02-07-2005 Grand Ayatollah Sistani

Well - the LA Times ran a story this weekend on Sistani, and I've just seen his name in the O.C. Register. So, I suppose it's time for us to know who this guy is.

Sistani is a Grand Ayatollah, which means that he has studied Islamic theology, philosophy, and secular sciences for a long time. And, I do mean a long time. His whole life, since he was 5 years old, has pretty much been devoted to scholarship and God. So, he's like a combination PHD professor, super rabbi, pope lawyer. His background is quite unlike anything that we have in our culture. I think it will be important to keep that in mind whene the media talks about the guy. Of course, the last Grand Ayatollah whose name any of us knew was Khomenni, and quite a few people (Sistani possibly included) weren't left with a great impression of him and his ideas.

Not to be too pessimistic, but I have to predict that the rhetoric between the (US) right wing and the Sistani supporter group may get hot. To that end, know that Sistani maintains a website at www.sistani.org which is pretty good. Most of his important statements appear to be translated into English, as well as some of his opinions. Muslims can query Sistani via the web or principals and details of Islamic law, and when he issues a Faqua (Islamic legal opinion) statement, you can read it there directly, rather than relying on US news sources to bring you a chopped up, quotation marked version of it.

So far, it appears that the UN and the US, take his opinion (or at least the influence therof) seriously. Sistani asked for direct elections. He got 'em. He stated that the redistricting effort was corrupt and had to stop. It did. He critisized an extension of the election timetable. It happened on schedule. And now, the party that he put together for the ballot, that used his face on their fliers, are coming up as winners.

Sistani will be an interesting player to watch. He seems, at this point, to have a wide base of public support among the Shi'a. But, he is not exactly the market-friendly, pro-western leader that the US had in mind. According to the bio on his website (I quote directly): "Ayatollah Sistani is very well known for his humble and simplicity in lifestyle. He earns ordinary house and furniture, and wears unexpensive garments. He does not care about fashion or modern mode." Clearly - he's no representatitive of the materialist consumer of the new world market. While he does seem to pull some financial clout - he operates several public housing projects (mostly for students) in his name - it's not clear that it means the same thing to him as it would to you are me.

In stated opinions, Sistani is not shy about the Palestinian conflict. He openly criticizes the killing of Palestinian Muslims as a US-backed activity, and places a duty on all Muslims to help them. In another published opinion, he criticized the US forces in Iraq for allowing the looting of a historical museum of islamic scripture. His statement alleged that if the US had taken one of the tanks from outside the oil ministry, and placed it in front of the museum, invaluable destruction could have been obverted. Sistani's tone was equally critical of the destruction of Christian churches in Iraq (not clear if this was by US boys or local ruffians), as he defended the rights of other religions to free living in the land.

Sistani's legal opinions in the Q&A portions of the website offer his insight on many of the Muslim codes that read like the description of a scince fiction culture to so many of us: 1/5 of all profits are to be given as charity and to the poor as "Khums" (a scripturally mandated socialism to which there are no exceptions). Listening to music for diversion and play is forbidden. Men should not look at women in a sexual way. To aid in this, women should be covered but for the face and hands. Extramarital sex is forbidden. Masturbation is forbidden. Consumption of alcohol is forbidden. Basically, if you've seen the "American Pie" movies, everything in there is totally forbidden.

Now, according to the LA times, Sistani has not indicated that he supports the concept of a fully Islamic state governed by unelected and unchecked power for the clerics. There is no way to confirm this firsthand (and since no self-respecting conservative would trust anything printed in the LA Times, that leaves us pretty ignorant). Sistani hasn't made (or translated into English) any statements regarding his political opinions. But, at the same time, there is nothing on his website pertaining to any Jihad on US imperialism, any killing of the infidels, or being rewarded with 72 virgins for the murder of US children. At least, not yet. I'll be very interested to see if this man gets played as a terrorist in the media. Doubtless, some ties to some Shi'a group that partakes in some Jihadist activities can be uncovered if needed. But, we'll see. For all we know he eats American children for dinner every night. I'm sure we'll know the truth soon.

It's hard to say just where the differences, concessions, and arguments will happen between this man and the US's interests. Will he favor publicly owned oil, as so many fear? Will he push for sharia legal codes, and if so, what interpretation and to what will that mean for women in Iraq? Based on his moral code, he's not going to be welcoming the Bud Light bikini tour into town anytime soon, does that mean that he'll oppose the privatization of Iraq's oil by western companies?

Should be interesting.