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. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/islamic-society/extremist-theology-otherisation-rhetoric-sectarianism/d/132267 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