The Concept of Umma(t)h As explained by Tamim Al-Barghouti

For many of us, the word ummah has somewhat negative connotations. It is ofter quoted as the dreamy flight of ideas of a concept which either never existed or is too fantastic.

But tonight, I came across a new understanding/interpretation of the word.

This is the best definition of Ummah I heard and want to commit to writing before I forget it.

The words are mine but the concept is of Tamim Al-Barghouti. This was after a long time that I heard a thought provoking speech at a fundraising banquet.

He is a young poet and political scientist of Palestinian father, a poet and Egyptian mother, an author. His poems had become popular and resonated in the squares, processions and streets and alleys during the Arabian Spring.

He spoke at CAIR NY annual banquet at the picturesque Grand Prospect Hall in Brooklyn.

The theme was Faith in Freedom. CAIR-NY team put up an elegant show. Ryan Mahoney has taken the organization to another level. The board is larger and very representative of the younger urban community.

Haroon Mughal was at his best. Do listen to him of you have a chance. Imam Sirah Wahhaj never disappoints. Tamim was the keynote speaker and I heard him for the first time.

People are divided into two types. One who get together on the basis of an idea, of equality, egalitarianism essentially faith. They may work together and even exist without a figure of authority. 

The other group is what is based on authority and order. It is a disciplined colonial authoritarian system, where the boundaries are fixed, rules are set, and are to be obeyed and followed. Here is only one version of truth and that has to be followed.

What happened in Tahrir Square from Jan to May 2011 is an example of the clash of the two groups. The first one, 20 million strong, stayed in the Square without a central figure but based on a concept, idea, of equality and justice.  They were able to operate a system based on common beliefs. No central authority and were still able to have an understanding of how the system has to run. The decision of not using violence against the government troops and tanks was not made by a select few and passed on to the others, the collective thinking of the whole group was a rational one and based on common sense that violence will only beget violence. The other group, ie the establishment failed despite their authority, order and organization.

This in one of the many examples he quoted in explaining the power of the people brought together based on a concept, ie as an ummat vs the organized hierarchy of Establishment, which is always either colonial or with colonial ethos. 

Colonialism is a form of oppression and its ultimate goal is to eventually transform the ruled into someone like the ruler so that they can be eventually ‘freed’. So, in Cromwell’s words, the ‘liberation’  of the Egyptians was the ultimate goal of the colonization.  So that the Egyptians can be liberated, not in the Mohammedan sense, but in a European sense.  That will ensure that the ‘independent’ states will remain somewhat dependent on the powers who allowed them to be liberated.

Same is true in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

In the concept of the Ummah (ummat) the base can be broadened, outside the folds of Islam, or whatever is the religion one practices. If someone believes in the universal value of justice, mercy or righteousness, that person is a part of the greater ummah as your God is Just, Merciful and Righteous. 

Contrary to what the general concept of one ummah as one nation under one rule of Khilafat, his concept of ummah is more of a shared common theme with several political interpretations and entities. He quotes that except for a short period of initial Muslim history, the Muslims have lived under more than one political establishment. But as the general concept of religion was same, the concept of ummah remained and flourished, as the community at large, was follower of a shared theme of equality, justice and fairness.

That means that the common denominator of ethical humanitarian values will make people 'one' despite different political and religious divisions, even to the extent of including non-Muslims into the folds.  In that sense the concept of Ummah is basically of the Human race at large coming together on universal themes of equality and justice.

To further his point, he gives the example of Quran itself.

Quran claims its evidence of being divine is its beauty of speech ie eloquence.  So if something is beautiful, it has to be good. Quran uses a lot of poetry, and like poetry it relies a lot on metaphor and ‘majaaz’.  In that it allows a lot of room of interpretation and exegesis and that is a quality of eloquence and beauty.

The word Ummah and Imam have the same root and it means basically a guide. It can be a person and it can be a book.  Prophet was an Imam and so is the book and later it was his life in the form of quotations and traditions.  Later it was the life of either his companions (for the Sunnis)  or the descendants ( for the Shias) which became a source or guide. So with time the base keeps on broadening and adjusts with the ethics of time.

So whatever is good, beautiful and has the values of justice and equality, has to be right and in essence within the folds of ummah.

Tamim has written five books but only one of them is in English.
The Umma and The Dawla: The Nation State and the Arab Middle East.