Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
Friday, November 22, 2013 | Reply Postscript Tuesday, November 26, 2013 12:00 pm
A new phenomenon is unveiling in Pakistan. A new Hegelian Dialectic is being fashioned once again in the blood of innocent Muslims. The previous Hegelian Dialectic of “Moderate Islam” (reformed Islam advocated by the Jewish Islamophobe Daniel Pipes to Tahir-ul-Qadri of Pakistan — the get along with empire version of Islam just like Sufi Islam) vs. “militant Islam” (antediluvian Islam advocated by Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeeda, good and bad Talibans, basically the fanatic Sunni-Deobandi-Salafi-Wahabi mongrel — the hate everyone else in Islam including the empire and its infidels, created by the empire itself and sustained by all its vassals and proxies) already being a spent force drawing diminishing traction among the Western public, the new Hegelian Dialectic “militant Islam” vs. “revolutionary Islam” (the valih-e-faqih advocated Shia Islam as established by Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran which is both revolutionary, militant, and guardian of its own peoples, reenacted by the Hezbollah in Lebanon) is being fashioned in Pakistan as we speak. The soil of Pakistan has been diabolically fertilized for it with the calculatedly spilled Shia Muslim blood.
I wish to draw your attention to my letter to “Hujjatul Islam” Syed Jawad Naqvi, the iconic Head of Jamea Orwathul Wuthqa, a new Islamic University in Lahore, Pakistan. The letter is self-explanatory and is reproduced below.
To: “Hujjatul Islam Syed Jawad Naqvi” firstname.lastname@example.org
From: “Zahir Ebrahim, Project Humanbeingsfirst.org” email@example.com
Date: Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM
Cc: two personal references of prominent personalities in Lahore, Pakistan
Subject: Your speech of Nov 18, 2013 – Allama Iqbal
Dear Allama Syed Jawad Naqvi,
as-salamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.
I write you this urgent letter from California where I have been listening and watching your amazing Muharram majalis speeches with great interest. The speech of 13th Muharram which you just moments ago concluded from Quetta, Monday November 18, 2013, like in virtually all your lectures, you once again brought up the lofty teachings from the mufakkar-e-Pakistan, Allama Dr. Muhammad Iqbal. The speech, and quotations from Iqbal, once again remain prophetic, powerful, empowering — the domain of great poets.
Why do I say “great poets”, and not great marde-momin scholar as you continually present him?
Because, as is historically self-evident, lofty versification and actual deed do not match for Allama Dr. Muhammad Iqbal.
Since you quote Allama Iqbal so liberally, and employ his teachings, as his eager exponent, before your own flock almost continually, I am most puzzled that perhaps you have penetrated some dark mysteries of hypocrisies that ordinary unemotional students like myself haven’t been able to comprehend.
I therefore invite you to most generously spend a tiny bit of your most valuable time in reading my analysis below and to provide your own learned comments on what I have examined as the historical facts pertaining to the acts of Allama Iqbal. I invite you to offer your own scholarship to explain why these documented acts of both egregious commission and egregious omission don’t appear to match the lofty proclamations that you continually attribute to Dr. Muhammad Iqbal from the Shia pulpit. I will be bold and truthful in what I am about to state. I believe you are misleading your flock by your one-sided focus on Iqbal’s writings while disregarding his factual acts of supporting the British empire on the ground.
Perhaps you shockingly remain unaware of the actual acts of Allama Iqbal? How is that possible for a scholar of your knowledge and political shaoor?
Or perhaps it is I who is unwittingly incorrect in my perception of these facts (?), in which case I strongly invite your learned corrections to the analysis lest I, and others reading my analysis on my website, be misled by distortions, falsehoods, and misperceptions that may have inadvertently crept into it despite my utmost efforts at due diligence to be factual, analytical, and both Socratic as well ba-baseerat. The latter of course always takes far more perceptive scholarship and honesty of purpose than mere pious claims to it which anyone can make – and therefore I invite you to adjudicate for yourself:
Since you do not know me, by way of introduction, I am copying on this letter two prominent personalities from Lahore who I believe have met you, and/or at least you may know them. One of them is my teacher from UET Lahore, the other is a personal friend of many years. Feel free to interlocute them for reference on me if my million-word-plus writings on my website are not sufficient or credible self-introduction.
I eagerly await either your solid corrections of any of my mis-perceptions, or, I await your own admission that you may have (surely only inadvertently) ignored some pertinent facts, and therefore accordingly at least your revision of your statements on Allama Iqbal made in public.
Your Shia followers in Pakistan, it is already evident from their behavior and sloganeering and the unfolding circumstances of tyranny upon the Muslims of Pakistan, never appear to challenge anything you state. A new SAVAK has been created in Pakistan to “tickle” a Pakistani “Hizbollah” into coming into existence in self-defence — and you appear to be its de facto leader today. As that leader in the making, your public and private attitudes betray what is in store for us poor Pakistani peoples: another Iran-Iraq like fratricide between Pakistani armed Shias and Pakistani armed Sunnis in the format of Hizbollah vs. Taliban; or great sanctuary from all tyranny.
If you accept public challenges, and respond to them with great scholarship and great wisdom as is the maarfat of anyone occupying the “takht-e-salooni” in its original exponent’s name as his self-claimed “inheritor”, it will surely demonstrate that we Pakistanis are not looking to a Shia dictatorship if you, or your exponents, tomorrow or in ten years, come to power in Pakistan. This simple and straightforward question on the facts and acts pertaining to Allama Iqbal is merely the first and very preliminary test of that openness, to be both forthright and straightforward in intellectual and/or political engagement, and open to being corrected when shown to be misled. Many more tests to come, for sure.
Passing in these tests of the public’s intellectual and/or political challenges with genuine humility, deep wisdom, and a demonstration of possessing unsurpassed ilm which is put to both constructive and beneficial use, will surely increase confidence in your valih-e-faqih solution-space as indeed the panacea for Pakistan for all Pakistanis.
An arrogant silence or marginalization of the petitioner will demonstrate the converse — of merely new tyrants to replace the old!
Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
The reference to New SAVAK in the letter can be understood in my previous analysis of the unobvious political motivations behind the otherwise senseless slaughter of innocent Shias in Pakistan: The New SAVAK in Pakistan – Understanding Shia Killings. Much realpolitik insight into what can easily transpire when a state has no will to act to protect its own peoples – either by its own ineptitude, or, as should be evident to even dumb-ass observers of the crisis that Pakistan is passing through in these times, when the state is itself complicit in the creation of “revolutionary times” in its own nation – can be gained by perceptively examining what transpired in 1953 against another defenseless minority in Pakistan: The ‘Ahrar-Ahmadiya controversy’ of 1953 and Shia Killings today in 2013.
A fate far worse potentially awaits both the Shia and Sunni Muslims of Pakistan than has been experienced by the Qadianis — because, if the diabolical Hegelian Dialectic of the “militant Islam” vs. “revolutionary Islam” is successful outside the parameters of the weak Pakistani state, both Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims could become the common losers no different than was witnessed in the Iran-Iraq war. The only winners in that fratricide were, and still are, the Western hectoring hegemons who got the two brotherly Muslim national armies to wage the eight-year fratricide upon each others peoples.
It will be worse in Pakistan because anytime two extra-state armed groups willing to die for their respective cause are brought into existence, one un-apologetically aided by the state and its politicians, the other visibly opposed by the state but nurtured nevertheless by its calculated policies and the protection of its agencies, and both sides aided and abetted into existence to wage war upon each other by Western agenda to fabricate artificial enemies, blood of the innocent flows into the nation’s streets. Armed extra-state domestic combatants can become far more an uncontrolled harbinger of “revolutionary times” as was seen in Ireland than was enacted in the far more controlled Iran-Iraq war that was orchestrated between the two brotherly nations. By some counts, 4 million on each side of the border paid the price of protecting their respective nations in this artificial war. Neither recognized the real enemy in any practical sense (the Iranian Ayatollah’s rhetoric not withstanding), nor did either nation take practical measures to unite against their common foe.
By my last count, the leadership on either side of the Iran-Iraq fratricide in the name of God sacrificed exactly zero members of their own immediate family in that eight year war. I am open to being corrected on that count however. Please send me a list of either the names of the dead children or grandchildren of Ayatollah Khomeini and Sadaam Hussein respectively who died on the battlefields between 1980 and 1988 on the Iran-Iraq border. Same is true of their respective cabinet members, ministers, and other Ayatollahs from Qom to Najaf. Unwilling sacrifices made by non-combatant stay-behind scholars and Ayatollahs to cowardly bombings in civilian centers does not count quite as much as holding the principled gun in one’s hand while facing the enemy on the battlefront like the rest of Iranian and Iraqi “basijis” were made to pay for Islam.
The same kind of religious rhetoric that got these co-religionist brothers to kill brothers for eight long years when the peoples of the two nations weren’t even antagonistic to each other, in fact, shared the same sect in common among their majority peoples, can far more easily be harvested in Pakistan today after three decades of deliberate domestic polarization on all possible axes of people differentiation (sectarian, tribal, ethnic, feudal, linguistic, provincial, immigrant) among a people who can hardly be termed a “nation” in a country where its own military and state apparatus have demonstrated little sympathy, let alone any empathy, for their own public. See for instance how Pakistan was artificially and arbitrarily carved by imperial fiat in the historical document titled: Indian Independence Act of 1947 to appreciate why Pakistan remains a perpetual harvest of dysfunction.
If you are Urdu enabled, you can learn a great deal of how the rise of “revolutionary Islam” is being encouraged in Pakistan in reaction to Shia slaughter from the emotional lectures of Allama Syed Jawad Naqvi archived at his most educational website: http://www.islamimarkaz.com. The Muharram lecture referenced in my letter to Syed Jawad Naqvi quoted above is in fact a series of 5 two-hour long speeches titled: Dushman Kay Saath Muqabley Kay Qurani Usool. The topic may be summed in English as: Identification of the Enemy and Principles of Engagement with it in the Light of the Holy Qur’an.
These lectures are most revealing for two reasons. Firstly, these contain a great deal of inspiring knowledge from the Holy Qur’an and from mankind’s history noted in the Holy Qur’an to awaken the sleeping Muslims to stand up for themselves; to harken the Muslim public mind, both Shia and Sunni, to break their bonds of servitude. Secondly, and most pertinent to this report, these speeches draw Determinate linkages to the conception of valih-e-faqih as the only governance principle of life encased in the Holy Qur’an for all times (see vilayat-i faqih, governance of the faqih, Ayatollah Khomeini, Islam and Revolution, translated by Hamid Algar, 1981). This latter connection I am simply unable to ascertain in the Holy Qur’an myself. While I am not a scholar, let alone scholar of the Holy Qur’an, the matter appears to be entirely Indeterminate in the Holy Qur’an. This nomenclature has been defined in my book Hijacking the Holy Qur’an and Islam, pg. 80.
But like any public mind beholden to a superlative orator who has command over his subject matter, the Shia mind too is easily persuaded by simple rhetoric, especially when a lot of it is actually correct and easily verifiable. It is the ten percent half-truths that is aliased under that ninety percent provably truthful envelope that is of concern for those savvy of social engineering. The manufacturing of consent with cognitive infiltration and perception management is an art as old as hegemony, as old as mankind. Especially at a time when the Shias across the world, and especially in Pakistan, are under mortal attack and will clutch at any straw, any messiah, to promise salvation. Including theological salvation — die fighting with dignity under the valih-e-faqih’s banner rather than standing still and being slaughtered anyway in the most undignified ways, is the basic argument. Incidentally, essentially a similar argument was made by Patrick Henry to awaken the early American colonists who seemed to be rather too complacent under the British empire’s guns: “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”
When does awakening the dead Muslim Ummah (Qur’anic word for nation) stop and fabricating “revolutionary Islam” start — I leave up to you to decide. In my view, I wish the former, an awakened public, but not as the new enemy of the West. Only as the enemy of the handful of hectoring hegemons who control both the Western and Eastern states from behind the scenes and are riding the back of the sole superpower du jour to orchestrate global primacy in a one-world government. Before every nation completely loses its national sovereignty in a fait accompli, I would much rather that non conformist people endeavor for the Eastern and Western publics to be commonly allied against this one common enemy of all mankind, irrespective of their religion, race, hemisphere, caste, color and creed, as the common good in every people’s own national interests.
Whereas “Hujjatul Islam” Syed Jawad Naqvi makes me a tad nervous because of his superlative brilliance and eloquence. He is a new phenomenon in Pakistan. A most dynamic and unusually learned scholar by my measure. What makes me nervous is captured in my letter to him by way of calling him out bluntly on his egregious omissions on the Superman Allama Iqbal. It is not possible that such a brilliant scholar would be ignorant of the fact that the British empire had knighted his hero “Sir”. The full details of this celebrated anomaly is in my report cited in the letter. This letter is my first baby step in intellectually engaging this great and most eloquent scholar because I only see a path of bloodshed ahead for Pakistanis as the game-theorized stooges of the Rand Corporation. To preempt that statistically engineered coercion in the preferred direction requires a great deal of intellectual and political sophistication.
Whereas this respected new theological savant in Pakistan, “Hujjatul Islam” Syed Jawad Naqvi, is visibly an overzealous exponent of the “Khomeinist revolution”. He most eloquently employs the poetic verses of both Allama Iqbal, and the Holy Qur’an, to argue for that mode of national governance for Pakistan as the only way out of the subjugation of the Pakistanis, to be led by the Shia in Pakistan under the spiritual and political guidance of the global valih-e-faqih du jour who is presently Ali Hosseini Khamenei, the current Supreme Leader of Iran.
How are the Sunni of Pakistan ever going to accept Shia hegemony directed from Iran in a nation that is 80 percent majority Sunni, when the Sunni Muslim mainstream throughout Muslim history have rarely accepted the Shia even as a legitimate sect, never mind its hegemony, with the sole exception of the Ismaili Fatimids who ruled Egypt a thousand years ago?
Well let’s just assume that the Sunnis of Pakistan are miraculously made to agree to accept Shia rule under the imammate system of valih-e-faqih for political expedience. When Pakistanis can easily accept all forms of dictatorships which are duly sanctified and legalized by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, it is not beyond imagination that a more moral and willing basis can be found to enact it. Let’s just say that happens.
The question that principally begs all questions however is this: Is this mode of governance, the supposed guardianship of pious angels, still in the best public interest of a nation fragmented and polarized on so many parochial axes like Pakistan, a nation fabricated on the grand chessboard by the British empire in the blood of the sub-continent, a nation with a long history of blind servitude to whosoever can wield the stick?
I presume that the obvious question of servitude to pious guardian angels is already settled in the mind of the obdurate Shia readers like in their fellow Catholic brethren obeying the pious Pope. But to make sure that the non Shia readers are not left at sea while the shores of intellectual thought are in plain sight, please permit me to make matters of obedience and voluntary servitude to fellow man directly explicit.
As most anyone with any perceptive knowledge of political theory and history can easily appreciate, the good Allama of Pakistan, “Hujjatul Islam” Syed Jawad Naqvi, is in fact arguing for a new form of dictatorship to supplant the Western designed modern dictatorships. A new form of dictatorship which is in fact as old as hegemony, as old as mankind: the pious dictatorship in the name of God. An absolute dictatorship in fact; and of course where ordinary mortal power corrupts, surely absolute power in the name of God is beyond absolute corruption!
Apart from the matter of voluntary servitude of the Shia masses to the Muslim turban as the Catholic masses to the Christian pope in the name of their respective God, more pertinent for ordinary peoples like myself who seldom align themselves to any form of voluntary servitude unless it is at the point of the bayonet, is not how the majority are treated in any “tribal” system, it is how the minority and “outsiders” are treated. Especially that handful of minority who may disagree with power, the ruling paradigms, or not belong to the majority tribe.
Therefore, most pertinent to me is the broader question: is the valih-e-faqih system as seen in Iran better able to form a just and fair society in a pluralistic non homogeneous nation like Pakistan without the hegemony of narrow self-interests ruling everyone else than any other system?
Is Iran an example of that egalitarianism even in its own more or less homogeneous Persian society?
A simple measurement of how those who have dissented with the valih-e-faqih in Iran, and what political representation or disenfranchisement its twenty percent Sunni minority (about the same percentage as the Shia minority in Pakistan) has received in Iran’s governance and its military, should be sufficient empirical evidence of the reality of absolute “tribal” and theological power.
A theologically absolutist and perpetual enemy of the West has been fashioned in Iran due to the “happenstances” of the Islamic revolution which, to my observations at least, has only been employed, perhaps unwittingly by the Iranian leadership, in diabolically furthering the Hegelian Dialectic with which the Western oligarchy has continued to impose global governance upon the world under the pretext of fighting “revolutionary times”. That Machiavellian phrase in quotes due to David Ben-Gurion, “What is inconceivable in normal times is possible in revolutionary times; and if at this time the opportunity is missed and what is possible at such great hours is not carried out – a whole world is lost”, is surely not lost to the astute students of political history and realpolitik, but is most assuredly alien to the rest of the innocent scholars of the world.
In fact, I will take a bet that absolutely no intellectual of the Iranian revolution, including Allama Syed Jawad Naqvi today and his valih-e-faqih, has ever even heard of this concept of Hegelian Dialectic and its Machiavellian dynamics to seed and harvest “revolutionary times” wherever and whenever it is fully played out. And if they have, it is only the Superman mind that would still pursue policies which continue to foster that very agenda in the guise of opposition.
For the rest of the politically suave scholars who are nevertheless reading the term “Hegelian Dialectic” for the first time in their life, and for those who have little or no understanding of its pertinence to modernity except calling it “conspiracy theory”, please see: Hegelian Dialectic – What is it?. For a radically different perspective from the mainstream discourse on Iran by pro-revolution Iranians and the Shias themselves, of how revolutionary Iran was perhaps diabolically orchestrated into that very paradigm to serve Western interests as West’s perpetual enemy, please see my book: Hijacking the Holy Qur’an and Islam, pg. 175 and surrounding pages.
Syed Allama Jawad Naqvi is indeed most persuasive, I am sure to many of his followers and listeners, when he eruditely draws for justification for valih-e-faqih under the imammate system from the verses of the Holy Qur’an. You can hear the boisterous cheers and emotional sloganeering from his spell-bound audiences wherever he speaks, with shrill cries of “death to America”, “death to America” resounding in the air with the same intensity as the chants of “alive is Khomeini”, “alive is Khomeini” and other rallying cries appealing to the Shia soul.
And thanks God nothing happens to the Good scholar in a nation where the life of any ordinary Shia Muslim (and Sunni Muslim) is spent in cold blood for far less crime than that — their name merely being a Shia sounding name for instance, taken off passenger busses and shot point blank for merely that offense! No murderous drone attack has so far been launched on Jamea Orwathul Wuthqa by empire. And no suicide bomber from among the Tafriki-Deobandi pirates has dared lower his arms at Jamea Orwathul Wuthqa in return for the good Allama routinely labeling these terrorists “waeshi darinde”, meaning, wild animals. And no intelligence agency has opened an investigation into how the imposing and rich campus of Jamea Orwathul Wuthqa in Lahore is being funded any more than they ever bother to look into how the Tafriki-Deobandi madrassas throughout Pakistan are being funded. Surely the donors and their trail of money is trivial to uncover in today’s day and age when just to open a bank account in Pakistan entails the bankers know not just your DNA, but also your wife’s and children’s DNA under the American KYC (Know Your Customer) Act officially adopted by the State Bank of Pakistan to protect the world from the curse of Pakistani money launderers. May God and the powers that be continue to protect all servants of God from all harm.
Caption The beautiful campus of Jamea Orwathul Wuthqa, a Shia Islamic Seminary in Lahore Pakistan. Who is funding, and protecting, this Shia madrassa in Pakistan which is so openly pro-Iran and pro Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei? Does Pakistan want the broad envelope of its domestic and international policies determined from Iran — to replace Western hegemony with Iranian hegemony? The justification for “revolutionary Islam” in Pakistan is to prevent the innocent Shia blood from being spilled. Imagine if you at the Rand Corporation wanted just that outcome – that the Shia rise up and form “Hezbollah” all across the Muslim world? This nemesis would be even better than Nazi Socialism and Russian Communism — a perpetual global enemy without borders — what better way to create a world without borders, meaning a world government? (image source islamimarkaz.com)
Here are some images of the “new terrorists” propaganda system in the making — can you imagine the global headlines that Daniel Pipes would give to these images of self-flagellation in Muharram by the Shia devotees, aided and abetted by the valih-e-faqih and the majority of the Ayatollahs who encourage this bloody display of Shia faith by silently condoning it, when Dr. Pipes has already daringly captioned “militant Islam” and “radical Islam” as “It’s Not a Clash of Civilizations, It’s a Clash between the Civilized World and Barbarians”? Is this what Shiaism is all about — is a question that is even asked by the majority of the Sunni Muslims worldwide, never mind the world’s public.
Caption Can anyone guess what Islamophobes would caption this display of “revolutionary Islam” to frighten the Western audiences: ‘It’s Not a Clash of Civilizations, It’s a Clash between the Civilized World and Barbarians’! The latter headline has already been employed by the Jewish reformer of Islam, Dr. Daniel Pipes, to awaken the Western public against the curse of the Taleban’s and the Al-Qaeeda’s version of “Islam” reaching them. (Images gathered from various news reports on the web, please check in the JPG image property for any copyright information of the original source)
Imagine the thought experiment if you will, that you are taking an undergraduate class in media studies under Dr. Joseph Goebbels of the Third Reich — come up with an emotionally tickling caption for these images of the bloody ritual of Ashura that would effectively rally the Western public to fight “revolutionary Islam” with an equal or greater zeal than they have thus far waged “united we stand” against “militant Islam”.
An authoritative account of the Misrepresentations and Distortions in the popular Ashura narratives heralded from the ubiquitous Shia pulpit itself is given in the series of four lectures delivered in 1969 by the notable Shia Iranian scholar Allama Murtaza Mutahhari. While ably capturing both the psychological motivations and the misrepresentations and distortions made by latter day Shia pulpits from Qom to Najaf, and from Karbala to India with reference to the sacred penmanship of the pious scribes of history, the learned and honest Iranian scholar notably failed to address the hagiographic distortions in that sacred historical penmanship itself. A reportage of the seminal events of Karbala compiled generations after the fact, in a primitive parochial society by a partisan people not much different than those occupying the pious pulpits today, but which is treated as sacrosanct! Most revealingly, whatever is written in those earliest historical narratives is treated as gospel truth by even the highest authorities of the Shia pulpit in exactly the same way as the Sunni pulpits treat their own hagiographic narratives of history.
What recuses that early reportage of Muslim history from the same type of rigorous intellectual examination for the same kinds of psychological motivations, misrepresentations and distortions, made by the same kind of fertile imaginations and fallible pens incestuously reinforcing their own shared ethos both wittingly and unwittingly? See my book: Hijacking the Holy Qur’an and Islam, pgs. 209 to 228 for elaboration upon this concept of taking recorded history with a forensic measure rather than an absolute one. Making history sacred has many more uses than mere academic scholarship. It lies at the very heart of mass behavior control. Novelist George Orwell most perceptively captured the utility of the control of the narrative – what is penned ab initio as well as what is made sacred posthumously: “Who controls the past controls the future; Who controls the present controls the past”.
There is a lot more devilishness involved in effectively waging the Hegelian Dialectic of the trifecta “militant Islam” vs. “revolutionary Islam” vs. “moderate Islam” to make the public mind. It has many helpers not the least of whom are the useful idiots themselves. The confusion created in the public mind, both Muslim and non-Muslim, and the fear cultivated in the Western mind unfamiliar with Islam to begin with, makes for a field day for the Mighty Wurlitzer. But it will only be officially accepted as official history by all and sundry ex post facto, when Western officialdom, its historians, and its dissent con-artists making much ado about the moral responsibility of intellectuals, have a field day explaining world government and how it was fashioned in the blood of the ‘untermensch’ no differently than today the scholars of empire openly explain how the Americas was resettled by administering the genocide sentence to ten million of its indigenous inhabitants, and how Palestine was, and still is being, resettled for Zion in the cold blood of its indigenous ‘untermenschen’.
Finally, is there more depth to this topic of valih-e-faqih and “revolutionary Islam” in the Holy Qur’an than I have uncovered, whereby my admittedly non-scholarly findings of the matter are somewhat different from the Shia scholars’ advocating it in the name of God?
I am sure that there is. I would like nothing better than for the learned scholars who have studied in the centers of highest learning in Qom under the greatest of Iranian Ayatollahs, to refute what I have written, and to do so with such compelling evidence from that Good Book alone – a Book that is singularly claimed by all two billion Muslims on planet earth to be the Word of God – that I would have no choice but to join that cause of Islam and make God’s appointed guardian my valih-e-faqih. If the ideology of valih-e-faqih is unequivocally part of the religion of Islam to govern the affairs of Muslims for all times, then it surely must also be expressed unambiguously in the Holy Qur’an which calls itself “Kitabun-mubeen”, a clear source of guidance for mankind, and therefore, be the primary motivation for its universal adoption by all Muslims on planet earth and not just by the Shias who gravitate towards it as cultural Muslims no differently than the Sunni sects gravitate towards the Caliphate as cultural Muslim. The valih-e-faqih du jour and his scholarly exponents should be able to make the intellectual and legal case for it directly from the Holy Qur’an. Why do they fail to do so?
I would like nothing better than to reliably learn that God, in His own Divine Scripture in His best Wisdom, has ordered me to follow his chosen valih as the divinely appointed guardian over us ordinary peoples, and has reliably disclosed their identity so that impostors can be hung and the genuine ones can be followed without question. That does relieve a great deal of intellectual burden from my overburdened soul; who doesn’t want to be part of the divinely anointed shepherd’s flock and follow the leader?
Hey — when God speaks, the people better listen. And the valih-e-faqih’s claim of his being God’s designated governor of the affairs of man is offered with just as much compelling evidence as all the other spokesmen of God who have ruled man throughout history. We have believed and followed some of them on blind faith alone. Sometimes mankind got it right. Other times, we were led into perpetual serfdom and servitude. The Holy Qur’an alone among all the divine books has claimed itself the “criterion” to separate truth from falsehoods for just such reasons. Such a criterion was not available in earlier times. For those who base their faith on Islam, that Good Book is the definitive word as the Word of God. So show me from that Good Book that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the representative of God as the valih-e-faqih over all Muslims. See my exposition: What does the Holy Qur’an say about Taqlid – Blind Following the Non-Infallible?, in which I have already surmised that no Shia scholar nor Ayatollah will dare touch it! Please prove my hubris wrong. If I am misled, please guide me.
I make the public statement that as a most ordinary common man, I will join any valih-e-faqih, any leader, any system of governance – even if a throwback to the stone-age where absolute power ruled openly, for it is no different today, only disguised, and ruled from behind the scenes, and therefore, far more treacherous and corrosive – if such a system and its governors will wage an effective struggle against the real hectoring hegemons to liberate all mankind from its diabolical clutches. I don’t much care what system it is, and which theology runs it, so long as the ordinary common man living within its governance gets both social and political justice, fairness, and is able to realize his individual and collective full potential as a living breathing human being first. The Qur’anic term for enabling and realizing that man is “ashraf-ul-maklooqat”, the best creature among all creations. A system of this nature, whatever name it may go by, can only be divine. Those leading such a system in the service of man, by definition, would be the noble valih of the people. I will accept such a valih-in-chief.
Therefore, show me a principled structure, a principled Bill of Rights, and the principled enactment of an egalitarian and just system that perpetually wages wars against the hectoring hegemons to enact perpetual freedom from tyranny for its peoples without creating perpetual police-states to imprison them in the name of their protection, and I will sign-on to that system. Due to my limited knowledge and acumen, I will refrain from asserting that no such system is possible — and all those who claim so are either Superman con-men, or charlatans and fools. So, just show me, and I may surely bite.
Barring that — why should anyone trust a pious pontiff holding a holy scripture any more than one would trust a pious politician nobly waiving the American constitution after killing off ten million of the land’s native inhabitants, or trust a virtuous scholar asserting piety in his profound political treatise? I have dismantled many of them as Superman, or great platitudinous theory. Man against Superman appears to be the real score of mankind from time immemorial, since the day Kaabil killed Haabil (Cain killed Abel), until this very day, the virtuous paths laid out in the Ten Commandments, the Good News, and the Holy Qur’an notwithstanding.
Only time, fait accompli, and any forthrightness present in Allama Jawad Naqvi’s response to my “tickling” letter, will reveal whether the “Hujjat-ul-Islam” is himself a mard-e-momin, or just another Superman! I hope it is the forthrightness – for then we have the national opportunity before the fact, meaning, before fait accompli, of either: joining a great national leader and political movement in the making, anointed or approved by God Almighty Himself, to finally lead the people in the land of the pure out of their perpetual misery; or preempting another horrible future staring us in the face.
As always, I pray that my instincts and analysis are dead wrong, on all counts.
— END —
The response by “Hujjatul Islam” Allama Syed Jawad Naqvi’s spokesman received today politely states: “shut up.” The learned “Hujjatul Islam” does not even have the basic courtesy, let alone moral courage, to offer a reply himself. He puts up his useful idiot bulldog to do the barking. Reproduced below is the full official response from the Iranian sponsored Shia pulpit of Pakistan occupied in the name of Imam Ali and the Ahlul Bayt of the Prophet of Islam. Do Pakistani Shias want an absolute dictator like this valih-e-faqih spokesman ruling them whose very first response to an intellectual challenge is to bark “shut up” at you through his pet bulldog? What do you think a real political challenge will entail? I hope the good scholar of Islam will claim that he did not sanction this poorly worded unbecoming reply which was sent in his name – for I still await a forthright response from the learned man himself to whom I wrote my letter. I have a genuine desire to be mistaken in my preliminary assessment that the Allama is himself just another Superman no different than his hero “Sir” Allama Iqbal. That term Superman is Nietzschean, and means one who treats himself as beyond the criterion that he postulates for others. On that yardstick, the “Hujjatul-Islam” of Pakistan has already hanged himself many times over as a Superman. While Allama Syed Jawad Naqvi’s sheepish flock in Pakistan and elsewhere desperately seeking a savior may not always command much rational intelligence in analytically parsing his brilliant oratory, emotional sloganeering is all they are evidently capable of in these most difficult of times facing the Shias worldwide, that and of course barking at anyone who dares to challenge their master, there are some who are not so easily fooled by pious words of salesman for “revolutionary Islam”.
“To: firstname.lastname@example.org, CONTACT@islamimarkaz.com
From: M. A. Naqawi email@example.com
Subject: your email/challenge to Ustad Jawwad Naqvi regarding Iqbal
Date: Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:01 AM
Dear Mr. ‘human beings first’ (I believe you parents named you Zaheer Ebrahim)
I do not know exactly which deity do you worship or what faith do you promulgate, but what I can conclude from a quick look at your blog is that you are somewhat of a functionally-atheist, humanist, new-age guy (i.e. daharia), who thinks he is the greatest researcher and the jack of all trades, and smart enough to the extent of even being able to challenge and defeat the clergy on their own soil.
You’ve criticized Ustad Jawwad Naqvi for glorifying Iqbal from the pulpit because you’ve come to believe that he was a British agent or at least a supporter. However, the fact that you are ignoring is that Jawwad Naqvi has never presented Iqbal as the perfect ‘Momin’ or an ‘Uswa’ or a role model for the Muslims to follow. All he does is praise him for his political insight and his understanding of the system of governance in Islam that his poetry reflects. You don’t have to be a body builder to be a kinesiologist.
Iqbal’s case is also the same, he has a deep understanding of the principles of governance in Islam and the Islamic approach towards running the government, but finds himself in an era where the Muslims have strayed away from the teachings of Islam and are far more interested in running their day to day affairs than pondering who is ruling over them and their lives and how. Therefore Iqbal expresses his concept and understanding of governance in Islam in his poetry as he goes about his daily business of being a middle-class, western-educated academic living under British rule.
It is quite remarkable though that even though Iqbal had never been to any seminary, and even if he had been they wouldn’t have taught him Wilayat e Faqih there, yet still, he came up with an idea of running the government that was very similar to the concept of ‘Wilayat-e-Faqih’ as presented later by Ayatullah Khomeini. This convergence by the way is not a coincidence but rather due to the existence of teachings in Islam that allow for no other system of governance than Wilayat-e-Faqih. Islam is a social system and it cannot be fully implemented in a society unless the government running that society is also Islamic and no one can better run an Islamic government than those well versed in the teachings of Islam (the clergy, they have to be sincere to Allah and the Ummah though).
Just as people like you today, that want to preach their ideas but do not find any audience, set up blogs to spill their brains out before the cyberworld, Iqbal also found in poetry a medium to preach his ideas and what in his opinion would an ideal Islamic government be like.
How does presenting his idea of governance in Islam make it incumbent upon Iqbal to do something to implement it? Or to refuse to enjoy the perks offered to him by the government of his time? Aren’t the silicon valley, Stanford/mit ‘Malaa’ (fat-cats ) like you enjoying the perks of western life while at the same time criticizing poor Iqbal for doing the same in his time? Would you give up your lavish life in the West (compared to an average Pakistani) and go to Pakistan to solve their problems? How ironic it is when people like you feign to be the sympathizers and the saviours of the Ummah. You’re no less of a slacker (than Iqbal) when it comes to doing something to help the people you so much claim to care about. So at least stop criticizing those who are spreading awareness among the public about ‘Istakbaar’ (global hegemons), its agents and its tactics in Pakistan.
Lastly, I would say that mostly when Ustad Jawwad Naqvi praises Iqbal and quotes his poetry, he is referring to the poetry in the latter part of his life wherein his ideas very closely resemble Wilayat e Faqih. Most of Iqbal’s latter poetry is in Persian and I highly doubt you know any Persian. So that is also one reason to shut up.
Ustad Jawwad Naqvi often says there are two ideologies today challenging the Islamic Ideology (that has God at its centre and derives its social system from teachings of God), the ancestor-worship ideology (the name tells all) and the human-worship ideology (that people like you practice and preach, that revolves around the human being).
Mind you, it is GOD that has created the human beings and only GOD, the one true GOD (The God/ Al ilah/ Allah) has the right to rule over the Almighty’s subjects. No one else except those entrusted by the Almighty can run the affairs.
About The Author
The author, a justice activist, formerly a Silicon Valley systems architect (see engineering patents at http://tinyurl.com/zahir-patents ), founded Project Humanbeingsfirst.org in the aftermath of 9/11. He was, mercifully, most imperfectly educated in the United States of America, which might explain how he escaped the fate of “likkha-parrha-jahils” mass produced from its vast manufacturing consent complex with all his neurons still intact, and still firing on all cylinders. Bio at http://zahirebrahim.org. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org .
First Published Friday, November 22, 2013 | Last updated Tuesday, November 26, 2013 12:00 pm 7281
The Rise of Revolutionary Islam in Pakistan – A Report on Behavior Control By Zahir Ebrahim 23