Self Identity Construction Of Islam

In the study of Islamic history and self-identity construction, there is much debate between scholars of different theological standpoints on how the religion that came to be called Islam came to be. On one side, certain Islamic religion scholars view the religion known as Islam as a conceptually defined entity from the very beginning of its creations, which was created without environmental influence or derivative forms over a significant period of time. This side of the argument is based on the adherence to the belief that Islam was created from the actions based off the writings of divine providence and direct instruction by God that lead to its growth and identity as a singular religion (Rippin, 2012, p.34-35). However, multiple sources

from various scholars of the opposite standpoint describe how the religion known as Islam came to be through gradual growth and progression of previous movements and environmental factors that helped shape the religion into what it is today.

As Fred Donner mentions, the main factors behind how Islam obtained its identity and took shape revolved around the three factors of unconventional belief system presentations, ecumenical alliance and separation, and eschatological militancy that were presented in Islam’s precursor form, The Believers or “mu’minun” (p.57). These points are what seem to be the more plausible and evident circumstances that managed to forge Islamic self-identification during the early 600’s instead of divine instruction.

The first circumstance of the presentation of an unconventional monotheistic belief system was the first factor that contributed to how what would later become Islam took shape and managed to establish a singular identity for a burgeoning movement that proved to be unorthodox for domestic religions at the time. The setting that Islam’s precursor

was formed in was a primarily polytheistic Arabia with tribal characters whose only experience with organized monotheistic dogma was under the Christian, Judaic, and Zoroastrian pressures of the surrounding kingdoms and empires (Cook, 1996, p.9-10). This new form of monotheistic doctrine created from a strictly Arabian origin, though somewhat jarring those who were adherent to more polytheistic beliefs found in traditional Arabian culture, provided a growing domestic alternative to beliefs based on being afflicted by the ill-coordinated activities of a plurality of personal gods (Cook, 1996, p.5). The monotheistic format of beliefs also proved to be more useful in unifying Arab populations than a polytheistic format, which was a pivotal trait of the movement that allowed it to become popular among various tribes. The new commonality found under this monotheistic belief system allowed Arabians to establish a singular identity, not unlike the effects of Confucianism on the early people of China, and provided a method of unifying people under the guise of a single morally-ordered community. This method was especially useful in unifying communities, such as the town of Yathrib, who had been afflicted by the political strife of warring tribes (Donner, 2010, p.42). The consolidated theological following allowed Muhammad to bring differing groups together via a singular belief structure and helped eventually solidify what would eventually become Islam as a strictly monotheistic religion.
The second circumstance of an ecumenical alliance and subsequent separation of members of the Believers Movement would prove to an integral turning point in the definition of what would become the early “Muslim” community.

As Donner mentions, the Believers movement incorporated Christians, Jews, and converts from pagan religions into their fold, and had not viewed themselves as constituting a new of separate religious confession (p.69). The early Believers Movement included Jewish clans affiliated with Medinese allies that would eventually align together under a single community known as an “umma” due to Muhammad’s Believers deciding Jewish beliefs were not antithetical to their own practices (Donner, 2010, p.44 and 69). This notion of ecumenical acceptance of other faiths directly contrasts what modern Islamic scholars believe to have been a strictly “For Muslim, By Muslims” religion based on a specific religious alignment to what was perceived as “Islam”. However, this ecumenical status would not last as a consistent unwillingness to acknowledge Muhammad as a religious leader and divine prophet instead of simply a communal leader that was exhibited by Jewish, Christian, and Zoroastrian members would lead to an underlying growing tension that would lead to the end of this ecumenical status. As elaborated on by Donner, members of the Believers movements chose to establish a decisive identity marker for who would be called a Muslim after Muhammad’s death that focused on

the recognition of Muhammad as a prophet (p.111-112). This identity marker started to further divide “Muslims” from other members of the community in addition to practices of taxation and discrimination that would culminate in the eventual exclusion of Jews and other monotheistic elements that would not accept the new “Muslim” norm (Donner, 2010, p.112). This change of ecumenical acceptance to group exclusion would establish the framework of what would eventually distinguish what would be called a “Muslim” from others and would eventually be used by “Muslims” as the cornerstone of their faiths.
The third circumstance of eschatological militancy and expansionist tendencies would also prove to ingrain a set of ideological tendencies that would forge the “Islamic” identity. Early members of the Believers Movement were motivated to pursue territorial conquests in the name of piety and the legitimation, and the exhortation to pursue, ideological war (Donner, 2010, p.85). As mentioned by Donner, though relatively pacifistic and passive in its initial efforts to spread its ideology, the Believers movement would eventually take on a more militant approach after Muhammad’s death in 632, which would eventually grant the movement the characteristic of being ardent to establish political presences across the lands (p.80-81). This pursuit of expansionist fervor was highly tethered to doctrines stated in the Qu’ran about the eschatological nature of the Believers’ faith which would eventually be marked as a significant characteristic of those who were identified as “Muslims” (Donner, 2010, p.78-80). This eschatological religious component behind the motivations of the Believers greatly contributed to the expediency behind the movement’s intentions to establish what was viewed as a God-guided, righteous order on Earth due to the understanding the world was nearing its end and that time was of the essence (Donner, 2010, p.82). This component understandably led to the members of the Believers Movement feeling that they need to engage positive or military action if need to root out the impiety present around them, which would eventually set the framework for the inimitable practice of “jihad” described in the Qu’ran that is exclusively adopted “Muslims” across history to work “in the cause of God” (Donner, 2010, p.82). This eschatological element of the Believers would establish the subsequent motivations that forged the Islamic identity and mark the followers of the religion as purveyors of piety and commitment in the name of fulfilling the will of God.
Given these points, it is apparent that much effort and tribulation over a period time by a previous movement’s goals and ambitions were the contributing factors that helped shape Islam into the renowned religion it would eventually become in the early 600’s. Scholars such as Fred Donner portray how the religion went through the gradual transition in its desire to establish an identity that would mark itself as a sacrosanct monotheistic faith.