Extremism at Modern Times..

Extremism at Modern Times..

Extremism at Modern Times
As terrorism originates from deviation and aberration from the convictions of the majority, and as those with the true beliefs were always the majority over times, the deviated people found themselves a minority and thus used to gather secretly to continue their existence. That is how the old-fashion deviation moved in time to the present.

So we see the old beliefs of Allah's resemblances and embodiments, fatalism, reincarnation, and the Khawarij thoughts recurring again and again, but in different names. Like their predecessors who used to accuse those who differ in their view on infidelity and liquidated them when they could, as in the case of the Khawarij who killed some of the Prophet companions' sons and those who believed in embodiment who cracked rifts and turbulence in Baghdad and killed a lot of people, the grandsons of those people carried on with the same accusations and killings but on a larger scale, as they are not faced with enough resistence.

We may spot the most radical thoughts now present in large scale in all Islamic countries as follow:
1. A doctrine that calls for inactivity and accuses of infidelity anyone who came with a new idea that did not exist at the time of the Prophet (the prayers and blessings of Allah be upon him).

2. A doctrine that assumes the protection of Islam as its duty, and alleges it wants to establish an Islamic Society. It accuses the rulers of Islamic countries of infidelity, under the pretext that they rule with man-made laws, as well as the Muslims for not overthrowing those rulers.

The first of these two groups can be divided into two sections:
1. One that prohibits modernity of all matters, religious-oriented and otherwise; prohibiting the use of phones, TV sets and such modern technology appliances claiming that they did not exist at the time of the Prophet (the prayers and blessings of Allah be upon him).

2. The second bans the new traditions regarding issues related only to the religion, not distinguishing between new heretical creations that are contradictory to the Sharia the and commendable ones. The followers of such doctrine consider all that has been introduced anew regarding religion are deviated, heretical and reprehensible, with no differentiation between what is in accord with the Sharia and what is not. By pursuing that, they contradict with what the Prophet (the prayers and blessings of Allah be upon him) said in a Hadith: "He who innovates a good tradition into Islam shall have its reward and as much reward as those who do it after him without deducting any of their rewards." Has what the second-generation follower (successor) of the Prophet, Yahya bin Ya'mor, done, dotting the Holy Qur'an, a heretical creation? What if all the Muslims reciting the Quran today benefit from the dotted copies? Can we claim that the Muslims are following a heretical creation? Of course not. Indeed the proofs against their deviated logic are numerous.

This group considers celebrating the Prophet, or pious people, or visiting their graves, as an association of deities to God. Well, has the visit of Imam Shafi'y to the grave of Imam Abu Hanifa when he was in Baghdad been so? In his book The History of Baghdad, AI Khatib AI Baghdadi quoted AI Shafi'y as saying that he did not seek any blessing from Abu Hanifa, but used to visit him while in Baghdad; and in case he needed to have some issues settled, he visited his shrine and prayed to Allah and invoked Him and shortly afterwards, all issues were settled. So, would that be an act of association by AI Shafi'y? On the other hand, isn't it stated in the book AI Mustadrak, of AI Hakim's, that the Prophet (the prayers and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Jesus, son of Mariam, shall indeed descend as a just ruler and shall take a path to perform Pilgrimage or Umrah, and indeed shall come to my grave and salute me and indeed I shall salute him back"? Can we say that Jesus' journey with the purpose of visiting the grave or the mosque of the Prophet (the prayers and blessings of Allah be upon him) is some sort of deity association? The influences of such accusation-oriented thinking were then reflected in the violent practices of the Muslim youth across the Islamic countries.

As for the other (first) group, the deviation manifests itself in deeming infidel any Muslim ruler who rules on the one hand according to man-made law; then in their on the Muslims to revolt against such rulers by virtue of coups, violent revolutions, destroying the main institutions
of a country, or killing the police and army officers. If those peoples do not do what they call upon them to do, they deem them infidel too, and decree that their lives, property, and honor are all lawful to be destroyed. Bombing of buses, airports, and public roads that occurred in Syria two decades ago was of that kind.

This group adopts a strategy that was embraced by its theorists and that became increasingly widespread through a lot of books published and translated into different languages, a strategy that affirms the infidelity of the Muslim society and hence calls for the necessity of revolting against the existing rulers in order to change the ignorant society and establish the Muslim rule that this extremist group is calling for.

Here we quote some of the phrases circulated in such books which many of those extremists think of as their constitution. One of them says "the time has returned to the way it was before this religion come to humanity with the testimony of (there is no God but Allah); humanity relapsed to the worshiping of people and to the injustice of other religions and abandoned the testimony of (there is no God but Allah)." It goes on saying that "all humanity relapsed, even those who repeat the words of "there is no God but Allah" on minarets without knowing its meaning or reason, they all relapsed to the worshiping of people." This kind of thinking, as we saw, through the collective deeming of the society considers that we are living in the pre-Islamic era before the prophet (the prayers and blessings of Allah be upon him). It deems infidel all Muslims for ruling according to man-made laws, even if it is in one case, saying that by them doing so they are declaring their rejection of Allah as their God and their rejection to acknowledge the oneness of Allah as their God. Again this different infidelity accusation phrases against Muslim rulers and peoples are repeated in such books.

We will not be exaggerating when we say that this trend of deeming rulers and peoples of infidelity is one of the most prominent aspects of extremism during the second half of the twentieth century that influenced the doctrines of most extremist movements in the Arab and Islamic worlds.

A booklet issued by some adherents of this call, entitled "Seeking Weapons and Using Them is a Religious Duty", says, "Every Muslim must do his utmost to obtain weapons in whatever way, then he must use them in killing the protectors of infidelity and evil, all the heads of treachery, from the least important to the most", i.e. from janitor to head of state.

Here we can see that the instigation to kill is the pivotal basis for those people who consider the society pre-Islamic. The idea of the pre-Islamic society unleashed by those who embrace the infidelity-accusation way of thinking was received by the extremist groups and base on what they built their ideas they believe in the terrorist operations to carry it out. It is even difficult to recognize the main idea they are calling us to believe in while their groups are loyalty-distracted and accuse each other of infidelity.

What order would they put in place after they have already killed people before seizing power? Not everyone who memorizes an Ayat of the Qur'an is a Sheikh or a leader. And since when have their statements become a source of religious law. This attitude of ours is only based on our great fear for our Arab and Islamic countries to fall victim of the dangers of extremism and fanaticism.

Islam is clear from such ideas.