Secular sayings collapsing under a microscope Examples of contemporary Muslim thinkers with knowledge, knowledge and specialization
The third episode: (The model of Dr. Muhammad Al-Mukhtar Al-Shanqeeti)
Mohamed Sharky
The intellectual journey of the Mauritanian academic researcher, Dr. Muhammad Al-Mukhtar Al-Shanqeeti, does not differ from the path of the two Egyptian doctors, Abdul-Wahhab Al-Masiri and Muhammad Emara, may God have mercy on them, because he received his academic training in American universities, and he specializes in the history of religions and in the philosophy of politics, and he has several books and many lectures. He participates in conferences and symposiums, and has political comments hosted by the Qatari Al-Jazeera channel. He is a lecturer at Qatari universities.
Al-Shanqeeti is a Muslim thinker who does not believe in the idea of separating religion from politics, which is a justified position by virtue of his experience and specialization in the philosophy of politics, and his experience with Western, Arab and international constitutions as well, and what is included in their texts, which supports his point of view scientifically and academically. He was a supporter of the Arab Spring revolutions, which he saw as an inevitable result of the Arab political reality.
Dr. Al-Shanqeeti often talks about democracy and its relationship to secularism, and he categorically denies that democracy is a result of secularism as many think, and he issues this point of view from experience and knowledge by virtue of his specialization, unlike those who think otherwise without having anything to justify their point of view. .
In an interview with him recorded on 01/05/2021, broadcast on social media, he elaborated on the issue of the relationship between democracy and secularism, and he believes that it is not possible to say for sure that there is neither an interdependence nor a contradiction between them. From this introduction, he set out to prove its validity through the living reality globally, in the West and in the Arab world, and based on his research and studies, and the research and studies of other people of expertise and specialization, including American and English foreigners, as well as Arab and Muslim researchers.
Al-Shanqeeti paved the way for this subject by starting from the idea of denying that religions are classified as one. Before that, he tried to define a trinity in which all religions meet, in order to then be distinguished from each other, and this trinity is necessary in order for religion to be called a religion, which is: the existence of belief, the existence of worship, and the existence of a universal story, and by the universal story he means a specific conception of existence and life. After that, religions are divided into three levels: religions at a minimum level, which are satisfied with the Trinity, and are represented by some pagan religions in the African continent, and religions at a middle level, which exceed the trinity by the existence of an ethical system, and are represented by Christianity and Buddhism, and religions with a higher limit, which are those It transcends the Trinity with the existence of an ethical system, a legislative system, and political, economic and social values, and Islam is considered the religion that is available with distinction on the standards of the highest limit.
In order to clarify the issue of secularism’s hostility to religion, which arose in Catholic Western countries in particular, including France, Al-Shanqeeti made a comparison between Christianity, which is a religion with a middle limit, i.e. with belief, worship, a universal story, and an ethical system, and Islam, which is a religion with a higher limit. What prompted him to make this comparison is the attempt of the secularists in the Arab and Islamic countries to transfer the Western secular experience literally or to reproduce it without distinguishing between the difference between Christianity and Islam in terms of their founding model, and they want to overthrow what arose because of the Catholic Christian religion of literally secularism on Islam with the difference between The two religions.
Al-Shanqeeti paused to show that Islam, as the final message, is a religion with the highest limit, and that he considers the previous heavenly religions not of a global character, but rather specific to well-known people, while Islam is the religion of the worlds, and it is complete with the elements that make it so.
Dr. Al-Shanqeeti believes that there is a difference between the mission of the Messiah, peace be upon him, and the mission of our master Muhammad, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, because the first one was sent as a missionary and a preacher, and not a legislator, because he was found in an environment in which there was a state with laws, which is the Roman state, while the Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, was sent May God bless him and grant him peace in an environment in which there is no state or laws. Rather, the pre-Islamic Arab society was rebellious and rejected every authority and its laws. That is why the Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, was sent to be an educator, leader and legislator, and to establish a state with a law. In this way, Al-Shanqeeti distinguished between the model of the Christian religion and the model of the Islamic religion, and he believes that secularism in Christianity is a sunnah, but in Islam it is an innovation, given that the Church did not engage in political competition until centuries after the mission of Christ, peace be upon him, and before that it was a Religion separate from the state. When the Catholic clergy competed with others in order to control the reins of government, the idea of demanding their opponents, who were secularists, emerged, to separate religion from the state. Arab secularists, and non-Arabs affiliated with Islam, want to apply the separation of the Islamic religion from the state, similar to what happened in Catholic Christian countries specifically, because non-Catholics, such as Britain and the United States, do not separate religion from the state, as evidenced by their constitutions, whether they are the constitutions of the fifty American states that It stipulates the religion adopted in it, with the exception of the federal constitution that does not stipulate that, and the testimony of the British constitution as well, and Dr. Al-Shanqeeti, who has experience in international constitutions, and he proceeds from his experience with them, and he speaks from experience.
The expert thinker in the philosophy of religions and the philosophy of politics proceeds to correct a fallacy that Arab secularists are still arguing about abstractly, and it is about the relationship between democracy and secularism, and he denies this relationship as previously indicated at the beginning of this article, that is, there is no correlation between them, nor a contradiction between them. And he explained it as follows:
Relying on the most important international index that categorizes countries democratically, the Northern European countries, namely: Norway, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark, have been ranked first in democratic practice, and they are secular countries, but in contrast their constitutions are not devoid of paragraphs referring to their official religion as expressed It is the conscience of its people, and based on this, it cannot be said that its secularism is the reason for its democracy. On the other hand, African and Asian countries are ranked at the bottom of the democratic ladder, although their constitutions stipulate their secularism, and Chad, the Congo, and North Korea were mentioned among them, and this is another evidence of the incorrectness of linking democracy with secularism inevitably and necessity.
Dr. Al-Shanqeeti concludes that it is impossible for the countries of the world to get rid of their bias towards religion, even if they declare their secularism, and he cites an example of that in secular China, which is biased towards Buddhism at the expense of Muslim minorities. Al-Shanqeeti explains this bias as keeping pace with the regimes, forced by the religious conscience of their people. This is what made him distinguish between the political majority and the cultural majority of countries, which should not be confused with each other, because constitutions are governed by the cultural majority represented by peoples, and the state is a harvest for which society scrambles. According to Al-Shanqeeti, the constitutions contain a thick side related to identity and values, and a light side related to what is procedural, such as the powers of presidents, and the rest of the powers of state institutions.
It is customary in the constitutions for al-Shanqeeti, that they provide for everything that is feared of being threatened, and he gives an example of the failure of the British and American constitutions to stipulate that the official language for them is English, because it is not threatened in them, rather it is threatened by others, while the constitutions of Arab countries stipulate The Arabic language is the official language, because it is threatened by the languages of the occupiers of yesterday.
Al-Shanqeeti discusses the problem of the relationship between the minority and the majority in Arab societies, and he describes minorities as spoiled, and the majority as foolish, because the majority may fall under the oppression of the internationally supported minority, as is the case with the Christian minority in the Arab world, which no one dares to attack. It also attacks the Muslim majority, and represents that by burning a mosque from Al-Sisi, but he does not dare to burn a church due to its international protection.
The solution to this problem, according to Al-Shanqeeti, lies in providing a balance between the majority and minorities, because violating this balance is considered a failure, bearing in mind that minorities and the majority in the Arab world are relative. for example .
Al-Shanqeeti concludes that the Arab and Islamic world cannot follow in the footsteps of modernity and secularism, with a great desire among its subjects for democracy, but they want it to be Islamic, not secular. He believes that secularism is imposed on this world by force, not by will, because the conscience of its people is Islamic, even with the declaration of its systems responding to the dictates of Western secularism. Arab regimes are obliged to take this sentiment into account in drafting their constitutions. Al-Shanqeeti mentions that Hafez al-Assad drafted the constitution of 1970 or 1971 without mentioning the religion of the state, and he found strong opposition, with which he was forced to add a clause stating that Islam is the religion of the state. He also mentioned that Al-Sisi found no choice but to include in his constitution a paragraph referring to the official religion of Egypt because he was also forced to submit to the religious conscience of the people, which he could not contradict.
Al-Shanqeeti concluded that the application of democracy in Islamic and Arab countries inevitably leads to the supremacy of Islam and the decline of secularism. This is inferred by what happened in Iraq when an American was tasked with drafting a constitution for it after its invasion, and after in-depth study it was concluded that the application of true democracy, not sham, in Iraq leads to two inevitable results: either the return of Islam, or hostility to America and the West, for this he advised the Americans to give up About thinking about transforming Iraq into a democratic country, and he is the owner of the saying: “More democracy means more Islam.” This was revealed by the democratic experiments in some countries of the Arab Spring, which were later aborted, because they made the religious sentiments of their peoples float to the surface, which worried Western countries.
Al-Shanqeeti pointed out that the Arab secularists are firmly convinced of the return of Islam if true democracy prevails in the Arab countries, so they are hostile to it, in order to block the path to the supremacy of Islam.
And the last thing Al-Shanqeeti concluded his intervention with, is describing the Arab constitutions as formalities or ink on paper, and that they are just a courtesy to the people, and they are in one valley, and the reality is in another valley, and they are in the rule of the right that is intended to be false, with his saying that the right remains a right even if it is wanted invalid Contrary to the formal nature of the Arab constitutions, which are suspended constitutions, Al-Shanqeeti mentions Western democratic countries that apply more than what is stipulated in their constitutions.
It remains for us to say that the experience of this academic researcher has revealed the incoherence of the saying of the Arab secularists, as well as revealed the defect in their comparison of the reality of the Arab countries with the reality of the countries of the West, and that their bet on secularism and modernity is a losing bet, and that their debate has become transgressive, and that the witnesses to this are from Western secular countries that They cheer for her, and glorify her with her praise, as explained by Dr. Al-Shanqeeti, who can only be praised for his scientific and academic weight, which is denied only by the ungrateful or stubborn.
Disclaimer: Please publish the second transmission of the article after correcting some typos, thank you very much