Bahrain Mirror: Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim, the spiritual leader of Shia majority in Bahrain, condemned the decision to close Shiite mosques in Hamad town, considering it a seditious step that aims at fighting the thoughts of Ahl Al-Bayt.

In a statement on (August 24, 2020), Sheikh Qassim wondered about the Fatwa the authorities relied on in their decision to close the mosques. He explained "If the fatwa was given by a Sunni jurist, then with all due respect to him, his opinion is not needed by the people of the other sect. If the fatwa was given by a Shiite jurist, then who is that jurist whose opinion is extremely anomalous compared to the consensus of all Shi'ite jurists and legislators."

The following is the statement:

In the name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful

Mosques are for God

Mosques are for God, to worship Him, remember Him, revive His religion, and convey His message.

No mosque is ever owned by any country.

Nonetheless, it is the duty of any Islamic country, and any country inhabited by Muslims, even if it is not legally an Islamic country, to protect mosques from being used for actions prohibited in Islam.

The question here is about the official decision in Bahrain to close the Hamad Town mosques, in which the Husseini majlises are held, the doctrinal and religious issues of Islam are clarified and the religion is conveyed. Was that decision taken because these majlises are considered wrongdoings in Islam and contradict with the majesty and sanctity of the mosque and its religious function?! Was this fatwa given by the ministry that made the decision or by a prominent Sunni jurist, or by a prominent Shiite jurist? If the fatwa was given by the ministry, then this is annulling the religion of God and substituting it with the ministry's religion. If the fatwa was given by a Sunni jurist, then with all due respect to him, his opinion is not needed by the people of the other sect. If the fatwa was given by a Shiite jurist, then who is that jurist whose opinion is extremely anomalous compared to the consensus of all Shi'ite jurists and legislators, and who contradicts the fact that commemorating what happened with Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) is a commemoration of religion, and that the survival of religion is the major result of the revolution of Imam Hussein (peace be upon him).

The aforementioned decision is similar to the many decisions of its kind that are only viewed by public opinion as aimed to stir up sedition and disturb the atmosphere of the Ashura season, and as one of the forms of the continuous warfare against the Islamic thought in general, and the thought of Ahl Al-Bayt (peace be upon them) in particular.

Is this what the nation's interest, security and unity need, from an objective point of view, even for those who do not want Islam to be taken into consideration respectfully?

Islam will not end. Hussein (peace be upon him) will not end. The believers will not forget Islam and will not forget Hussein (peace be upon him). May God guide everyone to wisdom and righteousness.

Peace be upon those who follow the right guidance.

Isa Ahmad Qassim

August 24, 2020

Arabic Version