بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Bismillaa-hir Rah-maa-nir-Raheem

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

For a ruler - no matter how qualified and experienced he may be - it is impossible to rule with justice and equity, except that:

1. He takes counsel from people, takes them into confidence, respects their aspirations and keeps them with him in matters of national interests. Or

2. He is aware of the fine points of the Shari’ah and is cognizant of the intricacies of worldly matters; he fully understands national exigencies and acts according to them. Also, he should have dedicated himself to the path of God, and service to the community.

He should take all the qualities to the level of perfection that the Shi’a school of thought considers necessary for a religious and a worldly leader. He should be the best among the people and must possess divine attributes, so that he can fulfil the duties of a divine representative on the earth. To say that disobedience of a ruler tantamount to disobedience of God is applicable to only this type of ruler.

But if a ruler is bereft of these two conditions, he would naturally try to rule the society through force and compulsion, which would inevitably create oppression, extremism, constraints and injustice in the kingdom.

Indeed, the Shi’a point of view regarding the ruler is absolutely correct from the academic aspect. However, even if you search the whole world, you will not be able to find such a ruler today. Therefore, it is necessary that the ruler of today should fulfil the functions of government without hurting national sentiments and without compromising national interests.

Tussles between rulers and people are basically due to the conglomeration of all powers in a single despotic and tyrant ruler. Because of this, there is an increase in oppression, aggression, and corruption. Although under an authoritarian rule, aggression and oppression are heaped on people indiscriminately, regardless of religion and faith, this book is only concerned with the oppression of the Shi’as throughout the ages.

The reason for this is that from the point of view of Shi’a belief, one can become eligible for religious and political leadership only if he is immune from mistakes or is a person who fulfils the criteria of an infallible, based on his eligibility and personal merits. If he is not such, he has no right to rule in the name of religion. Yes! If the people trust that leader, and he fulfils the expectations of the community, he is eligible to rule in the name of the society and serve the community.1

On the contrary, other schools of thoughts do not lay such conditions for a ruler. According to them, it is unlawful to revolt or rise against the ruler who rules in the name of religion, even though he may be a tyrant and a sinner. We have fully explained this subject in this book.

Since the beginning of Muslim history, the rulers ruled in the name of Islam. According to the Shi’a faith, these rulers did not fulfil the criteria of rulership. This the Shi’as considered them usurpers and used to oppose them. As Shi’ism spread and gained wide acceptance among the people, the tyrant rulers began to have sleepless nights. Hence the Shi’as had to bear different types of persecutions at their hands.

Obviously, no ruler, especially an autocratic one can ever tolerate opposition from any section of the society. That is why, historically, Shi’as became targets of cruelties of the tyrant rulers, and those rulers pushed them to the wall. They tried to crush the Shi’as completely so that none remains to voice opposition against their rule.

The book in your hand exposes the severe and ghastly behaviour that the tyrannical regimes employed with the Shi’as. This book discusses this shameful conduct of these people that resulted in the weakening of Islam and the Islamic unity, and which created - among the Muslims masses - hatred and animosity against Shi’a Muslims. And this continued to exist for many centuries.

Also, in this book, we have described the tyrannies of those rulers who killed national aspirations and violated the rights of the real legitimate rulers, illegally occupying the seats of power. This work is also concerned with the sacrifices of those who dared to oppose the tyrants and who laid down their lives and sacrificed their close and dear ones on the altar of justice. At last, their sacrifices bore fruits, resulting in regimes being overthrown, rulership and autocracies declining and tyrant rulers getting eliminated one after another and their power vanishing.

The Shi’as accord great importance to the qualities necessary for a religious ruler. They have recorded these points in their books of jurisprudence and faith. Shi’a scholars impart the same teachings to their students in the religious seminaries. They disseminate the same concepts to people at religious gatherings and during sermons. Shi’a sources say that a ruler who rules in the name of religion, but fails to fulfil one of the above conditions, is an enemy of God, His angels, and His prophets.

ln this matter the Shi’as do not differentiate between Shi’a and Sunni rulers. Rather, in their view, the crime of a Shi’a ruler who does not rule properly is more serious because he is acting against the principles of his faith. In this matter, Shi’ism does not consider that mere knowledge and justice of the ruler is sufficient. And according to Shi’a faith, it is even unlawful to give precedence to an inferior person in presence of a superior one.2

Thus, if inferior persons occupy the seats of power - despite there being eligible persons superior to them - they shall be deemed usurpers. So, we can say with certainty that according to the Shi’a beliefs, the Buwayhid, Fatimid, Hamadanid and Safavid governments3 were not Islamic rulership. The merely political rulership. The Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs were also 'political’ and not ‘religious’ rulers.

It will not be out of place to mention here that from the religious point of view, the Shi’as are not opposed to a government established through consensus, which protects human rights, defends the national boundaries, and administers the country in a competent manner. However, such governments have no right to interfere in religious matters.

Therefore, the use of word 'rulers' in the title of this book ‘Shi’as and the Despotic Rulers’ does not imply only Sunni rulers; it includes all oppressive and tyrant rulers. It must also be mentioned that the hardships to which the Sunni rulers subjected the Shi’as were due to political reasons and it had no connection with religious matters.

In short, the aim of writing this book is so that the reader should have freedom in his beliefs, expression of opinion and action, and he may thus act according to his conscience. For him achieve this aim, if the need arises, he must be prepared to lay down his life and sacrifice even something more than that.

If this book achieves the goal that I aspire, I will know that my labours are not wasted. If it does not, I would consider that it is due to my shortcomings. A deep research of history has led me to conclude that if the rulers had not been authoritarian and oppressive, Islam would have spread in such a manner that today you will not find a single non-Muslim in the whole world.

The final point is that when people reach the corridors of power, they undergo such a transformation that they lose all the good qualities. Look at those politicians, who before coming to power, were considered reliable by the people and who were looked upon to be such that they would not break the high moral principles. Once they attain power they start talking about diplomacy and exigency. The only exceptions to this rule are those whom Allah protects against deviation. But such personages are only a handful.

I pray to the Almighty Allah that for the sake of Muhammad and Aale-Muhammad (‘a), He bestows upon us the good sense to acquire fine qualities and moral virtues.

Muhammad Jawad Mughniya

Beirut, 1962

• 1. This highlights the difference between ‘People’s Republic’ and ‘Islamic Republic’.
• 2. In the view of Shi’as, an inferior person can never have precedence over a superior one. They base their contention on the Qur’anic verse:
  “…. Is he then who guides to the truth more worthy to be followed, or he who himself does not go aright unless he is guided? What then is the matter with you; how do you judge?” (10:35).
  The follower of Zaid, the Martyr, used to consider Ali (‘a) to be superior. But, in their opinion it was allowed to give precedence to the inferior. According to the belief of Zaidiyyah, anyone from the progeny of Fatimah (‘a) who stages an uprising for the sake of truth can become an Imam, provided he is learned, pious, brave, and generous.
• 3. Despite their being Shi’as [Note of al-Islam.org].