Wahhabis without Religion; or, A Genealogy of Jihadis in Colonial Law, 1818 to 1857

IF 0.8 Q2 AREA STUDIES
Rishad Choudhury
{"title":"Wahhabis without Religion; or, A Genealogy of Jihadis in Colonial Law, 1818 to 1857","authors":"Rishad Choudhury","doi":"10.1215/1089201x-9987892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article offers a new interpretation of the “Indian Wahhabi” beyond an ostensibly religious identity. Examining encounters between a centralizing state and decentralized circulatory regimes, the study thus illuminates an overlooked sociolegal genealogy of the jihadi militant in colonial India. From 1818, the East India Company secured its sovereignty by designating as deviant or permissible a host of itinerant figures in and around South Asia. In police records, court transcripts, and legislative archives, pilgrims with links to Arabia accordingly began appearing as suspected Wahhabis. Yet, in then seeking to distinguish “faqirs” from “fanatics,” colonial law used logics and exceptions with two important implications. First, as the “Wahhabi” came to imply a violent counterclaim to sovereignty, it also became a juridical formulation more political than religious. The faqir pilgrim here supplied the conceit of religion. Second, the complex question of jihad produced a deeper paradox, as grappling with a “religious” problem without “religion” stretched secular jurisprudence to breaking points. Until 1857, around South Asia, states of emergency hence dominated official responses to Wahhabis. Ultimately, colonial law’s gestures not only rendered unexceptional its regimes of exception. Ironically, they also reified religion, such that Islam and violence became culturally consubstantial in colonial thought.","PeriodicalId":51756,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Studies of South Asia Africa and the Middle East","volume":"42 1","pages":"404 - 419"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Studies of South Asia Africa and the Middle East","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/1089201x-9987892","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:This article offers a new interpretation of the “Indian Wahhabi” beyond an ostensibly religious identity. Examining encounters between a centralizing state and decentralized circulatory regimes, the study thus illuminates an overlooked sociolegal genealogy of the jihadi militant in colonial India. From 1818, the East India Company secured its sovereignty by designating as deviant or permissible a host of itinerant figures in and around South Asia. In police records, court transcripts, and legislative archives, pilgrims with links to Arabia accordingly began appearing as suspected Wahhabis. Yet, in then seeking to distinguish “faqirs” from “fanatics,” colonial law used logics and exceptions with two important implications. First, as the “Wahhabi” came to imply a violent counterclaim to sovereignty, it also became a juridical formulation more political than religious. The faqir pilgrim here supplied the conceit of religion. Second, the complex question of jihad produced a deeper paradox, as grappling with a “religious” problem without “religion” stretched secular jurisprudence to breaking points. Until 1857, around South Asia, states of emergency hence dominated official responses to Wahhabis. Ultimately, colonial law’s gestures not only rendered unexceptional its regimes of exception. Ironically, they also reified religion, such that Islam and violence became culturally consubstantial in colonial thought.
没有宗教信仰的瓦哈比教派;或《1818至1857年殖民法中的圣战分子家谱》
摘要:本文提供了一种超越表面宗教身份的对“印度瓦哈比教派”的新解读。通过考察中央集权的国家和分散的循环制度之间的冲突,这项研究揭示了殖民时期印度圣战分子被忽视的社会法律谱系。从1818年开始,东印度公司通过将南亚及其周边地区的一群流动人物指定为离经叛道者或被允许的人来确保其主权。在警方记录、法庭记录和立法档案中,与阿拉伯有联系的朝圣者相应地开始被怀疑为瓦哈比教派。然而,在当时试图区分“公平”和“狂热”时,殖民法使用了逻辑和例外,其中有两个重要含义。首先,随着“瓦哈比教派”开始暗示对主权的暴力反诉,它也成为一种政治性大于宗教性的司法表述。公平的朝圣者在这里提供了宗教的自负。其次,圣战的复杂问题产生了更深层次的悖论,因为在没有“宗教”的情况下处理“宗教”问题,将世俗法理学推向了崩溃的边缘。直到1857年,在南亚各地,官方对瓦哈比教派的反应主要是紧急状态。最终,殖民法的姿态不仅使其例外制度变得不例外。具有讽刺意味的是,他们还将宗教具体化,使得伊斯兰教和暴力在殖民思想中成为文化同质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信