Western Imaginings. Rohan Davis
of an ideologue, a leader wanting to exert his control over a people, and a group of warriors inspired by both.
Today Wahhabism is generally described as a relatively small but very influential branch within Islam in general and Sunni Islam in particular, advocating a return to what its proponents claim to be the true principles of Islam.26 Wahhabism is often identified for its ongoing efforts to purify what is seen as the modern, corrupted version of Islam, with the movement advocating for a return to basic principles, rules, and teachings of the version of Islam that existed during the time of the Prophet Muhammad and the first three generations of Muslims (often referred to as the pious ancestors, or the salaf).27
The doctrine of monotheism (tawhid) is widely considered to be the hallmark of both Abd al-Wahhab’s teaching and the Wahhabi movement he inspired.28 Proponents of Wahhabism are said to believe that a failure to adhere to and uphold tawhid is the key reason for a collapsing in social order, tyranny, corruption, oppression, injustice, and degeneration.29 Proponents of Wahhabism are therefore widely known for condemning any practices or activities violating or that could violate this belief.30 Commentators often remark that Wahhabism holds that dedication to tawhid must be absolute and any kind of worship or veneration of objects, or superstitious, animist, or other kinds of religious worship, are not tolerated.31 It is said that other interpretations of Islam like Sufism, Shi‘ism, and other versions of Sunni Islam are viewed by proponents of Wahhabism to be as unacceptable as the non-Islamic religions. Wahhabism’s puritanical and iconoclastic philosophies are often blamed for its conflict with other Muslim groups.32
Here it is also worthwhile to have a basic understanding of how scholars have distinguished between the different versions of Sunni Islam. Wahhabism is commonly understood by those studying the evolution of the movement to have derived from an offshoot of the Hanbali school of law, considered to be the most conservative and smallest in terms of followers of the four schools of Islamic thought/religious jurisprudence (also called madhhab in Arabic) within Sunni Islam (the others are Shafi‘i, Hanafi, and Maliki).33 The Hanbali school largely derives its religious law (known as sharia law) from the Qur’an, the Hadith (the words and customs of the Prophet), and the views of the Prophet’s companions (known as the sahaba). Unlike the Hanafi and Maliki schools, the Hanbali school does not accept community customs or jurist discretion as a basis for Islamic law in the absence of the Qur’an’s and the Hadith’s failure to provide clear answers to arising issues. Wahhabism’s unwavering commitment to the basic principles, rules, and teachings of the version of Islam practiced during the time of the Prophet Muhammad and the salaf is the major reason why it is typically considered the most austere version of Sunni Islam.34
Followers of Wahhabism are, however, likely to reject the categorization as an offshoot of the Hanbali school, which views (what outsiders would call) Muslims as belonging to one of two groups: followers of the salaf or followers of the khalaf (those who come after the salaf), the latter of which are not typically considered by followers of Wahhabism to be real Muslims.35 Some commentators have suggested that those following the way of the salaf will often label themselves as Salafis, while many outsiders, particularly those wanting to denigrate the movement, will insultingly label them as followers of Wahhabism.36 The term Wahhabism is considered by some to be derogatory because of its suggesting that these Muslims are followers of the scholar Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Wahhabism as enforced by the Saudi Arabian state, as opposed to followers of the salaf. My choosing to use the term Wahhabism in this book is for practical reasons. It is how most laypeople identify this tradition and is the term used by the overwhelming majority of writers, commentators, and scholars, particularly those in the West. I am aware of the negative associations often attached to the term and can only hope that readers, particularly those within Saudi Arabia, understand there is no malicious intent inspiring and motivating my use of the term.
Modern Saudi Arabian society is widely understood to be the quintessential society ordered according to Wahhabi religious doctrine.37 Wahhabism is typically seen as providing the theological basis for modern Saudi societal practices such as gender segregation, prohibition of alcohol, and the ban on women from driving.38 Wahhabism is not, however, said to be confined to Saudi Arabia, with Western commentators in particular often writing about the different states and groups of people promoting this belief system.39 Outside of Saudi Arabia, Qatar is the country most often described as enforcing Wahhabi religious doctrine, often attributed to the Saudi royal family’s ongoing support for Qatar’s ruling al-Thani family since the nineteenth century.40 Outsiders however tend to view the Wahhabism enforced by the Qatari state as a lot less rigid than in Saudi Arabia.41
Beyond these basic understandings, Wahhabism is a heavily contested category. This quality is captured in the Wikipedia entry on the Wahhabi movement. As is so often the case with Wikipedia, the entry draws on a rich assortment of sources of varying degrees of credibility, tendentiously describing it as
a reactionary religious movement or offshoot branch of Islam variously described as “orthodox”, “ultraconservative”, “austere”, “fundamentalist”, “puritanical” (or “puritan”), an Islamic “reform movement” to restore “pure monotheistic worship”, or an “extremist movement.”42
In the West, Wahhabism has been frequently singled out for attention as the source of modern Islamic terrorism. The US 9/11 Commission Report claimed that Islamist terrorism had found its inspiration in a long tradition of extreme intolerance flowing through the founders of Wahhabism, the Muslim Brotherhood, and prominent Salafi thinkers.43 In Europe the directorate-general for External Policies of the European Parliament issued a report in 2013 warning, “the risks posed by Salafist/Wahhabi terrorism go far beyond the geographical scope of the Muslim world. The attacks on New York, Washington D.C., London and Madrid remind us of this.” 44
Equally, and given long-standing and close ties between a succession of US administrations and the Saudi government, it has mattered that Saudi officials have long insisted that Islam is tolerant and peaceful. They have repeatedly denied allegations that their government exports religious extremism or supports extremist political movements.45 Likewise, careful scholarship by authors like Trevor Stanley suggest Islamic terrorism cannot be adequately explained as the export of Saudi Wahhabism, as many have claimed.46
This contest to define Wahhabism also involves Islamic scholars living in the West. Differing representations offered by Islamic scholars like Khaled Abou El Fadl and Stephen Schwartz are a microcosm of a much larger intellectual debate taking place in a range of scholarly and intellectual forums.47 Both these authors are inspired and motivated by different religious and political interests. El Fadl claims to represent the majority of Muslims he believes to be moderate, peace-loving, and who, like many in the West, value human rights, embrace modernity, and respect women. According to his self-proclaimed moderate Islamic approach, Wahhabism is a corrupted version of Islam existing on the lunatic fringe of the wider Islamic faith.
Schwartz is strongly motivated by a desire to promote his Sufi Islamic beliefs. Drawing on his personal experiences with Sufism in the Balkan region throughout the 1990s, Schwartz claims Sufism can provide the much-needed voice of reason at a time when radical Islamists like the Wahhabis, with the support of the Saudi state, are engaging in terrorism and violence. Like El Fadl, Schwartz understands Wahhabism to be a corrupted and perverse version of Islam; however, this is because it does not align with his own Sufi beliefs, as opposed to the modern and progressive interpretation of Islam that El Fadl claims to follow.
As both intellectuals are offering different particular Islamic views, both are clearly inspired by differing political and religious interests. It is therefore unsurprising that they also rely on different kinds of evidence to support their claims. In terms made famous by Benedict Anderson, both El Fadl and Schwartz are constructing slightly different Imagined communities.48 These differences in approach and reasoning only increase as we consider other scholarly representations of Wahhabism.