A Monthly Newsmagazine from Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought (ICIT)
To Gain access to thousands of articles, khutbas, conferences, books (including tafsirs) & to participate in life enhancing events

Opinion

Egypt! The Muslims are waiting

Abu Dharr

The Muslims have reposed high expectations in the people and leadership of Egypt. Will the new leadership follow in the footsteps of Hassan al-Banna and Syed Qutb or end up compromising with imperialism and Zionism?

Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun (The Muslim Brotherhood) has finally positioned itself in the seat of power in its own homeland, Egypt. This has been a long uphill struggle from the year 1928ce when its founder Hasan al-Banna launched this Islamic program within a few years following the European termination of the Ottoman Sultanate in Istanbul: the last and anemic vestige of an Islamic state. Imam Hasan al-Banna, in a sense, was the culminating prototype of Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (Asadabadi), Shaykh Muhammad ‘Abduh, and Shaykh Rashid Rida. The first a “Shi‘i”, the latter two “Sunnis.” In those days there was no such thing as a Shi‘i-Sunni rift. Sayyid Jamal al-Din spent his final days in Istanbul convincing Sultan ‘Abd al-Hamid of the merits of an “Islamic League” or an “Islamic Coalition.” Sayyid Jamal al-Din died in Istanbul after a long life spent in defying both Russian and British incursions into the Islamic hemisphere. He passed on frustrated and unfulfilled.

Shaykh Muhammad ‘Ab-duh, a student of Sayyid Jamal al-Din, experienced the latter’s political disappointments, and concentrated his efforts in the field of education. As the Shafi‘i Mufti of Egypt he enthusiastically elaborated on the book Nahj al-Balaghah. Yet no one, even up to this very day, ever accused him of being a Shi‘i sympathizer. In succession, Shaykh Muhammad Rashid Rida, considered by some a “hardcore Sunni,” was influenced by Imam al-Shawkani, a Zaydi Shi‘i. He managed to blend in the Hanbali strain with the Zaidi strain. Wouldn’t the Arabian Peninsula need someone like him today!

This give-and-take between “Sunnis” and “Shi‘is” was brotherly, scholarly, and competitive. And Imam Hasan al-Banna, in as far as intra-Islamic relationships, was a product of those open-minded and broad-minded decades and centuries.

This give-and-take between “Sunnis” and “Shi‘is” was brotherly, scholarly, and competitive. And Imam Hasan al-Banna, in as far as intra-Islamic relationships, was a product of those open-minded and broad-minded decades and centuries.

Imam Hasan al-Banna assumed the mantle of a leader as he stood for the independence of all Muslims from foreign occupation and colonialist social control. He worked for an Islamic ummah free of capitalism and communism. Some may consider him to be one of the pillars of the last century when it comes to Islamic rebirth and revivalism. He could see the eroding effects of Mustafa Kemal’s secularism and Muhammad Pahlavi’s westoxication closing in on Egypt and other Muslim territories. For all who knew him well, he was not in any sense a “Sunni-first” person. And among the Sunnis he was not one who would make an issue out of any madhhab.

…this led to the establishment of Dar al-Taqrib Bayna al-Madhahib al-Islamiyah (The Domain for the Approximation of Islamic Schools of Thought). The Azhar establishment played a pivotal role in this effort. Imam Hasan al-Banna was the host of Ayatullah Qummi who was received in the Ikhwan’s headquarters in Cairo with more than a touch of hospitality. Imam Hasan al-Banna met with Ayatullah Kashani during the Hajj of 1948ce. Both agreed to convene a grand conference that would close ranks and endear Sunnis and Shi‘is to each other.

An unintended consequence of the marriage of the Shah of Iran to King Faruq’s sister was the flourishing of a fond regard between the peoples of Egypt and Iran. This led to the establishment of Dar al-Taqrib Bayna al-Madhahib al-Islamiyah (The Domain for the Approximation of Islamic Schools of Thought). The Azhar establishment played a pivotal role in this effort. Imam Hasan al-Banna was the host of Ayatullah Qummi who was received in the Ikhwan’s headquarters in Cairo with more than a touch of hospitality. Imam Hasan al-Banna met with Ayatullah Kashani during the Hajj of 1948ce. Both agreed to convene a grand conference that would close ranks and endear Sunnis and Shi‘is to each other.

In the Indian subcontinent two towering Islamic figures, who had immense influence upon the Ikhwan — Muhammad Iqbal and Abu al-A‘la al-Mawdudi — were, more or less, on board with this conciliatory intra-Islamic ambition. They felt the need for Islamic solidarity: Sunnis and Shi‘is against the Hindu oppressor.

Without going into all the fine details and traditional fog, Sayyid Qutb’s concept of hakimiyah is on par with Imam Khomeini’s concept of wilayah minus the historical specifics that go into their definition. Imam Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr (shahid), in Iraq, in his book Falsafatuna (Our Philosophy) reverberates with the writings of Sayyid Qutb to a certain degree. The Shi‘is and Sunnis in Iraq through both Hizb al-Da‘wah (Shi‘i) and al-Hizb al-Islami al-‘Iraqi (Sunni) were on the same wavelength as they both stood their common ground against secularism, nationalism, and communism during the reign of president ‘Abd al-Karim Qasim. Sayyid Qutb’s outstanding tafsir, Fi Zilal al-Quran (In the Shades of the Quran), was being sent by shiploads from Beirut to both Iran and Pakistan during the 1960s.

Anyone with a thinking mind and pulsating heart can immediately identify the many similarities and common ground in the writings of Imam Khomeini, Abu al-A‘la al-Mawdudi, and Sayyid Qutb. Some of Sayyid Qutb’s books are translated into Persian, and some of Imam Khomeini’s books are translated into Arabic. This intellectual traffic was proceeding in both directions without a “Shi‘i” or a “Sunni” disclaimer.

Then came the earth-shaking event that caused rulers in high places to place a distance between themselves and this groundbreaking event: the Islamic Revolution in Iran. With all the previous Sunni-Shi‘i goodwill and with the sum total of Islamic Movement friendships and affinities, the rulers in the Arabian Peninsula who, from day-one, were never pleased with the Imam replacing the Shah decided to try their best to abort and finish off this historical and momentous shift led by Imam Khomeini and the Islamic Movement inside Iran.

The first serious Saudi foray into this grand scheme was their sponsorship of some leaders of the Syrian Ikhwan to bring down the Ba‘thi regime of Hafiz al-Asad. After three to four years of internal Syrian strife, the liberation effort ended with Hafiz al-Asad’s massacre of the Syrian Ikhwan in Hamah and their virtual abandonment by the Saudis. The Syrian Ikhwan internalized their dual defeat: the Ba‘this in Damascus crushing them militarily and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia forsaking them financially.

Meanwhile, in the Islamic State in Iran, Sayyid Qutb’s books became mandatory reading for the Revolutionary Guards. The Egyptian Ikhwan went on record to stand by Hizbullah in Lebanon when the Israeli Zionists tried to crush them in the Summer of 2006. The supreme leader of the Ikhwan in Egypt, at that time, Muhammad Mahdi ‘Akif made it clear where the Egyptian Ikhwan stood: they supported Hizbullah.

When the Egyptian people came out en masse against Mubarak, Imam Khamenei in one of his speeches likened the movement of the Egyptian people with the movement of the Iranian people three decades earlier.

When the Egyptian people came out en masse against Mubarak, Imam Khamenei in one of his speeches likened the movement of the Egyptian people with the movement of the Iranian people three decades earlier. When Mohammed Mursi was elected president of Egypt, Islamic Iran was one of the first to congratulate him.

There now appears to be on the horizon a comeback by the Saudis and other Arabian Peninsula regimes to spoil intra-Islamic relations. The Ikhwan in Egypt should rebound in the character of their founder Imam Hasan al-Banna and share the burden of our common Islamic destiny with its twin: Islamic Iran. There is something of a converse mutuality between Iran and Egypt: each one carries in its history what the other one was at one time: today’s “Shi‘i” Iran was at one time “Sunni” and today’s “Sunni” Egypt was at one time “Shi‘i”. We, the Muslims everywhere, need both of these Muslim populations to identify their own selves in the “other.” This, if it happens, will set the stage for us to surmount the sectarianism that is coming out of foul mouths and bloody policies…

“And hold fast — all of you [Muslims] — to Allah’s link, and do not draw apart from each other” (3:103).


Article from

Crescent International Vol. 41, No. 11

Safar 19, 14342013-01-01


Sign In


 

Forgot Password ?


 

Not a Member? Sign Up