The two opposite poles of the global Islamic movement

Abu Dharr

Deep down inside the recesses of the , there is what one may call a dichotomy — two mutually exclusive subclasses of the worldwide Islamic movement. One of them is centered on Islamic Iran and the other around what is today called “Saudi” Arabia. This animation is so intense and profound but no one wants to express it in public. It is limited to the inner circles of the inner circles of the polite and well-educated members of the worldwide Islamic movement. In a sense, the active and informed Muslims who belong to one or the other branch of this umbrella Islamic movement are alienated from each other because their individual organizational hierarchies have to answer to either one of these two divergent and many times mutually exclusive official umpires. Currently there is a detente between the government in Arabia and the government in Persia; both, of course, affirming in strong terms their Islamic credentials. But are they both legitimate points of reference for the larger Islamic movement in the world? Our humble but strong opinion is an emphatic NO. We say this with the support of facts on the ground and the record that speaks for itself.

In the first demonstration of facts, there is the Islamic political willpower in Iran that has, in word and in deed, taken on the imperialist and Zionist superstructure of kufr and shirk, and their combined might. Because of this, the loudmouths and bullhorns of racist Zionism and socioeconomic class imperialism are frothing at the mouth. Their corporate media fumes with the same, now tiresome, innuendo against the leadership of the Islamic state in Iran because of its self-willed and unwavering opposition to both militarist and political Zionism. This fearless and daring position by the Islamic leadership in Iran should remind every active Muslim who knows his history of the Yahudi forerunners (of today’s Zionists) in Arabia 14 centuries ago — the same ones who were also seething with rancor and conconcting countermoves against the Prophet (pbuh) when Islamic self-rule was on the rise in Arabia at the time.

Contrast Islamic Iran with the official Saudi sponsorship of a grand plan to reconcile the dispossessed Palestinians with their Israeli overlords. The official Saudi creatures and their unofficial Egyptian and Jordanian tools are what they call the “moderates”. And, who said there are no “moderate Muslims”? The real power-brokers in Arabia and its extensions into Egypt and Jordan among other countries along with that strain of the Islamic movement that answers to royal Riyadh are all showing excessive and compulsive concern with a slowly-but-surely consolidating front that will eventually move all the Muslims from Central Asia to the Mediter-ranean in a wave of military determination to pluck the regime of Zionist Israel out of existence. The American hegemon who went into Iraq and Afghanistan, giving both Israel and Saudi Arabia a decade of wiggle time, is beginning to pack his bags and gradually but surely moving out of Iraq and eventually out of Afghanistan. We call forth the wits and wisdom of this long paralyzed branch of the Islamic movement that has been sheltered and weltered by the financially obese and mentally anorexic Saudis to open its eyes and see the light!

This past month the top news item from Arabia concerned the $60 billion dollar military contract that the Saudi halfwits signed with the American military-industrial-banking complex. What an insult to every living and thinking Muslim everywhere! Are the Muslims in Arabia so brainless as to be unable to begin to build a military industry of their own? Let them begin with manufacturing their own guns and bullets and then proceed from there to manufacturing their own tanks and aircraft. This is also an insult to the larger Muslim population of the world; do the Saudi statesmen and representatives not believe that the 1.8 billion Muslims in the world are capable of initiating their own military industry that will free them from being dependent on their enemies for purposes of self defense? And at the end of the day all these weapons purchases will end up injecting much needed cash into the corporate coffers of weapons manufacturers like Raytheon, Lockheed, General Dynamics, Grumman and Northrop among others as well as the predatory policies of imperialist occupation and invasion forces — the ones that occupy Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan to be precise. We can almost hear their chief executive officers say behind closed doors “Thank God for Saudi Arabia”. Of course, Saudi Arabia returns the thanks to the US by making sure that its contingent of the worldwide Islamic movement does not forget that the USA [and even Israel] are Ahl al-Kitab!

Contrast this Saudi capitalist cash-cow with an independent Islamic Iran that has crossed the rubicon on its way to becoming the first independent Islamic nuclear powerhouse in the world. The quality and quantity of enriched uranium in Iran this coming year will be enough for the Islamic Republic to kiss all Western offers of “uranium exchanges” good-bye.

Step by step, there is a serious behind-the-scenes Euro-American discussion and at times argument to factor in Iran as the up-and-coming undisputed regional power in the “Middle East” and to factor out Saudi Arabia as the undisputed last-ditch stand by the old-school of political imperialist political thought that seeks to prevent Iran from becoming the acknowledged regional superpower. We have to remind the pre-Imam Khomeini “Shi‘i” faithful that these audacious and resolute strides are not attributable to a “theological” or “historical” superiority that some diehards never tire of expressing to the outside world. No indeed; it is the result of the hard work of the sons of the revolution who never forgot the eight years of imposed war and all the characters involved in those eight years, including the war financiers — the crude oil Arabians.

Listen, O sons of the broad Islamic movement in the world! If we were to rip this whole issue to its bare bones we could agree, I hope, to see that there is a real core conflict that puts the Islamic Republic of Iran on one side and the Zionist regime of Israel on the other. The rest are, let us say, “fillers”. The number one supporter of racist Israel is the United States of America. Any run-of-the-mill Muslim knows that. And the number one supporter of Islamic Iran is Syria, in the shaping up of the not-too-distant firestorm between an Israel of Zionism and an Iran of Islam.

In the distorted view of things within the Saudi sponsored wing of the Islamic movement the Americans turn out to be Ahl al-Kitab and nasara while the Syrians turn out to be kafirs and zindiqs. Before this begins to strain the minds of the indoctrinated Saudi types, would it not be fair if we were to look at how the Ahl al-Kitab American officials came down on all the Islamic fringes that are under the Saudi umbrella. Washington even went as far as demanding the Saudi embassy in Washington, DC close down its religious department which employed scores of da‘is and is said to have had a budget of scores of millions of dollars annually. The American Ahl al-Kitab officials are going to the Arabian nation-states — tribal states to be more precise — and to other Islamic countries and rearranging their educational curricula, seeing to it that all Qur’anic ayat and Prophetic hadiths mentioning Yahud in a negative way are deleted from textbooks.

Can we compare that to a country that has accommodated Palestinian fighters and Hizbullah to the detriment of Israel? Don’t rush to conclusions; no one here is trying to paint a rosy picture of the Syrian regime, we know it has its own agenda against Islamic self-determination in Syria and it should be addressed at the appropriate level. But in the larger scheme of things, the Islamic Republic in Iran has managed to deploy specific Syrian tactics to help with a groundswell program that intends to place all their common resources and assets into the up-and-coming fight with the Zionist tormentors of the Holy Land and its original population.

If the leading light and the momentous policies come from Islamic Iran then what is the Saudi Arabian government’s problem with a free trade agreement between Tehran and Damascus? Why are the Saudi national security functionaries so upset with Tehran and Ankara raising their economic ties to higher and unprecedented levels? Why do we sense nervousness in the Saudi financed Arabian media when Islamic Iran declares that it will begin to refine its own petroleum? One would think that the Saudi lords would feel a pinch of ardor and eagerness to do the same; but no, the Saudi officials are downright resentful and begrudging.

The Saudi royalists are hoping against hope that the Euro-American economic measures against certain banks belonging to the Islamic Republic will pay off. But the brave leadership in Iran called upon the people to adopt a “resistance economy”. And when Wall Street and Western economies have been gripped by structural problems such as inflation, unemployment, currency erosions, recessions looming into depressions, the economy in Iran with all its loopholes has weathered these troubled economic times with relative success. According to some sources, when the American economy in the past two years has been in a free-fall the overall economy of the Islamic State has grown by about one-third.

Its economy is strong enough to make Russia think twice before it decides to cancel a $13 billion S-300 missile system deal. If Islamic Iran’s economy were not doing well Russia would not have had second thoughts about canceling that deal, especially when it is prodded to do so by the US on generous terms. Add to this Islamic Iran’s policies that nudged Syria — its strategic ally — to acquire the Yakhnut surface-to-sea advanced missiles. The Israeli leadership tried in vain to persuade the Russians to call the deal off. No success.

Sure, Islamic Iran buys advanced military technology just as the Saudis do; but the difference is that in Islamic Iran there is an advanced military industry that will make buying weapons from foreign sources obsolete in another decade or so; while in American Saudi Arabia the plan for buying foreign military hardware goes on and on and on and may continue for another century if the status quo continues.

Is he who moves along, head beneath, more apt to be guided [the contemporary Saudi establishment] or he who walks composed on a path [head-up] straightforward [the current Islamic government in Iran]?

The total transformation of the Ummah requires more than just political success

by Iqbal Siddiqui July, 2012 The confirmation on June 24 that Muhammad Mursi, the candidate representing the Ikhwan al-Muslimeen, had been elected President of Egypt, has a certain air of inevitability. The Ikhwan has been established as the country’s main opposition movement for over half a century, and has been subject to official persecution for most of that time. Only its popularity and credibility among Egypt’s people has enabled it to survive numerous attempts to damage, destroy or marginalise it, and now to emerge stronger than ever before. And it was this same factor which made many of its leaders, activists and supporters confident throughout Egypt’s turbulent recent months that the Ikhwan would emerge in a position of strength once the babble of conflicting voices and messages from politicians and commentators was set aside and the Egyptian people given the opportunity to have their say. The context and implications of the Ikhwan success in Egypt are discussed elsewhere in this issue of Crescent International. The reaction among Islamic activists outside Egypt will probably be one of caution, recognising the significance of the success, but warning also that the challenges of power will be very different from those of opposition, and that numerous forces both within and outside Egypt will be doing their best to ensure that the Ikhwan are unable to fulfil the hopes that the country’s Muslims have for them. Already we have seen, in the few days between the final round of polling and the delayed announcement of the results, Egypt’s ruling generals taking extra powers for themselves specifically to ensure that Mursi’s hands are tied. Some commentators will probably also (and still) doubt the political vision and strategy of the Ikhwan’s leadership, particularly given that Mursi is not one of its established intellectual and political leaders, who were not permitted to take part in the elections. Such scepticism is perhaps understandable, and may yet be vindicated, as Mursi and his supporters face up to the realities of trying to rule Egypt from within the strict limitations imposed by the military establishment, with no doubt the tacit approval of the Western powers who claim to have championed democracy in Egypt. The powers that be in the West must have known that the Ikhwan would emerge in a powerful position in any even vaguely representative political process, as they did even in the pseudo-elections that took place under the Mubarak regime. Their calculation has evidently been that it was no longer practical to try to thwart this reality, and therefore their best bet would be to permit it while ensuring as far as possible that their key interests were protected, even though some element of Islam would have to be accommodated in some spheres of Egyptian public life. The continuing dominance of the military is no doubt a part of the West’s strategy. The new government can also expect to come under intense pressure to ensure that the US’s regional geopolitical interests are not challenged. In return, elements of “moderate Islam” in domestic Egyptian affairs will perhaps be officially tolerated — although still attacked through channels such as the international media, human rights organizations, etc. — in the hope that the Islamic movement will prove less popular in power, however restricted, than they always have in opposition. This strategy reflects a realization on the part of the West that many Muslims, including activists in the broader Islamic movement, still fail to grasp. This is that the objects of the establishment of Islam go far beyond the purely political — the establishment of Islamic states — and so require much more than political power, however achieved. The “total transformation” of Muslim societies represented by Islam (to use a phrase coined by the late Dr. Kalim Siddiqui) requires the individual and collective internalization and realization of the Islamic vision and Islamic values at all levels and in every sphere of society. This is impossible without Islamic political institutions and order; Islamic government within an Islamic state is an essential element of this process. But it is not the be all and end all. The achievement of political power is neither an essential prerequisite for beginning this process of transformation, nor proof of its completion or success. Rather it is merely a step in the process, which may be achieved early, providing the Islamic movement with invaluable powers and tools to facilitate and accelerate the broader transformation of society, as has proved to be the case with the Islamic Revolution in Iran, or may in other circumstances come later in the process, as a result of groundwork done in other areas. Either way, it is merely a step on the journey, not an end in itself. The hegemonic West has been forced by the Islamic commitment and aspirations of Muslim peoples to accommodate Islamic parties within their power structures. They hope that Muslim aspirations can be satisfied by Islamic-ish governments within non-Islamic states, thus enabling the Islamic transformation of Muslim societies to be limited to spheres in which the key interests of the hegemonic powers are not threatened. This is the context in which the successes of Islamic parties in countries such as Turkey, Tunisia and now Egypt must be seen. What Muslims must realize is that these successes are just minor steps toward the broader objectives of the Islamic movement. The total transformation of Muslim societies requires progress in many areas and spheres simultaneously, of which the political sphere is only one, albeit an important, even crucial, one. Having achieved a limited degree of power in Egypt, the Ikhwan now faces opportunities, challenges and obstacles very different to anything it has confronted before. Its enemies, and those of Islam more broadly, will hope that they will be able to cripple it and in the process do immeasurable damage to the broader Islamic movement. While supporting our brothers and sisters in Egypt as best we can, not least by reminding them of their responsibilities and warning them of the dangers they face, we must also maintain the broader perspective, in order that the historic vision, aspirations and progress of the Islamic movement is not limited to the merely political and cannot be damaged by the short-term vicissitudes of current affairs.

Iran’s principled stand vindicated in nuclear talks

Thirty-three years of valiant resistance and perseverance of the Islamic Republic

Abu Dharr


Thirty-three years ago this month the world was witness to the fall of a Shah and the rise of an Imam. The Shah was Persian by culture, American by loyalty. The Imam was Persian by culture, Islamic by persuasion. The Muslims of the world along with the imperialist victims of the world rejoiced at this turn of events. Ever since that time Uncle Sam and his nephew Cohen have been playing their cards against the Imam and the Revolution. How valiant and patient the sons and daughters of that revolution have been throughout all these years! Had all the forms of warfare and conspiracies and out-and-out lies been leveled against another revolution, it would have been on its knees by now.

Today, the Islamic Revolution in Iran is standing tall. It has developed its skills, advanced its technology, and extended its infrastructure to a degree that has finally brought the imperialist-Zionist club of nations out into the open in their war preparations, which are being set in motion as this article goes to press. The spreadsheets in the US and Europe inform us that there are 15,000 US combat ready troops in a slaphappy Kuwait: at least two army infantry brigades and a helicopter unit. The Pentagon has two aircraft carriers prowling regional waters: the USS Carl Vinson and the USS John Stennis. There are reports of a third aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln steaming toward the Persian Gulf, as of this writing. These and their strike groups are sharking their routes between their home base and the Persian Gulf.

The hot line between Washington and Tel Aviv is sizzling with blood-and-guts coordination plans. The word is out that the twin cities of Washington and Tel Aviv are gunning for Iran. Not to be left out of this imperialist-Islamic buildup of tension and threats the Qatari collaborator Sheikh Hamad Aal Thani (the Qatari Foreign Minister) and the Saudi sycophant Sa‘ud al-Faisal (the Saudi Foreign Minister) were in Washington last month listening to President Barack Obama and probably signing on to any future outbreak of hostilities. Their conversations remain a tightly guarded secret. Thanks to you, Islamic Iran, for showing the rest of the world who these toady officials in Arabia are and to whom they owe their allegiance.

Then we had, during this past month, the British Prime Minister David Cameron flying into Arabia to sell handsome amounts of weapons to the scared-to-death Saudi rulers. He held talks with King ‘Abdullah and his Crown Prince Nayef. This war scenario which comes to us from Washington and Tel Aviv is exactly what the military-industrial-banking complex needs. Thank you, Islamic Iran, for blowing the Islamic camouflage off the Anglo-American sheikhs in Arabia — and beyond.

You, the sons and daughters of the Revolution, with your dedication and tireless efforts have built your own state. You are showing the rest of us the way. It is your devotion to Islam as it was meant to be that is causing cracks in the Yahudi-Yankee edifice. Not all is rosy and peachy between the Israeli Knesset and the US Congress. The US budget has been bleeding for the better part of the past 33 years of the Islamic Revolution. The US Congress realizes that the America now owes more than it makes in a given year. And the hatchet men are out to chop off financial appropriations that are non-essential: there are plans for sequestration. This means that dollar-addicted Israel will have to be put on notice that it cannot expect to receive the generous amounts of cash infusions that it is addicted to. And this is resulting in a flare-up of behind-the-scenes tension between an America that no longer can supply and an Israel that needs more and more.

Little does the public eye notice that Israel is leading the charge, and the US is being pricked into combat position, a situation it is not ready for after its battles in Afghanistan and Iraq. The relationship between Yahudi-firsters in Washington and the Bible supremacists in Tel Aviv must be on thin ice when we hear that both sides called off “Austere Challenge 12” which was supposed to have been the largest war exercise ever between the US and Israel. Thank you, the persevering sons and daughters of the Islamic Revolution, for having shown us (those of us whose eyes are open) how flimsy and vulnerable the relationship is between the chicken hawks in Washington and their roosters in Tel Aviv.


People without prejudice — Muslims and non-Muslims — have watched your revolution grow from infancy into manhood. These people saw how the imperialists and Zionists targeted, via their agents, the scholars of Islam Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahhari, Ayatullah Seyyed Muhammad Hussein Beheshti, Ayatullah Ashraf Isfahani, Ayatullah Dastagheib, and many other great scholars of Islam were assassinated by “Persian” fifth-columnists. Yet the Revolution survived. Next, Iran’s soldiers became the target of the same enemies. And after eight long and bloody years and after hundreds of thousands of martyrs the Islamic Revolution survived. Now, the same enemies are targeting the scientists. You, the sons and daughters in your principled defense of the Islamic Revolution, exposed the cowards and showed us how they fight. When they lose at the battlefield they turn to assassinations and random killings.

The historical Islamic Revolution demonstrated to us the lengths to which the Zionists and imperialists will go to “frame” and “entrap” Muslims to justify a worldwide war that they say may continue for over a hundred years (a Freudian slip of the tongue that the Islamic Revolution may be around for a hundred years or more). You, the class of shuhada’, enlightened us as to the depth of hate and the visceral hatred that lurks in the bosoms of Euro-American-Israeli officials who cannot tolerate an independent Islamic state acquiring peaceful nuclear technology, when they themselves say that it is the right of all states.

You, the leaders of the Islamic State under the guidance of Imams Khomeini and Khamane’i, have stimulated our thoughts as to the real nature of our enemies and the enemies of oppressed people in the world. You educated us in these 33 years about enemies who hide behind a gloss of civilization but in their hearts they are anything but civilized. These enemies, as we all celebrate these bittersweet 33 years of revolution, may very well be planning a mass casualty attack of some sort against innocent people that will be blamed on Muslims.

They may even be thinking about some type of cyber-attack that may paralyze some society’s infrastructure in a way that is equivalent to a natural catastrophe or national emergency. They may be planning some type of disruption in the energy sector of the producers and consumers of petroleum. Their own man-made economies are teetering on the brink in Europe and in America. They are very adept at triggering a trans-Atlantic crisis that the world itself will suffer from.

You the leaders, the martyrs, the scholars, the soldiers, the scientists, and the devotees of Islam, have changed the geopolitical landscape of the world; whether you know it or not. You snatched the masks off the faces of political hypocrites and removed the gloves off the hands of financial thieves exposing their finger prints on crimes. And at the end of this line we and all the world can see how civilized these shayateen are: they urinate on dead Muslim bodies, they desecrate the Qur’an, they ridicule the Prophet (pbuh), they sexually assault the innocent, they commit every crime in the Book and none of our rulers from the filthy rich of Arabia to the dirt poor of Africa are able to speak truth to power the way you have done in Islamic Iran.

In all these years, an unspoken question lies deep down inside every astute Muslim, and that question is: will the imperialist US or Zionist Israel attack Islamic Iran? You have been answering that question for 33 years. And your answer in Allah’s (swt) words is:


They [the committed Muslims] were told: ‘But everyone is against you, be heedful of the danger’. And this [scenario] boosted their faith and commitment; and they [the committed Muslims] answered back: Suffice it that Allah is on our side, and He is the best confidant (3:173).


Pull quotes:
Today, the Islamic Revolution in Iran is standing tall… You, the sons and daughters of the Revolution, with your dedication and tireless efforts have built your own state. You are showing the rest of us the way. It is your devotion to Islam as it was meant to be that is causing cracks in the Yahudi-Yankee edifice… Not all is rosy and peachy between the Israeli Knesset and the US Congress.

Iran: The Price of Resistance

By Chandra Muzaffar

28 January, 2012


European Union foreign ministers have agreed to a full-fledged embargo on all imports of Iranian crude oil. Towards this end, various measures will be adopted gradually from 23 rd January to 1 st July 2012 . In December 2011, the US Congress (with a 100 to 0 vote in the Senate) presented a mandatory sanctions package to President Obama which starting June 2012 will prohibit any third-country banks and companies from dealing with Iran's Central Bank. Both the EU and US moves, it is alleged, are aimed at pressurising Iran to stop its so-called ‘nuclear weapons' programme through the emasculation of its oil exports which account for more than 80% of its national revenue.

Nuclear Weapons Programme

The first question we should ask is: Does Iran have a nuclear weapons programme? The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) --- its mischievous attempt to raise doubts about Iran 's nuclear energy programme notwithstanding--- admits in its November 2011 Report that there is no evidence of a nuclear weapons programme. Incidentally, every nuclear installation in Iran has been inspected hundreds of times by the IAEA making them the most thoroughly inspected nuclear facilities on earth! Even the US 's own classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) 2011--- which the well-known investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, had exposed in May 2011--- states quite clearly that Iran is not producing nuclear weapons and had in fact halted such a programme way back in 2003. NIE 2011 in a sense reiterates what is contained in NIE 2007.

Of course, Iran continues to enrich uranium up to the 20% level required for the production of medical isotopes. This is far below the 85% plus necessary to manufacture a nuclear bomb. Every major leader in Iran has emphasised over and over again that they have no intention of making a bomb. They regard it --- rightly--- as haram (or prohibited in Islam).

Because its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes--- medical research and electricity---- the Iranian government agreed to a nuclear fuel swap deal initiated by Brazil and Turkey in May 2010 which would have seen Iran shipping low-enriched uranium to Turkey in return for fuel for a research reactor. The Western powers and Israel rejected the deal.

Their rejection underscores the stark hypocrisy that surrounds the entire issue of Iran 's nuclear programme. If it is nuclear weapons that they are concerned about why didn't they accept a deal that would have, to a large extent, curbed any clandestine move by Iran to produce such weapons? Or, are certain Western powers and Israel against Iran producing nuclear energy even for peaceful purposes --- a right that Iran possesses as a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)?

It is important to raise these questions for two other reasons. One, the countries that are most vocal in demanding that Iran terminate its uranium enrichment programme are all nuclear weapon states. The US has an arsenal of more than 5000 nuclear warheads while Israel, an undeclared nuclear state---- the only nuclear weapon state in West Asia and North Africa (WANA)--- has perhaps between 200 and 400 warheads. Two, countries such as the US, Britain, France and even Israel had no qualms about assisting Iran to launch its nuclear programme in the fifties when it was under the Shah, Reza Pahlavi. US President, Dwight Eisenhower, saw it as an “atoms for peace” enterprise. One does not have to second guess why they were all so enthusiastic about the Shah's nuclear energy programme---- because the dictator was their gendarme in that corner of WANA, protecting their strategic, political and oil interests with all his brutal might.

Why did the West and Israel change their attitude towards Iran 's nuclear programme? Was it because an Islamic Revolution had occurred in Iran in 1979? Was Islam the decisive factor? Islam per se was not the major reason for the change in attitude. After all, the West counts as its allies a number of countries that view themselves as ‘Islamic States' and subscribe to a somewhat narrow, exclusive idea of Islam and Muslim identity. Saudi Arabia , Qatar and most of the Gulf Sheikhdoms would be outstanding examples. Colluding and collaborating with these states and other Islamic movements has never been a problem for the centres of power in the West.

Independence

The real reason why the Islamic Republic of Iran and its nuclear programme became anathema for the West and Israel was because of Iran 's defence of its independence and integrity in the face of US and Western hegemony. The Islamic Republic under the guidance of its charismatic leader Ayatollah Khomeini was not prepared to submit to US dominance or acquiesce with Israeli arrogance. From the outset --- from 1979 itself--- Iran was determined to manage its own destiny which is why it nationalised oil and strengthened its self-reliance.

In an earlier period--- in 1953 to be exact--- another Iranian leader, this time a highly principled secular democrat, Mohammad Mosaddegh, had also sought to assert Iranian independence and sovereignty by nationalising oil. This incurred the wrath of the British and American elites whose companies dominated the local oil industry. With the help of their intelligence services, they managed to oust Mosaddegh from his Prime Ministership and restore full authority to the Shah.

Others in WANA, at different times and in different circumstances, have also paid the price for resisting dominance.Gamal Nasser in Egypt, HouriBoumediene in Algeria, Hafiz Assad in Syria, Yasser Arafat in Palestine (and other Palestinian freedom fighters), Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, had all at some point or other in their lives refused to yield to hegemonic power. Today, there are leaders like Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon , Khalil Meshal in Palestine , and Bashar Assad in Syria who continue to resist Israeli power and US hegemony and are therefore targeted by Tel Aviv and Washington.

It is appropriate to observe at this juncture that resistance to US hegemony has had a longer and perhaps more tragic history in parts of Latin America . From Simon Bolivar and Jose Marti to Salvador Allende, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez,Evo Morales, and Rafael Correa these and other illustrious leaders have unflinchingly opposed attempts by the US elite to subjugate the people of Latin America and subordinate the continent to the whims and fancies of its northern neighbour. Indeed, today there is a new determination in Latin America to strengthen the independence of individual states and of the region as a whole through cooperation and collective action that is both innovative and dynamic.

There is no doubt at all that it is Iran 's refusal to be subservient to the US , Israel and their allies, its readiness to resist, that has incensed the powers-that-be. It explains why they are going all out to emasculate the Iranian economy, manufacture mass disaffection with the government and, at the right moment, engineer a regime change. The excuse they are using for this manipulation is of course Iran 's unproven nuclear weapons programme. In the scenario that is unfolding before our eyes, there are shades of the build-up that led to the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein 2003.

Targeting Iran

While Iran's desire to remain independent has been a prominent feature of the nation's personality since the Revolution 33 years ago, there must be situations and circumstances that are more current and contemporarywhich have given rise tothisobsession in Tel Aviv and in certain Western capitals with the targeting and taming of Iran.What are these situations and circumstances? There are many. We shall highlight some of them.

1. In the wake of the Arab uprising, the Israeli elite has become extremely apprehensive about the state's security and its future. It is afraid that popular movements sweeping through WANA would eventually challenge the legitimacy of the Israeli regime. Though Israel's protector, the US, has sought assurances from some of the Islamic parties that have come to power that they will not question the Israeli presence, the Israeli elite regards the increasing influence of states and movements in WANA that are firmly opposed to Israeli suppression of Palestinian rights--- the most powerful of which is of course Iran--- as a huge threat to Israel's very existence. This is why it wants its protector, buttressed by its European allies, to castrate Iran immediately.

2. This fear has increased dramatically in recent months with the economic decline of its protector and the economic crisis embroiling various European states. Israel knows that the US 's decline is part of a general decline which in a sense is irreversible and would therefore want its protector to act decisively against Israel 's foes like Iran now when the US still has the military muscle rather than wait until it is too late. For the US elite itself, the most serious implication of its decline is its loss of control over WANA, the world's major oil exporting region which is, at the same time, of tremendous geostrategic significance. When hegemonic powers are losing their dominance, do they not become more bellicose in attempting to perpetuate their power and privilege? Should we be surprised when they turn against other actors on the ascendancy who are perceived as the cause of their decline?

3. For both the US and Israeli elites and European leaders allied to them, it is Iran which is the lynchpin of the challenge to their hegemony over WANA. Iran maintains a tried and tested link to the Syrian leadership and to the Hezbollah in Lebanon . Hamas is also to a certain degree part of this link which in broad terms constitutes the resistance to US-Israel hegemony. As the fulcrum of this resistance, Iran has displayed remarkable tenacity--- a tenacity which is now expressing itself in its ability to take on US drones and US spies and to openly challenge US military power. Similarly, the Syrian crisis, orchestrated to a large extent by external forces, has revealed the resilience of the Bashar Assad government. Likewise, in defending Lebanon against the Israeli assault in 2006, the Hezbollah showed that it possesses both strategic depth and immense courage which in the end thwarted the Israeli agenda. Both Israel and the US are determined to not only break the link of resistance but also to crush each of the component elements of the link.

4. What has strengthened their determination to act against Iran in particular is the situation in Iraq . The Israeli and US elites had hoped that the conquest of Iraq would help to create a new environment in WANA which would reinforce their grip over oil and strengthen their geostrategic position in the region through a subservient leadership in Baghdad eager to do their bidding. Given Iraq 's importance, the Baghdad leadership, they reckoned, would succeed in shaping an atmosphere in the region conducive to Israel even if it were at the cost of Palestinian self-determination. However, things have not worked according to plan. WhileUS and British companies have managed to secure lucrative oil deals, Israeli and US elites have failed to gain political control over Iraq . A nation that is politically unstable, socially chaotic and deeply divided along sectarian lines, there is endless jockeying for power among contending groups. In the midst of this maelstrom, most of the groups within the majority Shia community seem to have gravitated towards Shia Iran . Shia affinity has undoubtedly smoothened the forging of political ties across the Iraq-Iran border. Recent political developments in Iraq indicate that the influence that emanates from these ties is considerable. It is this that annoys and angers the Israeli, US and British elites. Their political defeat in Iraq which is a major setback for them in WANA and beyond is one of the primary reasons why they are now training their guns on Iran .

5. Iran 's influence over Iraq has also riled some regional actors. The monarchical elite in Saudi Arabia , with its Wahabi orientation, often manifests an almost visceral hatred towards the Shia sect. Some Saudi leaders regard it as their duty to defend the Sunni majority against the rising Shia tide. They are not alone in perceiving growing Shia influence and power --- in Iraq , in Syria through the Alawite elite, in Lebanon via Hezbollah, and in Bahrain--- as a mortal threat to the Sunnis. The Qatari leadership and even some Turkish politicians and intellectuals have begun to ring the alarm bells. The latter, it is said, are backing some hard-line Sunnis in Iraq . These anti-Shia sentiments which are spreading quite rapidly in WANA have heightened the antagonism towards Iran . They have strengthened the hand of the US and Israel and their European allies as they prepare to move against the Iranian Republic .

6. For the US curbing Iran 's influence goes beyond WANA. Iran has become close to Russia in the last couple of years. The relationship is strategic and economic especially since they have overlapping interests in Central Asia and the Caspian region. Russia itself is re-asserting its power in Eastern Europe , Central Asia , West Asia and South Asia , much to the chagrin of the US . That is why it is uneasy about a Russian-Iranian nexus developing in the future.

7. Of even greater significance to the US 's hegemonic agenda is the relationship between Iran and China . Largely economic in nature, China imports 9% of its oil and 15% of its gas from Iran . China has massive investments in the oil and gas industry in Iran , and is helping to upgrade its infrastructure in general. Since access to energy is critical for China 's development, the US which is determined to contain China , is keen on exercising control over China 's sources of energy supply. What this means is that curtailing Iran 's oil and gas exports may in fact be part of a larger agenda whose principal goal is the containment of China , the nation that the US and the West view as the most formidable challenge ever to their centuries old dominance.

8. Iran 's expanding ties with various Latin American countries also irks the US . Countries such as Cuba , Venezuela , Nicaragua , Ecuador , Bolivia and Brazil , among others have become good friends of Iran in recent years. Most of these states are opposed to US dominance over Latin America . A couple of them have become very critical of Israeli occupation of Palestine . Since Venezuela and Ecuador are also major oil exporters, the US is worried that the ties that Iran , also an important oil exporter, is forging with them could enhance their collective clout in the global economy to the detriment of the US . This is yet another reason why the US sees Iran as a challenge to its hegemonic power.

9. It is not just because of Iran 's ties with oil exporting states in Latin America or its export of oil to China that oil is also a factor that explains the targeting of Iran . As one of the top five oil exporters in the world, Iran is an attractive destination for a lot of oil companies especially from the US --- a country which has been excluded from Iran 's petroleum sector for more than three decades. According to petroleum experts there are oil and gas fields that have yet to be explored fully. There is also money to be made from infrastructure investments. US and other Western oil firms are hungering to go in--- just as they moved into Iraq after the invasion in 2003.

10. A final factor that is responsible for this fixation with Iran is perhaps the position of the US dollar. The dollar, needless to say, is one of the most crucial pillars of US global hegemony. This is the reason why any attempt to redefine its role as the world's principal reserve currency elicits an immediate response from US financial and political circles. In the last few years Iran has been steadily distancing itself from the US dollar in its trade transactions. At the end of December 2011, it signed an agreement with China that states that the Iranian rial and the Chinese yuan would be used in bilateral trade. In early January 2012, Iran made a similar arrangement with Russia , the rial and the rouble replacing the US dollar. Iran and India are holding discussions on moving out of dollar settlements. Trading in gold is an option they are considering. These moves by Iran have assumed great significance because others, including US allies, are abandoning the dollar in some of their bilateral trade arrangements. Japan and China , for instance, have announced that they will trade in yen and yuan.Because Iran is perceived as one of those nations pushing hard for the abandonment of the dollar, the US has her in its sights. It has been suggested that one of the reasons why the US decided to invade Iraq in 2003 was because Saddam Hussein had switched from the dollar to the euro for the sale of his country's oil.

Suffering; Mistakes

The ten points elaborated here prove that the US and its allies have zero tolerance for any challenge, however minor, to US hegemonic power or to the position of Israel . Those who resist their power and position will pay the price. In the last 30 odd years, Iran has paid the price of resistance in hundreds of ways. Less than a year after the Islamic Revolution, a war was imposed upon Iran --- a war led by the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, on behalf of all the Gulf Sheikhdoms, a number of other Arab states, the US, Britain, certain other Western governments, and even the Soviet Union. Though Iran 's adversaries had different motives, their common objective was to crush the Revolution which they saw as a challenge to their interests. A million lives were lost on both sides of the divide in the eight year war which emasculated the Iranian economy and sapped the nation's energy. In June 1981, a vicious bombexplosion wiped out some top political leaders, a huge number of parliamentarians, and leading figures in the Judiciary. This, and other subsequent terrorist attacks, it is alleged,were master-minded by a militant group operating from Iraq called the Mujahideen-e-Khalq. In recent years the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme has been subjected to a cyber- attack and four of its scientists have been assassinated. And for decades, Iran has been under US economic sanctions which have had a negative impact upon its development programme.

Indeed, very few countries have been subjected to the pain and suffering that Iran has gone through in the last 33 years. The perseverance and fortitude of the Iranian people, as we have alluded to, is awe-inspiring. And yet, an objective analysis of Iran 's response to hegemony would suggest that Iranian leaders and activists have also made serious mistakes. From the perspective of international law and diplomacy, it was clearly wrong of Iranian students to seize the US Embassy in Tehran on 4 November 1979 and hold its occupants hostage for 444 days. Storming the British Embassy in the nation's capital on 29 November 2011 was also a foolish act for which Iran 's Minister of Foreign Affairs has apologised. Likewise, allegations of foul-play in the June 2009Presidential Election could have been better handled. The Iranian authorities should have countered those allegations by demonstrating their commitment to total electoral transparency and accountability. The language that the current Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, sometimes employs on matters of grave international significance is intemperate and injudicious. However difficult the situation maybe, there is no need to deliberately provoke or irritate one's enemies. As a case in point, though Ahmadinejad's oft-quoted remarks about Israel were distorted and twisted by the Western media and politicians, the Iranian President could have adopted a more mature yet principled stance vis-à-vis the Jewish state.

Hegemonic Agenda

Ahmadinejad's predecessor, Muhammad Khatami, proved that it was possible to defend Iran 's independence and dignity without being unduly confrontational. He sought to meet the challenge of hegemony by insisting upon dialogue among civilisations and the politics of inclusiveness. Khatami was prepared to talk to the US leadership. But instead of welcoming the offer of dialogue, US President, George Bush Junior, chose to castigate Iran as part of an “axis of evil.”

The demonization of Iran proves yet again that regardless of whether the target adopts a confrontational or conciliatory approach, the hegemon will continue to pursue its agenda. It is an agenda that has a power and potency of its own. In the context of WANA, Israel , it is so apparent, is the driving force behind US hegemonic power.

Making people everywhere aware of this and what its consequences are is one of the most urgent tasks at hand. This task is perhaps a little less difficult today compared to the past for two reasons. One, as we have stated a number of times before, US helmed hegemonic power is declining. People are becoming much more critical of US's global role now. Two, the citizens of WANA in particular are acutely conscious of what hegemonic intervention can lead to after witnessing the chaos and catastrophe that have befallen Iraq and Afghanistan . They are also beginning to sense--- after the initial euphoria---- that Libya may also be heading towards calamity. Foreign intervention they know is not the solution. It is the problem.

Immediate Measures

While mass consciousness building about the danger of hegemony as the ultimate repudiation of human dignity will take time, we could propose some immediate measures thatshould be taken to avert military strikes against Iran and to prevent a war in WANA. The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) grouping could through the UN Security Council suggest a new nuclear deal which would allow Iran limited uranium enrichment under strict supervision within a larger treaty signed by all the states in WANA and other leading powers that pledges to create a nuclear weapon free zone in the region within a certain time-frame. The manufacture, storage, saleand distribution of other weapons of mass destruction should also be prohibited. As the formulation of such a treaty begins in earnest, all sanctions against Iran should also be lifted. There are other challenges notably the Israeli occupation of Arab lands, the establishment of an independent, sovereign Palestinian state and the status of Israel , which should also be resolved at the same time.

Is there still time to persuade the powers-that-be to consider proposals like this? Or is it already too late in the day? Is the hegemon--- or is Israel--- about to strike?

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST) and Professor of lobal Studies at UniversitiSains Malaysia .

Malaysia .

27 January 2012

Is music prohibited in Islam?

The sections of this article are:

1- Is music prohibited in Islam?
2- The definition of the Psalm or Psalms.
3- Does this mean that we (Muslims) must play music while we pray?
4- Did Allah Almighty or Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him prohibit music?
5- Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him allowed music.
6- Conclusion.
7- My notes on music and music videos that use foul language and sinful acts.

Some Muslims believe that Music is prohibited/sinful in Islam. According to Islam: Music that leads to sinful acts such as drugs, sex, violence, etc... is absolutely sinful in Islam. But otherwise, how would it be sinful when Allah Almighty Himself allowed it to Prophet David peace be upon him?

Narrated Abu Musa: "That the Prophet said to him 'O Abu Musa! You have been given one of the musical wind-instruments of the family of David.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Virtues of the Qur'an, Volume 6, Book 61, Number 568)"

Let us look at Noble Verse 4:163 "We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms."

Let us look at Noble Verse 17:55 "And it is your Lord that knoweth best all beings that are in the heavens and on earth: We did bestow on some prophets more (and other) gifts than on others: and We gave to David (the gift of) the Psalms."

In the above Saying (Hadith) and Noble Verses, we clearly see that Allah Almighty did send the Book of Psalm to Prophet David peace be upon him. We also see that Allah Almighty called that Book a gift. If Allah Almighty allowed David peace be upon him and his followers to sing and play music, then how could we then claim that music is sinful and prohibited?

The definition of the Psalm or Psalms:

First let us define what the word "Psalm" or "Psalms" mean:

A collection of sacred poems forming a book of canonical Jewish and Christian Scripture.

Often capitalized [Middle English, from Old English psalm, from Late Latin psalmus, from Greek psalmos, literally, twanging of a harp, from psallein to pluck, play a stringed instrument]
First appeared before 12th Century

A sacred song or poem used in worship; especially : one of the biblical hymns collected in the Book of Psalms

From the America Online Dictionary.

Does this mean that we (Muslims) must play music while we pray?

I was asked this question before. My answer is: No, that is not what I am suggesting! In Islam, Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was inspired the instructions that taught us how to pray. Muslims do not sing nor play music while they pray, and it is prohibited to play music or sing while praying to Allah Almighty in Islam. But the point I am trying to make is, if Allah Almighty allowed music and songs to be played to people before us, then what gives us the right to prohibit music now?

Did Allah Almighty or Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him prohibit music?

There is not a single Noble Verse in the Noble Quran that prohibits music. In fact, music and songs are allowed in the Noble Quran as we saw above. Some Muslims however claim that Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him did prohibit music. Well, the section below actually proves the otherwise from the Sayings of Prophet Muhammad himself.

Muslims must also remember that when Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him reached the Holy City of Madina from the Holy City of Mecca with his best friend Abu Bakr; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him, the Muslims played music and sang the famous Islamic song "Talaa El-Badru Alayna" which means "The full moon had come upon us."

The music that Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him prohibited was the one that the infidels used to play which involved sexual activities by the women. It was part of the pagan Arabs' custom, and Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him wanted to prevent Muslims to be anywhere near that type of music, because it was a sinful music; a music that led to sinful activities.

Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him allowed music:

From Bukhari Volume 2, Book 15, Number 70:

Narrated Aisha:
Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) came to my house while two girls were singing beside me the songs of Buath (a story about the war between the two tribes of the Ansar, the Khazraj and the Aus, before Islam). The Prophet (p.b.u.h) lay down and turned his face to the other side. Then Abu Bakr came and spoke to me harshly saying, "Musical instruments of Satan near the Prophet (p.b.u.h) ? " Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) turned his face towards him and said, "Leave them." When Abu Bakr became inattentive, I signaled to those girls to go out and they left. It was the day of 'Id, and the Black people were playing with shields and spears; so either I requested the Prophet (p.b.u.h) or he asked me whether I would like to see the display. I replied in the affirmative. Then the Prophet (p.b.u.h) made me stand behind him and my cheek was touching his cheek and he was saying, "Carry on! O Bani Arfida," till I got tired. The Prophet (p.b.u.h) asked me, "Are you satisfied (Is that sufficient for you)?" I replied in the affirmative and he told me to leave.

This same Hadith is reported to us again in Sahih Muslim:

Book 004, Number 1942:

'A'isha reported: The Messenger of Allah (way peace be upon him) came (in my apartment) while there were two girls with me singing the song of the Battle of Bu'ath. He lay down on the bed and turned away his face. Then came Abu Bakr and he scolded me and said: Oh! this musical instrument of the devil in the house of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)! The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) turned towards him and said: Leave them alone. And when he (the Holy Prophet) became inattentive, I hinted them and they went out, and it was the day of 'Id and negroes were playing with shields and spears. (I do not remember) whether I asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) or whether he said to me if I desired to see (that sport). I said: Yes. I stood behind him with his face parallel to my face, and he said: O Banu Arfada, be busy (in your sports) till I was satiated. He said (to me): Is that enough? I said: Yes. Upon this he asked me to go.

Once again in Bukhari, this event is recorded:

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 268:

Narrated Aisha:
That once Abu Bakr came to her on the day of 'Id-ul-Fitr or 'Id ul Adha while the Prophet was with her and there were two girl singers with her, singing songs of the Ansar about the day of Buath. Abu Bakr said twice. "Musical instrument of Satan!" But the Prophet said, "Leave them Abu Bakr, for every nation has an 'Id (i.e. festival) and this day is our 'Id."

And then in Bukhari, another Hadith relates a connection between musical instruments and the family of David (saw). Further evidence that, indeed, the Psalms were musical in nature:

Volume 6, Book 61, Number 568:

Narrated Abu Musa:
That the Prophet said to him' "O Abu Musa! You have been given one of the musical wind-instruments of the family of David .'

And on one final note, I thought the following Hadith can also be used in the matter. The Hadith relates of how the adhan came to be, and how the Prophet's companions suggested the use of musical instruments such as the horn or bell like the People of the Book. Now although the Prophet ultimately approved the use of the human voice, there is no mention that the Prophet chastised his companions for suggesting musical instruments for the adhan. And if the Prophet was so very much against musical instruments, then why would his companions dare to suggest the use of such sinful things in the call to prayer????

From Muslim Book 004, Number 0735:

Ibn Umar reported: When the Muslims came to Medina, they gathered and sought to know the time of prayer but no one summoned them. One day they discussed the matter, and some of them said: Use something like the bell of the Christians and some of them said: Use horn like that of the Jews. Umar said: Why may not a be appointed who should call (people) to prayer? The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: O Bilal, get up and summon (the people) to prayer.

DOES ISLAM PROHIBIT MUSIC?

For years I was confused on this point.

You see many Muslims who have not bothered to ACTUALLY READ THE QURAN and HADITHS classify most music as "haram"!

Look at the "Action Items" published on one Salafy site:

"Get rid of those Michael Jackson CD's (please see my [Osama Abdallah] notes regarding the likes of the Michael Jackson CDs after the conclusion section below)

"If you had a large music collection as a kafir, have a collection just as large, but instead fill your library with Islamic audio tapes and lectures.

"Think about how many hundreds or maybe even thousands of dollars you've spent on music cd's and tapes that you could now spend on a home Islamic library.

"Replace any kafir aerobic exercise video tapes with recorded drum sounds, such as African drums, etc. . . . http://muttaqun.com/music.html

What is the basis for the "music prohibition"?

UNSUPPORTED BY THE QURAN

The "music banners" have cited the following ayahs in support of a "music prohibition": 31:6, 17:64, 53:57-62.

NONE OF THESE AYAHS SAYS A WORD ABOUT MUSIC!

031.006
YUSUFALI: But there are, among men, those who purchase idle tales, without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty.

PICKTHAL: And of mankind is he who payeth for mere pastime of discourse, that he may mislead from Allah's way without knowledge, and maketh it the butt of mockery. For such there is a shameful doom.

SHAKIR: And of men is he who takes instead frivolous discourse to lead astray from Allah's path without knowledge, and to take it for a mockery; these shall have an abasing chastisement.

017.064
YUSUFALI: "Lead to destruction those whom thou canst among them, with thy (seductive) voice; make assaults on them with thy cavalry and thy infantry; mutually share with them wealth and children; and make promises to them." But Satan promises them nothing but deceit.

PICKTHAL: And excite any of them whom thou canst with thy voice, and urge thy horse and foot against them, and be a partner in their wealth and children, and promise them. Satan promiseth them only to deceive.

SHAKIR: And beguile whomsoever of them you can with your voice, and collect against them your forces riding and on foot, and share with them in wealth and children, and hold out promises to them; and the Shaitan makes not promises to them but to deceive:


053.057
YUSUFALI: The (Judgment) ever approaching draws nigh:
PICKTHAL: The threatened Hour is nigh.
SHAKIR: The near event draws nigh.

053.058
YUSUFALI: No (soul) but Allah can lay it bare.
PICKTHAL: None beside Allah can disclose it.
SHAKIR: There shall be none besides Allah to remove it.

053.059
YUSUFALI: Do ye then wonder at this recital?
PICKTHAL: M arvel ye then at this statement,
SHAKIR: Do you then wonder at this announcement?

053.060
YUSUFALI: And will ye laugh and not weep,-
PICKTHAL: And laugh and not weep,
SHAKIR: And will you laugh and not weep?

053.061
YUSUFALI: Wasting your time in vanities?
PICKTHAL: While ye amuse yourselves?
SHAKIR: While you are indulging in varieties.

053.62
YUSUFALI: But fall ye down in prostration to Allah, and adore (Him)!
PICKTHAL: Rather prostrate yourselves before Allah and serve Him.
SHAKIR: So make obeisance to Allah and serve (Him).

Actually, the Quran APPROVES music! THATS RIGHT:

039.075
And thou wilt see the angels surrounding the Throne (Divine) on all sides, singing Glory and Praise to their Lord. The Decision between them (at Judgment) will be in (perfect) justice, and the cry (on all sides) will be, "Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds!"
If music is so wrong, why do Allah's angels "sing" to the Almighty!

THE AHADITH ARE IN CONFLICT

Even the hadith collections are in conflict on this point:

Compare:

Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 69, Number 494v:

Narrated Abu 'Amir or Abu Malik Al-Ash'ari:
that he heard the Prophet saying, "From among my followers there will be some people who will consider illegal sexual intercourse, the wearing of silk, the drinking of alcoholic drinks and the use of musical instruments, as lawful. And there will be some people who will stay near the side of a mountain and in the evening their shepherd will come to them with their sheep and ask them for something, but they will say to him, 'Return to us tomorrow.' Allah will destroy them during the night and will let the mountain fall on them, and He will transform the rest of them into monkeys and pigs and they will remain so till the Day of Resurrection."

With:

Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 15, Number 72:

Narrated Aisha:
Abu Bakr came to my house while two small Ansari girls were singing beside me the stories of the Ansar concerning the Day of Buath. And they were not singers. Abu Bakr said protestingly, "Musical instruments of Satan in the house of Allah's Apostle !" It happened on the 'Id day and Allah's Apostle said, "O Abu Bakr! There is an 'Id for every nation and this is our 'Id."

Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 268:

Narrated Aisha:
That once Abu Bakr came to her on the day of 'Id-ul-Fitr or 'Id ul Adha while the Prophet was with her and there were two girl singers with her, singing songs of the Ansar about the day of Buath. Abu Bakr said twice. "Musical instrument of Satan!" But the Prophet said, "Leave them Abu Bakr, for every nation has an 'Id (i.e. festival) and this day is our 'Id."

Muslim, Book 004, Number 1938:
'A'isha reported: Abu Bakr came to see me and I had two girls with me from among the girls of the Ansar and they were singing what the Ansar recited to one another at the Battle of Bu'ath. They were not, however, singing girls. Upon this Abu Bakr said: What I (the playing of) this wind instrument of Satan in the house of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and this too on 'Id day? Upon this the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Abu Bakr, every people have a festival and it is our festival (so let them play on).

Muslim, Book 004, Number 1940:

'A'isha reported that Abu Bakr came to her and there were with her two girls on Adha days who were singing and beating the tambourine and the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had wrapped himself with his mantle. Abu Bakr scolded them. The Messenger of Allah (may peace he upon him) uncovered (his face) and said: Abu Bakr, leave them alone for these are the days of 'Id. And 'A'isha said: I recapitulate to my mind the fact that once the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) screened me with his mantle and I saw the sports of the Abyssinians, and I was only a girl, and so you can well imagine how a girl of tender age is fond of watching the sport.

Now if music and musical instruments are so bad, why did the Prophet (pbuh) tell Abu Bakr "Let the show go on!"?

The "music prohibition" is yet another instance in which the Salafy have committed bidah by innovating prohibitions NOT FOUND IN THE QURAN!

Say, "Who prohibited the nice things God has created for His creatures, and the good provisions?" Say,"Such provisions are to be enjoyed in THIS life by those who BELIEVE. Moreover, the good provisions will be exclusively theirs on the Day of resurrection." We thus explain the revelations for people who know." QURAN, 7:32

Say "Do you see that which God has provided for you, you make some of it Unlawful (Haram) and some of it Lawful (Halal)?" Say "Did God allow you to do this? Or do you tell lies about God?"
QURAN, 10:59

The "music prohibition" is a fiction, that finds scant support even in the various ahadith collections.

If the Salafys want to abstain from music, they are free to do so. But don't tell the rest of Islam that the "music prohibition" is THE WORD OF ALLAH! It Isn't!

Conclusion:

Music is not prohibited in Islam. Allah Almighty in the Noble Quran allowed music and inspired it upon David peace be upon him. Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him didn't prohibit music unless it was used for sinful activities. Otherwise, music is allowed. It's been proven by science that music relaxes the mind and helps the person to gain energy and refresh himself. Most production plants in the industrial countries allow their workers to play music while working to helping them gain more energy.

Allah Almighty created music so we can use it in a positive and Islamic way to help us ease some of the burden of life from us. Even animals enjoy good music. In the Middle East, some people have their horses dance beautiful dances on music in many of the rural areas while they're celebrating.

My notes on music and music videos that use foul language and sinful acts:

As I said above, music that leads to sinful acts such as drugs, sex, violence, etc... is absolutely sinful in Islam. But sometimes the song is still very nice in rhythm and yet still contains some bad things in it. Personally, I believe that if the words in the song are ignored and the person only enjoys the music and rhythm of the song and it doesn't cause him to do any of the evil things that I mentioned, then in my opinion (only) that song and music is lawful.

Personally I have about 100 American music CDs at home. Many of the songs that I love contain bad language in them. I personally don't pay attention to that language; especially that it's usually buried under the loud guitar sound. That music never causes me to do evil things. I only listen to them because I love the rhythm and the music.

Now as to music videos where Michael Jackson for instance holds his groin while singing, I believe that these types of videos should not be watched especially when children are around. But personally I watched them and still would. But I wouldn't put any video with this type of bad graphics while kids are around.

Please be advised that this is only my personal preference and opinion. I could be terribly sinning here. My advice to you, especially for those who live in the West and 90% of the younger people's music does contain bad things in it anyway, is to try your best to ignore these bad things, and just enjoy the song and the music of it without enjoying the evils contained in it. I hope this makes sense.

And may Allah Almighty forgive me if I am violating what is righteous.

Are majority Muslim countries truly independent?

Zafar Bangash, Reflections




Given that there are 56 “Muslim” nation-states, all members of the United Nations and the Organization of Islamic Conference, the question may raise some eyebrows. Each country also has defined borders, a government headed by a king, amir, president, prime minister or even a general. Further, there is a cabinet, a standing army, national airline (or two), a national flag, and even an anthem for each country. Do these not represent independence?


We must define the term “independence” accurately to fully grasp the Muslim world’s current situation. Possessing territory, having a government, army, etc, do not necessarily mean independence. The term independence must be viewed more broadly. Neo-Marxist writers — Hans Singer, Raúl Prebisch, Paul A. Baran, Paul Sweezy, Andre Gunder Frank, Theotonio Dos Santos et al — have written extensively about dependency theory demonstrating how difficult it is for a society to break out of this cycle. We need not go into the details of dependency theory but suffice it to say that the natural resources and cheap labour of dependent societies are exploited to enrich wealthy societies (in reality, these enrich the top 1% of society as the Occupy Wall Street Movement has so clearly shown!). The elite in rich societies actively perpetuate a cycle of dependency through economic, political, social, cultural, banking, and financial policies. Societies that attempt to break out of the dependency cycle are coerced back into the fold through sanctions and/or the use of military force. The price exacted for trying to break loose is exceedingly high.


Even societies that go through a revolution — Cuba, Vietnam, Nicaragua, etc — show how difficult it is to throw off the yoke of dependency. Most countries in Africa gained “independence” from colonialism in the 1960s but they are still dependent on the colonial masters for survival. Africa is gripped by mass starvation even though it is a resource-rich continent, due largely to the manufactured nation-state conflicts managed by Western powers (read that: starvation policies) coupled with their structural adjustment programs (read that, slavery to debt), which regard material resources in the ground to be more valuable than human resources on the ground. African countries have been trapped into a spider web-type relationship from which they cannot escape. Institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are used to reinforce dependency on the colonial powers. Colonel Muammar Qaddafi of Libya paid the price with his life for attempting to break the Western stranglehold on Africa by proposing to establish an African Monetary Fund as well as an African Central Bank. More resources and capital have been sucked out of Africa into the West after “independence” than during direct colonialism.


Let us, however, return to our discussion of majority Muslim countries. Are they free to formulate their own economic, political, military, cultural or social policies? Even societies that are not financially dependent on the West suffer from the dependency syndrome. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates offer good examples. These are artificial constructs that were created by Britain to serve its interests. While financially secure, they are still subservient to the West when formulating political, social, cultural, military or educational policies. Even in the economic field, these countries cannot formulate policies to benefit their own people. Saudi Arabia pumps excessive amounts of oil far beyond its needs because it must serve US and Western interests. This keeps the price of oil low depriving producers of much-needed income while transferring wealth to the West. For every dollar drop in the price of oil, producers lose $1 billion per day. On the political front, few majority Muslim countries can stand up to Zionist Israel. Instead they are aligned with US/Zionist aggressors against the Palestinian people.


Flags and national anthems aside, what is the solution to the problem facing Muslim societies? Any attempt to answer this question merely through economic analysis will not yield the correct answer. Muslim societies are unable to formulate their own policies to serve the interests of their people precisely because they are not independent. For true independence, they must first undergo an Islamic revolution to overthrow the colonial imposed order. Iran has shown how this is done. For more than 30 years, Western “experts” and “pundits” have been predicting the collapse of the Islamic system. What they fail to understand is that an Islamic revolution changes the very nature of society and renders it impervious to sanctions and boycotts. As the Noble Qur’an states so eloquently: “Allah does not alter the condition of a people until they change their attitude” (13:11).


It is through this consummate change — a clean break from the exploitative milieu created by fear of temporal power to an Islamic system that fosters confidence by reliance only on the Sustainer of the worlds — that Muslims will gain true independence. Until then, Muslims will only delude themselves into believing they are independent.


Zafar Bangash is Director of the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought