What the Islamic 'ummah' really means

Mafoot Simon, The Straits Times, Asia News Network, Singapore

I am beginning to wonder if we are not in danger of playing into the hands of extremists who propagate their own skewed definition of the Islamic ummah, the global Muslim community, the way they did with their own narrow definition of jihad.

"Jihad" in its purest sense means struggle or perseverance applicable to any given situation in a Muslim's life. It also means holy war. But the extremists have conveniently narrowed holy war to mean religious militancy and used it as their rallying call.

The Islamic "ummah" in its purest sense refers to the general Muslim brotherhood living in almost every part of the world. But extremists -- or jihadists -- have narrowed that meaning and insist that different groups of believers, living in places as diverse as Alaska and Zambia, should live under one rule -- theirs.

Some even idealize Islamic solidarity to the extent of distorting history. As one Internet site argues: "The Islamic ummah was always one ummah throughout the whole world, from the Melayu in the Philippines and Indonesia through to the Mongols, Turkish and even European Muslims in southern Italy and Portugal. We had no division or borders in our lands, and did not recognize the issue of race until it was introduced by British and other Western orientalists in the 18th century..."

If it sounds incredulous, it is. The writer conveniently ignored that part of Islamic history in which some Muslims migrated to seek protection in Ethiopia under non-Muslim rulers and rules. And quite contentedly.

Maarof Haji Salleh, former president of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore and now a visiting fellow at the Institute of South-east Asian Studies, notes: "Even at the point of the foundation of the early Islamic state in Medina... there was never any mention that Muslims must come under one state."

But the jihadists are acutely aware that jihad and the notion of a global Muslim community -- their version of the Muslim community -- are a potent combination in their grand design to create an Islamic nation across the globe.

They draw verses from the Quran, and from the sayings and practices of Prophet Muhammad, to back their vision of the Islamic ummah -- one that has no affiliation with any country, Islamic or otherwise, except their own notion of a caliphate.

American scholar Ralph Braibanti, writing in the International Strategy And Policy Institute journal, observes: "This quest for community, as expressed in the concept of ummah, continues to be given rhetorical expression in contemporary Muslim affairs. The fact that it is mentioned in the Quran several times gives it a sacred position."

With their insistence on an international caliphate, the jihadists have, in fact, moved away from the traditional distinction -- not accepted by all Islamic scholars -- between the Dar al-Islam and the Dar al-Harb.

In the Dar al-Islam are nations which declare themselves to be constitutionally Islamic, such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. They also include countries where the majority of the population is Muslim, such as Indonesia.

A rule of thumb in identifying these states is membership of the 57-strong Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

The Dar al-Harb, on the other hand, refers to countries where Muslims form the minority, but where their beliefs can be fully and freely expressed.

The jihadists, brushing aside the possibility of peaceful co- existence, assume that Muslims in these countries, too, want to live in a land of the caliphate.

But the evidence suggests otherwise.

Results of recent elections in several countries, such as Malaysia and Indonesia, show that Muslim voters preferred nationalist governments to Islamist ones. And a survey by United States opinion research group Pew Research Centre late last year found "strong democratic aspirations" in most of the Muslim populations surveyed. These included people living in the kingdoms of Jordan and Kuwait, as well as those in authoritarian states like Uzbekistan and Pakistan.

In fact, many of the Muslims polled expressed a stronger desire for democratic freedoms than the populations in some nations of Eastern Europe, notably Russia and Bulgaria.

The distinction between the ummah as defined by the jihadists and the ummah as is generally known elsewhere is one that must be made, just as the distinction has been made between the two meanings of jihad. Accepting the jihadists' definition of the ummah would mean that they have succeeded in driving a wedge between Muslims and non-Muslims; between "them" and "us". That would fit their grand plan nicely.