Sunday, January 19, 2014

Tafseer Al-Baqara: 6-7 | Sheikh 'Ata Abu Al-Rashtah

Extract from the book 'At-Tayseer Fee Usool At-Tafseer' written by the Ameer of Hizb ut Tahrir, Sheikh Ata Ibn Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah.

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ سَوَاءٌ عَلَيْهِمْ أَأَنذَرْتَهُمْ أَمْ لَمْ تُنذِرْهُمْ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ 6

خَتَمَ اللّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهمْ وَعَلَى سَمْعِهِمْ وَعَلَى أَبْصَارِهِمْ غِشَاوَةٌ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عظِيمٌ 7
.

6. “Verily, those who disbelieve, it is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe.
7. Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearings, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be a great torment.”

After Allah had explained in the previous verses that the book is from Allah in truth and that there is no doubt in it, and after He (سبحانه) explained the status of those who are guided by it and have taqwa, that they are from the successful ones. Then He (سبحانه) explained in these two verses the situation of those who reject; that warning does not benefit them, as Allah has sealed their hearts.

As if it was an answer to one in confusion about his command, asking why did He not guide the disbelievers? That is because if the Arabs said “inna ‘Abdallah qaaim” “verily, Abdullah is standing”, then that was an answer to one questioning about Abdullah’s standing and he is doubtful about it. So, when Allah (سبحانه) begins the verse with إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ سَوَاءٌ, that will linguistically be according to what was mentioned.

[Your saying: “Abdullah qaaim” (Abdullah is standing) is information about his standing. Your saying: “inna Abdullah qaaim” (verily Abdullah is standing) is an answer to one questioning about his standing and he is doubtful about it. And your saying: “inna Abdullah la-qaaim” is an answer to one questioning and he is denying the standing. … Mubarad said this.]

The appearance of the hamzat ut-tasweeyah (أ) along with أَمْ (or) makes them free from the meaning of enquiry, to establish the equality between them both. i.e. with regards to the disbelievers, it is the same whether you warn them or not, they won’t believe – thus, equalising between the two situations.
[If the word سَوَاءٌ ‘whether’ has the alif al-istifhaam (alif of enquiry) after it, then it must come with أَمْ (or) e.g. سَوَاءٌ عليّ أقمت أم قعدت ‘it is the same to me whether you stood or sat’.
If one of two names were joined (عطف) after it, they are عطف joined with و ‘and’, none other, e.g. سَوَاءٌ عندي زيد وعمرو ‘Zaid and Amr are the same to me’. If there was after it two verbs and no istifhaam, then they are عطف joined together with أَوْ (or) e.g. سَوَاءٌ عليّ قمت أو قعدت ‘it is the same to me whether you stood or sat’. If there were two verbal nouns after it, e.g.
سَوَاءٌ عليّ قيامك و قعودك ‘it is the same to me your standing or your sitting’, then they are عطف joined with و ‘and’ or with أَوْ (or).]

Here there arises the following issues:

1. The term الَّذِينَ (those who) is from the forms of generality, so with this meaning Allah (سبحانه) informs us that those who disbelieve will not become a believer, whatever the warning or bringing Islam to them. So, is this matter left general or is it specified at all?

It is certain that this matter is not left general, as Rasool Allah
(صلى الله عليه وسلم) was sent with Islam to bring it to the people who are disbelievers. Whoever believed from them became a believer and whoever remained, remained on kufr. Therefore, this general text is specified, with the specification being completed here with the mind. The mind can specify the shariah text if the subject matter was the aqeedah, i.e. kufr and iman, because the mind is the way to iman. Similarly, the mind specifies His (تعالى) saying:

ذَلِكُمُ اللَّهُ رَبُّكُمْ خَالِقُ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ لَّا إِلَهَ إِلَّا هُوَ فَأَنَّى تُؤْفَكُونَ
“That is Allah, your Lord, the Creator of all things, none has the right to be worshipped but He, where then you are turning away” [Ghafir: 62]

So, كُلِّ شَيْءٍ “all things” is general, but it is specified by the mind to other than Allah (سبحانه).

From here, the verse إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ “those who disbelieve” is specified, by the mind, to the tribes of the disbelievers whom Rasool Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) was told that they would never become believers.
It is authentically narrated from Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنها) that he said: “this verse is about the learned Jews who were at the time of Rasool Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and did not become believers.” Ar-Rabee’ bin Anas said: “it was sent down about some men from Quraysh who were killed at Badr.”

Others said that it is about specific kuffar like Abu Lahab and Abu Jahl … [tafsir at-Tabari 1: 109]

2. Referring the ‘sealing’ back to Allah خَتَمَ اللّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهمْ is from the mutashabih (having more than one interpretation). The stronger opinion is that the meaning is that those specific kuffar insisted on their kufr, objecting to the truth, so that was cemented in their hearts, such that it was as if they were created with locked closed hearts that do not accept iman nor guidance. It follows then, that the meaning is majaz metaphorical for solidifying their hearts’ insistence on kufr, as though Allah created them with that attribute.

The الخَتَمَ seal and الغِشَاوَةٌ the covering can be used to indicate their dominant determination to disbelieve, so it is as though they are deaf dumb and blind, as in the verse:

صُمٌّ بُكْمٌ عُمْيٌ فَهُمْ لاَ يَعْقِلُونَ
“deaf, dumb and blind. So they do not understand”
[al-Baqarah: 171]

Allah (سبحانه) mentioned الخَتَمَ the seal for القلب the heart and السمع the hearing, and mentioned الغِشَاوَةٌ the covering for the sight, due to the suitability of الخَتَمَ, which is locking and stamp with a seal, for the heart (the mind).
[because of that, the complete pause after سَمْعِهِمْ

خَتَمَ اللّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهمْ وَعَلَى سَمْعِهِمْ وَعَلَى أَبْصَارِهِمْ غِشَاوَةٌ
“Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearings, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be a great torment”

is preferred rather than continuing the recitation, because الخَتَمَ is for السمع and القلوب, with
the و ‘and’ after it is for initiating a new statement, hence غِشَاوَةٌ has two Damma (the grammatical indicator of the beginning part of a new sentence)]
[القلب is used metaphorically here to mean the mind, due to their similarity in importance to the body. In the language of the Arabs the heart is used metaphorically to mean the mind in more than one situation. The Qur'an was sent down in the language of the Arabs and this usage was in more than one verse. Allah talked of the mind by mentioning the heart in verses. From them is:

فَتَكُونَ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ يَعْقِلُونَ بِهَا
“and have they hearts wherewith to understand”
[al-Hajj: 46] ]

Because, comprehending with these two is not limited to only one angle such as the sight is. You hear matters from more than one angle and understand from more than one side, yet you see with your two eyes what is in front of you, i.e. only one angle.
So, الخَتَمَ was suitable for القلب and السمع to lock from more than one angle, while الغِشَاوَةٌ the covering was suitable for الأبصار the sight to lock from one angle. Therefore, الخَتَمَ is not used to describe the eyes at all in the book of Allah, nor in the narrations of Rasool Allah
(صلى الله عليه وسلم), nor does it exist in the language of anyone of the Arabs, as far as I know.

3. Allah (جل شأنه) repeated the word عَلَى “upon”

خَتَمَ اللّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهمْ وَعَلَى سَمْعِهِمْ وَعَلَى أَبْصَارِهِمْ غِشَاوَةٌ
“Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearings, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be a great torment”

to emphasise the severity of الخَتَمَ, as though الخَتَمَ was completed in two places, القلب the heart and السمع the hearing, which is stronger than الخَتَمَ in one place. Like the one who protects something by putting it into a locked container inside a locked house, which is stronger protection than putting it into a locked container inside an unlocked house. It is here like that.
Repeating عَلَى necessitates noticing the meaning of the related action (خَتَمَ), as though it was mentioned twice (i.e.
َتَمَ اللّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهمْ وخَتَمَ َعَلَى سَمْعِهِمْ). Therefore, they said about the sentence “مررتُ بزيد وعمرو I happened upon Zayd and Amr” that it is one occasion, whereas the sentence “مررتُ بزيد وبعمرو I happened upon Zayd and upon Amr” that they are two occasions, as though when you repeated the particle you said “مررتُ بزيد ومررتُ بعمرو I happened upon Zayd and I happened upon Amr.” That is stronger in meaning the two occasions than using just the عطف joining together without repeating the genitive particle, due to what is in the عطف joining together of meaning one occasion or two.

4. Allah brought the words القلوب hearts and الأبصار sight in their plural forms, while He (سبحانه) brought the word السمع hearing in the singular. The word السمع does not come in the whole of the Qur'an al-kareem except in the singular.
Some said about that: “السمع is a verbal noun in origin: it is said
سمعت الشيئ سمعا وسماعا and the verbal nouns do not come as plurals as they are the names of categories”, except that this is not precise, because “الاسماع” did come in the language of the Arabs, but it is rare, seldom heard.

The preferred opinion is that the differences between people’s thinking and minds in relation to matters, and also their differences in seeing things with the eyes, is more common than their differences in hearing these matters, so the hearts (minds) and sight were made plural, while the hearing was left singular.

Because of that, when العلم i.e. اليقين certainty is mentioned in another verse, such that العلم indicates the lack of differences, so, the hearing, sight and the heart all come in the singular:

وَلاَ تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولـئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْؤُولاً
“And follow not that of which you have no knowledge of. Verily! The hearing, and the sight, and the heart, about each of those you will be questioned.” [al-Israa’: 36]

* * *

On the subject of the heart, hearing and sight:

1. In the Noble Qur'an comes the mentioning of the hearts first, then the hearing and the sight when the matter is linked to iman, as the mind is its component

خَتَمَ اللّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهمْ وَعَلَى سَمْعِهِمْ وَعَلَى أَبْصَارِهِمْ غِشَاوَةٌ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عظِيمٌ
“Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearings, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be a great torment.”
[al-Baqarah: 7]

After

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ سَوَاءٌ عَلَيْهِمْ أَأَنذَرْتَهُمْ أَمْ لَمْ تُنذِرْهُمْ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ
“Verily, those who disbelieve, it is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe.”
[al-Baqarah: 6]

ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمُ اسْتَحَبُّواْ الْحَيَاةَ الْدُّنْيَا عَلَى الآخِرَةِ وَأَنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الْكَافِرِينَ 107 أُولَـئِكَ الَّذِينَ طَبَعَ اللّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهِمْ وَسَمْعِهِمْ وَأَبْصَارِهِمْ وَأُولَـئِكَ هُمُ الْغَافِلُونَ

“That is because they loved and preferred the life of this world over that of the Hereafter. And Allah guides not the people who disbelieve. 107 They are those upon whose hearts, hearing and sight Allah has set a seal. And they are the heedless!”
[an-Nahl: 107-108]

2. If the matter was about other than iman and was about following the warning and guidance, hearing was brought forward, because it is the direct tool for the transmission. Allah (سبحانه) says:

أَفَرَأَيْتَ مَنِ اتَّخَذَ إِلَهَهُ هَوَاهُ وَأَضَلَّهُ اللَّهُ عَلَى عِلْمٍ وَخَتَمَ عَلَى سَمْعِهِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَجَعَلَ عَلَى بَصَرِهِ غِشَاوَةً فَمَن يَهْدِيهِ مِن بَعْدِ اللَّهِ أَفَلَا تَذَكَّرُونَ
“Have you seen him who takes his own lust as his god, and Allah knowingly, left him astray, and sealed his hearing and his heart, and put a cover on his sight. Who then will guide him after Allah? Will you not then remember?”
[al-Jathiyah: 23]

It is transgression due to not heeding the warnings, therefore the end of the verse came with أَفَلَا تَذَكَّرُونَ, so it was suitable here to bring forward the hearing.

3. When Allah (سبحانه) mentioned His favours for his servants, by creating them, He mentioned the hearing, the sight and the heart in order, which points to the order of creating these organs. He
(سبحانه) says:

وَاللّهُ أَخْرَجَكُم مِّن بُطُونِ أُمَّهَاتِكُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ شَيْئًا وَجَعَلَ لَكُمُ الْسَّمْعَ وَالأَبْصَارَ وَالأَفْئِدَةَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ
“And Allah has brought you out from the wombs of your mothers while you know nothing. And He gave you hearing, sight, and hearts that you might give thanks.” [an-Nahl: 78]

وَهُوَ الَّذِي أَنشَأَ لَكُمُ السَّمْعَ وَالْأَبْصَارَ وَالْأَفْئِدَةَ قَلِيلًا مَّا تَشْكُرُونَ
“It is He, Who has created for you hearing, sight, and hearts. Little thanks you give.” [al-Mu’minoon: 78]

قُلْ هُوَ الَّذِي أَنشَأَكُمْ وَجَعَلَ لَكُمُ السَّمْعَ وَالْأَبْصَارَ وَالْأَفْئِدَةَ قَلِيلًا مَّا تَشْكُرُونَ
“Say it is He Who has created you, and endowed you with hearing, seeing, and hearts. Little thanks you give.”
[al-Mulk: 23]

ثُمَّ سَوَّاهُ وَنَفَخَ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِهِ وَجَعَلَ لَكُمُ السَّمْعَ وَالْأَبْصَارَ
وَالْأَفْئِدَةَ قَلِيلًا مَّا تَشْكُرُونَ
“Then He fashioned him in due proportion, and breathed into him the soul, and He gave you hearing, sight and hearts. Little is the thanks you give!” [as-Sajdah: 9]

Audio: Analysis on Rebel Infighting in Syria

Play/Download

Join analysts Bilal Khan, Ali Harfouch and Adnan Khan as they attempt to shed light onto the recent surge of infighting between Syria’s rebel factions. What are the possible causes for the tension? What are the aims of the belligerent factions? How will the international community, particularly the US, react to these events? For all that and more, tune in!

Rebel Discord and the Syrian Uprising

 
By Ali Harfouch & Adnan Khan
 
As the world's powers and some Syrian rebel groups gather for the Geneva 2 talks, the Syrian revolution over recent months has witnessed an increase in rebel infighting. The progress of Jabhat an-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Sham (the Levant), or ISIS, has received global attention as they conducted a number of daring raids, making significant contributions in the rebels’ successes against Assad’s forces. The situation is changing rapidly in northern Syria as rebel fighters launched widespread attacks against ISIS in dozens of locations in Idlib and Aleppo provinces after ISIS stormed the town of Atareb in Aleppo. This led to widespread protests across Syria against ISIS, which in turn led to violent clashes across northeastern Syria.[1] Whilst tensions do exist between some rebel groups, this trend represents an ominous moment in the uprising that has the potential to derail two years of progress. The reasons for this can be encapsulated into four fundamental issues.  

Firstly, at the heart of the rift is Jabhat an-Nusra’s takeover by the group it originated from, the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), led by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. This organization became the Islamic State of Iraq and Sham (the Levant), or ISIS after this takeover. The announcement sent shockwaves across Syria and the region, but more so, amongst the leadership and rank-and-file within Jabhat an-Nusra. Within days, Abu Muhammad al-Joulani, the head of Jabhat an-Nusra rejected the proposal and ‘reaffirmed’ his allegiance to Ayman Al-Zawahiri, who for Joulani, represented the global Jihad whereas Baghdadi represented the cause in Iraq.[2] As a result fighters from Iraq moved into the Syrian theatre and began taking over territory Jabhat an-Nusra controlled and was governing. Matters reached boiling point in early January 2014 when Jabhat al-Nusra took over ISIS' position in Atmeh in northern Syria in conjunction with Ahrar al-Sham.

Secondly, some rebel factions are divided in their vision, with some of key ideologues calling for an insurrection against the “close enemies” - the regime in Damascus, while others are calling for the targeting of those who are allying with the enemy and the global powers. For example: a new Jabhat al-Nusra recruit said in an interview with AFP that, "Al-Nusra is fighting to bring down the regime, while ISIS fights to bring down the Free Syrian Army (FSA)."[3] Accordingly, different strategies have been employed by different movements all of which operate without an overarching framework held together by a coherent vision. The merger of rebel forces in November 2013 into the Islamic Front was an attempt to overcome this division by pooling resources, and not just jointly conducting attacks.[4]  

Thirdly, since the announcement of ISIS, its actions in Syria have only created more enemies and opposition against them, including the indigenous people of Syria. The rebel groups who fought the regime in the north of the country were already struggling with governance related issues, which included distributing resources, energy, wheat and operating courts. In addition to ISIS incursion into Atareb, citizens and rebel fighters have been increasingly upset over ISIS persecution in northern Syria. One of the most recent incidents includes the abduction, torture, and killing of the Ahrar al-Sham member Dr. Hussein al-Suleiman (aka Abu Rayyan), whose mutilated body was found on January 1st.[5] The ensuing protests in at least one village resulted in ISIS opening fire on unarmed protesters.[6]  Violent confrontations between Ahrar al-Sham and ISIS have been a regular feature in northern Syria for the last two months. The clashes of the past two weeks have witnessed the most intense and widespread clashes between ISIS and other revolutionary fronts.

Fourthly, as can be interpreted from the group’s name, be it the ‘Islamic State of Iraq’ or the ‘Islamic State of Iraq and Sham (Levant)’, this group views itself as a political entity who is ruling over its territories. For ISIS, implementing Islam includes their understanding of the creed and as a result many have been accused of apostasy for taking different positions to them. Based on this, courts have been set up and any opposition to ISIS rule or verdicts has been viewed as rebellion and has seen individuals and groups punished with execution. With ISIS controlling a number of checkpoints leading into Turkey, many residents have complained of paying multiple tariffs to just shop for basic staple foods.  ISIS is composed of fighters, who should be on the front lines facing-off against the regime, but many remain in rebel held territory running checkpoints, acting as judges and distributing resources. Rather than elect people from amongst the indigenous population, those best experienced in fighting are governing over the people and as a result maintaining cohesion has been through the gun.

Although there have been clashes and disputes between ISIS and other rebel groups before in Syria, the scale of what is happening right now is unprecedented. This is the first time the Syrian uprising is seeing more resources dedicated to infighting than fighting the regime. This takes place as the West struggles to bring together a ‘credible’ element of the opposition in its solution to Syria. The rebels have not launched a major offensive against Damascus for some time (since the Qalamoun offensive two months ago),  and even the al-Assad regime has sat back and watched the rebels fight amongst themselves. The people of Syria have sacrificed much in the face of a regime who believes all forms of torture and weapons (including chemical weapons) are fair game to thwart the uprising. If the rebel groups continue down this road, the Syrian people may eventually decide negotiating with the Assad regime is the lesser of two evils.
 

Explanation of At-Takattul al-Hizbi (Party Structuring) - Part 5

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 4 click here

As for the Taaqah Islaamiyah (Islamic power/potency) and what it contains in terms of Ta’theer (effect/influence), At-Tawassu’ (expansion) and Intishaar (spreading) then it is as follows:


From the angle of Ta’theer (influence) we have already explained that it only attained and occurs from the embodying (full comprehension) of the realities, incidents and things in a manner that stirs the emotions of the one listening. It increases his attention and as such is affected by what he hears. Said in another way the emotions and feelings are addressed first and then the Hukm (ruling) is brought upon the reality that has already been addressed by way of the emotions and feelings attached to the reality. So when the bliss of Jannah is described and the good things that are within it in a way that takes the listener to that Jannah so that he lives within its shade, and when the punishment of Jahannum is described, the skin of the listener prickles with Goosebumps as if he can sense its flames. We can notice this in relation to many acts so that the understanding is brought near and the matter fully comprehended.

This is like statement of Allah (swt):

وَاتْلُ عَلَيْهِمْ نَبَأَ الَّذِي آَتَيْنَاهُ آَيَاتِنَا فَانْسَلَخَ مِنْهَا فَأَتْبَعَهُ الشَّيْطَانُ فَكَانَ مِنَ الْغَاوِينَ (175) وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَرَفَعْنَاهُ بِهَا وَلَكِنَّهُ أَخْلَدَ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاهُ فَمَثَلُهُ كَمَثَلِ الْكَلْبِ إِنْ تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْهِ يَلْهَثْ أَوْ تَتْرُكْهُ يَلْهَثْ

And recite to them, [O Muhammad], the news of him to whom we gave [knowledge of] Our signs, but he detached himself from them; so Satan pursued him, and he became of the deviators.
And if We had willed, we could have elevated him thereby, but he adhered [instead] to the earth and followed his own desire. So his example is like that of the dog: if you chase him, he pants, or if you leave him, he [still] pants. (Al-‘Aaraaf 175-176).

Or like His (swt)’s statement:

) مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ حُمِّلُوا التَّوْرَاةَ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَحْمِلُوهَا كَمَثَلِ الْحِمَارِ يَحْمِلُ أَسْفَارًا بِئْسَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآَيَاتِ اللَّهِ

The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah and then did not take it on is like that of a donkey who carries volumes [of books]. Wretched is the example of the people who deny the signs of Allah (Al-Jumu’ah 4).

How can someone be entrusted with the Qur’aan and then not take it with him?

Or like His (swt)’s statement:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ ضُرِبَ مَثَلٌ فَاسْتَمِعُوا لَهُ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ تَدْعُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ لَنْ يَخْلُقُوا ذُبَابًا وَلَوِ اجْتَمَعُوا لَهُ وَإِنْ يَسْلُبْهُمُ الذُّبَابُ شَيْئًا لَا يَسْتَنْقِذُوهُ مِنْهُ ضَعُفَ الطَّالِبُ وَالْمَطْلُوبُ

O people, an example is presented, so listen to it. Indeed, those you invoke besides Allah will never create [as much as] a fly, even if they gathered together for that purpose. And if the fly should steal away from them a [tiny] thing, they could not recover it from him. Weak are the pursuer and pursued (Al-Hajj 73)

Therefore in this manner it can be noticed that the intended purpose of these examples is to bring the concepts close to the mind, by way of metaphors, so that the reality can be embodied and fully comprehended within the mind of the listener so instigate within him in his sensations that which pushes him towards thinking.

As for the Tawassu’ (expansion), then it is well known that the texts have come with broad guidelines that have treated the fundamentals in the life of the human in terms of him being human. And from these broad guidelines treatments are deduced or extracted to all new matters realities and incidents that occur. And just as the new realities and incidents are always arising, similarly the deduced and extracted Ahkaam (rulings) keep pace with these realities and incidents. This means an extension of the Ahkaam coping in line with every new matter. And the texts that comprise these treatments and fundamental thoughts are Arabic texts encompassing Arabic styles and understanding them and deriving from them necessitates an understanding of the Arabic language in a manner that makes possible the comprehension of its Mafhoom (implied understanding), Mantooq (explicit understand) and Ma’qool (reasonable understanding). In this way the correlation with the capability of expansion is an inevitable matter.

As for the Intishaar (spreading); then it is an obviously known matter than Islaam has come addressing the mind of the human in respect to him being human and without any regard for his colour, race or place of living. The inevitable potential exists therefore for anyone to believe in it because it addresses his powers of reason. Due to this Islaam moves from one region to another and from one human to another in a natural manner. This is because the human remains a human whether he may be. We have witnessed how Islaam was able to spread in less than half a century to cover most of the parts of the known world at that time and in continued to spread with the movement of its sons whether by way of Al-Jihaad, trade or natural movements. We have also seen how Islaam was victorious even when its people were defeated and this happened when the Muslims were defeated by the Mongols and only after a short period the Mongols embraced Islaam and began to spread it is the Far East.

And we have also noticed or it is necessary for us to notice that when Islaam was carried mixed with the power or potency (Taaqah) of the Arabic language, that the lands that embraced Islaam with this mixing then became part of the Arabic lands like those of Ash-Shaam (Greater Syria), Iraq and North Africa. As for those lands in which Islaam was carried separated from the power of the Arabic these were not exposed to the same effect and this reflected a shortcoming from the Abbasids and the ‘Uthmaanis who came after them.

For this reason we state that it is necessary for the Taaqah Al-Arabiyah (Power of Arabic) to be mixed with the Taaqah Al-Islaamiyah due to the power of influence/effect, expansion and spreading that arises from their mixing. Also for these reasons it is only natural for the work to begin in the Arab lands and for the nucleus of the Islamic State to be established within the Arab lands. It will then proceed to make the remaining parts of the Arab and non-Arab lands join to it so that the unity of the Islamic world can be fulfilled in the form of one single state that carries Islaam to the world. However despite it being an inevitable matter that the work begins in the Arab lands, it is also inevitable that the Da’wah will reach the remaining Islamic lands and that work will be undertaken in them to unite the awareness (of the Ummah) upon the obligation of resuming the Islamic way of life and to prepare to be joined and incorporated into the body of the newly founded state which would include the usage of all possible styles that can be used to achieve this.

This is what we believe in terms of the obligation to bring a true revival that is established upon the basis of the Islamic Mabda’ (ideology) and this is by way of the thought that we have explained.
Meaning: A Takattul (party structure) that makes the Islamic ideology the fundamental thought that it goes forth with in the path of generating revival. This ideology with its thought and method is carried and invited to by this Takattul universally (to the whole world) however it works for it in the Arab lands mixing it with the power of the Arabic language until the establishment of the Islamic State is accomplished, then proceeds to combine the remaining Islamic lands to form one state and then carry Islaam to the world.

To access part 6  click here

Saturday, January 18, 2014

Explanation of At-Takattul al-Hizbi (Party Structuring) - Part 4

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 3 click here

What we believe:

We believe that the fundamental thought for revival is the ideology alone that combines the Fikrah and the Tareeqah together and that this Mabda’ (ideology) is Islaam. When we say Nahdah (revival) we intend only by this statement the intellectual elevation. In order to distinguish between thoughts it is necessary to define the description of the elevated thought so that it can become known. As such we say that the elevated thought is the thought that is distinguished by two attributes: Al-‘Umq (depth) and Ash-Shumool (comprehensiveness). Otherwise the thought would be low, declined or shallow. So for the Fikr (thought) to be elevated it is necessary for it to be deep in terms of the origin of things/matters, their formation and their source. It must also be comprehensive to cover all angles of the issue that is being studied. Therefore when we talk about the fundamental thought for revival we only mean by this the fundamental thought that can be an intellectual basis/leadership for elevated thought i.e. to study all matters with depth and comprehensively so that no matter is left from the study. This means that we study the human from his beginning according to his human description and his living with other than him of living creatures in this wide universe. And it is obvious in this case that the study of the individual (alone) would mean selfishness, that the study of the nation (Watan) would mean a decline in the level of the human and that the study of nationalism (Qawmiyah) would mean a lowering from the level that is fitting for the human as a human. Sufficing the study to manifestations would only mean shallowness in the study. The representation of this transition within the Ummah is revival (Nahdah) and this does not occur except with an ideology (Mabda’) in the case where according to what we have defined the ideology is a rational Aqueedah (Aqueedah Aqliyah) from which a system (Nizhaam) emanates.This is considering that the ideology is what treats matters/affairs and their understanding from the very beginning. It is a ‘Masdar Meemi’ (infinitive) taken from the word Bada’a (to begin) and the beginning from which before it there are no questions and the beginning of what? So our statement ‘Aqueedah’ defines and specifies this in terms of the Aqueedah being the comprehensive idea (Al-Fikrah Al-Kulliyah) about the universe, man and life as it deals with the beginning of this universe, life and humans and the establshment of their reality in terms of them being created by a creator or being eternal, and by explaining their relationship with the one who brought them into existence, i.e. what is before them, and specifying their relationship with what came after them. This matter establishes the reality of the elevated thought with its two attributes of depth and comprehensiveness. The depth explains their connection with their creator or that they are eternal (uncreated) whilst the comprehensiveness indicates that the study as included everything that is possible for the senses to fall upon. Therefore making this basis the fundamental thought and understanding it in this manner generates within man a specific manner of thinking and way of examining/viewing things and events. In this maner the like of this human becomes an elevated human or revived one.

This is what we believe and Islam has come with this and intended for us to be of this elevated level. Islaam is a rational Aqueedah: The Imaan in Allah is rational, the Imaan in the Qur’aan being the speech of Allah is rational, the Imaan in the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw) is rational and Imaan in that which has come in the Qur’aan and the Messenger in regards to unseen matters or that which has come in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah in regards to the Ahkaam and systems, the origin of these have all been established by the mind (i.e. rationally). From the Kitaab and the Sunnah systems and laws emanate that cover all aspects of life and treat all human problems, and they have explained the method of applying and implementing these treatments. Similarly it has explained and made evident the method of carrying this ideology and bringing happiness to humanity upon its basis. It has treated the problem of the individual as an individual, the problem of a society as a society and state that takes care of the peoples affairs and looks to save mankind in its entirety.

Despite the fact that Islaam is an international (universal) system with its Aqueedah, its system and its view towards man, it is however not part of its method to work for it in an international (universal) manner in respect to the Da’wah (invitation) towards it. It is an international (universal) Da’wah without doubt however the work for it must be focused in one of its regions and this region would be the Majaal (area) of its work and the work according to the methodology of Islaam would commence in it. This is by the founding of an aware Kutlah (structure) that will take upon its shoulders the responsibility of undertaking the burdens of the Da’wah until it reaches its aim. This is followed by the founding of a people or Ummah that accepts for these systems and rulings to be implemented upon them. This is then followed by arriving at a force/strength that is capable of placing these systems and rulings into the position of implementation. Then the Islamic State will be naturally established in that region, it will implement the rulings of Islaam, begin to join the regions of the Islamic world to it and carry the Da’wah to the world. This is the methodlogy of Islaam in relation to its existence and spreading in its consideration as an eternal universal human message.

Yes, the world as a whole is suitable for the Islamic Da’wah however as the people in the Islamic lands still believe in the Islamic Aqueedah the Da’wah would commence amongst them for two reasons:

The first reason: To remind these Muslims that the establishing of Islaam in life’s reality, implementing its Ahkaam (rulings) and carrying it to the world is Fard (an obligation) upon them. That this Fard has been suspended due to the absence of the Khilafah and as such returning it is Fard. In addition there still remains in the Ummah many who have Taqwaa and fear Allah.

The second reason: That the Aqueedah of these Muslims still remains alive in their hearts although they it has been restricte to the spiritual Aqueedah. For this reason it is obligatory to begin with them to remind them of the Taqwaa (fear and obedience) of Allah and the obligation to work to return Islaam to the reality of life, to clarify the political Aqueedah in Islaam and to blend it with the spiritual Aqueedah in a way that prevents their separation to ever happen.

And in the case where the Arab lands are part of the Islamic lands and speak the Arabic language, and where the Arabic language is an essential (intrinsic) part of Islaam in its consideration as the language of the Qur’aan, and as a fundamental element from amongst the elements of the Islamic Thaqaafah (culture) whilst considering the Islamic culture as that which the Aqueedah has come with (i.e. the shari’ah texts, the Aayaat and Ahaadeeth) and that which the Islamic Aqueedah was the reason for its study like the sciences of the Arabic language, which leads to the consideration that the Arabic language is a fundamental element from amongst the elements of the Islamic culture, where it is not possible to understand that which the Aqueedah has come with in respect to the Aayaat and Ahaadeeth except with the Arabic language, then for this reasoning it is more appropriate to begin (the work) in the Arab lands. This is the first reason.
As for the other reason; then the beginning (of the Da’wah) happens where the person in whose mind the thought lit up as long as Islaam has not specified the starting point. Therefore had this idea lit up in the mind of one of the inhabitants of India or Persia then it would have started in the place that he was and would not be obliged to move with his Da’wah to the Arab lands. This is conditioned upon the Arab language being the only means to understand this Deen and this Da’wah. And it was necessary to blend the power potential of Arabic with the Islamic power potential so that the Arabic language is united with Islaam as Allah has intended and due to what they both possess in terms of the capability/potency to affect, expand and spread.

As for the potency of the Arabic Language to cause effect and impact; then this is due to the richness contained in its vocabulary that allows the reality to be illustrated in a precise manner that causes an effect and impact as a result. This is by capturing the incident or reality for the person in a way that he can see its true reality. And in the case where the language has put down seventy names for a lion, these names have conceived the lion in every circumstance or scenario and they are not expressions that hold the same meanings (synonyms). This ability and potency to illustrate the realities and events results in the most far reaching of effects. This is because the sensation of the person only comes from what he senses with one of his five senses of a certain thing. So we are not able to perceive the temperature of water except by touching it i.e. through sensation via the sense of touch. So the possibility of capturing the reality with worded expressions (Alfaazh) where it becomes an embodied reality in front of him that he can sense, touch, hear and smell, leads him to be able to conceive it as if it is actually in front of him. This capturing of the reality emblazes the feelings (Mashaa’ir) and stokes/fuels the sensations and as such it effects and impacts. So this is in regards to the angle of Ta’theer (impact/effect).

As for At-Tawassu’ (expansion); then this is due to what the Arabic language contains in terms of principles of Naht (origin), Ishtiqaaq (derivation) , Ta’reeb (Arabizing) and Tashbeeh (metaphor), which makes it expand to address all new arising matters, realities and incidents. The process of Ta’reeb (Arabization) means to take the new things along with their names that they have been named with and then making them submit to the rules of the Arabic forms hence the word becomes Arabic in form, and this is more than sufficient. And is not necessary to Arabize the meaning like some people believe and which many collectors of the Arabic language (dictionary compilers) have wasted a lot of time in doing. So for instance the word telephone remains Telifoon because it is upon Arabic form. It is not correct to express it with the meaning like the naming of it as ‘Haatif’ (Something that calls out). In this way the Arabic language remains with the potential accepting expansion to include all new matters that come in respect to names, worded expressions and meanings. Indeed the Qur’aan Al-Kareem has utilised this style. It is my belief that the Arabic language is the only language that preserves its originality in this Meezaan As-Sarfiy (the rules/principles of word formations) which distinguishes it from all other languages. And after subjecting this word or that to these rules (Al-Meezaan As-Sarfy) derivations of verbs can be made from these words in accordance to the same principles of Arabic derivation (Ishtiqaaq). So it is said: Talfana, yatalfanu, Talfanah for example and so forth with other words.

As for the Intishaar (spreading), then this is due to its connection and linkage to Islaam and the fact that it is the language of the Qur’aan which is not read accept in it and as such it is only natural for it to spread to every region that Islaam reaches. This is all in relation to the Arabic language i.e. in regards to the potency or power of Arabic. Therefore it should not be thought by anyone that the statement ‘At-Taaqah Al-Arabiyah’ (The power/potency of Arabic) means Arabs or Arabism. Rather what is intended by At-Taaqah Al-Arabiyah is the Arabic language and nothing other than that, and for it to mix and blend with the Taaqah AL-Islaamiyah (Islamic power/potency) which means making it the official (main) language of the Islamic Ummah and the (Islamic) State so that it will not be permitted to engage in any Mu’aamalah (societal transaction) unless it is in the Arabic language.

To access part 5 click here

Obituary of a Dawah Carrier | Wilayah of Jordan

Obituary of a Dawah Carrier
(Translated)

H. 16 Rabi' I 1435
M. 2014/01/17
No: 08/35

(مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ رِجَالٌ صَدَقُوا مَا عَاهَدُوا اللَّهَ عَلَيْهِ فَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ قَضَى نَحْبَهُ وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ يَنْتَظِرُ وَمَا بَدَّلُوا تَبْدِيلاً)
"Among the believers are men true to what they promised Allah. Among them is he who has fulfilled his vow [to the death], and among them is he who awaits [his chance]. And they did not alter [the terms of their commitment] by any alteration." [Al-Ahzab: 23]

Hizb ut Tahrir in the Wilayah of Jordan mourns to the Ummah one of their Shabab from the first prosperous generation: Mr. Ameen Mustafa at-Tum Al-Otaibi (Abu Ammar)

He passed away yesterday at the age of 80 years old. He - Rahimahullah - spent his life carrying the Dawah, devoted to the work of resuming the Islamic way of life in the Khilafah State, steadfast and defiant against the injustice of the oppressors. He is the one who shouted during one of his trials before the Military Court of Jordan, "If my work for the Khilafah is a crime, then I am the first criminal!"

We ask Allah, the Most Merciful, to show wide mercy towards him, entering him into Jannah with the Prophets, the Truthful Ones, the Martyrs, the Righteous and the best of their company. We also ask Allah to increase the reward of his family and to inspire them with patience and solace.

(إِنَّا للهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَاجِعُونَ)
"Indeed we belong to Allah, and indeed to Him we will return." [Al-Baqarah: 156]

Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir in Wilayah of Jordan

Oh Dar Al-Ifta Al-Missriyah! Democracy is a Kufr System

The Dar Al-Ifta Al-Missriyah still exercises the role that was drawn for it since its inception in 1895, if the Fatwa is related to a political matter or a matter that impacts the political reality of the ruling regime, then they are inevitably going to be fatwas that satisfies the Sultan, or if they are requested by him then they will add a spurious legitimacy to his authority, even if that leads to contradiction of the fatwas with each other, for example, a fatwa from the Dar Al-Ifta Al-Missriyah in 1956 that prohibits the peace with the Jews the usurpers of the land of Palestine unless they return that which was taken and seized by them, and a fatwa from the Dar Al-Ifta Al-Missriyah in the year 1979 that permits the peace between Egypt and the Jews and what is resulting from that should be seen as accurate.
In a statement issued by the Dar Al-Ifta Al-Missriyah on Friday, 10/01/2014 CE said, "It is not necessary to call for democratic rule as the rule of the people as a substitute for the rule of Allah; since there is no contradiction between the two," the Dar Al-Ifta Al-Missriyah confirmed that "the essence of democracy embodies the principles of political Islam in the selection of a ruler, and the adoption of Shurah (consultation) and advice and the enjoining of good and forbidding of evil and resisting injustice, are from the heart of Islam and are not Kufr or evil as some claim, since Islam preceded democracy in stipulating of the principle bases of the essence of democracy."
The fatwa was heedless of the true meaning of democracy, in terms of the legislation is by the people they prescribe the Halal and the Haram, the good and the bad, and in terms of not abiding by the Shari'ah rule in the name of freedom. But more than that it considers that there is no contradiction between the rule of the people and the rule of Allah, this is unprecedented, no one previously from those who stood up to the Fatwa of the most declined of ages said this. Because the Dar Al-Ifta Al-Missriyah is well aware that Muslims will not accept democracy in its true meaning; it has resorted to deception by claiming that democracy is the mechanism to elect ruler, and the adoption of the Shurah and advice and the enjoining of good and forbidding of evil, and resistance to injustice, so you can observe them in the Fatwa they spin away from the true meaning which is put by its people, from its meaning of sovereignty of the people who prescribe what they want through the opinion of the majority, they decide the Halal and the Haram, the good and the bad. Otherwise how will they get the false legitimacy for their new constitution? Is it not by voting to achieve a majority opinion? Or will the legitimacy be extracted from the Quran and Sunnah? Does democracy not mean that the individual is free in his actions to do whatever he wants, to drink alcohol, to commit adultery, to apostate, to insult and vilify the sanctities under the name of democracy and its freedoms?
This is democracy, this is its reality meaning and truth, and how could a Muslim who believes in Islam dares to say that democracy is permitted, or it is from Islam?
The issue of Ummah choosing its ruler is stipulated in Islam and we are not in need for their alleged democracy for that. Sovereignty in Islam belongs to the Shari', but the Bay'ah (allegiance) of the people for the Khaleefah is a prerequisite for him to become Khaleefah.
The election of the Khaleefah in Islam was practiced at a time when the world was living in the darkness of dictatorship and tyranny of kings. One who follows how the rightly guided Khulafah: Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman and Ali (ra), notices very clearly how the Bay'ah was given to them by the people of influence (Ahl al-Hal wal-Aq'd) and the representatives of the Muslims, once it is given he becomes a Khalifah and requires the obedience to the Muslims. Abdul Rahman bin Auf (ra) who was given the responsibility to learn the opinion of the representatives of the Muslims (who are people of Medina) He approached them asking all, and pass by many houses, and asked men and women to see which of the candidates they choose for the Khilafah, the opinion was settled in the end on Uthman and he was given the Bay'ah.
Hence, we in Hizb ut Tahrir say that democracy is a system of Kufr, not because it allows election of the ruler, this is not the subject basis, but because the foundation of democracy is to make legislation for humans, not to Allah and Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:
إنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ
"The legislation is only for Allah."
(Yusuf: 40)
فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىٰ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا
"No, by your Lord, they are not believers until they make you their judge in the disputes that break out between them, and then find no resistance within themselves to what you decide and submit themselves completely."
(An-Nisa: 65)
And the evidence is numerous and famous on the fact that legislation is for Allah alone.
This is in addition to the fact that democracy stipulates because of the personal freedoms, a man and a woman can do whatever they want, without a deterrent of Halal or haram, as well as the religious freedoms that allows apostasy and to switch religion without any restriction, then the freedom of ownership in the strong exploits the weak by all means available, and the rich is richer and the poor is poorer, as well as freedom of opinion, which is not to tell the truth, but it used against the sanctities of the Ummah, they consider those who slander Islam under the pretext of freedom of opinion as geniuses and the shower them with awards.
Although the Fatwa stressed clearly that Islam can be applied in every era and that the early Muslims managed its application in the early times of Islam with the simplicity of the communities and the fewer state functions, as it also enables Muslims of its application with the complexity of communities and increase the functionality of the state, but the Fatwa did not state clearly that Islam must be implemented in this day and age as well as it did not renounce democracy because it is from other than Allah, even if in some parts it coincides with Islam.
In the end, we do not say except what the Lord of Glory in His Holy Book:
الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإسْلامَ دِينًا
"Today I have perfected your deen for you and completed My blessing upon you and I am pleased with Islam as a deen for you."
(Al-Ma'ida: 3)
Accept that which your Lord approved for you and do not follow the ways of those who came before you religiously (in every inch and arm span) even if they entered a lizard's hole you enter behind them.
Sharif Zayed
Head of the Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir Wilayah of Egypt
Sunday, 11 Rabii' al-Awwal 1435 AH
12/01/2014 CE
No: PR 01/14