Download FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM WAS PROVIDED BY "FRIENDS

FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM WAS PROVIDED BY "FRIENDS" OF IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION,
THE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATION, GENERATIONS OF FAMILIES AND FRIENDS WHO
FEEL PASSIONATE ABOUT IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION PROGRAMS.
THIS PROGRAM WAS MADE
POSSIBLE BY THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING.
ON APRIL 17, 2007, AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
OF ISLAM AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA, DR. AHMED SOUAIAIA, DISCUSSED THE
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SUNNI AND SHI'ITE TRADITIONS WITHIN ISLAM.
THIS
LECTURE WAS SPONSORED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION.
THIS IS
"INTELLIGENT TALK TELEVISION."
Souaiaia: WHAT I'LL BE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS A TOPIC THAT IS OF GREAT
IMPORTANCE NOT JUST TO THE AMERICAN MUSLIM COMMUNITY HERE BUT MUSLIMS AROUND THE
WORLD.
TO BEGIN, LET ME START WITH A PERSONAL STORY THAT GOT ME INTERESTED NOT
JUST IN THE STUDY OF RELIGION FROM A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE, BUT ALSO ABOUT
LEARNING ABOUT DIVERSITY.
GROWING UP IN NORTH AFRICA, THAT IS LIBYA, TUNISIA,
ALGERIA, MOROCCO, AND MAURITANIA, FIVE COUNTRIES THAT ARE PREDOMINANTLY SUNNI -ABOUT 99 PERCENT OF THEM ARE SUNNIS.
AND IF WE HEAR ABOUT THE SHI'ITES,
USUALLY THEY ARE TOPICS OF JOKES.
IN FACT, SOME OF THE STORIES ASSOCIATED WITH
SHI'ISM ARE ABOUT -- DIMINUTIVE, IN THEY TEND TO REPRESENT THE OTHERS AS
DIFFERENT AND AS A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE -- HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG, WHETHER
ON THE BASIS OF FAITH OR IN PRACTICE, AND THEREFORE GOD IS NOT PLEASED WITH THEM
AND HE CURSED THEM.
AND SOME OF THE JOKES AROUND THEM IS THAT THEY WERE
CURSED, AND GOD GAVE THEM -- TURNED THEM INTO MONKEYS, AND HE GAVE THEM A TAIL.
WITH THIS KIND OF STEREOTYPES IN MIND, I COME TO RELOCATE IN SEATTLE.
AND I
STARTED MY UNDERGRADUATES AT THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON HANGING OUT WITH A
NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS, MOSTLY FROM SAUDI ARABIA -- AND I HEAR THAT A NUMBER OF
YOU ARE FROM SAUDI ARABIA HERE VISITING -- OTHERS FROM NORTH AFRICA, MOSTLY
SUNNIS.
AND THERE WAS THIS PERSON COMES IN ALWAYS WITH A SMILE, SAYS HI, AND
THEN HE WALKS DOWN TO THE -- LIKE THE UNION BUILDING JUST LIKE THIS ONE.
NOBODY ACKNOWLEDGED HIM SO I ASKED WHAT'S WITH THAT PERSON.
HE ALWAYS PASSES
BY AND SAYS SALAM, AND SOME RESPOND AND SOME DON'T EVEN CARE.
AND ONE PERSON
TOLD ME, WELL, HE'S A SHI'ITE.
AND TO ME HE'S THAT KIND OF NICE PERSON.
THIS
IS THE KIND OF SHI'ITE WE HEAR ABOUT, SO HE MUST HAVE A TAIL.
SO ONE DAY I
FOLLOWED HIM DOWN TO HIS OFFICE AT THE STUDENT ORGANIZATION AND ASKED HIM ABOUT
SOME OF THE BELIEFS AS IF I'M INTERROGATING HIM.
AND TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I
WAS TALKING TO HIM WITH SOME SORT OF ARROGANCE, LIKE I AM JUDGING HIM.
AND
THEN AT ONE POINT WHILE I'M MAKING HIM ANSWER MY QUESTION, HE REACHED TO PULL
ONE OF THE BOOKS TO GIVE ME.
MOST OF THEM WERE IN ARABIC ABOUT SHI'ISM.
AND
AS HE STOOD UP -- I REMEMBER AS HE STOOD UP AND TURNED TO THE WALL TO GET THE
BOOKS, I STARED DOWN TO SEE IF HE HAS A TAIL SOMEHOW CURLED IN HIS PANTS.
LOOKING BACK, THAT'S THE KIND OF DIVERSITY THAT I KNEW. YOU WERE NOT IN
HOMOGENEOUS SOCIETY LIKE IN ALGERIA, TUNISIA, MOROCCO.
YOU DON'T HEAR ABOUT
SHI'A. YOU DON'T LEARN ABOUT SHI'ITES.
YOU DON'T LEARN ABOUT OTHER ISLAMIC
MINORITIES.
YOU DON'T HEAR ABOUT OTHER RELIGIONS, BE IT JEWS OR CHRISTIANS.
THEY'RE ALL MINORITIES.
USUALLY THEY HAVE SOME SORT OF NEGATIVE STORIES
ASSOCIATED WITH THEM, AND IT COMES IN THROUGH THESE JOKES AND THROUGH THESE
NEGATIVE STEREOTYPES. IT HAPPENS THAT INSTEAD OF BELIEVING IN THESE -- AND
THIS PERSON, BASICALLY HE WAS ONE OF THE NICEST PEOPLE I'VE EVER MET.
HE
ENCOURAGED ME TO GO AND READ.
AND THAT'S MY STARTING. LEARNING ABOUT SHI'ISM,
IT HAS MORE -- TO ME IT WAS A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, BESIDES THE ACADEMIC
APPROACH THAT I USED LATER IN MY GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES.
AND SO TO
APPROACH THE TOPIC OF SUNNI/SHI'I DIVIDE, IT GOES -- IT STARTS WITH THE HISTORY,
BECAUSE AS EARLY AS THE DEATH OF THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD, THE EMERGENCE OF SHI'ISM
CAME TO SURFACE AND IT CONTINUED UNTIL TODAY.
AND SO THERE IS A REALIZATION
AMONG THE COMMUNITY THAT THE SHI'IS AND THE SUNNIS ARE BOUND TO COEXIST.
THEY
HAVE TO COEXIST, DESPITE ALL THE VIOLENCE THAT YOU WILL SEE AND THAT YOU WILL
HEAR ABOUT IN IRAQ, IN LEBANON, IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD WHERE THE SHI'I AND
THE SUNNI ARE IN SOME SORT OF CONFLICT.
AND TO THINK OF THE DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN SUNNI AND SHI'ITES, THERE ARE TWO APPROACHES TO IT.
ONE IS THE
HISTORICAL AND USUALLY APPROACHED FROM THE POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE.
AND I WILL
GO BACK AND GIVE YOU BACKGROUND -- AT LEAST A BRIEF BACKGROUND ABOUT ISLAM TO
EXPLAIN WHAT I MEAN BY THE HISTORICAL POLITICAL APPROACH.
THE OTHER IS
THEOLOGICAL.
WE CAN ALSO TAKE A PATH OF THEOLOGY THAT DISTINGUISHES BETWEEN
SUNNI AND SHI'ITES AND, LASTLY, THE APPROACH OF THE LEGAL ASPECT THAT CREATES
VARIOUS SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT.
THE FIRST ONE ABOUT THE POLITICAL ASPECTS IN
ISLAMIC TRADITION, THE -- BEFORE MUHAMMAD BECAME A PROPHET, HE WAS A MAN BORN IN
QURAYSH IN A TRIBE IN MECCA.
HE WAS KNOWN FOR HIS POLITICAL -- FOR HIS ABILITY
TO MEDIATE CONFLICT EVEN BEFORE HE WAS A PROPHET.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
ANECDOTES -- A NUMBER OF STORIES ABOUT HIM MEDIATING CONFLICT BETWEEN THE
VARIOUS CLANS OF QURAYSH.
ONE OF THEM IS WHO WOULD GET THE HONOR OF PUTTING
THE ROCK -- WHICH IS A HOLY ROCK, A BLACK ROCK, IN KA'BA.
KA'BA WAS A HOLY
SITE EVEN THEN. AND THEN HE RECOMMENDED THAT THE ROCK IS PUT ON A PIECE OF
CLOTH, AND THEN MEMBERS OF THE TRIBE ALWAYS SHARE IN THE HONOR OF PUTTING IT.
SO THAT KIND OF ABILITY TO MANAGE CONFLICT WAS PRESENT.
HE ALSO WAS KNOWN AS
TRUSTWORTHY EVEN BEFORE HE BECAME A PROPHET.
HE WAS RECOGNIZED AS A
TRUSTWORTHY PERSON.
AND THIS ABILITY TO MANAGE CONFLICT WAS A SELLING POINT,
AT LEAST FOR THE MADINAS.
SO HE WAS PREACHING -- I'M KIND OF SKIPPING SOME OF
THE ASPECTS THAT DO NOT RELATE BETWEEN THE SHI'I AND THE SUNNIS TO FOCUS ON THE
DIFFERENCES OR THE AREAS OF CONFLICT.
IT WAS AFTER TEN YEARS OF PREACHING IN
MECCA HE WAS INVITED TO MADINA, MOSTLY TO MEDIATE REALLY CONFLICT -- REALLY JUST
CONFLICTS.
BUT THERE WAS ONE CONDITION.
THE CONDITION WAS I WILL COME IN,
BECOME YOUR LEADER, AND TRY TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS -- POLITICAL PROBLEMS, BUT
I'M NOT GOING TO RENOUNCE MY MISSION AS A PROPHET, AS A MESSENGER, AS A RASU'L.
AND WITHOUT THAT, IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT MY DIVINE MISSION AS MESSENGER, I'M NOT
GOING.
AND IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS A COUPLE ATTEMPTS, NOT JUST ONE, BUT A
COUPLE ATTEMPTS TO CONVINCE THE MADINAS, THE PEOPLE OF MADINA, TO ACCEPT THAT
CONDITION, THAT HE'S INVITED, HE'S WELCOMED AS A PROPHET FIRST AND THEN AS A
POLITICAL LEADER. AND ON JULY 16, 622, HE MADE THE MIGRATION FROM MECCA TO
MADINA.
AND THIS EVENT IS CENTRAL.
THAT'S WHERE THE ISLAMIC CALENDAR BEGINS.
THE HIJRA CALENDAR BEGINS BY THE DAY HE ARRIVED IN MADINA, JULY 16, 622.
IF IT
IS THAT IMPORTANT, ALTHOUGH THE CALENDAR WAS INVENTED BY ONE OF THE COMPANIONS,
ONE OF THE CALIPHS, 'UMAR, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT WAS A CONSENSUS THAT THE
BEGINNING OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY, THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY BE IT RELIGIOUS, MORAL,
POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, EMERGED WITH THE MIGRATION TO MADINA. AND THIS IS ONE OF
THE ASPECTS, THOSE WHO WANT TO MAKE COMPARISON -- AFTER ALL, MUHAMMAD IS A
RELIGIOUS FIGURE. IF YOU WERE TO COMPARE HIM TO ANOTHER RELIGIOUS FIGURE IN THE
CHRISTIAN TRADITION AS SEEN BY THE ADHERENCE TO CHRISTIANITY, THEY SEE JESUS AS
DIVINE AND HUMAN AT THE SAME TIME.
FOR MUSLIMS, MUHAMMAD WAS NOT DIVINE.
HE
IS JUST AS DIVINE AS YOU AND I, BUT HE IS AS POLITICAL AND AS RELIGIOUS, AND
THAT IS A STRONG POINT OF EMPHASIS FOR UNDERSTANDING ISLAM, FOR UNDERSTANDING
THE CONFLICT THAT IS GOING ON TODAY.
SO FROM THE BEGINNING, ISLAM EMERGES AS
A COIN.
ON ONE SIDE OF IT, YOU SEE THE RELIGIOUS, THE MORAL ASPECTS THAT HE
WAS TEACHING FOR TEN YEARS:
THE UNITY OF GOD, BEING NICE TO YOUR PARENTS,
BEING NICE TO YOUR NEIGHBORS, AND ALMOST EVERYTHING YOU'VE READ IN BIBLICAL
TRADITION IN GENERAL, BEING MORALITY I THINK IN SO MANY TRADITIONS ARE THE SAME.
THE DIFFERENCE IS THE EMPHASIS ON THE UNITY OF GOD AND SO ON.
ON THE OTHER
SIDE OF THE COIN IS THE POLITICAL ASPECT AND THE CONCEPT OF BROTHERHOOD.
IN
FACT, ONE OF THE FIRST ACTS HE DECLARED WHEN HE ARRIVED TO MADINA FROM MECCA, HE
ORDERED EACH MEMBER OF THE ANSAR, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE PEOPLE OF MADINA, TO
PICK A PERSON, TURN TO THE LEFT, TURN TO THE RIGHT, PICK A PERSON, AND HE'S
GOING TO BE YOUR BROTHER, NOT BIOLOGICAL BROTHER BECAUSE BIOLOGICAL BROTHER
WOULD INVOLVE INHERITANCE, WOULD INVOLVE MONEY, AND THAT WOULD UPSET A LOT OF
PEOPLE.
SO IT WAS NOT A FULL ADOPTION, BUT IT WAS A SOCIAL ADOPTION OF ONE
ANOTHER.
AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE FIRST FOUNDATIONS OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY IN
MADINA IS TO CREATE THIS NEW COMMUNITY, NEW SOCIETY, BASED ON DIFFERENT ASPECTS,
NOT THE CLAN CONNECTION, NOT THE TRIBAL CONNECTION, BUT ON A BROTHERHOOD AS
DEFINED THROUGH THE TEACHINGS OF THE NEW FAITH.
FOR THE NEXT TWELVE YEARS, HE
WILL SERVE -- HE WILL CONTINUE THE MESSAGE OF MORALITY AND PIETY, BUT AT THE
SAME TIME HE WILL BECOME ALSO THE POLITICAL AND THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF OF THE
COMMUNITY.
IN TWELVE YEARS OF HIS PROPHETSHIP IN MADINA, IN FACT, HE PRESIDED
OVER 25 BATTLES.
IN TERMS OF COMPARISON, IF YOU WERE TO COMPARE IT WITH
AMERICAN SOCIETY TODAY, LIKE THERE IS I THINK ONE OF THE PRESIDENTS OR ONE OF
THE ADVISORS TO AMERICAN PRESIDENTS ONE DAY SAY, HE SAID EVERY PRESIDENT MUST
HAVE HIS LITTLE WAR, AND EVEN IF THERE IS NO REASON TO MAKE WAR, YOU HAVE TO
INVENT ONE.
THAT IS THE NATURE OF POLITICS.
THAT'S THE NATURE OF GOVERNANCE.
AND IT WAS STAMPED ON VERY EARLY ON THAT THIS IS THE RELIGIOSITY OF THE
COMMUNITY AND THE POLITICAL ASPIRATION OF THE COMMUNITY ARE THE SAME, AND THEY
OUGHT TO BE PRESENTED AND PREACHED AND EMPHASIZED WITH THE SAME KIND OF ZEAL.
HAVING ESTABLISHED THIS KIND OF SOCIETY WITH A DUAL NATURE, YOU CAN IMAGINE THE
KIND OF PROBLEMS THAT WILL EMERGE UPON THE DEATH OF THIS PERSON WHO WAS -- WHO
HAD IMMENSE, HUGE AUTHORITY. YOU KNOW, BEING THE POLITICAL AUTHORITY SOMETIMES
REQUIRED THE POLICE.
IF YOU KNOW HOW TO MANAGE POLICE AND THE MILITARY, THEN
YOU CAN IMPOSE YOUR WILL AS A KING OR AS A PRESIDENT OR AS A DICTATOR.
BUT
SOMETIMES BEING THE RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY, YOU DON'T NEED THE POLICE.
SOMETIMES
THE WORD WILL BE SAID AND IT WILL BE APPLIED IMMEDIATELY WITHOUT EVEN REQUIRING
POLICE, AND SO THAT'S THE KIND OF POWER THAT -- THAT THE PROPHET MONOPOLIZED,
ESPECIALLY THE LAST TWELVE YEARS.
SO UPON HIS DEATH, BEFORE HE WAS BURIED,
MUSLIM HISTORIANS TELL US OF AN EVENT WHERE THE FIRST DIVISION AMONG THE MUSLIM
COMMUNITY EMERGED. WHILE ALI, WHO WAS BY THEN HIS SON-IN-LAW, WAS DOING THE
RITUALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BURIAL, CLEANING THE BODY AND SO ON, A GROUP OF THE
ANSAR -- THESE ARE THE PEOPLE OF MADINA WHO SUPPORTED HIM BEFORE -- SAID WE
STILL NEED THIS KIND OF LEADERSHIP THAT HE INSTILLED.
AND SHOULD WE -- THE
OPTIONS WERE SHOULD WE REVERT TO THE TRIBAL COUNCIL LIKE BEFORE OR SHOULD WE
ELECT ONE PERSON LIKE THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD.
AND THEN ANOTHER GROUP OF THE
QURAYSH, ANOTHER GROUP FROM MECCA -- THESE ARE THE IMMIGRANTS; THESE ARE THE
PEOPLE WHO MIGRATED -- ALSO HEARD OF THIS EVENT, AND THEY CAME TO THE MEETING.
THIS MEETING TOOK PLACE IN SAQIFAT BANI SA'DAH, LIKE THE BACKYARD OF ONE OF THE
LEADERS OF THE ANSAR. AND WHEN THIS GROUP OF INFLUENTIAL LEADERS OF THE
IMMIGRANTS ARRIVED TO THIS MEETING, ONE IMPORTANT DECLARATION WAS MADE, AND IT
WAS MADE BY THE PERSON WHO WILL BECOME THE SECOND CALIPH, 'UMAR.
THIS
DECLARATION WAS WE'VE HEARD THE PROPHET SAY AND HEAR THE POWER OF THE WORDS, THE
POWER OF TRADITION, THE POWER OF RAPPORT.
WE'VE HEARD THE PROPHET SAY THAT THE
NEXT LEADER, MY SUCCESSOR -- MY SUCCESSOR -- AND HERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
POLITICAL SUCCESSOR, NOT RELIGIOUS SUCCESSOR, OUGHT TO BE FROM QURAYSH.
AND
HERE ALSO THE CREDIBILITY OF A PERSON, YOU DON'T DOUBT A PERSON ESPECIALLY IF
THEY HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF TELLING THE TRUTH.
SO WHEN 'UMAR SAID THIS
STATEMENT, THE CLAIM BY THE ANSAR ALREADY FELL. BUT THERE IS ANOTHER CLAIM THAT
CANNOT FALL, AND THAT IS THAT OF THE PEOPLE FROM THE CLAN OF THE PROPHET.
SEE,
A TRIBE IS LIKE AN UMBRELLA ORGANIZATION.
AND WITHIN THIS UMBRELLA
ORGANIZATION, THERE WOULD BE CLANS, LARGE FAMILIES. REMEMBER, THE ARABS USED TO
MARRY MORE THAN -- WHATEVER WOMEN THEY CAN GET.
SO ONE MAN COULD HAVE, LIKE,
70 CHILDREN, ONE HUGE CLAN.
AND THE PROPHET WAS FROM THE CLAN KNOWN AS THE
HASHIMITES, BANU HASHIM.
AND ALI, HIS SON-IN-LAW, WAS ALSO FROM THE SAME CLAN.
THERE IS AN INTERESTING REPORT IN THE ISLAMIC HISTORY -- AND THESE ARE QUOTES
FROM ISLAMIC HISTORY -- WHERE 'UMAR IS QUOTED TO HAVE SAID THAT QURAYSH OR THE
ARABS IN GENERAL, THE ARABS OF ARABIA WILL NOT ALLOW THE HASHIMITES TO
MONOPOLIZE RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY AND POLITICAL AUTHORITY.
AND FOR THAT REASON HE
ARGUED FOR THE CALIPHATE, FOR THE SUCCESSION. CALIPHATE, THE CALIPH MEANS IN
ARABIC KHALIFA, MEANS TO SUCCEED SOMEBODY, TO SUCCEED THE PROPHET IN POLITICAL
AUTHORITY.
AND SO WITH THAT KIND OF BACKGROUND, WITH THAT KIND OF INFORMATION,
HE WAS AWARE THAT THERE MUST BE A NEED TO SEPARATE POWER AMONG THE ARABS -- TO
SEPARATE POWER AND SPREAD IT AMONG THE TRIBES, THE VARIOUS CLANS OF QURAYSH, NOT
JUST THE HASHIMITES THE SAME WAY THE PROPHET HAD MONOPOLIZED POWER PREVIOUSLY.
FOR THAT REASON HE SELECTED ABU BAKR, WHO IS ALSO A KNOWN COMPANION, TO BE HIS
SUCCESSOR.
HE SAID ABU BAKR IS A WELL-KNOWN COMPANION. HE WAS VERY GENEROUS,
VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPHET.
HE WAS THE ONLY COMPANION WHO MIGRATED,
BASICALLY THAT THE PROPHET TRUSTED HIM ON HIS LIFE, TO MIGRATE FROM MECCA TO
MADINA, AND HE GAVE A LIST -- NUMBER OF REASONS.
HE'S ALSO THE FIRST PERSON -HE ARGUED THIS IS THE FIRST PERSON WHO LED THE PRAYER, THE COLLECTIVE PRAYER,
NOT THE INDIVIDUAL PRAYER, THE COLLECTIVE PRAYERS IN THE PRESENCE OF THE
PROPHET.
NOBODY ELSE HAD THAT KIND OF HONOR.
AND ABOVE ALL, ABU BAKR WAS A
VERY PIOUS MAN AND AN ELDER, AND AGE GOES A LONG WAY IN ARABIC CULTURE.
SO THE
ARGUMENTS TO THE SIRE IN FAVOR OF ABU BAKR WERE OVERWHELMING. BUT THERE WAS
ALSO ESPECIALLY SIX INDIVIDUALS, AND FOUR OF THEM BECAME ACTUALLY VERY POWERFUL
LEADERS OF THE COMMUNITY, WHO ARGUE THAT THERE WERE TRADITIONS FROM THE PROPHET,
SAYINGS OF THE PROPHET THAT SAID MY COMPANIONS OR WHOEVER ACCEPTS ME TODAY AS
HIS LEADER SHALL ACCEPT ALI AS HIS LEADER.
AND THERE IS EVEN IN THE
TRADITIONS, IN SUNNI TRADITIONS, REPORTS WHERE THE PROPHET IN HIS LAST
PILGRIMAGE ALSO MADE THIS DECLARATION, AND IT WAS UNDERSTOOD THAT HE WAS AT THAT
POINT, HIS LAST FAREWELL PILGRIMAGE, THAT HE WAS APPOINTING ALI TO BE HIS
SUCCESSOR.
ALI'S SUCCESSION, FIRST OF ALL, DID NOT WORK FOR A NUMBER OF
REASONS.
ONE, HE WAS NOT PRESENT DURING THIS MOMENT, THIS HISTORICAL MOMENT.
HE WAS NOT PRESENT.
HE WAS STILL BUSY SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SECOND, SOMETHING THAT
DID NOT WORK IN HIS FAVOR, HIS AGE. HE WAS STILL YOUNGER COMPARED TO 'UMAR, TO
ABU BAKR, AND SO ON.
AND THIRD, IT'S USUALLY THE INTENT, THE CONSCIOUS
DECISION TO SEPARATE AUTHORITY, RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY AND POLITICAL AUTHORITY.
NONETHELESS, THE APPOINTMENT WAS MADE.
ABU BAKR WAS SELECTED TO BE THE
SUCCESSOR.
AND ALTHOUGH ALI DID NOT PAY ALLEGIANCE -- AND THIS IS LIKE THE
VOTE.
THE MANDATORY VOTE IN THE ISLAMIC SYSTEM AT THAT TIME.
YOU HAVE TO GO
IN PUBLIC TO THE MOSQUE AND SHAKE THE HAND OF THIS NEW LEADER.
THERE ARE
REPORTS THAT ALI REFUSED TO PAY ALLEGIANCE TO THE FIRST CALIPH, ABU BAKR, FOR
THE FIRST SIX MONTHS.
OTHER PEOPLE SAY IT WAS RELATED TO HIS WIFE, WHICH IS
THE DAUGHTER OF THE PROPHET, FATIMA, WHO PASSED AWAY SIX MONTHS AFTER HER
FATHER.
AND THEREAFTER, AFTER SIX MONTHS HE BECAME AN ADVISOR OF THE CALIPH,
THE FIRST CALIPH, THE SECOND CALIPH, AND SO ON.
LET ME GO QUICKLY NOW IN THIS
PERIOD, BECAUSE THIS FORMATIVE PERIOD OF ISLAMIC GOVERNANCE AND ISLAMIC
RELIGIOSITY IS ESSENTIAL IN UNDERSTANDING ISLAM THAT WILL FOLLOW.
THE
APPOINTMENT WAS, IN A SENSE, LIMITED.
THE APPOINTMENT OF ABU BAKR WAS LIMITED
THE FIRST TIME.
IT WAS 'UMAR SAYING THIS IS THE MAN WHO IS QUALIFIED.
THEN A
SELECTED GROUP SAID WE AGREE.
THEN THERE WAS A PUBLIC AGREEMENT.
THEN AFTER
THE -- ACTUALLY BEFORE THE DEATH OF ABU BAKR, WHILE HE WAS ILL, HE WROTE A
WILL.
AND THIS IS ANOTHER ASPECT OF WHETHER THE ISLAMIC GOVERNMENT SYSTEM IS
DERIVED FROM THE KORAN OR IS DERIVED FROM THE CONSENSUS OF THE COMMUNITY.
IF
THERE WAS A DECISION WITHIN THE KORAN TEXT, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN CLEAR HOW THE
LEADER IS APPOINTED. BUT A CLEAR LEADER IS AN AD HOCISH KIND OF WAY OF
APPROACHING THE POLITICS.
THE FIRST ONE WAS APPOINTED IN A LIMITED WAY. THEN
THE SECOND CALIPH WAS APPOINTED BY WILL.
HE WROTE A WILL AND HE SAID I KNOW
THAT 'UMAR WILL BE THE BEST PERSON FOR THE COMMUNITY AT THIS POINT, AND THERE IT
GOES.
'UMAR BECAME THE SECOND CALIPH.
WHEN 'UMAR WAS -- HE WAS STABBED AND
HE WAS BEING TREATED, HE ALSO WROTE A WILL FOR A COUNCIL OF SIX MEMBERS.
AND
THESE SIX MEMBERS, TO THE EXCLUSION OF THE REST OF COMMUNITY, WOULD DELIBERATE
AND COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF A CONSENSUS, DIFFERENT, KIND OF A STRANGE FORMULA,
TO COME UP WITH THE NEXT CALIPH.
WITH A NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT RESULTED, IN THE
END 'UTHMAN EMERGES AS THE THIRD CALIPH. 'UMAR WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL AS AN
ADMINISTRATOR AND AS A MANAGER MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.
IN FACT, FOR THE FIRST
TIME, THE ISLAMIC STATE HAD ACTUALLY A TREASURY.
BEFORE WHEN THE MONEY -THESE ZAKA -- THE MONEY COMES INTO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, IT WAS DISTRIBUTED
AMONG THE POOR IMMEDIATELY.
ONLY DURING THE TIME OF 'UMAR THAT THEY HAD TO
CREATE A TREASURY, MEANING THEY HAD A SURPLUS OF MONEY. AND AS WE KNOW TODAY,
WHENEVER YOU HAVE A SURPLUS OF MONEY, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE NEXT REGIME?
WHEN
BILL CLINTON GIVES YOU A SURPLUS, WHAT DO YOU DO WITH IT EVEN IF YOU'RE A
REPUBLICAN?
YOU SPEND IT.
AND SURE ENOUGH, 'UTHMAN SPENT IT.
HE SPENT THE
MONEY.
AND ACCORDING TO MUSLIM HISTORIANS, HE WAS NOT WISE WITH THIS MONEY.
HE USED IT, IN FACT, TO CORRUPT THE SYSTEM BY APPOINTING GOVERNORS WHO WERE FROM
HIS CLAN, TO THE EXCLUSION OF GOVERNORS WHO ARE KNOWN FOR THEIR PIETY AND FOR
THEIR RELIGIOSITY.
THIS KIND OF ATMOSPHERE CREATED TENSION AND CREATED
RESENTMENT.
A CIVIL WAR WOULD BREAK. 'UTHMAN WOULD BE MURDERED.
AND FOR THE
FIRST TIME, BECAUSE HE WAS MURDERED SUDDENLY, HE WAS NOT ABLE TO APPOINT THE
NEXT LEADER, SO IT WAS A KIND OF MASSIVE CONVERSION ON ALI.
THEY SAID NOW ALI,
IT IS HIS TIME TO BECOME THE NEXT CALIPH. BUT HE IS IN A SITUATION JUST LIKE
PROBABLY THE NEXT PRESIDENT WILL HAVE.
WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH WAR, IT'S VERY
HARD TO MANAGE.
SOCIETIES ARE NOT DIFFERENT THEN OR NOW; THEY ARE THE SAME.
WHEN YOU HAVE A MESSY SITUATION, YOU'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH A MESSY SITUATION.
ALI INHERITED A MESSY SITUATION, AND IN SEVERAL YEARS HE DID NOT MANAGE TO DO
MUCH TO DEAL WITH THAT CIVIL WAR, AND HE ENDED UP BEING KILLED.
HIS SON TAKES
OVER FOR ABOUT SIX MONTHS.
BUT THE AMOUNT OF ABUSE -- AND HERE ARE THE MIXING
OF RELIGION AND POLITICS.
THE AMOUNT OF ABUSE THAT ALI WAS SUBJECTED TO FORCED
HIS SON, HASSAN, TO MAKE A DEAL WITH MU'AWIYYA.
MU'AWIYYA, THIS A CLANSMAN OF
'UTHMAN, THE THIRD CALIPH, BECAUSE MU'AWIYYA WANTED REVENGE, THE OLD ARABIC WAY
OF SETTLING SCORES.
HE SAID WE HAVE A PROBLEM, THE CALIPH WAS KILLED, WE NEED
TO KILL A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KILLED HIM.
AND ALI SAID WE CANNOT DO THAT.
IF IT WAS ONE PERSON, WE BRING HIM TO JUSTICE, BUT THIS IS A MASSIVE REVOLT AND
WE CANNOT GO AFTER A -- INDISCRIMINATELY JUST KILLING PEOPLE.
AND THAT LED TO
HIS DEATH.
BUT FROM THE MINARATS -- SO AFTER THIS MURDER AND EVERYTHING, FROM
THE MINARATS ESPECIALLY IN DAMASCUS, SYRIA TODAY, ALONG WITH THE CALL TO PRAYER
-- SO IMAGINE THIS SUPPOSED TO BE SOMETHING ABOUT PIETY, ABOUT RELIGIOSITY,
ABOUT SPIRITUALITY, COME TO PRAY, BUT THERE WAS A CURSE.
RIGHT AFTER THAT ALI
IS CURSED FROM THE MINARATS.
AND SO THERE WERE A LOT OF TENSIONS FROM THE -BIG TENSION BETWEEN ALI AND THIS NEW REGIME THAT IS EMERGING THAT WOULD BE KNOWN
LATER AS UAMAYYAD, FORCING THE SON OF ALI, HASSAN, TO MAKE A DEAL.
HE SAID I'M
GOING TO GIVE YOU THE CALIPHATE, WHICH WAS GIVEN TO HIM SEEMS LIKE BY POPULAR
DEMAND, AND YOU WILL STOP CURSING AND SAYING ALL THESE BAD THINGS AND INSULTING
MY FATHER.
AND IT SEEMED LIKE A DEAL WAS REACHED.
MU'AWIYYA BECOMES THE
CALIPH. MU'AWIYYA TAKES OVER.
TWO THINGS ARE GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THIS NEW
FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
FIRST, THE CALIPHATE BECOMES HEREDITARY.
THE FIRST FOUR
CALIPHS WERE EVERY ONE FROM A DIFFERENT CLAN, AND THEY WERE APPOINTED NOT BY
HEREDITY, BUT THEY WERE APPOINTED BECAUSE OF THEIR PIETY. MU'AWIYYA -- IT
DOESN'T MATTER HOW GOOD OR HOW BAD -- IN FACT, HIS SON YAZID WAS ONE OF THE
MOST CORRUPT. THERE ARE HISTORICAL REPORTS THAT SAYS THAT HE USED TO PUT THE
KORAN ON THE WALL -- COPIES OF THE KORAN ON THE WALL AND SHOOT AT THEM WITH
ARROWS.
THIS IS THE KIND OF LEADERSHIP -- POLITICAL LEADERSHIP THAT WAS
PRESENT IN ISLAM.
AND BECAUSE OF THIS KIND OF PERSONALITY AND THIS APPROACH TO
MAKING THE POLITICAL LEADERSHIP HEREDITARY, THERE WAS, OF COURSE, REVOLTS.
AND
THE LEADERS OF THESE REVOLTS MOSTLY WERE SHI'ITES.
HERE WHAT IS HAPPENING IS
THAT THE SHI'ITES FROM EARLY ON, IT SEEMS LIKE THEY POSITIONED THEMSELVES AS THE
POLITICAL OPPOSITION ON ONE HAND AND AS THE MORAL AUTHORITY OF THE COMMUNITY.
THE GRANDSON OF THE PROPHET OR THE SON OF ALI, HUSSAIN NOW, DID NOT GIVE THE
PUBLIC ALLEGIANCE TO 'UMAR, THE SECOND CALIPH, AND HE WAS MAKING HIS WAY TOWARDS
KUFAH IN IRAQ TODAY.
PROBABLY MOST OF YOU HEARD ABOUT IT.
IT IS STILL A
CENTRAL PLACE IN SHI'I ISLAM, AS WELL AS SUNNI ISLAM.
AND BEFORE REACHING
KUFAH, IN A PLACE CALLED KARBALA -- HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD OF KARBALA?
THAT'S IT?
KARBALA, THAT SOUNDS GOOD.
YOU CAN PRONOUNCE ALL THE LETTERS.
THERE IS NO "HA" OR "HKE."
SO KARBALA WAS THIS PLACE WHERE FIVE -- PEOPLE SAY
4,000 TO 5,000 TROOPS FROM SYRIA CONVERGED ON THESE 70 TO 75 FAMILY MEMBERS OF
HUSSAIN, HIS FAMILY AND SOME OF HIS SUPPORTERS, 70 PEOPLE. 4,000 TROOPS AGAINST
70, A BATTLE THAT LASTED ABOUT TEN DAYS.
AND AT THE END EVERYBODY WAS
MASSACRED WITH EXCEPTION OF SOME YOUNGSTERS AND WOMEN, INCLUDING HUSSAIN ALSO
WAS KILLED.
THIS IS STILL -- YOU WILL SEE IT COMMEMORATED ON THE MUHARRAM.
YOU HEAR MUHARRAM AND IT'S COMMEMORATED IN DIFFERENT WAYS IN NORTH AFRICA, MORE
SYMBOLIC.
YOU SEE IT IN PAKISTAN, AFGHANISTAN USUALLY IN A VIOLENT WAY, WITH
PEOPLE, LIKE, HITTING THEMSELVES WITH CHAINS AND SWORDS AND BLEEDING.
AND
RECENTLY IN IRAQ, IT ALSO EMERGED AS A CELEBRATION.
IT IS A CELEBRATION OF
THIS EVENT WHERE THERE -- THIS IS NOT ANY MAN.
THIS IS THE GRANDSON OF THE
PROPHET GENETICALLY.
HE IS AN IMPORTANT FIGURE.
YOU KNOW, IF CLONING WAS
PRESENT AT THAT TIME, THEY WOULD HAVE CLONED SOMEBODY ELSE IN HIS STEAD.
SO HE
IS A CENTRAL FIGURE.
AND WITH THE MURDER OR WITH THE KILLING OF HUSSAIN, ONE
OF HIS CHILDREN WHO WAS THE YOUNGEST AT THAT TIME, WILL BE BASICALLY SAVED.
THEN THE SHI'I WILL LOOK AT THE GENEALOGY, THE CHILDREN COMING FROM HUSSAIN.
SO HERE, TO MOVE QUICKLY TO THE GENEALOGY -- THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE
SHI'ITES, THERE WOULD BE AT LEAST THREE MAJOR BRANCHES OF SHI'ITES.
THE
TWELVERS WHO BELIEVE IN TWELVE IMAMS FROM THE TIME FROM ALI BEING THE FIRST TO
THE TWELFTHS WHO WENT INTO WHAT THEY CALLED A CULTATION.
HIDDEN, HE'S HIDDEN.
HE'S STILL ALIVE, FROM THE TENTH CENTURY, SOMEWHERE IN MID 931, I BELIEVE, 941,
HE'S THERE.
HE COULD BE ANY ONE OF YOU. THE OTHER SHI'ITES ARE CALLED THE
ISMA'ILIS, AND THERE WAS A DISAGREEMENT AGAIN WHICH SON SHOULD BE THE CALIPH,
AND THEY'RE CALL ALSO THE SEVENERS.
SO I THINK BRANCHES -- ONE BRANCHES AT
THE SEVENTH.
ONE BRANCHES AT THE FIFTH, THE ZAIDIS. IN TERMS OF LOCATION, THE
TWELVERS ARE MOSTLY IN LEBANON, IRAQ, AND IRAN AND SOME IN AFGHANISTAN. IN
TERMS OF THE ISMA'ILI SHI'ITES, MOSTLY ARE IN INDIA, PAKISTAN, THE FAR EAST,
BRITAIN, AND I THINK THE LEADER, AGA KHAN, IS ACTUALLY IN, I THINK, IN LONDON.
AND THEN THE ZAIDIS, MOSTLY IN YEMEN.
IN FACT, THERE IS A REVOLT. IT'S A
LOW-KEY CIVIL WAR THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR CLOSE TO HALF A DECADE IN YEMEN.
A NUMBER OF PEOPLE ARE MURDERED IN YEMEN, AND IT'S LED BY THE ZAIDIS SHI'ITES
AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT.
THAT'S IN TERMS OF DEFINING THE PRESENCE OF THE
SHI'ITES.
NOW, IN TERMS OF -- IN TERMS OF POLITICS, LET ME ALSO PUT IT IN A
DIFFERENT WAY. THE AUTHORITY, SHI'I-SUNNI DISTINCTIONS, REALLY IS ABOUT
UNDERSTANDING HOW AUTHORITY, BE IT POLITICAL, RELIGIOUS, IS UNDERSTOOD IN THE
ISLAMIC AND THE ARABIC CONTEXT.
IT'S ABOUT AFFINITY, IT'S ABOUT PIETY, AND
IT'S ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS.
IF YOU LOOK AT ALI, HE REPRESENTED ALL THESE THREE.
FIRST OF ALL, HE WAS KNOWN AS A VERY PIOUS MAN, SO THERE WAS THIS GROUP OF
PEOPLE CONVERGED ON HIM AS -- TOOK HIM AS THEIR LEADER BECAUSE HE WAS SEEN AS A
PIOUS PERSON.
IN TERMS OF AFFINITY, HE IS A COUSIN OF THE PROPHET, HE IS THE
SON-IN-LAW, HE IS MARRIED TO HIS DAUGHTER.
AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO BELIEVED IN
SOME SORT OF BLOOD RELATIONS FOUND ALSO IN ALI BEING MARRIED TO THE DAUGHTER OF
THE PROPHET AS A GOOD CANDIDATE.
AND THOSE THREE -- THESE THREE ASPECTS ARE
GOING TO CONTINUE EVEN UNTIL MODERN DAY.
IN FACT, IF YOU LOOK AT ISMA'ILIS,
THE ISMA'ILIS ARE ABOUT AFFINITY, BLOOD AFFINITY.
THEY DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT
PIETY.
IN FACT, SOME SAY THAT THE AGA KHAN IS ONE OF THE MOST CORRUPT PEOPLE,
BUT HE'S THE AGA KHAN.
THE SHI'I TWELVERS, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARE ABOUT PIETY,
AND THAT'S WHY THEY WEAR THE TURBANS, AS YOU WILL SEE THE AYATOLLAHS.
IT'S
ABOUT PIETY AND THEY HAVE TO EXPRESS IT IN A PHYSICAL WAY, AND THESE ARE THE
TWELVERS, OR THE IMAMIS. AND IN TERMS OF POLITICAL ARGUMENTS, THE ZAIDIS
REPRESENT THAT.
THERE'S AN INTERESTING DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE ZAIDIS AND THE
REST OF THE SHI'ITES. ONE OF THE MAJOR DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THE SUNNI AND THE
SHI'ITES IS THE PREFERENCE OF THE FIRST CALIPH, SHOULD IT HAVE BEEN ABU BAKR OR
ALI.
AND THE SHI'ITES IN GENERAL, ALL THREE ARGUE THAT ALI WAS THE MOST
QUALIFIED.
IT'S THE QUESTION OF QUALIFICATION.
HE IS THE BEST.
THE ZAIDIS
WILL ARGUE LATER, THEY SAY ACTUALLY IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT THE BEST.
WE AGREE
ALI IS THE BEST, NO QUESTION ABOUT IT, BUT ABU BAKR AND 'UMAR WERE GREAT AS
WELL.
AND SO THE ZAIDIS ARGUED THAT THE LEADERSHIP OF THE GREAT IS OKAY, EVEN
IN THE PRESENCE OF THE BEST.
AND THAT'S WHAT DISTINGUISHES THE ZAIDIS FROM
ESPECIALLY THE IMAMIS AND THE ISMA'ILIS.
AND SO THAT'S AN IMPORTANT KIND OF
DISTINCTION.
NOW, THEOLOGICALLY -- SO THAT'S ONE POINT IN TERMS OF POLITICS,
IN TERMS OF THE HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
NOW, IN
TERMS OF THEOLOGY ALSO, THERE IS SOME BACKGROUND FOR -- THEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
THAT DISTINGUISHES SUNNIS FROM SHI'ITES, AND IT CONTINUES UNTIL TODAY.
AND AS
YOU WOULD KNOW, RELIGION IS REALLY ABOUT CERTAINTY.
YOU CANNOT HAVE A STRONG
FAITH THAT WILL CONTROL THE MASSES.
AND THAT FAITH IS LIKE:
IS JESUS HIS
GOD, MAYBE.
YOU CAN'T DO THAT; CAN I GO TO PARADISE EVEN THOUGH I HAD A
COUPLE BEERS LAST NIGHT, MAYBE.
NO!
YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
IT'S ABOUT
CERTAINTY.
WE HAVE TO DRAW A CLEAR LINE.
THAT'S WHAT RELIGION IS REALLY
ABOUT IF YOU BOIL IT DOWN. IT'S LIKE -- IT'S ABOUT CERTAINTY.
AND CERTAINTY
NOT JUST IN TERMS OF SALVATION, INDIVIDUAL SALVATION, BUT ALSO IT'S ABOUT THE
COMMUNITY.
IT'S ALSO ABOUT THE COMMUNITY.
AND THIS COMES TO THE QUESTION OF
INTERPRETATION.
SO MUSLIMS ARGUE THAT GOD PROVIDED US WITH THE ABSOLUTE
KNOWLEDGE, LIKE ANY OTHER RELIGION.
YOU KNOW, THE BIBLE IS THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH.
FOLLOW IT AND YOU WILL BE SAVED.
MUSLIMS WILL ARGUE THE KORAN IS THE ABSOLUTE
TRUTH.
FOLLOW IT AND YOU'LL BE SAVED.
THEN THE QUESTION IS ABOUT
INTERPRETATION.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE PRIESTS.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE IMANS.
INTERPRETATION HAS TO BE ALSO ABSOLUTE.
AND HOW CAN YOU HAVE AN ABSOLUTE
INTERPRETATION?
ACCORDING TO THE SHI'ITES, THEY SAID GOD MAKES SURE -- GOD
MAKES SURE EVERY TIME THERE IS A LIVING HUMAN BEING WHO IS INFALLIBLE WHO CAN
INTERPRET TRADITION FOR US.
AND THE CONCEPT IS CALLED LUTF, OR GRACE, DIVINE
GRACE.
GOD IS SO LOVING THAT HE WILL NOT LET US GO STRAY.
AND THEREFORE,
FROM ONE GENERATION TO ANOTHER, HE WILL PICK ONE PERSON AND SAY, HEY, IT'S YOU.
AND THEN THAT PERSON BEFORE HE DIES SAYS YOU AND YOU AND YOU.
AND THE SHI'ITES
-- THE TWELVER SHI'ITES WILL HAVE THESE TWELVE INDIVIDUALS.
THAT'S WHY WHEN
THE LAST SHI'I IMAM DIED, THEY DIDN'T SAY OOPS, GOD MAKE A MISTAKE. NO, THEY
CAME UP WITH A GREAT THEORY.
AND THAT THEORY IS CALLED OCCULTATION.
HE
DIDN'T DIE.
HE'S STILL IN HIDING, AND HIS DEPUTIES GO EVERY NOW AND THEN AND
GET SOME INFORMATION FROM HIM AND HE'S GOING TO COME BACK WITH JESUS AND HE'S
GOING TO FILL THE WORLD WITH JUSTICE AND GOOD STUFF.
AND SO WE STILL HAVE THAT
CONTINUITY IN SHI'ITE THEOLOGY. NOW, IN TERMS OF CERTAINTY, SUNNIS ALSO HAVE
THE ASPECT -- HAS THE POINT OF CERTAINTY.
EVERYBODY NEEDS CERTAINTY.
AND IN
SUNNI ISLAM, CERTAINTY THEY SAID IS VESTED IN THE COMMUNITY, AND THEY ARGUE THAT
THE PROPHET SAID THE CONSENSUS IJMA, THE CONSENSUS OF MY UMMA OR MY COMMUNITY IS
INSPIRED BY GOD.
SO INSTEAD OF VESTING THIS ABSOLUTENESS, THIS INFALLIBILITY
IN ONE PERSON THE WAY THE SHI'I HAS DONE, THE SUNNI SAID IT'S IN THE MAJORITY,
IT'S IN THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
SO THAT'S A MAJOR THEOLOGICAL -- IT'S RELATED TO
THE INTERPRETATION OF THE THEOLOGICAL MATTERS.
THEOLOGY IS ABOUT CERTAINTY.
LASTLY COMES TO THE QUESTION OF THE LAW AND INTERPRETATION.
TO HAVE THE
CONSTITUTION IS NOT ENOUGH.
YOU NEED TO HAVE JUSTICES TO INTERPRET IT.
HAVING THE KORAN IS NOT ENOUGH.
YOU NEED TO HAVE JURISTS OR ULEMA TO INTERPRET
IT.
AND FOR THE MUSLIM -- SUNNI MUSLIMS FROM THE BEGINNING, THEY COINED A VERY
CRITICAL WORD.
IT'S CALLED IJTIHAD.
AND DO YOU SEE -- HEAR THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN "IJTIHAD" AND "JIHAD? HOW MANY OF YOU HEAR THE DIFFERENCE?
RAISE
YOUR HAND.
GOOD, GOOD, BECAUSE THEY'RE RELATED BUT THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE.
IJTIHAD IS THE EXERTION OF MAXIMUM EFFORTS TO DETERMINE THE PROPER
INTERPRETATION OF THE KORAN AND THE PROPER DETERMINATION OF THE LAW.
JIHAD IS
THE EXERTION OF MAXIMUM EFFORTS IN DEFENSE OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND THE PERSON -THE FIRST ONE WHO WILL INTERPRET THE KORAN IS CALLED THE MUJTIHAD, THE
MUJTIHAD.
AND THIS CONCEPT BEGAN VERY EARLY ON IN SUNNI ISLAM, AND IT
CONTINUED UNTIL PROBABLY FOR ABOUT THREE HUNDRED YEARS WHEN SOME BRILLIANT
CONCEPT EMERGED.
AND THAT IS WHEN YOU HAVE TOO MANY PEOPLE COMING UP WITH
IDEAS AND SAYING THIS IS THE BEST INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW, THIS IS THE ONLY
DETERMINATION OF THE SOURCE OF THE LAW, THEY SAID THE DOORS OF IJTIHAD HAVE
CLOSED.
THE DOORS OF IJTIHAD HAVE CLOSED MEANING -- ACTUALLY THAT CLAIM, TO
OVERSIMPLIFY IT, TO REMIND ME OF THIS TV AD THAT I'VE SEEN AT ONE TIME.
I
DON'T THINK IT'S FUNNY, BUT I LAUGHING WHEN I SAW IT BECAUSE IT REMINDED ME OF
IJTIHAD. I SAID THAT'S HOW IJTIHAD IS.
IT'S LIKE IF YOU GO TO THE INTERNET,
REMEMBER THERE WAS AN AD THAT THIS GUY WAS ON THE INTERNET CLICKING ON HIS MOUSE
AND GOING FROM ONE WEB SITE TO ANOTHER, AND THEN HIS WIFE TOLD HIM -- HE BECOMES
LIKE RED AND MAD.
HIS WIFE TELLS HIM, WHAT'S HAPPENING? HE SAID, I SURFED
THE ENTIRE INTERNET!
THAT'S WHAT THE CLOSURE OF IJTIHAD IS ALMOST LIKE.
IT'S
LIKE WE DISCOVERED EVERY POSSIBILITY THERE IS -- EVERY POSSIBILITY THERE IS, SO
WHATEVER LAW YOU WANT, WE'VE GOT IT.
AND THEREFORE, THIS CLOSURE OF IJTIHAD
REALLY CREATED A VERY STATIC SYSTEM THAT BEYOND THAT, YOU CANNOT REALLY COME UP
WITH ANY NEW RULING, AND WITH IT BEING STILL WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE PROPER
SHARIA.
SO I MAY COME UP WITH A NEW INTERPRETATION, BUT GENERALLY IT WILL BE
SEEN AS, KEY TERM HERE, INNOVATION.
INNOVATION IN RELIGION IS NOT GOOD.
GENERALLY INNOVATION CREATES A DIFFERENT SECT, A DIFFERENT SCHOOL OF THOUGHT.
SO WHILE THE MUSLIMS GENERALLY USE THE IJTIHAD TO EXPAND ON THE SOURCES OF LAW,
YOU HAVE THE SHI'IS WHO WOULD NOT BELIEVE IN IJTIHAD, AND FOR GOOD REASONS.
WHY?
BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE INFALLIBLE PERSON...
UNTIL RECENTLY -- UNTIL
THIS GUY, PROBABLY YOU'VE SEEN HIM, IN 1979, THERE WAS THIS BOOK WRITTEN BY THE
CIA WITH THIS MAN IN A BLACK TURBAN ON THE COVER OF THE BOOK CALLED AYATOLLAH
KHOMEINI.
AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI IS PROBABLY THE FIRST SHI'I PERSON TO ARGUE OR,
IN OTHER WORDS, TO ADOPT A SUNNI CONCEPT WHEN HE BROUGHT THIS NEW NOTION, THIS
NEW DOCTRINE CALLED VELAYAT-IFAQIH, THE GOVERNANCE OF THE JURISPRUDENT.
VELAYAT-IFAQIH IS THIS NEW THEORY THAT IS BASED ON WHICH THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF
IRAN'S SYSTEM IS BASED.
THAT IS A JURISPRUDENT, AN ISLAMIC MUJTIHAD IN OTHER
WORDS, MUST BE ON TOP OF HIERARCHY.
THE GRAND AYATOLLAH MUST BE ON TOP OF THE
HIERARCHY BECAUSE HE'S NOT INFALLIBLE BECAUSE HE'S NOT ONE OF THE IMAMS WITH A
CAPITAL "I," BUT HE'S THE CLOSEST YOU CAN HAVE.
HE'S LIKE THE DEPUTY.
AND
THAT'S VERY CLOSE TO WHAT SUNNI IJTIHAD WAS BEFORE THAT.
NOW, THE CONCLUSION
OF THIS SYSTEM, YOU HAVE THE SUNNI ISLAM EMERGING, THEN REACHING A VERY NARROW
SPACE FOR IJTIHAD.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY -- THE MAJORITY OF
THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY BASICALLY ON A STATE OF STAGNATION IN TERMS OF LAW AND IN
TERMS OF REFORM, ESPECIALLY POLITICAL REFORM.
YOU HAVE THE SHI'I REVIVAL THAT
HAS EMERGED SINCE THE 20TH CENTURY, BUT MOSTLY WITH THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION.
AND WE HAVE THIS NEW HIERARCHY IN THE SHI'I ISLAM.
IT'S MOSTLY MARKED BY THE
TITLES, AND YOU CAN ALSO TELL BY THE TURBANS.
THE HIERARCHY WOULD BE HUJJAT
AL-ISLAM TO ISLAM WOULD BE LIKE A PERSON WHO JUST GRADUATED. MAYBE YOU CAN CALL
HIM A MASTER STUDENT, A STUDENT WHO JUST EARNED HIS MASTERS.
THEN YOU HAVE AN
AYATOLLAH, A PERSON WITH A Ph.D. BUT FROM A SEMINARY.
THEN YOU HAVE A GRAND
AYATOLLAH.
AND IN IRAN I THINK TODAY -- I MEAN IN SHI'I ISLAM, THERE ARE ABOUT
FIVE, I THINK, FIVE GRAND AYATOLLAHS.
AND PEOPLE VOLUNTARILY -- SHI'IS
VOLUNTARILY WILL PICK ONE OF THESE GRAND AYATOLLAHS, SISTANI BEING ONE OF THE
MOST DOMINANT ONES.
THESE INDIVIDUALS BASICALLY GUIDE THE SHI'I COMMUNITIES.
THESE FIVE INDIVIDUALS REPRESENT THE LEADERSHIP, THE COLLECTIVE LEADERSHIP OF
THE SHI'I COMMUNITY.
THEIR OPINION REALLY MATTERS MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.
SO WHEN PEOPLE ARE CALLING -- TO BRING IT TO THE CURRENT EVENTS, WHEN PEOPLE
ARE ASKED TO VOTE, BE IT IN THE SUNNI OR IN THE SHI'I COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY IN
IRAQ, USUALLY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO VOTE THEIR -- THE OPINION OF THE MARJA',
MEANING THE OPINION OF THE GRAND AYATOLLAH THAT THEY FOLLOW, BE IT EXPLICIT OR
IMPLICIT.
EVEN IF HE DOESN'T MAKE A PUBLIC STATEMENT, IT GENERALLY SOMEHOW,
ESPECIALLY NOW WITH THE INTERNET AND ALL, THERE IS A MESSAGE THAT HAS BEEN
PASSED.
SO YOU END UP, LIKE, WITHOUT KNOWING ALL THIS HISTORY, YOU GO TO A
PLACE IN IRAQ WHERE IT'S ALMOST DIVIDED 50/50, 65 TO WHATEVER SUNNI AND
SHI'ITES, WITHOUT ANY PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE SHI'ITE, ESPECIALLY IN THE
WEST -- YOU KNOW, EVEN IN ISLAMIC STUDIES, EVEN IN AN INSTITUTION THAT HAS
ISLAMIC STUDIES, USUALLY WHEN THEY TEACH ISLAM, THEY TEACH FROM THE SUNNI
PERSPECTIVE.
THEY DON'T TEACH FROM COMPREHENSIVELY WITH THE SHI'I.
AND THEN
YOU END UP WITH A LOT OF FORCES AT WORK THAT REQUIRE A LOT OF ATTENTION AND A
LOT OF DETAILS BEFORE THEORIZING. WHAT I'VE TRIED TO DO IS ACTUALLY EXPLAIN TO
YOU THE HISTORY OF ABOUT FIFTEEN HUNDRED YEARS IN ABOUT LESS THAN FIFTY MINUTES.
AND I THINK I HAVEN'T DONE ANY OF THAT, SO I'M GOING TO LEAVE THE REST OF THE
TIME FOR QUESTION AND ANSWER.
THAT WILL ALLOW ME TO FOCUS MORE ON THINGS THAT
INTEREST YOU MORE, AND I'LL START TO TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS.
ON THE OTHER HAND, I
HOPE ALSO THAT THIS TALK AND THIS EVENT ALLOWED YOU ALSO TO THINK ABOUT WHO YOU
THOUGHT HAD A TAIL AND MAKE SURE THAT NOBODY HAS ACTUALLY A TAIL, BECAUSE IT IS
A FALLACY.
GIVEN THE INFLUENCE OF THE GRAND AYATOLLAHS ON SHI'ITE COMMUNITY, IS IT
POSSIBLE TO HAVE A DEMOCRACY IN THE WAY WE CONCEIVE OF IT IN THE UNITED STATES?
Souaiaia: EXCELLENT QUESTION. AND I THINK THE ADMINISTRATION IS PROBABLY
REALIZING THAT RIGHT NOW.
YOU CANNOT -- YOU KNOW, DEMOCRACY IS NOT A MAGIC
PILL THAT YOU THROW IT IN ANY COMMUNITY AND IT'S GOING TO WORK, AND ESPECIALLY
IN A SOCIETY WHERE THE -- LIKE THE SHI'I COMMUNITY WHERE THE RELIGIOUS
AUTHORITIES HAVE HUGE POWER OVER INDIVIDUALS.
IT BECOMES ALMOST USELESS.
SO
DEMOCRACY IS GOING TO TRANSFORM INTO A TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY.
AND I THINK
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING IN IRAQ IS THAT, BECAUSE OF THEIR SHEER NUMBER
AND BECAUSE ALL OF THEM WILL FOLLOW THE VIEW OR THE DECLARATION OF THE
AYATOLLAH, THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE THE WAY THE AYATOLLAH WANTS THEM, WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF THE MINORITY SECULAR SHI'ITES. AND THEN BY SHEER NUMBERS, THEY'RE
GOING TO DOMINATE THE REST.
AND WITH THE VERY WEAK CIVIL SOCIETY INSTITUTIONS,
VERY WEAK CONSTITUTION AND RESPECT FOR CONSTITUTION, YOU END UP WITH A VERY
VOLATILE SITUATION MORE THAN A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM.
AND SO IN SHORT, I
DON'T THINK DEMOCRACY CAN WORK IN IRAQ THE WAY AT LEAST IT HAS BEEN DESIGNED
SINCE THE INVASION.
MY QUESTION IS ABOUT SOMETHING YOU SAID DURING THE THEOLOGY BACKGROUND PART.
YOU SAID SUNNIS SAY CERTAINTY IS VESTED IN THE COMMUNITY.
COULD YOU GIVE SOME
EXAMPLES, PLEASE?
Souaiaia: OKAY.
WHAT I MEANT BY -- THERE ARE -- THE SOURCES OF LAW IN ISLAM
ARE THE KORAN AND THE SUNNA, BUT WHEN THEY'RE NOT CLEAR, THEY'RE NOT EXPLICIT
ABOUT SOMETHING, THEN YOU NEED TO INTERPRET THEM.
AND IF I WERE TO INTERPRET A
VERSE IN A PARTICULAR WAY, IT MAY HAVE SOME WEIGHT.
BUT IF 80 PERCENT OF US
HERE INTERPRET IT THE SAME WAY I INTERPRET IT INDEPENDENTLY, NOT INFLUENCED
LIKE, OH, HE SAID THAT AND HE'S SMART SO IT MUST BE RIGHT -- SO INDEPENDENTLY
70 PERCENT OR 80 PERCENT OF US REACH A PARTICULAR INTERPRETATION, THEN SUNNIS
SAY THAT'S THE KIND OF CONSENSUS ISMAL THAT DETERMINES CERTAINTY, BECAUSE GOD
SOMEHOW INVESTS THE TRUTH IN THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE.
AND ISLAMIC LAW IS
BASED ON THIS PRINCIPLE, SO ISMAL, AS SOME WOULD LOOK AT IT, CONSIDERED IT TO BE
THE THIRD SOURCE OF ISLAMIC LAW.
ANYTHING THAT WAS REACHED, ANY DETERMINATION
THAT WAS MADE BY RELYING ON CONSENSUS, IT BECOMES PART OF THE LAW AND IT CANNOT
BE OVERTURNED.
IT CANNOT BE -- EVEN IF LATER LET'S SAY THERE IS AN
INTERPRETATION THAT IS ESTABLISHED TODAY BY 70 PERCENT OF US SCHOLARS HERE, THEN
A DECADE LATER 99 PERCENT OF ANOTHER BRIGHT GROUP OF PEOPLE HAVE A DIFFERENT
INTERPRETATION THAT CONTRADICTS OURS, IT DOES NOT OVERRULE.
ALTHOUGH IT'S 99
PERCENT IN ISLAMIC JURISPRUDENCE, IT DOESN'T OVERRIDE A LESSER -- SO THE TIME - THE PRECEDENCE GOES TO THE FIRST ONE, TO THE FIRST CONSENSUS.
AND IN TERMS
OF ITS APPLICATION, A NUMBER OF ASPECTS WHETHER IN LAW OR IN PRACTICE, ARE
PREDETERMINED BY CONSENSUS.
IN FACT, LIKE HOW MUSLIMS PERFORM THEIR PRAYER,
THEY SAY IT'S A MATTER OF CONSENSUS, BECAUSE THE MAJORITY OF MUSLIMS PRAY THIS
WAY AND, THEREFORE, IT'S -- BECAUSE THE KORAN DOES NOT STATE EXACTLY HOW IT'S
DONE.
EVEN THE HADITH -- YOU CANNOT FIND A HADITH THAT SAYS EXACTLY HOW IT'S
DONE.
IT'S THE WAY IT'S CARRIED OUT.
AND THEY SAY IF THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE
DO IT THIS WAY, THEN IT'S A MATTER OF CONSENSUS.
AND IT APPLIES TO DIVORCE,
INHERITANCE LAW, MARRIAGE, FINANCE, EVERYTHING.
I WANT TO BE SURE I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY. I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT IN TERMS OF
INNOVATION, ESPECIALLY THEOLOGICAL, BUT MAYBE ALSO IN TERMS OF JURISPRUDENCE,
THAT THE SUNNIS HAVE BEEN MORE STAGNANT THEN THE SHI'I.
AND I JUST WANTED TO
ASK YOU IF THERE HAS BEEN INNOVATION AND OF WHAT KIND LATELY WITHIN SUNNI
COMMUNITIES.
Souaiaia: THE INNOVATION -- THE EXTENT OF INNOVATION IN SUNNI ISLAM IS VERY
MINIMAL, AND IT RELATES USUALLY TO POLITICAL ISSUES.
AND THAT'S WHERE THE
ISLAMIST MOVEMENTS IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES WILL BE ACTIVE, IN THE AREA OF POLITICS,
IN THE AREA OF FINANCE.
AND THAT'S WHY THERE IS A DEBATE, FOR EXAMPLE, ON
INTEREST, WHETHER IT'S CONSIDERED JUDIRIOUS OR NOT AND SO ON.
BUT ESPECIALLY
IN SUNNI ISLAM, THERE IS A DECLARATION AND IT'S -- ESPECIALLY EVERY FRIDAY,
IT'S PART OF THE SERMONS OF THE FRIDAYS, AND IT SAYS EVERY INNOVATION IN THE
MATTER OF RELIGION IS BADAA -- IT'S LIKE BAD.
AND EVERY ACT LIKE THAT IS
GOING TO BE REWARDED BY GOING TO HELL.
SO THERE'S THIS IMMENSE PRESSURE TO
AVOID ANY INNOVATION MATTERS OF RELIGION.
IN THE TERMS OF THE SHI'I, THE
BIGGEST INNOVATION IS THE ADOPTION OF IJTIHAD ITSELF.
AND ONCE YOU ADOPT THAT,
THEN A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS ARE GOING TO FOLLOW SUIT.
THE MEDIA MAKES A LOT OF TO DO OVER SOME OF THE STATEMENTS OF PRESIDENT
AHMADINEJAD.
I THINK I PRONOUNCED THAT RIGHT.
AND I HAVE HEARD SOME PEOPLE
SAY OR IMPLY AT LEAST THAT WHAT HE SAYS IS NOT NEARLY AS IMPORTANT AS WHAT THE
AYATOLLAH SAYS, THAT AHMADINEJAD DOESN'T REALLY HAVE THE POWER IN THE COUNTRY
BUT THE AYATOLLAH DOES.
WHERE -- WHERE IS TRUTH BETWEEN THOSE TWO STATEMENTS?
Souaiaia: THE TRUTH ABOUT THOSE STATEMENTS IS -- IS WHERE THE CONSTITUTION -HOW THE CONSTITUTION ORGANIZES POWERS.
AND IT IS TRUE THAT THE AYATOLLAH, THE
GRAND AYATOLLAH, WHO IS ON TOP OF THE HIERARCHY, HAS THE FINAL SAY.
HE CAN
OVERRULE A DECISION NOT JUST MADE BY THE PRESIDENT BUT ALSO MADE BY THE
PARLIAMENT, BECAUSE THAT'S THE HEART OF WHAT YOU CALL WILAYAT AL-FAQIH -WILAYAT AL-FAQIH, WHICH IS THE GOVERNANCE OF THE JURISPRUDENT.
OTHERWISE IT
WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE IF HE'S NOT -- IF HE DOESN'T HAVE THE FINAL SAY. NOW, THE
DIFFERENCE IS HE DOESN'T RUN THE COUNTRY DAY TO DAY.
HE MAY MAKE ALL THESE
STATEMENTS, BUT THE POLICY IS ACTUALLY INSTITUTIONALIZED.
THERE'S A BIG DEBATE
AMONG THESE GRAND AYATOLLAHS IN SHI'I ISLAM IN GENERAL.
REMEMBER THAT IRAN IS
JUST ONE COMPONENT OF SHI'I ISLAM, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE -- BY MAJORITY THE LARGEST
NUMBER OF SHI'ITES ARE IN IRAN.
BUT IN TERMS OF AUTHORITY -- IN FACT IRAQ
MIGHT BE THE PLACE OF AUTHORITY VERY SOON IF IT STABILIZES, BECAUSE THERE ARE
MORE GRAND AYATOLLAHS IN IRAQ THAN IN IRAN.
IRAN HAS BEEN ALWAYS SECONDARY.
ONLY DURING THE RULE OF THE BAATHIST IT BECAME IMPORTANT.
BUT THERE WAS THIS
GRAND AYATOLLAH FROM LEBANON CALLED FADLALLAH, AND HE ARGUED THAT IT'S NOT THE
POWER -- AND THIS IS A VERY INTERESTING APPROACH, AND IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO
SEE WHERE IT GOES IN TERMS OF THEORY, IN TERMS OF ALSO APPLICABILITY.
HE
ARGUED THAT THE NOTION THAT KHOMEINI CAME UP WITH, WHICH IS THE RULERSHIP OR THE
GOVERNANCE OF THE JURISPRUDENT, OUGHT NOT TO BE VESTED IN ONE PERSON BUT IN AN
INSTITUTION.
AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE POWER IS GOING TO BE DIMINISHED
FROM THAT PERSON WHO SITS ON THE HIERARCHY.
HE'LL BECOME MORE LIKE THE
CHAIRPERSON OF THIS GUARDIAN -- COUNCIL OF GUARDIANS WHICH IS MADE BY OTHER
GRAND AYATOLLAHS.
AND I THINK FADLALLAH ARGUED THIS PERSPECTIVE IN ORDER TO
MINIMIZE THE CRITICISM THAT RELIGIOUS AUTHORITIES ARE SUFFERING BECAUSE OF
POLITICAL FAILURES.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU ARE A POLITICIAN, NO MATTER WHETHER
YOU'RE THE BEST, THE SMARTEST, THE MOST PIOUS, IN THE END WHEN YOU HAVE A
COUNTRY THAT IS FAILING ECONOMICALLY AND ADMINISTRATIVELY, IT'S GOING TO REFLECT
ON THE RULERSHIP.
SO FADLALLAH IS ARGUING THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE
INSTITUTION AND THEN THE INSTITUTION NEEDS TO MAKE A DECISION IN A DEMOCRATIC
WAY.
AND THAT'S WHERE THE SPACE BETWEEN WESTERN DEMOCRACY AND ISLAMIC FORMS OF
DEMOCRACY EVENTUALLY IS GOING TO EMERGE.
IT'S SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE BETWEEN
RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY AND RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY ITSELF BEING -- APPLYING PRINCIPLES
OF DEMOCRACY. THAT MEANS WE'RE GOING TO SIT DOWN AND WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS
THINGS AND THEN SOME CONSENSUS IS GOING TO EMERGE AND THEN THIS DECISION WILL BE
TAKEN, NOT BECAUSE OF THE GRAND AYATOLLAH WHO SITS ON THE HIERARCHY BUT BECAUSE
OF THE CONSENSUS THAT WE'VE REACHED.
THIS IS NOT HAPPENING YET BUT IT SEEMS
LIKE THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
IT STARTED TO HAPPEN IN IRAQ.
INITIALLY
SISTANI WAS THE FINAL SAY.
THEN THEY DEVOLVED ACTUALLY A COUNCIL, AND THEY
CALLED IT THE MARAJI'. AND ALL THESE INDIVIDUALS COLLECTIVELY, THEY WOULD SIT
DOWN AND THEY'D MAKE A DECISION ON THE MAIN ISSUES.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN IRAN THAT
WILL IMPACT THE NEGOTIATION ABOUT THE NUCLEAR ISSUE.
IT WILL IMPACT THE ISSUE
OF IRAQ, THE STABILITY OF IRAQ.
IT WILL IMPACT ALSO THE ISSUE OF SHI'I-SUNNI
RELATIONS.
AND THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF SAY IN THAT.
IN FACT, HE
WAS IN SAUDI ARABIA RECENTLY.
I DON'T THINK HE WAS CONVINCING, BECAUSE
EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT UNLESS THE GRAND AYATOLLAH MAKES A STATEMENT ABOUT THE
CONFLICT BETWEEN SUNNI AND SHI'ITES, THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T HAVE MUCH, BECAUSE
HE'S AN ADMINISTRATOR.
HE'S THE PERSON WHO IS APPLYING -- IMPLEMENTING THE
POLICIES OF THE ENTIRE SYSTEM.
I THINK IN THE UNITED STATES WHEN WE LOOK AT IRAN, THE SORT OF KNEE-JERK
REACTION THAT THE PRESS IN THE UNITED STATES HAS REVOLVES AROUND RATHER THEY
TERM SUCH AS THEOCRATIC OPPRESSION AND THAT SORT OF THING.
BUT AS I HEAR YOU
DESCRIBE IT, WHAT IT REMINDS ME -- THE ROLE OF THE AYATOLLAHS MOST REMINDS ME OF
THE ROLE OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE UNITED STATES, WHERE THE CONGRESS MAY PASS
A LAW AND THE PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH MAY SET ABOUT TO ENFORCE IT IN ITS
OWN PARTICULAR WAY, BUT IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS NINE MEN AND WOMEN DECIDE WHETHER
THOSE LAWS ARE TRULY IN CONFORMITY WITH OUR TRADITIONS.
AND WHILE WE TALK
ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, OF COURSE, IS A WHOLE
TRADITION OF INTERPRETATION, OF LEGAL PRECEDENT.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, AS A
MATTER OF FACT, IS NOT JUST SOMETHING YOU READ IN THE CONSTITUTION.
IT'S A
WHOLE LIFE STUDY, VIRTUALLY.
AND SO I WONDER IF YOU WOULD COMMENT ON WHETHER
I'M FACING THE RIGHT DIRECTION WHEN I SEE THESE AYATOLLAHS IN A MUCH MORE
BENEVOLENT LIGHT, AS A MATTER OF FACT, THAN MANY OF THE AMERICAN INTERPRETERS,
AS REALLY SOMETHING MORE AKIN TO OUR SUPREME COURT THAN OPPRESSIVE THEOCRATS.
Souaiaia: THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION AND I THINK IT LEADS RIGHT INTO THE HEART
OF THE MATTER REGARDING THE CRITICISM USUALLY THAT STARTS IN THE WEST ABOUT
ISLAM AND THE QUESTION WHETHER ISLAM IS COMPATIBLE WITH DEMOCRACY AND SO ON AND
SO FORTH.
AND IN TERMS OF THE ROLE OF THE MUJTIHAD, BE IT IN THE SHI'I OR IN
THE SUNNI, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE REFORM THAT TOOK PLACE IN SHI'I ISLAM OR IN THE
SUNNI, THE CONSTITUTION -- IF ANY CONSTITUTION WERE TO EMERGE -- AND I THINK
ESPECIALLY THE WEST NEEDS TO REALIZE THIS IN THE END.
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF
TURKEY -- WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TURKEY, ALMOST EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE
ISLAMIC WORLD, WHEN THEY WRITE A CONSTITUTION, NO MATTER HOW SECULAR THAT
CONSTITUTION IS, IN THE END IT MUST MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT ISLAM BEING A
DOMINANT MARKER OF THE NATIONAL IDENTITY.
AND IT'S NOT PER CHANCE.
IT'S
BECAUSE OF THAT TWELVE YEARS OF THE LIFE OF THE PROPHET, UNLESS PEOPLE ARE
WILLING -- YOU KNOW WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MODERNIZATION, MODERNIZATION MEANING YOU
EFFACE, YOU DELETE A PARTICULAR IDENTITY AND THEN YOU REPLACE IT WITH SOMETHING
ELSE.
SO UNLESS THE ISLAMIC WORLD IS WILLING TO SAY, YES, I THINK IT WAS A BIG
MISTAKE, THOSE TWELVE YEARS OF THE PROPHET, IT WAS A FARCE.
YOU KNOW, THAT
POLITICS OUGHT NOT TO BE THERE. THEN YOU ESTABLISH A SECULAR SYSTEM LIKE THE
ONE THAT IS -- THAT WAS ESTABLISHED BY ATATURK IN TURKEY.
BUT WHERE IS IT
GOING RIGHT NOW?
IN FACT, THERE IS A BIG DEBATE ABOUT THE ISLAMISTS MIGHT TAKE
THE PRESIDENCY IN TURKEY BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS EMERGING.
IF THEY'RE ALLOWED TO
PARTICIPATE DEMOCRATICALLY, THEY MAY TAKE OVER OR PRESENT A DIFFERENT POINT OF
VIEW.
SO THE QUESTION OF JURISTS BEING SIMILAR TO JUSTICES IN THAT JUSTICES
INTERPRET THE CONSTITUTION, JURISTS INTERPRET THE KORANICITY -- ALLOW ME TO
MAKE UP THIS WORD -- THE KORANICITY OF A LAW. SO IF A LAW IS COMPATIBLE WITH
THE KORAN, THEN IT SHOULD GO.
IF IT DOESN'T, THEN IT DOESN'T HAPPEN.
AND SO
REFORM HAS TO HAPPEN WITHIN THIS SPACE.
NOW, I WOULD ARGUE -- AND I KNOW THIS
IS A RADICAL AND A CONTROVERSIAL POINT OF VIEW, BUT IF REFORM IS TO HAPPEN, IT
WILL NOT -- IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD, IT WILL NOT TAKE PLACE AS IT HAS TAKEN PLACE
IN TURKEY, IN EGYPT, OR IN TUNISIA, WHERE ISLAM IS MARGINALIZED.
IT WILL BE
REFORM ACTUALLY IN PLACES LIKE IRAN, LIKE IN OTHER COUNTRIES, MAYBE SUDAN TO
SOME EXTENT, WHERE THEY SAY -- OR SAUDI ARABIA, WHERE THEY SAY WE'RE APPLYING
THE SHARI'A, THEN THEY HIT A WALL.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU APPLY A LAW, THEN YOU
REALIZE, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF PRACTICES THAT ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE ANYMORE.
THE SOCIETY HAS EVOLVED.
AND THEN THEY INTERPRET THE TEXT, AND THEY FIND WAYS
TO INTERPRET IT IN A WAY THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE MODERN WORLD, AND THEN THE
REAL REFORM WILL TAKE PLACE.
BUT AS LONG AS IT'S TAKING PLACE IN THE CONTEXT
OF SECULAR VERSUS NONSECULAR, THEN IT WILL ALWAYS BE SEEN AS DEMOCRACY BEING THE
BASTARD CHILD OF COLONIALISM, WHICH IS REJECTED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE
COMMUNITY.
RIGHT NOW IT SEEMS LIKE WHAT'S GOING ON IN IRAQ AT THIS TIME IS THE OLD ARAB
TRADITION OF REVENGE:
I KILL YOUR BROTHER; I'M GOING TO KILL TWO OF YOUR
BROTHERS, BACK AND FORTH.
IS THERE ANY HISTORICAL EXAMPLES OR ANY HOPE FOR
THE SUNNIS AND THE SHI'ITES TO BE ABLE TO SIT DOWN AND WORK OUT THEIR PROBLEMS
TOGETHER IN A PEACEFUL WAY?
IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE I'VE HEARD ANYTHING
HISTORICALLY WHERE THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT PEACEFULLY.
IT'S USUALLY DONE
IN A WARRING TYPE SITUATION.
Souaiaia: VERY GOOD QUESTION.
THAT'S THE TRILLION-DOLLAR QUESTION.
[
AUDIENCE LAUGHTER ] I THINK I MENTIONED EARLY AT THE BEGINNING OF MY TALK THAT
SUNNIS AND SHI'IS HAVE COME TO ACCEPT THE REALITY AND THAT IS, ESPECIALLY IN A
TIME WHERE WE'VE MOVING TOWARDS INTERNATIONAL LAW, RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, AND
SO ON, AND WITH THE WORLD CONSENSUS AND UNIVERSAL NORMS, THE ABHORRENCE OF
GENOCIDE, ETHNIC CLEANSING, AND THE WIPING OF A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS GROUP AND
SO ON, IT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED NOT JUST BY THE WORLD COMMUNITY BUT BY THE
MASSES THEMSELVES.
BUT EVEN BEFORE THAT, WHEN THERE WAS NO GENOCIDE LAWS, WHEN
THERE WAS NO INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, WHEN THERE WAS NONE OF THAT, STILL
THE SHI'IS DESPITE THE OPPRESSION BY THE STATE -- SEE THERE WERE AT LEAST THREE
MAJOR CIVIL WARS THAT TOOK PLACE IN ISLAM WHERE THE SHI'IS WERE A SMALL MINORITY
AND THEY COULD HAVE BEEN WIPED OUT TOTALLY, BUT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN BECAUSE THERE
WERE ALWAYS A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS, WHETHER IN THE SHI'I OR THE SUNNI IN A
PARTICULAR PLACE, WHERE THEY WERE READY AND WILLING TO DEFEND UNTIL THE END AND
AT THE SAME TIME INFLICT SOME DAMAGE ON THE POWERS TO BE, FORCING THE GOVERNMENT
BASICALLY TO MAKE KIND OF A DEAL AND -- BECAUSE THEY REACHED A STALEMATE.
I
THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT PROBABLY WILL HAPPEN IN IRAQ.
THERE IS THIS QUESTION
OF REVENGE BACK AND FORTH.
BUT I'LL USE ONE EXAMPLE FROM MODERN TIMES FROM
RECENT HISTORY.
REMEMBER THE MOST RECENT CIVIL WAR THAT INVOLVED SHI'I AND
SUNNIS AND VARIOUS OTHER ISLAMIC SECTS IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD IS THE CIVIL WAR IN
LEBANON.
IT HAPPENED. NONE OF THE GROUPS MANAGED TO WIPE OUT THE OTHER.
THEY FOUGHT ONE ANOTHER FOR PROBABLY A DECADE, AND NOW THEY HAVE PROBABLY
ACTUALLY ONE OF THE -- UNTIL RECENTLY, UNTIL OUTSIDERS INTERVENED, BUT BEFORE
THE OUTSIDERS INTERVENED, IT WAS ACTUALLY A SYSTEM THAT WORKED BETTER THAN ANY
OTHER SYSTEM IN THE ARAB WORLD ACTUALLY WHERE PEOPLE WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITY
ELECT THEIR REPRESENTATIVE AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVE IS SELECTED IN THE
GOVERNMENT.
AND THEY HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE THE PRIME MINISTER ALWAYS MUST BE
SUNNI, THE HEAD OF THE PARLIAMENT IS SHI'I, AND THE PRESIDENT IS CHRISTIAN.
AND SO IF THEY'RE LEFT TO THEMSELVES, THEY KNOW THAT THEY WILL KILL ONE ANOTHER
EACH ONE OF THEM.
NO MATTER HOW -- IN TERMS OF POPULATION, IT DOESN'T MATTER.
IT'S LIKE EVERYBODY IS GOING TO BE A LOSER.
BUT CIVIL WAR IS FED GENERALLY BY
OUTSIDERS.
IT'S MADE LONG -- IT LASTS LONGER BY OUTSIDE INTERVENTIONS.
IN
IRAQ -- AS LONG AS FOREIGN TROOPS ARE IN IRAQ -- THIS IS MY VIEW BASED AGAIN
ON MY OBSERVATION.
AS LONG AS THERE ARE TROOPS THAT CAN BE SEEN AS OCCUPATION
-- I KNOW LEGALLY THE U.N. SAID, OKAY, YOU CAN STAY THERE.
BUT STILL THEY ARE
CERTIFIED AS OCCUPATION FORCES, AND AS LONG AS THEY ARE THERE, THE CIVIL WAR
WILL CONTINUE BECAUSE THERE IS A SHADED KIND OF GRAY AREA WHERE SOME OF THESE
FIGHTERS WITHIN SOME OF THESE WARRING GROUPS DO NOT SEE IT AS REALLY A CIVIL
WAR, AS SHI'I VERSUS SUNNI, THEY SEE IT AS RESISTANCE AGAINST OCCUPATION AND
THEIR COLLABORATORS.
SO THE SHI'IS I THINK ARE TARGETED TODAY MOSTLY BECAUSE
THE GOVERNMENT IS SHI'I AND THEY'RE SEEN AS COLLABORATORS.
AND IN THE CASE
WHERE ALL THE FOREIGN TROOPS WERE TO PULL OUT AND EACH OF THESE GROUPS ARE ARMED
TO THEIR TEETH, THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO FIGHT TO PROTECT THEMSELVES, I
GUARANTEE YOU IN A YEAR OR LESS THAN THAT, THEY WILL SIT DOWN AND NEGOTIATE A
FORM OF GOVERNANCE JUST LIKE THE LEBANESE HAVE DONE.
OF COURSE, FOR ABOUT A
YEAR, THERE WILL BE PROBABLY STILL PEOPLE KILLING ONE ANOTHER, BUT THAT'S THE
ONLY WAY TO STOP IT.
BUT AS LONG AS THIS IDEA THAT YOU'RE COLLABORATORS, IT'S
GOING TO LAST, BECAUSE HISTORICALLY ALSO IN THE ISLAMIC COMMUNITIES -HISTORICALLY IS WHAT YOU CALL FITNA, CIVIL WAR IS EVIL.
EVEN IF -- YOU KNOW,
IF THEY WANTED TO HAVE CIVIL WAR, THEY HAD THE BEST TIME TO DO IT, AND THAT'S
WHEN SADDAM WAS IN CHARGE.
BUT THEY DIDN'T DO THAT BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT
CIVIL WAR, MEANING MUSLIMS AGAINST MUSLIMS, SHI'I AGAINST SHI'I, IS NOT
ACCEPTABLE FOR EITHER OF THEM, FOR THE SUNNIS OR THE SHI'IS.
IT DOESN'T HAVE
RELIGIOUS GROUNDS. NO RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY WILL STAND UP AND SAY, YES, IT IS
LEGIT, WE NEED TO DEFEND OURSELVES.
BUT NOW THEY CANNOT DO THAT BECAUSE A LOT
OF SUNNIS -- ESPECIALLY SUNNIS SAY YOU'RE COLLABORATORS.
AND I THINK WHAT
HAPPENED JUST TODAY OR YESTERDAY, WHEN THE SADRIST GROUP -- THE SADRISTS PULLED
OUT OF THE GOVERNMENT IS INDICATION THAT HE REALIZED THAT THE RESISTANCE IS
BUILDING A NAME FOR ITSELF.
IT'S GAINING LEGITIMACY BY PAINTING THEM AS ALL OF
THE GOVERNMENT IS A COLLABORATOR WITH THE OCCUPATION.
SO IT'S NOT AS SIMPLE -I MEAN A LOT OF PEOPLE SAY IT IS A CIVIL WAR. IT IS A CIVIL WAR BUT IT'S CIVIL
WAR THAT IS STIMULATED BY OTHER THINGS.
[ APPLAUSE ]
FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM WAS PROVIDED BY "FRIENDS" OF IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION,
THE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATION, GENERATIONS OF FAMILIES AND FRIENDS WHO
FEEL PASSIONATE ABOUT IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION PROGRAMS.
THIS PROGRAM WAS MADE
POSSIBLE BY THE CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING.