Tuesday, June 5, 2018

The Personality and Life of Imam Khomeini (R.A.)


Prof. Hamid Algar University of California
It is related that when teaching a class on ethical advancement at Qum in the 1930's, Imam Khomeini (R.A.) would always close his lectures with the following sentence from the Munajat-i Sha'ban, a litany unique in that all the Twelve [Ma’sumin] Imams recited it:
O God, grant me total separation from other than You and attachment to You; brighten the vision of our hearts with the light of looking upon You, so that they may pierce the veils of light and attain the source of magnificence, and our spirits be suspended from the splendor of Your sanctity.
The Imam always assigned great importance to the study and recitation of the supplicatory prayers of the Imams (A.S.) from the Ahlul-Bayt (A.S.), as a means of attaining Munajat-i Sha'ban spiritual insight as well as petitioning the Creator, but this appeal from the Munajat-i Sha'ban seems to have been particularly close to his heart. It appears in texts and pronouncements belonging to different phases of his life: in the commentary on a hadith of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (A.S.) concerning "the meeting with ALLAH" (liqa'ullah), contained in Sharh-i Chihil Hadith, a work completed in 1939; in one of his works concerning the inner dimensions of prayer, Mi'raj al-Salikin, also finished the same year; in Jihad-i Akbar ya Mubaraza ba Nafs, a lecture on ethical purification delivered in Najaf in about 1972; in the lectures on the exegesis of Surat al-Fatiha that were televised in December, 1979 and January, 1980; and in Rah-i 'Ishq, a letter written by the Imam to his daughter-in-law, [Khanum] Fatima Tabataba'i, in 1983.
The aspiration "to pierce the veils of light and attain the source of magnificence" may therefore be regarded as a constant element in the devotional life of the Imam, and only by bearing it in mind can the totality of his struggles and achievements, including the political, be correctly understood. It was with a gaze fixed on "the source of magnificence", a mode of vision utterly different from that of the common political leader, that the Imam led a vast revolutionary movement to success.
The integrality and comprehensiveness of the Imam's personality and vision of Islam are such that analytical distinctions among their various dimensions are in a sense artificial, reflecting an effort to understand the Imam rather than his actuality. It is nonetheless legitimate - or at least inevitable - to speak of the Gnostic ( ‘irfani) and political aspects of his life and activity and to accord a certain primacy to the former, in terms of not only chronology but also significance. The Imam is generally regarded, by both Westerners and Muslims, as nothing more than an unusually gifted revolutionary leader, yet all who knew him intimately, as well as many who met with him but briefly, can testify that he possessed a vision transcending the political at the very same time that it controlled and embraced it. It is precisely this inclusion of the political in the Gnostic that is perhaps the most distinctive feature of the Imam's persona.
As for the chronological primacy of gnosis in the life of the Imam, this is amply demonstrated by the history of his early years in Qum. His immediate purpose in going there in 1920 was no doubt to study with Shaykh 'Abd al-Karim Ha'iri, one of the principal authorities of the day in jurisprudence, and he distinguished himself in this essential area of Islamic learning long before his emergence as a marja'-i taqlid in the early 1960's. But in Qum he soon developed an interest in  ‘irfan and associated disciplines that set him apart from many of his contemporaries and was, indeed, often viewed with suspicion and even hostility; many years later he had occasion to remark: "It is regrettable that some of the  ‘ulama should entertain such suspicions and deprive themselves of the benefits to be gained from studying  ‘irfan."
His first guide in the pursuit of  ‘irfan was Mirza'Ali Akbar Yazdi (d. 1926), a pupil of Husayn Sabzavari who had himself studied under Mulla Hadi Sabzavari (d. 1872), the author of Sharh-i Manzuma, one of the basic texts of  ‘irfan; the Imam was thus affiliated to one of the principal lines of the teaching and transmission of Shi'ite gnosis. Another early guide was Mirza Aqa Javad Maliki Tabrizi (d. 1924), who had been teaching in Qum since 1911. He held two classes on philosophy and ethics, a public one at the Madrasa-yi Fayziya and a private one in his own home that was attended by a number of gifted and favored students including the Imam.
The Imam also studied with Sayyid Abu al-Hasan Rafi'i Qazvini (d. 1975), among whose few published writings is a commentary on the Du'a al-Sahar, the same profound supplication to which the Imam devoted his first work, Sharh Du'a al-Sahar; it is therefore possible that the Imam's attention was first drawn to this text by Qazvini.
The Imam's chief teacher in gnosis was, however, Ayatullah Muhammad 'Ali Shahabadi (d.1950), to whom he respectfully referred in his own writings on  ‘irfan as "our master in theosophy" (ustad-i ilahi-yi ma). He met Shahabadi soon after the latter's arrival in Qum (probably in the late 1920's), and the answer he gave the Imam to a question on  ‘irfan convinced him that he was in the presence of a true master. After initially refusing the Imam's request for permission to study with him, Shahabadi consented to teach him philosophy, but it was gnosis the Imam wished to pursue, and he persisted until Shahabadi agreed to instruct him in that discipline. Every Thursday and Friday, as well as on holidays, usually alone but sometimes in the company of one or two other students, the Imam listened to Shahabadi lecturing on the commentary by Da'ud Qaysari (d. 1350) on the Fusus al-Hikam of Ibn 'Arabi, the Miftah al-Ghayb of Sadr al-Din Qunavi (d. 1274), and the Manazil al-Sa'irin of Khwaja 'Abdullah Ansari (d. 1089). The Imam's interest in these texts, particularly the last, remained demonstrably with him throughout his life.
In so far as the Imam's fusion of Gnostic and political concerns can be traced to any source other than illumination and immersion in the Qur'an and the teachings of the Ma’sumin, it is to another aspect of Shahabadi's influence upon him that it may be attributed. Shahabadi was one of the relatively few  ‘ulama in the time of Reza Shah to raise his voice against the misdeeds of the Pahlavi dynasty. He would regularly preach against the first Pahlavi during the commemoration of 'Ashura, and on one occasion manifested his extreme discontent by entering an eleven-month retreat at the shrine of Shah 'Abd al-'Azim.
A similar commitment to the political sphere manifested itself in one of his books, Shadharat al-Ma'arif, a brief work which has been well described as "social as well as Gnostic in content." Here Shahabadi analyzes the causes of decline and discontent in Muslim society, proposes the diffusion of authentic Islamic knowledge as a means of remedying the situation and creating unity, and concludes that although the establishment of perfect Islamic governance is a task reserved for the Sahib al-Zaman (AJ), the political dimension of Islam, implicit in all its juridical ordinances, cannot in any way be neglected, for "Islam is most certainly a political religion" (pp. 6-7).
The Imam began his teaching career at the age of twenty-seven by providing instruction in hikmat, a discipline closely related to  ‘irfan, and soon thereafter organized private sessions in  ‘irfan itself. It was in these sessions that the Imam trained and inspired some of his closest associates, including above all Ayatollah Murtaza Mutahhari, whom the Imam described after his assassination in May 1979 as "the very quintessence of my being." The texts taught to this elite were the section on the soul (nafs) in the Asfar al-Arba'a of Mulla Sadra and the Sharh-i Manzuma.
Gnostic and devotional matters also formed the subject matter of the Imam's earliest writings. In 1928, he wrote a detailed commentary on the Du'a al-Sahar, the prayer recited before dawn during Ramadan by Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (A.S.). This work was followed in 1931 by Misbah al-Hidaya ila al-Khilafa wa al-Wilaya, a brief but dense exposition of the innermost reality of the Prophet (S.A.W) and the Imams (A.S) that draws not only on a meditation on the hadith of the Ma’sumin but also on the akbari concept of the Universal Man (al-insan al-kamil).
 In 1937, the Imam completed a series of glosses on Qaysari's commentary on the Fusus al-Hikam and on the Misbah al-Uns, Hamza b. Fanari's commentary on the Miftah al-Ghayb of Qunavi. Two years later, the Imam completed his first work in Farsi, Sharh-i Chihil Hadith, a voluminous commentary on forty hadith of predominantly ethical and gnostic content. Also dating from 1939 is the Imam's Mir'aj al-Salikin wa Salat al-'Arifin (also known as Sirr al-Salat), a treatise in Farsi detailing the inner meaning of every part of the prayer, from the ablution that precedes it to the threefold takbir that concludes it. Somewhat more accessible than this dense and challenging work is another book on the same theme, Adab al-Salat, completed in 1942. Finally, mention may be made of Sharh-i Hadith-i Junud-i 'Aql o Jahl, a work completed in 1944 which, has been described as the fullest and most systematic exposition of the Imam's views on ethics and gnosis.
Beyond this enumeration, it is neither possible nor desirable on the present occasion to attempt a fuller presentation of the Imam's contribution to the discipline of  ‘irfan; it will be enough to refer the reader to Yahya Christian Bonaud's L'Imam Khomeyni, un gnostique méconnu du XXe siecle (Beirut, 1997), an excellent work of both synthesis and analysis. However, in connection with the trajectory of the Imam's life - the transition from early emphasis on  ‘irfan to later engagement in the political realm - it is imperative to note that the Gnostic writings are not a digest or extension of received opinions and formulations, drawn up in youth only to be laid aside in maturity; rather they are the manifest fruit of a powerful, original, and lasting vision.
As was remarked by Sayyid Ahmad Fihri, who attended some of the Imam's lectures in Qum during the 1930's, "it is apparent that he [the Imam] has experiential knowledge of all he wrote upon." To put it somewhat differently, the Imam's works on  ‘irfan were but the early, literary expression of a process of suluk, of continuous advancement towards the repeatedly invoked "source of magnificence." The Imam's leadership of the Islamic Revolution and his establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran may be therefore be said to have constituted, from a certain point of view, a further stage in that process of spiritual wayfaring; the fruits of his inward strivings came ultimately to transcend his own person and to manifest themselves with profound effect in the political realm.
This characterization may be justified with reference to the first three of the four journeys that furnish both the subject and the title of Mulla Sadra's Asfar al-Arba'a, a work with which the Imam was intimately acquainted. The first is the journey from creation to the divine reality (min al-khalq ila al-haqq), a movement away from immersion in the multiplicity of creation to exclusive awareness of the sole reality that is coterminous with the divine essence. The second journey takes place within the divine reality by means of that reality itself (fi al-haqq bi al-haqq); it consists of the perception of the divine perfections (kamalat) and of a series of extinctions in the divine names followed by subsistence through them. The third journey is that which leads back from the divine reality to creation (min al-haqq ila al-haqq); however, it does not bring the wayfarer back to his point of departure, for it is a journey that is accomplished by means of the divine reality (bi al-haqq) and has as its result the perception of the mysteries of the divine acts (af'al) as they unfold in the phenomenal world.
If the impertinence of speculating on the spiritual progress of the Imam be forgiven, it may be suggested that his period of primary emphasis on  ‘irfan and associated matters corresponded to the first and second journeys described by Mulla Sadra, and that his involvement in the political sphere and his leadership of the Islamic Revolution were analogous to the third journey. What is certain that the unique insight the Imam displayed at critical junctures during the revolution and the early years of the Islamic Republic cannot be explained purely in terms of political sagacity; a clarity of vision was at work which enabled him to see beyond the immediate conjuncture, and it may be permissible to describe this capacity as a witnessing of the af'al as they became manifest in the political sphere. If this characterization is justifiable, it becomes plain that the Imam generally refrained from overt political activity until 1962 not only because of an unwillingness to dispute the quietist attitude of the senior  ‘ulama of the day, but also because an essential process of inner preparation was underway. It was the Imam's own progress toward "the source of magnificence" that enabled him to lead a revolution that was like a collective suluk of the Iranian people. 
This having been said, it must be conceded that the scheme of the three successive journeys has an inevitably metaphorical character, in that the concreteness and definite accessibility of a terrestrial destination are lacking in the trackless realm of inward journeying. Moreover, the application of the scheme to a given life cannot be taken to imply an exact correspondence to chronologically distinct periods. It is no doubt for this reason that traces of political awareness and interest can be discerned in the life of the Imam even before his emergence on the national scene in 1962.
He had some contact with scholars who contested various policies of Reza Shah, not only his master Shahabadi but also Hajj Aqa Nurullah Isfahani and Mulla Husayn Fisharaki who led a protest in Isfahan against compulsory military service in 1924; Ayatollah Angaji and Mirza Sadiq Aqa who led a similar movement in Tabriz in 1928; Aqazada Kafa'i who was brought to Tehran for trial after the Mashhad uprising of 1935; and Sayyid Hasan Mudarris, whom the Imam later described as "the leader of those who stood against oppression." Moreover, the Imam often touched on political themes in the poetry he wrote at the time and which was privately circulated in Qum. Thus when in 1928 Reza Shah abolished the capitulations that had been granted to foreign powers and sought thereby to present himself as an authentic patriot, the Imam responded with a poem that included this line: "It's true he has now abolished every capitulation, but only to hide from you the abolition of the nation!"
In any event, such was the climate of the day in Iran that even such an essential component of Shi'ite spirituality as rauzakhwani {the recitation of texts commemorating the martyrdom of Imam Hussain (A.S.)} automatically took on political connotations. In an interview granted to the present writer in December 1979, the Imam recalled that the assemblies of rauzakhwani in which he participated in Qum during his youth rarely took place, and even then informers often infiltrated them, with the result that those participating were arrested. Still less to the liking of the Pahlavi regime than such traditional manifestations of piety were the public lectures on ethics given by the Imam in Qum in the early 1930's and, after a hiatus, from 1941 onward.
Although based on the Manazil al-Sa'irin of Ansari, one of the texts the Imam had studied with Shahabadi, these lectures served as the vehicle for a comprehensive exposition of Islam as a whole, including its political dimensions. Sayyid Ahmad Fihri recalled: "I count the time I spent attending those lectures among the most precious hours of my life. In his lectures the Imam taught true Islamic ethics, which cannot be separated from revolution, in such a way that he left a deep impression on all who attended." Another listener to those lectures, Ayatollah Murtaza Mutahhari, attributed to them "the formation of a good part of my intellectual and spiritual personality."
Moreover, it was not only religious scholars who attended the lectures; people from other walks of life would come from places as far a field as Tehran and Isfahan, defying the wish of the Pahlavi regime to isolate the religious institution in Qum from the general population.
The interconnectedness of the Gnostic and sapiential with the political and confrontational also came clearly to the fore in Kashf al-Asrar, which appearing in 1945 was the first published work of the Imam. The book is in the first place a crushing response to Asrar-i Hazarsala, a Wahhabi-inspired polemic against many of the key doctrines of Shi'ism. This is accomplished largely through the marshalling of a wide range of scriptural and rational arguments, but the Imam also has recourse to the great authorities of hikmat and  ‘irfan, men such as Ibn Sina, Suhrwardi, and Mulla Sadra. Further, the currency of works such as Asrar-i Hazarsala is denounced by the Imam as one consequence of the anti-religious policies of the Pahlavi regime, and it is in Kashf al-Asrar that the Imam expounds for the first time the doctrine of "the governance of the jurisprudent" (Vilayat-i Faqih) that was to become the constitutional foundation of the Islamic Republic.
In May 1944, at about the same time he must have been engaged in writing Kashf al-Asrar, the Imam issued what appears to have been his first political proclamation, calling for action to deliver the Muslims of Iran and the entire Islamic world from the tyranny of foreign powers and their domestic accomplices; the autograph copy of this proclamation is headed not only by the bismala but also by the injunction, "read it and put it into effect." The Imam begins, very significantly, by citing Qur'an, 34:46:
"Say: I enjoin upon you one thing only -- that you rise up for God, in pairs and singly, and then reflect."
This is the same verse that opens the chapter on awakening (bab al-yaqza) at the very beginning of Ansari's Manazil al-Sa'irin, the handbook of spiritual wayfaring beloved of the Imam since his days of study with Shahabadi. "Rising up for God" counts, then, as the essential point of departure for suluk; it is defined by Ansari as "awakening from the slumber of neglect and rising from the pit of lassitude." The Imam similarly says of the verse in question that in it "God Almighty has set forth the progress of man from the dark realm of nature to the farthest point of true humanity," so that the injunction contained in it is "the sole path of reform in this world."
But immediately after offering this Gnostic and ethical interpretation of the verse the Imam proceeds to analyze the lamentable state of the Muslim world, attributing it to the fact that all are engaged in "rising up for the sake of their appetitive souls" (qiyam barayi nafs); it is only through "rising up for God" that matters can be rectified. "Rising up for God" thus becomes both an act of personal redemption and a commitment to change and reform Muslim society, an insurrection equally against spiritual lassitude and neglect in oneself and against corruption, irreligion and tyranny in the world. There is perhaps no clearer textual indication of the interconnectedness of the ethical and Gnostic with the political in the worldview of the Imam than in this understanding of "rising up for God."
During the roughly eighteen years that elapsed between the issuing of this early proclamation and the beginning of the Imam's sustained public struggle against the Pahlavi regime in the autumn of 1962, he appears to have devoted himself primarily to teaching fiqh and usul and writing authoritative books on those disciplines. It has, however, already been pointed out that for the Imam  ‘irfan was above all an existential matter, so that the diversion of his pedagogical and literary energies to fiqh and usul cannot be taken to mean that  ‘irfan disappeared from the horizons of his inner life.
There is evidence; moreover, that even his teaching of these exoteric sciences was colored by Gnostic concerns and that this was one factor in attracting an unusually large number of students to his classes. To quote Sayyid Ahmad Fihri once more, the Imam was able "to demonstrate the conformity of the shari'a to the logic of  ‘irfan as well as the conformity of  ‘irfan to the logic of the shari'a." In addition, the teaching methods of the hauza [theology school] have always involved the transmission to the student of more than formal learning; a complete ethos and worldview pass from one generation to the next. That the Imam in particular was able to convey to his students essential spiritual virtues and qualities is apparent from the testimony of the late Muhammad Javad Bohonar that "the Imam would instill in us a sense of spiritual nobility, of responsibility and commitment, of spiritual and intellectual richness; his words would resound in our ears for many days after we left Qum to go preaching during Ramadan."
The Imam addressed himself in detail to this task of the ethical and spiritual training of his students in the lectures on the "Major Jihad", the struggle against the self-indulgent tendencies of the self, which he delivered at Najaf in 1972. It is significant that these lectures were given after the better-known series on the governance of the jurisprudent, and appropriate that they were first published as a supplement to them. For the establishment of Islamic government was seen by the Imam as both dependent on and aiming at the spiritual purification of Muslim society and those called upon to lead it, the religious scholars; success in the "minor jihad," the struggle against external forces hostile to Islam, was indissolubly linked to exertion in the " Major Jihad."
It is surely not accidental that the first tradition selected for commentary by the Imam in his Sharh-i Chihil Hadith was the hadith from which this pair of terms, major and minor jihad, is derived: "When a group of combatants whom the Prophet (S.A.W.) had sent forth returned, he addressed them saying, 'Welcome to a people who have completed the minor jihad; the major jihad remains for them to fulfill.' They asked: 'O Messenger of God, what is the major jihad?' He replied: “The jihad against the self.” In his commentary on this hadith, the Imam expounds a concise but complete program of inner combat, its first stage being the reflection (tafakkur) that is ordained in Qur'an, 33:46, the verse cited by the Imam at the beginning of his first public proclamation.
The numerous proclamations and directives, gathered together in the 22-volume collection entitled Sahifa-yi Nur, that the Imam issued first in the course of the struggle that led to the foundation of the Islamic Republic and then during the first ten years of its existence necessarily deal first and foremost with the problems and crises of the day. These documents also contain, however, numerous allusions to Gnostic and ethical concerns, demonstrating once again the inseparability of the spiritual and ethical in the worldview of the Imam; a thematic index of the Sahifa-yi Nur lists more than 700 passages of varying length dealing with the concerns of  ‘irfan.
Here, only two examples will be discussed. On December 22, 1979, when addressing the people of Qum, the Imam described the success of the revolution as due to the fact that the people of Iran had oriented themselves to the divine presence and thereby taken on "a divine existence." Later, after the beginning of the Iraqi aggression in September 1980, the Imam repeatedly said of the martyrs that they had gone to "the contemplation of ALLAH" (liqa'ullah). This contemplation, a major theme of  ‘irfan, had been the subject of a small treatise written by the Imam some time during the 1930's and published as a supplement to the lengthier work of his teacher, Aqa Javad Maliki Tabrizi, on the same subject. He treated the subject at greater length in his Sharh-i Chihil Hadith, where he clarifies that the meaning of liqa'ullah is not comprehensive rational knowledge of the divine essence but "a comprehensiveness of Gnostic witnessing attained by inner vision " (ihata dar  ‘irfan-i shuhudi va qadam-i basirat). He connects it, moreover, to the same supplication with which we opened this discussion, and it may therefore be concluded that for the Imam the martyr was one who by means of his death penetrated "the veils of light" to attain "the source of magnificence."
Perhaps the clearest public evidence of the Imam's continuing attachment to  ‘irfan and even his belief in the permissibility of conveying it to the broadest possible public came with his televised lectures on the exegesis of Surat al-Fatiha in December 1979 and January 1980. The lectures were suspended for a variety of reasons before the Imam had proceeded beyond the first two verses of the surah, but even in their incomplete form they are a remarkable exposition, clear, eloquent, and accessible, of key topics of  ‘irfan, especially the modes of divine manifestation and the meanings of the divine names.
Worthy of note are also the tumultuous events through which Iran was passing at the time the lectures were delivered: the intensified confrontation with the United States that followed on the deposed Shah's entry to America and the occupation of the United States Embassy in Tehran by the Students Following the Line of the Imam; the struggle to institutionalize the new order; various counterrevolutionary plots; and upheaval in the armed forces. It was against this background of turmoil that the Imam chose, with the perfect tranquility that characterized his demeanor, to lecture to the Iranian nation on key topics of  ‘irfan that might have been thought irrelevant to the urgent concerns of the day.
To understand this choice, it may be appropriate to recall an episode in the life of Imam 'Ali ('alayhi 's-salam) to which the Imam himself refers in the lectures on Surat al-Fatiha. Once, when advancing to do battle with Mu'awiya, Imam 'Ali (A.S.) began discoursing on the inner meaning of Tawhid. One of his companions asked him whether the time was suitable for the discussion of such matters. He responded, "this is the reason that we are fighting Mu'awiya, not for any worldly gain." The conclusion follows that it is precisely in the midst of the struggle for the establishment of an Islamic order that the deepest meanings of Tawhid may be fittingly evoked; the Gnostic and the political,  ‘irfan and jihad, are seen once again to be indissolubly linked.
The Imam's concern that Islamic gnosis should be properly known expressed itself even in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic. In a letter to Mikhail Gorbachev, leader of the Soviet Union, dated January 4, 1988, the Imam not only foretold the collapse and utter discrediting of Communism, with a prescience that outstripped the expertise of conventional Kremlinologists, but also warned against the spiritual and ethical chaos into which post-Soviet Russia has now in fact fallen. The essential problem confronting Russia, the Imam asserted, was not that of property, the administration of the economy, or personal freedom, but the absence of a valid faith in God. As a contribution to remedying the situation, the Imam proposed that Gorbachev dispatch Soviet scholars to Qum to study inter alia the works of Farabi, Ibn Sina, Suhrawardi, Mulla Sadra, and Ibn 'Arabi.
Important and eloquent testimony to the Imam's essential nature as a Gnostic of high rank is also contained in more intimate documents, written towards the end of his life: the poems in which he anticipated the union with the Divine Beloved to which he had constantly aspired, and letters to his son, the late Hajj Sayyid Ahmad Khomeini, and his daughter-in-law, [Khanum] Fatima Tabataba'i. Both the poems and the letters are marked by a strongly emotive tone that distinguishes them from the writings on  ‘irfan he had composed during the first phase of his life in Qum.
As for the public testament that was released after the Imam's death on June 3, 1989, it consists primarily of counsels to various classes of the Iranian people and warnings of the problems they will face in preserving the Islamic Republic. It is therefore easy to dismiss as a mere preliminary the Imam's opening emphasis on the hadith-i thaqalayn, that foundational text for all of Shi'i thought, and to overlook the occurrence, in the exordium, of a reference to "the reserved name" (al-ism al-musta'thar) of God.
The sense of this term, which ultimately goes back to a petitionary prayer of the Prophet (A.S.), may be summarized as the divine name (or compendium of names) that relate to the divine qualities that are not and never will be manifested, being "held in reserve" in God's hidden knowledge concerning himself. As has been suggested by Ayatollah Muhammadi Gilani, the reference made by the Imam to "the reserved name" at the very beginning of his testament indicates a wish on his part to encourage the cultivation of  ‘irfan after his passing as an indispensable part of his legacy. It is from the invocation of "the reserved name," together with all the names manifest or capable of manifestation, which the Imam descends, as it were, in the main body of his testament, to the plane of the divine acts that is simultaneously the plane of socio-political struggle. He thus underlined for the last time, subtly but unmistakably, the linkage between the Gnostic and the political that had been the hallmark of his life and one measure of his full and creative assimilation of the guidance of the Qur'an and the Ma’sumin.

Shia-Sunni Unity Conference Held in Birmingham

Sunni Unity Conference Held in Birmingham+pics


The aim of the conference was to underline the importance of unity in light of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and to discuss and disseminate the causes of division between the diverging sects and highlighting practical solutions to overcome these differences.

Sparkbrook Central Mosque in Birmingham held an Intra-faith conference for Shia-Sunni unity on Sunday April 29th in conjunction with UK Islamic Mission. The panel included well-renowned scholars from different Muslim schools of thought including:
  • Dr. Mohammad Ali Shomali – Imam of Islamic Centre of England
  • Mawlana Amirhussain Naqvi
  • Dr Zahid Parvez – Former President of Islamic Society of Britain
  • Sheikh Abdul Hadi Umri – President of Jamiat-e-Ahle Hadees
  • Dr. Muhammad Khalid – Director for the Centre of Intra-Muslim Studies
  • Mufti Muhammad Faruq Alvi – Imam and Khatib of Jami Masjid
The aim of the event was to underline the importance of unity in light of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and to discuss and disseminate the causes of division between the diverging sects and highlighting practical solutions to overcome these differences particularly in the face of contemporary challenges that have arisen in the modern era.
Sheikh Umri began by explicating verse 46 of Surat al Anfaal where difference of opinion amongst mankind is actually validated by Allah as something expected of human beings due to their nature and so he urged us to be sincere and think positively of one another and reminded us that our commonalities outnumber our differences by far and so we must allow these to bring us together. He also called out the media for blowing up these differences and prompted us to be vigilant of the ploys of our common enemy
Dr. Muhammad Khalid hailed this conference for being a one-of-a-kind effort to promote long-term unity when contrasted with the numerous collaborative meetings that are called in times of emergency but don’t have a lasting effect to bring our hearts close together.
He also advised us to keep away from scholars who claim there is no hope for Shia-Sunni unity and acknowledged the fact that extremists exist on each side however any sectarian literature/speakers must be discouraged from poisoning the minds of the members. He reminded us that if Allah urges us to make peace with the People of the Book for the sake of humanity what must He (s.w.t) expect from us with regards to our Muslim brethren?
Finally, Sheikh Shomali, who was the chief guest took the podium and recited a paragraph from the beautiful Munajat Shabaniyah to highlight the far-from-alien way Shi’as converse with the Beloved. After that he addressed the fact that all human beings are unique and different as a result of their novel upbringings, and the experiences they have encountered and so differences of opinion are expected. He reminded us however of a hadith where we are enjoined to “Love for the sake of Allah and Hate for the sake of Allah”.
He spoke of considering that as a “point of reference” in our social relation so that we must unite with those whom with when we unite, our core values of submission, love and dedication to Allah are not threatened. The esteemed Sheikh brought to our attention the social problems that come as cultural baggage left over from modernity and liberalism, which many of us Muslims have so quickly and blindly embraced, including family break-ups and drug abuse which are shaking the health of our communities.
He urged us to unite against these forces and let Allah into our hearts so that they are transformed and become larger to accommodate our brethren in faith and equals in humanity.
Below are some thoughts shared by a few sisters who attended the event:
Mahmooda Qureshi : “Much needed, long overdue, hope we can constructively put all the lessons learnt into practice.”
Abraar Hussain: “All Muslims are seen as the same by outsiders. We must distance ourselves from the extremists and highlight their disdain for Shia-Sunni unity and make clear that as a reason for our dissociation.”
Farzana Ali: “It’s very important to understand everyone’s point of view but we also must be vigilant of those purposely fuelling sectarianism and avoid arguments but engage in constructive dialogue. Each person must start by improving their own selves and being kind and loving so that we can unite.”

Role of Islamic Revolution in Fostering Islamic Unity


The revolution in Iran with its policy of “Neither East nor West; Islam is the Best”, has made the Islamic Republic of Iran the promoter of Islamic unity much to the dismay of the enemies of Islam.

The victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran on February 11, 1979 heralded the start of a new era in international developments. For the first time over the past few centuries a grassroots movement of a nation, without reliance on any outside power and with full trust in God Almighty had succeeded in overthrowing a repressive system and ushering in a dynamic system of government with wide-ranging international impacts.
The revolution in Iran with its policy of “Neither East nor West; Islam is the Best”, has made the Islamic Republic of Iran the promoter of Islamic unity much to the dismay of the enemies of Islam. O culmination of the Ten-Day-Dawn celebrations marking the 37th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution, we present you a feature titled “Role of Islamic Revolution in Fostering Islamic Unity”.
The Late French Muslim thinker, Roger Garaudy, in one of his articles described the victory of the Iranian people with the words: Truly the Islamic Revolution led by Imam Khomeini (God bless him) is not similar to any of the revolutions that have occurred in history for changing the society or the political systems. Social revolutions have also occurred in some countries because of the indignation of the poor against the rich.
This revolution, however, although possessing these trends, had new meanings which not only overthrew the political, social and colonialist system but also nailed the lie of the secular school of thought against religion and its role in ably administering the society and country. One of the impacts of the Islamic Revolution has been to strengthen Islamic brotherhood and foster unity among Muslims.
The Islamic Revolution in Iran, by drawing inspiration from the holy Qur’an and immaculate practice and behavior of Prophet Mohammad (blessings of God upon him and his progeny) established the pattern of unity and solidarity among Muslims.
The Father of the Islamic Revolution, Imam Khomeini, from the very outset invited world Muslims to unity and solidarity in the face of the hostility of the enemies of Islam. In one of his statements we read: O Muslims of the world who have faith in the truth of Islam! Rise and gather under the banner of monotheism and cut the hands of the treacherous superpowers from your countries in order to revive the dignity of Islam by overcoming differences, since you have everything.
The Late Imam was not a visionary, but he took practical steps in fostering Islamic unity. For instance, he immediately designated as Islamic Unity Week, the two dates of the month of Rabi al-Awwal believed to be the birth anniversary of the Prophet of Islam by the Sunni and Shi’a Muslims – 12th as per the Sunnis and 17th as per the Shi’as. He next declared the Last Friday of the blessed month of Ramadhan, “Qods International Day” for mobilizing world Muslims against the illegal Zionist entity called Israel.
Another dynamic step was setting up of the World Assembly for Proximity among Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. Imam Khomeini always paid special attention to the annual Hajj pilgrimage and viewed it as the best opportunity to promote Islamic solidarity by taking advantage of the presence of Muslims of different ethnicities, languages, colours, cultures, dresses, and social classes. He remarked on American plots to sow disunity by saying: Now when Muslim have travelled to the Land of Revelation for the Hajj pilgrimage from all over the world, by faith in Almighty God and the determination to resist the superpowers through unity of word, the Great Satan and its agents are trying to sow discord among Muslims. The strategy for fostering unity among Muslims was an outstanding feature of the politico-religious thought of Imam Khomeini.
In one of his speeches, Imam Khomeini remarked: We are prepared for defending Islam and the Muslim states. Our emphasis is on unity and brotherhood among Muslim states and all schools of Islamic jurisprudence. In line with the views of Imam Khomeini, the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran stresses Islamic unity and defense of world Muslims.
The emphasis on Islamic unity has been continued by the Late Imam’s successor, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei. In a speech to the joint gathering of Shiite and Sunni Ulama in Kermanshah, he said: By unity we do not mean that the various schools of Islamic jurisprudence should give up their beliefs and join one particular school, for; this is impossible.
But by unity we mean that every Islamic school should adhere to its beliefs and have no prejudice toward the other schools. Ayatollah Khamenei considers the basic solution for removal of difference to be dialogue among world Muslims. While, we are marking the 37th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution while the enemies of Islam are pursuing the policy of discord in Muslim states by promoting the Takfiri and other terrorist groups which have tarnished the image of Islam. Saudi Arabia with its divisive policies and reliance on the US is the main promoter of Takfirism that is against the spirit of Islam and Islamic unity. There was no such thing during the lifetime of Prophet of Islam.
Islam not only does not encourage sectarian clashes and spread of Takfirism, but it invites Muslims to unite with each other. Followers of Islamic schools have the right to freely propagate the teachings of their schools, without any negative propagation against the other schools. We hope that inspired by the ideals of the Islamic Revolution and by holding to the Rope of Allah by following the conduct of the Prophet of Islam, all Muslim states and schools of jurisprudence, will join hands to promote Islamic unity.

The Roots of Wahhabism, What Everyone Should Know

The Roots of Wahhabism, What Everyone Should Know
wahhabism


In order to diminish the violent effects resulting from Wahhabist ideals, ideals that essentially operate like a disease captivating the human psyche, we must learn it–acknowledge its history and origins. In the first part of a three-part series on Wahhabism we will address the roots and origins of this extremist cult.

Prelude to the Unfolding Nightmare:
An ultra-treacherous cult unfurls throughout the globe, devouring its prey like an indiscriminate wildfire. Political “experts” have loosely tried to equate this out of control cult to “Radical Islam”; some people call it “Jihadi Islam”; and some call it “Fundamental Sunni Islam”: Yet, all of these designations are a stretch–if not an intentional lure, or sheer denial–from the bitter truth. The truth is that this cult bears a name beyond any label or recognition of those titles mentioned prior, in fact, it is quite distinct from Islam altogether: the Cult of Wahhab, is one of the oldest, most dangerous, and well-organized cults of our time.
The genesis of this exceedingly vast cult can be traced back to Saudi Arabia, where it emerged and initially manifested with a little help from friends loyal to the Royal Saudi family (1); its branches radiating outward, through concepts rooted in what is commonly known as “Wahhabism.” Henceforward, like any other weed that smothers life surrounding it, Wahhabism must certainly be dug out by the roots before it spreads any further. Thus, in order to diminish the violent effects resulting from Wahhabist ideals, ideals that essentially operate like a disease captivating the human psyche, we must learn it–acknowledge its history and origins. We must get to know its {Wahhabism’s} depth and impact–everywhere: how it is utilized by certain global powers and political entities to control and influence bands or individuals affected by its doctrines–groups like ISIS; and how it spreads. Finally, remaining in a state of complacency towards the alarming rate at which Wahhabism spreads is a reminder, complacency against a prevalent crises never resolves; but, it only aids in the development of a more serious problem. Therefore, preventing the spread of Wahhabism must be addressed.
Setting the Record Straight:
What is Wahhabi, or Wahhabism? By most definitions: “Wahhabi is any member of the Muslim reform movement founded by Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab in the 18th century in Najd, central Arabia, and adopted in 1744 by the Saʿūdī family. Today Wahhabism is prevalent in Saudi Arabia and Qatar.” (2) This is how Wahhabism is commonly defined, but is it really as meek as that? Rarely is Wahhabism described for the gargantuan cult it really is, as the definition states it is delicately referred to as a movement: “the efforts and results of a group of people working together to reach a common goal: the civil rights movement.”  (4) However, the deeper you delve into this series analyzing Wahhabism—the roots, its impact on humanity, the movers and shakers–as well as completing independent fact searching on data surrounding it, the more one can visualize how a dangerous cult transpired from a movement.[1]Furthermore, there is a common misbelief among copious scholars that the late Mohammad Ibne Abdul al-Wahhab was the Father of Wahhabism or Wahhabi doctrine. Contrariwise, he was not the true founder of Wahhabi creed: although, the cult of stern thought and spurious religious ideology has earned his name–for carrying on and leading the Wahhabi reform movement progressively… and aggressively. At the core of Wahhabi ideology lies a deeper, yet still, sinister past–dating back to almost 700 years ago–beginning with a man on a tumultuous mission, a man named Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah: If ever a father had been named for sowing the Wahhabi seeds of thought, it should be this man. Ibn Taymiyyah is certainly an early link in a sinister chain of forged dogma, playing a pertinent role in corrupting the minds of millions who stand against Islam, captivating lost souls who fell victim to his doctrines and admired his legacy for centuries on.
The Long Dark Shadow of Wahhabism:
Aḥmad ibn Taymiyyah was born January 1263 – in his time he was considered to be a provocative scholar within the sphere of the Islamic World. (3)Taymiyyah was schooled in a rather religiously aggressive environment, according to historians. He attended an institution founded by Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Hanbali fiqh (jurisprudence) was beheld as the most conservative out of four orthodox systems of Islam—Hanabli, Hanafi, Maliki and Shafii–because it was “suspicious of the Hellenist disciplines of philosophy and speculative theology.” (3) Unfortunately, as the years progressed, it seem Ibn’s behavior transgressed: “Ibn Taymiyyah, together with the help of his disciples, continued with efforts against what, he perceived to be ‘un-Islamic practices’ and to implement what he saw as his religious duty of commanding good and forbidding wrong”(5)–and he did so violently. This is, within Wahhabism, at the core of the Cult and its follower’s discipline, which has led groups like Al Qaeda, ISIS, and Taliban (enforcers of strict Wahhabi codes) to carry out some of the most grisly acts against their captives.
It was Taymiyyah who first viewed all other religious practices that strayed from his perception of the Prophet’s “true” Sunnah as punishable—sometimes by death: According to his own distorted logic, “he was returning Islam to what he viewed as early interpretations of the Qur’an and Sunnah” (the codes of life that Prophet Muhammad {pbuh} lived by written in hadith). He drew many critics and opponents, even from among his colleagues of the Hanabli fiqh, because of his own innovations and fanaticism; especially, after leading ruthless undertakings against Shi’a, Alawite, Jews, and Christians.  Acceptance of Imamate, Saints, and holy sacred traditions he condemned; namely, graveyard visitations were viewed as false worship–“shirk” and “bid’ah”–as so many are accused of today by the Cult of Wahhab. One could say, Ibne Taymiyyah was the leading “shirk, bid’ah police” of his time: The innovator of an unscrupulous tradition adopted by the Wahhabi cult and their devout followers hundreds of years later. As he spiraled out of control creating the very bid’ah that he feared himself, at the age of 63, he was imprisoned in the Citadel of Damascus, prohibited from issuing fatwa any further. (6) Disappointingly enough, this would not be the end of Taymiyyah; the peak of his legacy would be born into another era, centuries later, with a man named Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab.
Centuries after his death, Ibn Taymiyyah ideologies would linger, building up a storm in the minds of his successors, having a profound influence over Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab’s own beliefs–whom would revive some of his most aggressive dogma. In the early-mid 1700’s, the well-known Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb would extract the beliefs of Taymiyyah and inject them once again into society; like Taymiyyah, his ideas were rooted in the Ḥanbalī School of law; and like Taymiyyah, they were rejected by local Ḥanbalī officials. His ideals earned him expulsion, first from the towns of Ḥuraymilāʾ and then from ʿUyaynah. (2) Nevertheless, these initiatives to silence Wahhab would not mark his downfall, it was only a stepping stone towards a greater accomplishment in the life of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Soon enough, visualizing the effectiveness of Wahhabism for control over the masses, The Emir, Muhammad ibn Sa’ud, inserted himself as Wahhab’s “saving grace” and a great source of financial support plus encouragement for Muhammad Wahhab. In 1744 the Saudi dynasty would begin funding the Wahhab movement. Emboldened and fuming with the same hatred, for non-Muslims and Muslims alike, left behind by Taymiyyah’s legacy, Wahhab along with his new collaborator would set the pace for the development of a well-organized and dangerous cult, on oil fertile grounds, throughout an entire nation.
At the turn of the 19th century, “they had brought all of Najd under their control, attacked Karbalāʾ, Iraq, a holy city of the Shīʿite branch of Islam, and occupied Mecca and Medina in western Arabia.” The Cult of Wahhab manifested and had been fully revived under the guidance of the Saʿūdī Fayṣal I. As one source describes: “The activities of Ibn Saʿūd in the 20th century eventually led to the creation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932 and assured Wahhābī religious and political dominance on the Arabian Peninsula.”(2)
Simultaneously, the Western world had their sights set on good ol’ – lustrous! — Arabian Black gold (oil) more so than Saudi’s infamous violations against humanity. They turned a blind eye then (towards oppressive rule), precisely as they do now. Westerners walking on Saudi Arabian sands sneered past the beheadings, the degradation of females from all age groups, and other violations… just as long as they–the men in fine black suits–could shake hands with the men clad in fine white thobes—Saudi monarchy. Western rulers would waste no time on inserting their fat cats as defenders and financers–via petrodollars from cheap oil purchases, linking all these elements together for a continuous cycle of dependent diplomacy–of the Saudi social system for decades to come… To Be Continued.
————————————————–
References and Citations
  1. Frontline – Saudi Time Bomb? PBS-Frontline. [Online] WGBH educational foundation, November 9, 2001. [Cited: April 15, 2017.](1) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/interviews/ahmed.html.
  2. Wahhābī Islamic Movement. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopædia. s.l. : Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 2017.(2)
  3. Short Biography of Imam Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah. Anonymous. s.l. : IslamWeb.net. 21707. (3)
  4. Thorndike, E.L. and Barnhart, L. Clarence. Advanced Dictionary. Scott, Foresman Advanced Dictionary. Glenview : Scott Foresman and Comapany , 1993. 0-673-12377-4.
  5. Islamic Philosophy . WordPress. [Online] December 9, 2015. [Cited: April 6, 2017.] http://islam.hilmi.eu/ibn-taymiyyah-the-founder-of-isis/.
  6. The Info List-Ibn Taimiye. The Info List . [Online] 2014-15. [Cited: April 6, 2017.] http://www.theinfolist.com/php/SummaryGet.php?FindGo=Ibn%20Taimiya.
  7. Laoust , Henri . Encyclopædia Britannica, Ibn Taymiyyah, . Encyclopædia Britannica. [Online] Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. , 6 23, 2014 . [Cited: April 14, 2017.] https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-Taymiyyah.
  8. Staff. What is Wahhabism? The reactionary branch of Islam said to be ‘the main source of global terrorism’ . Telegraph. [Online] March 26, 2016. [Cited: April 17, 2017.] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/29/what-is-wahhabism-the-reactionary-branch-of-islam-said-to-be-the/.
  9. The Saudi Connection: Wahhabism and Global Jihad. Choksy, Carol and Jamsheed, Choksy. Washington, DC : World Affairs Institute , 2015.

Monday, June 4, 2018

How the War Machine Fooled American Muslims On Syria


“It’s easier to fool American Muslims on Syria than it is to convince them that they have been fooled” is my twist on a saying attributed to Mark Twain. I learned this the hard way after trying to enlighten friends who were foaming in the mouth for regime change in Syria after drinking imperialist Kool-Aid served up in the mainstream media day and night.

It’s been seven years since conflict first broke out in Syria and piles of evidence have surfaced to destroy the mainstream narrative that Syrian President Bashar al-Asad is a “butcher” who is “killing his own people” to stay in power and “must go.” Articles, interviews, whistleblowers, and evidence on the ground in Syria definitively show that Western powers and their Israeli, Arabian, and Turkish allies are playing out plans hatched decades ago to bring a more compliant regime in Syria by financing, training, and arming insurgents, whom they affectionately call “moderate rebels,” on the ground while dropping bombs from above.

More people around the globe are waking up to the lies, especially after regime-changers’ claims of chemical weapons attacks by Syrian government forces fell apart again in April. While the majority of Syrian people have always supported al-Asad — 55% of Syrians wanted their president to stay in a 2012 poll commissioned by the Qatar Foundation — even rebel groups in Syria as well as many academics, journalists, activists, and ordinary folks worldwide are recognizing that the so-called “Syrian Civil War” is actually a continuation of imperialist designs to destroy and conquer Muslim lands. Tucker Carlson, conservative political commentator for Fox News, did scathing segments in April challenging the dominant narrative and drive to war against Syria.



But there’s one group of people that remains generally and hysterically faithful to the false narrative: American Muslims. They insist that al-Asad is a “pharaoh” and has been murdering Syrians, including gassing children, to hold on to power after peaceful demands for political change erupted in 2011. Even France, a former colonizer of Syria and one of the main architects of this war, said in early May that al-Asad’s ouster is no longer a prerequisite for a political solution. But the majority of American Muslims remain adamant that “al-Asad must go,” whether through insurgents, military strikes, or even assassination.

There’s a reason why war propaganda has especially taken root in the hearts of most American Muslims: their political, religious, and social sources of information are manipulated by the war machine. For seven years American Muslims have been bombarded by three sources of misinformation: media, masjids, and Syrian Americans. Attempts to engage in dialogue with them undoubtedly trigger emotional outbursts and personal attacks, making any type of civil discussion and critical analysis moot.

Here’s a comment I got on Facebook from a relative when I posted a video doubting claims that al-Asad used chemical weapons,

"Wow, just speechless… The entire world knows innocents who are NOT terrorists are being slaughtered by your favorite murderer Asad, and all you want to do is propagate your fake news that is fueled by your own political religious agendas… Anyone can sit on the internet and find ridiculous “support” for their even more insulting and ridiculous ideology… Don’t forget you are a mother. Just try to imagine what if it were you or [yo]ur children…

[More:] How can anyone believe such lies and 'fake news' when we know people who have personally traveled for the sake of humanity to volunteer in refugee camps and have seen and heard firsthand stories of the horrors from survivors??? From the relatives here, who are Syrian friends we all know and trust for decades, tell[ing] their stories of loved [ones] and friends being slaughtered in unspeakable ways? They are all liars? Also not to mention documentary films that everyone should see regarding White Helmets."

It is disheartening to see that even after the US has been exposed over and over for lying to the public to gain support for wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, American Muslims have wholeheartedly swallowed Syria war propaganda. To understand how this happened, let us take a closer to look at the sources of misinformation.

Mainstream Media
“Coverage of the Syrian war will be remembered as one of the most shameful episodes in the history of the American press,” according to Stephen Kinzer of Brown University. “Much of the American press is reporting the opposite of what is actually happening.” Even before the insurgency in 2011, the US mainstream media had been psychologically conditioning the public for regime change operations in Syria through predictive programming (see CNN’s Christiane Amanpour’s interview with al-Asad in 2005 where she says, “Mr. President, you know the rhetoric of regime change is headed toward you from the United States”).



The American media has always served as an outlet for war propaganda (“Remember the Maine!”) but in 2012 Congress repealed the ban on propaganda to the American public and agendized programming went into overdrive. The most egregious example of war propaganda posing as journalism is the Oscar-winning documentary “The White Helmets” about an organization of Syrian “rescuers” founded by a former British army officer and military contractor and funded by USAID as well as the British Foreign Office. In recent weeks the White Helmets have seen a reversal of fortunes, thankfully, as their chemical attack claims in Douma fell apart and Trump initiated a freeze on US funding for them.

Muslims may have seen through the Syria war propaganda had the “Muslim” media not been echoing the same views as its Western counterparts. Indeed, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey are equally involved in efforts to oust al-Asad and their press reflect that bias. The government of Qatar has paid billions of dollars to the “rebels” fighting to bring down al-Asad and uses its media arm, al-Jazeera, to bolster them. In 2012 a string of prominent al-Jazeera journalists quit the broadcasting outlet for biased reporting and agenda-setting in Syria. Even the media in Pakistan, officially neutral in the Syrian crisis, showcases virulently anti-Iran political commentators like Orya Maqbool Jan who regularly ignites hatred in the hearts of Pakistanis toward al-Asad and allies Iran and Hizbullah (see Neo TV’s videos “Orya Maqbool Jan Visit to Sham and Halab” and “Orya Maqbool Jan Views on Syria” on YouTube).

Masjids
When Germany needed Muslims to support war against the Allies in World War I, it opened up masjids in Muslim refugee camps and encouraged Muslims to faithfully adhere to their Islamic rituals, including attending Jumu‘ah congregation prayers where sermons were used to politically influence the worshippers. Americans continued that trend beginning in the 1970s by ordering Saudi Arabia to open up masjids and madrasahs in America and around the world, according to Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman’s own admission in March, which would preach a version of Islam compatible with US interests. Today those masjids shape Muslims’ political views regarding Syria and other issues through sermons, speakers, and programs. Many house imams are even educated and trained in Saudi Arabia.

After 9/11, American security and intelligence agencies gained even tighter control over masjids by establishing advisory councils made up of masjid leaders and FBI agents as well as through a network of paid agents. Government control over masjid affairs has gotten so out of control that a former intelligence director at the New York police department, Samuel Rascoff, wrote an article in 2012 in the New York Times entitled “Uncle Sam Is No Imam.” Since 2011, masjids have used the minbars to propagate contempt for al-Asad and his allies, such as Yasir Qadhi’s 2012 khutbah “Syria Crisis: O Bilaad al-Sham! You are in our hearts!!” Masjids in Chicago, Tampa, Los Angeles, and Detroit invited self-exiled Syrian scholar Shaykh Osama al-Rifai, whose masjid in Damascus was the main hub for anti-Asad demonstrators in the early days of the insurgency, to raise money for Syrians through the Syrian Sunrise Foundation.

To add fuel to the fire, warmongers tried to make the Syrian conflict into Shi‘i vs. Sunni (alleging al-Asad belongs to the Shi‘i minority ‘Alawi sect; for the record he has become a Sunni) to gain more support from Sunnis, and some masjids like the one in my town jumped in with two feet. The imam of our masjid gave a 2-hour lecture during a wedding ceremony on the “(dis)beliefs” of Shi‘is, mentioning things so absurd I don’t even remember them.

Syrian Americans
Too many people base their political understandings of complex foreign affairs on the opinions of “aunties” and “uncles” who grew up in those countries. But people who left their homeland, culture, and families decades ago for the American land of opportunity — regardless of how profusely they pray, fast, and read the Qur’an — are not reliable sources of information. If esteemed Companions of the Prophet (pbuh) could later regret who they supported during wars of fitnah, couldn’t our dear aunts and uncles be confused now?

“Most Syrians in the West who are today’s pro-opposition activists are descendants of Syrian and Egyptian-expelled Muslim Brotherhood families or they are ex-aristocrats who lost their lands due to socialist policies in the 1950s and 60s,” according to a 28-year-old Syrian who spoke with independent journalist Rania Khalek. “Now they speak out against the government from the safety of America.”

While Syrian-Americans are free to hate al-Asad for whatever reason, they must not knowingly or unknowingly become public relations tools for war hawks by giving legitimacy to and spreading support for their military exploits in Syria. The Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS), funded by USAID and led by an ardent opponent of al-Asad and Iran, has been a major source (along with the White Helmets) of disinformation regarding alleged chemical attacks by the Syrian government. SAMS put out a press release on April 8 claiming that 500 people suffering from chemical attack-like symptoms were brought to medical centers in Douma and six of them died (Douma witnesses, however, said there was no chemical attack, weapons, or victims during a Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons briefing in the Netherlands in late April). After Trump attacked Syria for allegedly using chemical weapons, another advocacy group, the Syrian American Council, was all over the media justifying Trump’s bombing campaign and encouraging further military action through a no-fly zone.

With America on a war rampage in the Muslim East, American Muslims have a huge responsibility to understand the reality of world politics so they can stop further death and destruction — surely not become part and parcel of it. As confused as American Muslims are regarding Syria, the basic thing they must do is correct their sources of information. They must turn to alternative and independent journalists instead of mainstream media, free masjids and minbars of government influence to allow critical discussions, and listen to the people living in the countries being bombed, not those who left them decades ago for personal advancement in the US.

If we don’t do this, American Muslims will soon find themselves cheerleading the destruction of another Muslim country, this time the Islamic Republic of Iran. Trump just tore up the nuclear agreement reached with Iran under the Obama administration, paving the way for increased hostilities. He is supposedly “committed to regime change” in Iran according to his attorney Rudy Giuliani (who recently attended two conventions organized by Iranian terrorist group the Mujahideen-e Khalq Organization in Washington and Albania), and he has surrounded himself with other Iran war hawks like National Security Advisor John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Those who don’t see another war on the horizon are living in a fool’s paradise.

Thursday, September 28, 2017

இலங்கையில் பௌத்த முஸ்லிம் முருகள்;  சில அவதானங்கள்:6

முஸ்லிம்கள் பிரச்சினை தெளிவாக புறிய நாங்கள் சில காலம் பின்னோக்கி பயணிக்க வேண்டும்.   உதுமானிய கிலாபத்தின் வீழ்ச்சியுடன், முஸ்லிம்கள் ஒரு இஸ்லாமிய சூழலிருந்து மாறி ஒரு சடவாத இறை நம்பிக்கையற்ற உலக சூழலில் வாழ ஆரம்பித்தனர். கோத்திர ஜாஹிலி நவகாலனித்துவம் இஸ்லாமிய புனித பூமியில், பனீ ஸஊதிகள் மூலம் கோலோச்ச  ஆரம்பித்து இரண்டாவது மகாயுத்தத்துடன் முஸ்லிம்கள் மார்க்க விழுமியங்கள்  இன்னும் திரிவுபடுத்தப்பட்டு  மோசமாக மாறி யஹூதி நஸாராக்களின் வல்லாதிக்கய சக்திகளின் சமய, கலாச்சார, பொருளாதார சூழலில் மூழ்கியது. நாசகார உலக சக்திகள் உலகமெங்கும் வியாபித்து தனது கோரப்பிடியை உறுதியாக்கிய  காலமது. எப்படி இன்று டெல் அவீவிலிருந்தும், வத்திக்கானிலிருந்தும் இயங்கும் முறையே: யூத; கிறிஸ்தவ மதம் திரிவுபடுத்தப்பட்டுள்ளதோ, அதே போல்த்தான் ரியாத்திலிருந்து இயங்கும் இஸ்லாமும் திரிவு படுத்தப் பட்டுள்ளது. உலக முஸ்லிம்கள் - இலங்கை முஸ்லிம்கள் உட்பட-இன்று உலக அலவில் வியாபித்திருக்கும் போலியான, இந்த இஸ்லாமிய விழுமியங்களிலிருந்து விடுபடாதவரை முஸ்லிம்கள் நிலையிலும், முஸ்லிம்களை மற்றவர்கள் பார்க்கும்; அனுகும் முறையிலும் எந்த மாற்றமும் ஏற்படப்போவதுமில்லை; அப்படி எதிர்பார்த்திருப்பதனால்  எங்களுக்குள் ஒன்றும் ஆகப் பாவதுமில்லை. ஒரு யதார்த்தத்தை முஸ்லிம்கள் மறந்துவிடலாகாது. அதாவது: ஆசியாவிலுள்ள அனைத்து பௌத்த நாடுகளும்: வியட்நாம்; கமபூச்சியா; லாவோஸ்; சீனா; மியன்மார்; இலங்கை போன்ற அத்தனை நாடுகளும் இரண்டாம் மகா யுத்தத்தின் பின் உலகில் தோன்றிய சடவாத வல்லாதிக்க சக்திகளுக்கு சிம்மசொப்பனமாக இருந்து பல யுத்த தினிப்புகளை எதிர்கொண்டது அண்மைய சரித்திர உண்மைகள் -(வியட்நாம் யுத்தம் முதல் புலிகள் யுத்தம் வரை)- ஆனால் இதே கால கட்டத்தில் உலக வல்லாதிக்க; சடவாத சக்திகளின்-(எமது மத்திய கிழக்கு குபேர இஸ்லாம் விரோத மன்னர்களின் வழிகாட்டளில்) -உலக வல்லூருகளின் எடுபிடிகளாக நாங்கள்  காரியமாற்றினோம்; காரியமாற்றிவருகிறோம் என்பதுவும் ஒரு கசப்பானதும்; ஆபத்தானதுமான உண்மையே.  தென் ஆசியாவில் பெரும்பான்மையாக வாழும் நாமிருவரும்-(பௌத்தர்களும்; இஸ்லாமியர்களும்)- எங்கள் உலக வல்லாதிக்க சக்திகளுக் கெதிரான போராட்டத்தை ஒருமுகப்படுத்தி ஒற்றுமையாக எங்கள்  போராட்டங்களை முன்னெடுக்க வேண்டிய காலமிது. அப்படியல்லாமல் மேற்கத்தியவாதிகளின் நிகழ்ச்சி நிரலுக்கமைய பௌத்தர்களுடன் எதிர்வாதம் புரியம் காலமன்று. இன்று தென் ஆசியாவில் நடந்தேரும் பௌத்த இஸ்லாமிய முறுகள் நிலையை ஸாமுவேல் ஹன்டிங்டனி்ன் 'க்லேஷ் ஒஃப் த ஸிவிலைஸேஷனின்', அமுல்படுத்தலின் ஒரு அங்கமாகவே நாங்கள் பார்க்க வேண்டும். முஸ்லிம்கள் தங்கள் தனித்துவத்தை உலக வல்லாதிக்க சக்திகளிடமிறுந்தும், அவர்கள் நீண்ட கைகளாக; தரகர்களாக இயங்கும் எம் குபேர மன்னர்களிடமிருந்தும்; எங்களைப் பிரித்துக் காட்டாத வரை; முஸ்லிம்கள்: டெல் அவீவிலிருந்து இயக்கப்படும் தௌறாத்தைப் போல் (யூத மதம்); வத்திக்கானிலிருந்து இயங்கும் இன்ஜீலைப் போல் (கிறிஸ்தவம்); ரியாத்திலிருந்து இயங்கும் ஃபுர்க்கானும் (இஸ்லாமும்) முற்றிலும் திரிபு படுத்தப்பட்டுள்ளது என்ற கசப்பான மற்றும் அபாயகரமான உண்மையை முஸ்லிம் சமூகம் உணராதவரை; மாற்எறீடுகள்ங்கசெய்ள்யாதரை; எங்கள் நிலை அபாயகரணமாதே.  ஸியாத் முஹம்மத்

Thursday, December 31, 2015

Paris attacks: the French 9/11?

paris-attacks-the-french-911-5196-articles.html by Waseem Shehzad December, 2015 While absolutely abhorrent, the Paris attacks, as others elsewhere, must be viewed beyond the self-serving statements of Western policymakers. Intensifying the same failed policies will not yield different results. The November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris have been compared to the events of 9/11 in New York. There may be some validity in such comparisons though perhaps not in the manner in which most people think. The attacks of 9/11 have been turned into the defining moment of human history. Every tragedy in the West must now meet the 9/11 standard. Thus, the Madrid train bombings of March 11, 2004 (191 dead, more than 2,000 injured) were called the “Spanish 9/11”; London’s subway bombings of July 7, 2005 (56 dead and 700 injured) were called the “British 9/11” and now we have the “French 9/11” (132 dead and nearly 200 injured). The next bombing in whatever European city will earn the title of “…9/11” with the name of the country inserted at the beginning. Of course missing from this discourse is the July 22, 2011 terrorist attack by Anders Behring Breivik, the Christian terrorist who murdered 77 youth in Oslo, Norway. He was not branded a terrorist, only a rightwing extremist. Absent also from all these names and slogan-mongering is any mention of the horrors visited upon other people, especially Muslims in their homes, villages and towns in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Palestine, Somalia, and Yemen. In the last 15 years, militaristic Western regimes have murdered millions of Muslims and several Muslim countries — Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now Syria — have been destroyed. Similarly, Muslims are the greatest victims of terrorism yet Western countries make such a fuss when a few hundred of their citizens are killed. This is not meant to justify the crimes that Muslims commit but it is important to keep things in perspective. Human life is precious regardless of who is the victim. There are good Muslims as well as bad just as there are good Jews and there are bad Jews. And there are good Christians as well as bad Christians. There are also good and bad atheists. Terrorism in perspective
No religion or non-religion has monopoly over violence or terror. We also do not buy into the canard that “not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims,” as the Loon Watch website accurately captured through its delightful headline, “All Muslims are Terrorists, except the 94% that aren’t” (January 20, 2010). Using FBI statistics, Loon Watch showed that between 1980 and 2005, Muslims accounted for a mere 6% of all terrorist acts in the US; Jewish groups were involved in 7%, Latinos in 42% while others accounted for 16% of all acts of terrorism. Yes, there are Jewish terrorist groups in the US. They go by such names as the Jewish Defence League (banned as a terrorist organization in the US, but not in Canada!), Jewish Armed Resistance, and Jewish Action Movement. There are also Christian terrorist groups like the Ku Klux Klan, Mormon extremists, Vietnamese Organization to Exterminate Communists and Restore the Nation, May 19 Communist Order, and the Fourth Reich Skinheads. One would never learn about this by watching Fox News or CNN. Even supposedly respectable news outlets — the New York Times, Washington Post etc. — only amplify acts perpetrated by Muslims anywhere in the world while completely ignoring similar crimes by Jewish terrorists or White supremacists in the US. In fact, those crimes are not called acts of terror at all. Here is a quick example. On November 21, the Italian police thwarted a plot by the mafia to kill the country’s justice minister who had vowed to introduce tougher drug laws. Italy said the mafia plot was not “an act of terrorism,” merely a crime! What constitutes terrorism? Only when Muslims are involved. Writing in the New Yorker magazine (August 10, 2012), Professor Steve Coll revealed, “In partnership with a team of researchers at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Public Policy, some of my colleagues at the New America Foundation collated and analyzed three hundred and two cases of domestic terrorism during the decade after the September 11th attacks. The numbers do not correspond with the public’s fear or understanding.” He went on, “The entire decade-long domestic death toll from terrorism (that is, where a political or ideological motive was apparent) was thirty.” Yes, a grand total of 30 people were killed over a 10-year period in terror related violence in the US! Let us compare these 30 deaths (that is three deaths/year) in a decade of terror-related violence with some other statistics. There were 12,664 murders in the US in 2011, the latest year for which the FBI provided detailed breakdown. Of these, 8,583 were caused by firearms. Thus, an American is 422 times more likely to be murdered in the street, the home, or shopping mall than by a terrorist act. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says nearly 4,000 Americans die due to drowning each year, the majority of them young children aged 1–4 years. In the first half of 2015, lightning killed 20 Americans (weather.com, July 17, 2015). The Consumer Product Safety Commission has revealed that Americans are as likely to be killed by falling television sets or furniture as they are by a terrorist act. Anyone for banning those killer couches? By far the greatest threat to Americans is the proliferation of firearms. Yet, there is a strong gun lobby that would not allow any restriction on the sale of firearms. In the US, there are 98 guns for every 100 people. It is the most heavily armed country in the world and the most violent. Let us return to Professor Coll’s findings. He wrote, “Of the three hundred domestic terrorism cases studied, about a quarter arose from anti-government extremists, white supremacists, or terrorists animated by bias against another religion. And all of the most frightening cases — involving chemical, biological, and radiological materials — arose from rightwing extremists or anarchists. None arose from Islamist militancy” (our emphasis). He then went on to ask this very pertinent question, “Why do these statistics seem so poorly publicized? Is the media a symptom of this problem or a cause?” Politicians’ reaction Equally bizarre is the reaction of most politicians. President Francois Hollande announced that French reaction to the terrorist attacks would be harsh and said he would intensify the war against ISIS. He also dispatched France’s only aircraft carrier, Charles De Gaulle, to the Mediterranean to join the fight. The reality, however, is that Western regimes and their regional puppets have been financing, training, and arming these very terrorists under the rubric of supporting “moderate” rebels. They are so consumed by hatred of President Bashar al-Asad of Syria that they are prepared to embrace organ-eating terrorists to overthrow him. Well, the ISIS terrorists — or evil, as the Western rulers are now calling them — have struck back. Some American politicians have also joined the fray. Donald Trump, who is seeking the Republican Party’s nomination for president, said he would shut down all mosques in the US and force every Muslim to wear a special ID tag. Trump is a vagabond; he has made similar racist comments about Mexicans, African Americans, etc. President Barack Obama tweeted back after Trump’s racist remarks, “Perhaps ignorant racists should wear special ID badges too.” And Obama offered to have one made for him! Let us readily admit that the Paris attacks were acts of terror; the victims were innocent civilians. But were the victims of similar bombings in Beirut a day earlier (November 12) that were also claimed by ISIS terrorists, killing 43, any less worthy of sympathy? What about the 224 people killed aboard the Russian plane that was brought down over Sinai soon after it took off from the Egyptian holiday resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh on October 31? A bomb planted in the plane’s luggage hold resulted in its being blown up in midair. A group affiliated with the takfiri terrorists claimed responsibility for that attack as well. British intelligence apparently knew about the bomb plot but did not inform the Russians! Russian casualties (224) exceeded those of Paris (132). And if we compare these figures in overall population terms, Lebanon’s 43 civilians killed and twice as many injured far exceed the losses of the other two. Lebanon’s population is merely four million compared to Russia’s 300 million and France’s 66 million. The contrasting Western media reporting of these terrorist acts was also revealing. In Russia’s case, the overriding narrative was that it was a blowback for Russia’s attacks on takfiri positions in Syria. The Beirut attacks were justified as being against the Hizbullah and, therefore, deserved. False flag operations? Some commentators have also said the Paris attacks were a false flag operation. They point to the fact that security drills were underway on November 13. Without subscribing to conspiracy theories, there is something odd about the fact that during each major terrorist attack, there is some kind of a military drill underway. This was the case during the 9/11 attacks; the London 7/7 attacks and now the Paris attacks. Did the terrorists know about each of these military drills in advance to plan their attacks? There is something even stranger underway. In the 9/11 attacks, we were told by no less a person than the New York City Police Chief Ray Kelly that the passport of one of the alleged hijackers, Mohamed Atta, was found in the rubble of the World Trade Centre. While on the one hand, we were told the fire was so intense that it melted the steel frames of the buildings causing their collapse, and on the other a terrorist’s passport somehow survived the inferno and gently landed in the street. Equally intriguing was that a terrorist on a suicide mission would take his passport with him. The same passport theory was floated in the Paris attacks: a Syrian passport was found near the body of one of the terrorists who blew himself up with a suicide vest! These terrorists must be really stupid to be carrying passports while on a suicide mission. Yet they were sophisticated enough to evade detection by planning such an elaborate plot that must have involved hundreds of people. This is what the Zionist website Debkafile claimed on November 14. Closely linked to the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, it described the multiple attacks as being aimed at French President Francois Hollande. Debkafile also chastised “France’s Director-General for Internal Security (DGSI) and Director-General for External Security (DGSE) for their refusal to pick up the slightest clue to the massive preparations afoot for a horrendous, wide-scale terrorist outrage against their capital city.”
It then conveniently informed us, “at least 200 operatives at various levels were completely in the picture and directly involved in at least two months of advance planning.” How did Debkafile know all this? Was the Israeli Mossad involved in these terrorist acts in some capacity or planted this information to control the narrative? Even the assertion that ISIS claimed responsibility for the attacks came from SITE, a website run by Rita Katz. She is an Iraqi-born Jewish woman who worked as a Mossad agent for more than 10 years in Israel before moving to the US. Most al-Qaeda and ISIS claims come through her website. How much credibility can her self-serving (i.e., serving Israel) claims have? In his commentary under the heading “Paris — Who made the terror?”(November 14), Denis G. Rancourt quotes Paul Craig Roberts, a senior official in the Ronald Reagan regime, “Some people are so naive and stupid as to think that no government would kill its own citizens. But governments do so all the time. There are an endless number of false flag attacks, such as Operation Gladio. Operation Gladio was a CIA/Italian intelligence operation that relentlessly bombed innocent Italians, such as those waiting in a train station, murdering hundreds, and then blaming the violence on the European communist parties in the post-WWII era in order to block the communists from electoral gains.” Even more egregious than Operation Galdio was Operation Northwoods, concocted by the CIA together with Admiral Lyman L. Lemnitzer, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. The plan involved hijacking and blowing up American passenger planes killing hundreds of Americans and blaming these terrorist acts on the Cuban government. These terrorist acts were then to be used as a pretext to attack Cuba to overthrow the government of President Fidel Castro who had come to power two years earlier. President John F. Kennedy rejected the plan. Some commentators have said this was one of the reasons for Kennedy’s assassination. Powerful figures in government do plan terrorist acts and kill their own citizens. And if the president does not approve it, then the president must be killed. We must, however, return to the issue of the West’s military aggression in the Muslim world. There was no al-Qaeda before the US got involved in Afghanistan by claiming to help the mujahideen. Zbignew Brezezinski, Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor, admitted that it was a small price to pay by having the Taliban and al-Qaeda emerge if that resulted in the defeat of the Soviet Union. There was no al-Qaeda in Iraq before the US invaded and destroyed that country, and there was no ISIS before the US-Zionist-Saudi-Turkish-instigated attack on Syria. The West’s wars on terror have actually increased terrorism. Further, the West and its Zionist ally are using these terrorists to destabilize the entire region primarily for one reason: to protect Zionist Israel and to ensure its supremacy in the region. There is bound to be blowback from such policies even if innocent people have to pay the price. Unfortunately, the price invariably is paid by innocent Muslims, in the Muslim majority countries as well as by those living in the West.