Wahhabi Islam: From Revival and Reform to Global Jihad: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 157: Line 157:
Contrary to the association of IAW’s school of Islam with literalism and  mindless rote memorization, IAW declared `The key of knowledge is questions.`<ref name="DLB2004: 107">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 107</ref> He “insisted on establishing the context of particular verses" of the Quran or hadith “so as to avoid a literal interpretation,” found the emphasis on memorization in the religious sciences to be “problematic”,<ref name="DLB2004: 107-8" /> highlighted the importance of the intent and spirit behind the actions taken rather than the ritualism involved,<ref name="DLB2004: 115">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 115</ref>  and denounced literalist ulama  "for their ignorance,” and “rigidity.”<ref name="DLB2004: 117">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 117</ref>
Contrary to the association of IAW’s school of Islam with literalism and  mindless rote memorization, IAW declared `The key of knowledge is questions.`<ref name="DLB2004: 107">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 107</ref> He “insisted on establishing the context of particular verses" of the Quran or hadith “so as to avoid a literal interpretation,” found the emphasis on memorization in the religious sciences to be “problematic”,<ref name="DLB2004: 107-8" /> highlighted the importance of the intent and spirit behind the actions taken rather than the ritualism involved,<ref name="DLB2004: 115">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 115</ref>  and denounced literalist ulama  "for their ignorance,” and “rigidity.”<ref name="DLB2004: 117">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 117</ref>


Another claim of some critics—that IAW was a “blind” follower of jurist [[Ibn Taymiyya]]—is contradicted by the fact that only three of 170 citations in his work ''Kitab al-Tawhid'', refer to the works of Ibn Taymiyya.<ref name="DLB2004: 108">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 108</ref>{{#tag:ref|"When pressed to choose between rulings by [[Ibn Hanbal]] and Ibn Taymiyya", he declined to choose,  "preferring to return directly" to the Quran and Sunnah "to form his own scripturally based opinion."<ref name="DLB2004: 111">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 111</ref>|group=Note}}
Another claim of some critics—that IAW was a “blind” follower of jurist [[Ibn Taymiyyah]]—is contradicted by the fact that only three of 170 citations in his work ''Kitab al-Tawhid'', refer to the works of Ibn Taymiyya.<ref name="DLB2004: 108">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 108</ref>{{#tag:ref|"When pressed to choose between rulings by [[Ibn Hanbal]] and Ibn Taymiyya", he declined to choose,  "preferring to return directly" to the Quran and Sunnah "to form his own scripturally based opinion."<ref name="DLB2004: 111">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 111</ref>|group=Note}}


Ibn Abd al-Wahhab never directly claimed to be a Hanbali jurist, warned his followers about the dangers of adhering unquestionably to fiqh, and did not consider “the opinion of any law school to be binding.”<ref name="DLB2004: 112-3">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 112-3</ref>  He did, however,  follow the Hanbali methodology of extreme conservatism in interpretation of the Sharia.<ref name="DLB2004: 112-3" />
Ibn Abd al-Wahhab never directly claimed to be a Hanbali jurist, warned his followers about the dangers of adhering unquestionably to fiqh, and did not consider “the opinion of any law school to be binding.”<ref name="DLB2004: 112-3">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 112-3</ref>  He did, however,  follow the Hanbali methodology of extreme conservatism in interpretation of the Sharia.<ref name="DLB2004: 112-3" />
Line 313: Line 313:
*The status and power of religious leaders of his era were threatened by IAW's preaching that all Muslims had the "right and the responsibility to encounter and study the Quran and hadith." They responded by smearing his teachings as violent and intolerant.<ref name="DLB2004: 243">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 243</ref>
*The status and power of religious leaders of his era were threatened by IAW's preaching that all Muslims had the "right and the responsibility to encounter and study the Quran and hadith." They responded by smearing his teachings as violent and intolerant.<ref name="DLB2004: 243">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 243</ref>
*[[Muhammad bin Saud]]'s son and successor as [[emir]] -- [[Abdul-Aziz bin Muhammad]]—departed from Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's teachings, adapting a `convert or die` policy towards conquered subjects, "for the express purpose of acquiring wealth and property".<ref name="DLB2004: 245">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 245</ref>
*[[Muhammad bin Saud]]'s son and successor as [[emir]] -- [[Abdul-Aziz bin Muhammad]]—departed from Ibn Abd al-Wahhab's teachings, adapting a `convert or die` policy towards conquered subjects, "for the express purpose of acquiring wealth and property".<ref name="DLB2004: 245">[[#DLB2004|DeLong-Bas, ''Wahhabi Islam'', 2004]]: 245</ref>
*Also in the 19th century, Wahhabis adapted the ideology of [[Ibn Taymiyya]], who called for "jihad against anyone who refused to abide by [[Sharia|Islamic law]] or revolted against the true Muslim authorities" on the grounds that such people were not true Muslims.  Wahhabis embraced Ibn Taymiyyah (according to DeLong-Bas) because they badly wanted to evict the [[Sharif]] rulers of the two holy cities in [[Hijaz]], and to rule Mecca and Medina themselves in a more righteous manner.  The sharifs were—according to some contemporary observers—greedy, religiously slack, unjust, and incompetent in protecting hajji pilgrims from bandits,  but were also Muslims, and waging war against other Muslims was forbidden in Islam.  [[Ibn Taymiyya]]'s belief provided a work-around by allowed Wahhabis to declare the Sharifs unbelievers. Wahhabis went on to drive the sharifs from Hijaz and to accept other beliefs of Ibn Taymiyya different from those of IAW, such as  
*Also in the 19th century, Wahhabis adapted the ideology of [[Ibn Taymiyyah]], who called for "jihad against anyone who refused to abide by [[Sharia|Islamic law]] or revolted against the true Muslim authorities" on the grounds that such people were not true Muslims.  Wahhabis embraced Ibn Taymiyyah (according to DeLong-Bas) because they badly wanted to evict the [[Sharif]] rulers of the two holy cities in [[Hijaz]], and to rule Mecca and Medina themselves in a more righteous manner.  The sharifs were—according to some contemporary observers—greedy, religiously slack, unjust, and incompetent in protecting hajji pilgrims from bandits,  but were also Muslims, and waging war against other Muslims was forbidden in Islam.  [[Ibn Taymiyyah]]'s belief provided a work-around by allowed Wahhabis to declare the Sharifs unbelievers. Wahhabis went on to drive the sharifs from Hijaz and to accept other beliefs of Ibn Taymiyya different from those of IAW, such as  
**a strict division of the world into opposing realms of ''dar al-kufr'' and ''dar al-Islam'';
**a strict division of the world into opposing realms of ''dar al-kufr'' and ''dar al-Islam'';
**a "far more extremist approach to the questions of violence and killing than did Ibn Abd al-Wahahb";
**a "far more extremist approach to the questions of violence and killing than did Ibn Abd al-Wahahb";
Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,633

edits

Navigation menu