AHC: Less extremist Khawarij?

The Kharijite sect of Islam is known for it's hardline views on takfir, excommunicating Muslims who commit even the most minor of sins. However, paradoxically, the Khawarij was well-known for being the sect of choice for all sorts of social malcontents from ethnic minorities to pirates to revolutionaries. As @John7755 يوحنا states:
However, as a whole, the Khawarij were not united by anything but their hatred of stately authority. Which is why Kharijism is called such, those whom separation is constantly incumbent. It is frankly, a very unique movement that is tied irreversibly to the rebellion against Muhammad and authority explicit in the Arab mindset prior to the 14th century. Shurha unlike the common trope in Islamic circles, typically did not surface as religious fanatics of an austere nature, but as outlaws, pirates, revolutionary and other seeking massive societal change or simply a breakdown of order. This created in it, a rich tapestry of excuberant spirit unique to the movement and its cause.

There appears to be a conflict between who became Khawarij and the contents of the ideology. Your challenge is to find a way for the Khawarij to be, in practice, more aligned with it's "constituents".
 
Simply speaking the challenge has already been met by real life - although they'd deny it, Ibadi Islam is effectively the successor to the Khawarij sect. Accordingly, Ibadi Islam is far less activist and Oman is fairly moderate.
 
although they'd deny it, Ibadi Islam is effectively the successor to the Khawarij sect.
Do they? from what I know about Ibadis, they do not deny that they originate from a less extremist sect of the Khawarij.

And also I've been fascinated with Ibadi Islam for years now, very interesting how the (alleged) first ever sect in Islam predating both Sunnis and Shi'as still exists, are in charge of the most peaceful and humble country in the Middle East/Arab world, and are a very moderate and non-political form of Islam.
 
Do they? from what I know about Ibadis, they do not deny that they originate from a less extremist sect of the Khawarij.

And also I've been fascinated with Ibadi Islam for years now, very interesting how the (alleged) first ever sect in Islam predating both Sunnis and Shi'as still exists, are in charge of the most peaceful and humble country in the Middle East/Arab world, and are a very moderate and non-political form of Islam.

From wikipedia:

Ibadism emerged around 60 years after the Islamic prophet Muhammad's death in 632 AD[3] as a moderate school of the Khawarij movement,[4][5][6][page needed] although contemporary Ibāḍīs strongly object to being classified as Kharijites.[6][page needed]
 
From wikipedia:
They do not deny having originated from the Khawarij, they just reject being classified as modern-day Khawarij, and denying being Khawarij isn't unique to Ibadis, virtually all Muslims deny being Khawarij, as it's become an insult to refer to terrorist groups like ISIS and AQ.
 
They do not deny having originated from the Khawarij, they just reject being classified as modern-day Khawarij, and denying being Khawarij isn't unique to Ibadis, virtually all Muslims deny being Khawarij, as it's become an insult to refer to terrorist groups like ISIS and AQ.

Ah fair enough, misinterpretation on my part
 
Ah fair enough, misinterpretation on my part
Just letting you know that the Taliban refers to ISIS as Khawarij, while other non-extremist Muslims in turn refer to the Taliban as Khawarij.

In short, the word "Khawarij" has become the Muslim equivalent of political insults like Fascist, Nazi, or Communist - these words barely mean anything anymore, they're simply insults to mean "something bad that people should oppose".
 
Simply speaking the challenge has already been met by real life - although they'd deny it, Ibadi Islam is effectively the successor to the Khawarij sect. Accordingly, Ibadi Islam is far less activist and Oman is fairly moderate.
I don't really think so. I don't think the Ibadi sect would be very interesting to pirates, outlaws, and revolutionaries. Furthermore, I don't think the Ibadi sect is a good sect if you have "hatred of stately authority".
 
They do not deny having originated from the Khawarij, they just reject being classified as modern-day Khawarij, and denying being Khawarij isn't unique to Ibadis, virtually all Muslims deny being Khawarij, as it's become an insult to refer to terrorist groups like ISIS and AQ.
Even ISIS proudly claims to occasionally curb Khawarij from their ranks. I recall a news article discussing how ISIS leaders said that they did exactly that. Nowadays, the typical avenues to Khawarij thought are excommunication for minor sins rather than opposition to state or religious authority. I wonder how being Khawarij was ever associated with malcontents (given most social malcontents also tended to drink, a minor sin that the Khawarij should oppose) given this.
 
Just letting you know that the Taliban refers to ISIS as Khawarij, while other non-extremist Muslims in turn refer to the Taliban as Khawarij.

In short, the word "Khawarij" has become the Muslim equivalent of political insults like Fascist, Nazi, or Communist - these words barely mean anything anymore, they're simply insults to mean "something bad that people should oppose".
Anyone who asserts the Taliban as being Khawarij are frankly ignorant of Islamic history of methodology.
 
Top