Sunni Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation
In light of the Divine Word, we recognize that the historical nature
of Sunni Islam is a broad one that proceeds from a shared respect for
the Qur'an and Sunnah, a shared dependence on the interpretations
and derivations of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), and
a shared respect for the writings of a vast array of scholars who have
been identified by their support for and affiliation with the Sunni
Muslims and have been accepted as the luminaries of Sunni Islam - as
broadly defined.
Likewise, detailed discussions in matters of theology are the
specific domain of trained specialists, and proceed on the basis of
well-defined principles and methodologies, which are beyond the
knowledge of the generality of Muslims.
I have nothing against such pledges, but I have to confess that this particular one makes me uneasy. Let me explain. Back in 2005, the world's leading authorities on Islam had
come together and signed a document known as "True Islam and it Role in Modern Society". The ground-breaking memorandum was later condensed and its title changed to a far catchier
Amman Message. Ostensibly, the Amman Message was not only easier to digest, it also allowed a large and growing online community to advertise and endorse it through weblogs, forums and social networking sites.
Make no mistake, the Amman Message lost none of its original bite. There was no running away from the fact that the Sunni form of Islam was most clearly represented by the four schools of jurisprudence; that is to say, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali (see
Detox the orthodox and
Get thee behind me, Madhhab! for a fuller discussion). The Salafists were mentioned too, but only after clarifying that Muslims of Sufi and Ashari persuasion were not, as some ideologues regularly advertise, heretics.
The reaction that followed such a declaration was, even in foresight, entirely predictable. While traditional Muslims enthusiastically welcomed it, ideological Muslims went off on another tangent. It was hardly surprising, since almost ALL the Sunni-affiliated groups mentioned by the Amman Message are considered by ideologues to be closet-deviants.
The document was perhaps too detailed for its own good, but of course, I mean that in the most ironic way possible. To cut a long story short, things between the dominant group of Muslims and their Salafist counterparts have changed little. In fact, it has gotten worse, as evidenced by the recent controversy of a popular scholar criticizing the theological school of Imam al-Ashari. I am not going into details, but we shall call this the AMTSIL affair, because I'm going to return to it later.
Into this apparent fray, I will advance a personal opinion. I acknowledge that the Amman Message might have proven unpalatable to some quarters, but I also believe that it placed an inflated sense of security on laymen adherents of Imam al-Ashari's theological school. Sure, the Amman Message made it exceedingly clear that an overwhelming majority of Muslim scholars had, for all intents and purposes, agreed on its role in orthodox Islam.
However, it also made laymen defensive over something that should have been left at the door of specialists. In fact, the high degree of outrage and the
ad hominem attacks that followed the AMTSIL affair seems to prove my point that very little knowledge was actually being exchanged. I recall the words of a traditional shaykh who once remarked:
Indeed, if we represent a religion- any traditional religion- as a circle or a sphere, then it is likely that its adherents will absorb and practice only a small segment of the whole. They will also emphasize this segment, as though to fill the empty space.
Any group that launches itself from an ideology of exclusivism cannot, in the end, be forced into the "mainstream" or the "majority" that Prophetic statements allude to. I refer especially to factions that find it necessary to define their own legitimacy and 'rightness' against the overwhelming majority. An ideological group is fed by its own myth of uniqueness; emulating the Christian framework of being the Saved Group (see
Salvation is just a family affair) amidst a sea of frankly misguided believers.
As an outsider, I observe a pattern of scaling back from the clarity (and perhaps limiting) of the Amman Message, to the ambiguity of the Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation; and I cannot help but speculate on the subtle reasons for this. After all, the lack of clarity benefits no one except those who oppose clarity in the first place.
My worst fear is that the pledge might open the door of dawah (evangelism) for the ideological (and madhhab-less) form of Islam to creep into the mainstream. Without clarity, this is not an altogether impossible prospect. I wish I share Shaykh Hamza Yusuf's confidence when he reportedly laid down this challenge during one of his lectures: "May the best dawah win!"
The attraction to the exclusivist version of Islam is especially acute amongst Muslim youths and fresh converts to Islam. Who can forget teenage angst and the pressing need to find an intellectual framework rooted in non-conformism? In his commentary on Imam al Ghazali's
Deliverance from Error
, Reverend R.J McCarthy writes of his own experience:
At that age, one is young and is making the great step, or steps, from adolescence to maturity...mentally and morally as well as physically. One becomes conscious of new and untried mental powers, but is still aware of one's lack of knowledge and experience and of one's still being subject to adult authority which may not always be gentle, understanding and sympathetic. One wants to try one's wings, to step into a somewhat alien, and perhaps hostile adult world with assurance and confidence. One wants to be noticed, to do something which will attract attention, and often enough the first thing to suggest itself is some sort of act or posture which protests against and defies the "establishment".
Nonetheless, I have little doubt that the signatories of the Pledge had had nothing but the welfare of the community they lead and represent at heart.
or Imam al-Jilani's 
is the sheer number of anecdotes they quote. I remember trying to read these books many years ago and coming away with a vague sense of disbelief. Sufis taming lions in the wilderness; Sufis traveling very long distances in impossibly short times; Sufi masters reading the minds of their students, etc. I did not come away with anything positive. It was not until later that I realized the real reason for this.
