Islamic Leadership in an Islamic Government (Waly al-Faqih)

Conditions of Leadership

By: Imam Khomeini

The conditions that a leader must have directly stem from the nature of the Islamic government. After general conditions, such as sanity, there are two foundational conditions which are:

  1. Knowledge of the law.
  2. Justice.

When differences arose after the Noble Prophet (s) as to who would take on the responsibility of the caliphate there was no difference of opinion in whether the future leader must have merits. The only difference was in regards to which person had those merits.

Since the Islamic government is a government of laws it is necessary for the leader to know what those laws are – as has been mentioned in traditions. It is not only necessary for the leader to have this knowledge but anyone who has some sort of position must have this knowledge as well. But, the leader must have the most knowledge. Our imams used this to reason for their imamate – they would say that an imam must be better than the rest of the people. The criticisms that Shia scholars give are also in this regard where they say that so and so asked the ruling from the caliph who was unable to answer him and therefore the caliph is not suitable for caliphate. They also say that the caliph performed such and such action that was in opposition to Islamic law and therefore he is not suitable for caliphate.

Knowing the law and being just are foundational pillars for Muslims. Nothing else has as much importance, for instance knowledge about the angels, knowledge about the attributes of Allah, none of these matter in the issue of imamate. If one has knowledge about all fields of science and has discovered all of the laws of nature or is an amazing musician he will not become more suitable for leading an Islamic government than one who has knowledge about the law and is just. That which is related to caliphate and that which was discussed in the age of the Prophet (s) and the imams (a) and that which is certain amongst the Muslims is that the leader or the caliph must know Islamic laws and must be just in theological and ethical matters. Intellect denotes this as well because and Islamic government is a government of law – not a free-flowing government or a government clinging to the whims of an individual. If the leader does not know the law he is not suitable for leadership because if he follows someone the strength of the government would be broken and if he does not follow someone he would not be able to implement the law. The tradition: “Jurists rule over sultans” is certain. If sultans followed Islam they would have to follow jurists – they would have to ask the jurists what the law would be in various cases and how to implement it. In this case the real leaders are the jurists and that is why they must officially take control of the government and not give it to someone who is forced to follow them because they are ignorant of the law.

Of course, it is not necessary for general workers to know all Islamic laws and become jurists. Rather, it is enough for them to know the laws that are in relation to their work; it is enough to know their duties.

This was the case in the time of the Prophet (s) and the Commander of the Faithful (a). The leader must have these two merits, but their representatives and other workers who are sent to other lands must know the laws that are in relation to their work.

A leader must be perfect in theological beliefs and ethics. He must be just. He must not be polluted by sin. A person who wants to implement divine punishments in their correct places; a person who wants to take control of the public treasury; a person who Allah gives power over his servants must not sin. “My pledge does not reach the oppressors.”

If a leader is not just he would not act just in giving Muslims their rights, obtaining taxes, spending the money obtained from taxes correctly, and implementing divine punishments. It is possible that he would place those close to him over the society and spend the public treasury to his own benefit. (Walayat al-Faqih, p.58-61)

The door of ijtehad must always be open in an Islamic government. The nature of a revolution and a government dictates that ijtehadi opinions must be freely given – even if they oppose one another. Nobody should have the right to prevent this. But, what is important is correctly understanding governance and the society in which, according to them, the Islamic system can make plans for the benefit of Muslims. It is here that the term ijtehad used in the Islamic seminary is not enough, rather if a person is the most knowledgeable in regards to the sciences taught in the Islamic seminary but is unable to recognize what is in the best interest of the society or is unable to recognize righteous people from non-righteous people he would not have a political vision and would not have the ability to make correct decisions. This person is not a mujtahid in social or government matters and cannot become the leader of the society. (Sahifah Nur, v.21, p.47, 1988, Tehran)

Dear Shaykh Ali Mishkini:

After greetings, you wanted my viewpoint in regards to the constitution. Whatever the people in charge thought was correct act in accordance to it. I will not intervene – except in the matter of leadership. We cannot leave our Islamic country without a leader. We must choose someone who will defend the honor of Islam in the political world.

At the beginning I believed and insisted that the condition of being a marja’ is not necessary. A just mujtahid who is confirmed by the Khobregan and is respected throughout the country is enough. If the people vote for the Khobregan so that they determine which just mujtahid is suitable for leadership then his acceptance is the acceptance of the people. In this case he will be chosen by the people and his governance will be established.

I said this in regards to the constitution, but our friends insisted on the condition of being a marja’ and because of that I accepted. I knew at that time that this will not be applicable in the near future. (Sahifah, v.21, p.129, 1989, Tehran)

Islam Times

The Political Dimensions of Islam

By: Imam Khomeini

At the same time that Islam orders man to worship and at the same time that Islam shows man how to worship, it tells man how to live and how his relationship with other humans must be. Islam even tells us how an Islamic society must deal with other societies. There is no action or movement from an individual or a society that does not have a ruling in Islam. Therefore, it is clear that the concept of an Islamic leadership and being religious encompasses all facets of the society because Islam takes the responsibility of guiding a society in all of its dimensions. (Sahifah Nur, v.4, p.167-168, 1978, Paris)

Islam is not something that only looks at one side of an issue. Islam has rulings on all sides of all issues – all of the issues relating to the world, relating to politics, relating to the society, relating to economics, and relating to everything which the people of the world do not know about. Monotheistic religions came to glance at both sides of the issue; to devise a plan which would be implemented by both sides. It is not the case that it only deals with one side while the other side is left ambiguous. Islam is especially this way – more than the other religions. [The two sides are referring to matters of this world and matters of the hereafter] (Sahifah, v.9, p.137, 1979, Langarud)

The Glorious Quran which is in the hands of the Muslims is the same as it was from the beginning of Islam to now; one letter has not been added to it or taken away from it. When this Quran invites people to ponder it does not mean that they should sit in their homes and remember Allah; to remember Him in private. The issue is a social issue, it is an invitation to politics; an invitation to governance and at the same time all of these issues are acts of worship. Worship was not separated from politics and social benefits. In Islam, everything which has been encouraged has a spiritual dimension, even working in factories, farming on farms, teaching in schools – all of these are in the benefit of Islam and have spiritual dimensions. (Sahifah, v.18, p.275, 1984, Tehran)

Islam’s ethical rulings are also political. The ruling that is in the Quran which states that Muslims are brothers to one another is an ethical ruling, a social ruling, and a political ruling. If the members of the various tribes that have become Muslim believe in Allah and the Prophet they are brothers. In the same way that brothers love each other, all groups must love each other. In addition to this being one of the huge Islamic ethical and in addition to it having huge ethical results it is also a huge social ruling that has huge social results. (Sahifah, v.13, p.23, 1980)

It can be said that, without exception, all of the divine encouragements, even in personal matters and even in issues regarding one’s relationship with Allah, have a social and political dimension to them. (Sahifah, v.18, p.274, 1984, Tehran)

If you were able to understand the meaning of religion in Islamic culture you would clearly see that there is no contradiction between religious leadership and political leadership. Rather, just as political struggles are part of one’s religious duties leading political movements is part of the responsibility of religious leaders. (Sahifah, v.4, p.167, Paris, 1978)

The slogan that religion and politics are separate is one of the propagational aspects of the occupational forces who want to keep Muslims away from deciding their own destiny. In Islamic law political and social issues are discussed before matters of worship. The Prophet’s methods in regards to internal and external political issues show that one of the great battles of the Prophet (s) was a political battle.

The martyrdom of the Commander of the Faithful (a) and Hussayn (a) as well as the imprisonment, torture, and poisoning of other imams (a) was all on the path of Shia political battles against oppressors. In one word: fighting and political activity make up an important part of religious responsibility. (Sahifah, v.4, p.33, 1977, Paris)

Islam Times

Imam Khomeini’s Spouse Passes Away

Khadije Saqafi, the wife of the late Founder of the Islamic Revolution Imam Khomeini passed away at the age of 93 after a long period of illness.
Islam Times would like to pass its condolences to all of the believers, free thinkers, oppressed, lovers of Iran, and lovers of Imam Khomeini on the death of this pure spirit.

She will be buried today and there will be a majlis for her held by Ayatollah Khamenei.

Please recite a Fatiha for her.

Islam Times

Islamic Scholars and Unity

Sayyid Jamal al-Din Asadabadi: Two important factors, unity and I’tila’ are counted as two great pillars of the Islamic faith. Rather, they are definite duties for a person who has accepted Islam.

Shaykh Muhammad Abduh: Differences and weakening the religion is an evil plan of the foreigners. The foreigners try to weaken the various Islamic sects by causing disputes. They want the people’s hearts of those sects to hate one another and to keep them away from clear Islamic commandments.

Ayatollah Burujerdi: One of the huge marja’s of the Shia world, who is highly respected as well, was Ayatollah Burujerdi. He worked very hard to create unity amongst Muslims and even cooperated with Dar al-Taqrib in Egypt. His opinion in unifying the Muslims was referring to the unanimously accepted tradition of thaqalayn and for the non-Shias of the world to look at the amazing amounts of knowledge that the Shia Imams have – which was given to them by the Prophet (s). He wanted them to come closer to Shiaism and to create the groundworks for Islamic unity.

Imam Khomeini: The society in which divine prophets and the Quran worked to establish was a unified society. This is a concept which surpasses tribes, nations, and governments. We must return to our roots and the Islamic culture without adding anything to it. We must put forth effort to protect and strengthen unity – starting from within ourselves. Disunity is from Satan and unity is from the Merciful. Is it possible for one to have a monotheistic ideology, believe that there is only one God, believe that divine will encompasses all things, but have disunity in his practice and in his relationship with other creations?

Ayatollah Khamenei: Islamic unity is an important issue which will be achieved by creating relationships between Islamic spiritual leaders. I open my arms up to people who follow an Islamic organization with the purpose of serving Islam and protecting the benefits of Muslims.

Shaykh Mahmoud Shaltut: Islam has not forced any of its followers to follow are particular sect. Rather, each Muslim can correctly choose any sect and observe the laws that are derived from it. Therefore, a person who follows one of the four sects can easily change to follow another one. The Ja’fari sect, famously known as the Twelver sect, is permissible to follow just as it is permissible to follow any one of the other four sects. Therefore, it is suitable for Muslims to recognize this and to leave all forms of fanaticism directed at a particular sect.

Sayyid Abd al-Hussayn Sharaf al-Din: Division is political and unity is political. Politics divided Sunnis and Shias from the beginning and now, politics must unite them.

Shahid Murtada Mutahhari: It is self-evident that what the scholars mean by unity is not making all Muslims follow one particular sect or accepting what is similar in all sects and rejecting what is different. This would be impossible. Rather, what they mean is putting all Muslims in one line together standing up to their enemies.

Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Hussayn Tabatabai: The Shia of the first century never left the lines of the majority. They aided the general Islamic society in progression. Now, it is also necessary for Muslims to be united and to refer to the principles of Islam. They must leave their disunity and face all of the problems that were caused by the foreigners during the past few decades.

Ayatollah Shahid Muhammad Baqir Sadr: I have spent my whole life in trying to bring about unity and brotherhood between Shias and Sunnis. I have made many pro-unity statements. I am the brother and the son of the Sunnis just as I am the brother and the son of Shias.

Imam Musa Sadr: Solidifying the lines of Muslims is not something that was ordained only by the Prophet (s). Rather, the necessities of life and the intellect also advise us to do the same thing. This is an issue which our existence depends on. I do not mean, by mentioning unity, that we should just blindly mention it over and over again. Rather, I mean that unity, in its complete meaning, is what we are striving for.

Islam Times

The Islamic Revolution and the Historic Role of Imam Khomeini in the Modern World

Imam Khomeini

Imam Khomeini

With the advent of the Industrial Revolution and the expansion of relations among countries of the world, transnational and regional dependency of countries on one another gradually increased. Subsequent to the rivalry among great industrial powers then emerging in Europe, a new division in their essential formation appeared. Domination escalated and promoted to the extent that military occupation, formal colonization and ordered appointment formed the principal structure of international relations in its conception at the time. On one hand, throughout the period of influence of the said transformations the relations among countries became more complex and intense everyday in such a way that the ruling class in the countries under domination becomes more durable and firm commensurate to its compliance with the wishes of the dominant powers. On the other hand, the periodic movements for independence and struggles of the nations for deliverance from domination, though succeeded in shaking the then evolving order in the world, were incapable of effecting fundamental and infrastructural changes in the structure and operation of the international relations. As such, cleavage among the countries became wider everyday. Due to this further fragmentation, the power and capability of the backward countries to exert influence in important international issues diminished.

During the initial years of the twentieth century, the world bore witness to two fundamental transformations in international relations. First, the share of the backward countries in important international decisions decreased. Second, the strategic rivalries among the European countries intensified. The intensification of these rivalries finally led to the occurrence of two world wars, the Second World War in particular. Amid the dire consequences of the Second World War, the world witnessed the appearance of a new order foreboding the bipolar system arrangements under the leadership of America in the Western camp and the ex-Soviet Union in the Eastern camp. This important and historic event, which set up new design of the world politics, had some ensuing outcomes:

First, the unknown countries of the Third World as subjects were transformed into role players in the relations of the rival independent variable poles.

Second, such a trend could inevitably tone down zeal for independence among the countries of the world.

Third, the technical concept of ‘independence’ turned to mean a sort of dependency on one of the power poles and keeping aloof from the other pole. This statement does not mean denying the endeavors of the national and religious leaders of the diverse countries in the world, rather, the point is we should know that none of the abovementioned events led to the presentation of an independent doctrine in the international system. Even the steps undertaken in India were not a model for revolution in other countries. It is because the leadership of Gandhi had no movement and motive for the export of revolution in itself. Secondly, in view of the constant traditions, culture and civilization of India, it had utmost emphasis on the creation of a political-populist structure based upon passive and seclusion-oriented individualism innate in the Hindu tradition. In the end, negation of one of the two main poles of power in the East and West was the objective of political endeavor of the humanist Hindu society.

In the same vein, the struggles of the Maoist peasants (village versus city) in China were in the first place not in pursuit of the realization of independence of the countries in the world. Secondly, more than consolidating the anti-Western capitalism front in the world, it became a factor in creating cleavage within the leftist camp of the East. Due to incapability in its political and international choices, it was initially isolated from among the leftist and radical groups and then it became weak in the global level.

As a result, in a brief study of the historical developments in the political systems and units of the world and the expanding relations among states particularly after the first Industrial Revolution, French Revolution, American independence, and the dominance of the colonial system in the world, the more it was nearer to the twentieth century and the First World War, the chance of coming into existence of sovereign and steadfast countries against the wishes and inclinations of European industrial countries was less and rare. Such was the state of affairs until finally, with the victory of the Bolsheviks in 1917 in Tsarist Russia; the formation of the former Soviet Union; the fundamental transformations in many geopolitical regions of the time; the outbreak of the Second World War; and the powerful rise of America in the political scene of the world, the inclination for independence in many Third World countries commenced. Yet, apart from what have been said earlier, the existence or establishment of a government independent from the wish of the superpowers was no longer possible in practice. Of course, as stated earlier, it did and does not suggest the absence of transformation in the world of politics. For, we have been witness to the ostensible independence of so many countries. We have seen various movements of nationalist and non-nationalist, religious and secular genuine forces. Nevertheless, what is important and the point of this article is as follows:

First, none of the struggles led to the creation of sovereign political units especially in the initial part of the twentieth century;

Second, in case of the existence of inclination for independence, it was still incapable of creating a sovereign political unit vis-à-vis the superpowers;

Lastly, with the absence of an experienced and independent model for revolution and achieving independence, the developing countries were wandering only within the circuit of dependency on one pole to another. The world indeed became the chessboard of the superpowers. The disappointed and disillusioned intellectuals and revolutionaries were on the verge of surrender.

In this tortuous, long and winding journey, in terms of the importance of geopolitical regions the world was subjected to profound transformations and necessarily assumed a particular form for itself. On account of the importance of a region for one of the two powers, its possible influence there exacerbated while control of a region became important. In terms of management in those regions, in view of the importance of countries, they appointed more dependent personnel office.

In broader dimensions, among these regions the Persian Gulf was identified as the most important region of the world and Iran among the countries of the region as the most important country existing in the Western bloc. In substantiating this hypothesis, it is enough for us to review the distant and recent past accounts of our country (Iran) from the time of the coming to power of the Ottoman Empire in Turkey up to the time of the disintegration of the former Soviet Union. A historical study shows that during these long years among the Third World countries, there has not been any country as much as Iran in involvement in the international conflicts and developments. The more precise meaning of this statement in the world of politics is that if in any part of the world the possibility is ever imagined of the occurrence of revolution and establishment of a government independent from the dictate and approval of the superpowers, in view of its geopolitical importance in the region, its neighborhood with the main rival of the West (i.e. the erstwhile Soviet Union), and its dominance in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz region in the most complex era of international relations throughout human history in the most strategic region of the world and in the most important Third World country for the Western bloc and America, in the case of Iran, which was named as the gendarme of the region and “island of stability,”1 even to imagine revolution was impossible.

Full article: AIM Islam

The end is close

1. He was sentenced to prison in 1998. His crime was reading a poem with Islamic overtone in a semi-secret meeting of the Welfare Party. His sentence was met with astonishment and criticism because only four years before that, 1994, he was the mayor of Istanbul. High judges of Istanbul announced that Recep Tayyip Erdogan disregarded the principles of secularism by reciting this poem, also the poem ridiculed Ataturk, the founder of secular Turkey.

Tayyip Erdogan was elected as Turkey’s prime minister on the 14th of March, 2003. James Woolsey, the director of the CIA at that time, expressed concern over the election of Erdogan and warned: “Ten years after Najm al-Din Arbikan, the Islamist, secular Turkey should not be faced with Islamists.” James Woolsey considered the Turkish people’s turn towards Islamists as a sign of a huge change in the region which was opened by the Islamic revolution in Iran. In a speech of his, the day after Tayyip Erdogan was elected (15th of March, 2003) and five days before America’s attack on Iraq (20th of March, 2003), which the English newspaper, The Guardian, reported without mentioning his name, he doubted America’s success in the attack on Iraq. He said that if Bush’s purpose in attacking Iraq was to make it a democracy, it must be know that the first principle of a democracy is the general public’s vote. He said that the Middle East after Khomeini’s (r) revolution has changed significantly and if it is left up to the people to vote, they would elect another Khomeini.

2. Thursday, the 29th of January 2009, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s prime minister, attended an international economical session held in Davos, Switzerland and attended by the heads of various countries. Shimon Perez, the president of the Zionist regime was also in attendance. With the bravery that stems from the faith in his heart he condemned the genocide that Israel committed in Gaza. He named Shimon Perez as the murderer of oppressed children. Erdogan, answering the stupid excuses that the Zionist president gave in defending their crimes committed in the 22-Day-War and as David Ignatius, the moderator of the roundtable, was trying to calm him down, he addressed Shimon Perez and said: “You are a lying criminal and you take pleasure in killing children.” Rajab Tayyip Erdogan continued his verbal attack in a loud voice after his microphone was cut off. The session ended and Friday when he returned to the airport in Istanbul the people of his country flocked to greet him chanting: “Welcome champion!” And: “You are a source of pride for us!” And finally: “Islam takes pride in you.”

Tayyip Erdogan likened Gaza to Karbala in the 22-Day-War and said: “Israeli crimes in Gaza makes one remember the sad events of Karbala.”

3. Imam Khomeini, who has predicted many things that have come true, said in a speech in 1988, on the anniversary of the proclamation to prophethood: “Everything has changed except in the castles of these powers. The world has changed and they still imagine that the world is as it was one hundred or one hundred and fifty years ago. They have not understood or they pretend that they do not understand. Africa has changed. Europe has changed. All of Asia has changed. All have changed except these heads. They will fall. They do not know what to do. They have not understood the people; they have not understood the world. Change your opinions. Now is not the time when you can say one thing and everyone will accept it. Do not imagine that everyone must remain silent in front of you.” (Sahifah Imam, v.20, p.241)

After the 33-Day-War in Lebanon and Israel’s defeat at the hands of Hizbollah, Ziof Shaff, a retired Zionist general of the armed forces and considered one of the most brilliant Israeli political analysts, said that this war broke Israel’s façade of being invincible. He was scared that Ben Gurion’s, the first prime minister of the Zionist regime who, like all other Zionists, was famous for his dishonorable murder of many people, prediction was coming true. The explanation of this is that Ben Gurion, after the Ramadan-Yom Kippur War in June 1967 and after the six-day victory over three Arab states, said: “Israel can be victorious in 100 more wars and not have any problems. But, if it looses one war its death will be near.” Ben Gurion did not see into the future and he entered Hell in the beginning of the 70s. He did not witness the victory of the Islamic revolution. He also did not witness beginning of the intifada in Palestine, the forming of Hizbollah in Lebanon, the defeat of Isreal in the 33-Day-War and the 22-Day-War, the voices of ‘Death to Isreal’ from the protests of people in the countries that are allied with the Zionist regime, and the brave rants of Recep Tayyip Erdogan in the Davos session. He was not there to see the world change. Ben Gurian did not mention the specifics of the formula – Israel’s first loss will be the start to its end, or at least the media did not mention it. But, Imam Khomeini (r) in the continuance of that same speech that was mentioned before, pulled the curtain of this secret. In Imam Khomeini’s view, oppressive forces and forces that scare the oppressed are showing off their power. He said: “Oppressed nations of the world must stand up to the oppressors; they must not be scared. They should not imagine that they will do whatever they say. They want to scare you with their propaganda.” Today, people, especially Muslims, clearly understood Imam Khomeini’s words: “A nation that has martyrs does not have captives.”

This point showed itself at the beginning of the Islamic revolution, then the eight-year war, then the 33-Day-War, and finally in the 22-Day-War in Gaza.

Insight-info

The Instances of Arrogant powers and the psychology of arrogance in the viewpoint of Imam Khomeini

Imam Khomeini

Imam Khomeini

Islam and revolutions that have sprung forth from Islam in all ages have been in danger of enemies and an attack by arrogant powers. This principle continues today as well.

In must be observed in regards to arrogant powers that they are not exclusive to particular people or a particular group. They cannot be considered to only be from one or two countries. Rather, they include individuals, organizations, and political parties who are open enemies of Islam. Because of their expansion they have been entitled the world arrogant powers.

Secondly, the enmity that the arrogant powers have with Islam started from the age of the Noble Prophet (s) and this groups enmity has severely increased with the internationalization and spread of Islam. They were always at war with the Prophet and his companions at all times; when the prophet had power and before he had power.

full article: www.insight-info.com

International Al-Quds Day Demonstration in London

Qods Day London

Qods Day London

The Annual Al-Quds Day Demonstration will take place on Sunday 28th September 2008, 1pm at Marble Arch and marching towards Trafalgar Square. The International Day of Al-Quds is day of the oppressed in Palestine and around the World.vIt is held each year on the last Friday of Ramadan. Al-Quds Day is not an Islamic religious holiday but a political event open to both Muslims and non-Muslims alike, and thus observance is not obligatory in Islam.

 
The remembrance of this day originated in Iran after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The observance was suggested by Imam Khomeini, Founder of the Islamic Revolution, in August of that year, saying:

“I invite Muslims all over the globe to consecrate the last Friday of the holy month of Ramadan as Jerusalem Day and to proclaim the international solidarity of Muslims in support of the legitimate rights of the Muslim people of Palestine.”

“For many years, I have been notifying the Muslims of the danger posed by the usurper Israel which today has intensified its savage attacks against the Palestinian brothers and sisters, and which, in the south of Lebanon in particular, is continually bombing Palestinian homes in the hope of crushing the Palestinian struggle. I ask all the Muslims of the world and the Muslim governments to join together to sever the hand of this usurper and its supporters. I call on all the Muslims of the world to select as Jerusalem Day the last Friday in the holy month of Ramadan – which is itself a determining period and can also be the determiner of the Palestinian people’s fate – and through a ceremony demonstrating the solidarity of Muslims world-wide, announce their support for the legitimate rights of the Muslim people. I ask God Almighty for the victory of the Muslims over the infidels.”

Friday Prayers in Tehran

Sayyid Ali Khamenei - Sept. 2008

Sayyid Ali Khamenei - Sept. 2008

Islamic Revolution Leader Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei underlined Friday that the Palestinian issue remains to be the prime regional problem at present, calling for the Muslim people across the globe to take to streets in droves to mark the World Qods Day (Sept 26).

Ayatollah Khamenei told worshippers in Tehran university campus, the venue of Tehran’s weekly Friday prayers that the upcoming World Qods Day ceremonies prove more significant as the Zionist regime had tightened the grip on the Palestinian people.

“The usurper regime has heightened pressure over the Palestinians after facing back-to-back defeats. They could not keep their fake dreadful image in the hearts of the Arab nations due to the valiant resistance of Lebanese and Palestinian warriors,” Ayatollah Khamenei said.

Ayatollah Khamenei denounced the west over its refusal to recognize the elected Hamas government. “The Gaza-based government of Hamas is the very legal authority which the world is expected to recognize. However, those who profess to cherish civilization but otherwise show no trace of humanity witness how the Zionist regime treats the Palestinians and keep silence and even supports it,” the IR Leader deplored.

Ayatollah Khamenei then urged the world of Islam to voice its stance over the issue. “The day of Qods is a favorable chance for the world of Islam. May God confer mercy on Imam Khomeini who designated the day as a day of solidarity with the Palestinian nation,” Ayatollah Khamenei said.

Ayatollah Khamenei expressed hope the world of Islam would see a substantial part of its population out of homes and in streets voicing their support to the Palestinian people. “God willing the world of Islam would grab the opportunity to live up to the right of the Palestinian people.”

 

full article: www.insight-info.com

Commemoration of Sayyid Arif Husseini’s martyrdom

21 years ago Sayyid Arif Husseini’s face was covered in blood by the hands of the arrogant powers of the world.

 Arif Husseini had a high status who reached the high status of martyrdom because of the way he worship the True One.

 These were some of the words by Imam Khomeini about this great martyr.

 Arif Husseini was born into a pure family and started his Islamic studies after middle school in Pakistan.

 After he finished his preliminary Islamic studies he migrated to Najaf in order to complete them.

 Arif Husseini entered Najaf around the same time that Imam Khomeini was exiled there.

 He studied for some time under Ayatollah Madani and then was introduced through him to Imam Khomeini.

 Arif Husseini was attracted to the Imam from that first meeting and decided to fight to the death for him.

 Husseini’s struggles in Iraq caused him to be exiled from there. After he was exiled he returned to Pakistan and after a short while traveled to Qom. He benefited from the presence of Ayatollah Mutahhari, Ayatollah Wahid Khorasani, and others while living in Qom. He was also kicked out of Qom because of his movement and once again returned to Pakistan where he propagated Islam and Imam Khomeini’s thoughts. Three years before his martyrdom he was elected as the head of a large Shia organization which enabled him to spread revolutionary and religious thoughts quickly throughout Pakistan.

 This is why he was targeted and killed by the arrogant powers of the world who feared the progress that he was making.

 Please send a salawat on his soul.

« Older entries