Hidden Premises on Islam (1): "Wahhabis are Sunnis."

Thanks. I'm not getting invites. Will try manually. You see what I mean.

Of course they came from the Sunni tradition Like all men descended from Prophet Adam. But you made a great segue to my next piece which is that reform may take interpretation of Islam to places none of us would ever want. The Sunni tradition has always had a responsible side. Sunni scholars belonged to the imperial and inclusive cultures of great states. That's why they were doubly careful in their interpretation of the basic principles. Latter-day reformists all want to establish their own Islams. And they seldom carry the weight of social responsibility. Allah protect us from where they can take innocent masses.

On a side point, I'm deeply interested in the British influence in institutionalizing Wahhabism. We know Lawrence was there by the side of Faisal from Jeddah to Paris. But Lawrence was just one man. Who were the others? What role did they play in grooming the theocracy of Wahhabism? Were there British ladies like Gertrude Bell who socialized with the sheiks and crystallized their ideology? Not just at the turn of the century but starting well before then. I think it is essential to understand the British role since then to be able to decipher the codes of Wahhabism.

Fada you've touched on the heart of the issue: In the Sunna way, it's all about the proper hierarchy: The Book defers its interpretation to the Prophet pbuh. And the Prophet pbuh defers to the scholars. For centuries, the scholars conveyed the standard operating principles of Islam through the generations. That, in effect, became the way of the salaf al saleheen. Now, OBL and his theoreticians like Zawahiri want to go back to the Book alone and interpret it in the way they want, cutting out centuries of responsible, inclusive science of Islam.

Dear Blaise, thanks for your frank comments. The issue is very nuanced and I would hasten to second you in that not all people living in Saudi Arabia subscribe to the violent Wahhabi interpretation. I've Saudi friends, I discuss these issues with them quite frankly. I never heard them rejecting the Wahhabi description. If anything, that name is a source of pride. Wahhabi describes their racial descent. Salafi describes their ideology. They don't much differentiate between the two.

To get a true sense of the irreconcilable fundamental differences between the Wahhabis and the Sunnis, one needs to be a Muslim during the holy pilgrimage. One of the thorniest experiences for both Sunni and the Shia is the trip to Medina. There, they see the graves of the friends of the Prophet completely leveled by Wahhabis. Sunnis and Shias shed tears for what the Wahhabis have done to one of the holiest of Islamic shrines. They beg the Saudi guards to open the gates for a brief visit to say a few prayers. Sometimes the guards grudgingly agree but still bring in on Wahhabi preachers who start shouting shirk, shirk to the crowd. Translated: Don't do this. You'll be equating the dead with the Lord and hence leaving the circle of Islam. As I noted in the original piece, the audacity of Wahhabis feeling the right to declare some Muslims not to be true believers is in the root of today's so-called takfiri terrorism. If they call themselves Salafis, all I can do is bring to everyone's attention that it is only a misnomer.

Thank you. I also believe that for one of the greatest democracies on earth, India, the difference between the Wahhabi way and the traditional Sunni way is the difference between squalor and splendor. Wahhabis in the true Al Qaeda fashion will surely try to set fire to the Muslim-Hindu peace in India. I hope that such efforts will be smashed by Indian Muslims themselves. As the Arabian peninsula was busy inventing Wahhabism, Indian Muslims kept to their peaceful Sunni faith.

Hi again BlaiseP: You are on to something very critical here.

The essence of the Sunni belief is this: There is a whole deferral mechanism. Not everything is spelt out in the Book. That's why the Book pointed to the Sunna for the details. And Prophet (p) in his turn declared the scholars to be his true inheritors for explaining his words and ways.

The Sunni believe in naql, or transference of religious judgement from one generation to the next. Just like there are 200KV power generators and 100K transmission lines and 30K transducers before we get 110V in our domestic power outlets, the Sunni do not attempt to connect directly to the high-voltage primary source, the Book.

The Sunni believes that tens of religious and worldly sciences need to be studied for many years before one can hope to interpret the book. Of course not all Muslims agree. It is precisely because Muslims diverged on this point that 73 sects were born. The Sunna are one of them. The Salafis or Wahhabis are another sect among the 72 non-Sunni ones. Yes, inspired by the likes of Ibn Taymiyya, they do wish to go directly to the book and come up with contemporary interpretations of the Book. This is a problem Muslims will never resolve.

My message here is rather to the Western world. Many in the West falsely hope that a new interpretation of Islam may just calm down the flames of fire among the restive youth of the Islamic world. What I'm saying is this is a dangerous non-sequitur. At best, a new interpretation may take us to better realms with 50% chance. Unless of course we had past precedent to change the probability equation. We do have past precedent though. We have the hundreds of years of Sunni states and empires. We have Western scholars who studied them extremely well. And now we have the Salafi re-interpretation of Islam. We have the Ibn Taymiyya way which produced Osama from a Salafi background and Zawahiri from an Azharian Sunni background. And the Zawahiri case is more worrying for me because I find it natural for a Salafi like Bin Laden to degenerate into terrorism. It is much more worrying for someone coming from the Cairo Sunni background not only to follow OBL but also give him his theoretical ammunition. All this is the product of the reform in religion that some in the West might want. That's reform.

It's up to us to compare this reformed Islam and its implications with the past precedent of Sunni tradition of centuries. To me the comparison is clear.