• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

An Islamic Reformation?

a_majoor

Army.ca Legend
Inactive
Reaction score
35
Points
560
The idea of the need for an Islamic Reformation, or asking "why Islamic moderates don't speak out against extremism" may have been answered in part. This information and these links were passed to me today, it is significant that AFAIK there has been no reporting on this in the Western media, particularly not in any mainstream media that I am aware of.

http://defence.pk/threads/suuni-conference-2016-exculdes-saudi-qatari-clerics.447333/

Suuni conference 2016 exculdes Saudi/Qatari clerics
Discussion in 'Middle East & Africa' started by mohsen, Sep 2, 2016.

http://www.timesheadline.com/world/100-muslim-clerics-attend-sunni-conference-chechnya-3423.html

A Sunni Conference organized in Chechnya saw the presence of more than 100 Muslim clerics from all around the world to unite against Takfiri Terrorists.

Grozny, a city in Chechnya witnessed the assemblage of world renowned Sunni Muslim Clerics, who unanimously took a stand that the Takfiri Terrorists had nothing to do the with Sunni Sect of Islam.

The Conference was attended by clerics from various countries like Russia, Syria, Turkey, India, Britain, Lebanon, Egypt, South Africa and Jordan who were willing to step up their fight against Takfiri Terrorists.

some very famous figures like the Al Azhar grand Mufti were present in this conference.

All the clerics represented a strong stand against these terrorists and asserted that all Islamic scholars should make an effort to awaken the world about these terror groups who are using the name of religion for personal geopolitical agendas.

Ahmed Mohammed Tayyab, Head, Al-Azhar University, Egypt said at the conference that, “Terrorists and Islam have no relation whatsoever, instead these terrorists are inclined towards spreading a radical ideology among Muslims, so that Islam is misunderstood world over.”
-----------
yet the most important event in this conference which was severely boycotted by the Wahhabi and western media was excluding the Saudi and Qatari (wahhabi) clerics from this meeting. a very positive measure to cut the source of terrorism among the Muslims.

Source: http://defence.pk/threads/suuni-conference-2016-exculdes-saudi-qatari-clerics.447333/#ixzz4Ju5r0uLK

http://www.firstpost.com/world/islamic-conference-in-chechnya-why-sunnis-are-disassociating-themselves-from-salafists-2998018.html

Islamic conference in Chechnya: Why Sunnis are disassociating themselves from Salafists

The world’s premier pan-Arab daily newspaper, Asharq Al-Awsat, reported that an international Islamic conference was organised in Grozny, a city in Chechnya with more than 100 top Muslim clerics from all around the world. The agenda was to take an uncompromising stand against the growing Takfiri terrorism that is playing havoc across the world.

The globally renowned Sunni Islamic scholars and clergy unanimously took a stand that the Takfiri terrorists, who loudly claim to belong to 'Sunni' Islam, are not from among the Ahlus Sunnah (the Islamic terminology for the mainstream Sunni Muslims in the world).
Addressing the conference, leading Sufi Sunni scholar and the current Grand Imam of al-Azhar, Sheikh Ahmad al-Tayeb, defined what is meant by 'Ahlus Sunnah' or Sunnism.

He stated: “Ahluls Sunna wal Jama’ah are the Ash’arites or Muturidis (adherents of Abu Mansur al-Maturidi's systematic theology which is also identical to Imam Abu Hasan al-Ash'ari’s school of logical thought). In matters of belief, they are followers of any of the four schools of thought (Hanafi, Shaf’ai, Maliki or Hanbali) and are also the followers of pure Sufism in doctrines, manners and [spiritual] purification.”
This statement goes in Arabic as follows:

أهل السنة والجماعة هم الأشاعرة والماتريدية في الاعتقاد وأهل المذاهب الأربعة في الفقه، وأهل التصوف الصافي علما وأخلاقا وتزكية على طريقة سيد الطائفة الإمام الجنيد ومن سار على نهجه من أئمة الهدى

Having said that, Sheikh Ahmad al-Tayeb allegedly excluded the “Salafists” from the term of Ahluls Sunna (Sunnis) stating that Salafists –also known as Wahhabis – are not from among the Sunnis.

This was, probably the first time that the global Sunni Islamic scholars have disassociated themselves so clearly from the Salafists, who also claim to be the Ahluls Sunna or ‘Sunnis’.

Though this report has not received the media attention it deserved, it should be caught up as one of the most underlying news emanating from the Muslim world.

Over 100 Islamic clerics from around the world, including India, have attended this anti-Takfirism Sunni conference in Chechnya. They concluded that Salafism/Wahhabism, the state religion of the Saudi Kingdom flourishing in almost all Muslim-populated courtiers because of the massive Saudi funding, is not the part of mainstream Sunni Islam.

Given the significance of this epoch-making conference, the participating religious leaders called the conference a “significant turning point to correct the treacherous and lethal deviation from the true definition of Ahlus Sunna, as a result of the extremists’ attempts to hijack this glorious epithet, misusing it for themselves.”

Senior scientists during the international Islamic conference in Chechnya. Twitter/@shkaboobackerSenior scientists during the international Islamic conference in Chechnya. Twitter/@shkaboobacker

Scores of Islamic leaders and clerics from various countries like Egypt, India, Russia, Syria, Turkey, Britain, Lebanon, Jordan and the South African countries, who attended this global Sunni conference, echoed in unison and spoke out against the Takfiri terror. They took a resolution to ‘awaken the world about the real terror outfits which are ‘using the name of religion for personal geopolitical agendas’.

Shaikh Muhammad Saad al-Azhari, a moderate Egyptian Islamic scholar and professor at the al-Azhar University, who is the religious affairs consultant for the Egyptian president, also participated in this conference. He is widely known in the Arab world for his scholarly refutation of the extremist jihadist theology of IS, as eloquently done in his Arabic book entitled, Al Haqq al-Mubeen fi al-Radd ala Man Tala’aba bil Deen. In this book, he has come up with original and fresh ideas attempting to rebut the theology of modern jihadism and political Islamism.

He masterly critiqued Sayyid Qutub, the chief political islamist ideologue and his commentary on the Quran Fi Dilal al-Quran (In the shade of the Quran). The theocratic interpretations on this commentary have twisted Islamic doctrines to fan the fire of Takfirist terrorism.

Therefore, Dr al-Azhari has refuted the radical Islamist underpinnings such as Hakimiyyah (Allah’s governance),  jihadism (violent misuse of Jihad), Khilafat (Sharia regime), Al wala Wal bara (loyalty to Muslims and disavowal towards others), Dar-ul Harb and Dar-ul Islam (religious classification of non-Muslim countries) point by point.

Remarkably, a considerable number of Indian Sunni Islamic scholars were also seen in this anti-extremism Islamic conclave. For instance, South Indian Sufi Sunni leader, Sheikh Abu Bakr Ahmad, who runs the largest Islamic seminary in Kerala – Jamia Markaz Saqafa Sunniya, and Shaikh Anwar Ahmad al-Baghdadi who teaches at a leading North Indian madrasa Jamia Alimia in UP were there to articulate an Islamic narrative of peace and counter-terror.

The mainstream Indian Sunni scholars have recently begun to refute the literature that has been compiled and disseminated in the country with a view to indoctrinating the radical Wahhabi ideology among Indian Muslim masses, particularly in Kashmir.

In India, the Wahhabi version of Islam, underpinned by Ibn Taimiya’s Minhaj al-Sunnah and Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s Kitab al-Tawheed, still has to be confronted in a consistent and coherent way.  It took roots in the country when the earliest Salfism-inspired Indian clerics like Syed Ahmad ‘Shaheed’ Rai Barelwi and Maulana Ismail Dehlawi wrote books such as Taqweatul Imaan (strengthening the Islamic faith) and Sirat-e-Mustaqeem (the straight path). In these books, the term ‘jihad’ which actually elucidates an inner struggle to attain salvation was misconstrued, for the first time in India, as the strait path to the rebellion, separatism and wanton killing of the ‘infidels’.

Since the leading Islamic scholars of al-Azhar University have excluded the Salafists from the true adherents of Sunni Islam, it has inevitably caused an uproar among the Saudi Salafist clergy. Agitated reactions continue within the Salafist clerical circle in Saudi Arabia in a bid to oppose the Sunni conference hosted by the Chechen capital, Grozny.

In its report on the issue, the Arabic-language daily Ray al-Youm has told that that the Sunni conference has created a storm of anger among pro-government clerics in Saudi Arabia.

According to the report, several Saudi clerics accuse the Sunni-oriented conference of being an attempt by the Russian government to deepen the gap between Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

“It is not prudent to ignite crises and trigger misadventures of political nature, as well as intellectual affiliations and sloganeering, to demonize the Muslims and thereby widening divisions,” the council said in a statement carried by the official Saudi Press Agency.
Notably, the Sunni leaders of the Chechnya conference have recommended the establishment of a national television channel, at the level of Russia, whose objective would be to “communicate the true image of Islam.”

It is interesting to note that the same Islamist discourse is playing out in India too. It is this very Salafist concern that several Islamist leaders in India expressed when the World Sufi Forum was held in New Delhi. They painted it as the Indian government’s effort to frame Sufism as a force opposing Wahhabism/Salafism, though India has averred to combat the religious extremism per se. However, the World Sufi Forum’s participants seemed more enthusiastic about promoting Sufism as a way of supporting inclusive democracy and pluralism rather than Muslim sectarianism.

As an earlier article on Firstpost noted that Sufis have come all out of their conclaves and hospices to fight back the evils of ideological extremism stemming from the hardcore philosophies in the name of Islam. But the anti-Sufism elements and new movements of extremism in the Indian Muslim society are misleading the nation. They disparage every anti-extremism Sufi practitioner as “pseudo-Sufi”.

The author is a scholar of Comparative Religion, Classical Arabic and Islamic sciences, cultural analyst and researcher in Media and Communication Studies. Views are personal. He tweets at @GRDehlvi. Email: grdehlavi@gmail.com
 
There is the possibility that they are going through a Reformation, so to speak, and it is not going in the direction we hoped.  Can we even set the timeline straight as to the current problems in the Islamic world? 
 
George Wallace said:
There is the possibility that they are going through a Reformation, so to speak, and it is not going in the direction we hoped.  Can we even set the timeline straight as to the current problems in the Islamic world?


Very true, and lets not forget that our reformation took over 200 years to accomplish and it was a simpler thing than that which faces the world's Muslims.

Our, Western Christian reformation (Christendom had already split into East and West) had many "threads," many of which have never quite come together, but it was, I believe it is fair to say, an essential foundation of the enlightenment, which was actually far more important and which is what some Muslim societies really need if they are even going to survive past the 21st century.
 
George Wallace said:
There is the possibility that they are going through a Reformation, so to speak, and it is not going in the direction we hoped.  Can we even set the timeline straight as to the current problems in the Islamic world?

"we", the west, have limited to no ability to set any timeline straight within a different culture as the last 15 years in Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated. Same as how the 30 year war and reformation of christianity couldn't be influenced by the Ottoman Empire, the muslim world needs to sort out it's issue and come to their own outcome, whether we like it or not.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
Very true, and lets not forget that our reformation took over 200 years to accomplish and it was a simpler thing than that which faces the world's Muslims.

Our, Western Christian reformation (Christendom had already split into East and West) had many "threads," many of which have never quite come together, but it was, I believe it is fair to say, an essential foundation of the enlightenment, which was actually far more important and which is what some Muslim societies really need if they are even going to survive past the 21st century.

What do you mean "it took"?  Is it finished?

http://www.redeemer-canrc.ca/history

The reformed reformers reforming.

 
Of course this is an evolutionary process, but for high ranking Islamic scholars to come together like this is an important public first step.

One thing which has become clear to me is that Islam, much like Judaism isn't run by theological arguments and interpretation as by legal interpretations (similar in intent to Jewish Talmudic and rabbinic law). So it isn't as "easy" as having the Pope deliver a Papal encyclical or hearing a pronouncement by the Archbishop of Canterbury or the seven ecumenical councils of the Orthodox Church. Regardless, this provides the majority of Shia Muslims with a legitimate means of countering radicalism, and should be welcomed by all of us as well.
 
Yasi Qadhi FB said:
Sadly, sectarianism is still well and alive in the Ummah.

Recently, a large group of scholars, primarily of a Sufi/Ashari trend, gathered in Chechnya for a conference whose pre-planned and coordinated conclusion was to claim that Atharis (or 'Salafis') were not a part of Sunni Islam, and hence were to be considered a heretical school. The fact that this conference was sponsored and planned by some of the most repressive government regimes in the world, for political purposes, and with a sectarian agenda, and indirectly supported by Western powers, was ignored by followers of that strand of Islam as the conference reached its foregone conclusion, simply because some of their own esteemed figures, such as Habib Ali al-Jifry, were involved in and in charge of organizing it. Narry a word of protest was heard against this shameless debacle of a conference by mainstream, moderate followers of that trend.

Love makes one blind to one's beloved's faults.

Not to be outdone, recently the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, as a result of comments of a political nature, criticized the Shi'ites as being 'sons of fire-worshippers' (in reference to their Zoroastrian heritage) and effectively excommunicated the entire mass of them from Islam. Again, the realization that regional powers are actually being played against one another by super-powers who have a vested interested in seeing an intra-Muslim civil war (in this case, America on the one side and Russia on the other, and Saudi Arabia and Iran as regional proxies), and the simple grasp that such ancient theological disputes are only being made relevant due to modern political struggles, is completely lost on those who issue, or support, such statements. 

Meanwhile, as some followers continue to cheer such rhetoric and blindly defend it, millions of Muslims around the world continue to live in the most unimaginable of circumstances. And even as these clerics issue their fatwas from the comforts of their stable lives, it is the innocent and helpless men, women and children, of Syria, of Yemen, of Iraq (and others...) who suffer as a result of the policies of power-intoxicated Western and Russian backed politicians being supported by the zealousness and short-sidedness and political naïveté of religious fundamentalist clerics. 

Yes, I'm angry and frustrated at the situation in the Muslim world. And so should you be as well.

Sallim, Allahumma sallim....

Yasir Qadhi said:
For the record, my stance on both issues is as follows:
I believe Atharism and Ash'arism are all within the fold of Sunni Islam, and I also believe that the differences between these strands and other Sunni strands should NEVER lead to animosity and hatred. Rather, tensions should be minimized and the average Sunni has no need or concern worrying about the advanced issues of theology that these groups differ over. Let those who deal with those issues discuss it at the proper level amongst themselves. Especially in this day and age, the Muslim world has far more pertinent concerns.

And I believe that Sunni theology is the valid and correct one, and that Shi'ism has beliefs that are wrong and misguided. Sunnism and Shi'ism have been separate and distinct for the last thirteen centuries, and it is naive to speak of 'unity' between them, for our differences are too many and too important to ignore. Nonetheless, Sunnis and Shi'ites should 'live and let live' and not resort to violence or killing, as that is impermissible. Debate and dialogue is necessary; blanket excommunication and physical harm is impermissible. And I also follow the mainstream Sunni position regarding Twelver Shi'ism: that they are from the groups within Islam that have deviated in some principles from the truth. I strenuously disagree with those who consider the entire group outside the fold of Islam, and in fact this is a very small and minority position (historically speaking) of the mainstream body of Sunnis.

So from my understanding and from what some of my Salafi friends.. who are not terrorists will take from this... all salafis are now kafr and these scholars have now become takfiris. Takfiris go around claiming people are no longer Muslim, like these people just did... at least from what I understood from the links.

I respect anyone trying to help Islam... but sometimes when you try you fail. I am extremely skeptical of any benefits this may have... and I am extremely critical of Salafis... but to kall them kafr scares me.

I just got back from hunting, ill review in more detail later. Thanks for sharing thucydides.

Abdullah
 
Chris Pook said:
What do you mean "it took"?  Is it finished?

That's why I mentioned the "many "threads, many of which have never quite come together." When our (Western Christian) reformation was done, and I think 1688 (only coincidentally the year of the Glorious Revolution)  is a good year to say that it was so complete as to make the seemingly endless inter-sectarian squabbles amongst Christian sects almost meaningless (except, of course, for the few hundred the true believes (per squabble) for whom they are quite vital). We, the Anglo-French led, end of the renaissance, West barely had a moment to catch our philosophical breaths when John Locke wrote Two Treatises of Government, in 1869, and David Hume wrote A Treatise of Human Nature in 1739, and, thereby, launched on a 100+ years of the tumultuous enlightenment.

So, yes, it's done, for all reasonable intents and purposes and it was done 300 years ago. Yes some people are still arguing but go to any officers' mess bar on a Friday afternoon and you'll hear even older, and just as "done," battles being refought by 21st century partisans.


The reformed reformers reforming.
 
I just wanted to explain my position a little better.. just so no one can think I sympathize with the terrorist pigs at all.

In Islam their is very strict requirements for calling a person a non-believer and if you call someone a non-believer when he is actually a believer you render yourself outside the fold of Islam. As shown in this hadith;

Mohammad sws said:
If a Muslim calls another kafir, then if he is a kafir let it be so; otherwise, he [the caller] is himself a kafir.'' (Abu Dawud, Book of Sunna, edition published by Quran Mahal, Karachi, vol. iii, p. 484)

Now the religious requirements to call the person a kafr... ill use links here, it is simply to much to post.. it is an extremely, extremely dangerous topic.

https://islamqa.info/en/85102

A seven page pdf file
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/downloads/pdf/MNJ090006.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj1tInou4vPAhXJmR4KHcUJBagQFgghMAE&usg=AFQjCNF_XTWi8QYi6Wsx8h1zbxWxo4iqZQ&sig2=hvKOo51KJhCKYaQ-tr6Qnw

And now a fairly extensive read up on Salafi Islam, from someone who used to be a salafi and is critical of their viewpoint.
http://muslimmatters.org/2014/04/22/on-salafi-islam-dr-yasir-qadhi/

Now Mufti Aasim Rashid, has himself, called these daesh pigs kafr's I was listening to him lecture in person maybe about two years ago. So due to the reasons he stated, such as the wholesale slaughter of innocents etc, I also follow his opinion they are in particular kafrs. But! Neither him, at least not that I heard of nor I, consider all Salafi's Kafr. You can watch videos by Mufti Aasim at this link;

http://lectures.ihsan.ca

I have zero doubts some percentage of Salafis are kafr, but to call them all kafr is an extremely unwise move in my opinion. Not only are they risking their own hereafter, but they are expanding the divide between Muslims even more. Albeit sadly it was predicted, but that is another topic falling under prophecy ;)

So I do appreciate the effort these guys put out, honestly and truely and yes it can be said certain Muslims need reformation. But not all of us do, at least in my opinion and to start this way seems to be getting off on the wrong foot... but then again, I have not done that Much either so who am I to judge. Maybe they are right... but until I am shown the error of my ways, I will believe the extremists to be kafr and everyone else, however misguided to be Muslim.

Abdullah
 
Since I am not an Iman or scholar, I'm not going to be able to debate this in a meaningful way. What is apparent to me, anyway, is that a cross section of Islamic scholars and Imans with the knowledge and authority to do so have interpreted Islamic law to "excommunicate" the more violent and extremist elements in the Sunni fold. If they actually can do so or are wise to do so requires a level of knowledge and understanding that I do not possess (much like I'm not going to go head to head with His Holiness the Pope on his pronouncements either).

The first order effects which are important to both observant Muslims and non Muslims alike is that these scholars have effectively told their followers that the "law" does not support the interpretations of the radicals (who also claiming to follow a "legal" interpretation of Islam), and they now have a valid argument "in law" to repudiate the arguments the radicals are putting forward. The second order effects is to delegitimize Imans who preach radicalism, undercutting their basis of support and potentially cutting away their followers. Starving radicals of support and preventing them from increasing their foothold in the community. The third order effect is to answer the Western question "where are the moderates and why are they not speaking out against the radicals. One thing the radicals have tried to do (with some success) is to isolate the muslim community in Western nations and drive a wedge between the communities to provide a more fertile recruiting ground for radicalism.

So for the moment, we should be supporting this initiative, helping our friends against the radicals and leave the theological and Islamic law complexities to the experts.
 
Thucydides said:
Since I am not an Iman or scholar, I'm not going to be able to debate this in a meaningful way. What is apparent to me, anyway, is that a cross section of Islamic scholars and Imans with the knowledge and authority to do so have interpreted Islamic law to "excommunicate" the more violent and extremist elements in the Sunni fold. If they actually can do so or are wise to do so requires a level of knowledge and understanding that I do not possess (much like I'm not going to go head to head with His Holiness the Pope on his pronouncements either).

Thucydides, I have come to respect your view of this world and your insight into how it works. I also hope more people like you give out the insights they have.. so thank you.

I personally know of some of the scholars who attended that conference and the amount of knowledge they have is immense, so I am sure they have good reasons for unanimously voting to label Salafi's as outside the fold of ahlu'sunnah and without knowing their reasons for doing so I can not be definitive in my position I guess. But suffice to say I am extremely, extremely hesitant in accepting that particular fatawa, one of the Major reasons is because Salafi's are not all one monolithic evil ideology. Their are Salafi's who believe democracy is Islamic, that Jihad is not just the literal kind and many many other issues... so to label non violent salafis kafr makes me stop and listen.. closely.

But their could be something that has evolved in Salafi aqeedah as a whole that takes them outside the fold of Islam and if that is the case, I accept it completely, albeit sadly. Another such group already exists and they say they are Muslim and yet their beliefs take them outside the fold of Islam, so their is precedent for it too. But even if this ruling is right, I won't believe all salafis to be evil, corrupt, baby killers.. I will just believe some are ;)

The first order effects which are important to both observant Muslims and non Muslims alike is that these scholars have effectively told their followers that the "law" does not support the interpretations of the radicals (who also claiming to follow a "legal" interpretation of Islam), and they now have a valid argument "in law" to repudiate the arguments the radicals are putting forward. The second order effects is to delegitimize Imans who preach radicalism, undercutting their basis of support and potentially cutting away their followers. Starving radicals of support and preventing them from increasing their foothold in the community. The third order effect is to answer the Western question "where are the moderates and why are they not speaking out against the radicals. One thing the radicals have tried to do (with some success) is to isolate the muslim community in Western nations and drive a wedge between the communities to provide a more fertile recruiting ground for radicalism.

Deobandi's, Barelvi's, Athari's, Asha'ri's etc etc and all their attendant camps have already denounced the extremists and said Islamic law does not under any circumstances allow these grotesque acts the extremists do. But I do agree this is a larger more public step, which was definetly needed to be seen.. I am just critical of calling all Salafi's Kafr.

For all I care preachers (of any religion or ideology) who are preaching hate, calling for "followers" to kill innocent civilians, legitimizing the rape and enslavement of people, torture etc.. take them  out back and ***** them. So I can definetly say I am with you on your second order.

Yes it is sad that the third point exists, but it does so it needs to be dealt with. The more isolated Muslims become the more idiot preachers who are not worth anything have minds to prey on and corrupt. The solution seems simple, ie we all sing kumbaya together.. but it is very hard sadly.

So for the moment, we should be supporting this initiative, helping our friends against the radicals and leave the theological and Islamic law complexities to the experts.

The enemy of my enemy, is my friend. Daesh and all extremists are my enemies, anyone who is trying to fight them in whatever way they can have my support. But that doesn't mean I don't have my reservations. Yasir Qadhi is a very well known teacher and ex salafi, so in the Islamic world his words have weight and I have adopted parts of his opinion in this particular matter.

But you are 110% I have no more right or ability to debate these matters then you do. Let the Mufti's fight the theological battles and we can do something else while they hash it out.

Abdullah
 
Back
Top