The solace of the savior and HEZBOLLAH's victory: belief in the MAHDI and JESUS as an encouragement to resistance

Thus, the Islamic reaction to oppression involves resistance – i.e. defensive jihad. Indeed, Surah Al-Anfal 8:39 commands that Muslims ‘fight them until persecution is no more’. In different ages, the reality of political oppression has caused some Shia to back illegitimate candidates for the title of Mahdi:

A common factor between Shia Muslims and Christians is that they refer to the Expected One in their respective eschatological systems as ‘the Saviour’, Shia referring to the Mahdi, and Christians to Jesus. The West, especially Europe, is essentially post-Christian, with religion playing little role in everyday affairs. However, at times of crisis, people turn to religion for solace.

A classic example was the effect of 9/11, which led to a massive upsurge in American church attendance. Similarly, in the wake of the events of 1967, with the defeat of the Arab states, Muslims began to abandon secular ideologies and turn to religion as a source of solace and of political resistance. The fruit of that turning was seen in 1979 with the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Following on from that, the people of Lebanon and Palestine have turned to religion for solace in the face of the Israeli occupation.

This solace has not been just for comfort in the face of oppression. Belief in the Biblical Saviour led Christians in Britain to successfully campaign against slavery in the nineteenth century, and belief in the Shi‘ite Saviour led Lebanese Shia to resist Israeli occupation and aggression and defeat both. It follows that belief in the eschatological triumph of the Saviour is a spur to activism prior to His Coming, and to understand the victory of Hezbollah, we must first understand the role of belief in the Mahdi in providing solace in both senses.

1. Islamic opposition to oppression and hopes for a deliverer
Islam has a horror of fitna, sometimes appropriately translated as ‘strife’ but also having connotations (depending on the context) of ‘oppression’. The classic texts in this regard are Surah al-Baqara 2:191, 193:
And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter…
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers…
Say: Warfare therein is a great (transgression), but to turn (men) from the way of Allah, and to disbelieve in Him and in the Inviolable Place of Worship, and to expel His people thence, is a greater with Allah; for persecution is worse than killing...

Thus, the Islamic reaction to oppression involves resistance – i.e. defensive jihad. Indeed, Surah Al-Anfal 8:39 commands that Muslims ‘fight them until persecution is no more’. In different ages, the reality of political oppression has caused some Shia to back illegitimate candidates for the title of Mahdi:
They were …easily carried away by the talented eloquence of Mukhtar and his successful propaganda for Ibn al-Hanafiya as the deliverer (Mahdi) from the tyranny and injustice inflicted upon them by the Umayyads. It was, therefore, not so much the rights and personality of Ibn al-Hanafiya which made the masses of the Shi‘is of Kufa accept him as Mahdi-Imam as it was their desperate yearning for a deliverer from Umayyad domination and oppressive rule.

A careful examination of Mukhtar’s propaganda for Ibn al-Hanafiya would show that the overriding emphasis in introducing him was on his role as Mahdi and not so much on his being the Imam. This may prove to have been the main factor which attracted people to him.

In this regard, an ayah that is of particular relevance to the experience of Shia down the ages, and of Muslims in places such as Lebanon and Palestine today, is Surah An-Nisa 4:75:

How should ye not fight for the cause of Allah and of the feeble among men and of the women and the children who are crying: Our Lord! Bring us forth from out this town of which the people are oppressors! Oh, give us from thy presence some protecting friend! Oh, give us from Thy presence some defender!

It is significant that the text does not exactly call for ‘liberation’, ‘salvation’ or ‘defence’ in the generic sense of an action: rather, the concept is individualised – the call is for a personalised Defender/Saviour. Arguably, this may just be meant in the generic sense, but equally, it is easy to see how this could be applied to the Mahdi as the ultimate Defender/Saviour of the Oppressed who cry out to God. Significantly, Imam Hussein made his way to Iraq in response to an agonised plea by the people of Kufa; This is a letter to Husayn bin Ali from his Muslim and faithful supporters. Be quick and hurry up, for the people are waiting for you, and they do not look towards anyone other than you. Hurry up. Hurry up. We repeat: Make haste. Make haste.

Equally significantly, the usual Shia exclamation upon reference to the Mahdi is ‘May Allah hasten his appearance’. The people of Kufa urgently desired the coming of an Imam who would establish justice and deliver them from oppression, and it was this Hussein promised in his reply to the people of Kufa:
You have written that you do not have an Imam and asked me to come to you so that Allah may perhaps draw you together on truth and guidance through me… I swear by my life that a true Imam and leader is only he who takes decisions according to the Qur\\\'an, establishes justice, promotes the Divine religion and dedicates himself to the path of Allah.

Likewise, Muslims today are often in situations where they crying out for justice, so it is not surprising that today there is deep longing and expectant hope for a Saviour to come and vanquish oppression whilst establishing Just Governance – i.e. the Mahdi.

Throughout Islamic history, and especially in the present day, it is not that Muslims wish to be delivered from a place – indeed, one of the features of Palestinian resistance is the determination not to repeat the tragedy of 1948 by fleeing from the enemy forces after the latter had deliberately committed a massacre in a neighbouring place to encourage ethnic cleansing. Rather, Muslims seek to be delivered from an oppressive political context. At times certain Muslims have looked to ‘defenders’ that others saw as questionable – many Palestinians had hopes that Saddam Hussein might prove to be their ‘defender’ during the Gulf War, whilst some Iraqis looked to the Americans to be delivered from the same figure. Early in Islamic history, however, such hopes for a ‘defender’ sent by Allah to deliver the righteous Ummah from oppressive rulers came to centre on the Mahdi:
Narrated by Abu Sa’id al-Khudaris:
I heard the Prophet declare from the pulpit: ‘The Mahdi … will fill the earth with justice and equity as it is filled with tyranny and injustice.’
Bihar al-anwar, Vol. 51, p. 74

Identification of the Mahdi as the ultimate ‘defender’ immediately demonstrates a difference with those who have looked to ordinary human figures, whether arguably estimable (e.g. Mossadeq or Nasser) or questionable (e.g. Saddam). The Mahdi, in contrast, is a supernatural character, and for Shia in particular, his manifestation to the world is supernatural and thus God-given:
Ja’far as-Sadiq
… Abu Khalid al-Kabuli … said:
Ali b. al-Husain… told me: ‘…I see your master, rising above the hill of your Najaf destined for Kufa, with three hundred and some odd over ten men, Jibraeel on his right, Mikaeel on his left, Israfil ahead of him, and with him (is) the Prophet’s standard, unfurled… (Bihar al-anwar, Vol. 52, p. 327).
The fact that the Saviour is supernaturally manifested in Iraq (i.e. attended by angels), aiming to reach Kufa just as Hussein did, provides a further connection with the martyred Imam.

The land where an Imam – specifically the Lord of the Martyrs (in Shia terminology) was slain, will be the land where the last Imam – al-Mahdi – will manifest himself to complete the work begun by Hussein in confronting tyranny, as this hadith quoting his words demonstrates:
I am the seal of successors. And through me shall Allah, the Mighty and Glorious, drive away the calamities from my progeny and my Shias.
(Bihar, v. 52, p. 30)
So just as the journey to Kufa was the scene for the greatest tragedy in Shia history, the ultimate journey to Kufa will be the scene for the final triumph of the Saviour over oppression.

This is confirmed by a saying of Imam Mahdi himself and by a tradition of Imam Reza:
Imam Mahdi said, ‘I pray for any believer who remembers the sufferings of my martyred grandfather, al-Husain, and then prays for my relief (al-Faraj)’
…O Son of Shabib! If you wish to cry for anything or anyone, cry for al-Husain Ibn Ali (PBUH) for he was slaughtered like a sheep… Certainly, the seven heavens and earths cried because of the murder of al-Husain (PBUH). Four thousand Angels descended on earth to aid him, but (when they were allowed to reach there) they found him martyred. So they remained at his grave, disheveled and dusty, and will remain there until the rising of al-Qa’im (Imam al-Mahdi (PBUH)), whereupon they will aid him. Their slogan will be, ‘Vengeance for the blood of al-Husain.’…

The Ziyarat Al-Nahiya, traditionally ascribed to the Twelfth Imam, emphasises the identification of the Mahdi with opposition to the oppression that Imam Hussein resisted:
Salutations from the one, who, had he been present with you in that plain, would have shielded you from the sharpness of the swords with his body and sacrificed his last breath for you… But … as I could not fight those who fought you, and was not able to show hostility to those who showed hostility to you I will, therefore, lament you morning and evening, and will weep blood in place of tears, out of my anguish for you and my sorrow for all that befell you…

Sachedina also comments on the annual condolences that Shi offer at Ashura which demonstrate the link between the service of Hussein and the jihad of the Mahdi: ‘May God …make us among those who will exact vengeance for his [Hussein’s] blood with his friend… the Imam Mahdi…’
2. The Mahdi as the Saviour from internal oppression
It should be noted that in the first aspect, eschatological hopes for the Mahdi relate to the internal situation of Muslims – that is, he is someone who will deliver them from oppressive rulers who themselves claim to be Muslims, as opposed to confronting Kufr – i.e. non-Muslim political forces. In this respect we can see a link between the jihad of Hussein against Yazid on the one hand, and Mahdist expectation on the other.

Hussein went to Karbala to confront illegitimate rule, sacrificing himself in the process. This self-sacrifice was not immediately successful in toppling the tyrannical government, but Mahdist expectation held that a descendant of the Prophet (a sayyid) would be ultimately responsible for overthrowing oppressive regimes.

Every year during the Ashura festival Shia remember the Tragedy at Karbala, mourning both his loss and their failure to aid him. The lamentations at this time involve eschatological expectation, where the promise of Imam ’Ali Ibn al-Husain is of a place in Paradise for the mourner.
Imam ’Ali Ibn al-Husain (A.S.) used to say: Every Mu’min, whose eyes shed tears upon the killing of Husain Ibn ‘Ali (A.S.) and his companions, such that the tears roll down his cheeks, Allah shall accommodate him in the elevated rooms of Paradise.
(Yanaabe’al Mawaddah, p. 419).

However, another tradition from Imam Sadiq links the lamentation of Muharram with concern for the issue of illegitimate and oppressive government:
Imam Sadiq (A.S.) said: He whose eyes shed tears for our blood which has been shed, or for our rights which have been usurped, or for the humiliation meted out to us or to one of our Shi’ites, Allah shall accommodate him in paradise for a long time.
(Amali Sheikh al Mufid, p. 175).

It is important to connect this with the tradition from Imam Reza that urges a retrospective identification with the martyrs of Karbala:
Imam Redha (A.S.) said (to one of his companions):
If you desire that for you be the reward equivalent to that of those martyred along with Husain (A.S.), then whenever you remember him say: ‘Oh! Would that I had been with them! A great achievement would I have achieved’.
(Wasaail al Shia’h, vol. 14, p. 501).
This should also be linked to the famous saying ‘Every day is Ashura, every land is Karbala’, which was an inspiration to Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution:
‘Everyday is Ashura and every land is Karbala!’ These are great, immortal words, mostly misunderstood and misused. Some think it means lamenting every day, but this isn\\\'t so! What was the role of the land of Karbala on the Ashura Day? All lands should be like that! The part of the role of Karbala was this: The Master of the Martyrs accompanied by a few men rose up against the tyranny and oppression of the cruel regime of Yazid, against the emperor of the time, fought him but as their number was too small, they sacrificed themselves and were killed, thus they did not submit to cruelty and this meant a defeat for the oppressor. And, the motto ‘Every day is Ashura’ means that we all must stand and fight oppression every day if it so exists, the command is unlimited in terms of time and location or place.

The Karbala event occurred on a site that was limited in dimension and number of challengers - 70 plus persons. But this is symbolic. All lands should perform the role that Karbala did, that is, people must resist oppression whenever and wherever it occurs, and fight it without regard for forces available.
It can be seen that the tradition, as Khomeini interprets it, establishes the universality and permanence of jihad against oppression. This means that Muslims are not meant to be passive until the coming of the Mahdi in resisting tyranny, but rather to prepare for his coming, which will be the ultimate jihad against unjust rule, by themselves engaging in the struggle against tyranny. The Mahdi’s jihad is simply the successful culmination of this struggle.

The only major difference in the jihad waged by the Mahdi is that Offensive Jihad remains his unique prerogative (therefore America need not worry about Iranian nuclear ambitions until his coming!); Defensive jihad – namely, resistance to oppression - is mandated by the tradition that everywhere is Karbala, and every day is Ashura.
3. The Shi‘ite Saviour the giver of solace
The general experience of the Shia throughout much of their history is that they have been the victims of oppression. At times this has been political in the sense of various regimes that have engaged in state repression, such as that of the Pahlavi dynasty, other times it has been at the hands of sectarian Sunnis, most notably in modern times the Wahhabi Saudi regime, the Taliban or now Al-Qaida in Iraq.

In recent times they have suffered the unique combination of racial and sectarian oppression that they denounce as the abiding characteristic of the Israeli regime, most notably in terms of Israeli actions in Lebanon, especially during the long occupation, exemplified during the well-documented abuses at Khiam prison. Frequently, this had led to mass-killings (such as Qana), causing them to equate the Israelis with Mu’awiya, the contemporary period with Ashura, and Lebanon with Karbala. At such times it is important to understand the psychological factor involved in Mahdist expectation, which has several facets.
Firstly, Shia believe that despite the Occultation of the Saviour, he is still present to aid them in their struggles.

For example, the Hadith displays that just as the sun continues to shine and enable us to live even when the clouds prevent seeing it, so does the Mahdi aid his followers: ‘As for deriving benefit from me in my occultation is like deriving benefit from the sun when it hides behind the clouds’ (Bihar al-anwar, v. 53, p. 181). A classic statement of the Mahdi’s role in providing both psychological solace and practical guardianship is found in Kafi:
Usul al-Kafi H 504, Ch. 15, h1
Abu Muhammad al-Qasim ibn al-’Ala’… has narrated from ‘Ad al-’Aziz ibn Muslim the following.

“…The Imam smiled and then said the following. “…The Imam is as crystal-clear water to thirst, an indicator of true guidance and the protector against destruction … The Imam is as a comforting friend, a very kind father, a real brother, and a tender-hearted mother of a small child, a refuge for people in disastrous conditions. The Imam is Allah’s trustee over His creatures, His authority over His servants, His representative in His lands, the preacher of His cause and the defender of His sanctuary… The Imam maintains law and order in religion. He is the might of the Muslims that enrages the hypocrites, and …exterminates unbelievers.”

Secondly, there is the issue of eschatological hope. However intense the oppression, however extensive the suffering, Shia have always been buoyed and upheld by the solace given by the expectation of the Saviour’s return. It is an integral part of Shia belief that though they may now face oppression, their ultimate future is secure, since they have the promise of final victory through the coming of the Mahdi. They believe that his coming will dispel and vanquish tyranny; in short, they will be on the winning side.

Thirdly, it must be remembered that when Shia mourn and weep, especially over Hussein, they are engaged in a practical act of eschatological expectation. We have seen in the quotes from some Imams about the Ashura festival – the hope of Paradise through shedding tears, and especially noteworthy is the tradition from Imam Sadiq that promises Paradise for anyone weeping over any oppressed believer – ‘the humiliation meted out to us or to one of our Shi’ites’.

A classic practical example is seen in the 1979 Iranian Revolution, where every martyr’s funeral became a political demonstration that intensified the jihad against the Shah, as ‘Imam Khomeini had said: “The blood of each martyr will awake a thousand of the living.” It is thus that unarmed people would prevail over such a renowned and powerful army.’ Another time Khomeini also stated ‘Lamentation of the martyrs, means preservation and perpetuation of the Movement. It is narrated that he who cries (at, Imam Hosein’s martyrdom) …will be admitted to the Heaven. Such a person who appears sad, whose face shows his affectation by tears, is actually helping to preserve the uprising and movement of Imam Hosein (a.s.).’

Thus, the tears of the mourners were also tears of solace and joy that their loved ones had ascended to Paradise as martyrs.
Equally in Lebanon, every Israeli bombardment and killing of villagers only led to increased resistance, both in terms of recruitment to Hezbollah and intensification of the fighting. It was impossible to destroy the morale of the Lebanese by these actions, since their tears were simultaneously sorrow for the loss of a loved one, after the manner of Hussein, but also joy at the martyr’s immediate entry into Paradise. Just as the Mahdi will avenge the blood of Hussein with the blood of Oppressors, so the Lebanese avenged the blood of their sons and daughters with the blood of Israeli soldiers.

The example of the Mahdi and his Ziyarat was therefore instrumental in bringing about the victory of both Khomeini’s revolution against the Shah in Iran and the Hezbollah jihad against the Israelis. Against this belief the most powerful arsenal in the Middle East was impotent.

Fourthly, even though the Mahdi is yet in Occultation, Shia seek his practical help. Hence, the solace given is not simply of comfort, but of invigoration to resistance. The Ziyarat al-Ashura contains this invocation, whereby Shia identify with Imam Hussein’s jihad: ‘May Allah curse the people who laid the basis of oppression…’ Another part of this Ziyarat is this statement: ‘O Abu ’Abdullah… I am at war with those who make war with you, till the Day of Judgement’, emphasising the permanence and immediacy of defensive jihad against oppression. Then the supplication is given which links the petitioner with the hope of the Mahdi: ‘I pray to Allah … to grant me an opportunity to be with a victorious Imam, from the family of Muhammad...’ Another petition to Allah in this Ziyarat is that ‘He may grant me the opportunity to seek victory, along with a rightly guided Imam from amongst you, who will surely come and speak the truth.’

This demonstrates the practical inspiration and solace that the Mahdi gives to his followers: he prepares them for jihad. The Mahdi’s coming is a revolution that involves military readiness: Imam Sadiq said: ‘Prepare yourselves for the revolution of our Qa’im, even if it means to gather an arrow [for fighting God’s enemies].’ (Bihar al-anwar, Vol. 52, p. 366). In Shia history this practical preparation has ranged from boycotts to military resistance. For example, in 1890 the Qajar Shah Naser ed-Din awarded a monopoly concession to the British Imperial Tobacco Company. This was met with protests, which were largely ignored until in 1891 Ayatollah Mīrza Hasan Shirazi issued this fatwa: ‘Today the use of … tobacco… is reckoned war against the Imam of the Age…’ This led to a massive nationwide boycott, forcing the cancellation of the concession. Hence, this victory against colonialism was accomplished through faith in and on the authority of the Mahdi. That is, it was the Victorious Boycott of the Awaited Saviour.

When Khomeini issued his famous work Hokumat-i-Islami, it included this call to people to ‘Prepare yourselves to be useful to Islam; act as the army for the Imām of the Age in order to be able to serve him in spreading the rule of justice.’ He continued: ‘The Imams … not only fought against tyrannical rulers, oppressive governments, and corrupt courts themselves; they also summoned the Muslims to wage jihad against those enemies.’ On that basis, Khomeini gave the call to overthrow the Shah: ‘Islam is the school of jihad, the religion of struggle; let them … transform themselves into a powerful force, so that they may overthrow the tyrannical regime imperialism has imposed on us ...’ This was effected successfully in 1979. Thus we may term the Iranian Revolution as the Victorious Revolution of the Mahdi.

This naturally brings us to Hezbollah. The internal foe in Lebanon - the Israeli occupation - was different than in Iran. Here it was externally-based, but was ‘internal’ in the sense of occupying the land. Hezbollah fused together the example of Imam Hussein in martyrdom with eschatological expectation of the Mahdi:
Hezbollah also used one of its own special types of resistance against the Zionist enemy that is the suicide attacks. These attacks dealt great losses to the enemy on all thinkable levels such as militarily and mentally. The attacks also raised the moral [i.e. morale] across the whole Islamic nation.

Sheikh Naim Qassem, Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General, made the explicit link with Hussein:
We have learned through Imam al-Hussein that the love of martyrdom is part of the love for God. We have learned to glorify jihad for the sake of Islam. Generations after al-Hussein’s resurgence in Karbala, we still learn from the magnificent accomplishments that materialized through his martyrdom. His vision was not momentary or restricted to the battle: it was directed at the future of Islam and of Muslims.

However, what is almost totally neglected in Western study of the movement is the role of the Mahdi in inspiring Hezbollah. Qassem has a section in Chapter Four called ‘The Promise of Victory’, wherein he refers to eschatological promises concerning Jerusalem:
The role of those who persevere and resist in and around the Dome of The Rock in Jerusalem is mentioned in the accounts of the Prophet (PBUH)
One sect of my people shall uphold their religion, conquer their enemy, and will never be harmed by any assailant except that which befalls them of distress and hardship, and they will remain as such until God’s order comes unto them.
When asked where this party is, the Prophet (PBUH) said: ‘In Beit-ul Maqdis (Jerusalem) and under its wings.’ Tradition also speaks of the appearance of the Twelfth Imam, Imam al-Mahdi (PBUH), who will work to purify Jerusalem. Accounts quoted from the Prophet (PBUH) state:
A man of my people treading on my path and tradition shall emerge. God shall bestow heavenly grace on him, and the land shall offer its benediction. He will disseminate justice on the land that would by then be a haven for tyranny. He works for seven years on this nation. He reaches Beit-ul Maqdis (Jerusalem).

Therefore, there is no separation between the religious duty of liberating Palestine and the Godly promise of victory.
It can be seen that Hezbollah’s jihad proceeded on the dual basis of the example of Imam Hussein and the promise of the Mahdi’s appearance. Moreover, Hezbollah clearly see their jihad as preparing for the coming of the Awaited Saviour: ‘If we are confident that our actions but pave the way for Imam

al-Mahdi’s emergence – he who will bring evenhandedness and justice after the reign of tyranny an despotism, then the future is quite promising.’ Therefore, Hezbollah’s jihad is both a microsm of the jihad of Hussein, with the Israeli government and its forces playing the role of Yazid, but also a microsm and a model of the future jihad of the Mahdi against the Dajjal and the Sufyani, with the Israelis seen as precursors of that ultimate oppressor. Thus, we can truly say that Hezbollah’s victory over the Israeli bombardment in 2006 was the Triumphant Jihad of the Mahdi. The fact of the Mahdi’s inspiration of Hezbollah’s jihad was hidden from the eyes of the Israelis. Yet for the Lebanese Shia, it was only hidden in the sense of the benefits to the Ummah of the Hidden Imam like the sun behind the clouds, as the Hadith illustrates. This is a major failing of secular Western commentators - to underestimate the power of Mahdist expectation in Hezbollah’s struggle.

4. The Reign and Coming of the Christian Saviour
The New Testament understanding of Jesus as the Saviour has a number of interesting parallels with both Imams Hussein and Mahdi. For example, like Hussein, Jesus was cruelly murdered by His religious opponents, suffering scourging (Mark 15:15) and Crucifixion at the hands of the pagan Romans (Mark 15:24), incited by the Jewish priesthood (John 19:6). Just as at Ashura Shia recall the self-sacrifice of Hussein, every time Christians celebrate the Lord’s Supper, they remember the self-sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross:
Luke 22:19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me’. 20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, ‘This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.’ (Cf. 1 Corinthians 11:24-25)

Christians believe it is by the self-sacrifice of Jesus that they are saved from Hell, admitted to Paradise and forgiven by God: Jesus stated in John 6:51 ‘I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh’; Jesus declared about the cup of wine at the Last Supper, from which the Lord’s Supper derives (Matthew 26:28): ‘this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins’.

Just as Shia hold that by weeping for the martyred Imam they have the prospect of Paradise, Christians believe that they have the absolute assurance of salvation by their faith in Jesus as the sacrificial Lamb of God, John 1:69.

However, there is a further aspect to Christ’s self-sacrifice that is relevant to our theme: the defeat of Satan. Jesus, speaking of His impending self-sacrifice on the Cross, declares ‘Now … the ruler of this world will be cast out’, (John 12:31, cf. 16:11). The Passion of Jesus at Calvary has analogies with the Passion of Hussein at Karbala: both confronted murderous tyrannical usurpers (John 8:44 – the Devil was a ‘murderer from the beginning’ i.e. of Man). Satan is depicted in the New Testament as the global usurper and tyrant – a kind of spiritual Yazid/Muawaiya.

Khomeini even referred to Yazid as a devil, again providing an analogy with the Biblical narrative, and just as the New Testament presents the self-sacrifice of Jesus as effecting the overthrow of Satan’s regime, Khomeini understood Karbala as overthrow of Yazid’s regime:
The Master of Martyrs (a.s.) rose up with a handful of disciples … As the uprising was for God, they defamed and ruined the monarchy of that devil (Yazid). Outwardly, they all got killed but their sacrifice caused the overthrow of the corrupt regime which meant to turn Islam into a tyrannous, corrupt monarchy.

We are told in 1 John 5:19 that ‘the whole world lies in the power of the Evil One.’ Satan gained control of the world through the transgression of Adam in Eden, since this allowed Sin to enter the world. By paying the price for Man’s sins, the power of the Devil was mortally wounded. What looked to the world like the defeat of Jesus was actually His triumph over Satan – Colossians 2:15: ‘When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.’ This has parallels with Karbala: Khomeini stated ‘For the Shiite Faith, Muharram is the month in which victory was achieved amid blood and sacrifice.’ Jesus triumphed by His blood: Revelation 12:11 ‘And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb’. Interestingly, Khomeini saw the triumph of Hussein over the Ummayads as resulting from the blood of the Imam:
The Master of Martyrs was slain, not defeated but, he defeated the Bani Omayyads in such a way that they could not rise again. His blood drove them away so thoroughly that even today, defeat is registered in name of Yazid and his subjects while Islam thrives by the victory of the Martyrdom of Imam Hosein (a.s.).

However, there is a further parallel. As we have seen, the self-sacrifice of Imam Hussein still left oppression in the world, and for Shia, this part of his calling is to be completed by Imam Mahdi, who will extinguish tyranny forever. Equally, Christians often speak of themselves as living between two ages – the ‘present evil age’ (Galatians 1:4), under the continued but wounded domination of Satan, and the Age to Come (Hebrews 6:5) following the Second Coming of Christ, when there will be a New Heavens and a New Earth (2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1), with Satan and his followers despatched to eternal Hell (Matthew 25:41, 46). At His first coming, Jesus said ‘The time is fulfilled, and the Reign of God is at hand’ (Mark 1:15 – meaning spatially imminent). The Greek word basileiea is best translated in most cases as ‘reign’ rather than ‘kingdom’ since it usually describes a dynamic activity than a place.

When Jesus exorcised demons, He said to the healed person ‘But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you’, Matthew 12:28. Hoekema comments: ‘The Greek verb used here, ephthasen, means has arrived or has come not is about to come.’ Yet the Reign is also future - Matthew 7:21-23; 1 Corinthians 15:50 – ‘flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God’).

How then do we resolve this apparent tension between the fact that the kingdom of God is ‘already’ and ‘not yet’? The answer is that the Kingdom of God belongs to the Age to Come - the two terms are interchangeable - Mark 10:25, 30 (‘…enter the kingdom of God …the age to come’). What has happened is that the powers of the Age to Come have invaded this present age through the Saviour, Jesus. We are presently awaiting the completion of the work wrought by Jesus at His First Coming.

After His Ascension, Jesus sat the right hand of God as Ruler and Saviour, Acts 2:33, 5:31. He is reigning now, and His reign is characterised by the subjugation of His enemies, Acts 2:34-35; 1 Corinthians 15:24-25. His Return disposes of the last enemy, death, by establishing the Resurrection Age in its fullness, v23.

5. The Solace of the Christian Saviour
In this sense, the Present Reign and Second Coming of the Biblical Saviour has parallels with that of the Shia Saviour. Both Christians and Shia believe that in some way their respective Saviours continue to intervene in human history. Both believe that their Saviours will return to complete an earlier ministry – in the case of Jesus for Christians, His Second Coming will complete the work of His First Advent, and for Shia, the Mahdi’s coming will complete the work of Hussein. As with the Shi‘ite conception of the Saviour, the Biblical Saviour provides solace in two ways.

Firstly, there is the psychological solace the Biblical Saviour gives His people in times of oppression or ordinary trouble. Jesus warned that the abiding characteristic of this present evil age is trouble, but gave solace and hope because of His triumph over Satan’s power, John 16:33: ‘These things I have spoken to you, so that in Me you may have peace In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world.’ Jesus told a congregation that they were to face suffering at the Devil’s instigation, but their martyrdom would simply be followed by Paradise, Revelation 2:10: ‘Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to cast some of you into prison, so that you will be tested, and you will have tribulation for ten days.

Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life.’ Christians are promised comfort ‘in all our affliction’ and ‘sufferings’ from Christ, 2 Corinthians 1:4-5. Because of this, Christians cans both rejoice in hope and persevere in tribulation, Roman 12:12. Christians, even when suffering terrible persecution at the hands of the Jewish authorities, the Romans or atheistic Communists, have known the supernatural solace that Jesus gives, enabling them to cope with persecution, 2 Corinthians 12:9-10. At other times miracles occur, as when the Lord sent an angel to release Peter from prison chains, Acts 12:7ff. When Paul faced persecution in Corinth, the Awaited Saviour Himself appeared, and gave him words of solace, promising Paul that Jesus would be with him, Acts 18:9-10. Thus the Christians were able to resist oppression.

The other encouragement Christians possess is that they know that the final triumph is theirs over their oppressors because of the Second Coming of Christ. Jesus will come back to punish those who persecuted His people and give Christians relief, 2 Thessalonians 1:5-7:
5 This is a plain indication of God’s righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering. 6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels…

However great the persecution they may face, Christians know that one day it will end, when Jesus returns. They also know that they may not have to wait until then, because Jesus is already enthroned in heaven, conquering His foes. Sometimes Jesus performs a miracle, such as transforming His enemies into His followers, as with Saul, the zealous Pharisee whom Jesus transformed into the Apostle Paul. Paul’s autobiographical statements demonstrate that before his conversion, he engaged in religious oppression of Christians - Philippians 3:6: ‘a persecutor of the church’. However, an event happened which changed Saul’s perception of Jesus, and thus his attitude to the Christians, namely, the vision of the Risen and Ascended Saviour on the Damascus Road:

This objective, external event had a soul-stirring effect on the very centre of Paul’s being (2 Cor 4.6; Gal 1.16)… It was the moment when Paul was transferred from his false judgement of Jesus (2 Cor 5.16; Gal 3.13) to the true knowledge of him as God’s exalted Messiah, as God’s Son, and as the Lord (2 Cor 5.16; Gal 1.16; Phil 3.8). Thus it brought about a complete change in Paul’s life: the enemy of Christ became his servant. Indeed, he was made a new creature in Christ (2 Cor 5.17).

The vision of the Ascended Saviour to Saul/Paul proved that God had raised Jesus from the dead and exalted Him to His right hand: ‘the one thing that could have convinced Paul that Jesus was the risen Lord was his Damascus-road experience; this henceforth was the essence of his gospel, and he owed it directly to that “revelation of Jesus Christ”’. The Acts record presents this as a vision of Christ in some form, Acts 9:3, 7; 26:13ff, 19. Paul himself refers to his seeing Jesus in 1 Corinthians 9:1: ‘Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?’ Similarly, in 1 Corinthians 15:8, Paul states regarding the Risen Jesus ‘He appeared to me also’.

Thereafter, he proclaimed that which he once persecuted, Galatians 1:23. Interestingly, there are parallels with the experience of people hostile to the Shi‘ite Imams, including the Mahdi whilst in Occultation, being transformed by an encounter with them:
The Almighty Allah has bestowed the Imams (a.s.) of “guiding with command”. They have the capacity to transform a period just by looking at it. Imam Hasan (a.s.) changed the Syrian foe into a humble friend, Imam Husain (a.s.) transformed Zohair Qayn, Imam Mohammad Taqi (a.s.) changed the heart of the Syrian worshipper, etc.. Similarly, Hazrat Vali-e-Asr (a.s.) has brought profound changes in the lives of people like Hasan Iraqi.

The pre-Christian Paul was ‘zealous’ – a term denoting Jewish religious fanaticism:
Zeal was more than just a fervent commitment to the Torah; it denoted a willingness to use violence against any - Jews, Gentiles, or the wicked in general - who were contravening, opposing, or subverting the Torah. Further, a zealot was willing to suffer and die for the sake of the Torah, even to die at one’s own hand...

The Israeli settler responsible for the Hebron massacre, Baruch Goldstein, was ‘zealous’ in this way: a vision from the Saviour in heaven such as that given to Paul would prevent any settlers from copying his outrage. Perhaps those who proclaim their belief in the present power of the Saviour, whether in Christian or Muslim terms, should consider that in their own minds they limit His power by neglecting the transformation that an encounter with the Saviour can accomplish on the oppressive enemy. Mohamed Mossadeq urged cheering Iranian crowds - ‘Don’t say “Death to the British!”; pray God to guide them’. Rather than saying ‘Death to America’, people in the Middle East should pray that God gives them a vision of the Saviour that transforms negative US policies.

However, for those unwilling to repent, the Ascended Saviour has other means of intervention. Jesus predicted the Destruction of Jerusalem in consequence for their rejection and murder of Him: Luke 21:22-23, 27: ‘For this is the time of vengeance in fulfilment of all that has been written... There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people... At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.’ Those responsible for the murder of Jesus were made to pay. Similarly, in Luke 19:41-44, we encounter the weeping of Jesus over the fate of Jerusalem because of its murder of the Saviour, in which a stark prophecy of the actions of the Roman soldiers in AD 70 is found, especially in v43-44 -

The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation.

Such did occur in AD 70 - the Romans surrounded the city, and besieged it for five months. After breaking through, they killed nearly everyone and levelled the city, including its Temple, home of the priesthood who incited the Romans to crucify Jesus. The irony is clear: God caused those people – the Romans - used by the Jerusalem Temple authorities to crucify the Saviour – to turn on those same oppressive authorities and destroy the central symbol of their system – the Temple. Just as the Shia Saviour is held to avenge the slaying of Hussein, the Biblical Saviour avenges His own murder.
6. The Strategy of the Saviour

In AD 70, the imperial power of its day, through the sovereign direction of God, turned on the regime it had supported in murdering the Saviour. At this juncture it is pertinent to state that just because the present global power - America - is seen by most Muslims as backing the regime oppressing Muslims and Christians, it does not follow that this will always be the case. From a supernaturalist viewpoint, it is quite possible that the power of the Saviour will transform its attitudes and policies leading America to confront such oppression. Moreover, it must be remembered that this has happened before, and this leads us to consider the strategy of the Saviour.

It is clear that the Occultation and then the manifestation of the Shia Saviour follows a clear strategy – firstly of protecting the Imam from assassination, secondly of his return in supernatural glory to battle his enemies, the Sufyani, the Dajjal and all oppressors. Similarly, the Biblical Saviour’s return has an analogous strategy- His coming completes His victory over Satan, and the Final Judgement ensues. It follows therefore that the followers of the Saviour, whether in Islamic or Christian perspectives, should also be guided by the Saviour in their struggles against oppression, and act with a conscious, workable strategy.

Khomeini, frequently recalling the sacrificial example of Hussein, had a definite strategy in Iranian Revolution. Essentially, the revolutionary jihad was an act of ‘people power’ through popular mobilisation: ‘Thousands of people died in the last months of the Shah’s regime, but they were mainly unarmed demonstrators, not guerrillas.’ A modern Western convert to Islam comments on Khomeini’s strategy in this regard:
For Imam Khomeini not only reinstituted the proper goals of a true revolution, he also defined the means: those of non-violence and the faith of an entire people in the power of martyrdom.

The most typical example of this new method was his attitude towards the army, in which the Shah had believed he possessed an invincible power, and the ‘immortal ones’ in his guard. Imam Khomeini had a different conception of power. He had the audacity to see it, not in arms, but in the inner conscience … of the soldiers. All his directives during the time of confrontation were inspired by these principles: ‘Do not attack the breasts of the soldiers, but their hearts.’ Desertions multiplied.

This non-violence, like that of Gandhi against the most powerful military and economic force of the day, was to bear fruit… It is thus that unarmed people would prevail over such a renowned and powerful army.

Similarly, Evangelical Christians have sought to extend the Kingdom of God by confronting and resisting oppression by non-violent means. The most obvious example of this is very relevant for British Christians in this year of 2007 – the abolition of slavery. It was Evangelical Christians under William Wilberforce who led a campaign of political lobbying, electoral intervention and popular boycotts of slavery products which led to the abolition of the slave trade in Britain in 1807 and of slavery throughout the Empire in 1833.

This was despite the obvious financial benefits to the British economy of slavery, and even purported security aid that the trade generated. Likewise, American Christians were in the vanguard of the fight against slavery in their country, and in both Britain and America, long the worst practitioners and sponsors of slavery in the West, became the most aggressive opponents of this oppression often obliging other countries, such as Brazil in 1885, to abandon slavery.

Perhaps this example should be instructive to the burgeoning Arab and Muslim communities in the West. Together with people from other communities, they could use their electoral numbers to mount an effective lobbying campaign against the oppression of their brothers in Lebanon and Palestine. The election of anti-war candidates in Britain and the largest rally in British history – two million people – against the Iraq war and for Palestinian liberty demonstrates the practical potential for this. What is lacking is a clear strategy - and the example of the Saviour in both Christian and Shia perspectives demonstrates the need for this.

What has guided Evangelicals in such campaigns is their belief in the self-sacrifice of the Saviour, His present reign and the desire to see His Return. In 2 Peter 3:12 Christians are urged to be ‘looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God’, i.e. the Second Coming of Christ. Christians are meant to ‘labour and strive’ for ‘godliness’ because ‘we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, especially of believers’, 1 Timothy 4:8-10, and we remember that He is in Heaven, ‘from which also we eagerly wait for a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ’, Philippians 3:20, and thus are ‘looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour, Christ Jesus’, Titus 2:13. Indeed, the Lord’s Supper demonstrates how Christians unite the functions of Hussein and the Mahdi in their Saviour, because it not only reminds them of His death, but also of His return, since they practise it ‘until He comes’, 1 Corinthians 11:26. Thus, the Lord’s Supper every Sunday gives Christians solace, both in terms of comfort and in terms of the expectation of Christ’s Return.


CONCLUSION
There are surprising analogies between the solace that Mahdist expectation gives Muslims and that which Messianic expectation gives Christians. The issue of solace in all its aspects - above all, the encouragement to prepare the way for the coming of the Saviour – is a neglected factor in Western studies of religion, largely perhaps because of the post-religious character of especially European academic discourse and its presuppositions.

Atheists and people who marginalise God simply cannot understand the idea of faith as a power to motivate people to endure oppression, and even to conquer it. This is what was so difficult for many Westerners to comprehend about the Iranian Revolution. Similarly, by all normal considerations, a few thousand poorly-armed guerrillas in Lebanon should not have been able to resist and beat the strongest military power in the Middle East, but Hezbollah did it twice. What commentators fail to notice was the power of expectation of the Saviour in motivating people in both contexts in their jihad.

Evangelical Protestants do not have a physical equivalent to jihad, but the New Testament reveals a spiritual analogy, whereby their prayers against Satan overcome him, Ephesians 6:10ff. This spiritual warfare undoubtedly helped cause the collapse of oppressive, atheistic Communism in Europe. After that collapse thriving congregations of Evangelical Protestants came to public notice, a testament to the power and solace of the Saviour in the face of oppression.

Finally, we come back to the question of tears. Women shed tears as Jesus was taken to be crucified, Luke 23:27, just as Shia shed tears for the Passion of Hussein. However, Jesus warned the women to cry for themselves, since the Judgment on Jerusalem would follow (in AD 70), v30 ‘Then they will begin to say to the mountains, “fall on us”, and to the hills, “cover us.”’. This is repeated in Revelation 6:16, where in answer to a prayer for justice and vengeance from the martyrs, v10, the terrible divine judgement fell on Jerusalem, described as ‘the wrath of the Lamb’, v16. On the other hand, the promise of God to oppressed Christians is that following the Second Coming of Christ, God ‘will wipe every tear from their eyes.

There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away’, Revelaiton 21:4 (cf. 7:17). Similarly, Shia hold that the injustice of the oppression and murder suffered by Hussein and his entourage will be avenged by the coming of the Awaited Saviour. Christians and Muslim alike in Lebanon and Palestine are awaiting their Saviour to return and liberate them. People everywhere who suffer oppression cry out for the Saviour to come and deliver them, just as oppressors should fear His coming. May God hasten His appearance!
©Dr Anthony McRoy, London, 2007

Foundations and Purposes of Imam Mahdi’s (a) Global Government

To comprehend the foundations and purposes of Imam Mahdi’s (a) global government it is necessary to analyse the prevailing world situation and how the present status will pave way for the ultimate revolution of mankind. In doing so, this paper begins by outlining the prospect of the global government and presenting the existing global conditions to draw from the need of his return. In evaluating mankind’s needs, this paper will not substantiate his return, since his coming has been ordained. It will however examine the ‘time of his appearance’ to meet these needs. These will help to formulate the purpose of his global governance. His coming will be in response to the peaceful kingdom of God on earth that has been promised to man. The paper will then cite evidence of his coming through the Quran and Hadith, to prove his return being authentic and then draw upon past governed systems to project the foundation of his governance. This will lead to proposing the foundations of the Imam’s governance in the global perspective, which will remain purely hypothetical.
The idea of a global government is not wishful thinking; rather it is an aspiration of every individual who believes in the essence of humanity and who looks towards an ideal world where kindness and humanity intertwines in spirit. This expectation of solace is geared towards the ‘Saviours return’ alias the Mahdi (a) who will lead to the emergence of the system of governance that will dominate the entire world arena. This belief in universal peace forms an anchor of faith which one cannot lose hope in, yet stirs resistance to despair and oppression. The foundation of this belief springs from several divine books such as the Quran, Torah and Psalms and the notion that ‘The righteous among my slaves shall inherit the earth". (Surah al-Anbia. 21:105) is a sign towards hope.
The current world governing powers constitutes the Group of Eight (G8) with the United States of America (US) leading. They dictate who is to be supported and maintained, who is to be alienated and sanctioned. Their decisions are based on who tows the line of the big powers or stands up to oppose them. To work against these powers often means walking alone as Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and some other nations have chosen to do. One of the global bodies which was formed to freeze world crisis was the United Nations Organization (UN). However the UN’s inability to establish authoritative rules has been its greatest failure. The genuine desire to make the UN more effective is being underplayed by forces controlling the world economy namely the G8 which is strongly influenced by the US. They are maintaining pressure to ensure international economic policy is kept out of UN’s control and transferred to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank which they totally control. Right now these very nations that talk of democracy make dirty deals with strategic allies who have no use of democratic values. These are double standard policies which govern the world.
The global situation shows that the world economy is being looted by powerful nations under the pretext of democracy. Nearly 80% of the known oil reserves of the world are in the hands of government controlled national oil companies. Countries are attacked and their economies are looted under the guise of terrorism, weapons of mass destruction and undemocratic rule, whereas the real reasons are found in enriching their own coffers and those of their allies.
The world economy is controlled by these oppressive nations. Bribery and corruption is a menace that is undermining democracy. Examples of such are like the British based company, BAE systems, the world’s largest military contactors who landed a $19 million contract with the Arabs through bribery but the prosecutor’s investigation were not concluded as Tony Blair said “it would hurt UK’s relationship with the Arabs’ which was vital to fight terrorism (The War and Peace digest, 1996). Another example is US company Halliburton winning contracts of over $600 million from the Development Fund in rebuilding Iraq, out of which more than half cannot be accounted for (Kerr, S. 2003). The real reason of invading Iraq was to take control of their oil fields and controlling their economy. Weapons of mass destruction were just a cover. This was recently admitted by Australian Defence Minister Brendon Nelson when he said, ‘securing oil supplies is a key factor behind the presence of Australian troops in Iraq’ (Sands, N. 2007). The US is still moving on to gain control of the broader Middle East economy.
It will not be surprising that the drive for Darfur may be under the same pretensions. It is common knowledge that there is oil in Southern Sudan and the reason to rush there now is under the pretensions of ‘war’. Intelligence reports indicate that the policies of the US have created more terrorists than it has killed (Nye, J. 2007). The US has enough nuclear weapons that can wipe off the whole face of the earth, yet they pose restriction to who can have these weapons and who cannot. The US administration’s plotting in acquiring power and control knows no boundaries. It takes them whatever cost to accomplish their greed. It is bent on creating divisions within the Muslim world. Their current strategy is using Muslim allies to fight Muslims within the Muslim world resulting in sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shias. The unrest in Lebanon, Syria, Palestine and Iraq are a direct result these plottings. Democracy in such countries is no longer free and fair unless the US gives its approval. The rightly voted Hamas government was ousted out by Mahmud Abbas under pressure from Israel and US. This is just one of such example. Freedom of rule is being curbed within Muslim lands for those who do not tow the line. Turkey, Iran, Syria and Lebanon are the current targets.
If we examine our environment, signs are that we are destroying our universe through our selfish ambitions. Humankind faces new untimely challenges of catastrophic climatic changes and without any aggressive preventive actions, it will lead to serious energy and climatic shocks that will disrupt agriculture, industry and people in general. The abstaining of signing the Kyoto Protocol by the US and some of its allies is a sign of defiance in maintaining a peaceful environment. Every nation must be able to take responsibility of its own actions. As Mayur Roshni, a leading urban environmentalist and head of Mumbai based Global Futures Network rightly analysed, ‘it is becoming apparent that the governments ruling the world are in fact being controlled by multinational companies who call the shots’. These trans-nationals buy governments and rule the world. Mayur further comments that ‘trans-national corporations have become the real power of the earth, the de-facto government, outside the rule of law’ (The War and Peace digest, 1996). The UN has proved ineffective in dealing with the challenges of trans-nationals like governments. These companies even walk out of the world court.
Abject poverty and suffering coupled with dependency has risen beyond the control of many nations’ power to resolve it. The benefits of globalization seem to have bypassed more than 3 billion of the world’s neediest people. When self made entrepreneurs can accumulate enough money to purchase that country then it is an embarrassment to human society. When a single person from the elite takes home monthly incomes which are 100 times more than what an average worker in society earns in a year, something is totally out of place. The imbalance in economy, power, and world control being in the hands of dictators is very evident as the gap grows wider between the elite and ordinary citizens.
People have to question their governments and the decisions their leaders make. Why do military budgets in most countries exceed health and education budgets combined?
Shirin Ebadi stated that if people want to free themselves from this cycle of terror and the wars of the 21st century then there is no other way but to put into practice the laws of human rights for all mankind (Gay, A. 2004). If enough people want change it will happen. But it cannot just happen by itself. People must be active in their pursuits for their own futures and should continue their struggle against oppression and oppressive rule. History has recorded that when the oppressed rise against their oppressors in unison, their might and power crushes the fort of the oppressors. The uprising of the people against the apartheid in South Africa and the rising of the people against the Pahlavi regime of Iran are some valid examples. This indicates that real power is in the hands of the ordinary, when they are driven with faith in their struggle for justice. Then no matter how sophisticated the weaponry or military, the opposition have, the will of perseverance leads the down trodden to victory. The Mahdi’s (a) revolution will bring triumph of the downtrodden people as in reality they are the majority and form the real manpower. The world scenario depicts the stage being right for the coming of the saviour as narrated from the Hadith. However at this point it cannot be ascertained as to how close we are to that time, since that will depend on the will and actions of the people and God’s command.
The number of true people needed to set off this revolution may just be 313 (Al-Bahrani H., 2006). This is indicated as the initial force required by the Imam when he reappears. In assessing this number one cannot be sure whether we have reached the target or not, or have we surpassed this number and wait for it to dwindle to these few? It is difficult to conclude; however the general feeling is that there may not be enough individuals with the will to save humanity at large. Although there are those who are willing and are concerned with fighting oppression and injustice, they may be operating within their own regions. The scale of this global revolution requires those who will fight for all mankind. This will then pave way for the global rule of Imam Mahdi (a) as mankind’s problems can no longer be solved by national governments whose interests lie only in promoting national interests.
World governance is now necessary to match global institutions of civil society with a global reach. A need for structural change reflecting a full range of world member states is direly essential. The power of veto which gives favour and power to certain ‘godly’ states is unrealistic and needs to be abolished. What is needed urgently is one unified government to take control of governing the globe. Re-distribution is the core political issue of the coming century. There has to be a shift of paradigm to be able to develop improvement in human conditions. A just and sustainable society for the people rather than sustained economic growth and building of fortunes and power houses is what humanity requires.
It is not possible to justify fully all the issues facing mankind in such a short discussion: nevertheless having presented some of the issues facing human kind today, the situation depicts the need of a saviour. This analysis should not be considered as the need to justify the reason for the reappearance of the Imam as that is inevitable and has been ordained. The promise of God in spreading His religion in the Quran (Tawbah 9:33) certifies that it is He who has sent His messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to make it prevail over every other religion, however much the disbelievers dislike. Therefore the coming of the last awaited guide is a known fact to all believers and the issues facing mankind indicate that the appropriate time of his reappearance is not very far (Sheriff Dewji, M. 1982). The Holy Prophet (saw) emphasized on waiting for this last from his Ahlul Bait and encouraged joining hands with him. He said: ‘if you see him then pledge allegiance to him even if you have to crawl on an iceberg, because he is the Caliph of Allah, \'The Mahdi\' (Sihah e Sitah). The emphasis laid by the Prophet (saw) was to draw attention of the people to recognise the status of the Imam being a divine representative and for men to join hands with him to achieve salvation. Nonetheless, it will not be easy to make this pledge as the revolution of the Imam will not be an ordinary one. It will bring a sea of change in the cosmic order.
The present world governances depict oppressive rule of democracies, favoured military supremacy, bribery and corruption, enriching of powerful nations, unfair distribution of the economy, polluting of the environment with no accountability, poverty and war, which leaves the majority of the world citizens in dependency and despair. The purpose of the global revolution in the coming of Imam Mahdi (a) will be to rid man of these situations
Appleby S (2007) in ‘Solutions to save the world’ proposes that if meaningful alliances are to be made among societies that have recently clashed or harbour historic resentments, religion must play a central role. Such thoughts are an indication that human society is becoming more aware of the need of faith and conviction. The coming of the Imam will address this need and release man from slavery and enable him to realise his true worth.
To be able to put forward the foundation of Imam’s governance and the events that will develop is like putting forth a hypothesis. The fact that our knowledge about future events is limited, it is challenging for anyone to define exactly what the future destiny holds for mankind. As there is not enough supporting evidence to back up or deduce the coming events that will procreate after the coming of the Imam, the analysis presented forth is based from historical recordings of his ancestors and the traditions from the household of the Prophet (saw). The basis of argument is thus taken from literature with aspiration from Sura Nur (24:54) in which God gives glad tidings to the righteous people by saying….‘God has promised those of you who believe and do righteous deeds that He will surely make you successors in the land’. These indicators point to his rule being a reality; however it is defining the proposed manner of governance that is hypothetical.
In presenting forth the foundation of Imam’s governance, it is necessary to demonstrate the situation that will face him on appearance, how he will handle this situation, what principles he will adopt in governing, the kinds of people and nations he will need to come to his support and the mandate of his rule.
The reign to his rule will not be a smooth takeover. Just like the Qureish who fought the Prophet (saw) to exile, the perpetrators will challenge the Imam equally. Their arrogance will blind their vision and greed will overcome their reason: however the rule of man will be in accordance to what God has planned. The struggle against tyrants will not be something new as the Quran documents histories of Prophets who rose and fought against the tyrants to liberate the people from the shackles of oppression (Nahl 16: 36).
The situation that will face Imam on his coming will be quite similar to that which faced his grandfather Ameerul Momineen, Ali ibne Abi Taleb (as). At that time people had lost sympathy for their government and were openly hostile to it. Rank, favouritism and greed had led to chaos resulting in people losing every respect for authority and they revolted. The revolt was due to the terrible treatment from the oppressive regime and its refusal in listening to the people’s grievances. The people had also realised that they were being kept ignorant of the true teachings of Islam and were made to concentrate on worldly benefits. Ameerul Momineen (as) thus led the people on a path of tranquility and justice by restoring human values (Reza, A., 2000). The world situation today too has no place for religion and society has no room for humility or modesty. The focus is more towards material gain which does not provide contentment, and in search for this, man will look for a system that will lead him towards inner peace and restoration of his dignity. This will be the system that Imam ul Asr will rise to offer.
The hope for the Saviour is not only anticipated amongst Muslims, but also shared among great religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Zoroastrianism who await the coming of the king in the last days. In this quest for the saviour of truth there is no ‘distinction of caste, creed, or country, the quest is universal, exactly in the same way as Mahdi (a) himself is universal’ (Al-Sadr, B; Mutahhari, M). The solace is that his coming will be followed by the coming of Prophet Isa (as) who will join hands with the Imam. It will behove his followers to follow in his foot steps. This will see the combining of forces of Islam with Christianity that will spring forth a force large enough to form the ruling majority. However there will be no compulsion for anyone to join the Imam as freedom of worship will prevail.
The Holy Prophet (saw) said: ‘The Qaim among my children will have my name, possess my features, follow my conduct and command people to my obedience and to my law and will call them to the book of the my Lord’ (Amini I, 2003). Consequently it is fair to imagine that the Imam will govern under a similar charter as the Holy Prophet (saw) did with the citizens of Yathrib. Among the clauses of the Yathrib Charter were:
All practising Jews will enjoy the same rights as Muslims; however they will not meddle in the affairs of each other.
In the event of an attack, all will rise to defend the central government
(Bodley R., 1946).
Therefore just as the Jews enjoyed security and freedom, all other religions will be offered the same treatment. Freedom in practising religion will be upheld and through this act of equality and justice, people will be drawn towards the true Islam.
His appearance will spring forth from the House of Allah and will spread towards Kufa and beyond. The city of Qum has been indicated to be the centre of piety and the teachings of Islam will be proclaimed from it. Upon his establishment he will first address the believers and bring to task those who have shunned their responsibility. He will question why people have abandoned the essence of religion to fit their preferred meanings. They will be given an opportunity to re-learn Islamic social and moral teachings and apply it to their lives. The whole approach towards real Islam will surface and eliminate practices of sinful behaviour. Paying lip service to the sacrifice of Imam Hussein (as) will be seen as destroying the goals of Kerbala. Piety will not be limited to the mosques but will require participation of everyone in society by exercising the duty of commanding good and forbidding evil and fighting off innovations that have invaded Islam.
The foundation of governance will surpass any current governing system. The transition from injustice and turmoil to tranquility and peace will not be a smooth one. His first and foremost directive will be maintaining a powerful army in order to gain control of territories. With the support of his 313 close helpers, the Imam (a) will establish a Central Bureau of governance. He will appoint governors among these 313 to represent the approximately 200 countries of the world. The Imam will lead the hub of this governance.
In forming the foundation of his global government, Imam Mahdi (a) shall realize the principles of all Prophets in the path of truth. His coming will materialise the failing and collapse of the current governances.
With the coming of the Imam the oppressing powers ruling the earth will be defeated as promised… “every nation can only live for an appointed time. When its term ends, it will not remain alive for a single hour nor will they die before the appointed hour’ (Surah al A\'raf 7:34 and Surah al-Nahl 16:61). His mandate in establishing a world government will focus on reclamation and rehabilitation of the whole earth so that no area remains wasted. It will involve the maximum utilization of the gifts of the earth and will strive for equal distribution of wealth and property among all human beings. He will open the scope of opportunities for everyone and all the lands will derive benefit from their own natural resources. The syndicate of the multinationals to loot any country’s oil or gas reserves will be sanctioned and natural resources will benefit the people of their own land. The Imam’s government will ensure that there is no monopoly or restrictions in military power or technology. The prospect of eradicating weapons of mass destruction will be witnessed and the will to abide by nuclear non-proliferation treaty will be controlled by the Imam. The finances used to acquire weapons will be diverted to alleviate poverty. It is only then that the millennium development goals will be fully realised, as the means to serve humanity will be led by one whose aim will not be in promoting himself but in developing human kind.
The government will endeavour to eradicate all vices that have engulfed mankind such as adultery, fornication, usury, intoxication, treachery, theft and homicide. The mission will also focus on eradication of war and restoration of peace, friendship and co-operation with coherence between man and nature (Al-Sadr, B.; Muttahari, M.).
It will be a government based on righteousness, virtue, justice and will lead people to freedom from forces of egoism, tyranny, deceit and fraud. He will bestow recognition to every human being, irrespective of his religious background with peace and equality. His foundation will be to ‘restore man to follow the true path of religion of their own free will and develop the habit of simple living and high thinking and give up the desire of seeking undue favours and unjustifiable pleasures’. This is the kind of men God and the Prophet wanted people to be. He will attach more importance to general welfare than to personal good. He will introduce equality and equity and make people accept the principles of brotherhood of man and general amity towards human beings. He will make people model subjects of the kingdom of God, to be adopted by those who desire peace and prosperity under a benign rule (Reza A., 2000).
Reference of the fall of oppressors taking place is cited in many supplications of the Ahl ul Bait, but most beautifully in the supplication of Nudba (Almanac) where the news of the demolisher of polytheist and hypocrisy will spread the flag of victory and annihilate the oppressors. The supplication of Iftitah also describes how his coming will put ‘order into our affairs and gather and unite the flocks of believers and increase the numbers from being minority and easing of difficulties (Kassamali, H.; T.). These citations offer proof to the kind of rule that we look forward to. It is through supplications that we realize the importance of the belief in the Mahdi (a) as a form of salvation from hopelessness. Persistence in this belief brings about certitude in waiting for his appearance. It is this hope that gives reason to perseverance in today’s struggles.
To bring about such an unparalleled revolution, the Imam will need a legion of companions who are determined and can endure all sorts of untold calamities in their way. The men who will form the Imam’s government and become his army generals will need to have strong commitment in serving God. These qualities will be found in the 313 who will come immediately to help Imam (a) after his appearance.
It is not possible to determine which country or nation will lead in backing the Imam’s revolution. It is likely that Muslims will rise in unison to defeat the big powers. On the other hand it could also be isolated states joining hands and coming to heed the call of Tawhid to take up the challenge of becoming leaders of human civilization. It is the response to his call that will decide who takes precedence in offering support to the Imam’s revolution.
Will the people accept him as a true leader? This may not be very difficult, as human beings are becoming more aware that their traditions and religions do not have the ability to satisfy their conscience. The natural thirst in moving towards God and the search for attaining peace has not been quenched. Thus this drive in search of truth will lead people to be open and approachable for the right guidance and when Imam Mahdi (a) will present the true Islam, it will appeal to their hearts and they will come towards the truth. It will be a time when human beings will have attained the level of perfection that is necessary to accept the government of truth (Amini A., 2003). The time will then be right for the world stage to relive the scene of the Prophet’s (saw) victory at the time of Fath Makka in 8 A.H (Razwy A.,1997) with the banner of ‘truth has come and falsehood has vanished` (Isra 17:81).
This final rule on earth will be the result of the toil of 124,000 Prophets and the 11 guided Imams and this governance will prevail to show the manifestation of the Almighty. The essence of the whole creation of mankind will come to life on this stage. It will be a time when man will witness the rule of justice and peace functioning on a global scale. When the final victory will prevail over all evils, the Imam will govern the world under one Islamic government. His appointed governors will rule under his guidance and the rulings will reflect the most equitable for the right and be the most universal way of justice. The fundamental constitution will reflect the rights of the ummah. The ummah of Islam will comprise members living anywhere on earth and also include non Muslims living in the Muslim lands who are at peace with Islam. The ummah will also comprise members who will perform collective responsibilities and attain collective well being and will be bound by moral outlook with a commitment to do what is right and shun what is wrong. The significance of this ummah will be the absence of any racial, political, territorial or any other discrimination. A similar rule of this notion of the ummah was started by Ameerul Momineen Ali ibne Abi Taleb (as) during the period of his Khilafat.
In conclusion the foundation of the governing rule will uphold the famous creed of Ali ibne Abi Taleb to his governor whereby he declared:
“Control your passions and check your hearts from doing what is not lawful for you. Train your heart to feel compassion for the people, to love them and be kind to them. Do not stand over them like a ferocious beast. For the people are of two categories: If he is not a brother to you in religion, he is a fellow like you in humanity’. (Extract from the document of the letter of Ameerul Momineen sent to Malik e Ashtar, Nahjol Balagha).
The supremacy of God in His might to manifest Himself as the Most Kind and Merciful Lord through His last guide, the Mahdi (a) will then become apparent. The Imam (a) will triumph and the people will finally realise the essence of real living within the spectrum of brotherhood. Islam will conquer the hearts of man and become the rule of the globe.

References
Al-Bahrani, H. (2006). The Qaem in the Quran. Miami. Shiabooks.ca Press
Almanac (English version of Mafaatehul Jinaan) (1994). Karachi. P.E.T Publications
Al-Sadr, B. & Mutahhari, M. The Awaited Saviour. Karachi. Islamic seminary Publications. http://www.al-islam.org/awaited/index.htm
Amini, Ibrahim. ((2003). Al-Imam al-Mahdi The Just Leader of Humanity. Qum. Ansariyan Publications
Appleby R.S (2007 May|June) 21 Solutions to save the world: A radical Solution
http://www.foreignpolicy.com
Bodley, R.V.C. (1946) The Messenger (the Life of Muhammad). Garden City, New York. Doubleday and Company
Gay, A. (2004 May 24). The Standford Daily. Ebadi Speaks on Democracy and Human Rights. http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2004/5/24/Ebadispeaks
Sehah e Sitah Imam Mahdi in Sehah Sitah. Sunane ibn-Majah: tradition 4084. http://www.e-resaneh.com/English/ImamMAHDI/htm
Kerr, S. (2003). Looting Iraq by Executive Orderhttp://www.zmag.org/content/print_article
Kassamali, H & T. (1996) A Manual of Ramadhan Devotions, Tayyiba Publishers & Distributors. Richmond B.C.
Mamdani, M. (2004). Good Muslim, Bad Muslim, Kampala. Fountain Publishers: Dar es salaam. E & D Limited
Nye, J. (2007 May|June) 21 Solutions to save the world: A Smarter superpower
http://www.foreignpolicy.com
Rafsanjani, H. (1994). Social Justice & Racial Discrimination. Islamic Organization Publication
Razwy, A. A. (1997). A Restatement of the History of Islam and Muslims. The World Federation of K S I Muslim Communities. USA
Reza, Sayyid Ali. (2000). Nahjol Balagha (Peak of Eloquence). Qum. Ansariyan Publications
Sands, N. (2007, July 5). Oil a key Factor in Australian role in Iraq: Minister. Agence France Press http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/05/2301/
Sheriff Dewji, M. (1982). Imame Zaman Hazrat Mehdi (A.S). Dar es salaam. Literary Section Ithnaasheri Union
The War & Peace Digest, April/May 1996, Vol.4.No,1 p.6 . How Transnationals Buy Governments (and rule the world).

 Imam Al-Mahdi (as) and opponents: The dialectic of complementarity and contradiction

of good and evil. The struggle between these two poles will continue until the Day of Judgment. However, this point may appear controversial and should, therefore, be fully discussed and concretely established before delving into the details of the theoretical propositions of this paper.
The Establishment of Conflict and Complementarity
The conflict between evil and good may be traced back to ancient times. Some may presuppose that the struggle between these two poles cannot be tracked to the ancient epochs as it is based, for the main part, on the production tools of the industrial society, as espoused by the Marxist material dialectic; however, it would be more reasonably realistic to accept that it certainly has existed since the earliest days of the human species on this earth and shall continue until the Day of Judgment. It may assume different forms, represented by outwardly different figures, but what counts is the essence of these forces rather than their various external manifestations. Also, what we mean by evil is that party which opposes Divine will and the rightly guided party of Almighty God (swt). Some think this might be summarized in one characteristic, i.e. possession or otherwise of the fear of Allah.
The conflict between good and evil is established in the majority of sacred books, albeit with dissimilar references and terms. The Qur\'an has emphasized the existence of this distinction as well as the fight in the story of Adam\'s sons after the first division took place between them when Abel, the potential victim, upon hearing his brother\'s pronouncement of intention to kill him, strongly despising such an act – and despite being fully aware of the risk of being killed for doing so - declared:
“.لئن بسطت إلي يدك لتقتلني ما أنا بباسط يدي لأقتلك إني أخاف الله رب العالمين”
“Even if you stretch forth your hand towards me in order to kill me, I will never stretch out a hand towards you to kill you. I fear God, Lord of the Universe!” Qur’an 5:28
By the end of this paper we shall refer to the Qur’anic verse which is both linked to the Imam Al-Mahdi (as) and his opponents and to the status of fearing Allah. The only difference is that the conflict was manifested here in individual representation, while our discussion topic goes beyond, extending the matter to communities, groups and, ultimately, various societies. However, the essence is contradiction between two totally different forces. This shall lead us to a thorough discussion of contradiction and its philosophical definition within the social arena.
Contradiction as a General Concept
One studies contradiction in Aristotelian formal logic in simple concepts, particularly in the propositional. The definition and the conditions are different compared to the social field and political philosophy. It is clearly obvious that the logical definition of contradiction – within Aristotelian frameworks - is not applicable to societies and the principles governing them, as both the concepts and compounds within the formal logic never claimed to apply such rules to the societal field. We, therefore, face two concepts with totally different connotations yet dissimilar meaning. As this discussion necessitates the study of contradiction and dialectic throughout the latest philosophical discussions, we are forced to discuss the Marxist and the Hegelian models of contradiction, paving the way for analyzing the recent brainchild of Huntington and his clash of civilizations.
Contradiction within Marxism in the Social Field
In dialectical materialism, contradiction, as derived by Karl Marx from Hegelianism, usually refers to an opposition of conflicting social forces. According to Marx, most prominent is the fact that capitalism promotes a social structure which has contradictions because the social classes have conflicting collective goals. These contradictions stem from the lethargic social function of the society\'s structure and inherently lead to class conflict, economic crisis, and eventually revolution, the existing order\'s overthrow and the formerly oppressed classes\' ascension to political power. Thus for formal societal approaches, the main predication of \'dialectical opposition or contradiction\' must be understood as \'some sense\' opposition between the objects involved in a directly associated context. \'Dialectical contradiction\' is not reducible to simple \'opposites\' or \'negation\'.
According to Marxist thinkers, dialectics is the science of the general and abstract laws of the development of nature and society. We are going to introduce their ideas based on Friedrich Engels. These principal features might be introduced as four, which are:
1. The universe, far from being a disconnected mixture of separate isolated entities, is an integral whole, with resultant universal interdependency. To sum it up: The law of unity and conflict of opposites.
The first of Engel\'s laws or expressions was seen by Hegel as the central feature of a dialectical understanding of things. Hegel wrote:
"It is in this dialectic as it is here understood, that is, in the grasping of oppositions in their unity, or of the positive in the negative, that speculative thought consists. It is the most important aspect of dialectic."
This principle may be easily acceptable as Muslim social philosophers have repeatedly emphasized this very point; however, astute thinkers may distinguish between various groups co-existing within a society, and reach different conclusions regarding each individual community. We cannot, therefore, accept this principle in its vague formulation.
2. Nature - the natural world or cosmos - is in a state of constant motion. Some have formulated these changes to occur either generally or in the particular form of quantitative into qualitative. Friedrich Engels, the German philosopher, wrote in his \'Dialectics of Nature\':
"All nature, from the smallest thing to the biggest, from a grain of sand to the sun, from the protista to man, is in a constant state of coming into being and going out of being, in a constant flux, in a ceaseless state of movement and change."
While the second principle is widely accepted within the milieu of Muslim philosophers - in particular the Sadrian (Al-Harakah Al-Jawhariyyah), it is nevertheless unclear how this could be applied within the social field. The exception is where it could be used to prove the need for Divine power and guidance, something which the materialistic dialectic has rejected since its establishment. We find ourselves forced to discuss the other part of this principle as a separate issue.
3. Development is a process whereby insignificant and imperceptible quantitative changes lead to fundamental, qualitative changes. The latter occur not gradually, but rapidly and abruptly, in the form of a leap from one state to another. A simple example from the physical world might be the heating of water: a one degree increase in temperature is a quantitive change, but at 100 degrees there is a qualitative change - water to steam.
This principle is probably taken by Hegel from Aristotle, and is equated with what scientists call "phase transitions". In each case, the phase transition of water is one of the main expositions of quantity into quality and vice versa. Karl Marx has also emphasized this law in his Capital.
"Merely quantitative differences, beyond a certain point, pass into qualitative changes."
As regards this principle, we may view the case from a specific angle as, within the social field, we found it difficult to adopt as a constant clear-cut rule where conditions supposedly bring about transformation from quantitative to qualitative, as societal factors are flexible and depend on many varying factors that can affect the destiny and future of the whole society. One is also able to defend an approach where contradiction may tend to affect the human societies within themselves, i.e. individuals whereby parts of the whole shall reach perfection towards elevated positive levels, and others may descend to ultimate lower levels.
4. All things contain within themselves internal dialectical contradictions, which are the primary cause of motion, change, and development in the world. This principle might be formulated as: The law of the negation of the negation.
The principle of the negation of the negation is Hegel\'s distinct expression. It was the expression through which, amongst others, Hegel\'s dialectic became fashionable during his life-time, notwithstanding his vague formulation; interpretation will be a difficult task. There is much related literature and many philosophical theories – amongst which one has, oneself, developed an innovative theory though we are not going to discuss it in this article. However, speaking critically and briefly – and interpreting solely from a materialistic context - one can straightforwardly reject the need for internal contradiction in order to perpetuate motion and to keep things changing and moving towards different levels. Further explanations might be needed in the next few paragraphs to elaborate upon this idea and to strengthen its depth.
Before concluding, there is a need, at this point, to emphasise that dialectical materialism is often defined by reference to two claims by Marx: first that he "put Hegel\'s dialectics back on its feet" and second, that "the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." See (The Communist Manifesto, 1848). Dialectical materialism is essentially characterized by the belief that history is the product of class struggle obeying the general Hegelian principle of philosophy of history that is the development of thesis into its antithesis which is sublated by the "Aufhebung" (~synthesis, a word that Hegel was loathe to use) - which conserves thesis and antithesis while simultaneously abolishing it. Thus the conflict of society\'s classes is a necessity for history\'s development, and adheres to the Hegelian principles of history.
In conclusion, within this dialectic, the process of modification through the conflict of opposing forces, whereby a given contradiction is characterized by a primary and a secondary aspect, the secondary succumbing to the primary is then transformed into an aspect of new contradiction.
Ayatollah S. M. B. As-Sadr differs from Marx regarding the origin of social contradiction. Marx relates contradiction to the growth of means of production. Although As-Sadr pictured the rise of contradiction in social relations due to the changing economic conditions of society, he regarded the real cause behind it not as consisting of external-environmental conditions, but rather as resting within man, himself. Man is not always the product of his environment, which itself is shaped by his mentality, thoughts and activities. The development of economic conditions is his doing, and social relationships are developed and organized to meet his needs. It was his intellectual and physical capabilities that made it possible for man to enhance his living conditions. Without these faculties, the external conditions would have remained the same since the dawn of history. The reason behind the rise of the social contradiction is that man deviated from the way of God. Changes in the conditions surrounding man would only serve as instigators of man\'s mental capabilities. They act as \'raw material\' for promoting and stimulating the appetite for the human brain to work. Change of environmental condition gives man the ability to develop new tools or means of production to counteract the effects of the changing conditions. He states:
‘...the natural forces of production do not, by themselves, reach their [state of] perfection and growth, or quicken their development and maturation, but rather they only instigate the senses and the thinking of man. Their natural development, thus, is not [the result of a] dialectical process, and the positive effect [i.e., the emancipation of life] does not emerge from this development. Rather, the forces of production are governed by an historical factor that is superior to them.’
That superior factor, according to Sadr, is the human ego of mankind, himself. Hence, the primary factor behind the contradictions that exist in society is, according to Sadr, not changing economical conditions (forces of productions) but rather the contradictions within man himself. The Holy Qur’an made it explicitly clear:
"كلا إن الإنسان ليطغى، أن رآه استغنى."
“However man acts so arrogant, for he considers he is self-sufficient.” Qur’an 96:7
"إن الله لا يغير ما بقوم حتى يغيروا ما بأنفسهم."
“God does not change what any people may have until they change whatever they themselves have.” Qur’an 13:11
Thus the historical process can be defined between two poles of political thinking; those who would like to protect their interests and retain the existing system of alienation indefinitely, and those who would like to revolt and replace the existing oppressive system of social relations with a just one.
The natural course of action for the deprived and weak has always been to lead a revolution against corrupt oppressive political regimes. The history of revolutions, according to Sadr, has taken two different routes to confront unjust social structures. The first is revolution that advocates the elimination of materialistic forms of societal oppression, considered as forms of alienation, encountered by the downtrodden on a daily basis. These feelings of exploitation by the masses lead them first to silent opposition. When oppression continues, they organize their effort in vocal political movements that give voice to their demands upon the system. These groups eventually resort to violent actions when all else fails. Revolutions of this type of movement mobilize masses on the basis that a new system would distribute wealth and resources to all members of society and eliminate privilege for the upper dominate class. However, such revolutions, while concerned about certain kinds of social needs, are short-sighted. The masses would continue to face other forms of alienation in the post-revolutionary system. The oppressed of yesterday would become the masters, and thus, the oppressor of today. The whole historical process would repeat itself with new players. Thus, "the revolution would only change the position of exploitation, but would not accomplish its elimination." That is probably why Marx considered the existence of a historical dialectic process whereby each rising class resorts to oppressive means and measures to protect its interests against other groups, i.e., every thesis gives rise to an antithesis.
The second type of revolutionary process is one that tries to eliminate the source of alienation rather than merely emphasizing elimination of its materialistic contradictions. It is a revolution that would resort to the creation of new social values that would see an end to all sources of exploitation. The revolution that would advocate the values of justice, righteousness, and equality that stem from belief in God is the only revolution that would secure man from the domination and exploitation of other powers. It is the total surrender of man to God that would free him from surrendering to others. When the revolution advocates the equality of all people, it must be on the basis that all are equal before God and no single group has special rights with respect to others. When such revolutionaries try to eliminate the means of control of the dominate group, it is not because of a belief that they have no right to reign, but because all people have equal right to govern before God and act as His representative on earth. Sadr called the latter type of revolution the \'(Divine) real revolution\' and the former the \'(Taghuti) relative revolution.\'
These few sentences have been an attempt to establish a correction of the theoretical Marxist approach, and while touching on the theoretical version of social contradiction, they should suffice to lead us to profoundly study and extensively examine the new approach, including its relation to Real Practiced Life.
Examining the Authenticity of Dialectical Marxism in Practice:
The Role of Religion in Mobilizing the Masses towards Revolution
The last few decades of the last century witnessed a new phenomenon, namely the Islamic revolution of Iran, where religion demonstrably played a major role in mobilizing the masses for the purpose of a national cause, simultaneously inspiring aspirations of International proportions with regard to the oppressors happily hogging their way around the globe. However, there are some politically observant and strategic analysts who have tried to trivialise or belittle the role of religious ideology in forming and motivating the forces of the revolution.
In his book: \'Six theories of the Victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran\', Haghighat edited an article entitled: \'The Role of Ideology, Leadership and People in the Islamic Revolution\' by Manoochehr Mohammdi that states that religion was the main factor for the victory of the Islamic revolution. Analyzing the main ideologies that could and eventually did influence the destiny of the revolution, we read in the article by Mohammadi:
\'In Iran, since long ago and from the early years of the present century, three different eastern and western ideologies have attracted different social groups. These are Nationalism, Marxism-Leninism, and Islam. Their advocates have endeavoured to gather a following by painting their own picture of ideal society. Nationalism, in the minds race, incorporates historical background, language, culture and traditions of people, who have gathered inside a set of geographical boundaries as an undissociatable unit, and considering such, honour it as friendly and otherwise as alien and enemy. The Marxist movement, despite the extensive efforts made, was less successful than nationalism in Iran for two reasons:
The atheistic structure and materialistic nature of Marxism-Leninism contradicted the Iranian society\'s nature and their deep religious beliefs. Thus, it could not find popular acceptability.
The extensive affiliation of Marxists to Moscow resulted in their becoming regarded "as a result of the bitter experiences of Iranian-Russian relation",
or as a group of Russian puppets. However, Islam as a divine school of thought had historical roots in the minds of various classes of people. A society with 98% of its members being traditional Muslims, and most of them adhering to their divine book\'s commands, is well prepared to accept revolution.\'
Many have rejected the idea that religion, and in particular Islam could have played a strong role in the people\'s motivation towards revolting against the Shah. Mohammadi writes:
\'Among the main arguments against this ideology being used as the ideology of the revolution are:
Many years of western imperialist propaganda had inspired the notion that, "Religion should be separated from politics and have no relationship with socio-political problems". This program of insinuation had affected various classes of people and even some of the clergy and religious authorities.
The ideal society that Islam intended to establish belonged to 14 centuries in the past and many believed it impossible to establish its orders in the modern era. Doubts existed whether it could answer the present epoch\'s conundrums.
Reliance on some of the Islamic principles, such as dissimulation and waiting for the advent of the 12th Imam in Shi\'ah tradition and obeying the designated guardian among the Sunnis, had left no room, not even in the minds of some true Muslims, for the idea that Islam could be wielded as a revolutionary ideology for changing the prevailing values.\'
After discussing many of the abovementioned points he insists:
\'The evidence in all of these popular and mass movements proves that the essential accelerating factor in the revolution had a purely religious aspect and was related to the insulting article as follows:
From January 10, 1978 till the victory of the revolution, all of the demonstrations had a religious aspect and were performed using religious traditions, ceremonies and festivities, (like Ashura, the 40th day mourning ceremony, and religious festival), and had no other distinguishing traits.
The starting and ending points of the demonstrations were at mosques and the regime showed its enmity to religion by attacking the Great Mosque of Kerman, Habib Mosque in Shiraz, and Lonradeh Mosque in Tehran, trying to stop these gatherings.
Invitation for the gatherings for street marches and leadership of the demonstrations were accomplished by the scholars. Non-religious leaders never had any role in administering and leading the demonstrations. Even when the National Front, trying to test its power, declared a strike and street march on the 40th day of mourning for the martyrs of Black Friday, it was unsuccessful. These initiatives had no relationship with the more open political atmosphere or Carter\'s human rights, policy, but they were brutally and ruthlessly answered. Even American so-called human rights supporters encouraged and supported the Shah in these acts of brutality.
People\'s slogans and requests were religious and political, and were based on two axes: Firstly the Shah\'s leaving and the fall of the Pahlavi regime, and secondly, establishing an Islamic state. Non-religious groups had no choice but to join the Muslim masses and were thus forced to abandon their own slogans so as not to face popular objection.
He concludes at the end of his article:
\'The greatest role in the victory of the revolution in Iran was played by religion and the school of martyrdom. Any attempt to relate it to issues such as Carter\'s human rights policy, the coalition of various forces, nationalistic movements, and so on, is distortion of reality and disagrees with documented historical facts.\'
This fact is also shared and confirmed by sharp and astute Western writers, such as Fred Halliday who, in an article titled: The Contradictory Legacies of Ayatollah Khomeini: The Iranian Revolution at Twenty presented in a London International Conference in 1999, wrote describing the above mentioned elements as follows:
“Khomeini had built a regime that combined religious and ideological authority with strong security system….The Iranian revolution claimed to be a novel kind of revolution, and many outside Iran agreed with this: this was a revolution made in the name of religion, and led by the clergy. This has never happen before in the history of modern revolutions. There were indeed other elements of novelty: this… Its ideological character was evident in the fact that it did not seek to invoke a long set of predecessors: Khomeini insisted…. The only model was that of the Prophet in the seventh century.
It is explicitly emphasizing that the Islamic revolution produced a new model for revolution in modern history that was both ideological and religious. Two factors combined to demonstrate in favour of Islam at the beginning of the third millennium.
The revolution faced many challenges and succeeded in stabilising and dynamically carrying out its functions. What was remarkable to observe was the domino effect collapse of the Communist states which had for so many years served as staunch rivals to the capitalist model. This has provided an extremely significant opportunity to revive the role of religion and the Divine values within the everyday life of the human being. The transformation or the influence of Divine values on the International arena was witnessed by politicians and strategists. Referring to this remarkable change, Shirin Hunter wrote the following in an article entitled: “The Post-Soviet International System and the Dialogue of civilizations”:
- “Between 1950s and 1970s, these efforts (referring to the United Nation Charter and the activities of other countries struggling to achieve independence within the International arena) were related mostly to issues of political and economic independence and to trying to [become part] of the International political system. In the 1980s, however, cultural and value-related issues acquired greater importance, and this trend was strengthened in the 1990s, following the Soviet Union collapse. Today, cultural and civilisational issues are key elements of the International discourse and inter and intra-state relations.”
While ideology and religion - especially Islam in the case of the Soviet failure in Afghanistan – provided an indispensable service in effecting the failure of communism, one could have possibly prognosticated the ideology, in general, and Islam in particular, to be central to the mind of strategists and theoreticians alike were it not for the number of remaining doctrinaires who were either not vigilantly engaged in scrutinizing the International arena, or who wilfully ignored this enormous ideological role, preferring to jettison the importance of religion. Some leading political figures espoused the idea of a "New World Order" with the existence of a single world Mega Power. However, they felt less at home with the resulting un-confrontational vacuum; having an adversary served well for uniting inner fronts in the face of a (real or imagined) major external enemy. In order to groom the everyday minds of leaders, minions and masses actively in the same direction, it was assumed that Islam could fill the void and become the perfect alternative bogeyman. Speaking about a \'New World Order\' was a politically motivated vague formulation and an attempt to present American Western hegemony over the rest of the world. It was not, however, shaped as an intellectual theory nor received as a well formulated theorem from a charismatic individual. The reason should be intrinsically clear as simply highlighting a fact is not an exceptional accomplishment, nor a great task entrusted to a magnificently charismatic global leadership.
Again, it was left to an American thinker to produce a theory to serve as Trojan Horse, saving ship, and dynamic vehicle within the \'New World Order\'. The theory of the \'Clash of Civilizations\' was introduced in a book by Samuel Huntington. He, a US political scientist, was "the director of security-planning for the National Security Council" in the White House regime of Jimmy Carter. Huntington has had access to a lot of very interesting behind-the-scenes data denied to lesser mortals. The ideas in this book were first presented in a lecture at the Washington "American Enterprise Institute." One of the crucial purposes and motivation for Huntington\'s brainchild lay in this factor, as, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, some considered the world could finally be able to breathe a sigh of relief due to the death of the cold war. According to the ideas in Huntington\'s book, however, one should not take that breath of relief as humanity\'s destiny has been ensnared, once again, by a huge, profound and wider global Clash. As he put it, paving the way for presenting his brainchild, namely ‘The Clash of Civilization’: true friends require true enemies:
"For peoples seeking identity and reinventing ethnicity, enemies are essential, and the potentially most dangerous enmities occur across the fault lines between the world\'s major civilizations." (p. 20)
Within and between these lines one is able to discern a crucial insidious factor, i.e. a shift from emphasis on ideology to something rarely, if ever, discussed within the circles of strategists, due to its fluid character the very nature of which escapes clear definition based on solid background: civilization.
The Shift of Importance from Ideology-Religion into Civilization-Strategy
This shift from emphasis on religion to civilization was lucrative, provided a wonderful opportunity and unleashed great energy for the masterminds behind the so-called \'New World Order\'. Otherwise, no one would ever have implemented the civilisational factor within International affairs of state, as this term was nonexistent in the lexicon of International affairs. According to Shirin Hunter in her article, entitled: The Post-Soviet International System and the Dialogue of civilizations\':
‘Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991 a new concept has been introduced into the lexicon of International affairs, namely that of ‘civilizations’ as actors on the International scene and, therefore, if not replacing, then competing with the nation state as the principal unit of the International system.
- The idea was first introduced by Samuel Huntington in the context of his ‘Clash of civilizations’ theory. According to this theory, civilisational incompatibility or affinity will be the main factor determining the nature of international and inter-state relations. Moreover, this theory implies that rather than individual states interacting with one another –albeit at different levels, bilateral, multilateral etc.- it will be a cluster of states bound together by certain common values within the framework of a particular civilization, that will become the main actor.’
Although she might be attempting to present his ideas, one has to state that, despite being a complex, learned and thought provoking work, his book introducing the Clash of Civilizations should in no way change the way one regards the international social and political order. It is especially important to be wary of rushing into judgements while applying it to world events post-September 11th, 2001. The idea was indeed invented several years before this tragic so-called wake-up event. And the course and history for its background was meant to elaborate, or substitute the \'New World Order\' in the academic milieu.
Huntington’s book has been denounced by some Left-wings as being written by a right-winger and therefore, presumably, of no intellectual significance. On the other hand S. Sayed, from the sociology department of the University of East London, despite admitting the complications of defining a \'civilization\', enjoyed Huntington’s analysis that Muslim Nations are being replaced by quasi-primordial constructs such as civilizations. He also shares the same idea that these entities are the manifestation of a national logic and likes the idea and recognition of the relationship between the nation and the form that the political entity has taken. He refutes, however, the idea which has animated Huntington and upon which he bases his theory. After mentioning a couple of shared practices amongst Muslims he says:
‘It is difficult to conclude from these examples that that which constitutes the unity of the Muslim Ummah is its uniform way of life. (Of course, it is precisely this idea of a Muslim/ Islamic civilization that animates people such as Huntington; nevertheless, like all attempts which conceptualise civilization as an unity, these flounder since they rest upon an eclectic collection of observable and generalized features.’)
The negative affects of this book (Clash of Civilisations), which seem to be frequently encountered in post 2001 readings, lies in its unmerciful ramification and pessimistic prognostication for the future of humanity.
One could probably link the thesis with the fact that America was in a period of increasing tension, particularly from confronting Muslims in various locations across the globe. Huntington is neither a liberal nor a left winger. In his advice, he emphasises that the West must restrain the military power of Islamic and Sino countries in their attempt for technological/military superiority over other civilisations. Of course, his brainchild is not limited to the Islamic territories but rather extends to cover two civilizations: the Islamic and the Buddhist world (China and countries in close geographic orbit/influence). (p. 312)
During a London Conference on \'Muslims Identity in the 21st century\' organized in Oct. 1998, Dale F. Eickleman, declared that Huntington\'s rhyming "West versus Rest" is of little use for the modern understanding of Muslim societies. He states:
‘They obscure, or even distort, the immense spiritual and intellectual ferment that is taking place today among the world’s nearly one billion Muslims, reducing this innovation, in most cases, to a fanatical rejection of everything modern, liberal or progressive.’
As Huntington has suggested, the core of the challenge and his absolute obsession lies in the fear of being inferior - both economically and militarily- to the two civilizations. Thus our main concern should be to confront the superiority complex, and to resolve it in finding ways to let others think of themselves as equal to others, and to recognize that the others are very much alike - regardless of their various differences - and that they, too, possess the ability to add something to the Mega Powers; knowledge and purification.
" ولولا دفع الله الناس بعضهم ببعض لهدمت صوامع وبيع وصلوات ومساجد يذكر فيها اسم الله كثيرا."
“If it were not because God repels some men by means of others, cloisters, churches, synagogues and mosques where God\'s name is mentioned frequently would have been demolished." Qur\'an 22:40
"قال الإمام علي (ع): الناس صنفان، أما أخ لك في الدين، وأما نظير لك في الخلق." الإمام علي (ع)، نهج البلاغة، الكلمات القصار
Imam Ali (as) said: “People are of two categories: either brethren in faith, or peer in creation.” Nahj ul-Blaghah, short sayings of Imam Ali (as).
Introduction of the Dialogue of Civilizations:
Just as the pursuit of mono-cultural, single religion, territorial and oppositional states has proven problematic since the demise of the Middle Ages, so has the increasingly singular pursuit of the American example of democracy for the post-Cold War world in the twenty-first century. The American type of democracy may function within certain societies with special conditions, but it is not the only or exemplary way to achieve a peaceful, productive, pluralistic and culturally dynamic society. After the refutation of the Clash of civilizations, there was the introduction of a wiser theory from the Muslims by Sayyed M. Khatami. The call was made prominent by the Iranian President in his keynote address at the opening of the United Nation in 1999. This call for a grand dialogue at the demise of the 20th and the inauguration of the 21st century was timely. Cultures have already encountered each other on religious journeys, modern holidays and vacations, military conquests, business transactions and intellectual exchanges and excursions.
The idea of the Dialogue of Civilizations cannot be rejected by a humble civilized human being, nor disapproved by an astutely religious individual. One should get beyond the various forms of contemporary fundamentalism and extremism wherever possible. Muslims today should operate with epistemological modesty, as no one can deny that great civilizations have been built by wise non-fundamentalist leaders like the Greeks, Chinese, Persian and Muslims.
The Qur’anic principle supports such a civilized approach, and we may quote the following Qur’aic verses:
"إذ قال لصاحبه وهو يحاوره، أكفرت .... الآية."
“His companion said to him while disputing with him: Do you disbelieve in Him who created you from dust, then from a small seed, then He made you a perfect man?” Qur\'an 18:37
"أدع الى سبيل ربك بالحكمة والموعظة الحسنة وجادلهم بالتي هي أحسن."
“Invite to the Way of the Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching."
Qur\'an 16:125
Also in a narration we read:
"إن الحكمة ضالة المؤمن، فحيث وجدها ألتقطها، فهو أحق بها."
“Wisdom is the ultimate goal of the believer, and wherever he finds it, it is his prerogative to acquire it, as he deserves it more than anybody else.”
Many Muslims among the religious minorities seem to have succeeded in dealing with cultural contradictions presented by others, and in conceiving themselves in tolerant, complex and realistic terms. Also, religious minorities, such as Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, live in a number of Islamic countries, and for instance in I. R. Iran under the Wilayat Faqih regulations are a model of cosmopolitanism. Yet superiority is still not manifested in each and every different way. These religious minorities, for example, don\'t pay the jizyah (the religious taxation upon non-Muslims within an Islamic State), while maintaining the application of the Islamic Shari\'ah Law. Some of them are not so favoured in other Islamic countries.
On the other hand, some Muslim communities living in the Free-World do not share an elevated position within the society, and are deprived of certain rights in a smooth smart way. Some of them have, consequently, remained on the hard shoulder of the main highway. The reasons are many and varied; some stemming from psychological seclusion, stigmatization of faith and humiliation of their holy figures during the last few decades. Appropriateness of the society\'s popular faith, such as Christianity, is so excessively focused and extremely emphasized to possibly cause a number of civilisational conversions, despite being increasingly abhorrent to the Muslim community. These social limitations, which have caused a number of nominal conversions to Christianity or other faiths, have had a negative impact on the status of sociology of the Free-World, regardless and notwithstanding its positive attributes.
The exclusion, conversion and attempted elimination of Muslims sensibilities and devotion will not help any healthy society to flourish. Rather it contributes to the instability of free societies. It is, therefore, wise to promote the Dialogue of Civilizations in order to minimize tensions and decrease elevated levels of confusion and misunderstanding. However, this peaceful idea, despite its many advantages, has not appeared to have been welcomed by arrogant individuals and atheistic Mega Powers.
An intellectual thinker marked the idea with a presentation designed to show that we are in a transitional phase from the "Rise and Fall" model to the "Dialogue" model. According to him:
“The implications are far reaching, not the least, a new understanding of civil society, cultural achievements by human beings of different nationalities and cultural manifestations.”
He also rightfully insists that Gibbon’s study on the Rise and Fall of Civilizations contributes to the topic of our discussion. He, therefore, advises a further study of the theory of ‘Dialogue of Civilizations’, as it lacks much sense without further investigation of the various technical terms implemented:
‘We must, in a dialogue of civilizations, investigate exactly, if historical records and archaeological evidence permit, why and how civilizations constitute themselves and fall apart and transform themselves into another form of civilization, or simple drop dead and become another chapter in the book on world history….
‘Much interdisciplinary research must be done in the Dialogue of Civilizations to achieve a kind of sense, so as to come to terms why and how any type of form of civilization emerges, flourishes, and ultimately dies.’
While analyzing the reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire – despite the fact that it had adopted the Christian religion - Gazo quoted Gibbons to blame the very same adopted religion as the main cause for its decline. He writes:
‘Gibbons, hitherto, is read for his literary style, for an example of the enlightenment attitude towards Rome and Christianity, and ultimately, for the Rise and Fall paradigm, inherent in his narrative. Of course, everyone somehow knowledgeable of a little historical reading knows Gibbons verdict: The basic reason for Rome’s fall and decline was Christianity.’
It seems, as he, himself, realized, there is a fault in generalizing the cause to be a ‘Religion’ or any religion, and he could not help adding, therefore, that even Gibbons, the very same theoretician, cannot put Islam under the same category. However, he presented it in the form of a smart political manoeuvre:
Gibbons, as a figure from the enlightenment, needs no apology for his version of Rome and the Christian subversion. The enlightenment thinkers themselves were, as is well known, not positively inclined toward the Roman Catholic Church. Again it is no surprise that Gibbons and his friends should be benignly inclined toward Islam.’
By these quotes we find ourselves not entrapped into rejecting the role of ideology or religion, especially Islam, as some previous American thinkers have, but rather encouraged to further study our theory as the workable alternative to the Marxist Material Contradiction, the New World Order and to both the Clash of Civilizations and the Dialogue of Civilizations.
The Ultimate Holistic Theory:
So far we have studied the Marxist theory of material dialectic and contradiction. Despite its intention to establish the laws of historical development, we have been unable to find them irrefutable. But the designers of the New World Order seem to highlight the conditions of the World only as they appear in their own eyes, without delving into theoretical principles. While the theoretician of the Clash of Civilizations merely added a theoretical flavour to the previous Western political leader’s idea, he, also, fails to present more than a prediction of the scenario of the World from his own eye. We have been unable, however, to uncover more than conflicting evidence in his formulation to present ‘the Clash’ and ‘civilization’. We consider that a reasonable and sensible thinker cannot tolerate or digest the image of a civilized individual initiating hostility and ‘clash’ with other so-called civilized individuals. Fighting and Clashes are not civilized phenomenon of human history. Observing Khatami’s idea from another angle, the Dialogue of Civilizations seems to introduce the best principle for a civilized individual; however, it lacks a holistic approach, as it is possibly detached from reality. A thorough all-inclusive theory needs to be introduced as a combination of the entire aforementioned discussion would have bitterly inevitable, albeit undesirable, consequences.
We, therefore, assume that regardless of the level of civilization, one develops a flavour of bitter conflict, despite the partly successful rounds of dialogue, which would ultimately be likely to succumb to clash and violence when one party seeks to enforce its agenda and claims through aggressive tactics. This is the case when each and every party begins their distinctive path, when one ascends to an elevated position, while the second descends to its highest level of ambitions.
Islamic Traditions Supporting the Holistic Approach
At this stage we feel the need to elaborate on the meaning of the complementarity of the two forces. It seems to be assumed that forces of evil and good, devil and Divine can never interact nor react forcing each other into complementarity. Speaking laconic formulation one emphasizes that what is meant by complementarity is the Qur’anic, philosophical and mystical definition where both ways of complementarity are both possible and plausible. The Holy Qur’an has described both forms of complementarity while distinguishing between two smart concepts: namely the ascending levels (Ad-Darajat) and descending steps (Ad-Darakat) where both parties would be qualified to reach their ultimate level of perfection, albeit in totally and completely opposite directions.
A historical record from the Prophetic era confirms these two examples. The first concerns the ascending levels (Ad-Darajat) which was confirmed when the Prophet (saws) relayed the news about Ja’afar bin Abi Talib having been removed of both of his hands, through chopping, before he was martyred; the Prophet (saws) informed the Muslims before Ja’afar’s death that the Divine Almighty God (swt) substituted his two hands with wings, both of which, would be used for his soul to ascend to Heaven.
The Holy Qur’an described the different levels for believers in paradise as follows:
"ولكل درجات مما عملوا."
“Each will have rank according to whatever they have done.”
Qur’an 46:19
And the Hadeeth related to Ja’afar bin Abi Taleb we read in the historical account as follows:
عن علي بن أبي طالب قال : ( بينما أنا مع النبي في خير أبي طالب التفت إلى جعفر فقال : أما أن الله قد وصلك بجناحين يطير بهما إلى الجنة كما وصلت بجناح ابن عمك )
The second - descending steps (Ad-Darakat) - is recorded by the fact that when the Prophet (saws) was present amongst a group of Muslims, they suddenly heard a voice emitted from very strong wind. The Muslims were surprised and urged the Prophet (saws) to explain what was happening, based on his Divine knowledge. The Prophet (saws), being a Divinely enlightened messenger, informed them that a huge stone had been thrown into the Hell fire 70 years previously, and had now reached the fiery Hellish depth. Another narration explains that the wind signalled the death of one of the most distinguished figures among the hypocrites. When the Muslims arrived at Madinah they heard loud mourning and lamentation from one of the hypocrites signifying that a member of the Muslim Madinan society had passed away. His name was Ben Zayd bin Tabut, who was an influential high-standing Jew who, despite being a hypocrite and a disbeliever had converted to Islam, at least in name.
"فلما نزل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بقباء من طريق عمق سرح الناس ظهره ، وأخذتهم ريح شديدة حتى أشفق، وقال الناس : يا رسول الله ما شأن هذه الريح؟ فزعموا أنه قال " مات اليوم منافق عظيم النفاق، ولذلك عصفت ، وليس عليكم منها بأس إن شاء الله " وكان موته غائظا للمنافقين - قال جابر بن عبد الله رضي الله عنهما : فرجعنا إلى المدينة فوجدنا منافقا عظيم النفاق مات يومئذ - وسكنت الريح آخر النهار فجمع الناس ظهرهم."
The Qur’an has also made the position of hypocrites explicitly clear with regards to the Hell fire:
"إن المنافقين في الدرك الأسفل من النار، ولن تجد لهم نصيرا."
“The hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the fire: no helper wilt thou find for them:” Qur’an 4:145
It reflects the very fact that this person, while being a member of the Muslim Society of Madinah, was able to reach his form of perfection, albeit in the totally negative and opposite direction. Both examples were confirmed and are the best proof of the fact that both forces were in conflict within the Muslim society of Madinah and that the contradiction and tussling between them reached ultimately complementarity, albeit in opposite direction.
Another Islamic tradition states the following:
"قال الباقر (ع) : " يا إبراهيم ! إن الله تبارك وتعالى لم يزل عالما قديما خلق الأشياء لا من شئ . ومن زعم أن الله - عز وجل - خلق الأشياء من شئ فقد كفر ، لأنه لو كان ذلك الشئ الذي خلق منه الأشياء قديما معه في أزليته وهويته كان ذلك أزليا . بل خلق الله - عز وجل - الأشياء كلها لا من شئ ، فكان مما خلق الله - عز وجل - أرضا طيبة ، ثم فجر منها ماء عذبا زلالا ، فعرض عليها ولايتنا أهل البيت ، فقبلتها . فأجرى ذلك الماء عليها سبعة أيام حتى طبقها وعمها ، ثم نضب ذلك الماء عنها وأخذ من صفوة ذلك الطين طينا ، فجعل طين الأئمة ( عليهم السلام ) ، ثم أخذ ثفل ذلك الطين فخلق منه شيعتنا ، ولو ترك طينتكم يا إبراهيم على حاله - كما ترك طينتنا - لكنتم ونحن شيئا واحدا " . قلت : يا بن رسول الله ما فعل بطينتنا ؟ قال : " أخبرك يا إبراهيم ، خلق الله - عز وجل - بعد ذلك أرضا سبخة خبيثة منتنة ، ثم فجر منها ماء أجاجا آسنا مالحا ، فعرض عليها ولايتنا أهل البيت ولم تقبلها . فأجرى ذلك الماء عليها سبعة أيام حتى طبقها وعمها ، ثم نضب ذلك الماء عنها ، ثم أخذ من ذلك الطين فخلق منه الطغاة وأئمتهم ، ثم مزجه بثفل طينتكم . ولو ترك طينتهم على حاله ولم يمزج بطينتكم لم يشهدوا الشهادتين ، ولا صلوا ولا صاموا ولا زكوا ولا حجوا ، ولا أدوا أمانة ولا أشبهوكم في الصور ، وليس شئ أكبر على المؤمن من أن يرى صورة عدوه مثل صورته " . قلت : يا بن رسول الله فما صنع بالطينتين ؟ قال : " مزج بينهما بالماء الأول والماء الثاني ، ثم عركها عرك الأديم ، ثم أخذ من ذلك قبضة فقال : هذه إلى الجنة ولا أبالي ، وأخذ قبضة أخرى وقال : هذه إلى النار ولا أبالي ."
‘Summery: When Almighty God created human beings from clay, He mixed the pure with the impure and then declared that this one is going to the Hell fire, and I am not concerned, and this is going to Paradise, and I don’t care. He then mixed them, without distinction, among creation.’
This tradition is likely to contribute to our discussion as it confirms that these two pieces – which in this context refer to two parties of humans, before they finally divide, were mixed and brought together after the primary distinction. It may metaphorically refer to the case that, despite the clear cut distinction between those two forces of good and evil, there will still be the overlapping of both principles and actors. It also confirms that, despite dialogue, mixture and interaction between the two parties, the final distinction between them was made in favour of total perfection, albeit towards completely opposite directions.
While both narrations support our holistic approach, there is one slight difference: The first was related to internal complementarity between conflicting parties manifesting a domestic peaceful and undeclared contradiction, while the second refers to the external complementarity occurring between two foreign parties manifesting contradiction in the International arena. Although both parties, politically and socially, in the case of internal and external contradiction, totally despise and feign reciprocal contradictory and absolute exclusiveness against the other, the natural dialectic of this action-reaction process is, however, consciously or unwittingly, forcing them towards interacting within the contradiction then ultimately reaching complementarity. After studying the theoretical aspects of our approach, it now becomes appropriate to examine Imam Al-Mahdi’s (as) relationship to his opponents in the light of the abovementioned holistic method.
Imam Al-Mahdi (as) and Opponents
Adopting the Qur’anic principle of Imamah, one is naturally positioned to face criticism that one is inclined towards promoting a One-Party government. Imam Al-Mahdi (as) being the representative of good, his opponents may be defined as representing the evil forces. One of the most commonly observed features is the accusation levelled at the Divine party as being dictatorial and a one-party rule.
Conversely, the accusers indirectly manipulate the concept that the distinctive qualities of their party, i.e. the opponents of Imam Al-Mahdi’s (as) Divine revolution are totally free, declaring the ‘Free World’. His opponents claim to protect - at least - elementary human rights such as extreme tolerance, opening the space for diversity, tolerance, and freedom of belief and expression. The logical accusation of human rights promoters to the Mahdis (as) would be negligence of basic rights of peace, security, and freedom.
From the abovementioned elaboration and information, we understand that those opinions are not identical with the actual given facts, either theoretically, or practically. Also, the contradiction was not formed according to Marxist definition, nor is society expected to be formed following Hegelian principles.
The institution (Sunnan At-Ta’rikh) of this dialectical struggle between positive and evil forces reflects a totally different image and a completely different application. A closer realistic scenario to the abovementioned dialectic is that these accusations reflect a self-egoistic Eurocentric nature leading to contradiction followed by complementarity, but towards totally opposite directions.
"وقال الذين كفروا لرسلهم لنخرجنكم من ارضنا او لتعودن في ملتنا فاوحى اليهم ربهم لنهلكن الظالمين، وَلَنُسْكِنَنَّكُمُ الأَرْضَ مِن بَعْدِهِمْ ذَلِكَ لِمَنْ خَافَ مَقَامِي وَخَافَ وَعِيدِ "
"Those who disbelieved told their messengers: "We\'ll run you out of our land unless you return to our sect!" Their Lord [however] inspired them [as follows]: "We shall wipe out wrongdoers and settle you on the land to succeed them." That is [in store] for anyone who fears My position and fears My threat." Qur’an 14:13-14
CONCLUSIONS:
- Human history is overwhelmed with examples of the contradiction between the good and the evil forces; however this contradiction should be grasped in its natural and human context. The Marxist material dialectic is not irrefutable. Most of the Hegel-Engels concepts were studied and critically discussed. Contradictions within social fields are facts, while any attempt to reject them is detached from reality. The main point is to try to grasp an all-inclusive and thorough model. The ideas of Muslim philosophers such as S. M. B. As-Sadr were analyzed as an alternative to the suggested Models and principles.
- The theoretical study was then supplemented by discussing reality using the most significant phenomenon of the last century, i.e. the Islamic Revolution of Iran, in the light of which, after studying different examples of both Western and Islamic thinkers, the prevailing opinion was presented.
- The effect of the collapse of the Soviet Union in the contemporary world was analyzed, and the introduction of the New World Order, followed by both the Clash and the Dialogue of Civilizations were introduced with their positive and negative elements.
- The ultimate and final holistic solution to fill the vacuum within the intellectual milieu was then presented. A holistic approach capable of being applied to the stark reality of life, presenting a civilized and moral alternative was introduced.
The alternative to the abovementioned theories was established while paving the way for complementarity for each and every active party within the socio-political and economic spheres for both internal and external contradiction, when both parties – evil or good - consciously or unwittingly, will be forced towards interacting within the inevitable social contradiction, then ultimately reaching complementarity, albeit towards opposite directions.
- The holistic approach was presented along with supporting evidence from Qur’anic verses as well as narrations from the Sunnah, and in the light of this theory, we have attempted to understand the relationship between Imam Al-Mahdi (as) and his opponents.

[ ShowCounter: 182]

user comments