerunner of the shar’ia, put forth by the Charter, sought to imbue

the will of God within the legal structure of the umma. God and man were to be co-participants

in the administration of justice and the preservation of social harmony. Consequently, the pre-

existing cultural, religious, and linguistic differences that all-too-frequently foster

marginalization and exclusion, were respected rather than accentuated. This theme is

exemplified in the Charter’s provisions for inter-faith relations.

6 Section 42 of the Medina Charter is here significant in that provides an early portrait of Muhammad as the

“Apostle of God.” Compare this conception of Muhammad as a political and theological leader with Sirah 10: Ayat

47, of the Qur’an.

 Explicit reference is made to toleration among the Abrahamic, religions of the book.

The Jews were free to profess their faith and the Muslim believers likewise. The financial affairs

Whitener 9

of each would be managed by the faithful of each. The community of believers was obligated to

provide assistance and adopt the notion of equality in all of their dealings with their brothers of

the Abrahamic faith(s). The accommodations for religious diversity present within the umma

also extended to Polytheism. The Charter provides for Pagans to retain their cultural and

religious customs provided they not interfere with those of the Muslims. Social equality also

implied political reciprocity in addressing those who attacked the principles of the Charter. So

long as they fought alongside the believers in service to God, the Jews were obliged to contribute

equally to the cost of war. Absolute loyalty among Muslims and Jews was requisite for the

sustenance of social harmony and the obeisance of God’s will.

On that basis, the Charter accomplishes a great deal in pursuing peace and imploring the

good will of two separate, yet interrelated branches of faith. Even if only an utopic vision, the

aforementioned ideal suggests a remarkable degree of deference within the early Muslim

community toward its brothers of faith. Rather than retreating into the confines of theological

superiority, the Charter seeks to extol the virtues of a united brotherhood of man (mu’akhat),

committed to serving its almighty creator.

The impetus for the acceptance of and respect for Judaism was two-fold. Despite the

presence of fundamental differences between the two religions, Islam and Judaism were in

agreement on the end to which each was devoted. Though Allah and Yahweh were distinct

in name, they were united as one in finality. The relationship between Muslims and Jews was

then, necessarily, one of interdependence and connectedness. Notwithstanding their theological

 Whitener 10

divisions, the prosperity and happiness of each was dependant upon the presence of political

collegiality. A political attack on one was a theological affront to the other, which necessitated

commensurate political recourse.

The Charter’s call for goodwill among the community of the faithful was theological in

tone, but political in methodology. The early Muslim community was organic; its citizens were

genuinely political actors whose well-being was emergent from, and intimately connected to,

that of their fellow man. The Charter suggests that a concerted effort was made to preserve the

well-being of the individual by establishing a community of individuals with shared goals,

common interests, and reciprocal teleologies. The success or failure of the umma rested in its

respect for the foundational political sub-structure, which supported and sustained the

community’s pursuit of peace, justice, and eternal bliss.

Its intent was to allow those living in the city of Yathrib--despite their theological or

philosophical differences--to peacefully co-exist as one community, living under the sovereignty

of One God. In doing so, it required its adherents to recognize their subservience to the almighty

and the bonds of allegiance upon which the community would depend. In ceding a portion of

one’s own, personal autonomy, one gained the right to collective prosperity. The individual of

faith need not remain in perpetual struggle to defend himself against the warring factions of the

unbelievers. His prosperity could be realized by recognizing the omnipotence of God and

allying himself with those for whom bliss in the hereafter was preferable to strife in the here and

now. We must not assume, therefore, that the early Muslim community existed as a crude and

Whitener 11

barbarous consortium of lawless philistines.

 Rather, the document makes evident that the early Muslim converts were sufficiently

refined that they recognized the need for order and stability to counteract the chaos of the

political world. As long as one was preoccupied with constant and futile polemics, one could not

fully devote oneself to God and the community of which he was a part. The Medina Charter

sought to end--or at least alleviate--the antagonisms between men in an effort to cultivate a more

intimate relationship with God.

The theological character of the Medina Charter is of the utmost importance, but it must

not be viewed in isolation to the political community which sought to protect it. The Charter

demonstrates that Theology and Politics were inextricably intertwined within the early Muslim

community. The fusion of the two, respective spheres, necessarily followed from a community

of persons dedicated to the faithful observance of divine mandates, yet forced to live in a world

where unbelief and lawlessness predominated. Just as the community of believers was called to

unite with and respect its brothers in faith, so too was it obliged to defend against and repel those

who sought to do it harm.

Though jihad is mentioned just once (section 45a) the Medina Charter implicitly affirms

its legitimacy as the means with which to preserve the health of the political community and the

sanctity of its theological foundations. This sentiment would be echoed some 164 times in

Qur’anic verse.

Whitener 11

“O you who believe! retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain,
the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female, but
if any remission is made to any one by his (aggrieved) brother, then prosecution
(for the bloodwit) should be made according to usage, and payment should be
made to him in a good manner; this is an alleviation from your Lord and a mercy;
so whoever exceeds the limit after this he shall have a painful chastisement. And
 there is life for you in (the law of) retaliation, O men of understanding, that you
may guard yourselves” (Q. 2:178-179).

Wholly antithetical to the Western, secularist conception of the community, the Islamic

ideal presupposes the semblance of scripture and jurisprudence (sharia) as the framework upon

which the “state” is to be constructed. Islam was, therefore, an extension of a political

organization from its very beginnings: the umma embodied a societal melange of congregation

and state. By claiming divine authority over the umma, the prophet Muhammad had, in a sense,

created an “embryonic state.”7

To speak of the existence of a fully-developed Islamic “state” before the death of the

Prophet Muhammad would be inaccurate. It would not, however, be inaccurate to describe the

Medina Charter as the first official document in the Islamic tradition to enunciate a social

construct in which politics and theology would be regarded as fused-reciprocals. Though the

Charter was explicit in setting forth the principles according to which the believers must live

their lives, it made no systematic effort to craft the conditions requisite for statehood. It did,

however serve as the model to which subsequent generations would look in establishing a

centralized

Whitener 12

political authority replete with the economic, militaristic, and bureaucratic functions of the

“state” proper.8

I would like to briefly discuss both the authenticity and usefulness of the Medina Charter

for scholarship in the history of Islamic Political thought. Though no original copy

7 Crone: God’s Rule: Government in Islam.

8 An amplification of exactly what constitutes a “state” may be found in the first two pages of this work.
Attempting to determine an approximation of when the Islamic state emerged, is, however, beyond the scope of the
present work.
is extant, there are compelling reasons to accept its veracity. In a philological analysis of the

Arabic in which the Charter was originally written, some scholars have concluded that the

resemblance between it and the language of the Prophet in the Qur’an is not merely

coincidental.9 Similarly, if a fabrication, the likelihood of the Charter occupying such a

fundamental position within the Islamic tradition and maturation of the Islamic state, would be

far less than the historical narratives suggest.10

This does not, however, mean that the document was promulgated in precisely the same

form as it has come down to us.11 It is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that the final

product was itself an amalgam of various ad hoc statutes and stipulations, hastily crafted to

address issues as they arose. The sheer breadth and variety of the Charter’s terms

certainly lend credence to this thesis. In keeping with the primary intent of the essay, I must

limit

Whitener 13

myself to the brief--yet cogent--defense of the Charter’s authenticity outlined above.

If we are prepared to grant the veracity of the Charter, it would certainly behoove us as

historians to inquire into its usefulness in historical scholarship. The Medina Charter is

complementary to the text of the Qur’an. It expounds upon the political details of the ummah,

which are treated in largely theological terms in the Qur’anic text. Its importance as a primary

source document in the theological history of Islam cannot be overstated; nor can its role in

influencing the development of the Islamic state in the latter portion of the 7th century A.D be

denied. In both instances, the Charter served as a framework to which Islamic culture could refer

9 Al-Umari: Medinan Society At the Time of The Prophet.

10 In his, Muhammad at Medina (p.225), Montgomery Watt holds that no falsifier writing under
the Umayyads or Abassids would have included non-Muslims in the ummah, retained the articles
against the Quraysh, or given Muhammad so “insignificant” a place.
11 Ibid.
as it sought to navigate the turbulent waters of geo-politics.

The terms of the Charter speak to a desire to establish a community in which God’s rule

was absolute and human beings would act as the faithful stewards of His creation. That

Muhammad sought to craft the basis of an Islamic community rather than pervert his position as

Prophet to establish a despotic system of government should not be overlooked.

Despite the rejection of the former and adoption of the latter in subsequent epochs of Islamic

history, the original intent of the charter is certainly worthy of homage.

One of the earliest extant indications of the inseparability of religion and politics in the

Muslim community; the Medina Charter provides demonstrable proof of the desire within Islam

for peace and acceptance among those of divergent faiths. Both such themes would be extremely

relevant and timely to the modern, social historian. So too would a faithful (re)reading of its text

be beneficial to those within contemporary Islam whose thoughts, actions, and deeds lie in

Whitener 14

contradistinction to the very maxims upon which their faith was established.

Historical Materialism and the early Islamic Polity

The role of economics in the progression of history and the establishment of political

regimes cannot be overstated. In keeping with this theme, I would like to offer a brief

commentary on Karl Marx’s theory of “historical materialism” with a view to synthesizing it

with the development of the Islamic political state. In doing so, I implore the reader’s

patience; for that which initially seems distant is frequently too close to fully appreciate.

The materialist conception of history relies on an organic community of men, each of

whom depends on the prosperity of their fellow citizens, to realize their own. Just as the

individual is incapable of sustaining his own physical and economic needs without recourse
to another, so too are they dependant upon a united community of men overseen and sustained by

an apparatus of subsistence. Each lives for the benefit of himself and in turn, the perpetuation of

the community. The labor of the individual gives rise not only to his continued existence, but

also to the lives and crafts of his fellow citizens.

The material needs of the community -- to which each of its inhabitants is forever

devoted -- shape both the lives of its patrons and the course of its development; Marx sees in this

thesis, the very essence of historical progression. The community is constantly and

unconsciously in pursuit of realizing the economic “needs” of both citizen and society with ever-

increasing efficiency and quantity. This materialism was once but the necessary byproduct of a

union among benevolent actors to ensure their individual and collective survival; beyond the

level of basic

Whitener 15

subsistence, however, materialism becomes perverted such that it yields subsistence at only the

most primitive of levels for those whose toil is requisite for preserving it, and economic

extravagance for those whose force has proven capable of exploiting it. The individual qua

individual is left with no alternative but to appropriate his productive capacities to the interests of

the state. This phenomena quickly assumes a universal character and subsumes the entire

community of which each individual is a part. The very existence of the community is then,

dependant upon the activity of the individual coinciding

with a purely material life.

The emergence of the state is simply an extension of the political dominance of the ruling

class of society. The economic (here we, of course, refer to material) needs of “society” are no

longer those of the community which sustains it, but those of the ruling class under whose
authority it came to be. Social customs, law, tradition, ideology-- and perhaps even religion--

become mere conduits with which to promote the “necessity” of economic “progress.” Each

comes to connote not their legitimacy as ends, but rather, their usefulness as means to perpetuate

the economic agenda of the ruling class of society.

The model of historical materialism to which Marx makes reference is, in my view,

directly related to the promulgation of the Medina Charter. Though theological and political

unity were the most conspicuous of the Charter’s maxims, it was not devoid an ulterior economic

import.12

Whitener 15

It is to this theme that we now turn.

The Role of Economics in the Promulgation of the Medina Charter

Jorgen Simonsen has argued quite convincingly that, the conflict between Mecca and

Medina was, “essentially a conflict over which of the two caravan cities were to have the leading

position in local and international trade.” He is of the opinion that in order to establish Medina’s

hegemony over Arabian trade, the prophet Muhammad originally offered protection (dhimma) to

anyone who would join his religious community, without regard for their religious affiliation.

Initially, nothing was asked for in exchange for dhimma, but as the power and influence of

Medina grew, the prophet in turn implemented a tax (jizya) and demanded the payment of tribute

(sadaqa) in return. Perhaps most noxiously, religious stipulations began to be associated with

membership in the umma.13 Though not completely the result of economic necessity, we would

12 Some western scholars have advanced the thesis that the prophet Muhammad utilized religion merely to
advance his own economic interests. Though the question was first raised by Muslim freethinkers themselves, we
lack sufficient evidence to positively confirm it.
13 Jorgen Baek Simonsen: Studies in the Genesis and Development of the Caliphal Taxation
System.
be in error to ignore its role as a contributing factor to the above machinations within the early

Muslim community.

A thorough examination of the extant papyri records and the dates of the early Muslim

conquests, suggests that only in the second Islamic century did there begin to develop a systemic

fiscal taxation system. In coming to this conclusion, it is of the utmost importance to remember

Whitener 16

that the classical theory of Islamic taxation (found in the Fiqh and interspersed in the Muslim

historical tradition) was the developmental byproduct of what Simonsen has termed, “the early

caliphal taxation system.” This is not, however, to suggest that the two systems were

compatible. To cite but one example of the difference between the two systems:the papyri of

Egypt and Palestine reveal that the jizya of the caliphal system was not, as in the classical

system, a fixed-rate sum levied universally on non-Muslims. The change in the tax’s purpose

and scope in classical economic theory attests to Muhammad’s desire for economic hegemony

and political prominence within the Arabian peninsula.14

Patricia Crone has proven herself to be a vociferous critic of Simonsen’s thesis.15 Her

analysis represents a serious critique of the traditional understanding of Mecca as a vibrant city

of commercialism, with unsurpassed political and economic authority within the early Muslim

community. If Crone is correct, the city of Medina would have had little need to assert its

political authority or economic prominence throughout the Muslim community, for no rivals--

political or economic--would have existed.

This analysis represents a plausible counterargument to the work of Simonsen and posits

a much more limited role for the Meccan economy in the formation of the Islamic political state.

14 ?
15 Crone, Patricia: Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam.
It does not, however, undermine his treatment of the prophet’s methods of exacting financial

recompense to advance the interests of the state; nor does it preclude the role that economic

Whitener 17

materialism could have played in its development. I should like to extend our analysis of the

early Islamic community (umma) and the political-economic influences that advanced its

standing, with a discussion of the principles upon which it was based.

The Influence of The Medina Charter on the Development of Islamic Law

By A.D. 630 the Prophet Muhammad was accepted by most to be the “ultimate” leader,

Imam, of the Islamic community. It was during the “Medinese period” in the

development of Islam, that the Prophet received those fundamental principles on which the moral

and social codes of the faith are based.16 The tribal customs from which the umma emerged were,

therefore, amended and reconstituted in the later compilation of the Qur’an.

The Islamic conceptions of “right” and “wrong” conduct were described in terms of

personal relationships. Each member of the umma was to cultivate and practice a life of honor,

courage, and sidq (truthfulness, loyalty).17 In turn, the umma itself would be sustained by a

collective and unwavering devotion to faith and justice. However, the early Islamic community

and the law that sustained it, fostered a social identity strictly exclusive of outsiders.

In replacing individual tribal customs with a universalist ethic, the importance of the

umma in the life of the individual was exalted; so much so, that a universal law with theological

and political elements (shari‘a), was developed to serve as the framework for the newly

established

16 S.F. Mahmud: A Short History of Islam

17 Black: The History of Islamic Political Thought.
 Whitener 18

civil society.

The Sharia

Traditional Islamic law may be divided into two separate, but interrelated realms:

personal acts of service to oneself (ibadat) and people’s relationships to one another

(mu‘amalat). The ibadat provided for the Five Pillars of Islam18 and advanced provisions for

Dietary and Hygienic maxims. The mu‘amalat regulated mutual dealings such as marriage,

divorce, inheritance, slavery and manumission, commerce torts, crimes, war, and taxation in

societal affairs. The law was not simply an enforceable rule; it carried a much more profound

moral significance as an act of obeisance in service to God. In abiding by the statutes of the

shari‘a, one respected his communal obligations to himself and his fellow citizens, but more

importantly preserved the sanctity of his relationship with God.

That the sharia served as the skeletal structure of the early Islamic community lends

credence to the thesis advanced by Anthony Black that Islam emerged from a stateless praxis.

He contends that in creating a ‘trans-tribal’ and ‘trans-national’ political society, there would

have been no need to develop formal state structures or constitutions. The business of the society

was

Whitener 19

not to be conducted by impersonal bureaucrats, but expressly specified by the shari‘a and

charismatic individuals. 19

18 The five principle aspects of Sunni Islam, stipulated by the prophet Muhammad : The Testimony of Faith, Ritual

Prayer, Obligatory almsgiving, Fasting ( Siyam), and the pilgrimage to Mecca ( Hajj ).

19 Black: The History of Islamic Political Thought.

 No provisions were made as to who would succeed Muhammad in his role as leader

(Imam) of the umma; it was simply assumed that on the basis of Quran’ic verse,20 a peaceful

succession of rightly-guided Deputies (caliphs) would continue the work of the prophet.

Black’s understanding is further amplified by the altogether sparse treatment of government and

politics in the Hadith Reports, compiled over a century after the death of the prophet

Muhammad. The societies emerging immediately after 632 A.D were, therefore, vibrant

theological communities, albeit ones without clear and tangible political structures.21

The Prophet and His Legacy

The politico-religious terms put forth by the Prophet Muhammad must always be seen in

relation to their reciprocal; for that which he sought to construct, was, ultimately, a political

society devoted, to Allah. Though Muhammad was the culmination of the prophets, neither he,

nor any other earthly being ever occupied a superior position to that of the almighty. The actions

Whitener 20

of the individual and the umma of which he was a part, always had a theological and never a

political telos. Allah endowed man with the capacities for virtue and right conduct; He willed

that people live in this world as one, united community, living together, actively in pursuit of

knowledge and an understanding of the powers of natural laws.22 Man lived his life according to

the teachings of the Prophet, in service to his brothers of the faith and the Almighty. Political

discourse and organization were simply the means with which the faithful directed their earthly

20 “ O believers, obey God, and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. If you

should quarrel on anything, refer it to God and the messenger ” (Q. 4:62).

21 Black: The History of Islamic Political Thought.

22 S.F. Mahmud: A Short History of Islam.

lives to divine providence.

The magnitude of the above is immense and wholly antithetical to the occidental

understanding of statecraft. Though a thorough exposition of the differences is beyond the scope

of the present work, I wish to offer a brief commentary in order to better explain the Islamic

understanding of the political society. The contemporary west is largely devoid of an official

theological import in political affairs. The Chief Executive, is not an earthly intermediary, but

simply a societal servant; he has no higher end other than the peaceful and efficient execution of

socio-political affairs. As we have seen, this contrasts rather starkly with the leader (imam) of

the Islamic community.

Islamic Statecraft

The Islamic conception of statecraft conceives a politics with no higher end than the

cultivation of man in service to the Almighty. The imam, an exemplary human being who serves

Whitener 21

as God’s deputy (Caliph) on Earth, is the facilitator of this end. His political actions are always

in keeping with the theological mandates set forth by God. Though his spiritual and intellectual

capacities may have exceeded those of his fellow men, his socio-political stature was to remain

their equal.23 The Brotherhood of Man was explicit in its demands: all men were to be equal; all

men were to be brothers. Collectively, they constituted a united community of the faithful who

recognized Allah, not an imam or a caliph, as the supreme authority in their lives; for as the first

pillar of Islam makes clear, “There is no god but God and Muhammad is His messenger.” His

supremacy is reiterated in the following Quran’ic verses:

“Say: ‘He is God, One,

God, the everlasting Refuge,
who has not begotten, and has not been begotten,

23 “Indeed the most honorable in the sight of God is the one who is most righteous among men,” (Sura XLIX).
 and equal to Him is not any one.’” (Sura CXII)

“And it is He who in Heaven is God

and in earth is God; He is the All-wise, the All-knowing. Glory be to him, to
whom belongs the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth
And all that between them is.” (Sura XLIII)

Ultimate authority, however, did not necessarily connote political or deistic despotism;

the Islamic Godhead was, to use S.F. Mahmud’s phrase, a “theological advance,” and Man, a

“spiritual advance.” The relationship between man and God was to be one of mutual respect;

though God would use his omnipotent powers to provide and preserve, He would also use them

to serve and protect. He warned against denial and disobedience at the same time that he

extolled

Whitener 22

His benevolence and compassion.

The development of the early Islamic polity was, in large part, an outgrowth of the efforts

of the Prophet Muhammad to establish a united community of men in the city of Medina. By

fusing the theological and political spheres of group existence, Muhammad created a social

construct that sought to provide for the prosperity of the individual and the community of which

he was a part; but so too was the community established by, and in service to Allah.

The role of economics figured prominently in the formation of the umma, but must not be

thought of as the primary reason for its establishment. The very fact that Muhammad sought to

imbue a theological import into the newly formed community attests to his mission as a Prophet,

rather than his pragmatism as a merely political leader. We must also remember that the

Medinese political community was but a prototype; the rest of the Islamic community—often

still characterized by a lack of formal and united state structures—did not simply vanish with the
creation of the Medinese umma. An exhaustive examination of the development of the Islamic

state must, therefore, also take into consideration the political machinations occurring outside of

Medina. The present work must be regarded as but one component of such a lengthy and

laborious, but worthy and meritorious enterprise.

Bibliography

Primary Sources:
<The Constitution of Medina, in A. Guillaume’s The Life of Muhammad: A translation of Ishaq's
Sirat Rasul Allah. (Oxford University Press, Karachi, 1955) pp. 231-233.

<The Koran Interpreted, an English translation by A.J. Arberry. (Touchstone Press, New York,
1955).

<The History of Prophets and Kings, the Foundation of the Community, Abu Ja far Muhammad
b. Jarir al-Tabari. Translated by M. V. McDonald and annotated by W. Montgomery Watt. (State
University of New York Press, Albany, 1987).

Secondary Sources:
<Al-Azmeh, Aziz. Muslim Kingship: Power and the Sacred In Muslim, Christian and Pagan
Polities. (New York:St. Martin’s Press, 2001).

<Black, Anthony. The History of Islamic Political Though: From the Prophet to the Present.
(New York, Routledge, 2001).

<Crone, Patricia. God’s Rule: Six Centuries of Medieval Islamic Political Thought. (United
Kingdom, Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2004).

<Crone, Patricia. Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. (First Gorgias Press LLC, Princeton,
New Jersey, 1987).

<Guillaume, A.. The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, (Oxford
University Press, Karachi, 1955).

<Marx, Karl. The German Ideology. Selected Writings of Karl Marx, 2nd edition, translated by
David McLellan, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000).

<Mahmud, Sayyid Fayyaz. A Short History of Islam. (Oxford University Press, Karachi, 1960).

<Simonsen, Jorgen Baek. Studies in the Genesis and Development of the Caliphal Taxation
System. Copenhagen. Akademisk Forlag, 1988.

<The Cambridge History of Islam in Two Volumes, Vol. I: The Central Islamic Lands,
(Cambridge University Press, Great Britain, 1970).

<Watt, Montogmery. Muhammad at Medina. (Oxford University Press, United Kingdom,

1981).

The Early Muslim Polity: A Religio-Political Analysis of the

Islamic Tradition’s Medinese Origins

Joe Whitener

Hayrettin Yucesoy PhD

Seminar: History of Medieval Islamic Political Thought

Saint Louis University

December 11, 2006