Saddam may get his punishment - but who will account his colonial backers
The Iraqi High Court has upheld the ruling that Saddam Hussein be hanged after he was sentenced to death in November for the massacre of 148 people in Dujail in1982. Whilst this ruling brings to an end the trial of Saddam, it does little to bring justice for the victims of Iraq - whether under the tyranny of Saddam or the tyranny of the present coalition forces.
The brutality of Saddam's rule is not in doubt. His victims were the people of Iraq who suffered for years at the hands of his murderous regime.The accusations levelled at Saddam and his henchmen focused solely on their role in the killings of innocents but made no reference to the weapons they used or whom they were bought from. The extent of US pressure has been that even the US instigated Iraqi constitution has been by-passed in recent days so as to ensure that a verdict on hanging need not require the approval of the Iraqi President or his ministers and risk causing a delay to the execution.
The trial of Saddam has completely ignored his close ties with western governments and companies throughout his years of brutality. It failed to scrutinise the weapons bought from western businessmen, the support given to him against the war with Iran in the 1980's, the meetings with foreign dignitaries and the befriending of his regime by Donald Rumsfeld and the US administration even after the massacres at Halabjah in 1988 . The infamous 'arms to Iraq affair' exposed how the British government was complicit in arms sales to Saddam - arms which we used against innocent people.
Therefore, the complete absence from the trial of the West's own role in grooming the monster Saddam only goes to prove that it was a sham exercise from the start. The sentence and verdict placed upon him has everything to do with his former colonial masters wishing to extricate themselves from association with his many crimes and absolutely nothing to do with bringing justice to the people of Iraq.
The added insult is that Bush and Blair - who are responsible for the deaths of 650 000 innocent civilians in Iraq during the unseating of the former ally of British and U.S. administrations, have faced no legal process, have faced no court and seemed to have escaped all earthly justice. They continue to support dictators, sell them arms, and sponsor the oppression they mete out to their citizens. That indeed is an enormous crime as yet left untouched.
From the onset, the capture and trial of Saddam was designed as a PR exercise - to play out to the International media that U.S. forces had a semblance of control over the worsening situation in Iraq and its government of occupation actually enforces a just rule of law. The most recent manipulation of events was the convenient date Saddam was sentenced, November 6 th - timed to coincide with the U.S. mid-term elections for maximum impact. The verdict came earlier than initially anticipated, and the judge read the sentence before he had delivered the verdict or even rehearsed the charges.
Many commentators have cited this absence of due legal process throughout the Saddam trial contradicting the illusion that real justice now exists after the overthrow of his murderous regime. The trial, courts, judges and judiciary were set up at the behest of the US backed Iraqi government with external pressure placed upon them to ensure 'selective justice' was done and aid the propaganda that US presence is a force for good.
It is clear that the trial and verdict of Saddam was a political show - for the benefit of ruling faction and the foreign occupying governments - and hiding the uncomfortable political truths that link Saddam to those foreign occupying governments. The sentencing of Saddam is simply a victor's justice, not a victim's justice of the thousands who were killed by him under the watchful eye of his colonial masters.
Saturday, 6 January 2007
Views on News - Colonialism
US and UK Colonialism in the Middle East endangers all faith communities
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, in widely reported remarks following his visit to the Middle East has expressed concern over the plight of Christian communities. Dr Williams cited the growing numbers of Christians who have left Iraq since the invasion in 2003 as well as a number of attacks upon priests as evidence of growing community tensions.
The innocent loss of life and displacement of people from all communities since the US and UK governments illegal decision to invade and occupy Iraq is regrettable and not justified. However, it would be incorrect to frame the events in Iraq or the wider Middle East as a conflict between Islam and Christianity or a religious war between rival faiths.
The current anger within the Muslim world is not driven by an inherent dislike of other religions or Muslims intent upon a ‘holy war against the infidels’, nor even because of a hatred of western freedoms, as is commonly depicted in the western media. Rather, the frustration and anger of the Muslim masses has reached unprecedented levels due to the naked colonialism of western governments who have killed thousands as part of the ‘war on terror’ in the last five years. A modern day colonialism which has seen hundred of thousands of foreign occupying troops and countless military bases established in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and the associated crimes and atrocities of Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, Bagram, Mazar-I-Sharif, Fallujah, Haditha and Baujur province. All the while aided and abetted by the dictators in the Muslim world. The hostility in the Muslim world to Bush, Blair and their armies is not directed at them in their capacity as westerners or Christians, but because of their policies and the hegemony they seek.
The policies of the US and UK government in Iraq is the starkest example of this. One can certainly agree with Dr Williams when he says that life for Christians has become more difficult or that “the situation has got worse since Saddam fell”. The sad reality of life in Iraq is that it has got worse for all communities. Almost four years after the invasion security for the people of Iraq is non-existent; sectarian conflict has emerged with government backing of armed militias; unemployment is at record levels; electricity is intermittent for most of the day; there is very little infrastructure leave alone reconstruction and oil production is lower than in days of Saddam. Unsurprisingly, Iraqis of all communities are leaving in there thousands every day.
Dr Williams also expresses his frustrations that the government in the run up to the war did not listen to the concerns of the Church or members of the Clergy. Again, he is not alone. Blair and his ministers did not listen to the millions of people who demonstrated against the war, discounted and manipulated the governments own intelligence reports which predicted that the Iraq war would increase the prospect of terrorism as well as the countless numbers who stated that the removal of Saddam was simply about replacing one form of tyranny with another.
The Middle East will continue to be beset by problems whilst it is run by western government proxies or through direct occupation. The desire of the Muslim world is for a return to the Caliphate; an independent and non-sectarian state.
The Caliphate will uphold the fundamental rights of justice and will not break its treaties, torture and abuse prisoners, imprison people without charge, oppress minorities and spy on its citizens. These fundamental rights are enshrined within statutory Islamic Law and cannot be reversed by legal precedent or the whims of any government.
Non-Muslims in the Caliphate will have established channels to air any grievances or denial of their rights. All citizens will be empowered with the right to speak out where necessary. Non-Muslims will enjoy an elevated status with respect and tolerance shown to their beliefs and places of worships. The Caliphate will look after the needs and protect the rights of all its citizens Muslims, Jews and Christians.
Sir Thomas Arnold in his book 'The Call to Islam’ states: "We have never heard about any attempt to compel Non-Muslim parties to adopt Islam or about any organised persecution aiming at exterminating Christianity. If the Caliphs had chosen one of these plans, they would have wiped out Christianity as easily as what happened to Islam during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella in Spain "
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, in widely reported remarks following his visit to the Middle East has expressed concern over the plight of Christian communities. Dr Williams cited the growing numbers of Christians who have left Iraq since the invasion in 2003 as well as a number of attacks upon priests as evidence of growing community tensions.
The innocent loss of life and displacement of people from all communities since the US and UK governments illegal decision to invade and occupy Iraq is regrettable and not justified. However, it would be incorrect to frame the events in Iraq or the wider Middle East as a conflict between Islam and Christianity or a religious war between rival faiths.
The current anger within the Muslim world is not driven by an inherent dislike of other religions or Muslims intent upon a ‘holy war against the infidels’, nor even because of a hatred of western freedoms, as is commonly depicted in the western media. Rather, the frustration and anger of the Muslim masses has reached unprecedented levels due to the naked colonialism of western governments who have killed thousands as part of the ‘war on terror’ in the last five years. A modern day colonialism which has seen hundred of thousands of foreign occupying troops and countless military bases established in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and the associated crimes and atrocities of Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, Bagram, Mazar-I-Sharif, Fallujah, Haditha and Baujur province. All the while aided and abetted by the dictators in the Muslim world. The hostility in the Muslim world to Bush, Blair and their armies is not directed at them in their capacity as westerners or Christians, but because of their policies and the hegemony they seek.
The policies of the US and UK government in Iraq is the starkest example of this. One can certainly agree with Dr Williams when he says that life for Christians has become more difficult or that “the situation has got worse since Saddam fell”. The sad reality of life in Iraq is that it has got worse for all communities. Almost four years after the invasion security for the people of Iraq is non-existent; sectarian conflict has emerged with government backing of armed militias; unemployment is at record levels; electricity is intermittent for most of the day; there is very little infrastructure leave alone reconstruction and oil production is lower than in days of Saddam. Unsurprisingly, Iraqis of all communities are leaving in there thousands every day.
Dr Williams also expresses his frustrations that the government in the run up to the war did not listen to the concerns of the Church or members of the Clergy. Again, he is not alone. Blair and his ministers did not listen to the millions of people who demonstrated against the war, discounted and manipulated the governments own intelligence reports which predicted that the Iraq war would increase the prospect of terrorism as well as the countless numbers who stated that the removal of Saddam was simply about replacing one form of tyranny with another.
The Middle East will continue to be beset by problems whilst it is run by western government proxies or through direct occupation. The desire of the Muslim world is for a return to the Caliphate; an independent and non-sectarian state.
The Caliphate will uphold the fundamental rights of justice and will not break its treaties, torture and abuse prisoners, imprison people without charge, oppress minorities and spy on its citizens. These fundamental rights are enshrined within statutory Islamic Law and cannot be reversed by legal precedent or the whims of any government.
Non-Muslims in the Caliphate will have established channels to air any grievances or denial of their rights. All citizens will be empowered with the right to speak out where necessary. Non-Muslims will enjoy an elevated status with respect and tolerance shown to their beliefs and places of worships. The Caliphate will look after the needs and protect the rights of all its citizens Muslims, Jews and Christians.
Sir Thomas Arnold in his book 'The Call to Islam’ states: "We have never heard about any attempt to compel Non-Muslim parties to adopt Islam or about any organised persecution aiming at exterminating Christianity. If the Caliphs had chosen one of these plans, they would have wiped out Christianity as easily as what happened to Islam during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella in Spain "
Views on News - Brutality
Death of Niyazov reveals the extent of his brutality and the support of his backers
The death of Saparmurat Niyazov the dictator of Turkmenistan for the past 21 years will bring only temporary relief to the people of Turkmenistan. His legacy leaves a host of problems to the country which has seen it turn into a playground for competing nations and western multinationals eager to usurp its rich natural resources.
Niyazov was a brutal despot who was nurtured by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to become its head in Turkeminstan in 1985. The collapse of the Soviet Union saw the need for a strong man to control the former Soviet republics and with Russian backing Niyazov became Turkmenistan’s first leader in 1991.
Niyazov’s crimes against the majority Muslim population of Turkmenistan were on a par with any of the tyrant rulers of the Muslim world. He tolerated no opposition or criticism of his regime with opponents being assassinated, exiled, imprisoned or simply ‘disappeared’.
People who dared challenge him were arrested and tortured, sentenced to long prison terms. The majority were political opponents but among his more recent victims were journalists and one human rights activist. Ogulsapar Muradova, 58, who worked for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, died in prison. Her body showed obvious signs of torture.
His infamous secret police were notorious for striking fear amongst the people with teachers, amongst others, being used to test children’s, and their parent’s, allegiance towards the State and Niyazov. His grip on power was cemented by rigged election results which regularly returned a 99.5% vote in his favour and in 1999 all effective limits were removed when his sycophants in Parliament voted him ‘President for Life’.
In 2002 Niyazov announced his intention to officially rename all 12 months of the year in commemoration of the country's heroes and most potent national symbols. He renamed January ‘Turkmenbashi which was his official name.
Despite the abundance of oil and gas within Turkmenistan, holding the fifth largest proven reserves of gas in the world, an estimated 20 trillion cubic metres, none of this wealth produced any prosperity for the people. Food and housing shortages were evident outside the capital city. Earlier this year thousands of medical staff were sacked and hospitals closed down, education for schoolchildren restricted and payments to the elderly curtailed. By contrast foreign companies from the West, Russia and China were feted by the regime with lavish ceremonies far removed from the lives of ordinary people.
The misappropriation of monies by Niyazov and his cronies was staggering. In similarities with the rulers of Saudia Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf States, he built palatial palaces for himself and spent millions on personal tributes such as gold statues. Niyazov is said to have amassed a personal wealth of $3bn.
Niyazov’s ties with Western powers as well as Russia and China were cordial to say the least in his years of ruthless power. European nations tolerated the dictator for the stability he provided in supplying cheap oil and gas via Russia. Silence over the brutal practises his regime conducted were the price to be paid for dealings with this energy rich country.
The US interests with the Niyazov regime were equally pernicious. The US had curried favour with Niyazov as firstly part of its global war on terror and secondly as a means to covert the abundant gas reserves of Turkmenistan away from Russia and China by building a series of pipelines from the Caspian sea to Europe.
According to the British Foreign Office, UK exports to Turkmenistan in 2005 totalled £13,810 million. Turkmen imports to the UK in 2005 totalled £4.036 million. British companies active in Turkmenistan include: Burren Energy and Dragon Oil which have oil Production Sharing Agreements to operate oilfields in the west of Turkmenistan.
The US and UK attacks on Afghanistan in 2001 were welcomed by Niyazov and Turkmenistan airspace continues to be used by US aircraft. In recent months US officials have visited the region to discuss prospects of opening a US base in Turkmenistan.
Indeed, Niyazov’s funeral on Sunday 24th December saw a litany of influential attendees keen to ensure their respective interests are progressed in the post Niyazov era whilst concerned that any power struggle does not effect the supply of oil and gas. Those who attended included the Russian Prime Minister, US Secretary for State Richard Boucher and officials from Gazprom, the Russian oil oligarchy.
The death of Niyazov highlights the dire situation within the Muslim world, which despite its strategic depth and energy resources continues to be plagued by the tyrannies of dictatorship and colonial exploitation.
The death of Saparmurat Niyazov the dictator of Turkmenistan for the past 21 years will bring only temporary relief to the people of Turkmenistan. His legacy leaves a host of problems to the country which has seen it turn into a playground for competing nations and western multinationals eager to usurp its rich natural resources.
Niyazov was a brutal despot who was nurtured by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to become its head in Turkeminstan in 1985. The collapse of the Soviet Union saw the need for a strong man to control the former Soviet republics and with Russian backing Niyazov became Turkmenistan’s first leader in 1991.
Niyazov’s crimes against the majority Muslim population of Turkmenistan were on a par with any of the tyrant rulers of the Muslim world. He tolerated no opposition or criticism of his regime with opponents being assassinated, exiled, imprisoned or simply ‘disappeared’.
People who dared challenge him were arrested and tortured, sentenced to long prison terms. The majority were political opponents but among his more recent victims were journalists and one human rights activist. Ogulsapar Muradova, 58, who worked for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, died in prison. Her body showed obvious signs of torture.
His infamous secret police were notorious for striking fear amongst the people with teachers, amongst others, being used to test children’s, and their parent’s, allegiance towards the State and Niyazov. His grip on power was cemented by rigged election results which regularly returned a 99.5% vote in his favour and in 1999 all effective limits were removed when his sycophants in Parliament voted him ‘President for Life’.
In 2002 Niyazov announced his intention to officially rename all 12 months of the year in commemoration of the country's heroes and most potent national symbols. He renamed January ‘Turkmenbashi which was his official name.
Despite the abundance of oil and gas within Turkmenistan, holding the fifth largest proven reserves of gas in the world, an estimated 20 trillion cubic metres, none of this wealth produced any prosperity for the people. Food and housing shortages were evident outside the capital city. Earlier this year thousands of medical staff were sacked and hospitals closed down, education for schoolchildren restricted and payments to the elderly curtailed. By contrast foreign companies from the West, Russia and China were feted by the regime with lavish ceremonies far removed from the lives of ordinary people.
The misappropriation of monies by Niyazov and his cronies was staggering. In similarities with the rulers of Saudia Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf States, he built palatial palaces for himself and spent millions on personal tributes such as gold statues. Niyazov is said to have amassed a personal wealth of $3bn.
Niyazov’s ties with Western powers as well as Russia and China were cordial to say the least in his years of ruthless power. European nations tolerated the dictator for the stability he provided in supplying cheap oil and gas via Russia. Silence over the brutal practises his regime conducted were the price to be paid for dealings with this energy rich country.
The US interests with the Niyazov regime were equally pernicious. The US had curried favour with Niyazov as firstly part of its global war on terror and secondly as a means to covert the abundant gas reserves of Turkmenistan away from Russia and China by building a series of pipelines from the Caspian sea to Europe.
According to the British Foreign Office, UK exports to Turkmenistan in 2005 totalled £13,810 million. Turkmen imports to the UK in 2005 totalled £4.036 million. British companies active in Turkmenistan include: Burren Energy and Dragon Oil which have oil Production Sharing Agreements to operate oilfields in the west of Turkmenistan.
The US and UK attacks on Afghanistan in 2001 were welcomed by Niyazov and Turkmenistan airspace continues to be used by US aircraft. In recent months US officials have visited the region to discuss prospects of opening a US base in Turkmenistan.
Indeed, Niyazov’s funeral on Sunday 24th December saw a litany of influential attendees keen to ensure their respective interests are progressed in the post Niyazov era whilst concerned that any power struggle does not effect the supply of oil and gas. Those who attended included the Russian Prime Minister, US Secretary for State Richard Boucher and officials from Gazprom, the Russian oil oligarchy.
The death of Niyazov highlights the dire situation within the Muslim world, which despite its strategic depth and energy resources continues to be plagued by the tyrannies of dictatorship and colonial exploitation.
Views on News - Blairs Speech
Blair Speech: Duty to integrate & stay silent
When Tony Blair made his speech in Downing Street: "The Duty to Integrate: Shared British Values" on 08 December 2006 he sparked the most extraordinary headlines. 'Blair tells immigrants to integrate or stay away'; 'Blair: Stick to our values or don't come'; 'IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DON'T COME HERE'. New Labour undoubtedly has the most sophisticated understanding of how to pass a media message of any British government of modern times. It is, then, undoubtedly the case that these headlines were intended by this speech. The speech unashamedly focused on the Muslim community, conflating immigrant, with Muslim, with problem.
Only a few years ago it would have been unthinkable for the Prime Minister to use a discourse on these matters that would befit a far right extremist. Indeed, it is not the offensive ideas of the far right fringe that is fuelling community division and hostility against Britain’s Muslim community, but the Prime Minister himself and his government. Although he commented that Blair’s Britain 'was not the stuffy old Britain that used to be sent up in the comedy sketches of the 1970s but a nation proud, willing and able to go out and compete on its merits', the reality was different. His was a speech of which Alf Garnett would have been proud. When Blair later said that 'it is a problem with a minority of that community, particularly originating from certain countries' he could just as well have said 'Pakis go home'!
This was also a speech that carried the latest lie for the Olympic Bid that Britain was a country "at ease with different races, religions and cultures". Britain, under Blair and despite his boast about legal protections (many of which come from European law in any case) has become more hostile to different races, religions and cultures.
It is a telling piece of New Labour spin that he said "only 25 per cent of Brits say they would prefer to live in an all-white area." That is 'only' 15 million people! But it is rank hypocrisy to argue that he believes in "essential values - belief in democracy, the rule of law, tolerance, equal treatment for all, respect for this country and its shared heritage". We can of course concede that he believes in Britain’s Imperial and Colonial heritage. But to argue he believes in 'democracy' when he has attempted to cluster bomb democracy onto Iraq and Afghanistan is laughable. His belief in the rule of law was heretical when it came to the illegal war in Iraq, Belmarsh, Guantanamo, and extraordinary rendition. His equal treatment for the Muslim community did not extend to stop and search, and not to 'residents', as opposed to citizens, in terms of their status before the law. All of this is ample proof of his contempt for 'this country' and those aspects of its heritage that adopted these principles.
But in fairness to Blair, his statements expose something that he cannot take sole blame for. Many leaders and politicians in Europe and the United States have sung the song of noble aims – justice, equality, rights, and 'freedom' – and yet worked against these values in their foreign policy. Think of Somalia and Vietnam, Suez and the Raj. The history of western foreign policy is one based upon violence and profits more than values and Prophetic teachings. The sad fact of the matter is that as long as big business dominates the political arena, the future is unlikely to be any more ethical. Mr Blair says that integration is about "integrating at the point of shared, common unifying British values". If by this he means integrating into values that promote the profit motivated violence of the 19th and 20th Century, then I and many others, Muslims and non-Muslims will defy his call for them to "take clear precedence over any cultural or religious practice". Instead, I will stand up, because of my religion and call loud and long against these values even if it rocks the boat. What Blair’s Iraq disaster symbolises is decades of imperial adventures that have allowed small numbers to prosper exponentially whilst simultaneously destroying the lives of millions.
Muslims want to engage with their non-Muslim neighbours – to further understanding about the distinct beliefs and practices of Muslims, as well as the common human traits we share. We have no problem with engagement in civil society. Some have said that we value matters such as modesty, courtesy, respect for the elderly and family, or 'community over individual' in a way that was once traditional in Britain, but is now lamented as it has been eroded by a 'freedom gone mad culture' – and this may well be a valuable contribution to modern Britain. Many now engaged in these initiatives believe that a more practical notion of aiming for harmony between communities is a way forward.
But by continually trying to push integration in society through vague and conflicting definitions of Britishness, war on terror propaganda and the imposition of the chosen values of the government of the day on everyone else is likely to impede the road to better community relations. His solutions once again focus around Muslims, immigrants and any one else who makes a good headline, laying the blame at someone else’s door. He, like Jack Straw before him, has again firmly deflected any consideration that there is a solution in addressing foreign policy.
Although this New Labour pattern is now extremely predictable, it is disturbingly reckless – that a government will try to save itself by vilifying a minority – even at the expense of community relations. It is something that has undoubtedly become part of Blair’s legacy to political life.
When Tony Blair made his speech in Downing Street: "The Duty to Integrate: Shared British Values" on 08 December 2006 he sparked the most extraordinary headlines. 'Blair tells immigrants to integrate or stay away'; 'Blair: Stick to our values or don't come'; 'IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DON'T COME HERE'. New Labour undoubtedly has the most sophisticated understanding of how to pass a media message of any British government of modern times. It is, then, undoubtedly the case that these headlines were intended by this speech. The speech unashamedly focused on the Muslim community, conflating immigrant, with Muslim, with problem.
Only a few years ago it would have been unthinkable for the Prime Minister to use a discourse on these matters that would befit a far right extremist. Indeed, it is not the offensive ideas of the far right fringe that is fuelling community division and hostility against Britain’s Muslim community, but the Prime Minister himself and his government. Although he commented that Blair’s Britain 'was not the stuffy old Britain that used to be sent up in the comedy sketches of the 1970s but a nation proud, willing and able to go out and compete on its merits', the reality was different. His was a speech of which Alf Garnett would have been proud. When Blair later said that 'it is a problem with a minority of that community, particularly originating from certain countries' he could just as well have said 'Pakis go home'!
This was also a speech that carried the latest lie for the Olympic Bid that Britain was a country "at ease with different races, religions and cultures". Britain, under Blair and despite his boast about legal protections (many of which come from European law in any case) has become more hostile to different races, religions and cultures.
It is a telling piece of New Labour spin that he said "only 25 per cent of Brits say they would prefer to live in an all-white area." That is 'only' 15 million people! But it is rank hypocrisy to argue that he believes in "essential values - belief in democracy, the rule of law, tolerance, equal treatment for all, respect for this country and its shared heritage". We can of course concede that he believes in Britain’s Imperial and Colonial heritage. But to argue he believes in 'democracy' when he has attempted to cluster bomb democracy onto Iraq and Afghanistan is laughable. His belief in the rule of law was heretical when it came to the illegal war in Iraq, Belmarsh, Guantanamo, and extraordinary rendition. His equal treatment for the Muslim community did not extend to stop and search, and not to 'residents', as opposed to citizens, in terms of their status before the law. All of this is ample proof of his contempt for 'this country' and those aspects of its heritage that adopted these principles.
But in fairness to Blair, his statements expose something that he cannot take sole blame for. Many leaders and politicians in Europe and the United States have sung the song of noble aims – justice, equality, rights, and 'freedom' – and yet worked against these values in their foreign policy. Think of Somalia and Vietnam, Suez and the Raj. The history of western foreign policy is one based upon violence and profits more than values and Prophetic teachings. The sad fact of the matter is that as long as big business dominates the political arena, the future is unlikely to be any more ethical. Mr Blair says that integration is about "integrating at the point of shared, common unifying British values". If by this he means integrating into values that promote the profit motivated violence of the 19th and 20th Century, then I and many others, Muslims and non-Muslims will defy his call for them to "take clear precedence over any cultural or religious practice". Instead, I will stand up, because of my religion and call loud and long against these values even if it rocks the boat. What Blair’s Iraq disaster symbolises is decades of imperial adventures that have allowed small numbers to prosper exponentially whilst simultaneously destroying the lives of millions.
Muslims want to engage with their non-Muslim neighbours – to further understanding about the distinct beliefs and practices of Muslims, as well as the common human traits we share. We have no problem with engagement in civil society. Some have said that we value matters such as modesty, courtesy, respect for the elderly and family, or 'community over individual' in a way that was once traditional in Britain, but is now lamented as it has been eroded by a 'freedom gone mad culture' – and this may well be a valuable contribution to modern Britain. Many now engaged in these initiatives believe that a more practical notion of aiming for harmony between communities is a way forward.
But by continually trying to push integration in society through vague and conflicting definitions of Britishness, war on terror propaganda and the imposition of the chosen values of the government of the day on everyone else is likely to impede the road to better community relations. His solutions once again focus around Muslims, immigrants and any one else who makes a good headline, laying the blame at someone else’s door. He, like Jack Straw before him, has again firmly deflected any consideration that there is a solution in addressing foreign policy.
Although this New Labour pattern is now extremely predictable, it is disturbingly reckless – that a government will try to save itself by vilifying a minority – even at the expense of community relations. It is something that has undoubtedly become part of Blair’s legacy to political life.
Free Mixing
In Islam, the basic principle of the interaction between men and women is segregation. This means that in all areas of life and in all places whether private or public, contact between men and women is generally prohibited. Many evidences establish the principle of not mixing between the sexes, and there are many ahadith which clarify that this is the case in both public and private areas:Abu Dawud narrated the following ahadith: The Prophet (saw) said, “The best row for men is the front row, (furthest from the women’s row) and the best row for women is the back row and the worst is the front row (just behind the men).” The Prophet (saw) saw men and women outside the mosque moving side by side in the crowd. He stopped the women saying, “It is not proper for you to walk in the middle of the path, you had better walk along the walls.”In Abu Dawud, p.284, Hadith No. 4931, it is narrated upon the authority of Aisha (ra) that she said: "I used to play with my friends and whenever the Prophet (saw) entered they would leave and whenever he (saw) went out they would come back in."In Abu Dawud Hadith No.4933, it is narrated that Aisha (ra) said: "The Prophet married me at seven and we had relationship at nine and when I moved to medina some women prepared me for the wedding and they nor I ever mixed with men in a house of women. The women received me and men received the Prophet and then we went to the house."In Abu Dawud V.4, p.370, Hadith No .5273, it is narrated upon the authority of Nafih that the Messenger Muhammad (saw) said, "Do not walk between two men or between two women in the street."This means that the Muslims should avoid contact with members of the opposite sex, whether Muslim or not, as a general rule. However, there are exceptions to this general rule, where the mixing or interaction between men and women is permitted in certain situations.For example, it is permitted for men and women who are mahram to each other to mix freely for any purpose that Islam permits. As well, there are certain areas where it is permitted for non-mahram men and woman to interact with each other, such as for the purpose of da‘wah (invitation to Islam). However, the type of mixing that can occur here is not free, and is restricted by the Shari‘ah to be within certain guidelines and boundaries, and the Muslim must be sure to understand these before any type of mixing takes place.The ahkam (rules) to do with mixing also vary with regard to the kind of place in which the mixing occurs.In an Islamic society, there are two types of areas where men and women come into contact with each other, which are quite different in their descriptions and in the ahkam (rules) which relate to them. The nature of the interaction between people in them may involve the mixing among men, among women, and between men and women. These are:The Public Areas - These consist of areas wherein anybody can be present without permission, e.g. the mosque, the streets etc.The Private Areas - These are areas where permission is required to enter them, such as houses. In such areas, it is forbidden to enter without permission, or even to look inside. Sahl ibn Sa’ad narrated, “A man peeped through a round hole into the dwelling place of the Prophet (saw) while he had an iron comb with which he was scratching his head. He (saw) said, ‘Had I known you were looking (through the hole) I would have pierced your eye with it (the comb). Verily, the order of taking permission to enter (a dwelling place) has been enjoined because of that sight (that one should not look unlawfully at the state of others)’. ” [Bukhari]Allah (swt) says:“O you who believe, don’t enter houses other than your own until you have asked permission and saluted those in them, that is best for you, in order that you may heed (what is seemly). If you find no one in the house, don’t enter until permission is given to you; if you are asked to go back, go back; that makes for greater purity for yourselves, and Allah knows well all that you do).” [TMQ An-Nur: 27-28]It was deduced from these verses that the place which is considered a house and upon which the rules of the private life apply is the one no one from outside is allowed to enter it except with a permission. In such place, the woman has special rules, to which the term of private life was given. This applies to that known as house or home. It was compared to it, by analogy, the places that are closed to the public i.e. in those areas which nobody is allowed to enter unless he had a special permission. However if those areas can be seen by people outside of them for example if they were made of transparent glass, where their inside is exposed to the public, then they are considered public places. Similarly, the places open to the public, wherever anybody has an enquiry or a transaction can enter, such offices are not subject to the rules of the private life.Islam defines rules and laws which regulate the relationships between men and women in each of these spheres.The Private LifeThis concerns the conduct of people when they are in the private areas. Here, the principle is that mixing between unrelated (non-mahram) men and women is forbidden as a general rule. However, the Shari‘ah gives permit for mixing to occur under certain special circumstances. In all these cases, a woman cannot be in Khalwa (seclusion) with another man alone. These areas include:1) Medicine: It is allowed for men and women to mix for the purpose of seeking medical treatment. The Sahabiyat used to treat the Sahaba and the Prophet (saw) consented to that.2) Da’wa: It is allowed for men and women to be present in the same class if the purpose of their mixing is learning about Islam or other types of education permitted by the Shari‘ah. The sister of Umar (ra) was being taught from the Quran by Khabab ibn Arrat (ra) with her husband when Umar entered upon them. It has been narrated that Umm Salamah and Aisha (ra) who used to do da'wa to men and women3) Marriage: If a man is looking to marry a woman then he is allowed to talk to her about issues related to finding out about her and related to the marriage. A man came to the Messenger Muhammad (saw) to ask about marrying a girl and the Prophet (saw) told him to go and see her i.e. see her in her Mahram’s presence.4) Duress or Compulsion: At times of absolute necessity or emergency, such as earthquakes, war or hurricanes, the necessary mixing is permitted for men and women in order to remove any danger or threat.5) State arrest: The evidence for this is from Uthman and Umar (ra) said, "O women, cover yourselves we are entering" and he entered a house to arrest someone with his army and there was Ijma of the Sahaba (consensus of the companions) on this.6) Eating: In Surah Nur Allah (SWT) says:“The blind is not to be blamed, the crippled is not to be blamed, nor is the handicapped to be blamed, just as you are not to be blamed for eating at your homes, or the homes of your fathers, or the homes of your mothers, or the homes of your brothers, or the homes of your sisters, or the homes of your fathers' brothers, or the homes of your fathers' sisters, or the homes of your mothers' brothers, or the homes of your mothers' sisters, or the homes that belong to you and you possess their keys, or the homes of your friends. You commit nothing wrong by eating together or as individuals. When you enter any home, you shall greet each other a greeting from Allah that is blessed and good. Allah thus explains the revelations for you, that you may understand.” [TMQ 24:61]For men and women to eat together is permitted in the places mentioned in the verse such as the home of your fathers or your friends as it says, “You commit nothing wrong by eating together or as individuals”.However people should be careful that even though eating together with the women at a friends house is permitted that they should leave once they have eaten and beware of socialisation with the opposite sex which would be exceeding the permit.7) Silat ar-rahm (maintaing the relationship between kith and kin): It is allowed for non-maharam relatives to sit with their non-maharam (people to whom marriage is permitted) for the sake of silat ar-rahm as long as it is without khalwah (privacy). There exist a number of hadith concerning the keeping of good relations with the relatives.It was narrated by Anas b. Malik that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Whoever loves that he be granted more wealth, and that his lease of life be prolonged, then he should keep good relations with his kith and kin". It is narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (saw) said: "Allah created His creation, and when He finished it, the womb got up and said, I seek refuge with you from Al-qatia (ties being severed with me)". On that Allah (swt) said: "Don’t you accept that I bestow my favours on him who keeps your ties, and withhold My favours from him who severes your ties?" On that it said, "Yes, Oh my Lord!" Then Allah (swt) said: "That is for you".The Public LifeThis concerns the conduct of people when they are in the public areas. Here again, the principle is that mixing between unrelated (non-mahram) men and women is forbidden as a general rule. However, the Shari‘ah gives permit for mixing (in the sense of presence in the same area) to occur under certain special circumstances. In all these cases, it is not a condition that a woman has a mahram in her presence. The areas can be broadly categorised to include:1) Hajj: Through the Prophets (saw) consent.2) Trade/hiring: This includes markets/shops, buying, selling, hiring, borrowing and lending. Tirmidhi narrated that the Messenger Muhammad (saw) traded with women, and Abu Bakr saw the Messenger Muhammad (saw) trade with a woman.3) Work: If the nature of the work means that one needs to mix then there is a permit. Work involves looking for work e.g. interviews, etc. The Messenger Muhammad (saw) permitted Zubayr Ibn Awwam's wife to work. She carried water both to men and women. The Messenger even offered his camel to assist her.4) Every day life affairs: This involves the unavoidable interaction between men and women in areas like streets, markets, restaurants, etc.Special cases within the Public lifeThere are private places upon which the rules of private life apply, such as houses. There are public places upon which the rules of the public life apply, such as the markets. There are public places with special rules like separating men from women, such as the mosques and attending the public talks at lecture theatres and the like which are compared by analogy.The Prophet (saw) said, “The best row for men is the front row, (furthest from the women’s row) and the best row for women is the back row and the worst is the front row (just behind the men).” [Abu Dawud]In Abu Dawud Kitab Al Salat, V.1, in the Chapter on Segregation, it is narrated that Umar bin Al Khattab (ra) said: "Make a special door for women in the mosques."So in the markets, it is not a condition that men separate from women during trading. But in the mosque and the lecture hall, the separation of men from women is a condition. The Messenger Muhammad (saw) used to address men and women in the mosque in medina, men in front and women behind. Similarly, in the hospitals the sections of men should be separated from the sections of women.In all these cases, where men and women are present at the same time, there must not be free mixing, where both sexes are mingling with each other. The general rule is that any contact between members of the opposite sex is minimised as much as possible, so any contact between members of the opposite sex must be necessary to the business at hand. Thus in the Islamic State, for example, in the trains or buses there would be separate areas for men and women.In any case, the activities which are occurring must be halal (i.e. permitted) in nature. Accordingly, mixing between non-mahram men and women for the purpose of amusement, leisure-activities or entertainment is strictly prohibited. Thus issues such as boyfriend/girlfriend relationships, dating, or enjoying leisure and company with unrelated women is haram. However, Islam does see these types of activities as acceptable, but only when regulated within the framework of marriage.WeddingsMixing (ikhtilaat) is not allowed unless it is for a need recognised by the Shariah for which there is a text in the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw) such as buying, selling, silat rahm (maintaining relations with kith and kin), etc.There is no text regarding the mixing of men and women in halls for wedding celebrations. Rather what has been mentioned in the time of the Messenger of Allah and his Sahabah is that the women used to sit with the bride on their own and the men used to sit on their own. Thus, mixing in halls is Haraam and no exception is made for it.In Abu Dawud Hadith No.4933, it is narrated that Aisha (ra) said: "The Prophet married me at seven and we had relationship at nine and when I moved to medina some women prepared me for the wedding and they nor I ever mixed with men in a house of women. The women received me and men received the Prophet and then we went to the house."What has been reported with respect to the wedding feasts is the wedding procession when the woman is taken to her husband’s house. It is allowed for men and women to take her to her husband’s house and then the men should separate form the women since this has been the established during the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he approved of it. This occurred outside and therefore falls under the rules of the public place.Khalwa (Seclusion)Khalwa relates to the presence of a non-mahram man and woman being on their own together without the presence of a mahram or any other person. This could happen in a private place, or a public place. In either case khalwa is forbidden from Islam, and both the man and woman involved are sinful.Khalwa in a Private Place: This could occur in any place that requires permission for entry, such as a house or bedroom in a residence building.Khalwa in a Public Place: This could occur in any public place whose nature is that no other people would be likely to pass by or come there. An example of such a place would be in a forest or an isolated room in an office.Muhammad (saw) said, “If a man and a woman are alone together in an isolated place, then the third is Shaitan.” Bukhari narrated that the Prophet (saw) said, “No man should stay with a lady in seclusion except in the presence of a mahram to her.” A man stood up and said, “O Rasul Allah! My wife has gone out intending to perform the Hajj and I have been enrolled in the army for such and such a campaign.” The Prophet (saw) said, “Return and perform the Hajj with your wife.”Modesty and Lowering the GazePart of the provision of maintaining the dignity and honour of men and women in Islam is in the regulation of the way they are regarded by each other. It is forbidden for the Muslim man to look at any woman with lustful intentions, except for his wife. The same is true for a Muslim woman with regard to other men.Rather, the emphasis is on lowering the gaze away from members of the opposite sex at times when they are present, like in the streets or the market place. Allah (swt) says,“Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty, that will make for greater purity for them, and Allah is well acquainted with all that they do. And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty.” [TMQ 24:30-31]Jarir ibn ‘Abdullah reported, “I asked Allah’s Messenger about the sudden glance (that is cast) on the face (of a non-mahram). He commanded me that I should turn away my eyes.” [Muslim]This reflects the principle that the way that Muslim men and women view each other is completely different to the way of the West, where women are seen as sex objects, and respect of both men and women in this context is almost non-existent. Indeed, if it does exist at all, the criteria upon which it is based mainly concerns the superficial physical attributes. Allah (swt) says:“And the believers, the men and women, are protecting friends of one another, they bid to honour and forbid dishonour, they perform the prayer, and they pay the alms, and they obey Allah and His Messenger. Upon them Allah will have mercy.” [TMQ 9:71]This aspect of the Social System of the Islamic State will prevent exploitation of women in pornography, or the use of their bodies as an enticement for people to buy products. Additionally, in the media as a whole, whether on television, magazines, newspapers or films, neither men nor women will be portrayed in roles where they reveal their awrah, or involve in activities that are forbidden in Islam.Thus the sexual bombardment from the media that is faced by people in the West, and the distorted image of men and women that this builds in the mind, will be absent in the Islamic State.
The True Meaning of Taqwa
"O you who believe! fear Allah as He should be feared and die not except in a state of Islam." [TMQ 3:102]Allah (swt) in the Quran emphasises the concept of Taqwa to us many times in the Quran.Taqwa is one of the most profound concepts in Islam. Taqwa is an avenue by which Muslims relate to one another in society and a means to channel their actions. Because of the great importance of taqwa, it has been referred to numerous times in the Qur’an and Sunnah in order to emphasise its relevance and significance to the Muslims. Allah (swt) strongly emphasises the rewards of people with taqwa in this life and the Hereafter. It is these muttaqeen that Allah (swt) grants assistance, victory and provides for. Thus, understanding the concept of taqwa is vital and mandatory for every Muslim.Unfortunately, this is the very concept which some of us have left behind, as a result of intellectual decline. The disbelievers in the distant past, as well as in present times, have understood the importance of taqwa and the Islamic creed, and how it could jeopardise their interests. They realised how taqwa and the Islamic creed (‘aqeedah) were the roots of power to the Muslims. Today we see a campaign to destroy the concept of Taqwa by making us divide the Deen from the Dunya, to secularise our understanding of Islam such that we limit it to personal Ibadat and akhlaq (morals) and detach from any other aspect of life such as economics, politics or social affairs. Allah (swt) warned us in the Quran about their continuous attempts to extinguish his light i.e. Islam, He (swt) said:"They wish to extinguish Allah's Light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow but that His Light is perfected even though the kuffar may detest it." [TMQ 9:32]Unfortunately due to the influence of the idea of separating the Deen and Dunya, we can see many misunderstandings amongst us as to who is defined as the Mutaqqi. A picture of a person who over emphasises prayer, fasting, and things such as donating to the masjid, while living a secluded and isolated life would be the one with taqwa, even though the same person would deal with usury, lie and do nothing towards reviving the Ummah. Due to this idea, people look to Islam as a religion like the other religions who are not complete Deen’s that have come with solutions to every aspect of life. So if I were to ask anyone from amongst the general population of Muslims, ‘what are the rules of Salah?’ I am sure most people would be able to answer this question. But if I was to ask ‘what is the ruling or economic system of Islam?’, ‘what are the Shariah rules relating to contracts and company structures’ or ‘what is our shar’iah responsibility towards the Muslims around the world who are being attacked such as in Iraq and Palestine?’ then I think many people would not know the answers to these questions, we must ask why? Didn’t Allah (swt) reveal to us a complete Deen covering all aspects of life? Didn’t Allah (swt) say in the Quran:“And We have sent down to you the Book as an explanation of everything, a guidance, a mercy and glad-tidings for those who submitted themselves to Islam.” [TMQ 16:89]So let us understand the true meaning of Taqwa. In contrast to the distorted picture that people have today, the Qur’an and Sunnah defines the idea of taqwa as protecting oneself from the Hellfire by following the orders of Allah (swt) by doing what He (swt) has commanded and avoiding what He (swt) has forbidden. Many ayat in the Qur’an point to this:“And unto Allah belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth. And, verily, We have recommended to the people of the Scripture before you, and to you (O Muslims) that you (all) fear Allah, and keep your duty to Him, But if you disbelieve, then unto Allah belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth, and Allah is Ever Rich, Worthy of all praise.” [TMQ An-Nisa’ 4: 131]Taqwa comes from the word 'waqiya', which means to protect. It is protection from the Anger of Allah (swt) and His (swt) punishment. This is why Taqwa is used to describe the performing of actions, which pleases Allah (swt) and abstaining from all actions that displeases Him (swt). Taqwa in essence means god consciousness, being conscious of Allah (swt) in all our actions and affairs.Also, in the Prophet’s (saw) last khutbah he said, “I ask you to fear Him (swt), listen to Him (swt), and obey.” Both the ayah, as well as the hadith, are commanding Muslims to have taqwa. A person should have taqwa as a barrier between himself and the Anger and Displeasure of Allah (swt). Through taqwa, the Muslim strives to obey Allah (swt) and abstains from His prohibitions.The son of ‘Ali (ra), Al-Hasan (ra) once said, “The people who have taqwa (al-muttaqoon) are the people who avoided whatever Allah (swt) has prohibited and have done whatever Allah (swt) has ordained.”‘Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (ra) once said, “Taqwa is not by fasting the day and not by praying the night. And its not by mixing between the two of them. But taqwa is leaving what Allah (swt) has made Haram and by doing what Allah (swt) has made Fard. After one has done this, Allah (swt) will provide good things for that person.”Ibn Juzayy said in his dictionary of terms from the introduction to his tafsir: "Taqwa's meaning is fear, clinging to obedience to Allah and abandoning disobedience to Him. It is the sum of all good."A true muttaqoon is a person who strives to possess a solid understanding and knowledge of the rulings of Allah (swt) through the Qur’an and Sunnah. Without proper knowledge of the Islamic rulings, a person would not know what is asked of him/her. Therefore, it is a must to understand Islam properly as well as to have the proper intention of pleasing Allah (swt) in carrying out these actions.Imam Ahmad mentions a hadith, narrated by a Sahabi, whereby a person once asked, “Oh Messenger of Allah, give me some advice.” The Prophet (saw) responded, “I advise you to fear Allah (swt) because it is the head of everything.” In another occasion the Prophet (saw) replied, “Fear Allah (swt) because it is the collection of all goodness.” Allah (swt) also promises to be with those who have taqwa. Allah (swt) says,“Truly, Allah is with those who fear Him, keep their duty unto Him, and those who are muhsinun (doers of good for Allah’s sake only).” [TMQ An-Nahl 16:128]Also taqwa constitutes a reason, that Allah (swt) has provided, in order to help one who is experiencing hardship and distress. Allah (swt) promises,“Whoever fears Allah, Allah will grant him a way out of hardship.” [TMQ At-Talaq 65:2]Allah (swt) had also promised forgiveness of sins to those people who are muttaqoon.“And whoever fears Allah, and keeps his duty to Him, He will forgive his sins from him and will enlarge his reward.” [TMQ At-Talaq 65:5]Allah (swt) has given the glad tidings for those who have taqwa. The news of paradise is assured to such people, giving hints at the vast rewards to those who take Allah (swt) as their Lord in their actions.“Verily those who are fearful of Allah (have taqwa ) are the people who, when an evil thought comes to them from Shaitan, they remember Allah and indeed they then see aright.” [TMQ Al-A‘raf 7:201]“And he (Muhammad) who has brought the truth and those who believe therein, those are al-muttaqoon (the pious and the righteous).” [TMQ Az-Zumar 39:33]Hence, from what Allah (swt) has outlined through the wahi, we can see that a person who possesses taqwa is not one who lives an isolated life, only praying, fasting and maintaining good character alone. Instead, the muttaqoon are those who fear Allah (swt) and look to what Allah (swt) has ordained in carrying out his actions to avoid His (swt) displeasure and anger. These people are involved with the Ummah, active in his/her life, concerned with the affairs of the Muslims, while at the same time praying, fasting, spending in Allah’s cause, having good morals and are forgiving. All these descriptions can be attributed to a person who has taqwa.The Deen has come to regulate the Dunya, not be separated from it. There is no concept of monasticism in Islam i.e. being like a monk. The Prophet (saw) said, “There is no monasticism in Islam.”Umar ibn al Khattab once looked at those praying and said, "The great number of times any of you raises and lowers his head does not deceive me. The [real] deen is being cautious and meticulous in the deen of Allah, and refraining from what Allah has forbidden, and acting according to what Allah permits and forbids.” Narrated Abu Huraira, the Prophet (saw) said, "The dunya is a prison for the believer and Paradise for the kafir (disbeliever)," [Sahih Muslim, vol.4, #7058]This means that we live within the prison of the Shariah, that every single action we undertake is based upon the revelation of Allah (swt). This means we must accept Islam completely and all of its rules including the rules relating to society, economics and Khilafah. This does not mean that we deny the world and that seeking material development and advancement according to the rules of Shariah is wrong. In fact once when Imam Ibn Hajar al Asqalani, a famous scholar in the past who died in 852 AH, who wrote the commentary of Sahih al Bukhar entitled ‘Fath al Bari’, was walking with his grand entourage through the town, they came upon a miserable, poor and dejected Jew. When the Jew recognized Ibn Hajar, he called out to him, "O scholar of Islam! Is it not true that your Prophet has said that this life is a prison for the believer and Paradise for the kafir? How is it that you are living in lavish wealth being a so-called believer, and yet I live this meagre and miserable existence?" Ibn Hajar responded, "What you say of the Prophet (saw) of what he has said is true. You should know that this opulence you see me living in, is a prison compared to what awaits for me in the Hereafter. And, you should know that what you are living is Paradise compared to what Allah has prepared for you in the akhira."We must realise that that every Muslim is obliged to believe in the Islamic Shari’ah as a whole otherwise we would be Kafir. Therefore the concept of secularism i.e. to separate the Deen from the Dunya is a Kufr concept. It is Kufr to deny the AHkam Shari’ah as a whole, or any definite (qaT'ai)detailed hukm of them. This is the case whether these ahkam (rules)are connected with worships (ibadaat), transactions (mu'amalaat), punishments (uqoobaat), foodstuffs, etc. So the rejection of the verse:"So establish regular prayer"[Al-Baraqah:43]Is the same as rejecting the verses:"But Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury,"[Al-Baraqah:275]"As to the thief, male or female, cut of f his or her hands,"[Al-Ma’idah:38]And is the same as rejecting the following verse calling the believers brothers regardless of their colour, language or ethnic origin – thus prohibiting nationalism i.e. to believe that we are better than others based upon our ethnic origin. So the Muslims in Iraq, Palestine and Iraq are our brothers just as the Muslims in Delhi, Bangkok or Jakarta:“The believers are nothing else but brothers” [TMQ Al-Hujurat: 10]Or the verses to do with ruling by what Allah has revealed, which we see the rulers in the Muslim world today ignoring, such as:“And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Zaalimun (unjust, oppressors).” [TMQ 5:45] “And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you, and do not follow their vain desires away from the truth which came to you.” [TMQ 5:48]In fact Allah (swt) has explicitly told us in the Quran that we are not believers unless we accept all of the rules of Islam. He (swt) said:"But no, I swear by your lord (allah), they will have no Iman, until they make you, (o prophet) rule between them in whatever they dispute amongst themselves, and then they find no resistance in their souls from what you have decided, instead they submit with absolute submission". [TMQ An Nisa: 65]Allah (swt) warned us of only taking Islam partially, He (swt) has condemned us if we think that politics is not part of Islam or that economics is not part of Islam, or that Islam has nothing to say about the current world situation. We must accept Islam as an Aqeeda and a system. Allah (swt) said:“So do you believe in some part of the Book and disbelieve in some. The penalty awaiting those who do this is nothing but humiliation in this life and the severest of punishment on the day of Judgement.” [2:85]Allah (swt) has revealed to us the best system to regulate the affairs of the Dunya so why are many of us even unaware of it?Let us look at some examples of Taqwa from the Sahaba: Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of Ibn Abi Awfa (may Allah be pleased with them both) who said: “We were struck by extreme hunger on the nights of Khaybar. On the day of Khaybar we found some domestic Asses so we slaughtered them. When the pots began to boil the caller of the Messenger of Allah called out to us and said: overturn your pots and do not eat anything of the meat of donkeys. ‘Abd Allah said: we said that the Prophet forbade them because the Khumus (i.e. a fifth of the spoils) had not been taken out of it. He said others said that he has prohibited them completely. I asked Sa’eed b. Jubayr who said, he has prohibited them completely.”authority of AnastAl-Bukhari reported on the , he said: b. Malik: “I was serving drinks to Abu Talha al-Ansari, ‘Ubaidah b. al-Jarrrah and Ubayy b. Ka'b prepared from unripe dates and fresh dates when a visitor came and he said: Verily liquor has been prohibited. Thereupon, Abu Talha said: O Anas! Stand up and break this pitcher. I stood up and (took hold) of a pointed stone and struck the pitcher with its lower part until it broke into pieces.”Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of ‘Ayisha (may Allah be Pleased with her) who said: “We have been told also that when Allah revealed the order that the Muslims should return to the pagans what they had spent on their wives who emigrated (after embracing Islam) and that the Muslims should not keep unbelieving women as their wives, 'Umar divorced two of his wives.”Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of ‘Ayisha (may Allah be pleased with her) who said: “May Allah have mercy on the Muhajir women. When Allah revealed the verse: “And let them draw their headscarfs all over necks and bosoms” [TMQ An-Nur:31] they tore their wrappers and concealed themselves with them.”Abu Dawud reported on the authority of Safiyyah bint Shaybah who reported on the authority of ‘Ayisha (may Allah be pleased her) that: She (‘Ayisha) mentioned the women of Ansar, praised them and said good words about them. She then said: “When Surat an-Nur came down, they took the curtains, tore them and made head covers of them.”Ibn Ishaq said: “…Al-Ash’ath b. Qays came to the Messenger of Allah as part of the Kindah delegation. Az-Zuhri informed to me that he came with eighty riders from Kindah. They entered the mosque of the Messenger of . They had long hair and put kohl (in their eyes). They wore Jubbahs with silk hems. When they entered the presence of Allah’s Messenger he said to them: did not you embrace Islam ? They said: Yes. He asked: ‘then what is this silk put around your necks? So they tore the silk and threw it away.”Hanzalah b. Abi ‘Aamir (may Allah be pleased with him) who was bathed by the angels heard the call to the battle of Uhud. He hurriedly responded to the call. He was martyred on the day of Uhud. Ibn Ishaq said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:“Your companion is being bathed by the angels, ask his family what happened to him?” His wife was asked. She had been a bride on that night. She said he went out in a state of impurity when he heard the call. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “That is why the angels have bathed him”.So let us be the ones who have Taqwa in its true meaning. Let us take Islam completely. Let us take heed from the words of Allah (swt) and may He (swt) strengthen us so that we can follow what He has said."O you who Believe! Enter into the Fold of Islam completely. And follow not the footsteps of Satan, for he is to you a clear enemy" [TMQ 2: 208]
The Relevance of Islam Today
By studying the history of humanity, it is evident that any nation builds its material achievements upon a specific intellectual foundation. This foundation sustains and advances the nation's material achievements, even in the face of severe problems or crises. On the other hand, if a nation lacked an intellectual foundation, its achievements would wither away and it would be unable to recover from any setbacks that confront it. It would lose its momentum altogether and cease to exist as a civilization. This intellectual foundation is of the utmost significance, as it serves as the basis for any civilization and provides a nation with its point of view about life, goals, methodology, and a reference for problems and issues that emerge in the course of a society. When the intellectual foundation is adopted and implemented, it engenders creativity and an effective way of thinking.The Muslim Ummah has a lengthy and rich history with the Islamic 'Aqeedah as its intellectual foundation. Today, the Muslim Ummah is living in decline, whether in the area of economics, politics, social order, government, morals, etc. It becomes important to scrutinize this set of conditions carefully so as not to mistakenly attribute these aspects as the reason for the decline. Since, this may cause us to direct our efforts away from the correct solution by addressing the symptoms rather than the root problem.This apparent state of decline did not occur in a sudden manner or due to minor problems. The Ummah abandoned Islam as its reference and intellectual basis. We began viewing Islam as a set of rituals and a historical heritage, with no relevance to life. This was a result of many factors that accumulated over many centuries. Some of which are:1. Neglect in the Arabic language.2. Muslims being infuenced by alien philosophies such as Greek, Hindu, and Persian. (Some Muslims in the past were influenced by such philosophies and established groups such as Al Mu'tazilah).3. The intellectual invasion headed by missionaries in the 17th century.4. The political invasions during the 19th century.5. The current educational curricula in the Muslim world.In the 4th century, the doors of Ijtihad were closed, resulting in a devastating impact upon the Muslim Ummah, especially in the long term. Closing the doors of Ijtihad stripped the Ummah from its ability to extract rules to solve newly emerging problems. The accumulation of unsolved problems resulted in the weakness in implementing Islam and caused Muslims to start doubting Islam's ability to solve contemporary problems, especially after the industrial revolution that occurred in the West. By the beginning of this century, many attempts were made or proposed to change the situation of the Muslim Ummah. These efforts focused on addressing the symptoms or resorting to other ideologies and ideas. One such effort was to make Islam relevant by viewing the Islamic Fiqh as changeable and adaptable to the changing society. This distorted understanding has led some to view dynamism of Fiqh from this perspective. So, what needs to be addressed are the mechanisms in Islam which enable it to be relevant and applicable until the Day of Judgment.Islam And Its RelevanceIslam is relevant in the coming of the 21st century in the same manner it was in the 7th century. Human beings can form a system for life. However, such endeavors will never be free of errors, inconsistencies, and will lack relevancy for all peoples at all times. The manmade system would be able to address specific problems in time, place, and for specific people under certain conditions. However, it will never be able to solve all the problems for all humanity at all times under every condition. All of this is due to the nature of human beings who are limited in their abilities, being influenced by their own needs and surroundings. A system revealed from the Creator surpasses all of these limitations. Allah (swt) states:“Know you not that it is Allah to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth? And besides Allah you have neither any Wali nor any helper.” (TMQ 21:107)“And We have not sent you (Mohammed) except as a giver of glad tidings and a warner to all mankind, but most men know not.” (TMQ 34:28)“And (remember) the Day when we shall raise up from every nation a witness against them from amongst themselves. And we shall bring you (o Mohammed) as a witness against these. And We have sent down to you the Book as an exposition of everything, a guidance, a mercy, and glad tidings for those who have submitted themselves.” (TMQ 16:89)How is Islam Relevant1. Islam is relevant, since it addresses Man as a human being with his inherent needs and wants. It addresses Man's problem as they relate to him as a being with a specific nature. Islam viewed Man from a holistic perspective and addressed the needs of Man as the basis for its solution. While capitalism did not view Man from a holistic perspective. It concentrated on certain aspects of Man's needs while neglecting his other needs. For instance, in capitalism any commodity or service is considered beneficial and has to be produced as long as it satisfies a need for an individual in the society, e.g. wine, drugs, prostitution. Capitalism views the producer or provider of such services as the one who contributes towards solving the economic problem. The problem is addressed by increasing production and subsequently closing the gap between supply and demand. Increasing production to meet demand overlooks the impact of producing the material or providing certain services for society. While, in Islam certain commodities and services have no value because of their negative effect on the society.Additionally, the tool through which Capitalism guarantees the acquisition of products or services is through money. So, whoever does not possess the price of something would be deprived of it. In Islam, the well being of the individual and society at large is considered and thus one would acquire things needed either through the mechanism of price or through other mechanisms, such as Zakah or through the State's treasury.2. Islam prescribed or specified a system for all aspects of life while leaving the technical and scientific aspects to Man. Islam left Man to pursue the most efficient technique available. One such example of this is the incident when the Prophet (saaw) in the battle of Badr chose a location for the Muslim army to encamp. One of the Sahabah asked the Prophet (saaw), "Is this the location that Allah has ordered you to choose or is it a tactical decision?" When the Prophet (saaw) said that it is a tactical decision, the Sahabi directed the Prophet (saaw)'s attention towards a more strategic location. In another example, the people inquired from the Prophet (saaw) on the method of pollinating date trees. So he (saaw) told the people to leave it up to the wind. When this method did not work and people complained to the Prophet (saaw) about it, the Prophet (saaw) replied that you know better in your daily affairs (referring to the know hows of life). On the same token, Islam encouraged us to cultivate agricultural land but left it up to Man to use the most efficient techniques available in cultivating and enhancing the quality of vegetation and fruits.3. The nature of the text of both Qur'an and Sunnah possess the following characteristics that give them relevancy:a) The text is viewed as a legal text, enabling the Mujtahid to derive rules for other issues not mentioned in the text based upon a valid methodology. If the text was viewed in the way the church viewed the bible (as a holy text), the scope of the text would be literal. As an example in (65:6), Allah says:"...then if they give suck to the children for you, give them their due payment..." [ 65: 6]The ayah mentions that monetary compensation should be paid for breastfeeding. However, from the text the following rules or principles can be derived:Compensation is extended to any hired employee. Also, the wage has to be defined in the contract and employees should receive their wage without any delay upon fulfilling contractual obligations.b) The text sometimes comes in the form of general guidelines while at other times provides details. As an example in (4:29), Allah (swt) says:“O you who believe! Eat not up your property among yourselves unjustly except it be as trade amongst you, by mutual consent...”The ayah specifies that any form of trade should be conducted upon mutual agreement. So the ayah left the type of trade unrestricted. There are certain transactions excluded from the unrestricted description of trade even if it is done with mutual agreements such as transactions involving Riba.Even the ayahs addressing some issues in detail such as inheritance leave room ijtihad.c) The text in many cases provides an Illah (legal reason) enabling the Mujtahid to extract rules for others cases sharing the same Illah. As an example in (62:9), Allah says:“O you who believe, when the call is proclaimed for the prayer on Friday, come to the remembrance of Allah and leave trade. That is better for you if you did but know.”The ayah prohibits trading when the adhan is proclaimed. Since the illah is the distraction from prayers, then any activity preventing one from the jumu'ah prayer is forbidden. It is important to note that there are specific guidelines for recognizing the illah mentioned in the text explicitly or implicitly.d) The text in some cases could be general while in others particular. Allah says in (5:38):“Cut off the hand of the thief, male or female, as a recompense for that which they committed. A punishment by way of example, from Allah. And Allah is All Powerful, All Wise.”This ayah was revealed in response to a specific incident. But is general to be applicable upon all incidents of theft.e) The text in some cases would include specific phrases, making the text relevant for all times. Allah say in (16:8):“And (He has created) horses, mules, and donkeys, for you to ride as an adornment. And He creates things of which you have no knowledge.”Although the ayah listed some animal as being halal to use as a means for transportation and as objects for adornment, the meaning of the ayah includes any means of transportation that could be developed which is taken from the last part of the ayah.The Role of IjtihadThe above mentioned points gave Islam the potential and capacity to address and solve any problem at all times. Through Ijtihad, the Mujtahid is able relate the text to the issue at hand. Ijtihad is defined as exerting one's utmost effort to extract rules from its legislative sources. From this definition, it is clear that the scholars would be able to extract rules for new problems. The process of Ijtihad is defined by specific rules, some of which are:The Mujtahid has to restrict his references to the legislative sources (Qur'an, Sunnah, Ijma' as Sahabah, Qiyas) and cannot practice ijtihad without defining legislative sources.The process itself must adhere to a specific methodology.The Mujtahid has to acquire specific knowledge that enables him to understand the text. For example, a good command of the Arabic language, Hadeeth, Tafseer, etc.The Mujtahid has to understand the issue for which the applicable rule is being sought.These requirements are needed for Ijtihad because the purpose of Ijtihad is to understand the issue and apply the Hukm Shar'ii. If this process is misunderstood, the Mujtahid may mix his personal opinion with the Hukm Shar'ii. This effort would not be the product of Hukm Shar'ii, but rather manmade law.Therefore, Ijtihad is defined as the mechanism by which the Hukm Shar'ii is reached at and is not a source. From this understanding, the meaning of ijtihad and its crucial role becomes clear. The closing of the door of ijtihad contributed significantly to the decline that happened in the Muslim Ummah. Thus, the door of ijtihad has to be reopened as part of the effort to revive the Ummah.Misconceptions About the Relevance of IslamSome Muslims would agree that Islam is relevant and it is not expected from any Muslim to doubt this fact. However, the relevance of Islam is distorted due to the following:1. Viewing the Shariah and Fiqh as separate. The difference is that the Shariah is founded upon revelation whereas the Fiqh is a product of juristic interpretation and is considered as an "independent opinion." They establish the difference between Shariah and Fiqh based upon their definition of Fiqh which according to them is the knowledge of the practical rules of Shariah. While Shariah to them is a collection of revealed rules and principles. Therefore, Fiqh evolves and enables the Shariah to be relevant in the light of the changing conditions of society through Ijtihad.2. Some view Fiqh as encompassing two aspects:a) Aspects related to the 'Ibadah (rites and rituals of worship) whereby a person received reward or punishment. All of this is based upon the text.b) Aspects related to the Mu'amalat (transactions) and other aspects based upon independent opinion.Therefore, Fiqh can be changed as long as it is not related to the Ibadah. Since the objective of Fiqh is to adapt the Shariah to fit the social change.3. Dr. Abdul Majid Al Najjar in his book Fiqh ul Taqayun claimed that the Ahkam Shariah is abstract and a set of ideal rules and that the role of the Mujtahid is to make these rules relevant to reality. In this process, the Mujtahid would bridge the idealism of the text and the reality of the problem, thus reconciling the two. Since, the issue changes from place to place, every society or environment should have its own Fiqh applicable to the issue.4. Some claim that the Shariah is relevant by its adaptability for gradual implementation. As an example, Islam can be implemented in a piecemeal fashion. Mohammed Ghazali in his book, Kayfa Na Ta'amalu ma'al Quran, went as far as to say that the punishment for drinking alcohol is irrelevant and should not be the concern, especially in the case of introducing Islam to the French, who are compulsive drinkers.All of these claims are supported based on following arguments:1. Some rules of the Qur'an and Sunnah were suspended or replaced by the Sahabah because they no longer secured the benefit and the objective for which they were initially revealed.2. The Sahabah were not bound by an elaborate methodology in Usul ul Fiqh. They took their lead directly from Qur'an and Sunnah. They exhibited liberalism and latitude in their interpretation of the Shariah.3. The Shariah specifies details for the 'ibadah. As for the mu'amalat (temporal matters), it is mainly concerned with the exposition of basic objectives and general principles which are open to rational inquiry and often provide a starting point for further development. This understanding is used as an evidence for the adaptation and changing of Fiqh to the environment.4. The historical emergence of Ahl ul Hadith and Ahl ul Ra'ee are used as evidences. It is claimed that Ahl ul Ra'ee were inclined to be more liberal in the use of rational and personal opinion in their development of Fiqh.5. 'Usul ul Fiqh was developed after the Sahabah and each school introduced a new legislative source or doctrine. All of this was designed to relate the Shariah to social reality and to serve as an instrument for its adaptation to the society. They point out the following historical development of Fiqh:The Tabi'een carried on the existing legacy of the Sahabah and took it to another level, which led to Ijma'.Ahl ul Ra'ee developed Qiyas when they failed to find a text addressing an issue.The Hanafiah developed Istihsan to overcome the rigidities and irregularities of Qiyas.6. The claim that the legislation in the Qur'an comes in two varieties: definitive and speculative. Although the Qur'an is definitive in its report and authenticity. Most of the Hadith reached us through Khabr Ahad which is speculative in authenticity and transmission. Furthermore, most of the Quran is speculative in its meaning. Therefore the Shariah remains open to interpretation and reconstruction.7. The Maslaha is used as a Shar'ii source to prove the relevance of Islam through its adaptation to reality and reconstruction. Maslaha is determined by the 'Aql and anything which has more benefit than harm based on the 'Aql is considered Islamically legitimate. Imam Shatibi is misquoted as this being his opinion.Refuting the above mentioned claims:1. The human being in his rational capacity is limited and is incapable of providing a system that will solve the problems of humanity. Rather, man's endeavor will always be subject to failure, prejudice, inconsistency, and contradictions. Our Creator, Allah (swt) is the sovereign. This must be kept in mind when we discuss issues related to legislation and way of life.2. Islam is built upon an intellectual basis and gave the mind a great role. However, this role is well defined and is not absolute. When it comes to the discussion of the creation of the universe and the need for Prophethood, it should be based upon rational proof and not on blind faith. However, once the individual believes in the Qur'an and Sunnah, the wahiy then becomes the reference and consequently it redefines the role of the 'Aql. The 'Aql then, has a role in two areas:A. The domain of Wahiy in which the 'Aql is a tool to understand the text and to undertand the reality. The Aql has no role whatsoever to pass judgment upon the text.B. The second domain for the 'Aql is the area of science and technology. It must be understood though that this role is given to the 'Aql by Wahiy. Human beings do not acquire this role independent of revelation. The Qur'an and Sunnah are replete with evidences that prove this point:“It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter, that they should have any opinion in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed in a plain error.” (TMQ 33:36)“You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged), you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. The command is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him. That is the straight religion, but most men know not.” (TMQ 12:40)“Verily, those who believe and do righteous good deeds, and humble themselves before their Lord, they will be the dwellers of Paradise to dwell therein forever.” (TMQ 11:123)3. The Prophet delivered the Message of Islam. The Qur'an was revealed in Arabic and people understood the Message because they had full command of the Arabic language which is a prerequisite for understanding the Qur'anic text. The Sahabah were pioneers whom Allah (swt) described as:The first to embrace Islam of the Muhajirun and the Ansar and also those who followed them exactly. Allah is well pleased with them as they are well pleased with Him. He has prepared for them Gardens under which rivers flow to dwell therein forever. This is the supreme success. (9:100)“...(and there is also a share in this booty) for the poor emigrants who were expelled from their homes and their property, seeking the bounty from Allah and to please Him.” (TMQ 59:8-9)“Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave their Bay'ah to you under the tree, He knew what was in their hearts, and He sent down calmness and tranquillity upon them, and He rewarded them with a near victory.” (TMQ 48:18)The Sahabah are the people who lived with the Prophet (saaw) day and night. They are the generation that compiled the Qur'an, memorized it, preserved it, and carried it to us.“Verily It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr and surely, We will guard it.” (TMQ 15:9)This ayah testifies that what they carried to us is exactly what Allah preserved and testifies that their consensus is the truth.The legacy of the Sahabah was not created by the Tabi'een as some groups claim. The Sahabah had full command of the Arabic language and they understood the text in a natural way without the need to put down their methodology for us in writing. Therefore, labeling them as liberals is totally absurd. It is completely false to claim that the Sahabah departed from the text or even suspended the text when it no longer secured their interests or benefits. In fact, this claim is a grave accusation against the Sahabah and the texts. 'Umar did not suspend the text, neither in the examples which are quite often repeated by some scholars from the Sunnah or Sh'iah. In all examples, it is mentioned that there is a text or the whole incident is false. As an example, the claim that 'Umar suspended the share for the Muahalftu kulbuhum (person of importance whose cooperation was important) and the cutting of the hand of the thief, Shaykh Mohammed Abu Zaharah studying the text showed that 'Umar's action was in line with the text.In the case of Muahalftu kulbuhum, the ayah mentions the illah and 'Umar understood the illah not existing anymore, and thus the rule would not apply. In the second example, 'Umar did not cut the hand of the thief based on the Hadith of the Rasul (saaw) of not applying the hudud when in doubt (Tirmidhi). 'Umar, in this case found a reasonable doubt not to cut the hand in that situation. Furthermore, who is Umar to prohibit something which Allah allowed ? Would the Sahabah accept this from him knowing that a woman objected to his placing of a limit on dowry control? The fallacy of these arguements is as abvious as the fallacy of the accusation made by the Shi'a that Umar prohibited Muta' (marriage limited in time) marriage. Rather, Muta'h was prohibited by the Prophet (saaw)4. As mentioned before, the Sahabah did not have any need to lay down Usul ul fiqh. This is the same reason why they did not have the need to lay down the rules of Arabic grammar. Both were known by them in a natural way. When we refer to the great scholars of Arabic language, such as Al Asma'ii, we never refer to them as the ones who established the rules of Arabic grammar. Rather, they are the ones who compiled the rules, just as others compiled Usul ul Fiqh. Usul ul Fiqh was practiced in a natural way. Later, the scholars began compiling its already existing rules. Furthermore, any elementary student of Usul ul Fiqh knows that Ali (ra) used to discuss issues belonging to Usul, such as Naskh (abrogation) and thus Usul was not an invention of late scholarship. It was not to be used to adapt and reconstruct the Shariah. Rather, it was laid down to direct the thinking in the process of ijtihad without which there would be chaso. It is obvious that Arabic grammar governs the syntax and speech on the same token that Usul ul Fiqh controls how a person understands the text and that this outcome is Hukm Shari, and not a manmade verdict. It is reported that 'Abd ul Rahman ibn Mahdi wrote to Imam Shaf'ee requesting from him " to write a book that includes the "methods" of understanding the Qur'an and covering how the narration should be accepted, the authority of Ijma', elaborating on issues of abrogation..." In response to this request, Imam Shaf'ee wrote his great book Ar Risala. Therefore, undermining Usul ul Fiqh means that it will be carried by the incompetent or it will be performed by those who want to mix their opinions or desires with the outcome of Hukm Shar'ii. This will be done by abandoning Usul ul Fiqh or trying to play with Usul by establishing rules to reach a predetermined conclusion.5. The classification of two schools of fiqh at the time of the Tabi'een cannot be thought of as a school of classical traditionalists versus liberal revivalist. This claim is false and implies that the Tabi'een who took from the Sahabah did not adhere to the text. Furthermore, if we go through the names of individuals belonging to the school of Madinah (Ahl ul Hadith), we find names like Malik ibn Anas who used to practice ijtihad according to Maslaha al Mursalah more than Abu Hanifa who belonged to Kufah (Ahl ul Rai). On the other hand, one find scholars such as Al Shabee and Hammad ar Rawiyah from the school of Kufah who were considered as Muhaditheen. Both schools realized what Rasul Allah (saaw) meant when he (saaw) said:“My Ummah will be divided into 70 sects. They would be those who started taking the Deen from their 'Aql.” (Al Darami)“He who adopts an opinion related to the Qur'an based on his 'Aql he will reserve for himself a place in the hellfire.” (Bukhari and Muslim)The schools of Hadith and Ra'ee were alike in this respect. Both adhered to the text while some practiced Qiyas more than the others.6. Claiming that each school of fiqh invented a new source to serve their purpose and then presenting this claim in a chronological order, leading the reader to think that there was a process of evolution and development which should continue is false. Each Mujtahid or imam of the time believed in Allah and the Message He (swt) sent. All realized that their role is to understand the Hukm Shar'ii based upon the evidence and none of them would adopt a source based upon a preconceived judgment. Thinking otherwise would mean that those imams are not worth consideration, that none of them were objective and the whole issue of Ijtihad and Fiqh was an intellectual sport. Therefore:A. Ijma' as Sahabah was not invented by the Tabi'een but rather was based upon the Daleel.B. Qiyas was not invented by Ahl ul Ra'ee, but rather based upon the Daleel.C. Istihsan was not introduced by the Hanafiah to handle irregularities and rigidity of Qiyas as claimed by some. It was based upon an evidence viewed by some as sound while others did not view it as such.The technical definition of Fiqh is not the knowledge of the practical rules of Shariah, since such a definition means that Shariah has two parts: practical rules and set of theories or principles. This distorted understanding leads one to the conclusion that Fiqh is the knowledge of the practical rules and as such the practical rules is a human effort based upon the theories or principles of Shariah.The definition of Fiqh in Arabic is having the knowledge of divine laws derived from the legislative sources. So, the law which is not derived from a source is not Fiqh and in this definition Shariah and Fiqh are synonyms. The linguistic meaning of Shariah means a non-exhaustive source of water. The term Shariah is used twice in Quran:“...to each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way” (TMQ 5:48)In this ayah the word Shariah is used to mean legislation.“Then We have put you on a plain way of (Our) commandment. So you should follow that, and not the desires of those who don't know.” (TMQ 45:18)In this ayah, the word Shariah is used to mean Islam.However, Islam consists of two parts the Aqeedah and the rules derived from it. Those rules are not independent opinion rather they are part of Islam. The understanding of the Mujtahid of the text as long as it is within the text will be considered part of Islam. It is true that this understanding could be changed or be different from one Mujtahid to another, but all of these difference have to be justified based upon the text.Assuming that there is a distinction between Fiqh and Shariah, both still cannot be viewed as a manmade endeavor. In the end, the defintion of Hukm Sharii is the address of the Legislator related to our actions. The Mujtahid understands the text based upon a specific methodology. His understanding is considered a Hukm Sharii and is binding upon him and anyone who follows that Mujtahid without the need for Ijma. The Hukm Sharii cannot be man made and consequently the entire collection of Hukm Sharii which is Fiqh cannot be man made. The Hukm Sharii whether related to Ibadah or Mumalat or whether derived directly or understood is binding. There is a reward or punishment on both the Mumalat or Ibadah. There is no difference between Hukm Sharii related to the prayers which is Ibadah and the prerequisites of the contract which is Mumamlat. Both aspect of Fiqh related to Mumalat and Ibadah are addressed in Islam. So to claim that Islam adressed Ibadah while addressed the general principles in Mumalat means ignorance in Quran and Sunnah. Anyone who reads Quran and Sunnah will discover abundance of details related to transactions, legal system, economic system, etc. Therefore, there is no sacred area related to Ibadah while an open area related to Mumalat.8. Based on the definition of Fiqh and Hukm Shar'ii, the Usul ul Fiqh is defined as the collection of principles pertaining to the methodology for the extraction of Fiqh. The Mujtahid is the one who exhausts his efforts in thoroughly studying a problem and seeking a solution for it from the sources of the Shariah. Therefore, the Mujtahid is not the one who exercises his intellectual abilities to issue a independent verdict, and as such he is not a legislator. As mentioned earlier, the Mujtahid has to adhere to a specific methodology, which is Usul ul Fiqh and has to meet the requirements of Ijtihad (understanding the Arabic Language, the knowledge of Shar'ii disciplines, and understanding the issue). The Mujtahid should view the Usul as the control mechanism that regulates and directs his thinking to extract the Hukm Shar'ii in a creative way. He should not view them as constraints or as a tool to adapt the Shariah, using it to justify a predetermined result.9. Claiming that most of the Qur'an and the Sunnah are speculative texts, and therefore the doors for adaptation and reconstruction are open is wrong. The Qur'an has Ayat which are Qata'ee (definite) in their meaning while others are Thanni. The word Thanni in this context means that a word would have more than one meaning and the scholar of Tafseer or Mujtahid would be required to study the text, the context, the language, the lifestyle of the Arabs at the time of revelation, and the methodology of Tafseer and Usul ul Fiqh before reaching an answer. The translation of the word Thanni to speculative or conjectural is very misleading and implies that those texts are open for speculation or that they are nothing but conjecture. This would lead to an erroneous understanding that each person has the authority to speculate without any room for discussion or that no controls exist to insure that the understanding is based on a sound methodology.10. One of the most abused or misused term is Maslaha which is (benefit or interest). This term refers to one of the disputed sources of Hukm Shar'ii by the early 'Ulema, few of which did consider it as a valid source for Hukm Shar'ii. Those 'Ulema who considered it as a valid source, used it with many controls and restrictions:a. It should not contradict the Qur'an.b. It should not contradict the Sunnah.c. It should not contradict Ijma'.d. It should not contradict Qiyas.e. It should not undermine any other Maslaha (benefit or interest) that is more important than the one under consideration.Those who allow many things under the pretext of Maslaha did not pay any attention to this, and say that when the text no longer secures any Maslaha, it should be departed. Most of those who promote Maslaha today refer to their independent opinion in determining the Maslaha as long as it complies with the "spirit of Islam". Such a term is very vague and misses a very important point: the text carries a specific linguistic connotation which the Shariah binds us to, otherwise there will be no use for the language at all. The Ijtihad based on this view would be nothing more than imagination based on Maslaha.As an example of this practice of Maslaha is clearly noted when some Islamic movements accept to hold some political positions in the cabinets of some regimes in the Muslim world or in the West under the pretext of Maslaha. This contradicts the numerous texts in the Qur'an and Sunnah, such as: surah 5: 44,45, 47 and the fact that the Prophet (saaw) rejected the Quraysh offer to become a king and ruler of their system. Claiming that Imam Shatibi adopted the Maslaha in this way is a false accusation of the Imam because Imam Shatibi himself said: "The 'Aql has no room in determining the Maslaha based on the rule of sovereignty " [Volume 2, p.219 (Al-Muwafaqat)]He further says:"If we agree that the Shariah is sent for the welfare of Humanity, then this should be according to what the Shariah prescribed and not based on their whims and desires " [volume 2 p117]He also says:"Violating the Shariah under the pretext of following the basic objectives or values of Shariah (Maqasid al Shariah) is like the one who cares about the spirit with the body and since the body without spirit is useless therefore the spirit without body is useless too."So how could an Imam like Shatibi who mentions very clearly that " the objective behind the Shariah is to liberate the individuals form his desires in order to be a true 'abd (slave) of Allah and that the legitimate Maslaha which the Shariah establishes would be considered as long as it maintains this life as a passage to the hereafter not based on the desires of the human being" P (2-25) How could any one accuse Imam Shatibi of promoting Maslaha based on Aql?HISTORICAL FACTORS THAT LED TO THESE MISCONCEPTIONS:Allah (swt) has sent Islam as a comprehensive social order based on the 'Aqeedah in order to replace the status of not only Arabia but the world at large.Thus, the establishment in Makkah opposed it and this opposition was even carried out by the People of the Book. Although the opposition of the polytheists was expected, the People of the Book, were expected to either embrace it or at least adapt to it. Therefore, a struggle took place from the very beginning. In the initial stage in Makkah, the struggle was purely intellectual and ideological from the side of the Muslims while the Quraysh used all the means at their disposal, such as torture, boycott, blackmail, defamation, killing etc. He (saaw) was able to achieve the objective of the Da'wah by migrating with his (saaw) Sahabah to Madinah and establishing the Islamic State there, which symbolized the turning point in the Struggle. From that point on, the struggle was on three fronts; political, material, and intellectual. It did not take the Muslims long to be the leading nation in the world. Many new means were employed against the Muslims to weaken their status such as:- Fabricating the ahadeeth- Instigating fitnah amongst the Muslims- Political assassinations of the earlier Khulafah- Establishment of sects (e.g., Hassasineen)All of those means that were employed in the struggle were not successful in stopping the Ummah from continuing as the leading nation in the world, even though it caused a drag in the momentum of the Ummah.The Crusader war and Mongol invasions both failed to defeat the Ummah in the long run, although they were victorious in some battles and occupied portions of the Islamic state for a while. It is apparent that their material efforts failed. After the defeat of the Crusades, they started employing a new means of attack which manifested in itself in missionary and ideological warfare. The first Spanish missionary, led by Ramon Lowell started his activities on an individual basis and then by the end of the 17th century this effort had evolved into an organized activity through secret societies and missions that were staked in the heart of Muslim land. The emphasis of their campaign revolved around several points or issues:· Severing the bond between the Muslims by calling for nationalism.· Elimination of Islam as the reference point for Muslims by replacing it with another yard stick· Shaking the trust of Muslims in the Islamic system by attacking some clear Islamic solutions such as Jihad, Penal Code, Marriage, divorce, role of women etc.Throughout this continuos campaign the West was able to recruit many agents from amongst the Muslim Ummah in their efforts. Those agents were not restricted to the political arena but also to the cultural and intellectual arenas. By the 19th century, many ideas were introduced to the mindset of the Ummah such as reconstructing religious thought in Islam, the negation of the doctrine of miracles, the abrogation of jihad, the permissibility of Riba', all of those ideas were propagated under the pretext of bridging the gap between Islam and the contemporary life. Those ideas were carried out by many people such as Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Muhammad Iqbal, Jamal Al Deen Al Afghani, Muhammad 'Abduh, and Rafa'a al Tahtawi, Rashid Rida, Taha Husayn, and 'Ali 'Abdul Raziq, most of which have maintained a close relationship with the British or French governments, either overtly or covertly. Additionally institutions were established to reorient the thinking of the people such as Aliger in India and in Egypt efforts were done to reorient Al Azhar and at times institutions were established such as Dar ul Uloom to counter Al Azhar. Zwaymer, one of the leading missionaries summarized the objective of those activities by addressing a conference for missionaries in Jerusalem, saying "If you succeed in your efforts, you will be the leading pioneers for the coming colonization". The statement of Guro, the French General who entered Damascus and Allenby the British general who entered Jerusalem is engraved in the minds of the Muslims.Guro kicked the tomb of Salah al Deen and said "Wake up Salah al Deen we are here !" Allenby said upon entering Jerusalem "Now the crusades have ended."Therefore, all of these ides which are now surfacing should not be considered independent of this historical context. All of these ideas and deviations directed the Ummah to the same result: turning away from the Wahiy as a reference, and giving the mind a role that overrides the Wahiy under the pretext of Reconstruction, Reform, Ijtihad, and a new Fiqh. Muslims will start accepting the status quo and changing Islam and the "Fatawa" will be tailored to justify this deviation. An example of this is the claim that the division in the Muslim Ummah is justified by the existence of different conditions in each country which prevent the reunification or the effort to bridge the gap between Islam and science. Today, the propagation of the misconceptions about the reform of the Shariah and the "ongoing efforts to reconstruct the Shariah" are nothing but the perpetuation of the legacy of the above mentioned persons and efforts.THE IMPACT OF THESE EFFORTS:Such claims as society undergoing continuous social change and that the Shariah has to adapt to this social reality means that whenever a change occurs Islam has to be molded. Rather, we should view Islam as that which came to change reality so as to render it compliant with the Islamic viewpoint of life.The following are examples which will assist the reader to realize the extent of this deviant effort and the gravity of its impact:1. In Tunisia, Rashid al Ghannoushi states in his book, Huriyat al Amma in regards to a woman being a ruler: that Ahkam al Shariah in general and specifically related to the political system should not be built upon any Thanniy daleel no matter how little the Thann is in the Daleel. He says that the Shariah is not a rigid text nor has it been laid down as a final formula. Also it is not codified like any other body of law. Therefore, the room is wide open for interpretation, updating, and reform through the individual and collective Aql (ijtihad). Based upon his methodology, a woman is allowed to be a ruler.2. In Sudan, Hasan Al Turabi in his book Tajdeed Usul ul Fiqh, claims that the setup of the traditional Usul ul Fiqh does not fit our contemporary needs. He claims that we are in need for a new outlook or understanding for rules of divorce and marriage in which we will benefit from the current social sciences and will build upon our inherited Fiqh, look into Quran and Sunnah equipped with all contemporary needs, sciences, and all Islamic and comparative Fiqh experiences. After this we will find a new way to what Allah's Shariah mandates within the context of our situation.3. The Fiqh Council in North America permitted adoption of the method of astronomical calculations in determining the beginning and end of the lunar month since "it is the best way to unite the community and present it to them in a suitable manner and defending the accusation of Muslims ignoring science". Although it has been claimed that the adaptation of the Shariah to change is limited to the Mu'amalat (as they claim), it seems that they also extended it to the Ibadah.With the new definitions of marriage and family in the West and with the consistent efforts in conferences like the population and women's conferences in Cairo and in Beijing, the Muslims in the future would be subjected to "new Fatawa' to adapt with this new social reality. Some people might think that this is an exaggeration, however with `Fatawa' that say that women do not have to wear the Khimar (headcover) and permitting the women to marry non-Muslim men, it seems, that things could go beyond this.THE SOLUTIONSince Islam is from Allah and addresses the human being with his instincts and organic needs, it cannot be changed because of the following:1. The Human being does not change in either his instincts nor in his organic needs. What changes are the tools, ways, and the means that humans use in their efforts to satisfy their needs. As an example; human beings before and at the time of the Prophet (saaw) used to marry, eat, own, love, hate, travel, satisfy, worship, etc. and will continue to do so. No new instincts or organic biological need can be added. However, the means of satisfying these needs change. It is well known that Islam views any object as Halal unless there is particular Daleel that excludes a particular object (unlike the actions, all of which require a daleel for the performance or abstention). Therefore, what do we need to change Islam for ?Since Allah (swt) is the One Who created man, He is the only One who knows how man's instincts and organic needs can be satisfied. It must be kept in mind that Allah knows the changes which humanity has, is, and will go through, and thus the system He (swt) chose for us must be the perfect system without any human alteration unless we start doubting Allah (swt)'s infinite capability. We have to remember that Islam has its own mechanism, which if followed and implemented effectively will enable the Mujtahid to derive rules from the text and not to change the Shariah or alter the text or rules. That is why every generation should have at least one Mujtahid.Therefore, we need to return to the text the way it is equipped with whatever is needed for this objective. This requires for us to look to Islam as our reference and leadership. We should stop viewing Islam as a set of rituals. This requires from us to pay attention to the Arabic language to make sure it is not separated from Islam. Additionally, by establishing Islam in life and opening the door for Ijtihad with its prerequisites, Islam will be relevant.CONCLUSION:It is very obvious that any law student can propose a law that adapts to new realities in society just by adding one proposition to this law that permits changes in the system. These changes in the system would be an attempt to keep up with the so called changes in life. Humanity witnessed Marx, Hobbes, Adam Smith, James Madison, and the American Founding Fathers who introduced systems that kept undergoing many changes.If we view Islam in the same manner, then where is the uniqueness and miraculous nature of Islam. In fact, why do we need Allah (swt) if the system He (swt) provided us with ends up being changed? Why do we need Allah (swt)'s system if it is similar to Marx's or Jefferson's?These efforts to deviate the Ummah from Islam should be viewed very seriously because they amount to nothing other than the current degree of submission of the Muslim Ummah to other than Islam by replacing its label with a false Islamic one.It must be a matter of Belief that Islam is relevant in all places and all times for all people as their way of life. The emerging need is for Ijtihad to ensure that the rules are correctly extracted from the Shari'ah for new problems. This means that the doors of Ijtihad should be open but not broken
The Meaning of Ibadah (Worship)
All praise is due to Allah, and peace be upon our master Muhammed, the seal of the prophets and messengers and the best of all creation, and peace be upon his family and companions, and upon those who followed their guidance and followed their path. Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala, stated in His Book: “And I have not created Jinn and man except to worship Me”; a verse recited by all Muslims, but many Muslims restrict the meaning of “worship” to rites and individualistic rituals, such as Salat, fasting, Zakat, Hajj, Du’a, and other acts to come closer to Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala. Their understanding of “‘Ibadah” (worship) does not go beyond these things, even in the slightest. In their view, the economic system, politics, ruling and transactions are all totally unrelated to ‘Ibadah. Truly it is a narrow, limited and impotent understanding of the meaning of ‘Ibadah, far from the vast and comprehensive meaning that Allah has given it, and from what our scholars, from amongst Al-Salaf Al-Saalih, had understood it to mean.Al-Fayrooz Abaadi said in his dictionary, Al-Qamoos Al-MuHeeT: “Al-‘Ibadah: Obedience”. Al-Tabari said in the Tafseer of the verse in Surat Al-Faatiha “Iyyaka Na’budoo” (You [alone] we worship): “Oh Allah, it is to You alone that we have Kushoo’, that we submit to, and that we depend on, acknowledging your Lordship over us, you alone and none other that you”. The original meaning of ‘Ibadah with all the Arabs is “to lower one’s self”. It is also called “the path that is lowered due to feet stamping it down”, and “the travelers lowered it”. From this, a mule that is lowered for riding is called “Mu’abbad”, and from this a person who is enslaved is called a “’Abd”, due to his being lowered before his master.Al-Zajaj said: “The meaning of Al-‘Ibadah: Obedience with submission”. And Al-Zamakhshari said: “Al-‘Ibadah: The most extreme level of submission and lowering one’s self”. And Al-Baghawi said: “Al-‘Ibadah: Obedience with lowering one’s self and submission, and the slave was called ‘Abd due to his submission and his obedience”. Therefore, ‘Ibadah, with its vast and comprehensive implications, means: Obedience with submission, and lowering one’s self, and accepting being led by Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala, in everything that He has ordered and everything that He has forbidden. This is what the Messenger of Allah, sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam, taught ‘Uday Ibnu Haatim, may Allah be pleased with him, as narrated by Imam Ahmed, Al-Tirmithi, and Ibn Jareer: When ‘Uday Ibnu Haatim heard of the call of the Messenger of Allah, sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam, he ran away to Al-Shaam – as he was a Christian before Islam. On the way, his sister, as well as a number of other members of his tribe, was taken captive. The Messenger of Allah then had mercy on her and let her go. When she returned to her brother, she persuaded him to consider Islam and meet the Messenger of Allah, sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam. ‘Uday was one of the leaders of his tribe, and his father, Haatim Al-Taa’i, was famous for his generosity. ‘Uday then proceeded to Madina and the people there began talking about his coming. When he entered upon the Messenger of Allah, sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam, he was wearing a silver cross around his neck; the Messenger of Allah, sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam, was reciting the verse “They took their Rabbis and Priests as lords besides Allah”. When he heard this ‘Uday said: “They did not worship them”. He (the Prophet) replied: “Yes they did. They (the Rabbis and Priests) made what was Halal into Haram for them, and what was Haram into Halal for them, and they (the people) followed them; that was their worshipping them”.It is clear in the Hadith that ‘Uday Ibnu Haatim, may Allah be pleased with him, understood ‘Ibadah in the exact same way that most Muslims today understand it; an understanding that limits it to individual rituals. It is as if he is saying: “By Allah, oh Messenger of Allah, we did not pray Salat to the Rabbis and Priests, nor did we slaughter animals for them or to come near them, nor did we take them as Gods that we directly worshipped besides Allah”. But the Messenger of Allah, sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam, wanted to teach him, as well as us today, the complete meaning of ‘Ibadah of Allah, and said to him: “They made what was Halal into Haram for them, and what was Haram into Halal for them, and they (the people) followed them, and that was their worshipping them”. Therefore, the Christians and Jews worshipped their Rabbis and Priests by obeying them in everything that they said, to the extent that they made the Halal into Haram and the Haram into Halal, and the people accepted it all.Therefore, oh Muslims, worshipping (‘Ibadah) of Allah is not limited to a small section of what Islam has come with, such as personal rituals like Salat, fasting, Zakat, and Hajj; rather ‘Ibadah of Allah means to implement all of what Islam has come with, without abandoning even a single ruling and without differentiating between one command and another. Thus, just like Salat and fasting are ‘Ibadah, equally Jihad and ruling with what Allah has revealed are ‘Ibadah as well. And just like Hajj and Zakat are ‘Ibadah, equally removing harm from the path and undertaking economic transactions according to the Shari’ah are also ‘Ibadah. And just like Tasbeeh, Tahleel and Takbeer are all ‘Ibadah, equally working to re-establish the Khilafah according to the method of the Messenger of Allah, sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam, is also ‘Ibadah. So why, oh Believers in Allah, is there this differentiation between the laws of Allah that has lead to the abandonment of some of His laws? The statement of Allah “And I have not created Jinn and man except to worship Me” means: “And I have not created Jinn and man except to obey Me”.In conclusion, the true, untainted ‘Ibadah of Allah is genuine obedience to Him. In other words, ‘Ibadah means implementing Allah’s commands and abstaining from His prohibitions, and applying everything that He legislated.We ask Allah that we are of those who worship Him as He should be worshipped by obeying all His commands and abstaining from all His prohibitions, and we ask Him that He makes us from those who listen to what is said and follow the best of it.And the last of our words is Alhamdulillahi Rabb Al-‘Alameen.Wal Salamu Alaykum wa Rahmat Allah wa Barakatuh
Friday, 5 January 2007
Foreign Policy and Violence
The government has insisted on its claim that its colonial adventure in Iraq has had no impact upon anger and violence. Instead, Tony Blair has adopted the neo-conservative mantra that it is Islam that is the problem.
We have compiled key intelligence reports and political statements which have conclusively proven that the governments of the west is where the problem lies.
UK MoD Defence Academy
In September 2006, it was revealed that a research paper prepared for the Ministry of Defence's Defence Academy stated that: "The war in Iraq...has acted as a recruiting sergeant for extremists across the Muslim world…Iraq has served to radicalise an already disillusioned youth and al-Qaeda has given them the will, intent, purpose and ideology to act."
Senior Cabinet memo
A leaked memo by senior UK Cabinet officials demands a "significant reduction in the number and intensity of the regional conflicts that fuel terror activity". The memo also suggests that in an ideal world "the Muslim would not perceive the UK and its foreign policies as hostile".
Sir Richard Dannatt [Head of the British Army]
In an interview with the Daily Mail, Sir Richard Dannatt, Head of the British Army, said that the presence of UK armed forces in Iraq "exacerbates the security problems" and they should "get out some time soon".
Chatham House
A report in July 2005 by Chatham House, the respected thinktank on foreign affairs, concluded that there was "no doubt" that the invasion of Iraq had "given a boost to the al-Qaida network" in "propaganda, recruitment and fundraising", while providing an ideal targeting and training area for terrorists. "Riding pillion with a powerful ally has proved costly in terms of British and US military lives, Iraqi lives, military expenditure and the damage caused to the counter-terrorism campaign."
JTAC assessment
On 19 July 2005, the New York Times published extracts from an assessment, drawn up in mid-June 2005, by the UK’s Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC). The most striking sentence in these extracts was: “Events in Iraq are continuing to act as motivation and a focus of a range of terrorist related activity in the UK”
JIC assessment
In April 2005, a report drawn up by the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) was even more explicit about the motivating effect of the invasion of Iraq. It was entitled International Terrorism: Impact of Iraq. The following extracts from it were published in The Sunday Times on 2 April 2006:
“It [the invasion of Iraq] has reinforced the determination of terrorists who were already committed to attacking the West and motivated others who were not.”
“Iraq is likely to be an important motivating factor for some time to come in the radicalisation of British Muslims and for those extremists who view attacks against the UK as legitimate.”
“There is a clear consensus within the UK extremist community that Iraq is a legitimate jihad and should be supported. Iraq has re-energised and refocused a wide range of networks in the UK.”
“We judge that the conflict in Iraq has exacerbated the threat from international terrorism and will continue to have an impact in the long term. It has reinforced the determination of terrorists who were already committed to attacking the West and motivated others who were not.”
Young Muslims and Extremism Report
A 2004 joint Home Office and Foreign Office dossier prepared for Tony Blair - 'Young Muslims and Extremism' - identified the Iraq war as a key cause of young Britons turning to terrorism. The analysis stated: "It seems that a particularly strong cause of disillusionment among Muslims, including young Muslims, is a perceived 'double standard' in the foreign policy of western governments, in particular Britain and the US."
"The perception is that passive 'oppression', as demonstrated in British foreign policy, eg non-action on Kashmir and Chechnya, has given way to 'active oppression'. The war on terror, and in Iraq and Afghanistan, are all seen by a section of British Muslims as having been acts against Islam." (Robert Winnett and David Leppard, 'Terror in London, Leaked No 10 dossier reveals Al-Qaeda's British recruits,' The Sunday Times, July 10, 2005)
MI5 assessment [UK Security Service]
The MI5 website states, “In recent years, Iraq has become a dominant issue for a range of extremist groups and individuals in the UK and Europe.”
ISC assessment
The intelligence services warned the UK government, prior to the invasion of Iraq, that military action against Iraq would increase the threat of terrorism to Britain. The Intelligence & Security Committee (ISC) report published on 11 September 2003, quoted a JIC assessment, entitled International Terrorism: War with Iraq, dated 10 February 2003:
“The JIC assessed that al-Qaida and associated groups continued to represent by far the greatest terrorist threat to Western interests, and that threat would be heightened by military action against Iraq.” (ISC report, Paragraph 126)
US National Intelligence Estimate
On 24 September 2006, The New York Times published an article, entitled Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat. It was about a US National Intelligence Estimate entitled Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States, which was completed in April 2006. National Intelligence Estimates are formal assessments on specific national security issues, signed off by the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte. They express the consensus view of the 16 US spy agencies, based on raw intelligence supplied by all of them. This Estimate is the first formal appraisal of “global terrorism” by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began.
In an effort to undo the damage done by this leak, President Bush has declassified and published the “key judgments” in the Estimate. But the “key judgments” merely validate the headline on The New York Times article:
“We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere."
"The Iraq conflict has become the “cause celebre” for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement."
"Four underlying factors are fuelling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1) Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the Iraq “jihad”; (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US sentiment among most Muslims - all of which jihadists exploit.”
Former Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi
A few days after the July 2005 London bombings, the former Italian PM Berlusconi, said, "Even intelligence from other countries shows the three Bs—Bush, Berlusconi and Blair—are considered the most exposed to this type of risk."
Michael Scheuer – First head of CIA Al-Qaida desk
Michael Scheuer, worked for the CIA for 22 years, and was the first head of its al-Qaida desk, serving in this capacity for two years. While still working for the CIA, he wrote a book entitled Imperial Hubris: Why the West is losing the War on Terror, which was published in 2004. His view, as summarised in this book, is as follows:
“… the greatest danger for Americans confronting the radical Islamist threat is to believe – at the urging of US leaders – that Muslims attack us for what we are and what we think rather than for what we do.
“Rhetorical political blustering ‘informs’ the public that Islamists are offended by the Western world’s democratic freedoms, civil liberties, intermingling of genders, and separation of church and state. However, although aspects of the modern world may offend conservative Muslims, no Islamist leader has, for example, fomented jihad in order to destroy participatory democracy, the national association of credit unions, or coed universities. …
“Al-Qaida’s public statements condemn America’s protection of corrupt Muslim regimes, unqualified support for Israel, the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and a further litany of real-world grievances. Bin Laden’s supporters thus identify their problem and believe its solution lies in war.
“[Scheuer] contends they will go to any length, not to destroy our secular, democratic way of life, but to deter what they view as specific attacks on their lands, their communities and their religion. Unless US leaders recognize this fact and adjust their policies abroad accordingly, even moderate Muslims will be radicalized into supporting bin Laden’s anti-Western offensive.”
US Defense Science Board
The US Defense Science Board, which exists to provide independent advice to the US Secretary of Defense, produced a report in September 2004. The report is on Strategic Communications, that is, the means whereby the US gets its message to the world. It concludes bluntly that communicating with the Muslim world is impossible at the present time:
“Thus the critical problem in American public diplomacy directed toward the Muslim World is not one of ‘dissemination of information’, or even one of crafting and delivering the ‘right’ message. Rather, it is a fundamental problem of credibility. Simply, there is none – the United States today is without a working channel of communication to the world of Muslims and of Islam.” (page 41)
And, according to the report, the US is not believed because of its policy towards the Muslim world, and the problem has got much worse since the US invasion of Iraq:
“American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.
“Muslims do not ‘hate our freedom’, but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf states.
“Thus when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy. Moreover, saying that ‘freedom is the future of the Middle East’ is seen as patronizing, suggesting that Arabs are like the enslaved peoples of the old Communist World — but Muslims do not feel this way: they feel oppressed, but not enslaved.
“Furthermore, in the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering. U.S. actions appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in order to best serve American national interests at the expense of truly Muslim self-determination.
“Therefore, the dramatic narrative since 9/11 has essentially borne out the entire radical Islamist bill of particulars. American actions and the flow of events have elevated the authority of the Jihadi insurgents and tended to ratify their legitimacy among Muslims. Fighting groups portray themselves as the true defenders of an Ummah (the entire Muslim community) invaded and under attack — to broad public support.
“What was a marginal network is now an Ummah-wide movement of fighting groups. Not only has there been a proliferation of ‘terrorist’ groups: the unifying context of a shared cause creates a sense of affiliation across the many cultural and sectarian boundaries that divide Islam.” (pages 40-41)
Kenneth Clarke MP [former Chancellor of the Exchequer]
Prior to the invasion of Iraq, many opponents of the action warned that it would give a stimulus to al-Qaida and associated groups. For example, speaking in a debate in the House of Commons on 26 February 2003, Kenneth Clarke said:
“The next time a large bomb explodes in a western city, or an Arab or Muslim regime topples and is replaced by extremists, the Government must consider the extent to which their policy contributed to it. That is why hon. Members should pause and why, unless evidence is produced for a breach and a material threat, my judgment today is that we should not go to war.”
Ken Livingstone [Mayor of London]
"An assault on Iraq will inflame world opinion and jeopardise security and peace everywhere. London, as one of the major world cities, has a great deal to lose from war and a lot to gain from peace, international cooperation and global stability." (quoted by Tariq Ali in The Guardian on 8 July 2005)
We have compiled key intelligence reports and political statements which have conclusively proven that the governments of the west is where the problem lies.
UK MoD Defence Academy
In September 2006, it was revealed that a research paper prepared for the Ministry of Defence's Defence Academy stated that: "The war in Iraq...has acted as a recruiting sergeant for extremists across the Muslim world…Iraq has served to radicalise an already disillusioned youth and al-Qaeda has given them the will, intent, purpose and ideology to act."
Senior Cabinet memo
A leaked memo by senior UK Cabinet officials demands a "significant reduction in the number and intensity of the regional conflicts that fuel terror activity". The memo also suggests that in an ideal world "the Muslim would not perceive the UK and its foreign policies as hostile".
Sir Richard Dannatt [Head of the British Army]
In an interview with the Daily Mail, Sir Richard Dannatt, Head of the British Army, said that the presence of UK armed forces in Iraq "exacerbates the security problems" and they should "get out some time soon".
Chatham House
A report in July 2005 by Chatham House, the respected thinktank on foreign affairs, concluded that there was "no doubt" that the invasion of Iraq had "given a boost to the al-Qaida network" in "propaganda, recruitment and fundraising", while providing an ideal targeting and training area for terrorists. "Riding pillion with a powerful ally has proved costly in terms of British and US military lives, Iraqi lives, military expenditure and the damage caused to the counter-terrorism campaign."
JTAC assessment
On 19 July 2005, the New York Times published extracts from an assessment, drawn up in mid-June 2005, by the UK’s Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC). The most striking sentence in these extracts was: “Events in Iraq are continuing to act as motivation and a focus of a range of terrorist related activity in the UK”
JIC assessment
In April 2005, a report drawn up by the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) was even more explicit about the motivating effect of the invasion of Iraq. It was entitled International Terrorism: Impact of Iraq. The following extracts from it were published in The Sunday Times on 2 April 2006:
“It [the invasion of Iraq] has reinforced the determination of terrorists who were already committed to attacking the West and motivated others who were not.”
“Iraq is likely to be an important motivating factor for some time to come in the radicalisation of British Muslims and for those extremists who view attacks against the UK as legitimate.”
“There is a clear consensus within the UK extremist community that Iraq is a legitimate jihad and should be supported. Iraq has re-energised and refocused a wide range of networks in the UK.”
“We judge that the conflict in Iraq has exacerbated the threat from international terrorism and will continue to have an impact in the long term. It has reinforced the determination of terrorists who were already committed to attacking the West and motivated others who were not.”
Young Muslims and Extremism Report
A 2004 joint Home Office and Foreign Office dossier prepared for Tony Blair - 'Young Muslims and Extremism' - identified the Iraq war as a key cause of young Britons turning to terrorism. The analysis stated: "It seems that a particularly strong cause of disillusionment among Muslims, including young Muslims, is a perceived 'double standard' in the foreign policy of western governments, in particular Britain and the US."
"The perception is that passive 'oppression', as demonstrated in British foreign policy, eg non-action on Kashmir and Chechnya, has given way to 'active oppression'. The war on terror, and in Iraq and Afghanistan, are all seen by a section of British Muslims as having been acts against Islam." (Robert Winnett and David Leppard, 'Terror in London, Leaked No 10 dossier reveals Al-Qaeda's British recruits,' The Sunday Times, July 10, 2005)
MI5 assessment [UK Security Service]
The MI5 website states, “In recent years, Iraq has become a dominant issue for a range of extremist groups and individuals in the UK and Europe.”
ISC assessment
The intelligence services warned the UK government, prior to the invasion of Iraq, that military action against Iraq would increase the threat of terrorism to Britain. The Intelligence & Security Committee (ISC) report published on 11 September 2003, quoted a JIC assessment, entitled International Terrorism: War with Iraq, dated 10 February 2003:
“The JIC assessed that al-Qaida and associated groups continued to represent by far the greatest terrorist threat to Western interests, and that threat would be heightened by military action against Iraq.” (ISC report, Paragraph 126)
US National Intelligence Estimate
On 24 September 2006, The New York Times published an article, entitled Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat. It was about a US National Intelligence Estimate entitled Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States, which was completed in April 2006. National Intelligence Estimates are formal assessments on specific national security issues, signed off by the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte. They express the consensus view of the 16 US spy agencies, based on raw intelligence supplied by all of them. This Estimate is the first formal appraisal of “global terrorism” by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began.
In an effort to undo the damage done by this leak, President Bush has declassified and published the “key judgments” in the Estimate. But the “key judgments” merely validate the headline on The New York Times article:
“We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere."
"The Iraq conflict has become the “cause celebre” for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement."
"Four underlying factors are fuelling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1) Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the Iraq “jihad”; (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US sentiment among most Muslims - all of which jihadists exploit.”
Former Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi
A few days after the July 2005 London bombings, the former Italian PM Berlusconi, said, "Even intelligence from other countries shows the three Bs—Bush, Berlusconi and Blair—are considered the most exposed to this type of risk."
Michael Scheuer – First head of CIA Al-Qaida desk
Michael Scheuer, worked for the CIA for 22 years, and was the first head of its al-Qaida desk, serving in this capacity for two years. While still working for the CIA, he wrote a book entitled Imperial Hubris: Why the West is losing the War on Terror, which was published in 2004. His view, as summarised in this book, is as follows:
“… the greatest danger for Americans confronting the radical Islamist threat is to believe – at the urging of US leaders – that Muslims attack us for what we are and what we think rather than for what we do.
“Rhetorical political blustering ‘informs’ the public that Islamists are offended by the Western world’s democratic freedoms, civil liberties, intermingling of genders, and separation of church and state. However, although aspects of the modern world may offend conservative Muslims, no Islamist leader has, for example, fomented jihad in order to destroy participatory democracy, the national association of credit unions, or coed universities. …
“Al-Qaida’s public statements condemn America’s protection of corrupt Muslim regimes, unqualified support for Israel, the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and a further litany of real-world grievances. Bin Laden’s supporters thus identify their problem and believe its solution lies in war.
“[Scheuer] contends they will go to any length, not to destroy our secular, democratic way of life, but to deter what they view as specific attacks on their lands, their communities and their religion. Unless US leaders recognize this fact and adjust their policies abroad accordingly, even moderate Muslims will be radicalized into supporting bin Laden’s anti-Western offensive.”
US Defense Science Board
The US Defense Science Board, which exists to provide independent advice to the US Secretary of Defense, produced a report in September 2004. The report is on Strategic Communications, that is, the means whereby the US gets its message to the world. It concludes bluntly that communicating with the Muslim world is impossible at the present time:
“Thus the critical problem in American public diplomacy directed toward the Muslim World is not one of ‘dissemination of information’, or even one of crafting and delivering the ‘right’ message. Rather, it is a fundamental problem of credibility. Simply, there is none – the United States today is without a working channel of communication to the world of Muslims and of Islam.” (page 41)
And, according to the report, the US is not believed because of its policy towards the Muslim world, and the problem has got much worse since the US invasion of Iraq:
“American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.
“Muslims do not ‘hate our freedom’, but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf states.
“Thus when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy. Moreover, saying that ‘freedom is the future of the Middle East’ is seen as patronizing, suggesting that Arabs are like the enslaved peoples of the old Communist World — but Muslims do not feel this way: they feel oppressed, but not enslaved.
“Furthermore, in the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering. U.S. actions appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in order to best serve American national interests at the expense of truly Muslim self-determination.
“Therefore, the dramatic narrative since 9/11 has essentially borne out the entire radical Islamist bill of particulars. American actions and the flow of events have elevated the authority of the Jihadi insurgents and tended to ratify their legitimacy among Muslims. Fighting groups portray themselves as the true defenders of an Ummah (the entire Muslim community) invaded and under attack — to broad public support.
“What was a marginal network is now an Ummah-wide movement of fighting groups. Not only has there been a proliferation of ‘terrorist’ groups: the unifying context of a shared cause creates a sense of affiliation across the many cultural and sectarian boundaries that divide Islam.” (pages 40-41)
Kenneth Clarke MP [former Chancellor of the Exchequer]
Prior to the invasion of Iraq, many opponents of the action warned that it would give a stimulus to al-Qaida and associated groups. For example, speaking in a debate in the House of Commons on 26 February 2003, Kenneth Clarke said:
“The next time a large bomb explodes in a western city, or an Arab or Muslim regime topples and is replaced by extremists, the Government must consider the extent to which their policy contributed to it. That is why hon. Members should pause and why, unless evidence is produced for a breach and a material threat, my judgment today is that we should not go to war.”
Ken Livingstone [Mayor of London]
"An assault on Iraq will inflame world opinion and jeopardise security and peace everywhere. London, as one of the major world cities, has a great deal to lose from war and a lot to gain from peace, international cooperation and global stability." (quoted by Tariq Ali in The Guardian on 8 July 2005)
Is Saudi Arabia an Islamic State?
In response to the question you raised about whether Saudi Arabia is an Islamic State (Dar al Islam) or not, we need to first define the meaning of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kufr (Land of Kufr) and then look to whether Saudi Arabia or any Muslim country today matches this definition.The following article explains this subject in detail together with the evidences, please check it: Clarfiying the meaning of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kufr1) According to Shariah terminology, Dar al-Islam is defined as the land which is governed by the laws of Islam and whose security (Aman) is maintained by the security of Islam, i.e. by the authority and protection of Muslims inside and outside the land, even if the majority of its inhabitants are non-Muslims.Dar al-Kufr is the land which is governed by the laws of Kufr, and whose security is not maintained by the security (Aman) of Islam, i.e. by other than the authority and security of Muslims, even if the majority of its inhabitants are Muslims.So what matters in determining whether the land is Dar al-Islam or Dar al-Kufr is neither the land itself nor its inhabitants, rather it is the laws and the security. So if its laws are Islamic and its security is maintained by Muslims then it is Dar al-Islam. When its laws are the laws of Kufr (disbelief) and its security is not maintained by Muslims then it is Dar al-Kufr. These definitions have been derived from the Islamic evidences and discussed by the Ulema (scholars) in history.2) When we look to Saudi Arabia it fundamentally contradicts Islam in a Qati (definitive) manner in many areas such as:- Being part of the United Nations - every member of which has to agree with international law set by the UN. This puts the law of man above the law of Allah.- Allying with the Kuffar against the Muslims. Saudi Arabia allowed America to use it to attack the Muslims of Iraq in the Gulf wars. America also has a military base in Saudi which is well known.- Accepting the legitimacy of the different countries in the Muslim world this is clear by the fact they are part of the OIC and Muslim League and have ambassadors in these different countries. This is definitively prohibited from different ahadith and the Ijma of the Sahaba:The Prophet (saw) said: "When the oath of allegiance has been taken for two Khalifs, kill the latter of them". (Narrated in Sahih Muslim by Sa'id al-Khudri)The Prophet (saw) also said: "Whoso comes to you while your affairs has been united under one man, intending to break your strength or dissolve your unity, kill him." (Narrated in Sahih Muslim by 'Arfajah)3) Just because Saudi Arabia may implement part of Islamic laws such as in the judiciary, it doesn’t mean that it is an Islamic state or Khilafah"So rule between them by that which Allah has revealed, and follow not their desires, but beware of them in case they seduce you from just some part of that which Allah has revealed to you" (TMQ 4:49)."Then it is only a part of the Book that you believe in and do you reject the rest? But what is the reward for those among you who believe like this but disgrace in this life and on the day of judgement they shall be consigned to the most grievest chastisement." [Al-Baqarah: 85]4) We cannot compare Saudi Arabia and say it is similar to the Khilafah after the Khulafah ar-Rashideen. As in those periods it is unanimously accepted by the Sunni Ulema in history that they were Khilafah and Dar al Islam, some of them misapplied some of the Islamic rules but they never implemented open kufr. There is a difference between the mis-implementation of some of the Shariah rules and the non-implementation as we see in Saudi Arabia.Some of the Khulafah were better than others and some of them were even oppressive, nevertheless the system of Islam remained implemented. Even though some of the rulers misapplied some rules and were oppressive, the Prophet (saw) foretold of this and instructed the Muslims to accept them as Khulafah and obey them as long as they did not implement open Kufr (Kufr bu’ah). Some of these ahadith are:Muslim reported that Salama b. Yazid Al-Ja‘afi asked the Messenger of Allah (saw): "O Prophet of Allah, if we were to be ruled by Ameers who ask us for their dues and deny us our dues, what do you order us to do then?" The Messenger of Allah(saw) turned his face away; he asked him again and Allah’s Messenger (saw) avoided him; then he asked for the second or the third time and he (saw) was pulled by Al-Ash‘aath b. Qays, so the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Hear and obey, for they shall be accountable for their actions and you shall be accountable for yours."Muslim reported from ‘Auf b. Malik who reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say:"The best of your Imams are those whom you love and they love you and you pray for them and they pray for you; and the worst of your Imams are those whom you hate and they hate you and you curse them and they curse you." We asked: "O Messenger of Allah, shall we not then declare war on them?" He (saw) said: "No! As long as they establish prayer among you. Behold if anyone was ruled by a Wali and saw him committing a sin, let him hate the sin committed against Allah, but let him not withdraw his hand from obedience."Muslim narrated from Huzayfah b. al-Yamaan that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "There will be Imams after me who will not be guided by my guidance, nor will they act according to my Sunnah; some men will rise amongst you with satans’ hearts in human bodies." Huzayfah asked: "What shall I do, if I were to reach that time?" He (saw) said: "You should hear and obey the Ameer even if he whipped your back and took your money; do hear and obey."Ahmad and Abu Dawood reported that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "O Abu Dharr, what would you do if some Walis possessed the booty and deprived you of it?" He said: "By He Who sent you with the Truth, I would raise my sword and fight until I join you." Upon this he (saw) said: "Let me tell you something that would be better for you than that. Remain patient and bear it until you join me."Al-Bukhari narrated on the authority of Junada b. abi Umayyah who said: We went to ‘Ubadah b. as-Samit when he was sick and we said: May Allah (swt) guide you. Inform us of a Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (saw) so Allah may benefit you from it. He said, the Messenger of Allah (saw) called upon us and we gave him the Bai’ah, and he said, of that which he had taken from us, that we should give him the pledge to listen and obey, in what we like and dislike, in our hardship and ease, and that we should not dispute the authority of its people unless we saw open Kufr upon which we had a proof from Allah. And it was also narrated by Tabarani. He said: “Unless you see open Kufr.”The Khulafah ruled by Islam and did not implement Kufr Bu’ah (open Kufr) that is why we find the great scholars of Islam such as Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Shafi, Imam Malik, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Jafar as-Sadiq and the like accepted that they were Khalif’s but accounted them. In fact the two most famous students of Abu Hanifah who recorded his Fiqh, most of us in India follow the Fiqh they recorded - Qadi Abu Yusuf and Muhammad As-Shaybani were appointed as Qadi al Quda (the chief judge) in state in the time of the Khalifah Haroon ar-Rasheed.Some of the great scholars wrote books about the history of the Khulafah such as Imam Suyuti known as al-Jalalayn, who died in 1505 CE – he wrote the book Tarikh al Khulafah, ‘History of the Khulafah’. Imam Mawardi who died in 1058 CE who was appointed as a Qadi and later an ambassador by the Abbasid Khalid Al-Qaim bi Amr Allah wrote the famous book, ‘Al Ahkam As-Sultaniya’, about the ruling system in Islam.Whereas today all the countries in the Muslim world including Saudi Arabia implement Kufr Bu'ah in many areas such as those mentioned earlier.
The Dangers of Dismissing People
Allah (swt) emphasised thinking well of the believers when He (swt) said: “Why then, did not the believers, men and women, then you heard it (the slander) think good of their own people.” [TMQ an-Noor: 12]Furthermore Abu Hurayrah (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “If a man says the people have perished then he has destroyed them.”We must realise the importance of realising the goodness amongst the Muslims, for if we didn't see it would lead us to dismissing the Ummah resulting in the failure of the Da'wa and the negligence in the obligation. It would lead to us becoming disheartened souls with a minuscule vision. We would give up in achieving the victory even though the victory may be closer than we possibly imagined. The life of the Da'wa would be removed from us and we would become empty vessels revolving around ourselves.Therefore it is incumbent upon us to realise the reality of the goodness within the Ummah and the reality of people in general. As we should know, people act on the basis of their concepts, therefore if their concepts are corrupt their actions would proceed in an incorrect manner, if their concepts were righteous then their actions follow in a manner leading to the gardens of bliss under which rivers flow as promised in the Qur'an.If we apply this upon the people around us and to the millions in the Ummah we would see their incorrect actions resulting from the declined concepts. However we should realise that these millions possess the Islamic Aqeeda and the mind which Allah (swt) has blessed them with, this should be enough for us to realise their potential and not become detached from them. For if the Islamic Aqeeda existed in ones heart then this would be a starting point for us regardless of his behaviour. Even if this Aqeeda was held in an emotional manner we would make it rational. If it was rational yet the individual shaped his life from other than Islam then we would re-ignite his thought upon the implications of the rational Islamic doctrine and link this to all aspects of his life. If he is shallow in thinking, we would broaden his horizons thus turning him into a thinker rather than one who his led.This potential definitely exists in the Ummah and we must look for the goodness in them rather than only focusing upon the negative points. So if one did not work for the resumption of Islam yet prayed the Salah and smiled to his brothers in order to achieve reward. We should see this and see that it is linked to Islam, we should attempt to understand the basis upon which he builds the rest of his life and rectify it.If one was arrogant yet he dealt with his children in a kind way, we should realise his potential for the good actions and attempt to show him the errors of arrogance and pride, the dangers they would lead to and their non-conformance with Islam.This mentality would make us productive thinkers, so if we were to face a society in which their was much lewdness and degradation in values, we would not get defeated. Rather we would look at the thoughts and sentiments that exist in that society and see the multitude of problems as something which would make it easier for the people to realise the error of the system and instil the desire to change it. The countries of the Indian sub-continent which many of us have visited may come to mind. We can see their potential for Islam, even the fact that the governments have to use the name of Islam should be a sign demonstrating the deep rootedness of the Aqeeda within the people. Even the armies in those lands possess a feeling for Islam.Indeed even the ones who do not possess the Islamic Aqeeda have the potential for change. For if this wasn't the case then Islam would not have spread and it would have remained in the mind of the Prophet (saw). The fact that the Islamic message was embraced by millions demonstrates the reality of change. The Prophet (saw) did du'a to Allah (swt) asking him for one of the two Umar's to come to Islam, these two were Abu Jahl (whose real name was Umar) and Umar bin al Khattab. As we all are well aware of Umar bin al Khattab embraced Islam and was transformed from the one who used to bury his infant daughters alive to the one who became one with the most exalted behaviour, the one who became the Amir and Shield of the believers, the one who was praised by the Prophet and of whom it was said: "When Umar walks down one side of the street, the Shaytan walks down the other side"Even though Abu Jahl never embraced Islam, the Prophet (saw) must have seen the potential for him to change otherwise he wouldn't have delivered the Da'wa to him or make the Du'a.Many examples can be given that prove the power of the Islamic call and the influence it has in radically and comprehensively transform individuals and entire societies.Inshallah understanding this should make us into people who urge to remove the darkness in the world with the light of Islam.
The Muslim Woman
Allah (swt) says: “I have not created jinn and humankind except to worship me” [TMQ 51:57]We all know that our objective in life as Muslims is to worship Allah (swt), this means that we must follow the commands and prohibitions of Allah in all the aspects of life whether in the Masjid, home, market, hospital or school.Many of us may be aware of this objective in general, however unfortunately when it comes to the role of the Muslim woman our roles and responsibilities we find that there is much confusion.Today the Muslim women are being pulled between two cultures, the Western culture which many of the youth are being attracted to and the Eastern culture which a lot of the elder generation are influenced by. Often people have a confusion between the Eastern cultural view of a woman and her role and the Islamic view of women, they mix these together and see them as one.People unfortunately don’t realise that there is a third option and true alternative – Islam and its view of the woman and her roleThe Western culture promotes freedom, liberation of the woman and so-called equality – that a woman can be like a man and do whatever a man can do, that she should not be restricted by her parents, family or even religion. This view seems appealing to some, especially the youth as the media continuously spreading these ideasFor example:· If we look at Sania Mirza, she is portrayed in the media as a successful Muslim woman, so some of our daughters may look at her as a role model· Also if we look to the famous bollywood stars they are also seen as role models to some· Especially amongst the youth the issue of fashion, looking good when going out of the house, especially at weddings – so it is common to see on the streets of Muslim women who are not covered according to the Islamic rules of wearing the Khimar (headscarf) and the Jilbab (outer garment).· The issue of boyfriend and girlfriend relationships is also penetrating the Muslim community, where our daughters even hide from their parents their relationships with boysOn the other hand we see people especially some from the elder generation affected by the Eastern culture. For example:· According to the Eastern culture, women are slaves to their husbands and exist to fulfil their needs – this becomes their objective in life· The concept of arranged marriage where the family chooses someone for the girl without her consent or sometimes without even seeing the man before marriage· Tribalism and nationalism is deeply rooted where even amongst the Muslims people only give their daughter in marriage to a certain tribe or family which is similar to them – so the Siddiqi’s may only marry other Siddiqi’s, Sayyid’s, Choudry’s, etc. This is very common.· The Eastern concept of modesty and dress does not emanate from Islam, so women may be wearing Salwar Kameez, Saari’s with a dupatta when they go out and they think they are dressing properly even though in the eyes of Allah they are naked if they are showing their hair, necks and other parts of their body in front of non-mahram men.· Backbiting (Gheebat) is common where people talk negatively about other MuslimsAs a result of these different views it is common to see arguments in households between mothers and daughters on a variety of issues such as dress code, modesty and marriage.However we need to realise that the solution to our problems does not lie in the sick Western culture where the women is seen as a commodity, where the charms of women are used to sell everything from ice creams to cars, where fornication (Zina) and adultery are commonplace where they think they have equality but in reality they are slaves to the lusts of men.Nor does the solution lie in the disgusting Eastern culture which comes from the idol worshipping religions who worship animals and even deny the oneness of Allah, who follow their forefathers blindly as the Quraysh at the time of the Prophet (saw) did without thinking whether it is right or wrong.We need to think - who can define the role and responsibilities of women correctly, the one who created men and women or limited human beings?Have we ever really questioned what our role should be or do we simply just imitate and follow what we see people around us doing?Since Allah (swt) created the male and the female and He knows best the situation of the man and the woman, then we must limit ourselves to the rules which He (swt) has legislated and not overstep them. This applies to whether these rules are intended solely for the men or exclusively for the women or whether they are for humans irrespective of their being men or women, because He (swt) knows best what is suitable for the human.Both the Western and Eastern view of the woman are wrong as they don’t come from Allah (swt), the creator of the Universe. The source of guidance for us is the Quran and Sunnah, not tradition, not what the media says, not what our parents say, not what the community says, not what the government says. So let us understand what Islam says about women, obviously in this short talk I cannot go into all the details, however I want to address some key points:a) The primary role of the woman: The Shari’ah has made the woman a mother and a housewife. It addressed her with rules relating to pregnancy, childbirth, to suckling, custodianship and to the waiting period (‘Idda). These rules are specified to women and not to men. Allah (swt) obliged men to earn income for himself and his family and he did not oblige this on women. Both men and women are equal in the sight of Allah, however they are different and have different roles and responsibilities according to the Shariah.According to Islam the primary role of the woman is that she is a mother and housewife because it is through this action the human race survives and because she is distinguished by this from the men. However, the woman’s primary role as mother and housewife does not mean she is confined to this role and prevented from pursuing other activities.So we as women must link our actions to what the Shariah has said and not just to engage in them because that’s what people do in society. So when we breastfeed our children, we should know that will be rewarded by Allah (swt) for that.When we look after our husbands, we don’t just do it due to public opinion or because of what the community thinks, rather we do it to please Allah (swt).One woman said to the Prophet(saw) ‘O Rasulallah, you brought tidings to men but not to women’. He said, “Does it not please any of you that if she is pregnant by her husband and he is satisfied with her that she receives the reward of one who fasts and prays for the sake of Allah? And when the labour pains come none in heaven or earth knows what is concealed in her womb to soothe her. And when she delivers, not a mouthful of milk flows from her and not an instance of child’s suck that she receives for every mouthful and for every suck, the reward of one good deed. And if she is kept awake by the child at night, she receives the reward of one who frees 70 slaves for the sake of Allah” [Tabarani]Some rules may be specific to men like praying Jumm’uah (Friday) Salah, some may be specific to women such as the exemption from Salah during period (menstruation).However there are many shariah rules that are applicable to both men and women such as the obligation of Salah, fasting, working for Khilafah, seeking knowledge, prohibition of backbiting, riba (usury) etc.b) Women are not slaves: Contrary to how the media portrays it, in Islam the man is the guardian of the woman and not the master as is in Eastern culture. Allah (swt) said:“Men are the guardians of women” [TMQ An-Nisa: 34]Unlike in Eastern culture, in Islam the aim of marriage is for the man and women to gain tranquillity by having companionship with each other. Although the man is the guardian of the women, she is not his slave. Allah (swt) has given rights to the man and the woman and they should cooperate in helping each other achieving these. The best of examples, the Prophet (saw) used to come back from Jihad and help his wife with the housework. The wives of the Prophet (saw) used to discuss with him and even debate with him, he used to treat them with respect and honour, he used to be kind and gentle with them and used to show compassion, love and mercy.c) Tribalism and nationalism completely contradict Islam and we should never use them as a basis for marriage.The Prophet gave his cousin Zaynab bin Jahsh (ra), who was from the exalted people of the Quraish, in marriage to Zayd bin Haritha (ra) who used to be a slave and was freed. We should look for Taqwa (piety) more than anything else.d) Muslim women can participate in society: If we look to the Sahabiyat they participated in society, it is allowed for Muslim women to work, to be doctors, nurses, engineers, teachers, etc of course with the permission of their guardians. For example Khadija (ra), the first wife of the Prophet (saw) was a businesswomen, Aisha (ra) was a scholar of Islam – many of the Sahaba used to come and ask her questions about the Deen, Shifaa bint Abdullah (ra) was a doctor at the time of the Prophet (saw) – she was literate and he (saw) even asked her to teach one of his wives to read and write, she was appointed as a Qadi (judge) of the marketplace during the Khilafah of Umar (ra).Today it is good for Muslim women to be successful in different fields without compromising their Islame) The importance of da’wa: This is a neglected obligation, the obligation to work to resume to the Islamic way of life and re-establish the Khilafah is a Fard on both men and women without distinction. The evidences to work for change are general upon both men and women, for example the Prophet (saw) said:“Whosoever sees a munkar (evil) must change it with their hand, if they cannot then with their tongue and if they cannot then they must hate it in their heart and that is the weakest of Iman.”The Prophet (saw) said “whoever” meaning whether male or femaleToday we must be active in spreading the message of Islam within our communities, to raise the awareness of our sisters about the Deen. Many are even unaware that Islam has solutions for all problems including how to raise our children and how to solve the problem of Iraq, how to treat our husbands and how to liberate Palestine for the Israeli occupation, how to deal with our parents and how to eliminate poverty in the world.There are two things we must be engaged in:1) Seeking knowledge: How can we engage in Da’wa without having knowledge, of course seeking knowledge is an obligation. We must continuously seek knowledge by reading, thinking and asking questions about the Deen. We should be thinking women like the Sahabiyat and women of the past. We should be aware about the problems of the Ummah and not just consumed in our own family problems where we think more about whether the roti gets burnt rather than thinking about our children being burnt by the bombs of the Kuffar in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and other lands. We are consumed in thinking about what clothes we are going to wear on some wedding or on Eid rather than thinking about how to solve the problem of the Muslims in our lands who have no clothes due to the poverty created by our corrupt rulers who are agents of the West.2) Giving Da’wa: The Prophet (saw) said: “Even if you know one ayah (verse) propagate it”.We as Muslim women are in a good position to help create the atmosphere of Da’wa within our families and communities. So when we meet other women instead of only talking about petty things like what we have cooked, or what has been happening in the dramas on Zee TV, what new films are out, etc – we should discuss issues of the Deen. We should learn knowledge from each other and help each other in this.Some of you may feel that it is difficult to be engaged in Da’wa due to household responsibilities and time constraints. However we must think practically of how to instil Da’wa into our normal lives, day to day we meet many people and interact with our families, we must ensure that we instil the correct Islamic culture within our children and not allow them to be brought up by the Kufr society.The Sahabiyat were da’wa carriers we should look at their examples. They were also mothers, wives and daughters, but they were also Da’wa carriers.Summayah (ra) was the first martyr of Islam who was struggling with the rest of the Sahaba to establish the Deen of Allah (swt), she was tortured to death by Abu Jahl, but she never gave in. The sister of Umar ibn al-Khattab did not turn away from the Deen and gave Da’wa to Umar even though he beat her very badly. Asma bint Abu Bakr (ra) continued to be a da’wa carrier even until she was an old woman when she spoke out against an oppressive leader Hajjaj ibn Yusuf. Women like A’isha (ra) had a remarkable memory and reported over 2000 ahadith. She had a deep understanding of tafseer, hadith and fiqh. At the age of 18 people came from all over Arabia to ask her questions about the deen because she was one of the most knowledgeable scholars.Umm Amarah (ra) even participated in Jihad, she was a skilled fighter and fought in many battle, most famously in the Battle of Uhud where she protected the Prophet (saw) with her own body, not caring about herself. The Prophet (saw) is reported to say that wherever he turned, whether to his left or right, he saw Umm Amarah (ra) fighting to defend him.May Allah (swt) give us the strength to carry this da’wa like the Sahabiyat in the past!
Why Are You A Muslim?
‘Why are you Muslim?’ It may sound like an obvious question, but often many of us don’t have a clear answer to it. I remember being asked this question by my elder brother when I was fourteen years of age, my initial answer was ‘Well, our family is Muslim’, his reply to this made me think, he said, ‘If your family were Hindu or Christian, would you be as well?’. I replied with a strong ‘No, Islam is the truth’, the discussion that followed made me question the basis of my life and changed my life for ever. He triggered me to think about how to prove that Islam is the truth rather than just believing it emotionally or blindly. In fact Allah (swt) has condemned people for imitating their forefathers and adopting their belief without clear evidence.In the Holy Qur’an, He (swt) says:“And verily guess is no substitute for the truth.” [TMQ 53:28]“They have no (certain) knowledge. They follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not (‘Isa).” [TMQ 4:157]"These are nothing but names which you have devised, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow nothing but conjecture and what their Nafs desire. Even though there has already come to them the Guidance from their Rabb" [TMQ 53:23]"Do you have Ilm (knowledge) for that which you claim so that you provide us with? You follow nothing but conjecture (Zann)." [TMQ 6:148]The followers of other religions have no decisive proof for their belief, therefore they believe in their religions emotionally or through imitation. Some of them think that you just have to have faith without clear proof. However when it comes to normal things in life people apply a lot of thought such as buying a car, house, choosing a University course or which bank to join, so how can it be that when it comes to the most important questions about life; which define the purpose of our lives that we should just have ‘faith’ without being convinced absolutely.It is therefore vital for a Muslim to believe in the existence of Allah (swt) without any doubt whatsoever and to believe in the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw) and that the Qur’an is the final revelation sent by Allah (swt) to humanity. Islam is unlike all the other religions as it has a decisive proof that convinces the mind.Proof of the existence of GodLet us begin by discussing the proof of the existence of Allah (swt). Although we are taught theories regarding the origin of the Universe and origin of the Man such as the big bang theory and the theory of evolution, we should realise that they contradict the clear reality which everyone can sense.The fundamental proof that God exists is that everything that we sense around us whether it is the mountains, the trees, the sun, the moon, the stars or animals and fellow human beings are limited things and are not eternal. By limited we mean that they have restrictions, a starting point and an ending point, and they have definable attributes i.e. they are all finite. Human beings are born and die. There is no-one alive who will not die. During their life span, they will grow to a certain height, weight and volume.It is true that there are differences between the things that exist in the Universe however all of them share the quality of being limited and finite, the earth may be huge but it still has a certain shape, weight, volume by which it is limited, this applies to all planets, stars, solar systems and galaxies. Even though a galaxy may look huge to us as the earth looks huge to us and it is not eternal. Even if all of the galaxies and elements of the Universe are added together they do not become unlimited and therefore require an origin. No scientist could ever prove using hard facts that the universe has no bounds. In fact when they say that the universe arose from the Big Bang and is expanding they inherently admit it is finite in size, otherwise it could not expand! There is nothing in reality which is unlimited. No matter how hard we try, we are unable to find anything unlimited around us. All we can perceive is finite and limited.It is a simple principle that something cannot come from nothing, therefore, where did the Universe come from? It cannot simply exist without having any cause as this contradicts the clear reality which everyone can sense, for example, if we see a car no one would ever think that it simply exists without any manufacturer, this can be applied to anything around us. The following example demonstrates this point well.Imam Abu Hanifa was once asked by an atheist, "Is there any proof that God exists?" he replied, "Forget it! At the moment, I am busy thinking about this ship.People tell me there is a big ship; it contains different goods on board. There is no one to steer it, no one maintaining it. Yet, this ship keeps going back and forth; it even traverses big waves on the oceans; it stops at the locations that it is supposed to stop at; it continues in the direction that it is supposed to head. This ship has no captain and no one planning its trips." The atheist who posed the question interrupted and exclaimed, "What kind of strange and silly thought is this? How can any intelligent person think that some thing like this can occur?"Imam Abu Hanifa said, "I feel sorry about your state! You cannot imagine one ship running without some one looking after its affairs. Yet you think that for this whole world, which runs exactly and precisely, there is no one who looks after it, and no one owns it."The attribute of everything around us is that they are all needy and dependent in order to continue existing. They are not self-sustaining or independent. Man has needs he has to satisfy in order to survive. He has organic needs for example he must eat and drink if he is to survive. If he does not he will die. We see the need and dependency in plants and animals. They depend on other parts of the food chain for their existence. The water cycle is dependent on the sun, which is dependent on the laws of the galaxies and of burning mass, and so on... Nothing we can perceive is self-subsistent. So things exist, but do not have the power of existence. They cannot control when they die or when other bodies die. Thus what we see is that everything around us is limited and finite. Everything that is limited and finite is dependant and everything that is dependant is dependant upon something greater than itself. Applying this to everything we see will bring us to a conclusion. If everything in the universe is dependant because it has not the power of being in existence on its own accord, and is also finite and limited, then what is everything dependant upon for its existence? It must be an unlimited and independent creator.Today the various theories that exist about the origin of the Universe such as the ‘Big bang theory’, ‘Big bang – Big crunch theory’ or ‘dialectic materialism’ they contradict the simple fact of the need for an unlimited creator.One example that highlights this is that of the origin of life. Living things like plants, animals and human beings are different from inanimate or dead things as they have certain features such as independent growth, motion and reproduction. If people believe that the Universe has existed forever or that it evolved from single blast etc, this means that they believe that life also evolved from inanimate or dead matter such as gases, liquids or solids. If this is the case, then they should be able to show us one example at least of non-living things producing life, no such example exists. In fact some of them say that this happened by coincidence millions of years ago when certain amino acids and chemicals mixed together to produce the first life. If this is the case, then they should be able to reproduce this ‘coincidence’ with their billions of dollars worth of technology. But they are unable even to produce the most basic life form; an amoeba, which is a single celled organism. What scientists can do is manipulate the attributes that exist within living cells such as in genetic cloning; however this does not mean that they are creating life from dead matter. They are simply manipulating the attributes that Allah (swt) has placed within life, just as we manipulate metal to produce knives and cars.Therefore, it is a simple fact that this universe must have a creator. The question remains is this creator like the universe i.e. limited or is the creator unlimited and eternal. If the creator was limited like the universe then He would also require a creator as this is the case with every limited thing. So if the universe was caused by a big bang as they claim, what was before the big bang? If it was something else like another universe then what was before that? This chain would continue until there would be a beginning or origin, this could only be caused by something which is uncaused or eternal, which we call God or Allah (swt).Furthermore the amazing design of every part of the universe, man and life are testament to the fact that Allah (swt) exists. Imam Shaa'fi explained this when he said, "The leaves of Toot (berries) are all but one. Each leaf tastes exactly the same. Insects, honey bees, cows, goats, and deer live off of it. After eating these the insects produce silk; bees produce honey; deer give musk (a special kind of scent), cows and goats deliver off-springs. Is this not clear evidence that one kind of leaf has so many qualities, and who created these qualities? It is the Khaliq (Creator) who we call Allah (swt)) Who is the Inventor and the Creator."We see that the Qur’an draws attention to everything around us and to conclude from this pondering the existence of Allah. There are hundreds of Qur’anic ayat expressing this meaning. Such as,إنَّ فِي خَلْقِ ألسَمَاوَاتِ وَالأرْضِ وَاخْتِلافِ ألَّيْلِ وَالنَّهــارِ لأََيــاتٍ لِأُوْلـــىالْبــَابِ"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alteration of night and day, these are indeed signs for men of understanding." [TMQ Al-Imran: 190]وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ خَلْقُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلاَفُ أَلْسِنَتِكُمْ وَأَلْوَانِكُمْ إِنَّ فِي ذلِكَ لآيَاتٍ لِّلْعَالَمِينَ"And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. Behold! herein indeed are signs for men of knowledge." [TMQ Ar-Rum: 22]أَفَلاَ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَى الإِبْلِ كَيْفَ خُلِقَتْ وَإِلَى السَّمَآءِ كَيْفَ رُفِعَتْ وَإِلَى الْجِبَالِ كَيْفَ نُصِبَتْ وَإِلَى الأَرْضِ كَيْفَ سُطِحَتْ"Will they not look at the camels, how they are created! And the heaven, how it is raised! And the mountains, how they are set up! And the earth, how it is spread!" [TMQ Al-Ghashiya: 17-20]فَلْيَنظُرِ الإِنسَانُ مِمَّ خُلِقَ خُلِقَ مِن مَّآءٍ دَافِقٍ يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ"So let man reflect, from what he is created. He is created fom a gushing fluid, that is issued from between the loins and ribs." [TMQ At-Tariq: 5-7]إِنَّ فِي خَلْقِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلاَفِ اللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهَارِ وَالْفُلْكِ الَّتِي تَجْرِي فِي الْبَحْرِ بِمَا يَنفَعُ النَّاسَ وَمَآ أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ مِنَ السَّمَآءِ مِن مَّآءٍ فَأَحْيَا بِهِ الأَرْضَ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا وَبَثَّ فِيهَا مِن كُلِّ دَآبَّةٍ وَتَصْرِيفِ الرِّيَاحِ وَالسَّحَابِ الْمُسَخَّرِ بَيْنَ السَّمَآءِ وَالأَرْضِ لآيَاتٍ لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْقِلُونَ“Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sends down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts therein, and in the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth are signs (of Allah's sovereignty) for people who have sense." [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 164]"Were they created of nothing, or were they themselves the creators? Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Nay they have not firm belief." [TMQ At-Tur 35-36]Proof of the Qur’anOnce we have concluded definitively that Allah (swt) exists the next obvious question that arises is that has Allah (swt) sent a revelation for us to follow. It is clear that we are not able to communicate with God and therefore we are unable to know what He wants us to do, how He wants us to worship Him and how we should solve the problems we face in life. All of these questions would remain unresolved unless there the creator has communicated with us and given us a guidance to follow.As Muslims we believe that throughout history, there have been messengers and prophets, men sent from the Creator, bringing laws or revelation on how man should conduct his life. They were given miracles which proved to mankind that they had a communication with God and a revelation from Him. A miracle is something which goes against the laws of nature which is impossible for anyone else to do; by miracles the Prophet’s were able to prove their direct relationship with God. For example prophet Musa (as) had a stick which parted the Red Sea, Prophet Isa (as) had the ability to cure the sick by just touching them.But how do we know if these messengers existed? The miracles performed by the above prophets were only miracles for that specific period of time. But how do we know that they were not just legends or fables? So what miracle do we have right now to convince us and guide us through our lives?The Qur’an itself is the main miracle that the Prophet (saw) brought which is different to the physical miracles of the other Prophet’s as they were limited to their times only. The Qur’an is an intellectual miracle that proves Islam. It was revealed to Muhammad (saw) in the 6th Century, it exists today and has been revealed for all times.It is an established fact that the Qur’an was proclaimed by Muhammad (saw) in Arabia over fourteen hundred years ago. In order for us to prove decisively that it is from Allah (swt), we must first consider the possible sources of the Qur’an and then eliminate these to arrive at its true origin.The only possible sources for the Qur’an are:a) The Arabsb) Muhammad (saw) himselfc) Allah (swt)At the time it was revealed, the pagan Arabs were deeply into poetry. It was an indication of nobility in society. People used to go to the desert for days just to write poetry. The Arabic language has great fluidity and depth of expression, so it was held high in esteem by the Arabs. Allah (swt) in the Qur’an challenged the Arabs to produce something comparable to it in language and they failed to do so.Initially Allah (swt) challenged them to produce ten chapters (surah’s) similar to it:"They may say: He forged it (the Qur’an). Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!" [TMQ 11:13]They failed to do so. Allah (swt) then reduced the challenge to something that at first glance may sound easy, He (swt) said:“If you are in doubt of what we have revealed to our messenger, then produce one chapter like it. Call upon all your helpers, besides Allah, if you are truthful” [TMQ 2:23]The smallest chapter in the Qur’an, Surah al-Kauthar is only three sentences long, surely someone in history must have matched this challenge? The Arabs at the time of Muhammad (saw) failed to do so, although they were the best in the Arabic language. Furthermore no piece of Arabic literature before them or after them until today has even come close to matching the language of the Qur’an.For non-Arabs sometimes this may be difficult to perceive as they do not appreciate the language of the Qur’an directly. However, everyone can agree that any piece of literature written by human beings can be matched; people can copy its style and produce something comparable to it in quality. If we look at great English authors like Shakespear no one would claim that they were Prophet’s and that their works are miraculous in nature. Even though they may have been geniuses in language, people can easily write something similar in excellence to three sentences from their books. Despite having the Arabic language, its letters, grammar, syntax and dictionaries available today, the Arabic linguists cannot construct any piece of language that is comparable to the Qur’an. Therefore, it is impossible that the Qur’an was written by any of the Arabs.It is also inconceivable that the Qur’an is the speech of Muhammad (saw). After all he was one of the Arabs. Also, whatever level of genius people may assign to him, he was still a human being and one of his tribe and nation. Since the Arabs failed to bring the like of the Qur’an, this equally applies to Muhammad (saw). Moreover, Muhammad (saw) has left saheeh ahaadeeth (sound narrations) and mutawaatir ahaadeeth (definitive narrations) whose authenticity is beyond doubt. If any of these ahaadeeth were to be compared with any verse of the Qur'an, there would be no similarity between them in style. He (saw) used to utter the revealed verse and say the hadeeth at the same time and yet there is a difference between them in style. Whenever any man attempts to diversify his speech, it will remain similar in style, because it is a part of him. Since there is no similarity between the hadeeth and the verse in style, the Qur'an is absolutely not Muhammad’s speech. It is important to point out that none of the Arabs, who despised Muhammad (saw), particularly at that time, were the most acquainted with the styles of Arabic speech yet never claimed that the Qur’an was Muhammad’s (saw) speech, or even similar to his speech.Since it is proved that the Qur'an is neither the speech of the Arabs nor the speech of Muhammad (saw), it is definitely the speech of Allah as this is the only rational possibility we are left with.The Qur’anic challenge is unique because the Creator, Allah (swt), pushes man to use his ability to undermine the authenticity of the Qur’an. It is such a profound yet simple challenge. Imagine throughout the history of Islam, all her enemies needed to defeat this challenge to destroy the whole basis of Islam. Yet not one, non-Muslim Arab or non-Arab has been able to do this even though all the tools of the Arabic language are at their disposal. The Western government’s hatred of Islam is well known. All they have to do in order to defeat Islam and to make over one billion Muslims apostatise from it, is not to spend billions of dollars in invading Afghanistan, Iraq and launching a mythical ‘war on terror’. They simply have to produce one chapter similar to the Qur’an.To this day Muslim and non-Muslim scholars have not been able to find any contradiction or mistake in the Qur’an. Moreover, if one was to compare word by word a copy of the Qur’an published today to one of the first copies of the Qur’an available then one would find that not a single word has been omitted or added. Copies of the Qur’an dating back to the first century of Islam can be found in Istanbul and Tashkent. Allah (swt) says:"Do they not ponder about the Qur’an? If it had come from God they would surely have found therein much contradictions." [T.M.Q 4:82]There are many texts available today claiming divine status from God, like the Bible of the Christians and the Torah of the Jews etc. However, they have no proof that they have been revealed by God, if they are not miraculous in nature then there is no reason to believe in them.As Muslims we believe that Allah (swt) revealed different books through history such as the original Injeel (Bible) and Torah, Allah (swt) informed us of this in the Qur’an this is why we believe these. However, we have also been informed that these books have been altered and therefore the versions that exist today are not that which was revealed by Allah (swt). Besides this, the Qur’an is the final revelation from Allah (swt) which abrogates all others.Allah (swt) says, "Say ye: "We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) Prophets from their Lord: we make no difference between one and another of them: and we bow to Allah (in Islam)." [TMQ Al-Baqarah:136]Once we have established through rational proof that Allah (Swt) exists and that the Qur’an is the Word of Allah, we must believe in everything that the Qur’an informs us of and commands us with, whether we can perceive them or not. Therefore, we must have Iman (belief) in the Day of Resurrection, in paradise (jannah) and hell, in reckoning and punishment, in angels, in jinn, in Shayaateen and all others that the Qur'an or hadeeth mutawaatir (definitive narrations) have mentioned. To believe in these things is therefore not irrational just because we cannot see them or sense them physically as we have conclusively proved the Qur’an being from Allah (swt) which informs us about all of these.يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ آمِنُواْ بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَالْكِتَابِ الَّذِي نَزَّلَ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ وَالْكِتَابِ الَّذِي أَنَزلَ مِن قَبْلُ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِاللَّهِ وَمَلآئِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلاَلاً بَعِيداً"O you who believe! Believe in Allah and His messenger, and the Book which He sent to His Messenger and the Book which He sent to those before (him). Any who denies Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgement, has gone far, far astray." [An-Nisa: 136]Once the Iman in Allah, His Messenger and the Qur’an has been proven, every Muslim is obliged to believe in the Islamic Shari’ah as a whole. We cannot pick and choose as we like. As the Shariah was revealed in the glorious Qur'an, and the Messenger (saw) conveyed it. If someone disbelieves in this he would be a (disbeliever) Kafir. Therefore, it is disbelief (Kufr) to deny the shariah rules as a whole, or any definite detailed rule amongst them. This is the case whether these ahkam (rules) are connected with worships (ibadaat), transactions (mu'amalaat), punishments (uqoobat), food, etc. So the rejection of the verse:وَأَقِيمُواْ الصَّلاَةَ"So establish regular prayer" [Al-Baqarah: 43]Is the same as rejecting the following verses:وَأَحَلَّ اللَّهُ الْبَيْعَ وَحَرَّمَ الرِّبَا"But Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury," [Al-Baqarah: 275]وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُواْ أَيْدِيَهُمَا"As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands," [Al-Ma’idah: 38]حُرِّمَتْ عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَيْتَةُ وَالْدَّمُ وَلَحْمُ الْخِنْزِيرِ وَمَآ أُهِلَّ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ بِهِ"Forbidden to you (for food) are dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which has been invoked the name of any other than Allah." [Al-Ma’idah: 3]We must completely surrender to all the rules revealed by Allah (swt) whether we see rational reasons for them or not.فَلاَ وَرَبِّكَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لاَ يَجِدُواْ فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجاً مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُواْ تَسْلِيماً"But no, by your Lord, they can have no (real) faith, until they make you judge in all the disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest submission." [An-Nisa: 65]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
