Iraq: Clerical Rule or No?

[-7áydér-]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

[Guest abaleada]

(bismillah)

(salam)

The WF system comes in many versions. One of them is implimented in Iran, another we are witnessing in Iraq. Ayatullah Seestani is the defecto Leader of Iraqi shia. He is agreeing or disagreeing with what is happening. He wants Islamic laws in place. He is proposing language that will bar any un-Islamic law. This is all a form of Wilayat e Faqih.

-Islamic Laws are implimented and respected.

-Anything against Sharia is stopped.

(bismillah)

(salam)

Do you think that it will be possible to implement an Islamic government using today's tools of democracy? Would it be possible to vote in an Islamic Constitution and morally upright persons who would lead the country in an Islamically correct manner? Should those involved in the process of government necessarily be among the ranks of the `ulama, in your opinion?

[NoorFatima]

(bismillah)

Ehsan, I’m going top ignore your pathetic answer, I didn’t know you were so childish and willing to insult anyone (including great men of knowledge) who disagrees with your “Rahbar” – May Allah Help you out of your denial.

To Heaven, if you think it was necessary to edit some words in my post, then I suggest you open your eyes to what Ehsan has noted and hinted in his post instead of just censoring one side while leaving the other.

(salam)

[MajiC]

I personally don’t believe a true Islamic state can be achieved during the time of the occultation of the Awaited Guide and Saviour.

(bismillah)

(salam)

So this is a reason, an excuse rather, for us to live under a system which is dominated by people like Chalabi? If you have no faith in your scholars then who will you resort to? The occultation of the Imam (as) does not mean that we should abandon reason and seek refuge in people other than those closest to our Imam (as). Rather, we should implement the Islamic principles so that our independence is in the hands of God-fearing men, who is more God fearing than a righteous 'Alim? As muslims we should strive for a system based on our beliefs and values, who better to administer the country than those who are learned and God-fearing?

Please feel free to clarify you intention if you feel misunderstood.

Thanks,

Wassalaam.

[NoorFatima]

(bismillah)

MajiC,

When I read this: "So this is a reason, an excuse rather, for us to live under a system which is dominated by people like Chalabi?" it makes me wonder if you actually read every post I posted after the one you quoted.

(salam)

Edited June 7, 2004 by NoorFatima

[MajiC]

(salam)

Nope I didn't actually read the entire thread. Why, did you change your stance? Otherwise whats the difference? InshaAllah I'll read the entire thread.

Edited June 7, 2004 by MajiC

[Orion]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Brother abaleada,

Do you think that it will be possible to implement an Islamic government using today's tools of democracy?

I think its possible. People of Iraq should have the will to have an Islamic system.

Would it be possible to vote in an Islamic Constitution and morally upright persons who would lead the country in an Islamically correct manner?

Why not, espacially if they they hold a fair and open elections.

Should those involved in the process of government necessarily be among the ranks of the `ulama, in your opinion?

If the people of Iraq choose to elect ulema to the positions in the government, as residents of Iraq, why should they be stopped. Even if the government posts are not held by scholars, the final authority must be in the hands of the qualified Fuqha.

To implement an Islamic government, one would need the following ingridents:

-Able Leadership esp. that of the Fuqha.

-Willingness of the majority of the people.

WS

Edited June 8, 2004 by Orion

[IWN]

someone was telling me that the Greatest of all Ayatollahs (currently Khamenei) is visited by Imam Mahdi (as) ... i dunno what to make of it...but could it be true?

[Hizbullah]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Why not? Many great scholars have met the Imam (as). Sayed Bahr al uloom(ra)[not the one in Iraq right now] and Sayed al Mar'ashi(ra) are only a couple of those who have said that they have been visited by the Imam (as).

Once this man asked Sayed Bahr al Uloom (ra): "Is it possible to see the Imam (as)?"

The Sayed sighed and said (talking to himself):"Oh, how shall I answer this man and my chest has touched his chest. [ie: the Imam (as) had hugged him(ra)]"

The great 'aref Sayed al Mar'ashi (ra) wrote the things the Imam (as) told him when he visited him. He (as) visited him a few times and said very interesting things. Anyway, this was off-topic but it was just to answer your question.

wassalam

Edited June 8, 2004 by Hizbullah

[The Venerator of Ali]

someone was telling me that the Greatest of all Ayatollahs (currently Khamenei) is visited by Imam Mahdi (as) ... i dunno what to make of it...but could it be true?

Yeh and I saw Zeus in my Dream :squeez:

[Hizbullah]

(bismillah)

Aren't we ever going to learn to keep quiet when we have nothing civilized to say? <_<

[Orion]

someone was telling me that the Greatest of all Ayatollahs (currently Khamenei) is visited by Imam Mahdi (as) ... i dunno what to make of it...but could it be true?

(bismillah)

(salam)

On one hand occultation of the Imam (as) does not mean that he is completely cut off from his followers. He helps and guides whoever he wishes and there are many documented accounts of Imam (as) meeting with the Ulema and also common people.

On the other hand no one can claim that he is in direct contact with the Imam (as) on a regular bases like the 4 naibs during minor occultation.

WS

[Guest abaleada]

(bismillah)

(salam)

To implement an Islamic government, one would need the following ingridents:

-Able Leadership esp. that of the Fuqha.

-Willingness of the majority of the people.

WS

(bismillah)

(salam)

If democratic elections result in a secular rule, will you be disappointed?

-sis Abbie

[-7áydér-]

"someone was telling me that the Greatest of all Ayatollahs (currently Khamenei)"

Actually its currently Sayyid Seestani.

[Firoz Ali]

Syed Sadr has made lots of cowards cover their face

[Baatil Ka Kaatil]

"someone was telling me that the Greatest of all Ayatollahs (currently Khamenei)"

Actually its currently Sayyid Seestani.

It shouldn't be a competition or anything of the sort anyhow.

Knowledge is at the mercy of ones minds' aqls' & wills extent. I don't think anyone except Allah (swt), Rasool pbuh and the Aimmah are in a position to judge our Ulemahs.

[Sister Zaynab]

someone was telling me that the Greatest of all Ayatollahs (currently Khamenei) is visited by Imam Mahdi (as) ... i dunno what to make of it...but could it be true?

Yeh and I saw Zeus in my Dream :squeez:

(bismillah) (salam)

Congratulations... you dreamed about a made-up mythological god... what exactly does that have to do with the reality of a living, breathing human being? Or is it that you just couldn't think of anything worthwhile to say?

[-7áydér-]

"Syed Sadr has made lots of cowards cover their face "

LOOOOOOOOOOOOL. Funny u say that, because its his OWN fighters who walk around the streets of Najaf covering their faces with scarves because they dont want the people of Najaf to see these guys for who they really are.

Its HIS men hiding in holy places...and its HIS men who are the cowards not fighting the Americans like men but rather firing rounds from Hadhra's both in Kerbala and Najaf.

[Orion]

If democratic elections result in a secular rule, will you be disappointed?

(bismillah)

(salam)

Are you saying they would want secular, non-Islamic laws? How can Muslims not want to live under the law given to them by of Allah? In case that happens it will be their loss......as it is upto the people to choose the right or wrong path for themselves and their future generations.

Having said the above it is expected that if their is fair and free elections without any manipulation, Iraqi nation will choose an Islamic system of government.

WS

Edited June 8, 2004 by Orion

[Orion]

"someone was telling me that the Greatest of all Ayatollahs (currently Khamenei)"

Actually its currently Sayyid Seestani.

It shouldn't be a competition or anything of the sort anyhow.

Knowledge is at the mercy of ones minds' aqls' & wills extent. I don't think anyone except Allah (swt), Rasool pbuh and the Aimmah are in a position to judge our Ulemahs.

(bismillah)

(salam)

Very well said. :)

WS

[Gypsy]

juancole writes:

Readers have frequently asked me for a thumbnail sketch of Sistani's political philosophy, and the issue came up on one of my lists today. I reproduce here what I wrote.

Sistani's conception of the new Iraq is that it should have an elected parliament, which will represent the will of the Iraqi people. His language on this is almost a translation of Rousseau (one might have wished for more Locke or Jefferson and less Rousseau, of course). The parliament should consist of laypersons, not clerics. And, it should be pluralistic and represent politically all Iraqis, including Kurds and Sunnis.

This elected, lay parliament is one basic element in the good society according to Sistani.

The other is the approval of parliament and its legislation by the Marja`iyyah or Shiite religious leadership. Legitimacy thus has dual roots, in the will of the people and in the approval of the clerics.

I have compared Sistani's vision of Iraq to Ireland in the 1950s. There was an elected, lay parliament. But if it took up a matter such as divorce, which affected the interests of the Church, the Bishops intervened and usually were able to get their way. Likewise, Sistani expects a majority of members of parliament to be lay Shiites, and he expects them to conscientiously heed his fatwas on social issues. These rulings, however, will be issued from the seminaries of Najaf and come from outside the government. Sistani expects to have no official post, and discourages clerics from seeking such posts. The clerical role is played out in civil society, not within the state, for the most part.

Sistani rejects Khomeini's theory of the guardianship of the jurisprudent (vilayat-i faqih) in governmental affairs. He does not want to see a faqih or supreme jurisprudent in Iraq similar to the position of Ali Khamenei in Iran. But he does speak about wilayat al-faqih fi al-masa'il al-ijtima`iyyah, or the guardianship of the jurisprudent in social affairs. The mechanism for such a guardianship is the issuance of fatwas or considered jurisprudential rulings.

Sistani would also like to have shariah or Islamic canon law form the basis for as much as possible of Iraqi civil law. Certainly he wants perso

nal status law to be shariah for Muslims. This was the system in Iraq under the monarchy, and obviously it does create a shariah bench for clerical judges appointed by the state, where the clerics can have a voice in civil affairs. (This system was introduced in Pakistan under General Zia ul-Haq, of which Sistani is well aware because one of his key colleagues is Bashir Najafi, a Pakistani grand ayatollah).

So, Sistani is not a secularist by any stretch of the imagination. If he gets what he wants, religious law will have a vast influence on Iraqi society and politics. The ayatollahs in Iraq will have as big a megaphone as the Catholic bishops did in 1950s Ireland.

On the other hand, Sistani is not a dictator or a Khomeinist. He is much more analogous to Jerry Falwell in the US-- a major religious voice who wants to move the society in a certain direction through weakening the separation of religion and state, without himself seeking political office.

I don't actually think there is anything "immoderate" about Sistani's vision in a contemporary Middle Eastern context. It is not what the Bush administration wants, or what most educated Iraqi women want, or the Kurds (and probably most Sunni Arabs for that matter) want. Attempting to implement the second part of it (ayatollah influence on legislation and social issues) will cause trouble with the other communities, potentially. But Sistani has all along been a Najaf pragmatist. He has constantly spoken of the need to assuage the feelings of the Sunni Arabs and Kurds. He will try to accomplish as much of his vision as seems practicable, and no more. His tools are not militias, guns, and bombs, but persistent persuasion and discourse. Occasionally he may bring peaceful crowds into the streets to demonstrate for some law or policy. It is in that discursive practice that his "moderation" lies.

My estimation of Sistani's potential influence is that it is generally positive given the situation of contemporary Iraq. It is important for traditionalist and even activist Shiites to hear praises of parliamentary governance and communal harmony. His potential impact on social legislation is reactionary, of course. But even he admits that the religious Shiites are likely to form less than 50% of parliamentarians, and that it is a little unlikely that he can get everything he wants any time soon. And, he is willing to be patient about his goals, as long as they are met minimally.

The one point on which Sistani's stance raises some alarms in my mind is that he seems completely unsympathetic to Kurdish demands for safeguards as a minority, and wants to remove their veto on the new constitution to be hammered out next year this time. The potential for Kurdish-Shiite violence is substantial in the coming years.

Al-Hayat quoted Sistani's letter to Kofi Annan about the just-passed UN resolution on Iraq as follows: "It has reached us that some are attempting to insert a mention of what they call 'The Law for the Administration of the Iraqi State in the Transitional Period' [i.e. the interim constitution] into the new UN Security Council resolution on Iraq-- with the goal of lending it international legitimacy. This "Law", which was legislated by an unelected council in the shadow of Occupation, and with direct influence from it, binds the national parliament, which it has been decided will be elected at the beginning of the new Christian year for the purpose of passing a permanent constitution for Iraq. This matter contravenes the laws, and most children of the Iraqi people reject it. For this reason, any attempt to bestow legitimacy on it through mentioning it in the UN resolution would be considered an action contrary to the will of the Iraqi people and a harbinger of grave consequences."

[akenfield]

I have no qualms about giving bay'ah to a Shia authority, provided he is reasonable and just. I have no problem even in serving and protecting such a system.

How would a good Muslim determine if a ruling cleric is "reasonable and just"? Is there any guidance in the Quran or the Hadiths for this?

What happens in a country if many Shia come to believe that such a ruler isn't just?

This is not a rhetorical question. I'm truly wondering if this has ever happened in an Islamic state, and what justifiable actions could be taken if a clerical ruler was unfit.

Very interesting and intriquing posts, Ultra Muslim.

[akenfield]

Zareen! That was a magnificent treatise on the Ayatollah al-Sistani! Thank you. I have had difficulty finding much balanced insight about his stance, although- from the very beginning- I had the hunch that this was a very wise man. Even as a non-Muslim, I recognize true holiness when I see it and a love for his people.

On the other hand, Sistani is not a dictator or a Khomeinist. He is much more analogous to Jerry Falwell in the US-- a major religious voice who wants to move the society in a certain direction through weakening the separation of religion and state, without himself seeking political office.

Oh, No! Don't compare him with Falwell, please, Zareen! It's like comparing a clay vase to one made of the finest china!

I believe the Ayatollah's view is even more progressive than that of Jordan, which is quite remarkable.

As for the constitution which he feels shouldn't be included in the UN resolution, an elected government can change the it in the future. I think his greatest objection to the current constitution is the role of women, if I'm not mistaken.

[Guest abaleada]

On the other hand, Sistani is not a dictator or a Khomeinist. He is much more analogous to Jerry Falwell in the US-- a major religious voice who wants to move the society in a certain direction through weakening the separation of religion and state, without himself seeking political office.

(bismillah)

(salam)

Sister, I know that you meant well, but the use of Imam Khumayni's name like that touched off a nerve on me. It just didn't feel right. Also, Fawell is a virulent Islamophobe, among other major personality flaws.

Edited June 15, 2004 by abaleada

[Guest abaleada]

As for the constitution which he feels shouldn't be included in the UN resolution, an elected government can change the it in the future. I think his greatest objection to the current constitution is the role of women, if I'm not mistaken.

(bismillah)

(salam)

Actually, Ayatullah Sistani objects to the so-called "contisution" and the so-called "government" on the basis that neither was obtained under free and fair elections.

[Guest abaleada]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Are you saying they would want secular, non-Islamic laws? How can Muslims not want to live under the law given to them by of Allah? In case that happens it will be their loss......as it is upto the people to choose the right or wrong path for themselves and their future generations.

Having said the above it is expected that if their is fair and free elections without any manipulation, Iraqi nation will choose an Islamic system of government.

WS

(bismillah)

(salam)

Thank you, brother.

[Guest abaleada]

Calling for more votes inshallah, especially from Iraqis. OR have we exhausted all of the Iraqis on board? I've got 17 votes from Iraqis so far.

Might anyone have heard or read opinions form other Iraqis, especially in their own social circles?

[Guest newshia]

I am not necessarily 4 or against Wilayet-e-Faqih, but i jus wanted 2 bring up/repeat few pts:

The Imam (as) embodied excellence in every sphere; as statesman, religious leader, soldier (if it was their role), philosopher... basically they knew everything, as Allah told them what they wanted 2 kno.

However, the current day religious leaders (Mujtahids, thinkers) r not necessarily all these things. They certainly rnt soldiers. Also, they r not infallible.

However, this is not meant 2 downgrade their position. Surely, I believe they were the wisest accessible guides 4 Muslims.

[akenfield]

Actually, Ayatullah Sistani objects to the so-called "contisution" and the so-called "government" on the basis that neither was obtained under free and fair elections.

I thought the Ayatollah did not object to the content of the constitution, except for the role of women. Perhaps I am mistaken.

There can't be any elections without some sort of guide or constitution to start with. The Palestinians set up what they called a "Basic Law" before they held elections. Then they voted for Arafat as president and members of the legislative council.

I do believe any constitution or set of rules can be changed after elections. An Islamic form of government may be chosen by the population in Iraq or it may not.

Personally, I feel that a pure Islamic theocracy might result in some sort of dictatorship which may not be good, if the person running it is not good.

HOWEVER, I respect any decision the Iraqi people make, as long as it is freely chosen.

[Sister Zaynab]

(bismillah) (salam)

I have not had the opportunity to actually READ what the constitution says. Does anyone have a good link?

What DOES it say about the role of women? (and is it their role in the government that you're talking about?)

Thanks.

[Orion]

I am not necessarily 4 or against Wilayet-e-Faqih,

(bismillah)

(salam)

Wilayah al-Faqeeh, which is the rule of a just jurist who is learned in the religion, is a devotional religious precept that is confirmed by reason as well as by the Islamic law. The Fuqha of our time are our leaders. Every Shia should believe in it.

WS

Edited June 18, 2004 by Orion

[Orion]

How would a good Muslim determine if a ruling cleric is "reasonable and just"? Is there any guidance in the Quran or the Hadiths for this?

What happens in a country if many Shia come to believe that such a ruler isn't just?

This is not a rhetorical question. I'm truly wondering if this has ever happened in an Islamic state, and what justifiable actions could be taken if a clerical ruler was unfit.

(bismillah)

The actions of a ruling cleric can easily be judged by other experts or a formal body of experts. If a clerical ruler is found to be unfit, he could be removed from his position and replaced. No one is above the law so he could even be punished if found guilty of any crimes.

[Guest abaleada]

up

[Muhammed Ali]

(bismillah)

Br Muhammed Ali,

I have said this before on Shiachat, the "shirazi.org.uk" website isn't the official website of Ayatollah Shirazi, it is made by a 25 year old who extremely dislikes the Iranian government, and highly mixed his beliefs along with the Sayed's - And I also said: "I will only answer to the words of the Sayed which are either taken directly from his books and/or Audio cassettes.

If you also want his official website, check out my signature.

(salam)

ok here is something from one of his books, be prepared to be refuted:

the book is : The Islamic System of Government by ayatullah muhammad shirazi

Article 8

The leader or the Head of State under the Islamic system of government is the Mujtahid[11] who satisfies all the criteria required, (in the case of there being a single Mujtahid.) If there were more than one Mujtahid, the Head of State is the leadership ‘council of scholars’ which consists of the Mujtahids. Under the consultative leadership system, the public elects the Mujtahid council members.

The Criteria for the Mujtahid are:

Ijtihaad

Which is the knowledge, expertise and ability to derive the ruling required for any case using the four sources of reference, i.e. the Qur'an, the Teaching of the Prophet (Sunnah), Unanimity and Reason.[12]

Commitment (‘Adalah)

To have a state of self-discipline that enables him to abstain from committing any major illicit act (sin) or persisting on minor ones.

Male Gender

It is not appropriate for a woman to hold this position.[13]

Freedom

The Head of State must have his own free will.[14]

Legitimate

Birth

As an individual of illegitimate birth is not suited for such a post.

There are also other criteria such as ‘Adolescence’, ‘Sound Mind’, ‘Faith’, etc. that do not require further comments.

and then:

Article 10

1.  If there was only one Mujtahid who meets all the required criteria then he is automatically the Head of State.

2.  If there were more than one, those Mujtahids elected by the public, may elect one Mujtahid or a group from themselves to lead the country.

3.  The nation may instead, opt to elect the leader of the country or the leadership council directly.

now that is what happens in iran. this is clearly against your own teachings.

Article 12

The elected Head of State may appoint the Head of Government e.g. Prime Minister. The head of government should be a trustworthy, competent and knowledgeable in Islamic law but does not have to be a Mujtahid. The two heads must co-operate in the process of running the affairs of the country.

you either dont know the teachings of sayed shirazi or you just like to type whatever agress with your own ijtihad.

[Muhammed Ali]

up