Other than the fact the President of Syria must be muslim.
But c’mon they celebrate Christmas. While they certainly have muslim doctrine, isn’t it like calling the Ba’hais Christian cause they recognize Christ, though not as devine.
Other than the fact the President of Syria must be muslim.
But c’mon they celebrate Christmas. While they certainly have muslim doctrine, isn’t it like calling the Ba’hais Christian cause they recognize Christ, though not as devine.
The Noble Qur’an itself recognizes Jesus, the son of Joseph, as the Christ, but not as divine.
Nusayris - also known as Alawis or Alawites - are a small group in Syria. Evidently, they were persecuted until Hafez al-Assad became president of Syria. His son Bashir al-Assad, also a Nusayri, became president after the death of his father. So Nusayris are in a comfy position unless the Baath Party (yes the same political movement that brough Saddam Hussein to power) is overthrown.
One website said:
This from http://i-cias.com/e.o/alawites.htm. Remember that Lebanon is basically an extension of Syria.
For more information, go to: http://philtar.ucsm.ac.uk/encyclopedia/islam/shia/nusay.html
Since they tend to keep to themselves and aren’t such a prominent group outside of Syria, they aren’t a group of concern for the Ummah. Ismailis, NoI, Ahmadis, Qadianis, etc., are more of a concern, especially since some (Ahmadis and Qadianis) are also accused of trying to win converts to their sect. However, if Nusayri beliefs were to be examined by a Muslim, he or she would most likely say they are not Muslim. That’s just my WAG.
WRS
Beats me. Their distance from mainstream Islam is comparable to that of the Druze, another secretive sect who resemble the ‘Alawis in several respects. However, the Druze are universally acknowledged to be a separate religion, not connected to Islam any more. While the ‘Alawis are still classed among the Muslims. All I can say is “go figure.”
There is one theory about the Druze, the ‘Alawis, the Yezidis, the Ahl-i Haqq, and the ‘Ali-Ilahis that they are remnants of pre-Islamic religions that took on protective coloration of Islam so they would be left alone.
There are other pre-Islamic Middle Eastern religions that went another route: they claimed the protected status of Sabi’ans. The Sabi’ans are a religion mentioned in the Qur’an as being an acceptable religion like the Jews and Christians. Only problem is, nobody really knows what the term Sabi’an refers to. This left the way open for the Mandaeans and Harranians to claim Sabi’an status.
However, the ‘Alawis, ‘Ali-Ilahis, Ahl-i Haqq, and other so-called ghulât Shi‘i sects preferred to present themselves as a form of Shi‘ism. In Syria’s case, this seems to have paid off in terms of good relations with Iran. However, when you look at what ‘Alawis actually believe and practice (hard to tell because they’re secretive), there is essentially no resemblance between them and regular Shi‘ism. Their claim to be Shi‘i seems to be just a ruse.
Since there are Christian elements mixed up in ‘Alawism, they seem to have been around during early Christian times in Syria, taking on protective coloration to pass as a Christian group before Islam showed up. But their origins are unknown. They come from the hilly hinterland of al-Ladhiqiyah (Latakia) in northern Syria.
I have seen a published copy of their secret sacred book, I forgot what it’s called, but according to one author it incorporates portions of Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics.
I always figured that alewifes were a Christian group, probably followers of Polycarp. . . OH! wait! . . . Never mind.
Well, I’d say three things:
a.) They consider themselves Muslim.
b.) At least some Muslims ( mostly Shi’a ) also consider them Muslims. Admittedly many Sunni commentators do not.
c.) Unlike JM, I’m not so sure their beliefs are so radically different from mainstream Islam as to be irreconciliable, though it’s probably a close call. For example unlike the NOI ( who claim to be Muslim ), they don’t recognize a prophet after Muhammed and unlike the Baha’i ( who definitely don’t ) they don’t consider the Qur’an to have been superceded. Most of their differences seem to fall into more debatable territory. For example:
Alawites recognize 7, not 5 pillars of Islam. However the two they add, defense of Ali and Jihad, are not incompatible with Islamic doctrine in a broad sense. Somewhat more problematic is the fact that they don’t consider said pillars absolute obligations, but rather symbolic. Still it’s not that far from mainstream Muslim ( especially Shi’a Muslim ) doctrine.
At any rate, IMO they are one of those groups that could go either way in terms of definition - Either a very heterodox sect of Islam or an entirely divergent religion. But they’re pretty close to the edge of the fence either way ( closer, I think, than the aforementioned groups ).
They celebrate the Eucharist of the Mass with bread and wine, although in a Shi‘i way. Interesting sort of Muslims…
Another tidbit of trivia about the Nusayris comes from Paschal Beverly Randolph, a fascinating American original in his own right. Randolph was an African-American abolitionist, a native of Virginia, who in the 1870s learned Tantric yoga and taught it as the “Immortality of Love.” He traveled throughout Asia and the Middle East learning the sexual customs of the East, and reported that the Nusayris practice an Arab form of Tantric sex. His name for Tantric sex was “the Anseiratic Mysteries,” a name derived from Nusayri.
Besides, unlike the Baha’is, Nusayris consider themselves Muslim or at least proclaim their Muslimhood. Baha’is believe that with Baha’ullah, Islam (with Christianity and Judaism and Hinduism and Buddhism and Zoroastrianism, etc.) was abrogated. Thus, Baha’is do not claim to be Muslim since the Baha’i message supercedes Islam.
Both, interestingly, started as Shi’a sects. Nusayriyyah still claims to be a Shi’a sect, whereas Baha’ism has become its own religion, quite like how, historically at least, Christianity started as a Second Temple Jewish sect and then became its own religion.
I like Tamerlane’s 3 points on determining whether a certain sect belongs to a certain religion. Modern Baha’ism fails all three points, although perhaps early Baha’ism (or pre-Baha’ullah Babism) would qualify for a few of the points. To me, a significant point is the first one - what do the people of the group consider themselves? No matter what similarities there might be between Baha’ism and Islam, the very fact Baha’is do not proclaim themselves as Muslims would disqualify it as a Muslim sect. (Historically speaking is another matter all together.)
In the end, I guess the answer would be because Nusayris have power while Druzes, Ahmadis, Qadianis, etc., do not.
WRS