Most Muslims around the world are still mesmerised by the egalitarian Madina model of state, management and welfare of the masses.
Even most of the dictators who usurped power through ruthless coups or conspiracies in various Muslim countries like General Zia-ul-Haq in Pakistan and General Numeri in Sudan also solemnly swore to make their countries a resplendent reincarnation of the same cherished dream.
As there are about fifty countries in the world with more than half the Muslim population and many of them have been repeatedly ravaged by military dictatorships, revisiting the exemplars of the commanders-in-chiefs in the most revered pristine Madina state thus certainly has an immense significance.
The battles and expeditions undertaken during the life of Holy Prophet (PBUH), are broadly divided into two types by religious commentators and historians. The engagements where the Holy Prophet (PBUH) himself happened to participate are called as ghazwahs while the others where he was not physically present are termed as saryas.
The Holy Prophet’s (PBUH) stature as being the supreme light, leader and commander implied that none other could be the chief commander while he himself graced the field and the faithful. Some engagements like at Khaybar, for instance, were blessed with his presence but still he deputed and replaced commanders on a daily basis to lead the action till Hazrat Ali (RAW) conquered the Fort on the final day.
The practice at the saryas, however, was that the commanders assigned to these expeditions were generally given written and sealed instructions which they were required to open after reaching a certain spot and time or after performing some other related commands.
The absence of any regular or permanent commander in all these engagements thus illustrates the practice of a civil supremacy conforming to the modern democratic trends. The commanders were, in fact, changed even for the specific targets of topography; or tribal, cultural and strategic modes.
Skipping a regular commander in the later saryas is immensely instructive as Muslims by then had also encountered the Roman and Persian armies that had been raised, groomed and grilled through an established hierarchy of commanders. Muslims were quite cognisant of the sprawling military academies, cantonments and strategies for putative conflicts and concerns of these empires.
Their commanders enjoyed administrative, judicial and financial controls over various regions and provinces and rolled in fabulous rewards and luxuries. Muslims even availed their strategies of surprise force storming and trenching (Khandaqs) but spurned the ‘star slot’ convention.
The purpose evidently was to ensure an egalitarian civil society sworn to peace, creativity and excellence in crafts, construction, trade and commerce unencumbered by any display or dominance and martial overtones.
The devotion of some other great commanders like Musa bin Naseer who conquered a part of Europe and Muhammad and Muhammad bin Qasim who conquered India despite being definite of their torturous future, is even more resplendent.
Yet quite puzzling is the contrast that most scholars, preachers and parties so passionate to infuse the Madina models in our lives and polity, have ignored this most crucial aspect that undermined the systems, resources and repute of so many Muslim states.