Islamic Revival

Imam Muhammad (d. 189), the companion of Abu Hanifa (d. 150) – Allah’s mercy be on them both – the main transmitter of his madhhab and a mujtahid in his own right, said: ولا بأس بأن يستعين المسلمون بأهل الشرك على أهل الشرك إذا كان حكم الإسلام هو الظاهر عليهم. “It is alright for the Muslims to seek the help of polytheists when fighting against (other) polytheists  if the rule of Islam is dominant over them .” (al-Siyar al-Kabir السيار الكبير , 4:191, emphasis added) This is the authoritative statement on the matter in the Hanafi madhhab. Imam Muhammad clarifies the hukm of what is designated in fiqh as the issue of seeking assistance in war from the disbelievers. He notes that assistance can be sought when Islamic rule is dominant. The implication of this condition is operative. That is, when Islamic rule is not dominant, seeking assistance is not allowed. In other words, seeking assistance is strictly conditional. If, and only if, the rule of Islam is dominant, it is allowed for t

On Wednesday the 6th of December 2017 Donald Trump made an  announcement of al-Quds (‘Jerusalem’) being officially recognised as the capital of Israel which drew reactions from world leaders across the globe. Here we present a few points regarding this development. 1. The US administration is intentionally provoking Muslims globally. That does not come as a surprise, particularly from Trump. But gratuitous provocation against the sanctities of people usually attracts uncontrollable reaction. If the new US embassy in Jerusalem, whenever it is built, or other US interests around the world, get attacked, the US administration has no one to blame but itself. 2. The reaction of world leaders is laughable. European leaders (France, Britain) and leaders of regimes in the Muslim leaders (Turkey, Gulf States, Saudi, Pakistan, Jordan) are feigning concern about the peace process and the now-allegedly-compromised neutrality of the US, as if the US were a neutral adjudicator in the fi

Download the book  The Transition Introductory Remarks In his tract on monetary reform, John Maynard Keynes referred to gold as a barbarous relic, whose rigidity had fettered the world from economic freedom and prosperity. He spoke at a time when the Occident were suffering from macroeconomic anaemia and were yearning for a solution. In sheer desperation, fiat money became the drug that gave growth-addicts what they craved for in the short-run. However, years after its introduction, the fiat system has induced far more volatility than it sought to resolve. In truth, Keynes failed to realise that barbarity was a trait not of gold but of fiat, insofar as it has plagued the world with monetary anarchy. In fact, the very system he consigned to history has never been more relevant than it is today. Islam’s imminent arrival as a political entity has necessitated a vital discourse, in which its ability to purge the world of its monetary woes by way of bimetallism must be explicated.