Bigotry and the Jurisprudence of Bigotry (Causes, Effects, and Accountability):

The second half of the fifth Hijri century was marked by sectarian strife that drained the nation’s efforts in unproductive social, cultural, political, and practical aspects, leading to stagnation and intellectual regression. It divided the community into conflicting and warring sects, distracting it from its essential issues of unity to marginal sectarian concerns.

Each sect considered itself the rightful existence on the stage of life. For example, some Hanbalis saw themselves as guardians over other Muslims in the Islamic community, claiming the correct understanding of Islam and portraying themselves as protectors of the faith. Whenever others deviated from their understanding, they incited the public against them in the streets and mosques.

Ibn Asakir in his book (“Exposing the Lies Attributed to Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari”) noted that among the Hanbalis, there was a faction that excessively delved into the Sunnah, involving what was irrelevant, driven by a desire to stir strife, which was not condoned by Ahmad – may Allah have mercy on him.

Muhammad Husayn al-Dhahabi in his book (“Tafsir and the Mufassirun”) discusses the reasons for doctrinal fanaticism and the emergence of differences among the followers of different schools. He noted that the adherents of each school regarded the words of their imams as absolute truths, dedicating their efforts to promote, defend, and disseminate them, and likewise exerting themselves to invalidate the school of those who disagreed.

This sectarian bigotry produced intellectual terrorism against those who deviated from the sect or opened up to other schools, branding them as uncommitted or hypocritical. Allegiance to a sect became the norm, with adherence to the Quran and Sunnah being secondary. The case of Ibn Aqil al-Hanbali, who faced ostracism for seeking knowledge about the Mu’tazili school, is a testament to this.

Abu al-Wafa’ Ali ibn Aqil mentioned that his Hanbali peers wanted him to shun the circle of scholars, leading to strife between him and his own sect during 461-465 AH. This reflects the Quranic verse, “Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam. And those who were given the Scripture did not differ except after knowledge had come to them, out of jealous animosity among themselves. And whoever disbelieves in the verses of Allah, then indeed, Allah is swift in [taking] account” [Al-Imran: 19].

The emphasis on sectarian writings disconnected Muslims from direct contact with the Quran and Sunnah. Followers believed that the authors had the absolute correct understanding of the Quran and Sunnah, bestowing titles like “Sheikh of Islam” and “Sultan of Scholars” on them, which led to the writing of biographical compilations like the Tabaqat of Hanbalis and Shafi’is.

Historical books mention that in 475 AH, the Shafi’is invited Abu al-Qasim al-Bakri al-Ash’ari to the Nizamiyya school to preach, which resulted in conflicts within and outside the school as he criticized the Hanbalis, echoing the Quranic verse, “They followed what the devils gave out [falsely of the magic] in the lifetime of Solomon. Solomon did not disbelieve, but the devils disbelieved, teaching men magic” [Al-Baqarah: 102].

The result of this sectarian bigotry was a hindrance to creativity, jurisprudential effort, and reform. It led the fanatics into a tunnel of closure, distancing them from social and realistic life, leading to desiccated concepts and petrified minds, stalling the schools at the level of glosses, annotations, and abbreviated texts. This disintegration led to the disintegration of the nation’s unity.

Sheikh Muhammad al-Ghazali, in his book (“How to Deal with the Holy Quran”), advocates for a methodology of returning to the Quran, initially stripping human interpretations of their sanctity. He criticizes the sanctification of schools of thought, which some adherents believe are as sacred as the Quran itself. He calls for direct engagement with the Quran, understanding it personally, and applying its teachings as understood, relying on others’ interpretations only for perspective, without sanctifying them.

The call for a new understanding, rooted in returning to the Quran and Sunnah, is essential for generations to recognize that parts of our jurisprudential heritage contain deviations and differences that hinder progress, while also housing the foundations for jurisprudential innovation and reform. This requires thorough review and purification of this heritage, discarding harmful foreign elements, retaining beneficial original elements, and revitalizing what has been neglected in people’s lives and thoughts through comprehensive reading aimed at discovering the truth and reforming the nation.

This task falls upon the scholars of these

generations, who should orient persons and objects in service of ideas (the Quran and Sunnah) and address real-life challenges, helping national institutions and administrations face challenges and adapt to new events and realities.

Malik ibn Nabi states that every society consists of three main elements: the world of ideas, the world of persons, and the world of objects. He explains that these components are interconnected, and depending on the nature of these connections, a network of social and other relationships among individuals and groups is formed. The method of thinking and understanding in a society is determined by these relationships, and society thrives when allegiance is to the world of ideas, guiding individual behaviors and societal policies. When allegiance shifts to the world of persons or objects, societal decay sets in, dominated by those with power, wealth, or those who manufacture desires, leading to a disintegrated society focused on superficial needs rather than foundational ideas.

10- Bigotry, and the Fiqh of Bigotry: Dr. Ihssan Baadarani