Iqbal's Conception of Khilafat in the modern World

It was his sixth lecture among a series of lectures delivered at Madras, Hyderabad, and Aligarh that prompted many ultra-conservative scholars of the Indian subcontinent to declare him a non-Muslim. The lecture titled, The Principle of Movement in the Structure of Islam, expounded on the concept of 'Ijtihad' (the thorough exertion of a jurist's mental faculty in finding a solution to a legal question) and it's crucial importance in the modern Muslim world. Although his discussion on Ijtihad touched upon several different topics, the one I will be highlighting is his discussion on the need for ijtihad regarding the concept of Khilafat. Khilafat is an Islamic injunction upon the Muslims which obligates them to have an Imam (leader) appointed over them.

Recognizing the lack of  guidance by the scholars of  India on the issue of khilafat, Iqbal pointed towards Turkey whose scholars had exercised ijtihad to present a modern solution to the appointment of an Imam. Iqbal raised a probing yet absolutely necessary question to the audience. He asked whether the caliphate or imamate should be vested in a single person. Turning to Turkey's (Grand National Assembly) Ijtihad, Iqbal points out that according to the Turks the caliphate can be vested in a body of persons, or an elected assembly. He quickly follows up this view by agreeing with it and proclaiming it to be 'perfectly sound'. He points out that in light of modern forces that are set free in the world, the 'Republican' form of government is thoroughly consistent with the spirit of Islam. Although Iqbal did criticize democracy in his poetical works, he saw no better form of governance than a democracy in the modern world. So, in Iqbal's conception democracy was the only way to implement khilafat. But why did Iqbal support such a view? To justify his stance, he sought the guidance of Ibn Khaldun- the first philosophical historian of Islam. 

According to Ibn Khaldun, there have been three distinct views regarding the idea of "Universal Caliphate" in Islam. The first being that the imamate is a Divine institution, and is consequently indispensable. The second that it is merely a matter of expediency (convenience). The third that there is no need of such an institution. The last view was taken by the Khawarij. Iqbal points out that modern Turkey has shifted from the first view to the second one (i.e., the view of the Mu'tazila). The reason, he explains, is that according to the Turks the idea of universal imamate has failed practically in the modern world. The Turks argued that it was a workable idea when the Empire of Islam was intact. This is true, in my opinion, because since the break of the empire, Muslims have been divided into several independent political units. Iqbal exclaims that the old views, regarding khilafat, have really only stood in the way of a reunion of the independent Muslim states. This is particularly true because many Muslim states today refuse to unite due to their differences regarding the view of khilafat. In a plea to urge the Muslim states to be progressive in their thinking Iqbal highlighted the incident when the condition of "Qarshiyyat" (the caliph should be someone from the tribe of Quraysh) was dropped by Qadi Abu Bakr Baqillani and Ibn Khaldun. Since the power of Quraysh had gone, they argued that the imamate should go to the most powerful man in the country. Thus, Iqbal argued that in light of modern times, Muslim states should reshape their laws in order to fit the modern requirements just as Qadi Abu Bakr and Ibn Khaldun did. I can not help but quote a verse from one of Iqbal's poems that highlights the importance of ijtihad and how a lack of it leads to even worse consequences. 

خود بدلتے نہیں قرآں کو بدل دیتے ہیں

Change not their interpretation, Quran they change.

We reach the crux of Iqbal's conception when he, towards the conclusion of his discussion on the need for ijtihad regarding khilafat, posited a suggestion to the modern Muslim states. He said, "For the present every Muslim nation must sink into her own deeper self, temporarily focus her vision on herself alone, until all are strong and powerful to form a living family of republics. A true and living unity, according to nationalist thinkers, is not so easy as to be achieved by a merely symbolical over lordship. It is truly manifested in a multiplicity of free independent units whose racial rivalries are adjusted and harmonized by the unifying bond of a common spiritual aspiration. It seems to me that God is slowly bringing home to us the truth that Islam is neither Nationalism nor Imperialism but a League of Nations which recognizes artificial boundaries and racial distinctions for facility of reference only, and not for restricting the social horizon of its members".

These statements of Iqbal show us how far-sighted he was and was willing to make a daring interpretation in order to make Islam relevant in the modern world. One might argue that Iqbal's ideas were too idealistic considering the current situation of Pakistan and other Muslim states around the world. Although, it is hard to ignore the fact that we have not united in any way but I believe ideals can be actualized given that they are promoted in the general masses and the youth specifically. After all, it is the general masses that have brought revolutions.

Personally, I find this line of thinking remarkable and it is hard to argue against it. I believe that Ijtihad regarding many other injunctions of Islam are absolutely necessary to cope up with the ever changing modern world. Being stubborn and idealizing the past would not solve the problems of the current era. Iqbal too highlighted how the past should be used as a guiding light but should not be idealized. To no surprise, many conservative scholars declared Iqbal as a non-Muslim due to this very reason. If our scholars do not think progressively we will eventually lose our youth to whatever ideology that would seem plausible to them, because Islam would not be answering their questions. The result of this would more often be an irrelevance of religion. More often than not, the ideologies the youth subscribe to involve ideas that even go against their own nature. It is absolutely necessary that our scholars study the secular disciplines because without them the youth can not be brought on the same page.  Unfortunately, the problem that Iqbal faced in his time is still rampant in muslim states today. Scholars of Pakistan are still stuck in tradition and blind zealous following which has done more harm than good. 

Sadly enough Iqbal has been disregarded in the curriculums within schools, colleges and universities. He has been reduced to a poet and many are unaware of his philosophical contributions. The result of this neglect is that Iqbal has been used by extremists of both the right and left for their own proposes. Iqbal has many times labelled himself as a vast ocean with disturbed waters. Indeed, his works are vast and the amount of recognition and praise he has attained in the west is a shame for the people for whom he was writing for. We need to revive the works of Iqbal because all of us subscribe to certain philosophies in life and many are followed uncritically. The philosophies of Iqbal, in my opinion, present the most fitted solutions for our crises, be it Mullahism, poverty,  false Sufism or spiritual deprivation.