15 April: Solidarity Day with Bahrain Female Prisoners of Conscience - Arabic English
Neither in Egypt, nor in Tunisia were women assaulted during the uprisings that took place, even though many women participated and were active members in the revolutions and uprisings. As for...
Neither in Egypt, nor in Tunisia were women assaulted during the uprisings that took place, even though many women participated and were active members in the revolutions and uprisings. As for Bahrain, the Arab Gulf country which should respect the religion, dignity, culture of its women, put many of these in prison.
Hence, Ayatollah Sheikh Issa Ahmad Qassem called for a campaign in solidarity with Bahraini female prisoners for the following aims:
1- Draw international attention to the oppression the Bahraini people are subject to, particularly women.
2- Morally support the Bahraini oppressed people.
3- Defining the legitimate demands of the people most important of which is a constitutional kingdom and elected government.
4- Mobilizing international rights organizations towards the blatant violations of women's rights in Bahrain.
5- Mobilizing the international public opinion and international women's organizations concerned about prisoners of "expressing opinion".
In the same context, the Bahraini Opposition overseas issued a statement in which it said "In response to the multiple methods the Bahraini authority resorts to in order to repress the people and the popular protests in demand of their rights, the people and the opposition insist to continue their peaceful protests despite all the aggression practiced against them."
Particularly speaking about women, the Bahraini Opposition overseas added in its statement that alongside men, the women in Bahrain have stood up to the government demanding their rights, having in return to bear imprisonment, torture, and martyrdom at times. The statement further noted that despite all this aggression, the Bahraini free women are still steadfast and unyielding.
The Bahraini Opposition overseas, therefore "called on the women of the Arab Nation as well as the World, to stand in defense of the Bahraini oppressed women, by that declaring the 15tho f April a day of solidarity with the women of Bahrain under the slogan "Free Women of Bahrain"."
Also, the Opposition urged all women's rights organizations in its statement , whether Arab, Islamic, or international to declare a clear rejection of what the women in Bahrain is subject to, which falls into the category of the these organizations' legal, ethical, and humanitarian duties.
"Save the women of Bahrain...Save the free women in prisons", concluded the statement.
http://www.english.moqawama.org/essaydetails.php?eid=13903&cid=215
More...
Description:
Neither in Egypt, nor in Tunisia were women assaulted during the uprisings that took place, even though many women participated and were active members in the revolutions and uprisings. As for Bahrain, the Arab Gulf country which should respect the religion, dignity, culture of its women, put many of these in prison.
Hence, Ayatollah Sheikh Issa Ahmad Qassem called for a campaign in solidarity with Bahraini female prisoners for the following aims:
1- Draw international attention to the oppression the Bahraini people are subject to, particularly women.
2- Morally support the Bahraini oppressed people.
3- Defining the legitimate demands of the people most important of which is a constitutional kingdom and elected government.
4- Mobilizing international rights organizations towards the blatant violations of women's rights in Bahrain.
5- Mobilizing the international public opinion and international women's organizations concerned about prisoners of "expressing opinion".
In the same context, the Bahraini Opposition overseas issued a statement in which it said "In response to the multiple methods the Bahraini authority resorts to in order to repress the people and the popular protests in demand of their rights, the people and the opposition insist to continue their peaceful protests despite all the aggression practiced against them."
Particularly speaking about women, the Bahraini Opposition overseas added in its statement that alongside men, the women in Bahrain have stood up to the government demanding their rights, having in return to bear imprisonment, torture, and martyrdom at times. The statement further noted that despite all this aggression, the Bahraini free women are still steadfast and unyielding.
The Bahraini Opposition overseas, therefore "called on the women of the Arab Nation as well as the World, to stand in defense of the Bahraini oppressed women, by that declaring the 15tho f April a day of solidarity with the women of Bahrain under the slogan "Free Women of Bahrain"."
Also, the Opposition urged all women's rights organizations in its statement , whether Arab, Islamic, or international to declare a clear rejection of what the women in Bahrain is subject to, which falls into the category of the these organizations' legal, ethical, and humanitarian duties.
"Save the women of Bahrain...Save the free women in prisons", concluded the statement.
http://www.english.moqawama.org/essaydetails.php?eid=13903&cid=215
[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
[03] Kullo Yawmin Ashura Kullo Arzin Karbala by Agha Jawad Naqvi - Urdu
Subject: Tarbiyat-e-Islami, Hamasa-e-Karbala
Event:Mohurrum 2005
Category:Seminar
Location:Sialkot
Description:5-Day Seminar
Subject: Tarbiyat-e-Islami, Hamasa-e-Karbala...
Subject: Tarbiyat-e-Islami, Hamasa-e-Karbala
Event:Mohurrum 2005
Category:Seminar
Location:Sialkot
Description:5-Day Seminar
Subject: Tarbiyat-e-Islami, Hamasa-e-Karbala
Event:Mohurrum 2005
Category:Seminar
Location:Sialkot
Description:5-Day Seminar
More...
Description:
Subject: Tarbiyat-e-Islami, Hamasa-e-Karbala
Event:Mohurrum 2005
Category:Seminar
Location:Sialkot
Description:5-Day Seminar
Subject: Tarbiyat-e-Islami, Hamasa-e-Karbala
Event:Mohurrum 2005
Category:Seminar
Location:Sialkot
Description:5-Day Seminar
MUST SEE - Historic Judgement in Mumbai - Maulana Syed Zaki Baqri - Part 7 - Urdu
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true...
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true path of Islam - the path of Haqq!!
More...
Description:
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true path of Islam - the path of Haqq!!
MUST SEE - Historic Judgement in Mumbai - Maulana Syed Zaki Baqri - Part 4 - Urdu
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true...
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true path of Islam - the path of Haqq!!
More...
Description:
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true path of Islam - the path of Haqq!!
MUST SEE - Historic Judgement in Mumbai - Maulana Syed Zaki Baqri - Part 2 - Urdu
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true...
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true path of Islam - the path of Haqq!!
More...
Description:
Historic Judgement of Ulama-e-Mumbai about Maulana Syed Mohammed Zaki Baqri - Majlis on the subject of objection raised by Pasban-e-Aza and Azadar.com - See for yourself Maulana Baqri on the true path of Islam - the path of Haqq!!
26th Sep-Hassan Nasrullah Speech on Youm ul Quds -English
Quds Day keeps Palestinian cause alive
Hezbollah\\\'s leader says Quds Day is clearly alive decades after its inception, as a warning to Muslims against abandoning the Palestinian cause....
Quds Day keeps Palestinian cause alive
Hezbollah\\\'s leader says Quds Day is clearly alive decades after its inception, as a warning to Muslims against abandoning the Palestinian cause.
“Thirty years after Imam Khomeini (PBUH) announced Quds Day, it is clearly very much alive…and has always had the support of those generations who supported Imam Khomeini and followed his path,” said Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah during a televised address on the ocassion.
He hailed the annual event as an opportunity to reinvigorate the cause of al-Quds and Palestine, “which was and still is subject to destruction, bargaining and forgetfulness.”
“The idea is not just for standing at podiums and crying because of (Palestinian) losses,” he said, adding that by marking Quds Day, Muslims highlight their determination to rectify the situation.
Nasrallah criticized those who are afraid of the negative repercussions standing for the Palestinian nation may bring, describing the issue as a central cause that concerns the destiny of the entire Islamic Ummah and of future generations.
He referred to the occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel as a humiliation for Muslims whose noblest sanctities remain occupied by their \\\'racist Zionist\\\' enemy.
The Hezbollah secretary general underscored the responsibility of the Muslim community towards al-Quds, Palestine and the Palestinian nation, saying Palestine belonged to the Palestinians, Muslims and the Arab world and that it must revert to its real owners.
He refuted the misconception of Israel being a superpower and described the Zionist regime as an entity created by Britain and taken over by the United States, noting that both are using Tel Aviv for their hegemonic aims. The Hezbollah chief then pored scorn on the shameful tactic of begging the founders of Israel in the hope of liberating the occupied territories.
He said Israel is the enemy of all Arabs and Muslims and called on the Arabs unite against their common enemy, adding that Premier Ehud Olmert\\\'s resignation is evidence of the Israeli defeat in the July 2006 war.
Nasrallah also emphasized that Hezbollah was genuinely devoted to the reconciliation of all Lebanese rival groups in the national effort to realize peace and political stability.
The founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini, designated International Quds Day in 1979 to oppose Israel\\\'s occupation of Islam\\\'s third most holy city and Palestinian lands in general.
Anti-Zionist demonstrations are held on the last Friday of the fasting month of Ramadan in some Muslim countries and by Muslim and Arab communities around the world.
More...
Description:
Quds Day keeps Palestinian cause alive
Hezbollah\\\'s leader says Quds Day is clearly alive decades after its inception, as a warning to Muslims against abandoning the Palestinian cause.
“Thirty years after Imam Khomeini (PBUH) announced Quds Day, it is clearly very much alive…and has always had the support of those generations who supported Imam Khomeini and followed his path,” said Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah during a televised address on the ocassion.
He hailed the annual event as an opportunity to reinvigorate the cause of al-Quds and Palestine, “which was and still is subject to destruction, bargaining and forgetfulness.”
“The idea is not just for standing at podiums and crying because of (Palestinian) losses,” he said, adding that by marking Quds Day, Muslims highlight their determination to rectify the situation.
Nasrallah criticized those who are afraid of the negative repercussions standing for the Palestinian nation may bring, describing the issue as a central cause that concerns the destiny of the entire Islamic Ummah and of future generations.
He referred to the occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel as a humiliation for Muslims whose noblest sanctities remain occupied by their \\\'racist Zionist\\\' enemy.
The Hezbollah secretary general underscored the responsibility of the Muslim community towards al-Quds, Palestine and the Palestinian nation, saying Palestine belonged to the Palestinians, Muslims and the Arab world and that it must revert to its real owners.
He refuted the misconception of Israel being a superpower and described the Zionist regime as an entity created by Britain and taken over by the United States, noting that both are using Tel Aviv for their hegemonic aims. The Hezbollah chief then pored scorn on the shameful tactic of begging the founders of Israel in the hope of liberating the occupied territories.
He said Israel is the enemy of all Arabs and Muslims and called on the Arabs unite against their common enemy, adding that Premier Ehud Olmert\\\'s resignation is evidence of the Israeli defeat in the July 2006 war.
Nasrallah also emphasized that Hezbollah was genuinely devoted to the reconciliation of all Lebanese rival groups in the national effort to realize peace and political stability.
The founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini, designated International Quds Day in 1979 to oppose Israel\\\'s occupation of Islam\\\'s third most holy city and Palestinian lands in general.
Anti-Zionist demonstrations are held on the last Friday of the fasting month of Ramadan in some Muslim countries and by Muslim and Arab communities around the world.
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah - Speech Al-Qods Day - 26 Sept 08 - English
**********************************
There was a connection problem from Press TV itself so approx 15-20mins was cut in between
**********************************
Quds Day keeps Palestinian cause...
**********************************
There was a connection problem from Press TV itself so approx 15-20mins was cut in between
**********************************
Quds Day keeps Palestinian cause alive
Hezbollah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s leader says Quds Day is clearly alive decades after its inception, as a warning to Muslims against abandoning the Palestinian cause.
“Thirty years after Imam Khomeini (PBUH) announced Quds Day, it is clearly very much alive…and has always had the support of those generations who supported Imam Khomeini and followed his path,” said Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah during a televised address on the ocassion. He hailed the annual event as an opportunity to reinvigorate the cause of al-Quds and Palestine, “which was and still is subject to destruction, bargaining and forgetfulness.”
“The idea is not just for standing at podiums and crying because of (Palestinian) losses,” he said, adding that by marking Quds Day, Muslims highlight their determination to rectify the situation.
Nasrallah criticized those who are afraid of the negative repercussions standing for the Palestinian nation may bring, describing the issue as a central cause that concerns the destiny of the entire Islamic Ummah and of future generations.
He referred to the occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel as a humiliation for Muslims whose noblest sanctities remain occupied by their \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'racist Zionist\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' enemy.
The Hezbollah secretary general underscored the responsibility of the Muslim community towards al-Quds, Palestine and the Palestinian nation, saying Palestine belonged to the Palestinians, Muslims and the Arab world and that it must revert to its real owners.
He refuted the misconception of Israel being a superpower and described the Zionist regime as an entity created by Britain and taken over by the United States, noting that both are using Tel Aviv for their hegemonic aims. The Hezbollah chief then pored scorn on the shameful tactic of begging the founders of Israel in the hope of liberating the occupied territories.
He said Israel is the enemy of all Arabs and Muslims and called on the Arabs unite against their common enemy, adding that Premier Ehud Olmert\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s resignation is evidence of the Israeli defeat in the July 2006 war.
Nasrallah also emphasized that Hezbollah was genuinely devoted to the reconciliation of all Lebanese rival groups in the national effort to realize peace and political stability.
The founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini, designated International Quds Day in 1979 to oppose Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s occupation of Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s third most holy city and Palestinian lands in general.
Anti-Zionist demonstrations are held on the last Friday of the fasting month of Ramadan in some Muslim countries and by Muslim and Arab communities around the world.
More...
Description:
**********************************
There was a connection problem from Press TV itself so approx 15-20mins was cut in between
**********************************
Quds Day keeps Palestinian cause alive
Hezbollah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s leader says Quds Day is clearly alive decades after its inception, as a warning to Muslims against abandoning the Palestinian cause.
“Thirty years after Imam Khomeini (PBUH) announced Quds Day, it is clearly very much alive…and has always had the support of those generations who supported Imam Khomeini and followed his path,” said Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah during a televised address on the ocassion. He hailed the annual event as an opportunity to reinvigorate the cause of al-Quds and Palestine, “which was and still is subject to destruction, bargaining and forgetfulness.”
“The idea is not just for standing at podiums and crying because of (Palestinian) losses,” he said, adding that by marking Quds Day, Muslims highlight their determination to rectify the situation.
Nasrallah criticized those who are afraid of the negative repercussions standing for the Palestinian nation may bring, describing the issue as a central cause that concerns the destiny of the entire Islamic Ummah and of future generations.
He referred to the occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel as a humiliation for Muslims whose noblest sanctities remain occupied by their \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'racist Zionist\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' enemy.
The Hezbollah secretary general underscored the responsibility of the Muslim community towards al-Quds, Palestine and the Palestinian nation, saying Palestine belonged to the Palestinians, Muslims and the Arab world and that it must revert to its real owners.
He refuted the misconception of Israel being a superpower and described the Zionist regime as an entity created by Britain and taken over by the United States, noting that both are using Tel Aviv for their hegemonic aims. The Hezbollah chief then pored scorn on the shameful tactic of begging the founders of Israel in the hope of liberating the occupied territories.
He said Israel is the enemy of all Arabs and Muslims and called on the Arabs unite against their common enemy, adding that Premier Ehud Olmert\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s resignation is evidence of the Israeli defeat in the July 2006 war.
Nasrallah also emphasized that Hezbollah was genuinely devoted to the reconciliation of all Lebanese rival groups in the national effort to realize peace and political stability.
The founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini, designated International Quds Day in 1979 to oppose Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s occupation of Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s third most holy city and Palestinian lands in general.
Anti-Zionist demonstrations are held on the last Friday of the fasting month of Ramadan in some Muslim countries and by Muslim and Arab communities around the world.
Topic-Sila-e -Reham-kindness to relatives Part 1-English
Maulana Syed Abul Qasim Rizvi speaking at Panjtan Center Melbourne Australia on the subject of Sila e reham and its importance in Islam.Dated 3rd of September 2006
Maulana Syed Abul Qasim Rizvi speaking at Panjtan Center Melbourne Australia on the subject of Sila e reham and its importance in Islam.Dated 3rd of September 2006
Imam Mahdi - An Introduction - Part 1 - English
And we have sent down to you the Book explaining all things.[1]
Believing in Prophet Mohammad peace be upon him and his holy family and also faith to returning of Imam Mahdi is not only for...
And we have sent down to you the Book explaining all things.[1]
Believing in Prophet Mohammad peace be upon him and his holy family and also faith to returning of Imam Mahdi is not only for Moslems. It mentioned in other holy books for others religions and illuminated them to this fact. There is an Ayah in Quran about this idea:
Before this we wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): My worshipper the righteous shall inherit the earth.[2]
All of Shiite commentators and some of Sunnite\\\'s said that \\\"Righteous Worshipper\\\" (Ebadi al salehoon) is related to Imam Mahdi.[3] According to this Ayah, good news of returning and manifestation of Imam Mahdi and his worldwide government was mentioned in Prophet David\\\'s book (Psalms) and other holy books. So believers of those prophets were aware of this subject. As you know most of the holy books except Quran are consider to distortion. Despite these alterations you can find this topic in these books now.
Is it possible that God talked about this case in all of the holy books and he didn\\\'t tell anything about Imam Mahdi in Quran? Of course not, certainly it is a wrong idea. We have a lot of Ayah in Quran about him. Seyyed Hashem Bahrani one of the great Islamic scientists in eleventh century wrote in his book[4] that more than hundred and twenty Ayah is about Imam Mahdi and demonstrate his word by addressing to our Imams verse. Some other scientists increase them to 265 Ayah and may be we can add some more verses (Ayah) to this collection.
All of these verses (Ayah) which by them we are informed manifestation of Imam Mahdi and all events that would happen at that time and learn something about his companion and also his enemy and our duty during this time are telling us how much Mahdaviat (things regarding to Imam Mahdi) is important in Islam. Interpretation of these verses and relating these verses to Imam Mahdi is not only for Shiite commentators, but most of Sunnite commentators accept it and mention to it in their books. One of the great Sunnite scientists Soleyman Ghondoozi Hanafi who was lived in 1294 was allocating one section in his book[5] to this topic and told that 57 verses in Quran are for Imam Mahdi.
At the end, there is an Ayah in Quran which is verified by both Sunnite and Shiite that it is about Imam Mahdi and regards to his revolution. Exalted God says about his manifestation and his government:
And we wished to be gracious to those who were being depressed in the land, to make them leaders (in faith) and make them heirs.[6]
All the commentators agree that heir (Vares) is Imam Mahdi.[7] O God! Manifest the promised of all religions as soon as possible, Amen.
__________________________________________
[1] Quran, Nahl, Ayah 89 [Back]
[2] Quran, Al Anbiaa, Ayah 105 [Back]
[3] Eghdo al Dovar (Salmi Shafeie) page 217 [Back]
[4] \\\"Mohajato Fi Ma Nazal Fi Al Gha\\\'em Al Hojja\\\" this book is named \\\"Simaye Hazrate Mahdi dar Quran\\\" in Persian. [Back]
[5] Yanabi Al Maveda, volume 3, Section 71 [Back]
[6] Quran, Ghesas, Ayah 5 [Back]
[7] Sunnite: Shavahed Al Tanzil (Hakem Haskani) Volume 1, Page 431, verse no. 590
Shiite: Ma\\\'ani Al Akhbar, Page 79, Verse 1
More...
Description:
And we have sent down to you the Book explaining all things.[1]
Believing in Prophet Mohammad peace be upon him and his holy family and also faith to returning of Imam Mahdi is not only for Moslems. It mentioned in other holy books for others religions and illuminated them to this fact. There is an Ayah in Quran about this idea:
Before this we wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): My worshipper the righteous shall inherit the earth.[2]
All of Shiite commentators and some of Sunnite\\\'s said that \\\"Righteous Worshipper\\\" (Ebadi al salehoon) is related to Imam Mahdi.[3] According to this Ayah, good news of returning and manifestation of Imam Mahdi and his worldwide government was mentioned in Prophet David\\\'s book (Psalms) and other holy books. So believers of those prophets were aware of this subject. As you know most of the holy books except Quran are consider to distortion. Despite these alterations you can find this topic in these books now.
Is it possible that God talked about this case in all of the holy books and he didn\\\'t tell anything about Imam Mahdi in Quran? Of course not, certainly it is a wrong idea. We have a lot of Ayah in Quran about him. Seyyed Hashem Bahrani one of the great Islamic scientists in eleventh century wrote in his book[4] that more than hundred and twenty Ayah is about Imam Mahdi and demonstrate his word by addressing to our Imams verse. Some other scientists increase them to 265 Ayah and may be we can add some more verses (Ayah) to this collection.
All of these verses (Ayah) which by them we are informed manifestation of Imam Mahdi and all events that would happen at that time and learn something about his companion and also his enemy and our duty during this time are telling us how much Mahdaviat (things regarding to Imam Mahdi) is important in Islam. Interpretation of these verses and relating these verses to Imam Mahdi is not only for Shiite commentators, but most of Sunnite commentators accept it and mention to it in their books. One of the great Sunnite scientists Soleyman Ghondoozi Hanafi who was lived in 1294 was allocating one section in his book[5] to this topic and told that 57 verses in Quran are for Imam Mahdi.
At the end, there is an Ayah in Quran which is verified by both Sunnite and Shiite that it is about Imam Mahdi and regards to his revolution. Exalted God says about his manifestation and his government:
And we wished to be gracious to those who were being depressed in the land, to make them leaders (in faith) and make them heirs.[6]
All the commentators agree that heir (Vares) is Imam Mahdi.[7] O God! Manifest the promised of all religions as soon as possible, Amen.
__________________________________________
[1] Quran, Nahl, Ayah 89 [Back]
[2] Quran, Al Anbiaa, Ayah 105 [Back]
[3] Eghdo al Dovar (Salmi Shafeie) page 217 [Back]
[4] \\\"Mohajato Fi Ma Nazal Fi Al Gha\\\'em Al Hojja\\\" this book is named \\\"Simaye Hazrate Mahdi dar Quran\\\" in Persian. [Back]
[5] Yanabi Al Maveda, volume 3, Section 71 [Back]
[6] Quran, Ghesas, Ayah 5 [Back]
[7] Sunnite: Shavahed Al Tanzil (Hakem Haskani) Volume 1, Page 431, verse no. 590
Shiite: Ma\\\'ani Al Akhbar, Page 79, Verse 1
Part 2 (Must Watch) Tehran Sermon - Rehbar Syed Ali Khamenie Speech - English & Persian
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has described the \\\\\\\'unprecedented\\\\\\\' turnout of almost 85% in the election as a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy.
Ayatollah Seyyed...
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has described the \\\\\\\'unprecedented\\\\\\\' turnout of almost 85% in the election as a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy.
Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said high turnout in the election, which witnessed more than 40 million Iranians casting their votes, was a great manifestation of people\\\\\\\'s solidarity with the Islamic establishment.
Addressing Friday prayers congregation, Ayatollah Khamenei said that last Friday\\\\\\\'s election indicated a \\\\\\\'common sense of responsibility\\\\\\\' of the Iranian nation to determine the future of the country.
The Leader added that all those who took part in the election proved their \\\\\\\'political consciousness and commitment\\\\\\\' towards the establishment to the whole world.
The Leader said the high voter turnout in the election was a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy and a \\\\\\\'real celebration\\\\\\\' for the friends of the country.
\\\\\\\"The Islamic Republic of Iran will by no means betray the votes of the nation,\\\\\\\" the Leader said, adding the legal system of the election will not allow any ballot rigging in Iran.
Ayatollah Khamenei, however, maintained that the Guardian Council, the body tasked with overseeing the election, would look into the complaints of the candidates who are unhappy with the election results.
The Leader also added that the establishment would never give-in to illegal demands, urging all presidential candidates to pursue their complaints through legal channels. Ayatollah Khamenei called for an end to illegal street protests aimed at reversing the result of the election.
Following the announcement of the election outcome, supporters of the defeated candidate Mir-Hussein Mousavi-who rejected the election results-- took to the streets of Tehran and other cities in daily rallies.
The Leader also warned against attempts made by foreign media outlets seeking to destabilize the country and blamed Britain in particular. Ayatollah Khamenei also decried the slander of former and incumbent top officials in pre-election debates by candidates.
President Ahmadinejad was re-elected the next president of the country with over 60% percent of the votes.
He won over his three rivals Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaei with almost 25 million votes.
The Leader said the time is over for rivalry, stressing that all should unite and line up behind the president-elect
Complete Transcript
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing.
In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country.
I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election.
I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media.
On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment.
The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system.
Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote.
In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us.
It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence.
Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense.
Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored.
Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system.
Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement.
My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory.
Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system.
This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy.
This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene.
This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country.
This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election.
If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election.
Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment.
They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout.
A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other.
For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game.
This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today.
I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily.
For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts.
The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed.
These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent.
Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system.
The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue.
The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment.
Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system.
I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism.
I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted.
My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue.
Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution.
People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent.
Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities.
They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon.
The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects.
All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people.
They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated.
One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice.
These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates.
Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings.
Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth.
If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates.
But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate.
There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made.
This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions.
They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me.
For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems.
On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere.
I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law.
On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures.
They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption.
Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities.
You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation.
Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures.
He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date.
On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities.
For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know.
In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people.
The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine.
The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that.
The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced.
There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country.
We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources.
Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it.
Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized.
Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat.
They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this.
The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution.
It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust.
In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process.
When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place?
However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands.
If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system.
Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this.
I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries.
We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now.
Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people.
It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues.
I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy.
In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain.
I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say.
All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want.
If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections?
Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda.
It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this?
They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership.
Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents.
It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country.
Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time.
I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly.
The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries.
Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters.
When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal.
When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave.
Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks.
Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe?
Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security.
This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services.
The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution.
Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people.
American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime?
During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights?
In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!
More...
Description:
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has described the \\\\\\\'unprecedented\\\\\\\' turnout of almost 85% in the election as a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy.
Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said high turnout in the election, which witnessed more than 40 million Iranians casting their votes, was a great manifestation of people\\\\\\\'s solidarity with the Islamic establishment.
Addressing Friday prayers congregation, Ayatollah Khamenei said that last Friday\\\\\\\'s election indicated a \\\\\\\'common sense of responsibility\\\\\\\' of the Iranian nation to determine the future of the country.
The Leader added that all those who took part in the election proved their \\\\\\\'political consciousness and commitment\\\\\\\' towards the establishment to the whole world.
The Leader said the high voter turnout in the election was a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy and a \\\\\\\'real celebration\\\\\\\' for the friends of the country.
\\\\\\\"The Islamic Republic of Iran will by no means betray the votes of the nation,\\\\\\\" the Leader said, adding the legal system of the election will not allow any ballot rigging in Iran.
Ayatollah Khamenei, however, maintained that the Guardian Council, the body tasked with overseeing the election, would look into the complaints of the candidates who are unhappy with the election results.
The Leader also added that the establishment would never give-in to illegal demands, urging all presidential candidates to pursue their complaints through legal channels. Ayatollah Khamenei called for an end to illegal street protests aimed at reversing the result of the election.
Following the announcement of the election outcome, supporters of the defeated candidate Mir-Hussein Mousavi-who rejected the election results-- took to the streets of Tehran and other cities in daily rallies.
The Leader also warned against attempts made by foreign media outlets seeking to destabilize the country and blamed Britain in particular. Ayatollah Khamenei also decried the slander of former and incumbent top officials in pre-election debates by candidates.
President Ahmadinejad was re-elected the next president of the country with over 60% percent of the votes.
He won over his three rivals Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaei with almost 25 million votes.
The Leader said the time is over for rivalry, stressing that all should unite and line up behind the president-elect
Complete Transcript
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing.
In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country.
I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election.
I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media.
On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment.
The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system.
Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote.
In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us.
It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence.
Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense.
Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored.
Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system.
Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement.
My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory.
Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system.
This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy.
This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene.
This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country.
This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election.
If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election.
Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment.
They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout.
A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other.
For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game.
This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today.
I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily.
For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts.
The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed.
These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent.
Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system.
The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue.
The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment.
Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system.
I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism.
I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted.
My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue.
Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution.
People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent.
Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities.
They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon.
The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects.
All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people.
They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated.
One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice.
These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates.
Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings.
Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth.
If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates.
But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate.
There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made.
This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions.
They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me.
For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems.
On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere.
I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law.
On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures.
They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption.
Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities.
You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation.
Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures.
He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date.
On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities.
For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know.
In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people.
The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine.
The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that.
The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced.
There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country.
We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources.
Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it.
Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized.
Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat.
They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this.
The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution.
It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust.
In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process.
When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place?
However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands.
If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system.
Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this.
I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries.
We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now.
Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people.
It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues.
I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy.
In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain.
I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say.
All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want.
If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections?
Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda.
It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this?
They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership.
Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents.
It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country.
Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time.
I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly.
The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries.
Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters.
When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal.
When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave.
Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks.
Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe?
Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security.
This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services.
The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution.
Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people.
American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime?
During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights?
In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!
[FULL SPEECH] Supreme Leader Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei - Friday Prayer - 19Jun09 - English
Complete Transcript
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise...
Complete Transcript
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing.
In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country.
I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election.
I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media.
On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment.
The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system.
Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote.
In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us.
It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence.
Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense.
Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored.
Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system.
Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement.
My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory.
Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system.
This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy.
This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene.
This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country.
This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election.
If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election.
Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment.
They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout.
A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other.
For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game.
This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today.
I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily.
For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts.
The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed.
These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent.
Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system.
The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue.
The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment.
Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system.
I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism.
I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted.
My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue.
Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution.
People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent.
Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities.
They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon.
The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects.
All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people.
They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated.
One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice.
These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates.
Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings.
Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth.
If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates.
But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate.
There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made.
This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions.
They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me.
For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems.
On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere.
I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law.
On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures.
They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption.
Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities.
You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation.
Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures.
He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date.
On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities.
For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know.
In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people.
The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine.
The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that.
The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced.
There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country.
We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources.
Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it.
Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized.
Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat.
They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this.
The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution.
It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust.
In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process.
When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place?
However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands.
If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system.
Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this.
I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries.
We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now.
Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people.
It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues.
I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy.
In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain.
I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say.
All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want.
If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections?
Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda.
It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this?
They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership.
Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents.
It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country.
Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time.
I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly.
The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries.
Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters.
When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal.
When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave.
Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks.
Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe?
Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security.
This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services.
The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution.
Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people.
American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime?
During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights?
In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!
Supreme Leader Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei - Friday Prayer Speech - 19Jun09 - English
More...
Description:
Complete Transcript
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing.
In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country.
I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election.
I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media.
On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment.
The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system.
Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote.
In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us.
It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence.
Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense.
Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored.
Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system.
Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement.
My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory.
Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system.
This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy.
This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene.
This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country.
This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election.
If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election.
Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment.
They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout.
A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other.
For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game.
This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today.
I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily.
For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts.
The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed.
These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent.
Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system.
The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue.
The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment.
Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system.
I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism.
I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted.
My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue.
Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution.
People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent.
Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities.
They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon.
The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects.
All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people.
They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated.
One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice.
These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates.
Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings.
Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth.
If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates.
But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate.
There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made.
This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions.
They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me.
For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems.
On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere.
I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law.
On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures.
They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption.
Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities.
You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation.
Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures.
He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date.
On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities.
For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know.
In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people.
The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine.
The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that.
The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced.
There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country.
We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources.
Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it.
Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized.
Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat.
They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this.
The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution.
It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust.
In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process.
When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place?
However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands.
If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system.
Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this.
I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries.
We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now.
Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people.
It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues.
I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy.
In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain.
I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say.
All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want.
If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections?
Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda.
It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this?
They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership.
Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents.
It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country.
Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time.
I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly.
The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries.
Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters.
When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal.
When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave.
Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks.
Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe?
Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security.
This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services.
The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution.
Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people.
American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime?
During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights?
In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!
Supreme Leader Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei - Friday Prayer Speech - 19Jun09 - English
The Digital Martyr - The New Dawn - Death by Assimilation and the Poison Within - Season 01 - Episode 01 - English
This is the first episode of the first season of The New Dawn. This episode was broadcast on Hidayat TV (Sky Channel 803) on Tuesday, 28th July 2009 at 10pm (UK Time).
The...
This is the first episode of the first season of The New Dawn. This episode was broadcast on Hidayat TV (Sky Channel 803) on Tuesday, 28th July 2009 at 10pm (UK Time).
The subject of this episode is “Death by Assimilation and the Poison Within”, with our guest speaker, Sayyed Ali Abbas Rizvi. This episode also features the full video of the Nasheed “Seal of the Prophets” by The Vigil.
See: http://themartyr.net/2009/07/28/the-new-dawn-season-01-episode-01-death-by-assimilation-and-the-poison-within/
More...
Description:
This is the first episode of the first season of The New Dawn. This episode was broadcast on Hidayat TV (Sky Channel 803) on Tuesday, 28th July 2009 at 10pm (UK Time).
The subject of this episode is “Death by Assimilation and the Poison Within”, with our guest speaker, Sayyed Ali Abbas Rizvi. This episode also features the full video of the Nasheed “Seal of the Prophets” by The Vigil.
See: http://themartyr.net/2009/07/28/the-new-dawn-season-01-episode-01-death-by-assimilation-and-the-poison-within/
The Digital Martyr - The New Dawn - The Hijab Holocaust - Season 01 - Episode 02 - English
This is the second episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “The Hijab Holocaust”; discussing the issue of racism and hijab in light of the tragic murder...
This is the second episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “The Hijab Holocaust”; discussing the issue of racism and hijab in light of the tragic murder of Marwa Sherbini, the Hijab Martyr, with our guest speaker, Shaykh Shabbir R Hassanally. This episode also features the full video of the Nasheed “Ya Amena” by The Vigil, featuring Ahmad Hamadani.
This episode was initially broadcast at 7pm on Tuesday, 4th August 2009 (due to a double booking), and repeated again on the same day (Tuesday, 4th August, 2009) at 10.30pm (it was scheduled for 10pm)
Please see:
http://themartyr.net/2009/08/04/the-new-dawn%e2%80%93season-01%e2%80%93episode-02%e2%80%93the-hijab-holocaust/
More...
Description:
This is the second episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “The Hijab Holocaust”; discussing the issue of racism and hijab in light of the tragic murder of Marwa Sherbini, the Hijab Martyr, with our guest speaker, Shaykh Shabbir R Hassanally. This episode also features the full video of the Nasheed “Ya Amena” by The Vigil, featuring Ahmad Hamadani.
This episode was initially broadcast at 7pm on Tuesday, 4th August 2009 (due to a double booking), and repeated again on the same day (Tuesday, 4th August, 2009) at 10.30pm (it was scheduled for 10pm)
Please see:
http://themartyr.net/2009/08/04/the-new-dawn%e2%80%93season-01%e2%80%93episode-02%e2%80%93the-hijab-holocaust/
The Digital Martyr - The New Dawn - The Ummah Needs You - Season 01 - Episode 03 - English
This is the third episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “The Ummah Needs You”; discussing the youth activism within the Muslim Community, with our...
This is the third episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “The Ummah Needs You”; discussing the youth activism within the Muslim Community, with our guests, Brothers Mazahir Karim and Muhammad Asaria. This episode also features the world-wide premiere of full video of the Nasheed “Allahu Akbar” by OnTheD.
For more information please see: http://themartyr.net/2009/08/11/the-new-dawn-%e2%80%93-season-01-%e2%80%93-episode-03-%e2%80%93-the-ummah-needs-you/
More...
Description:
This is the third episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “The Ummah Needs You”; discussing the youth activism within the Muslim Community, with our guests, Brothers Mazahir Karim and Muhammad Asaria. This episode also features the world-wide premiere of full video of the Nasheed “Allahu Akbar” by OnTheD.
For more information please see: http://themartyr.net/2009/08/11/the-new-dawn-%e2%80%93-season-01-%e2%80%93-episode-03-%e2%80%93-the-ummah-needs-you/
The Digital Martyr - The New Dawn - Mothers of Tomorrow - Season 01 - Episode 04 - English
The subject of this episode is “The Mothers of Tomorrow”; discussing activism within the women of the Muslim Community, with our guests, Sisters Zaynab Noureddine and Sister Sayyedah Jawad....
The subject of this episode is “The Mothers of Tomorrow”; discussing activism within the women of the Muslim Community, with our guests, Sisters Zaynab Noureddine and Sister Sayyedah Jawad. This episode also features the world-wide premiere of the fully English subtitled video of the Mournful Nasheed “Tawaf” by Nasri Hijazi and Yusuf Kamal, with the graphics by Hadi Chatila. The subtitles have been brought to you specially by The Digital Martyr.
See: http://themartyr.net/2009/08/18/the-new-dawn-%e2%80%93-season-01-%e2%80%93-episode-04-%e2%80%93-the-mothers-of-tomorrow/
More...
Description:
The subject of this episode is “The Mothers of Tomorrow”; discussing activism within the women of the Muslim Community, with our guests, Sisters Zaynab Noureddine and Sister Sayyedah Jawad. This episode also features the world-wide premiere of the fully English subtitled video of the Mournful Nasheed “Tawaf” by Nasri Hijazi and Yusuf Kamal, with the graphics by Hadi Chatila. The subtitles have been brought to you specially by The Digital Martyr.
See: http://themartyr.net/2009/08/18/the-new-dawn-%e2%80%93-season-01-%e2%80%93-episode-04-%e2%80%93-the-mothers-of-tomorrow/
The Digital Martyr - The New Dawn - Secrets of Ramadhan - Season 01 - Episode 05 - English
This is the fifth episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “Uncovering the Secrets of the Month of Ramadhan”; discussing the blessed month of Ramadhan and...
This is the fifth episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “Uncovering the Secrets of the Month of Ramadhan”; discussing the blessed month of Ramadhan and the Universal Day of Quds, with our guest, back by popular demand, Shaykh Shabbir Hassanally. This episode also features the world-wide premiere of the latest Nasheed “The Holy Land” by OnTheD, which has been brought to you specially by The Digital Martyr. This Nasheed has been dedicated to the late Sister Alia Zaidi, and all of the shohada and siddiqeen that have lost their lives in their struggle against injustice.
This episode was initially broadcast at 10pm on Tuesday, 25th August 2009.
More details: http://themartyr.net/2009/08/25/the-new-dawn-%e2%80%93-season-01-%e2%80%93-episode-05-%e2%80%93-uncoverin-the-secrets-of-the-month-of-ramadhan/
More...
Description:
This is the fifth episode of the first season of The New Dawn.
The subject of this episode is “Uncovering the Secrets of the Month of Ramadhan”; discussing the blessed month of Ramadhan and the Universal Day of Quds, with our guest, back by popular demand, Shaykh Shabbir Hassanally. This episode also features the world-wide premiere of the latest Nasheed “The Holy Land” by OnTheD, which has been brought to you specially by The Digital Martyr. This Nasheed has been dedicated to the late Sister Alia Zaidi, and all of the shohada and siddiqeen that have lost their lives in their struggle against injustice.
This episode was initially broadcast at 10pm on Tuesday, 25th August 2009.
More details: http://themartyr.net/2009/08/25/the-new-dawn-%e2%80%93-season-01-%e2%80%93-episode-05-%e2%80%93-uncoverin-the-secrets-of-the-month-of-ramadhan/
Shahadat-e-Syeda Fatima Zahra (s.a) - Maulana Abid Bilgirami - Urdu Majalis
Maulana Abid Bilgrami presents this majalis on the sorrowful event of Shahadat-e-Fatima Zahra (s.a.). This majalis is specially devoted towards the character development of our Mominaat....
Maulana Abid Bilgrami presents this majalis on the sorrowful event of Shahadat-e-Fatima Zahra (s.a.). This majalis is specially devoted towards the character development of our Mominaat. Speaking on the subject, Maulana has highlighted two big aspects in life, which most of the believing women could be affected. These are Gheebat (Back-biting) and Jaadu (Magic). Very informative majalis for our Mominaat.
More...
Description:
Maulana Abid Bilgrami presents this majalis on the sorrowful event of Shahadat-e-Fatima Zahra (s.a.). This majalis is specially devoted towards the character development of our Mominaat. Speaking on the subject, Maulana has highlighted two big aspects in life, which most of the believing women could be affected. These are Gheebat (Back-biting) and Jaadu (Magic). Very informative majalis for our Mominaat.
Omar Mukhar - Part 2 - Urdu
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish...
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish control. The admiral demanded that the Libyans surrender their territory to the Italians or incur the immediate destruction of the city of Tripoli. The Libyans fled instead of surrendering, and the Italians bombarded the city for three days, then proclaimed the Tripolitanians to be "committed and strongly bound to Italy." This marked the beginning of a series of battles between the Italian colonial forces and the Libyan armed opposition under Omar Mukhtar.
More...
Description:
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish control. The admiral demanded that the Libyans surrender their territory to the Italians or incur the immediate destruction of the city of Tripoli. The Libyans fled instead of surrendering, and the Italians bombarded the city for three days, then proclaimed the Tripolitanians to be "committed and strongly bound to Italy." This marked the beginning of a series of battles between the Italian colonial forces and the Libyan armed opposition under Omar Mukhtar.
Omar Mukhar - Part 1 - Urdu
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish...
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish control. The admiral demanded that the Libyans surrender their territory to the Italians or incur the immediate destruction of the city of Tripoli. The Libyans fled instead of surrendering, and the Italians bombarded the city for three days, then proclaimed the Tripolitanians to be "committed and strongly bound to Italy." This marked the beginning of a series of battles between the Italian colonial forces and the Libyan armed opposition under Omar Mukhtar.
More...
Description:
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish control. The admiral demanded that the Libyans surrender their territory to the Italians or incur the immediate destruction of the city of Tripoli. The Libyans fled instead of surrendering, and the Italians bombarded the city for three days, then proclaimed the Tripolitanians to be "committed and strongly bound to Italy." This marked the beginning of a series of battles between the Italian colonial forces and the Libyan armed opposition under Omar Mukhtar.
Omar Mukhar - Part 3 - Urdu
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish...
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish control. The admiral demanded that the Libyans surrender their territory to the Italians or incur the immediate destruction of the city of Tripoli. The Libyans fled instead of surrendering, and the Italians bombarded the city for three days, then proclaimed the Tripolitanians to be "committed and strongly bound to Italy." This marked the beginning of a series of battles between the Italian colonial forces and the Libyan armed opposition under Omar Mukhtar.
More...
Description:
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish control. The admiral demanded that the Libyans surrender their territory to the Italians or incur the immediate destruction of the city of Tripoli. The Libyans fled instead of surrendering, and the Italians bombarded the city for three days, then proclaimed the Tripolitanians to be "committed and strongly bound to Italy." This marked the beginning of a series of battles between the Italian colonial forces and the Libyan armed opposition under Omar Mukhtar.
Omar Mukhar - Part 4 - Urdu
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish...
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish control. The admiral demanded that the Libyans surrender their territory to the Italians or incur the immediate destruction of the city of Tripoli. The Libyans fled instead of surrendering, and the Italians bombarded the city for three days, then proclaimed the Tripolitanians to be "committed and strongly bound to Italy." This marked the beginning of a series of battles between the Italian colonial forces and the Libyan armed opposition under Omar Mukhtar.
More...
Description:
In October 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian naval contingent under the command of Admiral Luigi Faravelli reached the shores of Libya, then a territory subject to Ottoman Turkish control. The admiral demanded that the Libyans surrender their territory to the Italians or incur the immediate destruction of the city of Tripoli. The Libyans fled instead of surrendering, and the Italians bombarded the city for three days, then proclaimed the Tripolitanians to be "committed and strongly bound to Italy." This marked the beginning of a series of battles between the Italian colonial forces and the Libyan armed opposition under Omar Mukhtar.
Imam Khomeni ka Pakistanio k liay Paygham !! [URDU CLIP] MUST WATCH
Imam Khomeni ka Pakistanio k liay Paygham,
Original speech: Millat-e-Tashayyo Pakistan par inqilab-e-islami kay asraat.
Subject : Asr Shanasi, Inqilab-e-Islami, ,
Category : Program, ,...
Imam Khomeni ka Pakistanio k liay Paygham,
Original speech: Millat-e-Tashayyo Pakistan par inqilab-e-islami kay asraat.
Subject : Asr Shanasi, Inqilab-e-Islami, ,
Category : Program, ,
Event : 2011 Others, ,
Location : Lahore
Description : Speech held on 22nd March 2011 at Imamia Colony2011
full speech at: www.islamimarkaz.com
More...
Description:
Imam Khomeni ka Pakistanio k liay Paygham,
Original speech: Millat-e-Tashayyo Pakistan par inqilab-e-islami kay asraat.
Subject : Asr Shanasi, Inqilab-e-Islami, ,
Category : Program, ,
Event : 2011 Others, ,
Location : Lahore
Description : Speech held on 22nd March 2011 at Imamia Colony2011
full speech at: www.islamimarkaz.com
دومین نشست اندیشههای راهبردی با موضوع «عدالت» - 1 - JUSTICE - Farsi
دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی در جمهوری اسلامی، صبح روز 27 اردیبهشتماه 1390، با «موضوع عدالت» و با هم اندیشی و...
دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی در جمهوری اسلامی، صبح روز 27 اردیبهشتماه 1390، با «موضوع عدالت» و با هم اندیشی و تبادل نظر رهبر معظم انقلاب و دهها نفر از اندیشمندان، متفكران، استادان و محققان دانشگاهی و حوزوی برگزار شد.
در این نشست 4 ساعته، ابتدا 10 نفر از صاحبنظران و نخبگان در دو بخش نظری و كاربردی دیدگاههای خود را درباره «مبانی، مفاهیم، ابعاد، كاركردها و ضرورتهای عدالت» بیان كردند.
اولین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی در جمهوری اسلامی، آذر ماه سال گذشته با موضوع الگوی اسلامی -- ایرانی پیشرفت برگزار شده بود.
در آغاز این هماندیشی دكتر صادق واعظ زاده دبیر این نشست، با اشاره به پیگیری موضوعات نشست اول اندیشه های راهبردی گفت: مقدمات ایجاد مركزی برای هماهنگی و راهبری تحقیقات مربوط به الگوی اسلامی ایرانی پیشرفت انجام شده است كه این مركز كلیه ظرفیتهای نخبگانی كشور را برای تدوین این الگوی راهبردی فعال خواهد كرد. دكتر واعظ زاده همچنین با تشریح اهداف دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی گفت: تلاش خواهد شد با تكیه بر مطالب ارائه شده و استفاده از همه ظرفیتها «نظریه عدالت» تدوین شود.
اولین سخنران این نشست راهبردی در بخش دیدگاههای نظری، دكتر حسین عیوضلو، استادیار دانشگاه امام صادق(ع) بود. دكتر عیوض لو با ارائه دیدگاههای خود درباره «مفاهیم و معیارهای عدالت اجتماعی و اقتصادی در چارچوب الگوی اسلامی -- ایرانی پیشرفت» گفت: عدالت اجتماعی به معنای آن است كه هركس در جامعه بتواند پاداش متناسب با شایستگی ها و تلاش خود را دریافت كند. این استاد دانشگاه حق برخورداری برابر از منابع و ثروتهای عمومی -- سهم بری براساس میزان مشاركت در تولید و قرار گرفتن اموال در موضع صحیح را معیارها و قواعد عدالت از دیدگاه اسلام خواند.
حجتالاسلام ابوالقاسم علیدوست عضو جامعه مدرسین حوزه علمیه قم، اندیشمند دیگری بود كه در دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی به تشریح ابعاد عدالت به عنوان «یك سند، قاعده، رویكرد و گفتمان عام در كشف و اجرای احكام اسلام» پرداخت. این استاد حوزه و دانشگاه گفت: با عدالت نمی توان كژدار و مریز برخورد كرد بلكه باید با این مفهوم بنیادی، برخوردی روشمند انجام داد تا به یك گفتمان عام تبدیل شود. حجت الاسلام علیدوست، عدالت را یك قاعده در فقه دانست و افزود: در فهم دلایل و استنباط احكام، باید عدالت را به عنوان یك رویكرد مورد توجه قرار داد و در اجرای احكام نیز، عدالت را، گفتمان حاكم بر رفتار و گفتار مسئولان و كارگزاران قرار داد.
سومین سخنران دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی، دكتر فهیمه فرهمندپور استادیار دانشگاه تهران بود. دكتر فرهمندپور تحت عنوان «اقتضائات و ملاحظات عدالت جنسیتی با رویكرد دینی» گفت: عدالت را نباید تقسیم كمّی فرصتها و مشاغل در نظر گرفت بلكه در برداشت صحیح از عدالت، تفاوتهای طبیعی زن و مرد پذیرفته می شود.
وی افزود: برای ایجاد عدالت بویژه در مشاغل تخصصی باید شایسته سالاری مورد توجه كامل قرار گیرد و در الگوی اشتغال فارغ التحصیلان دانشگاهی تجدید نظر شود. ایجاد عرصه هایی غیر از ورود به دانشگاه برای تأمین نیازهای روانی، علمی و شخصیتی زنان و دختران از دیگر پیشنهادهای خانم فرهمند پور بود.
More...
Description:
دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی در جمهوری اسلامی، صبح روز 27 اردیبهشتماه 1390، با «موضوع عدالت» و با هم اندیشی و تبادل نظر رهبر معظم انقلاب و دهها نفر از اندیشمندان، متفكران، استادان و محققان دانشگاهی و حوزوی برگزار شد.
در این نشست 4 ساعته، ابتدا 10 نفر از صاحبنظران و نخبگان در دو بخش نظری و كاربردی دیدگاههای خود را درباره «مبانی، مفاهیم، ابعاد، كاركردها و ضرورتهای عدالت» بیان كردند.
اولین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی در جمهوری اسلامی، آذر ماه سال گذشته با موضوع الگوی اسلامی -- ایرانی پیشرفت برگزار شده بود.
در آغاز این هماندیشی دكتر صادق واعظ زاده دبیر این نشست، با اشاره به پیگیری موضوعات نشست اول اندیشه های راهبردی گفت: مقدمات ایجاد مركزی برای هماهنگی و راهبری تحقیقات مربوط به الگوی اسلامی ایرانی پیشرفت انجام شده است كه این مركز كلیه ظرفیتهای نخبگانی كشور را برای تدوین این الگوی راهبردی فعال خواهد كرد. دكتر واعظ زاده همچنین با تشریح اهداف دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی گفت: تلاش خواهد شد با تكیه بر مطالب ارائه شده و استفاده از همه ظرفیتها «نظریه عدالت» تدوین شود.
اولین سخنران این نشست راهبردی در بخش دیدگاههای نظری، دكتر حسین عیوضلو، استادیار دانشگاه امام صادق(ع) بود. دكتر عیوض لو با ارائه دیدگاههای خود درباره «مفاهیم و معیارهای عدالت اجتماعی و اقتصادی در چارچوب الگوی اسلامی -- ایرانی پیشرفت» گفت: عدالت اجتماعی به معنای آن است كه هركس در جامعه بتواند پاداش متناسب با شایستگی ها و تلاش خود را دریافت كند. این استاد دانشگاه حق برخورداری برابر از منابع و ثروتهای عمومی -- سهم بری براساس میزان مشاركت در تولید و قرار گرفتن اموال در موضع صحیح را معیارها و قواعد عدالت از دیدگاه اسلام خواند.
حجتالاسلام ابوالقاسم علیدوست عضو جامعه مدرسین حوزه علمیه قم، اندیشمند دیگری بود كه در دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی به تشریح ابعاد عدالت به عنوان «یك سند، قاعده، رویكرد و گفتمان عام در كشف و اجرای احكام اسلام» پرداخت. این استاد حوزه و دانشگاه گفت: با عدالت نمی توان كژدار و مریز برخورد كرد بلكه باید با این مفهوم بنیادی، برخوردی روشمند انجام داد تا به یك گفتمان عام تبدیل شود. حجت الاسلام علیدوست، عدالت را یك قاعده در فقه دانست و افزود: در فهم دلایل و استنباط احكام، باید عدالت را به عنوان یك رویكرد مورد توجه قرار داد و در اجرای احكام نیز، عدالت را، گفتمان حاكم بر رفتار و گفتار مسئولان و كارگزاران قرار داد.
سومین سخنران دومین نشست اندیشه های راهبردی، دكتر فهیمه فرهمندپور استادیار دانشگاه تهران بود. دكتر فرهمندپور تحت عنوان «اقتضائات و ملاحظات عدالت جنسیتی با رویكرد دینی» گفت: عدالت را نباید تقسیم كمّی فرصتها و مشاغل در نظر گرفت بلكه در برداشت صحیح از عدالت، تفاوتهای طبیعی زن و مرد پذیرفته می شود.
وی افزود: برای ایجاد عدالت بویژه در مشاغل تخصصی باید شایسته سالاری مورد توجه كامل قرار گیرد و در الگوی اشتغال فارغ التحصیلان دانشگاهی تجدید نظر شود. ایجاد عرصه هایی غیر از ورود به دانشگاه برای تأمین نیازهای روانی، علمی و شخصیتی زنان و دختران از دیگر پیشنهادهای خانم فرهمند پور بود.
The Unwritten Will and The Calamity of Thursday - English
On a Thursday, just three days before the demise of Prophet (PBUH&HF), the Messenger of Allah asked for pen and paper in order to state his last will and repeat the...
On a Thursday, just three days before the demise of Prophet (PBUH&HF), the Messenger of Allah asked for pen and paper in order to state his last will and repeat the declaration/assignment of his successor for his Ummah. Major Sunni sources including Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim mentioned that an opposition group among the companions whose leader was Umar, accused prophet of talking non sense (May Allah protect us) in order to prevent this writing. They questioned the rationality of Prophet to discredit his will. Below is some of the traditions concerning this tragic episode:
It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that:
Ibn Abbas said:\"Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was!\" Then Ibn Abbas cried severely so that his tears flowed to his cheeks. Then he added Prophet said:\"Bring me a flat bone or a sheet and an ink so that I could write (order to write) a statement that will prevent you people to go astray after me.\" They said: \"Verily the messenger of Allah is talking no sense.\" (Reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul-Wasiyyah \" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, P1259, Tradition (#1637/21).)
The other version is given by al-Bukhari and Muslim which indicates the role of Umar in that catastrophe: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573
Narrated Ibn \'Abbas: When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was \'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said: \"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray.\" \'Umar said: \"The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Quran, so Allah\'s Book is sufficient for us.\" The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, \"Come near so that Allah\'s Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray,\" while the others said what \'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them,\"Go away and leave me.\" Ibn \'Abbas used to say,\" It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah ‘s Apostle from writing a statement for them.
The above tradition can also be found in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul- Wasiyyah\" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, p1259, Tradition (#1637/22).
As you see in the above traditions, the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was accused of talking no sense by an opposition group among the companions whose leader was Umar. In the above tradition, Ibn Abbas mentioned Umar and his company PREVENTED Prophet from writing his will which could prevent people from going astray after him. So the conclusion from the above tradition is that the writing it did NOT take place. In the following tradition, however, Sa\'id Ibn Jubair alleged that the Prophet said three things but he has forgotten the third one which was beneficial for Muslims: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.393
Narrated Said bin Jubair:
I heard Ibn \'Abbas saying, \"Thursday! And you know not what Thursday is? After that Ibn \'Abbas wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn \'Abbas, \"What is (about) Thursday?\" He said, \"When the condition (i.e. health) of Allah\'s Apostle deteriorated, he said,\'Bring me a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray.\' The people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of a prophet, They said,\'What is wrong with him? Do you think he is talking no sense (delirious)? Ask him (to see if he is talking no sense). The Prophet replied,\'Leave me, for I am in a better state than what you are asking me.\'
Then the Prophet ordered them to do three things saying: \'Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do.\' The third order was something beneficial which either Ibn \'Abbas did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot!
Sa\'id Ibn Jubair claims that Prophet said three things but he has forgotten the third one which was beneficial for Muslims. It is interesting to see that the narrators who used to memorize thousands of traditions, simply forgot the last will of Prophet (PBUH&HF). Now if you look at the two things that the sub-narrator allegedly attributed to the Prophet, i.e.,
1. Expelling pagans from Arabian Peninsula 2. respecting foreign delegates
One can see that these are not the things that if Muslim do, they will NEVER go astray after Prophet. The matter should be much more important that would Guarantee the salvation of Muslims, and it could be no less important than the subject of leadership. Moreover such claim contradicts the saying of Ibn Abbas (in the early mentioned traditions) who claimed that the quarrel of the companions prevented the prophet from stating his will. Here is the last tradition I would like to mention in this regard.
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.716
Narrated Ibn Abbas:
Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was! The ailment of Allah\'s Apostle became worse (on Thursday) and he said \"Bring me something so that I (order) to write for you something after which you will never go astray.\" The people (present there) quarreled in this matter, and it was not right to quarrel in front of prophet. They said, \"What is wrong with him? (Do you think) he is talking no sense (delirious)?\"
The above tradition is also in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul-Wasiyyah\" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version, (Saudi Arabia), v3, pp 1257-58, Tradition (#1637/20).
More addresses for similar traditions:
Sahih al-Bukhari, in the chapter named \"The Book of Knowledge \"
(Kitabul-Ilm), also in the chapter named \"The Book of Medicine \"
(Kitabut-Tib), also in the chapter named \"Kitabul Itisam bil Kitab was-Sunnah\".
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1,pp 232,239,324f,336,355.
And much more...
Also as indicated above (Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573), Umar said: \"The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Quran, so Allah\'s Book is sufficient for us.\" Umar and those who supported him prevented prophet from writing (ordering to write) that statement, by accusing him of talking no sense. As I have mentioned in the discussion about \"Quran and Ahlul-Bayt\", prophet clearly indicated that we should follow both Quran AND Ahlul-Bayt in order not to go astray. So Quran alone is not sufficient as opposed to what Umar said above.
There is a bizarre commentary in the footnote of above traditions in Sahih Muslim (1980 Edition, Arabic version). It says: The above incident shows the high virtue of Umar, since he knew that people might not follow what prophet would write, and as a result, people would go to hell because of their disobedience of the order of prophet. So Umar prevented Prophet from writing, in order to save people from going to hell !
Also in the footnote of the same section of Sahih Muslim it is mentioned that Prophet possibly wanted to assign a Caliph on that Thursday, and the matter might have been the matter of successorship which caused such dispute.
In fact, most of the people who where present there, understood the intention of prophet, the same as what Umar did. Because prophet had previously indicated the issue when he said several times that:
\"I shall leave for you two precious Symbols: The book of Allah, and my progeny, that is my family (Itrat & Ahlul-bayt). If you follow them, you will never go astray after me.\" (Sahih al-Tirmidhi; a close version is also given in Sahih Muslim),
And also they were present in GHADIR KHUM where prophet said: \"Whoever I am his master, Ali is his master.\" (see Sahih al-Tirmidhi; Sunan Ibn Maja; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim; Khasa\'is, by al-Nisa\'i).
So when prophet during his illness said that \"Let me write something that you never go astray after me\", those people who were present, including Umar, quickly understood that prophet wants to repeat what he had already mentioned, but this time in writing.
A few Quranic verses should also be mentioned here. Allah said in Quran:
* \"O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of prophet ... lest your deeds become null while you do not perceive.\" (Quran 49:2).
* Allah also said: \"Nor does he (prophet) speak out of his desire. (What he says) is nothing but revelation that is revealed.\" (Quran 53:3-4).
* He, Exalted, also said: \"Whatever apostle tells you accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back.\" (Quran 59:7).
* He, Exalted He is, also said: But no by thy Lord! They can have no Faith until they make thee judge in ALL disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions but accept them with the fullest conviction. (Quran 4:65)
So when such a prophet, three days before his death, wished to write a document of his will to save the Muslims from going astray, he was accused of talking no sense (paranoid)!
The reason that prophet did not repeat his request (if it is true) was that he already was discredited by his companions and was accused of talking no sense. So even if he would say something, those people would not believe in him and would say such instruction has been given while he was talking no sense (paranoid). So Umar made it easy, and by saying that prophet is talking nonsense, ended it up.
There are few Sunni traditions which allege that prophet was confused to assign which person as his successor and finally failed to assign any body as his successor and left it to people to decide. Some even claim that prophet was willing to assign Abu Bakr, but he left it to people.
If Umar have ever heard of such sayings (that prophet was willing to assign Abu Bakr as his successor), he would never stop prophet from stating his will, and would never accuse him of talking no sense. Rather he would let prophet tell his will and assign Abu Bakr as his successor. We all know, the main support in \"Saqifah Bani Sa\'idah\" for the secret nomination of Abu Bakr for Caliphate, was Umar.
So if Umar have not heard of such traditions (the tendency of Prophet to assign Abu Bakr), there is a great possibility that those traditions were fabricated later.
Also it contradicts several authentic Sunni traditions regarding the assignment of Ali-Ibn-Abi-Talib as prophet\'s successor. As you know there are a huge number of fabricated traditions which was created by several pay-rolled scholars in support of some rulers, and mainly to justify what happened.
Finally, I would like to bring to your attention the importance and seriousness of the tragedy:
1- Notice that any person utters his most important wishes when he wants to write the statement of his will at the end of his life.
2- Notice the importance of the person who wants to write the will, who is the last Prophet of God, the best mankind ever. No human in the world was more enthusiastic than him about his community. The person who Allah has ordered us in Quran to follow him unconditionally.
3- Notice that prophet said this statement would be the key element in the destiny of Muslims according to the above traditions. They will never go astray if they abide it.
In such critical moment, people who claimed to be his sincere companions, stopped/insulted him. Those companions are responsible for misleading the Muslims throughout history and the generations to come.
=============
Side Comments
=============
Reading the article, a Sunni brother commented that: How could Umar prevent the manifestation of a Divine Commandment? If writing the will was the order of Allah to his Prophet, then how could be possible that Allah fails to manifest His own wish?
This brother has confused two different issues. Umar was able to prevent the manifestation of divine commandment since he was a human and was gifted some free will. Yet, Umar or any other human can NEVER prevent what Allah foreordained (Taqdir) and what Allah wills (Mashiyyah). Please take a note of this: There is a difference between the commandment of Allah (which people can disobey) and the will of Allah (which people have no ability to go against). It was the commandment of Allah to write that statement, yet the Will of Allah was what happened.
=========
Another brother mentioned that Prophet Muhammad never wrote a single commandment or teaching of his during his 23 years of ministry. Then how could he order people to bring pen and paper to write somthing for them?
Yes, the messenger of Allah did not write in public, because he used to dictate writing. However, this does not mean that he did not know how to write. It is also true that the Prophet was \"Ummi\", but this does not necessarily mean he did not know how to read and write. It rather means that Prophet did not have any human teacher to teach him how to read and write since the time he was born to his mother (\"Ummi\" derived from \"Umm\" meaning mother). His only teacher was Allah. And this is why Quran is a true miracle from a person who did not have a teacher and he who did not go to school. I would say, clearing doubt about the Quran as God\'s revelation was the only reason that the Messenger of Allah was not ordered attempt to write in public or claim as such.
Reading and writing not only in Arabic but also in all other languages, as well as the knowledge of language of all other creatures are not a lot to claim for the master of all messengers when we see in Quran that Prophet Sulayman and David knew the language of the animals. Again, all such knowledge could be released to the Prophet when he really needed, by the permission of Allah. But to the time it is not necessary, he would act as if he does not have such knowledge. It is like having access to the database rather than having all the knowledge within oneself.
About the Tragedy of Thursday, however, what the Prophet (PBUH&HF) meant by \"writing\" was the common sense of \"ordering to write\", and people were aware of it and was not the first time they have heard of it. Based on the traditions no body even said at that time that how he wants to write. Moreover, even we suppose that Prophet wanted to write by himself and people did not know about his ability to write, they could have given him the benefit of doubt (!!) to see if he can do such miracle (!?) beside all the miracles he has had already shown. Were they suspicious to his miracles?
This is the same Prophet that God said about him \"laa yantqu anil Hawaa\" (he does not talk of his own desires)? Never mind verses 33:36, 59:7, 4:80, 4:59, etc., and yet to justify a disobedience by some companions can we accuse him of rave? Did God know that there would be a time that His prophet could not stand to the above standard, and still going ahead and revealing such verses in his honor?
=========
Another brother mentioned that if the Prophet inteneded to appoint Ali as the Imam, why did he not do so in the presence of the whole people and not in his house few days before his demise?
The Prophet had already declared the appointment Imam Ali as Imam in many occasions from his first open preach in Mecca (see al-Tabari English, v6, pp 88-92; Ibn al-Athir, v2, p62; Ibn Asakir, v1, p85; al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v5, p97) to his last open sermon in Ghadir Khum (see Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298; Sunan Ibn Maja, v1, pp 12,43; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim; Khasa\'is, by al-Nisa\'i). Note that it was not Prophet who appointed him on his own, but it was rather Allah who appointed him.
What the messenger of Allah wanted to do in his last will was to write (or order to write) what he has already said. But, as quoted earlier, some people around him shamelessly reduced him to the level of insanity. What happened on that thursday is a proof by itself that the Prophet ALREADY assigned a successor, otherwise, there was no point of disobedience!
=========
Another person mentioned the verse \"Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion (Quran 5:3)\" which was revealed 2 months before the death of the Prophet shows that there was no new religious command is going to come thereafter. Otherwise, if that important statement the prophet was going to dictate to his followers would have been somthing which was forgotten, would make the verse untrue.
Perhaps the above brother would be surprized to know that many Sunni commentators of Quran have confirmed that the above verse (5:3) was revealed in Ghadir Khum AFTER the Messenger of Allah said: \"Whoever I am his leader, Ali is his leader. O\' God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him.\" (See the ariticled titled \"Ghadir Khum\" for extensive references). This means the perfection of the religion was due announcing the successor of the Prophet (PBUH&HF).
In fact what prophet wanted to do on that Thursday (three days before his death) was just to repeat, to remind, and to emphasize the things that has been revealed before. He didn\'t want to add any thing new.
No Muslim ever claimed that the position of prophethood has been taken from Muhammad sometime before his death. We do not have such case about other prophets either. Even let\'s suppose he was not prophet any more, or he wanted to say something new. Do you think you can find any man better or more enthusiastic than him about the destiny of his community?! Do you think his last wish was against the prosperity of his people?! How much should they have been rude that even they didn\'t let him talk!!!
[Reference : Shia Encycloedia]- http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia
More...
Description:
On a Thursday, just three days before the demise of Prophet (PBUH&HF), the Messenger of Allah asked for pen and paper in order to state his last will and repeat the declaration/assignment of his successor for his Ummah. Major Sunni sources including Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim mentioned that an opposition group among the companions whose leader was Umar, accused prophet of talking non sense (May Allah protect us) in order to prevent this writing. They questioned the rationality of Prophet to discredit his will. Below is some of the traditions concerning this tragic episode:
It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that:
Ibn Abbas said:\"Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was!\" Then Ibn Abbas cried severely so that his tears flowed to his cheeks. Then he added Prophet said:\"Bring me a flat bone or a sheet and an ink so that I could write (order to write) a statement that will prevent you people to go astray after me.\" They said: \"Verily the messenger of Allah is talking no sense.\" (Reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul-Wasiyyah \" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, P1259, Tradition (#1637/21).)
The other version is given by al-Bukhari and Muslim which indicates the role of Umar in that catastrophe: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573
Narrated Ibn \'Abbas: When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was \'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said: \"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray.\" \'Umar said: \"The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Quran, so Allah\'s Book is sufficient for us.\" The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, \"Come near so that Allah\'s Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray,\" while the others said what \'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them,\"Go away and leave me.\" Ibn \'Abbas used to say,\" It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah ‘s Apostle from writing a statement for them.
The above tradition can also be found in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul- Wasiyyah\" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, p1259, Tradition (#1637/22).
As you see in the above traditions, the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was accused of talking no sense by an opposition group among the companions whose leader was Umar. In the above tradition, Ibn Abbas mentioned Umar and his company PREVENTED Prophet from writing his will which could prevent people from going astray after him. So the conclusion from the above tradition is that the writing it did NOT take place. In the following tradition, however, Sa\'id Ibn Jubair alleged that the Prophet said three things but he has forgotten the third one which was beneficial for Muslims: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.393
Narrated Said bin Jubair:
I heard Ibn \'Abbas saying, \"Thursday! And you know not what Thursday is? After that Ibn \'Abbas wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn \'Abbas, \"What is (about) Thursday?\" He said, \"When the condition (i.e. health) of Allah\'s Apostle deteriorated, he said,\'Bring me a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray.\' The people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of a prophet, They said,\'What is wrong with him? Do you think he is talking no sense (delirious)? Ask him (to see if he is talking no sense). The Prophet replied,\'Leave me, for I am in a better state than what you are asking me.\'
Then the Prophet ordered them to do three things saying: \'Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do.\' The third order was something beneficial which either Ibn \'Abbas did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot!
Sa\'id Ibn Jubair claims that Prophet said three things but he has forgotten the third one which was beneficial for Muslims. It is interesting to see that the narrators who used to memorize thousands of traditions, simply forgot the last will of Prophet (PBUH&HF). Now if you look at the two things that the sub-narrator allegedly attributed to the Prophet, i.e.,
1. Expelling pagans from Arabian Peninsula 2. respecting foreign delegates
One can see that these are not the things that if Muslim do, they will NEVER go astray after Prophet. The matter should be much more important that would Guarantee the salvation of Muslims, and it could be no less important than the subject of leadership. Moreover such claim contradicts the saying of Ibn Abbas (in the early mentioned traditions) who claimed that the quarrel of the companions prevented the prophet from stating his will. Here is the last tradition I would like to mention in this regard.
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.716
Narrated Ibn Abbas:
Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was! The ailment of Allah\'s Apostle became worse (on Thursday) and he said \"Bring me something so that I (order) to write for you something after which you will never go astray.\" The people (present there) quarreled in this matter, and it was not right to quarrel in front of prophet. They said, \"What is wrong with him? (Do you think) he is talking no sense (delirious)?\"
The above tradition is also in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul-Wasiyyah\" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version, (Saudi Arabia), v3, pp 1257-58, Tradition (#1637/20).
More addresses for similar traditions:
Sahih al-Bukhari, in the chapter named \"The Book of Knowledge \"
(Kitabul-Ilm), also in the chapter named \"The Book of Medicine \"
(Kitabut-Tib), also in the chapter named \"Kitabul Itisam bil Kitab was-Sunnah\".
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1,pp 232,239,324f,336,355.
And much more...
Also as indicated above (Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573), Umar said: \"The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Quran, so Allah\'s Book is sufficient for us.\" Umar and those who supported him prevented prophet from writing (ordering to write) that statement, by accusing him of talking no sense. As I have mentioned in the discussion about \"Quran and Ahlul-Bayt\", prophet clearly indicated that we should follow both Quran AND Ahlul-Bayt in order not to go astray. So Quran alone is not sufficient as opposed to what Umar said above.
There is a bizarre commentary in the footnote of above traditions in Sahih Muslim (1980 Edition, Arabic version). It says: The above incident shows the high virtue of Umar, since he knew that people might not follow what prophet would write, and as a result, people would go to hell because of their disobedience of the order of prophet. So Umar prevented Prophet from writing, in order to save people from going to hell !
Also in the footnote of the same section of Sahih Muslim it is mentioned that Prophet possibly wanted to assign a Caliph on that Thursday, and the matter might have been the matter of successorship which caused such dispute.
In fact, most of the people who where present there, understood the intention of prophet, the same as what Umar did. Because prophet had previously indicated the issue when he said several times that:
\"I shall leave for you two precious Symbols: The book of Allah, and my progeny, that is my family (Itrat & Ahlul-bayt). If you follow them, you will never go astray after me.\" (Sahih al-Tirmidhi; a close version is also given in Sahih Muslim),
And also they were present in GHADIR KHUM where prophet said: \"Whoever I am his master, Ali is his master.\" (see Sahih al-Tirmidhi; Sunan Ibn Maja; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim; Khasa\'is, by al-Nisa\'i).
So when prophet during his illness said that \"Let me write something that you never go astray after me\", those people who were present, including Umar, quickly understood that prophet wants to repeat what he had already mentioned, but this time in writing.
A few Quranic verses should also be mentioned here. Allah said in Quran:
* \"O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of prophet ... lest your deeds become null while you do not perceive.\" (Quran 49:2).
* Allah also said: \"Nor does he (prophet) speak out of his desire. (What he says) is nothing but revelation that is revealed.\" (Quran 53:3-4).
* He, Exalted, also said: \"Whatever apostle tells you accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back.\" (Quran 59:7).
* He, Exalted He is, also said: But no by thy Lord! They can have no Faith until they make thee judge in ALL disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions but accept them with the fullest conviction. (Quran 4:65)
So when such a prophet, three days before his death, wished to write a document of his will to save the Muslims from going astray, he was accused of talking no sense (paranoid)!
The reason that prophet did not repeat his request (if it is true) was that he already was discredited by his companions and was accused of talking no sense. So even if he would say something, those people would not believe in him and would say such instruction has been given while he was talking no sense (paranoid). So Umar made it easy, and by saying that prophet is talking nonsense, ended it up.
There are few Sunni traditions which allege that prophet was confused to assign which person as his successor and finally failed to assign any body as his successor and left it to people to decide. Some even claim that prophet was willing to assign Abu Bakr, but he left it to people.
If Umar have ever heard of such sayings (that prophet was willing to assign Abu Bakr as his successor), he would never stop prophet from stating his will, and would never accuse him of talking no sense. Rather he would let prophet tell his will and assign Abu Bakr as his successor. We all know, the main support in \"Saqifah Bani Sa\'idah\" for the secret nomination of Abu Bakr for Caliphate, was Umar.
So if Umar have not heard of such traditions (the tendency of Prophet to assign Abu Bakr), there is a great possibility that those traditions were fabricated later.
Also it contradicts several authentic Sunni traditions regarding the assignment of Ali-Ibn-Abi-Talib as prophet\'s successor. As you know there are a huge number of fabricated traditions which was created by several pay-rolled scholars in support of some rulers, and mainly to justify what happened.
Finally, I would like to bring to your attention the importance and seriousness of the tragedy:
1- Notice that any person utters his most important wishes when he wants to write the statement of his will at the end of his life.
2- Notice the importance of the person who wants to write the will, who is the last Prophet of God, the best mankind ever. No human in the world was more enthusiastic than him about his community. The person who Allah has ordered us in Quran to follow him unconditionally.
3- Notice that prophet said this statement would be the key element in the destiny of Muslims according to the above traditions. They will never go astray if they abide it.
In such critical moment, people who claimed to be his sincere companions, stopped/insulted him. Those companions are responsible for misleading the Muslims throughout history and the generations to come.
=============
Side Comments
=============
Reading the article, a Sunni brother commented that: How could Umar prevent the manifestation of a Divine Commandment? If writing the will was the order of Allah to his Prophet, then how could be possible that Allah fails to manifest His own wish?
This brother has confused two different issues. Umar was able to prevent the manifestation of divine commandment since he was a human and was gifted some free will. Yet, Umar or any other human can NEVER prevent what Allah foreordained (Taqdir) and what Allah wills (Mashiyyah). Please take a note of this: There is a difference between the commandment of Allah (which people can disobey) and the will of Allah (which people have no ability to go against). It was the commandment of Allah to write that statement, yet the Will of Allah was what happened.
=========
Another brother mentioned that Prophet Muhammad never wrote a single commandment or teaching of his during his 23 years of ministry. Then how could he order people to bring pen and paper to write somthing for them?
Yes, the messenger of Allah did not write in public, because he used to dictate writing. However, this does not mean that he did not know how to write. It is also true that the Prophet was \"Ummi\", but this does not necessarily mean he did not know how to read and write. It rather means that Prophet did not have any human teacher to teach him how to read and write since the time he was born to his mother (\"Ummi\" derived from \"Umm\" meaning mother). His only teacher was Allah. And this is why Quran is a true miracle from a person who did not have a teacher and he who did not go to school. I would say, clearing doubt about the Quran as God\'s revelation was the only reason that the Messenger of Allah was not ordered attempt to write in public or claim as such.
Reading and writing not only in Arabic but also in all other languages, as well as the knowledge of language of all other creatures are not a lot to claim for the master of all messengers when we see in Quran that Prophet Sulayman and David knew the language of the animals. Again, all such knowledge could be released to the Prophet when he really needed, by the permission of Allah. But to the time it is not necessary, he would act as if he does not have such knowledge. It is like having access to the database rather than having all the knowledge within oneself.
About the Tragedy of Thursday, however, what the Prophet (PBUH&HF) meant by \"writing\" was the common sense of \"ordering to write\", and people were aware of it and was not the first time they have heard of it. Based on the traditions no body even said at that time that how he wants to write. Moreover, even we suppose that Prophet wanted to write by himself and people did not know about his ability to write, they could have given him the benefit of doubt (!!) to see if he can do such miracle (!?) beside all the miracles he has had already shown. Were they suspicious to his miracles?
This is the same Prophet that God said about him \"laa yantqu anil Hawaa\" (he does not talk of his own desires)? Never mind verses 33:36, 59:7, 4:80, 4:59, etc., and yet to justify a disobedience by some companions can we accuse him of rave? Did God know that there would be a time that His prophet could not stand to the above standard, and still going ahead and revealing such verses in his honor?
=========
Another brother mentioned that if the Prophet inteneded to appoint Ali as the Imam, why did he not do so in the presence of the whole people and not in his house few days before his demise?
The Prophet had already declared the appointment Imam Ali as Imam in many occasions from his first open preach in Mecca (see al-Tabari English, v6, pp 88-92; Ibn al-Athir, v2, p62; Ibn Asakir, v1, p85; al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v5, p97) to his last open sermon in Ghadir Khum (see Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298; Sunan Ibn Maja, v1, pp 12,43; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim; Khasa\'is, by al-Nisa\'i). Note that it was not Prophet who appointed him on his own, but it was rather Allah who appointed him.
What the messenger of Allah wanted to do in his last will was to write (or order to write) what he has already said. But, as quoted earlier, some people around him shamelessly reduced him to the level of insanity. What happened on that thursday is a proof by itself that the Prophet ALREADY assigned a successor, otherwise, there was no point of disobedience!
=========
Another person mentioned the verse \"Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion (Quran 5:3)\" which was revealed 2 months before the death of the Prophet shows that there was no new religious command is going to come thereafter. Otherwise, if that important statement the prophet was going to dictate to his followers would have been somthing which was forgotten, would make the verse untrue.
Perhaps the above brother would be surprized to know that many Sunni commentators of Quran have confirmed that the above verse (5:3) was revealed in Ghadir Khum AFTER the Messenger of Allah said: \"Whoever I am his leader, Ali is his leader. O\' God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him.\" (See the ariticled titled \"Ghadir Khum\" for extensive references). This means the perfection of the religion was due announcing the successor of the Prophet (PBUH&HF).
In fact what prophet wanted to do on that Thursday (three days before his death) was just to repeat, to remind, and to emphasize the things that has been revealed before. He didn\'t want to add any thing new.
No Muslim ever claimed that the position of prophethood has been taken from Muhammad sometime before his death. We do not have such case about other prophets either. Even let\'s suppose he was not prophet any more, or he wanted to say something new. Do you think you can find any man better or more enthusiastic than him about the destiny of his community?! Do you think his last wish was against the prosperity of his people?! How much should they have been rude that even they didn\'t let him talk!!!
[Reference : Shia Encycloedia]- http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia
[1/4] An Ethical Approach to the Subject of Women in Islam - Sh. Sekaleshfar - Fatemiyeh 2012 - English
Lecture series from Dr. Farrokh Sekaleshfar on the status of women in Islam with a focus on ethical and mystical interpretations. This lecture was given at Yaseen LA in commemoration of the...
Lecture series from Dr. Farrokh Sekaleshfar on the status of women in Islam with a focus on ethical and mystical interpretations. This lecture was given at Yaseen LA in commemoration of the martyrdom of Fatima Al-Zahra the grand daughter of the Prophet Mohammad.
More...
Description:
Lecture series from Dr. Farrokh Sekaleshfar on the status of women in Islam with a focus on ethical and mystical interpretations. This lecture was given at Yaseen LA in commemoration of the martyrdom of Fatima Al-Zahra the grand daughter of the Prophet Mohammad.
عالمی نھضت آزادی قدس Universal Movement of Al-Quds Liberation - Urdu
A great lecture by H.I. Ustad Syed Jawad Naqvi on the topic of Yawm Al-Quds. It answers many ideological questions and explains the importance of Yawm Al-Quds and its relation with other challenges...
A great lecture by H.I. Ustad Syed Jawad Naqvi on the topic of Yawm Al-Quds. It answers many ideological questions and explains the importance of Yawm Al-Quds and its relation with other challenges faced by the Muslim Ummah.
Subject : Ummat-Tabaqat aur Zimmedariyaan, Asr Shanasi, Afkar -e- Imam Khomeini (r.a)
Event : Ramadan 1433-2012
Category : Lectures
Location : Lahore
Description : A Must Listen Lecture delivered by Ustad Syed Jawad Naqavi on 17th August 2012
More...
Description:
A great lecture by H.I. Ustad Syed Jawad Naqvi on the topic of Yawm Al-Quds. It answers many ideological questions and explains the importance of Yawm Al-Quds and its relation with other challenges faced by the Muslim Ummah.
Subject : Ummat-Tabaqat aur Zimmedariyaan, Asr Shanasi, Afkar -e- Imam Khomeini (r.a)
Event : Ramadan 1433-2012
Category : Lectures
Location : Lahore
Description : A Must Listen Lecture delivered by Ustad Syed Jawad Naqavi on 17th August 2012
(NAM) Non-Aligned Movement Summit in Tehran 2012 - Ustad Syed Jawad Naqavi - Urdu
Subject : Asr Shanasi
Event : -
Category : Lectures
Location : Lahore
Description : A Must Listen lecture on the formation of Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)...
Subject : Asr Shanasi
Event : -
Category : Lectures
Location : Lahore
Description : A Must Listen lecture on the formation of Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Organization and its side effects on the world affairs with reference to the upcoming summit to be held in Tehran.
More...
Description:
Subject : Asr Shanasi
Event : -
Category : Lectures
Location : Lahore
Description : A Must Listen lecture on the formation of Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Organization and its side effects on the world affairs with reference to the upcoming summit to be held in Tehran.