As I reflect on my academic work, particularly an article I published back in 2019, I am struck by the enduring importance of understanding the interpretational methodologies – or manhaj – employed by influential Muslim figures, especially those who have gained prominence in the West as celebrity preachers. In that article, I focused on the ideas and significance of Dr. Bilal Philips, a notable ‘Salafi’ preacher and a major proponent of what has been termed Neo-Traditional Salafism. My aim then, and what I wish to emphasise now, is that comprehending the manhaj of such individuals, situating their views within the broader Islamic interpretative tradition, is paramount for developing higher levels of methodological awareness and avoiding the pitfalls of accepting their opinions without critical engagement.
Bilal Philips, a Canadian of Jamaican ancestry who embraced Islam in 1972, has spent a significant portion of his life in regions with a strong Salafi presence, such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar. Currently residing in Qatar, he directs the Islamic Online University (IOU) he founded. His educational background is primarily from Saudi Arabian Islamic universities, with the exception of his Ph.D. in Islamic theology from the University of Wales focusing on exorcism in Islam. Philips was part of a cohort of African American Muslims who received scholarships to study Islamic sciences in Saudi Arabia with the aim of disseminating the ‘Salafi’ approach upon their return to the West. He was, in fact, described as “the first Westerner to enroll at the University of Medina” and a key figure in the early Salafi movement. Even though he has been banned from several Western countries, his extensive written and audiovisual material, produced largely before these bans, continues to circulate widely online, attracting a broad Muslim audience beyond just those of Salafi inclination. His works address contemporary issues relevant to Western Muslims, as well as topics from the premodern Islamic interpretive tradition. Furthermore, his substantial online presence and the large number of students enrolled in his IOU underscore his considerable influence.
In my 2019 article, I argued that to truly grasp the significance of figures like Bilal Philips within the context of Salafism in the West, it is essential to analyse their manhaj – their methodology of interpreting the foundational sources of Islam, namely the Qur’an and the Sunna. Salafism in the West is not a monolithic entity; it is a discursive tradition with deep roots in Islamic intellectual history and an element of global Salafi movements. Understanding Philips’ ideas on interpreting the Qur’an and Sunna in light of the Islamic legal and exegetical tradition is crucial. I situated Philips as a proponent of Neo-Traditional Salafism (NTS), a contemporary movement that, in its approach to interpreting the Qur’an, Sunna, and the Islamic intellectual tradition, draws heavily from the premodern ahl al-hadith movement. Key contemporary scholars associated with this approach include figures like A. Bin Bazz, M. Al-Uthaymin, and N. Al-Albani.
The manhaj of NTS, as I outlined in my article, possesses several defining characteristics. Firstly, it views itself as a contemporary manifestation of the pre-modern ahl al-hadith school of thought in its conceptualization of ilm (knowledge), Salafism, and sunna, and their relationship to textual and non-textual sources of knowledge. Secondly, NTS proponents advocate for a predominantly textual legal hermeneutic, defining ittiba’ as strict adherence to what they deem ‘sahih’ (sound) hadith, which is often conflated with following the true Salafi Qur’an-Sunna manhaj. Thirdly, the NTS manhaj is often presented vaguely, comprising amalgams of Qur’anic verses and purportedly ‘authentic’ hadith, sometimes accompanied by brief commentaries from classical scholars who also espoused the ahl al-hadith manhaj. Notably, it generally lacks engagement with modern theories of interpretation. Furthermore, the NTS manhaj is frequently articulated through a discourse of opposition, contrasting itself with the methodologies of modernists, intellectuals, the madhahib, or Sufis. Finally, a critical aspect of the NTS manhaj is its adherence to a narrow interpretation of al wala’ wal bara’ (loyalty and disavowal), considering itself the sole “Saved Sect”.
One of the key areas I examined in relation to Philips’ manhaj was his understanding of the conceptual relationship between hadith and sunna. In Islamic thought, sunna traditionally referred to the commendable practices and traditions of the Prophet Muhammad and the early Muslim community, encompassing more than just recorded narrations. However, the NTS manhaj, as exemplified by Philips, tends to conflate the concept of sunna with that of ‘sahih’ ahad (single-narrator) hadith as defined by classical hadith scholars. Philips, in his work Usul ul Hadith, observes the different definitions of sunna but ultimately leans towards the view of the muhaddithun (hadith scholars) who consider sunna as synonymous with hadith. He argues that hadith are the “containers” of the Prophet’s sunna. He further posits that the Prophet’s sayings and actions (hadith) were primarily based on divine revelation and are a fundamental source of guidance second only to the Qur’an. In an online article, he even suggests that hadith represent a personal source of divine guidance similar in nature to the Qur’an. By essentially equating sunna with ‘sahih’ hadith, Philips adopts what I termed a “hadith-dependent concept of sunna”. This approach often overlooks the historical development of the concept of sunna, which in its early stages was broader, more practice-based, and not solely reliant on individual narrations.
Another crucial aspect of Philips’ manhaj that I analysed was his perspective on taqlid and the madhahib. Philips, in his booklet Evolution of Fiqh: Islamic Law and the Madhhabs, expresses a desire for the reunification of the madhahib and a framework for Islamic community work free from the divisive effects of madhhab factionalism. He critiques the “unresolved contradictions” within the rules inherited from the classical madhahib and links this to a perceived “stagnation” and “decline” in the Muslim world, advocating for a revival of Islam in its “original purity and unity”. This call for revival, given his views on sunna and hadith, aligns with the NTS emphasis on the “revivification of and the return to Prophetic Sunna” through strict adherence to ‘authentic’ hadith. Philips views attempts to maintain the co-orthodoxy of all recognized madhahib as “undesirable” and criticizes approaches that solely rely on the Qur’an and Sunna without reference to earlier scholarship, fearing it leads to extremism. He argues for adhering to the rulings of early notable Muslim scholars, believing they are more likely to represent the true intentions of the Qur’an and Sunna. He contends that the only infallible madhhab is that of the Prophet Muhammad himself, and that the other madhahib, being products of human effort, are subject to error. This stance is a clear critique of the taqlid-based hermeneutics of the classical madhahib, a hallmark of the NTS manhaj. Philips seems to suggest that strict adherence to a particular madhhab's opinion over a seemingly authentic hadith borders on shirk (associating partners with God). However, this view often oversimplifies the complex hermeneutical frameworks of the madhahib and their own methodologies for evaluating and incorporating hadith. As I discussed in my article, the taqlid-based hermeneutic is not simply blind following but involves reasoned interpretations within the framework of an established legal tradition.
Furthermore, my analysis extended to Philips’ methodology of Qur’anic exegesis, or tafsir. Consistent with the NTS manhaj, Philips advocates for tafsir bi-l-riwaya or tafsir bi-l-ma’thur – exegesis based on narrations, primarily hadith and the sayings of the Companions – as the most reliable method, minimizing “subjective opinion”. He expresses skepticism towards rationalist-philosophical, scientific, sectarian (Shi’i), and Sufi approaches to tafsir, viewing them as deviations from interpretation “based on authentic narration”. He praises the tafsir of Ibn Kathir, which is heavily reliant on hadith, as a prime example of the ahl al-hadith approach. Philips outlines a hierarchy of sources for tafsir: the Qur’an itself, the sunna (understood as ‘sahih’ ahad hadith), the athar (opinions of the Companions), and language. He suggests that interpretations based on opinion are only valid if they do not contradict these primary sources. This approach reflects the NTS emphasis on textual sources, particularly hadith, as the primary lens through which the Qur’an should be understood.
Perhaps one of the most telling aspects that underscores the importance of understanding the manhaj of figures like Philips is the internal critique he has faced from within the Salafi community itself. As I discussed in my 2019 article, the Salafi movement is far from unified, with various groups holding differing views on the correct manhaj for responding to theological, legal, ethical, and socio-political issues. The disagreements between Abu Khadeejah, a UK-based Salafi, and Philips exemplify these internal divisions. Abu Khadeejah criticized Philips for his associations with individuals and groups deemed to be deviating from the “authentically Salafi manhaj,” including those sympathetic to political Salafism. He accused Philips of promoting a “revolutionary manhaj” akin to that of figures like Hasan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb, engaging in ta’wil (allegorical interpretation), and differing from the opinions of prominent Salafi scholars like Al-Albani and Al-Uthaymin. Philips, in his rebuttal, defended his understanding of Salafiyyah and cautioned against the exclusionary tendencies of some within the movement. He affirmed his adherence to the manhaj of scholars like Al-Albani, emphasizing his deep respect for Al-Albani’s methodology. This internal dispute highlights the contested nature of what constitutes the “correct” Salafi manhaj and underscores the need to look beyond surface-level labels and examine the specific interpretational methodologies being employed.
In conclusion, my research, culminating in the 2019 article, strongly suggests that understanding the interpretational methodology (manhaj) of Muslim celebrity preachers like Bilal Philips is of paramount importance. By situating their views within the broader context of Islamic intellectual history and its diverse interpretative traditions, we can develop a more nuanced and critical understanding of their perspectives. Philips’ adherence to the Neo-Traditional Salafi manhaj, with its specific emphasis on hadith, its critique of taqlid, and its approach to tafsir, shapes his understanding and presentation of Islamic teachings. The internal criticisms he faces from within the Salafi community further illustrate the complexities and nuances within this movement. Therefore, it is crucial to move beyond simply accepting the opinions of such influential figures at face value. Instead, by cultivating methodological awareness and engaging with their ideas critically, informed by a deeper understanding of the rich and varied landscape of Islamic interpretation, we can foster a more sophisticated and less susceptible approach to religious guidance in the modern Western context.
Comments
Post a Comment