DOCSLIB.ORG

Defining Democracy in Islamic Polity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Defining Democracy in Islamic Polity Defining Democracy in Islamic Polity Posted on January 17, 2010 by admin Defining Democracy in Islamic Polity Muhammad Khalid Masud (Draft paper for discussion in the International Conference on “The Future of Islam, Democracy, and Authoritarianism in the Era of Globalization”, 5-6 December 2004, organized by the International Centre for Islam and Pluralism, Jakarta .) Whether democracy is compatible with Islam or not has been under discussion for more than a century. The issue has again come into focus in the wake of the war on terrorism. The assumption is that terrorism is a consequence of undemocratic and authoritarian polities. Broadly speaking, three views have emerged in this regard. One view, often favored by the Western media, holds that Muslim societies are unable to develop a liberal culture and hence Muslim countries have not been able to achieve democracy. Another, although a majority view among Muslim intellectuals, and not generally supported by the political practice, claims that democracy is not only compatible with Islamic teachings but also that Islamic polities in history have been more democratic than any other system in the world. The third view maintains that democracy is a foreign Western concept and does not go along with Islamic teachings. Islamic democracy, i.e. a democracy defined from the perspective, differs from “Western” democracy in form as well as in objectives. Whatever the perspective, studies on Islam and democracy never fail to stress the point that building democracy in Muslim countries is a formidable task. United States Institute of Peace Report on this subject opens with the following statement: “Democracy building remains an uphill struggle in most Muslim countries” (Special Report 93, 2002). The present essay analyzes the following four texts that illustrate these three views. 1. Martin Kramer, “Islam vs. Democracy” (1996), 2. Khalifa Abdul Hakim, The Prophet and his Message (1987) 3. Amin Ahsan Islahi, Islami Riyasat (1977), and 4. Qari Tayyib, Fitri Hukumat (1963). The analysis explores the question: why building democracy is such a formidable task. Martin Kramer Martin Kramer is a senior associate (and past director) of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University . He is also the Wexler-Fromer Fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy . Graduate from Princeton and Columbia , Dr. Kramer has been a visiting professor at Brandeis University , the University of Chicago , Cornell University , and Georgetown University . His authored and edited books include Islam Assembled ; Shi‘ism, Resistance and Revolution; Middle Eastern Lives ; Arab Awakening and Islamic Revival ; The Islamism Debate ; The Jewish Discovery of Islam ; and Ivory Towers on Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America . Islam is not campatible with democracy Martin Kramer (1996) argues that Islam is the reason that so many Muslim countries are not democratic. Contrary to the various writings of the Western scholars on Islam, Kramer insists that Muslim communities have been authoritarian and have resisted any idea opposite to authoritarianism. Islamic countries have produced no democratic movement. The various Islamic movements that have emerged during the last century are entirely opposed to democracy. They have rejected democracy as part of Westernism. He also disagrees with the scholars of Middle East who view that since 1979 a number of Islamic movements transformed themselves into populist movements against state. Kramer explains that it was so because these movements mainly arose in opposition to the ruling parties. The discontent with the states which were unable to provide solutions made them popular among the masses. The movements remained fundamentalist and violent. They participated in the political system and won elections in Egypt in 1987, in Tunisia in 1989, in Jordon in 1989 and in Algeria in 1990. Because these political parties faired well in electoral politics, Western scholars treated them as democratic movements and predicted that they will pave the way for fuller democracy. These scholars were not happy at the victory of fundamentalism but they interpreted this victory in the light of what they called ‘theory of initial advantage’. They argued that for the reason that the Muslim communities are not used to democracy and electoral politics, the fundamentalist groups naturally take advantage of the situation. The scholars, however, believed that eventually the fundamentalists will lose and real democracy of the masses and majority will prevail. Some political scientists also described FIS victory in Algeria as a protest vote, and hence not really significant. According to Kramer these predictions and theories are a blind spot and a self deception. In fact fundamentalism is neither a fad nor a temporary phenomenon. This is something very basic to Islamic thinking and culture. Consequently free elections will always strengthen fundamentalism and give them victory. In Kramer’s view, the Islamic fundamentalism is full of paradoxes and contradictions. Firstly Islamic fundamentalism is not reconciling with democratic values. Secondly the fundamentalists believe in the authority of Shari’a, which is a divine and immutable. Furthermore, Shari’a law supports inequality of women and non-Muslims and contravenes human rights. In this sense, rule of law, as preached by Muslim fundamentalist is not a democratic value but an authoritarian principle. Thirdly, the Islamists also speak of the principle of Shura, consultation, which they claim defines Islamic democracy. However, this Shura is subjected to the authority of Shari’a, and not binding. Kramer also rejects the idea of the western scholars that fundamentalism is not real threat to the west. He argues that in the Islamist thinking west stands as an enemy of Islam, an enmity which can never be reconciled. In fine, according to Kramer Islam is not only undemocratic but also a real and constant threat to the west and democratic institutions. Kramer seems to have taken a very difficult position. It simply holds that Muslims cannot be democratic unless they give up Islam. For him, majority opinion, elections, participation of the masses do not count as ingredients of democracy. Khalifa Abdul Hakim (d. 1959) Khalifa Abdul Hakim received his doctorate in Philosophy from Heidelberg University , Germany . Having retired as Professor and Chairman, Department of Philosophy, Usmania University , Hyderabad , India , he was appointed Director, Institute of Islamic Culture , Lahore in 1950 and held that position till his death. In addition to Urdu translations of Histories of Philosophy by Weber and Hoffdings, and William James’s Varieties of Religious Experience , his principal works include The Metaphysics of Rumi , Islamic Ideology , Islam and Communism , and Prophet Muhammad and his Mission . Democracy is Compatible with Islam Khalifa Abdul Hakim (1987) argues that the question about the compatibility of democracy to Islam continues to be problematic not because Islam is not favorable, but because Democracy is not definable. Early Greek philosophers, like Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, regarded democracy irrational, unnatural and disgraceful. Aristotle regards the concept of equality of all human beings as unnatural. Nature has not created humankind equal; some of them are born slaves. Plato explained that social systems which are the foundation for a political system are hierarchical. Majority of human kind are born to serve others. Only the elite can rule. Hence only a philosopher King is an ideal ruler. Looking at European history also we find democracy problematic. Magna Carta, which is often claimed to be the starting point for democracy, was in fact the product of negotiations between the king and the landed aristocracy; it was a declaration that limited the authority of a king and protected the rights of the elite. It was not governed by the principle of liberty and equality. In the nineteenth and twentieth century also, it was aristocracy who ruled in the name of the people. Macaulay envisioned no power for the common man. “Our democracy was from an early period the most aristocratic and our aristocracy the most democratic”, said Macaulay. Consequently, during the twentieth century democracy in Europe produced Nazism in Germany and Fascism in Italy . In both systems, majority suppressed minorities. Same was the phenomenon of communism in Europe . Communism decried capitalism as it did not allow power to peasants and workers. However, ethnic majorities in Soviet Union suppressed minorities. It is thus difficult to define democracy in the European historical context. It was the elite who ruled in the name of the people. Democracy is problematic to define in the Muslim world as well. There is no word for democracy in Islamic languages. The various terms used to translate the idea have semantic fields that do not correspond with the idea of democracy. The term Jamhuriyyat, for instance, was coined in probably twentieth century to translate democracy. The word Jamhur has an altogether different connotation in Islamic tradition, often meaning an undefined majority. The Muslim societies have not been able to develop an ideology or institution of democracy because democracy remains undefined. Traditional terms like Khalifa, Amir, Sultan and other terms do not convey a sense of democracy. In Islamic thought sovereignty always belonged to God. There was no idea of the sovereignty of the people. The political theorists regarded Khalifa as a deputy of God. Summarizing the various political theories developed by Muslim thinkers Hakim delineates the following twelve principles in Islamic political thought. • Sovereignty belongs to God alone. • Human kind is given free will. • Islam allows no compulsion; freedom is a religious right..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Militant About “Islamism”
    Pipes-final 12/7/04 5:57 PM Page 38 Militant about “Islamism” Daniel Pipes wages “hand-to-hand combat” with a “totalitarian ideology.” b y JANETTASSEL “It is a mistake to blame Islam, ichard pipes, Baird re- a religion 14 centuries old, for the at North American universities—“a kind search professor of history, of Consumer Reports,” he says, “for stu- recounts in his recent book, evil that should be ascribed to dents, parents, alumni, and legislators” Vixi, that when Daniel, his militant Islam, a totalitarian to air perceived biases and inaccuracies. first child, was born in 1949, This is yet another irritant to critics like he felt as if he himself were ideology less than a century old. Rashid Khalidi, Said professor of Arab Rbeing reborn. To mark the event he even Militant Islam is the problem, but studies and director of the Middle East quit smoking. Institute at Columbia University, who And, in a sense, with the birth of moderate Islam is the solution.” calls the Campus Watchers “intellectual Daniel, Richard Pipes was indeed reborn, �daniel pipes thugs”; Juan Cole, professor of history at perhaps even cloned. Daniel ’71, Ph.D. ’78 the University of Michigan, deems the (early Islamic history), is what old-timers project “cyberstalking.” “Crude Mc- would call a chip o≠ the old block. Both are essentially loners, Carthyism” and “totalitarianism” are among the less vitriolic non-belongers (the subtitle of Vixi is Memoirs of a Non-Belonger), terms used by other scholars to describe Campus Watch. In ad- and fighters. Pipes the elder, the fiercely anti-communist cold- dition, Pipes is now in his final year as a director of the federally warrior, head of President Ford’s Team B (formed to evaluate the funded U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin Kramer Vs. Fred Halliday
    Dr Alterman noted the lengthy process of trying to end the violence in Northern Ireland. Such a political process took time, would take time, would have reversals and needed a dynamic political constituency to support it. We still did not know whether the process was going to work. ‘The idea that somehow, with all this international support and interest for the Arab–Israeli conflict, it’s going to be any more clearly resolved in any shorter a time-frame than the Northern Ireland conflict is, I think, a dream,’ Dr Alterman said. ‘It’s not going to happen, it’s going to be more difficult than Northern Ireland, it’s going to have more reversals, it’s gong to take more effort. We are going to have to create a more robust international effort, but the silver lining is that Northern Ireland suggests that you can do it and you can’t stop trying to do it or you will never get there. We will need to try harder.’ Session V The Appeal of Confrontation: The West Speakers: Dr Martin Kramer, Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies Professor Fred Halliday, London School of Economics Chair: Nadim Shehadi, Chatham House In his introduction, Nadim Shehadi said Dr Martin Kramer had fired the first shot in the battle which was more or less the subject of this conference, when in November 2001 he had published his book Ivory Towers on Sand in which he attacked the academic community for not having done its job in warning policy-makers of the possibility of an attack like 9/11.
    [Show full text]
  • An Inconclusive
    The Israeli-Islamist War Martin Kramer Who won the summer war between Israel and Hizbullah? Right after the ceasefire, Hizbullah and its Iranian patrons declared the war a “divine victory,” and the Economist concurred, running this headline across its cover: “Nasrallah Wins the War.” Israel sank into a funk of self-recrimination. But a few weeks later, Hizbullah leader Hasan Nasrallah admitted that if he had it to do again, he would have avoided provoking Israel in the first place. Now it was the turn of Israel’s government to claim victory. Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer chimed in, claiming that Hizbullah “was seriously set back by the war,” and New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman called it a “devastating defeat”—for Hizbullah. The question of who got the upper hand will remain contested. But the debate over who won and who lost obscures the deeper significance of the summer war. It marks the beginning of the third stage in the conflict over Israel. An evolving conflict In the first stage, from Israel’s creation in 1948 through 1973, rejection of Israel dressed itself as pan-Arab nationalism. In the classic Arab-Israeli conflict, Arab states formed alliances in the name of Arab unity, with the aim of isolating Israel and building an Arab coalition that could wage war on two or more fronts. The fatal flaw of this strategy lay in the weakness of pan-Arabism itself. The failure to coordinate led Arab states to humiliating defeats in the multi-front Arab-Israeli wars of 1948 and 1967. In 1973, Egypt and Syria launched a coordinated Arab assault on Israel, with partial success.
    [Show full text]
  • Joshua Teitelbaum, Ph.D Professor and Senior Research Associate Bar Ilan University Home: (09) 744-9892 [email protected]
    Joshua Teitelbaum, Ph.D Professor and Senior Research Associate Bar Ilan University Home: (09) 744-9892 [email protected] Curriculum Vitae (updated to November 2012) Date and Place of Birth: Feb 28, 1958, USA (date of aliya, October 1981) Military Service: IDF, Sept. 1987-Jan. 1988 (shortened service for new immigrants). Reserve rank: captain, still serving. Marital Status: Married with three girls EDUCATION 1976-1980 UCLA (Los Angeles) Near Eastern Studies B.A., 1980 1981-1988 Tel Aviv University Middle Eastern History M.A., 1988 1989-1996 Tel Aviv University Middle Eastern History Ph.D., 1996 Title of Master’s Thesis: “The Saudis and the Hajj, 1916-1933: A Religious Institution in Turbulent Times” Names of Supervisor: Prof. Joseph Kostiner Title of Doctoral Dissertation: “The Hashemite Kingdom of the Hijaz, 1916-1925: the Failure of State Formation in Modern Arabia” Names of Supervisor: Dr. Martin Kramer SCHOLARSHIPS AND ACADEMIC AWARDS Year Name of Institution (city, country), Award 1978, 1979, 1980 UCLA, Los Angeles Honors Student, Dean’s List 1983, 1984, 1985 School of History, Tel Aviv University, Zalman Aranne Scholarship 1984 B’nai B’rith, Tel Aviv Eli Cohen Prize 1984 Ben-Gurion Foundation, Tel Aviv Nahum Karni Prize 1986 Mif`al HaPayis, Tel Aviv, Israel Landau Prize for Superior MA thesis 1988, 1989 Dayan Center, Tel Aviv University Dayan Fellowship 1988 Wiener Library, Institute of German History, Tel Aviv University, Honors Seminar in Comparative European History 1 1988, 1990 Dayan Center, Tel Aviv University Harry and Jenny Lewis Studentship 1992 Dayan Center, Tel Aviv University Uriel Dann Scholarship 1996 Society of Gulf Arab Studies, Wash.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pathology of Middle East Studies (Pdf)
    The Pathology of Middle Eastern Studies Martin Kramer Keynote address to the Ninth Annual Conference of the Association for the Study of the Middle East and Africa (ASMEA) October 28, 2016 Transcript as delivered. Full address may be viewed at https://vimeo.com/191273192 Thank you, good afternoon to all of you. I appreciate that rather extensive recitation of my credentials. There’s a timeworn response to such introductions. It’s a quote from Lyndon Johnson, who once said after being introduced: “I wish my father and mother could have heard that introduction. My father would have enjoyed it, and my mother would have believed it.” (Laughter.) As it happens, my mother and father are in the audience. (Applause.). So I’m looking forward to the drive home. When I was asked to deliver this address, I was flattered, but I also thought to myself: so it’s come to this. So thin are the top ranks of my school of Middle Eastern studies, that it now falls to me to deliver the ASMEA keynote. This day has come too soon. I suppose I knew that the moment was approaching when Bernard Lewis would draw silent. In May he celebrated his centennial. I still vividly remember his appearances before ASMEA, both in this room, and in the evening reception. I was in denial to think we would bask in his presence in perpetuity, only because he’s defied the odds for so long. I’m delighted to report that Bernard is in good health and humor. Buntzie Churchill is here; she accompanies Bernard and looks after him.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 1. Martin Kramer, “Islam's Sober Millennium” Jerusalem Post
    NOTES Chapter 1 1. Martin Kramer, “Islam’s Sober Millennium” Jerusalem Post, 30 December 1999, http://msanews.mynet.net/Scholars/Kramer/. 2. Ali A. Mazrui, “Islam and the End of History,” Iranian Journal of International Relations, vol. 7 #1, 1995, p. 3. 3. Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fate of Nations, (New York: Norton, 1997), pp. 409–411. 4. Jeffrey Sachs, “Islam’s geopolitics as a morality tale,” The Financial Times, 28 October 2001. 5. Martin Kramer, “The Muslim Middle East in the 21st Century,” 25 November 1998, Dayan Middle East Center Website. Chapter 2 1. Steven Bruce, “Fundamentalism, Ethnicity, and Enclave,” in Martin E. Marty, and R. Scott Appleby, eds., Fundamentalisms and the State: Remaking Polities, Economies, and Militance, vol. 3 of series (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993) p. 51. 2. For a good discussion of these issues, see Robert D. Lee, Overcoming Tradition and Modernity: the Search for Islamic Authenticity (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1997) pp. 1–7, 184. 3. I thank Professor Daniel Brumberg at Georgetown for this thought. 4. Dale F. Eickelman, and James Piscatori, Muslim Politics (Princeton: Princeton Univer- sity Press, 1996) p. 136. 5. For a good brief summary of this potential shift in political culture in Malaysia, see Chandra Muzaffar, Ulama as Mentri: the Challenge of Transforming Malay Political Culture,” 24 December 1999, International Movement for a Just World Website, http://www.jaring.my/just/. 6. Ibid. 7. For a definitive treatment of this topic, see Ann Elizabeth Myers, Islam and Human Rights (Boulder, CO: Westview Press) 1991. 8. Ahmad Mousalli, “Modern Islamist Fundamentalist Discourses on Civil Society, Plu- ralism and Democracy,” in Jillian Schwedler, ed., Toward Civil Society in the Middle East? (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1995) pp.
    [Show full text]
  • TIKVAH UNIVERSITY 5778 ALUMNI MEMBERSHIP CATALOG Fall 2017 | Winter 2018 | Spring 2018 | Summer 2018
    FALL-WINTER COURSES 2017-2018 TIKVAH UNIVERSITY 5778 ALUMNI MEMBERSHIP CATALOG Fall 2017 | Winter 2018 | Spring 2018 | Summer 2018 From the Executive Director: Dear Tikvah Graduates: The Tikvah Fund believes that ideas matter: from the Hebrew Bible to modern Jewish literature, from Zionist history to Ameri- can statesmanship, from the study of great leaders to the moral debates that swirl around us. The flourishing of the Jewish people depends on educated leaders, and serious education never ends. As a New Year (5778) begins, we are thrilled to offer an even broader array of opportunities to think, learn, and debate at the Tikvah Center—including: • Evening lectures, debates, and live Podcasts—on subjects as varied as Russia and the Middle East, reforming American education, Evangelicals and Israel, and the Jew- ish minds of Leo Strauss, Norman Podhoretz, and Hannah Arendt. • Mini-Courses throughout the year—including Michael Doran on Israel and the American Presidents, Ruth Wisse on the moral wisdom of Jewish literature, and Rabbi Meir Soloveichik on the political ideas of the Haggadah. • One-week summer institutes—including Jon Levenson on the book of Genesis, Martin Kramer on the Israeli Declaration of Independence, Rabbi Meir Soloveichik on Pirkei Avot, and Elliott Abrams on American foreign policy. This year, we want to open our doors—and our seminar room—to all of our alumni. We want you to help build the Tikvah community of ideas. All you need to do is join—become a Tikvah alumni member today! Sincerely, Eric Cohen Why Join the Tikvah Fund? e are very pleased to offer you, as graduates of our Tikvah university student and young Wprofessional programs, year-round access to the intellectual life and community of the Tikvah Center.
    [Show full text]
  • The Salience of Islamic Antisemitism by Martin Kramer
    The Salience of Islamic Antisemitism by Martin Kramer martinkramer.org by Martin Kramer Home It's not just about Israel, but neither is it the nature of Islam. News Reader Sandstorm Gallery The Salience of Islamic site search Antisemitism Institute of Jewish Affairs Reports this article In the Institute of Jewish Affair's Anti-Semitism World Report for 1992, it was determined that "Jewish security throughout the world is perhaps affected most seriously of all by Islamic fundamentalist groups." Yet at the same time, the report admitted that "this is an area about which there is more speculation than hard evidence." Since then, the bombing of the AMIA Martin Kramer, "The Salience of Islamic Antisemitism," building in Argentina in July 1994 has lifted any lingering doubt as to where Institute of Jewish Affairs the most serious threat to Jewish security lies. Hard evidence is rapidly Report (London), no. 2, replacing speculation. It is evidence we can no longer ignore or deny. October 1995. Taking a hard look at hard evidence and assessing it soberly means breaking the long habit of emphasizing only the tolerance of Islam—a tolerance which drew so many Jewish scholars to study it in the first place. Islam today is not what it was, and nostalgia is not a very practical sentiment. Today there is Islamic antisemitism—a belief among many Muslims that Jews everywhere, in league with Israel, are behind a sinister plot to destroy Islam. Some of these Muslims believe the battleground is anywhere on the globe where Jews are organized to assist and aid in this plot.
    [Show full text]
  • Islam and Islamism: Western Attitudes Since 9/11
    Democracy, Islam and the Middle East Amnon Cohen Editor The Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace The Hebrew Universitylk of Jerusalem 2005 63 Islam and Islamism: Western Attitudes Since 9/11 Martin Kramer In March of 1996, the Moshe Dayan Center, at Tel Aviv University, convened an international conference on Islamism, later publishing the proceedings under the title "The Islamism Debate." As I reread this volume recently, I was truly amazed at how much has changed since the book appeared. There is no mention, for example, of Al-Qaida, Osama Bin-Laden, and others that are now household names. Then, the debate focused on whether Islamism could accommodate itself to democracy, not whether Islamism could mutate into mass terrorism. In our deliberations we argued over whether you could ever tell moderates from extremists, not how you could tell extremists from suicidal terrorists. In Israel itself, it will be recalled, we had only just experienced the first waves of suicide bombings in the spring of 1996. There is little doubt that the events of 9/11 have rendered our past debates obsolete. In fact, I posit, 9/11 effectively ended the Islamism debate. It has been replaced within Islam by a debate conducted at a much higher volume, involving a far wider range of participants and viewpoints, and with much higher stakes. But first let us revisit the original Islamism debate and its shifting fortunes. In 1996 the situation in the Arab Middle East seemed tenuous. Societies were polarized between the regimes and the Islamists, and it seemed like an even contest.
    [Show full text]
  • The Unspoken Purpose of the Academic Boycott Martin Kramer
    ISRAEL AFFAIRS 2021, VOL. 27, NO. 1, 27–33 https://doi.org/10.1080/13537121.2021.1864846 The unspoken purpose of the academic boycott Martin Kramer Department of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, Shalem College, Jerusalem, Israel ABSTRACT The academic boycott of Israel, ostensibly targeting Israeli academe, is actually meant to isolate and stigmatise Jewish academics in America. It serves the aim of pushing Jewish academics out of shrinking disciplines, where Jews are believed to be ‘over-represented.’ That is how diehard supporters of the Palestinians find academic allies who have no professional interest in Palestine, in fields like American studies or English literature. KEYWORDS Academic boycott; American universities; Israeli policy; Jewish faculty; Palestinians What is behind the spread of the academic boycott movement? The usual explanation is that Israel’s policies, particularly Israel’s blockade of Gaza, the way it wages its war on Hamas, and its settlement policy in the West Bank, have pushed American academics over the edge. American academe, with its overwhelming liberal-left bias, has grown alienated from the Jewish state. This has created an opening for boycott advocates, who trade on the analogy between Israel and South Africa. If a boycott worked to end apartheid, it can work to end the occupation – so goes the argument. Let us begin by asking a simple question: who does the boycott seek to stigmatise and isolate? The simple answer would be: Israeli institutions of higher education, since they are the ostensible targets of the boycott. But that answer is way too simple. I am going to anticipate my more complex answer, and then explain it.
    [Show full text]
  • Yadgar Liran-Dissertation
    THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO “ALL THE KINGS OF ARABIA ARE SEEKING YOUR COUNSEL AND ADVICE”: INTELLECTUAL AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE BETWEEN JEWS AND MUSLIMS IN THE LATER MIDDLE ISLAMIC PERIOD A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE HUMANITIES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF NEAR EASTERN LANGUAGES AND CIVILIZATIONS BY LIRAN YADGAR CHICAGO, ILLINOIS JUNE 2016 © Copyright by Liran Yadgar, 2016. All rights reserved. ii For my father and in memory of my mother iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables vi List of Figures vii List of Maps viii Abbreviations ix Abstract xi Acknowlegments xii INTRODUCTION 1 I. On Periodization and Its Implications for the Historiography of Jews 1 under Medieval Islam II. The End of ‘Creative Symbiosis’ in the Late Middle Islamic Period? 19 CHAPTER 1. BIBLICAL COMMENTARY. 25 Joseph Ibn ‘Aqnīn’s (c. 1150-1220) Commentary on the Song of Songs, Inkishāf al-asrār wa-ẓuhūr al-anwār (Disclosure of Secrets and Appearance of Light) I. Allegorical and Philosophical Interpretations of the Song of Songs 26 II. Joseph ibn ‘Aqnīn: A Biographical Sketch 34 III. Ibn ‘Aqnīn’s Commentary on the Song of Songs 38 The Jewish Contents of Ibn ‘Aqnīn’s Commentary 42 The Islamic Contents of Ibn ‘Aqnīn’s Commentary 44 1. al-Fārābī 44 2. Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna) 50 3. Arabic Poetry 52 IV. Conclusions 55 CHAPTER 2. MYSTICISM. 56 al-Murshid ilā Al-tafarrud wa-l-murfid ilā al-tajarrud (Guide To Detachment and Aid to Solitude), a Mystical Treatise By David Ben Joshua Maimonides (c.
    [Show full text]
  • The Temples of Jerusalem in Islam | the Washington Institute
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 277 The Temples of Jerusalem in Islam by Martin Kramer Sep 18, 2000 ABOUT THE AUTHORS Martin Kramer Martin Kramer is The Washington Institute's Walter P. Stern Fellow and author of one of its most widely read monographs, Ivory Towers on Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America. Brief Analysis he political status of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is the subject of final status negotiations between Israel T and the Palestinians. According to press reports, at one moment in the Camp David negotiations last July, senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat asked his Israeli counterpart: "How do you know that your Holy Temple was located there?" A Jerusalem Report cover story (September 11) placed this in the context of a growing Palestinian denial of the existence of the First and Second Temples. "It's self-evident that the First Temple is a fiction," one Palestinian archaeologist at Bir Zeit University is quoted as saying. "The Second also remains in the realm of fantasy." Archaeologists will have their debates, and their place is in the academy. (There, the biblical account of the First Temple is contested, while the existence of the Second Temple, and its general location on the Temple Mount, are regarded as well-attested facts.) But at the negotiating table, the subjective sanctity of any site is a concrete reality which must be respected in its own terms. This is all the more so in the case of the existence and location of the First and Second Temples: both are attested by precisely the same Islamic sources which render the Haram al-Sharif (including the Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock) holy to Islam.
    [Show full text]