In a major new development, an Islamic force has arisen to challenge the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and support a more moderate regime in that country. This is a surprising opponent but the only one that could be of significance: al-Azhar University. Why is Egypt’s Islamic establishment taking on Egypt’s Islamists? Simple: survival and self-interest.
The prestigious al-Azhar is a conservative traditionalist institution that has been dominated by Egypt’s regime and used to oppose revolutionary Islamists. The Egyptian government decided who would run al-Azhar, who would be the country’s chief mufti (authority on Islamic law), who would preach in the mosques, who could build a mosque, and what clerics could appear on television and other media. If you wanted to build a career as an important Islamic cleric in Egypt you needed to get the rulers to like you. Their Islamist critics called them “parrots,” not only because they repeated the government line but also because a parrot is used like the English word, “bird-brained.”
Over the years, however, the establishment has made concessions to the new wave of radical interpretations. For the last few months, following Mubarak’s downfall, the al-Azhar leadership appeared ready to cut its own deal with the Brotherhood.
But the Brotherhood pushed too hard, demanding a totally new leadership for Egypt’s religious institutions. Facing a choice between resistance and total surrender (getting fired and perhaps facing a firing squad), al-Azhar’s heads decided to oppose the fundamental transformation of Egyptian society by the Brotherhood.
Thus, al-Azhar’s Grand Imam Ahmad al-Tayyib, whose resignation the Brotherhood had demanded, has issued a declaration on Egypt’s future favoring a “modern” and “democratic nation-state” based on a constitution including rights for women, checks and balances among governmental institutions, freedom of speech, and other such things.
Tayyib is allied with Egypt’s other leading official cleric, Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa. Both men were closely associated with the Mubarak regime, so a sweeping change in religious institutions would get them fired and possibly even facing legal charges under a Brotherhood-dominated government.
A power struggle between Islamists? So, what else is new? It really doesn’t matter, behind the rhetoric, both stand for the same thing. And to prove their ”legitimacy” their bona fides, their Islamic credentials, each will try to out-do the other in anti-Israel positions. Democracy in the Arab world is really populism, mob rule. When Arab factions vie for power, they attack Israel.
It’s the same with the Palestinians.
The bottom line, Arabs always go with the most extreme position, generally.
If it’s Islam, it’s extremism, it’s hard-wired into the ideology.
When all is said and done, it’s still a bunch of Muslims who think people who don’t believe as they do should be put to death. Ask the Copts. Ask the Jews. With Islam all you get is Islam. No moderation cuz to be moderate is to be apostate.
My hope, my prayer, is that the Islamist factions destroy each other.
all the islamic mullahs are phony religious men of GOD. They know nothing of the love of GOD nor of the love of humankind. Islam is a sick religion/cult because of these mullahs and imans whose job is to brainwash the sheep into hatred for everything
Hello, Professor Rubin,
This Al-Azhar challenge to the Muslim Brotherhood seems like it is up for grabs in terms of how extreme the Egyptian government can become. So, your statement about not “romanticizing” this challenge is very appropriate. However, an independent university is a step in a better direction.
Naturally, my concern is two fold: What will be the consequence of this challenge with respect to the government’s relations with Israel; and what the heck will President Obama do when he finds out that the Muslim Brotherhood, which whom he intends to speak and probably negotiate, could be displaced by an Al-Azhar government?
I guess, it’s all up for grabs; but let’s hope for the best.
Susan H. Somerville
Israel: Both will begin to flex. Who will hate Israel more.
Obama: By executive order fund the MB efforts to “rule the world”. Bwa Ha ha.
I’d like to think this action by al-Azhar represents a push-back by a more moderate Islam, but I have doubts that a moderate Islam exists. Moderate Muslims, who don’t act on the jihad and supremacist impulses in Islam, sure. But a doctrinally moderate Islam is hard to conceive. Don’t forget, al-Azhar officially endorsed the Umdat al Salik, the Shafii manual of jurisprudence, which declares jihad to be an imperative and declares parents or grandparents who kill their children or grandchildren to be free from punishment, thus providing a Sharia basis for honor killings.
I think you’re right, Dr. Rubin, that this is just an action motivated by the survival instinct. Regardless of the motives, for all our sakes I hope it blunts the Brotherhood’s rise.
According to the Koran, Hadith, and the multiple biographies of Muhammad, democracy is not compatible with most current interpretations of Islam. Therefore, barring a thorough going reformation of Islam either in a nation state or globally, no Islamic government can be democratic. Just look at how hard Erdogan is working in Turkey to get the people to accept a lurch into an Islamic state versus the more or less secular government they have under the current constitution.
No, methinks the boys at Al-Azhar are simply trying to preserve the status quo ante to keep their own perks, power, and prestige.
I wonder if any of the participants were ever schooled in the West with emphasis on our history, specifically our founding and the first amendment in particular. With air travel and the internet available today, wouldn’t they have some familiarity with the role religion ought to play in government if good government is desired?
Our government seems intent on eliminating religion from the public square (which is so wrong) while they seem bent upon designing government around their religion. If religion is to be that powerful in it’s effect on governance, why even pretend to have a government in the first place? Why bother with the purple ink to dip one’s thumb in order to prevent repeated votes while laws will be drafted according to some text with lots of dust on it?
What would America look like today had the Supreme Court been populated with priests and rabbis these last 200+ years? Of course, we may soon find out with the appointment of a wise Latina and a softball player (not that there’s anything wrong with that) whose liberal obsession with the Left’s religion of socialism/egalitarianism may come back and bite us. I guess it’s not likely the Middle East will recognize the rights of man and will put forth governments equally blind to such.
Ours hasn’t recognized state’s rights for some time now and works steadily to reduce individual rights in the name of some ‘greater good’. I’m in favor of those willing to keep the Imams, mufti, and pufti in check. There can only be so many robes to go around. And limos, and Air Force Ones and Twos, etc.
The rest of the world is better off when Muslims are killing other Muslims. Let’s hope this evolves into such a situation. Only when Islam is relegated to the status of a death cult, a la Jim Jones, will the rest of us be safe. Let us hope Israel can play this split to their advantage.
Sounds to me like a choice between measles and smallpox. Can’t they both lose?
Dr. Shalit
An assassination or two of these “moderates” should take care of the MB’s problems.
That a Muslim institution that still has considerable influence is coming out in favor a democratic and largely secular government(yes, we know that it won’t be fully secular) is encouraging. How much influence does Al Azhar have with pious Muslims(pious but not Islamist, that is)we’ll have to see.
The piece in the Egyptian newspaper Barry links to is well worth reading.
…al-Azhar’s heads decided to oppose the fundamental transformation of Egyptian society by the Brotherhood.
Three cheers for them, even given the self-preservation motivation.
It’s ugly to imagine Egypt’s inevitable decline under the backward hand of the so called Brotherhood.
. It is sad to see the fear of Islam as a whole leading you to be unable to cheer when something good happens. If Egypt goes for the turkish model, as it well may if moderation wins, then thats a huge win for the west You guys seem to be unable to differentiate. Its going to be a very interesting election, will propably end up with greater local autonomy I would guess.
“Islamic establishment that is not exactly liberal”-they are not more liberal than Israeli haredies. I think that Islamic establishment is liberal just to the extend of ignoring Islamic rules.This “liberalism’is hated by Muslims and can exist supported by the military force.
I am sorry, we are way past the game of good cop-bad cop played by islam.
The mad mullahs of Iran are preparing a nuclear holocaust for Israel, the economy of the world stumbles under the weight of the price of oil, violence against the Christians, the Hindus, the Buddhists, the Animists rages from Indonesia to Sudan, from Egypt to Iraq. Islamic supremacists are at work 24/7 to destroy every civilization in every country.
Have you ever read any “opinion” published by that “university” ? Try them.
More moderate and more modern ? because they LIMIT the horrors of the shari’a law ?
Are we already so lost in the fog of the liberal propaganda that we accept the moderate nazi as an improvement over the hard-core nazi ?
Islam has invaded North Africa, destroying a classical and christian civilization that had lasted for 1,000 years.
Roll the islamic invaders back to the deserts of Arabia Felix.
Happy Fourth !
Strangely, in the light of concerns for Israel’s plight, neither Rubin nor the link Noha el-Hennawy, make any reference to the Egyptian military and where their bias may lie in this important rift between “scholarly” orthodox Islam and “Radical” jihadists. The term “moderate” can hardly be applied to either of them.
Dr. Rubin,
Insightful piece. Don’t forget that there are reports coming out of Egypt, as well, that at least some of the Sufi orders are also opposing the MB and cooperationg with al-Azhar.
Just thinking how much better off the world would be without religious “elites” who engage in these power struggles for the right to control the behavior of people, extract wealth from them, punish them when they act contrary to their wishes and to shun and sometimes destroy those who do not agree with them. And all of this based upon the flimsiest of evidence that “god” wants any of this going on at all. If there is a god as envisioned by any of these man made religions and one day he(she) visits us, I believe he will just shakes his fist at all of these people and leave in disgust.
I agree with those who are basically saying that what we have here is a distinction without a meaningful difference. IMHO, if these two groups spend their time fighting with each other and, cross our fingers, start shooting at each other, this will divert their attention for a little while from their long term goal of destroying Israel.
It seems to me Israel can disable via electronic any Shia secure military operation when the time suits them. Anyway, off point a tad, but some posters state that let these factions fight it out, makes sense to me. Determine the weaker one and help that faction, thereby the fight is prolonged. Are there factions in Iran that are in disagreement? If so, feed it to make it last on and on.
As long as Coptic Christians are second class citizens in Egypt, there is still work to do in the lands held by the Sons of Allah.
All people in the world are in a deep sleep. these are just the plans for bigger plans!!