SUFI MYSTICISM IN THE EYE OF ISLAMIC TERRORISM

SUFISM, GENDER AND SOCIETY SPRING 2021

Rebeca Scott Abad

Abstract
The present paper Sufi mysticism in the eye of Islamic terrorism is a sample of how
Islamic radicalism has made Sufism one of its main targets. We will begin by explaining
the concepts that are the object of our study and offer a historical overview as well as a
general geographical dimension of the various locations of this mystical current.

Index
1. Definition of Sufism and context
2. Definition of Wahabism, Salafism and others Islamic currents
3. Definition of terrorism and Islamic terrorism
4. Brief historical approximation between these currents up to the present day
5. The eye of Islamic terrorism on the Sufi society
6. The role of Sufis in protecting societies from radicalism
 1. SUFISM AND CONTEXT

Sufism is another thought of Islam practiced in the 8th century by groups who chose to
solve their problems by moving away from the formal structures of traditional religions
and intermediary essences, trying to approach God through different paths and mystical
ways that were more real and pure, with depth, totally abandoning worldly life and its
dominant materialism and adulteration of the truth. Sufism is a spiritual richness
inseparable from Islamic culture; in short, it is the cultivation of the spirit, of the soul, the
yearning for knowledge and the use of reason as an instrument to know God. It is an
enriching and non-transferable inner experience that is not available to everyone.

The word Sufi, possibly coined around 776 by Abu-Said-Albur-Cheir, literally means 'of
wool' and, by extension, 'one who wears wool'. The most plausible explanation for the
name is that it was literally applied to a small group of men dressed in wool, and that it
was later extended to designate all the mystics of the community without distinction. The
Sufis in their clothing conveyed a life of deprivation and humility. These groups of Sufis
called themselves "the people of truth" (ahl al haqq) on the basis of passages from the
Koran and the prophetic traditions concerning poverty, chastity, purity of soul, humility,
renunciation of wealth and the material world, which is temporal permanence, trusting in
God and all that pleases him. In the early days of Islam, a large number of sects,
movements, associations and mystical ascetic paths (turuq) emerged as a way or thought
of perfection and approach to reach God, raising questions that challenged their solutions
to the problems affecting humanity in general, and the newly Islamised Muslims in
particular, through the literal religious tradition, confronting and dividing an angry,
dissatisfied and vexed part of Muslim society for long periods, before and after the
emergence of Islam, from its inception until the 8th to the 12th centuries when it
experienced great development.

The most prominent figures were Dun-Nun al-Misri, al-Junayd al-Baghdadi and al-Halaj.
Hassan al-Basri was considered an ascetic and not the first Sufi. However, for some the
true forerunners of Sufism were three other figures: Abu Hashim, who built the first
retreat house for mystics (zawiyah) in Syria, Hassan al-Basri and Rabiaa al-Adawiya of
Basra.
Sufis have a particular vision of religion. Indeed, they make a sharp distinction between
"form" and "meaning", "outside" and "inside", "shell" and "pulp". The goal of Sufism is
the knowledge of God, and to attain it, the Sufi must undertake a long journey and go
through various stages such as repentance, abstinence, renunciation, poverty, patience,
etc. The originality of Sufism is due to the three foundations on which it forges its thought
and practice: the Sharia, or Islamic law, which is shared by all Muslims; the Tariqa, or
the path and way of practising devotion; and the Haqqiqa, or the knowledge that the Sufi
acquires from within. Thus, Sufism remains one of the Islamic sciences like Kalam, fiqh
jurisprudence, grammar, etc., not an independent doctrine of Islam. The Sufi spiritual
path or tariqa is located between these poles.

Islamic Sufi thought coincides in form with other types of mysticism, both Greek and
European, in that they all use religious ritual in order to realise knowledge and
enlightenment. However, Islamic Sufism in its relationship with the Christians, the
Indians, the Greeks and the Persians was not a "mere copier" of their experiences and
philosophies. Likewise, its action was neither blind imitation, nor absolute acceptance or
rejection, but rather "a dialectical contact based on positive influence; criticism and
tolerance". Had it not been for its intimate conformity with the Qur'an, Sufism would not
have been so well accepted among Muslims generally, which enabled Sufis to call
themselves "special friends of God" and "the true heirs of the Prophet".
I
t took a long time for Sufism to gain citizenship rights and recognition by traditional
orthodox religionists and Muslim thinkers, as it was regarded by some of them as heresy,
as we shall see below.
 2. WAHABISM, SALAFISM AND OTHERS ISLAMIC CURRENTS

These two radical movements are firmly opposed to Sufism, which they label as heresy.
In the case of Wahhabism, this is understood as the fundamentalist Muslim movement
that advocates a radical return to the purity of the Islam of the origins and opposes any
kind of innovation. It is a Hanbali-inspired movement and its interpretation of religion is
so ultramontane that the most purist interpretation of religion is so ultramontane that
purists condemn music, poetry, tobacco and even laughter.

It should be clarified that, although we know them as Wahhabis, they do not call
themselves Wahhabis, but this is a denomination from the outside. It is linked to a
reformist movement in the Islamic tradition, which criticised the fact that the strength of
the divine message as set out in the Qur'an and exemplified in the Hadith, the sayings and
deeds of Muhammad, was being lost. This movement arose in the first half of the 18th
century and its leader was Mohammed Ibn Abdel Wahhab, hence Wahhabism. The
Wahhabis reject the recognition of saints or illustrious personages who could overshadow
their central dogma, the tauhid, which says that there is only one God to whom nothing
and no one can be compared. For Abdel Wahhab to name an Islamic doctrinal current
would contradict the Wahhabis' founding dogma, tauhid. Hence they call themselves "the
people of tauhid" and feel the name "Wahhabi" almost sacrilegious.

Salafism, on the other hand, is understood as a reformist Islamic movement that arose in
the 19th century and advocates a literalist and orthodox reading of the founding texts of
Islam, the Qur'an and Sunna, and considers their interpretation to be the only legitimate
interpretation. They reject the imitation (taqlid) of juristic schools, esoteric tendencies
and innovations (bida'h) in order to avoid interpretations of the Qur'an. The word
"Salafism" (Arabic: ‫اﻟﺴﻠﻔﯿﺔ‬, as-salafiyya) comes from the word salaf (predecessor or
ancestor) and refers to the term salaf as-salih (pious ancestors), which refers to the first
three generations of Muslims who were present at the birth and development of Islam.

The main difference between Wahhabists and Salafists is that Wahhabists accept having
a king to enforce Sharia and mediate between Allah and his believers. However, the
Salafists refuse to have an intermediary between them and their god other than a caliph,
i.e. a successor to the Prophet Muhammad.
 3. TERRORISM AND ISLAMIC TERRORISM

Before developing the concepts of terrorism and Islamic terrorism, it is worth mentioning
the terms fundamentalism and neo-fundamentalism.

After the end of the Cold War and the consequent decline in the bipolar power struggle
between the United States and the former Soviet Union in the various disputed areas,
particularly in the Middle East, an ideological and regional power vacuum was created,
which was exploited by a rising trend: fundamentalism.

Islamic fundamentalism attempts to provide its own vision of Islam, interpreting the
Koran literally in order to respond to the problems afflicting its communities by returning
to its origins and often moving away from the very essence of Islam. Fundamentalism
ignores the religious and political openness set out in the original Islam and it is made
very clear that "the basic aspiration of the fundamentalists is to do away with all the
"puppet" governments of capitalism, to put an end to the spread of Western culture in
their societies".

Within fundamentalism itself there are various tendencies in which the use of violence is
justified given the literal interpretation of the Koran, examples of which are Jamiat el
Muslimum, in which violence is in the last stage. However, they recognise three phases
of the struggle: the initial preaching, the exile and the triumphant return with the use of
violence"; Al-Jihad for which the only way to achieve the restoration of the Islamic state
is armed struggle. "

When we speak of neo-fundamentalism we should understand it as "jihadist or Islamist

terrorism", in which Islamic activists use terrorism, either indiscriminately or in a targeted
manner, to impose their ideas or political identity.

Terrorism commonly refers to acts of violence directed against civilians in pursuit of

political or ideological objectives. The terms terrorism and Islamism have been two
concepts that have virtually become one and the same. Terrorism and its evolution over
time, its aims and methods of action and the various types that exist are, after 9/11, the
subject of rigorous study, for since then the world has faced a terrorist threat that does not
have one specific target, but many and in all parts of the globe. The scenarios in which
terrorism materialises, local and global, are today the challenge facing the international
community. Terrorism seeks to exert pressure so that, through its actions, it achieves its
proposed objectives, which, depending on the organisation, may be of greater or lesser
dimension.
After the 9/11 attacks, this kind of "super-terrorism" manifested itself in its fullest
expression. This Islamic terrorism does not have a political vision, there is no possibility
of negotiation, the objective is very different, the aim is to push for the radicalisation of
the masses. That is why the message of Islamist terrorism has more to do with the
revolutionary than the religious.

Islamic terrorists" have their own characteristics that are not found in either Islam or
fundamentalism:
-They justify violence per se and do not claim responsibility for the acts they commit;
-They do not have a national political objective;
-They do not belong to a particular state, but are united by other motives beyond
nationalism and religion;
-They are generally identified with the Wahhabi current - the most conservative current
of Islam that reigns mainly in Saudi Arabia;
-Neo-fundamentalism is not a movement of the masses but of the few, whose main
means is international terrorism.
 4. HISTORICAL APPROXIMATION BETWEEN THESE CURRENTS UP TO
THE PRESENT DAY

It should be stressed that not all Islamist radicalisation processes always spill over
into waves of violence. It should also be made clear that these processes do not
exclusively affect the Muslim community, as the vast majority of Muslims - including
some radicals - do not engage in violence or terrorism. However, the need for
political correctness should not prevent this phenomenon from being fully addressed.

It must be remembered that, in the fight against radicalisation and Islamist terrorism,
the peaceful majority has become irrelevant in the face of a radical minority that today
bombards the status quo and threatens the security of liberal democracies in Europe
and the West.

One ingredient of Islamist radicalisation is the adoption of a strict fundamentalist

interpretation of the teachings of the Koran and a literal imitation of the conduct of
the Prophet Mohammed. Concatenated to this is the overriding goal sought by all
members of the radical sector of the Islamist spectrum, which is none other than the
restoration of the purity and glorious status of Islam. The strategies of the different
actors that make up the radical sector of the Islamist spectrum differ in terms of the
means to be used to achieve this end. The main difference lies in whether or not there
is an advocacy of violence. It is therefore worthwhile, for the sake of understanding
the transition between radicalisation and Islamist terrorism, to focus on the violent
conception of jihad over other less or non-violent means, namely extreme devotion,
religious proselytising or political participation.
 5. THE EYE OF ISLAMIC TERRORISM ON THE SUFI SOCIETY

As Sufism became popular, numerous Sufi religious orders were formed and spread
throughout the Muslim lands. Over time, non-Islamic practices and doctrines were
incorporated within some of these orders, which brought opposition and attacks from
official Islam, and a discrediting of Islam.

Moreover, due to its foreign origin, Sufism is considered by some Muslim voices to be a
heretical doctrine. These difficulties included linguistic difficulties, along with his study
of Islam from a Christian understanding of the religion. All this made his approach
superficial and erroneous in many cases, for example, his recurrent claim that Sufism is
un-Islamic and has nothing to do with the spiritual life of Islam. Spiritual life exists in all
religions, and therefore Islam has a mysticism based on its own teachings, while
intertwining with other mysticisms with which Muslims have had contact. But this view
is not shared by the traditional majority, the more radical groups and the more violent
extremists.

It is clear that ideological hybridity is characteristic of all political Islam in the twentieth
century. Earlier we mentioned Islamic currents such as Wahhabism and Salafism, in
relation to which we can mention, for example, that Wahhabism has given Jihadism
possibilities of expansion and penetration that it would not have had without Wahhabi
institutions. There are other Islamic ideological currents that have also greatly influenced
jihadism, such as the whole tradition of the Muslim Brotherhood created in 1928, or the
theories of the revolutionary vanguard.

This mixture of currents has led, not always, to violent radicalism, and the Sufi
community has been one of its targets. Numerous attacks have been committed against
Sufis and these are just a few examples: In 2017 alone in Pakistan a suicide attack on a
Sufi temple killed 52 people, at another Sufi shrine in Sehwan a bomb attack killed 76
people, among others; Egypt suffered one of the largest attacks on the Sufi community, a
Daesh attack on a Sufi mosque that resulted in the death of around 305 people also in
2017. Mali, Libya and Syria are not spared from this destructive phenomenon either.
These historic events are just a small proof of the violence and rejection of the Sufi
community.
 6. THE ROLE OF SUFIS IN PROTECTING SOCIETIES FROM
RADICALISM

If Sufism is rejected by the most radical opposition, it is without understanding the

important service of Sufism to Islam. Traders and Sufis were excellent vehicles for the
spread of Islam, and it reached China, Indonesia and the Philippines, as well as large parts
of Africa. In times of radicalism and the spread of the more reactionary positions of the
Mohammedan religion, Sufism is undoubtedly a bridge to understanding this religion, as
well as an alternative to the more belligerent, obscurantist and anti-pluralist Islam.

The importance of Sufism as an alternative to the clash of civilisations has manifested

itself, albeit in a manner controlled by the powers that be, for example in the Kingdom of
Morocco. Sufi orders, beyond developing their activities for spiritual realisation, have
historically ended up, due to their closeness to the poorest classes, getting involved in
social justice causes, including the fight against colonialism, as in Sudan. In the Moroccan
case, we see it as a double-edged sword. On the one hand, cleverly co-opted and
instrumentalised by the royal authorities, it has served to curb the rise of violent Salafist
movements in the generally stable North African kingdom. At the same time, however, it
has been used to domesticate the population and prevent any kind of social mobilisation
in protest, taking advantage of the fraternal atmosphere of the orders, their pacifying
character and their potential for social cohesion.

In short, Sufism is an essential element in achieving understanding between Muslim and

non-Muslim peoples, and an understanding of it will serve to eliminate cultural barriers
in one of the most problematic periods for the Islamic faith.
 BIBLIOGRAPHIE

ANAWATI, G. - C. and GARDET, Louis. Mystique musulmane. Aspects et tendances.

Experiences and techniques. Librairie philosophique J. Vrin, Paris: 1986, [pp. 310].
ASÍN PALACIOS, Miguel. El islam cristianizado. Study of "Sufism" through the works
of Abenarabi of Murcia. Libros Hiperión. 1st ed. 1931, Madrid: 2nd ed., 1981, [pp.
543].
BONAUD, Christian. Le soufisme et la spiritualité islamique. Maisonneuve et Larose,
Paris: 2002, [pp. 155].
BURCKHARDT, Titus. The Hispano-Arabic Civilisation. Original title: Die maurische
Kultur in Spanien. Spanish version by Rosa Kuhne Brabant. Madrid: Alianza Editorial,
S. A. 1st ed. 1977, (fifth edition, 1985).
CRUZ HERNÁNDEZ, Miguel. Historia del pensamiento en el mundo islámico,
Madrid: Alianza Editorial, 1st ed. 1996, 2nd ed. 2000, [pp. 325].
ERNEST, W Carl. Sufism. An essential introduction to the philosophy and practice of
the mystical tradition of Islam. Original title: The Shambhala Guide to Sufism.
Translation by Joan Carles Guix. Barcelona: Ediciones Oniro, S. A [pp. 271].
KÜNG, Hans. El islam: Historia, presente, futuro. Translation by José Manuel Lozano
Gotor and Juan Antonio Conde Gómez. Editorial Trotta, S.A., 2006, [pp. 847].
SCHIMMEL, Annmarie: Introduction to Sufism. Original title: Sufismus. Eine
einführung in Die islamisch mystik. Translation from German: Lía Tummer. Madrid:
Editorial Kairós, Barcelona, 1st ed. 2007, [pp. 164].