Religion Without Sectarianism!
Yahya Mohamed
In several studies, we have previously presented an approach that emancipated the phenomenon of sectarianism in the conventional sense. Not everyone who had exceeded the doctrine of their sectarian ideology or opposed it necessarily belongs to a particular sect. Although the new proposition cannot transcend the character of sectarianism in its absolute and general sense; however, this proposition does not target a particular religious sect but is directed at all the Islamic sects as a whole.
What we are proposing represents a new logic that does not work with the same mechanism common to all sects. Hence, it is possible to transcend the sects without exception, while each sect opposes the other sects in its detailed complexities, but does not differ from them in its general approach.
The sects have their meticulous beliefs, and some of them contradict each other, and each of them claims to represent the true religion, until the sectarian ideology became a religion, and religion became a sect, and thus appeared very difficult to differentiate between them. In actual fact, doctrine is doctrine and religion is religion. Religion is associated to God and the doctrine is created by humans, for religion is a divine doctrine, and doctrine is a human religion.
The sect strives, whether in beliefs and doctrines, or in jurisprudence, even though the sects do not recognize their discretionary work at the level of beliefs and doctrines to justify for them the definitiveness of the true path and its veracity, the doctrine is sometimes false and other times true, and therefore creates the possibility to cross-examine and criticize, make amendments, just as we criticize and refute all other human ideas, while this does not occur with religion if we acknowledge its divine source.
The theory of doctrinal emancipation depends on two things, namely, radical criticism and presenting an alternative to the circle of sects without submitting to its authority. It is another expression of the non-belonging, as it cannot be normalized within the framework of any of the well-known conventional religious doctrines. This may coincide with some sects on a particular matter and differ on other matters, and therefore cannot be identified within a particular sect. More importantly, it contradicts all doctrines about the route pertaining its detailed complexities that has been invented and considered it part of the religious identity without succumbing to any evidence, especially since this detailed route is tainted with speculation, thus is not correct to associate it to the religious identity unless it is definitive and supported by evidence. Religion is a source of definitive general concepts, not presumptive details.
Accordingly, we are facing a new logic that is moving away from what Islamic sects practice in accepting speculations in relation to religious jurisprudence. The Qur’anic verses, despite their abundance, and in most cases address important concepts and very few without complex details. If it was from divine religion as to what the sects propose then this should have been clearly indicated in the Qur'an.
Translated by Zaid Kanady
The reference
https://www.fahmaldin.net/index.php?id=2587