Alevism, Muwahhidun (or Druze), Baha'i Faith, Khuramiyya, Babi Faith, etc. all were new religions derived from Islam. But they all have their base in Shi'a Islam. What about Shi'a Islam led to it being so popularly considered for off-shoots? Was it the cult of personalities different Shi'a sects tended to cultivate? Was it the structure of Shi'a Islam itself where imams can rewrite or rethink core parts of the religion? What do you all think?
AHQ: What made Shi'a Islam such a common base for off-shoots of Islam?
- Thread starter HumptyDumpty
- Start date
Recall that Islam was originally the state-religion of a vast empire. Political independence had to be justified with a good religious cause, because otherwise you could be seen as an apostate, and that particular crime would make it very, very hard to retain the loyalty of your followers. When the Abbasid Caliphate began to disintegrate in the 9th and 10th centuries, many local rulers who wanted autonomy from Baghdad turned to Shi'a Islam, because it gave them a good reason to reject the Abbasids' authority. Hence Shi'a organizations received a lot of support from these figures, and this allowed Shi'ism to become the default outlet for criticism of Sunni Islam.
Not that Shi'as where the only people rebelling against the Caliphate. The Kharjites were a much bigger challenge for the Caliphate during most of the 1st millennium CE, but they had some dangerously meritocratic and even anarchic tendencies that made them undesirable allies for seperatist governors.
In Shi'a Islam, there is a strong emphasis on leadership, particularly the belief in the Imamate – the leadership of the community by designated Imams who are considered divinely appointed and possess special knowledge and authority. This concept of a divinely chosen leader contributed to the emergence of various sects that proposed alternative leaders or reinterpreted the concept of Imamat. There is also the flexibility within Shi'a Islam for reinterpretation and ijtihad (independent reasoning) which allowed for the development of new religious movements.
Could a flexibility exist among Sunnis or Khwaraij? Or in a more anti-authoritarian fashion?
Flexibility within Sunni Islam or among the Kharijites (Khawarij) certainly exists. Sunni Islam encompasses a wide spectrum of beliefs and practices, and interpretations can vary significantly among different scholars and communities. Likewise, the Kharijites, while historically known for their strict adherence to certain principles, were not a monolithic group, and there were variations in their beliefs and practices.
Sunni Islam encompasses multiple legal schools (madhahib) that interpret Islamic law (Sharia) differently. While each school has its own methodology, scholars within these schools engage in ijtihad, or independent legal reasoning, to derive rulings on new issues or to reinterpret existing ones. This flexibility allows for adaptation to changing circumstances and diverse contexts. For example: The Maliki school, prominent in North and West Africa, is known for its relatively liberal approach to ijtihad, allowing for pragmatic rulings based on local customs and needs. Similarly, scholars like Muhammad Abduh and Rashid Rida of the late 19th and early 20th centuries advocated for a renewal of Islamic thought through a more flexible and rational approach, emphasizing the
importance of ijtihad in addressing contemporary challenges.
Many Sunni scholars and movements emphasize the importance of tolerance and pluralism within Islam. Examples:
1. The Amman Message, a declaration issued in 2004 by Islamic scholars from various schools of thought, affirming the validity of different legal schools and condemning sectarianism.
2. The Nahdlatul Ulama in Indonesia, one of the largest Sunni Muslim organizations, promotes a tolerant and moderate interpretation of Islam, advocating for religious pluralism and interfaith dialogue.
This is the same for Kharijites, there have been Kharijite factions with more anti-authoritarian tendencies,
The Ibadi branch of Kharijism, still existing today primarily in Oman and parts of North Africa, has a tradition of tolerance and non-violence. Ibadi scholars emphasize the importance of consultation (shura) and peaceful coexistence with other Muslim groups.
You misunderstood me. I was just asking whether Sunni Islam could also be a base for off-shoots of Islam. That is, is it flexible enough to create new religions?
You are question was about flexibility and I answered such, but yes, off-shoots can and have come from the wider Sunni circle, for example, Mu'tazila was a rationalist theological school that emphasized reason and free will, influential for a time and then largely subsumed back into mainstream Sunni thought. The other major example would be Salafism and Wahabism, both are ultra-conservative movements claiming to return to a 'pure' version of early Islam, often rejecting established Sunni tradition in favor of their own strict interpretations.
Muta'zila are still Muslims. I'm talking about new religions out of Islam. Like how Christianity was based from Judaism.
You can try to syncretise it with some other faith, like Buddhism, with the merging of Islamic ideology and Buddhist cosmology and interesting results may appear, though the birth of a completely new faith would be quite hard but still withing the realms of possibility, though they might still be called Islam but they would so different from other Islamic denominations that they might as well be a new faith
"Yes Muhammad is the last and final messenger, but Buddha is our guide and teacher, our prophet and lightbringer"
"As Buddha taught, I let go of desire; in Allah's name, my heart aspires."
"On a lotus of awareness, my heart seeks refuge in Allah, the Most Merciful."
This might be an interesting idea for a TL
The thing is millenarian movements in Islam generally, whether Sunni or Shia, did end up using a lot of concepts that we might associate today with Shiism, including veneration of Ali, and the belief that Ali, Muhammad, Jesus and modern kings were somehow made of the same divine substance, the idea that the same soul could exist in two different bodies at the same time and then across lifetimes as well etc etc
As the millenarian aspect of things died out in the late 1600s and 18th century, the groups that then survived being reabsorbed into the conversation that the rest of Islam was having seemed to be particularly Shia when really that’s pretty much how everyone was in the Middle Ages.
As the millenarian aspect of things died out in the late 1600s and 18th century, the groups that then survived being reabsorbed into the conversation that the rest of Islam was having seemed to be particularly Shia when really that’s pretty much how everyone was in the Middle Ages.
The issue is that creating a new religion would be considered apostasy by most Sunnis (or other Muslims and even Christians and Jews for that matter). So you're either a Sunni/Muslim or you're founding a new religion. And historically speaking, apostasy was basically an open invitation for your neighbors to take all your stuff, and for your subjects to overthrow and replace you with an orthodox figure. Hence Islam and the Abrahamic religions in general discourage founding new religions but encourage sectarianism. It's a lot easier to establish and join a sect than a new religion.
I mean isn't that basically an Islamic version of Gnosticism?
I mean a Hui dynasty in China could probably syncretize Islam with Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism if they put their mind to it.
Edit: Praise al-Mahdi, the Prince of Radiance, may he reign 10,000 years!
Last edited:
That's the case for Shi'a Islam as well but that has still spawned off-shoots. It is the case for any religion. My point is ultimately asking whether the same conditions that lead to Shi'a Islam to create many off-shoots exists for Sunni Islam.
Technically Yazidism is an off-shoot of Sunni Islam since it started with Sheikh Adi ibn Musafir who was a Sunni Islam and ended up intermingling with Iranic polytheism. Perhaps something similar could happen more often?
If you look closely then yup
Or a new branch of Hinyana Buddhism
Can the Hui come to rule though, they never numbered much and didn't have a large warrior tradition before the Ming
I mean the Hui were important factors in a number of internal Chinese conflicts as late as the Communist Revolution, when the CCP broke their power. They weren't numerous in absolute terms, but they could easily become a much larger group in southern China during one of its numerous eras of crisis, similar to what happened with the Taiping movement. A number of native dynasties, especially the Ming, based their political power on religious movements.
Now that you said this, I think a Hui dynasty taking power in Southern China and creating its own version of Buddhist Islam would be pretty great
A good idea for a TL