, 9 tweets, 3 min read Read on Twitter
I'm no fan of the secular academical approach to #Islamic militantism. We all know who I'm talking about. There're some aspects to it that make it inherently flawed and inconsistent with the reality of #Islam. I'll comment on two of these flaws, but there are many more.
It enforces the idea of nationalism through the use of the term "foreign fighters". This term is foreign (pun intended) to the Islamic worldview, and is the result of the artificial, post-colonial borders dividing the #Muslim world into European-style nation-states.
In the Islamic worldview, a Muslim is symbolically related through membership of the shared religion to any other member of this socio-religious group we call the "ummah" (the Muslim Community). That's the inside group. Those that do not share the religion are obviously not.
That means that no Muslim is foreign to his fellow Muslim in the institutional, identitarian sense of the word as was popularized throughout 19th century #Europe. Rather, he is equal to his international peers and entitled to answer the call of jihād when needed.
The only classification made in Islam is that of the muhājirūn (immigrants) and anṣār (local supporters). However, this isn't defined by national borders or ethno-cultural differences, rather by the geographical reality of the moment. Proof is the proximity of #Mecca to Medīna.
Secondly, the secular academics' terminology lacks precision and accuracy. In the Islamic worldview, we use our own terminology to differentiate between different groups, like khawārij, murjiʾa or jahmiyya. These terms identify and classify accurately from a religious POV.
Secular academics avoid this, however, and fall back on their own terminological inventory, like the words "jihadists" or "islamists". Hollow, vague semi-scientific terms that have no basis in Islam whatsoever and fail to accurately define the subject.
The vast majority of (Sunni) Islamic scholars defined IS as khawārij and the Iranian-backed Shiite militants in #Syria and #Iraq as Rawāfiḍ. These are historical and religious terms used to understand the reality of said groups in a precise and religiously justified manner.
Insignificant terms for any secular analyst, he proceeds to call them all "islamist jihadists", which actually creates an artificial dimension upheld by these analysts that has no worth on the actual ground and is irreconcilable with the Islamic worldview. Problematic.
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Omer Sayadi
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!