Monday, April 30, 2007

Urdu video documentary: The destruction of the Khilafah

The following is a video documentary in Urdu about the anniversary of the destruction of the Khilafah:

The Infrastructure of the Islamic State by Imam Kalkashandi

By Imam Kalkashandi (died 820AH)

The Islamic history reflects much of the prosperity enjoyed by the Citizens of the Islamic State. The following extract highlights many examples from the past in order to highlight the supremacy of the Islamic infrastructure.

Imam Al-Kalkashandi wrote about the infrastructure of the Islamic state in his book "Reflecting On The Supremacy Of The Infrastructure Of the Islamic State" which is in three volumes and discusses the Khilafah up until the 7th and 8th century hijri. The following article contains extracts from his book:

"From the beginning of the Khilafah the Khaleefahs matched the way of life of Rasoul Allah. We can describe their lifestyle as difficult and close to the people. They were never arrogant despite Allah (swt) giving them much power. The khulafah thereafter continued but in time acquired much wealth and power. They had great a reputation from the non-Muslims who would say of them the although they were the ‘kings of the Muslims’ they ate stale bread and they would wander by foot around their subjects to see if they needed help despite having conquered the east and the west of the Earth." He is referring to Omar Al-Khattab (ra) here as it has been narrated "that when he conquered Bait Al-Maqdis he was in his tent and upon opening his bag Omar (ra) produced an old dried piece of bread which he proceeded to dampen with water before eating it. It was said of him that ‘we have never seen anyone like this’. This situation continued until the time of Mu’awiyah who agreed that the Khilafah must spread everywhere and upon consulting the ulema he adopted the opinion because part of the preparation for jihad was to strike fear into and to shake the enemies or non-Muslim kings it is allowed to create a high profile image of the Khilafah until the structure of the Khilafah changed from what they had to a very strong kingdom type of Khilafah. This continued until the kings of that era began to say that they wanted to be like the Khilafah (especially during the Abbasid period).

During the time of Mu’tasim (35H) a Roman king took a prisoner from among the family of Rasoul Allah (saw) whose name was Fatima. Fatima pleaded for the help of Mu’tasim who said no one could help her except the one who had ablak (a rare expensive type of white horse) since the Romans boasted of having 60 of them. Mu’tasim ordered his Amirs to ride only these horses and when he eventually rode to free Fatima, Mu’tasim did so at the head of 4000 ablak. When freed he asked Fatima to testify to her great, great, great grand-father Rasoul Allah (saw) on the Day of judgement that Mu’tasim came to save her with 4000 ablak and that he was at the front of them. Ibn kathir narrated that when the Roman ambassadors came in 305H during the time of the Khilafah of Mu’tadir, the Khilafah prepared a reception which consisted of 160, 000 fighters on horse-back, 700 assistants of the government department and 7000 servants surrounding the palace (4000 white and 3000 black). He decorated the palace of the Khilafah with weapons taken from other nations. The floor was covered by carpets consisting of 22,000 pieces of basut (1 basut is 10 Foot by 10 Foot in area). There were 38,000 curtains, 12000 of which were covered with gold embroidery and in the middle of the palace was a large tree of gold with silver branches. In addition there were 18,000 horse-carts and 100 live lions together with their trainers around the palace. When the guests arrived it took them between Zuhr and Asr inside the palace to reach the Khaleefah. Imam Qudai’ described the same thing, he said: "this continued until the time of Khilafah of Al-Mu’taqi who said that he wanted to maintain the high profile image but that he wanted the governors to have it as well. He said ‘every governor of the state needs to ensure that no one ever feels that he wants to leave before his application is heard.’" In the time of Bani Buway in Baghdad the name of the Khaleefah was put on the Dinar, 5,000 silver Dirham was allocated for him every day for personal use and all the khateebs were to mention the Khaleefah in their Khutbah. In addition 2,000 silver Dirham were to be allocated for every governor per day. In the time of Muawiyah a bed to carry the Khaleefah was made due to his ill health. This however became permanent, it was adopted for subsequent khulafah and in time became carriage 7 arms high. The mattress used to be well decorated upon which the Khaleefah would sit and the Khaleefah would be allowed to carry something, which belonged to the messenger Muhammad (saw). He would pray publicly at the head of the Jama’a and a mobile Mihrab would stand before him so that the citizens knew where the Khaleefah was. The mimber was decorated with jewellery.

Othman Ibn Affan (ra) was the first to have a curtain around him where he prayed outside of which stood soldiers from his army. The Khaleefahs name used to be sown into many clothes and curtains in gold and silver and this became a common sign of the Khulafah. Another custom was that the new Khaleefah would address the nation upon receiving the bay’ah and on every Juma’a and this continued up until the 7th century hijri when a khateeb was delegated for this. The first khaleefah to receive du’ah from the mimber was Imam Ali (ra) which caused concern for Muawiyyah because he felt the same should have been the case for Abu bakr (ra) and Omar (ra). The logo for the Khaleefah was a ring at the beginning, it is narrated in Bukhari and Muslim that the Sahaba said to Rasoul Allah (saw) "the kings do not read a letter unless it is stamped with authority" and so the Prophet (saw) asked them to make one for him. Abu Bakr (ra) wore the ring and held the Prophets cloak and stick. Othman (ra) lost the ring in a well and so after this each Khaleefah had his own ring with his own name on it (up until the time of imam Kalkashandi). It is narrated in Ibn Kathirs Kitab al-Tarikh that the Prophet (saw) gave his cloak Burda to Kaab Ibn Suwayr who never gave it to anyone and that Mu’awiyyah brought it from his son for 10,000 silver Dirhams. The Burda of the prophet (saw) used to be black with white lines. The stick Khatib of the Prophet (saw) continued to be carried by the Khaleefahs through the time of Bani Abbas up until the time of Imam Kalkashandi. The Khaleefah clothes were special, for example, the sleeves used to be 20 hand spans rolled back up until the time of Ayub. The flag of the Khaleefah was green with the Shahadah on it although Bani Abbas had a black flag. (NB. Attaturk was the first to put a crescent on the flag after a suggestion made by a Jew which has led to Orientalists accusing Muslims of worshipping the moon.)

The uniform of the Khaleefah was properly established at the time of Bani Umayyah. Yazid bin Abdil Malik bin Marwan used to give garments to the subjects who visited him. His store of garments was carried on 600 rolls of fabric and he ordered 10,000 shirts to be made annually as gifts.

From Imam Al-Tharariba it is narrated that when Mansur died he had 95,000,000,000 silver Dirhams to give to the people stored in the State department. Imam Al-Souri narrates that Haroun Al-Rashid had 100,000,000 golden Dinar at the time of his death. He left behind wealth the like of which has not been seen since. The value of the jewellery, furniture and camels etc. came to 100,025,000 Dinar over and above the building assets. Ibrahim Ibn Nur, a top Muslim historian, narrates that the Khaleefah Mu’tad left in the finance department at the time of his death: 100,000,000 Golden Dinar 20,000,000 Dinar worth of jewellery 20,000,000 Dinar worth of Kuswa i.e. cloth 3,000 Dinar Amana 65,000 Clothes for the administrative staff 1,000 Abaya for the ladies 1,000,000,800 pieces of jewellery 18,000 tubes for letter each worth 2 golden Dinar 18,000 Armenian carpets each 10-foot by 10 foot It is narrated that Al-Ma’mun allocated 2,000,000 Dinar in one day consisting of 500,000 Dinar for his brother Mu’tasim for his appointment in Morocco, 500,000 Dinar for Abbas as a fighter, 300,000 Dinar for Abdullah Bin Tahir to fight in Northern Iraq and 700,000 Dinar to the leaders of the army. It took Al-Rukhji, the chancellor 6 months to distribute this. Al-Mu’tasim left cash in the palace of the Khilafah of 8,025,000 golden Dinar plus 18,000 horses all equipped with carts. Al Muktadir left 68,000,000,000 golden Dinar when he passed away. When Al-Ma’mun got married to the daughter of Al-Hasan Bin Sahil, 26,000 balah chefs fed the people for 40 days. Carpets made of gold string covered the palace floor and a huge pot carried by 20 men was filled with jewellery, silver, gold and diamonds and whenever women entered to the Khaleefah he let them fill their bags. Umm Jafer and her other daughters had the task of distributing the jewellery but the pot was left for 40 days and no one took from it. Women worked for over three months making a candle, which stayed alight for 40 days and weighed 110 kilos. The leaders of the army entered and 4000,000 Dinar were placed for them from which each collected money with their soldiers. One scholar Al-Imam al-Ba’buni said, "O Amir Al-Munineen, you gave Allahs wealth as if you feel no shortage and whatever you give in this life will be rewarded in the hereafter." The general public had trays filled with gold and silver, some would get their servants to carry it. The Khaleefah freed 1,000 slaves (i.e. he said "whoever has a slave let him come to me and I will pay to free him") and he ordered 1,000 carts to deliver the people home.

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Shootings in the US, Crime & Islam’s solution to it

The following is the transcript of a circle I delivered recently. It is in bullet point form so may have grammatical errors.

وَالتِّينِ وَالزَّيْتُونِ (1) وَطُورِ سِينِينَ (2) وَهَذَا الْبَلَدِ الْأَمِينِ (3) لَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنْسَانَ فِي أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِيمٍ (4) ثُمَّ رَدَدْنَاهُ أَسْفَلَ سَافِلِينَ

Allah (swt) says:

“By the fig, and the olive. By Mount Sinai. By this city of security. We created man of the best stature. Then we reduced him to the lowest of the low”

These verses highlight to us how Allah (swt) has created us in the best form but has reduced us to the lowest of the low when he abandon him and his deen.

One such example of how some amongst mankind have become the lowest of the low is the example of crime such as the recent Virginia Tech massacre in America that occured Monday, April 16, 2007 on the campus of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia, United States.

I want to discuss the reality of what happened, whether it was an isolated incident or does it indicate a troubling trend in western society, what are the causes of such behaviour and what is the Islamic solution to crime.


A gunman killed thirty-two people and injured twenty-nine before committing suicide, making it the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

The gunman, Cho Seung-hui, was born in South Korea and grew up in Northern Virginia.

During the investigation, police found a suicide note in Cho's dorm room, including rants about "rich kids," "debauchery," and "deceitful charlatans" on campus. On April 18, 2007, NBC News received a package from Cho time-stamped between the first two murders and the rest of the massacre two hours later. It contained an 1,800 word manifesto, pictures, and 23 digital videos. In the videos Cho compared himself to Jesus Christ and expressed his hatred of the wealthy.

While it is true that it seems that he was mentally unstable – we cannot simply blame these types of incidents on mental illness – we must study whether this is an isolated incident or not, if it is not - what leads to this type of behaviour?

It is not an isolated incident

There have been many such shootings in recent years – most of which have less casualties and therefore are not so well known, of the famous ones are:

United States, April 1999: Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris killed 12 of their classmates and a teacher at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, before killing themselves.

Germany, April 2002: Seventeen people killed after a gunman - a former pupil - opens fire in a school in Erfurt, eastern Germany. He then turned the gun on himself.

March 21, 2005: A 16-year-old student shoots and kills five schoolmates, a teacher, and an unarmed guard at Red Lake High School on the Red Lake Indian Reservation in Minnesota before taking his own life.

The problem of killings and what have come to be known as gun crimes is much worse:

30,000 people die of gun wounds every year in USA (BBC)

Accurate figures on firearms are scarce, but there are an estimated 200 million guns in circulation in the US, a country with a population of about 300 million.

According to a Harris poll conducted in 2001, approximately 39% of all American households own at least one gun.

The risk of being killed by a firearm in the US is higher than in any other Western nation. Of countries outside war zones, the risk is greatest in South Africa, according to a United Nations report. (BBC)

America has one of the highest crime rates in the world

Consider these statistics compiled by Professor Morgan Reynolds (Texas A&M University) concerning burglary:

· 500,000 burglaries take place each month
· 250,000 of these are reported to the police
· 35,000 arrests are made
· 30,450 prosecutions take place
· 24,060 are convicted
· 6,010 are sent to prison; the rest paroled
· Of the 500,0000 burglaries, only 6,000 burglars went to jail! And if this 1 percent effectiveness ratio isn't disturbing enough, professor Reynolds found that the average time served was only 13 months.

In the US, a rape occurs every minute, and in the UK, one-third of women have been sexually abused by the age of 18. Also, there was a 500% increase in the reporting of rape between 1996 and 1997.

British people have the lowest level of confidence in the ability of the Government to get a grip on criminal behaviour, according to a recent poll carried out by Ipsos MORI. Of those questioned, 43% placed crime as their top concern.

Another poll revealed that one in five adults, nearly 10million people, want to move abroad citing crime as a major contributing factor.

Lethal cocktail of Freedom, individualism and self-interest is cause

· What controls peoples actions are the ideas they hold.

- The true problem and the true drug that causes this behaviour is that of the lethal cocktail of Western ideas – Freedom, individualism and self-interest.

- The West believe that Life is about seeking enjoyment/pleasures. Freedom to behave in a way that achieves your pleasure

This is what is preached and reinforced to all of us who live in the west. So people whether politicians, mothers, youth and others come to accept them as absolute beliefs about how to live.

It is this pursuit of pleasure, benefit and joy that drove the likes of Harold Shipman and Fred and Rosemary West in UK to their actions.

Harold Shipman, the Hyde general practitioner, killed at least 15 of his patients who had come to him expecting care, compassion and empathy. In pursuit of some perverse form of pleasure and joy he murdered his innocent victims.

Dennis Nilsen killed 16 young men; the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe, killed 13 women; Fred West murdered 12 people including his first wife and daughter.

John Haigh who was known as the “acid bath vampire” drunk the blood of his six victims before disposing of them in vats of acid; these people are all the products of the capitalist way of life.

Legislation cannot solve this problem

Banning guns, etc will not solve the problem – the false ideas need to be banned rather than the guns

A thing is neutral – can be used for good or bad – cannot blame objects – have to blame the actions and why they undertook them

Why are there so many guns in US? People are afraid, due to crime – no sense of security. Also the gun lobby is strong and the capitalist arms industry promotes guns

In an Islamic state there is sense of security – patrols by the police, taqwa, etc – people in Madina used to put a cloth over their stall of gold and go and pray salah.

The Islamic solution to crime

1) The Taqwa of the believer: The Muslim has conviction in the rational creed of Islam, which is built upon the study of reality and use of the mind. This gives them the definite foundation for their belief in Islam and motivates them to be subservient to the One and Only True God, Allah (swt).

Crime is a disobedience to Allah (swt). The Muslim’s longing for the Paradise and their fear of the punishment of Hellfire will prevent them from committing crime.

2) Public Opinion: It is one of the mutual rights and duties of the Muslims that they always look out for and take care the affairs of each other. Thus there will be a constant motivation and encouragement from all sides for people to observe the Islamic conduct.

Enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, “A Muslim is a mirror to another Muslim, he wipes his mistakes”.

Crime will be shunned and rejected by the society at large. Criminals and cheats will not be accepted, nor will wealth or any perceived benefits gained illicitly be respected. This pressure from the dominant values in the society will prevent those who are tempted to commit crime from doing so.

3) The Punishments: The last resort is the fear of the consequences of the criminal actions in terms of the punishment.

Getting the punishment in this world is an expiation for it in the hereafter

Al-Bukhari narrated from Ubadah bin As-Samit (ra) who said: “We were with the Prophet (saw) in an assembly and he said: ‘Give me the bay’ah on condition that you do not associate anything with Allah, you do not steal and do not commit zina, and he read all of this ayah (the ayah on the bay’ah of women). So whoever fulfils among you, his reward is with Allah and whoever does anything of that and is punished for it, then it is expiation (kaffara) for him. And whoever does anything of that and Allah conceals him upon it, if He wills He will forgive him and if He wills, He will punish him.”

This hadith is explicit in the worldly punishment of the sinner, cancels for him the punishment of the Hereafter. And because of that ‘Ma’iz’ confessed to zina so he was stoned until he died, and Al-Ghamidiyyah confessed to zina so she was stoned until she died, and a woman from Juhaina confessed to zina so she was stoned until she died. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said about her: “She has repented a reptentance were it to be divided between seventy of the people of Madinah, it would accommodate them.”

Umayr bin Sa’d al-Ansari (ra) who was appointed as governor of Hims in Sham. When Umayr reached Hims he called the inhabitants to a vast congregational prayer. When the prayer was over he addressed them. He began by praising and giving thanks to God and sending peace and blessings on His Prophet Muhammad. Then he said:

"O people! Islam is a mighty fortress and a sturdy gate. The fortress of Islam is justice and its gate is truth. If you destroy the fortress and demolish the gate you would undermine the defences of this religion.

"Islam will remain strong so long as the Sultan or central authority is strong. The strength of the Sultan neither comes from flogging with the whip, nor killing with the sword but from ruling with justice and holding fast to truth”

The Punishment system of Islam

Punishments were legislated to prevent people from crimes.

Allah ta’ala said: “Verily there is life for you in retaliation, O men of understanding” [TMQ 2:179] i.e. in legislating retaliation for you, which is killing the killer, is great wisdom which is the survival of lives and preserving them because if the killer knows that he will be killed he will desist from his work so that will be life for the souls.

And because, for the most part, the situation of the sane person is that if he knows that if he kills he will be killed, he will not set ahead to killing, and similarly for all restraints. The meaning of its being a restraint is that it restrains people.

There are four categories of punishment that criminals may be subject to. These are:

1. Hadud : This punishment is the right of Allah (swt), and it is a retribution for seven different crimes, which no-one can forgive. These are:

a) Fornication or adultery (zina) : The punishment is 100 lashes for fornication (i.e. pre-marital sex) or stoning to death for adultery (where the fornicator/s is/are married).

b) False Accusation (qadhf) : Where a false charge of adultery is insinuated against a man or woman. The punishment is 80 lashes.

c) Theft (sariqa) : Where theft is the crime. The punishment is cutting off of the hand, provided seven conditions are fulfilled concerning the circumstances of the crime.

The Islamic punishment of hand-cutting only applies if seven conditions are fulfilled. These are :

1) Two witnesses (with no contradiction or error in their testimonies)
2) The value of the stolen goods must exceed 1/4 of a dinar in value (4.25g of gold)
3) Cannot be food (if the thief was hungry)
4) Cannot be from the thief’s family
5) Goods must be halal in nature (e.g. not alcohol)
6) Must be stolen from a secure place
7) Must be no doubt on the goods (i.e. the thief definitely has no right over it, e.g. money from the public treasury)

d) Consumption of Intoxicants (khamr) : Where the crime is for example drinking wine. The punishment is 80 lashes.

e) Rebellion against the State (al-baghi) : Where individuals or groups revolt against the authority of the State, e.g. motivation of division of the Ummah. The punishment is death.

f) Apostasy (al-irtidad) : Where a Muslim changes his or her belief, and refuses to return after advice is given. The punishment is death.

g) Highway Robbery (hiraba) : Where robbers attack passers by on the open highways. The punishment is cutting off the hand and foot on opposite sides, or death if the crime led to the death of the victim.

In these issues, if someone is proven to be guilty of the crime and all the conditions for the punishment are fulfilled, there is no leniency or pardon for the perpetrator. Muhammad (saw) said, “By Allah, if Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad stole, I would cut her hand.”

2. Al-Jinayaat (or qisas): This concerns crimes against the rights of an individual where the victim has the option to demand punishment or forgive the criminal and demand blood money (diyyah). It concerns mainly the issues of killing and bodily harm, whether unlawful or accidental. For example, if someone deliberately committed murder, the family of the victim could demand that the perpetrator be killed, or they could forgive them and demand blood money. The value of blood money varies depending on the nature of the crime:

a) Blood money from the one who kills with intention is 100 camels, 40 of which must be pregnant, or the equivalent monetary value.

b) Blood money from the one who kills unintentionally i.e. manslaughter, is the equivalent of 100 camels.

It is narrated by al-Nissai and Darimi that Abu Bakr reported that the Messenger of Allah (saw) wrote to the inhabitants of Yemen and there was in his letter : “Whosoever kills a believer unjustly will suffer retaliation for what his hand has done unless the relatives of the murdered man consent otherwise. And therein it was : A man shall be killed for the murder of a woman. And therein it was : For the murder of a life, there is bloodwit of 100 camels...”

Another hadith narrated by Imam Nissai mentions that every part of the body has blood money, for example, the blood money for the eyes is equivalent of 50 camels.

3. Al-Ta‘azir : This is considered the right of the community. It covers those issues which are not part of the qisas or hadud, but which affect the right of the community such as shouting in the streets, cheating in the market place etc. The judge presiding over the case will study the severity and nature of the crime and prescribe a punishment to match it from his own ijtihad (i.e. study of the Islamic texts).The punishments may range from anywhere between a warning to death. One famous example happened in the time of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), where he punished a scholar who gave false testimony. He ordered that the scholar should have his head shaved, his face painted black, and be paraded semi-clothed in front of the people while sitting backwards on a donkey.

4. Al-Mukhalafat : This covers the areas of the rights of the State. Here the crime is committed when a person or group contravenes a law which the State has enacted, such as breaking the speed limit or parking in no-parking areas. The punishment is at the discretion of the judge, based on his own ijtihad or the adoption of the State.

Punishment is the last resort in the Islamic state

This applies because the severity of the punishment serves the primary role of a deterrent. Any shred of evidence that is doubtful or circumstantial will prevent the punishment. Indeed it is narrated in the Seerah (life) of Muhammad (saw) how he would exert himself to avert the punishment when individuals asked for the punishment to be implemented upon them. It is narrated that Muhammad (saw) said, “To free someone criminal mistakenly is better than to punish someone innocent mistakenly.” ‘A’isha (ra) narrated, “Ward off punishments as much as you can. If you find any way out for a Muslim then set him free. If the Imam makes a mistake in granting forgiveness it is better for him than that he should commit a mistake in imposing punishment.”

In this way, bearing in mind the heavy burden of proof, false conviction or unjustified punishment will be absent in the Islamic judiciary.

The Islamic Khilafah historically was a just nation in which the masses lived with dignity and honour – a fact even attested to by the famous English writer, H. G. Wells, in his book The Outline of History; “Islam has created a society more free from widespread cruelty and social oppression than any other society had ever been in the world before.”

Part 2 - Arabic translation of Khilafah & Indian Subcontinent article

The 2nd part of the arabic translation of the article The Khilafah and the Indian Subcontinent been published in Al-Waie Arabic Magazine, it is available on:

الخلافة وشبه القارة الهندية (2
إن من يقرأ كيف تفاعلت الهند وعلماؤها مع أحداث إلغاء الخلافة ليأخذه الإكبار على فهمهم العميق والمشرق لأهمية الخلافة في حياة المسلمين، ولوعيهم الكامل لدورها في جمع المسلمين وتحقيق أهداف الإسلام، ولمدى خطورة هذا الحدث عليهم، ويلفته كذلك موقفهم من تلك اليد المجرمة التي طعنت الأمة الإسلامية في قلبها «الخلافة»، تلك اليد التي هي بريطانيا التي سخرت أيدي الخونة من أبناء المسلمين الذين غمسوا أيديهم في دماء إخوانهم...
والجزء الثاني من هذه المقالة يكشف المواقف الصادقة والمخلصة لبعض علماء الهند الذين مضوا لأمر ربهم لتبقى آثارهم تدل عليهم، وتنقل لوعتهم بكلمات صادقات مازالت حتى اليوم تشهد الوقائع بصدقها وإخلاصها ووعيها... وكفى بالله شهيداً.
حركة الخلافة
بدأ في سبتمبر 1919م مولانا محمد علي وأخوه شوكت علي بالمشاركة مع أبي الكلام أزاد، ودكتور مختار أحمد أنصاري وحسرت مهاني، بدأوا منظمة جديدة باسم (حركة الخلافة) في الفترة (1919م - 1924م). كان هدفهم المعلن عمل كل ما يمكن عمله من أجل حماية الخلافة. فنظموا مؤتمرات خلافة في عدة مدن شمال الهند. ومن الملاحظ أن العلماء والنشطاء الذين كونوا حركة الخلافة جاؤوا من مذاهب متعددة وخلفيات فكرية مختلفة. فمولانا أبو الكلام أزاد مثلاً معروف أنه يجتهد ولا يقلد، حيث كان يعتقد أن تقليد المذاهب حرام. أما مولانا محمود حسن فكان ديوبندياً يتبع المذهب الحنفي، ومع هذا اتحدوا معاً تحت هدف العمل للحفاظ على الخلافة.
وفي عام 1919م لما بدأ مصطفى كمال يسرِّب إمكانية فصل الخلافة عن السلطنة أي عن الحكم، أعلنت لجنة الخلافة في بومباي هدفين تنظيميين مهمين وهما: «الأول هو الحثّ على احتفاظ سلطان تركيا بوصفه خليفة بسلطاته الدنيوية. أما الثاني فهو ضمان استمرار سيادته على الأماكن الإسلامية المقدسة».
وفي خطابه الرئاسي في اجتماع كلكوتا لمؤتمر الخلافة الإقليمي البنغالي عام 1920م بحث مولانا أزاد أهمية الخلافة معلناً: «إن هدف هذه المؤسسة هو تنظيم وقيادة الأمة الإسلامية في الطريق الصحيح لإقامة العدل وتحقيق السلام ونشر كلمة الله في العالم. ومن أجل كل ذلك كان من الضروري جداً للخليفة أن يمتلك السلطة الدنيوية». لم يكن هناك شكّ لدى مولانا أزاد «أنه بدون إمام فإن حياتهم غير إسلامية وأنه سيحكم عليهم بالإثم بعد الموت».
نشر مولانا أزاد عام 1920م كتاباً بعنوان (مسألة الخلافة) حيث قال فيه: «بدون الخلافة لا يمكن وجود الإسلام، ويلزم أن توجّه كل جهود المسلمين في الهند من أجل هذا الهدف».
ويقول مولانا أزاد في الكتاب نفسه في صفحة 176: «يوجد نوعان من الأحكام الشرعية: الأول يتعلق بالفرد كالأوامر والمحرمات والفرائض والواجبات من أجل تهذيب النفس. أما الثاني فلا يتعلق بالفرد بل بالأمة والواجبات الجماعية وسياسات الدولة مثل فتح البلدان والقوانين السياسية والاقتصادية».
وكما يقول بيتر هاردي فإن مولانا أزاد كان يعتقد بأن: «المسلم الذي يريد فصل الدين عن السياسة هو في نظر المسلمين مرتد يعمل بصمت».
كانت خسارة السلطة السياسية في الهند لصالح الإنجليز، وكونهم أصبحوا المتسلطين على الهند، وكذلك التهديد من مجموعة من القوى وتحركها على نزع السلطة الدنيوية من الخليفة، كانت هذه الأمور مقلقةً جداً لقادة المسلمين في الهند لدرجة أن بعضهم شعر بضرورة إصدار فتاوى «لصالح الهجرة من الهند».
أصدر مولانا أبو الكلام أزاد فتوى نشرت في الجريدة اليومية «أهل الحديث» الصادرة في أمريستار في 30 تموز 1920م، حيث حثّ في هذه الفتوى على الهجرة من الهند كخيار بديل لعدم التعاون مع البريطانيين.
ذكرت فتوى مولانا عبد الباري «بأن كل مسلم مقيم هنا عليه تبني عدم التعاون، ولكن إذا كان مستحيلاً فعليه أن يشرع في الهجرة». وأصدر مولانا شوكت تصريحاً باسم لجنة الخلافة المركزية «يعبر عن الأمل بأن يبقى المسلمون الملتزمون في الهند، وأن يعملوا من أجل عدم التعاون. ولكنه فقط في حالة عدم نجاحهم في ذلك يمكنهم النظر في اللجوء إلى خيار الهجرة». كان تأثير الفتوى مثيراً لدرجة أن آلافاً من المسلمين فضلوا مغادرة دار الكفر حيث انتهِكت حرمة حقوقهم الدينية المتمثلة في منصب الخليفة العثماني.
لم تكن مسألة الخلافة مسألة سياسية فحسب ولكن مسألة «الخلاص من الخطيئة أو الوقوع فيها». فإذا فقدت تركيا أقاليمها، فسيكون الإسلام كمبدأ في خطر. وقد أفصح مولانا شوكت عن عاطفته في خطابه الرئاسي في الاجتماع العاشر لمؤتمر الخلافة لكل الهند في 27/12/1923م قائلاً: «طالما كان هناك بوصة واحدة من جزيرة العرب تحت نفوذ غير المسلمين فلن يهدأ بال المسلم». (مسلمو الهند، شان محمد، ميناكشي براكاشان، 1981م، المجلد السابع، صفحة 209).
وقد شدّد محمد عاصف على أهمية الواجب الشرعي في وجود الخلافة في كتاب بعث به إلى محرر صحيفة الرفيق (كومريد) في 2 تشرين ثاني عام 1921م، حيث قال: «هيبة تركيا تتطابق مع هيبة الإسلام، ووجود الدولة العثمانية ضروري للتقدم الحياتي (الدنيوي) للسلالات (الشعوب) الإسلامية... وسيختفي الإسلام كقوة حضارية بحلّ الدولة العثمانية... وإذا سقطت تركيا فالإسلام لا يستطيع الصمود. لذلك فإن تركيا هي العمود الفقري للإسلام». وأيّد وجهة النظر هذه مولانا محمد علي الذي أكّد بأنّ هذا الموقف يعكس أيضاً الرأي العام لعامة المسلمين.
قرر اجتماع أنجومان معيد الإسلام تحت رعاية فرانجي محل في لوكنو في 26/1/1919م بأنه: «في الوقت الذي يعبر اجتماع علماء فرانجي محل هذا عن ولائه الثابت والمخلص للسلطان محمد السادس، فإنه يعلن بشكل مؤكد بأنه حسب عقائد الإسلام الصحيحة لا أحد غير سلطان تركيا الحالي يعتبر الخليفة الشرعي، وأن الإسلام لا يسمح أبداً بتدخّل غير المسلمين في تقرير مسألة الخلافة».
وفي الحقيقة أكّد آنذاك كثير من العلماء أمثال سيد سليمان ندوي على وجوب وجود خلافة. صرّح مولانا الندوي أنّ: «العلاّمة نصفي والإمام رازي والقاضي أوزود ضمن علماء آخرين كبار يبحثون الموضوع مع الرعايا بإسهاب في كتبهم وسيعتبر ذلك الكلمة الفصل في المسألة...
وجاء في كلمة ألقاها مولانا محمد علي في باريس عام 1920م: «تعتبر الخلافة أكثر مؤسسة ضرورية للأمة الإسلامية في العالم. والأغلبية الساحقة من المسلمين في العالم يعترفون بسلطان تركيا كأمير للمؤمنين وكوريث لخليفة نبيهم. وكجزء جوهري من هذا المعتقد أن يكون للخليفة، أمير المؤمنين، أقاليم كافية ومقدرات عسكرية وبحرية مناسبة وموارد مالية ملائمة».
وقال سيد حسين الذي شارك محمد علي منصة اجتماع باريس: «إذا كان للإسلام أن يوجد في العالم فمن الضروري تماماً أن يكون للإسلام خلافة. هكذا كان التاريخ والعرف في الإسلام منذ نشأته قبل 14 قرناً».
وقال مولانا محمد علي جوهر أيضاً: «كان حاكم تركيا هو الخليفة وخليفة النبي وأمير المؤمنين، ومن الضروري أن تكون الخلافة همّنا الديني شأنها شأن القرآن وسنة النبي». (حياتي شظية، محمد علي جوهر، ص41).
ولقد تولّى العلماء في الحقيقة دوراً قيادياً في حركة الخلافة. وهذه بعض النقاط الأساسية التي وردت في مؤتمر عقد من قبل العلماء في الهند 5 و6/4/1920م، حيث حضره كثير من العلماء:
النقطة الأولى: يجب أن يعمل العلماء لإيجاد رأي عام لقضية الخلافة.
النقطة الثانية: يجب مقاطعة العلماء المنافقين والعلماء المعارضين لهذه القضية.
النقطة السابعة: يجب أن يأخذ العلماء عهداً من أتباعهم بأن يبذلوا حياتهم وقلوبهم للحديث والكتابة في دعم قضية الخلافة.
النقطة التاسعة: يجب أن يبتعد المسلمون عن الانتخابات الدستورية.
وهذه بعض النقاط من الإعلان الصادر عن مؤتمر كل الهند الثاني لجمعية علماء الهند الذي عقد في 19 و20/11/1920م في دلهي التي تبين أيضاً مساندتهم لقضية الخلافة:
- الإنجليز هم أكبر عدو للإسلام وللمسلمين، ومقاومتهم فرض.
- حماية الأمة وحماية الخلافة ضرورة إسلامية مطلقة. إذا ساعد الإخوة في هذه البلاد وعاونوا في هذه القضية فلهم وافر الشكر على ذلك.
أُطلق سراح شيخ الهند مولانا محمود حسن، مدير دار علوم ديوباند، المذكور سابقاً، وعاد إلى بومباي في 20 رمضان 1338هـ، الموافق 8/6/1920م. وبعد عودته ساهم بنشاط في حركة الخلافة. كتب خليفته مولانا حسين أحمد مدني، «بعد تحمله عناء السجن والنفي، وبعد أن عاد شيخ الهند، رحمه الله، إلى الهند لم نجد تغيراً في عزيمته لمكافحة النظام الاستعماري وفي كراهيته للبريطانيين. لقد أقلقه فرض الحكم العرفي في البلاد، وتطبيق مرسوم رولات ومذبحة جالياناوالا باغ في البلاد، وتفكيك الدولة العثمانية، والمعاملة غير الإنسانية تجاه الأتراك خارج الهند. وبمجرد أن وطئت قدماه بومباي قابل مولانا شوكت علي وأعضاء آخرين من لجنة (حركة الخلافة). وجاء لاستقبال شيخ الهند مولانا محمود حسن في بومباي كل من مولانا عبد الباري من فرانجي محل، لوكنو، ومهاتما غاندي من أحمد أباد. وبعد أن تحدث شيخ الهند معهم ومع قادة آخرين في لجنة الخلافة على انفراد وأمام الناس وافق الشيخ على بدء الحركة السلمية لتحرير الهند». (نشق الحياة، المجلد الثاني، ص247).
تبين إحدى الفتاوى التي أصدرها الشيخ وجهة نظره تجاه التعاون مع المستعمرين. ورغم أنها صدرت عام 1920م فإن كثيراً من النقاط التي ذكرها فيها لاتزال تنطبق اليوم:
«لم يوفر أعداء الإسلام جهداً لضرب وإيذاء شرف وهيبة الإسلام. فالعراق وفلسطين وسوريا التي فتحت من قبل صحابة النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) وأتباعه بعد تضحيات لا تحصى عادت مرة أخرى لتصبح أهدافاً لجشع أعداء الإسلام. تمزّق شرف الخلافة. وخليفة المسلمين الذي كان يوحد جميع الأمة الإسلامية على وجه الأرض، والذي كان بوصفه خليفة رسول الله على هذه الأرض يطبق نظام الإسلام العالمي، والذي كان يحمي حقوق ومصالح المسلمين، والذي كان حريصاً على الحفاظ على مجد وحي خالق هذا الكون وعلى تطبيقه، قد أصبح هذا الخليفة محاطاً بالأعداء كما جرى الاستغناء عنه... انخفضت منزلة راية الإسلام اليوم. وتشعر أرواح حضرة أبو عبيدة وسعد بن أبي وقاص وخالد بن الوليد، رضي الله عنهم، بالقلق اليوم. لماذا كان كل ذلك؟ إنه بسبب أن المسلمين فقدوا كرامتهم وشرفهم والثقة بأنفسهم. فالشجاعة والحمية الدينية التي كانت مكمن قوتهم وميراثهم قد افتقدوها بسبب جهلهم وانشغالهم المفرط بتوافه الأمور.
لم يعد كافياً أن المسلم لا يساعد أخاه المسلم وقت الشدة، بل المأساة أن اللهفة على كسب ودّ وصداقة الكافر جعلت الأخ يقطع رأس أخيه. لقد شرب المسلمون دم المسلمين. لقد غمس المسلمون أيديهم في دماء إخوانهم.
يا أبناء الإسلام! ويا محبّي هذه الأمة العظيمة! إنكم تعلمون أن العاصفة والنار التي أحرقت الخيام في العالم الإسلامي وأشعلت النيران في حصن الخلافة الإسلامية قد أنجزت بأيدي أعوان الإنجليز من العرب والهنود. وأن مخزون الثروة التي أنفق منها النصارى في إخضاع الشعوب الإسلامية، جاء النصيب الأكبر منها من كدّكم.
فهل يوجد مسلم غني وجاهل لا يفهم النتائج القاتلة للتعاون مع النصارى؟ حتى الغريق الذي يتعلق عادةً بأية (قشة) لينجو من الغرق لو تعلق بهم فإنهم سيزيدونه غرقاً! (من فتوى مولانا محمود حسن في 16 صفر 1339هـ الموافق 29/10/1920م، سجناء مالطا، مولانا سيد محمد ميان، جمعية العلماء - I - الهند، الطبعة الإنجليزية، ص78- 79).
وعلى خلاف ما يقوله بعض علماء (مشايخ السلاطين) اليوم من انفصال السياسة عن الإسلام، فإن علماء ذلك الزمان أكدوا ارتباطهما الذي لا ينفصم. وقبيل هدم الخلافة عقدت الندوة الرابعة لجمعية علماء الهند في جايا في 24/12/1923م، حيث اجتمع في تلك الندوة العلماء الفقهاء ومعلمو الإسلام من كل أطراف الهند، وبحثوا باستفاضة القضية المتعلقة بالمستقبل السياسي للأمة الإسلامية. وبعد مباحثات مضنية توصلت الندوة بالإجماع إلى وجهة النظر القائلة بأن السياسة والدين جزءان من الإسلام لا ينفصلان.
وبعد مشاهدته للتأثير الواسع لحركة الخلافة، فإن الهندوسي، أبو حكومة الهند الحالية، مهاتما غاندي التحق بالحركة وأصبح عضواً في لجنتها المركزية.
ولكن بعد هدم الخلافة على يد مصطفى كمال في 3/3/1924م ماتت الحركة، ورأى الكثيرون استحالة إعادة الخلافة، فركزّوا على كيفية تحرير الهند من الاستعمار البريطاني.
وبعد إلغاء الخلافة بيوم واحد قال مولانا محمد علي جوهر كما ورد في صحيفة التايمز اللندنية يوم 4/3/1924م: «من الصعب توقع الآثار الحقيقة لإلغاء الخلافة على عقول المسلمين في الهند. أؤكد بكل ثقة أنها ستكون مأساةً للإسلام وللحضارة. إن قمع المؤسسة التي كانت تحظى بالاحترام والتي اعتبرت عبر العالم الإسلامي رمزاً للوحدة الإسلامية سيكون سبباً في تفكك المسلمين...».
كم كانت كلمةً صائبةً! فبعد إلغائها شاهد العالم الإسلامي ما قاله تماماً. واليوم وبعد أكثر من ثمانين عاماً على هدمها، أصبحت الخلافة ثانيةً كلمةً ذات وقع مؤثر في وسائل الإعلام على جميع الأطراف، فمن ناحية يخاف السياسيون والمفكرون والقادة في الغرب من عودتها، ومن ناحية أخرى يتوق المسلمون لإعادة إقامتها. فقد قال رئيس الولايات المتحدة جورج بوش الابن في مؤتمر صحفي أمام البيت الأبيض يوم الأربعاء 11/10/2006م: «يحاول المتطرفون إرعاب الناس العقلانيين من أجل إسقاط الحكومات المعتدلة لبسط الخلافة. لا يمكن أن تكون المخاطر في العالم الذي نعيشه أعظم خطورة من ذلك، كما سبق أن قلت. هناك عناصر متطرفة تستعمل الدين من أجل تحقيق أهدافها. ونحن لن نترك الوقوف ضد أهدافهم، ولن نمكنهم من إسقاط الحكومات المعتدلة، إنهم يريدون بسط خلافة مبدئية لا مكان لفكرة الحرية في عقائدها».
يجب على الغرب أن يدرك أن الخلافة جزء أصيل من الإسلام، وأنها لا بد قائمة بإذن الله، فلو كانوا حكماء لفكروا في كيفية بناء علاقات معها مستقبلاً بدلاً من شجبها وحياكة المؤامرات ضد قيامها.
إن الخلافة ستعود بإذن الله، وستحرر شبه القارة الهندية مرة أخرى...
اللهم اجعلنا ممن يشاركون في إقامة الخلافة اليوم كما فعل أسلافنا في الماضي.

أبو إسماعيل البيرواي

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

The dangers of looking for the angels amongst men

There are some who look to the Da’wah carrier and the necessary qualities needed in him in an idealistic and unreal way. So they see the criteria for being a good Da’wah carrier as absolute knowledge, immense depth, eloquent speech and the like rather than looking at what it means to be a carrier of the Islamic call to liberate mankind. There is a huge difference in placing perfection as a criteria and holding perfection as an ideal.

The one who places perfection as the criteria, would see it unachievable in himself and in those around him, it would lead him to drown in his own weaknesses and be overcome by the shortcomings of others rather than being a fire that extinguishes the corruption around him and lights the path towards salvation. He would focus on the trivialities and become obsessed by minutia.

If we look to what the Da’wah necessitates this would point to the correct criteria for this is the standard that Allah (swt) ordered us to achieve. He (swt) didn't make it an individual obligation upon us to become the best intellectuals, mujtahideen or the best writers. He (swt) ordered us to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing the Islamic state and all this entails. This obligation translates into our lives as individuals as doing as much as we can to achieve the results in the Da’wah. So the criteria must be viewed from this angle, those who have many barriers to achieving the results would not constitute a good Da’wah carrier. For example those with the problems of pride and arrogance would not be able to achieve the results for they would not be able to see past their own shortcomings and errors. Thus their Da’wah for them would always be right regardless of the reality, they would not contemplate about their own errors which would end in either them achieving what they think are results which in fact would be sporadic attempts or they would produce people who reflect themselves and those who don't match the standard of having the basis for the Islamic personality.

Another example would be those who carry defeatism, this would be an obstacle in achieving the results because the world would be too big for them so they would remain closed away from it, overcautious about delivering the message to the extent that they would end up not delivering at all or undertaking half hearted actions.

Other examples of the major barriers to achieving the results would be the interests being the centre of ones life rather than the Da’wah, dependence in thinking and vagueness in the delivering the call.

If the interests were at the centre of ones life, he would live for them and not for the Da’wah and Islam which would make him one who would be laid back in the heat of the battle, detached from the urgency of the situation and complacent at the butchering of the Ummah by the Kuffar. His actions for the Da’wah would be nominal and not real, he would not achieve the results because he would not even be seeking them.

If the Da’wah was the centre point of ones life but he was dependent in his thinking, he would not be able to build the mentality of others because the concepts that he would seemingly carry would be expressions and words of others and not his own thoughts. So when asked about his concepts he would look for the reply of others rather than have his own reply because he hasn't adopted the ideas as his own. Independence in thinking doesn't necessitate that he understands every concept to its ultimate depth or that he can quote the books of Marx, Hagel, the Pythagoreans, Stoics or the Epicurean’s, rather it means that he is convinced of the idea as his own.

Someone who proceeds with vagueness in delivering the call would not achieve the results because he would not be clear in what he is trying to achieve, an example of this type of person is someone who would make the discussion with others one way only rather than looking at their reality, what is needed in them and how to achieve this in a rational manner. This barrier would mean that someone would deliver the Da’wah with no focus and direction even though he may possess the determination and will. So whilst thinking deeply about the adoption of the concepts of the role of the mind, qada wal qadr, revival and decline he would not think deeply about the people he was discussing with, their reality, background, concepts, motivation and how to change that in the best way.

Therefore the criteria for the good Da’wah carrier is that he has no barriers between him and achieving the result. It is important to realise this does not mean that the strive for perfection in the heart of the Muslim is dissipated, on the contrary if the Da’wah carrier was one of this standard he would look forwards and desire to be like the Prophet (saw) and the Sahaba, he would yearn for the fragrance of Jannah and the pleasure of Allah, would be cautious of the path of Shaytan and would be careful never to invoke the anger of Allah (swt). The correct way to view perfection would be something we strive for and continually aim for, knowing that absolute perfection is impossible for us. This realisation in our minds would make us reflective upon our weaknesses in mentality and behaviour and seriously work to change them. Hence even those who are the best Da’wah carriers on earth would continuously develop. We must realise the difference between continual ascendance and someone with barriers.

May Allah (swt) enable us to strengthen our personalities and work to achieve the establishment of his deen in the best manner.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Part 3 - Foundations of the Curriculum in the Khilafah

The following is part of a draft translation of the Arabic book entitled 'Foundations of the Education Curriculum in the Khilafah state' published by Dar al-Ummah (Beirut, Lebanon), 1st Edition, 1425 Hijra—2004 CE. I will be posting sections from the book:


There are two leading goals of education that must be observed when setting the method and subjects of education:-

1. Building the Islamic personality, intellect and psyche, of the Ummah’s children via implanting
the Islamic culture—’aqeedah, thoughts and behaviour—into the students’ intellects and
psyches. Accordingly care must be taken in the Khilafah State to set and implement methods to
achieve this goal.
2. Preparing Muslim children such that some become scholars with expertise in every field of life
whether in Islamic sciences (ijtihad, fiqh, judiciary etc) or empirical sciences (engineering,
chemistry, physics, medicine etc). Scholars who are able to carry the Islamic State and Ummah
upon their shoulders so as to gain the preeminent position among the world’s nations and States,
such that the Khilafah becomes a leading and influential State based upon its ideology, not a
subordinate or client State in its thought or economy.


The correct teaching method is rational address by the teacher and the student’s intellectual
learning/reception. Thought or mind/ration (‘aql) is the tool for both teaching and studying; and Allah gifted humanity with this mind thereby ennobling and favouring him over much of His creation. And He made the mind the situational cause (manaat) of accountability.

The mind is composed of four (elements): The brain (suitable for thinking), senses, the reality, and information precedent to the reality. The mind or thought or understanding (idraak) all have the same meaning namely: “Transferring sensation of the reality via the senses to the brain with existent previous information to translate the reality”; then issuing judgement upon the reality. If one wishes to transmit/communicate this thought to othes, as in the education process, the teacher transmits this thought to students via one or more styles of expression, principally language. If the students link this thought with a sensed or previously sensed reality, or one whose like they had previously sensed, this thought would be transmitted to them just as if they had achieved it. If they did not so link it to a reality, sensed or able to be senses, such as where they understand a sentence’s meaning and it was explained to them without their conceiving any reality for it, this thought would not be transmitted to them. Rather mere information would be transmitted to them, such information making them educated persons (muta’allimeeen) not thinkers. Thus the teacher, when transmitting thoughts to students, must bring its meaning close to students’ brains by attempting to link it with a reality they sense, or a reality close to what they have sensed, such that they adopt it as a thought and not mere information. Accordingly the teacher must be keen to make the student sense the reaity; if the
cannot bring forward the reality itself, he must depict an image close to that reality in the student’s brain when giving the thought such that the student links the information with a sensed or conceived reality resulting in thought.

The thought that the teacher transmits to students is examined as follows:-

--If it has a sensed reality that the students have previously sensed, or they sense it during the thought’s transmission to them, they would perceive and accept it intellectually.
--If they had not previously sensed it nor do they sense it during the transmission, yet however they conceive it in their brains and believe it just as it is transmitted to them, and they accept it just as they accept the sensed reality, they would also understand and accept it intellectually.
In both cases, the thought the teacher transmits to them would become their own thought.

However, if the thought did not have a sensed reality or one that can be sensed by the students, this thought would remain mere information to those it was transmitted to.
The sensed reality is the one that man can sense via one of his five senses, whether this reality were material or abstract (ma’anawiyy). The material reality is like seeing the tree, hearing the sparrow’s
voice, feeling the fabric’s delicacy, smelling flowers’ fragrance and tasting honey’s flavour. The
abstract reality is like courage, trustworthiness, cowardice and treachery that are sensed intellectually upon their material appearance. So one comprehends that the Muslim’s fighting the enemy despite their material and numerical superiority is courage, whereas his fleeing from the battlefield is cowardice. The sensed reality or one that can be sensed, whether material or abstract, is a fundamental element in the thinking process. Thought cannot be thought without it.

The hidden/invisible matters (mugheebaat) that man cannot senses with any of his senses e.g.
Paradise, Hellfire, the Throne etc are not topics of thinking via the senses; rather they are topics of thought via information whose credibility is definitive (qat’iyy) like the Noble Qur’an and mutawatir Hadith. As for the hidden matters imagined by some e.g. ghouls and the bull carrying the earth upon its horns, preoccupying oneself with the like is not thinkiing since they are neither sensed nor conveyed definitively by the senses. They are (mere ) speculation and superstition without reality, and students must avoid preoccupying their thinking with the like.
In the process of rational address and intellectual learning via hearing or reading, the addressor namely the teacher or curriculum devisor must use the four elements of thinking. So care must be taken when addressed the one being educated i.e. the “student”, whether orally or via writing, to precisely depict the reality for the student if he has not previously sensed it so that the recipient feels as if he perceives the reality. This is done via accumulating all information related to the reality so as to bring its image closer to the student.

The principal tool for rational address and intellectual learning in teaching or learning is language and the words and sentences it contains, the meanings that these words and sentences indicate, and the thoughts carried by these meaning. If the teacher and student comprehend these words, sentences and meanings with respect to the thoughts they indcate, these tools would be effective in the teaching and learning process. Accordingly, every teacher and curriculum devisor must take student linguistic achievement into account and use words, sentences and compositions that they understand in order to facilitate the intellectual discourse between the two parties. By intellectual discourse we mean the mutual address between the two parties containing the four elements of thinking.

Using this method, written or verbal texts change into thoughts within the student’s brain (just as they exist for the teacher) that he is able to express according to his linguistice achievement, then interact with the same according to his criteria e.g. halal or haram, right or wrong.

This method is suitable to transmit or receive any thought, whether this thought is directly related to a specific viewpoint about life such as ideological thoughts, or not so related such as mathematical sciences. If the thoughts belong to the first category meaning they are directly related to a specific viewpoint about life i.e. the thoughts organising man’s relationship with his Lord, himself and others, such thoughts must be linked to the Islamic ‘aqeedah. Thereupon one addresses the student’s feeling along with addressing his though in demonstrating this thought’s relationship with the student in this life and the Hereafter such that he becomes convinced of this thought and it becomes a concept controlling his behaviour. Thus his feeling of love and partiality (iqdaam) mobilise towards the correct thoughts emanating from a specific viewpoint defined by the Islamic ‘aqeedah, and he moves to realise it with conviction and enthusiasimn. Or his feelings of hate and resistance (ihjaam) is agitated against erroneous thoughts that contradict and oppose his viewpoint about life, so he moves to fight and oppose them. Teaching the intellectual text realted to a viewpoint does not mean merely restricting oneself to its linnguistic meaning; rather it meands understanding the text so as to apply it upon its relevant reality in order that the the student adopts the Shar’a mandated stance towards it, whether by acting or abstaining. So he studies this type of thought to control his behaviour according to the Shari’ah rules. Education is not merely for the sake if intellectual amusement’ rather it is meant
to build the Islamic personality, in intellect and disposition, that strives to attain Allah’s pleasure in all its actions and statements.

Whereas if the thoughts are of the second type i.e. thoughts not directly related to a specific viewpoint such as physics, chemistry, mathematics etc, they are studied to prepare the student to interact with the universe that Allah subjugated to serve man.

He ta’ala said:

“And He has subjected to you, as from Him, all that is in the heavens and on earth” [TMQ Al-

And He ta’ala said:

“And He has subjected to you the night and day, and the sun and moon, and the stars are in subjection by His command” [TMQ An-Nahl:12]

The Muslim, as an Islamic personality, studies empirical sciences in order to derive benefit and employ it to serve the Islamic Ummah’s interests and vital issues. Knowledge is not sought for its own sake; rather, it is sought in order that man benefits from thethoughts and knowledge he learns in this life according to the Islamic rules.

He ta’ala said:

“Seek the home of the Hereafter with what Allah gave you, but do not forget your portion in this
world” [TMQ Al-Qasas:77]

Monday, April 23, 2007

The fallacy of the influence of Roman law on Islamic Jurisprudence

The following is a draft translation from Arabic.

Some orientalists, who hate Islam and detest the Muslims, claim that Islamic jurisprudence had been greatly influenced by Roman jurisprudence and law, when in the early ages the Muslims had rushed forth with the conquests. They said that this Roman law was one of the sources of Islamic law and that some of its Ahkam have been borrowed form this source. This means that in the time of the Tabi'un and after them, that Muslims had adopted Roman laws from Roman jurisprudence. They educe evidence for this view of theirs by claiming that at the time of the Islamic conquest there were schools of Roman law in the Sham region in Qaysariyya on the coasts of Palestine and Beirut. Also in the Sham region there were courts which in their systems and laws proceeded according to Roman law. And these courts inside the country continued for a time after the Islamic conquest which indicates that Muslims approved and adopted them and proceeded according to their laws and system. They supported this viewpoint with assumptions. They said, it is natural for a people who did not adopt much of a sedentary life like the Muslims, when they conquered an urbanised country such as the Sham region which was under Roman rule, that they should consider what they should do? What shall they rule them with? Thereafter, they borrowed their laws. Then they said that a comparison between certain sections of Islamic law and certain sections of Roman jurisprudence and law, demonstrate the similarity between the two. They also show that certain laws have been copied exactly they are from the Roman law, like : The burden of proof rests on the one makes the claim and on the one who rejects is the oath', and like the words fiqh and faqih. Rather those orientalists maintained that the Islamic law took from rules from the Talmud from Roman jurisprudence. According to their claim Islamic jurisprudence took Roman jurisprudence directly from schools and courts in Sham. And it took it via the Talmud.

This is what the Orientalists claim without furnishing any proof except assumptions. These statements from those orientalists are wrong for a number of reasons:

First: No one reported about the Muslims, whether orientalist or others, that one Muslim, whether he was a faqih or not, that he alluded to Roman jurisprudence or law, either by way of criticism, support or with intention to borrow. No one has mentioned anything whatsoever, which indicates that Roman law was not a subject of discussion let alone a subject of study. Some Muslims did translate works of Greek philosophy but they did not translate a single word or sentence from the Roman jurisprudence let alone translate a book. Which strengthens the judgement that they were abolished and wiped out from the country by merely being conquered.

Second: At the time when the orientalists allege that there were schools of Roman jurisprudence and courts which ruled according to Roman law in the Sham region, the Sham was full of mujtahidin from the 'Ulama, judges and rulers. It is natural that if any influence took place then it would have happened among those fuqaha (jurists). However, the reality is that we do not find in the fiqh of those people which has been preserved for us of any influence by Roman jurisprudence or any mention of it. Rather their jurisprudence and Ahkam were based on the Kitab, Sunnah and the ijma' of the Sahaba. One of the most famous from those mujtahidin is al-Awza'i. He used to live in Beirut, where the Orientalists allege was the site of the largest Roman schools in the Sham. He spent his entire life there and died there. His opinions have been recorded in many of the recognised books of fiqh. Thus, in volume vii of al-Shafi'i's al-Umm there are numerous Ahkams of al-Awza'i. It becomes clear to anybody who reads them the extent of al-Awza'i's remoteness from Roman jurisprudence, like the remoteness of the earth from the sky. Even, the mazhab of al-Awza'i, as it becomes clear from his fiqh itself and what has been reported about him, was that of the Ahl al-hadith. He relied upon hadith more than he relied upon ra'i. The example of al-Awza'i is that same as that of other fuqaha (jurists). If there were any influences they would have emerged amid those fuqaha.

Third: The Muslims believed that Allah (swt) addressed the whole of mankind in the Islamic Shari’a. And He sent our master Muhammad (saw) to all the people:

“We have not sent you (O Muhammad [saw]) except as a giver of glad tidings and a warner.” [TMQ 34:28]

They considered anyone who did not believe in the Islamic Shari’a as a disbeliever. And they believed that any Hukm which is other than the Hukm is Islam is a Hukm of kufr (disbelief) whose adoption is forbidden. Whoever believes in such a belief and acts upon it, he could take other than the Hukm of Islam especially in the early period, in the time of the conquests where the Muslims used to be the carriers of the Islamic Message, opening other countries to carry the da'wa of Islam to them. They conquered other countries to rescue the people from the rule of kufr (disbelief). So how can they conquer a country only to take the rule of kufr for they went to destroy it and put the rule of Islam in its place?

Fourth: It is not correct that the Muslims, when they conquered countries, they used to be of a lesser civilisation than the conquered country. If that was correct they would have abandoned their civilisation and adopted the civilisation of the conquered countries. The observable and perceptible reality is that the countries, which the Romans used to rule, carried thoughts about life which contradicted Islam. When the Muslims conquered them they did not force the inhabitants to profess Islam. Rather they were content just to take the jizya from the people. But it did not take long before the strength of the Islamic thought and the sublimity of the Islamic civilisation prevailed over the Roman thoughts and Roman civilisation and made it extinct. The inhabitants of the country became Muslims professing Islam and living according to it path with contentment and tranquility which indicates that the thoughts of Islam had wiped out the Roman jurisprudence and Roman thoughts. This reality which speaks for itself refutes the assertion of the orientalists that the Roman civilisation was stronger than the Islamic civilisation. And it refutes their assertion that the Islamic jurisprudence was influenced by the Roman jurisprudence.

Fifth: the word 'fiqh' and 'faqih' have been mentioned in the Noble Qur’an and in the sacred hadith. He (swt) said:

“Of every troop of them, a party should only go forth, that they (who are left behind) may get instructions in religion” [TMQ 9:122]

And he (saw) said: “Whosoever from whom Allah wishes good, He makes him to comprehend the deen.” And the question of the Messenger (saw) to Mu'az when he sent him to Yemen: With what will you judge? Mu'az replied: with the Book of Allah, then with the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saw), then I will exercise my own opinion; which is the fiqh. Similarly, sending the rest of the Walis to other regions, and the legal judgements of the Sahabah accounts for more than a quarter of a century, that constituted fiqh. So how can they assume that the word 'fiqh' and 'faqih' was taken from the Remans? As for the maxim: ‘The burden of proof rests on the one makes the claim and on the one who rejects is the oath', it is hadith of the Messenger (saw) which he stated before any legislative contact with the Romans. The maxim has been mentioned in the letter of 'Umar to Abu Musa in Basra. It is well known that no legislative contact took place between 'Umar and the Romans. So how can they maintain that the Muslims took the term fiqh, faqih and this principle from the Romans?

From this it becomes clear that the myth of the influence of Roman law on Islamic jurisprudence has absolutely no basis whatsoever. It is an fabrication of the orientalists who are hostile to Islam, who fill their hearts with hatred for the Muslims.

As for the issue of Islamic jurisprudence taking from the Talmud, its fallacy is evident from the Qur’an's attack on the Jews, for fabricating the Tawrah and Injeel which were revealed to sayyidna Musa and sayidina 'Isa, and that what they have before them has been written by their own hands, it is from them and not from Allah. It is a lie, a distortion of the Tawrah and Injeel. This attack includes the attack on the Talmud that is from their writings and not from Allah. This contradicts the notion of Muslims taking from them let alone the fact that the Jews used to be separate tribes from the Muslims. They did not live with the Muslim, they did not even mix with them, not to speak of the constant animosity between them and the Muslims, and the unremitting wars waged on them by the Muslims until they expelled them from their midst. This contradicts the idea of Muslims taking from them.

The truth, and the perceptible reality is that Islamic jurisprudence constitutes rules deduced from the Kitab and Sunnah or to what the Kitab and Sunnah alluded to in terms of evidence, and that if the rule is not based, in its origins, on a Shari’a evidence, it is not considered as part of the rules of Islam and nor is it considered part of Islamic jurisprudence.

Extract from The Islamic Personality, Volume 1 by Sheikh Taqi ud-deen an-Nabhani

Sunday, April 22, 2007

Ajal (lifespan) - In depth

The following is a translation from Arabic.

As for the issue of death, it is the same like the issue of sustenance (rizq). The one who brings life (al-muhyee) and causes death (al-mumeet) is Allah (swt); and life (al-hayaah) and death (al-mawt) are in the hand of Allah (swt). Allah (swt) has informed us by the definitely proved (qat’iyyat ut-thuboot) and of definite indication/meaning (qat’iyyat ud-dalaalah) verses (aayaat) that the cause of death is the end of life term (intihaa’ ul-ajal), and that Allah (swt) is the one who causes death. Thus, death inevitably occurs by the end of life term (ajal), and it never fails to take place then. Therefore, the cause of death is the ajal, and the one who causes death is Allah (swt). There are many aayaat on this issue. Allah (swt) said:

وَمَا كَانَ لِنَفْسٍ أَنْ تَمُوتَ إِلاَّ بِإِذْنِ الله كِتَابًا مُّؤَجَّلاً وَمَن يُرِدْ ثَوَابَ الدُّنْيَا نُؤْتِهِ مِنْهَا وَمَن يُرِدْ ثَوَابَ الآخِرَةِ نُؤْتِهِ مِنْهَا وَسَنَجْزِي الشَّاكِرِينَ

“Nor can a soul die except by Allah’s leave, a term being fixed as by writing.” [Aali ‘Imraan: 145]

اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَى عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَى إِلَى أَجَلٍ مُسَمًّى إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِّقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ

“It is Allah that takes the souls (of men) at death.” [Az-Zumar: 42]

أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِي حَآجَّ إِبْرَاهِيمَ فِي رِبِّهِ أَنْ آتَاهُ اللّهُ الْمُلْكَ إِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ رَبِّيَ الَّذِي يُحْيِـي وَيُمِيتُ قَالَ أَنَا أُحْيِـي وَأُمِيتُ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ فَإِنَّ اللّهَ يَأْتِي بِالشَّمْسِ مِنَ الْمَشْرِقِ فَأْتِ بِهَا مِنَ الْمَغْرِبِ فَبُهِتَ الَّذِي كَفَرَ وَاللّهُ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

“My Lord is He Who gives life and causes death.” [Al-Baqarah: 258]

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَكُونُواْ كَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ وَقَالُواْ لإِخْوَانِهِمْ إِذَا ضَرَبُواْ فِي الأَرْضِ أَوْ كَانُواْ غُزًّى لَّوْ كَانُواْ عِندَنَا مَا مَاتُواْ وَمَا قُتِلُواْ لِيَجْعَلَ اللّهُ ذَلِكَ حَسْرَةً فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ وَاللّهُ يُحْيِـي وَيُمِيتُ وَاللّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ

“O you who believe! Be not like the unbelievers who say of their brethren, when they are travelling through the earth or engaged in fighting: ‘If they had stayed with us, they would not have died, or been slain.’ This is so that Allah may make it a cause of sighs and regrets in their hearts. It is Allah that gives life and causes death, and Allah sees well all that you do.” [Aali ‘Imraan: 156]

أَيْنَمَا تَكُونُواْ يُدْرِككُّمُ الْمَوْتُ وَلَوْ كُنتُمْ فِي بُرُوجٍ مُّشَيَّدَةٍ وَإِن تُصِبْهُمْ حَسَنَةٌ يَقُولُواْ هَـذِهِ مِنْ عِندِ اللّهِ وَإِن تُصِبْهُمْ سَيِّئَةٌ يَقُولُواْ هَـذِهِ مِنْ عِندِكَ قُلْ كُلًّ مِّنْ عِندِ اللّهِ فَمَا لِهَـؤُلاء الْقَوْمِ لاَ يَكَادُونَ يَفْقَهُونَ حَدِيثًا

“Wherever you are, death will find you out, even if you are in towers built up strong and high!” [An-Nisaa’: 78]

وَقَالُوا أَئِذَا ضَلَلْنَا فِي الْأَرْضِ أَئِنَّا لَفِي خَلْقٍ جَدِيدٍ بَلْ هُم بِلِقَاء رَبِّهِمْ كَافِرُونَ

قُلْ يَتَوَفَّاكُم مَّلَكُ الْمَوْتِ الَّذِي وُكِّلَ بِكُمْ ثُمَّ إِلَى رَبِّكُمْ تُرْجَعُونَ

“And they say: ‘what! When we lie, hidden and lost, in earth, shall we indeed be in a creation renewed?’ No, they deny the meeting with their Lord! Say: ‘The angel of death put in charge of you, will (duly) take your souls; then shall you be brought back to your Lord.” [As-Sajdah: 10-11]

قُلْ إِنَّ الْمَوْتَ الَّذِي تَفِرُّونَ مِنْهُ فَإِنَّهُ مُلَاقِيكُمْ ثُمَّ تُرَدُّونَ إِلَى عَالِمِ الْغَيْبِ وَالشَّهَادَةِ فَيُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ

“Say: ‘The death from which you flee will truly overtake you.” [Al-Jumu’ah: 8]

وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَجَلٌ فَإِذَا جَاء أَجَلُهُمْ لاَ يَسْتَأْخِرُونَ سَاعَةً وَلاَ يَسْتَقْدِمُونَ

“When their term is reached, not an hour can they cause delay, nor (an hour) can they advance (it in anticipation).” [Al-A’raaf: 34]

نَحْنُ قَدَّرْنَا بَيْنَكُمُ الْمَوْتَ وَمَا نَحْنُ بِمَسْبُوقِينَ

“We have decreed death to be your common lot.” [Al-Waaqi’ah: 60]

وَأَنَّهُ هُوَ أَمَاتَ وَأَحْيَا

“That it is He Who caused death and gave life.” [An-Najm: 44]

ثُمَّ أَمَاتَهُ فَأَقْبَرَهُ

“Then He caused him to die, and put him in his grave.” [‘Abasa: 21]

لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا هُوَ يُحْيِي وَيُمِيتُ رَبُّكُمْ وَرَبُّ آبَائِكُمُ الْأَوَّلِينَ

“There is no god but He. It is He Who gives life and causes death.” [Ad-Dukhaan: 8]

إِنَّ اللّهَ لَهُ مُلْكُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ يُحْيِـي وَيُمِيتُ وَمَا لَكُم مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ مِن وَلِيٍّ وَلاَ نَصِيرٍ

“To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth. He gives life and causes death.” [At-Tawbah: 116]

كَيْفَ تَكْفُرُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَكُنتُمْ أَمْوَاتاً فَأَحْيَاكُمْ ثُمَّ يُمِيتُكُمْ ثُمَّ يُحْيِيكُمْ ثُمَّ إِلَيْهِ تُرْجَعُونَ

“How can you reject the faith in Allah, seeing that you were without life, and He gave you life; then He caused you to die, and will again bring you to life; and again to Him will you return?” [Al-Baqarah: 28]

These aayaat, which, are definitely proved, are of definite meaning that the one who gives life and causes death is Allah (swt). These aayaat ascribed causing death to Allah (swt). This ascription is real (haqeeqee), because ascription, in origin, is real, and it is not averted to metaphor (majaaz) except with an indication (qareenah). Since there is no any indication (qareenah) here to avert the ascription of death from its real meaning, then the meaning of ascription is the action of death, i.e. He is the one who caused the death. Therefore, one must believe that man does not die except if his ajal ended; and that the one who gives life (al-muhyee) and causes death (al-mumeet) is Allah (swt). Whoever does not believe in that is kaafir, because it is disbelief in the definite evidence (ad-daleel al-qat’ee), where rejection of what contained in the definite evidence is considered kufr. Accordingly, whoever denies that death is in the hand of Allah, and that man does not die except when he reaches his ajal, he is definitely kaafir, Allah forbids.

As regards the incidents of killing and the situations from which death results, they are cases (haalaat) in which death occurs, but are not causes (asbaab). So, they are not the cause (sabab) of death; rather the cause of death is the end of life term (intihaa’ ul-ajal). The difference between the cause (sabab) and the case (haalah) is that the cause definitely produces the effect (musabbab), and the effect (musabbab) does not result except from its cause (sabab). Whereas the case (haalah) is a circumstance or a condition in which the matter takes place; however its occurrence in that case is not definite. It might or might not take place; and it might take place in other than that state. Thus, the difference is quite obvious. The one who examines many of the matters from which death takes place, and the one who examines the death itself, becomes convinced that the matters from which death takes place, such as the plague, the cancer, shooting, burning and the like, might take place without causing death. Death might also take place without the occurrence of any of these cases. As an example, a deadly stab might hit a person, and all the doctors agree that the stab is deadly, but the stabbed person does not die; he might even cure of it and recover. While death might occur without a visible reason, such as when the heart of a person suddenly stops beating and he dies immediately, without discovering, after meticulous examination, the type of case in which the heart stopped. There are many of these cases known to the doctors. Hospitals, worldwide, have witnessed thousands of incidents where a matter that usually leads definitely to death took place, but the person did not die. On the other side, death might suddenly take place, without an apparent reason for that. Therefore, all doctors might say there is no hope in the cure of a particular patient according to the medical records, he might however recover, a matter that is beyond our knowledge. They might also say, there is no danger on a particular person, he is healthy, and he passed the point of danger, but he suddenly suffered a relapse and died. All of this is a tangible reality noticed by people and doctors. This indicates that these matters, from which death occurs, are not causes of death. If they had been causes, then death would have not failed to occur, and it would have not occurred without them, i.e. it would have not occurred without a tangible cause. The fact they failed to cause death, even for one time, and the fact that death occurred without them, even for one time, definitely indicates that they are not causes of death. They are rather cases in which death occurs. They are not the true cause of death; rather the cause is definitely something else. This is because the cause must inevitably produces the effect, and it should no fail in doing that. The cases do not do that; so something else must be the cause of death.

The question that arises now is that the mind proved what death usually occurs from it is not cause of death; it is rather one of the cases of death. Accordingly, the cause of death must be something else. Shar’ has proved as well that the cause of death is the end of life term (intihaa’ ul-ajal), and the one who causes death and brings life is Allah (swt). Is not there a rational proof that the end of life term (intihaa’ ul-ajal) is the cause of death? This is because negating of what death occurs from being the cause of death is not enough to prove, by rational proof, that the end of life term is the case of death. Therefore, there must be another rational proof that explains the cause of death.

The answer to this is that the proof of what death occurs of it is a case, and not a cause, is enough to prove there is a cause other than these cases from which death usually occurs. This is because death is an action that inevitably needs a doer, and it is an effect that must have a cause. Since what is suspected to be a cause has been negated, which are the cases from which death occurs, then there must be a cause other than them. Therefore, negating that from which death occurs being a cause of death necessitates there is a cause other than them. Accordingly, negating what death occurs from as a cause of death proves death occurs from other cause. Thus, the mind had proved the presence of a cause other than those thought to be causes of death. As regards the cause is the end of life term, and that the one who gives life and causes death is Allah (swt), the evidence to that is textual (sam’ee), and not rational (‘aqlee), i.e. it is the aayaat, which are definitely proved and of definite meaning, that prove the end of life term as the cause of death, and that the one who gives life and causes death is Allah (swt). Hence, the proof that death occurs by a cause other than the cases from which death occurs is rational evidence proved by mind. However, the evidence that the cause of death is the end of life term is textual (sam’ee) evidence and not rational (‘aqlee) evidence.

Saturday, April 21, 2007

Response to call for ammending the Qur'an in Holland

The following is a translation from Arabic.

The newspaper ‘Democratic Awakening’, the mouth piece of the People’s party for freedom and democracy, the VVD, has published an article titled: “The face of God in Qur’an and the Bible: The differences and Consequences”, written by a certain Frankfrie. The writer claims that the picture portrayed by Qur’an is primitive and has no clarity and is intolerant. He further argues that the Qur’anic portrayal of God encourages hatred and violence especially against those who carry a different point of view. The writer then concludes that the circulation of Qur’an in its current form is criminal and all its texts that instill hatred and violence should be discarded.

This article has found a champion in the form of Ms. Heleen Dupuis, who is a senator and president of the freedom wing of the party who defended and justified the article. She claims that the issue of subjecting the Qur’an to the Western norms of values is supported by the Muslims as a whole. Further she claims that this notion enjoys the whole –hearted support of those who are even backed by the Muslims scholars!

The supporters of this issue maintain that this will only open the doors for a dialogue with the Muslims. They further claim that this will encourage the Muslims to participate in an open debate on true Islam.

The truth is that this expedient pretext is regrettable and false, because the Muslims in general and especially the Shabab of Hizb ut-Tahrir have consistently expressed their intention to engage them in an open intellectual debate to demonstrate Islam as a viable alternative to the people. But off course the heretics are afraid of entering into such an intellectual dialogue. This is because they realise that such a serious intellectual debate will expose their falsehood and establish the truth- and this is what they are scared of!

The truth is that this expedient pretext is regrettable and false, because the essence of a dialogue on Islam between Muslims and non-Muslims requires that the Muslims argue for Islam while the non-Muslims argue against it; whereas they are calling for a debate with a pre-condition on us that Islam needs to be modified first and then they will agree for a dialogue. How can we then have a dialogue and what purpose will such a restrictive dialogue serve? If a Muslim becomes a non-Muslim, renounces his values and convictions then where is the need for a dialogue at all?

We therefore are not convinced that they seek a serious and earnestly intellectual debate by mounting this puerile and evil attack on Qur’an. We consider their expressed opinion on Qur’an as the erosion of the Liberal Party’s mass base. And why not? They are themselves a witness to the tremendous awakening about Islam! They are amazed at seeing Islam entering into hearts the world over, and people from the East as well as the West entering Islam in flocks!

The statement of the Media Representative continues:
The writer cites the ayah of the Qur’an which he claims incites hatred and begets intolerance, which indicates their intellectual depravity; this ayah is this word of Allah (swt):

{إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِآيَاتِنَا سَوْفَ نُصْلِيهِمْ نَاراً كُلَّمَا نَضِجَتْ جُلُودُهُمْ بَدَّلْنَاهُمْ جُلُوداً غَيْرَهَا لِيَذُوقُوا الْعَذَابَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَزِيزاً حَكِيماً (56)} (سورة النساء).

“Surely! Those who disbelieved in Our Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.), We shall burn them in Fire. As often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for other skins that they may taste the punishment. Truly, Allah is Ever Most Powerful, All-Wise. [TMQ 4: 56]

This ayah deals with the fate of the disbelievers after their death; this is similar in other religions including Christianity which the writer considers much more tolerant than Islam. This ayah extorts man to ponder over his reality and destiny. Contrarary to what the writer claims, this ayah does not incite hatred at all.

Because Islam is a universal religion, it incorporates all the systems to solve mankind’s problems. It recognizes the possibility of non-Muslims living among the Muslims, and incorporates relevant ways to deal with such a situation. Islam does not deny such an eventuality, but recognises its reality. The Prophet (saaw) said:

"من كان على يهوديته أو نصرانيته فإنه لا يفتن عنها" وقال: "ألا من ظلم معاهدا أو انتقصه أو كلفه فوق طاقته أو أخذ منه شيئا بغير طيب نفس فأنا حجيجه يوم القيامة".

“Whosoever wishes to remain a Jew or a Christian is not to be forced.” and said: “Beware anyone who does an injustice to a covenant or infringes on his rights or encumbers him beyond his capacity or takes from him unfairly, I shall be his arguer on the day of Judgement.”

Therefore, where is the justice and fairness that the West boasts of as ‘enlightenment’, which calls upon the Muslims to tear off and amend their Qur’an; and induces Muslims to renounce their religion in the name of integration into the ‘mainstream’ West?

The Media Representative’s statement concludes by reminding them to the challenging words of Allah (swt):

{أَمْ يَقُولُونَ افْتَرَاهُ قُلْ فَأْتُوا بِعَشْرِ سُوَرٍ مِثْلِهِ مُفْتَرَيَاتٍ وَادْعُوا مَنِ اسْتَطَعْتُمْ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ إِنْ كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ (13) فَإِلَّمْ يَسْتَجِيبُوا لَكُمْ فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّمَا أُنزِلَ بِعِلْمِ اللَّهِ وَأَن لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ فَهَلْ أَنْتُمْ مُسْلِمُونَ (14) (سورة هود)}.

“Or they say, “He (Prophet Muhammad saaw) forged it (the Qur’an).” Say: “Bring you then ten forged Surahs (chapters) like unto it, call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!”. If then they answer you not, know then it [the Revelation (this Qur’an) is sent down with the Knowledge of Allah and that La ilaha illa Huwa) none has the right to be worshipped but He)! Will you then be Muslims? [TMQ 11:13, 14]

Abu Zain – Okai Bala

Representative Member of Hizb ut-Tahrir - Holland
14th Rabi’ ul Awal, 1428 A.H
7th April, 2007 C.E

Thursday, April 19, 2007

New book by Sheikh Ata’ Abu Al-Rishta on Tafseer

The latest book by Sheikh Ata’ Abu Al-Rishta entitled 'Teyseer fi usul at-tafseer - Surah al-Baqarah' (To make understanding the principles of Tafseer [exegises] easier - Surah al-Baqarah) is now available to download in Arabic from the Sheikh's website:

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Q&A: Hijra from land of the disbelivers & having an Amir in Dar al-Kufr?

The following is a translation from Arabic.

Question 1: In origin is it permitted for Muslims to live in the land of the disbelievers as some ahadith indicate that this is prohibited. The Prophet (saw) said in translation, “I am not responsible for any Muslim who stays among polytheists.” They asked: ‘Why, Apostle of Allah?’ He said: ‘Their fires should not be visible to one another’, and he (saw) said, “Whoever joins the polytheists and lives with them then he is like them” and he (saw) said: “Migration will not end until repentance ends, and repentance will not end until the sun rises in the West.” (”Al-Musnad“, Vol.4/99, Abu Dawud, Kitab al-Jihad, Vol.3/7, Hadith 2479, and ad-Darami, Kitab as-Siyyar, Vol.2/239. Albani classifies it as Sahih. See: “Sahih al-Ja’mi’ as-Sagheer”, Vol.6/186, Hadith 7346) How do we understand these evidences?

Answer: The issue of migration.

Texts of mentioned Ahadith are as follows:

«أنا بريء من كل مسلم يقيم بين أظهر المشركين قالوا يا رسول الله ولم؟ قال لا تراءى ناراهما» أبو داود من طريق جرير بن عبد الله رقم (1530، 2274)

“I am not responsible for any Muslim who stays among the Mushrikeen. They asked: Why, Apostle of Allah? He said: Do not take light from their fire.” [Narrated by Jareer bin Abdullah, in Abu Dawood: No. 1530 and 2274]

«لا تنقطع الهجرة ما تُقبلت التوبة، ولا تزال التوبة مقبولةً حتى تطلع الشمس من المغرب» رواه أحمد من طريق معاوية.

“As long as repentance (Taubah) is accepted, hijrah will not cease, and repentance will be accepted until sun rises from the west.” [Reported by Ahmad on the authority of Mu’awiah]

The first Ahadith are regarding staying in dar al kufr when dar al Islam i.e. Khilafah exists.

The Hukm Shar’ai is to migrate from dar al kufr to dar al Islam. One may stay there while hoping to migrate to dar al-Islam or it is forbidden, as the reality may require.

Anyone who cannot declare his deen, or is not free to practice the Ahkam of Islam expected of him, while he stays there, and is in a position to migrate, it becomes obligatory on him to undertake hijrah to dar al Islam.

The evidence for this is the ayah:

“Verily those whom the angels take in death while they are oppressing themselves. They said: ‘In what (situation) were you?’ They reply: ‘We were weak and oppressed in the earth.’ They say: ‘Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to emigrate therein?’ For them is the abode of Hell, and what an evil destination!” [TMQ 4:97]

And in addition, the hadith first cited above.

Anyone who can declare his deen, and is free to practice the Ahkam of Islam expected of him, while he stays there, and is in a position to migrate, the hijrah is recommended for him and not obligatory on him to undertake hijrah to dar al Islam.

The evidence for this being the ayaat of hijrah, like:

إن الذين آمنوا والذين هاجروا وجاهدوا

“Those who believe and emigrated and fought in the way of Allah with their lives have greater rank before Allah and those are the successful ones” [TMQ]

By Qareenah, it is established that this request is not decisive for a person who is able to declare his deen in dar al kufr.

This is also indicated in the hadith reported by Ibn Hajr in al-Isabah on the authority of Nu’aim al-Nuham

It is narrated that when Nu’aim al-Nuham intended to emigrate, his people, Banu Adiyy, came and said to him:

“Reside with us and you are upon your deen, and we will prevent anyone intending to harm you. And you will suffice us with whatever you used to suffice us in. He used to supervise the orphans of Banu Adiyy and their widows. So he delayed emigration then emigrated afterwards. The Prophet (saw) said to him: Your people were better to you than my people to me. My people forced me to leave and wanted to kill me, while your people protected you and prevented (harm from reaching) you. He said: O Messenger of Allah, rather your people forced you to leave to the obedience of Allah and fighting His enemies, but my people hindered me from emigration and the obedience of Allah.”

This qareenah (indication) specifies that the order is not decisive for a person who is able (to declare his deen), i.e. the order is a recommendation or mandoob.

The hijrah from dar al kufr is haram in the case of a person who is able to declare his deen, carry out the Ahkam of Sharee’ah expected of him, and is in a position, either by himself or with the assistance of his group, to change the status of that dar al kufr to dar al Islam, either by merging it with the Khilafah state or facilitating its opening. It becomes an obligation for him to remain in dar al kufr and his migration from there becomes haram because this amounts to escaping from the obligation of changing the status from dar al kufr to dar al Islam of which he is capable either singularly or with his people.

This is as an overview of the issue of hijrah, for details, refer to Shakhsiyah, Vol. 2 , chapter on migrating from dar al kufr to dar al Islam, pages 266 to 270 of the Arabic edition.

However in the absence of a dar al Islam, it is permitted to stay anywhere, except where a Muslim is either not allowed to perform his deen’s activities freely, like the salah may have been prohibited, etc. or is prohibited from declaring his deen. In such an event he has to migrate to a land where it may be possible for him to act in accordance with the deen.

The above hadith cited regarding the continuation of hijrah, it simply means that hijrah will continue till the day of judgement. When dar al Islam is established, the hukm of hijrah will be applied, it will not be just the first hijrah from Makkah to Madina which was undertaken on the establishment of the first state, but will remain in force at a time when a dar al Islam exists and will be in force as we have explained.

(For details refer to the chapter in Shakhsiyyah Islamiyyah Vol 2 by Sheikh Taqi ud-deen an-Nabhani)

In short, the Ahadith concerning migration from dar al kufr to dar al Islam are linked to the existence of dar al Islam, and the hukm of hijrah remains valid to the day of judgement, so long as a dar al Islam exists, and hijrah is not limited to the first hijrah alone.

Question 2: Is it fard for Muslims living in non-Muslim lands to have an Ameer for themselves, as the hadith seems to indicate: Ahmad narrated on the authority of ‘Abdullah b. Amr that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said in translation: “It is not allowed for three persons (to be) without appointing one of them as an Ameer.”

Answer: The hadith reported by Ahmad on the authority of Abdullah bin ‘Amr:

«لا يحل لثلاثة نفر يكونون بأرض فلاةٍ إلا أمَّروا عليهم أحدهم»

“It is not allowed for three persons (to be) without appointing one of them as an Ameer.”

The hadith means that it is necessary for a group of people gathered on an issue, to appoint one among them as Ameer.

Those who have gathered for undertaking a journey, it is on them to appoint one Ameer for the journey.

Those who have gathered for a group (takattul), it is for them to appoint an Ameer for that takattul (structure), etc.

However administering the affairs requires the establishment of ruling (system) in a ma’roof manner. It is for this reason that it is not required of the Muslims living in the land of kuffar to appoint an Ameer on them as the Ameer for administering the affairs is the person with authority, and since these Muslims are living in the lands of kuffar, they cannot have an Ameer.

As for those living in the Muslim lands, it is incumbent upon them to establish the Islamic ruling and for it in accordance with the Ahkam al-Sharee’ah.

For Muslims living in the lands of kuffar, those Ahkam will be applied to them as were applied to the Muslims in Makkah before the establishment of the (Islamic) state in Madina. But while an Islamic state exists, those Ahkam of Islam will be applied as were applicable to the Muslims who remained in Makkah even after formation of the state, i.e. the Ahkam of migration as explained in the answer to the first question.

April 16th, 2007 C.E

The following is a draft translation from the section referred to in the Q&A from the Arabic book Shaksiyyah Islamiyyah (The Islamic Personality) Volume 2:


Emigration (hijrah) is leaving from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam. The Supreme said: “Verily those whom the angels take in death while they are oppressing themselves. They said: ‘In what (situation) were you?’ They reply: ‘We were weak and oppressed in the earth.’ They say: ‘Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to emigrate therein?’ For them is the abode of Hell, and what an evil destination!” [TMQ 4:97].

And Abu Dawud narrated via the way of Jareer bin Abdullah from the Prophet (SAW) who said: “I am free from every Muslim residing in the midst of the polytheists. They said: Why, O Messenger of Allah? He said: Do not take light from their fire.” The emigration from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam remains without termination (inqat’a). As for what Al-Bukhari narrated of his (AS) statement: “No emigration after the conquest of Makkah” and his statement: “No emigration after the conquest” and his statement: “The emigration has terminated but (there remains) jihad and intention.” And what was narrated about Safwan bin Umayya that when he became Muslim, it was said to him there is no deen for the one who does not emigrate so he came to Madinah and the Prophet said to him: ‘What did you come with, O Abu Wahab? He said: It was said there is no deen for the one who does not emigrate. He said: Return, Abu Wahab, to the (abatih) of Makkah. Reside in your residences. Emigration has terminated but (there remains) jihad and intention, and when you are asked to go forth (in jihad) then go forth.” All this is negating emigration after the conquest of Makkah. However this is reasoned with a Shari’ah reason deduced from the hadith itself since his statement: “after the conquest of Makkah” came in a way including reasoning similar to his (AS) statement: “Do not make into wine (tanbadhu) dates and raisins together” (narrated by Abu Dawud). His statement “together” came in a way including reasoning so the reason was the prohibition on making into wine (intibadh). This means that the conquest of Muslim is the reason for negating the emigration which means that the reason revolves around the reasoned (matter) in existence and absence, nor is it specified to Makkah but rather conquering any land by the evidence of another narration “no emigration after conquest.” This is strengthened by what Al-Bukhari narrated from Aisha who was questioned about the emigration and said: “There is no emigration. The believer would flee with his deen to Allah and His Messenger for fear of being persecuted. As for today, Islam has become dominant and the believer worships his Lord wherever he wishes.” This indicates that the emigration was upon the Muslim before the conquest fleeing with his deen fearing he would be persecuted. It was negated after the conquest as he become able to show his deen and perform the rules of Islam. So the conquest which resulted in that became the reason for negating the emigration; nor is it the conquest of Makkah alone. Therefore that means there is no emigration after conquest from the land which was conquered. His (AS) statement to Safwan “it has teminated/ended” means from Makkah after it was conquered since emigration is leaving from the land of disbelievers and the Dar al-Kufr, so if the land is conquered and becomes Dar al-Islam it no longer remains a land of disbelievers or a Dar al-Kufr so emigration no longer remains. Similarly there remains no emigration from all conquered lands. This is strengthened by what Ahmad narrated via the way of Muawiya who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (SAW) saying: “Emigration will not end as long as repentance is accepted, and repentance will continue being accepted until the sun rises in the west.” Ahmad also narrated that the Prophet (SAW) said: “Emigration will not end as long as there is jihad” and in another narration: “Emigration will not end as long as disbelievers are fought” which indicate that emigration from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam remains and has not ended. As for the rule of emigration, it is in relation to the one capable of it obligatory in some situation and recommended in other situations. As for the one not capable, verily Allah forgave him and it is not required from him.

That is due to his inability to emigration either due to illness, compulsion to stay or weakness like women, children and their like as came at the end of the ayah of emigration.
Whoever is capable to emigration and unable to show/display his deen nor perform the Islamic rules required of him, then emigration is obligatory upon him due to what came in the ayah of emigration. The Supreme said: “Verily those whom the angels take in death while they are oppressing themselves. They said: ‘In what (situation) were you?’ They reply: ‘We were weak and oppressed in the earth.’ They say: ‘Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to emigrate therein?’ For them is the abode of Hell, and what an evil destination!” The information here means the command and it is of the language of request as if He said: Emigrate therein. The request in this ayah is linked with emphasis (ta’keed) and linked with a severe threat upon leaving emigration. So it is a decisive request which indicates that emigration in this situation is obligatory upon the Muslim and he sins if he does not emigrate. As for the one able to emigrate but is capable to manifest his deen and perform the Shar’a rules requested from him, emigration is recommended not obligatory. As for its being recommended, this is because the Messenger (SAW) would encourage the emigration from Makkah before the conquest when it was Dar al-Kufr and there came ayah explicit about that. The Supreme said: “Verily those who believe and those who fought in the way of Allah, those are the ones hoping for the mercy of Allah and Allah is forgiving, merciful” [TMQ ]. And He said: “Those who believe and emigrated and fought in the way of Allah with their lives have greater rank before Allah and those are the successful ones” [TMQ ]. And He said: “As for those who believed and did not emigrate then you have no (wilayah) with them in anything until they emigrate. And if they ask your support in the deen, support is obliged upon you except with a people whom between you and them is a (mithaq)” [TMQ 7: ]. And He said: “Those who believed afterwards and emigrated and fought together with you, those are of you” [TMQ ]. All this is explicit in requesting emigration. As for its not being obligatory, the Messenger (SAW) did consent to those who remained in Makkah of the Muslims. It is narrated that when Nu’aim An-Nahham intended to emigrate his people, Banu Adiyy, came and said to him:

“Reside/Stay with us and you are upon your deen, and we will prevent anyone intending to harm you. And you will suffice us with whatever you used to suffice us in. He used to supervise the orphans of Banu Adiyy and their widows. So he delayed emigration then emigrated afterwards. The Prophet (SAW) said to him: Your people were better to you than my people to me. My people forced me to leave and wanted to kill me, while your people protected you and prevented (harm from reaching) you. He said: O Messenger of Allah, rather your people forced you to leave to the obedience of Allah and fighting His enemies, but my people hindered me from emigration and the obedience of Allah.” All this is in relation to Dar al-Kufr i.e. a land of war as it is irrespective of its residents being Muslims or disbelievers since the rule of the land does not differ according to the residents but rather differs by the system which it rules with and the security by which its people are secured. Accordingly there is no difference between Indonesia and the (Qafqas), or between Somalia and Greece. Except for the one able to manifest his deen and perform the requested Shar’a rules where he is able to change Dar al-Kufr wherein he resided to Dar al-Islam; it is forbidden for him in this situation to emigrate from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam. This is the same whether he possesses the ability by himself or his group structure (takattul) with the Muslims in his land or by seeking assistance of Muslims outside his land or by cooperation with the Islamic State or any (other) means. It is obligatory upon him to work to make Dar al-Kufr into Dar al-Islam and at that point it is forbidden for him to emigrate from it. The evidence for this is that if there resides disbelievers in the land within which he live and is ruled by kufr, it is obliged upon Muslims to fight its people until they become Muslims or pay the jizyah and be ruled by Islam. This is also obliged upon him in his attribute as a Muslim and in his consideration as one whom the disbelievers are next to and of those who are closer to the enemy. If those residing therein are Muslims and they are ruled by other than Islam i.e. by the system of kufr, it is obliged upon Muslims to fight their rulers until they rule by Islam. This is also obliged upon him in his consideration as one of the Muslims who is ruled by kufr. So in any case, fighting is obliged upon him and preparing for fighting if he is capable of it. The situation of the Muslim who lives in Dar al-Kufr does not go out of one of these two situations, so he is either of those upon whom jihad is obliged against the disbelievers near him or of those upon whom fighting the ruler ruling by kufr is obliged. In these two situations, it is considered that his leaving the Dar al-Kufr which rules by other than Islam i.e. by kufr as fleeing from the jihad from a place wherein it is obliged upon him or fleeing from fighting the one who rules by kufr, both of which are great sins before Allah. Accordingly it is not allowed for the one capable of changing Dar al-Kufr into Dar al-Islam to emigrate from it as long as he possesses the capability to change it into Dar al-Islam; this is the same in Turkey, Spain, Egypt and Albania without difference between them as long as they are ruled by the system of kufr.