Eidol Ghadir and a Pious Leadership

On the 18^th of Zilhejjah of the 10^th year after Hijra, a great event took place by a small pond which lay on the way between Holy Mecca and Medina. On that day the holy Prophet of Islam (May the blessing of Allah be upon him and his progeny) conveyed his message to the 120,000-strong crowd of Haj pilgrims. This great event became known as Ghadir Khom in the history of Islam. Muslims term this day as Eid and celebrate it since it has a special value and sanctity for them. Eidol Ghadir was the day the holy Prophet of Islam returned from his last Haj pilgrimage from holy Mecca.

On return from the Haj pilgrimage the caravan was passing through the desert. The sound of camels belling broke the silence and brought uphoria and ecstasy to this valley. In that vast desert there are a number of huge trees. There was a region named Ghadir Khom, the site where the Haj caravans separated from each other. Each one of the Egyptians, Iraqis and the people of holy Medina had to traverse this spot to return to their lands.

God’s messenger was delving into himself. The caravan approached Ghadir Khom. It was then that the crowd of pilgrims noticed the changes in the Prophet’s mood.

At that moment Ayah 67 of Surah Maidah was revealed to him:

“O Apostle! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message.”

The holy Prophet ordered the caravan to stop. Then the pilgrims made a pulpit for him. A tumult aroused among the crowd. All were keen to know what had happened. It seemed that a great mission was entrusted to the holy Prophet. So the holy prophet ascended the pulpit and said:

“O people, Hear my words, for it is possible that I may not meet you at this spot in the future. You and I are responsible. Have we carried out the mission?”

The pilgrims replied:” We testify that You have fulfilled Your mission. Then the holy Prophet said: I am leaving two memorable things among you-one of them is the Book of Allah and the other is my household , and if you abide by them you will never go astray.” After a pause the holy Prophet looked for Ali (PBUH) among the crowd, the person who was the constant companion of God’s messenger and the first person who believed in   the holy Prophet. The Prophet himself had several times praised the knowledge and competence of Ali (PBUH). The holy Prophet called upon  Ali and said: “O People who is the most competent to the faithful? “ The people answered: “God and His messenger know better.” At this juncture, the holy Prophet raised Ali’s hand and said: “God is my Master and I am the master of the faithful. Then the prophet continued Whosever master I am from  now on  Ali is his master  He then repeated these  sentences three times and then  said : “My God be friend with anyone who makes friendship with Ali and be enemy to anyone who has enmity toward  Ali. Love whoever loves Ali and hate whoever hates Ali. O people! Those present should convey these remarks to those who are absent.”

When the holy Prophet’s speech came to an end part of Ayah 3 of Surah Maidah was revealed to the holy Prophet:

“This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion;”

The appointment of Ali as leader was aimed at continuing the holy Prophet’s programs and policies after his passing away, whereas the infidels and the opposition thought that with the passing away of the holy Prophet, the light of Islam would be extinguished. God refers to this event as a perfection of religion. The Ghadir event is worth pondering from different aspects.

One is that leadership in Islam does not mean to win power and post but it is a divine posts and leader who should be immune from any wrongdoings. A pious leadership and Imamate of Muslims is so significant that God has cited it as one of the significant affairs of religion and a source for its perfection. For this reason, even the holy Prophet too can not appoint anyone to a divine status without God’s command. An issue which was explicitly acknowledged by God’s messenger. The history of Islam says: “When Prophet Mohammad invited the Bani Aamer tribe to embrace Islam, they said If we embrace Islam, would you entrust the leadership after you to us?” The holy Prophet replied: “It is the task of God to choose a successor to the Prophet. The Almighty will choose anyone He wishes. “

Therefore the choice of Ghadir has been made by God.

According to Islamic thinkers and exegetes the existence of a pious leader in the society is the most appropriate executive guarantee for safeguarding Islamic values and the security and soundness of a society. The Holy Prophet could not leave all the hardships he sustained for Islam without conclusion and planning.

Meanwhile, the appointment of Ali (PBUH) as successor proved that the leader of the Islamic community should enjoy special characteristics. Ali had spent all of his life in the path of justice and piety. Justice and piety are two prominent characteristics in the life of the Imam. It is evident that the human community is in dire need of such faithful and just leaders.

The other aspect of the Ghadir event is the issue of guardianship of people and society. The holy Prophet introduced Ali (PBUH) as the leader and guardian of Muslims. In this way the person who is the ruler and leader of people can not do whatever he wishes or embark on power display. He is responsible vis-à-vis the people so that with their cooperation he would materialize divine values and establish justice and security in the society.

Islamic guardianship stresses the fact that a leader of a society should have prominent characteristics such as piety, knowledge, insight, bravery and justice.

Imam Ali (PBUH) believed that ruling by itself has no value unless it becomes a means for materializing the rights of the oppressed. For this reason, he said: “Ruling to me is as worthless as priceless shoes, unless I restore a right and remove evil. “

Throughout history, thinkers and scholars have spoken and researchers have written many books about the Ghadir event. In the book entitled Al-Ghadir written by the famous Islamic thinker Allameh Amini   the names of about 60 Sunni thinkers who confirm the Ghadir event have been mentioned. One of them is Ebne Moghazeli who writes in the book entitled Manaqeb:

“The Hadith of Ghadir is a credible one which has been narrated by about 100 companions of God’s messenger. This Hadith is a virtue allocated only to Ali (PBUH).

Ebne Talhe Shafei also says:

“This day is termed Ghadir Khom and became an Eid for Muslims, for, God’s messenger appointed Ali to a high status."

The Issue of Islamic Party is too Normative

For less than a year now, political parties which will compete in gaining constituents in the 2004 election have consolidated themselves. However more recently, several Islamic parties or parties based on Islamic constituents, have experienced a worrying fragmentation. Why are Islamic parties so susceptible to fragmentation when unity of ummat (community) has been such a vocal issue? What factors determine the marriages and divorces amongst politicians within Islamic parties?
Syafi’i Anwar MA, Executive Director of International Center for Islam and Pluralism (ICIP) analyzed this phenomenon through a political and cultural approach in an interview with Ulil Abshar-Abdalla (25/9/03). To this PhD candidate at Melbourne University, in many developing countries the primordial political culture is often unable to rationally resolve institutional matters.
ULIL ABSHAR-ABDALLA: Brother Syafi’i, How do you respond to the phenomenon of the susceptibility for dissent within these Islamic parties?
SYAFI’I ANWAR: I notice that the fundamental problem is one of leadership. If we observe the background to the problem further, we’ll find that the starting point is an issue of leadership culture. I don’t know exactly what is the internal situation within those parties since I am not a member of an Islamic party, but I have many friends in them. As far s I can tell from my observations the conflicts often begin from insubstantial problems such as personality conflicts.
ULIL: You have said that the problem is with the leadership in the parties. Now there is Hamzah Haz in PPP, PBB has Yusril Ihza Mahendra, and there is Gus Dur in PKB. What is the crucial distinction between each leader such that they cannot function as a united entity as the community wishes?
SYAFI’I ANWAR: In my observation, the problem is not about the mission or vision of any one of these leaders but one of competing styles of leadership. Amin Rais speak out frankly, uninhibitedly and sometimes he is not wise. Yusril on the other hand is sometimes too rigid. Hamzah Haz is different, he is a politician who blows with the wind, easily-changing views, and that maybe natural for a politician. The problem is why fragmentation happens. I simply think it is not about the vision and mission but about conflicting styles of leadership.
I said it is because the leadership style is central to the leadership, and because every party has a leader figure. I agree that the constituents are important, but as long as the performance of the leader is not good, he will not be easily accepted by all parties.
ULIL: Why do their leadership styles bring them into dispute?
SYAFI’I ANWAR: Because our culture is primordial. We are often incapable of solving personal differences in rational ways. This actually is the common problem facing politicians in developing countries. The matter is that they are not talking about substantial issues.
ULIL: Actually establishing unity is easier at the level of the community than at the level of leadership.
SYAFI’I ANWAR: That’s right. As I’ve said, from observing the political culture, the Indonesian community is actually moderate, tolerant, and appreciative as long as the leader is a good leader.
ULIL: What is the type of political culture among our leaders that they can’t meet up?
SYAFI’I ANWAR: It is competition which is empty in terms of any clear ideology, vision and mission of the party. The matter of vision and mission of these Islamic parties is a problem and is not clear.
ULIL: A disease in our political culture is the clash among the leaders which then influences the base. Why is this so?
SYAFI’I ANWAR: I agree. But I want to emphasize that it’s not only a disease in the Islamic parties but of leaders of parties who prefer to be politicians than statesmen. It’s the biggest problem facing the nation. So, the Islamic party is rich in politicians but poor in terms of statesman.
ULIL: Do politicians always have bad images?
SYAFI’I ANWAR: No. but a politician should think to be statesman. It means, he does not only think in terms of his party, but in the future he should appear as credible, honest, as a man of integrity acting for the state’s best interests.
ULIL: It is all right if a politician is not a statesman.  But if he is a position and salary hunter, he confuses the community.
SYAFI’I ANWAR: Yes. Sometimes they used to read the verse of kursi… hahaha (Quranic verse named kursi which means position). So their orientation is not based upon the people’s interest. This is a big problem for Islamic parties. Besides, the problems concerning the Islamic party are normative and unrelated to really important matters, for instance human rights, employment, removing corruption and so on. Those issues are and should be more fundamental than issues about the enforcement of Islamic sharia which is a normative issue they concentrate upon.
ULIL: We even have seen the emergence of an Islamic Sharia Party.
SYAFI’I ANWAR: I think it will be contra productive. People currently wish for real solutions to real problems. At least the Islamic parties should have clear agendas for facing real problems. As Olivier Roy writes in his book The Failure of Political Islam, the main failure of Islamic parties which we can learn from other state’s experiences, especially Pakistan, is that they have no real agendas for solving the fundamental problems in society, like human rights, corruption and so on. They always focus on normative issues like the obligation of enforcing God’s law and so on.
ULIL: There are many stories about unpromising Islamic parties. My question is this, could we have any expectations for a better performance from Partai Keadilan Sejahtera/PKS (Justice and Welfare Party)?
SYAFI’I ANWAR: I want to see the matter critically. I agree if it is said that PKS is good enough from the aspect of organization, mission, vision, and in having an exemplary board. Here I’m in agreement with Martin Van Bruinessen, an Indonesianist from Netherlands. But the problem is related to the social base of PKS which is limited if it wants to compete in the 2004 election. I have observed that its mass base is on campuses which means PKB is not convincingly populist. Furthermore, PKS concentrates on normative matters as well.
Secondly, even though I am a member of Muhammadiyah, I am interested in Partai Kebangkitan Bangsa/PKB (a party delivered by Nahdlatul Ulama’) as it has a real social base. PKB’s constituency is clear, but the problem there is due to internal friction. As an observer, I must say that it is pitiable. I hope this problem can be resolved, otherwise, it will not only harm the Nahdliyyin, but also the nation in general. The internal clash can be utilized to the advantage of many parties.
ULIL: The problem of PKB is related to the strongman figure of Gus Dur. How do you read the situation?
SYAFI’I ANWAR: Gus Dur’s domination is really a big problem. When we talk about political matters, PKB has a real social base. My concern in PKB is great since it has a more real community. The friction and the splitting potential could have major implications.
What worries me is that this problem is not specific to PKB, but also is occurring in PPP involving Hamzah Haz and Zainuddin MZ. It is the same case there with the reconciliation between them who daily talk about the unity of community.
ULIL: PKB’s mass in the villages is wide and influenced by primordial views about leadership. If their leaders split, they would split as well. How are they to overcome this?
You are right. That’s why the leaders of party should be istiqamah (act in a straight forward way) and maintain a low profile. They should emphasize how to think about and give priority to future prospects. But in politics, keeping a low profile seems to be very politically expensive by nature.