{"title":"Sunni and Shiite Political Thought of Islam State Relationship: A Comparison between Abdurrahman Wahid of Indonesia and Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran","authors":"A. Nurdin, Ahmad Tholabi Kharlie","doi":"10.15575/jassr.v1i1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses how the Indonesian Sunni Muslim leader Abdurrahman Wahid and the Iranian Shiite Muslim leader Ayatollah Khomeini responded to the debate about the relationship between Islam and the state. Their responses impacted on the struggle of Indonesian and Iranian Muslims in considering the ideological basis of Indonesian and Iranian states. On the one hand, Wahid with his educational and social background and Indonesian political context rejected the concept of an Islamic state. He did not agree with the formalization of Islamic sharia. To implement his idea, he promoted the idea of Pribumisasi Islam. For Wahid, islamization was not arabization. Khomeini, on the other hand, believed that Islam is a religion that has complete laws and way of life including social rules. According to Khomeini, to effectively implement these rules, Muslims need to have executive power. In Khomeini’s view, when the Quran calls for Muslims to obey Allah, the messenger, and ulil amri, this means that Allah instructs Muslims to create an Islamic state. To realise his views, Khomeini proposed the doctrine of Velayat-e al Faqeeh. Thus, different religious-political contexts of these two leaders contributed to their different responses to the relationship between Islam and the state.","PeriodicalId":171342,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Asian Social Science Research","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Asian Social Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15575/jassr.v1i1.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
This paper discusses how the Indonesian Sunni Muslim leader Abdurrahman Wahid and the Iranian Shiite Muslim leader Ayatollah Khomeini responded to the debate about the relationship between Islam and the state. Their responses impacted on the struggle of Indonesian and Iranian Muslims in considering the ideological basis of Indonesian and Iranian states. On the one hand, Wahid with his educational and social background and Indonesian political context rejected the concept of an Islamic state. He did not agree with the formalization of Islamic sharia. To implement his idea, he promoted the idea of Pribumisasi Islam. For Wahid, islamization was not arabization. Khomeini, on the other hand, believed that Islam is a religion that has complete laws and way of life including social rules. According to Khomeini, to effectively implement these rules, Muslims need to have executive power. In Khomeini’s view, when the Quran calls for Muslims to obey Allah, the messenger, and ulil amri, this means that Allah instructs Muslims to create an Islamic state. To realise his views, Khomeini proposed the doctrine of Velayat-e al Faqeeh. Thus, different religious-political contexts of these two leaders contributed to their different responses to the relationship between Islam and the state.
本文讨论了印尼逊尼派穆斯林领袖瓦希德和伊朗什叶派穆斯林领袖霍梅尼如何回应关于伊斯兰教与国家关系的争论。他们的反应影响了印度尼西亚和伊朗穆斯林在考虑印度尼西亚和伊朗国家的意识形态基础方面的斗争。一方面,瓦希德以他的教育和社会背景以及印尼的政治背景拒绝了伊斯兰国家的概念。他不同意将伊斯兰教法正式化。为了实现他的想法,他提出了普里布米萨斯伊斯兰的理念。对瓦希德来说,伊斯兰化不是阿拉伯化。而霍梅尼则认为,伊斯兰教是一个拥有包括社会规则在内的完整的法律和生活方式的宗教。根据霍梅尼的说法,为了有效地执行这些规则,穆斯林需要拥有行政权。在霍梅尼看来,当《古兰经》要求穆斯林服从使者安拉,直到阿姆里,这意味着安拉指示穆斯林建立一个伊斯兰国家。为了实现他的观点,霍梅尼提出了法基赫学说(Velayat-e al faqieh)。因此,这两位领导人不同的宗教政治背景导致了他们对伊斯兰教与国家关系的不同回应。