Monday, May 1, 2017

Ibn Taymiyya 1250-1328 and Jihad



Ibn Taymiyya was born in HARRAN, in 1263 in northern Syrian [but now Turkey] to a family of Jurists.   Here’s what was going on

1258 Baghdad had fallen to the Mongols
1260 the Mongols were stopped by the Mamluks in Cairo
1295 the conversion of Ghazan Khan to Islam
what this meant is that second waves of Mongol invasions were by Muslims.

UNLIKE almost everyone else in Robinson’s book,  Ibn Taymiyyas life is well documented, and we have his writings, as well:

We know that Taymiyya wrote 80 pages a day, and published 500 volumes in all.  We also know his handwriting was terrible.
He died in prison in Damascus where he had been denied pen and paper


Interestingly he seems to only have become important in the 19th and then especially in the 20th century.

But the readings him in modern times have been opportunistic.

OPPORTUNISTIC: the taking of opportunities when they arise, regardless of planning or principle: And so we see him as a basis of Wahabim; He was also used by Osama Bin Laden

What made them love him? Why did he become popular?  And why did his popularity make governments nervous?  So nervous that His books were banned in Egypt and Jordan following the Arab spring.

Mainly it was because he was a radical reactionary : wanting a radical return to the past.

A reactionary is a person who holds political views that favor a return to the status quo ante, the previous political state of society, which they believe possessed characteristics (discipline respect for authority, etc.) that are negatively absent from the contemporary status quo of a society. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionary]
They are on the right wing

He was also a Fundamentalist sucn that only original scriptures and time period are authoritative, here the Qur’an and Hadith literature.  Thus Muhammad’s Islam was the true Islam and anything that was not practiced at the time of Muhammad or by Muhammad was INNOVATION or “Bid’a”.   This is assigning something to religion that wasn’t there at the beginning.

He was against Shiism
 He was against what he saw as pernicious influence of Christianity and Judaism
 He was against all manner of popular piety
To him these were INTERNAL THREATS, especially due toi in government and life of popular religion


But there were also EXTERNAL THREATS.
At this time, this referred to the military might of the Mongols…
Like RUMI 100 years earlier, Ibn Tayiyya;s family left HARRAN for Damascus. He was 7 years old.  Harran was then destroyed.   [[How do Refugee children feel?]

As a scholar in a family of jurists,  he could have just become a well paid teacher, like his father, but  he was fanatic in  his beliefs and wanted to spread them. 
1294: demanded the death of a Christian scribe who had insulted the prophet


His career as a public agitator began in 1294.  He was 31.  He led mobs to demand the death of a Christian scribe who had insulted the Prophet.   The authorities tried to mediate, but the mobs kept up till the scribe converted.  This was the only way to stop it. This ability to stir up trouble and mobs was not appreciated and he was in and out of prison for the next 6 years.  Until his last imprisonment, however, he used his time to write.


Ibn Taymiyya was not on unfriendly terms with the Mamluk leaders,  and with scholars and religious leaders, but most were moderates and he was radical.


One example of this was the results of a protest march by 500 sSufis who went to the citadel of Cairo, where the Mamluk army barracks were,  to protest Taymiyya’s criticism of some of their leaders.

But mostly his stance against Sufism had to do with the concept of Tawassul or intercession.  He believed that a person could not ask anyone other than God for help except on the day of judgment when intercession in his view would be possible.

After the protest,  Taymiyya was tried and imprisoned.

He said provocative things, such as when he spoke during Friday prayers from the pulpit, saying,
“God comes down to the sky of the world just as I come down now”
And he took a step down on the minbar .

A jurist from a different law-school reproached him for saying this.

Why?  It anthropomorphizes God, which is forbidden.

The crowd went at Ibn Taymiyya and attacked him such that his turban fell of.

Underneath his turban was a silk skull cap. Oh oh.  SOME Interpretations of the Quran say it forbidden for mean to wear silk.

He was taken to prison again.


What were his real fears ?

1 Logic,
 because it was an alternative to belief
2 Sufism
because it led to esoteric practices

SUFISM, in terms of mysticism and asceticism was ok. Taymiyya may have belonged to a Sufi order himself..
What was wrong was that Sufi practices were often INNOVATIVE  BID’H
And thus abominable.  Such as Music, Dance, and Saint veneration or practices at their tombs, which  he saw this as Idolatry


3 the idea of the UNITY OF BEING. 
Confusing the cosmos with the creator. 

Government and War
Shari’a and Jihad

What his reactionary fundamentalism called for was a religious government.  Before the Mondols there had been CALIPHS.  These were gone.  So now where was religious authority?  In laws.  But who was to make those laws?  A ha!

As a part of these laws, a new idea of JIHAD evolved FROM him.
And the use of his writing is why he is felt to be so dangerous and is censored and lead to ISLAMISM


Fundamentalists want to cling to originary texts,  that is the Quran and the Hadith.
They want to go to those writings and use them as the basis of all true relgion.


ISLAMISTS are opportunists in that their interest in proof texts is selective and strategic. They are rarely interested in the entire corpus, but scout for portions that support their ideology.


What they have taken from Taymiyya about JIHAD is an example

JIHAD  can be fundamentalist,  Islamist or part of considered, culturally contexxtualied juristic interpretation
jIHAD is a theory of struggle for “the right.

It includes internal struggle to be good person
But external struggle against wrong often means a struggle against WRONG BELIEF


As wrong belief, jihad can be a struggle against NONMUSLIMS.
However, it is forbidden by the Qur’an to fight against MUSLIMS.

But in Ibn Taymiyyas world, many of the Mongols, whom he wanted to fight against,  had become Mulims.
And this leads us to JIHAD and Ibn Taymiyya

As I said, it was a time of war and invasions.
The Mongols were on the move but Ghazan khan  had made a political conversion to Islam in 1295, so now they are Muslims.
The first military Mongol action in this wave was toward Damascus. Ibn Tyaymiyya was when they occupied Damascus for the first four months of 1303

 Most of the military had fled the city, including most of the civilians.[

Ibn Taymiyyah however, stayed and was one of the leaders of the resistance inside Damascus. In fact he went to speak directly to the Mongol Ilkhan Mahmud Ghazan and his vizier Rashid al-Din.


An artist illustrated of Ghazan Khan, a historical figure harshly rebuked by Ibn Taymiyyah, mainly due to his constant state of hostility towards the Mamluks of Egypt.


INTERESTINGLY He sought the release of Muslim and DhimmI  {people of the book. i.e. Jews and Christian]i prisoners whom the Mongols had taken in Syria, and after discussion, he secured their release.

Ibn Taymiyyah at this time began giving sermons on Jihad at the Umayyad mosque  He   also spoke to and encouraged the Governor of Damascus to fight against the Mongols and he, himself went to get reinforcements from Cairo.

In 1303 there was a 3rd Mongol invasion of Syria by Ghazan Khan.
This led to what has been called Ibn Taymiyyah's "most famous" fatwa.
In it he declared that jihad against the Mongols was not only permitted, but obligatory as Jihad..


Why Jihad?
The reason was that the Mongols could not, in his opinion, be true Muslims despite the fact that they had converted to Sunni Islam because they ruled using what he considered 'man-made laws' (their traditional Yassa code) rather than Islamic law or Sharia.Because of this, he reasoned they were living in a state of jahiliyyah, or pre-Islamic pagan ignorance. 
In other words, they were not really Muslims at all.

“The fatwa broke new Islamic legal ground because "no jurist had ever before issued a general authorization for the use of lethal force against Muslims in battle," and was to influence modern Islamists in the use of violence against self-proclaimed Muslims.
It even exempted Mamluk soldiers from the fast during the month of Ramadan so that they could maintain their strength.   They won!

“It is allowed to fight people for (not observing)
unambiguous and generally recognized obligations
and prohibitions, until they undertake to perform
the explicitly prescribed prayers, to pay zakat,
to fast during the month of Ramadan, to make the pilgrimage to Mecca
and to avoid what is prohibited, such as marrying women
in spite of legal impediments, eating impure things, acting unlawfully
 against the lives and properties of Muslims and the like.

It is obligatory to take the initiative in fighting those people,
as soon as the Prophet's summons with the reasons
for which they are fought has reached them.
 But if they first attack the Muslims then fighting them
is even more urgent, as we have mentioned
when dealing with the fighting against
rebellious and aggressive bandits."

“Ibn Taymiyyah was noted for emphasis he put on the importance of jihad and for the "careful and lengthy attention" he gave "to the questions of martyrdom" in jihad, such as benefits and blessings to be had for martyrs in the afterlife.] He asserted that martyrdom and eternal rewards and blessings, . He wrote that, "It is in jihad that one can live and die in ultimate happiness, both in this world and in the Hereafter.

ONE SIDE says he was not merely unpopular among the scholars of his day, but somewhat of an embarrassment.

ANOTHER SIDE says he was an influential leader.

ALL AGREE his influence was greatest with the rise of Sunni revivalism in the modern period.




No comments:

Post a Comment