Author: Ali Boriqee
Although I'm embarking on the task of deconstructing thoughts predominant of the Madkhali frame of mind, this is not aimed simply at the direct actors of the movement in specific, which include but are not specific to, organizations such as SPUBS and TROID. As members of ahlu-Sunnah wal Jama'ah, followers of the Athari creed, we must realize that the dogmatic features of Madkhali philosophy, which is more predominantly outlined by students of Rab'i al-Madkhali rather than the Shaykh himself, is a frame of mind that transcends partisan actors of the movement. The reason for this is precisely because this frame of mind has remained in the thought processes of those who even proclaim to have disassociated themselves from the partisan (hizbi) aspects to the salafi dawah and have proclaimed to have limited themselves to following "beneficial knowledge". In other words, Madkhali dogma can and is found within members of the salafi movement who, although have disparaged themselves from inter-partisan polemic of criticisms towards members of the movement, have essentially retained certain bid'i principles that were once advocated by centers of Madkhali activism like SPUBS and TROID.
Although I'm embarking on the task of deconstructing thoughts predominant of the Madkhali frame of mind, this is not aimed simply at the direct actors of the movement in specific, which include but are not specific to, organizations such as SPUBS and TROID. As members of ahlu-Sunnah wal Jama'ah, followers of the Athari creed, we must realize that the dogmatic features of Madkhali philosophy, which is more predominantly outlined by students of Rab'i al-Madkhali rather than the Shaykh himself, is a frame of mind that transcends partisan actors of the movement. The reason for this is precisely because this frame of mind has remained in the thought processes of those who even proclaim to have disassociated themselves from the partisan (hizbi) aspects to the salafi dawah and have proclaimed to have limited themselves to following "beneficial knowledge". In other words, Madkhali dogma can and is found within members of the salafi movement who, although have disparaged themselves from inter-partisan polemic of criticisms towards members of the movement, have essentially retained certain bid'i principles that were once advocated by centers of Madkhali activism like SPUBS and TROID.
So this series is based on the concept of De-Madkhalification of the salafi psyche and to help reorientate members of ahlu-Sunnah back into the sphere of usooli perceptions of the application of the sunnah and how the salaf lived, and more importantly, how the khalaf who followed the salaf, remained following the salaf, and how they were able to adapt to the circumstances of life while maintining the basic principles the salaf of this ummah upheld.
How is this manifested in modern times within the Madkhali movement? One of the manifestations of this is usually embedded in the statement typical to the following
"We should leave these issues (what appears to be contraversy) and use our time to learn more of the Qur'aan or memorize ahadeeth"
This statement above poses NO PROBLEM in and if itself, and in fact, these are the types of statements the generality of the people of the Sunnah usually make towards Madkhalis involved in trivial controversies like declaring nobodies to be innovators and making a mountain out of it. Likewise, this statement is applicable on a general basis to all who do truly involve themselves in trivial matters.
However,
the ulema do have a saying, and that is that a statement of truth can be made to imply falsehood. How specifically can such a lofty statement such as this be manipulated to have a false meaning, unintentional or otherwise? The method that this can take place is through applying this statements towards any particular individual or group that are actually dealing with substantive matters that affect their lives and their understanding of reality and deen. It can apply to understanding aspects of history which include, and in most cases does, include contraversy, but as is known, understanding history is an essential part in understanding our context and where we are, socially. Hence, the general statement above about avoiding contraversy is not meant to be applied on things that will benefit.
To confound the issue more, because of the rather narrow framework of Madkhali thought patterns, a whole host of issues is rendered essentially "of no benefit" which further adds to the realm of what contraversy is.
Applying the above truth towards such a false concept is a wonderful Machiavellian way to silence addressing real problems that we have as an ummah and regulate the affair to the simple reading of the Book of Allah and the Sunnnah.
Adding to this, what further is implied in this statement if it was intended towards such a false slant of silencing real efforts towards understanding issues, is that it assumes that the one who is being addressed by this statement is not partaking in these efforts anyway.
The sunnah came with "a time for this and a time for that". We dont go into extremes in our religion. We are commanded to give all things its proper due and placement.
I've seen the application of this statement made towards individuals who were analyzing issues that appear to be contraversial in nature due to the topic it falls under (history and/or geopolitics), but which was leading them towards helping to understand certain principles of the religion, and once stated, have silenced people trying to learn, and hence stifled Islamic learning.
Now, the underlying reason as to why would people who claim to be salafi, but obviously affected by this pattern of Madkhali thought, would do this, is linked back to the thought patterns of secular thinking embedded in Madkhali paradigmatic thought.
How can secular thought patterns be amidst the dawah of Madkhali actors or its laymen one might ask? Understand that this is NOT a charge of secularism towards Madkhalis nor do I believe they are secularists. However, what can be understood as a secular frame of mind is the typical act of divorcing the aspects that pertain to worldly life like geopolitics and the manuevers of power structures and power elites of the world, and history, as something not condusive to the aqeedah and "manhaj" of the salaf. Particularly when the entire life biography of the salaf was jihad against the power structures of their era, and the geopolitical manuevering of the salaf towards the aim of raising the Word of Allah uppermost over all ideological philosophies of kufr prevelant at the time. Likewise, the salaf were very much involved with the learning of history.
In short, typical madkhali thought is aimed more on isolating the perspective of "salafis" towards a particular strain of aqeedah and tawheed to the exclusion of other aspects of Tawheed and Emaan through delegitimizing these topics (stated above) as not relating to Tawheed, Aqeedah or the "manhaj" of the Qur'aan and Sunnah and the way of the salaf. And we know that whatever does not fall within the boundaries of Tawheed or the manhaj of the salaf is not relating to knowledge and of no benefit, hence major sections of Tawheed or Emaan is thus rooted out of conversation simply because it does not conform to the Madkhali perception of Tawheed and Sunnah and essentially of no benefit and all contraversy. This is how secular thinking is able to thrive inside the influence of Madkhali understanding of what "salafism" is.
May Allah صبحانه و تعال guide us back to the path, the thinking pattern of the salaf of this ummah.
Comments
Jazakallah khair