Tuesday, December 29, 2015

Q&A: The Mufti Mentality

The following is are extracts of a translation from an Arabic Q&A from the time of Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani.

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer and question


The Hizb says in some of its answers and questions that the Hizb does not give Fatwaas and that the Shabaab are not Muftis (those who give out legal verdicts) and if he was to be asked for a Fatwaa then he should respond frankly by saying that we are not Muftis. And this opinion means that we turn the people away from asking us about the Ahkaam Ash-Shari'yah and this means withholding knowledge and both of these are not correct to come from us. This is because turning the people from the Hizb is not correct because one of our most important aims is to make the Ummah embrace the Hizb and to make the ideas of the Hizb dominant upon the people. And because withholding knowledge is not permissible due to the statement of the Messenger (saw): <> so how do we reconcile between the opinion of the Hizb and what we are aiming to achieve and that which has been made Waajib upon us by the Shar'a?


The following has been stated in the definition of the Hizb as published in the last page of the book 'Mafaaheem': [Hizb-ut-Tahrir is a political party who's Mabda is Islam] and it was also mentioned in Mafaaheem: [It is obligatory for the bloc that carries the Islamic Da'wah to be a political bloc and it is not permitted for it to be a spiritual bloc, moral bloc, scholarly or educational bloc or anything from this type or similar to it. Indeed it is necessary for the Kutlah (block) to be political and from this understanding came Hizb-ut-Tahrir. It is an Islamic party, a political party whose work is political and it works to culture the Ummah with the Islamic culture in which the political aspect stands out] and in the following was mentioned in the book 'At-Takattul: [And when the Mabda (ideology) becomes embodied in the people it is not possible to keep it restrained but rather it drives them towards carrying the Da’wah so the actions become shaped by it and proceed according to its method and restricted by its limits. Their existence becomes solely for the sake of the ideology and for carrying the Da’wah to it, fulfilling its legal responsibilities. And this Da’wah aims at making the people embrace this ideology alone to the exclusion of anything else and towards bringing into existence ‘Al-Wa’ee Al-Aamm’ (general awareness)] and then it says: [The general awareness about the ideology will lead to the unifications of the thoughts, opinions and beliefs within the majority if not the whole of the Ummah and through this the goal of the Ummah is unified as well as its Aqeedah and viewpoint in life].

And it is also mentioned in the book ‘At-Takkatul’: [It is necessary to place a thick barrier between the mind and the academic aspect so that the Hizb culture does not take the direction of the academic school culture]. It then states: [It is necessary to place a thick barrier between those who have become part of the Hizb and the academic aspect in the Hizb’s culture and to pay attention that the purpose of the Hizb culture is to change the concepts and to work in the battlefield of life and to carry the intellectual leadership to the Ummah and it is not permissible for this person to hasten towards the academic aspect]. It then states: [And it is dangerous to push forward with the culture towards the academic aspect because it will take away from the essence of the work]. These thoughts, indeed these concepts are image of the Hizb and they represent the image of every Hizbi in the Hizb. This is because the Hizb represents a complete intellectual sensation and as such every Hizbi is the Hizb and the image of the Hizb is the image of every Hizbi. And as long as this is the image of the Hizb and the image of every Hizbi then it is impossible for him to be a Mufti and it is not correct for him to be one. As for him, he is a Da’wah carrier that proceeds on the political path and this is political and nothing else.

The image which is imprinted in the minds of the people in regards to any personality from amongst the personalities whether this personality is a Shakhsiyah Haqeeqiyah (real) like a leader’s personality or the personality of the ruler, or this personality can be a Shakhsiyah Ma’nawiyah (in perception) like the personality of a political party or a charitable association. And it is this which determines how the people behave towards this personality and defines their behaviour towards it. And the image of Hizb-ut-Tahrir which it is attempting to imprint in the minds of the people is the image of the aware leader (Qaa’id), the innovative/creative politician, the image of the judicious thinker and the image of the just ruler. This is because he aims at leading the Ummah in the struggle against peoples and nations, and he desires to revive her with the correct revival with the enlightened thought, and he strives to take her authority and take care of her affairs and take charge her issue. Therefore if the image that she (the Ummah) has of this personality does not manifest the characteristics of true leadership then how will she hand over her leadership to it and rush forward towards martyrdom in the way of achieving its goal?

Indeed the enemies of Islaam have given the Muslims a distorted image of the Messenger of Allah, an image that is stripped from the thoughts of Islaam and they were able through this to make the leadership of the Muslims with Islaam seem like a matter of wishful thinking and that taking the Messenger of Allah (saw) as the example in politics and leadership would lead to failure within authority and politics. And as long as this image does not return to the minds of the Muslims then they will never be led by Islaam and as long as the image of Abu-l-Qaasim (the Nabi (saw)) remains as a vague imagination in the Ummah then she will never be able to gain the strength to struggle against Kufr and the Kuffaar. Therefore providing the Ummah with the correct image of its Islaamic leadership is alone what will make the leadership of the Ummah firm and what will make her capable of entering the struggle with nations.

And giving the Muslims an image of Hizb-ut-Tahrir as a Mufti would make her pray behind it but it would not make her led by it and it would make them go to it for knowledge but not for protection and the caring of her affairs. As such then we if we want to take leadership of the Ummah then it is necessary that the Ummah takes from us the image of a leader, a political image, an image of a thinker and strong ruler and there is no way to achieving this except by providing her with the image of Hizb-ut-Tahrir. As such it was from the most important of obligations to be committed to, that the image of every Hizbi is the image of the Hizb in the eyes of the Ummah. And in addition that the personality of every Hizbi be a personality of political struggle in the eyes of the people which is attempting to take the leadership of the people so as to contest the throes of struggle. That the behaviour of every Hizbi be a behaviour of someone who engages in struggle built upon awareness for the sake of focusing on the flag and achieving the objective and this means nothing other than raising the word of Allah, breaking the material obstacles so as to open the way to the Islamic Da'wah. This is the personality of the Hizb in its true reality and this is its image and true essence. Therefore it is obligatory for every Hizbi to provide the people with the image of Hizb-ut-Tahrir just as it is and not the image of a Mufti or Muftis.

The Mufti is the one is open to give Fatwaas and the people go to him asking him about the Hukm Shar'i in relation to specific acts which they or others have come across and the 'Aalim is the one whose work is to explore knowledge in the books but does not address the people with Fatwaas although if asked about a specific issue then he will provide an answer to it as an issue and not as a specific Hukm for a specific occurrence. The Waa'izh (preacher) is the person who reminds the people about the punishment of Allah, with Jannah and the Day of account whereas the teacher is the one who teaches the individuals naked knowledge without any regard to its applicability to reality, circumstances or to acting upon it. And each of these four types manifests an image which differs from the other so the image of the Mufti is different from the image of the 'Aalim, and the image of the Waa'izh (preacher) is different from the Mu'allim (teacher) and even if the Waa'izh was in fact a teacher, and an image of the possessor of each characteristic from these characteristics is what is represented and none other and this is even if he possessed all four of these attributes/characteristics. As for Hizb-ut-Tahrir it does not possess the characteristic of a Mufti because he does not put himself forward to giving Fatwaa and he does not look into the acts of individuals in their description as individuals to provide them with Shar'iah rules but rather he is only a politician who cares for the affairs of the people with the Shar'iah rules. The Hizb also does not possess the characteristic of the 'Aalim because its work is not to sift through knowledge in the books and even if it revises the books seeking to obtain knowledge because sifting through knowledge is not its work or purpose but is rather a means employed within its work which political. It is also not a Waa'izh reminding the people of the Aakhirah and he does not turn the people away from the Dunyaa but rather he takes care of their affairs and he gives them awareness about the Dunyaa so that it takes mastery over it and it makes the purpose of the Dunyaa the happiness of the hereafter and obtaining the pleasure of Allah. And it is also not a teacher even if it cultures the people with the thoughts and rules so teaching knowledge alone is not its work and it does not concern itself with it and it only aims at acting in accordance to the thoughts and rules so it provides the knowledge linked to its reality and circumstances politically and not as knowledge and so as to take care of its affairs and not as education.

As such it is from the acts of Zhulm (injustice) to say that the Hizbi is a Mufti and it is a deviation if the Hizbi becomes a Mufti. It is true that there is nothing to prevent answering the questioner in regards to the Hukm Shar’i in a specific act but rather he cultures him with the Hukm that he has been asked about and he pulls him towards knowledge and enlightenment. So he takes a question that is suitable for culturing and provides the answer as culture and not as a Fatwaa. So he does not turn people away the question regarding the thoughts and the Ahkaam but does the opposite so he answers so as to attract them to him and to enlighten the minds with the thoughts of the Hizb and its opinions. However he does not put himself forward to provide Fatwaas but rather turns the questioner away from seeking a Fatwaa and enters with him into a discussion in which there is culturing for the questioner with a Hukm Shar’i so that he acts according to his knowledge which he has given him and not with what he has taken from the Fatwaa. So there is an underlying danger in addressing people with the Fatwa and to give the Hukm Shar’i as a Fatwaa from amongst the Fataawaa. If this happened it would transform the Shabaab of the Hizb into something that they are not and following from this it would distort away the image of the Hizb. He also does not conceal knowledge but rather he does not provide it as mere knowledge and rather must provide the knowledge as effective culture, as an enlightened thought and as a concept from amongst the concepts which affect the behaviour. From this the atrocity of turning the Hizb into a Mufti becomes apparent and for the Shabaab of the Hizb to become Muftis. That would lead to the real destruction not just for the Shabaab alone and not just for the Hizb but rather for the Ummah which needs to be led by the Hizb and the Mabada (ideology) which it carries when it transforms it from being a viewpoint for life to being a treatment of the individual alone.

This Hizb has been tested with three attempts to shift it from its true nature, attempts to pull it away from politics towards the Deen and Fiqh. So when the Naa’ib (elected representative) began to give purely political speeches in the Jordanian representative assembly, this caused a stir amongst some of the Shabaab who are no longer present amongst others who questioned: Where is the Islaam in these speeches? And where are the Aqaa’id and Ahkaam in the discussions of Hizb-ut-Tahrir in parliament? Then it occurred again when the Hizb began to make its weekly comments (statements) and political comments which led to many of the Shabaab of the Hizb amongst others say: The Hizb has deviated from its path and it can no longer be counted as an Islamic Hizb and it has become a political party just like the other political parties. And they began to attempt to direct the Hizb away from politics and from the political publications so as to return to publications of the ruling of Islaam and discussion around the Ahkaam As-Shar’i. Then when the Hizb began to attack the persons in ruling and restricted its publications to opposing their actions and restricted itself to the action of striking at the relationships between the authority and the Ummah then many of the Shabaab amongst others made a big issue about this that the Hizb attacked the personalities (i.e. rulers themselves) and chose to expose certain acts of certain rulers, and they said: The Hizb is resorting to insults and the Hizb is swapped its concern for thoughts to focusing on people and from Islaam to the rulers and they attempted to return the Hizb to Islamic publications and to distance it from opposing the ruling people. These are the three trials that the Hizb overcame and it did this, not by standing against it to rebuke it and not by accepting discussion about it but rather it overcame them by continuing with the political statements and political actions and it continued to strike at the hands of those who held on to the authority with strong consecutive strikes to bring down its sides, remove its place of dignity and the ambitions of the people within it. And it preserved its true Hizb nature in that it is a political party and it has no action apart from politics and this false thinking (even if it came from those who are sincere) could not budge the Hizb even a hair away from its identity or effect it in the smallest way from the true reality of its personality.

Indeed it is Hizb-ut-Tahrir and it is an Islamic Hizb from the angle of its ideology (Mabda) but it is not an Islamic party like the other Islamic structures....Rather it is only a political party whose ideology is Islaam. So Islaam is its Mabda (ideology) but it is not its work and Islaam is its foundation but not its description. So it will take hold of the authority when it becomes available to it to take over so as to take charge (care) of the affairs of the people in actuality and it will account the authority at all times whether it is in the ruling or outside of it. Therefore all of its work is restricted to politics, either practically by running affairs or by view through accounting the rulers upon the basis of Islaam.

And the Hizb and it is a collective of Shabaab and administrations however if the people say that the Hizb has said such and such or done such and such then they are referring solely to the Shabaab of the Hizb and its publications and this is because the Hizb is a sensory intellectual whole so every Hizbi is the Hizb. Therefore if the image of some of the Hizbiyeen or just a single individual becomes the image of a Mufti then the Hizb would have become distorted and become a Mufti. This is in addition to causing a deviation from the actions of the Hizb and a deviation from its identity because in time it will distort the image of the Hizb and transform the Shabaab of the Hizb from being politicians to turn them into Muftis. Due to this it is a danger for the Shabaab to start addressing Fatwaas and provide people with them because they will become Fuqahaa in the eyes of people and not leaders, seekers of knowledge and not Da’wah carriers, and the Hizb will become an educational association and not a political block. And in all of this there is a clear and wide-ranging harm upon the Shabaab themselves and the Hizb.

And this is regardless of the providing of Fatwaas being the lowest form of Fiqh and regardless of it merely being the word of a Mufti which represents decline in the society, and regardless of it encouraging the people to seek Fataawaa which exposes the Ahkaam Shari’ah for ignorant people to issue verdicts from it, and regardless of the giving of quick answers or giving answers from the memory being prone to error in the majority of cases. Indeed advising the Shabaab not to expose themselves to giving Fatwaa and making them understand the danger of being Muftis is not for the reason of treating the issue of Fatwaas in the society and it is not to stand up against the peoples understanding of the Ahkaam Shari’ah but rather it is for the sake of preserving the image of the Hizb in the eyes of the people as it should be seen as a political party and no other type of party. And it is also to protect the Shabaab from going outside of the frame of the Hizb and becoming something else like Muftis or ‘Ulamaa or preachers or teachers.

So in conclusion it is not correct for the Shabaab to put themselves forward for giving Fatwaas so that the people go them for Fatwaas. However if he is asked about the form of the Du’aa of Qunoot then he grabs hold of the opportunity to explain the (full) meaning of the Du’aa, and if he is asked about a movement in the Salaah then he grabs hold of the opportunity to explain the meaning of Taqleed, and if he is asked about estate agents he moves the discussion to the obligation to abide by the Hukm Shar’i. So he does not conceal what he knows and he does not attempt to learn so as to give Fatwaa but rather he is at this time and at all times upon this condition of being a Da’wah carrier on a political methodology i.e. he is a politician who’s ideology (mabda) is Islaam.

22 Rabee’ul Awwal 1390

Spread Hope and Tawakul Not Just Despair

Every few minutes of the day, on our TV, smartphones and via the internet, we receive the latest news and videos of atrocities facing our Ummah in the areas where we live and abroad. The latest massacre in Syria, the latest verbal assault on a Muslim woman on a bus in London and the latest UK government policy targeting our Mosques and madrassas. The constant barrage of bad news through the forwarding of these messages and videos is leading some to despair and choose to become silent or even change their appearance and aspects of our Deen – due to not seeing a way out of the many tests that are facing us on many fronts.
The ability – via social media and smartphone apps – to forward distressing news of the latest plots, attacks and policies against Islam and Muslims is leading some to despair. In a single day, some of us receive so many videos one after another that the bad news can become overwhelming and paralysing. They seem to further reconfirm the power of our enemies and our helplessness. Is this the intended purpose?
When the Prophet ﷺ was in the cave with Abu Bakr (ra) during the hijra, the situation was indeed desperate. The Quraish had now decided to finish him and to hunt him down and those pursuing them where just at the entrance to the cave leading to Abu Bakr to be extremely anxious. Instead of further increasing Abu Bakr’s anxiety by saying that they were indeed doomed, or that they would surely be captured, the Prophet ﷺ reassured his companion telling him not to despair because Allah سبحانه وتعالى – the All Powerful – is with them and would aid them. Allah relates this in the Qur’an,
إِذْ هُمَا فِي الْغَارِ إِذْ يَقُولُ لِصَاحِبِهِ لَا تَحْزَنْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ مَعَنَا فَأَنزَلَ اللَّهُ سَكِينَتَهُ عَلَيْهِ وَأَيَّدَهُ بِجُنُودٍ لَّمْ تَرَوْهَا وَجَعَلَ كَلِمَةَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا السُّفْلَىٰ ۗ وَكَلِمَةُ اللَّهِ هِيَ الْعُلْيَا ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ
“When they were in the cave and he said to his companion, “Do not grieve; indeed Allah is with us.” And Allah sent down his tranquillity upon him and supported him with soldiers (angels) you did not see and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowest, while the word of Allah – that is the highest. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.”
(At-Tawba 9:40)
So we should forward and spread the news about the problems, challenges and tests facing our Ummah but we should not do that alone without also forwarding reminders of Allah’s Might and Power and ability to rescue you from any situation – even when you cannot see a way out. We should also forward positive stories of Muslims who are challenging those against them or standing up proudly with their Deen despite the trials. Such things help to remind us to have tawakkul(Dependence on Allah), sabr (patient perseverance) and hope. This is what the Prophet ﷺ did when he reminded Abu Bakr in the cave that Allah سبحانه وتعالى is with them – and on the side of the believers. So let us act as He ordered, make dua to Him to ease our situation and to grant victory to our Ummah soon. Let us be those who awaken people to the reality of the challenges facing us whilst also spreading hope and reliance on Allah سبحانه وتعالى.
وَاللَّهُ غَالِبٌ عَلَىٰ أَمْرِهِ وَلَٰكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
“And Allah is predominant over His affair, but most of the people do not know.”
Taji Mustafa

Q&A: Surveillance Cameras - Sheikh Ata Abu Al-Rashtah

As-Salaam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakaatuhu
Best Wishes and Eid Mubarak to you our respected Amir, may Allah protect you…
My question is: What is the ruling on using public surveillance cameras and in stores? Is it permissible to criminalize the person by using the captured camera images as evidence if the person is caught stealing on camera?
From Dr. Bassam Ash-Shab’an

Wa Alaikum us Salaam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakaatuhu
Your question is composed of two parts: in the first you asked about the ruling of using surveillance cameras, and in the second you asked about the images captured by the surveillance cameras if they can be considered as Shariah evidence or not?
The answer to the first part of the question:
Cameras falls under the Shariah principle: “In origin things are permitted unless there is prohibition evidence” taken from the verse of Quran:
أَلَمْ تَرَوْا أَنَّ اللَّهَ سَخَّرَ لَكُمْ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ
“Do you not see that Allah has made subject to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth”
(Luqman: 20)
Also His saying سبحانه وتعالى:
وَسَخَّرَ لَكُمْ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا مِنْهُ
“And He has subjected to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth – all from Him”
(Al-Jathiya: 13)
There is no evidence that prohibits cameras, therefore its original rule remains as permitted. But the thing, though permissible, if used in a prohibited action, this use is forbidden, according to the comprehensive Shariah principle: “The means to a haram (prohibited) is itself haram (prohibited)” as well as the second principle of harm: “Every individual permissible thing if harmful or leading to harm, it will become prohibited while the matter remains permissible.” Therefore, the surveillance cameras if used for a permissible matter such as monitoring shops to prevent theft, or in the streets for traffic control … and so on, all these uses are permissible. But they were used to spy on people and monitor their movements and where they live or to look at their awrah, or to photograph the inside of their homes… All these uses are prohibited because spying on people and monitoring their movements and where they live, is prohibited due to the saying of Allah:
وَلَا تَجَسَّسُوا
 “And do not spy”
(Al-Hujurat: 12)
And what was narrated by Abu Dawood in his Sunan from the Prophet ﷺ who said:
«إِنَّ الْأَمِيرَ إِذَا ابْتَغَى الرِّيبَةَ فِي النَّاسِ أَفْسَدَهُمْ»
“If the Amir (leader) seeks distrust in people he would corrupt them.”
And because looking at the awrah of people and their private lives is prohibited; it was narrated by Muslim from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet ﷺ said:
«مَنِ اطَّلَعَ فِي بَيْتِ قَوْمٍ بِغَيْرِ إِذْنِهِمْ، فَقَدْ حَلَّ لَهُمْ أَنْ يَفْقَئُوا عَيْنَهُ «
“One who looks into people’s houses without their permission, it is permitted for them to poke his eye.”
And the answer to the second part of the question is:
The images captured by the surveillance cameras are not considered as a Shariah evidence for the crime because the Shariah evidences that are indicated as Shariah evidences are only four types, namely: Confession (the recognition), Yameen (oath), testimony, and irrevocable written documents.
There is no evidence other than these four evidences, based on the following evidences:
– Iqrar (confession): What is narrated from Zaid bin Khalid and Abu Huraira, may Allah be pleased with them, from the Prophet ﷺ that he said:
«وَاغْدُ يَا أُنَيْسُ إِلَى امْرَأَةِ هَذَا، فَإِنِ اعْتَرَفَتْ فَارْجُمْهَا«
“O Unays go to the wife of so, if she confesses then stone her.”
– Yameen (oath): what was narrated by Ibn Majah in his Sunan from Ibn Abbas that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
«لَوْ يُعْطَى النَّاسُ بِدَعْوَاهُمْ، ادَّعَى نَاسٌ دِمَاءَ رِجَالٍ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ، وَلَكِنِ الْيَمِينُ عَلَى الْمُدَّعَى عَلَيْهِ»
“If people are given according to their claims, the people claimed the blood of men and money, but oath is on the defendant”.
And what is narrated by Ad-Daaraqitni on the authority of Atta’, on the authority of Abu Huraira, from the Prophet ﷺ that he said:
«الْبَيِّنَةُ عَلَى مَنِ ادَّعَى، وَالْيَمِينُ عَلَى مَنْ أَنْكَرَ إِلَّا فِي الْقَسَامَةِ»
 “The evidence must be provided by the accuser, and the one who denies must give (oath) except in the case of Al Qasamah (the repeated oath of the family of the murdered.”
And in another narration Amr ibn Shuaib, from his father, his grandfather, that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
«الْبَيِّنَةُ عَلَى مَنِ ادَّعَى، وَالْيَمِينُ عَلَى مَنْ أَنْكَرَ إِلَّا فِي الْقَسَامَةِ»
“The evidence must be provided by the accuser, and the one who denies must give (oath) except in the case of Al Qasamah.”
– Testimony: the saying of Allah سبحانه وتعالى:
وَاسْتَشْهِدُوا شَهِيدَيْنِ مِنْ رِجَالِكُمْ فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُونَا رَجُلَيْنِ فَرَجُلٌ وَامْرَأَتَانِ
“And bring two witnesses from among your men, if there are no two men available, then bring a man and two women”
(Al-Baqara: 282)
– Irrevocable Written Documents: the saying of Allah سبحانه وتعالى:
وَلاَ تَسْأَمُوا أَنْ تَكْتُبُوهُ صَغِيرًا أَوْ كَبِيرًا إِلَى أَجَلِهِ ذَلِكُمْ أَقْسَطُ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ وَأَقْوَمُ لِلشَّهَادَةِ وَأَدْنَى أَلاَّ تَرْتَابُوا إِلاَّ أَنْ تَكُونَ تِجَارَةً حَاضِرَةً تُدِيرُونَهَا بَيْنَكُمْ فَلَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ أَلاَّ تَكْتُبُوهَا
“And do not be [too] weary to write it, whether it is small or large, for its [specified] term. That is more just in the sight of Allah and stronger as evidence and more likely to prevent doubt between you, except when it is an immediate transaction which you conduct among yourselves. For [then] there is no blame upon you if you do not write it.”
(Al Baqara: 282)
These are the evidences indicated by the Shariah evidences, but other evidences like: fingerprinting, blood analysis, photos, using police dogs, and others, they are no more than indicators used for identification, because they do not have proof from the Book (Quran) or the Sunnah and are not considered as Shariah evidences. Thus, evidences are considered as Shariah evidences only if there is proof for them or they were included under one of the evidences. Therefore, the images of surveillance cameras are not evidences, but that does not mean that they are worthless, they are clues, to help in identification, while this is identification and evidence is another thing, like the images and others, is permissible for use in identification, as in the case of identifying the murderer, but it is not considered as an evidence for the accusation. Al-Bukhari narrated in his Saheeh from Anas bin Malik may Allah be pleased with him:
«أَنَّ يَهُودِيًّا رَضَّ رَأْسَ جَارِيَةٍ بَيْنَ حَجَرَيْنِ، فَقِيلَ لَهَا: مَنْ فَعَلَ بِكِ هَذَا، أَفُلاَنٌ، أَفُلاَنٌ؟ حَتَّى سُمِّيَ اليَهُودِيُّ، فَأَوْمَأَتْ بِرَأْسِهَا، فَجِيءَ بِاليَهُودِيِّ فَاعْتَرَفَ، فَأَمَرَ بِهِ النَّبِيُّ فَرُضَّ رَأْسُهُ بِالحِجَارَةِ»
 “A Jewish man pushed the head of a servant between two stones, and she was asked: Who did this to you, is it so, is it so? until the Jew was named, she nodded her head in agreement, the Jew was brought in and he confessed, the Prophet ﷺ ordered that his head be hurled with stones.”
When the Messenger ﷺ asked the servant who attacked her and called out names of men she identified the Jew. He ﷺ did not take her statement as an evidence but as an identification, the Jew was brought in and he confessed and was killed. The evidence was his confession and not the words of the attacked servant … other clues, can be used as indicators not as Shariah evidences, unless they include Shariah evidences.

Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
11 Rabii’ Al Awwal 1437 AH
22/12/2015 CE
The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Facebook page:

The link to the answer from the Ameer on Google Plus:

The link to the answer from the Ameer on twitter:

The West has lost the battle for hearts and minds

The battle has been lost. It began whilst the embers of the last Khilafah State were still burning, soon to be extinguished. Whilst the poet’s ink was fresh on the page, when he cried,
The wedding songs turned into echoes of mourning,
And your death was announced within the signs of joy,
You were shrouded in the night of wedding with its dress,
And you were buried at the time of morning break,
You were escorted to your burial in horror, with the tears of a laughing (person),
In every area; and with agony of drunkenness of a conscious (person).
Minarets and minbars shouted for you,
Kingdoms and provinces cried on you,
India is bewildered and Egypt is sad,
And she cries on you with flowing tears.
Ash-Sham, Iraq and Persia ask,
Is there anyone who wiped the Khilafah from our lands?
All the great and the good attended your funeral,
They sat there in the seats of mourning,
O men! Watch a murdered noble-born (lady),
She was killed without sin or guilt.
This battle was one to terminate a civilisation, no less. Shawqi wept for its demise. Yet the memory faded. The Khilafah state would become a distant memory. Of times past, where greatness belonged to another era. The force of secular democratic systems and Arab demagoguery was meant to confirm this victory. Islam was all but extinguished, only to remain a word on the lips and shadows in a Mosque. The West had extinguished Allah’s order, so it believed. It was said the British General Allenby declared in 1918 when marching into Jerusalem, ‘now the Crusades are over’. For Britain and the West, the demise of the Khilafah was the demise of Islam. No less a victory over its greatest enemy.
Yet the battle failed. The history that ended, came back to life. The feeling and the thought returned into the hearts of iman, once occupied by foreigners. The West looked on with dismay, as this great civilisation began to rise. At first it haughtily declared the battle for hearts and minds would be won, hailing the supremacy of liberal capitalism. In freedom and equality. Yet it failed in the cells of Bagram, in the injustice of Guantanamo, in the atrocities of Fallujah and in the secret prisons it plotted around the world. It failed with its drones and its private militias. It spoke of freedom, yet its leaders closed the gates to those fleeing the wars they started. It spoke of equality, yet banned any utterance of Islamic political expression in Egypt. It used every means at its disposal to halt Islam. And with it, it destroyed its own façade.
Anyone who assesses this Ummah will witness its recovery. Yes, it has weaknesses. For sure it fails on many fronts. However, the Islamic thought has returned and the hearts have been turned. The West currently plots to restore Syria. Yet after countless conferences and meetings, it has failed to find support on the ground. This is because they know what is now an inevitability, the liberation of this Ummah has begun. The same west has attempted for years to ‘integrate’ Muslim populations in Europe and America, the sons and daughters of a Muslim world ravaged by colonialism. Yet they have failed. What we are witnessing is a monumental shift in the mindset of the West.
They now know this liberation cannot be reversed. This battle has truly been lost. And so they resort to an age-old strategy. To spread fear and hatred. If you cannot change Muslims, you spread fear. All their laws and restrictions upon Muslim communities in the West is to alarm. So fear consumes communities.
And to their non-Muslim populations, they spread hatred. Hatred for Islam, a blind hatred. A hatred for Muslims, mosques, caliphate, madrassahs, hijabs, beards, reverts, the young, the old, the work colleague, the taxi driver… To associate Islam, its people and its institutions with terrorism. When the cartoonic Donald Trump speaks, he echoes a deeper animosity peddled by politicians of all political hues. Hatred is a currency. It can be used when Islam returns to state and society, to confront it. It can only be reversed when the Mercy of Islam returns to extinguish their darkness.
And this is what is left of western civilisation. Fear and hatred.
يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِؤُواْ نُورَ اللّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللّهُ إِلاَّ أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ
“They desire to extinguish Allah’s Light with their mouths. But Allah refuses to do other than perfect His Light, even though the kafirun detest it.”
(At-Tawba: 32)

Abdullah Jaleel

Monday, December 21, 2015

Generating Atmospheres Within the Muslim Community in the West

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In recent times we have seen the acceleration of efforts of the Western nations to assimilate Muslims. The death of multiculturalism, open calls from politicians for a Western version of Islam and the narrative of countering non-violent extremism has prompted many pertinent questions raised by carriers of the Islamic Da’wah such as:
  • How do we counter the resilient campaign within an ideological nation to assimilate Muslims? 
  • Whilst the potential exists to influence and culture Muslim individuals who will not assimilate and will hold onto the Islamic ideas about life, is it feasible to generate an alternative atmosphere within Muslim communities that oppose the strong public opinion that dominates society founded on the fundamental ideas of capitalism? 
  • What are the prerequisites required to achieving tangible results in this domain? What are the necessary actions and core elements needed to achieve this? 
In order to answer these questions it requires us to have a clear understanding of: what society is composed of; the reality of an ideological society; the components of a community; the difference between a society and a community; the meaning of an atmosphere; the reality of alternative atmospheres opposed to the dominant thoughts and sentiments of society; how atmospheres are generated and preserved.


Allah (swt) has endowed the human being with the instinct of survival. One of the features of this instinct is for people to gather and live together, and thus the coexistence and interaction of people is a natural human disposition.

However, a person plus another person, plus another person would form a group. If a permanent relationship between them were to be established, they would become a society, regardless of their numbers. So a thousand people on a ship in the Atlantic Ocean would not be defined as a society. Nor would the three million Hujjaj who travel to perform Hajj every year to the noble city of Makkah be defined as society as they are just travellers who do not permanently reside thus their relationships are temporary.

The crux of understanding society is to comprehend the nature of permanent relationships. What establishes relationships between people is the interest for which each one of them embarks upon securing, whether this interest is related to the securing of a benefit or the repulsion of a harm.

Examples of these interests could be basic interests such as the need for food, clothing and shelter but also includes the wider interests such as the need for law and order and an authority or government. In summary, all human relationships are based on securing these interests. We can categorise and classify these by their distinct types such as:
  • Economic Interests: such as the relationship in trade between the buyer and the seller, the employer and the employee, the landlord and the tenant. 
  • Social Interests: relationships between men and women including married, non-married, family relations and those outside the family such as neighbours and work colleagues. 
  • Political Interests: between the ruling authority and the citizens of a state, this includes the relationship with the police, state institutions, local government and civil servants. 
These relationships need thoughts and ideas to govern them, otherwise there would be chaos. For example, in trade, there needs to be a thought that regulates the relationship between the buyer and the seller. If one was to simply walk out of a shop carrying an item without having paid for it or taken any agreement to do so, it would usually be deemed as shoplifting and not trade. In every society men in public do not behave towards women in any way they choose or please rather, there are thoughts that govern this relationship. The same is true with political relationships between the people and those in authority.

As human beings we are not robots as thoughts naturally lead to sentiments, so a woman walking in public wearing a mini-skirt in Makkah would be shunned, whereas in London or Paris this may be praised by the general public. Usually the governing system would be established upon a set of thoughts and sentiments which would also regulate relationships according to them. So the woman in the West is permitted by law to dress in a mini skirt within the public domain whereas the same act is forbidden by law to do so in Saudi Arabia.

The difference between ideological and non-ideological societies

The relationships amongst people would not result in a homogeneous society such as the Western societies today or the Islamic society established by the Messenger of Allah (saw) in the past unless three prerequisites were achieved:

A common outlook towards these relationships achieved through:

1. Unity of thought.
2. Unity in approval and disapproval towards these relationships achieved through unity of emotions and sentiments.
3. A unified system addressing their problems.

Therefore, although Yathrib (Madinah) prior to the Hijrah was one location, the Jews had a separate society to the Aus, Khazraj and other Mushrikeen as their relationships were governed by their own thoughts, sentiments and system.

In this regard there is a clear difference between ideological societies such as those of the West and the non-ideological societies of the Muslim world today. Today in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey or any other country in the Muslim world, the majority of people are Muslims, yet there exists a plethora of conflicting thoughts and emotions in society and in most of our countries the system is imposed upon the people by force.

The societies of the West have held with conviction the core ideas at the heart of capitalism, secularism, freedom and democracy for centuries. They experienced bitter feudal systems sanctioned by the Church and eventually settled upon relegating religion to the personal domain justified on the famous quote from the gospel, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God’s”. For example, if you were to poll ten random people from varying sectors of society from a bus driver, to a professor and a politician about their views on whether religion should interfere in politics - you would receive a unified response. If you were to ask the same question in the Muslim world, you are likely to get varying answers depending upon who you ask. Thus it is natural for those within western societies to see Islam and those who adhere to it as alien as Islam is fundamentally non-secular by its very nature.

These dominant thoughts and sentiments have a powerful effect on all individuals in society such that usually the majority would eventually begin to hold these ideas as their own and those who did not are under pressure not to speak or act against them publicly. This is why only a few would do so and consequently receive wide criticism for their views.

What is Public opinion?

When an opinion is expressed openly within society it has the potential to be a public opinion. What is important to note here is that opinions expressed in private are not considered. Public opinion is more transitory and fickle than dominant thoughts.

When an opinion is repeatedly and consistently expressed within the public domain it has the potential to gain prominence. It is noted that governments in general fear public opinion and invest a great deal of attention and time monitoring it; they value public opinion highly and realise its effect.

In times of war and disturbances, the control of public opinion becomes all the more significant, and governments move swiftly to quell any public opinion against them. This can be seen during all major wars in the last century whether the World Wars, the Vietnam War or the Gulf wars. In times of peace their control of public opinion becomes more relaxed; however if they felt that some concepts which may damage their credibility were being spread they move quickly to dampen them and to prevent provoking a public opinion against them.

When the Messenger of Allah (saw) was sent, the Quraysh did not budge at first, however when they sensed that his (saw) Message threatened to turn into a public opinion, they soon moved to resist it and prevent it from transitioning into a public opinion. Therefore, almost as a rule, every government tends to fight any concept or opinion or news item that could potentially turn into a public opinion against it.

In an ideological society we can further categorise the types of public opinion:

1. Those that are based upon or conform to the general awareness of the ideology, for the West this is Capitalism.
2. Those that oppose this ideology.

Within the first category a whole array of public opinions exist which have varying strengths. Some become prominent and others fade as the expression of their voice is diminished or if the foundation upon which they are based is exposed. So, in the past we have seen varying trends in the public opinion of western countries where the opinion for maintaining the nationalisation of public utilities such as gas and electricity was strong at one time and was part of the manifesto of various left wing parties such as the British Labour Party. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the weakening of socialism, the tide of opinion changed and the Labour party abandoned this policy known as Clause IV of the 1918 constitution of the party. After 9/11, the public opinion in some European countries, despite some scepticism was manipulated to support the sending of troops for war in Iraq, following the long drawn out conflict and the increasing casualties, this opinion changed over time.

These opinions although they may vary do not fundamentally challenge the foundation upon which the society is built and thus are tolerated and the mediums by which they are expressed are also open including the national press, television, radio, public events and even the parliament or equivalent.

Opinions that are publicly expressed that oppose the ideology are vehemently opposed by multiple means and even if they do have some reach are often drowned out unless there is a consistent effort backed by resources that continues to promote them. For example, in the wider society following the Charlie Hebdo episode when Muslims highlighted the double standards related to freedom of speech, we saw the reaction of the media, public and politicians.

In the non-ideological Muslim world to change the public opinion is relatively easier.

Firstly, as the Aqeedah of people is Islam, although the common thoughts and emotions in society are often a mix of Islamic, democratic, secular and nationalistic. When the Da’wah carriers take an issue such as the rise in gas prices in Pakistan or the water problem in Jordan, the alliance of the regimes with America or the economic enslavement to the western powers. By repeatedly raising these issues in the public places whether through public talks, demonstrations, distribution of leaflets, articles in the press, discussions in the markets, universities and cafes etc - even with a relatively small group they are able to affect public opinion. As they are not opposed to the ideology of the people, rather we are linking these matters to their Aqeedah removing the ambiguity and dust from it. So although they are opposed to the corrupt government they are not opposed to the creed of the people.

Secondly, the people in Muslim societies of the third world are less comfortable as they face more direct problems, instability, poverty and oppression. Therefore, the desire for change there is also stronger.

In fact it is a key part of the Islamic methodology for change to continuously adopt the interests of the people and expose the plans of the colonialists by intellectual and political struggle. The aim of this is not only to generate and maintain a particular public opinion; rather it is to make this based upon awareness of key Islamic concepts such as unity, Khilafah and Jihad fee-sabeelillah.

What is a community?

When talking about a community such as the Muslim community within a host society it is necessary to define and understand its reality.

By studying Muslims or other groups who have permanently settled in the West and are called communities we can determine the following components:

1. Individuals who live permanently in the same physical locality such as within the cities of London, Sydney or Chicago.

2. Who share a common set of thoughts specific to them such as the Islamic belief.

3. Living in a host society.

What is an atmosphere?

An atmosphere can exist when a thought or set of thoughts are repeatedly expressed and applied in a particular reality such as a football match, university, masjid or Islamic group.

An atmosphere can be sensed by those who interact with it and can affect those who are exposed to it. For example in a masjid where men and women are segregated even though it is not against the law for the woman to go into the men's section, generally even liberal minded women will generally conform.

It is similar to public opinion but on a micro level. Another example may be a mosque where political discussions are shunned in the mosque such that there are even signs up saying ‘don't talk about worldly affairs’, this atmosphere can be sensed by those that interact with it. Many would conform to it, it would take someone conviction in an alternative thought to oppose it such as the Da’wah carriers who explain that not only is politics part of Islam rather even the Islamic creed is political, they may initially be strongly opposed in such an environment.

Building and maintaining alternative atmospheres within the Muslim community in the West

Although there are permanently settled Muslims which we call a Muslim community, in real terms there are a multiplicity of Muslim communities within western countries with differing atmospheres.

The society we live in is a homogeneous Capitalist society, however the Muslim community within it exists in pockets scattered throughout the country in various cities and localities each with their own varying atmospheres. So you may live within a particular community and attend a particular mosque with a particular atmosphere of ‘no worldly discussions’ but around the corner from you there is a Muslim community with their own Islamic centre which has a highly politically charged atmosphere.

1. The common thoughts and emotions in this society and the public opinion have a major affect on all communities and atmospheres.

When you are within your local community, local mosque or halal butcher there is a certain link to the Islamic bond of brotherhood. However, everyone interacts with the wider society and is exposed to the thoughts of secularism, freedom, pluralism and democracy that permeate the society through various mediums including the media, education, state institutions and even entertainment.

Da'wah carriers need to be realistic in their expectation of the extent that we will be able to be successful in making the atmospheres within our communities oppose the western thoughts of freedom, democracy, pluralism and democracy and dominated by the concepts of: being intimately linked with the issues facing the Muslim Ummah worldwide; opposing neo-colonialist plans in the Muslim world; adhering to the Shari’ah rules in all matters whether worships, personal, economic, social or political; the Khilafah and the systems of Islam. 

2. To significantly impact an atmosphere of a particular local Muslim community would require the following: 
  • Actual presence of active Islamic Da’wah carriers in that community who carry Islam ideologically. Therefore, to be successful in a Muslim population numbering in millions then in reality the Da’wah carriers would need to have an actual presence throughout the numerous Muslim communities around that country. It is true that some activities would affect the communities at large such as the promotion of the correct Islamic concepts in the media. If they were able to secure a TV channel of their own or a medium that gained mass popularity such as a magazine or radio station in that case they more easily affect atmospheres nationally. This is difficult to achieve in western societies due to the increased regulations placed on television and radio programs. Promotion through social media, online mediums and the written word is more feasible
  • An ability to consistently publicly challenge incorrect thoughts within the public domain, such as support of secular political and refuting the modernist mantra that Islam doesn't have a detailed political system. For Da’wah carriers to impact a public atmosphere the challenge must be public and not private. Consistency is also important; a one off talk or event would not be enough to produce any sustainable change as Kufr thoughts are constantly hammered into people through all mediums. For a significant intellectual clash to take place within the atmosphere there needs to be a consistency in the clash such that the strongest thought rises to the top.
  • As the clash of ideas needs to be public within the atmosphere, the ability to use the public mediums would be useful such as the public khutbahs, talks, literature, local media etc. However, given the current climate in the West this space is likely to decrease. So if the Da’wah carriers were to target this they would need to utilise increasingly creative public styles.

3. For the Da’wah to be effective in this realm there are a number of dependencies as it requires grass roots work:
  • Strength in that particular community both in terms of numbers and strong cultured Da’wah carriers who can publicly articulate the call with frankness, courage, strength and thought. 
  • A wide reach within the atmospheres where Muslims interact in that community including the schools, colleges, cafes, mosques and other public places. 
  • The correct thoughts would be drowned out and in reality many times are unless they are able to present them persistently through multiple public mediums. This cannot be achieved unless the popular base of the Da’wah is large i.e. the number of its activists and its supporters who are consistently publicly engaging in the atmosphere. 
  • Undertake strong collective culturing public activities based upon the pure Islamic culture exposing the corrupt thoughts and explaining the Islamic thoughts and rules. 
  • Publicly challenging corrupt thoughts whenever they arise whether this is from Imams, councillors, activists or influential figures. 
There are a number of facilitating factors that would aid this:
  • Having a growing base of Da’wah carriers - where the Da’wah is consistently winning more to its ranks than losing. 
  • Strongly consistent concentrated culturing activities that would assist in their development in order to have strong personalities to carry the call. 
  • A growing supporter base who actually express thoughts built upon an ideological understanding of Islam publicly. 
  • Winning over influential personalities to the Da’wah who become mouthpieces for it. 
  • Promoting these thoughts through the existing media where possible. 
  • Influencing the call of others who speak publicly amongst the community such as the Ulema, activists and groups. 
It is like the difference between an aerial war and a land war, the Kuffar have the means at their disposal to win the aerial war in terms of promoting their corrupt ideas to Muslims. However, it is difficult for them to operate on the ground and to win the battle of hearts and minds at that level - whereas Islamic political parties have this ability.

Key dependency - growing a healthy body of Islamic Da’wah carriers

A key dependency to achieve the aim of countering assimilation in the Muslim community or for working to re-establish the Khilafah is growing a healthy body of Islamic personalities to carry the call. If presence on the ground is thin and in some cases non-existent then the thoughts of the Da’wah is a drop in the ocean of public opinion and are drowned by it.

Therefore, it is fundamental to the success of the work that there is consistent winning of new people who a cultured strongly so that they become a fire that scorches the false thoughts and a beacon of light that spreads the Da’wah.

This work is not a specific work that should only be undertaken by some of the body of an Islamic group rather it is the work of all its members and affiliates. It is different to delivering talks, circles, khutbahs and debates – these should not be a duty upon every member as people have varied abilities in this regard.

The vital issue of Khilafah, its evidences, the method to establish it, the refutation of other methods and the obligation of working with a group should be the daily bread of the Da’wah carriers as it is the vital issue, a matter of life and death that is key to convincing Muslims to work for it and to join the global struggle against Western hegemony.

Allah (swt) did not leave human beings to determine the priorities amongst actions by themselves based upon their own minds or criterion.

He (swt) predetermined a value of raising ones children to be Islamic personalities. However, He (swt) gave the acts of Jihad a bigger value. He (swt) predetermined a value to the providing for one’s dependants, and He (swt) placed a higher value on the repelling of the enemy from Muslim land. He (swt) placed a value on the building of mosques, but He placed a higher value on carrying the Da'wah to resume Islam through the establishment of Khilafah. Allah (swt) says:

 أَجَعَلْتُمْ سِقَايَةَ الْحَاجِّ وَعِمَارَةَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ كَمَنْ آَمَنَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآَخِرِ وَجَاهَدَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ لَا يَسْتَوُونَ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

"Do you consider the providing of water to the pilgrims and the maintenance of Masjid al Haram as equal to the worth of those who believe in Allah and the last day, and strive hard and fight in the cause of Allah? They are not equal before Allah. And Allah guides not the Zalimun (Oppressors)." [TMQ 9:19]

Abu Ismael al-Beirawi
December 2015