The current conflict in Iraq is not a battle between Sunnis and Shi‘as as most news agencies and analysts are claiming. The Islamic State for Iraq and Shaam or ISIS as they are popularly referred to are not representative of Sunnis and indeed their ideological position is closer to that of the 7th century Kharijite faction. In 657 AD, in the battle of Siffin between Ali ibnAbiTalib, the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet, and Mu’awiya ibn Abi Sufyan, a faction of people broke off from Ali’s camp after declaring that he should not have entered into arbitration with Mu‘awiya. They deemed both Ali and Mu‘awiya’s sides to be kuffar (pl. of kafir) and it is perhaps to this act that we can trace the intellectual origins of takfeer or the act of declaring someone a disbeliever. Prior to this, as Maulana Mohsin Najafi of the Jaamiatul Kausar in Islamabad, recently pointed out, the act of takfeer was not even utilised for political opponents with the assassins of the third Caliph Usman not being the victim of takfeer. Speaking at the 10th annual Rabeeush-Shahada festival held under the aegis of the holy shrines of Karbala, Najafi tackled this sensitive question, which is not only religiously important but is now also increasingly politically relevant.
One of the most important fatwa concerning takfeer was that of ibn Taimiyyah in the 13th century in which he labelled the Mongol invaders as kuffar for ostensibly converting to Islam yet continuing to practice the Yasa Code. Notably he also did takfeer of various Sunni Sufi orders reserving particular venom for those who were affiliated to ibn al-Arabi’s school of philosophy. These fatwas proved to the ideological inspiration for Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab who also used takfeer in order to consolidate his political and theological position. In the 20th century the Egyptian Mustafa Shukri drew ideological inspiration from the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood Hassan al-Banna and intellectual Sayed Qutb but later due to his increasing disenchantment founded the Jama’at al-Muslimoon. Founded in the 1970s, this group was later dubbed Takfeerwa’l Hijrah—excommunciation and exile— encapsulating his philosophy of deeming Muslims to be apostates and the need of ‘true Muslims’ to migrate in order to re-group and consolidate power. Another Egyptian Muhammad Abdus Salaam Faraj also founded a radical group at the end of the 1970s, which was eventually called al-Jihadbut disagreed with some of Shukri’s views. This group was behind Anwar Sadat’s assassination. In particular Faraj advocated an infiltration of the near enemy (Muslims) in order to fight them from within. Interestingly both groups also deemed it permissible for activists to breach the rules of the Sharia, such as drinking alcohol, in order to avoid detection. Faraj was a close friend and had a profound ideological influence on Ayman al-Zawahiri, one of the ideologues of al-Qaeda. Today al-Qaeda in some part finds its roots in the mujahideen of the 19 70s and 80s who were given training and funding by various Western countries as well as Pakistan in order to counter the looming spectre of Russian communism.
Recently Zawahiri in an open letter to the leaders of ISIS denounced the latter’s conduct and advised them to desist from their brutal and violent methods as well as reminding Jabhat al-Nusra that their sphere of operations was Syria and ISIS, that theirs was Iraq. Terrorists too extreme even for other terrorists! Previously the leadership of Al-Qaeda had sent a similar open letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian, reprimanding him for his brutal violence. Today ISIS has conveniently found resonance with disaffected Baathists and groups such as the Naqhbandi Army, headed by ‘Izzat Ibrahim ad-Duri a general under Saddam’s regimes as well as other Sunnis who have unfortunately been disenfranchised by the Shia dominated government in Baghdad. However, it is imperative to remember that the ideological core of ISIS and other splinter groups of Al-Qaeda are by their very nature not only against the Shi’a but also anti those Sunnis who disagree with them. The recent statement of Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, the ISIS spokesperson, is notable not only for the venomous language with which it refers to the Shia but also his request to ISIS followers to forgive those Sunnis whose ideology does not align with ISIS’. When 12 Sunni imams from Mosul refused to pledge allegiance they were executed.
The only people that have arguably benefited from the current situation are the Kurds but the rise of ISIS will be a constant threat to them as well in the future. With what is almost a non-existent border between Iraq and Syria, captured military hardware, control of oil fields, the looting of banks in Mosul and other towns as well as international funding, ISIS are a danger not only to Iraq but also to the region and beyond. The lines between the Syrian civil war and the Iraqi insurgence are becoming increasingly blurred and it is important for the international community to realize that parts of the opposition they have been funding in Syria has the ability to completely change the socio-political demography of the region and beyond. They already have a name for it: the Shaam Caliphate. However, what is most important to realise is that like their ideological ancestors these neo-Khaarijite militants are not representative of mainstream Sunnism and therefore the current conflict should not be portrayed as a Sunni insurgency or a Sunni-Shia conflict. Groups like ISIS already have counterparts in Pakistan and therefore the Indian government should take a lead, along with its partners, in helping to contain and eliminate the current insurgency in Iraq as this can have direct ramifications for the region in general and India in particular.
Ali Khan Mahmudabad is a PhD student in History at the University of Cambridge who writes a fortnightly column for the Urdu Daily Inqilab
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
>>>> "A terrorist group working openly and aggressively in the U.S.? "
>> "Why not. Won't be the first time too"
Name one, you liar!
"jihadi:"A terrorist group working openly and aggressively in the U.S.? "
Why not. Won't be the first time too, dear jihadi.
>> " terrorist group CAIR."
A terrorist group working openly and aggressively in the U.S.? Are you retarded?
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT