Read Online The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam From the Extremists by Khaled M. Abou el Fadl - Free Book Online

than Christians and Jews be- cause their heretical beliefs or actions were more damaging to the faith. 11
    Significantly, ‘Abd al-Wahhab also insisted that it was a sign of spiritual weakness for Muslims to care for or be interested in non-Muslim beliefs or practices. Pursuant to a doctrine known as al-wala’ wa al-bara’ (literally, the doctrine of loyalty and disassociation), ‘Abd al-Wahhab argued that it was imperative for Muslims not to befriend, ally themselves with, or imitate non-Muslims or heretical Muslims. Furthermore, this enmity and hostility of Muslims toward non-Muslims and heretical

    Muslims had to be visible and unequivocal. 12 For example, it was forbidden for a Muslim to be the first to greet a non-Muslim; and even if a Muslim returned a greeting, a Muslim should never wish a non-Muslim peace. Likewise, Muslims could convey their condolences to non-Muslims, but they should never pray that God have mercy upon them or ask God to for- give their sins. Muslims were only allowed to say, “May God guide you to the right path” or “May God compensate you for your loss.” If a Muslim violated any of these rules, he or she was to be treated as an apostate. The same dire conse- quences would follow if a Muslim referred to a non-Muslim as “brother” or “sister.”
    Moreover, Wahhabis prohibited the use of labels of respect intended to honor human beings, such as “master,” “doctor,” “mister,” or “sir.” ‘Abd al-Wahhab argued that such prefixes were a form of associating partners with God; therefore, using them was enough to make a Muslim an infidel. More impor- tantly, ‘Abd al-Wahhab argued, the prefixes and labels consti- tuted an imitation of Western unbelievers and were thus condemnable, because those who imitated unbelievers were themselves unbelievers. Similarly, partaking in celebrations, vacations, festivities, or any other social event originally in- vented by non-Muslims was sufficient to make a Muslim an infidel. 13
    ‘Abd al-Wahhab espoused a self-sufficient and closed sys- tem of belief that had no reason to engage or interact with any other, except from a position of dominance. This is especially important because ‘Abd al-Wahhab’s orientation did not ma- terially differ from the approach adopted by later Muslim pu- ritan groups concerning the irrelevance of universal moral values to the Islamic mission. This insularism and moral isola- tionism, clearly manifested in the writings of ‘Abd al-Wahhab, was powerfully reproduced by ideologues of subsequent puri-

    tan movements. For instance, Sayyid Qutb, one of the most in- fluential puritan ideologues, argued in the mid-twentieth cen- tury that the world, including the Muslim world, was living in jahiliyya (the darkness and ignorance associated with the pre- Islamic era). Like ‘Abd al-Wahhab, Qutb espoused a closed system of intellectual isolationism and argued that Muslims ought not interact with non-Muslims except from a position of supremacy. 14
    The real irony is that at the heart of ‘Abd al-Wahhab’s zeal for Islamic purity was a pro-Arab ethnocentrism that was completely at odds with Islam’s universal message. As in later puritan movements, there was a strong political and national- istic cause to ‘Abd al-Wahhab’s thought—a cause that was promoted and concealed behind a veneer of religious lan- guage. ‘Abd al-Wahhab’s sworn enemies were not Christians or Jews but the Ottoman Turks. ‘Abd al-Wahhab accused the Ottoman Turks of corrupting Islam, and he described them as the moral equivalent of the Mongols, who earlier had invaded Muslim territories and then converted to Islam. But like the Mongols, the Turks had converted to Islam in name only, as ‘Abd al-Wahhab saw it. Indeed, according to him, the Ot- toman Turks were the primary enemies of Islam because they were corrupting the religion from the inside while pretending to be sincere and true Muslims. ‘Abd al-Wahhab described the Ottoman