This chapter lays the foundations for the discussion that follows. It provides a brief ideological background of religious extreme groups in general and the so-called Islamic State and its roots in particular. Special attention is paid to the philosophy of prominent controversial theologians and political figures whose teaching has so far significantly shaped the narrative of extreme groups as we know them. For years, those radical scholars have systemically and meticulously blended the political survival of jihadi groups with the survival of Islam itself. By doing so, a criticism of the action of an extreme group is intentionally mischaracterized as an attack on Islam as a āfaith.ā
Who speaks for Islam in terms of its relation with other ethnicities and Western countries is a question that so far has noticeably shaped the relationship between Muslims in the Middle East and the rest of the world. For the so-called Islamic State and like-minded groups, who decides who is a ātrueā believer and who is ānotā is anything but trivial. It is about the political āsurvival of the fittestā among theologically driven organizations aim to re-examine and outright other subgroups. It is also about shoring up the base to ensure a steady stream of recruits. Put differently, speaking for Islam is a must have strategy without which few radical groups would survive, let alone prosper.
The difficulty of determining who truly speaks for Islam and Muslims lies in the fact that, unlike other monotheistic religions, Islam does not embrace a particular formal hierarchical religious structure. With the option of consulting specialists from all walks of life, the leader of an Islamic country or a group of people for that matter is both its political and religious leader and has the authority to adapt a particular interpretation of faith. For example, Turkey, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia are all Muslim countries. Yet, in so many ways, they are world apart.
For religious extremist groups, the lack of a central unifying religious authority is a blessing in disguise. It enables them to maintain their own scholarly authorities. It also empowers them to boast about the legitimacy of their otherwise questioned code of conduct when waging wars against other groups. Abu Muhammad al-Adnani , the former official spokesman of the Islamic State highlighted this point. He stated, āif one wants to get to know the agenda of the State, its politics, and its fatwas, one ought to consult its leaders, its public statements, its own sources, rather than the sources of its enemies.ā 1
For millennium, the question of who represents Islam has widened the division and fueled the tension between extremist groups and the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds at large. In particular, the lack of central authority has inadvertently empowered prominent controversial theologians and political figures not only to shape the narrative of extreme groups , but more importantly, to cement their theologian legitimacy and thus boost their popularity on social media and beyond. To understand how religious extreme groups have managed to win the loyalty of many followers, a very brief look at how Islamic jurisprudence functions would be helpful.
Most nations follow the common law or civil law legal traditions. To Western readers familiar with the terminology and process of those legal systems, the principles of Sharia law can be confusing. While Sharia law has written codes 2 that specify some matters capable of being brought before a court, the applicable procedure and, sometimes, the appropriate punishment for each offense is largely determined by the presiding cleric (sheikh). As a result, in the way he chooses to interpret the Quran or hadith, a cleric plays an enormous role in shaping Sharia law . Before the Internet era, the ideological impact of an extreme group and its scholars was limited to the geographical area it controls. This is not anymore the case. In the previous few years, evens have shown us that a fatwa issued by a radical cleric in the Middle East and posted on social media platforms could have ramifications in France, Germany, or the USA as opposed to Syria or Iraq.
To explain this point, we first start by briefly highlighting the sources of Islamic law and its hierarchy. The goal of this part is twofold: first, to identify the sources of Islamic Law that bind Sunni Muslims all over the world. Understanding the streams of thought contributing to the emergence of the Jihadi Salafism however is not possible by merely looking at the primary sources of Sharia law . The emergence of the al-Salafiyya al-Jihadiyya as we know it is credited to a number of contemporary Salafi scholars. The second goal of this discussion therefore is to examine the scholarly works of those clerics, in particular, a number of controversial principles and fatwas that have contributed to the rise of religious extremist groups. To this end, we briefly examine the work of four key scholars who have influenced and sometimes shaped the ideology of contemporary extreme groups .
There are four major sources of Islamic law. In descending order, these are the Quran, the Sunna, Ijma, and Qiyas. 3 If the legality of an issue was not addressed in the first source, then Muslim jurists consider the second source and so forth.
- The Qurāan is the oldest and most sacred text of Islam that was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad. Muslims believe the Quran to be the eternal and indisputable word of Allah and for this reason it is the most fundamental source of Islamic jurisprudence. If the Quran does not elaborate about a certain issue, it is permissible for Muslims to turn to the second source of Islamic law, namely, the Sunnah (customs and beliefs that make up a tradition). 4
- The Sunnah is the normative practices of the Prophet Muhammad including, but not limited to, his habits and practices for living the life of a decent Muslim and the hadiths; which are simply the sayings of the Prophet transmitted by his companions and others. Because hadith were transmitted orally, some disagreement arose about the words and deeds of the Prophet. Again, if the Sunnah of the Prophet does not provide guidance or a solution to a given issue, then Muslims are expected to turn to the third primary source of Islamic law, namely consensus or agreementāIjma. 5
- Consensus is sought when it is not possible to find a specific legal ruling in the Quran or Sunnah. In this case, the Ijma of the legal scholars within the community as to how to solve the issue in concern is preferred. The principle of Ijma is spiritly debated. Whose opinions are relevant for Ijma is a question that is still relevant to most ideologically driven groups....