From Obedience to Excommunication: Dissecting the Concept of Ulul-Amr in the Contemporary Discourse of Salafism

Abstract

Although Salafism is often perceived as a unified and cohesive ideological current, it encompasses a spectrum of perspectives regarding the theological and political status of Ulul-Amr (those in authority) and the corresponding relationship between rulers and the ruled. The study identifies three primary orientations in present-day Salafi thought, each reflecting a distinctive stance on political authority and religious legitimacy. The first is Pragmatic Salafism, which affirms the absolute authority of Ulul-Amr and calls for unconditional obedience to rulers. However, this strand allows for post-facto justification of regime change once it has occurred, often in the name of maintaining stability or order. The second is Revisionist Salafism, which challenges the rigid legalism of the pragmatic approach and proposes a more pluralistic and participatory reading of Sharia. It recognizes various civic rights, including public counsel (nasiha), critique of rulers, and the peaceful transformation of political structures. The third and most confrontational is Jihadi Salafism, which deems illegitimate rulers as ṭāghūt (false gods or tyrants) and religiously mandates their violent overthrow and excommunication (takfīr). This radical reconfiguration of Ulul-Amr has served as a doctrinal justification for widespread acts of political violence across several Muslim societies. By analyzing these contrasting positions, the study reveals a significant shift from traditional doctrines of loyalty and obedience toward more fragmented and, in some cases, militant interpretations of political authority. This shift underscores the dynamic and contested nature of Salafi political theology in the modern era.