Manifestation of Current Extremism

Praise be to Allah and peace be upon the Prophet of Allah.
Extremism is a dogmatic blight manifested in the form of dogmas and actions which are done by extremist people and by which they are driven away from the moderate middle path of Islam, by which they try to be distinguished from the people of moderation. These manifestations are attributed to basic fundamentals and apparent features as follows:

1. When extremism is related to understanding legal texts and this through one of the following:
a. Interpreting texts in a strict way
b. Going too deeply and unnecessarily into the meanings of revelation
2. Extremism related to Islamic rulings and that is done by one of the following:
a. Imposing on one's self and on others what Allah has not made an obligation, as a kind of extra devotion and monasticism
b. Prohibiting the lawful things which Allah made lawful as a kind of devotion
c. Neglecting all or some of the essential matters
3. When extremism is related to one's attitudes towards others: and that is through one of the following:
a. excessive praise of others
b. excessive dispraise of others
In every manifestation or act of excessiveness you will find one of these features. Violent incidents and observations reveal that behind these incidents there is one manifestation of extremism or another.
Scholars exerted their efforts to come up with a brief definition of extremism. Some of these definitions are relevant and state that extremism means: To transgress the legal limitations.
Throughout history the features of extremism were not limited; as the forms of deviation are numerous. It is only the truth whose aspects are known. As there are no limits for the forms of negligence, there are also no limits to the forms of excessiveness.
In judging an act, a saying or a belief as a form of extremism, we should study the case and consider the texts along with the facts in order to conclude that this is a type of extremism.
This study about "Manifestations of Modern Extremism" is not meant to define all the types of extremism but it is meant to present some of the features which we suffer from, especially in recent years.

The First Theme: Manifestations of extremism in calling people unbelievers:
First: Calling the rulers unbelievers:
The Qur'an clearly states that the application of a law other than Allah's is tantamount to disbelief. Allah says: "And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed (then) such (people) are the unbelievers." Scholars have differed regarding this Ayah and the right opinion is: the institution of a law other than Allah's is considered disbelief; which is of two types: disbelief of creed and disbelief of actions.
As for the first kind: Disbelief of creeds, it is of different kinds:
The first kind: When the one who applies a man-made law denies the priority of judging according to Allah's judgments and the judgments of the Prophet (peace be upon him).
The second kind: When one thinks that the ruling of other than Allah is better and more complete
The third kind: When one thinks that the ruling of other than Allah is as good as the judgment of Allah or that of His Prophet.
The fourth kind: When one believes in the permissibility of judging with that which contradicts the rulings of Allah and His Messenger
The fifth kind: Establishing courts that judge according to man-made laws
The sixth kind: The customary rulings followed by the chiefs of clans, tribes and nomads
The second section: Disbelief of Actions:
Which doesn't get its holder out of the realm of Islam. When the ruler prefers his own desires in a case to the ruling of Allah but with the belief that Allah's ruling is the truth and his own desires are wrong.
The wrong arguments of those who accuse such types of rulers of unbelief can be clarified in several aspects:
First: Giving absolute verdicts of naming the rulers unbelievers without regarding the details mentioned
Second, Claiming that the appointed ruler does not apply the rulings of Allah
Third: Naming certain rulers unbelievers regardless of any banning rules which might exist
We find in the words of present day fanatics clear labeling of the government or some of its notable officials as 'non-Muslims,' as stated in the book titled (Criticizing the Rejection to the Riyadh Bombings) 'Intiqad Al-I'trad 'ala tafjirat Al-Riyadh'. This labeling of unbelief results in many manifestations of extremism such as killing, bombings … etc.
The book on which the extremists rely as a main source for labeling the Saudi government non-believers is titled (The Clear Evidences in the Disbelief of the Saudi State) "Al-Kawashif Al-Jaliyyah fi Kufr Ad-Dawlah As-Su'udiyyah" authored by Abu Muhammad 'Asim Al-Maqdisi.

Second: Naming specific persons as nonbelievers without regarding the legal controlling rules:
It is from the established rules of Ahl-us-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah to separate between the general and specific rulings regarding the issue of naming people non-believers. The texts quoted about naming people non-believers for doing specific absolute things, their ruling may be canceled if one of the conditions is not met or the obstacles are absent.
Many people, who adopt the approach of labeling of unbelief, may name specific people non-believers regardless of the controlling legal rules. This happens a lot and the examples are countless.

Third: Naming as non-believers the Muslims who do not call the unbelievers as so:
Those who don't call the unbelievers, such as the Jews, Christians, or polytheists, with their disbelief are denying the words of Allah and His Messenger (peace be upon him).
As for one who invents something in religion and then calls people non-believers because they do not follow him; this is the greatest lie because naming people non-believers is a legal ruling that should not be misplaced.
In the modern time, if some fanatics name some people nonbelievers, they would also name anyone who does not agree with them on that labeling as non-believer. Consequently, naming people non-believers has become widespread even for a slightest disagreement among people, sometimes even among people who belong to the same group.

Fourth: Extremism in prohibiting governmental jobs, calling government employees as non-believers and sanctioning the murder of some of them
Prohibiting governmental jobs is a kind of extremism, especially when it is based upon naming the rulers non-believers; this attitude is wrong in two ways:
1. Naming the rulers non-believers:
2. Then prohibiting governmental jobs
Some modern groups committed that mistake; the Shukry Mostafa Group thinks that taking any job in the society which they called Jahili (pre-Islamic period of ignorance) is considered as bad as worshipping idols.
Their fatwa is founded on the proposition that the territory where they live and the surrounding community is non-Islamic and ignorant and that the members of that community are non-believers; both the ruler and the ruled.
Abu Jandal Al-Azdy from the Arabian Peninsula wrote a book entitled "Al-Bahith 'an Hukm Qatl Afrad wa Dubbat Al-Mabahith" (Investigating the killing of security men). Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi wrote a book entitled: "Kashf Shubuhat Al-Mujadlin 'an 'asakir Ash-Shirk wa Ansar Al-Qawanin". These two books advocate the idea that anyone who works for the government is a non-believer.

Fifth: Calling the Muslim Societies Jahiliyyah:
The street term "Jahiliyyah" (pre-Islamic period of ignorance) has been used to express the opposite of Islam.
In origin, the word Jahiliyyah is an adjective, but with the frequent usage it has become a noun indicating the time before the Prophet's mission.
This Jahiliyyah can exist in parts; some qualities of it may exist in a Muslim individual as the Prophet (peace be upon him) said to Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him) "You are a person with some qualities of Jahiliyyah," but this is not to establish a verdict of disbelief against him.
The ruling of describing something with "Jahiliyyah" differs according to the kind of description, based on the following:
1. The unreserved description of a certain time or of the Islamic Ummah as Jahiliyy; which is not permissible for the following reasons:
a. Ignorance in general means the time in which there is no Shari'ah and that was before the Prophet's mission but after his mission it no longer exists
b. The general description of Jahiliyyah without limitation or addition was not practiced by the Prophet (peace be upon him).
c. The description of Jahiliyyah can be divided; the fact that societies are governed by rulings other than Allah's doesn't mean they are non-believers and Jahiliyy; it is to be said: they are governed by Jahiliyy rulings.
2. The special description of an individual or a country as Jahiliyy; this has two possibilities:
a. If the described person/thing is worthy of that description; then the description is permissible.
b. If the described person commits major sins, it is not permissible to describe him with that description except when he deems it lawful to commit them.
3. If describing a nation or a person with Jahiliyyah is limited by a condition or a case, it will be permissible because the texts stated so.
Some fanatic groups in this time call the Muslim societies Jahiliyy and non-Islamic because they establish their thoughts, opinions and ideas upon the notion of 'the Jahiliyy society.' This is obvious in their writings and literary works.
It is also noticed that they have a correlation between deeming that the society is Jahiliyy and holding that Muslim lands have turned to Non-Islamic territories and that their people have become non-believers, which led them to extremism.

Sixth: Extremism concerning judging the territory:
An important note on this topic:
a. The question of differentiation between territories (on the basis of faith) is a discretional question and doesn't have clear evidence from the texts. 
b. Scholars divided the world into two areas: Islamic and non-Islamic as follows:
1. Due to the Islamic conquests, there was an urgent need to differentiate between the Islamic territories and the territories of war. 
2. This differentiation came to codify the fundamentals of relations between Muslim and non-Muslim countries.
3. Scholars held that there are legal rulings that differ according to a particular society and therefore differentiation was a must.
c. Judging a territory as a 'territory of disbelief' doesn't necessitate the disbelief of its entire people. 
d. Judging territories and differentiation between them does not mean a lot for ordinary people; it concerns the Muslim ruler in the first place. The issue relates to political fiqh.
Thus, the error of the fanatics who judge a Muslim territory as non-Islamic becomes obvious and consequentially they do either or both of the following:
a. Deeming violable the blood and properties of people and declaring war against that territory which has become non-Islamic in their thinking.
b. Naming the people therein non-believers as a result of describing the society with disbelief
In our contemporary reality, we find these two aspects of extremism peculiar of some Muslim groups, including:
1. Shukry Mostafa's Group which held that naming the territory non-Islamic is a reason to call all the people residing therein as non-believers.
2. The Egyptian Jihad Group which held that the major reason to fight the rulers who do not judge according to Allah's rulings and declare war against them is because the territory they rule over is described as non-Islamic, although they do not think that its people are non-believers.
They passed their legal verdict regarding the differentiation between territories based on the opinions and fatwas of some of the scholars of this Ummah.
3. It is stated in the book of "Intiqad Al-I'itrad 'ala Tafgirat Ar-Riyadh" (Criticizing the Rejection of the Riyadh Bombings) that societies are not ruled by the ordinances of Islam.

The Second Theme: The manifestations of extremism related to violence

First: Rebelling against the Rulers: 
Violence is the most prominent areas of extremism; the most prominent aspects that violence is to rebel against the rulers. Scholars are in agreement that it is not permissible to rebel against the just ruler.
The scholars' agreement on the prohibition of rebelling against the ruler is obvious in their writings until it became part of their creed. Expounding on the Sunni creed, Imam Ahmad (may Allah bless his soul) maintained: "Listening to and obeying the rulers and the head leader of the believers (is an obligation); whether they are pious or not, and to whosoever assumes caliphate through people's acceptance and sanction.
Nowadays fanatics rebel against the Muslim rulers calling them non-believers as it is stated in the book "Intiqad Al-I'trad 'ala Tafgirat Ar-Riyadh" and the book of Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi "Al-Kawashif Al-Jaliyyah 'ala Kufr Ad-Dawlah As-Sa'udiyyah".

Second: Bombings:
Allah (Exalted be He) sanctified blood, property and honor; the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "Your blood, property and honor are inviolable to you as the inviolability of your day in this month, in this country until the Day in which you will meet your Lord."
Killing the sanctified souls is very grievous. Not only killing a Muslim is prohibited but also there is a severe warning against killing the dhimmi (Non-Muslim living under the Muslim rule), mu'ahad (Non-Muslim who has a covenant with Muslims) and Musta'man (Non-Muslim who entered the Muslim land with a covenant of security).
Bombings is one of the manifestations of extremism that has emerged in recent years. It is a work whose doers relies on references with which they struggled to make them provide justifications for their actions; the most famous of their writings in this matter are:  
1. The book of 'Ghazwat Al-Hadi 'Ashar min Rabi' Al-Awwal – 'Amaliyyat Sharq Al-Riyadh – wa Harbina ma'a Amrika wa 'Umala'iha' (The Battle of the Eleventh of Rabi' Al-Awwal – Eastern Riyadh Operation and Our War against America and Its Agents) prepared by The Islamic Studies and Research Center.
2. The book of "Intiqad Al-I'trad 'ala Tafgirat Al-Riyadh" (Criticizing the Rejection of the Riyadh Bombings).

Third: Assassinations: 
Of the existing violence aspects which are frequently attached to those accused of extremism is assassination: Those who sanction assassinations rely on the story of the assassination of Ka'b ibn Al-Ashraf.
This Hadith contains a prophetic order to assassinate one of the chiefs of disbelief. But taking this as a proof to the permissibility of assassinating rulers is not appropriate due to the following:
1. Assassination must be carried out with the order of the head of the country; it is known that if assassination is left to individual opinions, it would lead to great corruption.
2. Assassination is to be carried out against those whose disbelief is ascertained; Ka'b and Ibn Abu Al-Haqiq were real disbelievers.   
3. The killed must be fighting against Muslims
4. The assassination should not lead to worse consequences 

The Third Theme: The manifestation of extremism in the application of the principle Al-Wala' and Al-Bara' (loyalty to the believers and disloyalty to disbelievers):

Wala' and Bara' is one of the fundamental principles of Islam; there are many texts to prove that.
Al-Wala' wa Al-Bara' has limits; too much Wala' is wrong, in the same way as too little Wala' is wrong.

Following are some examples of extremism in Al-Wala' and Al-Bara':

First: Extremism that results from bigotry for a particular sect or group:

Bigotry results from some reasons, including: whimsical love for oneself or for the followed leader, to the extent that one thinks himself or his sect or group infallible.
One who fanatically sides with a sect may do so because he thinks that that sect is right; this belief is not legally correct because right or wrong is measured according to the Qur'an and the Sunnah and not according to the conduct of a particular sect. The one who thinks that his sect is always right has placed himself among those who divided their religion and broke up into sects and is mentioned in Allah's saying: "Each group rejoicing in what is with it (as its beliefs)." Any group who has distorted their religion will rejoice with the ideologies that they deem right, while the absolute truth can only be sought in the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace be upon him).
This type of fanaticism affected the Ummah throughout its history and today it is a reality; belonging to a sect or a group has been counted upon as if it is one of the Islamic fundamentals.
The adherents of each group claim they are right while all others are wrong.

Second: Extremism that results from crediting a particular group or sect as the fountainhead of truth:

The greatest dilemma that affects religious fanatics is the exaltation of their own groups or sects; so they will not accept anything as religiously true except what comes through their own group. This originally contradicts the basis of religion; as from the fundamentals of tawhid is to believe in what Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) came with of revelation, to obey, love and revere him and to surrender to his judgment.
It is noticeable that the religious fanatics follow their sects and groups blindly; they love and hate for the sake of desires and will accept the truth only if it comes through their sects or groups.
When reading the writings of contemporary religious fanatics or discussing any of them, you will find that their biggest problem is that they only accept what comes through their sects or groups and therefore their fundamental notions are based on desires.

Third: Bigotry in following the Imam and leader:

Any saying can be accepted or rejected except the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him). All people are in bad need for the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Therefore, they must weigh their affairs according to the actions and sayings of the Prophet (peace be upon him). Whatever is in harmony with them is the truth and whatever contradicts them is falsehood.
Religious extremists contradict this great fundamental principle when they put their leaders in the rank of the Prophet (peace be upon him) by giving them absolute obedience.
The contemporary religious extremists fell in fanaticism and blind obedience as 'Abdur-Rahman Abu Al-Khair described his group known as "At-Takfir wal-Hijrah".
This would hold true for other fanatic leaders in every country and at every time. They exaggerate in estimating the status of their leaders and raise them higher than their ranks, offer them absolute obedience and understand every revealed text concerning the obedience of the Imam in the context of obeying their own leaders. They exaggerate in revering their leaders due to their extreme love of them because of the actions that they deem the standard of the soundness of the methodology and correctness of approach.
This is followed by giving homage to those leaders and understanding the revealed texts concerning pledging allegiance to the highest ranking Imam in the context of pledging allegiance to their own leaders. The absolute homage also exists in other fanatic groups who made it compulsory upon every follower of those groups.
In general, we can sum up the views held by religious extremists concerning Imamate and leadership in the following:
1. Since their group is the only Muslim group, their Imam is the sole Imam of the Muslims.
2. Their Imam has the right to control properties and souls and his followers have no right to object.
3. Their Imam is to be accorded absolute obedience; he is not obliged to explain the cause of ruling or its wisdom and the followers should not ask about this cause.
 
Fourth: Extremism in one's disavowal of disbelief:

Disavowal of the disbelievers is an established matter in the revealed texts but it does not mean to oppress and attack them, nor does it mean to treat them unjustly; Allah says: "And let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice."
Today, some religious extremists understand the matter of disavowal of the disbelievers wrongly as they think that it means declaring war against them in all cases without considering the legal rulings.

Fifth: Extremism in one's disavowal of Muslim communities:

One may disavow himself from those who defy Allah's religion and disbelieve in Him. As for Muslims who join between faith and disobedience, they can be befriended or deserted in proportion to their faith or disobedience respectively. Exaggerated dissociation with Muslims without a valid cause is dispraised and is regarded a form of rejected extremism.
Extremism represented in disavowal of Muslim communities happened in the contemporary Muslim life. This is clearly obvious from the writings of religious extremists. The defective area of their thinking is their misunderstanding of disbelief. In their view, the whole society is a Jahiliyy disbelieving society. Consequently, they want to disavow themselves from that allegedly disbelieving people. 

Sixth: The call to desert Muslim communities and naming those who stay among them as non-believers

Migration for the sake of Allah from the unbelievers' land to the land of Islam is legitimate; its doer is praised. But staying in the land of the unbelievers is not judged with disbelief and is not judged with sin, but the ruling needs more details.
A resident who doesn't want to migrate (from a non-Muslim land to a Muslim one) is not a disbeliever. He is to be judged as a disbeliever if he is satisfied, continued his stay, showed his full loyalty to the unbelievers and helped them against Muslims.
Some people exaggerated and named the one who refuses to migrate a disbeliever.
Other people exceeded the limits and claimed that migration from Saudi Arabia is obligatory as claimed by Abu Muhammad 'Asem Al-Maqdisi in his book "Al-Kawashif Al-Jaliyyah".

The Fourth Theme: Manifestations of extremism related to being strict upon oneself and upon people:

First: Being strict upon oneself:

The Lawgiver laid down His rules according to the capacity of man and made for the accidental hardships concessions to ease them as a mercy and easiness for the servants. Man was also forbidden to exceed the limits by putting himself to hardship. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Do not impose austerities on yourselves so that austerities will be imposed on you, for people have imposed austerities on themselves and (therefore) Allah imposed austerities on them. Their survivors are to be found in cells and monasteries. (Then he quoted) "Monasticism, they invented it; we did not prescribe it for them." 
Being strict upon oneself in every act exposes man to hardship and troubles. "Sometimes strictness is to do what is not obligatory or desirable and rank them in the rank of what is obligatory and desirable with regard to the acts of worship. Other times strictness is exercised through putting what is not unlawful nor disapproved in the rank of the unlawful and the disapproved with regard to good things."

As the whole thing has to do with hardship, let it be known that hardship is of two kinds:
1. Usual hardship:
This kind exists in every religious or worldly duty; all the legal requirements need some sort of effort. This kind of hardship does not preclude from observing religious duties because all the affairs of man in this world require exerting efforts.
2- Unusual hardship:
If we are to define this type of hardship in the light of legal texts, we should look at the particular action and its consequences; if persistence on doing it will eventually lead to cessation of the action, either completely or partially, or if it leads to a deficiency in its doer, in such case, there is an unusual type of hardship. This can be elaborated on as follows:
First: Complete cessation of the deed:
Cessation is induced by one of two things:
a. Boredom and tiredness then failure: 
Sometimes the texts expressed it by whatever causes dislike of worship, boredom or failing, etc.
b. Cessation due to conflict of duties:
Second: Occurrence of a flaw:
So long as an action leads to psychological or religious harm on the part of the doer, such as when man inflicts torture upon himself or deprives it from the necessities of life out of religiosity or as a form of devotion, this is considered as putting oneself in hardship.

Second: Being strict on people:
A careful study of the legal proofs proves that Allah has made this religion as a mercy, easiness and removal of hardships from all people. The Prophet (peace be upon him) used to order his Companions to go easy with people. He said to Mu'adh ibn Jabal and Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari when he sent them to Yemen: "Facilitate things for the people (treat the people in the most agreeable way), and do not make things difficult for them, and give them glad tidings, and let them not have aversion."
Man may take for himself the harshest lawful thing such as praying a very long prayer but he is not to oblige the people to do so.
Following the strict approach with people does not include obligating them with what Allah has ordained but to obligate people with things other than what Allah has ordained, which is of two kinds:
1. What is not originally legislated,
2. What is originally legislated but extremism occurred in its description or amount
This trend in contemporary life is clearly manifested in Maher Bakry's book Al-Hijrah where he said: "The word 'disobedient' is an alternative word for a 'disbeliever'; it exactly equals the word 'disbeliever'."

[*] This paper was presented in a symposium held at King Abdul-'Aziz's Center for National Dialogue between 27-31 December 2003, which was attended by more than 40 scholars and thinkers.