Islamic Revival: February 2009

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Q&A: The apparent disagreement between Karzai & America

The following is a translation of an Arabic Q&A:

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Question: Ever since Obama has taken over the new US administration, it is being observed that the statements by some American officials as well as Hamid Karzai indicate a worsening of relations between Karzai and the United States. Put it together with Karzai’s moves towards Russia and China as seen in some of his statements regarding supply of arms to Afghanistan by harnessing the position of Afghanistan as a prominent member of the Shanghai organisation. So, have their relations really soured to the extent that America no longer wants to sustain Karzai anymore either by preventing his nomination or by bringing him down in the coming presidential elections later this year? Or even by assassinating him? Or is it that this whole episode of such statements is a mere façade created by mutual agreement to give the Afghan people the perception that relations between him and the US have soured? Which will make Karzai acceptable to the Afghan people and help him win the elections? Further, can America find a similar agent who will remain a stooge to them, who could that person be?

Answer:

1. To begin with it must be reminded that the Democratic Party’s policy towards Afghanistan were fundamentally different with respect to the policy of the previous Bush administration. Joseph Biden, the current US vice president was the conspicuous face of the Democratic Party who worked on the Afghanistan and was very critical of the Bush administration’s Afghan policy.

The American newspaper New York Times varied a report about the visit of Joseph Biden and other US Congressmen to Afghanistan in February last year where during the course of the official dinner, they ‘interrogated’ Karzai regarding the rotten advisory mess in his government. Karzai denied any such problem which infuriated Biden so much that he declared: “the dinner time is over” and cut short his visit before schedule!

The same newspaper stated on 8th February, 2009: “The situation has changed for Karzai and Afghanistan as Karzai considers himself unwanted both by his people and Washington.” The paper added: “Indeed Obama considers Karzai as untrustworthy. It also reported Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying: “Karzai presides over the nation of narcotics.” The paper concluded saying: “The Americans regret and fear defeat in their war on Afghanistan, and they perhaps intend to override Karzai and deal directly with the provincial rulers and regional governors.”
However it is clear that the current Obama administration accords top priority to Afghanistan in its foreign policy, it wants a fundamental change in Afghanistan especially because Obama had been focusing on bringing about a change during his elections campaign speeches. Karzai on his part is aware of this reality and realizes that as an American agent, he cannot seek assistance from any other country like Russia or China in order to retain his position and he does not exercise control over any Afghan city and his position hinges on the support of the US armed forces.

2. In it is this context that Karzai’s relations with Russia and China can be understood in their proper perspective which is that these relations are decided and approved by the US to seek these countries support in its war with the Taliban.

As for Russia acceptance of Afghanistan as an honoured member of the Shanghai Organisation, it does not mean that Karzai can afford to be free of America; rather it implies that Russia itself allowed even US agent countries to enter the SCO club (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) to ensure security and peace for the SCO countries. This in itself does not mean that Russia is not trying to gain of influence in countries loyal to the America, rather it implies that it has ruled out any attempts to gain a foothold in Afghanistan, at least in the foreseeable future.

As for the Russia agreeing to supply arms to Afghanistan, and President Medvedev’s letter to Karzai regarding Russia readiness to cooperate with Afghanistan in the defence field, it means that America itself has asked Russia to assist because the Afghan armed forces have Russian weapons which require Russian spare parts.

In fact this was stressed by the Karzai government’s spokesman Humayun Hamid Zadeh who said: “Despite Karzai request to Russia for defence assistance, Afghanistan remains committed to its relations with the NATO and the United States.” He added: “The request to Russia for assistance has a technical angle, the equipments of our armed forces, the aircrafts and armoured tanks are Russian made and we are strategically committed to the NATO and the US.” The spokesman was referring here to the presence Russian made aircrafts in Afghanistan since the Soviet Union’s war with it.

This indicates that Karzai’s relations with Russia are a routine matter and they do not reflect a global conflict…

3. Based on these it can be said that Karzai is aware that his days in Afghanistan are numbered and he also realizes that the Obama administration has taken a decision to bring about a change including him. His recent criticisms are nothing more than theatrics by which he hopes to highlight himself as the real president.

In other words the Obama administration intends to try its luck with a person other than Karzai who has outrun his utility and is no longer suitable for continuing as president.
As for the new face, the Americans will try to find another person more acceptable to the Afghan people than Karzai whom everyone regarded a worthless toy of the Americans.

The popularity of any future Afghan president will depend on his being from the Pashtun lineage because it represents the Afghan majority and it is for this reason that the US will rule out important and popular personalities belonging to the Uzbek, Hazara and Tajik minorities like Younis Qanuni, Qayyum Faheem, the deputy to Ahmad Shah Masood who was killed some years back, or Ismail Khan, the governor of Heart, Rashid Dostum, Burhanuddin Rabbani or any other person from the Northern Alliance who conspired with the Americans to bring down the Taliban in the aftermath of the war in 2001 C.E.

As per the information available until now, it appears that Ali Ahmed Jalali; the former Interior Minster is the Americans’ best bet to replace Karzai in the upcoming elections scheduled for August/September next. This is because first of all he is a Pashtun, then he is a military man; and this is what the Americans want. As for other Pashtun leaders who are in the running for the president’s post, we do not believe that they possess similar qualifications.

However, the political situations and equations change rapidly and it is expected that of the Americans fail to find a suitable replacement for Karzai, the elections may be postponed and Karzai may remain in office until and a suitable and pliable stooge is found. In other words, Karzai’s term is just a matter of time. As for the chance that the US may even kill Karzai in order to eliminate him, it looks far fetched and unlikely since more than being an American stooge, he is a faithful US employee.

In conclusion, what appears to be a confrontation between Karzai and the Obama administration, is nothing more than theatrics designed to give the perception that the post of Afghan president is a real one and he is not a mere puppet.

Finally, we can say that the present Obama administration intends to change its course in Afghanistan which will be different to the direction taken by the Bush administration which failed miserably. A necessary requirement in this change of course is replacing the soiled face of Karzai and with this; the US hopes to improve the grim and deteriorating situation in Afghanistan which will reduce the security pressure on the US and its allies’ armed forces…

16th Safar, 1430 A.H
10th February, 2009 C.E

Arabic Source

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Part 7, The Islamic Rules of Trade - Renting Houses for Residence/Dwelling (Sukna)

Article 20, Explanation of the Draft Constitution of the Khilafah

The following is from the draft english translation of the Arabic book مقدمة الدستورأو الأسباب الموجبة له (Introduction to the constitution and the evidences that make it obligatory) published by Hizb ut-Tahrir 1382 Hijri (1963 CE). Please refer to the original Arabic for accurate meanings. Please note some of the adopted opinions of the Hizb have changed since the time the book was published so any of the adopted literature published after this book which contradicts what is mentioned in this book abrogates those specific points.

Article 20:The Muslims reserve the right to account the ruler

It is a duty of sufficiency upon them i.e. (Fardhu Kifaya) . The non-Muslim citizens reserve the right to lodge their complaint against any unfair treatment by the ruler or against any slackness in the implementation of Islam upon them.

The ruler is appointed over the subjects in order to look after their affairs. If he were negligent in this guardianship, he then should be accounted. Although, he will be judged before Allah (swt) and although he will be punished for his negligence or abuse, Allah (swt) has conferred upon the Muslims the right to account him and He (swt) obligated them to undertake this accounting by way of sufficiency (Kifayah). Allah (swt) has made the Ummah the supervisor over the ruler's actions and responsibilities, and He (swt) obligated the Ummah to condemn him if he were to neglect these duties of his, of if he were to be slack in his undertakings.
Muslim reported on the authority of Umm Salama that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

" In the near future, there will be Amirs; you will like their good deeds and dislike their bad deeds; He who sees through their bad deeds is absolved from blame; and he who hates their bad deeds is also safe, but one who approves and imitates them... meaning that he who recognises the bad deeds should change them and he who cannot do so but condemns them with his heart will be safe.

Therefore, the Muslims from among the subjects should account the ruler in order to make him change his ways and they would be sinful if they approved and followed the rulers in the actions that in principle should be disowned. As for the non-Muslims, they are entitled to lodge a complaint against the injustice perpetrated by the ruler, because all types of injustice have been absolutely and categorically forbidden, whether these were perpetrated against Muslims or non-Muslims, because the harming of the Dhimmi has also been forbidden.

The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
"He who harms a Dhimmi , I am his adversary, and if I am his adversary, I will be against him in the Day of Judgement."

Also, because some specific types of harm have been made forbidden by text, and likewise would be all types of harm.

Abu Dawood extracted from the Hadith pertaining the peace treaty which the Messenger of Allah (saw) signed with the people of Najran that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
"And on condition that no church of theirs is destroyed, no priest is banished. They would also not be coerced away from their faith."

Therefore, if the Dhimmi were wronged of if harm were inflicted upon him by the ruler, he reserves the right to lodge a complaint until the injustice is lifted and the perpetrator is punished. His complaint would be heard in any case, regardless of whether he was right or wrong. It has been reported that Abu Bakr (ra) talked to a Jew called Finhas with the aim of inviting him to Islam, so Finhas said to him: "By Allah o Abu Bakr we are not poor compared to Allah but He is poor compared to us; we do not humble ourselves to Him as He humbles Himself to us; we are independent of Him while He needs us. Were He independent of us He would not ask us to lend Him our money as your master pretends, prohibiting you to take interest and allowing us to. Had he been independent of us He would not have given us interest." Finhas was referring to Allah's (swt) saying:

مَنْ ذَا الَّذِي يُقْرِضُ اللَّهَ قَرْضًا حَسَنًا فَيُضَاعِفَهُ لَهُ أَضْعَافًا كَثِيرَةً
"Who is he that will lend to Allah a beautiful loan, which Allah will double unto his credit and multiply many times?" T.M.Q [2-245].

But Abu Bakr was enraged and could not contain his anger; so he hit Finhas hard in the face saying: "By He Who owns my soul, were it not for the treaty between us I would cut your head off you enemy of Allah." Then Finhas complained to the Messenger of Allah (saw) against Abu Bakr, and the Messenger of Allah (saw) listened to his complaint and then asked Abu Bakr about what had happened. Abu Bakr (ra) related to the Messenger of Allah (saw) what Finhas had said, but when he (saw) asked Finhas he denied what he had said about Allah (swt) to Abu Bakr.
Then Allah (swt) revealed the following:

لَقَدْ سَمِعَ اللَّهُ قَوْلَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ فَقِيرٌ وَنَحْنُ أَغْنِيَاءُ سَنَكْتُبُ مَا قَالُوا وَقَتْلَهُمُ الْأَنْبِيَاءَ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ وَنَقُولُ ذُوقُوا عَذَابَ الْحَرِيقِ
"Allah has heard the speech of those who say Allah is poor and we are rich. We shall write what they say and their killing the prophets wrongfully and we shall say, taste the punishment of burning." T.M.Q [3-181].

It is also known that Abu Bakr (ra) was a minister of the Messenger of Allah (saw) i.e. a Delegated Assistant; thus he was a ruler, and Finhas was a covenanter. The Messenger of Allah (saw) heard his complaint against Abu Bakr even though he was in the wrong; and if the complaint is heard from a covenantor, the more reason it should be heard from the Dhimmi, for he is granted the oath of Dhimma.

As for the complaint pertaining the mal-administration of the rules of Islam, Muslims and non Muslims alike are entitled to lodge them. Some Muslims did complain to the Messenger of Allah (saw) against Mu'ath Ibnu Jabal because he used to lengthen the recitation during the Salat. The Messenger of Allah (saw) listened to their complaint and reprimanded Mu'ath to the point where he said to him: "troublemaker." three times. Mu'ath was at the time Wali over Yemen and Imam over his people. This Hadith had several narratives. Therefore, whether the complaint was against him while he was in Yemen or while he was Imam over his own folk, it was nevertheless a complaint against someone appointed by the Messenger of Allah (saw); thus it was complaint against a ruler and a complaint against the mal-administration of the Shari'ah rules; this is so because the Shari'ah rule stipulates that the Imam should be brief in the Salat, for the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

"He who leads people in Salat should be brief."

Therefore, it was a complaint against the abuse of the Shari'ah rule; and just like it was heard from the Muslims pertaining the rule of Salat, the complaint should be heard against all other rules and not just the Salat. Furthermore, the mal-administration of Shari'ah rules is considered an unjust act, i.e. (Mathlama), thus complaint against it is the right of the Muslim and of the Dhimmi, because the Messenger of Allah (saw) is reported to have said:

"And I hope to meet Allah(swt) without having anyone claiming a Mathalma against me."

The word "anyone" in the Hadith includes the Muslim and the Dhimmi, for he (saw) did not say "without having a Muslim", but he said: "without having anyone." These are all the evidences of this article.

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Part 6, The Islamic Rules of Trade - Hiring Things

Due to the current global financial crisis there is increasing interest in the Islamic Economic System, the most comprehensive book on this topic is 'The Economic System of Islam' by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani. However as people have many questions relating to the Islamic rules of trade we will be posting related extracts from the draft translation of the Fiqh masterpiece 'The Islamic Personality, Volume 2' by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani.

HIRING THINGS

If the contract was concluded on the benefits of things like hiring houses, animals, cars and the like, then that which is convened on is the benefit of the thing, and estimating of the equivalent wage inevitably requires looking to the thing whose benefit equals the benefit of the hired thing. Whenever hiring of the thing is completed, then the lessee can receive the benefit of the thing which he leased; so if he rented a house, he can reside therein, and if it were an animal or car, then he can ride it. The lessee can rent the hired thing once he possessed it at the same (amount) he hired it or for more or less.

This is because taking possession of the hired thing is equivalent to taking possession of the benefit, with the evidence that he is allowed to dispose of it, so he is allowed to contract it, and because it is a contract permitted with the capital, so it is allowed with increase or decrease. However, if he hires the thing for the benefit he can receive the equivalent to that benefit or less in case of harm, but he has no right to receive more than the equivalent of that benefit. This is because it is not permitted for him to receive more than his right or other than what he deserves. If he hires an animal to ride it, it is not permitted for him to load a burden upon it because riding is lighter than loading. If he hires a car for a certain distance, it is not permitted for him to ride it for a distance longer than that which he hired it for. If he hired a house to live in, he is not allowed to make it a storehouse for wood, iron or the like which is of greater harm to the house than accommodation.

In short, if the contract was concluded on the thing for a recompense then it is a sale, and if it was concluded on the benefit of the thing for a recompense, then it is hiring. Accordingly the contract can be concluded upon the thing alone like selling a tree with produce whose goodness has appeared without selling its produce. It could also be concluded on the thing with its benefit like selling a house. It could be concluded on the produce alone like selling produce whose goodness has appeared, and it could be concluded on non physical/tangible benefit like living in a house. If it was concluded on a benefit which is not considered a thing, it is hiring not a sale. Just as the buyer of the thing owns the thing and disposes of it in all forms, the hirer of the thing owns the benefit which he possessed by hiring and he can dispose of it in all forms once he took possession of it. Just as the purchaser of the trees of produce, once its goodness appeared he has the right to sell it while it is on its trees, the hirer of the thing has the right to lease/rent it because he owns its benefit the same way as the purchaser of the produce owns the produce which he purchased.

Accordingly, the hirer is allowed to rent/lease the hired thing once he received/took possession of it. This is because taking possession of the thing when it is hired is equivalent to taking possession of the benefits, with the evidence that he is permitted to dispose of it, so the contract over it is permitted like selling the produce on its tree. Whenever the hiring of the thing is completed and he took possession of its benefit, the hirer possesses all of the Shar’ai dispositions in the benefit of the thing which he hired because it is his ownership. So he can hire it at the wage he considers, whatever (amount) it reaches. So if he hired it for 50 and then leased/rented (to someone) for 500, it is permitted, because he owns the benefit so he owns (the right to) rent it (to someone) according to what he considers not according to what he hired it for. Hence what is called as (khulow) for storehouses, houses and others—which is paying a specific amount of money on top of the estimated rent of the house or storehouse to the first tenant from the one who wants to hire it from him—is permitted and there is nothing (wrong) in it because the tenant can rent the house or storehouse which is his lease to another tenant for the estimated rent together with an extra amount he pays for him; and this is renting of the thing he rented with extra amount over the rent by which he rented it. This is a permitted matter because it is permitted for him to rent out what he rented for more or less (rent) than he rented it, because it is a contract permitted with the capital, so it is permitted with increase, like selling the purchased good after he takes possession of it for more than he bought it with.

Herein is a question of handing the hired thing to the owner after the end of the contract: Is it obligatory or not?

The response upon that is that returning the hired thing is obligatory upon him if the hired thing is in his possession due to what Ahmad narrated from Sumra from the Prophet (SAW) who said:

“It is duty upon the hand (possessor) what it took until it hands it over .”

Whereas if the hired thing is not in his possession, then it is looked into. If it were seized by force from him, it is duty upon the one who seized it by force to return the hired thing to its owner and not upon the one who hired, since the one who seized is the one commanded to return the thing.

Ahmad has narrated from As-Saib bin Yazid from his father who said: The Messenger of Allah (SAW) said:
“One of you should not take the furniture of his friend whether seriously or playfully. If anyone of you took the stick of his friend, he should return it to him.”

This is general whether he took it from its owner or from someone else. However, if he lent the rented thing to someone else or rented it to him, then after the end of the contract between him and the owner of the property, he is obliged to deliver the hired thing to its owner.

That is due to the generality of the hadith:
“It is duty upon the hand what it took until it returned it/handed it over” and there did not come another text in hiring or otherwise excluding it, as it came in seizing by force (usurping).

Therefore it remains general regarding the statement “until he returned it/delivered it.”
It is not true to say that the hadith also covers the second tenant because his hand took over so it is obliged upon him to return it, thus he is the one responsible for returning it. This is not true because the hadith, even if it applies upon the second tenant, does not annul returning of the hired thing from the first tenant. So it is duty upon the first tenant to return the hired thing to its owner, and it is duty upon the second tenant to restore the hired thing to the first tenant.
The obligation of returning it upon the first tenant does not annul returning it upon the second tenant.

Similarly the obligation of returning it upon the second tenant does not annul returning it upon the first tenant. However, the owner pursues the one whom he rented and handed the thing to him i.e. the first tenant. Accordingly if a person rented a house to another then the tenant rented it to someone else for a greater rent i.e. he took what they call the (kulow rijl) then once the renting period for the first tenant ended the contract ended, and it becomes obligatory upon him to deliver the house to its owner, unless if its owner renewed the contract with him, so it remains under his authority, even if not under his possession. Or its owner made contract with the second tenant, and considered himself to have received the house. In that case the first tenant is acquitted from the responsibility of delivering the house and it is considered that he delivered it to its owner and the owner’s relationship became with the second tenant.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Article 18 & 19, Explanation of the Draft Constitution of the Khilafah

The following is from the draft english translation of the Arabic book مقدمة الدستورأو الأسباب الموجبة له (Introduction to the constitution and the evidences that make it obligatory) published by Hizb ut-Tahrir 1382 Hijri (1963 CE). Please refer to the original Arabic for accurate meanings. Please note some of the adopted opinions of the Hizb have changed since the time the book was published so any of the adopted literature published after this book which contradicts what is mentioned in this book abrogates those specific points.

Article 18: The rulers are four types
The Khalifah, The Delegated Assistant, The Wali and the Amil. Other than these four are not considered rulers, but employees.

Article 19: It is forbidden for anyone to assume the rule or any action considered to be a ruling matter, unless he is Muslim, free and just.

Allah (swt) has conclusively forbidden the Muslims from appointing a Kafir ruler over them.

Allah (swt) says:

وَلَنْ يَجْعَلَ اللَّهُ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ سَبِيلًا
"And never Allah will grant to the disbelievers a way over the believers." T.M.Q. [4 -141]

Allowing the Kafir to rule over the Muslim is to grant him a way over him and Allah (swt) has conclusively and categorically prohibited this by using the Arabic preposition "Lan" meaning "will not", and this serves as a Qareena (conjunction) stipulating that the prohibition of allowing the Kafir to have any dominion over the Muslims is conclusive and decisive. It denotes that it is forbidden. Besides, Allah (swt) has imposed the condition of Islam on the witness of the Raja'a (return to one's wife after divorce), i.e. he should be a Muslim.

Allah (swt) says:

فَإِذَا بَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ فَارِقُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ وَأَشْهِدُوا ذَوَيْ عَدْلٍ مِنْكُمْ
"So when they fulfill their appointed term, either take them back on equitable terms or part with them on equitable terms, and take for witness two persons from amongst you endued with justice." T.M.Q. [65-2]

The understanding is that the witnesses could not be from other than the Muslims. Allah (swt) has also imposed Islam as a condition upon the witness in a matter of Deen.

Allah (swt) says:

وَاسْتَشْهِدُوا شَهِيدَيْنِ مِنْ رِجَالِكُمْ
"And get two witnesses out of your own men." T.M.Q. [2-282]

Which means not other from your own men. If Shari'ah imposed Islam as a condition for such a witness in both these matters, the more reason why Islam should be imposed as a condition for the ruler. Furthermore, the rule means the implementation of Shari'ah rules and the execution of the judges' sentences and they are commanded to rule by Shari'ah, which stipulates that the implementing person should be a Muslim, because he believes in what he implements, and the Kafir could not be trusted with the implementation of Islam; thus the person implementing the rules should be a Muslim. Furthermore, the rulers are those in authority and when Allah (swt) ordered us to obey those in authority; he imposed the condition of being Muslim for those charged with authority.

Allah (swt) says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ
"Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those charged with authority from amongst you." T.M.Q. [4 - 59]

In this verse Allah (swt) says "from amongst you “, i.e. from amongst other than you. Allah (swt) also says:

وَإِذَا جَاءَهُمْ أَمْرٌ مِنَ الْأَمْنِ أَوِ الْخَوْفِ أَذَاعُوا بِهِ وَلَوْ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى الرَّسُولِ وَإِلَى أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْهُمْ
“When there comes to them some matter touching safety or fear they divulge it.If only they had referred it to the Messenger or to those charged with authority amongst them"T.M.Q [4 -83]
And again, Allah (swt) says in this verse "from amongst them" i.e. the believers, not from amongst other than the believers. This indicates that the person charged with authority must be Muslim. The phrase "those charged with authority.” mentioned in the Qur'an is always qualified as being in reference to those in authority from among the Muslims. This confirms that the ruler must be a Muslim. Besides, the ruler enjoys the total obedience of the Muslims and the Muslim is not obligated to obey the Kafir because the obligation upon him is confined to obeying the Muslim person charged with authority.

Allah (swt) says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ
"Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those charged with authority from amongst you." T.M.Q. [4 - 59]

Therefore, Allah (swt) ordered the obedience of those in authority from among the Muslims and did not order the obedience of other than the Muslims; which indicates that the Muslims are not obligated to obey the Kafir person in authority, and there can be no ruler without obedience. It would be wrong to say that a Muslim is obligated to obey the Kafir if he happens to be a director of a department, because the head of department is not a person charged with authority, but rather a hired employee, thus obedience to him is in the first instance derived from the order issued by the person charged with authority stipulating that the head of department should be obeyed, and the point at issue is pertaining the person charged with authority, not the hired employee. Therefore, it is not fitting for the person charged with authority over the Muslims to be other than a Muslim; he cannot be a Kafir.

Hence, it is categorically forbidden for the rulers to be Kafir.
As for the condition stipulating that the ruler must be a man, this is derived from what has been reported on the authority of Abu Bakr who said: "Allah (swt) has made me benefit during the days of Al-Jamal, from a word which I heard from the Messenger of Allah (saw), when I was on the verge of joining the people of Al-Jamal and fight alongside them.

When he (saw) heard that the people of Persia appointed to the throne the daughter of Kisra he said: "People who hand their affairs to a woman shall not succeed."

Therefore, the Messenger of Allah (saw)'s saying that success will not come to those who appoint a woman to be in charge of their affairs, this saying acts as a prohibition against appointing a woman, for it is a form of request. Since this information has come in the form of a reprimand, it therefore serves as a Qareena denoting that the prohibition is decisive; thus the appointment of a woman to be in charge of people's affairs is Haram and that is why being a man is a condition for becoming a ruler. As for imposing the condition of being just upon the ruler, this is because Allah (swt) has made it a condition upon the ruler to be just.

Allah (swt) says:

وَأَشْهِدُوا ذَوَيْ عَدْلٍ مِنْكُمْ
"And take for witness two persons from among you endued with justice." T.M.Q. [65-2]
Therefore, the more for he whose position is higher than the witness, i.e. the ruler, to be just, because if the witness should be just, the more reason the ruler should be just. As for the condition of being a freeman, this is because the slave does not have control over his own affairs, thus he could not have control over other people's affairs. Besides, slavery necessitates that the slave's time is owned by his master. These are the evidences of this article.

Views on the news - 20/02/2009

Britain one step away from the return of the Spanish Inquisition

On Feb 17 the Guardian newspaper reported that British government was considering plans that would lead to thousands more Muslims being branded as extremists. The proposals are in a counterterrorism strategy which ministers and security officials are drawing up that is due to be unveiled next month. Some say the plans would see views held by most Muslims in Britain being classed by the government as extreme. According to a draft of the strategy, Contest 2 as it is known in Whitehall, people would be considered as extremists if:

· They advocate a caliphate, a pan-Islamic state encompassing many countries.
· They promote Sharia law.
· They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world.
· This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.
· They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.
· They fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Contest 2 would widen the definition of extremists to those who hold views that clash with what the government defines as shared British values. Contest 2 is still being finalised by officials and ministers. Those considered extreme would not be targeted by the criminal law, but would be sidelined and denied public funds.
No doubt such measures will fail to halt the tide of Islamic awareness that now encompasses the whole world. But real question is—how long before Britain and the rest of Europe resort to a modern day Spanish Inquisition in a desperate bid to purge their Muslim populations for so called “belief crimes”.

Jim Rodgers on the current economic crisis: Get yourself a tractor and learn how to farm

In an interview with Sir David Frost on Al Jazeera television, veteran investor Jim Rogers attacked Obama’s economic plan, blamed the Federal Reserve for the economic crisis and said that the World Bank and the IMF should be abolished, not given more power, if a recovery is to be made. Rogers strongly slammed Obama's stimulus package, pointing out that more good money was being thrown after bad, and that the bailouts were only making things worse. The veteran investor said that the U.S. was following the same disastrous policies as Japan in propping up companies that should be allowed to fail, and that the same consequences would be reaped as much as 20 years into the future.
"The way the system is supposed to work, when times like this come, the solid people, the competent people, take over the assets from the incompetent people and then you start over again from a sound base, this is what South Korea did, this is what Russia did, and they did fine. What they're doing this time is they're taking the assets away from the competent people and giving them to the incompetent people and saying now you compete with the competent people with their assets and their money - it's terrible economics and it's not going to work, it hasn't worked before and it's not going to work this time," said Rogers. Rogers said that price had to be paid for 15 years of excess, but that the crisis could have been overcome in two or three years had zombie companies and banks been allowed to go to the wall.
"The central bank in the United States, the Federal Reserve, would not let people fail," said Rogers. Asked if he had any respect for the World Bank and the IMF, Rogers responded, "Zero....the best thing that would happen would be if we could abolish the World Bank and the IMF, they were set up in 1945 and '46 with very sound goals and very sound aspirations - they have far far left behind those aspirations and goals, they're now run by people who do little more than take care of themselves....look at their projects and you would be mortified." In response to a question about what if any sectors would be profitable amidst the crash, Rogers advised people invested in stocks to "get yourself a tractor and learn how to farm".

America reveals Pakistan’s complicity in providing airbases for drone attacks

On Feb 14 the Pakistani English newspaper The Dawn revealed that Pakistan had granted permission to the US to use its airbase(s) to carry airstrikes in FATA. Expressing surprise over Pakistan’s opposition to the campaign of Predator-launched CIA missile strikes against targets inside the Pakistani border, Senator Feinstein said: “As I understand it, these are flown out of a Pakistani base.” The CIA declined to comment, but former US intelligence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that Senator Feinstein’s account was accurate. Later, Philip J. LaVelle, a spokesman for the senator, said her comment was based solely on previous news reports that Predators were operated from bases near Islamabad. Another Pakistani English newspaper The News reported that the US was secretly flying unmanned drones from the Shamsi airbase in Pakistan's southwestern province of Baluchistan as early as 2006, according to an image of the base from Google Earth. It also stated that the drones were Global Hawks — which are generally used only for reconnaissance, flying for up to 36 hours, at more than 400mph and an altitude of up to 60,000ft. The existence of drone bases inside Pakistan demonstrates that the Pakistani leadership is fully involved in the slaughter of its own citizens to please America.

Indonesia wants America to ‘educate’ its army officers

The cash-strapped and poorly equipped Indonesian Armed Forces, or TNI, has no plans to purchase military equipment from the United States but would welcome assistance in the area of officer training, Defence Minister Juwono Sudarsono said on Feb 18. Juwono told reporters that he had asked Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda to relay the message to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is currently in Jakarta for a two-day visit.“We want to enhance cooperation with the United States in order to give our military officers better educational and training opportunities,” Juwono said, adding that an exchange program involving TNI officers would be more constructive than an equipment purchase deal. Juwono said the TNI needed its officers to undergo advanced training programs, to enable them to lead the military in a more professional manner. American military programmes are renowned for producing loyal agents through which America secures her vital interests. Calling for such programmes is dangerous and is a betrayal of the Indonesian people. Rather the defence minister should have announced a complete cessation of ties with the US and demanded that America ends its military presence in the area.

20/2/2009

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Part 5, The Rules of Islamic Trade- There Does Not Exist a Labour Problem in Islam

Due to the current global financial crisis there is increasing interest in the Islamic Economic System, the most comprehensive book on this topic is The Economic System of Islam by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani. However as people have many questions relating to the Islamic rules of trade we will be posting related extracts from the draft translation of the Fiqh masterpiece 'The Islamic Personality, Volume 2' by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani.

The capitalist system in economics was implemented upon the western world, and upon Russia before the communist party ruled it. Among the principles of the capitalist ideology is freedom of ownership from which resulted the owners manipulation (misuse) of the employees i.e. the workers as long as there existed mutual consent and as long as the theory of liability is the one dominating over them. Labourers received from the employers evil, injustice and exploitation of their sweat and efforts. When the socialist thought appeared and called for justice to the employee, it emerged upon the basis of solving the problems of the labourers; not on the basis of treating the hiring contract. Accordingly socialism came with solutions to give justice to the worker, by determining the time of work, the wage of worker, guaranteeing his leisure etc….So it destroyed the theory of liability and showed its incompetence to solve the problems. So the jurists of the western law were forced to change their view towards liability, so that the theory of liability can stand/face before the problems; therefore they inserted amendments to patch up their theory.

Principles and rules were inserted into the work contract aiming to protect workers and to give them rights which they did not have before, like the right to get together, the right to form syndicates/unions, the right to strike, beside giving them retirement bonuses or compensation etc…even though the text of the theory of liability does not permit such rights. However interpolation had been made to the theory to solve the problems of workers which Socialist thought provoked/evoked amongst the workers. Then the socialist theory came to prevent ownership of wealth and give the worker everything he needs. Due to the contradiction of the viewpoints between the two ideologies, socialism from which emanates communism and capitalism, in respect of ownership and in respect of the employee, there emerged to them the labours problem. Each one of the two came to have a specific method in solving this problem which was generated by their two different viewpoints with respect to life.

As for Islam, there does not exist a problem known as labours problem nor is the Islamic Ummah divided into classes of workers and capitalists, or peasants and landlords etc….The whole issue is related to the employee, whether he was hired based on the work like specialists or technicians (faniyyeen) or he was hired based on his work only, like the rest employees; and whether he was an employee for persons or an employee for groups or a State employee, and whether he is a private employee or a common employee; they are all employees. The rules for such employees have been clarified and explained.

Once the employees commenced with a named wage, they are entitled of the named wage for the hiring period, and they can leave their employer after their hiring period ends; and if they differed with him, there comes the role of experts to estimate the equivalent wage. These experts are chosen by the two parties but if they could not agree upon them, the ruler chooses them and obliges the two sides to accept the experts say by force. It is not allowed that the ruler decides a specific wage by making analogy with the impermissibility of price-fixing for goods, because the wage is the price of the benefit and the price is the price for the good. Just as the market of goods decides the price of the good naturally, the market of the benefits of workers is decided by the need for workers. However it is duty upon the State to prepare work for workers:

“The Imam is a shepherd (ra’i) and he is responsible (mas’ul) for his subjects (ra’iyah)” (narrated by Al-Bukhari).

It is duty upon the State to remove the injustice of the owners of work upon workers, for silence upon injustice with the ability to remove it is forbidden and therein is great sin. If the State was complacent in lifting injustice or it itself oppressed employees, then the whole Ummah is obliged to account the State over this injustice and to endeavour to remove it. The Court of Unjust Acts is also obliged to look in this injustice and lift if from the oppressed people, and its verdict in the matter is executed upon the ruler and the State. This duty is not left to the employees who were oppressed alone as is the situation today in solving the problems of workers with strikes and demonstrations. This is because the injustice against any invidual of the citizens and the State’s complacence in taking care of the affairs of any individual citizen is a matter related to taking care of the whole Ummah even if it were specific to a person or persons. This is because it is execution of a Shar’ai rule, and it is not related to a specific group, even if it falls upon a specific group.

As for what workers require of medical/health guarantee for them and their families, and guarantee of their expenses in the situation of leaving work and at old age and guarantee of education for their children and similar guarantees usually discussed to secure the labourers, Islam does not discuss them when discussing the employees and employers because these are not the duty of the employer but rather the State. They are not also for workers only but rather for each unabled person among the citizens. This is because the State secures health and education freely for all, and secures for the unable person his expenditure whether he is a worker or not, since this is duty upon Bait ul-Mal and upon all Muslims.

Accordingly there does not exist labours problem nor a problem specific for a particular group or section of the Ummah. Any problem related to taking care of the affairs of citizens the State is responsible to solve it. The whole Ummah accounts the State so as to solve this problem and remove the injustice, not the official alone is responsible for the problem, nor the one upon whom the injustice falls.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Article 17, Explanation of the Draft Constitution of the Khilafah

Article 17: The rule is centralized and the administration is decentralized:

This article has been drafted to differentiate between the rule and the administration. Differentiation between them could be illustrated in two aspects:

1- The reality of each one of them.

2- The actions of the Messenger of Allah (saw) pertaining the appointment of the rulers and the employees. As for the reality of each one of them, the rule (Al-Hukm), the power (Al-Mulk) and the authority (Al-Sultan) mean the same thing, it is the competent entity that executes the rules.

This is explained in the celebrated Arabic dictionary Al-Muhit. To quote from the dictionary: "The power is the authority and the competence of the ruler.", "The rule is the judiciary, and the ruler is the executor of the rule." This means that linguistically ruling means judging, and the ruler is the executor of the rule; what is meant by the rule in this context is the terminological expression meaning the execution of the rules i.e. the power and the authority and the competence of the ruler. In other words, it is the function of the Imara which Shari'ah has made an obligation upon the Muslims.

The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

"It is unlawful for three to be in any part of the earth without appointing one from amongst them as Amir."

The function of the Imara is the authority utilized to repel unjust acts and to settle disputes. In other words, the rule is the government or the guardianship mentioned in the Qur'an.

Allah (swt) says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ

"Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those charged with authority from amongst you."

T.M.Q(4-59) .

Allah (swt) also says:

وَلَوْ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى الرَّسُولِ وَإِلَى أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْهُمْ

"If only they had referred it to the Messenger or to those charged with authority amongst them." T.M.Q(4-83),

It is the effective management of people's affairs. This is the reality of the rule; therefore, the government, the Imara, the power and the authority is the rule, and anything beyond this is the administration. Therefore, the work undertaken by the Khalifah and his Amirs, be it Walis or Ummal (pl. of Amil meaning governor) , in terms of looking after people's affairs by imlementing the Shari'ah rules and executing the judges' verdicts, is considered as part of the rule. Any other function undertaken by those persons or other persons is considered part of the administration. Hence, the difference between the rule and the administration becomes clear. The Legislator has conferred this rule, with this reality upon the Khalifah whom the Ummah elects, i.e. the Amir whom the Ummah chooses. By choosing the Amir, i.e. by giving the Baya'a to the Khalifah, the Khalifah becomes the one with the competence of government, i.e. the rule becomes the competence of the Khalifah i.e. the Amir. This competence, could not be given to anyone else, unless the Khalifah delegates it to someone else himself. This is why the rule is centralized. In other words, the rule is to the Ummah and she in turn appoints a Khalifah i.e. an Amir; by giving him the Baya'a i.e. by electing him, he becomes the competent ruler; and he consequently reserves the right to delegate ruling matters to whoever he wishes; and no person can have this competence unless the Khalifah delegates him with it. Hence, the centrality of the rule becomes apparent; that is confining the competence of government to whom the Ummah has chosen, to enjoy personally the exclusive power of ruling. No other person apart from him enjoys a personal competence of government unless this is conferred upon him by the Khalifah within the specifications of this conferment, related to the place, the time and the matter at hand. We gather from this that the rule is centralized and this centralization is binding.

As for the actions of the Messenger of Allah (saw), he (saw) dispatched the Walis to their respective Wilayas and ordered them to implement the Shari'ah rules upon people. He (saw) also appointed employees to undertake certain actions, not to implement the rules. For instance, he (saw) appointed a host of Walis and gave them the right to execute the rules, without however specifying the means nor the styles of execution; he rather left it up to them. In other cases, he (saw) used to write a document containing the Shari'ah rules, not the means of execution, nor the styles of execution; he used to ask other to execute the rule of Allah.

He appointed Amru Ibnu Hazm as a Wali and he handed him a document. He (saw) also appointed Mu'ath Ibnu Jabal and asked him how he would rule, and approved of his opinion in the matter. The Messenger of Allah (saw) appointed also Utab Ibnu Usayd as a Wali to execute the Shari'ah of Allah. He who used to be appointed as a Wali, used to also deem it within his competence to execute. Imran Ibnu Hassin was reported to have been appointed once as an Amil over the Sadaqa; so when he returned he was asked: "Where is the money?" "He replied: "Was it for the money that you sent me? We took the money from where we used to take it in the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and we placed where we used to always place it." This is different to the employees, for they would have their jobs specified and they would execute what they are ordered. For instance, the Messenger of Allah (saw) appointed Abdullah Ibnu Rawaha as an assessor over the Jews, i.e. he used to assess their produce before it is harvested. He (saw) used to dispatch the Ummal to levy the Zakat, so they would collect it and bring it back to the Messenger of Allah (saw); and he used to give them a wage. Basr Ibnu Said Ibnu Al-Saadi Al-Maliki said: "Omar Ibnul Khattab appointed me as Amil of Sadaqa, so when I finished and handed it over to him he paid me a wage. Upon this I said: "I did this for the sake of Allah." He said: "Take what you have been given, for I did your job in the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he gave me a wage, then I said the same as you have just said; so the Messenger of Allah (saw) said to me:

"If you have been given something without asking, take and give Sadaqa."

Imran Ibnu Hassin was a ruler, and he disapproved of being asked for the Zakat he had collected, for he executed the rule of Allah (swt) and gave it to those who were eligible, just like he used to do in the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw). However, Basr Ibnu Said was an employee who had performed what he had been commissioned in terms of collecting the Zakat and did not implement the Shari'ah rules. Hence, the difference between the actions of the ruler and the actions of the employee becomes apparent. The actions of the ruler is to implement the Shari'ah, i.e. to carry out the function of government, power and authority; whereas the actions of the employee (civil servant) is to carry out specific tasks and not to implement rules, and such actions are not part of the ruling matters, but rather part of the administrative tasks; and this also illustrates the difference between the actions of the ruler himself, for some of his actions are part of ruling matters, that is to implement the Shari'ah rules and execute the judges verdicts, which no other person has the competence to undertake, unless he is delegated by the one who has the power to rule, to undertake specific ruling matters; and other actions of the ruler are styles and means utilized to achieve the implementation, and these are part of the administrative matters. This type of actions does not require an appointment as far as the ruler is concerned; he also does not have to refer back to he who delegated him, because his appointment as ruler entitles him to utilize the means he deems fit and the styles he wishes, as long as the one who had appointed him does not impose specific styles and means, in which case he would have to abide by the specified styles and means. In other words, his appointment as ruler gives him the competence to undertake administrative actions provided there exist no administrative systems established by the one with the competence to rule, in which case the system must be adhered to.

Therefore, it becomes clear that the meaning of the rule being centralized is that assuming the authority, i.e. the implementation of Shari'ah is not a personally acquired right, it is rather given to the one whom the Ummah elects, and this authority is confined to him and to those whom he personally and exclusively delegates. The fact that the administration is decentralized means that the appointed ruler does not have to refer administrative matters back to the one who delegated him, he would rather perform them as he deems fit. This is established and deduced from the reality of the rule as mentioned in the Shari'ah texts, and from the actions of the Messenger of Allah (saw) pertaining the appointment of rulers. These are the evidences of this article.

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Understanding the Hadith

Nothing historically has received more scathing attacks from the kuffaar than hadeeth literature, that is, the preserved body of narrations related to the Prophet's صلى الله عليه وسلم sayings, actions and conduct. Originally, manykuffaar attempted to stir doubt in the genre of hadith literature by spreading dubious lies about the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and highlighting supposedly contradictoryahadeeth. Orientalists then took up the mantle of destroying the credibility of the Prophetic traditions by carrying out extensive research on the wholesale rejection of hadeeth as a historical source. This was initiated by Orientalists such as Goldziher and Schact, an attack that continues to this day at the hands of modern-day Orientalists.

There exist many misunderstandings about the reality of hadeeth even amongst the Muslim Ummah. Amongst some, there is an attitude that the Sunnah is of much less importance than the Qur'an. From this a mentality has emerged disregarding or neglecting legislation (ahkaam) simply because it is not found explicitly in the Qur'an. Unfortunately, many Muslims have criticised the use of ahadeeth (pl. Hadeeth) by using the very same arguments non-Muslims have used against the authenticity of the Sunnah. In 1977 Colonel Gaddafi, ruler of Libya, announced that the ahadeeth mentioned by the tongue of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم are of doubtful authenticity because they were compiled two hundred years after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. He gave an example of a contradiction in the hadeeth by quoting ‘Aisha رضي الله عنها which says, "Aisha رضي الله عنهاis deficient in mind and Deen." He also mentioned another hadith were we read, "Take half your Deen from the mouth of ‘Aisha رضي الله عنها." Gaddafi concluded that it is not allowed to accept ahadeeth because one cannot be certain whether they are authentic or fabricated. He thus concluded that the Sunnah cannot be taken as a source of legislation.

Historical origins

At the time of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم questions of authenticity were never an issue since the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was living amongst Muslims and his companions were able to correct each other if any mistakes were made in narration. ‘Umar رضي الله عنه once narrated that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "The deceased is punished due to the weeping of his family." ‘Aisha رضي الله عنها corrected him, saying, "The Prophet صلى الله عليهوسلم said this regarding a Jewess that she was punished whilst her family were crying for her," meaning that she was punished due to dying upon disbelief (kufr) whilst the family wept and not because the family was weeping for her. Due to their proximity to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, the Sahabah would check strange attributions and reports when they felt doubt.

The earliest record of fabrication of ahadeeth started after the first civil war between Ali رضي الله عنه and Mu'awiya from 35AH following the murder of Uthman رضي الله عنه. According to ibn Sirin (d.110AH), "They did not ask about the isnad (chain of narration) but when civil war (fitna) arose they said: Name to us your men; those who belong to Ahl al-Sunnah, their traditions were accepted and those who were innovators, their traditions were neglected."

After this time the fabrications increased with varying motivations. Initially the false attributions reflected political differences. According to ibn Abi al-Hadeed: "Lies were introduced in hadeeth on merits originally by Shi'ah. They in the beginning fabricated many ahadeeth in favour of their man, motivated by enmity towards their opponents. When the Bakriyya (i.e. supporters of Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه) found out what the Shi'ah had done they fabricated on their part ahadeeth in favour of their man."

From this problem arose the challenge to authenticate and verify the narrations being attributed to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. There were thousands of transmitters of ahadeeth scattered throughout the Islamic lands and an even greater number of reports to sift through. What was required was for the sound narrations to be separated from the weak and then to be compiled. This was all in the days when the best form of data storage was the human memory.

Understanding the Hadeeth methodology

The essential argument for the rejection of ahadeeth is that they were a human construct and not revelation. The discussion of the Shari'ah begins with its sources, which in origin is the Qur'an. The other legislative source is the recorded sayings, actions and conduct of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم which are termed ahadeeth. The ahadeeth are a collection of around 600,000 authenticated narrations comprised of the sayings, actions and consent of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. A hadeeth is always composed of two parts: the matn (text) and the isnaad(chain of reporters).

When one wants to authenticate any incident or statement one would look at those people narrating the incident and then look at their characters. It was out of this need that an entire science, known as 'ilm al-rijaal (knowledge of the men who transmitted ahadeeth) emerged and this science evolved into an extremely sophisticated discipline. This is because if one is characterised with lying, sin or memory loss, one cannot be considered trustworthy. One can also examine how close the narrators were to a reported incident in terms of whether they actually witnessed it or spoke to another person who narrated the event. This would require the specialist inhadeeth and the scholars of Islam to check accounts of a given narrators memory, eyesight, tendency to exaggerate etc. If the people narrating the event were small in number, then it must be asked if they could have colluded in their accounts. If the opposite were the case and the numbers of trustworthy individuals relating a similar account unknown to the others incredibly numerous, the possibility of collusion diminishes accordingly.

Since each narrator related narrations to others, and so on, chains of narrators develop and we must then examine the chains themselves as well as those within the chain. A tawaatur narration (a narration confirmed generation to generation) is a hadeeth which has been transmitted from one generation to another with each generation being composed of individuals so numerous that the possibility of fabrication or lying is effectively non-existent. It would be similar to taking into account the numerous different narrations from various generations and still claiming the Second World War never took place.

The chain of narration (isnaad) and its study is where the muhaditheen (scholars who collected and categorisedahadeeth) establish the continuity of the chain of narrators i.e. they ensure that there were no gaps, inconsistencies, distortions or errors in the chain. This was achieved by cataloguing the dates of birth and death of narrators and the towns they came from in order to establish the possibility that they had met and hence were actually able to transmit ahadeeth to one another.

The second issue that had to be ascertained was the probity or mendacity of transmitters. It is not sufficient to verify an unbroken continuous chain if even one of the transmitters was known to be of unsound character. Like any chain, all that is necessary for the whole sequence to collapse is simply one weak link that would allow it to fall apart quickly and easily. So one weak link, or in the case of hadeeth literation, a liar in the chain, will weaken or nullify the report respectively even if the rest of the chain features illustrious and trustworthy transmitters. It is for this reason that the Muslims at the time gathered information about the narrators ('ilm al-rijaal) which was a colossal accomplishment since it involved assessing the character, reputation and state of mind of thousands upon thousands of transmitters. This repository of biographical material would then be used to identify each and every transmitter in the chain to ensure a valid link back to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. It is as a result of this that the genre of biographical dictionaries emerged, a genre that went on to become one of the pillars of hadeethclassification with countless books being compiled on this subject. After the study of the chains the ahadeethwere classified into strong (sahih), good/sound (hasan), not sound (da'eef) and fabricated or spurious (maw-doo'). The ahadeeth came to be further categorised into topics such as purity, prayer, charity, partnership, marriage, trade, taxation, brokerage, ruling and deputation, amongst many others. This now meant that legislation could be deduced from this basis from the Sunnah, and Muslims have been doing this for the last fourteen centuries.

The ahadeeth is confirmed as a source of law by the Qur'an itself,

مَّنْ يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللّهَ

"He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed God." [TMQ An-Nisa: 80]

This method became the method of verifying what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did and said. This is why the science of ahadeeth developed and became a whole discipline itself. Thus a valid hadith is one whose chain is continuous by trustworthy and meticulous transmitters whose reports contained no abnormality or defects. Thus, the conditions in this definition can be listed as the following:

1. Ittisaal as-Sanad (continuity of the chain)
2. ‘Adaalatu Al-Ruwwaah (probity or trustworthiness of narrators)
3. DabT Al-Ruwaah (The precision and accuracy of narrators)
4. The absence of conflict with stronger narrations

Detecting forgery

A wide variety of techniques were developed to detect forgery and deception. There are techniques related to thesanad (chain) and also techniques relating to the matn (text). Such techniques were many in number and are beyond the scope of this article; two such techniques are reconciling facts with narrations and mukhtalaf al-Hadeeth, reconciling seemingly contradictory hadith.

An example of reconciling facts with narrations through textual analysis is the one quoted by ibn Qayyim in hiswork, Naqd al-Manqool. He quotes a report which says that an agreement was made with the people of Khaybarthat exempted them from the payment of Jizyah. This report was declared a fabrication due to the following indications in the Matn:

The text mentions Sa'd bin Mu'aadh رضي الله عنه but Sa'd had died before then in the Battle of Ahzab.

It mentions that Mu'aawiyah wrote the letter but Mu'aawiyah had not embraced Islam until the Conquest of Makkah which occurred after this incident.

The hadeeth mentioned Jizyah but the verses (aayaat) legalising Jizyah were not revealed until after the Battle ofTabuk.

Its text mentions that certain types of taxes were levied but these were known not to exist at the time of Khaybar.

The Jews of Khaybar fought the Messenger (saws) and his Companions. What did they do to deserve being granted such an exemption from the obligation of Jizyah, when other tribes equally bellicose had not been exempted?

Had the Prophet (saws) exempted the people of Khaybar from the Jizyah, he would not have stipulated that they be expelled when he صلى الله عليه وسلم willed. This does not fit with the ruling that the Ahl al-Dhimmah cannot be expelled as long as they abide by the rules of Islam.

If the Prophet had exempted them, why did none of his companions, the Sahaabah, ever exempt them?

In this way, established facts were utilised to ascertain the validity of the content in the various ahadeeth.

When presented with two sets of contradictory hadith, one of three options is possible. Either one can resort to reconciliation of the hadeeth by considering a whole host of issues such as textual indication or, if this is not possible, then the outweighing (tarjeeh) of one report over the other if the chronology is not known and finally, accepting abrogation if the chronology is known.

Thus, the means of removing conflicts are three:

a) Jam' a (reconciliation)
b) Tarjeeh (outweighing if the chronology is not known)
c) Naskh (abrogation if chronology is known)
d) If none of the above methods are possible, then the muhadditheen revert back to the original rule and assume the contradictory texts are non-existent.

The process of reconciliation succeeds by attempting to reconcile two conflicting texts due to certain linguistic and circumstantial considerations. Here, the textual indications can assist in the reconciliation between two texts. For example, in one hadeeth, we read, "Water is pure so nothing can make it impure." (Abu Dawud). In another, we read, "If the water is enough to fill two pots (qullatayn), it carries no impurity." (An-Nasaa`ee) The first text is ‘Aam (general) for all amounts of water except the wording of the second text indicates that water can become impure if its nature is changed. This is a specification (takhsees) of the first text by the meaning of the second.

Tarjeeh (outweighing) can occur in a number of ways; one such way is if one of the conflicting hadeeth accords with another authentic hadith. For example, one hadeeth reads, "There is no nikaah (marriage) without a wali (guardian)." (Abu Dawud) This hadeeth stipulates the presence of a wali but it seems to contradict anotherhadeeth which indicates that the wali is not stipulated. That hadith is as follows, "The matron has greater right than her guardians and the virgin her permission is sought. Her permission is her silence." (Saheeh Muslim) Yet the first hadith stipulating the presence of the wali agrees with another sound narration which says, "Any woman who gets married without the permission of her guardian (Wali), her marriage will be void, her marriage will be void, her marriage will be void." (al-Haakim) Therefore, the tarjeeh here will be that thehadeeth which says that there is no nikaah without a wali is outweighed and accepted because it is supported by another authentic narration.

As for abrogation, this happens when it is not possible to reconcile a hadeeth but abrogation is possible because the chronology is known. For example, one hadeeth reads, "The one who cups blood and is cupped has broken his fast" whereas another hadeeth reads, "...that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was cupped while he was fasting." If we scrutinize the circumstances of these ahadeeth, we find that first hadeeth took place in the 8th year after Hijrah during the Conquest of Makkah while the second hadeeth is in the Farewell Khutbah in the 10th year after Hijrah. Thus, Imaam Ash-Shaafi'ee رضي الله عنه took the view that the second hadeeth had abrogated the first, allowing the cupping of blood while fasting in Ramadaan.

The Muslim scholars and experts were able to amass a database of thousands of narrators, define rigorous criteria to assess authenticity, classify and adopt a grading system for chain narrators, devise techniques to detect and avert mistakes and fabrications and adopt a methodology to reconcile the differences within certain texts. The result was the remarkably robust and effective preservation of the Islamic ideology and its legislative capacity.

If we compare the system of hadeeth collection (Isnaad) to the modern system of historical analysis, we will find the former to be much more sophisticated and successful in establishing the authenticity of historical incidents and events. What the Muslims called a da'eef hadith is perhaps stronger in historicity, in some of its forms, than modern sources such as history textbooks, numismatics or historical criticism of literary texts. This is because da'eef does not mean fabrication but simple that it does not satisfy the stringent criteria developed by themuhadditheen.

Saturday, February 14, 2009

One State Solution: A Jewish Dream

Recent events in Palestine have raised many concerns about the practicality of the so-called ‘Two States Solution’. Political analysts are now perplexed, thinking as to whether this ‘solution’ will ever really work. Political commentators are now seriously questioning whether this proposal is realistic and if Israel will ever treat its potential neighbour, the imaginary state of independent Palestine, with fairness and justice? The overwhelming majority of these commentators and analysts, having witnessed Israeli barbarity in Gaza, will reject the notion of trusting Israeli authorities altogether and will propose many different solutions. A different solution is already in existence, which, is deliberately ignored by the powers vested with the responsibility to diffuse this conflict. This solution is a ‘One State Solution’[1], which has worked perfectly well in the past and still has the potential to restore the same prosperous and peaceful co-existence – which lasted for centuries - between the Muslims, Jews and Christians: The Golden Age of Islam.

The Islamic system is the only system that carries the capacity of treating others with complete fairness. Under the Islamic system, Jews lived in harmony and peace for over one thousand years and some of the Jewish scholars/historians remember that era as the ‘Islamic Golden Age’. Whenever the non-Muslim powers took control of any land, they failed to demonstrate impartiality and justice towards the other, especially, in political as well as socio-economic affairs.

In recent years, the British government has exerted immense pressure on Muslim leaders to combat anti-Semitism in the Muslim community. Muslims are however, the least deserving people to be accused of fostering anti-Semitism, as the facts presented below will amply demonstrate that the Jews were not treated in Islamic lands as they were treated elsewhere. The following discussion will substantiate the value and necessity of reviving the ‘One State Solution’ for Palestine, a solution that will provide freedom and security to all.

Jews had reached the peak of their prosperity under Islamic rule. Hasdai Ibn Shaprut (915-990 CE) was the chief minister of the Islamic Caliphate of Cordova, governed by the most powerful monarch in Western Europe, Abdur-Rahman III. Hasdai’s position inevitably benefited his people, as he made inquiries into the affairs of his brethren scattered as far as Caucasus. In a letter to the Jewish Khazar King Joseph, he elaborated upon his fortunate position in the Islamic lands:

‘Praise be to the beneficent God for his mercy towards me! Kings of the earth, to whom his [the Caliph’s] magnificence and power are known, bring gifts to him, conciliating his favour by costly presents, such as the king of the Germans, the king of the Gebalim, the king of Constantinople, and others. All their gifts pass through my hands, and I am charged with making gifts in return. (Let my lips express praise to the God in heaven who so far extends his loving kindness towards me without any merit of my own, but in the fullness of his mercies.) I always ask the ambassadors of these monarchs about our brethren the Jews, the remnant of the captivity, whether they have heard anything concerning the deliverance of those who have pined in bondage and had found no rest.’ [2]

Due to an active implementation of the Zionist apartheid policy in Palestine, one can never imagine a Palestinian Muslim becoming the prime minister of Israel. Samuel Ibn Nagrella ha-Nagid (993-1056 CE) was another powerful Jewish chief minister of Granada in Islamic Spain who served his people well. Abraham Ibn Daud (ca. 1161), a Jewish chronicler, elaborated upon ha-Nagid’s significance for the spread of the Jewish tradition:

‘He achieved great good for Israel in Spain, the Maghreb, Ifriqiya, Egypt, Sicily, indeed as far as the academy in Babylonia and the Holy City. He provided material benefits out of his own pocket for students of Torah in all these countries. He also purchased many books – [copies] of the Holy Scriptures as well as of the Mishna and Talmud, which are also among the holy writings. Throughout Spain and the countries just mentioned, whoever wished to devote full time to the study of the Torah found in him a patron. Moreover, he retained scribes who would make copies of the Mishna and Talmud, which he would present to students who were unable to purchase copies themselves, both in the academies of Spain as well as of the other countries we mentioned. These gifts were coupled with annual contribution of olive oil for the synagogues of Jerusalem, which he would despatch from his own home. He spread Torah abroad and died at a ripe old age after having earned four crowns: the crown of Torah, the crown of power, the crown of Levite, and towering over them all, by dint of good deeds in each of these domains, the crown of a good name.’ [3]

Samuel ibn Nagrella’s fortune and his influence benefited the Jews worldwide. This was only made possible because of his position as a chief minister of an Islamic power, and the relaxed attitude of the Muslim government towards the Jewish faith. For the Jews, this was certainly a practical manifestation of the promise made by Allah in the Quran:

‘And We have sent you (O Muhammad [SA]) not but as a mercy to mankind’ [4]

The mercy that Prophet Muhammad was sent with was not restricted to the Muslims alone, rather Islamic domination was to bring prosperity for others too. Note, that all the Jewish activities, under the patronage of Samuel Ibn Nagrella, mentioned above by Ibn Daud were taking place in the lands controlled by the Muslims. In other words, the freedom and autonomy allowed by the Shariah Law enabled the Jews to carry out their religious pursuits without any hindrance. Can one imagine an independent Islamic university or Madrasa functioning freely in the present day Tel Aviv? One needs not to be a genius to find an answer to this question. Bahya ibn Paqudah, a medieval Andalusian Jewish writer, describes the prosperous existence of the Jews in the Islamic lands in a treatise titled Kitab al-Hidaya (ca. 1080):

‘If one of our contemporaries looks for similar miracles now, let him examine objectively our situation among the Gentiles [Muslims in this case] since the beginning of the Diaspora and the way our affairs are managed in spite of the differences between us and them both secret and open, which are well known to them. Let him see that our situation, as far as living and subsistence are concerned, is the same as theirs, or even better, in times of war and civil disturbances. You see how both their leaders and their vulgar peasants toil much more than the middle and lower classes among us, according to our Lord’s promise contained in the Scriptures.’ [5]

Ibn Paqudah’s satisfaction concerning Jewish prosperity in Islamic Spain was not due to any other reason than the effective adherence by the authorities to the Islamic regulations with regards to the treatment of the non-Muslim subjects. He even acknowledges that ‘in spite of the differences between us and them both secret and open, which are well known to them’ the Jewish living conditions were some times better than those of the Muslims. This can not be attributed to anything other than the commandments in the Quran whereby Muslims are asked by God to uphold justice at all times, even towards those they may dislike:

‘O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah as just witnesses; and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety; and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is well-acquainted with what you do.’ [6]

Can a Palestinian citizen assert with confidence, like ibn Paqudah, today that his living standard is at least similar to that of an Israeli? The question of an ‘even better’ living standard for a Palestinian is as laughable as an American promise to deliver a just solution in the region. Benjamin of Tudela, a Spanish Jew who travelled to Baghdad in the year 1168 CE, described the situation of the Iraqi Jewry in these words:

‘In Baghdad there are about forty thousand Jews, and they dwell in security, prosperity, and honour under the great Caliph [al-Mustanjid, 1160-70 CE], and amongst them are great sages, the Heads of the Academies engaged in the study of the Law…’ [7]

The security, prosperity, and honour conferred upon the Jews of Baghdad is not surprising if one considers the teachings of the Prophet of Islam and his immediate followers in regards to protecting non-Muslim minorities living under Islamic governance. In the book of Sahih al-Bukhari, Prophet Muhammad (SA) is reported to have said:

‘Any one who kills a non-Muslim (Mu’ahid [protected one]) protected by the Islamic state will not smell the fragrance of paradise even though one can identify it from the distance of 40 years journey.’ [8]

Al-Bukhari narrated that even the immediate followers of the Prophet (SA) exercised maximum care in regards to fulfilling the promises of protection made with the non-Muslim citizens:

‘Omar bin Khattab [the 2nd Caliph] said on his death bed that whoever shall succeed me must fulfill the promises of Allah and his Messenger. Whatever treaty has been made with non-Muslims must be respected by my successor. He shall fight (if he has to) to protect them and he shall not put a burden upon them which they can not bear.’[9]

Will the Muslims in Palestine ever live in ‘security’, ‘prosperity’ and ‘honour’ the likes of which were enjoyed by the 12th century Iraqi Jews? In 1420 CE Rabbi Yitzhak Tsarfati wrote a letter to his persecuted German brothers from the Ottoman Turkish territory (Edirne [Adrianople]) inviting them to join him in prosperous and tolerant Islamic lands:

‘Your cries and laments have reached us. We have been told of all the sorrows and persecutions which you suffer in German lands. Listen, my brothers…if you…knew even the tenth of what God has blessed us with in this land, you would give heed to no further difficulties. You would embark at once to us…Here the Jew is not compelled to wear a yellow hat as a badge of shame…You will be free of your enemies. Here you will find peace.’ [10]

‘Here you will find peace’, is the concluding statement Rabbi Yitzhak used in his letter. This peace was an outcome of the justice delivered by the Ottoman authorities. If the Ottomans were just, this was due to the ideal they followed. The Prophet of Islam told his followers that on the Day of Judgment, when there will be no other shade, seven will be under the shade of Allah’s throne and a just ruler is at the top of the list [11]. Does a Muslim from Palestine have similar peace or can he invite other persecuted Muslim brothers and sisters to his homeland using the words of Rabbi Yitzhak? Are the Muslim men, women and children enjoying even the tenth of the prosperity the Israelis are enjoying today? Again the answer is easy to deliver, even by a Palestinian toddler. Even the Jewish pilgrims were protected from any injuries unlike today’s situation in Jerusalem. The Muslims are asked to produce all kinds of draconian paper work and endure humiliating security checks before they can even think of gazing upon the third most important land mark in Islam: Masjidul-Aqsa. In a stark contrast, an Italian Rabbi, Obadiah Yareh Da Bertinoro, travelled to Jerusalem in 1486 CE and he wrote a letter to his father telling him about the country and its people:

‘The Jews are not persecuted by the Arabs in these parts. I have travelled through the country in its length and breadth, and none of them has put an obstacle in my way. They are very kind to strangers, particularly to anyone who does not know the language; and if they see many Jews together they are not annoyed by it. In my opinion, an intelligent man versed in political science might easily raise himself to be chief of the Jews as well as of the Arabs…’ [12]

The Muslim scientists and academics are unable to achieve anything in the laboratories in Tel Aviv or any of the Israeli controlled institutions for that matter. One may argue that this may be due to the security threat posed by the Palestinian resistance. But the question ultimately boils down to what has caused this security threat to occur? Lack of justice and violation of rights naturally produces anxiety and fervour for resistance. Historically speaking, the Jews had no desire to resist Muslims in any way due to the prosperity they enjoyed under Islamic rule. They did, however, resist the Christian powers, as they were very often persecuted and provoked. A Jewish historian Elijah Capsali describes the Jewish prosperity in the Ottoman Empire in this way:

‘The Jews gathered together from all the cities of Turkey, both far and near, each person coming from his own place, and the community gathered in Constantinople in its thousands and its tens of thousands. The heavens helped them, too, and the king provided them perfect estates and houses filled with all kinds of goodness. The Jews resided there with their families and their clans; they were fruitful and swarmed and multiplied, and the land was full of them. From that day on, whenever the king conquered a place where there were Jews, he would immediately shake them up and drive them from there – and despatch them to Constantinople, the seat of his kingdom, and he would pick them up and cuddle them for ever. Now, since the Jews feared the Lord, he provided them with houses filled with all kinds of goodness in a place where formerly, at the time of the King of Byzantium, there were only two or three congregations, the Jews increased in numbers, becoming a people with more than communities, for the land could not support them altogether – for their property was overwhelming.’ [13]

‘For their prosperity was overwhelming’, having read this, can one still assert with reasonability that the Muslims were ever anti-Jewish or ant-Semitic? Islamic behaviour towards the Jews has been consistently filled with kindness and sympathy. This is due to the law Muslims follow, which is derived from the Quran and Sunnah. The Holy Quran instructs the Muslims to be kind to those who do not fight them for their religion:

‘Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion nor drove you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal with equity’.[14]

The Jewish chroniclers themselves testify to the Islamic kindness towards the weak and vulnerable. The Portuguese Jewish chronicler Samuel Usque elaborates upon the Jewish migrants’ situation in the city of Salonika, which was under the Ottoman rule:

‘The majority of my children who have been persecuted and exiled from Europe and many other parts of the world have taken refuge in this city, and she embraces them and receives them with as much love and good will as if she were Jerusalem, that old and ever pious mother of ours.’ [15]

Having read so many Jewish testimonies, one can easily see that the Jews found a safe haven in the Islamic lands and this fact alone is enough to convince one to place one’s confidence in the Islamic ‘One State Solution’. Those persecuted Jews who took refuge with the Muslims were also treated as friends and furthermore, their vulnerable situation was not exploited by the Muslim authorities. An Italian Jewish traveller, David dei Rossi, travelled through the Ottoman Empire during the 16th century. He documented his observations about Jewish people living in Safed in these words:

‘The Exile here is not like in our homeland. The Turks hold respectable Jews in esteem. Here and in Alexandria, Egypt, Jews are the chief officers and administrators of the customs, and the king’s revenues. No injuries are perpetuated against them in all the empire. Only this year, in consequence of the extraordinary expenditure caused by the war against Shah Tahmsap al-Sufi, were the Jews required to make advances of loans to the princes.’ [16]

The aforementioned primary testimonies provide a vivid perspective on the Jewish experience in Muslim lands, however, it is equally prudent to ponder upon the views of the contemporary Jewish and non-Jewish historians. The following paragraphs will shed light upon some of the modern works on the Islamic behaviour towards the Jews.

Some contemporary views:

Karen Armstrong notes in her History of Jerusalem that the Jews hailed the early Islamic conquest of the Byzantine lands as a mercy from God:

‘Toward the end of the seventh century, a Hebrew poem hailed the Arabs as the precursors of the Messiah and looked forward to the ingathering of the Jewish exiles and the restoration of the Temple. Even when the Messiah failed to arrive, Jews continued to look favourably on Islamic rule in Jerusalem. In a letter written in the eleventh century, the Jerusalem rabbis recalled the “mercy” God had shown his people when he allowed the “Kingdom of Ishmael” to conquer Palestine. They were glad to remember that when the Muslims arrived in Jerusalem, “there were people from the children of Israel with them; they showed them the spot of the Temple and they settled with them until this very day.”…In about 750 the Jewish author of “The Mysteries of Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai” saw the building [the Dome of the Rock] as a prelude to the messianic age. He praises the Muslim Caliph as “a lover of Israel” who had “restored the breaches of Zion and the breaches of the Temple” [17]

After having studied some early Jewish sentiments about the Muslim compassion, Karen Armstrong further concludes that:

‘The Muslims had established a system that enabled Jews, Christians, and Muslims to live in Jerusalem together for the first time.’ [18]

What Karen Armstrong failed to acknowledge was the fact that, under Islamic governance, it was not only the first time in Palestine but also the last time when the Jews, Muslims and Christians lived together in peace. And if this is proven to be accurate historically, then all sincere peace-brokers in the region and elsewhere should propagate the return of the Islamic system. History has proven beyond any element of doubt that this is the only long-term and durable solution for Palestine: ‘The One State Solution’.

Professor Dean Phillip Bell, who is dean and professor of Jewish history at Spertus Institute of Jewish Studies in Chicago, had similar views in regard to the Jewish treatment at the hands of Muslims:

‘Jews under medieval Islam never suffered from the same general negative perception as in the Christian West. Despite regional variations and high medieval political instability, in medieval Islam multicultural environments, combined with active engagement in sciences and literature, led to something of an Islamic golden age for the Jews, at least according to most historical accounts. It has been primarily in the context of recent political developments that the once assumed positive views of Jewish life under medieval Islam have been seriously questioned.’ [19]

Professor Bell’s comments are self explanatory and decisive, not requiring any further elaboration. Zion Zohar, an American Jewish historian, confirms the Jewish appreciation of the Muslim arrival in Spain (711 CE) in this way:

‘Thus, when Muslims crossed the straits of Gibraltar from North Africa in 711 CE and invaded the Iberian Peninsula, Jews welcomed them as liberators from Christian Persecution…Born during this era of Islamic rule, the famous Golden Age of Spanish Jewry (circa 900-1200) produced such luminaries as: statesman and diplomat Hasdai ibn Shaprut, vizier and army commander Shmuel ha-Nagid, poet-philosophers Solomon Ibn Gabriol and Judah Halevi, and at the apex of them all, Moses Ben Maimon, also known among the Spaniards as Maimonides.’ [20]

This prosperity and the Golden Age did not just end in the Middle Ages, rather this pattern continued for many centuries to come. In some places Jews were so comfortable with the Islamic system that they deliberately applied to Shari’ah courts for the purpose of attaining justice and arbitration, even when they had complete autonomy in their religious affairs [i.e. they had their own courts to refer to]. For instance, Amnon Cohen, another American Jewish historian, studied the 16th century documents stored in the archives of the Shari’ah religious court of Jerusalem (commonly known as sijill), whereby he found 1000 Jewish cases filed form the year 1530 to 1601 CE. Cohen published his research in 1994 and during his research he made some astonishing discoveries, as he himself states:

‘Cases concerning Jews cover a very wide spectrum of topics. If we bear in mind that the Jews of Jerusalem had their own separate courts, the number of cases brought to Muslim court (which actually meant putting themselves at the mercy of a judge outside the pale of their communal and religious identity) is quite impressive[21]…The Jews went to the Muslim court for a variety of reasons, but the overwhelming fact was their ongoing and almost permanent presence there. This indicates that they went there not only in search of justice, but did so hoping, or rather knowing, that more often than not they would attain redress when wronged…The Jews went to court to resolve much more than their conflicts with Muslim or Christian neighbours. They turned to Shari’a authorities to seek redress with respect to internal differences, and even in matters within their immediate family (intimate relations between husband and wife, nafaqa maintenance payments to divorcees, support of infants etc.).’[22]

Cohen further elaborates upon the Jewish condition in the 16th century Ottoman Jerusalem:

‘Their possessions were protected, although they might have had to pay for extra protection at night for their houses and commercial properties. Their title deeds and other official documents indicating their rights were honoured when presented to the court, being treated like those of their Muslim neighbours[23]…The picture emerging from the sijill documents is baffling. On the one hand we encounter recurring Sultanic decrees sent to Jerusalem – in response to pleas of the Jews – to the effect that “nothing should be done to stop them from applying their own law” regarding a variety of matters. There are also many explicit references to the overriding importance of applying Shari’a law to them only if they so choose. On the other hand, if we look closely at some of the inheritance lists, we see that the local court allocated to female members of Jewish families half the share given to male members, exactly as in Islamic law. This meant, ipso facto, a significant improvement in the status of Jewish women with respect to legacies over that accorded them by Jewish tradition, although it actually meant the application of Islamic law in an internal Jewish context [24]…he [the Muslim Judge] defended Jewish causes jeopardized by high-handed behaviour of local governors; he enabled Jewish business people and craftsmen to lease properties from Muslim endowments on an equal footing with Muslim bidders; more generally, he respected their rituals and places of worship and guarded them against encroachment even when the perpetrators were other Muslim dignitaries.[25]’

And finally Amnon Cohen describes the effective practicality of the Islamic One State Solution for the Jewish interests:

‘No one interfered with their internal organisation or their external cultural and economic activities…In a world where civil and political equality, or positive social change affecting the group or even the individual were not the norms, the Sultan’s Jewish subjects had no reason to mourn their status or begrudge their conditions of life. The Jews of Ottoman Jerusalem enjoyed religious and administrative autonomy within an Islamic state, and as a constructive, dynamic element of the local economy and society they could – and actually did – contribute to its functioning.’[26]

Therefore, the modern scholarly opinions too seem to suggest that the Muslims were never anti-Semitic nor did they ever persecute Jews because of their religion. If the Muslims have this historical record then they should be allowed to run the affairs of Palestine and other Islamic lands ensuring that the Islamic law is implemented comprehensively, as it was the effective implementation of this law in the first place which produced the ‘Golden Age’ discussed above. The ‘One State Solution’ based upon the Islamic model supported by Shari’ah is a cohesive model that allows a diverse multitude of ethnicities to co-exist and enjoy the same freedoms and rights that are thwarted by the Zionist state today. The ‘Two State Solution’ based upon Secular Democracy does not qualify to be a solution for the conflict, but rather will only intensify the divisions between the Muslim Palestinians. Furthermore, the proposal of the ‘Two State Solution’ is divisive and advocates the segregation of a ‘Jewish’ Sate from a Secular ‘Muslim’ state, proving that it is not a long term solution for the Middle East.

The Israeli authorities are not to be trusted, as their policies are adverse to peace and stability, and these policies are harmful for both the Muslim and the Jewish people. Orthodox Jews are also severely persecuted in Israel due to their opposition to the apartheid state of Israel. Neturei Karta Internationa[27] and International Jewish Anti Zionist Network[28] are two Jewish organisations working hard to show their solidarity with the Palestinian people. This in itself proves that not all the Jews sympathise with the Zionist cause. The 60 years Israeli criminal record alone should suffice to convince one to disqualify this terrorist state from taking charge of the holy land. Re-implementation of Islam and Islamic values alone can bring back the ‘Golden Age of the House of Jacob’, as the Muslims are bound to follow the teachings of their prophet concerning Jews, which are to be found in the treaty of Madina:

‘It is incumbent on all the Muslims to help and extend sympathetic treatment to the Jews who have entered into an agreement with us. Neither an oppression of any type should be perpetrated on them nor their enemy be helped against them.’[29]

Adnan Rashid
The Hittin Institute

Endnotes

[1] http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=M9OIqy6md9w
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=vqBJTBIUtM8
[2] Hasdai Ibn Shaprut quoted in The Jewish Caravan edited by Leo W. Schwarz, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia, 1946, p. 199.
[3] Abraham Ibn Daud quoted by Olivia Remie Constable.Medieval Iberia,
Pennsylvania, 1997, p. 101-2.
[4] The Quran, Surah 21 AL-Anbiya, verse 107.
[5] The Book of Direction to the Duties of the Heart, translation of Bahya ben Joseph ibn Paqudah’s Arabic work al-Hidaya ila Faraid al-Qulub by Menahem Mansoor. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1973, p. 171.
[6] The Quran, Surah 5 al-Maidah, verse 8.
[7] Benjamin of Tudela, The Jew in the Medieval World, a source book edited by Jacob R. Marcus, New York, 1972, p. 185.
[8] Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Jihad.
[9] Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Jihad.
[10] Rabbi Yitzhak Tsarfati quoted by Howard M. Sachar. Farewell Espana, New York, 1994, p. 75.
[11] Al-Bukhari 660, Muslim 1031.
[12] Rabbi Obadiah Yareh Da Bertinoro, quoted in The Jewish Caravan edited by Leo W. Schwarz, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia, 1946, p. 249.
[13] Elijah Capsali quoted by Joseph R. Hacker “The ‘Surgun’ System and Jewish Society in the Ottoman Empire during the Fifteenth to the Seventeenth Centuries.” In Ottoman and Turkish Jewry: Community and Leadership, ed. Aron Roderigue, Bloomington, IN, 1992, p. 6-7.
[14] The Holy Quran. Surah 60 Mumtahanah, verse 8.
[15] Samuel Usque, Consolation for the Tribulation of the Jews, trans. Martin A. Cohen. Philadelphia, 1965, p. 211-12.
[16] David dei Rossi, quoted by Norman A. Stillman, The Jews of Arab Lands: A History and Source Book. Philadelphia, 1979, p, 291-92.
[17] Karen Armstrong, A History of Jerusalem: One City Three Faiths. London, 1997, p. 233-40.
[18] Ibid, p. 245
[19] Dean Phillip Bell, Jews in the Early Modern World. New York, 2008, p. 25.
[20] Zion Zohar, Sephardic & Mizrahi Jewry, New York, 2005, P. 8-9.
[21] Amnon Cohen, A World Within: Jewish Life as Reflected in Muslim Court Documents from the Sijill of Jerusalem (XVIth Century). Part One, 1994, Pennsylvania, p. 8.
[22] Ibid, p. 17.
[23] Ibid, p. 18.
[24] Ibid, p. 20-21.
[25] Ibid, p. 22.
[26] Ibid, p. 22-23.
[27] www.nkusa.org.
[28] www.ijsn.net
[29] Ibn Hisham, as-Sira an-Nabawiyya, Cairo, 1955, vol 1, P. 501-4.

Source

Views on the news - 12/2/2009

Britain to launch glossy ads to win Pakistanis over to the West

On Feb 10 2009, The English newspaper The Guardian revealed that Prominent British Muslims were being recruited to star in a UK government-backed advertising campaign aimed at preventing people in Pakistan from engaging in extremist activity, the Guardian has learned. The three-month public relations offensive, called I Am the West, consists of television commercials and high-profile events in regions such as Peshawar and Mirpur. It is being funded by the Foreign Office which is paying up to £400,000 for a pilot project. The campaign has four key aims: to ensure Pakistanis realise the west is not "anti-Islamic", that British society is not "anti-Islam", to demonstrate the extent to which Muslims are integrated into British society and to stimulate and facilitate "constructive debate" on the compatibility of liberal and Muslim values. If the West really wants to show that it is not against Islam and Pakistan , the very least it can do, is: a) stop its military campaign against FATA, b) withdraw its forces from the Afghanistan , c) permanently discontinue its interference in Pakistani politics and d) cede its support to agent rulers.

Obama’s economic plans: Lifeboats for the rich and powerful

It expected that Obama’s $780 billion dollar economic stimulus plan will become law by next week. The stimulus plan includes tax cuts, additional spending on infrastructure and aid to the US states, which are experiencing grave budget difficulties. Only a portion of the stimulus will be spent in 2009, the bulk of the money will be spent by the end of 2010, when supposedly the effects of recession are still likely to be lingering. However, stimulus plan does very little to address the needs of the common man. Worse still is the news that Obama’s treasury secretary is looking to pump $2 trillion dollars to prop up failing banks. The American people must be wondering why almost $3 trillion of tax-payers money—their money— is in effect going to the super rich such as the banks and the big corporation who are going to rebuild America’s crumbling infrastructure. What the US government is doing is nothing short of daylight robbery— a modern sort of robin hood where the poor are robbed to pay for the life-styles of the rich.

Confusion over ICC’s warrant to arrest Bashir

The International Criminal Court has denied media reports the court's judges have agreed to issue an arrest warrant for Sudanese president Omar al Bashir. According to The New York Times newspaper and the Reuters news agency, diplomats at the United Nations have said International Criminal Court judges have approved an arrest warrant for Sudan President Omar al-Bashir. But the ICC has issued a statement saying that no warrant has been issued and the judges have not made a decision. An official announcement is expected sometime in February. The ICC chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, is seeking to charge President al-Bashir with war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide for the Sudanese government's role in the conflict in the western region of Darfur. The reports did not say which charges the judges had agreed to. The ICC is under pressure from Europe to issue a warrant against Bashir for the alleged genocide in Darfur. But American efforts to seek a compromise with Europe over Bashir’s future have so far stalled any such judgement.

Bakiyev ready to sell Kyrgyzstan to the highest bidder

Kyrgyzstan's president accused the United States on Wednesday of refusing to heed repeated calls to pay more rent for its air base in his country but did not say if he would welcome a fresh U.S. offer. President Kurmanbek Bakiyev said last week he would evict U.S. forces from Manas, an important staging post for U.S.-led operations in Afghanistan. He made the announcement in Moscow after securing more than $2 billion in Russian aid and credit. Speaking about the Americans, He said, "Over the last three years I have personally raised this question with (top U.S. officials). I have always said to them: 'We have to review the terms of our agreement. Prices have changed and Kyrgyzstan is in a difficult financial situation'. "And they always replied: 'Okay, Okay, Okay, Okay." They repeated that for years. But how long can one wait? We are a sovereign nation. We must have some respect for ourselves." Indeed, Bakiyev idea of national dignity is to rent out Kyrgyzstan's military assets to the highest bidder and facilitate military occupation of the country by a foreign power.

Holbrooke’s visit brings no reprieve to US bombings in Pakistan

Mr. Holbrooke’s trip to Pakistan, and his four-day tour of Afghanistan, which began on Thursday, was part of a top-to-bottom review of American policy in the region ordered by President Obama. However, Holbrooke’s visit did not bring an end to the American bombing of FATA or an increase in bilateral aid. In fact his silence was further confirmation that there is no difference between the policies pursued by Bush and Obama.

India to make soft drink from cow urine

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, India's leading Hindu cultural group, has developed Gau Jal or Cow Water, at its research centre in the Indian holy city of Haridwar on the River Ganges, and hopes it will be marketed as a 'healthy' alternative to Coke and Pepsi. "We refer to gau ark (cow urine) as gau jal (cow water) as it has immense potential to cure various diseases. We have developed a soft drink formula with gau jal as the base and it has been sent to a laboratory at Lucknow for testing," said director Om Prakash. Hindus worship cows and slaughtering them is illegal in some Indian states. Cow dung is traditionally used as a fuel and disinfectant in villages, while cow urine and dung are often consumed in rituals to "purify" those on the bottom rungs of the Hindu caste system. In some Indian states, cow dung and urine are sold in regular dairy shops alongside milk and yogurt.

12/2/2009

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Part 4, The Islamic Rules of Trade - Employment

Due to the current global financial crisis there is increasing interest in the Islamic Economic System, the most comprehensive book on this topic is 'The Economic System of Islam' by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani. However as people have many questions relating to the Islamic rules of trade we will be posting related extracts from the draft translation of the Fiqh masterpiece 'The Islamic Personality, Volume 2' by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani.

EMPLOYMENT/HIRING (AL-IJARA)
Hiring is a contract over benefit in return for recompense, and there enters under it three types:

The first type—Where the contract comes over the benefit of things like hiring houses, animals, vehicles and the like.

The second type—Where the contract comes over the benefit of work like employing the owners of professions and crafts for specific works. The matter which is contracted over is the benefit resulting from the work such as hiring painters, blacksmiths, carpenters and the like.

The third type—Where the contract comes over the benefit of the person, like hiring servants and labourers and the like.

Hiring in all its types is permitted by the Shar’a. Allah ta’ala said:
وَرَفَعْنَا بَعْضَهُمْ فَوْقَ بَعْضٍ دَرَجَاتٍ لِيَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُهُمْ بَعْضًا سُخْرِيًّا
“And We raised some of them above others in rank so that some of them take others as (sukhriyy)” [TMQ 43: 32].

And He said:
فَإِنْ أَرْضَعْنَ لَكُمْ فَآَتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ
“If they give suck for you, so some may command work from others”[TMQ 65:6].

Al-Bayhaqi narrated via the way of Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (SAW) said:
“Whoever hires an employee, he should let him know his wage.”
Al-Bukhari also narrated “that the Prophet (SAW) and As-Siddeeq hired a man from Banu Ad-Deel as a skilled guide (in desert).”

THE EMPLOYEE (AL-AJEER)

The contract of hiring/employment which comes over the benefit of work and the benefit of the person is the one which relates to the employee. The employee is one who gives himself in for hiring. The Shar’a has permitted the hiring of the human being for a benefit resulting from him like servants and the like or the benefit resulting from his work like painting, bleaching, engineering and the like. In order for the hiring to be convened, the competence of the two contractors is a condition such that each of the two should be sane and mature. The hiring of the insane is not convened, nor the hiring of below discretionary age child. If the hiring is convened, the consent of the two contractors is a condition of its validity, and that which is contracted upon—which is the benefit—be known in a way that prevents dispute. This knowledge of the benefit, in relation to the employee, is at times by explaining the period, at other times by determining the benefit, or describing the required work in a detailed description and specifying what the employee will do or specifying how he will work. Accordingly, hiring the coerced person is not valid, nor is the hiring of an unknown benefit.

THE WAGE (AJRA)

It is a condition that the money of the hiring be known by sight or a description that removes ignorance.
He (SAW) said:
“Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should not employ an employee until he informs him his wage.”
Value, however, is not a condition in the wage just as it is not a condition in the price of a sold good. The diffrence between the value and the price is that the value is what conforms with the fiscal measure of the thing, and is equal to it according to the assessment of the experts. As for the price, it is what was mutually agreed upon according to the value or greater or less (than that). It is not a condition that the wage of the employee be the value of the work because the value is not a recompense in the hiring. Thus it is permitted for the wage to be more than the work’s value, and it is permitted to be less than the value of the work. If a person were to hire an employee for a known wage so as to mould for him a piece of gold or silver in a specific fashion, then it is permitted as he is hired for a specific work. The equivalence is not a condition between the wage and what he works with of silver and gold in the weight. This is because that which is a condition in the wage is the recompense of the work, not the recompense of the subject of work which he performs. Whatever is suitable to be recompense/returnin sale like cash and the like is suitable to be a recompense/return in hiring i.e. whatever is suitable to be a price is suitable to be a wage. That which is not suitable to be a price in sale is permitted to be a recompense in hiring. For example, it is not permitted to buy an animal in return for residing in a house for a year, but it is valid to hire a garden (in return) for residing in a house. This is because sale is exchanging a (mal) property for a property, but exchanging wealth for benefit is not considered a sale. Contrary to hiring which is a contract over a benefit for a recompense/return, and this recompense needs not necessarily be wealth, but can be a benefit.

ESTIMATING THE WAGE

Hiring is known as being a contract over benefit for a recompense. This contract comes in three types:

Firstly: A type coming over the benefits of things like hiring houses, animals, vehicles and the like. What is contracted upon is the benefit of the thing.

Secondly: A type coming upon the benefits of work like painting, engineering, building and the like. What is contracted upon is the benefit of the work.

Thirdly: A type coming upon the benefits of persons like servants, labourers and the like. What is contracted upon is the benefit of the effort of the person.
In these three types, what was contracted upon was the benefit in each one of them. So the thing upon which the contract occurred is the benefit. The money mentioned is the return for this benefit. Hence the basis upon which estimating the wage is based is the benefit given by this thing or this work or that person. In relation towards it is not related to the value of the thing worked upon or its price, nor his productivity in relation to the employee just as it is not to meet the need of the employee. Similarly there is no relation to the increase of the living standard, or its decrease, in estimating it. So it is not valid to relate the estimation of the wage to the value of the thing or its price or the worker’s productivity or the satisfaction of his needs; nor does the rise or decline in the living standard have a role in its estimation. Its estimation returns to only one thing which is the benefit, because it is a contract over benefit in return of recompense. The wage is estimated according to the measure of benefit upon which the hiring contract occurred. In case of difference (of opinion) over the amount of wage, it is not estimated by evidence and proof as there is no role for evidence therein for it is not intended to prove the wage, rather to know its amount. Its amount is determined by the estimation of those who are experts of the benefit over which the hiring contract occurred and the experts in the estimation of its recompense.

This is in regards to the basis of the wage, or in other words the unit upon which estimation of the wage occurs. As in regards to its difference, it differs according to difference of the benefit in persons and in the same job and different jobs, and in the time and place. The wage of workers on whom the contract was concluded/based on the benefits of their persons, differs according to the effort which they expend; so the wage is estimated as so much for the strong and so much for the weak; or so much wage for so many hours of work; and more wage for more hours and less wage for less hours, and so on….The estimation of wage for the same type of work on which the contract of hiring was concluded/based on the benefit of work, by a specific amount, and it will differ between the persons who perform this type of work according to the difference of their perfection to it, like engineers for example. So the engineer will be given so much as a wage, and it will differ between engineers by the change of their perfection. Similarly the estimation of the wage for the different jobs occurs according to the benefit intended therein at the time of hiring those working therein i.e. the craftsmen.

The wage for these jobs will differ based on the difference of their benefit in view of the society, so the engineer’s wage will be so much, the builder’s wage so much and so on….The wage of the persons, in one job or different jobs, is estimated differently according to the difference in time. For example, the worker at night is given more than the worker working during daytime in the same job. Similarly the wage of the persons, in the same job and different jobs is estimated differently according to the difference in place. For example the worker in the desert is given more than worker doing the same job in the city and so on… It is permitted to estimate the wage linked to a specific time like the hour, day, month and year.

THE AMOUNT OF THE WAGE

The wage of the employee could be (musma) named/mentioned, and it could be the wage of the equivalent. As for the mentioned wage, it is the wage mentioned and specified at the time of the contract. It is considered of the mentioned wage, the workers each of whom knows his wage, like officials in a specific grade or labourers in a specific factory where the wage of its labourer is well known. Hence if you used labourers or officials and you named their wage, then the named is their wage. If their wage is not named, it needs to be examined whether it is known so it is given to them and is considered a named wage, or it is not known, then they are given the equivalent/like wage.

The equivalent wage is the wage of the similar work and the similar worker, or the wage of the similar worker only. The estimation of the equivalent wage must be by the experts, and the experts are obliged to specify the wage by looking into the person of the employee. For estimating the equivalent wage, three matters must be looked into:-

One: If the wage was over the benefit, it needs to look into the thing whose benefit is equivalent to the benefit of the hired (thing).

Two: If the benefit was over the work, it needs to look into the person similar to the employee in that work i.e. to look into the work and worker.

Third: To look at the time and place of hiring, because the wage changes according to the change of benefit, work, time and place.
The knowledge of wage of the equivalent depends on the exprts; so it is not permitted for the claimant to establish evidence upon it. Rather it is obligatory to be estimated by experts free of self-interest (not biased), so the two disputing parties choose them by consent. If the two did not agree, the ruler chooses them.

PAYING THE WAGE

It is permitted to pay the wage immediately, and it is permitted to delay it. If the two contractors stipulated paying the wage immediately or delaying it, the condition is observed.

He (SAW) said: “Muslims are bound by their conditions” (narrated by Al-Bukhari).

Everything the two contractors stipulated regarding the immediate or delay paying the wage is considered and observed. However, if the two contractors did not stipulate anything regarding paying the wage, it is looked into. If the wage is periodic at a specific time like monthly or yearly, it is necessary to be paid at the end of that time. If it is monthly it is paid at the end of the month, and if it is yearly it is paid at the end of the year. However if the hiring is upon work like sewing clothes, digging a well, repairing a car or the like, it must be paid at the end of the work. It is allowed to reiterate/repeat the wage in two forms or three, in the work, the worker, distance, time and place; it is obliged to pay the wage according to the form actually conducted. For example, if he says to the tailor, ‘If you sew in a minute, then for you is so much’ or “Sew thickly, then for you is so much’, he is paid for whichever of the two forms of work he performed for him.

TYPES OF EMPLOYEES

The employee is divided into private (khass) and common (mushtarak). The private employee is the one who works an appointed work for specifically one or more (persons) i.e. he is the one assigned exclusively to the employer alone and is prevented from working for anyone else throughout the period of hiring. For example if one person or more hired a cook to cook for them specifically appointing to him the period, that cook is a private employee.
The common employee is the one who works for somebody in a work that is not secured or temporary work without stipulating specification upon him i.e. he is the one not assigned exclusively to the employer. Rather it is permitted for him to work for other than the employer. If you were to hire a person to upholster the house furniture without stipulating upon him that he should not upholster for another, then he is a common employee whether he was in your house or in his place and whether a time period for upholstery was specified for him or not.

The private employee deserves the wage by making himself available during the time period to discharge what he is charged with together with his capability to do the work, whether he performed the work or not. His deserve of the wage is according to the time period not according to the work. Therefore, he is not allowed to work in the time period of the hiring for other than his employer. If he worked for someone else, his wage is reduced in proportion to his work. The common employee deserves the wage for the actual work like sewing, carpentry, painting, sailor etc….His deserve of the wage is according to the work and not according to the time period.

The difference between the private employee and the common employee in regards to the guarantee of what he holds is that the private employee is reliable so if something is destroyed in his hands accidentally and without his complacence and negligence, there is no responsibility upon him. As for the common employee, either the thing he destroyed by his action or not. If it is destroyed by his action he guarantees it whether he destroyed it deliberately or not. If it is destroyed without his action, it has to be examined. If it was unavoidable then he is not responsible; whereas if it was possible to protect it but he did not not do that then he does guarantee. This is because the thing with which the private employee works, even if it is under his hand, is under the disposal of the employer not under the employee’s disposal. Accordingly his hand (power over it) is the hand of trustee. This is contrary to the common employee, where the thing he is working with is under his disposal i.e. under the employee’s disposal not under the employer’s disposal; accordingly his hand (power) is not the hand of trustee but rather the hand of a disposer.

The difference between the two (types) in relation to the entitlement of the wage is that the private employee deserves the wage if during the hiring period he was present for work, and his actual work is not a condition. The common employee does not deserve the wage except by work. The hiring period for the private employee is either determined in the contract or not. If it is not determined, the contract is invalid due to its ignorance. Each one of the two contractors may invalidate it at any time he wishes, and the employee is entitled of the equivalent wage for the period of his service. If it is determined in the contract, and the employer invalidates the hiring before the end of the period and there is no excuse or defect in the employee obliging the invalidation like his illness or weakness in work, it is obliged upon the employer to pay the employee his wage upto the end of the period whether the employee was a servant or farm worker or other than that. However if he invalidated the hiring due to an excuse or defect on the side of the employee obliging the invalidation, then he is not bound to pay the wage except to the time when the hiring was annulled.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Q&A: Working in a bank or financial sector?

The following is a question we received from one of our readers and our answer:

Question: Please can you explain whether working in a bank is permitted and if so in which type of positions, for example is supporting the IT or software in the bank permitted? Also the same question for the financial sector in general i.e. stock markets, insurance, etc.

Answer:

The following is an extract from english translation of 'The Economic in Islam' by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani' that sheds light on the matter:

"The Rule Regarding Hiring Over Prohibited Benefits

In order that hiring be legally valid, the benefit must be permitted (halal) in nature. So the employee should not be hired for doing something which is prohibited. Accordingly a worker should not be hired to carry alcohol to one who buys it, or to press it. Nor should he be hired to carry pigs or carrion. At-Tirmidhi narrated from Anas bin Malik, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (SAW) cursed ten types of people regarding alcohol: its presser, the one who asks for it to be pressed, its drinker, its carrier, the one to whom it is carried, the one who serves it, its seller, the one for whom it is sold, its purchaser and the one for whom it is purchased." Hiring is also not allowed over any work of usury, because it is a hiring over a prohibited benefit, and because ibn Majah narrated from ibn Masoud that the Prophet (SAW) cursed the one who takes usury, his agent, its two witnesses and its recorder (clerk). The employees of banks and coinage (minting) departments and all the organisations that deal with usury have to be examined. If the work they were hired to do is a part of the usury work, whether the usury is the product of that work exclusively, or whether it is produced by that work along with others, Muslims are prohibited to perform such works. This includes the manager, accountants and auditors and every work that provides a benefit connected with usury, directly or indirectly. But the work that is not connected with usury directly or indirectly, such as the porter, the guard, the cleaner and the like, these works are allowed, because it is a hiring on an allowed benefit, and because what applies on the recorder and the witnesses of usury, does not apply on them. Similar to the employees of banks are government employees who are involved in deals with usury, such as employees who work in preparing loans with interest to farmers, and Treasury employees who are involved in usury works, and the employees of the orphans departments which lend property with interest. All these are prohibited jobs; anyone who is involved with them is committing a great sin, because it is applied on him if he is the recorder or the one who witnesses usury. Similarly it is prohibited upon a Muslim to engage in any work prohibited by Allah (SWT).

With regard to the work, whose profit or association in it is prohibited because it is legally invalid such as insurance companies, share holding companies and co-operative associations and the like, they have to be examined. If the work that the employee performs is illegal, or it is of an invalid (batil) or defective (fasid) contract, or results from them, a Muslim is not allowed to handle it, because a Muslim is not allowed to deal with invalid or defective contracts or with the actions which result from them. He is not allowed to deal with any contract or action which disagrees with the hukm shar’i (divine rule), so it is prohibited for him to be hired for involving in them. This is like the employee who records insurance contracts though he dislikes them, the one who negotiates the insurance terms, or the one who accepts the insurance. Similarly is the case of the employee who distributes the profit of the co-operative associations according to the member holdings, and the employee who sells company shares or who works in share stock accounting, and also like the employee who advertises for the co-operative associations and the like. All employees of companies, whose work is legally allowed to be performed, are allowed to be employed in such positions. If a person is not legally allowed to perform a work for himself then he is not allowed to be an employee for doing it because he is not allowed to be hired to do it. So actions which are prohibited to be conducted, the Muslim is prohibited from hiring others to it or to be hired himself to do it."

Regarding working in supporting the IT of a bank or financial institution the following is from a Q&A related to the subject:

"There are three relevant principles in this regard.
1. To do something prohibited is prohibited.
2. That which is predominantly believed to lead to something prohibited is prohibited.
3. That which is directly connected to something prohibited is prohibited.

So a riba-contract is prohibited. And writing it is prohibited, as stated in ahadeeth.

The development of a computer program which calculates interest is not prohibited as such, because the development of computer programs as such is permissible.

However, when it is directly connected with something prohibited (like riba), it is prohibited, too. For example:

If one gets order from a bank to develop an application which will (among others) be used to calculate interest (riba), then this is directly connected. In this case, the development is prohibited. It is regarded as assistance. If one was to develop such a computer program independently (without an order from a bank) and sell it on the market, then it would be permissible (even if among the buyers there were banks that bought and used the software). This is because there is no direct connection to something prohibited, therefore it cannot be regarded as assistance.

Another example: If someone works in a bank as a technician, who maintains computers which are used for prohibited things, then this is prohibited, for it is directly connected. His work means assistance. If he was ordered by the bank to deliver pizza to their personnel, this would be permissible, because it is not regarded as assistance and there is no direct connection to anything prohibited.

Most of the cases in question deal with matters which are directly connected with something prohibited.

For example: As said, the development of programs calculating interest itself is permissible. Like someone working for Microsoft doing such a job, if they want to sell it on the market without a direct connection to its actual practical use. If the same person was ordered to do so directly by a bank, it would be prohibited because it means assistance."

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Roses are red, violets are blue, and Valentines day is not for you!

The following is a transcript of a circle delivered on this subject.

وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا الزِّنَا
“Nor come close to adultery” [TMQ Al-Isra: 32].

Allah (swt) orders us not to come close to Zina (fornication) and people today are calling us to celebrate fornication.

The Prophet (saw) said: “Whoever imitates a people is one of them”.

It's that time of the year again when roses are exchanged, people confess their love and make promises to each other. February 14th, also known as St. Valentine's Day, is the time of year that for centuries has been dedicated to honour love and the pursuit of romance.On this day the postal services is very busy delivering cards and letters, or playing the role of a 'cupid', forwarding messages of 'true love'. Youngsters will be making Valentine's cards, and lots would be collecting money from their pocket money to buy gifts for their so called loved one. Also there a Valentine's Day rituals of sending anonymous cards, chocolates and gifts between secret admirers.
At school girls and boys will compete with each other to see who received the most Valentines cards and boast about the number of secret admirers they have. Others will be hiding their faces with humiliation in the realisation that nobody showed any romantic interest in them. It doesn’t stop there, in some places the Teachers and pupils will be organising the annual Valentines party, which for many youngsters will be their first encouragement to partake in the temptations of the opposite sex.

So what's the harm in all this some may ask? After all, is it not a day to remind your spouse of how much you love them, or for the children to indulge in a bit of fun? Valentine's Day is not simply about showing your affection to your partner or spouse, but it is in fact a day to remove all inhibitions and show your feelings to the person you secretly desire, a colleague, classmate, next door neighbour, relative etc, but someone to whom on any other day of the year it would not be easy to approach.

THE STORY OF ST VALENTINE

During the fifth century the Catholic Church wanted to end a pagan fertility rite that the Romans had practised every year since the 4th century BC. During the month of February a lottery would be held to celebrate a young man's rite of passage to the "god" Lupericus. Young teenage girls participated in this lottery, with their names being placed in a box and drawn at random by young men. Through the lottery these young girls would be assigned to the man who picked them out, in order to enjoy 'mutual pleasure' for the duration of a year until the next year's lottery.

The Church was unhappy with the promiscuous nature of this ritual and tried to end it by selecting a "Lover's Saint", who would be honoured as a replacement of the ritual of Lupericus. They chose a bishop by the name of Valentine who had been executed in the 3rd century AD. His punishment was as a result of his defying the Emperor Claudius who had banned marriages saying that married men made poor soldiers, as they did not want to leave their families during battles. Valentine invited lovers to come to him to be married in secret, a crime for which he was executed. However, before he died he is said to have sent a farewell message to the jailer's daughter with whom he had fallen in love while in prison. It read "From your Valentine."

وَلَنْ تَرْضَى عَنْكَ الْيَهُودُ وَلَا النَّصَارَى حَتَّى تَتَّبِعَ مِلَّتَهُمْ
"Never will the Jews nor the Christians be pleased with you (O Muhammad) till you follow their religion." [Al-Baqarah: 120]

VALENTINE'S DAY-A celebration of promiscuity

The modern day ritual of Valentine's Day has developed into something quite different from the intentions of Valentine. Indeed, it is ironic to think that what the Church tried to achieve so long ago was the preservation of the institution of marriage, in the guise of St Valentine's Day. The reality of Valentine's Day and what is associated with it is quite different; the return of promiscuity to society, relationships built upon and that result in fornication, unwanted pregnancies, back street abortions and all things that lead to the degradation and loss of honour in society.

Sadly, the corruption that ensues from this celebration of immorality affects all levels of society. Far from being a harmless activity, Valentine's Day is big business in Western society. Television and newspapers will publicise Valentine's Day through their promotion of special programmes, articles and events. Department stores, gift shops, the Post Office and clothes shops will be fully decorated with red roses and heart shaped balloons, enticing customers to purchase all that they will need to make their Valentine's Day dreams a reality.

Throughout the country in the month of February countless numbers of schools, universities and clubs are in preparation for balls and parties, inviting the unsuspecting populace. Regrettably, some Muslims will inevitably be amongst them lured into the havens of free mixing, alcohol, drugs, and illicit sexual encounters.

At university students will use 14 February to indulge in all manner of obscene activity. Young men and women will spend the day preparing a repertoire of 'chat up lines', which they will use as a tool for enticing complete strangers in to having 'one night stands' with them. Many may even be competing with each other in the number of people they can seduce in one night so that they can 'kiss and tell' the next day.

In The West - On Valentine's Day Student Unions will be issuing free condoms, college bars will be subsidising exotic cocktails, and drug-pushers will be stocking up on the latest line of 'date rape' pills. This is all part of the package that goes along with the illicit relationships, fornication and adultery that is celebrated around Valentine's Day.

He (saw) also said: “Two categories of people I have not seen them (yet): some people who hold whips like the tails of the cows by which they lash the people. And women who wear (clothes) but (are) half-naked, bending (their bodies) and bending the sight of the men to them. Their heads are like the tilted humps of the camels. These women will not enter the paradise nor will they experience its smell (odour), though its odour is felt at a distance of so and so (days).” [Muslim]

BITTEN BY THE LOVE BUG? No, it's just another STD

The consequences of the activities that many will take up on 14 February and beyond are clear to see. Year after year there is an increase in the number of date rapes that occur in this country. So much so Delhi and Mumbai and Calcutta were named as one of the most dangerous cities for women in India. Recently we saw the open sexual assault on women on the new years day in Mumbai.

The promiscuous activity within society has led to astronomical rises in the diagnoses of acute sexually transmitted diseases (STD).

In 2006 UNAIDS estimated that there were 5.6 million people living with HIV in India, which indicated that there were more people with HIV in India than in any other country in the world. The number of AIDS deaths in India (which was estimated at 2.7 million for the period 1980-2000) is judged to rise to 12.6 million in the period 2000-2015.

According to the latest findings of The Outlook-Synovate exclusive poll among 13-17 year olds - at least one in four has had a sexual experience. An alarming proportion has encountered multiple partners and claiming to indulge in sex at least once a month. At least 25 per cent of those polled claim to have used contraceptives; primarily condoms and pills. And most of those polled; claim to have lost virginity around 11-17 years.

DoctorNDTV.com conducted a survey to find out the perceptions and attitudes towards pre-marital sex in the Indian society. Interestingly, it was found that 88 percent of the people who took the survey felt that pre-marital sex did exist in our society.

Mumbai Counselling clinic claims that The all India occurrence of STDs in the age group of 18 to 30 is as high as 48 to 52 per cent. Premarital sex among 18- to 20-year-olds in metros is as high as 65.6 per cent amongst girls and 63.3 amongst boys.

يا معشر المهاجرين خمس إذا ابتليتم بهن وأعوذ بالله أن تدركوهنلم تظهر الفاحشة في قوم قط حتى يعلنوا بها إلا فشا فيهم الطاعونوالأوجاع التي لم تكن مضت في أسلافهم الذين مضوا ولم ينقصواالمكيال والميزان إلا الشاة بالسنين وشدة المئونة وجور السلطان عليهمولم يمنعوا زكاة أموالهم إلا منعوا القطر من السماء ولولا البهائم لميمطروا ولم ينقضوا عهد الله وعهد رسوله إلا سلط الله عليهم عدوامن غيرهم فأخذوا بعض ما في أيديهم وما لم تحكم أئمتهم بكتابالله ويتخيروا مما أنزل الله إلا جعل الله بأسهم بينهم

Abdullah ibn Umar said, 'The Prophet (saw) came to us and said, 'Oh Muhajireen, you may be afflicted by five things; God forbid that you should live to see them. If fornication should become widespread, you should realise that this has never happened without new diseases befalling the people which their forbears never suffered. If people should begin to cheat in weighing out goods, you should realise that this has never happened without drought and famine befalling the people, and their rulers oppressing them. If people should withhold zakat, you should realise that this has never happened without the rain being stopped from falling; and were it not for the animals' sake, it would never rain again. If people should break their covenant with Allah and His messenger, you should realise that it has never happened without Allah sending an enemy against them to take some of their possessions by force. If the leaders do not govern according to the Book of Allah, you should realise that this has never happened without Allah making them into groups and making them fight one another' [Ibn Majah].

How can the West claim to offer the alternative when its criteria of individual freedom and benefit which by establishing sensual gratification as the paramount concern has led to the misery of millions of people? If we take a quick look at the West’s record we find that in their societies the top five problems in the social and marital life are:
- Mistrust and Adultery - 70% of American wives commit adultery within 5 years of marriage.
- Divorce - one in three end up in divorce.
- Rape - 167 women are raped every day in the UK.
- Wife battery - a battery incident occurs every 18 seconds in the America.
- Child molestation and paedophilia - in Britain a quarter of a million people are known paedophiles!.

THE PATRON SAINT OF SEXUAL FREEDOM

The reality of Valentine's Day reflects a problem that does not end with 14 February. For the same concept, which drives people to stretch the limits of conventional morality on that day, is the same concept that Western society functions on every day of the year - sexual freedom.

The notion of 'sexual freedom' is central to the core values of secularism that the Western world has built as the foundation of its viewpoint in life. By separating religion from life's affairs, all values of morality and self-restraint have been subjugated to the whims and desires of individuals. While freeing people from the oppressive subjugation of the leaders of the 16th Century European Church, secularism has enslaved mankind into an even more disastrous predicament - the relentless pursuit of personal pleasure.

In the name of 'freedom', hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost through wars that have purported to spread it, such as recent the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. As a result of 'freedom', people throughout the Western world are subjected to an increasing danger and fear of robbery, attack, and rape, by people who have been brought up in the belief that freedom to pursue ones desires is a license to relieve their needs at the expense of innocent bystanders .When the concept of freedom is applied to the relations between men and women, then this 'sexual freedom' inevitably leads to chaos, anarchy and misery in society.

ISLAM REJECTS SEXUAL FREEDOM

In light of the above issues the Muslim Ummah must be vigilant and recognise the mechanisms deployed by the enemies of Islam to reshape our understanding of the Islam. When Muslims are encouraged to engage in St. Valentine's Day they are being asked to discard the Islamic morals, standards of behaviour, respect and dignity that is commanded from men and women.

It is essential for Muslims to realise that Islam demands that the point of reference is exclusively the Ahkham Shari'ah (divine rule). This is the only valid source of the rites, traditions or practices that Muslims are permitted to follow. Islam is in complete opposition to the secular concept of separation of religion from life. Nor does it give any credence to the false notion of individual freedom. Instead, Islam came to completely organise the affairs of humans in all aspects, liberating mankind from subjugation to other people, or their own base desires, and guiding them to the perfect laws of their Creator (swt).

It is reported that Anas Bin Malik (ra) said; "When the Prophet (saw) came to Medina, the people had two holidays from the days of Jahiliyyah. He (saw) said, "When I came to you, you had two holidays you used to celebrate in jahiliyyah. Allah has replaced them for you with better days, the day of Fitr and the day of slaughter (Adha)."

From this basis it is clear that Islam prohibits the celebration of festivals, whether they are Easter, Christmas or Shrove Tuesday. From its origin St. Valentine's Day is a pagan festival that encourages sexual relationships in society and is far away from anything a Muslim could contemplate. Therefore, observing its rituals and anything associated with it is prohibited for the Muslims and is rejected by Islam.

What valentines promote is free mixing and illicit relationships between the sexes. Sex is promoted everywhere. We constantly bombarded with billboards, advertising commercials, magazines, and songs to television programmes.

Through primary, secondary education and beyond, boyfriend-girlfriend relationships are normalised to the extent that it is seen as strange if someone isn’t ‘going out’ with a member of the opposite sex. Sex education in schools promotes this by explaining to the students the various forms of contraception instead of giving them the correct values related to the subject.
The Muslim Ummah must be vigilant and recognise the mechanisms deployed by the enemies of Islam to reshape our understanding of the Islam. When Muslims are encouraged to engage in St. Valentine's Day they are being asked to discard the Islamic morals, standards of behaviour, respect and dignity that is commanded from men and women.It is essential for Muslims to realise that Islam demands that the point of reference is exclusively to the Ahkham Shari'ah (divine rule). This is the only valid source of the rites, traditions or practices that Muslims are permitted to follow.

Realising the magnitude of the Haram actions

A Muslim must link his actions directly to the consequences: the rewards and punishments in the hereafter. He should visualise these even when thinking about performing any prohibited action. This consciousness of Allah (SWT) and the afterlife should be a shield to protect us from sin and should encourage us to earn reward.

Abu Hurairah reported that the Prophet (SAW) said, “When a person commits fornication there goes out of him the Iman (belief) and it hovers like a canopy over his head and when he quits this act the Iman reverts to him again” [Tirmidhi & Abu Dawud].

Ubadah ibn as-Samit narrated that the Prophet (SAW) said, "If you guarantee me six things on your part I shall guarantee you Paradise. Speak the truth when you talk, keep a promise when you make it, when you are trusted with something fulfil your trust, avoid sexual immorality, lower your eyes, and restrain your hands from injustice" [Ahmad and Baihaqi in Shu'ab al-Iman transmitted it].

The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, "The adultery of the eyes is the sight, the adultery of the tongue is the talk, and the inner self wishes, desires and the private parts testify all this or deny it" [Bukhari]

Unlike in the West where it is abnormal for women to step out of their homes without layers of make-up, lipstick and wearing revealing clothes, Islam forbade this for its impact on society is devastating in spreading immorality, like teenage pregnancies, single parents, rape, child abuse etc.

Those who say that they are too young to get married are effectively saying “I am too young to treat a woman (or man) fairly, justly and kindly.” They are effectively professing their lack of determination to commit, to be faithful, fair or just. Some may argue that both people in the relationship just want to have a bit of fun and are not ready to commit, so what’s wrong with that? The reality of that is that people get seriously hurt, abused and exploited.

Staying in the correct atmosphere

Remaining a correct atmosphere is vital for a Muslim to be able to avoid the temptations. The type of atmosphere that exists amongst some of the youth is very corrupt, where the topic of discussion revolves around the opposite sex and ‘showing off’ to each other. This type of atmosphere only serves to agitate the instincts of people and potentially leads them further away from Islam.

Abu Musa narrated that the Prophet (saw) said, "The example of a good companion in comparison with a bad one, is I like that of the musk seller and the blacksmith's bellows (or furnace); from the first you would either buy musk or enjoy its good smell while the bellows would either burn your clothes or your house, or you get a bad nasty smell thereof." [Bukhari Volume 3, No 314]

Relationships In IslamIn Islam the relations between a man and woman are clearly regulated and their interaction is not built upon arousing the sexual instinct or viewing each other as a form of sensual gratification. So anything which will lead to this is stopped. Involvement in or attendance of Western style pubs, club, parties, or any other such social function is completely prohibited to Muslims.Any signs of intimacy and passion are confined to the correct form of relationships between men and women, which is through marriage.Ibn Mas'ud narrates that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said; "Oh you youngsters. Whosoever amongst you can afford to marry should marry, because it will help you to lower his gaze, and guard his modesty (i.e. private parts from unlawful sex). And whosoever is not able to marry he should fast, because it will be protection for him."The implementation of Islam ensures that the society established upon it will be free of promiscuity and will exhibit a high level of moral awareness. The Shari'ah recognises the needs and instincts of both man and woman. The family is protected and strengthened by the prohibition of fornication, adultery, free mixing of the sexes and the regulation of the dress code. By these injunctions, Islam prevents the possibility of its society being plagued by the same sexual ailments as those seen in the West. Such as STD.

وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا الزِّنَا إِنَّهُ كَانَ فَاحِشَةً وَسَاءَ سَبِيلًا
Allah (swt) says 'Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)' [TMQ Al-Isra: 32].

Allah (Subhanahu Wa Ta’aala) says, "And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah enriches them of His Bounty" [TMQ An- Nur: 33].
Marriage, Love & Marital life

Islamically, when a relationship begins the man and woman should respect each other and treat each other well. Muslims don’t drink alcohol, they don’t gossip or backbite, they don’t sleep around, go to nightclubs or pubs. Hence, the situations in which unwanted pregnancies are obtained, STDs are spread and young girls are raped and abused are avoided.

Thus, men have loyal, supportive, kind wives who are trustworthy irreplaceable companions. Likewise women have strong, kind, devoted husbands who dedicate themselves to their wives’ comfort and happiness. And on top of that, they love each other.

Marriage is based on companionship in Islam, unlike in Western society where it is based on competition. Companionship is where one finds repose and tranquillity in the other.

They both have responsibilities towards each other.

وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ أَنْ خَلَقَ لَكُمْ مِنْ أَنفُسِكُمْ أَزْوَاجًا لِتَسْكُنُوا إِلَيْهَا وَجَعَلَ بَيْنَكُمْ مَوَدَّةً وَرَحْمَةً إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لآياتٍ لِقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ
And among His Signs is this, that He created for you wives from among yourselves, that you may find repose in them (li-taskunoo ilayha), and He has put between you affection and mercy. Verily, in that are indeed signs for a people who reflect.” [TMQ Ar-Rum: 21]

Saturday, February 07, 2009

Views on the news - 5/2/09

Iceland unveils world’s first homosexual leader

This week Iceland announced a new government that will be headed by the modern world's first openly Lesbian leader—Johanna Sigurdardottir. Sigurdardottir, 66, is a former air stewardess who was divorced from the father of her two sons, a banker, and now lives with her British-educated girlfriend Jonina Leosdottir, a 54-year-old author, playwright and journalist. The couple signed a civil partnership agreement in 2002. "I don't think her sexual orientation matters. Our voters are pretty liberal, they don't care about any of that," Skuli Helgeson, Social Democratic Alliance's general secretary, told the BBC. In most of Western Europe politicians are openly declaring their homosexuality. Only last week, Roger Karoutchi became the first French government minister to disclose his homosexuality. Other notable European politicians who have declared their homosexuality include the Mayor of Paris Bertrand Delanoë, and the governing Mayor of Berlin Klaus Wowereit.

America on the brink of a major economic catastrophe

Recently, the famous US future trend forecaster Gerald Calente was interviewed by economics writer Lew Rockwell about the American economy. This is what Calente said, “We are going from the "Panic of '08" into the "Collapse of '09", and it is unstoppable. It will be the greatest depression ever. In the middle of February or March, there will be disastrous collapses of other retail giants. There will be a collapse in commercial real estate which will dwarf the subprime problem.

There will be a revolt in this county, and the government is planning on ways of suppressing it. For example, Arizona is training police for economic calamity and riots. The military is building detention centres, and training military for riot control. There's no stopping this.
The Obama administration will take draconian measures, such as calling a bank holiday, confiscating gold, or something else dramatic which will really hurt the little people and enrich the too-big-to-fails.

Those in the know aren't trying to save the economy. The ship is sinking, and the wealthy are just scrambling to secure their own life boats.”

Gaza: Value of a British life versus a Muslim life

On 1/2/2009 the BBC reported that the family of a British cameraman shot dead in Gaza in 2003 have accepted a reported £1.5m payout from Israel. James Miller, 34, from Devon, was filming a documentary when he was shot dead in the town of Rafah. His family, who have said he was shot by a soldier, said it was "probably the closest (we) will get to an admission of guilt on the part of the Israelis". An Israeli inquiry cleared a soldier of firearms misuse but a UK inquest later ruled Mr Miller was unlawfully killed. How many Palestinians have been unlawfully killed in Gaza by Israel and through the economic blockade by the western powers in collaboration with the neighbouring rulers? And yet there is no compensation or pressure from western governments on Israel to conduct an inquest. Truly, the West has turned upside down its own concept of human rights— where the blood of western citizens is worth much more than the blood of Muslims. The Messenger or Allah (saw) said, “The blood of a Muslim is worth more than the Ka’ba and all its surroundings.”

Saudi fighter jets happy perform air tricks

No sooner had Israel bombed Gaza to smithereens, Saudi hawks performed complex air tricks at Al Ain air show in the UAE. Rather than deploy the fighter jets in Palestine the Saudi leadership were happy to donate 61 truckloads of food, 30 ambulances and a variety of other meagre supplies to alleviate the pain and suffering of the Palestinians. What is the point of spending billion dollars on military hardware that will never be used to defend the blood and honour of Muslims?

US rewards Musharraf for spilling Muslim blood and safeguarding American interests

On his visit to Washington, Musharraf was offered a job at the famous Middle East Institute. The institute's former head, former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan Wendy Chamberlain said Musharraf should be the institute's next scholar-in-residence on Pakistan. Musharraf on his visit was unrepentant and defended his policies of sending Pakistani troops into FATA and allowing US to bomb the tribal areas with impunity. If he accepts, he will surpass America most loyal agent Gamal Abdul Nasser in designing pro-American policies for the Middle East. His track record in securing American interests in Pakistan is just a taste of things to come.

5/2/09

Thursday, February 05, 2009

Erdogan is no hero

The prime minister of Turkey returned home recently from the world economic forum to a hero’s welcome. His “marvelous” feat was the act of walking out of the summit after a heated exchange with Shimon Peres regarding the Israeli aggression against Gaza.

Erdogan has also made some fiery statements regarding Gaza and is slowly being viewed as one of the harshest opponents of Israels’ aggression. Erdogan, speaking at a municipal election campaign rally in Anatolia, said Israel was:

“perpetrating inhuman actions which would bring it to self-destruction. Allah will sooner or later punish those who transgress the rights of innocents.”

If you look past these statements and his “walkout” at the summit, it’s very clear that Turkey is Israel’s greatest ally in the region.

Turkey has a long history of close ties with Israel. It was the first Muslim country to recognize it in 1949.
In 2006 the Israeli foreign ministry characterised its relationship with Turkey as “perfect”.
Turkey is Israel’s 8th largest trading partner and their annual trade is worth around 4 billion dollars.
Turkey and Israel have a military alliance. Their militaries have conducted joint exercises particularly their navies. Israeli pilots even trained in Turkish air space, flying training sorties from a Turkish base near Ankara. Israel has supplied unmanned air vehicles to monitor Kurdish rebel activities in Turkey’s southeast.
The Erdogan government appointed General Buyukanit’s as Chief of Staff of the armed forces, he is known to be pro-Israeli and one of his jobs has been to weed out anti-Israeli sentiment among Turkey’s senior military brass.
In 2006 the Jerusalem Post reported that Israel and Turkey were negotiating the construction of a multi-million-dollar energy and water project that will transport water, electricity, natural gas and oil by pipelines to Israel.

So we shouldn’t be duped by these empty symbolic acts, Turkey and Israel might be having a lovers tiff, but that’s all it is.

One last point to mention is that if the Turkish people can give Erdogan a hero’s welcome for walking out in protest, imagine the welcome he’d get if he used his resources as a deterrent to end the conflict once and for all. It just takes one brave man and the whole Ummah will be behind him, inshAllah.

Source

Wednesday, February 04, 2009

New Tamil translations related to Islamic economic system

The following are links to download recent translations into Tamil:

The Turbulance of the Stock Markets: Their Causes & The Shari'ah rule pertaining to these causes by Hizb ut-Tahrir

Capitalism in crisis - Translation of transcript of a talk highlighting the key reasons for the current global economic crisis.

Global economic crisis & the Islamic alternative - Translation of transcript of a talk outlining the Islamic alternative to the global economic crisis.

Note: Tamil fonts are needed to view the files, if needed they can be downloaded from: http://www.esnips.com/doc/e3f5a9e9-63b6-46c2-8ba4-83118da52982/Tamil-Fonts

Forming the Islamic Political Angle

Throughout the Muslim world, there is a reawakening of political thought based upon Islam. Many Muslims having realised that Islam is not just about rituals and religious rites are increasingly following events and occurrences and trying to view issues from the Islamic perspective. The thinking of years gone by, where Muslims would view the politics and occurrences in the world – from the angle of Western capitalism are fast fading. The battle for Muslim hearts and minds that some Western politicians talk about is about reversing the increasing trend for Muslims to view issues on the basis of Islam. The desire of the west is that Muslims form their thinking on the false and rotten basis that the West would like Muslims to embrace.

In order to further refine this reawakening of Islamic political thought – Muslims today need to have a more precise understanding of politics and Islam. Muslims must understand that Islam provides a special angle for them when viewing events in the world and without it their politics will be weak and ineffective- even if they understood the realities of events and occurrences well.

Building Politicians

An effective politician has to have clear thinking about what his politics are about. This means that he has to develop an angle on the basis of which he views events and occurrences. If he does not possess this angle then he would be confused in a fog of often-conflicting situations, events and occurrences. He would be become ineffective in achieving his aims and his politics would be chaotic and contradictory.

In the Western world, kafir politicians have a very precise angle with which to view events and occurrences. They view it from the basis of capitalism and its fundamental ideas like secularism, democratic principles, the notion of freedoms and pursuing ones interests. When they engage in politics they understand that the nations foreign policy is about securing the national interest. They understand how to view other nations and what to seek in any relationship from them. Domestically they are aware of what the meaning of the state’s responsibility in looking after the affairs of the people is. They have ideas about how individuals should live their life, what the rights of people should be. They are aware of their ideology and embrace it and view the world through the framework laid down by it.

They also develop political concepts as they engage in political life gaining experience- through the political traditions in their countries. They learn self-preservation, duplicity, spin, justification and lying to cover their tracks when they are involved in potentially scandalous activities. They learn that the way to judge an issue is not about right and wrong rather it’s about how it meets with their interests; they pick up the ability to use incidents to their advantage and the disadvantage of others. They understand that there is a public face that they must portray a certain image in public regardless of what they truly feel and think. They learn that in their politics it’s the law of the jungle and a person may be a friend on one day and an enemy on the next. It is in this way that the western politician develops an angle about how to view events and occurrences- and what political actions he feels are important to him and his country.

Islam condemns most of the characteristics that are acquired by western politicians. As well as condemning the basis used by them to form an angle on the basis of which to engage in politics. Islam seeks to build politicians on the basis of the values of its unique principles and values. Instead of selfishness for example, Islam builds selflessness, instead of using dirty tactics to achieve an agenda Islam encourages truthfulness and frankness. Islam teaches that what a Muslim wants for himself he wants for his brother- the West predominantly teaches that individual interests come first before those of all others.

For the Muslims, politicians carrying the Islamic viewpoint almost disappeared during the decline of the Uthmani Khilafah. The colonialist enemies of Islam succeeded in poisoning the political thinking of the Muslims and distorting their political angle. They introduced and inflamed many alien political thoughts – like nationalism where Muslims from Arabia started viewing themselves distinctly from Muslims from Istanbul. After the Islamic state was destroyed in 1924 - politics in the Muslim Lands became dominated by socialistic or capitalistic ideas. The politicians and the political movements that worked within the state structures that replaced the rule of Islam became totally ineffective and were merely used as tools. Their political angle was devoid of Islam and as can be witnessed today is only fundamentally concerned with their remaining in power.

A list of such people involved in politics in the Muslim lands in the past century includes– Mustafa Kamal, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Jamal Abdul Nasser, Anwar Sadat, King Hussein of Jordan, Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussain, Nawaz Sharif, Pervez Musharaff and Benazir Bhutto. All of these individuals were very far from the politics of Islam and all served the interest of Western powers rather than their own people. Those that wanted to build their nations tried to do so on a weak political basis – the likes of Jamal Abdul Nasser had the weak basis of Arab Nationalism upon which to base his politics.

All engaged in a political system that was installed by the West and built upon Western concepts. For this reason it was not possible that anyone from within government or parties working within the system bring any good for the Muslims. The colonialists appreciate that as long as the angle held by politicians of the Muslim world is corrupted they can carry on with exploiting their lands.

It is for this reason that a band of Muslims began to culture themselves about Islam as an ideology and a way of life so that once again there would exist a political block amongst the Muslims that would allow the decline of the Ummah to be reversed.

The fruits of this study of the Islamic culture can be seen far and wide throughout the Muslim world and beyond. However as the Khilafah state has not yet been established- true political experience is lacking. For Muslims politics is about accounting the state when not in power and practically looking after the affairs of the ummah domestically and internationally when in ruling. In the absence of the state the most important and vital political work is that to establish a the Khilafah state- for Muslims to engage in any other type of political activity, through the existing government structures or to attempt to secure every immediate interest that ummah faces would be a distraction from the vital political issue- the re-establishment of the Khilafah state.

The Special Angle

When engaging in politics the Muslim must understand his viewpoint and his angle correctly. If he does not then it is possible for others to manipulate him for their agenda. If the angle and the viewpoint are not clear in the mind then this may lead the individual have weak political will that may lead him to abandon his aims.

The angle for politics that is taken on the basis of Islam is distinct and unique and therefore it may be described as the special angle. The special angle will act like a compass for the Muslim politician that will lead him to the correct political action and steer him in the correct direction.

The special angle from which Muslims should view events is not based upon their whims or desires rather it comes from their aqeeda. From the Islamic texts it is well established that Islam came to mankind as a deen and the angle of la-illa-ha-il- Allah is the prism from which all events must be seen. This means that the hukm shari rules and the understanding of the Islamic ideology are the lens through which the Muslim politician views occurrences.

The special angle of a Muslim towards events, occurrences and the issues faced in life must be built upon Islam and its rulings. It should not be built upon factors such as benefit or utility as is the case for the capitalists. This would corrupt the politics of that individual, movement or indeed the state. Understanding the why, where and the agendas of different political actors is not enough to engage politics effectively.

Forming the Islamic Political Angle

In normal circumstances for Muslims to form the special angle would be a simple matter. If Islam was implemented in state and society the concepts of the Islamic ideology would be well established in society and therefore in the individuals. The unfortunate situation that Muslim societies face today, where societies are based upon a jumble of ideas rather than having Islam as the basis of society leads to a corruption in the angle held by politicians.

Politics is often defined as looking after the affairs of the people – meaning that politicians act to address how the problems, needs and wants of the people might be met. In this age the Muslim Ummah faces many issues- in the Muslim world there is military, political and cultural occupation, hunger, starvation, inadequate opportunities for education and health care systems that do not work even for those that can afford to pay. Considering this is the condition of many Muslims around the globe – it would be only natural for individuals to try to address these issues

Many of those that start off sincerely trying to improve the situation of the people but often end up becoming corrupt and tools of the ruler in the Muslim world today. In some places in the muslim world trying to do something for the people is outlawed, often carrying punishments of imprisonment and torture as this type of activity, talk or even thought is seen to be a threat to the existing regime. In these circumstances many political movements have come and gone, or have been transformed to become something that is very far from the vision of their founders.

Before Muslims embark on an attempt to bring change or address the needs of the people, they need to form a very clear angle on the basis of which they will engage their work upon.

The Islamic Political Angle must be based Upon the Islamic Ideology.

The Islamic ideology is the basis upon which a Muslim conducts his life – and this applies to the politics he engages in. Therefore his political angle must be built upon Islam and the correct ideological understandings of what Islam is. He must view the realities and occurrences from this basis.

For example if some Muslims were to claim that power sharing in the existing regimes was the way to implement Islam, and they were to demonstrate in reality that they have indeed been successful in applying parts of Islam. He would reject their call on the basis of understanding the Islamic ideology, as there cannot be any partial implementation of Islam and co-existence of the system of Islam with the system of kufr. This would be a fundamental understanding of the Islamic ideology, which would allow the Muslim politician to form the correct angle about the issue.

Similarly if others were to claim that democracy is the way to bring good for the Muslims – he would reject their call as democracy is kufr and is contrary to the Islamic belief.

Some claim that the Khilafah is a distant reality and not likely to be established soon; in the meantime let us work for some immediate aims like helping individuals in the locality. If the angle was based upon the Islamic ideology – the individual would understand that whilst helping individuals in his community is an act of charity and is an action that Allah (swt) will reward for – but if his angle were correctly formed, it would tell him that his actions towards re-establishing Khilafah were more of a priority. He would give no consideration to the thinking Khilafah was a long way from establishment or not. In this way the correct understanding of the Islamic ideology is indispensable in forming the correct political angle.

If the fundamental understandings of the Islamic ideology are weakly held in the minds of those that seek to bring political change then, it is easy for them to be diverted and even abandon their political call. Therefore those that are interested in bringing political change must be very diligent in culturing themselves with the Islamic ideology otherwise they may stumble at the first hurdle. The political angle of a Muslim politician must always remain anchored to the Islamic ideology and he must never deviate away from this. The Muslim must first develop his sight i.e. his concepts with which to see, then he must develop his understanding of the world around him, events and incidences and then he must undertake his political actions- which today must be centred around reviving the ummah and re-establishing the Khilafah.

Source

Tuesday, February 03, 2009

Do you live by Islam, or live for it?

I'm in the midst of my routine visit to my parents home these Christmas hols. It really has become routine, as as the Christmas holidays have dawned over the last few years, we have packed up our belongings, our woolly scarfs and several warm jumpers, jumped into our car ready for our relaxing break in the Welsh plains. The period of time here has come to characterise excesses of wonderful food, all the Christmas television and most of all rich amounts of family time as everyone is home, cuddled around the coffee table and blazing heaters. The ritual sale shopping where I try to buy all the things I need for the coming year, along with the wonderful time I spend with my family, who appreciate it to the nth degree, always brings with it a urging question for me on what life really is about. Without getting to mushily philosophical, every year I get a window into the world which could possibly be if I didn't have the central hearth of Islam in my life.

Alhumdulilah I can put my hand on my heart and say the time with my family, all the practical things I need to buy and do, has for me a strong link to my Creator; as clearly we all know the weight Islam places on pleasing the parents and keeping ties with kin. My ritual shopping even has a link (however tenuously some may assume!) it's all the stuff I need to get for my family and my kids to keep us going for a while inshaAllah. But it's that link that keeps me feeling cool. As without that link, I contemplate how would I really feel?

For me this link is what keeps me feeling content that the actions I do have some sort of weight and value, as Allah SWT has clearly told us in Surah AdhDhuriyat that the purpose of the creation of mankind, is for the sole purpose of us to worship him - not to shop, chill or let our life drift away trying to just even be happy.

But I think alhumdulilah alot of us, many of us who have had the honour to re-find Islam again, can intellectuslise this link. The understanding that unless our lives are led in accordance with Allah's rules and laws, then there is no meaning or use for us. But my understanding of this deen tells me that the Islamic purpose in life means more than this, and this is something I think we all find a battle to embed in life. And what concerns me more for the Muslim community I see living around me, is a more recent phenomenan which I feel challenges the desire for us to live purely for Islam.

A sister I remember once said to me that the biggest obstacle for the Muslim community in the West to regaining and working for the vision to resestablish just Islamic rule in the Muslim world, is that we have been lured by a lifestyle, the British Muslim lifestyle which acts as separating us and our aspirations from the rest of the Ummah. The fact that we now have supermarket halal meat, even halal organic meat now I hear, a growing abundance of masjids, the mushrooming of Islamic fashion, the whole new ethos of Islamic shopping, Islamic entertainment - both music and TV(!!) and even the opportunities to engage in British politics with your Islamic(ish) agenda; has meant for many Muslims who live by Islam today that we feel that this is it. We have an Islamicised version of almost everything on the mainstream British market. We have everything we need just around us and our goals become to develop this British Islamic lifestyle over anything else, whichI feel replicates the concepts of escapist entertainment culture we see in the West. We bury ourselves in material things and ideas which give us our kicks and take up our time, and ultimately help us escape the stark realities of this world and life. Things happening abroad then aren't really our problem as much, as we feel we belong here in the West and this is where our allegiances, worries and goals should lie. Alhumdulilah many of these things are good for the Muslim community in one sense as they have aided us to live by Islam and retain our Deen, but I fear that there are more dangers in this phenomenan than can be at first perceived, if the community do not treat this whole new revolution appropriately. I fear that we will just become hijab wearing and salah practising versions of our British counterparts we live with and amongst.

I'm not a traditional isolationist, if that's what you are now thinking. I don't believe in shunning everything with a taint of what is Western, but what I do believe is that we not only have to distinguish between the haram and halal in this society, but also the key ideas and concepts. Our Prophet SAW, throughout his entire Prophethood never sought comfort, whether material or emotional as his goal in life and neither did his Sahabah. Rather his goal throughout his life was always to make Islam superior and to protect his Ummah, as he famously said to Abu Talib 'If you put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, I would not leave this struggle until it is victorious or I perish therein'. For him SAW, not only would he sacrifice his comfort and the comfort of his family for Islam, but even his SAW life he SAW was willing to give. And if this is the example, of our best example, then is this not we should follow?

The beauty of the Deen of Islam is that it does not require us to follow a life of asceticism where we renounce everything and anything material, it does not even view wealth as something which is innately evil; but what Allah always does ask us to question, is why we are in this world in the first place. That are we here to seek comforts, pursue an individualistic lifestyle as our non-Muslim counterparts are urged to, looking out and living for ourselves and only those close to us; and getting our kicks in life out of material things? Just because some of these things maybe cloaked in an Islamic appearance, does not mean our use of them are not any less dangerous than the popular culture and fashion races of the West.

The abundance of evidences in the Quran and Sunnah highlight that the reason why we wake in the morning, all the kicks and what we dedicate the most important parts of our day to, what we get excited about - all that - should be for Islam, nothing else. As the Prophet SAW said 'None of you truly believes, until your desires conform with what I have brought.' We must therefore take the time out from our all engulfing lives to think. Think about what being a Muslim really means, that we live to carry Allah's word to the world and make Islam superior. That we are a vanguard of Islam and the Ummah and that this brings a duty and responsibility. It's not just about praying, fasting, having your Islamic mortgage and getting your kids into Islamic schools. We need to contemplate about this beautiful Deen of Allah SWT and how it is gathering dust in the auspicious Qurans on our shelves and is deemed, astaghfirullah, not good enough to rule over us in this so-called modern world we live in. And the effects of this being manifold - we have a global economics which has gone past breaking point, social systems where rape, crime, murder are in their multitude, and a world where abusing and oppressing the Ummah is just part of life.
With this turbulent reality around us, it is not normal for any follower of Islam or servant of Allah SWT to be able to live a life of comfort, content with all the Islamicised provisions we have gained and that's about it. The fact that even one mother of this Ummah yesterday in Gaza experienced the death of all her children should be cause for us all to dedicate our efforts and energy and time and sweat to work in the correct manner for the reestablishment of Allah's law and the shield of a righteous ruler for this Ummah. The Prophet SAW said: 'The imam is a shield from behind which the Ummah fight and are defended.' And the pain of this should be as sharp as the pain we would feel for our own mother or sister, as the Prophet SAW likened our relationship with the Ummah, wherever they are, as being part of the same body - if they hurt, we inevitably feel it too.

To live in this dunya is right and good as our bodies, our families all do have a right over us, as prescribed by our Creator. However this should not become our sole purpose in life as this was never the mission Allah SWT set for us, from the moment he set mankind onto this earth. Rather Allah's pleasure, and the promise of Jannah, we know only is rewarded to those who live to make Allah's deen the highest, sacrificing as much as we possibly can of this dunya - Not those who simply live by the basics of what Allah has forbidden and enjoined. It is living for Islam, not simply by Islam which is the pathway into Jannah, and who would want to risk it being any other way?

'Say: If it be that your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your mates, or your kindred; the wealth that ye have gained; the commerce in which ye fear a decline: or the dwellings in which ye delight - are dearer to you than Allah, or His Messenger, or the striving in His cause;- then wait until Allah brings about His decision: and Allah guides not the rebellious.' (9:24)

Source

Monday, February 02, 2009

Khilafat Hindi Site

Alhamdullilah the da'wah carriers working for the re-establish the Khilafah continue to write and translate articles and books into various languages. A new site has been created where literature related to Islam and Khilafah will appear in the Hindi language:

http://khilafathindi.blogspot.com/

Views on the news - 29/1/09

Britain admits its foreign policy radicalises Muslims

Since 7 July 2005, the British government and its supporters have avidly refused to blame Britain’s foreign policy for the radicalisation of its Muslim populace. But recently, the security minister told a conference in London otherwise. He said, “Tony Blair, I'm afraid, would never accept that our foreign policy actually had any impact on radicalisation. That's clearly rubbish. Gordon Brown is much clearer. The causes are so diverse. We didn't understand it, we still don't totally understand it but we actually have a far, far better understanding than we did in the past. To pretend what happens abroad has no impact is nonsense.” The minister also suggested that Israel's action in Gaza earlier this month would also hinder the Government's efforts to prevent the radicalisation of British Muslims. It is very hard to believe that the British government, which has a longstanding history of colonisation, oppression and occupation of nations and peoples now realises that there is an inconvertible link between foreign policy and radicalisation. Perhaps Brown’s sudden clarity has more in common with America’s change of tone towards Muslims under Obama.

The West and not Israel is the issue

For too long now, the diabolical behaviour of the Jewish state towards Palestinians have preoccupied Muslim minds. The Jewish state’s deeds are a synthesis of Western endeavours to divert the attention of Muslims away from their colonisation. Instead, if the Muslim masses focussed their energies on ridding their rulers and their colonialist masters from the region, the problem of Palestinian people will be resolved once and for all.

Obama seeks better colonisation of the Muslim world

Earlier this week, speaking to Al-Arabiya Television Obama told the Muslim world that America is not your enemy. The comments echo those made during the presidential inauguration, when Obama said, “To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.” However, America’s continued silence over Gaza, and its persistent drone attacks in Pakistan’s tribal belt gravely undermine Obama’s claims of respect towards the Muslim world. On the contrary, it suggests that an arrogant America seeks nothing more than better colonialism of the Muslim world through the select appeasement of a few over the oppression of the majority. And just to prove the point, Obama launched a tirade against phantom al-Qaeda for failing to provide education and healthcare, whilst absolving the agent rulers from providing these basic services. Indeed, it is America the vanguard of capitalism that is not only intellectually and morally bankrupt, but is the new sick man of the world.

IMF: The worst economic crisis since 1940

This week the IMF again changed its economic forecast for the world economy, and announced that the present crisis is the worst since WWII. Wealthy nations will experience their worst recession in the post-war period as a financial crisis continues to spread throughout their economies, the International Monetary Fund said as it slashed its global economic forecasts. A contraction of two percent is expected in 2009, even with massive fiscal stimulus packages planned by all rich countries. "We now expect the global economy to come to a virtual halt," said Olivier Blanchard, the IMF's chief economist. This is not the first time the IMF has revised its forecast and it suggests that the IMF like the Western politicians and capitalists have no clue about the recovery—if it happens at all. The leaders of capitalism cannot even agree on the scale of the economic crisis. George Soros, who "broke the Bank of England" in the crisis of 1992, said the size of the problem facing the world's financial system is "significantly larger than in the 1930s"i.e. larger than the great depression.

Islamists in Somalia take control

On 27 Jan Al-Shabab seized the seat of the Somali parliament and said that it will establish Shariah law in the city. Al-Shabab took over Baidoa, a day after Ethiopian troops who had been propping up the government ended their two year occupation. "We will establish an Islamic administration for the town, and appeal to residents to remain calm," al-Shabab spokesman Sheik Muktar Robow said. The takeover came as Somalia's parliament meets this week in neighbouring Djibouti to elect a new president. It appears unlikely the parliamentarians will be able to return to Baidoa, 155 miles (250 kilometers) southwest of the capital. Al-Shabab, has been gaining ground as Somalia's American-backed government crumbles.

Obama follows Bush and bombs Pakistan

Since assuming office, Obama has followed Bush and bombed Pakistan’s tribal belt. With the administration terming Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan as the most pressing issue of the Obama presidency, and with the arrival of an extra 30,000 US soldiers this year in Afghanistan, the situation is bound to deteriorate. America could not have executed its war without the aid of the Pakistani leadership. During the Bush years the connivance and treachery of the Pakistani leadership reached new heights. Under Kiyani and Zardari it is expected that the betrayal will surpass the records set by Musharraf and his government.

29/1/2009

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Saturday, February 14, 2009

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Saturday, February 07, 2009

Thursday, February 05, 2009

Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Tuesday, February 03, 2009

Monday, February 02, 2009

Subscribe To

Subscribe by Email

Categories

Blog Archive

Latest Comments

Links

Followers