Sheikh Qassem’s Full Speech on the Commemoration of the Martyred Scholars on the Path of Liberating Al-Quds

Translated by Al-Ahed News, Hezbollah Media Relations

Address by Hezbollah Secretary General, His Eminence Sheikh Naim Qassem, during the festival held by the party in honor of the martyred scholars on the path of liberating Al-Quds and in the Battle of the Mighty [Uli Al-Baas Battle] on December 5, 2025.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful.

All praise is due to God, Lord of the worlds, and peace and blessings be upon the noblest of creation—our master, beloved, and leader, Abu al-Qasim Muhammad—and upon his pure and immaculate household, his righteous and chosen companions, and all prophets and the pious until the Day of Judgment.

Peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you all.

Out of loyalty to the martyred scholars, we gather today at this festival commemorating the martyred scholars—dubbed Sacrifice and Ink—through which we seek to understand the noble path that has shaped our journey and our lives. We will speak about the scholars, and afterward address the broader political situation. Here, we must extend deep gratitude to Hezbollah’s Cultural Affairs Department for choosing this theme and dedicating this festival to honoring and exalting those noble martyrs.

This festival is one of sacrifice and ink. Sacrifice is their blood; ink is their pen. Their blood is the light of our lives, and their ink charts our path. They strove with their lives, their wealth, and everything they possessed. They gave all they had, and God rewarded them beyond measure.

They are the beacons of guidance across generations—never absent from our daily lives nor from the shaping of our children’s future. Their blood blossomed at its appointed harvest, and their teachings bloomed, heralding a legacy that endures. They are the cultivators of the earth, the rain from the heavens, and the anthem of life set to the rhythm of divine unity, Prophethood, and Imamate.

The Commander of the Faithful, Imam Ali [AS], said: “Scholars remain as long as time remains—though their bodies vanish, their likeness endures in the hearts.”

Their burden has now passed into the hands of the men and women of faith who walk this path with steadfastness, carving through the waves of human glory in the finest embodiment of God’s vicegerency on earth. To you, I offer a pledge of continuity and the glad tidings of what lies ahead; from the resistance, a pledge of steadfastness and victory; and from our families and all who believe in you and love you—a pledge of resilience, loyalty, and dignity.

The fully ordained clerics [turbaned] who were martyred in the Battle of the Mighty [Uli Al-Baas Battle] were fifteen. The martyred students of religious studies who were not ordained clerics are 41, and the martyrs from the families of scholars are 39.

At the forefront of the turbaned scholars stands the Sayyed of the Nation’s Martyrs, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah—may God’s pleasure be upon him—and after him, the Hashemite Sayyed, Sayyed Hashem Safieddine.

I will now mention the names of the remaining scholars, in honor, reverence, and blessing for them:

The martyred scholar Allama Sheikh Abdul Moneim Mhanna; martyr Sayyed Ibrahim Hassan Yassin; martyr Sayyed Muhammad Aref Saleh; martyr Sayyed Hisham Abdul Ameer Nour al Din; martyr Sheikh Ahmad Riyad al Awta; martyr Sheikh Amin Ali Saad; martyr Sheikh Hussein Ahmad Younes; martyr Sheikh Hussein Talal Jaffal; martyr Sheikh Abdo Benyamin Abouria; martyr Sheikh Ali Hassan Abouria; martyr Sheikh Ali Hussein Saif al Din; martyr Sheikh Talie Youssef Zein al Din; and martyr Sheikh Muhammad Khalil Hemadi.

Fifteen ordained clerical scholars were martyred in the Battle of the Mighty [Uli Al-Baas Battle], each in different ways and on different fronts. And, out of blessing and reverence, we must also mention the two noble pioneering martyrs—Sheikh Ragheb Harb and Sayyed Abbas al Musawi—as forerunners on this path.

The Messenger of God [PBUH] said: “On the Day of Resurrection, the ink of the scholars will be weighed against the blood of the martyrs, and the ink of the scholars will outweigh the blood of the martyrs.”

May God’s mercy be upon them, and may He elevate their stations and the stations of all martyrs. To all their souls, we gift the reward of the blessed Surah al Fatiha, preceded by blessings upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad.

The scholars distinguished themselves through their role and responsibility in education, moral formation, and in guiding society toward lofty goals. They nurtured their communities upon jihad, which is the foundation of the divine project—the struggle against the inner enemy, the devil of the ego and desire, and the struggle against the external enemy—the tyrants, oppressors, and occupiers.

Jihad is an essential pillar of the Islamic framework in which we are raised.

Welcome to a people who have completed the “lesser jihad,” and upon whom remains the “greater jihad.” They said: “O Messenger of God, what is the greater jihad?” He replied: “The jihad of the self.”

We live in a state of two jihads: the jihad of the self and the jihad against the enemy—and the two are inseparable. Here lies the central role of the scholars: raising us upon jihad in order to protect the human being, and planting within him the seeds of noble ethics, values, and a wholesome life.

What is the purpose for which the messengers were sent—and upon which our scholars patterned their mission?

God the Almighty says: “Indeed, We sent Our messengers with clear proofs, and with them We sent down the Scripture and the balance [of justice] so that people may administer justice. And We sent down iron with its great might, benefits for humanity, and means for Allah to prove who [is willing to] stand up for Him and His messengers without seeing Him. Surely Allah is All-Powerful, Almighty.” (Al-Hadid, 25)

This means the scholars have a role in education, moral upbringing, establishing justice among people, and in using force when necessary to confront enemies—preventing them from imposing their doctrines and conditions upon humanity.

The scholars gave themselves as martyrs, their children became martyrs, and they are always at the forefront. They lived the lives of the people, with them, and among them.

This is a distinguishing feature of Hezbollah: it has established an organized connection for the divine mission project—Islam, for the sake of humanity—across its different segments; between the scholars and the people, in a way that makes us feel that they are part of one society, one vision, and one line of action.

Hezbollah drew from the great scholars this methodology, which was articulated by Imam Khomeini (may God sanctify his noble soul) and continued by Imam Khamenei (may his shadow endure) and was applied by Imam Musa al-Sadr (may God return him and his companions safely), as a resistance and social movement. This path was further shaped by the Sayyed of the Nation’s Martyrs, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah (may God’s pleasure be upon him).

Our scholars have succeeded in building authenticity, integrity, dignity, a wholesome life, and the project of resistance.

Many inside Lebanon and beyond were surprised at how Hezbollah managed to carve its path. This is because the prevailing assumption was that the religious would withdraw from life, distance themselves from the people, and be unable to interact or engage with them. Yet Hezbollah stands out in its method of work: it enjoys widespread and influential popular support.

This popular support has become a subject of study and analysis: how do young men and women, children, men, women and the elderly—all segments of society—rally around Hezbollah in such a distinctive and striking way? This is largely due to the Islamic project on one hand, and the performance of scholars, preachers, and intellectuals in presenting this righteous path to others.

Thus, this popular support is natural—it aligns with human nature, and it is the result of presenting an honest, sincere, and devoted experience that seeks the welfare of humanity. This is the true interpretation of Islam, which counters the incorrect interpretations and flawed practices committed by some at different stages of our history.

Our work in Hezbollah has been grounded in the principle of “the completion of religion”:

“Today I have perfected your faith for you, completed My favor upon you, and chosen Islam as your way.” (Al-Maidah, 3)

We adhered to the constants of Islam and believed in striving in the path of God as a guidance for humanity:

“As for those who struggle in Our cause, We will surely guide them along Our Way. And Allah is certainly with the good-doers.” (Al-Ankabut, 69)

We worked according to the principles of noble character, as the Messenger of God (peace be upon him and his family) said: “I was sent only to perfect noble character.”

We believed in the “common word”:

“O People of the Book! Let us come to common terms: that we will worship none but Allah, associate none with Him, nor take one another as lords instead of Allah.” (Ali Imran, 64)

We were also raised on love of homeland, in accordance with the well-known saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family): “Love of one’s homeland is part of faith.” And as the Commander of the Faithful, Imam Ali (peace be upon him), said: “Countries are built through the love of homelands.”

We believed in freedom: freedom of choice, freedom to establish a state, freedom of expression, and freedom of belief. Our Imam Hussain (peace be upon him) addressed the opposing side in Karbala saying: “If you have no religion and do not fear the Hereafter, then at least be free in your worldly affairs.”

These are the teachings upon which we built our work. These are the teachings upheld by our scholars, who played a major role in promoting, preserving, and anchoring this path—establishing a direction that stands out from all others.

Today, when Hezbollah has managed to present this refined and pioneering model—impacting Lebanon, influencing its surroundings, and offering a unique experience on the national level, the public level, and in confronting the “Israeli” enemy—it naturally drew attention.

As a result, the arrogant powers, the forces of deviation and tyranny, have sought to disrupt Hezbollah, to eliminate Hezbollah, and to confront the resistance because it presents a transformative project—one rooted in patriotism, liberation, independence, dignity, humanity, honor, and ethics. And these forces do not want us, or any people, to live such a life. They do not want citizens to live such a life, because the global order is built on the premise that the powerful impose pressure on the oppressed and try to dominate them so they may enforce their conditions and exploit the world economically, culturally, and politically for their own interests.

Here, the Hezbollah experience became truly exceptional.

Is it conceivable that Hezbollah could coexist with others? It has become clear that Hezbollah is the one most capable of living alongside others—indeed, it has become a central force enabling others to interact and come together.

I recall in 1997, when we were thinking about how to expand the resistance and unite all honorable resisters—parties, forces, and individual figures—under one framework. Previously, there had been something called the National Movement, but it dissolved after the “Israeli” invasion. Attempts were made to form a national front to resist the “Israeli” enemy, but they remained fragmented. With time, there was no longer a unified national structure bringing these forces together.

So, in 1997, we thought about how to unify these groups. We organized a meeting for national parties and forces under the banner of resistance. Those who attended ranged from secularists to communists, Christians to Muslims, and various other groups. We were at the core of that meeting. Hezbollah succeeded in becoming an integral part of a comprehensive Lebanese resistance that included all forces, and in cooperating with them.

Hezbollah also succeeded in building a relationship with the most significant Christian political movement in 2006. Together with the Free Patriotic Movement, we presented a model of partnership between Hezbollah and an influential Christian force—based on shared national convictions and a common vision for Lebanon’s revival.

Thus, Hezbollah’s experience has never been one of isolation, nor one of imposing its views on anyone. It has always been cooperative, extending its hand to others, and offering a pioneering Islamic example. This example angered the West, the deviants, and the “Israelis”, and so they began to attack it. And, naturally, all those who do not want purity, dignity, honor, or patriotism to emerge in any group also launched their arrows under various pretexts.

But thanks be to God, this experience has proven to be pioneering.

When His Holiness the Pope came to Lebanon, Hezbollah welcomed him with the Imam al-Mahdi Scouts—may God hasten his reappearance—who lined the airport road by the thousands, along with others. They conducted interviews with some of the children. One could say that these children were asked to stand there, so no one can really know what ideas or convictions they hold.

But when Arab and foreign media interview a child—8, 9, or 12 years old—who says: “I am patriotic,” “I love the Pope,” “I want to cooperate with Christians,” “We are one country and share one direction,” this means that the upbringing we provide in our Scouts, in our schools, in our internal gatherings, is exactly the kind of upbringing that emerges as a vivid and very important example of uprightness, national unity, and cooperation with everyone.

This is the experience. Hezbollah issued a statement to the Pope—of course, it is natural to issue a statement, to make requests, and to thank him for certain things. Yet suddenly, some disturbed and agitated parties launched a campaign against the statement. Why oppose it? There is a visit—go focus on the visit.

In reality, they attack the statement because they found that it touched hearts, had an impact, and projected a clear, positive image of Hezbollah within the Lebanese reality. And these parties are working from every direction to bring down or distort this image. But they cannot. Who can distort the image of a group that fought, sacrificed, and offered blood, until they stood before the world with honor? Who can distort the image of a people rich in their strength, their morale, their patriotism, and their desire to hold a dignified position?

This is what people saw on television. Who can confront these statements made by children, these scenes, these words that shine in the sky of dignity, honor, patriotism, liberation and sincerity? No one can.

So, thanks be to God—this experience is a remarkable, important, and influential one. And in any case, if we were not this influential, such arrows would not be coming at us from every direction. But in the end, I tell you: all these arrows will break, and they will only increase our determination, strength, and energy. We are a community that believes in God, and we were nurtured by the God-fearing scholars who charted this path for the sake of the human being. And this is what will continue to appear at every stage.

Send blessings upon Muhammad and the Family of Muhammad.

Let me delve into the political discussion with three points:

First:

It is natural for there to be political differences within the country. How do we regulate political disagreement? It should be regulated according to the constitution and the framework of laws, rights, and responsibilities, and we should agree on how to manage and follow up on these differences. Internal disagreements must be about improving the conditions for state-building—not about some domestic actors serving as tools for external powers or promoting the “Israeli” project.

From this standpoint, we cooperate with everyone to build the state and liberate the land. This is our consistent approach and our work, and our record makes that clear. We do not seek validation from anyone. We do not act to be praised; we act to earn the pleasure of God Almighty. Therefore, we neither wait for anyone’s endorsement nor do we grant endorsements to others.

We do not claim the authority to label one person patriotic and another not. We do not classify people. So let some in Lebanon stop handing out certificates of patriotism—especially those who themselves need absolution for the crimes they committed, for the killings in the streets and on the roads, and for the civil wars they helped ignite, with all the dark history that entails. Such individuals are in no position to judge anyone. For their own sake, they would do well to remain silent, lest others point fingers at them.

So we neither grant certificates to anyone, nor do we accept anyone handing them out. Let the people judge for themselves—supporting or opposing based on real experience. In any case, parliamentary elections reveal popular backing and the country’s overall direction. They are the ultimate measure of all opinions and assessments.

Second:

Lebanon is facing a dangerous, expansionist “Israeli” aggression that must be confronted by all available means. Some say “Israel” has demands. My brother, what are you saying? Are you “Israel’s” lawyer? Are you speaking on “Israel’s” behalf? Are you on “Israel’s” payroll? Why are you justifying for it?

Netanyahu says: “I want a Greater ‘Israel’.” And you respond: “No, this is cultural rhetoric, general talk; he doesn’t mean it.” I say: pay attention. These “Israeli” statements are not detached from the entire history of occupation in our region. “Israel” is expansionist. If at times you see it advance and then retreat, it retreats only because it is unable to digest what it occupies.

In 1982, “Israel” reached the capital. It did not withdraw, even after 18 years, except because of the resistance’s blows. Had it not been for the strikes of the resistance, it would never have left. It would have established settlements and carried out many more plans in Lebanon.

And today I tell you: this enemy is an expansionist enemy. In the agreement, it did not abide by its commitments. Lebanon upheld its obligations, Lebanon’s resistance upheld its obligations, but “Israel” did not—and its violations are continuous. These violations are not about the weapons in the hands of Hezbollah or the resistance; no. These violations are an attempt to gradually pave the way for occupying Lebanon and to carve out a path toward a Greater “Israel” through Lebanon.

We are cooperating with the Lebanese state, and we affirm that it has chosen diplomacy to end the aggression and implement the agreement. We support it in continuing down this path. America and “Israel” have nothing to do with how we organize our internal affairs. It is not their business to say: “The Lebanese state has declared the exclusivity of weapons, so we will supervise to see how you implement this exclusivity.” It is none of their concern what we decide in Lebanon, what we do in Lebanon, what we agree on or disagree on in Lebanon. “Israel” and America have no role here. Their only role is to speak about the agreement and the obligations Lebanon committed to—and the obligations they committed to in return. Let them implement what is required of them.

The limit of our relations with the “Israeli” enemy today—as a Lebanese state—is the boundary set by the agreement, which concerns only the area south of the Litani River. There is no such thing as ‘beyond south of the Litani.’ Everything else is strictly an internal Lebanese matter. Resolution 1701 is a matter for the Lebanese among themselves. They implement it, they take the necessary steps, they set the procedures. “Israel” and America have no role—no role regarding weapons, no role regarding rebuilding capabilities, no role regarding the defensive strategy, no role regarding Lebanese disagreements or agreements or opinions. Let them step aside. We will sort things out among ourselves. But for them to impose themselves, dictate terms, and run things—that is completely unacceptable.

Let me also tell you something: today, when “Israel” and the United States say they want to disarm Hezbollah, do you think they are only talking about weapons? They say to us: “What’s the problem? We are simply calling for disarmament. And on a national level, we want disarmament.” But do you hear what they are actually saying? They want to disarm us, cut off our funding, shut down our services, close our schools, close our hospitals, block reconstruction, prevent donations, demolish homes, and target every resource and capability we have. In other words, what they want is to erase our existence.

So are we supposed to believe that the issue is just weapons—and that once the weapons are gone, Lebanon’s problems will be solved? Nothing will be solved in Lebanon. Setting aside the fact that we categorically reject disarmament—are we then supposed to accept all the other demands as well? So let this be absolutely clear: we will defend ourselves, our people, and our country. We are ready to sacrifice to the fullest extent. We will not surrender. Our strength will only grow, and we will never give in. We will stand by our people, our wounded, and our prisoners—the embodiment of sacrifice, dignity, and patience.

So let no one try to sell the illusion that this is a simple issue. It is not. We will safeguard our covenant and the trust of our martyrs. We will not retreat. And let it also be clear: we will not give weight to “Israel’s” servants, nor to “Israel” or America themselves. We will engage with our fellow citizens and political forces—those willing to listen, discuss, and cooperate—within the framework of a single country and a defensive strategy that we agree on. That is the only viable option. Anything else is impossible.

And anyone who steps back from the “Israeli” project—our door will be open to them, and we will discuss matters with them as well. We will not close the doors—but only on the basis of dignity, sovereignty, and maintaining our defensive capability in our own hands. The ability to defend oneself and stand up to aggression is a right that no one on Earth can take away. This, for us, is settled and final. Let them go look for defeated groups if they want to have that kind of conversation—we are not that group.

Third:

The Lebanese government must fulfill its responsibilities. Its first duty is to protect sovereignty, build the state, strengthen the economy, and serve the people. Let it begin by performing these duties. We are waiting for this government to show us its achievements and its accomplishments in stopping the aggression and achieving liberation. Give us a report from the moment you took office until now: What have you done in confronting the aggression? What have you done to free the prisoners? What have you done in terms of reconstruction? What have you done to improve people’s services? How have you advanced the country’s economy? Go work on these matters, instead of issuing statements to foreign actors just so they might approve of you, or posturing as though you can accomplish great things.

And let me tell you: don’t show off too much. Your strength, your weight, and your influence come when you, together with us and all national forces, stand united in confronting the occupier. The government has nothing to offer on its own—so why act this way? Let us work so that the Lebanese stand together as one hand against their enemies.

As for the issue of appointing a civilian representative to the ceasefire committee, this step clearly contradicts all the official statements and positions previously declared—statements that said no civilian could be included in the mechanism unless the enemy first halted its hostilities. So tell me: have the hostilities stopped? Did you adhere to this condition? You have offered a free concession—one that will neither change the enemy’s stance, nor its aggression, nor its occupation.

And here we are: the civilian envoy went, attended the meeting, and what happened? The military pressure increased, the aggression intensified, and “Israel” continued exactly as before. “Israel” wants you under fire. America wants you under fire. So every step you take becomes nothing more than an extension of “Israel’s” demands, while Lebanon has no demands being met. Is this really what you want?

We consider this measure another misstep added to the grave error of the August 5 decision. May God protect Lebanon from what is worse.

My brother, reconsider. Instead of taking steps forward that strengthen you and secure achievements, you are offering concessions that will bring you nothing with “Israel”. In any case, there is still an opportunity. You can stand on the principle that “Israel” must first halt its fire. You can push reconstruction efforts and place them squarely in “Israel’s” face. You can reach an internal understanding based on one rule: no more concessions of any kind until “Israel” fulfills its obligations under the agreement.

As for Hezbollah, we have done what is required of us. We enabled the state to assert its sovereignty within the framework of the agreement. And be sure of this: when we stand united, they can do nothing to us. We have endured a full year of steadfastness after the agreement, despite all this aggression. That alone proves that if we stand firm, we can continue standing. Keep this in mind—you already know it. Lebanon is like a ship: aligning with “Israel” means putting a hole in that ship, and then everyone sinks.

I hope we carefully examine our steps and recognize that Lebanon has one central problem: “Israeli” aggression. We must confront this aggression first, united. After that, every other issue has its own path and its own solutions.

Peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you.