| THE STREET MMBAR JUM'AH KHUTBAH (15 November 2013) 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.
Dear committed and beloved brothers and sisters…
THOUGHTS ABOUT KARBALA
Allah says- these ayaat are mentioned in the frame of time that we are in. The generalized meanings of these sentences are something like this
Of course, Allah has purchased from the committed Muslims their possessions or their wealth and their lives or their souls in exchange for Jannah so they do combat in that regard and they fell and they themselves are felled or they kill and they themselves are killed; this is a promise from Allah mentioned in the Torah, in the Injeel and in the Qur'an and who can be more truthful and who can honor his word better than Allah; so receive these glad tidings due to the pledge that you have made with Allah and He has made with you for that is the success in the full meaning of the word. (Surah At Tawbah verse 111)
The reason this ayah is quoted on this day is because we are in the first ten days of the month of Al Muharram, the first month of the year 1435 after the hijrah. On the tenth day of this month an event took place that is killed by the emotions of some Muslims and killed by the absent mindedness of other Muslims. The reference obviously here is to the tenth day of the month, Aashura', and the place being an area in Southern Iraq called Karbala Karbala
As we said, in today's world an Islamic revolution takes place and then you have misinformation and twisted information about the event, about the Islamic revolution and so was the case with many other significant human events. Leading up to that sixty first year of the hijrah, in the air- we all know that the third successor to Allah's Prophet was assassinated and much propaganda came out of that assassination. Whether you agree with this or not is not what we're trying to focus in on right now. What we're focusing on is what is in the public Muslim mind in those years and even a shade of it exists until now and that is that there was this perception that these Muslims who were supporters of Imam Ali (radi Allahu anhu) had a concept among them called ar raj'a. Remember, when we're speaking about these issues or perceptions or concepts we're speaking about them because they had an influence on what was to happen on the tenth day of Al Muharram in the area of Karbala'. This concept of ar raj'a was being used to try to distract or try to sway away from the legitimacy of the leadership of Ali. See how this goes. What did this concept of ar raj'a mean to some people at that time? Well, here's how it is presented in some history books. Remember, we're not arguing whether this is what actually took place or not. What we are focusing our attention on is that it was on the minds of people at that time. It goes like this…
A person by the name of ibn Saba'. He was something like what you may call a rebel rouser in the Arabian Peninsula going from place to place and saying "the Prophet is going to return. He didn't die, he's returning." He said "if Muslims believe that Isa (alayhi as salaam) is going to return then they should believe also that Muhammad (alayhi as salaam) is going to return." This is what is being said about this personality- whether he truly existed or not doesn't matter because as we said the perception is there and a perception is going to follow a good number of Muslims up until that day. So he said "how can they believe that Isa who is less important than Muhammad is going to return then by necessity a Prophet who is more important is certainly going to return." Then, as is the case with people who want to fuel these types of impressions he quoted the Qur'an, ayah number eighty five of Surah Al Qassas.
Certainly He who has mandated the Qur'an upon you (Oh Muhammad) will have you return for an anchor meaning to do this all over again (Surah Al Qasass verse 85)
He quotes this ayah, of course, out of context and stretching it's meanings to infinity, (so to speak), and he wanted to convince people that this is the case. We know out of personal experience there are people, even scholars, who argue the very existence of ibn Saba' saying "the person did not exist or it was a fictional character or it was a contrived personality that was used by the Umawis who usurped power to mislead the Muslim public away from legitimate leaders." From this type of concept of ar raj'a some people developed- because you have to reconstruct reality (and) what was going on. Islam was moving in all directions (and) new people were becoming Muslims. When new people were becoming Muslims and they were exposed to this idea of what is called ar raj'a then some of them began to develop a concept of tanasuf al arwah. Here is where some of these, (let's call them), "converts" to Islam from the East of the Arabian Peninsula had this perception of one single life of an individual going from one person being acquired by another individual- which obviously doesn't sit well with the understanding of the Qur'an and the Prophet; so if this perception was supervised by those in power and this person, ibn Saba', and his followers were trying to convince the Muslims of this idea, it becomes a turn off, meaning it could be very easily used by those in power to convince people that "look- these are the followers of Ali and look what they are talking about! They are talking about ar raj'a." What comes from that? An average individual knows all of this is nonsense. So don't think that when we speak about this is something that had nothing to do with the grand sacrifice that took place on the tenth of Al Muharram.
Then we had another one of these issues called al wisayah and that is the will that the leadership of the Muslims go from one leader to the next. This was also one of those perceptions that was in the air. Not many Muslims know, (because not many Muslims study, and we mean a systemic or a systematic study of other religions), in Jewish history there's something akin to al wisayah where leadership is passed down from one Prophet to the next so when someone begins to advocate this concept of al wisayah then the average Muslim is gong to begin to say "where did this come from!" You read the Qur'an, look at the Qur'an (and) you'll see in the context of Bani Isra'eel the word wassa (but) the word wisayah has a noun with this particular political meaning is not there in the Qur'an but still the origins of the word is there and when it is interjected into the political climate of the Umawi regime from the year forty until the year sixty one when Aashura' and Karbala' materialized then you get the sense once again that powers that be are using these issues to distract from people focusing on legitimate leadership. This is an incident that is related in Islamic history. We'll give you a piece of information that demonstrates (this). This is in Islamic history books. It's not something that is marginal or not mainstream- we try to avoid something that is marginal or not mainstream. So in this case, these people or folks that were influenced by ibn Saba', (whether he was fictional or whether he was real- this sort of is an academic issue and you can argue it both ways- the fact of the matter is that perception is there), so those who were influenced by ibn Saba' came to Ali and they said you are him or you are he. So Ali asked who is he meaning what do you mean by saying that? What do you mean by that? They said you are Allah. Nastaghfirullah, but that's what was said and that is what is there. So he gave instructions, of course after trying to see whether they are saying this and they are convinced of it (and) its part of what they believe (and) are they serious? After all this it surfaced that they are serious (and) they believe this so the history books tell us that he ordered them to be incinerated. Once again, we are not arguing whether this took place or it did not take place; we are arguing that this is in the minds of people. So when this actually happened when these individuals were in the flames they said now he has proven that he is Allah. The people who follow this type of thing say the only one who punishes with fire is Allah so if he punishes us with fire then he proves who he is. Why are we mentioning this? We're mentioning this because these types of perceptions that were there and influencing, probably, tens of thousands of people, should be accounted for when we speak about the build up that leads to Karbala' and Aashura'.
Another issue that was in the minds of people was the issue of Imam Al Hassan (radi Allahu anhu) having relinquished power and having that power vested in a new ruler, Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan. That is also something that happened historically. Every Muslim agrees to that but it is not the habit of Muslims, even thinking Muslims, to account for why that happened. The fact of the matter is that that happened to spare the lives of innocent combatants who would go to war and that war had the potential of becoming the first and most enduring of Islamic civil wars. So when people- speakers, scholars, learned individuals, people in the education field (and) people in the religious field, all of them put together- speak about Al Imam Al Hussein (radi Allahu anhu) they don't speak about Imam Al Hassan. It's like some of them feel if they wanted to speak about Hassan they will become apologetic. They sort of interpret his position of being one of a weak position. This happens when Muslim fragment a combined effort. They look at one policy in isolation of another and they can't look at what Hassan did and what Hussein did (with) both of them being complementary to each other. It would be very informative for these speakers who speak on this issue especially every year during this time of year to try and take a holistic look at what happened. When Hassan agreed with the conditions- because it wasn't a blind surrender of power … (we mentioned this previously), there was a build up of a Muslim psychology that was sick and tired of war and going to war. They saw what happened at Al Jaml, they saw what happened at Siffin, they saw what happened at An Nahrawaan so this mentality and this psychology right now was at a point that "we don't want this anymore." So Hassan was responding to the psychology of the people. He was their leader and he was responding to their psychology but in the process of that what happened was those who were in power were stealing the moment- here is our lesson to be learnt. The Umawis were stealing that fact so they came along and they swept this popular sentiment to their side and they used these numbers of people and claimed them for themselves and they even gave them the name Ahl As Sunnah wa Al Jama'ah which didn't exist before that. But these are the moments in history when these types of things happen and instead of us concentrating our attention on this lesson tear after year we go by without learning from our own selves. This also was a public perception that lived on until the tenth of Al Muharram, it lived on and it was there. People felt this way and as much as they can think, rationalized this feeling.
Then we had another, (what you may say was), attack by those in power on the public sentiment that was diffused among the Muslims. The Umawis had a policy of defaming Ali. This was official policy in the Masajid, in the different areas of the Arabian Peninsular, of Ash Shaam, of Al Iraq. Wherever they had control it was official policy when you ascend the Mimbar on Friday and you express the khutbah along with that you have to defame Ali and his descendants, his children. One such example of the chutzpah that the Umawis had, Muawiyah in particular, is that he told Mughirah ibn Shu'bah at that time who was the governor, (so to speak), of Al Kufa to express this foul language against Ali. One of the persons who was listening to this type of nonsense on Fridays stood up to him and took issue with him and told him (as) everyone was listening the personalities that you are defaming and that you are putting down are actually people of virtue. They deserve to be mentioned in a meritorious way and those that you are praising and glorifying you should be, (in the average language), knocking them down or you should be defaming them. This is the same Hujr ibn Adi (radi Allahu anhu) whose grave was attacked some months ago in Syria Syria
Prior to the tenth of Al Muharram one of the other social and mental perceptions that was out there in the public was the attempt by Yazid who came to power in an illegitimate fashion who gave orders to his deputy who was in Al Madinah, Al Waleed ibn Uqbah, to go to prominent personalities in Al Madinah and to obtain their consent or their allegiance to Yazid. So Al Waleed goes to certain people (and) one of them was Abdullah ibn Az Zubayr (radi Allahu anhu). He refused. He fled from Al Madinah to Makkah. The other person Al Waleed wanted to obtain consent from (regarding) the rulership of Yazid was Hussein. Hussein left Al Madinah and refused to agree with the leadership of Yazid. This is a very important segment of our history. We don't think it is one, (this is a humble after thought to these significant events), that should be addressed in an emotional manner. Obviously this occasion solicits an out pour of emotions which we're not detracting from (but) the problem we have is that there's no mental sizing up of what happened. This is what is absent. You out there- whether you are Shi'is or whether you are Sunnis- fail to present this issue in its mental framework! This is what has to done. It's a shame that we Muslims now after a lapse of fourteen hundred years are incapable of speaking about this issue in its thought provoking context not it's emotional stimulating content! Two different things! They may not be contradictory but they're different. A mind is one thing and the emotions and feelings are another thing. You can fill your emotions and continue to fill your emotions as has been the case for those of you who observe this occasion for around fourteen hundred years and what has come out of it? If you take a measured look at yourselves- what has come out of it? What has come out of it is, (in a few words): "Hussein a martyr who is drowned in tears on this occasion. He's a Shaheed. Shaheed Karbala'" and all of this. Ok- does anyone think about becoming a Shaheed? No! That part doesn't work out to that. If he was a Shaheed and you honor his memory as a Shaheed have you ever thought of becoming a Shaheed?! Does anyone on this occasion try to think about what goes into becoming a Shaheed? Because he took that position of principle and people nowadays want to run away from principle; even those who recall those memorable days want to run away from principle. That's one thing. The other thing is how convenient traditionalists have become! Very cozy life! Leave the Shahadah to Hussein. Then how about all of this responsibility of Islam? Can someone realize that we are responsible people? But no! That responsibility is delayed. The Shahadah was in the past- that's Hussein. He was honored with it (but) as far as we are concerned all of this whole affair is put on hold until the advent of Al Imam Al Mahdi. Between Hussein and Imam Al Mahdi there's a blank! It's being filled in with tears on ten days a year! That's it! That's the whole Islam?! Islam begins like that and ends like that?! Isn't this a sorrow state of affairs? Hussein leaves Al Madinah and he goes to Makkah and then from there as you may know the rest is that there are some people, (and here we're obviously going to have to abbreviate), in Al Kufa in Southern Iraq who by some accounts through around one hundred and fifty correspondences with Hussein- writing letters and sending emissaries and all this- we are your supporters and we don't have an Imam and we need a leader and you are for us and we are for you and all of this- these are the meanings. Then when the time comes and they are expected to honor their words and to defend their principles there's basically no one around. Of course there's a lot of details to this but that is all as they say history. We're not living in history? Are we living in those days? Can we go up to a person called Al Mughirah? Can we go up to another person called Muslim ibn Aqil (radi Allahu anhu)? Can we go up to another person called Abdullah ibn Az Zubayr? Can we go up to these persons? Are they here? Are they now? Or are we supposed to identify their equivalents who are, (believe us), busy at work today in a very sophisticated way. Hussein and Yazid- there's a lot of people who speak about Hussein in an emotional way and there's a lot of people also who speak about Yazid also in an absent minded way but no one tries to speak about them in a factual way. It may have been a part of their mind that was evil but there was a part of their mind that was working in a wicked way. That is what has to surface. If we don't look at what they were thinking about then we can't learn! For the first time we see that Yazid was a person who prayed. He went into the Masjid, he would sit on the Mimbar, he would lead the prayers just like every Muslim ruler in today's world would do. So what happened being a ruler who discharges Islamic rituals was done then and is done now and being an opposition that is not hiding behind Islamic rituals! The rulers then and now hide behind Islamic rituals and by doing so they delay the day of reckoning. They fool public opinion. Hussein parted with that façade of rituals. He was in Makkah and it was during the time of the Hajj and he leaves. The Muslims, you and I, have lost sight of the element of justice in the position of usurping rulers like Yazid all the way up to until Abdullah in Arabia today and we have lost sight of those who are seeking justice before or after rituals, in the presence or in the absence of rituals. No one can learn this lesson because no one thinks about these events.
Dear committed Muslims, brothers and sisters…
The love of Allah's Prophet extends to loving those who Allah's Prophet himself loved and obviously the Prophet loved his daughter and his grandchildren who lived in his life and he expressed his heartfelt emotions towards them. Any Muslim from whatever background they come from should be able to say these words free from any stigmatization or stereotyping and these other things that go on. It's a fact! Any Muslim should be able to state that fact. The problem is, (and let us be a little blunt and frank about this), a problem of perception even though we are not at the thinking level we should be at and you know this from the khutbahs you have been listening to. We are sub (or) below that level. That's a fact! If we just thinking at the level we are expected to think by Allah and His Prophet we wouldn't be in the condition we are in, (i.e.) Muslims killing Muslims, Muslims not understanding others, Muslims holding a grudge. Where did all of this come from? It came from the absence of our minds. This is a precious thing.
We said we're going to be frank with you. In the literature, the perception is out there- the Shi'is built something like a culture that in a sense you either belong to it and therefore you are acceptable on certain terms or you don't belong to it and therefore something has to de done for you to seethe light- something like that. We want to, brotherly and sincerely, ask our Shi'i brothers, (and we hope you take this question and you ponder it in the calmness of yourself and the light of your mind): is it necessary for a person, whether he's a Muslim or a non-Muslim, to become the Shi'i that you have in your mind or your understanding of a Shi'i (i.e.) this traditional honoring of Karbala' or the tears that are shed on the tenth of Al Muharram or the night before that- is that the only way a person can identify with Hussein? If that's the only way you have much thinking to do. You have know that there are many other methods and many other avenues to approach Hussein and to identify with him- many others. For those of you who are Sunnis out there, we say this to you as a brother also, deep down inside of you there is an area that you have not pondered (and) you have not thought about with your mind and that is if you love Rasulullah (and) there's no question that you do, then why can't you extend that love to those that he loved? Deep down in your history books, (we speaking to you who come from the Sunni tradition and you haven't even thought through yourselves), you know or you should know that Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad who was the commander of Yazid who was the one responsible for shedding the blood of the Prophet's household in Karbala' on Aashura' and in your books you say that some of this has to do with his mother and according to some of your books his mother was Persian. According to some of your books she came from Persian royalty and some of you try to blame the martyrdom of Hussein on the Persian origins of Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad. Can we not, both of these wings, just take a plunge into our deeper historical and personal selves and then from there on elevate with information and with a mind grounded in the Qur'an and in the Sunnah, in Allah and His Prophet, to emerge from all of this without the pollution that we have attached to us?
This khutbah was presented by Imam Muhammad Asi on the occasion of Jum'ah on 8 November 2013 on the sidewalk of Embassy Row in Washington D.C.
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (1) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment