Hagia Sophia, Religious Tolerance and Nation-States
By
Mushtaq Ul Haq Ahmad Sikander, New Age Islam
30 July
2020
The
destruction, conversion and restoration of places of worship are not something
new in history. Religion has been an important part of every civilization. The
faith of ruler was supposed to be followed by his subjects too. Any deviation
or call for a new religion was opposed vehemently if it was antagonistic to
official religion.
Saint Sophia museum in
Istanbul
-----
Religious
books document the struggles that prophets had to go through for opposing the
official religion and many were put to death for their beliefs. The story of
Islam is not different either. Caliphs under the divine mandate carried out
conquests and the people of these lands were supposed to pay Jiziya, be
rendered as second-class citizens, convert to Islam or fight with the Muslims
to either turn up as conquered or triumphant. According to Dr Javed Ahmad
Ghamidi, this was based on a divine mandate following Itmaam e Hujjat
(conclusive communication of truth) and making the truth manifest on humans.
This principle of Itmaam e Hujjat ended with the first generation of
Muslims as most lands were conquered (Dr Shahzad Saleem: Playing God:
Misreading a Divine Practice).
Later on,
the caliphate got degraded to monarchy but the title Caliph was appropriated by
monarchs. They carried the conquest spree, exploiting the religious jargon that
granted purpose and unity to the Muslim army. The jurists also divided the
world into realms coining terms like Darul Islam and Darul Harb.
These both were supposed to be in constant tussle with each other, despite the
fact that Darul Islam was ruled by multiple Caliphs (read monarchs) who
mostly had different goals, ambitions and taste often contradictory and
opposite to each other. So, this construction of Darul Islam as a
monolith was quite a contrast to the lived reality of Muslims.
yusuf.yilmaz /
Shutterstock.com
-----
Constantinople
was the seat of Roman empire and orthodox Christianity. Muslims conquered it in
1453 and converted the famous church Hagia Sophia into a mosque. In case of
conquered territories, we find two types of views among Ulama and jurists. One
school of thought upholds the fact that people, lands and every institution of the
conquered territory belongs to the Muslims and they have every right to just
occupy, utilize, repair, leave or destroy the religious places as they desire.
But this view is forcefully contradicted by Quran in the verse, “And had there
not been Allah’s repelling some people by others, certainly there would have
been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which
Allah’s name is much remembered.” (Surah Hajj:40)
So,
churches and synagogues are described as places of worship as equal in
reverence and respect as mosques are. So, occupying them forcefully or
converting them is out of question. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did not destroy,
occupy or convert places of worship, when he conquered Jewish territory in
Khyber. Another school of thought believes that if there is a covenant signed
with the rulers and religious heads of conquered territory that guarantee the
protection of religious institutions then they are not supposed to be annexed
or converted. They refer to the conquest of Jerusalem under second Caliph Umar
and the covenant. Caliph Umar himself declined to pray inside a church when
requested as he was apprehensive that after him Muslims may annex and convert
the church into a mosque on the excuse of his having prayed there. So, even
though there were no covenants the religious places still had amnesty from
being occupied. This is proved by the fact that first Caliph Hazrat Abu Bakr,
ordered his army not to destroy or annex, or attack places of worship or hurt
anyone who has taken sanctuary in their premises. Clearly Islam upholds the
sanctity of places of worship of each religion.
Turkey's ancient Hagia
Sophia, which has been a museum for decades, is now being turned back into a
mosque, causing religious and political divisions. #
-----
The
spirit of Islam was often contradicted or not implemented by Muslim rulers. For
instance, Hagia Sophia was a church that was converted into a mosque. Islamic
prayers were held there from 1453 to1932. It is not essential whether Muslim
ruler Sultan Muhammad Fatih purchased it or annexed it. But in spirit its
conversion was wrong. But in 1935 Kamal Ataturk in his attempt to secularize
Turkey, converted it into a museum. This move was opposed by a German Erkhard
Ungar, who was member of the commission chaired by Aziz Ogan, that exerted
great effort in making Hagia Sophia into a museum. Ungar insisted that the
place of worship should remain open as it was and put a note of opposition into
the report. Despite his opposition, the majority muslim commission went ahead
and converted it.
Now in
2020, the judiciary in Turkey has restored the previous status that now
reconverts it into a mosque. Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been cashing on the
sentiments of Muslims and promoting Turkish history as collective global muslim
history. This conversion has drawn a lot of appreciation as well as
condemnation. The historical wrongs cannot be rectified, otherwise Kaaba
too was full of idols, and many Hindu temples are built on the destruction of
Buddhist monasteries.
A process
of rectifying history will have no end. We have versions on history and its
narratives, not absolute truths and facts. Turkey is sovereign to take
decisions like these, similar to Indian judiciary that passed a verdict using
the demolition of 500-year old Babri mosque in Ayodhya as an opportunity to
allowing the building of a temple there.
If Turkey is a sovereign nation then why this
hue and cry all over the world?
Why some Muslims in different countries seem to
be jubilant at this decision?
Are transnational Muslim solidarity and
sentiments alive in an era of nation states?
Has globalization led to the transnational
citizenship and blurred the boundaries of nation states?
Why liberals are aghast at this decision?
The
world has attained the status of a global village. Modern means of
communication have rendered it possible for news to be relayed across the
borders. Media shapes opinions and Muslims have bigger share of negative news.
So, every news regarding Muslims in any part of the world is going to help
reinforce the stereotypical image of Muslims as well as Islamophobia. Despite
separate sovereignty of different Muslim states, the image of Muslims has been
constructed as that of a monolith. It has been reinforced by the fact that many
Muslims who have never even visited Turkey, are celebrating the judicial
decision. They are mentally still living in the era of Darul Islam
whereas nation states became an objective reality long back. Turkey will not
allow any Muslim to visit it without holding a valid visa. Even for performing
Hajj one needs a Saudi visa. Muslim Ulama, jurists and theologians still have
not upgraded themselves or Muslim masses to the era of nation states where
terms like Darul Islam and Kufr have been rendered redundant.
Muslims
world over are dejected, suffering from variegated crisis and possess a very
low self-esteem and confidence. Hence decisions like these certainly offer a
respite, hope and a taste of success in an era mired with pessimism and
failure. So they try to own, appropriate and exaggerate the Turkish judicial
decision and romanticize it as a victory of Muslims. Nation states are a
reality but modern means of communication certainly have led to the erosion of
sovereignty particularly by the transnational corporations, giving rise to a
popular culture particularly through media as tools of soft power. Although the
states remain sovereign, they cannot escape from the opinions and influence of
citizens and leaders of other countries. Also United Nations is a world body, whose
signatories are supposed to uphold various universal norms, values, principles
and fundamentals of its characters. Further it has led to another form of
limited governing body, compliance of whose orders is essentials in various
respects.
A few
groups give the justification that Christians burnt down mosques or turned them
into churches once they conquered Muslim lands particularly in Andalusia, so
Turkey did nothing wrong. They forget this fact that two wrongs do not make a
right and in that era it was something normal, but now times have changed. The
religion of a ruler or leader is not official, as most countries uphold that
states have no religion. So, this judicial step does not go well either with
the muslim minorities in different parts of the world or with the spirit of
Islam. Turkish Judiciary could have restored the church and masjid could have
operated equally in the same arena. This would have ushered a new era in
interfaith harmony. Instead this step reinforced the Islamophobic image of Islam
being intolerant and supremacist, thus opportunities of Dawah (inviting
to Islam) have diminished.
In the
current times converting, annexing or occupying churches and synagogues is counterproductive.
It may win Erdogan an election but it has turned away the hearts of millions of
non-Muslims from pristine teachings of Islam. Leaders should not try to act
like Prophets as if they are mandated by God himself. In case of Masjid e
Zaraar in Medina, Prophet (pbuh) was mandated by Allah to destroy it as
hypocrites used its space to hatch conspiracies. Now in the changed current
scenario religion is an individual choice and nation states are a reality that
have composite societies where both Muslims and non-Muslims are equal citizens.
So any decision in any part of the world will have ramifications for others
particularly Muslim minorities. Classical jurists could never conceive Muslims
as minorities but the reality is that Muslim minorities do exist and rightly or
wrongly, they are punished for the action of Muslim majorities existing
elsewhere. Hope Muslim rulers and nation states consider this fact before
constructing and executing their next adventure.
M.H.A.Sikander
is Writer-Activist based in Srinagar, Kashmir and can be reached at
sikandarmushtaq@gmail.com
Related
Articles:
A Nationalist Takeover of Hagia Sophia is not
What the Muslim World Needed Now
URL: https://newageislam.com/interfaith-dialogue/hagia-sophia,-religious-tolerance-nation/d/122505
New
Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African
Muslim News, Arab
World News, South
Asia News, Indian
Muslim News, World
Muslim News, Women
in Islam, Islamic
Feminism, Arab
Women, Women
In Arab, Islamophobia
in America, Muslim
Women in West, Islam
Women and Feminism