Khawarij- open discussion

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/kharijites1.htm

Wanted to start a serious topic of discussion of this very important but often neglected and misunderstood sect of muslims

Just to clarify what they believed in esp. with regard to their political stance I quote [very briefly ] from a sermon given by one of their clerics abu hamza when he briefly held medina
related by Malik b anas

Abu Bakr [RA] “…acted in accordance with Book and Sunnah”

Umar b Khattab [RA] “”…acted in accordance with Book and Sunnah , collected the tributes and distributed the shares "

and “…may Lord have mercy on both of them”

so they clearly held the first 2 caliphs in very high regard

regaring the next 2 their criticism was also much moderate

Uthman b affan
“in the last six years he rendered to no avail and passed away”

Ali b abi talib [AS]
“no beacon was given to him for guidence and he passed away”

By contrast their criticsim of the ummayads was very different

muawiyah b abusufyan
“accursed son of accursed , made farmers of God’s servants …so curse him with God’s curse”

yazid b muawiyah
“yazid of wine, apes and hunting panthers …God and his angels curse him”

then he criticized every other caliph skipped over umar b abdul aziz [RA]- who is said to have reconcilled many of their factions for the first time

Ameerulmomineen sayyidna ALi [AS] said about them
“Do not fight the Kharijites after me, because one who seeks right but does not find it, is not like one who seeks wrong and finds it”.

he also considered them as muslims since he neither forbade them to pray in mosque of Kufa nor stopped their stipends from Bayt ul Mal

Ali’[AS]'s generals Qays b Sa’d [RA] and Abu Ayyub[RA] also address them as “servants of God” and “return with us to fight against our enemy and your enemy” right before the battle of Nahrawan.
surprisingly their arguments did have an effect. It is known that great many of them nearly half of them] did eventually come back to the side of sayyidna ALi which was no mean feat since these guys were known for their extremely uncompromising stance and suicidal bravery

It is very hard to have any sympathy for them considering their widespread pillaging and contempt for muslim lives …however at the same time it cannot be denied that they were extremely observant muslims and did what in their minds was needed to reform the ummah.Arguing with them was also very difficult and only extremely pious men of the high status of sayyidna ALi[AS] and his companions (and later Umar II [RA])were able to convince a sizable portion of them to abandon their ways.
The other later rulers simply lacked the religious knowledge to present valid arguments to them and ended up suppressing them brutally as terrorists.The High regard in which they held Abu Bakr[ra] and Umar[ra] also proves that they did not differ fundamentally from other muslims and were just another school of thought , though a very militant one.

Why is this topic relevant today? Most of the modern day “extremists” are also mirror images of these sects not only in their being extremely pious muslims and in their political inflexibility but also on the low value they place on muslim lives.
Having said all that they do however have a point …what is the alternative are we offering to them today? we have put people who like the tyrants in the past openly ridicule islamic values …where can we find men like Umar[ra] , ALi[as] and abu ayyub [ra] who can convince them to return back to mainstream of muslims

plz dont use this thread to start a new shia-sunni debate
keep this focussed on the khawarij only …other members esp. picoico, US Resident, code_red , ravage and everyone else are welcome to share their thoughts

2

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

khwarij are extant today too, in the form of Ibadhies in Oman. They're theologically attractive in some ways, but by the time they moderated their stances they were a marginal group in Islam.

3

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

^ true , but all so-called extremist groups are in reality the ideological descendents of the khawarij

4

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

What purpose will this discussion serve dear?

Are you still not in peace with your "Aqaed".

5

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

^ I am perfectly at peace with them now Alhamdulillah ....but have seen too many good muslims go down the path of these misguided deviants

6

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

interesting Das Reich, ofcourse not on this topic, but you could one day share the results you arrived at and the path you took, if thats not too personal.

im assuming here you didnt end up finding the khwarij to be right. they are indeed very close to the small group of muslims in focus today, if in nothing else but the unflinching conviction of their own rightness and the deadly belief in the wrongness and culpability of others

Any Good thing which You have Done Today? Plzzz Share....:)
7

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

^ no the khawaraj are not right ....absolutely not .....but we have to know why they are wrong .....they have become a convenient scapegoat for everything that went wrong in early islamic history ....thats what i dont agree with

8

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

exactly and more to the point they deem other muslims who disagree with them kafir and shedding of their blood legitimate and fighting them a holy duty .....sounds all too familiar ...yet these same people angrily reject the label of khawarij

9

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

DR what do you wish to talk about, the khwarij, or how extremists can be persuaded to give up their khwarij-ish militant attitude. the extremists dont identify themselves with the khwarij, so any theological argument against the khwarij would probably not be acceptable to them.

10

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

:salam:

The ideological descendents (not literally but as you have put it, righteous in conduct except for their political inflexibility and value for lives of others, which in itself nullify’s their righteousness) do not look up to any muslim leader today as the Kharjiites did to some select few Sahaba of calibre. So given that it would be difficult to negotiate with them and bring them back into the fold. And it would be political reconciliation not religious reconciliation, they still would be marginalized for some of their beliefs perhaps. A fundamental difference would be the inviolability of muslim life and other innocent lives. This in itself is threatening no matter what political reconciliation is reached.

11

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

I am still searching for this species.

12

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

I must say though your historical observation about the similarity in how each of these groups back then and many today dealt with misguided religious interpretation, which eventually became their ideological base and then sprawned a political movement to destabilize the muslim government and community of its time, is very apt in this case. I think you are trying to match the behavioral aspects of the Kharijiites and many of todays extremist groups and how the means they use to impose their ideology thinking they are performing a righteous duty ordained by Allah SWT and hence see their conduct as legitimate even though it is deplorable. I think this is not about each groups specific ideology but the common denominator is misguided religious interpretation and how it breeds marginalized extremist groups militant in nature. The leaders or nexus of powerful people belonging to such groups cannot be reasoned with but its followers can be detered and salvaged.

13

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

good question...both , we cannot figure out the latter without understanding the former

but obviously latter is more important , we cannot expect that people like e.g irshad manji can convince these people to give up their ways ....on the contrary people like her only serve to swell up the ranks of the khawarij ...

04 March 2011 West Indies Vs Bangladesh
14

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

Jazakallah ...exactly this is the point I was trying to make

the salvage IMHO can only be done by people who themselves have such command over religion that they can provide their followers with an alternative religious leadership ......

and the so-called liberal muslim's weak arguments only serve to harden the resolve of the khawarij that they are indeed on the right path...and I am sorry to say but its hard to argue against them in such circumstances
a more modern example would be the religious opposition in Egypt
and their activites against Saadat, Mubarak etc...we can condemn them all we want but when they are fighting against tyrants like these its difficult not to sympathize with them

Pretend to be a woman here
15

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

they do exist but are not very vocal or visible and thats our own misfortune that we have confined islam only to the mosques

16

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

I agree, fight fire with fire. The complications of todays environment is quite different though. We have very few religious leaders who do so without having their own political gain involved. So far I have not seen a truly independent voice which is backed by governments either because they in turn would become targets of their wrong-doing when such scholars talk about even-handed policies. The grass roots issue would be that either side is not righteous enough to pioneer the agenda. Independent mediation would not satiate the political apetities of either.

If you peek back into our history such reconciliations or shifts in mistaken ideology were only occurences in the earlier generations of Khalifas because they themselves were beacons of righteousness and most of their company as well. The further you progress such examples become rare to almost extinct because all successive Khalifas with a few exceptions stood themselves on shallow ground and could live up to the religious ideology or correct path that would be proposed. The few rare instances are short-lived.

2 Likes
17

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

Peace All

esp. Das Reich and USResident

Good thread and good replies Alhumdulillah ...

The difference we have today as opposed to the time of the early Khawarij is the fact that Islam en masse is not considered the "fashionable" way of life like it was back then.

Religious Muslims had a lot more political influence because the wind of Islam was still fresh. Today we have another thing to handle together with the zealous Muslims of today, we have the pro-Western Muslim mindset (fully progressive and removal of morals and values).

The religious Muslims who follow sound traditions are marginalised by the zealous as 'not standing up and making too much friendship with non-Muslims' and the secular Muslims are marginalising the religious by associating them ignorantly with the zealous Muslims.

The Western media promote the views of both the extremes however the middle path view is only offered through lesser forms of media ... GS for this reason can be a good thing inshaAllah.

Today we have more to contend with that is a fact and furthermore we are disadvantaged as being Muslim is not the trendy thing to be.

To salvage the extreme followers of both the folds i.e. zealous and liberal Muslims we are met with difficulty, because to approach the liberal Muslim we need to show that Islam is better and offers compassion this is seen by the zealous as weakness, on the other hand if we show the zealous the correct and strict followings and interpretations we are seen by the liberals as uncompromising.

The truth is that Islam doesn't need to be compromised and we don't need to use force to establish Islam correctly. However to be uncompromising and completely passive is also wrong.

18

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

:salam:

JAK Br. Psyah.

This is something I agree with 100%. Ideologies or theologies were promoted mostly through leadership centuries ago. This is why ideologies spread en masse and Islam is no exception to that.

I don’t think all pro-Western muslims are for the removal of morals and values. I would rather put it as westernized . You might say they are Kalma go, but it ends there.

Nice observation. Must agree. I think instead of bringing zealous and liberal muslims together we should work both ends and move them towards the center. Ofcourse this is a figurative statement. Bringing zealous and liberals under one umbrella to compromise never works, each extreme needs to be worked on separately. And this requires a lot of tolerance and patience. This is no easy task, I know it because the muslim community I live in here is polarised between religious and liberal muslims very distinctly. The liberals are mostly the financiers of the community whereas then grunt work is done by the religious crowd and believe me it is no easy task to keep them together. Being the middleman, means you take hits from both sides and sometimes it can be very hurtful and overbearing.

19

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

salam alaikum
brother thanks for replying ......as you have rightly pointed out this is the dilemma which is causing the biggest problem amongst the muslim world today
not just terrorism itself which is a symptom rather than the cause of the disease

what practical steps we can take in our local communities you think which can cause some bridging of the gulf between the two extremes ?

20

Re: Khawarij- open discussion

The gulf will always exist and it will be unwise to trying to get too much into it. Every religion has people along the spectrum of the two extremes.

The solutions is to establish welfare states and the problem will take care of itself.

Just my 2 cents

~**~ Tussi Baray ----- Ho ~~~~ ~**~
~**~ Tussi Baray ----- Ho ~~~~ ~**~