Uloom al-Taareekh

KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORY

22:46. Do they not travel/Through the land, so that/Their hearts (and minds)
May thus learn wisdom/And their ears may/Thus learn to hear?
Truly it is not their eyes/That are blind, but their/Hearts which are
In their breasts.

47. Yet they ask thee/To hasten on the Punishment!
But God will not fail/In His promise. Verily
A Day in the sight of thy Lord/Is like a thousand years
Of your reckoning.

48. And to how many populations/Did I give respite, which
Were given to wrong-doing?/In the end I punished them.
To Me is the destination (of all).  (Surah Hajj)

We live in a moment, the horizon between the future and the past.  So ephemeral, this moment is.  Were is it?  At what second does the future become the past?  How long is this present moment?  What is its duration?  The ever-moving present is a singularity of no duration.

We could say that the future is all potentiality and no actuality, while the past is all actuality and no potentiality.  But is this true?  Yes, the future is characterized by potentiality, but is the past actual?  The present is actual; in fact, it is potential becoming actual.  But is the past actual?  It was…, but what is it now?  Does it actually exit?

Certainly, the past does not potentially exist.  It either exists or does not exist.  Unlike the future, it has no potential any more.  Its potential has been exhausted, and now it has … retired.  It has ceased to exist.  It is dead. 

However, something happened and its repercussions are still with us, like ripples in a pond of water or echoes of voices in the canyons of time.  Something happened in the present which has left imprints and effects in the present, the ever-moving present, the event horizon of the space-time continuum. 

Some have looked at time as linear, going one way.  Some have posited that at any given moment there are infinite possible futures, but only one past.  The line only goes one way.  Some have posited that even the past has infinite expressions.  Each moment leads forward to infinite futures, AND to infinite pasts. 

The Universe is what is, extended in space, in three dimensions; and in time, duration.  Allahu Samad, He is the self-sufficient upon which all depends.  He is One, Ahad, He is singular.  And He is Asr, time.  Asr also means middle – the Asr or middle prayers of the day are an example of this usage.  He has no beginning or end.  What does this mean?  It means He is All Middle.  All time and all space, but not with extent or duration, like Creation.  He encompasses time and space in one, unique Singularity.  And there is nothing like unto Him.

112:1 Say: He is Allah, the One!

2 Allah, the eternally Besought of all!

3 He begetteth not nor was begotten.

4 And there is none comparable unto Him.

With the Big Bang, the Creation spewed out into extent and duration.  And History began.

So how do we know what happened in the past?  Allah tells us to study the natural phenomenon around us and the evidence of peoples who came before us.

In his book, Iqtisadina, Sayed Muhammad Baqir al Sadr attacks the philosophy of history posited by the Communists.  In doing so, he marks out a view on history as something objective.  Something occurred in the past and it can objectively be known in the present. 

Scientifically-based study of past peoples is called Archeology.  Other natural sciences study the pasts of animals, plants, the planet Earth itself.  Astronomy studies the past of universe.  The stars we see shine as the result of past emissions of light.

So how is this knowledge of the past, objective?  Yes, something happened, …. I assume it did because there is present evidence of something happening, of continuity, of duration.  But, if conditions like Autism have taught us anything, it is that we filter out a lot of what is happening around us.  Allah knows all of these happening, but can we?  We filter out what is happening in the present, otherwise we would be overwhelmed by stimuli, so do we have objective knowledge of the present?  If we do not, how can we have objective knowledge of the past?

In this case, what is objective?  Perhaps it is being able to produce evidence for a position, for a statement or tasdiq about the present or past.  However, in one sense, all experience is subjective. It depends on our view point, our assumptions, our cultural beliefs and values.  As the Hiesenburg Uncertainty Principle points out, the observer is also part of the thing observed and will always affect the observation. 

Sayed al Sadr noted this in his updates to his work, Filasfana.  However, his main reason for writing this text was to refute Communist Dialectic Materialism.  Oddly enough, materialism actually precludes objectivity. I would refer you to this excellent book to discover why.  Dialectic Materialism leaves us in a shaky oscillating universe, where nothing is certain and everything is relative. 

So what about relativity?  Are there no absolutes, no certainties?  And if there are none in the universe in general, how can there be such things in history?  To understand how we can “know” history, we have to first understand how we “know” at all.

THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE

What does it mean to know something?  Is it merely a matter of data storage on the hard drive of our brains, which we call memory?  Or does it imply having some deeper relationship with that data?  Does it imply understanding?  Does it imply internalizing this data in such a way as to behave in a manner consistent with this data?  Is it “khabr”, “ilm” or “hikmah?”

Some of what we claim to know is based on our perceptions and our experiences.  We call this aposteriori knowledge or knowledge that is acquired – khabr.  Some of what we claim to know is based on intuition – ilm.  It does not arise from experience, but arises from relationships discovered by the mind.  We often call this apriori knowledge, knowledge that is not dependant upon experience, knowledge that is innate. 

However, there is another form of knowledge that we as humans require.  Because we have free will, and must make choices that have consequences, we require another form of knowledge to aid us in making these choices, the knowledge of what is morale.

Can we obtain this knowledge from experience?  Consider the lioness’ killing a gazelle. Is this morale, does it have a morale value?  From the lioness’ point of view, it is good.  Killing a gazelle feeds the lioness’ and their family, as well as a host of other creatures, like jackels, hyenas, vultures, even worms and flies.  From the gazelle’s point of view, well…, it is certainly not a pleasant experience becoming such a conscious part of the circle of life.  But again, is there really a morale value in these events?  Or are we just putting ourselves in the gazelle’s hooves because we, ourselves, have been hunted at one time?

Can we obtain this knowledge innately?  Innate knowledge consists of instinct,  as well as the principles upon which we analyze the information we obtain from experience.  From innate instinct and learned experience, we derive knowledge of the forms or tasawwir (concepts – either actual or potential), and relationships discovered between them, (tasdiq – either true or false).  We can state, “Killing is evil.” However, what is evil?  Killing someone who is about to kill your child is good for you and the child, isn’t it?  And to make matters more difficult, humans are able to look forward and predict consequences of present events, into the future. 

A lioness hunting for her family may be offered a choice, challenge a cheetah for a kill close by, or go and stalk and hunt a weakened buffalo in the distance.  Which choice will she make?  Most likely the easiest one, even if the other choice would provide more meat.  So she chases off the cheetah. 

Humans, on the other hand, can look forward and weigh degree of difficulty versus degree of reward.  We make more refined choices, including some that appear negative at first, but on reflection, turn out wonderfully.  We endure years of difficulty and strain to obtain the rewards of a well-built house, a lucrative education, a rewarding career, a fine herd of cattle, a wealthy family.

Other animals seem to be able to do some of this higher level thinking as well.  Dolphins, chimpanzees, bonobos, octopus and cuttlefish all have been shown to make higher level decisions.  But studies on language in gorillas and chimps have produced some interesting results.

Koko is a famous “talking” gorilla.  At one time, she had a consort named Michael.    Michael was captured wild in the jungle.  His mother was hacked to death in front of his eyes.  He remembered this event all of his life, and would draw pictures of green with patches of deep red.  There is photograph of Michael sitting in a window.  There is no way to describe his demeanor other than pensive.  What was he thinking about? Did he ever consider these humans he was interacting with?  How could they hack to death his mother, and yet produce kind and intelligent researchers such as Penny, the researcher who taught him to use sign language?  Michael has now left this world, but in that photo, we see a soul who is struggling with morality, yet he does not have the free will that humans have, and so he stands on the edge but cannot make that leap. 

We made that leap.  We ate the apple of knowledge of good and evil.  We took on the amana, the trust that even the heavens and the earth felt they could not bear.  We took on free will, and to have free will, we need to be able to distinguish between good and evil. 

To aid us in this exercise of free will, Allah gave us a qalb.  That thing with oscillates, oscillates between good and evil, between turning toward Allah and away from Him. The qalb is our “morale compass.”  And to aid us in always pointing toward “true north,”  Allah gave us “aql” or reason.  This is the innate component, the part that “perceives” not just concepts, tasawwur, but tasdiq, assents – statements that are either true or false.  We call this kind of perception, intuition.  It is the hikmah or “wisdom” that enables us to analyze a situation and make a decision based on distant consequences, the natural ability we have to recognize morality and make basic morale decisions.

The qalb is the compass, and the aql is the needle.  The aql helps us process information.  By using the innate apriori truths Allah gave us as part of our fitrah, we are able to analyze our experiences and guide our moral compass to better consequences based on those experiences, as well as on the experiences of others in the past.  

The aql is rational.  It uses rational processes generate truth or reveal falsity.

Deduction is the first rational process used by the aql..  If our assumptions or premises are true, the statements or tasdiq we derive from them are necessarily true.  Through deductive reasoning, we can gain knowledge of abstract constructs like math and geometry.  But deduction can also be based on experience, not just intuitive assumptions or apriori tasdiq.  However, the conclusions derived from these premises stem from the definitions of the tasawwur involved.  

A classic deductive argument follows:

1.  All bachelors are unmarried men
2. Tom is a bachelor

Therefore:  Tom is unmarried.

This argument takes the form of:

1. A = B
2. C = A

Therefore:  C = B

The truth table for this syllogism is:

T	T	F	F	F
T	F	T	F	F
T	F	T	T	F

The aql also uses inductive processes, based on scientific principles and observation.  Here, we observe as many cases or events of a similar kind as possible and then derive probabilities that the next case we see, or the next event we observe will follow the same pattern.  

We observe 100,000 swans and all are white, so we postulate that “All swans are white.”  While there is a good probability that the next swan that comes along will be white, it is not impossible that a black swan will appear, or even a pink one, for that matter.  

The form of this argument is:

A1 = B

A2 = B

…

A 100,000 = B

Therefore:  All As = B

The truth table for this syllogism will always produce the possibility that the conclusion is false even if all the premises are true.  Induction produces probabilities, not necessity.  The probability depends on the size of the sample.

So what about moral knowledge?  Is it based on deduction or induction?  Or is it based on both?  Is morality binary?  In Islam, every action has a value.  The hukm wadi’i value acts based on their comparison with ideal patterns of behavior.  Thus, an act can be sahih, fasid or batil; correct, voidable, and void or invalid.  Fasid acts are capable of being corrected, while batil acts cannot be corrected, and are invalid abnitio

Clearly the Islamic value of acts is “moral” in nature.  But what is the source of these values?  Clearly, the source is Allah.  So is any aspect of morality innate, part of our fitrah?

All people have a concept of morality.  Every society has declared murder, physical harm, and even social harm like slander to be evil.   We seem to have an innate sense of right and wrong.  Some things seemly clearly evil, and all people feel shock when hearing about massacres and horrible tortures of humans.

Michael, the gorilla also understood that killing his mother was painful to him, so how are we humans different?  Michael struggled on the brink of morality, but he could not make the leap to a sense of general morality, versus personal impact; moral acts versus a personally emotional act.  Was his mother’s death an evil act?  The poachers who butchered her to death with machetes went home and fed their kids.  How is that different from the lioness?  From the gorilla eating a trees fruit, the future children of that tree? 

The Prophet said,

عن أمير المؤمنين أبي حفصٍ عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه قال : سمعت رسول الله عليه وسلم يقول : سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : ( إنما الأعمال بالنيات ، وإنما لكل امرئ ما نوى ، فمن كانت هجرته إلى الله ورسوله فهجرته إلى الله ورسوله ، ومن كانت هجرته لدنيا يصيبها أو امرأة ينكحها فهجرته إلى ما هاجر إليه ) .

رواه إماما المحدثين أبو عبد الله محمد بن إسماعيل بن إبراهيم بن المغيرة بن بردزبه البخاري وأبو الحسين مسلم بن الحجاج بن مسلم القشيري النيسابوري في صحيحيهما اللذين هما من أصح الكتب المصنفة .

From the Commander of the Faithful Abi Hafs ‘Umar Ibn Al Khattab, who said : I heard the Prophet of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) say :
“Actions are but by intentions and every man shall have but that which he intended. Thus he whose migration was for Allah and His messenger, his migration was for Allah and His messenger, and he whose migration was to achieve some worldly benefit or to take some woman in marriage, his migration was for that for which he migrated.”
Related by Al-Bukhaari and Muslim.

(http://alchishti.wordpress.com/2006/02/20/actions-are-judged-by-intentions-imam-nawawis-arbain-1/)

Upon our creation, the malaaikah asked if Allah SWT would place upon this earth one who would create mischief and shed blood.  We intentionally kill, we intentionally do evil.  We do things that are not simply to feed the family.  We do not kill Michael’s mother to eat her, we kill her to sell her hands and feet, her head, her son.  We are capable of going beyond survival or even relative contentment to greed, avarice, and limitless selfishness.  We hoard things, not just so we will have supplies in the future, but prevent anyone else from having them, ever…

In Islam, acts are also valued as fard, mustahabb, mubah, makruh or haram.  These are the hukm shari’I of obligatory, preferred, permissible, disliked and forbidden.   Morality is not simply binary.  It can be complex.  Things are not just good and evil.  Things are gray.  

The qalb has three potential positions on an act.  We call these the nafs amr bi al suu, the nafs lawammah, and the nafs al mutmainah; the soul that commands to evil, the soul that blames and the soul at peace.  Some things are clearly evil and some are clearly good.  Our innate fitrah tells us which is which.  Our souls, then either command us to do evil or are at peace with the good.  Notice that it takes a command, an intention to do evil, but to do good is the natural state, the peaceful state.  The nafs al lawammah is the soul that blames, this is the state of the qalb that is dealing with less clear acts.  It is trying to analyze the consequences and determine if the ultimate consequences are evil or good.

2:216 But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not. (al-Baqara).

WAHY: THE NECESSITY OF WORDS OF INSPIRATION

2: 37. Then learnt Adam from his Lord

Words of inspiration, and his Lord
Turned towards him; for He
Is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.

38. We said: "Get ye down all from here;
And if, as is sure, there comes to you
Guidance from Me, whosoever
Follows My guidance, on them
Shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

After Adam AS disobeys the command of Allah SWT to not eat of the tree, Adam responds by repenting, seeking tawbah.  Unlike Iblis, who also disobeys Allah by not making sujud to Adam, Adam repents.  Iblis responds to his disobedience by becoming even more egotistical and obstinate.  He is then given respite by Allah until the Day of Judgment, but in the end, he will be punished.  He receives no solace or guidance.

Adam, however, repents and is then rewarded with “words” from his Lord.  These kalimaat are words of inspiration, words of wahy – revealed words.  In other places in the Qur’an, revelation is called “al-Kitab” because it was written, like the Saheefa Ibrahim, and the Torah and Injeel, and Qur’an.  But there was no writing or script in the time of Adam, AS, so he is given oral “kalimaat.” These words were revealed by Allah and part of this message was that Allah would send guidance from time to time to man.  This guidance would provide a furqan or criteria for moral judgments.

Innate knowledge is not enough to guide moral decisions because morality is not based on perception or intuition, but upon a deeper sense of “wisdom” or hikmah. Although we have an innate sense of hikmah from our fitrah, for those questions, acts and issues that are gray, deeper, involve layers of consequences; we need guidance or revealed knowledge to show us the way to make these kind of moral decisions. 

Adam and Hawa had the hikmah of their fitrah to guide them, and they had aql or reason, but they still failed to obey Allah and ate of the tree.  Shaytan convinces them that this act of eating of the tree would be good for them.  How could our basic fitrah show us that eating a fruit would be evil?  Yes, Allah SWT ordered us to not eat, but… why is it evil?  Is it evil to eat a fruit? Or is it evil to disobey?  What are the consequences?  Of eating? Of disobeying?  Seems Adam and Hawa need more information, something beyond just the fitrah.

Allah SWT tells Adam AS, after he disobeys and is ejected from the Garden, that He will send guidance to mankind.  This guidance is imperative because the innate “fitrah” and  “aql” were not enough to prevent man from falling into sin, into disobedience.

In Surah al Baqara, Allah SWT tells how He taught Adam the names of things.  He taught mankind the forms, the tasawwir. 

2:231. And He taught Adam the names
Of all things; then He placed them
Before the angels, and said: "Tell Me
The nature of these if ye are right."

When he asks the angels, those beings created by Allah SWT out of pure ruh, who have no free will, to name things, they answer they are not able to do anything like that.  They have only acquired knowledge provided to them by Allah.  They know nothing else.  They have no innate knowledge. 

2:232. They said: "Glory to Thee: of knowledge
We have none, save what Thou
Hast taught us: in truth it is Thou
Who art perfect in knowledge and wisdom.

Here, the malaika make an important statement; only Allah SWT has knowledge and wisdom.  Allah is the actual source of knowledge and wisdom.  And it is Allah that provides us with any form of knowledge and with the inate ability to process it, understand it and derive wisdom from it.  He created us with the ability to perceive with the senses and the mind, and with the aql to analyze this data.  He is the real source of both acquired and intuitive knowledge.

Allah is also the only source of revealed knowledge, what we call “wahy,” revelation. It is this form of obtaining knowledge that provides us with guidance.

So we have three ways of obtaining knowledge, through perception, through intuition and through revelation.  Hence, there are three types of knowledge, acquired, innate, and revealed.

Allah SWT tested man and jinn.  Iblis failed.  When he disobeys he remains arrogant and disobedient, while man repented and returned to obedience.  We were reward with words from Allah SWT to guide us as to how to make these more complex moral decisions, how to go from nafs al lawammah to nafs al mutmainah.  

This guidance is contained in the Kitab – The Tawrah, Injeel and Qur’an.  So we have the hikmah of aql and the furqan of revealed wahy in the kitab.  

DURATIONAL KNOWLEDGE

Considering the nature of human knowledge, what can we say about durational knowledge.  There are three branches of this knowledge – knowledge of the future, knowledge of the past and knowledge of the present – nur al ‘aan. 

We will perhaps discuss the knowledge of the future and present on another occasion, if Allah SWT gives us life.  For now we are focused on taariikh, knowledge of the past.

We asked before is objective knowledge of the past is possible.  We have personal understanding of subjective knowledge.  We call it memory.  As humans, we have individual memory, family memory, tribal memory, national memory.  Subjective in nature, these visions of the past reflect at best a tiny snap shot of the entire universe at that moment.  Not only is the view myopic, but our assumptions, values and other social and cultural factors color the scene.  The Romans hated the Carthaginians, so our “memory” of them is viewed behind Roman-colored glasses.  

Sometimes history tells us more about ourselves than the people and events of the past.  It reveals our prejudices, vices, and good points.  The Scarlet Letter, a book by Nathaniel Hawthorne, reflects the moral values of the Puritans and early religious settlers of the Americas.  It also reflects the author’s thoughts about the hypocrisy of self-righteous people, and about the double standard in moral behavior for men and women.  Nearly two decades ago, Demi Moore starred in a movie based on this same story, which reflected modern, liberation-centered notions of the role of women and morality.  The same thing could be said of evidence-based views of the past.

Shaheed al Sadr held that history was objective.  Based on his conception of causation and his argument that causation is actual, and not only actual but an apriori first principle; Shaheed al Sadr reasoned that history was not relative, but objectively knowable.

How can we objectively know history?  Certainly, we can look for evidence in the earth, as Allah SWT suggests.  We can observe ruins, and the remains of clothes, foodstuffs, trash, even human remains.  Based on inductive reasoning, we can make reasonable theories and assumptions about the lives of the people of the past.  This physical evidence can confirm verbal or written reports and well as prove how skewed they are.  Hence, physical evidence of past events help us analyze verbal and written reports.

Verbal and written reports also assist us in knowing history.  They reveal what happened, but they also reveal people’s perceptions of what happened.  This can be just as important, because these perceptions shape later events, even present events.  

Therefore, the verbal stories and written accounts, especially first person witness accounts, provide objective evidence, but also important clues as to causation of other events.  Sometimes our perceptions are even more important in shaping events than what actually happened.  Our psychology plays as much a role as physiology. 

Let us take the story of Gilgamesh and the Flood.  Whether it is true or not is not as relevant as the lessons we learn, the values it reveals, the impact on the continuing human drama.  Many people have a flood story. The Mesopotamian cultures, the Greeks, and the Maya, Inca, Ojibwe and Algonquin tribes all have flood myths. There is some physical evidence of such a catastrophic event.  Some have even found wood beams on mountains in Turkey.  But the story of Nuh, AS, and the lessons that story impart have more lasting consequences and are more “historical” value.  Nuh, Gilgamesh, Deucalion, and Nanabozho may have been the same person, but what matters is the result of this flood.  Rampant sin and evil is cleansed from the earth; the earth is renewed and humanity is reestablished from pure, sinless and noble ancestors.  It is a warning of what can happen to any society that strays too far from the moral path, who crosses the line and goes so far as to deserve to be wiped clean from the face of the earth.  In history, people are punished, but their ruins remain as a reminded.  Here, with the flood, not even the ruins remain.  No trace or taint is allowed to remain behind, only a warning…

No doubt, history is important as a teacher.  It provides us with lessons and also with continuity.  We gain understanding of causation; the cause of current events.  This knowledge enables us to learn from our failures and our successes.  We grow as individuals and as societies.  Yes, history has an objective component.  It did happen.  But it is how we remember it, and how we use that memory that is the most important.  Just like our memories help us train our moral compass, so history enables us to train the collective moral compass.  The goal of the din of Islam is not just to save individual souls, but to save all mankind, as mankind.

Allah SWT has fulfilled His promise to us.  He has sent us guidance, the guidance of Islam.

 

Syrian Holocaust

5: 30 But (the other's) mind imposed on him the killing of his brother, so he slew him and became one of the losers.

31 Then Allah sent a raven scratching up the ground, to show him how to hide his brother's naked corpse. He said: Woe unto me! Am I not able to be as this raven and so hide my brother's naked corpse ? And he became repentant.  

32 For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth. 

 33 The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;  (Surah al-Maida)

Today, Al Jazeerah and other news outlets are reporting that prisoners have been tortured, starved, and executed.  Thereafter, they were taken to be photographed, and then summarily disposed.  One of the persons who was ordered to photograph these bodies reports he took over 55,000 photos over 11,000 people.  

How many more people have to die in Syria?  How much more blood must be spilled?  What does Bashar al Asad want?  Does he really think things will return to the past?  Does he really think he will some how avoid that awful doom, Adhabun Adheem?

I appeal to the Shia Ulema of Iraq and Iran to condemn the actions of the Syrian government.  Have you forgot Saddam Hussein and the gas he used on Kurds and Iranians?  Have you forgotten what he did to so many opposition leaders in Iraq?  Have you forgotten what he did to our beloved Shaheed Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr?  Have you forgotten how he tortured and mutilated our beloved Shaheedah Aminah Bint al Huda?  

The Prophet SAW said that the hud punishments should be applied justly and on all, no matter what their rank.  Even if the hand of the thief to be cut was the hand of Fatimah bint Muhammad (AS), then the hud must be applied.  NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.  THERE IS NO SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY IN ISLAM.  This was the understanding of the Prophet SAW, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali (RAA).  

What can we do?  We must speak out, write to the embassies of these nations, and appeal to the presidents of the USA and Russia. 

We must also call on those groups striving against this oppression, this dhulm, to work together.  Any group that kills others or fights others who are striving against oppression is themselves an oppressor and is guilty of harabah.  The so-called Dawlat al-Islami is far from its name. The so-called Nusrah will only lead us to defeat.  Islam means surrender to Allah SWT, and communion with Allah, and community with believers.  Ikhtilaf is natural, and often a blessing, but fitnah, such as inculcated by such groups, is haram.  Fitnah akbar min al qatl.  And qatl is haram.  Yes Qatl is Haram!

 

We are commanded to strive in the Path of Allah, and most hold that jihad is fard.  It is.  But it is not just fard al-kifayah, but fard al ain.  On this point, I agree.  Striving for the pleasure of Allah SWT, and putting our faith into action are fard.  However, jihad is NOT qatl -fighting or killing.

Hajj Malik al-Shabazz (Malcolm X) talked about "by any means necessary."  This is not Islamic.  The ends do not justify the means in Islam.  The means must also be pure.  For example, some Jaafari Ulema have found that it is permissible to charge non-Muslims riba' since it takes money from the hands of non-Muslims.  However, Allah SWT has specifically said in the Qur'an that charging riba' is making war on Allah.  It is haram, and a grave sin.  The ends of taking money out of the hands of non-Muslims that could be spent against us, the Muslims, does not justify charging riba,' a grave sin and the making of war on Allah.  If we really want non-Muslims to not spend their money in efforts against us, then wouldn't it be better to treat them fairly and equally, and not charge them interest, causing them to have a fondness for Islam and Muslims, and possibly to be the sabab for their conversion to Islam.

Yes, we are permitted to fight, when that it necessary and appropriate.  However, should we be fighting fellow Muslims instead of striving against the atheistic Baathist regime who is butchering thousands every month?  Are we majnun?  If these groups are so majnun to act in this self-destructive manner, they are too majnun to even be required to follow Islam.  They are not required to pray, fast, make Hajj or even strive in the Path of Allah.  They are too crazy to be required to do so.

The body has a right, a haqq on us.  If such people are so crazy, they need to be locked up to protect themselves and others, and not allowed to roam around playing games with peoples' lives.  They are no better than Bashar.  Let us strive against all the oppressors, all the Yazids among us.  

Sunni, Shia, Sufi, Thisi, Thati.  Once a Sultan called an Allamah to his court.  The Allamah took off his shoes and carried them in with him.  He did not prostrate to the king. The courtiers of the Sultan blamed him for this, but he replied that he bowed to no one but Allah SWT.  Then they asked him why he had not left his shoes at the door.  He replied that he had heard that the Prophet had gone to a meeting of the Maliki scholars and that his (SAW) shoes had been stolen, so since some in the gathering were Maliki, he wanted to keep an eye on his shoes.  The courtiers laughed at the Allama's ignorance.  Didn't he know that Imam Malik lived 100 years after the time of the Prophet SAW?  The Allama replied, his must have been mistaken, it was the Hanbali scholars. They corrected the Allama again, and so with all the schools of thought.  Then he said, "if all of these Imams and Shuyuk lived after the Prophet SAW, then how did they originate these sects?"

There is one Islam.  Yes we have ikhtilaf, but fitnah....

Toward A New Unified Madhdhab

 MINHAJ AL-MAQAASIDIYYAH

          Before we begin our discussion of any fiqh issue, we should have an understanding of the basic methodology necessary to tackle any issue in fiqh – what we call Usool al-Fiqh.  Nine schools of thought or madhdhaahib present their manaahij or methodologies to the world today;  the Sunni schools of Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafii, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal; the modern schools of the Jamhuriyya, and the Salafiyya; the Shia Ja'afai schools, Aakhbari (textual) and Usooli (rational); and the emerging school based on the work of Al-Shatiibii, the Maqaasidiyya.  This last school is emerging and is best exemplified by the work of Ibn Ashur, Tariq Ramadan and Jasser Auda.  

          The Maqaasid ash-Shariah are the objectives of the Law.  They form the basic purposes for which the Law is sent down by Allah SWT.  The Maqaasid are;  promotion and protection of deen, promotion and protection of life, promotion and protection of aql, promotion and protection of dignity (lineage and honor), and promotion and protection of property.  Other scholars have cited other objectives, but they generally fall into one of these five categories.  For a thorough discussion of the Maqaasid please consult Jasser Auda's book, Maqasid Al-Shariah as Philosophy of Islamic Law: A Systems Approach, published by IIIT.

            While the Maqaasidiyya are mostly Sunni in aqeedah, the school has at least one Shia adherent, Sayed Muhammad Baqir Al-Sadr.  Although he has generally been seen as a rationalist due to his focus on presenting rational arguments against dialectic materialism, the philosophical foundation of Communism, he was known to be very interesting in the work of Ibn Ashur, and his works, particularly in Islamic Economics, (Iqtisaduna, Bank al-Ribawi), reflect an approach to usool that is neither solely textually based nor solely usooli based, but looks to the themes and spirit of the law expressed in the text to aid in the practical application of Divine Law in a particular environment. 

            Unlike Sunni thought, which due to the emphasis on text (Nuss), as well as classic interpretation of that text, as binding, Shia thought has long posited the necessity of “Nur al-Aan,” the Present Light.  While Sunni thought became mired in the closing of the proverbial “Doors of Ijtehad,”  Shia thought held that the decisions of the Marja’ or Mujtahid were only binding during his lifetime.  Once he was no longer present and was out of touch with reality, the mukhallif was no longer obliged to follow him, and was required to turn to a new, present marja'. 

            As a point of Islamic history, this difference began early in our Ummah.  From the early days, Abu Bakr and Umar (RAA) adopted a “common law” understanding of Shariah law.  The decisions of Muslim judges and rulers, especially the Khalif, became binding on the community, just like the decisions of judges in the American common law system.  Common law decisions become the law itself, apart from the legislation upon which it ideally is based.  Hence, we hear things in America like “judge-made law,” versus the statutes and laws passed by the legislature. 

            Ali ibn Abi Talib opposed this common law position, and posited what we refer to today as a “civil law” system, based on the code itself.  Judges’ decisions are not binding, although they may be highly persuasive.  The law is the legislation.  Judges are charged to apply the law to particular cases.  The only thing that is binding is the law, not the application of the law.  Today, Europe and many Middle Eastern countries have civil law court systems.

            The new Usool of the Maqaasidiyya reflects a more realistic understanding of legal systems, one that is capable of staying true to the Shariah Law, the Divine Law laid down by Allah in the Qur’an and Sunnah, and one that is also capable of remaining fresh and elastic so as to be able to meet all this forever changing world can demand. 

            The minhaj I have found best meets the needs of a united Ummah – one that is capable of carrying forward an Ummah envisioned by Shaheed al-Sadr – is one based on the Qur’an, the Authentic Hadith, and the Maqaasid al-Shariah, with highly persuasive secondary evidence from the opinions of the People of Madina, and the Judgments of Imam Ali and Qadi Shuraih.  

ULOOM AL HADITH

            The biggest issue to be resolved on the road to this minhaj is in the determination of authentic hadith, as well as the determination of authentic aathar and the judgments of Imam Ali and Qadi Shuraih.  Admittedly, this area will take time to consider and develop.  However, one thing is certain, the laudable attempt by Shaikh Nasruddin al-Albani, despite its momentous effort and sincerity, falls well short of its goals.  Both Shaikh bin Bazz and Shaikh Uthaimeen informed Shaikh al-Albani that his minhaj of looking solely to the Ilm al-Rijal, the Knowledge of the Narrators, was not sufficient to be able to call a hadith, sahih.  Not only can an isnad or chain of narrators be faked, but the books of Ilm al-Rijal come in two flavors, Sunni and Shia.  The great scholar and author of the authoritative book on Uloom al Hadith, Kitab Ma'arifat Anwa 'Ilm Al Hadith, Shaikh Shahrazuhri, notes that even in his time (1100 AD) it was not possible to correctly determine authenticity of a hadith by Ilm al Rijal alone.  How then, would it be possible for a modern scholar like Shaikh al-Albani to do this?

            For now, I will put forth the following criteria for determination of a sahih hadith.  The hadith should be found in substantial form in either the Muwatta of Imam Malik, the Kitab al Kafi of Muhammad Ya'qub Kulayni, the Sahih of Imam Bukhaari, or the Sahih of Imam Muslim.  It must meet the criteria of Imam Bukhaari as to isnad – in other words all the narrators should have actually met one another.  Its matin must meet the requirement of: "whatever (hadith) agrees with the Book of God (the Qur'an), accept it. And whatever contradicts it, reject it" It must not favor of any particular sect, nor should it be overly predictive or critical of future sectarian divisions.  Material that should have been known to more than one person should be reported by more than one person. For example, prayers and communal actions should have been reported by many people, not just one.  Ahad hadith are only acceptable if the matin contains material that only that person could have or should have known. 

           

            All other hadith books and other material, be it Seerah, Tafsir, Tarikh, etc may be persuasive, but are not binding.  Only the Qur’an and verifiably Sahih Hadith are binding.  As for aathar and the opinions of Imam Ali and Qadi Shuraih, they are highly persuasive, but require careful study to firstly determine authenticity, and secondly to determine applicability in the current context.  

THE ROLE OF REASON

            However, our law is not solely textual.  In order to apply Divine Law in the present light, we have many tools which Allah SWT has given us.  He instructs us to use reason, aql.  It is most unfortunate that the excesses of the Mu’tazillah led Sunnis to abandon reason, and so leave us to either emotions and whims or absurd literalism.  Allah gave us reason, aql; unless you deny this, then He meant us to use it.  For this reason, in the absence of a clear text (nass), I agree to the use of rational methods, including Qiyas, and Maslahah al-Mursalah.  However, I also feel there is a great role for Mantiq or Logic.  As noted by Shia scholars, Qiyas can have its limits and should not be stretched too far.  Sometimes the two methods give the same results, but the two should be used together to produce the best results.  So any new ruling should take into consideration both methods in its dalil.  As for Maslalah or Public Policy, this is important and should be taken into account; however, it should not be overused or stretched too far either.  

MASLAHAH

           

            Many arguments for certain fiqh positions, including those regarding the permissibility of eating commercial meat or for the calculation of the hilal that signals the start of an Islamic month, seem to revolve around perceived Maslahah, either the Maslahah of our wallets or the Maslahah of our non-Muslim bosses.  In perfect reflection of Jalal Al-e-Ahmed's Gharbzedegih, our people scream about injustice in such and such a country. and then turn into red-faced quaking cowards before their Western overlords when it comes to fear of losing their flow of green paper.  It is not for our own Maslahah.  How many of us end up working on Eid?  How many of us even bother to go to Eid prayer, or stay for the khutbah?  We would rather celebrate Halloween – Samhain in the old Pagan calendar -,and Christmas.  So we dress our kids up as witches and black cats, instead of Ali Ibn Abi Talib or Umar ibn Khattab. (The permissibility of the later is not the issue here.)

            Maslahah is important, but it must be balanced against the Maqaasid al-Shariah.  When we do so, we will achieve results that best meet our individual needs, our collective needs, and our duties and obligations to each other, and most importantly to Allah SWT.

Ashura: The Call to Strive Against Oppression

Every Firawn Has a Musa

Islam is built upon a single great overreaching principle – Justice.  And He has commanded us to strive against injustice.


2:39. And fight them on
Until there is no more
Tumult or oppression,
And there prevail
Justice and faith in God
Altogether and everywhere;
But if they cease oppression and war, then verily God
Doth see all that they do.

The path of Islam is the path of justice and freedom.  Allah SWT reminds us that He is al-Adl – the Justice and He will not treat us, his Creation, with the least injustice.

One of the ways He SWT has ensured that justice will prevail and people will have the freedom to choose to have faith in Allah, is by sending messengers to be a witness unto us.

إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَا إِلَيْكُمْ رَسُولًا شَاهِدًا عَلَيْكُمْ كَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا إِلَىٰ فِرْعَوْنَ رَسُولًا

Al-Muzammil 73:15  Behold I have sent a messenger, a witness from among you, just as I sent a messenger to Firawn.  

Our Prophet Muhammad SAW was sent as a messenger to deliver the guidance, the message from Allah, and as a witness to the truth of that message as well as a witness to the reaction of the people to that message.  Likewise, was Musa AS sent to the people of Firawn.  In fact, every prophet was sent as a witness to his people.  

The shuhadah al anbiyya, the witness of the prophets (AS) during this life is to the truth, the message that Allah SWT is One, and that He will hold us accountable for our actions on the Day of Judgment.  The witness of the prophets (AS) in the next life will be as to our acceptance of this message, this truth.

 10:47. To every people (was sent)
An Apostle: when their Apostle
Comes (before them), the matter
Will be judged between them
With justice, and they
Will not be wronged.

It was reported that the day the Children of Israel were saved from Fir`awn was called the day of `Ashura'. Imam Ahmad reported that Ibn `Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah came to Al-Madinah and found that the Jews were fasting the day of `Ashura'. He asked them, "What is this day that you fast'' They said, "This is a good day during which Allah saved the Children of Israel from their enemy, and Musa used to fast this day.'' The Messenger of Allah said,

«أَنَا أَحَقُّ بِمُوسَى مِنْكُم»

(I have more right to Musa than you have.) 


So the Messenger of Allah fasted that day and ordered that it be fasted. This Hadith was collected by Al-Bukhari, Muslim, An-Nasa'i and Ibn Majah. 

We know that Musa came to the people of Firawn.  Firawn was caught up in the gravest of sins, the shirk of setting himself up as a god.  He demanded that the people revere and worship him, as if he was a lord and was the one who actually provided their sustenance.  How deluded he was? 

28: 3. We rehearse to thee some
Of the story of Moses
And Pharaoh in Truth,
For people who believe.
4. Truly Pharaoh elated himself
In the land and broke up
Its people into sections, or parties
oppressing a small group
Among them: their sons he slew,
But he kept alive their females:
For he was indeed
A maker of mischief, a criminal
5. And We wished to bring peace and safety
to those who were
Being oppressed in the land,
To make them leaders, imams
And make them heirs spiritually and temporally


(And We appointed for Musa thirty nights and added (to the period) ten (more)) (7:142). 

It was said that these days were during the month of Dhul-Qa`dah plus the first ten days in Dhul-Hijjah, after which the Children of Israel were delivered from Fir`awn and they safely crossed the sea. Allah's statement,

﴿وَإِذْ ءَاتَيْنَا مُوسَى الْكِتَـبَ﴾

(And (remember) when We gave Musa the Scripture) means, the Tawrah,

﴿وَالْفُرْقَانِ﴾

(And the criterion) that is that which differentiates between truth and falsehood, guidance and deviation.

﴿لَعَلَّكُمْ تَهْتَدُونَ﴾

(So that you may be guided aright)

So the Bani Israel continued to commemorate the call to justice delivered by Musa to Firawn by fasting on the day of Ashura, the tenth day of Muharram.  

And every Firawn has a Musa.  To everyone who comes along and in arrogance, sets themselves up as a lord, a god, demanding to be worshiped by his fellow human beings, and in doing so commits innumerable acts of injustice, Allah SWT sends a Musa.  

The Quran remarks that Firawn and his people will be in the worst place in hell fire.  This will be their just reward for their injustice to humanity, their injustice to Allah SWT.

The Qasas or story of Musa and Firawn reminds us that Muslims must always strive against injustice.  In remembrance of this, Sunni Muslims fast on the 10th day of Muharram, the Day of Ashura.

What if the Firawn is a Muslim?

 

But what if the person committing Dhulm claims to be a Muslim?  

Some claim that Muslims cannot revolt against a Muslim ruler, even if he behaves unjustly.  They cite as evidence the following hadith:
The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “The best among your rulers are those whom you love and they love you in turn, those who pray (make supplication) for you and you pray for them. The worst of your rulers are those whom you hate and they hate you in turn, and you curse them and they curse you.”

Someone asked: “O Messenger of Allah! Shall we confront them with swords?”

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “No, as long as they hold prayers among you. If you see from your rulers what you hate, hate the action they do but do not rebel against them.” [Sahîh Muslim]

They say, “The majority of Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamâ`ah have adopted these hadîth and use them as evidence in their ruling that is unlawful to rebel against the ruler, no matter how oppressive he might be, unless he exhibits outright unbelief.”  (Sheikh Muhammad al-Qannâs,  http://en.islamtoday.net/node/1404).

Imam Ibn Taymiyyah says: “The Prophet (peace be upon him) ordered people to be patient with the oppression of the rulers and refrain from fighting them. This is better for people for their worldly life and their Hereafter. Whoever opposes them intentionally will cause nothing but mischief. Allah will eliminate evil by way of the oppressive king much more than the oppression he is doing to people. It was also said that sixty years under an oppressive ruler are better than one night without any ruler.”

Allah SWT warns us about violence and killing against fellow Muslims: 

  

4: 92 It is not for a believer to kill a believer unless (it be) by mistake. He who hath killed a believer by mistake must set free a believing slave, and pay the blood- money to the family of the slain, unless they remit it as a charity. If he (the victim) be of a people hostile unto you, and he is a believer, then (the penance is) to set free a believing slave. And if he cometh of a folk between whom and you there is a covenant, then the blood-money must be paid unto his folk and (also) a believing slave must be set free. And whoso hath not the wherewithal must fast two consecutive months. A penance from Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise.

93 Whoso slayeth a believer of set purpose, his reward is hell for ever. Allah is wroth against him and He hath cursed him and prepared for him an awful doom.

94 O ye who believe! When ye go forth in the sabeel of Allah, be careful to discriminate, and say not unto one who offereth you peace: "Thou art not a believer," seeking the chance profits of this life (so that ye may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils. Even thus (as he now is) were ye before; but Allah hath since then been gracious unto you. Therefore take care to discriminate. Allah is ever Informed of what ye do.

Although it is may be unlawful to fight against a Muslim ruler, this does not mean we should just patiently accept injustice.  We must not refrain from enjoining what is right and forbidding what is evil. In fact, we are required to do that and glorify our religion and to raise the word of righteousness, each one according to his ability.

In accepting the position of Amir, Abu Bakr said:

O People! I have been put in authority over you and I am not the best of you. So if I do the right thing then help me and if I do wrong then put me straight. Truthfulness is a sacred trust and lying is a betrayal. The weak amongst you is strong in my sight. I will surely try to remove his pain and suffering. And the strong amongst you is weak to me I will – Allah willing – realize the right from him fully. When obscene things spread among any nation, calamities generally continued to descend upon them. As long as I obey Allah and His messenger, you should obey me, and if I do not obey Allah and His messenger, then obedience to me is not incumbent upon you. (Now prepare for prayer). 

While some have taken the hadith regarding the unlawfulness of rebelling to mean any form of rebellion, Abu Bakr tells us this is not so.  He specifically tells the people not to obey him if he does not obey Allah and His Messenger, in other words if he fails to uphold the Deen of Islam, if he fails to follow its teachings and strays from its path.  
Although fighting and killing is not desirable and fitnah in the Muslim community is a grave sin, when faced with injustice and oppression, we must respond and not sit quietly by.  

We must first amr bi al-ma’ruf wa nahi anni al munkar – command the good and forbid the wrong.  Many misunderstand this important concept.  Some seem to think this is forcing people to Islam.  But Allah SWT makes it clear that there can be no compulsion in religion.  The choice to submit to Allah SWT must be free.  

Abu Bakr (RAA) says, that if he errs, set him straight.  Rulers are human,  therefore, if they make mistakes, we should gently remind them and give them the freedom and opportunity to do better.  

But amr bi al-ma’ruf wa nahi anni al munkar also means to be a witness, to be a shaheed.


2:143. Thus have We made of you
An Ummat justly balanced,
That ye might be witnesses
Over the nations,
And the Apostle a witness
Over yourselves;
And We appointed the Qibla
To which thou wast used,
Only to test those who followed
The Apostle from those
Who would turn on their heels
(From the Faith). Indeed it was
(A change) momentous, except
To those guided by God.
And never would God
Make your faith of no effect.
For God is to all people
Most surely full of kindness,
Most Merciful.


It is the role of the Ummah to be a witness over mankind, to witness as to the truth of the message of Islam, and to witness the reaction of the people to the message.  That includes witnessing to our leaders.

And the Prophet is the witness over us as to the message he gave us, and as to our response to it.

The Uthmanic Legacy

Muslims are forbidden to wage war, to cause tulmult and oppression and to create fitnah.  Allah SWT says the fitnah is worse than Qatl – tulmult and oppression is worse than killing.  On the other hand, Muslims are commanded to strive against injustice.  When it is the leader himself who is creating the tumult and oppression, he must be restrained.  

Unfortunately, we have usually killed him, and not just restrained him.  It started with Uthman.  Many were dissatisfied with Uthman and the fact that he favored his family, the Bani Umayyah.  They demanded change and marched on Madina.  They ended up killing the man and cutting off his wife’s fingers, because he refused to step down.  

It was wrong for Uthman to continue to rule when the people made it clear they were not longer satisfied with his rule. 

Imam Ahmad said: “Obedience to the ruler who is agreed upon by people is obligatory.” 

What we should note here is that obedience is required when the people have agreed on the leader, not when they are no longer satisfied with his rule.  People change and power corrupts.  Once a community feels the ruler is no longer looking after their best interest, and is oppressing them, that leader should be restrained.  If he is a Muslim, his blood is inviolate, but that does not mean he cannot be forced to step down.  

Every Yazeed Has A Hussein

We turn now to another Ashura, the one over 1300 years ago, the day that Hussein ibn Ali (RAA) stood at Karbalaa’.  A tyrant reigned in Hussein’s time.  He oppressed the people and lived in wealth and privilege.  Yet he claimed to be Muslim.  We can argue whether his behavior had so crossed the line that he had left Islam.  Many claim modern leaders have done so, in order to justify killing them.  This is not the point.  We cannot judge a person’s heart.  If they claim Islam, we cannot judge them, just as Allah points out in the Qur’an, even if they claim Islam just to save their skins, you cannot kill them.  Yazeed claimed to be a Muslim.  Yet he began to distort the message itself.  He began to oppress his own people.  

And so Imam Hussein (RAA) marched towards the people of Iraq who cried to him for help against the oppression.  He sought to mediate, to help settle the disputes, to try to talk sense to the leaders, to remind them of the true teachings of the deen of Islam.  

But the leaders sent an army to hunt him down and kill him.  They killed the nephew of Imam Ali, Muslim ibn Aqeel.  Who kills a messenger?  To do so violates all the rules of war men have agreed upon for all history, all over the world.  Then they went for Hussein, the grandson of the Prophet, and all the members of the Abd al Muttalib.  

Hussein (RAA) made his stand at the dusty plain of Karbalaa.  The blood of the grandson of the Prophet and his family soaks the soil of that barren plain to this day.  

Shia Muslims remember this Ashura by re-enacting the bloody passion of Hussein, by shedding tears and bloodying their own backs in remorse and sorrow.

The New Ashura

 

As we all know, our brothers and sisters in Syria are suffering tremendous oppression.  What began as peaceful demonstrations turned into bloody repeats of Karbalaa.  Our brothers and sisters and children are being butchered just as Hussein ibn Ali and the family of our beloved Prophet SAW were slaughtered over 1300 years ago, and by the same caliber of person, a person who flaunts religious laws, and kills fellow Muslims without hesitation or excuse.

What makes matters even worse is that the tyrant of our time masquerades as a descendant of Imam al-Saadiq, Ali ibn Abi Talib, the beloved baba of Hussein.  The legacy of the Bani AbdulMuttalib, and of Imam Ali and Hussein ibn Ali is a legacy of standing up for justice and striving against oppression.  Not only has Bashar al-Zhalim forfeited all rights to the legacy of the family of Abdul Muttalib, but he has committed the most heinous crime imaginable.  He has set himself up as a god.  He has killed children for failing to make sajdah on his likeness!  Istaghfirullah!!

Firawn did this long ago – and Prophet Musa AS warned him.  As we mentioned, Allah SWT has reserved a special torment in hell for those who set themselves up as gods – as rivals to Allah SWT Himself.   

For how many years have we seen violence in the Middle East and in the so-called Muslim World.  While it is true that many of these conflicts have been justified by oppression by outside forces, colonial powers and other jabbar, they have achieved nothing.  Not a single armed conflict in any Muslim land has been successful.  Although we may admire the heroism, the perseverance, the tenacity and strength of the oppressed people, not a single armed conflict or resistance movement has gained territory, managed to drive out the oppressors or managed to return their land to a state of peace.

Until Tunisia and Egypt.  The youth achieved real and lasting victory against jabbar not through violence, but through waging peace.  They waged real jihad – guarding each others property, protecting buildings from looters and criminal elements, even taking away trash and cleaning the city.  They achieved victory by praying together in the streets, by joining hands and getting beyond tribal affiliations, village affiliations and other things which divide humanity.  They achieved victory by following the actual Sunnah of the Prophet – who created an Ummah – free of social and political subdivisions and sources of fitnah, who called us to action – to put our faith into action and not just spew rhetoric and slogans.  And the leaders of this victory were there in the streets, just like our Prophet and Sahabi, who led in the effort.  They did not shout and scream and incite people to violence and then retreat to holes of safety while their followers fought and died.  They achieved victory through love not hate; through caring for each other, treating each other as equals, leaving behind the kibriyya of the group identity and adopting the identity of One Ummah. 

In Syria too, the people sought to wage peace, but the brutal response by Bashar al-Zhaalim overwhelmed the people.  He has tried to crush their will, but he has only strengthened their resolve.  Now they fight, but they are losing.  Without support from the outside, their weapons will soon dry up.  Then what?  The West stands by, allowing political fears to overcome ethics and human feeling.  These are men, women and children and they are dying in the thousands.  How can we sit by and watch.

But what can we do?  Violent warfare is not working.  It has not worked in a long time – as long as we have had weapons that do not allow the person about the face death the dignity of making their peace with Allah.  Guns, bombs, modern weapons kill from a safe distance.  And the victim will have no time to pray, no time to take the Shahadah, no time or even awareness of his eminent demise, no time to ask Allah for forgiveness.  Is that just? 

So how did our beloved Prophet SAW handle the situation when violence only led to a uncomfortable stalemate?  He marched on Hudaibiyyah.  Thousands of men, women and children marching unarmed on Makkah!  It frightened the Quraish so much they signed a peace treaty that eventually led to the opening of Makkah – the fatah Makkah.

So why do not we do the same?  Instead of composing beautiful latmiyyah for Hussein, or flogging our backs out of over a thousand years of remorse, why don’t we actually respond to his cry – hal min nasiriyin yasurna?!  Labayyak Ya Hussein – Labayyak Allahuma Labayyak – We are here to respond to Your call to establish justice and to strive against oppression.  And then let’s flog the tyrant, Bashar al Assad, not ourselves. 

Sunni, Shia, no matter what Madhdaahib, or school of thought.  Lets come together to overcome this zhaalim of our time. This should be our joint celebration of Ashura, fasting as the Prophet fasted in commemoration of the shahada of Musa, and marching and commanding our own leaders to justice, to ma'ruf and prohibiting them from dhulm and munkar.

But our goal should not be to kill them, our goal should be to humiliate them.  No more should we allow zhaalim leaders like Qadhaafi to commit suicide by mob, in a vain and moronic attempt to retain their hayaa, their dignity.  They have none to begin with.  No one’s hayaa is worth a single Muslim life and only Hell Fire will await them.  So capture Bashar al-zhalim and let him rot for the rest of his life in a jail in the Hague for crimes against humanity.  Let every Syrian come and spit on him.  May the rest of his days be filled with utter despair and humiliation.

In the time of the Prophet, the Sahabi made baiyyah to Allah SWT and to His Rasul (SAW).  They made a commitment also to each other – the Ummah of Allah. 

We speak the words of the Kalimah – the Shahada – the Witness, but how many of us have actually pledged our hearts, our minds, our lives to Allah – to His Rasul, Muhammad SAW – and to His Ummah!

Without this surrendering of our souls to Allah and commitment to following the Sunnah of Rasul Allah, and the commitment to coming together as One Ummah, we are not Muslims – those who are at Peace with Allah.  We may not have to go out in the streets to gain our freedom, we may not have to face guns and bombs, but we can join our brothers and sisters all over this globe in one Ummah of Islam and make a commitment to follow the true teachings of Allah and His Prophet, putting our faith into action by watching our behavior, staying clear of sins and using the tool of tawbah repentance to gain closeness to Allah, and by helping the less fortunate in our community, working together with other people of faith to strive against immorality and forms of oppression.  This is the legacy of our Prophet SAW.    His Sunnah is surrender to Allah, is striving in the sabeel of Allah – putting our faith into action with only Allah’s pleasure as our intention, our niyyat, for no selfish reason – for Allah alone – for inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi rajiuun.

Oh Allah I give you my life, I give you my love, I give you my soul!!

Bayyatu Allah Wa Bayyatu Rasul Allah Wa Bayyatu Ummatullah al-waahidah!

Allah Akbar!