Salam,
Ramadhan starts on Monday 01/09/2008.
May Allah swt accepts our fast and rewards us with Jannah ul Ferdous.
Wa-Salam
Sunday, 31 August 2008
Monday, 23 June 2008
Dhuroora (necessity)
The misuse of the principle of Dhuroora (necessity)
Unfortunately today some people misuse Islamic principles in order to justify clearly prohibited actions. One of the most commonly misapplied principles is that of Dhuroora (necessity). People often use it to justify taking interest based loans, working in jobs that involve haram, engaging in bribery, supporting kufr political parties and a variety of other prohibited actions. They attempt to justify this from Islamic texts by saying that when your dying of hunger it becomes permitted to eat pork and other haram foods. From this they generalise and say therefore we can break the Shariah rules under any type of difficulty.It is true that Allah said:إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَيْتَةَ وَالدَّمَ وَلَحْمَ الْخِنْزِيرِ وَمَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ غَيْرَ بَاغٍ وَلَا عَادٍ فَلَا إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ"He has forbidden you Al-Maytah (meat of a dead animal), blood, flesh of swine, and any animal which is slaughtered as a sacrifice for other than Allah. But if one is forced by necessity without willful disobedience and not transgressing, then there is no sin on him." [TMQ 2:173]So, the person who is in dire need can eat of what he finds from these prohibited food which is enough to keep him alive.It must be understood that these rules are specific rules with specific evidences, from them we cannot generalize and say that we are allowed to bend the shariah rules on the basis of any hardship, to do this would be haram.We must be careful here when we talk about the principle of “necessity “. Let us refer to what the classical ulema have said about this matter.Imam al Razi Al Jassas al Hanafi says in his Ahkam al Quran (vol 1/159): “Here the meaning of necessity purports the fear for life and limb when someone avoids foods (that are in essence forbidden) …..” Ibn Qudamah al Maqdasi al Hanabli in his Al Mughni says (9/331): “If it has become established, then the necessity that is expedient is the type that leads to starvation if the food is left”.He continues to say: “...The reason for the allowance of is the need to preserve the self from destruction because this Maslaha is more beneficial than the benefit of avoiding the impure….”Imam Abu Hamid Al Ghazali Al Shafi says in his Wasit (7/168): “As for necessity we imply the state that probably will lead to the person’s destruction, If, for example he does not eat and similarly if he fears that an illness would lead to death…..”Imam Ibn Juzi al Maliki says: “…As for necessity it is the fear of death and it is not conditional that someone is patient to such an extent that he witnesses his own death”. (Al Quanin al Fiqhia p116)Clearly then we are talking about an acute scenario that is particular. Even this has certain constraints according to many of the Ulema.(1) That there is no other means to remove this overbearing situation.(2) That this does not affect the rights of others. In other words we try to look for an exit that does not affect others. At least in principle to such an extent that a number of Ulema forbid Muslims to eat dead human flesh in matters of starvation because this affects the rights of others i.e. those of the dead. Another very common example is the sinking ship scenario. What if we are going to sink because of the excessive weight of the passengers, do we throw a few overboard to their doom to save the majority? The vast majority refuse this scenario of utilitarianism in Dhuroora. Another example is the Muslim prisoner shield that is put up in defence of a non Muslim army. This example is typically allowed for as a Dhuroora on a state level but more importantly because there are textual indications that allow collateral damage if it cannot be avoided. Some scholars understand this point as a Duroorah Kulia i.e. an all encompassing Duroorah (It applies to the Muslims as a whole rather than some at the expense of others)(3) Uttering Kufr by force is a Rukhsa (legal permission) and it is better according when forced on pains of torture and death to avoid it.Imam Suyuti in Ashbah wal Nadhair page 63 says : “Eating the flesh of the dead in times of necessity takes precedence over taking someone else’s money (to purchase food).”The scholars also differed on whether you can take drink alcohol when you are dying from thirst. Imam Shafi thought that alcohol makes the thirst even worse. Others also differed on whether one can take medication that has forbidden elements in it. Finally even some scholars did not consider it a sin if someone refused to take anything forbidden at all. (See Majmu’at al Bu’uth al Fiqhea by Dr Abdul Karim Zaydan pages 141-214)Anyway all four schools of thought and in fact the consensus agree that Dhuroora in the fiqhi sense makes some things that are forbidden allowed in an acute scenario. Remember this is not a norm but for very particular severe situations. It cannot be made a law. Certainly it cannot lead to a normal rule for an entire population.So one cannot claim that they have to take an interest based mortgage to buy a house on the pretext of necessity as they can rent or stay with relatives. Similarly someone can’t claim that he has to pay bribery to achieve his interests as he can achieve them in a legitimate way even if it is more difficult. Someone working in a job that involves haram such as in a restaurant where they would have to serve alcohol or as a cashier in a bank where they would have to receive and give riba (usury) can get another job that is halal even if it is lesser in pay.The countless ayat and ahadith ordering us to undertake our actions according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah (swt) can’t just be washed away based upon some difficulty or hardship.الَّذِينَ إِذَا أَصَابَتْهُمْ مُصِيبَةٌ قَالُوا إِنَّا لِلَّهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَاجِعُونَأُوْلَئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ صَلَوَاتٌ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ وَرَحْمَةٌ وَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمْ الْمُهْتَدُونَ“And certainly, We shall test you with something of fear, hunger, loss of wealth, lives and fruits, but give glad tidings to As-Sâbirin (the patient ones.).” [TMQ al-Baqarah:155-157]We should listen to the warning of the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he said:«بادروا بالأعمال فتناً كقطع الليل المظلم يصبح الرجل مؤمناً ويمسي كافراً، ويمسي مؤمناً ويصبح كافراً يبيع دينه بعرض من الدنيا»“Be prompt in doing good deeds (before you are overtaken) by turbulence which would be like a part of the dark night. During (that stormy period) a man would be a Muslim in the morning and an unbeliever in the evening or he would be a believer in the evening and an unbeliever in the morning, and would sell his Deen for worldly goods” [Sahih Muslim: Kitab ul-Iman, 213]Allah (swt) says:وَمَا كَانَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ وَلاَ مُؤْمِنَةٍ إِذَا قَضَى اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَمْرًا أَنْ يَكُونَ لَهُمْ الْخِيَرَةُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِمْ وَمَنْ يَعْصِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلاَلاً مُبِينًا. “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.” [TMQ al-Ahzaab:36]
Unfortunately today some people misuse Islamic principles in order to justify clearly prohibited actions. One of the most commonly misapplied principles is that of Dhuroora (necessity). People often use it to justify taking interest based loans, working in jobs that involve haram, engaging in bribery, supporting kufr political parties and a variety of other prohibited actions. They attempt to justify this from Islamic texts by saying that when your dying of hunger it becomes permitted to eat pork and other haram foods. From this they generalise and say therefore we can break the Shariah rules under any type of difficulty.It is true that Allah said:إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَيْتَةَ وَالدَّمَ وَلَحْمَ الْخِنْزِيرِ وَمَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ غَيْرَ بَاغٍ وَلَا عَادٍ فَلَا إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ"He has forbidden you Al-Maytah (meat of a dead animal), blood, flesh of swine, and any animal which is slaughtered as a sacrifice for other than Allah. But if one is forced by necessity without willful disobedience and not transgressing, then there is no sin on him." [TMQ 2:173]So, the person who is in dire need can eat of what he finds from these prohibited food which is enough to keep him alive.It must be understood that these rules are specific rules with specific evidences, from them we cannot generalize and say that we are allowed to bend the shariah rules on the basis of any hardship, to do this would be haram.We must be careful here when we talk about the principle of “necessity “. Let us refer to what the classical ulema have said about this matter.Imam al Razi Al Jassas al Hanafi says in his Ahkam al Quran (vol 1/159): “Here the meaning of necessity purports the fear for life and limb when someone avoids foods (that are in essence forbidden) …..” Ibn Qudamah al Maqdasi al Hanabli in his Al Mughni says (9/331): “If it has become established, then the necessity that is expedient is the type that leads to starvation if the food is left”.He continues to say: “...The reason for the allowance of is the need to preserve the self from destruction because this Maslaha is more beneficial than the benefit of avoiding the impure….”Imam Abu Hamid Al Ghazali Al Shafi says in his Wasit (7/168): “As for necessity we imply the state that probably will lead to the person’s destruction, If, for example he does not eat and similarly if he fears that an illness would lead to death…..”Imam Ibn Juzi al Maliki says: “…As for necessity it is the fear of death and it is not conditional that someone is patient to such an extent that he witnesses his own death”. (Al Quanin al Fiqhia p116)Clearly then we are talking about an acute scenario that is particular. Even this has certain constraints according to many of the Ulema.(1) That there is no other means to remove this overbearing situation.(2) That this does not affect the rights of others. In other words we try to look for an exit that does not affect others. At least in principle to such an extent that a number of Ulema forbid Muslims to eat dead human flesh in matters of starvation because this affects the rights of others i.e. those of the dead. Another very common example is the sinking ship scenario. What if we are going to sink because of the excessive weight of the passengers, do we throw a few overboard to their doom to save the majority? The vast majority refuse this scenario of utilitarianism in Dhuroora. Another example is the Muslim prisoner shield that is put up in defence of a non Muslim army. This example is typically allowed for as a Dhuroora on a state level but more importantly because there are textual indications that allow collateral damage if it cannot be avoided. Some scholars understand this point as a Duroorah Kulia i.e. an all encompassing Duroorah (It applies to the Muslims as a whole rather than some at the expense of others)(3) Uttering Kufr by force is a Rukhsa (legal permission) and it is better according when forced on pains of torture and death to avoid it.Imam Suyuti in Ashbah wal Nadhair page 63 says : “Eating the flesh of the dead in times of necessity takes precedence over taking someone else’s money (to purchase food).”The scholars also differed on whether you can take drink alcohol when you are dying from thirst. Imam Shafi thought that alcohol makes the thirst even worse. Others also differed on whether one can take medication that has forbidden elements in it. Finally even some scholars did not consider it a sin if someone refused to take anything forbidden at all. (See Majmu’at al Bu’uth al Fiqhea by Dr Abdul Karim Zaydan pages 141-214)Anyway all four schools of thought and in fact the consensus agree that Dhuroora in the fiqhi sense makes some things that are forbidden allowed in an acute scenario. Remember this is not a norm but for very particular severe situations. It cannot be made a law. Certainly it cannot lead to a normal rule for an entire population.So one cannot claim that they have to take an interest based mortgage to buy a house on the pretext of necessity as they can rent or stay with relatives. Similarly someone can’t claim that he has to pay bribery to achieve his interests as he can achieve them in a legitimate way even if it is more difficult. Someone working in a job that involves haram such as in a restaurant where they would have to serve alcohol or as a cashier in a bank where they would have to receive and give riba (usury) can get another job that is halal even if it is lesser in pay.The countless ayat and ahadith ordering us to undertake our actions according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah (swt) can’t just be washed away based upon some difficulty or hardship.الَّذِينَ إِذَا أَصَابَتْهُمْ مُصِيبَةٌ قَالُوا إِنَّا لِلَّهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَاجِعُونَأُوْلَئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ صَلَوَاتٌ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ وَرَحْمَةٌ وَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمْ الْمُهْتَدُونَ“And certainly, We shall test you with something of fear, hunger, loss of wealth, lives and fruits, but give glad tidings to As-Sâbirin (the patient ones.).” [TMQ al-Baqarah:155-157]We should listen to the warning of the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he said:«بادروا بالأعمال فتناً كقطع الليل المظلم يصبح الرجل مؤمناً ويمسي كافراً، ويمسي مؤمناً ويصبح كافراً يبيع دينه بعرض من الدنيا»“Be prompt in doing good deeds (before you are overtaken) by turbulence which would be like a part of the dark night. During (that stormy period) a man would be a Muslim in the morning and an unbeliever in the evening or he would be a believer in the evening and an unbeliever in the morning, and would sell his Deen for worldly goods” [Sahih Muslim: Kitab ul-Iman, 213]Allah (swt) says:وَمَا كَانَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ وَلاَ مُؤْمِنَةٍ إِذَا قَضَى اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَمْرًا أَنْ يَكُونَ لَهُمْ الْخِيَرَةُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِمْ وَمَنْ يَعْصِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلاَلاً مُبِينًا. “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allâh and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.” [TMQ al-Ahzaab:36]
Saturday, 31 May 2008
Jihad
Clarifying the meaning of Jihad
‘Jihad’ is extracted from the source, ‘Jaahada’ and it measured upon the fourth verb structure, which means interaction between two sides, al-Mufa’ala. Another example is ‘Al-Khisaam’ which means to quarrel and is extracted from its roots source – Khaasama. Also, there is the example of ‘Jidaal’, which means to discuss or to argue and is taken from the root source ‘Jaadala’.In the tongue of the Arabs, al-Jihad means, ‘exerting ability and effort to do an action or express opinions’.
In Al-Munjid, the words Jaahada, Mujaahada and Jihadan means, ‘exerting effort and ability to push the other away’. In the Tafseer of al-Naysaboori it is clearly stated that ‘al-Jihad’ means to exert effort to achieve the objective or what is intended.After all of these related definitions of the word ‘al-Jihad’ in the language, it is possible to give a clear linguistic definition, which is: ‘al-Jihad is the exerting of all effort and ability between two sides by the least.’
Based on the linguistic definition, the exerted effort could be via material weapons or without a weapon, with money or without money. Also it could be the struggle between two opposing desires exerting effort (Jihad) to overcome the other. It could also be by words and could be by refusing to do an action or to speak. An example of this is like the one who disobeys his parents when they order him to disobey Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) and the person becomes patient and perseveres when his parents insist in ordering him. And it is like the one who abstains from committing a haram desire when his nafs calls him to it. This is what is mentioned in Hashiyat Al-Jamal in al-Jalalayn: “Jihad is to have patience on difficulties. It could be during war and it could be inside the nafs.”
Based on this linguistic definition, the opponent that the Muslim engages Jihad against could be his own nafs, or the shaiytan, or the transgressor or the kuffar. Additionally, by this definition, Jihad could also be that which is in the way of Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) ‘Fi Sabeel Lillah’’. So the Jihad could be undertaken to please Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) or to please the shaiytan, like the Jihad of the Kuffar against others. Al-Naysaboori, wrote, “It is exerting effort to achieve the objective or what is intended regardless of the nature of the objective intended by the one who is exerting the effort.” The Quran used the word ‘Jihad’ in describing the activity of the kaafir fathers to make their believing children reject true belief. Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) says:
وَإِن جَاهَدَاكَ عَلى أَن تُشْرِكَ بِي مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ فَلَا تُطِعْهُمَا
“If they do Jihad to make commit association with me…do not obey them”
(tmq Surah Luqman 31:15)
In the Shariyah, the word ‘al-Jihad’ was transferred from the general linguistic meaning to a special confined (restricted) meaning in the Quran and the Sunnah. It is, “the exerting of the effort to fight in the Way of Allah directly or by financial aid, or opinion and the like” This special meaning of Jihad was given in Medina. In Mecca, the legislation concerning Jihad was not revealed and that is why the subject of Jihad in the Mecci surahs carries the general linguistic meaning. They are the three verses (ayaat) in Surah al-Ainkaboot:
وَمَن جَاهَدَ فَإِنَّمَا يُجَاهِدُ لِنَفْسِهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَغَنِيٌّ عَنِ الْعَالَمِين
"And if any struggle ‘Jaahid’ (with might and main), they do so for their own souls: for Allah is free of all needs from all creation.”
(tmq 29:6)
وَإِن جَاهَدَاكَ لِتُشْرِكَ بِي مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ فَلَا تُطِعْهُمَا إِلَيَّ مَرْجِعُكُمْ فَأُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ
“But if they (either of them) struggle ‘Jaahada’ (to force) you to join with Me (in worship) anything of which you have no knowledge, obey them not. You have (all) to return to me, and I will tell you (the truth) of all that ye did.”
(tmq 29:8)
وَالَّذِينَ جَاهَدُوا فِينَا لَنَهْدِيَنَّهُمْ سُبُلَنَا وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمَعَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ
“And those who strive in Our cause ‘Jaahadu’- We will certainly guide them to our Paths: For verily Allah is with those who do right.”
(tmq 29:69)
Also in surah Luqman verse 15, the word Jihad is used in the linguistic context. Regarding the verse in surah Al-Nahl talking about Jihad, it mentioned ‘al-Hijra’, which means that this is a Madani verse in a Mecci surah (chapter) – and this was mentioned by the al-Mufasiroon. The verse is:
ثُمَّ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ لِلَّذِينَ هَاجَرُواْ مِن بَعْدِ مَا فُتِنُواْ ثُمَّ جَاهَدُواْ وَصَبَرُواْ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ مِن بَعْدِهَا لَغَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ
“But verily Your Lord- those who leave their homes after trials and persecutions,- and who thereafter struggle ‘Jaahadu’ and fight for the faith and patiently persevere,- Your Lord, after all this is oft-forgiving, Most Merciful”.
(tmq 16:110)
The subject of Jihad in Medina occurs 26 (twenty-six) times and the majority of them carry the clear meaning of Fighting, ‘Qitaal’. From these verses are:
لاَّ يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ غَيْرُ أُوْلِي الضَّرَرِ وَالْمُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ فَضَّلَ اللّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ دَرَجَةً وَكُـلاًّ وَعَدَ اللّهُ الْحُسْنَى وَفَضَّلَ اللّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا
“Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah has granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). To all (in Faith) has Allah promised good. But those who strive and fight has He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward.”
(tmq 4:95)
The order of ‘Nafr’ (going out) means that Jihad is fighting.
لَـكِنِ الرَّسُولُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَعَهُ جَاهَدُواْ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ لَهُمُ الْخَيْرَاتُ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ
"But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper.”
(tmq 9:88)
Also in surah Al-Saf, after mentioning fighting (Jihad) at the beginning, Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) says:
إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَ فِي سَبِيلِهِ صَفًّا كَأَنَّهُم بُنيَانٌ مَّرْصُوصٌ
"Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.”
(tmq 61:4)
It is clear in the Madani verses that the subject of Jihad is specifically related to fighting and what fighting entails naturally from finance, weapons and the like. Also these verses demonstrate aspects of the conditions that precede the action of fighting and are conditional for its legality i.e. propagating the invitation for non-Muslims to embrace Islam (as this is the original condition for fighting as has been mentioned in ‘Mughni al-Muhtaj) and/or accept the Islamic authority over them. From the Sunnah of Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam), Jihad has been mentioned also with this shariyah meaning i.e. fighting and what it entails.
On the authority of Abi Hurayrah, who said: “People asked, “Oh Rasoolallah, tell us about an action that is equal to the Jihad fi Sabeel Lillah?” Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) replied, “You will not find it bearable.” They replied, “Tell us oh Rasoolallah, maybe we can be able to withstand it.” Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “The example of a mujahid Fi Sabeel Lillah is like the fasting man, the one who stays up at its night and prays and the one who is obedient to the verses of Allah, does not get tired of fasting, nor stops sadaqah until the mujahid returns back to his family.”
It is clear from the wording of the hadith that the question was about the mujahid with the meaning of the fighter in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) specifically. The answer also indicated the same meaning when Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “Until the mujahid returns back to his family” i.e. returns back from the fighting. Also by the authority of Jaabir, that the people asked Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam), “Which Jihad is better?” He (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “The one in which one’s horse is wounded and one’s blood is split in it.” On the authority of ibn Abbas, he said that Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “When your brothers were killed in the battle of Uhud, Allah put their souls inside green birds that wonder inside Jannah landing on the rivers of Jannah and eats from its fruits. When they see how they spend their time and they look at their food and drink and how great it was, they say, ‘How we wish that our people know about how Allah rewarded us, so that they may love Jihad and not refrain from it.’ So then Allah says to them that, ‘I will tell you people and your brothers on your behalf.’ So they became happy with that news.” Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) sent this in surah Al-Imran on the occasion of the Battle of Uhud:
وَلاَ تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ قُتِلُواْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ أَمْوَاتًا بَلْ أَحْيَاء عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ يُرْزَقُونَ
Think not of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead. Nay, they live, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord.”
(tmq 3:169)
From all of these shariyah texts, it is clear that the Legislator transferred the word Jihad from its general linguistic meaning to a special meaning, which is ‘al-Qitaal’ (fighting) and whatever is linked to it directly and indirectly, as has been mentioned earlier. Moreover, it relates to the words, which carry the same meaning of al-Jihad like war. From this we can see that the shariyah texts defined Jihad as fighting (qitaal) in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) and this can be found in the books of fiqh, which dealt with the shariyah meaning of Jihad and laws related to it.In Badi’ul Sanai’ of the Hanafi Mazhab, it states the following: “Jihad in the language is exerting effort. In the understanding of the Shara, it is exerting effort and energy in fighting fi sabeel lillah by nafs, finance, tongue or another.”
In Manhul Jaleel of the Maliki Mazhab, al-Jihad is defined as the, “fighting by a Muslim against a kaafir (who does not have a treaty with the Muslims) to make the word of Allah the highest…. or for a Muslim to arrive to do Jihad or to enter the Kaafir’s land for fighting.” Ibn Arafa defined this.According to the Shafi Mazhab in Al-Iqna, Jihad is fighting ‘Fi Sabeel Lillah’. Al-Shirazi in Al-Muhazab said that Jihad is ‘qitaal’.
In Al-Mughni according to the Hanbali Mazhab, Ibn Qudama did not give any other definition. In the section ‘kitab ul-Jihad’ whatever is related to war, whether it was fard ul-kifaya (collective obligation) or fard ul-ayn (individual obligation) or whether it was in the form of guarding the believers from the enemy and the guards ‘ribat’ at the borders, all of this is connected to Jihad. He also said, “If the enemy arrives, Jihad becomes fard ul-ayn on the murabitoon (border guards). If it becomes evident that the enemy arrived, then they do not leave to meet them except by an order of the Ameer, since the Ameer is the one who has the authority for issuing orders in the matters of war.”
So it is clear that the meaning of Jihad was transferred from the linguistic to the shariyah meaning, such that it was understood to mean fighting and nothing else. Such purity and clarity over its meaning today is clearly vague, from what is heard from the lips of rulers over the Islamic lands and even amongst the Muslim ummah itself, as a result of the dominance and pollution of western political thought and reeling from a defeatist mentality that seeks to be apologetic.
So what emerged and dominated the opinion were those who sincerely but incorrectly took Jihad as the rule for all matters whilst others reduced Jihad as a matter connected to defending the ‘nafs’ and identity i.e. defensive fighting as opposed to offensive fighting. Others went further to say that Jihad is of the ‘nafs’ and overcoming desires only, calling it the ‘Great Jihad’, further saying that it is better than the small Jihad which is ‘qitaal’ (fighting). Such are those that have become lazy and feeble, with their hearts filled with the fear of the enemy.
So the protection of the Deen, hatred of the Kuffar and the love of Jihad has become replaced with the protection of the nation-state (nationalism), pleasing the colonialists and the love of excessive material gain. Since these incorrect concepts have become common between Muslims and the clear definition of Jihad is absent from the minds, the incentive and love to do Jihad, for many, has died (though the increased hostility and aggression of the western nations in the Islamic lands has served to re-kindle the correct desire).It is, therefore, naturally important to clarify this matter such that the Muslims are able to refute the erroneous misunderstandings that exist, refute false claims and rekindle the love of Jihad.
Greater/Smaller Jihad
Firstly, the common understanding of Muslims is that Jihad is divided into two sections: Jihad ul-Akbar (the ‘Greater Jihad’), which is connected to Jihad ul-Nafs i.e. fighting the inner desires and shaiytan etc… Jihad ul-Asghar (the ‘Smaller Jihad’), which is fighting the kaafir enemy in battles and what is related to it.Of the evidences that are quoted from the Islamic texts, the main one is the hadith, where Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: “We have arrived from the small Jihad to the great Jihad”. So they asked, “What is the great Jihad?” He (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) replied, “It is Jihad ul-Nafs (against the inner self).”
In another narration, Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) referred to the“…Jihad of the slave against his desires.”Though it is correct that there is a Jihad against the nafs, like against shaiytan, however, it is not greater in the sight of Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) from the physical Jihad against the Kuffar and it (Jihad ul-Nafs) does not cancel nor invalidate it.This Jihad against the Kaafir enemies is continuous until the Day of Judgment as is the Jihad against the nafs also continuous until the Day of Judgement. But one should know that the evidences of doing Jihad against the nafs are different to the evidences of Jihad against the Kuffar.
Each has a situation different from the other (context) and it is not permitted to mix the two or to use the evidence of one for the other or to change one in place of the other. Rather there is a need for each, but in its correct context and each of them is a responsibility when put in their correct contexts.This is why saying that ‘Jihad ul-nafs’ is better and greater in the sight of Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) is both very dangerous and an outright mistake, which contradicts the understanding of Jihad in the Way of Allah.
It is invalid from many angles:
1. Jihad has two meanings as mentioned previously, a linguistic and a shariyah meaning. Jihad of the nafs comes under the linguistic meaning and not the shariyah meaning.
2. The evidences used to say that Jihad ul-nafs is greater than Jihad against the Kuffar cannot be used to prove this and this is clear from the reality of the evidences that are used. This is because,
a. The hadith is ‘mardood riwayatan’
b. The hadith is ‘mardood dirayatan’
With regards to its invalidation from narration that is because the hadith is weak ‘Da’eef’ as is clarified in Al-Ajmi Al-Saghir by Imam Suyuti. As for its invalidation by meaning that is because it is contradicting definite text, which makes Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah obligatory and makes it the greatest of action.This can be seen from three aspects:
a. The verses that mention the value of the Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah and that it is from the best actions like the verse:
لاَّ يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ غَيْرُ أُوْلِي الضَّرَرِ وَالْمُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ فَضَّلَ اللّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ دَرَجَةً وَكُـلاًّ وَعَدَ اللّهُ الْحُسْنَى وَفَضَّلَ اللّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا
“Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah has granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). To all (in Faith) has Allah promised good. But those who strive and fight has He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward.”
(tmq 4:95)
b. The verses that praise Jihad and the Mujahideen Fi Sabeel Lillah like the verse,
لَـكِنِ الرَّسُولُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَعَهُ جَاهَدُواْ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ لَهُمُ الْخَيْرَاتُ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ
“But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper.”
(tmq 9:88)
إِنَّ اللّهَ اشْتَرَى مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَنفُسَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُم بِأَنَّ لَهُمُ الجَنَّةَ يُقَاتِلُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ فَيَقْتُلُونَ وَيُقْتَلُونَ وَعْدًا عَلَيْهِ حَقًّا فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَالإِنجِيلِ وَالْقُرْآنِ وَمَنْ أَوْفَى بِعَهْدِهِ مِنَ اللّهِ فَاسْتَبْشِرُواْ بِبَيْعِكُمُ الَّذِي بَايَعْتُم بِهِ وَذَلِكَ هُوَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ
"Allah has purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.”
(tmq 9:111)
c. The verses that condemn and promises punishment to those who do not participate in Jihad, the ones left behind and the lazy neglectful ones,
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَا لَكُمْ إِذَا قِيلَ لَكُمُ انفِرُواْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ اثَّاقَلْتُمْ إِلَى الأَرْضِ أَرَضِيتُم بِالْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا مِنَ الآخِرَةِ فَمَا مَتَاعُ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا فِي الآخِرَةِ إِلاَّ قَلِيلٌ
“O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that, when you are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, you cling heavily to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter.”
(tmq 9:38)
In addition to this are the sayings of Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) that the best action to Allah is Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah and the fighting (qitaal) against the Kuffar: From the many narrations, Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, ”Taking a journey in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) is better than the duniya and what is in it.”“Those who guard (the borders) for one day in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) is better than the duniya and what is in it.” ”If anyone takes a position in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) it is better than his prayer ‘salah’ in his house for 70 years. Don’t you want Allah to forgive you your sins and enter you in the Jannah? Invade, in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah).”
Therefore what has been mentioned in the text shows clearly that Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah is one of the best actions and of the highest degree, which is clearly shown by the shariyah indicators, ‘Qarain’, that connect praise, condemnation, reward and punishment to expose the fact that Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah is greater and better than Jihad against the nafs. This is why the hadith is invalid in meaning ‘dirayatan’ because it contradicts the definite texts and therefore it is invalid ‘baatil’ to use as an evidence (i.e. to show that Jihad ul-nafs is a greater action).
Is Jihad is defensive only?
As for the opinion that Jihad in Islam is defensive and not offensive by using the evidence (and similar evidences):
وَإِنْ جَنَحُوا لِلسَّلْمِ فَاجْنَحْ لَهَا وَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ
“But if the enemy incline towards peace, do you (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that Hears and Knows (all things)”
(tmq 8:61)
وَقَاتِلُوا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ وَلَا تَعْتَدُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ الْمُعْتَدِينَ
Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors.”
(tmq 2:190)
This is also incorrect and invalid for its application upon this matter is incorrect for the following reasons:
1. The evidences of Jihad are general ‘mutlaq’ evidences and include all offensive and defensive actions e.g. waging warm to pre-empt an attack, to protect the borders, killing on the battlefield. To restrict or specify the evidences only to defensive and not offensive Jihad, requires a textual evidence to show that the Jihad is restricted to defensive Jihad only. And there is no such text in the Quran or the Sunnah that restricts or specifies this. Therefore, the evidences regarding Jihad remain general and to be used for all types of war and all types of fighting with the enemy. So it is invalid (baatil) to use the verse,
وَإِن جَنَحُواْ لِلسَّلْمِ فَاجْنَحْ لَهَا
“But if the enemy incline towards peace, do you…”
(tmq 8:61),
to show that Jihad is only defensive.
That is also the case with the rest of the evidences that are used by proponents of this erroneous understanding. This and similar verses cannot be used to specify or restrict the generality of the verses in surah al-Tawba because they were the last verses revealed regarding Jihad and what came prior to these verses regarding Jihad does not specify the verses which were revealed after them or came afterwards. And the verse does not restrict the latter revealed verses either. There has to be a text present to restrict or specify the general verse and they also must be revealed after the initial, which are general or mutlaq or even they (i.e. those verses which are restricted or specific) should be mentioned together with the general verses so that the two situations can be shown (i.e. to show the different situations upon which they apply). So Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) says: وَإِن جَنَحُواْ لِلسَّلْمِ , which is regarding the time of the peace. And He (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) says,
قَاتِلُواْ الَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَلاَ بِالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَلاَ يُحَرِّمُونَ مَا حَرَّمَ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَلاَ يَدِينُونَ دِينَ الْحَقِّ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ حَتَّى يُعْطُواْ الْجِزْيَةَ عَن يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَاغِرُونَ
“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued”,
(tmq 9:29)
which is at the time of war and fighting.
So peace and fighting are two situations, which remain un-abrogated, i.e. neither abrogates the other.
2. In addition to this, the saying and actions of Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) show that Jihad definitely is to start (offensive) fighting the kuffar to make the Words of Allah the highest and to propagate (da’wa) the call of Islam. Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said,
“I have been ordered to fight the people until they bear witness that, ‘there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger’ and they establish the prayer and the zakat. And if they do this, then from me is protected their blood and their wealth except by the right granted by Allah.”
As for his (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) actions, they are full of actions that show Jihad is to start the fighting. So when he went out to Badr to take the caravan belonging to the Quraysh, this was going out to fight, this is offensive – as Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) initiated the action before the Quraysh.
Likewise, when Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) invaded Hawazin in the battle of Hunayn, when he (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) seiged Ta’if and the battle of Mutah to fight the Romans and the Battle of Tabuk – all of these are evidences to show that Jihad is to start fighting kuffar (offensive). This should clarify the erroneous view that in origin Jihad is defensive.
3. From Ijma as-Sahabah, it is clear that Jihad is fighting Fi Sabeel Lillah to carry Islam and that it is offensive. The evidence, which is sufficient to explain this, is the opening of Iraq, Persia, Sham, Egypt and North Africa. They were all opened at the time of the Sahabah with their Ijma’ (consensus). Therefore, all what we mentioned are sufficient evidences to refute the claim that Jihad is defensive.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Muslims should gain the confidence to present the reality of Jihad to our ummah and raise the level of thinking on this issue such that the Muslims become clearer about its meaning, obligation, gain an increased love for it and importantly, understand the contexts in which it exists and is applied.The Islamic Ummah, served with the responsibility to present and guard Islam should not allow the rulers over the Islamic lands to pollute the meaning of Jihad and remove its love from the hearts of the believers. Indeed, the Islamic Ummah should not allow these rulers to commit the greater crime to rule over her by other than Islam and dilute the purity of the whole of Islam with their shamelessness, implementation of kufr and humiliating subservience to a part of the creation i.e. their colonial masters, instead of their subservience to the Creator and Master of all that is seen and unseen, Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala).
As for the interaction with the non-Muslims, it is important that the Muslims have the clarity and strength to tackle the malicious, incorrect and hateful propaganda that is focussed on Jihad that is presented as barbaric against peaceful people with the objective to force them to embrace Islam by compulsion and the sword.The Islamic ummah should tackle this from two perspectives.
Firstly, the Muslims should expose the violent, barbaric and inhumane foreign policy of the ‘civilised’ colonial powers that have destroyed nations, states and people; left millions to starve for the sake of securing capitalist interests, appointed and protected oppressive regimes that suppress the will of their people; plundered resources of the lesser developed and invade lands with brute force, terrorising the local civilian people with indiscriminate policies of killing, imprisonment, rape, ‘carpet bombing’; razing whole villages and towns into the ground; and forcing the people to adopt their life-styles, values and political structures. What right do such people have after witnessing the implementation of such a wicked and brutal foreign policy with their own eyes – in South America, Africa, Palestine, Afghanistan and more recently in Iraq, from the various credible news sources – to even begin laying a criticism against Jihad.Non-Muslims need to see the reality of their own governments and not be blinded the hysterical and deceitful propaganda that increasingly is aimed at Islam and its values.
Secondly, Muslims should demonstrate some of the rules that surround Jihad and state that offensively carrying the struggle against non-Islam does not permit Muslims to compel the local people to embrace Islam. This is because Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala) does not allow compulsion:
لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ
"There is no compulsion in deen"
(tmq)
Likewise Islam does not allow the exploitation, plundering, razing and desecration of places of worship, people’s homes and honour – when Jihad is carried offensively. Rather Jihad is carried offensively to cleanse the earth from the kufr, with the implementation of Islam as a system thus liberating man from the rule of man. The history of the Islamic conquests, the presence of Christians and Jews, who lived in security and prosperity under the Islamic State and the safe-haven that the Islamic authority provided for people savaged by the forefathers of the modern colonialists is sufficient proof for this.On the horizon, as the struggle between Iman and kufr increases day by day – it is imperative for the Muslims to hold to the truth of Islam, its rules and not permit the dilution of its intellectual wealth – a wealth which soon will transform the darkness of colonial rule to the mercy and shade of the Islamic authority, Al-Khilafah, by Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta'ala's) permission.
Sunday, 23 March 2008
Invasion of Iraq
The Iraq Invasion, the War on Islam, Consequences and the Way Forward
The media and policy discourse on the Iraq war over the last 5 years has focused on and evolved around issues such as civil war, the Sunni-Shia divide, the involvement of external actors such as Iran and Syria. However, an important issue which needs to be emphasised is how the Iraqi war and the subsequent occupation is linked to the Western objective of weakening and containing the growth of Islamic revivalism in the Muslim world.
Post Cold War, Francis Fukuyama's in his seminal work ‘the end of history', argued that liberal democracy had triumphed and its promotion had to be the key basis of US foreign policy around the world. This declaration was naïve to say the least; at best it was a knee jerk reaction to the collapse of the Soviet Union, as ideological revival had taken root in the Muslim world since the 1960s and had been developing strength in the region. It is subsequently this region where the US would face its main challenge, in tackling Islamic revivalism in the world.
The Clinton administration relied on the promotion of globalisation, with the belief that economic growth would lead to democratic and secular development in the region. This characterised the behaviour of international financial institutions and aid agencies in the region, which were linking aid and funding to economic liberalisation and the development of free markets. However, this US policy failed to take the ideological revival off its course, with Islamic movements and their ideological call growing in strength in the context of capitalistic economic and models of development in the region. The post 9/11 period, would see a radical shift in US foreign policy towards the region, directed by the neoconservatives, which had wanted a more clearer and sharper policy for the Muslim world since the early 1990s and had lobbied the Clinton administration to take on board their views, however this failed and the 9/11 events, the subsequent emotions and outcry, allowed the neoconservatives to manipulate public sentiments to begin its war on terror, which has become synonymous with a war on Islam. The neoconservatives have linked US national security to the Middle East, and have realised the ideological threat and challenge which Political Islam poses to US national interests, in particular the ever important oil and gas supplies from the region, which has become more important given the growth of China and its growing need for hydrocarbon energy. As a result, the need to weaken the strength of political Islam has shaped US foreign policy towards the region post 9/11. This policy has involved the following;
1) The weakening and breaking up of Muslim states i.e. the fragmentation of Iraq and similar situation developing in Pakistan 2) The creation of ethnic and religious divisions i.e. Sunni-Shia divide, through the Iraq chaos and the escalation of the Iranian threat and through statements made by Arab leaders, such as King Abdullah and Hosni Mubarak who have spoken of a Shia Crescent in the region 3) Giving the green light to Israeli aggression in Lebanon, with the US aware that the ramifications of the conflict would be wider and impacting the whole region i.e. refugees, ethnic and religious divisions. 4) Turning a blind eye to increased authoritarianism in the region, for example the Islamic movement has been hounded in countries, such as Egypt, Jordan and Central Asia
Therefore, the US has post 9/11 used the war in Afghanistan and particularly the invasion of Iraq to try to weaken the growth of Islam in the region. However the US and the West have also had an eye on Muslim populations in the West, in particular due to the failure to secularise them and giving them a nationalist identity, which replaces their Islamic transnational identity as one Ummah. As a result the West has fashioned and crafted policies to create secular identities among the Muslims, there has been an increased emphasis on patriotism in the US, with flags outside peoples homes a common seen and people being seen as been unpatriotic and to an extent committing treason, if a flag is not apparent forcing Muslims into developing a secular national identity, loyal to the US and her troops in Iraq.
Similarly this has been a common trend throughout Europe, with governments introducing policies, such as citizenship classes, ceremonies, tests, and oath of allegiances, with them clearly being directed towards the Muslim communities in Europe. Behind, all of this has been the objective to cut off the Muslim community from the Muslim world and to give it a French, British, and Germany identity, meaning that the Muslims would support European governments in the war on terror rather than supporting the movement for Khilafah in the region. Therefore, it is clear that Western policy has been double edged, one focusing on the Muslim world and the other to Muslims in the West, but with both edges directed towards taking the wind out of the sail of Islamic revivalism.
US Presidential Elections: Withdrawal from Iraq and the Muslim world?
An important question to answer is the impact of the impending US presidential elections on the occupation of Iraq and military presence in the Muslim world. The Republican candidate John McCain is a supporter of the war on terror, supported the Iraq invasion and supported the Bush administrations surge policy in Iraq. Therefore, McCain coming to power is not likely to substantially change US foreign policy to Iraq and the Muslim world and its objectives driving the policy. In relation to the democrats, Hilary Clinton supported the war in Iraq and now has been arguing for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and this is similar to Barak Obama. However, it is fair to say that the democrats are playing on the anti-war opinion in the US and manipulating this for political electoral points. The democrats and the republicans differ on styles in terms of executing US foreign policy but at heart they are both driven by US interests and her main interest post 9/11 is to tackle the growing demand for Khilafah in the region and this is going to continue to shape and drive US foreign policy post US presidential election in November 2008. This means that the instability and insecurity, which has characterised the Middle East post 9/11 is to continue, plunging the region into a further abyss, whether the democrats of republicans take control of Washington in November 2008.
The Way Forward for the Iraq and the Muslim World
The only way for the region, is Islam implemented by the Khilafah (Islamic State), this is the only ideology which is able to bring unity, stability and security to the region. Islam is linked to the region, through religion, culture and history, giving it a natural environment through which it can emerge in state and society. This is in direct contrast to external models of government and economics which are European centric, leading to inevitable conflict with the regions culture and history. The situation which we are seeing today in Iraq, the chaos and the Sunni-Shia divide is unprecedented, with that territory having never witnessed the bloodshed which it sees today. The ethnic and religious groupings lived in a cohesive society for centuries, under the mosaic of an Islamic political system, which was disturbed by colonialism post Ottomans and the subsequent colonial involvement, epitomised by the Iraq War.
The region is at an important juncture 5 years on from the Iraq war, US policy is causing instability and insecurity and there is a need for a paradigm change in the region, with political Islam taking root and acting as the means of dealing with the problems of the region, caused by authoritarianism and US policy. This needed change is now sensed by the majority of the people who wish to live under the systems of the Shariah and the unity of the Khilafah system.
The media and policy discourse on the Iraq war over the last 5 years has focused on and evolved around issues such as civil war, the Sunni-Shia divide, the involvement of external actors such as Iran and Syria. However, an important issue which needs to be emphasised is how the Iraqi war and the subsequent occupation is linked to the Western objective of weakening and containing the growth of Islamic revivalism in the Muslim world.
Post Cold War, Francis Fukuyama's in his seminal work ‘the end of history', argued that liberal democracy had triumphed and its promotion had to be the key basis of US foreign policy around the world. This declaration was naïve to say the least; at best it was a knee jerk reaction to the collapse of the Soviet Union, as ideological revival had taken root in the Muslim world since the 1960s and had been developing strength in the region. It is subsequently this region where the US would face its main challenge, in tackling Islamic revivalism in the world.
The Clinton administration relied on the promotion of globalisation, with the belief that economic growth would lead to democratic and secular development in the region. This characterised the behaviour of international financial institutions and aid agencies in the region, which were linking aid and funding to economic liberalisation and the development of free markets. However, this US policy failed to take the ideological revival off its course, with Islamic movements and their ideological call growing in strength in the context of capitalistic economic and models of development in the region. The post 9/11 period, would see a radical shift in US foreign policy towards the region, directed by the neoconservatives, which had wanted a more clearer and sharper policy for the Muslim world since the early 1990s and had lobbied the Clinton administration to take on board their views, however this failed and the 9/11 events, the subsequent emotions and outcry, allowed the neoconservatives to manipulate public sentiments to begin its war on terror, which has become synonymous with a war on Islam. The neoconservatives have linked US national security to the Middle East, and have realised the ideological threat and challenge which Political Islam poses to US national interests, in particular the ever important oil and gas supplies from the region, which has become more important given the growth of China and its growing need for hydrocarbon energy. As a result, the need to weaken the strength of political Islam has shaped US foreign policy towards the region post 9/11. This policy has involved the following;
1) The weakening and breaking up of Muslim states i.e. the fragmentation of Iraq and similar situation developing in Pakistan 2) The creation of ethnic and religious divisions i.e. Sunni-Shia divide, through the Iraq chaos and the escalation of the Iranian threat and through statements made by Arab leaders, such as King Abdullah and Hosni Mubarak who have spoken of a Shia Crescent in the region 3) Giving the green light to Israeli aggression in Lebanon, with the US aware that the ramifications of the conflict would be wider and impacting the whole region i.e. refugees, ethnic and religious divisions. 4) Turning a blind eye to increased authoritarianism in the region, for example the Islamic movement has been hounded in countries, such as Egypt, Jordan and Central Asia
Therefore, the US has post 9/11 used the war in Afghanistan and particularly the invasion of Iraq to try to weaken the growth of Islam in the region. However the US and the West have also had an eye on Muslim populations in the West, in particular due to the failure to secularise them and giving them a nationalist identity, which replaces their Islamic transnational identity as one Ummah. As a result the West has fashioned and crafted policies to create secular identities among the Muslims, there has been an increased emphasis on patriotism in the US, with flags outside peoples homes a common seen and people being seen as been unpatriotic and to an extent committing treason, if a flag is not apparent forcing Muslims into developing a secular national identity, loyal to the US and her troops in Iraq.
Similarly this has been a common trend throughout Europe, with governments introducing policies, such as citizenship classes, ceremonies, tests, and oath of allegiances, with them clearly being directed towards the Muslim communities in Europe. Behind, all of this has been the objective to cut off the Muslim community from the Muslim world and to give it a French, British, and Germany identity, meaning that the Muslims would support European governments in the war on terror rather than supporting the movement for Khilafah in the region. Therefore, it is clear that Western policy has been double edged, one focusing on the Muslim world and the other to Muslims in the West, but with both edges directed towards taking the wind out of the sail of Islamic revivalism.
US Presidential Elections: Withdrawal from Iraq and the Muslim world?
An important question to answer is the impact of the impending US presidential elections on the occupation of Iraq and military presence in the Muslim world. The Republican candidate John McCain is a supporter of the war on terror, supported the Iraq invasion and supported the Bush administrations surge policy in Iraq. Therefore, McCain coming to power is not likely to substantially change US foreign policy to Iraq and the Muslim world and its objectives driving the policy. In relation to the democrats, Hilary Clinton supported the war in Iraq and now has been arguing for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and this is similar to Barak Obama. However, it is fair to say that the democrats are playing on the anti-war opinion in the US and manipulating this for political electoral points. The democrats and the republicans differ on styles in terms of executing US foreign policy but at heart they are both driven by US interests and her main interest post 9/11 is to tackle the growing demand for Khilafah in the region and this is going to continue to shape and drive US foreign policy post US presidential election in November 2008. This means that the instability and insecurity, which has characterised the Middle East post 9/11 is to continue, plunging the region into a further abyss, whether the democrats of republicans take control of Washington in November 2008.
The Way Forward for the Iraq and the Muslim World
The only way for the region, is Islam implemented by the Khilafah (Islamic State), this is the only ideology which is able to bring unity, stability and security to the region. Islam is linked to the region, through religion, culture and history, giving it a natural environment through which it can emerge in state and society. This is in direct contrast to external models of government and economics which are European centric, leading to inevitable conflict with the regions culture and history. The situation which we are seeing today in Iraq, the chaos and the Sunni-Shia divide is unprecedented, with that territory having never witnessed the bloodshed which it sees today. The ethnic and religious groupings lived in a cohesive society for centuries, under the mosaic of an Islamic political system, which was disturbed by colonialism post Ottomans and the subsequent colonial involvement, epitomised by the Iraq War.
The region is at an important juncture 5 years on from the Iraq war, US policy is causing instability and insecurity and there is a need for a paradigm change in the region, with political Islam taking root and acting as the means of dealing with the problems of the region, caused by authoritarianism and US policy. This needed change is now sensed by the majority of the people who wish to live under the systems of the Shariah and the unity of the Khilafah system.
Monday, 25 February 2008
Islamic Manifesto
Hizb ut-Tahrir Bangladesh organized a press conference on (January 06, 2007) at the national pressvclub to present the party’s Islamic Manifesto. Chief Coordinator & Spokesman of Hizb ut-Tahrir Bangladesh, Mohiuddin Ahmed said in his written statement that the current politics led by Awami League (AL) and Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) has brought chaos to the lives of the people and failed to achieve the aspirations of the people. The corrupt power politics of AL-BNP and their allies has not only neglected the people’s affairs and denied them their rights; they have also forsaken the sovereignty and security of the nation. Our economy is unable to progress due to the imperialist control and their exploitation of our national resources.The people of this country have been deceived and betrayed by the elected governments of the past 15 years. The time has come for the nation to reject the politics of benefit and looting and to establish the ruling which will unite the nation and achieve progress. The Khilafah government is the only method for uniting the nation, securing the basic needs of the people, protecting national sovereignty and security and freeing the economy from imperialist control. More importantly establishing the Khilafah is a vital shariah obligation on the Muslims.
Hence Hizb ut-Tahrir Bangladesh presents this Islamic manifesto as an alternative to the current political system. The manifesto includes details of the Khilafah ruling system, its central and local government structure, the method of electing and accounting the ruler and the structure of the judiciary. It also discusses the method of securing the basic rights of the people including separate sections on the rights of workers, women and non-Muslims. The manifesto details the education, energy, industry, agriculture, foreign and defense policies of the Khilafah government.
The major points about the Khilafah government stated in the manifesto are mentioned below:
1. The people will be able to elect the head of state (Khaleefah) of their choice without violence, terror and intimidation.
2. The Khaleefah will rule by the Quran and the Sunnah based on his fear of accountability to Allah (SWT) and work to guarantee the basic rights of its citizens regardless of their religion or ethnicity. Therefore, the politicians have no opportunity to do politics for achieving their personal interest or the interests of their parties and allies.
3. The Majlis al-Ummah and the Court of Unjust Acts will account the Khaleefah to ensure that he is guaranteeing the basic needs of the people and running the government according to the Quran and Sunnah.
4. The Khilafah state will adopt the policy of becoming a leading state within the region as well asinternationally. Therefore the Khaleefah will not be cowardly and submissive in front of the imperialists nor will he forsake the interests of the nation in return for money and power. Similarly the politicians of the Islamic state will not call upon the imperialists to intervene in our internal affairs.
5. The government in the Islamic state is not permitted to allow private or foreign ownership of national resources. Rather the Khaleefah is obliged by the Quran and Sunnah to make proper use of national resources to build a strong economy free from any imperialist control.
Monday, 18 February 2008
The Sword
Using the Sword to Spread Western Values
Whenever western governments mention weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and Muslims in the same breath, the western media immediately breaks into wild frenzy warning its people that a catastrophic event of epic proportions is about to unfold.
Old European fables of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword are reinvented to convey the impression that Muslims are extremely dangerous, highly irresponsible and pay scant regard to human life. Hence the mantra of disarming Muslim countries of WMD has become the rallying cry of the West directed against the Muslim world.
In some cases the arguments are extended to justify the West’s ongoing policy of regime change in Syria, Iran and perhaps Pakistan. However, a close study of Islamic rule in the past contradicts the popular western myth that Muslims are bloodthirsty people anxious to wipe out the rest of mankind in the name of Islam.
The same however, cannot be said about the West. The West armed with its secular doctrine and materialistic world-view proceeded to exploit, plunder and colonise vast populations in order to control resources and maximise wealth.
In pursuit of these newfound riches the West succeeded in destroying civilisation such as the Incas, American Indians, Aztecs, and Aborigines. Those who survived colonisation were forcibly converted to Christianity, stripped of their heritage and sold into bondage to western companies. For the indigenous people of Africa, India, Asia, Middle East and others, the promises of freedom quickly evaporated and were replaced by colonial rule. Rather than show remorse towards such atrocities the West could only gloat at its achievements.
Technologies such as cannons, pistols, steam engines, machine guns, aeroplanes, mustard gas etc only hastened the acquisition of colonies and the exploitation of its people. Resistance offered by the natives towards their colonial masters was met by brute force – often resulting in the destruction of entire communities. When the West was not destroying the natives they were too busy annihilating each other in a desperate bid to cling on to their precious colonies. World Wars I and II are prime examples of the destructive nature of western values.
This is a description of the Old World where countries like England, France, and Germany built empires and accumulated immense wealth on the death and destruction of millions of innocent people. Is the New World (America leading the West) any different today?
Take the example of the New World and its relationship with Afghanistan and Iraq. Liberation has become occupation; democracy has given way to colonial rule, devastation is termed as precision bombing and the slaughter of innocent Muslims is described as collateral damage. Meanwhile, American and British oil companies are queuing up to exploit the oil wells of Iraq and transport the energy reserves of the Caspian Sea to Europe via Afghanistan.
The Islamic Khilafah in the past never treated mankind in such a barbaric fashion. Neither did the Khilafah spread Islam by force nor destroy civilisations. When Islam spread to Egypt, many Coptic Christians did not embrace Islam and today they still number approximately 7 million. Likewise, when India was opened up to Islam the inhabitants were not coerced into accepting Islam. India today has a population of more than 750 million Hindus.
Compare this to extermination of Muslim and Jews in the courts of the Spanish Inquisitors during the much-coveted European renaissance. Those Jews that survived this Spanish holocaust, were warmly welcomed by the Ottoman Caliphate. In Islamic Spain they flourished and became important members of the Islamic society.
Today the world has more to fear from the destructive nature of western values than WMD. In the past these values were enforced upon nations either through direct colonial rule or through tyrannical regimes loyal to the West. Presently, the greatest danger-facing mankind is the constant threat of the West imposing its values on the rest of the world through WMD.
Whenever western governments mention weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and Muslims in the same breath, the western media immediately breaks into wild frenzy warning its people that a catastrophic event of epic proportions is about to unfold.
Old European fables of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword are reinvented to convey the impression that Muslims are extremely dangerous, highly irresponsible and pay scant regard to human life. Hence the mantra of disarming Muslim countries of WMD has become the rallying cry of the West directed against the Muslim world.
In some cases the arguments are extended to justify the West’s ongoing policy of regime change in Syria, Iran and perhaps Pakistan. However, a close study of Islamic rule in the past contradicts the popular western myth that Muslims are bloodthirsty people anxious to wipe out the rest of mankind in the name of Islam.
The same however, cannot be said about the West. The West armed with its secular doctrine and materialistic world-view proceeded to exploit, plunder and colonise vast populations in order to control resources and maximise wealth.
In pursuit of these newfound riches the West succeeded in destroying civilisation such as the Incas, American Indians, Aztecs, and Aborigines. Those who survived colonisation were forcibly converted to Christianity, stripped of their heritage and sold into bondage to western companies. For the indigenous people of Africa, India, Asia, Middle East and others, the promises of freedom quickly evaporated and were replaced by colonial rule. Rather than show remorse towards such atrocities the West could only gloat at its achievements.
Technologies such as cannons, pistols, steam engines, machine guns, aeroplanes, mustard gas etc only hastened the acquisition of colonies and the exploitation of its people. Resistance offered by the natives towards their colonial masters was met by brute force – often resulting in the destruction of entire communities. When the West was not destroying the natives they were too busy annihilating each other in a desperate bid to cling on to their precious colonies. World Wars I and II are prime examples of the destructive nature of western values.
This is a description of the Old World where countries like England, France, and Germany built empires and accumulated immense wealth on the death and destruction of millions of innocent people. Is the New World (America leading the West) any different today?
Take the example of the New World and its relationship with Afghanistan and Iraq. Liberation has become occupation; democracy has given way to colonial rule, devastation is termed as precision bombing and the slaughter of innocent Muslims is described as collateral damage. Meanwhile, American and British oil companies are queuing up to exploit the oil wells of Iraq and transport the energy reserves of the Caspian Sea to Europe via Afghanistan.
The Islamic Khilafah in the past never treated mankind in such a barbaric fashion. Neither did the Khilafah spread Islam by force nor destroy civilisations. When Islam spread to Egypt, many Coptic Christians did not embrace Islam and today they still number approximately 7 million. Likewise, when India was opened up to Islam the inhabitants were not coerced into accepting Islam. India today has a population of more than 750 million Hindus.
Compare this to extermination of Muslim and Jews in the courts of the Spanish Inquisitors during the much-coveted European renaissance. Those Jews that survived this Spanish holocaust, were warmly welcomed by the Ottoman Caliphate. In Islamic Spain they flourished and became important members of the Islamic society.
Today the world has more to fear from the destructive nature of western values than WMD. In the past these values were enforced upon nations either through direct colonial rule or through tyrannical regimes loyal to the West. Presently, the greatest danger-facing mankind is the constant threat of the West imposing its values on the rest of the world through WMD.
Monday, 4 February 2008
Amanah of the Da’wah
Appreciating the Amanah (responsibility) of the Da’wah
It is noticed that some of us may not take the Amanah or the responsibility of the Da’wah in the manner it should be taken, some may take it in a light manner such that it is not the centre of their attention and highest priority in their mind. Rather we sometimes see people get dominated by their job, family, studies and other Dunyawi (worldly) matters that lead them to betray the Amanah (responsibility) of Da’wah.Therefore it is necessary to clarify the meaning of the Amanah, the importance of fulfilling it, the consequences of betraying it and how should it practically manifest.The Amanah means the trust or responsibility. It has been mentioned in relation to various issues in the texts upon our necks is something mentioned. It has been mentioned in relating to issues such as keeping a promise, keeping the private affairs of someone to yourself and the like. However the root meaning which we are concerned with today is the responsibility of the Deen and its conveyance.It should be understood that the concept of Amanah (Trust) has been given to us since the time Allah Azza wa Jall created mankind. Allah offered the trust to the Heavens and they refused, He Al Malik (Sovereign) offered it to the Earth and it refused, He Al Aziz (The Mighty) offered it to the Mountains and they refused then He Al Muhaymin (Giver of Protection) offered it to Man and he was indeed foolish and accepted it. Allah says in Surah Al-Ahzab (The Confederates):
إِنَّا عَرَضْنَا الْأَمَانَةَ عَلَى السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَالْجِبَالِ فَأَبَيْنَ أَنْ يَحْمِلْنَهَا وَأَشْفَقْنَ مِنْهَا وَحَمَلَهَا الْإِنْسَانُ إِنَّهُ كَانَ ظَلُومًا جَهُولًا
“Truly, We did offer Al-Amânah (the trust or moral responsibility or honesty and all the duties which Allâh has ordained) to the heavens and the earth, and the mountains, but they declined to bear it and were afraid of it (i.e. afraid of Allâh's Torment). But man bore it. Verily, he was unjust (to himself) and ignorant (of its results).”
[TMQ 33: 72]
The Prophet (saaw) gave the concept of Amanah such a degree of importance and the responsibility that accompanies it, that he (saw) equated its negligence to Hypocrisy, When He Nabieena (saw) said in a Hadith narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira
"Signs of a hypocrite are three: whenever he speaks he lies; whenever he promises, he breaks his promises; and whenever he has been entrusted, be betrays his trust; even if he fasts and prays and even if he claims he is a Muslim."
[Bukhari & Muslim]
And in another narration in the book of Imam Bukhari on the authority of Abdullah Ibn Umar:“The Prophet said, "Whoever has (the following) four characters will be a hypocrite, and whoever has one of the following four characteristics will have one characteristic of hypocrisy until he gives it up. These are: (1) Whenever he talks, he tells a lie; (2) whenever he makes a promise, he breaks it; (3) whenever he makes a covenant he proves treacherous; (4) and whenever he quarrels, he behaves impudently in an evil insulting manner."
We should think about ourselves – do we have this characteristic of Nifaq (hypocrisy)? Are we truly fulfilling the responsibility of the da’wah. If I was to ask you today – how many of you think you are committing a great sin? Maybe you would think that you are safe from that and that you may only fall into the minor sins now and again. However we need to be careful, if we do not fulfil the Amanah of the Da’wah which is the greatest of the Amanat today, then we will definitely fall into great sin as in reality it would be a great betrayal of this trust.We need to realise clearly that we are not free from the responsibility just because we are studying in halaqat and engaging in some actions of da’wah. The weight of the problems of the world – all of the evils including the killing of our brothers in Iraq, the abuse of our sisters in Palestine, the insults upon the Prophet (saw) by the Kuffar, the disrespect of the Quran in Guantanomo bay where they throw it in the toilets and where they urinate on it – the obligation to change all of these evils is upon our necks unless we are working to our utmost for the true solution to them, the Islamic Khilafah.
So we do not know whether the sin upon our necks as we mention in the hadith, “Whoseover dies without the bay’ah on the neck dies the death of Jahilliyah” [Muslim] Whether this sin is lifted from our neck or not, because the lifting of the sin is conditional upon the effort we are making in order establish that Khalifah to give the Bay’ah to.This requires serious effort, discipline, organisation, hard work, sleepless nights and perseverance in the da’wah. Only studying in halaqa two hours a week and talking to people now and again is not acceptable, it will not relieve the sin. Unless we couple that with true activity in order to win people to the true Fikrah (thought).
Contacting people
We should understand what that actually means for ourselves. It was mentioned in the leaflet by the pioneers of the da’wah for Khilafah:“You are responsible for establishing it in the Ummah. You are the most sensitive in the Ummah, possessing the deepest thought. How would you then accept to sleep while you are in a race with Kufr? If Kufr wins, you very well know what the result will be. Kufr has called all of its supporters against you in order to stop you. After your supporters have fallen, you would not have any support except that of the Ummah when it sees your zeal and sincerity and adopts your ideology. It will embrace your ideology when it realizes that you are neither ignorant nor a coward. This is the practical manifestation of your work.”
It also said:
“Let us learn from them how Allah grants victory, how they built themselves through the hardship of carrying the Da'wa and through establishing the Aqeedah in themselves and in the society. The ideology will not be established in the people and society until we establish it in ourselves by living with the people, educating them, convincing them, caring for them, and discussing with them until they adopt it. This will create ideological awareness which leads to public awareness in favour of the ideology. As a result, the ideology becomes the basis for people's ideas and feelings. Once it is established in such a manner, it guarantees that Islam is alive in reality and is applied….I would like to remind you that when the Prophet (saaw) began his mission, the resistance was stiff even to the very concept of Prophethood. But once the concept of Prophethood was established, even others started to claim it, like Sujah and Musailamah among others.
All of this is regarding strengthening the ideology in ourselves and in the Ummah…all of you should realize the importance of the task and the heavy burden we carry… the idea needs people to carry it in such a way that it becomes the air they breathe and the glasses they see with i.e., people who are completely occupied with the ideology. Also, their number should be enough to carry the Da'wa, to structure the Ummah, to establish the State, and to supervise the application of Islam once the state is established.Your number, no matter how big, will always be less than what you need today and after establishing the State. The issue of developing…and pumping new blood into it is a very important one. Naturally, it cannot be achieved through prayers and Ibadah even though such things motivate and inspire; it requires hard and well orchestrated efforts.
This means we should focus on winning people over. They are good in nature. They are our supporters, because they accepted our ideas…It is wrong to think that there is no good in the Ummah or that winning people is impossible. We are not able to win the people because of us, not them or the harsh environment or people revolving around their interests.”
It continues:
“Thus, every Shab…should make visits for the sole aim of winning people. He should not view it as a secondary thing or talk about it during a political talk but the effort should be fully dedicated towards winning people. Let each one of you go through the list of people he knows and add to that list and start working to win them. For Allah's sake, ask yourself: how many people did I win…how many visits did I perform in the last ten years or a given period of time to win the people? I leave the answer to you so that each will question himself before asking when will Allah grant us the victory! You have made the delay of victory a means of despair, and awaiting for the victory some sort of a stage where you tend to relax and wait as if the State is a magic stick that will change the society and construct the Ummah with the reading of Al-Fateha
.وَقُلِ اعْمَلُوا فَسَيَرَى اللَّهُ عَمَلَكُمْ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَسَتُرَدُّونَ إِلَى عَالِمِ الْغَيْبِ وَالشَّهَادَةِ فَيُنَبِّئُكُمْ بِمَا كُنْتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ"
And say: work, for your work will be seen by Allah, His Messenger and the believers and fear Allah so that you may prosper." [At-Tauba 9: 105]
Being organised
In order for us to fulfil the fard of da’wah and for us to follow the administrative rules of a party we must be disciplined and organised. Being organised means that we don’t leave things to the last minute and when we perform a task we do it properly. Unfortunately we are living in a non-ideological society where the norm is for people to be unorganised, always late in doing things, undisciplined and have a care-free attitude, where giving your word to someone doesn’t mean anything.We as da’wah carriers must be careful not fall into these things as we believe in Islam and this should transform our thinking and behaviour. Islam should make us disciplined, organised, on time and thoughtful in achieving our tasks in the best way. The Prophet (saw) said:
“Verily Allah has enjoined the perfection (ihsan) to everything; so when you kill, do so in a good way and when you slaughter, slaughter in a good way.” [Narrated by Muslim from Shaddad bin Aws]
So we must work to perfect our actions. In order to do this we have to think properly about actions and to think about the best way of achieving results.E.g. So if have to attend a meeting, circle or halaqa – we must think beforehand about how to reach there on time, the mode of transportation we will use, will there be a lot of traffic or not, etc. If the halaqa was early morning after Fajr, then we would ensure that we would set our alarm clock in order to wake up in time. This is what is meant by seriousness in thinking.E.g. If we need to prepare a talk to deliver, we must think in advance about the subject, the audience, the concepts you aim to pass, what examples will be relevant and then to prepare it properly in advance and to ensure you have enough time to revise it and check through it.E.g. If we are instructed to give a report about an activity then we should think about it properly, structure it, spend time on it and give it in a detailed manner so as to convey the reality properly. If the Kuffar can do this in their businesses and institutions – then how can we not do this? As we are doing not only a mubah (permitted) or mandub (recommended) work rather what we are doing is Fard (obligatory).
The da’wah carrier has to be organised in order to fulfil the tasks of the da’wah and his obligations which include the points mentioned in the leaflet ‘The Activities of the Da’wah carrier’: 1) The Islamic commitments, 2) Recitation of the Quran, 3) Reading the adopted culture and general culture, 4) Contacting people and 5) Following up the political events.How can we achieve these all without being organised? If we look at the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) we will see that he (saw) was very organised. How could he have achieved what he did in his life without being? He had many wives, was a da’wah carrier, was a father, friend and husband and became the leader of the Islamic state and leads wars and manage the affairs of state. This is only possible by being organised and disciplined.
Let us look at the example of the Hijra of the Prophet (saw). 1) He (saw) left Ali (ra) in his bed when he found out the plan of the Quraish. 2) He went to the house of Abu Bakr during midday when people are not normally about – due to the heat, 3) He had covered his face with his turban, 4) He asked Abu Bakr to speak to him privately and Abu Bakr (ra) explained that he could say anything in front of his family as they are his family, 5) He and Abu Bakr (ra) left from the back of his house, 6) They employed a non-Muslim guide to take them to Madina through an unusual route, 7) They hid in the cave.The Sahabah had discipline as they realised the weight of obligations and what it means to be Shuhada alan-Naas (witnesses over mankind). It was said about Abu Bakr Siddiq (ra) that when he used to prepare the armies that you would think he did not rely upon Allah and when you saw him in Salah you would think that he does not rely on anything in the Dunya.
Doing maximum not the minimum
We should not accept doing the minimum, rather we must strive to do the maximum for the da’wah.We must appreciate that the Da’wah is the at the top of the scale of values and is of the highest of the obligations. Therefore it is not permitted to treat it as part of our lives only, rather it must be the centre around which our lives revolve.It is related that when RasulAllah (saw) was commanded to carry the dawah, he said to the Mother of the Believers, Khadijah (ra), "From this day onwards, there is no rest".One of the greatest Imams of this Ummah, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (ra), who endured a life of poverty, hardship and trials, was asked one day by his son Abdullah, "Abi when will we ever relax?" To which the Imam, looking his son in the eye, said "With the first step we take into Jannah."
Allah (swt) has warned us of making other things our priority in life other than His Deen and the da’wah to it. He (swt) said:
قُلْ إِنْ كَانَ آَبَاؤُكُمْ وَأَبْنَاؤُكُمْ وَإِخْوَانُكُمْ وَأَزْوَاجُكُمْ وَعَشِيرَتُكُمْ وَأَمْوَالٌ اقْتَرَفْتُمُوهَا وَتِجَارَةٌ تَخْشَوْنَ كَسَادَهَا وَمَسَاكِنُ تَرْضَوْنَهَا أَحَبَّ إِلَيْكُمْ مِنَ اللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَجِهَادٍ فِي سَبِيلِهِ فَتَرَبَّصُوا حَتَّى يَأْتِيَ اللَّهُ بِأَمْرِهِ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الْفَاسِقِينَ
“Say if your parents, your children, your brethren, your wives, your tribe, the wealth you have acquired, a merchandise for which you fear that there would be no sale and dwellings you desire are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger and Jihad in His way, then wait till Allah brings His command, and Allah would not guide the wrong-doing folk." [TMQ 9: 24]
The word "Amrihi" (His command) in the verse means His punishment, and it serves as a warning to those who prefer these matters to the love of Allah, His Messenger and Jihad in His way. Hence Allah (swt) has classified and specified the values and warned against the violation of this order. Therefore, there is no excuse for the Muslim to place something at the top of the scale of values, different to the love of Allah, His Messenger and Jihad in His way, i.e. other than Islam and Jihad. Then the rest of the matters were put in their order according to what the Sharia'a rules had stated. Therefore, it would be forbidden for the Muslim to make his life at the top of the scale of values, then his wife and his children, then their wealth and well being, then Islam and Jihad, for if he did this, he would be sinful and would deserve the punishment of Allah (swt) as clearly outlined in the Ayah. A Muslim should therefore place Islam, Jihad in the way of Allah, the Da'awa to the Deen of Allah and making the word of Allah reign supreme at the top of his priorities i.e. at the top of the scale of values. Then the rest of the matter would also be placed, however, not according to the benefit obtained from them, but according to their order which Allah (swt) had predetermined and in relation to the other values.So let us make sure that we fulfil the Amanah as it should be fulfilled and not betray it. Let us ensure that we do our best and not just the minimum. Let us take heed in the words of Allah (swt):
إِنَّ اللَّهَ اشْتَرَى مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ بِأَنَّ لَهُمُ الْجَنَّةَ
“Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise.”
[TMQ 9:111]
Wednesday, 23 January 2008
Political Islam
Introduction
Politics is taking care of the affairs of a nation (ummah), internally and externally. This is conducted by the state and the ummah. The state conducts that practically; whilst the ummah takes the state to task over that.Taking care of the affairs of the ummah, internally and externally, by the state is discharged through the implementation of the ideology internally; and this represents the domestic policy.As regards taking care of the affairs of the ummah externally, by the state, it consists of her relations with other states, peoples and nations, and propagating the ideology to the world; and this represents the foreign policy.Understanding of theFor understanding the method of the western camp, it is worth noticing that though this method, which is colonialism, is constant, however the styles of realizing colonialism and view towards it have developed a little in the western camp. This was in term of its link, as a method, with capitalism, as a thought, through time. And also in term of change of styles and difference in the view towards colonialism, which occurred as a result of this development. As regards the change in the styles of the method (colonialism), it used to depend on military domination in what was known as old colonialism, but then it became to depend on other matters in what was called new colonialism. So, America started to depend on the economic side, such as loans, development projects, experts and the like; this is beside political pressure and harassment. However, America returned to use, beside these styles, the style of military domination over the nations and peoples, so as to subjugate them to her influence and will. She also began to endeavour to building military bases in her colonies so as to safeguard her influence in them. England became to depend on finding agents for her, English intelligence, making rulers as agents for her and on notorious trading deals. Her dependence on loans retreated because of her weak financial situation. Likewise, her dependence on military bases diminished due to her weak international influence, though she still holds fast to her military garrisons and bases in her colonies, as in Cyprus, or close to those colonies. Thus, change of styles became an inseparable attribute of colonialism. foreign policy is fundamental for safeguarding the entity of the state and the ummah; it is essential for the enablement of conveying the da’wa to the world; and it is indispensable for the sound regulation of the relations of the ummah with others.Since the Islamic ummah is entrusted with carrying the Islamic da’wa to the whole mankind, it is thus indispensable for Muslims to stay in contact with the world, where they comprehend its circumstances, understand its problems, be aware of the motives of its states and nations, pursue the political actions that take place in the world. In this context, they have to pay attention to the political plans of the states in terms of the styles they use for the execution of such plans, the relations between these states, and the political manoeuvres they use. Therefore, it is indispensable for Muslims to understand the reality of the situation in the Islamic world in the light of understanding the global international stance. This is vital for them so that they can find out the style of work they use to establish their state, and to convey their da’wa to the world.However, it must be understood that the situation of any state would not remain the same internationally. It rather goes into many changes, in terms of strength and weakness, power of influence or its absence, and in terms of difference and change of its current relations with other states. Therefore, it is not possible to draw constant and general guidelines for the international position, and nor giving a constant thought about the position of any of the existent states in the world. It is rather possible to give a general guideline about the political situation at a certain period, taking into notice the possible change of this position. It is also possible to give a specific thought about the situation of any state at a certain circumstance, bearing in mind the possible change of such position. Therefore, it is necessary that the politician has to pursue with the ongoing political actions in the world and to link them with his previous political information. This is necessary for him so that he can properly understand politics, understand whether the political situation remains the same or has changed, and understand the political situation of every state and whether such situation remained the same or has changed as well.Change of the international situation is subject to the change of political situation of some states from one circumstance to another. Such change of a political situation of a state is either because it became stronger or weaker, or because its relation with other states became stronger or weaker. In such a case, a change in international balance would result due to change in the balance of powers existent in the world. Therefore, understanding of the situation of each state that has influence on the international situation is the basis for understanding the international situation. Accordingly, attention must be focused on obtaining information about each state; because this is the first pillar for political understanding. Understanding of the situation of each state is not related to its position in the international situation; it is rather related to any thing related to its domestic and foreign policy. Thereupon, it is necessary to be acquainted with the thought upon which the policy of each existing state in the world is built; particularly those states that might have influence on the stance, which the Islamic ummah must take towards them. It is also necessary to know the plans and styles used by such states. This knowledge of the plans and styles must be linked with pursuing them constantly and with the extent of their change. Understanding of the motives behind such change or the reasons that forced such states to change these plans and styles is necessary as well; besides the sound knowledge of the matters that affect these states or drive them to change their plans and styles.
Politics is a thought and a method
As regards the thought upon which the policy of a state is established, it is the thought on whose basis the state builds its relation with other nations and peoples. The thoughts of the states that do not adopt an ideology, are different and dissimilar; besides such thoughts are open to change. The policies of such states would be studied through the study of their political plans and styles; where the study of the political thought is irrelevant.As regards the states that adopt and ideology, their thought is constant without a change. This thought would be the propagation of the ideology, which it adopts, to the world via a constant method that does not change, regardless of the change of styles; so the study of the political thought applies to such states.
Accordingly, the present states in the world have to be viewed based on the assumption that each one of them has a basic thought for drawing its relation with other nations and peoples; whether this thought was constant or not. It also has a specific method for executing this thought, whether such method was constant or not. In the light of its thought and method, it draws the plans, and follows the styles that help it to realize its objective. However, the present states in the world today give free rein to themselves in terms of the styles. So, they would follow a style that realizes the objective, even if it violates the method; and thus they follow the rule that says: “The end justifies the means”.Whatever the case may be, all the states draw political plans that change according to the need; and they follow styles that differ and diversify in accordance with the situations
The states undertake political actions so as to take care of the interests of the ummah. They build relations with other states in accordance with the interests. Despite that, there is a big difference between the states. The state that doe not adopt a certain ideology would make the interest alone as the effective factor in its international relations. As regards the state that adopts a certain ideology that conveys to the world, it makes the ideology an effective factor in its international relations, and makes the interest assigned by the ideology a supportive factor in this course. Therefore, it is necessary to understand a state in terms of the thoughts it adopts, whether it adopts an ideology or not. Then the factors that affect its international relations would be understood. Since an ideology affects the state that adopts it, and consequently it affects the international relations and the international situation, therefore it is necessary to be acquainted with the ideologies that prevail in the world today. It is also necessary to know the extent of effect each ideology has today on international politics, and its possible effect on international arena today and in future. In the light of these ideologies and the extent of their effect at present and in future, the international relations can be understood.
When we examine the world today, we find it dominated by three ideologies only, which are: Islam, communism and capitalism, where hundreds of millions of people embrace each one of them. However, Islam has no state today to adopt; therefore we do not see any effect to it in the international relations and international situation that prevails the world today. As regards the actions that are undertaken by the states of the world to prevent the return of the Islamic state to life, after the unrest amongst Muslims became quite noticed, this has nothing to do with the international situation, and nor it affects the international relations. This is because effect on the international situation and international relations requires the presence of a state that adopts Islam as an ideology, upon which it conducts its domestic and foreign policy.As regards that which is noticed, in terms of the prospects of international, particularly American, politics for attempting to reshape the Islamic region via plans of hegemony, such as ‘Greater Middle East Initiative’ in 2003. All of this is due to the growing fear of these states that emergence of a state to Muslims is potentially near. It is not because Islam affects on international politics the way it would do when there is a real Islamic state.
As regards the other two ideologies, each one of them has a state, rather more. Therefore, they have effect on international relations, international situation, and international politics, particularly when the Soviet Union (SU) was present, and before its downfall. One sign of their effect is that world was divided into two camps: the eastern one and the western one. However, after the collapse of the eastern camp, and fragmentation of Warsaw Pact, the bi-polar policy in the world came to an end. So, Communist ideology is no more implemented, even formally, except in China and North Korea. Accordingly, struggle in the world ceased to be international; it rather became regional. This is because after the downfall of SU, its (communist) thought ceased to have effect on the global politics. This was due to the fact that the propagation of communism, upon which its foreign policy was established, ceased to be implemented. As regards the states that still adopt communism, their foreign policy is not based on this thought. Chinese policy, as an example, is not built on propagating communism in the world. This is due to the reality of Chinese people, which was content with influence in the Asian neighbourhood; and it did not historically aspire for a global role. Due to this reality of the Chinese people, China did not strive any time to prepare itself and its resources for acquiring an effective position in the global politics. All the Chinese activities are still focused on winning regional influence in the neighbourhood.
As regards the capitalist camp, the thought upon which its policy is built is the propagation of capitalism, which is separation of religion from life affairs, worldwide. Though there are numerous and different states that adopt capitalism, all of them work to propagate their capitalist intellectual leadership in the world, and to make their viewpoint about live dominate over the world.As regarding the method, which the capitalist camp follows for executing its thought, it is colonialism; ie imposing the political, military, cultural and economic authority over the conquered peoples for the sake of their exploitation. This method of colonialism is constant, and does not change regardless of the change of governments and their laws. Colonialism is not as Lenin described, where he said: ‘It is the last stage of capitalism’. Rather, colonialism is part of the viewpoint of capitalism; and it is the method by which capitalism is propagated to the nations and peoples. Therefore, the foreign policy of the capitalist camp is constant, in terms of its thought and its method; and it does not change following the change and competition of states. Thus, Britain is like America, France, Italy and any other capitalist state; where its policy is based on propagating its ideology and its viewpoint about life, through colonizing the nations and peoples.
For understanding the method of the western camp, it is worth noticing that though this method, which is colonialism, is constant, however the styles of realizing colonialism and view towards it have developed a little in the western camp. This was in term of its link, as a method, with capitalism, as a thought, through time. And also in term of change of styles and difference in the view towards colonialism, which occurred as a result of this development. As regards the change in the styles of the method (colonialism), it used to depend on military domination in what was known as old colonialism, but then it became to depend on other matters in what was called new colonialism. So, America started to depend on the economic side, such as loans, development projects, experts and the like; this is beside political pressure and harassment. However, America returned to use, beside these styles, the style of military domination over the nations and peoples, so as to subjugate them to her influence and will. She also began to endeavour to building military bases in her colonies so as to safeguard her influence in them. England became to depend on finding agents for her, English intelligence, making rulers as agents for her and on notorious trading deals. Her dependence on loans retreated because of her weak financial situation. Likewise, her dependence on military bases diminished due to her weak international influence, though she still holds fast to her military garrisons and bases in her colonies, as in Cyprus, or close to those colonies. Thus, change of styles became an inseparable attribute of colonialism.
As regards the change in the view towards colonialism, concerning its link (as a method) with capitalism (as a thought), this view started to fluctuate between two matters. On one side is the strength of this link, i.e. colonialism is just a method for propagating capitalism, which means the prime attention is for propagating capitalism. On the other side is the weakness of this link, ie the prime attention is colonialism, itself, while the second attention is propagating capitalism. In this case, colonialism was close to become an objective. The strength and weakness of this link depend on the country, which the capitalist states want to dominate. Has such country a civilization, where these states want to invade it and enforce the corrupt capitalist civilization on it, so as to enable its control and pillage of its wealth? Or, is it empty, having no civilization to be attacked; they rather colonize it for robbing its resources and controlling it only? This is manifested in the fact that the severity of competition between the western states over the colonization of Africa was for its exploitation, and the propagation of the capitalist thought hardly existed. Civil war in Uganda and Rwanda continued for many years, causing hundreds of thousands of human victims. In the events of Zaire (Democratic Congo), there was only material greed and competition over influence between Europe and America. Britain and her European allies, together with America, did not look for anything in Africa except for material benefit. Thus, colonialism in Africa was close to become an objective rather than a method. However, in the Islamic world: the Middle East and North Africa or in Central and South Asia, the colonial powers, including America, besides they struggle to exploit its material resources, they strive to propagate capitalism as well, as represented in their attention to the conferences of ‘freedom of women’ and ‘consolidation of women’, the contents of the American plan for the Middle East, imposing the cultural hegemony as manifested in ‘rebuilding of cultures’, dialogue between religions, meeting of civilizations, and focus on changing or modifying the education curriculum; all of that is for breaking the attachment of Muslims to their civilization and culture. Thus, the method of capitalism started to develop with time. However, colonialism is a fundamental pillar in capitalism, whether it was a method for propagating capitalism or a method that is more to become an objective.
Political Awareness of the Hijra
The Muslims ought to be reminded of the events that took place to signify the Hijra. And what is incumbent is to reveal its essence so as to make the Muslims truly understand its meaning and significance as opposed to a mere spiritual tradition that is inherited like the other religions, or the events that resulted in a mere change in the recording of the calendar, much like the calendar of the christians. In order to portray its vital (ideological) aspects, that which is not discussed today due to its threat to the present regimes, it is necessary to first undertake a study of the Hijra from the authentic sources of seerah, and then to derive the meaning from it. The meaning that will draw attention to the real issues of today - that Islam is both a spiritual and political Doctrine - such that by it the generation of a momentum to revive the Muslim ummah will spring from it, and at the same time all will be made aware of it.A study from the authentic sources of seerahThe Messenger of Allah (saw) ordered the Muslims in Makka to migrate to Medina in small parties, and so they began to migrate either individually or in small groups.As for the political awareness of Quraysh with respect to the Muslims Ibn Ishaq states, "When Quraysh saw that Muhammad (saw), had assembled a party, and had support from elsewhere other than from the Quraysh and Makka, from a town other than theirs, and witnessed Muhammad's (saw) companions moving out to join these forces, they realised that the Muslims had found a new home with them and had acquired their protection. Quraysh were concerned that Muhammad would also leave them, since they knew that he had decided to do battle with them."As for the actual Quraysh response to this situation ibn Ishaq states, "Quraysh were concerned that the Messenger of Allah (saw), would leave and join them (those from a different tribe), since they knew that he had decided to do battle with them. They therefore, gathered in Dar al-Nadwa - the House of Assembly - the home of Qusayy bin Kilab, where all their top-level decisions were made."According to ibn Kathir, "Related from Abdullah bin Abu Najih, from Mujahid bin Jabr, that Abdullah ibn Abbas narrates the following. "The day arrived when they agreed to meet to enter their assembly to discuss what to do about the Messenger of Allah (saw). That day is known as yawm al-zahma (The Day of Gathering), and on it Shaytan, came before them in the form of a Shaikh from Nejd dressed in a heavy cloak. He stood at the door of the house, and when they saw him they asked who he was. Shaytan replied, "I come from Nejd, from the highlands, and I have heard why you have agreed to meet, and I have come to listen to what you say and perhaps offer some advice or comment." They invited him in. He entered the meeting where the Quraysh leadership were assembled. They consisted of Utba, Shayba, Abu Sufyan, Tai'ma bin Adi, Jubayr bin al-Harith, Abu al-Bakhtari bin Hisham, Zam'a bin al-Aswad, Hakim bin Hizam, Abu Jahl, Nabih and Munabbih, sons of al-Hajjaj, and Umayya bin Khalaf, along with various others of their supporters from Quraysh. They reminded one another of what they had experienced from the behaviour of Muhammad (saw), and agreed that they felt insecure (danger) from the possibility that he (saw), the Muslims, together with their material support (the chiefs of Medina), might make an attack upon them. Having discussed the issue, one of them said to have been Al-Bakhtari bin Hisham suggested, "Put him in irons and gaol him, then wait for him to have the same fate that befell poets before him, such as Zubayr and al-Nabigha. He would die as they had." But the Nejdi Shaikh objected saying, "No that is not a good plan. If you do shut him up, news of him will get right past the door you have locked on him and reach his supporters. They will promptly attack you and release him and then increase until they overcome you. That is not a good idea." They consulted further, and one suggested, "Let's exile him from our territory. Once he has gone we'll be rid of him and we'll be able to restore our affairs as they were before." The Nejdi Shaikh again observed, "No. That's not a good idea for you. You know how sweet his talk is, and his reasoning, and how he convinces others of his message. If you do that you'd have no security against him going to live with some Arab tribe and using his speech and discourse to get them to follow him. Then he would lead them against you and perhaps defeat or dispossess you and do what they like with you. No, think of something else." Abu Jahl then said, "I have an idea that hasn't occurred to you yet." "What is it?" They asked him. "I think we should select one young man from each tribe, and someone who is strong, of excellent lineage and reputation as a leader. We should give each one a sharp sword and they would go to him and use the swords to strike him in unison. They would kill him and we would be rid of him. If they do this, his blood would be spread over all the tribes. And Banu Abd Manaf will not be able to do battle against them all. So they will accept blood money which we can pay them." The Nejdi Shaikh commented, "What he says is right. This is the right idea, and no other." Having agreed upon this the assembly broke up.Jibreel (as) then came to Muhammad (saw), and told him, "Do not sleep tonight in the bed you usually use." When it was fully dark that night the Quraysh men gathered outside his (saw) door waiting for him (saw) to sleep so that they could attack him. Having seen where they were, the prophet (saw) said to Ali (ra), "Sleep on my bed, and wrap yourself in this green cloak of mine from Hadramawt; sleep in it. You'll not come to any harm from them." The prophet (saw) was in the habit of sleeping in that cloak of his."Yazid bin Abu Yazid relates from Muhammad bin Ka'b al-Qurazi, "The men met there at his (saw) door, Abu Jahl, who was among them said, "Muhammad claims that if you follow him you'll become kings of the Arabs and the non-Arabs alike. Then you'll be given life after death and be provided with gardens like those of Jordan. If you don't do that, then, he says, you will be slaughtered, given life after death but be put into a hellfire where you will be burned." The prophet (saw) then picked up a handful of dirt, saying, "Yes. I do say that. And you are one of them!" Then Allah (swt) took away their sight from them and they could not see him. He began sprinkling the dirt on to their heads while he (saw) recited the following verses from the Qur'an.
"Ya-sin. By the Qur'an, the wise. You are among those who are sent forth upon a straight path", upto the verse, "We have placed a barrier before them and a barrier behind them, and have covered them over so they cannot see" [TMQ Ya-Sin; 36:3-9].
Every single man among them had dirt thrown on his head. He (saw) then left and went where he (saw) so wished. Someone who had not been there with these men arrived and asked, "What are you waiting here for?" They replied, "For Muhammad." "God damn you! Muhammad just came out to you and he did not leave any single one of you without throwing dirt on your head. He then left and went elsewhere. Can't you see what has happened to you?" Each man then placed his hand on his head and found dirt there. Looking closely they saw Ali (ra) on the bed covered in the green cloak of Muhammad (saw). They stayed there until morning; when Ali (ra) arose from the bed they said, "By God, what he told us must have been true!"" Ibn Ishaq says that among other verses Allah (swt) revealed the following.
"And when the disbelievers plotted to confine, kill or exile you they made plans and He made plans, and He is the best Planner of all" [TMQ Al-Anfal; 8:30].
"Finally, Allah (swt) gave His (swt) Messenger the permission to migrate. "Say: O Allah, make my place of arrival good and make my place of departure good. And grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself" [TMQ Bani Isra'il; 17:80]
" And ibn Kathir states that the event marks the beginning of the Islamic era as was agreed upon by the sahaba (ra), during the rule of Umar (ra) - Al Hijra.All praises are due upon Allah the Almighty (swt). This was the move to Medina (which was also known as Dar al-Hijra), and it proved to be a turning point in the entire history of the ummah of Muhammad (saw), whereupon the Islamic State was established as a political entity that would influence the affairs of the world to come. The ideology was firmly established both in concept and in practical existence, and indeed this State, the very State that Muhammad (saw) himself established, continued in existence until its demise in 1924 at the hands of the colonialist disbelievers and their agent Mustapha Kemal.It is here that we can make the following observations and deduce the political awareness of the Hijra in light of our present times.1. The attempt to kill the Messenger of Allah (saw)We learn from the seerah that the attempt to kill the Messenger of Allah (swt) reflects the fact that what the prophet's (saw) call represented was a grave danger to the very existence of the Quraysh such that their very survival was in question - the survival of that regional power. That one man and his (saw) companions, warranted elimination altogether, provides evidence that there was a danger to the Quraysh of the gravest proportions. So, what was this danger? What was the threat that Muhammad (saw) posed that could not be contained? That it became the issue of survival (life and death) of Quraysh? What was it that the kings and rulers of his (saw) day perceived? Here follows an explanation.The key in understanding this is to realise that the prophet's (saw) call was not new to Quraysh at the time when they decided to kill him (saw). The verdict to kill him (saw) was issued at the gathering in Dar al-Nadwa, and immediately they moved to implement that plan that very same night. The prophet (saw) migrated to Medina and ibn Kathir mentions that, "Bukhari states that, "Matar bin al-Fadl related to us, quoting Rawh, quoting Hisham quoting Ikrama, from ibn Abbas who said, "The prophet's (saw) migration took place in the month of Rabi' al-Awwal in the thirteenth year of his (saw) mission, on a Monday.""" And ibn Ishaq stated that the decision to kill the prophet (saw) was issued only a day before. This means that the decision to kill him (saw) and the migration sequentially coincided and thus both events occurred in the thirteenth year of prophethood.So the verdict of killing came only after thirteen years of experiencing the prophet's call in which his (saw) methodology was explicit in politically challenging the leadership in Makka, and where he (saw) called for its destruction and termination. Why did they only now after thirteen years of experiencing this, decide to kill him if his (saw) explicit call was not secret and his (saw) intentions for power and leadership were not concealed? The clear answer and explanation lies in the realisation by the Quraysh leadership, which lies in two significant factors:a) The response of the strong factions within the society in Medina - namely the Nuqaba (Generals and Officers) - and,b) In the implications of the migration of the Messenger of Allah (saw) to a society that had been prepared and displayed a readiness to accept the full implementation of the Islamic Ideology.As for the first point, it reveals that the second pledge of Aqabah had been taken which meant that the ones in whose hands the real power lay, accepted rather than rejected the aim of the Messenger of Allah (saw) to establish himself (saw) as the head of that society, thereby establishing an Islamic State.According to ibn Ishaq, who related from Ma'bad, from 'Abd Allah, from his father Ka'b bin Malik who said, "When we met at the defile we waited for the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he (saw) did come. When they sat down, the first to speak was Al 'Abbas bin 'Abd Al Muttalib who said, "O Khazraj! Muhammad holds with us a position of which you are aware. We protect him from our people who think about him as we do. He is respected among his people and safe in his own town. But he is determined to join up with you. If you think you will keep trust with him in the invitation you have given him and will protect him from his enemies, then it is up to you to accept your responsibilities. But if you think you might hand him over and abandon him after he has joined you, then leave him right now. He does have respect and protection among his own people and in his town." We replied, "We hear what you say. Speak to us O Messenger of Allah (saw)! And take for yourself and for your Lord whatever you want." The Messenger of Allah (saw) then spoke, recited the Qur'an, invited people to Islam. He (saw) said, "I ask you to pledge that you will defend me as you do your women and children." Al Bara' bin Ma'mur then took him (saw) by the hand and said, "Yes indeed, we will! I swear by Him who sent you with the Truth, protect you as we do our women from whatever threatens them. We pledge ourselves to you O Messenger of Allah, and we are, I swear it, warriors from father to son over many generations." While Al Bara' was speaking to the Messenger (saw) he was interrupted by Abu Al Haytham bin Al Tayyihan, who said, "O Messenger of Allah, we have certain ties to others - meaning the jews - and if we break these, we are concerned that if Allah gives you victory, you might return to your own people and abandon us." The Messenger (saw) smiled and said, "If your blood be sought, our blood shall be sought, and your destruction is mine as well. I am of you and you are of me. I will battle those you battle and make peace with those with those whom you make peace." The Messenger of Allah (saw) then said, "Bring forth twelve from among you to be nuqaba (leaders vis-à-vis commanders) to take charge."With this event, the Quraysh became concerned at the progress of the prophet (saw). For ibn Ishaq states, "When Quraysh saw that Muhammad (saw) had assembled a Party, and had supporters from others than their own people and from a town other than theirs, and saw his (saw) companions moving out to join these others, they realised that the Muslims had found a new security with them and had acquired their protection. Quraysh were concerned that Muhammad (saw) would leave and join them, since they knew that he (saw) had decided to do battle with them. They therefore gathered in the Dar al-Nadwa, the House of Assembly, the home of Qusayy bin Kilab, where all their decisions were made. They discussed there what they should do with him (saw) since they now feared him more than ever."This is especially so due to the status of those of Medina who represented the strong and powerful factions, and the fact that their Chiefs of Staff gave unequivocal support to the establishment of the Islamic State. And the seerah indicates that they were distinguished amongst the general masses in society, in that the power and control of affairs lay in their hands.So the significance here of the successful contacting of the strong factions, (that is the Generals and Officers of Yathrib), is that it was a definitive move in establishing the Islamic authority, and therefore the ruling. Since, the ones in whose hands the power and control lay had been won over in a powerful manner, it clearly signified a departure from the days of intellectual and political struggle in Makka, to a decisive move into a completely different phase of the d'awa, that of taking power and implementing the Ruling of Islam.As for the second point - the implication of Statehood of the Islamic message - the significance is in the fact that he (saw) would receive not only protection, but also power, the basis of which would have been the Islamic Ideology. There, in Medina, if he (saw) were allowed to migrate, would receive no obstacles in the path of establishing the Islamic Ideology, and since his (saw) aims were not only confined to Medina, but rather to a return to Makka, but this time under quite different circumstances to what the Quraysh had perceived of him. For if he (saw) were successful in the migration, and the building and consolidation of the new society in Medina - namely the establishment of an Islamic State - he would be a force and a power to be reckoned with. Thus, the migration to Medina would establish the permanency of the Islamic threat like never before, with the formation of a new State - an Islamic one - present and active in the political arena to manage every affair of the Muslims via the vehicle of an Islamic State.The fact that the prophet (saw) and the Muslims would achieve an Islamic State and therefore an authority in ruling is not only a fact that can be comprehended from the seerah books, but also from the revelation of the Almighty (swt). For when Allah (swt) revealed,
"Say: O Allah, make my place of arrival good and make my place of departure good. And grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself" [TMQ Bani Isra'il; 17:80]
Ibn Kathir's tafseer states about this, "Qatadah said about this, "The phrase 'place of arrival' referred to Medina, while the words 'place of departure', referred to his (saw) migration from Makka. The words 'grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself' referred to Allah's Book and to the ruling by what Allah had revealed." It was Allah (swt) that had taught this prayer to the prophet (saw), and thus the migration was a migration to a place of authority and ruling whereby the implementation of the Ideology would practically exist.""Furthermore, when Allah revealed concerning the migration to Medina in Surah Al An'am,
"They are those whom We gave the Book, the Ruling (Al Hukm), and prophethood. But if they disbelieve therein, then indeed We, have entrusted it to a people who are not disbelievers therein." [TMQ Al-An'am; 6:89]
Ibn Kathir states in his tafsir, ""They are those whom We gave the Book, the Ruling (Al Hukm), and prophethood." It means We have bestowed these bounties (the Qur'an, the rule and authority, and the prophethood), on them, as a mercy for the servants, and out of our kindness for creation. "But if they disbelieve therein", refers to the three things, the Book, the rule and the authority, and the prophet, and 'they' refers to the people of Quraysh according to ibn Abbas, Sa'id bin al Musayyib, Ad Dahhak, Qatadah, As Suddi, and others. "Then indeed We, have entrusted it to a people who are not disbelievers therein." Means, if the Quraysh and the rest of the people of the earth - Arabs and non-Arabs, illiterate, and the People of the Book - disbelieve in these (the Book, the Ruling, and the prophethood), then We have entrusted them to another people, the Muhajirun and the Ansar, and those who follow their lead until the Day of Judgement."The fact and undeniable reality that the Messenger of Allah (saw) upon migration would have meant the establishment of an Islamic State ruling by what Allah (swt) has revealed, is now made clear, and provides explanation of the significance, political implications, and fears of the migration of the prophet (saw) in the eyes of the Quraysh leadership.So, the Quraysh realised that the threat was very real indeed, that the prophet (saw) and the Muslims had very little way to go before the stage of taking power and implementing the Ideology comprehensively. Thus a successful conclusion to the phases of d'awa undertaken in Makka. It would mean the birth of the Islamic State, and with it, it would bring the Islamic Ideology into existence. They (the Quraysh), realised the importance of ruling and authority, and what it would mean, and what it would enable the Muslims to do. They knew the implications of the establishment of the Islamic State, and they feared it and it occupied their concerns. So much did they realise this, that nothing would have provided for an effective measure but to kill him (saw). And they understood the implications of his (saw) entry into Medina which explains that they did not settle for any other measure in their meeting at Dar an-Nadwa, but to kill him (saw). This is what the establishment of the Islamic State meant to Quraysh, the opponents of the Islamic Ideology!This is the indication from the books of seerah as to the motive to kill the Messenger of Allah (saw) at this particular point in time. It is an indication that even the opponents of Islam understood the implications of an Islamic State present in life's affairs.O honourable ummah! It would not be fitting for you, after even your enemies then had realised the significance of an Islamic State, for you to neglect its importance in the affairs of the Muslims, and for you to neglect its call. Neither should you allow those elements who claim to be from among us to seduce you into thinking that the Islamic State is not of a major significance in Islam and to the Muslim ummah. As for you, the sincere mighty d'awa carriers, know that the escalation of forces and the intensifying of energies directed towards preventing your work from achieving its results, should not be a source of depression for you, but rather should be seen as a conducive sign that indeed you are on the right path in the way of your Lord and guided by the correct evidences for its method. For the opponents of Islam today, too recognise the nearness of your goals and the impending victory that is about to be manifest, and the readiness of the Muslim ummah in supporting the call to re-establish the mighty Khilafah State. And such recognition by the enemies of this Deen, pushes them to address this powerful momentum by inventing new and desperate measures against you (with creative styles and elaborate means), whether they are directly from the enemies themselves - namely the disbelieving colonialist nations - or indirectly, from their agents and faithful and loyal supporters.Just as the meetings, strategies, and plans took place at Dar al-Nadwa then, so do the meetings, strategies and plans occur today that convey such urgency and panic! Their sole purpose is to obstruct the changing affairs of the Muslim ummah and the success of the sincere d'awa carriers that are among them due to their successful and powerful progression. Do not be fooled into thinking otherwise, for they would desire your blindness and your dumbness!They have today organised a crusade with the banner of 'fighting terrorism' but the Muslims realised before anyone that not only would it be them who would feel the brunt, but they would be the sole targets of their Pharonic expression. And it is that which the Pharaoh then feared from the people, that the arrogant Pharonic American state fears today. This in itself is a proof of the fear that they harbour and the nearness of the impending victory.What is seen today of their strategies and plans is but a continuation of the plans that were concocted almost one-thousand years ago. They have convened many conferences and meetings. They have formulated many plans and strategies against the Muslims. And they too, like the Quraysh before them, are not unfamiliar with the Islamic Ideology, its State, and the carriers of its call. Thus, in the early conference of 1095 C.E the Europeans were roused by the similar propaganda and hysteria of today, and launched the crusades against the Muslims which ultimately led to their defeat and failure. Then, they convened again to assault the Muslims this time by a missionary and cultural invasion to weaken the Islamic ideological concepts. Then followed, the political invasion, the destruction of the Khilafah State in 1924, the imposition of the agent rulers, and the division of Muslim land. Even after all of this, the aspiration of ridding the world of Islam and its mighty state still did not materialise. So then came the creation of the State of Israel to keep the entire middle-east region under colonial influence, and then followed the Gulf War. These plans to keep these regions that are inhabited by Muslims and the sincere movements under the might of the colonial powers, and to ensure that their affairs remain under their control.So, even after all of these further attempts, and further attempts after that to block Islam and the Muslims from rising from the rubble, the Muslims have only increased in their energy and have crystallised their concepts, to the extent that almost every single inch of Muslim land is crying out for the return of the ruling by what Allah (swt) has revealed. Only yesterday was it that despite this continuation of the crusade against Islam, calls to establish the Islamic State were being echoed from not only the Middle-East, Central Asia, The Fertile Crescent (Al-Sham), as one might naturally expect, but also other regions despite their geographical obscurity such as Nigeria, Indonesia, Philippines, and Gambia. This is despite the fact that their Pharonic attempts have been methodical to the highest precision, they have lasted for a millennium, and unquantifiable resources have been expended.Indeed a new episode in this ongoing saga is what occurred in the aftermath of the events of September 11th, which signified and exposed the disposition of the colonialist US. It became clear from the news events or to the one who pursues the news that an attack in the Central Asian area was imminent prior to the events of September 11th, especially since the Taliban became independent from US control. So, in order to prevent the region falling into instability, especially with what was transpiring in Central Asia and Pakistan (which controlled Afghanistan) in terms of the call to re-establish the Khilafah State and the level to which it had progressed, the events of September 11th was used as the justification to enter these lands directly and quickly. Thus, apart from securing other interests in the region, the only way the Pharonic US state could guarantee that Islam and its State did not fill the political vacuum by the ones who truly crystallised the idea of Khilafah, was to directly colonise the entire area by force, fast, albeit by using the deceitful justification of September 11th the response to which was no doubt conjured up by the US think tanks and the rest of her Capitalist political medium.Thus, the desperation and panic emitted by the disbelieving US Pharonic state from what they fear if the Muslims are freely allowed to work for what they desire, is crystal clear in their finding no other option nor any other solution other than to use their Pharonic expressions, which not only included direct military force, but also a Pharonic hunt by them and their agents in the area to eliminate the sincere d'awa carriers in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan. And anyone else who resisted the US subjugation in any shape or form was also thrown into the same camp. And the fact that the events of September 11th are without defined objectives, may be ongoing for decades even centuries, is a clear enough indication to anyone that it is a ditch attempt to secure her interests by forcibly preventing any factor whatsoever that may distort her power and topple her world position. And the way in which Islam and the Muslims have been addressed is to create imaginary links between the Muslims in a given region, and the 'war against terrorism' in order to execute any Pharonic US will against it. So, those Muslim lands that have the military and strategic potential can now be legitimately destroyed by force, such as what they have described recently as the 'axis of terror'. And in the very least they (the US) enjoy a degree of influence of strategic parts of the Muslim world where they can monitor and keep in check any 'undemocratic' political change by force if necessary, under any convenient slogan. This is an indication of the fear that the US state feels and the future insecurity and instability she perceives from the lands where the d'awa carriers work.This fear from the Muslims is apparent because those regions have possessed such capabilities for a very long time. The reason why they are pursued now (as opposed to before) is due to the control they may enjoy of a single sincere leadership who is free from their colonialist influence. Furthermore, their attempts, as well as what has been mentioned, is to make sure that if the Muslims have their Khilafah State, then that state must not be able to bridge to military and technological gap that exists between it and the western states, namely the US, by eliminating any technological or strategic advantage. This is presently taking place via the political means such as the military campaigns (the 'axis of terror' being just one example), and their agent rulers such as Musharraf of Pakistan (strategically weakening and de-islamicizing the armed forces), and of course what will occur in the future under any convenient 'terror' pretext.Indeed, and as is most likely the case, the Pharonic US state realises that the campaigns to eject Islam from life forever have failed and are bound to fail. That is because, it is not merely a war that can be won and fought by superior technology, battle tactics, and dominant international position alone, rather it is a war, in fact a struggle, between two ideologies - western man-made Capitalism and Islam. The US have simply inherited a struggle that began with the Quraysh themselves, and they themselves have now come to witness that the conclusion to all these attempts, including those of recent times, is the manifest failure to extinguish the ideology of Islam. For the call to live by Islam both as a spiritual and political Doctrine is now stronger than ever. The call to re-establish its State that will execute all of its rules, and unify the entire ummah, all her lands, and all her armed forces and resources, is now wider than ever, and in light of the resources spent, that is perverse logic from their point of view! For Falsehood could never permanently prevail over the Truth, no matter how mighty it became, and no matter how severe the situation.This can only mean one thing. That the enemies of Islam and their agents, do realise the success of the call to re-establish the Islamic Khilafah (that began methodically in the middle of the last century) that will deliver a change which in itself warrants their keen attention. If they - the disbelieving colonialists - do not regard the implications of what it means for the ummah to have their Islamic Khilafah established as important, then why organise such campaigns? Why wilfully and knowingly inherit such an ideological struggle with the only alternative ideology left on the face of the Earth? Why spend such resources and dedicate policies and budgets where without exception Muslims and their lands are the subject? Why expend effort and resources to safeguard the US position not only for tomorrow or the year after, but for centuries to come? That is exactly just what Pharaoh feared, and that very fear is the same. Why covertly support the crackdown not only throughout the whole of Central Asia and Pakistan, but throughout the whole Muslim world of the sincere d'awa carriers who call for political change and carry nothing in terms of weapons or use force of any type? And while according to their democratic principles this non-violent (rather intellectual) method of change is lawful!They, like their predecessors - the Quraysh - do indeed sense the readiness and willingness of the Muslims to take control of their affairs once and for all, by supporting those sincere workers for change. Especially after being burned by the western powers and at the same time being given as fuel to that fire by her rulers! The Pharonic US State too, like Quraysh, realise the importance of the re-existence and the re-emergence of the Khilafah State, and the need to address it in their modern-day Dar an-Nadwas, and the plans that result from them, such as the elaborate and cunning campaigns related to September 11th, 'the war against terrorism', ‘rogue states’, 'axes of evil', 'anti-western', 'anti-democracy', ‘civilized Vs uncivilized’, ‘war against the just people of the world’ - in essence anything that stands in the way of the Pharonic US supremacy. And, behold, such desperate measures are a certain indication of their realisation that nothing will halt or even delay for even a single second the call to resume the Islamic way of life, except for drastic measures against the Muslims and their potential as a single unified ummah, especially in the aftermath of the failure of all the previous plans and devices. This in perfect realisation with what Quraysh then undertook as the only real and viable option to address the call by physical force. This clearly shows the success of the call for the return of the Islamic Khilafah State, and that success is being radiated!These actions by the enemies of Islam should thus be taken as a most conducive sign in the path to re-establish the Khilafah, and that is plain for all to see.So be of good cheer, and remain optimistic, for they fear you and fear your objectives, and the signs that are manifest at present, are those very same signs that appeared when the first Islamic State was established. This means that you should realise that you have progressed in successfully overcoming the serious obstacles and are now knocking at the doors of victory, and Allah willing you will enter it sooner than they may think!2. The response of the influentialsWe find from the books of seerah that when the Messenger (saw) concluded the second pledge from the Generals and Officers of the strong factions of Medina, it was an indication to Quraysh that the attempt to win the influential forces had been successful, which meant that the Muslims proceeding to implement the Islamic Ideology and the building of a state upon its basis was just around the corner. This is from the address by the senior officers at the second pledge, as stated by ibn Kathir."The Ansar, were seventy-three men, and their Nuqaba (Generals and Officers), were twelve in number, nine from Khazraj and three from Aws. Asim bin Umar bin Qatadah related that when this group met to pledge allegiance to the Messenger of Allah (saw), Al-Abbas bin Ubayda bin Nadla al Ansari, of the Banu Salim bin Awf said, "Oh Khazraj! Do you know what it is that you are pledging to this man?" "Yes", they replied. "You are pledging to go to war with all kinds of people. If you think that if you suffered great losses to your wealth and had your leaders killed, you would give him up, then do it now, or suffer the punishment of this life and the next. If you think you will keep firm to this Deen and to him (saw), in what he has called upon you to do, despite loss of wealth and your leaders being killed, then accept him. For, he is, by Allah, the best in this world and in the next." They replied, "We will take him regardless of loss of wealth or the death of our leaders. But, what will we receive in return for this, O Messenger of Allah, if we keep to this Deen and keep firm and resolute with you?" And the prophet of Allah (saw) replied, "Paradise!" "Then hold out your hand Messenger of Allah!" they asked. He (saw) did so, and they pledged allegiance to him."It was apparent in this aspect of the d'awa, that he (saw) was seeking the support of those persons with the actual (real) power. This is confirmed from what is stated by ibn Kathir and also from ibn Abbas about Al Abbas (his father), that he said, the Messenger (saw) told me, "I do not find any protection from you or your brother (meaning Hamza), can you take me out to the market tomorrow, so that I can visit the camp where the arab tribes gather." Thus, clearly indicating that what the Messenger (saw) was seeking was not found in his companions.When the Messenger (saw) continued the contacting of these particular entities he would seek information as to their strength and position, and speak with its leadership. And to qualify the above statement of the Messenger (saw) of the specificity of such persons, this can be confirmed from what ibn Kathir states."Ali (ra) states. "We then went to a meeting underway marked by calm and dignity. There were shaikhs of high rank and fine appearance there. Abu Bakr (ra) went forward and made the greeting. Abu Bakr asked them, "From whom are you?" They replied, "We are from the Banu Shayban bin Tha'laba." Abu Bakr then turned to the Messenger (saw) and commented, "I swear no one has more power in their people than these do." The man most comparable to Abu Bakr was Mafruq bin 'Amr, he was their most eloquent. He wore his hair in two braids that came down to his chest. Abu Bakr asked him, "How many are you in number?" Mafruq replied, "We are more than 1000 strong." Abu Bakr continued, "And how would protection be with you?" "We go to the limit. And every people has a forefather (meaning they are proud and noble)." Mafruq responded. Abu Bakr then asked, "And how is it when you make war with your enemies?" Mafruq answered, "When we meet in battle, we are the fiercest of men. We take greater pride in our steeds than in our sons, care more for our swords than our sperm.""This is but a fraction from the accounts from the books of seerah as to the seeking of support by the Messenger (saw) of those powerful people. And they were a distinguished group or class of persons who were not found from either amongst his (saw) companions or the ordinary people. Thus, from this, the Messenger (saw) sought the support to deliver change in practical terms, not from his (saw) companions, but from those unlike them, namely the Generals and Officers.The Messenger (saw) continued in this way to contact those strong factions approaching fifty two different tribes, even whilst bringing humiliation upon himself as what was experienced at Taif, until Allah (swt) opened the way to Al Aws and Al Khazraj.It must be noted that these were the powerful people that enabled the message of Islam to be transferred from one phase to another, and the support from whom Quraysh feared.This can be easily understood by the manner in which they seized the society in Medina in order to place the Messenger (saw) as its head, and the fact that they bypassed its current ruler, 'Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Salul, is an example of that material power. As for the fact that the Messenger (saw) was given the material support upon his entry into Medina as the defacto Head of State, Ibn Kathir states:"Imam Ahmed stated, "Hashim related to us, quoting Sulayman, from Thabit, from Anas bin Malik, who said, "I moved through the young men shouting, "Muhammad has come!" And I moved out ahead and still I could see nothing. But the Messenger of Allah did come, accompanied by Abu Bakr. They hid in a ruin in Medina, then sent out a Bedouin asking for the Ansar, to let them enter. Thereupon some 500 of the Ansar (with their weapons) came out saying, "Do come in, you are safe and will be obeyed."""" Having secured the means (by force and by military command and control) to be in a position to do so.It is today, that after having understood the methodology of resuming the Islamic way of life, and looking to the seerah of the Messenger (saw) for guidance, some from amongst the Muslims set out to emulate these actions in order to achieve that objective. Indeed, it is the support from what can be said of today's strongest factions, among which are the sincere Muslim armies, and their sincere Generals and Officers, that would indeed progress the work to resume the Islamic way of life into practical implementation. Such that, Islam will be implemented, the entire Muslim lands re-unified, her armies one, and the conveying of Islam to the whole of mankind would resume through the international existence of a State that carries and defends its message. Such progression poses obvious threats for those who thrive upon the current weakness and impotence of the Muslims.An indication as to the fears of the colonialists and their agents, as to the achievement of such a progression can be found in the tampering of the armed forces in the Muslim lands. They initiated that when they destroyed the Khilafah State and handed over its administrative control to their agents. They were organised according to the structures, mentalities, and culture of the western framework, whose hands were still fresh from the blood of destroying the Islamic State. Not only were their initial commanding officers foreign, but those allowed to progress under them were carefully selected to not only be imitators of the western secular culture, but a worshipper of it. An example of this is the careful implantation of the Dunma Jews into the major influential positions of the Turkish Armed Forces, the likes of whom are still there today. And such tampering and meddling with the armed forces of the Muslims is a sufficient evidence against the disbelievers. It is a clear sign today, just as Quraysh realised then, that they fear of what support they may give to the Muslim ummah and the sincere d'awa carriers among them!Any Islamic sentiment and anti-western secular sentiment was addressed through court-martials, imprisonment, and treason. This is what happened throughout the Pakistan Armed Forces under the supervision of the foreign powers and the brainwashed Officers, whereby some of the most brilliant and god-fearing soldiers were dispensed of. The same can be said for the armed forces of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and countless other Muslim lands under the subjugation of western secular culture. The powerful armed forces of the Muslims are monitored, observed, and carefully vetted to make sure that none loyal save to the agent ruler is allowed to gain rank and position. An example of this is in what occurred, and in what continues to occur, in the military purges that take place in the Turkish army. It was only recently where two-hundred (conservative official figures) army officers were ejected due to being 'Islamic' and moreover displaying Islamic loyalties. Also, the Pakistan armed forces, upon the request of the Pharonic US is purging its rank and file of the Generals and Officers who are found to have any loyalty to Islam and the Muslims. Even its most strategic and influential ISI intelligence network (that is considered the backbone of the Pakistani armed forces) is being pressured to be dismantled or its current leadership replaced, due to the strong Islamic sentiments that are found within them. While, those who love the western secular way of life, and detest the Muslims, are given promotions and commanderships.All this to prevent the Ansar of today from presenting themselves and fulfilling their due role.What has already been mentioned in itself provides sufficient evidence that the progress is being monitored and measures are being taken to prevent its successful results. But the fact that the monitoring needs to be something ongoing, and that the purges need to happen frequently, is a sign that despite their deceitful plans, the sincere Officers of the Muslims are responding to Allah (swt), His Messenger (saw), and their ummah.And indeed, it is they - the enemies of Islam - who have followed and shadowed the Muslims and the sincere d'awa carriers among them through the various points and phases of the call to resume the Islamic way of life one more time. These are such glad tidings, hopes and optimisms, that the correct methodology is bound to yield the correct results, even if it took time.The sincere d'awa carriers and the Muslims have contacted them, will continue to contact them, and will get them - Allah (swt) willing!3. The mentality of VictoryWhat should be absolutely clear is that the observations in their desperate final attempts to thrust obstacles in the face of the Muslim ummah and in the face of those sincere d'awa carriers among them, are (without a shadow of a doubt) manifesting themselves like before. For the desperate measures that Quraysh undertook in the later stages of the d’awa then, by way of fearing the support of the Ansar and the attempt to kill the Messenger (saw), is what is being mirrored today – the ongoing tampering of the Muslim armed forces, and the use of force and death against the political aspect of Islam and the d’awa carriers everywhere.But, those opponents then during the establishment of the first Islamic State experienced their limitations when it came to their plans and policies. Specifically, it was when they agreed upon and implemented the policy to address the impending threat. So confident were they in this countermeasure, and so confident were they against the Muslims that they mocked - as ibn Abbas, Qatadah, and Mujahid said - by saying that they should wait for the death of Muhammad (saw), just as the poets before him (saw) perished. And it was at this point when Allah had revealed,
"And remember when the disbelievers planned against you to imprison you, or to kill you, or to expel you (from Makka), they were planning and Allah too was planning, and it is Allah who is the best of planners." [TMQ Al Anfal; 8:30]
And it was they who ultimately failed, and Allah provided the successful entry into Medina by the prophet (saw) as the Head of the Islamic State, where it was established, and whilst Quraysh were still waiting by his doorstep to execute their confident policy!Surely this is good news that in the face of their policies and their intricate plans, both open and hidden, that Allah will aid the believers, and be the Provider of victory, and He (swt) is able and capable of all things, despite the lowliness the ummah feels in her present times.The Pharonic US state may have successfully rewritten, openly contradicted, and blatantly bypassed all the international laws and norms when it came to smiting the Muslims, to such a devious extent that not one state in the world is able to practically oppose it. She may arrogantly walk the Earth aiding whom she wishes and slaughtering whom she likes. She may have successfully invented a campaign to subvert and suppress the return of the Islamic Khilafah State that has the follower ship of not only her own citizens, but all the peoples of the world as if the Pharonic US state has performed some kind of evil magic over them. This made the Muslims the object of suspicion and his Deen as a source of guilt. Thus making the spilling of Muslim blood anywhere, under any circumstance, and by anyone, lawful in the eyes of the world's people, while the Muslims are without power. Indeed, they have succeeded in turning the criticism and the wrath of individuals, nations, and states against the Muslims everywhere and without exception, reminiscent of the witch-hunt of medieval times.The Pharonic disbelieving colonialists may have to their credit genius think-tanks supported by all forms of intelligence and material resources, they may have experience in dealing with all types of threats, they may have devised every form of countermeasure one may think of, they may be hailed as superpowers, they may posses ownership and allegiance of the world's political institutions, they may have a presence in every inch of land via their agents or any other means of spying, they may have trillion dollar budgets that even computers cannot count, they may have mighty military resources, they may enjoy all types of military superiority, they may have won over the regimes and rulers in our lands, nay they may even have armies of Jinn! But despite this, it will never be enough to stop the will of Allah (swt) the Almighty and His (swt) promise of victory to the ummah and to the mighty d'awa carriers among them!O honourable ummah! O mighty d'awa carriers! Do not let them or their agents draw your attention to defeat rather than victory. Do not allow them and their agents lead you to believe anything to the contrary, for they desire not victory, success, or anything wholesome for you, but rather they desire defeat and humiliation for you. Know that the criteria of success is not material resources, rather the criteria is Allah and Allah alone (swt), we believe in it, and they will never be able to counter it, and ultimately that is the frustration we see in their faces, and that will be the anguish and defeat we are going to - of a surety - witness!!!So be confident in your march, and raise your heads high, and be bearers of good news to those around you. Fill your minds with confidence that you are on the right path, and pour courage into your hearts. And look forward to an assured victory in this world, and an appointment with your Lord in the next. For you are indeed mighty in the eyes of your Lord, and formidable in the eyes of your enemies.
"Indeed, those who disbelieve spend their wealth to hinder men from the path of Allah, and so will they continue to spend it, but in the end it will become an anguish for them. Then they will be overcome. And those who disbelieve will be gathered into Hell" [TMQ Al Anfal; 8:36]"
And Allah has full power and complete control of His affairs, though most of mankind know it not" [TMQ Yusuf; 12:21]
May Allah the Almighty (swt) preserve you, your Deen, and your ideology.
Alhamdolilahi Rabbil 'Alameen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)