| THE STREET MIMBAR JUM'AH KHUTBAH (25 December 2009) webpage: http://www.facebook.com/The.Street.Mimbar http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_street_mimbar/ PLEASE e-mail Suggestions & Criticisms to khutbahs@yahoo.com It is in such a manner that We make plain Our signs so that the course of the Criminals may become clear. | Bismillah Ar-Rahmaan Ar-Raheem. Alhumdulillah. Peace and blessings on Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam), his Noble Companions and Family. Ayyuha Al Mu'minun… Audio on http://www.islamiccenterdc.com/khutbassermons.htm (12-18-2009) ABU DHAR (R): SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER PART 2 Allah and His Prophet has made this day a day of taqwa. Avoid Allah's punishing penalty as is due to Him, as your only Authority and Power… (Surah Aal Imran verse 102) Avoid Allah as Power and Authority and say/express what is accurate/right. (Surah Al Ahzaab verse 70) The Prophet of Allah says with the motion of his hand pointing to his bosom, the fact of the matter is you will find at taqwa to be located here. It is sad to say that many people have lost this sense and relationship of taqwa with Allah. It is going to take, (us to go with you- the listening, conscientious and willing Muslims), some time to try to get a hold at when and how the unravelling of this taqwa set into the Muslim public/masses throughout the course of time as our common history unfolded. This is going to take a little patience and much tolerance to try to sort out why we no longer observe in a practical manner this taqwa which we are supposed to recharge every Jum'ah at this time. Everything cannot be said in one setting, therefore we are going to have to muster everything that we have said and listened to in the past with what is being said now and in the coming weeks and months to try to have a sense for the reasons for the absence of this practical/functional taqwa in today's world/Muslims. Another observation is that we can't go into every detail- this is impossible- so there has to be a process in which we try our best with Allah in our minds, hearts and selves to try to trace this unravelling of the practical taqwa that belongs to our character as singulars and plurals. This humble speaker of yours is trying his best to put his hand on the beginning of the undoing of this necessary feature of taqwa that belongs to me, you and all other Muslims. In our recourse and reference to Allah and His Prophet, we mentioned the ayaat, (and there are many other ayaat), that instils in us the character and the necessary interactions in life that come from taqwa. We said that Allah's Prophet referred in the presence of all of those who kept close company with him to the veracity, frankness and outspokenness of a personality that was sharing the company of Allah's Prophet with the rest of those who were sharing his company. That was Abu Dharr (radi Allahu anhu). In reference to Abu Dharr, the Prophet of Allah said he is one of the most, (if not the most), who is willing to express the truth frankly or he is the most truthful of all persons when it comes to the manner of expressing the truth and when it comes to the substance of the truth. We don't take this from non mainstream Islamic sources because we know the Muslim mind- or the traditional Muslim mind out there, to be more accurate. For those of you who have these questions, (and we encourage you to have questions because it means you're thinking), this information that comes to you comes from references that everyone is familiar with: At Tabari, ibn Al Atheer, ibn Sa'ad and Al Mas'udi. All of these are mainstream/acknowledged/accepted Islamic books of reference. When in comes to Abi Dharr, we find that during the time of Uthman (radi Allahu anhu) something happened, which the contemporary speakers of Islam want to gloss over. They just want to by pass this as if it didn't happen. This is a rich experience that belongs to all of us, to which we should refer to/reconsider/rethink so that we learn from our historical selves. What happened at the time of Uthman that wasn't there before? What happened was for the first time now? We know there are extremist points of view on this and we want to set them aside and look at this sincerely and objectively. During the time in which Uthman ruled, something new happened and that was that the wealth that was acquired by the Muslims began to divide the Muslims- this was not there before. Some individuals began to have wealth/extra resources/money meanwhile other individuals, all of whom are in an Islamic society began to lack resources and were in need of money. Remember this condition/social division was not there before. If Muslims had, they would give and therefore there was no social and public feeling, but now, (we hesitate to use the word because it has its connotations and its insinuations), we had class consciousness among the Muslims. We didn't have hatred and we didn't have extremes at this point, but we had a beginning of something that wasn't there before- something that we can learn from and involve in our lives today to avoid the consequences that we suffered once before and we need not suffer once again. The division that has set in, that wasn't there before, (we have to emphasize and say it again and again and again because those who look at this issue within the traditions that we have use this… There's not many of them because this issue is not in the radar of the Muslim public. Because of our consciousness of Allah's Power and Authoritative presence, you and I are referring to these facts; we sort of are ahead of the rest of the Muslims who either because of their traditions want to look at it in a biased manner or refuse to look at it at all because of this new development within the Muslim society. There is supposed to be equal, co-operative, caring and sharing- features that were there during the time of the Prophet of Allah and his first two successors. Now, that feature was beginning to dissipate/diminish. In these books that we mentioned to you- the mainstream reference of history sources of Muslims: At Tabari, ibn Al Atheer, ibn Sa'ad and Al Masudi- we have to repeat them because some minds are always in the tendency of accusing. We are not here to accuse anyone; we are here to learn. Because of this divergence away from the model that had existed hitherto/up until this point, we read that for the first time, we have a person like Muawiya using bad words or foul language against Abi Dharr. Then, we have this official treatment for the first time (which) we didn't have before. There were people who took issue with Abi Bakr and with Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) but there was no coming down of the state upon individuals who held to their opinions which they believed are expressing the meanings of the ayaat and hadith. In addition to being verbally mistreated, Abi Dharr was officially mistreated. They tried to exile him from Arabia to Ash Shaam and then exile him back to Arabia to a remote and isolated area and in the process these people who gained power and wealth and who were in the process of combining the two- a feature that never should exist in an Islamic order- tried to humiliate him. A reference to the ayah that has been explained many times before in Surah Al Isra'. And if We want to destroy a social unit/order or society, We have the wealthy class becoming the ruling class; they, (meaning the wealthy and ruling class) cause that social order to disintegrate… (Surah Al Isra' verse 16) Now we have the distilling of the meanings of this ayah within an early Islamic society- its main members and characters come from the generation of Allah's Prophet. Why can't we learn? We don't have to turn acidic towards each other by throwing verbal acid against a person who sees things in another light- this need not be. Abu Dharr was humiliated by different individuals who have power and wealth and want to combine both together for no other reason but that he is expressing his mind and conscience. They sent him back on a horse/mule or whatever it was without a saddle- a distance of hundreds of miles from north to south. Try riding a horse/mule without a saddle for a couple of miles to get a sense/feeling for what was really happening. Now, there are two sides, (let us say two Islamic sides), to an issue that in the centuries and following generations up until our time were to produce ideologies and philosophies. We've dealt with this issue, we just haven't had the mental motivation to place this in our public minds so that we can do away with the divisions and schisms that have been produced by this. When we had the rulers who are on one side and people like Abu Dharr who are conscious of what is happening in the social world around on the other side, we have our mainstream Islamic history books, (the same ones that we referred to and others), tell us that there was a Jewish conspiracy here. This is not to belittle the influence of Yahud at that time and since that time and up to this day; definitely we are speaking about a very potent and poisonous strain in society then and now, but here's where we can begin to juxtapose/place-side-by-side as these two eras begin to look similar. In today's world, when Muslims encounter a problem, (most of it of their own making), they place most of the onus on Yahud. Anyone knows this in this world today, but many, (of the few who know this today), don't know it in its origins because, (during the social consciousness of the "haves and the have nots" during the time of the third ruler after the Prophet) they can't see that at that time also there was an accusation of Yahud to be the problem. This (accusation) centres around a person called ibn Saba'. In some books he is referred to as ibn As Sawda'. We mentioned him previously, (and we have no time right now to go into the details about whether this person is a fictional/real character); the problem is that many of the official writing of history attributes the sincere motivation of Abi Dharr to this Yahudi character. You can't have Muslims themselves who have noticed that society is beginning to break apart because of the concentration of wealth and power- this has to be attributed to a Yahudi who "became" a Muslim?! But this is what we have in our history. They begin telling us in these history books that ibn Saba' met Aba Dharr in Damascus and he began to tell him look at what Muawiya is saying. He is saying that this wealth/finances belong to Allah but in fact/practical life, this money/finances/resources belong to the Muslims and Muawiya should not get away with this type of publicity/propaganda, and so there was a Yahudi character behind Abi Dharr instigating him to turn against the Islamic state/government. This is a fallacy if we consider that this person called ibn Saba' (even) existed. We don't want to go into the historical of whether he was there or not there. That's another fine point in history but it is fallacious/wrong. It is not a qaul sadeed. It is not an accurate statement because when Abu Dharr began his opposition, he didn't begin in Ash Shaam, he began in Al Madinah. How come they come and tell us "ibn Saba' was the instigator of this?!" He wasn't. That Abu Dharr was instigated of this because of some kind of whispering/clandestine meetings with a Yahudi who "became" a Muslim wasn't the case?! There is a sequence of events, all of them put together, that want the Muslims to believe that the opposition to an Islamic rule that is beginning to go in a non-Islamic direction at the highest levels was due not to the sincerity of Muslims who came from the Prophet's circle, but to the intrigue and the conspiracies of Jews who became Muslims?! This fact was with us for almost fourteen centuries now and we still have it today. If someone wants to point today to those who claim that they are ruling in an Islamic manner- we are speaking specifically about those who are ruling in Arabia- let's put this in context. Those who are ruling in Arabia say "they are applying the Shariah and then they come and tell you "there's a Yahudi hand behind the criticism/speaking out against that regime in Arabia." It can't be done with Islamic consciousness/integrity/independence as was the case with Abi Dharr?! Do they mean to tell us that it can't be done that way? We look at ourselves as Islamic lackeys if we don't have the ability to generate a correcting process from within us; then something is wrong with us. Brothers and sisters who are listening, be aware that these details are not brought to attention because they don't want you to learn. If we learn our past experiences we will correct our current divisions/deviations and they don't want that to happen. Let us quote Aba Dharr, (and we have to remind you, once again, this information is taken from these mainstream Islamic sources), he was one of the most intelligent/insightful of the companions/Sahaba (radi Allahu anhum) of Allah's Prophet. Let us try to understand where he is coming from so that we can understand where we are going to. He always used to quote the Prophet's hadith in which the Prophet said, the closest of you in my company on the day of Qiyamah is the one who will live on, in the same way he was when I died and left him. This is very important to remember. The Prophet is telling all of those Sahaba around him that the closest ones to him are going to be the ones who are going to rejoin him on the Day of resurrection in the same way they were when the Prophet passed away and left them. They were all poor. There, generally), wasn't a rich person among them, so when Abu Dharr was going around reminding them of what they all knew the Prophet had said to them, some people who later on began to acquire lots of money were upset that Abu Dharr was reminding them of what the Prophet was telling them. We have to repeat this again, listen to the Prophet. Ittaqu Allah fi qawli Rasulillah. Later on, when there were people who gained and combined wealth and power, Abu Dharr would go around and say to them, By Allah, there is not one of you left except that he has taken his share of worldly affluence, except me. What Abu Dharr is saying to them is what has happened to you? Abu Dharr was reminding those who did not want to listen of the Prophet's hadith. Listen to this; this is the type of hadith that no one wants to stress from the mimbar. The Prophet of Allah says those of you who have the most in this world will have the least in the coming world except for he who gives out of what he gains. He gives left and right, without reservations/second thoughts... Do you see? These are the Prophet's words without what we call today "these saving accounts" … and without withholding and without hoarding/monopoly. What's wrong if a Muslim is going around? They came to Abi Dharr and they said to him, why don't you keep a low profile? (We're bringing the language of those times in today's world, in today's language.) In today's language, "cool it." The state at that time officially told him you are not permitted to speak in public gatherings to give your opinions. Do you think he listened to that? No! He continued. He wanted to speak to the people, he spoke to the people in the presence of the ruler and correction was not that the rulers would throw him into a dungeon. No. They disagreed. They can disagree, (and) we can disagree, but we don't have to be fanatics about it. And this continued until, when he was told you are not allowed to give your opinion, and Abu Dharr said to these people coming to him By Allah. If you were to place a sword on my mouth to prevent me from saying what I heard the Prophet of Allah expressing I will express it and then you can move that sword into my mouth but nothing is going to stop me from expressing my point of view. And what do we have since that time? This was the beginning of people not being able to express their Islamic conscience. Let the people who have an opinion step forward and express their opinion if we had a confident Islamic combination of wealth and power. We know that some of you want to think/take this into the context of Iran, and some of you want to say "does this apply over there?" Let us tell you, don't confuse the issues. If those who are making decisions in Iran are combining power and wealth then you can take this argument into that country. There are some people who have power but they don't have wealth; and some people who have wealth but no power and now the struggle is on to try to combine power and wealth. Those who were in power at the time of Abi Dharr are those who don't have power but they have wealth in our time in Iran. Don't confuse these two analogies; but they are not confused when you place them in the context of those who are ruling in Arabia where they have dirty wealth and oppressive power and they combine the two so that we have the results of the world that we have today. Brothers and sisters, Committed Muslims… Underline two words, ahlihi wa sahbihi wa sallam. The Prophet of Allah had his Ahl and his Sahaba and those of you who are trying to bring some type of war- this war is only for minds of those who didn't understand the intricacies of the relationships between those who had their own opinions coming from the book of Allah and the Messenger of Allah. They were not enemies! They had their differences. Some of them had their mistakes, and when they had their mistakes, a constructive way of looking at this is those mistakes were for us to learn from. They didn't make those mistakes for us to perpetuate and not correct. This (correction) can be done with a healthy mind and psychology, not with those who are inferior and they don't go to the others Muslims place. Why? Go to the others Muslim's place. However way you look at this, these are Muslims. What is wrong with you? You don't have enough information?! Allah and His Prophet don't speak to you? This characterizes those who rule in Arabia. They tell us "they apply shariah" and since last Jum'ah, what has occurred in that funny land that applies this "shariah", you had one of their intellectuals who wrote an article saying "it is permissible for men and women to speak to each other and look at each other…" Imagine this! (Take a) look at where the world is and look at the subject matter that is dividing fanatics?! Then, the whole class of people there called Hai'at Al Aml Ma'ruf wa An Nahi An Al Munkar assaulted this person. They said "how dare you say these things?" What do they want? He is saying "a woman can speak to a man and a man can look at a woman." Was not this the character of the people at the time of the Prophet? He is not saying anything new. He went as far as saying "a man and a woman can shake hands if there's no lust/covetousness involved." What's wrong with that? It is a person's opinion. It's become the talk of the town and Islamic circles all around; meanwhile there's war in Southern Arabia, Northern Arabia, West of Arabia and there's probably going to be war to the East of Arabia and all they talk about are sexual issues!? You can't over grow or out mature your instincts and take care of these sexual issues?! Listen brothers and sisters, these are facts of life and this is what happens when we are no longer able to take our responsibilities forward.. A couple of days ago a woman in her 70's had two men come and they say "they were bringing her something" probably helping her out but they have people who are supposed to act like they are keeping law and order, once again, the people who are called the people of Al Amr bi Al Ma'aruf wa Nahi An Al Munkar, (it seems like all of Amr bi Al Ma'ruf and Nahi An Al Munkar rotate around sexual issues!), come and accuse this woman who is in her 70's and they take her to court. This had been done weeks ago, but the court verdict came out just a couple of days ago saying "she should be lashed 40 lashes and put into prison for four months" and the other men, six/seven months and sixty/seventy lashes or whatever the verdict was. These were old men and they say "they were just helping this woman." We don't know how far/deep will our deterioration go! And then they occupy the Muslim public and the Muslim mind with these issues. This is where we are. This khutbah was presented by Imam Muhammed Asi on the occasion of Jum'ah on 18 December 2009 on the sidewalk of Embassy Road in Washington D.C. The Imam previously led the daily and Jum'ah prayers inside the Masjid. His speeches were revolutionary and thought provoking, and eventually irritated and threatened the Middle-East Ambassadors who control the Masjid. Finally, the Imam, his family, and other Muslims faithful to the course of Islam were forced out, into the streets. This khutbah originates from the sidewalk across the street from the Islamic Center, currently under seige. |
No comments:
Post a Comment