MUMINUN ISLAM Directory  - Listing Details
ScreenshotsPreview by



What is Salafi Islam?
What exactly is 'Salafism'? In the absence of a unanimously agreed upon definition, I propose to elucidate the modern Salafi phenomena via an outline of its beginnings, an assessment of its particular characteristics, manifestations of it in various contemporary groups, and a discussion of its positive and not so positive contributions to Islam and our global society.
Within the context of our modern World, or to be more precise over the last half a century, the term 'Salafi' has come to designate an Islamic methodology, the aspirational objective of which is the emulation of the Prophetic example via the practices and beliefs of the earliest generations of Islam. This is because the first three Islamic generations, in being closest to the era of Mu?ammad ?allallahu 'alayhi wa sallam (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the period of revelation, are understood to best embody the Prophetic Sunnah, and thus a pristine Islam.
Inasmuch as the term refers to a methodology, it would be fair to say that it does not specify any one particular or distinct community or group of believers. The generic nature of this term is further illustrated by the fact that more than a dozen distinct groups either identify themselves as Salafi, in that they believe themselves to be on the Salafi manhaj (methodology), or they do not object to the term being ascribed to them even if they themselves do not use it. Whilst saying this however, it is worth noting that every one of these groups considers the correct application of the term exclusive to itself, alleging that all other claimants are not representative of 'true Salafism'. This being the case, an outline of the various points of agreement and disagreement amongst the multiple strands of Salafi Islam is a prerequisite to a comprehensive understanding of 'Salafism'.
1.1 Points of consensus among Salafi movements
There are some general characteristics that are present in all manifestations of Salafism, without exception. In particular:
1)    they consider themselves alone as correctly espousing the teachings and beliefs of the salaf al-?ali?. In particular, they affirm the theological creed that was narrated from them (typically called the 'athari' creed')
2)    they categorically reject any possibility of metaphoric or symbolic interpretation of the Divine Names and Attributes (taw?id al-asma? wa'l-?ifat), a hallmark of the sects such as the Mu?tazilah and the Asha?irah
3)    they absolutely affirm God's exclusive right to be worshipped (taw?id al-uluhiyyah) and refute anything that may compromise this directly, or lead to its being compromised. Hence, syncretic practices of certain Sufis (e.g., extreme saint veneration, intercession of the dead, etc.) are condemned.
4)     they oppose all reprehensible innovations (bid?a) and  dissociate from those who ascribe to them (ahl al-bid?ah). There is especially staunch opposition to Shi?ism, particularly because of the Shi?ite doctrine of dissociating from most of the Companions.
5)    they respect and take recourse to the legal and theological opinions of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328). It is important to note, however, that Ibn Taymiyya cannot, and is not, considered a progenitor for the modern Salafi movement, as they view themselves as having no one single founder after the Prophet Mu?ammad ?allallahu 'alayhi wa sallam (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
1.2 Points of contention among Salafi groups
While there is general agreement on the above, there are numerous issues in which disagreement abounds, and each point of contention is manifested in a spectrum of opinions. Foremost amongst these issues are:
Position with respect to the validity and necessity of following one of the jurisprudential schools (madhahib):
The numerous Salafi strands hold conflicting positions with regard to the ruling on adhering to a particular madhhab, so much so that it has been a source of tension amongst them.
a)  Impermissible: opposition to the canonization of the schools of law was historically a feature of the ?ahiri school (of Ibn ?azm, d. 456H). The modern revival of this 'anti-madhhab' trend can be traced back to Mu?ammad ?ayat al-Sindhi (d. 1163) who influenced al-?an?ani (d. 1182), al-Shawkani (d. 1250), ?iddiq ?asan Khan (d. 1307),[1] and, most recently, Na?ir al-Din al-Albani (d. 2000).  All of these individuals were decidedly anti-madhhabist.
b)  Discouraged but not invalid: some Salafi movements permit the lay person to follow a madhhab in times of necessity, obliging him to go with the dalil (stronger evidence) when it is made known to him. [2]
c)  Permissible: By and large, Sunni Islam has considered adherence to a madhhab recommended or obligatory for a lay Muslim, and this is also found in some strands of Salafi Islam. Mu?ammad b. ?Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206),[3] champion of the 'Najdi da'wah' was influenced by al-Sindhi in theology but remained a committed follower of the ?anbali school of law, considering the practice of Islam's rites and rituals within the paradigm of a madhhab to be both valid and praiseworthy.
Dissociation from ahl al-bid?a.
Theoretically all Salafis dissociate from religious innovations and those who adhere to and propagate them. However, the scope and method of how this dissociation is implemented at the practical level varies from group to group and from scholar to scholar.
Those with the strictest stance on this issue inevitably cast a wide net of 'guilt by association': if person B associates with known deviant A, then person B is declared deviant. If person C then associates with deviant B, now he too becomes a deviant, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. The unfortunate, though predictable, product of such disaffiliation and judgment is the precipitation of further division and splintering within this brand of the Salafi community.
This methodology is the defining group of the 'Madkhalis' (students of the Saudi Shaykh Rabi? bin Hadi al-Madkhali), who legitimise this practice by considering it an extension of the science of al-Jarh wa'l-ta?dil (the science of '?adith criticism' whereby ?adith specialists deem narrators to be reliable or not). While in recent years the popularity of the Madkhali strand has waned considerably, many non-Madkhali Salafis continue to adopt a hardline attitude on this point, refusing even to invite persons of different viewpoints to their conferences and gatherings.
However, some Salafi scholars and groups adopt a more lenient stance in this regard, and are willing to allow co-operation with some non-Salafi communities (for example, allowing cooperation with Deobandis, but not Shi?is).
Theological position on 'iman' (faith) and whether actions constitute a requisite part of iman or are subsidiary to it.
The discussion of iman and what it connotes is a relatively modern question, one that arose in the latter part of the 90s when Sh. al-Albani stated that he did not consider actions to be a necessary part of iman.[4] The standard Salafi position prior to this, and the explicit position of Ibn Taymiyya and the scholars affirming Athari theology, was that certain actions are a necessary requirement of faith and the absence of such actions contradicted the presence of iman.
The level of allegiance and obedience toward an Islamic ruler (?a?at wali al-amr), and the amount of political activism allowed.
This point is a vast and convoluted one, and perhaps the most obvious issue of disagreement to those outside of the movement. The levels of political activism and political dissent, and the necessity of allegiance and loyalty to the Muslim rulers, and the 'Islam' of an illegitimate ruler, are theological 'grey' areas that various Salafi scholars have attempted to negotiate in today's ever-volatile political climate. The positions can be summarized as follows:
a)  Criticizing a legitimate ruling authority is doctrinally prohibited tantamount to sin and deviation. Some Salafis, in particular the 'mainstream' Saudi Salafis and Madkhalis, are extremely pro-government.[5]
b)  Questioning and advising the ruling authority is an extension of al-amr bi'l-ma?ruf wa'l-nahy ?an al-munkar ('advising the good and forbidding evil'). Some Salafis view voicing opposition to government policy as a legitimate and necessary extension of the Islamic notion of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, and equate it with the Islamic principle of attempting to prevent an oppressor from committing his oppression. Examples of this are the ?a?wa scholars of Saudi Arabia, who will be discussed below.
c)  Questioning the legitimacy of all rulers of Muslim lands. There are some Salafi groups who consider all the rulers of Muslim lands (or: only those who do not rule by the Shari?ah), to be illegitimate and regard them as disbelievers, whose legitimacy should be contested, perhaps by force.[6]
The issue of takfir (deeming the belief of a Muslim to be invalid) and in particular takfir of the rulers who don't judge by the laws of the Shari?ah (al-?ukm bi ghayr ma anzal Allah).[7]
Once again, there is a spectrum of opinion[8]:
a)  rulers of Muslim lands who judge by secular laws are believers. Some scholars, such as the previous Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Shaykh ?Abd al-?Aziz b. Baz (d. 1999) and Shaykh al-Albani, held the view that a ruler who judged by secular laws is still a believer (unless certain conditions, difficult to verify, exist). They argued that this is a sin that does not in itself expel them from the fold of Islam.
b)  such rulers are treated as Muslim, and obeyed for the greater good of the community, but their action of ruling by other than Allah is major kufr. This is the view of many middle-of-the-road Salafis, such as Shaykh Mu?ammad b. Sali? al-?Uthaymin (d. 2001).
c)  rulers of Muslim lands who rule by secular laws have fallen into kufr, and their rule is illegitimate and their belief negated; hence allegiance to them is null and void. This group consists of the hard-liners, represented by figures like Abu Mu?ammad al-Maqdisi and Abu Mus?ab al-Suri, whose writings inspire the jihadist-Salafi movements, which leads us to our next point.
Position with respect to jihad. Whilst the majority of groups championing Salafism are pacifist, there are minority voices within the overall 'Salafi movement' who adopt a more 'militarist' position. They consider a military jihad a binding obligation, either on some segments of the Ummah, or on all eligible members of the Ummah. They focus on either or both of the following:
(i)  removing secular rulers from Muslim lands.
(ii)  maintaining perpetual conflict against non-Muslim governments that have militarily intervened in Muslim lands.
Typically, and understandably, the last three points (i.e., the question of ruling by other than Allah, challenging the belief of the Muslim non-Shar?i ruler, and the issue of jihad) are intrinsically interconnected. Those holding the harshest views on the legitimacy and belief of a ruler who judges by other than the law of God inevitably adopt the most radical position in pronouncing takfir and thus lay the foundations for necessitating military jihad.
Please read full article from the Sh. Yasir Qadhi

Meta Keywords:


Tell a friend
You must be logged in to leave a rating.
Average rating: (0 votes)

No Reviews Yet.

You must be logged in to leave a Comment.