Discourse One: Keeping Quiet and Prohibiting Difference-Creating Activities
Introduction
It is perhaps the most simple and at the same time, most insincere method of creating Islamic unity. It is completely based on narrations mentioned in the first tendency. It advocates restriction from difference- producing analyses and maintaining silence. Now at this advanced stage, the secrets are recommended not be told.
Hence it is said:
“Now, as it is said that these are secrets of progeny of Muhammad, then they must be kept confidential and not revealed.”
Obviously, unity gained by negligence of knowledge will be imaginary unity. Furthermore, the outcome can well be judged if the steps, already suggested, are to be taken on road to Islamic unity such as:
“In controversial issues we should view afresh and anew. We should find new ways of friendship. We should give no room to new differences.”!
“Many differences in our time are groundless. As such, many differences should be forgotten and ignored. We should revise the method of debating issues or arguments.”!
“We must not dig graves under the sun in order to bring to life what is dead and buried.”!
“The subject matters that carry differences should not be discussed too openly in meetings or gatherings held under the title of ‘unity’.!
“What we say in this article can be summarized as: Muslims must not speak about differences that existed among their own leaders fourteen centuries ago: and more undesireable it is to speak about differences that have happened later and are constant and current.”!
“Narration of any matter that might hurt our Sunni brothers is prohibited.”!
“…There are certain matters which must be taken into consideration by broadcasting stations, television and media collectively. Besides, writers and speakers also must delete such matters, particularly about the Fatimid period in gatherings. Then alone unity is possible. Whatever, it could be, if it hurts the feelings of our Sunni brothers it must be avoided in our public gatherings and should not be mentioned at all. I can prove that whatever is being published in books and newspapers and told over the pulpits in religious gatherings and over TV and Radio is sufficient to injure the feelings of our Sunni brothers. Hence it is prohibited.”!
“We Muslims are not allowed to behave in a way that could endanger Ummah’s unity: To protect a part of the Ummah or Faith - no matter if that Faith happens to belong to Ahle Bayt of Prophet - we cannot injure unity as a whole.”!
“From the viewpoint of religious obligation anything that weakens Islam and strengthens infidelity or hurts Islamic unity, as a whole, is prohibited. It is obvious that consequent to such speeches there will not remain any unity in the Islamic front. As such, Islam will become weak against infidelity.”!
Criticism and Analysis
Ustad Ali Iraqchi Hamadani has discussed in detail in his book, Sad Dars Az Bahas-e-Imamat the captioned topic. We have summarized them below retaining the original points:
“Perhaps before a discussion on Imamate takes place it comes to mind that in this age when Muslims are facing such terrible enemies, are such discussions beneficial or not? Because the nature of this subject of Imamate is such that it necessarily renews differences, which are cornerstones laid immediately after the demise of Prophet. Various animosities and several bloodsheds have occurred since then. Because of these differences, the real enemy is neglected….as the unity of Muslims is most important necessity and discussions on Imamate cause disunity, for the sake of safeguarding unity, it is prudent to keep quiet...[because] the its harm is less than the harm of disunity which gives room to foreign influence.”
In reply to this objection the following questions may be posed:
“Is unity and integration useful in every subject and matter? Or subjects differ in this respect? There is no doubt that any subject if it happens to be useful or reasonable for an Ummah, co-ordination and co-operation becomes necessary for its achievement. On the contrary, any subject of no benefit - its availability is not only unnecessary but even harmful- Therefore elegance of the word ‘unity’ should not deceive us. As such, we must keep in view the aim prior to unity. Besides, Quran too approves unity if it be for truth and considers it harmful if it be in a wrong direction. Furthermore, it recommends having unity if it be for God’s sake. But it prohibits unity for the sake of wrong and falsehood.”
“Consequently, according to reason and Quran every man is obliged to judge the matter first. If it is correct and right he may extend his hand of unity towards a group. If it is otherwise he must refrain from it. As such, unity is necessary and desirable. However the aim must become transparent ahead of unity. Truth will cast a shadow over unity. Now to arrive at the truth, there is no way other than a debate or discussion which is not workable in a friendly atmosphere.”
If we desire that the difference that appeared among Muslims immediately after the Prophet’s passing away should disappear and vanish, we must search for a ground to pluck it from its root.
“We ought to know the events as to what they were; or persons as to who they were? Either events or persons are causes of difference after the Prophet. As a result, when we lay hands upon them we must draw a line between them and Islam. In other words, we must separate them from Islam. The reality of Islam will be obtained. Then we must be united to preserve this reality.
It goes without saying that the issue of Imamate and leadership became the cause of difference. After the Prophet’s passing away, a group claimed this position and therefrom sprung the difference.
So prior to unity, a debate is necessary into this subject in order to reach truth so that unity could be based on truth and reality. Otherwise such a unity would be useless and impossible.”
“Now this objection arises that: Whether it is good and sensible to be truthful about anything in any age or not? Most probably it might be said that to maintain silence is dictated by reason when telling the truth and narrating facts brings unwanted consequences. Such undesired aftermath must be avoided. Religiously too our infallible Imams have recommended dissimulation in cases when truth becomes a cause of mischief.
Therefore we should choose a way of protecting truth and safeguarding reality so that truth may not be totally sacrificed. The very prestige and entity of Muslims may not be destroyed. Instead of such discussions, we must try to make Muslims come closer. For the sake of protecting a greater reality we may overlook this.”
In reply we say:
“Subjects and instances must be scrutinized case by case. If truth be useful, it is good to speak. Else, one must resort to silence.
But it should be understood that Imamate is a very beneficial subject. No harm comes from it. Of course it depends on the way it is dealt so as to not end in a fracas or foul-mouthing.”
When one aims to reach truth through a debate or discussion, the trend will be logic, reason, proof and never abuse or inflexibility. Such a type of argument carries no corruption except benefits to a great extent.”
“In short, discussion about Imamate in an atmosphere away from childish bigotry and remote from abuses and vilifications has had been beneficial in every age and in the present age also.”
“Some short-sighted people imagine that since Shias believe Ali as immediate successor of Prophet and Sunnis believe Abu Bakr to be the immediate successor of the Prophet etc., so if Shias do not refer to the issue of succession of Prophet and show respect and affection towards the three Caliphs who preceded Ali this difference will be completely removed. Muslim all over the world could be united and become a power worth consideration! These people don’t know that if supposing such a thing ever took place, the enemy will seek some other way to ignite differences.”
Well, to reach a tangible result we have a suggestion. You separate Shia population from Muslims. Do all other sects of Muslims have unity among themselves although they share the same belief with regard to Caliphate? No. They are not united. Their respective governments too are not united with one another. Their nations too, although under the banner of Islam, are not in one row of Islam. The gap of disunity is more pronounced there.”
“In fact the great block on way of unity is imperialism and imperialists who have been active in every age in fomenting differences and keeping alive disunity.”
“Can these pains be assuaged by our silence regarding the right of Ali and his sons?
While it is that all these differences, mischiefs and bloodshed have been there only because the Shia society is loyal and devoted to the right of Ahle Bayt of Prophet and they do not entertain any friendly feelings towards their enemies. See how far has injustice gone! To what extent is this ignorance?! The body of Islam and Muslims is weakened due to shortage of blood which is the source of life in both the worlds (this and the next). God and His Prophet have pointed out this. All Muslim sects have narrated it. In other words, it is to be in line with Ali and his infallible sons. We must seek their embrace to invigorate Islam and Muslims. We cannot act like those in the guise of open-mindedness and waste this minimum blood resulting in collapse of Islam, only for the sake of unity and attaining power and pomposity.”
Those who claim unity desire Shias to give up their particular beliefs. Of course they are after their own interests. However they ignore the fact that the enemy will anyway persist in his task through some other means so that differences remain.
“In any case, the issue of Imamate if argued on basis of reason and evidence; will result in unity not disintegration.”
“Because in this discussion, we shall cover beliefs particular to each of the two parties referring to original Islamic sources that is Quran and authentic traditions; unveil truth and bring to fore the divine rope of rescue. Then all will together hold the hand of unity under the rich shadow of truth. The glory and greatness gone long ago will be regained by crushing foreign enemies and their associates by means of oneness and sacrifice. Indeed, such a unity will be a living one and deep-rooted.”
This type of discussion will give ground to:
“To discover reasons of difference through perfect scrutiny. Then to draw a line between right and wrong. Thus to know and recognize enemies who inserted the wrong into right by deception and cheating so that we can boycott them and those with them and discover Islam - pure, pristine, real and original - that the Prophet brought to us and introduced for our practice. Such an association that will come into being will be with knowledge and learning. Unity that will be gained will be fruitful among Muslims and fatal to outsiders and adversaries.
In such a case, the enemy will be deprived of excuse of differences of belief and other excuses would also become ineffective.
Because the enemy aims to gain from ignorance of people and thereby to obtain power over them and create disunity. Knowledge and awareness are strong walls to prevent the enemy from advancing his influence on Muslims. And discussion on Imamate leads to awareness, knowledge, exposing of realities and truth.”
Through discussion on Imamate we can gain following things:
“Difference of beliefs can be repudiated. Muslims can know one another. And unity, which is fatal to enemy, can be achieved.”
“To mend these defects it is necessary that Muslim people from Shia and Sunni community should come forward to form associations and programs where debates, discussions and teaching should take place. The light of Islam and Quran should be projected into depths of Muslim entity. We must know that Imamate is an important and fundamental issue. Muslims must discuss this subject since it is a cornerstone; because leadership is one of the pillars in Islam.”
“If Muslims are acquainted with real and original face of Islam, all sects will come closer to one another - resulting in unity. Such a unity that comes into being on the basis of knowledge and learning shall be powerful and lasting. This unity can withstand foreign influences. Knowledge can be attained through classes and debating societies.”
Ustad Ja’far Subhani in his analysis about the root of this type of tendency writes:
“Sometimes it is seen that simple-minded youths have a misunderstanding concerning unity which serves a good pretext in their hands. They try to criticize the truth-seekers. Their claim is that discussion about Abu Bakr’s Caliphate and Ali as to whose right it was, neither has a need nor is it fruitful…”
Those who harbor such opinion have neglected the bright consequences of this discussion, and therefore they think that it is useless and a hurdle for Islamic unity. But in our opinion it is nothing but ignorance about philosophy of recognizing the Imam. It has no other root except in ‘Sunni obduracy’ or ‘Wahabi tendency’.
This objection can bear meaning only in the event our belief about Imamate or Caliphate in Islam is same as that of Sunni scholars. In other words, to consider it a worldly office or position when its function will be to guard Islamic frontiers and strengthen defenses. However from Shia viewpoint Imamate is constancy of Message and continuation of divine bounty through the Prophet. Therefore the discussion becomes not only necessary but obligatory about duties of Imam and it cannot be briefed in the foregone ones. He should expound and explain important divine regulations, the prohibited, the sanctioned; besides giving explanatory notes on Quranic data. Imam is the only source and oracle immediately after passing away of Prophet…
Here we see that intellectual succession of Prophet is something that demands a thorough discussion because the relative issue is alive and it takes to itself importance of utmost nature. It must be clarified that the Imam is Ummah’s leader in knowledge, principles, divine commandments and its branches. Such a station and position as that of Imam if not completely understood, will yield no required or desired result.
…So much so if we
set aside the issue of Caliphate and overlook issue of leadership after the Prophet that goes to an infallible person; the issue that remains worth arguing is that of religion. Authority as to who it is or who must it be in matters of faith or religion after the Prophet’s passing away. This matter has an immediate bearing on prosperity and future of Muslims as a whole.”
The Ustad proceeds:
“There are some groups among extremists who aspire very much to establish a united government all over Islamic territories. They have prohibited any speech or discourse over issues of difference. They consider it as the cause of difference. They have even gone farther because they treat it as a factor that takes us backwards to the ages of battles of Ottoman Caliphs and Sultans of Iran.
We must point out to this group that the matter is not as hot as they consider. There are debates and discussions - one differs with other. There are discussions, which open the way to see facts. Such discussions are far from blind bigotry. They depend only on documents, which both parties consider authentic. Through such discussions alone is possible to illuminate the dark spots in Islam concerning belief, traditions and jurisprudence, etc. Does Quran not itself invite towards contemplation and consideration on its verses?
Groups that have prohibited discussion of issues (having differences)
regard the writers of such matters as provokers and instigators. They must know as to what would be the consequences of such a theory of theirs. A great part of Quran, the Prophet’s traditions and Islamic history will vanish little by little into forgetfulness. No one will recall the events nor will lift the veil to see what has happened. Therefore matters of great importance will thus be missed and lost.
How much better it would be if we dwell upon reformation instead of prohibiting this and that or assassination of thought. The writers should be reminded of existing chaos of Muslims. They should perform their job towards betterment of their position with utmost impartiality and neutrality. They should take care not to hurt feelings of others while they write on any of these critical issues. They should know that their writings will be judged on the Day of Judgment and it will constitute a part of the record of their deeds.
Briefly: Issues of belief that form the foundation of thought in every religion carry two views, which should be explained:
1- Unity cannot last long without knowing the branch matters or issues of difference. Unity founded on blind bigotry and without knowledge of branches will be feeble and shaky and of short duration.
2 - Our sons should be acquainted with this school by learning and reason because we are sure of the truth of this school - They must refrain from imitation in matters of belief. However it becomes necessary that these issues must be studied and taught. It is obligatory that our school must be transferred to our successors. Otherwise all will go by the winds and in days to come nothing will remain.
Every type of argument if handled with the method mentioned in foregone pages it will neither be harmful nor create differences. Rather it will be good and useful for unity. If scholars of each sect explain these difference-bearing issues openly, honestly, and without any cheating, most accusations, misconceptions and misunderstandings will fade away. Only truth will remain as it is.
…We have witnessed in our life that any book if written through conscience and based on truth and Quran without any trick or malicious motive; has served in bringing two opposite groups closer. And the tree of integration has borne fruits at the earliest.
…Such a book has never produced any difference.
It is remarkable to point out here that the work so far done in this respect is the effect of the cause. It is towards defending truth, logic and the reason of Shia sect about its belief, principles and branches of its regulations. If pretext of Islamic unity goes as far as overrunning Shia school then no truth, no reality would have survived. Nor honor and prestige remained for Shia.
The argument based on reason and sense with correct Islamic outlook, purged of bigotry and foul language cannot be objected or blamed. It brings closer the two disparate groups.”
Therefore any discussion or argument cannot be restricted by some or other pretext or a superfluous excuse. Islamic unity generally has become an excuse only.
Allamah Askari writes about this in his article:
“If in the past writing the sayings of the Prophet were prohibited under excuse of remembering Quran by heart. Today also the same is repeated under pretext of protecting Islamic unity. They want to close the door of learning and research. The policy is the same. However religion demands keeping the door of learning and research open.
Don’t argue! How strange it is! How dreadful and dangerous this sentence is. See the hurt and harm hidden therein. Is it not tantamount to say: Don’t go after knowledge? Do not speak about the conduct of the Prophet. In other words, do not learn these sciences. It is harmful what they are saying under pretext of religion that one should not hold any discussions!
Why at all should we give up argumentation and research? For the sake of Islamic unity? Whether all these differences among Muslims, in opinions, thoughts, religious commandments, will subside by just giving up argumentation? How should a discussion be given up when so many made-up traditions and altered history exists? In the face of so many controversies in Islamic belief, Prophet’s behavior, commandments of Quran and Islamic history that exist, argument should be set aside or it is the need of the day?
The fact is that arguments have become a persisting essentiality to invite debate or to publish reality for public scrutiny. After Infallible Imams, school]
our (Shia) scholars have followed this path. They have sacrificed their life. They put themselves to danger and risk. However they did not give up disseminating true Islamic knowledge.”
Invitation to Silence as Open-mindedness
We are invited to keep quiet and historical research and analysis is banned. All this is done under the mask of open-mindedness. Likewise, this statement:
“So what for are present differences between Shia and Sunni? Does it concern election,
which took place 1380 years ago? The scrutiny of the things is made such as to make it invalid or of no worldly advantage to you and me. Of course it is advantageous only in the next world when we die. It is so to say, if we carry the love of Ali in our hearts - whose right was usurped in Saqifah - after death we will enter heaven. While those who support the other candidates will go to Hell…”
At a single instance they have shown Shiaism in form of historical loves and hatreds…while it has a value for our life of today and tomorrow or an effect on our opinions.”!
It seems such type of viewpoint is a reflection of a deviated outlook about Imamate.
That Wilayat is being compared to rulership and all discussions about Imamate are confined to this environment.
It is expressed that:
“Usurping the Caliphate immediately after passing away of Prophet that took place in such a way is an obvious and an open tyranny and atrocity against reality and truth. A person who was the self and shadow of the Prophet was deprived of power and office of administration. As a result, Islam was deprived of the bounty of such a person. However whatever it was; did happen. To recover the right to whomever it concerns is impossible. To talk about it is now a hue and cry.”
In their camp Caliphate is regarded only a worldly office, that is an executive of an administration. In other school, it is seen through quite a different angle, which is:
“They only consider Imamate to be in sense of leadership of society. They say that the Prophet had installed Ali to succeed him for leadership and guidance. And Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman came inopportune.”
Shias are of the same caliber and there are two other issues also. [Absolute religious point of reference and total divine Guardianship]. Either they have no belief in this or they are silent in this regard. There are also those who acknowledge the second stage. However they have not reached the third.”
Ustad Ja’far Subhani replies:
“The issue of Imamate or leadership of Muslims depends on the nature of argument. If the argument is framed: Who occupied the social and political office of Imamate and administered after the Prophet? This becomes a historical question. After fourteen centuries, it would not interest the youth of present generation. Besides, it has nothing to teach or provide any useful information. To know that person was a matter of necessity in its age. The passage of time has made this issue lose dignity and importance.
If the trend of argument is changed, the issue will take the real entity to itself. In this issue, there are two things. The political and social leadership of Islamic society after Prophet and besides this there is another thing, which is authority in religion, its principles and its branches. The question is who it is to administer this school after Prophet? Who are and must be those to show or explain to the masses God’s commandments - what is allowed and what not and so forth. They must be of such a caliber that their word and actions must stand an authority, an absolute - unshakeable and unalterable one until the last Day. What they said and what they did must serve as a model to man. Therefore from this stage the argument bears sense and carries weight. It becomes needful to know the personage and personality of the Imam. The nature of this issue is such that it becomes a part of life. As such, nobody can ignore or overlook it. To know the Imam as to who and what he should be becomes obligatory because it is a part of religion.”
“In Shia view the Imam holds the office, which is continuity of message and extension of Prophethood. A matter of such an import should not be argued. It is an issue full of life. It is obligatory to know this station of Imam. Otherwise it will remain inconclusive…”
Invitation to Keep Quiet as Mark of Sympathy
There is another suspect in the margin of this very tendency, which makes silence obligatory. That is:
“Occupation in differences has kept the youth from reaching truth and basic principles of Islam. The spirit of faith is taken away from the people leaving them with the name of religion only.
Ustad Mutahhari writes while describing this type of outlook:
“The present generation of our current age is fed up of faith and less interested in Islam as a result of discussion about Caliphate, Imamate and unpleasant events that took place and its repetition. They are already suffering by spiritual chaos.
Such discussions could have had desired consequences in the past. They could even have diverted attention from one branch to another. However in present times bringing it back to memory weakens thoughts with regard to structure and its root. We see in other schools they always try to hide the ugly part of their history. But on the contrary, we Muslims try to keep it alive on narration and rather magnify it more than its actual bulk.
We cannot concur with the above opinion.
We do acknowledge that criticism of history if it be narration alone or a reflection of events, the effect that will be exercised will be same as above. If the glorious side of history should be sketched and ugly or shameful part of it overlooked, it will be deviation of history rather than criticism or analysis. Supposing if it were customary to forget, neglect or avoid disgraceful and ugly parts of history, what its aftermath will be with regard to issues that concern the very gist of Islam. What will be the fate of the issue relating to leadership of Islamic society? To ignore such an issue tantamount to ignoring the prosperity of Muslims. Besides, if the rights of some persons had been trespassed or taken away by force and those persons happened to be of dignity and decorum; what will be the case if historical facts are overlooked? It will be nothing but called verbal and written support of oppression.”
Invitation to Keep Quiet for Confidentiality
Invitation towards silence on part of unity-seekers and their insistence to avoid arguments that create differences is continuation of their same thoughts with same aim but in a different form. We can see this if we are mindful of the extent of its influence.
This change is a tricky one. It invites to not argue issues that create differences, particularly Saqifah and attack on the house where divine revelation descended, confiscation of Fadak and martyrdom of Zahra. This time their pretext is quite different and charming too; that is secrets should not be disclosed or made public.
Where would this end? In a long run its end will be deviation and denial of realities, which will be totally forgotten because of no argument whatsoever about it.
Dr. Muhammad Asadi Garmarudi writes in this respect:
“Secrets of the Prophet’s Ahle Bayt were of two categories: one: They themselves were insistent to not disclose them. They revealed them only to their close companions. Generally everyone had neither capacity nor ability to accept or bear them.
The second category consists of secrets by necessity of dissimulation and conditions of time and place. However it was not throughout history.
As such, the season for keeping secret has already passed. Therefore ignorance about those realities will entail deprivation of bounties and benefits of true religion. Zahra herself has pointed out in her address to chiefs of Migrants and Helpers the mandate that rests upon their lot to convey realities to coming generations and make them aware of truth.”
0%
Author: Ali Labbaf
