The Salafi Movement In Global Context Theology Religion Essay

The Salafi Movement In Global Context Theology Religion Essay Salafism (al-Salafiyyah) is a contemporary Islamic global movement, which is concerned with a search for the pure teachings of Islam as prescribed in the Quran and the Prophet Muhammads tradition (sunnah) by rejecting any external influences and human involvement in the interpretation of religious texts. The proponents of Salafism define themselves to be the inheritors of the pre-modern Ahl al-Hadits (people of the Prophet tradition). In their view, this school of thought was the only group that remained faithful to the pure teachings of Islam as prescribed in the Quran and the Sunnah so that it was considered the saved sect. They base their claim on a hadith (the Prophet Muhammad sayings) that the Prophet Muhammad was reported to have said that there would always be a group of his people who remained committed to the truth, whom the Salafis identify as the Ahl al-Hadith (Duderija, 2011). By claiming to be the inheritors of the Ahl al-Hadith and followers of its footsteps, the propon ents of contemporary Salafi movement attempt to assert that they have privilege and take pride to be the guardians of the pure Islam in modern period. The proponents of contemporary Salafism identify themselves, and are proud to be, as salafi (plural: salafiyyin), the followers of al-salaf al-shalih(the righteous ancestors). For them, the term salaf refers to the first three Muslim generations in the early Islam, who were considered as the best Islamic generations as they were directly guided by the Prophet Muhammad and his Companions. This self-ascription is based on their belief that their understanding and practicing Islam is in complete accordance with the footsteps and methodology of the salaf (manhaj al-salaf). Abdullah ibn Baz, one of the main Salafi authorities, said that Salafi ideology is derived from the Quran, Sunnah and Consensus (ijma`) which govern the method of acquiring din [religion] and understanding the Quran and Sunnah according to the principles agreed upon by the righteous predecessors (salaf) (Cited in Duderija, 2011:54). Due to this strong emphasis on the Salaf as the only model of understanding and practic ing Islam, Salafism can be said as a movement of return to the forefather (Marshallsay, 2004). Major Authorities of the Contemporary Salafi Movement Within contemporary Salafi movement, the most influential proponents are the Middle Eastern Muslim scholars with Saudi nationality or Saudi-educated, university educated, many gained PhDs in Islamic sciences from Saudi universities. These include Nashir al-Din al-Albani (d.1999), Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz (d. 1999), Muhammad ibn Shalih al-Uthaymin (d. 2001), Muqbil ibn Hadi al-Wadii (d. 2001), Rabi ibn Hadi al-Madkhali (b. 1931), Yahya al-Hajuri, and Shalih al-Fawzan. The dominance of Saudi Arabian or Saudi-educated religious scholars (ulama) asserts the centrality of Saudi Arabia as the birth of modern Salafism. As the main representative of the Salafi movement, these ulama become major references that Salafi leaders and ordinary followers in the Muslim world turn to for guidance and advice in their lives. Outside the Middle East, leading personalities of Salafism in Western countries such as Jamal Zarabozo and Bilal Philips (Duderija, 2011) mostly become the mouthpiece of these Middle East authorities, translating their Salafi messages for the Western Salafi followers. The same is true for the leaders of the Salafi movement in Indonesia. Most of them went to Saudi and Yemen universities or Islamic religious learning institutions (mahad) to study Islamic knowledge. These include Abu Nida, Ahmad Faiz, Yusuf Baisa, Jafar Umar Thalib, Ayip Syafrudin, Luqman Baabduh and Muhammad Umar Sewed (Hasan, 2007; 2009). Compared to their locally trained Salafi proponents, these Middle East graduates commonly enjoy more authority and recognition from their followers due to their highly-esteemed learning in Mecca or Medinah, two holy cities of Islam. Yet, all of these Salafi exponents make the Saudi and Yemeni Salafi authorities as major, and to some extent, the only references in learning and preachi ng Salafi ideas among Indonesian Muslims. The Middle East Salafi authorities write treatises on Salafi ideas exclusively in Arabic. But, this is not a major barrier for Salafi followers from non-Arabic speaking countries to understand the messages of these Salafi ulama. The Salafi followers and sympathizers have attempted to translate the works of these Salafi ulama into local languages. For this purpose, in Western countries, they have established publishing houses, including Tarbiyyah Publications in Toronto, Invitation to Islam and Al-Khilafat Publications in London, and Salafi Publications and Maktabah Darussalam in Birmingham. Mobilizing the information and communication technologies, they have created websites such as www.salafipublications.com, www.tarbiyyahbookstore.com, http://sunna.com, www.salaf.com, and www.fatwa-online.com. Individual Salafi authorities websites have been also established by the Salafi supporters, such as www.binbaz.com (on the works of Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz), www.rabee.net (on the works of Rabi i bn Hadi al-Madkhali), and www.ibnothaimeen.com (on the works of Muhammad ibn al-Uthaymin) (Duderija, 2011). The Puzzle of the Origin and Meaning of Salafism For decades, there has been conviction among Western and Western-educated scholars that history of Salafism is a history of Islamic modernism; that Salafi ideas are regarded as similar to those of Islamic modernist movement; and the Salafis are representatives of Muslim modernist. It is believed that Salafism dates back to the 19th Islamic modernism, which was associated with Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (d. 1897), Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905), and Rashid Ridha (d. 1935), whose principles and ideas include rejection of taqlid (blind following), promotion of ijtihad (independent interpretation), and support of progress and rationality in its responses to the decline of the Muslim world. As Lauziere (2010) identifies, this conception can be seen in the standard academic works of Islamic thought such as Brills Encyclopedia of Islam, Malcolm Kerrs Islamic Reform (1966), M. A. Zaki Badawis The Reformers of Egypt (1978), and Daniel Browns Rethinking Tradition in Modern Islamic Thought (1996). Some recent studies by scholars of contemporary Islam, such as Ali Hassan Zaidi (2006) and Dumber and Tayob (2011), also connect Salafi orientations with Muslim reformists in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. However, this conception is problematic in some respects. First, there is no convincing evidence to the claim of the connection among Salafism, al-Afghani, and Abduh. According to Lauziere (2010), there are no primary sources including al-Urwat al-Wuthqa, a flagship journal of al-Afghani and Abduh, that substantially prove the claim that al-Afghani and Abduh coined the term Salafism and used it to identify themselves and their reform movement in the 19th century. It is true that Abduh mentioned the term al-Salafiyyin (the Salafis) in Al-Manar (Al-Manar 5, 1902 cited in Lauziere 2010) to designate Sunni Muslims who were against Ashariyyah, a 10th century school of speculative Islamic theology,  [1]  in terms of theological issues based on their strict adherence to the creed of the forefathers (Lauziere, 2010). But, Abduh clearly did not claim to be a Salafi nor identified his followers as Salafis. He simply referred al-Salafiyyin in the context of theological debates as Sunni Musl ims who differed from Asharites based on their strict adherence to aqidat al-salaf (the creed of the forefather) (Lauziere, 2010). Moreover, Rasyid Ridha, one of Muhammad Abduhs main disciples, recognized the fundamental differences between Salafism and Islamic modernist school, which his mentor promoted. According to Ridha, following the Salafi creed did not necessarily make one committed to Islamic modernist school. During his time, Ridha identified Salafism as Wahhabism to which he called al-Wahhabiyyah al-Salafiyyah. Later, in 1928 he and some of his disciples declared their passage to becoming Salafis not only with respect to Islamic theology but also in fiqh or Islamic jurisprudence (Lauziere, 2010). Second, the unconfirmed claim of ideological connection between contemporary Salafism and the early 20th century Islamic modernism can be seen in the issue of how each defines the term Salaf. While the two movements shared the idea of the importance of the pious ancestors, they differ in the issue of to what extent the Salaf is defined and how it should be modelled. The proponents of Islamic modernism conceived that the term Salaf includes virtually the Muslim scholars of all schools of thought in the medieval period whose success and achievements should be contextually propagated and imitated within modern Muslim contexts. The early 20th century Salafism understood the Salaf as Muslim scholars in religious science as well as in secular science of the golden age of Islam in the medieval period that should be contextually followed. In contrast, the proponents of contemporary Salafism restrict the Salaf to the first three generations in the early Islam, namely the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (al-shahabat), those after them (al-tabiin) and the next generation after them (atba`u al-tabiin). They also include religious scholars (ulama`) in the first and second centuries of Islam who were considered to adhere to the way of these first three Muslim generations, particularly Ahmad bin Hanbal and the followers of his textual school. These Salaf generations and Salafi ulama` were considered rightly guided forefathers and, hence, role models to whom Muslims are obliged to follow their ways in any circumstances. In addition, when the proponents of contemporary Salafism speak about the Salaf, they use it in its narrow religious sense. Practically, they exclude, show suspicion and hostility towards social, cultural and scientific heritage of the Muslim forefathers. In their view, the perfect method of modelling the S alaf in the contemporary Muslim societies is preserving and imitating their footsteps without contextualizing them in the present contexts. Third, the issue of the unconfirmed ideological connection between Salafism and the late 19th century Islamic modernism can be discerned in differences between them with respect to methodology and objectives. In response to the decline of the Islamic world, the Islamic modernism of al-Aghani and Abduh was committed to islah (reform) in Muslim society through promotion of itidal (moderation and balance) by which Muslims were expected to conduct conciliation between Islam and Western civilization. It encouraged the appreciation and adoption of social, political and scientific achievements of Western civilization and at the same rooted firmly in Islamic principles and civilization. In other words, al-Afghani and Abduhs Islamic modernism was a moderate approach to Islam and Western civilization in that it was able to balance between revelation and reason, and between strict Islamic conservatism and blind following of the West (Lauziere, 2010). Contemporary Salafism, in contrast, aims to revive the golden age of Islam by adhering strictly to the ways of the first three Muslim generations in the early Islam understood and practiced Islam to protect its purity from forbidden religious innovation. From this perspective, the making of the Salaf as a perfect model requires strict applying the Salaf method in social and cultural vacuum, without contextualizing their ideas and practices within present contexts of the Muslim world. Subsequently, this movement regards revealed texts as the only primary sources so that its proponents tend to be anti-rationalistic approach to revelation. The proponents of contemporary Salafism are also suspicious of anything not textually written in the scripture, taught or done by the Prophet Muhammad, his companions and religious scholars adhered to their ways. Conservatism, or even ultra conservatism, is highly represented in contemporary Salafi movement. As a result, there is no adequate evidence to claim ideological connection between the late 19th and early 20th centurys Islamic modernism and the contemporary Salafi movement. There is no support that Al-Afghani and Abduh proclaimed they were Salafis or exponents of the Salafi movement or their ideas were in accordance with contemporary Salafism. The modernist conception of Salafism substantially differs from the contemporary Salafisms understanding of the same term. Within contemporary Salafi movement, salafism is conceived first and foremost as label by Sunni purist-literalist-traditionalists to designate their particular approach to Islam. Conceptual History of Salafism Undoubtedly, the uncertainty of the origin and meaning of Salafism within modern scholarship has caused the substance of Salafism remain puzzling. Fortunately, a recent study by Henri Lauziere (2010) is helpful in solving this puzzle and gaining relative certainty in the issues of the origin and meaning of Salafism. He argues that the puzzle of the meaning and origins of Salafism is attributable to the faulty scholarship and the fact that there is little scholarly attention to the examination of the history of knowledge production of Salafism (Lauziere, 2010:369). The First Use of the Term Salafism Historically speaking, Salafism as a religious orientation is not purely a modern phenomenon. Rather, it rooted in the Islamic scholarship in pre-modern history of Islam. The early use of the term Salafism (Salafiyyah) as an approach to religious texts is found in a number of religious scholars works in the medieval period. For example, Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1238) writes in his al-Fatawa al-Kubra: As for the Salafiyya it is as [Hamd ibn Muhammad] al-Khattabi and Abu Bakr al-Khatib [al-Bagdadi] and other have stated: The way of the Salaf is to interpret literally the Quran verses and hadiths that relate to the Divine attributes (ijra ayat al-sifat wa ahadits al-sifat ala zahiriha), and without indicating modality and without attributing to Him anthropomorphic qualities. So that one is not to state that the meaning of hand is power or that of hearing is knowledge (Cited in Haykel, 2009:38). However, as Haykel (2009) and Dumbe Tayob (2011) suggest, the historical precedent of the Salafi orientations even dates back earlier to the 9th century theological and juridical debates between the Ahl al-Ray (people of opinion), which was associated with the Mutazilah,  [2]  and Ahl al-Hadith (people of the Prophet Muhammads tradition), which was related to Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 855), the inspirer of the Hanbali school of law (Hanbaliyyah).  [3]  Particularly, the early use of the term Salaf and its derivatives in this period can be traced back to the Ahl al Hadits. It is reported that Ibn Hanbal said: It has been transmitted from more than one of our ancestors (salafina) that they said the Quran is the speech of God and is uncreated, and this is what I endorse. I do not engage in speculative theology and I hold that there is nothing to be said other than what is in Gods Book (Quran), the traditions of His messenger or those of his companions and their followers- may God have mercy on them. It is not praiseworthy to engage in theological discussion in matters not contained therein (Cited in Haykel, 2009:38). These statements not only refer to the early use of the terms Salaf and Salafism within Islamic scholarship, but also points out the way of thinking that the early Salafis advocated in regard to theological issues such as the nature of the Quran as Gods messages revealed to the Prophet Muhammad. With respect to the approach to the interpretation of religious texts, the Ahl al-Ra`y represented Muslims scholars who sought explanations from personal opinions and borrowings from other cultures and intellectual traditions, while the Ahl al-Hadits sufficed themselves with literal meanings of the texts and tradition of the Prophet and his companions believed as pure and original sources of Islam. Another corresponding term, madhhab al-salaf (the school of forefathers), is found in the literature of Muslim scholars of medieval period. As Lauziere (2010:372) suggests, written sources also indicate that medieval Muslims scholars used this term primarily in the theological debates within early schools of theology in Islam. The notion of madhhab al-salaf was used to designate those who hold a theological purity in a time when early Muslims were not faced yet with speculative theology (ilm al-kalam) resulted from the encounter of Islam and other world civilizations. The proponents of madhhab al-salaf showed hostility towards Islamic speculative theology (ilm al-kalam) which was influenced by Greek inspiration and rationalism such ilm al-mantiq (syllogistic logic) and falsafah (philosophy). Contrary to Islamic theologians (mutakalimin) such as Mutazilis and Asharites, the people of the madhhab al-salaf distanced themselves from intellectualizing the divine issues, such as al asma` w al sifat (the divine names and attributes). However, the word Salafi or Salafism was not commonly used by medieval purist Muslims to refer to themselves and their approach to Islam. Instead, the common epithets used to refer to the purists at the period were not derived from the word salaf, but rather from the terms associated with the Prophet Muhammads tradition, such as Ahl al-Sunnah (people of the prophetic tradition), Ahl al-Hadist (people of prophetic sayings and sayings) or al-Atsari (the follower of the prophetic report) (Lauziere, 2010:373). The Origin of the Confusion of Salafism: Louis Massignon and the Salafyah Review A recent study by Lauziere (2010) revealed the origin of the confusion between Salafism and Islamic modernism in scholarly literature. He argues that puzzle of Salafism lies in the fact Massignon and scholars who quoted him were not aware of the complex development of the Salafi epithets within Muslim scholars in the Middle East. They simply relied on al-Majallah al-Salafiyyah, a monthly reformist journal published by Salafiyya Bookstore in Egypt -whose key role in Salafi discourses will be examined in the following section- that reached overseas including Paris. Being established in 1917, the journal was edited by Abd al-Fattah Qatlan and rendered by him into English as Salafyah Review. The journal was purported to serve as a marketing vehicle for reaching a wider readership of the Salafiyyah Bookstore. More importantly, the journal was created in the period in which the reform spirit overwhelmed the Salafiyyah Bookstore before the coming of the Saudi-Wahhabi influence on the type o f literature it published. So, in line with the reform spirit, the journal aimed to spread the achievements of the pious ancestors (al-salaf) in a wide range of scientific, cultural and intellectual fields. In line with this spirit, the content of the journal encompassed various themes such as literature, linguistics, and astronomy in addition to religious topics (Lauziere, 2010:379). It was through this journal that the term Salafism caught the attention of Western scholars (Lauziere, 2010). Louis Massignon, a well-known French orientalist and the major contributor to the leading journal Revue du monde musulman, subscribed to Arabic journals including al-Majallah al-Salafiyyah. When the first issue of the journal reached his journal office, Massignon provided explanation of the Majallah al-Salafiyyah to the readers of his journal. He said that the Salafiyyah was an intellectual movement that emerged in early 19th century India at the time of Sayyid Ahmad Barelwi (d. 1931) [and] Siddiq Hasan Khan (d. 1890), the founder of the Ahl-i Hadith movement, had later rehashed its ideas (Cited in Lauziere, 2010:380). Then, he added that from there, [the Salafiyyah] was spread by Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and Syaikh Abduh and established itself in Baghdad, Damascus, Cairo and even in the Maghrib and Java (Revue du monde musulman 34, 1916-18 in Lauziere, 2010:380). But, later M assignon abolished the connection of the Salafiyyah with the 19th century Indian movement and focused more on its link with al-Afghani and Abduh. Then, he associated Salafiyyah with a relatively transnational Islamic modernism in the 19th century, whose proponents were committed to reform in Islam and Muslim societies (Lauziere, 2010). However, Massignons claim of Salafism is problematic as it raised questions with respect to conceptual and historical foundations of Salafism he based on. It is not clear how he came to this claim though it is known that he studied Islam in Baghdad and made contacts with some reform-oriented Muslim scholars like Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi. Due to this, it can be said that Massignon misinterpreted the term Salafiyyah and inadequately made Salafism and Islamic modernism of al-Afghani and Abduh synonymous (Lauziere, 2010). Nevertheless, as Lauziere (2010:381) shows, some leading scholars welcomed Massignons definition of Salafism and even took its validity for granted despite its factual limitations. The famous The New World of Islam, published in 1921, repeated this misinterpretation when made reference to Salafiyyah. In 1922, the leading journal The Moslem World published by Hartford Seminary did the same when it translated an article of Massignon from the Revue du monde musulman. This is further misinterpreted by Henri Laoust, a scholar who spread Massignons ideas in French, when in his seminal article in 1932 defined Salafism based on Massignons conception. Even influential scholar Sir Hamilton Gibb took Massignons claim of Salafism for granted in his famous Modern Trends in Islam. Hence, it is through this intellectual transmission that the term Salafism with the sense of Islamic modernist movement was created within Western scholarly literature on Islam. The Evolution of Salafism If there is no connection with al-Afghani and Abduhs Islamic modernism of the late 19th century, who first used the Salafi label as understood today? And how was it defined? As Lauziere (2010) argues, to remedy this puzzle requires considering the origin and development of the term Salafism from the perspective of conceptual history. According to Lauziere (2010, the growing popularity of Salafi epithets as well as overlap between Salafism and Islamic modernism can be attributed to a key role played by the Salafiyah Bookstore (al-Maktabat al-Salafiyyah). It was established in 1909 in Cairo by Muhib al-Din al-Khatib (1886-1969), a Syrian activist, well-known figure in the Egyptian publishing business, and pupil of Salafis-cum-modernists ulama`, Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi (d. 1914) and Tahir al-Jazairi (d. 1920). Al-Khatibs involvement in cultural and political affairs opened the opportunity to establish the bookstore aimed at spreading his interests in Islamic scholarship and reformist ideas under the label Salafiyyah (Salafism). The name Salafiyyah for the bookstore was inspired by al-Khatibs mentor, Tahir al-Jazairi, who had inclinations to the madhhab al-salaf (school of the forefathers) with respect to Islamic theology. But, it seemed that al-Khatib misinterpreted the term Salafiyyah or understood it in a broader sense than al-Jazairi meant (Lauziere, 2010). This is reflected in the way he and his partner, Abdul Fattah Qatlan (d. 1931), operated the Salafiyyah Bookstore, particularly in terms of the type of literature they published. Being motivated by desires to encourage educated Arab readers to rediscover the glory of their religious, social and cultural heritage for the advancement of their society, al-Khatib and Qatlan were not confined themselves in printing and selling books on the Salafi theology. Rather, they published works on progressive nature of Islams golden age as well as a wide range of issues not connected to religious reform. They used the Salafi epithets to refer virtually to any Islamic intellectual heritage in medieval period, not in a narrow sense of a particular school of theology. In addition to treatises on religion, the Salafiyyah Bookstore published works on Arabic literat ure, Arabic grammar, and work of medieval Muslim philosophers such al-Farabi (d.950) and Ibn Sina (d.1037). In short, the literature that the Salafiyyah Bookstore published and sold in the 1910s was in accordance with the spirit and concerns of Islamic modernism (Lauziere, 2010:378). The selection and publication of this type of literature suggest that al-Khatib and Qatlan attempted to revive the works of the great Muslim scholars and underline the Muslimss contribution to modernity in the West of modern age. Under the label Salafism, they sought to emphasize the compatibility between revelation and modernity as shown by the works of great and pious forefathers (Salaf) in the past by which Muslims in the modern age should model for the revival and advancement of the Islamic world. In turn, all this resulted in turning Salafiyyah into a common and popular term among producers and consumers of Arabic literature in the Middle East and other Muslim regions (Lauziere, 2010:382). More importantly, an impression built up that the Salafiyyah Bookstore intertwined the term Salafism with Islamic modernism projected to the revival of Arabs and Muslims in the modern period. The label Salafism it used was then considered as to represent the success and greatness of the Islami c past. The bookstore expanded the scope of the term Salafism beyond its initial theological meanings and gradually created the association between Salafism and the project of Islamic modernism (Lauziere, 2010:377). The later development of the Salafiyyah Bookstore, however, determined the association of Islamic modernism and Salafism and brought about decisive changes in the nature and development of Salafism after the establishment of the Saudi Kingdom in the early 1920s. The bookstore experienced a shift with respect to choices of works for publication. This began with the change in the choice of works for publication. In the early 1920s, al-Khatib and Qatlan began to print works that appeared contradictive to the progressive and rationalist ideas of the Islamic reform movement though they kept promoting Islamic modernism. For example, the Salafiyyah Bookstore published works of those who strongly opposed the secular and controversial works of Ali Abd al-Raziq and Taha Husayn. It also published anti-rationalist treatises by Hanbali and his school followers ordered by Saudis. This shift in the choice of publications was more clearly discernable in the establishment of the Saudi branch of the S alafiyyah Bookstore in Mecca in the late 1920 initiated by Qatlan in partnership with a Hijazi Muhammad Salih Nasif (d.1971). In 1928, to suit the local needs, this Saudi branch began to publish works on Ahmad ibn Hanbal and his supporters as well pro-Wahhabi books such a theological treatise by Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya (1292-1350), which was printed with the request and fund from Ibn Saud (d. 1932), the first monarch of Saudi Arabia (Lauziere, 2010:383). This shift within the Salafiyya Bookstores choice of publications, according to Lauziere (2010), should be seen in the context of political change in the Muslim world in the mid 1920s. The fall of the Ottoman Empire and the abolition of Islamic caliphate in the early 1920s brought about political and cultural turbulence within the Muslim world. At the same time, however, the rise of the Saudi Kingdom in Hejaz offered Muslim ummah (global Muslim community) a great hope of social and political renaissance in the Muslim world. Therefore, many Muslims intellectuals and religious scholars, including Rasyid Ridha, supported the young Saudi state and turned toward religious conservatism, particularly Wahhabism,  [4]  founded by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (1703-1792), and endorsed as an official school of Islam and promoted by the state. Al-Khatib showed the same response to these circumstances. He opted to support the young Saudi state and showed respect to the Wahhabism and its propone nts. These religio-political stances influenced the activities of his Salafiyyah Bookstore. This was reflected in the change of choices of editing and publishing when it began to publish the Wahhabi treatises and pro-Saudi works. Although Lauziere missed to capture the complexity of social and political transformation in the Muslim world in the first quarter of twentieth century, his argument was sufficient to overcome to the puzzle of Salafism by making sense of the evolution of Salafism. By publishing pro-Wahhabi works to cater the religious and political needs of the Saudi elite and proponents of Wahhabism, the Salafiyyah Bookstore brought its commercial label Salafism closer to Wahhabism. Though the Cairo Salafiyyah Bookstore still published modernist themes, the popularization and commodification of the Salafi epithets by the Saudi branch of the Salafiyyah Bookstore had brought the Wahhabi religious orientation to the fore. The unfounded intellectual association between Salafism (Salafiyyah) and al-Afghani and Abduhs Islamic reform as well as the absence of the monopoly over Salafism as a marketing brand that al-Khatib and Qatlan might have opened opportunity to the proponents of the Wahhabi-oriented pur ist movement kept using Salafiyyah as the label of their publications ignoring any modernist agenda as initiated by the original Salafi Bookstore in Cairo (Lauziere, 2010). It can be added that given that they shared the strong reference to the pious forefather (al-salaf al-shalih) with respect to theological issues with the Salafiyyah Bookstore, at least in its early years of operation, the proponents of Wahhabism had no difficulties in taking the advantage of using Salafism as their label of spreading the purist ideas of Ibn al-Wahhab. Through these religious-political processes, consequently, the Salafi epithets experienced re-definition and counter-definitions. More importantly, this gradually created the impression that the term Salafism and Wahhabism of Saudi Arabia were synonymous. The opening of the Saudi-connected Salafiyyah bookstores outside Saudi Arabia, such as in Syria and Pakistan, enforced this impression (Lauziere, 2010). Undoubtedly, this evolution of Salafism explains the state of the contemporary development of the Salafi movement with Saudi Arabia as its major supporter. Due to the fact that it is a contemporary phenomenon that assigns the epistemological value to traditions, Adis Duderija (2007:2011) labels the proponents of this contemporary Salafism as Neo-Traditional Salafis. In its later development, in the 1960s Wahhabi-inspired Salafism encountered with religious-political ideas brought by the Islamic activists who fled from their ruling governments repression and persecution found Saudi Arabia safe haven. This has to do with the Saudi Arabias policy under King Faisal (d. 1975) to support Islamic solidarity in its attempts to oppose Egypts pan-Arabism promoted by President Jamal Abdel Nasser (d. 1970), which was regarded as a threat to the existence of the kingdom (Lacroix, 2010). Among these refugees were the members of al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun (the Muslim Brotherhood), a religious-political movement that first emerged in Egypt in 1928 and then spread to the Muslim world. The political aspects of the ideology of al-Ikhwan al Muslimun encountered with the puritanical ideas of Wahhabism (Wahhabiyyah) brought about an intellectual hybrid identified as al-Sahwa al-Islamiyya (th

surrender :: essays research papers fc

Evaluate the wisdom of American insistence on the â€Å"Unconditional Surrender† of Japan. Introduction   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The United States of America is a warrior nation. To pretend otherwise ignores a national history colored in red blood and gun smoke. Despite this, the American national conscience seeks forever the moral high ground. This national need extends to America’s ability to wage and sustain war. World War II was no exception. The Call to Arms came only after Japan’s killing of unprepared men in Pearl Harbor. The nation did not see the attack as an attack on a legitimate target but as an immoral attack. Giving in to its warrior spirit, the nation looked for retribution. Unable to shake a conscience developed and tempered by its early religious heritage, though, the nation needed more justification than mere revenge for the coming actions it would take. America’s policy of â€Å"Unconditional Surrender† provided this justification. Implied in Unconditional Surrender was the concept of Unconditional Warfare – total war. Further implied in the concept of total war was the justification for a fully violent and vengeful response. America needed the moral justification implied in the policy of Unconditional Surrender. Elegant Violence: Japanese v. American views on Warfare   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  To the Japanese, the concept of Unconditional Surrender was a nightmare. The Japanese government had instilled in its people the idea that Unconditional Surrender to American forces would involve horrendous tortures and degradations. Whether or not the Japanese government actually believed their own war propaganda, there was concern among the Japanese leadership that Unconditional Surrender would mean the end of Japan as a nation-state due to the expected American dismantling of the Japanese Imperial system (Freedman 201).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The American public’s perception of Unconditional Surrender was not necessarily the perception of the nation’s leaders, though. In fact, most post-war planners in Washington saw America’s Unconditional Surrender policy as flexible (James 725) . However, the President did not choose to share his actual views on Unconditional Surrender with the public. To do so, would have been to negate the violent imperative behind America’s total war against Japan. Japanese and American perceptions of total war were much more in accord. Both the Japanese and American military cultures had strange and sometimes conflicting ideas about legitimate actions and targets. Both cultures could justify outrageous carnage and destruction in the pursuit of victory. That being said, the Japanese military’s almost fanatic devotion to Mahanian warfare mixed with their own Samurai code meant that, many times during the war, Japanese commanders passed up incredible targets of opportunities deeming them not worthy enough.

Jeffrey Dahmer Research Paper Essay

Jeffrey Dahmer was a notorious serial killer in the late 70’s throughout the early 90’s. What made him stand out from most serial killer’s was what he did to the bodies of his victims. During this research paper, I will cover his childhood life, what led to his lifestyle of killing and cannibalism and also the crimes that were committed during his murderous acts. I will also compare what theories relate to Jeffrey Dohmer and what could possibly be the reason why he did what he did. Childhood life Jeffrey Dahmer was born in Milwaukee on May 21, 1960 with two loving parents by the name of Lionel and Joyce Dahmer. He seemed like an ordinary child until the age of six, when he had a minor surgery and also when his mother gave birth to his brother. This is when his self-confidence seemed to be lacking. He started to isolate himself from other people and became very anti-social. He went from an outgoing social child to a loner who was uncommunicative and withdrawn. By his early teenage years, he seemed disengaged, tense and friendless (biography.com). In 1966, the Dahmer family moved to Bath, Ohio where Jeffrey’s insecurities continued to grow and his shyness kept him from making friends. Here is where he became fascinated with animals and started collecting road kill and stripping the animal’s carcasses and saving the bones (crime.about.com/od/serial/a/dahmer.htm). He began dissecting animals near his home in the woods on a regular basis. High School/ Young Adulthood Dahmer continued his anti-social behaviors throughout the start of his years at Revere High School. He maintained average grades and seemed to be a fairly normal teenager. He worked on the school newspaper but also developed a bad drinking problem. He was known as a model student, respectful, polite, and well groomed. Overtime, he became less interested in school and his social life really decreased. In the summer of 1978, Dahmer graduated from high school. His parents divorced just short of his 18th birthday. After high school Dahmer enrolled at Ohio State University and spent most of his time skipping classes and getting drunk. After a couple of semesters, he decided to drop out of college and to return home with his father. After an ultimatum was given to him by his father, he decided to join the Army. He signed up on a six year contract, but after two years he was discharged due to his drunken behaviors (crime.about.com/od/serial/a/dahmer.htm). Murder #1 Dahmer struggled with his own homosexual desires, mixed with his need to fulfill his appalling fantasies. His first murder was that of a hitchhiker he picked up. He was 19 year old Steven Hicks. He invited him to his father’s house in which they had some alcoholic drinks and then engaged in sex. Following their sexual acts, when Hicks was ready to leave, Dahmer bashed him in the head with a barbell and killed him. He cut up his victim’s body and placed it in garbage bags. He buried all Hicks body parts in the neighboring woods surrounding his father’s home. It would be nine years later before committing his second murder. In this particular murder, some of the additional crimes committed against the victim are, false imprisonment and kidnapping. False imprisonment is when someone reasonably believes they are restricted from movement. Steven Hicks voluntarily went with Dahmer to his father’s house. But when Hicks was ready to leave, at the point before Dahmer bashed Hicks in the head, I believe he felt he was restricted to leave at that brief moment before being killed. He is also guilty of kidnapping because Hicks was restricted from leaving by Dahmer before the attack took place. Murder #2 Dahmer’s second murder occurred in September of 1987 when he picked up a 26 year old man by the name of Steven Tuomi at a bar. Dahmer claimed he killed him on impulse and later stated he had no memory of committing this crime. After this particular murder, Dahmer’s murderous rampage begins to occur sporadically. Two murders in 1988, another in 1989 and his method were consistent to picking up his victim’s at gay bars. He had sex with all of his victim’s before and sometimes after killing them. Final Murder/ Arrest In May of 1990, he moved out of his grandmother’s house and into the apartment that later became notorious for his killings. He committed four more murders before the end of 1990 and two more in April of 1991, and another in May of 1991 (answers.com). On May 27, 1991, 14 year old Konerak Sinthasomphone was seen on the street, wandering naked, obviously under the influence of drugs and bleeding heavily. Two females from the neighborhood spotted him and called 911. Dahmer approached and tried to convince the women he was ok and attempted to take the boy away. The women stopped him until police arrived. Dahmer told responding police the Konerak was his 19 year old boyfriend and they had an argument while drinking. The police were convinced of Dahmer’s story and they released the boy back to him against the two women’s will. Later that night, Dahmer killed and dismembered Konerak’s body and kept his skull as a souvenir (answers.com). In this particular murder, Dahmer was also guilty of false imprisonment and kidnapping. The 14 year old boy Konerak was attempting to escape from Dahmer until he convinced the police that everything was ok and proceeded to take the drugged boy back with him. At this point kidnapping took place because Konerak was restricted from leaving when he was taken by Dahmer back to his place. False imprisonment also takes place because Konerak felt he could not leave from Dahmer’s captivity once he got hold of him again. The police in my opinion were guilty of Negligence by not further investigating the incident properly. The legal Definition of Negligence is conduct that falls below the standards of behavior established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm. In the summer of 1991, Dahmer was killing approximately one person per week. Dahmer came up with a theory that he could turn his victim’s into zombies. He attempted to accomplish this by drilling a hole in his victim’s head while their still alive and injecting hydrochloric acid into the frontal lobe area of their brains with a large syringe (answers.com). Surrounding neighbors of Dahmer constantly smelled bad odors coming from his residence. They also heard sounds such as drills or power saws. Final Attempt/ Arrest On July 22, 1991, Dahmer enticed another man into his home in attempt to make him another victim of his sick fantasies. Tracy Edwards was the name of the potential of Dahmer. There was a struggle between Dahmer and Edwards when Dahmer attempted to handcuff his wrist together. Dahmer had him at knife point and forced him into his bedroom. When Edwards saw the pictures of the mangled bodies on the walls and noticed the terrible smell coming from a large blue barrel. He punched Dahmer in the face, kicked him in the stomach, and ran out the door and escaped (Answers.com). He ran down the streets with handcuffs still hanging from one hand and waved down a patrol car. The police were led to Dahmer’s house by Edwards. When police arrived, they saw the photographs of the mangled victim’s bodies and at this time Dahmer was placed under arrest. While investigating, police found a human head in the refrigerator and multiple pictures of severed body parts. Further searching continued and police found three additional severed heads, severed hands, penises, and multiple human remains. This was the breaking point at which the story of Jeffrey Dahmer gained notoriety (Answers.com). This is when the public found out about accusations of his practicing necrophilia and cannibalism. Jeffrey Dahmer was indicted on 17 counts of murder and later reduced to 15. The attempt murder of Edwards was not tried in court. Dahmer’s trial began on January 30, 1992. The evidence against him was so incriminating, Dahmer plead not guilty due to reason of insanity. His trial lasted only 2 weeks and he was found guilty of 15 counts of murder and was sentenced to 15 consecutive life terms. He expressed remorse for his acts and said he wished he was dead. In May of 1992, he was extradited to Ohio, where he pleaded guilty to the murder of his first victim, Stephen Hicks (Answers.com). Dahmer’s Death While Dahmer was serving his time at Columbia Correctional Institution in Portage, Wisconsin, he was attacked on two different occasions by fellow prisoners. The first time was when he was returning from a church service. He survived that attack with superficial injuries. The second attack occurred when he was doing janitorial work in the prison gym, he and another inmate was attacked and severely beaten with a broomstick handle on November 28, 1994 by an inmate, Christopher Scarver. Dahmer died of severe head trauma while on his way to the hospital. Dahmer’s brain was then kept an examined for study purposes. Internal factors Internal factors that could have determined why he was subjective to commit such crime were his anti-social behavior. This behavior leads a person to more likely, lie, steal, assault others, and commit violent acts of crime. Anti-social behavior poses a great risk to a person’s physical and mental health. It also puts a person in a higher risk to use drugs, alcohol, and also very promiscuous behavior. Some external factors that could have subjected him to commit his violent acts were his relationships with the outside world. He felt alone and isolated from the outside world which made him want to have control over it by taking in victims and giving himself power over them. I don’t think there is a specific theory that can pinpoint why Jeffrey Dahmer did what he did. The only theory that I believe fits with his behaviors was the fact that he was anti-social and that’s what leads him in the direction he chose to go in. An anti-social person can lead them to a life of crime and violent behaviors. The behavior of Jeffrey Dahmer did fall in this category and his actions that which a normal person would not do shows his anti-social behavior very likely played a big part in his decisions. Theories are not proven beyond a reasonable doubt but they do make sense to an extent and help lead us in the right direction to understand why people that commit crime do what they do. These theories are vital to learning and understanding because it can help a Criminologists determine why Criminal’s such as Jeffrey Dahmer do what they do. Jeffrey Dahmer seemed to have void inside of him that he needed to fill. He felt empowered and satisfied when he took in his victims killing and mutilating their bodies. He was sane because he planned and knew what he was doing when committing the acts and there was definitely intent. Conclusion Jeffrey Dahmer is one of the most notorious serial killer’s today because of the way he went about his crimes. His victims’ families will be haunted by the actions taken by Dahmer. His actions were very disturbing and he needed to be removed from this earth. He is now dead and gone and people in the surrounding areas where he caused all that pain will no longer have to worry about him. Work Cited www.biography.com/people/jeffrey-dahmer-9264755 www.answers.cm/topic/jeffrey-dahmer

The Vietnam War - 1737 Words

The purpose of the Vietnam War, was to end the awful spread of communism. As Ho Chi Minh (North Vietnam’s communist president) fought to which spread North Vietnam’s political uses to Southern Vietnam. With this, the American Military Advisors sought to believe that a fall of Southern Vietnam to communist hands, would then lead to a total takeover of neighboring nations to fall under communism. The effect of the neighboring nations falling, was known as the â€Å"Domino Effect†. It all began when The Northern half of Vietnam, with the Vietcong Army, invaded the Southern half of Vietnam to spread their political rule of communism to the rest of their country; seizing it from France’s established colony. Dwight D. Eisenhower, in which was an American politician and General who served as the 34th President of the United States from 1953 until 1961. (Wikipedia), spoke of this theory of the spread of communism know as the â€Å"Domino Effect†. He stated in The President s News Conference of April 7, 1954, that without the United States entering the Vietnam revolution, there would be a risk of communism spreading to the Southern Half of Vietnam. He stated that if this was successful, it proves that the domino theory, â€Å"A communist victory in one nation would quickly lead to a chain reaction of communist takeovers in neighboring states† (History.com). Which forcefully put America in a position in which government officials felt the need to involve America in the Vietnam war by sending aShow MoreRelatedThe War Of Vietnam And The Vietnam War1525 Words   |  7 PagesThe war in Vietnam is The United States and other capitalist bloc countries supported South Vietnam (Republic of Vietnam) against the support by the Soviet Union and other socialist bloc countries of North Vietnam (Democratic Republic of Vietnam) and the Vietcong of war. Which occurred during the Cold War of Vietnam (main battlefield), Laos, and Cambodia. This is the biggest and longtime war in American history during the 1960s (Best 2008). It is also the most significant war after World War IIRead MoreThe Vietnam War On Vietnam1725 Words   |  7 PagesThe War on Vietnam Many believe that the way Americans entered the war against the North Vietnam communists was unjust. The United States got into a war that they had no clue on how to win. â€Å"The Vietnam War was a long, costly armed conflict that pitted the communist regime of North Vietnam and its southern allies, known as the Viet Cong, against South Vietnam and its principal ally, the United States. The divisive war, increasingly unpopular at home, ended with the withdrawal of U.S. forces in 1973Read MoreThe Vietnam War : Vietnam1170 Words   |  5 PagesBeyond Vietnam. The Vietnam War is one of the most traumatic episodes in the history of the United States. Not only because it ended with a defeat for the United States Army, but because unleashed the largest wave of protests in the country, in which the government lost support. Extended over more than a decade, between 1959 to April 30 of 1975, although the US intervened in 1965, in which American soldiers experienced in firsthand scenes of destruction and death. During the Vietnam War clashedRead MoreThe Vietnam War Of Vietnam920 Words   |  4 Pages1940’s Vietnam was trying to break free of French reign over their country. During this time period Vietnam was split into two parts, north and south. The Japanese had decided to take over Vietnam in 1942. They couldn’t capture all of Vietnam, so they decided to retreat. North Vietnam proclaimed independence on September 2, 1945 as the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. The State of Vietnam declared independence on June 14, 1949, but rema ined under French rule until August 1, 1954. South Vietnam was theRead MoreVietnam And The Vietnam War1711 Words   |  7 Pages â€Æ' The Vietnam War was one of the bloodiest wars in the history of Vietnam. Vietnam use to be a peaceful country until the idea of communism started spreading across Vietnam. Many wanted to stay democratic but saw what happened to the Germans and started to lean towards communism. Many also wanted to stay democratic and still had it hopes high that it will soon get their lives and economy back on track. It later exploded into a huge argument and then leads to a civil war spurring between NorthRead MoreThe Vietnam War Of Vietnam952 Words   |  4 Pageswords that describe the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War had 240 days of combat in one year. World War II had forty days of combat in four years(Interesting Facts). That statistic shows how rough the Vietnam War was. The fighting was constant between the two sides. This war was fought over politics and had many gruesome battles. Before the Vietnam war, Vietnam was in a revolution because they did not want to be ruled by France. Vietnam wanted to be independent right after World War II ended in 1945. JapanRead MoreThe Vietnam War Of Vietnam1534 Words   |  7 Pages The Vietnam War began November 1st, 1955 and ended April 30th, 1975. It was a long costly war that involved North Vietnam and their Southern allies, known as Viet Cong, against South Vietnam and its main ally the United States. This war was very unpopular at home and would end with the withdrawal of the United States and the unification of Vietnam under communist control. Many think of war as something that just men are involved in but very rarely do people think of the role of women in the warRead MoreThe Vietnam War Of Vietnam1573 Words   |  7 PagesA. The Vietnam War occurred from 1955-1975, this included the North and South fighting over government structure of the newly independent state of Vietnam, having recently become independent f rom France. However, the USA was in Vietnam as a sort of protection for the South Vietnamese people, who had a weaker army force, but only a few thousand Americans were in Vietnam for that purpose at the time. On August 7, 1964, the USA entered the war for the purpose of fighting the North Vietnamese due toRead MoreThe Vietnam War Of Vietnam2003 Words   |  9 PagesThe Vietnam War in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia lasted from November 1st, 1955 to around April 30th, 1975. The war was split up between two sides, North Vietnam, who were allied with the Soviet Union, China, and most of the communist countries during this time period, and South Vietnam, who were allied with the United States and many countries that were against the belief of Communism. Although the United States did not necessarily have to get involved in the war, they believed that they had too soRead MoreVietnam And The Vietnam War1987 Words   |  8 PagesIn 1945, at the end of WWII, Vietnam started their war for ind ependence against their colonial rulers, France. Nine years after the start of the First Indochina War, the French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu which led to a peace conference in Geneva. At the conference, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam received their independence from France. However, Vietnam was divided between a Communist North and a Democratic South. In 1958, Communist- supported guerrillas in South Vietnam, known as the Viet Cong, began