The Saudi thinker, Dr. Radwan Al-Sayyed, warned against using religion in political competition, given that religion is the conscience and tranquility of society, and it exchanges embraces with it. While competition fragments religion and society, its worship and its value system, pointing out that Islamic sects’ jurists considered the imamate or the presidency of the state a matter of convenience, management and discretion, which has nothing to do with beliefs or devotions. He explained that the thesis of “governance” and the perfect system refers the political issue to a matter of belief, just as the jihadist and organizational Islam have created a split in the religion.
Al-Sayed believes that the general religious and intellectual principles in the Islamic field do not conflict with the modern principles of the state. For example, the natural right does not differ from the concept of the five necessities of al-Shatibi, which he considered universal and universal. Because it “must be observed in every sect,” then there are many differences in the expressions, but not in the contents. Instead of starting sharp dichotomies with the West that carry identity politics, Al-Sayyed called for the involvement of Muslims in the world by adopting two ethical systems: the system of global ethics “which is the great commonality between religions, as it is a universal human reference,” and the system of reason, justice and morals that Muslim thinkers called for, Which embodies the basic Quranic concepts «acquaintance, good deeds, and responsibility».
He attributed the tragicity of the current situation, as Muslims suffer from deep internal rifts, and emotional and value separation from the world: to "the lack of a major reference or a clear vision of self, role, and position in the world." And he affirms that there is no way out of the peculiarities of turmoil and eruption except by returning to be part of the world and the era with the sense of the witness and his responsibilities, and the approach of charitable acquaintance and his work.
Al-Sayed revealed the questioning of revivalist Islam in the legitimacy of religious institutions. This led to the division of Islamic revivalism into two parts: Fundamentalist revivalism “mainly the Brotherhood movements”, which built an alternative legitimacy through associations that adopt the method of allegiance to the guide, so the organization became the axis on which the legitimacy that is intended to be built is held, just as there is a Salafist revival of a kind private.
He explained that the revivalists are very different from the reformists. These others, including Rifa’a al-Tahtawi, Khair al-Din al-Tunisi, Muhammad Abdo, and Ali Abd al-Razzaq, saw in the Ottoman organizations legal regulations carried out by a legitimate authority, including the principle of citizenship, parliament, the government, and the restriction of the ruler’s powers by the constitution. They welcomed the Ottoman Code of Justice, and introduced in the era of the national state jurisprudential principles and branches within civil laws, while the revivalists, since the fifties of the last century, established a categorical distinction between Sharia (and the jurisprudence based on it) and man-made laws of human origin. They doubted science and the possibilities of its contradiction with faith, and attempted to Islamize knowledge. Instead of cultural exchange with modernity and quoting and benefiting from it, they called for a comprehensive confrontation in order to preserve identity and Islam.
Presented by: Ali Al-Rubai @Al_ARobai
