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

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

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