POLITICAL THOUGHT OF MAWLANA SAYYID ABU AL-‘ALA MAWDUDI AND THE IDEA OF MUSLIM COMMUNALISM

ZEHRA NUR DÜZ                                                                                         11.06.2018

POLS 516, ISLAM AND POLITICS, RESEARCH PAPER                          

POLİTİCAL THOUGHT OF MAWLANA SAYYID ABU AL-‘ALA MAWDUDI AND THE IDEA OF MUSLIM COMMUNALISM

ABSTRACT

 At the core of the Mawdudi’s political theory there is the notion of ‘divine sovereignty’ (hukumat-i Ilahiya).This notion is the starting point of Mawdudi’s political philosophy because his approach toward all other concepts like nationalism and democracy build upon this notion. Mawdudi asserts that Islamic political philosophy is opposed to the secular Western concepts of democracy, which is based on the idea of the sovereignity of the people, nationalism and nation-state. On the one hand; Mawdudi argues that Islam proposes a distinctive model of democracy, which he calls ‘theo-democracy’, on the basis of the Qur’anic notion of hilafah. On the other hand; Mawdudi supports the idea of Muslim communalism as against the concepts of composite nationalism and Muslim Nationalism.

Key Words: Divine Sovereignty, Theo-Democracy, Muslim Communalism, Composite Nationalism, Muslim Nationalism, Muslim League, Jama’at-e-Islami, Dar al-Islam

INTRODUCTION

 The increase in the transnational dimensions of Islam and the revival that the Islam is experiencing in today’s world made the question of whether the current nation state system is acceptable to Muslims or not highly controversial. With this new term Muslims started to question the modern politically and culturally separated nation state system, and they seek to revive the early transnational community of belivers as the main political unit.

In this article I aim to analyse the contradiction between the concept of Ummah and the nation-state system through a study of the political thought and life of the Mawlana Mawdudi. His life and his ideology explains the origins and nature of this contradiction very well. This analysis will also enable us to better understand the underliying reasons of the appearance of Islamic revivalism in the contexts of India and Pakistan.

Mawlana Sayyid Abu Al-‘Ala Mawdudi is one of the most prominent Islamic figures of the last century. He devoloped a cohorent Islamic ideology, a systematic political interpretation of Islam, and a comprehensive understanding on society and politics. He also constituted a program and strategy to actualize these ideals (Nasr, 1996, p.3). He presented a pattern for those dealing in constitution making process in a newly established Pakistani state. Also we can easily determine the effects of his ideas on the discourse of modern Islamic thought, political Islam and Islamic politics. He provided some concepts, vocabulary and understandings for the scholars and activists of these fields. Through his intellectual workings and political activities he contributed to the formation of modern Islamic discourse on religion and politics (Singh, 2000, pp.6).

 Mawdudi’s worldview was both affected from the twentieth century’s political and social devolopments and made a huge global impact on the ideational and practical level. On the one hand; as a scholar, advocate, political theorist, activist, translator and commentator of the Qur’an; Mawdudi’s ideas on politics, religion and the Islamic state left a lasting impact on the lives and minds of Muslims of Pakistan and Muslims from all around the world. Mawdudi presented Muslims a political and religious worldview as a solution to their feelings of deprivation and powerlessness vis a vis the West. Still continuing importance of his ideas may be explained with the lasting dicomfortable conditions of Muslims ( White, Sıddıquı, 2013, pp.144,152). Mawdudi’s revivalist ideas were more than just a reactionary rejection of the West. He believed that any Muslim response would have to be unemotional and rational.

On the other hand; new ideologies of other anti-colonial movements had an important impact on Mawdudi’s ideas. The early communist and fascist experiences proved the capacity of small, ideological groups to mobilize the masses and to bring about a social and political revolution. Mawdudi’s ideas expanded and gained wide currency within this historical context. Mawdudi combined different aspects to constitute his ideas. Consulting to both Ulamas traditionalism, modernist social mobilization theories, and refering to the feeling of deprivation shared by the Muslims of India; Mawdudi became successful to appeal to the feelings and understandings of his age ( White, Sıddıquı, 2013, pp.145).

Mawdudi’s political vision may be better understand through the analysis of condition of Muslim community in India because Mawdudi’s idelogy has been shaped by the historical context in which he live. To better understand Mawdudi’s and Jamaat’s efforts for the reformation of the old Muslim identity and for the enhancement of Muslim unity and to better analyze the reasons of Jamaat’s support for Muslim communalism we should approach the issue within its historical context.

HİSTORİCAL BACKGROUND: ISLAMIC REVIVALISM IN INDIA

Since the second half of the nineteenth century the Muslims of India were facing a social and political decline. Firstly the collapse of Mughal Empire in 1857 and the abolishement of Ottoman Caliphate in 1924 increased the emotions of defeat and failure among Muslims ( White, Sıddıquı, 2013, pp.145). In the aftermath of the defeat of the Khilafet movement this decline became more apparent. The term between 1925-1940, from the collapse of Khilafet movement to the ‘Resolution for Pakistan’’ passed at Lahore, was an ambiguous period for Indian Muslims. This decline obligated Muslims to find new solutions (Nasr, 1996, p.30). The efforts to enhance the Muslim unity and Muslim identity were put forward as a solution to the predicament of Muslims. Mawdudi’s ideas was a reaction to this decline, and was a reassertion for the political and social power.

Mawdudi’s many ideas such as his anti-imperialism, his efforts to unite all Muslims in India, his consultation to pan-Islamic discourses, and his desire for the resurrection of the caliphate were inhereted from the Khilafet movement which collapsed in 1924 (Nasr, 1999, p.19,20). The demise of the caliphate and the failure of Khilafet movement to unite India’s Muslims had essential effects on Mawdudi’s ideology (Nasr, 1999, p.30). He saw Westernization, Turkish and Arab nationalism as responsible for this failure. He counted nationalism in these countries as against to the interests of Islam because of its secular nature.

The second reason for Jamaat’s support for Muslim communalism was that in the aftermath of the failure of the Khilafet movement; the Indian Muslims started to separate from each other, and they started to become more aware of their different qualities and particular interests. In other words Indian Muslims had the deficiency of an united leadership, political consensus, linguistic and ethnic unity, and a common goal or manifesto (Farooqui, 2013, p.101).

Thirdly; colonial government and secular nationalist forces resisted to Muslims’ efforts to play political roles in India (Nasr, 1996, p.21). The promised ideal Muslim community was perceived as a mean for the consolidation of politically and socially marginalized Muslim society. Because of the dominant position of colonial subjects of the British and Hindu majority; Muslims felt themselves as deeply isolated. Mawdudi was encouraged by the Muslim minority’s reassertion to come to power and their unsatisfaction of having ruled by non-Muslim law. The revival of Islamic identity was thought as the necessary condition for the formation of Islamic political structures and institutions, and for political mobilization and social action (Nasr, 1996, p.6).

Fourthly; Islamic revivalist aspirations have originated from Muslims’ motivation to preserve themselves from the negative effects of colonial powers and Hindu assimilations and negative cultural influence. The Hindu Shuddhi and Sangathan movements, the increasing missionary activity of the Ahmadi’s, the new devolopments in the Mecca and Medina with which Hyderabad was closely related and the authority of Hindu majority in the Congress party under the leadership of Mahatma Gandi was the apparent threats that led him and his Jamaat to striving for the ideal of Muslim communalism (Nasr, 1996, p.5,30,31). So, an ideologically and politically uniform Muslim community was the only way for the realization of Muslims’s ideals and demands, and for the protection of Muslims from outside influences .

THE NATURE OF ISLAMIC STATE AND THE CONCEPT OF ‘ABSOLUTE DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY’

Mawdudi made a commitment for the organization of an Islamic state. The ummah (holy community) was at the core of this ideal Islamic state. Mawdudi’s concept of Islamic State is universal and comprehensive. It is universal because it contains the whole ummah. It is all-encompassing because all areas of human life fall into Islamic State’s area of responsibility. This Islamic state was described also as ideological because its main purpose was implementation of a particular ideology, Islam’s itself.  Above all the notion of ‘divine sovereignty (hukumat-i Ilahiya) was at the core of Mawdudi’s political theory. We can regard this notion as the starting point of Mawdudi’s political philosophy because his approach toward all other concepts like nationalism and democracy build upon this notion (Giunchi, 1994, pp.352).

At the center of the Mawdudi’s rationale of Islamic State there is the notion of ‘God’s sovereignty’, al-hakimiyyah. In the theological sense Al-hakimiyyah means that ‘God is the only absolute Sovereign over all his creation’, and ‘All authority belongs only to God ’. In other words; ‘God has commanded people to obey none other than him’ (Afsaruddın, 2007, pp.304). It refers also that people should make their decisions in compliance with the law revealed by God. If an issue has been decided by God and His Messenger; believers do not have the right to say anything about this topic because God is the only Law-giver (Afsaruddın, 2007, pp.305).

This notion is directly related with the Shahada which means according to Mawdudi; only God is the absolute sovereign and law-giver. Mawdudi’s concept of God’s absolute sovereignty referred to two major meanings. First of all it indicates that human beings are totaly dependent on God and they do not have an absolute independence from God. Secondly; it means that human being do not have a right to make independent legislation and to modify the revealed law. So the responsibility of human beings is law-finding rather than law-making(Giunchi, 1994, pp.353).

As a continuation of the God’s sovereignty in the theological meaning; Mawdudi supports also the notion of God’s political sovereignty. This notion emphasizes God’s status as the supreme owner of a universal, wide ranging and absolute law, Sharia, that regulates not only the religious area but all aspects of the life, political field as well. According to this approach; God’s political sovereignty bans people to legislate an independent law from revealed law and forbids them to change or transform any law that God mandated as a condition (Afsaruddın, 2007, pp.305).  In his article David Singh summarizes the three main principles of Mawdudi’s political theory. First of all; only God is the supreme and absolute sovereign and God is the only law-giver. Secondly; an Islamic state must be established in accordance with Shariah. Thirdly; the government which rules an Islamic state has to comply with and carry out the revealed law (Singh, 2000, pp.7).

According to Mawdudi; accepting the sovereignty or authority of all other entities other than God comes to mean idolatry. So, if we think nationalism and democracy as disciplines of authority; we should examine Mawdudi’s negative understanding of nationalism and Western democracy in relation to his central notion of divine sovereignty (Giunchi, 1994, pp.352).

Mawdudı’s Concept of ‘Theo- Democracy’

With reference to this notion of divine political sovereignty Mawdudi believes that Islamic political philosophy is totally contrary to the secular Western concept of democracy. Because the concept of democracy is philosophically based on the idea of the sovereignity of the people, not on God.  According to Mawdudi, instead of Western democracy, Islam proposes a distinctive model of democracy on the basis of the Qur’anic notion of hilafah. According to Mawdudi; Muslim administrations should form, with Mawdudi’s saying, a ‘democratic caliphate’ or a ‘theo-democracy’ in compliance with Qur’an and the life of Prophet Muhammad (Afsaruddın, 2007, pp.306).

Notwithstanding that it is different from the Western understandig of the concept, Mawdudi asserts that Islamic state is actually democratic in its nature. He gives reference to Qur’an 24:55 to prove his this argument. With reference to this versicle of Qur’an he argues that the represantation of Allah on earth consists all humans who believe in Allah and carry out his or her religious duties. In other words; Hilafah is not limited to a exclusive class or clan of people rather dependent on individual devoutness and virtuous attitude. However according to Western understanding this Muslim polity is not democratic because it completely rejects the Western secular notion of absolute and unconditional sovereignty of public.

 On the other hand it is not theocratic because Theo-democracy rejects the ruling of any specific religious class and defends the ruling of the whole Mulim community. We can evaluate such a ruling as a special form of Islamic Theocracy because it is still ruled by a almighty revealed law. The main point that Theo-democratic regime differentiate from a real theocracy is that in an Muslim polity people can choose their leader and can dethrone him when it is necessary (Afsaruddın, 2007, pp.306).

However it is argued that Mawdudi’s concept of divide sovereignty shows some incoherency because he did not differentiate the inherent or theoretical authority, which is belonging to God, from the authority which is carried out on earth. As a consequence of this he did not give an clear answer to the question of who should rule as the representativ of God on earth(Giunchi, 1994, pp.353).

Maulana Mawdudi’s Views On Nationalism

Mawdudi’s revivalism was closely related with the issues of communal politics, identity formation, and nationalism. During the anti-colonial liberation fight; Indians newly met with the concepts of ‘nation’, ‘nationality’ and ‘nationalism’. The definition and interpretation of these new concepts was an essential political issue and difficulty because there was no any concensus about how to define, understand and implement these concepts. Mawdudi was heavily interested with the future national and religious identity and social and political status of Indian Muslims (Farooqui, 2013, p.101-103).

 His ideology and iniciatives may be interpreted as a process of a new identity formation which is against secular nationalism and traditional Muslim identity. He tried to form an Indian Muslim identity whose ‘others’ were colonial order and the Hindu majority. Mawdudi emphasized the opposition between Muslims and non-Muslims, and he highligted the cultural and social distinctiveness of Muslims. The Hindu-Muslim conflict was at the center of his communalist perspective (Nasr,1996, p.25) . He rejected the idea of a secular national state, and he has strived to revive the old Muslim solidarity, unity, and Muslim communal consciouness which was existent during the Khilafet movement.

At the same time with the Islamic revivalism nationalism as a new ideology which is imported from Europe was expanding its influence throughout India and among Muslim Indians. After the failure of Khilafet movement Muslims of India were divided in two groups. One group was on the side of the Congress and its idea of composite nationalism; the other was on the side of the Muslim League which is under the leadership of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and with its idea of Muslim Nationalism. Some prominent Muslim intellectuals like Mawlana Aza and some of the outstanding Ulama had supported the congress, and they were not disputed with the Western nationalim as Jama’at did. Mawdudi was against political solutions of both the Indian National Congress, and the Muslim League. According to Mawdudi both composite nationalism and Muslim nationalism were against Islam in their nature.

National Congress and Composite Nationalism:

Indian National Congress supported the Indian nationalism and defended the idea that all communities that live in India should unite and form one nation regadless of their religious, ethnic, cultural or linguistic differences because they believed that an absolute liberation would be carried only through the unity among all Indians or in other words only through the Hindu Muslim unity. In parallel with their this purpose, the members of congress and intellectuals like Mawlana Abul Kalam Azad that defended ‘one nation theory’ invited Indian Muslims to the demands of Indian National Congress after the collapse of the Khilafet. Azad was opposed to the idea of an independent Muslim state in Pakistan because he believed that Muslims should have an important place in India as an effective diaspora. The supporters of Indian nationalism aimed to replace the global Pan-Islamism and religious universalism with Indian nationalism. Especially after 1947; Azad’s idea of the ‘Composite nationalism’ constituted a central place in India’s political life (Farooqui, 2013, p.103,104).

However the ideals of Iqbal and Jinnah were more effective among Muslim population of India. Iqbal’s political ideas played a central role for the Pakistan movement. In parallel with Iqbal’s ideal of an independent state for the Muslims; Mawdudi questioned and criticised the Indian nationalism. According to him under the name of Indian nationalism and democracy; the Congress Party was actually enhancing the Hindu identity, and their efforts were serving only the interests and political supremacy of Hindu majority (Nasr, 1999, p.20). Mawdudi was opposed to the efforts to ensure cultural coexistence and dialogue of Muslims and Indians in India because this adaptation may serve to the Congress party’s purpose of a secular Indian republic and secularization among Muslims (Nasr, 1999, p.31). Also Mawdudi believed that Muslims of India were essentially different from Hindus of India, and they did not share with them anything common (White, Sıddıquı, 2013, pp.144). Mawdudi has challenged the Congress Party’s policies and political and religious relevancy of nationalist front, and instead of them supported Muslim communal consciousness (Nasr, 1999, p.32). Mawdudi and his Jama’at imagined a new ideal Muslim community, an Islamic nation, which is different from the Indian national community. Religion was the main element for their definiton of new nationhood. ( Nasr, 1996, p.4)

Mawdudi’s reaction against the anti-British supporters of the nationalist front is very important. Mawdudi strongly criticized their defence of the notion of a pluralistic Indian society, and challenged the religious foundation of their positions. He charged them with bargaining away Islam for the sake of their anti-British sentiments. He also blamed ulama with mobilizing support for the Congress Party and the Muslim League. For Mawdudi pluralism meant Muslim’s sacrifice of their identity and way of life. He standed up for an irreplaceble Islamic way of life, and he opposed to the negative impacts of West which captured the Indian Muslims (White, Sıddıquı, 2013, pp.144). The logic of Islamic revivalism in the case of India was against pluralism, coexistence, social interaction and power sharing between Muslims and Hindus (Nasr, 1996, p.32,33)

Islamic Nationalism or Islamic Ummatism: Muslim League and Jama’at-e-Islami

Jamaat was opposed to the idea of foundation of a sovereign Muslim national state in the areas where they live as majority. Until the partition the Jamaat stant against the Muslim League’s ideal of a Pakistani state. At the basis of this opposition underlies Jamaat’s negative attitude toward the idea of nationalism. According to Mawdudi; nationalism was theoretically contradictory with Islam, and would lead to a fragmentation within the Ummah. For him nationalism meant a negative impression of the West. So, Mawdudi was opposed also Muslim League’s understanding of nationalism which is un-Islamic in nature, and which is contrary to the right religious devotion according to him (Giunchi, 1994, pp.357).

With regards to his usage of the word ‘nation’ he may be seemed compatible with the two nation theory of the Muslim League. However; his interpretation and understanding of nationalism was different from Muslim League’s at some important points. First of all; his understanding of nation and nationhood was not founded on the basis of race, ethnicit or language rather it has been defined by ideology. Secondly; as alternative to their solutions he supported the formation of an Ideological Islamic state first in the whole of India and then whole world. As different from Muslim nationalism; Jamaat’s understanding of nationalism was universalistic, and its main purpose was expanding the dar al-Islam throughout the world.

Mawdudi and The Project of Dar al-Islam: For Mawdudi the old concept of Daru’l Islam meant construction of an ummah (holy community).Through the Islamic revivial, construction of a new Muslim identity, and establishment of an Islamic state in India, Mawdudi aimed to turn India into the daru’l Islam. The main purpose of this ideal was enabling Muslims to independenttly govern their religious, cultural, economic, social and political affairs themselves. Related with this aim the Pathankot project (1937-1939) which had been named as Daru’l Islam and which is started with the iniciative of Iqbal was crucial because the Pathankot was regarded as the center of this revival, and Pathankot community was regarded as the ideal Muslim community that serves as a model for the other parts of India. The movement that had been started in Pathankot later served as the foundation for Jama’at-i Islami. Mawdudi believed that for the realization of the Islamic da’wah only intellectual and social efforts were not enough. According to him organization and the control of centers of power were essential for the Muslim’s political achievement (Nasr, 1996, p.34-40).

His priority was not formations of Muslim governments in regions where Muslims live as majority or it was not estanlishment of a Muslim state in Pakistan. Rather for him the most essential issue was the source of the system of goverment; whether the goverment was founded on the basis of the sovereignty of God or on the basis of popular sovereignty which is implemented in Western secular democracies (Giunchi, 1994, pp.358).

Besides these reasons Mawdudi criticized the members of the Muslim League with becoming too westernized and secular, and he thought that thew were both unwiling and incapable to establish an Islamic order in the future Muslim majority state. He also criticized their vision of first founding a secular state and then step by step changing it into an Islamic state because he did not believe in this possibility. Rather he thought that this iniciaitive would eventually end up with a infidel ruling. According to Mawdudi this new national Muslim state will be both profitless for their aim and more importantly it will rather constitute an impediment in their way(Giunchi, 1994, pp.358).

Islamic Ummatism vs. Islamic Nationalism: Understanding the difference between the Jamaat’i Islami and Muslim League especially important because they very well indicates the ideological disagreements and divisions that separate trans-national and national Islamic movements in the Muslim world. The ideology of trans-national Muslim movements is generally described as ‘Islamic Ummatism’ while the ideology of ethno-national Islamic movements is described as ‘Islamic nationalism’. In the case of India Jamaat represents the type of trans-national Islam while Muslim League supports the Muslim nationalism. Mawdudi and Hasan al-Banna may be thought as the representatives of these two different kinds of Islamic movements (Dajani, 2011, pp.2).

Islamic Revolution From Mawdudi’s point of view:

 In Mawdudi’s view a radical reform or with his sayings his a ‘complete and thorough political change’ would not be achieved by violent social change or revolution, and extremism, rather a peaceful revolution can be realized only gradually. It might be achieved through intense communication with the authorities.  A way to the Islamic state may be found only within the present sociopolitical order. In other words Mawdudi’s description of Islamic revolution is evolutionary, and it was essentially a gradual process of reform that requires some changes in the moral, educational, social, cultural, psychological, and political conditions of the nation (Nasr, 1996, p.69-72). Mawdudi’s understanding of Islamic revolution  is very different from the approach of Ayatollah Khomeini with regards to its emphasis on the peacefull methods and educational processes. In the case of Khomeini the political and state power is regarded as essentially important to perform the Islamization process. However Mawdudi did not see politics as the only solution rather Islamization as an organic process may rise fistly in the social culture and only then end up with Islamic state(Nasr, 1996, p.78). Over the years Pakistan was moving toward an Islamic state without applying to a violent revolution (Nasr, 1996, p.72-74).

Involvement in Pakistani Politics: The Jamaat’s Shift From Ideological Movement to Political Pragmatism

Mawdudi did not accept Muslim League’s ‘’Two Nation Theory’ and at the beginning did not accept the idea of state of Pakistan. However after the partition of Pakistan in 1947 he immediately started to strive for the Islamization of the Pakistani state. Even though Mawdudi’ s version was the most effective one; Muslim communalism / Muslim nationalism was not monolithic and there were other rival versions of the Muslim nation. This is why Jama’at conflicted with the founders of Pakistan. After the foundation of Pakistan Jama’at remained anti-state in these first years, and tried to lead the country toward Islamization and Islamic revival, and aimed to maintain the role of Islam in society and politics. After its independence the Jama’at banned Pakistanis to pledge allegiance to the state until it became Islamic. On the other side the government blamed Jama’at with becoming pro-Indian and anti-Pakistan. The revenge of the Pakistani government did not discourage the Jama’at and, nor did it decrease the role place of Islam in Pakistan’s politics.

 However in later years Mawdudi started to defend the Jama’at’s participation to the political and electoral process. This reorientation of Jama’at’s position from an anti-state and revolutionary stance toward national politics and politicization made the Jama’at more submissive to the system and approaved the primary role of politics for its program (Nasr, 1996, p.41-43). At the beginning political activism was only a method to conserve the possibility of the Islamic state, but later became an end in itself. In his article on Maududi’s political thought

Irfan Ahmad discusses the centrality of the state in Islamist ideology. As different from the classical arguments of the inseperability of religion and the state in Islam and the explanations that assert that the idea of the state comes from the intrinsic logic of Islam; he argues that the central importance of state in Islamism is not a result of Islamic theology. Rather he sees the interventionism of the modern state in everyday life led to increasing centrality of the state in Islamic thought. He applies his theory to the Indian case and discusses that as a result of the colonial Indian state’s deep intervention in country’s peoples’ lifes; in his interpretations Mawdudi equalized the Islam with the state (Ahmad, 2009, pp.145).

This reorientation is related also with the new model of middle-class activism. The position of debate on Islam and politics shifted away form the ‘ulama’ toward a new generation of ideologues and activists throughout the Muslim world. Mawdudi played an important role for this shifting especially through his efforts for the establishment of a technocratic, disciplined, middle-class Islamic party. The expansion of this new model in Muslim geographies; Muslims started to face and confront with current state systems, and their religious vision started to become embedded with their seek of political power ( White, Sıddıquı, 2013, pp.153).

CONCLUSION:

The concept of security, which is understood as the stategic and political safety of a state and the economic system, reflects the modern European understanding.  For Muslims the objective conditions of security such as the mere absence of war and political turbulence or availability of economic conditions does not necesserally mean peace and security ( Akram, 2007, p.381). When the Muslim way of life is threatened they do not anymore feel that the enviroment in which they live is secure. For Muslims peace and security nescessiates the freedom to realize their religious traditions and to put the divine imperatives into effect, and also it requires the well-being of the Ummah (Akram, 2007, p.382).

As we can see also in the case Indian Muslims, this feeling of insecurity is closely related with the Western notion of secular nation state. The nation-state system is seen as the main threat to Muslim’s way of life by non-conformist Muslims all around the world( Akram, 2007, p.381). The territorial nation - state, sovereignty and nationalism ,which have their origins in Western colonialism, are relatively recent concepts in the Muslim world. So, a tension between the nation state and nationalism and the Islamic ideal of the Ummah have existed throughout the Muslim world, and Islamic unity has became the main ideal of trans-national Islamic movements.

Muslim societies’ hope for peace and security is directly linked with the concept of Ummah. To ensure their security and cooperation among themselves; the Muslim world appeals to the notion of Ummah(Akram, 2007, p.414,415). Islamic revivalism in the contexts of India and Pakistan, Jamaat-e Islami’s efforts for the reformation of the old Muslim identity, their purpose of enhancement of Muslim unity, and their idea of Muslim communalism shows that this concept still effectively affects the conciousness of Muslims, and it still plays an important role for Muslim’s political behaviour.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

- Nasser, Seyyed V.. Mawdudi and the Making of Islamic Revivalism, Oxford University Press, 1996.

- Espasito, John L., Shahin, Emad El-Din, The Oxford Handbook of Islam and Politics, Oxford University Press, 2013.

- White, Joshua T., Sıddıquı Nıloufer, Mawlana Mawdudi, The Oxford Handbook of Islam and Politics, Oxford University Press, 2013.

- Ahmad, Irfan, Genealogy of the Islamic State: Reflections on Mawdudi’s Political Thought and Islamism, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2009, pp.145-162.

- James Piscatori. Islam in a World of Nation-States. (Cambridge University Press, 1986)

- Ejaz Akram, “Muslim Ummah and Its Link with Transnational Muslim Politics,” Islamic Studies 46(3)(2007): 381-415.

- Singh, David Emanuel, Abu al-Al Mawdudi’s Political Theory: Some Ideas on Muslim- Christian Relations, Transformation , Vol.17, No:1, Sufering and Power in Christian and Muslim Relations : The Political Change of Islam Today and its implications fort he Churchin Education and Mission, January 2000, pp.6-14.

- Giunchi, Elisa, The Political Thought of Abul A’la Mawdudi, IL Politico, Vol.59, No.2 (169), Aprile- Giugnu, 1994, pp.347-375 (Dissertation submitted to the University of Cambridge , England, for the degree of Master of Philosophy in Islamic Studies, August, 1992).

- Afsaruddin, Asma, ‘Mawdudi’s Theo-Democracy’: How Islamic Is It Really?, Oriento Moderno, Nuova Serie, Anno 87, Nr.2, Islams and Democracies, 2007, pp.301-325.

- Farooqui, Muhammad Rafiuddin, The Political Thought of Maulana Mawdudi, Department of Islamic Studies, University College of Arts and Social Sciences, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Supervisor: Prof. Mohammad Suleman Siddiqi.

- Dajani, Amjad, Islamic Nationalism vs. Islamic Ummatism: Conceptualizing Political Islam, 2011, Meditarranean&Middle Eastern Studies Program, Department of Theology&Religious Studies, Kings College London

- Omar, Irfan A. Review of Roy Jackson, Mawlana Mawdudi and Political Islam: Authority and the Islamic State, New York: Routledge 2011, Cont Islam, 2015, 9:223-225.

- Official Website of Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Introduction of Founder of Jamaat: Syed Abu Ala Madoodi, https://jamaat.org/en/bani_intro.php