Saturday, November 15, 2014

Q&A: Regarding the ayah 3:104 - "Let there arise from you a group..."

The following are some useful questions and answers from the time of Sheikh Abdul Qadeem Zalloom (rh).

Question



With regards to the ayah 3:104 translated as “Let there arise from you an ummah (group) calling to al-Khair (Islam), enjoining the Marouf (all that is correct) and forbidding the Munkar (all that is evil) and those are the ones who will gain success.”

This Ayah (3:104) is the basis of the formation of the correct Political Party. There are some questions that need clarity:
  1. When the ayah says Al Khair – we understand this to be ‘all of Islam’ its aqeeda and its systems, its fiqra and its tariqa.
  2.  What then makes it an obligation to just call for the resuming of the Islamic way of life by establishing the state? And not call for all within Islam? Some say that all the rules of Islam must be addressed with the people.
  3. We understand the enjoining of the maroof and the forbidding of the Munqar to be a duty of the group and its task. One of the duties of the group is to address the rulers as they are the head of establishing the maroof and the munkar in the society, hence the group takes on the political side. There are some questions that arise from this explanation
    1. Is this addressing of the rulers to do with the reality, as we have no state and require to change the situation. If we had a state could a group exist that did not address the rulers but called for the ‘partial actions’ such as charity etc…
    2. Can we use the definition by Al Faeroz abadi – in his book Al Khamoos al muheet, to show that enjoining the maroof and forbidding the munkar is political. His definition seems to indicate that all types of ‘ordering’ and ‘forbidding’ is politics even if it is not to the rulers.
  4. What is the Hukm Shari in calling non Muslims to Islam as a Party today. Is it Fard upon the Party members, if not does it not fall under the branch Al Khair? Also if it is fard then how is this practically done?
  5. When a group is outside the ‘area of work’ for the state, what restricts it to undertaking some of the actions and not enjoing the maroof and forbidding the munkar of the rulers. Is this because it is only an obligation for the group to do this in one part of the world and the other parts assist in that ‘area of work’ and by doing the fard is done?
  6. The obligation to re-establish the state is obligation on all the Muslims in all the world. Those who live in the west remove this obligation by working with the correct party and carrying dawa with them, even if their actions do not directly contribute to the aim. Is this accurate?
  7. Is it accurate to say ‘it is haram’ to establish a group to undertake the partial actions such as charity, building mosques etc… or do we just say the obligation for establishing the group to establish the Khilafah is not met?
 Answer


Al Khair is the whole of Islam. Thus the daw’ah which is required “yadhuna illal khair – call to the good” must be to implement all of Islam. This implementation can’t take place except through establishing the State that implements the ahkam of the Shar

Thus by the existence of this state, the whole of Islam exists (in life). As for the call to other than that, like the charitable deeds and (building) mosques and the like, these do not establish the whole of Islam, rather these are parts of the khair and not the whole of the khair.

There are certain ahkam shariah in Islam that can be performed by the individuals such as the prayer. There are ahkam Shar’iah which individuals can’t perform such as the hudud (penal codes). The da’wah to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing the state is a da’wah to the whole of Islam. While the da’wah to the other matters is a da’wah to the parts of the khair, whereas the requirements in this Ayah is the dawah to the whole of the khair.

The other part of the ayah “Wa ya’moroona bil ma’roof way an hawna anil munkar” i.e. the existence of a group that enjoins the ma’roof and forbids the munkar. This is attached with alif laam (al) which is of the forms ( ) of generality, which means that commanding the ma’roof and forbidding the munkar must be in general, i.e. to the ruler, and the ruled (people) even the ruler is of more importance. This duty does not depend on the existence or non-existence of the state. In case it exists, the command and forbidding would be accounting the ruler. When it does not exist, the commanding and forbidding would be aimed at accounting and charging him to establish the state. Therefore the ayah demands (the establishment) of a political group and not just any group; whether the state existed or not. This is because the commanding and the forbidding (al amr wan nahi) is connected to the hukm in both cases.

Al Amr bil ma’roof wa nahi anil munkar is a political work as long as the relationship with the rulers is taken into consideration. For example to order a person to pray is different to ordering the people to pray and at the same time ordering the ruler to punish the one who does not pray. The first order (in the first case) is a command to the ma’roof detached from politics while the second is a command of the ma’roof and a political work at the same time.

As for what you say about the meaning of ordering the ma’roof and forbidding the munkar as it came in the Qamoos of Al-Muheet of Al Farooz Abadi, this is not precise. This is because ordering somebody to pray or to fast or to forbid him from flirting with a girl in the street, this ordering of ma’roof and forbidding of munkar is not a political work.

The ayah explains the work of the kutlah (group) which is the implementation of Islam completely in the reality of life. Therefore it works to establish a state in the Muslim countries to resume the Islamic way of life and implement Islam in the state then carry Islam to the non-Muslims by da’wah and Jihad.

So the Kutlah undertakes the call to non Muslims to Islam in this manner.

Since the principal work is resuming the Islamic way of life through the establishment of the Khilafah state, and this requires the political struggle with the rulers and explaining their enmity to Islam and their conspiracies against the Muslims, and withdrawing the peoples confidence in them and the work to change them and establishing a khaleefah for Muslims in their place.

All of this requires confronting the rulers in the majal. In the kuffar lands outside the majal, like the West, changing the rulers there and establishing the Khilafah is not the work of the Kutlah, therefore it does not undertake the political struggle, because before establishing the Khilafah it does not work to change the societies and systems in the Western World and the various lands of the kuffar.

The Muslims work with the correct Kutlah outside the majal, and his performance of the required duties, would mean that he would have absolved himself of the duty from himself by doing so, i.e. working with the kutlah.

The correct thing to say is that any takattul that does not call to all the khair, and does not work to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing the Khilafah, he would not have performed the duty demanded from him in this ayah.

However the kutlah that carries parts of the khair is not told that what he is carrying out is haram. Rather it is said that their work is part of the khair and not the khair demanded in the ayah, therefore they are sinful for not performing the duty demanded in the noble ayah.


Question

The ayah “ Let there arise from you groups …” is the only evidence which states the existence of political groups, can we determine the work of the group directly from this ayah? Is the method of re-establishing the Khilafah derived from this ayah? Can it be said that the ayah is general, and thus to restrict the majal is also haram? Also to use the actions of the sahabah where they did not work in certain areas and say that this restricts the majal is wrong, as the dawah was not fard upon them.
What are the obligations pertaining to the group which emerge from the ayah? And is it correct for the Amir to restrict the work of the group in certain areas?

Answer

With regards to the verse (translated), ‘And let there arise out of you a group inviting to all that is good (Islam), enjoining the Good (ma’roof) and forbidding the Evil (munkar). And it is they who are successful’. [TMQ 3:104]

We should understand that this verse is related to the obligation of having at least one group from amongst the Ummah and the verse defines the general objective of that group i.e. to call to the Khair, enjoin the Ma’roof and forbid the Munkar.

The question mentioned that this verse is the only evidence for the establishment of a group. This is incorrect, firstly we must understand the group is not Qati (definite) in its meaning as some scholars like al-Ghazali said that the verse does not refer to the establishment of a group but rather emphasises the obligation of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. Although we differ with such scholars and explain as to why the ayah orders the establishment of a group we can also refer to another evidence regarding establishing a group in today’s reality which is the Shariah principle, “That which the wajib cannot be accomplished without becomes wajib”.

Although the ayah explains the general work of the group, the actual work of the group would be dependent upon the situation of whether the Khilafah exists or is absent.

The work of the group in today’s reality, in the absence of the Khilafah has been explained in a previous Question and Answer by the Party dated 1/6/2001:

“Al Khair is the whole of Islam. Thus the daw’ah which is required “yadhuna illal khair – call to the good” must be to implement all of Islam. This implementation can’t take place except through establishing the State that implements the ahkam of the Shara

Thus by the existence of this state, the whole of Islam exists (in life). As for the call to other than that, like the charitable deeds and (building) mosques and the like, these do not establish the whole of Islam, rather these are parts of the khair and not the whole of the khair.

There are certain ahkam shariah in Islam that can be performed by the individuals such as the prayer. There are ahkam Shar’iah which individuals can’t perform such as the hudud (penal codes). The da’wah to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing the state is a da’wah to the whole of Islam. While the da’wah to the other matters is a da’wah to the parts of the khair, whereas the requirements in this Ayah is the dawah to the whole of the khair.
The other part of the ayah “Wa ya’moroona bil ma’roof way an hawna anil munkar” i.e. the existence of a group that enjoins the ma’roof and forbids the munkar. This is attached with alif laam (al) which is of the forms ( ) of generality, which means that commanding the ma’roof and forbidding the munkar must be in general, i.e. to the ruler, and the ruled (people) even the ruler is of more importance. This duty does not depend on the existence or non-existence of the state. In case it exists, the command and forbidding would be accounting the ruler. When it does not exist, the commanding and forbidding would be aimed at accounting and charging him to establish the state. Therefore the ayah demands (the establishment) of a political group and not just any group; whether the state existed or not. This is because the commanding and the forbidding (al amr wan nahi) is connected to the hukm in both cases.

Al Amr bil ma’roof wa nahi anil munkar is a political work as long as the relationship with the rulers is taken into consideration. For example to order a person to pray is different to ordering the people to pray and at the same time ordering the ruler to punish the one who does not pray. The first order (in the first case) is a command to the ma’roof detached from politics while the second is a command of the ma’roof and a political work at the same time.
As for what you say about the meaning of ordering the ma’roof and forbidding the munkar as it came in the Qamoos of Al-Muheet of Al Farooz Abadi, this is not precise. This is because ordering somebody to pray or to fast or to forbid him from flirting with a girl in the street, this ordering of ma’roof and forbidding of munkar is not a political work.

The ayah explains the work of the kutlah (group) which is the implementation of Islam completely in the reality of life. Therefore it works to establish a state in the Muslim countries to resume the Islamic way of life and implement Islam in the state then carry Islam to the non-Muslims by da’wah and Jihad.”

Although the ayah determines that the Party must be political because it must enjoin the good and forbid the evil, beyond this the ayah does not detail the method to re-establish the Khilafah. The method of the group to re-establish the Khilafah is not derived from the ayah alone as the ayah does not discuss how to transfer Dar al Kufr to Dar Islam in detail beyond mentioning the need for political work. Rather to derive the method we looked primarily at the actions of the Prophet (saw) and how he (saw) established Dar al Islam. As it has mentioned in the book ‘Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir’:

“The life of the Messenger (SAW) in Mecca should be taken as a model to follow in the Da’awa. Therefore, the da’awa should first proceed by first understanding it and perform all the obligations defined by Islam, as was the case in the House of Al-Arqam. Then, those who have studied and understood Islam and sincerely believed in it will move to interact with the Ummah, until the Ummah understands Islam and realises the necessity of the establishment of the Islamic state. The block should take the initiative by addressing the corruption of the people, and challenging them in their erroneous concepts and corrupt opinions. The reality of Islam and the essence of its da’awa have to be then demonstrated and explained, so that the public awareness about the da’awa is established and the Dawah carriers be considered as part of the Ummah. No gap should be between them, so that the Ummah as a whole carries this productive effort under the leadership of the block carrying the da’awa, until they assume authority and bring the Islamic state into existence. Then the life of the Prophet (SAW) in Medina should be the model to follow in the implementation of Islam and in carrying the da’awa to it.”

In emulating the actions of the Messenger (saw) as to how to re-establish the Khilafah, there is clear evidence that he (saw) had an area of work (Majal) and he (saw) allowed the Sahaba (ra) to leave this area of work and go to different places like Abyssinia Therefore the fact that the Party restricts the Majal is based on evidence from the actions of the Prophet (saw) and has nothing to do with the ayah 3:104 as this ayah’s subject matter is to do with the obligation of having a group from amongst the Ummah and the general nature of the work of this group. The ayah does not discuss the details of the method nor the issue of restricting the Majal and therefore it is incorrect to refer to it as an evidence on this subject.

It cannot be said that ‘you cannot use the actions of the Messenger (saw) in this regard because the Da’wa was not Fard upon the Sahaba in Makkah’, as the actions of the Sahaba (ra) are not a Shariah daleel for us but the actions of the Prophet (saw) are. The Da’wa was fard upon the Messenger (saw) and therefore it is valid to use his actions as a Shariah daleel regarding the method and the restriction of Majal. The Party mentioned in a previous answer to question dated 12th May 1978 when it stated:

“The carrying of the Da'awa was not obligatory upon the Muslims as a whole prior to the revelation of the command in Madinah. Therefore, the non obligation was in fact general and not specific to the Sahaba. The issue is not restricted to the obligation or the non obligation, it is rather linked to the permissibility or the prohibition of leaving the Majal. Therefore, the Messenger of Allah's (SAW) action, reflected in giving the Muslims permission to leave the Majal of the Da'awa i..e. to immigrate from Makkah, even as an escape from persecution, serves as evidence that it would be permitted for the party member to leave the Majal of the party. As for the carrying of the Da'awa, this is not connected to the issue, and the party member is at present commanded to carry the Da'awa, whether he were in the Majal or outside it. Therefore, his exit from the Majal would not exempt him from carrying the Da'awa, what the party member would be exempted from are the party activities. Therefore, it is permitted for the party member to leave the Majal of the Da'awa and he would not be obligated to undertake the party's activities, as for the carrying of the Da'awa, this would not fall
from upon his neck.”

It cannot be argued that the definition of a Majal wherein the Party works to take the power and therefore engages in political struggle is a restriction of the verse 3:104 as the verse is general. The verse talks about the subject of establishing of a group and the work of the group. To say that the verse is general (Aam) and that defining a Majal would be restricting it is incorrect. The ayat of Jihad are general (Aam) and Mutlaq (absolute), so when the Khalifah specifies which countries to attack and which countries not launch Jihad upon immediately, does this mean that he is restricting the Ayat? Of course not.

The Party adheres to what the noble ayah 3:104 orders as it works to establish the Khair and enjoing the Ma’roof and forbid the Munkar. The obligation of these tasks is upon the Party. The distinction between the obligation upon the Party and the obligation upon the individual needs to be understood.

The obligation of re-establishing the Khilafah is upon the individual established by numerous evidences, however it is impossible for him to do this alone as he does not have the capability. The only way for him to discharge this obligation is by joining a group who is working for this aim according to a method prescribed by the Shari’ah. Therefore the obligation of the individual is different to what has been obliged upon the Party. The individuals obligation is to work as part of a party and to undertake the activities that the Party requests of him. This does not mean that he does not have to engage in his other fara’id as an individual Muslim such as Salah, obedience to the parents, removing a munkar if it was in his capability by his hand such as preventing his child from haram, etc.

The work of the individuals within this group whether inside or outside the Majal would be determined by the Amir of the Party. It has been explained in the book ‘Introduction to the constitution’ article 21:

“The evidence (daleel) for the group being a political party has two aspects. Firstly, Allah (swt) did not order the Muslims in this verse to undertake the call to goodness and the enjoining of Ma’ruf and the forbidding of Munkar; rather He (swt) ordered the establishment of a group that undertakes these two actions. What is requested is not the undertaking of the two actions, but the establishment of a group that undertakes these actions. Hence, the emphasis in the command is on the establishment of the group and not on the two actions. The two actions are an indication of the actions of the group whose establishment is requested, thus they are characteristics that this group must possess.

For the group to be qualified as such and be able to assume the role assigned to it, it must meet certain conditions, in order for the group to acquire the quality mentioned in the verse. The formation of a group requires the presence of a bond that binds its members so that they become one single entity (jama’ah). Furthermore, what keeps this party functioning is the presence of an Amir whose obedience is compulsory. This is because the Shari'ah has ordered every group of three people or more to appoint an Amir. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "It is forbidden for any three people to be anywhere on earth without having appointed one Amir from amongst them" [Abu Dawud].

Disobedience would lead to the removal of a person from the group. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "He who sees from his Amir something that he dislikes, let him be patient, for whoever leaves the Jama’ah by a hand span dies, dies the death of Jahiliyya (ignorance)" [Bukhari and Muslim]. Therefore, Shari'ah deems the rebellion against the Amir as a separation from the group. What maintains it as a group is the obedience to the Amir.

These are two indispensable characteristics for the group to exist and to undertake its action. Therefore the verse, "Let there arise from amongst you a group..." means let there be from amongst you a group that has a bond binding its members and an Amir whose obedience is obligatory. This is the bloc, party, association, the organisation or any of these names that refer to the group that meets all the criteria.”

It is the Party that undertakes the actions of the method. The political party differs from an individual, so it is the Party that seeks the Nussrah not all of its individuals, rather it may allocate some of its individuals to focus on this. This is the nature of a party and this is why it is possible for a party to re-establish the Khilafah and not an individual by himself.

In the areas outside the Majal like the countries in the West, the Amir has decided what the work of the Shabab there should be and this is what they are obliged to carry out, this is how they fulfil their obligation of resuming the Islamic way of life. It was mentioned in a ‘Question & Answer’ dated 1/6/2001:

“In the kuffar lands outside the majal, like the West, changing the rulers there and establishing the Khilafah is not the work of the Kutlah, therefore it does not undertake the political struggle, because before establishing the Khilafah it does not work to change the societies and systems in the Western World and the various lands of the kuffar.

The Muslims work with the correct Kutlah outside the majal, and his performance of the required duties, would mean that he would have absolved himself of the duty from himself by doing so, i.e. working with the kutlah.”
 

No comments: