Table of Contents

Abstract ................................................... 1

Methodology and Islamic Scholarly Approach ................. 3

Chapter 1: Introduction .................................... 6

Chapter 2: Historical Context .............................. 8

Chapter 3: Recognitions and Public Declarations of Trust .. 12

Chapter 4: The 2003 Organizational Resignation and the

Emergence of Ideological Continuity 17

Chapter 5: Trust in Practice — The Ramadan Session and the

Public Delegation of Discernment 20

Chapter 6: Comparative Leadership and the Rejection of

Succession 23

Chapter 7: Spiritual Formation and Intellectual Emergence

During the Prison Years 26

Chapter 8: The Visionary Dream – Narrative and Meaning .... 30

Chapter 9: The Yusuf Paradigm — Qur’anic Succession

Symbolism in the Life of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed 35

Chapter 10: The Post-Truth Era and Community Disorientation

39

Chapter 11: Global Muslim Leadership and the Palestinian Cause

43
Chapter 12: Current Role and Continuing Work of Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed 47

Chapter 13: Media Analysis and Documentation .............. 50

Chapter 14: Muslim Journal and Ayesha Mustafaa’s Editorial

Influence 53

Chapter 15: External Interference — Obstruction, Erasure, and

the Quiet War on Continuity 57

Chapter 16: Conclusion and Final Reflections .............. 61

Chapter 17: Appendices and Supporting Documents ........... 64

Author Profile ............................................ 67

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled:
Did Imam W. Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed and the Struggle for Continuity.
It remains faithful to the original while being adapted for accessible, portable
distribution.

Did Imam W. Deen Mohammed Name a Successor?

The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed and the

Struggle for Continuity

A Dissertation by

A follower, student, and supporter of Imam W. Deen Mohammed

“And We appointed, from among them, leaders, giving guidance under

Our command, so long as they persevered with patience and continued
to have faith in Our signs.”
(Surah As-Sajdah, 32:24)

Dedication

This work is dedicated to all those who have remained sincere in

following the clear light of Qur’anic leadership in the West and to
those who have protected the legacy of Imam W. Deen Mohammed
with integrity, scholarship, and faith.

“I have to acknowledge the man who has done more than any other
person to help me get the correct image of Muslims and Imam W.
Deen Mohammed to America and the world — he’s getting ready to
 enlarge the picture!”

Imam W. Deen Mohammed

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Abstract

Section 0.1: Abstract

This dissertation investigates the question of succession in the

leadership of Imam W. Deen Mohammed. While it has been
widely assumed that no successor was named, this study argues
that Imam W. Deen Mohammed did identify a successor through
sustained trust, public positioning, and symbolic acts: Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed.

The research draws on public addresses, leadership

appointments, transcripts, private recollections, and Qur’anic
models of moral authority. It traces a consistent pattern of
responsibility placed upon Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed—from
his role as national representative to his visible placement beside
the Imam at major public sessions. Particular focus is given to
the 2003 national convention, where Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed announced the Imam’s resignation from
organizational leadership and reaffirmed his ongoing
mission—an act that functioned as a public transmission of trust.

The dissertation also documents the efforts that emerged after the
Imam’s passing to suppress or erase the significance of this trust.
Through an analysis of editorial decisions, selective silence by
key figures, and the framing of collective leadership, the study
outlines how the public record was reshaped. It situates this
erasure within broader dynamics of post-truth discourse and the
institutional challenges of succession in religious communities.
This is not a symbolic argument alone. It is a historical
reconstruction of evidence that was once public and has since
been neglected or denied. The conclusion affirms that the
succession of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed was not
speculative—it was visible, functional, and rooted in Qur’anic
standards of leadership. This dissertation restores that record and
explores its implications for the continuity of Imam W. Deen
Mohammed’s vision.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Methodology and Islamic Scholarly Approach

Section 0.2: Methodology and Islamic Scholarly Approach

Grounding Succession in Qur'anic Principles and Scholarly

Tradition

This dissertation conducts a qualitative, document-based

investigation rooted in Islamic scholarly methodology. It
addresses the question of succession not merely as a matter of
historical curiosity, but as a serious inquiry into trust, leadership,
and moral continuity within an Islamic framework. The central
focus—Did Imam W. Deen Mohammed name a successor?—is
approached with reference to both public documentation and the
enduring Islamic principles that govern the transmission of
authority.

In Islam, leadership is not conferred through charisma or

popularity. It is established through amanah (trust), shahadah
(witness), and 'ilm (knowledge). These are discerned through
public evidence, continuity of representation, and the absence of
contradiction from the source of authority. The Qur'an presents
numerous succession models—prophetic, familial, and
communal—that emphasize not formality but function: who acts,
who is entrusted, and who is qualified. This dissertation employs
that interpretive lens to examine the case of Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed.

A key scholarly anchor is the framework of Al-Mawardi (d.

1058), the influential Islamic jurist and political theorist whose
Ahkam al-Sultaniyyah (Ordinances of Government) outlines
ethical and practical standards for leadership succession. While
Imam W. Deen Mohammed did not operate within a caliphal
model, Al-Mawardi's emphasis on visible trust, moral standing,
and public recognition offers a valuable benchmark. His insight
confirms that legitimate succession does not always require a
formal decree—it may be established through public pattern,
delegated responsibility, and the absence of contradiction from
the leader.

This dissertation therefore adopts a working standard for

succession based on three intersecting criteria: 1. Symbolic
designation or elevation by the leader 2. Public trust and
visibility conferred upon the individual 3. No reversal or
contradiction of that designation before the leader's passing

Imam W. Deen Mohammed's approach to

leadership—particularly in his later years—was more ideological
than organizational. He increasingly relied on public positioning,
representative trust, and symbolic gestures rather than formal
appointment. This aligns with the Islamic concept of bayan—the
duty to make truth clear. In this spirit, the dissertation analyzes
not only what was formally said, but what was publicly
demonstrated: who was seated beside him, who was asked to
speak, and who carried the burden of representation when clarity
was most needed.

Sources are drawn from three principal categories: - Primary

Records: Speeches, statements, and published works of Imam W.
Deen Mohammed and Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed - Public
Documentation: National media coverage, internal publications,
convention recordings, and verified eyewitness accounts -
Islamic Frameworks: Qur'anic succession models, ethical
leadership criteria, and classical scholarly analysis, especially
that of Al-Mawardi

This methodology affirms that the question of succession cannot

be reduced to organizational procedure. It is a matter of
discernment grounded in Qur'anic logic, communal witness, and
trust placed in plain view.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Section 1: Introduction

Framing the Central Question of Succession

The death of a religious leader leaves a vacuum—but not all

vacuums are alike. Some are bridged by formal succession;
others become sites of silence, erasure, or contested memory. In
the case of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, who led the largest body
of indigenous American Muslims for over thirty years, the
question of succession remains both unresolved and deeply
consequential.

This dissertation addresses a defining question in the recent

history of American Islam: Did Imam W. Deen Mohammed
name a successor? It is a question rooted in both faith and public
record—and one that has lasting consequences for continuity,
leadership, and theological clarity.

The inquiry is not speculative. It is grounded in documentation,

public events, symbolic actions, and an Islamic scholarly
framework that values trust, consistency, and communal witness.
It centers on Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed—the only individual
consistently acknowledged, elevated, and entrusted by Imam W.
Deen Mohammed in ways that resemble succession in both form
and function.

Rather than reduce the question to a binary yes or no, the

dissertation treats it as a matter of interpretive evidence. What
did the Imam say? What did he show? Whom did he trust? And
how do Islamic principles of leadership and continuity help us
understand what was being transmitted—especially in the final
years of his public ministry?

To make this case, the chapters that follow analyze a

constellation of evidence—spoken and symbolic, private and
public—each pointing to the presence of a living trust passed
forward in plain sight.

The dissertation unfolds in a series of thematic and evidentiary

chapters. These build historical context, present key recognitions,
analyze public gestures, examine competing narratives, and
address the theological and communal implications of trust-based
succession. The work also contends with the post-truth
environment that followed Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s
passing, in which decentralization and institutional silence
obscured what had once been visible.

This work begins not with controversy, but with gratitude: for the
legacy of a man who transformed American Islam, and for the
possibility that his vision still speaks through the one who was
prepared to carry it.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 2: Historical Context

Section 2: Historical Context – Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s

Leadership and Vision

Reform, Responsibility, and the Recasting of American Islam

To understand the question of succession and the significance of

Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s role, one must first revisit the
extraordinary historical context shaped by the leadership of
Imam W. Deen Mohammed. He was not only the spiritual leader
of the largest body of indigenous American Muslims; he was a
reformer of unprecedented scope—redefining both the
theological and civic identity of his community after the passing
of his father, the Honorable Elijah Muhammad.

From the outset, his leadership was not only corrective—it was
preparatory. He understood that reform must endure beyond its
founder, and that continuity would require more than inherited
authority. It would require trust in those who grasped the
mission.

From Black Nationalism to Universal Islam

Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s ascent to leadership in 1975

marked a radical departure from the teachings of the Nation of
Islam. Within months of his father’s death, he began a deliberate
transformation of the movement—dismantling its theological
deviations, rejecting race-based ideology, and leading its
members toward the Qur’an and the sunnah of Prophet
Muhammad (peace be upon him).

This reform was not simply doctrinal. It was cultural,

psychological, and institutional. Imam W. Deen Mohammed
recognized that the Nation of Islam’s appeal had been rooted in
both its message and its structure: a tight, top-down system of
commands, titles, and nationalist pride. Undoing this structure
required not just religious knowledge, but moral courage—and a
commitment to re-educating a people wounded by both racism
and theological misdirection.

A Civic and Qur’anic Model

Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s approach to Islam in America

centered on three major themes: the Qur’an as the authoritative
text, the Prophet’s model as the definitive example, and the
Constitution of the United States as an opportunity for moral
expression rather than compromise. His emphasis on civic
participation, interfaith dialogue, and moral business practice
brought a new dimension to Islamic life in America. For him,
freedom was not merely legal—it was spiritual, intellectual, and
economic.

This alignment of Islamic principle with American civic life

marked a historic innovation. Rather than viewing the United
States as inherently hostile to Islam, Imam W. Deen Mohammed
viewed it as a proving ground—a place where Muslims could
model moral leadership, honesty, discipline, and public integrity.

Institutional Reform and Theological Centrality

One of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s most significant decisions

was to avoid re-centralizing power under himself. He dissolved
the strict hierarchies that had defined his father’s organization
and encouraged independent study, self-governance, and local
mosque autonomy. While Imam W. Deen Mohammed
decentralized administrative control, he remained the central
interpreter of Islamic meaning and reform. This balance between
autonomy and doctrinal coherence was delicate—and essential.

His goal was not to create a leaderless mass, but a community of

responsible participants who could carry the vision forward. This
explains both the intellectual flowering under his leadership and
the eventual confusion regarding succession. When clarity is no
longer imposed but earned through insight, only a few may be
able—or willing—to recognize it.

Spiritual Literacy and the Qualification to Lead

Perhaps more than any other American Muslim leader of his

time, Imam W. Deen Mohammed emphasized spiritual literacy:
the ability to understand religious texts and civic life through the
lens of moral intelligence. His khutbahs, public addresses, and
Ramadan sessions were platforms for cultivating this literacy. He
spoke not just to inform—but to elevate.

He encouraged his community to move beyond dependency on

charisma, cultivating instead a standard of understanding by
which true successors—those who carried the vision forward
faithfully—could be discerned. However, this vision required
maturity—and not all were prepared for its demands. This
tension between reform and readiness is essential to
understanding the question of succession.

Laying the Groundwork for Trust-Based Succession

While Imam W. Deen Mohammed did not name a successor in a

formal legal sense, he did prepare the groundwork for trust-based
succession—recognizing, elevating, and publicly affirming
individuals who demonstrated understanding of his mission.
Chief among these was Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed.

To grasp why Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s recognition

matters, one must understand that Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s
entire leadership was a preparation for trust-based
succession—not built on title or charisma, but on alignment with
a revealed, reformative vision rooted in Qur’an, reason, and
moral accountability.

It is from this foundation that the rest of the dissertation

proceeds.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 3: Recognitions and Public Declarations of

Trust

Section 3: Recognitions and Public Declarations of Trust

Naming, Elevation, and the Public Record of Imam W. Deen

Mohammed

While some argue that Imam W. Deen Mohammed did not

formally name a successor, there exists a substantial record of
public recognitions, statements, and symbolic gestures that
indicate his trust in and preference for Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed. These recognitions were not subtle. They were
made in major national forums, witnessed by imams, scholars,
and members of the general community. Together, they form a
credible succession framework rooted not in organizational fiat,
but in trust, responsibility, and consistent public affirmation.

Public Acknowledgments and Introductions

In Louisville, Kentucky (2000) at the 25th anniversary of Imam

W. Deen Mohammed’s leadership, he introduced Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed to the national gathering with these
words:

“I’ve made a slight change to the program. Of the many imams

who have done outstanding work there is one who has been with
me closely for better than 8 years now who has worked diligently
with me and distinguished himself—he is none other than Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed—hear him now.”
This was more than a casual endorsement. It was a national
acknowledgment of closeness, distinction, and diligence, placed
in the context of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s own legacy
celebration.

At the national convention in 2001, Imam W. Deen Mohammed

made what may be the most explicit public affirmation of Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed’s role:

“I have to acknowledge the man who has done more than any
other person to help me get the correct image of Muslims and
Imam W. Deen Mohammed to America and the world—my son,
Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed.”

This statement was delivered to the national community and

recorded by both attendees and external journalists. It articulates
a trust that goes beyond functionality—it suggests that Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed grasped the mission of Imam W. Deen
Mohammed deeply enough to represent it on his behalf.

A Record of Representation

Between 1990 and 2005, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed served as

Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s national representative. This role
was not informal or symbolic—it was repeated by both men in
public and private forums. At a young adults conference, when
asked about his position, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed stated:

“I am special assistant to Imam W. Deen Mohammed and

representative of his ministry.”

Imam W. Deen Mohammed immediately echoed:

“My special assistant and representative of my ministry.”

This mirrored declaration reflects intentionality, alignment, and
clarity of purpose. It affirms not only a role but a mutual
understanding of what that role signified.

In an earlier public forum, a woman in Grand Rapids, Michigan

asked Imam W. Deen Mohammed if there was anyone who
represented the religion as he taught it. He responded:

“While many are doing good work, the one I give most of the
responsibility to is Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed… He’s
responsible for most of the work to present the correct picture of
Islam and Muslims.”

Private Confirmation of Succession Insight

In addition to public recognitions, Imam W. Deen Mohammed

made statements in private that further affirm the depth of his
trust in Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed. One such moment, quietly
but profoundly revealing, came in a personal conversation
between the two men. Imam W. Deen Mohammed said to him:

“You are a combination of me and my father—but you didn’t

know my father, and yet you know him better than most of his
ministers.”

This statement confirms that Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed was

not merely a loyal worker or spokesman. He was recognized by
the Imam as possessing an inherited insight—a grasp of both the
reformist mission and the disciplined foundation upon which it
was built. Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s words acknowledge a
lineage of understanding that cannot be taught, only recognized.

These statements were not made publicly, but they reflect the
kind of spiritual conferral that is often more meaningful than
formal announcements—especially within Islamic tradition,
where leadership may be entrusted through recognition, not
declared through title.

International Recognition and Saudi Engagement

In a private conversation following a trip to Saudi Arabia, Imam

W. Deen Mohammed told Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed that
Saudi scholars had inquired about succession and leadership
continuity in his movement. Imam W. Deen Mohammed
responded to them by saying that he did, in fact, have someone in
mind—and afterward, he told Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
directly that he had mentioned him to those scholars as the one
carrying his teaching and trusted in that capacity.

This reference was made in a manner consistent with Islamic

tradition: not as a formal declaration of authority, but as a subtle
and respectful recognition—a referral grounded in faith, trust,
and spiritual continuity. Within the context of Islamic etiquette
and religious discourse, such gestures are often understood as
meaningful endorsements without overt proclamation.

This moment confirms that Imam W. Deen Mohammed was not

only preparing his community but also informing international
religious scholars of his intention. It establishes Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed not only as a domestic representative but as
someone whose understanding of the Imam’s vision was
sufficient to be communicated on the global stage.

Conclusion

While no official declaration was issued in the form some might

expect, the cumulative weight of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s
public statements, symbolic gestures, representative assignments,
and private acknowledgments provides clear evidence of
intentional succession. His actions demonstrated a pattern of
delegated trust—not defined by organizational fiat, but by
spiritual and intellectual confidence.

Taken together, these moments affirm that Earl Abdulmalik

Mohammed was not merely supported; he was entrusted. And
through that trust, sustained over many years and across settings
both public and private, Imam W. Deen Mohammed identified in
him the continuity of a mission still unfolding.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 4: The 2003 Organizational Resignation and

the Emergence of Ideological Continuity

Section 4: The 2003 Organizational Resignation and the

Emergence of Ideological Continuity

From Institutional Withdrawal to Affirmed Trust

In 2003, during the National Convention in Chicago, Imam W.

Deen Mohammed announced his resignation—not from spiritual
leadership, but from the formal national organizational structure
and its appointed imams. The context and delivery of this
resignation were strategic. It was not a retirement, nor a
withdrawal from his mission. It was a deliberate separation from
a leadership class he no longer trusted to faithfully carry forward
his vision.

This section examines the structural and symbolic meaning of the

2003 resignation and highlights the role of Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed in delivering the Imam’s message, revealing a public
act of trust with succession-level implications.

The Loss of Trust in Organizational Leaders

Imam W. Deen Mohammed had long expressed concern about

how many imams were interpreting his teachings. Over time, it
became clear to him that certain leaders were shaping coded
conversations among themselves—developing their own agenda
under the guise of continuing his reform. This silent
manipulation culminated in what Imam W. Deen Mohammed
described as the end of his patience. In private meetings with
national imams, he is reported to have said:

“My patience is long, but I’ve reached its limit with you.”

The decision to resign was not emotional. It was structured and

reflective of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s increasing clarity that
the organizational apparatus could no longer be trusted with the
sacred direction he had labored to establish.

The Chicago Convention: Delegated Authority to Communicate

Meaning

Imam W. Deen Mohammed did not deliver the resignation

statement himself. Instead, he entrusted the public announcement
to Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed. This decision is central to the
succession argument. It was a visible act of trust—assigning to
one person the task of articulating a major shift in leadership
engagement.

When Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed took the microphone, he did

not speak on his own behalf. He conveyed the Imam’s message
faithfully, concluding with the now widely recognized words:

“No force of nature, no influence, no spirit, no leader or group of

leaders will ever separate me from Imam W. Deen
Mohammed—and no (all of what is mentioned) should ever
separate you from Imam W. Deen Mohammed.”

The audience responded with thunderous applause, not only to

the words, but to the moment. This was not merely an
organizational announcement—it was a declaration of loyalty,
continuity, and moral clarity.

Resignation from Structure, Not Leadership

Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s resignation is frequently
misunderstood as a retirement from public work. In fact, he
continued writing, teaching, and addressing the public for five
more years. What he stepped away from was the influence of the
imams who no longer served his vision. He maintained
leadership in substance—just not through the inherited
administrative shell.

This resignation signals a key idea: succession was never

intended to be organizational. Imam W. Deen Mohammed
rejected the notion that spiritual leadership could be reduced to
positional hierarchy. Instead, he modeled a succession based on
discernment, continuity of message, and the ability to faithfully
reflect the Qur’anic worldview he had advanced.

Conclusion: The Emergence of Ideological Continuity

By selecting Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed to deliver the

resignation message, Imam W. Deen Mohammed made public
what had long been present in private—his trust in Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed’s voice, discernment, and alignment.
This moment becomes part of the evidentiary chain that supports
the case for succession not through title, but through transmission
of interpretive responsibility.

The Imam withdrew from a structure that no longer served the

mission. In doing so, he revealed where that mission continued.
And he entrusted its articulation to the one he had already
positioned to carry forward his most difficult truths.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 5: Trust in Practice — The Ramadan Session

and the Public Delegation of Discernment

Section 5: Trust in Practice — The Ramadan Session and the

Public Delegation of Discernment

A Demonstrated Transfer of Judgment in a Sacred Setting

One of the clearest public moments of symbolic trust between

Imam W. Deen Mohammed and Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
occurred during a multi-day Ramadan Session in the early 2000s.
This annual session was not a casual gathering—it was one of the
Imam’s most spiritually intensive forums, reserved for Qur’anic
reasoning, moral teaching, and directional clarity for the Muslim
American community. Within that high-trust setting, Imam W.
Deen Mohammed performed a sequence of actions that
collectively point to a deeper level of confidence and delegation
than had been shown to any other individual in public.

Three Days of Proximity and Responsibility

Throughout the session, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed was seated

directly beside Imam W. Deen Mohammed. No one else had
occupied that position over such a sustained period. He was not
there ceremonially. His assignment was to sift through dozens of
written questions submitted by attendees—questions on
theology, community direction, and social policy—and
determine which ones were most important for the Imam to
address.
This role required discretion, interpretive maturity, and
alignment with Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s methodology. It
signaled not only the Imam’s trust in Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed’s intellect, but in his discernment of the people’s
concerns—a crucial capacity for any leader expected to carry
forward vision.

A Visible Transfer of Platform

At one point, following a teaching segment, Imam W. Deen

Mohammed turned to the audience and said that he wanted Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed to speak to the community. He stated,
clearly and without qualification, that he wanted him to address
the gathering and say whatever he felt was appropriate.

Initially, the Imam moved the microphone in front of Earl

Abdulmalik Mohammed. Then, pausing briefly, he pulled the
microphone back toward himself, stood up, and made a decisive
gesture: he invited Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed to take his seat.

This sequence—assignment of discretion, invitation to address,

and the symbolic act of vacating the seat—was a clear public
expression of trust. It was not a performance. It was Imam W.
Deen Mohammed stepping aside in the presence of the
community and placing someone in his position to speak from
the center.

Symbolism and Qur’anic Norms of Delegated Authority

In Islamic tradition, particularly in moments of spiritual

authority, symbolic acts matter. While Imam W. Deen
Mohammed did not declare a successor by title, he performed
acts that—when understood in Qur’anic light—communicate
intention. The Ramadan Session gesture should be read as such.
It did not assign a rank. It did something more powerful: it
assigned interpretive trust in a sacred setting, under public
conditions, at a moment of reflection and communal
accountability.

Conclusion: Discernment, Trust, and Public Clarity

This Ramadan Session was not an isolated instance—it was part

of a larger arc of symbolic actions taken by Imam W. Deen
Mohammed over many years. But it stands out as a moment of
visible delegation. By assigning Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
the role of sifting questions, by inviting him to speak freely, and
by publicly rising from his seat to offer the platform, the Imam
gave the community more than an address. He gave them a
signal.

In the context of the succession argument, this moment cannot be

dismissed. It is a documented act of practical succession—not in
administrative form, but in Qur’anic spirit: a transfer of voice,
judgment, and moral standing.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 6: Comparative Leadership and the Rejection

of Succession

Section 6: Comparative Leadership and the Rejection of

Succession

A Coordinated Refusal to Acknowledge Imam W. Deen

Mohammed’s Successor

After the passing of Imam W. Deen Mohammed in 2008, a clear

pattern emerged within segments of the community leadership:
avoidance, redirection, and in many cases, overt denial of the
possibility that Imam W. Deen Mohammed had chosen a
successor. Despite numerous public recognitions, symbolic acts,
and consistent trust extended to Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed,
this leadership cohort reframed the narrative—shifting focus
toward collective management, memory-based celebration, or
familial inheritance.

This section does not cast judgment on personal sincerity, but it

examines how a coordinated refusal—whether explicit or
implicit—prevented the community from properly receiving the
Imam’s clearest indications of succession. The figures discussed
were either close to Imam W. Deen Mohammed, prominent in
shaping post-2008 narratives, or positioned themselves as
custodians of his legacy.

Key Figures Who Rejected or Reframed Succession

This section highlights six leaders whose post-2008 roles
contributed to a redirection of the community’s perception of
succession. Each, in their own way, either avoided public
acknowledgment of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed or helped
shape an atmosphere in which such recognition became
untenable:

- Ronald Shaheed - Yahya Abdullah - Nasir Ahmad - Talib

Shareef - Rashad Abdul-Rahman - Faheem Shuaibe

Recasting the Narrative: From Succession to Collectivism

What these figures have in common is not only their influence,

but their refusal to acknowledge the clarity with which Imam W.
Deen Mohammed operated. Instead of continuing the distinct
interpretive path shaped by the Imam, their work often defaults to
generic Islamic education, interfaith gestures, or community
events designed around unity without clarity.

This quiet consensus is not accidental. It protects the possibility

of shared leadership by eliminating the challenge of a singular
ideological successor. It also marginalizes the interpretive
framework Imam W. Deen Mohammed spent decades
constructing with precision and purpose.

The Cost of Collective Denial

The absence of clear succession has not resulted in healthy

plurality. It has led to ideological diffusion, narrative control, and
the emergence of parallel frameworks that dilute the Imam’s
message. Younger generations, unfamiliar with the period from
1990 to 2003, are increasingly presented with a flattened version
of the Imam’s legacy—one in which trust, symbolic continuity,
and moral clarity have been replaced by commemoration and
vague reform.

Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed has not been debated—he has been

omitted. And omission is not a neutral act. It is a form of
narrative distortion that must be named if the Imam’s true legacy
is to be understood.

Conclusion: Integrity and the Qur’anic Standard

The Qur’an warns against concealing what is true when it has

been made manifest. Imam W. Deen Mohammed made his trust
in Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed visible. It was not formalized
through titles or councils—it was made evident through symbolic
acts, interpretive responsibility, and public affirmation.

This section is not a personal indictment. It is a necessary record

of choices made by leadership. By naming those who denied or
reframed the question of succession, we affirm that succession
was not absent—it was simply rejected.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 7: Spiritual Formation and Intellectual

Emergence During the Prison Years

Section 7: Spiritual Formation and Intellectual Emergence

During the Prison Years

Books as Continuity, Writing as Moral Authority

The incarceration of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed marked a

defining period not of interruption, but of refinement. Stripped of
platform, title, and external affirmation, he continued the
intellectual and moral trajectory shaped by Imam W. Deen
Mohammed. His writings from this period—disciplined, deeply
rooted in Qur’anic worldview, and unshaken by
distortion—became a mirror for the legacy itself. What emerged
was not a defensive posture, but a fortified articulation of the
same vision Imam W. Deen Mohammed entrusted him with in
public life.

This section examines the prison years not as marginal to the

question of succession, but as essential to its validation.
Leadership, in the mold of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, requires
not proximity to power but proximity to truth under pressure.
That is precisely what these years reveal.

Books as Disciplined Defense of Vision

While incarcerated, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed authored two

major works:
- Democracy, Civic Virtue and Islam: The Muslim American
Jihad Against Extremism - On Nature and Nations: The Muslim
American Message to Humanity in the Day of Religion

These are not reactive books. They do not offer biographical

justification or personal rebuttal. Instead, they extend the logic of
Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s Qur’an-based reasoning into new
territory—exploring American political culture, the nature of
extremism, the sacred meaning of ethnicity, and the place of
Muslims in the moral order of civilization.

What is particularly striking is how these books are structured:

precise, measured, and unyielding in tone. They reflect the same
constitutional restraint that Imam W. Deen Mohammed modeled
in his own language—avoiding rhetorical excess while offering a
framework of moral accountability for both Muslims and the
broader society. Their publication from prison underscores a key
point: the voice continued uninterrupted, not in spite of trial, but
through it.

Isolation as a Mirror: Independent Authority in Action

For a leader shaped by Qur’anic principles, incarceration

becomes not just confinement but clarification. Without access to
community applause or institutional approval, Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed’s writings affirmed that leadership is not
conferred—it is confirmed under trial.

In this sense, the prison experience revealed a theological and

intellectual independence fully aligned with Imam W. Deen
Mohammed’s model. Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed did not
depart from the mission. He deepened it. He did not react to
distortion. He answered it with form, insight, and enduring
discipline.
This period also exposed the failure of the broader community to
defend one of its most trusted figures—further validating the
clarity of the Imam’s withdrawal from its organizational
apparatus. Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s continuation was not
dependent on external structures. It was rooted in trust already
given.

The Emergence of eamspeaks.com

Upon release, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed launched

eamspeaks.com, a digital platform to continue his writings,
messages, and reflections. The site quickly became a
continuation of the same voice sharpened in
isolation—addressing civic leadership, Islamic ethics,
international injustice, and the role of American Muslims in
shaping moral discourse.

The platform has since published dozens of essays, letters, and

khutbahs that reflect a moral clarity and global vision consistent
with Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s theology. Whether speaking
to American presidents, responding to crises in Gaza, or
engaging the Muslim American community on internal reform,
the tone remains steadfast: principled, Qur’an-based, and
unyielding in moral demand.

Conclusion: Writing as Succession Under Trial

If succession is to be tested by adversity, then this period stands

as decisive proof. Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed did not merely
survive distortion. He produced works of lasting insight that
reaffirm the vision Imam W. Deen Mohammed entrusted to him.
His voice, tested in confinement and refined through written
clarity, carried the weight of succession before titles were ever
discussed.
The dream that confirmed this clarity came in the final year of
prison. But the reality of leadership through interpretive
discipline was already well underway.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 8: The Visionary Dream – Narrative and

Meaning

Section 8: The Visionary Dream – Narrative and Meaning

A Personal Revelation and Its Succession Implications

One of the most spiritually consequential moments in

understanding the authority and mission of Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed occurred during his final year in prison. He
experienced a visionary dream—structured, symbolic, and
theologically resonant—that confirmed what had already been
placed in motion by Imam W. Deen Mohammed himself. This
dream does not serve as the beginning of his awareness; rather, it
stands as a divine confirmation of the responsibility he had
already accepted, and of the legacy he had been entrusted to
carry forward.

This section recounts the dream in its original structure and

offers a full symbolic interpretation that aligns with Qur’anic
insight, historical precedent from sacred tradition, and the living
legacy of Imam W. Deen Mohammed.

The Dream

The dream occurred in three distinct scenes, each with clarity and
precision:

1. Two Mr. W. D. Fards Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed saw two

versions of the figure known in history as Mr. W. D. Fard. One
was clearly an impostor, though dressed similarly to the other.
The impostor beckoned to him. As he approached, Earl
Abdulmalik discerned that this figure was not true—he had the
appearance but not the essence of the man.

2. Blighted Cities and Abandoned Microphones In the second

scene, he saw a vast and ruined American
cityscape—graffiti-stained buildings, urban desolation, and a
scattering of empty microphones on stands, seemingly left
behind by speakers or leaders long gone. It was a portrait of lost
message and abandoned responsibility.

3. The Encounter with Imam W. Deen Mohammed In the final

and most powerful scene, he saw Imam W. Deen Mohammed
standing before a massive crowd of faceless people. Imam
Mohammed was not facing them; rather, he was turned toward
Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed, and he greeted him directly:

“As-salaamu ‘alaykum, son. We’ve been looking for you. I’ve

been looking for you.”

He then gestured toward the faceless crowd and said:

“These people say they can’t find my glasses. Can you find my
glasses?”

To which Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed replied:

“Yes.”

He then departed on a search and came upon a mountainous pile

of black-rimmed eyeglasses—hundreds of thousands of pairs
stacked like a dark monument. After carefully searching, he
selected a pair and returned to Imam W. Deen Mohammed. The
Imam placed the glasses on his face, paused, and said:
“Ah yes. These are the perfect ones.”

He then took them off and handed them to Earl Abdulmalik

Mohammed.

This was the end of the dream.

Symbolic Analysis

The dream is rich with Qur’anic resonance, symbolic language,

and spiritual insight. Its three-scene structure reflects a classical
mode of divine instruction and moral teaching, reminiscent of
stories in scripture—particularly the lives of Yusuf (Joseph),
Musa (Moses), and others whose lives embodied trial, vision, and
responsibility. Like Yusuf, whose clarity came in confinement,
or Musa, who returned from exile bearing divine command, the
dream in this case emerges from trial—but confirms a mission
already set.

- The Two W. D. Fards represent the false and authentic origin

myths within the Nation of Islam. The impostor reflects a
distorted version of legacy—manipulated for influence or
personal gain. The true figure, while not fully described, is
preserved in essence. Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s rejection of
the impostor shows discernment, theological maturity, and
loyalty to truth.

- The Blighted Cities and Microphones symbolize a disoriented

nation—a once-inspired people who have lost their voice,
direction, and moral compass. The microphones, untouched,
suggest that truth is waiting to be reclaimed and re-articulated.
They reflect a leadership void and a waiting audience.
- The Final Scene with Imam W. Deen Mohammed is deeply
significant. Imam Mohammed’s greeting is both familial and
weighty. The missing glasses represent clarity of vision,
interpretive authority, and spiritual guidance. The crowd cannot
see. They do not even recognize what they are missing.

The glasses represent more than clarity—they represent the

specific interpretive lens through which Imam W. Deen
Mohammed understood the world, scripture, and community
reform. For him to try them on, affirm their perfection, and then
hand them to Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed is to symbolically
transfer that unique vision to the one he trusts to carry it forward.

That Imam W. Deen Mohammed entrusts Earl Abdulmalik

Mohammed with the task of locating his glasses—and that Earl
successfully finds the perfect pair—suggests something far
beyond metaphor. It is an act of trust, a transmission of clarity,
and a symbolic conferral of insight and continuity. The gesture
echoes traditions of moral and intellectual succession—not based
on titles, but on vision, discernment, and trustworthiness.

A Spiritual Mandate

This dream came not in anticipation of leadership, but after more

than a decade of public service, visible elevation, and strategic
trust from Imam W. Deen Mohammed. Its timing affirms rather
than initiates his place in the succession narrative. It came at the
end of a period of severe trial, at a time of social abandonment
and personal purification. In the tradition of reformers and
divinely guided individuals, the prison is not a place of
shame—it is the crucible where the mission is refined.

For a man already entrusted by Imam W. Deen Mohammed with

public responsibility, this dream affirms that the message is not
lost—and the community need not remain blind. The glasses
have been found. The vision is available. The only question now
is: Who will choose to see?

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 9: The Yusuf Paradigm — Qur’anic Succession

Symbolism in the Life of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed

Section 9: The Yusuf Paradigm — Qur’anic Succession

Symbolism in the Life of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed

Vision, Trial, and Strategic Continuity Beyond Title

The story of Yusuf (Joseph) in the Qur’an is not only a moral

tale—it is a divine model of discernment, misrecognition, and
eventual public clarity. Yusuf’s rise to a position of authority is
not driven by ambition or formal appointment. Instead, he is
tested through separation, imprisonment, and misjudgment.
Ultimately, he is recognized for his insight and moral leadership
in a time of societal crisis.

This section presents the Yusuf narrative as a symbolic frame for

understanding Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s position within the
legacy of Imam W. Deen Mohammed. It does not claim
equivalence in prophetic identity. Rather, it explores the Qur’anic
pattern of succession and trust as it unfolds in historical lives
guided by vision and tested by rejection.

Symbolic Parallels: Yusuf and Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed

The structural themes of Yusuf’s life—early discernment,

betrayal by kin, imprisonment, and eventual
emergence—resonate deeply with Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed’s trajectory:
- Early Proximity and Trust: Yusuf was beloved by his father and
recognized for his special insight. Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
was entrusted early with representational duties by Imam W.
Deen Mohammed, positioned publicly and privately as a trusted
voice.

- Rejection by His Brothers: Yusuf’s brothers rejected him out of

fear and jealousy. In the post-2003 community, many
leaders—though shaped by Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s
vision—failed to accept Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s role, not
because of doctrinal disagreement, but because of political or
personal concerns.

- Imprisonment and Clarity: Yusuf was imprisoned, yet his moral

insight became clearer in confinement. Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed experienced imprisonment during a time of great
distortion—but used that period to write, clarify, and deepen his
articulation of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s legacy.

- Recognition Through Service: Yusuf was not reinstated by his

brothers, but by a ruler and society that needed his interpretive
insight. Likewise, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s significance
has not been affirmed through community consensus, but
through his continued service, public consistency, and
intellectual clarity.

The Preserved Brother: A Qur’anic Echo of Supporters

One powerful element in the Yusuf narrative is his preservation

of his youngest brother—an act both strategic and intimate. He
reveals himself not to the entire group, but to the one among
them who can still be protected and transformed.
This mirrors the role of those few who have remained loyal to
Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s vision and recognize Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed’s position. They are not the majority,
but they are preserved. Their recognition is not political—it is
spiritual. And their survival under distortion is a sign of the
continuity Imam W. Deen Mohammed intended.

Strategic Leadership in a Time of Crisis

Yusuf’s emergence is marked not by rhetoric but by solutions.

He prepares Egypt for famine. He interprets dreams not as
predictions but as calls to action. His leadership is rational,
moral, and rooted in divine insight.

Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s writings—particularly in the

post-truth era—reflect a similar call. He challenges societal
confusion, confronts religious distortion, and proposes
frameworks of moral renewal rooted in Qur’anic literacy, civic
virtue, and principled clarity. His continued leadership is not
reactionary—it is strategic.

In this sense, Yusuf’s symbolic role as a leader amid confusion

offers the clearest analogy: not as a prophet, but as a figure who
rises because of divine guidance and interpretive integrity in a
time of moral famine.

The Ruler, the Confused Society, and the Need for Vision

In the Qur’an, it is not Yusuf’s brothers who first seek him—it is

the ruler, dominated by confusion, who sends for someone
capable of vision. This is an essential insight for succession in
today’s world. The society itself—American, Muslim, or
global—is the confused ruler in need of orientation.
Imam W. Deen Mohammed was that source of vision. Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed, by virtue of his trust, continued
writings, and lived interpretation, remains the clearest voice
capable of reframing confusion into clarity.

Conclusion: A Model of Succession Without Declaration

Yusuf’s succession was not announced. It was enacted. His

brothers did not validate him—truth did. His leadership was not a
reward. It was a response to necessity. So too with Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed.

The Yusuf paradigm offers a Qur’anic framing for understanding

how Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s trust, guidance, and symbolic
gestures pointed toward a successor not in name, but in function.
That successor, tested through rejection, clarified through
writing, and consistent in voice, has already emerged.

It remains for others to recognize what the pattern has revealed.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 10: The Post-Truth Era and Community

Disorientation

Section 10: The Post-Truth Era and Community Disorientation

The Breakdown of Authority and the Rejection of Evident

Succession

The rejection of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed as the recognized

ideological successor to Imam W. Deen Mohammed cannot be
understood solely as a matter of theological disagreement or
organizational breakdown. It must be viewed within the wider
collapse of shared truth in the post-truth era—where emotional
preference, institutional bias, and political maneuvering routinely
displace clear evidence, public precedent, and moral consistency.
This cultural shift has created an environment in which even the
most direct expressions of trust, delegation, and succession can
be dismissed, reframed, or denied without consequence.

The term “post-truth” describes a condition in which objective

facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to
emotion, personal loyalty, or group sentiment. In this climate,
documentation loses authority, and truth becomes whatever the
loudest or most familiar voice claims it to be. For Imam W. Deen
Mohammed’s community—deeply reformative and already
fragmented after decades of institutional change—this shift
proved especially destabilizing.

During his lifetime, Imam W. Deen Mohammed placed Earl

Abdulmalik Mohammed in positions of public trust and
responsibility over a sustained period. He introduced him as his
“special assistant and representative of my ministry.” He had him
seated beside him at Ramadan sessions, directed him to speak on
his behalf, and stated—on record—that he had done more than
any other person to help present the correct image of Islam and
Muslims to America and the world. These actions were not
isolated. They were deliberate and cumulative.

In any principled framework for recognizing succession, these

signs would be sufficient. A leader places someone beside him,
assigns them representative authority, and publicly acknowledges
their contributions. In communities grounded in evidence and
integrity, that would settle the matter. But in the post-truth era,
these same facts are treated as ambiguous, subjective, or
irrelevant. The very patterns that once defined trust and
continuity are reinterpreted or discarded based on social
influence, factional interests, or group allegiances.

After the passing of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, this

disorientation deepened. The phrase “the Imam never said”
became a rhetorical device used to cast doubt—even when his
words, gestures, and delegations were part of the public record.
The lack of a formal announcement was treated as proof of
non-selection, while the many symbolic and practical indicators
of succession were ignored or deliberately obscured.

Part of this confusion stems from the nature of the Imam’s later
leadership. He moved away from centralized organizational
control, focusing instead on ideological reform and personal
responsibility. As a result, succession was no longer a matter of
office—it was a matter of understanding. It required discernment,
not merely documentation. But the post-truth environment, by its
nature, resists discernment. It prizes noise over clarity and
perception over truth.

This environment also emboldened institutional actors who

sought to assert their own narratives. Rather than contend with
the Imam’s visible and consistent pattern of trust in Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed, they reframed history to create
ambiguity. The burden of proof was shifted. Instead of asking
who the Imam publicly empowered, they demanded an official
statement—ignoring the fact that his entire ministry had become
less about formal declarations and more about symbolic
placement and representation.

What emerged was not a vacuum but a distortion: the succession

was there, but it was buried under confusion, denial, and
revisionism. The community became disoriented—not because
Imam W. Deen Mohammed was unclear, but because clarity no
longer held authority.

This post-truth condition is now the central challenge in

recovering the Imam’s legacy. It is no longer enough to point to
facts. The facts must compete with preference, familiarity,
institutional memory, and public silence. Even documented
history must now be defended against those who refuse to
acknowledge what they saw.

In the end, the evidence for succession was never hidden—it was
ignored. The rejection of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed says less
about the man himself and more about the condition of a
community that could not—or would not—recognize the trust
that had been placed before them. The failure to uphold that trust
reflects not an absence of clarity, but an absence of courage and
collective integrity.
More at: about.me/farisdfareed
 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 11: Global Muslim Leadership and the

Palestinian Cause

Section 11: Global Muslim Leadership and the Palestinian Cause

Succession Through Moral Voice and Qur’anic Responsibility

Imam W. Deen Mohammed taught that true Islamic leadership is

measured not by institutional position, but by moral clarity and
the courage to speak from Qur’anic principles—even when such
truth is inconvenient. Nowhere was this standard more evident
than in his consistent advocacy for the Palestinian people. For
Imam W. Deen Mohammed, the Palestinian cause was not
simply a political matter—it was a divine test of sincerity, a call
to conscience, and a touchstone for the moral legitimacy of
Muslim leadership.

This section argues that the Palestinian issue functions as a

benchmark for assessing ideological succession. Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed’s unwavering and Qur’an-rooted commentary on
Palestine—in speeches, letters, and essays—reflects a direct
continuation of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s moral worldview.
In a time of confusion, silence, and political compromise, he has
preserved the moral thread that Imam W. Deen Mohammed
made central to global Islamic witness.

The Palestinian Crisis as a Test of Leadership

The Qur’an commands: “Stand out firmly for justice, as

witnesses to Allah, even against yourselves or your kin…”
(Qur’an 4:135). Imam W. Deen Mohammed placed this ethic at
the heart of his public discourse, and the Palestinian issue
became a defining lens through which it was tested.

In the post-9/11 climate, as many Muslim leaders in America

either remained silent or cautiously measured their words, Imam
W. Deen Mohammed maintained that Muslims must speak
clearly and consistently for oppressed peoples. This included
defending Palestinian human dignity while rejecting extremism
in all its forms. That stance demanded a level of balance,
restraint, and principle that few sustained after his passing.

Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s Writings on Palestine

In the years since Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s transition, Earl

Abdulmalik Mohammed has consistently spoken out on the
Palestinian issue. His record on eamspeaks.com reflects both
moral depth and Qur’anic reasoning. His work continues Imam
W. Deen Mohammed’s position—not as tribute, but as living
ideology.

His writings and speeches include:

1. Moral Appeals to American Power: - “Letter to President Joe

Biden: A Moral Call to Rethink U.S. Policy Toward Israel and
Palestine”

2. Enduring Qur’anic Solidarity: - “Enduring Support for the

Palestinian People”

3. Global Islamic Ethics: - “Islam and the Ethics of Global

Power” (Public Address)

4. Community Instruction and Moral Grounding: - Friday

Message: “On Conscience, Collapse, and the Future of the
Muslim World”

Each of these writings reflects the same interpretive maturity,

moral restraint, and global consciousness modeled by Imam W.
Deen Mohammed. They are not activist slogans; they are
measured, theological responses rooted in divine order and
prophetic responsibility.

Succession as Qur’anic Responsibility, Not Title

The Palestinian issue exposes the emptiness of positional

leadership unaccompanied by moral clarity. Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed’s record shows that succession in the lineage of
Imam W. Deen Mohammed is not proven by institutional
continuity—it is proven by the continuation of moral obligation.
His writings serve as living commentary on the Qur’an, aligned
with Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s own discursive tradition.

These are not occasional commentaries. They are sustained,

public, and anchored in the core of Islamic ethical thought. They
represent the theological and intellectual maturity required for
leadership in a time when both are rare.

Conclusion: A Living Moral Inheritance

Palestine remains one of the most visible moral barometers in the

Muslim world. Imam W. Deen Mohammed understood this and
spoke to it with consistency. Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed has
continued that work—through rigorous writing, moral
independence, and Qur’an-centered analysis.

This is not ceremonial continuation. It is ideological inheritance

in motion. The voice that stood for justice did not end with Imam
W. Deen Mohammed. It continues through the man he trusted
most to speak when others fell silent.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 12: Current Role and Continuing Work of Earl

Abdulmalik Mohammed

Section 12: Current Role and Continuing Work of Earl

Abdulmalik Mohammed

Since the passing of Imam W. Deen Mohammed in 2008, Earl

Abdulmalik Mohammed has continued to serve as a visible and
disciplined public figure, carrying forward the Qur’an-rooted
legacy entrusted to him. His leadership is defined not by title or
organizational control, but by clarity of message, structured
teaching, and continuity of sacred responsibility.

Upon his release from incarceration, he established the

Muslim-American Ministry for Human Salvation (MAMHS), a
national initiative dedicated to sacred moral leadership,
interpretive clarity, and social justice informed by divine
guidance. MAMHS is supported by a rapidly growing and
principled network of supporters who recognize the ministry as a
continuation of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s spiritual, civic, and
theological mission.

In 2024, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed authored “A More Perfect

Union: Ethnic America, Citizenship, and the Just Order” for the
USA Today Special Edition. This essay was not part of a
political campaign, but a stand-alone civic reflection on moral
leadership and American identity. It framed public
office—especially the presidency—as a sacred trust, and called
on American Muslims to embody ethical integrity within public
life. Published under MAMHS, the essay visually and
conceptually aligned Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed with the
moral lineage of Imam W. Deen Mohammed and the Honorable
Elijah Muhammad.

Separately, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed has publicly stated that

if the office of the presidency is pursued, it must be framed as a
moral office, not an exercise in political ambition. His comments
reflect a Qur’an-based understanding of leadership as a burden of
service, responsibility, and sacred trust.

Throughout 2024, he delivered major addresses in:

- Los Angeles, addressing Qur’anic ethics and sacred civic

responsibility; - Newark, New Jersey, during Muslim American
Leadership Day, focusing on interpretive discipline and national
cohesion; - Detroit, Michigan, where he delivered his annual
Saviors Day address, now a recurring tradition in his public
ministry; - A second Detroit address, later in the year,
highlighted by Islamicity for its moral clarity and theological
continuity; - Washington, DC, on leadership in a post-truth era; -
Cincinnati, Dallas, and Atlanta, where he offered structured
theological guidance to local communities; - Rochester, New
York, where he delivers an annual Independence Day address
honoring Frederick Douglass and linking Islamic ethics to the
African-American freedom tradition.

In addition to national appearances, Earl Abdulmalik

Mohammed conducts a weekly Islamic Studies discussion,
through which Qur’anic principles, community issues, and
current events are explored. The content from these sessions is
regularly shared by participants across the country and
internationally, forming a living curriculum of continuing
guidance and moral formation.
He continues to publish on eamspeaks.com, where his articles
cover issues such as democracy, global Muslim leadership,
Palestine, and civic integrity. These writings are grounded in
theological structure and reflect the exacting standards and
language cultivated under Imam W. Deen Mohammed.

His influence has also extended into modern media spaces.

Programs such as Bilalian Voices and The Frank and Faridah
Podcast—though independently produced—bear the marks of his
intellectual and spiritual influence. In addition, Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed has participated in numerous extensive interviews
across various platforms, addressing themes of leadership,
Qur’anic thought, American society, and the enduring relevance
of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s work.

Finally, he has revived and continues to lead the Ramadan

Sessions, a sacred institution first developed by Imam W. Deen
Mohammed. Under his direction, these sessions remain a source
of interpretive focus and public clarity—living testimony to the
unbroken line of trust.

Taken together, these efforts confirm that succession, as Imam

W. Deen Mohammed understood it, was never about institutional
control. It was about preserving the language, trust, and moral
logic of divine guidance. Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s
leadership affirms that continuity—alive in teaching, visible in
practice, and rooted in service.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 13: Media Analysis and Documentation

Section 13: Media Analysis and Documentation

Media coverage of Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s ministry and its

potential succession represents a crucial archive for
understanding what was visible, acknowledged, and ultimately
resisted in public view. From the early 1990s through the
mid-2000s, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed was a consistent and
documented presence in national and regional media, especially
in connection with Islamic reform, public theology, and
representation of the American Muslim identity.

A pivotal article by Teresa Watanabe in the *Los Angeles

Times*, titled “Influential Islamic Leader Steps Down”
(September 13, 2003), reported on Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s
resignation from the American Society of Muslims. The article
specifically identified Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed as the
national spokesman and noted him among those being promoted
as potential successors. This public acknowledgment by a major
national outlet underscored his visibility and credibility at the
time of the Imam’s decision.

In August 1999, *The Baltimore Sun* published a feature on

Imam W. Deen Mohammed and his community that included
Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed both textually and
photographically. The article emphasized the reform nature of
the Imam’s work and depicted Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed as a
central, trusted aide. His presence reinforced the idea that
succession—if not formally declared—was practically embodied
through representation and visible proximity.

The 1998 article from *The Baltimore Sun*, “A Journey by

Faith,” also referenced Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed. It
contextualized his position within the broader transition of the
Nation of Islam under Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s leadership,
presenting him as an active and formative figure in shaping the
community’s evolving identity.

Beyond these major articles, publications such as the *Tampa

Tribune*, *Philadelphia Inquirer*, *Chicago Tribune*,
*Washington Post*, and *Toledo Blade* also reported on Imam
W. Deen Mohammed’s ministry during the 1990s and early
2000s. In several instances, Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed was
mentioned in connection with national representation, civic
programs, or interfaith events. Though some references were
brief, their cumulative effect confirms that his public role was
widely acknowledged across mainstream press coverage of the
community.

Following Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s passing in 2008, this

public visibility declined sharply. Most major outlets ceased
coverage, and in the years immediately following, Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed’s name was noticeably absent from
community succession discourse in the media. This reduction in
attention did not reflect a retreat on his part, but rather a shift in
how the community—and its press organs—chose to frame
leadership in the post-Imam era.

In 2020, *Religion News Service* (RNS) published an article

revisiting the legacy of Imam W. Deen Mohammed. It named
Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed as one of the claimants to
succession but described him as a fringe figure. The framing
represented a significant shift in tone from earlier recognitions
and revealed both the community’s disorientation and the
national press’s reduced familiarity with the nuances of Imam W.
Deen Mohammed’s succession trajectory.

By contrast, in 2024, the Islamic media platform *Islamicity*

highlighted a major address delivered by Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed in Detroit. While not explicitly framed as a
succession announcement, the article recognized his theological
clarity, civic grounding, and public continuity with Imam W.
Deen Mohammed’s vision. The speech was treated as a
reassertion of the sacred logic that underpinned the Imam’s
legacy.

The media archive functions here not only as a record of public

acknowledgment but also as a mirror of internal community
tensions over authority, identity, and theological continuity.
From early affirmation to later marginalization and cautious
reemergence, the story told through the press is one of
recognition, resistance, and rediscovery. This reality compels a
return to the documented record to properly assess the continuity
of leadership Imam W. Deen Mohammed intended.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 14: Muslim Journal and Ayesha Mustafaa’s

Editorial Influence

Section 14: Muslim Journal and Ayesha Mustafaa’s Editorial

Influence

The Editorial Gatekeeping That Obscured Imam W. Deen

Mohammed’s Successor This section examines the editorial
conduct of Ayesha Mustafaa during her tenure at Muslim
Journal, focusing on how the paper handled the recognized
public role of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed under the leadership
of Imam W. Deen Mohammed. This is a case study in how
editorial discretion—particularly in faith-based journalism—can
shape public memory, suppress key developments, and obstruct
clarity in matters of succession.

Imam W. Deen Mohammed publicly affirmed Earl Abdulmalik

Mohammed’s role numerous times over the course of more than
fifteen years. He introduced him as his “special assistant and
representative of [his] ministry,” placed him beside him at
national sessions, and stated that he had done “more than any
other person to help me get the correct image of Muslims and
Imam W. Deen Mohammed to America and the world.” These
public declarations were documented in live sessions and
covered by national media.

However, Muslim Journal, under the editorial control of Ayesha

Mustafaa, consistently failed to report on these key affirmations
with the weight they warranted. This failure was not limited to
sporadic omissions. It reflected a sustained editorial stance that
treated Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed as peripheral, despite his
central position in Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s visible ministry.
If Muslim Journal intended to document the Imam’s vision and
movement with integrity, it had an editorial responsibility to
reflect the Imam’s stated priorities. By ignoring or downplaying
these recognitions, the paper distorted the historical record.

A Moment of Editorial Controversy The most serious editorial

breach came during Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s
incarceration, when Muslim Journal published a multi-page
anonymous dossier in its centerfold, condemning him. The article
contained numerous distortions, half-truths, and unsubstantiated
claims. It was signed by several individuals, including Ronald
Shaheed and Yahya Abdullah. Ronald Shaheed later disavowed
having approved the final version. The true author was never
identified, and the editorial team did not require attribution.

What made this incident more damaging was its placement. The
dossier appeared in the center pages typically reserved for Imam
W. Deen Mohammed’s preserved writings. No precedent existed
for publishing an anonymous, multi-page attack on a member of
the community in that space. No opportunity for response was
given to Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed. The decision to publish
the piece violated Islamic ethical norms, including the
prohibitions against slander and public accusation without due
process.

The effect was profound: by combining condemnation with the

Imam’s legacy space, the editorial staff gave the impression that
the attack had institutional legitimacy. This act, more than any
other, marked the point at which many concluded that Muslim
Journal had abandoned its ethical and spiritual trust.
Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s Discomfort with the Editorial
Direction Though Imam W. Deen Mohammed never publicly
removed Ayesha Mustafaa, there is credible evidence that he
expressed discomfort with her editorial handling of important
matters. He reportedly had to correct published
mischaracterizations and grew concerned about how his writings
were being represented. Some who worked closely with him
noted that submissions were edited or delayed in ways that did
not reflect his intent. These moments, while never turned into a
public rebuke, support the view that his message was not always
faithfully transmitted through the editorial gate.

Systemic Suppression and Historical Distortion The suppression

of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s presence in Muslim Journal
was not limited to the dossier. From the 1990s onward, while
Imam W. Deen Mohammed positioned him visibly and publicly,
the newspaper failed to report on major assignments,
international outreach efforts, or public recognitions. National
media—including the Los Angeles Times, Baltimore Sun, and
Tampa Tribune—documented Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s
work beside the Imam. Muslim Journal did not.

After the 2003 resignation, announced by Earl Abdulmalik

Mohammed at the Imam’s request, the newspaper offered no
analysis or acknowledgment of the moment. It failed to explore
the implications of the Imam withdrawing from organizational
leadership and empowering a trusted figure to speak on his
behalf. This absence allowed confusion, reinterpretation, and
misinformation to take root.

Conclusion: Gatekeeping and the Erasure of Succession In the

context of this dissertation, the actions of Muslim Journal
illustrate how editorial silence can obscure spiritual intent. The
failure to document and clarify Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s
trust in Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed directly contributed to the
lack of clarity surrounding succession.

Whether due to personal bias, institutional pressure, or an

aversion to controversy, the editorial decisions made under
Ayesha Mustafaa ultimately distorted the public record and
harmed the community’s ability to understand what was
entrusted to them. This is not a personal condemnation. It is a
documented failure of responsibility. If the historical archive of a
spiritual movement deliberately omits or suppresses the one
whom its leader most visibly and repeatedly empowered, then the
archive itself becomes a source of distortion.

The responsibility now falls on those committed to integrity and

truth to correct the record—and to ensure that what was intended
by Imam W. Deen Mohammed is no longer hidden by editorial
omission.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 15: External Interference — Obstruction,

Erasure, and the Quiet War on Continuity

Section 15: External Interference — Obstruction, Erasure, and

the Quiet War on Continuity

The question of succession in the aftermath of Imam W. Deen

Mohammed’s leadership is not only theological or historical—it
is political. And wherever succession is political, the possibility
of interference cannot be dismissed. In the years before and after
Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s passing, there were visible and
hidden efforts—both internal and external—to suppress,
discredit, or marginalize any clear line of continuity, especially
where it involved Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed. This chapter
documents those efforts—not to indulge in speculation, but to
clarify how spiritual succession, when it carries real substance,
often provokes resistance from those invested in either
institutional control or ideological divergence.

Internal Resistance and Personal Agendas Within the American

Muslim community shaped by Imam W. Deen Mohammed, some
figures resisted the idea that any successor was necessary at all.
Others rejected the idea that Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed could
be that successor, despite years of public recognition. The
reasons ranged from personal rivalry to discomfort with the idea
that someone who had endured prison could inherit the mantle of
moral leadership. Still others feared that acknowledging any
successor would undermine the decentralized philosophy that
Imam W. Deen Mohammed had worked to establish. But this
view fails to distinguish between decentralization of
organizational power and the spiritual centrality of trusted vision.
The Imam decentralized authority—he did not abandon
guidance. He made room for many voices, but he continued to
signal who among them best represented his own. That
signal—when it became too clear—was often met with silencing.

Media Control and Narrative Management As detailed in Section

14, the Muslim Journal played a central role in framing—or
erasing—the public perception of succession. But other
platforms, including national Islamic organizations, educational
forums, and convention spaces, also began omitting references to
Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed in the years following Imam W.
Deen Mohammed’s death. Some events that had once welcomed
him ceased doing so. Individuals once aligned with him publicly
distanced themselves. No explanation was ever formally given.
But the shift was undeniable.

Those who attempted to speak on his behalf were often cautioned

not to “reopen old wounds,” as if the very question of succession
were a source of discord rather than resolution. It became clear
that institutional preservation—not theological integrity—was
now the guiding principle in many leadership circles.

External Disruption and Strategic Distortion Beyond the

community itself, external actors—both foreign and
domestic—had vested interests in undermining the continuity of
Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s voice. Some were Islamic entities
uncomfortable with his reformist reading of the Qur’an and civic
model of Islam. Others were political institutions wary of any
religious leadership that foregrounded moral independence,
Black self-determination, and interfaith credibility.
Imam W. Deen Mohammed was not a local religious figure. His
work had global implications. He redefined the image of
American Muslims, spoke in international interfaith forums, and
presented Islam as a model for moral order within secular
democracies. That vision challenged both Western secularism
and authoritarian religious regimes. The possibility that Imam W.
Deen Mohammed had passed his trust to someone who shared
his reformist edge—yet also carried his father’s sense of
mission—was threatening to both traditionalists and power
brokers. Disrupting that continuity became a matter not of
doctrine, but of influence.

In some cases, this disruption took the form of quiet interference:

influential voices discouraging invitations, recommending
alternative speakers, or suggesting that Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed’s presence would be divisive. In others, the
suppression was more overt, with old accusations resurfaced,
records misrepresented, or alliances quietly severed.

Government Surveillance and Historical Patterns of Suppression

Any honest investigation of external interference must account
for the long and well-documented history of U.S. government
surveillance and disruption of African American
leadership—particularly through the FBI’s COINTELPRO
program under J. Edgar Hoover. Religious leaders, civil rights
figures, and organizations advocating for Black advancement
were often targeted, not because of criminal activity, but because
of their moral influence and potential to mobilize public thought.

Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s message—while peaceful and

rooted in civic values—still posed a challenge to the status quo.
His rejection of both race-based nationalism and blind
assimilation, his insistence on Qur’anic integrity, and his moral
critique of power made him unique—and potentially threatening
to entrenched systems. The idea that he might have entrusted this
moral and theological vision to someone else—particularly
someone already marked by the system through
incarceration—would not have gone unnoticed.

Quiet efforts to isolate, discredit, or erase Earl Abdulmalik

Mohammed from the record follow a familiar historical pattern.

A War Without Declaration No one declared war on the legacy

of Imam W. Deen Mohammed. But a war was waged
nonetheless—through omission, misdirection, and silencing. The
cost of this war was not just reputational; it was ideological. The
community lost not only a chance at continuity, but a model of
leadership that might have guided it more coherently into the
21st century.

Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed did not disappear. He continued

writing, teaching, and speaking. But the platforms that once
affirmed his presence became reluctant to acknowledge
him—even as they continued to invoke the legacy he was
entrusted to protect.

That silence was not neutral. It was engineered. And it continues

to shape the memory—and misremembering—of a critical
chapter in American Islamic history.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 16: Conclusion and Final Reflections

Section 16: Conclusion and Final Reflections

Succession as Vision, Trust, and Historical Responsibility

This dissertation has examined the question: Did Imam W. Deen

Mohammed name a successor? Through a comprehensive
analysis of public declarations, symbolic gestures, community
dynamics, leadership patterns, media documentation, and
verified historical records, the case for Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed as the ideological successor to Imam W. Deen
Mohammed has been made with clarity and scholarly integrity.

What emerges is not a portrait of succession based on formality

or organizational position, but one grounded in vision,
discernment, continuity, and trust. Imam W. Deen Mohammed
operated within a tradition where leadership is not always
announced through titles, but through a combination of public
trust, alignment in message, symbolic delegation, and enduring
consistency under trial. In every one of these dimensions, Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed fulfills the pattern.

The Weight of Evidence

This work has documented: - Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s

public recognitions of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed as his closest
aide and representative; - The symbolic positioning of Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed at critical national events, including his
role in the 2003 resignation announcement and the Ramadan
Session; - The publication of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed’s
works during his prison years that preserved the Imam’s moral
voice and theological lens; - The Qur’anic dream and its
symbolic affirmation of clarity and interpretive trust; - A broader
Qur’anic framework, particularly the Yusuf (Joseph) paradigm,
to understand how moral succession may unfold in the absence
of institutional affirmation; - Suppression, rejection, and
distortion by figures who had once been within the community
but refused to recognize what had been entrusted; - A
reemergence of moral commentary, rooted in Imam W. Deen
Mohammed’s ethics, through platforms such as eamspeaks.com
and public addresses; - Media records—early and recent—that
reflect an evolving public recognition, however fragmented.

Together, these elements affirm not merely that a successor

exists, but that the succession has already occurred—in the
ideological, spiritual, and representative sense.

Succession in the Post-Truth Era

One of the defining challenges of the contemporary moment is

the erosion of clarity. In an era dominated by disinformation,
spiritual confusion, and the commodification of religious
authority, the model of leadership Imam W. Deen Mohammed
left behind demands not replication, but continuation. It requires
an individual able to think with integrity, speak with vision, and
act with the moral weight of Qur’anic principle—beyond
partisanship and personal ambition.

Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed does not need a proclamation to

function in this role. His actions, writings, and endurance under
distortion serve as testimony. His refusal to campaign for
titles—while continuing to speak truthfully, organize educational
platforms, and call for global moral order—aligns with the very
tradition that produced him.

Final Reflections: What Now?

The future of any religious community depends on whether it can

see what it has already been shown. Imam W. Deen Mohammed
once said: “You’ll say, ‘Oh, what are we going to do when I’m
not with you anymore?’ You’ll do the same thing we did when
the Honorable Elijah Muhammad wasn’t with us anymore. Allah
will show you who you should support.”

That line was not theoretical—it was instructional. This

dissertation has sought to answer that instruction, not with
speculation, but with fact, testimony, and consistent moral
framing.

Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed does not represent a departure from

Imam W. Deen Mohammed’s ministry. He represents its
continuation in full alignment.

Succession has already taken place. The question now is whether

the community, the nation, and the world will recognize it—and
respond accordingly.

More at: about.me/farisdfareed

 This is a format adaptation of the original dissertation titled: Did Imam W.
Deen Mohammed Name a Successor? The Case of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed
and the Struggle for Continuity. It remains faithful to the original while being
adapted for accessible, portable distribution.

Chapter 17: Appendices and Supporting Documents

Section 17: Appendices and Supporting Documents

This final section contains supporting documentation that affirms

and expands upon the dissertation’s core argument: that Imam
W. Deen Mohammed did, in fact, identify a
successor—ideologically, interpretively, and morally—in the
person of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed. The appendices provide
reference material, archival content, and historical evidence that
contextualize key events, quotations, and developments analyzed
throughout the dissertation.

Appendix A: Timeline of Key Public Recognitions - 1991: Earl

Abdulmalik Mohammed begins serving publicly alongside Imam
W. Deen Mohammed. - 1996: Private conversation with Imam
W. Deen Mohammed following Saudi Arabia visit. - 1998:
Baltimore Sun article, “A Journey by Faith,” includes reference
to Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed. - 1999: Baltimore Sun publishes
photo and text inclusion of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed. - 2000:
Louisville event; Imam W. Deen Mohammed introduces Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed as “distinguished.” - 2001: National
Convention; Imam W. Deen Mohammed praises his son as the
person “doing the most.” - 2003: Los Angeles Times article by
Teresa Watanabe; public announcement of resignation. - 2004:
Ramadan Session; symbolic gesture involving Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed addressing the community. - 2024: Islamicity
coverage of Detroit address.
Appendix B: Transcript Highlights - Key excerpts from public
speeches by Imam W. Deen Mohammed that reference Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed. - Public declaration at the National
Convention: “He’s doing more than any other person…” - 2003
resignation announcement: “No force of nature… will ever
separate me from Imam W. Deen Mohammed.” - Ramadan
Session microphone exchange. - Interview excerpts with Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed (post-2008) addressing succession and
interpretation.

Appendix C: Media References and Citations - Los Angeles

Times (2003): “Influential Islamic Leader Steps Down” -
Baltimore Sun (1998, 1999): “A Journey by Faith” and
subsequent profile - Religion News Service (2020): Succession
reference and framing of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed -
Islamicity (2024): Public speech analysis - Additional mentions
in: Chicago Tribune, Philadelphia Inquirer, Washington Post,
Tampa Tribune, Toledo Blade

Appendix D: Photographic Documentation - Early childhood

photos of Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed with his father - Public
appearances during national conventions - Photographs
published in major newspapers - Speaking engagements
(2000–2024) - Images from Ramadan Sessions and national
addresses

Appendix E: Tables and Figures - Comparative timeline of media

coverage pre- and post-2008 - Charted development of public
trust moments - Succession arc showing ideological continuity -
Community leadership influence map - List of documented
public recognitions vs. periods of omission
More at: about.me/farisdfareed
 Author Profile: Dr. Faris D. Fareed
Dr. Faris D. Fareed is a researcher of Islamic ethical leadership and
post-charismatic succession in religious movements. His academic
background includes advanced studies in Islamic Governance and Ethics
at the International Islamic University of Malaysia, and Qur’anic Studies
at the Suleymaniye Faculty of Theology in Istanbul.

He currently serves as a senior researcher at the Institute for Sacred

Continuity, an independent initiative focused on preserving, documenting,
and analyzing the moral and intellectual legacies of reformist Muslim
thinkers.

Dr. Fareed’s work focuses on the hidden succession legacy of Imam W.

Deen Mohammed and the symbolic leadership carried forward by Earl
Abdulmalik Mohammed.

For more information, visit his public profile:

https://about.me/farisdfareed

Notable Reference:
“Others are promoting individuals such as Imam Earl Abdulmalik
Mohammed, the group’s national spokesman…” – Los Angeles Times,
Sept. 13, 2003

“Imam Earl Abdulmalik Mohammed… has been released early from

federal prison due to the coronavirus.” – Religion News Service, May
2020

“He’s getting ready to enlarge the picture.” – Imam W. Deen Mohammed,

Public Acknowledgement

This profile accompanies the work: The Unbroken Line