syed-mohsin naquvi wrote:
Dear Aamir Mughal,
Khumaynie was religious scholar, an expert in Islamic law. It was his life's work to interpret the Islamic law and give rulings on matters worldly as well as spiritual. Besides, Khumaynie was a very learned lawyer, not a M'asoom or a Sahaabi. His rulings apply only to those who actually follow him.
What is your problem?
My problem is this:
Khomeini once made a statement which was published in the Tehran times (Kitaab be Noujawanaan - P8) that if he conquers Madina Munawwarah, he will remove the two idols (Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar (May Allah be pleased with them) besides Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him). I am certain that no believer will accept such a statement against the great luminaries of Islam. Shall we then condemn only Khomeini and condone Mawdudi knowing well that Mawdudi was a close friend of Khomeini and was sympathetic to his course. In a book titled, 'Two brothers - Maududi and Khomeini' page 129, the following statement of Dr Ahmad Farouk Maududi (son of Abul-A'ala Maududi) was published in Roz Naame, Lahore - 29 September 1979, "Allama Khomeini had a very old and close relationship with Abba Jaan (father). Aayaatullah Khomeini translated his (fathers) books in Farsi and included it as a subject in Qum. Allama Khomeini met my father in 1963 during Hajj and my father's wish was to create a revolutionary in Pakistan similar to Iran. He was concerned about the success of the Iranian revolution till his last breath.
Mawdudi’s works began to appear in Iran in the 1960s. They were translated into Persian from Arabic by Ayatollah Hadi Khusrawshahi and members of a translating team working with him. Articles on Mawdudi and excerpts from his works also appeared in various issues of Khusrawshahi’s journal Maktab-i Islam. Following the revolution of 1978–1979, a number of Mawdudi’s works were translated into Persian from Arabic by Ayatollah Sayyid Muhammad Khamana’i. Interestingly, the first Persian translation of a work of Mawdudi was done in Hyderabad, Deccan, by Mahmud Faruqi in 1946; RJI, vol. 4, 90. More recent translations of Mawdudi’s works into Persian have occurred in Pakistan by the Jama‘at, which target the Afghan community.
This is my problem as well:
Dear Mohsin Sahab,
For your kind perusal,
Khomeini's Teachings on sex with infants and animals
Islamic Teachings on sex with infants:
"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. If he penetrates and the child is harmed then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however would not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister."
The complete Persian text of this saying can be found in "Ayatollah Khomeini in Tahrirolvasyleh, Fourth Edition, Darol Elm, Qom"
Islamic Teachings on sex with animals:
"The meat of horses, mules, or donkeys is not recommended. It is strictly forbidden if the animal was sodomized while alive by a man. In that case, the animal must be taken outside the city and sold."
Editor's notes: I wonder if it is OK to sodomize a dead animal? What happens if the buyer brings the poor animal back into the city?
"If one commits an act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrements become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed as quickly as possible and burned, and the price of it paid to its owner by him who sodomized it."
Editor's note: The poor animal first is sodomized and then killed and burned. What an Islamic justice towards animals? Where are the animal rights group?
"It is forbidden to consume the excrement of animals or their nasal secretions. But if such are mixed in minute proportions into other foods their consumption is not forbidden."
"If a man (God protect him from it!) fornicates with an animal and ejaculates, ablution is necessary."
Copy of Original Persian Text - 2 [Farsi quotation from Khomeini's book "Tahrir-ol-Masael" Ayatollah Khomeini's Religious Teaching - Original Farsi Text]
Editor's note: It does not say who should have ablution: the animal or the man?
Dear Mohsin Sahab,
If the above is true then what was the need of these Islamic Rantings below:
"I inform the proud Muslim people of the world that the author of the Satanic Verses book which is against Islam, the Prophet and the Koran, and all involved in its publication who were aware of its content, are sentenced to death."Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini FATWA issued February, 1989 against Salman Rushdie
Quotes from just after the Islamic Revolution in 1979:
"The mullahs are going to rule now. We are going to have ten thousand years of the Islamic republic. The Marxists are going to go on with their Lenin. We are going to go on in the way of Khomeini."
"What he [Stalin] did in Russia we have to do in Iran. We, too, have to do a lot of killing. A lot." Behzad, Iranian interpreter for Western journalist V.S. Naipaul
"There is no room for play in Islam... It is deadly serious about everything." Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini Speech at Qum, reported in Timemagazine January 7, 1980
"Khomeini has offered us the opportunity to regain our frail religion... faith in the power of words."
Norman Mailer, at a meeting of authors ragarding the fatwa, New York City, February 1989
Dear Mohsin Sahab,
What was the need of this Fatwa?
Ayatollah revives the death fatwa on Salman Rushdie By Philip Webster, Ben Hoyle and Ramita Navai From The Times January 20, 2005
FATWA against the author Salman Rushdie was reaffirmed by Iran’s spiritual leader last night in a message to Muslim pilgrims.
British officials anxiously played down comments after Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, told Muslims making the annual pilgrimage to Mecca that Rushdie was an apostate whose killing would be authorised by Islam, according to the Iranian media.
His words came during a lengthy tirade against “Western and Zionist capitalists” and the US-led War on Terror.
However, senior British officials swiftly made plain last night that the Iranian Government, which had disassociated itself from the fatwa in 1998, had not changed its position.They pointed out that because the fatwa was issued in February 1989 by Iran’s revolutionary founder and Khamenei’s predecessor, Ayatollah Khomeini, who had since died, it would always remain in existence.
They insisted that the move did not presage a further deterioration in the already tense relations with Iran over its nuclear programme. “This should not be taken as a new development,” one said.
The Foreign Office said: “The key thing from our point of view is that the Iranian Government formally withdrew their support for the fatwa on Salman Rushdie in 1998 which is when Britain and Iran formally upgraded their relationship to the level of ambassador.” A senior official said: “The original fatwa was issued by Ayatollah Khomeini shortly before he died. It can only be rescinded by the man who issued it or a higher authority so in practice it will hold indefinitely.
“Almost every time that the current supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, gives a sermon he mentions Salman Rushdie in these terms and denounces him as a man who has insulted the name of the Prophet and who can therefore be killed. It’s just the standard rhetoric.
“The crucial thing is that the fatwa is no longer endorsed by the Iranian Government because before 1998 what we had was effectively a state-sponsored death sentence.”
Ayatollah Khamenei said in his message: “They talk about respect towards all religions, but they support such a mahdour al-damm mortad as Salman Rushdie.” In Sharia, or Islamic law, mortad is a reference to someone who has committed apostasy by leaving Islam while mahdour al-damm is a term applying to someone whose blood may be shed with impunity.
The fatwa, or religious edict, calling for Rushdie’s execution was issued because of alleged blasphemy and apostasy in his novel The Satanic Verses.
When speaking, as he was in this case, in his capacity as a spiritual leader — rather than a leader in matters of state — Ayatollah Khamenei’s tone tends to be rhetorical.
Analysts in Iran played down the remark, suspecting that Ayatollah Khamenei was referring to the fatwa against Rushdie in a historical context and was not calling for it to be implemented now. “This isn’t shocking — it’s nothing new,” one Tehran-based analyst said.
Under the reformist President Mohammad Khatami, who was elected in 1997, Iran’s leadership has distanced itself from the order to kill Rushdie, who was born in Bombay to a Muslim family.
In 1998 Kamal Kharazi, the Iranian Foreign Minister, promised his British counterpart, Robin Cook, that Iran would do nothing to implement the fatwa, despite a $2.8 million bounty placed on Rushdie’s head by a foundation in Iran.
Scotland Yard’s Special Branch, responsible for protecting Rushdie, was not prepared to discuss the comments but officers are certain to study the text carefully and consult experts at the Foreign Office on the seriousness of the threat.
If necessary they will alert the author and police in New York, where he now lives.
Dear Mohsin Sahab,
If Wahabis of Saudi Arabia and Deobandi Taliban are Harsh then why this double standard for Rafizi Irani Ayatullahs and Rafizi Mullahs?
Iranian academic sentenced to death Jim Muir BBC Correspondent in Tehran
Thursday, 7 November, 2002, 21:45 GMT
A liberal journalist and academic, Hashem Aghajari, has been sentenced to death for apostasy - the renunciation of his belief - according to Iranian reports.
He was arrested in August after a speech in which he called for reform within the Islamic clerical establishment.
Some hard-line clerics had publicly demanded the death sentence, comparing Aghajari to the British author Salman Rushdie, who was the subject of a death order or fatwa issued by the late Ayatollah Khomeini.
Mr Aghajari's lawyer said the death sentence was passed by the court in Hamedan, the western Iranian city where the liberal academic and journalist made his offending speech earlier this year, and where his prosecution has been carried out over recent months.
They may put me in jail or assassinate me but they will achieve nothing from this
Hashem Aghajari speaking before his sentence
The death verdict was issued on charges of apostasy and insulting the imams of early Islam. On other charges, Mr Aghajari was sentenced to 74 lashes, 8 years in jail, and a 10-year ban on teaching activities - penalties that will clearly prove academic if the graver sentence is carried out.
The sentences have not yet been officially conveyed to the defence; once they are, there is a 20-day period during which appeals can be lodged.
Hashem Aghajari's lawyer, Saleh Nikbakht, was optimistic that what he called this "strong and harsh" sentence would be overturned by the Supreme Court on appeal.
He pointed out that a number of senior religious figures, albeit at the liberal end of the clerical spectrum, had ruled that there was nothing culpably blasphemous about Aghajari's speech, in which he called for an end to "blind obedience" to clerical decrees.
Hard-line clerics were outraged by Aghajari's speech
But other, hard-line clerics were outraged by Aghajari's criticism of the clerical establishment, and some have said that the death sentence was the only possible punishment.
Hashem Aghajari is a war veteran who lost a leg in the 1980-88 war with Iraq. He belongs to a left-wing reformist political group, the Islamic Revolutionary Mujahidin Organisation, which has fully supported him.
Reformists see his prosecution as the latest in a long line of moves against liberal figures by the hard-line judiciary. His case has become a cause celebre in both political and religious circles.
Some of his students at Tehran University staged a three-day strike in protest at his arrest and prison conditions.
There was concern that he was not receiving adequate treatment for an infection of his leg wound. The IRMO also issued a statement calling on the prison authorities to guarantee his safety, following reports that he had been attacked by inmates at the Hamedan prison.
Aghajari's case is similar to that of a liberal cleric, Hassan Yusefi-Eshkevari, who was arrested over two years ago after taking part in a controversial reformist conference in Berlin.
He too was condemned to death for apostasy, by a special clerical court. But the sentence was later quashed on appeal. After a series of appeals and revisions, he is currently under a seven-year jail sentence which he is still contesting.
The way Yusefi-Eshkevari's case was handled makes it seem unlikely that the death sentence on Hashem Aghajari will actually be carried out.
If it were to be, it would cause a political furore between reformists and hard-liners at an already critical moment in their struggle for power within Iran's Islamic system.
Eyewitness: Execution in Tehran Sunday, 27 October, 2002, 15:37 GMT
A noose was prepared in a vivid blue nylon rope
Two convicted murderers were hanged in public in Tehran on Sunday, despite concerns by human rights organisations about the apparent rise in the number of such executions in Iran.
BBC Tehran correspondent Jim Muir witnessed the execution of Hashem Anwarnieh at Jamshidieh Park on Sunday and sent this personal account.
It is still dark when we arrive. Near the end of a clear, chilly autumn night with sharp stars pricking an inky sky as it begins to lighten in the east, to the side of the Elborz mountains which tower over us.
What a relief, what a relief
Mother of the murder victim
I have been here many times, but never before at this time of day.
I came for walks on spring days, when unseen nightingales sing with delicious liquid loudness from the bushes. For summer dinners on the terraces of the restaurants scattered up the rugged hillside.
And once in a midnight blizzard, when hundreds of Tehranis also flocked here to play in the drifting snow.
But now there is a barrier across the dark road, and a police car with a flashing red light stands alongside a crane set sideways astride the road that runs up beside the mountain park.
This is as close as the crane can get to the spot inside the park where Hashem Anwarnieh, an armed robber, shot dead a policeman called Malek Amiri two months ago.
Hardline clerics see public executions as a deterrent
Dozens of men in uniform mill around in the pre-dawn gloom.
We pass unchallenged through the first barrier and wait by a second, maybe 50 metres from the crane.
Some riot police appear, rattling along with plastic shields, and melt into the background.
We are among the first here. We wait, hands in pockets against the chill, as a crowd slowly collects.
They are mainly young men, but also a man and his teenage daughter, another man and his wife, maybe two other women scattered among the 200 or so men.
More cars arrive with flashing lights and men with walkie-talkies crackling. One is clearly a boss. He sees the crowd is small.
"Let the people get closer!" he shouts.
Barriers are moved, and the crowd surges alongside the park wall until they are just across from the crane.
We, the press, are allowed to go as close as we like.
No one appeals for clemency for the convicts
Hanging back a little are the family of the murdered policeman.
A grizzled old man with a tight-fitting pointed cap. An old woman and a younger one, both in long black robes. The younger one is smiling.
More cars arrive, and a police van which parks alongside the crane.
Hashem is inside.
Photographers and cameramen crowd around and take his picture as he sits and waits. For quite a long time.
I wonder whether he wants to get it over with, or to cling to each last moment.
A dark Mercedes and another car arrive and officials get out.
The engine of the crane has started by now.
The crowd, who have been chatting idly like people waiting for anything, becomes alert.
I have a moment of envy. He is suddenly at peace, and we are not.
There is a buzz as Hashem Anwarniah is brought out of the van. He is surrounded by a small crush of officials, and the jostling cameramen move in close.
The crowd shouts, just a confused roar, probably telling the photographers to get out of the way so they can see.
Hashem is, perhaps, 30 and has a moustache and is quite good-looking.
He seems normal but a little nervous. Perhaps he has been drugged.
At one stage he exchanges a joke with one of the officials, and smiles.
Then he glances up and sees the hook of the crane which is dangling above his head.
Someone ties a cloth around his eyes.
'Come and watch'
A vivid blue nylon rope appears, with a hangman's noose at one end.
Someone ties the other end to the hook of the winch. Then the noose is placed around Hashem's neck.
For some reason, his blindfold is taken off.
He stands there for a while, looking around for the last time.
Then a small mask is brought, and fitted over his eyes. The last thing he sees is the bank of cameras about two metres away, filming and photographing the end of his life.
An official comes up to the dead policeman's family and says: "Come and watch."
They move forward closer to where Hashem is standing. He squares his shoulders and moves his head to make the noose sit more comfortably.
A man in a black suit standing beside Hashem raises his hand, and signals to the crane operator.
The rope goes straight.
A pause and then another signal, and it rises slowly and gently, taking Hashem with it. It seems somehow normal.
The crowd goes suddenly quiet.
The old woman in black, looking up as her son's killer rises into the dawn, says quietly over and over: "Akheish, akheish... what a relief, what a relief."
It is surprisingly peaceful. There is no shouting or kicking.
Within seconds, Hashem looks as though he has fallen asleep, his head at an angle. It is very simple.
Seen to be done
For perhaps a minute, a slight tremor runs through his dangling legs, then all is still.
I have a moment of envy. He is suddenly at peace, and we are not.
On the ground beneath him, all that is left are the cheap, grubby orange plastic sandals he was wearing when he arrived.
The policeman's family are ushered into an official car and driven off.
Islamic justice has been done. And seen to be done. People begin to drift away, glancing up at the still body as they go.
As we walk down the hill and look back, Hashem is still hanging from the crane in front of mountains now bathed in the honey glow of the rising sun he did not see.
Iran: Harsh Sentences Condemned
Letter to H. E. Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi-Shahroudi January 16, 2001
Human Rights Watch condemns the arbitrary and harsh sentences handed down by a Revolutionary Court in Tehran on Saturday January 13, 2001 against seven of the seventeen defendants being tried for attending an international conference in Berlin, Germany, in April 2000.
We believe there is no basis to the charges that they "conspired to overthrow the system of the Islamic Republic" and that they are victims of a politically-motivated prosecution intended to discredit the cause of political reform, to punish leading reformists, to intimidate independent thinkers, and to chill dissent.
The defendants participated openly in an international conference at which they contributed information concerning developments in Iran. In so doing, they were exercising their fundamental right to freedom of expression and to impart and receive information, rights that are protected under international treaty law to which Iran is a state party. Article 19 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states:
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.
There has been no suggestion that the participants from Iran attending the Berlin conference had any part in protests against the Iranian government that took place at that time. Their statements at the conference were reported in the Iranian media at the time.
In an open letter sent to Your Excellency on November 2, 2000, Human Rights Watch expressed concern that the defendants would not receive a fair trial in accordance with Article 14 of the ICCPR. These concerns have not been allayed. Many of the hearings in this trial took place in secret, and defense lawyers were not provided with information about the prosecution case.
Human Rights Watch is particularly concerned by the severity of the sentences handed down on these seven non-violent independent activists. Investigative journalist, Akbar Ganji, received a ten-year sentence to be followed by five years of internal exile in the south of Iran. His jailing appears designed to punish him for his activities as a journalist exposing the alleged involvement of leaders of the Islamic Republic in acts of gross violations of human rights.
Two translators employed by the German Embassy, Saeed Sadr and Khalil Rostamkhani, received ten and nine-year sentences respectively. Mr. Rostamkhani did not even attend the Berlin conference, although he was involved in its preparation. His wife, Roshanak Darioush, a prominent translator of German literature into Persian, served as a translator at the conference, but has not returned to Iran to face charges.
Other prominent reformist figures subjected to prison terms include student leader Ali Afshari, five years; veteran politician Ezzatollah Sahabi, four and a half years. Both of them were already detained last month on new charges relating to their criticism of government policy. Their families are unaware of their places of detention.
Two women's rights activists, publisher Shahla Lahidji and lawyer Mehrangiz Kar, each received four year sentences. Ms. Kar, recently diagnosed with breast cancer, has sought to leave the country in order to obtain treatment but has been banned from travel.
Another accused participant in the Berlin conference, Hojatoleslam Hassan Youssefi Eshkevari, remains in prison awaiting sentencing by a Special Court for the Clergy on charges of apostasy, which may carry the death penalty. Two other writers, Changiz Pahlevan and Kazem Kardavani, have not returned to Iran from Germany, having been informed that charges have been prepared against them also.
Three other defendants were fined or given suspended sentences. Seven were acquitted. The ten convicted defendants thus received highly divergent sentences for essentially the same offense, indicating that the court employed arbitrary criteria in deciding on sentences.
In conclusion, the charges against these individuals are transparently political and should never have been lodged against them. Their conditions of pretrial detention and the trials themselves were conducted in flagrant violation of international standards. For these reasons, Human Rights Watch urges Your Excellency you to rectify this travesty of justice by ensuring that these convictions are appealable to a higher body whose procedures comply with international standards and thus allow these unjust convictions and sentences by the Revolutionary Court to be overturned. We further call on Your Excellency to put an end to the manipulation of Iran's judiciary for political ends, and to ensure that individuals are not persecuted for exercising their protected right to freedom of expression.
Middle East and North Africa Division
Iran considering death penalty for web-related crimes Agencies Published: July 02, 2008, 18:03
Tehran: A law that could see the death penalty imposed for cyber crimes is set to be debated in Iran's parliament, reports said on Wednesday.
Under the draft bill, those found guilty of promoting corruption, prostitution and apostasy on the internet may face the death penalty. The bill aims to "toughen punishment for harming mental security in society," Iran’s ISNA news agency said.
ISNA said MPs placed the bill as a high priority discussion on the agenda.
Setting up weblogs and sites which promote any of the crimes listed in the bill are punishable by death.
According to the bill, those convicted of these crimes "should be punished as 'mohareb' (enemy of God) and 'corrupt on the earth'.”
Iran imposes strict restrictions on internet access, blocking thousands of sites which may carry content deemed immoral or religiously and politically inappropriate.
Iran: End Persecution of Nobel Laureate Documents Unlawfully Seized at Rights Activist Shirin Ebadi’s Office December 30, 2008
We are extremely worried for Shirin Ebadi's safety and her ability to continue her important human rights work. Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch.
The Iranian government should end immediately its escalating persecution of Dr. Shirin Ebadi, the 2003 Nobel peace laureate and a leading human rights defender, Human Rights Watch and the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran said today.
"We are extremely worried for Shirin Ebadi's safety and her ability to continue her important human rights work," said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch.
Ebadi reported that officials identifying themselves as tax inspectors arrived at her private law office in Tehran at approximately 5:30 p.m. on December 29, 2008, and removed documents and computers, despite her protests that the materials contained protected lawyer-client information
The raid was the second in 10 days targeting Ebadi and her colleagues. Human Rights Watch and the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran expressed serious concern that the continuing attacks against Ebadi not only endanger her, but also put all Iranian civil society activists in peril.
"If Ebadi is not safe from official harassment, no Iranian activist can feel safe from persecution and dubious prosecution resulting from the government's distaste for peaceful activism," said Hadi Ghaemi, coordinator of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran.
On December 21, officials prevented a planned celebration of the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and forced the closure of the Defenders of Human Rights Center (DHRC), which Ebadi helped found (http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/12/21/iran-reverse-closure-nobel-laureate-s-rights-group ). The center provides legal defense for victims of human rights abuses in Iran.
Narges Mohammadi, the spokeswoman for the Human Rights Center, said that after the attack on its office on December 21, government agents also went to Ebadi's private office and tried to remove documents under the guise of tax inspection. After Ebadi explained that she provides legal defense work pro-bono and that she earns no income from it, the agents accepted her explanation and left.
The confiscation of materials from Ebadi's private legal practice is the latest in a series of attacks against her, presumably in response to her human rights activism. In August, the official IRNA news agency alleged that her daughter had converted to the Baha'i faith, a serious accusation in a country where apostasy may be punished with death. Since winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Ebadi has been the target of many death threats from little-known groups accusing her of supporting Baha'ism.
The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran and Human Rights Watch called upon the Iranian authorities to restore intact the confiscated documents and computers and to cease any further harassment of Ebadi and other human rights defenders.
The groups urged concerned governments and inter-governmental bodies, as well the UN human rights mechanisms, to register strong protests publicly as well as privately with the Iranian government over its persecution of Ebadi and other human rights defenders.
For Further Reading:
Iran: Enforced closure of human rights centre an ominous development