Sufism, Old and New

One of the main ideas advocated by revisionist historians is that of Neo-Sufism, which argues that eighteenth century Islamic thought was characterized by a new brand of reform Sufism which was devoid of spirituality and at the service of Orthodox, legalistic Islam. This common notion was first introduced by Fazlur Rahman. In contrast, the chapter argues that eighteenth century Sufism was not devoid of spirituality, and it supports the argument that the concept of neo-Sufism is not useful for understanding eighteenth century reform or Sufism. Beyond this valid critique, however, the chapter draws the outlines of an eighteenth-century tradition of non-Wahhabi critiques of Sufism.

Ijtihād and the Regional Origins of a Universal Vision

This chapter takes issue with the popular network thesis which argues that an intellectual network of likeminded, reformist scholars was generated as a result of travelling through and residence and education in Mecca and Medina. In contrast, the chapter demonstrates the diversity and regional origins of most reform projects in the eighteenth century. It illustrates, for example, the regional differences between ways in which the idea of ijtihad was deployed, and relates these differences to regional traditions of scholarship.

Humanizing the Sacred

Another main idea in revisionist historiography is that hadith studies were revived in the eighteenth century and that hadith was used for socio-moral reconstruction. This last notion implies that the significance of hadith was in the practical ordering of social life and providing a blueprint for social behaviour, and not on intellectual grounds. In contrast, the book argues that some of the most original ideas were introduced in the course of academic/theoretical discussions of hadith, in particular the theory of hadith (‘ilm mustalah al-hadith). This chapter traces the development of two distinct schools of hadith studies in India and in Yemen, and teases out the implications of these very radical theories for notions of authority. The chapter proposes new ways of reading and analysing hadith, not just in terms of its social and cultural significance but also in relation to earlier traditions of hadith studies. In contrast to most contemporary critical studies of hadith, which focus primarily on the early period and on the question of authenticity, this chapter argues that these questions are not significant beyond the first three centuries of Islam, and that new techniques of analysis are needed for the study of this important body of literature.

Conclusion

Whether through a deliberate and conscious reconfiguring of choice juristic symbols and idioms, or through an academic attempt to order and classify the cumulative outcomes of a gradually emerging legal tradition, the legal writings of eighteenth century reformers were also historical writings that reflected on the historical contexts in which the law was articulated, and commented on the social and political crises of their times. As such, the legal writings of eighteenth-century reformers were sites in which traditional notions of authority were assessed, contested and restructured. This Chapter focuses on this aspect of eighteenth century legacy. It underscores the fact that the primary site of eighteenth century reform was in the fields of usul (theoretical principles). It also outlines the systematic arguments generated in the eighteenth century that limited the scope of religious law rather than extending it endlessly through legal analogy.

Genealogies of Dissent and the Politics of Knowledge

This chapter examines the relationship between the intellectual projects of eighteenth century thinkers and political authorities. The chapter argues that, in almost all the examined cases, eighteenth century thinkers conceived of their intellectual undertakings as subversive and dissenting ones, both in relation to political authorities and to established corporate intellectual authorities. This chapter extends the analysis from the intellectual/cultural sphere to the social/political one. The primary example examined in this chapter is the career of Shawkani and his complex relationship to power.

The Boundaries of Faith

Both the older historiography and the revisionist accounts persist in using Wahhabism as a model for depicting Islamic activism and thought in the eighteenth century. This persistence, the chapter argues, is one reason for viewing the eighteenth century as a century of decline. In contrast, the chapter demonstrates that a majority of eighteenth century Muslim thinkers articulate views that are radically opposed to Wahhabi ideas. The chapter outlines the very rich discourse against takfir that prevailed in eighteenth century thought. It also argues that Wahhabism was the exception to eighteenth century thought, and that there is no connection between it and other intellectual trends in the eighteenth century.

Introduction

This chapter surveys the prevailing traditional as well as revisionist accounts in the historiography of the Islamic eighteenth century. It outlines the arguments of the book, and its distinctive approach of identifying transformations in cultural traditions and explaining the historical contexts in which they take place. The chapter discusses the rationale for setting different beginning and end points for the period under examination. It also identifies the major figures studied in the book, and the regional traditions that shaped their experiences.