Lecturer at Razi University in Kermanshah, Iran.

Asadollah Azhir

Abstract

It is highly thought that the messianic activism lies behind the political

crashes in today’s Middle East conflicts. Therefore, we need to survey

whether the Abrahamic traditions have any influence over the everyday’s

political challenges. This paper is going to show that messianism at the

two sides of conflicts is not the main factor. Both in Islam and in

Judaism, messianic activism (or active messianism) is not permitted and

the abuse or instrumentalization of this belief is hardly rejected. The

appearance of such aspirations depends, conversely, on the political

situations. Nearly any religion would be converted or transformed to a

political movement, if its followers could not find their favorite world

through secular human actions. The failure of international and regional

organizations or conferences to solve the problems justly and impartially

led to the appearance of a religious messianic approach to the Middle

East conflicts.

Resumen

Generalmente se piensa que el activismo mesiánico se esconde detrás de

los enfrentamientos en los actuales conflictos del Medio Oriente. Por lo

tanto, tenemos que indagar si las tradiciones de Abraham tienen alguna

The Influence of the Messianic and

Apocalyptic Aspirations over the

Today’s Middle East Conflicts

STUDIA POLITICÆ Número 14 ~ otoño 2008.

Publicada por la Facultad de Ciencia Política y Relaciones Internacionales,

de la Universidad Católica de Córdoba, Córdoba, República Argentina.

Código de referato: SP.53.XIV/08.

STUDIA POLITICÆ

14 ~ otoño 2008

See for example in:

a) Sachedina Abdulaziz A

BDULHUSSEIN, Islamic Messianism, State University of New

York Press, Albany, 1981.

b) Watt W. MONTGOMERY, “The Muslim Yearning for a saviour: Aspects of Early Ab-

basid Shi ism”, in S. G. F. B

RANDON (ed.), The Saviour God, Greenwood Press Publis-

hers, 1963.

influencia sobre los desafíos políticos cotidianos. Este artículo mostrará

que el mesianismo en los dos lados de los conflictos no es el factor prin-

cipal. Tanto en el Islam como en el Judaísmo, el activismo mesiánico (o

mesianismo activo) no está permitido y el abuso o la instrumentalización

de esta creencia es muy rechazada. La aparición de tales aspiraciones de-

pende, por el contrario, de las situaciones políticas. Casi ninguna reli-

gión se convierte o transforma en un movimiento político si sus seguido-

res no han podido encontrar su mundo secular preferido a través de las

acciones humanas. El fracaso de las organizaciones o conferencias inter-

nacionales y regionales para resolver los problemas con justicia e impar-

cialidad ha dado lugar a la aparición de un enfoque religioso mesiánico

sobre los conflictos del Oriente Medio.

Introduction

ESSIANIC expectations root generally in human longing to achieve

some kind of redemption or salvation, which is naturally inacces

sible. Historical evidences show us that in many religious

traditions, especially in the ancient Middle East, there have been several

kinds of messianism.

The terms messianic and messianism come from Israeli and Jewish

tradition, referring originally to the coming of a royal descendant of David.

Mashih or messiah, literally an anointed one who was chosen by God, was

expected to appear and make an end to the pains and afflictions of the

Israelites, making this people tobe above all and causing others to serve the

people of God. The salvation, which was expected to come with appearing

of the Messiah, seemed to be at the outset a this-worldly, national and

political one. But in the course of Israeli history the term ‘messiah’ along

with the meaning of Salvation underweit some development toward

apocalyptical and then individual other-worldly saviour and salvation,

which embodied typically in Christianity.

Today the terms messianic, messianism and other related terms are used

widely to apply to some other kinds of salvific expectations. For example

‘Islamic messianism’ became seemly a common word, which has been

used by some leading scholars.

The term suggests Muslim expectation

See: TALMON, JACOB, The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy, fredrick A. Prager Pu-

blishers, New York (1951).

See New Testament, Eph, 6:12; 2Thess 2:9.

About Zoroastrian mythological messianism see: Bundahish, translated from Pah. to

Persian by Mehrdad Bahar, Tus, Tehran, 1378 AH. And for its English translation see:

HORNE, Charles F. (ed.) The Bundahish: The Zoroastrian Account of Creatich-Pamphlet,

Kessinger Publishing, 2006.

of the appearance of a religious-political figure who is traditionally called

Mahdi, literally the true guided one. Therefore it is allowable to take

Islamic messianism equal to Mahdism. ‘Secular messianism’ and

‘messianic democracy’

are some other approximately common terms in

today’s politics. Such terms imply that the holders of related doctrines

view themselves as self-appointed arbiters of good and evil, entirely

above the laws of men. They try to enforce their wishes, which they

equate according their worldview with human welfare.

Religious messianic activism

Generally we can divide messianism into activism and quietism, as well as

into religious and secular. Religious messianism implies a request of

change, a yearning towards transforming of dominant situations; it suggests

that the advocates of such an idea are not satisfied with the current

religious-moral and/or sociopolitical atmospheres, and they like changes in

their spiritual-physical world. Usually the present situations are symbolized

through and unified with the evil realm, so that Satan becomes the king of

the present world and God that of the coming one

One question here is whether the messianic idea causes sociopolitical

problems, trying to force the end or, conversely, it is political problems like

injustice, which make quietist messianism transform into messianic

activism. The historical evidence shows that religious messianism takes

always place when believers are not satisfied with the religious-political

situations. This phenomenon, despite its activistic character, is usually a

reaction of believers to some politically unbearable predicaments.

According to some researches, the rise of so-called fundamentalist groups

in Arab and Jewish communities depends on the disability of governors to

meet social and political needs like justice, security, peace, etc.

Therefore, dualism is a permanent component of messianism: there are two

realms of existence, one is the domain of the good, the righteous, light and

God Himself, and the other is the domain of the evil, the wicked, darkness

and Satan. The present world is under the dominance of satanic powers and

ASADOLLAH AZHIR

STUDIA POLITICÆ

14 ~ otoño 2008

About the influence and comparative points of Zoroastrian messianism in Jewish his-

tory see:

a) D

UCHENSNE-GUILLEMIN, J., The Western Response to Zoroaster, Oxford University

Press, 1958.

b) O

TTO, Rudolf, Reich Gottes und Menschensohn, C. H. Beck‘sche Verlagsbuchhan-

dlung, München, 1934.

it is to be defeated one day by the good powers. Maybe we can find the

most original kind of messianic dualism in mythology and sotarology of Zo-

roastrianism. There, the present world is a mixture of two orders, which is

dominated under the evil one, headed by Angara.mainu or Ahriman. This

Evil, according to Zoroastrian tradition, intervened in the process of creation

and made malevolently a parallel order of creatures in order to damage the

Mazda-created world. Not only every member of humankind, but also the

whole creatures participate in the battle between the two origins of the good

and the evil. The most significant dimension of each creature lies upon its

role in this history-long struggle; the more the being or its action contribute

the good to defeat the ahrimanized order, the more it enjoys religious virtue

and salvation. Although the scene of this battle lasts throughout the history,

the most important stage is to come at the end of the time, in which some

descendant of Zarathustra will renew not only the religion but also the

whole existence. He, analogous to his forefather, Zarathustra, together with

his two forerunner brothers complete the process of mythological, universal

and religious salvation with the miraculous intervention of divine powers at

the End. Ultimately and eschatologically the good powers conquest the evil

and bring the world back to its ideal heavenly state, of course with some

new features which make actually an unprecedented utopia.

There is a wide view among the scholars that Jewish- Christian messianolo-

gy was under influence of Zoroastrian kind during the Babylonian exile of

the Israelites. But the strong monotheism in Israeli religion remains always

in the background of its messianism, so that we may speak about a mono-

theistic messianism. The unique creator is God, and the whole creation is his

own action, without intervention of any others. Therefore the act of salva-

tion is referred to God himself. But the satanic powers, which are frequently

the creatures of the unique Creator, appear here to explain the natural and

moral deficiencies and evils. Satan, Belial, Antichrist, al-Dadgdgal and such

figures in Abrahamic religions are comparative with Ahriman and his fellow

daevas, with the difference that the dualism in Zoroastrianism is not reduced

to a subordinate to monotheism. Conversely, dualism in semitic religions is

not an essential cosmological dualism between two orders of existence, but

a historical moral deviation from the unique good-created order.

The meaning of salvation, depended on the kind of dualism and degeneracy

of the world and humanity, differs from religion to other. Religions like Zo-

roastrianism, which originate in cosmology and mythology, have mainly a

cosmological-mythological salvation, although through their historical de-

velopment they have gotten other dimensions of salvation. But in religions

like Judaism, it is mainly historical salvation, embracing moral-religious

and sociopolitical dimensions, because their soteriology (their doctrine of

salvation) got form in a world which suffered from social and political

pains and consequently led to such a doctrine of salvation. Here also we

can see developments towards cosmological-mythological soteriology un-

der the influence of other traditions. The situations in which a doctrine of

salvation takes shape can be considered as a criterion to understand how

much a soteriology through its history absorbed foreign features or devel-

oped itself to a sophisticated stage.

One common character of different messianisms is usually their eschatolog-

ical and apocalyptical characteristic. The history terminates ultimately to its

completion, to a stage in which every side of the good and the evil exhibit

their highest power to win the final battle. In this battlefield the good side is

to overpower the evil and thereby the history comes to the end. Traditional-

ly, both in Zoroastrian and in Semitic religions, the fall of moral-religious

and social values and the appearance of unbearable torments have been

seen as important signs of the imminence of the messianic salvation. These

discomforts were interpreted as the pain of birth, and were expected to end

to renovation of the world, a world without defects and oppressions. Such a

belief encouraged many people to expect redemption, to think hopefully

and messianic-minded and, more important, to suppose that the history of

humanity reached its climax and imminently comes the messianic era.

But all those beliefs and expectations are not enough to cause someone act

redemptive or messianic. To do so, it is required to believe in the responsi-

bility of believers or humankind to cooperate with God and divine powers

to bring the salvation. The meaning of messianic expectation changes from

a neutral position of believer towards history and humanity to a more activ-

ist messianism. According to this approach, men are not to expect merely a

new world; they should contribute to renew the world. This idea, as we

have already seen, originated in such religions, in which god is not consid-

ered as an omnipotent, but a benevolent being, who needs the contribution

of his creatures against the evil.

Apart from the question of human as cooperator of God and that of where

this idea originate from, it seems that we can make more a division between

two different kind of religious activism. Expecting longingly of the appear-

ance of salvation and believing in the responsibility of believers for that do

ASADOLLAH AZHIR

STUDIA POLITICÆ

14 ~ otoño 2008

not necessarily lead to a messianic political activism. The contribution of

believers to the redemption of the world and humanity can also take place

through religious rituals, prayers and other nonpolitical activities. The main

streams of orthodoxies in both Zoroastrianism and Abrahamic religions

have emphasized highly on a pious religious life in order to receive messi-

anic salvation. The Israeli prophets declared always that the precondition of

redemption of the people was their repentance and keeping on the Mosaic

Law. According to some Shiite traditions, the main act of the believer dur-

ing the disappearance of the Mahdi is to pray for his appearance.

Usually such a spiritual activism in messianic idea is called by scholars as

‘quietism’, but it should be considered that this term includes trends which

remain inactive or even denying messianic expectations. The merely spiri-

tual activism, although may seem something paradoxical, hints to a nonpo-

litical, forceless and religious system of ideas and activities, which tries to

provide the situations for the messianic era. I don’t insist on giving such a

spiritually activistic Messianism a new name, but I like to mention that the

term ‘quietism’ may not hint exactly this meaning, and we should notice

that this term implies a wider meaning.

Quietism, embracing the abovementioned trend, unlike politically messi-

anic activism, abandons the ultimate complete salvation to God the Sav-

iour. Monotheism is a firm ground for such an approach; it is only the

Creator who can save His creatures. The human saviour like Messiah or

Mahdi, remain here merely as an agent of God and a symbol of His em-

bodied action on the earth. But salvation is the act of God and remains for

him forever. Adding to spiritual activities, the main messianic act of be-

liever is expectation for coming of the messianic salvation. This doctrine,

opposite to prevalent view, can coexist with democracy as a human urgent

treatment in the lack of messianic theocracy. But in these pages we can

not peruse this question.

The religious-politically activistic messianism, in its precise meaning, sees

the messianic idea as a practical manifest of political operation. The merely

messianic expectation looks to them like a passive submission to the cur-

rent authorities. It may be called revolutionary messianism too, because it

advocates revolutions against tyrannical governors or orders, at national,

regional or international levels. Here we don’t survey whether the messian-

ic idea in religions rose due to social problems or not, but the rise of revo-

lutionary messianism in different traditions has been highly under influence

of sociological dissatisfaction. When men encounter problems and try to re-

solve them, they search ideas, to ground on them their action, to legitimize

their activity and to theorize it. The messianic-minded people in such pre-

dicaments like injustice or foreign imperialism naturally grasp the nearest

and most applicable ideas, namely the idea of the battle between the righ-

teous and the wicked at the end of the history under commandments of the

good, from one side, and the evil from others.

Surely, appearance of such movements in societies makes sociopolitical

problems more complex and their solution more difficult. However, gener-

ally we can conclude that the religious messianic movements with activistic

attitude rise in result of political dissatisfactions, although the rise of them

complicates the situations. The expansion of messianic ideas in relation to

their prevalence and aims depends on the expansion and dimensions of the

problems, which leads believers to such positions, and also on the religious

ideals of the tradition, which such movements rise from.

One question here is whether the messianic idea causes sociopolitical prob-

lems, trying to force the end or, conversely, it is political problems which

make quietist messianism transform into messianic activism. The historical

evidence shows that religious messianism takes always place when believ-

ers are not satisfied with the religious-political situations. This phenome-

non, despite its activistic character, is usually a reaction of believers to

some politically unbearable predicaments. According to some researches,

the rise of so-called fundamentalist groups in Arab and Jewish communities

depends on the disability of governors to meet social and political needs

like justice, security, peace, etc.

Successfulness of religious messianic movements to establish new politi-

cal-religious orders can be followed by rising of other new messianic

movements on the one hand, and/or secularizing of old faith on the other

hand. When the subsequences of established movement, which becomes

in turn a new tradition or government, can not satisfy messianic aspira-

tions of some believes due to its insufficiency or allegedly total wrong-

ness, the appearance of some more activist messianism is most likely. On

the other hand, the so-called realized activist messianism, the new tradi-

tion, tries to revise and modify its radical principles. It may go far ahead

to demessianize itself.

The modification of religious messianic activism by a realized political

tradition results in an especial kind of secularization; the old heavenly

apocalyptical ideals change to this-worldly ordinary political or even reli-

gious institutes. By this kind of secularization I don’t mean the separation

of the state and the church and similar ideas, but I mean that extraordinary

See BERMAN ELI, Hamas, Taliban and the Jewish Underground: An Economist’s View

of Radical Religious Militias, UC San Diego National Bureau of Economic Research,

September 2003.

ASADOLLAH AZHIR

STUDIA POLITICÆ

14 ~ otoño 2008

KLAUSNER, Joseph, Die Messianischen Vorstellungen des judischen Volks im Zeitalter

der Tannaiten, Krakau, 1903, p. 5.

See in Everyman’s Talmud, by A. Cohen, translation to Persian: Amir.Freidoun Gorga-

ni, p. 354.

See: COHN-SHERBOK, DAN, The Jewish Messiah, T&T, Clark, Edinburg 1997, p. 147

Ibid., p. 165.

See: MCGINN, B. “Forms of Catholic Millenarianism: A Brief Overview” in KOTT-

MAN, Karl A (ed.), Catholic Millenarianism: From Savonarola to The Abb Gregoire,

Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2001, p. 3.

See: An-No‘mani Mohammad Ibrahim, Kitab al-Ghibah, Tehran, without date,

p. 167.

high-standing religious ideals descend to everyday ordinary practical is-

sues. The famous meaning of secularization, the separation of state and

church, is somehow the result of abovementioned kind of secularization.

Secular messianism, which is a modern phenomenon and we assess it in

following pages, appears along the successive process of (quietist) messi-

anism, messianic activism, taking shape of a new tradition from the last

messianic movement, self-demessianization of the movement and secular-

ization of it.

Before going on to assess secular messianism, it is high worthy to men-

tion that the orthodoxies in Abrahamic religions usually have denied ac-

tivistic messianism. During the messianic rebellion of Bar-Kochba, which

led to the destruction of Jerusalem (70 CE) and more disappointment of

Jews, although Rabbi Akiba along with many people protected the move-

ment

, the main stream of the Jewish orthodoxy denied it and criticized

Akiba.

The messianic claims of Shabbatai Tsevi (d. 1676), though were

welcomed by jewish communities, but many religious authorities objected

the movement.

Zionism, both its religious and secular modes, was con-

fronted especially at the beginning, by objection of Jewish orthodoxy.

In Christianity, particularly from fourth century, under authorities like Au-

gustine (354-430), the literal understanding of the second coming of Jesus

and millenarianism was strongly criticized.

In Islam, in Shiite tradition,

the high religious authorities, the Imams, rejected the request of some of

their followers to take a messianic role

, and emphasized definitely on

eschatological miraculous characters of Mahdi’s movement, so that any

banner of rebellion before his was introduced as heterodoxy. In Sunnite

history, the rejection of activistic messianism was not less than that of the

Shiite. One of the latest instances was the hard reaction of Sunnite author-

ities to al-Mahdiyya movement in Sudan headed by Muhammad al-Mahdi

(1844-81).

See TALMON, JACOB, The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy, Fredrick A. Prager Pu-

blishers, New York (1951), p. 10.

TALMON, JACOB, The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy, p. 9.

Secular messianism

It is too difficult to make or realize an accurate distinctness between reli-

gious and nonreligious activist messianism, because firstly, there is not an

exact and common definition of religion. Some components like “ultimate

concern” make such a definition include Marxism, and some other concepts

like “believing in God” exclude Buddhism. Secondly, some religious char-

acters transfer to secular systems of thought without consciousness of its

founders or advocates; teleological and semi-apocalyptical inspirations of

Marxism are something like Jewish-Christian messianism, although Marx

and Engels had antireligious thoughts. But we may make a practical differ-

ence between religious and secular messianism by pointing on the different

grounds and ideals. The religious messianism, even in its political activistic

form, aims some religious values like priority and dominion of a particular

religious community or revival of its ancient glory. Objectives like justice

and peace are also understood religiously, corresponding to ideals of the re-

lated tradition. The unique source of religious messianism is the word of

God, though with a different interpretation from that of orthodoxies; messi-

anic movements emphasize always on the true understanding of scriptures

and consider the orthodox understanding a deviation from the text.

But secular messianism or secular messianic trend has some allegedly hu-

man goals in sociopolitical fields, which are not based on religious grounds

and aimed not at such ends. The main sources of this kind of messianism

are the human reason and will, but there is a great tendency to instrumental-

ize religious values, so that in some cases we confront with a fused form of

religious-secular messianism. However, as Talmon said “The point of refer-

ence of modern Messianism is man’s reason and will, and its aim happiness

on earth, achieved by a social transformation. The point of reference is tem-

poral, but the claims are absolute”.

These absolute claims about equality,

classless society, liberty, democracy etc. exhibit some ideologies, which

proclaim universal and global function, and feel mission for themselves to

save humanity, so that Talmon divided two different democracies and says:

“The coexistence of liberal democracy and revolutionary Messianism in

modern times could legitimately be compared to the relationship between

the official Church and the eschatological revolutionary current in Chris-

tianity during the ages of faith”.

A ‘totalitarian’ or ‘messianic democracy’

is an ideological democracy beside a merely methodical democracy.

ASADOLLAH AZHIR

STUDIA POLITICÆ

14 ~ otoño 2008

West, Charles C., Marxism in Encyclopedia of Religion vol. 9, pp. 240-244.

RUSSELL, B., A History of Western Philosophy, p. 383.

BAUER, Bruno, “Die Fähigkeit der heutigen Juden und Christen, frei zu werden” in

Einundzwanzig Bogen, p. 56-71, qouted in Marx: Zur Judenfrage, S. 49. Digitale Biblio-

thek Band 11: Marx/Engels, S. 475 vgl. MEW Bd. 1, S. 371.

The secular kind of messianism, as mentioned above, is a modern product

of the Judeo-Christian west, which underwent secularization and moderni-

ty. But the religious messianism had some direct and indirectly important

influences over the taking shape of the secular messianism. One of the

most important forms of such messianism is Marxism. Marx (1818-1883)

himself had Judeo-Christian training; his Jewish family converted to

Christianity and he was baptized in 1824. His Marxism “shared in and in-

teracted with the Judeo-Christian heritage in two fundamental ways: (1)

Marxism continually confronted, and drew on, the heritage of radical

Christianity, and (2) Marxism was a result of a process, rooted in the En-

lightenment and developed by G. W. Hegel and the left-wing Hegelians,

that transposed the structure of Christian faith and hope into a humanist

key. ... Communism for Marx, like the kingdom of God for Christians, is

genuinely eschatological. Hope in its coming is not dimmed by its de-

layed arrival. It is always at hand. It will bring a transformation of human

nature by new social conditions that, Marx believed, will be prepared in

the struggle itself and in transitional socialist”.

To understand Marx

psychologically, one should use the following dictionary:

Yahweh = Dialectical Materialism

The Messiah = Marx

The Electe = The Proletariat

The Church = The Communist Party

The Second Coming = The Revolution

Hell = Punishment of the Capitalists

The Millennium = The Communist Commonwealth

The terms on the left give the emotional content of the terms on the right,

and is this emotional content, familiar to those who have had a Christian or

a Jewish upbringing, that makes Marx’s eschatology credible.

When

Bruno Bauer criticized Jews because of their Jewish struggle for freedom

and wrote: “if they like to be delivered, they should not convert to Chris-

tianity, but to dissolve Christianity”

, Marx answered: “it concerns still

Ibid.

Encyclopedia of Religion, Zionism, Vol. 15, p. 4.

with a conversion of Jews, not merely to Christianity, but to the dissolved

Christianity”.

He did not find Bauer’s solution secular enough and liked

to offer a totally secular humanized salvation, but unconsciously he took

some religious features to his philosophy and made a semi religion with its

doctrine of salvation, which was messianic but secular.

Zionism was nearer to Bauer than to Marx. Under influence of western na-

tionalism and humanism, some secular leading Jews, along with some reli-

gious persons, translated the long-lasted messianic expectation in an activ-

istic dwelling in Palestine and establishing of a state as preparing for

messianic era (religious messianism) or the very expected salvation (secular

messianism). Theodor Herzl (1860-1904), the founder of modern Zionism,

although was supported by some rabbis, was a secular and westernized per-

son. Nevertheless, he was greeted by many eastern European Jews as a

messianic figure. “The attitude toward religion among the early secular Zi-

onist thinkers was frequently quite hostile. Traditional judaism was viewed

as the religion of the exile and the Zionists saw themselves as a movemnt to

‘negate the exile’”.

Some other secular Zionists like Ahad ha-‘Am (Ash-

er Ginsberg, 1856-1927), tried to develop a secular Judaism based on cer-

tain principles from the Jewish heritages; the Jewish religion was one ex-

pression of a wider Jewish national culture. Yet there was a religious

messianism, which saw Zionism as a preparation for the messianic era.

Avraham Yitshaq Kook (d. 1935) and his son, Tsevi Yehudah Kook (d.

1982) developed the idea that when Zionism succeeded, messianic times

would come and the Zionist movement would itself return to its uncon-

scious religious roots. However, Zionism was a deviation from the Jewish

tradition, and because of that it was rejected at outset by most orthodox rab-

bis. This rejection and the later acceptance of Zionism are comparative to

the similar story of the institute of kingship in ancient Israel. Both modern

Zionism and ancient kingdom were accepted after the Israelite/Jewish peo-

ple had undergone the hesitation in their function, with the difference that

the ancient kingship was absorbed in Israeli religion, but Zionism secular-

ized some religious ideals and instrumentalized them for political goals.

In protestant Christianity, unlike Catholic, the more literal understanding of

millenarianism and messianic expectation continued to survive in modern

age. Both Luther and Calvin viewed the papacy as Antichrist. Although the

ASADOLLAH AZHIR

STUDIA POLITICÆ

14 ~ otoño 2008

CLARKSON, Frederick, Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and De-

mocracy, Common Courage Press, 1997, p. 128.

It was quoted in an article named “Bush’s Messiah Complex” at the website

‘progressive.org’

more religious messianism transformed usually into new sects, the secular

messianism provides american politicians with a power to justify their un-

usual desires, to facilitate American hegemony, and to proclaim the end of

the history by the dominance of ‘totalitarian democracy’. The secular mes-

sianism, and here the messianic democracy, is a deviation from both tradi-

tional messianism and ‘liberal democracy’; it is an illegitimate fusion of

two different realms.

Here, like in the case of Zionism, some right-wing Evangelists contribute

American secular messianism with their millenarian feelings. They come

also sometimes together with the Zionist messianism to defend the Jewish

emigration to Israel and the building of settlements in Palestine as a contri-

bution for hastening the coming of the millennium. Near to the dawn of the

third Christian millennium, millions of enthusiastic millenarian-minded

people went on pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and the Israeli officials spoke

about ‘Jerusalem syndrome’. Such emotions pave the way for the politi-

cians, who may not have the same feelings, but theorize and instrumental-

ize them for their messianic globalization or democratization of the world.

Today’s American conservative governors, supported by such theories,

made themselves commitment to fulfill abovementioned aspirations forced-

ly. The gestalt of president Gorge W. Bush and his certainty of being sup-

ported by God made his messianic politics more complex. “Bush is playing

to a base activist constituency; many of these people believe that they’re

living in biblically inspired End Times.”

Michael Klare, professor of

peace and world security studies at Hampshire College, believes what moti-

vates Bush is “a combination of the empire and the messianic. He grasps

the practical need to control oil, for which the Administration is willing to

go to any lengths, and he fuses it with messianic fervor.”

Religious-secular messianic battle in the Middle East

Condoleezza Rice, Bush’s Secretary of State, during the war between Israel

and Hizbollah, interpreted this bloody affliction biblically as the “birth

pangs” of the new Middle East. Traditionally, in the Abrahamic religions

the messianic redemption was expected to be preceded by natural, cultural

See: SACHADINA, A. A., Messianism in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Modern Islamic

and even cosmological disorders. These were only some signs to declare

the immanence of messianic era, but they had no causal role in taking place

of the salvation. As we have seen, to give human struggle apocalyptic and

messianic redemptive meaning is at the same time deviation from both

monotheistic messianism and human secularism.

People in the Middle East seek justice, peace, welfare, autonomy, partly de-

mocracy, etc. When national or international institutes fail to meet these

needs peacefully, there rises inward or outward messianic longings, occa-

sionally against native or foreign dominant powers. However, inward mes-

sianic trends in Sunnite Arab world, unlike in Jewish atmosphere, appear

seldom. Some mystic messianic movements or trends in North Africa (like

al-Mahdyyah, 1881-5) or in India (like Ahmadyyah, 1891-1908) are not to

be seen in the Middle East. Here, when such aspirations appear, they aim

usually against foreign imperialism and hostility. Historically, Sunnite mes-

sianism was developed during the wars between Umayyad and then Ab-

basid caliphate from one side and Byzantine Empire from other side. It had

therefore in its activistic form an anti-crusade nature, and understands

sometimes the current events in the shadow of this historical background.

For example during the first Persian Golf War, in some circles Saddam

Hussein was understood as an expected messianic figure, who was, accord-

ing to a tradition spread at that time, ‘as strong as rock’.

Islamic messianism, unlike Jewish and Christian ones, has not experienced

secularization; therefore, it is nearer to its original religious characteristics.

Its eschatological and miraculous occurrence is expected to be fulfilled di-

vinely at the end of the world, and because of that, to make messianic

claims is too difficult. The today’s occasionally atavistic messianism in the

Middle East is comparable partly with the liberative theology in Latin

America; at the time of danger, they both try to use the best accessible the-

oretical and practical possibilities, and the messianic idea is one of these.

The most dangerous treatment with religions is to renovate them revolu-

tionary and to make an ideologically modern manifest from them; it can de-

stroy the long-lasted harmony. To change religious faith into secular reli-

gion is like to change the genes of a cell, which may be killer. I can not

agree with Rabbi Marx, an American liberal Jew, when he says: “Messian-

ism is not about waiting for tomorrow so we can embrace eternity; it’s

about transforming now into an eternity. It’s about courageously redeeming

the oppressed of today ...today is the Day of Judgment. And the message of

this day is “Don’t wait . . . Create.”

But what is to be created? When the

ASADOLLAH AZHIR

STUDIA POLITICÆ

14 ~ otoño 2008

other side decides to do the same, don’t the creations stand against each

other, and doesn’t it lead to destruction?

Such an understanding of ancient messianism in a modern way is enough

enthusiastic and exciting to cause the audience to think about the achieve-

ment of human modern possibilities, like democracy, in a messianic way.

There will be a messianism without messiah, or better to say, a messianism

with too many messiahs. To preach and achieve democracy with messianic

vehicles, don’t lead to a messianic democracy, which will be much exclu-

sivist that contradicts democracy itself? It seems that the eschatological

apocalyptic messianism must be left totally to its ancient doer, to God. If

men try to substitute for God, it results in totalitarianism. Men need to stay

human beings in order to make democratic societies and a democratic

world democratically. Today’s Middle East conflicts are not directly the

consequences of religious ideas; they rose partly from an attempt of alleg-

edly self-defense, which leads to instrumentalizing of religious belies, like

messianism, and partly from an imperialistic trend, which secularize and, in

turn, instrumentalize the messianic idea in order to make a monopole

favourite world.

Bibliography

AN-NO‘MANI, Mohammad Ibrahim. Kitab al-Ghibah, under efforts of Ali.Akbar Ghaffa-

ri, Maktabh as-Saduq. Tehran (no date mentioned).

BAUER, Bruno. Die Fähigkeit der heutigen Juden und Christen, frei zu warden. In Marx:

Zur Judenfrage, Digitale Bibliothek Band 11: Marx/Engels, vgl. MEW Bd.

BERMAN, Eli (2003). Hamas, Taliban and the Jewish Underground: An Economist’s View

of Radical Religious Militias. San Diego: UC San Diego National Bureau of Econo-

mic Research.

IALE, David. (1907-1986). “Zionism”. In Encyclopedia of Religion, Micrea Eliade

(ed.), New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

CLARKSON, Frederick (1997). Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and

Democracy. Common Courage Press.

COHEN, A. Everyman’s Talmud, translated to Persian: Amir.Freidoun Gorgani (no date

and publisher mentioned).

COHN-SHERBOK, Dan (1997). The Jewish Messiah. Edinburg: T&T, Clark.

APP, B. S. (1972). The Fifth Monarchy Men. London: Faber and Faber.

UNT, Stephan (ed.) (2001). Christian Millenarianism. Indianapolis: Indiana University

Press.

world, vol. 2.

His speech on Yom Kippur Sept. 98, quoted in Congregation Beth Organization (at

its website: www.bethor.org).

KLAUSNER, Joseph (1903). Die Messianischen Vorstellungen des judischen Volks im Zei-

talter der Tannaiten. Krakau.

CGINN, B. (2001). “Forms of Catholic Millenarianism: A Brief Overview.” In KOTT-

MAN, Karl A (ed.), Catholic Millenarianism: From Savonarola to The Abb Gregoire,

Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

RUSSELL, Bertrand (1945). A History of Western Philosophy, Simon and Schuster, New

York.

SACHEDINA, Abdulaziz Abdulhussein (1981). Islamic Messianism. Albany: State Univer-

sity of New York Press.

SACHEDINA, A. A. (1995). “Messianism”. In John L. ESPOSITO, (ed. in chief.) The Oxford

Encyclopedia of the modern Islamic world, New York [u.a.]: Oxford Univ. Press.

TALMON, Jacob (1951). The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy. New York: Fredrick A.

Prager Publishers.

WEST, Charles C. (1907-1986) “Marxism”. In Encyclopedia of Religion, Micrea Eliade

(ed.), New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

ASADOLLAH AZHIR