Ahl al al wa al aqd 38 however the problem of asan al

ahl al- ≈ al wa al- ≤ aqd ).’
38
However, the problem of √ asan al-Bann Æ stems from the basis that he
does not defend the parliamentary system as he does the constitution and
does not take his defense of it to a logical end as it may readily be discov-
ered that his acknowledgement of this parliamentary system is a condi-
tional acknowledgement ; that is, it hinges on the basis of providing the
necessary condition which is the absence of partisanship ( al- ≈ izb ∞ yah ) or,
in contemporary parlance, the multiplicity of political parties.
39
So how,
then, are we able to conceive of a parliamentary political system – struc-
tured on electoral partisan competition – without political parties?
This, in fact, is the primary problem among all problems in the thought
of √ asan al-Bann Æ and in his political conception of the system of the
‘Islamic state’.
The Multiplicity of Political Parties or the Specter of Civil Strife
(al-Fitnah)
Al-Bann Æ ’s position rested on a convulsive rejection of partisanship ( al-
≈ izb ∞ yah ) in general and of it in Egypt in particular. He does that in spite
On the ‘Islamic State’ – Religious and Political Aspects 133

of his candid admission that the Ikhw Æ n al-Muslim ∞ n is a particular polit-
ical group – alongside its concern for the religion and creed – in the state
and the political system. 40 And, in that, he exceeds others in what will per-
mit it for himself, obliged, against his will, to present a negative picture of
it and of its political program due to his conflict, rather his endeavor to
pulverize the very political measure of that which he attempts to defend
in his defense of constitutional rule and the system of parliamentary
representation!
In concert with the logic of his call, from the standpoint of peaceful,
political gradualism, 41 al-Bann Æ defends reform and Reformist methodol-
ogy in political, conceptual and educational work and in building society
and the state; and in all of what he defends of ‘reform’, ‘the overcoming
of (political) partisanship and the orienting of the political forces of the
ummah towards a united front and single line…’ 42 He does not hesitate in
calling upon the (Egyptian) political parties to join the ranks of the
Muslim Brotherhood in order ‘to unite under the banner of the mighty
Qur ≥Æ n’; enjoining them to respond and thus be ‘the best of them and the
most pleased in the life of the world and the afterlife’, and admonishing
that ‘appealing to them would shorten the time and the [required] efforts’;
and threatening them that if they refused, they would be ‘compelled to act
for the call ( al-da ≤ wah ) as minions while they could act for it as leaders!’ 43
Is this ‘Reformist’ in any respect; or is it moderate? What is it that drove
al-Bann Æ to this nihilistic position, this hostile stance towards political
partisanship and parties?