• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

The Hanbali and Wahhabi Schools of Thought As Observed Through the Case of Ziyārah Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Cameron Zargar, B.A. Graduate Program in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures The Ohio State University 2014 Thesis Committee: Nada Moumtaz, Advisor Sabra Webber Copyright by Cameron Zargar 2014 Abstract The Hanbali madhhab (school of jurisprudence) underwent great changes due to the influence of two major scholars who challenged the system of taqlīd (adhering to the views of a certain scholar or school of thought), Aḥmad Taqī al-dīn Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1327/8 C.E.) and Muḥammad Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb (d. 1791/2 C.E.). Both would emphasize a return to the Qur’an and sunnah (the words and deeds, or, exemplary model) of the Prophet of Islam in the form of an anti-madhhab stance that can clearly be observed in rulings that pertain to ziyārah (visiting graves). However, despite his opposition to taqlīd, Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb was clearly influenced by the opinions of Ibn Taymiyyah. Similarly, Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb’s views would be echoed by later jurists who came to be known as the “Wahhabis.” In this way, one might argue that initial opposition to taqlīd ultimately led to further taqlīd and what can be classified as a new madhhab. In order to demonstrate the changing views concerning ziyārah in the Hanbali madhhab, I will examine the major works of Hanbali jurists before and after Ibn Taymiyyah. It will be shown that matters that Wahhabi jurists consider to be prohibited (such as kissing or wiping the graves of righteous figures) or even heretical (like seeking forgiveness or intercession from the deceased) were not viewed as such before Ibn Taymiyyah. Rather, Ibn Taymiyyah’s views gradually gained legitimacy in the Hanbali madhhab until they were formally propagated by Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb and the Saudi state. But Ibn ‘Abdi’l- ! ii! Wahhāb caused a further break in the Hanbali madhhab due to his opinion that a large number of Muslims had apostatized. His views gained legitimacy by means of their implementation in Arabia. What would eventually emerge was a group of scholars who employed the same methodologies and proofs as Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb while simultaneously insisting that they were not a new madhhab, but rather, the true followers of the path of the earliest generations of Muslims, or, the salaf. In the following pages, I will address the opinions concerning ziyārah of Hanbalis and Wahhabis and ask whether the trends observed necessitate that Wahhabism be classified as a new madhhab. ! iii! ! iv! Dedication This work is dedicated to my father for teaching me to be courageous in the pursuit of knowledge, even when it is not convenient. ! v! Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Nada Moumtaz and Dr. Sabra Webber for their astute comments, creative ideas, consistent encouragement and sincere concern for my success. ! vi! ! ! ! ! Vita May 1999 .......................................................Beverly Hills High School 2003................................................................B.A. Near Eastern Studies, U.C. Berkeley Publications “Orality vs. Literacy: A Preliminary Look at the “Conversation” During the Early Caliphate,” Lights: The Messa Journal, Winter 2013, Volume 2, Issue 2. Fields of Study Major Field: Near Eastern Languages and Cultures ! vii! Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………ii Dedication………………………………………………………………………………...iv Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………v Vita………………………………………………………………………………………..vi Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..1 Chapter 1: Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb on the matter of ziyārah…………….9 Chapter 2: Hanbali Scholars Prior to Ibn Taymiyyah……………………………………20 Chapter 3: Ibn Taymiyyah’s break with Hanbali jurists…………………………………32 Chapter 4: Hanbali jurists after Ibn Taymiyyah…………………………………………45 Chapter 5: Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb and the groundwork for a new madhhab………………57 Chapter 6: Hanbali/Wahhabi jurists after Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb……………………….…71 Chapter 7: Wahhabism as a separate madhhab.………………………………………….84 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………..91 ! viii! Introduction A study of the works of Hanbali and Wahhabi1 jurists reveals that the Hanbali madhhab2 experienced trends in which the opinions of certain prominent figures would come to be challenged by iconoclastic jurists. Eventually, though, such iconoclastic jurists would themselves come to occupy the position of the scholars whom they sought to challenge in the first place. The origins of the Wahhabi movement can be traced to two points of rupture in Hanbali fiqh3. The first was in the fourteenth century, when Aḥmad Taqī al-dīn Ibn Taymiyyah decided to challenge the existent madhhab system and favor independent thinking over taqlīd4. He called for a return to the Qur’an and the sunnah5 of the Prophet of Islam. Then, after a decline in original scholarship in the Hanbali school in the eighteenth century, Muḥammad Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb, a great admirer of Ibn Taymiyyah, would take a similar stance. While also calling for an Islamic revival, Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb emphasized the deviation of the people of his time arguing that many 1 In the following pages, I will address the question of why Wahhabis are named as such. While those known as “Wahhabis” refer to themselves as “Salafis,” I have chosen to refrain from using the latter term in order to avoid confusion. That is to say, “Salafi” does not always refer to those who are commonly labeled “Wahhabi.” 2 School of thought. Here, a school of jurisprudence. 3 jurisprudence. 4 Adhering to the views of a certain scholar or school of thought. 5 The words and deeds, or, exemplary model. 1 who professed Islam had, in fact, fallen into a state of apostasy. Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb also presented his arguments as a return to the Qur’an and sunnah and independent of scholarly imitation. While most associate this approach in jurisprudence with Ibn ‘Abdi’l- Wahhāb, Wahhabism takes as its inspiration the works of Ibn Taymiyyah perhaps to an even greater extent than those of its eponym. However, it was by way of Ibn ‘Abdi’l- Wahhāb that Ibn Taymiyyah came to occupy the role of the unofficial founder of a new madhhab. But this involves a contradiction; while Wahhabis emphasize independent reasoning and oppose taqlīd, their school of thought oftentimes takes as dogma the views of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb. One instance by which one can see the influences of these two figures on the Hanbali madhhab is in regard to the matter of ziyārah6. A close look at Hanbali fiqh before Ibn Taymiyyah reveals that early Hanbali jurists considered displays of reverence (such as kissing or wiping7 the graves of righteous figures) and seeking forgiveness or intercession from the deceased to be permissible or meritorious. Oftentimes, they considered the question of the permissibility of these acts to be of such small consequence that they did not even address these matters in their works. However, Ibn Taymiyyah’s view that such acts were either innovations in religion (bida‘, singular: bid‘ah) or forbidden (ḥarām) gradually gained legitimacy among certain Hanbali jurists in the centuries after his death. Then, Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb would not only help Ibn Taymiyyah’s perspective gain authority, but he would take the new approach a step further; Muslims who participated in certain acts near graves were to be considered disbelievers, as they were guilty of shirk,8 and were to be opposed with 6 The visitation of graves. 7 By “wiping,” what is intended here is a particular form of wiping by which one seeks blessings. 8 Associating partners with God. 2 violence. After the success of Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb’s thought, due in large part to the establishment of the Saudi state in Arabia, Ibn Taymiyyah was viewed as the ultimate authority on a great number of issues in jurisprudence. Additionally, Ibn ‘Abdi’l- Wahhāb’s policy of takfīr9 would also find a place among later Hanbali jurists. The methods and particular hadith employed by Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb were implemented by Wahhabi scholars much the way other scholars might adhere to a particular madhhab. However, Wahhabis do not consider themselves to be part of a new madhhab known as “Wahhabism” but rather insist that they are simply the true adherents of a puritanical form of Islam, or, the madhhab of the salaf, free from the shackles of taqlīd and true to the original message of the Qur’an and the sunnah. “Wahhabism” is, by no means, a term preferred by those with whom the term is associated.10 Rather, such individuals refer to themselves as Salafis, muwaḥḥidūn (monotheists) or muslimūn (Muslims11) and are most closely linked with the Hanbali madhhab (school of thought) in terms of fiqh. By using the phrase “Wahhabi,” the opponents of Wahhabism12 sought to link such individuals to the 18th century C.E. scholar, Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdi’l-Wahhāb (d. 1206 A.H./ 1791/2 C.E.). Thus, Ibn ‘Abdi’l- 9 Dismissing another as a disbeliever. I have translated kāfir as “disbeliever” because what is intended in the cases examined here is one who knowingly rejects the message of Islam, and not merely one who does not believe (which would include those who do not believe due to their ignorance of Islam). 10 Uwaidah Al Juhany’s work Najd Before the Salafi Reform Movement: Social, Political and Religious Conditions During the Three Centuries preceding the Rise of the Saudi State finds its origins in Al Juhany’s dissertation of a similar name: “The History of Najd Prior to the Wahhabis: A Study of Social, Political and Religious Conditions in Najd During the Three Centuries Preceding the Wahhabi Reform Movement.” However, when his book was published in Riyadh (in association with the King Abdul Aziz Foundation for Research and Archives), he replaced the word “Wahhabis” with “Salafis.” See: Al Juhany, Uwaidah, Najd Before the Salafi Reform Movement: Social, Political and Religious Conditions During the Three Centuries preceding the Rise of the Saudi State, (Riyadh: Ithaca Press, in association with the King Abdul Aziz Foundation for Research and Archives, 2002), ix.

Load more

  107

Copy Link