The Ahlus Sunnah in Iran – A Study in Religious Discrimination and State Repression – Introduction

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

The Ahlus Sunnah in Iran

A Study in Religious Discrimination and State Repression

Introduction

All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. May peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and all of his Companions. To proceed:

For a long time, the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran remained cut off from their Muslim brothers across the Islamic world, confined within the artificial borders that the hand of tyranny had erected around them since the Safavid era.^[1] This state of affairs persisted throughout dark centuries until Allah willed the removal of this unjust blockade and the end of a long era of separation. The time came for brothers to meet one another, even if this meeting occurred only through the pages of Islamic magazines, which spoke on behalf of the children of the Islamic Ummah. Were it not for these magazines, this matter would have remained hidden from them. But how, then, should one begin talks on these amicable platforms during such a dark age—this age of overwhelming ignorance into which the Ummah has fallen and has been suffering greatly under its oppressive dominance since it strayed from the guidance of its Lord?

Could some of them speak during these gatherings about issues other than those of Palestine, Kashmir, Eritrea, the Philippines, Kurdistan, Baluchistan, Turkmen-Sahra, and other important issues of the Islamic Ummah? How could it be that some of them, unless they wish to disavow Islam, remain indifferent to the suffering of their people, neglecting to stay awake through the night in concern and vigilance, or fail to rise against evil—first with their hands, and if they are unable, then with their tongues, and if they are unable even do to that, then at least with their hearts? O Allah, so long as there are still those who consider themselves to be Muslims! Then listen, O children of the Ummah, to the words of your brothers, the Ahlus Sunnah in Iran, regarding their painful plight, so that their hopes in you are not disappointed.

In Iran: This country, distinct in character among all Islamic lands, ever since it was first liberated by the early Muslim conquerors radiya Llahu ‘anhum and its people entered into Islam after the overthrow of the Sassanian monarchy and the removal of tyrants from their arrogant, oppressive thrones, dispersing their ranks, ever since this land became part of the greater Islamic world and lost its colonial identity and status as the super-power of the time—this country has remained, since that era, a breeding ground for conspiracies and a source of sedition by the remnants of the royal family of the oppressive kings, their agents, and those who follow in their footsteps. These individuals could not bear to see their country ruled, against their will, by foreigners who came from the deserts of the Arabian Peninsula, as brothers to an oppressed people who had escaped the enslavement of kings. Nor could they tolerate seeing the halls of their Iwan Kisra (Palace of Ctesiphon) trodden under the feet of Arabs, who, prior to being uplifted by Islam, had no notable standing. As their poet Ferdowsi lamented in his epic Shahnameh, cursing the revolving heavens and blaming fate because of the “lizard eating, camel-milk drinking” Arabs who trampled the throne of the king and the Iwan Kisra in al Mada’in. For this reason, their most wretched agent, Fayruz the accursed, assassinated our master ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu, creating a breach in Islam that has yet to be sealed. This set the Muslims on a path of decline throughout these centuries, as is evident.

Yes, that faction was not able to achieve its goals, nor could they find peace of mind as long as they saw the rule of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala prevailing over their land, as it had during the early period of the Islamic conquest. However, what choice did they have when the majority of the population had embraced Islam and would not return to the darkness of the Sassanian system after having seen the light of Islam and tasted the sweetness of the fruits of Allah’s rule? The only way to incite sedition and restore their lost glory and oppressive colonial dominance over the Iranian people and other nations was through deception, cunning, and misleading the Muslims—portraying the first three Rightly-Guided Khalifahs radiya Llahu ‘anhum, as well as most of the Muhajirin and Ansar radiya Llahu ‘anhum, or rather, the early vanguards of Islam, as usurpers of the rights of the Ahlul Bayt radiya Llahu ‘anhum and their enemies. They proclaimed among the people that this faction sought to restore rights to their rightful owners.

From this starting point, the great sedition began and the corrupt agitators started revolting here and there, with some of them even ascending to the throne of power in one region or another. This state of affairs persisted for several centuries until it culminated in the rise of the Safavids, who established a Shi’i state, claiming affiliation with the Ahlul Bayt. But Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala knows that the Ahlul Bayt are innocent and independent, neither submitting to the Abbasid rule nor to the Ottoman rule at that time, which—despite its flaws—remained a point of convergence and unity for Muslims. With the Safavids’ ascent to power, Iran regained an independent^[2] identity after a long period, similar to what it had in the earlier times of the Sassanians and the official doctrine of its people became the Twelver Jafari school of thought, just as the Sassanians had Zoroastrianism. This was proudly declared in a history textbook that was officially adopted as part of the curriculum for one of the academic years in government schools and it remains in the hands of the youth.

In support of their tyrannical rule, the Safavids undertook a serious and widespread campaign to convert the Sunnis—who at that time constituted the majority of Muslims in Iran—to Shi’ism by any means necessary, even resorting to various forms of torture and the shedding the blood of thousands (as history recounts regarding Shah Ismail al Safawi). The outcome was what they sought, except in some regions of Kurdistan in western Iran, from the city of Qasr-e Shirin to the borders of Turkey; Baluchistan in eastern Iran, from Khorasan to the Sea of Oman; Turkmen-Sahra in northern Iran, from the Caspian Sea (also known as the Sea of Khazar), to the eastern borders; and areas connecting Baluchistan to Turkmen-Sahra through Khorasan, the Talysh region in western Caspian, and some parts of the coasts of the Gulf and the Sea of Oman.

In summary, the Sunnis, whose number now approximates eight million (so far, the Sunnis have not been able to determine their exact numbers due to reasons that are not hidden) remained in the border regions adjacent to countries neighbouring Iran, except for the Khuzestan region and a few other areas.

After the Safavids took control and throughout the subsequent centuries, the Ahlus Sunnah suffered greatly at the hands of the rulers, who falsely and deceitfully claimed affiliation with the Ahlul Bayt, who subjected the Ahlus Sunnah to suffering that only Allah knows the full extent of. At the same time, campaigns of misinformation, distortion, and alienation from the correct teachings of the religion grew stronger day by day among our Muslim brothers from the Shia community. This led to the creation of hatred and enmity between these two great groups of Muslims.

Naturally, as a result, the Ahlus Sunnah were deprived of their human rights at the hands of the tyrannical rulers and were treated—both by these rulers and by their fellow Muslim brothers from the Shia community—in the same manner that Jews and other non-Muslims were treated. However, it was not the Shia people who reaped the benefits of this poisonous harvest but rather the rulers and their agents.

Thus, this country became detached from the Islamic world and turned into a stronghold for the enemies of Islam from the West, who had long sought a base from which to target the Islamic world. The Safavid wars and subsequent conflicts with the Ottomans are still fresh in our minds.

Time passed and the Pahlavi dynasty came to power, reaching the point that was decreed for it. Finally, the most wretched of all, Shah Mohammed Reza^[3], dared to abolish the Hijri calendar and replace it with the imperial calendar in an attempt to erase the remaining traces of Islamic heritage from this land.

And in Iran, this afflicted country whose people—both Shia and Sunnis—have suffered, there arose, as you know, an Islamic revolution in which the entire populace, from both factions, participated with religious zeal and Islamic fervour. Although the first stage of the Revolution—gaining a correct understanding and comprehensive awareness of Islamic teachings through enthusiasm and emotion—caused all traces of estrangement, enmity, and alienation between the two groups to vanish like ashes scattered by a strong wind on a stormy day. The brothers drew closer to one another, replacing estrangement with acquaintance, enmity with love, and aloofness with compassion. Their perspectives toward one another changed and brothers embraced their brethren. The cry echoed across the skies of Iran, “No Shi’ism, no Sunnism; only Islam!”^[4]

Hearts were filled with hope that harmony and unity would return to Muslims throughout the Islamic world after what had befallen them—things that would not have happened if they had maintained their unity. Likewise, the leaders of the Revolution and their followers were living in that same fervour and emotion—or at least they appeared to in order to control the Muslims. One of the three major issues that the leader of the Revolution, Khomeini, paid serious attention to, which later became known as Khatt al Imam (The Imam’s Line), was that there should be no Shi’ism and no Sunnism, but only Islam.

An Islamic Revolution took place. During those days, Muslims were living in some of their finest moments, hoping for a bright future that would leave behind forever the dark night they had endured. But those days passed. Now, nothing remains except memories in our minds—memories that are truly among the best a Muslim can experience. Memories that evoke sorrow and bring tears to the eyes. Yes, no sooner had the leaders ascended to the seats of power, things changed and all hopes were swept away by the winds. What we did not anticipate began to unfold; faces changed once again, hearts turned estranged, and that pitch-black night returned—or rather, it returned darker than before. The condition of the Ahlus Sunnah worsened even more than before and the oppression and tyranny became harsher than ever. New methods of deception and sedition emerged, more insidious and dishonourable than before. By my life, we no longer harbour any doubt that these rulers are treading the same path as the tyrannical rulers before them, even if they claim—and how easy it is to make claims—that they are Alawite Shia^[5] and not Safavids.

Had the Revolution been a Shia Revolution in the name of Shi’ism from its very first day and not in the name of Islam and had the Sunnis not played a role in it… had it been so, there would not have been such profound sorrow and frustration among the Ahlus Sunnah. But the Revolution was Islamic, carried out in the name of Islam; and the Sunnis contributed to and supported it. The intellectuals and thinkers of the Ahlus Sunnah, as well as the common people, participated alongside their Shia brothers with the same effort, sincerity, zeal, and emotion. And if there were some among the Sunnis who did not respond to the will of the Muslim populace, the examples from the Shia were far more numerous and far more dangerous. Yes, Sunni intellectuals and the general public contributed to the Revolution, led by the valiant Sheikh who dedicated himself to upholding the word of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, serving the Revolution, and defending it: Sheikh Ahmed Moftizadeh. He rose before others and from the early signs of the Revolution, he began issuing statements, delivering speeches, holding meetings, and managing arrangements, tirelessly awakening the people and reminding them of their duty toward their Lord and their Ummah, mobilising them to walk the path of the Revolution, all out of concern for their happiness and fear that the Shah’s agents and other devils might use them as tools to achieve their desires and obstruct the Revolution. He employed every possible means to block the devils who sought to exploit sectarian differences.

Even after the victory of the Revolution, despite all the obstacles placed in his path by the new authorities, he continued to defend the Revolution, tirelessly striving without pause for the triumph of Islam and the exaltation of Allah’s word. After the victory, in addition to issuing statements and delivering speeches and organising meetings, he and others among the thinkers and opinion-leaders communicated with those in power, offering several proposals and working with all the means at their disposal, especially during the drafting of the constitution. (We will present to our Muslim brothers, Allah willing, some excerpts from his statements, speeches, and other works in what follows, so that what we have mentioned earlier becomes clear.) However, the reward for all this was that, after a period—about ten months ago—he was compelled, in order to prevent bloodshed (which the authorities sought to provoke by inciting conflict between him and the deviant parties), to leave his birthplace, the city of Sanandaj, the capital of Kurdistan. He now lives isolated from the people in body^[6], though his spirit remains with them; and his statements addressed to them have not ceased.

Since our discussion has brought us to mention Kurdistan, let us say something specific about it among the Sunni regions. It may be said, “Wasn’t this region, before and after the Revolution and even up to now, a base for enemies of the Revolution and Islam, who orchestrate conspiracies from there, wage wars against the Islamic Republic, and cause suffering for the Kurdish, Persian, and other Iranian peoples?” We respond: Yes, this is undeniable, but this apparent reality is not the whole story. It is clear to anyone with even a slight understanding of the situation in Kurdistan that its oppressed and deprived people, who have been denied their human rights by unjust rulers throughout history, have taken stands against oppression and injustice over the past centuries.

In this regard, organisations and parties were established in the past and leaders emerged onto the scene. It is natural for this oppressed nation to pin its hopes on those organisations and leaders. And just as there were organisations and leaders among them that genuinely worked to fulfil the aspirations of the people, there were also elements that did not wish good for this nation. When the revolution took place, some of the events we have already mentioned occurred in Kurdistan. However, in this regard, it was not unique compared to other regions. If the authorities had not pushed those individuals forward and incited them against the Muslim Kurdish people after the Revolution, the situation would not have exceeded the boundaries that were maintained in other areas. But the authorities did take such actions, bringing calamity, destruction, and torment upon this region, which its poor inhabitants continue to suffer from greatly. How many women lost their beloved husbands, how many children were left fatherless by the killing of their loving fathers, and how many parents mourned the loss of their cherished offspring? If you visit any city in this region, you will be astonished at the numerous black mourning garments worn by the women.

Do not think that we are unjustly accusing the ruling authority with this charge. A witness from among its own people testified to this—namely, Taliqani—as well as others. Before his death, he informed Sheikh Ahmed Moftizadeh that the Revolutionary Leadership Council had made a decision to pressurise opponents of the Islamic Republic nationwide to relocate to Kurdistan. This was done so that the authorities would not have to engage with opponents on multiple fronts and to hinder the progress of the Islamic movement that was growing and flourishing under the leadership of Sheikh Ahmed Moftizadeh. The most dangerous thing for them was an authentic Islamic movement and a Muslim who would not accept compromise or appeasement, like Sheikh Moftizadeh (this is their description of him, not a flattery from our side).

Yes, this is the truth. Otherwise, how could the Muslim Kurdish people, who initially rallied around that man who was promised by the leader of the Revolution, Khomeini—before his return to Iran—that he would implement his proposals regarding the rights of the Kurdish people and others, be satisfied with being abandoned and pursued by demonic organisations and leaders? They would not have been able to do this without the support of the authorities. But this afflicted people cling to the slightest hope to avoid drowning and they have no choice but to respond to the call of anyone who invites them, promising to secure their rights, even if the invitation is a lie and deceit in reality, as indeed happened through the government’s machinations against the Islamic movement. All that the poor people need—food supplies and other necessities—are distributed directly by the government in cities and villages, sometimes with the help of the leaders of these organisations.

The authorities successfully implemented the decision of the Revolutionary Leadership Council and intensified pressure on opponents from all corners. Thus, devils from every direction slipped into the prepared field in Kurdistan. Upon their arrival, they began to inflame their brothers who had previously occupied the land and embraced disbelief, spreading the spirit of corruption and destruction. They also made others remember the treacherous and ignorant leaders from the early days of the Revolution up to several months after it, with great reverence and veneration. In addition to what the authorities were doing, where media outlets never ceased informing the Kurdish people about their so-called leaders, a greater deception was added: they instilled in the minds of this people the idea of separating religion from politics. They labelled one person a “religious leader” and another a “political leader^[7]“, even though, outside this sinister context, this idea would be strongly rejected and would disrupt the lives of its proponents. Similarly, the authorities formed a committee to negotiate with those fabricated leaders, playing with them and deceiving the people by convincing them that these individuals were genuinely working hard to restore rights to their rightful owners. Another step planned by the authorities was to allow these parties and secular groups to seize some military camps and spread weapons and means of destruction and chaos among the people, thus creating the most suitable environment for conflicts and clashes. The authorities would then intervene with force and greater destruction under the pretext of helping the people. Since they had already entered this opening, nothing could stand in the way of their control over the people’s lives! In this way, they could implement their pre-planned programs regarding the transfer of people from Sunnism to Shi’ism! This is what is happening now, especially among the youth and particularly in schools.

When what happened in Kurdistan came to pass, Baluchistan, Turkmen-Sahra, and others learnt that they should take heed and not raise their heads or stand in the way of the authorities and their plans to implement their programs in those regions as well. Otherwise, they should expect a fate similar to that of their Kurdish brothers, as the leader of the Revolution indicated and threatened when he met with Mawlawi ‘Abdul ‘Aziz, the leader of Baluchistan, along with Sheikh Ahmed Moftizadeh and dozens of scholars from Sunni regions at his house in Qom after the approval of Article Twelve of the constitution.^[8] He promised to convince him to change it but later made it a forgotten memory.

 

NEXT⇒ The Sunni Majlis al Shura (Consultative Council)

---

^[1]  Ismail al Safawi founded this state in the year 1500 CE in Azerbaijan. He then extended his influence over Shirvan, Iraq, and Persia, declaring Shi’ism as the religion of the state. He also declared an unrelenting war against the Ahlus Sunnah, who constituted the majority of the population. He made Tabriz the capital of his state. The Safavid state reached the height of its power during the reign of Shah ‘Abbas al Safawi [1588–1629], who worked to redirect Iranian pilgrims from Makkah to Mashhad. He himself set an example by performing the pilgrimage on foot from Isfahan to Mashhad, intending this act to serve as a model for Iranians. The Ottomans and the Afghans managed to bring an end to this state in the year 1722 CE. Could the events orchestrated by the revolutionaries of Khomeini in Makkah Mukarramah be precursors to undertaking an action similar to what the Safavids did? And could the tomb of Khomeini become their new shrine?

^[2]  The word “independent” is not accurate, as the Safavids were agents of the Portuguese and the English, and the Shah’s court was not hesitant to associate with Christian missionaries and preachers. There has never been a Shia state that did not maintain close ties with the enemies of Islam, whether they were Crusaders, Jews, or communists. I believe that what the authors of the book meant by “independent” is that they no longer had ties with the Ottoman state. (See the previous source.)

^[3]  Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi: The British installed him as king of Iran in 1941. He recognised Israel in 1948, granted the Baha’is control of key ministries, and worked to revive the glories of ancient Persia. For this reason, he abolished the Hijri calendar and replaced it with the imperial calendar. His father, Reza Khan, was even worse than his son. Among his actions were the abolition of the Islamic hijab and the nullification of Islamic Shari’ah rulings. He was also a close friend of the tyrant Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.

^[4]  A dangerous slogan: “No Sunnism… no Shi’ism,” and commentary on the goals and machinations of those raising this slogan will come later.

^[5]  By his use of the term Alawite here, the author is not referring to the Alawites of Syria—who are a misguided sect that even the Twelver Shia do not consider to be Muslim—or making the claim that the rulers of Syria are members of this sect. Rather, he means that the Twelvers of Iran claim legitimacy through the lineage of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

^[6]  This was before his arrest; it is now unknown where he is imprisoned.

^[7]  The political leader of the Kurds in Iran was ‘Abdur Rahman Qasimluwa. He was a representative of the Kurds in the constitutional council, but the clerics expelled him on charges of corruption, for which the punishment is death. They set a trap for him in Austria—on July 13, 1989—when they convinced him that they wanted to negotiate with him and grant autonomy to the Kurds in Iran. Armed men stormed the apartment where he was staying and killed him. His assistant, ‘Abdullah al Qadiri, the deputy chairman of the Democratic Party of Kurdistan, and Fadl Mulla were also killed, along with Rasul, one of the leaders of the Iraqi Kurds.

As for the religious leader of the Iranian Kurds, he is Sheikh ‘Aziz al Din al Hussaini, who now lives in exile after it became impossible for him to cooperate with the clerics. Perhaps this man and others will reconsider their old policies and stances, for in hardship, a person feels closer to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

^[8]  It was mentioned when discussing the first principle of the Sunni Shura Council.