Observations by Sunni ‘Ulama’ who visited Iran

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

Observations by Sunni ‘Ulama’ who visited Iran

We have reviewed the statements of the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran and clarified the oppression that has afflicted them, as well as the satanic methods practiced by the Ayatollahs of Tehran against all of the Ahlus Sunnah, and not solely against the Kurds or solely against the Baloch.

In this section, we transition to presenting the statements of a number of scholars from the Ahlus Sunnah who visited Iran in response to official invitations from the leaders of the glorious Revolution. All of these individuals had praised the Khomeini Revolution at its inception and believed it to be an Islamic, non-Shia revolution. However, they were shocked by the realities when they participated in international conferences in Tehran. Among numerous publications and reports, we have selected the following three reports:

• A report by the Deputy Secretary-General of the Jami’at ‘Ulama’ al Islam in Pakistan, Sheikh Zahid al Rashidi, published by the Pakistani journal al Balagh. It is the finest and most rigorous of these reports.
• Verbal statements by Sheikh Muhammad ‘Abdul Qadir Azad, head of the Majlis ‘Ulama’ Pakistan, given to several newspapers and published in a printed pamphlet entitled What Is Happening to the Sunnis in Iran.
• A report by the scholar Muhammad Sa’id Banu from South Africa, published in Cape Town under the title Nine Days in Iran.

Report by Sheikh Zahid al Rashidi

This is a translation of what the Deputy Secretary-General of the Jami’at ‘Ulama’ al Islam in Pakistan, Sheikh Zahid al Rashidi, wrote in the Urdu language following his return from an official visit to Iran at the invitation of some Iranian officials. In his statement, he revealed the hardships he and the members of the accompanying delegation witnessed against the Sunnis in Iran.

This article was published by several monthly journals in the Urdu language, including the journal Al Balagh, which is issued monthly from Dar al ‘Ulum Karachi, in its twenty-first volume, Issue No. 6, dated 16 Jumada al Ula 1407 AH, corresponding to 17 February 1987 CE. The following is the text of the translation:

I visited some areas and cities in Iran accompanied by a number of scholars and intellectuals from 01/01/1987 to 12/01/1987, at the invitation of Iranian officials. The delegation consisted of:

1. Sheikh Manzur Ahmed Chanyuti, member of the Punjab Assembly.
2. Shudari Safdar ‘Ali, from Lahore.
3. Sayed Muhammad Ahsan Khakwani, from Multan.
4. Rajah Rab Nawaz, from Quetta
5. Dr. I’jaz Shafi’ from Islamabad.
6. Sayed Mukhtar Hasan from Rawalpindi.
7. Mufti Da’im al Din from Sakhi.
8. Sayed Asad Allah Butu from Sakhi.
9. Sayed Hussain Ahmed from Quetta.
10. Sayed ‘Abdur Rahman from Quetta.
11. Dr. ‘Ata’ al Rahman from Quetta.
12. Dr. ‘Abdul Wasi’ from Loralai.
13. Mirza Rashid Bank from Quetta.
14. Sayed Shahid Hussain from Quetta.

We were guests of the Iranian government—the Islamic Propagation Organisation. The head of the organisation abroad is Hujjat al Islam Muhammad ‘Ali Taskhiri, along with his companions Sayed Mas’ud ‘Ali Ridwi and Sayed Khalid Hussain. They were responsible for hosting arrangements and treated us with excellent hospitality, for which we thank them.

We also had the privilege of meeting with senior leaders of the Iranian Revolution and holding discussions with them, among them Sayed Ayatollah Montazeri (deputy of Khomeini), Sayed Ayatollah Jannati, Sayed Ayatollah Khaz’ali, Sayed Ayatollah Tabasi, and other members of the Iranian Parliament. We also visited Shia religious schools in the city of Qom, specifically the Faydiyyah School of Sayed Ayatollah Khomeini, Jami’at al Imam Jafar al Sadiq in Tehran, Jami’at al Imam al Rida in Mashhad, and Jami’at Zahedan (Balochistan).

We gained insight into the level of the educational system in Iran. The objectives of our visit to Iran were:

1. To learn about the achievements of the Iranian Revolution.
2. To observe the transformation of Iranian society after the Revolution.
3. To understand the aspects of the efforts and endeavours undertaken by the Iranian Revolution.
4. To ascertain the conditions of the Ahlus Sunnah and the extent of the civil rights and other entitlements they enjoy.

Our efforts were directed, to the extent possible, towards benefiting and gaining knowledge about the aforementioned objectives (by which I mean expressing my impressions and observations regarding the conditions of the Ahlus Sunnah and their rights in Iran—and it is not necessary that these impressions be shared by all delegation members). However, the basis of these observations is built upon facts that were witnessed by everyone.

Our means of learning about the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran was through our hosts, as they scheduled for us the day designated for observing the Iranian Parliament. On that same day, they arranged a session with eight members of the Iranian Parliament from the Ahlus Sunnah. We were informed that the total number of members in the Iranian Parliament is two hundred and seventy—among whom fourteen are members from the Ahlus Sunnah, including the eight who participated in the session with us. Sheikh Muhammad Ishaq al Madani, Sheikh Muhammad Hamid Damani, and Sheikh Sayed Hussain led the Sunni members in Parliament. The first two are from Iranian Balochistan, and the third is from Kurdistan. In this session, we obtained much highly useful information regarding the work of the Iranian Parliament and the manner in which the Iranian Revolution deals with the Ahlus Sunnah, as well as the impressions of the Ahlus Sunnah towards the Iranian Revolution. Numerous issues became clear to us through inquiries, but we noted that Sheikh Muhammad Hamid and Sheikh Muhammad Ishaq al Madani, despite their proficiency in the Urdu language, avoided conversing in it, and spoke with us in Persian, insisting consistently on using Persian. We realised the reason for their avoidance of conversing in Urdu.^[1]

It was not planned by our hosts for us to visit Sunni scholars or other Sunni notables; in fact, we sometimes noticed that they deliberately avoided this. However, we attempted to visit some Sunni scholars by altering the visit schedule arranged by the officials and deviating from some of the programs they had scheduled.

During our visit to Sheikh ‘Abdul ‘Aziz ibn ‘Abdullah Saryari, an important issue arose with the Iranians. The aforementioned Sheikh is the preacher of the central Masjid in Zahedan (Balochistan) and is one of the senior scholars of the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran. He had close ties with the leaders of the Iranian Revolution initially and, after the Revolution, was a member of the parliament that drafted the Iranian constitution, representing Balochistan. When we arrived in Zahedan, we learned that Sheikh ‘Abdul ‘Aziz was ill and in a hospital in Tehran. After returning to Tehran, we attempted to include a visit to Sheikh ‘Abdul ‘Aziz in our schedule, but unfortunately, despite our repeated efforts, we did not succeed in fulfilling this wish, as the officials, through their actions, made it clear that they were unwilling to allow it. In any case, as the time approached for our departure from Tehran to Mashhad, I, along with Sayed Manzur Ahmed Chanyuti, Sayed Hussain Ahmed, Qari’ ’Abdur Rahman, Dr. ‘Ata’ al Rahman, and Shudari Safdar ‘Ali, resolved to honour Sheikh ‘Abdul ‘Aziz with a visit. We reached his location in the hospital and had the honour of meeting him and conversing with him on various topics. We noted from his complaints about the leaders of the Revolution that the exclusion of a meeting with him and the omission of a visit to him from their program was not without reason.

Upon our return to Zahedan, we encountered the same situation as in Tehran, where we (three or four of our colleagues) visited Dar al ‘Ulum Zahedan, and we left the rest of our colleagues at the resting place. There, we met with Sheikh Nadhir Ahmed and Sheikh Muhammad Qasim, both graduates of Dar al ‘Ulum Karachi in Pakistan, and currently teaching at Dar al ‘Ulum in Zahedan.

The delegation’s schedule had announced that the ’Asr prayer would be held at the central Masjid, but they detained the delegation from the afternoon until the time for ’Asr and Maghrib prayers had passed, while they had decided to travel to Pakistan in the morning. We were forced to perform the ’Asr and Maghrib prayers at Dar al ‘Ulum Zahedan. After intense insistence and pressing, and with much bitter discussion, the delegation succeeded in reaching the central Masjid to perform the ’Isha’ prayer—and indeed, we prayed ’Isha’ at the mentioned Masjid. We met a number of worshippers and students from Dar al ‘Ulum in Zahedan, discussed some problems and issues with them, and obtained some new information.

We also wished to visit Sheikh Muhammad Yusuf, the special student of the eminent scholar Sayed Muhammad Yusuf al Bandari, as he is in Saradan managing a large religious school with a significant number of students of religious sciences at all levels, including the final stage—meaning the completion of the college degree. Sheikh Muhammad Yusuf is a colleague of Sheikh Manzur Ahmed Chanyuti, as they studied together. Saradan is located approximately two hundred kilometres from Zahedan. Sheikh Muhammad Yusuf had been informed by telephone of our desire to meet, so he arrived in Zahedan on the night we were intending to depart. When he reached our location, the delegation was preparing to go visit the Amir of Balochistan. The delegation instructed me to remain with Sheikh Muhammad Yusuf after discussing the matter among themselves, while the rest of the delegation members would go to visit the Amir. However, the officials prevented Sheikh Muhammad Yusuf and his two colleagues from entering our accommodation and ordered us to sit in a guest room affiliated with the Department of Information, under the guard of several individuals, and we spoke for about an hour or longer—as if we were in prison, similar to how a political leader is treated in prison when meeting his visitors.^[2]

We became certain that the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah suffer from problems and hardships in Iran. Perhaps we would not have believed these matters^[3] had not the officials and those accompanying our visits proven to us these mentioned problems and the complaints received through their treatment and behaviour. They left us no opportunity to investigate further, revealing to us only enough to confirm and verify the complaints and problems we had heard about, and we learned that they are indeed true. After this brief presentation, I will mention those hardships and problems facing the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran, and it becomes clear—in light of how the leaders of the Iranian Revolution treat the Ahlus Sunnah—that there is currently no prospect for resolving these problems.

1. Statistics in Iran have not been compiled based on sectarian affiliation (Shia and Sunni), and thus it is very difficult to know the exact percentage of the Ahlus Sunnah population with certainty and accuracy. However, according to estimates by some Sunni leaders, the number of the Ahlus Sunnah amounts to twenty-five percent of the total population of Iran. Most Ahlus Sunnah reside in the provinces of Balochistan and Kurdistan.^[4] However, the system of governance is a unified central system and provincial governors have no authority, as the provincial governor is merely a representative of the central government. Therefore, the Sunni majority has no political impact or weight in the mentioned provinces unless the government implements a regional system. Only then would the Ahlus Sunnah gain weight and respect among the Shia in Balochistan and Kurdistan.
2. The Ahlus Sunnah do not have a single Masjid in the capital of Iran, despite their large number, due to the Iranian government’s refusal to permit the construction of a Masjid for them.
3. The proportion of the Ahlus Sunnah in important government positions and sensitive roles is very small and not worth mentioning.
4. In regions where the majority of the population is Ahlus Sunnah, senior positions are held by Shia who are not native to these areas, particularly in Balochistan, where all important positions are occupied by non-Sunnis and non-residents.
5. The Iranian government strives to exclude the Ahlus Sunnah from employment through various means.
6. The planning for expanding housing for non-Sunnis in regions where the majority of residents are the Ahlus Sunnah is being carried out gradually. Senior Sunni leaders informed us of this and expressed their grave concern about the plan being implemented in the provinces of Balochistan and Kurdistan, stating that if conditions continue this way, the two mentioned regions will transition from majority to minority within ten years.
7. The authorities have granted minorities in Iran the right to form organisations according to the constitution, except for the Ahlus Sunnah, who are deprived of this right. For instance, one of the senior Sunni leaders, Ahmed Moftizadeh, attempted to form an organisation to connect the Ahlus Sunnah with each other under the name Central Consultative Council for the Ahlus Sunnah, but he was abruptly arrested shortly thereafter and remains in prison, enduring the severe sufferings that prisoners experience.
8. Sheikh Dost Muhammad al Baluchi from the city of Saradan, one of the senior scholars of the Ahlus Sunnah, was arrested on charges of raising demands for the rights of the Ahlus Sunnah and defending his ‘extremist’ creed. He fell severely ill in prison and was released from it, only to be sentenced to exile for five years to the village of Najafabad—one of the Shia villages near Isfahan—after having spent a full year in prison.
9. Similarly, another senior scholar from the Ahlus Sunnah, Sheikh Muhyi al Din al Baluchi, director of the Dar al Tawhid Islamic School in the city of Sarakhs, was arrested on charges of raising demands for the rights of the Ahlus Sunnah and defending his ‘extremist’ creed. A verdict was issued against him sentencing him to exile for seven years to another town, after he had spent a full year in prison.
10. Sheikh Nazar Muhammad al Baluchi, a former member of the Iranian Parliament elected by the residents of the city of Iranshahr in Balochistan, was arrested on charges of protesting a lecture delivered on the topic of Umm al Mu’minin Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha and the Battle of the Camel, which was broadcasted on Tehran Radio. The lecturer stated, “Those who accompanied Aisha in the Battle of the Camel were leaders of disbelief.” The religious zeal of the aforementioned Sheikh was aroused and he denounced this lecture and its content, submitting a formal protest regarding it.
11. The absence of religious education in Iran at the state level and its unavailability in most regions of Iran compel Iranian Sunni students to travel to Pakistan to pursue religious sciences. However, obtaining passports for them is difficult, and any student who travels to Pakistan to study religious sciences without a passport is arrested upon their return. In contrast, the situation is the opposite for the Shia, since thousands of Pakistani students study in the schools of Qom. According to the information that reached us, some Sunni students requested passports but were denied them. These obstacles diminish the students’ motivation and frustrate their desires to pursue religious sciences in the Islamic schools and universities of Pakistan.
12. Furthermore, the Ahlus Sunnah have complained about the non-admission of their students into Iranian universities, especially those students who have certain sectarian backgrounds, religious enthusiasm, and faith-based zeal.
13. A prominent personality from among the scholars of the Ahlus Sunnah informed us and expressed his regret over what is issued by prominent Shia figures during joint gatherings between us and them, particularly regarding their affronts to the beliefs of the Ahlus Sunnah—such as insulting the great Companions and those below them. This great scholar added, “We endure everything; we are even prepared to forfeit our freedom to live. However, we cannot endure insults to the great figures. How can that be tolerated? It is beyond endurance. Death at that point is far sweeter than this bitter life.”
14. A Sunni employee who demonstrates awareness and concern for the rights and issues of the Ahlus Sunnah is sidelined and transferred from their workplace to a remote location to pressure them into resigning. Through this tactic, the government rids itself of Sunni employees. Using this very tactic, Sheikh ‘Abdul Hakim Sarbazi, the brother of Sheikh ‘Abdullah Sarbazi, was removed from his position.

It is worth noting that these complaints come from segments of the Ahlus Sunnah that made tremendous efforts in supporting the Iranian Revolution at its inception and foundation. These complainants openly acknowledge (despite these complaints) that Iranian society has improved in terms of living standards^[5] and religion after the Revolution compared to the previous era under the Shah. They also admit that the behaviour of the Revolution’s leaders towards the Ahlus Sunnah was initially encouraging, but as the Iranian Revolution consolidated its control and power, conditions shifted from good treatment to bad treatment, and thereafter, from bad to even worse.

The discontent of the Ahlus Sunnah, who constitute 25% of Iran’s total population, reflects their lack of confidence in the leaders of the Iranian Revolution and creates a significant rift that is not in the interest of the Iranian Revolution.

I deem it my duty to draw the attention of the Islamic world—its organisations, associations, and intellectuals—toward their brothers, the Ahlus Sunnah of Iran. I conclude this article of mine, hoping from the generosity and grace of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala that the Islamic world will adopt a unified stance with one voice regarding their brothers from the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran, who have been deprived of their rights. The voices of the Islamic world must rise, appealing to the leaders of the Iranian Revolution to grant the Ahlus Sunnah their legitimate rights so that they may live in dignity and honour.

Statements by the Senior ‘Ulama’ of Pakistan

Sheikh Muhammad ‘Abdul Qadir Azad, President of the Majlis ‘Ulama’ Pakistan (Pakistan Ulema Council), visited Iran twice:

The first time was in February 1980 on the occasion of what they termed the “First Anniversary of the Iranian Revolution.”

The second time was in 1982 on the occasion of the convening of the World Conference for Friday and Congregational Imams.

Both visits occurred following an official invitation from the leadership of the Iranian Revolution. Sheikh Muhammad ‘Abdul Qadir Azad led a delegation comprising eighteen Pakistani scholars, met with Khomeini and asked him questions and listened to his answers, and discussed important matters with him. He also met with the rest of the leaders of the Iranian Revolution. He was displeased with what he saw and heard, and on one occasion felt compelled to withdraw and return to the hotel accompanied by the Pakistani scholars. He confronted the Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs, ‘Ali Akbar Walayati with the reasons that led him to withdraw. After the Sheikh’s return from Iran, he spoke, lectured, and published his observations about the Iranian Revolution and his experiences. Below is what he said regarding the conditions of the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran.

• All Sunni employees were purged on charges of collaborating with the Shah of Iran.
• Although they represent 23% of the population, none of them has the right to hold the position of president, prime minister, army leader, or other high-ranking posts.
• The Sunnis in Iran live like prisoners. In the city of Tehran, which has a population of seven million, there is not one Masjid for the Sunnis, despite the existence of twelve churches for the Christians and four for the Jews, not to mention the temples of the Magians. How can this be, when Khomeini is the one calling for the unity of the community?

The election of Sheikh Muhammad ‘Abdul Qadir Azad as deputy head of the Proposals Committee at the World Conference for Friday and Congregational Imams—i.e., in the second term—was significant. He proceeded to present important proposals, among which were the following:

• Among the evidence of your endeavour to fragment the unity of the Islamic community is the arrest of all Sunni scholars, such as al ‘Allamah Diya’i and Moftizadeh.
• The Iranian government has charged Sunni Iranian soldiers with treason, considered them rebels and insurgents and aides to the Shah, and sentenced them to death. This is a serious matter that undermines the unity of the Islamic community, fragments its word, and increases its fragmentation.
• Three years ago, Khomeini had promised the elites in a meeting with a Sunni delegation headed by Professor Sheikh ‘Abdul ‘Aziz, the head of the Sunni religious scholars in Zahedan, to grant a piece of land to build a Masjid upon it for the Sunnis in Tehran. Despite the price being paid, an order was issued to confiscate the paid sum and to imprison whoever paid this amount. Despite my appeal to Khomeini last year to fulfil his promise to the Sunnis, I found at the conference I attended this year some of his aides saying, “If we were to give the piece of land so that a Masjid for the Sunnis could be built upon it, it would become a Masjid al Dirar (mosque of hypocrisy).”
• For ten years, the Sunnis were accustomed to performing the ‘Id prayers in a public square in Tehran. However, this year, after they were granted official permission to pray for ‘Id al Fitr, and the worshippers gathered, the police forces arrived and dispersed the worshippers using helicopters and clubs.
• If Khomeini is serious in his call for the unity of the Islamic community, then he must declare from the rooftops that Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhum were Muslims, and that every Muslim—Sunni or Shia—must respect them with a respect equal to that afforded to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Thereby, the gap between Sunnis and Shia would narrow. May Allah guide us to the Straight Path.

These are the most important suggestions made by the Sheikh, the President of the Majlis ‘Ulama’ Pakistan, to the conference, and it was met with rejection. The Sheikh says that the dispute intensified between him and them, and that the ‘Ulama’ of the Ahlus Sunnah—whose number was no less than one hundred—became aware of the goals of the Iranians, and they did not sign the statement desired by the followers of Khomeini.

Statement of Sheikh Muhammad Sa’id Banu

Sheikh Muhammad Sa’id Banu, a scholar and preacher from South Africa, participated in the 1982 conference that Sheikh Azad attended—namely, the World Conference for Friday and Congregational Imams. He wrote a report entitled Nine Days in Iran. The first thing that caught his attention was that many of those who participated in this conference were called imams but were not imams, and they had come through mediation or because they carried a special recommendation. Concerning the conditions of the Ahlus Sunnah, he summarises their problems as follows:

1. The small number of their representatives in parliament, as they have fourteen members out of two hundred and seventy-two, which amounts to 5%, although they represent 25%. And among them there are no ministers or deputy ministers.
2. The application of the Jafari Shia school of law in the judiciary.
3. Repression, given that their most prominent scholars—including Moftizadeh—along with approximately two thousand Sunni intellectuals, are imprisoned.
4. The absence of Masjids for the Sunnis in Tehran, while permitting the building of temples for followers of other religions.
5. Propaganda against the Sunni school of thought in the media, where the Shia revile the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, especially the first three Khalifahs.
6. The educational system is biased towards the Shia creed.
7. Discrimination in treatment, as Sunnis face difficulty in obtaining work, unlike the Shia.

The writer, Muhammad Sa’id Banu, calls for an examination of the problems of the Sunnis in Iran, especially in the prisons. He noted during the conference that when they prayed in congregation, a Sunni person was never asked to lead them in prayer.

He mentions that there are students from Islamic countries who come to Iran to study Sunni schools of thought, only to convert to Shi’ism. He wonders about the future of these students upon their return to their countries and their rejection by their societies.

He then speaks about the contradiction between rhetoric and application in Iran, for they support the Syrian Ba’athist regime which killed members of the Muslim Brotherhood, while they fight against the Ba’athist regime in Iraq. Another example is their support for Ghaddafi—despite his unfortunate Islamic stances—and so on.

NEXT⇒ What happens in the Prisons of the Ayatollahs?

^[1]  The two Sunni representatives in the Iranian Parliament: Sheikh Muhammad Ishaq al Madani and Sheikh Muhammad Hamid Damani, who are Sunni, are unable to converse with the visiting delegation in the Urdu language, despite their mastery of it, and insist on speaking in Persian so that the conversation would be clear in front of the authorities’ spies. What oppression is this, what terrorism is this, and where is the immunity for members of parliament?

^[2]  What is mentioned in the report of the Deputy Secretary-General of the Jami’at ‘Ulama’ al Islam Pakistan implies the following commentary, “We spoke for about an hour or more as if we were in prison, similar to how a political leader is treated in prison when meeting his visitors.” This is the treatment of the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran and of the Ahlus Sunnah who visit Iran on official invitations.

^[3]  These observers were convinced after seeing with their own eyes, although sight is not the only means of verifying news.

^[4]  I do not know why they do not mention the rest of the Sunni regions despite their importance.

^[5]  Enough with pleasantries! These methods have harmed us greatly. The truth is that the Shah was a tyrant and a criminal, but these current leaders are more tyrannical, criminal, and oppressive.