Tawhid Rida's vision of
tawhid formed the central theme of his reformist teachings, as he believed it was supported by
rationality and opposed all forms of superstitious beliefs, oppression, and ignorance. Later Muslims' deviation from pure
tawhid as practiced by the
Salaf, Rida argued, led to their decline and subjugation. Echoing
ibn Taymiyyah, Riḍā also condemned the practice of
tawassul as
religious innovation. Riḍā called for the destruction of tombs and structures built above graves and banning practices associated with
grave veneration, which he condemned as
polytheism. Among these acts were worshipping creatures as deities besides God; believing God granted part of his divine powers or shares aspects of his dominion with the humans; and believing in the lordship of God, but worshipping worldly beings, such as seeking aid from the dead during sorrow. Muhammad Abduh, Rashid Rida's early mentor, had adopted an Ash'ari methodology of metaphorical and interpretive view of what he viewed as potentially anthropomorphic descriptions of
attributes of God. Rashid Riḍā, who was advocating
Salafi theology after the
First World War, began writing lengthy refutations of his teachers views. In his commentary to
Risalah al Tawhid, he criticized Abduh for straying away from the literalist Salafi approach. In response to Abduh's statement that the most important aspect of
tawhid was belief in "God's oneness in His essence and the creation of the universes"; Riḍā remarked that
Abduh failed to mention
tawḥīd al-ʾulūhiyyah, the view of
Allah as the only god, and disagreed with Abduh's stance on divine attributes. As a Salafi, Riḍā pushed back against the Ash'ari and
Maturidite schools and advocated the
traditionalist doctrine of Qur'anic letters, recitation, and voice being uncreated (
ghayr Makhluq) word of God, a belief based on the works of
ibn Taymiyyah. In Riḍā's editions of Abduh's works, his views that contradicted traditionalist creed were either deleted or critiqued in commentaries to conform to Salafi doctrines.
Tajdid and taqlid Riḍā believed that the early Muslims' upholding of
tawhid and
sunnah were the primary reasons for their spiritual and material success. He praised their independence, free from
blind adherence and motivated by Quranic teachings. He believed Muslim decline began after the end of the
Islamic caliphates in the 13th century, when the Arab rule, and the influence of their adherence to
sunnah, ended. Riḍā also believed that non-Arab rulers engaged in religiously-harmful innovation and superstition. Based on his reading of
hadith, he believed that a second Islamic victory was prophesised and undertook initiatives for global revivalism as a result. Riḍā travelled to Europe only once, on political grounds; he did not speak English or other European languages. He disliked the social life and was critical of Christianity. Despite this, he had a robust sensitivity to challenges faced by Muslims in the modern world. He believed that the
inner decay of Muslims, as well as the efforts by the
Catholic Church, prevented
Europeans from embracing
Islam. He wanted Muslims to accept aspects of
modernity only to the extent to which it was essential for the recovery of Islamic strength. He considered it a duty for Muslims to study modern science and technology. He repeatedly urged legal experts and the scholars to come together and produce modernised legal works based directly from the Qur'an and
hadith in a way that was accessible for all
believers. and was especially critical of what he considered
taqlid (blind following) of excessive
Sufism, which he believed to have distorted the original message of Islam. He encouraged both laymen and scholars to read and study directly the primary sources of Islam by themselves. This principle enabled Riḍā to examine contemporary subjects through a modern lens. He believed that the "fragmentation of Muslims into sects and parties" resulting from
taqlid was particularly harmful and would lead to worship of someone other than God, which was in direct contradiction of
tawhid. Theologically Riḍā argued that rigid adherence to
madhāhib prevented Muslims from thinking independently and prohibited their right to access the Scriptures directly. This enabled tyrants, supported by corrupt scholars, to justify oppression and preserve their rule. He also believed that
hadiths regarding the
Saved Sect referred to the ahl al-Ittiba, the people who followed proof-texts. He considered those who were pro-''mad'hab
to be innovators and thus dangerous to Islam. Despite this, he did not ignore the legacy of the four mad'habs'' and viewed their legal literature as a resource from which he derived rulings, adapting to changing circumstances. Although he placed
The Four Imams at the peak of juristic excellence, he claimed that
ibn Taymiyyah was more relevant for contemporary Muslims in practice. Riḍā's criticism of
taqlid extended beyond
sharia and Islamic theology to include socio-political developments. He believed these associations and the consequent
partisanship influenced ''mad'hab
affiliations and fanaticism. He was more critical of al-Mutafarnijun
, Europeanised emulators who he regarded as guilty of taqlid
for abandoning the path of the Salaf. While the madhab
partisans are influenced by administrative positions of power and promote governmental interests, the Mutafarijun'' divided the
Muslim community based on differences in language, nationality, and geography, and conceived new identities within the nation-states, which Riḍā considered significantly more harmful.
Secularism and modernism Riḍā believed that the management of state affairs and its principles were an integral part of Islamic faith. Accordingly, he called for the restoration of an
Islamic caliphate and waged fierce battles against
secularist trends that emerged during the 20th century. He considered calls for separation of religion and state to be the most dangerous threat to Islam. Riḍā admired
ibn Taymiyyah and
ibn Abd al-Wahhab in particular and was inspired to adopt a more conservative and orthodox outlook. Riḍā disagreed with Sidqi's beliefs that
hadith was prone to corruption due to flawed transmission and that Muslims should rely solely on the Qur'an, which Riḍā took as a minimisation of Muhammad's importance. He believed modernists had gone too far into Westernism in their reformist attempts, leading Muslims to lose their faith. He used the Qur'anic term
Jahiliyya to refer to ignorance of
pre-Islamic Arabia and the conditions of contemporary Muslims, and believed that governance not adhering to
sharia was
apostasy. This idea would become a major rationale behind the
armed Jihad of future militant organisations. Riḍā believed that a society that properly obeyed
sharia would be successfully resistant to both
capitalism and class-based socialism, since this ideal society would be immune to temptations. He dismissed modernist advocacy of cultural synthesis, emphasizing the self-sufficiency and comprehensiveness of Islamic faith. His aggressive rejection of Westernisation eventually led to the formation of transnational
Islamist movements such as the
Muslim Brotherhood and
Jamaat-e-Islami.
Anti-Zionism and antisemitism Riḍā published an article condemning
Zionism in 1898, making him one of the earliest scholarly critics of the movement. He warned that the Jewish people were being mobilised to migrate to Palestine with European backing to establish a Zionist state, and urged Arabs to take action, In his 1929 treatise
Thawrat Filastin (The Palestinian Revolution), he claimed that the Jewish people were historically fanatic observers of
in-group solidarity and exclusivity, and refused to assimilate with other cultures. Riḍā listed a number of historical crimes against the
Israelites including polytheism,
usury, and offenses against the
prophets of Islam. He claimed that God was punishing them for this by taking away their
kingdom and subjecting them to centuries of
Christian persecution. In one of his final texts, published in 1935, Riḍā told Muslims to unite and "take the path traced by our
ancestors, who defeated the Jewish in the first epoch [of Islam] and expelled them from the
Arabian Peninsula." Riḍā viewed the Zionist enterprise as part of a wider British imperial scheme to consolidate their regional dominion and provoke
civil strife among Muslims. Riḍā propagated
antisemitic stereotypes and conspiracy theories that would later become popular across the Arab world and various Islamist movements. He believed Jewish people were
controlling the Western banking system and were behind turning Christian states against Muslims. He wrote that the establishment of a Jewish state was preparation for the arrival of their
Messiah, which Riḍā thought to be the
anti-Christ and would be killed by
Jesus, the true Messiah in Islam. He believed that Jewish people were competent only in the financial sector and required British military backing to make up for their inadequate skills in other areas. He also claimed the Jewish people were a "selfish and chauvinist, cunning and perfidious" people who sought to exploit and exterminate other people. Riḍā believed that the term "freemason" itself referred to the re-construction of
Solomon's Temple in
Jerusalem. He claimed and emphasized that while the founders of Freemasonry came from both Judaism and Christianity, the Jewish people led and dominated the movement. He also argued that Jewish people wielded immense influence over the
Committee of Union and the treasury of the Ottoman Empire. Within two years of the Young Turk Revolution, Riḍā convinced that the
Ottoman Empire had succumbed to a "
Zionist-
Masonic influence." In spite of this, Rida did promote efforts to reconcile between Muslims and Christians. Habib Jamati said in his eulogy for Riḍā that Riḍā "had also befriended Christians and struggled alongside them for their common nation."
Shi'ism and Baháʼí Riḍā gradually became a sharp critic of
Shi'ism throughout his life. In a 1929 book, he wrote that he was once willing to work with the balanced reformers among Shias but that the situation has changed. He alleged that they "worship the dead," attributing to their incessionary practices towards
Awliyaa in their shrines. He called upon Shias to condemn these practices and, while he did not censure all Shias, he left them with few options but to comply. Pan-Islamic unity was still conceivable, but it had to be on Salafi terms. In 1927, following
heightened communal tensions,
al-Manar published a series of anti-Shi'i articles written by Riḍā's disciple
Muhammad Taqi ud din al-Hilali. Rida condemned the Shia for "supporting the Tatar and Crusader invasions" and alleged that
Raafidi doctrines were formulated by a Jewish-
Zoroastrian conspiracy aimed at "perverting Islam and weakening the Arabs." Riḍā considered the
Baháʼí Faith to be a completely separate religion from Islam with its own laws. He thought they to be
polytheists and
esotericists pretending to be Muslim and that they were a destructive internal threat to Islam. He saw Abduh's friendship with Baháʼí leader
'Abdu'l-Baha Abbas as a
betrayal to Islam.
Women Riḍā believed that men and women were treated equally in Islam in terms of spiritual obligations and their ability to earn God's favor. To support
Islamic gender roles, which defined a woman's position in both household and society, he pointed to issues such as sexual freedom, women's exploitation in the workplace, and the rising cases of illegitimate children, which he thought were all creating problems in European societies. He believed these gender roles represented the proper solution to these social problems, and that, while men are heads of the household, Muslim women were allowed to choose a spouse and were clearly given stipulated rights and responsibilities in a marriage. He also asserted that consent from the
male guardian of a woman was essential for a
marriage to be valid, since it stabilised the domestic order and befits the honor of both women and men. He criticised followers of the
Hanafi school who didn't adhere to this stipulation as bigoted partisans to ''mad'habs'' guilty of abandoning the
Qur'an and
sunnah in favour of their law schools. Riḍā encouraged Muslim women to participate in the social life of Islam as they did in earlier Islamic eras, but stressed that men were more capable and superior in terms of strength, intelligence, learning, and physical labour, which is why they have
legal guardianship over women. However, like a ruler over his subjects, male authority should be exercised through
shura and that they should strive to be like
Muhammad, who exemplified kind treatment of wives. Riḍā also defended
Islamic slavery, asserting that it protected women from harm and gave everyone chance to bear children, and therefore is not in conflict with justice. Riḍā wrote that every woman should have a legal guardian, so that women who are "prevented from being wife or mother [are] not thereby prevented from enjoying protection and honour." He felt that Muslim men, but not Muslim women, could marry non-Muslims to expand the reach of Islam.
On riba Riḍā considered that certain types of
usury (
riba) may be permitted in certain cases, such as extreme poverty or larger public interest. He was influenced by both ibn Qayyim and Abduh in his beliefs about
riba, though some of the beliefs he glossed from Abduh were tweaked to fit his agenda. Riḍā believed that only the first increase in a termed loan was permissible in
sharia, classifying it as
riba al-fadl, a term used by
ibn Qayyim. Based on his analysis of the reports in
Tafsir al Tabari that described the practice of
riba during the pre-Islamic period, Riḍā distinguished the former from the usury practised during the
pre-Islamic period (
Ribā Âl-Jāhilīyyá). However, he considered any further increase in returns or postponement of maturity date unlawful. Riḍā wrote that
riba rendered capitalism fundamentally at odds with an Islamic system as it directly violated Divine command. When state-sponsored Turkish translations of the Qur'an in the newly established
Turkish Republic were published in 1924, Riḍā characterised the project as a long-term plot to displace the Arabic Qur'an and to tamper with Islamic rituals. He wrote that
Mustafa Kemal's regime promoted heretical ideas to undermine Islam and that God "revealed it to the Arabian Prophet Muhammad in the clear Arabic tongue." Riḍā issued a
fatwa prohibiting Qur'anic translations. Among his objections were that identical translation of the Qur'an was impossible; translation would serve to sever "Islamic ties of unity" by stoking racial divisions; and the translation would be lesser in quality, as the reader would be "limited" by the translator's understanding. He was clear, however, that the prohibition was only on translations meant to substitute the Arabic Qur'an. He viewed the Arabic language as the common medium uniting Muslims of all nations and promoted Arabic as an integral pillar of his reform efforts and later issued a
fatwa stipulating that knowledge of Arabic is obligatory for every Muslim. However, he expanded the legal realm of the
ibadah to incorporate personal and civil laws, including marriage and
divorce. Riḍā divided
muamalat into moral issues and morally irrelevant issues. The former are similar to
ibadat rules, moral norms defined by God, therefore making them unchangeable. Violators of these rules, he thought, were sinful
transgressors. The latter could be solved through the process of analogical reasoning, or
Qiyas, which is a fundamental principle necessary for the relevant application to the law. Medieval jurists such as
al-Qarafi and
ibn Taymiyya considered
istislah as a logical extension of
Qiyas, whereby a consideration of utility neither explicitly enjoined nor excluded by the revealed texts would be assumed as a valid basis for judgment. Riḍā adopted this rationale, acknowledging that conclusions of
istislah were not legally binding as a firmly-grounded
Qiyas (as opposed to
Qiyas without precise textual basis), as "no individual is entitled to require or forbid others to perform an act without Divine authorization". Overturning
muamalat rulings were predicated on the condition of compulsion (
darurah) and were only to be undertaken by a competent
jurist, who may derive the appropriate ruling based on his
ijtihad. Drawing on
Hanbali and
Shafi'i legal traditions that supported the continuity of
ijtihad, Riḍā employed its doctrine into practice. He defined the application of
ijtihad strictly in terms of "pure adherence to the provisions of the
Qur'an and
sunnah and upon the understanding of the
Salaf" and restricted its scope by enforcing the authority of
scholarly consensus. He called upon all
Muslims to unite by taking the
Salaf as their role models. Early issues of
al-Manar emphasized the virtues of the Salaf and extolled their feats, such as their intellectual dynamism and especially the
early Islamic conquests. Riḍā believed that the period of the early
Muslim community epitomized pristine Islam to its perfection. However, Riḍā was clear in specifying that general principles cannot supersede clear-cut texts. He stated that a soundly transmitted Scriptural text could only be superseded by a specific text which is more superior or by general texts of Qur'an and authentic
hadiths that allow believers to prevent damage to themselves or to commit prohibited actions in a state of emergencies. He wrote that this permission was only valid during cases of extreme necessity and that the degree of allowance was proportional to the scope of necessity. Maintaining that Revealed texts were superior to
maslaha, Rida's legal approach towards them was based on the criterion and mechanisms elaborated by classical jurists such as al-Shatibi and
al-Tufi. In addition, Riḍā's legal doctrine continued the juristic traditions of a number of prominent
jurists between the 10th and 14th centuries such as
al-Ghazali,
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, al-Qarafi, and
ibn Taymiyyah. During these four centuries, Islamic jurists had commonly employed
maslaha as an amenity for legal resolution and juristic dynamism. As Riḍā saw it, the classical jurists had sufficiently elaborated the "philosophical, moral and hermeneutical controls" for valid use of the principles of
maslaha. Riḍā credited al-Ghazali and al-Shatibi for his revivalism of
maslaha, which revamped the principle within the traditional legal framework of
Qiyas. Riḍā's doctrines were later extended by
modernists to uphold
maslaha as an independent legal source, making
Qiyas dispensable and formulating positive laws directly on
utilitarian grounds, for the "wisdom behind the Revealed Laws is no longer inscrutable," which created new implications. Riḍā vehemently denounced these ideas and Egyptian lawyer Ahmed Safwat for promoting "non-adherence" to the
Qur'an and
sunna, in particular matters in the name of public utility. Though Riḍā believed that
mujtahids were obliged to take a broad view of all considerations affecting the public interest, "textual limits" had to be respected. The general public was obliged to follow the qualified
mujtahids unquestionably on
wordly Transactions and their consensus was a legal source (''
hujja shar'iyya'').
Politics Riḍā believed that problems faced by Muslims required political reform and his
anti-imperialism was characterized by radical
pan-Islamist stances. Riḍā contended that those who engaged in defence of Islam, its propagation, and its teaching should not engage in politics, in line with orthodox
Sunni doctrine, though he was also vehemently against secularist calls for separation of religion and state. He criticized Islamic scholars for compromising their integrity, and the integrity of the Islamic law, by associating with corrupt worldly powers. In advocating the restoration of the caliphate, he reiterated the unity of both the spiritual and temporal aspects of Islam, which was in direct opposition to the emerging tides of
secularism across the Arab and Turkish worlds. He suggested conditions necessary for the revival of the ideal caliphal rule and proposed ways to prevent the return to the
Ottoman imperial system. Instead of criticising
Sufism based on its perceived role in the Islamic historical scheme, Riḍā opposed Sufis because he considered their activities to be
innovations without textual precedents or any sanction in the practices of the earliest generations. Riḍā opposed
secularist criticisms accusing religion of being responsible for wars and human suffering, asserting that the
materialist and
irreligious conceptions of humanity were the prime instigators of warfare and bloodshed throughout history. In Riḍā's view, wars were an integral component of human history, and
Islamic law regulated conflicts to
just wars based on the doctrine of
Jihad. He praised the
religious campaigns of
Muhammad and
Rashidun Caliphate as an exemplary model of
Jihad to be emulated against the European imperial powers. He saw
Jihad as a binding duty for all capable male Muslims, not only to defend the religion but also to bring non-Muslims into the Islamic faith. However, since the obligation of
Jihad could only be fulfilled by strong men, the more immediate task was to acquire scientific and technical knowledge. Riḍā nonetheless distinguished between wars to spread Islam (
Jihad al-Talab) and wars to defend Islam (
Jihad al-Daf). While the latter was always obligatory, the expansion of Islam into non-Muslim territories was not obligatory unless Muslims were not allowed to live according to
sharia or unless Islamic
preaching efforts were hampered by the non-Muslim state. Riḍā's final substantial treatise,
The Muhammadan Revelation (
al-Waḥī al-Muḥammadī), published in 1933, was a
manifesto in which he proclaimed that Islam was the only saviour for the deteriorating West. Insisting that
Islam called for the unity of all people, opposing all forms of racist hierarchies that were responsible for the
World War I and the corrupted
League of Nations, Riḍā presented a Universal Islamic Order as a substitute for the crumbling
Wilsonian system. == Influence and legacy ==