Essays on Ghadir

Essays on Ghadir60%

Essays on Ghadir Author:
Publisher: Naba Publication (www.nabacultural.org)
Category: Imam Ali

  • Start
  • Previous
  • 21 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 9727 / Download: 4882
Size Size Size
Essays on Ghadir

Essays on Ghadir

Author:
Publisher: Naba Publication (www.nabacultural.org)
English

Geographical location of Ghadir

Ghadir literary means small lake or pond. Ghadir is the name of a place that comes on the way from Mecca to Medina. It is 3 miles further than Johfa towards Medina. Though geographically it exists on the way to Medina but this place acted as an exit point for all the people going out from Mecca for all the other places. When the Holy Prophet halted at this place after his last pilgrimage to make his all-significant announcement it was extremely hot at that time, and it was close to mid-day. There was no shelter present over there at that time. In fact there existed merely small minor patches of shades provided by a few acacia trees.

Date:

The date is 18th Zilhajjah of the year 10 AH. (10 March 632) Event Backdrop:

The Holy Prophet asked his companions to call the Muslims in general to attend for a pilgrimage to the Holy Kaaba. The Holy Prophet specified that he himself would also be there to attend for the pilgrimage and teach the Muslims the rituals of the pilgrimage and convey his significant messages directly to all. The call for the pilgrimage was made. On his way to Makkah more than 70,000 Muslims joined him. By the fourth of Zilhajjah more than 120,000 Muslims had collected for the Haj with the Holy Prophet.

After the Last pilgrimage:

After completing the last pilgrimage the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.) along with the Muslims set out of Mecca. On their way back the Muslims reached a place called Ghadir-e-khumm. The following verse was revealed to the Holy Prophet: "0 Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your God; and if you don't do it, you have not delivered His message (at all); and Allah will protect you from the people..." ( Quran 5:67) Delivery of the sermon:

On receiving the above verse, the Holy Prophet stopped at that very place called Ghadir-e-khum. He ordered his companions to call back those of the Muslims who had gone ahead. He waited for those Muslims who had remained behind to join them. He ordered Salman to prepare for a pulpit with the help of rocks and camel tooling. It was prime noontime and Muslims had covered their heads and legs on account of the heat. Muslims sat near the temporary pulpit. The Holy Prophet was at this place for about 5 hours. He recited nearly 100 verses of the Holy Quran most of which were in the praise of Ali. Seventy three times he reminded and admonished the Muslims about their deeds and future.

The following is a part of the lengthy speech of --the Holy Prophet which has also been narrated by the Sunni scholars repeatedly:

"It seems the time has approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. I am leaving for you two precious things. And if you adhere to them both, you will never go astray after me. They are the Book of Allah and my Progeny that is my Ahlul Bayt.

These two shall never separate from each other until they come to me by the Pool (of Paradise)." Then the Holy Prophet in an attempt to remind Muslims of his own authority over them said: "Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves?" Muslims answered unanimously "Yes, 0' Messenger of God". This served as a stepping stone for the announcement of his successor and vicegerent. The Holy Prophet held out the hand of Ali (p.b.u.h.) and said: "For whomever I am his Leader (mawla), 'Ali is his Leader (mawla)." The Holy Prophet then continued to say: "0' God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him." Revelation of the verse 5:3

Once the Holy Prophet completed his speech this verse of the Holy Quran was revealed to him: "Today I have peifected your religion and completed my favour upon you, and I am satisfied that Islam be your religion." (Quran 5:3). This verse explicitly mentions that only along with this express announcement of the vicegerancy by the Holy Prophet the religion of Islam can be considered complete and perfect. Without this announcement or because of the disregard of this announcement, the religion of Islam will be merely half truth. As indicated earlier, many times half truths are more dangerous than full falsehoods. No doubt if the Muslims disregard this announcement, they will have to endure oppression and hardship both materially and spiritually.

Hessan Bin Thabit's poetry:

Immediately after completion of the sermon Hessan Bin Thabit sought the permission of the Holy Prophet to convey to the audience his poetry which he had instantaneously composed regarding this event of ghadir. The Holy Prophet told him "Say with the blessings of Allah". He then conveyed the following poem to the audience:

"He calls them, (on) the day of Ghadir, their ProphetIn Khum so hear (and heed) the Messenger's call, He said: "Who is your guide and leader? (mawlakum wa waliyyukum )" They said, and there was no apparent blindness (clearly): “You're God, our guide, and you are our leader And you won't find from among us, in this, any disobedient,” He said to him: "Stand up 0' Ali, for I am Pleased to announce you Imam and guide after me (min ba'di imam wa hadi),

So whomever I was his leader (mawla), then this is his leader (mawla)So be to him supporters in truth and followers,"

Oath of allegiance:

The Holy Prophet according to his long term merciful nature towards the people did not get satisfaction only on this announcement. He wanted this announcement to take the shape of appropriate action from the side of the Muslims. He ordered the Muslims to meet Ali and give oath of allegiance to him. Umar Bin Khattab came first to Ali, gave oath of allegiance to Ali and said "Well done Ibn Abi Talib! Today you became the Leader (mawla) of all believing men and women." After Umar were Abu Bakr, Uthman, Talha and then others. The entire process of giving allegiance to Ali by the present 120,000 people took 3 days.

Revelation of the verse 70:1-3:

The news about the above announcement and the subsequent oath of allegiance given by the Muslims to Ali (p.b.u.h.) spread across both the urban and rural areas. This event was so significant that it touched the Muslims all across the globe. In this process Harith Ibn Nu'man alFahri (or Nadhr Ibn Harith according to another tradition) came to know about this. He hurriedly came to Medina and started disputing with the Holy Prophet on the issue of appointment of Ali (A.S.) as the vicegerant. He told the Holy Prophet "You commanded us to testify that there is no deity but Allah and that you are the Messenger of Allah. We obeyed you. You ordered us to perform the prayers five times a day and we obeyed. You ordered us to observe fasts during the month of Ramadhan and we obeyed. Then you commanded us to offer pilgrimage to Makkah and we obeyed. But you are not satisfied with all these and raised your cousin upon us as our master by saying 'Ali is the mawla of whom I am mawla.' Is this imposition from, Allah or from you?"

The Prophet said: "By Allah who is the only deity, this is from Allah, the Mighty and the Glorious. ".

On hearing this while going back to his camel Harith said "0 Allah! If what Muhammad said is correct" then fling on me a stone from the sky and subject me to severe pain and torture." He had not even reached his camel that Allah flung a stone on him who struck him on his head and penetrated his entire body and he was instantaneously left dead. At this the following verse was revealed "A questioner questioned about the punishment to fall. For the disbelievers there is nothing to avert it, from Allah the Lord of the Ascent." (Quran 70:1-3).

We have mentioned above the entire episode of the Ghadir. But unfortunately, even after knowing and understanding the entire truth we see heads move in rejecting the truth. There are basically 3 excuses which the opponents offer. Though these excuses are self-evident to be no more than futile excuses, but we will deal with them in detail so that the opponents are left with no shelter place.

Excuses:

1., The tradition of Ghadir is not reliable and authentic.

2. The word Mawla used in the tradition does not imply master, but it means friend. Hence the Holy Prophet actually announced about the friendship of Ali (AS.) on the day of Ghadir and not about mastership of him.

3. It does not appeal to our common sense that the Holy Prophet appointed Ali (AS.) as his successor in clear terms and still the companions of the Holy Prophet disobeyed him and after his demise appointed a vicegerent by themselves.

We will deal with the above excuses separately and in such details as to dispel all doubts and lay bare the mischief of the mischief makers. Excuse 1: The tradition of Ghadir is not reliable and authentic Rebuttal:

A. Sunni references for the verse 5:67 revealed in relation and just before the tradition of Ghadir. Though there are at least 69 chains of transmitters present for this from Sunni sources, but due to lack of space we will mention only 9 books:

1. "Yanabi' al-mawaddah" - Khajah Kalan Sulayman bin Ibrahim, al- Husayni al-Balkhi al-Qunduzi al-Hanafi.

2. "Arbaein fi faza'il Amir al-Mu'minin" - lamal aI-Din 'Ata' Allah b. Fazl Allah, al-Husayni al-Shirazi.

3. "AI-Durr al-Manthur" - al-Suyuti, lalal aI-Din 'Abd alRahman b. Kamal aI-Din Abi Bakr, al-Shafiei.

4. "Tafsir Kashf ol-bayan" - AI-Tha'labi, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Ibrahim, Abu Ishaq al-Nisaburi.

5. "Asbab al-Nuzul" - Wahidi, Abu al-Hasan 'Ali b. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. 'Ali b. Mattawayh, alNayshaburi.

6. "Dirayah fi Hadith al- Wilayah" (Kitab al-wilayah) Mas'ud b. Nasir b. 'Abd Allah b. Ahmad, Abu Saeid Sijzi( al -Sijistani).

7. Shawahid al-tanzil - Ibn Haddad Haskani, 'Ubayd Allah b. 'Abd Allah, Abu al-Qasim al-Hakim alNishaburi al-Hanafi.

8. Mafatih al-Ghayb (Tafsir al-kabir) - Fakhr aI-Din Razi, Muhammad b. 'Umar b. al-Hasan, Abu 'Abd Allah alShafiei.

9. Matalib Osul fi manaqib Ale Rasul - Muhammad b. Talhah, Abu Salim al-Qarashi al-Nasjbi Shafiei.

B. Sunni references regarding the tradition of Ghadir. Here it is more than sufficient to mention that Allama Amini has mentioned this tradition from 110 companions of the Holy Prophet and 84 second generation (Ta'bei) and 360 Sunni scholars. In fact at other places, other 200 Sunni ulema references are given which takes the number of Sunni ulema to have related the tradition of Ghadir to at least 560! Due to lack of space again here we will mention only 9 references from Sunni sources who have related the tradition of Ghadir and have specifically mentioned the words of "For whoever I am his Leader (mawla), 'Ali is his Leader (mawla).":

1. AI-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah fi Ta'rikh - Ibn Kathir, 'Imad aI-Din Isma'il b. 'Umar b. Kathir b. Daw', al-Qarashi alDimashqi.

2. Manaqib 'Ali b. Abi Talib - Ibn Hanbal, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Hanbal b. Hilal b. Asad, Abu 'Abd Allah al-Shaybani al-Marwazi.

3. AI-Musnad - Ibn Hanbal, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Hanbal b. Hilal b. Asad, Abu 'Abd Allah al-Shaybani Marwazi.

4. Kanz al- 'ummal fi sunan al-aqwal wa'l afal - Nur alDin 'Ali b. 'Abd al- Malik Husam aI-Din al-Muttaqi Hindi.

5. Sunan - Ibn Majah, Muhammad b. Yazid, Abu 'Abd Allah al-Qazwini. 6. AI-Musannaf - Ibn Abi Shaybah, 'Abd Allah b. Muhammad b. Ibrahim b. 'Uthman, Abu Bakr al-'Absi al-Kufi.

7. al-'Iktifa fi fadl al-'arba'ah al-khulafa' - Ibrahiin b. 'Abd Allah, al-Wassabi al-Yamani al-Shafi'i. , 8.AI-Khasa'is fi fadl 'Ali b. Abi Talib - al-Nasa'i, Ahmad b. Shu'ayb b. 'Ali b. Sinan b. Barn, Abu 'Abd al-Rahman al-Khurasani al-Nasa'i.

9. Miftah al-naja fi manaqib Al al-'aba - Mirza Muhammad b. Mu'tamad Khan al-Harithi al-Badakhshi (al- Badakhshani).

C. Sunni references about the verse 5:3 being revealed immediately after the sermon of Ghadir. Again here we can provide at least 35 chains of transmitters but due to lack of space we will mention only 9 Sunni books to confirm:

1. Manaqib 'Ali Ibn. Abi Talib - Ibn al-Maghazili, 'Ali b. Muhammad, Abu al-Hasan al-Tayyib al-Jullabi al-Shafi'i. 2. Miftah al-naja fi manaqib ab - Mirza Muhammad b. Mu'tamad Khan al-Harithi al-Badakhshi (al- Badakhshani).

3. Ma nazala min ai-Qur'an fi 'Ali - Abu Nu'aym, Ahmad b. 'Abd Allah, al 'Isfahani.

4. Manaqib 'Ali b. Abi Talib - Ibn al-Maghazili, 'Ali b. Muhammad, Abu al Hasan al- Tayyib al-Jullabi al-Shafi'i. 5. al-Khasa'is al- 'Alawiyyah - Muhammad b. 'Ali b. Ibrahim, Abu al-Fath al-Natanzi.

6. Kitab al-Manaqib - Khatib al-Kharazmi, Muwaffaq b. Ahmad, Abu al- Mu'ayyad al-Makki, known as Akhtab alMuwaffaq.

7. AI-Duff al-Manthur - al-Suyuti, Jalal aI-Din 'Abd alRahman b. Kamal aIDin Abi Bakr, al-Shafi'i.

8. Fara'id al-samtayn fi fada'il al-Murtadawa al-batul wa al-sibtayn - al- Juwayni, Ibrahim b. Muhammad b. alMu'ayyad, Sadr aI-Din Abu al-Majami' al-Hamawayni or al-Hamawi al-Shafi'i.

9. Tafsir aI-Qur'an al-'Azim - Ibn.Kathir, 'Imad aI-Din Isma'il b. 'Umar b. Kathir b. Daw', al-Qarashi alDimashqi.

D. References of Hessan Bin. Thabits poetry:

1. Ma nazala min aI-Qur'an fi 'Ali - Abu Nu'aym, Ahmad b. 'Abd Allah, aI- 'lsfahani.

2. Fara'id al-samtayn fi faza'iI al-Murtadawa aI-batuI wa aI-sibtayn - aIJuwayni, Ibrahim b. Muhammad b. aI Mu'ayyad, Sadr aI-Din Abu al-Majami' al-Hamawayni or al-Hamawi al-Shafi'i.

3. Kashf al-ghamma fi ma'rifat al-A'immah - al-Irbili, 'Ali b. 'Isa b. Abi al- Fath, Abu al-Hasan al-'Irbili.

4. al-'Azhar fi ma 'aqdahu al-shu'ara' min al-'ash'ar - alSuyuti, lalal aI-Din 'Abd al-Rahman b. Kamal ai-Din Abi Bakr, al-Shafi'i.

5. Kifayat al-Talib - Muhammad b. Yusufb. Muhammad, Abu 'Abd Allah al-Kanji al-Shafi'i.

6. al-Khasa'is al- 'Alawiyyah - Muhammad b. 'Ali b. Ibrahim, Abu al-Fath al-Natanzi. 7. Tazkirat khawass al-'ummah fi ma'rifat al-a'immah Sibt b. al-lawzi, Shams aI-Din Yusufb.Qizughli, Abu alMuzaffar.

E. References of Oath of allegiance as mentioned above:

1. AI-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah fi al- Ta'rikh - Ibn Kathir, 'Imad aI-Din Isma'il b. 'Umar b. Kathir b. Daw', al.: Qarashi al-Dimashqi.

2. Manaqib 'Ali Ibn. Abi Talib - Ibn Hanbal, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Hanbal b. Hilal b. Asad, Abu 'Abd Allah al-Shaybani al-Marwazi. 3. AI-Musannaf - Ibn Abi Shaybah, 'Abd Allah b. Muhammad b. Ibrahim b. 'Uthman, Abu Bakr al- _Absi al-Kufi.

4. Fada'il 'Ali - 'Abd Allah b. Ahmad b. Hanbal, Abu 'Abd al-Rahman al- Shaybani.

5. al-Fusul al-muhimmah li ma'rifat al-a'immah - Ibn alSabbagh, Nur aI-Din 'Ali b. Muhammad b. Ahmad, alGhazzi al-Maliki.

6. Manaqib Al Abi Talib - Ibn Shahrashub, Muhammad b. 'Ali, Abu la'far. 7. Sharaf al-Mustafa - 'Abd al-Malik b. Muhammad, AbuSa'd al-Wa'iz al- Nisaburi al-Kharkushi (al-Khargushi).

8. Tafsir Kashf wa'l-bayan - AI-Tha'labi, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Ibrahim, Abu Ishaq al-Nisaburi.

9. Riyad al-Nadirah - Muhibb aI-Din Ahmad b. 'Abd Allah, Abu al- 'Abbas al-Tabari al-Makki al-Shafi'i. Again due to paucity of space we limit to 9 books refferences. There are otherwise at least 76 chains of narrators mentioned in books for this.

F. The revelation of the verse 70: 1-3 is regarding the event of the dispute of Harith as mentioned earlier. References for this are:

1. al-'Arba'in fi faza'il Amir al-Mu'minin - Jamal aI-Din 'Ata' Allah b. Fazl Allah, al-Husayni al-Shirazi.

2. Tafsir Kashf wa'l-bayan - Al-Tha'labi, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Ibrahim, Abu Ishaq al-Nishaburi.

3. Tadhkirat khawass al-'ummah fi ma'rifat al-a'immah Sibt b. al-Jawzi, Shams aI-Din Yusufb.Qizughli, Abu alMuzaffar.

4. al-'Iktifa fi fadl al-'arba'ah al-khulafa' - Ibrahim b. 'Abd Allah, al-Wassabi al-Yamani al-Shafi'i.

5. Hidayat al-su'ada' - Shihab aI-Din Ahmad b. Shams alOin 'Vmar, Malik al- 'Vlama' al-Zawali al-Dawlatabadi. 6. Ma'arij al-wusul - al-Zarandi, Jamal ai-Din Muhammad b. Yusuf b. al-Hasan al-Madani al-'Ansari alHanafi. .

7. Wasilat al-ma'al fi 'add manaqib al-'AI - Ba Kathir alMakki, Ahmad b. al- Fadl b. Muhammad, al-Shafi'i. '

8. Jawahir al'iqdayn fi fadl al-sharafayn sharaf al- 'ilm aljali wa al-nasab al- 'ali - al-Samhudi, Nur aI-Din 'Ali b. 'Abd Allah b. Ahmad, al-Hasani al-Shafi'i. 9. al-Fusul al-muhimmah li ma'rifat al-a'immah - Ibn alSabbagh, Nur aIEssays Din 'Ali b. Muhammad b. Ahmad, alGhazzi al-Maliki.

Again we are unable to mention other sources due to paucity of space. There are atleast 31 chains of transmitters for this.

Excuse 2: The word Maula used in the tradition does not imply master but it means friend. Hence the Holy Prophet actually announced about the friendship of Ali on the day of Ghadir, and not about mastership of Ali (p.b.u.h.).

Rebuttal:

Though multitude of reasons could nullify the above excuse we will mention only 5 of them:

A. The first proof is the Holy Qur'an and the revelation of the verse: "0 Apostle! Deliver which has been revealed to you from your God; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people." (5.67)

Qazi in "Kashf Ghumma" gives a report from Razi Bin Abdullah: "In the days of the Holy Prophet we" used to read this verse thus: '0 our Prophet (Muhammad) deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord, that' is, Ali is the master of the believers. If you do not, then you have not delivered His message." Also Suyuti in his Durru'l-Mansur from Ibn Mardawiyya, Ibn Asakir and Ibn Abi Hatim from Abu Sa'id Khadiri, Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud (one of the writers of Divine - revelations) and Qazi Shukani in Tafsir-e-Fathu'l- Ghadir narrate that in the day of the Holy Prophet. In short, the warning contained in this verse says: "If you do it not then (it will be as if) you have not delivered His message (at all)..." shows that the message which the Holy Prophet had been ordered to deliver was of great importance. It was in fact essential to the completion of Prophethood itself. Therefore, the issue in question was surely the matter of the imamate, the conferring of authority on one who would guide the people according to the tenets of Islam after the death of the Holy Prophet. This important issue cannot be the friendship of someone by any stretch of imagination.

B. Second proof is the revelation of the verse "This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed my favor on you and chose for you Islam as a religion."

(5:3). Scholars trusted by sunnis, such as Jalalu'd-din Suyuti in Durru'l- Mansur, vol. II, p. 256 and Itqan, vol. I, p. 31; Imamu'l-Mufassirin Tha'labi in Kashfu'l-Bayan; Hafiz Abu Nu'aim Ispahani in Ma Nusala Mina'l-Qur'an Fi Ali; Abu'l-Fatha Nazari in Khasa'isu'l-Alawi; Ibn Kathir Shami in Tafsir, vol. II, p. 41, following Hafiz Ibn Mardawiyya: Muhammad Bin Jarir Tabari, scholar, commentator and historian of the 3rd century A.H. in Tafsir-e- Kitabu'l- Wilaya; Hafiz Abu'l-Qasim Haskani in Shawahid-ut- Tanzil; Sibt Ibn Jauzi. in Tadhkira-eKhawasu'l-Umma, p. 18; Abu Ishaq Hamwaini in Fara'idus- Simtain, ch. XII; Abu Sa'id Sijistani in Kitabu'lWilaya; AI-Khatib-e- Baghdadi in Ta'rikh-e-Baghdad, vol. VIII, p. 290; Ibn Maghazili Faqih Shafi'i in Manaqib, ch. XIV and Maqtalu'l-Husain, ch. IV, all have written that on the day of Ghadir-e-Khurn the Holy Prophet appointed Ali by divine order to the rank of wilaya (Vicegerent). He told the people whatever he was ordained to say about Ali and raised his hands so high that the white of both his armpits was visible. He addressed the people thus: "Salute Ali because he is the amir (master) of the believers. The whole Community complied with his order. They had not yet departed from one another when the aforesaid verse was revealed." The Holy Prophet was highly pleased with the revelation of this verse. So, addressing the people, he said: "Allah is Great, He Who has perfected for them their religion and has completed His favor on them, and is satisfied with my Prophethood and Ali's vicegerency after me." C. In that hot desert, where there was no protection for the travelers, the Holy Prophet gathered the whole nation (umma). People sat in the shade of the camels, with their feet covered, in the scorching heat of the sun. In these conditions, the Prophet delivered a long address, which Kharizmi and Ibn Mardawiyya in their Manaqib and Tabari in his Kitabu'l- Wilaya and others have narrated.

Does it make sense to think that the Prophet would require thousands of his followers to spend three days in the blazing desert to swear allegiance to Ali merely to indicate that Ali was their friend? It is reasonable to conclude therefore, that these arrangements were made not merely to indicate that people should befriend Ali. The event, in fact, marked the completion of the Prophet's message; the establishment of the Imamate, the source of the umma's guidance after the death of the Prophet.

D. Some of Sunni reputable ulema have acknowledged that the primary meaning of "maula" is "master." Among them is Sibt Ibn Jauzi, who after giving ten meanings of the word in his Tadhkira-e-Khawas, ch. 11, p. 20, says that none of them except the tenth one corresponds with what the Holy Prophet meant to say. He says: "The hadith specifically means obedience; so the tenth meaning is correct, and it means 'mastery over others.' Hence, the hadith means 'of whoever I am the 'maula' (master) Ali is also his 'maula' (master)." In the book Maraju'l-Bahrain Hafiz Abdu'l-Faraj Yahya Bin Sa'id Saqafi interprets it in the same way. He narrates this hadith with his own sources from his leaders, who said that the Holy Prophet, holding Ali by the hand, said: "Of whomsoever I am 'wali' or master over him, Ali is also his 'wali' or master." Sibt Ibn Jauzi says, "The saying of the Holy Prophet that Ali has authority or is the master over all the believers clearly proves the Imamate or vicegerency of Ali, and that obedience to him is obligatory."

E. Ali (p.b.u.h.) himself has referred to the tradition of Ghadir to mean master and has emphasized that he was clearly appointed as the vicegerant at Ghadir. Also others have referred to this event in form of reasoning protest or Munashadah (adjuration). Some places where Ali has reminded the event of Ghadir vis-a-vis his appointment as vicegerent are:

(a.) On the day of shura (counsel after Umar's death). (b.) During the days of Uthman’s rule.

(c.) The Day of Rahbah (year 35 AH) when many Companions stood up and bore witness that they attended and heard the tradition of the Prophet directly, twelve of whom were the participants of the Battle of Badr.

(d.) The Battle of al-Jamal, year 36 AH where he reminded T alhah.

(e.) The Day of the Rukban (riders) where several witnesses testified.

(f.) The Day of Battle of Siffin (year 37 AH).

Other members of the Household reminded people: (a.)Ihtejaj by Fatimah al-Zahra'(S.A.)

(b.) Munashadah by ImamHusein( AS.) (c .)Munashadah by ImamHusayn( AS.).

Other munashadahs and ihtejaj: munashadah of youth with Abu Hurayrah; Ihtijaj of Abd Allah b. Ja'far with Mu'awiyah; Ihtijaj in refutation of Amr b. al- 'Asi; Ihtijaj of Amr b. al-'Asi with Mu'awiyah; Ihtijaj of Ammar b. Yasir on day of Siffin; Ihitjaj of Asbagh b. Nubata in a sitting with Mu'awiyah; Munashadah of a man with Zayd b. Arqam; Munashadah of an Iraqi man with Jabir b. Abd Allah al-Ansari; Ihtijaj of Qays al-Ansari with Mu'awiyah in Madinah; Ihtijaj Darmiyyah al-Hajwaniyyah with Mu'awiyah; Ihtijaj of Amr al-Awdi; Ihtijaj of Umar b. Abd al-aziz, the Umayyad caliph; ihtijaj of Ma'mun, the Abbasid caliph, with jurists.

The above clearly refutes the second excuse and renders it baseless. Excuse 3: It does not appeal to our common sense that the Holy Prophet appointed Ali as his successor in clear terms and still the companions of the Holy Prophet disobeyed him and after his demise appointed a caliph by themselves.

Rebuttal:

A. This excuse may be common but it is not sense. Common sense does actually accept it very easily that if any leader identifies a vicegerent, and the followers are not entirely sincere, then they will not abide by this appointment.

B. Both sects accept that the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.) had said to Ali that "You are to me as Aaron was to Moses except that there shall be no prophet after me."

Now let us analyze the similarities between Aaron and Ali so that we come to understand that how it is possible for the companions of a Prophet to disobey and disregard the clear appointment of the vicegerant. The Holy Qur'an states that when Moses appointed Aaron as his successor, he gathered round him the Bani Isra'il (according to some reports, 70,000 people).

Moses emphasized that in his absence they should obey Aaron, his successor. Moses then went up the mountain to be alone with Allah. Samiri incited dissension among the Isra'ilis. He fashioned a golden calf and Bani Isra'il, having left Aaron, gathered round the treacherous Samiri in large numbers. It was a short time before this that the Bani Isra'il had heard Moses say that during his absence Aaron was to be his Caliph and those they should obey him.

Nevertheless, 70,000 people followed Samiri. The Prophet Aaron loudly protested this action and forbade them from indulging in such sinful acts, but no one listened to him. The verse of Chapter A'raf states that when Moses came back, Aaron said to him: "Son of my mother! The people reckoned me weak and had well-nigh slain me..." (7:150). The Bani Isra'il themselves heard the clear instruction from Moses, but when Moses went up to the mountain, Samiri seized his opportunity. He fashioned a golden calf and misguided the Bani Isra'il. Similarly, after the death of the Prophet, some people who had heard him say that Ali was his successor, turned against Ali. Imam Ghazali referred to this fact in the beginning of his fourth treatise in Sirru'l-'Alamin.

He states that some people returned to the state of their former ignorance. In this respect, there is great similarity between the situation of Aaron and that of Ali. Like many of renowned Sunni scholars and historians, Ibn Qutayba Dinawari, the well-known Qazi of Dinawar, in his "AI-ImamaWa Siyasa", (Vol I, P.14) narrates in detail the events of Saqifa. He says that they threatened to burn down Ali's house.

They took him to the mosque by force, and threatened to kill him unless he swore allegiance to them. Ali went to the sacred grave of the Prophet and repeated the same words of the Holy Qur'an which Aaron spoke to Moses: "He (Aaron) said: Son of my mother! Surely the people reckoned me weak and had well-nigh slain me..."(7:150). C. Not all those 120,000 Muslims who were at Ghadir stayed at Madineh. Only a few thousand stayed at Madinah. Out of these, many were bedouins or slaves or poor men. Only a maximum of 100 influential people had gathered at Saqifa. So it will be wrong to say that all 120,000 people presented at the day of Ghadir, conspired and disobeyed the Holy Prophet It should not astonish us that around 100 people went against the verdict of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.).

D. Communication system and circulation of information was not strong in those days. By the time everyone came to know of the selection of Abu Bakr against the verdict of the Holy Prophet it was too late. Abu Bakr had already become too powerful in material terms. Even if someone tried to oppose the ruling caliph he was silenced either through temptation or through intimidation. The episode of Malik Ibn Nuwayrah is a glaring example in this respect.

E. All the companions were not obedient. There are so many instances to prove the disobedience of the companions.

(a.) During the last days of his blessed life, the Messenger of God prepared an army to do battle with the Byzantines, and he appointed Usamah b. Zayd as its commander. This appointment of a young man, despite the availability of older men, proved displeasing to some of the Companions, and led to an argument among them. Those who strongly opposed to Usamah b. Zayd asked the Prophet to change him, but he paid no attention to their request and commanded Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman to join the Muslim army as it departed from Madinah. However, they not only disregarded military discipline but also disobeyed the categorical command of the Prophet. Instead of proceeding to the front with the army, they split off and returned to Madinah - Ibn Hisham, (alSirah, Vol. IV p. 338), Ya'qubi, "al-Tarikh", (Vol. II, p.92); Ibn Athir, "al-Kamil", (Vol. II, PP. 120-21).

(b.) Some of Sunni historians and hadith scholars have written that when the Prophet decided to write a document that would prevent the Muslims from going astray, 'Umar said: "The Messenger of God has become delirious." Others, however, in order to soften the offensiveness of his words, maintain that he said: "Sickness has overcome the Prophet; you have the Book of God at your disposal, which is enough for us." (Muslem, 'al-Sahih', Vol. Ill, P.

1259); "al-Bukhari, alSahih, (Vol. IV, P.5); Ahmad b. Hanbal, "al-Musnad", hadith no. 2992.), when companions could disobey the Holy Prophet in his presence, they can very easily disobey in his absence after demise. But here it is worth mentioning that there were respectable and independent minded companions, who did not change their position after the death of the Prophet.

They obeyed the appointment of Ali (A.S.) as the vicegerent that took place at Ghadir. Although they were more or less compelled to remain silent, they remained loyal to 'Ali b. Abi Talib, as leader. Among the outstanding personalities belonging to this group were Salman al-Farisi, Abu Dharr al- Ghifari, Abu Ayyub Ansari, Khuzaymah b. Thabit, Miqdad bin Aswad, al- Kindi, 'Ammar b. yasir, Ubayy b. Ka'b, Khalid b. Sa'id, Bilal, Qays b. Sa'd, Aban, Buraydah Ashami, Abu 'l-Haytham b. al- Tayyihan, as well as many others whose names are recorded in Islamic history. Some scholars have listed two hundred and fifty Companions of the Prophet, complete with names and descriptions, as belonging to this class.

Ghadir in the words of Non-Muslim

We have enunciated sufficient reasons to dispel all possibilities for excuses.

Here we would also like to quote an orientalist for sake of reference. Vaglieri has said in the Encyclopedia of Islam about Ghadir Khum: It is certain that Muhammad did speak in this place and utter the famous sentence, for the account of this event has been preserved, either in a concise form or in detail, not only by Ya'kubi, whose sympathy for Ali is well known, but also in the collection of traditions which are considered canonical, especially in the Musnad of Ibn Hanbal; and the hadiths are so numerous and so well attested by the different attributions that it does not seem possible to reject them.

Vaglieri continues, "Several of these hadiths are cited in the bibliography, but it does not include the hadith which, although reporting the sentence, omit to name Ghadir Khum, or those which state that the sentence was pronounced at al-Hudaybiya. The complete documentation will be facilitated when the Concordance of Wensinck have been completely published. In order to have an idea of how numerous these narrations are, it is enough to glance at the pages in which Ibn Kathir has collected a great number of them with their refrences."

Books related to Ghadir:

There are at least 185 Sunni books which have mentioned the event of Ghadir. It is not possible to mention all of them here but we mention just a few:

1. The well known commentator and historian of the fourth century hijri, Abu Ja'far Muharnmad Bin Jarir Tabari (died 310 A.H.), gives complete details of the hadith of Ghadir in his book Kitabu'l- Wilaya and has narrated it through seventy-five chains of transmission.

2. Hafiz Abu'l-Abbas Ahmad Bin Sa'id Abdu'r-Rahman Al-Kufi, popularly known as Ibn Iqda (died 333 A.H.), narrated this holy hadith in his book Kitabu'l- Wilaya through 125 chains on the authority of 125 companions of the Holy Prophet.

3. Ibn Haddad Hafiz Abu'l-Qasim Haskani (died 492 A.H.), in his Kitabu'l- Wilaya, has narrated in detail the event of Ghadir along with the revelation of the verses of the Qur'an.

Similarly some of the many books of Shia authors who have shown the event of Ghadir by providing extensive sunm sources are:

1. Al-Ghadir by Allama Amini - This is apparently the most magnanimous work on the event of Ghadir. This book is in 11 Volumes.

2. Abaqatul Anwar by Mir Hamid Husein - Out of total of 11 Volumes it has 3 bulky volumes dedicated to the subject of ghadir using Sunni references.

3. N afahatul Azhaar by syed Ali Milaani - This is basically explanation of the book Abaqatul Anwar. In this 4 volumes have been dedicated to the event of Ghadir.

4. Ihkaakul Haq by shaheed-e-thalis Qazi Noorullah Shustri - this book has dealt the subject of Ghadir in some of its parts out of a total of 30 huge volumes.

We end our article by quoting the verse of the Holy Quran "And say: The truth has come and the falsehood has vanished; surely falsehood is a vanishing (thing)." (17:81)

Zulfiqar Ali (Pakistan)

7- Ghadir in Islamic Traditions

According to the consensus of the narrators of the Islamic traditions, Tabarani and many others have quoted the narration of Zayd Ibn Arqam that:

"The Messenger of Allah (p.b.u.h.) once delivered a sermon at Ghadir Khum '0 people! It seems to me that soon I will be called upon and will respond to the call. I have my responsibility and you have yours. So, what do you say?" They said: "We bear witness that you have conveyed the Message, struggled and advised [the nation]; therefore, may Allah reward you with the best of His rewards".

He asked then,: "Do not you also bear witness that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is His Servant and Messenger, that His Paradise is just and that His Fire is just, that death is just. That the life after death is just; that the last day will undoubtedly arrive; and that Allah shall bring the dead to life from their graves?"

They said: "Yes, indeed, we bear witness to all of that".

He said: "O Mighty Lord! Bear witness that they have," Then he added: "O people! Allah is my Master, and I am the master (Mowla) of the believers. I have3 more authority over their lives than they themselves have 1. Therefore, to whomsoever I have been a master (mowla); this (Ali) is his master (mowla)4 ; "O Lord! Befriend whoever befriends him, and be enemy to whoever sets himself as his enemy." Then he said: "0 people! I am to precede you, and you will join me, at the Pool [of Kawsar]... and I shall ask you when you join me, about the Two Precious things, how you shall succeed me in faring with them; the Greater Precious Thing is the Book of Allah, the Omniscient, the Sublime, and the other are is my Ahlul-Bayt, for the most Gracious and Knowing (Allah) has informed me that they shall never part from each other till they join me at the Pool 5 In a section dealing with 'Ali's 3Many have contemplated upon this sermon, giving it due attention, and they have come to know that it is a reference to the fact that 'Ali's wiaiyat is a root of the faith; For the Prophet first put the question: "Do not you bear witness that there is no God but Allah, and that Muhammad is His Servant and Messenger?" Then he said:

"The Last Day is approaching; there is no doubt about it, and Allah shall certainly bring to life those who are in the graves," following that with a statement in which he mentioned the wilayat so that it would be understood that the latter bears the same significance like the matters about which he has asked them and to which they have agreed. This is obvious to all those who are familiar with the methods and objectives of speech.

4 His statement: "I am the mawla" is an outspoken testimony to a significant fact. The meaning of "mawla" is: one who is "awla", "has superior authority". Thus, the meaning of his statement is: "Allah is superior to me, and I am superior to the believers, and whoever considers me to be superior to him, must also consider Ali as such." 5 This wording of the hadith is quoted by Tabrani, Ibn Jarir, Hakim Tirmithi, from Zayd ibn Arqam. It is transmitted by 1bn Hajar from Tabrani and others in this exact wording, without questioning its authenticity; so, refer to page 25 of- Sawaiq al-Muhriqa.

virtues in A1Mustadrak, the author indicates that Zayd ibn Arqam6 is quoted through two sources both of which are held reliable by both Shaykhs: Hakim (one of such sources) says that when the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, returned from his Farewell Pilgrimage, he camped at Ghadir Khum, and ordered the believers to sweep the area under a few huge trees where a pulpit of camel litters was made for him. He stood and said: "It seems, as if, I have been called upon and responded to the call, and I enjoin you to look after both the Book of Allah and my Progeny; see how you fare with them after me. They will never part from each other till they join me at the Pool."

Then he added: "Allah, the Dear and Mighty, is my Master, and I am the master of every believer".

Then he raised the hand of Ali and said: To whomsoever I am a master, this Ali is his master. 0 Lord! Befriend …..".

The author quotes this lengthy hadith, in its entirety. In his "Talkhis", al- Thahabi quotes it without commenting on it. Hakim Tirmazi, too, quotes it as narrated by Zayd ibn Arqam, in his Al-Mustadtak, admitting its authenticity. In spite of his intolerance Al- Thahabi admits the same in his Talkhis, to which you may refer. Ahmed ibn Hanbal has quoted the same hadith as narrated by Zayd ibn Arqam thus:

"We were in the company of the Messenger of Allah, (peace he upon him and his progeny), when he camped in a valley called Wadi Khum. He ordered everyone to gather for prayers in midday heat. He then delivered a sermon to us under the shade of a robe over a rush tree to protect him from the heat of the sun. He said: Do you know- or do you believe and accept- that I have more authority over the believers than themselves? They answered: "Yes, indeed, you do".

He said: "Whosoever accepts me as his mowla, Ali is his mowla. 0 Lord! Befriend whosoever befriends' Ali and he the enemy of whomsoever opposes Ali."

Nisaei quoted Zayd ibn Arqam saying that when the Prophet returned from the Farewell Pilgrimage and having reached Ghadir Khum he ordered the ground under a few huge trees to be swept clean. He announced: "It looks like I have been invited [to my Lords presence] and I have accepted the invitation. I leave with Y°'! Two Valuable Things; one of them is bigger than the other:

the Book of Allah and my Progeny, my Household. See how you care both of them, for they shall never part from each other till they join me at the Pool." Then he added: "Allah is my Master and I am the Master (mowla) of every 6 Refer to page 21 of AI-Khasa'is al- 'Alawiyya, where the Prophet is quoted saying: "To whomsoever I have been the wali, this (Ali) is his wali.

believer ." Taking Ali's hand, he added saying, "To whomsoever I have been a Master, this Ali is his Master; 0 Lord! Befriend those who befriend him, and be enemy of all those who are enemy to him".

Abu- Tufail says: "1 asked Zayd: 'Have you heard these words of the Messenger of Allah, yourself?"7 He answered that all those who were there under the huge trees saw the Prophet with their own eyes and heard him with their own ears. This hadith is recorded by Muslim, in a chapter, on the "virtues of Ali" in his "Sahih" from several different narrators, ending with Zayd ibn Arqam; but he abridged it, and cut it short- and so do some people behave.

Ahmed Ibn Hanbal has recorded this hadith from Bora ibn Azib.8 Nisa'i has quoted, "Ayesha daughter ofSa'd said that she heard her father saying: "I heard the Messenger of Allah, (peace be upon him and his progeny), on the Day of Juhfa, he took "Ali's hand arid delivered a sermon, praised and adored Allah", then said: "0 people! I am your Leader". They said: "You have said the truth." Then he raised Ali's hand and said: "This is my Leader unto you, he will discharge the responsibilities of my religion on my own behalf, and I support whoever supports him, and I am enemy of whosoever who chooses to be his enemy.

Sa'd is also quoted saying: "We were in the company of the Messenger of Allah, when he arrived at Ghadir Khum. Those who went ahead of him returned to join him, while he waited for those who lagged behind, till all people assembled. Then he said: "0 people! Whois your Master and Leader?" They answered: "Allah and His Messenger." Then he took "Ali's hand, made him rise and said: 'Whoever has taken Allah and His Messenger as his Master, this (Ali) is his Master; O Lord! Befriend whoever be friends him, and be enemy of whoever chooses to be his enemy."

7Abu- Tufayl's question is obviously indicative of his amazement at this nation's overlooking this matter regarding 'Ali in spite of the hadith he narrates from the Prophet in his honor on the day of the Ghadir. As if suspicious of the accuracy of the narrated hadith, he went ahead and inquired of Zayd, having heard him narrate the same, "Did you hear it from the Messenger of Allah?!" His tone is that of someone amazed, and skeptical. Zayd answered him that all individuals present under those trees had, indeed, seen the Prophet with their eyes and heard him with their ears; so, Abul- Tufayl then knew that the matter was just as Kumait, may Allah be merciful unto his soul, says: .

On the day of the dawh, the dawh of the Ghadir,Caliph.!lte was made for him manifest and clear, Only if the throngs opted to obey;

Yet I have never seen such a day,

Nor have I seen such right

Trampled upon, discarded outright;

But the men had sold it, and I never sawSuch a precious thing to sale would go...

8This occurs on page 281 of his AI-Khasa'isal- Alawiyya, in a chapter dealing with Ali's status in the eyes of Allah, the Exalted, the omni-Scient, and also on page 25 of another chapter enjoining acceptance of his wilayat and warning against bearing animosity towards him.

The books of traditions recording this incident are numerous and cannot be all counted here. They all contain explicit texts indicating that Ali is the Prophet's successor, just as Fazl Ibn Abbi, Abu Lahab has said:9 The one to be recognized as the successor, generation after generation, After Muhammad, is 'Ali since for he was his companion in every occasion.

Hamid Famagh (Iran) 9These are among poetic lines composed as the answer of Walid ibn 'Uqbah ibn Abu Ma'it, quoted by Mohammad Mahmud Rafi'i in his Introduction to Sharh al-Hashemiyyat, page 8.

PartTwo : The History of the Inroad of Nationalism in the Islamic World

Nationalism as an imported school

Nationalism is an importedschool which has been exported by exploiting powers to disturb the unity of the Islamic world. Some Western thinkers andOrientalists who have always strived to introduce Western political and cultural colonization in Asia and Africa, provided the ground for its rise and the so-called enlightened groups depending on the West acted as its banner-bearers, propounding this school of thought.

Western colonizing governments have always considered the unity of the world of Islam, which they call “Pan-Islamism", a potential danger to their political and economic interests. At the end of the 19th century, inspired by the ideas ofSayyid Jamal-al-Din and Sultan AbdulHamid , there started talks about the unity of world Muslims, and the union and solidarity of the Turks and Arabs in the Ottoman Empire prevented the inroad of Western values and ideals in the critical and strategic Middle East zone.

Colonizing powers felt the danger and adopted apolicy which unfortunately proved effective. This was the infusion of the idea of nationalism and the awakening of national sentiments among the Arabs and Turks in order to check “Pan-Islamism” and thereby divide the great Ottoman Empire, and replace the declining influence of the Ottomans by the power of Western colonization.

It is noteworthy that nationalism rose first, not in the Muslimlands which were under British and French domination, but in regions which formed part of the Ottoman Empire. InIndia which was a British colony, such Westernized intellectuals as SirSayyid Ahmad Khan found no need to rely on nationalism, national andxenophobian sentiments and were still occupied with the thought of economic and educational improvement of the Muslims. They even took an opposing stand against the nationalism of the Hindu Congress Party.In Algeria and Sudan too, it was Islam that stood in the persons of theMahdi Sudanese and Algerian Abdul-Qader against colonization, but there was no sign of nationalism. In Indonesia and Malaysia and Muslim lands of the Far East, too, which were directly under British and French domination, Westernized intellectuals believed there was no need to rouse nationalistic feelings.

On the other hand, these intellectuals who were dependent on colonization, raised the cry of nationalism in the lands of the Ottoman Empire, namely Turkey, Egypt and the Arab lands in order to overthrow the Ottoman rule and pave the way for their own influence and expansion.

This historical fact clearly shows that those who sympathized with nationalism in Islamic lands did not claim independence out of xenophobia, butwere motivated by something quite different. They were in fact, the surrogates of Western colonizers whocould be used to break up Islamic unity and weaken or destroy the Ottoman Empire. We see now, why in the Iran of that time, the westernized intellectuals did not so strongly support the idea of nationalism aswas done in Turkey, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon by their allies, since Iran did not form part of the Ottoman Empire. Moreover, at that time, Iran had little connectionwith the world of Islam owing to the excessive reliance of theQajar kings on the prejudicial differences between theShi'a and Sunni sects, and colonial powers did not think it probable that Iran would join the great union of world Muslims. Therefore, they felt secure and all their effortswere directed at making the western culture and system bear root in Iran, and prevent a religious government from assuming power so, in Iran, the emphasis was laid on the question of the constitution, Western democracy and liberal thoughts of the West. In the works ofTaleboff andMirza KhanKermani , we see much less of nationalism and national unity than in those of their Arab and Turkish counterparts. The focal point of discussion was the 'constitution', Western liberalism and the necessity of casting aside religious thoughts and principles, and copying European culture1 .

Why were the Muslim lands of Istanbul, Cairo and 'Beirut preoccupied with the idea of nationalism? Why was this longing for nationalism at the end of the 19th century concurrent with the height of colonial expansion? Why did the Arabs and Turks, the targets of nationalism, confront each other? Why was there no talk of British or French colonialism? Why did nationalistic sentiments become popular in the realm of the Ottoman Empire, but not in those countries invaded by Western colonialism? Why is it that following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire,as a result of intense nationalistic sentiments, colonialism rapidly succeeded in swallowing the Middle East? Answers to these questionsmay be found in the wide dimension of Western colonial interference for the creation and expansion of nationalism in the world of Islam.

Napoleon and Frenchmen as pioneers of Egyptian Nationalism

In Islamiccountries nationalism took birth in the 19th century. The firstcountries which fell victim to it were Egypt and Turkey. Napoleon's invasion of Egypt was a turning point in the history of the Islamic world and the beginning of Westernization. During the brief stay of the French in Egypt, Western ideas had found their way amidst Egyptian intellectuals. The contact of such Egyptian scholars as AbdulRahman Jabarti , Sheikh Hassan Attar etc. with the men of learning that Napoleon had brought with him to Egypt, and the encouragement given by the French, roused the desire in some self-sold Egyptians to walk in step with the West. This point can explain why the spirit of nationalism rose first in Egypt to prepare the ground for its separation from the Ottoman Empire sooner than other lands belonging to it. Most probably, as the French were openly fighting the Empire of the Turkish Muslims and inherited the anti-Islamic prejudices from the crusaders and men like Charlemagne, they began sooner than others to break up Islamic unity and destroy the Ottoman Empire, by rousing Egyptian nationalism, in the same way as the British did with Arab lands.

In order to revive Egyptian nationalism and rouse the pride of the Egyptians of their past, Napoleon established an institution called the “Egyptian Foundation”, a sham scientific society supposedly for research in ancient Egyptian history and culture, but which in reality aimed at revivingEgyptianism against the idea of Islamic unity, and at undermining Islamic inclinations forcing a gap between Egypt and the Ottoman Empire. It was through this Foundation that some distinguished French men of learning such as Clot,Cerisy ,Linant andRousset were dispatched to Egypt2 , whose objective, as we may guess, was to help the Egyptians discover their ancientPharaonic culture and to acquaint them with French culture on which they were encouraged to frame their lives and policies.

Sylvestre deSacy and other French scholars wrote books on the magnificence of Egyptian civilization, and Egyptian nationalists such asTahtavi discovered the splendor of their ancient civilization and cultural independence through DeSacy's book, “Nationality3 ”.

It was probably through French influence that Muhammad Ali declared his independence from the Ottoman Empire and for the first time raised the question of Arab unity. Western missionaries, too, were very active. Between 1863 and 1879, no less thanseventy seven French, American, Italian and German schools were opened in Egypt.

Following all these efforts at colonization, a westernized intellectual class rose as the banner-bearer of Egyptian nationality, insisting upon the following of Western civilization.Defa'at -al-Tahtavi (1801-1873) was the first of these men. He stayed in Paris for five years andhaving been indoctrinated with French ideas, he returned to Egypt to propoundMontesquieu's thoughts on the nation and the country.

Tahtavi in his well-known book, “Manahej ” and other works made recurrent use of words like 'homeland' and 'patriotism', words which were not so popular till then among the Egyptians, in the concept of Western nationalism. He declared that the Egyptians were a nation apart from other Muslims, and the core of their love and loyalty should be their 'homeland'. He tried to prove that nationalism is not compatible with Islam, but this was a futile and hypocritical effort. This pioneer of nationalism considered the reason for the decadence of Egypt to be the rule of non-Egyptian Muslims such as theMameluks .But at the same time, he shamelessly spoke of the French and Westerners in general, not as a symbol of greed for the world, but as representatives of science, civilization and culture, and suggested that Egypt should follow the West4 .

Another pioneer of Egyptian nationalism wasYaghoub Zow'e , whose father was a Jew and mother, an Italian. He lived in Paris for a long time and was a French agent. In Paris, he published the journal, 'EI-Vatan -el-Mesri ' (Egyptian homeland) to propagate nationalism. He was a founder of Egyptian nationalism5 and had a close friendship with Cromer, the English governor of Egypt.

Taha Hossain was another Westernized Egyptian nationalist. He attempted in his book, 'EI-Mostaqbel -el-Thaqafe ', to prove that Egypt has no connection whatsoever with the world of Islam, but that it has instead, a strong bond with Europe.

In the time ofTaha Hossain , nationalist forces led by theWafd Party became a determining factor in Egyptian politics.Sa'ed Zaghlool , leader of theWafd party and other nationalist politicians were British pawns who considered political independence only as a means of becoming Europeanized progressives and found it in the acceptance of Western values.

This was an account of the rise and spread of nationalism in Egypt, showing how Westerners sowed the seed of nationalism and irrigated it.

Three Jews as inspirers of Turkish nationalism

Turkey was another of the first Islamic countries where the school of nationalism found its way. Bernard Lewis, the well-knownorientalist , confesses that three European Jews inspired the spirit of nationalism in Turkey6 .

The first person who tried hard to kindle the flame of Turkish nationalism was Arthur Lumley David (1811-1832). He was an English Jew who traveled to Turkey and wrote a book called, 'Preliminary Discourses' in which he tried to show how the Turks were a distinguished and independent race, superior to the Arabs and other oriental races.

Lewis writes: “The book of this English Jew made the Turks imaginethemselves as having a distinct nationality and independence.” Before the spread and indoctrination of Western ideas, no signis seen of nationalism in the Ottoman, Empire. Even until the beginning of the present century, the Turks did not consider the Arabs as aliens, and the Arabs looked upon the Turks in the same way. The Arabs were content to be included in the Ottoman Empireon account of being of the same religion, and the Turks respected them because of their culture, and knowledge of Arabic was considered a sign of learning.Even a Sultan like Abdul-Hamid was surrounded by Arab counselors in his court, the likes ofAbol-Hoda andEzzat Pasha . In the revolution of 1908 againstAbdul-Hamid there were at least two Arab officers, named Aziz AliMesri andMahmood Showkat Pasha among the leaders. But the book of the said Jew gradually convinced some self-sold and dependent intellectuals and politicians like the leaders of the" Young Turks» movement of the superiority of the Turkish race.

In 1851,Fu'ad andJowdat Pasha translated most of David's writings into Turkish. In 1869, another writer, AliSavi , published a treatise in Turkish which was an imitation of David's, speaking of the glorious past of the Turkish race. This was one of the first writings in which nationalism was propounded and it was somethingquite unprecedented in the Ottoman Empire.As Lewis says: “Thus the Turks discovered their nationality through the West and copied the writings of the Westerners7 .”

David Leon Cohen, a Jewish French writer was another man who greatly contributed to the expansion of Turkish nationalism. In 1899, he published a book called "IntroductionGenerale a l'Histoire de L' Asie8 ”. In this book, he writes of the racial superiority of the Turks and of their epical records in history. This bookwas translated into Turkish in the first decade of the 10th century in a large number. Prof.Khadouri and Bernard Lewis believe that the said Jew inspired the Pan- Turkism of 'Young Turks' who started a revolution in 1908.

In addition to the above book, Cohen published several epical stories on the past glories of the Turks. Clearly, the main aim of this Jew in his eulogy of the Turkish race was to rouse their racial prejudices and weaken their bond with other Muslim nations. He was not content with writing only, but also formed societies of exiled Turks and Egyptians in Paris and tried to lay the foundation of nationalistic movements in those countries9 .

But the person who had the greatest role in the creation of Turkish and Arab nationalism, was the famousorientalist , ArminiusVambery (1832-1918), the son of a Jewish Hungarian priest. He published many works on the necessity for the revival of Turkish nationality,language and literature. His works intensely captivated the attention of Westernized, so-called enlightened Turks and incited their patriotism. He was closely acquainted with the Turkishstatesmen and politicians of the first rank10 .

One of the main aims of the Jews in inciting nationalistic sentiments was to pave the way for the occupation of Palestine. The Jews in their unsuccessful contact with Sultan Abdul-Hamid to secure Palestinian territories for Jewishemigrants, came to the conclusion that the only way to fulfill their dream was to overthrow Abdul-Hamid and break up Islam and Arab and Turkish unity. Under the cover of nationalism and through encouraging the creation of the 'Young Turks' movement, Zionism first succeeded in deposing Abdul-Hamid , imprisoninghim and laying the ground for inciting differences and enmity between the Turks and Arabs.

These plots of colonialism and Zionism gave birth to the 'Young Turks'movement which resulted in the revolution of 1908 and deposal of Abdul-Hamid . The “Young Turks” who executed the Zionist scheme, embarked on a 'Pan- Turkish' policy based on a belief in the superiority of the Turks. So they adopted an anti-Arab stand, closed down Arab cultural societies and began acts of discrimination against the Arabs and non- Turks, a conduct which was in line with the direct plots of British colonialism in rousing Arab nationalism.

ThusZionism and imperialism and their discrimination towards the Arabs on the one hand, and inciting Arab nationalism and their opposition to the Turks on the other. Until this time, the Arabs did not consider themselves a separate race.But as the Turks were seeking the superiority of Turkish culture over other cultures, the Arabs, too, insisted upon their own independent identity. It was the racial and nationalistic policies of Young Turks that kindled the flame of Arab nationalism-a matter, which as we shall see,was directly supported by the British11 .

After the revolution of 1908, the “Young Turks” expanded Turkish nationalism by force and by propagation through the mass media. Moreover, the repeated blows inflicted upon Turkey by Arab countries, together with the extension of western education and dispatch of students to Europe, intensified Turkish nationalistic frenzy. Even some Muslim thinkers asNamek Kamal (1840-1888), Zia Pasha (1825-1880) andJowdat Pasha (1823-1898), tried hard to blend Islam with nationalism-an idea which was doomed from the very beginning since these two schools are incompatible. The progressive advance of nationalism and colonization at last led to the rise of Ata Turk accompanied by his anti-Islamic policy.

With him, Turkey becametotally dependent on the West, exactly what the Satanic West wanted. The Western intellectual class continued to promote thisschool which was now supported by the bayonets of Ata Turk and his successors. ZiaGukalp (1876-1942), the greatest theoretician of the Turkish nationalist school, was a well- known personality of the west who busied himself copying Western ideas and culture, both of which he made the core of his ideology. Turkish nationalism resulted at last in the membership of Turkey in the NATO, thereby surrendering its political and cultural independence.

This was then an account of the rise and advance of nationalism in Turkey.

$$SUB[ British Colonialism, the Banner-bearer of Arab Nationalism]

4- British Colonialism, the Banner-bearer of Arab Nationalism.

Nationalism was nowhere tobe seen in the Arab countries before the inroad of Western ideas and colonial influence.

Arab lands gradually came under the domination of the Ottoman Empire from the 16th century onward, and a unitywas established between almost all parts of the Muslim Middle East (excluding Iran). All through the Ottoman rule, until the beginning of the 20th century, the Arabs had no feeling of alienation towards the Turks, and were perfectly content with the unity that existed between Turkish and Arab lands. They considered the Ottoman Sultan, the rightful ruler of the Muslims, and the Ottomans, too, showed no discrimination towards the Arabs. They chose the governor of each Arab zone (with the title ofNaghib ) from among the people of the same zone.

French colonization was the first to sow the seeds of nationalism and the separation of Egypt, tobe followed by the deceitful and mischievous creation of Turkish nationalism by Imperialism and Zionism in the form of the 'Young Turks' movement and leading for the first time to discrimination of Arabs by them.

Concurrently, colonial powers especially Britain roused the racial and nationalistic sentiments of the Arabs through Christian Arab missionaries and Western intellectuals.

After Egypt, the pioneers of Arab nationalism were Syria,Lebanon and Jordan. Missionaries were most active in these regions. Members of the Jesuit Catholic sect from 1830 and Protestants from 1820 entered Syria. The giant Christian society became the agent for executing the plot of colonization. Christian Arabs regarded Western penetration to their own interests, and looked at French and British colonization as a refuge against the Muslims.They were very sensitive about the expansion of the idea of the universal IslamicUmmah , since such a unity would place them in a minority, whereas having nationalism as the basis of unity would not only prevent their being considered a minority (since in such a unity all are Arabs -not Muslims and Christians), but being ahead of the Muslims as far as Western education was concerned and trusted by colonial powers, they hoped to assume the rein of affairs. From the beginning, Christian Arabs sought the aid of Western governments against Muslim Arabs, as was the case in the Civil War of 1860 when they invited the Europeans for a campaign in Lebanon.But this method did not solve the Christians' problem in the long run since it roused the cynicism of the Muslims.Therefore on the suggestion of their colonial masters they resorted to the importation of the creed of nationalism.

One of the clearest examples wasNajib Azouri , a founder of Arab nationalism. He was an agent of both France and England. In 1904 in Paris, he published a book named “LeReveil de la NationArabe ”. He further formed a society by the name of “Ligue de laPatrie Arabe ”, and published a monthly journal named, “L 'independenceArabe ”, as an organ of the union. In its publication, an employee of the French Foreign Ministry named Eugene Lung, collaborated closely with him. Lung as a servant of French colonialism wrote a book named “LaRevolte Arabe”12 , in which he praised the Arab race. One of the points repeatedly stressed in this book was the racial,cultural and political differences between the Arabs and Turks, and occasional reference to the superiority of the Arabs over the Turks and the necessity of segregating the Arabs from the Ottoman Empire. To bothAzouri and Lung, three revolutions would be necessary to destroy the Ottoman Empire: An Arab revolution, a Kurdishrevolution and an Armenian revolution13 .

Azouri's views on international politics, too, show his dependence on Britain and France. Against the Turks, he sought the friendship of Britain, and supported the pro British party of MuhammadWahidi and pro-British dailies such as “El-Haghtatem ” and “El-Watan ”. He regarded the power ofGermany which supported the Ottoman Empire a danger to human society, and considered the governments of France and Britain as the banner-bearers of justice in the world, and encouraged these two colonizing powers to interfere in the Ottoman's internal affairs in favor of the Arabs. He volunteered to start a revolution within the Ottoman Empire in cooperation with lung, with the aid of British and French capital and weapons. Dr.Hamid Enayat writes:

Azouri expressed his loyalty and obedience to Britain and France and introduced himself as the supporter of their interests in the East, and said: 'The French should assist and tell us what they want from us14 .”

Azouri as a founder of Arab nationalism was dependent on the French and British governments and was in their service15 .

BesidesAzouri , there were such men asPetros Bostani ,Nasif al-Yazeji , Ibrahim al-Yazeji ,Nofel ,Salim Nofel ,Mikhael Shamhada ,Sem'een Kalhoun ,Gerges Fayyaz ,Rastan Dameshghia and many other Christian enlightened men depending on colonial powers, who tried to incite and expand Arab nationalism. These men did their utmost to convince the Arabs that they were a distinct race, superior to other Muslim nations. They deliberately misinterpreted history to attain this objective and presented Islam, Islamic culture and civilization as being originally Arabic- a matterwhich was a great treason to the intellect. Their arguments and ways to prove Arab nationality came from Western culture and thought.

Arab nationalism was reflected in two ways: firstly by emphasis on Egyptian, Syrian,Iraqi and other nationalities, and secondly by emphasis on Arab unity, or the Arab race.

During the World War I, the British government decided to enter the arena in person and to openly support and guard Arab nationalism, turning the enmity between the Arabs and the Turks to its own interest. The rise of SharifHossain , grandfather of kingHossain of Jordan against the Turks in June 1916, whichis regarded as an objective desired by Arab nationalism, was the product of direct British meddling and intervention. The expansion of Arab nationalism against theOttomans, brought the British and French governments into the Arab zone, resulting in the creation of Israel as a cancerous tumor in the heart of the Arab land.

SharifHossain , as a pioneer of Arab rebellion against the Turks was a British agent, and the British were the greatest supporters of Arab independence from the Turkish yoke. The story of SharifHossain's collaboration with the British as a hero of Arab nationalism is very amazing. In 1914, direct contactwas made through Abdullah, son of SharifHossain and father of KingHossain , betweenKitchner , well-known English general, and Sharif.Some time after,Kitchner sent one of his high-ranking officers, named RonaldStors to visit Abdullah. At this time, the World War had begun andKitchner who was now British War Secretary, sent a message to Abdullah in October 1914 asking him to rise in rebellion for independence against the Turks.Kitchner promised to support the Arabs' efforts for independence, and even to transfer the Muslim Caliphate from the Turks to the Arabs and choose Sharif as the new caliph.

SharifHossain , this so-called reverend pro-British nationalist, carried out the plan of colonialism in the name of Arab independence, and at a time when Turkeywas entangled with the British and French, he made an assault upon the Turks rousing the Muslims against them and infavour of the British. McMahon, an English general, sent a letter to Sharif, the copy of which is in the archive of the British Foreign Office in which SharifHossain's roleis lauded as a determining factor in “the combat for independence by the valiant Arab nation.”

On July 21, 1915, Sharif sent a message to McMahon, asking for British support for the Arab demand for the caliphate. On June 10, 1916, the Arab national uprising, with the aid of British arms and munitions and military and political supportwas started , led by SharifHossain . T. E. Lawrence, an English government official, was the principal adviser to Feisal, son of Sharif, in this national Arab uprising. On one side, the Arab forces rushed upon the Turks, while on the other, in a perfectly coordinated operation, General Allen by, the British commander in Palestine took the lead in fighting. Thus the combat of the Arabs for independence incited bynationalism, was promoted under British military protection.

But while British and French colonizing powers tempted the Arabs into a war of independence, and while SharifHossain and Arab secret organizations such as El-Fetat and El-Ahad were actively executing the schemes of the colonial powers, Britain and France were secretly dividing the Arab zones among themselves. With the Treaty of Sykes-Picot and the Balfour Declaration, they laid the ground for the division of Arab lands and creation of Israel as a country.

France occupied Algeria,Tunis and Morocco by inciting anti-Turkish feelings. Italy made Libya its colony, while Russia occupied parts of Armenia; Britain occupied Egypt, Cyprus, Aden, and the Sheikdoms of the Persian Gulf, and then Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, culminating in the creation of the cancerous tumor, “Israel”, in the heart of the Arab world.

And that was the painful story of Arab nationalism, its creation and expansion.

Conclusion

It becomes clear then thatnationalism in Islamic lands was incited by the Westerners , with the British and French missionaries andOrientalists having a great share in it. Itwas then expanded by colonial plots and used by colonialism as a tool for breaking up Islamic unity and destroying the Ottoman Empire . In this connection, Christian and Jewish minorities and pro-Western intellectuals were the principal executors of these imperialistic plans. Almost all the banner-bearers and famous pioneers of nationalism in Islamic lands were those who copied the Western values and ideals.

With the inroad of Western ideals, words like 'homeland' and 'patriotism' became very popular with the Arabs,Turks and Iranians. Nationalism was the stealthy and motivated imitation of Western models, dictated by colonial powers, eventually resulting in the dependence of those countries upon the West or East. This fact that for many years the main supporters of Egyptian nationalism and Arab nationality and other Islamic nations were France and Britain is more eloquent than words. With those brilliant records of colonization, at present, the biggest supporter of nationalist forces of Turkey and Iran is the U.S., and the supporter of theBa’athists and some Arab countries is the Soviet Union.

The important question that arises is why the idea ofnationalism which penetrated Islamic lands through Western ideas and colonial plots, was welcomed by some sections of the Muslim masses and how did it expand?

Firstly, the masses could not see the difference between 'patriotism' and 'nationalism' and to their unconsciousmind, both concepts seemed to denote the same idea as that of Islamic 'Ummahism '. From the beginning, Islam had created a strong feeling of the 'Ummah ' and had divided the world into the “House of Islam” and the “House of War”. The masses believed nationalism to be the same as 'Ummahism ' and therefore welcomed it.

The reason was that even though the people sometimes spoke of nationalism, yet in practice, they regarded a Christian Egyptian and Coptic Egyptian beyond the sphere of nationality, and Turkish Armenians as aliens. Actually, to the masses, nationalism and IslamicUmmahism meantone and the same thing.

Secondly, contrary to the main pioneers of nationalism, who propagated itas a result of their dependence on colonial powers and the West, the masses manifested nationalistic sentiments in opposition to social tyranny or to the colonial influence of Britain and France. To the masses, nationalism was a sentiment, not a school, but to the Western, so-called enlightened class and politicians, it was an ideology and a political creed.

The third factor behind the growth of nationalism among the masses was the injustice of the selfish, pseudo-Muslimgovernments which inflicted oppression and torture upon the people. While the Ottoman Empire was on the brink of collapse, Turkish rulers like other selfish rulers of history treated their subordinates oppressively including not only the Arabsbut the Turkish peasants. After the Young Turks assumed power,tyranny and discrimination became prevalent, an outcome of Turkish nationalism, which led to a spread of nationalistic sentiments among the Arabs, of which colonialism made the utmost use. The most recent example of a country where nationalism isfully manifest , is Bangladesh, resulting from the tyrannical conduct of Pakistan's military dictators.

Notes

1. Refer to the books: “Andishehaye Mirza Aqa KhanKermani ”- (Thoughts ofMirza Aqa KhanKermani ) andAndisheye Mirza Fath -e AliAkhundzadeh -( Thought ofMirza Fateh -e AliAkhundzadeh ) byFereydoon Adamiat .

2. M.Sabry : L 'Empire Egyptian sour Mohammad Ali, p; 579, Paris, 1930.

3. Refer to the book: «Andisheye Arab"-( Arab thought) byHurani and “Tarikhe Andisheye Siasie Arab] -(The history of the Arab political thought) byHamid Enayat , p. 28.

4. For more information onTahtavi's nationalistic thoughts, refer to the book “Seiri dar Andisheye Siasie Arab”-( A survey of the Arab political thought) byHamid Enayat , p. 34-35.

5. Ditto, p. 46.

6. Bernard Lewis: Islam in History, London, 1973, p. 132.

7. Bernard Lewis: Islam in History, p. 132.

8. Refer to “Nationalism in Asia and Africa” byKhadouri , p.159.Khadouri has offered reasons and proved that the westerners are the founders of nationalism in. most third-world countries. Also refer to «Islam in History», by Bernard Lewis, p. 132.

9. Refer to Jewish Encyclopedia, an article byZodic Kahn, p. 61, and “Turkism and the Soviets” byHutler , p.141.

10. Concerning the role of David Cohen andVambery in the emergence and expansion of the Turkish nationalism refer to “History-Writing and national revival in Turkey” by Bernard Lewis and “The Development of secularism in Turkey" byNiazi Brex , Printed in Montreal, 1944, p. 314-315.

11. Concerning the role of Zionism and the westerners in the creation and expansion of the Turkish nationalism refer to:Mardin's “The Genesis of young Ottoman thought” a study in the modernization of Turkish political ideas (Princitton N.J. 1962, p. 250). HaroldBoven's British contribution to Turkish studies, London, 1945, p. 43-4.Also refer to “The Emergence of Arab Nationalism" byZein Nzein , p.71.

12.Elic Kedourie : The Politics of Political Literature in Middle East studies, vol. III No.2, May 1972, p.230.

13. Refer to “Al-Belad -ul -Arabiat -e-dulat -et-Uthmania ”, by Sateaal -Hasari ,Darul -Elmul-mulaeen , Beirut, 1960, p. 126.

14. “Seiri dar Andisheye Eslamie Arab”-(A survey of Arab Islamic Thought), pp. 234- 228.

15. George Antonius: “Arab Awakening", p. 99.

PartTwo : The History of the Inroad of Nationalism in the Islamic World

Nationalism as an imported school

Nationalism is an importedschool which has been exported by exploiting powers to disturb the unity of the Islamic world. Some Western thinkers andOrientalists who have always strived to introduce Western political and cultural colonization in Asia and Africa, provided the ground for its rise and the so-called enlightened groups depending on the West acted as its banner-bearers, propounding this school of thought.

Western colonizing governments have always considered the unity of the world of Islam, which they call “Pan-Islamism", a potential danger to their political and economic interests. At the end of the 19th century, inspired by the ideas ofSayyid Jamal-al-Din and Sultan AbdulHamid , there started talks about the unity of world Muslims, and the union and solidarity of the Turks and Arabs in the Ottoman Empire prevented the inroad of Western values and ideals in the critical and strategic Middle East zone.

Colonizing powers felt the danger and adopted apolicy which unfortunately proved effective. This was the infusion of the idea of nationalism and the awakening of national sentiments among the Arabs and Turks in order to check “Pan-Islamism” and thereby divide the great Ottoman Empire, and replace the declining influence of the Ottomans by the power of Western colonization.

It is noteworthy that nationalism rose first, not in the Muslimlands which were under British and French domination, but in regions which formed part of the Ottoman Empire. InIndia which was a British colony, such Westernized intellectuals as SirSayyid Ahmad Khan found no need to rely on nationalism, national andxenophobian sentiments and were still occupied with the thought of economic and educational improvement of the Muslims. They even took an opposing stand against the nationalism of the Hindu Congress Party.In Algeria and Sudan too, it was Islam that stood in the persons of theMahdi Sudanese and Algerian Abdul-Qader against colonization, but there was no sign of nationalism. In Indonesia and Malaysia and Muslim lands of the Far East, too, which were directly under British and French domination, Westernized intellectuals believed there was no need to rouse nationalistic feelings.

On the other hand, these intellectuals who were dependent on colonization, raised the cry of nationalism in the lands of the Ottoman Empire, namely Turkey, Egypt and the Arab lands in order to overthrow the Ottoman rule and pave the way for their own influence and expansion.

This historical fact clearly shows that those who sympathized with nationalism in Islamic lands did not claim independence out of xenophobia, butwere motivated by something quite different. They were in fact, the surrogates of Western colonizers whocould be used to break up Islamic unity and weaken or destroy the Ottoman Empire. We see now, why in the Iran of that time, the westernized intellectuals did not so strongly support the idea of nationalism aswas done in Turkey, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon by their allies, since Iran did not form part of the Ottoman Empire. Moreover, at that time, Iran had little connectionwith the world of Islam owing to the excessive reliance of theQajar kings on the prejudicial differences between theShi'a and Sunni sects, and colonial powers did not think it probable that Iran would join the great union of world Muslims. Therefore, they felt secure and all their effortswere directed at making the western culture and system bear root in Iran, and prevent a religious government from assuming power so, in Iran, the emphasis was laid on the question of the constitution, Western democracy and liberal thoughts of the West. In the works ofTaleboff andMirza KhanKermani , we see much less of nationalism and national unity than in those of their Arab and Turkish counterparts. The focal point of discussion was the 'constitution', Western liberalism and the necessity of casting aside religious thoughts and principles, and copying European culture1 .

Why were the Muslim lands of Istanbul, Cairo and 'Beirut preoccupied with the idea of nationalism? Why was this longing for nationalism at the end of the 19th century concurrent with the height of colonial expansion? Why did the Arabs and Turks, the targets of nationalism, confront each other? Why was there no talk of British or French colonialism? Why did nationalistic sentiments become popular in the realm of the Ottoman Empire, but not in those countries invaded by Western colonialism? Why is it that following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire,as a result of intense nationalistic sentiments, colonialism rapidly succeeded in swallowing the Middle East? Answers to these questionsmay be found in the wide dimension of Western colonial interference for the creation and expansion of nationalism in the world of Islam.

Napoleon and Frenchmen as pioneers of Egyptian Nationalism

In Islamiccountries nationalism took birth in the 19th century. The firstcountries which fell victim to it were Egypt and Turkey. Napoleon's invasion of Egypt was a turning point in the history of the Islamic world and the beginning of Westernization. During the brief stay of the French in Egypt, Western ideas had found their way amidst Egyptian intellectuals. The contact of such Egyptian scholars as AbdulRahman Jabarti , Sheikh Hassan Attar etc. with the men of learning that Napoleon had brought with him to Egypt, and the encouragement given by the French, roused the desire in some self-sold Egyptians to walk in step with the West. This point can explain why the spirit of nationalism rose first in Egypt to prepare the ground for its separation from the Ottoman Empire sooner than other lands belonging to it. Most probably, as the French were openly fighting the Empire of the Turkish Muslims and inherited the anti-Islamic prejudices from the crusaders and men like Charlemagne, they began sooner than others to break up Islamic unity and destroy the Ottoman Empire, by rousing Egyptian nationalism, in the same way as the British did with Arab lands.

In order to revive Egyptian nationalism and rouse the pride of the Egyptians of their past, Napoleon established an institution called the “Egyptian Foundation”, a sham scientific society supposedly for research in ancient Egyptian history and culture, but which in reality aimed at revivingEgyptianism against the idea of Islamic unity, and at undermining Islamic inclinations forcing a gap between Egypt and the Ottoman Empire. It was through this Foundation that some distinguished French men of learning such as Clot,Cerisy ,Linant andRousset were dispatched to Egypt2 , whose objective, as we may guess, was to help the Egyptians discover their ancientPharaonic culture and to acquaint them with French culture on which they were encouraged to frame their lives and policies.

Sylvestre deSacy and other French scholars wrote books on the magnificence of Egyptian civilization, and Egyptian nationalists such asTahtavi discovered the splendor of their ancient civilization and cultural independence through DeSacy's book, “Nationality3 ”.

It was probably through French influence that Muhammad Ali declared his independence from the Ottoman Empire and for the first time raised the question of Arab unity. Western missionaries, too, were very active. Between 1863 and 1879, no less thanseventy seven French, American, Italian and German schools were opened in Egypt.

Following all these efforts at colonization, a westernized intellectual class rose as the banner-bearer of Egyptian nationality, insisting upon the following of Western civilization.Defa'at -al-Tahtavi (1801-1873) was the first of these men. He stayed in Paris for five years andhaving been indoctrinated with French ideas, he returned to Egypt to propoundMontesquieu's thoughts on the nation and the country.

Tahtavi in his well-known book, “Manahej ” and other works made recurrent use of words like 'homeland' and 'patriotism', words which were not so popular till then among the Egyptians, in the concept of Western nationalism. He declared that the Egyptians were a nation apart from other Muslims, and the core of their love and loyalty should be their 'homeland'. He tried to prove that nationalism is not compatible with Islam, but this was a futile and hypocritical effort. This pioneer of nationalism considered the reason for the decadence of Egypt to be the rule of non-Egyptian Muslims such as theMameluks .But at the same time, he shamelessly spoke of the French and Westerners in general, not as a symbol of greed for the world, but as representatives of science, civilization and culture, and suggested that Egypt should follow the West4 .

Another pioneer of Egyptian nationalism wasYaghoub Zow'e , whose father was a Jew and mother, an Italian. He lived in Paris for a long time and was a French agent. In Paris, he published the journal, 'EI-Vatan -el-Mesri ' (Egyptian homeland) to propagate nationalism. He was a founder of Egyptian nationalism5 and had a close friendship with Cromer, the English governor of Egypt.

Taha Hossain was another Westernized Egyptian nationalist. He attempted in his book, 'EI-Mostaqbel -el-Thaqafe ', to prove that Egypt has no connection whatsoever with the world of Islam, but that it has instead, a strong bond with Europe.

In the time ofTaha Hossain , nationalist forces led by theWafd Party became a determining factor in Egyptian politics.Sa'ed Zaghlool , leader of theWafd party and other nationalist politicians were British pawns who considered political independence only as a means of becoming Europeanized progressives and found it in the acceptance of Western values.

This was an account of the rise and spread of nationalism in Egypt, showing how Westerners sowed the seed of nationalism and irrigated it.

Three Jews as inspirers of Turkish nationalism

Turkey was another of the first Islamic countries where the school of nationalism found its way. Bernard Lewis, the well-knownorientalist , confesses that three European Jews inspired the spirit of nationalism in Turkey6 .

The first person who tried hard to kindle the flame of Turkish nationalism was Arthur Lumley David (1811-1832). He was an English Jew who traveled to Turkey and wrote a book called, 'Preliminary Discourses' in which he tried to show how the Turks were a distinguished and independent race, superior to the Arabs and other oriental races.

Lewis writes: “The book of this English Jew made the Turks imaginethemselves as having a distinct nationality and independence.” Before the spread and indoctrination of Western ideas, no signis seen of nationalism in the Ottoman, Empire. Even until the beginning of the present century, the Turks did not consider the Arabs as aliens, and the Arabs looked upon the Turks in the same way. The Arabs were content to be included in the Ottoman Empireon account of being of the same religion, and the Turks respected them because of their culture, and knowledge of Arabic was considered a sign of learning.Even a Sultan like Abdul-Hamid was surrounded by Arab counselors in his court, the likes ofAbol-Hoda andEzzat Pasha . In the revolution of 1908 againstAbdul-Hamid there were at least two Arab officers, named Aziz AliMesri andMahmood Showkat Pasha among the leaders. But the book of the said Jew gradually convinced some self-sold and dependent intellectuals and politicians like the leaders of the" Young Turks» movement of the superiority of the Turkish race.

In 1851,Fu'ad andJowdat Pasha translated most of David's writings into Turkish. In 1869, another writer, AliSavi , published a treatise in Turkish which was an imitation of David's, speaking of the glorious past of the Turkish race. This was one of the first writings in which nationalism was propounded and it was somethingquite unprecedented in the Ottoman Empire.As Lewis says: “Thus the Turks discovered their nationality through the West and copied the writings of the Westerners7 .”

David Leon Cohen, a Jewish French writer was another man who greatly contributed to the expansion of Turkish nationalism. In 1899, he published a book called "IntroductionGenerale a l'Histoire de L' Asie8 ”. In this book, he writes of the racial superiority of the Turks and of their epical records in history. This bookwas translated into Turkish in the first decade of the 10th century in a large number. Prof.Khadouri and Bernard Lewis believe that the said Jew inspired the Pan- Turkism of 'Young Turks' who started a revolution in 1908.

In addition to the above book, Cohen published several epical stories on the past glories of the Turks. Clearly, the main aim of this Jew in his eulogy of the Turkish race was to rouse their racial prejudices and weaken their bond with other Muslim nations. He was not content with writing only, but also formed societies of exiled Turks and Egyptians in Paris and tried to lay the foundation of nationalistic movements in those countries9 .

But the person who had the greatest role in the creation of Turkish and Arab nationalism, was the famousorientalist , ArminiusVambery (1832-1918), the son of a Jewish Hungarian priest. He published many works on the necessity for the revival of Turkish nationality,language and literature. His works intensely captivated the attention of Westernized, so-called enlightened Turks and incited their patriotism. He was closely acquainted with the Turkishstatesmen and politicians of the first rank10 .

One of the main aims of the Jews in inciting nationalistic sentiments was to pave the way for the occupation of Palestine. The Jews in their unsuccessful contact with Sultan Abdul-Hamid to secure Palestinian territories for Jewishemigrants, came to the conclusion that the only way to fulfill their dream was to overthrow Abdul-Hamid and break up Islam and Arab and Turkish unity. Under the cover of nationalism and through encouraging the creation of the 'Young Turks' movement, Zionism first succeeded in deposing Abdul-Hamid , imprisoninghim and laying the ground for inciting differences and enmity between the Turks and Arabs.

These plots of colonialism and Zionism gave birth to the 'Young Turks'movement which resulted in the revolution of 1908 and deposal of Abdul-Hamid . The “Young Turks” who executed the Zionist scheme, embarked on a 'Pan- Turkish' policy based on a belief in the superiority of the Turks. So they adopted an anti-Arab stand, closed down Arab cultural societies and began acts of discrimination against the Arabs and non- Turks, a conduct which was in line with the direct plots of British colonialism in rousing Arab nationalism.

ThusZionism and imperialism and their discrimination towards the Arabs on the one hand, and inciting Arab nationalism and their opposition to the Turks on the other. Until this time, the Arabs did not consider themselves a separate race.But as the Turks were seeking the superiority of Turkish culture over other cultures, the Arabs, too, insisted upon their own independent identity. It was the racial and nationalistic policies of Young Turks that kindled the flame of Arab nationalism-a matter, which as we shall see,was directly supported by the British11 .

After the revolution of 1908, the “Young Turks” expanded Turkish nationalism by force and by propagation through the mass media. Moreover, the repeated blows inflicted upon Turkey by Arab countries, together with the extension of western education and dispatch of students to Europe, intensified Turkish nationalistic frenzy. Even some Muslim thinkers asNamek Kamal (1840-1888), Zia Pasha (1825-1880) andJowdat Pasha (1823-1898), tried hard to blend Islam with nationalism-an idea which was doomed from the very beginning since these two schools are incompatible. The progressive advance of nationalism and colonization at last led to the rise of Ata Turk accompanied by his anti-Islamic policy.

With him, Turkey becametotally dependent on the West, exactly what the Satanic West wanted. The Western intellectual class continued to promote thisschool which was now supported by the bayonets of Ata Turk and his successors. ZiaGukalp (1876-1942), the greatest theoretician of the Turkish nationalist school, was a well- known personality of the west who busied himself copying Western ideas and culture, both of which he made the core of his ideology. Turkish nationalism resulted at last in the membership of Turkey in the NATO, thereby surrendering its political and cultural independence.

This was then an account of the rise and advance of nationalism in Turkey.

$$SUB[ British Colonialism, the Banner-bearer of Arab Nationalism]

4- British Colonialism, the Banner-bearer of Arab Nationalism.

Nationalism was nowhere tobe seen in the Arab countries before the inroad of Western ideas and colonial influence.

Arab lands gradually came under the domination of the Ottoman Empire from the 16th century onward, and a unitywas established between almost all parts of the Muslim Middle East (excluding Iran). All through the Ottoman rule, until the beginning of the 20th century, the Arabs had no feeling of alienation towards the Turks, and were perfectly content with the unity that existed between Turkish and Arab lands. They considered the Ottoman Sultan, the rightful ruler of the Muslims, and the Ottomans, too, showed no discrimination towards the Arabs. They chose the governor of each Arab zone (with the title ofNaghib ) from among the people of the same zone.

French colonization was the first to sow the seeds of nationalism and the separation of Egypt, tobe followed by the deceitful and mischievous creation of Turkish nationalism by Imperialism and Zionism in the form of the 'Young Turks' movement and leading for the first time to discrimination of Arabs by them.

Concurrently, colonial powers especially Britain roused the racial and nationalistic sentiments of the Arabs through Christian Arab missionaries and Western intellectuals.

After Egypt, the pioneers of Arab nationalism were Syria,Lebanon and Jordan. Missionaries were most active in these regions. Members of the Jesuit Catholic sect from 1830 and Protestants from 1820 entered Syria. The giant Christian society became the agent for executing the plot of colonization. Christian Arabs regarded Western penetration to their own interests, and looked at French and British colonization as a refuge against the Muslims.They were very sensitive about the expansion of the idea of the universal IslamicUmmah , since such a unity would place them in a minority, whereas having nationalism as the basis of unity would not only prevent their being considered a minority (since in such a unity all are Arabs -not Muslims and Christians), but being ahead of the Muslims as far as Western education was concerned and trusted by colonial powers, they hoped to assume the rein of affairs. From the beginning, Christian Arabs sought the aid of Western governments against Muslim Arabs, as was the case in the Civil War of 1860 when they invited the Europeans for a campaign in Lebanon.But this method did not solve the Christians' problem in the long run since it roused the cynicism of the Muslims.Therefore on the suggestion of their colonial masters they resorted to the importation of the creed of nationalism.

One of the clearest examples wasNajib Azouri , a founder of Arab nationalism. He was an agent of both France and England. In 1904 in Paris, he published a book named “LeReveil de la NationArabe ”. He further formed a society by the name of “Ligue de laPatrie Arabe ”, and published a monthly journal named, “L 'independenceArabe ”, as an organ of the union. In its publication, an employee of the French Foreign Ministry named Eugene Lung, collaborated closely with him. Lung as a servant of French colonialism wrote a book named “LaRevolte Arabe”12 , in which he praised the Arab race. One of the points repeatedly stressed in this book was the racial,cultural and political differences between the Arabs and Turks, and occasional reference to the superiority of the Arabs over the Turks and the necessity of segregating the Arabs from the Ottoman Empire. To bothAzouri and Lung, three revolutions would be necessary to destroy the Ottoman Empire: An Arab revolution, a Kurdishrevolution and an Armenian revolution13 .

Azouri's views on international politics, too, show his dependence on Britain and France. Against the Turks, he sought the friendship of Britain, and supported the pro British party of MuhammadWahidi and pro-British dailies such as “El-Haghtatem ” and “El-Watan ”. He regarded the power ofGermany which supported the Ottoman Empire a danger to human society, and considered the governments of France and Britain as the banner-bearers of justice in the world, and encouraged these two colonizing powers to interfere in the Ottoman's internal affairs in favor of the Arabs. He volunteered to start a revolution within the Ottoman Empire in cooperation with lung, with the aid of British and French capital and weapons. Dr.Hamid Enayat writes:

Azouri expressed his loyalty and obedience to Britain and France and introduced himself as the supporter of their interests in the East, and said: 'The French should assist and tell us what they want from us14 .”

Azouri as a founder of Arab nationalism was dependent on the French and British governments and was in their service15 .

BesidesAzouri , there were such men asPetros Bostani ,Nasif al-Yazeji , Ibrahim al-Yazeji ,Nofel ,Salim Nofel ,Mikhael Shamhada ,Sem'een Kalhoun ,Gerges Fayyaz ,Rastan Dameshghia and many other Christian enlightened men depending on colonial powers, who tried to incite and expand Arab nationalism. These men did their utmost to convince the Arabs that they were a distinct race, superior to other Muslim nations. They deliberately misinterpreted history to attain this objective and presented Islam, Islamic culture and civilization as being originally Arabic- a matterwhich was a great treason to the intellect. Their arguments and ways to prove Arab nationality came from Western culture and thought.

Arab nationalism was reflected in two ways: firstly by emphasis on Egyptian, Syrian,Iraqi and other nationalities, and secondly by emphasis on Arab unity, or the Arab race.

During the World War I, the British government decided to enter the arena in person and to openly support and guard Arab nationalism, turning the enmity between the Arabs and the Turks to its own interest. The rise of SharifHossain , grandfather of kingHossain of Jordan against the Turks in June 1916, whichis regarded as an objective desired by Arab nationalism, was the product of direct British meddling and intervention. The expansion of Arab nationalism against theOttomans, brought the British and French governments into the Arab zone, resulting in the creation of Israel as a cancerous tumor in the heart of the Arab land.

SharifHossain , as a pioneer of Arab rebellion against the Turks was a British agent, and the British were the greatest supporters of Arab independence from the Turkish yoke. The story of SharifHossain's collaboration with the British as a hero of Arab nationalism is very amazing. In 1914, direct contactwas made through Abdullah, son of SharifHossain and father of KingHossain , betweenKitchner , well-known English general, and Sharif.Some time after,Kitchner sent one of his high-ranking officers, named RonaldStors to visit Abdullah. At this time, the World War had begun andKitchner who was now British War Secretary, sent a message to Abdullah in October 1914 asking him to rise in rebellion for independence against the Turks.Kitchner promised to support the Arabs' efforts for independence, and even to transfer the Muslim Caliphate from the Turks to the Arabs and choose Sharif as the new caliph.

SharifHossain , this so-called reverend pro-British nationalist, carried out the plan of colonialism in the name of Arab independence, and at a time when Turkeywas entangled with the British and French, he made an assault upon the Turks rousing the Muslims against them and infavour of the British. McMahon, an English general, sent a letter to Sharif, the copy of which is in the archive of the British Foreign Office in which SharifHossain's roleis lauded as a determining factor in “the combat for independence by the valiant Arab nation.”

On July 21, 1915, Sharif sent a message to McMahon, asking for British support for the Arab demand for the caliphate. On June 10, 1916, the Arab national uprising, with the aid of British arms and munitions and military and political supportwas started , led by SharifHossain . T. E. Lawrence, an English government official, was the principal adviser to Feisal, son of Sharif, in this national Arab uprising. On one side, the Arab forces rushed upon the Turks, while on the other, in a perfectly coordinated operation, General Allen by, the British commander in Palestine took the lead in fighting. Thus the combat of the Arabs for independence incited bynationalism, was promoted under British military protection.

But while British and French colonizing powers tempted the Arabs into a war of independence, and while SharifHossain and Arab secret organizations such as El-Fetat and El-Ahad were actively executing the schemes of the colonial powers, Britain and France were secretly dividing the Arab zones among themselves. With the Treaty of Sykes-Picot and the Balfour Declaration, they laid the ground for the division of Arab lands and creation of Israel as a country.

France occupied Algeria,Tunis and Morocco by inciting anti-Turkish feelings. Italy made Libya its colony, while Russia occupied parts of Armenia; Britain occupied Egypt, Cyprus, Aden, and the Sheikdoms of the Persian Gulf, and then Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, culminating in the creation of the cancerous tumor, “Israel”, in the heart of the Arab world.

And that was the painful story of Arab nationalism, its creation and expansion.

Conclusion

It becomes clear then thatnationalism in Islamic lands was incited by the Westerners , with the British and French missionaries andOrientalists having a great share in it. Itwas then expanded by colonial plots and used by colonialism as a tool for breaking up Islamic unity and destroying the Ottoman Empire . In this connection, Christian and Jewish minorities and pro-Western intellectuals were the principal executors of these imperialistic plans. Almost all the banner-bearers and famous pioneers of nationalism in Islamic lands were those who copied the Western values and ideals.

With the inroad of Western ideals, words like 'homeland' and 'patriotism' became very popular with the Arabs,Turks and Iranians. Nationalism was the stealthy and motivated imitation of Western models, dictated by colonial powers, eventually resulting in the dependence of those countries upon the West or East. This fact that for many years the main supporters of Egyptian nationalism and Arab nationality and other Islamic nations were France and Britain is more eloquent than words. With those brilliant records of colonization, at present, the biggest supporter of nationalist forces of Turkey and Iran is the U.S., and the supporter of theBa’athists and some Arab countries is the Soviet Union.

The important question that arises is why the idea ofnationalism which penetrated Islamic lands through Western ideas and colonial plots, was welcomed by some sections of the Muslim masses and how did it expand?

Firstly, the masses could not see the difference between 'patriotism' and 'nationalism' and to their unconsciousmind, both concepts seemed to denote the same idea as that of Islamic 'Ummahism '. From the beginning, Islam had created a strong feeling of the 'Ummah ' and had divided the world into the “House of Islam” and the “House of War”. The masses believed nationalism to be the same as 'Ummahism ' and therefore welcomed it.

The reason was that even though the people sometimes spoke of nationalism, yet in practice, they regarded a Christian Egyptian and Coptic Egyptian beyond the sphere of nationality, and Turkish Armenians as aliens. Actually, to the masses, nationalism and IslamicUmmahism meantone and the same thing.

Secondly, contrary to the main pioneers of nationalism, who propagated itas a result of their dependence on colonial powers and the West, the masses manifested nationalistic sentiments in opposition to social tyranny or to the colonial influence of Britain and France. To the masses, nationalism was a sentiment, not a school, but to the Western, so-called enlightened class and politicians, it was an ideology and a political creed.

The third factor behind the growth of nationalism among the masses was the injustice of the selfish, pseudo-Muslimgovernments which inflicted oppression and torture upon the people. While the Ottoman Empire was on the brink of collapse, Turkish rulers like other selfish rulers of history treated their subordinates oppressively including not only the Arabsbut the Turkish peasants. After the Young Turks assumed power,tyranny and discrimination became prevalent, an outcome of Turkish nationalism, which led to a spread of nationalistic sentiments among the Arabs, of which colonialism made the utmost use. The most recent example of a country where nationalism isfully manifest , is Bangladesh, resulting from the tyrannical conduct of Pakistan's military dictators.

Notes

1. Refer to the books: “Andishehaye Mirza Aqa KhanKermani ”- (Thoughts ofMirza Aqa KhanKermani ) andAndisheye Mirza Fath -e AliAkhundzadeh -( Thought ofMirza Fateh -e AliAkhundzadeh ) byFereydoon Adamiat .

2. M.Sabry : L 'Empire Egyptian sour Mohammad Ali, p; 579, Paris, 1930.

3. Refer to the book: «Andisheye Arab"-( Arab thought) byHurani and “Tarikhe Andisheye Siasie Arab] -(The history of the Arab political thought) byHamid Enayat , p. 28.

4. For more information onTahtavi's nationalistic thoughts, refer to the book “Seiri dar Andisheye Siasie Arab”-( A survey of the Arab political thought) byHamid Enayat , p. 34-35.

5. Ditto, p. 46.

6. Bernard Lewis: Islam in History, London, 1973, p. 132.

7. Bernard Lewis: Islam in History, p. 132.

8. Refer to “Nationalism in Asia and Africa” byKhadouri , p.159.Khadouri has offered reasons and proved that the westerners are the founders of nationalism in. most third-world countries. Also refer to «Islam in History», by Bernard Lewis, p. 132.

9. Refer to Jewish Encyclopedia, an article byZodic Kahn, p. 61, and “Turkism and the Soviets” byHutler , p.141.

10. Concerning the role of David Cohen andVambery in the emergence and expansion of the Turkish nationalism refer to “History-Writing and national revival in Turkey” by Bernard Lewis and “The Development of secularism in Turkey" byNiazi Brex , Printed in Montreal, 1944, p. 314-315.

11. Concerning the role of Zionism and the westerners in the creation and expansion of the Turkish nationalism refer to:Mardin's “The Genesis of young Ottoman thought” a study in the modernization of Turkish political ideas (Princitton N.J. 1962, p. 250). HaroldBoven's British contribution to Turkish studies, London, 1945, p. 43-4.Also refer to “The Emergence of Arab Nationalism" byZein Nzein , p.71.

12.Elic Kedourie : The Politics of Political Literature in Middle East studies, vol. III No.2, May 1972, p.230.

13. Refer to “Al-Belad -ul -Arabiat -e-dulat -et-Uthmania ”, by Sateaal -Hasari ,Darul -Elmul-mulaeen , Beirut, 1960, p. 126.

14. “Seiri dar Andisheye Eslamie Arab”-(A survey of Arab Islamic Thought), pp. 234- 228.

15. George Antonius: “Arab Awakening", p. 99.


4

5