| THE STREET MIMBAR JUM'AH KHUTBAH (26 September 2014) 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 Muslims…
Audio on http://www.islamiccenterdc.com/apps/podcast/podcast/348298 (09-19-2014)
SUNNI-SHI'I : TWO EYES, ONE BODY PART 2
We are going to continue this journey of breaking down the psychological barriers and defeating the propagandistic assaults against we, the Muslims. Obviously, sectarianism right now is the most serious game that they are playing, a dangerous one that is costing us much life and limb. The ayah that we quoted previously, and obviously the Prophet of Allah and the Prophets of Allah (alayhim as salaam) before him encountered.
People responded by saying: We have found that our ancestors and our forefathers were pursuing a social pattern and we are following suit. (Surah Az
This is actually, (if you give it more of your thought), applicable to many of us. We are born in a certain family, we are born in a certain culture, we are born within certain traditions, we are born in a madh'hab, we are even born in "religion" so because of that we automatically walk that path so the ayah, (if you give it more thought), is actually an ayah of self critique, meaning that you can't say just because your great grand fathers and you can't say just because of the inherited ways of doing things that becomes the standard. No! This applies even to you. This type of answer that is this ayah itself cannot apply to those who were thousands of years ago nor those who are current (and) with us right now. It doesn't hold. You are required to think who you are (and) what you do. So if we take it into the sectarian world of today, no one can come and present his credentials because he says "he is a Sunni." So what? What does that mean? Or someone else comes and says "he is a Shi'i." Once again, so what? What does that mean? If your understanding, (i.e.) the person coming with this type of mentality, is that you are right because you were born in a Sunni or Shi'i tradition or culture or society that doesn't hold any water (and) that doesn't mean anything. If that's the way you think about yourself then read this one ayah. So we go back to the beginning of all of this or we go back to where today's people think the beginning of all of this was and we find that the scholars, the Fuqaha', the Imams, the leaders way back then were people of ijtihad. That we think everyone agrees to even though some of those who agree to it still live within their traditional cocoon which is implicit within this ayah. Nevertheless, the agreement across the board is (that) Abu Hanifah, Ash Shafi'i, Al Baqir, As Sadiq, Malik, ibn Hambal, Zayd, Al Awza'i, An Nafs Az Zakiyah and on and on were Mujtahids. There's no disagreement on this. So let us begin from something that everyone agrees upon. But what is an ijtihad? This is something that the average Muslim is not privy to because those who have the information about this circulate it only within their circles and that is everyone of these Mujtahids had the perception my ijtihad, my reasoning, my judgment and my conclusion- all of these are part of ijtihad- is correct but it may tolerate being wrong and the ijtihad of someone else besides me is wrong but it could be right. (Do) you see the room here? Even at the summit (and) at the very top level of scholarship represented by these scholars their outlook (and) their psychology was not like today's sectarians! Today's sectarians- Sunnis and Shi'is doesn't matter- come up to you and say "I'm right and absolutely everyone else is wrong." And it goes to the extent whereby they quote the hadith that 72 factions and sects and divisions of Muslims are all going to Jahannam and this particular person and his types are the correct ones and they're the only ones going to Al Jannah. That's how miserable they have become! That's how detached they are even from the scholars that they attribute themselves to. Once again, the person, the Faqih, the Imam- whoever came out with a reasoning and a judgment was so confident of himself that he said what I am presenting you with as an ijtihad but there's always that possibility that it may be wrong and the ijtihad of that other scholar, whoever that is, is wrong on this particular matter if he disagrees with my ijtihad but it could be right. At this kevel of things this excludes the fanaticism, the bigotry and the bias that you recognize in the sectarians that now are being financed and are being armed all the way to the killing fields. What did one of the individuals, a scholar in his own right, ibn Al Qayyim, (they know exactly who ibn Al Qayyim is), who is quoted by the particular sectarians emanating from the Arabian Peninsula and spreading their hatred and their hostilities all around the Muslim territories and beyond- we have a share of it here simply because there's money involved; when you have money you have mobility- say about fanatics and people who are prejudiced within their own religious traditional, culturalized explanations? We'll quote him, he said "after those first generations of Muslims, (i.e.), the Sahaba and the Tabi'in came followers, (i.e.) people who followed them in time." What did they do? "They rendered fanaticism to their own madh'hab and that fanaticism has become their religion." Exactly what is happening to the followers of this person today! You can see it. Do we have to say the words of these individuals right now who are in the headlines? Their initials- the IS, the ISIS, the ISIL and their counterparts in other areas in Africa and Asia- the people who he is speaking about. This is ibn Al Qayyim speaking- its not me (and) it's not someone who takes issue with these types of individuals or organizations- "they have made this fanaticism their capital by which they transact their commercial deeds." Capital here means their wealth. It's as if he is looking at what is happening today, (i.e.), the monies, the budgets (and) the treasuries that are invested in this fanaticism. Ibn Al Qayyim is speaking. Once again we remind you this is not someone who's outside the fold. It's not an Orientalist, it's not a Sufi, it's not a Shi'i, it's not an Ash'ari- it's not any of this. It's one of them, (so to speak).
Ok- the sources of ijtihad, without getting distracted into much detail, some would say "the Qur'an and Sunnah. Stop here. These are the sources of ijtihad." Then others would add to that the faculty of reasoning, thinking. Then here you go into other details. You have al qiyas, al istihsan, al masalih al mursalah, al istis'hab, etc. Regardless of these other details what all Muslims agree about is the reference of ijtihad is Allah and His Prophet, (in simple words). You are permitted to go look at the Fuqaha' (or) those scholars who gave us the opinions way back then, (a thousand and a few hundred years ago or so), that we refer to right now! Let's say you are convinced that a certain scholar has the best judgment, assessment and conclusion on most of the issues- OK. That is due to you- fine. There's no disagreement here; but you can't come and say "just because of that you can't or you won't consider what other scholars said?!" What do you want to do? (Do) you want to fanaticise what Allah has given you? This is an enrichment process. Besides, if you think a particular scholar belongs to you and you belong to him in exclusion to the others you're becoming selfish! You're turning something that is halal and permissible and fine and good and dandy into something that is becoming possessive, (i.e.), something that you own and then you want to allow people into it and out of it and you consider yourself above others and superior. You begin to open up the doors of prejudice and discrimination. Just like we have the racist problem over here we begin to have the religious problem in here! As was said previously, there's no ayah (and) there's no hadith that imposes a persons ijtihad upon any Muslim- none! We know this is a bold statement but it's the trust! People want to avoid the variety of ijtihadat, the variety of legitimate opinions. It's just like medicine. Think about it like this- this will open your horizons a little- if you have some pain in your body somewhere (and) someone comes up to you somewhere and says "take some Aspirin for your pain. I think Aspirin will work." Someone else comes up to you and says "no, no. I think Tylenol is better or Acetaminophen. I think these are better for the pain you have." These are doctors telling you this. Then someone else, a third one comes up to you and says "forget about the other two. I think Ibuprofen is better for what you have." Then someone else comes to you and says "your pain is so profound that you need something that is way beyond this category. It's called Codeine." Now all of these are used for pain. And just to take this analogy from medicine and place it in the realm of Fuqaha'- this is what Fuqaha' produce and obviously some of this is going to work for some pain and other types are going to work for other types of pain. Then you have to calibrate how much are you going to take. Are you as an individual, let's say in your prime, 35 years old, the athletic type going to take the same dose of the same medication as someone else who's frail and who's ailed in his body is going to take? Then, is it going to be administered or given in the same way? S it going to be given orally, (i.e.), you're going to swallow it, or is it going to be given as a form of injection or is it going to be administered in another way? Because the area of medicine doesn't have the religious stigma to it anyone in his right mind would say "wait a minute here- all of these are valid applications. Whether it is Aspirin, whether it's Tylenol, whether it's Ibuprofen or whether it is Codine or whether it is some other form of medicine." In the world of medicine you know you don't become fanatic about this! But if someone were to come to you and say "when you are performing your wudhu with washing your feet" and some other Mujtahid comes to you and says "you may perform your wudhu by wiping your feet" then all of a sudden Muslims become divided! "You have to do it this way" or "you have to do it that way." Why do you become divided and why does your antenna goes up and you go on alert and you are prejudiced against the other?! Allah is giving both of this to you! Both of these are Qur'anic and we can explain this but its going to take time and we just simply don't have time for that. We said that many of these schools of thought when we put all of these ijtihads together and when we combine them we call of them a school of thought. How many of you are aware of the similarities of the schools of thought? Almost every time someone wants to speak about these they begin to speak about what is different- and there's nothing wrong with that if it doesn't cause division but they speak about what is different precisely to cause divisions and there comes a time where the trouble makers of the world begin to harvest these division by the wars and the invasions and occupations that we have in our body today. It all begins with simple issues but then it builds up and it builds up and the distance increases between and among Muslims and then we have these wars.
Al Azhar university that is considered to be one of the prominent universities in the Islamic world- prominent in the sense that it is a Sunni university; (and) not many people know it but in formulating answers to issues that have to do with divorce in particular Al Azhar has given more weight to the Shi'i answers to the issue of divorce than to the Sunni answers. OK- Iran Egypt
… We have found that our ancestors and our forefathers were pursuing a social pattern and we are following suit. (Surah Az
Now, there are things that all of the Mujtahids have agreed upon. All of the Mujtahids have agreed on the number of rak'aat in the salah. The fajr is two, the dhuhr is four, etc. All of them agreed on that. That is called a hujuh qa'tiah. There can be no ijtihad when all these Mujtahids agreed on this, among many other issues. They all agreed on it. There can't be any thing else that comes and says "all of this is wrong." But whatever they disagreed upon is rahmah wa'si'ah. Whatever they agreed upon is hujuh qa'tiah whatever they may have disagreed upon is rahmah wa'si'ah, (i.e.), its an accommodating blessing; but they way we are engineered to think and feel is that we don't have to look at this as an accommodating blessing, we look at this as reason to pull the trigger. This is how deteriorating we have become.
Then, you know, some people will tell you "the point of division or difference between As Sunnah and Ash Shi'ah." It's a shame that someone would say something like that because like we said previously both of these are like two eyes in a body. Some people just want to look at this with one eye. What are you going to say to a person that just wants to see with one eye? "I'm a Sunni, I'm just going to look with one eye!" Or "I'm a Shi'i, I'm just going to look with one eye!" That's how you're behaving whether you know it or not! Both of these eyes belong to you. See through them. Don't say (there's) a difference. What's the difference between one eye and the next? Is there a real difference between them? But that's what's happening! Next time you listen to these people who speak on these issues and they say "the issue of difference between As Sunnah and Ash Shi'ah" say what is this?!
Another one of these scholars, ibn Taymiyah- who hasn't heard of ibn Taymiyah? This what you may call their, (i.e.) the sectarians who are going around killing left and right, lead scholar because of this takfir mentality that they have. What did ibn Taymiyah say about Imam As Sadiq. These are his words. Anyone listening to this should transmit these words to those fanatics(and) these killers. Ibn Taymiyah is saying about Imam As Sadiq "he had of knowledge and of deen something which Allah made distinct about him vis-a-vis and his father and his grandfather were from the prominent Imams as far as knowledge and as far as deen are concerned." This is ibn Taymiyah speaking about Imam Sadiq. Now we shift a little to the political sphere.
It's been something like an unwritten agreement among all Muslims that something drastically happened, a paradigm shift happened, after Imam Ali (radi Allahu anhu) ruled the Muslims. However you want to word it this is the internal agreement among all Muslims. Something happened- OK. The way that new development was dealt with was with the use of force. Imam Hussayn, Zayd, An Nafs Az Zakiyyah (radi Allahu anhum) dealt with that deviation by the application of force. Others dealt with it in different manners (or) ways, (i.e.) to encourage the use of force. They themselves were not involved on the use of force but they encouraged it or in acts of, (what is called today), civil disobedience or in just speaking truth to power. We know, (and we say this as a brother and a servant), that many times there are people (who are) scholars, learned individuals, academicians, lecturers, etc. who come and speak about a certain part of Islamic history. Brothers and sisters, listen to us- our Islamic history if we take a holistic look at it has basically two components. Obviously we're simplifying a lot of this history but to make a point- it has two components. There is a danger threatening the Muslims coming from the outside and there's a danger threatening the Muslims generated from the inside. An internal threat and an external threat- this is generally the way you should be perceiving our history. Now when you have speakers come to you and they begin speaking about how victorious the Muslims were and they'll quote you the battle of Yarmouk, and they'll quote you the liberation of Al Quds- this is way back 1,300 and 1,400 years ago. How the Muslims reached Al Andalus and how they reached towards the Indian sub-continent. They will go on and on and on and when they are speaking they omit the internal dynamics of the Muslims. They're not speaking about what's happening inside the Muslim body. Notice this whenever next time you tune into these types of speakers who they leave the internal dynamics of the Muslims away from the public eye. Now, on the other hand you will have Muslims (who are) academicians, scholars, lecturers, learned individuals, etc. (we're avoiding a couple of words), come to you and they will speak to you about the internal challenges the Muslims were facing. They will speak about Al Jamal, they will speak about Siffin, they will speak about Karbala
Now, we want to ask you: take today's world and what's happening now. We have the same type of dynamics but on steroids now- internally and externally. The same things are happening. Now you know today's world. Look at what's happening in Syria and Iraq Syria and Iraq
Another way of looking at this to extend your thoughts and to try to work with you on this problem- we had almost 1,400 years ago the tragedy of Karbala Karbala Karbala Baghdad to Tarsus Tarsus is on the Mediterranean , then back through Ar Raqqa. Ar Raqqa today is one of these cities in Syria Baghdad
We know (that) one of the questions that's going to come is where did you get this information from? We're going to tell you where we get this information from. This information is in these books: Tarikh Baghdad by ibn Al Athir, Al Kash'shaaf by Zamakhshari, Aqd Al Farid by ibn Abdir Rabbah, Dhuhr Al Islam by Ahmed Amin, Al Manaqib by Al Makki, Al Kamil by ibn Athir and Al A'lam by Al Zarqali. Now all of you who are just a little familiar with Islamic history know these are mainstream books. If they are mainstream books why is this not common information and common sense?
Abu Hanifah was told by the ruler of the time "you are going to become, (in today's world it's like), the Attorney General." He refused. He didn't want to belong to an administration that he knows has no legitimacy. This is a small back and forth between Abu Ja'far Al Mansur and Abu Hanifah. Abu Ja'far Al Mansur was the ruler of the Abbasi dynasty at the time. He says "many times we've sent you money and you refused to accept it." Then Abu Hanifah replies and says if it was your money I would have accepted it but this is the money of the Muslims and I have no right to take any of it. I am not a Muslim soldier and I am not a Muslim in need. Malik said to the same ruler, Abu Ja'far Al Mansur, the pollution that's in the water here began at its source, meaning you're the source of the polluted politics of this Ummah. What is he? An agent of the state? The state knew it had to look the other way concerning certain scholars so it more or less accommodated these four "Sunni" schools of thought or else if it's going to take issue with all of them it's going to expose itself. It had to be accomodationist towards all of them.
When Idris Al Awwal, one of the great grandsons of Hassan, went to what is today Morocco
Let us try to conclude, (we know we're probably taken a little more time), by a statement of Zayd. He said the Ummah deputized Aba
Dear committed brothers and dear committed sisters…
You are very well aware of the trouble-making, the mischief making, the schemes, the intrigue (and) the conspiracies. Yes, we say this word (and) no one should shy away from it because after all we are dying by the hundreds everyday because of warfare, not because of natural causes; because of imposed wars and battles upon us. They want us to hate the other and they give a broad definition of the other almost to hate everyone except yourself and the few people around you and you go from hating them to killing them. Where did all of this hatred and this killing come from? We've spoken about this before. There are issues of jihad, there are issues of qital but also with that there are issues of principle and issues of discipline that are absent now from the craziness that we see and we read about. Where did all of this come from? It came from that kingdom of evil. We know some people will consider these words inappropriate for a khutbah but they are appropriate for a khutbah because we are poor. Listen- we are poor. We are poverty stricken! We don't mean in the financial sense. We are very rich and wealthy in the financial sense. Allah has blessed our geography in the world with resources so much so that everyone invades us and occupies us because of our resources. So materially speaking we are not poor. We are poverty stricken and we are poor in our minds! We don't generate ideas- that's why we are poor! A recent crunching of some figures came out and it found that that nation state called Saudi Arabia US comes number one but look at the difference in population base between the US and that kingdom of Shaytaan called Saudi Arabia India , East of Arabia, or go North to Central Asia and see how some of us are dying because we have no food. Some of us are dying in the cradle and others are dying a slow death of many years. The worst type of death is when they kill us in our minds. We are no longer able to think for ourselves and this sectarianism is a symptom of our inability to think for ourselves.
This khutbah was presented by Imam Muhammad Asi on the occasion of Jum'ah on 19 September 2014 on the sidewalk of Embassy Row in Washington D.C.
__._,_.___
Posted by: stop evil <stop_evil123@yahoo.co.uk>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic () |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment