God's Caliph: Religious Authority in the First Centuries

God's Caliph: Religious Authority in the First Centuries of Islam (University of Cambridge Oriental Publications) ✷ [BOOKS] ✫ God's Caliph: Religious Authority in the First Centuries of Islam (University of Cambridge Oriental Publications) By Patricia Crone ❁ – Natus-physiotherapy.co.uk This study examines how religious authority was distributed in early Islam It argues the case that as in Shi'ism it was concentrated in the head of state rather than dispersed among learned laymen as This study examines how religious Religious Authority PDF Ç authority was distributed in early Islam It argues the case that as in Shi'ism it was concentrated in the head of state rather than dispersed among learned laymen as in Sunnism originally the caliph was both head of state and ultimate source God's Caliph: eBook ↠ of religious law; the Sunni pattern represents the outcome of a conflict between the caliph and early scholars who as spokesmen of the community assumed religious leadership for themselves Many Islamicists have assumed the Shi'ite concept of the imamate to be a deviant development In contrast this book Caliph: Religious Authority ePUB ´ argues that it is an archaism preserving the concept of religious authority with which all Muslims began.

9 thoughts on “God's Caliph: Religious Authority in the First Centuries of Islam (University of Cambridge Oriental Publications)

  1. Abu Hasan محمد عبيد Abu Hasan محمد عبيد says:

    لا شك أن فكرة الكتاب مهمة وتفتح للقارئ آفاقا وتلفته لأمور ربما لم يكن منتبها لهالم النجمة الواحدة إذا؟للمنهج العفشيكي الذي اتبعه المؤلفانيأتيان بروايات من كتاب الأغاني والعقد الفريد يبنيان عليها رؤيتهماثم إذا جاء نص يخالف فكرتهما، ببساطة، يقولان أنه مشكوك فيهوإن لم يستطيعوا التملص من النص أو إلقاء ظلال الشك عليه، تأولوه تأويلات باردة سمجة في استغباء علني للقارئقد ينطلي منهجهما على القارئ الأجنبي، لكنه لا ينبغي أن ينطلي على القارئ العربي

  2. Abdulsattar Abdulsattar says:

    يشرح مفهوم الخلافة عند السنة و يناقش أن فكرة الامامة الشيعية هي فكرة سنية الاصل لم يعجبني الكتاب لكثرة الحواشي التي يمكن ان تضيع الشخص غير المتخصص

  3. Tiemu Tiemu says:

    This book turns centuries of convention and common sense upside down disturbingly shakes it then leaves an effluence of confusion and uestion marks What exactly was the early caliphate?Sunnism's is widely regarded as being most loyal to the Islamic tradition because of its simplicity and demographic dominance Not necessarily so according to this bookInstead we find ourselves in the kind of Mahayana Theravada school debate whereby both sides claim to faithfully adhere to the original teachings and order of the founder whilst neither actually seem to cut the mustard This book critically examines and challenges the sunni side of the argument but as a western non Muslim scholar using the scientific and social studies method not a theological standpoint So what do we learn?Briefly and this is only part of what is in this short but deep work The word 'caliph' was originally used as denoting God's representative on earth as Muhammad was He was the representative of Allah not the representative of Allah through Muhammad through the scholars Not a prophet but with hands free to write and amend This is what the shiah divinely guided imam has always been The religious and political office was one and the same in the Caliph with the religious leaders mere followers of the Caliph rather than being a separate independent religious class of their own; The Caliph could create adulterate and revoke religious law He had a power akin to Muhammad's; The term 'sunnah' merely meant a custom in general not the custom of Muhammad Customs could be 'remembered' or recited at will claiming provenance by a mere assertion that it was so A Caliph's sunnah was no worse than a prophet's sunnah; The Caliph's power and authority was akin to Muhammad himself The person Muhammad long dead becomes and prominent as source of power for the religious class who increasingly invoke Muhammad as their guide above the Caliph Eventually the Caliph finds that the religious teachers have created an independent power base thereby relegating the Caliph to matters merely non religious in natureThis is not a long book Although based on contemporary sources there is no silver bullet to prove the author's thesis as fact But it does raise interesting possibilities Whether shi'ism is an adulteration or not it could be that its concept of the divinely guided Imam is a closer reflection of the original Islam than of sunnism's version based on consensus among religious scholars of the different madhabsThose who enjoy uestioning the veracity the entire system of ahadith will especially enjoy this book because it applies that similar kind of skepticism of ahadith to this entirely different area

  4. Tariq Mahmood Tariq Mahmood says:

    Sunni ulama claim that the caliph all title did change its meaning in the twelve years between 632 and 644 The apparent reasoning being that earlier caliphs were looking to legitimise their rule by masking the importance of Muhammad This trend was changed in the 70's when later Caliph's decided to use Muhammad's memory to get basically the same resultsAnother reason for marginalising Muhammad's legacy by the Umayyads was because it affected their dynastic legacy as they claimed to decedents from Uthman and saw Ali as the pretender Fascinating little study of the importance of Caliphs within Islam which is taken up by the fringe Islamist movements like the Taliban therefore very relevant todayThe importance of leadership in the heyday of Islam is clearly visible in this study It's also plain to see why the institution of the Caliph lost its charm mainly after the crushing defeat at the hands of Mongol hoards Unfortunately the Islamic world has never been able to come back after the harrowing defeat at the hands of the pagan Mongols So was sunnah really only based on the life of Prophet or did it also contain a healthy dose of influence from various caliphs as well? The book argues for the later which again makes a lot of sense For if Islam really blossomed during the time of Caliphs than their almost complete control on religious law seems mandatory Why would an almighty caliph compromise with a lowly ranking Alim?

  5. Ahmad Ahmad says:

    REad the book in its arabic translation The books mesage is unclear and hazy It suposed the reader has verry weak knowledge of the history of islamic society and state The book assumes some findings to be in opposite to regular sunni understanding of islam like calling the khalid the khalif of God while in reality these findings are uoted by traditional scholers again and again in all thier books of sunni islam like Ibn khaldoon for example the book puts heavy focous on evidence from poetry of glorifing the king and assume this is the societies vision in general didnt like the book very weak

  6. Kumail Akbar Kumail Akbar says:

    Crone can be very dry to read at times but packs a LOT of information in Gods Caliph and Gods Rule Hard to read her casually but if the content interests you as much as it did me you'd enjoy it

  7. عبد الله القصير عبد الله القصير says:

    كتاب يشرح مفهوم الخلافة عن السنة تحديدًا وهل هو خلافة رسول الله أو خلافة الله لم أهضم الكتاب لكثرة الحواشي التي شتتني

  8. Edith Edith says:

    Provocative skeptical approach to early Islamic history Crone and Hinds argue that 1 based on the use of the phrase khalifat Allah religious and political powers were not separate during the Ummayad caliphate contrary to classical notions that post rashidun caliphs retained political power while religious authority was delegated to jurists and ulema Instead caliphs made religious laws as well and that precedents seems ot be valued ie it's good to follow them but not binding 2 the Prophetic sunna that came down to us today did not develop until the end of the Ummayad era; previously it vaguely referred to acts that were righteous and just and could refer to decisions by other prophets David Solomon etc not just Muhammad These developments could well have been asserted by scholars out of preserving their institutional importance Crone and Hinds amply cited sources but given the vagueness of the period and how a lot of the materials were filtered through later Abbasid era that had their own interests in tweaking historiography all we have are theories with varying levels of persuasiveness

  9. Azzam To& Azzam To& says:


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *