The battle for dominion of Islamic world

Jan 21, 2016

There are two diverging forms of Islam — the Sunnis and Shiites. In Qom (a city south of Tehran) for example, there are 40 institutions connected to the mosque, but they were not religious organizations: they were associations to help the deaf, or the blind, for medicines, a children’s TV, an astronomics observatory in the nearby mountain,  a Library of history, philosophy ... I once even found an imam who told me that every day he read some pages of Plotinus’ Enneads, in the original Arabic version manuscript, which is still called Theology of Aristotle.

This is unthinkable in the Sunni world. Under the Wahhabi tradition, these books would be burned. Mystical Islam has always been similarly persecuted: we should remember what happened with Al Hallaj in the ninth century. He was crucified for his ideas and his writings, in which he described his spiritual union with God.

Some years ago, in 2008, we held the first Catholic-Muslim Forum at the Vatican. There I met an imam who was “a teacher of philosophy.” We discussed a recent episode:  A university student in Paris posted on the website islam.org asking for help in preparing a thesis on Avicenna (980-1037). The answer was: Do not study these things of unbelievers, focus instead on the Quran! The imam in front of me, a Shiite, concluded: This was certainly the response of a Sunni imam. They have no understanding of philosophy or science.

A Shiite imam’s formation includes many subjects that are not strictly religious, but cultural. In contrast, Sunni imams are limited to the study of Islam. For this, dialogue with the Shiites is easier and of a wider scope; dialogue with the Sunnis has a very narrow base. A Sunni imam’s formation focuses primarily on memorizing verses from the Quran without understanding or interpreting, or putting them into a historical context.

Supremacy in the islamic world
Sunnis and Shiites have the same outlook on life and religion, and this is why they clash. This clashing of views has existed since the beginning, but once, the differences were more accepted. With Wahhabism, the Sunni dogma is emerging everywhere. In Pakistan, for example, the blasphemy laws that have led to the death sentence of Asia Bibi and the killing of so many people, are inspired typically by Arabia. In all Sunni regions — with the exception of some countries like Egypt — this fundamentalism that rejects the use of reason in the reading of the Quran is spreading.

Sunnis and Shiites are fighting to win supremacy of influence in the Islamic world and for those who must deal with the West. Iran’s nuclear deal with the major powers gives free rein to Tehran; and Saudi Arabia — which opposed the agreement to the very end — are still bitterly opposed to it. So does Israel, although for different reasons.

It should also be said that the ISIS war was originally an anti-Shiite war. 

It is no small chance that the governing groups in Syria and Iraq refer to Shiism: the Alaouite minority in Damascus and the Shiites (who are the majority of the population) in Baghdad. Tensions and clashes between the two communities are now widespread in Lebanon, India, Pakistan, wherever there are Shiite communities.

Shiites are a maximum 15 per cent of Muslims and therefore, cannot claim to be hegemonic in the Islamic world. The Sunnis, who are the vast majority, tend to establish themselves in an all-encompassing manner. Very often, in televised debates in Egypt, I hear the Sunni imam tell his fellow Shiites, “You have no right to be here! This is a Sunni land.” And the Shiites are Egyptian like him!

No Self-Criticism
In addition to the tendency towards totalitarianism, the Sunni world has always tempted to absolve itself of all blame: It has never exercised any self-criticism. For centuries, the Muslim world has had a pluralist character. From the eighth to the thirteenth century, under the Abbasids with its capital in Baghdad, there were Sunnis and Shiites, fundamentalists and liberals. In the ninth century, there were even Mu’tazili who claimed that “the Quran was created,” while others said it was “uncreated.” If the holy book is “uncreated,” it comes directly from God and cannot be touched; if it is “created,” then it is possible to study and interpret it. The Mutazilite position developed for centuries, especially under the Caliph al-Ma’mun (813-833). His successor, al-Mu’tasim (833-842), instead took on a partisan position regarding the “uncreated” question and ousted the Mu’tazili. But their power remained over the centuries: the Quran must be interpreted with reason, with what is most acute and intelligent in reality. Unfortunately nowadays this position is seen as a threat and those who express it risk being accused of heresy.

The Al-Azhar University is suffering greatly as a result of this problem: being partially supported by Saudi Arabia, it does not criticize the “uncreated” position, although in the past, it forcefully drove the need for reform modernizing Islam.

Money and Submission
Here another issue comes into play: how does Saudi Arabia spread its Wahhabi ideology? Egypt receives at least $3 billion a year from Riyadh, Sudan receives a few billion ... To win them over to their vision, the Saudis are willing to pay, to support governments and build mosques. More than  1,000 mosques have been built so far by Saudi Arabia in many parts of the world (also in Italy and in Europe). Usually, these mosques are majestic, huge, and Riyadh also pays imams and employees. The reality is: he who pays, commands. And this is why Saudi Arabia influences the style of Islam that is lived.

In Egypt, because of Saudi Arabia’s influence, the sale of food and drink to anyone is prohibited during Ramadan. In return, the Saudis bought an area close to the pyramids, which became an exclusive resort where rich Arabs enjoy freedoms banned in their own nation. Some Muslims see Saudis as “corrupt,” but who guarantees them power? Thanks to their money and wealth.

What is sad is that Saudi Arabia buys “religious” allies with money. It should be noted that their fundamentalist religious style, and practice of syariah leads directly to the ISIS style of government. Every week, there are executions in Saudi squares — beheadings, flogging, stoning — conducted as if it were a religious rite, just as we see in the videos distributed by ISIS.

I would add a caveat: ISIS did not just fall from the sky. ISIS is the brutal application of teaching spread not only by Saudi Arabia, but also by the many Islamic universities, including certain teachings of Al-Azhar, which forms thousands of imams yearly! This phenomenon has been highlighted by liberal scholars in some television broadcasts. The source which inspires jihadists has its origin in a traditional Islamic teaching that is still widespread today!

A political clash
In an attempt to rule the Islamic world, Saudi Arabia wants to decide on the future of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, many African and Asian countries. It has a negative role, because it lacks a wide and tolerant vision and totally ignores modern thought: it only tolerates syariah and is spreading this fundamentalist vision across the world. It is thanks to this that fundamentalism has arrived in Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, etc.

In this light, Iran, with its more open and cultivated Islam, could act as a counter balance, but despite being the most populous nation in Arabia, it does not reflect the strength it possesses. And the Shiites are far from popular in the Gulf.

The clash between Saudi Arabia and Iran is therefore a political clash, but its roots are religious and the fight is for religious supremacy. Moreover, in the Islamic world, religion and politics go hand in hand. -- AsiaNews