The Modern Myth/Zion of the Caliphate

[nino_savatte]

Hurrah!

 

[newharper]

god i could bore for england on this subject!

You do Oscar, you do.

 

[Boogie Boy]

The Caliphate was a temporal AND religious Empire that sprouted outwards from Mecca, starting after the first few decades after muhammad quraysh's death in 632 AD. at its' zenith under the Abbasids - the golden age of Arabia, the arabs managed to conquer the whole of north africa, spain (tho' spain was under a separate caliphate, that of a branch of the Umayyads, the caliphs who the abbasids deposed), and practically all that we today call the Middle East. It reached its' peak c. 950, then decline under the threat of the mamlukes (originally slaves trained from childhood to serve it) and by c.1100-1150 was effectively a dead letter.
The Caliph (from khalifat-al-ummara, the Commander Of The Faithful) was both the supreme religious leader - equivalent of the Pope, I guess - and an Emperor.
The reason why the notion has such potency for muslims (and other arabs) today is that during that period, it was not only - arguably - the world's most powerful and largest empire, but also the world's most advanced civilisation. From its' decline, until mr Karl Twitchell's splendid discovery (see; aramco) the arab world was in decrepitude and decline. and arabia is the heart, soul and spiritual homeland of Islam. Despite the great empires founded by the muslim dynasts the moghuls and the Ottomans, their empires were not built ALL around Islam - that just happened to be their faith.
So Muslims look back on this as their great golden age, and extremist, hyper-idealist muslims seek to recreate that period with a new Caliphate, and extreme fundamentalists believe that Islam can only regain its' spiritual purity by returning their society to the values, ways and social structures of the 7th C. hijaz.
and - needless to say - they are all utterly, completely squirrels.

A very interesting post. The only bit I would slightly disagree with relates to the idea that the fundamentalists wish to see a return to c 7th Century values that may or may not have existed in the Hijaz - I would be interested in knowing precisely what values these might be?

BB

 

[Streathamite]

as much the whole culture, way of life as simply 'values', seen in isolation; life in its' totality as an act of submission to allah, with uncompromising uniform conformity to the rigid social codes associated with a close-knit desert tribe, and an evangelical, conquering attitude to mawali and dhimmi (albeit a benevolent evangelicalism).

In other words, that all men & women of reason and morals will see the righteousness of their faith, and convert, and therefore any who don't are evidently satan's emissaries and must be crushed....

which means I guess that hedonistic atheistic heathens like me are really for it....
natch, prayer, alms, and a secondary but protected role for women are core to this.
and no, there won't be too many off-licences littering up the joint.....

 

[TeeJay]

...the knightly leader of the arabs.

although ironically Saladin was a Kurd.

 

[Streathamite]

...which again shows how NOTHING is ever simple in that part of the world!

 

[ViolentPanda]

Ah, you're thinking of Nebuchadnezzar.

Wasn't he the King of the Jews who, according to doggerel verse, wipes his arse on the Evening News?

Whereas Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan reckons he's Tamberlaine reincarnate.

Power corrupts, but absolute powers sends you totally and utterly squirrels, so much so that he's forgotten how to spell the name of the bloke he is reincarnated from.

Bloody Uzbeks, a bit more schoolwork and a bit less goat-fucking is what they need!

 

[nino_savatte]

Wasn't he the King of the Jews who, according to doggerel verse, wipes his arse on the Evening News?




Power corrupts, but absolute powers sends you totally and utterly squirrels, so much so that he's forgotten how to spell the name of the bloke he is reincarnated from.

Bloody Uzbeks, a bit more schoolwork and a bit less goat-fucking is what they need!

Didn't Thatcher once compare herself to Joan of Arc? Pity she didn't end up the same way.

 

[JWH]

We're not confusing Kerimov with Turkmenbashi, are we? I know Kerimov is authoritarian, but I hadn't heard he was barking.

 

[nino_savatte]

We're not confusing Kerimov with Turkmenbashi, are we? I know Kerimov is authoritarian, but I hadn't heard he was barking.

There was an edition of Meet the Stans where they said he was attempting to claim some sort of lineage to Timur Leng (Tamburlaine/Timur/Tamerlane). Karomov has spent a lot of money rebuilding Samarkhand.

 

[Boogie Boy]

as much the whole culture, way of life as simply 'values', seen in isolation; life in its' totality as an act of submission to allah, with uncompromising uniform conformity to the rigid social codes associated with a close-knit desert tribe, and an evangelical, conquering attitude to mawali and dhimmi (albeit a benevolent evangelicalism).

In other words, that all men & women of reason and morals will see the righteousness of their faith, and convert, and therefore any who don't are evidently satan's emissaries and must be crushed....

which means I guess that hedonistic atheistic heathens like me are really for it....
natch, prayer, alms, and a secondary but protected role for women are core to this.
and no, there won't be too many off-licences littering up the joint.....

But was it ever really thus, as it appears quite likely that the development and consolidation of Islamic culture took place over a wide span of time, and was not 'fixed' or clearly defined for at least 150 years after the apparent move from Mecca to Yathrib (Medina). It appears that after the death of Muhammad many who had chosen to take up Islam wavered in their continuing support of the religion - a fact that Muhammad appears to have been aware of during his lifetime. Many aspects that you have highlighted can clearly be found in the Qur'an - but it is worth remembering that the text of the Qur'an was not codified until many years after the death of Muhammad - and there are traditions that strongly suggest that there were changes made to achieve the 'finalised' version - with large tracts of 'text' being lost.

BB

 

[Streathamite]

err...I know that, you know that, many dispassionate onlookers know that. however, it does not prevent the more barking wing of radical and fundamental islam believing that if they create an extremely devout, puritanical society based on what they perceive to be the social mores of that period, then a new golden age will be upon them.
I did say they were squirrels

 

[ViolentPanda]

err...I know that, you know that, many dispassionate onlookers know that. however, it does not prevent the more barking wing of radical and fundamental islam believing that if they create an extremely devout, puritanical society based on what they perceive to be the social mores of that period, then a new golden age will be upon them.
I did say they were squirrels

What worries me is just how many of their own they'll deal with as "heretics". I mean the Ishmailis and the Sufis go without saying, so that's over half (perhaps more) of the Muslim populations of Central Asia killed or enslaved (I'm assuming they'd stick to their principles about forcible conversion). And then they'll start culling any sectarian offshoots of the main wings.

I wonder if they'd permit prostitution (IIRC the original Caliphate allowed it under certain conditions) or attempt to enforce a modern interpretation of "the Caliphate" that circumvented certain features of the original?

 

[Streathamite]

oh, they'll go for the modern, even-more-austere version. all prostitutes killed. All those guilty of any sinful, western-style 'apostate' behaviour ditto. And whilst the original caliphate was big on protecting jews and xtians, in return for them accepting 2nd-class status, I think the new caliphate might just conveniently overlook that doctrinal nicety.

 

[Boogie Boy]

err...I know that, you know that, many dispassionate onlookers know that. however, it does not prevent the more barking wing of radical and fundamental islam believing that if they create an extremely devout, puritanical society based on what they perceive to be the social mores of that period, then a new golden age will be upon them.
I did say they were squirrels

I'm glad that you know that, and equally glad that I know this, but reading your post I was a little uncertain as to whether you were suggesting that there was a clear 'fundamentalist culture' in place in the 7th CE in the Hijaz, rather than a range of alternative cultures - some within and outside an 'Islamic' framwork.

I'll shut up now?

BB

 

[SwizzleStiX]

jezza posting

I'm glad that you know that, and equally glad that I know this, but reading your post I was a little uncertain as to whether you were suggesting that there was a clear 'fundamentalist culture' in place in the 7th CE in the Hijaz, rather than a range of alternative cultures - some within and outside an 'Islamic' framwork.

I'll shut up now?

BB

I was saying that the proponents of the 'new caliphate' belief-framework - being all completely squirrels, natch - believe passionately that such a state existed, and is a desirable one to return to.

 

[Boogie Boy]

I was saying that the proponents of the 'new caliphate' belief-framework - being all completely squirrels, natch - believe passionately that such a state existed, and is a desirable one to return to.

Squirrels it is then!!

BB

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

and - needless to say - they are all utterly, completely squirrels.

Why is that?

 

[Streathamite]

Why is that?

squirrels is latest U75 fashionable slang for 'completely, utterly barking mad' (R, TM butchersapron), and you'd have to be to believe all that bollix.
do keep up wi' da fashion, like....

 

[nino_savatte]

Why is that?

My turn.

 

[Streathamite]

that should spell it out....

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

squirrels is latest U75 fashionable slang for 'completely, utterly barking mad' (R, TM butchersapron), and you'd have to be to believe all that bollix.
do keep up wi' da fashion, like....

I'm aware of what you meant. We have been using the term 'squirrelly' to mean bonkers, for a long time.

My question is, why must one be squirrelly to believe that the ideal state to be strived for is one where politics and religion are one, and where people are united under the laws of islam?

I personally don't agree that that constitutes an ideal or anything close, but I don't believe that everyone who holds that belief, is crazy. Some definitely are, but not necessarily all or even the majority.

 

[hipipol]

The Caliphate

Oddly tolerant in fact, no head to foot clothing for women enforced etc, seems to have been an Ottoman imposition, seem to recall the Q'uran only says that a women must dress "modestly" and even that was only to avoid inflaming the base instincts of men, no reflection on her like.
Majority of sucessful Muslim empires were happy just to charge Jizra (speeling?) or tax on Kafirs (unbelievers), Al Andalus, Sicily, Moghul (well execpting the deranged antics of Aurangzeb)
As for the Caliphate having died pre-1000 CE, during the Brit wars with Mysore embassies were sent to the Ottoman court by Tipu Sultan to ask for the "Caliph" to declare war against the Brits a Jihad, so some residual authority still rested there

 

[Boogie Boy]

I'm aware of what you meant. We have been using the term 'squirrelly' to mean bonkers, for a long time.

My question is, why must one be squirrelly to believe that the ideal state to be strived for is one where politics and religion are one, and where people are united under the laws of islam?

I personally don't agree that that constitutes an ideal or anything close, but I don't believe that everyone who holds that belief, is crazy. Some definitely are, but not necessarily all or even the majority.

Perhaps 'squirrels' is the wrong term, but I think that RJ was using that particular term against a very small group - the individuals with a uniquely extreme intepretation of the Qur'an.

BB

 

[Streathamite]

I'm aware of what you meant. We have been using the term 'squirrelly' to mean bonkers, for a long time.

My question is, why must one be squirrelly to believe that the ideal state to be strived for is one where politics and religion are one, and where people are united under the laws of islam?

I personally don't agree that that constitutes an ideal or anything close, but I don't believe that everyone who holds that belief, is crazy. Some definitely are, but not necessarily all or even the majority.

fair question, and it's not those aspects which I believe are particularly barking (above and beyond my belief that all religions are squirrels anyway); it's the belief held by some that an essential prerequisite to creating that state is a recreation - as faithfully and closely as is humanly possible - of the social, cultural, religious, political and economic framework as pertained to arabic life in the hijaz in the late 6th and 7th century.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

fair question, and it's not those aspects which I believe are particularly barking (above and beyond my belief that all religions are squirrels anyway); it's the belief held by some that an essential prerequisite to creating that state is a recreation - as faithfully and closely as is humanly possible - of the social, cultural, religious, political and economic framework as pertained to arabic life in the hijaz in the late 6th and 7th century.

Ah, so we agree: to our western perception, that would be a bad thing.

I'm glad to see that you're slowly coming around.

 

[Streathamite]

I'm glad to see that you're slowly coming around.

ye whaaaaa'? i've always said that the militant fundamentalists, and caliphate-recreators are barking! always.
what on earth are you on abaht, geezer?
ETA: are you feeling quite alright? I have never said anything other than that OBL & co are quite, quite barking. you - on the other hand - did, after all, support a war whose most likely long-term consequence is to leave ideological fellow-travellers of theirs in control of Iraq.

 

[Streathamite]

My question is, why must one be squirrelly to believe that the ideal state to be strived for is one where politics and religion are one, and where people are united under the laws of islam?

second answer; in my militantly atheistic POV, anyone who wants to put the superstition known as 'religion' anywhere near the centre of a State is a bit barmy, anyways

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

second answer; in my militantly atheistic POV, anyone who wants to put the superstition known as 'religion' anywhere near the centre of a State is a bit barmy, anyways

I'm an atheist, and I don't want religion anywhere near government, but I don't believe that all the followers of religion, even the devout ones, are crazy.

 

[Streathamite]

fairy snuff, mebbe you're more tolerant than me.
i mean, praying to someone born of a chance knee-trembler between a ghost and a virgin indeed....