Sydney-siders woke up on Easter Sunday (April 8, 2007) with the following front page headline screaming out from the Sun-Herald newspaper: "MUFTI SACKED." Finally, it seemed the 360,000-odd Australians who tick "Muslim" on their census forms would be free of perhaps the biggest cause of their collective embarrassment. Finally, the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils (AFIC), the peak body representing the management committees of many Australian mosques, had removed the position it created with little or no idea what kind of PR monster they had unleashed on the communities they claimed to represent.

Sadly, it seems the powers-that-be at AFIC got cold feet and are now denying the sacking. The new leadership of AFIC now denies ever sacking Sheikh Taj el-din Al Hilaly from the post of Mufti. Instead, AFIC President Ikebal Patel has once again deferred the matter to a new umbrella body of Australian Imams.

Continuing Institutional Confusion

You have to feel sorry for Australian journalists trying to report on Australian Islam. The first hurdle they must face is deciding who actually speaks for Islam. Then they must ask whether this is the same authority or person who speaks for Muslims. Believe it or not, the two can actually be different.

They certainly are different in the Australian context, where Islam is more an ethno-religious than religious phenomenon. The vast majority of Australian mosques operate along ethnic lines. The mosque where Sheik Hilaly preaches is managed by a body whose constitution only allows full membership and voting rights to men eligible for Lebanese citizenship.

To make matters worse, Muslim religious leadership in Australia involves no clear hierarchy. Only recently have Australian Imams managed to organise themselves into an Australian National Imams' Council (ANIC) under the leadership of an academic from Griffith University, Dr. Mohamad Abdallah.

Dr. Abdallah recently spoke to Radio National and said that ANIC members had decided that the position of mufti would inevitably have to be replaced by a sub-committee of ANIC dealing with fatawa (or non-binding opinions on the position of the Islamic sacred law on novel issues). Dr. Abdallah said that ANIC "has elected its executive members in a democratic fashion and also will move forward to elect a council of fatwa, and not necessarily a mufti, to look at the affairs of the Australian Muslim community."

Not necessarily? Abdallah continues: "There was a general feeling amongst the majority of the 60 imams who were present in the meeting on Sunday that it would be more conducive and productive for Australian Muslims to have a Council of Fatwah, which will be basically made of scholars, reputable scholars from Australia who are in their own capacities, are imams xC9 The role of this will be to take the burden of responsibility off the shoulders of one person who says he's a mufti, and to take the responsibility as a council, as a collective body, to examine issues that affect the Australian Muslim community, particularly things that relate to legal aspects of Islamic law and Australian law."

Dr. Abdallah quite clearly encapsulated the confusion and ambiguity surrounding the role of Australia's mufti. "One of the suggestions that were made in the meeting was to define a mufti xC9 So there is certainly no clear definition of a mufti, but certainly the unanimous opinion of the imams who were present, that the mufti does not need to be, and should not be the spokesperson of the Muslim community." Making matters even more confusing, Dr. Abdallah expressed the view that the federal umbrella body AFIC was increasingly seen as redundant.

Stephen Crittenden: Mohamed, is another part of this story that the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, AFIC, which started out as the body that certifies Halal meat, but somehow created this honorary title of mufti of Australia for Sheikh Hilaly, and of course which has been in utter disarray in recent times, that we're seeing in the creation of this new body of imams, AFIC's influence effectively disintegrating?

Mohamad Abdallah: Certainly. I think that is the case.

Stephen Crittenden: It will no longer be the body people come to for political comments?

Mohamad Abdallah: Well personally I hope so, I hope that might be the case. This was the feeling that we got from many of the Imams. One thing they asserted for sure, that we are independent of AFIC, and now that it is a Council of Imams, who are scholars in their field, they will be able to handle issues, particularly we're talking about legal issues or Islamic issues, much better than AFIC or any other organisation.

Sheik Hilaly and Lebanese Sunni sectarian politics

Despite holding the grand title of "Mufti of Australia, New Zealand and the South Pacific," Hilaly's influence is limited, at best, to a faction of Lebanese Sunni Muslims living in the Canterbury, Auburn and Bankstown regions of South Western Sydney. Though Lebanon has a large and influential diaspora living in various parts of the world xD0 the United States, Brazil, Argentina, France and countries in the Middle East, the bulk of Australia's Lebanese migrants came during and after the civil war and the Israeli invasion.

Many were quite literally plucked from their small town and village environments. Few had work skills relevant to Australia. Most were uneducated. Among these were Sunni Muslims from Tripoli, Mena and surrounding districts. These migrants were extracted from some of the lowest socio-economic strata of Lebanon. They brought with them sectarian conflicts unique to their region.

Among these conflicts was the presence of the followers of one Ethiopian Sheik named Abdullah Hareri al-Habashi, whose followers became known as al-Ahbash. Remnants of the movement exist in the United States, and are known as the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects The Australian branch of the Ahbash exist in large numbers only in Sydney.

The Australian wing of the Ahbash have a limited focus. Their activities are conducted mainly among persons of Lebanese and Syrian background, and have little interest in Muslims from other ethnic backgrounds. Further, their activities are almost exclusively confined to the Sydney metropolitan area. Apart from management of a mosque, the Ahbash also run a school with two campuses in south western Sydney.

Within Lebanese politics, the Ahbash are known to be close to the Syrian government. Their opposition to Sheik Hilaly has its roots to his years spent in Lebanon before he arrived in Australia. Though Egyptian-born, Sheik Hilaly spent a number of years working with Sunni Muslim communities in Lebanon. One of his children was born in Lebanon, and he was employed by the Lebanese Moslems Association on the recommendation of the then Mufti of Lebanon, Sheik Hassan Khalid.

Hilaly & Ahbash sectarianism

Apart from the Syrian government, the Ahbash also have a cosy relationship with sections of the Australian government. This seems largely related to their very strong anti-Wahhabi stance.

The Australian government has a love-hate relationship with the Wahhabi sect. On the one hand, the Prime Minister regularly visits a school managed by a Wahhabi foundation and headed by an allegedly Wahhabi financier with close ties to the Attorney-General.

On the other hand, the government seems to subscribe to the new neo-Conservative orthodoxy which regards Wahhabism as the source of jihadi terrorist violence. Hence, the Ahbash tailor their rhetoric to suit this orthodoxy, focussing on their opposition to Wahhabi theology.

Then again, the same trick is used by opponents of the Ahbash sect, such as the followers of Nazim Qubbrusi and Hisham Kabbani, leaders of a Naqshbandi order. Some followers of Qubrussi and Kabbani recently set up a Sufi Muslim Council which uses virtually the same anti-extremist rhetoric as the Ahbash sect and which was recently backed by a senior Minister of the Blair government in the UK.

The moderate credentials of the Ahbash have been questioned by those who have had dealings with this fringe Lebanese sect. The Ahbash prohibit Muslims from assisting non-Muslim communities in pursuing their lawful rights to build houses of worship, and are not known to be involved in any inter-faith activities.

Lebanese sectarianism setting the Muslim agenda

This intra-Lebanese dispute between the supporters of Sheik Hilaly and the Ahbash has featured heavily in reporting of Muslim affairs, especially in national broadsheet The Australian, owned by US citizen Rupert Murdoch. The Oz (as it is known in Australian media circles) has employed an Arabic-speaking reporter of Lebanese Druze extraction named Richard Kerbaj.

Kerbaj has broken numerous stories about Sheik Hilaly, many of them based on material provided by members of the Ahbash sect. Unfortunately, in the past, much of Kerbaj's reporting has focussed on the Sydney Lebanese Sunni sector, leaving the broader Australian community with the impression that Lebanese affairs and Muslim affairs are one and the same. Hence, the ongoing battle of words between Hilaly and the Ahbash is often projected as affecting Muslims of all ethno-religious backgrounds, including the vast majority of Muslims who have little time for either side of the conflict.

Hilaly's Future

Despite their best efforts, it seems the Ahbash will play only a minor role in the removal of Sheik Hilaly. The new Australian National Imams' Council's fatawa sub-committee will more than likely render the position of mufti redundant.

And so it seems inevitable that Mufti Day will inevitably come to an end. For many Australian Muslims, it ended years ago.

Irfan said "The moderate credentials of the Ahbash have been questioned by those who have had dealings with this fringe Lebanese sect."

Aside from categorizing them as a sect which is completely untrue, it seems that "you" made "you" a reference. Those who "dealt" with them and "questioned" their moderation is non other than YOU. Funny.

My experiences and dealings have been replicated by others also.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6261

So now we have two references 'You" and a forum. Wow. I am sure that your evidences are admissible in an Australian court.

I have personally spoken to Haddad, if he is the person you are referring to, and I can relate tons of things about him and his master al qubrusli and his functionary Qabbani. So would you make me a reference? Please.

I have visited the Ahbash institutions in North America and surely I can not say that they are '"remnants". I would like to invite you to visit their institutions in Germany, france, Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, Holland, Finland, Norway, Indonesia, bengladesh, Jordan and other places. Those are a lot of remnants, don't you think so?

For you, it seems that being a moderate means forsaking his religion. Every single moslem knows that Islam forbids assissting others on doing anything that is forbidden in Islam including assissting others in building churches or Buddhist worship places. This seems to have been including in your profile of moderate Muslims. Well I assure that in this case they do not fit the profile.

If you have a problem with them try to solve it with them directly.

Wow, I didn't know that Supremacism was an attribute of a mainstream muslim, cough, cough...

Can you explain what you're getting at with the hotlinking of Shaykh Nazim's name to an Habashi article calling him a negater of Islam? What I gather is this:
1) Habashis and Shaykh Nazim's order both oppose wahhabis;
and,
2) Habashis don't get along with Shaykh Nazim's Naqshbandi Order.
Is that right? Because if that's it, I still don't get it. There are a wide range of muslim organizations beyond the Habashis and Naqshbandis that are opposed to Wahhabi ideology, and they tend to make the same arguments. And there are plently of other people the Ahbash don't like, like you, apparently. How is the Naqshbandi Order implicated in the story you are telling?

OK, let's try and understand this point for a moment ...

a. Ahbash material makes the claim that they are 'moderate' Muslims.

b. Ahbash also claims that other Muslims (whether Wahhabis or even other non-Wahhabi Muslims) are NOT moderate Muslims.

c. Ahbash is a sectarian phenomenon limited to Lebanon and Syria.

d. In Sydney, many people who have had dealings with the Ahbash leadership say that their claims to being moderate are suspect.

I understand some people are contesting item (d). To such people, I suggest they come to Sydney and find out for themselves.

Although Ahbash don't like the followers of Nazim Qubrussi (and vice versa), the fact is that both have a history of claiming a virtual monopoly over the title of 'moderate' Muslim, at the expense of other more established Muslim groups.

The problem with the Ahbash -v- Hilaly dispute in Sydney is that it is really a Lebanese turf war which has been conflated and imposed upon the rest of the non-Lebanese Muslim communities, many of whom have little or no understanding of the nature of the sectarian bout.

This is my argument. If you choose not to believe it or to disagree with it, be my guest.

Ok, I get in now. Sort of an "in passing" kind of thing, while we're on the subject of groups that claim to be moderate. Super, thanks!

Article c is wrong too. You can visit their centers all over europe, Canada and the US. They have members of all ethnic backgrounds and in some area they have more non Arabs than they have arab suporters. I am sure that you did not do your homeword because facts speak the opposite of what you are claiming. In my first reply I invited you to visit their centers all over Europe, North America, India, Bangladesh , Indonesia etc.. which you completely ignored because you did not do your homework nor you are even willing to do it because you will find out that you are wrong about your claims.

You are trying to say that they are not moderates according to your definition of moderation which I explained the flaws in it.

Their moderation cost them blood which I do not think you have never ever shed one drop in standing against fanatics. The founder of AICP was assassinated by qa3ida in 1995. more than 20 of them were either assassinated or seriously wounded in attacks by wahhabi fanatics. You can do your research in lebanon and check how many wahhabi/ikhwani were arrested and confessed - in court -that they were preparing car bombs, snipers etc.. to kill them. I am sure you have never ever visisted their centers and institutions in Lebanon and checked how heavily fortified they are because of the so many assassination attempts against them and/or car bombs etc..

My belief is that you are seeking attention. This is all.

Mainstream Muslim, the article was about Sydney and the troubles relating to Sheik Hilaly. Believe it or not, Sheik Hilaly is not really all that relevant to Europe or the US. Just as the Ahbash in Sydney are of little relevance to (and indeed have little interest in) non-Lebanese and non-Syrian Muslims in Australia.

irfy said "the article was about Sydney and the troubles relating to Sheik Hilaly." I think you wanted something far more than just discussing the issue of hilali in Sydney. If it was only sydney that you wanted to talk about then I invite you to read what you, yourself, wrote in the article. You said " Remnants of the movement exist in the United States, and are known as the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects" So it was not sydney what you wanted to discuss. I know it and you know it.

MM, is the real issue for you Sheik Hilaly? Or is the real issue the fact that you don't like seeing the Ahbash sect's presence in Sydney discussed?

If you are not in Sydney, feel free to visit our city and see for yourself. You are free to disagree with my assessment.

I can see clearly that it is not Hilali that you want to discuss but you have a grudge against ahbash and some scores you want to settle. This is why you brought the issue of their presence in NA. When you have a grudge against them, your assessment will become highly doubtful.

Over and out.

I guess this is the price of independence. Hilaly supporters claim I have a grudge against him. His opponents say I have a grudge against them.

When you try not to be sychophantic, the sychophants from all sides attack you. Still, that is why they are sychophants.

I think as muslims we've conceded our personal responsibilities to Allah to others. That we've given up the accessibility of Islam and its open vision to an orhtodoxy that does littles but legitimises itself instead of the actual message of Islam.

We establish masjid boards and Ulama councils for people who have duplicitous roles in society. They are not societies equal participants. They don't respect democracy, pretend things like muslim civil law is somehow Shariah. They undermine normal decent operating societies based on a small disengaged view of society. We have done this and in actual fact taken away our personal responsibilities to live life Islamically and be a middle Ummah.

Learned Ulema are so withdrawn from the historical truth, scientific methodology and parctical humanity .. that they've been distorted by their lack of vision and malabsorption into society. We have created them, undermined our responsibility to deen and we will suffer because of it.

One day I'll learn to spell 'sycophants' correctly!

Irfy,

I hear you about the spelling problems. Let me help you out - switch to Firefox. It comes with a spell checker! Being ridiculed for being non-intellectual and sticking to my own experiences in life to talk about is bad enough without adding to it my spelling deficiencies! Firefox has saved me a lot of looking back and saying 'dammit - how did I spell even such simple words wrong?!'