Justified separation: Why has the position of Sufism changed on the Islamic Caliphate?

The Sufi attitude towards the Islamic caliphate project took a changing direction after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, cancelled it in March 1924. The Sufism initially joined the Muslim Brotherhood in the call to the caliphate immediately after the Caliphate’s overthrow. The Sufi orientation, at the time, was spearheaded by Sheikh Muhammad Madi Abu al-Azayem, the founder of the Azzami method, which was exploited by the Muslim Brotherhood and was employed in attracting the Sufi trend to support the project and attempt to revive it.

If a matching in the call to the caliphate took place between the Muslim Brotherhood and some Sufi schools after its downfall, it did not last long, especially after Al-Banna attacked the Sufi schools in his articles published by the Muslim Brotherhood newspaper at the time. El-Banna considered Sufism a reason for many calamities and demanded the government to eliminate it.

In elaboration of the previously mentioned, it can be said that the position of Sufism from the Islamic Caliphate since the fall of the Ottoman Caliphate until the present time did not take one form and one firm course all the time, and it has raised several questions, including in the foremost: What is the position of the Sufism intellectual project from the project and the concept of the Islamic Caliphate? How does the mystical Sufism see the call by the Islamic Movement to the Caliphate? What is its position on the caliphate of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi?

The mental perception of the Sufism on the Islamic caliphate:

It seems that what Sufism is calling for in terms of its approach and concept is totally contradicting the concept of the caliphate which the Islamic movements are calling for. If the latter considers the idea of ​​the caliphate and working to restore it starts from cultural, social and economic cooperation between the Islamic peoples (it goes beyond the limits of the simple state), and then the formation of alliances and treaties reaching to an integrated community, Sufism is the embodiment of the concept of individual salvation in its work, which contradicts the idea of ​​gradual expansion and transition adopted by Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, as steps preceding the caliphate.

He said in the letters of the fifth conference of the group, published in the book titled “The Imam's Messages” that they make the idea of the caliphate and working on restoring it at the top of their approach, while they believe that this requires many prerequisites that are necessary. They also said that the direct step to restore the caliphate must be preceded by steps, including the fact that there must be a full cultural, social and economic cooperation among all Muslim peoples, followed by the formation of alliances and treaties.

The concept of Sufism about reform and the idea of ​​individual salvation in the world which means moving from self-sufficiency to attention to the other within the confines of a society confirms that the Sufi thought did not address public affairs or transformation to participate in the political work or the call for the formation of Islamic confederations, such as what the symbols of the Islamic movement have recently advocated.

Therefore, the Sufi quest remains in accordance with the Sufi thought lying in the self and limited to reforming themselves by attaining the faith values ​​that bring the individual closer to his Lord and make him be closer to those who are dear to God.

Mystical Sufism and the caliphate project:

After the fall of the Islamic caliphate on March 2, 1924, and the removal of the caliph from Turkey, Hassan al-Banna was keen to employ Sufi schools in the call for the Islamic caliphate, fearing the use of liberal forces at the time. One of the most important results of his attempts was adopting some Sufi schools the call for the Islamic caliphate which is represented in the Azzami approach and the role of its founder Sheikh Mohammed Madi Abu Al-Azayem.

Abu Al-Azayem made the unity of the Ummah and the restoration of the caliphate from 1924 until the end of 1927, as Sheikh Mr. Aladdin Madi Abu Al- Azayem said, the core of his preaching to the extent that he put the word of the caliphate as the main slogan of the Azzami approach which “God is our creator, our Jihad is our lesson, the Messenger is our destination, and our purpose is the caliphate".

Although the movements and tours of Sufism in the call for the caliphate were carried out in parallel with the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the call for caliphate during the ten years following the fall of the Ottoman Caliphate, the position of Sufism from the idea of ​​the caliphate and the recruitment of some of the Brotherhood to promote the restoration of the Caliphate did not last long. The Sufi schools took hostile attitude to the Muslim Brotherhood group and rejected the call for the caliphate. One of the reasons behind the dissidence of some Sufi supporters of the idea of ​​the caliphate and the Muslim Brotherhood is the fact that al-Banna attacked the Sufi schools and considered them a reason for the suffering of many in the society. He also published many of his articles in the Muslim Brotherhood magazine which is the mouthpiece of the group at the time, attacking the moulids (festivals) and the celebrations of the Sufis and how they are allowing opportunities for indecent affairs and called upon the government in these articles to dissolve the Sufi movements if they did not introduce reforms.

He wrote the article in the fifth issue of the Muslim Brotherhood magazine in 1933, in which he said: "The text in Sufism in this sense was a reason for the affliction of the Muslims and opened the way for any deviant that is using Islam to satisfy his desires … I warn that things will confuse you and you will understand Sufism in another sense, and I ask God to guide you because the road is full of misfortunes."

It can be said that the Sufi position on the Islamic caliphate since the fall of the Ottoman caliphate until now has changed according to each structured model taken by Sufism, whether traditional schools (the schools surpassing the borders of the state and the Sufi small mosques spread in most countries of the world) or Sufi parties with power (Sufism in Turkey), or the model of protracted movements (the Hizmet movement led by Fathallah Gulen), and can be addressed as follows:

(*) Traditional schools: That represents the position of the traditional schools on the Islamic caliphate project which is adopted by the Muslim Brotherhood group and other Islamist movements. The traditional schools represent Sufism in its institutional nature - that is, which takes the hierarchical structure in its task construction, which begins with the disciple (bottom of the pyramid), and ends with the Sheikh of the Sufi method. This model is considered the strongest in the Arab Sufi condition, the most spreading and the most intertwined among its parties. The traditional schools of Sufism reject the Islamic Caliphate project on the basis of different concepts of reform on both sides.

The concept of societal reform adopted by the Sufi schools in the recent period came in the light of facing the Islamic state project announced by the Islamic movements. Regarding the approaches of the Sufi schools in many countries of the world for social reform, we find that they raise the slogan of the end of the Rashidun caliphate, and the building of the faithful individual (The individual is not affected by any political or economic or social reforms without a spiritual reform).

Sufism's vision on societal reform takes a reverse direction to the Islamic groups' view of reform, which is representing in the re-building of the Islamic state. Sufism rejects reform from the top of the regime and neglects the rule of building the individual believer. It can be said that the reform adopted by Sufi schools in the face of the caliphate revolves around the reform of the individual and the preoccupation with his inner self so as to produce the most reconciled and reliable human being within the borders of the homeland and the state. In addition, the Sufi approaches have not yet submitted a project to take power.  They also make domestic explanations of Islam, countering the ideas imported from the time of the caliphate such as the conflict between Jews and Crusades.

The Turkish model: Although Turkish Sufism bears the same names as the Sufi schools spread throughout the world, whether it is Tijian, Naqshbandi, Qadiriyah, or Rifaiya, the idea of ​​the Ottoman Caliphate still exists among them as other Muslim Turks. This dates back to the fact that Turkish Sufism is deeply rooted in the depths of the Ottoman Caliphate and its effects are integrated in all aspects of the Turkish life. This takes place to the point that Sufism plays a social role that predominates the role played by other Islamic movements.

The fact that some Turkish leaders - such as Necmettin Erbakan, former Turkish Prime Minister, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and others – hails from the womb of the Turkish Sufi schools led to the revival of a historical relationship between the Sufism and the Ottoman Caliphate.

The Ottoman Caliphate adopted the Sufi schools from the early days, and the great sultans of the Ottoman caliphate, such as Selim I, the ninth sultans of the Ottoman Empire and the seventy-fourth Caliph of the Muslims and Mohamed el-Fatih, the seventh sultan of the Othman Empire.

It is therefore possible to say that the deep, historical relationship between the Sufis Turks and some sultans of the Ottoman Empire, and the interplay between the Sufis and the ruling parties in Turkey made the Sufi schools take a positive attitude towards the project of the restoration of the Islamic Caliphate without the other Sufi schools spread throughout the world.

The extending Sufi movements and the Hizmet movement model: The Hizmet movement, led by reformist Muhammad Fathullah Gulen, may be a different model of Sufi-oriented reformist movements. It follows a practical approach of the concept of religious and social reform in most countries of the world in a decentralized manner. This approach differs from the centrality of the caliphate advocated by the Islamic movements, which adopt the ideas of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood Hassan al-Banna. The ideas of the founder of the Hizmet movement are generated from the ideas of his teacher Badi Zaman Saeed Nursi, one of the most prominent scholars of religious reforms before 1960. Moreover, mechanisms to implement the reform program on which the movement is based on in 160 countries indicate that the movement is not dreaming of restoring the Islamic caliphate which was the aim of al-Banna and several Islamic movements.

The vision of Fathallah Gulen and his movement on reform differs from the reform adopted by the Islamic movements in that they are based on the restoration of the Islamic identity in all countries of the world in order to preserve the Islamic identity, not the Islamic Caliphate. This will be through mechanisms different from the mechanisms called for by Islamic movements seeking to restore the Islamic Caliphate. Gulen neither called for taking up arms, nor excluding others. He also did not call for the Islamization of the state in exchange for the secular state.

His movement has also put Islam, nationalism and liberalism in one basket, and has never referred to the idea of ​​the Imamate, the Caliphate and the Great State like the Muslim Brotherhood. Rather, it applied a reform model that conforms to the circumstances of each country and does not clash with its parties.

It can be said that the Hizmet movement as a developed Sufi model rejects the idea of ​​centralization, does not possess an ideology, and does not present itself as it is established for change. Rather, it works on the basis of social reform that does not exclude or isolate. It recognizes the dialogue of religions and provides an applied model for it (being a Muslim for a month) and this contradicts the idea of the Islamic Caliphate which Islamic movements call for.

The position on Baghdadi’s caliphate:

In all, it is possible to say that the Sufi schools took a stand against Daesh (Islamic State) after the organization committed its worst crimes against Sufism in all the areas it controlled, or which it was trying to concentrate in, such as its demolition of graves in Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen, and its targeting of several Sheikhs as happened in the Sinai region of Egypt.

The Sufi schools objected to the caliphate of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as it considered Daesh as a deviant from Islam. “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has nothing to do with the Islamic caliphate, but what these organizations are committing under the pretext of following religious predecessors has nothing to do with those predecessors. These are practices that bring back Muslims to the dark ages," Sheikh Abdul Khaleq al-Shabrawi, Sheikh of the Shibrawiyya method, said in a press statement. At one of his weekly sermons at Hussein Mosque in Cairo, Sheikh al-Shabrawi called for fighting Daesh, describing it as misleading. He said, “Muslims all over the world have to confront Daesh as misleading groups.”

In the end, it can be said that the rejection of mystical Sufi movement may be the reason for the support it receives from many Arab and Western governments to counter the Takfiri ideology. However, this trend has recently begun in the Western Asia region, and in West Africa; to face the threats of jihadist organizations in the Arab Maghreb and Europe.