40:45
|
45:04
|
1:16
|
7:37
|
Session 1: Wilayat-e-Faqih | Introduction | Farsi sub English
This episode:
- Introduction
- A modern approach
- The meaning of Wilayat-e-Faqih
- Success of this political system
Hujjatul Islam Qasemi is a Howza teacher in Qom, Iran.
This episode:
- Introduction
- A modern approach
- The meaning of Wilayat-e-Faqih
- Success of this political system
Hujjatul Islam Qasemi is a Howza teacher in Qom, Iran.
1:33
|
Have Softer Approach Against America? | Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi | Farsi Sub English
You must have heard this argument somewhere that if you deal with America in a comparatively softer manner, you wouldn\\\'t have to face America\\\'s aggression and oppression. What is the response...
You must have heard this argument somewhere that if you deal with America in a comparatively softer manner, you wouldn\\\'t have to face America\\\'s aggression and oppression. What is the response of Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi to such proposals? What kind of enmity exists between us and the United States of America?
#DeathToAmerica
More...
Description:
You must have heard this argument somewhere that if you deal with America in a comparatively softer manner, you wouldn\\\'t have to face America\\\'s aggression and oppression. What is the response of Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi to such proposals? What kind of enmity exists between us and the United States of America?
#DeathToAmerica
Video Tags:
purestream,
media,
production,
Softer,
Approach,
America,
Ayatollah,
Misbah,
argument,
deal,
aggression,
face,
oppression,
response,
proposals,
enmity,
United,
States,
2:45
|
[134] Hadith Explanation by Imam Khamenei | The Highest Wisdom | Farsi Sub English
Ayatollah Khamenei explains a beautiful hadith of Prophet Muhammad (S) where he explains the highest wisdom. Many a times we, humans, get so focused on acquiring \'more of everything\' that...
Ayatollah Khamenei explains a beautiful hadith of Prophet Muhammad (S) where he explains the highest wisdom. Many a times we, humans, get so focused on acquiring \'more of everything\' that we become blind-sighted and distracted from the real goal and destination of our lives. What should be the approach of a true wise person?
More...
Description:
Ayatollah Khamenei explains a beautiful hadith of Prophet Muhammad (S) where he explains the highest wisdom. Many a times we, humans, get so focused on acquiring \'more of everything\' that we become blind-sighted and distracted from the real goal and destination of our lives. What should be the approach of a true wise person?
Video Tags:
qom
tv,
production,
imam,
khamenei,
hadith,
explanation,
Highest,
Wisdom,
Prophet
Muhammad,
humans,
focused,
acquiring,
Blind
Sighted,
distracted,
Real
Goal,
destination,
lives,
approach,
true,
Wise
Person,
30:38
|
[Friday Sermon] The 3 Alifs to Live By | How to Approach Our Desires - Maulana Syed Muhammad Rizvi | English
- Importance of reminding ourselves of the mission of Imam Hussain (a.s).
- In a will to his brother, Muhammad Hanafia, Imam Hussain (a.s) explains the purpose of his actions in 4...
- Importance of reminding ourselves of the mission of Imam Hussain (a.s).
- In a will to his brother, Muhammad Hanafia, Imam Hussain (a.s) explains the purpose of his actions in 4 points:
-- He negates wrong motives towards himself knowing that people would try to portray him as having ulterior motives.
-- He then expresses what his purpose is, to seek reformation in the community of his grandfather.
-- He explains the method of the Islamic law that he is using: bidding people to do good and forbidding them from evil.
-- And lastly he confirms that what he is doing is continuing the path of his grand father and his father.
- Reform should be an ongoing process at an individual and collective level.
- Examples of reformation on a personal level: focusing on improving our prayers, reflections of our fasts, giving charity, reflection on our means of livelihood etc..
- Examples of reformation on a social level by taking lessons from Karbala: brotherhood and unity of fellow Muslims in spite of the diversity in race, colour, language and ethnic background, outlook towards Muslim community on a global level, outlook towards non-Muslim etc..
- Importance of responding to Imam Hussain’s(a.s) call by submitting our heart, ears, mind, eyes, opinions and desires to him.
- When our heart is longing for something that is not permissible then make the choice that Imam Hussain(a.s)would make.
- We are surrounded by different circles around us.
- Inner circle are the Shias of the Ahlulbayt.
- Bigger circle around it, is the Muslim community.
- Outer bigger circle is the humanity at large.
- 3 Alif to keep in mind when interacting which each circle of groups:
-- Ithaar which means to sacrifice. For the inner circle the expectation is to have willingness to sacrifice for one another.
-- Infaaq which means to be charitable. This needs to be applied towards the Muslim community at large.
-- Insaaf which means to be just. The minimum requirement towards the humanity at large is to be just towards them. That doesn’t mean you don’t need to be charitable towards them either.
- Ilm-ul Ghayb (knowledge of the unseen) is only given to the chosen ones by the grace of Allah.(s.w.t).
- Narration of the story of the thirst of Hur and his army to show that Imam Hussain(a.s) had ilm-e ghayb.
- Imam Hussain(a.s) did not ask Hur if he had come as a supporter or an enemy. He saw they were thirsty and he quenched their thirst. That’s called humanity. Yet he was denied water in Karbala.
- He used his ilm-e ghayb in order to guide others but he would never use it for his own benefit. That was his test and trial. He knew water would be stopped yet he did not fill extra water for his own self.
- He personally used less water then others. On the day of Ashura, the most thirsty person was Imam Hussain (a.s).
- We need to reflect and see how we treat one another.
- Importance for volunteers to realize that those who come for the commemoration are the guests of Imam Hussain(a.s) and the volunteer is the host on behalf of Imam Hussain(a.s). So they should treat the guests well.
- It’s the kindness that Imam Hussain (a.s) showed towards them, that eventually brought back Hur to Imam’s camp and he then attained martyrdom.
MP3:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/JCC/Fridays/FridayKhutba_Rizvi_2016-09-30_13-51-04.mp3
Friday Juma Khutba
Recited By: Maulana Syed Muhammad Rizvi
Date: September 30th, 2016
www.facebook.com/IslamiCentre.org
www.twitter.com/sayyidmrizvi
www.islamicentre.org
More...
Description:
- Importance of reminding ourselves of the mission of Imam Hussain (a.s).
- In a will to his brother, Muhammad Hanafia, Imam Hussain (a.s) explains the purpose of his actions in 4 points:
-- He negates wrong motives towards himself knowing that people would try to portray him as having ulterior motives.
-- He then expresses what his purpose is, to seek reformation in the community of his grandfather.
-- He explains the method of the Islamic law that he is using: bidding people to do good and forbidding them from evil.
-- And lastly he confirms that what he is doing is continuing the path of his grand father and his father.
- Reform should be an ongoing process at an individual and collective level.
- Examples of reformation on a personal level: focusing on improving our prayers, reflections of our fasts, giving charity, reflection on our means of livelihood etc..
- Examples of reformation on a social level by taking lessons from Karbala: brotherhood and unity of fellow Muslims in spite of the diversity in race, colour, language and ethnic background, outlook towards Muslim community on a global level, outlook towards non-Muslim etc..
- Importance of responding to Imam Hussain’s(a.s) call by submitting our heart, ears, mind, eyes, opinions and desires to him.
- When our heart is longing for something that is not permissible then make the choice that Imam Hussain(a.s)would make.
- We are surrounded by different circles around us.
- Inner circle are the Shias of the Ahlulbayt.
- Bigger circle around it, is the Muslim community.
- Outer bigger circle is the humanity at large.
- 3 Alif to keep in mind when interacting which each circle of groups:
-- Ithaar which means to sacrifice. For the inner circle the expectation is to have willingness to sacrifice for one another.
-- Infaaq which means to be charitable. This needs to be applied towards the Muslim community at large.
-- Insaaf which means to be just. The minimum requirement towards the humanity at large is to be just towards them. That doesn’t mean you don’t need to be charitable towards them either.
- Ilm-ul Ghayb (knowledge of the unseen) is only given to the chosen ones by the grace of Allah.(s.w.t).
- Narration of the story of the thirst of Hur and his army to show that Imam Hussain(a.s) had ilm-e ghayb.
- Imam Hussain(a.s) did not ask Hur if he had come as a supporter or an enemy. He saw they were thirsty and he quenched their thirst. That’s called humanity. Yet he was denied water in Karbala.
- He used his ilm-e ghayb in order to guide others but he would never use it for his own benefit. That was his test and trial. He knew water would be stopped yet he did not fill extra water for his own self.
- He personally used less water then others. On the day of Ashura, the most thirsty person was Imam Hussain (a.s).
- We need to reflect and see how we treat one another.
- Importance for volunteers to realize that those who come for the commemoration are the guests of Imam Hussain(a.s) and the volunteer is the host on behalf of Imam Hussain(a.s). So they should treat the guests well.
- It’s the kindness that Imam Hussain (a.s) showed towards them, that eventually brought back Hur to Imam’s camp and he then attained martyrdom.
MP3:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/JCC/Fridays/FridayKhutba_Rizvi_2016-09-30_13-51-04.mp3
Friday Juma Khutba
Recited By: Maulana Syed Muhammad Rizvi
Date: September 30th, 2016
www.facebook.com/IslamiCentre.org
www.twitter.com/sayyidmrizvi
www.islamicentre.org
1:15
|
I’m Hungry and Thirsty | One Minute Wisdom | English
As we approach the end of the month of Ramadhan, Sayyid Shahryar Naqvi reminds us of some vital points. It only takes a moment!
#OneMinuteWisdom #Islam #Quran #Ahlulbayt #Ramadhan #Ramadan
As we approach the end of the month of Ramadhan, Sayyid Shahryar Naqvi reminds us of some vital points. It only takes a moment!
#OneMinuteWisdom #Islam #Quran #Ahlulbayt #Ramadhan #Ramadan
Video Tags:
islamicpulse,
production,
One
Minute
Wisdom,
Hungry,
Thirsty,
approach,
month
of
Ramadhan,
Ramadhan,
ramazan,
ramadan,
Sayyid
Shahryar
Naqvi,
reminds,
vital
points,
takes
a
moment,
Islam,
Quran,
Ahlulbayt,
Dua Tawassul - My Favorite Recitation - ARABIC with ENGLISH subtitles-By Aba Thar Al-Hawaigi
Dua Tawassul is a supplication recited by the Followers of the Family of the Prophet of Islam -Ahlulbayt- in which they ask Allah-the Exalted-for the intercession of those pure people whom He has...
Dua Tawassul is a supplication recited by the Followers of the Family of the Prophet of Islam -Ahlulbayt- in which they ask Allah-the Exalted-for the intercession of those pure people whom He has spoken of in the Quran - when Allah says -None shall have the power of intercession but such a one as has received permission -or promise- from -Allah- Most Gracious - 19.87 - Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth 2.255 - no intercession avail except for those for whom permission has been granted by -God- 20.109 - And those whom they call upon besides Him have no authority for intercession. BUT he who bears witness of the truth and they know -him- 43.86 - And how many an angel is there in the heavens whose intercession does not avail at all except after Allah has given permission to whom He pleases and chooses - 53.26 Question - Does Allah -swt- allow us to use others as a Wasila -means of approach- to him. Yes - Allah -swt- tells us in the Quran that the sole reason for creating Man and Jinn is so that they worship Him. We are here to worship Allah who also says in the Quran -Fear Allah and find a wasila to him 5.35. The definition of wasila is -a means of approach- so worship is not direct - it is attained via a means of approach - a guide. Remember Allah -swt- is not telling you to create a wasila - he is telling you to find it. So it exists - it is down to you to find it. For mankind that wasila can only be through a fellow human being - we have no contact with jinns and therefore they cannot act as a wasila. Angels likewise cannot act as a wasila to Allah -swt- as they have no contact with us until the time of death. The wasila will have to be a human being- because the earth is inhabited by humans and as Allah says when explaining the appointment of Prophets -If there were angels on the earth I would send them an angel as a Prophet from heaven -Surat al Isra verse 95 Question - Is this Dua authentic - Shaykh Tusi says - in his book Misbah - that Imam Hassan bin Ali Al Askari a.s. wrote this duaa for Abu Muhammad who requested him to teach him the proper way of reciting salawat. Allama Majlisi has mentioned this duaa on the authority of Ibn babawayh who confidently says that there is no difficulty or problem that this duaa does not solve. The merciful Allah is beseeched in the name of and for the sake of the Holy prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt. It is known as the Dua which fulfills all legitimate desires in a short amount of time. By Aba Thar Al-Hawaigi
More...
Description:
Dua Tawassul is a supplication recited by the Followers of the Family of the Prophet of Islam -Ahlulbayt- in which they ask Allah-the Exalted-for the intercession of those pure people whom He has spoken of in the Quran - when Allah says -None shall have the power of intercession but such a one as has received permission -or promise- from -Allah- Most Gracious - 19.87 - Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth 2.255 - no intercession avail except for those for whom permission has been granted by -God- 20.109 - And those whom they call upon besides Him have no authority for intercession. BUT he who bears witness of the truth and they know -him- 43.86 - And how many an angel is there in the heavens whose intercession does not avail at all except after Allah has given permission to whom He pleases and chooses - 53.26 Question - Does Allah -swt- allow us to use others as a Wasila -means of approach- to him. Yes - Allah -swt- tells us in the Quran that the sole reason for creating Man and Jinn is so that they worship Him. We are here to worship Allah who also says in the Quran -Fear Allah and find a wasila to him 5.35. The definition of wasila is -a means of approach- so worship is not direct - it is attained via a means of approach - a guide. Remember Allah -swt- is not telling you to create a wasila - he is telling you to find it. So it exists - it is down to you to find it. For mankind that wasila can only be through a fellow human being - we have no contact with jinns and therefore they cannot act as a wasila. Angels likewise cannot act as a wasila to Allah -swt- as they have no contact with us until the time of death. The wasila will have to be a human being- because the earth is inhabited by humans and as Allah says when explaining the appointment of Prophets -If there were angels on the earth I would send them an angel as a Prophet from heaven -Surat al Isra verse 95 Question - Is this Dua authentic - Shaykh Tusi says - in his book Misbah - that Imam Hassan bin Ali Al Askari a.s. wrote this duaa for Abu Muhammad who requested him to teach him the proper way of reciting salawat. Allama Majlisi has mentioned this duaa on the authority of Ibn babawayh who confidently says that there is no difficulty or problem that this duaa does not solve. The merciful Allah is beseeched in the name of and for the sake of the Holy prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt. It is known as the Dua which fulfills all legitimate desires in a short amount of time. By Aba Thar Al-Hawaigi
Dua Nudba Urdu Translation
Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And blessings of Allah and peace be on our Chief Muhammad, His Prophet, and on his children. O my Allah! (All) praise is for Thee for that which Thou...
Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And blessings of Allah and peace be on our Chief Muhammad, His Prophet, and on his children. O my Allah! (All) praise is for Thee for that which Thou decided upon and resolved in the matter of Thy friends, whom Thou purified for Thyself and Thy religion. When wisdom and high rank from Thee, prostrated themselves in adoration before them (from the Bountiful Preserving Lord), for whom neither there was any decreased, nor dispersion thereafter, then Thou stipulated for them piety and righteousness. While they were in this mean and crooked world, free from its pomp, vanity and false enjoyments, Thy overreaching authority made known their identity; and equipped them with sincerity and perfection stood surety for them and communicated intimately with them, sent the news of their auspicious arrival in advance, and praised them in clear terms for the benefit of one and all.
Fell down on the ground in prostration Thy Angels before them, Thou chose them to reveal Thy Words, gave them Thy wisdom as a gift, set them up as the (only) medium to reach Thee, the only means to the eternal land of peace and happiness. One dwelled in Paradise until Thou sent him on (as the first Prophet).
One was made to cruise the "Ark", and had been rescued, and kept safe from destruction through Thy mercy.
One was chosen and prepared for Thy Mission, as (Thy) Friend, (who) made a request to Thee for a good report in (his) later generations, so Thou approved and complied with, exalted them and gave them authority.
One was spoken directly through the Tree, his brother was appointed his successor and helper. One was brought in without a father, was given clear proofs, and was supported with the Holy Spirit.
For each Thou prescribed a Divine law, and set up a traced out path, each was appointed a guardian-executor, (and each) fulfilled the duty after being kept safe and protected, in the term of establishing Thy religion, a witness and argument over Thy servants (mankind), Lest the truth staggered from its firm stand and foundation, and the falsehood conquered the hearts of the people, and might not say a single man: "If only Thou had sent a Messenger unto us as a Warner, to show us the path of wisdom and guidance, so that we might have followed Thy revelations before we were (thus) humbled and disgraced!" Then Thou made plans to bring out the wonderful advent of Muhammad, (Send blessing on him and on his children).
So Thou just as chose him master of Whosoever Thou created, made him (whom Thou Selected), pure, clean and the best, exalted and praised him (whom Thou elected), surpassed in generosity and liberality while bestowing high-mindedness and beneficence upon him (whom Thou took in confidence and relied upon); made him leader-in-chief of (all) thy Prophets, and sent him to the troubled world of men and jinn, among Thy servants, lowered and humbled before him the Easts and the Wests, under his total control was brought all affairs, exalted his soul in Thy heavens gave over to him the knowledge of what took place and what will happen, concerning facts and operation of creation.
Then invested him with awe and majesty, Jibraeel, Meekaaeel, and distinguished Angels stood around; him at his beck and call, gave Thy word to him that Thou would make his religion prevail over all religions, however much the idolaters may be averse.
Thereafter acknowledged his atonement and provided good and perfection for his children, allotted for him and his children the first sanctuary appointed for mankind, at Becca (Mecca), a blessed place, a guidance to the people, wherein are plain and clear signs; the place where Ibraahim stood up to pray, and whosoever enters it is safe.
Thou said: "Allah’s wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O "People of the House", and purify you with a thorough purification." Thereupon Thou settled conclusively fee (recompense) of Muhammad (Thy blessings be on him and on his children) love for them, in Thy Holy Book.
So Thou said: "Say (O Muhammad): I ask of you no fee (recompense) therefore, save love of (my) Kinsfolk." And Thou said: "Whatever recompense (return) I have asked for you, (it) is only for yourselves." And Thou said: "I ask of you no reward for this, save that, whoso will, chooses a way unto his Lord." Therefore they are the (only) means to (approach) Thee, the (only) medium to get Thy favours.
So Thou certainly did not let his hard work go waste, and gave authority to his successor, Ali ibne Abi Taalib, (Thy blessings be on them both, and on this children), a guide. At the time when he was made a warner and a guide for every people, said he (the Holy Prophet), their Guide, in a public meeting overflowing with people; "Of Whomsoever I am the Mawlaa (Lord, Master) Ali is his Mawlaa. O Allah! be a friend of him who is a friend of him, be an enemy of him who is an enemy of him, help that man who helps him, forsake that man who forsakes him" and said: "Of whosoever I am the Prophet Ali is his Chief."
And said: "I and Ali are (one basic root of) a tree, and the rest of mankind are like diverse plants, he proclaims the position (relationship) of Haaroon to Moosaa." Therefore he told him: "I am to you as Moosaa was to Haaroon, but certainly there is no Prophet after me."
His (Ali’s) life partner was his (Muhammad’s) daughter the chief of the women of the worlds. Lawful was for him (Ali), in "the mosque", that which was permitted to him (Muhammad), all doors were closed, except his door.
He (Muhammad) gave his knowledge and wisdom into his (Ali’s) keeping. He said: "I am the city (center) of knowledge and Ali is its gate.
Whoso desires to approach and dwell in the city of knowledge and wisdom should come through its door." Thereafter he said: "You are my brother, successor and inheritor, your flesh is my flesh, your blood is my blood, your truce is my truce, your fight is my fight, faith is blended, mixed and mingled (part and parcel) in your flesh and blood, just as it is compounded in my flesh and blood, you shall take charge of the reservoir of my inheritance, you are the fulfilment of my religion, you shall execute and keep alive my "way of life", your friends and followers shall speak with authority, command respect and hold the torch of good manners and refinements, their faces will be all around me in the eternal land of peace and bliss (Paradise), in my close company.
Were it not you O Ali, the faithfuls would not know the truth after me." After him (Muhammad) be (Ali) was the guide for the wanderers, a bright light in the blind darkness, the strong rope of Allah, and the right path, did not ever hold back kindness and compassion from the common people, nor ever made excuses or delay to give priority to the matters of religion, nor blew his own trumpet nor felt proud of his glory, did the same thing the Messenger used to do, (Blessing of Allah be on them both and on their children) put an end to misinterpretation, did not lose temper, for the sake of Allah, if any one turned to mud-slinging and name-calling.
He had thrown the proud tribal chiefs of Arabia into a fright, destroyed their heroes, attacked and dispersed their cavalries, because of which hatred and deep grudge took root in their hearts. Badr, Khaybar, and Hunain created jealousy and envy in them, therefore, united they joined hands to oppose him, and came out in great number to fight against him, till he destroyed all deserters, who had swerved from what was right, the shameless who deviated from true religion, while he was carrying out the important mission.
Killed him a malicious criminal, a contemporary, serving the interest and following the doctrine of earlier impudent villians. An unparalleled and outlandish approach was applied to the directions of the Messenger of Allah, (Blessings of Allah be on him and on his children), concerning the "Guides" (Imaams), one after the other. The narrow-minded obstinate "ummah" did not care for and had ill-feelings towards him.
Flocked together to pass up and deny his connection with his family, and pushed his children out of their way, but a handful of sincere faithfuls kept their promise and dutifully upheld the rights of his children; Some were slain, some were held prisoners, some were sent to distant foreign lands, and they met face to face (when came upon) their destiny (martyrdom).
That which is given to each (of them) as reward of good deeds is the best recompense, since the earth belongs to Allah, and He gives it for an inheritance to whom He wants from among His servants, and the (good) end is for the God-fearing wise; glory to our Lord! Verily the promise of our Lord must be fulfilled; Allah does not break His word, He is Almighty, Wise.
So be purified and refined by making known and remembering the choicest children of Muhammad and Ali, blessings of Allah be on them both, and on their children.
The heartbroken, in tears, make their hearts bleed, together with them, the deeply moved perceptive men of letters describe their wisdom and liberality, as they themselves used to do, eyes of sensitive and thoughtful people are full of overflowing tears, their voices choked up with emotion; they cry out to protest against the injustice done, they call up dumb and insensate souls to stir and take notice. Where is Hasan? Where is Husayn? Where are the children of Husayn? The whole good, one and all! The truth altogether! Where is the regular unbroken vital connection? Where is the on going sequence of desirable goodness? Where are the clear source and spring of Light (vision and insight)? Where are the lively vivid handsome faces? Where are the distinctly visible pioneers? Where are the "know all the answers" scholars who communicated and made clear the religion of Allah? The fundamentals of knowledge and wisdom! Where is the ‘Everlasting legacy of God"? (never ever is the "family of Guides" without One).
Where is the impenetrable defense who broke the back of the oppressive tyrants? Where is the "awaited saviour" who will set the have-nots and the depressed on their feet? Where is the "The Hope" who will put and end to tyranny and oppression? Where is the "preserved guaranty" who shall give new life to rule of law and refined way of life? Where is the "Chosen in preference good" who shall raise the spirits of the people and give currency to justice and fairplay? Where is the "hope-giving confidante" who shall make full use of the "Book" and define the sphere of action? Where is he who shall blot out dogma in the matter of religion and his (Muhammad’s) children? Where is he who shall break up meddlesome trouble and tampering? Where is he who shall pull down the foundations of confusion (polytheists) and hypocrisy? Where is he who shall stamp out corruption, vice, reaction and injustice? Where is he who shall trim the outgrowth of despair, longing and hardships? Where is he who shall erase the traces of unfairness and self-seeking conceit? Where is he who shall untie the twisted knotes of falsehood and disruption? Where is he who shall separate senselessness and insolence from the people? Where is he who shall tear up by the roots obstinacy, corruption and apostasy? Where is he who shall love dearly the favourites of Allah and take pains to tame and train the trangressors? Where is he who shall make people familiar with "words of wisdom"? Where is the ultimate (Divine) source of plenty and prosperity? Where is the "Divine aspect" the God-fearing may look up to? Where is the link that connects the cosmic complex? Where is the authority who shall communicate and make known the true point of view? Where is the author of the conception of peace, fairplay and welfare? Where is the defender of the traditions of the Prophets and their children? Where is the investigator of the blood of the Martyrs of Karbalaa? Where is he who shall get the upper hand over the perpetrators of crime and greed? Where is he who shall not rest until he answers the cries of help when called upon? Where is the foremost leader of the people – the just, the truthful and the wise? Where is the son of the chosen Prophet? The son of Ali Al-Murtaza! The son of Khadeejah, the resplendent! The son of Faatimah, the great! My father, my mother, and I turn to you for protection and sanctuary.
O son of the favourite Leaders! O Son of the distinguished nobles! O son of the rightly guided Guides! O Son of the most refined high-minded liberals! O Son of the select generous Guardians! O son of the polite and pure purifiers! O Son of the impartial judges! O Son of the openhanded hosts! O Son of the mature teachers! O Son of the brilliant fulfillers! O Son of the clear and precise arguments who penetrated deep (into the domain of mind)! O inheritor of the made known prophesy! O inheritor of the clear preaching! O inheritor of the evident signs! O inheritor of the exact science! O inheritor of the widely sought after culture and customs! O inheritor of the milestones of glory and greatness! O inheritor of the extraordinary events! O inheritor of the reason that had been put to experiment! O inheritor of the Right Path! O inheritor of the Message that made deep impression on mankind! O Son of him who is in the "Mother of the Book" kept with Allah, the Highest High, the All-wise.
O inheritor of the convincing proofs! O inheritor of the genuine evidence! O inheritor of the distinctly visible demonstration! O inheritor of the decisive information! O inheritor of the absolute joy and happiness! O inheritor of "T’aa-haa" and clear wisdom! O inheritor of "Yaa seen" and "Zaariyaat" O inheritor of "T’oor" and "A’adiyaat" O Son of him who "drew near and came down till he was two bows’ length or nearer."
(The Highest High came near and received him gladly). If I but knew the destination of your purposeful journey! To which isolated land did you go? Good, pleasant and satisfying? Or otherwise? Or in well guarded concealment? It breaks my heart (when) I look at all that has been created, but cannot see you, nor hear a whisper about your whereabouts, nor any secret communication! It is disheartening to know that you are attending to and watching over the disorder and confusion, and I, in the thick of violent turmoil, am far away, unable to give report of injustice.
I eagerly long for you who is out of sight, but has not forsaken us. I eagerly long for you who has departed and is invisible, but is not far from us.
I eagerly long for you who inspires love and deep affection, and the faithful men and women take delight in your memorable glory. So we are excited with a longing desire.
I eagerly long for you who is worthy of acceptance and lawful driving force of belief and conviction, never weary or annoyed. I eagerly long for you who is the root of praise and distinction, never can be uprooted.
I eagerly long for you who is always tender, gentle and comforting, never makes one’s affairs worse instead of better. I eagerly long for you who is just and equitable beyond a trace of doubt, does not take severe action until misbehaviour trespasses the limit.
O Master! How long and unto what is to be directed (my) request for friendly attention concerning you? And what is the message? It makes me sad to get favourable reply from anyone other than you, but to be duped and cheated in the end.
It casts a gloom upon me that you suffered hardships and the chicken hearted deserters left you alone. It is painful for me what took place for you from them and that which had happened.
Is there a helper with whom I may cooperate and take pains? Is there a restless with whom I may share when action is taken? Is there a faint twinkle of evidence to make me willingly take up the trouble? Do you O Son of Ahmed have means and ways to arrange our meeting? Can you once cleverly guide the course of time, so that we may obtain our wish? When shall we abridge the gap that separate us from the vision so that we may refer to the authority? How long shall we keep waiting for your pleasing satisfying essence and quality? Already the period of expectation has lasted too long! When shall we receive our share from you and have our minds set at rest? For we have fixed our eyes upon you and strive with perseverance. When shall we be happy, and see your beautiful form and fine aspect? Groups of cheerful willing disciplined helpers, in great numbers, gathering around you to carry out one work after the other! You fulfilling (every promise) and giving joy, heart and confidence (to the faithfuls); filling the earth with justice; making your enemies follow the law and accept the revolution; taking the wind out of the haughty and the boastful, and those who knew but denied the truth; breaking the back of the proud and the arrogant; uprooting the roots of the unjust; and we-singing the praise of Allah, the Lord of the worlds.
O my Allah! Thou disperses the clouds of sorrows and hardships. Unto Thee we turn to ask for help against the enemy; for Thou (alone) helps and guides. Thou (alone) puts into good order affairs of this world and shall make better the Hereafter. So come to help! O He Who is called to help the helpless, Thy servants, surrounded by calamities.
Show them the face of their Leader. O the Mightiest Almighty. Allow him to put an end to evil and corruption, and satisfy his Love (for the faithfuls) and dislike (for the sinners). O He Who, from the "Arsh directs and controls all creation, and unto Him is the return, final and ultimate.
O my Allah! We are Thy servants, longing for Thy friend (appointed authority), who reminds us of Thee, and Thy Prophet, who was created as a refuge and asylum for us, established as a foundation and spring of truthfulness for us, and was made the Leader-Guide of the faithfuls. Convey to him our heartfelt congratulations and welcome.
Make us feel more deeply for him. O Lord! Very Kindly, make his headquarters our place of domicile and dwelling abode, and fulfill Thy promise by returning him to us as our Leader Guide, so that he takes us to the eternal land of peace and bliss, where we shall rub elbows with Thy sincere servants who shed blood to pronounce the Faith.
O Allah send Thy blessings on Muhammad and on the children of Muhammad. Bless his ancestor Muhammad, the Messenger, the foremost Leader, and bless his progenitor, the succeeding Leader, and his great grandmother, the ever truthful, Faatimah daughter of Muhammad, and his chosen virtuous forefathers, and send blessings on him, superior, whole, conclusive, staying, numerous, and full, not ever bestowed (even) on any of Thy sincerely attached and pious friends from among Thy creation.
Bless him with blessings, (that) cannot be counted in numbers, cannot be "proximated" in space of time, cannot be consumed in terms of having nothing remaining.
O my Allah! Set up truth, destroy falsehood, show the right path to Thy friends, humiliate Thy enemies, and do it without interruption, (through him). O my Allah! Unite us with him.
Let us be friends with his ancestors. Give us courage to disperse those who oppose and try to prevent him, and make them stay in their shame and disgrace for ever.
Help us to discharge the duties made incumbent upon us by him, and make every effort to obey him, keep from that which is declared unlawful by him, rely upon him to get his approval.
Let us be with him when he makes peace, and frees mankind from fear, gives currency to love are kindness, brings bliss and happiness, spreads good and virtue, so that we may do our best to promote his cause through Thy mercy, and win victory for Thee. Accept our prayers, forgive our sins, fulfil our desires, give us means of livelihood, unrestricted, make less our hardships, meet our demands in full (through him).
Turn towards us Thy kindness and loving aspects, and bring us close to Thee. Turn the eyes of Thy mercy upon us, to bring to fullness Thy kind favours, and after that do not ever let them disappear in the name of Thy generosity, and give us the opportunity to quench our thirst from the spring of his great grandfather (Kawsar), (blessing of Allah be on him and on his children), using his cup, filled by him, fresh and pure, sufficient, wholesome, clear and cool, not leaving any desire thereafter, O the Most Merciful.
More...
Description:
Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And blessings of Allah and peace be on our Chief Muhammad, His Prophet, and on his children. O my Allah! (All) praise is for Thee for that which Thou decided upon and resolved in the matter of Thy friends, whom Thou purified for Thyself and Thy religion. When wisdom and high rank from Thee, prostrated themselves in adoration before them (from the Bountiful Preserving Lord), for whom neither there was any decreased, nor dispersion thereafter, then Thou stipulated for them piety and righteousness. While they were in this mean and crooked world, free from its pomp, vanity and false enjoyments, Thy overreaching authority made known their identity; and equipped them with sincerity and perfection stood surety for them and communicated intimately with them, sent the news of their auspicious arrival in advance, and praised them in clear terms for the benefit of one and all.
Fell down on the ground in prostration Thy Angels before them, Thou chose them to reveal Thy Words, gave them Thy wisdom as a gift, set them up as the (only) medium to reach Thee, the only means to the eternal land of peace and happiness. One dwelled in Paradise until Thou sent him on (as the first Prophet).
One was made to cruise the "Ark", and had been rescued, and kept safe from destruction through Thy mercy.
One was chosen and prepared for Thy Mission, as (Thy) Friend, (who) made a request to Thee for a good report in (his) later generations, so Thou approved and complied with, exalted them and gave them authority.
One was spoken directly through the Tree, his brother was appointed his successor and helper. One was brought in without a father, was given clear proofs, and was supported with the Holy Spirit.
For each Thou prescribed a Divine law, and set up a traced out path, each was appointed a guardian-executor, (and each) fulfilled the duty after being kept safe and protected, in the term of establishing Thy religion, a witness and argument over Thy servants (mankind), Lest the truth staggered from its firm stand and foundation, and the falsehood conquered the hearts of the people, and might not say a single man: "If only Thou had sent a Messenger unto us as a Warner, to show us the path of wisdom and guidance, so that we might have followed Thy revelations before we were (thus) humbled and disgraced!" Then Thou made plans to bring out the wonderful advent of Muhammad, (Send blessing on him and on his children).
So Thou just as chose him master of Whosoever Thou created, made him (whom Thou Selected), pure, clean and the best, exalted and praised him (whom Thou elected), surpassed in generosity and liberality while bestowing high-mindedness and beneficence upon him (whom Thou took in confidence and relied upon); made him leader-in-chief of (all) thy Prophets, and sent him to the troubled world of men and jinn, among Thy servants, lowered and humbled before him the Easts and the Wests, under his total control was brought all affairs, exalted his soul in Thy heavens gave over to him the knowledge of what took place and what will happen, concerning facts and operation of creation.
Then invested him with awe and majesty, Jibraeel, Meekaaeel, and distinguished Angels stood around; him at his beck and call, gave Thy word to him that Thou would make his religion prevail over all religions, however much the idolaters may be averse.
Thereafter acknowledged his atonement and provided good and perfection for his children, allotted for him and his children the first sanctuary appointed for mankind, at Becca (Mecca), a blessed place, a guidance to the people, wherein are plain and clear signs; the place where Ibraahim stood up to pray, and whosoever enters it is safe.
Thou said: "Allah’s wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O "People of the House", and purify you with a thorough purification." Thereupon Thou settled conclusively fee (recompense) of Muhammad (Thy blessings be on him and on his children) love for them, in Thy Holy Book.
So Thou said: "Say (O Muhammad): I ask of you no fee (recompense) therefore, save love of (my) Kinsfolk." And Thou said: "Whatever recompense (return) I have asked for you, (it) is only for yourselves." And Thou said: "I ask of you no reward for this, save that, whoso will, chooses a way unto his Lord." Therefore they are the (only) means to (approach) Thee, the (only) medium to get Thy favours.
So Thou certainly did not let his hard work go waste, and gave authority to his successor, Ali ibne Abi Taalib, (Thy blessings be on them both, and on this children), a guide. At the time when he was made a warner and a guide for every people, said he (the Holy Prophet), their Guide, in a public meeting overflowing with people; "Of Whomsoever I am the Mawlaa (Lord, Master) Ali is his Mawlaa. O Allah! be a friend of him who is a friend of him, be an enemy of him who is an enemy of him, help that man who helps him, forsake that man who forsakes him" and said: "Of whosoever I am the Prophet Ali is his Chief."
And said: "I and Ali are (one basic root of) a tree, and the rest of mankind are like diverse plants, he proclaims the position (relationship) of Haaroon to Moosaa." Therefore he told him: "I am to you as Moosaa was to Haaroon, but certainly there is no Prophet after me."
His (Ali’s) life partner was his (Muhammad’s) daughter the chief of the women of the worlds. Lawful was for him (Ali), in "the mosque", that which was permitted to him (Muhammad), all doors were closed, except his door.
He (Muhammad) gave his knowledge and wisdom into his (Ali’s) keeping. He said: "I am the city (center) of knowledge and Ali is its gate.
Whoso desires to approach and dwell in the city of knowledge and wisdom should come through its door." Thereafter he said: "You are my brother, successor and inheritor, your flesh is my flesh, your blood is my blood, your truce is my truce, your fight is my fight, faith is blended, mixed and mingled (part and parcel) in your flesh and blood, just as it is compounded in my flesh and blood, you shall take charge of the reservoir of my inheritance, you are the fulfilment of my religion, you shall execute and keep alive my "way of life", your friends and followers shall speak with authority, command respect and hold the torch of good manners and refinements, their faces will be all around me in the eternal land of peace and bliss (Paradise), in my close company.
Were it not you O Ali, the faithfuls would not know the truth after me." After him (Muhammad) be (Ali) was the guide for the wanderers, a bright light in the blind darkness, the strong rope of Allah, and the right path, did not ever hold back kindness and compassion from the common people, nor ever made excuses or delay to give priority to the matters of religion, nor blew his own trumpet nor felt proud of his glory, did the same thing the Messenger used to do, (Blessing of Allah be on them both and on their children) put an end to misinterpretation, did not lose temper, for the sake of Allah, if any one turned to mud-slinging and name-calling.
He had thrown the proud tribal chiefs of Arabia into a fright, destroyed their heroes, attacked and dispersed their cavalries, because of which hatred and deep grudge took root in their hearts. Badr, Khaybar, and Hunain created jealousy and envy in them, therefore, united they joined hands to oppose him, and came out in great number to fight against him, till he destroyed all deserters, who had swerved from what was right, the shameless who deviated from true religion, while he was carrying out the important mission.
Killed him a malicious criminal, a contemporary, serving the interest and following the doctrine of earlier impudent villians. An unparalleled and outlandish approach was applied to the directions of the Messenger of Allah, (Blessings of Allah be on him and on his children), concerning the "Guides" (Imaams), one after the other. The narrow-minded obstinate "ummah" did not care for and had ill-feelings towards him.
Flocked together to pass up and deny his connection with his family, and pushed his children out of their way, but a handful of sincere faithfuls kept their promise and dutifully upheld the rights of his children; Some were slain, some were held prisoners, some were sent to distant foreign lands, and they met face to face (when came upon) their destiny (martyrdom).
That which is given to each (of them) as reward of good deeds is the best recompense, since the earth belongs to Allah, and He gives it for an inheritance to whom He wants from among His servants, and the (good) end is for the God-fearing wise; glory to our Lord! Verily the promise of our Lord must be fulfilled; Allah does not break His word, He is Almighty, Wise.
So be purified and refined by making known and remembering the choicest children of Muhammad and Ali, blessings of Allah be on them both, and on their children.
The heartbroken, in tears, make their hearts bleed, together with them, the deeply moved perceptive men of letters describe their wisdom and liberality, as they themselves used to do, eyes of sensitive and thoughtful people are full of overflowing tears, their voices choked up with emotion; they cry out to protest against the injustice done, they call up dumb and insensate souls to stir and take notice. Where is Hasan? Where is Husayn? Where are the children of Husayn? The whole good, one and all! The truth altogether! Where is the regular unbroken vital connection? Where is the on going sequence of desirable goodness? Where are the clear source and spring of Light (vision and insight)? Where are the lively vivid handsome faces? Where are the distinctly visible pioneers? Where are the "know all the answers" scholars who communicated and made clear the religion of Allah? The fundamentals of knowledge and wisdom! Where is the ‘Everlasting legacy of God"? (never ever is the "family of Guides" without One).
Where is the impenetrable defense who broke the back of the oppressive tyrants? Where is the "awaited saviour" who will set the have-nots and the depressed on their feet? Where is the "The Hope" who will put and end to tyranny and oppression? Where is the "preserved guaranty" who shall give new life to rule of law and refined way of life? Where is the "Chosen in preference good" who shall raise the spirits of the people and give currency to justice and fairplay? Where is the "hope-giving confidante" who shall make full use of the "Book" and define the sphere of action? Where is he who shall blot out dogma in the matter of religion and his (Muhammad’s) children? Where is he who shall break up meddlesome trouble and tampering? Where is he who shall pull down the foundations of confusion (polytheists) and hypocrisy? Where is he who shall stamp out corruption, vice, reaction and injustice? Where is he who shall trim the outgrowth of despair, longing and hardships? Where is he who shall erase the traces of unfairness and self-seeking conceit? Where is he who shall untie the twisted knotes of falsehood and disruption? Where is he who shall separate senselessness and insolence from the people? Where is he who shall tear up by the roots obstinacy, corruption and apostasy? Where is he who shall love dearly the favourites of Allah and take pains to tame and train the trangressors? Where is he who shall make people familiar with "words of wisdom"? Where is the ultimate (Divine) source of plenty and prosperity? Where is the "Divine aspect" the God-fearing may look up to? Where is the link that connects the cosmic complex? Where is the authority who shall communicate and make known the true point of view? Where is the author of the conception of peace, fairplay and welfare? Where is the defender of the traditions of the Prophets and their children? Where is the investigator of the blood of the Martyrs of Karbalaa? Where is he who shall get the upper hand over the perpetrators of crime and greed? Where is he who shall not rest until he answers the cries of help when called upon? Where is the foremost leader of the people – the just, the truthful and the wise? Where is the son of the chosen Prophet? The son of Ali Al-Murtaza! The son of Khadeejah, the resplendent! The son of Faatimah, the great! My father, my mother, and I turn to you for protection and sanctuary.
O son of the favourite Leaders! O Son of the distinguished nobles! O son of the rightly guided Guides! O Son of the most refined high-minded liberals! O Son of the select generous Guardians! O son of the polite and pure purifiers! O Son of the impartial judges! O Son of the openhanded hosts! O Son of the mature teachers! O Son of the brilliant fulfillers! O Son of the clear and precise arguments who penetrated deep (into the domain of mind)! O inheritor of the made known prophesy! O inheritor of the clear preaching! O inheritor of the evident signs! O inheritor of the exact science! O inheritor of the widely sought after culture and customs! O inheritor of the milestones of glory and greatness! O inheritor of the extraordinary events! O inheritor of the reason that had been put to experiment! O inheritor of the Right Path! O inheritor of the Message that made deep impression on mankind! O Son of him who is in the "Mother of the Book" kept with Allah, the Highest High, the All-wise.
O inheritor of the convincing proofs! O inheritor of the genuine evidence! O inheritor of the distinctly visible demonstration! O inheritor of the decisive information! O inheritor of the absolute joy and happiness! O inheritor of "T’aa-haa" and clear wisdom! O inheritor of "Yaa seen" and "Zaariyaat" O inheritor of "T’oor" and "A’adiyaat" O Son of him who "drew near and came down till he was two bows’ length or nearer."
(The Highest High came near and received him gladly). If I but knew the destination of your purposeful journey! To which isolated land did you go? Good, pleasant and satisfying? Or otherwise? Or in well guarded concealment? It breaks my heart (when) I look at all that has been created, but cannot see you, nor hear a whisper about your whereabouts, nor any secret communication! It is disheartening to know that you are attending to and watching over the disorder and confusion, and I, in the thick of violent turmoil, am far away, unable to give report of injustice.
I eagerly long for you who is out of sight, but has not forsaken us. I eagerly long for you who has departed and is invisible, but is not far from us.
I eagerly long for you who inspires love and deep affection, and the faithful men and women take delight in your memorable glory. So we are excited with a longing desire.
I eagerly long for you who is worthy of acceptance and lawful driving force of belief and conviction, never weary or annoyed. I eagerly long for you who is the root of praise and distinction, never can be uprooted.
I eagerly long for you who is always tender, gentle and comforting, never makes one’s affairs worse instead of better. I eagerly long for you who is just and equitable beyond a trace of doubt, does not take severe action until misbehaviour trespasses the limit.
O Master! How long and unto what is to be directed (my) request for friendly attention concerning you? And what is the message? It makes me sad to get favourable reply from anyone other than you, but to be duped and cheated in the end.
It casts a gloom upon me that you suffered hardships and the chicken hearted deserters left you alone. It is painful for me what took place for you from them and that which had happened.
Is there a helper with whom I may cooperate and take pains? Is there a restless with whom I may share when action is taken? Is there a faint twinkle of evidence to make me willingly take up the trouble? Do you O Son of Ahmed have means and ways to arrange our meeting? Can you once cleverly guide the course of time, so that we may obtain our wish? When shall we abridge the gap that separate us from the vision so that we may refer to the authority? How long shall we keep waiting for your pleasing satisfying essence and quality? Already the period of expectation has lasted too long! When shall we receive our share from you and have our minds set at rest? For we have fixed our eyes upon you and strive with perseverance. When shall we be happy, and see your beautiful form and fine aspect? Groups of cheerful willing disciplined helpers, in great numbers, gathering around you to carry out one work after the other! You fulfilling (every promise) and giving joy, heart and confidence (to the faithfuls); filling the earth with justice; making your enemies follow the law and accept the revolution; taking the wind out of the haughty and the boastful, and those who knew but denied the truth; breaking the back of the proud and the arrogant; uprooting the roots of the unjust; and we-singing the praise of Allah, the Lord of the worlds.
O my Allah! Thou disperses the clouds of sorrows and hardships. Unto Thee we turn to ask for help against the enemy; for Thou (alone) helps and guides. Thou (alone) puts into good order affairs of this world and shall make better the Hereafter. So come to help! O He Who is called to help the helpless, Thy servants, surrounded by calamities.
Show them the face of their Leader. O the Mightiest Almighty. Allow him to put an end to evil and corruption, and satisfy his Love (for the faithfuls) and dislike (for the sinners). O He Who, from the "Arsh directs and controls all creation, and unto Him is the return, final and ultimate.
O my Allah! We are Thy servants, longing for Thy friend (appointed authority), who reminds us of Thee, and Thy Prophet, who was created as a refuge and asylum for us, established as a foundation and spring of truthfulness for us, and was made the Leader-Guide of the faithfuls. Convey to him our heartfelt congratulations and welcome.
Make us feel more deeply for him. O Lord! Very Kindly, make his headquarters our place of domicile and dwelling abode, and fulfill Thy promise by returning him to us as our Leader Guide, so that he takes us to the eternal land of peace and bliss, where we shall rub elbows with Thy sincere servants who shed blood to pronounce the Faith.
O Allah send Thy blessings on Muhammad and on the children of Muhammad. Bless his ancestor Muhammad, the Messenger, the foremost Leader, and bless his progenitor, the succeeding Leader, and his great grandmother, the ever truthful, Faatimah daughter of Muhammad, and his chosen virtuous forefathers, and send blessings on him, superior, whole, conclusive, staying, numerous, and full, not ever bestowed (even) on any of Thy sincerely attached and pious friends from among Thy creation.
Bless him with blessings, (that) cannot be counted in numbers, cannot be "proximated" in space of time, cannot be consumed in terms of having nothing remaining.
O my Allah! Set up truth, destroy falsehood, show the right path to Thy friends, humiliate Thy enemies, and do it without interruption, (through him). O my Allah! Unite us with him.
Let us be friends with his ancestors. Give us courage to disperse those who oppose and try to prevent him, and make them stay in their shame and disgrace for ever.
Help us to discharge the duties made incumbent upon us by him, and make every effort to obey him, keep from that which is declared unlawful by him, rely upon him to get his approval.
Let us be with him when he makes peace, and frees mankind from fear, gives currency to love are kindness, brings bliss and happiness, spreads good and virtue, so that we may do our best to promote his cause through Thy mercy, and win victory for Thee. Accept our prayers, forgive our sins, fulfil our desires, give us means of livelihood, unrestricted, make less our hardships, meet our demands in full (through him).
Turn towards us Thy kindness and loving aspects, and bring us close to Thee. Turn the eyes of Thy mercy upon us, to bring to fullness Thy kind favours, and after that do not ever let them disappear in the name of Thy generosity, and give us the opportunity to quench our thirst from the spring of his great grandfather (Kawsar), (blessing of Allah be on him and on his children), using his cup, filled by him, fresh and pure, sufficient, wholesome, clear and cool, not leaving any desire thereafter, O the Most Merciful.
[ENGLISH e-Book] Al-Ghadir and its Relevance to ISLAMIC UNITY by Shaheed Ayatullah Mutahhari
Message of Thaqalayn
\"Al-Ghadir\" and its Relevance to Islamic Unity
________________________________________
Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahhari
Translated by Mojgan Jalali
Vol. 3,...
Message of Thaqalayn
\"Al-Ghadir\" and its Relevance to Islamic Unity
________________________________________
Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahhari
Translated by Mojgan Jalali
Vol. 3, No. 1 and 2 (1417 AH/1996 CE)
The distinguished book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" has raised a huge wave in the world of Islam. Islamic thinkers shed light on the book in different perspectives; in literature, history, theology, tradition, tafsir, and sociology. From the social perspective we can deal with the Islamic unity. In this review the Islamic unity has been dealt with from a social point of view.
Contemporary Muslim thinkers and reformists are of the view that unity and solidarity of Muslims are the most imperative Islamic exigencies at the present juncture when the enemies have made extensive inroads upon the Islamic community and have tried to resort to different ways and means to spread the old differences and create new ones. We are aware that Islamic unity and fraternity is the focus of attention of the Holy Legislator of Islam and is actually the major objective pursued by this Divine religion as firmed by the Qur\'an, the \"Sunnah\", and the history of Islam.
For this reason, some people have been faced with this question: Wouldn\'t the compilation and publication of a book such as \"al-Ghadir\" which deals with the oldest issue of differences among the Muslims- create a barrier in the way of the sublime and lofty objective of the Islamic unity?
To answer this question, it is necessary first to elucidate the essence of this issue, that is, the Islamic unity, and then proceed to examine the role of the magnum opus entitled \"al-Ghadir\"and its eminent compiler \'Allamah Amini in bringing about Islamic unity.
Islamic Unity
What is meant by the Islamic unity? Does it mean that one Islamic school of thought should be unanimously followed and others be set aside? Or does it mean that the commonalties of all Islamic schools of thought should be taken up and their differences be put away to make up a new denomination which is not completely the same as the previous ones? Or does it mean that Islamic unity is in no way related to the unity of the different schools of Fiqh (jurisprudence) but signifies the unity of the Muslims and the unity of the followers of different schools of Fiqh, with their different religious ideas and views, vis-a-vis the aliens?
To give an illogical and impractical meaning to the issue of the Islamic unity, the opponents of the issue have called it to be the formation of a single Madhhab, so as to defeat it in the very first step. Without doubt, by the term Islamic unity, the intellectual Islamic \'Ulama\' (scholars) do not mean that all denominations should give in to one denomination or that the commonalties should be taken up and the different views and ideas be set aside, as these are neither rational and logical nor favorable and practical. By the Islamic unity these scholars mean that all Muslims should unite in one line against their common enemies.
These scholars slate that Muslims have many things in common, which can serve as the foundations of a firm unity. All Muslims worship the One Almighty and believe in the Prophethood of the Holy Prophet (s). The Qur\'an is the Book of all Muslims and Ka\'abah is their \"qiblah\" (direction of prayer). They go to\"hajj\" pilgrimage with each other and perform the \"hajj\" rites and rituals like one another. They say the daily prayers and fast like each other. They establish families and engage in transactions like one another. They have similar ways of bringing up their children and burying their dead. Apart from minor affairs, they share similarities in all the aforementioned cases. Muslims also share one kind of world view, one common culture, and one grand, glorious, and long-standing civilization.
Unity in the world view, in culture, in the civilization, in insight and disposition, in religious beliefs, in acts of worship and prayers, in social rites and customs can well turn the Muslim into a unified nation to serve as a massive and dominant power before which the big global powers would have to bow down. This is especially true in view of the stress laid by Islam on this principle. According to the explicit wording of the Qur\'an, the Muslims are brothers, and special rights and duties link them together. So, why shouldn\'t the Muslims use all these extensive facilities accorded to them as the blessing of Islam?
This group of \'Ulama\' are of the view that there is no need for the Muslims to make any compromise on the primary or secondary principles of their religion for the sake of Islamic unity. Also it is not necessary for the Muslims to avoid engaging in discussions and reasons and writing books on primary and secondary principles about which they have differences. The only consideration for Islamic unity in this case is that the Muslims- in order to avoid the emergence or accentuation of vengeance - preserve their possession, avoid insulting and accusing each other and uttering fabrications, abandon ridiculing the logic of one another, and finally abstain from hurting one another and going beyond the borders of logic and reasoning. In fact, they should, at least, observe the limits which Islam has set forth for inviting non-Muslims to embrace it:
\"Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good exhortation, and have disputations with them in the best manner... \"(16: 125)
Some people are of the view that those schools of fiqh, such as, Shafi\'i and Hanafi which have no differences in principle should establish brotherhood and stand in one line. They believe that denominations which have differences in the principles can in no way be brothers. This group view the religious principles as an interconnected set as termed by scholars of Usul, as an interrelated and interdependent set; any damage to one principle harms all principles.
As a result, those who believe in this principle are of the view that when, for instance, the principle of \"imamah\" is damaged and victimized, unity and fraternity will bear no meaning and for this reason the Shi\'ah and the Sunnis cannot shake hands as two Muslim brothers and be in the same rank, no matter who their enemy is.
The first group answers this group by saying: \"There is no reason for us to consider the principles as an interrelated set and follow the principle of \"all or none\". Imam \'Ali (\'a) chose a very logical and reasonable approach. He left no stone unturned to retrieve his right. He used everything within his power to restore the principle of \"imamah\", but he never adhered to the motto of \"all or none\". \'Ali (\'a) did not rise up for his right, and that was not compulsory. On the contrary, it was a calculated and chosen approach. He did not fear death. Why didn\'t he rise up? There could have been nothing above martyrdom. Being killed for the cause of the Almighty was his ultimate desire. He was more intimate with martyrdom than a child is with his mother\'s breast. But in his sound calculations, Imam \'All (\'a) had reached the conclusion that under the existing conditions it was to the interest of Islam to foster collaboration and cooperation among the Muslims and give up revolt. He repeatedly stressed this point.
In one of his letters (No.62 \"Nahj al Balaghah\") to Malik al-Ashtar, he wrote the following:
\"First I pulled back my hand until I realized that a group of people converted from Islam and invited the people toward annihilating the religion of Muhammad(s). So I feared that if I did not rush to help Islam and the Muslims, I would see gaps or destruction which calamity would be far worse than the several-day-long demise of caliphate.\"
In the six-man council, after appointment of \'Uthman by \'Abdul-Rahman ibn \'Awf, \'Ali (\'a) set forth his objection as well as his readiness for collaboration as follows:\"
You well know that I am more deserving than others for caliphate. But now by Allah, so long as the affairs of the Muslims are in order and my rivals suffice with setting me aside and only I am alone subjected to oppression, I will not oppose (the move) and will give in (to it).\" (From Sermon 72, \"Nahj al- Balaghah\").
These indicate that in this issue \'Ali (\'a) condemned the principle of \"all or none\". There is no need to further elaborate the approach taken by \'Ali (\'a) toward this issue. There are ample historical proofs and reasons in this regard.
\'Allamah Amini
Now it is time to see to which group the eminent \'Allamah, Ayatullah Amini - the distinguished compiler of the \"al-Ghadir\" - belonged and how he thought. Did he approve of the unity of the Muslims only within the light of Shi\'ism? Or did he consider Islamic fraternity to be broader? Did he believe that Islam which is embraced by uttering the \"shahadatayn\" (the Muslim creed) would willy-nilly create some rights for the Muslims and that the brotherhood and fraternity set forth in the Qur\'an exists among all Muslims?
\'Allamah Amini personally considered this point - i.e. the need to elucidate his viewpoint on this subject and elaborate whether\"al-Ghadir\" has a positive or a negative role in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In order not to be subject to abuse by his opponent - be they among the pros and cons - he has repeatedly explained and elucidated his views.
\'Allamah Amini supported Islamic unity and viewed an open mind and clear insight. On different occasions, he set forth this matter in various volumes of the \"al-Ghadir\'. Reference will be made to some of them below:
In the preface to volume I, he briefly mentions the role of \"al-Ghadir\" in the world of Islam. He states: \"And we consider all this as service to religion, sublimation of the word of the truth, and restoration of the Islamic \'ummah\' (community).\"
In volume 3 (page 77), after quoting the fabrications of Ibn Taymiyah, Alusi, and Qasimi to the effect that Shi \'ism is hostile to some of the Ahl al-Bayt (the Household of the Prophet) such as Zayd bin \'Ali bin al-Huseyn, he notes the following under the title of \"Criticism and Correction\":
\"These fabrications and accusations sow the seeds of corruption, stir hostilities among the \'ummah\',create discord among the Islamic community, divide the \'ummah\', and clash with the public interests of the Muslims.
Again in volume 3 (page 268), he quotes the accusation leveled on the Shi\'ahs by Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida to the effect that \"Shi\'ahs are pleased with any defeat incurred by Muslims, so much as they celebrated the victory of the Russians over the Muslims.\" Then he says:
\"These falsehoods are fabricated by persons like Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida. The Shi\'ahs of Iran and Iraq against whom this accusation is leveled, as well as the orientalists, tourists, envoys of Islamic countries, and those who traveled and still travel to Iran and Iraq, have no information about this trend. Shi\'ahs, without exception, respect the lives, blood, reputation, and property of the Muslims be they Shi\'ahs or Sunnis. Whenever a calamity has befallen the Islamic community anywhere, in any region, and for any sects, the Shi\'ahs have shared their sorrow. The Shi\'ahs have never been confined to the Shi\'ah world, the (concept of) Islamic brotherhood which has been set forth in the Qur\'an and the \'sunnah\'(the Prophet\'s sayings and actions), and in this respect, no discrimination has been made between the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis.\"
Also at the close of volume 3, he criticizes several books penned by the ancients such as \"Iqd al-Farid\" by Ibn Abd al-Rabbih, \"al-Intisar\" by Abu al-Husayn Khayyat al-Mu\'tazili,\"al Farq bayn al-Firaq\" by Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi, \"al-Fasl\" by Ibn Hazm al-Andulusi, \"al-Milal wa al-Nihal\" by Muhammad ibn Abdul-Karim al-Shahristani \"Minhaj al-Sunnah\" by Ibn Taymiah and \"al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah\"by Ibn Kathir and several by the later writers such as \"Tarikh al-Umam al-Islamiyyah\" by Shaykh Muhammad Khizri, \"Fajr al Islam\" by Ahmad Amin, \"al-Jawlat fi Rubu al-Sharq al-Adna\" by Muhammad Thabit al-Mesri, \"al-Sira Bayn al-Islam wa al-Wathaniyah\" by Qasimi, and \"al- Washi\'ah\" by Musa Jarallah. Then he states the following:
\"By quoting and criticizing these books, we aim at warning and awakening the Islamic \'ummah\' (to the fact) that these books create the greatest danger for the Islamic community, they destabilize the Islamic unity and scatter the Muslim lines. In fact nothing can disrupt the ranks of the Muslims, destroy their unity, and tear their Islamic fraternity more severely than these books.\"
\'Allamah Amini, in the preface to volume 5, under title of\"Nazariyah Karimah\" on the occasion of a plaque of honor forwarded from Egypt for \"al-Ghadir\", clearly sets forth his view on this issue and leaves no room for any doubt. He remarks:
\"People are free to express views and ideas on religion. These (views and ideas) will never tear apart the bond of Islamic brotherhood to which the holy Qur\'an has referred by stating that \'surely the believers are brethren\'; even though academic discussion and theological and religious debates reach a peak. This has been the style of the predecessors, and of the \'sahaba\' and the\'tabi\'un\', at the head of them.
\"Notwithstanding all the differences that we have in the primary and secondary principles, we, the compilers and writers in nooks and corners of the world of Islam, share a common point and that is belief in the Almighty and His Prophet. A single spirit and one (form of) sentiment exists in all our bodies, and that is the spirit of Islam and the term\'ikhlas,\"
\"We, the Muslim compilers, all live under the banner of truth and carry out our duties under the guidance of the Qur\'an and the Prophetic Mission of the Holy Prophet (s). The message of all of us is \'Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam ... (3:18)\' and the slogan of all of us is \'There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.\' Indeed, we are (the members of) the party of Allah and the supporters of his religion.
In the preface to volume 8, under the title of \"al-Ghadir Yowahhad al-Sufuf fil-Mila al-Islami\", \'Allamah Amini directly makes researches into the role of \"Al- Ghadir\" in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In this discussion, this great scholar categorically rejects the accusations leveled by those who said: \'Al-Ghadir\' causes greater discord among the Muslims. He proves that, on the contrary, \"Al-Ghadir\"removes many misunderstandings and brings the Muslims closer to one another. Then he brings evidence by mentioning the confessions of the non-Shi\'i Islamic scholars. At the close, he quotes the letter of Shaykh Muhammad Saeed Dahduh written in this connection.
To avoid prolongation of this article, we will not quote and translate the entire statements of \'Allamah Amini in explaining the positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" in (establishing) Islamic unity, since what has already been mentioned sufficiently proves this fact.
The positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" is established by the facts that it firstly clarifies the proven logic of the Shi\'ahs and proves that the inclination of Muslims to Shi\'ism - notwithstanding the poisonous publicity of some people - is not due to political, ethnic, or other trends and considerations. It also verifies that a powerful logic based on the Qur\'an and the \"sunnah\" has given rise to this tendency.
Secondly, it reflects that some accusations leveled on Shi\'ism - which have made other Muslims distanced from the Shi\'ah- are totally baseless and false. Examples of these accusations are the notion that the Shi\'ites prefer the non-Muslims to the non- Shi\'i Muslims, rejoice at the defeat of non-Shi\'ite Muslims at the hands of non-Muslims, and other accusations such as the idea that instead of going to hajj pilgrimage, the Shi\'ahs go on pilgrimage to shrines of the Imams, or have particular rites in prayers and in temporary marriage.
Thirdly, it introduces to the world of Islam the eminent Commander of the faithful \'Ali (\'a) who is the most oppressed and the least praised grand Islamic personality and who could be the leader of all Muslims, as well as his pure offspring.
Other Comments on \"al-Ghadir\"
Many unbiased non-Shia Muslims interpret the \"al-Ghadir\" in the same way that has already been mentioned.
Muhammad Abdul-Ghani Hasan al-Mesri, in his foreword on\"al-Ghadir\", which has been published in the preface to volume I, second edition, states:
\"I call on the Almighty to make your limpid brook (in Arabic, \'Ghadir\' means brook) the cause of peace and cordiality between the Shia and Sunni brothers to cooperate with one another in building the Islamic \"ummah.\"
\'Adil Ghadban, the managing editor of the Egyptian magazine entitled \"al-Kitab\", said the following in the preface to volume 3:
\"This book clarifies the Shi\'ite logic. The Sunnis can correctly learn about the Shi\'i through this book. Correct recognition of the Shi\'ahs brings the views of the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis closer, and they can make a unified rank\".
In his foreword to the \"al-Ghadir\" which was published in thepreface to volume 4, Dr. Muhammad Ghallab, professor of philosophy at the Faculty of Religious Studies al-Azhar University said:
\"I got hold of your book at a very opportune time, because right now I am busy collecting and compiling a book on the lives of the Muslims from various perspectives. Therefore, I am highly avidfor obtaining sound information about \'Imamiyah\' Shi\'ism. Your book will help me. And I will not make mistakes about the Shi\'ahs as others have\".
In this foreword published in the preface to volume 4 of the\"al-Ghadir\", Dr. \'Abdul-Rahman Kiali Halabi says the following after referring to the decline of the Muslims in the present age and the factors which can lead to the Muslims\' salvation, one of which is the sound recognition of the successor of the Holy Prophet (s):
\"The book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" and its rich content deserves to be known by every Muslim to learn how historians have been negligent and see where the truth lies. Through this means, we should compensate for the past, and by striving to foster the unity of the Muslims, we should try to gain the due rewards\".
These were the views of \'Allamah Amini about the important social issues of our age and such were his sound reflections in the world of Islam.
Peace be upon him.
Text Source: http://www.al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=ghadir-relevance.htm
More...
Description:
Message of Thaqalayn
\"Al-Ghadir\" and its Relevance to Islamic Unity
________________________________________
Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahhari
Translated by Mojgan Jalali
Vol. 3, No. 1 and 2 (1417 AH/1996 CE)
The distinguished book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" has raised a huge wave in the world of Islam. Islamic thinkers shed light on the book in different perspectives; in literature, history, theology, tradition, tafsir, and sociology. From the social perspective we can deal with the Islamic unity. In this review the Islamic unity has been dealt with from a social point of view.
Contemporary Muslim thinkers and reformists are of the view that unity and solidarity of Muslims are the most imperative Islamic exigencies at the present juncture when the enemies have made extensive inroads upon the Islamic community and have tried to resort to different ways and means to spread the old differences and create new ones. We are aware that Islamic unity and fraternity is the focus of attention of the Holy Legislator of Islam and is actually the major objective pursued by this Divine religion as firmed by the Qur\'an, the \"Sunnah\", and the history of Islam.
For this reason, some people have been faced with this question: Wouldn\'t the compilation and publication of a book such as \"al-Ghadir\" which deals with the oldest issue of differences among the Muslims- create a barrier in the way of the sublime and lofty objective of the Islamic unity?
To answer this question, it is necessary first to elucidate the essence of this issue, that is, the Islamic unity, and then proceed to examine the role of the magnum opus entitled \"al-Ghadir\"and its eminent compiler \'Allamah Amini in bringing about Islamic unity.
Islamic Unity
What is meant by the Islamic unity? Does it mean that one Islamic school of thought should be unanimously followed and others be set aside? Or does it mean that the commonalties of all Islamic schools of thought should be taken up and their differences be put away to make up a new denomination which is not completely the same as the previous ones? Or does it mean that Islamic unity is in no way related to the unity of the different schools of Fiqh (jurisprudence) but signifies the unity of the Muslims and the unity of the followers of different schools of Fiqh, with their different religious ideas and views, vis-a-vis the aliens?
To give an illogical and impractical meaning to the issue of the Islamic unity, the opponents of the issue have called it to be the formation of a single Madhhab, so as to defeat it in the very first step. Without doubt, by the term Islamic unity, the intellectual Islamic \'Ulama\' (scholars) do not mean that all denominations should give in to one denomination or that the commonalties should be taken up and the different views and ideas be set aside, as these are neither rational and logical nor favorable and practical. By the Islamic unity these scholars mean that all Muslims should unite in one line against their common enemies.
These scholars slate that Muslims have many things in common, which can serve as the foundations of a firm unity. All Muslims worship the One Almighty and believe in the Prophethood of the Holy Prophet (s). The Qur\'an is the Book of all Muslims and Ka\'abah is their \"qiblah\" (direction of prayer). They go to\"hajj\" pilgrimage with each other and perform the \"hajj\" rites and rituals like one another. They say the daily prayers and fast like each other. They establish families and engage in transactions like one another. They have similar ways of bringing up their children and burying their dead. Apart from minor affairs, they share similarities in all the aforementioned cases. Muslims also share one kind of world view, one common culture, and one grand, glorious, and long-standing civilization.
Unity in the world view, in culture, in the civilization, in insight and disposition, in religious beliefs, in acts of worship and prayers, in social rites and customs can well turn the Muslim into a unified nation to serve as a massive and dominant power before which the big global powers would have to bow down. This is especially true in view of the stress laid by Islam on this principle. According to the explicit wording of the Qur\'an, the Muslims are brothers, and special rights and duties link them together. So, why shouldn\'t the Muslims use all these extensive facilities accorded to them as the blessing of Islam?
This group of \'Ulama\' are of the view that there is no need for the Muslims to make any compromise on the primary or secondary principles of their religion for the sake of Islamic unity. Also it is not necessary for the Muslims to avoid engaging in discussions and reasons and writing books on primary and secondary principles about which they have differences. The only consideration for Islamic unity in this case is that the Muslims- in order to avoid the emergence or accentuation of vengeance - preserve their possession, avoid insulting and accusing each other and uttering fabrications, abandon ridiculing the logic of one another, and finally abstain from hurting one another and going beyond the borders of logic and reasoning. In fact, they should, at least, observe the limits which Islam has set forth for inviting non-Muslims to embrace it:
\"Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good exhortation, and have disputations with them in the best manner... \"(16: 125)
Some people are of the view that those schools of fiqh, such as, Shafi\'i and Hanafi which have no differences in principle should establish brotherhood and stand in one line. They believe that denominations which have differences in the principles can in no way be brothers. This group view the religious principles as an interconnected set as termed by scholars of Usul, as an interrelated and interdependent set; any damage to one principle harms all principles.
As a result, those who believe in this principle are of the view that when, for instance, the principle of \"imamah\" is damaged and victimized, unity and fraternity will bear no meaning and for this reason the Shi\'ah and the Sunnis cannot shake hands as two Muslim brothers and be in the same rank, no matter who their enemy is.
The first group answers this group by saying: \"There is no reason for us to consider the principles as an interrelated set and follow the principle of \"all or none\". Imam \'Ali (\'a) chose a very logical and reasonable approach. He left no stone unturned to retrieve his right. He used everything within his power to restore the principle of \"imamah\", but he never adhered to the motto of \"all or none\". \'Ali (\'a) did not rise up for his right, and that was not compulsory. On the contrary, it was a calculated and chosen approach. He did not fear death. Why didn\'t he rise up? There could have been nothing above martyrdom. Being killed for the cause of the Almighty was his ultimate desire. He was more intimate with martyrdom than a child is with his mother\'s breast. But in his sound calculations, Imam \'All (\'a) had reached the conclusion that under the existing conditions it was to the interest of Islam to foster collaboration and cooperation among the Muslims and give up revolt. He repeatedly stressed this point.
In one of his letters (No.62 \"Nahj al Balaghah\") to Malik al-Ashtar, he wrote the following:
\"First I pulled back my hand until I realized that a group of people converted from Islam and invited the people toward annihilating the religion of Muhammad(s). So I feared that if I did not rush to help Islam and the Muslims, I would see gaps or destruction which calamity would be far worse than the several-day-long demise of caliphate.\"
In the six-man council, after appointment of \'Uthman by \'Abdul-Rahman ibn \'Awf, \'Ali (\'a) set forth his objection as well as his readiness for collaboration as follows:\"
You well know that I am more deserving than others for caliphate. But now by Allah, so long as the affairs of the Muslims are in order and my rivals suffice with setting me aside and only I am alone subjected to oppression, I will not oppose (the move) and will give in (to it).\" (From Sermon 72, \"Nahj al- Balaghah\").
These indicate that in this issue \'Ali (\'a) condemned the principle of \"all or none\". There is no need to further elaborate the approach taken by \'Ali (\'a) toward this issue. There are ample historical proofs and reasons in this regard.
\'Allamah Amini
Now it is time to see to which group the eminent \'Allamah, Ayatullah Amini - the distinguished compiler of the \"al-Ghadir\" - belonged and how he thought. Did he approve of the unity of the Muslims only within the light of Shi\'ism? Or did he consider Islamic fraternity to be broader? Did he believe that Islam which is embraced by uttering the \"shahadatayn\" (the Muslim creed) would willy-nilly create some rights for the Muslims and that the brotherhood and fraternity set forth in the Qur\'an exists among all Muslims?
\'Allamah Amini personally considered this point - i.e. the need to elucidate his viewpoint on this subject and elaborate whether\"al-Ghadir\" has a positive or a negative role in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In order not to be subject to abuse by his opponent - be they among the pros and cons - he has repeatedly explained and elucidated his views.
\'Allamah Amini supported Islamic unity and viewed an open mind and clear insight. On different occasions, he set forth this matter in various volumes of the \"al-Ghadir\'. Reference will be made to some of them below:
In the preface to volume I, he briefly mentions the role of \"al-Ghadir\" in the world of Islam. He states: \"And we consider all this as service to religion, sublimation of the word of the truth, and restoration of the Islamic \'ummah\' (community).\"
In volume 3 (page 77), after quoting the fabrications of Ibn Taymiyah, Alusi, and Qasimi to the effect that Shi \'ism is hostile to some of the Ahl al-Bayt (the Household of the Prophet) such as Zayd bin \'Ali bin al-Huseyn, he notes the following under the title of \"Criticism and Correction\":
\"These fabrications and accusations sow the seeds of corruption, stir hostilities among the \'ummah\',create discord among the Islamic community, divide the \'ummah\', and clash with the public interests of the Muslims.
Again in volume 3 (page 268), he quotes the accusation leveled on the Shi\'ahs by Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida to the effect that \"Shi\'ahs are pleased with any defeat incurred by Muslims, so much as they celebrated the victory of the Russians over the Muslims.\" Then he says:
\"These falsehoods are fabricated by persons like Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida. The Shi\'ahs of Iran and Iraq against whom this accusation is leveled, as well as the orientalists, tourists, envoys of Islamic countries, and those who traveled and still travel to Iran and Iraq, have no information about this trend. Shi\'ahs, without exception, respect the lives, blood, reputation, and property of the Muslims be they Shi\'ahs or Sunnis. Whenever a calamity has befallen the Islamic community anywhere, in any region, and for any sects, the Shi\'ahs have shared their sorrow. The Shi\'ahs have never been confined to the Shi\'ah world, the (concept of) Islamic brotherhood which has been set forth in the Qur\'an and the \'sunnah\'(the Prophet\'s sayings and actions), and in this respect, no discrimination has been made between the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis.\"
Also at the close of volume 3, he criticizes several books penned by the ancients such as \"Iqd al-Farid\" by Ibn Abd al-Rabbih, \"al-Intisar\" by Abu al-Husayn Khayyat al-Mu\'tazili,\"al Farq bayn al-Firaq\" by Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi, \"al-Fasl\" by Ibn Hazm al-Andulusi, \"al-Milal wa al-Nihal\" by Muhammad ibn Abdul-Karim al-Shahristani \"Minhaj al-Sunnah\" by Ibn Taymiah and \"al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah\"by Ibn Kathir and several by the later writers such as \"Tarikh al-Umam al-Islamiyyah\" by Shaykh Muhammad Khizri, \"Fajr al Islam\" by Ahmad Amin, \"al-Jawlat fi Rubu al-Sharq al-Adna\" by Muhammad Thabit al-Mesri, \"al-Sira Bayn al-Islam wa al-Wathaniyah\" by Qasimi, and \"al- Washi\'ah\" by Musa Jarallah. Then he states the following:
\"By quoting and criticizing these books, we aim at warning and awakening the Islamic \'ummah\' (to the fact) that these books create the greatest danger for the Islamic community, they destabilize the Islamic unity and scatter the Muslim lines. In fact nothing can disrupt the ranks of the Muslims, destroy their unity, and tear their Islamic fraternity more severely than these books.\"
\'Allamah Amini, in the preface to volume 5, under title of\"Nazariyah Karimah\" on the occasion of a plaque of honor forwarded from Egypt for \"al-Ghadir\", clearly sets forth his view on this issue and leaves no room for any doubt. He remarks:
\"People are free to express views and ideas on religion. These (views and ideas) will never tear apart the bond of Islamic brotherhood to which the holy Qur\'an has referred by stating that \'surely the believers are brethren\'; even though academic discussion and theological and religious debates reach a peak. This has been the style of the predecessors, and of the \'sahaba\' and the\'tabi\'un\', at the head of them.
\"Notwithstanding all the differences that we have in the primary and secondary principles, we, the compilers and writers in nooks and corners of the world of Islam, share a common point and that is belief in the Almighty and His Prophet. A single spirit and one (form of) sentiment exists in all our bodies, and that is the spirit of Islam and the term\'ikhlas,\"
\"We, the Muslim compilers, all live under the banner of truth and carry out our duties under the guidance of the Qur\'an and the Prophetic Mission of the Holy Prophet (s). The message of all of us is \'Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam ... (3:18)\' and the slogan of all of us is \'There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.\' Indeed, we are (the members of) the party of Allah and the supporters of his religion.
In the preface to volume 8, under the title of \"al-Ghadir Yowahhad al-Sufuf fil-Mila al-Islami\", \'Allamah Amini directly makes researches into the role of \"Al- Ghadir\" in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In this discussion, this great scholar categorically rejects the accusations leveled by those who said: \'Al-Ghadir\' causes greater discord among the Muslims. He proves that, on the contrary, \"Al-Ghadir\"removes many misunderstandings and brings the Muslims closer to one another. Then he brings evidence by mentioning the confessions of the non-Shi\'i Islamic scholars. At the close, he quotes the letter of Shaykh Muhammad Saeed Dahduh written in this connection.
To avoid prolongation of this article, we will not quote and translate the entire statements of \'Allamah Amini in explaining the positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" in (establishing) Islamic unity, since what has already been mentioned sufficiently proves this fact.
The positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" is established by the facts that it firstly clarifies the proven logic of the Shi\'ahs and proves that the inclination of Muslims to Shi\'ism - notwithstanding the poisonous publicity of some people - is not due to political, ethnic, or other trends and considerations. It also verifies that a powerful logic based on the Qur\'an and the \"sunnah\" has given rise to this tendency.
Secondly, it reflects that some accusations leveled on Shi\'ism - which have made other Muslims distanced from the Shi\'ah- are totally baseless and false. Examples of these accusations are the notion that the Shi\'ites prefer the non-Muslims to the non- Shi\'i Muslims, rejoice at the defeat of non-Shi\'ite Muslims at the hands of non-Muslims, and other accusations such as the idea that instead of going to hajj pilgrimage, the Shi\'ahs go on pilgrimage to shrines of the Imams, or have particular rites in prayers and in temporary marriage.
Thirdly, it introduces to the world of Islam the eminent Commander of the faithful \'Ali (\'a) who is the most oppressed and the least praised grand Islamic personality and who could be the leader of all Muslims, as well as his pure offspring.
Other Comments on \"al-Ghadir\"
Many unbiased non-Shia Muslims interpret the \"al-Ghadir\" in the same way that has already been mentioned.
Muhammad Abdul-Ghani Hasan al-Mesri, in his foreword on\"al-Ghadir\", which has been published in the preface to volume I, second edition, states:
\"I call on the Almighty to make your limpid brook (in Arabic, \'Ghadir\' means brook) the cause of peace and cordiality between the Shia and Sunni brothers to cooperate with one another in building the Islamic \"ummah.\"
\'Adil Ghadban, the managing editor of the Egyptian magazine entitled \"al-Kitab\", said the following in the preface to volume 3:
\"This book clarifies the Shi\'ite logic. The Sunnis can correctly learn about the Shi\'i through this book. Correct recognition of the Shi\'ahs brings the views of the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis closer, and they can make a unified rank\".
In his foreword to the \"al-Ghadir\" which was published in thepreface to volume 4, Dr. Muhammad Ghallab, professor of philosophy at the Faculty of Religious Studies al-Azhar University said:
\"I got hold of your book at a very opportune time, because right now I am busy collecting and compiling a book on the lives of the Muslims from various perspectives. Therefore, I am highly avidfor obtaining sound information about \'Imamiyah\' Shi\'ism. Your book will help me. And I will not make mistakes about the Shi\'ahs as others have\".
In this foreword published in the preface to volume 4 of the\"al-Ghadir\", Dr. \'Abdul-Rahman Kiali Halabi says the following after referring to the decline of the Muslims in the present age and the factors which can lead to the Muslims\' salvation, one of which is the sound recognition of the successor of the Holy Prophet (s):
\"The book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" and its rich content deserves to be known by every Muslim to learn how historians have been negligent and see where the truth lies. Through this means, we should compensate for the past, and by striving to foster the unity of the Muslims, we should try to gain the due rewards\".
These were the views of \'Allamah Amini about the important social issues of our age and such were his sound reflections in the world of Islam.
Peace be upon him.
Text Source: http://www.al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=ghadir-relevance.htm
Did Obama Lie about FATWA?? - Nuke Free World By Rehbar - English & Persian
DID OBAMA LIE ?????
September 30, 2013 – At his press briefing last Friday, Barack Obama practically ran to the podium to announce his “historic” phone call to Iran and to proclaim that the...
DID OBAMA LIE ?????
September 30, 2013 – At his press briefing last Friday, Barack Obama practically ran to the podium to announce his “historic” phone call to Iran and to proclaim that the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had issued a “fatwa” against nuclear arms.
The media salivated at the courageous, bold initiative by the president to negotiate with Iran and to obtain such a stunning diplomatic commitment. It sounded like the foreign policy coup of the century. And to think, all it took was a phone call. Not only that, it happened just days before Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was scheduled to meet with Obama about the situation in Iran
September 30, 2013 – At his press briefing last Friday, Barack Obama practically ran to the podium to announce his “historic” phone call to Iran and to proclaim that the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had issued a “fatwa” against nuclear arms.
The media salivated at the courageous, bold initiative by the president to negotiate with Iran and to obtain such a stunning diplomatic commitment. It sounded like the foreign policy coup of the century. And to think, all it took was a phone call. Not only that, it happened just days before Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was scheduled to meet with Obama about the situation in Iran
Reading Obama’s Iran speech
President Barack Obama addresses the 68th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Tuesday, September 24, 2013
President Barack Obama addresses the 68th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Thu Sep 26, 2013 7:10PM GMT
2
Phyllis Bennis, The Nation
Related Interviews:
‘Rouhani’s remarks in US, conciliatory’
\\\\\\\'Rouhani speech, perfectly appropriate\\\\\\\'
Related Viewpoints:
Ziocons fume over Rouhani UN speech
All of a sudden we’re talking to Iran. Now, granted, that shouldn’t be such an astonishing bombshell. But given the reality of the last several decades, it pretty much is. And that’s all good. It’s been too long coming, it’s still too hesitant, there’s still too much hinting about military force behind it… but we’re talking. Foreign minister to foreign minister, Kerry to Zarif, it’s all a good sign.
There were lots of problem areas in the speech-President Obama was right when he said that US policy in the Middle East would lead to charges of “hypocrisy and inconsistency.” US policy-its protection of Israeli violations of international law, its privileging of petro-monarchies over human rights, its coddling of military dictators-remains rank with hypocrisy and inconsistency. And Obama’s speech reflected much of it.
But President Obama’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly reflected some of the extraordinary shifts in global-especially Middle East and most especially Syria-related-politics that have taken shape in the last six or eight weeks. And on Iran, that was good news. Yes the president trotted out his familiar litany that “we are determined to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.” But this time, there was no “all options on the table” threat. He added explicitly that “we are not seeking regime change and we respect the right of the Iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy.” The reference to Iran’s right to nuclear energy represented a major shift away from the longstanding claim among many US hawks and the Israeli government that Iran must give up all nuclear enrichment.
Respecting Iran’s right to “access” nuclear energy is still a bit of a dodge, of course-Article IV of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) recognizes not just access but “the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.” Iran is a longstanding signatory to the NPT, and is entitled to all those rights. Obama referred only that “we insist that the Iranian government meet its responsibilities” under the NPT, while saying nothing about Iran’s rights under the treaty. But the high visibility US recognition of any Iranian right to nuclear power-in the context of a new willingness to open talks-is still enormously important.
It was also important that President Obama spoke of Iran with respect, acknowledging Iranian interests and opinions as legitimate and parallel to Washington’s. He recognized that Iranian mistrust of the United States has “deep roots,” referencing (however carefully) the “history of US interference in their affairs and of America’s role in overthrowing an Iranian government during the Cold War.” In fact, his identification of the 1953 US-backed coup that overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh as a product of the Cold War may have been part of an effort to distance himself and his administration from those actions. (It’s a bit disingenuous, of course. The primary rationale for the coup was far more a response to Mossadegh’s nationalization of Iran’s oil than to his ties to the Soviet Union.)
Obama also paid new attention to longstanding Iranian positions. He noted that “the Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, and President Rouhani has just recently reiterated that the Islamic Republic will never develop a nuclear weapon.” Now anyone following the Iran nuclear issue knows that the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, stated at least as far back as 2003 that nuclear weapons are a violation of Islamic law and Iran would never build or use one, and the fatwa, or legal opinion, was issued at least as far back as 2005. This isn’t new. But for President Obama to mention those judgments in the context of “the basis for a meaningful agreement” is indeed new.
Mainstream US press and officials have long derided those statements, claiming that fatwas are not binding, that 700-year-old religious laws can’t have a position on nuclear weapons, etc. But in so doing they ignore the real significance-that President Rouhani, the Supreme Leader and the rest of Iran’s government have to answer to their own population too. After years of repeating that nuclear weapons would be un-Islamic, would violate a fatwa, etc., it would not be so easy for Iran’s leaders to win popular support for a decision to embrace the bomb.
There is a long way to go in challenging aspects of President Obama’s speech at the United Nations-his embrace of American exceptionalism and his recommitment to a failed approach to Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, his view that war and violence can only be answered by military force or nothing, and more. He didn’t explicitly state a willingness to accept Iran’s participation in international talks on Syria. There is a serious danger that any move towards rapprochement with Iran would be matched with moves to pacify Israeli demands-almost certainly at the expense of Palestinian rights.
But in the broader scenario of US-Iran relations, this is a moment to move forward, to welcome the new approach in Washington now answering the new approach of Tehran.
More flexibility will be required than the United States is usually known for. The usual opponents-in Congress, in Israel and the pro-Israel lobbies-are already on the move, challenging the new opening. But these last weeks showed how a quickly organized demonstration of widespread public opinion, demanding negotiations instead of war, can win. We were able to build a movement fast, agile and powerful enough to reverse an imminent military attack on Syria and instead force a move towards diplomatic solutions to end the war. This time around, the demand to deepen, consolidate and not abandon diplomatic possibilities is on our agenda-and perhaps once again we can
More...
Description:
DID OBAMA LIE ?????
September 30, 2013 – At his press briefing last Friday, Barack Obama practically ran to the podium to announce his “historic” phone call to Iran and to proclaim that the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had issued a “fatwa” against nuclear arms.
The media salivated at the courageous, bold initiative by the president to negotiate with Iran and to obtain such a stunning diplomatic commitment. It sounded like the foreign policy coup of the century. And to think, all it took was a phone call. Not only that, it happened just days before Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was scheduled to meet with Obama about the situation in Iran
September 30, 2013 – At his press briefing last Friday, Barack Obama practically ran to the podium to announce his “historic” phone call to Iran and to proclaim that the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had issued a “fatwa” against nuclear arms.
The media salivated at the courageous, bold initiative by the president to negotiate with Iran and to obtain such a stunning diplomatic commitment. It sounded like the foreign policy coup of the century. And to think, all it took was a phone call. Not only that, it happened just days before Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was scheduled to meet with Obama about the situation in Iran
Reading Obama’s Iran speech
President Barack Obama addresses the 68th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Tuesday, September 24, 2013
President Barack Obama addresses the 68th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Thu Sep 26, 2013 7:10PM GMT
2
Phyllis Bennis, The Nation
Related Interviews:
‘Rouhani’s remarks in US, conciliatory’
\\\\\\\'Rouhani speech, perfectly appropriate\\\\\\\'
Related Viewpoints:
Ziocons fume over Rouhani UN speech
All of a sudden we’re talking to Iran. Now, granted, that shouldn’t be such an astonishing bombshell. But given the reality of the last several decades, it pretty much is. And that’s all good. It’s been too long coming, it’s still too hesitant, there’s still too much hinting about military force behind it… but we’re talking. Foreign minister to foreign minister, Kerry to Zarif, it’s all a good sign.
There were lots of problem areas in the speech-President Obama was right when he said that US policy in the Middle East would lead to charges of “hypocrisy and inconsistency.” US policy-its protection of Israeli violations of international law, its privileging of petro-monarchies over human rights, its coddling of military dictators-remains rank with hypocrisy and inconsistency. And Obama’s speech reflected much of it.
But President Obama’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly reflected some of the extraordinary shifts in global-especially Middle East and most especially Syria-related-politics that have taken shape in the last six or eight weeks. And on Iran, that was good news. Yes the president trotted out his familiar litany that “we are determined to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.” But this time, there was no “all options on the table” threat. He added explicitly that “we are not seeking regime change and we respect the right of the Iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy.” The reference to Iran’s right to nuclear energy represented a major shift away from the longstanding claim among many US hawks and the Israeli government that Iran must give up all nuclear enrichment.
Respecting Iran’s right to “access” nuclear energy is still a bit of a dodge, of course-Article IV of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) recognizes not just access but “the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.” Iran is a longstanding signatory to the NPT, and is entitled to all those rights. Obama referred only that “we insist that the Iranian government meet its responsibilities” under the NPT, while saying nothing about Iran’s rights under the treaty. But the high visibility US recognition of any Iranian right to nuclear power-in the context of a new willingness to open talks-is still enormously important.
It was also important that President Obama spoke of Iran with respect, acknowledging Iranian interests and opinions as legitimate and parallel to Washington’s. He recognized that Iranian mistrust of the United States has “deep roots,” referencing (however carefully) the “history of US interference in their affairs and of America’s role in overthrowing an Iranian government during the Cold War.” In fact, his identification of the 1953 US-backed coup that overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh as a product of the Cold War may have been part of an effort to distance himself and his administration from those actions. (It’s a bit disingenuous, of course. The primary rationale for the coup was far more a response to Mossadegh’s nationalization of Iran’s oil than to his ties to the Soviet Union.)
Obama also paid new attention to longstanding Iranian positions. He noted that “the Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, and President Rouhani has just recently reiterated that the Islamic Republic will never develop a nuclear weapon.” Now anyone following the Iran nuclear issue knows that the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, stated at least as far back as 2003 that nuclear weapons are a violation of Islamic law and Iran would never build or use one, and the fatwa, or legal opinion, was issued at least as far back as 2005. This isn’t new. But for President Obama to mention those judgments in the context of “the basis for a meaningful agreement” is indeed new.
Mainstream US press and officials have long derided those statements, claiming that fatwas are not binding, that 700-year-old religious laws can’t have a position on nuclear weapons, etc. But in so doing they ignore the real significance-that President Rouhani, the Supreme Leader and the rest of Iran’s government have to answer to their own population too. After years of repeating that nuclear weapons would be un-Islamic, would violate a fatwa, etc., it would not be so easy for Iran’s leaders to win popular support for a decision to embrace the bomb.
There is a long way to go in challenging aspects of President Obama’s speech at the United Nations-his embrace of American exceptionalism and his recommitment to a failed approach to Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, his view that war and violence can only be answered by military force or nothing, and more. He didn’t explicitly state a willingness to accept Iran’s participation in international talks on Syria. There is a serious danger that any move towards rapprochement with Iran would be matched with moves to pacify Israeli demands-almost certainly at the expense of Palestinian rights.
But in the broader scenario of US-Iran relations, this is a moment to move forward, to welcome the new approach in Washington now answering the new approach of Tehran.
More flexibility will be required than the United States is usually known for. The usual opponents-in Congress, in Israel and the pro-Israel lobbies-are already on the move, challenging the new opening. But these last weeks showed how a quickly organized demonstration of widespread public opinion, demanding negotiations instead of war, can win. We were able to build a movement fast, agile and powerful enough to reverse an imminent military attack on Syria and instead force a move towards diplomatic solutions to end the war. This time around, the demand to deepen, consolidate and not abandon diplomatic possibilities is on our agenda-and perhaps once again we can
51:08
|
(22February2024) Pledging Allegiance to Imam al-Mahdi (A) | Shaykh Ali Qomi | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | English
1️⃣ Why is there a need to pledge allegiance to Imam Mahdi (A)? (Theological approach)
2️⃣ Why can\\\'t we just NOT pledge allegiance to no one and live a simple life?...
1️⃣ Why is there a need to pledge allegiance to Imam Mahdi (A)? (Theological approach)
2️⃣ Why can\\\'t we just NOT pledge allegiance to no one and live a simple life? (Historical approach)
3️⃣ What does it mean to pledge allegiance to Imam Mahdi (A) today? (Ideological approach)
This lecture deals with the three fundamental questions regarding our allegiance to Imam Mahdi (ATFS).
It is essential that we strengthen our relationship with the Imam of the age. Insha\\\'Allah.
Thursday \\\'Family Night Program\\\' in Qom | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) :
01. (22February2024) Introduction | Br. Husayn Zaidi | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | English
02. (22February2024) Qur\\\\\\\'an Recitation | Br. Baqir | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | Arabic
03. (22February2024) Dua Kumayl | Shaykh Ali Naqi| Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | Arabic
04. (22February2024) Salaam O\\\' Imam Mahdi! Our Allegiance | Nasheed | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | Farsi Sub English
05. (22February2024) Pledging Allegiance to Imam al-Mahdi (A) | Shaykh Ali Qomi | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | English
Date: 22 February 2024
www.studentsofqom.org
More...
Description:
1️⃣ Why is there a need to pledge allegiance to Imam Mahdi (A)? (Theological approach)
2️⃣ Why can\\\'t we just NOT pledge allegiance to no one and live a simple life? (Historical approach)
3️⃣ What does it mean to pledge allegiance to Imam Mahdi (A) today? (Ideological approach)
This lecture deals with the three fundamental questions regarding our allegiance to Imam Mahdi (ATFS).
It is essential that we strengthen our relationship with the Imam of the age. Insha\\\'Allah.
Thursday \\\'Family Night Program\\\' in Qom | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) :
01. (22February2024) Introduction | Br. Husayn Zaidi | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | English
02. (22February2024) Qur\\\\\\\'an Recitation | Br. Baqir | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | Arabic
03. (22February2024) Dua Kumayl | Shaykh Ali Naqi| Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | Arabic
04. (22February2024) Salaam O\\\' Imam Mahdi! Our Allegiance | Nasheed | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | Farsi Sub English
05. (22February2024) Pledging Allegiance to Imam al-Mahdi (A) | Shaykh Ali Qomi | Celebrating the Wiladah of Imam Mahdi (A) in Qom | English
Date: 22 February 2024
www.studentsofqom.org
33:34
|
[English Translation] Interview Bashar Al-Asad - President Syria on current situation - 30 May 2013
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the...
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
More...
Description:
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
34:40
|
[Arabic] لقاء خاص مع الرئيس بشار الأسد - Bashar Asad Interview - 30 May 2013
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the...
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
More...
Description:
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
36:27
|
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah Iftar Speech at the Annual Women Commission 2013 - Arabic sub English
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivers a follow up speech and backing up his position and Hezbollah\\\\\\\'s political and military position. This is rebuking the black listing of Hezbollah\\\\\\\'s...
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivers a follow up speech and backing up his position and Hezbollah\\\\\\\'s political and military position. This is rebuking the black listing of Hezbollah\\\\\\\'s \\\\\\\"military wing\\\\\\\" as a terrorist organisation.
Pretty much he shows all the flaws in their approach, the Israel and American + Saudi influence they have had in making this decision under pressure and not out of a justified approach.
More...
Description:
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivers a follow up speech and backing up his position and Hezbollah\\\\\\\'s political and military position. This is rebuking the black listing of Hezbollah\\\\\\\'s \\\\\\\"military wing\\\\\\\" as a terrorist organisation.
Pretty much he shows all the flaws in their approach, the Israel and American + Saudi influence they have had in making this decision under pressure and not out of a justified approach.
34:30
|
Science and Open Mindedness | French Sub English
In this new analysis, Sheikh Jamel Tahiri comes back to the topics discussed in the last analysis, namely the prime number 19 and the \"salam\".
19, this number has a peculiarity with...
In this new analysis, Sheikh Jamel Tahiri comes back to the topics discussed in the last analysis, namely the prime number 19 and the \"salam\".
19, this number has a peculiarity with the Quran and proves that it is not human and is not the result of chance. He also comes back to the term \"salam\", peace. What is peace?
Beyond its external dimension, it has an internal dimension. Indeed, man is in perpetual conflict with himself. Man lives with two realities, the reality of the material body and the reality of the soul or spirit.
As long as he has not understood the mission of the two, he is in conflict and lives this conflict perpetually within himself while he can appear to live in #happiness.
When we are at peace with ourselves, we can serenely transmit the message to everyone in general and build this world.
It is because man lives a conflict inside himself that he ends up externalizing them and leading men into division and disunity.
Islam, the religions, the Prophets came for an approach of research, of quest towards God.
In Islam, and this is valid for all religions, we study in the framework of religious studies the stories and the Quran based on the life and the opinion of the scholars who preceded us. However, our Imams teach us to be in a process of perpetual research and evolution.
One of the differences between the Shiite school and the Sunni school is that for our Sunni brothers, there is no \"Ijtihad\", which can be translated as the effort to make the idea be appreciated according to the place and time. The Shiites have also locked this door by taking at face value what the scholars have left and not questioning them anymore. In reality, this approach of effort in research is Qur\'anic through the notion of \"Ummi\", translated as virgin, purity, impartial, because one has not relied on learned and acquired things. Ummi is based on an innate science, a science free of all things that would disturb the #reflection.
Article : https://www.timetowitness.com/science-and-open-mindedness/
🔗 Original video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLD0EL9MIt8
🔗 Original channel : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1KF8_Ly41H-LifRhd8KAcA
📺 Check out our Playlists
Science & Technology : https://link.timetowitness.com/play/science
Eschatology : https://link.timetowitness.com/play/eschatology
Spirituality: https://link.timetowitness.com/play/spirituality
Neom Project: https://link.timetowitness.com/play/neom
🔴 Don\'t forget to 🔴
🔵 Join our Telegram channel : https://link.timetowitness.com/telegram
✅ Subscribe to our channel : https://link.timetowitness.com/youtube/subscribe
📩 Subscribe to our newsletter : https://link.timetowitness.com/email/subscribe
🔴 Follow us on 🔴
🌐 Our Blog : https://www.timetowitness.com/
📢 Facebook : https://link.timetowitness.com/facebook
📢 Twitter : https://link.timetowitness.com/twitter
📢 Pinterest : https://link.timetowitness.com/pinterest
📢 Reddit : https://link.timetowitness.com/reddit
📢 Instagram : https://link.timetowitness.com/instagram
PLEASE NOTE:
Any of the views expressed by the speakers do not necessarily represent the views of Time2Witness or any other projects it may have or intend to do. Time2Witness and it\'s affiliates do not advocate nor condone any unlawful activity towards any individual or community.
More...
Description:
In this new analysis, Sheikh Jamel Tahiri comes back to the topics discussed in the last analysis, namely the prime number 19 and the \"salam\".
19, this number has a peculiarity with the Quran and proves that it is not human and is not the result of chance. He also comes back to the term \"salam\", peace. What is peace?
Beyond its external dimension, it has an internal dimension. Indeed, man is in perpetual conflict with himself. Man lives with two realities, the reality of the material body and the reality of the soul or spirit.
As long as he has not understood the mission of the two, he is in conflict and lives this conflict perpetually within himself while he can appear to live in #happiness.
When we are at peace with ourselves, we can serenely transmit the message to everyone in general and build this world.
It is because man lives a conflict inside himself that he ends up externalizing them and leading men into division and disunity.
Islam, the religions, the Prophets came for an approach of research, of quest towards God.
In Islam, and this is valid for all religions, we study in the framework of religious studies the stories and the Quran based on the life and the opinion of the scholars who preceded us. However, our Imams teach us to be in a process of perpetual research and evolution.
One of the differences between the Shiite school and the Sunni school is that for our Sunni brothers, there is no \"Ijtihad\", which can be translated as the effort to make the idea be appreciated according to the place and time. The Shiites have also locked this door by taking at face value what the scholars have left and not questioning them anymore. In reality, this approach of effort in research is Qur\'anic through the notion of \"Ummi\", translated as virgin, purity, impartial, because one has not relied on learned and acquired things. Ummi is based on an innate science, a science free of all things that would disturb the #reflection.
Article : https://www.timetowitness.com/science-and-open-mindedness/
🔗 Original video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLD0EL9MIt8
🔗 Original channel : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1KF8_Ly41H-LifRhd8KAcA
📺 Check out our Playlists
Science & Technology : https://link.timetowitness.com/play/science
Eschatology : https://link.timetowitness.com/play/eschatology
Spirituality: https://link.timetowitness.com/play/spirituality
Neom Project: https://link.timetowitness.com/play/neom
🔴 Don\'t forget to 🔴
🔵 Join our Telegram channel : https://link.timetowitness.com/telegram
✅ Subscribe to our channel : https://link.timetowitness.com/youtube/subscribe
📩 Subscribe to our newsletter : https://link.timetowitness.com/email/subscribe
🔴 Follow us on 🔴
🌐 Our Blog : https://www.timetowitness.com/
📢 Facebook : https://link.timetowitness.com/facebook
📢 Twitter : https://link.timetowitness.com/twitter
📢 Pinterest : https://link.timetowitness.com/pinterest
📢 Reddit : https://link.timetowitness.com/reddit
📢 Instagram : https://link.timetowitness.com/instagram
PLEASE NOTE:
Any of the views expressed by the speakers do not necessarily represent the views of Time2Witness or any other projects it may have or intend to do. Time2Witness and it\'s affiliates do not advocate nor condone any unlawful activity towards any individual or community.
Hajj Spirituality Day Before Hajj by Khalil - English
A must to see Day before Hajj. A spiritual approach to compare how Hajj is related to death and how it gives another chance to a person to be born again and live again. Presented by Khalil Jaffer....
A must to see Day before Hajj. A spiritual approach to compare how Hajj is related to death and how it gives another chance to a person to be born again and live again. Presented by Khalil Jaffer. First Edition Sept 2007
More...
Description:
A must to see Day before Hajj. A spiritual approach to compare how Hajj is related to death and how it gives another chance to a person to be born again and live again. Presented by Khalil Jaffer. First Edition Sept 2007
Why USA always lies - why - News in English
Ahmadinejad reiterated, "The security report published in America was a victory for the Iranian nation, since all nuclear pretexts against the Iranian nation have been put forth by the Americans,...
Ahmadinejad reiterated, "The security report published in America was a victory for the Iranian nation, since all nuclear pretexts against the Iranian nation have been put forth by the Americans, and now it is the same government that is declaring that those claims had been made based on wrong information." He added, "They are thus confessing that Iran has not breached any commitments, and that confession means accepting the Iranian nation's victory in this campaign." Arguing that "Due to their arrogant approach they would never confess openly", Ahmadinejad said, "Yet, we accept any kind of confessions on their part."
More...
Description:
Ahmadinejad reiterated, "The security report published in America was a victory for the Iranian nation, since all nuclear pretexts against the Iranian nation have been put forth by the Americans, and now it is the same government that is declaring that those claims had been made based on wrong information." He added, "They are thus confessing that Iran has not breached any commitments, and that confession means accepting the Iranian nation's victory in this campaign." Arguing that "Due to their arrogant approach they would never confess openly", Ahmadinejad said, "Yet, we accept any kind of confessions on their part."
The Story of Stuff - Ch.1 - Introduction - English
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to...
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.
More...
Description:
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.
The Story of Stuff - Ch.2 - Extraction - English
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to...
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff.
More...
Description:
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff.
The Story of Stuff - Ch.3 - Production - English
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to...
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff.
More...
Description:
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff.
1:59
|
The Story of Stuff - Ch.4 - Distribution - English
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to...
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff.
More...
Description:
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff.
The Story of Stuff - Ch.5 - Consumption - English
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to...
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.
More...
Description:
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.
2:16
|
The Story of Stuff - Ch.6 - Disposal - English
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to...
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff.
More...
Description:
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff.
The Story of Stuff - Ch.7 - Another Way - English
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to...
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.
More...
Description:
The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.
6:47
|
Sunni Clerik attacks Wahabism - Arabic sub English
Yemeni cleric Sheikh Ali Al-Jiffri attacks the Wahabi ideology that wishes to distance people for the love of the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.a.w) Please approach Sunni brothers and explain...
Yemeni cleric Sheikh Ali Al-Jiffri attacks the Wahabi ideology that wishes to distance people for the love of the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.a.w) Please approach Sunni brothers and explain them that Sunnis are different from Wahabis. Wahabis are a fitna and enemies of Islam. We need to spread awareness amongst Muslim ummah to be united against these Wahabis Nasibis. Wahabis and their forefathers never liked our prophet and his family.
More...
Description:
Yemeni cleric Sheikh Ali Al-Jiffri attacks the Wahabi ideology that wishes to distance people for the love of the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.a.w) Please approach Sunni brothers and explain them that Sunnis are different from Wahabis. Wahabis are a fitna and enemies of Islam. We need to spread awareness amongst Muslim ummah to be united against these Wahabis Nasibis. Wahabis and their forefathers never liked our prophet and his family.
22:56
|
Gaza-Israel Massacres More than 300 Palestinians-800 Wounded Part 1-English
Iran Urges Int'l Community to Halt Israeli Crimes
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi called on the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic...
Iran Urges Int'l Community to Halt Israeli Crimes
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi called on the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to take immediate measures to bring an end to Israel's brutal attacks in the Gaza Strip.
About 220 Palestinians were killed across the Gaza Strip on Saturday in massive air strikes carried out by the Zionist regime.
This brutal and inhumane strike brings more shame upon Israel, MNA quoted Qashqavi as saying on Saturday.
"Although this crime has apparently been committed to gain more votes in the election campaigns of the occupiers of the occupied territories, it also provides firm evidence that the Zionist regime's aggressive approach is continuing."
He also criticized the members of the international community for their silence in the face of the disastrous situation in Gaza.
"These crimes are the result of the painful silence of the international community in the response to the inhumane siege of oppressed men, women, and children in the Gaza Strip."
The Foreign Ministry spokesman addressed the world bodies and so-called upholders of human rights, saying, "The important question in this issue is: Shouldn't attacking residential areas and massacring dozens of men, women, and children in the streets… cause any reaction or human feelings to arise, and shouldn't this be considered… a serious human rights issue?"
Qashqavi also expressed his condolences to the Palestinians and emphasized that the Iranian nation and government strongly supports the oppressed Palestinian nation in their struggle against the Zionist regime.
More...
Description:
Iran Urges Int'l Community to Halt Israeli Crimes
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi called on the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to take immediate measures to bring an end to Israel's brutal attacks in the Gaza Strip.
About 220 Palestinians were killed across the Gaza Strip on Saturday in massive air strikes carried out by the Zionist regime.
This brutal and inhumane strike brings more shame upon Israel, MNA quoted Qashqavi as saying on Saturday.
"Although this crime has apparently been committed to gain more votes in the election campaigns of the occupiers of the occupied territories, it also provides firm evidence that the Zionist regime's aggressive approach is continuing."
He also criticized the members of the international community for their silence in the face of the disastrous situation in Gaza.
"These crimes are the result of the painful silence of the international community in the response to the inhumane siege of oppressed men, women, and children in the Gaza Strip."
The Foreign Ministry spokesman addressed the world bodies and so-called upholders of human rights, saying, "The important question in this issue is: Shouldn't attacking residential areas and massacring dozens of men, women, and children in the streets… cause any reaction or human feelings to arise, and shouldn't this be considered… a serious human rights issue?"
Qashqavi also expressed his condolences to the Palestinians and emphasized that the Iranian nation and government strongly supports the oppressed Palestinian nation in their struggle against the Zionist regime.