Working to discount the growing theology of terror

Working to discount the growing theology of terror

Muhamad Ali, Hawaii

Dr. Azahari is gone, but terrorism neither began with him, nor
will it end with his death. The military and political efforts to
crush terrorist networks have certainly reduced the terrorist
threat, but a more serious systematic intellectual effort to de-
legitimize a theology of terror, a worldview which justifies the
unjustified killing of innocent people is no less crucial in our
attempt to prevent it gaining widespread sympathy and following.
In our preaching, teaching, and writing, we have not done enough
to de-legitimize terrorism which has made the world a dangerous
place to live.

The masterminds must have transmitted their knowledge and
skills to new recruits. They have spread their worldview through
various means: statements, books, the Internet and mass media.
The terrorists may well have sympathizers in every country in the
world.

In every religion or ideology radicalization of sacred texts
has long existed. In Muslim history, theological prisms were born
out of politics with a religious nuance. Khawarij was a splinter
group which justified the killing of Muslims who according to
them did not obey the law of God. Today's terrorists may be
regarded as the khawarij of the early Islamic age.

Each sacred scripture or ideological book can be interpreted
in many ways. But this semantic character of multi-
interpretability does not mean that those of us who seek a
peaceful world are to tolerate the intolerant interpretations of
texts. In other words, we should refute the religious arguments
of the terrorists -- or whatever they call themselves. It is
really not enough to condemn terrorists as "un-Islamic" and leave
their discourse publicly unchallenged.

To maintain that Islam allows multi-interpretations should not
mean passivity, relativism, or nihilism as if there is no truth
at all. To say that Islam is diverse should not mean that we
should tolerate particular interpretations which not only
denounce other interpretations but also wish to destroy universal
humanity.

Muslim scholars now have to be more vocal to state that the
terrorists are not martyrs. They should state that the terrorists
will not go to heaven as they no doubt claim.

The khawarij-like-terrorists have used particular religious
teachings for self-legitimatization, have read world events and
legitimized their actions in such a way that they believe only
they are genuine religious and only they go to paradise. Their
interpretations of jihad, amar ma'ruf nahi munkar, and kufr are
highly selective, literal and partial.

The terrorists have militarized the peaceful teachings of
Islam. They are absolutist; they believe that their
interpretations are the only genuine interpretation of Islam and
the others are simply wrong.

Their definition of jihad as a holy war against unbelievers,
infidels, and Muslims who do not share their views, should be
declared foolish, delusive and false. They are misguided into
false consciousness.

Jihad in its defensive meaning can only be carried out under
particular conditions (shurut wal arkan), that is, legal
conditions with a justified cause. The holy war waged by the
terrorists has violated religious teachings by creating
widespread destruction of humankind.

The terrorists do not treat the Koran justly and
comprehensively. They entirely neglect the Koranic passages that
urge the use knowledge and wisdom (hikma), good lessons (mauizha
hasana) and better dialog (jadal) in their interaction with other
people. The terrorists do not understand the essence of Islam to
spread justice (adl), peace (salam), and blessings for the whole
mankind and universe (rahmatan lil alamin).

The terrorists repeatedly state that they are waging a holy
war against the enemies of Islam, the enemies of God, who have
killed the Muslims in Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan. They feel
they are in a global war and are thus justified to kill any
Americans or their allies in any parts of the world. They will
wage a war until there is no progeny (fitna), a progeny according
to their own definition. They believe they are commanding the
good and forbidding the evil. They claim the West is entirely
evil. The Arab and other Muslim governments if not infidels are
apostates. And only through jihad such a progeny will not
prevail. These interpretations are literal, selective,
essentialist and dangerous.

Terrorists view the world events, a country, a religion, a
people in essentialist ways, in a black and white fashion. They
interpret the American presence in Saudi Arabia, the conflicts in
the Middle East, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in the Philippines, in
such a way that all the enemies should be fought against
everywhere.

They generalize one moment, one person, one place into the
whole moment, all people, and the whole place. They cannot
differentiate; they simplify the complex realities. They use
myths, perceptions and sentiments, rather than reason which they
do not trust. They are against reason and dialog.

They claim to follow the path of the earliest pious Muslims
(al-salaf al-shalih), but they have actually followed the radical
khawarij path. The Prophet and the earlier pious companions could
not possibly justify the killing of innocent people and the
waging of war in times of peace. The terrorists are simply
misguided in their attempt at using the text and the golden age
of Islam for their misreading of today's events, religions, and
peoples.

It is not sufficient simply to understand the roots of
terrorism. We have to deal with them seriously. The voices that
resort to terror, violence, and murder, must be silenced.

Muhamad Ali is an academic staff at the State Islamic
University, Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta, and is a PhD candidate
in History at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He can be
reached at muhali74@hotmail.com