"Islam 101" - Anushirvan: "The Koran determines who is a genuine Muslim and Who isn't!"

"Islam 101" - Anushirvan: "The Koran determines who is a genuine Muslim and Who isn't!"(TT).Tundra Tabloids’ commentator, Anushirvan comments to a previous post on the Jordanian cleric who admonishes tough treatment on apostates from Islam. He elucidates for us the Islamic understanding of absolutism (driving a nail into the idea of the ”many paths in Islam) and the defining of ”who’s a Muslim”.
text-align: justify;">The Quran itself contains provisions with regards to determining who is a genuine Muslim and who isn’t. The core concept of Islam is called Tawhid, the religion’s most fundamental concept and holds Allah is one and unique. The Qu’ran asserts the existence of a single and absolute truth that transcends the world; a unique, independent and indivisible being, who is independent of the entire creation.

The indivisibility of Allah implies the indivisibility of Allah’s sovereignty which, in turn, leads to the concept of a just, moral and coherent universe, as opposed to an existential and moral chaos. Tawhid is a moral absolute and defines the inherent impossibility of the average human (Muslim or otherwise) to create laws that are binding or legitimate in any way. Such laws would be automatically diluting and corrupting the ultimate moral authority Allah represents.

Hence, total adherence to Islam within the constrains of Tawhid has to be just as absolute. 

Last but least, the level to which Muslims adhere in practice to Tawhid has to be measured against the backdrop of two concepts: Shirk (defined as polytheism/idolatry) and bid’ah (heresy within Islam).

As we have already seen, Shirk can be used to determine who the “default infidels” are (non-Muslims in general), ( http://tundratabloids.com/2012/02/r-e-s-p-e-c-t-islam-demands-it-but-never-gives-it.html) and in fact, it is an equally useful concept to sort the Sunni wheat from the Sunni chaff (genuine Sunni Muslims vs. false Sunni Muslims, AKA Munafiqun) in terms of Salafi moral supremacism. (bid’ah on the other hand is a criterion that solely applies to the distinction between Sunni Muslims vs. non-Sunni Muslims)

In the Salafi view, the average Munafiq can also be designated as a default apostate, and thus equally kafir like the default infidel. To the average Salafi, there’s no real distinction to be made between a Munafiq and a Murtad, both imply the same thing in practice: the individual does not attain the moral standards related to Tawhid, he/she is inherently immoral to the core and can be persecuted without any reservations.

The converging concepts of Tawhid, Shirk and Bid’ah have lead to a particular Salafi viewpoint relating to what does or doesn’t constitute legitimate rule, called Al Wala’ Wal Bara’ (literally: Loyalty and Separation) that is commonly understood among Salafis as “Love and Hate for Allah’s Sake”. 

Al Wala’ Wal Bara’ is derived from Quranic verses demonstrating that violence against Munafiq Sunnis can be equally justified as in the case of violence directed against non-Muslim infidels (Christians, Jews, Bhuddists, Hindus, atheists,…et al.) or non-Sunni Muslims (Shi’ites of different subdenominations, Ahmadiyya, Ibadi,…etc.)

In order to demonstrate that Al Wala’ Wal Bara serves as an explicit justification and permissible incitement to direct violence against Muslims, (even if they are Sunni) we need to scrutinize the line of reasoning behind this concept and take the definition from the horse’s mouth, so to speak. A google search of Al Wala’ Wal Bara will for instance yield a lot of results linking to different Muslim forums that explain the concept in great detail. (http://quranicverse99.tripod.com/islamicways/id15.html).

The conclusions we can draw from this are manifold:

1) Salafism rejects the idea that infidels can be instrumental in furthering the cause of Islam. Infidels have to be avoided in first instance, they corrupt Muslim doctrine and instill Western decadence in Muslims.

2) Muslim regimes that ally themselves in any way with infidels are de facto illegitimate. (for example: Mubarak’s Egypt and the USA) Salafism clearly defines “the enemy within Islam” by Al Wala Wal Bara.

3) Impermissible idolatry (shirk) includes the integration of non-Islamic concepts into the doctrine (like Western secular-oriented socialism or nationalism in Nasserism, Ba’athism and Kemalism) Secular- influenced regimes in the Muslim world are de facto illegitimate. (Ben Ali’s Tunisia, Mubarak’s Egypt, Assad’s Ba’athist Syria).

4) Solidarity between Muslims can only exist between ‘genuine’ Muslims that submit themselves to Tawhid as Salafis define it, all shirk and bid’ah has to be discarded.

5) Integrating Western ways of life into the life of the Muslim individual is forbidden. Every activity that relates to leisure time amusement or Western materialism is a type of corrupting idolatry. (hence, the “no fun in Islam” tenet is absolute in Salafism).

6) Non-Salafi Sunnis are (alongside Shi’ites, Sufis, Ahmadiyya…etc.) de facto infidels, they have to be persecuted, war can be waged on them and it is perfectly justified against both Munafiq temporal rulers and average citizens going about their daily business, alike. This explains why Muslims kill Muslims all the time.

7) The converging concepts of Tawhid, Shirk and Bid’ah are explicitly inscribed in the Quran to demarcate the moral boundaries between those who can be considered genuine Muslims and those Muslims who are considered “morally corrupt” and are therefore deemed apostates and infidels. These provisions in the Quran are tools to establish a greater level of Islamic uniformity across the global Muslim world, and have given rise to the Al Wala Wal Bara core tenet of Salafism as a tool to violently reinforce this doctrinal uniformity in practice. Which demonstrates that Islam can in no way be considered as a moderate doctrine or a benign religion. These core issues are specifically designed in order to stave off any type of Islamic reform in the first place ! Thus, Islam can NOT be modernized in any way. Islamic reform constitutes corruption and defilement of the doctrine.

8) If Salafism becomes mainstream in the West (and to a certain extent it is becoming increasingly mainstream already), then these so-called Arab Spring Movements (which are decidedly Salafist by nature) will eventually also mobilize against illegitimate infidel rule across Europe and the Anglosphere. In other words, we can expect Salafi revolutions on our own doorstep !Read the full story here.