heretics

previously i wrote of my explanation of the existance of differences of opinion WITHIN islam; and, the various ways in which islam is practiced by Muslims around the world. Some want a criteria which muslims can follow to determine HERETICAL SECTS (groups with Mis-understandings of the fundamental beliefs of Islam, like finality of prophethood, concept of tawhid, etc.) And once we are able to determine who the Heretics are, we can take action to ensure that they are not mistaken for TRUE ISLAM and then, prevent the emergence of new Heresies to protect these core beliefs from corruption. (i don't know what it is about determining and labeling others as Heretics, maybe it compensates for the insecurities in the minds of some muslims about their own beliefs, allah knows best.) Good News! THIS CRITERIA EXISTS! There are several books that describe it, "Islamic Creeds" by Montgomery Watt gives a selection of these criterias of the "core beliefs and their order of priority" that some muslims desire. it is called "aqida" literature, and one of its goals is to designate sects to be outside of Islam. also, the "core beliefs" some feel should not be violated are also refered to as the"usul" of islam. there is no need to reinvent the wheel. for centuries, among muslim scholars it has been understood that if anyone violates the "aqida" or crosses the boundries established by the "usul" they can be considered outside of ISLAM. ITS BEEN DONE, the teachings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and Nation of Islam were determined NOT ISLAM by the scholars after thay consulted the aqida literature. In fact Dr. Sherman Abd al Hakim Jackson's new book is about the issue of what the USUL boundries are, it's a translation of a work by Imam Ghazzali. Those who feel the need to label people heretic should BUY IT, READ IT, UNDERSTAND IT. theres no need to even struggle through the complicated process. the books are already out there. just search for "usul" or "aqeeda of Imam at-Tahawi." Now a problem is that eventhough we (sunni muslims) have had the criteria for centuries, it did not stop the emergence of the Nation of Islam in America and the Qadiani in India. How these groups come into existance is a lot more complicated than just them simply misunderstanding or lacking knowledge about the core beliefs (although this could be the major reason, i don't know). and when it comes some people's desire of "safe-guarding against their formation." i don't know what to say, except that i believe we must never FORCE anyone to follow even the "core beliefs". The most perfect recent examlple of an attempt to safe-gaurd is the arrogance and oppression by the taliban in Afghanistan or the wahhabi movement in saudi arabia and their desire in the late 1700's to cleanse Arabia of what THEY DESIGNATED as anti-islamic beliefs posing as islam, they declared jihad against Muslims whom they considered Kafir and murdered many innocent lives in the pursuit of PURIFYING ISLAM. i know others who can recommend better books on the subject of aqida or about the issue of usul vs. furu. peace.

brands of islam

the following was said by a member of the Brodisc list: "how many brands of Islam should exist (Can somebody on this list, please, please answer this question!)? If one group does anything wrong, we as Muslims are going to get blamed for it."...Here's what i think about this statement: ---If there is only ONE Brand of Islam and a group of misguided fools from within it does anything wrong, the blamers will no doubt blame you anyways. Let's not worry about the blamers. we can respond to them, but let's not design our deen in reaction to critics. As a wanna-be believer I think "Brands of Islam" are good. a BRAND probably means one of two things: 1 -schools of thought/mazhab/sect; and 2 -i'll call it cultural manifestation or "flavor" I'll start by saying that, i believe, the deen, as taught by the Prophet, was/IS One - BUT, his companions understanding of it differed in various minute ways (hey, i don't blame them, they were human). don't misunderstand, The Best of the Sahaba knew what ALLAH and his NABI said and they passed it down to the next generation as they heard it, we have it recorded in Quran the many volumes of reliable hadith. But when it came to putting those same teachings into practice after the prophet's death, there were times when they differed among themselves. For example when they interpreted the teachings about leadership, the people of the Prophet's household "ahl al-bayt" formed their own understanding of that aspect of Islam. Basically...As far as schools of thought go, the earliest generations were not able to have ONE Islam. Aside from the whole shia/sunni imamate thing, there were those of the Kufa School with their view on the permissabilty of reason "ahl al-Rai" and how about those, the "ahl al-hadith", who felt that having the text of the revelation makes the use of reason unnecessary.... Now...what if there can be various interpretations of aspects of Islam other than just leadership or the use of reason? THIS surely leads to different "brands of islam" (where "brands" refers to other sects or schools of thought) each can support its own arguments with Quran and sayings of our beloved Rasul salatowasalam. not only can they have different interpretations on the practices (the WHATs and WHEREs and WHENs) of living as Muslims but also their own distict Ways of finding out what those practices ought to be (various rules for ijtihad - the HOW to get the WHATs)? ... *Coming up with yet another method "usul" or ONE BRAND, will NOT make the previous ones and the schlolars who practice them vanish.There will simply come into existance yet another "brand"of Islam.... I really have no problem with there being various schools of thought and them differing with one another, that is what makes Islam so dynamic, and it's history so interesting. if there IS a problem with this senerio, its simply a problem of the people's adab, good manners, and the ethics of disagreement, which the greatest scholars have always stressed (maybe not always practiced, but hey, I forgive them, they're human!) There are plenty of books about Ikhtilaf. This doesn't even include the difference between philosophy, mysticism, and theology. Just take a look at the Cultural Atlas of Islam by Ismail Faruqi, and definately read "Vision of Islam" by William Chittick and Murata, it explains the development of Islam through history quite well. We learn that these types of understandings overlapped each other. scholars participated in various types of learning, each with distict "brands" - schools of thought. Its Beautiful, the intellectual depth of Islam... OK... about the flavors of Islam, its cultural manifestion. What if... Some scholars go through the full procedure to come up with a new method of determining the SHARIAH, to unify the understanding of all muslims on the basics of islam, (or for a more humble reason like muslims being able to practice Islam in more meaningful manner as an American Minority)... OR What if... they do the required research into Quran, with full understanding: (ulum al Quran)-knowledge of language of the quran; -investigations into the occasions of revelation for the various suras and ayahs we have information about; -knowledge of the abbrogated and abbrogating verses; -investigations into what the great commentators of the past had to say about the various verses (tafsirs). And, aside from the Quran they investigate the life of the Prophet, his sayings (hadith) and characteristics (shama'il). And, aside from the example of the Prophet, they investigate the example of the earliest communities. And, also the work of the classical scholars and various schools of thought. (Usul al fiqh) And, also History, Psychology, Sociology, etc.... From all of these, the dilligent scholars figure out the basics of the Deen and craft the Mother Mazhab that is at the root of all Mazhabs, the one that unites them all under the banner of:"THE SHARIAH OF THE ONE TRUE ISLAM -cleansed of all baggage "There will still be the aspect of putting it into practice. There will be different Flavors, Unless this Mazhab advocates that we ONLY eat, dress, communicate -have language, travel, and work-earn a living exactly as our Prophet did, disregarding all regional considerations and technological developments. THERE WILL BE FLAVORS, even of this Mother Mazhab, as it is practiced in different parts of the world, not to mention the different parts of this country alone. we don't live in a vacuum, we interact with the natural environment and the local inhabitants. Its a part of Islam's great history: Spanish Islam, Chinese Islam, Indian Islam, African Islam, even a new American True Islam can have: -New Yorker True Islam -Southerner True Islam -California/Left Coast True Islam -American Heartland True Islam -Austin/Texas True Islam -South Beach True Islam... FLAVORS... OOOh Yeah! can't these all be considered "brands of Islam"?? (especially if they are packaged and sold properly) I'm all for regional adaptation of Muslim life. I'm not afraid of flavor and SPICE, No offence Rasulallah, but arab food IS BLAND!! SO, In Conclusion... yeah we have brands of islam. i think its a good thing. it makes islam relevant to different people in different places at different times. it also makes it easier to distinguish between people who are on to something good, and other who give off a bad vibe. i'm happy to identify myself as a Miami Muslim with bit of Austin flavor, a part-time follower of the Hanafite School of Fiqh, Maturidite School of Aqida, Ghazzalian Sufism and Rumi's School of Ishq, and the brand of activism as espoused by Jamil Al Amin in "Revolution by the Book". All of this is a part of MY Islam, and I doubt anyone can mistaken me for a Wahhabi. peace.

sectism izm skizm

i teach 13-15 year olds at two different weekend islamic schools. recently, kids at both schools asked me "what are the shia?" and "what is the difference between sunni and shia?" how to respond... before i respond to the kids, i need to be clear in my own understanding of the evolution of my muslim community. my own subject is architecture and i've read much history to understand its context, but i havn't studied sociology and anthropology, and i only skimmed through a translation of ibn khaldun's muqadima, i know there is more to it than what i write below. but, here's how i see it... two aspects: componants and interactions between them... aspect#1- understanding the individual components that make up the muslim community. (my design oriented mind thinks graphically, so in my notebook i've drawn diagrams -a circle to represent the componant and a point in the center to represent its authority figure) here are the components: listed as COMPONANT (authority figure) -1. PROPHET'S LIFETIME UMMA (prophet) -2. RASHIDUN PERIOD UMMA (caliph) -3. POST RASHIDUN TRANSITION rival CALIPHATES and SHIA revolutionaries -4. ABBASID PERIOD UMMA (ahl us SUNNA caliph, sufi shaykh, SHIA imam) -5. LATE ABBASID PERIOD (sultan) -6. MONGOL CONQUEST SULTANTES -7. EMPIRES (badshah) -8. PRE MODERN PERIOD (colonial governor) -9. POST CALIPHATE NATIONS (revolutionary leader)... aspect #2: how these components and branches within components relate to one another and interact with each other is more complicated. (graphically i have the circles that i described above overlapping each other in various ways during the different periods of our history.) ...of course many times the complicated social dynamics and interactions between individual human beings that make upour muslim community cannot be reduced into neat bubbles. if it were only that easy... ex. one of the girls in the class has a shia father and sunni mother.... so, knowing what i know about our history, what should i say to the 14 year old child that asks me "whats the difference betwen shia and sunni?" how much history do i share with them at that stage of there growth? and what means of communication should i use? my first instinct is to tell them a story of the key incidents that caused the split. then give them the very very basic difference between the two like i described above: shia placing the imam above all and the imam being a decendant of ali. i want to come up with a role playing exercize with problems similar to the ones that caused the spilt. and have them act out what they come up with as a solution, then compare their solution to the shia and sunni response. is this too much for them at that age? should i stop at the story? i don't know what to do. help.... peace and love.