The Principles Underlying the General Guardianship of the Jurist

The First Principle: Man is Gregarious by Nature
Man is gregarious by nature and he cannot meet his needs except though socialization and mutual help. However, often with socialization comes a clash of desires and a conflict of ideas, and there comes about a definite need for laws and a power to implement these laws in a just manner, so as to prevent transgression and conflict. This power (to implement laws) is what we mean by government.
This is why we see that the life of mankind, in all its stages- even in the stone age- was never free of a government no matter how small and simple, be it just or unjust. A system, even if it is oppressive, is better than the absence of any system and thus anarchy. The Commander of the Faithful (as) said: “people must have a leader, whether he is righteous or a transgressor”
There is no doubt that the Imam (as) does not mean to justify the leadership of a transgressor. Rather, he wants to show that it is, according to the intellect, more preferable than anarchy if the choice was only between the two.
The Second Principle: The Rule Belongs Solely to Allah
There is no doubt that Allah, the Exalted, is our Creator and that creation, nurturing and guidance are all in His hands. He is Omniscient of what would benefit His creation and slaves in their worldly and religious affairs. Similarly, the Almighty does not rule except that which would be beneficial for us as well as the system of existence.
No matter what level of knowledge mankind reaches, he will be unable to and will always fall short of fully knowing what would benefit him in both this world and the Hereafter.
Therefore, mankind must submit to Allah, His divine legislation and His just wise laws in all stages of his life. Allah, the Exalted says: “the rule is only for Allah, He declares the truth, and He is the Best Judge.” (6:57).
He also says: “He who does not rule by what Allah has revealed, they are the disbelievers…He who does not rule by what Allah has revealed, they are the oppressors…He who does not rule by what Allah has revealed, they are the transgressors’”
The Third Principle: Islamic Jurisprudence is the Constitution of Life, including Government
We discussed in the last chapter the necessity of the Imam and the ruler in most of the fields of jurisprudence, and that Islamic jurisprudence is not a set of individual rules of worship only. Rather, it includes the constitution of life including Islamic government.
It encompasses financial laws- such as in Khums, Zakat and Kharaaj- civil laws- such as in marriage and divorce- military laws- such as in Jihad, border security and rules of war captives- and punitive laws- such as in judgment, sentencing and blood-money.
Thus Islamic jurisprudence is the constitution of the Islamic government in its entirety. Because of this, al-Kashani called one of the chapters in his book ‘al-Wafi’: ‘there is nothing that people need except that there is a reference in the Book or the Sunna for it’.
The Fourth Principle: Islamic Government is a Necessary Part of an Islamic Society
The endurance of Islamic jurisprudence necessarily requires there to be an Islamic government which ensures that Islamic jurisprudence is put into practice and which takes up the role of implementing it. Otherwise, the divine laws will be overlooked, as is the current situation in many countries which are ‘Islamic’ by name.
The Fifth Principle: It is Necessary to Appoint a Leader who will take up the role of implementing the Islamic Laws in Order to achieve that Aim
The necessity of governments means the necessity of a trusted ruler who is well versed in the divine laws. Al-Fadhl ibn Shaathan narrated from Ali ibn Musa al-Ridha (as): “a person said: ‘why did He appoint guardians and command that they should be obeyed?’
He (as) said: ‘for many reasons. Among them: if He did not place for them an upright, trustworthy, protective Imam the community would have been overwhelmed and religion would have perished. The practices and laws would have been changed; the innovators would have added to the religion and the disbelievers would have subtracted from the religion, and they would have made things ambiguous for the Muslims’”
Since the Islamic Ruler must be the most knowledgeable of people about the laws of Allah and the most just amongst them, there is no doubt that in the presence of an infallible (as), there would be no room for the guardianship of anyone but him. This is why the truthful sect believed in the guardianship of the Commander of the Faithful (as) after the demise of the Prophet (pbuh), and that the Prophet (pbuh) and his infallible successors (as) have the right of general guardianship and the right of complete divine representation. Al-Muhaqqiq al-Tusi says: ‘the Imam is a blessing, his appointment is obligatory upon Allah the Exalted in order to achieve the desired aim’. This is all in relation to the time of their presence (as).
The Sixth Principle: it is not Permissible to Suspend Divine Laws in the Era of Occultation
There is no doubt that the laws of Islam do not become abrogated, and there is no doubt that they last till the Resurrection Day. Otherwise, it would mean that the greater period of time was excluded from these laws. It would also lead to the performance of prohibited acts as well as the spread of corruption during the period of occultation, and this is definitely something to be avoided in the view of the Legislator.
The author of al-Jawahir says: ‘…among the strange things is the doubt that people have about this, it is as if they have not tasted anything from the taste of jurisprudence…and in general the issue is one of the self evident facts that does not need any evidence.’
Therefore, in the period of occultation, and the time when the community is deprived of an infallible ruler, we have two choices. Either we ignore governance- and this goes against the fourth principle because it is ignoring something important which people need in order to organize their current and next life, as was discussed earlier- or we say that the Holy Legislator left it to the community to run their own affairs as they see fit, according to the doctrine of democracy or dictatorship or other political ideologies that may be common in any place or time.
The latter is invalid like the former, because in both cases an important need of the Muslim community is ignored. Which need is greater than the need for one who would manage the affairs of the community and maintain the order of the Muslim lands during the time of occultation, while maintaining the Islamic laws which cannot be implemented except at the hands of the guardian of the Muslims?
Therefore, no option remains except to specify a legislative ruler: the qualified jurist who is the closest person to the infallible. Because of this, Imam al-Khomeini (may Allah have mercy on him) says: ‘that which is a proof for Imamat is in itself a proof for the necessity of governance after the occultation of the Guardian of the Affair, may Allah the Exalted hasten his holy return’.
It is perhaps because of this that it is often said that the science which is responsible for proving the guardianship of the jurist is theology not jurisprudence.
If one argues: why is it not permissible that the ruler be one of the people with the jurist taking an advisory role only?
The answer would be: the evidence that proves in theology that it is not permissible to give precedence to one with a lower status to one with a higher status applies here also. Umar ibn al-Khattab used to take the advice of the Commander of the Faithful (as) at times, for otherwise there would be no meaning to his words: ‘Had it not been for Ali, Umar would have perished’. Despite this, he was a usurper of the right of the Commander of the Faithful (as). Allah, the Exalted, says: “is He then Who guides to the truth more worthy to be followed, or he who himself does not go aright unless he is guided? What then is the matter with you; how do you judge?” [46]
Moreover, the task of protecting the Islamic government is not carried out by mere advice, because the ruler who is not a jurist may not adhere to the advice of his advisors, as is the habit of rulers.
The Seventh Principle: The Consecutive Indications for the Necessity of the General Guardianship of the Jurist
1- The guardianship of the jurist in the roles which are agreed upon among the scholars- such as giving jurisprudential edicts and judging- necessitates the guardianship of the jurist in politics and in running the affairs of the community as well. This is because acting with regards to Khums, judgment and the implementation of judicial sentences is the role of a government.
Thus the qualified jurist during the period of occultation either has general guardianship in representation of the infallible Imam (as) or has no right of representation at all. This is because the wisdom for representation exists for whatever is confirmed to have been the role of the Imam in running the affairs of the community and is not limited to issuing edicts and the authority over Khums.
2- The strong prohibition against referring to the unjust judges and their scholars indicates indirectly that there is strong encouragement towards referring to the just judges and scholars. During the period of occultation, this means nothing except referring to the legislative ruler, who is the qualified jurist.
In other words, there is no guardian for the Muslim community during the period of occultation because the original guardian (atfs) is in occultation, while the one who claims specific representation of the Imam during the major occultation is a liar, and the one who has no right of representation from him (atfs) is a tyrant without any authority of guardianship over the community at all. Therefore, the guardianship of the general representative of the Imam (atfs) is established (as the only remaining sound option).
This general representative is the jurist, because of the definite principle: ‘the ruler (i.e. the just ruler) is the guardian of the one who has no guardian’, which is understood from some narrations.
This principle means that the jurist takes up the role of the guardian because there is no guardian other than him. Analogous to this is the consensus of the jurists without any disagreement that the legislative ruler is the guardian over the one who is not intellectually mature- due to insanity or similar things- and who has no family member who may be a guardian.
The ruler would, for example, have the authority to enter him into a marriage if this was beneficial for him. They have all agreed that the legislative ruler takes the role of the guardian because such a person has no guardian, and they based this on the above-mentioned principle.
3- The guardianship of the jurist on minor Hisbi affairs indicates, by precedence, his guardianship over government.
The Holy Legislator guides towards the performance of beneficial actions and the avoidance of harmful actions in one of the three following ways:
a- He requests that beneficial actions should be performed and that corrupt actions should be avoided from the Muslim individuals in a general, encompassing form, just as He commanded them to pray, give charity and perform other specific obligations.
b- He requests that beneficial actions should be performed and that corrupt actions should be avoided as a substitutive general obligation, just as He commanded to perform the prayer for the deceased as well as other substitutive obligations.
c- He requests that beneficial actions should be performed and that corrupt actions should be avoided without specifying a particular doer for these actions. These are what our jurists call the Hisbi (literally: reward or control) affairs, such as appointing a guardian for an orphan who has no guardian, or performing the funeral rites of a deceased person who has no guardian, etc.
Allamah Bahr ’ul-‘Uloom said: ‘Hisba means proximity, indicating any action with which one intends to gain proximity towards Allah (swt). It refers to any good action which one knows should be performed in the external world according to legislation, but which has no specific person to perform it’ The proof for this is the unconditional nature of the Qur’anic ayah: “and help one another towards goodness and piety”
Our scholars have agreed that the one who takes up these Hisbi affairs is the infallible (as) if he is able and present. In the narration of Hobaba al-Walibiya, she narrates: “I saw the Commander of the Faithful (as) among the enforcers of the law. With him was a whip with two tongues. He would strike with it the ones selling the impermissible types of fish (catfish, eel, zammar)”.
The scholars have also agreed that the one who should take up these responsibilities during the period of occultation is the jurist or his representative and that this is not permissible for anyone else.
There is also no doubt that one of the most important things which we know the Legislator wants to occur in the external world is the Islamic government. If we then assume that He had not appointed anyone to take up this affair specifically during the period of occultation, then surely it would be one of the Hisbi affairs which is one of the tasks of the jurist, and in fact the most important one.
Imam al-Khomeini said: ‘maintaining the order, defending the borders of the Muslims, protecting their youth from deviating from Islam, and stopping the spread of anti-Islamic propaganda and similar tasks are among the most clear of the Hisbi issues, and these goals cannot be achieved except by the formation of a just Islamic state. Thus even if we do not consider the evidence for Guardianship, there is no doubt that the ones that we are certain have the authority to perform this duty are the just jurists’.
Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Source: Imam reza network

The Role of the Jurist in Different Areas of Jurisprudence

In this chapter we will conduct a quick survey in different areas of jurisprudence. As you will see, the survey shows:
1) The necessity of the existence of a legislative ruler (al-Hakim al-Shar’) in order to implement the divine laws, and that:
2) Governance is part of the system of Islamic jurisprudence.
1- Prayer
a- Congregational prayers: Islam has emphasised on congregational prayers even in the battle lines, in which case it is called the prayer of fear or prayer of pursuit.
b- Prayer for the deceased: it is narrated from Abu Abdullah (as): “if the Imam is present at the burial of the corpse then he is the most worthy to pray over it” It is also narrated from the Commander of the Faithful (as): “if a ruler from among the rulers of Allah is present at the burial of the corpse then he is more worthy of praying over it”. The meaning of ‘ruler’ and ‘Imam’ in these and similar narrations is more general than the infallible Imam (as) and the just jurist, as will come later. This is why Sheikh al-Tusi says in ‘al-Mabsoot’: ‘if the just Imam attends he would be more worthy of leading and it would be obligatory upon the guardian (of the deceased) to ask him to go forward to lead’. Therefore, the specification of the word ‘Imam’ to the infallible Imam by the author of al-Jawahir is out of place.
c- Burying the deceased Muslim who has no guardian, trustee or heir is the obligation of the legislative ruler.
d- Friday prayer: the one who should take up its establishment is the leader of the community or his representative. Al-Fadhl ibn Shathan narrated from al-Ridha (as): “if it is said: ‘why was the sermon put in place?’ It would be said: ‘the congregational prayer is a general gathering and so He wanted to make a way for the leader to advise the people and to encourage them towards obedience and frighten them from disobedience, and to help them towards that which is beneficial for their worldly and religious affairs, and to inform of all the harmful or beneficial events that are taking place across the globe.”
e- The Eid Prayers: it is narrated in the authenticated narration of Suma’a from Abu Abdullah (as): “there is no prayer on the day of Eid except with the Imam” [25].. This narration is relevant based on the possibility that ‘Imam’ in this narration is not referring to the leader of the congregational prayers but to the leader of the community.
2- Fasting and Ritual Self-Isolation (i’tikaf)
It is narrated in the authentic narration of Muhammad ibn Qays from Abu Ja’far (as): “if two witnesses witness in the presence of the Imam that they saw the crescent moon thirty nights ago the Imam would command the people to break their fast (the next day)” (Wasailul Shia) our jurists are in agreement that the term ‘Imam’ in this context means the (just) ruler.
3- Zakat
It can be understood from the Glorious Book and numerous narrations that Zakat is among the taxes of the Islamic government and that the one who is in charge of collecting and distributing the Zakat is the Legislative Ruler, through his workers. The following two narrations will be sufficient to prove the point:
a- The authentic narration of Zurarah and Muhammad ibn Muslim, in which they narrate from Abu Abdullah (as) regarding the interpretation of the Qur’anic ayah: “surely, charity is for the poor and the indigent...” that he (as) said: “the Imam shall give all of these people”
b- It is narrated from al-Ridha (as): “if a person who is overwhelmed with debt borrows money or seeks to borrow money rightfully, he would be given one year respite. After this year, if his situation does not improve, the Imam shall fulfil his debt from the public treasury.”
4- Khums, Anfal and Kharaj
There is no disagreement about the fact that Khums and Anfal belong to the Imam due to his leadership, and this is why they are passed on from the Imam to the next Imam and not to the heirs of the Imam. Abi Ali ibn Rashid narrated from Imam al-Hadi (as): “whatever belonged to my father because of his position of Imamat belongs to me, and whatever belonged to him for other reasons is inheritance.”
It is narrated from Imam al-Kadhim (as) that he said: “Khums applies to five things: war booty, treasures found while diving, treasures under the earth, the mines, and Salina. From each of these five things Khums should be extracted and allocated to those whom Allah (swt) allocated it to...
It should be divided among them according to the Holy Book and the Sunna such that it will suffice them for that year...and the earth which was taken by force with men and horses, it is given to those who work on that land, cultivate and maintain it, according to what the Ruler agrees with them as per their share; being a half, or a third, or two thirds, and according to what will be beneficial for them and will not harm them...
The rest of the Khums will go towards the sustenance of the assistants of the Ruler in establishing the religion of Allah, as well as what he sees fit to strengthen Islam and strengthen the religion, such as Jihad and other things which have a general benefit. None of it, whether a large or small amount, is for himself. Besides Khums, the Anfal belongs to him.
Anfal is any ruined land whose inhabitants have abandoned it, as well as any land that was not attacked by horses and horsemen but whose inhabitants reached an agreement and surrendered without fighting. To him also belongs the peaks of the mountains and the insides of the valleys, as well as the woods and any barren land with no caretaker...and he is the heir of the one with no heir”
5- Hajj
In the narration of Abdullah ibn Sinan from Abu Abdullah (as): “if people stopped making the pilgrimage of Hajj, it would be obligatory upon the Imam to force them to perform Hajj” (Wasailul Shia)
In another narration from Abu Abdullah (as): “if people did not perform Hajj, it would be obligatory upon the ruler to force them to do this, and to stay there. Also, if they stopped visiting the Prophet (pbuh), it would be for the ruler to force them to do this and to stay there. If they did not have the financial means, he would have to spend on them from the public treasury of the Muslims”.
6- Jihad
The obligation of Jihad in general is one of the necessities of the religion of Islam. The ayat regarding this obligation are numerous. Is it possible to imagine Jihad- whether it be defensive or pre-emptive- without a ruler or governor or army? Sheikh al-Tusi said regarding fighting those who oppose the Imam: ‘whoever rebels against a just Imam and breaks his allegiance to him and opposes him in his rulings, then he is a rebel and it is permissible for the Imam to fight him and battle against him’.
7- al-Hijr (to limit someone’s legal competence)
The necessity of a government in dealing with the affair of a Mahjour (the one who is restricted in accessing his wealth) is clear. In the narration of Safwan it is narrated: “I asked Abul Hassan (as) about a man who owed another man some money. The one to whom the money was owed died and left two trustees. Is it permissible to pay that debt back to one of the two trustees and not the other trustee? He (as) said: ‘this is not proper, unless the ruler had divided the wealth between them and placed half of it in the possession of one and half in the possession of the other, or they reached an agreement under the auspices of the ruler.’”
8- Marriage and Divorce
In the authentic narration of Abu Basir it is narrated: “I heard Abu Ja’far (as) saying: ‘if one had a wife and did not clothe her with that which would cover her ‘awra (the parts of the body which should be covered) and did not feed her with that which would give her strength, the Imam has the authority to separate them.’”
In another narration from Abu Ja’far (as) by Abu Basir: “if I had authority over people, I would teach them how to divorce, then I would not come across a man who went against this except that I would strike him painfully on his back.”
9- Judgment and Sentencing
There is no doubt that the task of judgment and implementation of punishments is one of the tasks of the government. In the narration of Hafs ibn Ghiyath it is narrated: “I asked Abu Abdullah (as): ‘who implements the punishments, the ruler or the judge?’ He (as) said: ‘the implementation of punishments is the task of the one who rules”
10- Judicial Punishment and Blood-Money
Jurists have defined judgment to be a legislative authority on behalf of the Imam (as) to look after the laws and benefits of the general public. The author of al-Jawahir says: ‘perhaps what is meant by their mentioning guardianship- since we know that the judges are not an example of it- is clarification that the role of making true judgments is a status and a role just like that of leadership and that it is one of the branches of the tree of general leadership of the Prophet (pbuh) and his successors (as)’.
Therefore, there is no doubt that implementing the judicial punishment and the rules of blood-money needs an Islamic government and a legislative ruler. One option is to say that these laws should be suspended during the period of occultation.
This is both impermissible legislatively and would mean that the greater part has been excluded, because the time of occultation is far longer than the time when the Infallibles (as) were present.
It is narrated from Abu Ja’far (as): “a legislative punishment implemented on earth purifies it more than it would be purified by forty days and nights of rain” [37]
In another narration from the Commander of the Faithful (as): “O Allah, You have said to your Prophet, may Your blessings be upon Him and His Progeny, in among that which he informed about: ‘whoever suspends a punishment from among My punishments then he has become stubborn against Me and asked through this My enmity.’” [38]
Therefore, the rules of judicial punishment and blood-money in Islamic jurisprudence indicate the necessity of an Islamic government more clearly than the sun in the middle of the day.
Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Imam reza network

If the ruling of a Mujtahid goes against the ruling of the jurist guardian, which one must be followed?

The ruling of the guardian jurist is the one that should be followed in issues that relate to the management of the Muslim nation and the general affairs of the Muslims. As for issues which are purely individual, it is possible for every person to follow their own Marja’.
To be more precise, it is obligatory upon all, whether they be a lay person or a Mujtahid, to follow the rules of governance that emanate from the jurist guardian. An example of this from the narrations is the ruling of the Imam or the ruler about the visibility of the crescent moon.
In the authentic narration of Muhammad ibn Qays from Abu Ja’far (Imam al-Baqir a.s): “if two people witness in the presence of the Imam that they saw the crescent thirty days ago then the Imam should order people to break their fast” (Wasailul Shi’a) Note, that the term ‘Imam’ in these narrations means ‘ruler’ (whether an infallible one or not), as discussed in the second chapter.
If there are Multiple Islamic Countries, should there be one guardian jurist for all, or is it permissible for each country to have its own guardian jurist?
The textual and intellectual principles indicate by necessity that the entire Muslim community must have one leader who unites them and links them together and rules over them in issues which require general rulings. It should be such that these countries should be considered one powerful government, with one country able to help another. The presence of multiple rulers who are independent in their opinion and will in all affairs, without having one leader to unite them and judge with certainty in their disputes is a sure way to disunity and failure.
Sheikh al-Saduq has narrated from Imam al-Ridha (as): “If he says: ‘why is it not possible for there to be more than one Imam on earth simultaneously?’ It would be said: ‘for a number of reasons, among which are the following. The actions and plans of one person cannot conflict, whereas the actions and plans of two people never agree.
We never find any two people except that they have different intentions and wishes. If they were two and their intentions, wishes and plans were different, and it was obligatory to obey both, then neither would be more worthy of being obeyed than the other. This would lead to disagreement, conflict and transgression among people. No one would be in obedience of one leader without being disobedient to the other, and thus all the inhabitants of the land would be sinners…” [115]
This is with the assumption that this is possible. If however we assume that it is impossible to establish one Muslim nation which encompasses all Muslims, then there is no problem with establishing small countries based on the laws of Islam. This is better than ignoring the affairs of governance until the foreigners and tyrants become rulers over the Muslims and overpower them. This (i.e. the establishment of different Islamic countries) would become valid because of the principle ‘that which is possible should not be ignored because of that which is impossible’.
Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Source: Imam reza network

Legislation in an Islamic State

Introduction
There are six different issues that we shall investigate in relation to the subject of legislation in an Islamic State. The very first question which arises in this connection is: who has the authority to legislate laws which are binding for all individuals in a society, and a breach of which calls for punitive measures?
From the viewpoint of Islam and reason, all human beings have been created equal; no individual enjoys any inherent right of sovereignty and guardianship (wilayah) over others. Race, nationality, geographical location, class‑none of these factors confers any right of sovereignty on any individual or group. God, the Almighty, is the Master of the universe, and it is He Who is the Sovereign over all creatures. All are equal before Him, and none enjoys any preferential right of sovereignty over others. This idea finds a recurring echo in several Quranic verses such as the following:
Say: `People of the Book! Come now to a word common between us and you, that we serve none but God, and that we associate not aught with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords, apart from God ....' (3:64)
They (the Jews and the Christians) have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords apart from God .... (9:31)
The right of authority and sovereignty, solely a Divine prerogative, is referred to as `amr' in the Quran. This is the meaning of the word which occurs in such verses as the following:
...Verily, His are the creation and the command (amr) .... (7:54)
... The command (amr) belongs to God entirely .... (3:154)
The same meaning of amr is meant in the phrase uli al‑'amr (those in authority) in the verse 4:59:
O believers, obey God, and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you .... (4:59)
All mankind are of a single origin, and no race, nation or individual has any superiority over others, except on the grounds of piety and righteousness:
O mankind, We have created you from a male and a female, and made you nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely, the nobler among you in the sight of God is the more God‑fearing of you .... (49:13)
Accordingly, any law regardless of who legislates it, is not binding upon others. Only the Divine Law is valid and binding, on the basis of God's all‑embracing mastery and sovereignty over all things:
...Sovereignty belongs only to God; He has commanded that you shall not serve any but Him .... (12:40)
Indeed, We sent forth among every nation a Messenger, [saying]: Serve God, and eschew the taghut .... (16:36)
The above Islamic principle has been incorporated in the Constitu­tion of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which declares: `The Islamic Republic is a system based on: (1) faith in the One God, and His exclusive prerogative of sovereignty and legislation, and the duty to submit before Him ...."
Nevertheless, if God were to delegate His right of sovereignty to a human being, and bestow upon him the right to legislate and the authority to rule, then, as a consequence, within the scope of such delegated authority, he will have the licence to command and forbid and to ‑enact laws. In that case, his authority will represent Divine authority, his commands will be considered the commands of God, and disobedience to him will amount to disobedience to God. This type of authority, which the Holy Prophet (S) enjoyed, is mentioned in this verse:
Whosoever obeys the Messenger, thereby obeys God .... (4:80)
All prophets have implemented and enforced Divine laws, and, within the scope of the wilayah (i.e. guardianship or authority) delegated to them, obedience to them was obligatory for their followers. The following verse refers to the binding authority of the Prophet's judgements:
It is not for any believer, man or woman, when God and His Messenger have decreed a matter, to have a choice in the affair. Whosoever disobeys God and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error. (33:36)
The Prophet’s Role
The Prophet (S) was a sovereign and a lawgiver in his life, and after him the right of sovereignty and the authority to legislate passed on to his successors appointed to the office of wilayah (i.e. khilafah and imamah) over the Muslim community, the Ummah. The Prophet's successor, while maintaining the authority of the Book and the Sunnah intact, possesses the right to legislate according to particular conditions and circumstances, and, on account of his wilayah, deserves obligatory obedience, as stated by the verse 4:59. His wilayah (like that of the Prophet) is derived from and dependent on the absolute wilayah of God.
However, since, on the one hand, the Quran does not specify any particular person for the office of wilayah (of the uli al‑amr), and on the other hand the Prophet (S) and his successors (the awsiya', i.e. the Imams [ A ] ) have determined its general transferability to anyone who possesses certain specified qualifications, the right to legislate is evidently also transferable to him. (This type of wilayah is called al­ wilayat al‑`ammah, whereas the wilayah of the Prophet [ S ] and the Imams [A], since it is conferred upon them specifically, is called al­ wilayat al‑khassah). According to the Shi'ah hadith, the office of al­ wilayat al‑`ammah has been assigned to any `adil faqih who fulfils the requirements of ijtihad. When there are several individuals who possess the requisite qualifications, an individual from among them or a group of them may be elected to take charge of this sovereign office.
It is on this basis that the Article 5 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran specifies that:
"During the time when the 12th Imam (may God expediate his appearance) is in occultation, in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the leadership of the affairs and guidance of the people is the responsibility of a just and pious jurispru­dent, aware of the contemporary issues, courageous, of drive and initiative, whom the majority of the people know and accept to be their Leader. In case no such jurisprudent enjoys confidence of such a majority, a Leadership Council consisting of jurisprudents meeting the above requirements will assume the same responsibility."
Whatever we have said until this point contains two points of difference between us and our brethren of the Ahl al‑Sunnah. The first is about the imamah or al‑wilayat al‑khassah of the twelve Imams (A). The second relates to al‑wilayat al‑`ammah of the qualified jurisprudent (faqih jami` al‑shara'it) during the period of occultation (ghaybah) of the Twelfth Imam (A). A group of Shi'ah `ulama' have also not accepted the doctrine of al‑wilayat al‑`ammah of the faqih (also called, wilayat al‑faqih).
In the case of absence of a qualified faqih, we are faced with the problem of proper governance and administration of the political affairs of the Muslim community. Does Islam offer any solution for this problem, or does it leave the people unguided, to grapple with the problem themselves? Is it conceivable that a religion which has meticulously specified duties in all minor and major affairs of life, should leave unsolved and neglect such a significant and vitae affair of the Muslim society? This question is relevant to all these three groups: firstly, the Ahl al‑Sunnah in relation to the post‑prophetic era; secondly, the Shi`ah who do not believe in the institution of wilayat al­ faqih in relation to the period of ghaybah of the Twelfth Imam (A); thirdly, for the Shi'ah who believe in wilayat al‑faqih in relation to the case when a qualified faqih is absent or unavailable. A brief prelude is necessary before we answer this question.
Society without a State
It is evident that a society without a State and a system of laws cannot hope to survive, and even if it does, presumably, it cannot be a society of a high order that can cater to all the needs and demands of the human nature. The existence of social order is an essential need confirmed by all Divine religions. In an anarchic society devoid of any system of law and order, neither prophethood can fulfil the objectives of its mission of guiding the people, nor is there any ready ground for the worship of God and implementation of His commands. In a state of social and political chaos, the goals mentioned in the following Divine verse cannot be achieved:
Indeed, We sent Our messengers with the clear signs, and We sent down with them the Book and the Balance, so that mankind may uphold justice .... (57:25)
The necessity of the existence of the State is a self‑evident axiom, readily accepted by reason and also affirmed by the Shari'ah. If there can be any argument about government and the State, it is with regard to their form and characteristics. Here, we arrive at the heart of our problem: In case of the absence of a God‑appointed sovereign (al‑wali al‑mansus), who should occupy the office of the sovereign?
That which can be stated on rational (`aqli) and canonical (naqli) grounds is that the office of the wilayah of Muslims should be occupied by the following in the descending order of priority: the Prophet (S); the successor appointed by the Prophet to the office of wilayah (i.e. al‑wali al‑mansus); an `adil faqih; an `adil believer (al‑mu'min al‑`adil); a fasiq believer (al‑mumin al‑fasiq). The last three types may hold the office of wilayah of Muslims; after the requisite conditions are met by individuals, the individuals are selected for the office, and after they formally take official charge of their duties. Moreover, obedience to their commands which are not contradictory to the Divine commands is essential.' Accordingly, they have also the authority to legislate laws and regulations for fulfilment of the various objectives of the State­such as legislation about economic, financial and commercial matters, defence, creation and maintenance of security, administration of justice, recovery of the rights of the weaker sections of the society from the more powerful, and so on. These are some of the essential reasons for the existence of the State, as Imam `All (A) points out in one of the sermons of the Nahj al‑balaghah
Mankind cannot dispense with a ruler, good or bad. [As a consequence of the general conditions of law and order provided] by his rule, the believer performs his acts [of righteousness] and the unbeliever attains his [worldly] enjoyments. In it God eases things to reach their ultimate destinations. Through it tribute is collected, the enemy is fought against, the security of the highways is maintained, and the rights of the weak are wrested from the powerful .... (Nahj al‑balaghah, sermon 40)
In another tradition, `Ali (A) is reported to have said:
In a Divine rule and an Islamic State it is an obligation of Muslims not to make any [collective] move before they select for themselves a chaste and knowledgeable leader who is pious, abstinent and well‑versed in administra­tion of justice, who may collect for them tribute, taxes and charities, and take care of their hajj and [prayers in] congregation. (al‑Hayat, vo1.II, p. 421)
Al‑Imam al‑Sadiq (A) says:
... that, because the rule of an equitable sovereign and his officials ensures the revival of righteousness and justice in all their aspects, and promises the death of oppression, injustice and corruption of all kinds. For this reason, anyone who strives for the establishment of the power [of such a ruler] and assists him in enforcing his authority is one who endeavours for the cause of obedience to God and for the strength of His faith .... (al‑Hayat, vol.II, p. 421)
After admitting the need for a sovereign State in the Islamic society at all times and in all places, and accepting its right to legislate, we may now go on to deal with some other issues related with the subject of Islamic government which we mentioned at the outset. Presently we shall take up the two following problems:
A. Is legislation permissible? That is, may we legislate despite the existence of the ahkam (laws, rules) of the Shari'ah and how?
B. What is the role of ijtihad in legislation in an Islamic State?
Basically, in view of the fact that the enforceable laws in an Islamic State must be in conformity with the fundamental principles of Islam, and in view of the fact that the Divine ahkam are firmly embedded in the Book and the Prophet's Sunnah, we have to conclude that there is no room for legislation (in the secular sense), and expression of any opinion contrary to the explicit teachings of the Quran and the Sunnah is tantamount to apostasy:
... And whoever does not judge according to what God has revealed‑they are the unbelievers. (5:44)
There may not be any disagreement whatsoever between a law and the ahkam of the Shari'ah. However, what are meant here are not the variable but the fixed laws of Islam, such as those related to all the `ibadat (viz. issues relating to salat, sawm, zakat, khums, hajj, etc.); the personal laws (e.g. the ahhdm related to birth, heredity, marriage, divorce, inheritance, will (wasiyyah), death, etc.); and the penal laws (e.g. hudud, diyat, and qisas). The possibility of legislation is absolute­ly precluded in such matters. But in cases where the Shari`ah does not lay down any rule, or where the legal rules have been hitherto based on social acceptability, social habits and customs (`urf) and certain demands of social welfare (as in the case of legal rules relating to business dealings [mu'amalat]), or in cases where the Shari'ah has given powers to others (such as in the case of ta`zirat, or matters relating to the affairs of the State, regulations related to State administration, employment, relations with foreign governments, control over the borders and frontiers, etc.), the legislator has a licence and a free hand. He can, in conformity with the general and basic Islamic criteria, principles and objectives, and in accordance with the interests of public welfare, legislate laws. In other words, there are certain fixed Islamic principles and criteria which may be considered as constituting the `constitutional law' of Islam, and all other laws and regulations are valid only when they do not negate any of such principles and criteria as: the duty to establish justice; respect for the right of ownership; the obligation to safeguard life, property, honour, faith and sanity; the duty to pursue goodness and benevolence and to refrain from evil and malice in all things; the duty to support the oppressed and to fight for the removal of fitnah (sedition, persecution) and fasad (corruption); the ban on consumption of illegitimate acquisitions (money, assets); the illegitimacy of the khabaith and the permissibility of the tayyibat; the obligation to honour all agreements and treaties; the principle of exemption from `usr and haraj (hardship, difficulty); the principle of la darar wa la dirar (invalidity of all dealings and arrangements which involve loss, harm or injury to any of the parties involved); joint social responsibility (al‑takaful al‑ 'ijtima`i); public security, etc. Any legislation is valid only when it does not conflict with any of the above‑mentioned general principles. This is exactly what the Article 4 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic affirms: "All laws‑penal, financial, economic, administrative, educational, military, political, etc.‑and legislation controlling natural resources should be based upon Islamic criteria. This article generally and universally controls all other articles of the Constitution, as well as other laws and regulations, by the judgement of the jurisprudents of the Guardianship. Council." Besides, the Article 170 states: "The judges of the courts of justice shall be obliged to refrain from implementation of any of the Government's decrees and regulations which should be contrary to the Islamic laws and criteria, or should lie beyond the jurisdiction of the powers of the Executive. All individuals are entitled to apply to the administrative courts for annulment of such decrees and regulations."
Role of Ijtihad in Legislation
Here, the role of ijtihad in legislation also comes to light. Because, as mentioned, Islam has certain fixed laws which are not affected either by the passage of time or due to changes in the conditions of life or on account of differences of culture and region. Except in exceptional cases and within the limits of exigency, it is not permissible to violate them. Examples are, the ban on usury, on drinking of wine, gambling, and similar other cases mentioned earlier.
To legislate laws which are contrary to them is considered equivalent to belligerence against God.
Apart from these, there are the variable ahkam which are change­able in accordance with changing conditions. This is the secret behind the perpetuity of Islam, its capacity to sustain until the Judgement Day, and its adaptability to varying conditions and situations. In many cases the Shari'ah gives the legislator a licence to frame laws and regulations with due observance of the welfare of the society, or provides general guide‑lines for him. For instance, the following hadith is quite explicit about the cases where Islam has on purpose left the Islamic State free to make an independent decision:
Indeed God has assigned you certain duties which you must not neglect. Then He has prescribed for you certain limits which you must not transgress, and has made certain things infrangible, which you must not infringe on. There are certain things which He has passed over in silence, but not on account of oversight; therefore, do not impose them upon yourselves. (Nahj al‑balaghah, aphorism 105)
In such cases, characteristic temporal demands may require, at times, absolute permissivity; at times, absolute restraint; and at other times, specific restrictions. The free hand given to the hakim (judge, legislator) in the case of ta`zirat, which cover a wide range of punish­ments in Islam and in which the quality and quantity of punishment depend upon the discretion of the judge, thus allowing for differences of culture, is yet another example of the legislative licence. (There is no difference here whether by "hakim" we mean the judge or the State, because if the judge is a State authority and possesses executive power, he may select some particular ta`zirat and issue a circular to the regional judges, and his directive shall be considered valid. Some jurisprudents have explicitly confirmed this point.)
The principle of la `usr wa la haraj, and that of la darar wa la dirar are other important bases for variation of the ahkam. [2]Many of the ahkam al‑khiyarat (that is, those ahkam in which one of the parties is free to dissolve an agreement) have emerged in fiqh as a result of the principle of ld darar wa la dirar. The same is true of exigency (idtirar) and the Secondary Laws (al‑ ahkam al‑thanawiyyah).
The primary role of ijtihad in law‑making is to distinguish between the fixed and the variable ahkam. This is not an easy job because of the presence of numerous ambiguities (mutashabihat). Furthermore, the mujtahid has to undertake a close investigation, discriminating between the essentials and nonessentials of Islam in the fatwa's of the past mujtahidun, and employ his deductive skills‑which are evidently not free from the influence of his particular conditions and times'‑to deduce the hukum of the Shari'ah from the original texts and sources. In this way, he is able to confirm or deny the conformity of a certain proposed law with the Islamic principles. It is on this basis that the Article 19 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that: "In order to ensure that the laws passed by the Assembly do not contradict the Islamic laws and the Constitution, a Guardianship Council shall be formed, consisting of : (1) Six qualified jurisprudents who are aware of the needs of the time and contemporary problems. The nomination of such persons is the responsibility of the Leader or the Leadership Council. (2) Six lawyers qualified in various branches of jurisprudence from among Muslim jurists whose names are proposed to the Assembly by the Supreme Judicial Council. Their appointment is approved by the Assembly."
Notes:
End of Discussion
At the end of this discussion, it seems pertinent to call attention to certain points:
1. Some have considered legislation as exclusively a Divine prerogative, and deny that God has deputed any agent with legislative powers. Such legislative powers of a Divine agent are unacceptable to them even in the case of the Holy Prophet (S). The Prophet's Sunnah, or for that matter of all other prophets, is looked upon by them as fulfilment of the Law given in entirety by God. However, it is quite simple to accept this view with the explanation that the Sunnah of the prophets ‑and for that matter all the laws laid down by the uli al‑ amr ‑has a relation to the ahkam revealed by God corresponding to the relation between ordinary regulations approved by the cabinet of ministers to the constitution. Or perhaps it would be more correct to compare this relationship with that between ordinary laws and the constitution, admitting that in some cases the Prophetic Sunnah may be comparable to the regulations approved by the Executive.
2. The legislative powers of the Imams (A) are more restricted than that of the Holy Prophet (S). Therefore, they did not allow themselves the right of ijtihad in the presence of nass (i.e. explicit Divine or Prophetic text), and recommended the criterion of conflict with the Sunnah as a valid ground for rejecting a hadith as untrue. Nevertheless, some elements of the Prophetic Sunnah may be variable­an issue which in itself calls for an elaborate discussion.
3. The distinction between the law and fatwa's of the mujtahidun is also clear. The fatwa is a product of ijtihad and the faqih's deductive endeavour. It is based on research in the four sources of fiqh, namely the Book, the Sunnah, reason and ijma` (the last of which is again derived from the Sunnah), and giving of final verdict on the basis of various proofs (adillah). At the end of this process the faqih declares his verdict that the hukm of the Shari'ah is such and such in such and such a matter. The issue may pertain to the `ibadat, the personal matters (al­'ahwal al‑shakhsiyyah), or problems of political, economic, social or military significance. Of course, it is possible that such a fatwa may be proclaimed as a law by the State.
But the law, on the other hand, is approved by the State authorities with view to such factors as the needs of the time, demands of the welfare of the Ummah, and, occasionally; the requirements of exigency, with due observance of the general principles of Islam. The law derives its legitimacy from the power of the State. Of course, in an Islamic State the legitimacy of the State's authority is also derived from God. In other words, the distinction between the fatwa's of the mujtahidun and the law passed by the State with respect to the Divine ahkam is similar to one between a recommendation and an order.
4. Another issue is that of the policy of the Islamic State in regard to the problem of the diversity of fatwa's. In the Islamic State, like any other form of government, the sovereignty of the State laws should extend over the whole of society. Plurality of law, of whatever kind and in whatever form, is equivalent to anarchy and chaos.
However, the diversity of fatwa's, does not cause any difficulty as long as they are related to personal rituals and duties. But in relation to the affairs of the State where the law should ordinarily prevail, all citizens being obliged to obey it uniformly, if everyone followed a different fatwa, the affairs of the State would not only go out of the control of the authorities, but would also result in a general chaos on the level of the judicial and executive wings of the State itself.
Therefore, the only rational alternative is that all citizens should recognize the duty to obey one of the diverse fatwa's which is selected by the supreme legislative body of the State on the basis of the criteria of superior jurisprudential soundness and completeness of conformity with the demands of public welfare, and proclaimed as law. Moreover, this duty of general obedience to the State laws is based on the obligatory duty of a Muslim to obey the uli al‑'amr (the legitimate authority) and the rational need for prevalence of general law and order.
Also, there cannot be any valid objection from the viewpoint of the Shari'ah against this; because there is no proviso for validity of legislation except absence of contradiction with the Islamic principles and criteria, and agreement with one of the reliable non‑exceptional fatwa's.
From the viewpoint of the problem of diversity of fatwa's as far as I have knowledge at the moment, the late Sayyid Isma'il al‑Sadr has affirmed this position in his footnotes on al‑Tashri` al jina’i fi al‑'Islam ("Penal Legislation in Islam").
We may emphasize again that the consequence of following diverse fatwa's is something which cannot be accepted by anyone. No State will allow the right to different sections of the public to reject government regulations regarding, for example, compulsory military training, payment of taxes, commercial and trade laws, etc. under the pretext that they do not agree with the fatwa of the mujtahid whom they follow (marji` taqlid). This is especially true if we have on hand an anomalous faqih who considers every modern phenomenon as bid `ah (heresy), who justifies smuggling and contraband transactions on the basis that (the people have authority over their assets), who denies the right of ownership to the State, gives the right to legislate to none, and, ultimately, considering the State illegitimate and taghuti (non‑Islamic) because it does not conform to his views, wants to see the Islamic Republic toppled in the same way as we overthrew the regime of the ex‑Shah!
5. Nationality: Nationality is a kind of political relationship which connects an individual with a certain State or country, in a way that his rights and duties are derived from this relationship.
Nationality is one of the issues of international law and has been incorporated in the constitutions and civil codes of countries. The Iranian civil code, in imitation of the French civil code, assigns its Articles 976 to 991 to the matter of nationality or citizenship. It recognizes certain rights and duties for the country's citizens, which are not recognized for foreigners. In general, the bases for citizenship are blood and soil, that is, the country of birth and the nationality of the parents. In certain cases, the acquisition of citizenship on the basis of marriage is also allowed for. The Iranian civil code accepts both blood and soil in particular cases. Nationality in this sense is one of the notions accepted by all governments for exercising control over their country's frontiers and relations with other States.
However, citizenship or nationality in this sense is non‑existent in Islam (although we, in the Islamic Republic, are compelled to accept it for reasons of need and advisability. It is one of the instances in which the legislator in the Islamic State can legislate laws with due observance of the Islamic principles and welfare of the Ummah. To respect such laws is a duty in accordance with the obligation to obey the uli al‑'amr).
Islam is a universal religion and is not limited to any particular tribe, nation, race or region. The earth belongs to God and mankind are all His creation. Accordingly, the laws of Islam are uniformly enforce­able in all places. Islam addresses its message to all human beings, Muslims and non‑Muslims, whether they live in Muslim lands or elsewhere; although, practically, its laws are enforceable only in relation to Muslims and that too only in the territories of an Islamic State.
From the viewpoint of Islam, the world is divided into dar al­'Islam (the House of Islam) and dar al‑kufr (the House of Kufr). The dar al‑kufr may be either dar al‑barb (the House of war) or dar al‑'aman (the House of Amnesty). The dar al‑'Islam is the territory under the sovereignty of an Islamic State, wherein the Muslims can freely perform their religious duties. The dar al‑kufr is the territory under the control of non‑Muslim States, where the Muslims are not free to exercise their religious duties and practise Islam. If the dar al‑kufr should entertain hostilities with Muslims, it is called dar al‑harb. But if a treaty between it and the Islamic State exists, then it is called dar al‑dhimmah or dar al‑'aman.
The dar al‑'Islam has its own specific laws. In it persons of doubt­ful religious identity are treated as Muslims, and, for example, a slaughtered beast of doubtful legitimacy is treated as halal (permissible). On the other hand, in the dar al‑kufr, persons of doubtful religious identity are treated as non Muslims, and a slaughtered beast of doubtful legitimacy is treated as haram (forbidden). The Muslim, whatever corner of the world he may inhabit, is treated as a citizen of Islam and its subject; he has the same rights and duties as other Muslims, regardless of wherever he may live‑in the U.S.S.R., the U.S.A. or China or somewhere else. However, if in the dar al‑kufr it is not possible for him to fulfil his Islamic duties, it is obligatory for him to migrate to another place. Also, from the viewpoint of execution of the hudud and ta`zirat, there is no difference whether the culprit is a resident of dar al‑ Islam or of dar al‑kufr. The non‑Muslim, regardless of wherever he may live, does not enjoy the privileges of a Muslim, although in respect of the universal sovereignty of Islam he is obliged to perform the duties imposed by Islam on all mankind.
The non‑Muslim is considered absolutely a foreigner regardless of whether he lives in a Muslim or a non Muslim country. If he is a dhimmi and fulfils what is required of the dhl al‑dhimmah, he enjoys the privileges of the ahl al‑dhimmah. Then his life, property, and honour are to be respected, and he enjoys certain freedoms within the limits specified in the Islamic Law. In exchange for his commitments, he is under the protection of the Islamic State. If he does not accept the conditions of a dhimmi, or violates them, he is treated as a muhdrib (in the state of belligerence).
If he is a mustamin, that is, a muharib granted amnesty by the Islamic State‑and in general such amnesty is provisional‑he is under the protection of Muslims and no one has the right to offend him. If he is in a state of belligerence with Muslims, there being no agreement or pact between him and the Muslims, his life and property have no guarantee of security.
To be certain, the Islamic hudud and ta`zirat in respect of criminals are the same for non‑Muslims as for Muslims, except for the offences of the ahl al‑dhimmah which are permitted by their canon.
To summarize, citizenship and nationality in Islam is on the basis of belief. Islam recognizes no other criterion except faith. Every individual acquires citizenship individually on the basis of faith. Even the husband and the wife do not derive their citizenship from each other. Children are subject to the parents' citizenship until maturity. If the parents are non‑Muslims, the children are also considered the same. If one of the parents is a Muslim, the children too are considered Muslims.
1. It is essential to note here that accepting the wilayah of a non‑ma'sum is a concession dictated by need; because only a ma'sum may properly hold sovereignty over people in his capacity as the vicegerent or deputy of God par excellence (khalifat Alldh); his commands being indisputable commands of God. However,in the case of the absence of the ma `sum, on the one hand, and the unacceptability of chaos and anarchy, on the other hand, we are forced to concede to the selection of a ruler in the descending order of priority mentioned here. At every level of choice, we are further forced to make concession in case of absence of a candidate with the desirable qualifications. Of course, the procedure and conditions for selection of the State authority call for an elaborate discussion, in its own right‑a matter which is beyond the scope of this article.
2. Al‑Shahid al‑'Awwal (Muhammad ibn Makki) in his work, al‑Qawa'id, says:
The permission to choose an easier and more practicable alternative (yusr) when practice of a hukm involves difficulty and hardship is based on the Divine verses: " ... He (God) has laid on you no impediment (haraj) in your religion ...." (22:78); and "... God desires ease (yusr) for you, and desires not hardship (`usr) .... " (2:185); and also on such traditions of the Prophet (S) as; "I have been sent with an easy and lenient Islam ...." and "Id darar wa la dirar fi al‑ Islam". All kinds of licences authorized by the Shari'ah are derived from this principle.
It is obvious that such cases of licence do not contradict, in the least, the hadith:
The halal and haram of Muhammad (S) are valid to the Judgement Day.
Or the statement of Imam 'Ali (A):
No one ever started a bid'ah without thereby discarding a sunnah (of the Holy Prophet). (al‑Wafi, vol. I, pp. 59‑60)
The above traditions relate to condemnation of bid `ah (innovation or heresy) in the faith; not to unchangeability of all the ahkdm of Islam.
3. One cannot deny the influence of such factors as social and geographical environments; personal temperament; major contemporary events and general conditions, such as war and peace; general and personal economic conditions such as plenty or famine, or prosperity or poverty; family background and education; degree of success or failure in life; the type of contemporary rule and rulers ­whether oppressive or not, and scores of such other factors on the process of deduction of the ahkam of the Shari'ah by a mujtahid. A faqih who has grown up in the dry and waterless deserts of Hijaz will not approach the issues of taharah and najasah (ritual purity and impurity) in the same way as a faqih who comes from a place like Mazandaran (with plenty of rainfall, rivers and streams‑a region covered with green, dense forests). A faqih used to poverty and destitution will differ in his interpretation and application of the ahkam of the Shari'ah from one who grows up in the midst of prosperity and general welfare. Their views will not agree about the meaning of istita`ah for the Hajj pilgrimage and they will hardly agree about what constitutes israf (wastefulness). A mujtahid of the days of Qajar rule may be expected to share few points of agreement with the faqih who has lived through the days of Islamic Revolution, about the issues of jihad and the duty of al‑ amr bi al­ma'ruf wa al‑nahy `an al‑munkar.
Unfortunately this point is not given sufficient attention. If due attention had been paid to this matter, it would have been much easier and simpler to revise many fatwa's and to recognize one's right to be sceptical about the juristic conclusions and opinions of the past. In any case, it is one of the essential requirements for a living practice of ijtihad in every era to recognize the variability and relativity introduced into the mujtahid's judgements on account of changing conditions and circum­stances. It is as essential to understand the possibility that a later faqih may under­stand the same original sources differently and find in them things which were not visible to the earlier fuqaha'. If we understand this issue, it will give a greater dynamism to the Islamic fiqh and allow it to be more answerable to the needs of times. It is also evident that the influence of conditions of environment by no means deprives the faqih of the validity of his fatwa's. Otherwise, no fatwa of anyone would ever be valid. However, realization of this point can awaken us to the need for a living study of various problems in every age and the need for courage to reevaluate the opinions of others.
Source: Ahmad Jannati
Imam reza network

Guardianship of the Jurists (Fuqaha)

The guardianship of the Jurists is the process of continuity of Imamate. In this context according to several hundred traditions of the Holy Prophet which have been narrated by accredited companions of the Holy Prophet the number of infallible Imams is twelve. Eleven of the twelve exalted personages have been martyred after him through poisoning or with swords because they fought against the despots of their times. Our twelfth Imam, Imam Mahdi is in occultation and according to hundreds of reliable traditions he will reappear by Allah's command to establish a just government. Since people have not been able to accept his leadership, Allah has kept him in His Protection until an opportune time.
As for example when a certain government lights eleven lamps and the people extinguish them it will preserve the last lamp at a safe place and will not light it until people become so much mature and enlightened that they understand the utility of light.
Similarly when Allah sent eleven infallible Imams and the people tortured them, made them captives and martyred them, Allah has kept the twelfth Imam in His safe custody until the opportune time. On the other hand Allah has not left us to ourselves without guidance during the period of occultation of the twelfth Imam Mahdi but He has entrusted us to just, pious and virtuous jurists so that we may faithfully follow them.
Therefore, it is incumbent on all Muslims to protect the Islamic system and obey the commands of Allah which the just jurists issue.
Islam has such rules and regulations in different fields of activities, financial, economic, punitive, administrative and judicial that these cannot remain suspended, nor can they be controlled by ignorant and selfish people. Islam does not allow that a particular group of persons may start ruling the other. Thus Islam has entrusted the job of enforcing the rules and regulations to the jurists and pious people only so that they may issue decrees in accordance with the Divine Commandments. The obedience to these jurists by the people is as obligatory as it is to the Holy Prophet and the Infallible Imam.
The Role of the Jurist
Now a number of questions arises here. Do the Muslims need some system of Government? Should an Islamic State be protected and defended or not? Should the lands be safeguarded? Should laws be promulgated in an Islamic State? Should the right of the oppressed be restored to him? Should or should not the voice of Islam reach every nook and corner of the world? Were the teachings of the Prophets and the Imams confined to their time only or were they applicable to all places and all times? If the answer to these questions is in the affirmative and Islam has its own system of social structure and laws and regulations, and the rights should be honoured, and the land should be safeguarded then the form of government must be Islamic, because without a system based on just and correct lines, especially when the enemies of Islam have a big farcically alluring system with them, we cannot protect our religion, laws, country, life, property and honour.
If the government is necessary then the ruler is also necessary, because the government cannot be run without a ruler. Therefore, since Islam needs a government for enforcing its laws, we should find out the qualifications of the ruler and know whether he has a deep understanding of the Divine commandments, is just and competent, and can appreciate and face difficulties. If it is necessary that the ruler should be a true Muslim, well-informed, pious, virtuous and statesman, then that person must be a jurist, and his government will be called the government of the jurist.
Those, who do not believe in the concept of the guardianship of a jurist should study the following view-points and accept anyone of them.
(i) Islam is confined only to prayers, fasting, individual worship, moral values only and it does not envisage the solution of social problems, justice, political and economic problems.
(ii) Islam was only meant for the duration of the lifetime of the Holy Prophet only, and it was abandoned after him and now its important social problems are confined only in books.
(iii) Important social laws should be enforced by the ignorant and wicked persons only.
If none of the above-quoted view-points is acceptable or appeals to reason, then we must accept the guardianship of the jurist, which means that the enforcement of Islamic laws and solution of difficult problems should be solved by eminent Muslim scholars and thus we must not think that the guardianship of the jurist is unjustifiable.
Is it not narrated from Imam Ja'far Sadiq that "in the Holy Qur'an all the individual and collective needs of the society have been described". (al-Kafi, vol. I, p. 59)
Hence, are the government, ruler, administration and various fields of human activities not included among the important needs of the society?
The Holy Prophet said, "I am grateful to Allah that I have described all the requirements of the Ummah before my death".
Is there not the need of a ruler and the government during the occultation period of Imam Mahdi in the Islamic society?
Imam Ali Riza while dealing with the problem of guardianship says, "There is no nation which is without its leader and the social structure of a society is directly concerned with the leader and that people should manage the public treasury by keeping an account of its income and expenditure, organize the society, fight against the enemies and protect the society from internal dissensions and disunity. If there is not going to be any such leader, then the nation will break up into pieces and the Divine commandments and the teachings of the Holy Prophet will be tampered with at the command of despotic ruler". (Biharul Anwar, vol. VI, p. 60)
You will note that the question of leadership and the government has been stated to be the most important problem by Imam Ali Riza. It is obvious that for the benefit of the poor masses management of the public treasury, equitable distribution of wealth, struggle against enemies, administration of social institutions are not such that they are only concerned with the time of the previous infallible Imams and that the Ummah should be left to itself during the occultation of our living Imam Mahdi that is to say, there should be no need of a government or a ruler during the period of occultation.
Thus Islam acknowledges the existence of the society and the necessity of the government and its ruler, but what is important is that we should know the conditions and qualifications of the ruler, and what type of the government it should be and how it should carry on the administration.
According to common sense and keeping in view the various Islamic narrations, the responsibility of the government should be laid on the shoulders of the just jurist. We reproduce here excerpts from some narrations:
(i) The Holy Prophet considered the jurists as his caliph. 506
(ii) The living Imam Mahdi with his own hand wrote in reply to a letter: "You should refer to our narrators about your problems and difficulties for they are our argument and proof on you just as we are the argument and proof of Allah".
(iii) When Imam Ja'far Sadiq was asked about the problems which are referred to despotic administration for decision he said, "Referring to these departments is very bad because it is referring to the despot and if someone gets back his right from these despotic departments it becomes unlawful. On such occasions however, it is your duty to refer to those people who know our teachings and narrations fully well, because I declare them as the qazi (Judge) for you. Thus you should remember that if this jurist has given you his decision and you consider it worthless it is as if you have considered the Divine command as worthless. If anyone disobeys these jurists, it is as if he has disobeyed us, and whosoever disobeys us, has in fact disobeyed Allah and this action amounts to polytheism".
(iv) The Holy Prophet said, "Scholars are the successors of the Prophets". (Wasa'il, vol. XVIII, chapter 11)
(v) Imam Kazim said "Jurists are the fortresses of Islam". (Kitabal Bai', Ayatullah Khumayni)
(vi) Allah has taken an assurance from the scholars that they would not pass over the gluttony and oppression of the despots in silence and would not ignore the hunger of the poor. (Sermon—7, Peak of Eloquence, ISP, 1984)
Naturally in a society supporting the oppressed and crushing the tyrant do need a government or its operative agency.
(vii) In the Holy Qur'an we have been taught that in a society we should stick to justice. Can justice in a society be maintained without the existence of a government or a ruler?
(viii) Imam Husayn says, "Discharging of the duties and the enforcement of laws should be in the hands of the scholars, God-fearing and pious persons. These are the people who do not make any changes in the Divine commands pertaining to lawful and unlawful things, and who are the custodians of trusts". (Tuhaful 'Uqul, p. 242)
(ix) Imam Ali says, "Scholars are the rulers of the people". (Ghurarul Hikam, quoted from al-Hayat, vol. II, p. 293)
Thus it is deduced that in an Islamic society the head of the government should be a just jurist with all the prescribed qualifications. These very jurists are the authorized representatives of the infallible Imams during the period of the occultation of our living Imam Mahdi. If the authority and guardianship of the jurist is terminated, the despots would raise their heads and the Divine commandments will be altered.
• It is not known as to what is the objective of those people who oppose the jurist?
• Do they say that for Muslims no government and no administration is necessary?
• Do they say that some system is necessary but there is no necessity of an administrator, ruler or guardian?
• Do they say that guardians and the rulers of the people should be those who have no concern with Islam?
• Do they say that the ruler should be a jurist and Muslim but it is not necessary that he should be just and pious?
• Do they consider that guardianship of the jurist is some sort of a dominating force? Is the jurist a representative of a particular group or class of people?
• Does the selfishness of the jurist not nullify his sense of justice and fair-play by which his guardianship in the society will automatically cease to exist?
Is the acceptance of the jurist's guardianship tantamount to setting up various centres of authority and domination?
When it is meant that the laws and commandments which have passed through the channel of a just jurist may not be diverted to divergent and un-Islamic directions, their representatives are delegated all the powers to exercise their authority on their behalf. Hence there is no question of setting up independent centres of authority and power, as actually the authority and power only emanate from the Divine commands which are enforced by the just jurist only.
We would ask those who oppose the guardianship of the jurist as to whom they want to entrust the affairs of the Ummah? We ask whether the Muslims should not follow someone in their affairs or is their following restricted to worship of Allah only? Is there not the possibility of a lawful or an unlawful thing in matters of social problems such as strikes, rehabilitation, travels, disputes, agreements, pacts, appointments, dismissal etc.? Should we not follow some jurist in all those matters where there is a question of lawfulness and unlawfulness? Should the leadership of the Muslims be entrusted to an un-Islamic leader? Will it not be like handing over the administration of a medical college to a man who is not a physician himself?
Is the handing over of the Ummah to an unjust ruler not a great injustice to humanity?
Has the time not come when we should protect ourselves from false leadership, unscrupulous politicians and professional opportunists, we should come under the Islamic protection, and accept only that leadership, which is compatible with the standard laid down by Qur'anic revelations.
However, the topic of Imamate has become a little lengthy but it would have been an injustice if we had not dealt with the leadership of the people and its way and means during the occultation period of our present Imam Mahdi.
Muhsin Qaraati
Source: Imam reza network

A Glance at the Fundamentals of the Trusteeship of the Jurisprudent (Wilayat al-faqih)

Regarding the worship of the men, what is understood/derived from the Holy Quran is that the most perfect and outstanding attribute for the man is to be the servant of Allah, because the perfection of every being/creature is to move on the basis of its own genetic system. And since he himself is not fully aware of this route and its aim, Allah should guide him and clarify the reality of the man and the universe and the mutual relation of the man and the universe.
The relation/connection of the man with all the phenomena from the one hand and his ignorance/negligence to the quality of these relations from the other hand specify the necessity of a guide that is an absolute knowing.
If the man distinguishes this route properly, in other words if he is the servant of Allah and accepts His Lordship and His Awareness about all of these cases, then he will attain the best perfection.
Therefore, the most important perfection that the Glorious Allah propounds in the Holy Quran is “uboudiyah” that means ‘servantship or devotion’.
“ All praise is God’s’ Who sent down upon His servant the Book (the Qur’an)...” (Quran: XVIII, 1)
Just as isra’ and ascension (`urouj) are based on `uboudiyah, the revelation of the Divine Book and its descent are on the basis of `uboudiyah.
The man should fly from the platform of `uboudiyah if he wants to have isra’ or ascension (mi`raj) and likes/wills that his heart becomes the place of the descent of revelation.
The verses “Glory be to Him Who carried His servant (Apostle Muhammad) by night ... “ (Quran, XVII, 1) and “Then revealed He unto His servant what He did reveal.” (Quran: LIII, 10), and the verse “ All praise is God’s’ Who sent down upon His servant the Book (the Qur’an)...” (Quran: XVIII, 1) all are on the basis of `uboudiyah.
This fact is not special for the religious sciences [/knowledge if the religion] and the eternal sciences, but also the people who have wilayee knowledge and rule of the basis of inwardness guide the others, they too have attained this position on the basis of `uboudiyah.
While mentioning the story of Khidr (the prophet), Allah the Exhaled says: “Then found they one, from among Our servants...” (Quran, XVIII, 65).
Moses, the Interlocutor of Allah had already been appointed to benefit from one of special servants of Allah that has taken some advantage of intuitive knowledge (`ilm ladunni). So both Khidr and the Holy Prophet [of Islam] have attained this position through `uboudiyah and Allah’s Favor.
The nest point is that in order to attain the state of prophecy, caliphate, Imamate and similar states, `uboudiyah is the essential although not sufficient condition, whereas the Divine Favor and Grace and Allah’s knowledge to the futurity, all have efficient roles.
It is not true that if a person becomes a perfect servant of Allah, he will become a prophet or an Imam. However, he will become a friend (waliyy) of Allah and not his prophet of messenger, since “God knoweth best where to place His apostleship” (Quran: VI, 124). Furthermore the man himself should possess the perfection of `uboudiyah.
At times Allah grants the knowledge, spirituality and even greatness to some people but none of them are used properly. As the holy verse “Relate unto them the news of him whom We gave Our signs, but he withdrew (himself) from them...” (Quran: VII, 175) indicates, Allah grants the vital/key positions such as prophecy, caliphate, Imamate and so on to particular individuals but it is possible that He grants some greatness, intuitions and spiritual knowledge to other people as tentative positions, because the human perfection is through `uboudiyah and it is exclusively for Allah [/just Allah deserves it (`uboudiyah)]. “hAnd commanded thy Lord hath that thou shalt worship not (any one) but Him,…” (Quran: XVII, 23) that indicates that nobody deserves to be worshiped and worshipping other than Allah is not permissible.
Guardianship of the Saints (Righteous)
If it is proved that the perfection of man is amidst servantship, and man is exclusively a servant of Allah, so whosoever other than Allah cannot be the real guardian of anybody so that we could say that God is the genuine guardian. And whosoever other than Him, like the prophets and saints are subordinate guardians.
After it became clear that the guardianship of the prophets and saints is not genuine, the guardianship of jurisconsult (wilayat al-faqih) becomes clear and many doubts will be solved.
It is important to make it clear that how many real guardians in a linear sequence there are for man.
Consider the guardianship of a father or a grandfather upon the interdicted child. Either of them who executes the guardianship, there will be no opportunities for guardianship of the latter. Is the guardianship upon the society of this kind/category? Or is it in a linear sequence? ...
The intellectual argument that is confirmed by Quranic verses necessitates that the perfection of man is to submit/obey one who is aware of the reality of the man and the universe and the mutual relation/... between them. He is nobody but Allah; therefore, the worship and guardianship are exclusively for Him, that is the only guardian of man is Allah.
So it cannot be true that the man has many guardians some of them are genuine and the others are subordinate, in other words, some are close guardians and some are far ones, rather the man has one real guardian that is Allah.
Considering the lifestyle of the prophets, their most elegant courtesy is the monotheist courtesy. All their acts are based on this verse: “ Verily my prayer and my sacrifice, my life and my death, (are all, only) for God, the Lord of the worlds.” (Quran: VI, 162). Although this verse addresses the Holy Prophet, however, the life and death of all the prophets and the Infallible are for the sake of Allah.
While the Holy Quran ascribes the power, strength, glory/honor, bread and some other affairs to other than Allah, it concludes that these are exclusively for Allah.
Regarding glory/honor Allah bid: “But for God is all honor and for His Apostle and for the believers…” (Quran: LXIII, 8) At the same time in another surah He bid: “God’s (alone) is all honor...” (Quran: XXXV, 10). Concerning ‘power/might’ bid: “ (The Lord said unto Zachariah’s son) O’ Yahya! Hold thou the Book fast!” (Quran: XIX, 12). And addressed the children of Israel: “Hold ye fast that which We have bestowed upon you with the strength (of determination) …” (Quran: II, 63) and addressed the Muslim combatants: but at the same time then bid: “And prepare ye against them wgatever (force) ye can…” (Quran: VIII, 60).
Then Allah bid: “…Unto God belongeth all power…” (Quran: II, 165)
Another instance is ‘sustenance/bread’. Allah is introduced as ‘the Best Provider’, that indicates that there are some other providers but Allah is the best of them. However, in another verse Allah bid: “Verily, God He (alone) is the Bestower of sustenance, the Lord of unbreakable strength.” (Quran: LI, 58) According to Arabic rhetoric in indicates that God is the only provider.
Regarding intercession (shafa`ah), a number of intercessors are recognized in the Holy Quran as God says: “” It is denoted that there are many intercessors, however, in other verses emphasizes that the genuine intercession is only for God “Who is he that can intercede with Him but with His permission?” (Quran: II, 255).
It is true for guardianship. In surah Ma’idah God says: “Verily, your guardian is (none else but) God and His Apostle (Muhammad) and those who believe, - those who establish prayer and pay the poor-rate, while they be (even) bowing down (in prayer).” (Quran: V, 57). In this verse by assistance of the traditions the guardianship is proved for the Holy Prophet and the members of his household (Ahl al-Bayt). The issue is even clearer in surah Ahzab in which God says: “The Prophet (Muhammad) hath a greater claim on the believers than they have on their own selves” (Quran: XXXIII, 6). The guardianship of the Holy Prophet upon the lives and the properties of the individuals is higher than /prior to their own selves. That is why God says in surah Ahzab: “And it is not for a believer man or woman to have any choice in their affair when God and His Apostle have decided a matter...” (Quran: XXXIII, 36). Despite these three verses God underscores in another surah that guardianship is exclusively for God: “Or have they taken besides Him guardians? But God, He is the Guardian...” (Quran: XLII, 9).
This indicates that the guardianship of the apostle, the Infallible and the saints are not equal to that of Allah. And since the guardianship is exclusively for Him,
His guardianship cannot be an intermediary of affirmation of the guardianship for anybody except Allah.
As a [philosophical] example, if water is placed beside fire, it really gets warm. This nearness to fire is an intermediary for getting water warm. In this state the qualification of water to warmth is a real qualification, and this nearness to fire is an intermediary in affirmation and not in occurrence. But consider the same fire placed in front of a mirror. In the mirror you can see the flames of fire rising but it is only the reflection of fire, so the mirror does not get warm due to the flames reflected therein.
The verses * and * do not mean that the Glory of God is an intermediary for affirmation of glory for the Holy Prophet and the saints. Otherwise the Glory of God will become limited, because if a number of glories exist, then none of them can be unlimited. The infinite leaves no opportunities for another individual however limited, rather the Glory of God becomes the intermediary for occurrence of glory for them. The Holy Quran has an elegant term/statement in this regard that is that these are signs and tokens/symbols of God, namely if a believer is glorious, he is a sign and token/symbol of God’s Glory. Also if the Holy Prophet is a guardian, his guardianship is a symbol of God’s Guardianship. The saints of God are symbols of the Divine Guardianship, and they demonstrate the Divine Attributes, while others are dark and obscure and do not indicate the nominal, attributive or actual perfection.
Allamah Tabataba’i, our teacher said frequently: “This fact that the religion has declared that there is no creature in no conditions that is not the symbol/token of God, is an elegant expression. Because, if it is a symbol of God, then it is not independent, since if it was independent, then it could not reflect/manifest God.
Therefore, * and * are essentially (bi al-dhat), then * is accidental (bi al-`arad). By this explanation the interpretation of the verses *, * and * becomes clear.
Allah, the Exalted, asked Moses, the interlocutor:
- “Why didn’t you visit me when I was sick?”
Moses answered: “But You never become sick.”
- “That believer servant that was sick is my manifestation (incarnates Me). If you respected him, you would respect Me.”
These are not allusion, trope/allegory, metaphor and simile, rather they indicate seeing God reflected in the mirror of [the heart of] a believer. Then one understands that the others (other than Allah) are nothing, and Allah has not ** in anybody. The same as fire flame or sunshine that do not ** in the mirror, and do not unite with it. Thus the ** and the unification are impossible.
By the assistance of such a sight the divine guardian knows his position properly and is aware of being the creatures symbols/tokens [of God].
Guardianship upon the Elite
The guardianship of the Prophet and the Imam upon the society is not such as the guardianship upon the fool, the madman, and the interdicted persons.
Otherwise it is counted a contempt/disgrace to the people and a desecration to the guardianship of the jurisconsult.
He who undertakes the guardianship upon a madman, a fool or a young child, organizes/administrates them according to his own thought and opinions. So regarding playing, entertainment, sleeping, feeding and other affairs he treats according to his own desire and will. This is the indication of the guardianship upon the interdicted. However the guardianship of the Prophet, the Imam and his successor is not of this kind, rather their guardianship refers to that of Allah, that is the religion and its school themselves undertake the leadership and guardianship of the society. The reason is that whereas the people are under guardianship of the religion, the real personality of the Prophet and other infallible persons is under the guardianship of the religion and their legal personality.
For the Infallible - from the aspect that they are infallible – have nothing except from Allah. [For instance] if the Holy Prophet as a trustee of the divine revelation receives a verdict of fatwa from Allah and announces it to the people, it is obligatory for all, including the Prophet to act according to such a fatwa.
For instance, Allah has bidden: “They ask thee for a decree (about the Law): Say, (O’ Our Apostle Muhammad
God giveth you a decision...”(Quran: IV, 176) “This is Allah’s fatwa. Narrate it to the people.” Once this fatwa is announced to the people by the Prophet, it will become obligatory for all, even the Prophet, to act accordingly.
Another example is about the guardianship verdicts such as coming to a rupture with a certain tribe, or expelling/banishing, the Jews for instance from the city. So submitting such an injunction is obligatory and therefore, violating it is forbidden even for the Prophet.
It is also true for the judges. For instance, when two hostile parties attended the law court of the Holy Prophet, and he judged about them, once the judgement is finished and the verdict is issued, then violating that verdict is forbidden and therefore, following it is compulsory even for the Prophet. So there is no privilege for the Prophet in this regard. After the Prophet, the same is true for the Infallible Imam, and if he has a special deputy such as Malik Ashtar (Imam Ali’s companion) and Muslim ibn `Aqil (Imam Husayn’s deputy) the same position is true for them.
In case there is no special deputies, the same position is true for the general deputy (na’ib `amm).
Did the late Imam Khomeini have any [special] privilege to the Iranian nation in this regard? Whenever he issued a fatwa, it was obligatory even for Imam Khomeini himself to act accordingly. Or when he judged that the Israeli embassy should be wound up/closed, it was compulsory for all, including he himself to follow this judgement. Since he has no personal privilege in this regard, nobody can object that accepting the guardianship of the jurisconsult means that Iranian nation, for instance, are interdicted!
It has become clear that the guardianship of the jurisconsult is not of the kind of the guardianship upon the madmen or the interdicted, rather it is the guardianship of the school [of thought] (religion) guardian of which is an infallible person or his just deputy. The Prophet himself is under the guardianship of the school, in the other words, the real personality of the Prophet, the Imams or other individuals are the subset of the guarded, and his legal personality is the guardian.
Now that the meaning of guardian (waliyy) became clear, no harm would occur for the monotheism, that is accepting the guardianship of the saints becomes equal to monotheism. Because according to the verse: “But God, He is the Guardian...” (Quran: XLII, 9) the individuals in the society are the servants of Allah, and He is their real Guardian, while the saints are His symbols and tokens. Like a mirror that reflects the Guardianship of Allah and not like boiling water, for instance that got hot due to the fire.
In this state one takes pride in the guardianship, for he is under the guardianship of Allah. As an example, take a tree. It needs suitable water and air to grow. These two are of vital importance. The role of guardianship upon the society is like that of water and air for a tree. If one likes to become the blessed tree of Touba, he should follow this way.
The late Imam Khomeini emphasized: “Support the guardianship of the jurisconsult so that your country remain secure.” The reason was that the tree of humanity should grow in good conditions. Necessarily an expert in Islam who believes in it should take the reins of government so that when he issues an injunction, before the others he acts himself acts accordingly. This is the meaning of the guardianship of the jurisconsult that returns to the guardianship of jurisprudence and justice. Otherwise nobody has guardianship upon the others.
In the guardianship of a father upon his son the father is not obliged to act according to his order before his son, and subsequently the son cannot object why his father did not act accordingly first. While in the guardianship of the jurisconsult if he do not follow his order before the others, the nation has the right and option to object him.
Imam Ali, the master of the believers, said: “We never ordered you to do a certain duty unless we excelled you to act accordingly.” The message of prophet Shu`ayb (Jethro) in the Holy Quran is: “I desire not that in opposition to you I betake myself unto that which I forbid you from it....” (Quran: XI, 88)
It has become clear [through the past discussions] that if the guardianship of the Prophet and Imams is for the sake of their real and not legal personality,
thus the guardianship of the just jurisconsults too, is considering their legal personality that is jurisprudence and justice. So nobody can cheat the people that if they accept the guardianship of the jurisconsult it means the [recognition] that they are interdicted. Because the people are intelligent and understand whether this guardianship is that of upon the interdicted or that of upon the free human beings.
Genetic and Legislative Guardianship
Guardianship is divided in two kinds: genetic (takwini) and legislative (tashri`i). As examples of the first kind, Allah is the guardian of man and universe. The human self has guardianship upon its inner powers/faculties and also upon every kind of application of the imaginative and imaginary faculties, as well as upon its healthy members/parts of body. Once the self orders to see or to hear, the eye and the ear will submit provided the member is not paralyzed or maimed.
This kind of wilayah returns to cause and effect. Each cause is the wali of the effect, and every effect is under guardianship of a cause. The causality of the cause is either as reality or as a manifestation of the real cause. If the causality of a thing is real, its wilayah will be real, too, and if its causality is a manifestation of the real cause, its wilayah too will be a manifestation of the real wilayah.
Legislative guardianship means that one person is the guardian of the others according to law. A part of this kind of guardianships refers to jurisprudential issues, another part returns to the ethical affairs, while the rest refer to the theological issues.
In the genetic guardianship it is impossible to violate. For instance, once the self has determined to imagine an image in the mind, it will be drawn in the mind instantly
If man wills to bring, for instance, the holy shrine of Imam Riza in his mind, once he wills, the imaginary image of that place will come to his mind. It is not true that if one’s internal system/organ is healthy, in case he wills a matter, the system does not submit. Or he wills to see a place but will not be able to. So, in case the member/body part the member is not paralyzed or maimed, then it would be under the protection/guardianship (wilayah) of the self, while the self is the protector/guardian (wali) of the healthy member.
However, the matter is different in the legislative kind of wilayah, since this kind may be violated. In the other words the man can follow or violate a law and an ordinance related to responsibility (taklif), because he is free, and this freedom is a matter of his perfection. A part of the legislative wilayah is discussed under the topic of ‘Interdiction’ (hajr), where certain individual are interdicted due to immaturity, foolishness, madness, and bankruptcy. And subsequently a guardian will be determined for them.
In some cases a guardian and supervisor is needed because of the death. For instance, a deceased person needs a guardian (wali), and his heirs are prior to the other to be his wali concerning the funeral rituals. Another instance is the killed person, so that his heirs have guardianship upon his blood (to take revenge). This is the jurisprudential kind of wilayah that is discussed in different chapters of jurisprudence such as Purity (taharah), Punishments (hudoud), and Blood-money (diyah). But the legislative wilayah that is discussed under the topic of wilayat-e faqih is loftier than these issues. It is not of the type of wilayah that is discussed in such different jurisprudential parts of Interdiction (hajr), Purity (taharah), Blood vengeance (qisas), and Blood-money (diyah).
The Islamic community neither is deceased person nor an immature, a fool, a madman, and a bankrupted to require a wali.
All the attacks and the criticisms of both the local and abroad writers against wilayat-e faqih are initiated from this misunderstanding that they deem it is of the wilayah discussed in the jurisprudence under the title of Interdiction, while it is not relevant to it at all, rather it means supervision and protection.
The holy verse : "Verily, your guardian is (none else but) Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad) and those who believe, - those who establish prayer and pay the poor-rate, while they be (even) bowing down (in prayer)." (Quran: V, 57) addresses the wise and responsible persons and not the irresponsible or the interdicted.
Allah, the Exalted, never addresses the interdicted, the madmen, the immature and the bankrupts by the holy verse “The Prophet (Muhammad) hath a greater claim on the believers that they have on their own selves …” (Quran: XXXIII, 6), or the verse: V, 57, or the verse “O’ ye who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those vested with authority from among you” (Quran: IV, 59). The meaning of this wilayah is to supervision and administration to which refers the essence of wilayah related to the legal personality of the waali and not his real personality.
It means that when Imam Ali, the Commander of the Faithful writes in his letters that this is a message you receive from your wali. Imam Ali from the aspect that he is the son of Abu Talib, is the same as other individuals and locates under the wilayah of his own Imamate. Because of he wants to issue a fatwa, it is obligatory even for him to act according to his fatwa. And when he issues a verdict of judgment, he is not permitted to violate it, and should act accordingly. And when he rules as a ruler, even he himself should follow it and cannot violate.
Therefore, it has been made clear that Imam Ali is under wilayah considering his real personality, and is the wali, and the Commander of the Faithful considering the fact that he has received this post denoted by the holy verse (Quran: XXXIII, 6) due to the Event of Ghadir and the like.
Position of wilayah in the theological discussions
One can discuss on wilayat-e faqih from two aspects: jurisprudential and theological.
The first one is that in case such a law exists, is it obligatory to act accordingly? This is a matter propounded by a jurisprudent that is the submission compulsory for us and consequently is the disobedience forbidden? Do some of the individuals of the Islamic community have the right to take the reins of government, and is it permissible for them?
These two issues are jurisprudential. In the other words, whatever is propounded regarding the ruler (waali) from the aspect that he is responsible (mukallaf), and any issue subject of which is the act of responsible (person), are jurisprudential. Is it obligatory for the people to obey the waali from the aspect that they (people) are mature, wise, intellectual, erudite and responsible? The answer to this question, whatever it could be (positive or negative), is a jurisprudential answer.
But the theological approach to wilayat-e faqih is that: Has Allah issued any commandments regarding the occultation period?
The subject of such discussion is Allah's Act and necessarily the act of the responsible.
If Allah has ordered, its submission is obligatory both for the ruler (waali) and the people. Because Ali, the commander of the faithful, said:
" If people had not come to me and supporters had not exhausted the argument …" (Nahj al-Balaghah, sermon 3). If those who gave alliance and also the companions were not available, argument (hujjat)) would not be perfect for me and subsequently I would not accept it.
The reason is that propounding a jurisprudential discussion, for instance, if we proved in jurisprudence that it is obligatory for people to submit the wali-ye faqih, or if we prove that a full authority jurisprudent has such a right, duty or responsibility, although it is a jurisprudential issue, necessitates the fact that Allah has commanded such a way. Because unless Allah has issued such a commandment neither the jurisprudent nor the people become responsible.
So it has become clear that as a formula, if the subject of a discussion is Allah's Act, then this discussion is a theological one, while if the subject is the act of responsible (person), then the discussion is a jurisprudential one.
The reason that Imamate is one of the parts of the principles of our branch of Islam (Shi'ism) while the Sunni branch does not recognize it as a principle of the religion, is that the Sunni branch holds that it is not obligatory for Allah and the Prophet, and Allah has not given any commandments regarding the leadership of the Ummah. It is people that should elect a leader. So Imamate is their attitude is an application like other jurisprudential applications.
But in our attitude we hold that this task is an Act of Allah, for we believe in infallibility. So we hold that Allah has commanded his Prophet to introduce Ali as his successor.
Now the discussion has reached this point that Allah is aware of all corpuscles of the universe, (“And doth not concealed from thy Lord (even) the weight of an atom in the earth nor in the heaven, …” Quran, X: 61), He knows that His Infallible Saints (awliya') are present for a limited period and the last Infallible Saint (that is Imam Mahdi) will be under occultation for a long period. Has Allah issued any commandments/instructions/ injunctions for occultation period, or has abandoned the nation (Ummah)? This is a theological discussion.
If the Islamic thinkers have propounded wilayat-e faqih doctrine as a theological discussions, is based on this fact and not because they believe it as the rank of prophecy or Oneness of Allah. Then, every discussion object of which is Allah's Act, is theological but the reverse is not true (It is not true that each theological discussion is a part of the principles of the religion.
Guardianship in the Traditions (hadiths)
One of the definitions of wilayah is to supervise (as a guardian) and administrate the society. In addition to the Holy Quran, in the traditions transmitted to us from the Infallible the very same meaning has been applied. We mention some of these traditions below as examples:
1. Imam Ali has used this meaning for wilayah (that is guardianship and administration) in different phrases of Nahj al-Balaghah, for instance:
A. In Sermon 2 after describing the members of the Prophet's household (Ahl al-Bayt) as: " They are the trustees of His secrets, shelter for His affairs, source of knowledge about Him, center of His wisdom, valleys for His books and mountains of His religion. With them Allah straightened the bend of His religion's back and removed the trembling of its limbs." then says that by the Ahl al-Bayt -that are the basis of the religion- many problems are solved. "They possess the chief characteristics for vicegerency (khalafah). In their favor exists the will and succession (of the Prophet)." Exclusion of the wilayah is due to these facts.
This statement is frequently used by Imam Ali in the sermons of Nahj al-Balaghah whenever he introduces himself to the public as waali and wali, and states that he has the right of wilayah upon them and they are under his wilayah. This does not mean that Imam is the guardian of the people and the people are interdicted.
B. In Sermon 216 delivered at the Battle of Siffin, Imam said: "So now, Allah the Glorified, has, by placing me over your affairs, created my rights over you," In the same sermon in the paragraphs 6 and 7 is mentioned: "The greatest of these rights that Allah, the Glorified, has made it obligatory, is the right of the ruler over the ruled and the right of the ruled over the ruler … Consequently, the ruled cannot prosper unless the rulers are sound, while the rulers cannot be sound unless the ruled are steadfast." . Here the walis and the wilayah or the waalis (rulers) regarding guardianship (administrating) the society is intended.
C. (Nahj al-Balaghah, letter 42)
When Imam Ali decided to set out towards the enemies, wrote a letter addressing `Umar ibn Abu Salamah Makhzoumi, the governor of Bahrain and summoned him to the capital. Replacing him with another person Imam explained: "The reason that I have recalled you and sent another person instead of you is not because you managed there improperly, rather since I am in an important travel, you can assist me in the military tasks. As long as you were the ruler of Bahrain, you performed the right of the wilayah properly and perfectly." "... Therefore, proceed to me when you are neither suspected nor rebuked, neither blamed nor guilty. I have just intended to proceed towards the recalcitrant of Syria and desired that you should be with me because you are among those on whom I rely in fighting the enemy and erecting the pillars of religion, if Allah wills…"
In the Treaty of Malik Ashtar the Imam has frequently used the term wilayah in this definition (guardianship):
III. A. "... Because you are over them and your responsible Commander (Imam) is over you, while Allah is over him who has appointed you." (Nahj al-Balaghah, Letter 53, paragraph 4)
III. B. "... Because people do have shortcomings and the ruler is the most appropriate person to cover them. Do not disclose whatever of it is hidden from you..." (Nahj al-Balaghah, Letter 53, paragraph 8)
III. C. " … their good wishes prove correct only when they surround their commanders (to protect them). Do not regard their positions to be a burden over them."
(Nahj al-Balaghah, Letter 53, paragraph 20)
3. Imam Muhammad Baqir said: "Islam is founded on five pillars: prayers (salat), zakat, hajj, fasting (sawm), and wilayah" (See: Wasa'il al-Shi`ah, volume one, p...).
This wilayah has three discussions two of which are jurisprudential that are located at the same level of fasting and hajj. But the third discussion is a theological one that may not lay at the level of these two.
If we observe that the Holy Prophet has allocated the wilayah for Imam Ali and has appointed him Imam and the Commander of the Faithful, just because Allah ordered him to do so (and to address people whosoever I am his Mawla, Ali is his mawla too), then this is a theological issue.
Now that the Prophet has announced this command in accordance with the holy verse "(O Our Apostle Muhammad
Deliver thou what hath been sent down unto thee from thy Lord ... " Quran: V, 67), then it is obligatory for the Prophet, Imam Ali, the companions and other individuals to act accordingly. The Prophet cannot refrain to recognize Imam Ali as caliph, can he? He is also responsible, and therefore, it is obligatory for him, too. The holy verse " The Prophet believeth in what hath come down unto him from his Lord" (Quran: II, 285) indicates that the Prophet recognizes Ali as the caliph. This is a jurisprudential issue in which there is no difference between the Prophet and others, also between the Imam and his followers.
As a conclusion two aspects of the wilayah mentioned in this hadith are jurisprudential: firstly, it is obligatory for Imam Ali himself to accept this position, and secondly, it is obligatory for the community to accept Ali as their waali. The reason is that the subject of such issues is the act of the responsible (person).
But considering that Allah commanded His Prophet to announce the caliphate of Imam Ali, so its subject is the Act of Allah, and consequently is a theological issue.
4. Another tradition similar to this hadith was narrated by Hurayz from Zurarah, that Imam Muhammad Baqir said:
"Islam is founded on five pillars: prayers (salat), zakat, hajj, fasting (sawm), and wilayah." Zurarah asked the Imam: "Which one is the predominant?" The Imam answered: " Wilayah is." (Wasa'il al-Shi`ah, volume one, p. 40; Usoul al-Kafi, Vol. I, p. 462).
To justify their aloofness from the ruling and guardianship some people assume that wilayah means the belief in the Imamate of the Imams and the affection to this family. (As denotes the holy verse: “Say thou (O’ Our Apostle Muhammad): “ I demand not of you any recompense for it (the toils of the Apostleship), save the love of my relatives” Quran: XLII, 23) But Zurarah asked the Imam the predominant. After the Imam underscored Wilayah as the predominant, then added: "Because it acts as the key for them (i.e. the five pillars) and the waali is the guide towards them". It means the waali (namely the ruler) is discussed.
Thus, it has been clear that the wilayah means guardianship, a guardianship upon the elite and not upon the mad persons. If one analyzes properly, he will find out that the waali has both a real personality that is mukallaf to the divine commandments, at the same time he has a legal personality that is appointed (granted) by Allah. That real personality is the subset of the legal one. In this case there will not be any privileges for him. Which act has been obligatory for the Prophet but not for the community? Which sin is forbidden for the community and not for them (the prophets)? Which fatwa is obligatory for the community and not for them? Which judgment and wilayee verdict violating of which is forbidden for the community and not for them? So, it is clear that they are responsible persons (mukallaf) as we are. We can conclude that wilayah is a legislative (tashri`i) matter and it means to protect and supervise the wise human society.
The Role of the Assembly of Experts in Wilayah issue
Where is the position of the Assembly of Experts? This assembly specifies a full-authorized jurisprudent according to the constitution and then introduces him to the public. The people consider him as wali and not attorney. While the constitution was being edited for the first time, some members of the Assembly suggested the phrase "the people select him" but at the very place it was amended as "the people accept him". Some asked the difference between the two phrases, I replayed that to appoint an attorney (tawkil) differs from accepting the guardianship (tawalli).
The wali should possess some privileges that refer to his theoretical and practical theosophy. While he is wali, at the same time his is equal to the individuals in front of the law.
In fact this is his jurisprudence and justice that governs; but the issue that which person is the wali, is not a scientific issue, rather it is a matter of subject that must be recognized by the Assembly of the Experts.
It is probable that in your point of view a certain person is fully authorized while in my viewpoint another person is fully authorized.
The Necessity of waali from the intellectual point of view
In the recent discussion of Religion and Development, some have stated that there are no discussions of development, management and leadership in the religion; rather this is the responsibility of science and wisdom. They assume that wisdom contradicts the religion, while the wisdom and the tradition act as the two eyes of the religion. All the books that deal with the principles of the jurisprudence (usoul al-fiqh) stipulate that the rich sources of the jurisprudence are the Book, Sunnah, consensus and wisdom. The consensus refers to the Sunnah, while the wisdom is independent. For instance, planning for the development and the improvement of the country, and also regulating the local and foreign policies if are done through the common sense and away from the carnal desires, then they are attributed to the religion. Since all matters and details have not been mentioned through traditions, then the other eye of the religion that is wisdom will complete it.
Their misunderstanding is that they have summarized the religion exclusively in the Holy Quran and the tradition, and hence have put the scientific management opposite to the jurisprudential one, and conclude that the religion is incomplete! While the religion recognizes whatever the wisdom finds out. As the traditional reason introduces some of the affairs as the inherent obligation and introduces some others as the prior obligation, the rational reason has the two kinds of obligations.
The issue of leadership and management of the community are a rational one. Let us suppose that a clear injunction had not come in the verses of Quran or the tradition, the common sense judges clearly, and this rational judgment is the Command of Allah.
All the jurisprudents that thought of the philosophy of jurisprudence have obviously understood the necessity of the "waali". In this regard one can refer to the statements of such great jurisprudents as Ayatollah Hasan Najafi (d 1900, the compiler of the book Jawahir al-Kalam) and Imam Khomeini.
While propounding the issue of war and enjoining right conduct and forbidding indecency in his great book Jawahir al-Kalam, Ayatollah Najafi said:
"This fact becomes clear by deliberation in the texts and observing the status of the Shiites specially the Shiite scholars.
The decree (tawqi`) of Imam Mahdi towards Shaykh Mufid declaring respect and honor for Mufid is a good instance. Had not there been the generality of wilayah, a great deal of the affairs respective to the Shiites would have remained idle. It is strange that somebody doubt to accept, as if they have not savored the taste of the jurisprudence at all!” (See: Jawahir al-Kalam, vol. 21, p 397)
What this honorable jurisprudent underscores on is an intellectual issue. After deliberating on a dense amount of commandments in different fields, he concluded that such great amount of commandments and orders definitely need an executer or an administrator otherwise, the affairs respective to the Shiites in the occultation period of Imam Mahdi would have remain idle. He finally reaches to this conclusion that whosoever ... in the issue of wilayat-e faqih, it seems as if he has not tasted the savor of the jurisprudence (fiqh) and has not found out the mystery of the words of the Infallible Imams (a.s).
He even has proceeded to the point that holds: " It is improbable that a fully qualified jurisprudent (faqih) does not possess the authority to summon for primary jihad (contrary to defensive jihad).
The late Imam Khomeini had not reached this lofty position at the beginning and held that the primary jihad is not authorized for the jurisprudent (faqih), but later in Najaf, he too reached that level and recognized the primary jihad with its own conditions one of the authorities of the fully qualified faqih.
Wilayah and Politics
It is occasionally said that wilayah does not correspond with government, ruling, and politics, because wilayah defined as guardianship is always concerning the individual and not the society and the procedures of ruling a country.
The answer is that the wilayah as it is defined as the guardianship upon the interdicted discussed in "Interdiction" (hajr) part of the jurisprudence (fiqh), and the wilayah concerning performance of funeral rites of the deceased person or the wilayah that the avenger of blood possesses, none correspond with governing the community. It is not relevant to this holy verse at all: "Verily, your guardian is (none else but) Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad) and those who believe, - those who establish prayer and pay the poor-rate, while they be (even) bowing down (in prayer)." (Quran: V, 57) Because this wilayah means: ruling and supervision (/administration).
If the message of the above verse is that your guardians and supervisors are the Holy Prophet and Imam Ali (the Commander of the Faithful), then this wilayah is addressed to the elite, the faithful, the scholars, the sage people, and not the mad persons.
Therefore, both in genetic and legislative systems the wilayah having the meaning of supervision and administration belongs to Allah essentially since Allah said: "... But Allah, He is the Guardian." (Quran: XLII, 9) and said: " … there is none besides Him a Protector." (Quran: XIII, 11).
It is exclusively for Allah to be a waali and genetic supervisor and administrator. This is the exclusion of the absolute wila' (wilayah) for Allah the Exalted, both from genetic and legislative aspects. Allah said: "There is no judgment but Allah’s … " (Quran: XII, 40)
So it has been clear that if one states that there is no wilayahs indicating/ defining supervision and administration, it will be a false statement. While if one declares that wilayah with the meaning of the mandate of the interdicted is not respective to our community (Iranian community), it will be a true statement because, those who hold the doctrine of wilayat al-faqih, do not state that the wilayah composed/compiled for the faqih in the constitution (of the Islamic Republic of Iran) is of the kind of wilayah concerning the interdicted or relating to the ritual bathing of a Moslem's corpse, or the wilayah of blood vengeance (qisas), blood-money (diyah), and punishments (hudoud), because none of them is relevant to supervising the community. The concept of wilayah mentioned in the holy verse (Quran: V, 57) is the supervision of the community, that the wilayat al-faqih is the manifest of which, that administrates the community in accordance with the scales /measures of injunctions and the intellectual and transmitted sagacity and expediency.
Role of the people for electing a wali-e faqih
It is occasionally said that wilayat al-faqih is one of the insolvable problems of the Islamic Republic since its existence necessitates its non-existence! In the other words, if wilayat al-faqih exists, then wilayat al-faqih does not exist, and vice-versa. Because from one hand in the Islamic Republic, the people have elected, directly or indirectly, a person as their leader, therefore, the people have vote, and subsequently they are not interdicted and do not need a guardian (wali). From the other hand if the jurisprudent (faqih) is the guardian/ trustee (wali) of the people, so the people do not have vote. That is why no one noticed this insolvable problem that is reconciling the wilayat al-faqih with people's vote and acceptance. Because the people have voted not to have vote!
This doubt originates from the point that they have restricted the wilayah
in that of the part "interdiction", while if wilayah is defined as the supervision/trusteeship upon the elite, the wise and the men possessed of minds like what is dealt with in the verse "Verily, your guardian is (none else but) Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad) and those who believe, - those who establish prayer and pay the poor-rate, while they be (even) bowing down (in prayer)." (Quran: V, 57) and also the Event of Ghadir and the holy verse “The Prophet (Muhammad) hath a greater claim on the believers that they have on their own selves …” (Quran: XXXIII, 6), then the above doubt will be solved. Was the wilayah of Imam Ali (the Commander of the Faithful) in the Event of Ghadir as the guardianship upon the interdicted or it was as trusteeship upon the men of understanding (ulul albab)?
Waali does not mean the guardian of the interdicted; rather it means the trustee (supervisor/ administrator) concerning the affairs of the elite of the society.
Such a wali or ruler/governor is either completely well known for the people, or not in case he is not well known the people refer to the experts and ask them for information in this regard.
Like when the Holy Prophet asked first for the approval (and acknowledgement) of the audience (in Ghadir Event) saying: “Have I communicated you what (the mission) I was responsible for and I should communicate you or not?” -“Yes”, the audience replied. Then the Holy Prophet asked: "Do you approve that I have a greater claim on you than you have on yourselves?" (See: Al-Kafi, the Book of the Divine Proof [Kitab al-Hujjah]) "Yes”, they replied. Then the Holy Prophet said: " For whomever I am the authority and guide Ali is also his guide and authority.” And the people accepted.
Can we declare that this is a fact that the existence of which necessitates its non-existence and vice-versa?
(It is true that) if the meaning of wilayah is restricted in the guardianship upon the mad persons (for instance), then the wilayah may not be compatible with the people's vote, because the wilayah of the wali is proved by the vote of the interdicted, while the interdicted person has not vote!
The Prophet himself propounded the Islamic republic and holding a referendum and said that the regime should be Islamic, it is based on the revelation. It must be democratic. It is based on the acceptance of the people. He said that he has been living for forty years among the community and has taken his (social) examinations successfully.
"I lived among you an edge before it; What! Then (yet) ye understand not?" (Quran: X, 16)
After taking a lifetime examination, aren't you wise enough to understand? If not, then accept my demonstration since I am your trustee.
This statement of the Holy Prophet that is "I lived among you an edge before it;” is the republic aspect of the Islamic regime; it means that you accept the fact that all the affairs have been provided from Allah's side: The revelation has sent down, my position has been determined, the prophetic mission, the prophethood, the wilayah and the trusteeship have been provided all, what remained is your acceptance and act accordingly. Then added: "Demonstrate, this is my miracle.”...
Such a thing contains no paradox within itself. In the other words, what is relevant to the law and the commentators of it - that is the Ahl al-Bayt themselves- and what is defined as the explainer and teacher of the Book and Wisdom and the purifier of the souls and what is as the executer of the punishment laws, all have been provided within this religion. Only the acceptance of the people has remained. This acceptance is related to as to be the wali of the people and not the client/lawyer of them. Never there will be contradiction/contradiction with the acceptance of the people. All the posts are approved for the Infallible but to take affect such posts needs the people's vote. Such a commentary on the wilayah is free from the injury of dreaming the contradiction.
Alteration of the posts and the necessity to the experts
Since the true posts are perfection, therefore, the false posts are countless contrary to it. The range of it oscillates from the Lordship to the faith. Some instances are presented below so that it clears that opposite a truth there is a falsehood that claims being truth. Concerning the lordship that means that Allah is the Lord of the worlds and there is no lords but He, some attempted first to struggle/fight against the notion of lordship from its basis, but when they found out that the man is in need of the Lord at last, then they declared that yes, the man is in need of the lord, and the lord exists but it is not Allah, rather we are the lords! " And (Pharaoh) said: 'I am your Lord, the most High!'" (Quran: LXXIX: 24), " And said Pharaoh: 'O' Chiefs! I know not any Allah for you other than me,'" (Quran: XXVIII, 38). Pharaoh did not say this at first, but after refusing the notion of Lordship and not taking a good result of it declared: “I agree that the society is in need of a Lord, but the Lord is me and not whoever you claim.”
After the lordship, the prophethood may be dealt with. While the prophets were sent from Allah, the Exalted, the heads of oppression and blasphemy fought against the notion of prophecy and prophetic mission, but since they did not get a good result, reacted that the prophethood is true. It is true that certain individuals (prophets) are appointed by God and are sent from Him to guide the people, but "A" is the prophet and not "B".
In case of advent of a true prophet, many false prophets appeared in contrary.
When certain heads of the Ignorance were asked: "Why didn't you believe in the Prophet in spite of all his miracles, but you have approved the statements of Musaylimah, the liar instead?"
"Because he is a member of our tribe", they replied.
Caliphate and Imamate were the same as this. At first they said that the Prophet has not appointed anybody as his successor, a guardian and a leader for the community. Then they concluded that it was impossible that the Prophet has declared everything (of lesser importance) but has neglected the most important part of the religion that is, the leadership. Then they claimed and quoted plenty of the virtues for the others and announced (publicized) false and faked hadiths concerning the caliphate of some of them.
At the next step the clergymen and the scholars were dealt with. The oppressor countries struggled with the scholars and the religious intellects, but when they realized their popularity in the society and that the clergy is a genuine and popular institution, then they established court clergymen to issue verdict to satisfy their wills.
In the fifth phase we confront the populace and observe the process of faith among them. The hypocrites fought the faith as far as possible at the first step, but when they realized that the faith is a welcomed fact among the community, pretended to be faithful.
"And when they meet with those who believe, they say, "we believe" but when they go apart to their devils, they say, " surely we are with you, verily, we did but mock." (Quran, II, 14)
It has been clear so far that (in a range) from the "Lordship" to the "Faith" and from the faith to the "divinity" there always has been a false and fake process contrary to the true and genuine one.
In case the offices are being altered, and the truth and untruth are being mistaken how the people can distinguish between the truth and the falsehood (that is the true person and the false one)?
People's vote is for the very same reason that they think and select the truth, therefore, it necessitates to refer to the experts and it becomes compulsory to establish the Assembly of Experts.
The Paradox Between Wilayat al –faqih and People's Election
It is said that wilayat al-faqih contradicts the ruling, democracy, liberty of the individuals, elections, and establishing the Assembly of Experts, etc. Therefore, a regime that is based on wilayat al-faqih is false, and consequently all contracts whether national or international signed with such a regime is invalid and void according to the religious rites, and thus the latter party of the contract can vindicate his/her own rights.
They propound two evidences:
1. Since the term 'wilayah' means guardianship upon the interdicted, so it contradicts the people's vote, election for the Assembly of Experts and the like.
That is whether the people directly elect the jurisprudent (faqih) or empower someone to elect the guardian (wali) for them, indicates in the both cases that from the one hand the people are wise and sagacious, and have the vote, and consequently do not need a guardian, from the other hand if the jurisprudent is a guardian (wali) upon the people, then the people do not have vote.
Considering the contradiction available in the regime based on wilayat al-faqih indicates that such a regime is a paradoxical one!
2. Considering the general sense of the contracts, any kind of conditions that opposes and contradicts the text and purport of the contract, will cause the contract to be invalid and void.
The examples below may make the matter clearer:
The content of the contract is divided in four categories:
- Ownership of the essence/substance (`ayn)
- Ownership of the benefit/profit (manfa`ah)
- Ownership of the exploitation (intifa')
- The right of receiving enjoyment (istimta`)
Instances:
1. Such as the (act of) purchase and sale
2. Such as the contract of renting /leasing
3. Such as the contract of borrowing
4. Such as the matrimonial contract
The instance of the first kind is dealing (purchase and sale) and the compromise that has the ordinances/ injunctions of the purchase and sale. The content of such a contract is that the vendor becomes the possessor of the price, while the buyer becomes the owner of the commodity. The content of purchasing contract is the possession of the substance (`ayn), while in renting; the content of the lease is the possession of the profit (manfa`ah) (for the lessor/landlord) and not the substance.
He, who takes a commercial unit or a residential one on lease, it denotes that the property itself is for the lessor, however, in exchange for the lease, the leaseholder becomes the owner of the profit of it.
The third kind that is the ownership of the exploitation is that when, for instance, the borrowing contract was signed, the borrower that, for instance has borrowed a vessel that is the loaner has given the borrower the loan of it.
And this contract/agreement was done either verbally or practically (mu`aataat) the borrower can exploit that vessel but is not the owner of its profit.
This case is different from hiring a vessel from the stores that let out vessels and kitchen utensils. For, in these cases one owns the profits of the vessels while he who borrows a vessel from his/her neighbor is the owner of the exploitation of it and not the profit of it.
In the contract of matrimony the husband possesses the right of receiving enjoyment by the marriage formula (contract) and becomes the mahram (ritually intimate) with his spouse.
The question that is raised now is that in case a forbidden condition that does not contradict the necessity of the contract whether or not invalidates the contact.
Some jurisprudents hold that the forbidden condition does not invalidate a contract, although it contradicts the Book of God, and also is invalid (fasid); but in the event that a condition contradicts the explicit text of the contract (neither opposing the general application of the contract nor its requisite) there is not controversy that such a condition is both invalid and invalidating the contract.
For instance, the two parties stipulate within the deal contact that a party sells a house to the latter party provided that the buyer does not become the owner of the house! Or on the condition that the vendor does not own the price of it!
Such a condition that contradicts the necessity of the contact is both invalid and invalidating the contract.
Another instance is that, one leases a trade or a residential unit provided that the lessee does not own its profit, and that at the same time the landlord does not possess the rent!
The third instance is that one lends a vessel on the condition that the borrower does not have the authority of exploitation.
The fourth instance is that the contract of matrimony is arranged is such a way that it is conditioned within it that the spouses do not become ritually intimate (mahram) with one another.
All of the above conditions contradict the necessity of the contract and consequently are invalid and they invalidate the contract.
Some (of the jurisprudents say that) the issue of wilayat al-Faqih is same as these cases, that is, the people sign a contract (election) with the fully qualified jurisprudent and undertake mutually and vote that they do not possess the vote and will not interfere the contracts. For, the meaning of the wilayah is that all the authority is in the hands of the wali-e faqih, and the people are under the guardianship, are interdicted, and have not the authority to comment.
And they conclude that these kinds of referendums and elections are invalid and necessarily invalidating, for, they contradict the content of the contract and the mutual undertaking, and consequently, the referendums held so far are invalid and invalidating, and the government in which they resulted in are invalid. And also, all kinds of the deals whether local or international are invalid.
The Answer
It is true that a condition that contradicts the necessity of the contract/pact is invalid (fasid) and corrupter (mufsid), but two points should not be neglected: First, the term wilayah having the meaning of supervision and being a wali is separated from the wilayah discussed under the topic of interdiction (hajr) in the Islamic jurisprudence.
If one speaks about the issues of the Islamic government, the Islamic policy, and the trusteeship of the jurisprudent (wilayat al-faqih), he should totally dispense with the wilayah (guardianship) upon the immature, the dead, and so on and should just think of the verse (Quran: V, 57).
Whatever this holy verse carries as a message, it is true first for the prophets, then the Infallible Imams, and then their special deputies, such as Muslim ibn `Aqil and Malik Ashtar, and then for those who are appointed generally by them, like the late Imam Khomeini.
Secondly, both the opponents and pro-wilayat al-faqih have accepted two instances of wilayah of the fully qualified jurisconslut.
The first instance is that when the people accept an authority (that is a leading jurisprudent), do they select him as their attorney (wakil) or as wali in fatwa?
Indeed, the religion has appointed the fully qualified jurisprudent for this position, whether the people refer to him or not, but to put this appointment in practice depends upon the acceptance of the people.
Many a time a fully qualified jurisprudent that can be a leading faqih (jurisprudent), but since he has not made himself known, or the people do not know him by one reason or another, therefore, his authorization will not be put into practice, at the same time another faqih having the same scientific conditions my be welcomed and accepted by the people.
Now the question is that such a person that is recognized as the authority, whether is the attorney of the people, or he has been appointed this position by God, but since the people have found such a merit and quality in him so, they have referred to him. Therefore, such a person cannot be their attorney at all, for the attorney does not posses any authority, unless the people entitle it to him by establishing the contract of empowering. The approval of the power of attorney is conditioned to the establishment of empowering by the people, while concerning the approval of being an authority it is not like that the people and the followers submit him the office of being an authority.
Another instance is the judgment of the fully qualified jurisprudent during the period of occultation. It has been acclaimed by all, that the fully qualified jurisprudent has the right of judging. Is the fully qualified jurisprudent in the position of judgment the attorney of the people? Has the religion of Islam appointed him judge? [The true answer is that] he is the judge, and the people give no positions to him. If the people refer to him and accept him, then his judgment will be put into practice.
These two instances are not of the kind of the power of attorney, rather are a part of trusteeship (wilayah), that is the fully qualified jurisprudent being an authority, is the wali of decree (fatwa) and not the people’s attorney (wakil) in issuing a decree (ifta) for his followers. Such an authority should be submitted obligatorily. The same is true for the fully qualified jurisprudent that is a judge, the difference is that one of them informs/advises (ikhbar) while the latter establishes (insha'); like a fully qualified jurisprudent that has occupied the position of judgment and issues decrees.
So the people refer to positions that the religion has granted/allocated to the fully qualified jurisprudent and realized them and then recognized them. If the fully qualified jurisprudent has a worldly reputation – like Shaykh Ansari – then there will be no need to testimony/certification of two just witnesses.
The followers can refer to him directly. In case several scholars equal from the aspect of justice, or one was more knowledgeable than the others but was not as famous as the rest, then the people consult the experts to know who is the most knowledgeable or who equal with one another. So in these cases when one refers to a scholar in fact he has recognized his authority position. It is not true that he has given that scholar the authority, therefore, that attorney of the people in giving decree or in judgment.
This acclamation of the people is not power of attorney; rather it is the acceptance of wialyah.
If, for instance, the people accept/recognize the authority of a person provided that to be silent and submissive in lieu of his jurisprudential decrees, is this condition opposing the exigency/necessity of this pact?
If some people accept the position of judgment of a fully qualified jurisprudent and declared within their acceptance that they trust (in) the judgment and the sovereignty of his juridical system, provided that they be silent and submissive against the decrees given by him, then is this condition opposing /contradicting the exigency/necessity of such a pact?
If the people selected a group as experts to introduce to them the competent leading authority, are these selections and voting contradicting the recognition /acceptance of the authority and being silent and submissive before the decrees (fatwas) of the authority?
So those who oppose the wilayat al-faqih, accept two samples of the fully qualified jurisprudent, but dispute in the third sample, that is the trusteeship (wilayah) upon the community and the policy declaring that this kind of voting to a jurisprudent is equal to lack of voting, and that this condition contradicts the necessity of the pact.
(As the answer) we say that when the fully qualified jurisprudent became (was elected/designated as) the waali of the community, and the elite wise and intellectual people acclaimed his wilayah, and declared that the (Divine) command (Quran: V, 57) is originally for the Infallible Imam, and then for his special deputy, and in the event that the special deputy was not available, then it will be for the common deputy in the third rank. The also state that they have accepted the wilayah of them (the Imam or his deputies) to act according the Book of God and the Sunnah of his Apostle. Does this indicate that whatever business/deals that jurisconslult has made, or the contracts and pacts he has established are of the interfering types and consequently invalid?!
The fact is that, the people have accepted the religion and believe that they have no votes opposite it, and since they are elite they say that they have not another statement in front of God, and they do not practice independent reasoning (ijtihad) against the clear terms (nass).
When a person accepts the religion, this acceptance is the truth. When he verified the religion and realized that it is the truth, and then accepted it, therefore, admits that the fatwas of the religion are the truth and his will does not contradict the truth, and that he does not possess any ijtihad in front of the nass.
The believers that acclaimed the wilayah of Imam Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, did they accept him as their attorney? Or they recognized him as their wali?
God, the Exalted, said to the Prophet: (O’ Our Apostle Muhammad
Deliver them what hath been sent down unto thee from thy Lord (Quran: V, 70)
He communicated the message of God to the people saying: " For whomever I am the authority and guide, Ali is also his guide and authority."
The people accepted saying: "May this position be pleasing to you O' the Commander of the Faithful!"
And gave him their allegiance. Did they designate him as their attorney, indicating that the Imam had no positions without the vote of the people?! Or did they recognize him as their wali? If one holds that Imam Ali was the attorney of the people, it means that so long as the people have not voted to him and have not recognized, he will have no rights, while, if we hold that he was appointed by God, then he has the right and authority of guardianship (and supervision), and (consequently) the people recognized this fact and accepted it.
Therefore, (it is concluded that) any kind of the contracts the Islamic waali signs or it is signed on his behalf, is in accordance with a good will of the people, for the people recognized that this school of thought is true, and voted in its favor, and appointed one who knows this school of thought well, believes in it, and is the executer of it, as the responsible of this task; indeed, they have accepted his responsibility, so, it is not the case of empowering him. Such a condition never contradicts the necessity of the contract.
It is concluded that, firstly, the power of attorney (wikalah) differs from trusteeship (wilayah); secondly, the wilayah is divided into several kinds, thirdly, the wilayah that is propounded in the issue of governing and ruling is not of the kind of wilayah discussed in the chapter of "the interdiction", rather it is of the kind discussed in the holy verse "Verily, your guardian is (none else but) Allah and …” (Quran: V, 57), fourthly, both positions are true for the jurisprudent , but one is (given) originally while the other one is subordinately and as a deputy.
Therefore, if one states that the fully qualified jurisprudent is the Imam's attorney (wakil), it is true, and if he states that he (the jurisprudent) is the attorney, or the deputy of or appointed by Imam Mahdi, it is also true; but if he states that the fully qualified jurisprudent is an attorney on behalf of the people or is appointed by them, this would be a false statement.
The difference among these four matters is that, the Infallible Imam and (particularly) Imam Mahdi- may our lives be scarified for him - can do two tasks:
One option is that he appoints a person to represent him (the Imam) and to act as his attorney to do certain tasks; it means that he becomes the Imam’s attorney and deputy; this is true. Another option is that he establishes the trusteeship (wilayah) for a person. For instance, in the event that there are endowed properties that are lacking of a custodian (due to his death or because a custodian has not been appointed for it so far), the Imam appoints a custodian for it. This is the establishment of trusteeship (wilayah) for him.
In case, an authority (a leading mujtahid) empowered a person or persons, once this authority dies, the power of attorney of his attorney will be nullified, for, the validity of the power of attorney is dependent upon the life of the client (i.e. the authority); while if that authority appoints a person as the custodian of a certain endowed property, the custodianship of him will endure continuously even after the death of that authority. So, to empower is different from the establishment of trusteeship.
These are two instances in which the Infallible Imam can both empower a person (i.e. as his attorney) and establish the trusteeship for a person. But the people have not the authority in neither of these tasks concerning the religious issues. It is not true that the people empower the leading authority, or establish the office of trusteeship (wilayah) for him. The people neither establish the power of attorney in the judgment for the fully qualified jurisprudent, so that he becomes their attorney to be a judge, nor they establish the office of trusteeship for judging so that he becomes the custodian of judgment, and to have the trusteeship upon judgment on behalf of the people.
Rather the offices that the religion has granted to the fully qualified jurisprudents, whether the people accept or not, that jurisprudent possesses this authority in a demonstrating manner (thuboutan), but the intellectual pious people identify the individuals that deserve such offices, then recognize and accept the office of one who is fully qualified. As it is the recognition and acceptance in the discussion of the position of an authority (marji`iyyah) and not the empowering, concerning the jurisprudent that has trusteeship upon the people, the discussion is also the recognition and acceptance and not the empowering.
In some cases the people accept the trusteeship of the Special Deputy (of the Imam), like those who accepted the wilayah of Muslim ibn `Aqil and Malik ibn Ashtar. As they accept the trusteeship of the General Deputy in the other cases.
So, it is not true that trusteeship of the jurisprudent is an invalid condition and invalidates the contract so that the local and international treaties of the Islamic System to be unauthorized.
So, it has been (clearly) concluded in brief that the wilayah discussed in the Holy Quran and in the traditions in some cases denote undertaking the affairs of a dead (deceased) or he who is tantamount to him/her; and in the other cases it means the tenure of the affairs of the community.
The following contain two series of some Quranic verses for instance, concerning the two different meanings:
- The verses indicating the wilayah upon a dead (deceased) or he who is tantamount to him/her:
1.A. The wilayah upon a dead (deceased)
And whoever is slain unjustly, then indeed have We given his heir the authority by God that surely we will suddenly attack by night, him and his family, and then surely we would say unto his heir we witnessed not the murder of his family, … (Quran: XXVII, 49)
1.B. the wilayah upon the interdicted who are tantamount to a dead
But if he who oweth be witless or infirm, or if he be not able to dictate himself then let his guardian dictate justly … (Quran: II, 282)
They said: “Swear ye to one another by God that surely we will suddenly attack by bight, him and his family, and then surely we would say unto his heir we witnessed not the murder of his family, …” (Quran: XXVII, 49)
- The verses denoting the trusteeship (wilayah) upon the Islamic Community:
"Verily, your guardian is (none else but) Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad) and those who believe, - those who establish prayer and pay the poor-rate, while they be (even) bowing down (in prayer)." (Quran: V, 57)
“The Prophet (Muhammad) hath a greater claim on the believers that they have on their own selves …” (Quran: XXXIII, 6)
Either kinds of wilayah has its respective terms and conditions (ordinances) that were discussed in this article in brief. Wilayat al-Faqih is of the second kind. Therefore, it is not at all the question of being the Islamic Community an interdicted one; and none of the ordinances of the wilayah upon the interdicted – discussed in the Islamic jurisprudence including the chapters of the funerals, taking reprisals, reduction (of the punishment), pardon, blood-money, wali of the blood of the slayed (maqtoul), or the chapter of the interdiction - are applicable in this case.
Grand Ayatollah Jawadi Amuli
Imam reza network

War and Peace in Islam

“In the name of Allah Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Verily We have granted you a manifest Victory.”
We are here in this spiritual gathering today to commemorate two great occasions; the passing away of the most noble creature of God, the Holy Prophet of Islam (saww), and the martyrdom of the second infallible Imam, the first grandson of the Prophet; Imam Hasan (a.s.).
The topic I am going to deal with today is “Peace and War in Islam” a very controversial issue nowadays. The reason I have chosen this topic is
that unfortunately there is a misunderstanding among some Shiites who don’t have enough Islamic education. They assume that Imam Hasan was a man of peace whereas Imam Husain was a man of war. As a result, conservatives praise Imam Hasan and claim to be his followers, while the extremists blame Imam Hasan and accuse him of seeking a comfortable life. Imam Husain, on the other hand, is an extremist for the first group and a role model for the second. According to the second group, armed struggle is the only duty upon every Muslim, he is Yazidian otherwise.
This argument in fact goes back to the question of whether Islam is the religion of peace or does it advocate for war? In other words, was Islam in its early days spread by sword or were there other factors involved? Is Islam the religion of violence or it is the religion of peaceful coexistence? Are Muslims allowed to sign any peace treaty with a non Islamic state that they are in conflict with, or they are bound to fight, whatever the circumstances are?
These and many such questions have occupied the minds and the time of many contemporary intellectuals.
It may not be an exaggerated claim that many people in the West hold that Islam is a terrorist religion and hence the term Islam sounds obnoxious to them. Such a false belief, to the best of my knowledge, is one of the main barriers between Westerners and real Islam. Should they become familiar with the true image of Islam regarding war and peace, I can assert many of them who are already perplexed and seeking asylum would embrace Islam. Such an illusion has not of course come to their mind out of the blue. Millions of dollars have, and are still being allocated by the enemies of Islam, especially in the last decades to inject this illusion into the minds of people, to introduce Islam, as a frightful evil which no one would be daring enough to get close to.
To cut a long story short, we believe Islam in its nature is a peaceful religion advocating a wise coexistence. The following are some of the proofs that wars have never been the cause for the spread of Islam:
1. Indonesia is the most populated Islamic state with more than 100 million Muslims. Yet, there has never been any Islamic military attack to that country.
2. Millions of Muslims in China are worshipping Allah and yet, Islam has never entered China by military force.
3. Many African countries as well as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, have all embraced Islam without being forced by any Islamic groups.
4. In the contemporary world, many people in the West, from black Americans, including their inmates, as well as Europeans including their migrants, to Australians, New Zealanders to Aborigines are coming towards and embracing Islam without any military force.
5. The Mongol leader Genghis Khan was one of the great conquerors in the history of the world, born C.1167. In his series of destructive, savagely and bloody invasions of much of the Asian mainland, he invaded Iran which was an Islamic state by then. Yet, after one or two generations instead of Iranian Muslims being converted to the Mongolian religion, they themselves embraced Islam.
6. Many Ayat as well as Ahadith in different ways and means condemn all types of corruption on earth. Needless to say, human wars and the shedding of blood are one of the best examples of corruption.
Q. With all respect to the previous proofs, still we do have some examples of Islam being spread by the sword. Iran is one of the vivid examples which was conquered by Muslim Arabs in early Islam. As a result, Iranians had to become Muslims and give up their previous religion, i.e. Zoroastrianism.
A. Hundreds of wars have taken place in the history of mankind, yet the conquerors have never been able to force their religion upon the conquered peoples, as the Mongolians failed to do so. Hence, Iranians did not embrace Islam because of the sword of Muslims. As a matter of fact, it is impossible to penetrate into the hearts of people by sword. The power of the sword is not more than for cutting the flesh. The sword is not capable of influencing the conscience and the belief of human beings. In short, the main reason for people like Iranians accepting Islam rests on other issues. Iranians were impressed by the justice found in Islam, after being sick of the vicious discrimination from the Sasanian dynasty.
Types of War
Although Islam is the religion of peace, and unlike some of the Western thinkers, such as Freud and Nitche, who did not acknowledge war as a natural phenomenon in human life, Islam prescribes war under a few circumstances.
In general, there are two types of war.
1. War in the sense of blood shedding, murdering, massacres and plundering for the sake of power, as a struggle for survival.
2. War in the sense of protecting the life of the innocent by destroying the evil people who try to destroy human life and wisdom. Such a war is like a surgical operation for the sake of saving the rest of the body by amputating the decayed organ or limb. The sword of Islam is nothing more than a surgical knife in the hands of a wise surgeon. It is like a small shovel to uproot the weeds from the gardens of humanity.
To this end, war in Islam is not only a form of worship, but holy worshipping.
The Islamic Jihad (holy war) has never been mentioned in the Quran without having the preliminary statement ‘for the sake of God’. That, then, is what makes Islamic wars different from other types of human war which are fought for the sake of power, sovereignty and profit.
Peace in Islam
Since the man of Islam has surrendered to Allah, he is a warrior when war is required, based on the above explanation, and he is the most peaceful person when it is time for peace.
The Holy Quran in Sura 8 Aya 61 states: “And if the enemy incline towards peace, you should also incline towards peace, and trust in Allah..”
The history of Islam has presented many examples in which the Holy Prophet (saww), as well as his infallible successors have welcomed peace when it would be of benefit to the Ummah. Islamic victory does not necessarily mean fighting and conquering. If the victory can be gained in a peaceful way, then war is not prescribed in Islam. Therefore, to be a warrior or a peaceful man in Islam depends upon the circumstances in which a man of Islam finds himself.
Two vivid examples of peace in Islam
1. The Peace of Hodaybiah: Hodaybiah is a small village near to Mecca in which the treaty between the Prophet and the infidels of Qoraysh was concluded in the year 6 AH.
In short, in the year 6AH the Prophet along with his companions who it is estimated were around 1600 people, left Madina to pilgrimage to Hajj. As part of their good will, and to show that their only reason for the journey was the performance of Hajj, they did not carry any weapons. However, the Qoraysh, who were informed of the Muslims journey, took an oath that they would not allow Muslims to enter Mecca. The Holy Prophet sent an ambassador to them with some gifts, explaining to them that the Muslims did not wish to confront the Qoraysh. In return, the Qoraysh killed the camel of the ambassador, and death, too, was close for the ambassador himself.
For the second time the Prophet appointed another ambassador to deliver the message. Omar Ibn Khattab was the appointed one, though he refused, his excuse being that many of the Qoraysh hated him and his life may be danger.
Finally, a treaty was made between the Qoraysh and the Prophet, named the Treaty of Hodybiah. The scribe of the treaty was Imam Ali (a.s.). He initiated the treaty with the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. The agent of the Qoraysh objected to that, saying: if we believed in Allah we would not fight you. The name was omitted. Again, when the name of the Prophet was mentioned in the treaty as the messenger of Allah, the agent of Qoraysh objected saying : ‘If we believed you were the messenger of Allah we wouldn’t fight you’.
In short, although most parts of that treaty seemed against Muslims, the Prophet did not reject it, for that situation required peace which could later bring greater victory that sometimes may not be gained by the sword. Ignoring this fact, Ibn Hisham, the famous historian has narrated that upon acceptance of the peace treaty, Omar Ibn Khattab objected to it, going to the Prophet and surprisingly, questioning him as to whether he was the messenger of God!
-Yes, I am, replied the Prophet.
- Aren’t we Muslims ?
-Yes, said the Prophet.
-Aren’t they infidels ?
- Yes, added the prophet.
- Then why should we humiliate ourselves?
The Holy Prophet said: “I am the servant of God and His messenger and will never disobey Him, as He will never leave me alone.30”
Although the treaty seemed bitter to the taste of some of the Muslims who were not able to foresee the future, nor did they surrender to God, it paved the way for many great victories, to the extent that the Holy Quran has mentioned that treaty as a vivid victory: “Indeed, We have granted you a manifest victory”. In fact, the treaty of Hodaybiah paved the way to conquer Mecca as well as Khaybar in two years time. Muslims strengthened themselves and within two years easily interred Mecca; the capital of the infidels of Qoraysh. To this end, Imam Sadiq (a.s.) says: There was no event in the history of Islam, as blissful as the treaty of Hodaybiah.
2. The Peace treaty of Imam Hasan (a.s.)
The peace treaty between Imam Hasan and Mo’awia is one of the bitter events in the history of Islam. This treaty has even been used by some of the adversaries to blame and accuse Imam Hasan of being a man who was, God forbid, seeking his material comfort to the extent that some of them have shamelessly accused him of blasphemy. In fact, the state of Imam Hasan’s oppression is more than that of his brother Imam Husain. For, Imam Hasan was oppressed by both his companions and those historians partial to Ahlul-Bait .
Safadi shamelessly says: “(Imam) Hasan Ibn Ali said to Mo’awia that he had a debt. If Mo’awia would pay his loan off, then he was willing to give up the Caliphate to him. Mo’awia paid off his loan and Hasan Ibn Ali gave up the Caliphate to Mo’awia.”( Safadi : Sharh Laamia 2:27)
Dr. Philip Hitti following Safadi with utmost impudence says: “People of Iraq appointed Hasan Ibn Ali, who was the oldest son of Ali and Fatima the daughter of the Prophet to be their spiritual leader. However, Hasan, who was a pleasure seeking person!, not a statesman, was not suitable for the position and hence resigned being satisfied with an annual ration he received from Mo’awia”.(Philip Hitti, Al-Arab. p. 78)
The followers of Mo’awia have never provided any historical documents for their false claims.
The Causes of Peace
Before shedding some light on the reasons why Imam Hasan was forced to agree to the Peace Treaty, we should ask ourselves:
Did not the Prophet of Islam sign a peace treaty with the infidels? Of course he did. So, can we say the Prophet (saww) was, God forbid, a man seeking pleasure and not a statesman? Was not Imam Ali, the courageous man of Islam, forced to accept the peace treaty which was imposed on him in the battle of Seffin? Moreover, no doubt, peace is accepted in Islam when the circumstances allow, as I have already explained.
Above all, it is a big mistake to assume that making peace with the enemy is equal to seeking pleasure but that constant fighting is courage and bravery. In contrast, the man of Islam is seeking God’s satisfaction. His reason for fighting is the same as his reason for making peace. To him, both peace and war are to be used in their due place. Therefore, different circumstances require different treatment and strategy. Do not forget that Imam Husain who is known to us for his courageous devotion in Karbala, continued the peace strategy of his brother with Mo’awia for ten years. In short, there is no single difference between our Imams. Had either of them been in the other’s situation, he would have done the same. It is the circumstances which make the difference.
By the way, among many reasons which forced Imam Hasan to accept the Peace Treaty, the following were the main ones:
1. The rumor of peace:
Cold War is one of the methods used in wars. Spreading rumors against the enemy and weakening the morale of the opposing soldiers has always been one of the methods of defeating the enemy.
Mo’awia, utilising this method, appointed some of his spies to spread rumours among the army of Imam Hasan to the effect that the Imam had corresponded with Mo’awia accepting peace.( Ibn Abil-Hadid 4:13-15) The army of Imam Hasan was impressed so much by the rumors that some of them accused Imam Hasan of blasphemy saying: “The man has become an infidel!”
2. Division, Impatience and tending to material pleasures:
Imam Hasan, prior to accepting the peace, delivered a lecture to the public explaining to them the reasons behind their being defeated by Mo’awia.
One part of the lecture reads:
“We were fighting people of Damascus by the power of coexistence, unity and patience, until you were divided and lost your patience. Before, you used to prefer your belief to your material comfort, and now your material comfort is what you care for. Mo’awia has invited us to a peace treaty in which you will lose your dignity. Nevertheless, if you are willing
to sacrifice, then we will fight him.” The crowd shouted: “Accept the peace. Accept the peace.”( Ibn Athir, Al-Kaamil 3:406)
In fact, Mo’awia had purchased the high officers of Imam Hasan. Obaidullah Ibn Abbas was the first commander of Imam Hasan and yet, Mo’awia was able to buy him with one million Dirhams, half to be paid cash and the rest on credit. The companions of Imam Hasan were so unfaithful that they even made attempts upon his life. If the tents of Imam Husain were plundered by his enemies face-to-face, the tent of Imam Hasan was plundered by his own so-called soldiers. They pulled away the mat on which he was praying. If Imam Husain was wounded by the arrows of the army of Yazid, Imam Hasan was wounded by his own officer Jarrah Ibn Senan. It was under such circumstances that Imam Hasan accepted the peace. He then carried on another mission, i.e.: to train faithful soldiers, if not for his time, they were trained for the time of his brother, Imam Husain who was going to carry the same message. As a matter of fact, the peace treaty that Imam Hasan agreed upon, paved the way for the revolution made by Imam Husain.
To this end, the Holy Prophet (saww) is quoted to have said: “Hasan and Husain are both Imams, whether they rise up or sit down.”
Slow Death
After accepting the peace, Imam Hasan left Kofa forever for Madina. After which, he opened another chapter in his life.
At this stage, he was gradually being sacrificed. Unlike a soldier in the battle front who has a quick death, the dear Imam suffered a slow death throughout 10 years.
During the last 10 years of his life he carried yet another mission. The Ummah was not prepared to fight the devil. They needed to be educated and that was the mission of the Imam. Despite the rumors that Mo’awia was spreading against the Imam, his personality was an influence on people.
Such great men as our infallible Imams reach a point where both their lives and deaths are a real threat to the oppressors. They attempt to destroy their personalities by spreading rumors against them. But their transcendental personalities are too high to be reached by those devils.
Mo’awia was encountering this puzzle which had made him confused, until a vicious plot was arranged. He bribed Jo’dah, the wife of the Imam who was suffering from the inferiority of infertility, to poison her husband.
Half a century had passed since the migration of the Prophet, and the Imam was at the age of 47.
On a day whilst fasting, Jo’dah poisoned the cup of milk with which Imam Hasan was supposed to break his fasting. Immediately after drinking the milk, the poison corrupted his digestive system and the Imam faced death. He called upon his brother Imam Husain. These were the last seconds of the life of Imam Hasan… two brothers cordially hugging each other. This was one time that Imam Husain hugged one of his brothers. The second time was at Karbala when Abbas called upon Husain while both his arms were brutally chopped off…
Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Source: Imam reza network

Muslim Ummah at the Threshold of 21st Century

(This is translation of an article by Prof. Khurshid Ahmad published in Tarjumanul Qur'an, November,1997)
Twentieth Century is moving swiftly towards its end. It started when Western colonial powers had gained strength at world level. It was also the time when mechanization started and the might of steam engine had totally dominated minds of these powers. Industrial movement, French revolution, freedom of USA coupled with its economic attainments and the wide spread invincibility notion attached to Western powers, were the important events of that time. In short, the whole world and particularly the Islamic world (a world power before and after renaissance) came under total spell of European powers during the first quarter of 20th century.
Britain alone controlled a quarter of the world major part of which comprised of Muslim territory. Britain had a vanity that it was controlling the sea all-over the world and that sun never set on its dominion. France had under its control a third of Africa besides a good number of Far-Eastern states. Even countries like Italy, Spain and Portugal were controlling a number of places around the world. The colonial powers were using resources of the whole world to strengthen their economic, political and cultural dominance. Similarly, Tzarist Russia had under its thumb the Central Asian States (a galaxy of republics, which once symbolized epitome of Islamic glory.
Lost Grounds
The whole Muslim Ummah was under the autocracy of Western powers with no hope and signs of improvement from anywhere. Turkish Ottoman Empire (a symbol of Islamic world power with its borders stretching from Morocco to Central Europe (had become the "Sick-Man" of Europe. Balkan wars and World War I had forced her to retreat and ultimately confined to a limited area around Anatolia. Even here the great empire had to fight for survival and was coerced to adopt secularism in guise of Kamalism. It had to compromise on elimination of Ottoman Empire and destroy its historical, religious and cultural identity to secure political and geographical entity.
For the Middle East the Western colonial powers had a horrible plan. Pan-Arab nationalism and lust for power were the destructive instruments applied to snatch political freedom from the Middle-Eastern Muslim rulers. About a dozen powerless states under the European command emerged on world map as a result of Sykes-Picot Agreement (1916) and Balfour Declaration (1917).
As such, the plan was to divide Middle East into pieces on one hand and on the other to create conditions facilitating creation of a Jewish state among Arabs. The machination ultimately bore fruit and Israel was established in the heart of Muslim Ummah with due understanding among USA, UK and USSR with connivance of UN. This way, all those rulers, tribes and people who once enjoyed power, pelf and freedom were eliminated from world politics forever. Muslims, who enjoyed world leadership status for more than 12 centuries, were thus deprived of this position for the first time in history. Except in a few semi-independent states (Afghanistan, Turkey, Yemen and Arab Peninsula), the Muslim might and political authority - the symbols of Muslim Ummah's dignity – was totally eliminated from around the globe.
Future Perspective
These were the conditions under which the Muslim Ummah entered into the 20th century. Now, when we review the past 100 years' political conditions of Muslims, we find signs of hope since revival and the struggle of the Muslim Ummah has set in all spheres of life. This resurgence has no other explanation but what the Qur'an Says: "and (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and God too planned, and the best of planners is God." (S III-54)
The colonial powers had planned to make Muslim Ummah ineffective forever. But history stands witness that if Muslims retreated at a front they demonstrated strength at another, e.g., when Baghdad was destroyed, Muslims were dominating power in Africa and Spain; the weakness of Arabs was compensated by the advancement of Central Asian Muslim states; the destruction of Haspania and surrender in Qartabah and Gharnatah was equated by bringing Constantinopal under the command of Ottoman empire which symbolized the 'Rise of Islam.'
During this period Muslims captured vast areas of Asia and Africa. This important feature of Muslim history has disrupted in the recent past. But just as a day follows the night, the Muslim Ummah during the past five decades have, to a large extent, overcome the miserable conditions of the past and started reform at world level.
At present Muslim population is about 1.6 billion which makes roughly 22 per cent of world population. About 1000 million Muslims live in 56 Muslim states and are part of UN and OIC. The rest 600 million Muslim are spread in different countries. There is hardly any place on earth, which is not inhabited by Muslims. A significant number of Muslims (200 million) live in India.
In Europe and America, Muslim population though insignificant in the past has now increased manifold. Widespread migrations at world level have introduced Muslims to those areas, which hitherto stood untended for centuries from the teachings of Islam. Numerical strength plus the Muslim states' geographical location have given Muslim a strategic position in today's world.
Seen in the geo-strategic outlook, the politically independent Muslim states virtually command one-fourth of the world; from Morocco to Indonesia and Kazakhstan to Turkey and Bosnia. Muslim bloc can be divided into two big geographical zones; one, a large chain starting from Morocco/Senegal and through Pakistan entering Central Asia, and two; the most important zone of Bangladesh, Malaysia and Indonesia.
The two zones are of strategic importance for all sea, land and air transport routes. Dead Sea, Red Sea and Caspian are in the center of Muslim states. A number of Muslim countries have seacoasts on Indian and Atlantic Oceans. The important sea gateways like Damial, Suez, Port Said, Djibouti and Aden are under Muslim control. Muslim world is impregnate with important economic resources like agriculture, oil, electricity, coal, iron, uranium, tin, rubber, copper, etc. About 1/4th of the Muslim world is not simply in a position to achieve sustained economic growth and provide adequate education and other social infrastructure to their citizens, but can also play an important role in the economic and technological development of brother Muslim countries, e.g.
Turkey has the skill to manufacture F-16 fighter planes; Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Kazakhstan have economic strength to help other Muslim countries financially; Pakistan, despite strong Western resistance, has successfully advanced with its peaceful nuclear energy agenda in a period almost half that other countries might take, and; the change in oil prices of 1972 and 1980 has tilted the balance of economic strength towards Islamic countries. In nutshell, we can safely conclude that the strength and centrality which the Muslim Ummah enjoy today has no match in its history (a fact which should never be ignored. It is another sore subject why Muslim world could not take full advantage of its present powerful position on the world checkerboard.
Materializing the Goal
Only human resource development or political and economic strength is not enough to achieve the cherished goal. Most important aspect is the brainy movement to direct and portray the religious and ideological identity of Muslim Ummah. This century can rightly be termed the century of Islamic revival; political and economic aspects being mere parts of it. The plight of Muslims climaxed at the close of 20th century and so did the revival. In fact, it was the lowliness of Muslim Ummah, which touched many Muslim thinkers’ minds and souls who attended to the urgent call and engaged themselves to find cause of Muslim downfall and to identify measures for revival.
The enemies of Islam assumed that by politically dominating the Muslims; dividing them into small states, nationalities and tribes; imposing secular system through secular rulers; and by crafting Western political, economic, educational and cultural agendas, Muslim Ummah can be neutralized for ever. But the ultimate prudence of God Almighty was different. The sense of extreme deprivation played the role of activator.
The modernist liberal West could not liquidate Muslim Ummah’s strong Islamic creed. After doing away with the slavery, the Muslim Ummah started struggle for revival and reverted to its roots. The great Muslim scholars of the recent times urged the Ummah to submit to the will of God Almighty and strictly follow the teachings of Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Qur’an and the Hadith (the pious traditions set by the Prophet) were dignified as the cornerstone of the movement. In order to eliminate slavery and make Shari’ah (Islamic precepts of religion) supreme, efforts were made to interpret Islamic principles so as to meet the modern day requirements.
The causes of Ummah’s descent were identified while at the other end hollowness of Western Hedonistic philosophy was fully exposed. The Muslim scholars were successful in highlighting Western powers' strong points which had such a damaging impact on culture, ideology and moral values of Muslim society. Principles of Islam for self-reliance and development were reincarnated. And history proved the dictum that Islam has an in built natural flexibility which helps it to react with full force against oppression.
The current Islamic resurgence comprises of two very important aspects: First, its extensive manifestation in terms of:
Political emancipation;
Economic development;
Promotion of education;
Creation of new political and economic institutions such as Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), Islamic Development Bank (IDB), Islamic Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ICCI), International Islamic Universities (IIUs);
Integration of Islamic banks (presently 105 interest free banks with assets exceeding $80 billion operate around the globe);
Rejection of Western culture;
Search for means to extend cooperation and coordination among Muslim countries;
Creation of a number of similar other institutions which are symbols of unity of Muslim Ummah and indicators of their ideological awareness
Second and an equally important aspect is the rational which is the real force behind this comprehensive revival movement. In fact, it is this force, which have played the most significant role in changing the ideological and cultural pattern of Muslims virtually on entire globe. In the Indian Sub-Continent, movements led by Syed Ahmed Shaheed, Shah Ismail Shaheed and in Bengal the movement of Haji Shariatullah and then the efforts of Iltaf Hussain Hali, Shibli Naumani, Maulana Abuul Kalam Azad, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar reactivated Muslims on intellectual, moral, cultural and ultimately on political fronts. Revival movement of Allama Iqbal, Syed Maududi's literary and intellectual work and the leadership of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, all converged on a nation-wide political movement and ultimately resulted in creation of separate Muslim abode in 1947.
This nascent yet strong movement of the early half of 20th century gained ground in the later half and gradually spread all over the Islamic world. The Muslim nations started fighting for freedom from colonial powers with principle motive to protect and promote their Islamic identity. Some times it appeared as if nationalism was the fighting force for freedom, yet it is an acknowledged fact that even behind nationalism the one and the only force was resurgence of Islamic thought.
Kentole Smith in Islam and Modern History (Princeton University Press, 1957, p.77) admits: "Muslims have never accepted any concept of nationalism under which the principles of loyalties are outside the jurisdiction of Islam." He says: "besides (as far as Muslims are concerned) in the past only and only Islam has been the driving force which has provided to Muslims the discipline, strength, and desire for freedom."
Jamalud Din Afghani, Muhammad Abdullah, Muhammad Rashid Raza and the founder of Ikhwanul-Muslimoon, Imam Hasan-al-Banna Shaheed, led and promoted the revival movement in Arabic World. In Turkey, in the depressed secular state, Saeed Noorsi, Adnan Mandrees and Najmud Din Irbakan have kept alive the Islamic movement. In North Africa, Abdul Qadi, Ahmed Badees, Ibrahim Aljazairi, Sanosi Malik bin Banni and presently Abbas Madani, Ahmed Bilhajj, and Rahid Ghanoshi have strengthened the Islamic movement. Similarly, in Sudan, Mehdi Sudani followed by Inssar and Ikhwanul-Muslimoon have given life to the movement. And now under the dynamic leadership of Dr. Hassan Tarabi, Sudan is going through a unique experiment of Islamization. In Iran, the religious and popular movement of Imam Khomeini and Ayatullah Khamnaee has started a new era.
The Conflict Element
Essence of Islamic movement and the general revival of Islam at world level are the real forces which are shaping the future of Muslim Ummah. This is an era of conflict as a result of which a new epoch is emerging. But, certainly the Islamic movements are going to succeed in the future unlike the remains of colonialism which do not possess spark to revive. The Western nations and their friends consider Islam a danger primarily for this trait.
Once Communism is dead, personalities like Richard Nixon, Ronald Regan, ex-secretary general and the present secretary general of NATO, the policy makers, scholars and Western educationists, all portray Islamic revival movement as a threat. They are making last ditch efforts to create conflict situation between the West and the Muslim Ummah. The terrorist act at Oklahoma has been, without any justification, attributed to Islam. The American culprit's death sentence subsequently bespeaks the bias which Americans reserve for Muslims.
A Muslims majority Bosnian State is unacceptable to West as it holds central position in Europe. Procedures are applied to force Arabs agree to Israeli-styled peace. They are being forced to open their markets for Israel. As a result of Afghan war Eastern European nations now stand liberated; Berlin war has been erased to ground; Russia, is indebted to West and the World Bank; Central Asian Muslim States are free; and Communism at world level has totally shattered.
But, the people of Afghanistan are not allowed to take benefit of their struggle. Muslim heroes of Afghan war are now branded as fundamentalists. Arabs' highly praised participation in Afghan war, is now a stigma. Democracy, propagated globally, is denied per force to Algeria because the Islamic Movement has the potential to win elections. And all this is being done under the hocus pocus imaginary threat.
Muslim Ummah has no territorial conflict with the West rather it seeks its inherent right to develop individual and social life in accordance with its own set of religious doctrine, culture and history where family is central to real target for bringing change. But, this change is presented as a threat to the West.
The reason behind this expertly crafted notion is West’s inability to guide humanity in the right direction; its lack of knowledge and bigotry towards Islam. The experiment of secular culture has failed. Despite West’s total command over the world for about 500 years it could not establish an equitable and just system. There has certainly been a tremendous industrial growth and increase in wealth in the West but it was unable to provide welfare, justice and peace to mankind.
Even now 1/4th of the world population is without basic food. The West possess in itself the poverty problematic 14-15 per cent population. On average the unemployment is above 10 per cent. Despite spectacular achievements in the medical science, humanity confronts new and complex diseases. Western family structure has totally collapsed. The number of single-parent children (born without formal marriages) has exceeded above legal children.
The number of single family parent has reached 40 per cent and 30 per cent in USA and Europe, respectively. The rise in crime has seized the freedom of society and the younger generation is in particular morally corrupt. Material growth cradles mental-sickness and suicide which is on the rise. The historians hypothesize with fear that a civilization born of material growth is not conducive for human beings. Famous poet Iqbal says: "In spite of significant findings about Universe and control over nature through scientific development, the West could not eradicate the evils plaguing humanity."
In fact it is the weakness of the West which is making it fearful of the potential strength of Islam, otherwise, Muslims militarily, politically or economically pose no threat to it. The real conflict lies in ideology and moral values. This is an area where West is like a spent force with no new system or message for the humanity at hand. It is here that Islam has the potential to bring the humanity light and fresh thinking.
Islam has a message for humanity; a live message for their present living, a promise for attractive destiny and a glorious future. The spread of this message had neither been due to violent force in the past nor it needs such force today. In fact it is filling the gap where humanity is trapped. This is the real danger for the West, otherwise it is a total blessing for the humanity making no distinction between East and the West. Recently, The Economist (London), analyzed the past and future of mankind after the fall of Communism and dislodging of Berlin Wall. It particularly concluded that fall of Communism did not indicate any good message for the humanity. It was apprehended that fundamental Muslims and Christians believe that they have a new message for the humanity.
To portray Islam as potential danger for humanity is suicidal. The resurgent movement is a message which can save humanity and this movement has the potential to open a new era. Instead of treating it as a friend and great savior of humanity, it is being considered a danger and an enemy by the West.
The sagacious Western leadership must clearly understand that in Islam Jehad does not mean the use of brutal force. Jehad is the name given to that discipline and struggle which is applied to achieve the positive goals of life.
It is a constructive force which helps to achieve high human values. This was the force that was used by an ill-equipped Afghan army to push belligerent Russia off its shoulders and thus change the history and the course of time. And now this is the force behind Intifaadah movement in Palestine which has forced Israel to a point that it has to seek cooperation of PLO for peace. The same force has neutralized huge oppressing forces in Kashmir, Tajikistan and Chechnya. Henceforth, portraying such a liberating force as a negative one shall serve nothing to mankind.
Currently, USA is the greatest military power. With 6 per cent of population it controls about 25 per cent of world economic potential. In spite of this it could not overcome the ordinary men in Vietnam and preferred to retreat after the loss of about 50,000 troops. In the Middle-East war with Iraq, USA with its 29 allies, equipped with the most modern technology, had to employ about 40 per cent of its tactical Air Force and 70 per cent of tank power to ensure a minimum loss of life on its side. It was feared that only about 2,000 American coffins would have forced America to withdraw its forces. This happened in Somalia where America pulled out its army when 23 of its troops were killed.
Thus, the military force of the West is no guarantee to control the world. Things have significantly changed. A nation having firm belief, high moral values and the will to struggle and sacrifice can no more be deprived of its freedom.
Under the conditions explained above, it is quite obvious that Islam is the only constructive force for the future. Indeed much has yet to be done. It has to strengthen its moral values, gain intellectual creditability in order to motivate the masses.
It is also utmost desirable to get rid of those rulers of the Muslims countries who are under the influence of the West. Once the masses and the leadership work for the same ideology and destination and instead of confrontation the energies are used for new and positive objectives, change is sure to come. In order to achieve this objective firm belief, determination and continuos efforts are essentially required. God willing, the Ummah is going to have new and bright future in the 21st Century.
(This is translation of an article by Prof. Khurshid Ahmad published in Tarjumanul Qur'an, November,1997)
Khurshid Ahmad
Source: Imam reza network

The Divine Cultural Revolution

In the Name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate
Lord, open my breast, and ease for me my task. Unloose the knot upon my tongue that they may understand my words. May peace be upon the Messenger, the trustee and the firm rope of Allah, our Master and lord, the last of prophets, Abu 'l Qasim Muhammad (S); and peace be upon the immaculate Imams from his household. May peace be upon us and the righteous servants of Allah.
Man is a cultural being. Many thinkers regard man as an economic being more than anything else, and thus base all estimations on this judgement. Actually man is a cultural being. He creates a specific culture and desires to live with it. A human culture, however, has its roots and various dimensions. It has economic, emotional, spiritual and instinctive dimensions as well, which include his need for food, clothing and shelter, his craving for love and affection, his ambition for power and status, and his quest and pursuit of God.
If we carefully study the culture of an individual or of a society, we shall notice all these elements in it. Some of them may, however, be more conspicuous in certain societies. In some societies, religious and spiritual tendencies are predominant and play a decisive role, while in others the economic trends serve the same purpose. In some of the societies, ambition for power and position is displayed and in others the love for carnal pleasures is distinctly exhibited. In certain societies the aesthetic strains are more distinguished, while in others the tendencies of mammonism are more pronounced.
But what are the main factors responsible for influencing the human life and determining the character of his collective' culture? Which are its primary components and what form do they take in its constitution? What are its sources and what are the factors that determine the direction of its evolution?
The morality and behaviour of every individual are manifestation and expression of the collective entity which is culture. It is the sum total of our outlook, behaviour and norms. For this very reason, a person's world outlook, i.e. his attitude towards the world and towards the purpose of its creation, is regarded as the infrastructure of his behaviour. Some cultures regard man as a material being and consider the universe as a sheer material entity. According to this view, the human beings are born in this material course to grow, to live, to get old and die, or die before getting old. On the contrary, there is another view which holds that man's existence is more comprehensive than his physical existence, which is confined to a limited span of time between life and death. According to this view, the present life is only a phase of his existence, which transcends the limits of physical death. These different views cause people to differ in their outlooks regarding the problems of everyday life.
What is it that gives real meaning and purpose to human existence and is also relevant to our cultural revolution? What is the philosophy of life and the philosophy of being and becoming from the Islamic viewpoint? These are, of course, a series of familiar problems which I aim to deal with in a methodical way in order to reach the desired conclusion.
As Muslims, we believe that this physical and phenomenal world is the manifestation of the Creator of nature and matter. It is the manifestation of the creative fountainhead of life, God, the Source of all being, that exalted sublime Being, that infinite Power and that tremendous magnet that constantly attracts and aligns all being scattered through space and time. Any failure to harmonize themselves with His power transforms beings into meaningless insignificant and wandering non entities. In the case of human beings the relationship of man's alignment and union with Divine Essence is dependent upon man's choice and his self consciousness.
It is God who is the reality of being and the meaning of existence. Everything is meaningful only in the light of God's existence. To speak of a world without God, is like speaking in absurd and meaningless terms. Such is the view of a believer in God's existence, of a Muslim and a `natural man' regarding his relationship with the universe and its Creator. This is the conviction of a Muslim who believes in the Quran, in the Day of Resurrection and the Day of Judgement.
The Quran equally emphasizes both the worldly life and the life after death. According to the Quran, man's existence is subject to a lengthy course. Obviously, a person with such an outlook cannot plan his life within the framework of physical life and death, while planning his future; a realistic and foreseeing person makes schemes and plans. In the early five or six years of his life, he does not possess any plan regarding his future and merely lives in the present. It is about the age of thirteen or fifteen years that men attain enough maturity to think about their future and become aware enough to cogitate upon their future and prepare themselves to face it. This is the time when a person of foresight plans and programmes his life keeping in mind his wants and needs. However, the span of life in this world is just a section of man's real life, though most of the time he is engaged in the matters of this transitory life. The acts performed in this life are indicative of the life in the other world which is certainly much more long than the life in this world. Isn't it here, in this life, that he should decide what he would do in the next, just as he does during his school years?
Usually, one decides about his future profession during his school days. This phenomenon bears but a faint similarity with the process of equipping oneself for the life after death the life in eternity. The thing which is common for both the courses is to live with the remembrance of God and His love, acquiring the peace of soul and spiritual bliss with God's light in one's heart:
Those only are believers who when God is mentioned, their hearts quake, and when His signs are recited to them, it increases them in faith, and in their Lord they put their trust. (8:2)
And
In God's remembrance are at rest the hearts of those who believe and do righteous deeds. (13:28)
His remembrance transforms all mental worries, anxieties, fears and tensions into peace and tranquility.
The Theme of Discussion
Whatever has been said till now was meant to be a background for our discussion regarding the philosophical understanding of the most sublime dimension of our social and cultural revolution. In this regard, the `remembrance of God' is the most important doctrine that can assist and promote our aims in the most effective way. The `remembrance of God' should be reinforced in our personal as well as in our social lives. To do so is both very easy and difficult. Easy, since we believe more or less in God. We are not completely alienated from God. The ritual prayers that we offer, at morning, noon and at night, are after all an evidence of the commitment between us and God. For, if it were not, we would not have offered our prayers when we are all alone and there are no parents, wives, children, or neighbours to remind or to reproach us. We do say our prayers, both when alone and in the presence of other people. So, it is because of the importance of the `remembrance of God' in our lives that we say our prayers regardless of whether anybody is present to see us or not. Even this much of faith is enough to benefit our existence. We should augment this asset by adding to it His remembrance and love so that it may give light and warmth to our existence.
It is evident that a materialist isolates himself in the darkness of ignorance of God's existence a darkness where the rays of the Divine light do not touch him and he remains severed from God and His sacred remembrance, rendering his own life meaningless and absurd, or at least lacking in meaning and light. Those who have studied and keenly observed the circumstances of our times may have noticed that nihilism is the natural fate of those who imprison their lives within the walls of materialism.
Our cultural revolution should lead our society through the enlightened path of God's love, so that the Divine light may illuminate the life of every one of us and influence our behaviour in a profound and creative way. This is a very difficult task and requires a lot of willpower, endeavour and vigilance. It is essential that the cultural revolution should carve out a programme for the followers of every age group and design a plan to provide the grounds for their intellectual and spiritual development.
The Cultural Revolution
The cultural revolution is a very complex and complicated process. It is not so simple as it is imagined. It needs a lot of industry and dedication on the part of all those who are concerned: the university teachers and students, the religious leaders and thinkers, the planners and intellectuals, and in short all the followers of the path of God, to determine the starting point so that the rest of the way should be determined by traversing this path and through unceasing effort.
The cultural revolution is not a simple enterprise to be accomplished in a short time. The cultural revolution is a revolution which needs to be launched and advanced with great care and dedication. It cannot progress and advance automatically by itself without any application of effort on the part of its participants. The participants, the human individuals, are themselves not any automatic, mechanical beings. One of the most crucial mistakes committed during the century of scientism was the assumption about man that he is a fully automatic machine. Specially ever since the automatic and self regulating machines have been invented, this view has gained currency. This type of thinking dominated the human minds nearly throughout this century of scientism. Anthropology was regarded as the study of a complex machinery with sensitive delicate wires. But fortunately, since the last thirty or forty years, this attitude is gradually changing. The thing which was regarded as a super automatic, complex and delicate machinery was discovered to be the human body alone, and the body an insignificant fraction of the whole human existence.
Man an Unknown Being
Of course, it is understandable that those aspects of human life that resemble those of biological organisms could be, to some extent, compared with the complicated mechanism of a super automatic machine. But these are not the only things that constitute a human being. Man is not a human being just because of these physical characteristics. It is culture which fashions a real human being. When we arrive at this point, all sorts of evaluations and estimations based on physics or physiology regarding man break down totally; since they have failed to offer an acceptable understanding of the human being. During the last forty years the human sciences have come to the conclusion that man is as yet an unknown being.
Perhaps one of the best books on this subject to appear during the recent decades is by Alexis Carl entitled Man: The Unknown Being. A prominent physician and a product of the age of scientism, he believes that man cannot be defined in the terms of scientific criteria or formulae. Not even the most advanced discoveries of empirical sciences such as physics, biochemistry and biology can satisfactorily explain human existence. He goes even further and says that these scientific disciplines are inept even in the treatment of his physiological ailments, where it is not possible to ignore his spiritual strengths. His being evades the criteria forged by science. Yet, a cultural revolution can open new venues for understanding of this elusive being which is man.
However, one cannot be sure that he will follow this secure route of assured salvation without any interruption if he is left to himself. Now we can properly understand the meaning of: "Guide us in the straight path", that we recurringly utter at least five times a day.
I remember, during the early days of my youth, very involved discussion used to be held on diverse subjects among the people of younger generation. It was approximately thirty six or thirty seven years ago that the problems of ideological significance like materialism, Marxism and ancient Iranian notions became topics of our hot discussions. The subjects varied over a wide range, more vast and richer perhaps than those discussed today. Since, after a long spell of repression and restraint, an era of independence and freedom had begun which nevertheless lacked any kind of experience of struggle and conflicts that occurred during these last eight to ten years preceding our revolution. That is why the questions that were asked and answers that were sought varied over a wide range. During those days, as a devout Muslim youth, I was sometimes involved in fiery discussions with other youths. At times we had ardent and excited debates. One of the questions that were often, raised was regarding the verse:. (Guide us in the straight path). It was asked, what does it signify that we every day repeat it in our prayers: guide us in the straight path? Is it not that we are Muslims? If Islam is the straight path, are we not already on the right path being Muslims? If God has shown us the right path, what is the point in asking Him to guide us in a straight path? Does it not imply doubt in the way we follow? Why do we then believe in Islam and say prayers? Since the very act of saying prayers implies the fact that we believe in Islam. I remember how some people used to make improper remarks and gave inadequate explanations. They used to give misleading and immature replies which themselves may lead to dire consequences causing serious deviations and misunderstandings.
Mans Need for Constant Guidance
It is a fact that the notion of "Guide us in the straight path," has not only been formulated for the purpose of uttering it in every prayer, but because man is always in need of Divine guidance. Why? Because human life is not similar to the highly automated cycles of a machine or a computer that work according to certain predetermined designs or programme. Man, on the other hand, is ever in the process of making choice and selection, and this condition requires a constant guidance. Man is a perpetual seeker and explorer, and an explorer is ever in need of a guide. Who can be a better guide than Allah whose guidance can lead man through the complex intricacies of worldly life, and invigorate and revive in him the consciousness and awareness that can warn him of dangers and remind him of his duties. It is of course possible that some people may become overly conscious in this regard to imagine that whatever they do is wrong and harmful. This is sickness, not awareness. We need to be alert and conscious, not suspicious and whimsical. Being whimsical and hesitant can prove to be harmful to the same extent as the correct thinking can prove to be beneficial. It has repeatedly been emphasized in the Quran through various verses, that the prophets were sent to deliver the people from the clutches of ignorance and forgetfulness through self realization and remembrance of God. The Quran cautions man about the dangerous and hazardous path that he has to tread.
Therefore we need to revive, restore and to preserve in ourselves the sense of consciousness and responsibility towards our duties which springs from our quest of God by means of this cultural revolution. We have to achieve a state of permanence of this form of consciousness, which is of course not an easy task. In order to make the difficulty of this task more comprehensible, I shall give a few examples. A person who interprets all problems of life in a state of alienation from God and evolves a set of attitudes and perspectives, he may advance in life without any apprehension or fear of the consequences. But it is not possible for a Godfearing person to adopt any of these attitudes as unmindfully and without examining the consequences. There are certain people who adopt a policy of pursuit of comfort and convenience. As children they grow up with this attitude, and as grown ups they prefer to lead a safe and secure life free from all pains, hardships and dangers. This type of outlook is typical of a person whose main aim is to avoid pains and troubles. But when a person having commitment to God tries to evade his duties towards God, his conscience ceaselessly reproaches him for his irresponsible behaviour. His conscience calls him to face all kinds of difficulties for the sake of objective and demands for the sacrifice of his well being, his property or even of his life: he should be too ready and willing to sacrifice everything in order to execute God's will. His inner voice demands that he should not be afraid of getting hurt or being killed, and that he should embrace the idea of sacrificing his life for the sake of God.
Each time we pay a visit to the hospitalized youths, wounded or crippled for the sake of our revolution or on the war fronts, we are surprised and filled with admiration on seeing them. Their radiantly happy faces reflect their inner joy, while we know they suffer from severe pain and unsound physical condition. Those brave warriors of Islam, lie on their sick beds greeting us joyfully with smiles' on their pale faces, though they !night have been restless with pain. I remember once I went to pay a visit to one of these high spirited heroes of our Islamic Revolution. He was a middle aged fellow. Obviously the wounds sustained by him were extremely painful, but his face was bright and peaceful. The Quranic verse reads:
Those only are believers who, when God is mentioned, their hearts quake, when His signs are recited to them, it increases them in faith. (13:28)
It should be remembered that although he (the wounded warrior) was overwhelmed with pain and the fever caused by his inflammatory wounds was so high that he could hardly open his eyes, yet his face was happy and beaming, reflecting his inner soul.
What was actually active within him that caused his soul to overpower his ailing body? It was actually his thriving faith and trust in God and the belief that God watches him and his deeds. His behaviour was not under the control of a desire for comfort. It shows how the domination by a Divine culture transforms the human behaviour, and that too in such a distressing condition of physical pain and torment. Such a human being cannot be made to drift from the path of God to some other path. The people who are on the other side are of peevish and reckless nature, who cannot live if they do not quarrel. Such a person is ever looking for an opportunity to pick a quarrel. It is almost impossible for him to remain peaceful without clashing with someone. There are certain people and their number is not few who knive others and get knived and severely injure themselves, but they little care about their pains. The wounds they suffer, bitterly hurt them, but they overcome the pain on account of their extraordinary love of "heroic" exploits.
A hero and a scoundrel both resemble in many ways. Both act in the midst of danger. Great dangers do not alarm them. But call back the anti social rogue to return to the path of God, to sheathe his sword and lay down his knife, and submit to duty. When he was in the dark regarding his duties towards God, he had a certain line of action and operation, and was quite happy and content with his unmindful, callous way of life. But now that he has committed himself to a certain ideology and a specific cue, he has become careful and knows well what should be his appropriate and fitting course of action. Now he possesses full awareness.
The Conscious Choice
Dear sisters and brothers, the greatest pain a human being undergoes is the strain of making a free and conscious choice; when one finds himself in a state of hesitation regarding various problems and enigmatic situations that need to be attended according to God's directions. It is the time when one has to abandon his reckless non commitment to tread the sublime path of Islamic culture and adopt a painful life of choice and awareness. A reckless ruffian indifferent to comforts, who would easily abdicate his health, his limbs, even his life to satisfy his craving for adventure would be overwhelmed with the pain and agony of choice characteristic of a worthy warrior.
It becomes still more difficult when, like Ali (A), he has to choose his course of action upon the chest of his enemy, with a bare sword in his hand. The same moment he resolves to cut his throat, within seconds an incident occurs which no automatic and the most sophisticated warning system could have predicted. What should be done? His opponent insults him by spitting in his face. What should be done? The angry and revengeful as well as a victorious man within him commands to chop up the rival's head without any delay, but a more conscious and honest choice guided and directed from above admonishes him and tells him that drawing the sword for the sake of quenching the personal thirst of revenge does not suit a man brought up in the Islamic culture and tradition. He gets up and sheathes his sword.
Islam's Goal
The aims and objectives of a common politician are known to everyone. He is after a high political position, social status and power. He is ambitious to the extent of indulging in any sort of crime in order to achieve his selfish ends. He would not refrain from any crime, intrigue or murder in that fiendish direction. Whatever he does is aimed at the same purpose. He hatches plots and conspiracies and takes advantage of every opportunity to defeat his rivals. He tries to demolish his rivals through all sorts of tricks, strategies and conspiracies with the help of his allies until either defeating the rival or facing defeat himself. His aims and ends are clear.
If you try to trace the causes of various political clashes that occurred for the sake of power and status, throughout history, from the times when battles were fought with the most primitive weapons to the present days of modern propaganda warfare, you will notice that the mobilization of forces and resources had the common purpose of power and aimed at bringing the enemy to his knees. However, if these questions are posed to the politician: What is my power for? What would
I do with the office I so much cherish? These questions would negate the assumption that power is an end in itself. It would imply that power and position is not a means to satisfy his lust for wealth and riches, but a means to realize the Divine ideals before which every human being is accountable. When one reaches such a position he is expected to be careful and watchful of his every step. He is constantly in need of Divine guidance. Before taking any step he has to first carefully consider how to confront the opponents. How is he to fight them? Should he speak to them? Should he crush them? Should he be kind or harsh with them? Should he gain their heart? Should harsh and abusive words be used, or whether they should be subdued through kind and affectionate words? The purpose is not whether harshness or mildness with enemy would end in his vanquishing and increase of one's power; the criterion now is not power but adherence to a Divine duty. To subjugate or to destroy the enemy is not the goal in the Islamic culture; it is educating and instructing of an enemy. No such constraint exists for a person who is merely involved in a power struggle and who is not committed to the ideals of God, since, he is mainly interested in defeating the enemy. But for one who believes in the Divine logic, the end is that an enemy should be delivered and educated to follow the right path not to crush him into obedience and surrender but to guide him into obeying God.
Divine Presence
If we are committed to Divine duty in all our choices, we should be extremely cautious in our ways, behaviour, tactics and strategies. You will acknowledge that this is an extremely difficult task that requires constant guidance from God and inspiration from our Divine school of thought.
An individual holding a responsible position in a Divine society, must be perfectly conscious of God's guidance while performing his duties: He is constantly in need of this Divine guidance and the Divine light through the source of Islam, to show him the right path and to guide him in a right way of performing his duties. He is likely to be contacted regarding business matters for various purposes by different people: a close friend or a neighbour may approach him. From the point of view of ordinary prudence, his course of action may be clear: he does a favour to a friend or a neighbour. But as an honest and sincere Islamic administrator, he is expected to act in an equitable and impartial manner. He should treat everyone equally. Equity and impartiality should be his criterion . To him, friend or stranger, kin or alien, neighbours and others, countrymen and foreigners, the people speaking the same language and those. speaking other languages, the people sharing the same religious faith and those having a different faith, all are equal and the same. He should not differentiate among them except in certain cases, and that too within the framework of Islam. Man should always contemplate and judge his actions, not by means of ordinary social norms, but through the Divine humanistic standards, in order to fulfil the Divine ideal. We should always verify and judge ourselves according to it. This is the Divine philosophy ruling over the lives of the dedicated citizens of the Islamic Republic, who have aligned themselves with this Revolution. Now we can see for ourselves how far we have succeeded in our attempts and to what extent this philosophy has been actualized in our lives. How far have our youths advanced in this direction of functioning according to the will of God, and how far they still have to go?
Caution
Here I have a word of caution for the young and the middle aged persons, who constitute the bulk of the active generation, never to assume that you cannot change yourselves on account of age. According to the logic of the Quran, no one is ever too old. One of the most sublime Islamic principles regards man as a being who is always in the process of becoming. From the very first day of his life to its last, a man is always in the process of development and change; a state similar to that of an ever changing fluid. The Quran says in this regard:
Say, `O my servants! Who have been prodigal against yourselves, do not despair of Allah's mercy; surely Allah forgives the sins altogether, surely He is the All forgiving and the All compassionate.' (39:53)
Thus, it is desirous of all the middle aged and the elderly people to be active and determined in the support of the cultural revolution, and resolved to cultivate the manners and attitudes according to the Divine system. Their behaviour and the relationship of the people with one another, everything, should be according to the Divine spirit and congenial to the sense of Divine duty and God's remembrance. And if it is felt that our condition has not improved much, and old faults still persist here and there, we should admit that our inner cultural revolution has not progressed to the desired degree of profundity.
Indeed, if the cultural revolution with its philosophical dimension, and its dimensions of consciousness and world outlook as its basic elements, is expected to advance, it should lead the individual and society, both, in the direction of the Quranic and Islamic ideal. Instead of contemplating everything in the selfish and narrow terms of personal conformity and discord, or dignity and indignity, people should attune themselves to evaluate their life, choices and deeds in the broader perspective of the Quran and Islam. They should erase such imaginary presumptions from their minds as were prevalent during the pre revolution days.
Perpetuation of the Revolution
If we examine the extent of the advancement of our revolution, we shall notice that we still have a very long way to go. In fact it would be found vital for the life of Islam and the Revolution that it should continue perpetually and indefinitely into the future. The economic, civil, administrative, military, and other such problems should be given supplementary and secondary importance. Our main and principal aim should be to maintain our administration, politics, our armed forces, our production and commercial activities, export and import in subservience to the Islamic ideal. Everything should be subordinated to the Islamic essence, to Islamic consciousness and the Islamic perspective. If we neglect the sovereignty of the Islamic world outlook over all the aspects of our existence, our revolution is likely to fall into jeopardy.
The Most Important Dimension of the Islamic Revolution
Which is the most important and the principal aspect of this revolution? The answer is: the cultural aspect.
This revolution, fortunately, started as a cultural movement. It was due to the reason that in the last few years we had successfully changed this aspect of our collective entity and our political system. Other revolutions do, of course, begin with a certain specific cultural note; but this Islamic Revolution of ours has surpassed all other revolutions in this regard. We may rightfully attribute its victory to the predominant Islamic spirit of self sacrifice and wish for martyrdom among our people. As long as this had not happened victory was impossible. Will it not be a great tragedy if this revolution, which is the result of a cultural movement, should transform itself into something other than what it was at its birth? Unless we guard it with great care this victory can any time change into something else. It is our responsibility that every one of us should resolve never to lose the sight of the main thread of our cultural movement. I hope, with every day that passes, we will find ourselves more and more advanced in this direction. I hope we shall utilize the alchemy of God's remembrance to transform our behaviour and manners, speech and thought, morals and sensibilities, everything , in the direction pointed out by Islam, the Quran, the sunnah, and the Islam of leadership that inspired our constitution. Insha' Allah.
Wa al S'alam.
Sayyid Muhammad Husayni Beheshti
Source: Imam reza network

Unity of Islamic Ummah, the Architect for Reviving the Divine Civilization

"And hold fast, All of you together, to the cord of Allah, and do not become disunited "(Al-i Imran 3:103)
Lo! Allah loveth those who battle for His cause in ranks, as if they were a solid structure.(As-Saff 61:4)
The believers are but a single brotherhood ; so make peace between your brothers ; and fear Allah so that you may receive mercy. (Al-Hujurat 49:10)
The Muslim Ummah today is 1500 millions strong and constitute one fourth of the entire mankind with diverse ethnic and linguistic origins. Their geographical location is stretched over the four corners of the globe with magnificent and unique Civilization heritage.
At present Muslim population is about 1.8 billion which makes roughly 30 per cent of world population. About 1300 million Muslims live in 56 Muslim states and are part of UN and OIC. The rest 500 million Muslim are spread in different countries. There is hardly any place on earth, which is not inhabited by Muslims. A significant number of Muslims (220 million) live in India. In Europe and America, Muslim population though insignificant in the past has now increased manifold. Widespread migrations at world level have introduced Muslims to those areas, which hitherto stood untended for centuries from the teachings of Islam. Numerical strength plus the Muslim states' geographical location have given Muslim a strategic position in today's world.
Seen in the geo-strategic outlook, the politically independent Muslim states virtually command one-fourth of the world; from Morocco to Indonesia and Kazakhstan to Turkey and Bosnia. Muslim bloc can be divided into two big geographical zones; one, a large chain starting from Morocco/Senegal and through Pakistan entering Central Asia, and two; the most important zone of Bangladesh, Malaysia and Indonesia.
The two zones are of strategic importance for all sea, land and air transport routes. Dead Sea, Red Sea and Caspian are in the center of Muslim states. A number of Muslim countries have seacoasts on Indian and Atlantic Oceans. The important sea gateways like Damial, Suez, Port Said, Djibouti and Aden are under Muslim control. Muslim world is impregnate with important economic resources like agriculture, oil, electricity, coal, iron, uranium, tin, rubber, copper, etc.
About 1/4th of the Muslim world is not simply in a position to achieve sustained economic growth and provide adequate education and other social infrastructure to their citizens, but can also play an important role in the economic and technological development of brother Muslim countries, e.g. Turkey has the skill to manufacture F-16 fighter planes; Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Kazakhstan have economic strength to help other Muslim countries financially; Pakistan, despite strong Western resistance, has successfully advanced with its peaceful nuclear energy agenda in a period almost half that other countries might take, and; the change in oil prices of 1972 and 1980 has tilted the balance of economic strength towards Islamic countries.
In nutshell, we can safely conclude that the strength and centrality which the Muslim Ummah enjoy today has no match in its history (a fact which should never be ignored. It is another sore subject why Muslim world could not take full advantage of its present powerful position on the world checkerboard.
Throughout the last fourteen hundred years of Muslim history, even in the extreme political slumber of the last few centuries, Islamic way of life has played the most influential role in shaping the human destiny. With its divine creed and superb natural codes of practices, Islam's dynamic and assertive appeal has the edge over all other faiths or man made ideologies.
The meteoric rise and enduring might of Islamic Civilization were the result of the birth of a "best community" (khaira ummatin, Al-Qur'an 3:110) or a "middle community" (ummatan wasatan, Al-Qur'an 2:143) which Allah (Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala, SWT) had raised for mankind.
However, that role has undergone a serious setback in the past centuries due to their own indulgence and negligence. The most devastating disease of the Ummah today is their disunity and discord characterized by political, theological, sectarian and tribal conflict. Thus the most important and heart-felt requirement of the Ummah today is the need for unity - the unity of mind and action as well as the unity of hearts and emotional feelings among its members. The Muslim hearts today are beating all over the world for their lost unity - the unity of belief, hopes and aspirations in order to seek the pleasure of Allah (SWT).
What is Islamic Unity?
Why did the Muslim Ummah, the architect of the longest and most powerful as well as divine Civilization in human history, lost that unity? How can this be regained in the context of the complex internal and external factors that are dominating the Muslim world?
Moreover, isolated examples of cooperation, Islamic brotherhood and unity at times of necessity between the Muslims and their rulers had always occurred throughout the history. Military assistance to the Sultan of Granada by the Ottoman Sultan in 1483 CE. [History of the Ottoman Turks, E.S. Creasy, Beirut, 1961, p.122] and the unique military help to the Indian Muslims by the ruler of Afghanistan in 1761 are exemplary events of mutual assistance among the Muslim leaders, even in the decadent period of Muslim history.
The most outstanding attempt for global unity of the Muslim Ummah in the last century CE was led by Jamal al-Din Asadabadi famous as Afghani (1838-97 CE ), a leader of towering personality. His Pan Islamic Movement created a political sensation and psychological whirlwind in the Muslim world which was by then the underdogs of the world community.
Asadabadi considered Islam the potential source of Muslim unity and political strength and to this end devoted most of his life. [The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 5th Ed., Vol.10, 1977, p.20]
Afghani was a pragmatic leader who realized that, at that particular time, a single government for the whole Ummah would not be acceptable. He expounded, I am no pleading that a government of one single ruler should be accepted by all (these countries), because to accomplish this is probably very difficult. But I do really expect the predominance of the Qur'anic rule over all of them, and they should make Islam a means of their unity. [Al-Urwat al-Wuthqa, Jamal al Din Afghani, Cairo, 1957, p.72]
The other pioneering Movement was launched in British occupied India for the demand of the restoration of Khilafah when the Ottoman Caliphate was abolished in 1924. The Khilafah Movement, as it was called, was based on the spirit of Islamic unity under a universal caliphate. It was an important historical event for the Muslims of India, but had little impact outside.
The conference of 1926 in Cairo by the Muslim religious and political leaders from a number of countries was an emotional attempt to revive the Caliphate. As they were non-governmental delegates, they decided to hold a Grand Assembly of the Ummah
" in a country which shall be chosen by the delegates of the Islamic peoples - in which the delegates of the Muslim people shall meet to discuss the measures to be taken with a view to the establishment of the Caliphate fulfilling all the conditions prescribed by the Shari'ah (Islamic law)" [OIC, Abdullah al-Ahsan, IIT, Herndon, VA, USA, 1988, p.11-12].
However, the gifted Muslim leaders continued their strenuous effort to construct a common platform for the Ummah. By then, the idea of creating a separate Muslim state on the Indian subcontinent was growing. It was not an ideal way to unify the Ummah as Allama Iqbal, the most accomplished thinker of the modern Muslim world, emphasized. [Atlas of the Islamic World Since 1500, Francis Robinson, UK, 1982, p.149]
Our essence is not bound to any place;
the vigor of our wine is not contained
in any bowl ; Chinese and Indian
Alike the shard that constitutes our jar,
Turkish and Syrian alike the clay
Forming our body ; neither is our heart
Of India, or Syria, or Rum,
Nor any fatherland do we profess
Except Islam.
(Rumuz-i-Bekhudi, 1918; trans. Arberry)
However, he came to terms with the reality of the Indian situation and started campaigning vociferously for the creation of Pakistan where the "Islamic Shari'ah could be enforced".
The recent works on regeneration of the Ummah and thus realization of global Islamic unity through going back to the pristine purity of Islam were initiated by two towering personalities in 1928 and 1941. Sheikh Hasan al Banna's Ikhwanul Muslimin in the Arab world,Imam Musa Sadr in Lebanon,Ayatullah Sayyid Muhammad Baquir al-Sadr Shaheed in Iraq, Maulana Sayyid Mawdudi's Jama'at-e-Islami in Indian sub-continent and finally Hadrat Imam Khomeini(R.A.) in Islamic Republic of Iran have been instrumental in molding the characters of millions in modern Muslim history. The glorious Islamic Revolution under the dynamic leadership of Hadrat Imam Khomeini(R.A.) has strengthened the Islamic Ummah and the Islamic Revivalist Movements throughout the world.
The necessity of unity was only felt by the Muslim leaders when, after the occupation of Jerusalem by Israel in 1967 war, Al-Aqsa mosque was desecrated under Zionist occupation on 21 August, 1969. A Summit Conference representing 24 Muslim countries was held in Morocco on 22-25 September, 1969 with a view to "promoting among themselves (Muslim governments) close cooperation and mutual assistance in the economic, scientific, cultural and spiritual fields, inspired by the immortal teachings of Islam".
This is the forerunner of OIC (The Organization of Islamic Conference) whose membership has increased to 46 countries. But apart from being an ornamental body, the OIC has so far failed to exhibit any ray of hope for genuine Islamic unity the Ummah is so eagerly waiting for.
So if we aspire to be united we should have that ideal in our mind. We might never attain to that high level, but we should at least keep it as a goal, and as a criterion by which we judge how far towards the unity we have gone.
The characteristics of that community are:
First, `Imaan'(beliefs)
Secondly, `ibaadah(worship)
Third is akhlaq(moral behavior) and this is the fruit of eemaan and `ibaadah.
The fourth point is defending Islam
The last point is that of political unity and following the Ulil Amr Muslimeen and without any doubt Hadrat Ayatullah al-Uzma Sayyid Ali Khamene'i is the Ulil Amr Muslimeen.
The solution for the cause of disunity would be to grab a hold of the righteous path and live by it. That path is the Holy Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.) and his Holy Ahlul Bayt(A.S.).
A perception of one-Ummah feeling is to be created among the Muslim people all over the world. As burning of a finger aches the whole body, so should be the sensitivity of the Muslims. The sufferings of the Palestinians, Afghans and Iraqis, for example, should be so felt by them that the whole Ummah cry out together and come up with realistic help.
Equality and justice need to be established within the Ummah on the basis of Islamic brotherhood.
The Holy Qur'an says:
... Lo ! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. (Al-Hujurat 49:13)
But Iran has already dealt with the above issue and so can we. The solution that is adopted by the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran after the glorious Islamic Revolution of 1979 is workable all over the Muslim world. It is clearly stated in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran that the law of the land in Iran would be based on Fiqh Jafari, but the followers of all other schools would be free to practice their own Fiqh in their private and personal affairs. This highly ingenious but equally simple and uncomplicated approach represents a really enlightening lesson for the entire Muslim Ummah.
In 1990,the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran Ayatullah al-Uzma Sayyid Ali Khamene'i established "The World Forum for Proximity of Islamic Schools of Thought" to carry out extensive ecumenical research to explore the practical ways and measures in bringing about the proximity and understanding between all the Islamic schools of thought. This unique organization which belongs to the Islamic Ummah regularly issues the journal "Risala-tul-Taqrib" in Arabic and has published many books to bring about proximity and understanding in the Islamic Ummah.
"The World Forum for Proximity of Islamic Schools of Thought" has established the "Islamic Schools of Thought University" in Tehran, which is first of its kind and unique in the world where the Ulama from all the leading Islamic schools of thought teach the Islamic seminary students belonging to all the leading Islamic schools of thought hailing from various countries.
Every year on the auspicious occasion of the Birthday of the Holy Prophet of Islam(S.A.W.) which is celebrated as the "Unity Week" (12-17 Rabi al-Awwal) between the Muslims of the world an international seminar is regularly conducted by this organization in Tehran to bring about better understanding between the 1800 millions strong Muslim Ummah.
The mass-involvement in the socio-political and cultural affairs of the Ummah need to be the part and parcel of the Muslim world. The power of a nation lies on its people. A nation can only prosper when the hopes and aspirations of those people are in harmony with those of its leaders.
Exhortation of patience and tolerance is to be practiced by the Ummah in matters of mutual affairs. The Holy Prophet's affirmation that "Diversity of opinion is a blessing, while disunity a curse" must be accepted by the Ummah with sincerity and broadmindedness. The Holy Qur'an also says
... And help one another unto righteousness and pious duty, but help not one another unto sin and transgression... (Al-Maidah 5:2)
The political spirit of the institution of Hajj needs to be restored so that it works as a platform for mutual understanding and cooperation between various Muslim groups and communities as well as Muslim countries. This will also help forging a global link among the Ummah to collectively fight the evils of modern Jahiliyah.
Inter-Governmental bodies OIC and other governmental agencies, global or regional, should initiate to strengthen the cause of Muslim unity by increasing their commitment to their own declared objectives and charters. Economic cooperation, science and technology exchange as well as information and cultural cooperation should be strengthened between the Muslim countries.
These should include cooperation in the promotion of the features and history of Islamic Civilization, academic and research link in various areas of mutual interest as well as information-related and humanitarian activities. Cooperation in defending Muslim rights and Islamic values in Muslim-minority countries can lead to a better understanding among the Muslim countries.
Islamic Movements
After the victory of the glorious Islamic Revolution in Iran the determination and dedication of the most gifted section of the Ummah have produced a rich blend of a cluster of Islamic Movements around the world.
The open aggression on the Muslim people by the global Kufr, with their powerful politico-economic and propaganda weapons, and the persecution of Islamic workers by secular westernized Muslim rulers have augmented the strength of the Islamic Movements. What is seriously needed from these Islamic Movements is realistic strategy and their effective implementation.
The first target of the Islamic Movements is, thus, to build an Islamic state through which they can work for global Islamic reunification of the Ummah.
Organized and comprehensive Tabligh of Islam is an obligatory duty for the Ummah, individually and collectively.
Call unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the better way. (An-Nahl 16:125)
And who is better in speech than him who prayeth unto his Lord and doeth right, and saith : Lo! I am of those who surrender (unto Him). (Fusilat 41:33)
Absence of tabligh or an ineffective one reduces the Ummah to an introvert community who gradually become sluggish in all walks of life. For the light of Allah, al-Islam, to be transmitted to four corners of the globe, the active members of the Ummah must open their illuminated hearts to the millions of His servants, Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
Greater Islamic unity is not only in the interests of the majority but also of most of the rest of the world as well. As the contemporary Muslim world is passing through a phase of self-analysis and internal reawakening, Islam is becoming more and more relevant as well as guiding light (Sirajam Munira) for the reconstruction of individual and social life of the Ummah. The reality of Islamic unity now lies on the Ummah's firm resolve to build a universal society on the foundations of Islam.
The concept of universal relationship brotherhood among the Muslims is the cornerstone of Islamic unity and is the charter of worldwide Islamic Movement. Brotherhood is a notion based on faith, fraternity and equality without denying the reality of human differences in attitudes. It originates from mutual love, respect and emotional feelings for one another as in the case of a united family. It unites mankind on the basis of ideology and convictions. Anybody from any part of the globe, irrespective of racial or linguistic origin, can join the house of Islam through the testimony of Islamic faith and the needful actions.
Global reunification of the Ummah is neither a myth nor an impossibility, as the western theorists or secularized Muslim leaders tend to describe it in order to dampen the spirit of the Muslim people. It is a divine requirement. However, its attainment depends on two conditions - Allah's (SWT) favor and the Ummah's turning back to Islam.
However, the yearning for unity and the ideals of Islamic brotherhood had always persisted in and kept illuminating the hearts of the Muslim masses throughout the history, in spite of political and theological trauma that the Islamic Ummah have passed. The target to unify the Ummah remained a guiding factor for the Islamic Revivalist Movements that emerged later on.
The Century of Islamic Revivalism
This century can rightly be termed the century of Islamic revival; political and economic aspects being mere parts of it. The enemies of Islam assumed that by politically dominating the Muslims; dividing them into small states, nationalities and tribes; imposing secular system through secular rulers; and by crafting Western political, economic, educational and cultural agendas, Muslim Ummah can be neutralized for ever. But the ultimate prudence of God Almighty was different.
Equally important aspect is the rational which is the real force behind this comprehensive revival movement. In fact, it is this force, which have played the most significant role in changing the ideological and cultural pattern of Muslims virtually on entire globe. In the Indian Sub-Continent, movements led by Syed Ahmed Shaheed, Shah Ismail Shaheed and in Bengal the movement of Haji Shariatullah and then the efforts of Altaf Hussain Hali, Shibli Naumani, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar reactivated Muslims on intellectual, moral, cultural and ultimately on political fronts. Revival movement of Allama Iqbal, Syed Abul Aala Maududi's literary and intellectual work and the leadership of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, all converged on a nation-wide political movement and ultimately resulted in creation of separate Muslim abode in 1947.
This nascent yet strong movement of the early half of 20th century gained ground in the later half and gradually spread all over the Islamic world. The Muslim nations started fighting for freedom from colonial powers with principle motive to protect and promote their Islamic identity. Some times it appeared as if nationalism was the fighting force for freedom, yet it is an acknowledged fact that even behind nationalism the one and the only force was resurgence of Islamic thought. K.Smith in Islam and Modern History (Princeton University Press, 1957, p.77) admits: "Muslims have never accepted any concept of nationalism under which the principles of loyalties are outside the jurisdiction of Islam." He says: "besides (as far as Muslims are concerned) in the past only and only Islam has been the driving force which has provided to Muslims the discipline, strength, and desire for freedom."
Jamalud Din Afghani, Muhammad Abduh, Muhammad Rashid Raza and the founder of Ikhwanul-Muslimoon, Shaykh Hasan-al-Banna Shaheed, Imam Musa Sadr in Lebanon, Ayatullah Sayyid Muhammad Baquir al-Sadr Shaheed in Iraq, led and promoted the revival movement in Arabic World. In Turkey, in the depressed secular state, Saeed Nursi, Adnan Mandres and Najmud Din Arbakan have kept alive the Islamic movement. In Iran, the religious and popular movement of Imam Khomeini(R.A.) has started a new era for the Islamic world.
Future Perspective
The Muslim Ummah entered into the 21st century. Now, when we review the past 100 years' political conditions of Muslims, we find signs of hope since revival and the struggle of the Muslim Ummah has set in all spheres of life. This resurgence has no other explanation but what the Holy Qur'an Says: "and (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah." (Al-i Imran-3:54).
The colonial powers had planned to make Muslim Ummah ineffective forever. But history stands witness that if Muslims retreated at a front they demonstrated strength at another.
This important feature of Muslim history has disrupted in the recent past. But just as a day follows the night, the Muslim Ummah during the past five decades have, to a large extent, overcome the miserable conditions of the past and started reform at world level.
The Conflict with Modern Jahiliyah
Essence of Islamic movement and the general revival of Islam at world level are the real forces which are shaping the future of Muslim Ummah. This is an era of conflict as a result of which a new epoch is emerging. But, certainly the Islamic movements are going to succeed in the future unlike the remains of colonialism which do not possess spark to revive. The Western nations and their friends consider Islam a danger primarily for this trait.
Muslim Ummah has no territorial conflict with the West rather it seeks its inherent right to develop individual and social life in accordance with its own set of religious doctrine, culture and history where family is central to real target for bringing change. But, this change is presented as a threat to the West.
Modern Jahiliyah which is leading mankind far away from Truth and Justice. This has, in effect, robbed peace from the surface of the earth. Man has downgraded himself from the position of his Creator's vicegerency to a status which is unworthy of human dignity. Humanity is suffering from an unparalleled identity crisis.
However, like all the empires of the past, the West has invented its own monster, the adulation of extreme materialism. The melting pot is becoming too hot to maintain one's exclusive characteristics.
The proliferation of consumer culture and entertainment industry is eating away the spirit of innocence from the younger people. The display of erotic adverts in public places and the mass circulation of pornographic tabloids are inviting people towards promiscuity. Radical feminism, modeling, glorification of extra-marital sex and homosexuality have become the tools of modernity. The effect is the erosion of morality, the disintegration of family structure, child abuse and other social ills.
The reason behind this expertly crafted notion is West's inability to guide humanity in the right direction; its lack of knowledge and bigotry towards Islam. The experiment of secular culture has failed. Despite West's total command over the world for about 500 years it could not establish an equitable and just system. There has certainly been a tremendous industrial growth and increase in wealth in the West but it was unable to provide welfare, justice and peace to mankind. Even now 1/4th of the world population is without basic food. The West possess in itself the poverty problematic 14-15 per cent population. On average the unemployment is above 10 per cent.
Despite spectacular achievements in the medical science, humanity confronts new and complex diseases. Western family structure has totally collapsed. The number of single-parent children (born without formal marriages) has exceeded above legal children. The number of single family parent has reached 40 per cent and 30 per cent in USA and Europe, respectively. The rise in crime has seized the freedom of society and the younger generation is in particular morally corrupt. Material growth cradles mental-sickness and suicide which is on the rise. The historians hypothesize with fear that a civilization born of material growth is not conducive for human beings. Famous poet Iqbal says: "In spite of significant findings about Universe and control over nature through scientific development, the West could not eradicate the evils plaguing humanity."
In fact it is the weakness of the West which is making it fearful of the potential strength of Islam, otherwise, Muslims militarily, politically or economically pose no threat to it. The real conflict lies in ideology and moral values. This is an area where West is like a spent force with no new system or message for the humanity at hand.
It is here that Islam has the potential to bring the humanity light and fresh thinking. Islam has a message for humanity; a live message for their present living, a promise for attractive destiny and a glorious future. The spread of this message had neither been due to violent force in the past nor it needs such force today. In fact it is filling the gap where humanity is trapped. This is the real danger for the West, otherwise it is a total blessing for the humanity making no distinction between East and the West.
Under the conditions explained above, it is quite obvious that Islam is the only constructive force for the future. Indeed much has yet to be done. It has to strengthen its moral values, gain intellectual creditability in order to motivate the masses.
The realization is growing that Islam is, in fact, the only solution to the evil remains of Colonialism and the only answer to the threat of New World Order.
Conclusion
The unity of the Ummah is a necessity not only for the Muslim people but also for the entire humanity. Although Islam, as a message and a model, was completed 1400 years ago, the main task of bringing all mankind into its fold has not yet materialized. Islamic unity is a major step towards achievement of the universal brotherhood of mankind. A peaceful world based on human dignity, equality and justice can only be established if the Muslim Ummah forcefully play their global role and guide humanity. Thus, the unity of Islamic Ummah is the chief architect for reviving the 'Divine Civilization' in human history.
I pray to Allah (S.W.T.) to join our hearts and unite Muslim Ummah to revive the 'Divine Civilization' in human history. Ameen
Haider Reza Zabeth
Source: Imam reza network