Respecting differences

by Zafar Bangash June, 2013

The tendency among some Muslims to insist that their particular understanding of Islam is the only correct way has caused numerous problems. These are compounded by rigidity leading to unnecessary conflict when Muslims should be tolerant of different approaches. Every Muslim sincerely and consciously commits to the One God — Allah (swt) — the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as the last and final messenger for all humanity, and the Qur’an as the revealed word of Allah (swt) to guide humanity till eternity. Problems arise in the Muslims’ selective understanding and application of Qur’anic teachings and the role of the noble Messenger (pbuh) in their lives. This is further complicated by some Muslims’ insistence that their particular understanding is the only legitimate way to interpret and implement Islam in real life. When such attitudes harden into fanaticism, it leads to disunity among Muslims and divisions in the Ummah. Many different approaches can be identified but the most serious differences exist among those Muslims that are striving to establish Islamic states in their societies. Is there only one way to achieve this? Often adherents of different approaches seem to think theirs is the only correct way and all others are wrong. Our readers know where we stand. Our position is clear from our writings in this magazine as well as from our other works such as the tafsir of the noble Qur’an by Imam Muhammad al-Asi or the books we have produced on the Sirah of the noble Messenger (pbuh). But we also take the position that no matter how strongly we may disagree with other Muslims’ point of view we do not exclude them from the fold of Islam or from adding their views to the larger ferment of Islamic ideas. Denouncing other Muslims as kafirs has regrettably become fashionable among some groups (the takfiris). They go further: based on such denunciation, they think it is permissible to kill the Muslims so identified. Such behavior has no sanction in the Qur’an or the Sunnah and the Sirah of the noble Messenger (pbuh). There are a few conditions in which killing others (anyone) is permitted: three of these include engagement on the battlefield, treason, and the murder of an innocent person. In the latter case, the Qur’an stresses forgiveness over revenge. So how did Muslims end up with this strange takfiri ideology that is spreading like a virus in the Ummah? A closely related phenomenon is that of sectarianism. It is used to create hatred against a targeted group of Muslims to justify acts of violence against them — including killing them. Muslims would do well to identify the forces that are pushing them toward sectarian warfare: imperialism and Zionism. True, different sects have always existed among Muslims but their differences never took on the virulent form it has taken on today. Whose interest does it serve for Muslims to fight each other? Let us be blunt: some Muslims that call themselves Sunnis are busy instigating hatred against other Muslims that carry the Shi‘i label. This is most clearly visible in places like Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Bahrain. The launch of this campaign can be traced to the success of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, a Shi‘i majority country, in 1979. Iran’s success exposed the fraudulent claims of the puppet Arabian regimes to being Islamic. The only way they could undermine Islamic Iran was by playing up the sectarian card. Regrettably, some Sunni ‘ulama including those that have built a reputation for learning have also joined this campaign. Changes in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon have led them to describe these as the “Shi‘i project.” When a tyrant like Saddam Husain was in power in Iraq, many of these ‘ulama remained silent. Today, they seem to have fallen for the lure of comfortable living under the patronage of petro-rulers and joined their vicious sectarian game. Instead of urging Muslims to confront imperialism and Zionism and their local agents in the Muslim world, they are busy pushing Muslims into the flames of sectarianism. We have no doubt that committed Muslims will ultimately triumph over the imperialists, Zionists and their munafiq agents in the Muslim world, as promised by Allah (swt) in the noble Qur’an (47:07, 61:13), but before that victory is achieved, Muslims would have paid a terrible price in life and blood. Committed Muslims have an obligation to properly understand the global reality and take the necessary steps to guard against all such schemes aimed at dividing them. Such divisions only serve the agenda of a more and more desperate West, whose policies have failed. Leading Muslim institutions, such as al-Azhar in Egypt, have a responsibility to come out clearly against such attempts at creating divisions and work for social and religious harmony among Muslims. Al-Azhar has a rich history of working to bring Muslims together. The legacy of Shaykh Mahmoud Shaltut needs to be revived and built on. Now is the time to do it. Zafar Bangash is Director of the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought

“Civilized” America bares its poisoned fangs in the Islamic realm against Iran

by Abu Dharr

If one thinks about it seriously, the world looks like a bizarre place. Scientific strides and technological developments make us think and believe that we are living in the “genteel” and “civilized” 21st century. Few can argue about the scientific and industrial progress in all fields of physical applications and material evolution. Who can argue against automotive transportation or laser manipulations, for example? Nano-technology and medical research, satellites and submarines, the refrigerator and air-conditioner, and a whole line of products can be used to raise the standard of living, provided that the use of technology is done with human-nature as its reference point. We do not want to go on and on heralding the breakthroughs of science and its applications. We think you get the point…

But then we look around and realize that humanity — the same humanity that is enjoying its technological civilization — is living in political and social wilderness. The nation-states of the world are for all practical purposes akin to wild animals: they prey on the poor and annihilate the innocent. Some of them behave like pigs that devour their own piglets when they turn against their own citizens. Some of these nation-states are like foxes: they will do anything they can to trick others into wars and long lasting antagonisms. There are political beasts in every government — from the chief executive all the way down to the puny bureaucrat. It is not an exaggeration to say that the political jungle of the world has its dinosaurs, terrestrial reptiles, cyclopses, dragons, and vampires. In many instances, the most advanced technologically are the most retarded politically.

The best demonstration of this is the imperialist ogre, otherwise known as the United States government. This political pedophile and military monster is making a living out of demonizing Islam, dehumanizing Muslims, and attacking Muslims in their countries and even in their bedrooms. It has its scrofulous sight nowadays set on Islamic Iran. If there were no animal instinct in official Washington, why would it now have a third aircraft carrier stationed in the Persian Gulf? Its amphibious assault ships are like sharks waiting for a kill! And the 10,000 US combat personnel on the waters of the Persian Gulf await the Pentagon’s orders to disrupt the lives of millions of average people going about their everyday life in that region of the world. Military personnel on the USS Nassau, USS Mesa Verde, and USS Ashland are equipped for instantaneous landing, special operations behind enemy lines, and in all likelihood “special operations” units who may be called upon for “classified assignments.”

There are at least 6 vertical take-off AV-HB Harrier attack planes, as well as several AH-1W Super Cobras, 12 CH-46 Sea Knight and CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopters. There are also choppers convertible to fast V-22 Osprey planes having the capability of landing virtually anywhere. The USS Harry S. Truman Strike Group consisting of 12 warships is plying the Arabian Sea, mostly opposite the Islamic Revolutionary Guard’s Base of Chah Bahar, near the Iran-Pakistan border. Add to that further westward in the Arabian Sea is the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower Strike Group. There is definitely a monster in Washington — with evil on its mind! And this is only a snapshot of a larger and still growing American military presence in and around the heartland of Islam which includes multiple rings of military bases: army, air-force, and navy all around the Islamic Republic. In a jungle like this, wouldn’t anyone with common-sense think about protecting their country and defending their citizens? Would any rational person in the world blame the Islamic Republic of Iran for its military industries and military technologies? In such circumstances, you have to be suicidal not to think about self-defense and state security.

All of the loudmouths in the mainstream media who are talking about Iran becoming an “existential threat” to Israel are leaving out 90% of the facts. It is not Iran that is a threat to the region and the world; it is the maniacs of Zion who are a threat to regional peace and world security. The Israeli top-gun Netanyahu vows that Iran will not be allowed to establish an outpost on Israel’s borders. We have news for you: the Muslims of the world will not be satisfied with just an outpost on Israel’s borders — they want and will have an outage of Isra-hell altogether. The Islamic giant is rising in this imperialist-Zionist jungle. The Zionist wolves are growling; Israel is becoming a Zionist zoo. And you ain’t heard nothing yet… The more Islamic blood that Israel spills, the more Islamic fighters will be born. If you thought that Hizbullah is a threat to the Israeli savage, wait until recruits begin coming in from all over the Muslim world — from the far east to the far west, from the northern polar region to the southern polar region of the planet. This is the tide of the future. There is no turning the clock back. Open your eyes and look carefully: is the world taking the shape of those who want to continue the status quo of the jungle — imperialist America and Zionist Israel in the forefront — or those who want to create a new tomorrow where humans have the liberty and dignity endowed upon them by their Creator — the Law-Giver and Merciful — led by the Islamic State in Iran and the Islamic Movement in the world?

Iraq and Afghanistan will be remembered as the two battlefields that defanged the imperialist-Zionist beast. Putting aside the illusions of a Hollywood/
mass-media monopoly over the airwaves and information sources the fact of the matter is that the Islamic Republic of Iran wields more influence in Iraq than does the American imperium. After “I’m a Zionist” Joe Biden arrived in Iraq over the American 4th of July weekend, Baghdad’s Green Zone, which is supposed to be secured by the American leviathan was rattled with five mortar rounds and the cry “duck and cover.” This maximum security area that houses the one billion dollar, 100-acre US embassy-industrial complex — the world’s largest — cannot be shielded from the anti-Zionist and anti-imperialist salvos for justice coming from a Muslim population that will never cower to the illegitimate political siblings of the Zionist-imperialist Frankenstein.

Just a couple of decades ago, the Muslims of the world were willing to give the USA the benefit of the doubt. Not any longer. The government of the US is now evil incarnate. It is not hyperbole to say that two billion Muslims in the world concede the inevitability of a military showdown with the democracy-cum-military regime in Washington that has spread itself into all corners of the Islamic world with its military bases and corporate interests at the expense of one third of humanity, at least! When the US says, as an echo of the Israeli enemy, that it cannot live with an Iranian bomb while it lived with a Soviet bomb and a Chinese bomb, when the US says such things it proves that its hatred for Muslims and Islam is much more virulent than it was towards Marxists and Communism.

And then, as if to add insult to injury, we had the United Arab Emirates ambassador to the US come out and say what has always been concealed in official Arabdom, “A military attack on Iran by whomever would be a disaster, but Iran with a nuclear weapon would be a bigger disaster.” How did this ignoramus become an ambassador? Well, I take that back; it is the advanced buffoonery of such individuals that qualify them to become ambassadors. The diplomatic corps of the Arabian nation-states are stacked with equivalent morons. In this particular case and in the relaxed atmosphere of Aspen, Colorado, his excellency the ambassador may have had just one shot too many. Usually such official socialites are loosened up to drop their pants behind closed doors; but in this case the ambassador dropped his jaws.

Even when we shift our attention away from the military jungle we wind up watching animals living in a political and social jungle. Greek mythology lives on in the Zionist-imperialist strategy as they prepare for the clash of the titans.

This time though, contrary to their infatuation with their behemoth military buildup, David will, once again, slay Goliath.

The Imam’s life and legacy

June 3rd marks the 21st anniversary of Imam Khomeini’s passing into heavenly company. Amid his many achievements was the success of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, establishing the first Islamic state in modern times. We reproduce an abridged version of Zafar Bangash’s foreword in the latest book, Imam Khomeini: A Leader of Principle and Purpose, published by Crescent International for the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought.

Three factors are essential for the Islamic movement to bring about change in society: an accurate understanding of the situation in which it operates; clarity about the goal it wishes to pursue; and, the process through which this would be achieved. This is also the lesson we learn from the Sirah of the noble Messenger of Allah (r) when he proclaimed the message of Islam, first in Makkah and later in Madinah. He was absolutely clear about the jahili nature of society in Makkah, indeed the entire Arabian Peninsula and beyond, and refused to compromise with it. He set out to challenge and demolish it and replace it with a system based on Islamic principles and values.

The process for this change was the mobilization of a group of people that were totally committed to bringing change in society regardless of the price they would have to pay. And they did. At the end of the life of the noble Messenger of Allah (r) on earth, Islam had not only spread throughout the Arabian Peninsula, but an Islamic state had also been established and consolidated. It started in Madinah but expanded both east and west ultimately encompassing the entire Arabian Peninsula during his lifetime. The Prophet’s (r) successors expanded the Islamic domain to virtually the entire known world, spreading as far as Central Asia and China and into parts of Europe. This is the model Muslims have followed throughout history.

In the Muslims’ contemporary history, there have been numerous movements that have struggled to bring about change in their respective societies. Some have subsumed their struggle under the label of nationalism while others have openly proclaimed that they wish to implement Islamic laws in society, yet with the exception of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, none of the other movements has succeeded. What sets the Islamic movement in Iran apart from others, such as al-Ikhwan al-Muslimoon (Muslim Brotherhood) in Egypt and Jamaat-e Islami in Pakistan or movements inspired by their thought and method? Numerous reasons can be advanced for the lack of success of these movements — and there are elements of truth in all of them — but it needs emphasizing that no movement succeeds without struggle and sacrifice. It is not in the sunnah of Allah (Â) to not test His faithful servants: this was the case with all the Messengers and Prophets of Allah (Å) and continues to be the case with those that have made a faith-commitment to Allah (Â). He makes clear in the noble Book:

Do people think that when they say, “we make a faith commitment to Allah,” that they would not be tested with trials and tribulations? Lo! We tested those who were before you. Thus Allah distinguishes those that are sincere [in their commitment to Him] and those that merely feign and lie [about their commitment] (29:2–3).

Thus challenges and trials and tribulations are part of the struggle that committed Muslims must endure in order to achieve the goal of implementing Islam in society. Both the Ikhwan and the Jamaat-e Islami were endowed with charismatic leaders although they did not achieve the stature of Imam Khomeini. The Ikhwan and the Jamaat also had well-thought-out programs but because they frequently made erroneous assumptions, success eluded them and continues to do so today.

What we can say with confidence is that Islamic movements cannot gain power by participating in elections organized under the prevalent jahili systems in Muslim societies. The experience of the Ikhwan (in Egypt), the Jamaat (in Pakistan), the Islamic Salvation Front (in Algeria) and many others that operate as Islamic political parties confirms this. Some may cite the successes of Hamas and Hizbullah to assert that participation in electoral politics under existing systems can bring positive results. It needs pointing out that their conditions are rather different. Their lands and societies are under direct foreign military occupation. They are forced to make difficult choices. Should they deal with the external enemy or tackle the internal situation first? The choices facing them are not pleasant and both carry grave risks.

The news of Imam Khomeini’s death on June 3, 1989 was marked by extreme grief both in Iran as well as outside. Millions of people in Iran participated in his funeral procession in Tehran while tens of millions of others around the country were grief-stricken. While an estimated three million people had welcomed the Imam on February 1, 1979 when he returned from 15 years in exile, more than 10 million people participated in his funeral prayers in Tehran in the scorching summer heat. The authorities in Iran had to urge people from outside Tehran not to come because facilities in the capital were stretched to breaking point. The scenes at his funeral, as witnessed on television, were heartbreaking.

What these demonstrated clearly was that the Imam lived in people’s hearts. He had earned their trust and confidence through self-sacrifice and denial of worldly pleasures. He was bold and courageous but above all, he had unshakable faith in Allah (Â) and His promised help. The people knew that he was a leader of exceptional qualities but he lived a life that was very close to that of ordinary people in Iran. They also knew that he had no personal ambitions in life beyond adhering to the commands of Allah (Â) and eliminating injustice from the face of the earth. These are the attributes of a truly great leader. This, however, is only one dimension of his multifaceted personality.

Imam Khomeini came from a deeply intellectual tradition. From a very early age, he was immersed in the study of ‘irfan (gnosis) and mysticism. His interest in fiqh was aroused much later. It was clear even in his early life that he was deeply troubled by the injustices in society and he reflected on the causes of such malaise. He began to raise and discuss these issues at a relatively young age despite being quite junior in the hierarchical structure of the ‘ulama in Iran. But he was careful not to overstep his authority in the presence of senior figures. It was later when he had reached a more senior position that he began to express his views more forcefully, leading to his arrest by the Shah’s regime and ultimately exile from Iran in 1963. Exile, however, did not deter him from speaking out, and thus he attracted large audiences. There was a yearning among people searching for a leader with courage, knowledge and charisma. They found their ideal in Imam Khomeini.



There are many dimensions of Imam Khomeini’s personality. It is regrettable that apart from Professor Hamid Algar, perhaps the greatest authority on the Imam, there have not been many scholars that have paid adequate attention to the Imam’s intellectual contribution in numerous fields. Most Muslims around the world became familiar with the Imam’s writings and works through the pioneering efforts of Professor Algar and through the writings of the late Dr. Kalim Siddiqui in the Crescent International. In Tehran, there is also an Institute established for the Compilation of the Works of Imam Khomeini. While it has done some good work, it is largely confined to literature in Farsi and perhaps some material in Arabic. The English works produced by the Institute are of questionable quality.

What is needed is a team of dedicated researchers to concentrate on the writings and declarations of Imam Khomeini to make the rest of the world aware of them. There is a great deal about his intellectual contribution that is unknown to most people. Unless these works are properly researched, analysed and discussed, the world would remain unaware of Imam Khomeini’s contribution in many fields. Even his widely known achievement — leading the Islamic movement to bring about an Islamic revolution in Iran — is not properly understood; even many Muslims do not understand and hence do not appreciate it fully. Some of it is undoubtedly the result of negative propaganda in the western media, and even within the Muslim world financed and supported by such regimes as those in Saudi Arabia or Iraq under Saddam. The West’s animosity toward the Imam is based on the loss it suffered in Iran. He overthrew the West’s favourite puppet and demolished the Western-imposed exploitative order there. This was a major blow to Western interests. This the West could not tolerate, hence the incessant hostile propaganda and negative portrayal of the Imam. They could hardly be expected to extol his virtues. The Islamic State of Iran continues to be viewed with great hostility even today precisely because it refuses to surrender to the West, unlike other regimes in the Muslim world.

The western media’s hostile propaganda is one dimension of the problem. In fact it is confirmation of the fact that the Imam had embarked on a course that was viewed by imperialism and Zionism, the two leading sources of zulm in the world today, as a challenge to their exploitative and anti-human policies. But what explains the hostility of such states as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq under Saddam? These bastions of Arabism are illegitimate entities that were created by western colonialists to serve their interests. The Imam’s successful struggle against the Shah, who was in the mould of all these other rulers, by bringing about an Islamic revolution exposed them completely. This was especially true in the case of Saudi Arabia whose rulers had wrapped themselves in the mantle of custodians of the Two Holy Cities. Muslims worldwide were forced to ask: how could the custodians of the Haramayn be subservient to the kafirs, especially the US, a sworn enemy of Islam?

The hostile propaganda against the Imam was confirmation that his mission was dedicated to the service of Allah (Â). But such propaganda does not fully explain the lack of knowledge among Muslims and other people about the Imam’s immense contribution in such diverse fields as the understanding of the Qur’an, hadith, ‘irfan, fiqh, theology, Muslim political thought, etc. In any case, we should not give too much credit to the Saudis and their ability to influence events in the Muslim world. What is truly lacking is the will and a well-thought-out plan to study the Imam’s contribution. This is an area that awaits serious consideration and attention.

The Islamic Republic commemorates the Imam’s anniversary each year. Guests are invited from all over the world. Papers are presented and conferences held. The commemoration ceremonies culminate in a huge rally at the Imam’s mausoleum in the Behesht-e Zahra Cemetery. Why has a committee of scholars not been appointed and provided facilities to undertake serious research into the writings and thought of the Imam? It serves little purpose to produce numerous volumes of questionable quality and assume that this is all that is required. True, people continue to have deep attachment to the memory of the Imam more than two decades after his departure from this world but his intellectual contribution is of a much higher order and needs to be addressed at the proper level.

This would provide important lessons for the global Islamic movement. It is through the process of learning from our successes as well as failures that we would be able to better tackle the challenges confronting us.

Al Azhar Verdict on the Shia

What follows is the Fatwa (religious verdict/ruling) of one of the Sunni world's most revered scholars, Shaikh Mahmood Shaltoot with regard to the Shia. Shaikh Shaltoot was the head of the renowned al-Azhar Theological school in Egypt, one of the main centers of Sunni scholarship in the world. It should be of interest to know that a few decades ago, a group of Sunni and Shia scholars formed a center at al-Azhar by the name of "Dar al-Taqreeb al-Madhahib al-Islamiyyah" which translates into "Center for bringing together the various Islamic schools of thought". The aim of the effort, as the name of the center indicates, was to bridge the gap between the various schools of thought, and bring about a mutual respect, understanding and appreciation of each school's contributions to the development of Islamic Jurisprudence, among the scholars of the different schools, so that they may in turn guide their followers toward the ultimate goal of unity, and of clinging to one rope, as the well-known Quranic verse, "Hold fast to the Rope of Allah and do not diverge" clearly demands of Muslims.

This massive effort finally bore its major fruit when Shaikh Shaltoot made the declaration whose translation is appended below. It should be made unequivocally clear as well, that al-Azhar's official position, vis a vis the propriety of following any of the Madhaahib, including the Shi'ite Imami school, has remained unchanged since Shaikh Shaltoot's declaration.

Some people who follow pseudo-scholars in Hijaz may beg to differ; that notwithstanding, what you see below is the view held by the overwhelming majority of Sunni scholars, and not just those at al-Azhar. Let it be known to those who strive to divide us, that their efforts are but in vain.

For the readership's reference the phrase "al-Shia al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna 'Ashariyyah" means the Twelver Imami Shi'ite School of thought which comprises the overwhelming majority of Shi'ites today. The phrase "Twelver Shi'ites" is used interchangeably with "Ja'fari Shi'ites" and "Imami Shi'ites" in various literature. They are merely different names for the same school of thought.

"al-Shia al-Zaidiyyah" are a minority among the Shi'ites, concentrated mainly in Yemen located in the Eastern part of Arabian peninsula. For a more detailed description of the Zaidis vs. the Twelver Shi'ites, please refer to the book, "Shi'ite Islam" written by the great Shi'ite scholar, Allamah Tabataba'i, and translated by Seyyed Hossein Nasr, and published by the State University of New York Press (SUNY).

And as for Shaikh Shaltoot's declaration ...

Head Office of al-Azhar University: IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE BENEFICENT, THE MERCIFUL Text of the Verdict (Fatwa) Issued by His Excellency Shaikh al-Akbar Mahmood Shaltoot, Head of the al-Azhar University, on Permissibility of Following "al-Shia al-Imamiyyah" School of Thought
His Excellency was asked:

Some believe that, for a Muslim to have religiously correct worship and dealing, it is necessary to follow one of the four known schools of thought, whereas, "al-Shia al-Imamiyyah" school of thought is not one of them nor "al-Shia al-Zaidiyyah." Do your Excellency agree with this opinion, and prohibit following "al-Shia al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah" school of thought, for example?
His Excellency replied:

1) Islam does not require a Muslim to follow a particular Madh'hab (school of thought). Rather, we say: every Muslim has the right to follow one of the schools of thought which has been correctly narrated and its verdicts have been compiled in its books. And, everyone who is following such Madhahib [schools of thought] can transfer to another school, and there shall be no crime on him for doing so.

2) The Ja'fari school of thought, which is also known as "al-Shia al- Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah" (i.e., The Twelver Imami Shi'ites) is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as are other Sunni schools of thought.

Muslims must know this, and ought to refrain from unjust prejudice to any particular school of thought, since the religion of Allah and His Divine Law (Shari'ah) was never restricted to a particular school of thought. Their jurists (Mujtahidoon) are accepted by Almighty Allah, and it is permissible to the "non-Mujtahid" to follow them and to accord with their teaching whether in worship (Ibadaat) or transactions (Mu'amilaat).

Signed,
Mahmood Shaltoot.

The above Fatwa was announced on July 6, 1959 from the Head of al-Azhar University, and was subsequently published in many publications in the middle east which include, but are not limited to:
al-Sha'ab newspaper (Egypt), issue of July 7, 1959.
al-Kifah newspaper (Lebanon), issue of July 8, 1959.

The above segment can also be found in the book "Inquiries about Islam", by Muhammad Jawad Chirri, Director of the Islamic Center of America, 1986 Detroit, Michigan.