Violence Against Shias: An Assault on Islam

It is another day in Pakistan and it is another assault on Shias in Pakistan. It does not matter how many have died. It is not a game of numbers because the life of every human being is sacred. What matters is the continued helplessness of those who stand for human dignity and life. Fourteen-hundred years have passed and the Muslim community and its scholarship, by and large, has failed to effectively develop a method to resolve peacefully its political, social-cultural and theological differences. On the contrary, the idea that the opposition must be eliminated physically has gained more popularity. It is a sad situation for every sincere and serious follower of the Quran and its eternal message of peace, freedom, unity, and justice for all. An assault on Shias is anti-Islam. In fact, killing a fellow human being unless it is in self-defense without the intention of killing is anti-divine.
The Prophet and his closest supporters, including the first four Caliphs did not identify them as Shias or Sunnis. They had differences over their style of governance and their interpretation of the Quran, but rarely did they demonstrate violent tendencies towards each other to settle them. Imam Ali did not exhort his supporters to take up arms against Caliph Abu Bakr or Omar. Rarely did we find any reference in his or their sermons of cussing or cursing those who are often accused of usurping his right to leadership or challenging their authority.
The Shia and Sunni differences rest upon the issue of political and spiritual leadership of Umma. For 1.1 billion Sunnis it is the Khilafat that is important and for 350 million Shias, it is the Imamat that is significant. Even though the majority of the religious leaders of the two communities (leave alone the masses) would not be able to clearly identify the differences between the two approaches of governance and succession of the Prophet, they are willing to condemn each other for it. Sunni leaders, by and large, think that Shia's are not genuine in their commitment to Islam and the Shia leaders, by and large, view Sunnis as supporters of a political system that was illegitimate and corrupt. For over 6 billion of people of the world, this debate is irrelevant. A great majority of non-Muslims have adopted political ideas that negate the philosophy of Imamat and Khilafat altogether. And in the most world, including the predominantly Shia Iran or Iraq or Sunni dominated Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, no one takes the khilafat or imamat seriously in political realms.
All other differences have stemmed from this basic issue that emerged in a tribal culture and played out in a despotic environment that was still adjusting to divine teachings pertaining to the sanctity of human life and dignity, equality, the rights of women and the right to dissent.
People usually interpret violent events such that took place in Pakistan with political spectacles. Some have already argued that India’s intelligence RAW, or CIA or Mossad might be involved in them as they want to destabilize Pakistan, especially at a time, when China and Pakistan are increasing their level of cooperation in the upcoming port of Gawadhar in Baluchistan.
Regardless, the fact is that the seeds of hatred often leading to violence are sown by those who claim to speak in the name of God and his Prophets. They could have come together to look at the differences to decide that they would not resolve to violence to settle them, that they would refrain from using vulgar language to denounce each other and that they would deal with the opposing viewpoints with respect.
The divine teachings do not promote violence or terror. Their purpose is to help individuals to control their anger to create a peaceful environment so that people can learn to grow out of their differences. By emphasizing the differences, the clergy, is not only defying the divine teachings, but also rebelling against it, a sad reality that most of us have accepted and cherished.
The only way out is to stand up against these differences and assert that Muslims will not identify them with either Shia or Sunni or Hanafis, Maliks, Ibadis, Ismaelis, Hanbalis, Shafais,  Malikis, Deobandis, Barelvis. The malice of disunity and conflict has pervaded our culture for long and it would take long before its impact can be reduced. The first thing we need is to have people who can say boldly and clearly that we are Muslims and we are part of the Umma of the Prophet. It means that we stop asking the question: are you a Sunni or Shia or this or that? It means that we stop fighting over differences that we see among ourselves. It means showing respect to differences even if the opponent is not willing to show respect to you.

If we do not change ourselves, both Shias and Sunnis would become irrelevant to Islam as they have already become irrelevant to the world. They would have only a nuisance value that through these killings they have been demonstrated. In the words of the Quran: “while that which is for the good of mankind remains on the earth. Thus Allah sets forth parables.” (13:17)

British Muslim Vigilantes Make Mockery of Divine Teachings

Muslim patrol, Muslim vigilante, Muslim police, or religion enforcers are now in news in Great Britain. It is said that groups of young Muslims are patrolling areas and forcing non-Muslims to stop coming to their area if they consume alcohol or dress in an inappropriate manner. Comments such as “we do not respect those who do not believe in Allah,” “We do not care what your belief system is” and “Go away from our area because you are not Muslim,” are clearly heard in the videos posted by such groups on YouTube. Should we Muslims call such groups, racists, bigots, fanatics and anti-Islam, should we remain quiet or should we support them?
Before we attempt to answer these questions, let us modify the situation slightly. Change Muslim patrol to British nationalist patrol or Christian evangelist vigilante and imagine these vigilantes going from the streets to streets in areas per-dominantly populated by Muslims or Hindus or immigrants and demanding that the residents either leave or adopt their customs or religion or the way of life. They ask Hindus to eat beef and Muslims to eat pork and ask women to remove their hijab if they have to live in their country or they demand that Muslims should not make loud their call to prayer.
Every one of us would feel repulsed. We would call such acts racist, bigoted and fanatic. So why do we have to apply different standards to these identical situations. One may argue that alcohol is “haram” (forbidden) in Islam and Muslims have a duty to enforce this divine command in their lives. So apply it in your life and when you get the mandate by the people on a clear manifesto to ban consumption of alcohol openly in your country or your town, do it. But to arbitrarily force people to change their lifestyle is against all that Islam stands for. The Quran recognizes people’s right to reject God and adopt a lifestyle contrary to the divine teachings and guidance. A Muslim cannot be a Muslim unless he believes in the validity of the Quranic teachings and makes efforts to live by them.
So respecting and protecting others’ belief systems and style of life is part of the Quranic mandate. Those who are making comments that we do not care about your belief system are in fact making a mockery of divine guidance.
If these vigilantes are serious about Islam’s prohibitory guidance regarding alcohol, or improper dress or a lifestyle that harms the people in general, they should try to educate people and through an electoral process win over the electorates to their perspectives and policies. Even then, from a sharia perspective, it would be wrong to impose one's religious beliefs upon others.

A Saudi Preacher, torture, rape and murder: A Tale of Twisted Justice

A Saudi preacher is accused of raping and torturing his five-year-old daughter to death. He admitted using a cane and cables to inflict the injuries after suspecting his daughter’s virginity. He served a few months in jail and then a judge ruled that the prosecution could only seek blood money and not the death penalty or life imprisonment. The scholar paid about $50,000 blood money to the mother of their daughter and was released from the custody. (Thank God that the judge did not allow the guilty preacher to keep the money under the pretext that he is the father of the girl.) Thus the value of a five-year-old was determined and that included compensation for rape and torture.

The judge based his ruling on sharia, so is the claim. Does the sharia want a murderer to get away with the crime? Does the sharia offer no punishment for torture and rape? Does the sharia have no rulings on child abuse? Does the sharia place a dollar value on torture, rape, and human life? Does the sharia absolve parents from the abuses committed against their children or spouses? These questions must be asked honestly because the ruling given in the name of God and Islam does not make any sense no matter how the legal experts interpret the Quran and the Sunna of the prophet.

If the Sharia is defined as a license to torture, murder or rape, then this is neither divine nor prophetic. It is simply male-chauvinistic tribalism immersed in ignorance and total disregard to human life and dignity. This cannot be allowed in the name of God or Islam. Muslims in general and Muslim scholars, in particular, owe it to their creator to question the legitimacy of this ruling and take a stand against it. Yet few would dare to do that. Most of them did not care about this case. Most of them didn’t bother to follow it and question the logic behind the verdict.

It is sad that despite the presence of so many learned scholars of Islam in the world, few are willing to condemn this verdict and openly distance them away from this vulgar interpretation of sharia. On the contrary, many are trying to justify this verdict in the name of God and Prophet. Shame upon them.

The Quran demands equal rights for children, boys and girls included. The Quran does not give parents the unlimited authority to do whatever they want to do with their children. The Quran condemns rape, torture and child and spousal abuse. There is no room for these things in a society that claims to follow Islamic precepts. However, violations of these mandated Quranic rights do occur. It is in these circumstances that justice and those who are entrusted with the responsibility of preserving it must play their roles properly. If they do not, then it is the duty of Muslim scholarship to take a unified stand against this. The silence in these matters is like condoning and supporting crime and injustice.