Arab slanderers have exploited the relation between the “Hamas” movement and Iran, spreading rumors that “Hamas” is merely a cell of the Iranian regime. Through this, they sought to end popular support for “Hamas,” claiming it is a Shia movement and not Sunni!
Since this allegation arises from a religious perspective related to (Sunna and Shia), it is necessary to respond to it from a religious point of view.
Before addressing this, we must confirm the reality known to all: the Iranian regime has diplomatic relations with most Arab and Islamic countries.
These diplomatic relations mean that an agreement has been reached between the Iranian regime and these countries on the level of diplomatic mission. This aims to protect the interests of these countries, ensure the welfare of their citizens, conduct necessary negotiations dictated by circumstances, and strengthen international, economic, and cultural relations.
Iran has diplomatic relations with most Arab and Islamic countries
It is known that these missions monitor the developments in the host countries and provide regular reports. The head of the mission is appointed as an ambassador, minister plenipotentiary, or chargé d'affaires. They are entrusted with communicating with the host country and serve as personal representatives to the head of their state. Their appointment is only approved by a letter of credence presented to the head of the host country. The sending state determines the number of mission members based on its capabilities and in proportion to its assessment of the importance of its relations with the host country.
All of this has been established between the Iranian government and most countries in the Arab and Islamic world. Then comes someone who claims that “Hamas” violated the isolation imposed on Iran and established relations with it!
Why did “Hamas” turn to Iran?
To answer the question, we must first determine that the relation between “Hamas” and the Iranian government is a political one, not religious or doctrinal.
“Hamas” accepted assistance from Iran because they share a common stance against the Zionist entity. This relation is more accurately described as a political alliance rather than an “affiliation.” “Hamas” only resorted to this alliance when many Arab regimes, which had previously stood with the Palestinian people, started normalizing with the occupation. Some of these regimes even classified “Hamas” as a “terrorist” organization. “Hamas” was left with no choice but to collaborate and accept support from forces that share their stance against the occupation.
Palestinian resistance (whether Hamas or others) deals and collaborates with the Iranian government based on their shared stances regarding “resisting the occupation.” There is no strategic alliance between the resistance and the Iranian government, and Iran agreed to support the Palestinian resistance without the later having to commit to any concessions.
The relation between Hamas and Iran is political, not religious or doctrinal
The repeated allegation regarding the relation between (Hamas and the Palestinian resistance with Iran) especially after the heroic resistance operation “Al-Aqsa Flood,” aims to undermine the resistance and insinuate that the Palestinian resistance aligns with Iran's expansionist projects in the region.
These skeptical parties exploited political misconceptions within our societies. Many are accustomed to the idea that political understandings between any two political parties imply dependency and subordination. The fact is that this is true for most models of political alliances in our Arab countries.
However, Palestinian resistance has had long and bitter experiences with political alliances in our countries, which has enabled them to learn and evolve politically. They now build their alliances based on shared positions, not on complete agreement, dependence, or subordination. The principle is that “we cooperate on what we agree upon, and each of us has our own direction and opinion when we differ.” This approach has proven successful in political relations.
Therefore, although “Hamas” and the Palestinian resistance have a good relationship with Iran and significant cooperation, this relation is restricted to what is agreed upon: resistance against occupation. The resistance is not connected to any other activities of Iran.
The Palestinian resistance aligns with Iran in “resisting” the occupation
Necessities permit prohibitions in Islam
As for the religious aspect, Islam has allowed those in dire need to consume carrion. Allah says, “He has only forbidden to you dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah. But whoever is forced [by necessity], neither desiring [it] nor transgressing [its limit], there is no sin upon him. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Al-Baqarah:173). Regarding this ayah, Al-Saadi said: Whoever is compelled, meaning driven to the prohibited due to hunger or coercion, without seeking the prohibited and he has the ability to obtain what is lawful, or without being hungry, and he does not exceed the limit in consuming the permitted due to necessity, then there is no sin upon him; meaning, there is no harm. If the condition of harm is removed, the ruling reverts to its original state. In such a situation, a person is commanded to eat, and it is forbidden for him to cast himself into destruction or kill himself. He is obligated to eat, and it is sinful if he abstains until death, as he would be causing harm to himself. This allowance and leniency are from Allah's mercy towards His servants. Therefore, Allah concludes this with these noble and suitable names, saying, “Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”
Ibn Kathir, in his tafseer (interpretation), mentioned that Mujahid said: “Whoever is compelled, not desiring or transgressing, cutting off the path or deviating from the imams, or engaging in disobedience to Allah, for him, there is permission. And whoever goes out as an aggressor, transgressor, or in disobedience to Allah, there is no permission for him, even if he is compelled to do so.” This view is also narrated by Saeed bin Jubair.
The books of prophet Muhammad’s, peace be upon him, biography have confirmed the story of Ammar ibn Yasir, may Allah be pleased with him, with the polytheists. When the polytheists subjected him to severe torture in Mecca, this torture was not inflicted on him alone but also on his father and mother. They placed a burning rock on his chest, beat him severely, killed his parents right in front of him, Yasir and his wife Sumayyah, may Allah be pleased with them, and asked him to curse the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. Faced with such oppression, torture, genuine coercion, and the killing of his dearest family members after the Prophet, peace be upon him, and in the face of the tremendous pain he felt in every part of his body, he said what the disbelievers wanted from him. He cursed the Messenger of Allah with his tongue, while his heart did not submit to it, and no one was ever dearer to him than the Prophet, peace be upon him, not even his own self.
“Hamas” was forced to align with Iran as it was left to face Zionist aggression alone
Although Amar’s stance is sound according to Islamic law, he came running tearfully and repentantly as soon as the disbelievers released him. He complained to the Prophet, peace be upon him, while crying and apologized for what he had done, saying, “I said such and such about you.” The Prophet, peace be upon him, asked him, “How do you find your heart?” Ammar replied, “I find it reassured by faith.” The Prophet, peace be upon him, then said, “If they come back to you, then do it again.” Allah, the Almighty, says: “Whoever disbelieves in Allah after his belief except for one who is forced while his heart is secure in faith. But those who [willingly] open their breasts to disbelief, upon them is wrath from Allah, and for them is a great punishment.” (An-Nahl: 106) (1).
The story of Nuaim bin Masud, may Allah be pleased with him, in the Battle of the “Trench” is well known to everyone, where the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, allowed him to create division between the polytheists and Jews of the Banu Quraiza.
If Hamas is forced to deal with Iran, then it has an excuse because it deals with an enemy that does not honor a believer's ties of kinship or covenant, and it has been abandoned by those around it, leaving it to face this Zionist aggression on its own.
-------------------------------------------------------
- The book "Be a Companion" by Dr. Ragheb Al-Sirjani (1/6).Top of Form
