The Arab World during the Interwar period and during World War 2

“In all the neighboring Arab lands tied to Egyptians by language and religion, young Egyptians saw a similar picture. In Iraq, they saw revolution and repression and the same kind of pseudo-independence under British occupation as in Egypt, with oil rather than the Suez Canal as the motive. In Trans-Jordan, there was a puppet emir with a British-controlled army. In the Sudan, the British ruled under a so-called condominium from which Egypt, the other power on paper, had been squeezed out in practice. In North Africa, the French were in control, and Algeria, in particular, was subjected to French colonization, economic domination and virtual annexation to France. Above all, there was Palestine. There the Egyptians saw an Arab majority being held down by force by the British in order to protect the influx of Zionist immigrants aiming to build their own state and in order to provide Britain with a military base. The Palestine Arabs had been engaged in a large-scale popular rebellion for self-government and independence since 1936. If there was anything outside their own country which had an effect on the mind of idealistic young Egyptians comparable with the impact of the Spanish civil war on the youth of Britain and France, it was the Palestine Arab revolt. They saw there a small people with few resources fighting on for three years against powerful British forces. Among those who volunteered to help the Palestine guerrillas the Muslim Brothers in Egypt were in the forefront.

The only Middle East states which had remained free-and hoped to stay neutral- were Kemalist Turkey which had earlier defied and fought the Western allies; Reza Shah’s Iran, performing a balancing act between Britain and Russia which was to fail when these two Powers unexpectedly became allies; Saudi Arabia, still independent because the extent of its oil treasure was not yet fully known and because its oil partner was America which had not yet developed imperial habits in the Middle East; and the Yemen, because it was remote, backward and commercially unattractive. In the wider Muslim world, the 150 million Muslims of India, Indonesia and Malaya were part of the British and Dutch empires, the millions of Muslims in Africa were ruled from London and Paris. In Central Asia, ancient Islamic states had been crushed by the Russians, by Tsars and Bolsheviks alike, and were now being Communized by force. Nowhere in 1938 or 1939 did the world prospect look bright, but the priorities of injustice and woe were different depending on whether they were seen from London, Paris or Cairo, from the Cambridge of John Cornford or the Mankabad camp-fire of Gamal Abdul Nasser.”

(Source: Nasser- A Political Biography, Pg.47-48)

“We have the preoccupations of converting the society from a feudalist and capitalist society into a socialist society.”- Gamal Abdel Nasser

“The journalist went on to question King Feisal on the possibility of further fighting in Yemen and he replied: ‘We do not want any fighting and I believe that the President has internal problems which would prevent him from fighting.’

What are these problems? Of course we have preoccupations and problems. He once says preoccupations and another time he says problems, in an attempt at slander at our internal situation. We have the preoccupations of converting the society from a feudalist and capitalist society into a socialist society in which sufficiency and justice prevail. We have the preoccupations of development and construction. What has been achieved in these 14 years was not to be achieved in 50 years. The budget rose from L.E. 200 million to L.E. 1100 million, the national income rose from L.E. 800 million to L.E. 1800 million, production rose from L.E. 1800 million to L.E. 3500 million. We have schools for all the people, we have equal opportunities, we have social justice for all the sons of the nation and equal opportunities for all the sons of the nation. We do not have a minority which obtains everything for itself and a majority which takes almost nothing. We raise production, increase the national income and provide every person in our country with honourable work; the resources of the country are for all its sons; we liberate the individual from economic and social exploitation after having destroyed the alliance of feudalism and capitalism.

These are the preoccupations existing in our county. But if he means the question of the stooge Moslem Brotherhood, then this is another question.

When I went to Jeddah in August and before talking with King Feisal, I told him that I would like to give him an idea about the situation in our country lest the Moslem Brotherhood should have made him understand that they could change anything or take action; I knew that they had taken money from him and I knew that he prolonged the talks on the basis or assumption that the Moslem Brotherhood might change the situation in a month or two or three, and I should like to assure him that all the Brothers are quiet now and that there isn’t a noise out of even one of them. I also told him that Saudi Arabia gave money to Said Ramadan and that Zaghiul Abdel Rahman said in his confessions when he came here and gave himself up that L.E. 250 thousand were paid to Said Ramadan and the Abu El Fath brothers abroad to work against our regime.

If he means the hired Ikhwan (the outlawed Moslem Brothers) then he knows from their conspiracies were financed. He knows they were paid by the Baghdad Pact, by Saudi Arabia and by Arab reactionaries. The people concerned with the affairs of the Brothers abroad sold themselves to anyone from whom they could take money- to every enemy of Egypt. They became true hirelings of the reactionaries and imperialism.

The brothers were never an issue: they were rounded up in ten minutes. Ours is an open and free country. We have freedom, we have criticism, we have self-criticism. Ours is not a closed reactionary country where a person can be executed without anybody knowing about it. When we arrest anyone we announce it and whoever stands trial is tried openly and the proceedings are published by the press. Ours is an open society for all the world’s press to write about.”

(Source: https://ia600700.us.archive.org/12/items/AddressByPresidentGamalAbdelNasserAtTheGreatPopularRallyHeldByThe/Nasser2.pdf)

“So seek safety fast, for there is a vigorous seeker pursuing you: the grave.”-Ali (Pbuh)

“One day, Ali (Pbuh), mounted the podium, praised Allah and thanked Him and mentioned death, ‘O Allah’s slaves! There is no escaping from death. If you stand in its path, it will take you, and if you run away from it, it will still take you. So seek safety fast, for there is a vigorous seeker pursuing you: the grave. Beware of its smallness, darkness and aloneness. Verily, the grave is either a hole of the Fire or a garden in Paradise. Verily, the grave speaks thrice each day and proclaims, ‘I am the house of darkness. I am the house of worms. I am the house of aloneness.’ Verily, what comes after that is a Day in which the baby gets white hairs and the adolescent becomes drunk.”

(Source: https://ia600206.us.archive.org/26/items/SilentMomentsTheDescriptionOfBeforeAfterDeathAspects/Silent%20Moments%20-%20The%20Description%20of%20Before%20&%20After%20Death%20Aspects.pdf)

“Do you consider the killing of women and children to be Jihad? Why have you- to this day- not carried out any strike in Israel?” A Question and response for Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri

“My reply is that we haven’t killed the innocents, not in Baghdad nor in Morocco, nor in Algeria, nor anywhere else. And if there is any innocent who was killed in the Mujahideen’s operations, then it was either an unintentional error, or out of necessity as in cases of al-Tatarrus [taking of human shields by the enemy]. I explained in detail the ruling concerning al-Tatarrus in the book The Healing of the Believers’ Chests and in the eighth chapter of the book The Exoneration and the brother Abu Yahya al-Libi has a book called Al-Tatarrus in Contemporary Jihad.

I would like to clarify to the brother questioner that we don’t kill innocents: in fact, we fight those who kill innocents. Those who kill innocents are the Americans, the Jews, the Russians and the French and their agents. Were we insane killers of innocents as the questioner claims, it would be possible for us to kill thousands of them in the crowded markets, but we are confronting the enemies of the Muslim Ummah and targeting them, and it may be the case that during this, an innocent might fall unintentionally or unavoidably, and the Mujahideen have warned repeatedly the Muslims in general that they are in a war with the senior criminals- the Americans and the Jews and their allies and agents- and that they must keep away from the places where these enemies gather.

The Crusader-Jewish propaganda claims that the Mujahideen kill the innocent, but the Muslim Ummah knows who its enemy is and who defends it.

Shaykh Usama Bin Laden says in his latest speech, ‘I reassure the Muslims in general and our people in the neighboring states in particular that they will only receive ever good thing from the Mujahideen, Allah permitting, because we are your sons defending the Ummah’s religion, and in the same way we are defending its sons. And the victims among the Muslims’ sons who fall during the operations against the unbelievers and Crusaders or their usurping agents are not intentional. And Allah knows that it saddens us greatly, and we are responsible for it, and we seek Allah’s forgiveness for it, and we ask Allah to have mercy on them and cause them to enter his spacious Gardens and compensate their families and near ones well.

‘It is not hidden from you that the enemy intentionally takes up posiitons in the midst of the Muslims, for them to be human shields for him. And here I emphasize to my brothers the Mujahideen to beware of expanding the issue of al-Tatarrus, and to make sure that their operations targeting the enemies are regulated by the regulations of the Shari’ah and as far as possible from the Muslims.’

‘Rather, our hostility is directed towards the puppet rulers, those whom we don’t reassure, but in fact strive to topple them and bring them before the judiciary of the Shari’ah. How can we reassure them, when they have allied themselves with the Ummah’s enemies and done all manner of things to it? How can we reassure them, when they have made the law of men partner to the Law of Allah the Most High? And how can we reassure them, when the road to the widest front for the liberation of Palestine passes through the territories controlled by them?’ These were his words, may Allah protect him.

As for the statement of the questioner ‘I challenge you and your orgainzation to do that in Tel Aviv,’ I don’t know- hasn’t the questioner heard that Qaida al-Jihad struck the Jews in Jerba, Tunisia and struck the Israeli tourists in Mombasa, Kenya, in their hotel, then fired two missiles at the El-Al airliner carrying a number of them? Hasn’t the questioner heard what Shaykh Usama bin Laden (may Allah protect him) mentioned in his last speech, that the battalions of the Mujahideen, after expelling the occupier from Iraq, shall make their way towards Jerusalem? Hasn’t the questioner heard that Allah (the Glorious) has honored us with the dealing of blows to America- the head of international unbelief- and its allies- like England, Spain, Australia and France- in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Arabian Peninsula, the Yemen, and Algeria? And those are Israel’s fathers, creators, guardians and protectors.

And then why does the questioner focus on how al-Qaida in particular must strike in Israel, while he doesn’t request- for example- the Jihadist organizations in Palestine to come to the aid of their brothers in Chechnya, Afghanistan and Iraq? If this is become of his good opinion of al-Qaida and that it must strike Islam’s enemies everywhere, then we thank him for his good opinion, and we promise our Muslim brothers that we will strive as we can to deal blows to the Jews inside Israel and outside it, with Allah’s help and guidance. And from Allah we seek help.”

(Source: https://azelin.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/the-open-meeting-with-shaykh-ayman-al-zawahiri-1429h.pdf)

Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri talks about why they are being targeted

“Let us speak frankly. This campaign and media furor is basically directed against and focused on Al-Qa’ida of Jihad because, in American eyes, it is the most dangerous opponent to US interests and national security. What Al-Qa’ida advocates is liable to shake America’s very existence. Otherwise internal conflicts have been found in the Moroccan desert, Sudan, Lebanon, and Yemen for decades but no one raised an furor about them.

We in Al-Qa’ida of Jihad do not seek internal conflict. We seek to expel the invaders from the Muslim lands and establish a Muslim state. As we have been led by the mental efforts we made to act in accordance with Shari’ah, our practical plan, which we have repeatedly announced, is the following:

a.) Striking at crusader and Zionist targets; and

b.) making serious efforts to change these corrupt regimes and establish an Islamic order.

I repeat that serious efforts are necessary. I do not mean attending a conference or demonstrating for an hour or even attending a lesson for two hours. There might be among the efforts used by making serious efforts is a much larger undertaking. Serious efforts to make changes are much bigger than some people who believe that it is possible to bring victory to the Muslim nation while sitting in their offices among papers and books, criticizing this person and correcting the other person without ever joining the real battle, offering sacrifices in the form of their persons, wealth, children, or leaving their homeland, jobs, salaries, and other trivial worldly things.

Serious efforts to bring about change require:

1.) Sincerity in pursuing the objective for the pleasure of God; and

2.) persistence, perseverance, and determination to reach the goal in addition to mobilizing and organizing resources, planning one’s steps and seizing opportunities.

The great Islamic poet Allamah Mohamed Iqbal, may he rest in peace, says:

To the sun always make your way
In the heat of the day and early morning.

They also require a willingness to sacrifice one’s dearest possessions, including one’s life to reach the objective and be ready to live under pursuit, be made homeless and poor, or spend one’s best years of life in jail.

When we do this, we will have done our best and all that is left is to implore God for victory.”

(Source: https://fas.org/irp/dni/osc/exoneration.pdf )

Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri talks about where Egypt is heading

“The first question: If we took Egypt as a model of the Arab and Islamic countries, is there any hope of peaceful change in Egypt? Is there any hope of at least peaceful demonstrations in Egypt when the government is working on a law that it will push through the People’s Assembly to ban demonstrations at houses of worship? By this it means no demonstrations at Al-Azhar, the very place where Egyptians have protest against injustice for hundreds of years?

Let me ask the question with more frankness: Is the situation in Egypt improving or getting worse? Let us examine its foreign policy, the corruption in the country, its economy, and agriculture. Let us explore not Shari’ah and religion but normally recognized morals in the media and in public life, human rights, poverty, sickness, and education. Where is Egypt heading? Is it heading towards the leadership of the Arab and Islamic world or is it heading towards being a client and subservient? Do its ruler defend its rights or are his best efforts devoted to acting as America’s broker or informant who submits to it reports on his colleagues, the other Arab rulers?

The second question: Keeping in mind the reality to which I referred in the first question, does this document offer a plan for change in our Arab and Islamic countries or do its six options- a) emigration, b) self-isolation, c) amnesty, d) withdrawal from action, e) patience, and f) concealment of faith- supply the recipe from escaping from reality?

Escaping from reality might be a Shari’ah sanctioned solution vis-a-vis the corrupt conditions that cannot be changed. Imam Al-Bukhari, may he rest in peace, cited Abu-Sa’id al-Khidri, may his soul find favor with God, that the prophet, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, said, ‘It might be best for a Muslim to herd his sheep through the narrow mountain passes and follow the pasture in order to keep his religious faith safe from conflict and sedition.’

Do those who welcome the document see the situation like this? Escape from reality might be a solution that is against Shari’ah to which a person might be pushed by different motives. It remains a solution for one person or a group of persons but it cannot be a solution for a society, a population, or a nation. If it cannot be a solution for a society, a population, or a nation, then more logically it cannot be a solution to a nation that is the victim of aggression, whose land is occupied, whose territories are stolen, and whose sanctities, creed, and values are under attack.

Furthermore the document’s author does not offer this merely as a solution for himself or even for those who signed alongside him at the official government departments or the other detainees or even the other Islamic movements. He offers this as a solution to the whole nation!

It is astonishing that when he was proposing his solution to the whole nation or even to the Islamic movements or the detainees, he offered emigration as a solution. This drove me to ask: emigration to where? The best place where a Muslim can live in dignity today is among the mujahidin, whom the author said were living in caves under the protection of tribesmen and intelligence services. Those who welcomed his document said that it was at least a step on the road. But I ask: What road? Where does it lead?

This makes me caution the document’s author and all those who signed it alongside him to look and explore in which direction they are pushing them? To what destination are they taking them? To proclaim their repentance, consider Al-Sadat a martyr, and recognize Husni Mubarak and his children and grandchildren as an Egyptian ruling dynasty? This makes me ask the same question of those who welcomed the document: To where? It is a simple question but is very embarrassing.

A section of those who welcomed the document do not believe in Islam and do not want it. Another group claims that it wants Islam on condition that it should not negatively affect its official and informal relations with power centers and official and non-official media. Others want Islam without it posing a threat to their positions, salaries, and other privileges. Another group is prepared to pay a small price for its Islamic belief but some of its leaders do not object to the establishment of a bi-national secular state in Palestine on the way to finally achieving two states in the land of Palestine. So, to where are they going? Does the nation not have the right to ask? Are they not obligated to answer? Finally are those not worthy of being asked?

They claim that they welcome the document because it calls for halting internal conflict. I ask them: When did the internal conflict ever stop? The government conducts internal conflict against its people on a daily basis, in every sphere.

Furthermore the document does not call for a halt of internal conflict. It goes far beyond this. It calls for no objection to injustice and refusal to be preoccupied with public affairs or the Muslim people’s affairs. The document solves the problem of a captive who feels he has made enough sacrificies or regrets that he has made them and who wants to devote his attention to his own affairs. This, by the way, has been its author’s problem for the past 14 years. It does not, however, solve the problem of a society, population, or nation.

I might understand that a captive might make such a declaration in his circumstances of detention. I was twice a captive, may God be praised for everything, and I know what it is like to be in capitvity. However, the Muslim nation in Egypt and elsewhere can do without this decision completely in these tempestuous circumstances in its history.

Let us assume that the internal conflict stopped and no one disturbed public order any more. Would those who welcomed the document have then arrived at the goal they wanted? Would conditions be better or would they deteriorate? Moreover, why are you urging the oppressed detainees inside the Egyptian jails and members of Al-Qa’ida of Jihad to sign the document so that the internal conflict might stop but you do not ask HAMAS to do the same? Has not HAMAS carried out and does it not continue to carry out internal conflict? Is this not a clear contradiction?

Would it be logical for a person who sees eye to eye with the document’s author to draw up a document for the Palestinians urging them to abandon jihad because it caused the shedding of Muslim blood and tell them that they have to make a choice among the six options offered by the document?

If it is claimed that there is a big difference between Egypt and Palestine because Palestine is under Jewish occupation, the answer is that Jewish occupation does not justify the shedding of Muslim blood. There is a US occupation in Egypt and the number of Muslim dead who were killed by US planes that took off from Egypt and from the US warships that passed through the Suez Canal were supplied at Egyptian ports and were loaded from the US military stores in Egypt was greater than the number of Palestinians whom the Jews are killing in Gaza; 1 million Iraqi children were killed by the embargo, not the war. ”

(Source: https://fas.org/irp/dni/osc/exoneration.pdf )

 

The revolutionary characteristics of Democratic Kampuchea

“The new Kampuchean regime has five distinctive revolutionary characteristics.

One is the continuing and substantial revolutionary secrecy. Although the Communist Party, which led the revolution, publicly revealed its existence last fall, only a small number of its leaders is known. When speaking, Kampuchean Communists habitually use quiet tones, almost a half-whisper.. In our travels from province to province, on our long journey through roadways in unbearable heat, we were efficiently transferred from hand to hand with the help of some secret and barely noticeable communications.

A second significant characteristic of the new regime is the absence of any civil government aisde from the National Assembly. There are no district or provincial assemblies nor executuve organs. Administrative affairs and political mobilization are the respobsibility of the party committees. The size of the party committees does not appear to be proportional to the number of workers in a given establishment or to the number of inhabitants in the locality. One small factory in Phnom Penh has a party committee of seven people for 300 workers. The party committee in the Kampng Som harbor, with about 6,000 workers, has only five members and it is directly responsible to the Ministry of Communications.

With the exception of unions on the factory and enterprise level, there are no cultural, technical, military, sport, humanitarian, professional or other organization in Kampuchea. Our hosts explained that because there are only two classes in the country, peasants and workers, it isn’t necessary to establish special social-political organizations, except for the Communist Party, which directly administers all affairs. Workers are organized in unions, peasants in cooperatives; that is sufficient for the system to function.

The third characteristic of the regime which struck us- probably because we expected a highly-organized system of political indoctrination- is the absence, even in mild form, of political indoctrination. According to our hosts, not one Marxist-Leninist work has been translated into Khmer during the three years since the liberation. There is no time for theory now, they say. We got the impression that ideological-political work is undeveloped at the grassroots level. When asked what political topics they had discussed recently, workers responded that they talked about national defense and fulfilling the production plan.

The political terminology in official use is closest to the Chinese. There is no doubt that Mao Tse-tung’s ideas, particularly in his works written during the Chinese revolution, inspired the political and ideological thought of Pol Pot. It is also certain that the strategy and tactics of the Kampuchean liberation army, especially in the final operations surrounding the cities with the support of the rural population, indicate a significant application of the experiences of the Chinese revolution to the concrete conditions of Kampuchea.

The fourth noteworthy characteristic of this society is the principal of egalitarianism, really ‘collective socialism.’ The absence of commercial relations or of any kind of compensation according to work leads in two directions. There is highly centralized state control which obligates the state to distribute everything from rice to the annual suit of clothes to each of its citizens. At the same time there is a fundamental radicalism in interpreting the concept of relying on one’s own resources.

The Kampucheans have proudly rejected international economic aid because they believe that they can develop their country with their own resources. Within Kampuchea this self-reliance often takes on extraordinary forms. One cooperative destroyed houses in order to recycle the iron stilts customarily used in Kampuchean buildings; in the neighboring cooperative there was an iron junkyard which no one had used yet. Truks filled with bricks for housing construction adjacent to a factory were rolling through the city streets while only a mile or so away there are empty apartment buildings whose former tenants have left for a distant cooperative.

The fith and last distinctive feature of this society- one which explains the necessity for developing utopian visions of the future- is the very evident sense of national pride. It is reminiscent of the behavior of a quiet and introverted person whose opinions were hardly taken into account earlier, but who now speaks out unexpectedly, but invariably passionately.”

(Source: https://ia600500.us.archive.org/35/items/NewWarInSoutheastAsiaDocumentsOnDemocraticKampucheaAndTheCurrent/NWSEA.pdf)

The bartering system in Democratic Kampuchea

“One unique feature of the new Cambodia is that money has been withdrawn from general circulation. Instead, goods are exchanged through a sophisticated barter system.

I got an explanation of how this works at the Meas cooperative near Kompong Cham, one of the few we were allowed to visit. The 300 residents of this cooperative grow rice in nearby fields and weave cloth for brightly colored checked scarves and sarongs.

Since this cooperative produces more rice than its residents can eat, the rice is ‘sold’ to the central government in Phnom Penh. The cooperative recieves a credit for the rice- 4 riel per ton- and uses those credits to produce things it cannot produce such as gasoline for its tractors.

The accounts of each cooperative are kept on a national registry in Phnom Penh, an offical told us.

‘That is not so unusual,’ he said. ‘In your country you don’t use money often. You use credit cards and checks.’

Cooperatives like Preah Meas are administered by committees. These generally have three members with one person acting as a president.

At Le Bo cooperative in Takeo, we were shown what officials hope will become the norm for Cambodia in the future.

It seemed to be almost entirely self sustaining. Besides its clean huts, the cooperative had a large bamboo chicken coop, neat vegetable plots around the homes and, we were told, a pigpen farther out in the fields.

Neat the communal dining hall and patio was a foundry where agricultural implements were produced. Inventiveness was in evidence everywhere. One man was peddling a bicycle bellows while another melted down brass from spent American ammunition casings. ”

(Source: https://ia600500.us.archive.org/35/items/NewWarInSoutheastAsiaDocumentsOnDemocraticKampucheaAndTheCurrent/NWSEA.pdf)

NACAZAI talks about the revolutionary potential of America

“The USA, the epicenter of imperialism, fortress of world Zionism and the exterminationist settler-colonialist project, whose creation and maintenance entails the greatest systematic crimes in world history, is not a valid nation, but a project whose very existence negates the alienable rights of usurped people.

We argue that it is incapable, under any circumstances, of being a consolidated socialist and anti-imperialist unit.

Going clear back to the savage attacks by the petty bourgeoisise journalist John Reed and the original Communist Party of the United States of America, the supposed ‘revolutionary heyday’ of socialism and anti-imperialism in the US, against Marcus Garvey and others who defended the principle of race-first and nation-first policies with regards to colonial subjects and descendents of the African slave trade, there has never been nor ever will be a legitimate ‘multi-cultural’ communist or anti-imperialist party within its boundaries or contaminated with the idea of a progressive American project.

White the much longer and complicated circumstances of the USA, in a number of ways, make the solution to the dismantling of the USA and the creation of the various socialist and national democratic projects of its usurped people more difficult to assess than the clear solution of the Arab-Zionist conflict, i.e. the total liquidation of the Jewish project of Palestine in favor of the eternal Arab character, the non-recognition of the USA still looms as the only just, thorough and plausible solution.

While we fully affirm and recognize the rights of progressive and anti-imperialist regimes to attempt to build normalizaed relations with the USA as part of an overall policy to end embargos and sanctions against their people, we ask the international communist and anti-imperialist forces to correct their delusional belief of the capability of the ‘multi-cultural’ proletariat to form a socialist USA, regardless of what this or that revolutionary leader or party stated in the past.

The First Nations people of America and all of its oppressed ethnic groups will always negate ‘multicultural’ America in favor of the right to self-determination and self -preservation, rightfully so.

Americanization of the world is the number one enemy of freedom-loving people everywhere, and this Americanization is more than a product of modern imperialism, but being much older and institutional, goes clear back to the origins of the rape and genocide of the First Nations peoples’ and hundreds of millions of enslaves African compatriots, eternally incompatible with socialist construction and anti-imperialism, regardless of the economic and social changes which emerge through the centuries.”

(Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20080725021302/http://www.nacazai.org/usanotavalidcountry.html)

“How long should our unawareness continue?”- Ibrahim bin Ad-ham

“Our hearts were covered with three seals, and verily, the slave will not reach certainty [in Faith] until these seals are removed: delight in what is there, sorrow for what has been lost and rejoice by receiving praise. When you are delighted with what you have, you are a tightwad. If you grieve for what has been lost, then you are an outraged person, and such a person will taste the torment. If you rejoice when you are praised, then you are proud, and the proud will have their actions annulled.”- Ibrahim bin Ad-ham

(Source: https://ia600206.us.archive.org/26/items/SilentMomentsTheDescriptionOfBeforeAfterDeathAspects/Silent%20Moments%20-%20The%20Description%20of%20Before%20&%20After%20Death%20Aspects.pdf)