| THE STREET MIMBAR JUM'AH KHUTBAH (16 January 2015) 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, brothers and sisters…
Audio on http://www.islamiccenterdc.com/apps/podcast/podcast/351570 (01-02-2015)
SOME THOUGHTS ON SUNNIS AND SHI'AHS
It is from a position of trying to control the damage that is being done that we have been expressing ourselves because of the sectarian misunderstandings, stereotypes, traditions, policies, institutions, individuals, etc. who have taken sides in what really should not be an issue with these types of sides to it. We will, in this effort, continue to be part of the solution as much as we can to contribute to Muslims thinking through their problems instead of becoming victims of these problems and that is in obedience and in compliance of Allah's insistence on our togetherness, our solidarity and our cohesion.
وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ جَمِيعًا وَلَا تَفَرَّقُوا
And hold on, all of you, to Allah's fortified extension to you and be not divided… (Surah Aal Imran verse 103)
In the first instance one of the issues that some sectarians dwell on and they bring this issue up in their own circles and when the circumstances permit they try to go public with it or they do go public with it and that is the issue that "some Muslims have another Qur'an." Of course this is bogus. All Muslims have one Qur'an beginning with Surah Al Fatihah and ending with Surah Al Mu'awwadatayn, (i.e.) Surah Al Falaq and Surah An Naas and all the surahs in-between exactly as they are arranged with their ayaat, with their punctuation marks, etc. All the Muslims share this. There's no room for someone to say to some other Muslim "other Muslims have another Qur'an." This is a lie! Just because we contribute to that lie… How do we contribute to it? How does the average Muslim contribute to this lie? The average Muslim contributes to it because he's unfamiliar with the other Muslims- that's how he contributes to it. He doesn't know the other Muslim. They don't know each other. When people don't know each other any type of fabrication can be thrown out there to the public- just like this. What becomes a little argumentative here- this is what the sectarians on the Sunni side, (and, once again, we don't know how many times we have to repeat this (but) when we use the word Sunni here it's being used as it is traditional defined not as it is accurately defined)- they say "OK- have you read Al Kafi?" This is a book that- once again because of the ignorance (with the result that) Muslims don't know each other- some Muslims who are on the Sunni side say "these Shi'is have a book called Al Kafi and that is the equivalent to, in the Sunni realm Sahihayn Al Bukhari and Muslim." That's not accurate; that's not the truth of the matter. So these people who create and then spread this type of misinformation (are) obviously working on the ignorance of the Muslims. This is our ignorance that they are working on. If we knew each other no one can come and say "some Muslims have another Qur'an." But here they are! They dig up somewhere some publication somewhere along the line that says "in the Kafi, itself, the original Qur'an had 17,000 ayaat in it." Now we don't dismiss that some publication of this book had a statement like that in it but who said that and who believes that?! Allah did not say that, the Prophet did not say that, no Imam said that. Some person who put together some hadiths said something like that or it is reported in one of the additions that he said something like that. So what? Many people say a lot of things! You are going to judge what one person of a certain persuasion said and then generalise that and say "all of the people belonging to that certain persuasion believe in that statement"?! That's not the case. The problem here, (if we're going to learn from our history and our mistakes), is we contribute to an issue like this. If Muslims who are Sunnis just go to where Shi'is are and listen to them and see if they can hear anyone saying "there is another Qur'an or that some ayaat have been taken away from the Qur'an." We can turn this the other way around- if someone wants to counter this he can go to some of the sahih hadiths in the Sunni literature. In the sihah of the Sunnis there is a hadith that says there were certain ayaat in the Qur'an that no longer exist. Does any Sunni believe that? Absolutely not! What are you going to take? A "sahih hadith" like that?! Another hadith says Surah Al Ahzaab used to be such and such times more than it is right now meaning a great proportion of Surah Al Ahzaab disappeared. Any Sunni believes that? No. If Shi'is were visiting Sunnis in their Islamic Centres and wherever they speak they would realise no Sunni believes this. No Muslim believes in something like the Qur'an has extra things in it or it has minus things in it. The Qur'an is complete.
إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ
Certainly We have brought into the consciousness of men this awareness, which is in reference to the Qur'an, and indeed, Allah says, We meaning divinity is preserving it. (Surah Al Hijr verse 9)
Every Muslim believes in this ayah. So how come someone comes along and tries to fabricate a lie that says "other Muslims believe in this lie." It is about time we put something like that behind our backs. Then, when we clear the issue on the Qur'an, (i.e.) all Muslims agree to this Qur'an; now there may be an issue of the Muslims themselves falling short of understanding the Qur'an- that's another issue; that's an issue to do with Muslims, it has nothing to do with the Qur'an itself. An ayah in the Qur'an says
وَقَالَ الرَّسُولُ يَا رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِي اتَّخَذُوا هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنَ مَهْجُورًا
And the Messenger said "Oh my Sustainer, my people have abandoned this Qur'an. (Surah Al Furqan verse 30)
OK- that has to do with the human factor here. It has nothing to do with the impeccable feature of the Qur'an and these two issues should not be confused.
Then we come to the issue of ahadith. This is a very long and extended issue that has to do with the sanad of the hadith, (i.e.), you know the number of individuals who narrated these hadiths, how reliable are they, how trustworthy are they, their moral character, their social character, their communicative character, etc. Then it has to do with al matn, the content of the hadith itself. So there were those who said "they heard the hadith" and then the hadith itself. What type of meaning is it presenting? Around these two issues there have been much give and take throughout all of these years among all Muslims but the final judgement on the hadith is how well does it stand in the context of the Qur'an- that's how, in the final analysis, we verify whether a hadith is to be accepted or a hadith is not to be accepted. All Muslims agree that there are fabricated ahadith. Now you tell us, if there are fabricated hadiths which all Muslims agree to then are there not fabricated statements attributed to the Sahabis (radi Allahu anhum)? Are there not fabricated statements attributed to the Imams (radi Allahu anhum)? If the Prophet, himself, has fabricated statements (i.e.) things he never said but they are there in all Islamic literature- the Prophet said quote, quote, quote, quote… and when we put that quote in the climate of the Qur'an it doesn't stand! There's no authenticity to it! So how come all of us Muslims agree that yes there's been many ahadith that were attributed to the Prophet but the Prophet never said them but when it comes to a Sunni, (as an example), (and you) say a certain Sahabi has been reported to have said this that and the other but does not fit into the Qur'an so you should not accept it he has difficulty with that same thing?! When you come to a Shi'i (and) you say a certain hadith has been attributed to an Imam and this doesn't fit in the context of the Qur'an- he won't accept that. We are trying to tell everyone that the Prophet himself had false hadiths attributed to him so there are false hadiths attributed to everyone else and still because we choose to be ignorant of ourselves- a Sunni is ignorant or a Shi'i and a Shi'i is ignorant of a Sunni- this ignorance feeds the troublemakers. This is the heyday of the trouble makers!
Then we have the issue of As Sahaba. If you read the books that praise that word As Sahaba- we're talking about the word As Sahaba. There are many books out there, of course, in the Sunni context that speak night and day about the virtues of the Sahaba which is fine- there's no problem here; but when you come to try to understand who these Sahaba are, (i.e.), "can you just define for us who you mean by these Sahaba"? Here's where we begin to have difficulties because in the majority of all of this literature they count tens of thousands of Sahabis. Impossible! How do you define who a Sahabi is in the tens of thousands? Yes. In some of these books, at least, you'll find several thousand but these several thousand that are (not) defined in these books… The Qur'an speaks about the first Islamic society on earth in Al Madinah and in Al Hejaz- that first Islamic society had Munafiqun in it. Who are the Munafiqun? Just like you have scores of thousands of Sahabis you have just a few Munafiqin that you can count with the fingers of your two hands- that's all?! With all the ayaat about the Munafiqin you only have a few of them?! Something is imbalanced here. Something is wrong. But we are not healthy enough to self criticise. This is part of our problem. Listen to this very closely brothers and sisters- part of our problem is we don't have the capacity to critique ourselves and what we mean by critiquing ourselves we don't mean a Sunni critiquing a Shi'i or vice versa- that's very difficult. It gets very difficult because of the traditionalism of a thousand or more years that have built up like a separation wall no Sunni is going to listen to a critical Shi'i speaking and no Shi'i is going to listen to a critical Sunni speaking. It's very difficult to happen but what will happen and it becomes much more difficult to deal with is if a Sunni self critiques his own history, his own background, his own traditions and a Shi'i does the same thing. This is where we are lacking. No one wants to do something like that. Why? If you are confident of Allah's word and guidance what's wrong with you? Why can't we begin this process and cleanse these impurities that have built up in our own respective contexts? Why can't we do that? This is what we need and we don't need just some average person who thinks he has the capacity to do that. We need scholars who have spent much time and effort in this area to do it and to do it with utter sincerity (and) utter selflessness. When they stand up and they say "this is our mistake" then those who are listening who identify with this particular person can accept something like that, whether he is a Sunni or whether he is a Shi'i.
Another issue that not many people pay much attention to is that some Muslims resist calling other Muslims Mu'mins. They are careful not to use the word Mu'min when it comes to another Muslim who doesn't agree with their particular version of things. This is dangerous. This is extremely self defeating. We have to be able to do something like that. We have to be able to say that anyone who meets the quality and condition of iman is a bona fide Mu'min and not come and almost cryptically communicate that "I will deny the other Muslim that description of iman." This does not work for Islamic solidarity and Islamic togetherness.
Another issue for us is you come across the word many times Jamharatu Ulema' Al Muslimin- this is particular in Sunni Islamic literature- which means the consensual opinion of Islamic scholars. We ask you- this word, may be in the past had some type of understanding but take today's world- when you Jamharatu Ulema' Al Muslimin, the consensus of the opinion of Islamic scholars- where? How are you and I going to ascertain that there is a consensus among Islamic scholars here in this time? Where? Who? Everyone is divided. Everyone lives in their national shell. Who has brought the Ulema' together, asked them these pertinent questions and then received from them the type of consensual answer? Where? Who has asked the Ulema' brave questions about wealth and poverty in this world so that we come up with Ra'i Jamharatu Ulema' Al Muslimin? Who? Has anyone heard of something like this? Can anyone tell us what the opinion of the scholars who come from the Far East of the Muslim geography to the Far West of the Muslim geography, from the furthest North to the furthest South is- all of these Ulema'? There's not one forum in the world today that brings them together so that we know how they think about a particular practical issue- not one! So how can anyone use a word like Jamharatu Ulema' Al Muslimin when they make it impossible for them to meet yet they still use these types of words and these types of words are accepted by many people. When you do have a cluster of Ulema', they cluster around a particular treasury (and) a particular nation-state! They haven't broken out of their intellectual tribalism so how do they use this type of word- Wa Qala Jamharatu Ulema' Al Muslimin, (i.e.) the overwhelming majority of Ulema' said such and such? Where are the overwhelming majority of Ulema' who said such and such? We don't even know how many Ulema' there are in this world! Has anyone taken a count of the qualifies Ulema' who qualify for ijtihad in this world? So if we can't even count them, how can we claim that they have some type of unified opinion about a certain matter? Take the issue in today's world of Aal Saud- poor us, the committed Muslims! How come everyone repeats this false designation, Aal Saud? Just give it a little thought- instead of saying Aal Saud why can't you say Bani Saud? Just like we have Bani Isra'eel (and) we had Bani Umayah we have Bani Saud. They all go perfectly. They fit together in a perfect way. Why is it very acceptable (that) if you go to Saudi Arabia and you say Aal Saud that no one is going to look at you awkwardly? "What are you saying? Aal Saud? Shush! You can't say Aal Saud. No. It's normal. You can say something like that but on the other hand if someone wants to say a speech about Aal Muhammad then this is a threat. Something's wrong here. The person is suspect. He's up to something. He's speaking about Aal Muhammad." It's haraam to speak about Aal Muhammad but it's halal to speak about Aal Saud! This is the world we are living in. They've gotten away with this description to such a degree that not many of us have turned on our minds to think about what we say. We don't even give thought to what we say. This terminology has even broken language barriers. It went beyond Arabic speakers and now the word Aal Saud is used in English and probably in many other languages without any negative connotation whatsoever. Now compare the way they are running their country today with the way- we don't know if Aal Muhammad were given a chance to run Arabia had the Umawis not come and stolen legitimacy and authority (how it would be)- but if Aal Muhammad were to rule who could say that the rule we have today in Arabia compares to the rule we would have had in Arabia 1,300 years ago or so. But it's our lazy mindedness (and) it's our ignorance that feeds the sectarianism that they are working on.
Dear committed brothers and sisters…
Just to draw your attention to one little matter and one little issue that will tell me and you how Allah's words are begging us to understand their meanings. We think every post elementary Muslim is familiar with the word Alladhina Aamanu wa Amilu As Salihat. That's a phrase that's used so many times in the Qur'an. The word amilu is used to mean that an amal is inclusive of what you say and what you do. The word amal and its derivatives, whether they are nouns or verbs, means what you say and what you do. So the word amal doesn't tolerate a split between what is said and what is done. On the other hand there's another word in the Qur'an, (that we think most of you are familiar with), yaf'alun or taf'alun or if'alu. Of course, in English when translators come to translate these words they give them the same meaning which is "to do" not distinguishing the fact that al fa'l is something independent of what is being said not like al amal. Al amal is something which is inclusive of what is said and what is being done. Let's take a short surah which most of you have memorized. In Surah Al Asr
إِلَّا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ وَتَوَاصَوْا بِالْحَقِّ وَتَوَاصَوْا بِالصَّبْرِ
We are advised to mutually and in an institutional way remind ourselves of truth and of perseverance with it (Surah Al Asr verse 3)
So the word amilu as salihaat is inclusive not only of doing what is right but also of saying what is right conterminously. They go with each with other; that is why after that their collective or synergistic counsel of al haqq and perseverance comes to underline the meaning of amilu as salihaat. On the other hand for the people who have separated church from state, (we use this as the expression is used in the English language (and) it is applicable to Christian, Jew, Muslim and whoever is secular out there), there is an ayah in Surah As Saff in which Allah says
لِمَ تَقُولُونَ مَا لَا تَفْعَلُونَ
… why do you say that which you do not do? (Surah As Saff verse 2)
So al fa'l here has broken away from what was said. There's a separation of speech from action. This may seem as a subtlety, (and we hope some of you have understood what was said), but if you go and begin to re-read the same ayaat that you read previously making a distinction between ya'malun and yaf'alun in the Qur'an you will see at the most basic of levels- forget about separation of religion from politics and Mosque from parliament and church from state and the level of sociology and politics and decisions even at the level of a person's feelings and a person's motions- there has to be an integration of what is said and what is done- a subtle issue that has been buried by centuries of ignorance, the centuries of ignorance right now that we are trying our best to dispel from this position every week so that these who are ruling in our lands who are creating these innocent lives that are being killed in the tens of thousands- just a recent number that was (a) statistic used in the news just in the past 24 hours (said) in the last three or four months $1billion was used in a thousand and four hundred sautés in certain areas, this means attacker planes, fighters and bombers attacking certain positions in Iraq and in Syria. Today the speaker in the Haram in Makkah gave a long and winded khutbah against the extremists. It is interesting (that) in this khutbah that khatib didn't mention that these extremists that he is talking about- he said "they have misled the Muslims (and) they have caused unspeakable damage", (we're paraphrasing his words), "they have served the purposes of all the enemies of the Muslims" which we don't think he's exaggerating a bit but he doesn't trace this issue to its origins. These same people that he's speaking about are the ones who right now are introducing an educational curriculum in the territories that they control that promotes the ideas of the Masha'ikh and the Shuyukh and the Ulema' of the current Imam in the Haram who's speaking against them. You speak about contradictions and conflicts? You speak about schizophrenia and you speak about a type of self-centredness? He didn't have the courage to pursue this problem to its origins. Its origins are there where he's speaking from, (i.e.) the land that is occupied by his masters and he doesn't have the courage to speak truth to power and in the meantime- they don't say this, they plan this- may the Muslim's ignorance increase and may the Muslim's wars consume more lives (and) may the Muslim's divisions multiply. That's what they are interested in. Who's interested in the togetherness of the Muslims? Who's interested in defeating the common enemy of the Muslims at its roots which is the ignorance of Muslims pertaining to their own selves- their contemporary self, their historical self (and) their denominational self? At all levels there's a permeating ignorance and should that ignorance be fought in the Masajid?! Perish the thought! The Masjid should be a place that promotes ignorance- that's their official policy. If someone wants to speak a little (or) a small proportion of words that enlighten the public by the Qur'an and by the Sunnah then that person is suspect. It's about time this charade came to an end. The least we can do is to begin to think for ourselves against those who have been studying us for generations and centuries, (i.e.), "what is going to tick that Muslim off? What is going to make that Muslim upset? What is going to cause one Muslim to hate another Muslim?" (If) you go to a university of church and you give a presentation about Islam and one of the first questions if not the first question they'll ask you is "what is the difference between a Muslim Shi'i and a Muslim Sunni?" This is not a Muslim who's asking but he's listening to a lecture about Islam. What is this? They know (in) our Muslim rulers who's Sunni and who's Shi'i. We ask you, do you know the persuasion of a Yahudi ruler (or) of a Nasrani ruler? What church they go to? Are they liberal or are they orthodox? What denomination (or) what sect are they from? Do you know? How come they know everything about us and we barely know anything about them? How come the information about us is splashed all over the place and the information about them is kept silent? Poor us- we never ask! Pity our own selves- this is once again attributable to our inability to think. That's what is required. That's what we have to do.
This khutbah was presented by Imam Muhammad Asi on the occasion of Jum'ah on 2 January 2015 on the sidewalk of Embassy Row 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.
__._,_.___
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 (1) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment