Tuesday, December 30, 2014

Q&A: Motives behind the Global Struggle

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullah wa Barakaatuhu
In the book Political Concepts, under the chapter "Motives Behind Global Struggle" on page 30 English version (page 54 Arabic version), the first line on the first paragraph mentions: "Since the dawn of history to the day of judgement, the motives of the nations for global struggle are either pride and the desire for sovereignty or the pursuance of material interests." (Then on the same page on the paragraph before last, on line 15 of the Arabic version) Then it mentions on page 31 of the English version in the first full paragraph: "Colonialism in all its forms is the most dangerous materialistic motive of the global struggle."

The Question is in the first paragraph, motives of the nations for global struggle are summarized and restricted to two only, not more, there is no third, and this is when it stated: "motives of the nations for global struggle ...does not extend beyond these two motives" but in the second paragraph it mentioned a third motive that was not mentioned in the first paragraph which is "colonialism". The question posed in a different manner: Are the motives of the nations for global struggle two or three? Because one who reads both paragraphs finds contradiction and difference between them, so how can they be reconciled? Because if the motives of the nations for global struggle were two why then mention a new third one which is colonialism?
From Ahmad Fuad Fuad

Wa Alaikum Assalaam wa Rahmatullah wa Barakaatuhu
There is no contradiction between what was mentioned in the book Political Concepts, at the beginning of page 54 of the Arabic version (on page 30 English version), that the motives of the nations for global struggle are restricted to two: the desire for sovereignty and pride and the pursuance of material interests, and what came later on the page, that the motive of colonialism in all its forms is one of the most dangerous motives of the nations for global struggle. This is because the colonialism motive comes under the pursuance of material interest; colonialism is the method of the capitalist ideology to achieve material interest according to their criteria which is "interest". This means that colonization is due to another motive which is the pursuance of material interest, and it is not a new motive separate to the two mentioned at the beginning of the page. If you take a closer look, you will notice that it mentions another issue that can be taken as another motive... but the text referred it to the motive of the desire of domination and pride, on the same page it mentions the following: "The urge to stop other countries growing in strength as happened against Napoleon, the Islamic state and Nazi Germany is a desire motivated by sovereignty, because it is a stand against those powers seeking to be sovereign." 

Similarly, just as it did not consider the motive of limiting the growth of strength of another nation as a separate motive to the two mentioned, likewise colonialism is not considered a separate motive to the two mentioned, because the two mentioned motives are the main motives that come under other related matters.

Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
17 Muharram 1436 AH
10/11/2014 CE
The link to the answer from the Ameer's Facebook page:

Q&A: Loans from Foreign Countries

Assalamu Alaikum dear Sheikh, may Allah سبحانه وتعالى honor you with Islam, and may He سبحانه وتعالى honor Islam with you. I pray to Allah سبحانه وتعالى to be one of those who grant you Baya'a for the Khilafah upon the method of Prophethood, for He سبحانه وتعالى is capable for everything... I have a question about the matter of borrowing from foreign countries and international financial institutions, where it is mentioned in the book The Funds in the Khilafah State that it is prohibited by the Shariah because borrowing from them cannot happen except via usurious interest and conditions... The question is: When can the borrowing be permitted, and what are the conditions which makes it prohibited? Is there a difference if these countries are in treaty or in warship??? May Allah سبحانه وتعالى aid you in what there is good for Islam and the Muslims in the life and Afterlife. Assalamu alaikum wa Rahmatuh Allahi wa Barakatuh.
From Ahmad Sa Saad

Wa Alaikum Assalam wa Rahmatuh Allahi wa Baraktuh
It seems that you are confused about what was mentioned in the book, The Funds in the Khilafah State. "As for borrowing from foreign countries or international financial institutions, it is not allowed by Shar'a because such loans would not be except with bank interest or with imposed conditions." As if you assumed that the statement alludes that there can be conditions to make it permitted to borrow from foreign countries and international financial institutions, so you asked about these conditions. However, this is not the case, but it rather means that borrowing from foreign countries and international financial institutions is not allowed for two reasons: "it has usurious interest and it involves conditions", and if the borrowing will take this form, then it is not allowed. The book clarifies this matter in the rest of the paragraph, as it is mentioned:

"Bank interest is prohibited by Shar'a, whether from individuals or countries, as the imposition of conditions gives the lending countries and institutions control over Muslims and makes the will of Muslims and their disposition subject to the will of the lending countries and institutions, a matter which is prohibited by Shar'a. The international loans were among the most dangerous afflictions and among the causes for imposing the authority of the Kuffar upon the Islamic lands; and how often has the Ummah suffered from the calamities of these loans? Therefore, the Khalifah is not allowed to resort to international loans to cover the expenditure on these areas."

Upon that, borrowing from foreign countries according to what was explained above is not allowed. As for the rest of the questions with regards to the foreign country being in a state of treaty or warship, the case is then the following:

According to the current procedures for international loans, loaning is not without Shariah violations: "usurious interest and conditions against the Shariah". Accordingly, it is not allowed to borrow from foreign countries, whether these countries are in warship or treaty according to the current international contracts.

Your brother
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
05 Safar, 1436 AH
27/11/2014 CE
The link to the answer from the Ameer's Facebook page:

Q&A: The Meaning of "Competence" in the Conditions of the Khaleefah

Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Raheem, Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,
I have a question: it was mentioned in the book The Islamic Personality - Volume II, page 20 (page 33 Arabic edition), the competence under Item VII of the conditions of the Khaleefah, then explained the competence and elaborated until it reached the following statement: "Also it is not a contracting condition for the Khilafah that the Khaleefah must be brave, or the people of good vision to manage the affair of the community and to conduct its interest". Question: is this not considered competence?
Ntham Rd

Wa Alaikum Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,
The text contained in the book is: "Also it is not a contracting condition for the Khilafah that the Khaleefah must be brave, or the people of good vision to manage the affair of the community and to conduct its interest, this is so because there is no sound Hadith was reported on this issue, and it does not come under a Hukum Shari' that makes it a contracting condition, although it is preferable that the Khaleefah be brave and of deep insight and vision".

As you know a contracting condition means that if the Ummah elected a Khaleefah who does not fulfil the conditions of contract then his Khilafah is invalid. And reflecting on those two things you mentioned it shows that they are not a condition of contract, in the sense that if the Ummah elected a Khaleefah who does not fulfill them it does not invalidate his Khilafah because the Shari' evidences do not indicate this. But the two are the conditions of preference, that is, it is preferred for the Ummah to take into account these two conditions when electing the Khaleefah, so that it is attentive to elect one who fulfils the conditions of contract and most of the conditions of preference, for this is better and stronger.

As for the competence, it is of the conditions of contract, which means that the Khaleefah must be competent to undertake the duties of the Khilafah, without specifying the competence by a certain thing. So whatever affects, a defect effect, the ability to perform the duties of the Khilafah, it is considered an infringement of the competence condition. This is because the work of the Khaleefah is the application of the Ahkam (rules) of the Shariah, and this necessitates the ability to undertake the deeds himself or to follow-up the deeds by himself if he assigns others to do so. Accordingly if he is unable to perform the deeds then he cannot fulfill the contract of the Khilafah that he personally is appointed for in order to apply the Ahkam of the Shariah. It is enough for this to meet the conditions of contract including the competence, which if missing, the Khilafah contract will no longer remain valid. For example if the Khaleefah has a memory loss due to a disease, or entered into a long time recovery, or similar diseases where the disease persist for a long period that affects the integrity of governance in the State, so that the Khaleefah due to the disease could not perform the deeds himself or follow-up the deeds by himself if he assigns others to do them. And so the Court of Madhalim will conduct the procedures to prove the incompetence and thence the decision necessary to declare the vacancy of the Khilafah post.

As for the failure to fulfil the conditions of preference, it does not invalidate the Khilafah contract. Thus to be brave, mastering the finest methods for fighting, or be of the people of opinion, graduated from top universities. All this is not the condition of contract, therefore it does not invalidate the Khilafah contract, because there is no Shari' evidence for it, and because such conditions do not affect, a defect effect, performing the deeds of the Khilafah. Also because if the matter necessitates an appropriate bravery in some issues, such as wars, for example, the Khaleefah can use some of the owners of bravery in this matter. As well as, if the matter necessitates the opinion of holders of high degrees, the Khaleefah can refer to such people from his subject. However, as we said earlier, the priority for the Ummah is to elect a Khaleefah who possesses both the conditions of contract and the conditions of preference. But if the Ummah chooses one who possesses the conditions of contract but does not possess all the conditions of preference then his Khilafah is valid as long as it fulfils the conditions of contract because the sound Shari' evidences indicate so.

Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
27th Muharram 1436 AH
20/11/2014 CE
The link to the answer from the Ameer's Facebook page:

Q&A: The Meaning of Logic Sensation and Intellectual Sensation

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh respected Scholar, our Ameer Sheikh Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah,
Respected Scholar Sheikh Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah, I have a problematic question in the book "Structuring of a Party"; where the word "sincere" was mentioned in the saying: "even if he wished to be insincere he could not be", what does this mean? As well as I hope to clarify the meaning of "logic sensation (manTiq al-Ihsas)" and the "intellectual sensation". Thank you very much and May Allah reward you with Khilafah in your era and you become our Imam, Ameen.
Mohammed Dhuha, Indonesia, Wa Assalam Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh.


Wa Alaikum Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

It looks like you mean to ask about the following text from the book "Structuring of a Party" (Attakattul el-Hizbi) page 23 (pages 25-26 Arabic edition):
"This is because it is sensation that leads to thought in the Hizb. This thought would shine in the Ummah amidst other thoughts. Initially, the Hizb's thought will be just another thought amongst many. It will be the weakest of them because it is newly born and not yet deeply rooted in the Ummah. The Hizb's thought will not have established a supportive climate for itself yet. However, it is a thought based on logic sensation (manTiq al-Ihsas), i.e. understanding of reality based on direct sensation, it will generate an intellectual sensation, i.e. having a clear sensation. Hence, the deep thought, due to its nature – purifies whoever it impresses, making him sincere, even if he wished to be insincere he could not be."

Hence your question is about the meaning of logic sensation, and the intellectual sensation, and why this thought makes its carrier sincere.

A great deal of your questions are answered in the book "Concepts of Hizb ut Tahrir" (Mafahim Hizb ut Tahrir), where it explained the meaning of logic sensation, and the meaning of intellectual sensation, on page 56 (p. 58-59 Arabic edition) in the "Concepts" book is as follows:
"It is not permitted at all to separate action from thought or from the specific objective or Iman, since this separation, no matter how small, is harmful on the action itself, on its results, and to its continuity. This specific objective must be understood and clear for each individual who wants to perform any action before they can embark on this action.
It is also obligatory that the sensory perception be the basis, i.e. the understanding and thought be the result of sensation and not mere hypothetical assumption or imagination. The sensation of the reality should be carried to the brain, thus generating, together with any previous information (on the issue) brain activity, which is the thought. This is what guarantees depth in thinking and productivity in the action. Sensory perception leads to intellectual sensation i.e. sensation that is strengthened in the individual by the thought. For example the sensation of the carriers of the da'wah once they have understood the da'wah becomes stronger than before." 

Logic sensation means that the thought is taken after the direct sensation of its reality and standing on it, and not by preaching and instruction by what is not conclusively correct, and of course it is not through assumption of imaginary issues. Therefore, logic sensation means thinking based on direct sensation. Logic sensation is stronger and firmer than others, because it is connected to the sense directly. Thus a person's perception of the extent of decline and underdevelopment experienced in Africa, for example, through information he or she received, is much different from his or her perception of the extent of this decline when making a visit to Africa and his or her direct acquaintance of the reality there, and arriving through this acquaintance to judging Africa of being declined and underdeveloped.

As for the intellectual sensation, it contrasts the abstract sensation, which is to feel the reality without having a thought related to this fact. But if the thought was found in a person and he or she sensed the reality after having this thought, then his or her sense of reality and his or her understanding of it is undoubtedly stronger and firmer than his or her abstract sensation i.e. sensation before the existence of the thought. Hence, the generation of sensation after having the thought on it is called intellectual sensation. Thus, the sensation of a person, for example, of the reality of Africa after his or her knowledge of the meaning of decline and his or her perception of the difference between it and the revival, is stronger than his or her sensation of the reality of Africa before he or she intellectually knows the meaning of decline and the meaning of the revival. Similarly, his or her sensation of the horridness of the Kaffir West exploitation of Africa and looting its wealth is stronger after his or her intellectual knowledge of the policies of these countries towards Africa, more than his or her sensation of exploitation before the existence of this knowledge. Therefore, members of Hizb ut Tahrir in Africa feel the decline of the society there and the horridness of the exploitation of their country more than other people because of their perception of the meaning of decline and the acquaintance of the policies of the colonial states towards their country and their knowledge of the greed of these countries, while the sensation of others is so weak, and some of them do not even pay attention to it.

The transformational thought that the ideological party attains would be through the logic sensation that leads to true and correct results, and generates an intellectual sensation that makes its holder sees the reality and senses it in its true and correct form. Hence this thinking undoubtedly generates sincere concepts in its owner, so he or she does not stand at the borders of theoretical knowledge. Thus, the holder of this thought understands the realities of things, so he or she can only be sincere and truthful like the thought which he or she holds. He or she cannot cheat oneself and deludes it that the reality is contrary to what he or she sees. Rather he or she sees the reality for what it really is, and knows the treatment for what it really is; so he or she cannot be except sincere as long as he or she is holding this thought.

Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
15th Safar 1436 AH
7/12/2014 CE

Saturday, December 27, 2014

(Resorting to) Al-Ghaibiyaat (unseen matters) and the thinking about causes and effects

Answer to a question:
There is no doubt that the Ghaibiyaat (unseen matters) represents a kind of easy exit or escape in the face of troubles and crises in comparison to exerting effort to thin deeply about the causes and effects which in fact represents the correct method for escaping troubles and crises. The Islamic Ummah has indeed witnessed (in its past) many difficult periods and she used to escape from the troubles and crises by utilising enlightened thought in order to overcome them. This was by acquiring knowledge of the causes and effects and by applying thought to them. However in the period of descent and following that her thinking became affected by obscurities which obscured the minds and twisted the thoughts. The Ghaibiyaat spread within her and kept her from exercising enlightened thought as she resorted and turned to the Ghaibiyaat and trod the path represented in the easy escape or exit. This is led to the absence of their ability to overcome the difficult periods and so the difficulties increased and lasted for longer and so she fell into misfortune until she collapsed.
A person choosing the easy escape or exit is natural in respect to a human being in respect to him being human and as such he seeks the easy exit whatever it maybe whether it is found within the Ghaibiyaat or somewhere else. However the Ghaibiyaat pose a greater danger to mankind than any other direction and as such resorting to them hits a vital area and is destructive to the human being.
The place which allowed for the Muslims to resort to the unseen matters (Ghaibiyaat) was their Imaan in Al-Qadaa Wal-Qadr and their certainty that Allah creates everything and does everything. As such it became an easy exit for the person to have reliance upon the Qadr. This is by saying that the matter is destined and that Allah is the one who brings it about so it is the wish of Allah and His will. And in this simplest of ways the thought related to the causes and effects halted whilst the destinies were surrendered to.
The truth of the matter is that just as Allah (swt) said:
فَلَمْ تَقْتُلُوهُمْ وَلَكِنَّ اللَّهَ قَتَلَهُمْ
And you did not kill them but it was Allah who killed them (Al-Anfaal 17).
He (swt) also said:
انْفِرُوا خِفَافًا وَثِقَالًا وَجَاهِدُوا بِأَمْوَالِكُمْ وَأَنْفُسِكُمْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ
Go forth, whether light or heavy and perform Al-Jihaad with your wealth and lives in the way of Allah (At-Taubah 41).
قَاتِلُوا الَّذِينَ يَلُونَكُمْ مِنَ الْكُفَّارِ
Fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers (At-Taubah 123).
وَاقْتُلُوهُمْ حَيْثُ ثَقِفْتُمُوهُمْ
And kill them wherever you overtake them (Al-Baqarah 191).
And just as He (swt) said:
لَوْ أَنْفَقْتَ مَا فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا مَا أَلَّفْتَ بَيْنَ قُلُوبِهِمْ وَلَكِنَّ اللَّهَ أَلَّفَ بَيْنَهُمْ
If you had spent all that is in the earth you could not have brought their hearts together (Al-Anfaal 63).
He (swt) also said:
وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ جَمِيعًا وَلَا تَفَرَّقُوا
And hold fast to the rope of Allah all together and be not divided (Aali ‘Imraan 103).
إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَ فِي سَبِيلِهِ صَفًّا كَأَنَّهُمْ بُنْيَانٌ مَرْصُوصٌ
Verily Allah loves those who fight in His way in a row as if they are (one single) structure joined firmly (As-Saff 4).
The truth is also that Allah (swt) has wished (or willed) things for us (or to befall upon us) and He has wished for things from us. That which he has willed and wished to happen to us He has concealed from us whilst that which He (swt) has wished from us He has commanded us with it. We have not been informed about the Qadr of Allah because it is hidden from us and so we are unaware of it and it is impossible for us to know it. As for what Allah (swt) has wanted from us then He (swt) has commanded us with that. He (swt) has wanted from us to carry the Da’wah to the disbelievers and even if He knew that they would never believe. He (swt) has demanded from us to fight the disbelievers and to fight the rebels and even if He knows that we will be defeated by them. He wanted from us to be a single State even if this were to cover the whole world and even if he knew that the Muslims would be multiple States and that even a small piece of land will be divided into a number of States. He (swt) wanted from us to be severe and strong with the disbelievers and merciful amongst ourselves and even though He knew that the feelings of hostility amongst ourselves would become severe indeed. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘I asked Allah for three (things) and so He responded positively to two (of my requests) but did not in regards to the third. I asked Him to not destroy my Ummah by plague and so He responded positively, I asked Him to not destroy my Ummah by drought and so He responded positively and I asked Him to not make the harshness (or harm) amongst the Muslims to be severe and He did not respond affirmatively’. So when Allah Ta’Aalaa commands us with a matter then this does not mean that he has not destined upon us the opposite of that and when He (swt) forbids us from a matter that this does not mean that he has not written for us other than that. This is because we have not been commanded in respect to that which He (swt) has made Qadar for us (destined) or written for us but rather we have only been commanded to implement that which He has commanded us without paying any consideration to what has been destined or written for us.
The issue of the Ghaibiyaat represents surrendering and giving in to what we have believed to have been destined and written for us whilst not undertaking that which Allah Ta’Aalaa has commanded us to undertake. This is because surrendering is easier than implementing the commands and the person in accordance to his nature chooses the easier and lighter option over the harder and more difficult one (when presented to him). For this reason he chooses surrender instead of undertaking that which is harder and more difficult whilst taking the Imaan in Qadar to support and provide credence to his choice.
Allah (swt) has commanded us to have Imaan in Qadar its good (Khair) and its bad (Sharr) however He did not teach or inform us about that which he has made Qadar for us and written for us. Rather He has commanded us with His clear and apparent commands whilst forbidding us from specific forbiddances and He has informed us of these and made them clear to us. Therefore mixing the Imaan with what He (swt) has commanded us to believe in with the commands that He (swt) has commanded us to implement is what has caused ambiguity and confusion in respect to the action and the manner of how to proceed. It is therefore this mixing that has led to the infiltration of these Ghaibiyaat (unseen matters i.e. Qadar) and it is what has made taking these unseen or unknowable matters as the basis of reliance in respect to choosing the easier and the lighter over the harder and more difficult or burdensome. As such it is from this mixing that the danger of surrendering has arisen and the danger of refraining and sitting back from undertaking action.
It is true that Allah (swt) is the effecter of what He wishes and the creator of everything however Allah (swt) has made rules and laws for this creation (and universe) according to which it proceeds and He has made laws for things and matters which are formed in accordance to them and which change and remain in accordance to these laws. He (swt) can break these rules and laws however He (swt) has done this for the Nabi or Rasool. As such the Imaan in Allah’s power to grant victory to the believers over the disbelievers does not mean that the believers will be victorious whilst they do not take into account or adopt the causes or reasons (Asbaab) for the victory. This is because victory without adopting its causes is not possible whilst the power (Qudrah) of Allah does not relate to the impossible. So the fact that Allah (swt) has power over a matter does not mean that the individual, group or Ummah is powerful or capable over it (and its achievement). The Qudrah (power) of Allah is a specific attribute belonging to Him whilst the Qudrah (power and capability) of the servant is specific to him and it has no relation to the Qudrah of Allah. As such mixing between the Qudrah of Allah and belief in it and the Qudrah of the servant and his undertaking of what Allah has commanded him with, is what has led to the sitting back and abstaining from action (or work for change) and it is what leads to the sedation of nations and peoples.
Verily Allah (swt) said:
وَلَيَنْصُرَنَّ اللَّهُ مَنْ يَنْصُرُهُ
Allah will surely grant support the one who supports Him (Al-Hajj 40).
This means that He (swt) has made an oath to be the support and one to provide victory to the one who supports Him and this text is Qat’iy Ath-Thuboot (definite in transmission) and Qat’iy Ad-Dalaalah (definite in meaning or import). As such Imaan in it is Fard whilst denying it is Kufr and there is no doubt in regards to that. However this belief has been mixed (or confused) with the action making the one who is meant to support Allah abstain from action because He (swt) will definitely grant him victory. So the one who supports Allah has been commanded by Allah to undertake action. Even though He (swt) has informed him that He will grant him victory He has however at the same time commanded him to undertake work or action. So his reliance and dependency upon the promise of Allah and his abstention from undertaking action represents a disobedience to Allah rather than representing a support for Him. His abstention from undertaking the action therefore negates that he will be supported or granted victory by Allah and as such the absence of victory for the one who claims that he is supporting Allah whilst he does not engage in work or action does not mean that Allah (swt) has gone against His promise. Rather it means that the person by not undertaking that which Allah has commanded him to undertake in respect to taking into account and adopting the Asbaab (reasons or causes) of victory has disobeyed Allah and as such has gone outside from those whom Allah will provide victory to. This is because supporting Allah means performing His commands and abstaining from that which He has forbidden. This person will not then be granted victory as long as he has not supported Allah by undertaking the actions that he has been commanded to undertake.
Therefore the mixing between the Imaan in regards to that which he has been commanded to believe in and undertaking the actions which Allah (swt) has commanded him to undertake leads to being deprived of that which Allah has promised due to abstaining from the work and not undertaking it.
The establishing of the State, any State, within a Jamaa’ah (collective), any Jamaa’ah, has laws and rules related to it and these are that the collective or the strongest faction within it accepts the concepts, criteria and convictions (Mafaaheem, Maqaayees and Qanaa’aat) upon which this State is to be established upon. A long as they have not accepted these concepts, criteria and convictions it is not possible to establish a State amongst them and even if it was overtaken by a dominating force and the strong took hold of the authority amongst them. This is because the original position in respect to establishing the State is the acceptance of the collective or most powerful faction of these concepts, criteria and convictions. These are the laws of the collectives and the laws related to the rule and the authority. These laws are witnessed and seen and an attempt to ignore them whilst taking the authority by force and might cannot bring into existence the Dawlah (State) even if it is possible to bring about those who have taken the authority by force for a while.
Removing the colonised State from those States which have colonised it has rules and laws attached to it and this is for those working to remove it to possess a material power that is can overcome its material power. It must also possess an intellectual (or thought based) power enabling them to comprehend and perceive the tricks (or strategies) and realise the meaning of the material power. Therefore if the intellectual power and the material power do not exist then it is not possible to remove the colonised State. The uprisings of nations and however great they are cannot remove the colonisation and even if it represents the enemy of Allah and as such it is essential to gain knowledge and understanding of the rules and laws of Allah in respect to (both) gaining mastery and colonisation.
The same then applies to everything in existence. Allah (swt) has created all that exists, He has created man and created laws and rules for their living and He (swt) has commanded him with commands and forbidden him with forbiddances. It is therefore necessary that mankind does not mix there Imaan in Him with that which He has commanded and forbidden i.e. to not mix the matters that they have been commanded to believe in with that which they have been commanded to undertake in terms of actions. It is this mixing that leads to resorting to reliance upon the unseen. He (swt) did command them to undertake action upon the basis that He is capable of breaking the (natural) laws and rules but rather He commanded them to believe in the fact that He (swt) is capable of any matter and all powerful over all affairs whilst (also) commanding them to undertake work or to act in accordance to these laws and rules.
He (swt) commanded them to believe in the existence of Jannah and hellfire and He (swt) promised them mercy and forgiveness however He (swt) did not command them with Jannah and the Naar or to act in accordance to what He promised them. Rather He Ta’Aalaa commanded them to act with that which enters into Jannah and protects from the Naar (fire) and He commanded them not to depend upon His Rahmah because just as He (swt) is Raheem (merciful) He (swt) is also Muntaqim (vengeful); He punishes the disobedient and rewards the obedient. Therefore it is essential to not mix between what He (swt) has commanded us to have Imaan (belief) in and what He (swt) has commanded us to act with. Similarly it is necessary for them to differentiate between that which He (swt) commanded them to believe in and that which He (swt) has commanded them to act with.
Therefore the issue of the Ghaibiyaat (unseen matters) comes about due to mixing between that which is obligatory to believe in decisively and that which it is obligatory to undertake in terms of actions. If this mixing or confusion had not existed then the (reality surrounding) the Ghaibiyaat would not have existed and as such it is necessary to differentiate between that which is obligatory to have Imaan in and that which it is obligatory to act with. If this differentiation was not to happen and the mixing took place then the issue of the Ghaybiyaat would still find its way into the people and the people will continue to resort to them in order to take the easiest and lightest way out in times of hardship and crises and particular in the difficult times encountered in life.
5th Safar 1394

Friday, December 26, 2014

Imam Abdullah Bukhari - May Allah have Mercy on Him – Assassinated in Istanbul!

مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ رِجَالٌ صَدَقُوا مَا عَاهَدُوا اللَّهَ عَلَيْهِ فَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ قَضَى نَحْبَهُ وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ يَنْتَظِرُ وَمَا بَدَّلُوا تَبْدِيلاً
"Among the believers there are men who have been true to the contract they made with Allah. Some of them have fulfilled their pact by death and some are still waiting to do so, not having changed in any way at all."
(Al-Ahzab, 33:23)
Daily Sabah, the Turkish newspaper, published on its English-language website on 13/12/2014 CE the report of the heinous crime that took place on Wednesday morning, on 10/12/2014, in Istanbul.
During his meeting with Putin on 10/12/2014, the tyrant of Uzbekistan, Karimov, had requested help from his partner in crime Putin in the face of Islam, which deprive him of sleep. The very same day the Russian Intelligence Service in coordination with the Uzbek Intelligence Service carried out the assassination of Imam Abdullah Bukhari (38 years old) a martyr of the word of truth, in the city of Istanbul when he was about to enter the Headquarters of the Education Institute where he lectures on Shariah to his students. The Martyr Abdullah Bukhari had been forced to migrate from Uzbekistan because of his pursuit by the repressive forces of Karimov the dictator, threatening his life and his family, and despite receiving repeated death threats, he insisted on moving forward in his call to get rid of the tyranny of the dictator Karimov.
This assassination crime comes within a long series of the crimes of the tyrant Karimov and his partner, Putin, who declared war on Islamic Dawah carriers not only in Russia and Central Asia, and even abroad. The Russian and Uzbek intelligence services have committed in 2009 and 2011, several assassinations in Turkey against activists calling for the demise of the Karimov's tyranny, and assassinations against media personnel who expose his crimes. According to press reports, there is a list of activists opposed to Karimov targeted to be assassinated. In 1995, the Uzbek security services kidnapped Imam Abdul Wali Mirzayev in Tashkent airport. In August 2006, Imam Muhammad Rafeeq Kamalov was killed in Kyrgyzstan. In February 2012, the assassination attempt of Imam Abed Qari Nazarov took place in Sweden, and the last of those crimes was the assassination of Imam Abdullah Bukhari in Turkey.
May Allah have mercy on the Imam Abdullah Bukhari and accept him in the footsteps of the martyrs of the call and may Allah grant him an abode with the prophets and the Sidiqeen and Martyrs and the righteous and those are the best of companion. We ask Allah to take revenge on the tyrant of Uzbekistan and his partner tyrant of Russia sooner rather than later.
Their pure blood will be, God willing, the flames of light that will add to the Muslims' resolve and determination to sacrifice all dear and precious for the Deen, also there will be a curse that deprives the tyrant of Uzbekistan and his partner Putin of sleep, Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:
أَفَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَيَنْظُرُوا كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ ۚ دَمَّرَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ ۖ وَلِلْكَافِرِينَ أَمْثَالُهَا
"Have they not travelled about the earth and seen the final fate of those before them? Allah destroyed them utterly. And those who are kafir will suffer the same fate."
(Muhammad: 10)
Oh Allah, we are confident and sure in you alone and Allah is sufficient for all, Oh Allah make the foothold of our brothers firm and send Your tranquility in their hearts. This call is in Your path and You promised those who follow Your path of victory and authority, and You are the Haqq and Your promise is true:
وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَىٰ لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْنًا ۚ يَعْبُدُونَنِي لَا يُشْرِكُونَ بِي شَيْئًا ۚ وَمَنْ كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
"Allah has promised those of you who have iman and do right actions that He will make them successors in the land as He made those before them successors, and will firmly establish for them their deen with which He is pleased and give them, in place of their fear, security. 'They worship Me, not associating anything with Me.' Any who are kafir after that, such people are deviators."
(An-Nur, 24:55)
The Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir
Thursday, 26 Safar 1436 AH
18/12/2014 CE
Issue No: 1436 AH /009

Q&A: The Meaning of Tabarruj (Revealing the Beauty)

Our honourable Sheikh, Assalaamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakaatuhu
I read what you wrote regarding wearing of the trousers in front of relatives, and that it is not Shariah compliant, however you did not provide an evidence for this...but you said that it is from Tabarruj; and as what we have learnt the meaning of Tabarruj is anything that attracts the attention. However, how a society views Tabarruj differs from one country to another; wearing of the trousers, as I understand, in our private social life among relatives does not attract attention because everyone in the private life wears a long shirt and trousers, so it is not attracting attention because everyone is wearing the same and the society that we live in is what determines its view of the dress, whether it has Tabarruj or not, i.e. it is attracting attention or not, please can you clarify this.
Jazak Allah Khair and May He grant you victory and support of the people of power.
From Ranood Zagl

Wa Alaikum us Salaam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakaatuhu
Tabarruj in the language is: when a woman reveals her adornments and beauty to men, In "Lisan Al Arab" it states: "And Tabarruj: Revealing the adornments to foreigners, which is rebuked, but it is acceptable for the husband". In "Qamous Al Muheet" it states: "And She showed Tabarruj: She revealed her adornment for men".
In "Mukhtar As-Sahah" it states: "and "Tabarruj" is when a woman reveals her adornments and beauty to men."... And in "Maqayees Al –Lugha": "Baraja' the letters: Ba, Ra, and Jeem have two origin sources: One means to become apparent, and to show (Al-thuhoor and Al-Borooz), and from it is Tabarruj, which is when a woman reveals her beauty)." What is understood from the word "Izhar" and "Al-thuhoor and Al-Borooz'' that the adornment is attractive and is made apparent to men; and the Shariah meaning is not different from that, Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:
وَلَا يَضْرِبْنَ بِأَرْجُلِهِنَّ لِيُعْلَمَ مَا يُخْفِينَ مِنْ زِينَتِهِنَّ
"And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment"
(An-Nur: 31)
Therefore a woman must not walk stamping her feet strongly on the ground allowing her anklet to produce a sound that will make a man aware that the woman is wearing jewelry on her ankle under her clothes. All of this means that Tabarruj in the language and Shariah meaning is the adornment that is attracting attention.
Applying this understanding on wearing of the trousers in the private life in front of the non-Mahrim relatives when they visit for the purpose of family ties, when they visit their female relatives at occasions allowed by the Shar' like during Eid festivals... If the trousers are worn without a long shirt that covers the separation of the the area above the thighs which is defined when wearing the trousers, it will attract attention. When a woman wears trousers and it defines the separation of the area above the thighs she will attract attention; but if the shirt covers this separation above the thighs and others, it will not attract the attention generally unless it is unusual.
It is not necessary to have a text that mentions that wearing of the trousers in the private life in front of non-Mahrim relatives is Tabarruj, that is because the evidences above have defined the reality of Tabarruj, and this applies to the trousers without a shirt that covers the separation of the trousers above the thighs and others, this is why in the answer to the question, the following was mentioned: (Wearing of the trouser is Tabarruj, this is why it is prohibited to appear in front of non-Mahrim relatives when they come for family relations or for Eid greetings while wearing trousers." End. The answer was regarding wearing the trousers with the short shirt that does not cover the trousers. This answer have confused some sisters, this is why some of them asked for clarification of the topic, so I sent the following answer:
"What is published on the Hizb website about wearing the trousers in the house in front of non-Mahrim relatives is considered as Tabarruj, and it is prohibited to wear it in front of them... this is the case if the trousers were exposed, i.e. trousers with a short shirt that shows the trousers; in this case it is considered as Tabarruj. It is prohibited to wear it in front of non-Mahrim relatives in the house when they visit for family ties like in Eid festivals as an example, but if there was a skirt on top of it that is not attractive and covers it or covers a large part of it...it is then not Tabarruj in her house in front of non-Mahrim when they visit for family ties during the Eid festivals for example..." End.
It is clear from the question that the one who wrote it has not seen this answer.
It is obvious that the answer is regarding in the houses and not the public life, because the dress in the public life is known to have three criteria: to cover the "Awrah", must not be Tabarruj, and the Shari' Jilbab must be worn. We have previously provided details of this in other answers.
Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
22 Safar 1436 AH
14/12/2014 CE
The link to the answer from the Ameer's Facebook page:

Friday, December 12, 2014

Q&A-The Nature of Bid’ah

During one of our meetings, we discussed the word “Bid’ah.” Some of us said that it refers to everything that contravenes the command of The Legislator (Al-Shaari’), and others said that it refers only to contravening the command of The Legislator in matters of ‘Ibadaat (acts of worship). Could you please clarify this issue? Jazakum Allahu Khairan.
1- The commands of The Legislator are two types: The first type is in Seeghat Al-Amr (the form of a command) and accompanied with the explanation of the method to complete this command (i.e. the practical steps to implement it from start to finish). For example, Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

وَأَقِيمُواْ الصَّلاَةَ

“And perform Salat” [Al-Baqara, 2:43]
this is in Seeghat Al-Amr, but it was not left to man to pray however he pleases, but rather other texts were revealed that explain exactly how prayer is performed, including the intention, standing, recitation, Rukoo’, Sujood, etc. Equally, Allah سبحانه وتعالى revealed:

وَلِلّهِ عَلَى النَّاسِ حِجُّ الْبَيْتِ

“And Hajj to the House (Ka’ba) is a duty that mankind owes to Allah” [Al-Imran, 3:97],
and this is also in Seeghat Al-Amr, but in the form of “news in the context of a command,” and this is also accompanied by texts explaining how this command to perform Hajj is to be completed from start to finish.
The second type is also in Seeghat Al-Amr, but is general (‘Aam) or unrestricted (Mutlaq), and is not accompanied by the method to complete the command (the practical steps to implement it). For example, the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said:
“Whoever (loaned something or sold something on credit), then the measure must be known, the weight must be known, and the period (until payment is made) must be known” [Bukhari];
here, the command with relation to selling something on credit is in Seeghat Al-Jumla Al-Shartiyyah (the form of a conditional sentence), ordering us to know the measure, weight and payment period, but The Legislator did not explain the specific steps to complete the contract, such as, for example, having the two contractors stand before each other, one of them recite something from the Qur’an, then each of them take a step forward, then they hug each other, then they discuss the credit contract, followed by an offer and an acceptance, etc.
Another example is the Ahadith of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم:
“Gold (traded for) gold is Riba, except when (it is exchanged immediately in the same meeting)” [Bukhari] and
“Gold (traded) for gold, likeness to likeness, and paper (traded) for paper, likeness to likeness” [Bukhari and Muslim].
These Ahadith are “a command in the form of news,” but the specific steps to complete the trading were not given, as explained in the previous examples.
In another example, it was narrated to us through authentic Ahadith that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم would stand up when a funeral procession would pass him. It was narrated in Sahih Muslim:
“If you see a funeral procession, then stand up for it…”
and the actions of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم are a form of a Talab (request or command), but he صلى الله عليه وسلم did not show us exactly how to perform the exact steps related to this command, as demonstrated in the first example.
Hence, there are commands from The Legislator that were accompanied by texts detailing the practical steps for implementation, and there are commands from The Legislator that are general (‘Aam) or unrestricted (Mutlaq) that were not accompanied by detailed practical steps for implementation.
2- The expression (Istilaah) “Bid’ah” applies when a command of The Legislator, with which texts detailing the practical steps for implementation were also revealed, are contravened. This is because the command was not implemented exactly as instructed by The Legislator.
The linguistic (Lughawi) meaning of the word “Bid’ah,” as explained in Lisaan Al-Arab: “The Mubtadi’ (person who carries out a Bid’ah) is the person who brings forth something in a manner that is different than was known previously […] and if you (Abda’t) something, it means that you invented it and it is unique.”
The above definition also applies to the Istilaahi meaning of the word “Bid’ah,” i.e. contravening the Shar’iee method, as detailed by Islamic legislation, to complete a Shar’iee matter. This is what the Hadith,
“Whoever performs an act that is not upon our command, it is rejected” [Bukhari and Muslim]
is referring to. Thus, whoever performs three Sujood (prostrations) instead of two during his Salat has committed a Bid’ah, and whoever throws eight stones at the Jamrat of Mina instead of seven has committed a Bid’ah. Every Bid’ah is a misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Hellfire (i.e. he is sinful for the action).
3- Contravening a command of The Legislator that was not accompanied by the practical steps for implementation falls under the classification of Hukum Shari’ee, and is defined as Haram, Makruh or Mubah if the address was Khitaab Takleef (prescriptive address), and Baatil (invalid) or Faasid (corrupt) if the address was Khitaab Wadh’ (descriptive address). This, in turn, is dependent on the form of the Qareena (conjunctive evidence) that accompanies the command, whether in the form of Jazm (decisive), Tarjeeh (outweighing), or Takhyeer (choice).
So, going back to our first example, if someone sells something on credit (i.e. completed the contract of sale) in contravention to the command of The Legislator (i.e. without knowing the measure, or the weight, or the deadline when payment will be made), it cannot be said that he has committed a Bid’ah, but rather it is said that this contract contravenes the command of The Legislator and is Baatil or Faasid depending on the type of contravention.
And in the second example, if a person traded gold for gold in contravention to the command:
“Gold (traded for) gold is Riba, except when (it is exchanged immediately in the same meeting)” and “…likeness to likeness,” (i.e. not exchanged immediately and not likeness to likeness),
it cannot be said that he has committed a Bid’ah by contravening the command, but rather it is said that he committed Haram by being involved in a Riba contract.
And failure to stand up when a funeral procession passes, choosing to remain seated, cannot be called a Bid’ah, but rather is called Mubah (permissible) because Islamic texts have been narrated for both cases. It was reported by Muslim of Ali Bin Abi Taalib (ra) who said:
“The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم stood up then sat down” [Muslim].
This also applies to the command of The Legislator,
“…seek (the wife) with (strong) Deen, otherwise you will (lose)” [Bukhari],
where contravening this command cannot be called a Bid’ah, but rather the Islamic ruling regarding marrying a woman who does not have a strong Deen should be researched. This is because the practical steps for choosing a wife have not been given, where, for example, the man might stand before the woman and recites Ayat ul-Kursi, then he takes one step forward and recites the two Mu’awithaat, then he takes one step forward and says Bismillah, then he extends his right arm forward and proposes marriage, and so on.
This also applies to the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم to the tradesmen,
“O tradesmen, this buying and selling (or market) is attended by Laghw (false speech) and swearing oaths, so fill it with charity” [Abu Dawood and Ahmed],
due to their excessive swearing of oaths during trade. But The Legislator did not clarify specific steps to implement the command “…so fill it” and therefore it cannot be said that if someone sold something and swore an oath, but then did not give charity, that he come with a Bid’ah; rather, the Islamic ruling regarding a tradesman not giving charity after swearing oaths should be researched on its own.
This applies to all contraventions of the commands of The Legislator that were not accompanied with specific steps for implementation.
4- By looking more deeply (Istiqraa’) into the Islamic legal texts, we find that only the majority of the ‘Ibadaat (acts of worship) are accompanied by exact, practical steps for implementing the commands of The Legislator, and therefore Bid’ah does not occur outside of the ‘Ibadaat.
We say “the majority of the ‘Ibadaat” here because some of them were not accompanied by practical steps for implementation. One example of this is Jihad. Even though it is an act of ‘Ibaada, but the commands related to it came unrestricted (Mutlaq) or general (‘Aam), such as the verse:

قَاتِلُواْ الَّذِينَ يَلُونَكُم مِّنَ الْكُفَّارِ

“Fight those of the disbelievers that are close to you” [At-Tawba, 9:123]
and the verse:

جَاهِدِ الْكُفَّارَ وَالْمُنَافِقِينَ وَاغْلُظْ عَلَيْهِمْ

“Fight (Jaahiduu) against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them” [At-Tawba, 9:73]
These commands are not accompanied with Islamic texts to detail the exact steps to implement them, such as how to fight: if you would recite an Ayah, then shoot a bullet, then take a step forward, then shoot another bullet, then take a step to the right, and so on.
Hence, a person that does not perform Jihad when it is prescribed upon him is not said to have come forth with a Bid’ah, but rather he has committed a Haram for his neglecting Jihad.
5- In conclusion, contravening a command of The Legislator that was accompanied by an exact explanation of the steps required to complete the command is a Bid’ah. And contravening an unrestricted (Mutlaq) or general (‘Aam) command of The Legislator that is not accompanied by an exact explanation of the steps required to complete the command is a contravention of the Ahkam Shar’iee: Haram, Makruh, or Mubah if it is in a Khitaab Takleef (prescriptive address), and Baatil or Faasid if in a Khitaab Wadh’ (descriptive address).
And by looking more deeply (Istiqraa’), we find that the majority of ‘Ibadaat were accompanied by the exact steps for implementation, and therefore contravening these laws falls under the classification of Bid’ah.
6- As for the evidences regarding Mu’amalaat (transactions) and Jihad, these were revealed in an unrestricted (Mutlaq) and general (‘Aam) fashion, and therefore contravening these commands falls under the classification of Ahkam Shar’iee: Haram, Makruh, or Mubah if it is in a Khitaab Takleef (prescriptive address), and Baatil or Faasid if in a Khitaab Wadh’ (descriptive address).