Why doesn't ISIS get along with other Islamic governments?

[ronki23]

The Taliban aren't Salafis, they are Deobandis. The Pakistani Taliban also aren't the Taliban, they are a separate entity.

Qutbism, if it is even a word, relates to the fusion of Islamic fundamentalism with Western totalitarian concepts and ideas borrowed from the communists and Nazis. Al-Qaeda and ISIS utilise these concepts, although Qutb wasn't a Salafi.

The main reason that they don't all get along though is not primarily that they have religious differences, but that they have strategic differences.

The Taliban are basically a Religious ethno-nationalist group, rather than a transnational movement. Their concern is Pashtun power in Afghanistan.

Hamas are another nationalist group.

Al-Qaeda were a transnational terrorist group whose ultimate goals may be loosely similar to ISIS, but they have vastly different ideas about how to go about achieving them.

ISIS started off as a fundamentalist resistance movement, who became a de facto state with transnational aspirations. As they claim to be a caliphate, any Muslim who refuses to acknowledge Bagdhadi as rightful Caliph damages their claim to legitimacy, and can be declared kuffar. They also reject the concept of nation states/nationalism as an innovation.

So it is really about what each group wants to achieve and/or their strategy to achieve this, rather than narrow question of religious belief.

So what is Salafism and how does it differ from Deobandism? As bin Laden married Mullah Omar's daughter and Mullah Omar married bin Laden's daughter
And ISIS used to be part of Al Qaeda so I assume ISIS is Salafism that rejects Qutbist ideals that Al Qaeda followed e.g claiming Baghdadi was the Caliph

I don't know enough about Hamas but compared to Fatah they're very right wing

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

@ronki23 alqeada got boring. Isis wants big caliphate state, it looks like they are already de facto state.
The flags of syria and iraq doesnt exist in Raqqa and Mosul.

 

[ronki23]

@ronki23 alqeada got boring. Isis wants big caliphate state, it looks like they are already de facto state.
The flags of syria and iraq doesnt exist in Raqqa and Mosul.

But unlike ISIS, Al Qaeda believes in a religious theocracy while ISIS has one man (Baghdadi) intending to rule over them; they're going against Islam by holding a man (Baghdadi) as high as Muhammad??

 

[Shad]

But unlike ISIS, Al Qaeda believes in a religious theocracy while ISIS has one man (Baghdadi) intending to rule over them; they're going against Islam by holding a man (Baghdadi) as high as Muhammad??

Baghdadi claims to be the Caliph which is position held by many across most of the 1400 years of history in Islam. It is not against Islam nor Muhammad, it is a valid position within Islam. The issue is he took/claimed the position with no grounds to do so. He did not inherited the title, was selected nor elected. He rules a tiny portion of the Islamic world where as acknowledged Caliphs ruled significant portion and was acknowledged by a suzerainty system in lands not directly under their control. He represents a minority within the greater Muslim population thus over a billion lay Muslims, scholars, clerics, etc do not endorse his claims, only his followers acknowledge his claims. Since he lacks acknowledgement violence is the only way to press his claims. He will only stop when ISIS is destroyed or conquers a majority of the Muslim population which he can force acknowledgement.

 

[ronki23]

Baghdadi claims to be the Caliph which is position held by many across most of the 1400 years of history in Islam. It is not against Islam nor Muhammad, it is a valid position within Islam. The issue is he took/claimed the position with no grounds to do so. He did not inherited the title, was selected nor elected. He rules a tiny portion of the Islamic world where as acknowledged Caliphs ruled significant portion and was acknowledged by a suzerainty system in lands not directly under their control. He represents a minority within the greater Muslim population thus over a billion lay Muslims, scholars, clerics, etc do not endorse his claims, only his followers acknowledge his claims. Since he lacks acknowledgement violence is the only way to press his claims. He will only stop when ISIS is destroyed or conquers a majority of the Muslim population which he can force acknowledgement.

But why do so many listen to him?

I'm assuming they choose ISIS over Al Qaeda because ISIS promises a 'true' Islamic country free of Western influence but the way ISIS abuses those of other Abrahamic religions and even other sects of Islam is not what Islam preaches (I have read some passages that non-Muslims [even myself] read out of context])

I also assume these extremists chose ISIS over Al Qaeda and the Taliban because the OPPORTUNITY for an ISIL is there

 

[Kirran]

I don't know enough about Hamas but compared to Fatah they're very right wing

By any left/right scale, they both basically break the scale off to the right. Hamas is more fundamentalist than Fatah, and more violent.

But unlike ISIS, Al Qaeda believes in a religious theocracy while ISIS has one man (Baghdadi) intending to rule over them; they're going against Islam by holding a man (Baghdadi) as high as Muhammad??

Nah, that's all cool in Islam. As Shad says, it's just his claim to Caliph that is disputed. Both Al Qaeda and IS want to establish an Islamic theocracy, but IS has actually done it.

What's interesting about them is that Al Qaeda's legitimacy in the eyes of its supporters is irrelevant to its control of any land. It's not that kind of organisation. It's a banner for 21st Century pro-Islamist subsersives. IS has a more tenth-century mentality, and its legitimacy rests upon its control of land. If it loses that, it's finished.

Baghdadi claims to be the Caliph which is position held by many across most of the 1400 years of history in Islam. It is not against Islam nor Muhammad, it is a valid position within Islam. The issue is he took/claimed the position with no grounds to do so. He did not inherited the title, was selected nor elected. He rules a tiny portion of the Islamic world where as acknowledged Caliphs ruled significant portion and was acknowledged by a suzerainty system in lands not directly under their control. He represents a minority within the greater Muslim population thus over a billion lay Muslims, scholars, clerics, etc do not endorse his claims, only his followers acknowledge his claims. Since he lacks acknowledgement violence is the only way to press his claims. He will only stop when ISIS is destroyed or conquers a majority of the Muslim population which he can force acknowledgement.

They get around this by saying that all those who reject the doctrines of Islamic State, which are the only interpretations of the Qur'an which they believe are valid, have therefore forsaken the message of Islam and are apostates. Therefore, they should be killed, subjugated or converted to ('the true') Islam, in line with many modern takes on Shariah.

Islamic State ain't gonna stop until they are destroyed, through losing control of all land, or they conquer the whole world. Until then, they will war. They believe they are near the End Times, that Qur'anic prophecy is being fulfilled right now, that soon the final battles between the true followers of Islam and the Roman unbelievers will come. That's why they've conquered areas which are strategically unimportant, because they are included in prophecy. They kill prisoners on the fields where it was prophesied that the unbelievers would be slaughtered. They celebrate when their own people are killed on land where it was prophesied they would.

But why do so many listen to him?

I'm assuming they choose ISIS over Al Qaeda because ISIS promises a 'true' Islamic country free of Western influence but the way ISIS abuses those of other Abrahamic religions and even other sects of Islam is not what Islam preaches (I have read some passages that non-Muslims [even myself] read out of context])

I also assume these extremists chose ISIS over Al Qaeda and the Taliban because the OPPORTUNITY for an ISIL is there

I think it's because is IS is solid: it's got land, it is at war, it is a visible force. It doesn't hide away, it doesn't have sleeper cells. It is an up-front return to the early days of Islam.

 

[Augustus]

So what is Salafism and how does it differ from Deobandism? As bin Laden married Mullah Omar's daughter and Mullah Omar married bin Laden's daughter

Not sure that is true about bin Laden although some people have claimed it is.

Salafism and Deobandism can both be loosely termed 'revivalist' movements but they are not unitary so its not easy to say 'what is the difference?' Saying someone is Salafi also doesn't mean they support the jihadis, people who consider themselves Salafis have a wide range of views, they just see the Prophet and the Salaf as the best example of what it means to be Muslim. This leads some of them to reject much of traditional Islamic jurisprudence as innovation.

They are not nice neat categories though that can be defined in a few words.

And ISIS used to be part of Al Qaeda so I assume ISIS is Salafism that rejects Qutbist ideals that Al Qaeda followed e.g claiming Baghdadi was the Caliph

The group that became ISIS pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda at some point, before they split as al-Qaeda leadership wanted them to only operate in Iraq, and leave Syrian operations to al Nusra.

They split over strategic and political reasons not religious ideology.

'Qutbism' (which is a bit of a made up word) really relates to political attitudes rather than religious ones anyway while Salafism relates to religious attitudes, not political ones.

Thinking of them as labels or shortcuts that can be used to make sense of the situation is not going to get you anywhere.

 

[ronki23]

Not sure that is true about bin Laden although some people have claimed it is.

Salafism and Deobandism can both be loosely termed 'revivalist' movements but they are not unitary so its not easy to say 'what is the difference?' Saying someone is Salafi also doesn't mean they support the jihadis, people who consider themselves Salafis have a wide range of views, they just see the Prophet and the Salaf as the best example of what it means to be Muslim. This leads some of them to reject much of traditional Islamic jurisprudence as innovation.

They are not nice neat categories though that can be defined in a few words.




The group that became ISIS pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda at some point, before they split as al-Qaeda leadership wanted them to only operate in Iraq, and leave Syrian operations to al Nusra.

They split over strategic and political reasons not religious ideology.

'Qutbism' (which is a bit of a made up word) really relates to political attitudes rather than religious ones anyway while Salafism relates to religious attitudes, not political ones.

Thinking of them as labels or shortcuts that can be used to make sense of the situation is not going to get you anywhere.

For some reason my post didn't come up but what is the Salaf? I assume it's some sort of school of Sunni Islam and the first step to understanding

I was under the assumption that Islam was just a Sunni/Shia split but I guess Ahmadiyya and Nation of Islam are the other 2 branches. We can see with ISIS and Al Qaeda they don't even get along with other Sunnis let alone other religions

 

[Pastek]

For some reason my post didn't come up but what is the Salaf? I assume it's some sort of school of Sunni Islam and the first step to understanding

I was under the assumption that Islam was just a Sunni/Shia split but I guess Ahmadiyya and Nation of Islam are the other 2 branches. We can see with ISIS and Al Qaeda they don't even get along with other Sunnis let alone other religions

The salafis are people who try to follow a strict interpretation of the Quran & Sunna.
I think they follow more the Hanbali school.

"A Salaf (سلف "ancestor") is an early Muslim from the first three generations of proponents of Islam.
The Salaf are the first few generations of Muslims, which included Muhammad's companions and followers at the time."

"The Salafi movement or Salafist movement is an ultra-conservative movement within Sunni Islam that references the doctrine known as Salafism. According to Salafis they follow the doctrine that may be summed up as taking "a fundamentalist approach to Islam, emulating the Prophet Muhammad and his earliest followers the 'pious forefathers'.
The movement is often divided into three categories: the largest group are the purists (or quietists), who avoid politics; the second largest group are the activists, who get involved in politics; the smallest group are the jihadists, who form a tiny (yet infamous) minority."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches

 

[Shad]

But why do so many listen to him?

For a variety of reasons. They were brought up under the same version of Islam. They shifted views due to events in their lives. They agree with this version of Islam. Also the current mindset within Islam places high value on "scholars" whom have no value. Do a search of Yusuf Este on this forums for an example. The man has no formal education but people flock to him because he tells them what they want to hear. I think the major reason is many Muslims know next to nothing about the religion they practice and are taken in by smooth but uneducated talkers.

I'm assuming they choose ISIS over Al Qaeda because ISIS promises a 'true' Islamic country free of Western influence but the way ISIS abuses those of other Abrahamic religions and even other sects of Islam is not what Islam preaches (I have read some passages that non-Muslims [even myself] read out of context])

The nostalgia for an Islamic state is high but is usually based on common memes rather than a look at history.

The whole context thing is another issue and one abused by both sides but DIR is not a place to talk about it.

I also assume these extremists chose ISIS over Al Qaeda and the Taliban because the OPPORTUNITY for an ISIL is there

They could be choosing it since they see it as true Islam. The reasons are varied from individual to individual. The only common factor for all is the religion.

 

[ronki23]

I'm trying to understand the differences between the types of Sunni Islam that extremists follow. Al Qaeda I supposed to be Qutbist but they claim they're Salafi, Taliban are Deobandi. But what about Wahabbism? What do Hamas believe in? I assume ISIS is Qutb as well

Also, Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi claims to be a descendant of Muhammad so why does he hate Shias and why do Shias hate him as they believe in a Caliph? (I thought the descendants of Muhammad were the Jordanian Royal Family)

 

[ronki23]

What is the Taliban view of this attack on the Kabul Airport? It was undertaken by IS-KP.

Al Qaeda's leader is Dr Ayman al Zawahiri

Why was ISIS/ISIL/IS-KP formed if they wanted the same thing as Al Qaeda ?

Taliban is not good: non Muslims were leaving by the droves. I fear it will happen again

 

[ronki23]

The Taliban released thousands of IS-KP prisoners from jails. I don't buy it that they "don't get along" nor do I buy the Taliban's so called condemnation of the airport attack

 

[Sakeenah]

What is the Taliban view of this attack on the Kabul Airport? It was undertaken by IS-KP.

Al Qaeda's leader is Dr Ayman al Zawahiri

Why was ISIS/ISIL/IS-KP formed if they wanted the same thing as Al Qaeda ?

Taliban is not good: non Muslims were leaving by the droves. I fear it will happen again

Why are you assuming we ( Muslims in Islam DIR) have answers to these questions?
Only Taliban can answer those questions, or you could try Google..

 

[ronki23]

Why are you assuming we ( Muslims in Islam DIR) have answers to these questions?
Only Taliban can answer those questions, or you could try Google..

OK. Because I didn't want to make a new thread. Soooo just come over to the thread(s) in the Middle East DIR