Introduction: Islamic Sects and Movements

Given the presentation of Islam in popular media, it is not surprising that most Westerners (including some scholars) view the faith as a static, monolithic religion that clings fiercely to its seventh century roots, resisting any attempt at change. This is, of course, far from the truth. In common with other faith traditions, Islam has been a dynamic force from the start, with adaptations stemming from individual leaders, diverse ethnic populations, and the cultural contexts in which the religion took root. Christians and Jews, among other representatives of religious traditions, commented on Muḥammad, the prophet and founder of Islam, and identified resemblances between the new monotheistic religion and their own traditions (Hoyland 2000). Islamic tradition implicitly recognizes its own diversity; even as some groups label others heretical and denounce the inventions of so-called ‘liar prophets’ or fitna (‘strife’) spread by leaders who have succumbed to ungodly forces, they also acknowledge the relationship between these diverse interpretations and their own creed (van Ess 2001). In this way, Islamic literature tells the story of Musaylimah Kazzab (whose very name contains the word ‘liar’), who, along with his followers, was killed by troops sent by Abū Bakr shortly after Muḥammad’s death (Makin 2010). The Khārijites and Muʿtazilites are also mentioned in standard Sunnī and Shīʿa narratives, being portrayed as falling so far outside of mainstream Islam that their ideologies deserve to be wiped out of Islamic thought. Yet, their existence is clearly acknowledged (Timani 2017). Such innovation in Islamic thought is not restricted to the past. Modern reformers have continued to push the envelope, sometimes being met with comparable disdain from certain Muslim groups as the ‘false prophets’ of the Prophet Muḥammad’s time. These reformers include the founders of the Aḥmadiyya Muslims Jamāʿat (Chapter 27) and the Bahāʾī Faith (Chapter 33). According to traditional Sunnī and Shīʿa accounts, such ‘heretical’ movements have little or no value for scholars interested in understanding ‘authentic Islam.’ Should scholars of Islam researching the current state of Islam confine themselves, then, to studying only those movements which modern-day mainstream Shīʿa and Sunnī Muslims consider to be central to their faith? Do movements that are deemed less than ‘fully’ Islamic by some Muslims tell us nothing about Islam past, present, or future? The answer for contemporary scholars is clear; Islam is not monolithic, and ideal typical images of the tradition that focus on texts and theology are partial at best, and misleading at worst (Neitz