Faiths

Belief

2011-01-02T23:59:00.001Z

Islamic Belief and Rationality

To have faith in a creator is considered by many as equal to following something blindly. The rise of science and technology in the last 50 years has resulted in many people abandoning their religious beliefs and adopting the faith of science which concludes there is no need for a creator.

Names such as Richard Dawkins a staunch atheist regularly ridicules those who believe in a creator and look upon any person who believes in Allah سبحانه وتعالى as effectively contradicting the very make-up of a human being. Scientists as well as those who are smitten by the discoveries in the scientific world have over the years developed a number of theories which for them proves there is no such thing as a creator. These theories or arguments can be categorized as follows:

Scientific theories - based around the fact that Allah سبحانه وتعالى has never been seen, heard or touched so how could He exist, and all things are just different forms of atoms (matter) so there is no need for a creator.

Moral arguments - such as how could a creator exist and create so much evil, corruption, vice, wars and unhappiness in the world? Surely Allah سبحانه وتعالى would be all the good things such as love, peace and mercy.

Logical arguments - The ideas developed from logic include, if Allah سبحانه وتعالى is all powerful could he create a stone heavy enough that he couldn't lift and other questions such as can Allah سبحانه وتعالى create a wall even he couldn't climb.

Cult theories - These theories include that we may live in a matrix, aliens could have created us or even the devil may have created us.

Before looking at these arguments it must be understood that all of them are designed to try and prove that there is no need for a creator.

The limitations of science

There is no doubt, the development of science over the last 200 years has led to the creation and invention of technology and research which would have been unimaginable to all those in the 18th century. The genetic make-up of humans, the discovery of DNA, the motor vehicle etc are just some of the success stories of scientific development. However many who are mesmerised by science have tried to use it to suggest there is no creator. This is a complete misuse of science; this can be seen if we look at how science concludes facts.

The scientist would carry out an experiment in a laboratory and would subject the thing under study to various conditions such as extreme heat or cold and then see how it reacts in comparison to how it would react in its normal environment. From this, facts would then be concluded. Hence science can not experiment with those things which are intangible such as ideas, laws, history, behaviour and those things beyond the universe. This is because all these things are not tangible. You cannot take them into a laboratory and heat them or freeze them. Therefore it is impossible for science to experiment with Allah سبحانه وتعالى as Allah سبحانه وتعالى cannot be experimented with.

Many scientists argue there is no need for a creator as everything we see in the universe such as planets, humans, stars etc are just different forms of matter. They are just atoms which are arranged in a particular way and when a human dies as an example, they turn into dust which is another form of matter. However it is physically impossible for anything to change from one state to another on its own. Water cannot change into steam on its own, and ice cannot turn into liquid on its own. Both of these need something else to make the transition. For water to transform into steam it requires heat, and for ice to turn into liquid it requires a certain amount of cold. For transformation to occur any amount of heat or cold is not enough, but a specific amount is needed i.e. steam will not be generated from water unless the heat is 100 degrees; 80 degrees will not generate steam. Why will this only occur at 100 degrees? Why not at any other temperature? This is because the water, the heat and the steam have no will on deciding things. The rule of changing from water to steam at 100 degrees was imposed on them - they had no choice; if they did then they could transform at any temperature, not only at 100 degrees. This shows that it is wrong to suggest things are merely matter or atoms as something other then them is laying rules and controlling things, this can only be the creator.

Good and bad

Many believe that it's not your belief in Allah سبحانه وتعالى or following a religion that makes you a good person. Rather it's if you have good morals such as honesty, love, peace, mercy etc, and if these are the best morals then how could Allah سبحانه وتعالى allow so much oppression, wars, disease and disasters in the world? Surely this proves there is no creator?

This argument has a number of problems as it assumes Allah سبحانه وتعالى is like a human who has morals and it assumes humans created such attributes, hence Allah سبحانه وتعالى must have them aswell. If Allah سبحانه وتعالى was like a human then it means Allah سبحانه وتعالى would grow old and die one day no different to humans. This would be ridiculous to believe. Placing the blame for the existence of problems around the world is even more ridiculous as all of them are man-made. WWI was started by Britain as Germany was threatening Europe. WWII was again started by Britain along with Russia and France due to Hitler expanding Germany. The Iraq war was started by the US due to Oil. The war in Kashmir was effectively created by the British as they gave a majority Muslim land to India, and finally the problems in the Middle East were created by Britain who imposed Israel upon the people of Palestine. The oppression around the world is created and maintained by humans not Allah سبحانه وتعالى.

It must be logical....

The people who raise logical arguments in no way prove that Allah سبحانه وتعالى does not exist. Rather they raise circular arguments which go nowhere. Whether Allah سبحانه وتعالى can lift a stone, fly, climb etc in no way proves he doesn't exist. These questions in themselves are wrong as there is no correct answer to them whichever way you answer them. They are the same as asking, is Germany the largest continent in the world? Obviously it is not. However this means Germany is a continent just not the largest. The problem here is the question asked was wrong as it contradicted the definition of Germany which is that it's a country in Europe. Similar to this would be to ask, can the cat speak Chinese? Answering yes is irrational and answering no would mean the cat cannot speak Chinese but it can speak. Again the question was wrong as it assumes cats can speak.

Hence logical arguments are in fact illogical as they contradict the definition of what a creator is. So lifting, climbing, throwing etc are attributes of humans. How can humans use their attributes to describe Allah سبحانه وتعالى? This would be the same as one of us creating a drink, giving it a colour and taste and then the drink imposing restriction and rules for us. The created does not affect the creator.

Cult theories

One would think, with the development of science that more and more people would conclude that the signs in the world show us that there is a creator. However unfortunately more and more people are beginning to believe in the weird and wonderful. Keanu reeves film about the struggle of Neo against some supernatural force called the Matrix which controls everything raised the possibility that life as we see it may not be what it seems. Some, such as a group of scientists in the US called clonaid, even say that humans were created by aliens.

The problem here lies with the method of thinking, which is anything and everything is possible; there is no such thing as an ultimate truth. This type of thinking is encouraged in the West, as critical thinking is healthy and ensures only the strangest theories would remain as they can withstand the test from any suspect thinker. However ideas such as ‘we come from alien's' etc are physically not provable or cannot be verified by anyone who claims them. There is no evidence whatsoever of a Matrix. In fact you will never know whether the writer of this article is a human or some alien. Such thinking is irrational and in fact keeps you from ever believing in conclusive things which can be verified.

Islam and the mind

By using our mind and senses of touch, smell, taste, hearing and sight which most humans have we can asses everything around us and conclude nothing in the universe exists on its own. All of them whether the leaf on a tree, plants, computers, cars etc rely on other things to work and survive and all of them are restricted by universals laws which they cannot go beyond. This indicates that they could not have created themselves and they cannot live forever due to their reliance on other things for their existence, which means there must be something other than them that brought them into existence. The creator cannot have any of the attributes of the created as this would place the creator in a situation of being created.

When the correct process of thinking is used it is inevitable that all people would come to the conclusion of a creator. It is only deviant thinking that has allowed evolutionary ideas to gain mainstream attention. The Islamic belief is a rational belief built upon the mind. Over 60% of the Qur'an discusses Allah's creations and orders all to think about the created. There are many verses in the Qur'an that ask all humans to think and ponder:

أَمْ خُلِقُوا مِنْ غَيْرِ شَيْءٍ أَمْ هُمُ الْخَالِقُونَ

أَمْ خَلَقُوا السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ بَل لَّا يُوقِنُونَ

"Or were they created out of naught? Or are they the creators? Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Nay, but they are sure of nothing!" [At-Tur , 52: 35-36]

إِنَّ فِي خَلْقِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلاَفِ اللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهَارِ لآيَاتٍ لِّأُوْلِي الألْبَابِ

"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of Night and Day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding." [Al-Imran, 3:190]

Through the use of the rational method we can conclude the correct theories from the completely irrational

The Ulema's

2010-04-06T01:16:00.001+01:00

Those who truly fear Allah are the Ulema...

"…Those truly fear Allah among His servants are those who have knowledge (Ulema). For Allah is Exalted in Might and is Forgiving." [Al-Fatir: 28]

Regarding "…Those truly fear Allah among His servants are those who have knowledge…"

Ibn Kathir stated that, "The more the knowledge of Allah and His (swt) power is complete, the more He (swt) will be feared by those who have the complete knowledge."

Imam Al-Qurtubi said that, "The scholars are those who know the power of Allah (swt). They are in no doubt of his (swt) punishment no mater what the sin is."

It was narrated by Ali ibn abi Talha that Ibn Abbas (ra) said, "The scholars are those who know that Allah is capable of anything."

Al-Rabee narrated that Ibn Abbas (ra) said, "He who dos not fear Allah (and His punishment) is not a scholar."

Ali ibn abi Talib (ra) said, "The true faqih is the one who will not make the people give up or lose hope in Allah’s mercy; an does not belittle disobedience to Allah; and does not make the people feel protected from Allah’s punishment; and does not leave the Qur’an deliberately (when judging) to judge by other than the Qur’an. A worship not based on knowledge has no value. And a knowledge with no understanding has no value. And a recitation without reflection has no value."

"For Allah is Exalted…" i.e. the One who punishes and rewards should be feared.

The amount of Islamic knowledge, however varies from individual to individual. Therefore, some will know more than others and will need to teach those whose knowledge is less. Those who have the knowledge of the Islamic rules are called ulemaa'. While they do not occupy any spiritual position in Islam, they are given more responsibility then others due to the knowledge they posses. They are the ones who teach the Ummah their Deen, help guide them through the problems of life and direct them to the Islamic priorities. Allah (swt) made it clear that His revelation is to be openly declared to all:

"And Allah took the covenant from those who had received the scripture to make it known and clear to mankind and not to hide it" (TMQ 3:187)

He (swt) has warned against hiding the knowledge, which He (swt), has entrusted us with. He
(swt), says:

"Those who hide the proofs and the guidance which We revealed, after We had made it clear in the scripture, on them shall be Allah's curse and the curse of those who are entitled to curse." (TMQ 2:15 9)

Allah's Messenger (saw) informed us of the status and importance of the scholars when he (saw) said, "Whomever Al1ah wants goodness for, he makes him understand the Deen (Islam)." [Al-Bukhari]

He (saw) also said, "The scholars on earth are like the stars in the sky. People are guided by them in the darkness of the land and the sea. If the stars are covered, people would get lost." [Ahmad]

So we are told by the Messenger (saw) himself that scholars play an important role in guiding the Ummah and championing its cause. They are most needed nowadays at a time when Islam is no longer implemented, shirk of legislation is the law of Muslims, division and fragmentation pervade the Ummah, and the Western nations dominate over us. They are desperately needed now to show the Ummah how to re-establish Islam, unite as one body and take control of the international arena. It is the scholars who must lead the Ummah in its struggle against the tyrant rulers who not only insist on implementing western laws on Muslims, enslaving them to imperialist masters, but also imprisoning, torturing and killing those who want to simply live by Islam. The Islamic scholars of the past played such a leading role. They always stood firm and favoured Islam and the well-being of the Muslim Ummah over any other interest, and sometimes even at the expense of their own lives. They feared no one but Allah (swt) and thus they spoke the truth with absolutely no compromise of Islam. This was especially the case when it came to the rulers and how they conducted their affairs.

Muhammad (saw) said, "Whoever sees an unjust ruler breaking the prohibition of Allah, breaking His covenant, disagreeing with the Sunnah of the Prophet, committing sins and creating animosity against the servants ofAI1ah, and he does not say or do anything against it, then it is the right of Allah to put him where he belongs (hell)." (reported by At Tabbai in At-Tarikh and Ibn Al-Atheer in AI-Kamel).

Muhammad (saw) also said, "There will be unjust rulers who cause hardship to their people. Whoever went along with their lies and helped them with their injustice, he is not from me nor am I from him, and he will not drink from the Al-Hawd (pond)" (Ahmad, An-Nisa'ii, At-Tirmithi).

The following accounts are examples of how the scholars remained steadfast to Islam and did not remain silent in correcting the rulers of their time. Their love of Allah was far greater than any fear of torture the ruler could administer.

1 - The scholar Imam Sufiyan At-Thawri said "when AI-Mahdi Abu Jaa'far AI-Mansoor (the Khalifah came to Hajj, he asked for me. So [his men] watched the house and took me at night. When I was before him, he sat me close to him. He said, "Why don't you stay close to us where we can consult you in our affair. Whatever you tell us to do, we will comply with it." I [Sufiyan] said to him, "How much did you spend on this trip [for Hajj] of yours." He said, "I don't know. I have trustees and appointees [to take care of these matters]. "I said, "What excuse will you have tomorrow when you stand in front of Allah (swt), and He asks you about it?" (Sufiyan then related the example of Omar Ibn Al-Khattab). Omar Ibn Al-Khattab asked his servant, when he performed Hajj, for how much did he spend on their trip? He said, "O Ameer of the believers, I spent 18 Dinars." Omar said, "We overspent from the Muslims treasury" (Sufiyan then added) You know, Ibn Mas'ood reported that the Prophet said, "A person who spends from the wealth of Allah and His Messenger [extravagantly], will be rewarded hell." One of Abu Ja'faar's aids said (to Sufiyan) "You say this to the Ameer of the believers!?" Safiyan answered him, with the dignity and strength of the believers: "Silent! It is Haman (minister of Pharaoh) who destroyed Pharaoh and Pharaoh destroyed Haman. (Meaning the one who gave advice and the one who should follow the advice destroyed one another when they did not do as they should.)."

2 - Hajeej Az-Zayyat was a scholar at the time of Hajjaj who was a tyrant governor of Iraq. Al-Hajjaj asked him, "What do you think of me?" Az-Zayyat replied, "I say you are one of the enemies of Allah. You break Allah's laws and you kill for mere doubt." Al-Hajjaj asked him, "What do you say about the Ameer of the believers Abdul Malik bin Marwan?" He said, "He is a bigger sinner than you. You are but one of his sins." Al-Hajjaj ordered him to be tortured. They split bamboo sticks and tied his flesh with it. Then they started splitting the sticks tearing his flesh with it. He died shaheed. He was only 18 years old; may Allah (swt) have mercy on him.

3 - Sulayman bin Abdul Malik stopped by Medinah on his way to Mecca. He sent for a scholar named Abu Hazem. Once Abu Hazem entered, Sulayman asked him, "Why do we hate death?" Abu Hazem replied, "Because you ruined your hereafter and took care of your life. So you hate to go from luxury to ruin. Then after giving him sincere advice, Sulayman asked him, "What do you say of me?" Abu Hazem said, "Do not push me to answer." He said, "It is advice. You must tell me." Abu Hazem said, "Your forefathers overpowered the Muslims and took over the ruling position without the Muslims consultation or approval. They also killed a great number of them. You should know their behaviour and what was thought of them. One of the people said, "How could you say this!" Abu Hazim said, "Allah took the covenant from the scholars to explain things to the people and not to hide (true knowledge)"

Imam Malik bin Anas stated: "It is a duty upon every Muslim whom Allah has given some knowledge or fiqh to confront any ruler, command him to do good, forbid him from evil. This differentiates the scholar from others when they approach a ruler. This is the status that is not surpassed."

The reader should compare the positions taken by the scholars of the past against unjust, yet legitimate Khalifahs and governors and those taken by nowadays scholars. Al-Jaahith reported in Al-Byan wat Tabiyeen that Muhammad (saw) was asked, "0 Messenger of AI1ah, who is the worst people?" He replied, "The scholars, if they become corrupt."

Imam Ali is reported to have said, "Two types of people I cannot tolerate are - a scholar who is shameless and an ignorant worshiper. The ignorant worshipper fools the people with his worship and the scholar with his shamelessness."

If these scholars were true Islamic scholars they would show the people by example, standing by the Islamic rule, even if it costs them their lives. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal realised his role as a scholar who is to show the Ummah that the Muslim is to fear none but Allah. He stated, "If the scholar uses Tuqyah (concealment of knowledge for one's own protection) in his answers, the ignorant person does not know, when will the Truth become known!"

These scholars have misled many people, especially those who have taken them as idols without knowing it. While denouncing imitation, they keep repeating what their scholars say, rejecting the tangible. We remind our brothers and sisters of a basic part of our Aqeedah called al-walaa wal- baraa' (allegiance to the believers and its supporters and denouncing the disbelievers and their supporters).

When a ruler rules by Kufr and scholars support him, what is their Islamic verdict? And what is our position vis-à-vis them? 0 Allah, have we conveyed the Message? 0 Allah be our witness!
Imam AI-Ghazali in Ihya'a Uloom id-Deen, volume 7, page 72 said, "This was the way and tradition of the scholars: commanding good and forbidding evil. They cared less for the might of the rulers. They depended on Allah's blessing to protect them and accepted Allah's rule of giving them the Shahadah. When their intentions were pure, their words softened the hard hearts. But now, greed has tied up the scholars tongues and made them quiet. Even if they talk, their speech will help none of the affairs at hand and thus they will fail. Had they told the truth and intended to give knowledge its due right, they would have succeeded. The corruption of the people is due to the corruption of the rulers; the corrupt rulers exist due to the corruption of the scholars (for the scholars are not speaking out against these rulers); and the corruption of the scholars is due to the love of wealth and power.

Whoever is dominated by the love of this world, he is so preoccupied that he is unable to question the general public. If he cannot even question the general public of their duty, then how will he have the capacity and the courage to question the rulers and those in higher positions?"

work

2010-01-19T09:52:00.000Z

It has today become an indisputable reality that this Ummah yearns for the return of the Islamic Khilafah. She has witnessed much that solidifies this desire. Today, we find that Allah (swt) has brought back the desire in the hearts of the Muslims and this Ummah to return to the rule of Islam. Amongst them are those who are willing to dedicate their time and effort for the service of Islam. This article seeks to explain how such people can work for Islam and work for its noble aims.

Knowledge before action
Hazzam bin Hakeem narrated from his uncle from the Messenger of Allah (saw) who said: “You are in a time of many jurisprudents (fuqaha), few speakers/lecturers, many who give and few who ask; so action in this time is better than knowledge. There will soon come a time of few jurisprudents, many speakers, many who beg and few who give; so knowledge in this time is better than action.”

This noble advice by the Messenger (saw) builds the principle that Islam has always placed knowledge before action. It is saddening to see that amongst some workers for Islam, action comes before knowledge. This is highly dangerous, since we saw at the beginning of the last century a plethora of patriotic movements rising up against the colonialist occupation only to find that when the colonialists left they implemented the same secular models in their lands. Also we find today, under the banner of Islam, some Muslim governments conducting “experiments” for Islamisation, even though the Qur’an and Sunnah showed in detail the Islamic system, and this has been explained in many volumes of books.

Islam has placed knowledge and thinking as a precondition for action, and this ensures that the action undertaken is the correct action and that the action is according to Islam and is the correct action to achieve the aim. But the question may be asked - what type of knowledge is required? Here are a few areas that anyone working for Islam should seek to understand:

i. To gain an understanding of Islam and its basic concepts. These concepts need to start with the Aqa’id (belief) because this is the basis of all correct actions. A Muslim must be convinced of his basis, because under all strong structures lay a strong, solid foundation. We have witnessed, with great sadness, excellent people with much energy working for the goals of Islam one day and then leaving this work the other because their foundations were weak and all they had was zeal and desire rather than sound knowledge.

ii. To understand the Shari’ah rules. Islam has made it an obligation for a Muslim to understand the Hukm Shari’ concerning his actions. So a Muslim must be aware of his obligations. It is incorrect for a Muslim to work for Islam, yet fall short of abiding by the rules of Islam in his personal life. Again we witness with sadness many who openly call out against ‘Western culture’ yet in their own lives are engrossed with its films and music, soaps and trivialities the same West gives them. In understanding the Shari’ah rules, one must make sure he or she does not limit themselves to just a specific area which they are inclined to. Rather Islam needs to be taken completely.

iii. To understand the main points of Kufr. This area is unobvious to many. The Messenger (saw) used to know the thoughts of the Quraish so that he could speak out against them. Also Allah (swt) encouraged this, so in the Qur’an He (swt) points out on many occasions the contradictions that existed with the Mushrikeen. Today the Muslim needs to be aware of the dominant ideology, capitalism, its components and its contradiction with Islam. Again this knowledge requires more than just a superficial understanding such that the call of Islam becomes a general unconvincing call. When Allah (swt) says, "Say 'This is my way: I call to Allah with sure knowledge, I and whosoever follows me. And Glorified and Exalted is Allah. And I am not of the Mushrikeen" [TMQ Yusuf: 108], he commands the knowledge to be precise. Today we need to understand globalisation, democracy, freedom, interfaith dialogue, and secularism amongst many other ideas that are invalid and cannot be adopted by the Muslims.

iv. Knowledge of the correct Islamic work. If a Muslim were to study Islam correctly he would find that Islam has placed the authority as the most essential organ to safeguard the rules of Islam and the Muslims. This necessitates that in the absence of this authority work is required to bring it back. The Khilafah is the only correct structure Islam has laid down, the Messenger (saw) said, “after me there will be no Prophet, but there will be Khulafah and they will number many”. So the correct Islamic work is to call for the Khilafah. That means to work to bring back its return. This work by definition is a political work, and thus requires an aware Islamic political party.

Apart from what has been mentioned above, a Muslim must seek knowledge continuously and must always strive to excel in his or her understanding.

Carrying Da’wa
If a Muslim was to engage in gaining knowledge he would realise quickly that knowledge without action is like a donkey with books on its back. This knowledge would be of no use to the people no matter how much he gained and how much of a faqih he became. Islam has said that the most essential component in carrying Islam and bringing back the Khilafah is to carry Da’wa. That is to invite people. Allah (swt) says, "Invite to the way of your Lord..." [TMQ An-Nahl: 125]. Also Islam has mandated that Da’wa should be carried immediately after knowledge. Never in the history of Islam has a Da’wa carrier stayed at home after being affected by Islam. The stories of the Sahabah (ra) are all an evidence for this. Also the Messenger (saw) said, “Convey from me even if it is one ayah”. The following needs to be kept in mind when carrying Da’wa.

i. Da’wa should be a focused work. The Muslims need to be told in a clear, unambiguous way that the many problems we see are due to the absence of the Khilafah and that Islam demands the Da’wa carrier to discuss this issue. Muslims must expose the plans of the West in our lands, their agents in the form of our leaders and all that stems from their corrupt ideology that distances the Muslims from uniting once again under this strong leadership such as the erroneous concepts of nationalism, pragmatism, gradualism and the like.

ii. A Muslim should not talk about what he does not know. The Messenger (saw) always sought revelation from Allah (swt) before he spoke a word. This forms a general rule that one cannot speak out of ignorance.

iii. Da’wa should be carried purely for the pleasure or Allah (swt). A Da’wa carrier must not seek benefit or position from carrying Da’wa. Rather he must do this purely for the sake of Allah (swt). This principle, that is to carry Da’wa for the pleasure of Allah (swt) if understood, will ensure the Da’wa carrier does not stray from his path and change his argument to suit the people.

iv. When carrying Da’wa nothing should interfere with the correct idea and the conveyance of it. The Messenger (saw) was the best example, and he conveyed this message without allowing egoism or personality into the discussion.

v. The call should be carried without compromise. It is not permissible to change the message in order to please the people or to win a temporary supporter. Rather this call needs to be frank, carried with wisdom, that is using the best of styles but conveying the haq (truth) completely. Furthermore the ideas that are carried must not be reconciled with the Western ideology and its standards. It must rather be derived purely from Islam.

vi. The carrier of the Da’wa must be ready to face the trials and tribulations that those who oppose it will place in his or her path. The only way to prepare for this is to have the clear knowledge of the key Islamic ideas such as al Qadaa wal Qadr, or Rizq (sustenance) being from Allah (swt), or Al-Tawakkul (reliance on Allah [swt]) amongst other ideas. Also they must equip themselves with the knowledge of the previous Prophets (as) and their companions and how they bore hardships and finally they must be close to the Qur’an as there is not any other book but this that has the ability to motivate, inspire and energise.

Working with an Islamic Party
Allah (swt) has made carrying Da’wa Fard upon every Muslim. He (swt) has also obligated upon the community to establish at least one group to call to al-Khair, that is Islam, to enjoin al-Maroof (all that is good) and forbid al-Munkar (all that is evil).

Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an,

“Let there arise from amongst you a band of people, who call to Al-Khair, enjoining al-maroof and forbidding al-munkar. And they are those who will gain success.” [TMQ Ale-Imran: 103]

This ayah obligates the establishment of a group. If one was to study the nature of the task to re-establish the Khilafah one would find that for this work to be effective, there needs to be a collective effort. Furthermore the Messenger (saw) worked with the Sahabah (ra) as a group to change the Kufr society and transform it to an Islamic one.

There are some points to consider before choosing which group or groups are correct to ensure that the action undertaken is one with full awareness. As with all actions, Allah (swt) will account us for obedience to him and so to just choose any group would be impermissible, rather the one or ones that fulfils the obligation pointed out in this noble ayah must be considered. These are the points:

i. This group must call to Islam. Allah (swt) mentions in this ayah the word ‘Al Khair’, which is Islam. So if they were a nationalistic, democratic, capitalistic, socialist group etc… then they would not fulfil the command in this ayah. In fact joining groups who are based upon these foreign ideas or who call for such ideas would be sinful, as to call for these ideas and to gather around them is haram.

ii. This group must call to the vital issue, as defined by Islam. The vital issue today is the re-establishment of the Khilafah. It is the Khilafah that will implement Islam, and without it, it would be impossible for the society to adhere to all of the laws of Islam. By definition, calling for the Khilafah is a political work, as it involves changing the society to establish an authority and removing the present authorities based upon non-Islam. So this group must be a political group or party.

iii. It must have a clear method of affiliation. It has been observed that many groups are tarnished with infighting, strands, wings and the like. This is due to the members of these groups not having a unified aim and sets of ideas. Rather the people are often chosen because they show some sort of enthusiasm to do work regardless of them carrying the same ideas and aims.

iv. The group must have a ‘culturing process’. That is they must have a way of developing newcomers to the group as well as established members. This culturing must be taken seriously and all should need to go through it. This ensures they are built and developed with the Islamic culture, purifying their intentions and thoughts, building their concepts and strengthening their resolve. So the initial zeal and enthusiasm is transferred to a sound knowledge and consistent work. It is saddening to see the many who begin to work for Islam and then stop this work; this can generally be attributed to a lack of culturing with Islam in this group.

v. This group must be clear in its language, and bold in its actions - to enjoin the Maroof and forbid the Munkar requires from the Muslim to challenge all that is wrong and uphold all that is right.

vi. The group must study the reality clearly and comprehensively. Islam mandated that the reality in which the group works must be understood. This includes the study of the thoughts and ideas that exist in society as well as the plots and plans of the Kafiroon and her agent rulers in our lands. To just have a generalised understanding of the reality would not allow the people to understand the true nature of the problem we face.

vii. The group must not look down upon the Ummah nor abuse them for not working with them or not adhering to Islam. Rather it should seek to lift up their spirits, energise them, wake them from their slumber and bring about this change. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “Whoever says the people are destroyed are the most destroyed of the people.” [Sahih Muslim].

viii. The group should have a strong atmosphere that gels the members together. This atmosphere must be a pure one and it should be based upon seeking the pleasure of Allah (swt). We witness many groups that exist in the West that are run like a company, where the members have to continuously be forced to undertake actions. This is contrary to the way of Islam where the strength of the idea makes a person willingly want to sacrifice his time and effort. The Messenger of Allah (saw) wrote in a letter to Abdullah Ibn Jahsh, when he sent him to lead an expedition to keep an eye on Quraysh at Nakhlah, between Makkah and Ta’if: “Do not coerce anyone of your companions to proceed with you, and go forth with my order with those who follow you.”

These three points; gaining knowledge, carrying da’wa and working with an Islamic Party would be the practical way to work for Khilafah. So after this, we would say join this work with the sincere ones who seek to achieve the highest place in Jannah. Strengthen your resolve, for the Ummah yearns for change, and this change requires work. May our deeds be multiplied in reward in the eyes of Allah (swt) and may we become the ones who will be the “beloved” to the Messenger (saw)!

The Messenger Muhammad (saw) said:
“Islam began as something strange, and it shall return to being something strange, so give glad tidings to the strangers.” It was asked, "Who are those strangers, O Messenger of Allah?" He replied, “Those that correct the people when they become corrupt.” This is the narration of at-Tabaraani in his al-Kabeer.

Political Awareness of the Hijra

2009-10-17T12:48:00.001+01:00

The Muslims ought to be reminded of the events that took place to signify the Hijra. And what is incumbent is to reveal its essence so as to make the Muslims truly understand its meaning and significance as opposed to a mere spiritual tradition that is inherited like the other religions, or the events that resulted in a mere change in the recording of the calendar, much like the calendar of the christians. In order to portray its vital (ideological) aspects, that which is not discussed today due to its threat to the present regimes, it is necessary to first undertake a study of the Hijra from the authentic sources of seerah, and then to derive the meaning from it. The meaning that will draw attention to the real issues of today - that Islam is both a spiritual and political Doctrine - such that by it the generation of a momentum to revive the Muslim ummah will spring from it, and at the same time all will be made aware of it.

A study from the authentic sources of seerah

The Messenger of Allah (saw) ordered the Muslims in Makka to migrate to Medina in small parties, and so they began to migrate either individually or in small groups.

As for the political awareness of Quraysh with respect to the Muslims Ibn Ishaq states, "When Quraysh saw that Muhammad (saw), had assembled a party, and had support from elsewhere other than from the Quraysh and Makka, from a town other than theirs, and witnessed Muhammad's (saw) companions moving out to join these forces, they realised that the Muslims had found a new home with them and had acquired their protection. Quraysh were concerned that Muhammad would also leave them, since they knew that he had decided to do battle with them."

As for the actual Quraysh response to this situation ibn Ishaq states, "Quraysh were concerned that the Messenger of Allah (saw), would leave and join them (those from a different tribe), since they knew that he had decided to do battle with them. They therefore, gathered in Dar al-Nadwa - the House of Assembly - the home of Qusayy bin Kilab, where all their top-level decisions were made."

According to ibn Kathir, "Related from Abdullah bin Abu Najih, from Mujahid bin Jabr, that Abdullah ibn Abbas narrates the following. "The day arrived when they agreed to meet to enter their assembly to discuss what to do about the Messenger of Allah (saw). That day is known as yawm al-zahma (The Day of Gathering), and on it Shaytan, came before them in the form of a Shaikh from Nejd dressed in a heavy cloak. He stood at the door of the house, and when they saw him they asked who he was. Shaytan replied, "I come from Nejd, from the highlands, and I have heard why you have agreed to meet, and I have come to listen to what you say and perhaps offer some advice or comment." They invited him in. He entered the meeting where the Quraysh leadership were assembled. They consisted of Utba, Shayba, Abu Sufyan, Tai'ma bin Adi, Jubayr bin al-Harith, Abu al-Bakhtari bin Hisham, Zam'a bin al-Aswad, Hakim bin Hizam, Abu Jahl, Nabih and Munabbih, sons of al-Hajjaj, and Umayya bin Khalaf, along with various others of their supporters from Quraysh. They reminded one another of what they had experienced from the behaviour of Muhammad (saw), and agreed that they felt insecure (danger) from the possibility that he (saw), the Muslims, together with their material support (the chiefs of Medina), might make an attack upon them. Having discussed the issue, one of them said to have been Al-Bakhtari bin Hisham suggested, "Put him in irons and gaol him, then wait for him to have the same fate that befell poets before him, such as Zubayr and al-Nabigha. He would die as they had." But the Nejdi Shaikh objected saying, "No that is not a good plan. If you do shut him up, news of him will get right past the door you have locked on him and reach his supporters. They will promptly attack you and release him and then increase until they overcome you. That is not a good idea." They consulted further, and one suggested, "Let's exile him from our territory. Once he has gone we'll be rid of him and we'll be able to restore our affairs as they were before." The Nejdi Shaikh again observed, "No. That's not a good idea for you. You know how sweet his talk is, and his reasoning, and how he convinces others of his message. If you do that you'd have no security against him going to live with some Arab tribe and using his speech and discourse to get them to follow him. Then he would lead them against you and perhaps defeat or dispossess you and do what they like with you. No, think of something else." Abu Jahl then said, "I have an idea that hasn't occurred to you yet." "What is it?" They asked him. "I think we should select one young man from each tribe, and someone who is strong, of excellent lineage and reputation as a leader. We should give each one a sharp sword and they would go to him and use the swords to strike him in unison. They would kill him and we would be rid of him. If they do this, his blood would be spread over all the tribes. And Banu Abd Manaf will not be able to do battle against them all. So they will accept blood money which we can pay them." The Nejdi Shaikh commented, "What he says is right. This is the right idea, and no other." Having agreed upon this the assembly broke up.

Jibreel (as) then came to Muhammad (saw), and told him, "Do not sleep tonight in the bed you usually use." When it was fully dark that night the Quraysh men gathered outside his (saw) door waiting for him (saw) to sleep so that they could attack him. Having seen where they were, the prophet (saw) said to Ali (ra), "Sleep on my bed, and wrap yourself in this green cloak of mine from Hadramawt; sleep in it. You'll not come to any harm from them." The prophet (saw) was in the habit of sleeping in that cloak of his."

Yazid bin Abu Yazid relates from Muhammad bin Ka'b al-Qurazi, "The men met there at his (saw) door, Abu Jahl, who was among them said, "Muhammad claims that if you follow him you'll become kings of the Arabs and the non-Arabs alike. Then you'll be given life after death and be provided with gardens like those of Jordan. If you don't do that, then, he says, you will be slaughtered, given life after death but be put into a hellfire where you will be burned." The prophet (saw) then picked up a handful of dirt, saying, "Yes. I do say that. And you are one of them!" Then Allah (swt) took away their sight from them and they could not see him. He began sprinkling the dirt on to their heads while he (saw) recited the following verses from the Qur'an. "Ya-sin. By the Qur'an, the wise. You are among those who are sent forth upon a straight path", upto the verse, "We have placed a barrier before them and a barrier behind them, and have covered them over so they cannot see" [TMQ Ya-Sin; 36:3-9]. Every single man among them had dirt thrown on his head. He (saw) then left and went where he (saw) so wished. Someone who had not been there with these men arrived and asked, "What are you waiting here for?" They replied, "For Muhammad." "God damn you! Muhammad just came out to you and he did not leave any single one of you without throwing dirt on your head. He then left and went elsewhere. Can't you see what has happened to you?" Each man then placed his hand on his head and found dirt there. Looking closely they saw Ali (ra) on the bed covered in the green cloak of Muhammad (saw). They stayed there until morning; when Ali (ra) arose from the bed they said, "By God, what he told us must have been true!"" Ibn Ishaq says that among other verses Allah (swt) revealed the following. "And when the disbelievers plotted to confine, kill or exile you they made plans and He made plans, and He is the best Planner of all" [TMQ Al-Anfal; 8:30]."

Finally, Allah (swt) gave His (swt) Messenger the permission to migrate. "Say: O Allah, make my place of arrival good and make my place of departure good. And grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself" [TMQ Bani Isra'il; 17:80]" And ibn Kathir states that the event marks the beginning of the Islamic era as was agreed upon by the sahaba (ra), during the rule of Umar (ra) - Al Hijra.

All praises are due upon Allah the Almighty (swt). This was the move to Medina (which was also known as Dar al-Hijra), and it proved to be a turning point in the entire history of the ummah of Muhammad (saw), whereupon the Islamic State was established as a political entity that would influence the affairs of the world to come. The ideology was firmly established both in concept and in practical existence, and indeed this State, the very State that Muhammad (saw) himself established, continued in existence until its demise in 1924 at the hands of the colonialist disbelievers and their agent Mustapha Kemal.

It is here that we can make the following observations and deduce the political awareness of the Hijra in light of our present times.

1. The attempt to kill the Messenger of Allah (saw)

We learn from the seerah that the attempt to kill the Messenger of Allah (swt) reflects the fact that what the prophet's (saw) call represented was a grave danger to the very existence of the Quraysh such that their very survival was in question - the survival of that regional power. That one man and his (saw) companions, warranted elimination altogether, provides evidence that there was a danger to the Quraysh of the gravest proportions. So, what was this danger? What was the threat that Muhammad (saw) posed that could not be contained? That it became the issue of survival (life and death) of Quraysh? What was it that the kings and rulers of his (saw) day perceived? Here follows an explanation.

The key in understanding this is to realise that the prophet's (saw) call was not new to Quraysh at the time when they decided to kill him (saw). The verdict to kill him (saw) was issued at the gathering in Dar al-Nadwa, and immediately they moved to implement that plan that very same night. The prophet (saw) migrated to Medina and ibn Kathir mentions that, "Bukhari states that, "Matar bin al-Fadl related to us, quoting Rawh, quoting Hisham quoting Ikrama, from ibn Abbas who said, "The prophet's (saw) migration took place in the month of Rabi' al-Awwal in the thirteenth year of his (saw) mission, on a Monday.""" And ibn Ishaq stated that the decision to kill the prophet (saw) was issued only a day before. This means that the decision to kill him (saw) and the migration sequentially coincided and thus both events occurred in the thirteenth year of prophethood.

So the verdict of killing came only after thirteen years of experiencing the prophet's call in which his (saw) methodology was explicit in politically challenging the leadership in Makka, and where he (saw) called for its destruction and termination. Why did they only now after thirteen years of experiencing this, decide to kill him if his (saw) explicit call was not secret and his (saw) intentions for power and leadership were not concealed? The clear answer and explanation lies in the realisation by the Quraysh leadership, which lies in two significant factors:

a) The response of the strong factions within the society in Medina - namely the Nuqaba (Generals and Officers) - and,
b) In the implications of the migration of the Messenger of Allah (saw) to a society that had been prepared and displayed a readiness to accept the full implementation of the Islamic Ideology.

As for the first point, it reveals that the second pledge of Aqabah had been taken which meant that the ones in whose hands the real power lay, accepted rather than rejected the aim of the Messenger of Allah (saw) to establish himself (saw) as the head of that society, thereby establishing an Islamic State.

According to ibn Ishaq, who related from Ma'bad, from 'Abd Allah, from his father Ka'b bin Malik who said, "When we met at the defile we waited for the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he (saw) did come. When they sat down, the first to speak was Al 'Abbas bin 'Abd Al Muttalib who said, "O Khazraj! Muhammad holds with us a position of which you are aware. We protect him from our people who think about him as we do. He is respected among his people and safe in his own town. But he is determined to join up with you. If you think you will keep trust with him in the invitation you have given him and will protect him from his enemies, then it is up to you to accept your responsibilities. But if you think you might hand him over and abandon him after he has joined you, then leave him right now. He does have respect and protection among his own people and in his town." We replied, "We hear what you say. Speak to us O Messenger of Allah (saw)! And take for yourself and for your Lord whatever you want." The Messenger of Allah (saw) then spoke, recited the Qur'an, invited people to Islam. He (saw) said, "I ask you to pledge that you will defend me as you do your women and children." Al Bara' bin Ma'mur then took him (saw) by the hand and said, "Yes indeed, we will! I swear by Him who sent you with the Truth, protect you as we do our women from whatever threatens them. We pledge ourselves to you O Messenger of Allah, and we are, I swear it, warriors from father to son over many generations." While Al Bara' was speaking to the Messenger (saw) he was interrupted by Abu Al Haytham bin Al Tayyihan, who said, "O Messenger of Allah, we have certain ties to others - meaning the jews - and if we break these, we are concerned that if Allah gives you victory, you might return to your own people and abandon us." The Messenger (saw) smiled and said, "If your blood be sought, our blood shall be sought, and your destruction is mine as well. I am of you and you are of me. I will battle those you battle and make peace with those with those whom you make peace." The Messenger of Allah (saw) then said, "Bring forth twelve from among you to be nuqaba (leaders vis-à-vis commanders) to take charge."

With this event, the Quraysh became concerned at the progress of the prophet (saw). For ibn Ishaq states, "When Quraysh saw that Muhammad (saw) had assembled a Party, and had supporters from others than their own people and from a town other than theirs, and saw his (saw) companions moving out to join these others, they realised that the Muslims had found a new security with them and had acquired their protection. Quraysh were concerned that Muhammad (saw) would leave and join them, since they knew that he (saw) had decided to do battle with them. They therefore gathered in the Dar al-Nadwa, the House of Assembly, the home of Qusayy bin Kilab, where all their decisions were made. They discussed there what they should do with him (saw) since they now feared him more than ever."

This is especially so due to the status of those of Medina who represented the strong and powerful factions, and the fact that their Chiefs of Staff gave unequivocal support to the establishment of the Islamic State. And the seerah indicates that they were distinguished amongst the general masses in society, in that the power and control of affairs lay in their hands.
So the significance here of the successful contacting of the strong factions, (that is the Generals and Officers of Yathrib), is that it was a definitive move in establishing the Islamic authority, and therefore the ruling. Since, the ones in whose hands the power and control lay had been won over in a powerful manner, it clearly signified a departure from the days of intellectual and political struggle in Makka, to a decisive move into a completely different phase of the d'awa, that of taking power and implementing the Ruling of Islam.

As for the second point - the implication of Statehood of the Islamic message - the significance is in the fact that he (saw) would receive not only protection, but also power, the basis of which would have been the Islamic Ideology. There, in Medina, if he (saw) were allowed to migrate, would receive no obstacles in the path of establishing the Islamic Ideology, and since his (saw) aims were not only confined to Medina, but rather to a return to Makka, but this time under quite different circumstances to what the Quraysh had perceived of him. For if he (saw) were successful in the migration, and the building and consolidation of the new society in Medina - namely the establishment of an Islamic State - he would be a force and a power to be reckoned with. Thus, the migration to Medina would establish the permanency of the Islamic threat like never before, with the formation of a new State - an Islamic one - present and active in the political arena to manage every affair of the Muslims via the vehicle of an Islamic State.

The fact that the prophet (saw) and the Muslims would achieve an Islamic State and therefore an authority in ruling is not only a fact that can be comprehended from the seerah books, but also from the revelation of the Almighty (swt). For when Allah (swt) revealed, "Say: O Allah, make my place of arrival good and make my place of departure good. And grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself" [TMQ Bani Isra'il; 17:80] Ibn Kathir's tafseer states about this, "Qatadah said about this, "The phrase 'place of arrival' referred to Medina, while the words 'place of departure', referred to his (saw) migration from Makka. The words 'grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself' referred to Allah's Book and to the ruling by what Allah had revealed." It was Allah (swt) that had taught this prayer to the prophet (saw), and thus the migration was a migration to a place of authority and ruling whereby the implementation of the Ideology would practically exist.""

Furthermore, when Allah revealed concerning the migration to Medina in Surah Al An'am,

"They are those whom We gave the Book, the Ruling (Al Hukm), and prophethood. But if they disbelieve therein, then indeed We, have entrusted it to a people who are not disbelievers therein." [TMQ Al-An'am; 6:89]

Ibn Kathir states in his tafsir, ""They are those whom We gave the Book, the Ruling (Al Hukm), and prophethood." It means We have bestowed these bounties (the Qur'an, the rule and authority, and the prophethood), on them, as a mercy for the servants, and out of our kindness for creation. "But if they disbelieve therein", refers to the three things, the Book, the rule and the authority, and the prophet, and 'they' refers to the people of Quraysh according to ibn Abbas, Sa'id bin al Musayyib, Ad Dahhak, Qatadah, As Suddi, and others. "Then indeed We, have entrusted it to a people who are not disbelievers therein." Means, if the Quraysh and the rest of the people of the earth - Arabs and non-Arabs, illiterate, and the People of the Book - disbelieve in these (the Book, the Ruling, and the prophethood), then We have entrusted them to another people, the Muhajirun and the Ansar, and those who follow their lead until the Day of Judgement."

The fact and undeniable reality that the Messenger of Allah (saw) upon migration would have meant the establishment of an Islamic State ruling by what Allah (swt) has revealed, is now made clear, and provides explanation of the significance, political implications, and fears of the migration of the prophet (saw) in the eyes of the Quraysh leadership.

So, the Quraysh realised that the threat was very real indeed, that the prophet (saw) and the Muslims had very little way to go before the stage of taking power and implementing the Ideology comprehensively. Thus a successful conclusion to the phases of d'awa undertaken in Makka. It would mean the birth of the Islamic State, and with it, it would bring the Islamic Ideology into existence. They (the Quraysh), realised the importance of ruling and authority, and what it would mean, and what it would enable the Muslims to do. They knew the implications of the establishment of the Islamic State, and they feared it and it occupied their concerns. So much did they realise this, that nothing would have provided for an effective measure but to kill him (saw). And they understood the implications of his (saw) entry into Medina which explains that they did not settle for any other measure in their meeting at Dar an-Nadwa, but to kill him (saw). This is what the establishment of the Islamic State meant to Quraysh, the opponents of the Islamic Ideology!

This is the indication from the books of seerah as to the motive to kill the Messenger of Allah (saw) at this particular point in time. It is an indication that even the opponents of Islam understood the implications of an Islamic State present in life's affairs.

O honourable ummah! It would not be fitting for you, after even your enemies then had realised the significance of an Islamic State, for you to neglect its importance in the affairs of the Muslims, and for you to neglect its call. Neither should you allow those elements who claim to be from among us to seduce you into thinking that the Islamic State is not of a major significance in Islam and to the Muslim ummah. As for you, the sincere mighty d'awa carriers, know that the escalation of forces and the intensifying of energies directed towards preventing your work from achieving its results, should not be a source of depression for you, but rather should be seen as a conducive sign that indeed you are on the right path in the way of your Lord and guided by the correct evidences for its method. For the opponents of Islam today, too recognise the nearness of your goals and the impending victory that is about to be manifest, and the readiness of the Muslim ummah in supporting the call to re-establish the mighty Khilafah State. And such recognition by the enemies of this Deen, pushes them to address this powerful momentum by inventing new and desperate measures against you (with creative styles and elaborate means), whether they are directly from the enemies themselves - namely the disbelieving colonialist nations - or indirectly, from their agents and faithful and loyal supporters.

Just as the meetings, strategies, and plans took place at Dar al-Nadwa then, so do the meetings, strategies and plans occur today that convey such urgency and panic! Their sole purpose is to obstruct the changing affairs of the Muslim ummah and the success of the sincere d'awa carriers that are among them due to their successful and powerful progression. Do not be fooled into thinking otherwise, for they would desire your blindness and your dumbness!

They have today organised a crusade with the banner of 'fighting terrorism' but the Muslims realised before anyone that not only would it be them who would feel the brunt, but they would be the sole targets of their Pharonic expression. And it is that which the Pharaoh then feared from the people, that the arrogant Pharonic American state fears today. This in itself is a proof of the fear that they harbour and the nearness of the impending victory.

What is seen today of their strategies and plans is but a continuation of the plans that were concocted almost one-thousand years ago. They have convened many conferences and meetings. They have formulated many plans and strategies against the Muslims. And they too, like the Quraysh before them, are not unfamiliar with the Islamic Ideology, its State, and the carriers of its call. Thus, in the early conference of 1095 C.E the Europeans were roused by the similar propaganda and hysteria of today, and launched the crusades against the Muslims which ultimately led to their defeat and failure. Then, they convened again to assault the Muslims this time by a missionary and cultural invasion to weaken the Islamic ideological concepts. Then followed, the political invasion, the destruction of the Khilafah State in 1924, the imposition of the agent rulers, and the division of Muslim land. Even after all of this, the aspiration of ridding the world of Islam and its mighty state still did not materialise. So then came the creation of the State of Israel to keep the entire middle-east region under colonial influence, and then followed the Gulf War. These plans to keep these regions that are inhabited by Muslims and the sincere movements under the might of the colonial powers, and to ensure that their affairs remain under their control.

So, even after all of these further attempts, and further attempts after that to block Islam and the Muslims from rising from the rubble, the Muslims have only increased in their energy and have crystallised their concepts, to the extent that almost every single inch of Muslim land is crying out for the return of the ruling by what Allah (swt) has revealed. Only yesterday was it that despite this continuation of the crusade against Islam, calls to establish the Islamic State were being echoed from not only the Middle-East, Central Asia, The Fertile Crescent (Al-Sham), as one might naturally expect, but also other regions despite their geographical obscurity such as Nigeria, Indonesia, Philippines, and Gambia. This is despite the fact that their Pharonic attempts have been methodical to the highest precision, they have lasted for a millennium, and unquantifiable resources have been expended.

Indeed a new episode in this ongoing saga is what occurred in the aftermath of the events of September 11th, which signified and exposed the disposition of the colonialist US. It became clear from the news events or to the one who pursues the news that an attack in the Central Asian area was imminent prior to the events of September 11th, especially since the Taliban became independent from US control. So, in order to prevent the region falling into instability, especially with what was transpiring in Central Asia and Pakistan (which controlled Afghanistan) in terms of the call to re-establish the Khilafah State and the level to which it had progressed, the events of September 11th was used as the justification to enter these lands directly and quickly. Thus, apart from securing other interests in the region, the only way the Pharonic US state could guarantee that Islam and its State did not fill the political vacuum by the ones who truly crystallised the idea of Khilafah, was to directly colonise the entire area by force, fast, albeit by using the deceitful justification of September 11th the response to which was no doubt conjured up by the US think tanks and the rest of her Capitalist political medium.

Thus, the desperation and panic emitted by the disbelieving US Pharonic state from what they fear if the Muslims are freely allowed to work for what they desire, is crystal clear in their finding no other option nor any other solution other than to use their Pharonic expressions, which not only included direct military force, but also a Pharonic hunt by them and their agents in the area to eliminate the sincere d'awa carriers in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan. And anyone else who resisted the US subjugation in any shape or form was also thrown into the same camp. And the fact that the events of September 11th are without defined objectives, may be ongoing for decades even centuries, is a clear enough indication to anyone that it is a ditch attempt to secure her interests by forcibly preventing any factor whatsoever that may distort her power and topple her world position. And the way in which Islam and the Muslims have been addressed is to create imaginary links between the Muslims in a given region, and the 'war against terrorism' in order to execute any Pharonic US will against it. So, those Muslim lands that have the military and strategic potential can now be legitimately destroyed by force, such as what they have described recently as the 'axis of terror'. And in the very least they (the US) enjoy a degree of influence of strategic parts of the Muslim world where they can monitor and keep in check any 'undemocratic' political change by force if necessary, under any convenient slogan. This is an indication of the fear that the US state feels and the future insecurity and instability she perceives from the lands where the d'awa carriers work.

This fear from the Muslims is apparent because those regions have possessed such capabilities for a very long time. The reason why they are pursued now (as opposed to before) is due to the control they may enjoy of a single sincere leadership who is free from their colonialist influence. Furthermore, their attempts, as well as what has been mentioned, is to make sure that if the Muslims have their Khilafah State, then that state must not be able to bridge to military and technological gap that exists between it and the western states, namely the US, by eliminating any technological or strategic advantage. This is presently taking place via the political means such as the military campaigns (the 'axis of terror' being just one example), and their agent rulers such as Musharraf of Pakistan (strategically weakening and de-islamicizing the armed forces), and of course what will occur in the future under any convenient 'terror' pretext.

Indeed, and as is most likely the case, the Pharonic US state realises that the campaigns to eject Islam from life forever have failed and are bound to fail. That is because, it is not merely a war that can be won and fought by superior technology, battle tactics, and dominant international position alone, rather it is a war, in fact a struggle, between two ideologies - western man-made Capitalism and Islam. The US have simply inherited a struggle that began with the Quraysh themselves, and they themselves have now come to witness that the conclusion to all these attempts, including those of recent times, is the manifest failure to extinguish the ideology of Islam. For the call to live by Islam both as a spiritual and political Doctrine is now stronger than ever. The call to re-establish its State that will execute all of its rules, and unify the entire ummah, all her lands, and all her armed forces and resources, is now wider than ever, and in light of the resources spent, that is perverse logic from their point of view! For Falsehood could never permanently prevail over the Truth, no matter how mighty it became, and no matter how severe the situation.

This can only mean one thing. That the enemies of Islam and their agents, do realise the success of the call to re-establish the Islamic Khilafah (that began methodically in the middle of the last century) that will deliver a change which in itself warrants their keen attention. If they - the disbelieving colonialists - do not regard the implications of what it means for the ummah to have their Islamic Khilafah established as important, then why organise such campaigns? Why wilfully and knowingly inherit such an ideological struggle with the only alternative ideology left on the face of the Earth? Why spend such resources and dedicate policies and budgets where without exception Muslims and their lands are the subject? Why expend effort and resources to safeguard the US position not only for tomorrow or the year after, but for centuries to come? That is exactly just what Pharaoh feared, and that very fear is the same. Why covertly support the crackdown not only throughout the whole of Central Asia and Pakistan, but throughout the whole Muslim world of the sincere d'awa carriers who call for political change and carry nothing in terms of weapons or use force of any type? And while according to their democratic principles this non-violent (rather intellectual) method of change is lawful!

They, like their predecessors - the Quraysh - do indeed sense the readiness and willingness of the Muslims to take control of their affairs once and for all, by supporting those sincere workers for change. Especially after being burned by the western powers and at the same time being given as fuel to that fire by her rulers! The Pharonic US State too, like Quraysh, realise the importance of the re-existence and the re-emergence of the Khilafah State, and the need to address it in their modern-day Dar an-Nadwas, and the plans that result from them, such as the elaborate and cunning campaigns related to September 11th, 'the war against terrorism', ‘rogue states’, 'axes of evil', 'anti-western', 'anti-democracy', ‘civilized Vs uncivilized’, ‘war against the just people of the world’ - in essence anything that stands in the way of the Pharonic US supremacy. And, behold, such desperate measures are a certain indication of their realisation that nothing will halt or even delay for even a single second the call to resume the Islamic way of life, except for drastic measures against the Muslims and their potential as a single unified ummah, especially in the aftermath of the failure of all the previous plans and devices. This in perfect realisation with what Quraysh then undertook as the only real and viable option to address the call by physical force. This clearly shows the success of the call for the return of the Islamic Khilafah State, and that success is being radiated!

These actions by the enemies of Islam should thus be taken as a most conducive sign in the path to re-establish the Khilafah, and that is plain for all to see.

So be of good cheer, and remain optimistic, for they fear you and fear your objectives, and the signs that are manifest at present, are those very same signs that appeared when the first Islamic State was established. This means that you should realise that you have progressed in successfully overcoming the serious obstacles and are now knocking at the doors of victory, and Allah willing you will enter it sooner than they may think!

2. The response of the influentials

We find from the books of seerah that when the Messenger (saw) concluded the second pledge from the Generals and Officers of the strong factions of Medina, it was an indication to Quraysh that the attempt to win the influential forces had been successful, which meant that the Muslims proceeding to implement the Islamic Ideology and the building of a state upon its basis was just around the corner. This is from the address by the senior officers at the second pledge, as stated by ibn Kathir.

"The Ansar, were seventy-three men, and their Nuqaba (Generals and Officers), were twelve in number, nine from Khazraj and three from Aws. Asim bin Umar bin Qatadah related that when this group met to pledge allegiance to the Messenger of Allah (saw), Al-Abbas bin Ubayda bin Nadla al Ansari, of the Banu Salim bin Awf said, "Oh Khazraj! Do you know what it is that you are pledging to this man?" "Yes", they replied. "You are pledging to go to war with all kinds of people. If you think that if you suffered great losses to your wealth and had your leaders killed, you would give him up, then do it now, or suffer the punishment of this life and the next. If you think you will keep firm to this Deen and to him (saw), in what he has called upon you to do, despite loss of wealth and your leaders being killed, then accept him. For, he is, by Allah, the best in this world and in the next." They replied, "We will take him regardless of loss of wealth or the death of our leaders. But, what will we receive in return for this, O Messenger of Allah, if we keep to this Deen and keep firm and resolute with you?" And the prophet of Allah (saw) replied, "Paradise!" "Then hold out your hand Messenger of Allah!" they asked. He (saw) did so, and they pledged allegiance to him."

It was apparent in this aspect of the d'awa, that he (saw) was seeking the support of those persons with the actual (real) power. This is confirmed from what is stated by ibn Kathir and also from ibn Abbas about Al Abbas (his father), that he said, the Messenger (saw) told me, "I do not find any protection from you or your brother (meaning Hamza), can you take me out to the market tomorrow, so that I can visit the camp where the arab tribes gather." Thus, clearly indicating that what the Messenger (saw) was seeking was not found in his companions.

When the Messenger (saw) continued the contacting of these particular entities he would seek information as to their strength and position, and speak with its leadership. And to qualify the above statement of the Messenger (saw) of the specificity of such persons, this can be confirmed from what ibn Kathir states.

"Ali (ra) states. "We then went to a meeting underway marked by calm and dignity. There were shaikhs of high rank and fine appearance there. Abu Bakr (ra) went forward and made the greeting. Abu Bakr asked them, "From whom are you?" They replied, "We are from the Banu Shayban bin Tha'laba." Abu Bakr then turned to the Messenger (saw) and commented, "I swear no one has more power in their people than these do." The man most comparable to Abu Bakr was Mafruq bin 'Amr, he was their most eloquent. He wore his hair in two braids that came down to his chest. Abu Bakr asked him, "How many are you in number?" Mafruq replied, "We are more than 1000 strong." Abu Bakr continued, "And how would protection be with you?" "We go to the limit. And every people has a forefather (meaning they are proud and noble)." Mafruq responded. Abu Bakr then asked, "And how is it when you make war with your enemies?" Mafruq answered, "When we meet in battle, we are the fiercest of men. We take greater pride in our steeds than in our sons, care more for our swords than our sperm.""

This is but a fraction from the accounts from the books of seerah as to the seeking of support by the Messenger (saw) of those powerful people. And they were a distinguished group or class of persons who were not found from either amongst his (saw) companions or the ordinary people. Thus, from this, the Messenger (saw) sought the support to deliver change in practical terms, not from his (saw) companions, but from those unlike them, namely the Generals and Officers.

The Messenger (saw) continued in this way to contact those strong factions approaching fifty two different tribes, even whilst bringing humiliation upon himself as what was experienced at Taif, until Allah (swt) opened the way to Al Aws and Al Khazraj.

It must be noted that these were the powerful people that enabled the message of Islam to be transferred from one phase to another, and the support from whom Quraysh feared.

This can be easily understood by the manner in which they seized the society in Medina in order to place the Messenger (saw) as its head, and the fact that they bypassed its current ruler, 'Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Salul, is an example of that material power. As for the fact that the Messenger (saw) was given the material support upon his entry into Medina as the defacto Head of State, Ibn Kathir states:

"Imam Ahmed stated, "Hashim related to us, quoting Sulayman, from Thabit, from Anas bin Malik, who said, "I moved through the young men shouting, "Muhammad has come!" And I moved out ahead and still I could see nothing. But the Messenger of Allah did come, accompanied by Abu Bakr. They hid in a ruin in Medina, then sent out a Bedouin asking for the Ansar, to let them enter. Thereupon some 500 of the Ansar (with their weapons) came out saying, "Do come in, you are safe and will be obeyed."""" Having secured the means (by force and by military command and control) to be in a position to do so.

It is today, that after having understood the methodology of resuming the Islamic way of life, and looking to the seerah of the Messenger (saw) for guidance, some from amongst the Muslims set out to emulate these actions in order to achieve that objective. Indeed, it is the support from what can be said of today's strongest factions, among which are the sincere Muslim armies, and their sincere Generals and Officers, that would indeed progress the work to resume the Islamic way of life into practical implementation. Such that, Islam will be implemented, the entire Muslim lands re-unified, her armies one, and the conveying of Islam to the whole of mankind would resume through the international existence of a State that carries and defends its message. Such progression poses obvious threats for those who thrive upon the current weakness and impotence of the Muslims.

An indication as to the fears of the colonialists and their agents, as to the achievement of such a progression can be found in the tampering of the armed forces in the Muslim lands. They initiated that when they destroyed the Khilafah State and handed over its administrative control to their agents. They were organised according to the structures, mentalities, and culture of the western framework, whose hands were still fresh from the blood of destroying the Islamic State. Not only were their initial commanding officers foreign, but those allowed to progress under them were carefully selected to not only be imitators of the western secular culture, but a worshipper of it. An example of this is the careful implantation of the Dunma Jews into the major influential positions of the Turkish Armed Forces, the likes of whom are still there today. And such tampering and meddling with the armed forces of the Muslims is a sufficient evidence against the disbelievers. It is a clear sign today, just as Quraysh realised then, that they fear of what support they may give to the Muslim ummah and the sincere d'awa carriers among them!

Any Islamic sentiment and anti-western secular sentiment was addressed through court-martials, imprisonment, and treason. This is what happened throughout the Pakistan Armed Forces under the supervision of the foreign powers and the brainwashed Officers, whereby some of the most brilliant and god-fearing soldiers were dispensed of. The same can be said for the armed forces of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and countless other Muslim lands under the subjugation of western secular culture. The powerful armed forces of the Muslims are monitored, observed, and carefully vetted to make sure that none loyal save to the agent ruler is allowed to gain rank and position. An example of this is in what occurred, and in what continues to occur, in the military purges that take place in the Turkish army. It was only recently where two-hundred (conservative official figures) army officers were ejected due to being 'Islamic' and moreover displaying Islamic loyalties. Also, the Pakistan armed forces, upon the request of the Pharonic US is purging its rank and file of the Generals and Officers who are found to have any loyalty to Islam and the Muslims. Even its most strategic and influential ISI intelligence network (that is considered the backbone of the Pakistani armed forces) is being pressured to be dismantled or its current leadership replaced, due to the strong Islamic sentiments that are found within them. While, those who love the western secular way of life, and detest the Muslims, are given promotions and commanderships.

All this to prevent the Ansar of today from presenting themselves and fulfilling their due role.

What has already been mentioned in itself provides sufficient evidence that the progress is being monitored and measures are being taken to prevent its successful results. But the fact that the monitoring needs to be something ongoing, and that the purges need to happen frequently, is a sign that despite their deceitful plans, the sincere Officers of the Muslims are responding to Allah (swt), His Messenger (saw), and their ummah.

And indeed, it is they - the enemies of Islam - who have followed and shadowed the Muslims and the sincere d'awa carriers among them through the various points and phases of the call to resume the Islamic way of life one more time. These are such glad tidings, hopes and optimisms, that the correct methodology is bound to yield the correct results, even if it took time.

The sincere d'awa carriers and the Muslims have contacted them, will continue to contact them, and will get them - Allah (swt) willing!

3. The mentality of Victory

What should be absolutely clear is that the observations in their desperate final attempts to thrust obstacles in the face of the Muslim ummah and in the face of those sincere d'awa carriers among them, are (without a shadow of a doubt) manifesting themselves like before. For the desperate measures that Quraysh undertook in the later stages of the d’awa then, by way of fearing the support of the Ansar and the attempt to kill the Messenger (saw), is what is being mirrored today – the ongoing tampering of the Muslim armed forces, and the use of force and death against the political aspect of Islam and the d’awa carriers everywhere.

But, those opponents then during the establishment of the first Islamic State experienced their limitations when it came to their plans and policies. Specifically, it was when they agreed upon and implemented the policy to address the impending threat. So confident were they in this countermeasure, and so confident were they against the Muslims that they mocked - as ibn Abbas, Qatadah, and Mujahid said - by saying that they should wait for the death of Muhammad (saw), just as the poets before him (saw) perished. And it was at this point when Allah had revealed, "And remember when the disbelievers planned against you to imprison you, or to kill you, or to expel you (from Makka), they were planning and Allah too was planning, and it is Allah who is the best of planners." [TMQ Al Anfal; 8:30] And it was they who ultimately failed, and Allah provided the successful entry into Medina by the prophet (saw) as the Head of the Islamic State, where it was established, and whilst Quraysh were still waiting by his doorstep to execute their confident policy!

Surely this is good news that in the face of their policies and their intricate plans, both open and hidden, that Allah will aid the believers, and be the Provider of victory, and He (swt) is able and capable of all things, despite the lowliness the ummah feels in her present times.

The Pharonic US state may have successfully rewritten, openly contradicted, and blatantly bypassed all the international laws and norms when it came to smiting the Muslims, to such a devious extent that not one state in the world is able to practically oppose it. She may arrogantly walk the Earth aiding whom she wishes and slaughtering whom she likes. She may have successfully invented a campaign to subvert and suppress the return of the Islamic Khilafah State that has the follower ship of not only her own citizens, but all the peoples of the world as if the Pharonic US state has performed some kind of evil magic over them. This made the Muslims the object of suspicion and his Deen as a source of guilt. Thus making the spilling of Muslim blood anywhere, under any circumstance, and by anyone, lawful in the eyes of the world's people, while the Muslims are without power. Indeed, they have succeeded in turning the criticism and the wrath of individuals, nations, and states against the Muslims everywhere and without exception, reminiscent of the witch-hunt of medieval times.

The Pharonic disbelieving colonialists may have to their credit genius think-tanks supported by all forms of intelligence and material resources, they may have experience in dealing with all types of threats, they may have devised every form of countermeasure one may think of, they may be hailed as superpowers, they may posses ownership and allegiance of the world's political institutions, they may have a presence in every inch of land via their agents or any other means of spying, they may have trillion dollar budgets that even computers cannot count, they may have mighty military resources, they may enjoy all types of military superiority, they may have won over the regimes and rulers in our lands, nay they may even have armies of Jinn! But despite this, it will never be enough to stop the will of Allah (swt) the Almighty and His (swt) promise of victory to the ummah and to the mighty d'awa carriers among them!

O honourable ummah! O mighty d'awa carriers! Do not let them or their agents draw your attention to defeat rather than victory. Do not allow them and their agents lead you to believe anything to the contrary, for they desire not victory, success, or anything wholesome for you, but rather they desire defeat and humiliation for you. Know that the criteria of success is not material resources, rather the criteria is Allah and Allah alone (swt), we believe in it, and they will never be able to counter it, and ultimately that is the frustration we see in their faces, and that will be the anguish and defeat we are going to - of a surety - witness!!!

So be confident in your march, and raise your heads high, and be bearers of good news to those around you. Fill your minds with confidence that you are on the right path, and pour courage into your hearts. And look forward to an assured victory in this world, and an appointment with your Lord in the next. For you are indeed mighty in the eyes of your Lord, and formidable in the eyes of your enemies.

"Indeed, those who disbelieve spend their wealth to hinder men from the path of Allah, and so will they continue to spend it, but in the end it will become an anguish for them. Then they will be overcome. And those who disbelieve will be gathered into Hell" [TMQ Al Anfal; 8:36]

"And Allah has full power and complete control of His affairs, though most of mankind know it not" [TMQ Yusuf; 12:21]

May Allah the Almighty (swt) preserve you, your Deen, and your ideology.
Alhamdolilahi Rabbil 'Alameen.

The Family

2009-06-15T10:41:00.000+01:00

The Family Meltdown of Secular Society

On the 5th April 2008, Justice Coleridge, the judge in charge of family courts across South West England delivered a speech to family lawyers from the organisation "Resolution", where he described family life in the UK in "meltdown" marked by an epidemic of family breakdown.

He said, "A large number of families now consist of children being brought up by mothers who have children by a number of different fathers, none of whom take any part in their lives or support or upbringing....These are not isolated, one-off cases. They are part of the stock-in-trade of the family courts." He continued, "Almost all society's ills can be traced directly to the collapse of family life. We all know it. Examine the background of almost every child in the care system or the youth justice system and you will discover a broken family. Ditto the drug addict. Ditto the binge drinker. Ditto those children who are truanting or who cannot behave at school. Scratch the surface of these cases and you invariably find a miserable family, overseen by a dysfunctional and fractured parental relationship - or none at all."

This morbid description of family life in the UK comes in the wake of other news stories in recent times - the fall in marriage rates in England and Wales to the lowest level since records began in 1862 (Office for National Statistics) and a rise in divorce rates to the highest since 1996. Teachers at last month's annual conference of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers also described a "toxic circle" of family breakdown affecting children's ability to learn and their mental health and well-being.

In addition to such stories, one is all too familiar with the other issues related to family life in Britain - the neglect of elderly parents or relatives, the shrinkage of the "extended family", the lack of time spent with children due to both parents having demanding work expectations, the sufferings of the "Superwoman" struggling to balance the responsibilities of home life with a high-maintenance career or job, and the devaluing of family life in the workplace. Last week, the Fawcett society launched their manifesto "Sexism in the city", highlighting the fact that 30,000 women a year in Britain lose their jobs simply for being pregnant and that of all social groups, mothers to be and new mothers experience the most discrimination in the labour market. In February 2006, the Institute for Public Policy Research published a report detailing a fertility crisis in Britain due to women delaying motherhood or remaining childless due to fears that they would face a reduction in lifetime earnings or lose their place on their career ladder for taking time out to have babies. It described a "baby gap" of 90,000 due to this delay in motherhood. The demographic impact of this "baby gap" that many European countries such as France, Italy and the UK are predicting is of an ageing population, a reduced national workforce due to a generation gap and fewer young people to look after the old.

The Impact of Family Breakdown on Lives

The declining worth of family life in Britain and in many other secular societies is evident to see. This is despite the fact that report after report, study after study has shown that marriage and strong families are the cornerstone to stability in the lives of children and a healthy society. The consequences of broken families and dysfunctional or neglectful parent-child relations are also clear to see. Politicians from all camps have related increasing levels of anti-social behaviour, drug- addiction and binge-drinking amongst the youth and teenage pregnancies to rising quotas of dysfunctional families. Judge Justice Coleridge commented in his speech, "I am not saying every broken family produces dysfunctional children but I am saying that almost every dysfunctional child is the product of a broken family." In addition the emotional impact of divorce and broken families on spouses, children and single parents left to bring up their children by themselves, often having to juggle 2 to 3 jobs in the process has caused as the judge describes, "...a never-ending carnival of human misery. A ceaseless river of human distress." Rising levels of child depression, self-harm, even eating disorders have been afforded to the current state of family life in Britain. One should also not forget the emotional gauntlet experienced by women forced to undergo IVF treatment in order to conceive, due to reduced fertility, miscarriages and increased pregnancy related complications related to delaying motherhood.

The Causes of Family Breakdown in Secular Society

The response of many Western governments to this dire problem of "Family Meltdown" has been in main financially based - tax incentives to encourage marriage and married couples to stay together, affordable childcare to enable single mothers to work, working and child tax credits for poor families, and even paying couples to have a second or third child as in France. Throwing money at issues seems to be a recurring knee-jerk reaction of many capitalist secular societies in solving deep-seated problems within their societies. To believe that simply more money will solve this dire state of family affairs is on par with believing that a bundle of dollar notes could seal the hole of a sinking Titanic. Of course Western governments have introduced other initiatives to try and raise the importance of family responsibilities. These include parenting classes or fines for neglectful parents as well as establishing laws to outlaw pregnancy-related discrimination in the workplace but these handful of actions fail to recognise that the fundamental cause of this family meltdown are core secular values and the general lack of weight given to family life within capitalist societies.

The "freedom-loving" culture of liberal society has nurtured a hedonistic and care-free attitude to life based upon the pursuit of carnal and individualistic whims and desires rather than nurturing a mindset of responsibility and respect towards others. This has created an aversion to marriage in many individuals due the level of commitment, fidelity and responsibility required - viewing marriage as a "curbing of their freedom" and preferring rather to be "free and single" and to have sexual relations with "whoever, whenever". It has spurned a culture of promiscuity resulting in spiralling rates of teenage pregnancies, abortions, single mothers and adultery which is the main cause of divorce in Britain. It has created a situation where a man may have relations with many women, father children from different mothers and take no physical or emotional responsibility for either his child or its mother other than a cheque in the post once a month. This situation has created a lack of trust in individuals seeking a partner for marriage, unsure whether a relationship based upon loyalty, fidelity and care and concern for one another will survive such a societal climate based upon a norm of promiscuity and individualism.

This "cancerous" individualistic mindset of "Me, myself, and I", bred within capitalist societies that sanctify securing individual self-interest over all else has eaten away at the foundations of family structure. It has caused individuals to focus on what is best for themselves rather than what is best for their spouse or marriage resulting in increased divorce. It has contributed to people rejecting or delaying having children until later life to maximize their social life, personal finances and personal freedom. It has caused parents to neglect their children while pursuing their own personal interests. It has caused children to neglect their elderly parents, viewing them as burdens on their time and their personal finances, placing them in homes for others to look after. The individualistic concern for one's own family and disregard or neglect of other relatives has caused a lack of a support system for extended family facing physical, financial and emotional problems, causing individuals to suffer in silence alone.

In addition, within capitalist secular societies there has been a devaluing of motherhood and family life against economic life. Firstly, on a historical level, the Western struggle for gender equality and the rise of feminism placed the public life and the man's traditional role of being breadwinner above the private life, motherhood and the woman's traditional role of home-maker. Many feminists argued that female respect and liberty was not compatible with economic dependence upon her husband nor full domestic responsibility and therefore it was not simply a matter of the woman having the right to work but the necessity to work. Christabel Pankhurst, the well known radical feminist and member of the suffragette movement of the early 20th century said of home-life responsibilities that they were an in intolerable burden on married women, a waste of time and economic energies, and was unpaid and unrecognised.

Today, one of the consequences of this view of home-life and concept of "Gender Equality" has been the creation of societies where women do not simply have the right to employment but rather are expected to work even if single mothers with sole responsibility for the care and upbringing of their children. The concept of gender equality that was in theory to produce the "have it all woman" in reality produced the "do it all woman" - who continued to burden the responsibilities of motherhood and household chores but now also struggled with the added burden of financially maintaining the family. With both parents as breadwinners in many families, there is a constant struggle to find time for the children or time to make marriages strong. The basis of gender equality where one looks at what is best for the woman verses what is best for the man rather than what is best for a family or community overall can sometimes overlook what is best for a strong marriage, for the children and for society. Furthermore, the idea of gender equality that erodes the appreciation of sex differences within the workplace and society, hinders rather than facilitates the securing of specific rights based upon sex difference such as pregnancy or maternity rights or flexible working hours for those women with young children and lays open the door to discrimination.

Secondly, the capitalist, materialistic system that has placed the pursuit of the "£" or "$" as its supreme ideological goal, has placed profit over people and finance over families. It has focussed consistently on securing the coffers of government or business over securing the family. This constant drive for short-term profitability has undervalued motherhood and family life and forced even single mothers into work, leaving them little time to bring up their children effectively. Indeed, there are often financial incentives for mothers to return to work; very few incentives for them to stay at home in order to ensure the effective upbringing of their children if they feel this is necessary, which is especially the case with many single parents. This valuing of materialism over motherhood has led to a situation where a pregnant woman or one with young children is often seen as a burden to a company rather than as an asset to society. A 2005 survey of 98 companies by the Recruitment and Employment Confederation found that ¾ of companies would rather break the law than employ a pregnant woman or one of child-bearing age - a fact well-known by many women who would rather delay having children or remain childless rather than face this "fertility penalty" on their earnings or career. It seems that being "chained to the kitchen sink" has been replaced with being "chained to the economic market".

Unfortunately, the Muslim Ummah living in the West or in the Muslim world has not been shielded from these secular or materialistic values. The consequence is that the concept of "strong marriages" and "strong family units" that has always been understood by Muslims over the generations to be the heart or building block of a strong community, has today also been eroded. We face similar problems as those discussed due to the adoption of secular and liberal values and mindsets into our lives - increased divorces, increase in adultery, family breakdown, neglect of children, neglect of elders, severed relationships with extended family and so on. In addition, our community has been blighted with non-Islamic Asian/Arab/African traditions and culture that have also affected our marriages, parent-child relationships, in-law relationships and family structure.

The Islamic View towards Family

Within Islam, issues such as "strong marriages", "motherhood", "fatherhood", "rights and responsibilities of parents, "rights and responsibilities of children", "keeping relations with extended family (silat-ur-Rahm)" and "strong family units", have a high status of importance in the religion and should enjoy an elevated status within a community and society. Islam therefore does not believe in personal or sexual freedom - the freedom of an individual to have any relationship they wish, the freedom to commit adultery and betray one's spouse and family, the freedom to father children and bear no physical, emotional or financial responsibility towards them or their mother. Rather, it believes in building a mindset of accountability towards a Creator that nurtures values such as chastity, loyalty in marriage, and a sense of responsibility towards others and for one's actions. In addition, strict social laws - such as the dress codes for men and women, segregation of the sexes, the prohibition of a man and woman being alone together (khulwa), and harsh punishments for fornication and adultery - all aim to ensure that sexual relations are restricted to marriage and that every child is born with wedlock, knowing who is responsible for its financial, physical and emotional welfare. These values and these laws create a sense of trust between men and women in marriage, when seeking a partner for marriage and in society in general.

Islam not only encourages marriage, linking it to completing half of one's religion(deen) but also encourages husband and wife to consistently seek tranquillity within the marriage to keep the union strong. The Prophet(saw) said, "Oh you youngsters. Whoever amongst you who can afford to marry should marry, because it will help him more to lower his gaze and guard his modesty (i.e.chastity). And whoever is not able to marry he should fast, because it will be a protection for him" (Bukhari and Muslim). He(saw) also said, "When a man gets married, he gets one half of the deen. Thus he should fear Allah in the other half" (Al-Baihaqi). Allah(swt) says in Surah Ar-Rum,

"And among His Signs is this, that He created for you wives from among yourselves, that you may find tranquillity in them, and He has put between you affection and mercy." [Ar-Rum: 21]

Although Islam permits divorce, the Muslim should understand that it is one of the most hated actions in the eyes of the Creator such that it is avoided as much as possible and arbitration sought to heal the relationship. Infact in one hadith, it is mentioned that the Throne of Allah(swt) shakes upon hearing of a divorce of a believing man and woman.

With regards to individualism, Islam abhors it. Rather it seeks to build a mentality of responsibility towards others. Therefore, the husband stands accountable to the Creator for fulfilling the rights of his wife. The wife stands accountable to the Creator for fulfilling the rights of her husband. Parents stand accountable to the Creator for fulfilling their responsibility to their children of ensuring their financial and physical well-being as well as their strong Islamic upbringing. The Prophet(saw) said, "Beware! Each of you is a shepherd and each of you is responsible and answerable for his flock. The leader and the ruler is a shepherd over the people and shall be questioned about his subjects (as to how he conducted their affairs); a man is a guardian over his family and shall be questioned about them (as to how he looked after their physical and moral well-being); a woman is the guardian over the household of her husband and his children and shall be questioned about them (as to how she managed the household and brought up the children); a servant is the shepherd of his master's property and shall be questioned about it (as to how he safeguarded his trust). Beware! Everyone of you is a guardian and everyone of you shall be questioned with regards to his trust." (Bukhari and Muslim). In addition, individuals stand accountable to the Creator for fulfilling their responsibility towards their parents of looking after them financially and physically in their old age.

The Prophet (saw) says, "Verily, on the Day of Resurrection, Allah has slaves to whom He will neither speak nor purify nor look at." He was asked, "Who are they, O Allah's Messenger?" He replied, "He who disowns and abandons his parents, he who disowns his children and he who was granted a favour by a people but he denied their favour and disowned them." (Ahmad). Allah (swt) says, "Your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him, and that you be kind to parents. Whether one or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them a word of contempt, nor repel them, but address them in terms of honour. And, out of kindness, lower to them the wing of humility, and say, ‘My Lord! Bestow on them Your Mercy even as they cherished me in childhood.'" [17:23-24] The Muslim also stands accountable to the Creator for keeping good relations with his relatives and fulfilling their rights. There is no acceptance of severing relations with relatives. In Islam, a man may need to take charge of the financial maintenance of a female blood relative and therefore must have a regular awareness of their well-being. A woman may be given custody of a child from a blood relative and therefore must have a regular awareness of their well-being. The Prophet(saw) said, "The tie of kinship (rahm) is suspended from the throne of Allah, and says, ‘Whoever supports me, Allah will support him, and whoever cuts me off, Allah will cut him off'" (Bukhari and Muslim). He(saw) also said, "The one who severes ties with the relations will not enter Paradise." Jabir(ra) narrated that the Prophet(saw) said, "If any of you is poor let him start with himself and if any one of you has surplus (wealth) let him spend it on his family, and if any of you has further surplus let him spend it on his relatives."

With regards to materialism, Islam understands that the earning of money is important for the physical needs of individuals and therefore encourages a healthy economic life for society. However, it is also based upon the belief that although money may be the currency for this life, it is fulfilling the good deed prescribed by Allah(swt) that is the currency in the Hereafter. Having many children, looking after their welfare, and giving them a good Islamic upbringing to make them good Muslims and upright citizens who are a source of goodness for the community and society, is just one of those actions given much weight in currency in the Hereafter. The Prophet(saw) used to say, "Get married to the tender and fertile(women), for indeed I will vie with the Prophets in your great numbers on the day of Judgement." Abu Sa'id al-Khudri narrated that the Prophet(saw) said, "If anyone cares for three daughters, disciplines them, has them married, and does good to them, he will go to Paradise." (Abu Dawud). He(saw) said, "A man will be raised some degrees in Paradise and he will say, ‘For what reason I am receiving this?' He will be told, ‘Because of your son (child) asking forgiveness for you.'" (Bukhari). In contrast to the capitalist ideology, the philosophy of the Islamic system is not based upon securing "capital" over all else but rather understands that society must be organised in order to fulfil all aspects of human life effectively. Therefore it does not seek to maximise economic life up and above family life but rather understands that both are required for a healthy society. Nor in Islam are the roles of men and women in society and family life defined according to the concept of "Gender Equality", where the role of breadwinner is valued above the role of mother and home-maker. In family life Islam defines the responsibility of the man as the breadwinner and the woman as the homemaker and the nurturer of the children. One role is not above another but both are essential for the effective organization and functioning of family life and the progress of society as a whole.

Allah(swt) says,

"And wish not for the things in which Allah has made some of you to excel others. For men there is allotted from what they have earned (and likewise) from women there is allotted for what they have earned" [An-Nisa:32]

In this regard, the woman as a wife and mother is permitted to work but there should be no societal or financial pressures upon her to do so if she chooses not to for the woman cannot compromise her vital role of being a wife and mother, caring for her children and family and nurturing the thinking and development of the future generations. At all times, the obligation of her financial maintenance falls first upon the male members of her family and second upon the state if they are not able to provide her with adequate support. She does not have to embrace the long suffering identity of a superwoman, struggling to balance a successful career with a successful home life, for her value within the society is based upon her obedience to her Creator and not upon the level of tax she contributes to the economy. Indeed, in contrast to capitalist societies, where motherhood has been devalued, where many stay-at-home mothers feel undervalued in society and many working mothers face discrimination for having children, Islam seeks to build a mindset within public life, the workplace and society as a whole of the great status that motherhood has in life. "Paradise lies beneath the feet of the mother" is a well known saying of the Messenger(saw). A man at the time of the Prophet(saw) came to him and said "I have carried my mother single handed around the Kaba 7 times, does this repay the kindness she showed me as a child?" The Prophet replied "It does not even repay one contraction of the womb". It was narrated that on one occasion a woman called Salamah said to the Prophet (saw), "O Messenger of Allah, you brought tidings to men but not to women." He said, "Did your women friends put you up to asking me this question?" She said, "Yes, they did." He (saw) said, "Does it not please any of you that if she is pregnant by her husband and he is satisfied with her that she receives the reward of one who fasts and prays for the sake of Allah? And when the labour pains come none in heaven or earth knows what is concealed in her womb to soothe her. And when she delivers, not a mouthful of milk flows from her and not an instance of child's suck, but that she receives, for every mouthful and every suck, the reward of one good deed. And if she is kept awake by the child at night, she receives the reward of one who frees seventy slaves for the sake of Allah." (Tabarani). A poet once said, "The mother is a school: if you prepare her properly, you will prepare an entire people of good character; The mother is the first teacher, foremost among them, and the best of teachers." This is very much the understanding that Islam has - that the mother lies at the heart of the family and therefore is pivotal for society. One impact of this view is that even in the workplace, the understanding, value and flexibility for family responsibilities should be a common appreciation amongst employers rather than one that has to be forced upon them by the hand of the law.

Conclusion
In today's world, Islam and the Shariah are under constant attack, described as uncivilized, barbaric, backward and dangerous by particular Western governments and the Western media. This is despite the fact that within secular societies, the social and moral fabric of their family and societal lives are crumbling before their very eyes by their own admission due to the danger and chaos created by liberal, capitalist and secular values. These values have been and continue to be exported to the Muslim lands, causing "Meltdown" also in Muslim families and societal life. Islam however, has provided us with a beautiful set of principles and values to make our families and social structure strong which we must embrace and mould our lives upon. However, we are lacking the Islamic Khilafah system to water the soil of our lands with these values, to build and protect this mindset on mass amongst the Muslim Ummah. It is therefore the work to establish this state that we must turn our urgent attention and time. In addition, as Muslims, Allah(swt) has provided us with ample opportunity to carry the dawa to the non-Muslims around us by explaining the beauty of Islam in solving various problems facing humanity including the issue of family breakdown that is unfortunately plaguing so many societies across the world today.

"Whoever follows My Guidance shall neither go astray, nor fall into distress and misery. But whoever turns away from My Reminder (That is, neither believes in the Qur'an nor acts on its orders) verily, for him is a life of hardship, and We shall raise him up blind on the Day of Resurrection." [Ta-Ha: 123-124]

Secularism? What a mess???

2009-04-08T01:14:00.002+01:00

Should we fear the beard or Secularism?

Recently Mohammad Salim, a Muslim student studying at the Nirmala Convent Higher Secondary School in Madhya Pradesh, India petitioned the Indian Supreme Court that he be allowed to sport a beard, contrary to his school’s rules. The Supreme Court dismissed Salim’s petition and upheld the ruling of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which had ruled that Salim has no right to wear a beard if forbidden by his school rules.

On 30th March 2009 on behalf of the entire division bench of the Supreme Court, Justice Markandeya Katju commented as follows: “We should strike a balance between rights and personal beliefs. We cannot overstretch secularism. We don't want to have Talibans in the country. Tomorrow a girl student may come and say that she wants to wear a burqa, can we allow it?”

Why can’t we apply the same logic to the adherents of other religions? Shouldn’t the Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh be forced to remove his Sikh Turban whilst on state duty and during official functions? Shouldn’t all female Hindu officials including the President of India, Pratibha Devsing Patil be forced to remove the Bindi and any other Hindu symbols? Shouldn’t the BJP be banned for being a political party that overtly espouses Hindutva?

The hypocrisy is plain to see as the issue is nothing to do with religious symbols, it is rather to do with Islam specifically. We have seen the same happening in other so called democratic and ‘free’ countries, in France we saw the banning of the Hijab in schools and in the United Kingdom a Muslim schoolgirl Shabina Begum lost the right to wear the Islamic Jilbab (outer garment/burqa) at her school. What do they fear from a piece of cloth like the headscarf or facial hair? Justice Katju made it clear that it is not to do with the actual facial hair but what it may represent i.e. Islamic values, attempting to brand any Muslims who adhere to Islamic values as Taliban.

Since September 11, under the pretext of the war on terror, the non-Muslim world has undertaken a host of measures specifically aimed at Muslims. These measures include arbitrary arrests, physical torture, imprisonment without trial, surveillance of mosques, muzzling of Imams, and deaths in police custody. Some have even been forced to become spies. Muslims have also witnessed the endless vilification of Islam by the media.

All this has left an indelible impression on Muslim minds that secular democracies are incapable of guaranteeing Muslims the peace and security to practice their religion.

The plight of Muslims living under secular dictatorships supported by the West is much worse. In countries like Uzbekistan, Muslim males are routinely arrested for having a beard or visiting the Mosques too often. In Turkey, Muslim women who opt for university education are forced to abandon their hijab.

But the fiercest punishment is reserved for those who seek to criticize these tyrannical regimes; imprisonment, torture and extra-judicial killings can routinely be found in such countries. So we also find Muslims living in the Muslim world convinced that secularism is flawed and unfit to govern them.

Even non-Muslims living under secularism feel that their religion is vulnerable. Many Christians in the West view gay bishops, women priests, illegitimate children, and the commercialization of Christmas as malicious attempts by secular fundamentalists to subvert Christian values and replacing them with secular ones.

Likewise, secularism has failed to protect the Christian sects in Northern Ireland and safeguard the lives of Jewish, Christian and Muslim people living in Palestine. India, the largest secular state in the world, is prone to religious violence where Hindus, Christians, Muslims and Sikhs are all victims of secularism. So, just like Muslims, non-Muslims are also looking for an alternative system that can provide them with an opportunity to practice their religion in peace.

Islam is the sole ideology in the world where people of different faiths can worship and perform their religious duties without experiencing reprisals or insecurity. In practice this is secured by a true Islamic Caliphate state not the current Muslim states like Saudi Arabia nor the previous rule of the Taliban. In the past the Caliph safeguarded the rights of non-Muslims and Muslims alike, without discriminating between them. Take the case of Palestine: under the shade of the Caliphate, Muslims, Jews and Christians lived in harmony, a feat unrivalled in the history of mankind.

The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys Allah.” [1]

Thomas Arnold describes the relations between non-Muslim citizens (dhimmi’s) and Muslim communities under the Islamic rule, he says:

“The toleration extended towards the Christian Arabs by the victorious Muslims of the first century of the Hijrah and continued by succeeding generations, we may surely infer that those Christian tribes that did embrace Islam, did so of their own choice and free will.”[2]

Cecil Roth mentions that the treatment of the Jews at the hands of the Ottoman State attracted Jews from all over Western Europe. “The land of Islam became the land of opportunity. Jewish physicians from the school of Salanca were employed in the service of the Sultan and the Viziers (ministers). In many places glass making and metalworking were Jewish monopolies, and with their knowledge of foreign languages, they were the greatest competitors of the Venetian traders.” [3]

Secularism is bound to fail as it is a man made concoction which was based upon a compromise between the Clergy and the philosophers of Europe. After a bloody struggle lasting centuries they agreed to, ‘Render under to Caesar what is Caesar’s and render unto God what is God’s’ therefore dividing religion and politics and church from state. This idea in reality contains an intrinsic contradiction, if we acknowledge the existence of God, the creator and Lord of the Universe then who are we to relegate Him and His law to only personal rituals?

Shouldn’t secular symbols such as nightclubs and Bollywood be banned instead? As they represent secular values that lead to the increasing promiscuity in society where pre-marital relations are becoming the norm, sexually transmitted diseases are increasing, rape and molestation becoming daily items in the newspapers. Shouldn’t the poisonous liberal values be opposed instead of the headscarf or the beard which represents a Muslims adherence to Islamic rules that teach being good to neighbours, the prohibition of consuming intoxicants, honouring ones parents, helping the poor and needy and living a pious life.

Isn’t secular India a country where two thirds of the population live in poverty? Where corruption is deep rooted in the system from the police, government officials to the politicians? Some may argue that India is not a proper secular state, let us then consider the bastion of secularism, the western nations. Hasn’t the secular system led to more than 35 million Americans and 12.5 million British people living below the poverty line? Hasn’t the secular capitalist system been exposed by the current global economic crisis where the system of selfishness, greed and the free market led to the eventual collapse and recession we see today?

Contrary to the media portrayal of the Taliban, the Islamic Caliphate system established by the Prophet Muhammad (saw) himself in Madina and continued after his death is one that established justice, waged war against poverty, was a leader in innovation, science and technology, created communal harmony where people of all faiths lived in peace, worked to eliminate corruption, promoted education of all citizens male and female, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

Instead of scaremongering and breeding fear of Islam non-Muslim societies need to open their minds to at least study it as a genuine alternative to the problems that plague the world today.

The Vital Issue For the Muslims

2009-03-19T22:45:00.001Z

In the month of Rabi al-Awwal, 13 AH, the Islamic State centred at Medina was plunged into the most serious crisis since its establishment…the death of the Prophet (saw). Having conquered the forces of Kufr, subjugated the elements of shirk and established a governing state; the Prophet (saw) passed away having completed his mission. The news of his death quickly spread to all parts of the city. On hearing it, some wept, some were dumbstruck and others refused to believe that the Messenger of Allah (saw) had died.

Amidst the confusion, several other critical issues arose. News reached the capital that large numbers of people had publicly refused to pay the Zakah. Others were rallying around an impostor prophet by the name of Musailima. On the borders of the state far to the North the armies of the Roman Empire were preparing to fight while the army of Jihad, having just been given its orders to march, had encamped outside Medina. Within this atmosphere of unrest another issue, perhaps the most critical of all still remained to be solved; the burial of the Prophet (saw).

It was at this most serious of junctures that the most outstanding personalities of the Islamic State, the Sahabah(companions), took control.

The Ansar of Medina had gathered in the saqifa of Banu Sa’ida, to discuss the issue of ruling and government after the Prophet (saw). Abu Bakr (ra), along with Umar bin al-Khattab (ra) and Abu Ubaidah (ra) made their way to the meeting place. A long and fierce debate then ensued which continued beyond two nights. At its conclusion the Sahabah who had gathered decided that Abu Bakr (ra) be given the bay’ah and chosen as Khalifah for the Ummah. Thus, the successor to ruling and implementation of Shari’ah was chosen. The critical issue to note is that during these three days and two nights of discussion all the other problems that the Ummah faced were still in existence. However the Sahabah (ra) prioritised the selection of a Khalifah as the most critical issue. Following Abu Bakr’s (ra) appointment, units were organised to fight against the false prophet, those refusing to pay the Zakah were punished, the army of Jihad was dispatched to deal with the Romans and the Prophet’s (saw) body was buried.

It is vital that the actions the Sahabah took at this time are closely examined, for the Ijmaa(opinions) of the Sahabah indicates a Shari’ah rule for us. What they were faced with was a collection of issues which all required solving. All the issues were either Fard(obligatory( to carry out or were hudood to be implemented; neither could be delayed. Thus the burial of a body is Fard, the punishment of those who refuse to pay Zakah is obligatory, Jihad must continue and impostor prophets attacking the foundation of the Islamic State must be dealt with. However, the action prioritised above these actions was the selection of a Khalifah.

Rasoolallah (saw) had in fact already commanded what the Muslims should do upon his death and had laid down the hukm regarding the issue of rule. His (saw) hadith recorded in the Sahih of al-Bukhari states, “And after me there will be no more prophets, but there will be Khulafah, and they will be many”. The Sahabah asked, “What do you order us regarding them”. He (saw) replied, “Fulfil the Bay’ah(elect a leader) to them, one after one.” Rasoolallah (saw) also emphasised the obligatory nature of this bay’ah(vote). The Sahih of Muslim narrates, the Prophet (saw) said, “Whoso dies whilst there was no Bay’ah (pledge of allegiance) on his neck, he dies the death of jahiliyyah (ignorance).” Thus the Prophet (saw) made it compulsory on every Muslim to have the pledge of allegiance to a Khalifah.

It is this bay’ah that the Sahabah sought to establish. They immersed themselves in this work and gave it the priority it deserved. That is, being the most important issue above other issues, even over the burial of the Prophet (saw) himself. For it is by the establishment of the ruling system of Allah (swt) that the Shari’ah is implemented, the Hudood is enforced, the rights are upheld and the Deen is made dominant.

This idea has remained with the Muslim Ummah throughout its history. Wherever Islam spread, the rule of Allah (swt) was implemented and the bay’ah to the Khalifah was maintained. After the age of colonialism when the Ummah was given an opportunity to assert itself, to implement a law, to profess a belief, it was always Islam. Thus the hundreds of millions in the Indo-Pak subcontinent who were roused, did so in the name of Islam, did so behind the slogan, What is the meaning of Pakistan? There is no God but Allah!

It was the desire to re-establish an Islamic ruling authority, to restore the Shari’ah, and to implement the Deen that moved the masses, that led to the sacrifices, that convinced millions to migrate. Their goal was one, a land where a Mu’min could live under the shade of the Shari’ah.

That aspiration today still remains unfulfilled. In its place are a host of issues, problems and calamities that affect the Muslim Ummah, globally and locally. In government the rule of Allah (swt) is replaced with the rule of Insaan, economically our lands lie chained to debt, militarily our vast arms gather dust while our brothers and sisters are butchered. Once again the Ummah questions itself. What issue should we pursue? What problem should we solve first? Where does the solution lie? We are in fact at that critical juncture faced by our predecessors, the Sahabah (ra). The guidance given to them applies to us today, the rule given to them applies to us today, and the actions undertaken by them apply to us today, to re-establish the Khilafah. The lack of the rule of Allah (swt) is indeed the most critical issue, for in its absence, Kufr reigns supreme. In order to arrest this situation, lead this Ummah to revival and fulfil our Fard, the re- establishment of the Khilafah is the vital issue.

Link to our reality today

What we learn from the example of the Sahabah radhiallahu anhum, is that while there may be a myriad of issues assaulting the Ummah, what must be done is to analyse, understand and prioritise the issues according to Islam. Thus they focused on the leadership for and unity of the Ummah. It resolved the problems, of the Muslims, stabilised their situation and brought victory to Islam and the Believers.

In our situation of today, our blood is spilled in Afghanistan, Jenin, Hebron, Chechnia and now again in Palestine. There are murders and cruel tortures of Muslims in Uzbekistan and China. We know of the poverty in Africa and Indonesia, of the killings and persecutions in India, Chechnia, Palestine, Kashmir. What do we attend to first? The Ummah are in shock - angry, saddened and confused.

We had the same reaction to the destruction of the Khilafah on the 3rd of March, 1924. We had the same reaction when Israel was established on our blood and our land. And now, after September the 11th Muslims all over the world, are having to answer Bush’s question - are we with them or against them. The response is confused:

Some suggest embracing the west - although decreasingly so

Some suggest rejecting modernity and technology - retreating into some exotic orthodoxy

Some suggest reshaping ourselves to the Western / American mould of Islam - through
compromise, integration, assimilation, and secularising.

The reality is however, that the kuffar too are in deep trouble. Look at the suffering in the world today. This, in the ‘golden age’ of capitalism, when the kuffar have only one dominant ideology and yet, there is global poverty, famine, pollution, exploitation of human suffering and majority economic deprivation. The West fashion weapons of mass destruction and great cruelty. Then manufacture wars to sell those weapons - it’s a trillion dollar industry this ‘organized violence’ - prospering on misery the sublime achievement of Western civilisation, the fruit of ‘enlightened Western thought’. Kufr, capitalism, and taghut have enslaved us and have failed the kuffar themselves. Enron, Arthur Andersen, WorldCom, and recently rumblings about AOL-Time Warner - this at the height of their power. The very bastions of capitalism are collapsing before our eyes - without us lifting a finger. If the global consequences weren’t so seriously tragic, it would be hilarious.

The correct response to the onslaught on the Believers

None of the 3 options bulleted above are correct nor are they acceptable to Islam. The answer lies in embracing Islam comprehensively and exclusively - that is to establish our lives on our Iman, our aqeedah, and to have sabr (not just patience, but also being steadfast, being calm and positive and continuing with what is fard and refusing what is haram). Islam itself is the solution - this Deen, came as a solution to all of life’s issues. Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala mentions in the Qur’an the translation of the meaning of which reads,

And We have sent down to you the Book (the Qur'an) as an exposition of everything, a guidance, a mercy, and glad tidings for those who have submitted themselves (to Allah as Muslims)
[ An Nahl: 89]

Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala describes the Messenger sallallahu alaihi wasallam as a ‘mercy to all the worlds’.

The bond to our Aqeedah

We as Muslims, have declared that we witness, that we know, Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala exists, that Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam is His Messenger, that Al Qur’an is indeed the Word of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala. Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala links our belief to the implementation of Islam in every fabric of our daily lives. Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala commands that judging by Islam in our life’s affairs is linked to Belief in Islam,

“But no, by your Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make you (Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.”
[ Surah An Nisa: 65]

Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam said in his last sermon, (Khutbah al-Wada’a)
“…I am leaving with you that if you hold fast to, you will never go astray. The Book of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala and the Sunnah of His Prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam”

Islam is a system and way of life that was implemented globally for over 1300 years. They did not do this because it was of ‘great benefit’ they did this because its creed, its foundation, the basis of life was absolutely and simply true. From this correct basis emanated a system of ruling, of economy of societal interaction, duties and responsibilities, of systems of relations between men and women. This system of life, took care of the world. The fruits of our Deen, was truly an illumination and enlightenment of the world. It contributes to all the high values existing today. None paralleled it.

Bernard Lewis, in his book ‘What Went Wrong?’ writes, ”Islam represented the greatest military power on earth… It was the foremost economic power in the world… It had achieved the highest level so far in human history, in the arts and sciences of civilization”.

In talking about world civilisations, and contrasting it with the Chinese, he observes, “Islam in contrast created a world civilization, polyethnic, multiracial, international, one might even say intercontinental.”

He also writes, “It is often said that Islam is an egalitarian religion. There is much truth in this assertion. If we compare Islam at the time of it’s advent with the societies that surrounded it - the stratified feudalism of Iran and the caste system of India to the east, the privileged aristocracies of both Byzantine and Latin Europe to the West - the Islamic dispensation does indeed bring a message of equality. Not only does Islam not endorse such systems of social differentiation; it explicitly and resolutely rejects them. The actions and utterances of the Prophet, the honored precedents of the early rulers of Islam as preserved by tradition, are overwhelmingly against privilege by descent, by birth, by status, by wealth, or even by race, and insist that rank and honor are determined only by piety and merit in Islam.”

Further on, he conceded, “The Muslim women had property rights unparalleled in the modern West until comparatively recent times. Even for the slave, Islamic law recognized human rights - the term “civil rights” has no meaning in the context of those times and places - unknown in classical antiquity, in the Orient, or in the colonial and post colonial societies of the Americas.”

We failed, because we moved away from Islam

We need to return to Islam. Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala promises and informs us, that the objective of Islam and the Muslims who carry it, is to establish it and for it to supersede over all other ways of life,

They intend to put out the Light of Allah (i.e. the religion of Islam, this Qur'an, and Prophet Muhammad) with their mouths. But Allah will complete His Light even though the disbelievers hate (it).

He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth to make it victorious over all (other) ways of life even though the Mushrikun (polytheists) hate (it).
[ As Saff: 8 - 9]

Conclusion

And so, what is the answer to those who gleefully fire missiles at innocent babies? Who aim their powerful guns at the skulls of children? At the kafir soldiers who rape and beat pregnant women? At cowardly treacherous leaders like Karimov and Mubarak who torture and electrocute the Believers in Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala and Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam? What must the Islamic Ummah do (first) to deal with the myriad of problems that stalk us? The answer is the re-implementation of Islam. The method from Shara’a is to work with a group to re-establish the structure - the Khilafah (Islamic ‘State’) and to establish the one single leader for the Islamic Ummah - the Khalifah on that structure. Then he, empowered by Allah’s Deen, will mobilise the Believers to correct all the wrongs, insha Allah.

If we are indeed Believers, and we believe in Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala, Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam and Islam, then we will never apply any solution from taghut and kufr nor anything other than Islam. We will apply the solution from the Deen of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala upon the root problem. Not because it brings benefits or it works but because it is the Command of the Creator of man, life and the universe.

Rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam said, "I have five names. I am Muhammad. I am Ahmad. I am al-Mahi (the effacer), by whom Allah effaces (obliterates) kufr. I am al-Hashir (the gatherer), before whom people are gathered. I am al-Aqib (the last)."
[Related by Malik, from Ibn Shihab from Muhammad ibn Jubayr ibn Mutim]

We are the followers of that Prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam, we are the Ummah of the Effacer of falsehood. Islam is the solution, Khilafah is the Method. It is time for us to implement the Truth.

"Say (O Muhammad): If you love Allah then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful"
[ Al-i-Imran 3:31]

Hadith

2009-02-23T09:55:00.001Z

Understanding the Hadith

Nothing historically has received more scathing attacks from the kuffaar than hadeeth literature, that is, the preserved body of narrations related to the Prophet's صلى الله عليه وسلم sayings, actions and conduct. Originally, manykuffaar attempted to stir doubt in the genre of hadith literature by spreading dubious lies about the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and highlighting supposedly contradictoryahadeeth. Orientalists then took up the mantle of destroying the credibility of the Prophetic traditions by carrying out extensive research on the wholesale rejection of hadeeth as a historical source. This was initiated by Orientalists such as Goldziher and Schact, an attack that continues to this day at the hands of modern-day Orientalists.

There exist many misunderstandings about the reality of hadeeth even amongst the Muslim Ummah. Amongst some, there is an attitude that the Sunnah is of much less importance than the Qur'an. From this a mentality has emerged disregarding or neglecting legislation (ahkaam) simply because it is not found explicitly in the Qur'an. Unfortunately, many Muslims have criticised the use of ahadeeth (pl. Hadeeth) by using the very same arguments non-Muslims have used against the authenticity of the Sunnah. In 1977 Colonel Gaddafi, ruler of Libya, announced that the ahadeeth mentioned by the tongue of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم are of doubtful authenticity because they were compiled two hundred years after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. He gave an example of a contradiction in the hadeeth by quoting ‘Aisha رضي الله عنها which says, "Aisha رضي الله عنهاis deficient in mind and Deen." He also mentioned another hadith were we read, "Take half your Deen from the mouth of ‘Aisha رضي الله عنها." Gaddafi concluded that it is not allowed to accept ahadeeth because one cannot be certain whether they are authentic or fabricated. He thus concluded that the Sunnah cannot be taken as a source of legislation.

Historical origins

At the time of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم questions of authenticity were never an issue since the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was living amongst Muslims and his companions were able to correct each other if any mistakes were made in narration. ‘Umar رضي الله عنه once narrated that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "The deceased is punished due to the weeping of his family." ‘Aisha رضي الله عنها corrected him, saying, "The Prophet صلى الله عليهوسلم said this regarding a Jewess that she was punished whilst her family were crying for her," meaning that she was punished due to dying upon disbelief (kufr) whilst the family wept and not because the family was weeping for her. Due to their proximity to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, the Sahabah would check strange attributions and reports when they felt doubt.

The earliest record of fabrication of ahadeeth started after the first civil war between Ali رضي الله عنه and Mu'awiya from 35AH following the murder of Uthman رضي الله عنه. According to ibn Sirin (d.110AH), "They did not ask about the isnad (chain of narration) but when civil war (fitna) arose they said: Name to us your men; those who belong to Ahl al-Sunnah, their traditions were accepted and those who were innovators, their traditions were neglected."

After this time the fabrications increased with varying motivations. Initially the false attributions reflected political differences. According to ibn Abi al-Hadeed: "Lies were introduced in hadeeth on merits originally by Shi'ah. They in the beginning fabricated many ahadeeth in favour of their man, motivated by enmity towards their opponents. When the Bakriyya (i.e. supporters of Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه) found out what the Shi'ah had done they fabricated on their part ahadeeth in favour of their man."

From this problem arose the challenge to authenticate and verify the narrations being attributed to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. There were thousands of transmitters of ahadeeth scattered throughout the Islamic lands and an even greater number of reports to sift through. What was required was for the sound narrations to be separated from the weak and then to be compiled. This was all in the days when the best form of data storage was the human memory.

Understanding the Hadeeth methodology

The essential argument for the rejection of ahadeeth is that they were a human construct and not revelation. The discussion of the Shari'ah begins with its sources, which in origin is the Qur'an. The other legislative source is the recorded sayings, actions and conduct of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم which are termed ahadeeth. The ahadeeth are a collection of around 600,000 authenticated narrations comprised of the sayings, actions and consent of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. A hadeeth is always composed of two parts: the matn (text) and the isnaad(chain of reporters).

When one wants to authenticate any incident or statement one would look at those people narrating the incident and then look at their characters. It was out of this need that an entire science, known as 'ilm al-rijaal (knowledge of the men who transmitted ahadeeth) emerged and this science evolved into an extremely sophisticated discipline. This is because if one is characterised with lying, sin or memory loss, one cannot be considered trustworthy. One can also examine how close the narrators were to a reported incident in terms of whether they actually witnessed it or spoke to another person who narrated the event. This would require the specialist inhadeeth and the scholars of Islam to check accounts of a given narrators memory, eyesight, tendency to exaggerate etc. If the people narrating the event were small in number, then it must be asked if they could have colluded in their accounts. If the opposite were the case and the numbers of trustworthy individuals relating a similar account unknown to the others incredibly numerous, the possibility of collusion diminishes accordingly.

Since each narrator related narrations to others, and so on, chains of narrators develop and we must then examine the chains themselves as well as those within the chain. A tawaatur narration (a narration confirmed generation to generation) is a hadeeth which has been transmitted from one generation to another with each generation being composed of individuals so numerous that the possibility of fabrication or lying is effectively non-existent. It would be similar to taking into account the numerous different narrations from various generations and still claiming the Second World War never took place.

The chain of narration (isnaad) and its study is where the muhaditheen (scholars who collected and categorisedahadeeth) establish the continuity of the chain of narrators i.e. they ensure that there were no gaps, inconsistencies, distortions or errors in the chain. This was achieved by cataloguing the dates of birth and death of narrators and the towns they came from in order to establish the possibility that they had met and hence were actually able to transmit ahadeeth to one another.

The second issue that had to be ascertained was the probity or mendacity of transmitters. It is not sufficient to verify an unbroken continuous chain if even one of the transmitters was known to be of unsound character. Like any chain, all that is necessary for the whole sequence to collapse is simply one weak link that would allow it to fall apart quickly and easily. So one weak link, or in the case of hadeeth literation, a liar in the chain, will weaken or nullify the report respectively even if the rest of the chain features illustrious and trustworthy transmitters. It is for this reason that the Muslims at the time gathered information about the narrators ('ilm al-rijaal) which was a colossal accomplishment since it involved assessing the character, reputation and state of mind of thousands upon thousands of transmitters. This repository of biographical material would then be used to identify each and every transmitter in the chain to ensure a valid link back to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. It is as a result of this that the genre of biographical dictionaries emerged, a genre that went on to become one of the pillars of hadeethclassification with countless books being compiled on this subject. After the study of the chains the ahadeethwere classified into strong (sahih), good/sound (hasan), not sound (da'eef) and fabricated or spurious (maw-doo'). The ahadeeth came to be further categorised into topics such as purity, prayer, charity, partnership, marriage, trade, taxation, brokerage, ruling and deputation, amongst many others. This now meant that legislation could be deduced from this basis from the Sunnah, and Muslims have been doing this for the last fourteen centuries.

The ahadeeth is confirmed as a source of law by the Qur'an itself,

مَّنْ يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللّهَ

"He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed God." [TMQ An-Nisa: 80]

This method became the method of verifying what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did and said. This is why the science of ahadeeth developed and became a whole discipline itself. Thus a valid hadith is one whose chain is continuous by trustworthy and meticulous transmitters whose reports contained no abnormality or defects. Thus, the conditions in this definition can be listed as the following:

1. Ittisaal as-Sanad (continuity of the chain)
2. ‘Adaalatu Al-Ruwwaah (probity or trustworthiness of narrators)
3. DabT Al-Ruwaah (The precision and accuracy of narrators)
4. The absence of conflict with stronger narrations

Detecting forgery

A wide variety of techniques were developed to detect forgery and deception. There are techniques related to thesanad (chain) and also techniques relating to the matn (text). Such techniques were many in number and are beyond the scope of this article; two such techniques are reconciling facts with narrations and mukhtalaf al-Hadeeth, reconciling seemingly contradictory hadith.

An example of reconciling facts with narrations through textual analysis is the one quoted by ibn Qayyim in hiswork, Naqd al-Manqool. He quotes a report which says that an agreement was made with the people of Khaybarthat exempted them from the payment of Jizyah. This report was declared a fabrication due to the following indications in the Matn:

The text mentions Sa'd bin Mu'aadh رضي الله عنه but Sa'd had died before then in the Battle of Ahzab.

It mentions that Mu'aawiyah wrote the letter but Mu'aawiyah had not embraced Islam until the Conquest of Makkah which occurred after this incident.

The hadeeth mentioned Jizyah but the verses (aayaat) legalising Jizyah were not revealed until after the Battle ofTabuk.

Its text mentions that certain types of taxes were levied but these were known not to exist at the time of Khaybar.

The Jews of Khaybar fought the Messenger (saws) and his Companions. What did they do to deserve being granted such an exemption from the obligation of Jizyah, when other tribes equally bellicose had not been exempted?

Had the Prophet (saws) exempted the people of Khaybar from the Jizyah, he would not have stipulated that they be expelled when he صلى الله عليه وسلم willed. This does not fit with the ruling that the Ahl al-Dhimmah cannot be expelled as long as they abide by the rules of Islam.

If the Prophet had exempted them, why did none of his companions, the Sahaabah, ever exempt them?

In this way, established facts were utilised to ascertain the validity of the content in the various ahadeeth.

When presented with two sets of contradictory hadith, one of three options is possible. Either one can resort to reconciliation of the hadeeth by considering a whole host of issues such as textual indication or, if this is not possible, then the outweighing (tarjeeh) of one report over the other if the chronology is not known and finally, accepting abrogation if the chronology is known.

Thus, the means of removing conflicts are three:

a) Jam' a (reconciliation)
b) Tarjeeh (outweighing if the chronology is not known)
c) Naskh (abrogation if chronology is known)
d) If none of the above methods are possible, then the muhadditheen revert back to the original rule and assume the contradictory texts are non-existent.

The process of reconciliation succeeds by attempting to reconcile two conflicting texts due to certain linguistic and circumstantial considerations. Here, the textual indications can assist in the reconciliation between two texts. For example, in one hadeeth, we read, "Water is pure so nothing can make it impure." (Abu Dawud). In another, we read, "If the water is enough to fill two pots (qullatayn), it carries no impurity." (An-Nasaa`ee) The first text is ‘Aam (general) for all amounts of water except the wording of the second text indicates that water can become impure if its nature is changed. This is a specification (takhsees) of the first text by the meaning of the second.

Tarjeeh (outweighing) can occur in a number of ways; one such way is if one of the conflicting hadeeth accords with another authentic hadith. For example, one hadeeth reads, "There is no nikaah (marriage) without a wali (guardian)." (Abu Dawud) This hadeeth stipulates the presence of a wali but it seems to contradict anotherhadeeth which indicates that the wali is not stipulated. That hadith is as follows, "The matron has greater right than her guardians and the virgin her permission is sought. Her permission is her silence." (Saheeh Muslim) Yet the first hadith stipulating the presence of the wali agrees with another sound narration which says, "Any woman who gets married without the permission of her guardian (Wali), her marriage will be void, her marriage will be void, her marriage will be void." (al-Haakim) Therefore, the tarjeeh here will be that thehadeeth which says that there is no nikaah without a wali is outweighed and accepted because it is supported by another authentic narration.

As for abrogation, this happens when it is not possible to reconcile a hadeeth but abrogation is possible because the chronology is known. For example, one hadeeth reads, "The one who cups blood and is cupped has broken his fast" whereas another hadeeth reads, "...that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was cupped while he was fasting." If we scrutinize the circumstances of these ahadeeth, we find that first hadeeth took place in the 8th year after Hijrah during the Conquest of Makkah while the second hadeeth is in the Farewell Khutbah in the 10th year after Hijrah. Thus, Imaam Ash-Shaafi'ee رضي الله عنه took the view that the second hadeeth had abrogated the first, allowing the cupping of blood while fasting in Ramadaan.

The Muslim scholars and experts were able to amass a database of thousands of narrators, define rigorous criteria to assess authenticity, classify and adopt a grading system for chain narrators, devise techniques to detect and avert mistakes and fabrications and adopt a methodology to reconcile the differences within certain texts. The result was the remarkably robust and effective preservation of the Islamic ideology and its legislative capacity.

If we compare the system of hadeeth collection (Isnaad) to the modern system of historical analysis, we will find the former to be much more sophisticated and successful in establishing the authenticity of historical incidents and events. What the Muslims called a da'eef hadith is perhaps stronger in historicity, in some of its forms, than modern sources such as history textbooks, numismatics or historical criticism of literary texts. This is because da'eef does not mean fabrication but simple that it does not satisfy the stringent criteria developed by themuhadditheen.

Strangers

2009-01-17T16:06:00.002Z

The Return of the Strangers

We live in a strange time. A time where many have been driven astray from the Deen of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by the enjoyments of this world. A time where even the wise become confused and puzzled from the contradictions that they see before them. This is the time where the truthful people are belied and the liars are said to speak the truth; the honest people are betrayed and the betrayers become ones who others trust. Indeed this is the time where most hardships and tests befall those who stand with the truth, whereas ease and comfort seem to be what those who practice immorality and injustice receive.

Yet amidst this bizarre world, a group of strangers emerge who are not even recognized by their own families and friends. Pain and suffering comes to them in many shapes and forms and their livelihoods are unjustly taken from them. But they are not strangers in the sights of the angels. Who are those strangers in these scary times?

The prophet Muhammed (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

"Islam started strange and it will become strange once again as it started, so glad tidings to the strangers"

[Sahih Muslim]

When the message of Islam was first revealed to the world, the Kuffar of Makkah responded to it with anger and oppression to those who called for it. They knew that Islam was a challenge to their way of life and they were not willing to accept its message, even though they knew that it was the truth.

What happened with the Prophet Muhammed (sallAllahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and his companions in Makkah was not something new. This is the nature of any new message that comes to challenge an existing way of life. It will always be faced with hardships and pain. It is an attempt to weaken the carriers of the new message. It is an attempt to force them to compromise in their message. But this is not what the prophets and their companions did.

The prophet Muhammed (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

"A time will come when Leaders will befall you. If you obey them they will lead you astray and if you disobey them they will kill you" The companions asked: "What do you order us to do then?" He responded: "Be like the companions of Isa (‘alayhi al salam) where they were chopped with saws and crucified on wood; for by the One who has my soul in His hand (Allah), death in the cause of Allah is better than a life of disobedience."

This is the expectation of the Dawah carriers, the callers of the Deen of Islam. They know the hardships that they are going to face and it does not slow them down from carrying the message of Islam unaltered and without compromise. They know that they only do this for the sake of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) alone and no other. Every feeling of pain or torture that they face increases their connection with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and makes them more convinced of the truth that they hold and carry to the world.

Muslims are on a mission on this Earth to present the message of Islam as a way of life. We know of the injustices that are taking place around us and the governments that support them. We know that the systems that currently exist in this world are not Islamic and do not serve the interests of the Muslims. Where is the Islamic system that is the beacon of light and justice for this world?

The carriers of this message will be tested in many ways. But a combination of patience and Iman is the only thing that keeps the believers going. We have Iman and trust that the fruit of this face-off between truth and falsehood is definite victory of the truth and its followers. After this journey of patience – this journey of hardships and tests – victory will come as it came to those before us. The prophets and their companions became strong after their initial weakness; they became leaders after being sidelined in society and being the odd ones out.

Allah's promise of victory and our belief in the truth is what the strangers of this time hold on to.

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says:

"And the Disbelievers said to their Messengers: "Be sure we shall drive you out of our land, or you shall return to our religion." But their Lord inspired (this Message) to them: "Verily We shall cause the wrong-doers to perish! And verily We shall cause you to abide in the land, and succeed them. This (reward) is for those who fear the standing before Me (on the Day of Judgement); this (reward) is for those who fear my threat."

[TMQ Ibrahim: 13-14]

Muharram and ‘Ashoora

2009-01-10T20:02:00.002Z

The significance of Muharram and ‘Ashoora

The day of ‘Ashoora is approaching us on the tenth of the month of Muharram. This sacred month of Muharram is a blessed and important month for the Muslims.It is the first month of the Hijri calendar, and is one of the four sacred months concerning which Allah (swt) says in Surah al-Tawbah:

“Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (in a year), so it was ordained by Allah on the Day when He created the heavens and the earth; of them, four are sacred. That is the right religion, so wrong not yourselves therein…” [TMQ al-Tawbah: 36]

In this ayah, Allah says, “so wrong not yourselves therein…” means do not wrong yourselves in these sacred months, because sin in these months is worse than in other months.It was reported that Ibn ‘Abbas (ra) said that this phrase, “so wrong not yourselves therein…” referred to all the months, then these four were singled out and made sacred, so that sin in these months is more serious and good deeds bring a greater reward.It was narrated by al-Bukhari (2958) that Abu Bakrah (ra) reported that the Prophet (saw) said:“The year is twelve months of which four are sacred, the three consecutive months of Dhu’l-Qa’dah, Dhu’ l-Hijjah and Muharram, and Rajab Mudar which comes between Jumaadil-akir and Sha’ baan.”In these days of Muharram the Prophet (saw) recommended for us to fast on the 9th and the 10th of this month.

Al-Bukhari narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas (ra) who said: “The Prophet (saw) came to Madinah and saw the Jews fasting on the day of ‘Ashoora’. He said, ‘What is this?’ They said, ‘This is a righteous day, it is the day when Allah saved the Children of Israel from their enemies, so Musa fasted on this day.’ He said, ‘We have more right to Musa than you,’ so he fasted on that day and commanded [the Muslims] to fast on that day.” [Bukhari, Hadith No: 1865].In a report narrated by Imam Muslim, that the Jews said, “This is a great day, on which Allah saved Musa and his people, and drowned Pharaoh and his people.”Muslim also reported that, “Musa fasted on this day in thanksgiving to Allah, so we fast on this day.”

Mu'awiyah ibn Abu Sufyan relates: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say, "It is the day of 'Ashoora. Allah (swt) has not made fasting obligatory for you. But I am fasting. He who likes to observe fast among you should do so, and he who likes not to observe it (does not have to) observe it." [Sahih Muslim] Abu Qatada (ra) relates that the Holy Prophet (saw) said that, “the fast on the 10th of Muharram atones for the sins of the preceding year.” [Sahih Muslim] Abu Huraira (ra) reports that the Holy Prophet (ra) said, “after Ramadan, the fasts of Muharram have the greatest excellence.” [Sahih Muslim] In addition to the keeping of the fast on the 10th of Muharram we should also aim to fast on the 9th as well as stipulated in the following ahadith:Ibn Abbas (ra) relates that when the Holy Prophet (saw) said, "If I survive till next year, I will definitely observe fast on the 9th of Muharram (as well)." [Sahih Muslim] Hakam ibn Al-Arat (ra) relates: I went to Ibn Abbas (ra). I said to him: Tell me about fasting on 'Ashura. He said, "When you seen the new moon of Muharram count the (days) and (begin to) observe fast on the 9th." I said to him: "Is it how the Messenger of Allah (saw) observed the fast?" He said, "Yes." [Sahih Muslim]

These days also remind us of the story of Musa (as) and his struggle against the Pharaoh. Allah (swt) said in Sura al-Qasas:“These are Verses of the Book that makes (things) clear. We rehearse to you some of the story of Musa and Firawn (Pharaoh) in Truth for people who believe. Truly Firawn elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief. And We wished to be gracious to those who were being depressed in the land to make them leaders and make them heirs. To establish a firm place for them in the land and to show Firawn and Haman and their hosts at their hands the very things against which they were taking precautions.” [TMQ 28:1-6]Indeed brothers the story of Musa (as) is a great story that Allah (swt) related to us in the Quran.

Allah (swt) told us of how the Firawn oppressed the people, how Firawn broke the people into sections depressing a small group among them, how Firawn killed the new born sons of the people and how he ruled the people with his tyranny and oppression.And we all know how Allah Azza wa Jal raised Musa (as) to liberate the people from this tyranny and oppression.Allah Ar-Rahman ar-Raheem mentioned in the in Surah al-Qasas how he protected Musa (as) from his campaign of killing the children. Allah (swt) tells us of how when Musa (as) was born Allah (swt) inspired his mother to cast him into the river. Look how she obeyed this command of Allah (swt) with no resistance, imagine casting your child into the river, this is the meaning of having Tawakkal in Allah (swt).

Firawn and his wife found Musa (as), upon seeing Musa (as) Firawn’s wife felt joy and convinced Firawn not to slay him. Allah (swt) reunited Musa (as) with his mother when he would not take the milk from others, so eventually the wife of Firawn employed Musa (as)’s mother as a maid to look after him. Allah (swt) explains this beautiful story,“And We ordained that he refused suck at first until (his sister came up and) said: "Shall I point out to you the people of a house that will nourish and bring him up for you and be sincerely attached to him?"...Thus did We restore him to his mother that her eye might be comforted that she might not grieve and that she might know that the promise of Allah is true: but most of them do not understand.” [TMQ al-Qasas: 12-13]When Musa (as) grew up he stood against Firawn and challenged his corruption and tyranny, he led the Children of Israel (Bani Israel) against the Firawn and made them disbelieve in him and his tyranny. Firawn believed he was a god and that he had the power of life and death in his hands.

Allah Azza wa Jal said in Surah Yunus:

“Firawn was an arrogant tyrant on the earth indeed he was one of the Musrifeen (transgressors)” [TMQ 10:83]

Brothers today we have many modern day Firawn’s, many Musrifeen (transgressors) and tyrants.Today Bush and his America is one of these modern day Pharaoh’s. We know America thinks it is the God of this world, how it bombed the Muslims in Iraq,Gaza,Afganistan, how it bombed the Muslims in Afghanistan and Sudan in the past for no reason and how it continues to impose it’s policies all over the Islamic lands. It is the arrogant tyrant of the world today. The arrogance of these people is apparent, as one Time magazine title put it 'America Rules: Thank God’.Brothers, America is not the only Firawn in this world today, America has many assistants in the world as Firawn had his assistants like Haman.

Today the rulers in the Muslim world are these assistants and Firawn’s who carve up the people as Firawn did and oppress them as Firawn did and kill them as Firawn did.Today brothers although there are many tyrannical agents of Firawn and the side of Baatil (falsehood) is clear, we must realise that the side of Haq (truth) is also clear and gaining momentum. The people on the side of truth, carrying the call of liberation from the rules of man to the rule of Allah (swt), from darkness of the Firawn’s to the light of the Khilafah, even if they face all types of persecutions and hardship in the pursuit of this.Brothers! Musa (as) liberated the Children of Israel from the Firawn, we to need to liberate the Muslim Ummah from the oppression of Capitalism. The method to achieve this is taken from the well known Hadith,

"Banu Israel used to be looked after by the Prophets; when one Prophet died, another one would succeed him, and there will be no more Prophets after me. There will be Khulafah and they will number many."

Firawn’s end came even though he believed he had all power in his hands. Indeed the time will come when America and its agents in the Muslim world will drown in the ocean of history as Firawn and his men were swallowed by the ocean and drowned.Musa (as) and all the other Prophet’s (as) relied upon non other than Allah (swt) to fulfil their mission. Musa (as) sought help and support from his Lord, Allah (swt) says in Surah Ta-Ha ,

"Musa said: 'O my Lord! Open for me my chest (grant me self-confidence, contentment, and boldness). And ease my task for me; And loosen the knot (the problem) from my tongue, (i.e. remove the impairment in my speech), that they understand my speech, And appoint for me a helper from my family, Haroon, my brother; Increase my strength with him, And let him share my task (of conveying Allah's message), That we may glorify You much, And remember You much, Verily! You are of us Ever a Well-Seer” [TMQ Ta-Ha: 25-35]

Today in our pursuit of re-establishing the Khilafah to dethrone the Firawn’s of this world we must rely on Allah (swt) alone, He is As-Samee’a, Al-Mujeeb.

Insha Allah talla, the Victory is near and all ocupplied Muslim Lands will be liberated [ by the hands of the Noble Ummah of Muhammad 'saw'.]

O Allah 'swt' May we be the worthy ones to unite this Ummah and establish Islam as a political entity. Ameen

Ramadhan

2008-08-31T18:23:00.001+01:00

Salam'

Ramadhan starts on Monday 01/09/2008.

Many Allah swt accept our fast and reward us with Jannah al Ferdous.

Wa-Salam

Women

2008-06-23T14:52:00.001+01:00

Women and Equality

The current debate on women's rights has until now been predominantly shaped by its progress in the west. Whilst attitudes towards women have changed significantly in the west through the endeavours of feminists and women's rights movements of different philosophical persuasions, Akmal Asghar questions some of the assumptions - and their universality - as well as the broader impact of their successes.The treatment of women in any society has become, without doubt, a key marker in evaluating its progress. The accepted framework of the debate on women's rights has centred around the need for 'equality', to redress a historic imbalance that has empowered men considerably more than it has women, and to undermine patriarchy and societies modelled on its assumptions. It is without doubt that the perception, treatment and rights of women are now dramatically different to those of even the last century. But alongside the rapid changes that followed the 'domestic revolution', as some term it, a number of very key questions remain unanswered. While historical prejudices and assumptions may be slowly eroding in areas of opportunity, employment conditions, political rights, and marriage-particularly in the West-it would be difficult to argue that the debate on women's rights is now over. Many feminists and women's rights activists, while welcoming the changes of the last century, believe that there are many battles still to be fought, although they remain deeply divided on which battles they are.These unanswered questions not only relate to the rights of women, but to the impact that the successes of women's movements have had on society as a whole. Their progress has fuelled increasingly complex dilemmas on issues such as the rights of children, relationships with the opposite sex, and the escalation of previously rare social problems. They have exposed shortcomings in the accepted framework and in its very assumptions, illustrated by the bitter divisions that plague post-feminist movements. Critically, one must ask if the discussions in the West-promoted as a template and international standard-have addressed the core issues of the debate. If, however, they have overlooked them we are in need of a new perspective.The contextThe currently accepted framework of debate on women's rights originated shortly after Europe's age of enlightenment. It was Mary Wollstonecroft, influenced by her company of liberal thinkers, who first applied the conclusions of the enlightenment to the issues of women in her 'Vindication of the Rights of Women' in 1792. It followed the publication of 'The Rights of Man' by her close friend Thomas Paine and challenged the 'domestic tyranny of men' as Paine had challenged the 'divine right of kings'. After nearly a century of campaigning, and through the turbulence of the French Revolution, another landmark work on the rights of women was the publication of 'The Subjugation of Women' by John Stuart Mill.'Modern' perspectives on the rights of women are largely based on the liberal conclusions first articulated by Wollstonecroft and Mill. Also termed 'constructivism', liberal positions assert that men and women are fundamentally-'perfectly' as Mill puts it-equal. Accepting anything less is to promote the oppression of one sex over the other, rendering the other subordinate. Observed differences between men and women, they asserted, are neither biological nor innate but the product of centuries of conditioning. This is why feminists are keen to differentiate between 'gender' as a social construct and 'sex'. Simone De Beauvoir, one of the most significant voices after Wollstonecroft, famously remarked in her book 'The Second Sex': "One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman". Equality translated to equal political, economic, and social rights and opportunities, such as those to independent education, employment and political representation. The 'division of labour', between housewife female and breadwinning male, was deplored as a symbol of subjugation and patriarchy (male dominated society) and a consequence of the growing injustices of the industrial revolution. Liberal individualism, therefore, was the bedrock on which classical theories of women's emancipation were founded and which now form the foundations of modern perceptions.The traditionalists, or essentialists, who maintained that the differences between men and women were a biological fact and not a social construct, are now less prominent in the debate on women's rights. Advocates such as James FitzJames Stephen, a contemporary of Mill, in his book 'Liberty, Equality and Fraternity' held that differing political, social and economic rights should follow from these determined differences. The Victorians held that men and women should operate in two separate spheres (with the women confined to the home) based on the long-established belief of the world as a naturally ordered whole, in which all was harmonious as long as things stayed in their ordained places. This is the division of labour feminists deplored. Although conservatives and traditionalists still maintain similar arguments, the liberals have the victory in the debate thus far.Equality: The European contextGreat significance and importance has been assigned to the discussion of 'equality', and to the specific meaning it has come to assume, by western writers. But its symbolism as a key tenet in the debate on women's rights, such that it has become the very prism through which emancipation is measured, is largely because of its European context. Movements who championed women's emancipation were defined by their struggle against a distinctly European mindset and the inconsistency with which it treated women in relation to men, particularly during its medieval to post-industrial period. It is events in Europe and post-revolution America-both of whom share a common European tradition-which have defined the accepted framework of the debate on women.A number of contributions forged the historical context in which equality between the sexes was first suggested in Europe. Christian theology, a pillar of Europe's medieval monarchies, played a pivotal role in forming Europe's confused perspectives on women. The Decretum Gratiani, which formed the basis of Church law for nearly eight hundred years between 1140 and 1917, assigned roles and duties on the basis that "sin came into the world through them [women]" and that "because of original sin they [women] must show themselves submissive".i Apart from blaming Eve for original sin, and so condemning women, the belief that Eve was created out of the bent rib of Adam popularised their secondary nature. Indeed, even after the Reformation, the works of theologians that asserted women possessed an innately evil capacity, and that even their humanity was questionable convinced monarchs and senior clergy. Pope Innocent VIII's endorsement of the book 'The Hammer of the Witches' in 1484, which asserts: "What else is woman but a foe to friendship, an inescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic danger, a delectable detriment, an evil of nature, painted with fair colours",ii resulted in thousands of women being burned at the stake.These theological traditions positioned women at the start of the industrial revolution. Industrialisation, however, did not liberate women from their historical treatment but merely compounded their subordination. The considerable wealth generated during the industrial age created a growing male middle class who increasingly disregarded women. Women either found themselves working for a pitiful wage in the large factories brought on by industrialisation or married to the expanding group of middle class industrialists to whom they deferred ownership of their property, control over wages they earned independently, and the major part of their marriage rights. Accompanying the increasing power middle class men enjoyed, was domestic abuse and violence. Women bemoaned their treatment at the hands of men, who justified their typically drunk and unruly behaviour on the pressures of increasing competition in commerce and industry and showed no interest in domestic matters other than to demand that their needs were met. Indeed, it was this situation in industrial Europe that formed the key notion of patriarchy, or male dominated societies, that feminists have opposed ever since.Even the enlightenment's most eminent thinkers spoke of the subject in a manner reflective of more traditional attitudes. Rousseau in 'Emile', his seminal work on education, wrote: "Men and women are made for each other, but their mutual dependencies are not equal. We could survive without them better than they could without us. They are dependent on our feelings, on the price we put on their merits, on the value we set on their attractions and on their virtues. Thus women's entire education should be planned in relation to men. To please men, to be useful to them to win their love and respect…"iiiIn this historical context, equality was significant and indeed very controversial when first suggested. The equality debate established the framework by which Europe dealt with the subjugation of its women, corrected perceptions of their inferiority and founded movements that worked for their emancipation. But if we separate the long history that formed the backdrop to the notion of equality, we find the assertion that neither men nor women are inferior to one another is a very simple, indeed obvious, truth. Correcting historical prejudice alone cannot be a basis for defining a relationship between people.Evaluating the idea of equalityThe simple assertion that men and women are equal-that women are not inferior to men-alone articulates very little if considered outside its historical context; it leaves a number of unanswered questions. It does not address how best men and women can cooperate to forge a socially cohesive society. In the wider context of human relationships, we are in need of more than just this simple assertion of equality to handle the disputes and organise the relationships that naturally arise between people. Indeed, we are in need of a body of additional ideas and principles.Liberal individualism, however, may regard this an irrelevant criticism; it considers men and women as individuals and the unanswered questions justified because they represent the personal freedom for both men and women to conduct their lives in the way they see fit. The issue of social cohesion may, therefore, be of marginal importance if it means restricting the choices of individuals in the name of the health of the collective.There are two important issues to consider in responding to liberal objections. Firstly, the need for a framework of additional ideas and principles arises from no more than human interactions that occur within families, social groups, and society as a whole. Liberal individualism, characterised sometimes as putting the 'individual before society', would articulate a deficient political theory if it were to ignore relationships that are often not a matter of much choice. Individuals could always choose to isolate themselves from family and society, but we are born with family and relatives and so naturally relate with them; we engage in social activity with friends, and relationships between men and women determine the very future of the human race through human reproduction. Some framework is needed to articulate rights, indeed responsibilities, that men, women and their offspring should be appropriated in order to produce a socially coherent society.Secondly, the issue of difference. Differences between men and women can lead to specific needs and complex disputes, whose management is a key element of ensuring social cohesion. Any failure to acknowledge or manage them effectively in the name of equality can be just as oppressive and detrimental as believing they symbolise the superiority of one sex over the other. A simple assertion of human equality provides limited guidance on the issue of difference and gives rise to a need for additional, more elaborate, ideas and principles.Differences between men and womenElaborating on each of these points, let us briefly consider the issue of difference. Often received with scepticism, liberal and feminist thinkers asserted that perceived differences between men and women were a social construct, not biological fact, and that the discussion of differences had been used historically as a tool for condemning women to subordinate roles. Historically in Europe, there have been some perceived differences between men and women (whether or not women possessed deficient intelligence, reduced capability for sound verdicts, and a lower capacity to learn and reason) which were assumptions, not facts, about women. The distinction between gender and sex therefore appears justifiable and a helpful way to separate social construct from biological fact. But rejecting all differences by attributing them to the product of social conditions may equally result in a dishonest account of human nature.There are observable differences between men and women, the nature of which have been the subject of many contemporary debates in science, indeed the themes of philosophical discourse over many millennia: from studies by evolutionary psychologists and neuroscientists, to the conclusions of Plato and Aristotle.iv In fact, among the increasingly fragmented post-feminist movements are those who assert, rather than deny, differences between men and women. They draw on differences between men and women to identify the uniqueness of women and refuse male assimilation that results from interpreting female characteristics in male terms. They assert femininity and characterise contemporary thinking in many ways.The ‘Poet Psyche’ attempted to understand the uniqueness of women through the use of Freudian, amongst other, psycho-analyses. The early eighties saw the emerging popularity of the 'difference feminists', after the publication of Carol Gilligan's 'In a Different Voice' in 1982, following conclusions by Nancy Chodorow published in 'The Reproduction of Mothering'. Gilligan attempted to assert that women possessed a different type of intelligence, a more caring and emotionally sophisticated psyche that was uniquely different-although some went on to assert it more superior-to that of men.The conclusions of these scientific and philosophical studies have been disparate and varied-some clearly disproved and erroneous, as have some of the methods used to understand them, particularly Freudian tools or Gilligan's surveys (as well as the questionable relevance of knowledge of the precise nature of differences in solving practical social problems). However, these discourses demonstrate that differences between men and women have been consistently observable and are not recent phenomena. It is crucial to note that unlike some conservative conclusions,v differences do not translate to the inferiority or superiority of either sex and must be considered in this context.Addressing differences and relationships between men and womenEquality alone appears an unsophisticated conclusion in dealing with differences. This is because they may result in a demand for different treatment, indeed additional rights under certain circumstances. For example, it is women that give birth and carry the physical impact of doing so during pregnancy and delivery, just as they carry the burden of doing what they can to give birth to a healthy child. This may require specific medical treatment and care arrangements during pregnancy and after the birth of the child, for both mother and child. These are requirements that men will never need as the difference in treatment arises from biological differences between men and women. In simple equality terms, this may appear an endorsement of unequal treatment, and so demanding equality alone can be misleading.Leaving aside simple differences due to biology, the issue is more complex when dealing with disputes. The issue of children is particularly divisive if not managed correctly, as they involve a collective group of individuals and the relationships between them. For example, if a couple decide to separate after the birth of their child, or even some time after that, who takes responsibility of the child if both want to do so? If one does take custody, what governs the relationship, access, the amount of time spent, financial assistance the mother or father have with that child if they are not the ones granted custody? Women may consider they have a greater right over the child because of the physical impact they endured carrying the child during pregnancy, a demand that asserts biology can justify different, indeed additional, rights. Such disputes have proven a challenge for western legislators, and lucrative for its legal profession; among other things, the increasing divorce rates present a number of complex scenarios. The failures of the current system (discussed in detail later) to deal with such situations have left both sexes, in different situations, complaining of unfair treatment. The 'Fathers for Justice' campaign in Britain is one public example of parents expressing their sense of anger at the unfairness with which they believe the system has treated them in relation to women. Such feelings of unfairness are unfortunate, as fairness rests at the heart of any pursuit for, or perception of, equality.Indeed, a number of problems naturally confront men and women, regardless of the precise nature or extent of differences between them, simply because of the fact that the continuation of the human species depends on their mutual coming together. Politicians and thinkers have not only been preoccupied with disputes, but also with the ideal setting for their convening and the impact that fractured relationships can have on both sexes and society as a whole.The need for a social frameworkA simple assertion of equality alone, therefore, has limited practical use; there is a need for something more detailed and sophisticated. It provides limited insight into the rights either sex should be appropriated in such disputes. As the philosopher J R Lucas points out: "It is clear that formal Equality by itself establishes very little… Many of these differences we may wish to rule out as not being relevant, but since the principle of formal Equality does not provide, of itself, any criteria of relevance, it does not, by itself, establish much. It gives a line of argument, but not any definite conclusion".vi The words of Peggy Antrobus resonate these limitations as she describes 'equality vs difference' being amongst the woman's movement's "paradoxes and dilemmas"vii in her book 'The Global Woman's Movement'.We are therefore in need of a social framework comprising additional, more elaborated, ideas and principles that tackle justice, rights and responsibilities, and how to administer them. Terms such as 'justice', 'equality', 'unequal', and 'fair' are closely associated, and do not always carry reciprocal meanings as has been briefly illustrated, but exactly how depends on this framework. Critics also point to the fact that a principle of equality provides insufficient guidance in, for example, arbitrating justice.viiiCriticising through the prism of equalityIndeed, feminist activists and thinkers implicitly acknowledge this. The meaning of 'equality' is heavily contested exactly because it has come to include perspectives on the ideal social framework, and how to attain it. For liberal feminists, it is largely correcting prejudices in the prevailing, western system; for some radical feminists it is primarily fighting patriarchy; for socialist feminists it is equalising economic conditions; for some it is even reasserting motherhood, and all these are among many others. These disagreements and disputes all centre on translating or 'practicalising' equality, which often results in fundamentally opposing conclusions. For example, the use of the women's body in advertising or pornography; whether to correct, undermine or replace the current system; whether or not to assert difference or to regard it as having no bearing in the appropriation of rights; whether or not the domestic mother is a subjugated role or a symbol of distinct femininity; whether or not the terms 'feminine' or 'femininity' themselves inherently depict subjugation and should be rejected, are just a few of the subjects that deeply divide contemporary feminist thought.But although termed 'equality', it is essential to separate it from opinions on social framework and policy. Asserting that neither men nor women are inferior to each other can be accepted as universal; current opinions on social policy are not. Therefore, approaching the subject of women's right through the term 'equality' can be ambiguous, if not misleading, as can criticising alternative perspectives on women's rights through its use. The substantive debate is thus over the social frameworks used to manage the relationships between men and women, and not the somewhat nebulous labels used to describe them.Failures of the current social frameworkThe predominant approach to social framework, labelled 'equality', in western liberal democracies has been to grant women the rights and opportunities that men have enjoyed historically. It has translated into a demand for equal employment, political, economic, and social rights and opportunities, and attempts to combat sexist prejudices. It is an approach that seeks to equalise rights and opportunities in the context of the existing system; not to replace it, but to equalise treatment under it.However, a policy that seeks simply to equalise treatment in an existing system may also be oppressive. In fact, a considerable segment of feminist thought rejects it as a counterproductive approach. It does not correct inherent errors in the values that form the existing system, but assimilates women into them. Particularly if the existing system is institutionally at the service of men, women continually refer to their rights in male terms as they play catch-up in a system that is accepted as preferential to and prejudicing men, therefore institutionalising their disadvantaged status.The issue of employment opportunities and rights has featured significantly in this approach. Feminist thinkers considered financial independence from men a key part of emancipation; that men's monopoly over earnings has meant that power has rested with the male half of humanity historically. Promoting economic independence, however, has led to difficulties of other kinds. For those couples, or single mothers, with children, liberation against domestication through pursuing paid employment has often made little financial sense, and has created concerns over relationships with children. Alongside increases in the number of women in paid employment has been an increase in demand for childcare, and with it substantial costs of hire, compounded by current shortages.ix The cost of day nurseries in the UK, nationally, is estimated to be nearly £7000 a year for a 2 year-old child, peaking to £168 per week in London,x and the cost for a nanny is estimated at averaging over £21,000 a year,xi above the national average wage. Even for most dual-income families this is a considerable financial burden, and says nothing of the mental and physical effort that is required to combine paid employment with responsibility for children. Indeed, the situation is rather ironic. A mother seeking employment creates an employment opportunity in doing so, through the need for someone to mind her child whilst at work; hiring the child-carer costs a considerable proportion of her own wage, and more often than not will hire a woman.xii Superficially, it appears a rather complicated reshuffle but with the same net effect-someone must care for the child. If the mother, or father, had remained at home it would not have considerably altered her, or the couple's, income or costs. But as current employment debate demonstrates, despite the financial paradox, employment has become an icon of empowerment and is demanding that women's child-bearing nature should not put them at any career disadvantage to men.It is not only financial pressures that women and couples have come to endure. The onset of a number of social dilemmas and problems can be traced back to confusion and a lack of guidance over social responsibilities, although liberal individualists may interpret such shortcomings as welcome freedom. Men and women may lead independent, indeed irresponsible, lives but the birth of a child brings with it a shared responsibility that needs to be managed. Working parents have a limited amount of time with their children, an issue of considerable regret as surveys indicatexiii and there is confusion over responsibilities towards children in respect of time, commitment, values, and whether or not to divide or share tasks between couples. While women increasingly confront the assumption that they are primarily responsible for the care of children, it appears that the popular perception among men is that they are not.xiv Some couples may share responsibilities but the numbers of single parent families are rising, as are children available for adoption, teenage pregnancies, abortions, and 'unintended' births. The impact has been to burden parents with numerous social and financial dilemmas and to burden society with the impact of their inevitable mistakes.A Great Disruption?In his book 'The Great Disruption', Francis Fukuyama points to the, "…negative social trends, which together reflect a weakening of social bonds and common values in Western societies…" understanding the causes of which he dedicates a book. He contends that the onset of service based industries and the independence provided by the invention of oral contraceptives in the 60s and 70s unleashed women to the labour markets, a trend which has subsequently compromised traditional family structures. The breakdown in family structures and the loss of 'social capital' in the west he asserts, has subsequently created crime, insecurity and moral decline. But the technological advances which delivered the computer and the pill were not the cause of women entering employment; but rather tools for advocates of women's liberation, as the Economist magazine points out.xv It is ironic, that while heralding the triumph of liberal democracies in 'The End of History and the Last Man', Fukuyama admits that individualism (which consequently led to the basis of feminism) now compromises social stability: "The tendency of contemporary liberal democracies to fall prey to excessive individualism is perhaps their greatest long-term vulnerability and is particularly visible in the most individualistic of all democracies, the United States".xviThis increasing confusion over social responsibility has prompted some to attempt to identify the most appropriate social setting for children, families and society as a whole. Indeed, none other than Jack Straw, when he was British home secretary, wrote in his introduction to 'Supporting Families': "The evidence is that children are best brought up where you have two natural parents and it is more likely to be a stable family if they are married. It plainly makes sense for the government to do what it can to strengthen the institution of marriage", a view fought vociferously by radical feminists in his own party.xvii But promoting 'stable' family structures in the context of expanding dual income families, as women seek empowerment in the labour markets, and the costs of childcare, is fraught with dilemmas, complications, and apparent paradoxes.The heart of the problem in the current framework lies in the paradox created by trading-off liberal individualism and the need for social cohesion; liberating women from traditional family settings and the need for stable homes; challenging men's monopoly on earnings and the disadvantage created by women's child-bearing nature; seeking equality with men and appropriating for human differences. The logic of each creates an impasse.Roles & ResponsibilitiesWestern societies have increasingly rejected the notion of different roles and responsibilities between men and women to handle their increasing social dilemmas, as part of a social construct of gender and a disadvantageous division of labour. However, the questioning of social construct, both social roles and policy, by feminist thinkers has largely been to undermine historically western assumptions about women. No right to vote; to own property or to dispose of income as one wishes; denied access to education and work; considered meaningless in political and intellectual circles; regarded as inferior to men-all these describe the condition of women in European history. It seems appropriate to undermine these assumptions, indeed to reject them, as it does challenge this subjugated feminine construct. But it would be short-sighted to reject all beliefs about social relationships between men and women on the back of European experience and the roles it appropriated its women.From the discussion on managing differences, it appears that even after deconstructing social roles and constructs, the reality of men and women lead us back to conclude that some social system is needed to regulate their relationships, to prevent subjugation, abuse of rights and manage disputes between them. A framework is needed to articulate responsibilities and rights that men, women and children have towards each other. Thus, should we reject the notion of a 'social construct' per se, or specifically those false 'social constructs' that lead to the subjugation of either sex?But in a secular framework, an answer is difficult as it is trapped in gender polarisation. Either it is men that decide roles and responsibilities, or women. Whoever decides, they will fuel accusations of bias, preference, and privilege towards the deciding sex, by strengthening either patriarchy or matriarchy. In the development of the debate in the West these are the accusations that arguably rendered the appropriation of roles irrelevant in the first place.Questioning the assumptions & presenting alternativesThe story of the modern woman is one of her journey through the history of Western Europe and North America. Whether the depiction of Mary Wollenstonecroft as the 'first feminist', the French revolution, Mill's work on the 'Subjugation of Women', the Pankhurst's and the suffragettes, or the 'successes' of 'second wave' feminism in the 60s and 70s; it is the European experience that has been taken as the global model for women's emancipation. It inspires, indeed defines, feminism in other parts of the world. But its European context has entrenched a number of Eurocentric assumptions.This is most apparent when considering alternatives, such as the Islamic social framework. It is true that in the industrial middle class, men translated economic prowess as power both in society and in family, and the domestic mother in the context of advent of liberalism and capitalism came to represent a subjugated role. However, a domestic mother in the Islamic social framework is in an empowered and honoured position. She is afforded rights to property, is encouraged to learn and gain scholarship, to be politically active-indeed is granted the vote-and is afforded a number of marriage rights including access to divorce. This Islamic framework does not measure worth in terms of wealth or access to it, as has increasingly been the case in the West since the advent of liberal Capitalism, and so motherhood is valued no less, and often more so, than a highly paid role.By the same token, Islam does not consider men predominating in the work place as representing patriarchy, or placing society at the service of men's needs. The Islamic framework is built on accepting that men and women are equally human, neither inferior to the other (indeed it did so well before Europe's enlightenment) and are judged equally before their Creator. Both men and women may choose to work and earn, and those earnings are measured by merit and not by sex; women will earn the same as men if undertaking the same work. Likewise, the validity of opinions is not measured by assumptions about the advocating sex, but as the product of human reasoning. It promotes different roles for men and women, but does not suffer from gender polarisation as it is not men or women who decide the preferred roles and responsibilities but their Creator.It is common to hear criticisms of Islam's treatment of women because of the difference in, for example, dress code. This is interpreted as representing inequality and subjugation to men, or even sexist. But as the discussion earlier demonstrates, criticising difference as inequality is an unsophisticated outlook and practical views on equality are actually views on social framework. And so labelling Islam's social framework as promoting inequality is to do no more than say it is different; alone it represents no universal criticism as views on social framework are particular to broader viewpoints of ideology and disputed among feminists themselves.

Evolution

2008-06-01T11:26:00.002+01:00

Exposing the flaws in the Theory of Evolution

This article will describe and explore the Theory of Evolution. It will attempt to describe the theory, defining its main elements, and also take a brief look at the historical changes to the Theory – a kind of evolution of the Theory of Evolution! In addition, the article will seek to discuss the evidences used by the proponents of this theory and then provide a synopsis of the counter arguments.

Introduction

The Theory of Evolution has become the de facto standard used in the West, and indeed beyond, to explain the existence of creation and life. It is described as rational and scientific; many statements are made to demonstrate the strength of the Theory – such as the number of scientists who have given it their blessings and its widespread acceptance beyond the scientific community. Nonetheless, there is a strong perception existing in our day and age of the credibility of the Theory of Evolution. To some extent, it is discussed and taught in schools and educational establishments and promoted in the mainstream media. In stark contrast, other arguments that explain the existence of life are considered to be irrational, backward and steeped in ignorance borne out of belief in religion. In other words, there are essentially two clear camps: the ‘scientific’ and progressive camp which espouses the virtues of the Theory, and the apparently ‘unscientific’ contingent which clings to outmoded explanations such as the existence of a Creator. In recent times, thanks in no small part to various Christian elements in the U.S., the clashes between these two sides have become more visible and the tempo seems to have been raised. There have been calls for a restructuring to the way in which the Theory is taught to children, or at the very least provision for a balanced approach, so that the young are taught about other explanations as well. Many establishments have insisted on giving religious teaching the priority, leading to conflict with those who believe religion should have no such role in schools.

The Theory of Evolution

The theory of evolution is sometimes described using complex and convoluted language, which can be a significant source of confusion. What adds to the confusion is the fact that aspects of the theory do undergo change and revision. In this article I will try to explain the main points that constitute the theory, on which those who propose this theory are agreed, without getting bogged down in the finer details or indeed the many arguments and assumptions in relation to areas where there may be some difference of opinion and divergence of views. I have also tried to simplify the description so it can be understood without recourse to a dictionary and constant definition of scientific terminology.To understand the thrust of the theory, it is useful to have an idea of some of the concepts that are used and an appreciation of the context.

Firstly, the definition: biological evolution is defined as descent with modification from a common ancestor. In this context, descent means going down from one generation through to the following generations. Modification alludes to alterations in genetic make-up and changes in gene frequencies. This definition encompasses what is known as small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations).Of course biological evolution is not simply a matter of change over time. Lots of things change over time: trees lose their leaves, mountain ranges rise and erode, but they aren't examples of biological evolution because they don't involve descent through genetic inheritance.

Secondly, a key central idea of biological evolution is that all life on Earth shares a common ancestor, just as our cousins and we share a common grandmother. It is argued that through the process of descent with modification, the common ancestor of life on Earth gave rise to the diversity that we see documented in the fossil record and around us today. Evolution means that we are all distant cousins: humans and oak trees, hummingbirds and whales.The process of evolution produces a pattern of relationships between species. As lineages evolve and split and modifications are inherited, their evolutionary paths diverge. This produces a branching pattern of evolutionary relationships. These relationships can be reconstructed and represented on a "family tree," called a phylogeny.

As a consequence of this ‘family tree’ understanding, it is important to remember that:

1. Humans did not evolve from chimpanzees. Humans and chimpanzees are evolutionary cousins and share a recent common ancestor that was neither chimpanzee nor human.

2. Humans are not "higher" or "more evolved" than other living lineages. Since these lineages split, humans and chimpanzees have each evolved traits unique to their own lineages.

Thirdly, another important aspect of evolution is the linking of speciation events to time i.e. trying to understand when different species evolved. Using various methods, such as radiometric dating, scientists are able to conclude that life began 3.8 billion years ago, and insects diversified 290 million years ago, but the human and chimpanzee lineages diverged only five million years ago.To give an analogy for this, imagine squeezing the billions of years of the history of life on Earth into a single minute. Then it would take about 50 seconds for multi-cellular life to evolve, another four seconds for vertebrates to invade the land, and another four seconds for flowers to evolve — and only in the last 0.002 seconds would "modern" humans arise.

So, the claim is made that evolution is the process by which modern organisms have descended from ancient ancestors. Evolution is apparently responsible for both the remarkable similarities we see across all life and the amazing diversity of that life — but exactly how does it work?Fundamental to the process is genetic variation upon which selective forces can act in order for evolution to occur. Evolution only occurs when there is a change in gene frequency within a population over time. These genetic differences are heritable and can be passed on to the next generation — which is what really matters in evolution: long term change. Therefore, we need to examine the actual mechanisms of evolution.In essence there are four basic processes, which constitute the mechanisms of evolution. These are mutation, migration, genetic drift and natural selection.

Mutation refers to the actual changes in the DNA within cells. The DNA affects how an organism looks, behaves and so on. Thus a change in the DNA can alter all aspects of its life.When cells divide the DNA is copied exactly as it is. However, on occasion, it is possible for they’re to be a discrepancy in the copying of the DNA. This difference is considered a mutation. It must be kept in mind that mutations are random – and so do not normally depend on external factors. That said, it is possible for there to be mutation as a result of exposure to radiation or chemicals, causing the DNA to break down. In this case, when the cells repair the DNA, the result is not a perfect repair – and so the resultant DNA is a mutation.Whether a particular mutation occurs is not related to how useful that mutation would be. The mutation in the genes can yield a beneficial, neutral or harmful change for the organism.

Although mutation can occur with any gene, it is the mutation that affects genes, which can be transmitted from one generation to the next that is of interest, since this is a form of evolution. If genes mutate and cannot be passed to future generations, then these mutations cannot be considered as having any relation to evolution. These are called Somatic Mutations and occur in non-reproductive cells. Hence the genes that are affected by mutation related to biological evolution are the reproductive cells, like eggs and sperm. Any mutations in the sex cells mean that potentially the change (the mutation) can be passed onto following generations. These mutations are labelled Germ Line Mutations.Migration is the flow of genes from one population to another. This Gene Flow can include various different events, such as pollen being blown to a new destination or people moving to new cities or countries. In a situation where genes are carried to a population where those genes previously did not exist, gene flow becomes a very important source of genetic variation.

Thus, as well as being mechanisms of evolution, Mutation and Migration also constitute sources of genetic variation. Another source of genetic variation is sex, which can introduce new gene combinations into a population.Genetic drift refers to the situation where, just ‘by chance’, some individuals leave behind a few more descendents and thus genes than other individuals. This happens to all populations since there can be no avoidance of chance. So for example, every time somebody steps on an insect with a certain characteristic, this reduces the number within that particular population and hence means there is one less insect remaining to pass on its genes to a new generation. Conversely, this also means that there are now more insects with different characteristics within the same population, who are able to pass on their genes. Clearly, this shows that genetic drift affects the genetic makeup of a population through entirely random means.Natural Selection is the fourth cog in the wheel of evolution. This in itself requires three components: variation in traits, differential reproduction and heredity. To understand this, consider a population of beetles. Some beetles are brown and others are green – this is a variation in a trait or a characteristic.

The environment is not able to support unlimited growth of the population and so not all individuals are able to reproduce to their full potential. For example, we could say that green beetles are easily visible on the ground and so tend to get eaten more by birds – so less survive to reproduce compared to brown beetles. In other words, we have differential reproduction.Finally, the brown beetles have brown baby beetles since this trait has a genetic basis i.e. they pass on a gene that determines the colour to be brown. This is what is meant by heredity. Putting these components together, evolution by natural selection is seen at work. The more advantageous trait of brown colour becomes more common in the population with time and if this process continues, then eventually all the beetles will be brown.

It is claimed that natural selection is also able to shape behaviour. The mating rituals that many birds have, the wiggle dance that bee’s do or the human capacity to learn language, have genetic components.In some cases, natural selection can be observed directly. Data shows that the shape of finches' beaks on the Galapagos Islands is related to weather patterns: after droughts, the finch population has deeper, stronger beaks that let them eat tougher seeds.In other cases, human activity has led to environmental changes that have caused populations to evolve through natural selection. A striking example is that of the population of dark moths in the 19th century in England, which rose and fell in parallel to industrial pollution. These changes can often be observed and documented.

‘Fitness’ is a concept used to describe how good a particular organism is at leaving its set of genes in the next generation compared with others with a different set of genes. Going back to the example of beetles, if brown beetles were to consistently leave more off spring than green beetles, then they would be considered to have a higher fitness. Fitness however does depend on the environment in which an organism lives. Also, from this perspective, the fittest individual is not necessarily the strongest, fastest or biggest. What matters is leaving it’s genes in the next generation and so survival ability, finding a mate and producing off spring is more important. This sub-category of natural selection in relation to finding a mate and reproductive behaviour is labelled sexual selection.Another category of natural selection is artificial selection. This is where, instead of nature, humans consciously select for or against particular features in organisms. For example, the human may allow only organisms with the desired feature to reproduce or may provide more resources to the organisms with the desired feature. Historically, farmers and breeders have used this idea of selection to cause major changes in the features of their plants and animals.

One key aspect of natural selection is known as adaptation. An adaptation is a feature that is common in a population because it seems to provide an improved function. Adaptations can take many forms: a behaviour that allows better evasion of predators, a protein that functions better at body temperature, or an anatomical feature that allows the organism to access a valuable new resource — all of these might be adaptations. For example, mimicry of leaves by insects is an adaptation for evading predators or the use of echolocation by bats to help them catch insects. Similarly, the creosote bush is a desert-dwelling plant that produces toxins that prevent other plants from growing nearby, thus reducing competition for nutrients and water.To summarise, all of the mechanisms discussed above (mutation, migration, genetic drift and natural selection) can cause changes in the frequencies of genes in populations, and so all of them are mechanisms of evolutionary change. However, it is worth keeping in mind that natural selection and genetic drift cannot operate unless there is genetic variation — that is, unless some individuals are genetically different from others.

A historical perspective

Although Charles Darwin is synonymous with the Theory of Evolution, he was not the first naturalist to propose that species changed over time into new species i.e. that life evolves. In the eighteenth century, a naturalist called Buffon along with others began to introduce the idea that life might not have been fixed since creation. By the end of the 1700s, palaeontologists had swelled the fossil collections of Europe, offering a picture of the past at odds with an unchanging natural world. And in 1801, a French naturalist named Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet; Chevalier de Lamarck took a great conceptual step and proposed a full-blown theory of evolution.Lamarck was struck by the similarities of many of the animals he studied, and was impressed too by the burgeoning fossil record. It led him to argue that life was not fixed. When environments changed, organisms had to change their behaviour to survive. If they began to use an organ more than they had in the past, it would increase in its lifetime. If a giraffe stretched its neck for leaves, for example, a "nervous fluid" would flow into its neck and make it longer. Its offspring would inherit the longer neck, and continued stretching would make it longer still over several generations. Meanwhile organs that organisms stopped using would shrink (called vestigial structures).

Lamarck was mocked and attacked by many of his contemporary naturalists such as Cuvier. While they questioned him on scientific grounds, many of them were also disturbed by the theological implications of his work. Lamarck was proposing that life took on its current form through natural processes, not through miraculous interventions. For British naturalists in particular, steeped as they were in natural theology, this was appalling. They believed that nature was a reflection of God's benevolent design. To them, it seemed Lamarck was claiming that it was the result of blind primal forces. Shunned by the scientific community, Lamarck died in 1829 in poverty and obscurity.In many ways, Darwin's central argument was very different from Lamarck's. He argued that complexity evolved simply as a result of life adapting to its local conditions from one generation to the next. He also argued that species could go extinct rather than change into new forms. But Darwin relied on much the same evidence for evolution that Lamarck did and Darwin wrongly accepted that changes acquired during an organism's lifetime could be passed on to its offspring.

Lamarckian inheritance remained popular throughout the 1800s, in large part because scientists did not yet understand how heredity works. With the discovery of genes, it was finally abandoned for the most part. But Lamarck, whom Darwin described as "this justly celebrated naturalist," remains a major figure in the history of biology for envisioning evolutionary change for the first time.Throughout the nineteenth century, heredity remained a puzzle to scientists. How was it that children ended up looking similar to, but not exactly like, their parents? These questions fascinated and frustrated Charles Darwin deeply. After all, heredity lies at the heart of evolution.Ironically, it was just as Darwin was publishing the Origin of Species in 1859 that someone got the first real glimpse of the biological machinery behind heredity. In a secluded monastery in what is now the Czech Republic, a monk named Gregor Mendel was studying heredity in a garden of peas. Through his experiments, Mendel discovered what later scientists called "dominant" and "recessive" alleles i.e. part of genetics.

Darwin and a British biologist called Alfred Russel Wallace had independently conceived of a natural, even observable, way for life to change: a process Darwin called natural selection. Within a few decades, most scientists accepted that evolution and the descent of species from common ancestors were real. But natural selection had a harder time finding acceptance.Even in 1900, whilst many scientists were rediscovering Mendel's insights, they continued to remain opposed to natural selection. After all, Darwin had talked of natural selection gradually altering a species by working on tiny variations. But the Mendelist’s found major differences between traits encoded by alleles. In order to jump from one allele to another, evolution must make giant jumps—an idea that seemed to clash with Darwin.But in the 1920s geneticists began to recognize that natural selection could indeed act on genes. For one thing, it became clear that any given trait was usually the product of many genes rather than a single one. A mutation to any one of the genes involved could create small changes to the trait rather than some drastic transformation. Just as importantly, several scientists — foremost among them Ronald Fisher, JBS Haldane and Sewall Wright — showed how natural selection could operate in a Mendelian world. They carried out breeding experiments like previous geneticists, but they also did something new: they built sophisticated mathematical models of evolution.

Known as "population genetics," their approach revealed how mutations arise and, if they are favoured by natural selection, can spread through a population. Even a slight advantage can let genes spread rapidly through a group of animals or plants and drive other forms extinct. Evolution, these population geneticists argued, is carried out mainly by small mutations, since drastic mutations would almost always be harmful rather than helpful.Thus, population genetics became one of the key elements of what would be called the Modern Synthesis.In 1937, a Soviet-born geneticist named Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote a landmark book called Genetics and the Origin of Species. Dobzhansky's ability to combine genetics and natural history attracted many other biologists to join him in the effort to find a unified explanation of how evolution happens. Their combined work known as "The Modern Synthesis" brought together genetics, palaeontology and many other sciences into one powerful explanation of evolution, showing how mutations and natural selection could produce large-scale evolutionary change.

While evolutionary biologists were fashioning the Modern Synthesis, geneticists around the world searched furiously for the molecules that carried genetic information. They knew that cells contained several different types of molecules, such as proteins and nucleic acids. But which had the capacity to bear information and be copied into new cells?The answer came through the discovery of DNA by Francis Crick and James Watson, which revolutionized evolutionary biology. Mutations, researchers realized, change the structure of the DNA. A single base pair may change, or a set of genes may be duplicated. Hence, those mutations that confer a selective advantage to an individual become more common over time, and ultimately these mutant genes could drive the older versions out of existence.

Evidences used by the proponents of the Theory

The mechanisms covered thus far are the basic building blocks of the theory of evolution. The next logical step is to look at the evidence that is given to claim these processes are responsible for both micro and macroevolution. In other words, what evidence is there that evolution has occurred and is responsible for the variety of life around us, and also is there evidence that demonstrates the mechanisms discussed in this article are indeed behind all these changes?

Those who support the theory of evolution present proofs that can loosely be gathered into a number of categories. We will examine these in turn.The primary source of proof for the theory comes from Fossil Evidence. The argument is that fossil records provide excellent snapshots of the past and when assembled they illustrate evolutionary change over many millions of years.As well as being actual remains of organisms, and thus giving an understanding as to the shape, appearance and skeletal structure, fossils can give additional clues. For example, they can indicate interactions that took place many years previously. A fossil may contain punctures or holes that could be teeth records of various animals, allowing scientists to extrapolate about what kind of organism may have been responsible, the shape of its jaws, and so on.Fossils can tell us about the growth patterns in ancient animals. For example, examining a cross section of a bone that has been found, it is possible to see the number of blood vessels; this in turn would indicate the speed of growth and so on.

An important section of fossil records are transitional forms. These are fossils or organisms that show the intermediate states between ancient organisms and their descendents. Since scientists have found so many transitional forms, it is claimed there is an abundance of evidence for evolution. An example of this is the case of the beluga whale. The beluga whale has its nostrils at the top of its skull. A fossil record of an animal that is considered to be related to today’s whales and dolphins, called Pakicetus, had its nostrils at the front of its skull. This animal lived about 50 million years ago. So scientists would expect that there might be a transitional form i.e. an animal that had some variation in the position of its nostrils compared to Pakicetus and the beluga whale. In fact, fossil records have been discovered of a skull, about 25 million years old, where the nostrils are in the middle of the skull. This animal has been labelled Aetiocetus.So Aetiocetus could plausibly be the transitional form, linking Pakicetus to the beluga whale and demonstrating a steady evolution.

The second source of evidence is garnered from studying homologies. Evolutionary theory predicts that organisms that come from the same ancestor will share similarities. These similar characteristics are known as homologies. As mentioned earlier, the logic is essentially that historically every species shares a common ancestor. As we move forward in time, new species evolve, but since they share a number of common ancestors, so we would expect them to share some characteristics that exist or existed in those ancestors. A crude example would be that of humans and apes. At some stage, going back in time, there was a common ancestor from which both species evolved. So humans and chimpanzees would have similar characteristics, based on the fact that they share common ancestors. Another example of homology is that of leaves. If we were to examine the leaves of say the pitcher plant (which has leaves shaped to capture insects), the Venus Flytrap, the Poinsettia (which has bright red leaves) and the cactus plant (where its leaves are essentially spines) then we would see that each type of leave has a different shape and function. Yet they are all derived from a common ancestral form.

Yet another example of homology is the forelimb of tetrapods (vertebrates with legs). Frogs, birds, rabbits and lizards all have different forelimbs, reflecting their different lifestyles. But those different forelimbs all share the same set of bones - the humerus, the radius, and the ulna. These are the same bones seen in fossils of the extinct transitional animal, Eusthenopteron, which demonstrates their common ancestry.Comparing the anatomies of different living things, looking at cellular similarities and differences and studying embryological development can reveal homologies.

Studying the embryological development of living things (i.e. prior to birth) provides clues to the evolution of present-day organisms. During some stages of development, organisms exhibit ancestral features in whole or incomplete form. For example, some species of living snakes have hind limb-buds as early embryos but rapidly lose the buds and develop into legless adults. The study of developmental stages of snakes, combined with fossil evidence of snakes with hind limbs, supports the hypothesis that snakes evolved from a limbed ancestor.Similarly, toothed whales have full sets of teeth throughout their lives. Baleen whales, however, only possess teeth in the early foetal stage and lose them before birth. The possession of teeth in foetal baleen whales provides evidence of common ancestry with toothed whales and other mammals. In addition, fossil evidence indicates that the late Oligocene whale Aetiocetus (the same Aetiocetus - our transitional friend with the nostrils in the middle of its skull), which is considered to be the earliest example of baleen whales, also bore a full set of teeth.

From a cellular and molecular level we find fundamental similarities between the cells of living things, which can be explained by the theory of evolution. All organisms are made of cells, which consist of membranes filled with water containing genetic material, proteins, lipids, carbohydrates, salts and other substances. The cells of most living things use sugar for fuel while producing proteins as building blocks and messengers. Comparing a typical animal cell with that of a plant, there are only three structures unique to one or the other (these are the cell wall, the centriole and the chloroplast). All other aspects are similar, such as the nucleus, cytoplasm and the vacuole.Comparison of genes between species also reveals striking similarities – for example, even roundworms share 25% of their genes with humans. In many ways, DNA is itself a homology for all living things – i.e. everything has DNA and so this is a common trait that must have come from a common ancestor.

In a nutshell, homologies are used as proof for the theory, since the existence of similarities between groups of organisms is an indication of common ancestors and thus evolution.A third source of evidence for evolution is the fact that there has been sufficient time for this process to have produced the diversity we see. The age of the earth has been determined through both relative dating (i.e. examining the different layers of rocks on the surface of the earth) and numerical dating which relies on the decay of radioactive elements such as uranium and potassium. The conclusion made is that the timescales involved are adequate for evolution to take its course.Artificial selection, mentioned earlier, is also an evidence for evolution. This is because people have been using selective breeding with plants and animals for many hundreds of years, and this breeding has shown how species can change dramatically. It can be argued that artificial selection has the ability to modify the forms and behaviours of populations to the point they are seemingly very different to their ancestors. So artificial selection is a model that helps with understanding natural selection.

The variation in the environment and ecology is also a proof of sorts. As predicted by evolutionary theory, populations evolve in response to their surroundings. In any ecosystem there are finite opportunities to make a living. Organisms either have the genetic tools to take advantage of those opportunities or they do not.For example, house sparrows arrived in North America from Europe in the nineteenth century. Since then, genetic variation within the population and selection in various habitats, have allowed them to inhabit most of the continent. House sparrows in the north are larger and darker coloured than those in the south. Darker colours absorb sunlight better than light colours and larger size allows less surface area per unit volume, thus reducing heat loss — both advantages in a cold climate. This is an example of natural selection acting upon a population, producing microevolution on a continental scale.

Finally, experiments also show that populations can evolve. As an example, John Endler of the University of California has conducted experiments with guppies (a type of fish) of Trinidad that clearly show selection at work. The scenario is as follows: female guppies prefer colourful males for mating purposes. Predatory fish also "prefer" colourful males, but for a less complimentary purpose — a source of food that is easy to spot. Some portions of the streams where guppies live have fewer predators than others and in these locations the males are more colourful. Not surprisingly, males in locations where there are more predators tend to be less colourful.When Dr. Endler transferred predatory fish to the regions with brightly coloured male guppies, selection acted rapidly to produce a population of duller males. So this demonstrates that persistent variation within a population provides the raw material for rapid evolution when environmental conditions change.

Arguments against the Theory of Evolution

The previous section outlined some of the proofs that are presented for the theory of evolution. We will now consider briefly a few of the arguments against the theory.1. The theory of evolution is usually described as fact, and many people see it like this due to a moulding of public opinion. Yet the trouble is that it is simply a theory. And like many theories it is wont to constantly chop and change. Indeed we can see on numerous occasions how it has changed over time and undergone revisions. For example, according to Darwin himself, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down”.

Another example is the proposition of a slightly different model in recent times. Called "punctuated equilibrium", this model rejects the Darwinist idea of a cumulative, step-by-step evolution and holds that evolution took place instead in big, discontinuous "jumps". This is because those who ascribe to it believe the fossil record does not support gradual evolution. Sadly for the proponents, Niles Eldredge and Stephen Gould (American palaeontologists) their own theory is bankrupt – since for one thing, it conflicts with the understanding that genes cannot undergo radical mutations.

2. The sources of proof given for the theory essentially rely on retro-fitting the supposed evidence to the theory i.e. the theory states evolution occurred from a common ancestor, and then study of fossils and homologies is used to indicate that indeed the theory is correct and evolution does occur. But equally we could state there is a creator who created the amazing diversity of life and also the similarities between species – in fact this is more plausible. Thus fossils and homologies would just as much, if not more, support this ‘theory’ of a Creator.

3. Fossils are a record of what may have existed. They do not indicate anything more than this. By examining a fossil we could equally state that the organism was created as opposed to evolving from an ancestor. The fossil record is also very much incomplete – there are massive, gaping holes. This presents a staggering problem for proponents of the Theory. The somewhat weak argument is that the bulk of the fossil record may have been destroyed or is yet to be discovered. According to Neville George, a professor of Palaeontology at Glasgow University:

“There is no need to apologise any longer for the poverty of the fossil record. In some ways, it has become almost unmanageably rich and discovery is outpacing integration…” Yet he goes on to say, “The fossil record nevertheless continues to be composed mainly of gaps”.

Contrary to what evolutionists claim, there are only limited (if any) transitional forms. Importantly, for example, we don’t see transitional forms that show the alleged evolution of apes to humans [and to try and explain the many loopholes regarding this, there is a current debate among evolutionists themselves about whether it occurred in steps or smoothly which we alluded to earlier i.e. punctuated equilibrium]. The fossil record back then (and still today) is nearly totally void of transitional species. If species are continually mutating, never constant, why do we find several of the same, certain prehistoric creatures, but never any that appear to be in transition? Why do palaeontologists find lots of dinosaurs but never where dinosaurs come from, nor what they turned into?

In Darwin's own words, 'Why, if species have descended by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of species being, as we see them, well defined?' It is an excellent question, which he answers himself, 'I can give no satisfactory answer.'Indeed British evolutionist Derek Ager admits, “The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at the level of orders or of species, we find - over and over again - not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another”.

Yet another problem in using the fossil record as evidence for evolution is that under closer examination, it appears to be a proof for exactly the opposite argument – i.e. creation. For example, one of the oldest strata of the earth in which fossils of living creatures have been found is that of the Cambrian, which has an estimated age of 500-550 million years. The living creatures found in the strata belonging to the Cambrian period seemed to emerge all of a sudden in the fossil record – there appeared to be no ancestors, although in relatively recent times palaeontologists believe fossils have been found dating from the preceding Vendian (or Ediacaran) period. The fossils found in the Cambrian rocks belonged to snails, trilobites, sponges, earthworms, jellyfish, sea hedgehogs, and other complex invertebrates. This wide mosaic of living organisms made up of such a great number of complex creatures emerged so suddenly that this miraculous event is referred to as the "Cambrian Explosion" in geological literature.

“A half-billion years ago, the remarkably complex forms of animals we see today suddenly appeared. This moment, right at the start of Earth's Cambrian Period, some 550 million years ago, marks the evolutionary explosion that filled the seas with the world's first complex creatures. The large animal phyla of today were present already in the early Cambrian and they were as distinct from each other as they are today”.And one of the most vociferous advocates for atheism and evolution in today’s age, Richard Dawkins, comments “the Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years, are the oldest ones in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists”.

4. The basic mechanism for gene variation is mutation. And it is known that mutations are random and limited in their scope. We should note that what is not a point of debate here is the fact that genes undergo mutation; neither is there a point of conflict with the various biological processes within organisms. For example, we know that insects can build up resistance against forms of pesticide over time – in fact, in the same manner humans have long believed that taking poison in small quantities can help survive what would normally be a fatal dose. These observations do not really constitute evolution. However, even if we agreed to define these particular cases as examples of microevolution, the fact is that they can be explained by what we have come to know through scientific study and resulting conclusions. The argument for a Creator also accepts scientific facts and conclusions – it no more denies the laws of biology being created, than it denies the laws of physics being put in place by the Creator. Hence, change within the framework of the laws of biology is possible – and there is sufficient evidence for this. The main problem however is with macroevolution. To even begin to consider macroevolution, mutations would need to be dramatic – trying to get round this, it is claimed that there has been sufficient time for many small scale mutations to eventually yield the different species we see. But frankly this isn’t plausible – we have seen no evidence to support such a claim - and so this is again nothing more than a pure hypothesis.

In addition, there are many other problems with the mutation argument. If mutations occur, they actually cause harmful effects and not beneficial ones. We can witness the effects of mutations caused in humans following radiation poisoning at Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl – that is, a litany of death, disability and illness.According to the evolutionist scientist Warren Weavers commenting in the report prepared by the Committee on Genetic Effects of Atomic Radiation, which had been formed to investigate mutations that may have been caused by the nuclear weapons used in the Second World War:“Many will be puzzled about the statement that practically all known mutant genes are harmful. For mutations are necessary parts of the process of evolution. How can good effects - evolution to higher forms of life - results from mutations practically all of which are harmful?”

Similarly, another scientist B.G. Ranganathan states in his book ‘Origins?’ that “Mutations are small, random, and harmful. They rarely occur and the best possibility is that they will be ineffectual. These four characteristics of mutations imply that mutations cannot lead to an evolutionary development. A random change in a highly specialised organism is either ineffectual or harmful. A random change in a watch cannot improve the watch. It will most probably harm it or at best be ineffectual. An earthquake does not improve the city, it brings destruction”.Finally, mutations do not actually add any new information to an organisms DNA. During a mutation, the genetic information is either destroyed or rearranged, but since there is no new information, it is impossible for mutations to cause a new trait or organ within a living organism.

5. Artificial selection (breeding) and sexual selection do produce new combinations but these are limited in their scope. They are restricted to a finite set of possible gene combinations. So breeding cannot introduce a radically new species – it simply gives a result based on the limited pool of combined genes. It cannot give a result outside of this. E.g. Horse plus donkey gives a mule. Or an African married to a Caucasian can result in off spring described as half-cast. The latter cannot produce a human whose skin colour is red or purple, etc.

6. The odds are heavily stacked against evolution. Evolution cannot answer where the first cell came from. The best guess is that came about through a random coincidence. Fred Hoyle, a well-known English mathematician and astronomer, and someone who believes in evolution, made the analogy that the chances of the first cell forming in this manner were comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials present. And according to Professor of Applied Mathematics and astronomy from University College (Cardiff, Wales), Chandra Wickramasinghe:

“The likelihood of the spontaneous formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it... It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence”. In other words the random formation of such a first cell is an impossibility.

But still let’s assume we suddenly have a cell. The first cell would then have to self-reproduce otherwise there would only ever be one cell. This becomes problematic for evolutionists so they suggest self-replication – i.e. the first cell has the ability to clone itself. However, organic matter can only self reproduces if it exists as a fully developed cell with existing support structures such as the particular environment and energy. This then requires more leaps of faith – so let’s make another assumption, this time that the cell does have a complex structure and the ability to reproduce. But, for evolution, mutation needs to happen. So firstly, since mutation is random, even given an absolute age, mutation might not occur. And secondly, mutation can only take place if the cell is forced to repair itself or if it makes a copy of itself. Thus, for a handful of cells, to copy and mutate successfully and form different cells and for this process to continue onwards to produce the complexity of life we see is something, which cannot happen. Leaving aside time, and the random nature of mutation, just the series of mutations necessary to produce even the simplest of species are impossible.

7. There is no actual hard evidence for the process of evolution itself. We don’t witness evolution. All that experiments (such as the one involving guppies) or observations in the field (such as the house sparrows example) demonstrate is a form of selection. But this is not real evolution – the fact that a population may change due to various factors (such as environment, predators, etc) or that it may become extinct is not a change from one species to another. So even if we can see natural selection of sorts, this is based on rational factors, and is not evolution.

8. Evolution cannot answer why only the human species has the clear faculty of intelligence, thought and reasoning that has allowed it to progress. It cannot explain the existence of emotions, except through an undefined notion such as chemicals within the body. And it is unable to offer any satisfactory explanation for issues such as the existence of the soul – indeed according to evolutionary theory, there cannot be a soul, rather life itself must be caused by the functioning of cells since after all everything has evolved from a single cell.

9. Adaptation is mentioned as a feature of evolution. That is, the manner in which organisms have evolved beneficial characteristics adapted to their environment, which help them survive. So one example we gave earlier was that of stick insects, where their body itself is a form of camouflage protecting them against predators. However, evolutionists themselves state that mutation is random and can lead to beneficial as well as harmful results. The environment cannot influence the occurrence or form of any mutation. So in this case, the evolutionary argument would have to be that today’s stick insects evolved from ancestors, which did randomly mutate to have this beneficial characteristic of camouflage. Those within the population that didn’t inherit this mutation would have died out due to their inability to survive. But once again, claiming that a series of mutations occurred, that lead to stick insects possessing characteristics that are suited to their environment, is nothing but conjecture. As before, we could equally state that a Creator has created various species and organisms of life with these inherent varying characteristics. So, organisms were in fact created with characteristics that we interpret as beneficial to them, instead of these traits evolving through time. Thus, the fact that many organisms seem well matched to their environments cannot be cited as any kind of proof or indication of evolution.

10. Let’s take a look at another argument that shows the fallacy of evolution. Many organisms and parts of organisms do not appear to have evolved from lesser things because they are 'irreducibly complex' life forms. Irreducible complexity is a concept that has been developed to describe something that is made of interacting parts that all work together. To understand this, take the example of a mousetrap. A mousetrap cannot be assembled through gradual improvement. You cannot start with a wooden base, catching a few mice, then add a hammer, and catch more, then add a spring, improving it further. To even begin catching mice one must assemble all the components completely with design and intent. Furthermore, if one of these parts changes or evolves independently, the entire thing will stop working. The mousetrap, for instance, will become useless if even one part malfunctions.

Likewise, many biological structures are irreducibly complex. Bats are a well-known example. They are said to have evolved from a small rodent whose front toes became wings. This presents a multitude of problems. As the front toes grow skin between them, the creature has limbs that are too long to run, or even walk well, yet too short to help it fly. There is no plausible way that a bat wing can evolve from a rodent's front toes. In fact, the fossil record supports this, because the first time bats are seen in the fossil record, they have completely developed wings and are virtually identical to modern bats.Consider another example, that of the eye. Suppose that before animals had sight, one species decided it would be advantageous to be able to decrypt light rays. So, what is evolved first? The retina? The iris? The eye is made of many tiny parts, each totally useless without the others. The probability that a genetic mutation that would create each of these at the same time, in the same organism, is zero. If, however, one organism evolved just a retina, then the logic of Darwin suggests that the only solution is to rid oneself of useless traits replacing them with beneficial ones, so the idea of the eye evolving one segment at a time is also bogus.

Conclusion

In a time where the theory of evolution has been catapulted to the level of fact, it is useful for us to have a firm grasp of what this theory is, and with the emerging discussion gaining more and more profile (that between creationism on the one side and evolutionary thought on the other) it is vital that we are able to show the strength of the correct argument.

One big problem of presenting the topic of evolution is finding a reasonable balance: on the one hand, simplifying and leaving out some of the terminology risks not being able to convey the subject matter accurately; on the other, by not revising and simplifying at all, there is a distinct possibility that only those with a solid understanding of biology and science will grasp what is being presented. This article has attempted to run through the basic mechanics of the theory, proofs that are presented for it and some of the arguments against evolution. Many points are too elaborate and wide ranging to touch upon in this discussion. In any event, there is an abundance of material available regarding the theory and surrounding issues that discuss these aspects in much more detail and is worth exploring for those that are interested in doing so. The theory is often cloaked in scientific language and complex terminology, and presented as a solid and viable explanation for the existence of life. Although the focus and objective of the article was not to prove the fallacy of the theory, but rather to be informative with respect to the whole discussion regarding evolution as a concept, nevertheless it has hopefully been shown that evolutionary understanding, far from being fact, is nothing more than speculation and hypothesis.

The Pope

2008-03-31T11:40:00.001+01:00

Pope Benedict

On 24/3/2008 the English newspaper The Times reported that Pope Benedict XVI had baptised Magdi Allam, 55, an outspoken Egyptian-born critic of Islamic extremism and a supporter of Israel. The move revived memories of the fury that greeted Pope Benedict’s speech at Regensburg University in 2006 in which he branded Islam as inherently violent by quoting a Byzantine emperor. Rather than manipulating every opportunity to attack Islam, the Pope must realize that his real enemy is secularism and not Islam. Retreating behind the veil of ‘freedom of speech’, and ‘freedom of religion’, secularists have relentlessly abused Catholicism and forced the Roman Church to modify its views and practices. Today, Catholic teachings are scarcely recognizable and face imminent extinction, unless the Vatican takes a firm stand against the secular powers.

Under the Khilafah, Catholicism was not forced to change its views, and Christians lived in harmony with Muslims. Hence, it would be wise for Pope Benedict XVI to reconsider his position towards Islam and support the right of Muslims to re-establish the Khilafah. In this way, the pope will not only be saving Catholicism and protecting the rights of his flock in the Muslim world, but it would also send a positive signal for future relations with the Khilafah.

Ibrahim (as)

2008-03-23T10:38:00.002Z

Lessons from the story of Ibrahim (as)

وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ دِينًا مِّمَّنْ أَسْلَمَ وَجْهَهُ لله وَهُوَ مُحْسِنٌ واتَّبَعَ مِلَّةَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ حَنِيفًا وَاتَّخَذَ اللّهُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ خَلِيلاً

"Who can be better in religion than one who submits his whole self to Allah, does good, and follows the way of Abraham the true in Faith? For Allah did take Abraham for a friend."

Abul al an’biya (father of the Prophets min al ulil Adham min arusl) Ibrahim (as). Ibrahim who was mentioned in 73 places in the Quran. In 25 Surahs of the book of Allah. Ibrahim, was born in Babylon in Iraq, the land of the Chaldeans (Al Kaldanieen), also known as Babylonia. At that time some people worshipped idols of stone and wood; others worshipped the planets, stars, sun and moon; still others worshipped their kings and rulers.

Abraham was born into that atmosphere, into a typical family of that ancient time. The head of the family was not even an ordinary idolater, but was one who totally rejected Allâh and who used to make the idols with his own hands. Some traditions claimed that Abraham's father died before his birth and he was raised by an uncle whom Abraham called father. Other traditions said that his father was alive and was named Azer.Into that family Abraham was born, destined to stand against his own family, against the entire system of his community. In brief, he stood against all kinds of Shirk.He was endowed with spiritual understanding from an early age. Allâh enlightened his heart and mind gave him wisdom from childhood.

Allah (swt) Says:

وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَا إِبْرَاهِيمَ رُشْدَهُ مِن قَبْلُ وَكُنَّا بِه عَالِمِينَ

We bestowed aforetime on Abraham his rectitude of conduct, and well were We acquainted with him."

During his early childhood Abraham realized that his father made strange statues. One day, he asked him about what it was he made. His father replied that he made statues of gods. Abraham was astonished and he spontaneously rejected the idea. Being a child he played with such statues sitting on their backs as people sit on the backs of donkeys and mules.The people in Babylon used to worship many Idols from amonst them were: Mardukh (Considered to be the god of gods), there were other gods too, such as Ay (god of justice and law), Seen (the god of the heavens) as well as others.

One day his father saw him riding the statue of Mardukh. So and he became furious. He ordered his son not to play with it again.Abraham asked: "What is this statue, father? It has big ears, bigger than ours."His father answered: "It is Mardukh, the god of gods, son!

These big ears show his deep knowledge."This made Abraham laugh, he was only seven years old at that time. Since his childhood his heart had been full of hatred for these idols. He could not understand how a sane person could make a statue and then worship what he had made.

He noticed that these idols did not eat, drink or talk and they could not even turn themselves right side up if someone turned them upside down. How, then could people believe that such statues could harm or benefit them?Abraham 's people had a big temple full of idols, in the middle of which was a niche accommodating the biggest gods which was of different kinds, qualities and shapes.

Abraham, who used to go to the temple with his father when he was a child, greatly despised all that wood and stone. What surprised him was the way his people behaved when they entered the temple; they bowed and started to cry, begging and imploring their gods for help as if the idols could hear or understand these requests! Just like today the way our rulers bow, beg and cry to their colonial masters.One night Abraham left his house to go to a mountain. He walked alone in the dark until he chose a cave in the mountain where he sat resting his back against its wall. He looked at the sky. He had hardly seen it when he remembered that he was looking at planets and stars which were worshipped by some people on earth. His young heart was filled with tremendous pain. He considered what was beyond the moon, the stars and the planets (i.e. Allâh) and was astonished that these celestial bodies were worshipped by men when they had been created to worship and obey their Creator, appearing and disappearing at His command.Ibrahim (as) started his da’wa to his father,

Allah (swt) mentiones in the Quran:

إِذْ قَالَ لِأَبِيهِ يَا أَبَتِ لِمَ تَعْبُدُ مَا لَا يَسْمَعُ وَلَا يُبْصِرُ وَلَا يُغْنِي عَنكَ شَيْئًايَا أَبَتِ إِنِّي قَدْ جَاءنِي مِنَ الْعِلْمِ مَا لَمْ يَأْتِكَ فَاتَّبِعْنِي أَهْدِكَ صِرَاطًا سَوِيًّا

O my father! to me has come knowledge which has not reached you: so follow me: I will guide you to a way that is even and straight."

Ibrahim was very young when he did this, maybe less than 16 years old, Ibrahim is directed this discussion to someone not only older than him, but his father. Why would Ibrahim ask his father to follow him? Ibrahim said: to me has come knowledge which has not reached you. So that Ibrahim can take leadership of his father and People based on his message and knowledge that Allah gave him.

So we know that the best leaders that ever lived are those who use the knowledge and shari’ah of Allah (swt). Just like the Previous Prophets like Dawud, Sulayman, Muhammad (saw) and also after the Propthets and Messengers The Khulafaa like Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman Ali and the other great Khulafaa.But what about now? The useless and spineless leaders we have ruling the muslim world. Where we have so many problems be it in the political, social or economic matters. Just like RasulAllah (saw) said in a hadith that one of the signs of day of Judgement will be ‘imarat as-sufaha’ leadership of the foolish.

So Ibrahim (as) Father replied to him and said:

الَ أَرَاغِبٌ أَنتَ عَنْ آلِهَتِي يَا إِبْراهِيمُ لَئِن لَّمْ تَنتَهِ لَأَرْجُمَنَّكَ وَاهْجُرْنِي مَلِيًّا

(The father) replied: "Dost thou hate my gods, O Ibraham? If thou forbear not, I will indeed stone thee: Now get away from me for a good long while!"

Abraham left his father's house and abandoned his people and what they worshipped. He decide to do something about their state of disbelief, but did not reveal it. He knew that there was going to be a great celebration on the other bank of the river which would be attended by all the people.Abraham waited until the city was empty, then came out cautiously, directing his steps towards the temple. the streets leading to it were empty and the temple itself was deserted for the priests had also gone to the festival outside the city.Abraham went there carrying a sharp axe. He

He approached one of the statues and asked:

فَرَاغَ إِلَى آلِهَتِهِمْ فَقَالَ أَلَا تَأْكُلُونَ

The food in front of you is getting cold. Why don't you eat?" the statue kept silent and rigid.

Abraham asked all the other statues around him: "Will you not eat of the offering before you?"

(Ch 37:91)

مَا لَكُمْ لَا تَنطِقُونَ

He was mocking them for he knew they would not eat. He once again asked then: "What is the matter with you that you do not speak?"

(Ch 37:92)

He then raised his axe and started smashing the false gods worshipped by the people. He destroyed them all except one on whose neck he hung the axe. After this his anger subsides and he felt at peace. He left the temple. He had fulfilled his vow to show his people a practical proof of their foolishness in worshipping something other than All.When the people returned, they were shocked to see their gods smashed to pieces, lying scattered all over the temple. They began to guess who had done that to their idols and Abraham's name came to their minds.

Allâh the Almighty said: they said:

قَالُوا مَن فَعَلَ هَذَا بِآلِهَتِنَا إِنَّهُ لَمِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ

Who has done this to our aliah (gods)? He must indeed be one of the wrongdoers."

They said:

قَالُوا سَمِعْنَا فَتًى يَذْكُرُهُمْ يُقَالُ لَهُ إِبْرَاهِيمُ

We heard a young man talking against them who is called Abraham." They said: "Then bring him before the eyes of the people, that they may testify." they said: "Are you the one who has done this to our gods, O Abraham?"

Abraham said:

قَالَ بَلْ فَعَلَهُ كَبِيرُهُمْ هَذَا فَاسْأَلُوهُمْ إِن كَانُوا يَنطِقُونَ

nay, this one, the biggest of them (idols) did it, Ask them, if they can speak!

"So they turned to themselves and said: "Verily you are the Zalimun (polytheists, and wrongdoers)." Then they turned to themselves (their first thought and said): "Indeed you (Abraham) know well that these idols speak not?"

Abraham said: "DO you then worship besides Allâh, things that can neither profit you nor harm you? If upon you, and upon that which you worship besides Allâh! Have you then no sense?"

(Ch 21:59-67 Qur'ân)

Furious, they demanded that Abraham be arrested and tried. Abraham did not resist. this was precisely what he had been aiming for, so that he could show them up in public for their foolish beliefs. Just like the da’wa carriers today, when they get arrested by the ruthless regimes when the da’wa carriers with nothing but the intellectual challenge of the Ideology of Islam challenges the systems of capitalism and the like.At the trial they asked him if he was responsible for breaking the idols. Smiling, he told them to ask the biggest idol which was still whole. He told them that he must be the culprit! They replied that he knew well that the idol could not speak or move which gave Abraham the chance to prove the foolishness of worshipping these lifeless objects.They then realized the senselessness of their beliefs; however, their arrogance would not allow them to admit their foolishness. All they could do was to use their power of authority as tyrants usually do to punish Abraham.

They kept him in chains and planned their revenge.Anger was burning in their hearts. They decided to throw Abraham into the biggest fire they could build. All the citizens were ordered to gather wood as a service to their gods. Ignorant, sick women vowed that if they were cured they would donate so much wood to burn Abraham. For several days they collected fuel.They dug a deep pit, filled it with firewood and ignited it. They brought a catapult with which to cast Abraham into the fire. Abraham was put on the catapult, his hands and feet were tied.

The fire was ready with its flame reaching the sky. The people stood away from the pit because of the great heat. Then the chief priest gave his order to cast Abraham into the fire.The angel Gabriel came near Abraham's head and asked him: "O Abraham do you wish for anything?" Abraham replied: "Nothing from you."The catapult was shot and Abraham was cast into the fire. But his descent into the blaze was as descent on steps in a cool garden. The flames were still there, but they did not burn for Allâh the Almighty had issued His command:

"O fire! Be you coolness and safety for Abraham."

(Ch 21:69 Qur'ân)

The fire submitted to the will of Allâh, becoming cool and safe for Abraham. It only burned his bonds, and he sat in the midst of the fire as if he were sitting in a garden. He glorified and praised Allâh the Almighty, with a heart that contained only his love for Allâh.

There was not any vacant space therein for fear, awe, or worry. It was filled with love only.Fear and awe were dead, and the fire was turned into coolness, making the air pleasant. Those who love Allâh as Abraham do did not fear.

Allâh declared: Those (believers) unto whom the people (hypocrites) said: "Verily! the people (pagans) have gathered against you (a great army), therefore, fear them." but it only increased them in Faith, and they said: Allâh Alone is Sufficient for us, and He is the Best Disposer of affairs for us."So they returned with Grace and Bounty from Allâh.

No harm touched them; and they followed the good Pleasure of Allâh. Allâh is the Owner of Great bounty. It is only Satan that suggests to you the fear of his Auliya (supporters and friends, polytheists, disbeliveers in the Oneness of Allâh and in His Messenger Muhammad) so fear them not but fear Me if you are true believers." (Ch 3:173-175 Qur'ân)

The throng, the chiefs, and the priests sad watching the fire from a distance. It was burning their faces and nearly suffocating them. It kept burning for such a long time that the disbeliveers thought it would never be extinguished. When it did burn out, they were greatly amazed to find Abraham coming out of the pit untouched by the fire. Their faces were black from the smoke, but his was bright with the light and grace of Allâh. The raging fire had become cool for Abraham and had only charred the ropes which held him. He walked out of the fire as if he were walking out of a garden. Cries of astonishment were heard from the heathens. They wanted to harm him, but We made them the worst losers. (Ch 21:70)This miracle shamed the tyrants, but it did not cool the flame of anger in their hearts. However after his event many of the people followed Abraham, although some kept their belief a secret for fear of harm or death at the hands of the rulers.Abraham had established a definite reasoning against idolaters. Nothing was left for him except to reason against the people who proclaimed themselves gods.When the king, Namrud, heard of Abraham's safe exit from the fire he became very angry. He feared that the status of godhead he had proclaimed for himself was not challenged by an ordinary human being. He summoned Abraham to the palace and held a dialogue with him which Allâh Almighty recounted:

أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِي حَآجَّ إِبْرَاهِيمَ فِي رِبِّهِ أَنْ آتَاهُ اللّهُ الْمُلْكَ إِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ رَبِّيَ الَّذِي يُحْيِـي وَيُمِيتُ قَالَ أَنَا أُحْيِـي وَأُمِيتُ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ فَإِنَّ اللّهَ يَأْتِي بِالشَّمْسِ مِنَ الْمَشْرِقِ فَأْتِ بِهَا مِنَ الْمَغْرِبِ فَبُهِتَ الَّذِي كَفَرَ وَاللّهُ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

Have you not thought about him who disputed with Abraham about his Lord (Allâh) because Allâh had given him the kingdom? When Abraham said to him: "My Lord (Allâh) is He Who gives life and causes death." He said: "I give life and cause death." Abraham said: "Verily, Allâh causes the sun to rise from the east; then cause it you to rise from the west." So the disbeliever was utterly defeated. Allâh guides not the people who are Zalimeen (wrongdoers etc)."

(Ch 2:258 Qur'ân)

Abraham's fame spread throughout the entire kingdom. People talked about how he had been saved from the blazing fire and how he had debated with the king and left him speechless. In the meantime, Abraham continued calling people to believe in Allâh, exerting a great effort to guide his people to the right path. He tried every means to convince them. However in spite of his love and care for his people, they felt angry and deserted him. Only one woman and one man of his people shared his belief in Allâh. The woman's name was Sarah and she became his wife.

The man's name was Lot and he became a prophet.When Abraham realized that no one else was going to believe in his call, he decided to emigrate. He left his people and traveled with his wife and Lot to a city called Ur, then another called Haran, and then to Palestine.Allâh the Almighty told us: So Lut believed in him (Abraham's message of Islamic Monotheism). He (Abraham) said: "I will emigrate for the sake of my Lord. Verily, He is the All Mighty, the All Wise." (Ch 29:26)After Palestine, Abraham traveled to Egypt, calling people to believe in Allâh wherever he traveled, judging fairly between people, and guiding them to truth and righteousness.Abu Hurairah narrated that Abraham peace be upon him did not tell a lie except on three occasions, twice for the sake of Allâh (Exalted and Almighty) when he said: "I am sick," (when his people were holding a festival in honor of their gods, Abraham excused himself by saying he was sick. (Ch 37:89 Qur'ân) and when he said: "(I have not done this but) the big idol has done it."

The (third was) that while Abraham and Sarah (his wife) were going (on a journey), they passed by (the territory of) a tyrant. Someone said to the tyrant: "This man (Abraham is accompanied by a very charming lady." So, he sent for Abraham and asked him about Sarah saying "Who is this lady?" Abraham said: "She is my sister." Abraham went to Sarah said "O Sarah! There are no believers on the surface of the earth except you and me. This man asked me about you and I have told him that you are my sister do not contradict my statement." the tyrant then called Sarah, and when she went to him, he tried to take a hold of her with his hand, but his hand got stiff and he was confounded. He asked Sarah: "Pray to Allâh for me and I shall not harm you." So Sarah asked Allâh to cure him and he got cured. He tried to take hold of her for the second time, but his hand got as stiff as or stiffer than before and he was more comfounded. He again requested Sarah: "Pray to Allâh for me, and I will not harm you." Sarah asked Allâh to again, and he became all right. He then called one of his guards who had brought her and said: "You have not brought me a human being but have brought me a devil." The tyrant then gave Hajar as a maid servant to Sarah. Abraham, gesturing with his hand, asked: "What has happened?" She replied: "Allâh has spoiled the evil plot of the infidel or immoral person and gave me Hajar for service." Abu Hurairah then addressed his listeners saying: "That Hajar was your mother, O Bani Ma is Sama (Arab, the descendants of Ishmael, Hajar's son)."Abraham's wife Sarah was sterile. She had been given an Egyptian woman Hajar, as a servant. Abraham had aged and his hair was gray and after many years spent in calling people to Allâh. Sarah thought she and Abraham were lonely because she could not have a child. Therefore, she offered her husband her servant Hajar in marriage. Hajar gave birth to her first son Ishmael (isma'il) when Abraham was an old man.Abraham, by God's command, accepted Sara's request. He took Hagar and Ismael with him and began journeying until, under the guidance of God, they entered the land of Makkah. He left them there and returned to Sara. The Quran narrates Abraham had prayed to God,saying, "Lord, I have settled some of my offspring in a barren valley near your sacred house, so that they could be steadfast in prayer. Lord, fill the hearts of the people with love for them and produce fruits for their sustenance, so that they may give thanks".Hagar, that helpless woman with her suckling baby, was left alone in that waterless and bare desert far from any city or town. But Hagar had learned the way of trust in and reliance on God from Abraham, so with faith in God, she followed the path of patience and tolerance. She lived on the provisions that she had until they were used up and hunger and thirst overcame her. Her milk dried up, leaving her baby hungry and thirsty.Hoping to find water to save her baby's life, Hagar began to search in the desert but found nothing. Hopelessly, she returned to Ishmael and found him crying restlessly. Seeing her baby in this condition broke her heart. She, too, began weeping; she didn't know what to do.The baby was overcome with weakness; it seemed that he was passing the last moments of life. Hagar ran seven times back and forth in the scorching heat between the two hills of Safa and Marwa, trying to mount a higher ground to spot any water in the area, until, completely disappointed and with tear-filled eyes, she returned to her baby.

The agony of Hagar in her search for water is remembered by Muslims by imposing an act of ritual walking (sa`i, Arabic: سعى) that would signify her journey between the two hills in their Hajj at MakkahStanding beside her baby, weeping and wailing, Hagar was watching that heartbreaking scene. God then sent the Angel Jibreel, who scraped the ground. From that spot, a clear spring gushed out from the ground and began to flow under Ishmael's feet. Hagar was delighted. But she was also anxious about the water flowing away. Hence, she confined the pool of water with sand and stones, remarking at the same time: Zam Zam ("Stop, Stop"). She then sat on the ground next to her baby, wet his lips and poured some of the water into his parched mouth, refreshing him. The danger to his life was over. Hagar also drank some water, recovered her strength, and praised God.(Other versions of the story say Ishmael scraped the ground with his heel and the ZamZam appeared.)Little by little, birds came to use the water of the spring. The tribe of Jorhom, who dwelt in the area, discovered the spring because of the birds flying overhead and the tribe then settled beside it. They asked her permission to use the spring and she agreed.Hagar became acquainted with them, and her fear and loneliness were removed.In this way, the prayer of Abraham was answered. From time to time, Abraham would go to see Hagar and his child. Visiting them made him happy and reinvigorated him.The spring that burst forth when Gabriel struck the ground on the orders of God still exists today and is called the Zamzam.Abraham lived on earth worshipping Allâh and calling people to monotheism, but he was journeying to Allâh, knowing that his days on earth were limited and that they would be followed by death and finally resurrection. The knowledge of life after death filled Abraham with peace and love and certitude.One day he begged Allâh to show him how He brought the dead back to life.

Allâh commanded Abraham to take four birds, cut them up and mingle their body parts, divide them into four portions and place them on top of four different hills, then call back the birds in Allâh's name. Abraham did as he was told. Immediately the mingled parts of the birds separated to join their original bodies in different places and the birds flew back to Abraham.Almighty Allâh revealed: Remember when Abraham said: "My Lord Show me how You give life to the dead."

Allâh said: "Do you not believe?" Abraham said: "Yes I believe, but to be stronger in Faith." HE said: "Take four birds, the cause them to incline towards you (then slaughter them, cut them into pieces) and then put a portion of them on every hill and call them they will come to you in haste. And know that Allâh is All Mighty and All Wise."

للّهم صلِّ على محمّدٍ وآلِ محمّدٍ كما صَلَّيتَ على إبراهيمَ وآلِ إبراهيم إنّكَ حَميدٌ مَجيدٌ

The Month of Revival

2008-03-17T16:58:00.002Z

Rabiul Awwal: The Month of Revival

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ شَاهِدًا وَمُبَشِّرًا وَنَذِيرًا (45) وَدَاعِيًا إِلَى اللَّهِ بِإِذْنِهِ وَسِرَاجًا مُنِيرًا

"O Prophet! Truly We have sent thee as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner, and as one who invites to Allah’s (grace) by His leave, and as a lamp spreading light (Siraajan-Munir).”

[TMQ 33:45-46]

The month of Rabiul Awwal has special significance in the history of Islam. The birth and the death of our beloved Prophet (saw) happened in this month and the hijrah of Prophet (saw) to Madina to establish the Islamic state which changed the course of history also took place in this month. By scrutinizing these incidents we have lot of things to follow especially in our age of decline. Let us go deep into what they are,

Birth of Prophet (saw)

This is the month in which our beloved Prophet (saw) born (9 or 12 of Rabiul Awwal) who liberated the people from darkness (days of jahilliyah) to the light of Islam. We are the best nation because we are the ummah of Mohammed (saw) who was the master of messengers and we have one degree higher grade than other nations, because Allah(swt) says,

كُنْتُمْ خَيْرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ تَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَتَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ وَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ

"You are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin al ma’roof and forbid al munkar, and you believe in Allah…”

[TMQ 3:110]

Allah (swt) praises us as khaira ummah, but we are obliged to think about our current situation and also think about our ancestors actions by which they retained the capacity of khaira ummah. By the plan of kuffar, now we are so fragmented and weakened but it is not a barrier for us to become the leading nation once again, if we work hard in the path of our Prophet (saw) then Allah (swt) will definitely grant us victory. Allah (swt) says,

وَلَا تَهِنُوا وَلَا تَحْزَنُوا وَأَنْتُمُ الْأَعْلَوْنَ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ مُؤْمِنِينَ

"So do not become weak (against your enemy), nor be sad, and you will be superior(in victory) if you are indeed (true) believers”

[TMQ 3 : 139]

The Islamic ummah are obliged to love their Prophet (saw) more than their life and it is directly linked to the Iman. So we must have the power (sultan) to protect the honour of our Prophet Mohammed (saw) at any cost. Allah (swt) says,

النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَى بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنْفُسِهِمْ وَأَزْوَاجُهُ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ

"The Prophet is closer to believers than their ownselves and his wives are their (believers) mothers”

[TMQ 33:6]

Anas narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

«لا يؤمن عبد حتى أكون أحب إليه من أهله وماله والناس أجمعين»

“None of you can believe until I become more beloved to him than his family, wealth and all the people.”

(Agreed upon).

But in our days Taghoots are insulting, dishonouring our beloved Prophet (saw) and the one who dishonour our Prophet (saw) is given protection and support by the enemies of Islam, who always fear about the rise of Islam again. All these incidents show us our humiliated situation because we are in a state of unable to protect the honour of our beloved Prophet (saw). But in the past, the one who tried to insult our Prophet (saw) was terrified by the single authority of all Muslims i.e. the Khilafah state. These all are due to one factor, the Khilafah which acted as shield to protect the honour of Islam, our Prophet and Muslims in the past but now we are without that shield, that’s why we are facing several problems. Because of these things Muslims around the world are yearning for the return of such leadership. Allah (swt) says:

وَلِلَّهِ الْعِزَّةُ وَلِرَسُولِهِ وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ

… But honour, power and glory belong to Allah, His Messenger, and to the believers…”

[TMQ 63:8]

Sadly Muslims of today follow the Prophet (saw) only in 'spiritual' matters, but Islam is not only a spiritual matter, it is an ideology (deen). So we should renounce such a declined thought and emulate Prophet (saw) in all of our actions especially in politics to change our current state of decline. We see Muslims today restrict themselves only to celebrate Meelad of Prophet (saw) in this month but we should also follow him (saw) as the best politician of the world, because he (saw) is the role model for us in all of our actions not only in spiritual actions. Allah (swt) says,

لَقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ لِمَنْ كَانَ يَرْجُو اللَّهَ وَالْيَوْمَ الْآَخِرَ وَذَكَرَ اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا

"Indeed in the Messenger of Allah you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much”

[TMQ 33:21]

Lessons from the Hijrah

The Prophet (saw) made hijrah to Madina and he (saw) reached there on Friday 12th of Rabiul Awwal. From the very first day he (saw) established the authority for Islam. That’s why hijrah marked as the happiest moment for the Muslims. In the period of Makkah, the Prophet (saw) strove hard to establish the authority for Islam but this result was not achieved, then next he (saw) tried to seek nusrah (support) from the tribes who lived outskirts of Makkah they refused. In the month of hajj Prophet (saw) met the tribes of Aus and kazraj from Yathrib. They replied in a positive manner to the call and support for Islam. They gave first pledge of al aqaba. Then Prophet (saw) sent Musab ibn Umayr (ra) to them to call and to teach Islam and to gather public opinion in favour of Islam. In Madina the message of Islam reached every single household and many embraced Islam. Then Musab (ra) returned with 75 men from Aus and Kazraj with great victory in the next hajj. They gave second pledge of al aqaba which served as a basis for the Prophet (saw) to establish the Islamic authority in Madina. By the result of this pledge, Muslims who had the capability migrated to Madina first. Then the Prophet (saw) by the permission of Allah (swt) made hijrah to Madina accompanied with Abu bakr (ra). The Muslims of Makkah sacrificed more for the hijrah but at the end they attained a great victory by establishing an entity for Islam in madina. Thus hijrah marked as a turning point for Muslims because afterwards Muslims progressed day by day to a leading nation.

But sadly many Muslims today describe the hijrah as a sad event and compare the hijrah to the situation of refugees and run a way to protect their lives. These all are due to the many so called scholars of our age, they are influenced by the orientalist writers of the history of Prophet (saw) whom always distort the image of Islam. These so called scholars distort the image of Islam directly and indirectly by spreading these kinds of biased history written by Westerners. We should always refer to the authenticated seerah of Prophet (saw) written by the scholars of Islam and act upon that. This is because sunnah is not only following the verbal speech of the Prophet (saw) but also following other kind of actions which Prophet (saw) did in his lifetime. Emulating each and every obligatory action of the Prophet (saw) from his seerah will only lead us to the path of revival and able us to liberate mankind from darkness to the light of Islam.Allah (swt) also obliges us to unite and work for the superiority of His deen. Allah (swt) says

وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَاءُ بَعْضٍ إِلَّا تَفْعَلُوهُ تَكُنْ فِتْنَةٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَفَسَادٌ كَبِيرٌ

And those who disbelieve are allies to one another ,(and) if you (Muslims of the whole world collectively) do not do so (i.e become allies, as one united block with one khalifah- chief muslim ruler for the whole muslim world to make victorious Allah’s religion of Islamic monotheism ), there will be fitnah (wars, battles, polytheism, etc) and oppression on earth, and a great mischief and corruption (appearance of polytheism)”

[TMQ8:73]

Death of Prophet (saw) and the actions of Sahaba

The Prophet (saw) died on Monday, 12th of Rabiul Awwal. Instead of burying Prophet (saw) the Sahaba (companions) did certain actions which give us a lesson to learn and act. Generally if a Muslim dies, it is obligatory for Muslims to bury him as soon as possible a. But the Sahaba did not bury the Prophet (saw) immediately; rather they involved themselves seriously in selecting the Khalifah for Muslims, who is the one to take care of the affairs of the Muslims. For this they gathered in the courtyard of bani Saida and after the discussion of two days they came to a conclusion that Abu bakr (ra) should be their Khalifah. After appointing the Khalifah, the Sahaba’s then made preparation for the burial of Prophet (saw). By their actions we come to know the importance of appointing an Imam for the Muslims within three days and it should be dealt as life or death issue like the Sahaba did. But now we are living without an Imam who takes care of the affairs of the ummah for more than eight decades. So all the problems we face today is due to the one reason that is we forget the issue which was dealt by the sahaba’s as life or death issue i.e. the Khilafah. We will definitely revive by establishing the Khilafah rashidah, if we have firm belief in Allah (swt) and follow the sunnah of Prophet (saw). The Prophet (saw) said as narrated in the Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal:

«تكونُ النّبُوة فيكمّ ما شاءَ اللهُ أن تكون، ثمّ يرْفَعَها إذا شاءَ أن يرْفعُها. ثُمّ تكونُ خِلافةً على مِنهاج النبوَّة، فتكونُ ما شاءَ اللهُ أنْ تكونَ، ثُمّ يرْفعُها. إذا شاءَ الله أنْ يرفعَها. ثُمّ تكونُ مُلْكاً عاضّاً، فيكونُ ما شاءَ الله أنْ يكونَ، ثُمّ يرفعُها إذا شاءَ أنْ يرفعَها، ثُمّ تكونُ مُلْكاً جَبريَّةً، فتكونُ ما شاءَ الله أنْ تكون، ثُمّ يرفعُها إذا شاءَ أنْ يرفعَها. ثُمّ تكونُ خِلافةً على مِنهاج النُّبُوَّة، ثم سكت»

"The Prophethood will last among you till Allah wishes it to last, and then Allah will raise it up. Afterwards there will be a Khilafah according to the way of the prophethood so long as Allah wishes it to last, and then Allah will raise it up if He wished. Afterwards there will be an oppressive rule, and it will last so long as Allah wishes it to last, and then Allah will raise it up if He wished. Afterwards there will be a compulsory rule, and it will last as long as Allah wishes it to last, and then Allah will raise it up if He wished. Afterwards there will be a Khilafah according to the way of the Prophethood.”

[Ahmad]

The above quoted hadeeth give us information about the matter which will happen in near future by the will of Allah (swt). So Muslims are obliged to work for the return of Khilafah on the sunnah of Prophet (saw). If we do so then Allah (swt) will grant us victory.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا اسْتَجِيبُوا لِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُمْ لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ

"O you who believe!Answer (the call of) Allah and His Messenger when He calls you to that which gives you life.”

[TMQ 8:24]

Fatalism

2008-02-18T16:01:00.002Z

Al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya (fatalism)

During the time of Rasool Allah (saaw) and the Sahabah, the meaning of Qadr was well understood without any ambiguity and what it meant was very clear. There was no debate. inquiries, or differences in this issue, except the discussion between Abu Ubaidah and Umar (ra), when Umar decided not to proceed in his trip to as-sham, once the news came telling that there was a plague spreading there and decided to go back to Madinah, telling the people '' I'm returning back, thus you should return as well''. In this incident Abu Ubaidah did not attend Umar's consultation with the people and the result of the consultation.However, when Abu Ubaidah heard of Umar's orders. he came to Umar telling him ''O Umar, are you running away from Allah's Qadr.'' By this he was objecting Umar's decision to return back to Madinah. Umar was amazed by this objection raised by Abu Ubaidah and Umar said to him, ''O Abu Ubaidah. I wish someone other than you would have said this. Yes. I am running away from Allah's Qadr to Allah's Qadr ''. He explained this by saying, if you see a man coming to a place where there are two areas, one area is lush and the other barren. Don't you see that if he takes his cattle to the lush area, he is doing so according the Allah's Qadr and if he take his cattle to the barren area, he is also taking it by Allah's Qadr.

This is the only report which talked about the difference in understanding Al-Qadr, amongst the Sahabah. Otherwise, Muslims in general understood Al-Qadr the way it is in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. This understanding is that everything is written in the preserved tablet (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz), from the very beginning (before creation) and there is no relationship for this in the man's actions or in the obligations Allah orders us to carry. This situation continued all the way till the second half of the second century Hijri or till the middle of the Abbasid era. Due to the translation of the Greek, Persian and Hindu philosophies, some misconceptions accumulated in the minds of some people and the question of al-Qada wal-Qadr emerged and over shadowed the concept of Al-Qadr.After that, the issue of al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya (fatalism) became widespread among the people. It influenced them and shaped their behavior. It was one of the declining factor for the Muslim Ummah and when the decline became more obvious (during our time), it was one the most important factor, which prevented the Muslims form working for the revival. This situation continued till the beginning of the second half of the 20th century, Common Era (CE). At that time, a new Islamic culture emerged, clearing the issue of al-Qada wal-Qadr intellectually and presenting the Islamic point of view towards it. This culture also cleared the meaning of al-Qadr based on the Sharii text.

Thus, now the issue of al-Qada wal-Qadr became very clear for those who are involved in the Islamic work or Islam in general. Those who looked up to the western culture and the ones cultured by it, their interest in addressing Islam started decreasing (so they stopped attacking Islam through this perspective). The issue of al-Qada wal-Qadr was no longer an issue which occupied the mind of the Muslims or shaped their behavior. However, this did not affect al-Qadaria al-Ghaybiya (fatalism) and its place in the minds of the Muslims. All of the Muslims kept being influenced by it, the way it was in the past and those who are adhering to the Western culture, they started to get influenced by similar ideas carried by the West, which they call divine destiny. Thus, the issue of the al-Qadaria al-Ghaybiya is not solved and a question emerged about the difference in al-Qadr and al-Qadaria al-Ghaybiya due to the difficulty in distinguishing the difference between them. Before starting to address this question, we would like to pay attention to the fact that al-Qadr is a word which is different than ''al-Qada wal-Qadr'', the combined term.The Qadr as the word is what Allah knows and wrote in preserved tablet (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz) at the very beginning (of creation). However, al-Qada wal-Qadr means the question of having the actions occur against man's will. This includes the characteristics of objects, which also occur against man's will. Thus, the real meaning of both are different. Although, the meaning which may come to the mind of the people once they hear both terms may be the same, which is the ability of man to stand and face what was written.

Since al-Qadr is different then al-Qada wal-Qadr, then a deep investigation of the issue leads us to realize that what needs to be addressed in al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya versus al-Qadr. It should not be al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya versus al-Qadr and al-Qada wal-Qadr. Because the issue is the written actions and not the free choice of man or having man being forced to carry out his actions. Now it is clear that al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya emerged when people started mixing between al-Qadr and the meaning of al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya without distinguishing them. In other words, it emerged as a result of mixing between al-Qadr and its results (submitting to it). While forgetting al-Qadr itself and being confined to its submission. Due to this mixing and the failure to define the fine line of separating both, al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya emerged and spread and even over shadowed al-Qadr. Therefore, we need to understand the reality of both and the difference between them. Al-Qadr is all that Allah (swt) knows which is everything in al-Lowh al-Mahfooz. This taken from many Shani text (which are used as Daleel for the meaning of al-Qadr); for example when Allah (swt) says:

''(All) except the family of Lut. Them all we are surely going to save (from destruction). Except his wife, of whom We have decreed that she shall be of those who remain behind (i.e. she will be destroyed)''.

[Al Hijr 15: 59-60]

Also'..And the Command of Allah is a decree determined.''

[Al-Ahzab 33:38]

also,Say: ''Nothing shall ever happen to us except what Allah has ordained for us..''

[At-Tauba 9:51]

andAnd there is nothing hidden in the heaven and the earth, but is in a Clear Book (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz)

[Al-Naml 27:75]

andAnd no aged man is granted a length of life, nor is a part cut off from his life, but is in a Book (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz,)

[Fatir 35:11]

and

And with Him are the keys of the Ghaib (all that is hidden), none knows them but he. And he knows whatever there is in (or on) the earth and in the sea; not a leaf falls, but he knows it. There is not a grain in the darkness of the earth nor anything fresh or dry, but is written in a Clear Record. [Al-An'am 6:59]

The meaning of all of these Ayat is that Allah knows everything in the universe and Allah wrote it in a clear book. Similarly, this is described in the following Ahadith:The one which mentions that a woman should not ask for her sister's divorce in order to marry her sister's husband, because she will have what Allah wrote for her.

And the one which says that Musa told Adam, ''O Adam, Allah has chosen you and wrote by His hand for you; how come you blame me for something Allah wrote before He even created me.''

And in the Hadith which mentions that Allah wrote the Qadr of everything 50,000 years before the creation of the universe while His throne was on the water.

And the Hadith which mentions that Allah (swt) created the pen and instructed it to write. The pen asked, ''O Allah, what should I write''. Allah said, ''write the Qadr of everything till the day of judgement.''

And the Hadith which mentions that writing is dried and you will meet what is written.And the Hadith which mentions that if the Ummah gathered to benefit you in something, they will never be able to benefit you with something other than what Allah wrote for you and if the whole Ummah got together to harm you in something, they will never be able to do it. unless Allah wrote it for you. Pens are laid down, and the ink has dried. (Ibn Abbas)

When Rasool Allah (saaw) says all of this, he means that nothing happens, except what Allah destined and wrote for the human beings and nothing happens against that which Allah knows. This is the meaning of Qadr and this is the meaning which is included in the Sharii text.The Sharii text gives the meaning in a clear way without any ambiguity. This is what a Muslim should believe in. A Muslim knows that he cannot do anything against what Allah has determined. He knows also that what he can and cannot accomplish are within al-Qadr. A Muslim knows that he cannot succeed, unless Allah determined this success for him (wrote in al-Lowh al-Mahfooz). A Muslim is aware of all this and believes in it, because this is what the different Ayat imply: such as:

''...Nothing will happen to us except for what Allah wrote for us

[At-Tauba 9:51]

And what the different Ahadith tell us; such as the one which mentions that the pens are laid down and the ink has dried.

Based upon this understanding, Muslims believed in al-Qadr without any ambiguity. There was no doubt in a Muslim's Aqeedah, so long as no alien ideas were attached to this understanding. However, after Muslims got influenced by alien thoughts, a veil covered their minds, causing them to loose the clarity of their understanding of the Aqeedah. Muslims used to believe in the Qadr and keeping it in the realm of belief (Iman). But now, Muslims started noticing this Iman in the Qadr, before performing any action and they started to carry various actions shaped by this Iman in the Qadr. Thus, they surrounded themselves by what is predetermined. Muslims started to think that whatever Allah predetermined is going to happen, regardless if they became active or passive in carrying out an action. They started believing like this, despite the fact that they know for sure that, it is impossible for anyone to have access to Allah's knowledge. In other words, the Muslims do believe that it is impossible for anyone to know what Allah's knowledge is.

Muslims know all of this, yet they still link their actions with this knowledge of Allah. Thus, al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya (fatalism) emerged. It became something different than believing in al-Qadr. This is because, believing in the Qadr is to believe conclusively that nothing will happen in this universe, other than what Allah has predetermined everything and wrote in al-Lowh al-Mahfooz. However, al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya means to surrender to what is predetermined. There is a difference between believing in the Qadr and surrendering to the predetermined. Surrendering to this predetermined is simply the result of believing in the Qadr with the absolute surrender; which is that what is predetermined is going to happen and nothing will happen if Allah did not predetermined it.

By the time, believing in the Qadr was over shadowed and now the Muslims have the total surrender. In other words, the belief in the Qadr is no longer restricted to the realm of belief. Now, the outcome alone (which is the total submission) became the issue. Al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya, inside ourselves is linked to the combination of Iman in the Qadr and absolute submission to it; but when it comes to the actions of a person who believes in it, it is no longer a combination of Iman in the Qadr and the total submission to it. Now it is just total submission. In the end. Muslims started saying (once they fail), this is Allah's predetermination and it is my Qadr. If he fails many times, and succeeds in the end, he will say, this is the predetermined time for my success and I succeeded just because it came in the time which Allah had decided. Thus, Muslims started linking the success or the failure to the Qadr in most of their actions. Muslims started saying that it is useless to overcome the predetermined because whatever is predetermined is going to happen and no power can stop it.

This is al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya. It is the absolute surrender to the predetermined without even looking at the belief in the Qadr. In other words, it is moving the issue from the belief to the surrender. As a result, all actions will be linked to the Qadr and to Allah. From this we see that al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya did not emerged from the belief in the Qadr. Rather, it emerged from surrendering to the Qadr or from observing al-Qadr when performing an action. This observation is the fine line and it is the pit fall. Thus, we have to understand it believing in the Qadr and understand that issue of this observation and recognize the fine line that separates believing the Qadr and al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya. We must know that believing in the Qadr is just a belief. It is a conclusive belief and must not produce a submission to the predetermined. The danger is from this surrender which was produced by this belief. In other words, it came form observing the Qadr while we perform an action or while we are just about to perform it. This danger cannot be prevented, except by keeping the Qadr totally and completely in the realm of Iman without linking to the actions. It is like any issue of the Aqeedah, we are asked to believe in it, while making it distinct from the actions. Mixing it with the actions and removing this fine line is what causes this pit fall. Al-Qadaria al-Ghaybiya spread amongst the Muslims during the decline era, because of the lack of clarity misunderstanding the Qadr and not separating this Iman in the Qadr from the actions. People started surrendering to the Qadr. Muslims started justifying their failure and successes to the Qadr. They started justifying their obedience and disobedience to Allah on the Qadr.

Consequently. Muslims no longer want to overcome obstacles facing them and no longer want to achieve the great achievements which they are supposed to, because they started surrendering themselves negatively to whatever happened to them, good or bad. Al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya is to observe the Qadr in everything and in every action: whatever occurred and whatever did not occur. It is to believe and surrender to the Qadr in a negative way. It is one of the most dangerous and harmful dogma the Ummah can carry. It has grave consequences and it annihilates the individual, Ummah and the society, any society. Thus, it has to be countered and separated from the belief in the Qadr. We do believe that Allah knows or predetermined everything. This, however, should not be observed in our actions. We do not have access to Allah's knowledge. No one knows that there is going to be a failure or success. No one knows weather there is going to be obedience or disobedience. We do not have access to Allah's knowledge and consequently Allah's knowledge should not be observed and linked to our actions, because we do not know it and it is impossible for us to know. Thus, we do not surrender to it. Rather, we should put a thick barrier separating it (Allah's knowledge) from our minds. It should not be thought about, imagined or speculated before carrying any action. But, we should restrict ourselves to the issue, the hukm Sharii, causes of success, the factors of failure and keep this alone in mind.

The Islamic Ideology

2008-02-03T14:32:00.000Z

Understanding the Method of the Islamic Ideology

INTRODUCTION

An ideology can generally be defined as a set of related concepts and beliefs that constitutes the basis of the political, economic, social system. Upon further scrutiny of the fundamentals and essence of any ideology and application, one arrives at the understanding that an ideology invariably includes a method or technique by which its ideas can be realised. Hence, we understand that an ideology consists of two main elements: Idea and Method.In light of this, we must seek to confine all out actions, in the pursuit of the revival, to the method which emanates from our ideology. Failure to do this will result in our carrying out actions which do not emanate from the Islamic ideology, thus negating the Islamic goals and objectives.In order to comprehend the realm of actions considered as part of the Islamic method, we must understand the nature and distinction of what constitutes Means, Style, and Plans as well as the concept of Strategy and Tactics.

IDEA (Fikrah)

The term Fikrah can be translated as an idea or thought. The most fundamental thought, the doctrine of creed, is termed the 'Aqeeda. The resultant thoughts and a system dealing with all aspects of life emanate from the 'Aqeeda.Thus, the Idea - in the sense of it being one of the two elements of an ideology - can refer to the 'Aqeeda, and the resultant thoughts.

1. 'Aqeeda or doctrine itself is the fundamental thought about the universe, man and life." Say, Allah is One." ( Al Ikhlas; 112:1 )This ayah is an idea directly related to the 'Aqeeda.

2. Resultant rules ( Ahkam ) are derived from the doctrine and used for solving the issues of life in general." ...Allah has permitted trading and forbidden Riba. " ( Al Baqara; 2:275 )

This ayah results in thoughts related to specific relationships, i.e. the economy andacts of worship. Other ayat have thoughts related to the conditions for and conformation of the Khalifa, the Islamic viewpoint towards men and women, rules related to business transactions, food, clothing, etc.

METHOD (Tareeqah)

The method is the material manifestation of the idea which seeks to bring the ideology into application. The method addresses the following subjects;

A) Implementation of the solutions.
B) Preserving the 'Aqeeda ( creed ).
C) Conveying the ideology.

The Islamic method for the implementation of Islam in the society is through the Khalifa. The Khilafa is a complete structure of the state, tasked with over seeing the implementation of Islam in the affairs of life, including the Khalifa, his Executive and Delegated Assistants, the Judiciary, and the rest of the system.To categorise an action as part of the method, it has to be validated by Daleel or evidence. Additionally, any action which is part of the method has to be validated by a Daleel to categorise it as such. For example, Jihad is a method from which many actions branch off. Each one of them is based on an evidence. For example, initiating combat of how Islam is to be presented to those whom we are to fight with, are all based on evidences. Other evidences specifically describe and clarify the circumstances in which fighting is allowed to be temporarily suspended. It becomes quite clear that these actions are part of the method which have to be adhered to by performing the acts exactly the way they were performed by the Prophet ( saaw ). Hence, it is totally forbidden to modify ( add, delete, or alter ) any of these acts. It is totally forbidden to deviate even slightly from these acts because they all stem from the method.

From the aforementioned, it is clear that the Idea and the Method comprise the Ideology. Therefore, both should be adopted and adhered to with a full and strong conviction because it is forbidden to adopt the Idea and relinquish the Method just as it is forbidden to adopt the Method and relinquish the Idea. Consequently, discarding the Salah is just as forbidden as forsaking the penalty of cutting the hand of the thief, and abandoning the payment of Zakah is just as forbidden as neglecting Jihad, and committing cannibalism is not any worse than conspiring against the Muslims, and drinking alcohol is just as forbidden as the political disunity of the Muslim Ummah. All of these thoughts and concepts are a coherent part of Islam which have to be adopted comprehensively because Allah, The Most High, says:

" And you who believe is a part of The Book and disbelieve is a part. The punishment of those who do that among you is the humiliation in this life, and they will be subjected to the most severest chastisement in The Hereafter. And Allah is not unaware of what you do."

( Al Baqara; 2:285 )

Thus, Islam clarifies both the Idea and the Method and commands us to uphold and adhere to both of them and prohibits us from abandoning either one.Now that the Idea and Method have been expounded upon, we will elucidate the Style, the Means, and the Plan of the 'Aqeeda. These three concepts may sound synonymous in meaning, but in reality they differ from one another. Each one of these terms has to be clearly defined so that we can deliver Islam in the correct manner, and the clarity of these terms has to maintained at all times to safeguard ourselves against any deviation from the correct path. One may question the importance of clarifying the differences amongst these terms and to define them separately.

The importance of realising these differences becomes quite relevant when we look in retrospect to the recent annals of Islamic history, where the Muslim Ummah could not distinguish between technology and culture. The Ummah imported and adopted many cultural elements from the Western civilisation.The lack of understanding and awareness of the differences amongst the Style, the Means, and the Plan have led Muslims to the weakest and darkest period of their history and the Ummah is still suffering from the consequences of this lack of awareness. The Muslims took from the Western civilisation what Islam prohibited and renounced and left what Islam allowed them to adopt from it. Thus, it is important for the Muslims to fully understand the Style, the Means, and the Plan of the 'Aqeedah and to clearly distinguish between them.

THE STYLE ( Usloub )

The Style is an act which branches from the Method. However, it differs from the Method in that no Daleel is specifically prescribed for this type of action. In this instance, the Daleel for the fundamental act is considered as an enactment and reinforcement of the Style.
For example, in Jihad, there is evidence that compels us to prepare as much power as possible to fight the enemy.

"...And prepare as much power for them ( the enemy ) as possible. "

( Al Anfal 8:60 )

This preparation entails many acts of preparation, such as using a specific style for manufacturing weapons, adopting certain military techniques styles and so on. All of these acts are implicitly included within the word 'prepare', so there is no need for evidence to prescribe each act since the general evidence that ordains the preparation is considered adequate for all of the acts.

Similarly, selecting one Khalifah for all Muslims is an act from which branches out several acts such as adopting certain procedures of election and tallying votes. Adopting certain styles to prepare a force against the enemy, and a certain procedure to select the Khalifah are all acts that do not need specifically prescribed evidence. The Style, which is a set of branching acts, assumes the same verdict or ruling as the one for the fundamental act without the need for a specific evidence. Adopting certain martial arts, a certain procedure of tallying votes, a certain traffic system and dividing the military forces into subdivisions are all considered styles adopted to accomplish a certain objective and allowed for adoption. The exception is when a specific style has to be adopted, in which case this specific style becomes obligatory because the legal rule states:

" That which is required to accomplish the obligation, is itself obligatory."

From this we can see that no one is obliged to follow a certain style ( except when a specific style is obligatory ) because it is considered to be a natural part of an individual's personality. For this reason, the style may differ from one person to another, such as in writing a letter, a book, or expressing oneself. Styles take on different forms and shapes and are receptive to changes from one situation to another.

Moreover, it is not prudent to be confined to a certain style as a standard upon which all other styles are evaluated. This is because one style may be very successful in a given situation and a total failure in some other situations. The Style is dictated by the nature of the action. For this reason, it is not accepted to be stagnant and depend upon certain styles in refusal of adopting and other style.`Moreover, it is obligatory that we relentlessly search for the most effective styles. In many instances, effective styles led to marvellous outcomes, like the manoeuvring of Khalid Bin Al-Walid when he withdrew his army in the Mut'ah battle. The outcome was that he saved the army from immanent destruction.

DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN THE METHOD AND THE STYLE

Throughout the history of the Da'wah, one can see that there are many circumstances that clarify the differences between the Method and the Style, and that we are obliged to adopt and uphold the Method without any deviation. It should be made clear that we are not obliged to adopt a specific style. The Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammed (saaw) is considered to be an inseparable and coherent part of Islam. The Sunnah explains and describes in detail, many thoughts and rules that are ordained in the Qur'an. The explanation and illustration of a certain thought has the same verdict and ruling as the thought itself. For example, how to pray is an illustration and enactment of the order of Allah to pray. Allah, The Most High ordained the performance of prayers and Hajj and its details. All of these acts carry the same verdicts as the thought itself because these acts only illustrate how these thoughts are to be enacted.However, some of the acts of the Prophet Muhammed (saaw) were not an illustration of a thought. In this case, these acts need to have supporting evidences to prove that they are either obligatory, recommended, permissible, or are exclusively reserved for the Prophet (saaw). To know whether a given act of the Prophet (saaw) is obligatory, recommended, or allowed, rules outline in Usul ul Fiqh need to be considered.

By investigating the acts of the Prophet (saaw) throughout the different phases of the Islamic Da'wah, certain acts are part of the Method and others are part of the Style. The Prophet (saaw) conveyed Islam following a method and initiated some acts through the course of conveying Islam. It is obligatory to follow the Prophet Muhammed (saaw) when his (saaw) acts are considered to be a Method and recommended to follow when his (saaw) acts are only recommended.For example, the method of the Prophet (saaw) in conveying Islam and moving from one phase of the Da'wah to the next and his initiation in every phase of a new act that was not done in the previous phase, and his persistence and perseverance to carry out the same acts despite the potential dangerous outcomes are all considered to be an abundant number of supporting evidences that these types of acts are obligatory and part of the method. Specifically, the fact that the Prophet (saaw) was relentlessly persistent in concentrating his effort on culturing individuals in sessions and educating the general public and his steadfastness and endurance in this act undoubtedly presents a mountain of supporting evidence that educating the public and the individuals is part of the Method. Consequently, it has to be adopted. The initiation of the second phase of the Islamic Da'wah by the Prophet (saaw) involved two acts which were not initiated in the first phase:

A) Addressing the abominable practices of the society in the manner mandated by Islam as when the Prophet (saaw) attacked fraud, cheating in the scales and burying of young girls.

B) His initiation to uncover the plots of the pagans against the Muslims as occurred during the war between the Romans and the Persians.All of these acts indicate that uncovering the plots of the non-Muslims and addressing the issues of the society on the basis of Islam are part of the Method. The fact that the Prophet (saaw) initiated these kinds of acts in the second phase of the Da'wah, but not in the first, indicates that these specific acts are necessary and obligatory in that particular phase.

Also, the initiation of the Prophet (saaw) of seeking the protection for the conveyance of Islam and his persistence in doing so and his sending of Mus'ab Bin Umayr to Al-Madina indicates that seeking the protection for conveying Islam is part of the Method as well. Thus, to convey the Islamic Call, it is necessary to implant the Islamic thoughts into the life of the general public in the first phase of the Islamic Call. It was also necessary to uncover the plots of the non-Muslims and address the issues of society on the basis of Islam in the second phase of the Islamic Call. Subsequently it was necessary to establish the Islamic State, which is considered the third phase of the Islamic Call. Additionally, it was required to confront the ideology of the pagans and persevere in doing so. All of these are part of the Method. The persistence of the Prophet (saaw) and the initiation of these acts was to illustrate the obligation of these acts in conveying Islam. The evidence that these acts are obligatory is the ayah:

" Indeed, there is an exemplary character in the Messenger (saaw) for you."

( Al-Ahzaab 33:21)

Following the steps of the Prophet (saaw) is accomplished by the initiating the acts which are performed by the Prophet (saaw) in the exact manner that the acts are carried out. This is an issue that is discussed in detail in the books of Al 'Usool. Imaam Al Qurafi dedicated one chapter in his book Al Furooq, in which he explained that what the Prophet (saaw) did as an Imaam or Qadi cannot be performed by anyone else unless he is an Imaam or Qadi, and what the Prophet did as a Caller to Islam is obligatory upon us as carriers of Islam.Thus, it is not allowed, when we carry the message of Islam, to initiate any material actions prior to establishing the Islamic State, since only the Islamic State conducts a material struggle. This is because the Prophet (saaw) initiated material actions only when he became the Imaam of the Islamic State. For this reason, the Prophet (saaw) did not initiate any material actions in Makkah because he (saaw) was not ruler in Makkah.

In addition, we find that the Prophet (saaw) initiated some acts when he (saaw) was conveying the Message of Islam. The actions of educating the public took on different forms while the intensified education delivered in the private arena took on the forms of study circles ( like the sessions of Al Khabab). The speech addressed to the general public assumed different styles such as when the Prophet (saaw) invited some people to a meal with the objective of delivering the Message if Islam or when he stood on Al Safa and broadcast the call of Islam.

All these acts are to be considered branches from a fundamental concept, which in this case is public education. Here, the obligatory issue is public education but the but the style that were employed differed, and thus we are not obliged to follow the same styles adopted by the Prophet (saaw). We can speak to the people where people gather, such as the mosque, weddings, or funeral; through the media, such as buses, trains, planes, etc. Similarly, the Prophet (saaw) initiated a number of acts what he (saaw) was seeking protection. He (saaw) sought protection only from Muslim tribes and strong Muslim individuals.Consequently, we can seek the protection of tribes, military commanders, or the masses as long as they are Muslim. These are classified as styles, which take on many forms and shapes according to the circumstances. Seeking protection from the positions of power does not change but the positions of power themselves may change. In summary, the style is defined as how a given obligatory issue is executed, not requiring a specific Daleel since it is already substantiated by the evidence for the main or root action and objective that may be pursued. For example, the preparation of forces to confront the enemy is an obligatory act that can be accomplished through many styles, that can be effectively used to accomplish the objective.

THE MEANS (Waseelah)

The Means are the physical tool that are permitted for adoption when initiating a particular act. Using a sheet of paper for writing, or a radio station for talk, or the sword as a means of fighting are all classified as a Means. The Qa'idah in 'Usul al Fiqh states that all objects are allowed except those that are specifically forbidden by textual evidence. For example, we can utilise ballot boxes as a means for election, we can adopt certain means of fighting such as possessing intercontinental ballistic missiles, or use satellites as a means for communication. Furthermore, we can address the people through a pamphlet, leaflet, or periodicals. All of these means are allowed. The Prophet (saaw) once sent someone to Yemen to master the manufacture of swords and adopted this new technology.

THE PLAN (Khittah)

The Plan is a general policy directed towards accomplishing a particular goal dictated by the 'Aqeedah and the Method. The Prophet (saaw) viewed this world from a specific perspective. He (saaw) conveyed the Message of Islam to the society at large. The Quraish in Makkah were the first State in Arabian Peninsula and a major obstacle in the path of the Islamic call. For this reason, we find that the Prophet (saaw) engineered the appropriate plan to deal with this obstacle. The plan reveals that the Prophet (saaw) sought to isolate the Quraish from the other tribes. So he (saaw) had the Quraish surrounded with tribes who submitted to Islam or who had peace treaties with the Muslims. Following this, the first task that the Prophet (saaw) performed after he (saaw) settled in Al Madina was to establish a treaty with the tribes who inhabited the are between Al Madina and the Red Sea, such the tribes of Johinah and Bani Doomarah and Ghaffar, and monitored the movements of the Quraish.

As a result of this plan, the battles of Badr, Uhud and Al Ahzaab occurred. Subsequently, when the Prophet (saaw) became aware of the communication between the tribe of Khaibar and Quraish, he (saaw) devised anther plan that established a treaty between the Muslims and the Quraish. This way, the Prophet (saaw) poured all his efforts to subdue Khaibar after he (saaw) could not establish any treaty with them. Then, the Prophet (saaw) initiated acts that would help accomplish the goal of this plan until it materialised in the treaty of Hudaybiah. Then, when he (saaw) subjugated Khaibar, Makkah was next, so he (saaw) engineered another plan that dictated the suppression of the Quraish. As a result, the conquest of Makkah took place.The Prophet (saaw) devised another plan, to carry Islam outside as a universal Call. He (saaw) sent a letter to the Kings in the Arabian Peninsula and all the Kings of the surrounding lands. Letters were sent to the King of Egypt, Muqawqas; Emperor of Rome, Hercules; and the King of Persia, Kisrah. Thus, we find that the Prophet (saaw) devised plans to accomplish certain goal and changed the plans when the goal changed. In addition, the Prophet (saaw) adopted certain styles to accomplish a certain plan which he (saaw) initiated. Suppressing the Quraish dictated the monitoring of the Quraish and establishing communications with the tribes around Quraish. Also, establishing a treaty with the Quraish dictated certain acts that happened in the treaty of Al Hudaibiya, and certain manoeuvres performed by the Prophet (saaw) immediately prior to and after the ratification of the treaty. When a state implements plans, it does so to accomplish certain goals that are dictated by the policy of the state. When it is needed to change the plans, the state has to change them and it is forbidden not to abandon plans because it is necessary for the Islamic State to function as the leading state in the world.

Abandoning the execution of adopted plans means abandoning the message of Islam, which in turn means abandoning the leadership position which translates into the suppression of the State's power as was characterised by the Ottoman State towards its end. Planning is necessary for the State and for the Da' wah carriers because the Prophet (saaw) laid out plans in Makkah and in Madina. He (saaw) did not abandon planning any at any phase of the Islamic Call. Every phase of the Islamic Call may dictate a certain plan. For example, gaining the public support for the Islamic thought dictates interaction with the society, which in turn dictates living with the society. Living with the society does not happen until we enter the society. For this reason, entering the society is a necessary plan that dictates many styles and public speech and political struggle.Two additional terms that one ought to be aware of are strategy and tactics. Initially, strategy and tactics were used as military terms. However, today they have a broader connotation. The relationship between the strategy and tactics is similar to the relationship between the plan and style.

THE STRATEGY (Estrateegya)

The strategy is defined as the art of employing the political, economic, psychological, and military forces of a nation or a group of nations to afford the maximum support to adopted policies in peace or war. The policies are built on the ideology of the nation. Some people also refer to this as the grand or higher strategy to distinguish it from the original purely military use of the word strategy. Since the war is nothing but an action to accomplish a goal, which the state could not accomplish by diplomacy, it is appropriate to discuss strategy in its broader meaning. The strategy deals with the entire theatre of operations of a state, at the diplomatic, economic, and military level. It is concerned with determining which resources the state will use and to what extent in order to achieve the objective. In other words, the strategy is the global plan to the State.

As an example, the Prophet's (saaw) objective was to carry Islam to the Arabs and non-Arabs. This required a strategy to enable the Islamic State to first, survive in and then dominate the Arabian Peninsula. In the regard, Muhammed (saaw) sought to isolate the major tribe, the Quraish, be entering into a series of treatise with her neighbours. The he (saaw) sought to politically and militarily engage the Quraish. As a result of this engagement, Muhammed (saaw) was able to neutralise Quraish. This enabled him (saaw) to dominate the arabian peninsula, after which the state continued to carry Islam to the rest of humanity.The Prophet's (saaw) objective was to carry Islam to the Arabs and non-Arabs. This required a strategy to enable the Islamic state to first dominate the arabian peninsula. First, in this regard, Muhammad (saaw) sought to isolate the major tribe, Quraish, by entering into a series of treaties with her neighbours. Then he (saaw) sought to politically and militarily engage the Quraish. As a result of this engagement, Muhammad (saaw) was unable to neutralise the Quraish. This enabled him (saaw) to dominate the arabian peninsula, after which the Muslims continued to carry Islam to the rest of humanity.

THE TACTICS (Takteek)

The tactics, in warfare, is the art of fighting battles on land, on sea, and in the air and the execution of movements for attack or defence. In general, it is the art or skill employing available means to accomplish an end. It is concerned with the handling of one or more strategic resources in a specific manner to serve the object of strategy. Similar to a style, the tactics too will be based on what is thought to be effective at a particular time. It does not need a Daleel to make it permissible, unless if a specific tactic or style involves haram actions. If that is the case, then the tactic will be haram, i.e. sitting with people who are drinking wine with the objective of carrying the dawah to them.The tactic requires creativity, as it will be a function of the situation that one is faced with. It should also be flexible, such that one would be able to adapt to the changing situation. For example, the Prophet (saaw) knew about the communications between the tribes of Khaibar and the Quraish. He (saaw) tried to cut off these communications. This was the tactic he adopted initially. When this failed, the Prophet (saaw) changed to a new plan, which was to establish a treaty with the Quraish. For this, he initiated new tactics, such as the Umrah to Mecca, and the stance he took during the campaign at Al-Hudaibiyah, near Mecca. Thus, the tactic changed during this campaign according to the new plan and circumstances.

For example, the Prophet (saaw) knew about the communications between the Khaibar and Quraish tribes, so he (saaw) tried to cut off these communications. He (saaw) first made contact with Khaibar to establish a treaty, but his attempts were of no avail. The Prophet (saaw) then changed his tactic to establishing a treaty with the Quraish. He (saaw) initiated actions or tactics to accomplish this goal. Thus, the tactic changed according to the circumstances.These are the conventional meaning of these concepts that should be upheld and advocated by Muslims and especially the callers to Islam. Also, since the callers of Islam are future statesmen, they should develop and increase their awareness of all the issues that are related to these concepts. We should live up to the statement of Umar Bin Al-Khattab (ra), when he said: " I am not a deceiver and the deceiver cannot deceive me."

Hijra

2008-01-20T15:43:00.000Z

Political Awareness of the Hijra

The Muslims ought to be reminded of the events that took place to signify the Hijra. And what is incumbent is to reveal its essence so as to make the Muslims truly understand its meaning and significance as opposed to a mere spiritual tradition that is inherited like the other religions, or the events that resulted in a mere change in the recording of the calendar, much like the calendar of the christians. In order to portray its vital (ideological) aspects, that which is not discussed today due to its threat to the present regimes, it is necessary to first undertake a study of the Hijra from the authentic sources of seerah, and then to derive the meaning from it. The meaning that will draw attention to the real issues of today - that Islam is both a spiritual and political Doctrine - such that by it the generation of a momentum to revive the Muslim ummah will spring from it, and at the same time all will be made aware of it.A study from the authentic sources of seerahThe Messenger of Allah (saw) ordered the Muslims in Makka to migrate to Medina in small parties, and so they began to migrate either individually or in small groups.As for the political awareness of Quraysh with respect to the Muslims Ibn Ishaq states, "When Quraysh saw that Muhammad (saw), had assembled a party, and had support from elsewhere other than from the Quraysh and Makka, from a town other than theirs, and witnessed Muhammad's (saw) companions moving out to join these forces, they realised that the Muslims had found a new home with them and had acquired their protection. Quraysh were concerned that Muhammad would also leave them, since they knew that he had decided to do battle with them."As for the actual Quraysh response to this situation ibn Ishaq states, "Quraysh were concerned that the Messenger of Allah (saw), would leave and join them (those from a different tribe), since they knew that he had decided to do battle with them. They therefore, gathered in Dar al-Nadwa - the House of Assembly - the home of Qusayy bin Kilab, where all their top-level decisions were made."According to ibn Kathir, "Related from Abdullah bin Abu Najih, from Mujahid bin Jabr, that Abdullah ibn Abbas narrates the following. "The day arrived when they agreed to meet to enter their assembly to discuss what to do about the Messenger of Allah (saw). That day is known as yawm al-zahma (The Day of Gathering), and on it Shaytan, came before them in the form of a Shaikh from Nejd dressed in a heavy cloak. He stood at the door of the house, and when they saw him they asked who he was. Shaytan replied, "I come from Nejd, from the highlands, and I have heard why you have agreed to meet, and I have come to listen to what you say and perhaps offer some advice or comment." They invited him in. He entered the meeting where the Quraysh leadership were assembled. They consisted of Utba, Shayba, Abu Sufyan, Tai'ma bin Adi, Jubayr bin al-Harith, Abu al-Bakhtari bin Hisham, Zam'a bin al-Aswad, Hakim bin Hizam, Abu Jahl, Nabih and Munabbih, sons of al-Hajjaj, and Umayya bin Khalaf, along with various others of their supporters from Quraysh. They reminded one another of what they had experienced from the behaviour of Muhammad (saw), and agreed that they felt insecure (danger) from the possibility that he (saw), the Muslims, together with their material support (the chiefs of Medina), might make an attack upon them. Having discussed the issue, one of them said to have been Al-Bakhtari bin Hisham suggested, "Put him in irons and gaol him, then wait for him to have the same fate that befell poets before him, such as Zubayr and al-Nabigha. He would die as they had." But the Nejdi Shaikh objected saying, "No that is not a good plan. If you do shut him up, news of him will get right past the door you have locked on him and reach his supporters. They will promptly attack you and release him and then increase until they overcome you. That is not a good idea." They consulted further, and one suggested, "Let's exile him from our territory. Once he has gone we'll be rid of him and we'll be able to restore our affairs as they were before." The Nejdi Shaikh again observed, "No. That's not a good idea for you. You know how sweet his talk is, and his reasoning, and how he convinces others of his message. If you do that you'd have no security against him going to live with some Arab tribe and using his speech and discourse to get them to follow him. Then he would lead them against you and perhaps defeat or dispossess you and do what they like with you. No, think of something else." Abu Jahl then said, "I have an idea that hasn't occurred to you yet." "What is it?" They asked him. "I think we should select one young man from each tribe, and someone who is strong, of excellent lineage and reputation as a leader. We should give each one a sharp sword and they would go to him and use the swords to strike him in unison. They would kill him and we would be rid of him. If they do this, his blood would be spread over all the tribes. And Banu Abd Manaf will not be able to do battle against them all. So they will accept blood money which we can pay them." The Nejdi Shaikh commented, "What he says is right. This is the right idea, and no other." Having agreed upon this the assembly broke up.Jibreel (as) then came to Muhammad (saw), and told him, "Do not sleep tonight in the bed you usually use." When it was fully dark that night the Quraysh men gathered outside his (saw) door waiting for him (saw) to sleep so that they could attack him. Having seen where they were, the prophet (saw) said to Ali (ra), "Sleep on my bed, and wrap yourself in this green cloak of mine from Hadramawt; sleep in it. You'll not come to any harm from them." The prophet (saw) was in the habit of sleeping in that cloak of his."Yazid bin Abu Yazid relates from Muhammad bin Ka'b al-Qurazi, "The men met there at his (saw) door, Abu Jahl, who was among them said, "Muhammad claims that if you follow him you'll become kings of the Arabs and the non-Arabs alike. Then you'll be given life after death and be provided with gardens like those of Jordan. If you don't do that, then, he says, you will be slaughtered, given life after death but be put into a hellfire where you will be burned." The prophet (saw) then picked up a handful of dirt, saying, "Yes. I do say that. And you are one of them!" Then Allah (swt) took away their sight from them and they could not see him. He began sprinkling the dirt on to their heads while he (saw) recited the following verses from the Qur'an. "Ya-sin. By the Qur'an, the wise. You are among those who are sent forth upon a straight path", upto the verse, "We have placed a barrier before them and a barrier behind them, and have covered them over so they cannot see" [TMQ Ya-Sin; 36:3-9]. Every single man among them had dirt thrown on his head. He (saw) then left and went where he (saw) so wished. Someone who had not been there with these men arrived and asked, "What are you waiting here for?" They replied, "For Muhammad." "God damn you! Muhammad just came out to you and he did not leave any single one of you without throwing dirt on your head. He then left and went elsewhere. Can't you see what has happened to you?" Each man then placed his hand on his head and found dirt there. Looking closely they saw Ali (ra) on the bed covered in the green cloak of Muhammad (saw). They stayed there until morning; when Ali (ra) arose from the bed they said, "By God, what he told us must have been true!"" Ibn Ishaq says that among other verses Allah (swt) revealed the following. "And when the disbelievers plotted to confine, kill or exile you they made plans and He made plans, and He is the best Planner of all" [TMQ Al-Anfal; 8:30]."Finally, Allah (swt) gave His (swt) Messenger the permission to migrate. "Say: O Allah, make my place of arrival good and make my place of departure good. And grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself" [TMQ Bani Isra'il; 17:80]" And ibn Kathir states that the event marks the beginning of the Islamic era as was agreed upon by the sahaba (ra), during the rule of Umar (ra) - Al Hijra.All praises are due upon Allah the Almighty (swt). This was the move to Medina (which was also known as Dar al-Hijra), and it proved to be a turning point in the entire history of the ummah of Muhammad (saw), whereupon the Islamic State was established as a political entity that would influence the affairs of the world to come. The ideology was firmly established both in concept and in practical existence, and indeed this State, the very State that Muhammad (saw) himself established, continued in existence until its demise in 1924 at the hands of the colonialist disbelievers and their agent Mustapha Kemal.It is here that we can make the following observations and deduce the political awareness of the Hijra in light of our present times.1. The attempt to kill the Messenger of Allah (saw)We learn from the seerah that the attempt to kill the Messenger of Allah (swt) reflects the fact that what the prophet's (saw) call represented was a grave danger to the very existence of the Quraysh such that their very survival was in question - the survival of that regional power. That one man and his (saw) companions, warranted elimination altogether, provides evidence that there was a danger to the Quraysh of the gravest proportions. So, what was this danger? What was the threat that Muhammad (saw) posed that could not be contained? That it became the issue of survival (life and death) of Quraysh? What was it that the kings and rulers of his (saw) day perceived? Here follows an explanation.The key in understanding this is to realise that the prophet's (saw) call was not new to Quraysh at the time when they decided to kill him (saw). The verdict to kill him (saw) was issued at the gathering in Dar al-Nadwa, and immediately they moved to implement that plan that very same night. The prophet (saw) migrated to Medina and ibn Kathir mentions that, "Bukhari states that, "Matar bin al-Fadl related to us, quoting Rawh, quoting Hisham quoting Ikrama, from ibn Abbas who said, "The prophet's (saw) migration took place in the month of Rabi' al-Awwal in the thirteenth year of his (saw) mission, on a Monday.""" And ibn Ishaq stated that the decision to kill the prophet (saw) was issued only a day before. This means that the decision to kill him (saw) and the migration sequentially coincided and thus both events occurred in the thirteenth year of prophethood.So the verdict of killing came only after thirteen years of experiencing the prophet's call in which his (saw) methodology was explicit in politically challenging the leadership in Makka, and where he (saw) called for its destruction and termination. Why did they only now after thirteen years of experiencing this, decide to kill him if his (saw) explicit call was not secret and his (saw) intentions for power and leadership were not concealed? The clear answer and explanation lies in the realisation by the Quraysh leadership, which lies in two significant factors:a) The response of the strong factions within the society in Medina - namely the Nuqaba (Generals and Officers) - and,b) In the implications of the migration of the Messenger of Allah (saw) to a society that had been prepared and displayed a readiness to accept the full implementation of the Islamic Ideology.As for the first point, it reveals that the second pledge of Aqabah had been taken which meant that the ones in whose hands the real power lay, accepted rather than rejected the aim of the Messenger of Allah (saw) to establish himself (saw) as the head of that society, thereby establishing an Islamic State.According to ibn Ishaq, who related from Ma'bad, from 'Abd Allah, from his father Ka'b bin Malik who said, "When we met at the defile we waited for the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he (saw) did come. When they sat down, the first to speak was Al 'Abbas bin 'Abd Al Muttalib who said, "O Khazraj! Muhammad holds with us a position of which you are aware. We protect him from our people who think about him as we do. He is respected among his people and safe in his own town. But he is determined to join up with you. If you think you will keep trust with him in the invitation you have given him and will protect him from his enemies, then it is up to you to accept your responsibilities. But if you think you might hand him over and abandon him after he has joined you, then leave him right now. He does have respect and protection among his own people and in his town." We replied, "We hear what you say. Speak to us O Messenger of Allah (saw)! And take for yourself and for your Lord whatever you want." The Messenger of Allah (saw) then spoke, recited the Qur'an, invited people to Islam. He (saw) said, "I ask you to pledge that you will defend me as you do your women and children." Al Bara' bin Ma'mur then took him (saw) by the hand and said, "Yes indeed, we will! I swear by Him who sent you with the Truth, protect you as we do our women from whatever threatens them. We pledge ourselves to you O Messenger of Allah, and we are, I swear it, warriors from father to son over many generations." While Al Bara' was speaking to the Messenger (saw) he was interrupted by Abu Al Haytham bin Al Tayyihan, who said, "O Messenger of Allah, we have certain ties to others - meaning the jews - and if we break these, we are concerned that if Allah gives you victory, you might return to your own people and abandon us." The Messenger (saw) smiled and said, "If your blood be sought, our blood shall be sought, and your destruction is mine as well. I am of you and you are of me. I will battle those you battle and make peace with those with those whom you make peace." The Messenger of Allah (saw) then said, "Bring forth twelve from among you to be nuqaba (leaders vis-à-vis commanders) to take charge."With this event, the Quraysh became concerned at the progress of the prophet (saw). For ibn Ishaq states, "When Quraysh saw that Muhammad (saw) had assembled a Party, and had supporters from others than their own people and from a town other than theirs, and saw his (saw) companions moving out to join these others, they realised that the Muslims had found a new security with them and had acquired their protection. Quraysh were concerned that Muhammad (saw) would leave and join them, since they knew that he (saw) had decided to do battle with them. They therefore gathered in the Dar al-Nadwa, the House of Assembly, the home of Qusayy bin Kilab, where all their decisions were made. They discussed there what they should do with him (saw) since they now feared him more than ever."This is especially so due to the status of those of Medina who represented the strong and powerful factions, and the fact that their Chiefs of Staff gave unequivocal support to the establishment of the Islamic State. And the seerah indicates that they were distinguished amongst the general masses in society, in that the power and control of affairs lay in their hands.So the significance here of the successful contacting of the strong factions, (that is the Generals and Officers of Yathrib), is that it was a definitive move in establishing the Islamic authority, and therefore the ruling. Since, the ones in whose hands the power and control lay had been won over in a powerful manner, it clearly signified a departure from the days of intellectual and political struggle in Makka, to a decisive move into a completely different phase of the d'awa, that of taking power and implementing the Ruling of Islam.As for the second point - the implication of Statehood of the Islamic message - the significance is in the fact that he (saw) would receive not only protection, but also power, the basis of which would have been the Islamic Ideology. There, in Medina, if he (saw) were allowed to migrate, would receive no obstacles in the path of establishing the Islamic Ideology, and since his (saw) aims were not only confined to Medina, but rather to a return to Makka, but this time under quite different circumstances to what the Quraysh had perceived of him. For if he (saw) were successful in the migration, and the building and consolidation of the new society in Medina - namely the establishment of an Islamic State - he would be a force and a power to be reckoned with. Thus, the migration to Medina would establish the permanency of the Islamic threat like never before, with the formation of a new State - an Islamic one - present and active in the political arena to manage every affair of the Muslims via the vehicle of an Islamic State.The fact that the prophet (saw) and the Muslims would achieve an Islamic State and therefore an authority in ruling is not only a fact that can be comprehended from the seerah books, but also from the revelation of the Almighty (swt). For when Allah (swt) revealed, "Say: O Allah, make my place of arrival good and make my place of departure good. And grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself" [TMQ Bani Isra'il; 17:80] Ibn Kathir's tafseer states about this, "Qatadah said about this, "The phrase 'place of arrival' referred to Medina, while the words 'place of departure', referred to his (saw) migration from Makka. The words 'grant me an aid and an authority from Yourself' referred to Allah's Book and to the ruling by what Allah had revealed." It was Allah (swt) that had taught this prayer to the prophet (saw), and thus the migration was a migration to a place of authority and ruling whereby the implementation of the Ideology would practically exist.""Furthermore, when Allah revealed concerning the migration to Medina in Surah Al An'am,"They are those whom We gave the Book, the Ruling (Al Hukm), and prophethood. But if they disbelieve therein, then indeed We, have entrusted it to a people who are not disbelievers therein." [TMQ Al-An'am; 6:89]Ibn Kathir states in his tafsir, ""They are those whom We gave the Book, the Ruling (Al Hukm), and prophethood." It means We have bestowed these bounties (the Qur'an, the rule and authority, and the prophethood), on them, as a mercy for the servants, and out of our kindness for creation. "But if they disbelieve therein", refers to the three things, the Book, the rule and the authority, and the prophet, and 'they' refers to the people of Quraysh according to ibn Abbas, Sa'id bin al Musayyib, Ad Dahhak, Qatadah, As Suddi, and others. "Then indeed We, have entrusted it to a people who are not disbelievers therein." Means, if the Quraysh and the rest of the people of the earth - Arabs and non-Arabs, illiterate, and the People of the Book - disbelieve in these (the Book, the Ruling, and the prophethood), then We have entrusted them to another people, the Muhajirun and the Ansar, and those who follow their lead until the Day of Judgement."The fact and undeniable reality that the Messenger of Allah (saw) upon migration would have meant the establishment of an Islamic State ruling by what Allah (swt) has revealed, is now made clear, and provides explanation of the significance, political implications, and fears of the migration of the prophet (saw) in the eyes of the Quraysh leadership.So, the Quraysh realised that the threat was very real indeed, that the prophet (saw) and the Muslims had very little way to go before the stage of taking power and implementing the Ideology comprehensively. Thus a successful conclusion to the phases of d'awa undertaken in Makka. It would mean the birth of the Islamic State, and with it, it would bring the Islamic Ideology into existence. They (the Quraysh), realised the importance of ruling and authority, and what it would mean, and what it would enable the Muslims to do. They knew the implications of the establishment of the Islamic State, and they feared it and it occupied their concerns. So much did they realise this, that nothing would have provided for an effective measure but to kill him (saw). And they understood the implications of his (saw) entry into Medina which explains that they did not settle for any other measure in their meeting at Dar an-Nadwa, but to kill him (saw). This is what the establishment of the Islamic State meant to Quraysh, the opponents of the Islamic Ideology!This is the indication from the books of seerah as to the motive to kill the Messenger of Allah (saw) at this particular point in time. It is an indication that even the opponents of Islam understood the implications of an Islamic State present in life's affairs.O honourable ummah! It would not be fitting for you, after even your enemies then had realised the significance of an Islamic State, for you to neglect its importance in the affairs of the Muslims, and for you to neglect its call. Neither should you allow those elements who claim to be from among us to seduce you into thinking that the Islamic State is not of a major significance in Islam and to the Muslim ummah. As for you, the sincere mighty d'awa carriers, know that the escalation of forces and the intensifying of energies directed towards preventing your work from achieving its results, should not be a source of depression for you, but rather should be seen as a conducive sign that indeed you are on the right path in the way of your Lord and guided by the correct evidences for its method. For the opponents of Islam today, too recognise the nearness of your goals and the impending victory that is about to be manifest, and the readiness of the Muslim ummah in supporting the call to re-establish the mighty Khilafah State. And such recognition by the enemies of this Deen, pushes them to address this powerful momentum by inventing new and desperate measures against you (with creative styles and elaborate means), whether they are directly from the enemies themselves - namely the disbelieving colonialist nations - or indirectly, from their agents and faithful and loyal supporters.Just as the meetings, strategies, and plans took place at Dar al-Nadwa then, so do the meetings, strategies and plans occur today that convey such urgency and panic! Their sole purpose is to obstruct the changing affairs of the Muslim ummah and the success of the sincere d'awa carriers that are among them due to their successful and powerful progression. Do not be fooled into thinking otherwise, for they would desire your blindness and your dumbness!They have today organised a crusade with the banner of 'fighting terrorism' but the Muslims realised before anyone that not only would it be them who would feel the brunt, but they would be the sole targets of their Pharonic expression. And it is that which the Pharaoh then feared from the people, that the arrogant Pharonic American state fears today. This in itself is a proof of the fear that they harbour and the nearness of the impending victory.What is seen today of their strategies and plans is but a continuation of the plans that were concocted almost one-thousand years ago. They have convened many conferences and meetings. They have formulated many plans and strategies against the Muslims. And they too, like the Quraysh before them, are not unfamiliar with the Islamic Ideology, its State, and the carriers of its call. Thus, in the early conference of 1095 C.E the Europeans were roused by the similar propaganda and hysteria of today, and launched the crusades against the Muslims which ultimately led to their defeat and failure. Then, they convened again to assault the Muslims this time by a missionary and cultural invasion to weaken the Islamic ideological concepts. Then followed, the political invasion, the destruction of the Khilafah State in 1924, the imposition of the agent rulers, and the division of Muslim land. Even after all of this, the aspiration of ridding the world of Islam and its mighty state still did not materialise. So then came the creation of the State of Israel to keep the entire middle-east region under colonial influence, and then followed the Gulf War. These plans to keep these regions that are inhabited by Muslims and the sincere movements under the might of the colonial powers, and to ensure that their affairs remain under their control.So, even after all of these further attempts, and further attempts after that to block Islam and the Muslims from rising from the rubble, the Muslims have only increased in their energy and have crystallised their concepts, to the extent that almost every single inch of Muslim land is crying out for the return of the ruling by what Allah (swt) has revealed. Only yesterday was it that despite this continuation of the crusade against Islam, calls to establish the Islamic State were being echoed from not only the Middle-East, Central Asia, The Fertile Crescent (Al-Sham), as one might naturally expect, but also other regions despite their geographical obscurity such as Nigeria, Indonesia, Philippines, and Gambia. This is despite the fact that their Pharonic attempts have been methodical to the highest precision, they have lasted for a millennium, and unquantifiable resources have been expended.Indeed a new episode in this ongoing saga is what occurred in the aftermath of the events of September 11th, which signified and exposed the disposition of the colonialist US. It became clear from the news events or to the one who pursues the news that an attack in the Central Asian area was imminent prior to the events of September 11th, especially since the Taliban became independent from US control. So, in order to prevent the region falling into instability, especially with what was transpiring in Central Asia and Pakistan (which controlled Afghanistan) in terms of the call to re-establish the Khilafah State and the level to which it had progressed, the events of September 11th was used as the justification to enter these lands directly and quickly. Thus, apart from securing other interests in the region, the only way the Pharonic US state could guarantee that Islam and its State did not fill the political vacuum by the ones who truly crystallised the idea of Khilafah, was to directly colonise the entire area by force, fast, albeit by using the deceitful justification of September 11th the response to which was no doubt conjured up by the US think tanks and the rest of her Capitalist political medium.Thus, the desperation and panic emitted by the disbelieving US Pharonic state from what they fear if the Muslims are freely allowed to work for what they desire, is crystal clear in their finding no other option nor any other solution other than to use their Pharonic expressions, which not only included direct military force, but also a Pharonic hunt by them and their agents in the area to eliminate the sincere d'awa carriers in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan. And anyone else who resisted the US subjugation in any shape or form was also thrown into the same camp. And the fact that the events of September 11th are without defined objectives, may be ongoing for decades even centuries, is a clear enough indication to anyone that it is a ditch attempt to secure her interests by forcibly preventing any factor whatsoever that may distort her power and topple her world position. And the way in which Islam and the Muslims have been addressed is to create imaginary links between the Muslims in a given region, and the 'war against terrorism' in order to execute any Pharonic US will against it. So, those Muslim lands that have the military and strategic potential can now be legitimately destroyed by force, such as what they have described recently as the 'axis of terror'. And in the very least they (the US) enjoy a degree of influence of strategic parts of the Muslim world where they can monitor and keep in check any 'undemocratic' political change by force if necessary, under any convenient slogan. This is an indication of the fear that the US state feels and the future insecurity and instability she perceives from the lands where the d'awa carriers work.This fear from the Muslims is apparent because those regions have possessed such capabilities for a very long time. The reason why they are pursued now (as opposed to before) is due to the control they may enjoy of a single sincere leadership who is free from their colonialist influence. Furthermore, their attempts, as well as what has been mentioned, is to make sure that if the Muslims have their Khilafah State, then that state must not be able to bridge to military and technological gap that exists between it and the western states, namely the US, by eliminating any technological or strategic advantage. This is presently taking place via the political means such as the military campaigns (the 'axis of terror' being just one example), and their agent rulers such as Musharraf of Pakistan (strategically weakening and de-islamicizing the armed forces), and of course what will occur in the future under any convenient 'terror' pretext.Indeed, and as is most likely the case, the Pharonic US state realises that the campaigns to eject Islam from life forever have failed and are bound to fail. That is because, it is not merely a war that can be won and fought by superior technology, battle tactics, and dominant international position alone, rather it is a war, in fact a struggle, between two ideologies - western man-made Capitalism and Islam. The US have simply inherited a struggle that began with the Quraysh themselves, and they themselves have now come to witness that the conclusion to all these attempts, including those of recent times, is the manifest failure to extinguish the ideology of Islam. For the call to live by Islam both as a spiritual and political Doctrine is now stronger than ever. The call to re-establish its State that will execute all of its rules, and unify the entire ummah, all her lands, and all her armed forces and resources, is now wider than ever, and in light of the resources spent, that is perverse logic from their point of view! For Falsehood could never permanently prevail over the Truth, no matter how mighty it became, and no matter how severe the situation.This can only mean one thing. That the enemies of Islam and their agents, do realise the success of the call to re-establish the Islamic Khilafah (that began methodically in the middle of the last century) that will deliver a change which in itself warrants their keen attention. If they - the disbelieving colonialists - do not regard the implications of what it means for the ummah to have their Islamic Khilafah established as important, then why organise such campaigns? Why wilfully and knowingly inherit such an ideological struggle with the only alternative ideology left on the face of the Earth? Why spend such resources and dedicate policies and budgets where without exception Muslims and their lands are the subject? Why expend effort and resources to safeguard the US position not only for tomorrow or the year after, but for centuries to come? That is exactly just what Pharaoh feared, and that very fear is the same. Why covertly support the crackdown not only throughout the whole of Central Asia and Pakistan, but throughout the whole Muslim world of the sincere d'awa carriers who call for political change and carry nothing in terms of weapons or use force of any type? And while according to their democratic principles this non-violent (rather intellectual) method of change is lawful!They, like their predecessors - the Quraysh - do indeed sense the readiness and willingness of the Muslims to take control of their affairs once and for all, by supporting those sincere workers for change. Especially after being burned by the western powers and at the same time being given as fuel to that fire by her rulers! The Pharonic US State too, like Quraysh, realise the importance of the re-existence and the re-emergence of the Khilafah State, and the need to address it in their modern-day Dar an-Nadwas, and the plans that result from them, such as the elaborate and cunning campaigns related to September 11th, 'the war against terrorism', ‘rogue states’, 'axes of evil', 'anti-western', 'anti-democracy', ‘civilized Vs uncivilized’, ‘war against the just people of the world’ - in essence anything that stands in the way of the Pharonic US supremacy. And, behold, such desperate measures are a certain indication of their realisation that nothing will halt or even delay for even a single second the call to resume the Islamic way of life, except for drastic measures against the Muslims and their potential as a single unified ummah, especially in the aftermath of the failure of all the previous plans and devices. This in perfect realisation with what Quraysh then undertook as the only real and viable option to address the call by physical force. This clearly shows the success of the call for the return of the Islamic Khilafah State, and that success is being radiated!These actions by the enemies of Islam should thus be taken as a most conducive sign in the path to re-establish the Khilafah, and that is plain for all to see.So be of good cheer, and remain optimistic, for they fear you and fear your objectives, and the signs that are manifest at present, are those very same signs that appeared when the first Islamic State was established. This means that you should realise that you have progressed in successfully overcoming the serious obstacles and are now knocking at the doors of victory, and Allah willing you will enter it sooner than they may think!2. The response of the influentialsWe find from the books of seerah that when the Messenger (saw) concluded the second pledge from the Generals and Officers of the strong factions of Medina, it was an indication to Quraysh that the attempt to win the influential forces had been successful, which meant that the Muslims proceeding to implement the Islamic Ideology and the building of a state upon its basis was just around the corner. This is from the address by the senior officers at the second pledge, as stated by ibn Kathir."The Ansar, were seventy-three men, and their Nuqaba (Generals and Officers), were twelve in number, nine from Khazraj and three from Aws. Asim bin Umar bin Qatadah related that when this group met to pledge allegiance to the Messenger of Allah (saw), Al-Abbas bin Ubayda bin Nadla al Ansari, of the Banu Salim bin Awf said, "Oh Khazraj! Do you know what it is that you are pledging to this man?" "Yes", they replied. "You are pledging to go to war with all kinds of people. If you think that if you suffered great losses to your wealth and had your leaders killed, you would give him up, then do it now, or suffer the punishment of this life and the next. If you think you will keep firm to this Deen and to him (saw), in what he has called upon you to do, despite loss of wealth and your leaders being killed, then accept him. For, he is, by Allah, the best in this world and in the next." They replied, "We will take him regardless of loss of wealth or the death of our leaders. But, what will we receive in return for this, O Messenger of Allah, if we keep to this Deen and keep firm and resolute with you?" And the prophet of Allah (saw) replied, "Paradise!" "Then hold out your hand Messenger of Allah!" they asked. He (saw) did so, and they pledged allegiance to him."It was apparent in this aspect of the d'awa, that he (saw) was seeking the support of those persons with the actual (real) power. This is confirmed from what is stated by ibn Kathir and also from ibn Abbas about Al Abbas (his father), that he said, the Messenger (saw) told me, "I do not find any protection from you or your brother (meaning Hamza), can you take me out to the market tomorrow, so that I can visit the camp where the arab tribes gather." Thus, clearly indicating that what the Messenger (saw) was seeking was not found in his companions.When the Messenger (saw) continued the contacting of these particular entities he would seek information as to their strength and position, and speak with its leadership. And to qualify the above statement of the Messenger (saw) of the specificity of such persons, this can be confirmed from what ibn Kathir states."Ali (ra) states. "We then went to a meeting underway marked by calm and dignity. There were shaikhs of high rank and fine appearance there. Abu Bakr (ra) went forward and made the greeting. Abu Bakr asked them, "From whom are you?" They replied, "We are from the Banu Shayban bin Tha'laba." Abu Bakr then turned to the Messenger (saw) and commented, "I swear no one has more power in their people than these do." The man most comparable to Abu Bakr was Mafruq bin 'Amr, he was their most eloquent. He wore his hair in two braids that came down to his chest. Abu Bakr asked him, "How many are you in number?" Mafruq replied, "We are more than 1000 strong." Abu Bakr continued, "And how would protection be with you?" "We go to the limit. And every people has a forefather (meaning they are proud and noble)." Mafruq responded. Abu Bakr then asked, "And how is it when you make war with your enemies?" Mafruq answered, "When we meet in battle, we are the fiercest of men. We take greater pride in our steeds than in our sons, care more for our swords than our sperm.""This is but a fraction from the accounts from the books of seerah as to the seeking of support by the Messenger (saw) of those powerful people. And they were a distinguished group or class of persons who were not found from either amongst his (saw) companions or the ordinary people. Thus, from this, the Messenger (saw) sought the support to deliver change in practical terms, not from his (saw) companions, but from those unlike them, namely the Generals and Officers.The Messenger (saw) continued in this way to contact those strong factions approaching fifty two different tribes, even whilst bringing humiliation upon himself as what was experienced at Taif, until Allah (swt) opened the way to Al Aws and Al Khazraj.It must be noted that these were the powerful people that enabled the message of Islam to be transferred from one phase to another, and the support from whom Quraysh feared.This can be easily understood by the manner in which they seized the society in Medina in order to place the Messenger (saw) as its head, and the fact that they bypassed its current ruler, 'Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Salul, is an example of that material power. As for the fact that the Messenger (saw) was given the material support upon his entry into Medina as the defacto Head of State, Ibn Kathir states:"Imam Ahmed stated, "Hashim related to us, quoting Sulayman, from Thabit, from Anas bin Malik, who said, "I moved through the young men shouting, "Muhammad has come!" And I moved out ahead and still I could see nothing. But the Messenger of Allah did come, accompanied by Abu Bakr. They hid in a ruin in Medina, then sent out a Bedouin asking for the Ansar, to let them enter. Thereupon some 500 of the Ansar (with their weapons) came out saying, "Do come in, you are safe and will be obeyed."""" Having secured the means (by force and by military command and control) to be in a position to do so.It is today, that after having understood the methodology of resuming the Islamic way of life, and looking to the seerah of the Messenger (saw) for guidance, some from amongst the Muslims set out to emulate these actions in order to achieve that objective. Indeed, it is the support from what can be said of today's strongest factions, among which are the sincere Muslim armies, and their sincere Generals and Officers, that would indeed progress the work to resume the Islamic way of life into practical implementation. Such that, Islam will be implemented, the entire Muslim lands re-unified, her armies one, and the conveying of Islam to the whole of mankind would resume through the international existence of a State that carries and defends its message. Such progression poses obvious threats for those who thrive upon the current weakness and impotence of the Muslims.An indication as to the fears of the colonialists and their agents, as to the achievement of such a progression can be found in the tampering of the armed forces in the Muslim lands. They initiated that when they destroyed the Khilafah State and handed over its administrative control to their agents. They were organised according to the structures, mentalities, and culture of the western framework, whose hands were still fresh from the blood of destroying the Islamic State. Not only were their initial commanding officers foreign, but those allowed to progress under them were carefully selected to not only be imitators of the western secular culture, but a worshipper of it. An example of this is the careful implantation of the Dunma Jews into the major influential positions of the Turkish Armed Forces, the likes of whom are still there today. And such tampering and meddling with the armed forces of the Muslims is a sufficient evidence against the disbelievers. It is a clear sign today, just as Quraysh realised then, that they fear of what support they may give to the Muslim ummah and the sincere d'awa carriers among them!Any Islamic sentiment and anti-western secular sentiment was addressed through court-martials, imprisonment, and treason. This is what happened throughout the Pakistan Armed Forces under the supervision of the foreign powers and the brainwashed Officers, whereby some of the most brilliant and god-fearing soldiers were dispensed of. The same can be said for the armed forces of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and countless other Muslim lands under the subjugation of western secular culture. The powerful armed forces of the Muslims are monitored, observed, and carefully vetted to make sure that none loyal save to the agent ruler is allowed to gain rank and position. An example of this is in what occurred, and in what continues to occur, in the military purges that take place in the Turkish army. It was only recently where two-hundred (conservative official figures) army officers were ejected due to being 'Islamic' and moreover displaying Islamic loyalties. Also, the Pakistan armed forces, upon the request of the Pharonic US is purging its rank and file of the Generals and Officers who are found to have any loyalty to Islam and the Muslims. Even its most strategic and influential ISI intelligence network (that is considered the backbone of the Pakistani armed forces) is being pressured to be dismantled or its current leadership replaced, due to the strong Islamic sentiments that are found within them. While, those who love the western secular way of life, and detest the Muslims, are given promotions and commanderships.All this to prevent the Ansar of today from presenting themselves and fulfilling their due role.What has already been mentioned in itself provides sufficient evidence that the progress is being monitored and measures are being taken to prevent its successful results. But the fact that the monitoring needs to be something ongoing, and that the purges need to happen frequently, is a sign that despite their deceitful plans, the sincere Officers of the Muslims are responding to Allah (swt), His Messenger (saw), and their ummah.And indeed, it is they - the enemies of Islam - who have followed and shadowed the Muslims and the sincere d'awa carriers among them through the various points and phases of the call to resume the Islamic way of life one more time. These are such glad tidings, hopes and optimisms, that the correct methodology is bound to yield the correct results, even if it took time.The sincere d'awa carriers and the Muslims have contacted them, will continue to contact them, and will get them - Allah (swt) willing!3. The mentality of VictoryWhat should be absolutely clear is that the observations in their desperate final attempts to thrust obstacles in the face of the Muslim ummah and in the face of those sincere d'awa carriers among them, are (without a shadow of a doubt) manifesting themselves like before. For the desperate measures that Quraysh undertook in the later stages of the d’awa then, by way of fearing the support of the Ansar and the attempt to kill the Messenger (saw), is what is being mirrored today – the ongoing tampering of the Muslim armed forces, and the use of force and death against the political aspect of Islam and the d’awa carriers everywhere.But, those opponents then during the establishment of the first Islamic State experienced their limitations when it came to their plans and policies. Specifically, it was when they agreed upon and implemented the policy to address the impending threat. So confident were they in this countermeasure, and so confident were they against the Muslims that they mocked - as ibn Abbas, Qatadah, and Mujahid said - by saying that they should wait for the death of Muhammad (saw), just as the poets before him (saw) perished. And it was at this point when Allah had revealed, "And remember when the disbelievers planned against you to imprison you, or to kill you, or to expel you (from Makka), they were planning and Allah too was planning, and it is Allah who is the best of planners." [TMQ Al Anfal; 8:30] And it was they who ultimately failed, and Allah provided the successful entry into Medina by the prophet (saw) as the Head of the Islamic State, where it was established, and whilst Quraysh were still waiting by his doorstep to execute their confident policy!Surely this is good news that in the face of their policies and their intricate plans, both open and hidden, that Allah will aid the believers, and be the Provider of victory, and He (swt) is able and capable of all things, despite the lowliness the ummah feels in her present times.The Pharonic US state may have successfully rewritten, openly contradicted, and blatantly bypassed all the international laws and norms when it came to smiting the Muslims, to such a devious extent that not one state in the world is able to practically oppose it. She may arrogantly walk the Earth aiding whom she wishes and slaughtering whom she likes. She may have successfully invented a campaign to subvert and suppress the return of the Islamic Khilafah State that has the follower ship of not only her own citizens, but all the peoples of the world as if the Pharonic US state has performed some kind of evil magic over them. This made the Muslims the object of suspicion and his Deen as a source of guilt. Thus making the spilling of Muslim blood anywhere, under any circumstance, and by anyone, lawful in the eyes of the world's people, while the Muslims are without power. Indeed, they have succeeded in turning the criticism and the wrath of individuals, nations, and states against the Muslims everywhere and without exception, reminiscent of the witch-hunt of medieval times.The Pharonic disbelieving colonialists may have to their credit genius think-tanks supported by all forms of intelligence and material resources, they may have experience in dealing with all types of threats, they may have devised every form of countermeasure one may think of, they may be hailed as superpowers, they may posses ownership and allegiance of the world's political institutions, they may have a presence in every inch of land via their agents or any other means of spying, they may have trillion dollar budgets that even computers cannot count, they may have mighty military resources, they may enjoy all types of military superiority, they may have won over the regimes and rulers in our lands, nay they may even have armies of Jinn! But despite this, it will never be enough to stop the will of Allah (swt) the Almighty and His (swt) promise of victory to the ummah and to the mighty d'awa carriers among them!O honourable ummah! O mighty d'awa carriers! Do not let them or their agents draw your attention to defeat rather than victory. Do not allow them and their agents lead you to believe anything to the contrary, for they desire not victory, success, or anything wholesome for you, but rather they desire defeat and humiliation for you. Know that the criteria of success is not material resources, rather the criteria is Allah and Allah alone (swt), we believe in it, and they will never be able to counter it, and ultimately that is the frustration we see in their faces, and that will be the anguish and defeat we are going to - of a surety - witness!!!So be confident in your march, and raise your heads high, and be bearers of good news to those around you. Fill your minds with confidence that you are on the right path, and pour courage into your hearts. And look forward to an assured victory in this world, and an appointment with your Lord in the next. For you are indeed mighty in the eyes of your Lord, and formidable in the eyes of your enemies."Indeed, those who disbelieve spend their wealth to hinder men from the path of Allah, and so will they continue to spend it, but in the end it will become an anguish for them. Then they will be overcome. And those who disbelieve will be gathered into Hell" [TMQ Al Anfal; 8:36]"And Allah has full power and complete control of His affairs, though most of mankind know it not" [TMQ Yusuf; 12:21]

May Allah the Almighty (swt) preserve you, your Deen, and your ideology.Alhamdolilahi Rabbil 'Alameen.

Belief in Allah [swt]

2008-01-13T14:04:00.000Z

All praise belongs to God and may His blessings and peace be upon His messenger. Let me begin by extending my thanks to the Muslim Students' Association of the University of Purdue for kindly extending this invitation to speak. I would also like to thank the audience for attending this lecture. I will try to keep my remarks as brief as possible in order to allow you, the audience, to comment and ask any questions you might have pertaining to this or other topics.
The topic that I have been asked to address tonight pertains to the Islamic concept of monotheism and its relationship to the notion of the culmination of God's revelation with His sending of the prophet Muhammad.
Islam Let me begin by remarking that the concept of monotheism is at the core and heart of the Islamic religion. If one wants to know what is Islam about, one should, before anything else, begin with this topic.
But before we start our investigation of monotheism in Islam, let us first define Islam. Islam is an Arabic word comprising of two meanings. The first meaning is to submit or surrender unto God, God in Arabic being Allah. The second meaning is purity. Hence, Islam means a pure submission or surrendering unto God alone. Thus an adherent to Islam, or a Muslim, is an individual who has submitted or surrendered purely to the will of God and to no one else. For this reason, there are two ideas antithetical to Islam: (1.) an unwillingness to submit to God in the first place; or (2.) an impure submission to God, where one submits to both God and someone/something else. This is the general meaning of Islam.
With this brief definition of Islam, it is important to understand that Islam teaches that all of God's prophets were Muslims. Indeed the very first human, Adam (who himself was a prophet), and his wife, Eve, were Muslims. Moreover, all the generations that succeeded them were also Muslims in this general sense. Namely, that they all submitted unto God and God alone by obeying His will and laws and directing all their worship to Him alone.
From this, we see that Muslims do not accept – as is popular within certain circles of sociology and religion – that human beings developed only at a late date the concept of monotheism.[1] Advocates of this belief argue that humans were initially animistic perceiving natural phenomena as living beings and extending to those imagined beings worship. Monotheism, they further argue originated first among the Jews. And they further claim it was from the Jews that monotheism spread to other peoples who incorporated this idea into their religious traditions. Muslims, as I mentioned, do not believe this to be true. The worship of others with or besides God, Muslims hold, appeared post the first human communities.
Why worship God? At this point someone might ask, why worship God? First we worship God because of His perfection. Everything in the universe praises God and fulfils God's will.
Moreover, we Muslims believe that Islam, that is to worship God alone, is humanity's natural and original state. Not to submit to God and God alone is to deny the very essence of being a human. Our existence here on earth is not without purpose. Our presence here on earth has a meaning much more than merely enjoying a few material pleasures while we spend out our allotted days. Rather, we believe that we have been placed on earth for a purpose. It is inconceivable for us Muslims that an all-wise God who has created everything with such perfection and placed such order in the universe would at the same time not have a purpose for our existence here on earth. This purpose we find in the Qur'an is to worship God. God says in one Qur'anic ayat:

I created the jinn and humankind only that they might worship Me. (The Qur'an 51:56)

While in another ayat, God asks:

Thinkenth man that he is to be left aimless. (The Qur'an 75:36)

This latter ayat dispels the idea that we humans have been left "aimless," that is without purpose.
Now of course, in nature we find creatures who unlike human beings do not possess free will. These creatures fulfill God's will by following their instincts. But we human beings, however, have an ability to choose between doing good or evil. We have the choice between accepting God's message or rejecting it.
The prophets While it is true that the very first human beings, as we said, remained upon Islam for generations, later deviation from this natural state arose. For this reason, out of His mercy, God spoke directly to certain men instructing them to be His emissaries or messengers to humanity.
Regarding these prophets, Muslims believe that they are human beings. Hence in their essence, these prophets are no different than any one of us. They become hungry and have to eat; they become thirsty and have to drink, they suffer pain, they become ill, and like all human beings they eventually die. Where the prophets do differ from us is in character for they are the best of humanity. There is no fault in their character. For this reason God selects them and speaks to them with the aim of instructing humanity and to give us glad tidings if we choose to follow God's instructions and guidance and warns us of the doom in this world and the hereafter if we choose to forsake God's instructions and guidance. As a result these messengers attempt to correct any deviations that appeared among humanity in beliefs or society. The greatest deviation being the loss of the natural state of Islam.
A brief history of prophethood and revelation We believe that the first messenger sent to humanity was the prophet Noah who is also recognized in both Jewish and Christian tradition. He is thought to have lived in that part of the world, which we refer today to as Iraq. Noah called humanity to the worship of God alone after humanity began worshipping idols. These idols were conceived as representations of intermediaries who were believed stood between man and God. Noah's people would seek to please these individuals by various acts of worship so that in turn these individuals would intercede on their behalf with God. Although Noah invited his people back to their natural state of worship of God alone, Noah's people persisted in their idolatry and rejected both Noah and the message he bore. God then in His anger destroyed humanity with the great flood. Humanity was wiped out with the exception of those few humans who were saved with Noah. The few survivors with Noah and their subsequent descendents remained upon monotheism. However after a passage of some time, the length of which is known to God alone, idolatry once again crept back into the beliefs and practices of humanity. Once deviation re-appeared, God continued to send prophets to every people. Among these prophets was Abraham. After Abraham, prophethood continued among his progeny. Both of Abraham's sons, Ishmael and Isaac were prophets. Isaac's son, Jacob, who was known as Israel, was also a prophet, as was Jacob's son, Joseph. From the seed of Jacob, or the children of Israel, other prophets appeared. Among these prophets were Moses, Aaron, David, and Solomon. Whenever a prophet among the children of Israel died, God would select another to replace him until prophethood culminated among the children of Israel with Jesus the son of Mary. Jesus, Muslims believe, was like all other prophets sent by God to call his people to the worship of God alone and the fulfillment God's commandments. The surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said:

O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hasth forbidden Paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no helpers. They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three: when there is no God save the One God. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve. (The Qur'an, 5:72- 75)

Finality of prophethood and the culmination of revelation Then following Jesus, prophethood as a whole culminated with Muhammad. Muhammad was sent to the whole of humanity in the year 570, according to the Christian calendar, some 1,400 plus years ago. The prophet Muhammad too called people to worship God alone.

Say (O Muhammad): O mankind! If ye are in doubt of my religion, then (know that) I worship not those whom ye worship instead of Allah, but I worship Allah who causeth you to die, and I have been commanded to be of the believers. (The Qur'an, 10:105)

Therefore in the message he brought from God, Muhammad was no different from any of the previous prophets but in two aspects. First he was different is in that while the previous prophets were sent to their specific peoples alone; the prophet Muhammad was sent to all of humanity.

Say (O Muhammad): O mankind! Lo I am the messenger of Allah to you all – (the messenger of) Him unto whom belongeth the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth. There is no God save Him, He quickeneth and He giveth death. So believe in Allah and His messenger, the Prophet who an neither read nor write, who believeth in Allah and in His Words, and follow him that haply ye may be led aright. (The Qur'an, 7:158)

Secondly, after the prophet Muhammad, there will be no other prophet; and after the revelation sent to him, there is no further communication from God. His message had to be thus applicable for all of humanity and for the rest of time. Muslims still obey the Prophet and seek to pattern their lives according to his.
Moreover with the sending of the prophet Muhammad, the laws that the previous prophets came with are no longer applicable. While it is true, as we have seen, that all the prophets had a common message but each had a distinct law. Hence, since God sent the prophet Muhammad to the whole of humanity it no longer became permissible to follow the previous laws, like the law of the Torah given to Moses or the law of the Gospel given to Jesus the son of Mary. With the sending of the prophet Muhammad, it has now become incumbent upon all human beings to believe in him and his message and obey him. He is the final prophet who was sent for all humanity.
The Prophet Muhammad as many observers of human history have said is the most influential person on humanity and the course of human history. If we do not at least accord him that status, we nonetheless would have to concede that he was among the most influential individuals on humanity. There is a famous book written by Michael Hart where he lists the 100 most influential people in human history and wherein which he accords the number one position to the prophet Muhammad. [3] While another author who wrote on the intellectual development of Europe has said that the prophet Muhammad has had more influence on individual human beings than any other human being in history.
Evidence for Muhammad's prophethood If we look at his message we find he announced that he was selected by God, that God spoke to him, and through him God informed humanity that we must follow and obey Muhammad for their guidance in this world and their salvation in the hereafter. These are merely claims in of themselves, so how do we know that these claims are true? How do we know that Muhammad is truly a prophet?
God supports prophets in proving the validity of their claims by many means among them are miracles. We know the truthfulness of the prophet Muhammad by these miracles. We also know the truthfulness of his message by the fact that his message confirms the previous revelations. We also know his truthfulness by the fact that he is mentioned in the previous scriptures. And we know the veracity of these claims by the virtue of his character and the character of his community.
Judgment Day This is in a nutshell the Islamic belief. God created humanity to worship Him and when humanity deviates from the purpose of their existence God sends to them prophets calling them to return back to God's guidance.

We said: Go down, all of you, from hence; but verily there cometh unto you from Me a guidance; and whoso followeth My guidance, there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve. But they who disbelieve, and deny Our revelations such are rightful owners of the Fire. They will abide therein. (The Qur'an 2:38-39)

When life on earth comes to an end and humanity will be resurrected to stand before God for judgment; the primary question asked of people will be did they worship God alone or not? This is why Muslims believe that the worship of others with God or refusing to submit and worship God is the only sin that is unpardonable by God.

Lo! Allah forgiveth not that a partner should be ascribed unto Him. He forgiveth (all) save that to whom He will. Whoso abscribeth partners to Allah, he hath indeed invented a tremendous sin. (The Qur'an 4:48)

And your Lord hath said: Pray unto me and I will hear your prayer. Lo! those who scorn My worship, they will enter hell, disgraced. (The Qur'an 40:60)

Now if someone was to enquire what is the Islamic faith? Then what I have just summarized would be the answer. As for the other aspects of Islam like the five daily prayers, the obligatory charity, the fast of the month of Ramadan, the pilgrimage to Makkah or Islam's social order; then all of these matters stem from that faith. For this reason entrance into the Islamic religion consists of the mere declaration there is no god worthy of worship but God (Allah) alone and Muhammad is the messenger of God.
Monotheism in Islam Now the Muslim concept of monotheism, or tawhid to use the Arabic term, consists of two aspects: (1.) a monotheism in one's beliefs, and (2.) a monotheism in one's deeds. Regarding monotheism in one's beliefs, Muslims maintain that one must negate from God any imperfection or fault that is ascribed unto His being, attributes, actions, words, or wisdom. For this reason, Muslims will negate that God has any son or daughter; or that he takes a wife; or that he needs sleep or food; or that he would die. All these qualities of imperfection that indicate a need or an inherent weakness, Muslims will negate from God. At the same time, Muslims will affirm unto God all attributes of perfection.
God is all knowing. In the Qur'an, God informs us that not a leaf drops from a tree but that God knows it. God knows what is in the wombs of women, not just the sex of the child, male or female. But God knows, will that child be born healthy? How will that child's life turn out? How long will that child live? What that child will face in life? God hears and sees everything. There is no sound or object hidden from Him. God is all wise. Hence nothing that God says or does but it is for a great wisdom. God is merciful; mercy being God's nature. But at the same time, God is severe in punishment.
God is one in his being. He is not a duality, trinity, or plurality. Likewise, Muslims believe that God cannot be approached via an intermediary. When praying, we should direct our prayers directly to God. There is no intercessor – neither angel, prophet, or righteous person – among us to whom one should pray, so then that individual would in turn pray to God on our behalf. This is the Islamic view of monotheism as it pertains to beliefs. As for monotheism in one's acts, Muslims direct all their acts of worship to God alone. For this reason, when Muslims pray they do not pray to the prophet Muhammad asking him to forgive their sins or take care of any worldly need, like health for those who are ill, wealth for those who are under economic duress, and the like.
Monotheistic religions Perhaps some of you in order to fulfill a humanities requirement have taken a course in world religions where it is not uncommon to hear the characterization of the three great monotheistic religions of the world, meaning by that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Likewise in the United States, religious groups will often engage in interfaith meetings where statements like these are floated around, often receiving the approval of all. Indeed, just one month ago here in the United States, there was a parliament of world religions were notions of religious equivalency were extend even to paganistic religions. [4] As a result, both the popularity of these ideas and a desire of many to better know other religions leads us to discuss this topic. Also as I will discuss that this idea of three great monotheistic religions is an idea that Islam rejects. Muslims believe that the only truly monotheistic religion is Islam and that Judaism and Christianity while originally monotheistic are no longer so.
Judaism and Christianity As I began my lecture, it is often said there are three great monotheistic religions in the world: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Following this brief exposition, we can now see why Islam sees itself alone, in exclusion to all other religions, as monotheistic and why Islam sees Judaism and Christianity as no longer monotheistic.
The Jews can no longer be considered monotheistic because they no longer believe God to be prefect. If you look into Jewish writings[5], you will find various imperfections attributed to God. For example, in the Torah it is mentioned:
After creating the universe in six days, God rested on the seventh day. (Genesis 2:2- 3)^{[6] Here is an attribution of weakness to God.
After seeing humanity's wickedness on earth, God became remorse for creating humanity. (Genesis 6:5-6)[7] Here is an attribution of ignorance of the future to God. While Christians occupy the other extreme by raising a human being, specifically Jesus the son of Mary, to the status of the Divine. [8] So Islam stands in between these two extremes, those who attribute faults to God and those who raise humans to the status of the Divine. And both Jews and Christians are guilty of believing in some of the prophets in exclusion to others; the Jews denying the prophethood of both Jesus and Muhammad9; while the Christians denying the prophethood of Muhammad. Moreover even with those prophets in whom they believe, they have attributed to them all sorts of monstrosities that would default them from being prophets. Among these calumnies:
The prophet Noah is accused of drunkenness (Genesis 9:21)[10 ]
The prophet Lot is accused of having incestuous unions with his two daughters resulting in the origins of the Moabites and the Ammonites (Genesis 19: 30-8)
David is accused of arranging the death of a companion to marry that man's wife.
The prophet Solomon is accused of idolatry. (I Kings 11:1-11)
Muslims on the other hand believe that the prophets were perfect in their character and they are models that we follow. Moreover these reports are an evidence of the tampering that has occurred in the previous scriptures. Hence the Muslims even though they believe in the previous scriptures, they say that these scriptures have since their time of revelation been altered. And hence the Torah of today is not the Torah given to Moses; and the Gospel given to Jesus son of Mary is not any one of the four gospels that are found today. The Qur'an being guides final scripture has been preserved from any change occurring. It remains the very same scripture that was revealed to the prophet Muhammad one thousand and four hundred and thirty three years ago.
With this I would like to conclude my remarks and open the floor for questions.
1 This idea it seems was first advanced by David Hume in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779). Putting aside the clear textual evidence found in the Qur'an and the Sunnah negating this notion, the "growth of historical knowledge and of scientific anthropology has shown that this is not so." See Key Ideas in Human Thought, ed. Kenneth McLeish, p. 487.
2 A Qur'anic aya is equivalent to a verse. The word aya literally means sign, as each Qur'anic aya is indicative of the Divine origin of the Qur'an.
3 Michael Hart (1978), The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History.
4 The second Parliament of the World's Religions was held in Chicago August 28 - Sept. 5 1993.
5 See Everyman's Talmud, p. 7.
6 Contrast this with the following Qur'anic passage [fill].
7 Contrast this with the following Qur'anic passage [fill]. In the Qur'an God tells us that prior to creating Adam He knew by His perfect foreknowledge that humanity would cause corruption on earth and shed much blood. Yet God still nonetheless creates humanity because He knew by that very foreknowledge that among men there would be prophets and righteous. His perfect wisdom therefore dictated that such good come into existence even with the evil of men.
8 For example the Nicene Creed states: "And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God, Begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God, Begotten not made, Being of one substance with the Father, By Whom all things were made." May Allah be greatly exalted from such blasphemies!
9 Rabbinic writings hold that Jesus was a sorcerer executed by a rabbinical court for his blasphemy. See The Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, p. 200.
10 The Oxford Dictionary of the Bible (p. 268) remarks that while Noah was "chosen by God for his good character … this was not sustained indefinitely."}

Muslim Women! Who am i !

2008-01-03T13:36:00.000Z

Who I Am !

What do you see when you look at me Do you see someone limited, or someone free

All some people can do is just look and stare Simply because they can't see my hair

Others think I am controlled and uneducatedThey think that I am limited and un-liberated

They are so thankful that they are not meBecause they would like to remain 'free'

Well free isn't exactly the word I would've usedDescribing women who are cheated on and abused

They think that I do not have opinions or voice They think that being hooded isn't my choice

They think that the hood makes me look caged That my husband or dad are totally outraged

All they can do is look at me in fear And in my eye there is a tear

Not because I have been stared at or made fun of But because people are ignoring the one up above

On the day of judgment they will be the fools Because they were too ashamed to play by their own rules

Maybe the guys won't think I am a cutieBut at least I am filled with more inner beauty

See I have declined from being a guy's toyBecause I won't let myself be controlled by a boy

Real men are able to appreciate my mind And aren't busy looking at my behind

Hooded girls are the ones really helping the muslim causeThe role that we play definitely deserves applause

I will be recognized because I am smart and brightAnd because some people are inspired by my sight

The smart ones are attracted by my tranquilityIn the back of their mind they wish they were me

We have the strength to do what we think is rightEven if it means putting up a life long fight

You see we are not controlled by a mini skirt and tight shirtWe are given only respect, and never treated like dirt

So you see, we are the ones that are free and liberatedWe are not the ones that are sexually terrorized and violated

We are the ones that are free and pureWe're free of STD's that have no cure

So when people ask you how you feel about the hoodJust sum it up by saying 'baby its all good' ;)

Ibn Taymiyyah words.

2007-12-31T09:17:00.000Z

"Whoever desires bliss, let him adhere to the threshold of servitude"

ibn al-Qayyim, Madarij [1/531]

"Guidance is not attained except with knowledge and correct direction is not attained except with patience"

Majmu Fatawa [10/40]

"This whole religion revolves around knowing the truth and acting by it, and action must be accompanied by patience"

Majmu Fatawa [10/38]

"The one who is truly imprisoned is the one whose heart is imprisoned from God and the captivated one is the one whose desires have enslaved him"

ibn al-Qayyim, al-Wabil [p. 69]

"What can my enemies do to me? I have in my breast both my heaven and my garden. If I travel they are with me, never leaving me. Imprisonment for me is a chance to be alone with my Lord. To be killed is martyrdom and to be exiled from my land is a spiritual journey"

ibn al-Qayyim, al-Wabil [p. 69]

Dawah

2007-12-18T08:51:00.000Z

Method on Dawah

http://www.esnips.com/doc/272ff5c2-1879-4300-870e-fce0cd204b4a/Quranic_Method_on_Dawah

Seeking knowledge

2007-12-16T08:29:00.000Z

The importance of seeking knowledge

The Prophet (saw) said:

"Seeking knowledge is an obligation upon every Muslim"

Today unfortunately we see many Muslims who when it comes to their education, work or even entertainment they would gain a lot of knowledge regarding these areas, however when it comes to the Deen they have very little. Indeed the Prophet (saw) mentioned this time:Hazzam bin Hakeem narrated from his uncle from the Messenger of Allah (SAW) who said:

“You are in a time of many jurisprudents (fuqaha), few speakers, many who give and few who ask; so action in this time is better than knowledge. There will soon come a time of few jurisprudents, many speakers, many who beg and few who give; so knowledge in this time is better than action.”

What type of knowledge is Fard ul Ayn?

Firstly, It is obligatory upon us all to believe in Islam definitively without a doubt and therefore this knowledge must be known to us. This is the knowledge of the fundamentals of Aqeeda

He (swt) says:

“And verily guess is no substitute for the truth.”

[TMQ 53:28]

And He (swt) said:

“They have no (certain) knowledge. They follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not (‘Isa).”

[TMQ 4:157]

"Do you have Ilm for that which you claim so that you provide us with? You follow nothing but conjecture (Zann)."

[TMQ 6:148]

"These are nothing but names which you have devised, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow nothing but conjecture and what their Nafs desire. Even though there has already come to them the Guidance from their Rabb"

[TMQ 53:23]

Jalaluddin as-Suyuti, a Mujtahid Imam of the Shafi madhab has commented on this verse, that the people had zann (conjecture) which is opposed to knowledge (ilm) i.e. certain knowledge. He also stated that Allah had sent down definitive proof (Burhan Qati) for the truth of the Islamic Aqeeda. [Tafseer al Jalalayn page 627. It is stated in Reliance of the Traveller Ahmed ibn Naqib al misri (ra) (769/1368) Book of Qada (Judiciary)]In all of these and other ayaat (verses) to do with beliefs Allah (swt) censures those who take the beliefs through conjecture (Zann) and decisively prohibits them from this.

Therefore it is prohibited for us to have emotional belief or belief based on imitation. We must know for ourselves that Allah (swt) exists, that Muhammad (saw) is His last Messenger, the Quran is the word of Allah and whatever is contained in it is the truth such as the belief in the angels, previous books, previous prophets, the day of Judgment, Jannah, Jahannam, etc.

Secondly, it is an individual obligation for us to know the Shariah rules related to our own lives and actions.Allah (swt) has addressed us directly in the Quran on so many occasions:

“O you who believe, obey Allah and His Messenger”

We know that our purpose in life is to worship Allah (swt) as Allah said:

“I have not created Jinn or mankind except that they worship me”

[TMQ 51:57]

Allah (swt) has also clearly ordered us to take from the Messenger (saw):

“And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad [saw]) gives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it).”

[TMQ59:7]

Therefore we must at least know the Shariah rules relating the Fara’id (obligations) and Muharramat (prohibitions) from our actions such as:- The ahkam (rules) of Salah- The ahkam of relationships with the opposite sex- The ahkam of responsibility to parents- The ahkam of buying- The ahkam of replying the to the Salam- The ahkam of backbiting- The ahkam of working for Khilafah- The ahkam of Riba (usury)

Whatever actions we undertake we need to know the hukm before performing the action, there is a principle in Usul: Every actions requires a hukm and every hukm requires an evidenceTherefore it is Fard for a doctor to know the ahkam relating to his field, e.g. is post-mortem allowed, rules relating to treating the opposite sex, using intoxicants for medical purposes, etc.

For an Imam of the Masjid it is Fard to know the ahkam relating to leading the prayer, the obligations of the Khutba, the responsibility towards the Muslims, the obligations of speaking the truth from the Minbar, etc.It is Fard for the teacher to know whether it is permitted to teach subjects that contradict Islam and promote Kufr, the ahkam of teaching members of the opposite sex, the ahkam of disciplining the student.

It is Fard for the husband to know his obligations towards his wife, what are the prohibited actions to undertake with her, how can he discipline her if she is disobedient, etc. Similarly for the wife to know her responsibilities towards her husband, parent towards the child, child towards the parents and so on.It is Fard for the Khalifah of the Muslims to know ahkam relating to his responsibility, etc.

We must ensure that we follow the Shariah and not rules invented from the mindIn the Hadith in Sahih of Bukhari, on the authority of 'Urwa b. al-Zubayr who said: 'Abd Allah b. 'Amr b. al-'As overcame us with proof. I heard him say: “Allah will not deprive you of knowledge after he has given it to you, but it will be taken away through the death of the learned men (Ulema’a) with their knowledge. There will remain ignorant people who, when consulted, will give verdicts according to their opinions whereby they will mislead others and themselves go astray.” i.e. they give Fatwas according to their own opinions which are not derived from the Islamic evidences.

In the authentic Hadith the Prophet (saw) said: “The best speech is the Book of Allah and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad (saw). And the evil matters are the newly invented issues and every Bida’a (innovation) is a misguidance.” The 'newly invented issues' are the Bida’a (innovations), they are whatever contradicts the Islamic evidences.Hadith narrated by Al-Daraqtuni in Al-Afrad, of Anas of the Prophet (saw), where he said: "Whomever cheats my Ummah has the curse of Allah, the Angels and the people combined, upon him. They asked: What is cheating, Oh Prophet of Allah? He said: If he invented an innovation for them, and they acted upon it".

“Whoever speaks about the Quran without any knowledge, then let him seek his place in the fire of hell.” [Tirmidhi , Abu Dawud]Islam has forbidden us from following any path other than the path of ‘Ilm: “And follow not that of which you have no knowledge. Verily! The hearing, and the sight, and the heart, of each of those you will be questioned (by Allah).”

[TMQ 17:36]

Even if we are not aware of the evidence, we must know that the hukm is derived from the Islamic texts by legitimate Ijtihad

“So ask the people of the Reminder (ahl al-zikr) if you do not know.”

[TMQ 21:7]

He (swt) has ordered the one who does not have the knowledge to ask the one who is more knowledgeable than him.

It has also been narrated on the authority of Jabir (ra): “a man was struck by a stone that fractured his skull. Then he had a wet dream. He asked his companions - do you know of a permit (Rukhsa) for me to perform Tayammum (dry ablution)? - They said - we do not find any permit for you and you can use water. He then had a bath and died. The Prophet (saw) said: “Verily, it would have sufficed for him to make Tayammum, so tie a piece of cloth around his head and wipe over it and wash the rest of his body.' And the Prophet (saw) said: 'why did they not ask when they did not know. Indeed, the cure for inability and lack of knowledge is to ask.” [Abu Dawud: 275, Ibn Majah: 565, Ahmad: 2898] The Messenger (saw) instructed them to ask about the Hukm Shar'ai.

We have to be careful from whom we take our knowledge in relation to the Shariah rules, they should be someone we trust and someone who basis their opinions upon the Islamic evidences.

A narration of Imam Zuhri springs to mind, "Be careful from whom you take your knowledge, because that is your Deen."

We should beware of all government Mufti’s, scholars and Imams – also those who have openly violated the Shariah or given verdicts that contradict the Qati (definitive) matters.Abu Hanifah said, “If you see the scholar at the gates of the ruler then accuse him in his Deen”.

True scholars never compromise the truth. Let us take the example of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimallah), the master of Hadeeth, the Mujtahid of Makkah and to whom the Hanbali Madhab is attributed. In his time Ma’moon became Khaleefah who had adopted the Mu’tazilla belief that the Quran was created and attempted to force this belief upon the masses.He started with the Ulema as they were the ones who had the leadership over the Ummah. Amongst the Ulema was Imam Ahmad who refused to accept this corrupt doctrine. His uncle went to him and asked him to say with his tongue what he does not accept in his heart, to this he responded, “If the Alim stays silent in the face of falsehood when will the truth become manifest”.

The recommended knowledge

Gaining knowledge in the other areas of Islam which is beyond the knowledge of the fundamentals of Aqeeda and direct ahkam for our lives is mandub (recommended. Such as knowing the evidences for the ahkam, knowledge of the Seerah, Islamic history (Tarikh), Tafseer, Arabic language, Ilm al-Hadith and Usul ul-Fiqh.We should strive to achieve this knowledge continuously

The rewards of gaining knowledge

Al-Bukhari narrated through Mu’awiyya bin Abu Sufyan: The Messenger of Allah (SAW) said:“The one for whom Allah wills good (khayr), He grants him fiqh in the deen.”

It was narrated that Umar bin al-Khattab said: “The death of one thousand worshippers who pray at night and worship in the day is less serious than the death of one intelligent knower (baseer) of the halal and haram of Allah.”All these narrations indicate to us as Muslims, and emphasise the importance of seeking knowledge.

Abu Huraira said, The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: "The word of wisdom is the lost property of the believer, so wherever he finds it he has a better right to it." (Tirmidhi).

Abu Dardaa' (ra) said: "To learn of one issue (in deen) is better for me than to pray the entire night"

He also said: "The scholar and the seeker of knowledge are the partners in the sharing of good. Other men are hungry and there is no good in them."Fath Al Musilee (radhiallahu anhu) said: "Would the sick person who is not fed or given anything to drink or given any medicine, not die?"

The people replied: "Surely!" He said: "It is the same with the heart, it would die if knowledge and wisdom is withheld from it."

Narrated Abdullah bin Masud (Allah be pleased with him): The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "Do not wish to be like anyone except in two cases.

(1) (The first is) A person, whom Allah has given wealth and he spends it righteously;

(2) (the second is) the one whom Allah has given wisdom and he acts according to it and teaches it to others." (Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 1).

Abu Huraira said, The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: "People are like mines of silver and gold; the more excellent of them in the days of Ignorance are the more excellent of them in Islam when they attain knowledge.” (Muslim, Mishkat).

Status of people of knowledge

The people of knowledge have a special status in Islam, we should respect them

“Say: "Are those who know equal to those who know not?" It is only men of understanding who will remember.”

[TMQ az-Zumar:9]

Jabir (ra) reported: After the battle of Uhud, the Prophet (saw) arranged the burial of two of the martyrs in one grave. In each case he would ask, “Which one of them had learnt more Qur'an by heart?” He placed whichever was thus pointed out to him, first in the Lahd (type of grave). [Bukhari]

'Ubaadah b. as-Saamit (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “He is not from my Ummah who does not acknowledge the honour due to our elders, who shows no mercy to our younger ones and nor recognises the right of our scholar.” Al-Munziri said: reported by Ahmad with a hasan chain. Al-Haythami said: reported by Ahmad and at-Tabaraani and its isnad is hasan.

Abdullah b. al-Mas'ud (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “Let those be nearest to me in Salah (prayer) who are mature and possess (religious) knowledge, then those who are nearest to them in these respects.” He repeated this three times and then added, “Beware of indulging in the loose talks of the markets (when you are in the mosque).” [Muslim]

Abu Musa (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “It is out of reverence to Allah that we respecting an aged Muslim, and the one who commits the Qur'an to memory and does not exaggerate pronouncing its letters and nor forgets it after memorising, and to respect the just ruler.” Reported by Abu Dawud. An-Nawawi said the hadith is hasan. Ibn Muflih said the isnad is jayyid.

May Allah (swt) enable us to gain the correct knowledge and apply it.

Women

2007-12-15T18:05:00.000Z

A woman in the 21st century is faced with pursuing a career, education, and also being a wife, a mother, and a daughter. And in the midst of all these activities, it is easy to lose sight of the most important aspect that governs our life, as Muslims, Islam.

Islam allows a woman to have a career, husband, children, and whatever else she wants as long as it falls within the domain of Islam! The domain of Islam includes the woman's right and responsibility to have an education, and participation in the daily affairs of the nation; she can be a teacher, a scientist, a business woman in the office or market place, an administrator, or a doctor; and take care for her family obligations. Of course there are rules of conduct that apply to both women and men in these public activities, such as the dress code.

Islam is more than a mere set of rituals; it is a complete ideology that deals with every aspect of our life. It addresses human beings without any consideration of color, race, or sex, or the time period we are living in.

As believer's in Allah (swt) and the Day of Judgment, we know that Islam is the final Message sent to all humanity, and because it is from our Creator it is the only ideology that takes care of the affairs of the people in a correct manner. Consequently, delivering the Message of Islam (dawah) to all humanity is an obligation (fard) for both men and women. There are many ayats and hadiths which are related to the importance of dawah, for example:

Who is better in speech than the one Who calls to Allah, works righteousness, and says

" I am from those Who are Muslims"

[Quran 41: 33]

I am well aware of what my slave expects from me, I am with him if he mentions me, if he mentions me to himself, I mention (him or her) to myself, and if he mentions me among an audience then I mention (him or her) among better audience. [Hadith Qudsi]

Thus one of the most important aspect of a Muslim woman's identity comes from carrying the Islamic dawah. She can do dawah to her husband, children, family and the general public.
In today's life the absence of the application of Islam makes it very difficult to fulfill all our responsibilities as Muslims. As woman living in a non-Islamic environment we are kept busy looking for short term solutions to our problems dealing with our duties in and out of the home, without even realizing that our responsibility encompasses the condition of the whole Ummah.

The Believers, men and women, are protectors of each other, enjoining the right and forbidding the wrong, establishing regular prayer, paying zakat and obeying Allah and His messenger. On them will Allah pour his mercy, for Allah is exalted in power, wise.

[Quran 9 : 71]

The most important thing to remember when discussing the identity of the Muslim woman, is that Islam did not come to confine the activities of women, but instead to liberate them.
This is as much the case today as it was 1400 years ago, as you can see from two of the many example of Muslim women: A very well known example is Aisha (ra), who taught both men and woman Quran, tafseer, and transmitted many hadiths from the Prophet (PBUH). Another great example is of Nusaybah bint Ka'b who participated in the battle of Uhud, where she not only brought water to the wounded, but took an active part in the fighting, and on that day she wounded twelve of the enemy severely; when the Muslims pulled back and exposed the prophet, she stood in his defense

[Seerah Ibn Hisham].

Inshallah, for us to be successful in this life and the Hereafter, Muslim women need to know that we do play a key role in securing the Islamic way of life today.

British political think tanks

2007-11-10T13:45:00.000Z

Hate filled Extremists in the political think tanks

The past few years has seen the emergence of a unified set of voices in various media and political institutions. They preach an extreme philosophy that would appear to many to foster hatred and division in society. They project themselves in an arrogant manner that seems to assume that their political ideology is superior to all others. They have a supremacist view, although they claim to be non-violent, they breed an atmosphere that allows violence to occur. They are the neo-conservatives, amongst who are members of the Policy Exchange and think tank and the Henry Jackson Society. Their supremacist view is one that is best summarised as advocating a pro-active approach to spread their extreme interpretation of liberal democracy in the world. The Henry Jackson Society is linked to many influential American neo-conservatives and its members have been enthusiastic supporters of U.S. President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq. Hence, one could argue that they fostered an atmosphere that potentially led to the deaths, or at least justified the deaths, of over half a million civilians. As we will see, many of the key figures in these circles are linked to the current Conservative Party leadership. This week, the Policy Exchange issued a report, titled 'The Hijacking of British Islam'. It reads more like a document where the evidence has been sought to fit an argument than a piece of serious research. The author is Dr. Denis MacEoin, who according to Wikipedia is a novelist and former lecturer in Islamic studies. He sometimes writes under the pseudonyms Daniel Easterman and Jonathan Aycliffe. Under the pseudonym Easterman, he wrote 'The Name of the Beast' published by HarperCollins and described as a 'millenial occult horror of the emergence of the Antichrist in modern Egypt.' Again, according to Wikipedia, in recent years, he has become active in pro-Israel advocacy (hasbara).

The 'The Hijacking of British Islam' report was published by the Policy Exchange, who are often described as a centre-right think tank. Many would describe them as far-right, and certainly they contain people who amongst Muslims are (in) famously viewed as some of the most anti-Muslim and anti-Islam personalities in the UK. Their current chairman is Charles Moore, a leading conservative commentator who frequently writes hostile articles. He has written some of the most offensive and provocative questions about the Prophet Muhammad (saw) in an artcile in the Telegraph. Moore also described the Muslim woman's veil as "a hostile statement about the society in which the wearer lives", thereby potentially whipping up hatred against Muslim women.

Their former director was Michael Gove, a self-confessed neo-conservative once described as a "venomous media voice who thinks no Muslim is worth talking to" - which he of course denied. He is the author of Celsius 7/7, which has been described as ‘pernicious' and 'paranoid'. In it, he plays on the fears of the British public, trying to focus on the political aspects of Islam as the causes for violence in the world. Gove is widely believed to be one of the ideologues behind Cameron's Conservative party and its policies. He was unashamedly in favour of the massacre of hundreds of thousands in Iraq in order to remove Saddam Hussein.

Along with these two are Nicholas Boles MP, another of Cameron's lieutenants, and Dean Godson, the director of research. Mr Godson has written articles such as 'Do we have to treat Muslims as Muslims?' and 'You'll never guess who's to blame for 7/7' in which he tries to counter the idea that either Tariq Ramadhan or the MCB are moderates. He sensationally suggests that there is an 'Arabising' of Britain's Muslim community.

Many of these people are linked to the Henry Jackson Society, described by some as a neo-conservative think tank - a label they deny - who are dedicated to the spread of their interpretation of free market capitalism and liberal democracy across the entire planet. Whilst many view this as totalitarian and supremacist, their ranks include prominent neo-conservative supporters, and ‘liberal interventionists'.

It has many high-profile signatories to its statement of principles, Michael Gove, Edward Vaizey, David Willetts, Denis MacShane, Fabian Hamilton, Gisela Stuart, former MPs David Trimble, Jackie Lawrence, as well as Sir Richard Dearlove - former head of the British Secret Intelligence Service - and Irwin Stelzer, Rupert Murdoch's friend. Notable patrons include Richard Perle and William Kristol, two of the leading lights in the American neo-conservative movement, James Woolsey, former Director of the CIA and Tsakhiagiyn Elbegdorj, former Prime Minister of Mongolia.

These two organisations have echoes of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a US think tank that was extremely well co-ordinated and unified in purpose, which then in turn influenced the Republican leadership, in particular President George W. Bush. It was PNAC that led the call for the war in Iraq, and the US has paid the price ever since.

The Policy Exchange is more media savvy than most think tanks. It now has an impressive track record of co-ordinating its controvertial and some would say sensationalist ‘research' with political events and policy timetable. This report emerged in the week that Hazel Blears will address the governments position on ‘extremism'. A previous report on Islam and Muslims was released in the week Cameron set out his views on the subject about a year ago. A report commissioned by them from Martin Bright attacked the government's position on engagement with the MCB and promoted the Sufi Muslim Council (SMC) only days before the official launch of the SMC.

One wonders when the moderates amongst advocates of liberal democracy will denounce these extreme voices, or when the world will wake up to the threat posed by people whom some will see as 'hate-filled radicals' bent on spreading their ideology across the world, even at the cost of innocent life.