Sayed Kamel Al-Hashimi ripped the religious turbaned lot a huge new one in a debate in Al-Wasat published this morning, I agree with what he says and wish that we had many more like him. Maybe if the other religous “leaders” were to loosen their turban a little bit, maybe blood will reach their dormant and solidified brains to enable them to evaluation positions and thoughts like Al-Hashimi:
«تÙÂغيص» القوى الÙÂاعلة ÙÂيالساØÂØ©– الهاشمي: هناك مشكلة كبيرة، وهيالموازاة بينالذوات والØÂقائق يا شيخ صنقور، وهذا خطأ ÙÂضيع ÙŠØÂصل عند العلمانيينوالمتدينين، ÙÂذاك يقول «أنا الدولة والدولة أنا» وذاك يقول «أنا العلمانية والعلمانية أنا» وذاك يقول «أنا الشريعة والشريعة أنا» وآخر يقول «أنا الدينوالدينأنا»، كلا شيخ صنقور، أنت لست الدينولا أنا الدين، ولست أنت الشريعة ولا أنا الشريعة.
– صنقور(مقاطعاً): Ù†ØÂنلم ندع٠ذلك، ونرÙÂض هذه المغالطة، ونØÂنلم نقل إننا نمثل الدينولا يستطيع Ø£ØÂد أنيقول انه يمثل الدين، وإنما نقول هذا هو الدين، وليس للعباءة أية قداسة ولكنعندما يتوجه الإقصاء لأصل الدينÙÂهذا ما نرÙÂضه إطلاقاً.
– الهاشمي: شيخنا العزيز، دعنيأكمل كلامي…المشكلة الأخرى هو انغماسنا لتبرير الأخطاء ØÂينما يخطأ رجل دين، وأنا لست منهمكاً ÙÂيتبرير الأخطاء، ÙÂما ØÂدث هو زلة وجل منلا يخطأ، ووجهة نظريمعروÙÂØ© ÙÂيالعلمانية، ولكنيجب أننوجه نقدناً للمتدينين، والله سبØÂانه وتعالى ÙÂيالقرآنالكريم لديه تعبيران، وعلى المتدينينأنينتبهوا إلى التعبير الثانيالذييخصهم ØÂينما يقول عزوجل: «يا أيها الذينآمنوا لا تتخذوا الذيناتخذوا دينكم هزواً ولعبا» (المائدة:57)ØŒ والذينهم بØÂسب ÙÂرضكم العلمانيونالذيناتخذوا دينالإسلام هزواً ولعباً.
– صنقور (مقاطعاً): وأنت ماذا تقول ÙÂيمصداق الآية…
-الهاشمي: شيخنا تدبر آيات الله عزوجل والتÙÂت إليها، وانالآية أعابت على مجموعة منالناس اتخذوا دينكم، وهذا أمر طبيعي، لانكل إنسانيعتقد بصØÂØ© دينه، ويقول الإمام الصادق(ع): «ثلاثة لا يقول امرؤ منها إنه على خطأ: دينه الذييعتقده وعمله الذييÙÂعله ورأيه الذييراه»، وهذا أمر طبيعي، ÙÂكل إنسانيتخذ دينالآخرينهزواً ولعباً، لأنه يؤمنبصØÂØ© دينه.
ولكنÙÂيالوقت ذاته لدينا تعبيرٌ إلهيآخر يقول ÙÂيه الله سبØÂانه وتعالى للنبيالكريم(ص): «وذر الذيناتخذوا دينهم لعباً ولهواً» (الأنعام: 70)ØŒ وأنا اعتقد أنّنا نلعب بالدينأيضاً ونلهو به ØÂينما لا نقيمه على أساس صØÂÙŠØÂ. وأنا اسأل المتدينينقبل أناسأل العلمانيين: هل انتم تؤصلونأم تعطلونالØÂالة الدينية بتصرÙÂاتكم وسلوكياتكم مع الناس والرأيالعام، وربما مبدأ نواياكم هو تأصيل الدينولكنالنتيجة هيتعطيل الدينوالرواية عنالرسول الأكرم(ص) تقول: «إنهذا الدينمتين، ÙÂأوغلوا ÙÂيه برÙÂÙ‚ØŒ ولا تكرهوا عبادة الله إلى عباد الله»، وكم منعباد الله كرهوا الدينبسبب المتدينين، وأنا اعتقد أنهذه مسألة لا Ø£ØÂتاج النقاش ÙÂيها بعد بروز القاعدة والتيار السلÙÂيالتكÙÂيري، ÙÂقد صار الناس – بسبب هؤلاء – يخرجونمندينالله Ø£ÙÂواجاً كما كانوا يدخلونه Ø£ÙÂواجاًَ، ÙÂنتمنى ألا نكون«كالراكب المنبث، ÙÂلا ظهر أبقى ولا سÙÂر قطع».
– صنقور: وهل Ù†ØÂنكذلك يا سيد؟– الهاشمي: اعتقد أنالكثير منالمتدينينيسيئونإلى الدين، أنت لا تستطيع أنتنÙÂيالبعد الإنسانيعنيأو عنك، ÙÂأنت إذا أصبØÂت متديناً ÙÂأنت متدينوليس ديناً، ومتشرع وليس شريعة، لا نوازيونخلق بينالذوات والØÂقائق، ÙÂالعدل مطلقاً هو الله والØÂÙ‚ هو الله «ذلك بأنالله هو الØÂق» (الØÂج:62) وكل شيء صاÙÂ٠بلا أيعدم هو الله، وهذا هو أمر مقرر ÙÂيالعقائد، ولا اعتقد أنكم لا تستوعبونه، ÙÂإذا أنا الإنسانليس ديناً، بل أنا منسوب إلى الدين، وأتمنى ألا أكونكالإنسانالذييخطأ و»تغرس» سيارته ومنثم نعطي«بنزين» أكثر «ÙÂتغرس» السيارة أكثر!
– صنقور: أطالبك يا سيد بذكر المظاهر…
– الهاشمي: ذكر المظاهر ليس Ù…ÙÂيداً.
– صنقور: لا، أريدك أنتذكر ليمظهراً أو مظهرينمنتصرÙÂاتنا.
– الهاشمي: ذكر المظاهر ليس مناسباً ليوليس مناسباً لك ولا إلى الدين، ولكنإذا كنت مصراً على ذكر المظاهر على رغم إننيلا أريد ذلك، ÙÂسأشير إلى سياسة (تÙÂغيص) القوى الÙÂاعلة وبدأت المسألة بالقوى الدينية مع الأس٠على مبدأ «الاقربونأولى بالمعروÙ»!ØŒ وهناك قوى دينية كانت ÙÂاعلة ÙÂيالساØÂØ© وهيربما السبب ÙÂيما نتØÂدث ÙÂيه اليوم عنتشريعات ÙÂيالبرلمان، وهيالقوى التياستطاعت أنتثبت Ù†ÙÂسها واتت بضغوطاتها عبر البرلمانواليوم «ÙÂغصت» وجلست ÙÂيبيوتها أو أنها مهمشة منالمجتمع، واليوم أتى الدور على التيار العلماني«ليÙÂغص» ويسØÂب إبراهيم شريÙÂØŒ وأنا أقولها بكل صراØÂØ©: منعندكم أيها المتدينونوالتيار الدينيكله بقضه وقضيضه…
– صنقور: وأنت لست منهم يعني؟!
– الهاشمي: بما ÙÂيهم أنا، منلديكم كإبراهيم شري٠يستطيع أنيوثق سرقة الأراضيوغير ذلك بالاقتصاد وهو إنسانخبير؟، وعندما «تÙÂغص» هذه القوى، وكلما أصبؠلدينا ÙÂيالمجتمع خبير سواء كاندينياً أم علمانياً (نسبة إلى العلم)ØŒ ولا تنسونأنالبعض ينسب العلمانية إلى العلم وليس ÙÂصل الدينعنالدولة، وأنا استغرب أننا نلغيمنالمعادلة 50 عاماً منالوراء، والدليل على ذلك أنالعلمانية صارت ÙÂيها مراجعات منالإسلاميينأنÙÂسهم كالشيخ شمس الدين، ومراجعاته مشهورة ÙÂيالعلمانية وأعطى تÙÂسيراً للعلمانية غير السائد عنالمتدينيناليوم، وهناك منبدأ مراجعات جديدة مثل عبدالوهاب المسيريالذيلديه أكثر منكتاب عنالعلمانية، والكتاب الأخير بجزءيه: «العلمانية الجزئية والعلمانية الشمولية»، وبينما الآخرونوقÙÂوا عند الشهيد السيدمØÂمد باقر الصدر وبعضهم ØÂتى لم يصل إلى هذا المستوى.
إنواØÂداً مثل إبراهيم شري٠يساويمئات الملايين– ÙÂينظري– منأمثال التيار التكÙÂيريالذينيدعونالتدين، ولنرَ مجلة «نيوزويك» ÙÂيعددها ما قبل الأخير التيصدرت بعنوان: «ØÂقائق نريد إنكارها» ومنضمنهذه الØÂقائق النÙÂسية والعلمية تقول: «يلجأ الناس إلى الإنكار عندما يدركونأنالØÂقيقة ستدمر شيئا عزيزاً على قلوبهم، وستدمر شيئاً كبيراً يعتقدونبصØÂته، ومع ذلك تنزلق السيارة ونØÂننصÙÂÙ‚ ونقول: صؠصØÂ»!
وأقول يا شيخنا العزيز صنقور، أنت إنسانمتدين، ولا اعلم أنت ربما تدعيالÙÂقاهة أو هيثابتة إليك، أينÙÂقه الأولويات والمصالؠالتيتقتضيمعارك مهمة وتخير معارك وهمية كما ÙÂعل ØÂزب الله وكما ÙÂعلت إيران؟.
– صنقور: هذه هيمعركة ÙÂكرية…
– الهاشمي: المعركة الÙÂكرية تدور ÙÂيالقاعات والكتب، أما Ù†ØÂول المعركة الÙÂكرية إلى «شيلات ÙÂيمواكب العزاء الØÂسينية» ونØÂنلسنا مكلÙÂينبأنكل خطأ ÙÂعله متدينأننبØÂØ« له عنتبرير.
مراجعة الÙÂكر الدينÙÅ
ربما سيد منخلال دعوتك الصريØÂØ© إلى مراجعة الأÙÂكار الدينية تقصد أنك شريعتيالبØÂرين؟
– الهاشمي: أنا لست «شريعتيالبØÂرين» وأنا استكثر على البØÂرينأنيكونلها مثل شريعتي.
الوسط «ÙÂلتسقط العلمانيّة» ١٢ يوليو ٢٠٠٧
Of course Al-Hashimi also subscribes to the idea that religion should not be used as the main metric to govern a country. In his paper delivered on April 3rd earlier this year in Wa’ad’s premises, he clearly stated that Islam should not be used as such as Allah and the Prophet clearly said that a Muslim’s forte is his mind, not his religiosity:
مسار القناعات المستنبطة: وهو المسار الذييعتمد العقل والعنصر المشترك قبل الاÙÂتراق والتباين، وهو المسار الذيأسس له الرسول الأكرم بقوله (ص): (لكل شيء آلة وعدة وآلة المؤمنو عدته العقل، ولكل شيء مطية ومطية المرء العقل، ولكل شيء غاية وغاية العبادة العقل، ولكل قوم راع وراعيالعابدينالعقل، ولكل تاجر بضاعة، وبضاعة المجتهدينالعقل، ولكل خراب عمارة وعمارة الآخرة العقل، ولكل سÙÂر ÙÂسطاط يلجئونإليه Ùˆ ÙÂسطاط المسلمينالعقل) [نم، ج1ØŒ ص95]ØŒ وهو ما استعاد تأصيله الإمام الصادق (ع) ÙÂÙŠØÂديثه مع ابنالسكيت ØÂينما سأله قائلاً: (ÙÂما الØÂجة على الخلق اليوم؟ قال: ÙÂقال عليه السلام: العقل، يعر٠به الصادق على الله ÙÂيصدقه والكاذب على الله ÙÂيكذبه، قال: ÙÂقال ابنالسكيت: هذا والله هو الجواب) [الكاÙÂÙŠØŒ الكلينيج 1ØŒ ص 25].
Comments
Finally, a turban and a brain to go with it.
lets hope this works for the good of this mess and not make it a war between individuals in news papers and online blogs.
Mahmood,
As much as I enjoy reading your blog at times, there are times when I just cringe at what I read.
You should be smarter than making statements such as “loosen their turban a little bit, maybe blood will reach their dormant and solidified brains”, which acts as a base for comments like “a turban and a brain to go with it” from our friend Eyad the Great..
As an Arab man, with Arabs having had their fair share of generalizations, you should not employ so little carelessness in choosing the words you write.
Turbans are not just worn by our religious leaders, they’re worn by millions around the world. I know if I wore a turban, I would be very offended by what you wrote – whether I was a religious ‘leader’ in Bahrain or not…
Ahmed, I respect your opinion as I hope that you would respect mine.
I wrote what I wrote how I wrote because of my passion for the subject and my personal interpretation of the event; if that offends you or anyone else, well frankly that is really not my problem.
I do believe strongly in separation of the religion and state.
Because through out history religious figures were used by rulers as pawns in order to control the masses of people, nations lived in fear of Myths that do not exist. (Greek Gods).
If you think about it there is a couple of countries here and there that I’d love to point them out but I can’t unfortunately that still uses the same old Greek method.
So therefore I think that it for the best to just live and let live, which recently has became a say that I use in so many occasions, I do believe and I quote a famous writer ” religion is the opium of the people”.
I do understand what I have wrote might offend so many people and I do understand that I’ll face an attack from so many religious fanatics and zealots but all I can say is “live and let live”.
Best regard
Good for you. I am all for it. And click onto this, it made me laugh saying to myself this is water on Mahmoud’s mill. A bit of humour would do a lot of good to your serious blog visitor. The ability to laugh at ourselves opens minds and doors. So there we go what happens under turbans and Hegjabs.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20070709/tod-britain-court-islam-6058bda.html
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article2758838.ece
goodness! Relief us of this “EVIL”, no difference between him and the islamists.
the problem is one of priorities. we have completely different goals.
as far as i am concerned, our country is Moslem but that is not nor should it ever be the goal of the country at the expense of the economy, education, the people and a better life for our children
the other side (and it is another side, like it or not) has other priorities.
my translation:
Islam is for us first -continues Sangoor_ and this country is Moslem and we want to preserve its intellectual, social and cultural identity, and all the other matters are important but they come second
the twain may stroll together often, but they will not converge permenantly.
and the question keeps coming back to
منهيمرجعيتك؟
Political stances should come from data not from people. it should come from knowledge, not from biographies. it should look to the future not to the past. in the past, they believed the earth was float, think where we would be if people still believed that! knowledge is why we live today the way we live today, and if other parts of the world hadnt moved on, we would still be stuck in a time warp. thanks to knowledge we now sit at our keyboards and transmit these messages, and they want to tell me their is Islam.
the problem with Shareef’s response
we might vote on where we are going to have dinner
and we may leave the decision on what to order to each individual
but someone has to make a decision how best to finance the outing. the best person to do that is the one who is best with money.
and
someone has to decide how best to get there. the best people to do that are the one most familiar with the area, with the one who owns the car.
someone should mention that the fish at this restaurant is really awful. the one to do that is the one who comes here every week and knows their menu inside out.
in a way i agree with the strict religious group in that you need to ask your experts. the problem is two things:
1. we ask our experts, we then make our choices. if we still do not understand because of the decision’s complexity, we should defer to them. we do not have to defer to them in all matters.
2. we have to learn to respect that life has many areas and requires much expertise in many fields, none of us have all of it. the expertise will come from different people, not from the religios scholars. from economists and educationalists and businesspeople and scientists and literists and artists … and from religious scholars.
their leaders will never agree with this, because it limits their power of interference and therefore brainwashing power.
then this Sayed comes along. he disagrees with them because….. he believes in knowledge and expertise. they only believe in their own.
Mahmood,
“I wrote what I wrote how I wrote because of my passion for the subject and my personal interpretation of the event; if that offends you or anyone else, well frankly that is really not my problem.”
And Arabs were being assualted all over the Western World because of individuals’ personal interpretation of September 11 and their association of Arabs with all things terrorism.
Sorry Mahmood but that’s a weak excuse for insensitivity.
Ahmed, just accept – and I am sorry to repeat myself – that those were my words and how I chose to phrase them. You are free to disagree with me on the content, not style. So if you do have a germane contribution, please do share, other than that I am not going to change my style of writing just to please you or anyone else.
Now get with the program and stick to the topic if you would.
The goals should be – and largely are – the same, social justice so that people can live with dignity. What they do in their own time is up to them.
Unfortunately the Islamists completely miss this point as they concentrate on trying to force you to be their version of a good Muslim first before they work very hard at trying to make you a good productive human being.
And that’s exactly what Sangoor, Isa Qassim and the others all concentrate on dogmatically. And they have been using the big 4-pound hammers to drive that point across of late.
exactly. it should be. it may be yours and mine, but that is not THEIR main goal.
religion is not what they do on their own time, it is their main priority.
different agenda. hence, lies the divide.
I agree with you Mahmood
That is my stand against religious figures too.
Or in other words as I’d like to put it.
Pray don’t think about economy
Fast don’t consume our food and resources
Work like an ass God loves people who work but as well don’t be greedy and share the wealth, Consult never THINK for your self.
Don’t do this it is a SIN,
Crime and punishment it has always worked to control people.
Sorry for being so carried away
Good luck
sorry, that was me again. my computer apparently does not recognize me anymore!!!
Dear Mahmood,
What is to be realised in Bahrain and especially with in the bahraini shiite sect of islam, that there are different leaders of thought in same sect itself.
You might have groups believing in an islamic government or rule ,, and it is a must .. and is clearly reflected by the movements of Imam Khomeini and his successor Sayed Khamanei. And this school of thought is represented in Bahrain by Shaikh Isa Qassim, not that he calls for it, but he believes in such thing.
You might have another group – some are clergymen with influence – believing that the country should not be run in the name of islam.
And thats what we find in the movements of Grand Ayatullah Sistani – where he have’nt demanded an islamic rule like the one in Iran ” wilayat – ul – faqih “, but in a more liberal country. Actually, they believe that islam should practiced – narrowly – with laws regarding matrimony, divorce, death and distribution of ” meerath “,and at the same time they believe that islam should be practiced at an individual level and social level.
Creating an islamic government is a debatable subject between the shia clergymen themselves.
I can be a religious man and at the same time caliing for separating islam from the government …
وأثلجت صدريكذلك
“ÙÂيالبØÂرينلا توجد علمانية ولا إسلام.. توجد هشاشة إسلامية مقابل هشاشة علمانية”
This is classic! And it’s the bottom line! Couldn’t take this statement out of my head for three days now!
With all due respect to all Islamic clerics, or Liberal leaders and the people of Bahrain (including commentaters in this page), that was the bottom line!
Another classic comment!
I’ve been reading it for three days now.. Took things out of my tongue!
All my respect to the honourable Sayyed! My hat’s off for this person and those like him in Bahrain!
My respect to the leaders of the opposition too (both sides) but people in the middle should be listened too!!
Don’t you think that this particularly indicate that cracks in so far impenetrable walls are starting to appear? I am not happily dancing in the street that political Islam is on the way out, no, but I am thrilled that a cleric in Bahrain has this kind of deep conviction of the necessity for modernity and moderation.
It is thinking like this, I think, that will ultimately save Islam.
Don’t you think that this particularly indicate that cracks in so far impenetrable walls are starting to appear?
Sorry for the mix up ….
I’m not sure which clergymen you are talking about, but I have not heard of them before taking this stance. What I did continuously hear in fact is quite the opposite, as the good Shaikh Isa Qassim, Sangoor and others have deliberately asked for an Islamic State and nothing less!
I do believe strongly in separation of the religion and state.
thanx my body ,, you just mentioned my exact opinion ( Relegion is peaoples opiuom ) now Im proud to be Bahraini bcs Bahrain has somebody to think like you.
Another case of id theft me thinks. Will the “real” Just me please stand up?
What a breath of fresh air this Alhashimi is after all the stifling barbaric comments that come out of most clergy men today. Mind you I tend to feel that the most absurd Islamic fatwas are released by non turban wearing clergy, but in fact of the mini-skirt-thobb-wearing-lice-infested-heavily-bearded ones. LoL! But isnt this what the real Islam is about! ” lakum deenakum w leya deeni “! Way to go Hashimi!
Welcome back Sarah, I missed you! 😀
I’m not sure which clergymen you are talking about, but I have not heard of them before taking this stance. What I did continuously hear in fact is quite the opposite, as the good Shaikh Isa Qassim, Sangoor and others have deliberately asked for an Islamic State and nothing less!
Hmm are you sure Al Hashimi is´nt really Cat Stevens ( Yusuf Islam) in diquise ?? looks just like him …. lol
Seems like a sensible chap…. but can he sing ? That is the quesion !
” Oh baby ,baby it´s a wild world !!…..”
Vic