Perhaps it’s a bitter irony that one reviews the current desire for revolution and rebellion in the Muslim world as thousands of British children have just celebrated that most infamous of rebellious plots against their government: the attempted destruction of the Houses of Parliament by Guy Fawkes himself.
The political chaos that the Muslim world and Pakistan in particular finds itself in at the moment has taken an even greater turn for the worse. One struggles to decide who are the greater criminals in these soap-operas that result in real peoples’ deaths; is it the rampaging group of rebellious vigilante “Mujāhidīn” of the NWFP declaring anyone who opposes them as heretics? Is it the criminal secular leader? Is it the opportunistic group of opposition political figures inciting the common folk to rise and then naturally be massacred as their heroes hide behind bullet proof glass?
It’s at times like these when we should remind ourselves of what it actually means to be from the people of Ahl’l-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah, and to identify ourselves with that great Prophetic generation that brought light, justice and humanity amongst the darkness and oppression of disbelief.
The characteristics of Ahl’l-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah or “the People of Sunnah and Community” meaning “those that follow the way of the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam), and stick close to the community of Muslims upon the way of his Companions and the rightly guided Imams after them” as expressed by many of our scholars in their books on ‘aqīdah, manhaj and usūl’l-dīn (tenets of belief, methodology and the foundations of the religion) are detailed and many. Often, depending on context, certain characteristics are emphasised due to a need, such as Ahl’l-Sunnah uniting against the Khawārij, or against the deviancy of the extreme Rāfidhah or defending the belief that the Qur’ān is the Uncreated Divine Word of Allah during the political turmoil of Imam Ahmad’s era. Throughout history, various aspects of Ahl’l-Sunnah have kept deviation and destruction at bay.
Our time is no different. If we focus on the “Mujahid” group mentioned above, the Islamic extremism and fanaticism we are experiencing at the hands of these deranged few, in response to the now clichéd Western hegemonic advances but also oppression and abuse of human rights from within the Muslim countries, are actually nothing new. History has borne witness to violent and deviated responses to the tyranny of Muslim rule, justifying by it the killing of innocents, the destruction of the community and the ultimate loss of our freedoms, including the most important of them, the freedom to worship freely.
Hasn’t our generation witnessed over the last 25 years the catastrophe of Syria, Algeria, Iraq and countless other examples and now Pakistan? There was no-one who doubted that the brutality of the regimes running these Muslims countries and that their crimes against the masses had been closer to disbelief than Islam, but how were Ahl’l-Sunnah expected to react?
At that time, when one was young and inexperienced, full of emotion and immaturity, there was only one way to react: to fight back. It was a given to declare the leader a kāfir or a munāfiq, to find the evidences for it and then to call for the ruler’s head and everyone who supported him, and then of course to demand absolute and unrestricted Sharī‘ah (“We don’t want Nawaz Sharif!! We want Qur’ān Sharīf!!”).
Naturally, the leaders of this call had been hasty to ignore what Ahl’l-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah traditionally have done at such times, when the Muslims have become tired and defeated at the hands of evil and unjust rulers: to have patience. Patience here meant to stick to the fundamentals, audit one’s actions, look at our relationship with Allah, stick closely together with the general Muslims and, most strikingly, not revolt against the ruling authority.
“What?! Not revolt against the authorities?! Tell us to do anything but that! How on Earth can you not expect us to fight back, to not fight for the Deen of Allah, to not fight and become Shaheed?!”
Emotionally, the argument to hold our tongues and restrain our anger doesn’t hold up. Admittedly, it’s rather politically incorrect in Western Islamic circles to just accept authorities as they are and “turn the other cheek”. When even the most politically apathetic Muslims are see in the streets involved in beating and then getting beaten by the police and army, in revolt against the oppressive measures present at the moment, it doesn’t help when the more popular public figures, the educated and celebrities of them, succumb to un-islamic modes of reply and thereby incite the people to protest and fight back now with claims that “the fight for democracy will be lost for the next five years.”
But know that there is no space for an emotional argument when we have sacred traditions and a clear picture of the actions of the rightly guided Imāms of Ahl’l-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah during their encounters with leaders and rulers of a similar evil streak. Indeed, we can say that, in our political context today, the most defining characteristic of Ahl’l-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah we might wish to revive today was their patience with the prevalent political condition and their concentration on reformation and not revolution.
Patience is an incredibly difficult quality to achieve, even more so when one cannot see the justification for it in times of anger and revenge. Many of us, when confronted with the evil, greed and even kufr of the ruling authority, react in a way which conforms to our desires – a reaction of resentment with the desire to physically change the prevailing condition. It’s almost as if we demand that all those in authority over us to be like the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) even though it was he (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) himself who informed us that we would be ruled by evil tyrants after the early generations of the rightly guided Caliphs!
The status quo with all our de-facto leaders are that they are not people of religion, except a tiny few. In fact, if we were to make religious uprightness a condition for the validity of their leadership as Imām al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd’l-Salām (rahimullāh) mentions, then many legitimate acts to do with judgement, the courts, possessions, earnings, the economy, charity etc would all be rendered null and void. In fact, it is well known that most of the leaders are sinful and immoral but the loss of these general benefits is far worse than the ruler being upright. (Qawā‘id al-Ahkām, 1/50-51)
Who did the Muslims expect to be ruled by anyway? In what state of righteousness are we to deserve righteous leaders? “You reap what you sow” we’re often told and certainly, the fact that many Muslims across the world make up some of the most immoral, dishonest, fraudulent and corrupt members of society cannot bode well for the future.
We take the rights of other people every day but when we are oppressed by our rulers, we wish to demand our rights by revolution, fighting, and rebellion – yet the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, “You will see after me, selfishness (from the rulers etc) and other matters that you will disapprove of.” The Companions asked, “What do you order us to do, O Messenger of Allah?” He said, “Pay their rights to them (to the rulers) and ask your right from Allah.” (Bukhari)
Thus, we have been commanded to have patience with their evil, and hope for the reward with Allah. Actually, if one is to reflect, this is a great mercy from Allah because in the absence of the ability to do anything else anyway, then with the intention to have this patience, we are (quite incredibly) rewarded for following the Prophetic guidance.
In fact, whether in times of difficulty or ease, even the most rudimentary study of the biography of the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) will show that he was a reformer and not a rebel. He worked all his life to obtain helpful conditions to allow the beauty and power of Islam to flourish in the hearts of the People. His actions, treaties, patience and wisdom bear testimony to that and his results, sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, speak for themselves.
Likewise, the Qur’ān is a book of reformation and correction through peace and security and not violence and rebellion except in the most extreme circumstances of war. The Qur’ānic message is to strive for every opportunity to make peace and cease fighting to allow the people the opening they have been searching for.
It is vital to understand that Islam always looks to the consequences of the actions done in its name, to determine the validity of the original proposed action. The concept that only better should result, and that a greater evil must be avoided at all costs, is something easy and clear to understand and is well established as a key principle in our Deen; yet for some bizarre reason, this concept still seems to remain elusive to the violent few.
Ibn al-Qayyim (rahimullāh) said, “Rebelling against the kings and rulers is the basis of all evil and fitnah until the end of time – whoever contemplates on what has happened to Islam historically with respect to fitnah, whether major or minor, will recognise its connection to this fundamental problem i.e. that to resist the evil (authority) leads to an evil worse than it, and that the lack of patience with that evil and the seeking of its removal produces a problem even worse than in the first place. The Messenger of Allah (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) witnessed the greatest of evils in Makkah yet he was not able to change it; indeed when Allah opened up Makkah and made it Dār’l-Islām, he (the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam)) was determined to change the Ka‘bah back to the original foundations of Ibrahīm but he did not despite being able to do so, fearing creating a situation even worse with the possibility that the Quraysh would not be able to handle it due to their newness to Islam and their recent departure from kufr. Thus, it is not allowed to rise up against the leaders due to the consequences that result, which is even worse than before, as is well known…” (Turuq’l-Hākimiyyah)
We should also look at the immense concern for the sanctity of human life the scholars had, especially when it comes to taking political control, even if the situation demands it such as when oppression is rife from the leaders and all the people on the ground support you.
Ibn al-Athīr (rahimullāh) narrates that Marwān b. al-Hakam approached ‘Abdullāh b. ‘Umar (radhy Allāhu ‘anhumā) to pledge allegiance to him in an attempt to convince him to take the leadership of the nation as Khalīfah, saying, “The People of Shām are with you.” “And what will I do with the People of ‘Irāq?” replied Ibn ‘Umar. “Fight them,” said Marwān.
Ibn ‘Umar turned to him and said, “By Allah, if mankind in its entirety obeyed me except the people (of the tiny, rural village) of Fadak, and I fought them and a single man was to die, I would not do it.” (2/154, Usud al-Ghābah)
No-one claims that to adopt such an attitude is easy, especially when our anger demands itself to be spent in some direction against the tyrant ruler, whether by cursing, or making du‘ā against him etc. yet if we wish to be truly upon the methodology of the most pure, we must have patience. Imām Ibn ‘Abd’l-Barr (rahimullāh) narrates with his own chain to Anas (radhy Allāhu ‘anhu) that he said, “The senior Companions of the Messenger of Allah (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) would prohibit cursing of the Leaders.”
In fact, if one thinks this to be difficult then reflect on this: the great scholar Fudhayl b. ‘Iyādh (rahimullāh) once said, “If I was to be granted just one supplication that would be accepted, I would make it for the Leader; if his condition is corrected, the lands and the people will become secure in peace.”
You can actually hear them cry out now: “What?! You don’t want me to fight and curse the enemy of Allah and destroyer of His Deen and then you want me to pray for him too?!!”
Yes, that’s the kind of patience, humility and vision we’re calling for. No-one said following the Sunnah in times of fitnah was going to be easy.
Hasan al-Basri (rahimullāh) also said about the king of all tyrant oppressors, Hajjāj b. Yūsuf, “Have no doubt, Hajjāj is the Punishment of Allah; don’t try to repel the punishment of Allah with your hands, rather you must humble yourselves and have humility because Allah, the Most High, says, “We have already seized them with punishment, but they did not turn humble to their Lord, nor do they supplicate in humility,” (al-Mu’minūn, 76)
Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimullāh) mentions in his Majmū‘ a key point that we often forget when we think about revolting against the government, namely that the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) highly praised his grandson Hasan (radhy Allāhu ‘anhu) for the fact that he would mediate and unite the Muslims by the Will of Allah, without rebellion. Yet, he (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) never praised at all the actions of those who fight during times of fitnah, nor rebelling against the evil ruler, nor withdrawing allegiance to the ruler nor splitting away from the Jamā‘ah of the Muslims.
Indeed, remember that the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) informed Abu Hurayrah (radhy Allāhu ‘anhu) of the secret “two containers of knowledge”, and even though we are sure that this information was about the later rulers to come and the evil that would result from them and those that fought against them, Abu Hurayrah still didn’t command the Muslims to fight these rulers despite knowing all their identities. Why? Because he knew that the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) didn’t want to establish such a precedent, and Abu Hurayrah knew that the evil that would result would be far worse than what he’d been told about as it was.
And why do we assume that Abu Hurayrah knew the identities of the people that would be involved in this fitnah? Why from history itself. Imām al-Dhahabi (rahimullāh) narrates from ‘Ubayd b. Sa‘īd that he entered Masjid al-Harām with Ibn ‘Amr (radhy Allāhu ‘anhumā) and they found the Ka‘bah burning after it had been caught in the middle of a battle from the army of Husayn b. Namīr. Ibn ‘Amr stopped and started to weep, so much so that the tears flowed over his cheeks and then he shouted, “O People! By Allah, if Abu Hurayrah had told you that you would kill the grandson of your Prophet and that you would burn the House of your Lord, then you would have said: there is no bigger liar than Abu Hurayrah! But you have indeed done that – so wait now for the anger of Allah to befall us…” (al-Siyar, 3/94)
When the people wanted to rebel with Ibn al-Muhallab during the time of Hasan al-Basri (rahimullāh), he advised them to stay in their homes and lock their doors and then said, “By Allah, if the people are put to trial by their leaders and yet remain patient with that, Allah ‘azza wa jall will lift that trial from them; (those who didn’t have patience) ran to the sword and they were eventually overtaken by it. I swear by Allah, they did not bring a single day of good whatsoever! Then he recited, “And the sublime word of your Lord was fulfilled for the children of Isrā’īl, because they stood patient; and We destroyed what Pharaoh and his people used to build and what they used to raise high.”” (al-A‘rāf, 137)
Instead, in our society, revolution is not just in vogue, it’s the modern way to deal with that which we don’t like. This attitude has to be changed, not to one of a deviant pacifism, for Ahl’l-Sunnah are as well known for their love of and steadfastness upon Jihād, just as they are famed for their patience against difficult times and tyrant rulers who take all our possession, rights, and liberties. No, the prevalent attitude needs to focus on those characteristics that are more applicable for our current weak condition.
One can never dream that the consequence of rebelling against the most evil leaders and oppressors in our secular times would lead to an even greater secular crackdown and even worse conditions and loss of liberty for the Muslims. Surely, as our opponents claim, the grass is always greener on the other side!?
One couldn’t be more wrong as a look at the reality on the ground confirms day in, day out.
In our times, to fight and dissent seems to be the only option that takes our hearts. It seems the only honourable and correct thing to do. And how wrong we are when we think like this, especially when we see from the actions of those scholars who were involved in fighting or rising against a ruler, that they were full of remorse afterwards and never praised their actions.
Consider what Ibn Taymiyyah said: “The most that will happen is that they (the rebels) will either be overcome, or they will overcome (their opposition) and their control will eventually fade away leaving no result for them. Look at ‘Abdullāh b. ‘Ali and Abu Muslim who killed many people (along their path of rebellion against the tyrant and eventual victory) and yet were then later both killed by Abu Ja‘far al-Mansūr. As for the People of al-Hurrah, Ibn al-Ash‘ath and Ibn al-Muhallab et al, they were destroyed and their people were destroyed. They never established neither Deen nor Dunya; And know, that Allah, the most High, does not command to that which does not better the Deen or the Dunya.
And if there are those who attempt such from the saints of Allah, the God-conscious and even from the People of Paradise, they are not better than ‘Ali, ‘A’isha, Talhah and Zubayr et al; despite this, they never praised what they did with respect to fighting…”
Even the best of us can sometimes be tested in times of fitnah, so what then of the likes of us in our times? That’s why in times of confusion such as these, we must turn to our elders, scholars and wise people to help us through with knowledge, wisdom and patience.
These principles to be followed in times of fitnah are not something the scholars have just pulled out of thin air, rather these are experiences learnt from when the people rebelled against ‘Uthmān thereby breaking the Caliphate upon Prophethood, the aftermath after what happened with Husayn b. ‘Ali, the rising of Ahl’l-Madīnah at al-Harrah and the ensuing fitnah, the rising of the Qurrā’ with Ibn al-Ash‘ath against ‘Abd’l-Malik in ‘Irāq and the ensuing fitnah, the issue of Zayd b. ‘Ali and so on, may Allah be pleased with all of them and allow us to learn our lessons from them. These are examples from the rightly guided, so what then of the hundreds of examples in history since then until now from the ignorant and misguided? Will we never learn?
Don’t those who are fighting the government see the fear that has been created, the houses destroyed, the innocent killed and made homeless, the demolition of the mosques, the increase in crime, the loss of safety and security, the loss of trust and increase in suspicion, the closing of schools and institutions, the closure of charities and all the pain and suffering that comes with that, the imprisonment of people who wish only to worship Allah, and worst of all, Islam becoming hated by the common people for it is seen as the root cause of all this fitnah?
Even when Islam was being tested with the most dangerous of trials such as the introduction to orthodox Islamic theology of the “created Qur’an deviation”, Imām Ahmad b. Hanbal (rahimullāh) stood and refuted the concept but never lead the people in revolt against the deviant ruler. When his companions came to him to urge him to do so against al-Wāthiq, he replied, “Condemn their belief in your hearts but remain obedient to them and do not break the unity of the Muslims; don’t shed your own blood and the blood of the Muslims with you, rather look to the consequences of your actions and have patience…” (Adāb’l-Sharī‘ah, Ibn al-Muflih and Al-Mihnat’l-Imām Ahmad, 70-72)
All the above can of course be related to the current political problems the Muslims face in all their countries, yet the same general principles of not hurrying to physical action and depending upon patience and good deeds is actually a universal principle we need to apply in all aspects of our daily and personal lives as well, whether in the family with our wives, in our mosques with our Imams, in our workplaces with our colleagues and within our own organisations and groups.
No-one should turn away from what Ahl’l-Sunnah has historically become well known and established for. Our identity isn’t simply a verbal text, a weekend study course or a forum discussion to fight over.
Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimullāh) said, “From the key principles of Ahl’l-Sunnah wa’l Jamā‘ah is to keep (united) with the Muslim Community and to leave fighting the rulers during fitnah. As for the people of desires, such as the Mu‘tazilah, they see rebelling against and fighting the rulers from the very principles of their Deen…”
To be from Ahl’l-Sunnah is to live the ideals and to apply them as much as possible in every aspect of life that we can. We do this by preserving our unity, agreeing on the key basics and moving forward to maintain our collective strength until we deserve a better political condition and rulers. At this moment in time, it is a minor miracle that we are still able to worship Allah at all – maybe someone is making istighfār for us somewhere.
Perhaps, as the sounds of the fun and games of Guy Fawkes fireworks start to fade away, and we realise that the sounds of missiles and gunfire increases with the loss of innocent life in the Muslim lands, we’ll start to call ourselves and our people to those defining characteristics of Ahl’l-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah in times of fitnah such as maintaining unity, not rebelling against our governments and having patience. May Allah jalla wa ‘alā give us all ability to do that, amīn.
The Defining Characteristic of Ahl’l-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah during Fitnah
November 9, 2007 at 3:54 am
Excellent advice! May Allah reward you with good! It pains me to no end when I try to advise my ‘zealous’ Muslim brothers (my family included) about the level of political involvement that an ‘aami Muslim is expected to have.
It’s sad that everyone thinks revolution and ‘activism’ is the way to go in Islam these days. Because of this, purifying the Nafs has taken a back seat.
Besides, how else can one be patient without first gaining knowledge and then training oneself.
I’m going to make my family read this post!
November 9, 2007 at 5:21 am
Very refreshning in light of how this is being discussed on another “popular” blog at the moment.
November 9, 2007 at 6:09 am
BismillaharRahmanirRahim
as-salaamu ‘alaikum. The majority of Muslims are saying that they are ‘ahl sunnat. If you see someone, that says I am ‘ahl sunnat, you should say,
If you are not following the sunnat of the rasulAllah (s.a.w.s.), sahabin, tabi in and salihin, those righteous people that came afterward. And if you you are living like that you should prepare, get ready for the attacks and bombardments of the world, from your family, the government and groups who are against the rasulAllah (s.a.w.s.).
But if you are only ‘ahl sunnat by name you are ok at that time. In fact the one who are ‘ahl sunnat by name only are the ones who are becoming allies with those who are attacking the ones who are living the sunnat of the rasulAllah (s.a.w.s.)
-Fulani
November 9, 2007 at 6:35 pm
i love it, thank you.
November 10, 2007 at 12:44 am
We are taught in our religion that the type of leadership we get will reflect society.
Hence, corrupt secularist leaderships can only establish themselves if the people are easily swayed due to lack of taqwah.
People have their own desires and greeds, and these make them open to compromise; to the extent that they will sacrifice their religion for selfish pursuits.
So AE, you are right, we need to remain patient and correct our own actions. If society develops taqwah then, then a corrupt leadership cannot survive.
November 10, 2007 at 2:06 am
Salaam
Well said.Alhamdulillah in depth and clears up a lot and may Allah swt guide the ummah in these times of fitnah.
I think there are two extremes in the way this situation is being handled.One which you have clearly explained and shown us the correct way of handling it.However,there is also another extreme where people actually show support for the ruler and believe that the ruler or the supposed system being implemented is correct.
I see MUSLIM WOMEN,not covered in appropriate islamic dress, on T.V,marching down the streets saying “What do we want….DEMOCRACY,when do we want it…..NOW.”
Is this BELIEF of wanting Democracy,or SUPPORTING a corrupt rulers methods against the beliefs if Ahl-sunnah?
We should excersice patience,and not rebel and resort to bloodshed to try to solve the problem.However, at least in our hearts(the ummah in general), dont you think we should at least be aware that whatever the current system is in pakistan is corrupt and pray to Allah swt to give us islam? as was quoted,
“Condemn their belief in your hearts but remain obedient to them and do not break the unity of the Muslims; don’t shed your own blood and the blood of the Muslims with you, rather look to the consequences of your actions and have patience…” (Adāb’l-Sharī‘ah, Ibn al-Muflih and Al-Mihnat’l-Imām Ahmad, 70-72)
My statement is not a challenge to anyone.If i am wrong in thinking that bloodshed is wrong but support is also wrong,then please correct me.
salaam
November 10, 2007 at 10:34 am
assalamu alaikum
jazakallah khair for your words of wisdom.
As I read the post a hadith entered my head: (paraphrasing)when you see an injustice/bad act then act with your hand, if you’re unable to do so then with your tongue..
Are these young ‘uns following this kind of viewpoint? I dont know.
November 10, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Salaams,
Absolute Fantastic Read….
Shukran
November 10, 2007 at 10:00 pm
Salams,
Does anyone know of any lectures/class on Hajj in the Manchester area? Please post here.
Abu Eesa are you going to Hajj? If so, will you be doing a class on it?
November 10, 2007 at 11:35 pm
there is a class for women only in masjid imdadia tmrw insha allah. masjid imdadia is on blackburn street in old trafford. 10am – 12pm by qualified alimahs
November 11, 2007 at 12:48 am
[...] Sunnah During Fitnah (Must Read) Posted November 10, 2007 This is an excellent post about the trials of vigilantism and why it is nothing but fitnah and brings more trouble to [...]
November 11, 2007 at 12:52 am
This was an excellent post akhee. May Allah reward you
November 11, 2007 at 3:20 pm
as-salaamu ’alaykum,
JazaakAllaahu khayran, a much-needed article!
[The link at the bottom of the post doesn’t seem to work for me].
November 12, 2007 at 12:25 am
Br. Abu ‘Eesa -
There was some feedback to the piece from Br. Abuz Zubair posted here: http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showpost.php?p=57620&postcount=6
November 12, 2007 at 9:22 am
very well written
November 12, 2007 at 9:41 pm
Abuz Zubairs reply to your article Abu Eesa!
Please don’t delete it
1) What is the objective of writing this? So that perhaps a ‘few deranged’ vigilantes in Pak would stumble across it and take heed? How is this relevant to the Muslims living in the UK or the West? This is precisely why I don’t like to discuss fiqhi arguments for or against suicide bombings because they are completely irrelevant to us in the UK.
2) Who are the intended audience for this piece? No. 10 Muslims or those youngsters who may sympathise with the rebels? If it is the former, then you are preaching to the converted. If it is the latter, they won’t listen to you, anyway, because they look at you as a liberal who neither understands them nor sympathises with them.
3) Why now all of a sudden mention ‘Ahl al-Sunnah’? Why didn’t you think of that while belittling the differences between Sunnis and Ash’aris and deeming them minor? Just because this particular issue happens to be close to your heart, you think you can easily drop the term ‘Ahl al-Sunnah’ and marginalise those who you strongly disagree with? You even mentioned the ‘creation of the Quran’ as a thing of the past, whilst at present, you are at the forefront of belittling the very difference the Salaf died for and Ahl al-Sunnah united against.
4) Even if a ‘few deranged’ are responsible for criminality, how can you ignore the criminality of the secularists, which hasn’t just begun now, but since the beginning of Pakistan? It astounds me that you would compare between a ‘few deranged’ on one hand who have just started to hit back, rightly or wrongly, and a secularist Musharaf with his army and police force who are responsible for torturing, kidnapping, illegally handing over thousands of MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN, to the US over the past six years, and of carpet bombing Muslim villages at the behest of the US, killing hundreds of children reciting Quran in the process. How can one even compare between Muslims and secularists? Whatever the basis for the comparison maybe, it is completely nonsensical and surprising coming from the one who wrote passionately about the theatre siege in 2002.
5) After years of oppression, killing of women and children, mass murders, carpet bombings, and finally destruction of mosques and Imam Ghazi (something like that happening for the 1st time in Pak history!), in the most conservative province of the country, what do you expect the population to do if not blow up? It has nothing to do with any religious justification or lack of ‘patience’ that we hear about every now and then from Western arm chair critics. It is a natural reaction to being placed in a pressure cooker for years. The Burmese Buddhists are neither Wahhabis nor Taliban sympathisers. It is the oppression when it goes beyond certain threshold, it causes people to naturally react, and most usually in an ugly manner. In such cases people do not look for a reason or a justification to react. They simply react. So lay the blame where it is due.
6) At a time when the Home Office is in the fifth gear against what it calls Islamism, and we are clearly under ideological attack, we cannot afford to read defeatist articles over and over, disparaging any sort of activism. May Allah be merciful with the Salaf, who said: ‘The difference between the living and the dead is movement’.
7) You quoted ahadeeth with respect to not revolting against sinful rulers, and applying them to dictators who have several charges of kufr against them. Musharraf is the Ataturk of Pakistan. He said it before 9/11. He is a secularist to the core, as he and you have admitted. He is guilty of aiding the kuffar against the Muslims, which is in itself kufr (refer to the fatwa issued after 9/11) It is Shar’an obligatory to remove such rulers, even if by force, according to the consensus of Muslim jurists through out our history; that is, if it is possible for him to be removed without it resulting in greater evil.
8) If a group of Muslims are guilty of a premature revolt, no doubt they should be criticised. But to criticise them does NOT mean to justify the Islam of a ruler who has several charges of kufr against him, or to belittle his wrong doings. Call spade and spade.
9) This article of yours, and other such defeatist articles before, your article on the hadeeth on riba, and your view on the punishment for apostasy in Islam, are all symptoms of another greater problem. The main problem is your liberal-leaning way of thinking, coupled with a sense of shame towards some of the things you do not feel comfortable with in Sharia, simply because they aren’t palatable with the modern Western civilisation as it stands today. The most dangerous aspect of this problem is that you are constantly in denial that this is indeed the case. Yet, if you analyse your thinking process carefully, you would realise that whenever you air your liberal-controversial views, it is often the case that you arrive at a view first, and then bend over backwards to prove your hypothesis, and to this end, make blunders that may appear to be outright academic dishonesty. An example of that is your attribution of ‘no hadd for riddah’ opinion to al-Sarkhasi and Ibn Taymiyya, whereas both of them are completely free of this opinion, which could be described as no less than heresy. Brothers like your honourable selves need to stop right now in their footsteps and question their own thinking process, before they end up where Usama has ended up today.
One of the most timely and profound statements of Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan:
“When you warn against extremist, do not forget to warn against negligence. When you promote al-Wala, do not forget al-Bara”
November 13, 2007 at 9:54 am
al-Hamdulillaah, can always rely Abu-Z!
November 13, 2007 at 10:59 am
Wa ‘alaykum salam wa rahmatullah
Firstly, my salams to all in Birmingham for the last few days. Albeit shocking for a Cockney living in the best city in the world (Manchester!) to say, but Brum is starting to grow on me…
HILLBILLIE: My statement is not a challenge to anyone.If i am wrong in thinking that bloodshed is wrong but support is also wrong,then please correct me.
You’re not wrong at all. There are always these extremes and the challenge is always to remain balanced upon Orthodox Sunnah in the midst of religious and secular fanatics.
Are these young ‘uns following this kind of viewpoint? I dont know.
Young, immature and inexperienced Muslims always have held this viewpoint, as we all did years back. When you’re young, free, single and passionate, everything needs to be slapped down physically. The correct understanding comes with age and wisdom, and is starkly clear from the Prophetic education gradually given to the Companions in the early days of Islam when they wanted to chop this munafiq’s head off, and fight this tribe, and refuse that treaty – but it was the Prophet (s) who showed us the practical implementation of this hadith.
The problem of course is when more experienced “scholars” start to call for chaos and anarchy, that causes the confusion. I quote my cousin from yesterday on the phone who was responding to the fact that the rebels in the NWFP have been going round the houses of the villagers to see whether they will support the rebels’ cause or not, and then slaughtering them (literally) if they refuse. He said, “What are we to do? One Mullah says you are kafir if you don’t fight the hypocrites, and the other Mullah who says you’ll become kafir if you do. What can we do? How do we know who’s right from our Imams??!”
La hawla wa quwwata illa billah. May Allah save us from this fitan.
Abu Eesa are you going to Hajj? If so, will you be doing a class on it?
Not this year I’m afraid, but I hope to lead a group next year from our Masjid insha’Allah. I don’t plan to be doing any seminars either, although Masjid Noor and Didsbury will probably be having something, as well as what the sister mentioned above.
Abuz Zubairs reply to your article Abu Eesa!
Please don’t delete it
Firstly, to my knowledge other than porn links and the like, I’ve never deleted a comment neither here or on Islamiblog over the last few years. You can go and check all the posts and find enough vitriol against me (wal-hamdulillah, we all need our egos to be kept in check, however painful or rude!) remaining to entertain a few of you for the rest of the year!
Allah knows best.
As for brother Abuz-Zubair’s comments, then I see no benefit in responding. Unfortunately, this will only cause anger and hatred for he has broken his trust with respect to confidential things I once told him, attributed incorrect things against me and broken a code of conduct we agreed on with respect to private mailing lists. Hence, I have no desire to discuss with someone whose sincerity I sadly doubt, despite his great potential in fiqh and arabic masha’Allah. Unless a large number of people are absolutely desperate to have his concerns responded to by myself, say…100 people, then email me at abu_eesa@propheticguidance.co.uk and I shall respond publicly insha’Allah. Also, a senior scholar whom we both respect (I think) has advised me not to waste my time, saying, “Communication will be harmful.”
On a far brighter note, I have received some valuable feedback, criticism and improvements from tullab’l-’ilm and some senior scholars as well. I hope to share this with you once I’ve collated it all towards the end of the week insha’Allah.
Jazakumullahu khayran.
November 13, 2007 at 3:50 pm
[...] is an excellent post against the chaos going on around the [...]
November 13, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Assalamu’alaykum Wa Rahmatullah
IslamBradford Hajj Seminar
IslamBradford will be holding a seminar for all prospective Hajis. The seminar will comprise of a simplified, practical presentation of the key rituals of Hajj according to the Qur’an and Sunnah. The presentation will include a powerpoint presentation and the opportunity to ask questions.
Date: Saturday 17th November 2007
Time: 5pm -6-30pm
Place: IslamBradford Centre, Preston Street
Audience: All
Free!
Brothers’ Arabic Teacher Vacancy
Position: Native Male Arabic Teacher
Outline Job Description:
*To teach small groups of brothers basic classical Arabic (fusha) through both English and Arabic medium. This will include grammar, vocabulary and conversational skills.
*To develop suitable syllabi and teaching resources for IslamBradford Arabic programmes.
Skills / Experience:
Previous experience of teaching non-Arabic speakers essential.
Strong command of Arabic grammar and clear spoken Arabic and English.
Genuine desire to help non-Arabic speakers access the Arabic language and meet their full potential.
Ability to assist in the teaching of Tajweed is desirable.
Location: IslamBradford Centre, Preston Street.
Date: Weekly on Mondays
Time: Typically between 7:00pm – 9:30pm (2.5 hours)
Salary: Based on hourly rate to be agreed.
Application Process:
Please email brief CV to info@islambradford.com. For further details: 07986 036 152.
Share Our Vision: To Launch A 21st Century English Language Islamic Centre in Bradford for All
The IslamBradford Team
For more information see http://www.islambradford.com
November 14, 2007 at 12:33 am
“…I have received some valuable feedback, criticism and improvements from tullab’l-’ilm and some senior scholars as well. I hope to share this with you once I’ve collated it all towards the end of the week insha’Allah…”
Sorry brother, but shouldn’t you have done this before submitting your article? You would have saved yourself a lot of the controversy that is now permeating through this thread.
“…I have no desire to discuss with someone whose sincerity I sadly doubt…”
You have to be careful here, as you’re basically stating that you have the ability to look into someone’s heart and determine their sincerity.
“…Also, a senior scholar whom we both respect (I think) has advised me not to waste my time, saying, “Communication will be harmful…”
But you’ve already set the ball in motion here. You’ve already posted your article on a public blog site, which has been released into the public sphere.
The very nature of a public blog is that it warrants responses, comments, and viewpoints by the public. If you’re going to pray for rain, then expect the mud.
November 14, 2007 at 5:39 am
as-Salamu `alaikum brother Abu Eesa,
With all due respect, but your response, or lack there of, to the legitimate points raised by Abuz-Zubayr is troubling. Instead of answering the issues he raised you instead decide to make some personal attack on the brother and question his sincerity, which seems quite petty. If the two of you have some personal dispute, well that is between you both, but to use that as an excuse not to respond to valid criticism is childish and silly. Furthermore, when you write an article of this nature you should be prepared for criticism and deal with it accordingly. Unfortunately you have come across as unable or unwilling to defend the thesis you have lain out here. Some brotherly advice, if you aren’t willing to defend an argument or claim then simply don’t make it.
November 14, 2007 at 11:13 am
Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Abu Eesa,
Put the keyboard down….
Two wrongs don’t make a right. If a million people ask you to do something doesn’t justify doing it. If through the advice of your teachers and direction from Allah you feel there is a warrant for a response then please respond in a way that befits a Muslim.
I think it’s important for people of knowledge to understand that when they make public comments, it gives the public scope to spread these comments. The higher those involved in the dispute, the more fitnah it causes.
So whatever issues you have insha Allah can be dealt with without emotions and in a way that minimises the spread of fitnah and eating of a brother’s flesh by us the public.
I hear stories where the scholars of the past would hear much evil said about them but rather than react, they would look for what they could take from it.
Wassalam
November 14, 2007 at 12:32 pm
as-salamu’alaykum
I agree with Abu Omar. If you did not like his points or even if he had gone against promises made to yourself to keep certain matters off the public arena – then perhaps you should have exercised “patience” and taken some advice from your own article during a time of fitn, and remained silent and dealt with the matter privately.
I do not 100% agree with AbuZ but I neverthless believe your comments are not much worse if not worse. As others have said, you warranted a response from your public article, now you should deal with it.
I think he ended his article quite nicely and I would like to repeat it as in my opinion it is one of the most profound statements on this page from an individual:
Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan (hafidhullah):
“When you warn against extremist, do not forget to warn against negligence. When you promote al-Wala, do not forget al-Bara”
Jazakallah Khayr
PS: And really you shouldn’t wait for a 100 requests for a reply. AbuZ can be a bit fiery but I am sure you are able to reply in a manner which doesn’t add more oxygen but is as academic as the article you first wrote. JZK.
November 15, 2007 at 9:13 am
Salaam. Both articles from A.E and A.Z reap benefit. neither of the two are scholors or are free from error (like us all).
I would like to add that sometimes u may interperate ‘patience’ as curled up at home praying in the corner and waiting for your enemy to come and oppress u….but as far as i have read/heard ‘patience’ is actully steadfastness after establishing an act of sharia. As u will find in the tafseer of surah Asr, that sabr COMES AFTER believing, doing rightous action and speaking the truth. As Allah says “and exhort one another to truth and exhort one another to patience” and As luqman adviced his son “O my son! Establish prayer, enjoin what is right, forbid what is wrong, and bear with patience what befalls you. This is of the most rigorous of affairs.” and As Allah says “Enjoin prayer on your people and be patient therein.” As we can see real patience comes after action, so it may well be the case that the brothers in pakistan and other areas alike are more closer to the Sunnah then we may think??
‘O believers! Be patient, and excel in patience with the enemies and guard Islamic country on the border and remain fearing Allah that you may be successful.” Ail Imran :200
May Allah bless both AE & AZ
November 15, 2007 at 10:22 am
Salaam,
It is very strange to me that you say in one sentance you do not wish to respond to Abu Zubair…yet you respond.. and not only that your response is basically to try and discredit him by bringing up something that has nothing to do with what he is speaking about? it seems like your playing with words like saying
“If people read that I dont want to respond many will not realize I actually responded but let me divert the attention from Abu Z POST AND POINTS, and come at him with a character or personal attack
Which you are basically responding and opening a can of worms, so people can sit there and chat like “I wonder what the beef is between Abu Eesa, and Abuz Zubair?” Instead of the real issue of which is your post on this blog…
Abuz Zubair dealt with it nicely.
*Thumbs Up*
November 15, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Refelecting upon the 9 points stated by Abuz Zubair they seem quite inaccurate. Here are 9 Points in response to the comments made by the brother:
1. And what do you want him to write about on his own blog? Strictly Come Dancing today and then Darfur tomorrow? He can write what he wants, when he wants, to whoever he wants. What’s the real intention behind your objection here? People who consider his writings will read and learn something (or not), and others who consider him a deviant modernist liberal progressive sufi and other such wonderful descriptions on your website, will ignore him anyway!
2. Whoever the audience is, they should learn from what has been mentioned in it, something which the Ummah has agreed upon i.e. that one doesn’t create a bigger evil than the first.
3. You obviously have something personal here in this point that you want to bring out – stick to a “critique” of the piece. Whoever is intended by Ahlus-Sunnah, we all certainly know that the Salaf were against the Khawarij, rebellion if it led to a greater evil and whatever else. Are you nitpicking?
4. Ignore the secularists??! First of all, an article concerning one issue doesn’t have to mention other issues or the opposite of it as some kind of a condition for an article (!), despite what the respected Sheikh Fawzan has said. And what makes this point so embarrassing for you brother is that Abu Eesa himself calls Musharraf a “criminal secular leader” above. Have you actually read this properly? I’m sorry this doesn’t do enough for you, but I suppose you want an article every day here naming each and every single leader as a Kafir, and then you’ll be satisfied?
5. Ok fine, so killing all by the leader means the mujahidin should kill all as well. If that’s your opinion then fine. Don’t criticise others who want to stop those killers from slaughtering their family members because they DO want to be patient with the evil of the ruler, and don’t have the ability to change that kafir ruler at all.
6. Defeatist? If telling the people not to kill and get killed, then I hope we’re all going to be defeatist insha’Allah. But I forgot, sorry, when the Mujahidin slaughter the army and the villagers who are against them, it’s jihad right?
7. Your whole point is a waste of a paragraph. The issue here is not whether Musharraf is kafir or not, but as Abu Eesa has made abudnantly clear with his quotes, the greater evil that will reign. Why can’t you see that?
8. Sorry, I didn’t see any justification of the ruler’s islam in the article. And what’s that got to do with anything, unless you really wantt the nation to rebel? You really want Pakistan to become Iraq don’t you brother?
9. I think you’ve created bogeymen in the da’wah and you wish to blame everything in the world upon them. I think I’ll follow the advice of your well-known Sheikh who sent you there to study in Saudi and just ignore what you write to protect our Deen.
November 15, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Response to comments made by Brother Abuz Zubair:
1) What is the objective of writing this? So that perhaps a ‘few deranged’ vigilantes in Pak would stumble across it and take heed? How is this relevant to the Muslims living in the UK or the West? This is precisely why I don’t like to discuss fiqhi arguments for or against suicide bombings because they are completely irrelevant to us in the UK.
This is an extremely strange and weak objection. Beyond the fact that Abu Easa can write whatever he wants on his blog, the piece is extremely important for the Muslims in the U.K. Many of the Muslims living in the U.K are originally from the Indo-Pak region, with many still having their families and close relatives living there. Surely, they would want to know how to interpret events taking place back home and learn the Islamic view. In fact, one does not even have to be a Pakistani to want to know the Islamic viewpoint. We are living in a global village; events that happen in one country may drastic effects in another. Have not Muslims all over the world been in some way affected by the events that took place on 9/11?
Moreover, everywhere you see, whether on television, newspapers, radio etc people are commenting on events in Pakistan, so why can’t Abu Easa also write on the topic, especially when he is familiar with the area and has close family and friends directly inflicted by the fitnah.
Furthermore, the positive comments in the posts, clearly demonstrate that at least for some of us, the article was important and greatly appreciated.
Again, one does not need to be undergoing tribulation to know how Ahl-Sunnah responded in similar situations. We as Muslims are supposed to take lessons from our past to make sure similar things do not happen again.
Suicide bombing completely irrelevant to the us in the U.K?
So what was 7/7? Is it not true, that there is a small group of Muslims, who believe that suicide bombings is legitimate in the U.K.
In any case, anyone who is active in dawah in the West, will have to deal with these type of questions on a daily basis. Even the normal Muslim will be asked by his non-Muslim colleagues at work on the issue, how can all of this be irrelevant?
2) Who are the intended audience for this piece? No. 10 Muslims or those youngsters who may sympathise with the rebels? If it is the former, then you are preaching to the converted. If it is the latter, they won’t listen to you, anyway, because they look at you as a liberal who neither understands them nor sympathises with them.
Why does everything have to be black or white. It seems according to you there are only two types of Muslims, No. 10 Muslims and sympathizers. The vast majority of readers on this blog (if not all) would reject such categorization and yet still benefit and appreciate what Abu Easa explained in his article.
When you criticize the Mu’tazili, Asha’ri, Maturudi schools can’t the same illogical argument be used against you? i.e. either you are preaching to the converted and therefore your comments are a waste of time or you are speaking to the Mu’tazili/Asha’ri/Maturudi sympathizers and therefore will be deemed by them as a radical wahabi salafi!
In fact, it is quite ironic that this is the same argument used by the Takfiri’s against Shaykh al-Fawzan.
All Abu Easa is required to do is give the advice, whether the people listen or not is another matter. One does not have to have 100% assurance that his advice will be accepted, before he can give it!
3) Why now all of a sudden mention ‘Ahl al-Sunnah’? Why didn’t you think of that while belittling the differences between Sunnis and Ash’aris and deeming them minor? Just because this particular issue happens to be close to your heart, you think you can easily drop the term ‘Ahl al-Sunnah’ and marginalise those who you strongly disagree with? You even mentioned the ‘creation of the Quran’ as a thing of the past, whilst at present, you are at the forefront of belittling the very difference the Salaf died for and Ahl al-Sunnah united against.
This is a red herring and really has nothing to do with the main points addressed by Abu Easa in this article. The public cannot ascertain what you and Abu Easa may have discussed in your private discussions and therefore it should not have been mentioned.
4) Even if a ‘few deranged’ are responsible for criminality, how can you ignore the criminality of the secularists, which hasn’t just begun now, but since the beginning of Pakistan? It astounds me that you would compare between a ‘few deranged’ on one hand who have just started to hit back, rightly or wrongly, and a secularist Musharaf with his army and police force who are responsible for torturing, kidnapping, illegally handing over thousands of MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN, to the US over the past six years, and of carpet bombing Muslim villages at the behest of the US, killing hundreds of children reciting Quran in the process. How can one even compare between Muslims and secularists? Whatever the basis for the comparison maybe, it is completely nonsensical and surprising coming from the one who wrote passionately about the theatre siege in 2002.
When did Abu Easa ignore the “criminality of the secularist”? As brother Tariq stated, “an article concerning one issue doesn’t have to mention other issues or the opposite of it as some kind of a condition for an article.”
In fact, I think you have misunderstood Shaykh al-Fawzan, when he said:
“When you warn against extremist, do not forget to warn against negligence. When you promote al-Wala, do not forget al-Bara”
I don’t think the Shaykh is saying that one has to do this in every single one of his discourses or writings. All the Shaykh is doing is stressing, that as a principle your overall writings should be balanced. In other words, one should not limit all his writings in attacking the extremist and yet never make a comment on the liberals.
If you argue, that the Shaykh meant otherwise, then it seems the Shakyh does not abide by the principle himself. Many times the Shaykh talks about extremist and yet makes no comment about the secularist in the same talk.
I can give many examples but I think one will suffice. Where in the following fatwa did the Shaykh speak against the secularist?
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=5090
Moreover, it seems you are unfamiliar with Abu Easa’s writings either that or you have an ulterior motive. Not only has Abu Easa criticised Musharraf in the past but even in this very post he describes him as a “criminal secular leader”, a “tyrant” who is “guilty of human right abuses” and much more. What can be more damning than that?
5) After years of oppression, killing of women and children, mass murders, carpet bombings, and finally destruction of mosques and Imam Ghazi (something like that happening for the 1st time in Pak history!), in the most conservative province of the country, what do you expect the population to do if not blow up? It has nothing to do with any religious justification or lack of ‘patience’ that we hear about every now and then from Western arm chair critics. It is a natural reaction to being placed in a pressure cooker for years.
The Burmese Buddhists are neither Wahhabis nor Taliban sympathisers. It is the oppression when it goes beyond certain threshold, it causes people to naturally react, and most usually in an ugly manner. In such cases people do not look for a reason or a justification to react. They simply react. So lay the blame where it is due.
Okay so are you saying two wrongs make a right? So since the tyrant is killing everyone the rebels should do the same. Whatever supposedly natural reaction we may have, we still have to see whether that act is permissible in Islam or not.
Moreover, many of the things the “mujahideen” are doing, is claimed to be in the name of Islam. Many of them do give religious justification for it. In the same way, the Khawarij gave justification for their atrocities. When it comes to Musharraf, most Muslims recognise his deviancy and tyranny, the problems comes when men with big beards, turbans, Kalashnikovs and a copy of the Qur’an in their hands, start doing the same crimes.
The Salaf did not need to write detailed compilations on the heresy of Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, yet the same was not the case when dealing with the Khawaarij.
6) At a time when the Home Office is in the fifth gear against what it calls Islamism, and we are clearly under ideological attack, we cannot afford to read defeatist articles over and over, disparaging any sort of activism. May Allah be merciful with the Salaf, who said: ‘The difference between the living and the dead is movement’.
It seems you have changed your mind. Somehow, the events in Pakistani are suddenly relevant and have an impact on the way Muslims will be treated in Britain.
I would also wish you would stop making non-committal statements and clearly state your position on the events in Pakistan. One minute you describe the rebels as “deranged” and the next minute you are praising their activism!
Furthermore, you have clearly misrepresented Abu Easa’s view. If you read the article carefully, he clearly rejects pacifism and stresses the love of the Ahl-Sunnah for jihad.
7) You quoted ahadeeth with respect to not revolting against sinful rulers, and applying them to dictators who have several charges of kufr against them. Musharraf is the Ataturk of Pakistan. He said it before 9/11. He is a secularist to the core, as he and you have admitted. He is guilty of aiding the kuffar against the Muslims, which is in itself kufr (refer to the fatwa issued after 9/11) It is Shar’an obligatory to remove such rulers, even if by force, according to the consensus of Muslim jurists through out our history; that is, if it is possible for him to be removed without it resulting in greater evil.
The issue here is what to do if by trying to remove a tyrant it will result in greater evil. The principle is the same whether the person is Kafir or Fasiq.
Moreover, we are not just dealing with Musharraf here but rather the entire government and the army, or are they all kafir too?
8) If a group of Muslims are guilty of a premature revolt, no doubt they should be criticised. But to criticise them does NOT mean to justify the Islam of a ruler who has several charges of kufr against him, or to belittle his wrong doings. Call spade and spade.
When did Abu Easa justify the actions of Musharraf? Are we reading the same article? All Abu Easa did was criticize the Muslims who are “guilty of premature revolt” and then you criticize him for it!
9) This article of yours, and other such defeatist articles before, your article on the hadeeth on riba, and your view on the punishment for apostasy in Islam, are all symptoms of another greater problem. The main problem is your liberal-leaning way of thinking, coupled with a sense of shame towards some of the things you do not feel comfortable with in Sharia, simply because they aren’t palatable with the modern Western civilisation as it stands today. The most dangerous aspect of this problem is that you are constantly in denial that this is indeed the case. Yet, if you analyse your thinking process carefully, you would realise that whenever you air your liberal-controversial views, it is often the case that you arrive at a view first, and then bend over backwards to prove your hypothesis, and to this end, make blunders that may appear to be outright academic dishonesty. An example of that is your attribution of ‘no hadd for riddah’ opinion to al-Sarkhasi and Ibn Taymiyya, whereas both of them are completely free of this opinion, which could be described as no less than heresy. Brothers like your honourable selves need to stop right now in their footsteps and question their own thinking process, before they end up where Usama has ended up today.
A lot of allegations, but sadly very little substance. Whatever Abu Easa’s leanings may be, is what he wrote in this article true or not? That is what you should have dealt with. Most of what you have written above cannot be verified, since it was held during private discussions. Based on your misrepresentation of the above article one is given very little confidence on how accurately you describe Abu Easa’s private views.
As for the hadeeth on Riba, I was under the impression that ibn Abi Hatim, ibn al-Jawzi and other contemporary scholars have also graded the hadith weak, or do they have liberal leanings too?
All Abu Easa did above was re-write the statement below of ibn al-Qayyum in light of the present situation.
Moreover, ibn al-Qayyum did not limit his statement to Muslim tyrants but also discussed situations where the leaders are kafir, similar to the situation in Makkah during the time of the Prophet (sallahu ‘alayhi wassalam). This is the core argument of Abu Easa and one, which you sadly failed to give attention to.
Ibn al-Qayyim in his writing (as quoted above) (rahimullāh) said, “Rebelling against the kings and rulers is the basis of all evil and fitnah until the end of time – whoever contemplates on what has happened to Islam historically with respect to fitnah, whether major or minor, will recognise its connection to this fundamental problem i.e. that to resist the evil (authority) leads to an evil worse than it, and that the lack of patience with that evil and the seeking of its removal produces a problem even worse than in the first place. The Messenger of Allah (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) witnessed the greatest of evils in Makkah yet he was not able to change it; indeed when Allah opened up Makkah and made it Dār’l-Islām, he (the Prophet (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam)) was determined to change the Ka‘bah back to the original foundations of Ibrahīm but he did not despite being able to do so, fearing creating a situation even worse with the possibility that the Quraysh would not be able to handle it due to their newness to Islam and their recent departure from kufr. Thus, it is not allowed to rise up against the leaders due to the consequences that result, which is even worse than before, as is well known…” (Turuq’l-Hākimiyyah)
November 15, 2007 at 6:36 pm
as-salamu’alaykum
I have a question if Br. Abu Eesa could help me on please. Jazakallah Khayr.
Abu Zubair mentioned the fact that one should not fight the ruler if removing the evil results in a greater evil. Now, that seems quite general and open to interpretation. That is a scholar could decide that the struggle would not result in a greater evil and another scholar may decide on the contrary. In the end the matter is an issue of which there is legitimate difference of opinion, right?
Then if there were “muhajahidin” following a scholarly opinion that the struggle was worth it and that there was not a consequence of a greater evil – then is it allowed for us to rebuke them for holding and practising that opinion?
Note in the above example we have a ruler who is enforcing a secular system which is disbelief in itself and is causing much evil around the country and the world. And we have Muslims who are fighting him in order to stop this evil. In the struggle innocent Muslims do get killed and injured but they believe that it is not as much or as destructive at what the ruler has and is doing already. So then is it permissable for us to rebuke them?
Does having patience mean we should speak out against these people fighting a known oppression or perhaps not commenting on either side?
Jazakallah Khayr in advance.
was-salamu’alaykum
November 15, 2007 at 8:01 pm
You know, it doesn’t look good students of knowledge bittering with each other…
November 15, 2007 at 10:30 pm
You mean bickering
November 15, 2007 at 10:31 pm
You mean bickering
November 15, 2007 at 10:57 pm
Assalamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullah everyone
Sorry for being a bit off the pace.
Right, let’s look at some of your points:
Furthermore, when you write an article of this nature you should be prepared for criticism and deal with it accordingly.
Please forgive me, but I laughed out loud when I read that. If you thought I worried about criticism then you obviously have no idea what one gets into when they accept the responsibility of giving da‘wah, teaching, becoming an Imam, accepting public office and all other such silly things. If I didn’t want criticism, I’d get myself a TOEFL in a month, make hijrah for Allah to Dubai, teach the one thing that I love namely English for a few hours a day by chatting about my life story and watching American movies with the rich Arabs with the “intention of learning English culture” (sorry T!) and then drive down in my half price brand-new Amazon to the beach, amusement park and ski-slope and spend my days keeping it real whilst some Afghani Qari teaches my kids hifdh and we all live very happily ever after. Ay na‘m. Now that’s the life.
Sorry, I got a bit carried away there. And I didn’t mean you Kif either.
But seriously, if there are any budding da‘ees or tullab’l-‘ilm out there reading this, the one thing that you’d better expect is serious criticism, everything you ever say or write being taken in the very worst light possible and just a pretty miserable time if you don’t understand that all people who want to do this job need to take the good with the bad, wal-hamdulillah.
So back to the issue brother, I have no problem with criticism whatsoever. Please go ahead with any further points that you wish to make and someone will hopefully deal with them insha’Allah. Indeed, I like to invite some criticism sometimes because it usually makes you learn from your mistakes and makes you stronger. Others can see things that you rarely can.
Which you are basically responding and opening a can of worms, so people can sit there and chat like “I wonder what the beef is between Abu Eesa, and Abuz Zubair?” Instead of the real issue of which is your post on this blog…
Abuz Zubair dealt with it nicely.
*Thumbs Up*
I thought about what you wrote dear sister and I realised that not only are you absolutely right (and thus I regret writing anything at all in my previous comment which has basically shifted attention from the article) and I wish to apologise to the senior scholar who told me to ignore the brother because it would be worse to communicate, and he was proved right.
Your statement “Thumbs Up” shows perfectly the kind of tennis match Muslims want to see today instead of learning their Deen and getting closer to Allah. I apologise again for my role in that.
As for the ‘ilmi concerns expressed above, then I think the two brothers above have generally dealt with them wallahu a‘lam.
One piece of advice I will give to everyone, starting with myself: when you read or hear something, and it doesn’t feel right or you have some doubts, then go over it again slowly this time, and then go over it again. If people could get used to this methodology, it’d stop them making themselves look silly in the future.
I also said before that I asked some senior scholars to read the article. Unfortunately, the majority of them just agreed with the content which is always disappointing because one doesn’t learn too much that way. There were a few points made though:
One advised me to change the word “reform” to “revival” which I found a very beneficial point as there is indeed much psychological baggage with the modernist word “reform” whereas a true orthodox approach would always be to build on our tradition. I still think islah should be reform and I’ll leave it at that, but people shouldn’t have an inferiority complex when they think of the word “reform” like the liberal agent provocateurs would have us believe, but rather reform back to the Sunnah i.e. revival of the Sunnah. I hope I didn’t confuse everyone there.
Another asked for the article to be turned into a much deeper series. I simply don’t have the time for that, and if a reader could, it’d be most beneficial.
Also, it was requested that the word “Ahl’l-Sunnah” be clarified. My response is that I always find that when you go into too much detail with this very politically loaded word, you’ll lose from the message of the article you’re writing. Everyone wants to be from Ahl’l-Sunnah these days, so let everyone claim it for themselves and let them live up to the standard. I want people to focus on the fact that “Ahl’l-Sunnah” opposed the Khawarij with respect to rebellion, bloodshed and all the rest of their infamous traits – and that they always left taking certain courses of action if the resultant evil would be worse.
We’re all aware of the Salafi and Ash‘aris arguments surrounding whether the word “Ahl’l-Sunnah” is a general one or a specific one, whether it includes Ash‘aris (or vice versa Salafi/Atharis) or not, and all the rest of it which I have no interest whatsoever in when dealing with 99.9% of the Muslims I do. So let’s focus on not becoming Kharaji in our ideas and leave the other detailed ‘aqidah points to those who wish to go into them deeper.
One other respected brother doesn’t like comparisons between the tyrant Muslims of the past and the more “obviously” kafir rulers of today.
In response, obviously, we do find a difference when we study it carefully, but I don’t think it detracts from the points made above for two reasons:
1. The issue here is not the Islam or lack of with respect to the ruler; the issue here is whether a ruler is kafir or not, if rising against them will cause more problems according to senior scholars and wise people, then it is left and one gets on with things as mentioned above in the article.
2. Also, there isn’t that much difference between then and now. Some Tabi‘in used to hold a few of the rulers in those days to be kafir aswell. Likewise, we have rulers today who certainly pass for Muslim, and others who are clearly closer to kufr than iman and Allah knows best.
Maybe I should have emphasised this point more, that the article is about the fact the greater evil must be avoided. Yet I still think this is clear if one reads the article carefully. And I don’t wish to take the focus off the fanatics who don’t have justification for anything they are doing at the moment with the Muslims in Pakistan, Iraq and other places. And oh by the way, neither do any of the rulers, just to implement Shaykh Salih’s advice.
The brother also mentions, as does a commenter above, that “patience” doesn’t mean just sit there and make du‘a. This is a valuable point, and for us all over the world, we will have different roles and responsibilities, strengths and weaknesses, and we must remain “active” in our various forms of “activism” that bring benefit to the Muslims, locally and internationally as per the advice of the elders and wise.
One other respected talib’l-ilm suggests that such an article gives the impression that Muslims in the West should not protest and criticise the Muslim rulers, which shouldn’t be the case because there are no negative ramifications from this and our political systems in the West encourage and allow that anyway, maybe even force positive results from such political pressure.
This is an interesting point. Naturally, we don’t want to become politically apathetic in our communities at a time when we need to become more politically astute and proactive. Let the scholars judge the actions of these Western communities for them; their is a problem though that we give the impression to some of the emotional youth in this country (as mentioned above by brother Abdullah) that rebellion is the solution. Also, such advice is definitely more pertinent to those in such situations at the moment.
Anyway, this is an interesting point and needs discussion. I personally think that Khariji thinking even in the West has a negative effect down the line somewhere even if we don’t see it know, but Allah knows best.
And the final advice was to tighten the language, but I decided not to because it’ll remain only on this blog and as you all know when I’m on the blog 1210s, I’m just chillin’….
Thanks for all your comments and advice. The End.
November 15, 2007 at 11:04 pm
Sorry Mahmud, I forgot about your question.
Will it be too much a cop-out if I say quickly for now:
1. It is the senior scholars, the experienced ones and the people of power, that we really consider when it comes to decisions like this, not the individual opinions of a few, even if it comes down to “acceptable ijtihad”. There is obviously more detail to this, but you can read more of what I wrote on this under “the Price of Shari’ah” on this blog previously.
2. Please, if you can, read or study the book “Siyasat’l-Shar’iyyah” by Ibn Taymiyyah (r)with the commentary by Shaykh al-’Uthaymin (r); that is, if you don’t mind reading from such a schoool of thought and will be objective enough not to let your madhab affect your judgement. If you don’t like Salafi scholars, then I’m afraid I can’t advise much on this subject because I found they have the best explanations of such issues.
And Allah knows best.
November 16, 2007 at 11:35 am
Some people would argue that there are some senior scholars who have decided that there is a greater benefit in rebelling against certain regimes (e.g. in Pakistan) and thus it is a very legitimate action that the mujahideen are doing. These scholars, they say, have weighed up the harms and benefits of rebelling and have made a legitimate ijtihad that the rebellion has greater benefit than harm. How would you answer that, Abu Eesa?
Moreover, how can we call such people ‘rampaging group of rebellious vigilante’? Surely they are people who are simply following scholars’ ijtihads?
November 16, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Abdullah,
Who are these scholars who have been asking people to rebel against regimes, such as Pakistan?
November 16, 2007 at 11:13 pm
salams.
dear readers, if you really want to know about the noble mujahideen check this blog:
http://inshallahshaheed.muslimpad.com/about/
before attacking the brother or criticising what he says with the lies, deceit and propoganda that we have been fed, i suggest you read carefully what he says as he brings forth ayaat and ahadeeth and very strong arguments. That is just the ‘about’ page check his blog, his links, his archives etc.
November 16, 2007 at 11:54 pm
Assalamu Alaikum,
Well Bro Abu Eesa, I guess you couldn’t help yourself but feel the need to reply.
Fair enough this is your blog. You can write about this that and the other. However Muslims are not without strings attached and I’m sure you know better than most what the power of such a technology is.
I read it, because firstly I stumbled across it and now because I do find knoweledge, first hand accountsof events and cricket news
I like the schizophrenic nature of this blog ;perhaps a manifestation of ones self or other self
?
Wassalam
November 16, 2007 at 11:56 pm
Assalamu Alaikum,
Well Bro Abu Eesa, I guess you couldn’t help yourself but feel the need to reply.
Fair enough this is your blog. You can write about this that and the other. However Muslims are not without strings attached and I’m sure you know better than most what the power of such a technology is.
I read it, because firstly I stumbled across it and now because I do find knoweledge, first hand accountsof events and cricket news
I like the schizophrenic nature of this blog ;perhaps a manifestation of ones self or other self
?
Wassalam
November 17, 2007 at 12:54 am
Shaheeda,
If Samir Khan is so convinced of his ‘very strong arugments’ why hasn’t he himself made hijrah from Carolina, after suggesting we all should migrate?
November 17, 2007 at 3:50 am
Assalamaalaikum
Based on what you (AE) signed a number of weeks ago. Do you not think that this pledge should be clarified or even revised. Especially the following:
“Urge Muslim scholars and students of sacred knowledge to take the lead in working to end ad hominem attacks on other scholars and students; to cease unproductive, overly polemical writings and oral discourse; and to work to stimulate greater understanding and cooperation between Muslims, at both the level of the leadership and the general community.”
November 17, 2007 at 10:41 am
http://www.myiwc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2859
Interesting what you wrote here, Abu Eesa.
November 17, 2007 at 10:47 am
“And maybe there were mistakes amongst some of our brothers and sisters in their desperate actions. And maybe there weren’t. But what is even more sad is how we always seem to amplify their mistakes and deficiencies, and try to cover our daily huge sins for not responding to the Command of Allâh the All-Mighty. Whenever these brave people take some kind of action as opposed to just espousing hot air, i.e. they do something, build something, defend themselves, all we wish to do is to knock it down, criticise, offer suggestions, but never reflect on our condition. Why do we say that which we do not do? Indeed a great wrong it is with Allâh that we say something which we do not do.”
November 17, 2007 at 10:49 am
“And let me mention also that at this time of immense intellectual confusion amongst the Islamic callers with respect to the basic fundamentals of our religion such as Jihâd etc, that the ones who tried to attack it or conceal it or dilute it or change it or even run from it, were only disgraced and destroyed. And those who cling to it and defend it and run to it and promote it in its correct form have only honoured themselves by it and have saved themselves with it.”
November 17, 2007 at 2:02 pm
@ muhammad
so you havent read his blog to find the answer? you should ask him yourself and find out, just leave a comment and he might get back to you.
Besides the issue is not whether the brother has made hijrah or not (inshaAllah he will) it does not give a reason for you to push aside the suggestion to read the material pertaining to jihad. Anyway the brother doesnt just say we should all make hijrah out of his desires, he brings forth the statements of scholars of jihad.
I think brother mohammed posted quotes that are very relevant when it comes to the issue of jihad regardless of the purpose he posted it for but jazak Allah khayr anyway.
November 17, 2007 at 2:18 pm
It was from Abu Eesa’s own article. See the link:
http://www.myiwc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2859
November 17, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Wa ‘alaykum salam wa rahmatullah
I like the schizophrenic nature of this blog; perhaps a manifestation of ones self or other self
?
Myself. Very much the Self. Me, Myself and I.
Based on what you (AE) signed a number of weeks ago. Do you not think that this pledge should be clarified or even revised.
No, I don’t think so. Allah knows best.
Interesting what you wrote here, Abu Eesa.
The truth, my dear brother Muhammad, is always interesting. Ok, it might be a little bit difficult to say sometimes, it might not necessarily be PC, but it is always interesting.
November 18, 2007 at 2:43 am
SubhanAllah yaa ustadh abu eesa,
Your sabr and the way you really don’t get angry and what I, personally, would take offence at, or at what I am angry about for you (as in, some of the statements/arguments above seem really fruitless to me as they seem to be used only to insult you and try to make you out as a hypocrite rather than to learn about the truth or hear what you’re actually trying to say – which, actually, in your post, was really good and I learnt from it and it made me realise why the ppl of patience are so rewarded and revered- and hence the comments of some people are really gettin my back up!) – all this has really just put me in awe, and all I can say is SubhanAllah! And jazkallahu khayran for teaching us such etiquettes even through a simple blog!
I don’t mean to “big you up” here, in a way which is not beneficial to you or in an immodest way, but I am seriously grateful for what you have just taught me.
May Allah (swt) Reward you greatly. ameen
November 18, 2007 at 11:21 am
You didn’t answer my question, though:
Some people would argue that there are some senior scholars who have decided that there is a greater benefit in rebelling against certain regimes (e.g. in Pakistan) and thus it is a very legitimate action that the mujahideen are doing. These scholars, they say, have weighed up the harms and benefits of rebelling and have made a legitimate ijtihad that the rebellion has greater benefit than harm. How would you answer that, Abu Eesa?
Moreover, how can we call such people ‘rampaging group of rebellious vigilante’? Surely they are people who are simply following scholars’ ijtihads?
November 28, 2007 at 5:16 pm
[...] is an excellent post against the chaos going on around the [...]
January 12, 2008 at 12:02 am
Abu Eesa, just wanted to say that I greatly enjoy your site – bar the cricket and football.
January 12, 2008 at 12:08 am
Dearest Sister Umm313
May Allah reward you greatly and bless you in this life and in the Hereafter for your kind words.
Umm313, I just wanted to say that I also greatly enjoy my site, especially the cricket and football – bar everything else.
Aahh, the beautiful games…
March 6, 2008 at 5:58 am
I am well aware of the scrutiny that goes along with a public position. That is not at all in question. I was giving some advice in light of your response to the criticism of Abuz-Zubayr, which you didn’t seem to take so well.
Just so it is clear, I acknowledge and agree with several of the points you raised in this article. It is just that I took issue with the way you responded to criticism.
June 18, 2009 at 9:47 pm
[...] [...]
July 9, 2009 at 8:02 pm
[...] [...]
April 22, 2010 at 5:52 pm
The inshaAllahshaheed blog has vanished altogether. Has the author of the blog gone off to ‘Jihad’ or is he still lingering somewhere in kafir lands like UK and USA? Anyway, if the author of that blog choose to delete his blog’s content for whatever reason, and since the ‘content’ is so much important for Muslims to know about ‘noble Mujahideen’ as one poster Shaheeda comments, then the sincerity and credibility of the blog’s author is really put into question.
No lies, no fabrications, no propaganda. Here’s some truth from the notorious OBL himself:
And here’s a blog post from one of our brothers, contemplating the death of one such rebel in Saudi, who blasted himself for whatever ‘lies and propaganda he was fed’:
http://blog.athaar.org/?p=156