Dr. Umar Khan
Dr. Khan belongs to a Lahore based Think Tank.
28-6-26
The Treaty of Diriyah: A Watershed Moment in Islamic History
“If you want to understand today you have to search yesterday.”
— Pearl S. Buck
In the medieval Christian world, monarchy and clergy walked hand
in hand, with the Pope ultimately legitimizing sovereigns. The Islamic world,
by contrast, operated differently. While there was no formal clergy akin to the
Christian priesthood, a highly respected class of learned scholars—the ulama—held
significant sway. For centuries, these scholars consistently resisted the
monarchy and its preferred interpretations of Islam, often serving as a check
on temporal power.
All of this changed in 1744. In the town of Diriyah, in the Najd
region of central Arabia, a formal alliance was signed between a struggling
political force and a new, non-mainstream religious reform movement. This was
the Treaty of Diriyah.
A History of Resistance
After the four rightly guided caliphs, the Muslim world devolved
into absolute monarchy, though rulers continued to dress their authority in
Islamic parlance, labeling themselves caliphs. The ulama,
throughout the ages, not only resisted but actively fought political pressure
from authorities who sought to legitimize their demands regardless of validity.
Scholars refused to compromise on religious principles, support unjust
policies, or legitimize the absolute authority of kings. They paid dearly for
their intransigence with repeated imprisonments, torture, and even death:
- Imam
Hanbal, the
famous Sunni scholar and founder of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence,
endured imprisonment and torture by the Abbasid caliphs but stood firm in
his ideals.
- Imam
Malik was
flogged and tortured by the Abbasid governor of Medina for invalidating an
oath of allegiance made under duress.
- Imam
Hanifa, founder
of the Hanafi school of thought, was imprisoned and likely poisoned by the
caliph for refusing to serve as chief judge and legitimize his actions.
- The Shia
imams, too, were all persecuted and allegedly poisoned by the political
establishments of their times.
The Pact That Changed Everything
But the signing of the Treaty of Diriyah fundamentally altered
this dynamic. The pact between Muhammad ibn Saud, a local emir, and Muhammad
ibn Abd al-Wahhab, a struggling religious reformer, bound them to mutual
support. The emir would provide political authority, resources, and military
protection, while the reformer would offer religious legitimacy and a mission
to influence and ally other tribes. This bond was further strengthened by
intermarriage among their offsprings, as was typical of the era.
The Treaty of Diriyah proved to be a watershed moment that would
fundamentally reshape the Islamic world. For the first time in Islamic history,
monarchy and dynastic politics received formal religious sanction. Today, this
legacy makes the Gulf region the only part of the world where absolute monarchy
still survives as a dominant political model, a distinction that is hardly
enviable.
The alliance gave the House of Saud a higher religious purpose:
the purification of Islam. This provided fervent followers with a cause for
jihad, enabling them to conquer much of the Arabian Peninsula and establish the
First Saudi State. Meanwhile, the fortunes of the Wahhab family improved
exponentially; Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, who had been expelled from many places for
teachings considered heretical, now had a platform and worldly benefits that
persist to this day.
The British Question
There are claims, and some evidence, that this treaty was signed
at the prompting of the East India Company. Having substantially strengthened
its position in India, the Company allegedly sought to pressure the Ottoman
Empire to facilitate its trade with its prized possession, the newly subjugated
India. The book Memoirs of Mr. Hempher, The British Spy to the Middle
East propagates this narrative, though its credibility is suspect. The
book argues that Britain, with its renowned divide-and-rule strategy, backed
the Wahhabi movement to weaken the Muslim world dominated by Ottoman Turks who
were predominantly Hanafi, a school of thought opposed by the Wahhabis. This
support fueled sectarian divisions, with radical elements going so far as to
label Hanafis guilty of shirk, the ultimate sin.
Despite the book's doubtful origin, later developments such as
Saudi relations with the British in the 19th and 20th centuries lend some
credence to the theory. During the tumultuous periods of the First, Second, and
Third Saudi states, dissidents consistently found refuge in British
protectorates when out of power and returned as rulers, a pattern reminiscent
of Afghan princes in British India. The Treaty of 1865, the Treaty of Darin
(1915), and the Treaty of Jeddah (1927) all confirm the closeness of these
relations. The later adventures of Lawrence of Arabia and the Arab Revolt
against the Ottomans may well have their origins hidden here.
Intellectual Corruption and Its Legacy
The treaty and the subsequent formation of a semi-theocratic
state gave religious legitimacy to the House of Saud and worldly benefits to
the House of Wahhab (known as Al al-Shaykh). They still hold the most senior
religious positions in the Kingdom, including the Grand Mufti and the Ministry
of Justice. But like any subservient government department, they cannot deviate
from the official line of the monarchs. Their religious interpretations cannot
cross the red lines of their patrons' conveniences. Loyalty to the ruling
family assures comforts and privileges that quickly become necessities, ultimately
affecting judgments and official opinions. The opulence of clergy in Pakistan
riding arrogantly in expensive SUVs might also have origins deeply embedded in
this treaty.
Corruption of any kind is bad, but intellectual corruption is
arguably its worst form due to the immense harm it can cause. When scholars,
experts, or leaders manipulate data, logic, or ethics to serve vested
interests, they poison the well of truth, destroy public trust, and normalize
unethical behavior at a societal level. Intellectuals hold the highest place in
societies because they are supposed to be immune to the temptations of worldly
possessions. Vulnerable ulama, however, can serve edicts and
justify acts for their immediate benefit rather than for actual righteousness.
Such quid pro quos are expected and natural.
Along with legitimizing absolute monarchy, Islam, which once encompassed
a whole way of life, was reduced to a set of rituals. Acts of worship (ibadat)
were emphasized, while the real problems of common people were ignored. This
sanctified and validated monarchy, the root cause of most ills. Oppression,
corruption, backwardness, intolerance, instability, and factionalism found
fertile ground to germinate and grow in these undemocratic societies. Traveling
from Europe to Pakistan in my younger days, I was surprised to find rampant
corruption in government departments across the Islamic world, something I
never saw in the West.
While much of the world was moving toward democracy and
democratic institutions, this religious support for absolute monarchy became a
major hindrance to institutional development in the Islamic world. The
historical destruction or collapse of nations rarely results from a single
catastrophic mistake; instead, it is almost always the culmination of a
cascading series of systemic errors. After the banning of the press, the
alliance of religious authority with dynastic absolute monarchy was probably
the most harmful development in the Islamic world.
Conclusion: A Call for Reflection
This single historical event became a pivotal watershed in
Islamic history, redirecting its course in a way that ultimately stifled
intellectual and political progress. The legacy of this shift is often cited as
a root cause of the region's current volatility, institutional fragility, and
resistance to reform.
In today's world, if over a billion Muslims, followers of the
true faith, have fallen far behind others, they must have done something
terribly wrong. The causes of this decline must be identified and corrected.
The initial priority should be the decoupling of religious and political
authority, a process Europe accomplished centuries ago, which laid the
foundation for its long-term development and prosperity.
“Tumhari dastan bhi na rahe gi daastano mein” Allama Iqbal
“Study
history, study history. In history lies all the secrets of statecraft.”
— Confucius
No comments:
Post a Comment