This freedom included interpreting the haditha into sharia, or Islamic law, but in the tenth century Sunni leaders declared the gates of knowledge closed, and the sharia complete. The Arabic empire still flourished, however, despite the persecution of various heresies including the mystical branch of Islam, Sufism. Strangely, religious tolerance was also ostensibly part of Muslim belief and practice in government, but apparently this did not extend to warping or blaspheming the Muslim religion itself. The Arab empire was eventually overrun by Mongols, but instead of ending Islamic rule this actually extended and complicated it.

The Mongols actually converted to Islam within decades of their entrance into Muslim territories, and political thinking that allowed one Muslim to kill another person claiming to be a Muslim was developed by a Muslim resistance leader....

Muslim leaders -- all Muslims, in fact -- should try to implement sharia, but the Mongols were not doing so, so their claim to be Muslims could be considered false. This logic is still used today in regards to many Muslim leaders by fundamentalists. In general, however, Muslim leaders since the time of Muhammad's death have reigned in the Middle East with a large degree of tolerance and acceptance. The image of Muslim leaders in the modern era that is often propagated in the West as despotic and theocratic seems unfair given a longer view of history. In fact, for their time period, it seems as though Muslim governments and leaders offered more freedom than many of the Christian and secular governments that existed around the same time. There was also a major emphasis on militarism within Muslim culture, often extending from the leaders, but this was also true of many other peoples.