The following are some useful questions and answers from the time of Sheikh Abdul Qadeem Zalloom (rh).
Question
Question
With regards to the ayah 3:104
translated as “Let there arise from you an ummah (group) calling to al-Khair
(Islam), enjoining the Marouf (all that is correct) and forbidding the Munkar
(all that is evil) and those are the ones who will gain success.”
This Ayah (3:104) is the basis of the
formation of the correct Political Party. There are some questions that need
clarity:
- When the ayah says Al Khair – we understand this to be ‘all of Islam’ its aqeeda and its systems, its fiqra and its tariqa.
- What then makes it an obligation to just call for the resuming of the Islamic way of life by establishing the state? And not call for all within Islam? Some say that all the rules of Islam must be addressed with the people.
- We understand the enjoining of the maroof and the forbidding of the Munqar to be a duty of the group and its task. One of the duties of the group is to address the rulers as they are the head of establishing the maroof and the munkar in the society, hence the group takes on the political side. There are some questions that arise from this explanation
- Is this addressing of the rulers to do with the reality, as we have no state and require to change the situation. If we had a state could a group exist that did not address the rulers but called for the ‘partial actions’ such as charity etc…
- Can we use the definition by Al Faeroz abadi – in his book Al Khamoos al muheet, to show that enjoining the maroof and forbidding the munkar is political. His definition seems to indicate that all types of ‘ordering’ and ‘forbidding’ is politics even if it is not to the rulers.
- What is the Hukm Shari in calling non Muslims to Islam as a Party today. Is it Fard upon the Party members, if not does it not fall under the branch Al Khair? Also if it is fard then how is this practically done?
- When a group is outside the ‘area of work’ for the state, what restricts it to undertaking some of the actions and not enjoing the maroof and forbidding the munkar of the rulers. Is this because it is only an obligation for the group to do this in one part of the world and the other parts assist in that ‘area of work’ and by doing the fard is done?
- The obligation to re-establish the state is obligation on all the Muslims in all the world. Those who live in the west remove this obligation by working with the correct party and carrying dawa with them, even if their actions do not directly contribute to the aim. Is this accurate?
- Is it accurate to say ‘it is haram’ to establish a group to undertake the partial actions such as charity, building mosques etc… or do we just say the obligation for establishing the group to establish the Khilafah is not met?
Answer
Al
Khair is the whole of Islam. Thus the daw’ah which is required “yadhuna illal
khair – call to the good” must be to implement all of Islam. This
implementation can’t take place except through establishing the State that
implements the ahkam of the Shar
Thus
by the existence of this state, the whole of Islam exists (in life). As for the
call to other than that, like the charitable deeds and (building) mosques and
the like, these do not establish the whole of Islam, rather these are parts of
the khair and not the whole of the khair.
There
are certain ahkam shariah in Islam that can be performed by the individuals
such as the prayer. There are ahkam Shar’iah which individuals can’t perform
such as the hudud (penal codes). The da’wah to resume the Islamic way of life
by establishing the state is a da’wah to the whole of Islam. While the da’wah
to the other matters is a da’wah to the parts of the khair, whereas the
requirements in this Ayah is the dawah to the whole of the khair.
The
other part of the ayah “Wa ya’moroona bil ma’roof way an hawna anil munkar”
i.e. the existence of a group that enjoins the ma’roof and forbids the munkar.
This is attached with alif laam (al) which is of the forms ( ) of generality,
which means that commanding the ma’roof and forbidding the munkar must be in
general, i.e. to the ruler, and the ruled (people) even the ruler is of more
importance. This duty does not depend on the existence or non-existence of the
state. In case it exists, the command and forbidding would be accounting the
ruler. When it does not exist, the commanding and forbidding would be aimed at
accounting and charging him to establish the state. Therefore the ayah demands
(the establishment) of a political group and not just any group; whether the
state existed or not. This is because the commanding and the forbidding (al amr
wan nahi) is connected to the hukm in both cases.
Al
Amr bil ma’roof wa nahi anil munkar is a political work as long as the
relationship with the rulers is taken into consideration. For example to order
a person to pray is different to ordering the people to pray and at the same
time ordering the ruler to punish the one who does not pray. The first order
(in the first case) is a command to the ma’roof detached from politics while
the second is a command of the ma’roof and a political work at the same time.
As
for what you say about the meaning of ordering the ma’roof and forbidding the
munkar as it came in the Qamoos of Al-Muheet of Al Farooz Abadi, this is not
precise. This is because ordering somebody to pray or to fast or to forbid him
from flirting with a girl in the street, this ordering of ma’roof and
forbidding of munkar is not a political work.
The
ayah explains the work of the kutlah (group) which is the implementation of
Islam completely in the reality of life. Therefore it works to establish a
state in the Muslim countries to resume the Islamic way of life and implement
Islam in the state then carry Islam to the non-Muslims by da’wah and Jihad.
So
the Kutlah undertakes the call to non Muslims to Islam in this manner.
Since
the principal work is resuming the Islamic way of life through the
establishment of the Khilafah state, and this requires the political struggle
with the rulers and explaining their enmity to Islam and their conspiracies
against the Muslims, and withdrawing the peoples confidence in them and the
work to change them and establishing a khaleefah for Muslims in their place.
All
of this requires confronting the rulers in the majal. In the kuffar lands
outside the majal, like the West, changing the rulers there and establishing
the Khilafah is not the work of the Kutlah, therefore it does not undertake the
political struggle, because before establishing the Khilafah it does not work
to change the societies and systems in the Western World and the various lands
of the kuffar.
The
Muslims work with the correct Kutlah outside the majal, and his performance of
the required duties, would mean that he would have absolved himself of the duty
from himself by doing so, i.e. working with the kutlah.
The
correct thing to say is that any takattul that does not call to all the khair,
and does not work to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing the
Khilafah, he would not have performed the duty demanded from him in this ayah.
However
the kutlah that carries parts of the khair is not told that what he is carrying
out is haram. Rather it is said that their work is part of the khair and not
the khair demanded in the ayah, therefore they are sinful for not performing
the duty demanded in the noble ayah.
Question
The ayah “ Let there arise from you groups …” is the only evidence which states
the existence of political groups, can we determine the work of the group
directly from this ayah? Is the method of re-establishing the Khilafah derived
from this ayah? Can it be said that the ayah is general, and thus to restrict
the majal is also haram? Also to use the actions of the sahabah where they did
not work in certain areas and say that this restricts the majal is wrong, as
the dawah was not fard upon them.
What
are the obligations pertaining to the group which emerge from the ayah? And is
it correct for the Amir to restrict the work of the group in certain areas?
Answer
With regards to the verse
(translated), ‘And let there arise out of
you a group inviting to all that is good (Islam), enjoining the Good (ma’roof)
and forbidding the Evil (munkar). And it is they who are successful’. [TMQ
3:104]
We should understand that
this verse is related to the obligation of having at least one group from
amongst the Ummah and the verse defines the general objective of that group
i.e. to call to the Khair, enjoin the Ma’roof and forbid the Munkar.
The question mentioned that
this verse is the only evidence for the establishment of a group. This is incorrect,
firstly we must understand the group is not Qati (definite) in its meaning as
some scholars like al-Ghazali said that the verse does not refer to the
establishment of a group but rather emphasises the obligation of enjoining the
good and forbidding the evil. Although we differ with such scholars and explain
as to why the ayah orders the establishment of a group we can also refer to
another evidence regarding establishing a group in today’s reality which is the
Shariah principle, “That which the wajib
cannot be accomplished without becomes wajib”.
Although the ayah explains
the general work of the group, the actual work of the group would be dependent
upon the situation of whether the Khilafah exists or is absent.
The work of the group in
today’s reality, in the absence of the Khilafah has been explained in a
previous Question and Answer by the Party dated 1/6/2001:
“Al Khair is the whole of
Islam. Thus the daw’ah which is required “yadhuna illal khair – call to the
good” must be to implement all of Islam. This implementation can’t take place
except through establishing the State that implements the ahkam of the Shara
Thus by the existence of
this state, the whole of Islam exists (in life). As for the call to other than
that, like the charitable deeds and (building) mosques and the like, these do
not establish the whole of Islam, rather these are parts of the khair and not
the whole of the khair.
There are certain ahkam
shariah in Islam that can be performed by the individuals such as the prayer. There
are ahkam Shar’iah which individuals can’t perform such as the hudud (penal
codes). The da’wah to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing the state
is a da’wah to the whole of Islam. While the da’wah to the other matters is a
da’wah to the parts of the khair, whereas the requirements in this Ayah is the
dawah to the whole of the khair.
The other part of the ayah
“Wa ya’moroona bil ma’roof way an hawna anil munkar” i.e. the existence of a
group that enjoins the ma’roof and forbids the munkar. This is attached with
alif laam (al) which is of the forms ( ) of generality, which means that
commanding the ma’roof and forbidding the munkar must be in general, i.e. to
the ruler, and the ruled (people) even the ruler is of more importance. This
duty does not depend on the existence or non-existence of the state. In case it
exists, the command and forbidding would be accounting the ruler. When it does
not exist, the commanding and forbidding would be aimed at accounting and
charging him to establish the state. Therefore the ayah demands (the
establishment) of a political group and not just any group; whether the state
existed or not. This is because the commanding and the forbidding (al amr wan
nahi) is connected to the hukm in both cases.
Al Amr bil ma’roof wa nahi
anil munkar is a political work as long as the relationship with the rulers is
taken into consideration. For example to order a person to pray is different to
ordering the people to pray and at the same time ordering the ruler to punish
the one who does not pray. The first order (in the first case) is a command to
the ma’roof detached from politics while the second is a command of the ma’roof
and a political work at the same time.
As for what you say about
the meaning of ordering the ma’roof and forbidding the munkar as it came in the
Qamoos of Al-Muheet of Al Farooz Abadi, this is not precise. This is because
ordering somebody to pray or to fast or to forbid him from flirting with a girl
in the street, this ordering of ma’roof and forbidding of munkar is not a
political work.
The ayah
explains the work of the kutlah (group) which is the implementation of Islam
completely in the reality of life. Therefore it works to establish a state in
the Muslim countries to resume the Islamic way of life and implement Islam in
the state then carry Islam to the non-Muslims by da’wah and Jihad.”
Although
the ayah determines that the Party must be political because it must enjoin the
good and forbid the evil, beyond this the ayah does not detail the method to
re-establish the Khilafah. The method of the group to re-establish the Khilafah
is not derived from the ayah alone as the ayah does not discuss how to transfer
Dar al Kufr to Dar Islam in detail beyond mentioning the need for political
work. Rather to derive the method we looked primarily at the actions of the
Prophet (saw) and how he (saw) established Dar al Islam. As it has mentioned in
the book ‘Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir’:
“The life
of the Messenger (SAW) in Mecca should be taken as a model to follow in the
Da’awa. Therefore, the da’awa should first proceed by first understanding it
and perform all the obligations defined by Islam, as was the case in the House
of Al-Arqam. Then, those who have studied and understood Islam and sincerely
believed in it will move to interact with the Ummah, until the Ummah
understands Islam and realises the necessity of the establishment of the
Islamic state. The block should take the initiative by addressing the
corruption of the people, and challenging them in their erroneous concepts and
corrupt opinions. The reality of Islam and the essence of its da’awa have to be
then demonstrated and explained, so that the public awareness about the da’awa
is established and the Dawah carriers be considered as part of the Ummah. No
gap should be between them, so that the Ummah as a whole carries this
productive effort under the leadership of the block carrying the da’awa, until
they assume authority and bring the Islamic state into existence. Then the life
of the Prophet (SAW) in Medina should be the model to follow in the
implementation of Islam and in carrying the da’awa to it.”
In
emulating the actions of the Messenger (saw) as to how to re-establish the
Khilafah, there is clear evidence that he (saw) had an area of work (Majal) and
he (saw) allowed the Sahaba (ra) to leave this area of work and go to different
places like Abyssinia Therefore the fact that the Party restricts the Majal is
based on evidence from the actions of the Prophet (saw) and has nothing to do
with the ayah 3:104 as this ayah’s subject matter is to do with the obligation
of having a group from amongst the Ummah and the general nature of the work of
this group. The ayah does not discuss the details of the method nor the issue
of restricting the Majal and therefore it is incorrect to refer to it as an
evidence on this subject.
It cannot
be said that ‘you cannot use the actions of the Messenger (saw) in this regard
because the Da’wa was not Fard upon the Sahaba in Makkah’, as the actions of
the Sahaba (ra) are not a Shariah daleel for us but the actions of the Prophet
(saw) are. The Da’wa was fard upon the Messenger (saw) and therefore it is
valid to use his actions as a Shariah daleel regarding the method and the
restriction of Majal. The Party mentioned in a previous answer to question
dated 12th May 1978 when it stated:
“The carrying of the Da'awa was not obligatory upon
the Muslims as a whole prior to the revelation of the command in Madinah.
Therefore, the non obligation was in fact general and not specific to the
Sahaba. The issue is not restricted to the obligation or the non obligation, it
is rather linked to the permissibility or the prohibition of leaving the Majal.
Therefore, the Messenger of Allah's (SAW) action, reflected in giving the
Muslims permission to leave the Majal of the Da'awa i..e. to immigrate from
Makkah, even as an escape from persecution, serves as evidence that it would be
permitted for the party member to leave the Majal of the party. As for the
carrying of the Da'awa, this is not connected to the issue, and the party
member is at present commanded to carry the Da'awa, whether he were in the
Majal or outside it. Therefore, his exit from the Majal would not exempt him
from carrying the Da'awa, what the party member would be exempted from are the
party activities. Therefore, it is permitted for the party member to leave the
Majal of the Da'awa and he would not be obligated to undertake the party's
activities, as for the carrying of the Da'awa, this would not fall
from
upon his neck.”
It cannot be argued that the definition
of a Majal wherein the Party works to take the power and therefore engages in
political struggle is a restriction of the verse 3:104 as the verse is general.
The verse talks about the subject of establishing of a group and the work of
the group. To say that the verse is general (Aam) and that defining a Majal
would be restricting it is incorrect. The ayat of Jihad are general (Aam) and
Mutlaq (absolute), so when the Khalifah specifies which countries to attack and
which countries not launch Jihad upon immediately, does this mean that he is
restricting the Ayat? Of course not.
The Party adheres to what the noble ayah
3:104 orders as it works to establish the Khair and enjoing the Ma’roof and
forbid the Munkar. The obligation of these tasks is upon the Party. The
distinction between the obligation upon the Party and the obligation upon the
individual needs to be understood.
The obligation of re-establishing the
Khilafah is upon the individual established by numerous evidences, however it
is impossible for him to do this alone as he does not have the capability. The
only way for him to discharge this obligation is by joining a group who is
working for this aim according to a method prescribed by the Shari’ah.
Therefore the obligation of the individual is different to what has been
obliged upon the Party. The individuals obligation is to work as part of a
party and to undertake the activities that the Party requests of him. This does
not mean that he does not have to engage in his other fara’id as an individual
Muslim such as Salah, obedience to the parents, removing a munkar if it was in
his capability by his hand such as preventing his child from haram, etc.
The work of the individuals within this
group whether inside or outside the Majal would be determined by the Amir of
the Party. It has been explained in the book ‘Introduction to the constitution’
article 21:
“The evidence (daleel) for the group
being a political party has two aspects. Firstly, Allah (swt) did not order the
Muslims in this verse to undertake the call to goodness and the enjoining of
Ma’ruf and the forbidding of Munkar; rather He (swt) ordered the establishment
of a group that undertakes these two actions. What is requested is not the
undertaking of the two actions, but the establishment of a group that
undertakes these actions. Hence, the emphasis in the command is on the
establishment of the group and not on the two actions. The two actions are an
indication of the actions of the group whose establishment is requested, thus
they are characteristics that this group must possess.
For the group to be qualified as such
and be able to assume the role assigned to it, it must meet certain conditions,
in order for the group to acquire the quality mentioned in the verse. The
formation of a group requires the presence of a bond that binds its members so
that they become one single entity (jama’ah). Furthermore, what keeps this
party functioning is the presence of an Amir whose obedience is compulsory.
This is because the Shari'ah has ordered every group of three people or more to
appoint an Amir. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "It is forbidden for any three people to be anywhere on earth
without having appointed one Amir from amongst them" [Abu Dawud].
Disobedience would lead to the removal
of a person from the group. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "He who sees from his Amir something
that he dislikes, let him be patient, for whoever leaves the Jama’ah by a hand
span dies, dies the death of Jahiliyya (ignorance)" [Bukhari and
Muslim]. Therefore, Shari'ah deems the rebellion against the Amir as a
separation from the group. What maintains it as a group is the obedience to the
Amir.
These are two indispensable
characteristics for the group to exist and to undertake its action. Therefore
the verse, "Let there arise from
amongst you a group..." means let there be from amongst you a group
that has a bond binding its members and an Amir whose obedience is obligatory.
This is the bloc, party, association, the organisation or any of these names
that refer to the group that meets all the criteria.”
It is the Party that undertakes the
actions of the method. The political party differs from an individual, so it is
the Party that seeks the Nussrah not all of its individuals, rather it may
allocate some of its individuals to focus on this. This is the nature of a
party and this is why it is possible for a party to re-establish the Khilafah
and not an individual by himself.
In the areas outside the Majal like the
countries in the West, the Amir has decided what the work of the Shabab there
should be and this is what they are obliged to carry out, this is how they
fulfil their obligation of resuming the Islamic way of life. It was mentioned
in a ‘Question & Answer’ dated 1/6/2001:
“In the kuffar lands outside the majal,
like the West, changing the rulers there and establishing the Khilafah is not
the work of the Kutlah, therefore it does not undertake the political struggle,
because before establishing the Khilafah it does not work to change the
societies and systems in the Western World and the various lands of the kuffar.
The Muslims work with the correct Kutlah
outside the majal, and his performance of the required duties, would mean that
he would have absolved himself of the duty from himself by doing so, i.e.
working with the kutlah.”
Comments