Q&A: The role of Jihad in the Work for the Establishment of the State

This is the translation of the  Answer to a Question asked to Shekh Ata'a Bin Khalil Abu Rashta, The Ameer of Hizb Ut Tahrir

There are those who say that Hizb ut Tahrir depends on the period of Mecca in its quest for the establishment of the Khilafah and not on the period of Medina. It views material action, i.e. "Jihad" in the stage of calling for the establishment of the Khilafah as a violation of the Shari'ah, because the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم has not done so... The questioner adds: Why is the evidence of the establishment of the Khilafah not taken from the Medinese period, where Jihad was valid and applied? Is there a clear-cut sufficient answer to the issue? Wa jazak Allahu khairan.

---

Answer:

Within this question lie several matters that require explanation:

1. The relevant evidence, whether from the Book or from the Sunnah, must be followed comprehensively, and there is no difference between the evidence emerging in Mecca al-Mukarrameh and the evidence emerging in the Medina al-Munawwarah.

2. The required evidence is one that pertains to the issue, rather than evidence that does not pertain to the matter:

a. For example, if I wanted to know how to perform ablution, I would search for evidence pertaining to ablution, whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina. The ruling is then extracted from the evidence according to the established legal (Shar'ii) methodology... But I would not research evidence on fasting to extract from it the ruling of ablution and its modalities.

b. As another example, if I wanted to know the provisions of Hajj, I would start searching for evidence pertaining to Hajj, whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina, and from it the ruling is extracted according to the established legal (Shar'ii) methodology. I would not research the evidence of prayer to extract from it the provisions of Hajj and its modalities.

c. As a further example, if I wanted to know the provisions of Jihad: Whether as an individual or as a collective obligation, whether defensive or aggressive, what pertains to Jihad from the provisions of conquests and spreading Islam, whether the conquest takes place by force or through conciliation... I would research the evidence on Jihad wherever it is to be found, whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina, and the ruling is extracted from it according to the established legal methodology. But I would not research the evidence on Zakat to take from it the ruling of Jihad and its details.

d. This is the modus operandi in every issue, the evidence is researched whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina, and from this evidence the Shar'i ruling of the issue is taken according to the established legal methodology.

3. Now we come to the issue of establishing an Islamic state, and we search for its evidence, whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina, and extract the Shar'i ruling according to the established legal methodology.

We do not find any evidence to establish an Islamic state, except that which was presented by the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم in his Seerah in the Holy City of Mecca. He called to Islam secretly, then forming a believing, steadfast block...then he announced it among the people in Mecca and its surroundings...then seeking support from the people of power and strength. Eventually Allah showed mercy to him صلى الله عليه وسلم through the Ansar, so the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم emigrated to them and set up the state.

This is the evidence of the establishment of the State, and there is no other evidence. The Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم showed it to us in his Seerah through clear-cut evidence, and we have to commit to it. The issue is not one of the Meccan period before the imposition of Jihad, or the Medinese period after the imposition of Jihad. Rather it is a research for evidence pertaining to the establishment of the State, which is only to be found in Mecca until the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم migrated to Medina and established the State.

It is one matter while Jihad is a different matter. As we said, the evidence on the establishment of the State is taken from its precedents, and the evidence on Jihad is taken from its precedence, and they are different and independent from each other. Therefore Jihad is not suspended in the absence of the Khilafah state, because the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم says:

«وَالْجِهَادُ مَاضٍ مُنْذُ بَعَثَنِي اللهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ إِلَى أَنْ يُقَاتِلَ آخِرُ أُمَّتِي الدَّجَّالَ، لَا يُبْطِلُهُ جَوْرُ جَائِرٍ وَلَا عَدْلُ عَادِلٍ»

"Jihad is ongoing since Allah Almighty sent me until the last of my Ummah will fight the Dajjal, neither the injustice of an oppressor nor the justice of a righteous will suspend it." [Reported by al-Bayhaqi in as-Sunan al-Kubra from Anas Bin Malik]

Therefore, Jihad is ongoing within the framework of its Shar'i provisions, whether the Khilafah has been established or not.

And the work for the establishment of the Khilafah is not suspended because the rulers suspended Jihad. The work for the Khilafah goes on until it is established, because it is prohibited for the Muslims who are able to, that there shall be no Bay'ah to a Khaleefah in their necks. Muslim narrated from Abdullah Bin Umar who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم say:

«مَنْ خَلَعَ يَدًا مِنْ طَاعَةٍ، لَقِيَ اللهَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ لَا حُجَّةَ لَهُ، وَمَنْ مَاتَ وَلَيْسَ فِي عُنُقِهِ بَيْعَةٌ، مَاتَ مِيتَةً جَاهِلِيَّةً»

"Who withdrew his hand from obedience will meet Allah on the day of resurrection without an argument for himself, and who died without a Bay'ah in his neck, died the death of Jahiliyah."

Hence Jihad is ongoing, and the work for the Khilafah continues until it is established, none of them depends on the other, they are two different issues. For each issue its Shar'i evidence is sought, and from it the ruling specific to the matter is extracted according to the established legal methodology.

4. Therefore commitment of the Hizb to the method of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم as he demonstrated in Mecca until he established the state in Medina, and the non-use of hostilities during the phase of calling for the establishment of the Khilafah, have nothing to do with the Meccan or the Medinese period. Rather there is no evidence on the establishing the State except for what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم demonstrated in Mecca until it was established in Medina. Therefore the issue is the method of the establishment of the state, but there is no other method except what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم demonstrated in his Seerah in Mecca.

If the issue was the work of the Islamic State and its institutions... then we had taken it from the evidence demonstrated by the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم in Medina, because the State was established there.

5. Conclusion:

A. The provisions on any matter are taken from the evidence that pertains to this matter, whether revealed in Mecca or Medina. Such that the provisions of fasting are taking from the evidence on fasting, and the provisions of prayer are taken from the evidence on prayer, and the provisions of Jihad are taken from the evidence on Jihad as well as the provisions of the establishment of the State are taken from the evidence on establishing the State...and so on.

B. The commitment to the method of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in Mecca for the establishment of the State stems from the fact that there is no other evidence on the establishment of the State except that which was demonstrated in the Holy City of Mecca. Had there been evidence on the establishment of the State originating in Medina, then this evidence too would have been made a source of research.

We ask Allah Almighty's help and success for the establishment of an Islamic state, a rightly guided Khilafah that restores honor in Islam and Muslims, and humiliates Kufr and Kuffar, such that goodness prevails throughout the world, and that is beloved to Allah

Finding the One!

Finding the One!

 

By Sister Taaiebah Ebrahim

 

As a pretend statistician, I'll say it's statistically proven that females are more prone to being caught up in idealistic romantic notions of love especially since we tend to be more emotional beings and brainwashed by fairytales of damsel's in distress and the knight in shining armour hype. Naturally, as a young girl, I had far too many self-edited fairytale re-runs constantly playing in my head.  My excitement was always in anticipation of when my prince would romantically woo me, with me being obviously unaware, just as it was in those fables.  

Truth be told, I was always aware that those fables were indeed far from reality, so nothing surprised me and every person seemed fairly predictable. But even so, I hoped for a miracle - someone original to sweep me off my feet.

And then I was approached…I was given the longest love letter, ever. I was flattered that Someone had taken the time to write to me and was most definitely intrigued. But - I didn't really know Him. So I thought, at least let me, hear Him out, after all, there was a great amount of effort put into this letter.

 

In all honesty, it was quite entertaining. The letter reflected warmth, beauty, bravery, it was so inspiring. It was like a dream sometimes where good battled and won over evil. There were heroes overcoming their weaknesses, there were love stories (my favourite) and other stuff, but really, the whole thing was about me. I knew this because my name was written all over the place. I was totally in tuned with the Author and was taken aback at how He knew so much about me.

Everyday I got presents from Him too. Now, I'm not the type to get bought over, but these gifts were too nice to return to sender, if you know what I mean.

So, I'd read portions of His letter everyday...and to be honest, gifts aside, He really started growing on me and the more I'd read His letter, the more attached I became to Him. Even though I didn't meet Him yet, I really started to like Him. The more I read, the more love I felt . He seemed to tick all the right boxes; He was knowledgeable, spoke about every topic relevant from animals to society and its challenges. He always made me feel so special by making reference to me, all the time. He would go on and on about how He would do anything for me… I just had to ask. So that was nice.

 

He got me thinking. I mean this was it. It's the moment we wait for our whole lives. The magic moment that reroutes your future in a simple decision. But as my eyes got bigger, I'd keep reading things in this letter, that I wasn't sure I was ready to hear. There was a commitment, yes indeed a BIG one!

I was at a crossroad. Take Him or wait for someone else. The decision, however, was clear and there was no real choice to be made. It was more like a one way street than a crossroad. He promised to listen to me, when everyone failed to understand me.

 

 He'd appreciate my humour, understand my emotions and my demeanour. He promised to never break His promises. Could I really believe Him?

He said this whole world and everything in it was nothing compared to me. His words kept on taking my breath away. He seemed so perfect and I felt so honoured and fortunate. I realised I found the One! As the letter began to conclude, He then beautifully and eloquently said…

"Qul huwa laahu Ahad" (Say: He is Allah, the One.) (Quraan 112:1)

This love letter was the Qur'aan, obviously, and the perfect One indeed is. ..ALLAH, THE GREAT.

You see, before I wrongly assumed this craving for love and understanding needed feeding from a human. And while being fully aware of humans and their flaws and predictabilities, I never saw the One who was always there.

 

 I realised it was Allah that was always will be my first and true love.

 

The point is that we all have this insatiable gap that needs feeding and we're always craving to feel complete. It's an unsettling feeling knowing something's missing. And until we begin to realise that it can only be filled with accepting Allah's love, we'll forever be searching for temporary fixes that promise no certainty.

 

Without any judgement, it's understandable in our modern life age to blindly hunt for short-lived reliefs to numb the nagging aching in our chests – after all, we've been coached since young to seek out quick fixes. But it's no reason to your life's betterment to insist on this sort of addictive cycle.

We don't have to wait until we all eventually reach the moment of 'Heeeelp! My cup runneth over!'. It'd be a good idea to nicely sit your sub-conscious down for a no-nonsense one-on-one family meeting, and make it realise that so long as it goes on autopilot in search of completion in anything or anyone outside of yourself, it and you will always feel unfulfilled and super sucky. Being consistently strong in a new way of thinking, trains your sub-conscious to new automatic patterns. Look for permanent freedom - not temporary relief peeps.

Another point to note is to avoid placing the unrealistic expectation of finding perfection in a partner. Everything we've been conditioned to look for in a spouse, is in Allah in perfection, so rely on Him alone to see to your needs, and share your joys with your spouse.

 

Allah is indeed the Only True Love, He is First and Last, His Love is a beginning without an end, His promises are all true, all we need to do is Love Him  and love for His Sake and when every other Love dims the Love of Allah will still shine bright!

The Umbilical Cord...

The Umbilical Cord …

By Sister Jasmine Khan

When we emerge from the womb at birth we are attached to our mothers by the umbilical cord. The first thing the doctor or midwife does is to sever this cord so that we can make it on our own in the world. However, the umbilical cord has significance besides the purely physical. This metaphorical connection to our birth mother will make its influence felt throughout the life of both child and mother. This bond between mother and child is so powerful that however hard outside agents may try to break it, and even succeed to a certain extent, the connection will stay and re-surface, no matter how frayed the cord may become.

There is another umbilical cord which will make itself felt, if we allow it to. That is the invisible cord which connects us to our Creator, the true source from which all of us come into this world. No matter how many outside influences we may have in life, that connection stays, and will eventually clamour for attention. As we turn to our mothers for love and nurturing, our souls will constantly yearn for the love and mercy of our true Creator. We may ignore it, deny it, or be too blind, deaf and dumb to acknowledge it, but it will remain the one constant in our hearts, our souls, in the very essence of our being.

As we enter another season of Hajj, we look at family, friends and neighbours scurrying around with last minute chores that have to be completed before departing for the Holy Land. One cannot help reflecting about the whole concept of Hajj, and why it is the fifth and last pillar of Islam. When we declare the Kalimah Shahadah and Testify that there is only One Allah and that we believe firmly in our Creator, we move to the next pillar which commands us to perform the Salaah. We do this out of obedience initially, but there comes a point when we perform our Salaah out of gratitude for all the bounties that Allah has given us; the greatest being the gift of life. We fast to inculcate Taqwa and because we crave Allah's mercy and forgiveness for our transgressions. We pay Zakah (compulsory charity) and give Sadaqah (voluntary charity) because we want others less fortunate to share in the rizq (provisions) that we have been blessed with. Once we have fulfilled the first four pillars of Islam we feel content to a certain extent.

It is now that our heart and soul starts to crave nearness to Allah, whether we are aware of it or not. We feel a subconscious yearning to meet Allah. We know that someday we will be re-united with our Creator, we will return to that from which we came. This inexplicable longing persists and grows. When we are truly in touch with our heart; when that heart is free from all that is impure, negative, and ugly, the longing will be felt. Our soul will crave to be ever closer to Allah, just as a child turns to his mother for comfort and love. Consider how very merciful Allah is; even more merciful than the best mother. Allah knows what we need and has granted us the opportunity to meet that innate need, by giving us the fifth pillar of Islam, the Hajj(Pilgrimage).  We do not have to wait for death to fulfil our yearning. It has been said that the gathering on the plains of Arafat is like a miniature Qiyaamah(Day of Resurrection)  and during our lifetime we are granted this unique opportunity to experience this magnificent favour from our Creator.

We often hear people commenting on those who have performed Hajj: "look at that, she/he has been to Makkah, but has not changed at all".  Going for Hajj does not change us; the change has to take place before undertaking the journey. In fact, change is the wrong word, we do not change; we grow and develop. If we change today, we can change back tomorrow. Life is a process of moving from not knowing, to knowing, it is a process of evolving. We do not change from a baby to a child and then to an adult. We grow from one stage to another, developing the necessary skills to cope with each stage.

Similarly our faith needs to grow and develop; it must grow from believing in what we cannot really conceive of as a child, to what we possibly cannot conceive of as a young adult, until we reach a state of clarity. At this point we see and feel the workings of Allah as a constant in our life. We need no proof other than what is taking place in our life. When we are connected to our inner core, the core which comes from Allah, we experience Allah's influence from moment to moment. Faith is not an object that can be taken up and put down at will.  True faith means to believe in Allah every second of the day, it is active and dynamic, not passive.

When we truly believe, unconditionally and with total commitment, trust must follow. We cannot say: "I believe, or I have Imaan and Taqwa", and then worry about the outcome of certain things. Total trust in Allah means the having the conviction that nothing happens without Allah's permission, that Allah wants only good things for us. Once we believe and trust, we will flow. We acknowledge and accept that only Allah is in charge, and we submit. Once we have done everything we can to ensure a good outcome, we release. This is the real power of flow. Nowhere is the power of flow more convincingly portrayed than during the rites of pilgrimage. Many of those people have been known to leave babies, young children and elderly parents to perform the pilgrimage. Some have left their jobs, even sold their homes to pay for the trip. They are the ones who have submitted to an inner yearning to meet Allah, to beg for forgiveness and to re-establish connection to their source. They are the ones who have translated faith into action. Their trust in Allah is absolute, and when they say: "I leave my family in the hands of Allah," it is evidence of absolute trust.

When we look at the Hajj portrayed we see millions of people moving like a river in flow. They have truly felt the tug of the invisible cord that joins them to Allah, and have given in to the longing to re-connect. Like a child returning to a mother for succour and comfort, all of us have this yearning for the ONE who is even more Merciful. Whether we know it or not, whether we are aware of it or not, that cord is there. When the heart is pure, when the longing to re-connect is so great, that is when the invitation to be a guest of Allah comes!

May Allah Ta'ala make us amongst His chosen guests…Ameen

Egypt - Former Mufti Justifies killing of Muslims and describes them as Khawarij

Press Release

﴿كَبُرَتْ كَلِمَةً تَخْرُجُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ ۚ إِنْ يَقُولُونَ إِلَّا كَذِبًا﴾

 “Grave is the word that comes out of their mouths; they speak not except a lie.” [Al-Kahf 18:5]

The Former Mufti is a Cheap Tool in the Hands of the Oppressors

He Justifies the Killing of Muslims: Falsely and Slanderously Describing Them as Khawarij!

(Translated)

The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

«إنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَقْبِضُ الْعِلْمَ انْتِزَاعًا يَنْتَزِعُهُ مِنْ الْعِبَادِ وَلَكِنْ يَقْبِضُ الْعِلْمَ بِقَبْضِ الْعُلَمَاءِ، حَتَّى إِذَا لَمْ يُبْقِ عَالِمًا اتَّخَذَ النَّاسُ رُءُوسًا جُهَّالًا فَسُئِلُوا فَأَفْتَوْا بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ فَضَلُّوا وَأَضَلُّوا»

“Allah does not remove knowledge snatching it away from His slaves, but He takes away knowledge by taking away the scholars, until no scholar is left so the people will take ignorant heads to ask them, they will give Fatwas without knowledge, going astray and leading astray.” [Reported by al-Bukhari]

This is the case with former Mufti Ali Jum’a, who despite leaving his position of giving Fatwas in favor of the Sultans, still insists on passing Fatwas unto them, amounting further sins over his previous sins. The man does not refrain from giving a Fatwa on the shedding of sacred blood, even if it requires him to twist the texts and apply them on other than their reality. It seems he is indifferent to carrying his sins and the sins of those who killed people aggressively and unjustly under the pretext of his Fatwa.

In the video the former Mufti’s speech delivered in front of a number of army and police leaders in the presence of the faction of as-Sisi and General Muhammad Ibrahim, the Interior Minister, which was leaked by activists, the former Mufti said: "Multiply you efforts! Woe to you if you sacrifice your men and your soldiers for these Khawarij. Blessed are those who killed them and were killed by them. Whosoever kills them is dearer to Allah than them. We must purify our city and our Egypt from these bastards, who do not deserve our Egyptian identity. We are afflicted by disgrace through them, so we must absolve ourselves from them as the wolf was absolved from the blood of the son of Jacob."

This irresponsible statement full of malice and hatred against anyone who wants Islam and stands against the oppressors makes us realize why the demonstrators were killed in cold blood and in these large numbers. The soldiers and officers through this awful Fatwa of Ali Jum’a were given green light to commit what they have committed of massacres, which by the way is the same chargewith which the Mufti accused the rebels of January 25^th.

The man had been used earlier in the department of moral affairs of the armed forces to justify the killing of demonstrators and to legitimize this crime. The latest video is only a repetition of what was said before. The man has sold his Deen for a fleeting piece of the Dunya, lying to Allah by claiming frequent visions to support murder and lynching and burning, and that Allah is with those who commit such. The man has lost the remainder of his insight by inciting the soldiers "to multiply their efforts" and falsely claiming that this is "the tolerance of Islam" and "the power of Islam" and "the sweetness of Islam"! Said Ibn al-Musayyib (Rahimahullah) said: "If you see the world fearing the princes then it is a bandit." And Yahya Bin Mu’az said: "The magnificence of knowledge and wisdom will perish if the Dunya is requested by them." Has the Mufti not taken a lesson from those who preceded him in Syria and elsewhere, who were the tools of the oppressors against their own people? They went without anybody feeling sorrow over them, neither the sky nor the earth wept for them, they had no foresight.

The masters of the scholars – and this man is not one of them – in every age and every place did not stand between the Ummah and the ruler at the same distance from both. Rather they stood in the row of the Ummah closer to it, not to appease the public and gain popularity, but because the Ummah’s rights were disregarded in most cases, and its sanctity was assaulted, and the arrows of grievance were shot at her by influential aggressors, let alone the current rulers of Egypt who do not even apply Islam!

It is natural that the Ummah reveres the scholars, who are the leading, pioneering fraction, for them to bring the Ummah victory and claim its rights, not to be cheap tools of the oppressors, justifying their oppression and killing of the Ummah! May Allah fight this man for his delusion!

﴿أَفَرَأَيْتَ مَنِ اتَّخَذَ إِلَٰهَهُ هَوَاهُ وَأَضَلَّهُ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ عِلْمٍ وَخَتَمَ عَلَىٰ سَمْعِهِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَجَعَلَ عَلَىٰ بَصَرِهِ غِشَاوَةً فَمَنْ يَهْدِيهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ اللَّهِ ۚ أَفَلَا تَذَكَّرُونَ﴾

“Have you seen he who has taken as his god his [own] desire, and Allah has sent him astray due to knowledge and has set a seal upon his hearing and his heart and put over his vision a veil? So who will guide him after Allah? Then will you not be reminded?” [Al-Jathiya 45:23]

Sharif Zayed

Head of the Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir

in Wilayah of Egypt

US Aid is Poison and its End is a Thousand Times Easier than its Continuance

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Jennifer Psaki, Spokesperson for the US State Department said on 9/10/2013 that Washington would freeze military and economic assistance to Egypt, while waiting for the country to make credible progress towards a democratically elected civilian government. The Los Angeles Times quoted US officials who emphasized that core U.S. security interests in the region, including the Egypt-Israeli peace treaty, would not be jeopardized by the cuts.

We recognize that these statements from America do not mean the final relinquishment of poisoned aid to Egypt. Rather they are a means of threatening the new government according to what America wants, so nothing takes place against their interests. Ever since America entered the Middle East as a neo-colonial power, it has used aid as a means to colonize people and expand control and influence. During a conference in Istanbul held by American diplomats accredited to the Arab Group on 2nd October 1950 under the chairmanship of George Maggie, representative in the State Department, it was among the schemes "to take cooperation with the people of the country as a means of access to the region" in their habit of forging names to sell the wolf in sheep's clothing!

This means that toxic aid that they called "cooperation" stem from the heart of America's policy to penetrate the depths of the region and to produce agents, while looting the wealth and sucking its blood. America has used the method of aid to colonize Indonesia. When Sukarno in the 1950s refused American aid, they continued to harass him through threats and intimidation until he accepted the aid and then U.S. influence entered Indonesia and continues to exist until today.

Thus, what America has called humanitarian assistance in its dictionaries is in fact colonial projects under an economic pretext, even to its friends! The Marshall Plan after World War II named European Recovery Program was the gateway for American companies to be an active partner in many parts of the European economy. After ten years had passed the European economy in general became the property of American companies. Although it has decreased somewhat in recent years, the impact of U.S. companies on the European economy still exists today.

All of the aid is evil, because reality shows that the Kaffir colonial states, especially America, do not offer aid except to extend their influence and hegemony, to serve their interests, as well as the interests of the Jewish entity. All this is secured for the grievous crime of the Camp David Agreement. Even officials of the Jewish entity are wary of the impact of reducing US aid to Egypt, as the entity considers "US aid to Egypt an important pillar of the Camp David Agreement." The US aid is nothing but harm, and the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

لَا ضَرَرَ وَلَا ضِرَارَ

"No harm and no causation of harm."

As reported by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, and he said: "This is a Hadith with a Sahih chain of transmission according to the conditions of Muslim, although he did not report it."

The acceptance of this aid is a major crime in Islam, because it creates ways for the colonialist Kuffar to enter Muslims lands through influence, economy and politics. Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

وَلَنْ يَجْعَلَ اللَّهُ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ سَبِيلًا

"Allah will not give the disbelievers any way against the believers [to overcome them]"(An-Nisaa, 4:141)

This is on the one hand. On the other hand, this aid is not worth anything of the Egyptian GDP. American aid of about $1.5 billion does not amount to more than 0.3% of the GDP of Egypt, not to mention that it is not worth anything of Egypt's wealth of oil, gas and metals, and the traffic in the Suez Canal. The slightest lifting of tolls in the Suez Canal would bring in a multiple of that amount, as well as cutting off gas to the Jewish entity which is being sold cheaply! Selling this gas at market prices would bring in a multiple of that amount, besides that we are in an actual state of war with the Jewish entity which has usurped the land of al-Isra' wal-Mi'raj. It is not permissible under any circumstances to engage in peaceful relations with them, neither political nor economic.

As for widespread rumors that poverty and economic crises would befall the country were it not for this aid, then this is a feeble statement. The poverty of the Muslim countries is an artificial poverty caused by the shortage of those occupying the seats of governance and the sources of decision makers. The wealth of the Ummah and its public property is squandered on corruption, harmful to the country and its people. Instead of public property being distributed to the Ummah which is their right, it settles in the pockets of those in power, in their domestic and foreign bank accounts, both secretly and publicly. The country is then tied to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund through America's poison called aid. This is the cause of poverty in the Muslim countries, although they are abundant with God-given wealth far-exceeding their needs, if only properly placed within the framework as disclosed by the Kind, the All-knowing.

Oh Muslims in the land of Egypt: Your duty is to show the initiative by rejecting this aid, instead of America threatening you with cutting it off! The basic principle is to prevent this toxic aid from entering the country. Rejecting the aid strikes America and the Jewish entity in a deadly spot. This is what we must excel in and where we must spend our utmost effort. Our answer must be to throw their poison in their faces, instead of Ambassador Badr Abdul 'Atiy, spokesman of the Egyptian Foreign Ministry, saying: "This decision is improper in terms of content and timing". He added: "Egypt is also interested in the continuation of good relations with the United States!"

It was on as-Sisi's coup to throw this aid in the face of its owner, and to toss America's toxin back into its throat, so they will know that the land of Egypt finds strength in their Lord and honor in their Deen. Unfortunately this coup is far from this. Rather it has been busy with killing people, so they will say only what he says and see only what he sees, as Pharaoh said before:

قَالَ فِرْعَوْنُ مَا أُرِيكُمْ إِلَّا مَا أَرَى

"Pharaoh said, 'I only show you what I see myself'"(Ghaafir, 40:29)

The murder of the soul which Allah has forbidden except by right will cause the murderer to perish in this world and the hereafter. From what he صلى الله عليه وسلم said to the crowd of people on the day of Arafah was:

فَإِنَّ دِمَاءَكُمْ، وَأَمْوَالَكُمْ، وَأَعْرَاضَكُمْ، بَيْنَكُمْ حَرَامٌ، كَحُرْمَةِ يَوْمِكُمْ هَذَا، فِي شَهْرِكُمْ هَذَا، فِي بَلَدِكُمْ هَذَا

"Your blood, your wealth, your honors are sacred amongst you as the sanctity of this day, in this month, on this soil." [Reported by al-Bukhari]

Whoever kills a soul unjustly has wronged his Deen and his Ummah, and his fate is as described by the Strong, the Glorious:

سَيُصِيبُ الَّذِينَ أَجْرَمُوا صَغَارٌ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ وَعَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ بِمَا كَانُوا يَمْكُرُونَ

"Debasement in the sight of Allah and a severe punishment will strike those who did wrong for the plots that they concocted."

(Al-An'am, 6:124)

That is what has been done to their adherents before them, and the wise is the one who takes a lesson from what happened to others:

إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَذِكْرَى لِمَنْ كَانَ لَهُ قَلْبٌ أَوْ أَلْقَى السَّمْعَ وَهُوَ شَهِيدٌ

"There is a reminder in that for anyone who has a heart, or who listens well, having seen the evidence."

(Qaf, 50:37)

Hizb ut Tahrir

6th Dhul Hijjah 1434 AH

11th October 2013 CE

NOTE. The above is a translation of the meaning of the original Arabic leaflet

Introduction to an Islamic Constitution for Syria and the Muslim world - Article 4

The following is the translation of an article from the book by Hizb ut-Tahrir entitled 'Introduction to the Constitution and the necessary evidences for it' which is the explanation of its draft constitution for the Khilafah state. This draft translation is from the second edition published in 2009 which was updated from the original published in 1963. Numerous brigades in Syria have agreed to the implementation of this constitution after the removal of the corrupt system that has brutally suppressed the people for decades. 

Article 4

The Khalifahdoes not adopt any specific Shari’ah rule in matters related to rituals(‘ibadaat) except in Zakat and Jihad, and whatever is necessary to protect the unity of the Muslims, and nor does he adopt any thought from among the thoughts related to the Islamic ‘Aqidah.

There is a consensus of the companions that the Khalifah alone has the right to adopt and from this consensus the famous rules “the decision of the Imam resolves the disagreement” and “the decision of the Iman is binding” have been derived. However, it emerged from the events of Al-Ma’mun (pertaining the Fitna (strife) of the creation of the Quran), that adoption in the thoughts related to Aqa’id (beliefs, plural of ‘Aqidah) caused Fitna for the Khalifah and Fitnah amongst the Muslims. Therefore, the Khalifah deems it fit to abstain from adopting in matters related to ‘Aqidah and in rules related to rituals in order to avoid problems and to gain the consent and tranquillity of the Muslims. However, abstaining from adopting in matters of 'Aqa’id and in rituals does not mean that it is forbidden for the Khalifah to adopt in them, it rather means that the Khalifah chooses not to adopt in them for he can either adopt or abstain from adopting. Thus, he may choose not to adopt. That is why the article stated that the Khalifah “does not adopt” rather than stating that the Khalifah is “forbidden from adopting”, which indicates that he may choose not to adopt.

As for why he chooses to abstain from adopting in Aqa’id and in rituals, this is based upon two issues: Firstly, the hardship caused by coercing people to follow a specific opinion related to ‘Aqidah matters. Secondly, the fact that what prompts the Khalifah to adopt is in reality the management of the Muslims’ affairs by one single opinion and preserving the unity of the State and the unity of the ruling. Hence, he adopts in matters related to the relationships between individuals and related to public matters, and he does not adopt in matters related to relationship of man with his God.

With respect to the first issue, Allah prohibited the compulsion of the disbelievers to leave their beliefs and to embrace the Islamic ‘Aqidah, forbade forcing them to leave their rituals and ordered compelling them to be restricted by other Shari’ahrules so, by greater reasoning, the Muslims should not be forced to leave the rules related to the beliefs as long as they remained Islamic beliefs and should not be forced to leave the rules related to rituals as long as they were Shari’ah rules. Also, the compulsion to leave ideas connected to beliefs is a definite cause of hardship and will inflame loyalty (to those ideas) without doubt as proven by what happened with Imams such as Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal in the Fitna of creation of the Quran. When they were subjected to beating and humiliation, they did not submit neither did they leave what they believed in. Allah (swt) has said “(Allah) has not laid upon you in Deen any hardship” (TMQ 22:78).

The rituals are like the beliefs since compulsion upon specific rules while the person holds another opinion as the Shari’ah rule is a cause of distress upon the soul for it is the relationship of people with Allah and because it is bound to the ‘Aqidah; so the Khalifah should not adopt in whatever causes distress upon the Muslims. However, it is not forbidden for him to do so.

As for the second issue, the beliefs and the rituals are the relationship between man and the Creator and they do not bring about relationships upon which problems spring from, as opposed to the transactions and punishments since they are the relationship between the individuals within the society and cause the occurrence of relationships from which problems result. The origin in transactions is the resolution of disputes and the essence of the Khalifah’sadoption is to manage the peoples’ affairs. Their affairs are openly managed on the part of the Khalifah with respect to what is between them in terms of relationships and there is no scope for this in regards to their relationship with Allah, in other words in their beliefs and rituals.

For that reason the tangible reality of adoption by the Khalifah is that it can only be in respect to the relationships between people in order to manage their affairs and not in the relationships between them and Allah. Consequently, the reality of adoption is that it is only in the relationships between the people and the public relationships. So, adoption in the relationship between man and the Creator, in other words, in the beliefs and rituals, contradicts the reality of adoption. Based upon this, the Khalifahwill not adopt in what contradicts the reality of adoption. However, it is not forbidden for him to do so.

Built upon these two matters – the distress or the hardship and the contradiction of the tangible reality of adoption, the Khalifah does not adopt in the thoughts of the beliefs or in the rules of the rituals. However, if a clear prohibition is mentioned in the Quran and in the Sunnah regarding a certain belief (‘Aqidah), then, at that time it is adopted (prohibiting that belief) even if there is hardship and even if it contradicts the reality of adoption so as to give preference to the definite text. For example, beliefs cannot be adopted except by conviction. In a similar fashion, it can be done if managing the affairs of the Muslims necessitates collecting them upon one rule. This is based upon the texts that enjoin the protection of the congregation of Muslims and the protection of the unity of the state. As example for this are the specification for the times of Hajj and fasting Ramadan, the Eid celebrations, Zakatand Jihad.

In these issues the Khalifahadopts a specific Shari’ah rule since, with respect to the ‘Aqidah, there cannot be compulsion to leave conviction, rather adhering to what is held as conviction is enforced. This is from text which is conclusive in its narration and indication (qati’ thabut qati’ dalalah). With regards to the ritualistic issues, there is no hardship in them since they are not from that which pertains to the relationship solely between man and His Lord such as prayer, rather they are those that are connected to the relationships between people, such as the celebrations. Due to this adoption is permitted in these two circumstance regarding beliefs and rituals.

What determines whether an idea is from the ‘Aqidah or from the Shari’ah rules is its Shari’ahevidence. So, if the evidence is an address related to the action of the servants of Allah, then, it is a Shari’ah rule since the Shari’ahlaw is the address of the Legislator related to the actions of the servant, and if it is not related to the actions of the servant, then, it is from the ‘Aqidah. Additionally, the difference between the ‘Aqidah and the Shari’ahrule is that what is requested to have Iman in and has no action requested in it, is from the ‘Aqidah, such as the stories and the information regarding the unseen.  Those issues that request action are the Shari’ah rules. So, the following words of Allah are all from ‘Aqidah: “Believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book which He revealed to His Messenger” (TMQ 4:136),  “Allah is the Creator of all things” (TMQ 39:62),  “And mention in the book Maryam…” (TMQ 19:16), and the words “It is a Day whereon mankind will be like moths scattered about; and the mountains will be like carded wool” (TMQ 101:4-5). All of these are from ‘Aqidah because they are not related to the actions of the servants; they are from what Iman is requested in, and there is no request for action in them. Also, the words of Allah: “And Allah has permitted trade” (TMQ 2:275), “If they suckle the children for you, give them their due payment” (TMQ 65:6), and His words “and when you judge between men, judge with justice” (TMQ 4:58) are all from the Shari’ahrules since they are related to the actions of the servants and they are from the issues that actions are requested in.

Based upon this, the fact that the Messenger of Allah  is the seal of the Prophets is considered from the ‘Aqidah since it comes under what is requested to have Iman in. Conversely, the Imamate, in other words the Khilafah is not from the ‘Aqidahsince it is amongst the issues which action is requested in. The fact that the Prophet  is free from sin is considered from the ‘Aqidah. However, the issue of the Khalifah being from  Quraysh,  Ahl Al-Bayt (family of the Prophet) or any Muslim from amongst the Muslims is from the rules of the Shari’ah and it isn’t from the ‘Aqidah since it is related to the actions of the servants and is related to the the conditions of the Khalifah. In this manner, everything that is not connected to the actions or is requested to have Iman in is from the ‘Aqidah, but what is from the actions of the servants or what is requested to be acted upon is considered to be from the Shari’ahrules.

The reality of ‘Aqidah is that it is a fundamental thought; the meaning of it being an ‘Aqidah is that it is taken as the fundamental criteria to measure anything else; therefore if the idea was not a fundamental one, then it would not be considered ‘Aqidah. Also, ‘Aqidah is the comprehensive thought regarding the universe, man and life, what came before the life of this world and what will come after it and the relationship between life and what came before it and what will be after it. This definition is for every ‘Aqidahand is applied upon the Islamic ‘Aqidah. The definition also includes the unseen within it. Accordingly, every thought from the ideas of this comprehensive thought is from the ‘Aqidah. So, everything which is related to Allah, the Day of Judgement, the creation of the universe and the like is part of the ‘Aqidah, but everything which has no relation with that is not considered from the ‘Aqidah.

Q&A: Collection of the Holy Qur'an, The Seven Recitations and Tafsir of the Ayah: "While Allah created you and that which you do"

The following is a draft translation of a collection of Questions asked to the Scholar Shekh Ata'a Abu Rashta.

Questions:

Dear Brother, Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatahu

1. In the book Ash-Shaksiyah 3 (Islamic Personality Volume III), under the topic "The First Evidence – The Book", under the point "Fourth" it says: "The research on it does not concern the question whether it is from the Qur'an. Rather it concerns its submission and delay..."  What is meant by that?

2. Concerning the recitations: Some consider the recitations that were transmitted through Tawatur to be seven, others consider them to be ten. What is the correct opinion on this issue?

3. The recitations that were transmitted as Ahad (not reaching the status of Tawatur), and are in harmony with the Uthmani scripture and the Arabic meaning, how to treat them? Can they be applied for recitation?

Also the odd recitations that have been transmitted as Ahad but do not correspond with what has been written in the Mushaf, how to treat them?

4. Do you have a specific assessment on the issue of the seven letters?

5. I have another questioning pertaining to Tafsir and hope that I have not overburdened you. The question concerns the explanation of the holy Ayah:

وَاللَّهُ خَلَقَكُمْ وَمَا تَعْمَلُونَ

"While Allah created you and that which you do?"

(As-Saffat, 37:96)

Some of the translations I have consulted say: It is possible that it is the origin and it is possible that it is the consequence, so how to decide between the two? What is the impact on the Islamic schools of thought in connection to the topic of al-Qadaa' wal-Qadar?

Barakallahu Feek, may Allah open the gates of His blessings on you.

Wassalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatahu

Kamal

---

Answer:

Wa Alaikum Assalaam wa Rahmatullahi Wabarakatahu

1. What you have mentioned from what came in As-Shaksiya 3 (Islamic Personality Volume III)... There was a confusion which has been revised and corrected, and the passage became as follows:

"Fourth: The collection of the Qur'an is a controversy transferred from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, because transmission is upon hearing from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم verbally, and this is the subject of research. The collection of verses into one Mushaf does not concern the question whether the Ayat are from the Qur'an, and the collection was not through scripture from the Huffaz. Rather it was a gathering of papers that had been written down between the hands of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and were then arranged according to every Surah as read by the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, then encountering what the Huffaz had from it of the Qur'an and storing them in one place..."

2. The Recitations transmitted through Tawatur (repeated chains of transmissions):

A. The seven recitations transmitted through Tawatur are the ones by which the Muslims read in the presence of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم as much as Allah willed. They are collected in Uthman's Mushaf (ra). A number of the Tabi'in and their Tabi'in from the Scholars of recitation collected the recitations and their lines of transmission (Isnad). In the books they laid down the lines of transmission in detail, inspecting all of which is connected to them.

These are the Scholars, the owners of the seven recitations:

- Nafi' Bin Abdul Rahman Bin Abi Na'eem Al-Lithi (Mawlahum) Abu Ruwaim the Madinese Reciter, died in 169 AH in Madina.

The ones who narrated from him were: Qalun, who died around 220 AH in Madina and Warsh, who died 197 AH in Egypt.

- Abdullah Bin Kathir Abu Mu'abbad Mawla 'Amro Bin 'Alqama al-Kanani ad-Dari al-Makki, who has born 45 AH in Mecca and died in Mecca in 120 AH.

The ones who narrated from him were: Al-Bazzi Ibn Abi Bazza, the Meccan Muaddhin who died 250 AH in Mecca and Qunbul al-Makki al-Makhzumi, who died 291 AH in Mecca.

- Abu 'Amro Bin al-'Ala' al-Mazani, the reciter of the people of Basra who was born in Mecca in 68 or 70 AH, he grew up in al-Basra and died in Kufa in 154 AH.

The ones who narrated from him were: Ad-Duri who resided in Baghdad and died 246 AH and As-Susi who died 261 AH.

- Abdullah Bin 'Amir al-Yahsabiy, the Imam of the people of ash-Sham in recitation, he was from the Tabi'in and died in Damascus in 118 AH.

The one who narrated from him was: Hisham Bin 'Ammar ad-Dimashqiy, born 173 AH and died 242 AH in Damascus.

- 'Assim Bin Abi an-Najud al-Assadiy (Mawlahum) al-Kufiy, who died at the end of the year 127 AH.

The one who narrated from him was: Shu'ba al-Kufiy al-Assadiy al-Bazzaz al-Kufiy, who died around 190 AH.

- Hamza Bin Habib az-Ziyat al-Kufiy, born 80 AH and died 156 AH in Hulwan.

The ones who narrated from him were: Khalaf Bin Hisham al-Bazzaz, who died in Baghdad in 229 AH and Khalad Bin Khalid al-Kufiy, who died in Kufa in 220 AH.

- Al-Kasa'iy (because he resided in Kasa') al-Kufiy, the reciter with Nahuw, born around 120 AH and died in Ranbawih in 189 AH.

The ones who narrated from him were: Abul Harith al-Laith Bin Khalad al-Bahgdadiy, who died in 240 AH and Hafs ad-Duriy, who was the former narrator from Abi 'Amro.

The Masahif that are currently being printed come in the recitation of Hafs from 'Asim, in the same scripture used by 'Uthman (ra). There are other print versions of the Mushaf that come in the recitation of Warsh or Qalun from Nafi', especially in some African regions.

The best known among the Scholars who collected the seven recitations is Imam Ahmad Bin Musa Bin al-Abbas, better known as Ibn Mujahid, who died in 324 AH. He singled out the known seven recitations and reported them in his book "As-Sab'a fi al-Qira'at", where he mentioned the Scholars of the seven readings. These seven recitations have occupied firm positions in registration and became a destination for students of recitation. Ibn Mujahid built his choice upon very high conditions. He did not take a recitation except from an Imam who was known for his accuracy and integrity, and who spent a lifetime with internalizing the science of recitation, with the agreement of taking and receiving from him. This resulted in the outcome of the recitation of those seven we have mentioned above.

B. And when Shams ad-Din Abu al-Khair Ibn al-Jazri, Muhammad Bin Muhammad Bin Yusuf, who died in 833 AH, came, he researched the transmission of the recitations and found another three recitations, which he saw to be like the seven recitations that came through Tawatur in accordance with the 'Uthmani scripture. He put them down in writing in his book "An-Nashr fi al-Qira'at al-'Ashr", mentioning the names of the three scholars he had added. They are:

Abu Jaafar Yazid Bin al-Qa'qa' al-Madani, who died 130 AH.

Yaqub Bin Ishaq al-Hadrami al-Kufi, who died in 205 AH.

Khalaf Bin Hisham Abu Muhammad al-Bazzar al-Assadi al-Baghdadi, who died in 229 AH.

I have paid interest to the seven Mutawatir recitations, as I mentioned in my book "Taysir al-Wusul ila al-Usul" with their lines of transmission and their transmitters... I did not study the other three recitations mentioned by al-Jazri, although al-Jazri and other Scholars placed them on the same level as the seven Mutawatir recitations. I will research them in detail in the future in sha Allah, to attain this noble knowledge.

3. With regard to the recitations that are not Mutawatir, whether they comply with the scripture of the 'Uthmani Mushaf or not, reciting the Qur'an with them is not permissible. They are not Qur'anic, because the Qur'an is what has been transmitted from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم through Mutawatir transmission.

4. Revelation of the Qur'an in Seven Letters:

The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

إِنَّ هَذَا القُرْآنَ أُنْزِلَ عَلَى سَبْعَةِ أَحْرُفٍ، فَاقْرَءُوا مَا تَيَسَّرَ مِنْهُ

"This Qur'an was revealed in seven letters. Read from it what is facilitated for you." (Agreed upon)

He صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

أَقْرَأَنِي جِبْرِيلُ عَلَى حَرْفٍ فَرَاجَعْتُهُ، فَلَمْ أَزَلْ أَسْتَزِيدُهُ وَيَزِيدُنِي حَتَّى انْتَهَى إِلَى سَبْعَةِ أَحْرُفٍ

"Jibril made me read in one letter so I reviewed it. I did not add to it but he kept adding to me until he terminated seven letters." (Al-Bukhari)

The scholars differed as to the meaning of "seven letters", some of them settled the differences of language in the Mutawatir recitations and collected them in seven groups: "Wujuh al-I'rab – Az-Ziyadah wa an-Naqs – At-Taqdim wa at-Ta'khir – Al-Qalab wa al-Ibdal – The forms of pronunciation such as Tarqiq, Tafkhim, Imala, Fath..." and some of the scholars settled them to be Arab languages that did not come out by Mutawatir recitations ...

After studying the subject, I assume that the seven letters are languages as in "dialects" of the Arab tribes from which the Arabic tongue emerged, which were the subject of competition between the eloquent at the time of the descent of the Holy Quran. This because the Mutawatir recitations do not depart from language "dialects" of these tribes, which are the seven famous fluent dialects at the time of the revelation of the Holy Qur'an:

• Quraish • Tamim • Qais • Asad • Hadheel • section of the Kenana • section of at-Ta'iyeen

This is what I perceive to be correct in this matter, so what is meant be the seven letters are the seven dialects of the Arabic tribes mentioned above. This does not mean that it is permissible to recite the Qur'an in all his wordings in the dialects of these seven tribes, rather the Qur'an has to be recited solely as reported from the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم through Tawatur, because recitation in other than what came through Tawatur is not permissible, since what is not mutawatir cannot be considered from the Qur'an.

5. As for the translation of the Ayah:

وَاللَّهُ خَلَقَكُمْ وَمَا تَعْمَلُونَ

"While Allah created you and that which you do?"

(As-Saffat, 37:96)

The "ما" is a linking element, i.e. Allah سبحانه وتعالى created you and created the idols that you worship. The obvious meaning (Nass) of the Ayah is evidence for that, since Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

فَرَاغَ إِلَى آلِهَتِهِمْ فَقَالَ أَلَا تَأْكُلُونَ مَا لَكُمْ لَا تَنْطِقُونَ فَرَاغَ عَلَيْهِمْ ضَرْبًا بِالْيَمِينِ فَأَقْبَلُوا إِلَيْهِ يَزِفُّونَ قَالَ أَتَعْبُدُونَ مَا تَنْحِتُونَ  وَاللَّهُ خَلَقَكُمْ وَمَا تَعْمَلُونَ

"Then he turned to their gods and said, "Do you not eat? What is [wrong] with you that you do not speak?" And he turned upon them a blow with [his] right hand. Then the people came toward him, hastening. He said, "Do you worship that which you [yourselves] carve, While Allah created you and that which you do?"(As-Saffat, 37:92-96)

It is obvious that the Ayah

وَاللَّهُ خَلَقَكُمْ وَمَا تَعْمَلُونَ

"While Allah created you and that which you do?"(As-Saffat 37:96)

Comes after

قَالَ أَتَعْبُدُونَ مَا تَنْحِتُونَ

"He said, "Do you worship that which you [yourselves] carve"(As-Saffat 37:95)

Therefore what is meant are the idols.

Those who interpreted the "ما" as an original element and understood from it "Allah created you and your actions", had they understood that Allah created the actions of man and their understanding had stopped at the creation, meaning that Allah created them and the actions, such that He created the ability to undertake action, giving man the power to undertake action, they would not have gone far astray. Rather they interpreted "and Allah created your actions" to mean "He has forced you to undertake them". Such that Allah سبحانه وتعالى has forced us to every action we undertake, and we do not have a choice in doing anything, neither the evil nor the good action. This is of course wrong, because there are actions up to the choice of man, who is rewarded and punished for them. Hence saying that Allah سبحانه وتعالى is forcing us to undertake all of our actions without any choice is a wrong statement.

فَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ خَيْرًا يَرَهُ وَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ شَرًّا يَرَه

"So whoever does an atom's weight of good will see it, And whoever does an atom's weight of evil will see it."(Az-Zalzala, 99:8)

As for the topic of al-Qada' wal-Qadar and the Islamic difference of opinion on it, this is a very long issue. Its details are mentioned in the first volume of ash-Shakhsiyah (Islamic Personality Volume I), so please review it from there. And Allah is with you.

Your Brother,

Ata' Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah

18th Dhul Qi'ddah 1434 AH

24th September 2013 CE

What can be learned from the Westgate Attack?

Following the attack on the Westgate Mall in Nairobi which killed tens of people and injured hundreds more, we in Hizb ut Tahrir East Africa, the political party whose ideology is Islam are shocked and sad-dened by this event and would like to highlight the following issues:

Firstly, the attack has clearly shown the deterioration of security in Kenya. Before this attack, we had witnessed the killing of citizens in various areas like Mandear, Bungoma and Garissa. Also, for residents of major towns in Kenya, it is normal to be harassed by criminals on a daily basis. This is an evidence of failure by the security apparatus to protect the public. Most people are questioning that if the step the government took in sending its troops to Somalia in the Linda Nchi operation was intended to ensure security in the coun-try, then why are such attacks happening? Certainly, the Hizb views that the step was taken under political pressure from western governments especially Britain and America which aimed at installing their agents in Somalia so as to plunder its resources and enhance all manner of evils.

Secondly, major media organizations changed the face of the event. It had earlier been reported that the attack was undertaken by gangsters but after several hours, the story was changed to a terrorist attack after Al-Jazeera reported that Al-Shabaab had claimed responsibility. This has clearly shown that Westerners con-trol major media organizations and use them to tarnish Islam and create hatred between Muslims and non-Muslims. This is dangerous as it is easy to plunge the country into religious violence. It is clear from this that according to the media killings done by some Muslims are terrorism but when done by non-Muslims, it is not linked to religion or called terrorism. It reminds us of the attack in July 2012 that killed 42 police officers in Baragoi which was never associated with terrorism by the press. The Hizb states that all terrorism and acts of thuggery are against Islam. However, the West has given the term 'terrorism' a special meaning that suits them. Anyone who is against the interests of Capitalists is branded a terrorist. Evidence for this is that Britain branded Mau Mau fighters as terrorists because they opposed the injustices of the British colonialists. Like-wise, as Islam is an ideology that clashes with the Capitalist ideology, it follows that all Muslims who op-pose injustices and corruption of the evil Capitalist ideology even if only by words are branded terrorists.

Thirdly, from this attack, it has exposed the lies by Western leaders who pretend to cry crocodile tears for the deaths of women and children while their hands are dripping with the blood of millions of women, chil-dren and elderly in countries like Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, etc. These leaders are the ones who patronize and give permission to their puppets in Muslim countries to use chemical weapons against the public as is being done by their puppet Bashar Al-Assad of Syria. Another of their hypocrisy is while Kenyans are congregating in several centers to donate blood to help the injured, these leaders are urging their citizens to avoid crowded areas and not to leave their houses because of security reasons. They therefore care for the security of their citizens and not that of Kenyan citizens. Also, they are issuing travel advisories to their citizens that because of lack of security, they should not enter Kenya while at the same time not issuing advisories to close their Multinationals which continue to plunder Kenyan resources.

In conclusion, the Hizb states that terrorism is another scapegoat by the West to enter Africa including Kenya to plunder its resources. Their Capitalist ideology has failed to bring peace and security in the whole world. This ideology which divides people along party, religious and tribal lines will continue to destabilize peace as currently witnessed in the world. The main objective of the 'war on terror' is to stop the rise of Islam to lead the world as an ideology which is a complete way of life and a solution to all mankind's problems. For 13 centuries, Islam ruled and succeeded in spreading peace, security and uniting society without regard for religion, race, tribe or status.

Shabani Mwalimu

Media Representative of Hizb ut Tahrir in East Africa

Wednesday 19th Dhul Qi'ddah 1434 AH

25/09/2013 CE

REF: 18 / 1434 AH

Introduction to an Islamic Constitution for Syria and the Muslim world - Article 3

The following is the translation of an article from the book by Hizb ut-Tahrir entitled 'Introduction to the Constitution and the necessary evidences for it' which is the explanation of its draft constitution for the Khilafah state. This draft translation is from the second edition published in 2009 which was updated from the original published in 1963. Numerous brigades in Syria have agreed to the implementation of this constitution after the removal of the corrupt system that has brutally suppressed the people for decades. 

Article 3

The Khalifahadopts specific Shari’ah rules which he will enact as a constitution and laws. If he adopts a Shari’ah rule, this rule alone becomes the Shari’ahrule that must be acted upon and it becomes a binding law that every citizen must obey openly and privately.

The evidence of this article is derived from the Ijma’(General Consensus) of the Companions that the Khalifah reserves the right to adopt specific Shari’ah rules. It has also been established in the same manner that it is obligatory to act upon the rules adopted by the Khalifah. The Muslim is not permitted to act upon any rule other than what the Khalifahhas adopted in terms of rules even if these rules were Shari’ah rules adopted by one of the Mujtahideen (scholars of Islam). This is so because the rule of Allah that becomes duly binding upon all the Muslims is what the Khalifah adopts. The rightly guided Khulafaa’ proceeded in this manner; they adopted a host of specific rules and ordered their implementation. Thus the Muslims, with all of the Companions amongst them, used to act upon these rules and to abandon their own Ijtihad (Islamic opinion derived from the Islamic evidences). For instance, Abu Bakr (ra) adopted in the matter of divorce a rule stipulating that the triple divorce would be considered as one divorce if it were pronounced in one sitting. He also adopted in the matter of distributing the wealth upon the Muslims a rule stipulating that wealth should be distributed equally amongst the Muslims, regardless of seniority in Islam or anything else. The Muslims followed him in this as well as the judges and the Walis (governors) implemented the rules that he had adopted. When Umar (ra) took office, he adopted other opinions different to those of Abu Bakr (ra) in the same two matters; he imposed the rule stipulating that the triple divorce is considered as three and he also distributed the wealth among the Muslims according to their seniority in Islam and according to their needs rather than distributing equally. The Muslims duly followed him in this and the judges and the governors implemented the rules he had adopted. Then, Umar (ra) adopted a rule stipulating that the land conquered in war is a spoil for Bayt al-Mal (the State’s treasury), not for the fighters, and that the land should remain with its owners and should not be divided among the fighters or among the Muslims. The governors and the judges duly complied and implemented the rule that he had adopted.

It was in this manner that all of the rightly guided Khulafaa’proceeded with respect to adoption of opinions, ordering people to abandon their Ijtihad and the rules which they had acted upon, and instead adhere to that which the Khalifah had adopted. So the Ijma’ of the Companions was established on two matters; the first is the right of adoption and the second is the obligation of acting upon what the Khalifahadopts. Famous Shari’ah principles were derived based on this Ijmaa’of the Companions. These are: “The Sultan reserves the right to effect as many judgements as the problems which arise”, “The order of the Imam resolves the disagreement” and “The order of the Imam is binding”.

The evidence for adopting one Islamic opinion is the fact that there are different Islamic opinions regarding one single matter; hence, in order to act upon the Shari’ah rule in any matter it is imperative to adopt a specific Islamic opinion for it. This is so because the Shari’ah rules, which represent the address of the Legislator related to the actions of the worshippers, have come in the Quran and in the narrations, and many of these can have a number of possible meanings according to the Arabic language and according to Shari’ah. For that reason, it is natural and inevitable that people differ in their understanding of the address of the Legislator and that this difference in understanding reaches the level of disparity and contradiction in the intended meaning. Thus, it is inevitable to have different and contradictory understandings of the same matter. Because of this, there could be a host of different and contradictory opinions in a single matter. So when the Messenger of Allah  said at the battle of Ahzab: “None of you should pray ‘Asr except in Bani Quraythah”(recorded by Al-Bukhari through Ibn Umar), some understood that he was urging haste and so they prayed on their way to Bani Quraythah, while others understood that he  had literally ordered them to pray ‘Asr in Bani Quraythah; therefore, they delayed praying ‘Asruntil they reached their destination. When the Messenger of Allah  heard of this, he approved both understandings, and there are many verses and narrations similar to this.

The difference of opinion in single matters makes it incumbent upon the Muslims to adopt one opinion from these various opinions since all of them are Shari’ah rules and the rule of Allah (swt) in one single matter regarding one person is not multiple. Therefore, it is imperative to choose one single rule from the Shari’ah in order to act upon. Hence, the Muslim’s adoption of a specific Shari’ah rule is necessary and inevitable when he or she undertakes the action since undertaking  the action obliges the Muslim to accomplish it according to the Shari’ah rule. The obligation of acting according to the Shari’ah rule, whether this was a Fard(obligatory), Mandub (recommended), Haram (forbidden), Makruh (despised) or Mubah(permitted) makes it incumbent upon the Muslim to adopt a specific Shari’ahrule. Therefore, it is obligatory upon every Muslim to adopt a specific Shari’ahrule when taking rules for actions, irrespective of whether he or she was a Mujtahidor a Muqallid (someone who follows the opinion of a scholar in an issue rather than deriving it themselves) or whether they were the Khalifah or other than the Khalifah.

With respect to the Khalifah, it is imperative for him to adopt a host of specific rules according to which he assumes the management of peoples’ affairs. Hence, it is necessary for him to adopt certain rules pertaining to what is of a general nature to all the Muslims in terms of matters of government and authority such as Zakat, levies, Kharaj(land tax), foreign relations and everything that is related to the unity of the State and ruling.

However, his adoption of the rules is subject to scrutiny. If the Khalifah’s managing of the people’s affairs were subject to adopting specific Islamic rules, then in this case the adoption would be obligatory upon the Khalifah. This would be in concordance with the Shari’ah principle stipulating that: “Whatever is necessary to accomplish a duty is in itself a duty”, such as the signing of treaties. However, if the Khalifahcould manage peoples’ affairs in a specific matter according to the Islamic Shari’ahrules without having to resort to the adoption of a specific rule in this matter, then in this case the adoption would be permitted for him rather than an obligation, such as Nisab Al-Shahadah (the minimum number of witnesses in a testimony). In this case, it is permitted for him to adopt or not to adopt, for in essence the adoption is permitted and not obligatory; this is so because the Ijma’ of the Companions is that the Imam can adopt and there is no Ijma’that the Imam must adopt. Therefore, the adoption itself is permissible and it does not become obligatory unless the obligatory management of peoples’ affairs cannot be accomplished except through adoption. In such a case it then becomes obligatory so that the duty could be accomplished.