Nationalism in Sunni Intellectuals’ Views: A Comparative Study of the Views of Arab and Indian Subcontinent Intellectuals

  The political ideology of nationalism arose during the eighteenth century, first formally expressed in the French Revolution when the old state (monarchy legitimated by religion) was replaced by the “people” as the sole legitimate authority. The nationalists had created the nation as a cultural and territorial unit and in the basis of the ultimate foundation of solidarity; In practice, therefore, a small number of nationalists were hostile to religion as a faith and consolidate social solidarity. Also, many secular nationalists have been advocating a separation between religious faith and social solidarity in the face of religious divisions within the territorial nations. The nationalist debates in the Islamic world do not have a long history and they have been coming back for several centuries and various factors have contributed to the arrival of nationalist debates on the Islamic world. After World War II, two dimensions were added to nationalist discourse and strategy: Arab socialism addressing the issue of how to organize the growing number of independent Arab states, and pan-Arabism (al-qawmiyya al-arabiyya) aiming to transcend the existing regional order(Kramer, 2001: 273). The nineteenth-century Muslim writers, like Tahtawi , Nadim, Mursafi, and Abduh, used the term nationalism to preserve the independence and freedom of a nation against a foreign invader who called it synonymous with the term patriotism(Enayat, 1363: 14).   Pan-Islamism or the Alliance of Islam is a name for an ideology in which transnational Islam ties replace any ethnic or national link. For the first time, Western orientalists used the term to show the expansionist policies of the Ottoman Empire, but most Muslims, The word was made and reflected on the mindset of the European people. Also, Another group is also known as Islamic advocates in politics. Islamic advocates in politics have often proclaimed that ‘the Muslim’s nationality is his faith’. Many such Muslims have denounced nationalism for dividing the Muslim community, the umma, into fragmentary units, contributing to its weakness in the face of its religious and civilizational opponents. Sayid Qutb, the founding ideologue of modern radical Islam, responded to the Prosecutor’s questioning of his patriotism in the trial that culminated in his execution in 1966: “I believe that the bonds of ideology and belief are more sturdy than those of patriotism based upon region and that this false distinction among Muslims on a regional basis is but one consequence of crusading and Zionist imperialism which must be eradicated”( Zubida, 2004: 407). The present article aims to investigate the Nationalism in Sunni Intellectuals’ Views. And has studied the ideas of such scholars as Iqbal Lahori, Abul A’la Muwdudi, AbalRahman Kawakibi, Sati' al-Husri and Mustafa Kamil, and examined the roots of the thought of these scholars. Accordingly, the present research seeks to answer the following questions: What are the views of Arab Intellectuals’ (Kamil, Kawakibi and al-Husri) about nationalism and the relationship between nationalism and Islam? What are the views of the Indian Subcontinent Intellectuals (Iqbal and Muwdudi) on nationalism and the relationship between nationalism and Islam? What are the differences between the Arab Intellectuals and the Indian Subcontinent Intellectuals in the relationship between Islam and nationalism?       The research method used in this paper is documentary research.  The documentary research, also called the "study" method, is a research method that is conducted through a study of various sources and sources. In the documentary method, the researcher does not seek to examine the mental intentions and the perception of the hidden motives of a text, but the researcher's interest is to exclude from the comprehension of the intentions and motives of the documents and texts or interpretive analyzes of a text, and as a language The writer's writing and discourse are accepted and documented (Gaborone, 2006: 222).   The first and most important difference between the thoughts of these Intellectuals is that all three Arab Intellectuals have a positive view of nationalism, but Iqbal and Muwdudi are completely opposed to nationalist debates in the Muslim world. In this regard, one can mention Mustafa Full, who turned Egypt's nationalist movement into a struggle and, by introducing it to the world, could turn Egypt into an international issue(Yari, 1392: 131).It is also possible to point out that Iqbal, who completely disagreed with nationalist debates, considered this as the main cause of the misery of the Muslim world, in other words, treating nationalism as an insult to Islam(Saidi, 1380: 542). Other differences include the emphasis of the Arab Intellectuals on being Arab instead of being Muslim, while Indian subjectivist Intellectuals, regardless of nationality, emphasized Islam. In this regard, one can also refer to the Kawakibi who is known as the father of Arab nationalism, while both Iqbal and Muwdudi have a great deal of emphasis on the Islamic world as a whole of the same nationality. The great emphasis of Arab Intellectuals on nationality is among the other differences that the Indian subcontinent Intellectuals, and especially Iqbal, are completely opposed to. Iqbal believes that the division of Muslim countries with different names is wrong: He believes: "The nationalities and colors that individuals make - Hindi, Pakistani and Indonesian, are fake and tricky, and ethnicity and nationalism are often livestock that colonizers are for the diversion of Muslims from a broad unity, but Muslims must know that the land of Islam is one(Iqbal, 1368).If the Arab Intellectuals, and especially Mustafa Kamil, have a great deal of emphasis on nationality, and especially on Egyptians. Thus, the Instrumental use of religion in the service of the ideals of nationalism, among other differences, can be seen among the Arab thinkers, especially among the ideas of Kawakibi and al-Husri. In this regard, one can refer to Kawakibi who believed that religion was not in opposition to patriotism, but considered religion as a tool for serving patriotic ideals(Kawakibi, 1363: 60).  If the Indian subcontinent thinkers, both lucky and Muwdudi, consider religion as the most important factor for Muslims' solidarity.     Based on the findings of the present research, these thinkers can be divided into two opposing factions, the first one being the opinions of Iqbal Lahouri and Muwdudi, and the other side includes Intellectuals like Kawakibi, Kamil and al-Husri. Intellectuals such as Iqbal Lahouri and Muwdudi are against nationalism in the Western sense and oppose nationalism in its modern European sense and oppose nationalism as Islam and Islamic unity. And, on the other hand, thinkers such as Kawakibi, Kamil and al-Husri are in favor of nationalism, and nationalism is considered to be the flourishing factor of Islam, especially the Arab world. In addition, Arab Intellectuals have a great deal of emphasis on Arabs, but Indian Subcontinent Intellectuals, regardless of all features, emphasize being Muslim, and this is another of the differences between these two intellectual factions. Also, the great emphasis of Arab Intellectuals on nationality is among the other differences between these two factions, and separates the Intellectuals of the subcontinent from the Arab Intellectuals, Indian subcontinent Intellectuals, and especially Iqbal, are completely opposed to this issue. , the Instrumental use of religion in the service of the ideals of nationalism of the differences between the two factions and sides of the border has become more obvious.