Sunday, January 12, 2014

Explanation of At-Takattul al-Hizbi (Party Structuring) - Part 3

Photo: Explanation of At-Takattul (Party structuring) series:

Part One:

Sharh At-Takattul Al-Hizb Sheikh Al-Hawarey

When the calamities descend upon the Ummah that are followed up by occurrences in which Zhulm (oppression) dominates and the affairs of the people are handed to those who are not qualified to undertaken them, the people begin to grumble and complain. This discontent transfers to becoming a general sensation and feeling of being oppressed. This sensation becomes embodied within some of the people which then drives them into activity and to move to repel the oppression, get rid of Fasaad (corruption), raise the status of their society and Ummah and to revive with her to reach the level that they wish for her to attain. It is only natural that these people will then resort to structuring (forming a group) so as to establish the capable strength required to bring change according to their estimation and for them to join upon a goal or an idea that they would gather round comprising of their goals and the path that they will proceed in accordance to. 

Due to what our Islamic world suffers from in terms of decline and backwardness and what it endures in terms of oppression and abuse we see that many movements have come one after another that aim at stopping its decline, elevating its status and to revive with it to the highest elevation that befits it. However all of these movements for more than 100 years have failed to achieve what they strove for and the evidence for their failure is the reality of the Islamic world today. It has continued in its decline until it has reached the very bottom or near to that and we have not gained anything from these movements except for this unbridled and ardent desire to work for change. So we are able to say that the good that these movements left for us is the general feeling of the desire to make change and even if they have taken the Ummah to the brink of despair. However the one who examines the Ummah finds that it still has within it the noble qualities that allow it to accept a way out from what it suffers from, as long as it senses that there does exist a way to free themselves or that there is a reliable trustworthy leadership that it can follow or be led by.

The one who examines these Harakaat (movements) and has followed these attempts will find that they were not individualistic actions but were rather structures (Takattulat) or organisations that were structured upon a specific thought for the purpose of achieving a specific goal or objective. Despite this they failed.

The reasons for the failure of the movements and the previous attempts:

To become aware of the reasons or causes for failure it is necessary to study these movements from two angles:

1) The first angle is that of the Fikrah (thought) and objective that for its sake the gathering took place. Was this Fikrah (thought/idea) correct or incorrect?
2) As for the second angle then it is the angle of structuring. We do not mean here by the structural angle that which occurs inside the structure in terms of structuring (administration) but rather we mean the bases that any structure is established upon regardless of the thought that it has adopted or the path that is proceeds in accordance to.

So the structure any structure is established upon four bases which are:

1) The idea that comprises the aim and which the people are gathered upon.
2) The method that this structure proceeds along in the way to achieving its aim.
3) The people who are responsible for this structure in terms of the extent of their Imaan in its Fikrah (thought/idea) and Tareeqah (method).
4) How the affiliation of the people into the Takattul (structure) is completed.

Any flaw in any basis from amongst these bases will inevitably to the failure in arriving to the achievement of the aim which the Takattul (structure) is working to achieve. And by scrutinising all of these movements that have arisen within the last century we find that all of them have failed from the structural perspective due negligence in regards to these bases.

This where:
• They were established upon a Fikrah ‘Aammah (general idea) that was not defined. Indeed it was Ghaamidah (obscure/vague) or Shibhu Ghaamidah (semi-obscure) in addition they were lacking in Tabalwur (crystallization), An-Naqaa’ (purity) and As-Safaa’ (clarity).
• They did not know a Tareeqah (method) to implement their idea (Fikrah) rather their idea proceeded by improvised and twisted means. This is in addition to it being surrounded by obscurity and ambiguity.
• They relied upon people in whom the correct awareness had not been completed and the correct will was not focused within them. They were rather people possessing desire and zeal alone.
• Those people who undertook the burdens of the movements did not possess the correct bond between them. It was no more than a structure that was represented in forms of actions and a number of titles.

We will now examine in the following section each of these bases in some detail:

1) They were established upon a Fikrah ‘Aammah (general idea) that was not defined. Indeed it was Ghaamidah (obscure/vague) or Shibhu Ghaamidah (semi-obscure) in addition they were lacking in Tabalwur (crystallization), An-Naqaa’ (purity) and As-Safaa’ (clarity).

Yes it is necessary that every Takattul be based upon a Fikrah (idea/thought) and it can either be a Fikrah ‘Aammah (general idea) or a Fikrah Kulliyah (comprehensive idea/thought). The general idea is the type that can be used as a basis for thought in many matters that come together in a single basis. As for the comprehensive idea, it can be used as a basis for everything. This is in relation to distinguishing between the general and comprehensive thoughts. Therefore the thoughts of nationalism, regionalism and patriotism are only general thoughts that do not encompass all aspects or areas of life. However the Fikrah Mabda’iyah (ideological thought) is a comprehensive idea that covers all aspects of life.

I will add to this by stating that it is not defined. So the structures that were formed include those that have been established upon the basis of Islaam (The glory of the Muslims), some have been established on the basis of nationalism (Might of the Arabs and Arab dignity) and some on a patriotic regional basis (Syrian etc...) amongst other ideas. These are all general ideas but they are undefined.

Therefore ‘The glory of the Muslims’, ‘Islamic might’, ‘Return to Allah’, ‘Islamic education’, Islamic brotherhood’, ‘Islamic revival’, ‘Arab revival’, ‘Independence’, ‘Arab unity’ and ‘The eternal message’ amongst other ideas and slogans, do not have a defined (or specified) meaning.

So in relation to the following statements for example:

‘Returning the glory of the Muslims’    = Ghaamidah (vague).
‘The honour/might (‘Izzah) of the Muslims’ = Ghaamidah (vague).
‘Returning to Allah’    = Shibhu Ghaamidah (semi-vague).
‘Islamic Tarbiyah (education/raising)’  =  Shibhu Ghaamidah (semi-vague).
‘Islamic brotherhood’    = Shibhu Ghaamidah, Ghaamidah.
‘Islamic revival’     = Ghaamidah (vague).
‘Arab revival’     = Ghaamidah (vague). 
‘Independence’     = Ghaamidah (vague).
‘Arab Unity’     = Shibhu Ghaamidah (semi-vague).
‘Islamic Unity’     = Shibhu Ghaamidah (semi-vague).

Therefore Ghumood (vagueness/obscurity) is not having knowledge of the aim/objective or the way to attain it. As for Shibhu Ghaamid (semi-vague) then its meaning is well-known but its features have not been made clear like the statements ‘Returning to Allah’ and ‘Islamic Tarbiyyah’.

As for the loss of the Tabalwur (crystallization) then the meaning of crystallization is transforming from a liquid state to a solid one like the crystallizing of salt from water. What is intended here in regards to lack of crystallization is an expression of the feelings and emotions of those affected by this and that the ideas were not embodied in them and indeed they were incapable of identifying and specifying  its features if they had desired to explain the idea to the people. Therefore they relied upon slogans and stirring the emotions alone and this can be seen to be the reality of most of the movements that are currently present.

As for the loss of the Naqaa’ (purity), then in regards to the Islamic movements, they did not comprehend or perceive clearly what had been entered into Islaam in terms of western ideas. An example of this are the principles that were brought in related to the formation of the Shar’iah rulings that were taken from the Roman and French jurisprudence (Fiqh). There are a great number of western principles that are studied upon the basis that they are Islamic principles and bases. This is like the principle: ‘The custom rules (i.e. dominates)’ or ‘The origin in contracts are the intentions and meanings’ and ‘That which does not contradict Islaam is from Islam’ amongst others.
So An-Naqaa’ (purity) means distancing the foreign bodies from the fundamental thought so that it remains sound in its origins and branches. As for non-Islamic movements like nationalistic and patriotic movements, they have not truly comprehended the danger and seriousness of what they have carried of western thoughts. Indeed they have believed in (some of) these thoughts and have dedicated themselves to them like the ideas of Democracy and Freedom amongst others for example. This is in addition to attempting to explain and interpret Islaam in accordance to what suits and fits with these thoughts and then they claim that they are Islamic.

As for the Safaa’ (clarity) then this means the clarity of vision. And what is intended here in terms of clarity of vision means comprehending the linkage between the thought and the origin that it has emanated from or built upon. So in respect to Muslims and the carriers of the Da’wah the Safaa’ (clarity) of the thought means that every Hukm Shar’iy (ruling) that they call for is tied to the evidence that it has emanated from and that every thought that is called for is built upon the fundamental thought which is the Aqueedah (belief) of the Ummah. This was not fulfilled within these movements and they were unable to distinguish between Shuraa and democracy as a result. Indeed they were unable to differentiate between Shuraa being a Hukm Shar’iy that the human resorts to in order to arrive at a correct view irrespective of this human being a ruler or not a ruler. This is because Shuraa is a Mandoob (recommended) Hukm Shar’iy and it is a style to arrive at what is most probable to be correct whether this is a matter of ruling or other than a matter of ruling. Despite this it is still possible to hear those who are callers to Islaam stating that the system of ruling in Islaam is the system of Shuraa and following from this it is true democracy.

As for non-Muslims from amongst those whom do not have a defined idea then the work with them is greater and harder because they have taken the western ideas just as they are without regard for whether these ideas are suitable for their nation and society or not suitable and they remain upon this state whether it relates to their fundamental thoughts or their styles.


Sharh At-Takattul Al-Hizbi (Explanation of Party Structuring) by Sheikh Mohammad Al-Hawarey (rh). 

This is a translation from Sheikh Hawarey's explanation of the unique book by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani. 

To access part 2 click here

This is the condition in which these Harakaat (movements) lived and by which they intended to go out and revive the Ummah upon its basis. It is an obvious matter that the one who does not have something cannot pass it on to others, so when the stores of zeal were exhausted they ended in failure and then other movements arose from their ruins and their fate was the same as those that preceded them. Had the Ummah not had what it had and had its Aqueedah not been a practical Aqueedah that leads to structuring (naturally) then all of these movements would have ended in despair which would have afflicted the Ummah and killed her spirit towards the work and forming structures to perform it. This is what (the enemies) had wanted however Al-Hamdu Lillah the blood that runs in her veins prevents her from reaching the level of despair and indifference or lack of caring. This is despite its existence amongst a large section from amongst the people.

All of this is because it was only natural for these movements to fail because they were not established upon a clear and defined idea, they were not aware of a method that would lead them soundly, they were not formed upon people possessing awareness and they were not formed upon the correct bond.

These are the main reasons that led to the failure of all the movements and attempts that were present in the Islamic world from the angle of structuring in addition to that which we have summarized in relation to these four points. As for the detail behind this then the one who is observant will find that these movements were either Islamic or Nationalistic (Qawmiyah).

So the Islamic movements (Harakat) were and still remain established upon the call (Da’wah) to Islaam in an open manner:

There are those that call the Muslim to commit to the practise of the ‘Ibaadaat and for him to regulate the relationship between him and his Rabb whilst prohibiting the political work. They do not have any conception or visualisation for the Islamic society, Islamic State or other than these.

And there are those who call to Islaam with the call to return to Allah without specifying it.

And there are those who call to Islaam, the study of the Islamic Aqueedah and understanding the Aqueedah (belief).

And there are those who call to Islaam with the call of reforming the individual so as to reach from that the reformation of the society.

And there are those who belief that the way of escape (from the bad situation) and reviving the Muslims is by making them one Ummah where their states are bound together under an Islamic league.

All of the above attempt to interpret Islaam in a way that agrees with the prevailing present situations, the standing systems/regimes to the point where they made a principle from which they launched from and this was their statement: ‘The changing of the Ahkaam with the changing of the Azmaan (times) is not denounced/repudiated’. They built a lot upon this principle to the point where they made clear Kufr ideas into Islamic ideas like democracy and freedom amongst other thoughts. So their process was interpreting the Ahkaam (rulings) of Islaam and its texts by the fundamental concepts that they held with the argument of bringing Islaam closer to the minds. This was despite the aim behind doing this being the acceptance of these systems, thoughts and rulings by the people and their approval of them.

As for the national movements (Al-Harakaat Al-Qawmiyah), then after the success of the west in separating eastern Europe (Balkans) from the body of the Islamic State, by using nationalistic thoughts, they then implanted these ideas into the hearts of the Arabs and Turks aiming to rip apart the unity of the Muslims and form nationalistic states upon the ruins of the Islamic State. These movements were directed directly by the west and would convene their meetings in London and Paris. They would call for revival upon the basis of nationalism taken from the Europe their model example, that these states were established upon a nationalistic basis and revived upon a nationalistic basis in addition to freeing themselves from the religious thoughts which then as a result allowed them to revive. Therefore it was (in their view) necessary to establish an Arab unity for the Arab Ummah to revive upon its basis. Similarly the Turks viewed that their revival must necessarily be established upon the nationalistic basis.

There were intense and sharp discussions that appeared in the newspapers and press between the people of these two movements, the Islamic and nationalistic, around an imaginary idea which was: Which of the two is better and most appropriate? An Arab league or an Islamic league? It was as if the problem was the division of lands whilst this division had not existed prior to the first world war. Despite this these discussions were intense and this was either out of ignorance or in an attempt to mislead the public opinion and divert it from the correct sound thinking in relation to revival and the way in which it is reached or achieved, despite the dominant motivation being to mislead and divert. They finally arrived at the formation of the Arab League in the year 1945 so what was the result of this? And did it change anything in the reality? This is because the intended purpose was to divert the minds from the serious thinking about the Islamic State or about the basis that the revival of nations is based upon.

Alongside the nationalistic and Islamic movements, patriotic movements (Harakaat Wataniyah) were formed in different parts of the Islamic world. This was a reaction to the occupation of the disbeliever’s occupation of the Muslim lands and their taking over control of them. So revolutions took place and actions demanding revolution and independence to expel the disbeliever and keep the Kaafir presence from the nation’s land. They mobilised the street in Iraq, Shaam and Palestine amongst others for the sake of independence, so their demand (in reality) was one of installing and confirming the puppets of the agents of the disbelievers in the seats of ruling. So King Faisal was appointed in Iraq whilst Abdullah was appointed in Jordan and the republic in Syria. In this way the leaderships directed the situation to re-enforce the hold of the Kaafir (disbeliever) by way of re-enforcing the agents in the positions of leadership amongst the people and the re-enforcement of their rule, systems and laws.

In addition these agents with their tyranny, oppression, the corrupt systems that they came with and the bad economic situations that they created, they pushed the people to establish movements or engage in actions and revolutions that led as a result to further strengthen the foothold of the disbelievers and their agents. All of this was a result of the absence of the thought and the method from the minds of those who were involved in these movements.

To access part  4 click here

3 comments:

Halal Recipes said...

Masha'Allah a very good blog, keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

Jzk Bro looking forward to next part. Is the full book translated yet or is it in progress? Jzk

Islamic Revival said...

Salams, the whole book is not translated yet it is work in progress inshallah.