A Pause with ʿAllama al-Muhtadi on His Convictions
Shifts in Awareness from Resistance to Conciliation
In this brief article I would like to pause in dialogue with what His Eminence ʿAllama Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzim al-Muhtadi put forward in Muharram al-Haram of the year 1429 AH in the bulletin (al-Husayn), issued by the Ahl al-Bayt (a) Society, which His Eminence the Shaykh heads. In his article, His Eminence put forward messages addressed to each of (the people, the government, the opposition and the scholars),
.
under the title (Al-Muhtadi’s Convictions, by the Pen of al-Muhtadi!!). Since I know that His Eminence the Shaykh is broad-minded toward dialogue and loves to hear the viewpoints of others, I am confident of his good opinion; from time to time some discussions on various matters have taken place between us, and cooperation between us in Islamic work that serves the community continues, just as it continues with others. But what prompted me this time to write my opinion on His Eminence’s convictions is, on the one hand, the nature of those convictions, and also the fact that he published them openly and asked me personally to read them, and I promised him I would...
Nor do I forget to point out that that article of his contains many positive points that undoubtedly contribute to building a better reality for the community, such as centering on moral values, spreading the principle of coexistence, accepting plurality and diversity within the community, and the like... However, I pause here with some of the ideas that appeared in the article, and I consider it necessary to arrive at a clear view regarding them, because of the bearing of their effect on a person’s culture and awareness, and consequently they will direct his conduct and course. I will go through them as briefly as I can, “and my success lies only with Allah: in Him I have put my trust, and to Him I turn penitently” (Qurʾan 11:88).
Concepts: Between Authenticity and Coinage
The summary of what His Eminence the Shaykh put forward in his convictions regarding some of the concepts that appear in the literature of Islamic movements is:
• That he does not endorse the word (opposition—muʿāraḍa) and calls for replacing it with the word (counsel—munāṣaḥa); and likewise the word (revolution—thawra): he sees no authentic basis for it in Quranic usage or in the narrations from the Prophet (s) and his Ahl al-Bayt (a). Therefore it must be erased from the lexicon of the Islamic movement.
• That he holds that these words harbor hatred, violence and destruction, and so they call the one who holds them to revolt against himself, his family and his society; thus they are the source of partisan zealotries, estrangements and mutual recriminations...
• That it is not correct to call the uprising of Imam al-Husayn the revolution of Imam al-Husayn (a), because Imam al-Husayn was a caller to reform...
Discussion of concepts is an important discussion, because concepts are the gateway for conveying our messages first to our own minds and awareness, and from there we send them on to others. Hence the discussion takes on its importance; therefore we ought to look at the source of that content and be aware of its connotations precisely and clearly.
The words we use in our exchanges either have linguistic significations, taking their content and the legitimacy of their use from the linguistic usages of the Arabs, or have religious-legal significations, taking their content exclusively from the (textual) religious sources...
The first type of words forms for us the descriptive terms and concepts that we use in our exchanges to denote meanings already familiar beforehand, through any kind of familiarity: that mentioned in context, that familiar by custom, or that familiar academically in dictionaries of terminology, or the like...
The second type of words is that which forms for us the system of value-laden concepts and terms, which condense within themselves an authentic content that cannot be separated from them; and this type, as we said earlier, has as its source the authoritative religious texts.
Precisely here His Eminence the Shaykh fell into a kind of methodological confusion, through which he loaded a concept of the descriptive type with the implications of value-laden concepts. He said: (And we ask about the word (revolution): why did the Qurʾan not use it in calling to change and reform, and why do we find no usage of it in the hadiths of the trustworthy Prophet and the pure Imams?!).
The word ‘revolution’ serves to denote a state of political action or one of its stages; it is a descriptive word for this state of action. Therefore it is not methodologically correct for us to reject it or accept it on the basis of its being used, or not used, in the religious texts in this sense... because, quite simply, it is one of the descriptive words. And of course this would extend to many words in common usage that we have accepted by consensus and whose meanings we have agreed upon. If His Eminence the Shaykh is going to reject the word (revolution) because it does not occur in this sense, then he must reject the word (society—jamʿiyya) and the word (Hawza), which he uses in naming his institutions, since these words do not occur in the language of the narrations.
His Eminence the Shaykh gave another reason for his rejection of the word (revolution), connected to the content that this expression holds, saying: (Because it is a word that holds violence and destruction; and with the absence or weakness of educational guidance, you see the individual revolting even against his loved ones and his kin, on the pretext of revolutionism, if they differ with him even in method! And here lies the source of the partisan zealotries, the estrangements and the hurling of lies at one another that have torn apart—and still tear apart—the closest members of society, let alone the more distant.)
I do not know exactly where His Eminence the Shaykh got this absolute connotation of the word. If we examine the word by going back to its root (thāra, yathūru, thawran, and thawarānan...) in the books of language, we would find that (thāra) has multiple meanings, all of them determined by context and by what it is attributed to... Sometimes it comes in the sense of (to be stirred up—hāja) or in the sense of (leaping—al-wathb); when it is said that dust or the like thāra, it means (it appeared and radiated); thāra of water means (it gushed forth with force); thawarān of the twilight means (its spreading and rising); and thawwara al-amr means (he investigated the matter)... as in Lisan al-ʿArab and elsewhere.
The root of the word, then, has different significations oscillating between agitation and rising up, between spreading and radiating, and between investigating and turning over...
Therefore we find that the Quranic usages of the word have different significations—indeed, dynamic significations in harmony with the scene the verses relate—in a range of meanings with wonderful and positive dimensions...
The Lord of Might and Majesty swears by the horses of the mujahidin that raise dust as they enter the fields of jihad: “by the raiders at dawn, raising therein a trail of dust” (Qurʾan 100:3–4)... And in His saying, the Exalted: “not broken to till the earth or water the tillage” (Qurʾan 2:71), stirring up the earth (tathwīr) is turning it over in order to make it fit to receive seeds, so that they grow and bear good fruit... And His saying, the Almighty: “and they plowed the earth and developed it” (Qurʾan 30:9), meaning they extracted its treasures and good things...
And in the movement of stirring up in the sky, we see it bring life to the earth by providing rainwater through the sending of the winds to raise the rain-bearing clouds, as He, the Exalted, says: “It is Allah who sends the winds and they raise a cloud; then We drive it toward a dead land and with it revive the earth after its death. Likewise will be the resurrection [of the dead]” (Qurʾan 35:9).
So we do not find the basis of the negative connotations that His Eminence Shaykh al-Muhtadi cited, such as violence and destruction, in the word (revolution) or in its verbal-noun root—neither in the language nor in the Quranic verses. Quite the contrary: the Noble Qurʾan’s usage carries connotations of giving life and of extracting treasures and good things...
All that objection is no justification for rejecting this word—unless we say that there is some sensitivity about using it, or that its use in practice by some may involve a kind of negativity or a lack of awareness of its literature; and none of that gives us grounds for rejecting it...
In general, revolution is a stage that societies reach after political problems worsen and reach a dead end. It need not be in politics: it may be a social revolution, or a cultural or economic revolution. The discussion of its fields has expanded until it has come to have a science called the science of revolution. We are not compelled to adopt the theorizations of that science’s thinkers, for as Muslims we possess our own guidelines for action and our own literature, which have proceeded from the body of knowledge in which we believe.
It is worth mentioning that I found a narration that used the word (yathūr—rises in revolt) as it is used in Islamic political literature: from Abu ʿAbd Allah (a), in a hadith about a certain matter, he said at its end: (until the avenger of al-Husayn (a) rises in revolt). That is, until Imam al-Mahdi, the Awaited (aj), rises in revolt. Some narrated it with the expression (until he rises—yaqūm), but Shaykh al-Saduq, in the book (Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih) and the book al-ʿIlal, reported it with the wording (yathur). This, then, is an infallible Imam’s expression about the revolution of another infallible Imam, so there is no room in it for a negative meaning at all.
The very same discussion applies to the word ‘opposition’. However, it is worth pointing out that His Eminence Shaykh al-Muhtadi proposed that the word ‘opposition’ be replaced with the word (counsel—al-munasaha), even though giving sincere advice is one of the tasks of the opposition. This reduction of the opposition to counsel alone may mean that you ought not to oppose or reject a matter as a political participant who has the right to political participation. For you to be merely an adviser means that you do not enter into any process of influence and building in the homeland, and do not enter into any of the three powers... the legislative, the executive and the judicial... And this, by my life, is a simplification and reduction that reaches the point of a person stripping himself of his own rights...
Historical Reading: Between Comprehensiveness and Fragmentation
In the context of His Eminence Shaykh al-Muhtadi’s discussion of his rejection of the word ‘revolution’, he offered a quick historical reading of the movement, revolution and uprising of Imam al-Husayn (a), in a way that serves his purpose, saying:
(It is not correct to call the uprising of Imam al-Husayn (a) a revolution... for al-Husayn was nothing but a caller to peaceful reform who was compelled to defend his creed, his freedom, himself, his family and his companions when the enemy decided to crush him. He (a) met Ibn Saʿd, the commander of the Umayyad army, and negotiated with him for a peaceful solution, asking him to accept his taking refuge, even in the mountains of Yemen, in order to spare the enemy confrontation and the shedding of inviolable blood. ).
Here there are two observations:
The first: His Eminence the Shaykh rejected the word ‘revolution’ for considerations we have discussed and on which we have clarified our view; yet he used the word (the uprising—nahḍa—of Imam al-Husayn (a)), and his own argument applies to this very expression, for not even its derivation appears in the verses of the Noble Qurʾan, and I do not know whether the Ahl al-Bayt used it in this sense or not... even though the word nahda is also an expressive word: nahda is rising up, resistance, and rising to fight, and nahda in the sense of energy and strength, as reported in Lisan al-ʿArab... So justifying the use of this expression while fighting that one is not fair... for both are expressive...
The second: His Eminence the Shaykh presented here a historical view of the revolution of Imam al-Husayn (a), saying that he was a caller to peaceful reform—and there is no doubt about this, for he is the one who said: (to seek reform in the community of my grandfather)... However, the Shaykh mentioned that Imam al-Husayn (a), in order to achieve peacefulness, proposed to Ibn Saʿd that he let him go his way so that he could go to Yemen, in order to spare the enemy confrontation and the shedding of inviolable blood...
Here I pause—a pause with this reading, which may be understood contrary to what Imam al-Husayn intended for his revolution. Here we say that the statement is, at first glance, correct; but how do we read this event?
It is not valid to read the event cut off from its historical context, and it is not right to understand some statements in isolation from the other statements the Imam made during his journey...
Are we to understand from the Imam’s request for refuge in Yemen that he wanted to abandon the mission of change that he had wanted to bring about—when he is the one who said: (I am the most entitled to bring about change)...
And if we say that he really wanted to go to Yemen, why did he not take the advice of his brother Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya from the start? Did he not tell him: Go to Yemen, for your father and your brother have devoted followers there??
This would lead us to a grave matter: that the Imam’s judgment—we seek refuge in Allah—was not mature when he rejected the proposal of his brother Ibn al-Hanafiyya, and that afterwards he wanted to act on the opinion he had opposed??!!
Or did the Imam (a) want to flee from the authority of Yazid and escape pledging allegiance to him—when he is the one who said: (and one like me does not pledge allegiance to one like him)...
Reading the texts of the Husayni journey comprehensively, taking in all its stages, gives us facts that admit no distortion or ambiguity... namely, that Imam al-Husayn (a) saw that Yazid was a calamity for Islam and that change had to be brought about, even if that meant the shedding of the purest blood on the face of the earth...
And because a fragmentary reading of the religious texts in general contributes to building a view based on personal taste and preference, from which each person takes what supports his orientations, desires and choices—exactly like those who said that Allah the Exalted said: “Do not approach prayer...” (Qurʾan 4:43) and cut the verse short so that it would accord with their desires... I heard one of the senior scholars speaking from the pulpit of Imam al-Husayn (a), claiming that the Imam would not have moved had the letters of the people of Kufa not come to him, claiming that the Imam’s movement for change comes only after the community agrees upon it, and that it must come about through consultation... ignoring the Imam’s responsibility of leadership, and his carrying the concern of the community in his heart and mind, as he said: (I have only gone out to seek reform in the community of my grandfather, the Messenger of Allah...)...
Hence we find that some of the statements of the Imam (a) during his journey to Karbala expressed his aims and aspirations clearly, as in the letter he gave to Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya; some were answers to a questioner’s question, the Imam answering according to the party before him...; and some texts came to establish the proof against the people, and so on...
Discussion of the matter of historical reading would be lengthy given the nature of the research; I will suffice with this. I have written a book that dealt with (A Reading of the Reformist Discourse of Imam al-Husayn (a)), in which I addressed the comprehensive reading of the noble Husayni discourse.
I am not determining here what the Shaykh means by his words, since they admit multiple interpretations...
What is worth mentioning—outside the topic—concerning the revolution of Imam al-Husayn (a) is that renewing his remembrance every year places us before the values of change and the act of reform, and the principles of risali action, so that we reject injustice, reject falsification, and work for freedom, dignity and honor... Those meanings were, at Karbala, clearer than the sun at high noon; therefore Karbala is a proof against us in every action we undertake... And any twisting of the religious texts, or taking minds for fools through flattery, Karbala will expose with its values, just as it exposed Yazid and his helpers.
Counseling the Government and Opposing the Opposition
On a close reading of the first and second clauses, concerning the government and the opposition, we find that His Eminence Shaykh al-Muhtadi made some observations that are correct in general, as ailments with which the opposition is afflicted; however, he was harsh with it in contrast to his leniency with the government. At the quantitative level, the space of discussion given to the opposition was six times what he addressed to the government—at a time when we see the responsible authorities in the state sparing no effort in holding citizens in contempt through intimidation and violent arbitrary arrests, and in deliberately belittling every honorable citizen through policies of random and political naturalization, through freezing every file that would benefit citizens, and through policies of sectarian discrimination... Does the suffering of this unjustly oppressed people not deserve a few lines from His Eminence the Shaykh directing his reproach at the government??
Will demanding that the opposition be emptied of its content, so as to turn it into conciliatory groups in the face of political tension, violence and contempt for all legitimate demands, be of any benefit? And will confining oneself to counsel, then counsel, then counsel change one who has no ear?
If there is no ear that listens, it is natural that ripples and pressing social movement should arise, demanding change as a result of, and a reaction to, the failure to listen... And if that ear that listens is found, then we must raise our voices with our demands and proclaim the injustice done to us...
In conclusion... this is a pause for churning opinion, as the Commander of the Faithful (a) says, so that it may yield sound opinions. I have great confidence in the broad-mindedness of His Eminence Shaykh al-Muhtadi, may Allah preserve him. We ask Allah to bestow upon us guidance and success in what He loves and is pleased with, and my prayer for all active scholars is for success and right guidance.
12/Muharram al-Haram/1429 AH
