Ulama, Hierarchy, and Polity in Islam

In the way that Christianity has several polities and way to govern the Church (Ecclesia means the congregation or the people), I wonder on how Islam in practice governs the Ummat (the people).

Islam as how early Caliphate or Rasyidun Caliphate was done had the Caliph as the highest governor and law-giver. We can see how Ummar bin Khatab set the new way of doing public Tarawih prayers (bid'ah hasanah). So, in a way, the way Caliph governs the Ummat is like the way the Judges of the Old Testament governed the Israelites.

While Caliphs in the form of dynastic kings kept existing, the matter of Islamic laws that is the matter of religion was proved as not being every king's forte. So, the learneds aka ulamas filled this role.

Ulamas is a broad term. Those who are learned do learn about many things. Generally, each person excel more in one specific thing. 

Several kind of ulama:

1. Theologian (of aqidah) or Mutakalim (of Kalam)

2. Jurist (fuqaha of fiqih)

3. Mufti (canon lawyer)

4. Judge (qadi)

5. Grand mufti or syeikhul Islam

6. Muhaddits (haddits scholar)

7. Hafiz (Quran memorizer)

8. Qari' (Quran well-chanter)

9. Mujtahid (law-reasoner by ijtihad)

10. Syeikh (can be a leader of a tariqa or of learned scholars)

11. Mursid (spiritual father in tariqa)

12. Wali (saint)

So from what I know and understand, each type of ulama above exist inpendent as in there is no bishops or laying of hand in order to teach or choose someone for something. Apostolic succession exists in the sense of people who become learned generally must have a teacher whose teacher and so on have an unbroken chain to Sahabat and Rasulullah. 

Syeikhul Islam is probably chosen by the king. And maybe there is no thing as council among the learned like among bishop to choose a Metropolitan (primus interpares) like in Christianity.

Jurists (fuqaha, ahli fiqih) usually learn from ulama to ulama and from early jurists they can meet. When they produce a work, it will be read by other jurists or ulamas and it will be rated, approved, or disapproved. So there is a kind of consensus but maybe there is no council to ratify it formally.

Same for muhaddits and theologians.

Qadis are probably appointed by king.

As for organization, it exists in some country like Indonesia (Nadlatul Ulama and Muhammadiyah). Maybe the higher ups discus things and ratify certain things. But, because there is no bishop-priest system in it so not everyone that belongs to the organization are informed and do what the higher ups have decided. And when people are asked about the canon like how Orthodox and Roman Catholic have, they don't understand. Or it's not really clear if the canon and the theology are laid down formally and distributed in a full for the mass. People can learn things after they have become muslims but there is probably no formal cathechism or the rank of one being a cathecumen who is deemed to have no proper basic understanding of the faith.

Mursyid or sheikh in a tariqa (religious order) is maybe appointed by the former mursyid among its murid (sufi students, novitiate etc). Its a close knitted community based on spirituality instead of simple canon of law. So the relation between a mursyid and a murid is quite direct and clear. Although, there are maybe some ranks to help manage the act of teaching, etc.

Hafiz and Qari' have their own teachers.

So each of these kinds of ulamas complement each other but kind of work independently.

If in the Christianity we usually have bishop, metropolitan, and council to ratify things. Any theologians or saints and their works might be presented and evaluated by the council whether it is a local or ecumenical. And then the result will be distributed to the priest. The priest will teach the laity of it.

In Islam, it seems like there is this kind of hierarchy or scheme. So, there is no council unless maybe the king ask for it. There is no rebutal or refutation of a heresy or something ratified by a council. There is no chain of authority so that the laity can universally be taught, understand, and practice the results. It is not so uniformed or maybe coordinated and centralized. What you can do is maybe hoping that everyone in the same denomination will do the same and do not practice any heresies that is maybe new, unknowingly. Which can change the 'faith' and their denomination.

But in a school, university, or madrasahs, usually things are more centralized and uniformed. So, all you can do is teaching those who come into madrasahs and hope that everyone of them will keep the faith of the people. And maybe some ulamas do have correspondence or contact with each other in a certain way. So, yeah. Not optimum but still doable.