Subscribe

RSS Feed (xml)

Powered By

Skin Design:
Free Blogger Skins

Powered by Blogger

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

What is the Best Means for the world to Fall Under Islam?

The non Muslim world must understand that the aim of Salafi Islam is bring the world under the control of Islam. The only conflict occurs when discussing the means by which this must occur.
It is a matter of Roles, and who is to play which. There is no disagreement over if the roles discussed below are acceptable, including violent jihad.

"By means of this document we send a message to America and those behind it. We are coming, by the will of God almighty, no matter what America does. It will never be safe from the fury of Muslims. America is the one who began the war, and it will lose the battle by the permission of God almighty"


- Al-Qaeda statement, April 24, 2002 Source

Map from the World Islamic Mission Research Division- A salafi web site





The fundamental beliefe behind Salai islam is that the whole world will eventually come under the control of islam. They believe that it is the job of the faithful to work to this come to pass
Understand that they are all very clear that this will happen, and that they are bound to work toward an Islamist world.

What follows is a a 7 year old statement from Quintan Wiktorowicz explaining the conflict iside the Salafi movement over the best means for the whole world to fall under islam.

-Shirmron

*********

The 2002 statement is best understood as part of an ongoing debate about the use of violence in Islam. Al-Qaeda is a component of a broader "fundamentalist" community and as a result is actively engaged in debates about religious authority, the legitimacy of war and rules of engagement in combat. In the 1990s, most disputes focused on whether it was permissible to rebel against incumbent regimes in the Muslim world. Toward the late 1990s, this focus shifted to address the United States as an emerging enemy and the legitimacy of particular tactics in warfare against unbelievers.

The 2002 document is part of this latest debate and should therefore be understood as an argument that seeks not only to outline al-Qaeda's justification, but also address alternative, competing religious interpretations about acceptable violence in Islam.

DEBATING VIOLENCE
Al-Qaeda is a radical tendency within a broader Islamic movement known as the Salafi movement. The term Salafi is derived from the Arabic salaf, which means "to precede" and refers to the companions of the Prophet Muhammed. Because the salaf learned about Islam directly from the messenger of God, their example is an important illustration of piety and unadulterated religious practice. Salafis argue that centuries of syncretic cultural and popular religious rituals and interpretations distorted the purity of the message of God and that only by returning to the example of the prophet and his companions can Muslims achieve salvation.

The label "Salafi" is thus used to connote "proper" religious adherence and moral legitimacy, implying that alternative understandings are corrupt deviations from the straight path of Islam.

While Salafis all agree about the importance of the prophetic model and the paradigm of the companions, there are important interpretive differences that have engendered schisms within the movement, particularly over the proper method to create an Islamic society and protect the umma (Muslim community).

Differences in interpretation tend to emphasize one of the following four basic methods for promoting Islam:

1) Propagation (dawa). Salafis who focus on this method emphasize personal piety, cleansing the corpus of hadiths (reported sayings and traditions of the Prophet Muhammed), and spreading proper Islam. For this group, the priority is for individuals to practice a pure understanding of Islam. This entails not only propagation and individual piety, but a program to eliminate any weak or false hadiths so that Muslims ensure they are truly following the prophetic model.

2) Advice. A large number of influential Salafis and their followers believe that it is the responsibility of the ulama (religious scholars) to advise leaders about Islamic legislation and regulations. In general, however, they believe this advice should be given in private.

3) Non-violent action. Some Salafis believe that it is the duty of Muslims (particularly the ulama) to openly speak out against un-Islamic actions, decisions and public policy. This can include the use of the khutba (Friday sermon), open letters, public speeches, demonstrations and rallies.

4) Violent action. A small, radical fringe in the Salafi community argues that it is an Islamic duty to use violence to remove leaders who do not properly follow or enforce Islam. Known as jihadis, these Salafis do not reject the other methods, but they do emphasize the necessity of violence. Al-Qaeda is part of this group.

These differences have produced debates about the proper methodology for promoting Islam, leading to often vitriolic conflicts. Because Salafis believe that there is only one accurate understanding of Islam -- the model of the prophet and his companions -- this creates a tendency to dismiss any differences of interpretation as deviations.

  • It is quite common, for example, for one Salafi group to call scholars and followers from other clusters to "return to the straight path."
  • This has even generated disagreements over who can be considered a Salafi. In particular, non-violent Salafis, who make up the vast majority of the movement, often vehemently reject use of the Salafi label to describe the violent or jihadi elements.
  • The latter, however, identify themselves as Salafis and dismiss the other groups as misguided, ignorant (unknowledgeable about Islam) or corrupt.

The debate within the Salafi community over the use of violence has divided the movement more than any other issue.

  • During the 1990s, as al-Qaeda developed, the initial debate between violent and non-violent Salafis was over takfir -- declaring a Muslim an apostate. Declaring a Muslim an unbeliever is a serious endeavor, since it could mean a death sentence. The central axis of divergence was over whether one could judge a ruler in the Muslim world an apostate according to his actions.
  • Non-violent groups argued that one can never know with certainty what is in an individ-ual's heart and that so long as a ruler has a "mustard seed of iman (belief)," he is considered a Muslim, especially if he allows Muslims to pray and generally practice their religion.
  • The jihadi Salafis, on the other hand, argued that the oneness of God (tawhid) demands that Muslims follow Islam in both belief and action. In other words, an un-Islamic belief is just as revealing as an un-Islamic action. As a result, the jihadis charged the Saudis and other regimes in the Muslim world with un-Islamic behavior and thus apostasy, and called for a jihad to remove them.

No comments: