What attracts Somalis to Salafism?

[Khayr]

Originally posted by Viking:

Khayr,

The points Nur raised and the petro-dollars you mentionned probably did have a lot to do with it. But I think that two more aspects might have also played a significant role in the directions Somalis take.

 

1. Somalis generally are people of an oral tradition and don't have a history/tradition of academe, or libraries of domestic literature from the past. Therefore, most of the population followed "literally" what the handful of scholars (educated abroad) had to say because there is/was no alternative. You will hardly hear a Somali (I'm generalising here) say I read this and that (about a certain issue and the different points of view scholars have) but you will often hear Sheikh hebel said this and sheikh hebel said that, their source of information is oral, either from the pulpit, casettes, word-of-mouth or through madrasas (from teachers with links to the Hijaz).

 

2. We don't have a culture of questionning things that are of religious nature. To do this, you will have to refer to books or other scholars from the past whose works you need to know about by reading. This makes the issue of "taqleed" very easy to swallow for most Somalis because of the reasons stated above.

I agree about the strength of oral tradition and that somalis that system of communication to be the one of the soundest.

 

Thus, if the only somali masjids have a salafi bend, then the somali community in that local will follows those tenants. They see somali and they see religion, thus it must be the truth and only true version of the deen.

 

It is true that the salafiyyah do have alot of financial backing and therefor can print and distribute most of the current religous literature and fund masajids.

 

For somalis, if habelayo goes to the masjid and they are your somali friend/relative etc., then we are more likely to attend with them and listen to their dawa.

 

If it ain't somali and if it is a taboo in the somali community, then it usually is rejected. That is why somalis congregate in masajid that are filled with other somalis and their somali peers. If somalis don't frequent a particular masjid, there must be something wrong with it-right?

 

Nur said:

 

This may not be true brother, during the golden age of knowldge, Bagdad , Basra, Damascus and Azhar were attracting the faithful to islam, its not the location, its the content that attracts the faithful, and today, Makkah's Umm Al Quraa University and Madina University have gotten their act together to graduate many students.

I would disagree saxib and say that it is the location and the very fact that the Hijaz has many resources ($$$) to offer in the spread of the Salafiyyah minhaj.

[xiinfaniin]

Jimcaale:- Salafiya Jadiida, at least the one in Somalia, is a reactionary movement and there’s neither jurisprudential significance nor theological implication to it. It’s simply a fancy label! Its origins could be traced back in the early Nineties when Al-itihaad’s failed coup in Puntland ignited divisions within that movement. Certain groups within that movement somehow decided to disown one of the most fundamental aspect of Islamic awakening; waging jihaadi war! Absence of a khaliif who can unify and lead Muslim Ummah, they argued, any armed struggle against any entity is not islamicly permissible! Their problem started when begun issuing fatwas against wars that were popular even in the secular segment of Somali society such as the one in occupied Somali Galbeed. Shariif AbdiNur had put forth one of the best argument on this issue that I’ve come across to refute this group’s misleading religious decrees.

 

Of course things have changed with the emergence of Mogadishu Islamic Courts and someone was telling me the other day that one of the principle leaders of this salafiya jadiida group is now among Courts movement!

 

Kheyr, excuse our side discussion within your thread!

[ElPunto]

Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

^^Very good! I am begining to like your reasoning

! Salafism is also a descriptive school that adheres to a particular approach in exacting jurisprudential verdicts, good Point. Ever heard

الإ ستدلال السلÙÙŠ

(istidlaal a-salafi)? What that basically means is to adopt a restrictive approach in terms of formulating proofs in solving fiqh issues! It doesn’t mean however living back in time and ignoring new realities! It’s very critical to understand this concept of Salafism especially when doing scholarly Ijtihaad!

 

People who consciously attack this concept understand what it entails; true adherence to the scholastic learning of that era! You of all people shouldn’t get thrown out of balance upon hearing this word! You shouldn’t view it in a negative light. Indeed I think we should all appreciate the religious significance of this concept! Roots of most fundamental principles of our Islamic sciences were put down during that era. Processes of validating ahaadiith were argued and agreed up on. Theological positions were solidified and settled.

 

Sophistry aside, Salafism is a good label. To argue that we all be satisfied calling ourselves Muslims, though commendable a call, is missing the point of this discussions. You see, you are not cracking a hole in your Muslim identity if you subscribe to the Shaafi’ school. Likewise[edit] you are not doing any harm by categorising yourself as a Salafi.

Oh come on - restrictive interpretations is the correct way to go about it - since we are taught to remain conservative in matters of religion. And one subscribes to the Shaafi' school - one is not a Shaafist(unlike a 'Salafist'). A legitimate and well-recognized school of jurisprudence. But this salafist label has emerged in the last few years. And if it is the process as you've described above - it hardly needs a label since it describes the very religion of Islam.

[Legend of Zu]

^^^^ Just to complete the destruction of Xiin's argument - Muhaajiruun and Ansaar terms are based on What Allah have called them in the Quran.

 

As for Salafis..well..I can't see how they become part of the salafu saalix...even tho Salafis claim to be walking on their path...

 

As for the argument that salafi is a school of thought..that is quite debatable to the least and refutable to the most

 

Salaams

[Nur]

The Point

 

You write: Oh come on - restrictive interpretations is the correct way to go about it - since we are taught to remain conservative in matters of religion. And one subscribes to the Shaafi' school - one is not a Shaafist(unlike a 'Salafist'). A legitimate and well-recognized school of jurisprudence. But this salafist label has emerged in the last few years. And if it is the process as you've described above - it hardly needs a label since it describes the very religion of Islam.

 

 

Walaal.

 

 

The context in which names are attached to movements is crucial in order to understand what is in a name.

 

Salafia, as you have described is not a jurisprudence School of thought ( Madarasa Fiqhiya), so no one should equate it with that category of schools.

 

Salafia is a ( Change Management) movement that found itself policing other revivalist Islamic movements in the turn of the century, who in the course of their Dawa work splintered into feuding factions with different names, in dispute over Aqeedah, Fiqh, controls of the revivalist movements, priorities and even on the level of Sunnah adherence of members of this growing revivalist movements.

 

Salafiyah, calims that the best way to bring about an Islamic Nation again is through strict adherence to the Sunnah of the Prophet SAWS and the Quraan. Its leaders are mostly Hanbalis from Saudi Arabia or Somali students who have graduated from the Saudi Universities. The major hurdle that Salafayah movement has faced is the seemingly Dhaahiri interpretation of selected traditions, which are in conflict of Imam Shafici's way of Fiqh. Also absent from the Salafiya movement is a clear definition of a seemless transition from the present condition of the Ummah to that envisioned by the revivalists with their differences in approaches. And lastly, there is neither a single authority that represents this name, nor a single definition that spelled out what constitutes Salafiya approach in detail. One vague definition often given is the ( Quraan+ Sunnah+ The understanding of the Salaf generation) , however Quraan and Sunnah were covered by scholars of Tafseer and Science of Hadeeth, both of the salaf, but the "understanding of the Salaf" for those two sources present a circular logic, Like saying " We are closed, because we are not open" as Imaam Al Tabari was a Salaf Mufassir, likewsie Ibn Salaah who laid down the foundation of the science of hadeeth was a Salaf Hadeeth Scientist ( Salaf are those who lived immediately after the companions.

 

However, the Somali graduates of the colleges in Madina and Ummul Qura came back home to teach Islam from the Hanbali point of view without any accomodation to the locals adherence to Shafici school of thought for ages, which created the publics unease with this new phenomena known as Salafiya which is confused with schools of thought ( Madh-habs) on one hand meanwhile acting as a guide for Islamic revivalist movements on the other.

 

Fiqh or as roughly translated ( Jurisprudence) comes in different contexts:

 

Fiqhul Axkaam wal Cibaadaat: Which is the Shafici, Hanbali, Hanafia and Maliki

 

Fiqhul Waaqic: Which is Knowledge body of understanding current events from an Islamic perspective.

 

Fiqhul Xarakah: Which is the knowledge body that governs the Islamic revivalist movement and guides its stratgies in bringing about an Islamic Ummah based on the teachings of the quraan and Sunnah.

 

The latter is were Salafiya movement, and lately a splinter group ( Salafiya Jadida aka Jaamiya) has made an impact.

 

I whole heartedly agree that we should not accept any other name for the ummah except that which Prophet Abraham had called us in Quraan, ( Huwa sammakumul Muslimiina Min Qabl), ironically the name MUSLIM would be the essence of true Salafiyah, because the Salaf called themselves MUSLIMS only, therefore we should only abide by Quraan and Sunnah given names.

 

 

Nur

[-Lily-]

^^^ I agree with Nur completely. I find it very confusing to have labels within labels and the only purpose of lables in this case is to divide people and exclude them.

[xiinfaniin]

lol@General Zu ----to complete the destruction kulahaa !

 

The Point: we’ve come very close in getting into a recursive argument here saaxiib! That was one reason I’ve dropped of this discussion. Salafism, contrary to what good brother Nur suggested, is an approach where one restricts own self to follow a particular derivation when constructing proofs. You could genuinely object to any branding in Islam other than Muslim label but to suggest a name for a scholastic approach somehow smells negativity is, I am afraid, a failing of sort! I perfectly understand that, in today’s’ poisoned environment, one would be guardedly careful to stay away from negative partisanship that’s prevalent in our wider Muslim community. What I can’t understand, however, is for us to distance ourselves names and labels that should rather be the source of our pride and a part of our heritage. I tried to give you examples were a specific identification was used to describe particular segment of Prophets companions or a fiqh school was named after his originator to designate its jurisprudential conventions. Likewise Salafism represents approach and tradition of an admittedly blessed generation who put the roots of our Islamic science foundation. You attempted to counter by saying that needs not to be honored with a label since the Qur’an and the tradition of Muhammad both educate and give similar instructions. I would almost agree with that argument if I didn’t sense that your understanding of Salafism is insufficient and, quite honestly, at times completely wrong! Remember it’s always helpful to understand the thing you want to object to! Salafism, to repeat, is not a label that just popped up!

 

Nur, I don’t understand why you are attempting to somehow link Salafism with Saudi Arabia or for that matter to the Somali sahwah! I did understand that Kheyr’s question needed addressing but I still think to suggest Salafism is a latter day concept is quite misleading! Saudi Arabia is where Salafism met its demise. Saudi and its Islamic schools didn’t help revive Salafism rather it subverted it.

[Reality Check]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

Because they’re the loudest and they never stop telling us all that they’re the chosen sect. Advertising works, brother. Why do we all drink Coca Cola instead of Pepsi?

I'm drinking diet pepsi right now.

[Nur]

Xiin walaal

 

Salafiya term, in its present usage was born within Saudi Arabia as an answer to other revivalist movement who have introduced innovations in aqeedah or ibaadaat, but like any other movement it has its positive and negative aspects with respect to its ability to take the ummah from its presnet demise to where it should be, it has rightfully awakened the Ummah about the importance of adherence to the two sources. The scope of this thread however, is the validity of naming the ummah other than Muslim. Anyone who coins a name for the Ummah other than Muslim is indeed helping in dividing the Ummah into splinters.

 

 

Nur

[xiinfaniin]

Originally posted by Nur:

Xiin walaal

 

Salafiya term, in its present usage was born within Saudi Arabia as an answer to other revivalist movement who have introduced innovations in aqeedah or ibaadaat, but like any other movement it has its positive and negative aspects with respect to its ability to take the ummah from its presnet demise to where it should be

, it has rightfully awakened the Ummah about the importance of adherence to the two sources. The scope of this thread however, is the validity of naming the ummah other than Muslim.

Anyone who coins a name for the Ummah other than Muslim is indeed helping in dividing the Ummah into splinters.

 

 

Nur

Nurow,I respectfully disagree with that assessment of yours. Saudi Arabia, like many other countries in the Muslim world, had, and still has, scholars whose theological and jurisprudential approach reflect of that of Salafu saalix. To say that it has a particular claim on Salafism however is incorrect. I am astonished that you are tacitly assigning certain negativism to this term!

 

As far as I know Inbu Wahabi’s anti qubuur-worshiping movement was the only revivalist group that was closely associated with Saudi Arabia!

[Uthman1]

Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) made it clear that the salafs were the 1 group out of the 73 when He said: “My community will experience everything that the Children of Israel had experienced, following in their footsteps exactly, so much so that if one of their number had approached his mother publicly for sex, one of my community will do the same. The Children of Israel divided into 72 sects. My community will divide into 73 sects, and all of them will be in the Hellfire save one.â€

 

The people asked him: “And which one will that be

 

He replied: “The one that follows what I and my Companions are upon right now.â€

 

So to say that Salafs is a new phenomena and recently introduced by the Saudi era is untrue and all the mayor Scholars of past and present were salafs such as Ibn Taymiyya, Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, Bukhari, Hanbal, Shaafi etc.

 

We are muslims - because we submit to Allah and believe in His books(i.e Quran)

 

We are Sunnis - because we believe in the Sunnah of Muhammad Ibn Abdullah(pbuh)

 

We are Salafs - because we interpret the Sunnah like the honourable companions did.

 

However scholars have given fatwa that a salaf is a name and shouldnt be used as a deep allegiance to the group.

[NGONGE]

^^^ I agree with part of what you say there (the part about salafism being a new concept that started in Sudia Arabia). However, in one of your earlier arguments, you alluded to the fact that we assign names to schools of thought by the names of their originators (Bin Hanbal, Abu Hanifa, etc). Correct me if I’m wrong but I was under the impression that Salafis reject such labels too!

[Uthman1]

^^^^ I didnt say that salafs started in the Saudi era. Thats untrue thing to say since the Saudi era started around 60-70 years ago while the companions(salafs) lived over 1400 years ago.

 

Salafs and school of thought are separate. A school of thought is four scholars interpretations and I want to make clear that the four school of thoughts only disagree in the minor issues of islam not the major such as how much zakah to be paid or disagreement relating to innovations. But if you look at Salafs, Shia and Sufis, there is a disagreement with the major issues in islam such as innovation(sufis) and rejection of sunnah(shia).

 

So to identify the people on the true path, we go back to the Messenger and His companions and how they interpreted Quran and Sunnah and this is what the Salafs are on and what we should all be on.

[Haneefah]

Originally posted by Nur:

The scope of this thread however, is the validity of naming the ummah other than Muslim.

Anyone who coins a name for the Ummah other than Muslim is indeed helping in dividing the Ummah into splinters.

Thank You shaikh Nur. This pretty much sums up my own stance on this over-exhausted topic of 'salafis vs fulaan'. It's quite tiresome, furthermore, I fail to see any benefits these types of arguments could possibly reap.

[Modesty]

I personally follow ahlul sunnah wal jama3ah, i have nothing against salafis, but they seem super strict, especially the reverts.