The Mystery of Life

The Mystery of Life15%

The Mystery of Life Author:
Publisher: www.al-islam.org
Category: Ideological Concepts

The Mystery of Life
  • Start
  • Previous
  • 25 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 24725 / Download: 4837
Size Size Size
The Mystery of Life

The Mystery of Life

Author:
Publisher: www.al-islam.org
English

This book is corrected and edited by Al-Hassanain (p) Institue for Islamic Heritage and Thought

The Mystery of Life

A Secret Inside Secrets, Selections from the books written by Allamah Muhammad Taqi Ja’fari

This book deals with a myriad of subjects related to human life: philosophy, mysticism, anthropology, cultures, arts, history and much more.

Author(s): Allamah Muhammad Taqi Ja'fari

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments 8

Preface 9

Recognition in the Domain of Thoughts 11

The Possibility of Recognition. 11

The Devices and Tools for Discovery and Gaining Knowledge 12

The Importance of Adjusting and Refining the Senses 13

The Factors that Influence Recognition and Identification. 13

The Process of Recognition. 14

Different Forms of Knowledge and Recognition. 15

Supreme Forms of Knowledge 19

The Various Forms of Practical Relationship between the Mind and the Phenomenon to be discovered  21

The Activities of the Mind. 22

Various Relationships between the Mind and the Subject 24

The Relationship between the Mind and the Observable Facts in Discovery. 27

The Relationship between the “Self” and “Other than the “Self” in Cognition  27

Pillar 1: The “Self” and the Factors that Influence the Process of Gaining Knowledge 27

Pillar 2: Other than the Self, or the Realities about the Universe 30

A Criticism of Idealism. 31

Responding to a Point of Criticism. 31

From Science to Philosophy: A Look Inside 33

The Definition of Science 33

The Levels of Science 33

Factors that Make Man Seek Science 34

Scientific Laws 34

The Definitions of Philosophy. 38

The Principles of Philosophical Systems 39

The Criterion for a Subject Being Scientific or Philosophical 40

A Scholar's Philosophical Rise 41

The Essence of Supernatural Knowledge 41

The Analytical Method or the Combination Method? 43

The Differences between Science and Philosophy. 45

The Classification of Philosophy. 46

The Advantages of the Collaboration between Science and Philosophy. 48

The Humanities 50

The Philosophy of Science and the Humanities 53

Philosophical Doubt 54

Science and Philosophy in Intelligible Life 56

Anthropology: A New Scope 58

Theories on Human Nature 58

The Human Nature in the Qur’an. 58

Human Characteristics 59

Human Nature 60

Man's Internal Potentials 62

Interpreting Opposite Potentials 63

The Identity of the “Self” (the “ Ego” ) 64

Self-assessment 66

Taking Oneself Seriously. 66

Good Intentions for the Self 67

Self-alienation. 67

1. Negative Self-alienation. 67

2. Positive Self-alienation. 69

The Qualities of Existence Dependent upon the Self 70

Finding the Roots of Man's Weaknesses 71

Conscience 73

The Definition of Conscience 73

A Scientific and Philosophical Study of Conscience 73

The Criticism on the Originality of the Conscience 73

The Importance of Conscience 75

The Characteristics and Consequences of Conscience 75

The Relationship between Recognizing Oneself and Recognizing God. 76

Man's Four Relationships 78

Spiritual Moderation. 80

The Relativity of Spiritual Moderation. 80

Spiritual Expansion and Contraction. 82

The Relativity of Spiritual Expansion. 82

The Basic Origin of Spiritual Expansion and Contraction. 83

Conscious and Unconscious Expansions and Contractions 83

The Expansion and Contraction of the Divine Conscience 83

The Consequences of Expansions and Contractions 84

The Reasons Why Anthropology Has Failed. 84

The Problems with Contemporary Psychology. 85

Life: The Hows and Whys 87

Asking about the Philosophy of Life 87

Motives for Asking about the Aim of Life 87

The Necessity of Recognizing the Ultimate Aim of Life 88

Various Viewpoints on the Aim of Life 89

The Aim of Life as Seen in the Holy Qur’an. 90

The Characteristics of an Objective Life 91

The Six Kinds of Life: 92

Education: The Basics 94

The four principles of education are: 94

Principle 1: The Fundamentals of Education. 94

The goals of education are: 94

The Basics of Education. 94

Principle 2: The Teacher and the Trainer 96

Principle 3: The Student and the Trainee 98

Factors Resisting Education. 100

Principle 4: The Contents of Education. 101

How Do Cultures Evolve?. 102

The Four Principles of Culture 102

Two Different Forms of Culture 102

Two Aspects of Culture 104

Diversity of Cultures 104

Acquiring Cultures 105

Factors that Can Preserve Cultures 105

Why Cultural Elements Lose Their Harmony. 106

Can Culture Undergo Evolution? 106

The Fundamentals of Western Culture 107

Man and the Universe: What Should Man Do?  109

Knowledge of the Universe by means of the Seven Factors 111

Perceiving the Universe by means of the Seven Aspects 112

Changing by means of the Seven Aspects 114

Changing Others by means of the Seven Aspects 115

The “What There Should Be” and “What There Is” System   117

The Relationship between Values and Scientific Research. 117

The Relationship between “What There Should Be” and “What There Is” 119

An Analysis of the Relationship between “What There Should Be” and “What There Is” 119

The Relationship between “What There Should Be” and “What There Is” in the Qur’an  120

The Relationship between Ideology and World-view. 121

What Is Ideology? 121

What Is World-view? 121

Life, Rising Up. 123

The Factors that Can Elevate Man's Evolutionary Life 125

Intelligible Life, the Fundamental Domain. 130

The Definition of Intelligible Life 131

The Role of Wisdom in an intelligible Life 132

The Feasibility of an intelligible Life 132

A Closer Look at the Aspects of Intelligible Life 133

Man and Freedoms 138

The Right to Freedom and the Right to Free Will 138

The Classifications of Freedom. 139

In the Society: From Economics to Politics 144

Work. 144

The Definition of Work. 144

The Value of Work. 144

The Domains of the Value of Work. 145

Various Kinds and Aspects of Human Work. 146

The Relationship between Work and Human Life 148

Values 148

Ownership. 149

The Natural Roots of Ownership. 149

The Limitation of Personal Ownership. 151

Unity among People 151

The Various Forms of Unity. 152

Differences among People 154

The Various Forms of Unity. 157

Social Order and Cooperation. 157

The Principles of Social Order and Cooperation. 158

Power and Right 158

Power in the hands of selfish man. 160

Power in developed man. 161

A Study of History. 163

What Is the Philosophy of History? 164

Causality in History. 164

Is History Motivated Internally or Externally? 164

Is There a Single Motivating Reason for History? 165

The Necessity of Distinguishing the Necessary Factors from the Determining Factors in History  166

Various Viewpoints on the Factors Motivating History. 167

Does History Advance on an Evolutionary Path? 169

Civilizations: The Principles and the Presumptions 172

The Difference between Civilization and Culture 172

What Elevates a Civilization. 173

The Basic Reasons Why Civilizations Fall 174

The Unconditional Philosophical Principles of Civilizations 174

Principle One: The Self-love of Life 174

Principle Two: The Economy. 175

Principle Three: Free Will and Freedom. 175

Principle Four: Stagnant Civilizations Gradually Deteriorate 176

Principle Five: The Law of Causality. 176

Conditional Philosophical Principles in Civilizations 177

The Relationships between Civilizations 178

Men and Women: A Serious Study. 180

The Identity of Men and Women. 180

Theoretical Wisdom in Men and Women. 181

Men and Women in the Family. 182

Three Issues Concerning the Differences between Men and Women. 184

Inequality of Men and Woman Testifying. 186

God: From Seeking God to Faith in God  187

The History of Belief in God. 187

Void of Reasons for Defying God. 187

Classifying People based on Their Belief in God. 188

Factors Inhibiting Obvious Recognition of God. 189

Essentiality Reasoning. 191

Faith. 193

The Necessity of Faith. 193

Man's Mental States during Worship. 195

Is Religion a Personal Matter? 196

The Origins of Defying Divine Commandments 196

Devotion. 197

The Characteristics of Valuable Devotion: 197

Having God in Mind. 198

The Conditions for Calling and Remembering God. 199

Divine Justice 200

The Rule of Kind Favors 203

The Consequences of the Rule of Kind Favors 204

The Relationship between God and His Creatures 204

The Relationship between God and His Creatures in the Qur’an. 205

Fatalism and Free Will: Which Is the Truth?  207

The Characteristics of Will 207

The Difference between Tendency and Will 208

The Difference between Will and Determination. 209

The Quanta of Will 209

Is the Will Free? 210

The Levels of Free Will 210

The Three Fundamental Principles in Proving Free Will 211

The Steps toward Making Free Will-based Actions Come True 211

Two Kinds of Will, Decision and Supervision in Actions based on Free Will 212

A Look at Human Rights 215

Seven reasons have been presented for the compilation of the Human Rights. We will now comment on some of them: 215

The Reasons and Motives for Setting Human Rights in Islam. 217

The Ad Valorem Theorems in the Human Rights Declaration. 217

The Points in Common between the Western and Islamic Views on the Human Rights 221

A Brief Study of the Qur’an. 225

What is the Qur’an? 225

The Qur’an: A Miracle 230

How God's Divine Beauty Can Be Recognized. 232

The Divinity of the Qur’an. 238

1. The Sense of Absolute Dominance and Control 238

2. The Void of Contradiction in Qur’anic Verses 238

Thought and Reasoning in the Qur’an. 240

How the Qur’an Sees the Universe: Carefully Calculated. 241

The Stories in the Qur’an. 241

The Rise and Fall of Cultures and Civilizations 245

Fear of God as Seen in the Qur’an. 246

Forget Judgment Day, and There Will Be No Good or Bad. 248

The Universe on Judgment Day. 248

The Necessity of Knowing the Qur’an. 249

The Qur’an and Creation. 250

The Book of Justice and Fairness 250

The Book of No Contradictions 251

The Qur’an, the Book that Confirms and Verifies Prophets 251

The Qur’an, the Panacea for Mankind's Pains 251

The Qur’an, The Book for Mankind. 251

Positive Mysticism. 253

The Characteristics of Positive Mysticism. 253

The Characteristics of Negative Mysticism. 256

The Ecstatic 257

The Conditions and Obstacles on the Path of Mystic Endeavor 258

Mysticism and the Four Relationships 259

Mystics and the Order and Harmony of Life 260

Mysticism, Work and Effort 260

Mysticism and Power 260

Mysticism and Politics 260

Mysticism and the Society. 261

Mysticism, Wisdom and Science 261

Mysticism and Jihad. 262

Criticizing Nonsense 262

Religion, Rule of Life, and the Truth. 263

Mystic Change 264

Arts and Aesthetics 265

Four Various Viewpoints on Art 265

The Philosophical Viewpoint on Art 265

Pursuant Art, Pioneer Art 267

Modernism in Art 267

Artists 268

Various Types of Beauty. 269

The Truth about Beauties 269

The Virtually Internal Pole of Beauties 271

The Virtually External Pole of Beauties 271

The Differences between Observable Beauty and Intelligible Beauty. 272

The Definition of Beauty. 272

What Does Whitehead Tell Us? A Critique of a Book  274

The History of Ideas 274

Philosophy and the Truth. 275

The Laws of Nature 277

God. 277

Religion. 278

Defying the Ultimate Reason. 279

Man. 280

Moral Ethics 281

Freedom. 282

Art 283

Human Civilizations 283

Islam. 285

Acknowledgments

This is our first step into the world of great human beings who have understood the harmonious rhythm of the universe - and even become part of it. We feel obliged to thank the Mr. Abdullah Nasri, Mr. Shahram Ansari and Mr. Karim Feizi for helping to compile this book. We would also like to thank and Ms. Ruqayya Alizadeh for editing and proofreading the book and Ms. Roya Azizi Mousavi for setting its computer layout, and Mr. M. Hemmathi for designing the cover of this book.

The contents of this book have been compiled and selected from the following books written by Allamah Ja’fari:

• from a Scientific and Qur’anic Point of View, 1982

• A Study of the Philosophy of Science, 1992

• A Study and Critique of David Hume's Thoughts on Four Philosophical Issues, 1992

• A Study and critique of The Adventures of Ideas, 1991

• The Relationship between Man and the Universe, 1953

• A Study and Critique of the Russell-Wyatt Dialogs, 1964

• The Message of Wisdom, 1998

• An Interpretation and Critique of Rumi's Mathnavi (15 vol.), 1969- 1973

• A Translation and Interpretation of the Nahj-ul-balaghah (27 vol.), 1979-1998

• Conscience, 1966

• Fatalism and Free Will, 1967

• The Philosophy of Life, 1968

• Man in an Elevating, Evolutionary Life, 1984

• Intelligible Life, 1985

• Universal Human Rights, 1992

• The Philosophy of Islam's Political Principles, 1987

• Positive Mysticism, 1992

• Pioneer Culture to the Rescue of Mankind, 1993

• The Qur’an, A Symbol of Intelligible Life, 1995

We would like to end this book by adding that we would highly appreciate any suggestions readers of this book may wish to provide us with.

Preface

In the 1923, a child was born in northwestern Iran who would a few decades later become, for his scientific efforts and profound writings, one of the greatest thinkers of his time. His name was Muhammad Taqi Ja’fari.

Though born in a family who were by no means rich - which created many problems inhibiting his progress in education and academic endeavors - he persisted, and it was his tireless persistence and stamina that turned him into one of the richest men of the East in knowledge and mysticism. He soon accumulated a huge treasure of knowledge full of original, basic, innovative thoughts.

Muhammad Taqi Ja’fari never studied at any university; yet, his ingenious, delicate mental endeavors lead to the creation of invaluable amounts of knowledge, particularly in fields such as philosophy, anthropology, ideology and analyzing modern truths.

Ja’fari began his formal education at theological schools and seminaries, but his academic career mostly involves comprehensive viewpoints with the context of solving major ideological and philosophical dilemmas.

Searching for topics and posing fundamental questions was the most prominent aspect of Allamah Ja’fari's mentality; thus, he was constantly searching, excavating into new worlds few had stepped into - at least, the way he stepped into them.

His childhood was spent with his silent, boyish thoughts; his youth, however, involved studies mainly focusing on humanity and the universe. As time passed, these two issues became more and more important to him, though his peers did not think so.

His first book, The Relationship between Man and the Universe (The Change of Physical Mass in Man's Understanding from the Earliest Times up to the Twentieth Century), written in three volumes, showed how distinctive his way of thinking was; even though he was just a young man, he had begun a journey that he spent the rest of his life on - studying humanity, the universe and the facts that sacrifice the universe for man and man for himself.

By considering things from a novel point of view, Muhammad Taqi Ja’fari tended to use historical issues with a new definition and for a new purpose. This made him be much more than a pure philosopher; other scholars paid attention to his thoughts on the basics of recognition and discovery and insights into science and philosophy.

Still, he never stopped at that, and tried open up a new road by using the latest findings in the humanities and also experimental sciences like physics and mathematics. In fact, his questions about the mystery of life and his stops at stations like how evolutions arises in culture, the secrets about education helped him swiftly pass through the narrow road of “what there is” and “what there should be,” and see life as an elevation.

That was when he reached a crucially fundamental domain called “intelligible life,” and then devoted all his capabilities into extracting a constructive truth out of obvious realities like culture, economics, science, history, philosophy, civilizations and technology that could save the world

from falling into oblivion for the stormy hands of those who lack balanced thinking.

Since Ja’fari put a great deal of care into his work, and experienced and analyzed both Western and Eastern unsolved issues with incredible vigor and passion, and also probably due to his pioneer discoveries regarding issues where others failed, the second half of his lifetime had him change into an internationally renowned thinker.

Many Western scholars and thinkers from prominent universities all over the world visited him and held talks and discussions with him - over 100 major interviews, some of which have been published. Allamah Ja’fari and Bertrand Russell had correspondence with each other. Professor Rosenthal, Dr. Kenneth Alan Luther, Dr. Allal Al-fasi, Professor Gankowski, Professor Van Ess, Professor Koroda, Professor Muhammad Abdul-Salam, and many others were among those who came to Tehran to hold discussions with Allamah Ja’fari.

This book contains selections of but parts of the late Allamah's thoughts on some fundamental issues. It can be considered a way of thinking attempting to view truths from a new scope. Allamah Ja’fari's thoughts clearly show that he never confined himself to geographical boundaries; his main concern was mankind and the future - a future we cannot afford to neglect.

Those who knew him admit that he excelled at avoiding prejudiced or limited thoughts, and this book should also verify this fact - it is the cry of a thoughtful bird who sees the world as a garden to develop, fly and fly higher and higher in. He heeds us not to forget flying higher. Through his hundreds of comprehensive studies and analyses, he has told us that it is impossible to solve the mystery of life without making it face eternity.

Discourse One: Keeping Quiet and Prohibiting Difference-Creating Activities

Introduction

It is perhaps the most simple and at the same time, most insincere method of creating Islamic unity. It is completely based on narrations mentioned in the first tendency. It advocates restriction from difference- producing analyses and maintaining silence. Now at this advanced stage, the secrets are recommended not be told.

Hence it is said:

“Now, as it is said that these are secrets of progeny of Muhammad, then they must be kept confidential and not revealed.”[11]

Obviously, unity gained by negligence of knowledge will be imaginary unity. Furthermore, the outcome can well be judged if the steps, already suggested, are to be taken on road to Islamic unity such as:

“In controversial issues we should view afresh and anew. We should find new ways of friendship. We should give no room to new differences.”![12]

“Many differences in our time are groundless. As such, many differences should be forgotten and ignored. We should revise the method of debating issues or arguments.”![13]

“We must not dig graves under the sun in order to bring to life what is dead and buried.”![14]

“The subject matters that carry differences should not be discussed too openly in meetings or gatherings held under the title of ‘unity’.![15]

“What we say in this article can be summarized as: Muslims must not speak about differences that existed among their own leaders fourteen centuries ago: and more undesireable it is to speak about differences that have happened later and are constant and current.”![16]

“Narration of any matter that might hurt our Sunni brothers is prohibited.”![17]

“…There are certain matters which must be taken into consideration by broadcasting stations, television and media collectively. Besides, writers and speakers also must delete such matters, particularly about the Fatimid period in gatherings. Then alone unity is possible. Whatever, it could be, if it hurts the feelings of our Sunni brothers it must be avoided in our public gatherings and should not be mentioned at all. I can prove that whatever is being published in books and newspapers and told over the pulpits in religious gatherings and over TV and Radio is sufficient to injure the feelings of our Sunni brothers. Hence it is prohibited.”![18]

“We Muslims are not allowed to behave in a way that could endanger Ummah’s unity: To protect a part of the Ummah or Faith - no matter if that Faith happens to belong to Ahle Bayt of Prophet - we cannot injure unity as a whole.”![19]

“From the viewpoint of religious obligation anything that weakens Islam and strengthens infidelity or hurts Islamic unity, as a whole, is prohibited. It is obvious that consequent to such speeches there will not remain any unity in the Islamic front. As such, Islam will become weak against infidelity.”![20]

Criticism and Analysis

Ustad Ali Iraqchi Hamadani has discussed in detail in his book, Sad Dars Az Bahas-e-Imamat the captioned topic. We have summarized them below retaining the original points:

“Perhaps before a discussion on Imamate takes place it comes to mind that in this age when Muslims are facing such terrible enemies, are such discussions beneficial or not? Because the nature of this subject of Imamate is such that it necessarily renews differences, which are cornerstones laid immediately after the demise of Prophet. Various animosities and several bloodsheds have occurred since then. Because of these differences, the real enemy is neglected….as the unity of Muslims is most important necessity and discussions on Imamate cause disunity, for the sake of safeguarding unity, it is prudent to keep quiet...[because] the its harm is less than the harm of disunity which gives room to foreign influence.”[21]

In reply to this objection the following questions may be posed:

“Is unity and integration useful in every subject and matter? Or subjects differ in this respect? There is no doubt that any subject if it happens to be useful or reasonable for an Ummah, co-ordination and co-operation becomes necessary for its achievement. On the contrary, any subject of no benefit - its availability is not only unnecessary but even harmful- Therefore elegance of the word ‘unity’ should not deceive us. As such, we must keep in view the aim prior to unity. Besides, Quran too approves unity if it be for truth and considers it harmful if it be in a wrong direction. Furthermore, it recommends having unity if it be for God’s sake. But it prohibits unity for the sake of wrong and falsehood.”[22]

“Consequently, according to reason and Quran every man is obliged to judge the matter first. If it is correct and right he may extend his hand of unity towards a group. If it is otherwise he must refrain from it. As such, unity is necessary and desirable. However the aim must become transparent ahead of unity. Truth will cast a shadow over unity. Now to arrive at the truth, there is no way other than a debate or discussion which is not workable in a friendly atmosphere.”[23]

If we desire that the difference that appeared among Muslims immediately after the Prophet’s passing away should disappear and vanish, we must search for a ground to pluck it from its root.

“We ought to know the events as to what they were; or persons as to who they were? Either events or persons are causes of difference after the Prophet. As a result, when we lay hands upon them we must draw a line between them and Islam. In other words, we must separate them from Islam. The reality of Islam will be obtained. Then we must be united to preserve this reality.

It goes without saying that the issue of Imamate and leadership became the cause of difference. After the Prophet’s passing away, a group claimed this position and therefrom sprung the difference.

So prior to unity, a debate is necessary into this subject in order to reach truth so that unity could be based on truth and reality. Otherwise such a unity would be useless and impossible.”[24]

“Now this objection arises that: Whether it is good and sensible to be truthful about anything in any age or not? Most probably it might be said that to maintain silence is dictated by reason when telling the truth and narrating facts brings unwanted consequences. Such undesired aftermath must be avoided. Religiously too our infallible Imams have recommended dissimulation in cases when truth becomes a cause of mischief.[25] Therefore we should choose a way of protecting truth and safeguarding reality so that truth may not be totally sacrificed. The very prestige and entity of Muslims may not be destroyed. Instead of such discussions, we must try to make Muslims come closer. For the sake of protecting a greater reality we may overlook this.”[26]

In reply we say:

“Subjects and instances must be scrutinized case by case. If truth be useful, it is good to speak. Else, one must resort to silence.[27] But it should be understood that Imamate is a very beneficial subject. No harm comes from it. Of course it depends on the way it is dealt so as to not end in a fracas or foul-mouthing.”[28]

When one aims to reach truth through a debate or discussion, the trend will be logic, reason, proof and never abuse or inflexibility. Such a type of argument carries no corruption except benefits to a great extent.”[29]

“In short, discussion about Imamate in an atmosphere away from childish bigotry and remote from abuses and vilifications has had been beneficial in every age and in the present age also.”[30]

“Some short-sighted people imagine that since Shias believe Ali as immediate successor of Prophet and Sunnis believe Abu Bakr to be the immediate successor of the Prophet etc., so if Shias do not refer to the issue of succession of Prophet and show respect and affection towards the three Caliphs who preceded Ali this difference will be completely removed. Muslim all over the world could be united and become a power worth consideration! These people don’t know that if supposing such a thing ever took place, the enemy will seek some other way to ignite differences.”

Well, to reach a tangible result we have a suggestion. You separate Shia population from Muslims. Do all other sects of Muslims have unity among themselves although they share the same belief with regard to Caliphate? No. They are not united. Their respective governments too are not united with one another. Their nations too, although under the banner of Islam, are not in one row of Islam. The gap of disunity is more pronounced there.”[31]

“In fact the great block on way of unity is imperialism and imperialists who have been active in every age in fomenting differences and keeping alive disunity.”[32]

“Can these pains be assuaged by our silence regarding the right of Ali and his sons?

While it is that all these differences, mischiefs and bloodshed have been there only because the Shia society is loyal and devoted to the right of Ahle Bayt of Prophet and they do not entertain any friendly feelings towards their enemies. See how far has injustice gone! To what extent is this ignorance?! The body of Islam and Muslims is weakened due to shortage of blood which is the source of life in both the worlds (this and the next). God and His Prophet have pointed out this. All Muslim sects have narrated it. In other words, it is to be in line with Ali and his infallible sons. We must seek their embrace to invigorate Islam and Muslims. We cannot act like those in the guise of open-mindedness and waste this minimum blood resulting in collapse of Islam, only for the sake of unity and attaining power and pomposity.”[33]

Those who claim unity desire Shias to give up their particular beliefs. Of course they are after their own interests. However they ignore the fact that the enemy will anyway persist in his task through some other means so that differences remain.

“In any case, the issue of Imamate if argued on basis of reason and evidence; will result in unity not disintegration.”[34]

“Because in this discussion, we shall cover beliefs particular to each of the two parties referring to original Islamic sources that is Quran and authentic traditions; unveil truth and bring to fore the divine rope of rescue. Then all will together hold the hand of unity under the rich shadow of truth. The glory and greatness gone long ago will be regained by crushing foreign enemies and their associates by means of oneness and sacrifice. Indeed, such a unity will be a living one and deep-rooted.”[35]

This type of discussion will give ground to:

“To discover reasons of difference through perfect scrutiny. Then to draw a line between right and wrong. Thus to know and recognize enemies who inserted the wrong into right by deception and cheating so that we can boycott them and those with them and discover Islam - pure, pristine, real and original - that the Prophet brought to us and introduced for our practice. Such an association that will come into being will be with knowledge and learning. Unity that will be gained will be fruitful among Muslims and fatal to outsiders and adversaries.

In such a case, the enemy will be deprived of excuse of differences of belief and other excuses would also become ineffective.

Because the enemy aims to gain from ignorance of people and thereby to obtain power over them and create disunity. Knowledge and awareness are strong walls to prevent the enemy from advancing his influence on Muslims. And discussion on Imamate leads to awareness, knowledge, exposing of realities and truth.”[36]

Through discussion on Imamate we can gain following things:

“Difference of beliefs can be repudiated. Muslims can know one another. And unity, which is fatal to enemy, can be achieved.”[37]

“To mend these defects it is necessary that Muslim people from Shia and Sunni community should come forward to form associations and programs where debates, discussions and teaching should take place. The light of Islam and Quran should be projected into depths of Muslim entity. We must know that Imamate is an important and fundamental issue. Muslims must discuss this subject since it is a cornerstone; because leadership is one of the pillars in Islam.”[38]

“If Muslims are acquainted with real and original face of Islam, all sects will come closer to one another - resulting in unity. Such a unity that comes into being on the basis of knowledge and learning shall be powerful and lasting. This unity can withstand foreign influences. Knowledge can be attained through classes and debating societies.”[39]

Ustad Ja’far Subhani in his analysis about the root of this type of tendency writes:

“Sometimes it is seen that simple-minded youths have a misunderstanding concerning unity which serves a good pretext in their hands. They try to criticize the truth-seekers. Their claim is that discussion about Abu Bakr’s Caliphate and Ali as to whose right it was, neither has a need nor is it fruitful…”[40]

Those who harbor such opinion have neglected the bright consequences of this discussion, and therefore they think that it is useless and a hurdle for Islamic unity. But in our opinion it is nothing but ignorance about philosophy of recognizing the Imam. It has no other root except in ‘Sunni obduracy’ or ‘Wahabi tendency’.

This objection can bear meaning only in the event our belief about Imamate or Caliphate in Islam is same as that of Sunni scholars. In other words, to consider it a worldly office or position when its function will be to guard Islamic frontiers and strengthen defenses. However from Shia viewpoint Imamate is constancy of Message and continuation of divine bounty through the Prophet. Therefore the discussion becomes not only necessary but obligatory about duties of Imam and it cannot be briefed in the foregone ones. He should expound and explain important divine regulations, the prohibited, the sanctioned; besides giving explanatory notes on Quranic data. Imam is the only source and oracle immediately after passing away of Prophet…

Here we see that intellectual succession of Prophet is something that demands a thorough discussion because the relative issue is alive and it takes to itself importance of utmost nature. It must be clarified that the Imam is Ummah’s leader in knowledge, principles, divine commandments and its branches. Such a station and position as that of Imam if not completely understood, will yield no required or desired result.

…So much so if we[41] set aside the issue of Caliphate and overlook issue of leadership after the Prophet that goes to an infallible person; the issue that remains worth arguing is that of religion. Authority as to who it is or who must it be in matters of faith or religion after the Prophet’s passing away. This matter has an immediate bearing on prosperity and future of Muslims as a whole.”[42]

The Ustad proceeds:

“There are some groups among extremists who aspire very much to establish a united government all over Islamic territories. They have prohibited any speech or discourse over issues of difference. They consider it as the cause of difference. They have even gone farther because they treat it as a factor that takes us backwards to the ages of battles of Ottoman Caliphs and Sultans of Iran.[43]

We must point out to this group that the matter is not as hot as they consider. There are debates and discussions - one differs with other. There are discussions, which open the way to see facts. Such discussions are far from blind bigotry. They depend only on documents, which both parties consider authentic. Through such discussions alone is possible to illuminate the dark spots in Islam concerning belief, traditions and jurisprudence, etc. Does Quran not itself invite towards contemplation and consideration on its verses?

Groups that have prohibited discussion of issues (having differences)

regard the writers of such matters as provokers and instigators. They must know as to what would be the consequences of such a theory of theirs. A great part of Quran, the Prophet’s traditions and Islamic history will vanish little by little into forgetfulness. No one will recall the events nor will lift the veil to see what has happened. Therefore matters of great importance will thus be missed and lost.

How much better it would be if we dwell upon reformation instead of prohibiting this and that or assassination of thought. The writers should be reminded of existing chaos of Muslims. They should perform their job towards betterment of their position with utmost impartiality and neutrality. They should take care not to hurt feelings of others while they write on any of these critical issues. They should know that their writings will be judged on the Day of Judgment and it will constitute a part of the record of their deeds.

Briefly: Issues of belief that form the foundation of thought in every religion carry two views, which should be explained:

1- Unity cannot last long without knowing the branch matters or issues of difference. Unity founded on blind bigotry and without knowledge of branches will be feeble and shaky and of short duration.

2 - Our sons should be acquainted with this school by learning and reason because we are sure of the truth of this school - They must refrain from imitation in matters of belief. However it becomes necessary that these issues must be studied and taught. It is obligatory that our school must be transferred to our successors. Otherwise all will go by the winds and in days to come nothing will remain.

Every type of argument if handled with the method mentioned in foregone pages it will neither be harmful nor create differences. Rather it will be good and useful for unity. If scholars of each sect explain these difference-bearing issues openly, honestly, and without any cheating, most accusations, misconceptions and misunderstandings will fade away. Only truth will remain as it is.

…We have witnessed in our life that any book if written through conscience and based on truth and Quran without any trick or malicious motive; has served in bringing two opposite groups closer. And the tree of integration has borne fruits at the earliest.

…Such a book has never produced any difference.[44] It is remarkable to point out here that the work so far done in this respect is the effect of the cause. It is towards defending truth, logic and the reason of Shia sect about its belief, principles and branches of its regulations. If pretext of Islamic unity goes as far as overrunning Shia school then no truth, no reality would have survived. Nor honor and prestige remained for Shia.

The argument based on reason and sense with correct Islamic outlook, purged of bigotry and foul language cannot be objected or blamed. It brings closer the two disparate groups.”[45]

Therefore any discussion or argument cannot be restricted by some or other pretext or a superfluous excuse. Islamic unity generally has become an excuse only.

Allamah Askari writes about this in his article:

“If in the past writing the sayings of the Prophet were prohibited under excuse of remembering Quran by heart. Today also the same is repeated under pretext of protecting Islamic unity. They want to close the door of learning and research. The policy is the same. However religion demands keeping the door of learning and research open.

Don’t argue! How strange it is! How dreadful and dangerous this sentence is. See the hurt and harm hidden therein. Is it not tantamount to say: Don’t go after knowledge? Do not speak about the conduct of the Prophet. In other words, do not learn these sciences. It is harmful what they are saying under pretext of religion that one should not hold any discussions!

Why at all should we give up argumentation and research? For the sake of Islamic unity? Whether all these differences among Muslims, in opinions, thoughts, religious commandments, will subside by just giving up argumentation? How should a discussion be given up when so many made-up traditions and altered history exists? In the face of so many controversies in Islamic belief, Prophet’s behavior, commandments of Quran and Islamic history that exist, argument should be set aside or it is the need of the day?

The fact is that arguments have become a persisting essentiality to invite debate or to publish reality for public scrutiny. After Infallible Imams, school]

our (Shia) scholars have followed this path. They have sacrificed their life. They put themselves to danger and risk. However they did not give up disseminating true Islamic knowledge.”[46]

Invitation to Silence as Open-mindedness

We are invited to keep quiet and historical research and analysis is banned. All this is done under the mask of open-mindedness. Likewise, this statement:

“So what for are present differences between Shia and Sunni? Does it concern election,[47] which took place 1380 years ago? The scrutiny of the things is made such as to make it invalid or of no worldly advantage to you and me. Of course it is advantageous only in the next world when we die. It is so to say, if we carry the love of Ali in our hearts - whose right was usurped in Saqifah - after death we will enter heaven. While those who support the other candidates will go to Hell…”[48] At a single instance they have shown Shiaism in form of historical loves and hatreds…while it has a value for our life of today and tomorrow or an effect on our opinions.”![49]

It seems such type of viewpoint is a reflection of a deviated outlook about Imamate.[50] That Wilayat is being compared to rulership and all discussions about Imamate are confined to this environment.

It is expressed that:

“Usurping the Caliphate immediately after passing away of Prophet that took place in such a way is an obvious and an open tyranny and atrocity against reality and truth. A person who was the self and shadow of the Prophet was deprived of power and office of administration. As a result, Islam was deprived of the bounty of such a person. However whatever it was; did happen. To recover the right to whomever it concerns is impossible. To talk about it is now a hue and cry.”[51]

In their camp Caliphate is regarded only a worldly office, that is an executive of an administration. In other school, it is seen through quite a different angle, which is:

“They only consider Imamate to be in sense of leadership of society. They say that the Prophet had installed Ali to succeed him for leadership and guidance. And Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman came inopportune.”

Shias are of the same caliber and there are two other issues also. [Absolute religious point of reference and total divine Guardianship]. Either they have no belief in this or they are silent in this regard. There are also those who acknowledge the second stage. However they have not reached the third.”[52]

Ustad Ja’far Subhani replies:

“The issue of Imamate or leadership of Muslims depends on the nature of argument. If the argument is framed: Who occupied the social and political office of Imamate and administered after the Prophet? This becomes a historical question. After fourteen centuries, it would not interest the youth of present generation. Besides, it has nothing to teach or provide any useful information. To know that person was a matter of necessity in its age. The passage of time has made this issue lose dignity and importance.

If the trend of argument is changed, the issue will take the real entity to itself. In this issue, there are two things. The political and social leadership of Islamic society after Prophet and besides this there is another thing, which is authority in religion, its principles and its branches. The question is who it is to administer this school after Prophet? Who are and must be those to show or explain to the masses God’s commandments - what is allowed and what not and so forth. They must be of such a caliber that their word and actions must stand an authority, an absolute - unshakeable and unalterable one until the last Day. What they said and what they did must serve as a model to man. Therefore from this stage the argument bears sense and carries weight. It becomes needful to know the personage and personality of the Imam. The nature of this issue is such that it becomes a part of life. As such, nobody can ignore or overlook it. To know the Imam as to who and what he should be becomes obligatory because it is a part of religion.”[53]

“In Shia view the Imam holds the office, which is continuity of message and extension of Prophethood. A matter of such an import should not be argued. It is an issue full of life. It is obligatory to know this station of Imam. Otherwise it will remain inconclusive…”[54]

Invitation to Keep Quiet as Mark of Sympathy

There is another suspect in the margin of this very tendency, which makes silence obligatory. That is:

“Occupation in differences has kept the youth from reaching truth and basic principles of Islam. The spirit of faith is taken away from the people leaving them with the name of religion only.[55]

Ustad Mutahhari writes while describing this type of outlook:

“The present generation of our current age is fed up of faith and less interested in Islam as a result of discussion about Caliphate, Imamate and unpleasant events that took place and its repetition. They are already suffering by spiritual chaos.

Such discussions could have had desired consequences in the past. They could even have diverted attention from one branch to another. However in present times bringing it back to memory weakens thoughts with regard to structure and its root. We see in other schools they always try to hide the ugly part of their history. But on the contrary, we Muslims try to keep it alive on narration and rather magnify it more than its actual bulk.

We cannot concur with the above opinion.

We do acknowledge that criticism of history if it be narration alone or a reflection of events, the effect that will be exercised will be same as above. If the glorious side of history should be sketched and ugly or shameful part of it overlooked, it will be deviation of history rather than criticism or analysis. Supposing if it were customary to forget, neglect or avoid disgraceful and ugly parts of history, what its aftermath will be with regard to issues that concern the very gist of Islam. What will be the fate of the issue relating to leadership of Islamic society? To ignore such an issue tantamount to ignoring the prosperity of Muslims. Besides, if the rights of some persons had been trespassed or taken away by force and those persons happened to be of dignity and decorum; what will be the case if historical facts are overlooked? It will be nothing but called verbal and written support of oppression.”[56]

Invitation to Keep Quiet for Confidentiality

Invitation towards silence on part of unity-seekers and their insistence to avoid arguments that create differences is continuation of their same thoughts with same aim but in a different form. We can see this if we are mindful of the extent of its influence.

This change is a tricky one. It invites to not argue issues that create differences, particularly Saqifah and attack on the house where divine revelation descended, confiscation of Fadak and martyrdom of Zahra. This time their pretext is quite different and charming too; that is secrets should not be disclosed or made public.[57] Where would this end? In a long run its end will be deviation and denial of realities, which will be totally forgotten because of no argument whatsoever about it.

Dr. Muhammad Asadi Garmarudi writes in this respect:

“Secrets of the Prophet’s Ahle Bayt were of two categories: one: They themselves were insistent to not disclose them. They revealed them only to their close companions. Generally everyone had neither capacity nor ability to accept or bear them.

The second category consists of secrets by necessity of dissimulation and conditions of time and place. However it was not throughout history.

As such, the season for keeping secret has already passed. Therefore ignorance about those realities will entail deprivation of bounties and benefits of true religion. Zahra herself has pointed out in her address to chiefs of Migrants and Helpers the mandate that rests upon their lot to convey realities to coming generations and make them aware of truth.”[58]

Discourse Two: Adopt Common Things and Ignore Differences between Islamic sects

Introduction

One wrong conception formed by the term ‘Islamic unity’ is to accept what is common among Islamic faiths and leave the points of differences.

Within the folds of this conception lies a point, which must not be ignored. It is commonly used to block the way that raises issues of Shia belief.

In this method, we come across the same idea that necessitates silence. It invites discourse only in matters of common beliefs. Discussion is very much encouraged from this outlook. However the case is not the same with regard to subject of Imamate. Therefore under pretext of Islamic unity, the most fundamental issue particular to Shia school, which is belief in Imamate, goes into oblivion.

It is thus declared:

“All our efforts are towards this: Religions must wipe out past from their mentalities. Discussion should take place within framework of logic and reason including the most sensitive issue we have, i.e. Caliphate and Imamate…

In this said ground, discussion is possible away from sympathy with reason. The aim must not be to remove differences, but rather to control differences and create mutual understanding between two sides. Both sides should be brought home to the effect that presently these discussions do not cater to the need of Muslims. On the contrary, they do more harm than good.”![59]

Criticism and Analysis

Ustad Murtuza Mutahhari writes concerning the erroneous results of Islamic Unity:

“The second fault is: by raising these issues what would be the status of Islamic unity? The thing that befell Muslims was that their glory was snatched away from them. They were belittled and brought under domination of other non-Muslim nations. Imperialism, new or old, utilizes this tool towards igniting old differences. This has served as a good tool all over Islamic countries without exception. For imperialism is, in the name of religion, showing sympathy for Islam but aiming to enlarge the gulf and deepen rancor among Muslims themselves. Does it not suffice whatever we have suffered and endured through this way? Should we go on again? Will not raising such designs result in helping the aims of Imperialism?

The answer is: Unity and co-ordination forms the most essential need of Muslims. However the old rankling rancor is mother-pain of Muslims; now it is contagion in the world of Islam. The enemy too benefits from it always.

It seems that the accuser has mistaken the sense of Islamic unity.

Islamic sects must overlook principles of their respective beliefs for the sake of unity. This was not the conception of Islamic unity among clerics and scholars of faith and open-mindedness a century ago. In other words, it means to accept joint material of belief among sects and to set aside the very particulars of their own belief. Such a thing is neither reasonable nor practicable. How is it possible to ask followers of a faith to ignore or give up certain principles, which are in belief or practice, in his view constitutes a part of text of Islam? That is for the sake of unity of Islam and Muslims he should turn a blind eye at a portion from the whole of Islam in the name of Islam?

There are several other ways to make people committed to a religious principle. The most natural one is reason and logic. People cannot be made faithful by means of request or in the name of interests nor can they be stripped of faith.

We ourselves are Shia. We are proud to be followers of Ahle Bayt of Prophet. We do not consider a least thing, whether be it an appreciable or undesired, worthy of transaction against interests. We do not entertain any request from any in this regard. Likewise, we do not expect from others also to give up a principle among principles of their belief for sake of Islamic unity. To accept common elements of belief and to repudiate particulars of a sect is a kind of transgression on absolute consensus.[60] Moreover, it is not a true Islamic product. In any case, particulars of any sect among sects of Islam are parts of Islamic text. There cannot be Islam if it happens to be devoid of these distinctions and specifications. In usual terms, it is a difference in one party and in one single front.

Unity of a party demands that all individuals be at equity with regard to ideology, thought, way and vogue with the exception of personal matters.

Nevertheless, unity of a front means something different. All parties and groups, no matter however different in their taste, ideology, customs and norms must stand in one row against their common enemy because of combined elements common among them. It is obvious that arranging a row against enemy does not contradict with defending objectives and criticizing objectives of other brothers or inviting to their own objectives by associates of the same front. However inviting to or supporting Islamic unity cannot bar the truth. Things that provoke bigotry or old rancor must not take place. Scientific discussion has an immediate bearing on reason and not on sympathy and feelings.”[61]

Discourse One: Keeping Quiet and Prohibiting Difference-Creating Activities

Introduction

It is perhaps the most simple and at the same time, most insincere method of creating Islamic unity. It is completely based on narrations mentioned in the first tendency. It advocates restriction from difference- producing analyses and maintaining silence. Now at this advanced stage, the secrets are recommended not be told.

Hence it is said:

“Now, as it is said that these are secrets of progeny of Muhammad, then they must be kept confidential and not revealed.”[11]

Obviously, unity gained by negligence of knowledge will be imaginary unity. Furthermore, the outcome can well be judged if the steps, already suggested, are to be taken on road to Islamic unity such as:

“In controversial issues we should view afresh and anew. We should find new ways of friendship. We should give no room to new differences.”![12]

“Many differences in our time are groundless. As such, many differences should be forgotten and ignored. We should revise the method of debating issues or arguments.”![13]

“We must not dig graves under the sun in order to bring to life what is dead and buried.”![14]

“The subject matters that carry differences should not be discussed too openly in meetings or gatherings held under the title of ‘unity’.![15]

“What we say in this article can be summarized as: Muslims must not speak about differences that existed among their own leaders fourteen centuries ago: and more undesireable it is to speak about differences that have happened later and are constant and current.”![16]

“Narration of any matter that might hurt our Sunni brothers is prohibited.”![17]

“…There are certain matters which must be taken into consideration by broadcasting stations, television and media collectively. Besides, writers and speakers also must delete such matters, particularly about the Fatimid period in gatherings. Then alone unity is possible. Whatever, it could be, if it hurts the feelings of our Sunni brothers it must be avoided in our public gatherings and should not be mentioned at all. I can prove that whatever is being published in books and newspapers and told over the pulpits in religious gatherings and over TV and Radio is sufficient to injure the feelings of our Sunni brothers. Hence it is prohibited.”![18]

“We Muslims are not allowed to behave in a way that could endanger Ummah’s unity: To protect a part of the Ummah or Faith - no matter if that Faith happens to belong to Ahle Bayt of Prophet - we cannot injure unity as a whole.”![19]

“From the viewpoint of religious obligation anything that weakens Islam and strengthens infidelity or hurts Islamic unity, as a whole, is prohibited. It is obvious that consequent to such speeches there will not remain any unity in the Islamic front. As such, Islam will become weak against infidelity.”![20]

Criticism and Analysis

Ustad Ali Iraqchi Hamadani has discussed in detail in his book, Sad Dars Az Bahas-e-Imamat the captioned topic. We have summarized them below retaining the original points:

“Perhaps before a discussion on Imamate takes place it comes to mind that in this age when Muslims are facing such terrible enemies, are such discussions beneficial or not? Because the nature of this subject of Imamate is such that it necessarily renews differences, which are cornerstones laid immediately after the demise of Prophet. Various animosities and several bloodsheds have occurred since then. Because of these differences, the real enemy is neglected….as the unity of Muslims is most important necessity and discussions on Imamate cause disunity, for the sake of safeguarding unity, it is prudent to keep quiet...[because] the its harm is less than the harm of disunity which gives room to foreign influence.”[21]

In reply to this objection the following questions may be posed:

“Is unity and integration useful in every subject and matter? Or subjects differ in this respect? There is no doubt that any subject if it happens to be useful or reasonable for an Ummah, co-ordination and co-operation becomes necessary for its achievement. On the contrary, any subject of no benefit - its availability is not only unnecessary but even harmful- Therefore elegance of the word ‘unity’ should not deceive us. As such, we must keep in view the aim prior to unity. Besides, Quran too approves unity if it be for truth and considers it harmful if it be in a wrong direction. Furthermore, it recommends having unity if it be for God’s sake. But it prohibits unity for the sake of wrong and falsehood.”[22]

“Consequently, according to reason and Quran every man is obliged to judge the matter first. If it is correct and right he may extend his hand of unity towards a group. If it is otherwise he must refrain from it. As such, unity is necessary and desirable. However the aim must become transparent ahead of unity. Truth will cast a shadow over unity. Now to arrive at the truth, there is no way other than a debate or discussion which is not workable in a friendly atmosphere.”[23]

If we desire that the difference that appeared among Muslims immediately after the Prophet’s passing away should disappear and vanish, we must search for a ground to pluck it from its root.

“We ought to know the events as to what they were; or persons as to who they were? Either events or persons are causes of difference after the Prophet. As a result, when we lay hands upon them we must draw a line between them and Islam. In other words, we must separate them from Islam. The reality of Islam will be obtained. Then we must be united to preserve this reality.

It goes without saying that the issue of Imamate and leadership became the cause of difference. After the Prophet’s passing away, a group claimed this position and therefrom sprung the difference.

So prior to unity, a debate is necessary into this subject in order to reach truth so that unity could be based on truth and reality. Otherwise such a unity would be useless and impossible.”[24]

“Now this objection arises that: Whether it is good and sensible to be truthful about anything in any age or not? Most probably it might be said that to maintain silence is dictated by reason when telling the truth and narrating facts brings unwanted consequences. Such undesired aftermath must be avoided. Religiously too our infallible Imams have recommended dissimulation in cases when truth becomes a cause of mischief.[25] Therefore we should choose a way of protecting truth and safeguarding reality so that truth may not be totally sacrificed. The very prestige and entity of Muslims may not be destroyed. Instead of such discussions, we must try to make Muslims come closer. For the sake of protecting a greater reality we may overlook this.”[26]

In reply we say:

“Subjects and instances must be scrutinized case by case. If truth be useful, it is good to speak. Else, one must resort to silence.[27] But it should be understood that Imamate is a very beneficial subject. No harm comes from it. Of course it depends on the way it is dealt so as to not end in a fracas or foul-mouthing.”[28]

When one aims to reach truth through a debate or discussion, the trend will be logic, reason, proof and never abuse or inflexibility. Such a type of argument carries no corruption except benefits to a great extent.”[29]

“In short, discussion about Imamate in an atmosphere away from childish bigotry and remote from abuses and vilifications has had been beneficial in every age and in the present age also.”[30]

“Some short-sighted people imagine that since Shias believe Ali as immediate successor of Prophet and Sunnis believe Abu Bakr to be the immediate successor of the Prophet etc., so if Shias do not refer to the issue of succession of Prophet and show respect and affection towards the three Caliphs who preceded Ali this difference will be completely removed. Muslim all over the world could be united and become a power worth consideration! These people don’t know that if supposing such a thing ever took place, the enemy will seek some other way to ignite differences.”

Well, to reach a tangible result we have a suggestion. You separate Shia population from Muslims. Do all other sects of Muslims have unity among themselves although they share the same belief with regard to Caliphate? No. They are not united. Their respective governments too are not united with one another. Their nations too, although under the banner of Islam, are not in one row of Islam. The gap of disunity is more pronounced there.”[31]

“In fact the great block on way of unity is imperialism and imperialists who have been active in every age in fomenting differences and keeping alive disunity.”[32]

“Can these pains be assuaged by our silence regarding the right of Ali and his sons?

While it is that all these differences, mischiefs and bloodshed have been there only because the Shia society is loyal and devoted to the right of Ahle Bayt of Prophet and they do not entertain any friendly feelings towards their enemies. See how far has injustice gone! To what extent is this ignorance?! The body of Islam and Muslims is weakened due to shortage of blood which is the source of life in both the worlds (this and the next). God and His Prophet have pointed out this. All Muslim sects have narrated it. In other words, it is to be in line with Ali and his infallible sons. We must seek their embrace to invigorate Islam and Muslims. We cannot act like those in the guise of open-mindedness and waste this minimum blood resulting in collapse of Islam, only for the sake of unity and attaining power and pomposity.”[33]

Those who claim unity desire Shias to give up their particular beliefs. Of course they are after their own interests. However they ignore the fact that the enemy will anyway persist in his task through some other means so that differences remain.

“In any case, the issue of Imamate if argued on basis of reason and evidence; will result in unity not disintegration.”[34]

“Because in this discussion, we shall cover beliefs particular to each of the two parties referring to original Islamic sources that is Quran and authentic traditions; unveil truth and bring to fore the divine rope of rescue. Then all will together hold the hand of unity under the rich shadow of truth. The glory and greatness gone long ago will be regained by crushing foreign enemies and their associates by means of oneness and sacrifice. Indeed, such a unity will be a living one and deep-rooted.”[35]

This type of discussion will give ground to:

“To discover reasons of difference through perfect scrutiny. Then to draw a line between right and wrong. Thus to know and recognize enemies who inserted the wrong into right by deception and cheating so that we can boycott them and those with them and discover Islam - pure, pristine, real and original - that the Prophet brought to us and introduced for our practice. Such an association that will come into being will be with knowledge and learning. Unity that will be gained will be fruitful among Muslims and fatal to outsiders and adversaries.

In such a case, the enemy will be deprived of excuse of differences of belief and other excuses would also become ineffective.

Because the enemy aims to gain from ignorance of people and thereby to obtain power over them and create disunity. Knowledge and awareness are strong walls to prevent the enemy from advancing his influence on Muslims. And discussion on Imamate leads to awareness, knowledge, exposing of realities and truth.”[36]

Through discussion on Imamate we can gain following things:

“Difference of beliefs can be repudiated. Muslims can know one another. And unity, which is fatal to enemy, can be achieved.”[37]

“To mend these defects it is necessary that Muslim people from Shia and Sunni community should come forward to form associations and programs where debates, discussions and teaching should take place. The light of Islam and Quran should be projected into depths of Muslim entity. We must know that Imamate is an important and fundamental issue. Muslims must discuss this subject since it is a cornerstone; because leadership is one of the pillars in Islam.”[38]

“If Muslims are acquainted with real and original face of Islam, all sects will come closer to one another - resulting in unity. Such a unity that comes into being on the basis of knowledge and learning shall be powerful and lasting. This unity can withstand foreign influences. Knowledge can be attained through classes and debating societies.”[39]

Ustad Ja’far Subhani in his analysis about the root of this type of tendency writes:

“Sometimes it is seen that simple-minded youths have a misunderstanding concerning unity which serves a good pretext in their hands. They try to criticize the truth-seekers. Their claim is that discussion about Abu Bakr’s Caliphate and Ali as to whose right it was, neither has a need nor is it fruitful…”[40]

Those who harbor such opinion have neglected the bright consequences of this discussion, and therefore they think that it is useless and a hurdle for Islamic unity. But in our opinion it is nothing but ignorance about philosophy of recognizing the Imam. It has no other root except in ‘Sunni obduracy’ or ‘Wahabi tendency’.

This objection can bear meaning only in the event our belief about Imamate or Caliphate in Islam is same as that of Sunni scholars. In other words, to consider it a worldly office or position when its function will be to guard Islamic frontiers and strengthen defenses. However from Shia viewpoint Imamate is constancy of Message and continuation of divine bounty through the Prophet. Therefore the discussion becomes not only necessary but obligatory about duties of Imam and it cannot be briefed in the foregone ones. He should expound and explain important divine regulations, the prohibited, the sanctioned; besides giving explanatory notes on Quranic data. Imam is the only source and oracle immediately after passing away of Prophet…

Here we see that intellectual succession of Prophet is something that demands a thorough discussion because the relative issue is alive and it takes to itself importance of utmost nature. It must be clarified that the Imam is Ummah’s leader in knowledge, principles, divine commandments and its branches. Such a station and position as that of Imam if not completely understood, will yield no required or desired result.

…So much so if we[41] set aside the issue of Caliphate and overlook issue of leadership after the Prophet that goes to an infallible person; the issue that remains worth arguing is that of religion. Authority as to who it is or who must it be in matters of faith or religion after the Prophet’s passing away. This matter has an immediate bearing on prosperity and future of Muslims as a whole.”[42]

The Ustad proceeds:

“There are some groups among extremists who aspire very much to establish a united government all over Islamic territories. They have prohibited any speech or discourse over issues of difference. They consider it as the cause of difference. They have even gone farther because they treat it as a factor that takes us backwards to the ages of battles of Ottoman Caliphs and Sultans of Iran.[43]

We must point out to this group that the matter is not as hot as they consider. There are debates and discussions - one differs with other. There are discussions, which open the way to see facts. Such discussions are far from blind bigotry. They depend only on documents, which both parties consider authentic. Through such discussions alone is possible to illuminate the dark spots in Islam concerning belief, traditions and jurisprudence, etc. Does Quran not itself invite towards contemplation and consideration on its verses?

Groups that have prohibited discussion of issues (having differences)

regard the writers of such matters as provokers and instigators. They must know as to what would be the consequences of such a theory of theirs. A great part of Quran, the Prophet’s traditions and Islamic history will vanish little by little into forgetfulness. No one will recall the events nor will lift the veil to see what has happened. Therefore matters of great importance will thus be missed and lost.

How much better it would be if we dwell upon reformation instead of prohibiting this and that or assassination of thought. The writers should be reminded of existing chaos of Muslims. They should perform their job towards betterment of their position with utmost impartiality and neutrality. They should take care not to hurt feelings of others while they write on any of these critical issues. They should know that their writings will be judged on the Day of Judgment and it will constitute a part of the record of their deeds.

Briefly: Issues of belief that form the foundation of thought in every religion carry two views, which should be explained:

1- Unity cannot last long without knowing the branch matters or issues of difference. Unity founded on blind bigotry and without knowledge of branches will be feeble and shaky and of short duration.

2 - Our sons should be acquainted with this school by learning and reason because we are sure of the truth of this school - They must refrain from imitation in matters of belief. However it becomes necessary that these issues must be studied and taught. It is obligatory that our school must be transferred to our successors. Otherwise all will go by the winds and in days to come nothing will remain.

Every type of argument if handled with the method mentioned in foregone pages it will neither be harmful nor create differences. Rather it will be good and useful for unity. If scholars of each sect explain these difference-bearing issues openly, honestly, and without any cheating, most accusations, misconceptions and misunderstandings will fade away. Only truth will remain as it is.

…We have witnessed in our life that any book if written through conscience and based on truth and Quran without any trick or malicious motive; has served in bringing two opposite groups closer. And the tree of integration has borne fruits at the earliest.

…Such a book has never produced any difference.[44] It is remarkable to point out here that the work so far done in this respect is the effect of the cause. It is towards defending truth, logic and the reason of Shia sect about its belief, principles and branches of its regulations. If pretext of Islamic unity goes as far as overrunning Shia school then no truth, no reality would have survived. Nor honor and prestige remained for Shia.

The argument based on reason and sense with correct Islamic outlook, purged of bigotry and foul language cannot be objected or blamed. It brings closer the two disparate groups.”[45]

Therefore any discussion or argument cannot be restricted by some or other pretext or a superfluous excuse. Islamic unity generally has become an excuse only.

Allamah Askari writes about this in his article:

“If in the past writing the sayings of the Prophet were prohibited under excuse of remembering Quran by heart. Today also the same is repeated under pretext of protecting Islamic unity. They want to close the door of learning and research. The policy is the same. However religion demands keeping the door of learning and research open.

Don’t argue! How strange it is! How dreadful and dangerous this sentence is. See the hurt and harm hidden therein. Is it not tantamount to say: Don’t go after knowledge? Do not speak about the conduct of the Prophet. In other words, do not learn these sciences. It is harmful what they are saying under pretext of religion that one should not hold any discussions!

Why at all should we give up argumentation and research? For the sake of Islamic unity? Whether all these differences among Muslims, in opinions, thoughts, religious commandments, will subside by just giving up argumentation? How should a discussion be given up when so many made-up traditions and altered history exists? In the face of so many controversies in Islamic belief, Prophet’s behavior, commandments of Quran and Islamic history that exist, argument should be set aside or it is the need of the day?

The fact is that arguments have become a persisting essentiality to invite debate or to publish reality for public scrutiny. After Infallible Imams, school]

our (Shia) scholars have followed this path. They have sacrificed their life. They put themselves to danger and risk. However they did not give up disseminating true Islamic knowledge.”[46]

Invitation to Silence as Open-mindedness

We are invited to keep quiet and historical research and analysis is banned. All this is done under the mask of open-mindedness. Likewise, this statement:

“So what for are present differences between Shia and Sunni? Does it concern election,[47] which took place 1380 years ago? The scrutiny of the things is made such as to make it invalid or of no worldly advantage to you and me. Of course it is advantageous only in the next world when we die. It is so to say, if we carry the love of Ali in our hearts - whose right was usurped in Saqifah - after death we will enter heaven. While those who support the other candidates will go to Hell…”[48] At a single instance they have shown Shiaism in form of historical loves and hatreds…while it has a value for our life of today and tomorrow or an effect on our opinions.”![49]

It seems such type of viewpoint is a reflection of a deviated outlook about Imamate.[50] That Wilayat is being compared to rulership and all discussions about Imamate are confined to this environment.

It is expressed that:

“Usurping the Caliphate immediately after passing away of Prophet that took place in such a way is an obvious and an open tyranny and atrocity against reality and truth. A person who was the self and shadow of the Prophet was deprived of power and office of administration. As a result, Islam was deprived of the bounty of such a person. However whatever it was; did happen. To recover the right to whomever it concerns is impossible. To talk about it is now a hue and cry.”[51]

In their camp Caliphate is regarded only a worldly office, that is an executive of an administration. In other school, it is seen through quite a different angle, which is:

“They only consider Imamate to be in sense of leadership of society. They say that the Prophet had installed Ali to succeed him for leadership and guidance. And Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman came inopportune.”

Shias are of the same caliber and there are two other issues also. [Absolute religious point of reference and total divine Guardianship]. Either they have no belief in this or they are silent in this regard. There are also those who acknowledge the second stage. However they have not reached the third.”[52]

Ustad Ja’far Subhani replies:

“The issue of Imamate or leadership of Muslims depends on the nature of argument. If the argument is framed: Who occupied the social and political office of Imamate and administered after the Prophet? This becomes a historical question. After fourteen centuries, it would not interest the youth of present generation. Besides, it has nothing to teach or provide any useful information. To know that person was a matter of necessity in its age. The passage of time has made this issue lose dignity and importance.

If the trend of argument is changed, the issue will take the real entity to itself. In this issue, there are two things. The political and social leadership of Islamic society after Prophet and besides this there is another thing, which is authority in religion, its principles and its branches. The question is who it is to administer this school after Prophet? Who are and must be those to show or explain to the masses God’s commandments - what is allowed and what not and so forth. They must be of such a caliber that their word and actions must stand an authority, an absolute - unshakeable and unalterable one until the last Day. What they said and what they did must serve as a model to man. Therefore from this stage the argument bears sense and carries weight. It becomes needful to know the personage and personality of the Imam. The nature of this issue is such that it becomes a part of life. As such, nobody can ignore or overlook it. To know the Imam as to who and what he should be becomes obligatory because it is a part of religion.”[53]

“In Shia view the Imam holds the office, which is continuity of message and extension of Prophethood. A matter of such an import should not be argued. It is an issue full of life. It is obligatory to know this station of Imam. Otherwise it will remain inconclusive…”[54]

Invitation to Keep Quiet as Mark of Sympathy

There is another suspect in the margin of this very tendency, which makes silence obligatory. That is:

“Occupation in differences has kept the youth from reaching truth and basic principles of Islam. The spirit of faith is taken away from the people leaving them with the name of religion only.[55]

Ustad Mutahhari writes while describing this type of outlook:

“The present generation of our current age is fed up of faith and less interested in Islam as a result of discussion about Caliphate, Imamate and unpleasant events that took place and its repetition. They are already suffering by spiritual chaos.

Such discussions could have had desired consequences in the past. They could even have diverted attention from one branch to another. However in present times bringing it back to memory weakens thoughts with regard to structure and its root. We see in other schools they always try to hide the ugly part of their history. But on the contrary, we Muslims try to keep it alive on narration and rather magnify it more than its actual bulk.

We cannot concur with the above opinion.

We do acknowledge that criticism of history if it be narration alone or a reflection of events, the effect that will be exercised will be same as above. If the glorious side of history should be sketched and ugly or shameful part of it overlooked, it will be deviation of history rather than criticism or analysis. Supposing if it were customary to forget, neglect or avoid disgraceful and ugly parts of history, what its aftermath will be with regard to issues that concern the very gist of Islam. What will be the fate of the issue relating to leadership of Islamic society? To ignore such an issue tantamount to ignoring the prosperity of Muslims. Besides, if the rights of some persons had been trespassed or taken away by force and those persons happened to be of dignity and decorum; what will be the case if historical facts are overlooked? It will be nothing but called verbal and written support of oppression.”[56]

Invitation to Keep Quiet for Confidentiality

Invitation towards silence on part of unity-seekers and their insistence to avoid arguments that create differences is continuation of their same thoughts with same aim but in a different form. We can see this if we are mindful of the extent of its influence.

This change is a tricky one. It invites to not argue issues that create differences, particularly Saqifah and attack on the house where divine revelation descended, confiscation of Fadak and martyrdom of Zahra. This time their pretext is quite different and charming too; that is secrets should not be disclosed or made public.[57] Where would this end? In a long run its end will be deviation and denial of realities, which will be totally forgotten because of no argument whatsoever about it.

Dr. Muhammad Asadi Garmarudi writes in this respect:

“Secrets of the Prophet’s Ahle Bayt were of two categories: one: They themselves were insistent to not disclose them. They revealed them only to their close companions. Generally everyone had neither capacity nor ability to accept or bear them.

The second category consists of secrets by necessity of dissimulation and conditions of time and place. However it was not throughout history.

As such, the season for keeping secret has already passed. Therefore ignorance about those realities will entail deprivation of bounties and benefits of true religion. Zahra herself has pointed out in her address to chiefs of Migrants and Helpers the mandate that rests upon their lot to convey realities to coming generations and make them aware of truth.”[58]

Discourse Two: Adopt Common Things and Ignore Differences between Islamic sects

Introduction

One wrong conception formed by the term ‘Islamic unity’ is to accept what is common among Islamic faiths and leave the points of differences.

Within the folds of this conception lies a point, which must not be ignored. It is commonly used to block the way that raises issues of Shia belief.

In this method, we come across the same idea that necessitates silence. It invites discourse only in matters of common beliefs. Discussion is very much encouraged from this outlook. However the case is not the same with regard to subject of Imamate. Therefore under pretext of Islamic unity, the most fundamental issue particular to Shia school, which is belief in Imamate, goes into oblivion.

It is thus declared:

“All our efforts are towards this: Religions must wipe out past from their mentalities. Discussion should take place within framework of logic and reason including the most sensitive issue we have, i.e. Caliphate and Imamate…

In this said ground, discussion is possible away from sympathy with reason. The aim must not be to remove differences, but rather to control differences and create mutual understanding between two sides. Both sides should be brought home to the effect that presently these discussions do not cater to the need of Muslims. On the contrary, they do more harm than good.”![59]

Criticism and Analysis

Ustad Murtuza Mutahhari writes concerning the erroneous results of Islamic Unity:

“The second fault is: by raising these issues what would be the status of Islamic unity? The thing that befell Muslims was that their glory was snatched away from them. They were belittled and brought under domination of other non-Muslim nations. Imperialism, new or old, utilizes this tool towards igniting old differences. This has served as a good tool all over Islamic countries without exception. For imperialism is, in the name of religion, showing sympathy for Islam but aiming to enlarge the gulf and deepen rancor among Muslims themselves. Does it not suffice whatever we have suffered and endured through this way? Should we go on again? Will not raising such designs result in helping the aims of Imperialism?

The answer is: Unity and co-ordination forms the most essential need of Muslims. However the old rankling rancor is mother-pain of Muslims; now it is contagion in the world of Islam. The enemy too benefits from it always.

It seems that the accuser has mistaken the sense of Islamic unity.

Islamic sects must overlook principles of their respective beliefs for the sake of unity. This was not the conception of Islamic unity among clerics and scholars of faith and open-mindedness a century ago. In other words, it means to accept joint material of belief among sects and to set aside the very particulars of their own belief. Such a thing is neither reasonable nor practicable. How is it possible to ask followers of a faith to ignore or give up certain principles, which are in belief or practice, in his view constitutes a part of text of Islam? That is for the sake of unity of Islam and Muslims he should turn a blind eye at a portion from the whole of Islam in the name of Islam?

There are several other ways to make people committed to a religious principle. The most natural one is reason and logic. People cannot be made faithful by means of request or in the name of interests nor can they be stripped of faith.

We ourselves are Shia. We are proud to be followers of Ahle Bayt of Prophet. We do not consider a least thing, whether be it an appreciable or undesired, worthy of transaction against interests. We do not entertain any request from any in this regard. Likewise, we do not expect from others also to give up a principle among principles of their belief for sake of Islamic unity. To accept common elements of belief and to repudiate particulars of a sect is a kind of transgression on absolute consensus.[60] Moreover, it is not a true Islamic product. In any case, particulars of any sect among sects of Islam are parts of Islamic text. There cannot be Islam if it happens to be devoid of these distinctions and specifications. In usual terms, it is a difference in one party and in one single front.

Unity of a party demands that all individuals be at equity with regard to ideology, thought, way and vogue with the exception of personal matters.

Nevertheless, unity of a front means something different. All parties and groups, no matter however different in their taste, ideology, customs and norms must stand in one row against their common enemy because of combined elements common among them. It is obvious that arranging a row against enemy does not contradict with defending objectives and criticizing objectives of other brothers or inviting to their own objectives by associates of the same front. However inviting to or supporting Islamic unity cannot bar the truth. Things that provoke bigotry or old rancor must not take place. Scientific discussion has an immediate bearing on reason and not on sympathy and feelings.”[61]


4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19