استوقفنا عنوانان في الصفحة الأولى لصحيفة «واشنطن بوست» الأميركية الصادرة في 8 كانون الأول/ ديسمبر 2020: العنوان الأول: «الإنجيليون يسيّرون ترامب ما يعني فشل الدين»، والعنوان الثاني: «شرعنة المخدرات». العنوانان يمثلان الذهنية القائمة في الولايات المتحدة عند النخب وخاصة عند من يسوّق لليبرالية. وهذا الموضوع بالذات تناوله رئيس الجمهورية العربية السورية الدكتور بشار الأسد في كلمته لمجمع العلماء والعالمات (التشديد على العالمات كان من الرئيس السوري) في افتتاحية الاجتماع الدوري لوزارة الأوقاف. لم يكن المقصود الردّ على ما أتت به الصحيفة لأنّ كلامه سبق ما صدر فيها بل لأنه ربط الموقف السياسي بالبعد الثقافي والمجتمعي لما يمثّله الدين بشكل عام والإسلام بشكل خاص والعروبة والعلاقة بينهما واللغة العربية والقضايا المرتبطة بكلّ ذلك في السجالات التي تدور في الفضاء الثقافي. فلماذا نعتبر كلمة الرئيس في غاية الأهمية في هذه الظروف ومن خلال المنصة التي اختارها؟
السبب الأول هو أنه لأول مرّة نشهد مقاربة من شخص يعتلي أعلى موقف في المسؤولية السياسية أيّ الحكم ويقدّم مقاربة حول ترابط العديد من القضايا الثقافية الفكرية بالسلوك الفردي والجماعي وبالسياسة وبشكل دقيق يتجاوز تعداد العناوين العريضة. فالمواضيع التي تناولها الرئيس بشار الأسد تشمل السياسة والثقافة والدين والمجتمع والفكر كما طرح الإشكاليات المتعدّدة وكيف تنعكس على السياسة. ولم يكتف الرئيس بالتوصيف والتشريح بل رسم الخطوط العريضة لمعالجة الإشكاليات التي تكلّم عنها وجميعها تستحق النقاش المعمّق. وبالتالي أن تأتي هذه المقاربة عن مسؤول يعني أنّ القيادة لمشروع عربي نهضوي موجودة في أعلى هرم المسؤولية وأنّ التجدّد الحضاري هو سينتج عن المقاربات التي يقوم بها المجتمع العربي والإسلامي لكافة قضايا العصر. هذه النقطة في رأينا في بالغ الأهمية خاصة وأنّ الأمة مستهدفة بكلّ ما يكوّنها من مجتمع ودولة وثقافة وحضارة وخاصة في ما يتعلّق بالدين واللغة والموروث الحضاري والفكري. فالحروب التي شُنّت على هذه الأمة منذ قرون عديدة ما زالت قائمة ولم تفلح حتى الآن في محو هذه القوّة الذاتية التي تقاوم الاحتلال والاغتراب.
السبب الثاني هو أنّ الكلمة أتت دون قراءة لنصّ ما وبتسلسل ما يدلّ على عمق الاستيعاب لمجمل القضايا الشائكة وبالتالي تسكنه. كما أنّ إشاراته المتعدّدة لوسائل التواصل الاجتماعي وما يدور من سجالات فيها يدلّ على أنه ليس منقطعاً عن واقع المجتمع. بعض القضايا التي عرضها كالهجوم على القرآن الكريم كالوصف بأنه منتوج سرياني هو هجوم موجود في تلك وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي وقد اطّلعنا عليها. وفي هذه الكلمة عبّر الرئيس عن قناعات عميقة يستطيع المرء من خلالها فهم كيفية التفكير وكيفية المقاربة وبالتالي المواقف التي يتخذها. فهي إحدى المفاتيح لقراءة تفكيره ومواقفه والضوابط والخطوط الحمر التي لن يتجاوزها. فالعروبة خط أحمر وليس شعاراً بل ممارسة لهوية جامعة.
السبب الثالث هو أنّ جوهر كلمة الرئيس السوري يجسّد أدبيات التيّار العروبي الواسع والموجود في مخرجات المؤتمر القومي العربي ومنشورات مركز دراسات الوحدة العربية. وهذا ليس مستغرباً أن يكون كذلك الأمر في سورية وقيادتها بل هو أمر طبيعي بينما العكس لن يكون ذلك، أيّ أن يكون على قمة الهرم السياسي في سورية إلاّ من يجسّد الروح العروبية. فهذه هي سورية قلب العروبة النابض والتي استهدفها العدوان الكوني عليها خشية من تلك العروبة. ويأتي كلام الرئيس ليحسم فكرياً وسياسياً جدلاً عبثياً في الفضاء الفكري والسياسي حول العلاقة بين العروبة والإسلام. فالعديد من المثقفين العرب حاولوا في مراحل مختلفة وضع العروبة في وجه الإسلام كما حاولوا تسويق الهويات الفرعية على حساب الهوية الجامعة. فجاء كلام الرئيس السوري ليدحض كلّ ذلك ويعتبر ألّا تناقض بين هوية العائلة والقبيلة والمدينة والمنطقة والإقليم مع الهوية العربية الجامعة لكلّ تلك المكوّنات. وهذا هو متن الخطاب العروبي للمؤتمر القومي العربي ومن يؤمن بالمشروع النهضوي العربي. فهذه العروبة الجامعة تحلّ المشكلة المصطنعة للأقلّيات التي أدخلتها الحقبة الاستعمارية منذ القرن التاسع عشر.
هذه الملاحظات تستدعي التوقف عند النقاط العديدة التي أثارها الرئيس في حديثه إلى مجمع العلماء والعالمات كما شدّد في بداية كلمته. والنقاط العديدة أثيرت في سياق خط بياني واضح. فالحرب التي تخوضها سورية حرب متعدّدة الأوجه منها ما يمسّ بتماسك المجتمع ويضعف صموده. والتماسك المجتمعي مهدّد إذ الهجوم يستهدف مقوّمات ذلك التماسك وهي الهوية من جهة والدين من جهة أخرى والعلاقة بينهما. ومقاربة الرئيس السوري كانت لها عدّة أبعاد بدءاً بالفكر وثم بالسياسة وتداعياتها على قدرة المواجهة وعلى المستقبل. واستند في المقاربة إلى مخزون فكري وفقهي في آن واحد إضافة إلى ربط ذلك بالخيار والموقف السياسي.
لن نستطيع في هذه المقاربة تناول كلّ الأفكار التي أتى بها الرئيس السوري في كلمته لضيق المساحة أولاً ولأنّ العديد منها يستحق مقاربات منفصلة كحديثه عمّا سمّاه بالليبرالية الحديثة مثلاً أو حول أصول اللغة العربية أو حتى دور الإسلام في بلاد الشام. لذلك سنتناول بعضها لما نعتبره من أساسي في فهمنا لكلمته.
في البداية، الخط البياني للكلمة هو تشخيصه لطبيعة المواجهة التي فُرضت على سورية عبر العدوان الكوني عليها. لم يكرّر أسباب العدوان ومن اشترك وما زال في ذلك العدوان لكنه أراد أن يركّز في تشخيصه للمشهد على استهداف المجتمع في سورية. وأحد محاور الاستهداف هو عبر الهجوم على مكوّنات الوعي أيّ الدين واللغة في بعديهما التاريخي والمستقبلي وفي دورهما في تماسك المجتمع. ومن هنا تأتي أهمية المنصة التي اختارها لدحض الكثير من الاتهامات التي وجّهت لبنية الدولة والمجتمع ليس فقط من قبل الخصوم والمتشدّدين الذين استعملوا الدين كوسيلة لأهداف سياسية لا علاقة بالدين بل للذين اعتبروا أنّ الحداثة هي عبر نقض الدين في المجتمع والدولة. والرسالة التي أراد إرسالها هي التكامل بين الدين والدولة عندما تكلّم عن «العلمانية» وبعض المفاهيم المغلوطة التي يتمّ ترويجها وعن إمكانية إخراج الدين من الدولة. فهذا لن يحصل إلاّ إذا تمّ إخراج الدين من المجتمع. وبما أنّ مقاربته للأمور تفيد بأنّ الدين ضرورة لتماسك المجتمع فإنّ ذلك يعني أنه لا يجوز وضع الدين في قفص الاتهام كعائق لتنمية المجتمع لأنه قاعدة أساسية لتماسكه وبقائه. وتشديده على الدور الذي يقوم به مجمع العلماء والعالمات هو لتثبيت تلك العلاقة ودحض أيّ فكرة أنّ الدولة القائمة في سورية هي ضدّ الدين كما يروّج له خصومها أو كما يعتقد البعض من «المتحرّرين» أو «العلمانيين». من جهة أخرى نفى مزاعم جماعات التعصّب والغلو والتوحّش بأنها تمثّل الإسلام. فهذه الجماعات ترتكب الكبائر المحرّمة في الدين وذلك عبر قتلهم للأبرياء والتمسّك بالطقوس على حساب المقاصد. وتشديده على المقاصد كان لافتاً لأنّ ذلك يعكس فهمه للإسلام وتمسّكه به والمختلف عن التفسيرات الضيّقة والحرفية والخارجة عن السياق.
صحيفة «واشنطن بوست» في عنوانها عن «فشل الدين» تنتمي إلى تيّار ليبرالي انتقده الرئيس السوري. استفاض الرئيس في كلمته عمّا سمّاه بـ «الليبرالية الحديثة» التي تهدف إلى سلخ الإنسان عن هويته ليس فقط بالمعنى السياسي أو الثقافي بل أيضاً من هويته الجنسية أو الجندرية كما سمّاها (الجندرية تعريب لكلمة «جندر» الإنكليزية التي تشير إلى جنس المرء من ذكر أو أنثى). وهذا يتنافى مع موروثنا الثقافي والديني. فكيف يمكن للمرء أن «يختار» هويته الجندرية بينما الطبيعة هي التي تقوم بذلك؟
وأوضح أنّ الليبرالية الحديثة تنقض مفهوم مرجعية الجماعة وتريد نقلها إلى مرجعية الفرد ما يسهل نزع الهوية وما تمثّلها. فمرجعية الفرد مدمّرة للمجتمع عبر تدمير الوحدة الأساسية له وهي العائلة ومن ثم القبيلة وأو العشيرة ومن ثم الوطن. كما تدعو تلك الليبرالية إلى تعميم ما هو مناف للأخلاق والصحة العامة كالدعوة لتعميم المخدّرات كما ذكر الرئيس وكما جاء في عنوان آخر في الصحيفة الأميركية، وهي إحدى الأبواق البارزة لليبرالية وتدّعي ذلك بدون خجل. فالدين غير مقبول عند هؤلاء الليبراليين الحديثيين على حدّ قوله خاصة لدوره في المجتمع. في هذا السياق يفتح الرئيس، سواء قصد ذلك أو لم يقصد، باب التفكير بالموروث الثقافي المستورد من الغرب. الرئيس الروسي بوتين انتقد الديمقراطية المستوردة والرئيس السوري انتقد الثقافة المستوردة. ونحن ندعو إلى بناء منظومة معرفية عربية منبثقة عن موروثنا الثقافي مع التمسك بالمخزون العلمي الذي كوّنه العالم عبر القرون.
الهجوم على الدين في المجتمع السوري، واستطراداً في المجتمع العربي أجمع، يأتي عبر كتابات تشكّك في مكوّنات الشرع الإسلامي بدءاً بالقرآن الكريم وثم في الحديث ووصولاً إلى الفقه. وحرص الرئيس السوري أن يربط بين الحالة السورية التي يعتبرها متقدّمة في هذا المجال وبين حالة العالم الإسلامي التي اعتبرها متراجعة، فسورية هي جزء من العالم الإسلامي ولها مكانتها المميّزة تاريخيا، في الماضي، والحاضر، والمستقبل. فهو حريص على الحفاظ على تلك المكانة وهذه هي إحدى مهام مجمع العلماء والعالمات. وفي ما يتعلّق بالقرآن الكريم أشار الرئيس إلى ما يتمّ تداوله في وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي حول «سريانية» القرآن. هذه إحدى الاتهامات وليست الوحيدة ولكن نكتفي بما ذكره الرئيس السوري. والمقصود في «سريانية» القرآن، أنّ القرآن الكريم مؤلّف منقول وليس من كلام الله الذي أوحى به إلى الرسول الأكرم. والتشكيك بالقرآن الكريم هدفه ضرب عصفورين بحجر واحد. الأول هو ضرب أساس الإسلام والثاني ضرب العروبة. صحيح أنّ العروبة موجودة قبل الإسلام ولكن على حدّ قول علماء آسيويين أشار إليهم الرئيس السوري في كلمته أنهم لا يتصوّرون الإسلام خارج العروبة. ونحن نقول إنّ العروبة مفتاح لفهم الإسلام كما أنّ الإسلام مفتاح لاكتشاف العروبة. ولا يغيب عنّا أدبية أحد مؤسّسي حزب البعث الأستاذ ميشال عفلق في محاضرته الشهيرة «في ذكرى الرسول العربي» حيث قال: «فالإسلام هو الهزة الحيوية التي تحرّك كامن القوى في الأمة العربية فتجيش بالحياة الحارة، جارفة سدود التقليد وقيود الاصطلاح. مرجعة اتصالها مرة جديدة بمعاني الكون العميقة، ويأخذها العجب والحماسة فتنشأ تعبّر عن إعجابها وحماستها بألفاظ جديدة وأعمال مجيدة، ولا تعود من نشوتها قادرة على التزام حدودها الذاتية، فتفيض على الأمم الأخرى فكراً وعملاً، وتبلغ هكذا الشمول.»
من هذه الزاوية انتقل إلى الهجوم الآخر على الدين وهو التشكيك باللغة العربية فقدّم مطالعة سريعة حول أصول اللسان العربي وعلاقته بالسريانية والآرامية. ومن جهة أخرى اعتبر الاجتهاد الفقهي إنجازاً مشكوراً للفقهاء الذين قدّموا التفاسير والاجتهادات ولكن كانت مبنية على أرضية معرفية غير التي هي موجودة اليوم. لكنه رفض تقييم تلك الاجتهادات بمعايير الحاضر لبيئات مختلفة في الماضي لما يحمل ذلك من إجحاف بحق الفقهاء الذين قدّموا ما لديهم ضمن ظروفهم. لذلك اعتبر أنّ من مهامّ مجمع العلماء والعالمات الذي يمثل أمامه هو تقديم اجتهادات متماهية مع شؤون العصر دون بالضرورة ترك الموروث الفقهي. نعتقد أنّ هذا موقف في غاية الأهمية ولكنه شائك لأنه يفتح باب عصرنة الفقه في عصر معادي للدين بشكل عام وللإسلام بشكل خاص. فالتمسّك بالموروث الفقهي من تماسك المجتمع المسلم عبر القرون وبالتالي يجب الانتباه والحذر من الشروع في اجتهادات قد تكسر ذلك التماسك. وبالنسبة لنا التماسك هو عنصر استراتيجي في عصر التجزئة والتفتيت. كما يجب الحذر من الوقوع في إنشاء فقه الدولة التي تتغيّر مع الظروف وبالتالي يهدّد بتماسك الفقه والشرع.
كما ذكرنا أعلاه ليس بمقدورنا تفصيل كلّ ما جاء في كلمة الرئيس بشّار الأسد لضيق المساحة ولعمق الإشكاليات التي تتلازم مع الطروحات الفكرية التي ذكرها. من الواضح أنّ أمامنا قائد شاب ولكن مخضرماً وواسع الاطلاع بالتاريخ والثقافة وبأهمية التجدّد الحضاري عبر التمسّك بالهوية الجامعة التي تصون وحدة المجتمع كمرتكز لتحقيق وحدة الأمة. فلا تجدّد في رأينا في ظلّ الضعف ولا قوّة في ظلّ التجزئة. كما أنّ المعركة ليست سياسية فحسب بل مجتمعية وثقافية وحضارية. هذا ما خرجنا به بعد الاستماع للكلمة مع الشعور بالاطمئنان حول مستقبل سورية ومستقبل الأمة العربية.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad launched from a gathering of scientists in Damascus a call for the renaissance of scientists with the task of leading the confrontation with the liberalism project, which aims to strike the national identity and the ideological depth represented by Islam, together with social and family values, considering that this project aimed at dismantling societies and opening the way to the project of hegemony, This project stands behind both fragmentation, Misrepresentation and extremism, Assad accused French President Emmanuel Macron and Turkish President Recep Erdogan of sharing roles in managing extremist climates to strike the true identity of societies, He called for realising the lack of contradiction between their Islamic affiliation, their national identity and their secular state.
When an Islamic reference with the rank and knowledge of Sheikh Maher Hammoud said that when he listened to the speech of President Bashar al-Assad yesterday, in a council of leading scholars in Syria, he was surprised that the level of talk and depth in the issues of jurisprudence, doctrine, Qur’an and interpretation matched the senior scholars, as he was surprised by the clear and deep visions in dealing with issues affecting the Islamic world in deeper matters than politics, this is some of what will be the case for anyone who has been able to hear the flow of President Assad in dealing with matters of great complexity, sensitivity and accuracy, over the course of an hour. He is half-spoken in the sequence of the transition from one title to another, and supports every idea of religious evidence, Qur’anic texts, prophetic hadiths and historical evidence, and he paints the framework of the battle he is fighting intellectually to address decades-old dilemmas known as titles such as secularism, religiosity, Arabism and Islam, moderation and extremism, the task of scholars in interpreting and understanding biography and providing example in the front lines of identity battles, in drawing the paths of social peace, and establishing a system of moral, national and family values.
–
Assad is crowned by efforts led by great reformers in the Arab and Islamic worlds to address these thorny issues, courageously advancing to this difficult, risky course, taking it upon himself as an Islamic, nationalist and secular thinker, to present a new version of the doctrinal, intellectual and philosophical understanding, seeking To replace imaginary virtual battles with historical reconciliation between lofty concepts and values related to peoples and elites, but divided around them, and fighting, instead of looking for the points of fundamental convergence that begin, as President Al-Assad says, of human nature, divine year and historical year. High values cannot collide, people’s attachment to them cannot be contradictory, and scientists and thinkers must resolve the contradiction when it emerges, and dismantle it. This is the task that Assad is dealing with by diving into the world of jurisprudence, thought and philosophy, and he is putting his hand on a serious intellectual wound, which is his description of the role played by the liberal school based on the destruction and dismantling of all societal structures, and elements of identity, to turn societies into mere individuals racing to live without meaning and controls, closer to the animal instinctive concept, and to the law of the jungle that governs it.
–
The historical role of Islam in the East, its structural and historical overlap with the manufacturing of major transformations, and universal identities, a title that needs the courage of Assad to approach it in terms of adherence to secularism, nationalism, prompts Assad to reveal the danger of realizing those who look to take control of this East of the importance of occupying Islam, as an investment less expensive than occupying the land, and doing its place and more. Whoever occupies Islam and speaks his tongue cuts more than half way to achieve his project, and reveals the danger of Assad realizing this in the heart of the war on Syria as one of the most prominent titles of the war prepared to control Syria, and in parallel the demonstrations of Islam in Syria, elites, scientists and the social environment.of resistance to the projects of intellectual, political and related occupation Seeking to destroy identity, belief, family cohesion, morality and value system, which carried the project of extremism financed and programmed with hundreds of satellite channels to spread strife and sow fear and encourage terrorism, with a neat rotation between the two sides feeding each other, and pushing Syrian scientists in the face of the precious sacrifices of the ranks of scientists, and they played in this confrontation a role that President Assad places as the role of the army on the front sands.
–
Historically, Syria has been the focal point of the national identity, from which Islam has established its status as a cultural political project, and in front of doctrinal and religious schools divided between Wahhabism and the Muslim Brotherhood led by Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the aspiration for Islam in the Levant has always been to promote the Islam of al-Azhar, and together constitute the historical turning point in the course of the East, in harmony with the understanding of the national identity of society and the secular foundation of the state. In this historic conversation, it is clear that President Assad has taken this important task upon himself as a thinker, not just as head of state.
أطلق الرئيس السوري الدكتور بشار الأسد من لقاء علمائي جامع في دمشق الدعوة لنهضة العلماء بمهمة قيادة المواجهة مع مشروع الليبراليّة الذي يستهدف ضرب الهوية القوميّة والعمق العقائديّ الذي يمثله الإسلام، ومعهما القيم الاجتماعية والأسرية، معتبراً أن هذا المشروع الهادف لتفكيك المجتمعات وفتح الطريق لمشروع الهيمنة، هو الذي يقف وراء التفلّت والتطرّف معاً، متهماً الرئيس الفرنسي امانويل ماكرون والرئيس التركي رجب أردوغان بتقاسم الأدوار في إدارة مناخات التطرّف لضرب الهوية الحقيقيّة للمجتمعات التي دعاها الأسد الى إدراك عدم التناقض بين انتمائها الإسلاميّ وهويتها القوميّة ودولتها العلمانيّة.
عندما يقول مرجع إسلامي بمرتبة وعلم الشيخ ماهر حمود أنه عندما استمع الى حديث الرئيس بشار الأسد أول أمس، في مجلس ضمّ كبار العلماء في سورية، فوجئ بأن مستوى الحديث وعمقه في قضايا الفقه والعقيدة والقرآن والتفسير يُضاهي كبار العلماء، كما فوجئ بالرؤى الواضحة والعميقة في تناول القضايا التي تطال العالم الإسلامي في شؤون أعمق من السياسة، فهذا بعض ما سيقع عليه كل مَن أتيح له سماع تدفّق الرئيس الأسد في تناول شؤون شديدة التعقيد والحساسية والدقة، على مدى ساعة ونصف متحدثاً بتسلسل الانتقال من عنوان الى آخر، وتدعيم كل فكرة بالشواهد الدينيّة والنصوص القرآنية والأحاديث النبوية والشواهد التاريخية، وهو يرسم إطار المعركة التي يخوضها فكرياً لمعالجة معضلات عمرها عقود طويلة عرفت بعناوين، مثل العلمانية والتديُّن، والعروبة والإسلام، والاعتدال والتطرف، ومهمة العلماء في التفسير وفهم السيرة وتقديم المثال في الخطوط الأماميّة لمعارك الهوية، وفي رسم مسارات السلم الاجتماعي، وإرساء منظومة القيم الأخلاقية والوطنية والأسرية.
–
يتوّج الأسد مساعي قادها إصلاحيّون كبار في العالمين العربي والإسلامي لتناول هذه القضايا الشائكة، متقدماً بشجاعة لخوض هذا المسلك الوعر، والمحفوف بالمخاطر فيأخذ على عاتقه كمفكر إسلاميّ وقوميّ وعلمانيّ، تقديم نسخة جديدة من الفهم الفقهيّ والفكريّ والفلسفيّ، تسعى لاستبدال المعارك الافتراضيّة الوهميّة بمصالحة تاريخية بين مفاهيم وقيم سامية تتعلق بها الشعوب والنخب، لكنها تنقسم حولها، وتتقاتل، بدلاً من أن تبحث عن نقاط التلاقي الجوهري التي تنطلق كما يقول الرئيس الأسد من الفطرة البشريّة، والسنة الإلهيّة والسنة التاريخيّة. فالقيم السامية لا يمكن لها أن تتصادم، وتعلّق الشعوب بها لا يمكن أن يأتي متناقضاً، وعلى العلماء والمفكرين حل التناقض عندما يظهر، وتفكيكه. وهذه هي المهمة التي يتصدّى لها الأسد بالغوص في عالم الفقه والفكر والفلسفة، وهو يضع يده على جرح فكري خطير يتمثل بتوصيفه للدور الذي تقوم به المدرسة الليبرالية القائمة على تدمير وتفكيك كل البنى المجتمعية، وعناصر الهوية، لتحويل المجتمعات الى مجرد أفراد يتسابقون على عيش بلا معنى ولا ضوابط، أقرب للمفهوم الحيوانيّ الغرائزيّ، ولشريعة الغاب التي تحكمه.
–
الدور التاريخيّ للإسلام في الشرق، وتداخله التركيبي والتاريخي مع صناعة التحوّلات الكبرى، والهويات الجامعة، عنوان يحتاج الى شجاعة الأسد لمقاربته من منطلق التمسك بالعلمانيّة، والقوميّة، يدفع الأسد للكشف عن خطورة إدراك الذين يتطلعون لوضع اليد على هذا الشرق لأهميّة احتلال الإسلام، كاستثمار أقل كلفة من احتلال الأرض، ويقوم مقامها وأكثر. فمن يحتلّ الإسلام ويلبس لبوسه وينطق بلسانه يقطع أكثر من نصف الطريق لتحقيق مشروعه، ويكشف الأسد خطورة إدراكه لهذا الأمر في قلب الحرب على سورية كواحد من أبرز العناوين للحرب التي أعدّت للسيطرة على سورية، وبالتوازي ما أظهره الإسلام في سورية، من النخب والعلماء والبيئة الاجتماعية من قدرة مقاومة لمشاريع الاحتلال الفكري، والسياسي، وما يتصل بها من سعي لتدمير الهوية والعقيدة والترابط الأسري والأخلاق ومنظومة القيم، وهو ما حمله مشروع التطرّف المموّل والمبرمج بمئات الفضائيّات لبثّ الفتن وزرع الخوف والتشجيع على الإرهاب، بتناوب متقن بين طرفَيْه يغذي أحدهما الآخر، ودفع علماء سورية في مواجهته تضحيات غالية من صفوف العلماء، وأدوا في هذه المواجهة دوراً يضعه الرئيس الأسد بمصاف دور الجيش على الجبهات.
–
تاريخياً، كانت سورية هي نقطة الارتكاز التي تأسست عليها الهويّة القوميّة، والتي امتلك منها الإسلام صفته كمشروع سايسيّ حضاريّ، وأمام مدارس فقهيّة ودينيّة تتوزّع بين الوهابية والأخوان المسلمين بقيادة سعودية وتركية، كان التطلع دائماً لإسلام بلاد الشام ليستنهض معه إسلام الأزهر، ويشكلان معاً نقطة التحول التاريخية في مسار الشرق، بالتناغم مع فهم الهوية القوميّة للمجتمع، والأساس العلماني للدولة. وفي هذا الحديث التاريخي، يبدو بوضوح أن الرئيس الأسد قد أخذ هذه المهمة الجليلة على عاتقه كمفكّر، وليس فقط كرئيس للدولة.
مفاهيم عقدية ومسائل دينية شائكة بنظرة عميقة وفاحصة، ويتحدث عن أخطار اللبرالية الحديثة (المفاهيم ما بعد الحداثوية) على أصل الإنسان والإنسانية، وعن مفاهيم المجتمع والاسرة في الدين
ومغالطات اطروحات فصل الدين عن الدولة والأخلاق، ويضع كل هذا في اطاره الموسع في نقاش العروبة والإسلام في المعركة السياسية والاستعمارية القائمة على اوطاننا
والمستمرة منذ زهاء القرن من الزمن، مع الاستدلالات الشرعية حسب الأصول.
القى الرئيس الأسد هذه الكلمة في جامع العثمان، فهكذا تكون الخطب الدينية بحق، وكان لافتا شموليتها، ناهيك عن الإجابة على بعض المسائل الفقهية
والفلسفية الشائكة التي كانت الإجابة عليها صعبة رغم كثرة الكُتّاب والخطباء.
Tehran – On the first martyrdom anniversary of Lieutenant General Hajj Qassem Soleimani, Al-Ahed News met with the IRG’s Quds Force Deputy Commander Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Fallahzadeh [Abu Baqer].
• A message to the mujahideen in the resistance
Brigadier General Fallahzadeh explains that “since the days of the greatest Messenger [PBUH], the enemies have not ceased the pursuit of their hostile plans. Throughout history, they have been plotting against the authentic Mohammadan Islam. And in this era, which is the era of Imam Khomeini and Imam Khamenei, we see that the enemies introduce a new scheme to the region every day.”
However, he points out that those “plans were thwarted, and the enemy was defeated.”
The general attributes this success to “help from God Almighty … the wise leadership of the late Imam [Khomeini], then the Leader of the Islamic Revolution [Imam Khamenei], as well as the field leadership of the Secretary General of Hezbollah His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and the rest of the leaders, such as Sayyed Abdul Malik Badr Al-Din Al-Houthi, the Palestinian resistance, and the popular mobilization units, especially in the days when the resistance front was led by martyr Hajj Qassem Soleimani and Hajj Esmail Ghaani.”
“We must continue with the approach, method, strategy, and program with which we used to confront the enemy since the beginning of the Islamic Revolution, and surely victory will be ours. The enemies must know that they only achieved defeat, humiliation, and failure from all their plans and money spent in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon,” he added.
“More than seven trillion dollars were spent before Trump took office, and that is not a small amount of money. They spent huge sums of money, but they only reaped defeat and failure. They will also reap humiliation and defeat in the future.”
The general’s advice is “to have knowledge of the Imam, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, and to know one’s responsibilities and act upon them. Our responsibility and our job is to obey the Imam. This is not only a mere slogan, but rather we should be practical. If we do that, the banner of authentic Mohammadan Islam will be raised.”
“By doing so, we will be proud believers, for humiliation and treason will not bring us glory. Glory is achieved by working with what Imam Hussein [PBUH] said: ‘Humiliation is far away from us; we must be tough on the enemy and have mercy on our friends, and we must love people and serve them.’”
• A Recommendation for young people to move forward with the approach of Hajj Qassem
According to the deputy commander of the Quds Force Brigadier General Fallahzadeh, Hajj Qassem was a role model and a true believer. His life was exemplary and his approach was clear. He got to know the Imam and fulfilled his duty and responsibility which was to recognize the truth about the enemy and confront it. He put his whole life on this path. In the end, he gave his honorable life for the sake of Islam and the people. Hajj Qassem was a true and loyal believer. He was a true servant of God Almighty. He made an effort in serving the people and took great care of the families of the martyrs and was humble.
He concludes his interview with Al-Ahed by saying, “On the other hand, Hajj Qassem used to follow up on the enemy’s movements and monitor them. He planned to confront the enemies and thwart their efforts, and we saw the victories that he achieved. We cannot be Hajj Qassem, but we can follow in his footsteps, which is to continue on the path of Ahl al-Bayt and Imam Khomeini.”
Speech of His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on the occasion of the birth of Prophet Muhammad 10-30-2020
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and prayers and peace be upon our Master and Prophet, the Seal of Prophets, Abi al-Qassem Muhammad Bin Abdullah and his good and pure household and his good and chosen companions and all the prophets and messengers.
Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you all. God Almighty said in his glorified book:
{In the Name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. O Prophet, indeed We have sent you as a witness and a bringer of good tidings and a warner. And one who invites to Allah, by His permission, and an illuminating lamp. And give good tidings to the believers that they will have from Allah great bounty. Almighty God has spoken truly.}
To start with, I congratulate all Muslims in the world as well as all the Lebanese who are one people and partners in happiness and sorrow.
I congratulate Muslims and everyone else on the birth of the greatest Messenger, our Master, and Prophet Muhammad bin Abdullah [PBUH], as well as on the birth of his great grandson, Imam Jaafar bin Muhammad Al-Sadiq [PBUH].
I’ll begin by talking about the occasion a little. From there, I’ll talk about some files and topics relevant to the current stage.
Our Master Muhammad bin Abdullah [PBUH] was born approximately 1495 years ago, in what was known as the Year of the Elephant [Am Al-Fil], in the month of Rabi ‘al-Awwal – this month. Some say he was born on 12 Rabi al-Awwal, others say 17 Rabi al-Awwal.
This blessed birth was the natural introduction to the birth and proclamation of the final divine message, after which there is no abrogation, modification, or alteration. Hence, ‘what is permissible [halal] during Muhammad’s era is permissible until the Day of Judgement, and what is forbidden [haram] during Muhammad’s era is forbidden until the Day of Judgement.’
It was also an introduction to rebirth of the true human life, for generations that would emerge from darkness into light, through this newborn child, and also the birth of a nation that would remain immortal until the Day of Resurrection.
We all know that the prophets and messengers performed miracles and accomplishments, especially when we are talking about great prophets like Ibrahim, Musa, and Isa [PBUT]. They all had miracles that were witnessed by the era they lived in and the generation that lived there.
These accounts were told to us. They were preserved in holy books, especially the Holy Quran, as well as history books. These accounts reached all the people – Muslims, Christians, and Jews.
The Messenger of Allah Muhammad [PBUH] performed various miracles as well. The people of his time bore witness to them. Now his time has passed, and accounts were passed on to us through stories and history books. We, however, did not witness these miracles. The Messenger of God Muhammad [may God bless him and his family and grant them peace] had various miracles as well, as is the case with the miracles of the previous prophets.
However, the Messenger of Allah Muhammad [PBUH] possesses an immortal miracle that will continue to live on until the Day of Resurrection and will be witnessed by all generations in all times and in all places. This miracle is His sacred book that God sent down to him – the Holy Quran.
One of the miracles of this great book is that its words, verses, and surahs have not been subject to any distortion, forgery, or modification for more than 1450 years. This means that despite the reasons, factors, and motives – among Muslims and non-Muslims, from within Islam and otherwise – to distort this religious book, its verses and surahs, it remained preserved form 1450 years.
This holy book remaining in this accurate and wondrous form is in itself a miracle. It is the fulfillment and validation of the divine promise: {Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian.}
A religious book so important to the lives of millions and hundreds of millions, and now nearly two billion people cannot be preserved in this manner without being touched despite the existence of all reasons, doctrinal reasons, and political reasons to distort, falsify, or amend it.
This is evidence of divine preservation of this Prophet’s book. This Qur’an has been challenging humanity for the last 1450 years. And this challenge will remain until the coming of the Hour – if they all gathered to produce the like of this, to bring forth ten surahs like it, or produce a surah of the like.
And this Qur’an, which is still vibrant and brings people out of the darkness and into the light, is its immortal miracle. The prophets and messengers also have their accomplishments, and the greatest achievement of our Prophet and our Master, the Messenger of God Muhammad is this human achievement that has been achieved by his hands. It is in itself it the closest thing to a miracle – this deep and tremendous transformation that has been achieved in the society of the Arabian Peninsula by his hands and thanks to his vocation, efforts and jihad.
If we go back in history, the Arabian Peninsula was made up of Mecca, Yathrib [it was not called Medina yet], the city of Taif, a group of large towns, tribes, and clans, all the way to Yemen including its cities, civilization, and former kings. This entire region that we now refer to as the Arabian Peninsula was the main setting for the Prophet’s movement and missionary work.
Let us take a look at the people in that community before the birth of the Prophet and his missionary activities – their way of life, their religious life [What did they worship? What did they believe in?], their education [reading and writing], their level of knowledge, their culture, their values, their traditions, the values governing that society, poverty, deprivation, their security situation, the wars, the tribal wars, and their dispersion.
The Messenger of God [PBUH] did not come to address one aspect of the lives of these people, but rather all aspects, foremost is the doctrinal, belief, knowledge, cultural, ethical and behavioral dimensions. If we then studied the way of life of the people in the Arabian Peninsula after the Prophet’s missionary work, efforts, and jihad, what has become of these people?
What are the serious, deep, and very important transformations that took place, especially on the human side? Their faith and belief? The way they shifted from worshipping idols to worshipping the one God? Their sciences, their culture, and the system of values? Their perception of man, woman, other human beings, and the followers of other religions? Their customs, traditions, discipline, behavior, and morals? This tremendous human transformation that took place in the Arabian Peninsula and constituted the main basis for the launch of this nation and the spread of its voice and message to the whole world, making it the basis for global change, is Prophet Muhammad’s accomplishment.
The most important and very remarkable aspect is that this accomplished in 23 years only. We know that bringing about huge change in the lives of people within 10, 20, 30, and 40 years is hard, especially when it comes to culture, doctrine, values, and behavior. But this was achieved by the Messenger of God. He also paved the way, as we have said, for this humanitarian and religious pillar until the Hour of Resurrection.
I wanted to make this introduction so that I can delve into the topics that I want to speak about. All Muslims throughout history until the coming of the Hour have love, adoration, respect, and appreciation for this great Prophet, unmatched with any other human being and despite their love, appreciation, and reverence for all the prophets, messengers, awliya, imams, and righteous and good people throughout history.
All Muslims have a distinct view, a special faith and love, for this man, this person, and this figure. Muslims may disagree throughout history. This happened in several cases – intellectual cases of sometimes ideological nature, Islamic rulings, in cases of halal and haram, evaluating Islamic history, evaluating persons. In contemporary time, they may disagree on important social and political issues, conflicts, wars, etc.
But there are unanimous points and issues that Muslims have not disagree on throughout history, and they cannot depart from until the Hour of Resurrection. Among the most important of these unanimous points is their belief in Muhammad bin Abdullah [PBUH], his message, his prophethood, his greatness, and his stature.
They see him as the seal of the prophets since there is no prophet after him, the master of messengers, the master of creation, the master of beings, the most perfect man and the greatest human being, and the closest of God Almighty’s creations to Him, the most beloved and dearest of them to Him. This is how Muslims view this Messenger and this Prophet.
With this faith, his love is mixed with their blood, flesh, being, bodies, souls, minds and hearts because this belief is not only an epistemic belief, a philosophical belief, or a cultural or intellectual belief. No, there is a kind of distinct emotional, spiritual and psychological relationship. Of course, this is and will always be required towards the Prophet as they glorify him in this world and see his greatness and special stature in the Hereafter.
From here, we will use one point as a springboard to move on to other topics. Therefore, Muslims cannot tolerate any offense or insult directed at this great Messenger, and they consider defending the dignity of their Prophet as one of the highest priorities that comes before any interests and calculations, be it political, economic, or related to their lives. They consider this matter a top priority. They cannot be forgiving about it, nor can they remain silent about any behavior or practice that insults or offends the Great Messenger of Allah.
From here, I delve into the first file in tonight’s talk, which is the current problem that concerns all Muslims in the world today – the current problem between the French authorities [from the top of the pyramid] and Islam and the Muslims. I would like to speak calmly, objectively, and scientifically in order to dissect this issue and search for solutions, that is to reach a solution and not perpetuate enmities or search for new ones.
We begin with the latest incident that took place in the French city of Nice, in which a Muslim man killed three people and wounded others.
We will start from the end and return to the beginning. We strongly condemn this incident, and Muslims from the various scholarly, religious, and political positions, as well as the Islamic world and Muslim communities in France, Europe, and everywhere condemned it.
Islam also condemns such incidents, and it is not permissible for anyone to regard it as belonging to Islam. Islam and the Islamic religion, which forbids killing, assaulting, or harming innocent people just because of differences in ideological affiliation, reject it and reject every similar incident that preceded it or comes after it.
For us Muslims and Islam, it is always rejected and condemned, wherever this incident occurred and whoever was targeted – in France or anywhere in the world.
Let us establish this point as a basis so that there is clarity later.
Secondly, in the context of this case, it is not permissible for the French authorities or others to hold the religion of the perpetrator or the followers of the perpetrator’s religion responsible for the perpetrator’s crime. In other words, if the perpetrator of the crime is a Muslim, it is thus not permissible for anyone to hold Islam or the Muslims in France or in the whole world responsible for this crime. This is fundamentally an incorrect, unrealistic, illegal, and immoral perception.
When a person commits a crime, he must be held responsible for this crime, regardless of his motives, even if he believed that his motives are religious. This happened in France and in Europe, and it is happening in other places in the world.
We might have to speak in terms of Muslim and Christian. We will, however, not come near the Jews. If a Christian man committed a crime of this kind – and this happened in France and most of the crimes that are committed in France are not committed by Muslims as well as in Europe – the media usually does not shed light on it. But whoever follows it knows about statistics and figures. Is it right for someone to say the one who is responsible for this crime is the Jesus Christ [PBUH], God forbid? Or the Christianity? Or hold the Christians in the world responsible? Or the Christians in the country where the crime was committed? No one accepts this behavior. Unfortunately, the French authorities are doing this.
President Macron and the rest of the French officials spoke about Islamic terrorism – now someone has translated it to Islamic terrorism or Islamic fascism, a lack of difference. There is no such thing as Islamic terrorism or Islamic fascism. If someone is committing an act of terror, then he is a terrorist. And if he commits a crime, then he is a criminal. But we cannot say Islamic terrorism and Islamic fascism.
Today the United States of America is committing massacres all over the world from the year 2000 onwards, the wars they’ve committed in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and in the region after September 11. Let us put aside World War I and II, Hiroshima, and the likes and just talk about the current generation.
Millions of people have been killed, and the Americans admit that hundreds of thousands have been killed in these wars, even if some were killed by mistakes such as weddings that were bombed in Afghanistan, sometimes deliberately. Does anyone come out and say that since the United States of America’s president and government are Christians and its army is mostly Christian, then this American terrorism is a Christian terrorism? Or that the one who bears the responsibility for this terrorism, God forbid, is Jesus Christ or the Christian religion whose values and teachings contradict these terrorist acts?
Muslims did not say that what the European armies, including the French army, did in Algeria and what the others did in Libya and elsewhere in our region is a Christian terrorism and that the Christian faith is responsible. Not at all. And if someone said this, then they are mistaken.
This phenomenon is at the very least not present. Therefore, it is absolutely impermissible to generalize and hold a religion or the Prophet of a religion or the nation that believes in a religion responsible for a crime committed by any person belonging to a certain ideology or religion whether he was a Muslim, Christian, or Jew. This is wrong and should stop. The French and French officials do it every day. However, there are those who are correcting and saying no, we respect Islam as a religion. If you respect Islam as a religion, you have to change the term “Islamic terrorism” and “Islamic fascism”, and you do not have to follow Trump who uses this kind of terms.
Third, we heard in the past few days that you are objecting that someone in France offended your Prophet. The most important is that some Muslims also offend your Prophet and your Islam. I would like to say here that some Muslims definitely offend Islam and that some Muslims offend the Prophet of Islam, and some commit very, very serious offenses.
And what we have witnessed in the past few years in terms of terrorist acts and crimes, including the demolition of mosques, churches, and historical monuments; the killing of people; the beheadings; the cutting open of chests; and the slaughtering of people like ewes based on their affiliations – foreign media have also promoted and photographed them in the world.
These are major offenses to our religion and our prophet, and we were attacking this and we strongly object to this, but suppose this is correct and not an assumption, if some Muslims offend our Prophet this does not justify you to offend our Prophet, if some of you offend your sanctities, are we allowed to offend your sanctities? This is absolutely no logic, the prophets, the apostles, the religions, the religious symbols, the sanctities of the nations must be respected, even if the followers, the nation or the group come out from within the community who does not perform this respect and exceed this respect.
These are major offenses to our religion and our prophet, and we attacked this and strongly objected to this. But let us suppose, this is true and not an assumption, that some Muslims are offending our Prophet. This does not justify you to offend our Prophet. If some of you offend your sanctities, are we allowed to offend your sanctities? This is absolutely not logical. Prophets, messengers, religions, religious symbols, and the sanctities of nations must be respected, even if followers, a nation, or a group do not respect them.
Fourth, here I continue to address the French officials and the public. Instead of holding Islam and the Islamic nation responsible for these terrorist acts that are taking place in France, Europe, and other places, let us discuss together your responsibility towards these actions and groups.
Let us go back 10 years, from 2011 onwards – we won’t say 50 years ago – there was a terrorist takfiri ideology that adopted killing just because of ideological, intellectual, sectarian, and political differences. They even committed brutal crimes just because they disagreed with the other about a detail.
You protected this ideology. The Americans, the US administration, the French governments, the European governments, you protected it, you provided it with all the facilities in the world. People that disagreed with your way of thought faced difficulties in obtaining a visa when they wanted to take part in an activity in your country. But doors were widely opened to those with this [takfiri] ideology and were protected.
You facilitated the presence of these groups that were formed and adopted this ideology in Syria and Iraq. You helped support, arm, and fund them until these groups gained experience and a fighting spirit. Now, you are surprised about a massacre or a beheading?
Where did this begin? Did it start in our region and countries? Who did this? You supported them politically, via the media, and financially. You provided them with international protection and international conferences. You opened borders for them, gave them passports, and facilitated their arrival to the region. Acknowledge your responsibility first and how much responsibility you bear regarding this matter.
I invite you to go back to the 2011-2012 archives where I or many others told this to you, especially to the Europeans – do not be part of this global war against Syria, Iraq and the region; these groups could not penetrate into Lebanon. Do not adopt them. Do not defend these people. Do not facilitate their arrival and do not strengthen them because you will lose this battle, and these groups will turn on you. This ideology will turn on you. These groups and these people will return to your country and will flood them with terror and destruction.
They will return to your countries and do what they did in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and other countries. On that exact day, we told you, America is far away, and the closest to our region is Europe, and the most serious threat is to Europe and you have to be aware. But you were too proud to listen. You believed that you will win this war, and it is known afterwards where you ended up.
Today, you must also acknowledge your responsibility. Do not blame those who have no responsibility. What is the relationship of the Messenger of Islam, Muhammad bin Abdullah, with these crimes? What is the relationship of his religion, Islam, and the Quran with these crimes? What is the relationship of a nation of two billion Muslims with these crimes?
The people you embraced, protected, nurtured, and brought to your countries are the ones who are responsible. This is what you should reconsider because you are still pursuing these sorts of policies. I will repeat what I said and use the same tone that we used when we were stating our position: We cannot be in a front alongside those who behead, cut chests open, eat livers, and slaughter.
These were your allies and your groups, and they were protected by you. That is why you – the French, the Europeans, the Americans, and their allies in the region – must reconsider your behavior and methods, including the employment of these takfiri terrorist groups as tools in political projects and wars. You never learn. You did this in Afghanistan, and you paid for it on September 11. You made mistakes and are repeating the same mistakes. The use of these type of groups as tools must stop. Otherwise, you too will be paying the price of these mistakes.
Secondly, the French authorities have put themselves and France and also want to involve all of Europe and the European Union in a battle with Islam and the Muslims for flimsy and sometimes incomprehensible reasons. I will speak from a position of concern and not to score points. What is the reason? Meaning these developments that took place in the past weeks and was clearly shown by the media – an open and clear war in France from the president to the government, from the ministers to the parliament, and from the media to the street. What is the reason? What started this problem? Who assaulted the other? Who offended the other?
This issue began when the sinister French magazine published insulting cartoons of the Prophet of Islam, so Muslims rose up to protest in more than one place in the world. This matter then developed into a series of events, including the killing and beheading of the history professor.
Instead of taking the initiative to deal with this matter, to absorb it, and to have a real and correct attitude towards it – let us wait, not confuse truth with falsehood, not to mix things together; there is a main reason that led to these repercussions – instead of dealing with the repercussions, unfortunately the French authorities declared a war of this kind. They insisted that this is freedom of expression, and we want to continue practicing freedom of expression and the satirical cartoons. This came from the top of the pyramid. Basically, what is the message you are sending to the two billion Muslims in the world?
What are we talking about here? It is not about a political, financial, or economic matter, nor is it a conflict or a battle. We are talking about a matter related to their Prophet, their Messenger, and their Master, whom I spoke about at the beginning and stated what he represents to them. To the French authorities, what deserves this sacrifice?
You took it upon yourselves to protect this battle and adopt it, then you tell us you’ve got values including freedom of speech and that you don’t want to abandon them. Let us discuss this a little. Why did I say at the beginning, we want to speak calmly and objectively? The first discussion is operational and procedural. If it was really this and the way things are in France or in Europe, one could have said that let us see how we can approach the subject from another angle.
However, the issue is not like that. You must first convince the Muslims in the world that this claim is sincere. They do not accept that. This is not an honest claim. This is not a true claim. We have a lot of evidence and examples in France and Europe on practices by authorities that prevent freedom of expression, rather suppress freedom of expression. There are matters that may be less sensitive than a topic related to a prophet two billion people in the world believe in.
In order not to waste all the time, I will give one well-known example because it does not need much explanation. It’s about the French philosopher Roger Garaudy. You can find this example in television archives, documentaries, films, and articles. What the man did was write a book and a study regarding the myths behind the genocide of the Jews, or the so-called Holocaust. He presented a scientific discussion and figures, discussed numbers, wrote an academic scientific study, and spoke about the political exploitation of this incident. To date, Europe, especially Germany, is being blackmailed by international Zionism because of this issue. The man did not curse, insult, mock, or draw satirical cartoons. He did not even touch on Judaism. He only tackled an important and sensitive issue that happened in Europe. What did the French authorities do to this French philosopher?
The judiciary sued him. He was tried and defamed, and he was sentenced to prison. It is possible that because he was very old, they did not implement the sentence. The man was suppressed. Is this freedom of expression? Is this the value you are defending? Yes, it may be said that when the matter affects a certain sect, “Israel”, or the Zionists, then freedom of expression ceases to exist. But when it affects another sect, an entire nation with two billion people and their sanctities, freedom of expression remains absolute.
There are many more examples like Roger Garaudy that one can mention in different occasions, confirming that freedom of expression in France and in Europe is not absolute, but rather it is limited by legal, political, security, and other restrictions.
This claim – that it is an absolute freedom which allows anyone to do whatever they want, for a newspaper or a cartoonist to draw cartoons of the Prophet of Islam, or for someone to make a film mocking the Prophet of Islam – being acceptable is not right. We can give you many more examples. But this is unacceptable.
This means that your battle is now based on a non-existent and non-realistic basis. This is not your reality, and we can come up with a list of how you behave on television, newspapers, magazines, and radio stations because they adopt, for example, certain ideas or broadcast certain programs. This is in the archives. This is first.
The other aspect, which is also important, is the discussion – is it true that you really possess this value in this manner? If we look at it from a humanitarian and moral perspective, is there such a thing as absolute freedom of expression? Meaning, isn’t there a limit? Why does freedom of expression cease to exist when it comes to anti-Semitism? When a person insults, exposes, and attributes lies and crimes to others, is this acceptable? You don’t have a problem with this in France and in Europe? Is it really like this?
Is this true? If a person publishes secrets and documents affecting national security under the rubric of freedom of expression, how do you deal with him? How do America and the West deal with him?
If someone said some things, announced some things, or wrote about matters that may lead to internal strife or a civil war or breach national security, how do you deal with him? Does freedom of expression end when someone’s dignity is on the line?
We wish and demand a reconsideration because this is not a humanitarian value. This is contrary to humanity. This is not a moral value. This is against morals and moral values. Therefore, it must be reconsidered.
I would like to conclude this part and this file. I would like to address the French authorities and tell them, today in the Islamic world no one is looking for new enmities or new battles, and I do not think that two billion Muslims think in this way.
On the contrary, Muslims are working to alleviate enmities in this world and keep the specter of wars away from them and confrontations they always pay the price for. You should think about dealing with this sin and this great mistake that has been committed.
I heard French officials saying that we do not submit to terrorism. It is not required that you submit to terrorism. You are required to fix the mistake, and addressing the mistake is not submitting to terrorism. On the contrary, insisting on a mistake and going into confrontations that do not serve anyone is submitting to terrorism. It is heeding to the demands of terrorism and terrorists who want to blow up all the squares in the world. You must go back to the source and address this mistake. This is not submitting to terrorism.
First of all, you are applying it incorrectly. Apply it correctly. Apply it to Muslims just as you would apply it to non-Muslims. Be fair and be just. Offending our dignities, the dignity of our prophets, and the dignity of our Prophet is something that no Muslim in the world can accept. I would like to clearly tell you – even if the political regimes in the Arab and Islamic world found excuses for their conspiracies, concessions, and betrayals, they will not be able to remain silent and cover up the insults before their people when it comes to offending their holy Prophet who is adored and respected by the people. Therefore, this battle that you insist on fighting is a lost cause.
What will happen to the political and economic interests of France and the French people as well as its relations with the peoples of the Islamic world if it continues on this path? This matter must be addressed, and you can find a solution for it.
I conclude by saying that instead of dealing with the repercussions and mobilizing more soldiers and security services to prevent terrorist operations of this kind, address the root of the problem. Stop the excuses and treat the root of the problem. Do not allow this mockery, this aggression, and this insult to continue, then the whole world will stand with you.
In any case, terrorist acts are condemned as I said at the beginning, but it is your responsibility and everyone’s responsibility to address matters from their roots.
Here, it is possible to consider His Eminence the Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar’s proposal that calls for an international legislation to prohibit this type of action which concerns Muslims and the Islamic nation. The same or similar wording can be adopted. For example, we can talk about adopting international legislation criminalizing the act of insulting the prophets and messengers, insulting divine religions, or insulting the sanctities of nations. Any form of this kind.
Of course, if an international legislation of this kind is adopted, this will form a legal ruler over freedom of expression and will create a way out for the French government and for all other governments that claim to preserve freedom of expression as being part of their values and laws.
A solution to this matter must be found. The world does not need any more problems, confrontations, and wars. It is not permissible to push the world and its people, especially our Islamic nation and the European countries that such positions, into confrontations and wars of this kind for the sake of trivial, absurd claims that lack any humane, moral, and legal grounds. The responsibility of dealing with it today lies primarily on the French authorities, and everyone must cooperate to address this file and put an end to this strife. This was the first file. In the context of marking the birth of the noble Prophet and the massive crowds we saw yesterday in Yemen’s Sana’a and in a number of Yemeni cities and governorates, one cannot help but take note of this scene and its indications.
Despite the devastating war – when we say war, that means there is killing, wounding, displacement, and destruction of buildings that is now in its sixth year – despite the blockade, the starvation, difficult living conditions, outbreaks and diseases, and despite all these difficult circumstances, we find the masses gathering in Yemeni cities. For what? To commemorate the birth of the Messenger of God and to defend him. I would like to talk about this topic for a few minutes.
In Lebanon and elsewhere, we know what it means when a country is in a state of war. There is the possibility of an aerial bombardment at any moment, and the aggression does not hesitate to kill civilians including men, women and children. Despite all the security, health, and environmental dangers as well as the state of war, these people come out to express their deep faith in the Messenger of God, their great love for the Messenger of God, and their unparalleled willingness to defend the dignity and honor of the Messenger of God. Is this not a sign, a strong message that all people must take note of?
First and foremost, I call on Muslims in the world who believe in this Prophet, respect, and adore him to take note of what we saw yesterday in Yemen. These people chant for hours, repeat songs and slogans, and listen to their dear leader, His Eminence Sayyed Abdul Malik Al Houthi, as he explained and clarified. In the conclusion, he affirmed that they stood firmly and categorically by the Palestinian cause and alongside the Palestinian people.
Take a look. The besieged Yemenis, the strangers in this world today, the ones being attacked, those who are fighting diseases, hunger, blockade, and all difficult circumstances do not resort to any excuse to abandon Palestine, the Palestinian cause, or the Palestinian people. They declare their determination and adherence to Palestine and the Palestinian cause and their defense of the Palestinian people.
In return, there are those who have luxury and affluence, those who are immersed in the pleasures of the world, who did not engage in a war with the “Israeli” enemy in the first place rush to abandon Palestine, recognize “Israel” and normalize with it. Is this not a divine argument?
They affirmed that they will stand by the countries, people, resistance movements, and the axis of resistance in the face of American and Zionist projects, even though they are in dire need for the world to stand beside them and defend them. Muslims and all peoples of our Arab and Islamic region and the world should retake note of what we saw and heard yesterday.
They should take note of it with a humanitarian, ethical, and religious background. I tell you today this is a new, divine, religious argument on all Arab and Islamic scholars, officials, leaders, elites and people all over the world. It is a new, divine argument for them to break their silence. Those who support this American-Saudi-Emirati and unfortunately, Sudanese aggression against the people of Yemen must withdraw this support.
And those who are still silent about this daily crime should break their silence. A large and powerful wave and movement must be formed in the Arab and Islamic worlds to put pressure on those leaders, the leaders of the aggression who insist on continuing the aggression and the war. This is the least thing we can do to show loyalty to them – the people of knowledge, the people who adore the Messenger of God, and the people defending the Messenger of God [PBUH].
It is time for this unjust and criminal war to stop. The greatest and most urgent duty today is to work on ending this war. The greatest thing a Muslim can offer on these days to the Messenger of God is to stand by those who deeply believe in him, those who love him with affection, those who defend him with their souls, blood, money, and children. This is also in the context of the commemoration.
Time is over. I, in fact, wanted to talk a little about the topic of normalization in the region, the land border demarcation negotiations with occupied Palestine, the security situation at the southern Lebanese border with occupied Palestine, the “Israeli” military maneuvers, and the general situation in Lebanon. But considering that the first file took a lot of the time allotted, God willing, I will deliver a speech on Martyrs’ Day on 11-11, the day commemorating Hezbollah’s martyr. Therefore, I will postpone these topics. I will only talk about the formation of the government in Lebanon.
Of course, we hope that the Prime Minister-designate, in cooperation and understanding with His Excellency the President of the Republic and in cooperation with the rest of the parliamentary blocs, will be able to form a new Lebanese government as soon as possible. Of course, everyone knows that the financial, economic, and social conditions in Lebanon cannot be managed and addressed without a government with legal powers. The caretaker government cannot continue, so we carry this hope.
Our data indicate that the atmosphere is reasonable, positive, and good. We do not want to exaggerate the positivity, but the atmosphere is reasonable. We will cooperate from our part and will facilitate in whatever way we can, God willing.
Much of what is reported in the media and in articles is not true. Some are not accurate, while others are baseless, especially with regard to our approach to forming the government.
God willing, we are positive, and we will remain positive. We will provide whatever help we can to aid the concerned officials in forming the government as soon as possible. We will not spare any effort in this regard, God willing, especially now. This is the real challenge.
Regarding the anniversary of the October 17 movement, what was awaiting the country, and what some people were expecting, God willing, if there was time, we will talk about it later.
It’s not the time to engage in disputes and quarrels. It’s time for understanding, cooperation, and openness to form a government, God willing.
I want to conclude by mentioning the dangerous rise in coronavirus cases. Now, we are recording 2000 cases. This is a very dangerous thing. At the beginning, people used to complain when the numbers hit the 60, 70, or 100 mark. Now, the numbers are hitting 1600 and 1800 cases, and we will be nearing 2000. You know the situation of the hospitals. The death toll is rising day by day, and it seems that many people have become accustomed to this situation and are coexisting with it.
I repeat and say that negligence is inhumane, immoral, and illegal. In the religious sense, it is a sin, and it is haram.
There are countries in the world today -since we were talking about France- that are heading into lockdowns, the same in Germany, in Spain, and in Italy. The Americans cannot see in front of them – there are 80 thousand or 90 thousand cases. Some people in the world are going mad, while others are opting for new measures.
We cannot continue in this way in Lebanon. It is not a matter of the Health Ministry, but rather the whole government, the whole country, scholars, religious authorities, political leaders, fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, parents, brothers, sisters. It is a humanitarian responsibility that concerns everyone. Everyone should wear masks, adhere to social distancing, and sanitize. These measures reduce the dangers of getting infected. Lockdowns that cause people to lose their jobs and starve are not the only solution. Coexistence is possible by adhering to the measures.
I would like to call on people once again and I will never tire because it is my legal, moral, religious, and humanitarian responsibility as well as the responsibility of each and every one of us to commit while we call on others to commit [to the health measures]. Otherwise, we are heading towards a very dangerous path at the health level that requires a major cry in the country and dissatisfaction with the existing reality.
I ask God to protect everyone, heal everyone, and guard everyone with his eye that does not sleep. Once again, I congratulate you on the birth of the Master of Messengers and the Seal of the Prophets Abi Al-Qassem Muhammad bin Abdullah. I ask God to make us among those who believe in him, his lovers, and those who are following on his path and are committed to his teachings. May He grant us his intercession on the Day of Resurrection and put us with him and never separate us from him in this life and in the Hereafter. May He allow us to mark this occasion again with goodness, blessing, victory, peace, and health. Many happy returns. Peace and Allah’s mercy be upon you.
لم تكن ردود الفعل من العالمين الإسلامي والعربي، على المواقف التي أطلقها الرئيس الفرنسي إيمانويل ماكرون، وأساء فيها إلى نبي الرحمة وأهان الإسلام، واتهمه بأنه يعيش في أزمات، بالمستوى الردعي الذي يستحقه، ويكشف زيفه وادّعاءه ومغالطاته، ويفضح جهله بالإسلام كعقيدة ورسالة سماوية إنسانية كغيرها من الأديان والرسالات التي تدعو إلى المحبة والتسامح والسلام، والحق والفضيلة، وتتصدّى للإرهاب أياً كان مصدره ومرتكبه وهويته «ومن قتل نفساً بغير حقّ كأنه قتل الناس جميعاً» هذا هو الإسلام.
إنّ الرئيس ماكرون يجب ان يعلم وأعتقد أنه يعلم، إلا إذا كان يريد تجهيل نفسه، أنّ الإرهاب لا دين له ولا طائفة ولا هوية، ونذكّره وهو حكماً يتذكّر ماذا فعلت دولته التي استعمرت دولاً بشعوبها وخيراتها في أفريقيا، في الجزائر وتونس ولبنان وغيرها، وكيف حكمتها بالحديد والنار والاعتقال والقمع والتجويع ومصادرة الممتلكات، يعني أنها مارست الإرهاب المكشوف والمقنّع.
نذكّره، ونسأله، أليست فرنسا وأميركا وأوروبا وبعض العرب هم من اخترعوا «داعش» والحركات الإرهابية المتطرفة، ودعموها سياسياً ومالياً وعسكرياً؟ هل يتذكّر الرئيس الفرنسي عندما أطلق وحلفاؤه، على الإرهابيين القتلة، لقب «مقاتلي حرية» (freedom fighters).
ألستم من موّل وسلّح ودعَم الإرهابيين، ونقلهم إلى بلادنا لقتال الدول التي رفضت الانصياع والخضوع لمشاريعكم ومخططاتكم المشبوهة إرضاء وخدمة للكيان الصهيوني الغاصب؟
ألستم أنتم من فتحتم الطريق أمام الإرهابيين تحت أيّ مسمّى كانوا ليرتكبوا المجازر ويقطعوا الرؤوس ويجزّوا الرقاب ويغتصبوا النساء، في أفظع ما تعرّضت له البشرية في العصر الحديث؟ أليسوا هم بغطاء منكم وحمايتكم قتل الإرهابيون مئات الألوف من الشعوب العربية والإسلامية البريئة، ويتّموا أولادهم وشرّدوهم في البراري في ظروف اجتماعية وإنسانية ومعيشية وصحية ومناخية أودت بعشرات الالوف منهم؟ ألستم من ساعد الإرهابيّين على تدمير بلادنا وتهجير شعوبها وتحطيم وسرقة تراثها وآثارها وطمس حضارتها التي كانت الشاهد على زيف حضارتكم؟
إنّ الذين ينحرون ويقطعون الرقاب في بلدكم فرنسا، هم من صناعتكم، وقد عادوا إلى بلادكم بعد أن أمعنوا إرهاباً وقتلاً وتدميراً وخراباً في بلادنا، يعني بكلّ بساطة بضاعتكم عادت إليكم، بعد أن نفذوا إرهابهم في العراق وسورية ولبنان واليمن.
إعتذر أيها الرئيس الفرنسي ممّن أسأت إلى دينهم ونبيّهم وقيَمهم الرسالية والإنسانية، وتعهّد بعدم تكرار ما ارتكبته من خطأ فاضح لا يغتفر…
“In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
In Part I of this topic (See here), the inception of the Islamic Republic of Iran under the leadership of Imam Khomeini was referenced as a specific example of a system in governance based on Imamat and Wilayat as interpreted, implemented, and practiced in Shi’a Islam. Iran was a nation pegged and primed to become a model for a fully secularized, westernized, and liberalized society in a Muslim majority land. This was a nation endowed with lucrative material wealth and natural resources, several millennia of civilization, culture, and written history but headed by a darling pro-Western puppet regime brought about through series of costly overt and covert schemes and operations.
As well it was stated in the article that the inception of this system was to bring the Word of God into the governance of people exactly when supercilious Western elites, that is, the sorts of elites who have this delusion that history begins and ends with them, were gleefully celebrating an envisioned modern Atlantis in which the Word of God has no place in its systems of governance. Still, the Islamic Republic of Iran happened. Not only did the Islamic Republic of Iran happen, it became a significant, enduring, and dynamic force to reckon with despite all options on and under the table that were thrown at it. Talk about the showing of a heavenly middle phalange. Metaphorically speaking, of course.
Before attending to the next segment, I would like to address here a question posed in the comment section of the part I of the essay since the response to that helps with specific points in the overall argument of the essays. “daniel” on October 02, 2020 · at 4:46 am EST/EDT wrote:
“99.25% of the participants voted “yes” to an Islamic Republic system of government in Iran[1] replacing a system of monarchy based on an inherited position transfer from a king to his eldest son.”
Was the Iran 1979 referendum (results shown above) a once off thing & considered binding for life or was it set up as a recurring probing exercise which follows some regular interval, say a 50 years cycle?
Until 1979, any major movement, like the Constitutional Movement of 1906 or any systematic mechanism that could have legitimately and authentically admitted the will of the people into the system of governance had often been violently suppressed. I addressed some of that in another essay last year titled “Willfully and Consciously Demonizing Shia: the Leadership of the Pious.” Please see here.
The revolution of 1979 happened because for hundreds of years almost all major and minor movements to reform the system of governance according to authentic desires and will of the people of Iran had failed. The referendum in 1979 was the first and the ONLY straight forward mechanism at that time to get the voices of the people heard, clearly documented, and actualized. After some revisions to the constitution 10 years later, another nationwide referendum was held and 97.38% of the participants approved the revised version of the constitution. Furthermore, through direct election of their representatives into Majlis Shoraye Islami (an assembly of 290 seats) and Majlis Khobregah Rahbari, the Assembly of Experts for Leadership (consisting of 88 seats), the people of Iran could make decisions about the constitution and the Wali Faqih, respectively.
When there are already appropriate, effective, and functioning venues and mechanisms in place, the need for a referendum becomes null and void unless either all of those systems become so corrupt and dysfunctional that the will of the people can no longer be genuinely manifested, or the issue in question is so novel that the approval of which does not fall within the realm of the established mechanisms and requires a nationwide referendum. So far, we have had neither of those situations occurring in Iran.
I would like to add a comment that I thought the answer provided by another commenter “arash” a good use of the instrument of jadal—a form of argument when one uses already accepted conventions of the opponent as proof and/or refutation of one’s own argument. Although I think “daniel” may have asked the question out of sincere curiosity, I do understand the sensitivity of the question and what may have prompted that response. A repeated ad nauseam favorite false statement by the Zionist West, Inc. has often been that a democratic referendum can work in a Muslim land only once: to bring about an Islamic State into power (often referencing Egypt and Muslim Brotherhood experience of 1950s as example); then it is stopped for good. Nevertheless, we are glad that the democratic processes work so very well and in an exemplary manner at least in the US, France, UK, and elsewhere in the West. Electoral College Votes. Two Party Systems. AIPAC. Industry Lobbies. Yellow Vests. Brexit. Arbitrary Lockdowns…
People. Glass Houses. Stones.
Now, in continuing with our topic in this follow-up essay, we start with defining the terms and concepts related to the topic of wilayat and Imamat. The term wilayat is derived from tri-literal root word “wāw lām yā,” literally meaning “something that comes very closely on the heels of another of a similar essence without distance and separation between the two.”[1] Depending on the context, the word wali could take different (but related) meanings. Prominent among the meanings are guardian, protector, friend, ally, encouraging, aiding, assisting, heeding, following, parent, and offspring.[2] The common denominator and implicit in all these meanings of wali and its derivatives are two conjectures: 1) a spiritual and devotional nearness, intimacy, and companionship; 2) a reciprocal and mutual relationship both in theory and in practice.
Generally speaking, anyone and anything can become anyone’s wali and/or one can choose him/her/it as his wali, be it an informal choice and/or a formal declaration though laws and conventions. If you want to know who your wali is, you must take an inventory of who and what your closest allies, companions, influencers, friends, masters, and followers are and how you spend most of your time. While at it, you should examine what credentials those awlia (plural form of wali) have, where they are leading you, what the final destination and ultimate consequence of the path in which you are following that wali are. Let’s make the meaning of the term more palpable and empirical.
An alcoholic has chosen alcohol and its colleagues –that is, anything and anyone connected to it by way of selling, serving, producing, distributing, and more – as his awlia. He spends part of his time chasing after getting that alcohol and the remainder of his time following where that alcohol takes him (in mind, body, and soul). Obedient to his wali to the bone. Ditto with a drug addict, sex addict, food addict, fame addict, internet addict, and you name it. For capitalists, capital et al. are their awlia. For Satan worshippers, Satan is their wali. They chase to find it and they follow where it leads, a downward spiral to be sure. For some Trump and his handlers are their wali/awlia; for others Biden and his handlers are their wali/awlia. Some choose Muhammad bin Salman as their wali, and some do the same with Abul Fattah el-Sisi. Sultan Erdogan Jr. is wali to some and Netanyahu is wali to others. Zionism, imperialism, globalism, and more are all awlia to this, that, and the other. For some, their ego is their wali and for some others their wants, lusts, ambitions and greed.
A troupe of wretched examples to be sure. The reality of our world is such that hopeless examples of wali far exceed the worthy and upright ones. As Molana Jalal-iddin Muhammad (Molavi) in Mathnavi reminds us: رشته ای بر گردنم افکنده دوست — می کشد هر جا که خاطرخواه اوست“A bridle around my neck placed by the beloved – Taking me place to place wherever s/he desires.” So, it behooves us to choose wisely that/s/he which/who we choose as our wali. Generally speaking, that is.
More specifically, however, about the term wali (and its plural form awlia), Quran issues certain caveats. There is a verse in Quran (2:255) called Ayatul Kursi which is memorized and often recited by Muslims with the two verses that follow it, verse 256 and verse 257.[3] The trio offer many blessings and bounties for those who recite them regularly. So, they are quite well-known among those who are blessed enough to have chosen Quran as their regular companion. All three verses and their translations are in the reference sections. Here, however, I would like to restate first Verse 257 in which the word Wali with a specific meaning of Protecting Guardian and its plural form awlia meaning guardians are used:
“Allah is Wali [Protecting Guardian] of those who have believed. He brings them out of the darkness(es) toward the light. And those who disbelieved, their awlia [guardians] are the Taghut [transgressing oppressor and evildoers] who bring them out of the light toward the darkness(es). Those are the companions of the fire and they abide therein forever.”
Thus there is only One True Wali for humanity and that is God, the Protecting Guardian. If a person or a collective (an Ummah) chooses anyone and anything other than God as his/her/their guardians, then they are eventually led into nothing but all sorts of darkness: Oppression, misery, ignorance, transgression and more. The choice is clear: Choose One True Wali, or become slaves to many masters and false gods and their self-serving impulses. If a nation does not choose God as One True Wali, it appears that any good-for-nothing two-bit jerk with some capital, fire power, and conniving skills would dare to imagine himself as qualified to be their master and make decision for them. I am just saying.
Logic, reason, wisdom, common sense, and intelligence all dictate that we, as individuals and/or as collectives choose the best and the most qualified for guardianship, administration, and caretaking of our affairs according to our beliefs and ideals. And nobody is putting a gun/sword over anyone’s head to choose God as their Wali.
I can see an explosion of fiery questions in so many minds. Wasn’t Islam spread by sword?! Didn’t Allah-fearing Muslims attack nations and forced people to convert to Islam or get decapitated?! Does the word Daesh/ISIS mean anything?! I am very grateful that you are asking all these questions, notwithstanding the questionable assumptions. The key to answering all these questions is following all the intricate details that one way or another link to the concept of wali and use concrete and true examples to distinguish true from false, which by the end of these essays we will have done, Inshallah.
Verse 256 of Chapter 2 (Baqarah) that we mentioned above states that:
“There is no compulsion in the religion. Certainly a distinction has been clearly made between the right and the wrong. Therefore, whoever disbelieves in false idols/evildoing transgressors and believes in Allah, then certainly he has grasped onto a robust anchor that will not break. And Allah is All-Hearing and All-Knowing.”
Since there is no (read, must not be any) compulsion in this religion and the distinction between right and wrong has been clearly made, our job is to first reject all false awlia and then accept One True Wali. If we do not, our punishment/the consequence is to fall into dizzying vortices of fear and regret. If we succeed in doing this though, then we have grasped onto a “robust anchor”—an unbreakable, firm, unwavering, and lasting chain and handhold. Again, the choice is clear and is ours.
Now, we need to follow up on two clues: 1) How God as Wali translates into the concept of wilayat of a person, which means guardianship, stewardship, caretaking, safekeeping, and supervision by other than God; 2) What/who the bands in the unbreakable chain of “robust anchor” are.
As Muslims, we believe the Almighty God has absolute Wilayat, the Absolute Protecting Guardianship, of all creation, including the human beings. This Wilayat takes two inter-linked and inter-related types of laws that govern us (humans) and the world in which we live. One form relates to the laws of Taqwin, or the innate laws of nature. Everyone and everything from a speck of dust to electrons to multi-cellular complex beings to the universe at large submits to, or is a Muslim to, these laws of Taqwin.
We are able to study the chemistry of water because the electrons, the protons, the neutrons, the atoms, the molecules, the hydrogen bonds, and every drop of water, every stream, river, lake, and ocean all faithfully submit to the laws of Taqwin. Because there is a law, we can learn from the repeated patterns made possible by that law and try to manipulate observable things around us. It does not really matter if someone believes in God or s/he is an agnostic or an atheist. Every ounce of his/her existence submits, or is a Muslim to the laws of Taqwin set by God, the Creator. When we study biology, anatomy and physiology, biochemistry, parasitology, microbiology, immunology, virology, ecology, and whatever else, we are in fact trying to understand the laws of Taqwin regardless of whether we fully understand or willingly admit this fact or not.
Most of these laws could be observed, learned, experimented with, and from them countless lessons could be drawn. God’s Wilayat in Taqwin is Absolute. That we can manipulate a gene, for example, it does not mean that somehow we have gained some sort of a veto power to overwrite the laws of Taqwin. It only means the laws of Taqwin that govern the genes offer a level of flexibility to be “interpreted,” to a certain point, in practice. So, those “scientists” with a tiny bit of knowledge but huge propensity for arrogance should exercise caution not to get too cocky since they do not really know when their arrogance might just force them to nosedive into abyss. Wilayat over Taqwin is not our topic of discussion here, so we leave it be.
The other form of God’s Wilayat relate to the laws of Tashri’e. These are laws that are sent to people by God through His great Messengers and Prophets (May peace be upon them all) to guide humanity in this life and prepare/educate/equip them with the appropriate knowledge and skill for the Hereafter. The first prophet, we are taught by Quran, was Adam (peace be upon him) and the last one was Prophet Muhammad. However, great prophets of God were not merely some post office employees given a piece of mail to deliver. They were also given the responsibility and mandate to govern the societies of believers in accordance to the laws set by God Almighty. In other words, they were delegated by God to govern; an authorized or deputized Wilayat. In this regard then a prophet is Wali of God, and all prophets are Awlia of God, Awlia-Allah.
Why? Because the one who knows and understands the laws best, the one who has been trained and assisted by the Law Maker the best, the one who is the most truthful, honest, trustworthy, pious, and pure and behaves most authentically in accordance with the laws of God and obeys him in heart, body, mind, and soul is the best qualified person to govern the believers of God based on His laws. It is not an unreasonable and illogical concept that would be hard to grasp. It is rather simple.
Is it stated in Quran that the prophets of God have guardianship over the believers’ affairs? Yes. A few examples are helpful. During the time of Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him), he had the legitimate Wilayat and guardianship to govern and lead the society of the believers. During the time of Prophet Moses (peace be upon him), he had the legitimate Wilayat and guardianship to govern and arbitrate the affairs of the believers. Likewise with Prophet Isa Son of Maryam (peace be upon him), Prophet David (peace be upon him), Prophet Issac (peace be upon him), Prophet Muhammad and all other prophets of God. Relevant verses abound in Quran but here are a few examples:
In Chapter 4 (Nisaa), Verse 64:1-8, it is stated: “And We did not send any Messengers except for them to be obeyed by Permission from God.”
Chapter 4, Verse 59:1-10 reads: “O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those among you who have the guardianship of your affairs.”
Chapter 26 (Shu’ara), Verses 105-110: “The people of Noah denied the Messengers. When their brother Noah said to them, ‘Will you not fear God? Indeed, I am a trustworthy Messenger to you. Therefore, fear God and obey me. And I do not ask of you any payment for it. My payment is not but from the Lord of the Worlds. So, fear God and obey me.”
Chapter 26, Verses 142-145: “When said to them their brother Saleh, ‘Will you not fear God? Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy Messenger. So, fear God and obey me. And I do not ask of you any payment for it. My payment is not but from the Lord of the Worlds.”
Chapter 26, Verses 160-164: “People of Lut denied the Messengers. When said to them their brother Lut, ‘Will you not fear God? Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy Messenger. So, fear God and obey me. And I do not ask of you any payment for it. My payment is not but from the Lord of the Worlds.”
Therefore, this guardianship, this delegated (by God) system of governance is entrusted to Prophets who are trustworthy and get their wages/salary directly from God. They are not there to fill their pockets, accumulate wealth, and fulfill their lofty desires at the expense of people and under the guise of governing them. They have primacy over any other person for that position.
These are all Prophets of God and we are saying that Prophet Muhmmad was the last of the Prophets. Then, what happened after him? Was the world left without a Wali? Were people and the believers left on their own to find someone, anyone, to govern their affairs? Was there any criterion? Did the Prophet leave the people stranded to fight and divide? Would that even be a responsible and wise thing to do?
It is quite evident that we Shi’a Muslims believe that Wilayat did not end with the Prophet and the guardianship of the society of the believers, the Muslim Ummah, had a clear path to take. This brings us to the next phase of the essay in which we explore the term Imamat and how a major division occurred as soon as the Prophet passed away. We are entering into a very complex territory and a minefield and, with God’s Help, I will need to do some major mine neutralization. So, stay tuned, please.
References
[1] Jafari MR & Haeri SH (1390). “An Inquiry into the meaning of the term Wali.” Quarterly Special in Imamat Research, No. 1, Imamat Cultural Foundation, Spring 1390.
[2] Norasideh AA, Feyzullah-Zadeh AA, and Mastery Farahani J (1391). “Semantics of the term ‘Wali’ in Al-Quran Al-Karim.” Arabic Literature Bulletin,No. 7 (6/65), Pages 151-168. Shahid Beheshti University, College of Literature and Social Sciences.
“Allah is One, there is no God but Him, the Ever existing, the Sustainer of all that exists. It does not overtake Him either slumber or sleep. To Him belongs all there is in the heavens and whatever on the earth. Who is the one who can intercede with Him except with His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them. And they will not encompass anything of His knowledge except that which He Wills. His dominance extends to all the heavens and the earth. And it will not tire Him the guardianship of them both.”
“There is no compulsion in the religion. Certainly a distinction has been clearly made between the right and the wrong. Therefore, whoever disbelieves the false idols/evildoing transgressors and believes in Allah, then certainly he has grasped onto a robust anchor that is unbreakable. And Allah is All-Hearing and All-Knowing.”
“Allah is Wali [Protecting Guardian] of those who have believed. He brings them out of the darkness(es) toward the light. And those who disbelieved, their awlia [guardians] are the Taghut [transgressing oppressor and evildoers] who bring them out of the light toward the darkness(es). Those are the companions of the fire and they abide therein forever.”
Bismillah-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahim, “In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
Who is qualified to be in the position of governing and based on what rules are two of the most essential questions with which human societies continue to wrestle. We are currently witnessing at the global stage how the fate and wellbeing of nations are tightly linked to the quality of, or lack thereof, the people in charge of their affairs and the quality of the rules with which they are governed. There is now multitude of nations and leaderships globally that operate based on many ideological shades and hues. From among them, one could choose a few systems to dissect, compare, and contrast to have a sober understanding of which system could offer the wisest framework for a given nation, why, and how. Here, I will focus on one specific form within Shi’a Islam frame of reference, that of Imamat with its extension Wilayat Faqih.
Admirers of secular and other non-secular persuasions could have their own picks and explain their version of things. While they are at it, they could also explain how theirs is working out for them but we request that they do so with intellectual honesty and solid evidence.
Happily, time is almost up for two specific groups of people who have actually been enablers of one another’s dysfunctions, true colleagues, if you will: 1) Religious hypocrites who have duplicitously used religion as a shield to further their selfish lusts and corrupt ways. 2) Non-believing seculars who have made misuse of religion by the first group a scapegoat for their ignorance, arrogance, and incompetence. They are in fact two blades of the same scissors, a match made in hell.
A genuinely interested and intellectually honest and fair person nowadays could examine all evidence about particular leaderships and nations that claim a given religion or ideology as their frame of reference and distinguish the real from the fake. Quite a few rulers around the world, for example, claim Islam as their frame of reference—let’s say, like Iran or Turkey or Saudi Arabia or Egypt or Pakistan or any other— but an impartial thinker could examine all the evidence and reach a reasonable conclusion that these nations have decidedly different systems of words and deeds even though they all claim Islam as the overarching framework. When, for instance, Ayatullah Khamenei of Iran speaks about which direction Iran and the Iranians should be, would be, and are taking, a diligent truth seeker has enough tangible, measurable, and truthful evidence to determine that this man is speaking and behaving as an honest, forthright, and God-fearing leader. In contrast, when the Sultan Al-junior Rajab Tayyib Erdogan of Turkey speaks of Islam, Muslims, and Quran, a fair person can clearly conclude based on real and tangible evidence that s/he is witnessing an Effendi Charlatan in operation.
Questions (be they real, cynical, or rhetorical) forming in the mind of those without real familiarity with Quran and Islam might include the followings: If Islam as a religion and Quran as a Book of God have qualities that they could produce such contrary products and opposite leaderships as a wise leader like Ayatullah Khamenei and a weasel like Sultan Erdogan Junior, then what good is such religion and of what use is such Book?! Random and lottery picking could have a 50/50 chance of either of the two outcomes, too. So, why bother with God, Islam, the religion, and the Book?
These are rational questions and I am glad that some are asking them, albeit with their inner voices. The short answer to these questions is that the two are not both products of the same religion and Book. They are the products of the degree to which they stay on or astray from the Right Path as set by this religion and this Book. The Leader is an example of someone who is genuinely striving to be on the Right Path to the best of his abilities. The weasel is an example of someone who has willfully deviated from the Right Path in deeds but is pretending to be on it in his ramblings. The long answer and evidence and documents supporting it constitute the core of these writings.
For the sake of transparency and for those who may be new to my essays, I must state once again that I am a Shi’a Muslim Twelve-Imami and a believer in Wilayat Faqih, the current system of governance in Iran. An important task before me here as I see it, is not to get anyone to accept or approve of this system of Imamat and Wilayat Faqih. Rather, I hope to provide enough and clearly enough explanations and examples to disentangle and clarify complex and at times decidedly contentious historical and religious facts and concepts in order to correctly convey the wisdom and the reasoning behind this particular system of leadership and governance to those who are interested and/or have an intellectual curiosity about the subject.
I am certain I cannot pack into one moderately-sized essay everything I ought to say to do a decent job of explaining without making this difficult article so lengthy that by the time people reach the middle, they will have already forgotten the beginning. Therefore, in as much a synopsis form as possible, I will Inshallah explain in this and most likely one or two follow-up essays how a delegated system of governance by God based on God’s rules as revealed in Quran and interpreted by scholars of Shi’a Twelve-Imami has worked both in theory and in practice. We shall see. I will also use historical examples from Islam and Iran in addition to relevant concepts to make the text less abstract and more comprehensible. We shall see as well how things have been working out for us the non-seculars specifically the Shi’a Muslims under Imamat and Wilayat Faqih, as operationalized in the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is not going to be an easy ride. So, do please bear with me and the essays.
“Islamic Republic, Not a Word More, Not a Word Less”
Fifty days after the victory of the Iranian Revolution in 1979, through a nation-wide referendum in which 98 percent of eligible voters participated, 99.25% of the participants voted “yes” to an Islamic Republic system of government in Iran[1] replacing a system of monarchy based on an inherited position transfer from a king to his eldest son.
The ballots were worded rather simply (See the image below): “The change from previous regime to Islamic Republic the constitution of which will be put to the nation’s vote for approval.” The “Yes” ballots were in crimson text on a green background. The “No” ballots were in red lettering on a beige background.
No gimmicks. No play on words. No deceptive tactics. It was on persistent urging of Imam Ruhullah Khomeini the referendum was held in the first place. Many were insisting that he, as the uncontested Leader of the Revolution, should just make a public announce about the change in Iran’s political system since the majority in the population was wholeheartedly supporting him anyway. Why mess with a referendum?
Imam Khomeini begged to differ. He insisted on a real tangible and measurable participation by the people of Iran. The people of Iran must put their choice into writing. A choice in which there is obligation and responsibility for their life on earth and for the Hereafter. Their decision had to be clearly documented and witnessed by themselves first and foremost, by the world at large, by the future generations, and above all, by God. A majority “yes” vote in this context could be thought of as a written Bey’at, or a written covenant of allegiance, to the very principles of Islam as the overarching framework of governance. The governed does not just consent. The governed enters into a contract to never desert the scene and to remain ever-vigilant and ever-present at war or at peace or wherever the battle is. For the past 40+ years, majority of the Iranian people, by Grace of God Almighty, have been in the scene.
It is useful to go into a bit more details about the events surrounding the referendum since it gives us an inside look into how things were back then at the beginning. Also, I might need to refer back to some segments later on in the essays. Late Sadiq Tabatabai, the spokesperson for then the transitional government, writes the details in his memoires as follows:
We were in the middle of Esfand (the 12th month in the Iranian calendar, March 1979) when Ahmad Agha (Imam Khomeini’s second son) called me from Qom. He said, “Agha says you must hold a referendum.”
I said, “That’s all good but I am not in charge!”
He said, “You should talk to the State Minister and tell him Imam says a referendum must be held.” I went to Agha Ahmad Haj Seyyed Javadi and relayed Imam’s message. He said, “A referendum needs tools. It requires provincial and regional governors. When we have none of these, how could we hold any referendum?! The State Ministry used to have a major office of elections but that is not currently active either.”
So, I called Ahmad Agha and told him what the State Minister had told me. An hour later, Ahmad Agha called again and said that Agha was asking how the referendum’s situation was progressing. I said, “Ahmad jan, this is not some dyeing barrel [an Iranian expression meaning it is not that easy].”
He said, “You know Agha and I know him, too! I am not going to go back to him a second time and say no! If you want, you come and tell him yourself.”
Immediately, I headed to Qom and went to see Imam. I said, “Agha, why a referendum? You should just make an announcement about it. The whole world knows that the entire population is behind you if you just announce that Islamic Republic is now our political system, all the people will be behind you and support you. Besides, a referendum is going to show exact same thing as well. Right now, we have no resources.”
He said, “You are not understanding things. Right now, it is as you say. But fifty years from now, they are going to turn around and say that they stirred people’s emotions and they just forced the system they wanted on them. They manipulated the public’s sentiment and had them say what they themselves told them to say. So, voting must be done and the precise number of people for and against it must be officially determined and publicly announced.”[2]
Those of us who observe on a regular basis what is spewed out of the media outlets of hostile regimes in the UK, the US, the Zionist entity in Occupied Palestine, and their regional oil wells with flags, we could see quite vividly how they are trying so desperately to distort and falsify the Iranian history and the history of our revolution. So, we find ourselves always remembering to salute Imam Khomeini for his prudence and foresight.
Within less than three weeks from the majority “yes” vote to change to an Islamic Republic, another nationwide election was held and 73 members of Majlis Khubregan-e Qanon Asasi, the Assembly of Experts for Constitutional Laws were elected directly by the people. This assembly formulated the first constitution of the Islamic Republic with Wilayat Faqih, or the Guardianship of Faqih, as its core custodial authority and stewardship through some 67 public and open sessions.[3]
The final draft of the constitution was once again put to a nationwide vote on November 22, 1979, just as it had been promised by Imam Khomeini and was clearly written on the ballots for the very first referendum (See above). Again, there were quite a few people who were insisting the constitution not to be put into another direct vote by the people. However, Imam Khomeini insisted once again on proceeding with another nationwide referendum so the people of Iran could cast their votes regarding the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The constitution was approved by nearly 95% of the eligible participants who voted positively.
Now, from among all existing systems of government, why this system and how is it different from other Islamic countries in the world? Why did it happen in 1979? Why in a Shia-majority Iran? What does “Wilayat” mean? What are the indicators of “Wilayat”? What does “Faqih” mean? What are the attributes of a “Faqih”? Why should a “Wali Faqih” become the supreme steward of the entire system? Where did this system and its principle concepts come from and why? Where is it headed, how, and why?
We will get to all these questions and more. But it is important to first contextualize the formation of this decidedly religious system by examining the global socio- and geo-political context in which it was being established during the last quarter of the 20th Century. I apologize for zigzagging back and forth through time. It is a necessary tactic here to get to some significant events.
The Iranian Islamic Revolution in a Global Context
Written in blood-red color and pasted on a solid black background a rhetorical question was plastered on the cover of Time magazine on April 8, 1966, about thirteen years before the victory of the Iranian Revolution. At the cost of 35 cents per issue, a willfully ostentatious question read: “Is God Dead?”[4] The cover, for the first time ever, used no figures, photographs, or drawings. Dismissal of a deeply-rooted system of belief in God was gleefully advertised. No need for any distractions and pictorial bells and whistles. The title aimed to rehash a rhetoric of Nietzsche from eight decades earlier written in The Gay Science:
“After Buddha was dead, people showed his shadow for centuries afterwards in a cave,—an immense rightful shadow. God is dead: but as the human race is constituted, there will perhaps be caves for millenniums yet, in which people will show his shadow.—And we—we have still to overcome his shadow.”[5]
A shadow play, heh?! In the Time article, the author had not failed to overestimate the power of the self-proclaimed liberals of the West. Nor had it faltered to underestimate God and men of God. He wrote, “Secularization, science, urbanization all have made it comparatively easy for the modern man to ask where God is and hard for the man of faith to give a convincing answer, even to himself.” He was, after all, catering to his bosses’ greed to sell a few more copies of the magazine at 35 cents a piece. His boss was catering to the greed of his masters at Meredith Corporation to keep his job. Meredith Corporation in turn was catering to the greed of its shareholders at New York Stock Exchange to show a noticeable rise in their stock price. Greed, a deadly Sin? Says who?
The harbingers of the self-declared liberal West intoxicated by a feeling of intestinal fortitude failed to see, or more accurately refused to believe, what was going on right under their aloofly laic noses in their most precious puppet kingdoms. While the West was busy closing the file on anything God might say about the governance and rulership of people and societies in the West itself and around the world, Imam Ruhullah Khomeini, a man of God in his sixties then, who was sent to exile in Najaf by Shah’s regime was hard at work to bring the Word of God into the governance of the people who believed in God, and in Iran of all places.
Around the time the Time article was being circulated in April 1966, Imam Khomeini gave a mission to his first son, Agha Mostafa Khomeini to take part in Hajj and make connections with other Muslim activists and inform them of the aims and the progress of the Islamic movement. Shah’s SAVAK (National Intelligence and Information Agency) in close collaboration with Istikhbarat (Information Ministry) in Iraq and Saudi Arabia is following the movement. A memo from the central office of Shah’s SAVAK that was forwarded to a local office of SAVAK in Qom (See the image below) reads:
“Information obtained indicates Mostafa Khomeini, the son of Ayatullah Khomeini, who in the current year went to Mecca, has had contacts with a few radical elements including Majdiddin Mahllati, one of the opposition clerics in Shiraz. They have made some decisions for the months of Muharram and Safar. Since it is probable that these types of people, upon their return to Iran, create incitements, you must order a complete surveillance of the known entities and make necessary arrangements and announce the outcome.”[6]
Iran was a country that was groomed by the lords of the West and through overt and covert operations and a major coup d’etat to become its most darling puppet secular regime and Gendarme in Persian Gulf. It was to be Shi’a only in name and a great model for the region. Even up until two years before the victory of the Iranian Revolution, Jimmy Carter referred to it as an “Island of Stability in one of the more troubled areas of the world.” How boorishly unschooled. (To be continued.)
References
[1] The Center for Islamic Revolution Documents, “Media Narrative Regarding the Islamic Republic Referendum on Farvardin 12, 1358.” News Code: 4822. Published online at 12:19, Farvardin 12, 1398 (April 1, 2019). Accessed online through the Center’s site: http://irdc.ir/
[2] Tabatabai S. “Social and Political Memoires of Dr. Sadeq Tabatabai.” Vol. 3, Pages 269-276. Translated from Farsi.
[3] Madani, Seyyed J (1382). “A Review of the Formation of the Islamic Republic’s Constitution.” Portal of Comprehensive Social Sciences, Zamaneh, No. 16. Social Sciences and Cultural Studies Research Center, Article Number: 9644. Online at: Insani.ir
[5] Friedrich Nietzsche (2001). “The Gay Science.” Willimas B., the Editor; Nauckhoff J., the Translator. Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, UK. Available online at: http://www.holybooks.com/the-gay-science-friedrich-nietzsche
[6] SAVAK Memo #1432600011 to Qom’s SAVAK. Central Office of National Intelligence and Security Agency, Prime Minister’s Office, Farvardin 25, 1345 (April 14, 1966).
بعد تحرير الجنوب اللبناني، وانتصار تموز/يوليو 2006، ودخول حزب الله إلى سوريا في العام 2013، وجد الحزب نفسه أمام سؤال حان وقته.
في السادس عشر من شباط/فبراير 1985، تلا الرئيس الحالي للمجلس السياسي لحزب الله، السيد إبراهيم أمين السيد، الرسالة المفتوحة التي وجهها حزب الله إلى المستضعفين في لبنان والعالم. بدا ما قاله آنذاك بياناً حماسياً، غريباً، بل ممعناً في غرابته، من مجموعة جديدة وافدة إلى مسرح الأحداث في لبنان، يحار مراقبوها في نسبتها إلى المجال الذي تنتمي إليه، والأهداف الكبيرة التي تطمح إلى تحقيقها.
التطلّعات العابرة للحدود التي تضمَّنتها الرسالة أقل ما كان يمكن أن يردّ عليها بعضهم في حينها، بأن يستخدم عبارة الزعيم السوفياتي جوزيف ستالين حين حذّروه من قوة الفاتيكان، فتساءل ساخراً: “كم دبابة عند بابا الفاتيكان؟”، أو بحسب نصّ آخر: “كم فرقة عسكرية يملكها البابا في الفاتيكان؟”.
مجموعة صغيرة حديثة العهد بالسياسة والقتال تدّعي لنفسها قوة خارقة، فتقول: “أما قدرتنا العسكرية، فلا يتخيّلَنَّ أحد حجمها، إذ ليس لدينا جهاز عسكري منفصل عن بقية أطراف جسمنا، بل إنّ كلاً منّا جندي مقاتل حين يدعو داعي الجهاد إنّنا متوجهون لمحاربة المنكر من جذوره، وأوّل جذور المنكر أميركا”.
أتصوّر مثلاً أن يقارن أحدهم بعد أن قرأ الرسالة بين الأحزاب القومية واليسارية التي كانت تحمل أحلام جماهيرها بالوحدة والتضامن والتكامل وتلاحم الجبهات، لدحر مشاريع الهيمنة الاستعمارية والانقضاض على “إسرائيل” وتدميرها واستعادة فلسطين من مغتصبيها، ولكنها مُنيت بعد مدة من انطلاقتها بفشل في أهدافها، وإحباطات في مشاعرها، ونكسات في نتائج أعمالها، وبين جماعة لا أرضية سياسية وعسكرية لها، تريد أن تختبر من جديد بـ”سوريالية ثورية” حجم الألم والأحلام الموجعة التي يُخلّفها طريق المحاولة والخطأ! لا بأس، يقول هذا البعض، فلتجرّب حظها من الخيبة والمرارة، ففي الإنسان دوماً شيء ما يقوده نحو حتفه وتلاشيه!
لكن لم تمرّ إلا سنوات قليلة حتى بدأ المراقبون يستكشفون شيئاً جديداً تماماً. رواية مختلفة تقول إنّه ليس بالضرورة أن يعيد التاريخ نفسه بطريقة حلزونية، فما رُصد بعد سنوات قلائل من تحولات وإنجازات وانتصارات، اتضح أنّها لم تكن استجابات عاطفية غاضبة متسرّعة على هوان قديم وعجز مقيم، بسبب ما حلّ من خراب داخل العالمين العربيّ والإسلاميّ، بل هي مبنيّة على رؤية علمية، وخطوات عملية، وعوامل تاريخية ودينية وجيوسياسية، ودوافع كافية لضمان اجتياز الصراع بنجاح.
القضية لم تكن تتطلّب البتة عند “المؤسسيين الأوائل” تستراً على طرح ربما يؤدي إلى استنتاجات وتفسيرات خاطئة ومشوّهة، أو تستدعي مقاومة الفكرة المغرية القائلة إننا” أمة ترتبط مع المسلمين في أنحاء العالم كافة برباط عقائدي وسياسي متين هو الإسلام”، وبضرورة الدعوة” إلى إقامة جبهة عالمية للمستضعفين، لمواجهة مؤامرات قوى الاستكبار في العالم”، أو “أننا نطمح أن يكون لبنان جزءاً لا يتجزأ من الخارطة السياسية المعادية لأميركا والاستكبار العالمي وللصهيونية العالمية”، لجهة إفراطها وخروجها عن قوانين الاجتماع والسياسة اللبنانية.
لم يكن ذلك كله مدعاة للتحفظ، بل على العكس، جاء التأكيد في الرسالة على أهميته وقيمته الحقيقية، ولو كان العقل السياسي يضيق به، أو كان يطمح إلى ما يفوق إمكانيات الحزب آنذاك، لأنّ المبدأ العقائدي الذي كان يدفع في هذا السبيل، ويُملي هذه الاعتبارات، ويُذكي هذا الشعور، ويستجلب هذه الإرادة، كان أقوى من التصورات السيادية والدستورية السائدة، وأكبر من الوقائع والمعايير التي تحكم سلوك الدول وتوازناتها.
كل المؤمنين بالنهج الأصيل والعاملين في مداره كانوا مشغولين بالتأكيد أنّ أمةً جديدةً يجب أن تُولد من رحم التناقضات والصراعات المفتوحة على أكثر من ميدان. لم يشعروا بأنهم في مأزق أو تيه صحراوي لا يدري أحد منهم إلى ماذا يُفضي، بل كانوا على يقين من سلامة الطريق وتحقيق الأهداف.
وإذا كانت بعض الحركات العابرة للحدود الدينية والجغرافية والعرقية في المنطقة العربية قد وصلت إلى طريق مسدود في نضالاتها، ولم تستطع تجاوز هزيمتها، بسبب طبيعة التكوين الفكري والسلوك السياسي الذي حوّلها إلى كتل جامدة معطلة، فإنّ التنظيم الجديد قد صمّم فكرته تصميماً ذهنياً صارماً، وحددّ لانطلاقته بداية واعية واعدة، وخلق تشكيلاً منفتحاً على الجهاد المحلي الحديث والإرث التاريخي القديم، بنحو يعيد هيكلة البنية الرمزية والإيديولوجية باستحضار ماضي الثائرين وإعادة دمجه بالحاضر، ثم إنّ هناك إدراكاً للثمن الفادح الذي يجب دفعه، لا أنّ القضية مجرد تكهن أو رغبة “صوتية” لا تنفع في الحقيقة أكثر من استدراج أقدام “المتكهّنين” إلى هاوية الوهم.
كما أنّ التنبؤ بالنصر استشراف علميّ محفوف بالمخاطر، لا ينفصل لحظة واحدة عن الارتباط بالواقع الحي الذي يفرز الإنجازات والإخفاقات على السواء. ولأنّ صورة العدو أكثر تعقيداً من كونه مجرد مجنون يتغذى على القتل، فإنّ النصر ليس خبراً يُذاع، وإنما هو نضال محموم، ومقاومة ضارية واستراتيجية طويلة تتطلَّب قدرة عالية على تحمل الألم والصعاب، وإرادة فولاذية لمواصلة العمل، واعتماداً على الذات في النطاق الجغرافي المحلي، واستبعاداً كلياً لدور المنظمات الدولية التي تقف في معظم الأحيان إلى جانب الظالمين والغزاة، بدلاً من مساعدتها المستضعفين؛ أصحاب الحقوق المشروعة.
وكما يقول الشاعر عبد الرحمن الشرقاوي: “إنّ القضية ملكنا… هي عارنا أو فخرنا”، فالانهزام أو الانتصار تعبير واقعي متعلق بطبيعة المعركة وظروفها، ولكن المهم في الأمر أن لا ينضوي المقاومون تحت أيّ مظلة غير موثوقة، ولا ينساقوا وراء منهج غير إسلامي. أما الاعتماد على الذات، فلا يعني التردد عن قبول مساعدة قوى الأمة المختلفة، بل المطلوب أن تتحرك كل الطاقات في التعامل مع الأزمات والتحديات في إطار الوحدة أو “الجسد الذي إذا اشتكى منه عضو، تداعت له سائر الأعضاء بالسهر والحمى”.
لذلك، يؤكد المقطع التالي العلائقية والوشائجية المطلوبة بين الأطراف وقلب الأمة: “إننا أبناء أمة حزب الله في لبنان… إننا نعتبر أنفسنا جزءاً من أمة الإسلام في العالم، والتي تواجه أعتى هجمة استكبارية من الغرب والشرق على السواء”.
هذا التعاضد بين فئة في لبنان وفئة أو فئات في بلدان أخرى أشبه بصيغة قانونية لازمة بين طرفين أو أكثر، تقتضي كل أشكال التعاون المتاحة، ما يجعل النسق الديني المتشكل عن هذا التوليف “المقدس” يلبي الوظيفة الإيديولوجية والسياسية للحزب الذي يسعى إلى هدم أركان الأعداء في البقعة التي يتحرك فيها.
إنّ هذا الاتصال المقصود بالأمة يهدف الحزب الجديد من ورائه إلى التمايز عن مغالطات نخب حزبية وعلمائية على امتداد المنطقة، كانت تنشر الاستسلام والقدرية، وعوّضت المقاومة بالتواكل والغيب، فكان ضرورياً تطهير الإسلام مما علق به من تشويهات، واستدعاؤه مجدداً ليكون المرجع النظري والحركي الذي يُلهم المسلمين اللبنانيين طريقة النهوض، وبناء العلاقات، ومواجهة التحديات بكل تشعباتها.
ولكنَّ مشكلة هذا الاتصال، في رأي البعض، أنّه يهزّ التكوين الوطني للحزب، ويشكّك في درجة التزامه بالقضايا اللبنانية التي يُفترض أن يُدافع عنها تحت سقف سيادة الدولة، لكنّه من خلال تفضيله إطار الأمة على إطار الوطن، وتوهينه البعد الداخلي في مقابل تعظيمه البعد الخارجي، يبلغ الرجحان مستوى يجعل الحزب يفقد خصائصه ومشروعيته المحلية، بيد أنّ حزب الله بانخراطه في محاربة الاحتلال الإسرائيلي ومشاريع الهيمنة الغربية على لبنان، يعيد إنتاج الأجوبة الحاسمة حول مَن صنع الهزائم، ومَن صنع العار، ومَن جلب التخلف والهوان لهذا الوطن.
هنا يأتي النص الديني الإسلامي، لا كدليل نظري فحسب، وإنما كسياق واقعي اجتماعي، وكممارسة سياسية وجهادية ملموسة، فحضور الدين علامة على الوعي الجماعي، باعتباره وسيلة لتغيير مقاصد الناس وتوجهاتهم، وأيضاً باعتباره هدفاً لتعديل مبادئ الحكم وموازين القوى، فالنص الديني بقدر ما يسمح بالكشف عن هوية فرد أو مجتمع، فإنه يؤسّس لنهج مختلف وأوضاع جديدة.
وحين يعلن الحزب عن الإسلام كمرجعية للحياة، فإنّه يموقع ذاته داخل النسق العام للأمة في عمقه وامتداداته، فلا يعترف بأي حدود ومسافات جغرافية تعترض طريق الأخوة الدينية! الإسلام هنا لا يحضر كطقوس يكتنفها مبدأ حرية ممارسة المعتقد الإيماني فحسب، بل كإطار شمولي أممي لا تنفلت منه قضية من قضايا الإنسان، في وقت يأتي تحرك الحزب في المجال السياسي أو العسكري ليخلق تميّزه وفرادته، في مقابل السكونيين من النخب والحركات الدينية التي تبحث عن الهروب خارجاً، وبعيداً من الواقع، لئلا تصطدم بقسوته ومتطلبات الحضور الحي فيه.
لذلك، لم يكن ممكناً للحزب أن يتطور خارج عملية الصراع مع أعداء الأمة، فالحزب الذي تنظم الشريعة الإسلامية كل وجوده ومساراته في هذه الحياة، يشعر بأن هيمنة القوى الاستعمارية وتدخّلها في شؤون المسلمين يشكل انتهاكاً صارخاً لا يمكن القبول به.
هذه النقطة بالذات ستمنح الحزب إمكانية كبيرة لقيادة الجمهور وتحريكه نحو مديات الأمة الواسعة ومداراتها الرحبة. على هذا الأساس، تستوي فكرة الجهاد كمصدر للشرعية، وتحضر المقاومة بوصفها سياقاً تحررياً على المستوى الوطني، وعلى مستوى الأمة أيضاً.
ولهذا تأتي العبارة التالية: “إننا أبناء أمة حزب الله التي نصر الله طليعتها في إيران، وأسّست من جديد نواة دولة الإسلام المركزية في العالم… لسنا حزباً تنظيمياً مغلقاً، ولسنا إطاراً سياسياً ضيقاً”، لتؤكد الارتباط المطلوب والحركة الحارة المتوقعة، انطلاقاً من مستويين ديني وسياسي؛ الأول استجابة لأمل (وعد إلهي) بالاستخلاف والتمكين، والآخر استجابة لموقف عملي يقتضي تحمل التكاليف والمسؤوليات والسعي لبناء التجربة الجديدة.
صحيح أنّ دوافع النشوة والفوران بعد انتصار الثورة الإسلامية في إيران مسؤولة عن تحرّك الأحاسيس الدينية بطريقة عفوية وتلقائية، لكن لم يكن ذلك خارج رؤية استراتيجية وعقلانية في بناء السياسات والبرامج. هنا تأتي النظرية، أي الأفكار التي تشكل أساس الإيديولوجيا التي على الحزب أن يعمل بها في ما يتعلَّق بأمور الحرب والسلم، لتستقر ضمن قالب “نظرية ولاية الفقيه”، التي أبرزها الإمام الخميني كإرث مخزني قديم، ولتكون البوصلة التي احتاجها حزب الله لترسم له التوجهات والقواعد العامة، ولتخلق لجمهوره الاهتمام المطلوب بقضايا الإسلام والصراع في المنطقة والعالم.
لكن ظهور هذه النظرية كتعبير موضوعي عن المقومات التي لا بدَّ من توفرها لتهيئ للحزب مكاناً بين الحركات الثورية، وتمنحه هويته الخاصة، كان مشروطاً بالظرف التاريخي، وهو ظرف الثورة الإسلامية، وانتشار شراراتها في أرجاء المنطقة، وتفاعل حركات المقاومة والتحرر المناهضة للمشاريع الأميركية والإسرائيلية مع تطلعاتها، وتحفّز مثقفين وعلماء دين وكتاب ونشطاء سياسيين على طرح ما لم يكونوا في السابق يجسرون على الاقتراب منه، وكذلك التحولات المحلية في لبنان العالق بين الهيمنة اليمينية الطائفية والاحتلال الإسرائيلي لقسم من الجنوب اللبناني، ووجود الفدائيين الفلسطينيين الذين أغنوا الأرض بالبندقيات والشعارات الثورية الحماسية.
ضمن إطار هذه المجموعة من الأحداث بذاك السياق الطولي، بنى حزب الله مفاهيمه التأسيسية حول الجهاد المحلي والأممي، والتي لم تنحصر بالمناسبة في الوعي المكتسب من طرف نظرية ولاية الفقيه والثورة الإيرانية، بل في عمقها الممتد إلى باطن البنية الاجتماعية اللبنانية، بعناصرها التاريخية المُستلهمة من الاحتكاك بتجارب نضالات ثورية في مناطق مختلفة من العالم، ولكن عبقريته التي طورها لاحقاً أمينه العام الحالي السيد حسن نصر الله، تكمن في أنّه استطاع أن يحمل بقوة فكرة جاء أوانها، وأن يصعد بتيار استيقن أنّ حركته نحو الآماد الواسعة بدأت.
بعد تحرير الجنوب اللبناني، وانتصار تموز/يوليو 2006، ودخول حزب الله إلى سوريا في العام 2013، وجد الحزب نفسه أمام سؤال حان وقته: كيف يمكن تشبيك الجبهات لتحقيق الهدف المقدس، وهو إزالة “إسرائيل” من الوجود؟
لقد فشل تيار القومية العربية في توظيف الإمكانيات البشرية والمادية واستثمارها وإدارتها لإنزال هزيمة بالعدو، وفشلت الأحزاب اليسارية العربية في بناء مناخ عام يتيح اتخاذ قرارات تتطلَّبها ظروف الصراع، فلم تستطع تلك القوى التي لها ارتباطات واسعة خارج المنطقة العربية تشكيل بيئة دولية للصراع، وتوجيه الحركة السياسية أو العسكرية العربية في إطار خطة عامة جدّية تستهدف إنهاك الكيان الإسرائيلي وإرباكه.
المراوغات والاستعراضات، وأنصاف الضربات، وتصادم الأولويات، وتضارب التصورات، لم تؤدِ إلا إلى تحويل الصراع من صراع عربي – إسرائيلي إلى صراع عربي – عربي. تحوّلت الحرب مع “إسرائيل” إلى شبه حرب، والتسوية معها إلى استراتيجية انجرّت إليها الأنظمة على نحو متتالٍ.
حزب الله، في المقابل، أدرك أنّ “التفكك العربي الكبير” الذي أرادته أميركا عبر “الربيع العربي” يجب أن يُرد عليه بالعودة إلى فكرة “أمة حزب الله” العابرة لدول سايكس – بيكو المقطعة لأوصال الوحدة السياسية والدينية. قد يكون ذلك شيئاً مثيراً في لحظة مختلطة بالتحولات ودماء الشهداء ونداء القدس الغلّاب الذي ينفذ كالأذان إلى أعماق الحالمين بالنصر الأكبر.
أفراد الحزب الذين قطعوا خطوة في هذا الطريق مع الدخول إلى سوريا، وتهشّم الحدود بين أكثر من دولة من دول المنطقة، أضفوا على الموقعية الجديدة لحزبهم مسحة دينية ومسحة تاريخية. مقطع من الرسالة يقول: “إننا نعلن بصراحة ووضوح أننا أمة لا تخاف إلا الله، ولا ترتضي الظلم والعدوان والمهانة، وأنّ أميركا وحلفاءها من دول حلف شمال الأطلسي والكيان الصهيوني… مارسوا ويمارسون العدوان علينا، ويعملون على إذلالنا باستمرار. لذا، فإننا في حالة تأهب مستمر ومتصاعد”.
المطلوب، إذاً، بناء وحشد قوى الأمة التي بدأت طلائعها تتبلور في اليمن “أنصار الله”، والعراق” الحشد الشعبي”، وفلسطين “فصائل المقاومة المختلفة”، لتغلب على هذه العطالة التاريخية. أمة حزب الله تحتاج إذاً إلى القدرات الكبرى والمشاعر العظيمة، وإلى موقف جماهيري يستهدف التقدم بالوعي والإلهام، وذلك بالخروج من الالتزام الجغرافي المزعج، لجهة عبئه الداخلي المعاكس لحركة الساعة السريعة المستمرة!
اليوم، ليس لهذه القوى سبب يؤطرها ويحدّها في بقعة جغرافية واحدة وفي مهام محلية محددة. الأحداث الكبرى في المنطقة حوّلت الدول إلى حدود وسكان ومتوسط دخل وميزان مدفوعات، والأنظمة إلى بروتوكولات واحتفالات وميديا، فيما حزب الله يدرك ضرورة أن تتحول هذه القوى المقاومة إلى فكرة وتيار وحركة تاريخية، وينبغي أن لا يدعها أحد مكتوفة اليدين في الحروب المقبلة إذا ما هدد وجود الأمة خطر، أو دفعها طموح محموم إلى خوض حربها المقدسة نحو فلسطين!
هل حانت اللحظة فعلاً؟ وهل لدى حزب الله الشجاعة الكافية ليقود جماهير الأمة لتوحيد التراب العربي، مدشناً مرحلة جديدة من تاريخ حركات المقاومة في المنطقة والعالم؟ وهل يفعل السيد حسن نصر الله ما لم يقدر عليه جمال عبد الناصر؟
Sayyed Abdulmalik Al-Houthi said in a speech today, Saturday, on the occasion of the anniversary of Sayyed Hussein Al-Houthi’s martyrdom that the Coronavirus appeared as a new threat in the global arena. He noted that it is possible that America has a hand in spreading the epidemic and taking advantage of it even if it means harming the American society itself.
He also pointed out that companies owned by the Zionist lobby in America consider the economic interest a justification for doing anything, no matter how harmful. “It is possible that the Zionist lobby spread a pandemic and create a vaccine for treatment in exchange of immense profit,” he explained. He continued, “some American companies are known to have had created a pandemic after preparing a vaccine for it to sell it in very large amounts.”
He stressed that many of the epidemics and problems are the product of a person’s actions and his/her behaviors as confirmed by the Holy Qur’an. He then continued explaining that this might occur due to the lack of adhering to the right guidance and divine instructions.
“Epidemics may come due to an imbalance in how humans deal with nature, such as a man-made error that may result in significant damage,” he said. “Epidemics and diseases may also occur due to systematic work intended to spread damage, such as biological warfare, which includes the usage of viruses to spread epidemics in specific societies.”
Moreover, Sayyed Abdulmalik Al-Houthi expressed that America and some countries have huge laboratories with great capabilities that work to use harmful viruses that spread epidemics and kill people. He added that it is not the first time the US uses biological warfare, reminding everyone of the blankets infected with smallpox germs once provided for native Americans under humanitarian slogans.
Furthermore, he stated that some societies have been targeted with what is presented under humanitarian assistance, such as medical tools or food items, which would be contaminated with viruses that transmit deadly epidemics.
“There are military means to spread germs and viruses to a specific community for an epidemic to breakout, resulting in the so-called biological warfare,” he explained. “Some experts in biological warfare have been talking about Americans working for years to take advantage of the Coronavirus and work to spread it in certain societies.” he added.
He further expressed that it is expected of the US to target China as a competing country economically and culturally, not to forget our Islamic nation as societies within or the nation in general. He also stressed that it is important to be aware of the nature of the negative role taken by the forces of evil in order to fight back and confront their subversive actions.
“There is great importance in expressing hostility toward America and holding it accountable as a human community for it to refrain from its criminal practices.” he continued.
As for the preventative measures and health guidelines released by the competent authorities, Sayyed Houthi stressed that it is very important to take them seriously, while at the same time panic and intimidation should not be exaggerated. He assured that this epidemic should not be considered a disaster that cannot be addressed, saying “frustrating people and terrorizing them using danger is a negative and hostile action.
In addition, he pointed out that such danger should not be neglected or ignored, but rather we must make it an opportunity to build a new reality for the nation in which it will meet the challenges. He also expressed that the Yemeni people have been dealing with viruses of another type, “the aggression virus and the betrayal germs” in a raging war.”
“We see ourselves today in an advanced position as we fight the battle of freedom and independence and defend our people, our dignity and pride,” said Sayyed Houthi. “The Corona epidemic has not reached our country, by the grace of God, and cooperation must be considered with the competent authorities in the procedures that it implements,” he added.
He also noted that the arrival of the Coronavirus to Yemen would be considered an American act conducted by its Saudi and UAE tools and would be addressed as a hostile act. He then went on to advise the mercenaries to be cautious since they have sold themselves in battles, they may be relied upon to spread Coronavirus in their areas bringing it to Yemen, adding, “If the mercenaries are not wary of Corona, this would be utter stupidity and a huge loss for them.”
Sayyed Abdulmalik Houthi also mentioned that Yemenis must continue to support the fronts as there are important and strong victories and operations in the arena, and our duty is to continue to confront the aggression.
Regarding Sayyed Hussein Al-Houthi, the founder of the Ansarullah revolution, “we realize that the Sayyed Hussein Al-Houthi is the martyr of the Qur’an and we realize the importance of his revolution as we witness the danger of such phase.”
Sayyed Abdulmalik Houthi added that some of the nation’s people went towards adopting the option of obedience to America and Israel and working to implement its agenda. He indicated that the pro-America people in our nation worked to remove any obstacles facing American hegemony and hindering any anti-America movements.
He stressed that the loyalists of America intent on spreading strife within the nation and targeting all elements of power within it, pointing out that some of the nation’s people were silent and they stopped any action against America and Israel. He concluded that the nation must face such American schemes with what he described as a “Quranic stance”, resembling faith, responsibility and knowledge.
خلال أربعين عاماً هي أعوام ما بعد انتصار الثورة الإسلامية في إيران، وهي الأعوام التي أمضى الشهيد القائد عماد مغنية ما تيسّر له من العمر منها منذ البدايات الأولى حتى يوم الرحيل قبل اثنتي عشرة سنة، كان العنوان الذي أعلنه الإمام الخميني وتعاهد عليه مع رفاقه في قيادة الثورة، بناء نموذج ثوريّ جديد يستند إلى الإسلام لا يصيبه التكلّس والفساد من الداخل، ولا يساوم على الاستقلال والتنمية مع الخارج، ويبقي جذوة المواجهة مع المشروع الأميركيّ الإسرائيليّ مشتعلة، وفي ذكرى انتصار الثورة، الحادية والأربعين، ومع مرور أربعين يوماً على استشهاد القائد قاسم سليماني، تحلّ الذكرى الثانية عشرة لرحيل العماد، ويستحق كشف حساب.
–
خلافاً لما يظنه الكثيرون من دعاة استنساخ ثنائية الدولة والثورة، ولما يظنه المتحدثون عن نفوذ إيراني في المنطقة، أو عن هلال شيعي، أو عن تصدير الثورة، كان المشروع الذي آمن به عماد مغنية ووهبه عمره، هو بناء مقاومة عالمية للهيمنة الأميركية، ومقاومة عربية إسلامية للمشروع الصهيوني، والإيمان بأن هذين المشروعين يلبّيان حاجات إنسانية وأخلاقية ويعبّران عن النظرة التي انطلقت منها القيادة الإيرانية في فهم الإسلام وجعله مرجعاً لها، وثلاثية هذا المشروع، ربط شرعية ومشروعية الجمهورية الإسلامية، أي الدولة، بالقدرة على بناء قاعدة متينة اقتصادياً وعسكرياً وسياسياً لحماية المشروع وتوفير المقدّرات لتقدّمه ونموّه، وجعل المقاومة من اجل فلسطين مشروعاً عابراً للعقائد والقوميات والديانات، والسعي لجبهة عالمية تناهض الأحادية الأميركية في مشروعها للهيمنة الاقتصادية والعسكرية والسياسية على العالم.
–
كان العماد هو عماد مشروع بناء المقاومة العربية لأجل فلسطين، وكان الحاج قاسم سليماني القاسم المشترك بين خطوط تلاقي المقاومتين العربية والعالمية، وجاء الاجتياح الصهيوني للبنان، كما كل إجراء عدوانيّ مشابهاً تبعته في فلسطين، فرصٌ ينتظرها مشروع المقاومة، لينمو ويكبر ويقدم وصفته ويستقطب المزيد من النخب والشباب ويبني المزيد من الاقتدار، ويخوض المزيد من المواجهات. ونجح عماد نجاحاً منقطع النظير في لبنان وفلسطين، وأسس في سورية، وفي العراق وفي اليمن، وكانت تجارب المواجهة أعوام 1996 و2000 و2006، تظهر النجاح وتؤسس لما بعده. فكانت فلسطين حاضرة في انتفاضتها وتحرير غزة مع عماد مغنية، كما كانت سورية شريكاً في أعوام 1996 و2000 و2006 في لبنان، وكان تأسيس المقاومة في العراق وتحضير اليمن ساحة مقاومة من الإنجازات العظيمة، بينما أسس القائد قاسم سليماني في باكستان وأفغانستان، مستنداً إلى ما كان يبنيه ويرعاه في إيران، وامتدّ نحو تأسيس مشابه للعلاقة بسورية بعلاقة مع روسيا، والصين وفنزويلا وسواها.
–
منذ رحيل العماد تحمل القائد قاسم سليماني بعضاً من أعباء مهمته، وتحمّل قائد المقاومتين العربية والعالمية السيد حسن نصرالله البعض الآخر، ومع رحيل القائد سليماني صار العبء كله على قائد المقاومتين، لكن أين نحن الآن من المشروع الأصلي؟ والجواب بالانتقال من مرحلة المقاومات المتفرقة إلى جبهة المقاومة الواحدة، تحت شعار واحد يترجم هتاف الموت لأميركا والموت لـ”إسرائيل”، ببرنامج عمل عنوانه، لا بديل عن المقاومة في فلسطين ولأجل فلسطين، بعدما صارت مشاريع التسوية بعضاً من الذكريات، وليس خافياً أن ربط أمن كيان الاحتلال بقبضات المقاومين وليس بتواقيع المهزومين، هو الذي أدّى لليأس الأميركي الإسرائيلي من رهان التسوية للخروج بالتمسك بالجغرافيا طريقاً للأمن بدلاً من مقايضتها بالأمن، الذي لم يعُد يملك منحه للكيان أياً من دعاة التطبيع وجماعات التفاوض والاعتراف. وجاءت صفقة القرن تعبيراً عن هذا التحول، الذي حشد الأمة بمفهومها الواسع والمركّب وراء خيار المقاومة كخيار وحيد. وتلعثم النظام الرسمي وارتبك وفقد الخطاب، واللغة، والدور، وصارت المقاومة سيدة الساحات، وفي المقاومة العالمية صار شعار إخراج الأميركي من المنطقة برنامج عمل للدولة الإيرانية وللمقاومات الموحّدة في محور، وقد أنجزت إيران ما توجب على دولة الاستقلال والتنمية من مقدرات. ومثلما كان رحيل العماد نقطة الانطلاق لتأسيس محور المقاومة وفاء لدوره وقيادته وما أشعل رحيله من مشاعر، جاء تعبيراً عن حاجة موضوعية لتلبية مقتضيات المواجهة، وتوزّع خرائط استثمار المقدرات العسكرية في المواجهات المقبلة، ومثل ذلك شكل رحيل القائد قاسم سليماني نقطة الانطلاق لمشروع عملي بدأ تنفيذه عنوانه تحرير المنطقة من الاحتلال الأميركي، بما هو أبعد من مجرد الوفاء للدماء، إلى طلب جواب يليق بحجم الانتقام عبر جعله الفقرة الرئيسية من برنامج الأهداف التي كانت حياة مغنية وسليماني مرصودة لتحقيقها، وعنوانها طرد المحتل الأميركي من المنطقة، وإنهاء كيان الاحتلال في فلسطين.
–
خلال أربعين عاماً بلغت إيران ساحة الاشتباك الكبرى بعدما أكملت عدتها، ولم تعد إيران التي كانت قبل الأربعين، كما لم تعُد أميركا كما كانت وقد شاخت وهرمت وهزمت مراراً، ولا عادت “إسرائيل” كما كانت وقد تضعضت أركانها، واهتزّ كيانها، وفي يوم العماد وأربعين سليماني تبدو الأهداف أقرب مما يتخيّل الكثيرون، وبدلاً من أن يكون الاحتلال أشدّ شعوراً بأمنه برحيل القادة هو في حال ذعر من الآتي. والمقاومون والثوار يشعرون العدو بحضورهم في الغياب أشدّ مما يعيش حضورهم في الحياة، اسألوا قادة الكيان وقادة البنتاغون، هل هم أشدّ أمناً بعد اغتيال العماد والقاسم، أم أشد ذعراً وخوفاً ورعباً؟
When Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah returned to Al-Montathar Islamic Seminary [Hawza]
By Latifa al-Husseini
Beirut – In the midst of all the hustle and bustle around us, there are superior things. There is the forgiving religion. Its believers are fully devoted to it, to its values and to its origins. They are not distracted from God’s revelation and knowledge. They are students who took a unique path, choosing to delve deeper into Islamic law and pursue it as a way of life.
After ten years of hard work, eight students from Imam Al-Montathar (PBUH) Islamic Seminary [Hawza] in Baalbek completed their studies in Islamic sciences. It is time to wear the turban of Ahl al-Bayt (PBUH). [the Prophet’s household]. It is the peak of bliss for them, equivalent to dreams, let alone when a Hashemi Muhammadi leader is putting those turbans on their heads, making them preachers of belief and faith.
The coronation took place on December 11, the 14th of Rabi’ al-Thani of the Islamic calendar. Eight graduates from Al-Muntathar Hawza were hosted by the Secretary General of Hezbollah. The religious “edifice” had been informed of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s approval to sponsor the graduation of its students in person and was decided to take place last Wednesday. The hawza and its students were prepared.
The time came. Teachers and students were summoned to one of the halls where the security preparations there allowed Sayyed to attend. The attendees gathered. Both the occasion and the circumstance were exceptional. The sponsor of the ceremony has arrived.
There was confusion as the “Secretary” entered. Moments of amazement quickly turned into excitement. While His Eminence shook hands with the students and teachers and warmly embraced them, the director of the hawza’s administrative affairs Sheikh Bilal Awada was introducing them.
The time allotted for the ceremony was limited, so it soon commenced. Verses from the holy Quran was read by one of the students, Sheikh Mohammad Amhaz. Then, the head of Hezbollah’s Sharia council, Sheikh Mohammad Yazbek, welcomed the attendees and thanked His Eminence for sponsoring the graduation for a third year in a row. Sayyed, then, started his address.
As a former student in this hawza, it is special to Sayyed as it reminds him of his early days of jihad in Baalbek. Sayyed started his speech by recalling one of the most important stages in Hezbollah’s rise religiously and as a resistance, the 80s.
“The hawza has a special place, and whenever Sheikh Mohammad Yazbek asks me to sponsor such ceremonies, I quickly accept because I cannot refuse it,” Sayyed said.
According to Sheikh Mohammad Amhaz, Sayyed’s speech was divided into two parts: the first was recommendations directed at students of Islamic sciences, in which he stressed that “today we need the insight of the religious clerics, especially among students of Islamic sciences, accompanied with piety in particular”.
Sayyed stressed, “Our goal as religious scholars and students, equally, is to be with all social classes and not one without the other.”
Sayyed recalled his experience when he was a student in the of Najaf Al-Ashraf seminary and his memories with Sheikh Ahmed Al-Sheikh, who was a colleague in Islamic studies and a friend of his. He elaborated extensively on the very difficult living circumstances in Iraq during the days of the Baathist regime, when he was about 18 years old. Students of religious sciences were subject to dangerous circumstances. They faced possible liquidation, being killed or even kidnapped. During that period, the Baathists doubled their targeting of hawza students, and he was one of them. Things reached a dead end. Until he became homeless. So, he had to leave the country and head back to Lebanon. However, several obstacles stood in his way. When he entered Iraq, the officer at the passport control did not stamp his passport. The stamp proves he legally entered the country. But a divine miracle prevented the situation from getting worse. The passport control did not notice the missing stamp, and His Eminence as well as his brothers were able to return to their country safely.
His Eminence told this touching story for a reason, according to Sheikh Mohammad Amhaz. Sayyed wanted to give us an example of the hardship he faced while he sought Islamic studies. He wanted to encourage us as religious scholars to rely on God in adversity before prosperity, to follow the path of guidance until the end and endure hardships, for there is nothing that can stop our scholastic path, be it security or political circumstances.
The second part of Sayyed speech, which spanned for about two continuous hours, tackled the internal Lebanese affairs, especially in light of what it has been witnessing for more than 50 days. Sayyed emphasized that we might go through difficult economic conditions, but this requires patience, farsightedness and endurance.
“We have always been accustomed to being aided by God during difficult circumstances,” Sayyed added. “We depend on God and on everyone shouldering their responsibilities. Our dependence is on God.”
Sitting with Sayyed is captivating. Nothing could distract us during his presence, Sheikh Amhaz points out. The atmosphere of warmth and love took over the occasion, which was far from military and extreme seriousness. However, Sheikh Amhaz adds, “We tried to make use of our time with His Eminence. The meeting holds a deeper meaning to us. There is no place here for superficial matters.”
The time for putting on the turbans neared. The names of the graduates were put on each turban. The scene was preserved and photographed, but Sayyed made sure to organize the filming process himself. He gave instructions and directions on how to take pictures and from which angle. He looked like a real expert, says Sheikh Amhaz.
Sheikh Amhaz pauses well at that moment, describing it as “impressive and beyond all sanctities, but mixed with uneasiness and fear of the responsibilities the newly turbaned clerics will shoulder.”
Sayyed gave the graduates a lot of advice. But he gave one special recommendation to Sheikh Muhammad Amhaz since he recites and memorizes the Quran. His Eminence advised him to always keep reading the Quran. And he specifically told him, “Your turban to me is conditional on you continuing to read the Quran, especially since some clerics ignore this aspect after wearing the turban … We must persevere and work in this direction, so that the focus is not only on Husseini oratory.”
The students of Islamic studies spent three hours of affability with Sayyed Nasrallah. The time spent overflowed with feelings of devotedness and piety. It was also mixed with the values of worship, obedience to the Lord and devotion to the path of his Messenger. According to everyone present, the sponsor of the occasion seemed firm but modest, fortified but ascetic. The verse {Forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves.} applies to him.
Following are the names of the graduating students:
Filed under: Islam, Quranic Islam | Tagged: Mohamed Shahrour | Comments Off on وفاة المفكر السوري محمد شحرور The death of the Syrian thinker Muhammad Shahrour
A year or two ago, I would have never imagined that I would be writing an article with this title, at least not this soon; but things change.
If anything, my previous articles about ISIS which I wrote back between 2014 and 2017 were very alarming and predicted the worst, but again, things change, and back then there were many reasons to feel alarmed.
I have reiterated in that era of the past that the ISIS ideology had deep roots in fundamentalist Islam, and I still have this view. I have professed many times that this fundamentalist doctrine had been in place long before Christopher Columbus set a foot on American soil and that we cannot blame the CIA, Israel, the UK, or the West in general for the creation of this ideology, and I am not retracting. I have also said that those fundamentalist views do not represent real Islam, and there is no change in heart on this aspect either. So what has changed?
In this context, we are talking about the ideological rise and fall of ISIS. We are not talking about the political aspects and the horde of players who helped create, manipulate and employ ISIS for different reasons and agendas. With all of those players however, ISIS needed the support base, and that support base was the Muslim youth who are disenchanted by world events and the manner the world views Islam. Furthermore, they are disgruntled by the governments of the Muslims World and their links to the West: links they consider as treasonous and shameful. It was this mindset that was the recruitment base for ISIS; not the Pentagon.
So for the benefit of clarification, I must herein emphasize that there has always been a perverted version of Islam that founded itself on violence; in total contradiction to the Quranic teachings that clearly forbid coercion and oppression. This version was finally committed to a written doctrine, written by Ibn Taymiyyah; the founding doctrine of the Wahhabi Saudi sect.
When the West “discovered” this doctrine, it tried to employ it to its advantage, and this was how Al-Qaeda and ISIS were created, with Al-Qaeda’s role to hurt the USSR in Afghanistan, and ISIS to topple the legitimate and secular Syrian Government.
The not so funny thing about ISIS was that when the proclamation of creating the Islamist state back in mid-2014, the Caliphate passion became something easy to grow and self-nurture in the hearts and minds of many Sunni Muslims across the globe; including moderate ones.
Harking back at what happened back then; one honestly cannot blame them much. After all, many of the then Iraqi ISIS commanders and fighters were former Saddam-era Iraqi Army personnel. Many of them have even actually walked away from the “dictator” in the hope that the “regime change” was going to be for the better, only to soon realize the state of mess and mayhem that the American invasion created.
Before ISIS “had the chance” to show its ugly face, may moderate Muslims thought that this new force emerging out of Mesopotamia, one that does not recognize the border lines that Western colonialists have drawn between Sham (Syria) and Iraq, one that wants to unite Muslims, is perhaps “the one” to go for and support.
Ironically, most of those Muslims today look back at those days and either forget or wish to forget that at one stage, at some level, deep down in their hearts they supported ISIS, albeit not fully knowing what it stood for.
It was this subtle and covert support for ISIS by some elements of the global Sunni rank-and-file that gave ISIS a fertile ground for luring in recruits and that was the major cause for concern.
If anyone looks for evidence that supports this statement, then he/she need not go further than looking at the recent history of terror attacks in the EU (especially France) and the UK.
After the horrendous Bastille Day attack in Nice in the summer of 2016, a new direction for terror was established, and the perpetrator proved that one does not need a weapon to kill. His weapon was a truck, and he didn’t even need to buy it. He rented it.
After this infamous attack and what followed it, I among many others, predicted more of such events, and they continued for a while, and then suddenly they stopped. Why? This is the question.
For ISIS to be have been able to keep its momentum and growing support base, it needed to gain the hearts and minds of Muslims. But to do so, it needed to score victories and be able to revive Muslim nostalgia. Both are equally important.
In the beginning, it boasted its victories and the biggest of which was the takeover of Mosul; Iraq’s second largest city. This was how the ears of many Muslims worldwide pricked up and poised themselves to hear more. Some jumped on the band wagon straight away, but the majority braced and waited for more evidence that ISIS in general, and Baghdadi in specific, are the right ones to trust and follow.
What followed the capture of Mosul by ISIS however was nothing short of disgrace for ISIS; one that exposed its true inner ugliness. And instead of being able to capitalize on its initial momentum and promising to achieve more of it by adopting at least some of the virtues of Islam, ISIS turned its inability to achieve further military victories into a blood bath, looting and a sex slave market.
Before too long, even some of the most ardent Muslim supporters of ISIS turned away from it, and then against it, to the degree that they now even forget or deny that they once supported its baby steps.
What is interesting to note is that the move from secularism to Islam has not changed in the Muslim world. An increasing number of Muslim girls are wearing the Hijab with or without ISIS, but ISIS itself has lost its sway with the general Sunni Muslim populace.
What is interesting to see is that the definition of what is a “real Muslim” is changing, and changing quickly. And whilst the move towards Hijab and all what comes with it is still going full steam ahead, there seems to be a growing trend in the Muslim World towards moderation.
The ISIS fundamentals of black and white doctrine seem to be becoming increasingly tolerant of certain shades of grey. Even some personal Facebook friends and friends of friends who have brandished their photos performing Pilgrimage at Mecca don’t seem to be at dis-ease posting other photos brandishing a Heineken. To someone outside the Muslim Faith this may not sound like a big deal, but in reality, it is.
This all sounds good, but what has happened here really?
ISIS has definitely lost the plot. Fortunately for the world, irrespective of who are/were the people “behind” ISIS, its recruitment base had to come from Muslims; especially the youth. Having lost the ability to draw more recruits and enthusiasts who pledge their actions and lives to Baghdadi without even having to be formal ISIS members, ISIS as an organization and a name is now a spent force, and dare I say a figment of the past.
This however does not mean that the Muslim community has “immunized” itself against potential new ISIS-like organizations and agendas.
The initial rise of ISIS could have well been the result of a nostalgic remnant of a certain belief system that many Muslims did not even want to investigate and study properly to see if it really and truly conforms with the Teachings of Islam and all other religions. The fall of ISIS however heralds a new unprecedented era in the Muslim mind, and this calls for great optimism.
Perhaps for the first time in the history of Islam ever since its inception, Muslims are now beginning to examine some teachings they inherited. Even Saudi Arabia and its infamous Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Salman (MBS) seem to be sick and tired of the old rules and dogmas that allow this and prohibit that; based on no foundation at all. I have never been a fan of MBS, but having lived in Saudi Arabia for a while, I had always thought that this country would never allow women to drive, never ever. The fact that he changed this is a great step in the right direction. This does not take away from MBS’s genocidal activities in Yemen of course, but on the dogmatic side of things, this is a huge step towards reform. In Saudi Arabia there is also a call to have a second take on the Hadith (the spoken word of Prophet Mohamed) in an attempt to identify certain teachings that promote violence and that are incompatible with Islam. The rationale behind this is that they were never the words of the Prophet to begin with and that they might have been injected into the huge discourse by others with political agendas. Such an initiative was totally unfathomable only up till a few years ago.
Does this mean that we are seeing the end of Muslim fundamentalist-based violence? Hopefully we are, but the real answer to this question is for the whole Muslim community to answer.
The truth is that ISIS may be done and dusted, but the ideology behind lives on.
It is hoped for that the actions of ISIS will be remembered for eternity. It is hoped that Muslims realize that if they truly want to pursue the fundamentalist dreams of conquest and world dominion, then they cannot distance themselves from the legacy of ISIS. It is hoped that they look forward to a new world that is open to all religions and doctrines.
I am a firm believer that God created man in His own image, and part of this image is goodness and love of goodness; and Muslims are part of this creation. After all, Muslims, all Muslims believe in the Hadith that says: “The best people are those who most benefit to other people”. Russia and Syria might have won the military war on ISIS, but it is Muslims who have won the spiritual fight. Muslims: 1, ISIS: 0.
ِArabic Translation
By UP
صعود وسقوط داعش
غسان كادي
، لم أكن أتخيل منذ عام أو عامين أبداً أنني سأكتب مقالًا بهذا العنوان؛
في ذلك الوقت كانت هناك أسباب كثيرة للشعور بالقلق، لكن الأمور تتغير.
في مقالاتي السابقة حول داعش التي كتبت في الفترة ما بين 2014 و 2017 كانت مقلقة للغاية وتوقعت الأسوأ ، لكن الأمور تغيرت .
في تلك الحقبة الماضية كررت أن أيديولوجية داعش لها جذور عميقة في الإسلام الأصولي ،وقلت أيضًا أن تلك الآراء الأصولية لا تمثل الإسلام الحقيقي ولا يزال لدي هذا الرأي. فالعقيدة الأصولية كانت موجودة قبل فترة طويلة من اكتشاف الأرض الأمريكية وعليه لا يمكننا اتهام وكالة الاستخبارات المركزية أو إسرائيل أو المملكة المتحدة أو الغرب عمومًا بإنشاء هذه الأيديولوجية، وأنا هنا لا أتراجع. إذن ما الذي تغير؟
في هذا السياق، نتحدث عن الصعود ولسقوط الأيديولوجي لداعش، ولا نتحدث عن الجوانب السياسية واللاعبين الذين ساعدوا في إنشاء وتوظيفها لأسباب وجداول أعمال مختلفة. لأنه مع توفر كل هؤلاء اللاعبين، كانت داعش بحاجه إلى بيئة حاضنة وقاعدة الدعم، وكانت البيئة الحاضنة وقاعدة الدعم هي الشباب المسلم المحبط بالأحداث العالمية والطريقة التي ينظر بها العالم إلى الإسلام والاستياء من حكومات العالم الإسلامي وروابطهم الخائنة والمخزية بالغرب. هذا الاحباط والاستياء مكن البنتاغون من التوظيف السياسي لداعش.
لذلك لا بد أن أشدد هنا على الوجود الدائمً لنسخة منحرفة من الإسلام تأسست على العنف ؛ في تناقض تام مع التعاليم القرآنية التي تمنع بوضوح الإكراه والقمع. نسخة كتبها ابن تيمية ؛ العقيدة المؤسسة للطائفة الوهابية السعودية.
عندما “اكتشف” الغرب هذه العقيدة المنحرفة، حاول أن يوظفها لصالحه ، وهكذا تم إنشاء القاعدة وداعش، القاعدة لإلحاق الأذى بالاتحاد السوفيتي في أفغانستان، وداعش لإسقاط الشرعية والعلمانية الحكومة السورية.
لا شك ان إعلان داعش عن إنشاء الدولة الإسلامية في منتصف عام 2014 ، أيقظ الحنين والأمل بعودة الخلافة في قلوب وعقول العديد من المسلمين السنة في جميع أنحاء العالم ؛ بما في ذلك المعتدلين. وبصراحة لا يمكن إلقاء اللوم عليهم كثيرا. بعد كل شيء ، فإن العديد من قادة ومقاتلي داعش العراقيين كانوا في السابق من أفراد الجيش العراقي في عهد صدام. لقد ابتعد كثير منهم عن “الديكتاتور” على أمل أن يتم “تغيير النظام” للأفضل ، لكنهم انضموا لداعش يسبب حالة الفوضى التي أحدثها الغزو الأمريكي.
قبل أن تظهر داعش وجهها القبيح ، ربما اعتقد المسلمون المعتدلون أن هذه القوة الجديدة الخارجة من بلاد ما بين النهرين ، والتي لا تعترف بالحدود التي رسمها المستعمرون الغربيون بين الشام (سوريا) والعراق ، هي القوة التي تستطيع توحيد المسلمين، والتي يجب دعمها .
ومن المفارقات، أن معظم هؤلاء المسلمين عندما ينظرون اليوم إلى الوراء، إما ينسون أو يودون أن ينسوا أنهم في مرحلة ما، في أعماق قلوبهم، أيدوا داعش ، وإن كانوا لا يعرفون تمامًا معنى ذلك.
هذا الدعم الخفي والسري لداعش من قبل بعض التيار السني العالمي هو الذي أعطى داعش أرضية خصبة لجذب المجندين وكان ذلك هو السبب الرئيسي للقلق.
إذا كان أي شخص يبحث عن أدلة تدعم هذه المقولة، فلن يحتاج الا إلى أبعد النظر في الهجمات الإرهابية في الاتحاد الأوروبي (وخاصة فرنسا) والمملكة المتحدة.
في الهجوم المروع الذي وقع يوم الباستيل في نيس في صيف عام 2016 ، أثبت مرتكب الجريمة أنه لا يحتاج إلى سلاح ليقتل. كان سلاحه شاحنة ، ولم يكن بحاجة لشرائها. فقد استأجرها.
وبعد هذا الهجوم المشين وما تلاه ، توقعت من بين أشياء كثيرة أخرى حدوث المزيد من هذه الأحداث ، التي استمرت لفترة، ثم توقفت فجأة.
لماذا ا؟ هذا هو السؤال.
لتتمكن داعش من الحفاظ على دعم بيئتها الحاضنة المتنامية ، كانت تحتاج إلى كسب قلوب وعقول المسلمين. وللقيام بذلك ، كان من الضروري تسجيل الانتصارات لإحياء حنين المسلمين للخلافة.
في البداية ، تفاخرت داعش بانتصاراتها وكان أكبرها الاستيلاء على الموصل. ثاني أكبر مدن العراق. وهكذا أصبحت آذان العديد من المسلمين في جميع أنحاء العالم تستعد وتهيئ نفسها لسماع المزيد. قفز البعض على عربة داعش مباشرة ، لكن الغالبية استعدت وانتظرت للحصول على مزيد من الأدلة على أن داعش بشكل عام ، والبغدادي على وجه الخصوص ، هما الشخصان المناسبان للثقة والمتابعة.
لكن ما أعقب استيلاء داعش على الموصل لم يكن أقل من وصمة عار كشفت عن قبحها الداخلي الحقيقي. وبدلاً من أن تتمكن داعش من الاستفادة من زخم انتصارها الأولووعدها بتحقيق المزيد من ذلك من خلال ابراز من فضائل الإسلام على الأقل ، حوّلت داعش عجزها عن تحقيق المزيد من الانتصارات العسكرية إلى حمام دم ونهب وسوق للاسعباد الجنسي.
قبل مضي وقت طويل ، حتى ابتعد بعض أكثر المؤيدين الإسلاميين المتحمسين لداعش عنها ، ثم تحولوا ضدها ، لدرجة أنهم الآن نسوا أو أنكروا أنهم أيدوا ذات مرة خطواتها الاولى .
ما يثير الاهتمام هو ان فقدان داعش سيطرتها على عامة المسلمين السنة لم ينعكس على عملية الانتقال من العلمانية إلى الإسلام لم يتغير في العالم الإسلامي. فعدد يرتدي عدد الفتيات المسلمات المحجبات يزداد
وما يثير الاهتمام هو أن تعريف “المسلم الحقيقي” يتغير ويتغير بسرعة. وبينما لا يزال ارتداء الحجاب وكل ما يأتي معه في تزايد ، يبدو أن هناك اتجاهًا متزايدًا في العالم الإسلامي نحو الاعتدال.
يبدو أن أساسيات مذهب داعش الأسود والأبيض أصبحت أكثر تسامحًا مع بعض ظلال الرمادي. حتى بعض الأصدقاء الشخصيين على وأصدقاء الأصدقاء قاموا بتلوين صورهم وهم يؤدون رحلة الحج في مكة المكرمة ،و لا يبدو أنهم لا يرغبون في نشر صور أخرى تحمل علامة هاينكن. بالنسبة لشخص من خارج الديانة الإسلامية ، قد لا يبدو هذا أمرًا كبيرًا ، لكنه في الواقع كذلك.
كل هذا يبدو جيدا ، ولكن ما حدث هنا حقا؟
بالتأكيد فقد فشلت مؤامرة داعش لحسن الحظ بالنسبة للعالم ، وبغض النظر عمن يكون / كان “وراء” تنظيم “داعش” ، كان المسلمين خاصة الشباب قاعدة التجنيد؛ فقدت داعش القدرة على جذب المزيد من المجندين والمتحمسين الذين نذروا أفعالهم وحياتهم للبغدادي دون الحاجة حتى إلى أن يكونوا أعضاء رسميين ، وأصبحت داعش كمنظمة واسم الآن قوة مستهلكة ، وأتجرأ على القول، صورة من الماضي
لكن هذا لا يعني أن المجتمع المسلم “قام بتحصين” نفسه ضد المنظمات وجداول الأعمال المحتملة الجديدةالمشابهة لداعش.
كان من الممكن أن يكون الصعود الأول لداعش هو بقايا حنين لنظام معتقد معين لم يرغب الكثير من المسلمين حتى في دراسته بشكل صحيح لمعرفة ما إذا كان يتوافق حقًا مع تعاليم الإسلام وجميع الأديان الأخرى. لكن سقوط داعش يبشر بعهد جديد لم يسبق له مثيل في العقل الإسلامي ، وهذا يستدعي تفاؤلًا كبيرًا.
ربما لأول مرة في تاريخ الإسلام منذ نشأته ، بدأ المسلمون الآن في دراسة بعض التعاليم التي ورثوها. حتى في المملكة العربية السعودية وولي العهد السعودي الأمير محمد بن سلمان يبدو أنهما سئموا من القواعد والعقائد القديمة التي تسمح بهذا وتحظر ذلك ؛ بدون أي أساس على الإطلاق.
لم أكن من عشاق محمد بن سلمان، ولكني كنت أعيش في المملكة العربية السعودية لفترة من الوقت ، وكنت أظن دائمًا أن هذا البلد لن يسمح أبدًا للنساء بقيادة السيارات، لكن هذا حدث وهو خطوة كبيرة في الاتجاه الصحيح و خطوة كبيرة نحو الإصلاح يجب ان لا تنسينا الإبادة الجماعية التي تقوم بها السعودية في اليمن بالطبع.
في المملكة العربية السعودية ، هناك أيضًا دعوة لإعادة النظر في الحديث (الكلمة المنطوقة للنبي محمد) في محاولة لتحديد التعاليم المنسوبة للنبي التي تروج للعنف والتي تتعارض مع االقرآن واعتبارها احاديث منحولة تم حقنها من قبل الآخرين لتبرير اجندات سياسية. مثل هذه المبادرة لم تكن ممكنة على الإطلاق قبل بضع سنوات.
هل هذا يعني أننا نشهد نهاية للعنف الإسلامي القائم على الأصولية؟ نأمل أن نكون ، لكن الإجابة الحقيقية على هذا السؤال هي برسم المجتمع المسلم بأسره.
والحقيقة هي أن داعش يقد هزمت ولكن الأيديولوجية الكامنة ورائها ما زالت مستمرة.
من المأمول أن يتذكر المسلمون أفعال داعش إلى الأبد وأن يلفظوا إرث تنظيم الدولة الإسلامية وأحلامها الأصولية المتمثلة في الفتح والسيطرة على العالم ، من المأمول أن يتطلعوا إلى عالم جديد مفتوح لجميع الأديان والمذاهب.
أنا من أشد المؤمنين أن الله خلق الإنسان على صورته ، وجزء من هذه الصورة هو الخير ومحبة الخير ؛ والمسلمون جزء من هذا الخلق. بعد كل شيء ، المسلمون ، جميع المسلمين يؤمنون بالحديث الذي يقول: “خير ا النَّاس انفعهم ” للنَّاس
ربما تكون روسيا وسوريا قد ربحت الحرب العسكرية على داعش ، ولكن المسلمين هم الذين فازوا في المعركة الروحية. المسلمون: 1 ، داعش: 0.
For a brief moment in human history, or what feels like only a fraction of a second now, the United States of America experienced a mirage of a position, dubbed a “superpower,” self-appointed1. Those who lacked ethical and moral imagination went along with that coronation2. Or, perhaps they were just humoring it until a better replacement came along3.
Internally and externally, the United States maintained its illusion of superpower status through the application of diverse tools, some hard and harsh, some soft, and some gray in nature. On the economic front, it mass produced an industrial-scale fiat currency4 as a trading tool and adopted games of chance, fundamentals of speculation5 and gambling as its “genius” economic principles. It manufactured large bubbles of debt6, mimicking a toddler’s birthday party, then divided and sold the airs within as investment bonds. The illusion of trust in an untrustworthy entity was the collateral. No worries though. Whenever the time got ripe and the bubbles burst, sophisticated air-capturing devices and adjustment tools were customized, nicely packaged, and were readied for retail. The hamster on the wheel of finance kept on running but never arriving; alas, the chicanery of economic progress was kept alive.
On the military front, the United States dropped two atomic bombs killing and genetically maiming hundreds of thousands of people for generations to come. In the Eyewitness Account of Hiroshima, August 6th, 1945, Father John A. Siemes, then a professor of modern philosophy at Tokyo’s Catholic University, concluded his remarks by saying:
“We have discussed among ourselves the ethics of the use of the bomb. Some consider it in the same category as poison gas and were against its use on a civil population. Others were of the view that in total war, as carried on in Japan, there was no difference between civilians and soldiers, and that the bomb itself was an effective force tending to end the bloodshed, warning Japan to surrender and thus to avoid total destruction. It seems logical to me that he who supports total war in principle cannot complain of war against civilians. The crux of the matter is whether total war in its present form is justifiable, even when it serves a just purpose. Does it not have material and spiritual evil as its consequences which far exceed whatever good that might result? When will our moralists give us a clear answer to this question?”7
While the “moralists” on whom Father Siemes pinned his hopes seventy four years ago were too busy theorizing about their own slumber, the United States of America stockpiled thousands of ready-to-be-deployed nuclear bombs, as fear-inducing threat tools. It deviated enormous amounts of world’s precious resources into the development of military hardware and software gadgets, using “defense” and “American interest” as its rationale8. It then created chaos and mayhem all over the planet9 as its pressure lever to sell death toys to teeny-weeny boys10—expensive batteries not included and costly -900- numbers for instructions on operations and maintenance11.
On the public relations and propaganda front, it used industrial-scale colorful media forms12 as its tool to lie, to cheat, and to fool. It is useful to remember that the United States of America, the land of the free and the home of the brave, freely burnt alive and made melted charcoals13 of tens of its own defenseless and unarmed mothers, fathers, and children in Mt. Carmel, Waco, Texas14. It bravely broadcasted, live, the entire event on several television networks for days to nip it in the bud for its own agitated population exactly how low it is capable of sinking to maintain its clutch and subdue dissent. For sure, that trick alone silenced many for a few years, Timothy McVeigh15 and his disloyal company excluded, while it worked on another script for another terror-inducing spectacular performance. Too many tricks to remember and too many tools to recount in this short essay; but at last, the jig is up.
Internally, the house has fallen on moral, ethical, justice, and economic grounds, but has forgotten to collapse. Those who cannot see this need corrective lenses or the right standards to evaluate and measure things. Externally, and more relevant to our topic here, the structure of the world’s power relations and alignments are changing rapidly in a tangible and measureable way away from the United States’16 autocratic clutch. While the self-absorbed and the infatuated speak of dangers of a power vacuum, others are quite busy realigning themselves. Let us remind ourselves of Saxon White Kissinger’s poem about delusions of indispensability,
“Sometime when you feel that your going
Would leave an unfillable hole,
Just follow these simple instructions
And see how they humble your soul;
Take a bucket and fill it with water,
Put your hand in it up to the wrist,
Pull it out and the hole that’s remaining
Is a measure of how you’ll be missed.”17
Coalitions, partnerships, and algebraically aligned groups of countries around the globe, some with hybrid letter-number titles of “this plus that minus the other,” are emerging left, right, and center. Even multi-billioners, themselves cheerleaders and enablers of the Empire of Illusions, are busy, like rats, circling the globe door to door to release their poisonous capital in the hope of infesting another Titanic, another morality-free sinking ship into making. There is a buzz that George Soros is trying to establish his own anti-war ‘Code Pink’ group (should name it Code Navy Blue, perhaps). No doubt, the irony would not have been lost to George Orwell had he lived to see it.
Enough eulogizing. What do all these mean, or should mean, to ordinary people and local community groups around the world? That is, for what, where, when, why, and how should the very people who often shoulder the brunt of all the dregs that roll downhill prepare themselves? For the rest of us, too, no matter what positions we hold and what relationships we have with the rest of the world, the same questions apply. I and the local community groups with and within which I work are grappling with these questions on a daily basis. We are doing what we can to ensure that our short and borrowed lives on this earth is worth the breaths we take. Many of us find ourselves feeling increasingly fortunate to live in Iran where doing so many things in so many ways is possible. More fortunately for us, the general frameworks within which we ask questions, analyze situations, design solutions, and implement them are all intertwined and enmeshed in our culture and belief system: Quran, Our Prophet’s and Imams’ teachings, and an important element called “Al-Hekmah” or the Wisdom. So, how do we evaluate the current transformations in the world around us and how do we try to choose the correct position and make a difference? Here, I present a brief and simple snapshot of our local-universal eye-view.
Firstly, Quran’s ethical teachings, as exemplified through the words and deeds of our Prophet, Imams, and pious scholars, tell us that there is no separation of religion and politics in Islam. As Allammeh Seyyed Hassan Modarres (1249 – 1316 HS, parallel in date with 1870-1937 AD), a religious sage and one of the champions of Iranian Constitutional movement, said in one of his most famous speeches, and Imam Khomeini, the Founder of the Revolution, quoted, “Siasat-e ma eyn_e dianat_e ma, va Dianat_e ma eyn_e Sia’sat_e mast.” (“Our politics is exactly our religion and our religion is exactly our politics.”) The paragraph from which the line is borrowed reads,
“The source of our politics is our religion. We are on friendly terms with the entire world so long as they have not aggressed against us. But, if anyone aggresses against us, we will respond. Our politics is exactly our religion and our religion is exactly our politics.”18
Notwithstanding a particular religious belief and appealing simply to human logic, how would it even be possible for someone to have an authentic personal and private ethical and religious belief about, for instance, “thou shall not kill the innocent,” and live, work, and play within the rules and regulations of countries and political systems that kill innocent people to generate revenues and to maintain their national economic lifestyles of choice? Or, appealing to a more rudimentary level of human thought, how could we possibly afford not to be political, when the concentration of the very oxygen in the air we breathe, the amount of poisons with which our waters and foods are laced, the diseases we suffer, the so-called cures we are allowed to access, our fertility, our sexuality, our freedom to move from point A to point B are all determined by politics? Are we living with our heads buried in the sand?
Given these realities, for our people and local community groups here, being political is not a matter of choice but a religious obligation, a human necessity, and a critical survival instinct. Since we cannot avoid this, we do our utmost and take great deal of care to be well informed in order to be able to choose the right (as in correct) politics. People here take the trouble of going that extra kilometer so that, God forbids, they do not end up assuming they are on the right side and the followers of Imam Ali (the first Imam of Shi’a belief) and ImamHussein (the third Imam of Shi’a belief) but, in fact, do things that are tantamount to carrying water for the turbines of Mo’avieh and Yazeed (Father and Son corrupt tyrants in Ummayyad dynasty against whose policies the Shi’a imams stood, resisted, and eventually got martyred).
Secondly, our religion and our pious religious scholars teach us that we should neither oppress others nor submit to oppression by others. So, our resistance has at least three dimensions: one, we must resist our own urges to oppress others, while at the same time, resist being sucked into siding with oppressors. Two, we must resist oppression against ourselves by anyone. Three, whenever and wherever we hear the cry for help of the oppressed people (Muslim and/or non-Muslim), we are obligated to respond and help, within our means and capacity to do so, and in a sound and appropriate way. Standing silently on the sideline and keeping quiet out of fear or greed is not an option for us. People here commemorate Imam Ali as the epitome of excellence in justice and in “qist” (particular form of justice). They commemorate Imam Hussein as the epitome of resistance against oppression and injustice. When you hear the chants of “Kullu Yau’men Ashura, Kullu Arzen Karbala” -Every day is Ashura, Every place is Karbala, it is useful to remember that today’s Karbala extends from Afghanistan to Yemen to Syria to Palestine to Nigeria to Sudan to Caracas and to any other place on the globe that people are fighting injustice, resisting oppression, and asking for help.
This stance is not just an isolated religious belief of some uninformed local community groups. It is written clearly into our constitution, the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran19. In Article 2, Section 6.c, and in Article 3, Section 5,6,15, and 16, it reads:
2:6.c – the negation of all kinds of oppression, authoritarianism, or the acceptance of domination, which secures justice, political and economic, social, and cultural independence and national unity.
3:5 – the complete rejection of colonialism and the prevention of foreign influence.
3:6 – the eradication of all kinds of tyranny, autocracy, and monopolization of power.
3:15 – the cultivation and strengthening of Islamic brotherhood and general cooperation among the people.
3:16 – the organization of the nation’s foreign policy based on Islamic criteria, fraternal commitment to all Muslims, and unrestrained support for the impoverished people of the world.
Any of our elected and/or appointed officials who would tell you otherwise, is either ignorant of the very law he must uphold (in which case, shame on him) or he has gotten to his position by lying, cheating, and swearing to uphold the very laws he is deliberately breaking (in which case, he is a hypocrite and double shame on him). On a bright note though, the ordinary people in the trenches feel extremely blessed that the most senior person in their land, the Leader, is also the most steadfast champion and the flag bearer of the constitution. To put him on a sanction list means to put the Iranian constitution and millions of ordinary people in local communities on a sanction list. Of course, had the US done differently, we would have questioned our own authenticity.
More generally though, as the current situation in the world unfolds, it is useful to remember some basic facts. No imperialist, no arrogant power, no superpower wannabe operates in a vacuum. There are always cheerleaders, enablers, junior and senior accomplices, profiteers, and conspirators. Regardless of what their mouth says, their action speaks louder. Let’s consider a simple example. The Unites States was able to spend trillions in military adventures killing millions of innocent people around the world and expropriating their resources in two fundamental ways: 1) It shortchanged its own tax-paying population, the young, the retired, and even the unborn in all sorts of social and public rights and amenities. 2) It kept on issuing treasury bonds on its accumulated debt, currently about 22.5 trillion dollars20, with People’s Bank of China, Central Bank of Japan, and naïve citizens21 as its most devoted purchasers.
To speak inside a parenthesis and to be totally candid, the ordinary people here find Japan’s “I’ve-fallen-and-I-can’t-get-up!” attitude which has lasted nearly 74 years quite puzzling. Once upon a time, they lost a war. Who doesn’t at one point or another? Now that it happened, shouldn’t they stand up, dust off, and shake off this subdued and subservient house servant role and assume an independent position with dignity and self-respect? I am told. As Imam Hussein said, “If you do not have any religion and are not fearful of the Day of Judgment, at least be protective of your liberty and autonomy in your life in this world.”22 People hope and pray to God that hardworking and noble people of Japan will rise up and will one day free themselves of the US occupation. Again, regular, ordinary people here are genuinely willing to provide support, if the Japanese themselves are willing to fight for their independence.
We will assume being under occupation by the US is Japan’s excuse. But, what has been China’s excuse? China has been buying the US debt as an export-led strategy to ensure its economic growth23. Therefore, to the extent that China, out of self-interest, has acted as an enabler of the United States aggressions and wars, it, too, is responsible. Its development, too, is contaminated with the crime and injustice against, and the blood of innocent people proportionate to the amount of advantage it had gained through its indirect support of those acts. We will not even address its voting record, until just a couple of years ago, as the UN’s Security Council permanent member. Now that it, too, is a target, its change in behavior is not trustworthy enough because it does not appear to be based on ethical and moral principles. It would not be illogical to assume that the moment the direction of winds changes, it is likely that China’s current stance would change, too.
Therefore, for ordinary people in local communities here, that is, the very same people who are active, and who willingly volunteer their own lives and their children and spouses to go and fight alongside those who resist oppressions and hegemony by the US and the West, these and other critical points and lessons will not go unchallenged and unlearned. Only those who have a proven record of being honest and trustworthy, of acting on principles, and steadfast in their resolve fighting against oppression are worthy of trust and long-term partnership, regardless of their race, nationality, and religious affiliation. Others must work much harder, regardless of what they profess to be.
As the entire world is moving on, and as partnerships and coalitions are constantly dissolving and forming, and as the nuclear strike buzzes & hypes are being heard again, I would like link back to the beginning of the essay and re-insert, again, the quoted parts of Father Siemes’ remark, but this time, I complement the segment with a new twist in interpretation and prediction. He recounted,
“We have discussed among ourselves the ethics of the use of the bomb. Some consider it in the same category as poison gas and were against its use on a civil population. Others were of the view that in total war, as carried on in Japan, there was no difference between civilians and soldiers, and that the bomb itself was an effective force tending to end the bloodshed, warning Japan to surrender and thus to avoid total destruction. It seems logical to me that he who supports total war in principle cannot complain of war against civilians. The crux of the matter is whether total war in its present form is justifiable, even when it serves a just purpose. Does it not have material and spiritual evil as its consequences which far exceed whatever good that might result? When will our moralists give us a clear answer to this question?”7
I can guarantee anyone who reads these lines that ordinary people in local communities here in Iran are fully aware that what is currently going on is, in fact, a total war against their very existence. They also know there is no difference between civilians, soldiers, and [they add] our Commander in Chief (Seyyed Ali Khamenei). Should one, two, or more nuclear bombs be added to the United States’ repertoire of its pressure levers in its ongoing total war against Iran, unlike the Japanese, the ordinary devout Shi’as in Iran (who are quite significant in number), from all levels of the society, are not going to be sitting around philosophizing, musing, and theorizing about whether or not the total war against them was justified, where all the moralists have gone, or play the role of an obedient house servant. Furthermore, they are not going to enter into a shock & awe state, not knowing what to do. Bihawl’lallah wa Quwwatah (By God’s Power and Might), they will, however, make sure that will not end the bloodshed; rather, it will begin a very effective and exact bloodshed. From my reading of the population here, I can bet my life on that. Can the US, holding tight and fast to its nuclear Trump card, be equally sure of its own bet? If yes, Bismillah.
Mansoureh Tajik lives in Alborz Province in Iran. She has a background in teaching and research in the areas of community and environmental health, environmental justice, and media literacy. She collaborates with various local community members, groups, and organizations to provide support in addressing health and environmental problems, sustainable agriculture, and in design, implementation, and evaluation of relevant improvement projects.
References
1. Thomas Donnelly, Donald Kagan, and Gary Schmitt (2000). “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New American Century,” A Report of The Project for the New American Century, September 2000. Accessed on 7/9/2019; Available online at: https://archive.org/details/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.
2. Fotios Moustakis & Rudra Chaudhuri (2006). “Counting the Cost of an American Unilateralist Policy: a Superpower at Risk?” Published By: Defence Academy of the United Kingdom, Conflict Studies Research Centre, Special Series, 06/43. ISBN 1-905058-88-8, August 2006, UK.
3. Jan Nijman (1992). “The Limits of Superpower: The United States and the Soviet Union since World War II.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 82, No. 4 (Dec., 1992), Pages 681-695. Published by Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of the Association of American Geographers.
5. Ricardo J. Caballero, Emmanuel Farhi, and Mohamad L. Hammour (2006). “Speculative Growth: Hints from the U.S. Economy.” The American Economic Review,” Vol. 96, No. 4, Pages 1159-1192.
6. Nathan Perry (2014). Debt and Deficits: Economic and Political Issues. A GDAE Teaching Module on Social and Environmental Issues in Economics. Global Development and Environment Institute, Tufts University, Medford, MA.
7. The Manhattan Engineer District Report (1946). The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Manhattan Engineer District of the United States Army under the direction of Major General Leslie R. Groves on June 29, 1946. Accessed on 7/25/2019; Available Online at: https://www.abomb1.org/hiroshim/hiro_med.pdf
9. Sarah N Pedigo (2016). “United States Interventions: Power Vacuums and the Rise of Extremist Groups.” Master of Arts (MA) Thesis, Sociology/Criminal Justice, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/86pc-ex82 Available Online at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/sociology_criminaljustice_etds/6
10. Zahra Aghamohammadi1 and Ali Omidi (2018). The Prospect of the United States and Saudi Arabia’s Relations In Light of the Khashoggi Murder. Journal of World Sociopolitical Studies, Vol. 2, No. 4, October 2018, Pages 605-632.
11. Congressional Research Service (2019). “The U.S. Export Control System and the Export Control Reform Initiative,” Updated April 5, 2019. R41916· VERSION 49.
12. Sebastian Kaempf (2019). “A relationship of mutual exploitation’: the evolving ties between the Pentagon, Hollywood, and the commercial gaming sector.” Journal of Social Identities, Journal for the Study of Race, Nation and Culture, 25:4, 542-558, DOI: 10.1080/13504630.2018.1514151.
16. Robbert Kappel (2015). “Global Power Shifts and Challenges for the Global Order.” German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, Policy Paper 2/2015.
18. Hossein Razmjoo (1366 H.S.). “Modarres and His Principle Non-Equilibrium in Politics.” Meshkaat, The Center for Computerized Research in Islamic Sciences, Dr. Shariati College of Literature and Humanities. Original in Farsi, Translated by the author.
22. Muhammad Baqer Majlisi (1403 HQ). Translation, by the author, of a portion of Narration (Hadith):
ان لَم یَکُن لَکُم دینٌ و کُنتُم لاتَخافونَ المَعادَ فَکونوا اَحراراً فِی دُنیاکُم
from Bihar ul-Anwar, 2nd Edition, Vol. 45, Page 51.
23. Ingvild Borgen Gjerde, DNB Markets (2019). “Why China will not sell its US Treasuries.” The Note, Market Matters, 15.05.2019. DNB Markets, a division of DNB Bank ASA. DNB Bank ASA is a part of the DNB Group.
During the brutal Zionist aggression against Lebanon in July 2006, His Eminence Sheikh Akram Barakat was on a special mission to Syria.
The mission covered more than one dossier, including following up on the issue of the displaced. He was keen on looking after the people of resistance in the home of the resistance. His Eminence took honorable stances that must be recorded, remembered and used as a lesson. He chose to talk to Al-Ahed news about some of those. They begin with the following:
They will triumph, not the Ummah
In the middle of the July 2006 war, the decision was made to meet His Eminence Sheikh Dr. Mohammed Said al-Bouti.
Sheikh al-Bouti’s home in Damascus was not on the ground floor. It was a few stories higher. So it was necessary to climb an old staircase in a small building. We didn’t have to take the stairs because there was no electricity. There was no power outage – the sort we are used to in Lebanon. But we took the stairs because there was no elevator in that building.
Sheikh al-Bouti and one other gentleman received me in his small, modest reception room, welcoming me with his usual smile. One of his sons was with him. He had inherited his father’s kind features and calmness.
I began by thanking him for his supportive attitude towards the resistance, which stems from the purity of the heart and foresight. I made a distinction between him and the Saudi Sheikh Ibn al- Uthaymeen, who at that time forbade prayers for the resistance. The sheikh told me about his position on Shia Muslims as a Sunni scholar who was committed to what he believes.
He surprised me when he asked:
Do Shiites have a special project contrary to what they declare, as many claim, and therefore their motive does not stem from loyalty to Allah Almighty?
Suddenly the voice of the sheikh shuddered. His facial features changed, and as if talking to himself aloud, he said:
I wonder where Sayed Hassan is now?
Is it possible that Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is unfaithful?
Is it right for me – a person sitting comfortably on this couch – to be wondering about his sincerity, while he is now on the battlefield?
I wonder where Sayed Hassan is now?
The old sheikh started crying, shedding tears. His son had to intervene to calm him down from that sincere, innate and emotional outburst.
But the Sheikh continued his speech. Shedding tears, with the hoarseness in his voice and the trembling of his slim body, he said,
“Oh, how I wish I was one of Sayyed Hassan’s fingers!”
I do not know! Perhaps during his speech, he remembered Sayyed’s finger that gave the latter power while moving it during the Takbeer of Ihram [the utterance of Allahu akbar in prayer]. This power made the enemy tremble when he [Sayyed Nasrallah] waves his finger during his speeches. This finger is the Finger of Tawheed, the finger of threat, the finger of Tawalli and the finger of Tabbari. It is the finger of eminence and beauty.
The old scholar was not satisfied with mere words, but expressed his wish to meet Sayyed in a special meeting to kiss the grip of power, which is purified by the ablution of the knowledgeable, and the hand holding the sword that is defending the nation.
“Since the beginning of this war, I have traveled to Homs to meet one of the righteous awliya. I asked him to pray for the resistance in Lebanon. He replied: O Sheikh Said, since the beginning of this war, I have been repeating a special prayer for the victory of the resistance. Rejoice Sheikh Said. They will triumph, and not the Ummah,” Sheikh al-Bouti continued saying while shedding sincere tears.
After that, we bid the old Sheikh farewell. He made us feel ashamed because he refused to bid us farewell from his home. He walked us to the car despite his old age and his great stature, not to mention the added difficulty of going up and down the stairs without an elevator.
This was the degree of his morality. This is his love for Sayyed. The latter was deeply affected when I told him what happened in Damascus.
When I heard about the martyrdom of Sheikh al-Bouti while giving a religious lesson in a mosque, I was not surprised. After all, martyrdom suits him.
From Sayyed Hassan to Sayyed Hassan
A Syrian woman in her 70s went to a center for the Islamic Resistance Support Association. She opened her bag and took out a large swath of money in Syrian currency. She gave it to the representative of the Association, saying: “This is a donation for the Islamic Resistance.”
The representative was surprised by this amount of money, as the woman did not look rich. He could not help himself and asked her the reason behind her donation. She replied confidently and calmly:
“Today I received my full pension, and I came to donate it to the resistance. It deserves it more than me.”
The representative of the association was surprised by what she said. That act made him emotional as he listened to her near the blessed Sayyeda Zainab shrine. Holding his pen, he asked the honorable lady:
“Would you kindly tell me your name so I can write it down on the receipt of the donation?”
She replied with pride:
“Write, From Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah to Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.”
Our women are in the service of your women
I was contacted by a Syrian deputy from the People’s Council. He asked me to come to one of the buildings in al-Sham. He mentioned that these buildings were allocated for the families of the Mujahideen in the Islamic Resistance.
I arrived with the deputy and toured a new building, which was equipped with modern furniture. To my surprise, a cinema was set up, a cafeteria filled with things children love, and a prayer room equipped with clay tablets [Turbah] for prostration [sajda].
The ‘Sunni’ deputy carried the sajda tablet towards me and asked: Are these good?
What surprised me more is what I saw next-door to that building. There was a small playground for children. Alongside it was a Shawarma restaurant.
As we left the building, I noticed a few buses. The deputy told me that they were in the service of the Mujahideen’s families whenever they wished to travel to Damascus.
I thanked the deputy, asking him to convey my thanks to the person who came up with this idea and kind initiative. His answer was: This initiative is the least we can do for the families of the Mujahideen who are fighting the “Israeli” enemy in Lebanon and defend the whole nation. We hope to make the children of the Mujahideen and their wives comfortable, including in matters related to services. We do not want the wives of the Mujahideen to tire themselves, so “our women will serve the women of the men of God.”
I am one of those women
Hours after the resounding victory of the July war, the Iranian ambassador to Damascus called me to ask me to attend a political celebration in the Syrian capital on the occasion of this divine victory. I arrived to the hall and found that it was filled with diverse political figures from more than one Arab and Islamic country.
His Eminence Sheikh al-Akhtari, the veteran Iranian Ambassador, informed me of the program of the celebration. The program included a speech by the Minister of Awqaf in Syria and another by the General Mufti. He asked me to speak on behalf of the Islamic Resistance and the Islamic Republic of Iran. I thought quickly about what was appropriate to say in this forum, and I thought that the speech should be about the culture of the resistance, which is what made this great divine victory possible. During my speech, I recalled some of the moments I experience in al-Sham with the beloved Syrian people during the war. One of the things I mentioned was my aforementioned exchange with the Syrian deputy who told me: “We do not want the wives of the Mujahideen to tire themselves, so our women will serve the wives of the resistance fighters.”
When the ceremony ended, many of the attendees came to congratulate me. One of the attendees was a middle-aged woman. She told me with tears in her eyes: “I am a deputy in the Syrian People’s Council. And I was one of those women you spoke about. I had the honor of serving the wives of the resistance fighters.”
* Cultural Assistant to Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah
خلال العدوان الصهيوني الغاشم على لبنان في تموز 2006، كان سماحة الشيخ أكرم بركات حاضرًا في سوريا على مدار الأيام، في مهمّة غاية في التميّز، ترتبط بأكثر من ملف، بينها متابعة شؤون النازحين هناك، فكان حريصًا على أهل المقاومة في ديار المقاومة. وكانت لسماحة الشيخ مشاهدات مشرِّفة، لا بد من تدوينها، واستذكارها، لتكون درسًا وعِبرة، خص موقع “العهد” الإخباري بها، ومن هنا تبدأ:
* هم سينتصرون وليس الأمّة
في منتصف حرب تموز/ يوليو من العام 2006 كان القرار بلقاء سماحة العلامة الشيخ د. محمد سعيد البوطي.
لم يكن المنزل الدمشقي للشيخ البوطيّ متاخمًا للأرض، بل كان يرتفع عنها بضعة طوابق، لذا كان لا بدّ من الصعود على الدّرجات القديمة لذلك المبنى الصّغير، لا لانقطاع التيّار الكهربائيّ، كما اعتدنا في لبنان، بل لعدم وجود مصعد في تلك البناية.
مع أحد السّادة الأجلاء استقبلني الشيخ البوطيّ في صالونه الصّغير المتواضع مرحِّبًا بابتسامته المعهودة وإلى جانبه أحد أبنائه، وقد ورث من أبيه ملامح الطّيبة، وهدوء النفس.
الشيخ البوطي رحمه الله:
هل من الصحيح أن أتساءلَ ـ أنا الجالس المرتاح على هذه الكنبة ـ عن إخلاصه، بينما هو الآن في ساحة الحرب؟
ابتدأتُ الكلام بشكره على موقفه الداعم للمقاومة، المنطلق من طهارة قلب، وبصيرة عقل، مميّزًا بينه وبين الشيخ ابن عثيمين السعودي الذي حرّم في ذلك الوقت الدعاء للمقاومة.
بادرني الشيخ بالحديث عن موقفه من المسلمين الشيعة، بوصفه عالماً سُنّياً متمسّكًا بما يعتقده، وفاجأني بطرحه لتساؤل لديه:
هل للشيعة مشروع خاصّ، خلاف ما يُعلنون، كما يُروِّج لذلك الكثيرون، وبالتالي، لا ينطلقون من دافع الاخلاص لله عزّ وجلّ؟
فجأة تلجلج صوت الشيخ، وتغيَّرت معالم وجهه، وأخذ يقول، كمن يتحدث مع نفسه بصوت عال:
هل يعقل أن يكون السيّد حسن نصر الله غير مُخْلِص؟
هل من الصحيح أن أتساءلَ ـ أنا الجالس المرتاح على هذه الكنبة ـ عن إخلاصه، بينما هو الآن في ساحة الحرب؟
ترى أين يكون الآن السيد حسن؟
وأخذ الشيخ العجوز يبكي ذارفاً دموعاً كثيرة، ما استدعى نجله لأن يتدخَّل لتهدئته من نوبة تلك العاطفة الفطريّة الصادقة.
لكن الشيخ أكمل حديثه، مع ذرف الدموع، وبحة الصوت، وارتجاف الجسم النحيف:
“يا ليتني إصبعٌ من جسد السيّد حسن”.
لا أدري، لعلّه كان يتذكّر أثناء كلامه اصبع السيد الذي منحته حركته في تكبيرة الإحرام قوةً أصبح العدوّ يرتجف منه حينما يلوِّح به في خطبه، فهو إصبع التوحيد، وإصبع التهديد، هو إصبع التولي، وإصبع التبري، هو إصبع الجمال، وإصبع الجلال.
لم يكتف العالم المسنّ بتلك الكلمة، بل أردف معبِّرًا عن أمنيته في مقابلة السيِّد بلقاء خاص ليلثم قبضة القوّة، المطهَّرة بوضوء العارف، القابضة على زند السيف المدافع عن الأمّة.
وأكمل الشيخ البوطيّ حديثه، اللابس هذه المرّة معطف الصوفيّ، غير منقطع عن ذرف الدموع الصادقة التي اغتسلت بها روح هذا العالم السنّي، حتى أضحى صفوان أملس، لم تستطع أمطار المذهبيّة أن تستقرّ فيه، فقال:
“أنا، منذ بداية هذه الحرب، سافرت إلى حمص قاصداً أحد الأولياء الصالحين، وطلبت منه أن يدعو للمقاومة في لبنان، فإذا به يجيبني: يا شيخ سعيد، منذ بداية هذه الحرب أردّد وردًا خاصّاً لأجل انتصار المقاومة، أبشر يا شيخ سعيد، إنّهم سينتصرون وليس الأمّة”.
بعدها ودّعنا الشيخ بما أخجلنا، فهو لم يرتضِ إلا بتشييعنا من طابقه العلويّ إلى السيارة التي أقلّتنا، رغم سنّه الكبيرة، ومقامه الجليل، وصعوبة النزول والصعود بلا مصعد كهربائيّ.
إنها أخلاقه، إنها محبّته للسيّد الذي تأثّر أيّمَا تأثّر حينما رويت له ما جرى في هذا المشهد الشاميّ.
حينما سمعتُ بخبر شهادة الشيخ البوطيّ وهو يلقي درسه في بيت الله لم أتفاجأ؛ فمن كانت تلك مواقفه، تليق به هذه الخاتمة.
*من السيد حسن إلى السيد حسن
أقبلت امرأة سوريّة في العقد السابع من العمر إلى مركز هيئة دعم المقاومة الإسلامية، فتحت حقيبتها التي كانت تحملها، وأخرجت منها كميةً كبيرةً من المال بالعملة السوريّة، وأعطتها لمندوب الهيئة، قائلة:
“هذا تبرّع للمقاومة”.
اكتب: “من السيّد حسن نصر الله، إلى السيّد حسن نصر الله”
تفاجأ الأخ المندوب من تلك الكميّة من المال، في حين أنّ المرأة لا يبدو عليها الثّراء، ولم يستطع صبراً على حديث نفسه، فسألها عن سرّ ذلك، فأجابت بثقة وهدوء: “اليوم قبضت كامل راتبي التقاعدي، وقد جئت أتبرّع به للمقاومة، فهي أحقّ به مني”. اندهش مندوب الهيئة من كلامها، وكادت العبرة أن تخنقه، وهو يستمع إليها قرب المشهد الزينبيّ المبارك. سألها وهو يحمل قلمه ليكتب على إيصال هيئة الدعم اسم تلك المرأة الشريفة، قال لها: هل تتفضّلين عليّ بذكر الاسم الكريم لأكتبه على ايصال التبرّع، فأجابته بعزّة وشموخ:
اكتب: “من السيّد حسن نصر الله، إلى السيّد حسن نصر الله”.
* نساؤنا بخدمة نسائكم
اتصل بي نائب سوريّ في مجلس الشعب يطلب منّي الحضور إلى أحد المباني الشاميّة التي ذكر لي أنّها خُصّصت لإقامة عوائل المجاهدين في المقاومة الإسلاميّة.
وصلت إلى هناك، وقمت مع النائب بجولة في ذلك المبنى الجديد الذي جُهِّز بأثاث حديث، وما فاجأني فيه تخصيص قاعدة سينما، وكافيتيريا مملوءة بما يحبّه الأطفال، ومصلّىً وضعت فيه أقراص ترابية للسّجود عليها.
حمل النائب “السنّي” قرص سجدة، وأدناه مني سائلاً: هل هذه “السجدات” جيّدة؟!
وما زاد مفاجأتي ما رأيته إلى جانب المبنى من ساحة تشكّل مدينة صغيرة لألعاب الأطفال، وإلى جانبها أدوات مطعم مخصّصة للطعام المعروف بـ “الشّاورما”.
قمنا بتنظيم وترتيب كل ما يوفِّر الرّاحة لأطفال المجاهدين وزوجاتهم، حتى الأمور المتعلقة بالخدمة، لا نريد لزوجات المجاهدين أن يرهقن أنفسهنّ
وعند خروجنا من ذلك المبنى التفتُّ إلى وجود بضعة “باصات” أخبرني النائب أنّها بخدمة عوائل المجاهدين حينما يريدون التنقّل داخل دمشق.
شكرتُ سعادة النائب طالباً منه أن ينقل شكري إلى صاحب الفكرة والرعاية لهذه المبادرة الطيّبة، فكان جوابه:
إنّ هذه المبادرة هي أقلّ واجب نقوم به مع عوائل المجاهدين الذين يقاتلون هذه الأيّام العدوّ الإسرائيلي في لبنان، ويدافعون عن الأمّة جمعاء، وقد قمنا بتنظيم وترتيب كل ما يوفِّر الرّاحة لأطفال المجاهدين وزوجاتهم، حتى الأمور المتعلقة بالخدمة، لا نريد لزوجات المجاهدين أن يرهقن أنفسهنّ، لذا فـ “نساؤنا سيخدِمْنَ نساء رجال المقاومة”.
* أنا من هؤلاء النساء
بعد النّصر المدوّي في حرب تمّوز بساعات اتّصل بي سفير الجمهورية الإسلاميّة الإيرانيّة في دمشق طالباً منّي الحضور إلى احتفال سياسيّ في دمشق بمناسبة هذا النصر الإلهيّ. وصلت إلى القاعة فوجدتُها ممتلئة بحضور سياسيّ متنوّع من أكثر من بلد عربي وإسلاميّ.
أطلعني سماحة الشيخ الأختريّ، السّفير الإيرانيّ المخضرم، على برنامج الاحتفال، وأن فيه كلمة لوزير الأوقاف في سوريا، وكلمة للمفتي العام فيها، طالباً أن يكون لي كلمة باسم المقاومة الإسلاميّة والجمهوريّة الإسلاميّة الإيرانيّة معاً. فكّرتُ سريعاً بما هو مناسب للحديث في هذا المحفل، فخطر في بالي أن تكون الكلمة حول ثقافة المقاومة التي صنعت هذا الانتصار الربّاني الكبير. وأثناء كلمتي استحضرتُ بعضاً من المشاهد الشاميّة التي عايشتها مع الشعب السوري الحبيب أثناء الحرب، وذكرتُ من بين تلك المشاهد ما تقدّم ذكره من قول ذلك النائب السوريّ لي:
“لا نريد لزوجات المجاهدين أن يرهقن أنفسهنّ، لذا فنساؤنا سيخدمن نساء رجال المقاومة”.
وحينما انتهى الاحتفال أقبل العديد من الحاضرين لتهنئتي، ومن جملتهم أقبلت امرأة متوسّطة في العمر، وقالت لي، والدموع تُذرف من عينيها:”
أنا نائب في مجلس الشعب السوري، وأنا كنت من أولئك النساء اللواتي تحدّثت عنهن، كان لي شرف أن أكون في خدمة نساء رجال المقاومة”.
My dear friend Sheikh Imran Hosein will be lecturing in various cities across the UK (including Scotland!) in August and September. If at all possible, I highly recommend that you do you best to try to attend one of his lectures and, if given the opportunity, speak with him. This is especially true if you consider yourself a Christian and, even more so, an Orthodox Christian. Don’t miss the opportunity to listen and speak to a truly exceptional man.
August 26th – Closed event. ‘The Conquest of Constantinople in Islamic Eschatology’. Lecture and dialogue with the Greek Orthodox Community of Leeds
Recording will be uploaded.
LEEDS
Monday August 27th – The Quran, Pakistan’s Economic & Monetary Predicament and the New Imran Khan Government. 6:30pm Andalus Center, 211 New City rd, G4 9PA
SCOTLAND GLASGOW
Tuesday 28th August – The Prohibition of Riba in the Quran & Sunnah – 7pm Sizzlers Hall, 7 Guthrie St, DD1 5DR
Email: fahadshery@yahoo.com
SCOTLAND DUNDEE
August 31st – Imam Al-Mahdi and the return of the khilafa State – 6:30pm – Ilford Central mosque – 50-58 Albert Rd, IG1 1HW
LONDON ILFORD
September 2nd – An Introduction to Islamic Eschatology – All day seminar 9am-6pm, Registration required at Eventbrite. Coombe Farm oaks rd, CR0 5HL https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/all-da...
LONDON CROYDON
September 9th – Methodology For The study of the Quran – 6pm – Seven sisters Masjid, Suffield Rd, N15 5JX sevensistersislamiccentre@gmail.com
LONDON SEVEN SISTERS
September 15th – The Quran, Pakistan’s Economic & Monetary predicament and the new Imran Khan government – email: info@hameem.org
LONDON
The Essential Saker II: Civilizational Choices and Geopolitics / The Russian challenge to the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire
“We are the nation of martyrdom, we are the nation of Imam Hossain, you better ask.” – Iranian Major General and Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani, July 27, 2018
That injunction for education was in response to US President Donald Trump’s threatening “all-caps tweet” to Iran. The exchange provides a rather timely news peg for this article, and it also confirms its necessity; this article relates the importance of Imam Hossain in modern Iranian society.
Despite the good advice, I doubt Trump will ask anyone about Imam Hossain, and it appears certain he lacks the intellectual stamina for “such a long” article.
The previous part of this series – ‘Cultural’ & ‘Permanent Revolution’ in Iranian Revolutionary Shi’ism – is rather necessary reading in order to understand this part…unless one is already familiar with the life and death of Imam Ali, is aware of the foundation of the Sunni-Shia intellectual schism, and also has (at least) an areligious historical perspective on the political situation of the early Islamic era immediately following the death of Prophet Mohammad. Hossain immediately followed Ali, his father, so such background knowledge will help one to fully grasp the historical-cultural-political-religious links presented here.
In this previous segments of this 11-part series I have mainly discussed facts: Why the World Socialist Web Site’s 3-part series claiming that “Islamic Socialism is a sham” is false and blind; how the centrally-planned economy of the Shahs paved the way for the socialist-inspired economy of the Islamic Republic of Iran; why “privatisation” in Iran is a misleading misnomer; and a 4-part sub-series on the Basij, a much-misunderstood institution which actually reflects the attempt of revolutionary Shi’ism to redistribute wealth and power to the poorer classes & to solidify support for Iran’s unique structure and culture.
While the goal of this series is to show how Iran is the ignored success story of socialism, it is also to shed light on the Western blackout of honest, accurate & balanced discussion on modern Iran. Therefore, I thought that discussions of Imams Ali and Hossain should have gone first, as they are the major motivating force of modern Iran…but that would have immediately turned off the receptivity towards learning new perspectives on Iran among the often anti-religion Western leftists. Therefore, I have saved these two religious-philosophical & cultural discussions for the end, because I wanted my discussion of Iran’s unique creations to be factual & structural and not philosophical. We can’t argue the clear facts which prove Iran’s socialism – not anymore.
But Iran’s (now totally-clear) socialist policies cannot be explained or understood solely by an intellectual lens of “socialism” – “socialism” does not fully explain the unique creation of the Basij, the unique creation of the post of Supreme Leader, the unique creation of the bonyads or state charity cooperatives to help run 10-15% of the economy, etc. For full comprehension, religious-cultural knowledge must be added.
Because Iran is a unique (revolutionary) country, this means they have implemented policies which truly have no parallel. It also means the reasons for such policies are often not accepted by others, and even more rarely understood. The WSWS refuses to add in this component of “religion” – thus, their series could only falsely claim that Iran’s revolution was seemingly totally inspired by the Iranian Communist Tudeh Party, in a rather selective rewriting of history which aimed to marginalise the role of religion in Iran.
All of these unique (revolutionary) polices, structures and ideas can indeed be explained by socialism because they are socialist…but something crucial will still be lacking; one cannot fully understand them without clarifying additional philosophical, cultural and religious tenets which run deeper in Iran than the obviously vitally nourishing economic-democratic ideas of 19th-21st century socialism.
Is this more new scholarship linking Iran and socialism? Possibly, but links have already been made for many decades
The previous part drew the parallel – and quite likely for the first time ever – between Imam Ali’s failed “Cultural Revolution”, after the original political Revolution of Islam, and the Chinese Cultural Revolution.
Similarly, I cannot report finding internet links between Imam Hossain and the Trotskyist theory of “Permanent Revolution”, either.
However, I am not here to take credit. While I feel that Ali / China link was perhaps not able to be made in the heyday of the Iranian Revolution – as it is quite possible the true aims / goals / results of the Chinese Cultural Revolution were not known – the link between Hossain and “Permanent Revolution” was quite clearly obvious.
I contend that if I can’t find a record of this historical parallel being explicitly made there are clear reasons why:
The internet does not include the the cassette tapes, mosque lectures and fragile mimeographs which were the method of political communication in 1970s Iran.
Perhaps most Iranian thinkers wanted to give more credit to Islamic revolutionary figures, who were more relatable to the average Iranian.
The Revolution of 1979 was intensely patriotic: A repeated claim was that Iran already contained all it needed to have a modern, revolutionary, just society – holding up non-Iranian figures hurts that claim. And it’s not as if Trotsky, Mao or other foreigners were going to sue Iranians for using their ideas without attribution….
Iranian socialists were discredited-by-association in the 1980s by the horrific, detested, traitorous, totally illegitimate, most definitely NOT socialist cult known as the Mujahideen Khalq Organisation (known as the MKO or MEK, or People’s Mujahideen in English). Their unthinkable actions – stealing corpses to inflate body counts for propaganda purposes, fighting alongside Saddam, massacring Kurds, assassinating Iranian scientists, thousands of other terrorist acts, etc. – likely caused many to step away from proudly espousing the socialist intellectual lens which was so prevalent in the 1970s. It is mind-boggling to me that intelligent Western leftists ask me about the MKO as if they are some sort of viable leftist option in Iran…but it’s a big world, filled with too many insane cults – on the left, right and centre – to keep track of. The unforgivable MKO has also been gallingly whitewashed in the West by hundreds of millions of dollars from the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia and France (where they are now headquartered). Support for the MKO on the part of West repeatedly sends the Iranian government into an absolute tizzy, and rightly so – it is proof of the West’s appalling and murderous intentions against Iran (as if more proof was needed….).
I will quote extensively, as in the previous part, from seminal Iranian Islamic revolutionary thinker Ali Shariati – I think readers will see for themselves how very clearly he adapted some key Trotskyist ideals in his modern portrayal of Imam Hossain. Whether Shariati admitted it or not, “Permanent Revolution” is all over his ideas, slogans, analyses, etc.
I can verify from personal discussions with older, politically active that (duh!) Trotsky was indeed one of the key figures on their minds in the 1970s and beyond.
But I am only a journalist reporting what I have found: the explicit link is not found, but I am both a poor journalist and poor researcher. I do not seriously expect Iranians to tell me that Imam Ali-Mao links were widely made, but I do expect them to tell me Imam Hossain – Trotsky links were.
Regardless, credit for linking Ali / China & Hossain / Trotsky – plus another $0.50 – will only get me a cup of coffee, as the saying goes (at least it did prior to inflation); the main thing is to understand modern Iran in order to promote human brotherhood.
The huge misunderstanding on ‘martyrdom’ between Iran and the West
It is often said that “self-sacrifice” and “martyrdom” are the main principles of the 1979 Islamic Revolution and Iranian society today…but this fact is of almost of no value to Westerners, because in 2018 there is a fundamental misunderstanding between the West and Iran on what “martyrdom” means and is.
Two parties cannot create mutual understanding if definitions of words are totally different. This article aims to rectify that.
But to do that, it is necessary for non-Muslims to learn about Imam Hossain, the grandson of Mohammad, the son of Imam Ali, and the 3rd Shia Caliph but who was not a Caliph for Sunni because Hossain was cheated out of it by Muawiyah, founder of the Umayyad dynasty and the 6th Sunni Caliph (this last statement is a universal historical consensus and not solely a Shia one – this was all explained in the previous part of this series).
In short: in 680 AD Imam Hossain (spelled Husayn or Hussein or Hossain in Arabic) marched off to certain death at Karbala, Iraq, rather than sanction the government of the Umayyad dynasty, which Imam Hossain and his father perceived as insufficiently Islamic and insufficiently revolutionary. This martyrdom has inspired a feeling of “Permanent Revolution” within Shia Iranians.
Many anti-religion leftists falsely assume this martyrdom was solely the result of a dispute on religious doctrine – I suppose it was, but I am 100% certain it was an intensely political act as well. Nobody is forcing anyone to accept the religious aspect – Islam can never be forced – and this means that non-Muslims can view Ali and Hossain in a purely political, areligious, historical context. But the widespread failure to do this has had huge consequences in modern political analysis.
The yearly pilgrimages to Karbala, Iraq, to commemorate Hossain are among the largest peaceful gatherings in human history. Even though 10-20 million people attend, they are totally ignored by Western media. That’s a pity, because even though “God is dead” to Western culture, the Arba’een pilgrimages shows how very, very, very living it is to Shia. Like that or not – this galvanising power cannot be ignored. As Soleimani said to Trump: “you better ask” about Hossain.
As I explained in the previous article, the Revolution of Islam was a sweeping & immediate political revolution as well as a revolution in religious thought and practice. This duality cannot be argued in the slightest, nor is there a single reason why they should be contradictory. Therefore, socio-cultural-historical parallels abound with other the great political revolutions in human history.
Non-Muslims and Westerners have much to glean politically from the Revolution of Islam, if they can only set aside their anti-religion bigotry. Again: one can examine the early Islamic age from an areligious perspective because it was a political & social revolution, unlike Christianity after the life or the death of Jesus son of Mary.
Regardless, the political structures and daily life in the Islamic Republic of Iran in 2018 cannot be understood without grasping the importance of Imam Hossain in our collective unconscious. Unlike Jesus in the secular West, Hossain is a constant, universal presence in Iran (and for the many non-Shia, as well), and a perpetual reminder of the need for moral political action.
The second, failed generation of Islamic revolutionaries
As the previous article described, to many Iranian thinkers like Ali Shariati, after Prophet Mohammad’s death Islam was literally hijacked by slackening revolutionaries who forgot the socio-political message of Mohammad in order to create the imperialist Umayyad empire.
In 656 Imam Ali became Caliph and tried to stop this ideological and religious slackening, and thus represents, in modern terms, the Cultural Revolution in the Revolution of Islam, just as China had a Cultural Revolution years after their Chinese Communist Revolution (or quite similar to how Iran had the world’s only other official Cultural Revolution, from 1980-83).
But, in 661 Ali is assassinated. Ali’s son Imam Hassan becomes the Caliph (the 5th to Sunnis, the 2nd to Shia) but he has inherited a shattered administration. He is forced to abdicate to the politically & militarily powerful governor of largely Christian Damascus, Muawiyah, who is declared Caliph. The wishes of Mohammad are denied, the bloodline of Mohammad is broken, and the officially-secular & imperialist Umayyad dynasty is founded.
Imam Hassan, daughter of Mohammad’s daughter Fatima and Imam Ali, retires to Medina and dies in 670. After Ali’s death Umayyad clerics spent 60+ years making state-ordered ritual curses of Ali during public prayers, so Hassan was clearly in a very weak position. When he dies he is even denied burial next to his grandfather, Prophet Mohammad, and his relatives in Medina. I quote from Ali Shariati’s Martyrdom and Martyrdom:
“Imam Hassan, the manifestation of loneliness and isolation in Islamic Society, even in the Medina of the Prophet, clearly shows how the Truth-seeking party in Islam is utterly shattered. The new force of revolution completely overwhelms everyone and everything and conquers in every domain. Now it is Hossain’s turn.”
That “new force” is those who split off to create Sunni Islam, which is why the Shia Shariati continues, unequivocally:
“Hossain inherits the Islamic movement. He is the inheritor of a movement which Mohammed has launched, Ali has continued and in whose defence Hassan makes the last defence. Now there is nothing left for Hossain to inherit: no army, no weapons, no wealth, no power, no force, not even an organized following. Nothing at all. ”
Not only does the first two sentences of that paragraph name nearly all the males in my family, but it should emphatically make clear the historical-ideological view of Shia Islam, and how it obviously sharply differs from Sunnis.
The post-Mohammad era: When Shi’ism was truly an underground & political movement
Just as I wondered if Mao had any idea of Imam Ali’s message of Cultural Revolution, I wonder if Lenin had any idea of what Hossain stood for? I rather doubt it, but I’m certain the he, too, would have approved.
To paraphrase Shariati, who is paraphrasing Lenin: Hossain and the very few true revolutionaries are aware that the revolution is being compromised, and are asking – “What should be done?”
Certainly, there were no lack of ideas of appeasement being flung at Hossain: fatalism (God wishes it this way), are you so innocent that you can rectify the whole community, jihad is not the only path to God, asceticism is so personally pleasing, don’t oppose a Damascus which is spreading Islam, people judge by what they see so Islam must show a rich face to the Byzantine Romans and Persians to win them over, many temples and churches have been replaced by mosques, Islam is gaining in importance, Muslims are getting the top jobs, don’t cause trouble when there is Holy War against Christians in Europe and Zoroastrians in Iran, opposing those aristocrats is unrealistic and combative, we must win over our own aristocrats, do not mix earthly matters with heavenly ones, etc.
It all adds up to a call of: support the ruling system, and end your idealistic, permanent revolution.
This is something rejected by revolutionary Shi’ism, because the results of such a choice are clear:
“Sixty years have passed since the migration of the Prophet. Everything earned by the Revolution has been destroyed. All of the successes earned a century before have been abolished. The Book brought by the Prophet is placed on the spears of the Umayyad (literally, during their first war against Imam Ali). The culture and ideas which Islam had developed through jihad, struggle and efforts in the hearts and minds of the people became a means for explaining the Umayyads rule.
…
“Yes. In these black times the ignorance of aristocracy is being revived. Power is being dressed in piety and sacredness. The desires for liberty and equality created by Islam in the hearts of those sacrificed for power or policy are breaking down. Tribal (sectarian) ignorance has replaced the humanitarian revolution.
…
Jihad has become the means for massacre. Religious taxes are a means of public plunder. Prayer is a means of deceiving the public. Unity has been covered with the mass of profanity. Islam has become a chain of surrendering.
…
Nations are being taken into slavery as before.”
Obviously, Marxist- and socialist-inspired condemnations abound, as is the desire for modern revolution.
It is perhaps natural that when the Iranian Shia Shariati focuses on the 50-year period between the death Mohammad until the martyrdom of Hossain – from 632 until 680 – he is intensely critical of the lack of political revolutionary commitment on the part of the entire second revolutionary generation except for what is a very real “Shiite Resistance Movement”, which is truly an underground political phenomenon.
Imam Hossain answers Lenin’s question
In 680 the Caliph Muawiyah dies. Muawiyah’s betrayal of the House of Mohammad culminated in the handing of the caliphate to his son, Yazid. This ended the consultative and democratic caliphate and inaugurated monarchy and the Umayyad dynasty.
Yazid would go on to commit terrible atrocities at the Battle of Al-Harrah, which led to the looting of Medina by the Syrian army in 683, and then even an unthinkable siege of Mecca, leading to the burning of the Kabaa. The siege only ended when Yazid died from falling off his horse. These acts obviously damaged Umayyad authority among the People and strengthened the argument of the early Shia.
By 750 the Iranian-Iraqi Abbasid Revolution would kick the Umayyads out of the entire Middle East, while the Great Berber Revolt had kicked them out of the Maghreb just a few years prior. West and East Africa were not yet Muslim at this time.
The ethnic (Arab) elitists but religiously-tolerant Umayyads only found fertile soil in Europe, ruling Spain for several centuries. The Abbasid Caliphate would rule Islam for five centuries, replacing the feudal Arab Caliphate with a multi-ethnic, religiously tolerant Islamic Golden Age that lasted until the Mongol Invasion in 1258. The Mamluks of Egypt fought off the Mongols, thus sparing not just the Maghreb but all of Africa, and also allowing the Abbasids to re-center the Caliphate (religiously, but not politically) until the Ottoman conquest in 1517.
Thus a truly “Muslim World” – one in which unity is based only on Islam and not Arab ethnicity & Islam – does not begin until after the Umayyads. Shia obviously feel that Imam Ali and Imam Hossain perceived this sooner than anyone.
Shariati describes the view of Hossain back in 680: Hossain surely foresaw the crumbling of the Umayyad’s legitimacy – due to an obvious slackening of revolutionary integrity, the corruption of revolutionary ideals and culture, and the renunciation of political & social involvement;
“Imam Hossain, as a responsible leader, sees that if he remains silent, Islam will change into a religion of the government. Islam will be changed into a military-economic power and nothing more. Islam will become as other regimes and powers.
…
He is alone, unarmed. Opposing him is one of the most savage empires of the world which is being covered over by the fairest and most deceiving cover of piety, sacredness and unity which the ruling power possesses. He is alone. He is a lonely man who is responsible to this school of thought.
…
Whoever is more aware is more responsible, and who is more aware than Imam Hossain? What is his responsibility? He is responsible to fight against the elimination of the truth, the destruction of the rights of the people, annihilation of all of the values, abolition of all of the memories of the Revolution, destruction of the message of the Revolution, and to protect the most beloved of cultures and the faith of the people, for their destruction is the aim of the most filthy enemies of the people. They want to once again create the unknown, mysterious deaths, exiles, putting people in chains; the worshipping of pleasure, discriminations, the gathering of wealth; the selling of human values, faith, honor, creating new religious foolishness, racism, new aristocracy, new ignorance and a new polytheism.”
It’s a powerful historical analysis, and one which combines modern, socialist-inspired political thought with Abrahamic morality. The Shah had obviously re-created these evils, but it’s clear that just toppling a tyrant is no guarantee of revolution.
It should thus be clear how Iranian Revolutionary Shi’ism was created, how it was shaped by the lenses of socialism, and why it galvanised mullahs and masses far more than the Tudeh Party ever did.
But Hossain was totally weakened and could not depose the powers in Damascus. Therefore, he used his one weapon – his certain, aware death at Karbala.
The death of Imam Hossain – the birth of ‘living artists’ in the future
Hossain, then in Mecca, was invited by the people of Kufa, Iraq, (the future first seat of the Abbasid Caliphate 70 years later, showing they maintained their revolutionary zeal & culture ) to be their leader. Kufans had come around after 20 years of rule by Muawiyah. Hossain accepts.
However, Hossain gets word that Yazid’s troops were killing his sympathisers and blocking the gates – going to Kufa thus means certain death, given Hossain’s lack of power and resources.
Imam Hossain had two choices: go to Medina and swear allegiance to the new Umayyad dynasty, or march to the certain death at Kufa. Sanctioning imperialism is never Islamic, nor a modern revolution. Seventy kilometres from the Kufa gate Hossain’s band of family and loyal companions, 72 people, chose to fight the Battle of Karbala.
“He leaves Mecca to reply to the question, ‘How?’… (to) all those who can see, feel, understand and thus suffered and felt themselves responsible, who are thus looking for a revolution, (and) are then asking “What should be done?”
Clearly, the aware death of Hossain was selected by revolutionary Shi’ism as a direct answer to the title of Lenin’s famous pamphlet, which he took from a Russian book from 1863 which called for socialist self-sacrifice (martyrdom, to Iranians).
I quote Shariati at some length, because I cannot decide what should be omitted, and also because Western readers must drastically re-orient their conception of the word “martyrdom” if they want to understand the Shia and Iranian version (and the version very close to Sunni Muslims, as well.)
“The great teacher of martyrdom has now arisen in order to teach those who consider jihad to relate only to those who have the ability, and victory to be only in conquering. Martyrdom is not a loss, it is a choice. A choice where by the warrior sacrifices himself on the threshold of the temple of freedom and the altar of love, and is victorious.
Hossain, the heir of Adam, who gives life to the children of mankind, and the successor of the great prophets, who taught mankind ‘how to live’, has now come to teach mankind ‘how to die’.
Hossain teaches that ‘black death’ is the miserable fate of a humbled people who accept scorn in order to remain alive. For death chooses those who are not brave enough to choose martyrdom. Death chooses them!
The word shahid, martyr, contains the highest form of what I am saying. It means being present; bearing witness; one who bears witness. It also means that which is sensible and perceptible; the one whom all turn towards. Finally it means model, pattern, example.
Martyrdom: to arise and bear witness in our culture and in our religion is not a bloody and accidental happening. In other religions and tribal histories, martyrdom is the sacrificing of the heroes who are killed in the battles of the enemy. It is considered to be a sorrowful accident, full of misery. Those who are killed in this way are called martyrs and their death is called martyrdom.
But in our culture, martyrdom is not a death which is imposed by an enemy upon our warriors. It is a death which is desired by our warrior, selected with all of the awareness, logic, reasoning, intelligence, understanding, consciousness and alertness that a human being has.
Look at Hossain. He releases his life, leaves his town and arises in order to die because he has no other means for his struggle to condemn and disgrace his enemy. He selects this in order to render aside the deceiving curtains which covered the ugly faces of the ruling power. If he cannot defeat the enemy in this way, at least he can disgrace them. If he cannot conquer the ruling power, he can at least condemn it by injecting new blood and the belief of jihad into the dead bodies of the second-generation of the Revolution revealed to the Prophet.
Quite a passage – far from being a tragedy or a screaming kamikaze pilot hopped up on speed, Iranian martyrdom is based on intelligent and sensitive awareness. It is obviously highly political, and contains an urgent and progressive (anti-reactionary) political message.
In summary, in our culture – contrary to other schools where it is considered to be an accident, an involvement, a death imposed upon a hero, a tragedy – (it) is a grade, a level, a rank. It is not a means but is a goal itself. It is originality. It is a completion. It is a lift. It itself is midway to the highest peak of humanity and it is a culture.”
This is the “martyrdom” which is imbued in Iranian culture. How imbued is it? Iranians hear the word multiple times daily in the common greeting between two friends or even two strangers: “Gorban-e-shoma” (“I will be your martyr”). Many Iranians will say that I am over-exaggerating the literal importance of this phrase, but that IS the literal translation. To me, commonplace linguistic phrases reveal a culture’s true soul; but it is true that nobody is really promising immediate martyrdom on the other’s behalf.
(I always thought this Farsi phrase grew out of Koran 4:86 – “Answer a greeting in kinder words than those said to you in their greeting, or at least as kind. God keeps account of all things.” What could be a kinder greeting to a total stranger than promising to die for them?)
However, only the thick-headed would imagine Iranian martyrdom to be only concerned with death – such a society would quickly empty itself of inhabitants.
Martyrdom is also the constant little sacrifices of one’s individual well-being for the sake of society, and in much, much less drastic forms than death. Martyrdom essentially exists in order to activate the “living artist” who improves society by moving beyond mere individualism.
Martyrdom and Martyrdom and ANOTHER Martyrdom
“In European countries the word ‘martyr’ stems from ‘mortal’ which means ‘death’ or ‘to die’. One of the basic principles in Islam and in particular in Shiite culture, however, is ‘sacrifice and bear witness’. So instead of martrydom, i.e. death, it essentially means ‘life’, ‘evidence’, ‘testify’, ‘certify’.”
Martyrdom is, of course, one of the central messages of Jesus to Christians…but not as significantly to Muslims, however: the Koran explicitly rejects the idea that God could allow a messenger and prophet of God to be killed in such a way. Indeed, for Islam Jesus was not killed on the cross – it was only made to appear that way by God. In Islam faith always wins over evil, therefore the death of Jesus on the cross is illogical – how could Jesus’ executioners have won?
That is a complicated issue, but bringing it up helps us clarify the roots of the difference in the meaning of “martyrdom” to Muslims and Westerners. It also helps illuminate why the martyrdom of Imam Hossain is so important in Islam – he is essentially the primary Abrahamic martyr to Muslims.
But I think Shariati rather significantly misunderstands “martyrdom” as defined in the West. Although he is correct that they view it in a far more negative fashion than in Islam, I think Shariati’s view is wrong by failing to include two key points:
Firstly, Shariati does not acknowledge that – for Christians themselves – there is also a positive message of Jesus’ martyrdom: which is, that the key is to emulate Jesus when it comes to his martyrdom.
However, I believe that West European Christians (not East European) have proven incapable of grasping this positive message. Therefore, the point is moot for the Western half of the continent.
Secondly, Shariati did not grasp that many West Europeans mistakenly appear to think that because Jesus died for our sins, Jesus thus ended the need for more martyrdom. This quite significantly compounds the disagreeableness of “martyrdom” to Westerners.
Indeed, “martyr” is a term used only to disparage in Western European cultures. The only time one hears it in English is in the phrase “Don’t be a martyr”. The word and concept are similarly totally absent in French.
The word “martyr” is never even used to describe who has died unjustly (the primary view in Sunni cultures) – not for a Palestinian protester killed by Zionists, nor a Jew killed in the Holocaust.
For the West, I believe that martyrdom has evolved to mean “an unnecessary exaggeration of suffering” – as though you are pretentiously claiming that you are doing something on the level of Jesus Christ. When it comes to martyrdom in the West the message is unambiguous: don’t do it at any time. As I am aware of the Iranian version and its elevation of martyrdom, I always found this cultural difference quite, quite surprising.
I think the negative Western view reveals two flaws, as martyrdom is clearly a positive thing: a fundamental cultural indifference to unjust suffering, at least when compared with Muslim and Iranian culture, and also a distaste for suffering on behalf of any cause. The latter observation is caused by the rampant individualism of the capitalist West: anyone suffering for a cause necessarily and annoyingly reminds them of their fundamentally self-centred lives – thus their society discourages it.
There is also rampant nihilism in the West, which is not at all the same as religious fatalism, and which is yet another cause of their distaste for martyrdom: if all is pointless, why die for anything? Martyrdom is thus negatively associated with a needless death, when for Sunni Muslims martyrdom is associated with an unjust death, and for Shia it is associated with a selfless death.
Thus Westerners view “martyrdom” as both a needless death as well as a negative, self-aggrandising act, while Sunnis view it positively but primarily as an act of injustice, whereas Shia & Iranians view martyrdom as a necessary, positive way to effectuate social change. Therefore, we really are talking about “Martyrdom and Martyrdom and Martyrdom”.
Martyrdom to Iranians is thus actually the equivalent of English “altruism”.
But, just like martyrdom, altruism conflicts with Western capitalist-imperialist ideology, as it is the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.
We should thus not be surprised that “altruism” is a word which almost never heard in Western daily discourse, nor in their political discourse.
Therefore, even prior to Basij teenagers being forced into wartime self-sacrifice by Western aggression, “martyr” was something with negative connotations for Westerners and positive connotations for Iranians.
The Western denigration of martyrdom forces the denigration of Iranian revolutionary Shi’ism
This Iranian conception of “martyrdom” should explain much in the first 8 parts of this series, no?
Why wage revolution against the Shah for decades? Why sit in opposition to East and West? Why be so uncaring of Western public opinion? Why be so stridently revolutionary? Why condemn Israel when it only reaps trouble? Why give 15% of the economy to charity foundations? Why create the Basij? Why refuse to participate in the dominant neoliberal ideology of global imperialist capitalism?
“I cannot see the Iranians agreeing to continue to suffer while Tehran continues to finance foreign movements like Hezbollah in Lebanon or the Houthis in Yemen,” Jean-François Seznec, professor of international relations at Johns Hopkins University, told France24 media just yesterday. You can’t see it, really, Mr. Hotshot professor? I can, because I understand the Iranian conception of “martyrdom” – you clearly are another clueless academic.
(And I know that polls show that all of these non-Iranian revolutionary movements – as well as in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere – are massively supported in a democratic majority in Iran).
Martyrdom – in the unique Iranian definition, of course – is a large part of the answer to all those questions I just posed. Whatever the West wants to hide, forget or put a smiling capitalist-imperialist face on – Iran chooses martyrdom, or would like to.
So we must relearn what Iran means by “martyrdom” – they are talking about “Iranian Shia martyrdom”. The right terms in English are really: self-sacrifice, altruism, social justice.
These desires explain why 10-25 million Iranians have joined the Basij – for the overwhelmingly majority it is essentially just a social hobby which encourages (moderate, dull) self-sacrifice for societal betterment. You do get some social and monetary benefits, which are especially of importance to the lower class, but for many Basiji it also fills this emotional need that “I need to martyr some of myself and my time for others”. This emotional need exists exactly the same in the West, but it does not exist in the same intensity, nor does it exist in a government-supported form.
The West, with their different definition of “martyrdom”, and in combination with their hatred of socialism & Islamic democracy, wants people to believe that Iranian “martrydom” is all wild-eyed death when it it is 99.9% the mere provision of some rather mundane civil service / community improvement instead of watching TV. Iranian are not THAT great at being martyrs!
Yet the West hears “martyr” and assumes the worst about those who support Iranian revolutionary Shi’ism,
For an example, I return to the book on the Basij I reviewed in this series, Captive Society, by Saied Golkar. It is the only book ever written about the Basij in the West, but it is clearly a book which is against the Basij.
Golkar is discussing the WSBO – the Women’s Society Basij Organization, which is the main Basij group for women.
“The ideal family, which is promoted by the WSBO, is called the Islamic Revolutionary family or ‘family of holy defense’. The Islamic revolutionary family has specific features, according to WSBO head Minoo Aslani. The family is the place of modesty and chastity, where women take moral care of their family members. It is a place where women encourage charitable and spiritual affairs among their children and husbands, and where women should speak about religion and the Islamic Revolution.”
To many this is a happy, typical, politically-modern home concerned with moral social conduct. For Westerners and those who oppose modern Iran – this is some sort of horror, because the government should never get involved with these types of values, as they are purely personal (and thus should vary extremely wildly, apparently).
Golkar thus descends into fear-mongering, and surely finds plenty of receptive minds in the West: Golkar refers to a scholar which labelled this kind of family a “martyropath family”. He believes that Basij women are being brainwashed into training a “martyropath,” or a person who is enchanted by death and wants to die to preserve Iran.
To me the only “-path” of any sort here is Golkar, for so obviously trying to portray Basij families as fascist psychopaths. It is incredible that this supposedly-objective scholar is trying to portray a “martyropath” as a credible description of an average Basiji.
But this is what people always do with Iran – they portray them as insane, death-loving, religious fundamentalists instead of human beings.
No Iranian woman (who does not belong in a mental institution) trains their child for martyrdom – they only train their children to be altruistic and selfless. There should be no doubt that in probably every single case of martyrdom known to man, it was ultimately done against the mother’s wishes (and a father’s). I am not a parent myself, but I think any parent would immediately agree with that.
As has been reported for the case of martyrs in Iran during the Iraq war: to choose a martyr’s death is a lonely and individual decision, and families did their best to stop it. However, this does not mean that – after the deed was done – families did not also see the glory in the death of defending their community, family, nation; this is no different than in any other nation with any of their soldiers.
The reality is this: Basiji women are merely being encouraged to be modern revolutionaries, and that is what is frightening to the counter-revolutionary West.
Just as there is a downside to the West’s “never martyrdom” approach, there is a downside to Shia Iran’s “martyrdom please” approach as well. For example, missing a couple meals during Ramadan does not make one the world’s greatest Muslim martyr. It is quite easy for Iranians to puff themselves up as great Muslims and revolutionaries because they have mentally accumulated 10 million insignificant instances of where they put the needs of someone else first, i.e., simply done the right thing. If any culture could break their own arms from patting themselves on their own backs, it is Iran.
However, a society full of martyrs is certainly far, far more desirable than a society full of self-serving individualists, no? This is essentially the point to take away from this article, I think.
The message of Imam Hossain remains a political beacon
The willful ignorance of the revolutionary, unique and socialist-inspired structures of revolutionary Shi’ism which created Iranian Islamic Socialism is only dangerous for Westerners: they are the ones who are misled about the nature of modern Iran; they are the ones who have such a terrified, “Muslim martyropaths will get me” worldview; they are the ones who are deluded by the paranoia that it is Iran which is targeting them and not the other way around; and they are the ones whose societies are worsened by the failure to transplant some of Iran’s unique solutions to modern problems in their own country; I could go on and on listing such problems.
It should be now quite clear that Iranians have re-intepreted the martyrdom of Imam Hossain to coincide with something quite similar to the Trotskyist socialist concept of “permanent revolution”.
We should see how something like the Basij – whether one approves of them or not, and I am officially neutral on their value – clearly was originally created to try and incarnate this idea of Perpetual Revolution for which Trotsky (and Lenin and other socialists) had different yet very similar notions. By constantly recruiting new members, training them in modern revolutionary Shi’ism and granting them affirmative action spots in the universities and government, it is clear that they are an effort to constantly refresh the Islamic Revolution and to constantly reshape Iranian culture in favor of Iranian Islamic Socialism. Again, I merely condense here the objective conclusions proven in my 4-part sub-series on the Basij and do not judge nor promote.
Obviously, revolutionary Shi’ism did not sprout overnight, nor did it need a war to make its values widespread; it has all existed in Iran for some time, yet it was the Islamic Republic of Iran which made these the officially-sanctioned values of the government for the first time ever.
Hopefully people will realize that Iranian “martyrdom” and its “permanent revolution” is something which is based both on ancient sources of unimpeachable morality as well as the unimpeachable modern political ideas of democratic progress and economic equality. The slogans of 1979 – “Every place is Karbala!” and “The martyr is the heart of human history! – reflect this reality.
“Every place is Petrograd” and “The revolutionary is the heart of human history” could have been taken from Trotsky.
Agree with Iranians or not, modern Iran is indeed revolutionary, and thus quite in keeping with its ideological heroes – Prophet Mohammad, Imam Ali, Imam Hossain, Lenin, Mao, Trotsky, Castro, Algeria and others. It is clear who deserves top billing; it’s amazing that Western leftists still do not even know the cast of main characters…but that is out of ignorance or willful blindness.
I hope these articles have also shown that one need not be an Iranian nor a Muslim to accept that the Iranian Revolution is proof that Islam can be a progressive revolutionary force once again. One also does not have to be a Muslim to see that socialism will not advance globally without first accepting those facts.
***********************************
This is the 9th article in an 11-part series which explains the economics, history, religion and culture of Iran’s Revolutionary Shi’ism, which produced modern Iranian Islamic Socialism.
Here is the list of articles slated to be published, and I hope you will find them useful in your leftist struggle!
‘Martyrdom and Martyrdom’ & martyrdom: understanding Iran
‘The Death of Yazdgerd’: The greatest political movie ever explains Iran’s revolution (available with English subtitles for free on Youtube here)
Iran détente after Trump’s JCPOA pull out? We can wait 2 more years, or 6, or…
Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for PressTV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. His work has appeared in various journals, magazines and websites, as well as on radio and television. He can be reached on Facebook.
The Essential Saker II: Civilizational Choices and Geopolitics / The Russian challenge to the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire
نشرت صحيفة «القدس العربي» قبل أيام أنّ نقابة المحامين في النجف أجرت محاكمة للخليفة الأموي هشام بن عبد الملك انتهت بالحكم عليه بالإعدام بتهمة قتل زيد بن علي بن الحسين.
الخبر طريف ومخيف في آن. طريفٌ لوجود ناس في كوكبنا الأرضي ما زالوا يجدون رغبة ومتعة في الاقتصاص من شخص لارتكابه جرماً قبل نحو 1400 سنة. مخيفٌ لاحتمال أن تتفشّى هذه التقليعة في أوساط البشرية المعاصرة، فينبري أشخاص أو جماعات من فرط ولعهم بإحقاق الحق ونشدان العدالة إلى إجراء محاكمة لقابيل بتهمة قتل أخيه هابيل!
تصوّروا لو تحوّلت هذه التقليعة الى نزعةٍ أو تقليد جارفٍ عابرٍ للأمم والشعوب، فينبري بعض المسيحيين إلى إجراء محاكمة لكلّ مَن يثبت التحقيق قيامه أو اشتراكه أو تدخله في جريمة صَلب السيد المسيح. ثم تصوّروا لو أنّ بعض المسلمين انبرى إلى إجراء محاكمة لكلّ من يثبت التحقيق قيامه أو اشتراكه أو تدخّله في جرائم اغتيال كلّ من الخلفاء الراشدين: عمر بن الخطاب وعثمان بن عفان وعلي بن أبي طالب والخليفة الأموي عمر بن عبد العزيز الذي يعتبره الفقهاء خليفةً راشدياً بالتقوى والفتوى والممارسة وسيّد الشهداء الحسين بن علي وغيرهم كثيرون من القادة والأعلام والأفذاذ المظلومين. تخوّفي أنه إذا ما جرت هذه المحاكمات ومثيلاتها، فتكون البشرية قد استحضرت ماضيها وأعادت اجتراره في الحاضر وربما في المستقبل إلى نهاية التاريخ.
هل مِن مسوّغ لتخوّفي هذا؟
نعم، لأنّ بعض العرب والمسلمين ما زال يعيش في الماضي ويقوم، بشكلٍ أو بآخر، باستحضار بعض واقعاته وحكاياته وأحداثه وحوادثه ويُعيد اجترارها أو محاكاتها في الحاضر.
نعم، الماضي يحتلّ قسماً كبيراً من حاضرنا. ونحن نعيشه يومياً ونعيد إنتاجه، بوعي أو بغير وعي، في شتى مناحي حياتنا. كلّ ذلك لأنّ الماضي في ثقافتنا ما زال المثل والمثال والقدوة والأسوة. فنحن لا نتذكّر واقعاته وأحداثه لأخذ العبرة والاتعاظ بل للاجترار والمحاكاة.
ما سبب هذه الظاهرة المرَضية؟
إنني من القائلين إنّ الإنسان في قوله وفعله هو إبن ثقافته. كما تكون ثقافته يكون. صحيح لأنّ جملة عوامل وحاجات وتطلّعات تكوّن ثقافة الإنسان، وقد يكون لبعضها دور في تكوينها أكثر من غيره، ومع ذلك فإنّ حضورها في عقل الإنسان وقلبه وأعصابه يبقى حضوراً متكاملاً ومؤثراً.
من الواضح أنّ للماضي حضوراً واسعاً وفاعلاً في ثقافة معظمنا التي هي ثقافة ماضوية، إنْ صحّ التعبير. معظمنا يفكّر بلغة الماضي وصِيَغه وقيمه وحتى مصطلحاته، ويستسيغ استحضاره وإعادة تجسيده في الحاضر. نحن، بهذا المعنى، ماضويون. أجل، ماضويون في التفكير والتدبير ونجد، غالباً، ضالتنا وفخرنا في ماضينا التليد، ونصبو إلى محاكاته في حاضرنا.
لكن، هل ماضينا كله تليد؟ هل كله صحيح، وصحي وحقيقي ومتألّق وجدير، تالياً، بأن يُحاكى ويقلّد؟
لا شك في وجود جوانب بهيّة وباهرة في ماضينا، لكن ثمّة جوانب أخرى مظلمة وبائسة. لذا لا يجوز قبول أو تقبّل الماضي كله بعجره وبجره. من الممكن، بل من الضروري، اكتناه قيمَه وجوانبه الحيّة، لكن من الضروري أيضاً اطّراح قيَمه الشائخة وجوانبه المظلمة.
بعض الماضويين، وربما السلفيين أيضاً، موغل في التعلّق بالماضي حتى حدود الشغف. الماضي كله أفضل من الحاضر. الماضي كله جدير بأن يُعاد فرضُه على الحاضر والمستقبل. الماضي، في مفهوم هؤلاء، هو المقدّس بالمقارنة مع الحاضر المدنّس.
لعلّ السبب الرئيس لسطوة الماضي على الحاضر هو اقتران الحاضر في معظم مراحل تاريخنا بسطوة الغير المعادي أو المختلف ونزوعه إلى فرض نفسه، وبالتالي ثقافته علينا. رفض الجديد والحديث كان جرّاء مجيئه أو اقترانه مع الآخر المستعمِر أو العدو أو، أقلّه، المختلف.
هكذا كانت، في الغالب الأعمّ، ردة فعل عامة الناس من ذوي الثقافة الماضوية. غير أنّ قلّة فينا، على مرّ التاريخ، تجاوزت أطر ثقافتها الماضوية وتطلّعت إلى ما هو خارجها واستطاعت، تالياً، أن تقف موقفاً نقدياً من الثقافة الماضوية السائدة ومن التراث عموماً.
سببٌ آخر فاعل لتمسّك عامة الناس بالماضي وتقديمه على الحاضر. إنه الدين من حيث هو مصدر الإيمان. الدين موجود ونابع من الكتب الدينية المقدّسة التي تعود بتاريخها الى الماضي ما يجعل المؤمن متمسّكاً بالماضي لكونه مصدر الإيمان العزيز على قلبه ومشاعره ووجدانه.
قلائل من الناس، مفكّرون عقلانيون ومصلحون شجعان، تمكّنوا عبر التاريخ من الخروج من الماضي نحو الحاضر والمستقبل من دون أن يسيئوا إلى تمسك المؤمنين، ولا سيما الماضويين منهم، بقيَم الماضي التي يعتبرونها مقدّسة. هؤلاء لاحظوا أنّ الإيمان بالله ورسله لا يتناقض مع ثقافة الانفتاح العقلاني على الحاضر والتشوّف المتوازن الى المستقبل. بل إنهم لاحظوا ظاهرة مدمّرة هي أنّ عبادة السلطة التي يمارسها معظم الحكّام تتعارض مع عبادة الله. لذا دعوا إلى فصل السلطة عن الدين. هذا الفصل بين الاثنين لا يسيء إلى الدين بل يحصّنه ضدّ أخطاء أصحاب السلطة وخطاياهم. كما أنه يجنّب أهل السلطة سلوكيات بعض أهل الدين المتزمّتة وأحياناً المتعارضة مع مصالح الناس عامةً.
كيف الخروج من الماضي وثقافته المغلقة إلى الحاضر وثقافته المنفتحة والمستقبل وثقافته المغايرة؟
ثمّة مسالك وطرائق عدّة، لعلّ أفعلها في زماننا وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي التي قرّبت بين الأفراد والجماعات، وأتاحت للفرد فرصاً كثيرة لإطلاق قدراته وإيصالها الى الملأ، وجعلت الانشغال بقضايا الحاضر ومتطلّباته متقدّمة على قضايا الماضي وأحداثه الدموية وأَوْلى بالاهتمام من محاكمة قاتلي الناس في أرواحهم وأرزاقهم وطموحاتهم، وأوْلى بالتحقيق من محاكمة قابيل قاتل أخيه هابيل وأمثاله من قَتَلة العظماء على مرّ التاريخ!
![Sayyed Nasrallah’s Full Speech on Prophet Muhammad’s [PBUH] Birth Anniversary](https://english.alahednews.com.lb/uploaded2/images/20201111120947.jpg)
“Since the beginning of this war, I have traveled to Homs to meet one of the righteous awliya. I asked him to pray for the resistance in Lebanon. He replied: O Sheikh Said, since the beginning of this war, I have been repeating a special prayer for the victory of the resistance. Rejoice Sheikh Said. They will triumph, and not the Ummah,” Sheikh al-Bouti continued saying while shedding sincere tears.
