Extremist Theology And ‘Otherisation’ Rhetoric Breed Sectarianism In The Muslim World; India Too Suffers From This Cancer
By
Grace Mubashir, New Age Islam
6 May 2024
The Current
Sectarian Conflicts In The Middle East And South Asia Are Caused By
Geopolitical Rivalries That Are Heating Up Again. These Rivalries Are Closely
Connected To The Way Islamic Political Theology Is Interpreted Theologically. A
Strong Theological Idea Called "Othering Theology" Supports The
Exclusive View That Is Common In The Region's Political, Social, And Religious
Spheres. The Ideas Of Well-Known Classical Theologians Who Helped Shape This
View Of Faith Are Looked At In This Article, Along With The History Texts That
These Theologians Used To Support Their Points Of View.
Main
Points:
1.
Islamism has employed the rhetoric of
'othering' to justify its ideology, particularly in delineating who qualify as
true believers and who falls outside that category
2.
Salafi sectarianism has also made inroads into
India, albeit with some complexities due to the country's diverse religious
landscape and historical context
3.
The exclusivist mindset, prevalent in movements
such as Wahhabism and Salafism, manifests in considering manifestations of the
faith as false and illegitimate
4.
The discourse of 'othering' is integral to
puritanical movements, notably championed with violence by groups like IS in
Iraq
5.
Understanding how these theological frameworks
affect modern debates is important for understanding and maybe even ending the
conflicts in the area.
-------
Islamism
has employed the rhetoric of 'othering' to justify its ideology, particularly
in delineating who qualifies as true believers and who falls outside that
category. Advocates of Islamism, such as the Islamic State (IS), formerly known
as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), often portray the world in
binary terms—a core of true believers surrounded by disbelief.
Salafi
sectarianism has also made inroads into India, albeit with some complexities
due to the country's diverse religious landscape and historical context.
Salafism in India is primarily associated with the Ahl-e-Hadith movement, which
emerged in the 19th century as a response to British colonialism and the
perceived cultural and religious influences it brought.
The
Ahl-e-Hadith movement in India, influenced by Salafi ideology, emphasizes a
strict adherence to the Quran and Hadith, rejecting many traditional practices
and interpretations within Sunni Islam. This movement gained traction,
particularly in regions like northern India, where scholars like Siddiq Hasan
Khan and Shibli Nomani played significant roles in its development.
In
contemporary India, Salafi sectarianism manifests itself through various
channels, including mosques, educational institutions, and media outlets that
propagate Salafi interpretations of Islam. While still a minority within the
larger Muslim community, Salafism has attracted followers who are drawn to its
emphasis on purity of faith and rejection of what it perceives as Bid’ah
(innovation) in religious practices.
However,
Salafi sectarianism in India faces challenges due to the country's pluralistic
society and the presence of other Islamic sects, such as Sunni and Shia
Muslims, who adhere to different theological interpretations. Additionally,
India's secular constitution and the government's efforts to maintain religious
harmony pose constraints on overtly sectarian activities.
Furthermore,
the Ahl-e-Hadith movement in India has historically distanced itself from
political activism, focusing instead on religious revivalism and educational
initiatives. However, there have been instances where Salafi groups in India
have been accused of promoting divisive ideologies or engaging in extremist
activities, although such incidents are relatively rare compared to other parts
of the world.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Also Read: Indian Muslim
'Leadership' and Role of Ulema in Ghettoisation of Muslims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The
emergence of modern Islamism in the 1970s and 1980s witnessed a surge in
violence, not only targeting non-Muslims but also directed at Muslim rulers
perceived as betraying the faith by aligning with disbelief. Sayyid Qutb
(1906-1966) played a significant role in shaping this mindset, providing a conceptual
framework that labelled Muslim rulers as unbelievers due to their perceived
neglect of Islamizing society and the state.
Qutb's
comparison of contemporary governments to the pre-Islamic rulers of the ‘Jahiliyyah’
period (the era of ignorance) justified the notion of jihad within
Muslim-majority states and sanctioned violence against Muslim political
leaders. The assassination of President Anwar Sadat in 1981 by the Egyptian
Islamic Jihad marked a significant turning point in the modern era, as Islamist
violence began targeting Muslim leaders for their perceived betrayal of the
faith.
The
exclusivist mindset, prevalent in movements such as Wahhabism and Salafism,
manifests in considering manifestations of the faith as false and illegitimate.
These movements advocate for the purification of Islam by urging believers to
return to its true origins, namely the Quran and the Sunnah. This purification
entails safeguarding Islam and Muslims from what is perceived as the
'corruption' of modernity and from innovations that could detract from the
focus on faith.
Wahhabism
and Salafism represent puritanical movements deeply committed to preserving
Islam in its pristine form as practised during the time of the Prophet
Muhammad, before alleged dilution, distortion, and corruption occurred over
time. Central to their ideology is the endeavour to rescue Islam from what they
view as false interpretations, exposing and discrediting those who deviate from
the true path of Islam.
The
discourse of 'othering' is integral to puritanical movements, notably
championed with violence by groups like IS in Iraq. The assertion of
exclusivity regarding the truth is not a recent development. Throughout
history, Muslim scholars have debated vigorously on the delineation between
faith (Iman) and disbelief (Kufr), and consequently, between believers and
non-believers. This discussion has led scholars to label individuals and groups
as either belonging to the community of faith or falling into disbelief, thus
promoting the discourse of 'othering' that remains prominent in contemporary
Islamist literature.
Early
Trends
The
Khawarij, identified as the first sect of Islam, emerged amidst internal strife
within the Muslim community. Characterized by their puritanical stance and
rallying cry of 'there is no rule but the rule of God' (La Hukma Ilia Lillah),
they opposed both contenders for leadership: Ali ibn Abi Talib (599-661) and
Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan (602-680). In the eyes of the Khawarij, the majority of
Muslims had strayed from the true path. They believed themselves to be the sole
custodians of authentic Islam and deemed it their religious obligation to
propagate it.
The
Khawarij labelled those who disagreed with them as apostates, justifying their
execution. Though short-lived in Islamic history, their radical views and
actions, which diverged from mainstream Islamic discourse, led to their
elimination during the early Abbasid era. However, their legacy endured,
particularly through the tradition of Takfir, the charge of unbelief levelled against
fellow Muslims. This othering rhetoric of the Khawarij persists in contemporary
radical movements, making their ideology relevant today.
Within
Sunni Islam, scholars from the Hanbali School have notably relied on othering
discourse. Taqi ad-Din Ahmad ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328), a prominent Hanbali
theologian and jurist, expanded the scope of what constituted disbelief. He
held deeply antagonistic views toward other Abrahamic religions, particularly
Christianity and Judaism, and was equally critical of sectarian divisions
within Islam. Ibn Taymiyya argued that renegades claiming to be Muslim were
more misguided than adherents of other faiths. Central to his intellectual
project was the call for Muslim reunification through adherence to the beliefs
and practices of the Salaf us-Saalih, the first three generations of Muslims.
Unlike
other scholars, Ibn Taymiyya emphasized the significance of both belief and
practice, considering the mere declaration of faith insufficient. He identified
a range of practices that, if denied, could lead to accusations of apostasy,
such as rejecting the obligation of daily prayers, almsgiving, and fasting
during Ramadan. Denial of prohibitions like adultery and usury, despite being
considered practical issues within Islamic law, similarly resulted in charges
of unbelief. This broad interpretation distinguished Ibn Tamiya’s approach,
making him a significant figure in the development of exclusivist rhetoric in
medieval Islam and shaping discourse on faith and practice within the Muslim
world.
Ibn
Taymiyya wrote during the period of Mongol rule in Baghdad (1258-1335), a
political context that likely influenced his thinking. Despite the Mongol
rulers' conversion to Islam and the proclamation of the Shahada, Ibn Taymiyya
remained sceptical. He issued three controversial fatwas advocating revolt
against Mongol rule, adopting a distinct othering discourse to discredit both
Mongol rule in general and Ghazan Khan (1271-1304) in particular. This marked a
significant shift in Islamic political theology.
Classical
Islamic scholars across all four schools of jurisprudence traditionally avoided
endorsing revolt against incumbent rulers. Throughout Islamic history, jurists
were hesitant to provide religious justification for rebellion. For instance,
al-Ghazali (1058-1111), a highly influential Muslim thinker, did not view
revolt against a ruler as religiously sanctioned, advocating instead for
peaceful criticism to avoid upheaval. Similarly, Ahmad ibn Hanbal (died 855),
the founder of the Hanbali School, considered revolt against a ruler a sin and
emphasized obedience to the government.
Ibn
Tamiya’s writings departed significantly from this tradition. He not only
sanctioned revolt against a Muslim ruler deemed to have deviated from the true
path but also presented it as a religious duty. This theological stance provided
modern-day Islamists with a framework to confront incumbent governments. For
instance, Juhayman al-Otaybi (1936-1980) justified the seizure of the Grand
Mosque in 1979 by denouncing the perceived blasphemous practices of Saudi
rulers. Similarly, Muhammad abd al-Salam Faraj (1954-1982) labelled Anwar Sadat
an apostate, leading to Sadat's assassination. More recently, Abu Muhammad
al-Maqdisi highlighted the 'infidel nature' of the Saudi state, frequently
invoking Ibn Tamiya’s denunciation of Mongol rulers as precedent.
Later
Scholarship
Ibn
Tamiya’s rulings exerted significant influence on subsequent Islamic jurists,
particularly within the Hanbali school of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence. Among
these scholars was Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (1703-1792), who espoused a
puritanical interpretation of Islam and vehemently opposed any form of
innovation (bid'a) that he saw as deviating from and distorting the religion.
During his
studies in Medina and Iraq, Abd al-Wahhab was profoundly influenced by the
jurisprudential works of Ibn Taymiyya and his student Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya
(1292-1350). One could argue that Abd al-Wahhab sought to implement the
principles conceptualized by these two medieval scholars in his own practice
and teachings.
Abd
al-Wahhab significantly expanded the theological framework for the discourse of
'othering' and articulated the grounds for excommunicating Muslims who did not
adhere to his puritanical version of Islam. His alliance with Muhammad ibn
Saud, the tribal chief of Diriyah in 1744, merged religious and
political-military authority, providing Abd al-Wahhab with a rare opportunity
to implement and enforce his puritanical interpretation of Islam.
However,
the first Saudi state was short-lived, as the Ottoman Empire reclaimed lost
territories in the Arabian Peninsula in 1818. Abd al-Wahhab's theological
perspective harboured antagonism towards the Ottomans and competing tribal
chiefs. Despite losing political power when the Saud family was expelled from
the peninsula in the 19th century by the rival Al-Rashid tribe, the alliance
between the Saud and Wahhab families endured.
The
fortunes of the Wahhab family changed with Abdul Aziz ibn Saud's military
resurgence at the turn of the 20th century, leading to the defeat of rival
tribes and the eventual formation of the modern-day Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in
1933. The discovery of oil in 1938 endowed the new state with immense wealth
and enabled it to assert itself as the custodian of Mecca and Medina.
Abd
al-Wahhab's teachings became the official version of Islam in Saudi Arabia,
giving rise to a codified interpretation known as Wahhabism. Othering became a
central component of Wahhabism, particularly evident in its endeavour to purify
Islam from perceived deviations. Abd al-Wahhab and his descendants, known as
Shaykhs, authored numerous books and treatises defining shirk (the sin of
idolatry).
Similar to
Ibn Taymiyya, Abd al-Wahhab's othering discourse was grounded in his narrow
conceptualization of Tawhid (the Oneness of God). For him, true Tawhid must be
expressed not only verbally but also internally and through actions. Merely
reciting the declaration of faith (the Shahada) was inadequate; one must
understand and consistently demonstrate the true meaning of Tawhid. Abd
al-Wahhab asserted that even minor distractions could lead a believer astray
from Tawhid, emphasizing that a true believer's thoughts and actions should be
governed by love for God above all else.
The concept
of absolute Tawhid as the defining feature of Islam led Abd al-Wahhab to argue
that there were various ways one could be categorized as an apostate. These
ranged from the denial of the oneness of God and engaging in polytheistic
practices to failure to take a stand against unbelievers or indulging in
sorcery. Abd al-Wahhab condemned a broad spectrum of shirk (polytheism) evident
in the practices of many Muslims, suggesting that a significant portion of
professed Muslims of his time could be considered apostates. Consequently, he
asserted that it was incumbent upon Wahhabi Muslims to fight against all others
until they embraced Islam.
This
discourse established a stark dichotomy between the Saudi Wahhabi
politico-religious entity and 'others', encompassing not only Christians, Jews,
and Shias but also Sunnis, including Wahhabis who, for instance, accepted
military aid from non-Muslims or lived under the rule of adversaries. While Abd
al-Wahhab's initial concern might have been the purification of the Arabian
Peninsula, the political ambitions of the Saud family brought the Wahhab-Saud
alliance into direct conflict with the Ottoman Empire. This confrontation
profoundly influenced the theological outlook of Wahhabi scholars, as ongoing
hostilities with competing powers in the Arabian Peninsula reinforced the
othering of the external world as a core tenet of Wahhabism.
The
conflict with the Ottoman Empire over centuries left a lasting imprint on
Wahhabi othering discourse. Abd al-Wahhab's descendants not only excommunicated
the Ottomans as apostates but also denounced those who supported or consented
to Ottoman rule as apostates. Sulayman Ibn Abdullah Al al-Shaykh (1785-1818),
Abd al-Wahhabi’s grandson, notably expanded upon his grandfather's othering
discourse. Sulayman broadened the circle of disbelief (Kufr) to encompass all
Muslims except Wahhabis and explicitly labelled specific Muslim groups as
apostates.
Sulayman's
actions, particularly the capture of Medina, Mecca, and Taif in 1802-1803,
provided the Wahhabis with an opportunity to impose their puritanical vision on
a larger scale. As the leading Wahhabi scholar of his time, Sulayman demanded
the allegiance of Mecca's Ulama to the Wahhabi school. When met with
resistance, he declared all those who did not adhere to Wahhabi beliefs as
heretics. Ultimately, Sulayman extended the label of apostasy to most Muslims,
stating that anyone who aided idolaters (Ottomans) or feigned agreement with
them, even out of fear, was considered an apostate.
Expressing
concern over the increasing number of defections from Wahhabism, Sulayman
authored an influential treatise consisting of a general discussion supported
by 21 Quranic-based texts as evidence. In this work, he denounced many Muslims
of his time as unbelievers.
Another
significant text by Sulayman addressed the issue of travelling to Ottoman territories.
Titled 'On the Rule Governing Travel to the Land of Idolatry and Residence
there for Trade and Showing Signs of Hypocrisy and Friendship with the
Ottomans,' this treatise argued against travelling to Ottoman lands,
highlighting the dangers of hypocrisy and fostering friendly relations with
non-Wahhabi Muslims.
Concluding
Remarks
Portraying
not only apostates but also other Sunni groups as outside the community of
belief due to perceived inadequacy in meeting jihadi standards has become a
common practice among contemporary scholars and ideologues. For instance, Abu
Muhammad al-Maqdisi, a Jordanian Palestinian scholar, argues that those who
submit to idolatry themselves become idolaters. This line of thinking has led
to the condemnation of Salafi groups such as the Muslim Clerics Association and
the Iraqi Islamic Party. Similarly, Zarqawi used a similar argument to label
Shias in Iraq as apostates, justifying attacks not only on Shiite leaders but
also on Shia civilians, whom he viewed as collaborators with the enemy. Zarqawi
accused Shias of spying on Muslim fighters and cited scholars like Sheikh Ali
Al-Khudhair, who categorizes all Shias as unbelievers.
These
contemporary scholars and ideologues actively cultivate an exclusivist
discourse relying heavily on classical articulations of othering rhetoric in
Islamic political discourse. These historical trends of othering are evident in
physical conflicts like the ongoing internal strife among radical groups in
Iraq and Syria, mirroring conflicts like the Ikhwan and Saudi-Wahhabi conflicts
of the early 20th century. Moreover, jihadi groups increasingly use labels like
Mushrikeen (polytheists) and Murtadeen (apostates) to justify
attacks on various sects and groups of Muslims as unbelievers.
Ibn
Taymiyya and Abd al-Wahhab, as argued in this paper, were two prominent figures
whose theological articulations of 'the other' hold significant influence in
contemporary othering discourse among Sunni Islamists. Therefore, these
classical scholars occupy a central position in contemporary literature.
Once
othering becomes entrenched in politico-religious discourse, it permeates all
levels of society, becoming as much a bottom-up as a top-down process. Over
time, othering rhetoric has expanded beyond ideology to become a decisive
aspect of political, social, religious, and economic dynamics, fuelling hatred
at the societal level and potentially attracting new recruits to jihadi groups.
In Saudi Arabia, for instance, the educational curriculum denigrates all except
those adhering to Wahhabism. Reports indicate that Saudi textbooks have been
indoctrinating students with an ideology of religious hatred against
non-Muslims and Muslims who do not subscribe to the strict Wahhabi brand of
Islam. This othering discourse has now become pervasive in the Middle East and
South Asia, with groups like IS relying on it to spread messages of hatred and
turmoil throughout the region.
-----
A
regular columnist for NewAgeIslam.com, Mubashir V.P is a PhD scholar in Islamic
Studies at Jamia Millia Islamia and freelance journalist.
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism