Ana səhifə

Le califat de yazid ier. 1909-21


Yüklə 1.01 Mb.
səhifə9/13
tarix18.07.2016
ölçüsü1.01 Mb.
1   ...   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13
part is to facilitate access to the hidden idea, to the mysteries of religion; for we are dealing with an esoteric and initiatory religion.

The three persons of the triad have clothed themselves in human flesh in each of the seven cycles—borrowed from the theories of the ‘Seveners’—which divide the history of the world. The last of these manifestations or incarnations coincided with the period of the Hijra. It was composed of ‘Ali, Muham­mad and Salman al-Farisi. Announced by Salman, his precursor, ‘Ali was enthroned by Muhammad. As to Salman, he is an obscure Companion of the Prophet, specially venerated by all the Shi‘a sects, who look upon him as one of the chief partisans of ‘Ali.

Although the persons of the divine triad are declared ‘inseparable', the two last are not placed on a footing of equality with ‘Ali. Rather are they presented as emanations of the archetypal divinity; that is, ‘Ali. It is the last-named who created Muhammad. The latter, in his turn, ‘has created the Lord Salman from the "light of his light"'. It is this very marked pre-eminence of ‘Ali which enables the Nosairis to call themselves ‘Muwahhidun’, or Unitarians. The triad is denoted by the symbol ‘‘Ams’, formed by the letters ‘ain, mim, sin, the initials of the names of the three Nosairi hypostases: ‘Ali, Muhammad, Salman. The relations between the three divine persons consti­tute ‘the mystery of ‘Ams’, the grand arcana revealed to the adepts in the services of initiation. Salman has taken upon himself to create the ‘Five Incomparables’ (aitam). The list of these has been made up by choosing from among the ‘Sahabis’, or Companions of the Prophet, the strongest partisans of ‘Ali . It is on these Incomparables that the creation of the world devolved.

So far all the Nosairis declare themselves in agree-

172 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS
ment. But in what external symbol does the divinity manifest itself in a permanent manner? Which among the natural phenomena is to be regarded as the habitation of the divine being and the tangible object of religious worship? The definition of this emblem gave birth to the four sects, into which they are divided: the Haidaris, Shamalis, Kilazis and Ghaibis.

Some seek the religious symbol either in the sun or the moon, or in the dim light which precedes the rising or setting of the sun. Others imagine they recognize it in the air or atmosphere. These diver­gences of opinion have won for the ‘Shamalis’ the name of ‘Shamsis’, or sun-worshippers; for the Kilazis that of ‘Qamaris’, or worshippers of the moon. A new source of division was opened when the question arose of determining whether these natural phenomena are the symbol of ‘Ali , Muhammad or Salman. These discussions have been food for subtle polemics among the Nosairi theorists. We will do no more than allude to them.

The Nosairis believe in metempsychosis. The Milky Way is made up of the souls of the ‘Unitarian’ faithful, transformed into stars. The second Sura of their Qoran is nothing but a prayer imploring, as a favour, escape from the lower degrees of metempsychosis, that is to say, from transmigration into the bodies of animals, a punishment which really constitutes the Nosairi hell. They alone among the Muslim factions admit the Fall. In the beginning, these souls were all glittering stars and enjoyed the vision of ‘Ali; but they delighted in the contemplation of their own excellence and to punish this pride ‘Ali banished them to earth and imprisoned them in human bodies.

Like the Druses, they are divided into two classes: the multitude of the profane (‘amma) and the chosen

THE SECTS OF ISLAM 173
few of the initiated (khassa). Initiation, presided over by a kind of godfather, or ‘uncle', does not begin before the age of eighteen, and lasts for at least nine months. Women are never admitted to initiation. The Nosairis possess no edifices set apart for worship. Their country is, however, covered with ‘qubbas’, or cupolas, which, erected on the summits of prominent hills, shelter the tombs of their saints. They are sur­rounded by venerable trees, which have themselves become the object of a superstitious worship. The religion of the profane multitude consists in visits to these tombs and sacrifices offered up there. The people have practically returned to the worship of the high places, sub omni ligno frondoso (Jeremiah 2, 20). For the initiated, religion consists in the revelation of the sacred symbol ‘‘Ams and in the allegorical inter­pretation of the religious books.

Nosairism, sprung from the Shi‘a consecrated to the worship of ‘Ali, has adopted several Shi‘a festivals. The greatest is that of ‘Ghadir Khomm’, which commemorates the anniversary of the day when, according to the Imamate tradition, Muhammad solemnly appointed ‘Ali as his vicar. This theme could not satisfy the ‘Alid fervour of the Nosairis, according to whom the Prophet declared that ‘Ali was the ‘Ma'na’ or Idea, the very Essence of the divinity. They celebrate also the commemoration of Kerbela (v. p.144), but without the circumstances with which the Imamites surround it.

Much more unexpected, in fact a peculiarity unique among the Muslim sects, is the adoption by the Nosairis of the great Christian festivals: Christmas (December 25, Old Style), New Year's Day, the Epiphany, or Baptism, ‘Ghattas (of Christ), Palm Sunday, Easter and Whitsuntide. To these they add borrowings from the martyrology of the Eastern Churches: the festivals

174 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS

of St. Barbara, of St. John Chrysostom, and of St. Catherine. They also bear Christian names: Matthew, John (‘Yuhanna’, the Christian form substituted for the Muslim spelling Yahya), Gabriel, Spiridion, Helen, Catherine, etc., a phenomenon without analogy in Islam.

The religious festivals are sometimes celebrated at night, the better to observe secrecy. Only the initiated are present and the meeting-place is a private house, belonging to one of the Faithful who undertakes to bear the expenses of the ceremony. The Imam or officiant is chosen from among the Sheikh ad-din, the counterpart of the ‘Ra’is al-'aql’ of the Druses (v. p. 168), who takes his place between two assistants or acolytes. In front of them are disposed candles, incense, fragrant plants and wine. One of the assistants censes the Imam and the nearest of those present. Then he hands the thurible to the second assistant, who passes along the ranks of the congregation in order to cense them. Some prayers (quddas) are recited over the cups of wine that have just been censed and those present exchange the kiss of peace. After further prayers, the Imam mixes a portion of his cup of wine with that of the acolyte, and at this signal all the congregation empty theirs and intone religious chants.

It would be difficult to ignore the analogy of this liturgy with Christian ceremonies. It becomes still more striking when considered in conjunction with a remark in the Nosairi catechism. This collection openly mentions ‘the consecration of the wine’; after which it adds: ‘The greatest of God's mysteries is that of the body and blood of which Jesus has said: “This is my Body and my Blood; eat and drink of them, for they are life eternal." The wine is called ‘Abd an-Nur, because in it God has revealed Himself.'

THE SECTS OF ISLAM 175


According to M. Rene Dussaud, the Nosairis present ‘a remarkable example of a people passing immediately from paganism to Isma‘ilism’. Presumably they have never been Christians. We have, therefore, to explain this fact, completely isolated in the history of the variations of Islam, and to clear the adoption and the origin of borrowings preserving so clearly the stamp of Christianity; the use of wine, of candles, of incense, the kiss of peace; a liturgical language frankly Christian; and a whole collection of festivals and ceremonies, jealously eliminated from the religious practices of Islam, not excepting those sects furthest removed from Qoranic orthodoxy.

Religious secrecy is, if possible, observed still more strictly than among the Druses. Its violation entails the death penalty. They, like certain other sects, are allowed to conform outwardly to the dominant religion, and be Christians with Christians, Muslims with Muslims. ‘We Nosairis,’ they sometimes say, ‘are the body and the other cults a garment. Now, the garment does not change the nature of the man but leaves him as he was. Thus we always remain Nosairis, although outwardly we may adopt the religious practices of our neighbours.'

Licentious practices and assemblies have been imputed to them as to their neighbours and bitter enemies, the Isma'ilis. The profound secrecy in which they enwrap their nocturnal ceremonies, and the liturgical use of wine, necessarily confirmed, especially in the eyes of the Muslims, these malicious reports. The French Mandate has put an end to the petty persecution to which they were subjected under Turkish rule. The Nosairi liturgy replied by male­-dictions directed against Islam and prayers ‘for the destruction of the Ottoman power’.

At the present time, the ‘Alawites’ participate in

176 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS
the government of their mountains where they are in the majority and no longer hesitate to declare themselves openly. The women are not obliged to observe any religious practice; they enjoy great freedom of move­ment and are not compelled to wear the veil. The men occasionally avail themselves of the Qoranic licence to marry four wives. They carry on no propa­ganda and admit no proselytes. Their religious litera­ture—polemics and liturgical poetry—shows great intellectual poverty. Their principal sacred book, the ‘Kitab al-Majmu‘’, a pale copy of the Qoran, is divide into sixteen Suras; another ‘Majmu‘’, or collection, enumerates and expatiates on the litur­gical festivals peculiar to the sect. They form a population of husbandmen scattered in Northern and Central Syria as well as in Turkish Cilicia, and number in all about 300,000 adepts.

THE ‘ALI-ILAHI. The origin of the Nosairis dates back to the beginning of the tenth century. Their religious system was completely formed when the first Druse missionaries arrived in Syria and attacked their doctrines. Allied to the Nosairis with whom they are often confused, even to the extent of being called by their name, is the much more modern sect—it cannot be earlier than the seventeenth century—of the ‘Ali- ilahi, or ‘‘Ali-allahi’, partisans of the God ‘Ali. They are self-styled ‘Ahl-i-Haqq’, or People of the Truth.

They are scattered throughout Anatolia and Persia, in Turkestan and the South of Russia; among the Kurdish clans in Northern Syria they number about fifteen thousand. They form compact groups in these diverse regions but seek to hide their identity by adapting themselves to the formal religious practices of their neighbours. The wide area over which they are dispersed, the fact that they are split up into

THE SECTS OF ISLAM 177


various nationalities, Kurdish, Turco-Mongol, Persian, whose aspirations are mutually antagonistic, the mystery in which they are forced to enwrap themselves, the fact that their religious collections are drawn up in Turkish, Persian and Kurdish, make up a tangle of unfavourable circumstances which has prevented their attaining, like the Nosairis, a unity of doctrine and religious practices.

They are divided into numerous sects. Their liturgy recalls that of the Nosairis, and also includes a kind of ritual communion in which bread and wine occur. All are agreed concerning the divinity of ‘Ali. They consider him as one of the seven incarn­ations of the divine essence, but they persist in looking for a final coming. Those in Anatolia, often called ‘‘Alawis’ or ‘‘Alawites’, and popularly ‘Qyzylbash’, or red-heads, have points in common with the Bektashis (v. p. 136) and their religious leaders main­tain relations with these and with the Nosairis. The latter are apt to consider the ‘Ali -ilahi as one of their sub-sects, and this is one of the reasons which have driven the Nosairis of Syria to demand the official name of ‘Alawis.

The dogmatic concepts of these Anatolian ‘Alawis—­the majority of whom are Kurdish—can be thus summed up: There is only one Truth, ‘haqq’, namely, ‘Ali . It is, then, to ‘Ali that all revelations can be traced; ‘Ali who has spoken through the medium of all the prophets. All, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, held their prophetic mission by the grace of ‘Ali. It is, then, to ‘Ali that the esoteric teaching of all the messengers from Heaven ultimately relates. The name of ‘People of the Truth’ professes to proclaim these doctrines.

It is unnecessary to add that these sects—Druses, Nosairis, ‘Ali-ilahis—all sprung from the Isma'ilian

178 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS
Shi‘a ,—have no longer anything in common with Islam in spite of certain conventional observances behind which they seek to conceal their religious separatism. This is no doubt why their representa­tives have not been invited to the ‘Congress of the Caliphate’ (see below), to which other sects, Ibadites, Imamites, Zaidites, and even the Isma‘ilis, have been summoned.

VIII
REFORMISTS AND MODERNISTS


REACTION AND REFORM. One of the characteristic traits of Islam is its conservative spirit. It professes to be the cult of the Sunna and of the Tradition. Outside the path traced by the Sunna or custom of the Prophet and followed by the ‘pious ancestors’ (as-salaf as­salih), it knows no salvation. Every innovation, ‘bid‘a’, every departure from the Sunna appears to it suspicious and synonymous with heresy. This is the principle proclaimed by the title of Sunnis, adopted by the orthodox, and of the more modern ‘Salafiyya’, namely, partisans and imitators of the ancestors.

But life pays no attention to abstract theories. In order to live, Islam has had to bow to the conditions governing all living organisms. It has unbent and adapted itself to surroundings and circumstances; it has admitted modifications and compromises. This evolution, which began a short time after the Prophet's death and in Medina itself, the ‘cradle of the Sunna’, has continued throughout the whole course of its history. Ijma‘ has covered with its authority these innovations, fiercely resisted at first—as for example printing, authorized only by fatwas in 1729. In order to legalize them it has discovered the theory of laudable and salutary bid‘as.

Its intervention has not disarmed opposition.
179

180 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS


Zealots have never been lacking who made it their mission to revivify custom, ‘ihya as-sunna’, and declaimed without ceasing against the abuses intro­duced under cover of the consensus. Such was the attitude adopted by the Zahirites or literalists. Next, it is among the Hanbalites that this reaction has always evoked the most persistent echo. No set-back discourages them; they do not recoil even before the prestige of a Ghazali. And yet orthodox opinion owed him a debt of gratitude for having laboured towards ‘the restoration (ihya) of the religious sciences’, by demonstrating the possible agreement between philosophy, theology and mysticism.

IBN TAIMIYYA. The most singular among all these makers of protests is incontestably the Syrian polemicist Taqi ad-din, whose name has already been mentioned several times. His inordinate activity overflowed the whole domain of Islamic discipline. A ruthless logician, Ibn Taimiyya declared himself against the speculative methods which the Ash'arites and Ghazali had placed at the service of orthodoxy.

He refused to recognize the value of ijma', created by the laborious agreement of the ulema. He was an indefatigable detector of heresies, who passed his life in denouncing novelties and discovering hetero­doxies. The bitter enemy of the mystical fraternities, Ibn Taimiyya, whom Dhahabi calls ‘the standard of the ascetics’, proscribed not only casuistry in jurisprudence, but the honours paid to the Prophet, the cult of the saints and of their tombs. He was an adherent of the Hanbalite school, and demanded the punishment of error by the most drastic penalties, often capital. His polemical pamphlets bore sug­gestive titles such as ‘The unsheathed sword’, ‘As-sarim al-maslul’. His integrity cannot be called in question, but his mistake lay in refusal to tolerate

REFORMISTS AND MODERNISTS 181


any religious ideal save one—his own. This intem­perate zeal, nourished by an incontestable erudition on the subject of the traditions, could not but disturb the conservatism of his contemporaries. The latter, according to Ibn Battuta, judged him ‘to have a disordered brain’, the victim of a mental derangement sometimes called odium theologicum.

Thus he spent the greater part of his stormy career in the prisons of the Muslim Inquisition at Cairo and Damascus—he died confined in the citadel of the latter town—without abating his intransigence or ever interrupting for a moment, even when in irons, his polemics both oral and written (1328). His disciple, the Damascene Ibn Qayyim al-Jauziyya, passed through the same trials and displayed the same lack of discretion in his polemical activities.

To both befell later the strange fate of being extolled and quoted alike by Wahhabis and modernists. The latter edit or re-edit the most long-forgotten pamph­lets of the implacable Damascene controversialist, Ibn Taimiyya. They see no better way of showing their gratitude for the vigorous blows which he dealt to the superstitions introduced into Islam. Ibn Taimiyya ‘was buried in the cemetery of the Sufis at Damascus (Dhahabi). The sepulchre of the great adversary of the cult of tombs continues to receive the homage of pilgrims.

THE WAHHABIS. All the sects that we have studied in the previous chapter owe, as we have seen, their origin to a political dispute, the question of the Cali­phate. In the eighteenth century, an Arab of Nejd proceeded to create a fresh dissidence. This innovator, called Muhammad ibn ‘Abdalwahhab (1703-1791), was born at ‘Oyaina, a small place in Nejd. It was his father, the Hanbalite ‘alim ‘Abdalwahhab, who was to give his name to the Wahhabis, although he

182 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS
was far from approving his son's exaggerated Puritanism. Under his guidance, Muhammad was initiated into the wisdom of Islam. His tendency to innovate, his rejection of certain observances of traditional Islam, were already manifest when he departed for the Hejaz. He studied for some time at Medina, and it was perhaps in this town that he was fired with enthusiasm for the writings of Ibn Taimiyya. However, he was outspoken in his criticism of the visits to the tomb of the Prophet and the ceremonies performed there. After a brief sojourn at Nejd he went to Basra, whence his views caused him to be expelled. He settled at last in his own country, and addressed himself, but without success, to several Arab chiefs with the object of winning them over to his doctrine. Towards 1745, he established relations with Muhammad ibn Sa‘ud, Emir of Nejd (†1768), who became his stepson. Supported by the latter, he imposed on Nejd, partly by persuasion, partly by force, his creed, which became the State religion of Nejd and was thereafter propagated and maintained in that country by the secular arm.

The Wahhabi innovator took up all the themes of his master, Ibn Taimiyya. Like him, in order to restore Islam to the golden age of the Prophet and his Companions, he preached the return to the two ‘sole’ sources of revelation: the Qoran and the early Sunna. He proscribed all speculative glosses in theodicy, exegesis and the traditions. He accepted, after the manner of the Zahirites, the literal meaning of the Qoran and the hadith, their whole anthropo­morphic mode of expression, without attempting to scrutinize the ‘kaif or modality, without even considering the very discreet compromises admitted by the Ash'arites (v. p. 57). He condemns all the innovations by which Islam has attempted to adapt

REFORMISTS AND MODERNISTS 183
itself to changing conditions, the laxity introduced by the spirit of worldliness and forgetfulness of early austerity. Let mosques be restored to their condition in the time of the Prophet: without mosaics or gilding, as also without minarets. This is anti-modernism in all its rigour.

The Ottoman Sultans, such as Murad IV (1632-1640), had begun by forbidding tobacco and coffee until fatwas authorized their use. Ibn ‘Abdalwahhab refuses to recognize this legitimizing by ijma‘, and his condemnation includes music and the wearing of silken apparel and gold and silver jewellery by men. With the early tradition the puritan Wahhabis sanction istisqa, or prayers for rain in times of drought; but they abhor to ask this same favour or any other at the tomb of a saint, not excepting that of the Prophet.

Without formally condemning visits to this last-named monument, they forbid that prayers should be offered there. They also prohibit public prayers in times of plague and other calamities. ‘We proscribe', wrote Ibn Sa‘ud, Emir of Nejd, at the begin­ning of the nineteenth century, to the Pasha of Damas­cus, ‘the erection of edifices on tombs, trust in the saints, prophets and martyrs; next the fraternities of faqirs, and Dervishes, in a word the role of inter­cessor attributed to creatures. We regard these beliefs and institutions as tainted with polythe­ism. We liken them to serious sins, such as drink­ing wine, swearing, except in the name of Allah, gaming...!’

From polemics, the Wahhabis soon passed to action. Their first onslaught was on the holy cities of the Shi‘a, pillaging the rich sanctuaries at Najaf and Kerbela. Masters of Central Arabia, they seized Mekka and Medina in 1803 and 1804. There they forced the ulema and the population to countersign

184 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS
their own ‘takfir’, that is, to acknowledge officially that up to that date they had lived as infidels. Not content with demolishing the mausoleums and the cupolas erected on the tombs, they replaced the silken veils covering the Ka'ba with common stuffs. At Medina they plundered the accumulated treasures of the tomb of Muhammad; but the local ulema had to send them fatwas justifying this audacity and alleging the use of the treasure in the interest of the Medinese population. For several years they plun­dered the Mekkan pilgrims and finally caused the cessation of the pilgrimage. It was necessary to subdue the iconoclasts of Nejd by force of arms. Owing to the decadence of the Ottoman Empire, the mission had to be entrusted to the powerful Egyptian Pasha, Mehemet-‘Ali, who, with his sons, only accom­plished it after a campaign lasting no less than quarter of a century.

IBN SA'UD. After that no more was heard of the Wahhabis. They divided into the Northern and Southern factions, headed by the two rival families of Ibn Sa‘ud and Ibn Rashid, whose dissensions long stained the desert with blood. At the end of 1921, ‘Abdal ‘aziz ibn Sa‘ud, the hereditary Emir of Southern Nejd, succeeded in vanquishing his adversary Ibn Rashid, Emir of Shammar or Northern Nejd. He took his capital Ha‘il and massacred the rest of the family. In conflict since 1918–1919 with Husain ibn ‘Ali, Grand Sherif of Mekka and since 1916 King of the Hejaz, Ibn Sa‘ud took possession of Taif and Mekka during the summer of 1924. A year of blockade delivered into his hands the port of Jeddah, the last refuge of King ‘Ali, who had succeeded his father, the ex-King Husain. This success brought the ephemeral Sherifian dynasty of the Hejaz to an end.

Ibn Sa‘ud, who had previously taken the title of

REFORMISTS AND MODERNISTS 185


Sultan, appeals to a world-congress of Islam to decide the future of the Hejaz. His victories have made him the most powerful sovereign in Arabia. His possessions extend to the borders of Iraq, Palestine, Syria, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. His striking personality has expressed itself in the creation of the ‘Ikhwan', or brethren. They are a brotherhood of Wahhabi activists; the Englishman Philby calls it a ‘new freemasonry'. They form the propagandist organization of the sect, the nucleus of Ibn Sa‘ud's army; picked soldiers in war-time, agriculturists in time of peace. Nejd numbers a score of agricultural colonies created by the Ikhwan.

Wahhabi proselytism has spread into the Arabian states bordering on Nejd, into Mesopotamia, ‘Oman and Somalia. India has numerous groups classed under the various names of ‘Salafiyya’, ‘Ahl al-hadith’, ‘Fara'idiyya', etc., who without adhering completely to the doctrinal programme of the Wahhabis, all draw inspiration from their reformist tendencies. These Neo-Wahhabi communities aim at purging Islam from the contamination of Hindu polytheism.

The mistake of Wahhabism has been to deny, or at least to limit, arbitrarily the function of ijma‘. They have incurred the strictures of the Sunnis by their readiness to anathematize (takfir) all the other Muslims, by the excesses of their sumptuary puritan-ism, no less than by their acts of violence against the persons of their adversaries, and the traditional monuments and institutions of Islam, excesses which only their partisans attempt to dispute. In strict law they do not, however, constitute a sect, still less a heresy properly so-called. They are the ultras, the integretists, of orthodox Islam. Disciples of Ibn Taimiyya, they form the extreme right wing of the Hanbalite school. Within the last few years

186 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS


they have, moreover, somewhat relaxed their early intolerance.

In the course of their recent occupation of the holy cities of the Hejaz, they have given proof of a relative moderation, appreciable, however, when compared with their attitude of a century ago. Some specially lofty cupolas and tombs were again razed to the ground. Certain sanctuaries were declared apocryphal and were cut off. But the treasure of Muhammad's mausoleum was respected. The prohibition of coffee—the favourite beverage of the Wahhabi sovereign—has been revoked or has fallen into desuetude. Circumstances have forced them to make other concessions, no less significant. The King of Nejd has added to his title that of King of the Hejaz and does not believe that he has come to the end of his career and ascent to power. As he has appealed to the Muslim world, political considerations oblige him to treat Islamic opinion with tact, and particularly the Islam of India, where he numbers his most influen­tial partisans. On July 2, 1925, at the close of the annual pilgrimage, in the presence of the delegation of Indian ulema, he made the following declaration, every word of which deserves careful consideration:

‘Before God and all Muslims I pledge myself to urge them to cleave to the old religion. My belief and my confession of faith are those of the pious ancestors; my rite (madhhab) is their rite. Whenever there is an explicit Qoranic verse or an authentic hadith or a prescription dating back to the four first Caliphs or confirmed by the unanimous conduct of the Companions of the Prophet; when agreement between the four Imams, founders of the juridical rites (v. p. 85), can be established, or agreement among their successors, the ulema, without departing from the Qoran and the Sunna, in all these cases I

REFORMISTS AND MODERNISTS 187


adopt no other belief but profess what our pious predecessors professed.'

It would be difficult to imagine a more astute formulary. Vexatious questions have been evaded. It is drawn up in a manner which, while insisting on doctrinal agreement, avoids defining the role which ijma‘ is to play therein and determining the terminus ad quem of its chronological extension. Under these conditions Sunnis and Wahhabis could both lend it their support. Here is the explanation of the sudden change which has been effected in the orthodox camp. Hardly does a voice here and there recall the fatwas that formerly condemned the Wahhabis, under pressure, as is now admitted, of the Ottoman author­ities. To-day Sunni writers readily undertake the vindication of their doctrine and represent them as a calumniated sect whose rehabilitation is a work of justice.

The Wahhabite sympathies of the Muslim intel­lectuals and modernists must necessarily be more unexpected. Their doctrinal scepticism seemed bound to separate them from such sincere believers as the innovators of Nejd, for whom progress consists essen­tially in a return to the most remote past. Leaving out of account the Neo-Wahhabi factions of India, the reformist school of the Manar (see p. 211) is entirely devoted to the Wahhabis. These sympathies were noisily expressed on the occasion of the recent events which revolutionized the political situation in the Hejaz. The modernists flatter themselves that in the Wahhabis they have found useful auxiliaries who will facilitate for them the reform of Islam. Furthermore, the two parties are at one on another point of their common programme, the desire to close the Arabian Peninsula to all foreign penetration. Which will carry the day? The laggards of Arabia, or

188 ISLAM BELIEFS AND INSTITUTIONS


those who propose to skip the intermediate stages in order to make up lost headway on the road of modern progress?

AHMADIYYA. A more recent reformist movement in Islam, dating from 1880, has resulted in the creation of a new sect, that of the ‘Ahmadiyya’. The founder from whom it takes its name, Mirza Gholam Ahmad (†1908), a native of Qadian in the Punjab (India), claimed to have discovered the veritable tomb of Christ, who he alleged had found refuge in India and died there. This find served as the starting-point of Ahmadiyya.

Its three chief novelties are its Christology, its theory of the Mahdi and that of the jehad. It is this last which gives it an appearance of Islamic reform. It arbitrarily revises not only the Christology of the Gospel but also that of the Qoran (v. p. 50). If this collection (

1   ...   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©atelim.com 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət