Madrasahs and Extremism: Scholarly and Jurisprudential Realities
◈ Claims of Ghamidi Sahib and Their Critique
Respected Javed Ahmad Ghamidi Sahib has repeatedly adopted the stance that the current wave of extremism and conflict among Muslims is the result of the religious thought taught in Islamic seminaries (madrasahs). He reiterated this claim in his column titled "Islam and the State – A Counter-Narrative" published in the Jang newspaper, asserting that this extremism is the consequence of the ideology propagated in madrasahs, which is further spread by religious parties and movements.
Supporters of Ghamidi Sahib’s views also hold the same opinion. For instance, Khurshid Ahmad Nadeem stated in his column dated 12 April 2017 the same perspective.
⚠ However, this claim contains a fundamental intellectual fallacy,
which logically falls under the category of Hasty Generalization. In such fallacies, a general ruling is applied to different things based on some apparent similarities, which leads to serious misconceptions.
The Reality of the Curriculum Taught in Madrasahs
✒ A Principled Review of War and Relations with Non-Muslims
One of the primary foundations of Ghamidi Sahib's claim is that the traditional jurisprudence taught in madrasahs creates an environment of continuous war with non-Muslims and presents this as the objective of Islam.
However, contrary to this assertion:
① In Pakistani madrasahs, Hanafi jurisprudence is generally taught, and according to Hanafi thought, the cause (ʿillah) of war is not being a non-Muslim, nor is it about perpetuating a confrontational environment with them.
② Within Hanafi jurisprudence, peaceful coexistence, peace treaties, and truces with non-Muslims are not only permissible but are considered desirable.
The Context of Deobandi Madrasahs and Hanafi Jurisprudence
Pakistani madrasahs, especially the Deobandi institutions, are jurisprudentially affiliated with the Hanafi school of thought. Regarding the cause of war in Hanafi jurisprudence, renowned legal scholar Professor Mushtaq Ahmad has presented a comprehensive explanation in his book titled:
"Jihad, Resistance, and Rebellion"
According to this book:
① In Hanafi jurisprudence, the cause of war is not the power or capability (manʿah) of a group; rather, war is permitted under specific circumstances based on state policy.
② Declaring continuous war or conflict with non-Muslims as the objective of Islam is against the principles of Hanafi jurisprudence.
Kharijite Jurisprudence and the Distinction from Madrasah Thought
⚖ Context of the Peshawar Tragedy
After the Peshawar tragedy, Dr. Mushtaq Ahmad presented a jurisprudential analysis in the monthly al-Shari‘ah, which was also included in his aforementioned book.
According to this analysis:
✓ The actions of extremist groups must be viewed through the lens of Islamic law: Are these individuals common criminals, rebels, or Kharijites (Khawarij)?
✓ Kharijite groups are those who declare their opponents as disbelievers (kuffār) and justify killing them on this basis.
Kharijite Jurisprudence vs. Madrasah Jurisprudence
There is a clear distinction between the jurisprudence of extremist groups and the jurisprudence taught in madrasahs, as detailed below:
According to Hanafi Jurisprudence:
① Killing children, women, the elderly, farmers, and non-combatants during war is impermissible.
② Even in retaliatory action (muʿāmalah bi’l-mithl), targeting non-combatants is prohibited.
③ Suicide is absolutely forbidden, even in the context of warfare.
According to Extremist Groups:
① Any action that harms the enemy is deemed permissible during war — including the killing of children and women.
② Suicide is considered not only permissible for harming the enemy but also a virtuous act.
✳ Example: The Issue of Killing Non-Muslim Children
● Hanafi Jurisprudence:
✓ Killing children of non-Muslims during war is forbidden, except in a case where the child is attacking and there is no alternative.
✓ The Hadith of the Prophet ﷺ — "ولا تقتلوا وليداً" (Do not kill a child) — is given foundational importance.
✓ According to Hanafi principles, unintentional harm in war may be tolerated out of necessity, but intentionally targeting children is strictly prohibited.
● Extremist Groups:
✓ These groups base their justification for killing children on the Hadith "ھم منھم" (They are of them), interpreting it to legitimize killing.
✓ They reject the principles of Hanafi jurisprudence, offering their own specific interpretations.
⚔ Accusations of Extremism Against Madrasahs
✴ Allegations by Ghamidi Sahib and His Supporters
Ghamidi Sahib and his like-minded individuals claim that madrasahs are the source of extremism. However, this claim raises several critical questions:
① Madrasahs have existed for centuries, so why has extremism only risen in recent decades?
② In India, the same Hanafi curriculum is taught more traditionally — why hasn't extremism emerged there?
③ If jurisprudence is the root of extremism, then from which madrasah did the founders of extremist organizations like Jamaʿat al-Takfīr wa’l-Hijrah graduate?
The Real Causes of Extremism
Ignoring all contributing factors to extremism and attributing it solely to madrasahs or a specific school of thought is an act of intellectual dishonesty. Western think tanks like Rand Corporation have even gone so far as to blame extremism directly on the Qur'an. Therefore, placing the blame on madrasahs or jurisprudence is akin to turning a blind eye to reality.
Summary
① Extremist organizations have their own jurisprudential framework, which is distinct from the jurisprudence taught in madrasahs.
② Hanafi jurisprudence, which is predominantly taught in madrasahs, does not permit extremism or continuous war with non-Muslims.
③ Blaming madrasahs for extremism is an intellectual fallacy and reflects ignorance of on-the-ground realities.
