Open Daily: 10am - 10pm | Alley door pickup 10am - 7pm 3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
612-822-4611

  • Open Daily: 10am - 10pm
    Alley-side Pickup: 10am - 7pm

    3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
    612-822-4611

Open Daily: 10am - 10pm | Alley-side Pickup: 10am - 7pm
3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
612-822-4611
Politics, Anti-rationalism and Authoritarianism in Islam: Freeing Islam from Islamism

Politics, Anti-rationalism and Authoritarianism in Islam: Freeing Islam from Islamism

Terebessy, Leslie

Paperback

IslamGeneral EducationSocial Movements

ISBN13: 9798265823847
Publisher: Independently Published
Published: Sep 17 2025
Pages: 224
Weight: 0.67
Height: 0.47 Width: 6.00 Depth: 9.00
Language: English
Islam is an Abrahamic faith. It is a teaching of reconciliation. But this is not always reflected in the perceptions of preachers or rulers. Neither is the perception that Islam is a teaching of reconciliation reflected in the umma's encounters, past and present, with non-Muslims or with different parts of the umma itself. Power-hungry elites sought to enlarge the empire through wars prohibited in revelation, wars of aggression. To bypass the prohibition of aggression in revelation, hawkish rulers tasked hawkish jurists with the fabrication of a justification for wars of aggression. Mercenary ulama took up the challenge. Misguided by the politicization of revelation, the umma embarked on a warpath. Muslims became embroiled in wars with non-Muslims, in the clash between the dar al-Islam and the dar al-harb, an early variant of the clash of civilizations thesis. The justification of wars of aggression required reinterpreting Islam as a religion of war. The reinterpretation required a weaponization of exegesis and jurisprudence. Exegesis and jurisprudence were recalibrated to fabricate a justification for the territorial expansion of the empire. Weaponization transpired by turning to hawkish traditions and the teaching of abrogation. This was expedited by recourse to perceptions in defiance of the teaching of revelation. These perceptions encompass treating tradition as revelation from God and as a judge of revelation. They also encompass recourse to the teaching of abrogation, treating wars of aggression as a sixth pillar of Islam, and recourse to the teaching of predestination. Recourse to problematic perceptions, not in line with the teaching of revelation, required the repression of reason, too. For which person in his or her right mind would endorse the perception that traditions, paraphrased reports attributed to the prophet in defiance of his prohibition of recording his traditions, are revelations from God? As a result of the reluctance to engage reason, parts of revelation began to strike exegetes as unclear, insufficiently detailed and contradictory. Accordingly, exegetes would assert that the Book of Allah is in parts unclear, insufficiently detailed, and contradictory. The allegedly unclear and insufficiently detailed verses would be clarified and completed by recourse to tradition. The alleged contradictions in revelation would be redressed by recourse to the teaching of abrogation. But the Book of Allah presents itself as clear, fully detailed, and free of contradictions. In different words, the reinterpretation of revelation as a teaching of war required a corruption of the knowledge of revelation. Moreover, the reinterpretation of revelation required the perpetration of kufr. For rejecting any verse in the Book of Allah is tantamount to kufr. Accordingly, the practice of clarifying revelation by recourse to tradition, and the reconciliation of allegedly contradictory verses by recourse to the teaching of abrogation rest on kufr. Recourse to the teaching of abrogation of parts of the Book of Allah changed its teaching. Recourse to the teaching of abrogation enabled reinventing Islam as Islamism. The reinterpretation of revelation required the repression of reason. Reason was subordinated to tradition and the use of reason in religion was treated as a form of kufr. The repression of reason also transpired in politics, in the form of the persecution of the rationalists and the shutting of the gates to ijtihad. The repression of reasoning engendered a tradition of intellectual retardation. The repression of reason proved detrimental. It prevented Muslims from understanding revelation. By being prevented from understanding revelation, the umma was also prevented from following revelation. The repression of reason detached the umma from its religion. In reinterpreting revelation as a teaching of war, the ulama transgressed the bounds. For Allah does not love aggressors.

Also from

Terebessy, Leslie

View All

Also in

Islam

View All