| THE STREET MIMBAR JUM'AH KHUTBAH (1 January 2010) 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. Brothers and sisters, committed Muslims… Audio on http://www.islamiccenterdc.com/khutbassermons.htm (01-01-2010) ABU DHARR: SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER PART 3 We have our share/proportion of issues/problems and we've been living with these issues and problems for generations and for over a millennium. Only a few of us have had the privilege from Allah to learn/mature/extract lessons from experience and to avoid the troubles/problems that were generated earlier on; and yet, a fewer than those are willing to open up the book and to radiate Qur'anic guidance on the problems/issues, (multiple as they are), that we have been grappling with throughout these centuries/generations We don't think we would be going beyond the boundaries of courtesy to say that we, all of us Muslims- if there is 99.9% of us who failed, then it means basically all of us- fail to, (in a comfortable/serene spirit), open up these issues that we have in an air of calm and point to the chapters/lessons that are rich in our experience. We take an ayah: Allah says in Surah Al Baqara, in an ayah that, (as far as its quote/wording/reading it exactly as it is), absolutely every Muslim in the world without any exception reads/recites to the vowel/consonant/word without any difference. This we all do unanimously. What we do not do unanimously is to concentrate our minds on the meaning of this ayah and similar ayaat throughout the Holy script. Let us go back with you and with Allah's help and assistance to the first generation of Muslims. Whatever we may say and however we may express ourselves, there is a sense that that generation had the privilege of being the first generation to live the meanings of these revealed words from on high. OK- let us take a look at what happened within this generation. We're not being offensive and without using words that don't belong to us, let us look at one of the chapters in our history that no one wants to look at; and if there are some people who want to look at it, all of a sudden the manner in which they express themselves becomes a turn off. They may want to look at this, but the way they want to express themselves causes other listening people- Muslims or non Muslims- to lose interest in the subject. This chapter has to do with two individuals who are by any definition are called Sahabis- one of them is Uthman ibn Affan (radi Allahu anhu) and the other one is Abu Dharr Al Ghifaari (radi Allahu anhu) by any definition/historical book, these are considered two Sahabis of the Prophet of Allah. We brought to your attention, (previously, as we continue to do), that early on, in those days, when these two Sahabis had their opinions on these issues, the Muslims began at that time to feel that something has happened that should have not happened. One of the lessons, (please look at this as a lesson i.e. something to learn from), is the medium of these two Muslims between Uthman as the Khalifah of the Muslims and Abu Dharr as a prominent Sahabi of the Prophet. When Muslims began to feel that something is going wrong here, Abu Dharr began to address this problem. (But) in which way? Brothers and sister- this to many Muslims is an emotional issue; we want to de-emotionalise this so that we can learn. These two individuals learnt. They were not settling their differences by gangs or agitating the public- one against the other. No! These Muslims had the character that brought them together. This is something that is hard to accomplish, even among the developed Muslims i.e. those who belong to Islamic Movements, those who have an Islamic resume and background. (If) they have differences of opinion, why don't they meet? When these Muslims from the Prophet's inner-circle, (so to speak), had their differences, they met and set down. They disagreed, but that disagreement didn't mean "I can't speak to the other Muslim" or "I'm going to have a popular movement against the other Muslim who I disagree with." They met, (but) what happened when they met? We're distilling the broader range of issues, but the two major issues that they could not see eye to eye with was zakaah. This is a financial/money issue. Uthman said if a person pays his zakaah, that's enough- he has met his obligations vis-à-vis Allah and His Prophet and vis-à-vis the Islamic governance and populace. It's done- he paid the zakaah- it's finished. That's it. Abu Dharr said no. There is more to the financial responsibilities to a Muslim than only paying Az Zakaah. The giving character of a committed Muslim goes beyond just paying Az Zakaah. This was a very serious point of contention that they deeply and sincerely disagreed about. The other issue that they deeply and sincerely disagreed about was what is the leverage or authority does the ruler himself and the Islamic government itself have? We're not speaking about secular/deviant government- we're speaking about an Islamic government. How much authority/jurisdiction does the government have when it comes to the treasury of the Muslims or Bayt Maal Al Muslimeen? Brothers and sister- please understand that just because we're speaking about Uthman and Abi Dharr, that this is a personal issue. We're looking at a popular Islamic issue that was represented by these two individuals/Sahabis. The first issue that goes un-noticed or that is deliberately left out of current Islamic discussions is what happened/transpired between these two intra Islamic trends? We know that at this point people are going to say "where do you get your information from?" Once again, we have to remind these people that always have these questions, (and they don't ask us face to face. They go around and begin throwing these questions in the peripheries to other people), these are from mainstream Islamic books of history and these events. One of them is called Muruj Al Dhahab by Al Mas'udi, the other is called Al Kaamil by ibn Al Atheer. These are mainstream Islamic books. These are not some weirdoes or extremists. All of this comes to you from this general body of information which no one wants to take a look at. So, they had these differences and they met. We want to quote for you word by word the conversation. It's not a very long one. We know its cold, but may Allah reward you for your patience. What happened when they were there in that meeting? These books tell us that it was Uthman and Abu Dharr and other individuals there with them. Uthman says/asks the following, (and we quote), consider a person who has given out the zakaah of his money/wealth; is there any other thing that is due or that he should be spending besides this of his wealth/money? Do other people have a right to his wealth? This is what he is asking. Then, another person who is there, his name is Kaab Al Ahbaar, answers and he says no. there's nothing else due upon this person who has paid his zakaah- O Ameer Al Mu'mineen. And Abu Dharr who was there said the following, (and we quote), you are lying you son of a Yahudi. These are very strong words, but what? Would you prefer very strong expressions of your convictions? These were not fighting words or foul language, this was a spontaneous expression of an Islamic point of view with a person who disagrees. Kaab Al Ahbaar came from a Yahudi family. One of the details that is not detected in Islamic history is how does a person a sort-of Johnny-cum-lately Muslim who comes from a Yahudi family- who as far as we know was not a Badri, or from Al Muhajirin and Al Ansaar (radi Allahu anhum) in their history of support of Allah's Prophet- all of a sudden is attending one of the most sensitive discussions in the highest office that the Muslims have. We know that many Muslims want to run away with this and say "look how Muslims were open to Yahud/Jews?" (Take) a look at where they were in our history if you accuse us of being fanatics and in today's language "anti-Semites." A person like Kaab Al Ahbaar takes issue with a person like Abi Dharr and none of us are learning- that's the tragedy. After fourteen centuries some of us don't want to read our history. What do you mean "you don't want to read your own history?" And when others of us read this type of history, want to express it with words and language that is offensive to the decent mind and heart of the average Muslim. So, Abu Dharr responds to Kaab Al Ahbaar and he says to him you have lied you son of a Yahudi. Then, it's not like Abi Dharr is just expressing an opinion, he quotes the ayah from/by which he responds to Kaab Al Ahbaar. This was the ayah that was quoted from Surah Al Baqarah Virtue is not that you automatically orient yourself to the East or the West, rather, Al Birr is to be committed to Allah and the final day… (Surah Al-Baqarah verse 177) So, Abi Dharr was not just speaking his mind. And he wasn't putting his personality in the middle of this. He was conveying a Qur'anic meaning into an Islamic meeting in which there were opinions that were deviating away from the Qur'an, this ayah, the Prophet and from the self disciplined generation of Muslims that Abu Dharr still belonged to; but some of the people were accumulating wealth and power and combining the two were deviating away from. Then Uthman asks those who were there, (and we quote), do you find anything wrong with us, (meaning the rulers/officials/decision makers), in the Islamic state if we take the money that is in Bayt Al Maal and then we spend it among those who are our deputies/governors and then we disperse some of it to you? This, once again, is an innocent question and it comes from a person whose sincerity is not in doubt; his acumen/foresight maybe in doubt, but his sincerity is not. Then, the same person Kaab ibn Ahbaar says there's nothing wrong with that. Then, Abu Dharr once again says to him, son of a Yahudi- you are very bold in stating yourself in our deen. The inference here is that Kaab ibn Ahbaar is a rookie. He's not a person who has a record/history of sacrifice and struggle for the deen of Allah- he's a new comer. Abu Dharr is saying how brave you are as a new comer expressing yourself at this level with these words and with this opinion. If we take these features of the generation of the Sahaba/first Muslims that many Muslims say are the standard/reference point for the rest of the Muslims until the end of time- if that's the case- then why are they omitting necessary knowledge? If they're telling us "these are our examples," which we are not arguing with, then how come they keep away from us vital knowledge like this? They did not all agree/have one opinion. They had different opinions. OK- let us look and let us learn from these different opinions because if we are not going to learn, then we're going to go back to square one and we're going to refight the differences that divided them. So you can see the way the discussion was going on between Abu Dharr and Kaab ibn Ahbaar and then when Uthman heard that, he said to Abi Dharr your harm to me has exceeded its bounds; literally it means make absent your face from my presence because you are inflicting damage upon us. He didn't say "throw him in the dungeons, arrest him bring in the troops." He said this has gone too far right now. The injury and harm that is being done to us is no longer tolerable. We can't take it any longer. Go away so I can't see you any more. Abu Dharr goes. He leaves Al Madinah and he goes to Ash Shaam- he didn't change his mind/convictions. He went to Ash Shaam and the ruler/governor in Ash Shaam was Muawiyah, but Ash Shaam was not like Al Madinah. Al Madinah still had the self discipline/austerity/self denial from the time of Allah's Prophet and then there was this wealth and power that were combining to spoil the atmosphere that the Prophet left in Al Madinah; but when Abu Dharr went to Ash Shaam/Damascus it was all the other way around. The atmospherics were saturated with the combination of wealth and power and Abu Dharr spoke to Muawiya the same way he spoke to Uthman. He said to him the person who is rich right now, you made him rich and the person who is poor right now, you made him poor. If those who call themselves Socialists/Leftists/Communists/Marxists, (and all of this), knew this type of a person existed in Islamic history they would claim him for themselves! We don't need their type of experience; we understand what they stand for and we may even appreciate some of them who gave their lives for their principles/beliefs, but this doesn't make Muslims Marxists/Leftists or these other types of things- if only we could understand who we are; but because we don't understand who we are and the rich experience in our past, then along comes some Muslims who begin to express some ideas and then they are classified as this, that and the other. Then, Abu Dharr in Ash Shaam began to speak to the rich people. This is not easy. Even today, in a world in which they say there is freedom of expression/conscience/the press/of coming together/aggregation/assembly and democracy- it is called all of these freedoms- do you think an average/poor person will be able to go and speak to rich people? But in the nature of that society, it was possible. With the beginning of the problems that we were going to have to deal with, it was still possible for a person like Abu Dharr who came from Al Madinah/Arabia and relocated himself to Ash Shaam to speak to the people of Ash Shaam, who were rich. He told them that their accumulation of wealth is equivalent to kanz and iftikhar. These are two Qur'anic words found in the Qur'an and Sunnah. Kanz means hording/saving money and not spending it. Iftikar means monopoly. The ayah in the Qur'an from which Abu Dharr is coming says Break good news to those who accumulate gold and silver, theirs shall be an excruciating torment in the life to come. (Surah At-Taubah verse 34) Of course, this is sarcastic in the Divine sense of expressing it. This was a Muslim speaking his Qur'anic (conscience). The Prophet of Allah says whoever hoards/monopolises anything has committed an ithm. If we can only open up our eyes, we can see and understand this Islamic position. Abu Dharr was saying this to the affluent class of Muslims who had wealth in Ash Shaam. There were no barriers here. (You) can try and go to a person in the Muslim world today who has money/wealth- can you speak to him? If you have a Qur'anic and Prophetic mind and character- you're the Muslim that you're supposed to be- do you think you have access to these people? In that time and day Abu Dharr had access to these people which tells us that there's a difference between those societies today that say that "they are Islamic" and the type of "Islamic" social atmosphere that was prevalent at that time. He came to them, (and we quote), O you rich folks: Sympathise or show compassion for the poor folks/people in poverty, show them that you care. This is Abu Dharr's rephrasing of the meanings of the ayah… The good news I have for you people who are accumulating this wealth and causing these problems… we have suffering people/Muslims/human beings who are poor/in poverty. I have news for you. You are going to have irons of fire that will come and press down on your foreheads, sides and backs. Ask your self "where do you see this dynamic in the world today?" It was there i.e. in the generation of Allah's Prophet, (but) it is not here (i.e.) in a generation that claims to be in Allah's Prophet. Of course, in all of this contact that Abu Dharr was having with the people, no one was telling him "you can't go into a Masjid or meet with Muslims or discuss this affair in public or these are ideas that are not supposed to be presented to the average person." All of these things that are said today were not said at the time. Given the freedom the Muslims enjoyed at that time, that freedom opened up a dynamic; and that dynamic was that people began to flock/gravitate to Abi Dharr. When information began coming to Muawiyah, (as is the case with those who sit on the seats of power), that what is beginning is a popular movement and people are beginning to change their opinions about wealth and power, Muawiyah spoke to Abi Dharr. He said to him O Abu Dharr, it's better for you to stop doing what you are doing or put an end to what you are involved in now. Notice that with all the criticisms that you've heard from your's humbly and truly about Muawiyah, this person didn't come to Abi Dharr as is the case with today's people who sit on thrones/seats of power and deal with their opposition i.e. "throw them in jail, round them up, torture them…" They disagreed, but unlike Uthman, here we have a person i.e. Muawiyah, who is to his core interested in power. Then, what was Abu Dharr's response to him? Was it something like "wait a minute, I have to think about this. I can't be expressing these ideas. Why don't I go underground? Why don't I think of another way of presenting this message or having a halaqah/study groups?" and these other things that we right now have in our world. How did he respond to Muawiyah? Abu Dharr speaks to Muawiyah and he says to him, (and we quote again), By Allah, I will not end/terminate what I am doing until the monies/wealth/treasury is distributed amongst all the people and not that there's a certain segment/stratum/class of people have this money. No- it belongs to everyone and I'm not going to stop or be silent about this until that is finally done. Then, as is the case with people in power, there's a saying that says "everyone has a price" so here Abu Dharr was going to be exposed to the shenanigans of rulers. Muawiyah wanted to buy Aba Dharr, so what does he do? He sends an emissary/courier who he gives 1,000 dinars and says go give this to Abu Dharr. This person goes one evening and he delivers/gives this money to Abu Dharr. The next day, the same person comes to Abi Dharr and he says excuse me, I made a mistake. That money was not supposed to be delivered to you, it was supposed to be delivered to someone else. Could you please give me back that money? Here, brothers and sisters, we can identify the originality/genuineness of the character of a person. Abu Dharr told that person you have to give me three days because it was only one night between evening and morning. Abu Dharr had given out all of this money to those who were in need. This courier returns to Muawiyah and says Abu Dharr doesn't have the money I gave him last night. He already gave it out to those who are in need. Then, Muawiyah realised we can't buy this person; he's not like the others and he communicates this concern to the Khalifah in Al Madinah i.e. this is what's happening here. If things continues like this, things are going to get out of hand. What do we do with him? The answer to that was well- send him back to Al Madinah. We mentioned this before and we will mention it again- the way he was sent back to Al Madinah was on a donkey without a proper saddle. It was something like hay that was placed on there and he was sent back guarded i.e. to make sure that he didn't go anywhere else. He went from Ash Shaam to Al Madinah. Muawiyah had five Sicilian guards make sure that he arrives in Al Madinah. The lesson that we, Muslims, have not learned and Allah has given us centuries to learn this lesson is that it is permissible to disagree and we can express our disagreements to ourselves; and not behind closed doors or secret meetings, but we can express these differences face to face. You don't expel people from Masajid and from their countries when you don't even have an inkling of Islam to quote/justify your policy of expulsion, refugee status or of denying them civil rights. We have all of this around us, to the magnitude that was never present in our past and we are living as if nothing is happening and we are not supposed to speak out because the personalities that spoke out are silenced by those who preach and say "they teach Islam." Brothers and sisters, Muslims of commitment… These meanings that are there for your understanding of Allah and His Prophet. If you care to partake of these meanings, then take a look around you in today's real world. Last week, we had some Muslims who were commemorating the martyrdom/shahadah of Al Imam Al Hussein (alaihi as salaam wa radi Allahu anhu). In the same frame of time, there were armies and militaries that were killing and murdering other Muslims who are aware of Al Imam Al Hussein and Aashura in Al Yemen. They didn't have the luxury to be in Masajid beating their chests and releasing their tears. Their children and families are out in the open- hundreds of thousands of them. This is not Israel. Israel is not on the border of Yemen. It's a government that makes broad claims to its Islamic legitimacy that is involved in these bombing campaigns. And at what time? This has been going on for months and years now. During the time of the Hajj and Shahr Al Haram, all of this was taking place. Muharram is a sacred and secure time frame in the Islamic calendar, but don't remind those who make their high claims about Islam about Al Shahr Al Haram and about Muslim lives. Then, if you're not able to see this tragedy, look at Gazzah. A tragedy has been in the making there for four years now. Sanctions, starvation policies- you can name any and every type of warfare and it's at work right in front of you. And there are many more that you can add. This is the beginning. Why do all of these happen and why are many Muslims detached from these affairs. Because they are not taught from the Mimbar! You are not supposed to go to the Masjid to learn. We are supposed to go to the Masjid to gain ignorance- that's the way the world operates nowadays! It is because of the way these Masajid are run that we have tears and blood and sweat all across Islamic countries and regions of the world. If we only could have, from the occupied Mimbar of Allah's Prophet and from the occupied Masajid of this world the word of truth expressed to a starving for information/truth/justice Muslim public, we would not have the conditions that we have today. This khutbah was presented by Imam Muhammed Asi on the occasion of Jum'ah on 1 January 2010 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