The history of early Islam was changed by the bloody events of the year 680 AD (60 After Hijra) when Prophet Mohammad’s grandson was brutally killed by the second ruler of the Umayyad dynasty. Together with 72 of his relatives and supporters Imam Hussain was massacred in a way that would become the standard method of liquidating adversaries by dictators and takfiris like ISIS. The Karbala epic was one of sacrifice by one man whose name would remain over the centuries as a beacon for those seeking freedom and justice; the two elements lacking in Arab and Muslim world today.
11th November 2014
Chairman: Today’s programme deals with Imam Hussein: the quest for universal justice. This particular incident that took place nearly 1200 years ago in the caves of Kerbala was an interesting and important event. A Christian priest once said that if Imam Hussein was Christian they would have flags all over the world for him. He made a mark in history showing how to stand up and fight sectarianism and tribalism and all the ills we are seeing today. It very much relates to what is happening in the Middle East with certain groups like the so called Islamic state and Whaabis who are portraying themselves to be Muslims but are not only killing Muslims but other human beings as well. Imam Hussein’s stand at that time crystalised and showed to the world what is good and what is evil. At this moment we also see with some clarity that people are trying to muddy the waters by saying that ISIS is doing good or is trying to defend the poor people. The ruler of that time Yazid was also mudding the water by confusing the Muslim world.
Dr Oliver Scharbrodt: There is a common misconception of Islam in the West as a religion that is either violent by its very nature or at least has a problematic relationship towards violence. A more sophisticated argument would state that Islam in a somehow unique way lends itself to the use of violence in comparison to other religions. Those in support of such notions would usually focus on terrorist activities by individuals and groups that use Islam to legitimise their violent approach.
As current events in Syria and in Iraq dramatically illustrate, is that this violence is not solely directed against non-Muslims but also at other Muslims such as Shiis or any other group that is seen as not conforming to a very intolerant, narrowly-defined and exclusivist understanding of Islam. It is, however, important to acquire a proper understanding of the diverse range of views on violence within Islam and to avoid generalisations and essentialisations by using rather extremist examples to make generalised and inadequate statements about the relationship between Islam and violence.
I will look at examples from the authoritative sources and the prophetic examples to discuss the diverse range of views and focus on the notion that Islam is conceived in the Qur’an as a “middle community” or “community of moderation” (umma wasat). Then, I will explore the role of Imam Husayn (a.s.) and the tragedy of Karbala has played in defining attitudes towards non-violence in the Shii tradition. This presentation is inspired by the views of the great Indian anti-colonial activists Mahatam Gandhi on Imam Husayn (a.s.). In the 20th century, Gandhi has become the role-model and paradigmatic example of what non-violent resistance towards oppression means and how oppression can be successfully fought by resisting without the use of violence, just through mere passive resistance which manages to retain the moral high ground. Gandhi’s approach has inspired Martin Luther King and the American Civil Rights Movement against the disenfranchisement of African Americans in the 1950s/60s and many other campaigns worldwide that seek to resist oppression and to establish justice by peaceful means.
Gandhi himself was full of praise for the sacrifice of Imam Husayn (a.s.) in Karbala, writing: “I learned from Husayn how to achieve victory while being oppressed.” Mahatma Gandhi’s first Salt Satyagrah was inspired by Imam Hussain’s non-violent resistance to the tyranny of Yazid. Gandhi is said to have studied the history of Islam and Imam Husayn (a.s.) and was of the opinion that Islam represented not the legacy of a sword but of sacrifices of saints like Imam Husayn (a.s). Mahatma Gandhi writes: “My faith is that the progress of Islam does not depend on the use of sword by its believers, but the result of the supreme sacrifice of Husayn (a.s.), the great saint.” Gandhi recognised that there is a strong tradition of non-violence within Islam to which he himself could relate and that the perfect embodiment of this tradition is Imam Husayn (a.s.) and his martyrdom in Karbala
Islam as a community of moderation
The Quran describes Muslims as umma wasat, a middle community, or community of moderation which avoid extremes. From Quran 2:143: „wa-kadhalika ja‘alnakum ummatan wasatan la-takunu shuhada’ ‘ala al-nas.“ „This is how we made you a middle community so that you may become witnesses for the people.” Islam is conceived as a community that follows the middle path to God avoiding excesses and extremes. For instance, Muslims are required to avoid the extremes both hedonism and asceticism. While the Islamic tradition recognises that there are natural human urges and drives that were created by God and should therefore not be suppressed as in certain ascetic traditions, these urges likewise need to be controlled and placed in a wider socio-moral framework in order to maintain human dignity and social stability. As such, Islam tries to bring the spiritual and physical side of human beings into balance. This middle path is also evident in Islam’s relationship to other religions. While Muslims should not shy away from their belief in the truth of their religion, they should equally retain cordial and friendly attitudes towards the followers of other religions and rather see the shared humanity in every person regardless of his or her religious background, as Imam ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib said about non-Muslims: “akhukum fi al-insaniyya.” “They are your brothers in humanity.” The religious differences in the world are God-given; there is no divine plan to unify all the various different religions in one. As a consequence, forced conversions are illegitimate or any other kind of coercion in religious matters (see Quran 2, 256).
This attitude of moderation is also visible in Islamic attitudes towards violence. It would be wrong to say that Islam is an entirely pacifist religion – rejecting the use of violence under any circumstances. However, the use of violence should not be the default position and not used without due reason. Violence is seen as the very last resort in the struggle for rights and justice. The centrality of the notion of social justice is important here. While one should strive to achieve this aim peacefully, one should at the same time not compromise this ideal for the sake of retaining a position of complete non-violence. Ultimately, there will be circumstances when the use of violence is necessary to either achieve or preserve social justice, an idea that is similar to ideas in other religions such as the Christian just war theory or secular notions that the use of violence is legitimate in self-defence. Nevertheless, the absolute sacredness of life is asserted in the Quran (see Quran 5, 32). The Islamic ideal is the establishment of a society and the formation of individuals that are at peace with themselves and with each other. This ideal is put forward in the Quranic verse describing Muslims as constituting a community of moderation.
There are important historical role models for non-violence in the life of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Meccan period of Muhammad’s prophetic mission was marked by non-violent resistance to the rejection and oppression he and his early followers had to endure. They endured persecution and humiliation without resorting to violence. Before the hijra, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was invited by the tribes of Medina as an arbiter to end the civil war between different tribal factions in the city and to pacify the relationship between them. The peace treaty the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) initiated, the so-called Constitution of Medina, stands as a document emphasising peaceful approaches to conflict resolution. As these examples illustrate, when justice can be achieved through peaceful means, then non-violence is preferable. Although justice possesses a higher value than pacifism, achieving it though non-violent means is desirable.
Husayn’s challenge to Yazid’s rule
What lessons can be drawn from the events of Karbala on the question of the relationship between Islam and violence? The fact that Yazid openly violated Islamic law is acknowledged by Muslim historians from different groups. Unlike his predecessor Mu’awiya, he did not even pretend to be a good Muslim but openly defied Islamic beliefs and practices. With the ascension of Yazid to the caliphate, early Islam not only witnessed the return of the pre-Islamic tribalism of Arab society by leaving political power within a particular clan but also the adoption of various imperial traditions of pre-Islamic empires. Despite Yazid’s appointment and success in establishing his power through his military strength, his political advisors saw it necessary to gain the allegiance of Imam Husayn (a.s.) as the sole surviving grandson of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). He issued the order to the governor of Media, were Imam Husayn (a.s.) resided, to receive his pledge of allegiance or to kill him if he refuses to do so. Despite Yazid’s order to coerce Husayn into giving his allegiance or to kill him and Husayn’s refusal, the governor of Media was not able to order the killing of the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and Husayn managed to get to Mecca in preparation of annual pilgrimage (hajj).
Despite invitations from his followers in Kufa to lead a rebellion against the Umayyad dynasty and his potential ability to galvanise opposition to their rule, as Muslims were arriving from all parts of the Muslim world for the hajj in Mecca, Husayn did not rush to any decisions. Many sources suggest that if he had acted swiftly he would have been able to launch a successful revolt from Mecca against Yazid. In the meantime, Yazid appointed a more ruthless governor to Kufa who curbed any anti-Umayyad activities and sympathies for Husayn. Despite the changed situation in Kufa, Husayn continued on his expedition, also fully aware that all roads to Kufa had been blocked. Shortly before their arrival at the plains of Karbala, Husayn and his entourage met the Umayyad army dispatch sent to arrest him led by Hurr b. Yazid. The dispatch was exhausted and thirsty after long journey. Although knowing of their intention to kill him, Husayn shared his water provisions with them and also prayed together with them. After the suggestion by one in Husayn’s group to attack dispatch, Husayn refused to issue such an order as he did not want to initiate violence. The events that followed then are all well-documented and do not need to be retold.
It is important to note that Imam Husayn’s actions were not a miscalculation, but right from the start he was fully aware that he would be martyred. It is significant that he did not make any efforts to mobilise resistance against the Umayyads which he could have easily done in Mecca. He refused the offer of protection from tribesmen he encountered during his journey who warned him of the dangers awaiting him in Kufa. Imam Husayn (a.s.) even asked his supporters to abandon him on the night before fighting began. Western scholarship often presents Imam Husayn (a.s.) as a tragic figure who miscalculated his chances of success, perhaps was naïve or relied on his supporters in Kufa many of whom turned out to be less reliable as they had appeared. However, this perspective fails to acknowledge the significance the events in Karbala have for Shiis and for all Muslims. Rather, he intended to bring about a revolution in the consciousness of the Muslim community. Imam Husayn (a.s.) was not interested in political power, as achieving political power is always temporary. He was looking for eternal power achieved by sacrifice and suffering:
“… from the very beginning Husayn was planning for a complete revolution in the religious consciousness of the Muslims. All of his actions show that he was aware of the fact that a victory achieved through military strength and might is always temporal, because another stronger power can in course of time bring it down in ruins. But a victory achieved through suffering and sacrifice is everlasting and leaves permanent imprints on man’s consciousness.” (Jafri 1989, p. 202)
Imam Husayn (a.s.) saw in the Umayyad rule a conservative reaction of the Arabs against the revolutionary spirit of Islam brought upon by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). As his grandson, he felt the particular responsibility to revive this spirit. During the reign of the Banu Umayya, pre- Islamic practices have resurfaced: tribal hostility and moral conduct that clearly violated Islamic principles, and the adoption of pre-Islamic traditions of the Middle East by the Umayyad rulers.
Hence, accepting Yazid as caliph would not have merely been a political arrangement with the ruling dynasty but an endorsement of the way of life Yazid embodied, and given his position as caliph, the temporal and spiritual head of the Islamic community, such an act would have legitimised it. Hence, the struggle between Yazid and Husayn should not be misunderstood as a political struggle over leadership of the Muslim community but about retaining the integrity of Islam which could only be saved through suffering and sacrifice.
The sacrifice of the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would send a message throughout the world about the spiritual and moral corruption of its rulers at that time and defend Islamic morality and spiritual principles against their corruption by the political elite. Such sacrifices and suffering as aspects of passive, non-violent resistance retain the moral high ground, illustrating the very immoral nature of oppression by not responding in the same manner but by enduring suffering to reveal its immorality.
One example of the moral superiority of this approach became evident in the defection of Umayyad commander Hurr b. Yazid originally dispatched to capture Imam Husayn (a.s.) and his follower and to bring them to Kufa. Impressed by Imam Husayn’s conduct, Hurr had to choose between either killing the grandson of the Prophet or loosing his career and status. He chose the former, joining Imam Husayn (a.s.) and begging for his forgiveness. In return, Husayn embraced him.
Imam Husayn’s opposition to Yazid’s way of life was wake up call for Muslim consciousness. He retained the moral high ground by not seeking violent confrontation. In the events unfolding in the Muslim world today, we can observe similar dynamics. For these reasons the message of Karbala is universal; it has appeared great leaders such as Gandhi but it is also relevant in today’s struggle against individuals and groups who use Islam to legitimise violence and oppression, as did the Banu Umayya fourteen hundred years ago.
Dr Kamal Helbawy: Thank you very much for the academic background by Oliver and many thanks for the invitation to speak. I am happy to be here to talk about a model. Imam Hussein is not just the person who died for any wordly purpose or in a fight for power or authority but a very good model. We are talking about a man and a martyr who kissed the Prophet and the Prophet kissed him. We are talking about a man who came on the back of the Prophet when he was praying. We are talking about a man whose mother is Fatima. We are not talking about an ordinary person or an ordinary fight.
We are in the middle of a fair amount of fights from the First World War, to the Second World War to hundreds of wars which are going on but none of them is designated to elevate and support moral values. Even the alliances made by America and the West is a triumph to seize power and to dominate the world but the case is completely different with Imam Hussein.
So the first point is that there is a mission in war. The mission is mentioned in a verse in the Quran. There is a mission to this ummah to the prophets and the last one is Muhammed and this mission should be accomplished whether you die or not, whether you have to make a sacrifice or not. The mission has to be accomplished and perfected and the model has to be produced. Sometimes a person dies and the ummah get awakened.
We have seen in the 21st century during the spring revolution one man who was not known at all called Abu Azizi in Tunis and he awakened many countries around him. But Imam Hussein made a very comprehensive sacrifice looking at life and death at the same time to be the terms of the mission. He could have lived for the mission or he could die for the mission itself. So there was an equal balance and an equal purposes: the worldly and the other. But the after life is more important to this mission that we are talking about.
The shahada of Immam Hussein as has been written about by many scholars, especially Professor Ali Shirati, don’t sleep, don’t vanish from the scene, do not allow munkar and deviation to come through. You have to do something in the right way. When there is something wrong you have to do something right – you have to show the model, you have to show the zeal and you have to show the model and the example at the same time.
Another area where you cannot approve wrong doings, at least you have to deny by your heart and some people like Imam Hussein denied with his blood, with his intellect, with his wisdom, with his power with his family, ahl al bayt, his daughters, his sisters. It arouses our interest to understand the ultimate purpose and the ultimate goal that Imam Hussein was looking for – that is paradise which is the blessing from God, the eternal blessing.
One of the aims as well is to awaken people. The people are awakened. They have seen an example and they can produce others. There is a model you can use and whenever s you see something wrong you will never accept it. When you see deviation from the mission you stop and then you have to do something about it and correct the way in which you think and behave and consider matters.
So we can say that shahada is to bring reform to society. All our societies need reform and they need people to take the example of Imam Hussein and go ahead and fight for hunger and blood as is the case with ISIS and Nusra and some others who claim to speak in the name of Islam. But Islam will never accept that and will never approve what they are doing.
The motive is to stop deviation. But you can’t fight deviation with another deviation. You have to show the right message. There are eternal values including for example fighting for freedom. Sometimes America is supporting dictators and sometimes it is facing dictators or claiming to face real dictatorship. Sometimes they support dictators in South America and in Africa, in eastern Europe sometime ago and in the Arab world but shahada is to search for freedom and face any deviation from the main mission and to ensure dignity for all the people – not only the ruling families, or the people in power or the armed people and security people or people working in higher positions in a country.
Imam Ali also spoke about minorities. He said a brother who believes in the same thing you believe in or a brother in humanity. So you cannot deny that. You cannot consider any other creature or human being to be inferior to you. But the Quran asserts or confirms that you cannot use force in religion.
One of the most important points is to bring the rulers to accountability, bringing the people – this is more important in our time at present. So what Imam Hussein was trying to do was to bring the rulers who are deviating to accountability. They are not above other people and it is a key principle on the march, in the war, in the sacrifice. It was clear how to bring these people who are becoming tyrants to accountability.
So we can really conclude is to say that shahada is not a war or shedding blood or killing people as we see in different parts of the world either with technology or with arms. It is a higher degree – another way of life. You are dying to live. So you die, you sacrifice yourself, your blood and your future in this world to build another future in another world that is eternal blessed paradise offered by God the creator to those who sacrifice their blood for values and other important principles.
This is away from conflict. It was not a trial to win a conflict with the Ummayads or Yazid or between the Yazidi project and the Husseini project if we can say so but for universal values and principles. Shahada as well is a choice to die with full satisfaction. It is not like other soldiers who are pushed to fight a fight they do not like to go through. In the end someone is offering his blood to achieve full satisfaction.
Chairman: Imam Hussein gave a formula for bringing rulers to accountability. I think that is one of the key messages of Imam Hussein.
Dr Hassen Al-Sader: I would like to thank Dr Shehabi for his kind invitation to participate in this discussion and I would also like to thank the two previous speakers for their introduction to this noble and holy man and his relevance to today’s struggle. In my presentation I would like to discuss Imam Hussein through a slightly different perspective – not through the perspective of the time of Imam Hussein but through our own eyes and our modern challenges and problems and how we can benefit from this man in our quest for universal justice.
I have five points to discuss hopefully finishing with a conclusion on how to benefit from Imam Hussein in our quest for universal justice.
To start with the first point justice is understood correctly but I think in a limited manner as purely political means. When we refer to justice we usually interpret it as a justice in the political system that is governing any country – any part of the world. We concentrate on that when we study, understand and give lectures about Immam Hussein. We present him in a political struggle between a noble freedom fighter and a dictator. Even today we understand Imam Hussein through our own lens in relevance to our struggle for freedom in our respective nations. It is correct, it is true but I think justice has a much wider interpretation than just a political system. So I hope by the end of the discussion we will have a much wider understanding of Imam Hussein – more than just the people versus the governor or the people versus the government or a dictator.
Justice can be defined in many ways. I found a definition that will help us understand Imam Hussein. Justice associated with fairness, equality and morality to treat those around us – the living and the non-living, fairly, appropriately and justly. We treat those around us living and non living in accordance with their rights. All those around us people and the rest of the universe, the earth – has rights. If we treat them in accordance with their rights and a high level of morality we are doing them justice. Political justice is part of it but it is a much wider concept.
I would like to focus on moral justice. When we look at people around us we find that they all have rights. And if we don’t treat them in accordance with their rights then we are being unfair and there is no justice. In my opinion this is a current global problem. Parents, not just children, have rights. They have universal rights. And if societies across the world, including British society, do not give parents their rights then we have a lot to achieve.
Mothers and fathers have rights and we need to find justice there. Children have rights. The elderly in society have rights and sometimes it is more than just the law that enforces them. I hope we don’t have to have a law to force young people to stand and offer their seats to elderly commuters. At the moment no one is doing this. If you take the underground you will find that the elderly have lost their rights in society. No one respects them. And if we do not treat them fairly I think this is a form of injustice. It is much wider than political dictatorship.
Teachers have rights. I don’t recall a single tv programme in the last ten years preaching to us as citizens that our teachers have rights, the rights of respect and appreciation that they still enjoy in some parts of the world. Thank God they do.
Trees have rights and animals have rights. Everything around us has rights and in our quest for universal justice we need to have a much wider horizon to establish justice.
The world is facing a moral catastrophe. There is a global decline in moral justice across all nations. Different levels, different problems. It depends on where you live. It is a global phenomena. There is a global decline in morality across almost all nations in the world including our British society. The two main factors behind this moral decline are the lack of moral education and mispractise.
These problems are not new. It is just that the scale of the problem, the extent of the problem, the depth of the problem has gone out of control. The problems are not new. Moral challenges have faced humanity since the dawn of civilisation but the scale of it is so huge at the moment.
The first point is a lack of moral education, – we are not teaching ourselves. In fact Open Discussions and the Gulf Culture Club and I thank all the centres of all religions who still attempt to teach a bit of morality across society. I really thank them because there is no other source. In the name of political correctness we have adopted a modern style or relativism. There is no right and wrong. You claim it is right I should get up and offer my seat to an old lady. You claim it is wrong for me to swear at my mother. It is relative. You say it is right and I say it is wrong. What sort of backbone of society are you bringing me to?
Religion. We do not teach religion because we mispractise religion and hence we have no understanding of the common values of religion. So you can’t teach people religion. You can’t teach people the common values that are shared by all religions. So you have your own values and I have mine. They are all relative. Don’t ask this teenager to obey any particular path because it is all relative and there is no right and wrong.
We teach people an explanation of existence like Darwinism. If you present Darwinism as an explanation of the world than morality simply has no place in our understanding because if it is the survival of the fittest that is the reason behind your existence in November 2014 than this is against all moral values. I am a physician so I know what I am saying. If it is the survival of the fittest that we teach our children as an explanation of why we exist there than I cannot explain why the NHS invests so much financial and human resources in treating untreatable diseases.
How much are they going to spend on that disabled child? He is going to live for 30 years. Several million? You better allocate that to the survival of the fittest. That disabled child with a chronic illness does not have any positive gens to pass on to the next generation. So if it is survival of the fittest I should just take this unfortunate organism that was born into the world and I should put him aside as he is costing us several million and I should put that aside for the survival of the fittest. So if we are presenting society with an explanation of existence that simply stretches out relativism there are no moral values.
The second part of this problem where we have the catastrophe of global moral decline is the mispractise or the mis representation of our religions be we Christians, Muslims, Jews or Hindus. That is why the young – even the old – are running away from religion. The people who are preaching moral values are not practising – why should we? And we are coming closer and closer to the conclusion of why Imam Hussein helps us in our quest for universal justice.
The current features of today’s civilisation, be it the east or the west, is a civilisations or society that is focused around selfishness, individualism and a self centred life style. Don’t think of others, ignore others, it is all about the survival of the fittest. So if the people in another part of the world are suffering it is not you who is suffering. You should not care. The people of Bahrain are not your people. If you are a Sunni you don’t care about them because they are Shia. Most of the people of Palestine are Sunni so I don’t care because I am a Shia. And if it is Africa I am white they are black. I am Muslim, they are Christians and so on. This is a self centred, narrow minded approach. If it is not affecting you it is not your problem. And the maximum that you want to do is to write an email to your MP.
Racism, fear and hopelessness. I think courage is part of our moral values. To have moral values is not to be a pacifist. It is to be a brave and pro active individual and citizen in society. This general hopelessness says that the world has big problems and there is no hope. I think that is moral decline. The fear of the global powers. If the global financial market is exploiting Africa we do not care. It is not all about dictatorship. If there is an economic model that is exploiting the poor we as citizens of the West simply do not care. We don’t hold our politicians accountable to what the foreign policy of our nations is doing.
We care if the local council is not performing – we care about local laws but s not something to do with foreign policy. Maybe we will join a demonstration to stop the war but not anything more than that. The banking system is exploiting the tax payers – and I am not going to give more details in the presence of Iqbal Assaria but I would love to benefit from him.
We do not care about these systems which are unjust and unfair systems, nationally and globally. We do not care about the leaders of democratic nations exploiting citizens. We don’t object because it is not affecting us.
The final point is the solution. The solution that we need in our quest for universal justice can’t be just words. It can’t be just sharing a set of moral values that we need to spread in the form of a lecture. All corrupt individuals including religious fanatics use good words. George Bush uses the words of peace and fairness. Hate preachers in the Gulf and Saudi use the word mercy. It is not words. Words are not going to make it. It is not enough to just say we need to tell the education secretary or the education committee in a parliament to include more moral values in the text books. That is not the solution. It does not work like that.
The only people who I have not heard talk about good moral values are ISIS. I have not yet heard them talk about mercy and love because I think they are just a different breed, a different form of animal that does not have these words. But other religious fanatics use them. So we need to combine words with actions. We need an example to mobilise people. We need an example that works across history, across nations, an example that combines perfect moral values with perfect actions. We need to present the faultless example of Imam Hussein which we have to the rest of the world.
We have read a bit about history and about great leaders. And every single great leader had his or his own faults – especially when it comes to family relations. Great figures like Mandela and other people who were peaceful freedom fighters. You can study their lives and find faults so we need to present the world with a figure who is perfect, including his relationships with his family and I am talking about a man who went on a quest for universal justice with his family.
We need a moral revival in our quest for universal justice. We need people to hear about Kerbala, ashura and Imam Hussein. And trust me when they hear about him they will think and hopefully wake up. They will think that they must have a set of moral values, regardless of their religion. This is a problem beyond the Muslim ummah. People must have a set of values that are worth it. Just like Hussein sacrificed for his moral values, people need to see the value of moral values. At the moment people understand the value of something of any object by how much is paid in exchange for it. And if the price is the life of a noble man who deserved to live more than anyone else these values deserved such a sacrifice. When people hear about him they will adhere firmly to their values and endorse them. When they find this perfect and rare combination between firm faith and a big heart.
There is usually problem with religious individuals because if you are religious you tend to be very religious, whether you are a Muslim, Christian, Jew or Hindu. Imam Hussein is that rare example that he was so firm in his faith, in his religion yet he was so merciful that he cried for the people who were about to kill him. He fought to the last breath firm yet he was merciful.
If people are after the quest of universal justice then they should be part of this global movement. The movement of Imam Hussein aims for a moral revival, a global moral revival with the man who represents the prophets and imams as its symbol, Imam Hussein.
*Dr Oliver Scharbrodt, Ph.D. (2006) in Islamic and Religious Studies, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, is Professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Chester. His research interests include modern and contemporary Islam, Shii Islam, Sufism and Muslims in Europe. He is the executive editor of the Yearbook of Muslims in Europe, published by Brill, which is the most important reference work on trends and developments within Islam in Europe. Currently, he is the principal investigator of a research project on Shia communities in Britain and their links to the Middle East, funded by the Gerda Henkel Foundation.
**Dr. Kamal El-Helbawy was born in Egypt in 1939 and joined the Muslim Brotherhood . While lecturing at Sokoto University he participated in founding the first branch of the Muslim Educational Trust in Sokoto in 1971 in Nigeria. Dr. Helbawy travelled to Saudi Arabia in the early 1970s where he was among the founders of the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY) and became their first executive director until 1982. He served as an advisor to the Arab Bureau of Education for Gulf States (ABEGS) from 1982 – 1987. From 1988 to 1994 Dr. Helbawy was in charge of Muslim Brotherhood affairs and activities in Afghanistan – During the same period he was based as an advisor at the Institute of Policy Studies in Islamabad – Pakistan. He served as the editor in chief of Arabic weekly – Qadaya Dowaliya – International Issues published in Pakistan from 1988-1994 After settling in the United Kingdom in 1994 Dr. Helbawy helped create the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) and the Muslim Association of Britain(MAB) and he became its first founding president. He continues to be among the Board of counsellors of MCB. He is currently the chairman of the Centre for the Study of Terrorism (CFSOT) and an advisor to the Global Civilizations Study Centre (GCSC). He is also a founding member of the recently launched 2008 Islamic Unity Forum ”IUF” which seeks to unite Muslims both Sunni and Shi’a communities.
***Dr Hassen al-sader is a medical doctor specialising in the field of haematology. He has a keen interest in developing the Muslim community and its participation in main stream British society. His lectures promotes education as the best method to fight extremism. He believes in faith having a pivotal role in developing society. He graduated from St Georges university of London and he is currently an advisor to the Muslim Students Council. He is also the co-founder of the Social Development and Revival Foundation.