Mukhtaṣar A`lām al-Ḥanafiyyah min Ahl-ul-Bayt” Scholars of Ahlul-Sunnah from Ahlul-Bayt (Part 1)

First: The Shiite religious plan to establish a Shiite-based state in Lebanon, a state that is to be based on the Twelver ideology including all its deviated beliefs and tenets and abhorred Bid`ahs (innovations in religion). For more information on Shia’s origins and beliefs, refer to my article Origins of Shia. Moreover, be informed that Lebanese Shiites at that time were not religious. Although having born the title Shiites, they knew nothing about the nature and beliefs of their sect.

Second: He had very great funds to facilitate achieving his plan. It is well-known that Shiite authorities all over the world are very wealthy as they receive one fifth (20%) of the income of Shiites as they are believed in to belong to the Prophet’s Household. In fact, such money is their purely owned property and thus have full right to dispose of it as they like. As such, they constitute a huge economic power and thus have full authority.

Shia fight against Sunni rule

Shiite sects were basically revolutionary movements against ruling regimes who aim at assuming power and authority at the expense of and in conflict with Sunni regimes. Actually, Shia managed to rule a wide range of Muslim territories during different stages of history. (For knowledge about negative abominable effects of their rule over a given place, refer to the article “Shia’s Dominance“.) By the decline of the Safavid Dynasty in the middle of the eighteenth century A.D., they had no more rule over any place in the world and their plan faded away for a long period. However, their authoritative thought started to revive at the outset of the fifties of the past century. By then, they had a relentless ambition to establish a state to spread their Twelver-based deviated thought through the influence of authority and armament. The aspired for state was supposed to be established in no more than three countries, Iran, Iraq and Lebanon, where there exists good numbers of Shiites, which might enable them to establish their state.

The Shiite lobby planned to establish a state in one of, or in all, those three countries. Therefore, men of mission were distributed to those regions. Thus, Khomeini was entrusted with staging a coup d’etat in Iran, others were entrusted with doing the same in Iraq, an issue which we will tackle in a later article if Allah so wills, and Musa Al-Sadr was entrusted with doing the job in Lebanon. Actually, it was an interlaced, complicated and deliberate mission. Actually, the time factor was of no significance to them that they deemed it unimportant to reach their goals even after decades. The same method was applied to establish ancient Shiite states such as Buwayhid, Ubaidi, falsely called Fatimid, and other Shiite states. (See the article “Shia’s Dominance” for more information.) Usually, Shiite organizations practice their mission on the proletariat and poor classes. They preach in those people revolutionary spirit, inherently implanted in Shiites, against the rich and inhabitants of palaces hoping, via doing so, that a coup d’etat may result in establishing the Shiite state.

The same method applied along history was applied in Iran (we might perhaps have time to discuss the Shia revolution there). The plan is making its way now through Lebanon and Iraq. If the plan is to succeed in the latter two countries, expansion will be extended later to include Syria, Kuwait, Bahrain and the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia. Accordingly, I found it inevitable to write this article so that Muslims might understand surrounding events.

A plan to establish a Shiite state

Let us go back to the story of Lebanon.

Musa Al-Sadr was delegated to Lebanon to plan for the establishment of a Shiite state. Being an ethnic Lebanese and having a good command of Arabic as well as Persian, Al-Sadr was thus elected for the mission. There was a continuous political coordination between him and Al-Khomeini and even more stronger ties. Al-Khomeini’s son Ahmad Al-Khomeini was married to Al-Sadr’s nephew. Moreover, Al-Sadr’s son was married to Al-Khomeini’s granddaughter. Besides, Mustafa Al-Khomeini was an intimate friend of Musa Al-Sadr.

Al-Sadr headed directly for South Lebanon where the Shia population density live. He started to work on the social level showing no clear religious tendency. He established many service institutions to help the poor and the needy. However, his Shiite tendency started to emerge gradually. He established Ja’fari courts, which issue verdicts among Shiites subject to the Twelver school of thought, having been enabled by the sectarian nature of Lebanon to do so taking into consideration the very weak state of Lebanese government and army. Al- Sadr was known for working both sides of the street and thus was ready for cooperating with anyone in order to achieve his goals. Knowing that Mornite Christians represent the strongest current in Lebanon at that time, although competed by the Sunni current, he strengthened ties with the former. Actually, Shiism in its very essence stands for a revolution against Sunni Islamic ideology and rejection of the story of Islam beginning with Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq and Umar bin Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with them) as well as all Sunni Muslim states along the history of our Ummah. Please, bear in mind that roughly all Sunnis at that time were not firmly committed to principles of their religion and adopted nationalist, socialist and secularist ideologies. Undoubtedly, Shia’s main idea is conflict with Sunnis. Accordingly, Al-Sadr strengthened ties with Charles Helou the Maronite president of Lebanon at that time rather than cooperating with Sunnis in order to join Muslim forces.

Actually, he was viewed by Helou to be the right ally in face of the Sunni front and thus showed favor to and encouraged him. By the same token, Helou consented in 1967 to the establishment of the Supreme Shiite Islamic Council to represent the Shia of Lebanon. Moreover, he passed the law No. 72/76 providing that the Shiite Council might refer to greatest Shiite authorities in the world (Iran, Iraq and others) regarding fatwa, rulings and laws and not necessarily to Lebanese rules. The Council has already been established in 1969 headed, of course, by Musa Al-Sadr and was recognized by the government in 1970, which further decided to give a 10-million-dollar aid to the Shiite south.

Furthermore, Musa Al-Sadr did not forget to curry favor with the USA. In a meeting with the US ambassador, Al-Sadr stated that he resists the Nassirite Socialist expansion among the Shiite youths. His relations with the Americans got so disclosed that Al-Khomeini’s escort accused him of it, bearing in mind that Al-Khomeini, at that stage, considered the USA to be a contingent peril as it strongly supported the Shah. Contrary to all Al-Sadr’s expectations, a serious development took place when Palestinian refugees in Jordan suffered from the Black September massacre which lasted with the expulsion of the Palestinian fighters led by Fatah to Lebanon. Unwelcoming expulsion of “Sunni” Palestinians to the south Lebanon (near Palestine), Shiites thought it might be a stumbling rock in the way of the Shiite state plan, bearing in mind that Fatah at that time had socialist secularist tendency and was far away from Islamic teachings.

Nevertheless, Musa Al-Sadr benefited from Fatah making good relations with them in the hope of having Fatah give Shiites military training and thus help establish Shiite militias that will have serious influence in Lebanon. Meanwhile, Fatah sought another ally besides communists, which produced an interest-based relationship between them.

In 1971, Hafiz Al-Asad came to power in Syria. He belonged to the Alawis, also known as Nusayris, a sect, although judged to have dissented from Islam, is still considered within the political scope of Islam. They claim Ali to be a god (High indeed be Allah exalted above that they say!). However, Musa Al-Sadr issued a famous fatwa judging Alawis to be Shiites and thus considering Hafiz Al-Asad a Muslim!

This led to a close rapprochement with Syria and its ruling regime and to Musa Al-Sadr becoming a vehicle for on-going contact between Hafiz Al-Asad and Iranian Revolution leaders. Actually, Al-Asad strongly supported rising against the Shah and backed Iran in its war against Iraq, for he was at bitter enmity with Saddam Hussein.

This way, Musa Al-Sadr was laying the foundation of his new Shiite state supported by the greatest Shiite authorities in the world especially Al-Khomeini, Lebanese Christians, the USA and Syria as well as Fatah the so-called Sunni group.

In 1974, he founded the Movement of the Disinherited to press for better economic and social conditions for the poor. At the beginning, many Christians in the south, thinking it a national movement aiming at improving the status of the poor in Lebanon, joined the movement in large numbers. Discovering the clear Shiite orientation of the Movement, they decided to withdraw. Soon after, Al-Sadr, held an agreement with Yassir Arafat, Fatah leader, to the effect of Fatah giving military training to the Movement of the Disinherited, which was well-known to the weak Lebanese government. In 1975, Al-Sadr declared the formation of the militia, Afwaj al-Muqawama al-Lubnaniya (the Lebanese Resistance Detachments) better known by the acronym AMAL (which also means “hope”) to be the military wing of the Movement of the Disinherited and was headed, of course, by him. Soon after, Al-Sadr snubbed Palestinians and started to strongly demand the expulsion of Sunni Palestinians from the Shiite south. Later, we will come to know that the AMAL movement fought against Palestinians in the well-known War of the Camps from 1985 to 1988.

The Lebanese civil war broke out in 1975, a multifaceted civil war involved in which are many internal and external parties. However, we have to single it out with special analyses so that we might have a clearer understanding of it.

Musa Al-Sadr: Multiple Enmities

Having founded the Supreme Shiite Council and the AMAL Movement, Musa Al-Sadr turned into a significant power center, which aroused the anger of many parties. In fact, Musa would publicly boast of feeling powerful and would in many conferences threat of prompting his supporters to attack palaces of the rich in case their demands are not fulfilled. He would further criticize some behaviors of Al-Khomeini and would deal with some universal powers without consulting Shiite authorities who sent him to Lebanon. Things got even worse when he paid a visit to Iran to hold a meeting with the Shah himself to ask him to pardon twelve Shiite religious leaders whom the Shah had decided to execute. Al-Khomeini considered such a visit a violation of the universal Shiite coordination and dealing with the Shah who is the enemy of revolutionists. The situation aggravated in 1978 on a breakup of relations between Syria and Al-Sadr. Being under pressure of surrounding countries as well as the US after the visit paid by Al-Sadat to the Zionist entity in 1977, Syria wanted a strong support from Lebanon as the Syrian army was in Lebanon at that time and wanted Al-Sadr to ally with no other than Syria. Feeling powerful in face of the Syrian awkward situation, Al-Sadr wanted to strengthen ties with Arab countries and thus did not heed Syrian warnings. Thus, he visited Kuwait and then Algeria and then headed for Libya in August 1978 to give rise to a great surprise. Libya declared that Al-Sadr left in August 25, 1979; however, he has never been seen in any place all over the world since then.

It is something really astonishing. Actually, Musa Al-Sadr is not that young boy as may lose way in the airport and is not that insignificant figure whose destination might be ignored by the hosting country. Evidently, he was detained and then assassinated.

At that time, Musa Al-Sadr was lurked by many enemies many of whom are accused of killing him. Foremost are the leader of the would-be Iranian revolution that is to take place one year later who do not want charismatic figures having many relations and thus could compete with Al-Khomeini for the leadership of the would-be Shiite state. Moreover, arousing the anger of the Syrian regime could have one ultimate result, i.e. being assassinated, bearing in mind the well-known cruel manner in which the Syrian regime would deal with its opponents. Furthermore, Libya itself had relations with the leadership of the Iranian revolution and thus will support it later in the war against Iraq. Taking into consideration that the Lebanese civil war was at its utmost heat, we can infer that many internal Lebanese forces were interested in toppling Musa Al-Sadr.

In fact, disappearance of Musa AL-Sadr represented a confusing puzzle, many competing scenarios for which were suggested by politicians but were all in vain. Either way, Musa Al-Sadr left behind a fierce conflict and the armed AMAL Movement undertaking his plans. Moreover, his post at the head of the Shiite Supreme Council remained vacant. One year later, the Iranian Revolution will be staged to oust the Shah. Four years later, Zionist forces will invade the south Lebanon.

Actually, all such complicated events gave rise to Hezbollah which is to complete Al-Sadr’s plans but with a purely Iranian orientation. How could this happen? What is the fate of AMAL? What is the attitude of Shiites toward Palestinians in the south? How could Hezbollah steal the limelight? Who is Hassan Nasrallah? What are his beliefs and ideas?

The answer to these questions will be dealt with in length in our coming article, if Allah so wills. I ask Allah to glorify Islam and Muslims.

Story of Hezbollat 2

March 3, 2010 at 4:18 pm | Posted in History | Leave a comment

 

 

 

 

 

 

i

 

1 Votes


Many Muslims give their emotions free reign to judge things and to evaluate men, organizations and states. They do not bother themselves discover what is behind the scenes or what is done sub-rosa or to search for roots and origins of issues. Thus thinking, they will be greatly misled and will be driven into a great misconception of consequences. I think they will regain consciousness only when stricken by a disaster and when it is too late.

In the previous article “The Story of Hezbollah 1/3“, we gave account of the deep roots that paved the way for the rise of Hezbollah in Lebanon. In this article, I will go on my way knowing that I am treading a tightrope. I also know that while trying to provide Muslims with a wider vision I will be confronted with a sweeping wave of refusal and insults from those Muslims who sympathize with any successful example during this sensitive period of the Ummah’s history regardless of whether such an example is a corrupt Shiite who thinks that criticizing, slandering and objecting to the opinions and situations of Companions is a kind of practicing freedom of opinion. I am also certain that I will be confronted with a fierce resistance of Shia themselves. They back Sunni writers who call to closing and not to deal with this file and to pay attention only to the danger of the USA and the Zionist entity. Meanwhile, they will be taking large strides towards achieving their plans and Muslims will be surprised by the existence of a Shiite state as large as the Buwayhid state or even larger!

AMAL divided after Musa Al-Sadr

After coming from the Iranian city of Qom to Lebanon having lived for a while in Najaf, Musa Al-Sadr sought to unite Shiites in one integrated entity that is apt to be the future state. He concerned himself with the sectarian characteristic of the entity and thus established the Supreme Shiite Council in 1969 A.D. He also paid attention to the military aspect and thus founded the AMAL, acronym for Afwaj al-Muqawama al-Lubnaniyya (Lebanese Resistance Detachments), Movement. He established strong ties with Maronite Christians as well as the USA, Syria and those who dispatched him to Lebanon foremost among whom is Al-Khomeini who lived in Iraq at that time

With the increasing power of Al-Sadr, a conflict of interests started to take place and a dispute rose between him and the leaders of the would-be Iranian Revolution as well as between him and the Alawi Syrian president Hafiz Al-Asad who was one of his strongest supporters. These disputes ended up with the surprise of Al-Sadr’s disappearance in Libya while paying an official visit in 1978.

Actually, Musa Al-Sadr left behind a great vacancy to be filled.

Shia tried to reorganize themselves and appointed Al-Sadr’s deputy Abdul-Amir Qabalan as the head of the Supreme Shiite Council while still named the deputy president and thus leaving the president’s post vacant till now. Moreover, the spiritual authority was given to one of their sheikhs, Muhammad Hussein Fadl-Allah.

However, the situation in the Shiite military wing, known as the AMAL Movement, worsened and its members were divided into two parties.

The first party consists of secular Shiites who want to manage things without reference to the Twelver (Ithna ‘Ashriyyah) rulings, do not like to be attached to religious authorities outside Lebanon and, rather, adopt a nationalist thought. This party is headed by the well-known Lebanese leader Nabih Berri. The second party consists of those who want to go on following the steps of Musa Al-Sadr and thus establish a sectarian Shiite-based state applying the deviated beliefs of Shia by force of armament. Such a state is to expand its authority to as many areas as it can and is to be attached to the revolution leadership planning for a coup d’etat in Iran. However, the latter party lacked a leader to be led by.

During this awkward period, two Shiite figures who studied the Shiite creed in Najaf, Iraq, came back to Lebanon. These two figures were Abbas Al-Musawi and Hassan Nasrallah, who will have great impact on preserving Musa Al-Sadr’s sectarian religious line.

The two men could quickly permeate into the AMAL Movement and occupy leading positions therein although Hassan Nasrallah was only eighteen at that time.

In 1979, the Iranian Revolution took place, the Shah was ousted and Al-Khomeini returned from Paris (having been exiled there by Iraq in 1978) to Tehran to assume leadership and make the necessary arrangements. He then got rid of his competitors and snubbed those belonging to other Iranian currents who helped him. Actually, he could absolutely secure a foothold. However, he did not head for the holy city of Qom as was expected but remained in the capital Tehran.

Firmly settled in Iran, Al-Khomeini began to put Lebanon and Iraq into consideration as they contain the largest population of Shia and, at the same time, represent the integral part of the Shiite plan to establish a great state in the region.

The situation in Iraq aggravated as Saddam Hussein ruled it with an iron hand, which was experienced by Al-Khomeini himself who stayed in Iraq for fourteen full years before being expelled to Paris. Therefore, Al-Khomeini perceived that the Shia organization in Iraq cannot topple Saddam Hussein’s ruling regime. Hence, Al-Khomeini chose the military option and immediately waged a comprehensive war against the Iraqi regime in 1980 – less than one year after the Iranian Revolution. The purpose of waging the war was to topple the regime and hand over authority to the Shia of Iraq and consequently annex it to Al-Khomeini’s long-dreamt-of great Shiite state.

As for far multi-sects Lebanon, it needs a long way preparation requiring men of complete loyalty to Al-Khomeini. Therefore, Al-Khomeini contacted the two men believing in the Twelver thought and the principle of Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists which helped Al-Khomeini come to power. These two men were Abbas Al-Musawi and Hassan Nasrallah. Since then, Iranian direct support of them started. However, the AMAL Movement is still led by the secular-oriented Nabih Berri.

In 1981, the AMAL Movement held its fourth conference to put an end to internal disputes between conflicting parties within the movement each aspiring laying control on the Shiite south. The conference came up with a decision to the effect of the continuation of Nabih Berri at the head of AMAL making Abbas Al-Musawi his deputy, which is an important step to control southern Lebanon.

Zionist invasion: The Shiite situation

In June 6, 1980, an event took place that changed the arrangements of all parties. To the surprise of everyone, Zionists invaded southern Lebanon as a whole and even imposed a siege on Beirut demanding the expulsion of Yassir Arafat, the leaders of Fatah and other armed Palestinian militias from southern Lebanon. It was so obvious that the Zionist army agreed with the Christian Maronites to exclude Palestinians who constituted a pressing force in the Lebanese society. In this regard, many massacres were committed against Palestinians most prominent of which is Sabra and Shatila massacre during which three thousand Palestinians were killed. Anyway, Zionists together with Christian Maronites managed to expel most Palestinians from southern Lebanon and from Beirut.

Actually, such events coincided with the desires of Shiites who long ago demanded the expulsion of Palestinians from the south in order to pave the way for them to establish their state there. However, the Zionist occupation did not withdraw after expelling Palestinians. Rather, it perched in Lebanon occupying the whole south Lebanon.

This development had the effect of destroying Shia’s hopes of establishing their state, especially as they are divided into secularists and religious. Thus, the religious among them decided to disaffiliate from the AMAL Movement and contact Iran leaders to gain their support. They have already formed a nine-member committee which traveled to Tehran. On meeting Al-Khomeini, they declared their belief in the principle of Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists. Accordingly, Al-Khomeini will be the Islamic Jurist under whose guardianship Lebanese Shiites will be subject. Al-Khomeini authorized the committee who returned to Lebanon to actually disaffiliate from the AMAL Movement and form what was known at that time as Islamic Amal Movement which was headed by Abbas Al-Musawi.

Iran strongly backed the newly-formed entity and further sent to Al-Biqa valley in Lebanon through Syria 1500 Iranian Revolutionary Guards to give a military training to Islamic Amal Movement and to provide it with necessary financial and military capacities. Thus, the nascent movement gained the support of two big countries in the region, i.e. Iran and Syria. However, Syria continued to support the nationalist AMAL Movement at the same time.

Foundation of Hezbollah and dominating the south

The Lebanese Civil War continued flaring up and the power of the Islamic Amal Movement continued to grow till Abbas Al-Musawi declared in February 1985, the foundation of Hezbollah as an alternative of the Islamic Amal Movement. Three months later, namely in May 1985, the AMAL Movement headed by Nabih Berri committed a heinous massacre against Palestinians killing hundreds of them to give the finishing stroke to those of them who survived in southern Lebanon.

The AMAL Movement competed with Hezbollah for leadership in southern Lebanon and Al-Biqa valley, where Shia population centralize. Hence, conflict between them got so fierce and ended up with a violent battle during which Hezbollah crushed the AMAL Movement in 1988. Later on, more than 90% of the members of AMAL joined Hezbollah that is subordinated to Iran according to the system of Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists and supported by Syria. Consequently, AMAL gave up the military arena and turned into no more than a political group.

Although Hezbollah became the sole competitor in the arena, its main source of power, i.e. southern Lebanon, was still occupied by Jews. This caused it to dominate some areas in Beirut making them a jumping-off point. Actually, Hezbollah did not seek to attack eastern Beirut where the Christian population live. Rather, it attacked western and specially southern Beirut and started to occupy it by military force bearing in mind that these are areas where the Sunni population reside. Hezbollah would sometimes construct its edifices in public places and sometimes on Sunni-owned lands, an act that was well-known by the Lebanese government, which moved no hairbreadth in this regard. Eventually, the southern suburban of Beirut turned into a purely Shiite region under the complete control of Hezbollah.

Al-Khomeini died in 1989 to be succeeded in the post of the Revolution Guide by Ali Khamenei. However, nothing changed as to Hezbollah’s subordination to the guardian Islamic jurist Ali Khamenei. In the same year, Lebanese conflicting parties met in Taif through a Saudi intermediation to sign the Taif Agreement which ended the Lebanese civil war. In the same year, the greatest Sunni figure in Lebanon, Sheikh Hassan Khalid (may Allah show mercy to him), was assassinated and thus Sunnis lost their leadership which gave way for Hezbollah to rise as the Islamic symbol in Lebanon.