Saturday, November 18, 2006

Moderation and Extremism

The following is a translation from Arabic.

The war of The West against Islam assumes different guises and includes various spheres, which are all summed up in the undertaking of whatever distances Islam from the reality of life. The campaign was not limited to distorting its image, destroying its Khilafah, disparaging its rules and depicting Islam as something from the past. Rather, the campaign targets anything that can bring it back to the leadership of the world. They constantly fear Islam. That is why their plotting never ceases, lest the carpet be pulled from under their feet, and if the Muslims came back to their glory.

The West looks upon the Muslims as a nation that lives by her Islam, their deen is a universal deen, which is fit and suitable for mankind, and their souls constantly look for unity. The different strategic areas of their States will become the place of one strategic State, which will hold the waists of all the continents and tower above them. They are sitting on huge resources more abundant than the needs of a super power, thereby making it a leading State. Their numbers are close to a third of the world population. Their worry and concern, if Allah (swt) gives them victory, is not the killing and plundering of the resources of the lands they open; rather it is the opening of hearts and bringing the people - all people - from the darkness of kufr to the guidance of Islam. It is in the conviction of every one of them that bringing any person into Islam is more valuable to him than the world and what it contains.

That is why Islam has witnessed many plots against its rules and the sincere ones, working to remove The West’s effect on its people and others. This plotting takes place in proportion with the danger they feel of it.

If Islam had not been the true deen of Allah (swt) then it would have been wiped out, vanished and completely ruined. However, the Iraadah (Will) of Allah continues and His mashee’ah dominates. The Muslims have remained loyal to their deen in the worst period of their decline, though the West has succeeded in making their criteria erroneous, and their concepts wrong and their mentality corrupt. That is because it realised from its first crusade that Islam is entrenched in the hearts of the Muslims and it is far stronger than any attempt that may try to uproot it. That is why they changed their plans in their second crusade, from whose woes we still suffer: It built its plans to distance the Muslims from their deen, and spread their concepts, convictions, and intellectual criteria, so as to ensure their material control. Thus they first created the intellectual subservience to it and then they followed that up with its material domination. Then they installed rulers and surrounded them with a corrupt intellectual and political medium. Then they began to link the States with it, by making the policy of the States in the world proceed in one direction, to realise its interests, and by turning the world into one shared company in which the west is the financier and producer, while the other States form in it the working and consumer class. Then it covered the world with huge media networks, in which the media networks of other States were subordinate to theirs. With this they intended that we only read what they write, hear what they transmit, see what they disseminate and only talk about and understand matters in light of what they wish. It is a new, developing colonialism. It is more severe and worse than the old colonialism. The old colonialism used to occupy man from outside, whilst the new occupies his inside half and his outside half, in order to make the subservience to it absolute, without being threatened by anything.

Even when it comes to our deen, The West wants to make us understand our deen in its own way. The one who deviates from this viewpoint, then it mobilises its media against him. Thus, it depicts Islam in an abnormal way, intending to violate the traditions, disagree with the norms and break the consensus. It labels Islam with extremism, terrorism, fundamentalism and bigotism. It describes the deen as an enemy to humanity, which prefers darkness and living in the darkness. And it is aggressive, inciting in its approach animosity and hatred. After distorting the picture and changing the facts, the regimes begin to attack it, considering that it deserves it. In doing all this, they rely on the ignorance of the people about the facts, and the help of some scholars, who bless everything that The West does. However, the awakening we see today has began to flow in the body of the Ummah, which has made their task against the deen difficult, and has made the Ummah look at The West, the rulers and these Ulama’ as the same; as a Shaytan and the rulers as the followers of Shaytan, and that those scholars would not have reached their positions, except in proportion to how much they have foiled the dignity of the deen before the rulers, and they are the scholars of decline, and they will come to an end when the decline comes to an end. The period of the correct Islamic revival has its own scholars who might be untidy in their appearance, but God fearing and honest.

Today we are at a stage where the West and the rulers live in the actual fear of Islam’s return. That is why we see them sensitive to every Islamic call posing as a danger to them, working to contain it and leveling all sorts of charges against it, using media tricks and propaganda against it and employing the services of the Ulama’ to attack it. Hence, they have labelled every Islamic movement that only calls for Islam, as extremist and terrorist. Muslim scholars, and nationalist and patriotic writers have written books and given lectures calling for casting aside extremism and inviting moderation. All of them start off from one standpoint regarding this issue and that standpoint is that of The West only. If there were not Muslim scholars who participate in this battle and try to give The West’s stance legitimacy and an acceptable face, we would have not taken upon ourselves the task of response to them. This is because the other people have no weight in the sight of the Ummah, their position is that of the rulers. Indeed, their attack may even backfire. Even those scholars themselves began to be isolated from the Ummah, and the Ummah began to turn her back to them, due to their frequent justifications that carry no sign of truth, and their Fatawa that deviate from the regulated Shar’ee principles, and in their final stages they did not only start to contradict an Islamic understanding, but to suspend Shar’ee texts, upon whose authenticity and adherence (in action) the Ummah are agreed. Some of these Fatawa have reached the point that they enjoin the munkar (evil) and forbid the ma’roof (good), may Allah save us from that! The zeal displayed by such scholars, when they present their thoughts, which are alien to Islam, and novel to Islam, is not to please Allah (swt) but to please the rulers and their masters. When they show concern for the Muslims and the interests of the Islamic da’wah in their discussions, the Ummah have come to realise the error of such thoughts and the deviation of those who advocate them.

Now, after this introduction that was necessary to understand the truth behind the proposal of the issue of ‘extremism and moderation’, we must discuss the subject from an Islamic viewpoint, so that the Muslims can understand the truth without any ambiguity, since emotion alone is not enough to define the correct stance. As usual, we shall deal with this subject according to the Shar’ee principles, so as to be in harmony with the basis of Islam, which is the Islamic ‘Aqeedah.
Islam has come to treat the human being a whole. Thus, it deals with his relationship with himself, via the akhlaaq (morals), mat’umaat (foodstuffs) and malbousaat (clothing). It deals with his relationship with other people, via the mu’amalaat (societal transactions) and ‘uqubaat (punishments). It also deals with his relation with his Creator, via the ‘Aqaa’id (beliefs) and ‘ibadaat (worships). That is why Islam is comprehensive in its solutions for every action of the human being. It is a comprehensive thought that can give an answer for everything that relates to the affairs of life.

Moreover, the structure of Islam is complete and integrated, established on a basis from which every solution emanates and upon which every thought is built. That is why the concepts, convictions and criteria of Islam are all from the same nature as its basic thought. As an explanation of this, Islam is established on the basis of the Imaan of the Muslim in Allah, Who is al-Khaaliq (the Creator), and al-Mudabbir (the One who manages the affairs); and that man is weak, dependent, needy, deficient and limited and unable to give solutions. That is why He (swt) sent His Messenger (saw) so as to teach the people who Allah is, al-Ma’bood (the One worthy of worship) and how He (swt) should be worshipped and what the presence and absence of the ‘ibaadah entails, in terms of thawaab (reward) and ‘iqaab (punishment) in the Hereafter. This results in the Muslim acquiring a criterion for all his actions, which is the criterion of Halaal and Haraam. Thus his mind functions not as an arbitrator on the legislative texts, nor to legislate together with the texts; rather it functions only to understand what the texts indicate. The texts that give solutions are from Allah (swt). The task of the human being is to understand the texts, which he must adhere to. He may get it right or make a mistake in understanding what Allah (swt) wants, but in both cases he is rewarded on condition that he complied with the Shar’ee method of Ijtihaad. This explains the great concern of the Muslims in establishing the authenticity of the texts, which resulted in the ‘ilm al-Hadeeth (science of Hadith); and their deep concern for understanding the texts that resulted in the science of Usul al-Fiqh. Some of its principles were laid down, such as ‘Allah is the Haakim (judge)’, ‘the basis of actions and things is the adherence to the Shar’ee evidence’, and ‘pretty is what the Shar’a says is pretty, and ugly is what the Shar’a says is ugly’,’Good is what pleases Allah and bad is what angers Him’. We see as well that the Muslim believes his happiness is the attainment of Allah’s Good Pleasure, and his tranquillity and stability rest on the satisfaction of his instincts and organic needs according to his belief in Allah (swt) and adherence to His Shar’a. Thus, we see the structure of Islam complete and perfect, where all of its thoughts are in harmony and established on one basis. Whatever this basis approves of is taken otherwise, it is rejected.

Whatever applies to Islam as an ideology applies also to the capitalist thought, because it is an ideological thought, and its intellectual structure is homogeneous, so either it is taken as a whole or it is rejected as a whole. The idea of separating the deen from life represents the basis from which its solutions emanate and on which all its thoughts are built. The idea of separating the deen from life, which was established on the compromise solution, led to the belief that man is master over himself. In order that he can be master over himself, any guardianship over him must be removed, a matter that cannot be achieved except by letting him practice the four freedoms by himself. Thus the idea of freedoms arose, which has a specific meaning to him; to be the master over himself means that he should strive to secure his fundamental needs according to his own views, without the control of any external viewpoint, whether it is from a religion or otherwise. This resulted in the idea of Democracy. The one who embraces the idea of separating the deen from life considers his happiness to be attained when he attains the optimum level of sensual gratification. So whatever his mind comprehends as an interest (because his mind is the legislator), became the purpose of his actions.

When the thought is homogeneous, it does not accept anything to be mixed in it. The mixing, in the Shar’ee meaning is Shirk, whether it is kufr or a sin.

Just as Islam does not accept Democracy, because Democracy is the ruling of the people, whilst the judgement in Islam is for the Shara’; likewise the Capitalist thought does not accept Islam to assume the power, because that would mean the abolition of Democracy and all the thoughts that result from it. Hence, we see The West fighting the radical Islamic calls and the Islamic movements that are working to assume the power. The West views these as a danger to it, and it would destroy it from the basis. From this standpoint The West fights them and commits aggression against them, and views them as its mortal enemy, and charges them with various labels. It labels them as fundamentalist, because they build on principles that do not recognise its existence; and extremist because they refuse to deal with it, for there are no common matters between them; and bigoted because they do not show regard to its call and do not consider its existence. If we were to examine the matter, we would see that what it labels others with, is what it is wholly engaged in itself, and it can be described with what it describes others. It terms of The West’s standpoint, it is considered fundamentalist because it builds on a basis, which it believes in and does not accept any other basis to be rival to it, although the Democracy they advocate permits others to assume the power, as long as the people select it. It is also considered extremist, terrorist and bigoted, because it does not respect the existence of political Islam, nor deal with it, and nor is it possible to meet with it over common matters. How many times has The West contradicted its ideology, and plunged itself in what it portrayed the others as? What kind of Democracy is this, which cancels the elections in order to impose instead of it the dictatorship of rulers, while in its view, this is the way that reflects the view of the people?
Therefore, when we wish to pass a judgemant on an idea as being correct or erroneous, we must refer it to its basis, examine it and judge it through that basis. It is not possible to examine any partial thought via the basis of another idea. We cannot say, for example, that happiness in Islam must be based on obtaining the optimum level of sensual gratification. Nor can we say that the Muslim can believe in the freedoms The West believes in, because Islam does not approve or agree of that. The one who accepts Islam as a basis, he must accept whatever emanates from it, and take Islam as a whole, because leaving some of it is like leaving the whole. He (swt) says;

“Do you believe in a part of the scripture and reject a part? Then what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of this world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be consigned to the most grievous torment.” [TMQ 2:85]

From this standpoint we reject the view of the western states that Islam is a deen of moderation and that it rejects extremism. It is a word of truth but with an evil aim, because the West proceeds from its corrupt basis.

Thus tatarruf (extremism), ghulou (excess), israf (extravagance) or ifrat (immoderation) are words that have Shar’ee meanings; if a Muslim disagreed with them, he will fall into sin. Likewise, i’tidal (moderation), iqtisad (adoption of a middle path), istiqamah (straightness) and wasatiyyah (moderation) have their own Shar’ee meanings, which the Muslim must adhere to. The same applies to tafreet (negligence) and tasahul (carelessness). When we wish to know the rule of the Shar’a about them, we cannot proceed from concepts and criteria the capitalist believes in, in order to judge on them. This is Haraam. This also serves the West and its thought, and makes a reference to other than Islam when judging on Islam and its concepts.

There are many Shar’ee rules that the Muslim must undertake, otherwise he will be sinful if he leaves them, but the West considers them as extremism, fanatacism and and terrorism. Things such as Jihad in the path of Allah (swt), working to establish the Khilaafah, enjoining the ma’roof (good) and forbidding the munkar (evil), which include the rulers; opposition to kufr, carrying of the da’wah, rejecting Democracy, prohibiting the dealing with riba (usury), women wearing Hijaab, and many other such obligations that the Muslim must adhere to. Are we allowed to judge on these matters through the stinking corrupt western thought, which did not bring any good to its followers, so how can it bring any goodness to others? Moreover, are the Muslims allowed to advocate what the West advocates?

Thus, we must reject the West’s idea of extremism and moderation. We must reject the West’s interference in the affairs of our deen. That is why this discussion did not proceed from a Shar’ee standpoint from the very beginning. Rather it is a political stance, used to entrench a direction in the Ummah suitable for the West. It is discussion that relates to the continuation of the colonisation of peoples minds.

Today, we must move to understanding the opinion of Islam regarding this subject from a Shar’ee standpoint, which serves the da’wah and draws us closer to Allah (swt).

Al-mughaalaah (the extremism) or ghulou (excess) is increase and exaggeration. Mughaalaah in religiosity is strictness and rigidity in exceeding the limit ordered and decreed by the Shar’a. It is also called Ifraat. In contrast to mughaalaah is the tafreet (negligence), derived from the word ‘farrata’; in the matter ‘Fartan’, meaning to fall behind, waste, and show weakness in it. Tafreet in the deen means the negligence in its rules, wasting its rights, and showing weakness in performing its duties. From this arises the statement ‘laa ifraat wa laa tafreet fil Islam’, meaning there is neither exaggeration nor negligence in Islam.

As for iqtisaad (mediatory position) it is tawassut (middle positioning), i’tidal (moderation) rushd (forthrightness), and istiqaamah (straightness). The mu’tadil in the deen is the one who adheres to the order of Allah (swt) and does not deviate from it towards ifraat or tafreet. He (swt) said;

“There are from among them people who follow a middle course (ie practise iqtisaad), but many of them do evil deeds.” [TMQ 5:66] The tafseer is that it is an Ummah mu’tadilah, following the order of her Lord ie adhering to the middle course, which Allah (swt) ordered. Al-Fayoomi said in his ‘al-Misbaah al-Muneer’; “Qasada fil Amr qasdan means he took the middle course, sought for the most relevant and did not go beyond the limit”.

The one who examines these definitions will understand that the Muslim is required to adhere to the hudood (limits) of Allah and not overstep them. He should also be mu’tadilan ie mustaqeeman (upright) on His order. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said; “Say: ‘I believed in Allah and then istaqeem (remain straight) on the path.’” [Reported by Muslim and others], ie adhere to what Allah (swt) has ordered and refrain from that which He has forbidden you. ‘Fastaqim’ here means ittaqi (fear (Allah)) and hence the saying of Allah (swt) came to clarify the meaning; “And istaqim (stand firm and straight) as you are commanded.” [TMQ 42:15].

Thus, Allah is the One Who commands and the Muslim is the one who is obedient and adheres to the command. The Muslim is not able to know the path of Taqwa and the way to straightness by himself. If he follows himself, then he has followed his whims, and the one who followed his whims has deviated. Therefore there is no istiqaamah except with the following what Allah (swt) has ordered and restricting oneself to it alone, and not overstepping it, whether by doing more than one is required to do or falling short of it. In order to understand this, we must refer as usual, to the basis.

The Muslim believes in Allah (swt) and believes in what Islam has brought, in terms of solutions, that agree with his fitrah (natural disposition) that Allah (swt) has created in him. This is because this fitrah is from the Creator who created it, ordained its attributes, and created what is good for it. At the same time, he believes that what other religions and ideologies have, in terms of solutions, are deficient, erroneous and deviant, they cause misery and do not bring man happiness. That is either because they are the handiwork of man who is unable, needy, weak, hasty and limited, whose mind is not able to encompass his reality as a human being and consequently is unable to provide solutions; or they are divine in origin, but they have come for specific peoples and not for all; in addition to the fact that man’s action has reached them in fabrication and change.

That is why Islam is distinguished from other ideologies and religions as being a divine deen, which deals with all actions of man and gives solutions in such a manner that ensures happiness in both worlds. “Whoever follows My Guidance shall neither go astray, nor fall into distress and misery. But whosoever turns away from My Reminder; verily for him is a life of hardship, and We shall raise him up blind on the Day of Resurrection. He will say: ‘O my Lord! Why have you raised me up blind, while I had sight before.’ (Allah) will say: ‘Like this, Our Ayat (proofs and evidences) came unto you, but you disregard them, and so this Day, you will be neglected (in the Hell-Fire, away from Allah’s Mercy).’” [TMQ 20:124-126]. Thus, the one who does not follow the guidance of Allah (swt) in this world, is blind and has deviated from the right path and has abandoned the truth.

Also, Allah (swt) has preserved this deen for us from being lost and has prevented the hand leaning towards change and fabrication of its texts. He (swt) said; “Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (ie the Qur’an) and surely, We will guard it.” [TMQ 15:9]. However He (swt) did not prevent the understanding of people from deviating. Preservation and protection of the texts is a proof from Allah (swt) against the people. As for the people, they can go astray and deviate. They can interpret the texts with meanings the texts do not accept, they can add things and take things away; but this is in understanding and not in the texts of the Qur’an. Thus, the Muslim must be of good Imaan, strong adherence (to the Shar’ee rules) and firm and straight on the command of Allah, the All-Knowing All-Informed, from which the believer will not deviate an inch.

It is Islam that decides, and the Muslim believes in what Islam has decided. Man as a whole is not able to legislate, no matter how intelligent he is, or the depth of experience he has, or the strength of his Imaan. In the process of legislation, man must submit to the texts, even if he is Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq. Perhaps this is what he meant, when he stated in his first speech after assuming the reigns of the Khilafah; “Obey me as long as I obey Allah regarding you, and if I disobey (Allah) then I have no right of obedience over you. For indeed I am a follower and not an innovator”, in adherence to the saying of the Messenger (saw); “Follow and do not innovate, for you were given what is enough for you.”

This is something we find in the Muslim and do not find in the thoughts of others, who try to solve problems of man themselves; because Islam is fundamentally different from them.
Accordingly, the Muslims are obliged to adhere and not be defeated and they should follow rather than innovate.

If we look at the state of Muslims towards this deen, from the beginning of its revelation on the noble Messenger (saw) until today, we will find that the love of the deen in some Muslims had exceeded everything else. Some took their own view that they are able to worship Allah (swt) in a stronger manner. They might look down upon the correct and regulated worship of others, because they see themselves as able to undertake more than what the Shar’a requires from them. They took themselves to extremes in terms of the amount of worship. They might also invent a new method (of worship) for which no daleel (evidence) has come, being led by what his nafs (whims and desires) wants. The matter may exceed the bounds, such that he wants to impose it on others, and he portrays the one who does not respond to him as deficient (in his worship). We see this person rely on the Shar’ee evidences for everything he says or does, with some strictness in understanding, and rigidity in opinion. This is Haraam, even if it ensues from the love of Allah (swt) and His deen, because it constitutes changing of the deen and exceeding the limit set by the All-Wise Legislator. Thus, Allah is the One Who has created us, and we do not encompass Him in knowledge, and nor do we know the reality of His Essence, or know which worship is obliged on us; rather, He (swt) encompasses everything. Since we desire the Good Pleasure of Allah, then nothing pleases Him except that we stand firm and straight on His command. He (swt), drawing our attention to His Knowledge, regarding this issue says; “Should not He Who has created know? And He is the most Kind and Courteous, the All-Aware.” [TMQ 67:14]. Al-Bukhari, reported from ‘Aisha (ra); Rasool Allah (saw) did something as a form of concession, but some people declined to follow him in that. The Prophet (saw) got knowledge of that, so he praised Allah (swt) and said, “What is the matter with some people, who decline from (feel above of) something that I do? By Allah, I am more knowledgeable than them of Allah, and more than them in fear of Him.” Here comes the warning against the excess, and the command to enter into Islam, and drink (take) from it gently. Al-Bukhari reported from the Rasool (saw) that he said, “The deen is easy. Nobody dealt harshly with the deen, save it defeated him. So follow the right course and close as possible. Pass the glad tidings. Make use of the ghudwah (the early morning after fajr). Travel early and come back by evening, and use some of the duljah (early hours of the night, in travel).” In another narration, “Come closer (to the straight path), travel early and come by evening, and use some of the early hours of night. Follow the middle course, follow the middle course, you can then reach (the aim).”

Regarding the good intention, which forms the impetus for strictness and excess, al-Bukhari and Muslim report from Anas (ra) concerning a group of people who, upon being informed about the worship of the Messenger (saw), viewed theirs as little. So they said, “How far we are from Rasool Allah (saw), for Allah (swt) has forgiven all his sins.” So they pledged together to spend nights in qiyaam (prayer), fast all the days, and isolate (from relationship with) women. The Rasool (saw) said to them: “Are you the people who said so and so? Indeed I fear Allah more than you, and observe Taqwa to Allah more than you. But I fast and break fasting. I pray and sleep (at night), and I marry women”, and he ended his hadith by saying, “So whoever turned away from my Sunnah (way), he does not belong to me.”

This indicates Allah (swt) does not accept any actions except those legislated by Him. What man adds or invents is not considered drawing close to Allah (swt). Abu Dawud reported in his Sunan about a man who asked the Messenger of Allah (saw); “O Messenger of Allah (saw), how is it if a man fasts all the (days of the) time?” The Rasool (saw) said; “He (is as if he) did not fast, and did not break fast.” Imam Ahmad reported from Rasool Allah that he (saw) said, to the one who told him that his mother nadharat (vowed) to Allah to make Hajj on foot. “Order her to ride, for Allah has no need for her walking.” Al-Bukhari also reported from Ibn Abbas, who said, “While the Prophet (saw) was making Khutbah (speech), they saw a man standing. The Prophet (saw) asked about him. They said ‘Abu Israel nadhara (vowed) to Allah that he stands and does not sit down, he does not seek a shadow (for shade), does not speak, and he fasts. The Prophet (saw) said; ‘Order him to speak, let him seek shade, to sit, and complete his fasting.”

What indicates that the way of excess leads to destruction is the saying of the Rasool (saw) in what was reported by Muslim; “Al-Mutanattinoon (stubborn ones) will perish.” He said that three times. Ahmad, al-Nasa’i and Ibn Majah narrated, with the words reported by Ibn Majah, “O people. Beware of ghulou (excess) in the deen. Indeed what destroyed those before you is the ghulou (excess) in the deen.”

What has been said about strictness also applies to the one who neglects his duties. Thus he believes in the deen in origin, but neglects his duties, depends on his wishes, commits the grave sins and promises himself with repentence before his death, as if he knows the ghayb (unseen) of his ajal (life-term). This is Haraam. The Muslim is rather required to adopt Islam completely and with haste, and not accept anything but the best obedience; otherwise his behaviour is considered deviation from the straight path of Allah (swt).

Just as Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw) warn the Muslims of excess and exaggeration as individuals, He (swt) also warns them of this, as groups, States and ‘ulema. Today, we see many Muslims from the da’wah carriers and their scholars, proceeding from the love of Islam, wishing to give the image of the deen as being sublime, easy and free of difficulty, going too far in this regard. They cross the bounds and deviate from the straight line drawn by the Messenger (saw), neglecting many of its ahkaam, and coming out with opinions that have no connection to the texts of Islam. They did all of this just to give an image of Islam as agreeing with the time and moving with the reality, until they took this matter to the point of suspending Shar’ee texts, upon which the Ummah agreed to adhere. Not to mention the interpreting away of some other texts. They came to the view that the murtadd (apostate) is not killed, despite the saying of the Messenger (saw); “Whosoever changes his deen, kill him.” [Reported by Bukhari and Ahmad], under the pretext that the circumstance and the reality in which the Messenger (saw) said this differs from our circumstance and our reality. This was done so as to harmonise this position with the position of the West, which advocates freedom of religion. They came to take the view that it is allowed for the woman to assume the position of Imaamah, despite the hadith of the Messenger (saw); “No people will ever succeed, if they appoint a women as ruler.” [Reported by Bukhari, Ahmad, Tirmizi, Nasa’i], under the pretext that this hadith was said regarding a specific incident and cannot be generalised. They did this in order to give the image that Islam respects women; according to the view of The West. In addition they gave permission to deal with usury, under the pretext that it is unavoidable in the pressing environment of international relations.

All of this leads to the loss of the rights of Islam, and shows that Islam is unable to take on the affairs of life. This weakness that they display is in fact their own weakness and not the weakness of Islam. What stands behind tafreet (neglect) is the same issue that stands behind ifraat (excess); ignorance of the deen and ignorance of man. That is why, in the deen, those two types of people destroy themselves (a type that goes into excess, and a type that neglects), both of whom are controlled by their desires. The first wishes to please his wilfulness, and the second goes along with his soul to please the people, far away from seeking to please Allah (swt).
Towards these two positions, we are obliged to adhere to the order of Allah (swt), without excess or neglect. It is from this standpoint that we understand the saying of Allah (swt); “Thus We have made you a balanced nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger (saw) be a witness over you.” [TMQ 2:143]. In other words, Allah (swt) has made this Ummah a just witness over mankind, just as the Messenger (saw) is a witness over the Ummah. Owing to this, the Ummah becomes the best and most honourable Ummah. Her position amongst mankind is like that of the summit of a mountain, where she occupies its highest and most central position. We do not explain this ayah as The West explains it, from the standpoint of its concepts based on the compromise solution. This is Haraam as we have explained before. The ‘Aqeedah cannot be based on the compromise solution. This is like kufr itself. The issue is one of either kufr or Imaan, light or darkness, guidance or misguidance. As regards the subject of the Shar’eeah rule, we have previously established that there is no legislator, no haakim (judge) except Allah (swt), and that there is none to reverse His judgement, for He is the best of Judges.

This is the understanding of The West on the subject of moderation and extremism. This is the Islamic understanding. So do you think they meet? The West’s intention behind its position is to destroy what it sees as representing a danger to its presence and colonisation. So shall we help The West and give them power over the necks of the Muslims? Helping The West means to help them against the Muslims who are working for Islam. He (swt) said: “So unto this then invite (people) (O Muhammad [saw]) and Istaqim (stand firm and straight) as you are commanded and follow not their desires” [TMQ 42:15]. And He (swt) said; “So stand (ask Allah to make) you (Muhammad [saw]) firm and straight as you are commanded, and those who turn in repentence (unto Allah) with you, and transgress not (Allah’s legal limits). Verily, He is All-Seer of what you do. And incline not toward those who do wrong, lest the Fire should touch you, and you have no protectors other than Allah, nor would you then be helped.” [TMQ 11:112-113]

Our hearts carry the goodness for this deen and yearn for its victory. With the Help and Tawfeeq of Allah (swt), hearts and minds will be opened to the support of this deen. The goodness that we cherish for ourselves, we also cherish for others. We pray to Allah (swt) that He makes our advice like the rain with which He (swt) revives the hearts and minds, for Allah (swt) alone can show the Straight Path.

Sheikh Ahmad Mahmoud

Extract from the book Dawah ilal Islam 'Dawah to Islam'.

No comments: