2
Tensions between Religious and Political Authority in the Umayyad Caliphate
Religious Studies 180
14 October 2008
In the wake of Muhammad’s death the Muslim world began to splinter into various factions. In order to create solidarity among the fractious umma, those that were close to the Prophet founded the caliphate. This new authority immediately began to cause tension between the religious and political aspects of leadership that the Muslim people expected from the successor of Muhammad. However, one group in particular, the Umayyad, best demonstrates the division and escalating tension between the religious and political authority of the caliphal office. Through the shunning of custom established by the Rashidun and Muhammad and the alienation/exclusion of specific Muslim factions, the Umayyad dynasty highlights the tension between the religious and political authority of the caliphate.
To best understand the tension and division of roles in the caliphate, one must first understand the origin of the word. This is because the word Caliph has a divided meaning. It comes from the Arabic word khalifa. According to Vernon Egger, the word “can denote both deputy and successor; which are clearly distinct meanings” (46). However, in Mark Wegner’s study of the word “both [in] Arabic and Hebrew the first form of the root commonly denotes succession in time, place, or function, it has come in the former to be applied to the thing succeeding and in the latter to the thing succeeded” (652). This double meaning is important because it leads to confusion as to what role the leader should play in guiding the Muslim community; i.e. should the Caliph be simply a deputy that guides military and political affairs or a full successor to Muhammad that is both a military and religious figure? Also important, is that the word itself may not have been used by the first four caliphs. But, it did attain use in the Umayyad dynasty specifically used as the title “khalifat Allah” which means “deputy of God” (Egger 46). Wegner proposes that this “Umayyad claim to the caliphate” is simply one that signifies the dynasty as legitimate “avengers of the blood of ‘Uthman” because “they had been installed in their position by God” (652). This certainly adds to the religious claim to authority for the dynasty. Nevertheless, these interpretations of the word’s origin suggest that the duality of roles was an important feature of the caliphal office to the umma. As shall be discussed, though, this was not the case in practice. According to Wegner, when considering the history of the Arab empire, there is the “the conventional picture of the entire Umayyad period as an interval of secular kingship between the perfect theocracy of the Rashidun and the less perfect theocracy of the Abbasids” (652). The Umayyad dynasty from the beginning of their rule began to shift the nature of the caliphate into a primarily political authority.
The Umayyad dynasty was founded by a man named Mu’awiya in 661. While he mostly adhered to the policies set forth by the first four caliphs or “Rashidun,” he also differentiated his rule from that of the Rashidun by installing his son as heir to the title (Zaman 119). By doing this, he supplanted the previous custom of a caliphal selection based on the consensus of high ranking tribal and religious (119). In this regard, the political authority began to overshadow the religious authority. This is not to say that the council selectors only focused on religious aspects when choosing the next Caliph, but the process of consensus was one in which the Caliphs were chosen by their adherence and closeness to the Prophet and their piety towards Allah. The Rashidun were all men that had been around Muhammad and were close supporters and family members (Egger 28, 63).
In addition, the Umayyad dynasty began to lose contact with the rest of the Muslim community. The first Caliph of the Umayyad dynasty, Mu’awiya, was one of the last caliphal leaders to hold an open court that allowed the public to access the Caliph (Egger 66). Thus, from the beginning of the dynasty, a gulf was forming between the caliphate and the rest of the umma. This division is profound if one considers that a religious leader must be present with the people in order to be gain the full support of his people. Another way the Umayyad dynasty lost contact with the umma was through the excessive luxury and opulence of these Caliphs. Egger claims that over time “it became clear that the new rulers were not as pious as their forebears had been,” because of alcohol consumption and grand palaces (66). For the devout Muslim, alcohol consumption was strictly forbidden and contemptible
One of the greatest ways in which the Umayyad dynasty created tension between the religious and political authority was the relocation of the imperial capital from the holy city of Medina to the city of Damascus in Syria. Muhammad had moved to Medina from Mecca in order to turn “his attention to spreading the message of Islam to frontiers beyond the Arabian Peninsula,” (Farouk-Alli 313). With a firm power base, Muhammad was able to carve out his Arab empire. Later, the first four caliphs continued in the tradition of the Prophet by leaving the capital of the empire in Medina (313). The capital of the Arab empire had been firmly set in Medina for 39 years before the installation of Mu’awiya in 661 C.E. (Farouk-Alli 313 & Egger 66). Mu’awiya's relocation of the capital caused religious tension, because the “pious Muslims… considered Medina and Mecca to be the center of the world” (Egger 66). The relocation also caused political tension, because the elite of Medina were suddenly left out of imperial affairs. Mu’awiya’s disdain for tradition was the result of politics. He stayed in Damascus to remain in his base of power, Syria (66). This decision, based strictly on political stability, would have great ramifications in the realm of religious authority and was one factor that would lead to the weakening of the religious character of the caliphate during the Umayyad rule. The relocation showed the neglect, if not disrespect, for history of the Prophet and his institution of ritual prayers that tied Muslims to the important mosques of Medina (Farouk-Alli 314). Eventually, the Umayyad dynasty fell out of favor due to its lack of religious authority. In fact, “anti-Umayyad sentiments were extensive, particularly among the emerging religious class” (Teipen 223).
Another testament to the tension between religious and political authority during the Umayyad rule was the schism between Muslims over the idea of caliphal succession. This schism was such a major feature of early Islam that its effects persist today. The controversy in ideology derives from the period before the creation of the Umayyad dynasty, when Mu’awiya and Ali’ were fighting for the caliphate. Each man had strong support for their claim to the office. The followers of Ali’ were so convinced of his divine right to power that when Ali’ conceded arbitration to Mu’awiya at the battle of Siffin a group abandoned Ali’ and labeled him a heretic, thus forming the faction of Muslims known as the Kharijites (Egger 65). However, this is only the first point of ideological controversy. At this point in time, the groups were mainly focused on the superficial political succession. It is the successor to Mu’awiya, Yazid, who ossified the division of umma as having two separate, but parallel, doctrines of Islam. It happened as a result of Ali’s second son, Husayn, challenging the authority of Yazid. Yazid sent his army out to quell the rebellious Husayn. When the two armies meet at the battle of Karbala Husayn was killed (Stewart 623). With Husayn’s death, the umma was forever rent into the two major groups of Muslims—the Sunni and the Shi’i. The people that supported Ali’ and his lineage were driven into secrecy and persecuted by the Umayyad rulers. In their exclusion, this new community formed their own customs and beliefs, such as the idea of an Imam as the “divinely appointed and guided leader” (Egger 75). In this respect, the Imam is considered the heir of Muhammad both as a religious and political leader. On the other hand, the Sunnis did not accept this idea of the Imam. According to Carl Ernst, the Sunnis “accepted the political status quo, regardless of the justice of the case” and simply followed the rule of the Umayyad caliphate (169). As a result of the differing ideologies, “the Shi‘a engaged in periodic uprisings against what they viewed as the illegitimate caliphs” throughout the Umayyad rule (Stewart 623). This ideological split between the Sunni and Shi’i is one that perfectly demonstrates the tension between religious and political authority of the caliphate for the umma at large. The Shi’i believed that the Caliph should be an Imam directly linked to Allah as a full successor to the Prophet, whereas Yazid and subsequent Umayyad Caliphs simply wanted to maintain their political authority regardless of religion or religious conviction. The Sunnis were unobligated to resist the Umayyad authority.
The Umayyad Caliphate from the mid-seventh to mid-eighth century was one of the best examples of how the caliphate experienced tension between religious and political authority. The Rashidun, following in the direction of Muhammad, managed to keep the office as both a religious and political institution. Tensions existed in the early stage, but it was not until the Umayyad dynasty took control of the caliphate that major divisions and tensions arose in the umma. Specifically, the fight between Ali’ and Mu’awiya and later Yazid and Husayn created a tremendous division in the umma both in political and religious aspects, but also the opulence and neglect of tradition by the Umayyad Caliphs led to a profound tension in the community over the role of the caliph as a political and religious authority.
Works Cited
Egger, Vernon. A History of the Muslim World, to 1405. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004.
Ernst, Carl W. Following Muhammad: Rethinking Islam in the Contemporary World. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003.
Farouk-Alli, Aslam. "Holy Cities." Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World. Ed. Richard C. Martin. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 311-316. 2 vols. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. UNC-Chapel Hill. 13 Oct. 2008 <http://find.galegroup.com>.
Stewart, Devin J. "Shi‘a: Early." Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World. Ed. Richard C. Martin. Vol. 2. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 621-624. 2 vols. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. UNC-Chapel Hill. 13 Oct. 2008 <http://find.galegroup.>.
Teipen, Alfons H. "Empires: Umayyad." Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World. Ed. Richard C. Martin. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 222-224. 2 vols. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. UNC-Chapel Hill. 13 Oct. 2008 <http://find.galegroup .com>.
Wegner, Mark. "Succession." Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World. Ed. Richard C. Martin. Vol. 2. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 651-656. 2 vols. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. UNC-Chapel Hill. 13 Oct. 2008 <http://find.galegroup.com>.
Zaman, Muhammad Qasim. "Caliphate." Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World. Ed.Richard C. Martin. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 116-123. 2 vols. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. UNC-Chapel Hill. 13 Oct. 2008 <http://find.galegroup. com>.