Views on the News - 4-12-2009

America to collapse in 2010
Russian Professor Igor Panarin says that events are continuing to confirm his doomsday prediction first made over 10 years ago, that the United States will completely collapse like the Soviet Union before the end of 2010, and warns that the chaos could begin to unfold in as little as two months. Panarin, doctor of political sciences and professor of the Russian Diplomatic Academy Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told journalists during the unveiling of his new book that President Obama has done nothing to forestall the fast approaching crisis. "Obama is "the president of hope", but in a year there won't be any hope," said Panarin. "He's practically another Gorbachev - he likes to talk but hasn't really managed to do anything. Gorbachev at least had been a secretary of a regional communist party administration, whereas Obama was just a social worker. His mentality is totally different. He's a nice person and talks nicely - but he's not a leader and will take America to a crash. When Americans understand that - it will be like a bomb explosion."

Muslims should pull their money out of Swiss bank accounts
Muslims should consider withdrawing their money from Swiss bank accounts in response to the country's ban on construction of minarets, a Turkish minister said. "I am certain this (vote) will prompt our brothers from Muslim countries who keep their money and investments in Swiss banks to review their decision," said Egemen Bagis, cited by Turkish daily Zaman. Bagis is the chief negotiator for Turkey's European Union accession as well as minister for European affairs.

Dubai's prime companies declared junk
International ratings agency Standard & Poor's said it had cut the credit ratings of six Dubai government-linked companies. S&P said it had taken the move after the likelihood of extraordinary support from the Dubai government appeared "low" after the emirate indicated it would not guarantee the debt of Dubai World currently at $59 billion, its flagship conglomerate. The six Dubai government-related entities (GREs) lowered to junk status were DP World, DIFC Investments, Jebel Ali Free Zone, Dubai Multi Commodities Centre Authority, Dubai Holding Commercial Operations Group and Emaar Properties PJSC. Their credit ratings remain under surveillance and could be downgraded further, the agency said.

French troops bribe Taliban in exchange for safety
French troops deployed in Afghanistan are attempting to bribe Taliban fighters not to attack them, a senior Taliban leader has told Al Jazeera. In an interview, Saif-Allah Jalili, the Taliban commander of the Kabul district, said on Monday that his men have been offered gifts and money by the French soldiers in order to persuade the fighters not to engage their forces. "The French in Sorubi [in Nangarhar province in eastern Afghanistan] tried to send gifts to Taliban fighters and offered them a lot of money in return for not launching attacks targeting the French troops," Jalili said. "But Taliban fighters replied by rejecting everything and by strongly demanding the departure of the French troops and all other troops from our country, which they invaded by force," he said. The Taliban claim comes only a month after Italian troops in the same area were accused of paying off Taliban fighters to keep the area calm.

Obama's new strategy points to an expansions of America's war against Pakistan
Obama's Afghan strategy is quickly turning into an official proclamation of war on Pakistan. ‘What happens in Pakistan ... will do more to determine the outcome in Afghanistan than any increase in troops or shift in strategy,' said Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Opening a hearing on Afghan strategy, Kerry, a Democrat, said that it is the ‘presence of al-Qaida in Pakistan, its direct ties to and support from the Taliban in Afghanistan and the perils of an unstable, nuclear-armed Pakistan that drive our mission'. Sen. Richard Lugar, the committee's top Republican, chimed in, saying the president and his administration ‘must justify their plan not only on the basis of how it will affect Afghanistan, but also on how it will impact our efforts to promote a much stronger alliance with Pakistan.' Lugar said ‘it is not clear how an expanded military effort in Afghanistan addresses the problem of Taliban and al-Qaida safe havens across the border in Pakistan.' Both Gates and Mullen sought to underscore the threat that al-Qaida poses in Pakistan, which maintains its own arsenal of nuclear weapons. Gates said he considered the dangers to be greater than they were 18 months ago because al-Qaida has become ‘deeply involved' with Taliban forces operating inside Pakistan that are trying to destabilize the government there. Mullen said al-Qaida's pursuit of nuclear weapons and interest in Pakistan is ‘extraordinarily dangerous.'

4th December 2009

Chapter 6: The Legal Ruling [al-Hukm al-Shar’i]

The following is the draft english translation from the Usul Al-Fiqh masterpiece of the Arabic book الشخصية الاسلاميَة الجزء الثالث (The Islamic Personality Volume 3 ) by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani. Please refer to the original Arabic for accurate meanings.


Allah addresses the legally responsible persons [mukallafīn] with the entirety of the Islamic Shari’ah, comprising both its foundations and branches, that is, the beliefs and the rules related to actions. However the science of Usūl al-Fiqh is not concerned with the foundations (beliefs). Rather it is concerned with the branches (legal rulings related to actions). Further it is concerned with the legal rulings related to actions from the perspective of the bases upon which the rulings are built, not from the perspective of the various rules and issues a ruling contains. Hence it is necessary to appreciate the reality of the legal ruling [hukm shar’i] when studying the legal evidences.

The scholars of usūl have defined the legal ruling as ‘the address of the legislator related to the actions of the servants in terms of compulsion [iqtidā’], choice [takhyīr], or declaration [wad’].

The legislator is Allah, the Exalted, and hence the ‘address of the legislator’ means the address of Allah. Further, although the address of Allah directs the listener towards certain rules and principles, the address is the original meaning itself not what it directs towards. Thus the very meaning which the words and compounds denote is the address.

The reason for using ‘the address of the legislator’ instead of ‘the address of Allah’ is to include the Sunnah and the Ijma’ al-Sahabah, both of which also signify the address of Allah. The use of ‘the address of Allah’ may give the wrong impression that the Qur’an alone is intended; yet the Sunnah too is revelation and as such is the address of the legislator, and the Ijma’ al-Sahabah reveals an evidence from the Sunnah so it too is the address of the legislator.

The reason for using actions of the ‘servants’, instead of ‘mukallifīn’ is so as to include the rulings related to the child and the insane like the zakat due on their wealth.

The meaning of the legal ruling being related to compulsion [iqtidā’] is its being related to a request [talab], because the meaning of the word iqtidā’ is talab. The request is of two types: the request to act, and the request to abstain. If the request to act is decisive [jāzim] then it denotes the obligation [ījāb, fard], and if it is non-decisive then it denotes the recommendation [mandūb, sunnah, nāfilah]. If the request to abstain is decisive then it denotes the prohibition [tahrīm, hadhr], and if it is non-decisive then it denotes the reprehensibility [karahah]. As for choice [takhyīr] it denotes the permissibility.

As for the address of declaration [wad’], or the address related to the action of the servants in terms of declaration, then it is the making of a thing a cause [sabab] or preventative factor [mani’] etc. like the sunset being the necessitating factor for the presence of the prayer, and thereby being the cause [sabab] of prayer, and like the impurity being a preventative factor for prayer. Hence these things, whilst they are signs [‘alamah] for the rulings, they are also rulings in their own right. Allah has made the moving of the Sun from its zenith [zawāl] the sign for the presence of Dhuhr, and the presence of impurity a sign for the invalidity of prayer. There is no meaning to the zawāl being necessitating except its being a request to perform the prayer, nor is there a meaning to the impurity invalidating except its being a request to abstain from impurity. As such these things in their reality are an address from the Legislator.

Hence the definition of the hukm shar’i as ‘the address of the legislator related to the actions of the servants’ is both comprehensive and exclusive [jāmi mani’]. With its reference to the relation to compulsion or choice it covers the five rulings: wājib, mandub, harām, makruh, mubah, and by its reference to the declaration it covers the sabab, shart, mani’, sahih, batil, fāsid, rukhsah and azimah. On the basis of this definition the address of the Legislator is of two types: the address of responsibility [khitab al-taklīf] and the address of declaration [khitab al-wad’].

Are the contracts, transactions and court verdicts before the establishment of the Khilafah considered valid?

The contracts and transactions that were concluded, together with the courts' verdicts that were confirmed and executed before the establishment of the Khilafah are considered valid between their parties till the end of their execution before the Khilafah. Judiciary in the Khilafah would not repeal them and nor start them again. No new lawsuits would be accepted regarding them after the establishment of the Khilafah.


Two cases would be excluded of that:

1. If the case that was confirmed and its execution was finished still have a continuous effect that contradicts Islam.

2. If the case relates to somebody that hurt Islam and Muslims.

The evidence for not repealing the contracts, transactions and lawsuits that were confirmed and whose implementation finished before the establishment of the Khilafah, and nor raising them again in other than the above mentioned two cases is that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم did not return back after the conquest of Makkah to his house from which he emigrated.

Uqayl ibn Abi Talib had, according to the laws of Quraish, inherited the houses of his relatives that embraced Islam and emigrated. He had disposed of them and sold them, including the house of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم. It was said at that time to the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم: "In which house are you going to stay?" He صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "Has Uqayl left any of our houses?" [Bukhari, Sahih, #3058]

In another narration, he said: "Did Uqayl leave to us any house?" He had then sold the houses of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, but the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم did not repeal them. The hadith is reported by Al-Bukhari through Usama ibn Zayd, he said: "That he said on the day of the conquest, ‘O Messenger of Allah, where do you want to stay tomorrow?' The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, ‘Did Uqayl leave us any house?'" [Bukhari, Sahih, #3058].

It was also narrated that when Abu Al-‘As ibn Al-Rabi' embraced Islam and emigrated to Al-Madinah, his wife Zainab had then embraced Islam and emigrated after Badr, while he remained Mushrik in Makkah, the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم returned to him his wife, without renewing her marriage contract to him. This was recognition of the marriage contract concluded at Jahiliyyah time. Ibn Majah reported through Ibn Abbas (ra): "That the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم sent back his daughter, i.e. Zainab to Abu Al-‘As ibn Al-Rabi' after two years based on her first marriage contract". [Tirmidhi, Sunan, #1142]

With regard to raising the lawsuits that have continuous effect contradictory to Islam, the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم had cancelled the usury left to Abbas on the people after they came to the Islamic State, and only gave their actual capital. This means after dar ul-Islam, the usury left upon them would become cancelled usury. Abu Dawud narrated through Suleiman ibn Amru from his father, he said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم say in the farewell pilgrimage:

"Behold! Any usury from the days of Jahiliyyah is cancelled. You are only entitled of your capitals, where you do not wrong (others) and nor are you wronged."

Moreover, those who were married to more than four wives according to the laws of Jahiliyyah were obliged after dar ul-Islam to hold to four only. Al-Tirmidhi reported through Abdullah ibn ‘Umar that Ghaylan ibn Salamah Al-Thaqafi embraced Islam while having ten wives in Jahiliyyah, and they embraced Islam together with him. "The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم commanded him to choose four of them."

Therefore, the contracts that have continuous effect contradictory to Islam, such effects are removed after the establishment of the Khilafah. This removal is obligatory.

If for example a Muslim woman was married to a Christian before Islam, then after the establishment of the Khilafah this contract is cancelled in accordance with the rules of shara.

In regards to starting lawsuits related to those who harmed Islam and the Muslims, this is permitted because the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, when he conquered Makkah declared the blood of some people to be shed with impunity as they used to harm Islam and Muslims in Jahiliyyah. He asked that their blood be shed even if they hung themselves to the curtains of the Ka'bah. This is despite the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم saying: "Islam removes that which comes before it", as narrated by Ahmad and Tabarani from Amr ibn Al-As. This means the one that harmed Islam and Muslims are excluded from this hadith.

Since the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم forgave some of them later on, such as his forgiving to Ikrimah ibn Abu Jahl, therefore the Khalifah is allowed to start a lawsuit against these or forgive them. This applies to those who used to torture Muslims for saying the truth or those who defamed Islam. The hadith: "Islam removes that which comes before it", [Ahmad, Musnad, 4/199] does not apply to them, for they are excluded of it, and a case is started against them according to the view of the Khalifah.

In other than these two cases the contracts concluded before the establishment of the Khilafah, together with the transactions and lawsuits are not cancelled and nor started as long as they were confirmed and their implementation finished before the establishment of the Khilafah.

Thus, if a man for example was sentenced with two years of imprisonment for a charge of breaking the doors of a school, and he finished the two years before the establishment of the Khilafah and he left the prison. Then after the establishment of the Khilafah he wanted to start a case against the one that imprisoned him for that charge because he views that he did not deserve imprisonment. Such a case is not accepted, because it happened, and a sentence was given for it and its implementation finished before the establishment of the Khilafah. He has to refer this matter to Allah سبحانه وتعالى, anticipating reward from Him سبحانه وتعالى.

If however, this man was sentenced for ten years, of which two had finished, and the Khilafah was established; in this case the Khalifah is allowed to examine the case, either by cancelling the sentence of punishment from its origin, thus letting him come out of the prison as free of the charge, or to be satisfied with the period he already spent, and he comes out of the prison. It is also possible to study the remaining time of the sentence taking into consideration the relevant divine rules and the interest of the citizens, particularly the issues related to the rights of the people, such that it removes the discord.

The above chapter is taken from the book:

The Institutions of State in the Khilafah in Ruling and Administration

(A translation of Ajhiza Dawlat-al-Khilafah)