This thread could go in GQ, but it is about such a political question that it probably would be moved to GD eventually, so I might as well start it here.
From “Portrait of a Rebellion: Shiite Insurgency in Iraq Bedevils U.S.,” by Juan Cole, published in In These Times, June 21, 2004:
Is this for real? And, if so, what does it mean? How will it affect the actions of al-Sadr and his militia (the only militia in Iraq that has not dissolved itself per Coalition instructions)? A lot of American evangelical Protestants think we’re living in the “End Times” and soon we’ll see the coming of the Antichrist and the second coming of Christ and Armageddon, with the famine and the pestilence and the noise and the bleeding and the hurting . . . In fact, some Protestants think America should prop up Israel just so Israel can play its appointed role in the working out of End Times prophecy. Do extremist Shiite Muslims think this way, or anything like this way? Is this about eschatology? Do they think the end of the world is coming? And . . . who is this “Mahdi”? What role is he expected to play? Is he a sin-redeemer like Christ? A just king like the Jewish Messiah? Or what?
I remember there was an episode shortly after Khomeini’s revolution in Iran, when an Iranian styling himself the “Mahdi” and an armed band of his followers tried to take over Mecca. All were ultimately captured and executed by Saudi authorities. Is anything like this in the offing?
The Mahdi is the Mahdi. I guess he’s most like the Messiah in Judaism. He’ll come and defeat evil, bring peace and justice to the world, destroy oppression and tyranny, and through his example, everyone will come to worship God.
In Shia Islam Abu al Qasim Muhammad b. al-Hasan al- Askari is the twelfth Imam of the lmamiyya (popularly named the Twelver Shi’ites), and known as Hujjat, Mahdi, Khalaf Salih, Qa’im and Muntazar.
“when the earth will be filled with tyranny and injustice the Mahdi will rise and fill the earth with justice and equity. He will be among the descendants of the Prophet arid from the line of Fatimah. His grandfather will be Husayn, and his father will be Imam Hasan Askari, the son of Imam Ali Naqi, the son of Imam Muhammad Taqi, the son of Imam Ali Rida, the son of Imam Musa Kazim, the son of Imam Jafar Sadiq, the son of Imam Muhammad Baqir, the son of Imam Zayn al - Abidin, the son of Imam Husayn b. Ali b. Abi Talib.”
(Ibn Arabi Futuhat makiyya. Have taken this translation from someone else :)… )
He is said to be born in 869AD (the records on this date can vary a few years) and 5 years old when his father died. The Shia say he then disappeared but that he is still alive but stays invisible. They claim the Prophet and others forsaid that the Mahdi shall return when the earth is full of unjustice and then he shall restore justice.
The Mahdi is for Shia Islam a Messianic figure who shall according some traditions re-appear when Jesus returns.
There was indeed a lot commotion made around Khomeiny who was proclaimed by some to be the Mahdi. Which is said to have been of influence for his succes.
(In the course of history sometimes such a claim was made about others, always serving political goals. )
As soon as I heard of this “Mahdi army” in Iraq, I became a bit cautious and asked myself the question what on earth was behind the choice of this name.
My take on it is that they underscore with this their claim to “restore justice” in Iraq because they try to get rid of the invaders/occupyers and (of course) have as primary goal to install a government basedc on Shia Islam. Which is for a certain group among the Shia Muslims there of course an idea of “doing justice”.
I never heard any claim that Al Sadr would be “the Mahdi”… That is pure unfounded speculation of the writer of th&at article, in my view.
If you know that the last one about whom this claim was made was Khomeiny, then I think Al Sadr is wiser then to risk to make such a ridiculous claim. That would only make him come across as completely delusional and unforgivable arrogant.
Salaam. A
The invasion and occupation of the grand Mosque in Mecca in november 1979 was not done by Iranians, but by Saudi dissidents.
The leader was from one of the most important families and claimed to be justified for his actions because of the corruption among the members of the House of Saud who in his view also had lost its legitimacy by allowing Western influence in the Kingdom.
The link with the revolution in Iran is that his accusations against the Saudi monarchy resembled the ones Khomeini made against the shah.
Salaam. A
Am I not alone in finding how much Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are so damn close to each other, but fight so bloody much? I mean, this is probably a “well, duh” moment, but seriously, what the hell? None of them started getting all pissed off and going on crusades against Buddhists. Sigh. I guess it is just like the Cat’lic - Protestant fighting. I mean, seriously, you’re all waiting for the same damned train to arrive. Stoparguing over what color it is. One day, Jesus and Mohammed and the Mahdi and that god the Aztecs were waiting for are going to land on their flying saucer, take a good look around, and just leave.
And 25 years later, the Westerners exerting the influence still scratch their heads and wonder why anyone is upset at them and why they were “suddenly attacked” for “no reason”
Let me add a bit to your confusion
Islam never profiled itself to be “a new religion” (that is an invention of primarly the Christian world).
Hence it also does not teach to “fight” the other monotheistic religions although this particular teaching got quite a bit neglected and forgotten over time and still happens to be forgotten by some.
Salaam. A
And yes, Al Qur’an is full of references to the day of Judgement (and descriptions of paradise and hell).
To clarify: There is no schism in Islam in the sense of what is understood to create divisions in Christianity.
Al Qur’an, the 5 pilars of Islam and the principal dogmas are the same for all Muslims.
Shi’ism was the direct result of a political dispute considering the succession of Muhammed in the very early days of Islamic history, and developped itself later into its own sects.
Reread the quote – the author is not saying that al-Sadr claims to be the Mahdi, nor that his followers claim it for him, but that al-Sadr expects the Mahdi to come soon.
While the Mahdi takes on a much more important and central role in Shi’a eschatology, where he is labelled as a specific hidden Imam ( except in Zaydi traditions, that don’t recognize a Mahdi ), at least some Sunni traditions appear to accept the idea of a Mahdi appearing as a precursor to the second coming of Jesus ( also supposedly occultated ). It was under this tradition that Muhammed Ahmad declared himself as al-Mahdi and launched the Mahdist state in Sudan.
I’m confused. “Second coming of Jesus”? I thought that in Islamic doctrine, Jesus is not the Messiah, or even a messiah, but merely a prophet, and a less important prophet than Mohammed. So why is his “second coming” foretold, or important? And what’s this about his being “occultated”? Don’t Muslims assume that Jesus was a mortal man, and simply died on the cross and was not resurrected (except by living on in Paradise like all righteous souls)?
It’s a pretty common belief in Islam that Jesus didn’t die on the cross. They were going to crucify him, but then God took him to heaven and put somebody in his place (Judas, I think) who God made everybody think was Jesus. So Judas got crucified instead.
I swear, one of these days I’m going to find a local mosque (given that they haven’t all been burned down yet) and grill them about everything. I know WAY too little about Islam.
far be it from me to dampen your intellectual curiousity, but these are parlous times.
Partticularly as we are in what might be caled John Walker Lindh’s back yard,
it might be best for you to limit your research to books bought for cash while wearing a fake beard and wig.
