Showing posts with label Jamia Hafsa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jamia Hafsa. Show all posts

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Neutrality, Impartiality and Trial of Pervez Musharraf.


Musharraf's party today questioned the impartiality of the judge who revoked the former military ruler's bail and ordered his arrest, saying he had once served as a counsel for a radical cleric of the Lal Masjid here. Musharraf was remanded to judicial custody for a fortnight yesterday, two days after Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui of the Islamabad High Court cancelled his pre-arrest bail and directed police to detain him. The All Pakistan Muslim League, however, said Siddiqui's "personality is highly controversial" as he had earlier served as the lawyer for Abdul Aziz, one of the top clerics of the Lal Masjid, against which Musharraf ordered a military operation in 2007. Siddiqui also contested the 2002 general election on a Jamaat-e-Islami ticket from a parliamentary constituency in Rawalpindi, said APML spokesperson Aasia Ishaque. "Pervez Musharraf was subjected to judicial terrorism in the Islamabad High Court," she said. Siddiqui had represented Abdul Aziz in an anti-terrorism court following his arrest during the Lal Masjid operation and later succeeded in getting Aziz's home declared a "sub-jail" so that he could be detained at his residence, she added. "Personal vendetta against Pervez Musharraf is being carried out by appointing political workers as judges. It's very ironic that the lawyer of a terrorist is giving judgement in a terrorism case against Pervez Musharraf," Ishaque said. REFERENCE: Impartiality of judge hearing Pervez Musharraf's case questioned Sunday, Apr 21, 2013, 13:45 IST | Place: ISLAMABAD | Agency: PTI http://www.dnaindia.com/world/1825221/report-impartiality-of-judge-hearing-pervez-musharraf-s-case-questioned

Capital Talk (Pervez Musharraf Mulzim Ya Mujrim) – 22th April 2013

 
Capital Talk - 22th April 2013 by luckyzemtv

"QUOTE"



"UNQUOTE"


Now please note the discrepancies in the column of Former MD PTV, Jang Group, GEO TV, ARY, and Express News Employee Dr Shahid Masood's column of Disappeared Female Students of Lal Masjid and also note the role of Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (Alliance of Religio-Political Parties in Pakistan from 2002 to 2007 and ally of General Pervez Musharraf)




2007 ISLAMABAD: The three-year-old political sins of top MMA leaders have once again given a second lease of political life to General Pervez Musharraf at a very crucial phase, as the infamous 17th Amendment becomes the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision to allow a uniformed president to get himself re-elected for the next five years from the present assemblies. For many, the most-important thing is that the verdict of the Supreme Court has justified the recent claim of Musharraf that he had made with a lot of pride and arrogance in his choking voice that “let the agitators do their job, he would have the last laugh”. Likewise, the government’s prediction that it would win the case with a majority also turned out to be right. Meanwhile, the critical role of the MMA in facilitating the rule of Musharraf in uniform is so definite and irritating that during the two-week-long proceedings on the case, some judges did not forget to remind the religious parties about their ‘deeds’. It is now widely believed in the political circles that the MMA would go down in the history as a force which used political Islam not only to validate the rule of General Musharraf since October 12, 1999, but also helped him to become president in uniform first after the general election in 2002 and now in 2007 by providing legal and constitutional excuses to the Supreme Court to extend a favourable decision to a military general. One political observer said that if Musharraf gets himself re-elected as the president on October 6, it would be only because of the MMA leaders who had decided to vote in favour of 17th Amendment after striking a deal with a uniformed general and distorted the Constitution of 1973.  Likewise, General Musharraf once again would be feeling grateful to the MMA leaders, particularly Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Maulana Fazlur Rehman, whose single act not only gave him the crucial support when he needed it most, but it continued to yield results when he once again needed it. At the time of passage of the Legal Framework Order (LFO) in 2004 after the MMA leaders decided to betray the political forces engaged in desperate struggle against the rule of Musharraf, it was widely assumed that it might be only one-time “political sin” of the MMA leaders. But, now the SC verdict on Friday confirms the wild doubts of critics of the MMA that the country would continue to suffer from the havoc created by the decision of Qazi and Fazl. The MMA, nicked named as a “B team” of General Musharraf, had given a false impression after the 2002 elections that it would fight for the supremacy of the Parliament when President Musharraf would push his LFO for approval from the Legislature. In the absence of two former prime ministers – Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto – Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Fazlur Rehman simply hijacked the agitation movement of the opposition parties to oppose Musharraf and his LFO in the Parliament. The movement became so aggressive and popular in nature that at one stage, it emerged that Musharraf might yield to the rising political power of these forces. The international media and community were also giving serious attention to the political turmoil in Pakistan amid the rising pressure from the Commonwealth and the European Union on Musharraf to get legitimacy from the Parliament or he might lose their vital support. 




 The agitation movement within and outside the Parliament against the LFO was so effective that it crippled the Jamali government. At that time, Musharraf appointed two of his top and trusted generals, Maj Gen Zaki and Maj Gen Ehtasham Zamir, assisted by S M Zafar, to negotiate a secret deal with the MMA. Qazi, Fazl and Liaquat Baloch started meeting these generals late nights. Finally, a deal was brokered between the generals and the MMA, which exclusively benefited both the parties. The first reward was the continuation of the MMA-led NWFP government, share in the Balochistan cabinet and slot of the Opposition Leader in the National Assembly. Likewise, the MMA also got the references against its MPs blocked after certain forces tried to get them disqualified on account of educational qualification. After initial dents in its lost credibility, the MMA leaders once again revived their political credentials when they used Nawaz Sharif who, too easily, accepted their role as a major opposition when he started giving them more importance despite being partners of Musharraf in the government. The MMA got the real boost as a major opposition alliance, despite being part of Musharraf regime, when Nawaz Sharif gave them importance at London during the All Parties Conference and later formed an alliance with them. But, soon Nawaz realised that he was only being used by smart and shrewd politicians of the MMA to defuse his rising popularity as none of them turned up at the Islamabad airport on September 10 to receive him. It is interesting to note that the MMA leaders are so smart that they have not only been facilitating Musharraf in power but they have also been successfully acting as the real opposition to the regime. When contacted by The News, MNA Liaquat Baloch did not agree with the conclusion that the religio-political alliance was actually responsible for the continuation of Musharraf rule. He said the 17th Amendment had given benefits to all the parties, including all the women parliamentarians, minorities and other segments. He said that under the agreement with Musharraf, he was to take off his uniform by December 31, 2004, but he backed out. Likewise, the MMA leader said Musharraf was given concession only for one term and now he was allowed to contest the election in uniform without any valid justification. He said the doctrine of necessity was once again revived and the MMA should not be blamed at all. “What is our fault,” Baloch put a counter question. REFERENCE: Musharraf gets new lease of life, thanks to MMA BY Rauf Klasra Saturday, September 29, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=10367&Cat=13&dt=9/29/2007



2007 Ejaz says he helped release Ghazi in terror cases Wednesday, April 11, 2007 ISLAMABAD: Federal Minister for Religious Affairs Ejaz-ul-Haq has admitted that he had made personal efforts to get Maulana Abdul Rashid Ghazi, Naib Khateeb of Lal Masjid, released in cases of terrorism. Expressing his views in a talk show on Geo TV alongside Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz Information Secretary Ahsan Iqbal, Nayyar Bukhari of the Pakistan People’s Party and Maulana Abdul Rashid Ghazi on Tuesday, the minister said he took the action after a written confirmation from the Maulana guaranteeing his good behaviour. Giving his side of the story in the programme, Maulana Abdul Rashid Ghazi denied the minister’s claim, saying he was never indicted in any terrorism case, while his car was impounded by police, which was never returned. He failed to give a satisfactory answer when asked about the fact that former chairman National Book Foundation Ahmad Faraz had registered an FIR against him on charges of forced occupation of land belonging to the Ministry of Education, but still no action was taken against him. Taking part in the debate, Ahsan Iqbal and Nayyar Bukhari accused Ghazi Abdur Rashid of conniving with the government to stage a socio-political drama to divert public attention from the ongoing judicial crisis. Ghazi said he has made it clear to PML-Q President Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain that the occupation of Children’s Library would continue until their demands for implementation of Islamic Shariah were fully met. Upon the terse comments, Ejaz-ul-Haq said if the Shujaat-Ghazi talks failed, the government would have no other option but launch a full-fledged operation at Lal Masjid. Meanwhile, Khateeb of Lal Masjid Maulana Abdul Aziz has started writing to the Ulema and the seminary students nationwide to seek their support in the ongoing row with the government. In his letters he urged the Ulema and students to rise against such social evils like liquor, obscenity and so-called “liberalisation”. 




The letters also urged all the students and the Ulema to proceed to Lal Masjid unarmed but with their batons and baggage for Aitekaf and speeding up their services for promulgation of Islamic values. They have been advised to avoid any prolonged bickering with personnel of the law-enforcement agencies and limit themselves to self-defence, refrain from rioting and destroying and burning public property at all costs. They have further been advised to rather offer themselves for jails but try to preach Islam and Islamic values, including Jihad to jail inmates, if detained by the government. On the other hand pamphlets have been distributed in Karachi by Tehrik-e-Talaba urging all to proceed to Islamabad on the call of Maulana Abdul Aziz. —Online Monitoring desk adds: talking to Geo News correspondent, Ejaz said that the administration of Lal-Masjid and the Jamia Hafsa was not showing flexibility in talks with the government. The minister warned of operation against it, which could result in the loss of lives if the matter remained unresolved. The federal minister said that senior Ulema, including scholars from Waziristan and Hangu, have been disappointed after failure of their efforts to convince Ghazi Abdul Rasheed and Maulana Abdul Aziz. Ejaz believed that restoring the writ of the government was not a difficult task, however, he added, the establishment was not willing to do it at the cost of human lives. Ejaz urged both Maulanas Abdul Aziz and Abdul Rashid Ghazi of Lal Masjid to adopt sagacious approach and avoid confrontation with the people. “Both the brothers should negotiate with the government and help reach a peaceful settlement of the issue as it is creating doubts in minds of the people of the country, he added. The people from various walks of life and the Ulema and Madrassa students persuaded them to give up but alas they did not pay heed to, he said. Terming one-month ultimatum issued by Lal Masjid absurd he said the Objective Resolution is the part of the Constitution and ensured that no law contrary to the Islamic injunctions can be enacted in the country. Responding to a question, he said enlightened moderation is not contrary to Islamic teachings as Islam stands for acquiring knowlege. It also preaches moderation as the best way of life. REFERENCE: Ejaz says he helped release Ghazi in terror cases Wednesday, April 11, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=7065&Cat=13&dt=4/11/2007

Now please note the discrepancies in the column of Former MD PTV, Jang Group, GEO TV, ARY, and Express News Employee Dr Shahid Masood's column of Disappeared Female Students of Lal Masjid and compare it with the Lal Masjid Commission Report published in 2013.


2013 ‘103 killed in Lal Masjid, Jamia Hafsa operation’ * Report says 92 civilians among dead, no woman included  - ISLAMABAD: The report of a commission that probed the operation in Lal Masjid has verified from reports, claims, witnesses and media reports that 103 people were killed in the operation. The report by the one-man commission of Federal Shariat Court’s Justice Shahzado Shaikh was made public on the directives of the Supreme Court on Saturday. The commission worked on eight terms of reference, including how many persons, if any, male or female, civilian or law enforcement agencies’ personnel, lost their lives in the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid operation. The commission’s 304-page report is comprehensive document, which stated that of the 103 persons killed, 92 were civilians and 11 belonged to the armed forces of Pakistan. Among the 92 civilian casualties, 76 were traced/identified, whereas 16 bodies remained unidentified. It verified that no other claim of any killing could be brought in front of the commission. On page 142 of the report, it is verified that 103 persons died in the operation and no woman was killed. It said that the number of persons died in the incident of Jamia Hafsa remained a mystery. During the proceedings before the Supreme Court of Pakistan from July 8, 2007 to December 4, 2012, different reports were submitted regarding the number of casualties. The commission on this account summoned the record of the deceased from all government departments and agencies, verified claims and statements from volunteers. The task before the commission was to analyse these reports and verify claims and reports. REFERENCE: ‘103 killed in Lal Masjid, Jamia Hafsa operation’ * Report says 92 civilians among dead, no woman included Sunday, April 21, 2013 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2013%5C04%5C21%5Cstory_21-4-2013_pg7_3 GEO NEWS 2007 http://www.geo.tv/important_events/lalmasjid/pages/english_news.asp Lal Masjid operation: Report brings more troubles for Musharraf by Malik Asad | 21st April, 2013 http://dawn.com/2013/04/21/lal-masjid-operation-report-brings-more-troubles-for-musharraf/


Ugly Role of Pakistani Media, Pervez Musharraf & Lal Masjid (2007)
Ugly Role of Pakistani Media, Pervez Musharraf... by SalimJanMazari

 TOP Story (Parvez Musharraf Case) – 23rd April 2013
   
Top Story - 23rd april 2013 by Malik_Jee

Need for broader Lal Masjid probe by Zahid Hussain 6th December, 2012 http://dawn.com/2012/12/06/need-for-broader-lal-masjid-probe/ Not the full picture: Lal Masjid commission report http://dawn.com/2013/04/23/not-the-full-picture-lal-masjid-commission-report/


What the Pakistani Press, particularly the Jang Group reported on Lal Masjid in 2007 contradicts what their TV Anchors telecast on the same issue in 2007 and even now they blatantly lie and distort the Issue of Lal Masjid. 

Here are the few headlines. Ghazi says Lal Masjid has guns Thursday, April 12, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=7104&Cat=13&dt=4/12/2007 Local Taliban raid video shop, burn CDs in Islamabad by Shakeel Anjum Sunday, April 15, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=7165&Cat=13&dt=4/15/2007 Wanted clerics back Jamia Hafsa students Rahimullah Yusufzai Wednesday, April 18, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=7244&Cat=13&dt=4/18/2007 Lal Masjid cleric warns govt against any action by Muhammad Anis Saturday, April 28, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=7488&Cat=13&dt=4/28/2007 ‘Suicide bombers given go-ahead’ by Mobarik A Virk Wednesday, July 04, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=8818&Cat=13&dt=7/4/2007 Lal Masjid has 10,000 suicide bombers: Abdul Aziz by our correspondent Thursday, May 31, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=8218&Cat=13&dt=5/31/2007 Hardliners ask Islamabad barbers not to shave beards Friday, April 13, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=50965&Cat=6&dt=4/13/2007


Bay Laag (Are Lawyers Involved in Terrorism?) – 24th April 2013

 
laag on capital - 24th april 2013 by shozib



2007 Lal Masjid to set up ‘Shariat court’ ISLAMABAD: An announcement about the enforcement of Islamic Shariah will be made at the ‘Enforcement of Shariah and Azmat-e-Jihad’ conference being held here today (Friday) at Lal Masjid. A Shariat court comprising 10 muftis will be set up in this regard. The court will take decisions against those found involved in running brothels and following illegal practices. The Enforcement of Shariat and Azmat-e-Jihad conference will continue till Asar prayers. Noted Ulema will address the conference. A three-day Aitkaf has started in the central Lal Masjid and it will conclude on April 7. Thousands of people from across the country have reached Lal Masjid. Maulana Abdul Aziz, the prayer leader of Lal Masjid, said that an announcement about the enforcement of Shariah would be made in the conference and a Shariat court comprising 10 muftis would be set up. The court would caution that no one should operate brothels in Islamabad or Rawalpindi. If people did not refrain from pursuing un-Islamic practices, the students of Lal Masjid would take notice of it on their own. Meanwhile, the federal government has described the use of force in the Jamia Hafsa and Lal Masjid issues as the last option. Sources told Online news agency that Home Secretary Kamal Shah reviewed the whole situation at a high-level meeting on Thursday. Kamal said the government has directed the Islamabad district administration to continue to pursue the dialogue process with the Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa administration. The Islamabad administration briefed him about the ongoing negotiations with the administration of Jamia Hafsa and Lal Masjid. The meeting decided that the use of force against the students of Jamia Hafsa would be the last option. The government will try its utmost not to allow the students of Jamia Hafsa to take law into their own hands. The meeting also decided to arrest the elements who are found involved in stopping or forcing the owners of video shops or CDs shops to shut their businesses. Sources said the National Crisis Management Cell set up in the Interior Ministry is persistently monitoring the matters related to Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa. 


 Reports on a day-to-day basis are being sent to President Pervez Musharraf, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz and Interior Minister Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao in this respect. Meanwhile, hundreds of human rights activists rallied on Thursday to urge the government to act against the students of Jamia Hafsa who have launched “anti-vice” patrols in the Islamabad. Around 600 protesters chanted slogans calling upon the authorities to “curb the rise of extremist forces in the country that are promoting intolerance and violence,” an AFP photographer witnessed. The protest came a week after Burqa-clad girls from the Jamia Hafsa abducted a local woman accused of running a brothel. They released the women and her two relatives two days later, after making her read out a confession. Male students from Lal Masjid, meanwhile, have formed Taliban-style “Vice and Virtue” squads urging owners of DVD and music shops to shut their business. The students were “harassing and terrorising ordinary citizens in the name of Islam” and must be stopped, said a joint statement by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and a dozen non-governmental organisations. It also urged people to “rise against these extremist religious bigoted forces and secure the future of the present and future generations.” REFERENCE: Lal Masjid to set up ‘Shariat court’ today Friday, April 06, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=6945&Cat=13&dt=4/6/2007 Lal Masjid on the warpath BY Muhammad Anis Saturday, April 07, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=6965&Cat=13&dt=4/7/2007

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Alleged Last will of Ghazi and Karbala - VI

Shaikh Mohommad wrote:

May the souls of all those innocent people rest in eternal peace under blessings of Allah as they were taken hostages by the fanatics and used cowadly as human shield for their political designs in taking up arms against the armed forces of Islamic Republic. This logic is applied by Zionists when they kill Palsestinians. They say that "terrorists" where hiding being civilians. It has to do Hindu ideology of Karma. It says that you suffer is because of what you did in the past. Hence suffer and do not try to change or challenge the oppressors.

Shaikh Mohommad
=====================================================

Dear Sheikh Sahab,

Then how would you define the Quranic Verses below:

ظَهَرَ الْفَسَادُ فِي الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ بِمَا كَسَبَتْ أَيْدِي النَّاسِ لِيُذِيقَهُم بَعْضَ الَّذِي عَمِلُوا لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ


1- Corruption doth appear on land and sea because of (the evil) which men's hands have done, that He may make them taste a part of that which they have done, in order that they may return. [AL-ROOM (THE ROMANS, THE BYZANTINES) Chapter 30 - Verse 41]


لَهَا مَا كَسَبَتْ وَعَلَيْهَا مَا اكْتَسَبَتْ


2- "For it (is only) that which it hath earned, and against it (only) that which it hath deserved." [Verse - 286 II The Cow - Soorah Al Baqarah]


Quoting the verses above doesn't mean to justify what happened durin the tragedy of Lal Mosque. May Allah forgive all those who lost their lives there. Amen.


Mullah Abdul Rasheed Ghazi's alleged last will quoting Karbala as an example is not Hujjat [Proof] to justify his Khurooj[Rebellion]. Since Ghazi was a Hanafi therefore I will be quoting Hanafi Thought on Karbala and Khurooj [Rebellion].



Hanafi School of thought on Khurooj:

Hazrat Hussain Ibn-e-Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] going against Ameer Yazid [May Allah have mercy on his soul] and the Sunni view on Yazid:

"QUOTE"

In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful

Imam al-Tahawi (Allah have mercy on him) states in his famous al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya:

“We do not recognize uprising against our Imam or those in charge of our affairs even if they are unjust, nor do we wish evil on them, nor do we withdraw from following them. We hold that obedience to them is part of obedience to Allah, The Glorified, and is therefore obligatory as long as they do not order us to commit sins. We pray for their guidance and their wrongdoings to be pardoned”. (al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya with the Sharh of al-Ghunaymi, P. 110-111).

The commentators of al-Aqida al-Tahawiyya have mentioned many evidences for this. Allama al-Ghunaymi al-Maydani and other commentators on this work elaborated on this topic by mentioning the relevant evidences.

Allah Most High says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ أَطِيعُواْ اللّهَ وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ وَأُوْلِي الأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ فَإِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِن كُنتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ ذَلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلاً

1) O you who have attained to faith! Pay heed unto God, and pay heed unto the Apostle and unto those from among you who have been entrusted with authority; and if you are at variance over any matter, refer it unto God and the Apostle, if you [truly] believe in God and the Last Day. This is the best [for you], and best in the end. [Quran 4:59]


2) Sayyiduna Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, and whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah. And whoever obeys my ruler (amir), obeys me, and whoever disobeys my ruler, disobeys me” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6718 & Sahih Muslim, no. 1835).


3) Sayyiduna Anas ibn Malik (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Listen to and obey your ruler, even if he is an Abyssinian slave whose head looks like a raisin” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6723 & Sahih Muslim).


4) Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Whoever sees his ruler doing something he disapproves of, he should be patient, for no one separates from the (Muslim) group even for a span and then dies, except that he will die a death of (pre-Islamic) ignorance. (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6724 & Sahih Muslim, no. 1849).


5) Sayyiduna Abd Allah (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “A Muslim must listen to and obey (the order of his ruler) in things that he likes or dislikes, as long as he is not ordered to commit a sin. If he is ordered to disobey Allah, then there is no listening and no obedience. (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 6725 & Sahih Muslim, no. 1839).


The above evidences are clear in establishing the fact that one must obey the ruler even if he is corrupt or a sinner (fasiq). The reason for this, in the words of Allama al-Ghunaymi, is that, there have been many corrupt rulers in Islamic history and never did the predecessors (salaf) rebel against them, rather they used to submit to their rule and establish Jumu’ah and Eid prayers with their permission. Also, piety is not a pre-requisite for leadership. (Sharh al-Ghunaymi, p. 110).


Other scholars emphasize that uprising against corrupt leadership results in more tribulation and destruction then the initial oppression of the ruler. With forbearance and tolerance, one’s sins will be forgiven. And in reality, the corrupt ruler is imposed by Allah due to our own wrongdoings, thus it becomes necessary that we repent and seek Allah’s forgiveness coupled with good actions, as Allah Most High says: “Whatever misfortune happens to you, is because of the things your hands have wrought” (42:30)…….. And He says: “Thus do we make the wrongdoers turn to each other, because of what they earn” (6:129). Therefore, if a nation wants to free themselves from the oppression of their leader, they must refrain themselves from oppressing others.


However, if the ruler commands to do something that is a sin, then there is no obedience, as mentioned earlier in light of the many evidences found in the Sunnah.


Also, uprising and challenging a corrupt ruler becomes permissible when he openly transgresses in a way that his action is not open to any interpretation, provided one has the means to do so.


As far as the actions of Sayyiduna Imam Husain (Allah be pleased with him) and his uprising against Yazid is concerned, firstly, it should be understood that according to the majority of scholars, the status of a heir to the throne (wali al-ahd) is only one of recommendation that requires approval from the nations prominent and influential figures after the demise of the Khalifa.


Qadhi Abu Ya’la al-Farra al-Hanbali states in his Ahkam al-Sultaniyya:


“It is permissible for a Khalifah to appoint a successor without the approval of those in power, as Abu Bakr appointed Umar (Allah be pleased with them both) as his successor without the backing and presence of the prominent figures of the community. The logical reason behind this is that appointing someone a successor to the throne is not appointing his a Khalifa, or else, there will be two Khalifas, thus there is no need for the influential people to be present. Yes, after the demise of the Khalifah, there presence and approval is necessary”.


He further states:


“Khilafah (leadership) is not established merely with the appointment of the Khalifa, rather (after his demise) it requires the approval of the Muslim Ummah” (al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyya, p. 9).


In view of the above, the majority of the Umma’s scholars are of the view that if a Khalifah or ruler appoints his successor without the approval of those in power, then this is permissible, but it will only serve as an suggestion. After his demise, the nation’s influential and powerful people have a right to accept his leadership or reject it.


Keeping this in mind, the leadership of Yazid was also subject to the same criterion other leaderships are. His leadership could not be established after the demise of Sayyiduna Mu’awiya (Allah be pleased with him) until it was approved by the major personalities of the nation.


Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) from the outset did not approve of Yazid being designated a leader. This was his personal opinion that was based on purely religious grounds and there was nothing wrong in holding this view.


After the demise of Sayyiduna Mu’awiya (Allah be pleased with him), Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) saw that the major personalities of Hijaz including Sayyiduna Abd Allah ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) had not yet approved of Yazid’s leadership. Furthermore, he received heaps of letters from Iraq which made it clear that the people of Iraq had also not accepted Yazid as their leader. The letters clearly stated that they had not given their allegiance to anyone. (See: Tarikh al-Tabari, 4/262 & al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, 8/151).


In such circumstances, Sayyiduna Husain’s (Allah be pleased with him) stand with regards to Yazid’s leadership was that the pledge of allegiance by the people of Sham can not be forced upon the rest of the Muslims. Therefore, his leadership was as yet not established.


In Sayyiduna Husain’s view, Yazid was a tyrant ruler who desired to overcome the Muslims, but was not yet able to do so. In such a circumstance, he considered his religious duty to prevent a tyrant ruler prevailing over the Muslim Ummah.


For this reason, Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) sent Muslim ibn Aqeel (Allah be pleased with him) to Kufa in order to investigate the truth about Yazid’s rule. His journey was not of an uprising nature, rather to discover the truth.


Had Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) thought that Yazid had imposed his rule and established his power all over the Muslim lands, the case would have been different. He would certainly have accepted his leadership without choice and would not have opposed it. But he thought that this was a tyrant ruler that had no authority as of yet, and can be stopped before he establishes his authority.


This is the reason why when he came close to Kufa and discovered that the inhabitants of Kufa have betrayed him and succumbed to Yazid’s rule, he suggested three things, of which one was “Or I give my hand in the hand of Yazid as a pledge of allegiance”. (See: Tarikh al-Tabari, 4/313).


This clearly shows that when Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) discovered that Yazid had established his authority, he agreed to accept him as a leader. However, Ubaid Allah ibn Ziyad was not ready to listen to Sayyiduna Husain and ordered him to come to him unconditionally. Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) was in no way obliged to obey his command and he also feared his life, thus had no option but to fight him. This was the beginning of the unfortunate incident of Karbala. (See, for details, Imam Tabari’s Tarikh al-Umam wa al-Muluk & Imam Ibn Kathir’s al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya).


In conclusion, it is impermissible to rebel against authority even if the ruler is oppressive or a sinner. The opposition of Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) was due to the fact that Yazid’s rule had not yet been established and he intended to prevent his rule before it being established.


The position of Yazid


With regards to your second question that, is it permissible to curse Yazid?

Firstly, it must be remarked here that this is not an issue on which one’s Iman depends, nor will one be asked on the day of Judgement as to what opinion one held about Yazid. This is a trivial matter, thus many scholars have advised to abstain from indulging and discussing the issue and concentrate on the more immediate and important aspects of Deen.


Secondly, it should be understood that there is a general and accepted principle among the scholars that it is impermissible to curse a Muslim no matter how great of a sinner he is.

Imam Nawawi (Allah have mercy on him) states:


“Cursing an upright Muslim is unlawful (haram) by unanimous consensus of all Muslims. The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Cursing a believer is like killing him” (Sahih al-Bukhari).


As far as the sinners are concerned, it is permissible (but not rewarded) to curse them in a general manner, such as saying “Allah curse the corrupt” or Allah curse the oppressors” and so forth. It has been narrated in many narrations that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) cursed sinners in a general manner. However, to curse a particular person who commits some act of disobedience, such as oppression, murder, adultery, etc, there is a difference of opinion. The Majority of Scholars Including Imam al-Ghazali hold the view that this is impermissible.


Yes, it will be permissible to curse a person regarding whom it has been decisively established that he died on disbelief (kufr), such as Abu Lahab, Abu Jahl, Pharaoh, Haman and their likes. (See: al-Adhkar by Imam Nawawi & Reliance of the traveller, P. 772-773).


In view of the above, if it is established that Yazid died as a non-Believer or he regarded the killing of Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) permissible and died without repentance, then it would be permissible to curse him. However, it this is not established, then it would not be permissible.


Indeed some scholars did curse him (Sa`d al-Din al-Taftazani, for example, See: Sharh al-Aqa’id al-Nasafiyya, P. 2845), but the majority of the Ulama have cautioned against cursing him. Firstly, because it has not been decisively established that Yazid himself killed or ordered the unfortunate killing of Sayyiduna Husain (Allah have mercy on him). There are some reports that he expressed his remorse on the actions of his associates, and even if he did, then murder and other sins do not necessitate Kufr.


Imam al-Ghazali (Allah have mercy on him) states that it is even impermissible to say that Yazid killed or ordered the killing of Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) let alone curse him, as attributing a Muslim to a sin without decisive evidence is not permissible. (See: Sharh Bad al-Amali by Mulla Ali al-Qari, P. 123-125).

He further states:

“If it is established that a Muslim killed a fellow Muslim, then the understanding of the people of truth is that he does not become a Kafir. Killing is not disbelief, rather a grave sin. It could also be that a killer may have repented before death. If a disbeliever dies after repentance, then it is impermissible to curse him, then how could it be permissible to curse a Muslim who may have repented from his sin. And we are unaware whether the killer of Sayyiduna Husain (Allah be pleased with him) died before or after repentance”. (ibid).

All of the above, whilst keeping in mind that (when cursing becomes permissible), it is not something that is obligatory (fard), necessary (wajib) or recommended (mandub). It only falls into the category of permissibility (mubah).

Therefore, it would best be to abstain from cursing Yazid, as there is no reward in cursing him, rather one should abstain from discussing about him altogether and concentrate on more practical aspects of Deen. May Allah Almighty give us the true understanding of Deen, Ameen.

And Allah knows best

Alleged Last will of Ghazi and Karbala - V


Shaikh Mohommad wrote:

Hence suffer and do not try to change or challenge the oppressors. Islam teaches everyone to fight and fight those who fight against you.


Shaikh Mohommad
==================================================

Dear Sheikh Sahab,

Your sentiments must be respected for the loss of innocent lives during Lal Mosque Tragedy in the year 2007. But please do read the Methodology of Jihad and Islamic Ways to challenge the Oppressors [please dont quote Karbala] before jumping to conclucsions. The ways adopted by the Certain Religious Elements in Pakistan is of Khawarij not Islamic. You dont use violent means to change the government within the Muslim Country by putting the lives of Women and Children in danger like the Clerics of Lal Mosque did.

Read...........


While Abdul Rehman Ibn Maljam [Kharji] attacked Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] which resulted in his martyrdom and on the same day Barak Bin Abdullah [Another Kharji and friend of Ibn Maljam, had attacked Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (May Allah be pleased with him) which resulted in injury] [Al-Bidaya wal Nihaya by Hafiz Ibn Kathir/Tareekh Ibn-e-Khaldun by Allaama Abdul Rehman Ibn-e-Khaldun]


The Khawarij believed that Mu`awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) had committed kufr by fighting against the Caliph, and that `Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) had also committed kufr by agreeing to an arbitration. They were a strictly religious group who believed that any sin was kufr. They eventually fragmented into around twenty sects, each accusing the others of kufr.


"QUOTE"

Al-Khawaarij

The Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] said:


إنَّ أمّتكم هذه جُعل عافيتها في أوّلها، وسيصيب آخرَها بلاء وأمورٌ تنكِرونَها،

وتجيء فتنٌ يرقّق بعضُها بعضاً، وتجيء الفتنة فيقول المؤمن: هذه مهلكَتي،

ثم تَنكشِف، ثم تجيء الفتنة فيقول: هذِه هذه،

فمَن أحبَّ أن يُزحزَح عن النار ويُدخَل الجنّة فلتأتِه منيّتُه وهو يؤمن بالله

واليوم الآخر، وليَأتِ إلى الناس الذي يحبُّ أن يُؤتَى إليه



“Safety of this your ummah lies in its first generation. Its later generations will be afflicted with calamities and things you will find repulsive. Trials will follow one another successively until later ones will make the former seem insignificant until the believer will say at the advent of each trial: ‘This is the one that is going to destroy me.’ So let whosoever wants to be saved from Hell and made to enter Paradise die while he is believing in Allaah and the Last Day and let him do to people what he would like them to do to him .” (Muslim)


Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood spoke the truth when he described the companions of the Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) by saying:


فإن الحي لا يؤمن عليه الفتنة، أولئك أصحاب محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم من كان منكم مستنا ، فليستن بمن قد مات أبر هذه الأمة قلوبا ، وأعمقها علما ،

وأقلها تكلفا ، قوم اختارهم الله لإقامة دينه ، وصحبة نبيه ،

فاعرفوا لهم حقهم وتمسكوا بهديهم ، فإنهم كانوا على الهدى المستقيم



“Whoever wants to follow a path, let him follow the path of one who has died, for there is no guarantee that the one who is still alive will not be tempted. Those are the companions of Muhammad ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ), the most pure in heart of this ummah and the most deep in knowledge, the least sophisticated and complicated, people whom Allaah chose to establish His religion and accompany His Prophet. So acknowledge their rights and adhere to their guidance, for they are following true guidance .”


وَإِنَّ مِنْهُمْ لَفَرِيقًا يَلْوُونَ أَلْسِنَتَهُم بِالْكِتَابِ لِتَحْسَبُوهُ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ

وَمَا هُوَ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَيَقُولُونَ هُوَ مِنْ عِندِ اللّهِ وَمَا هُوَ مِنْ عِندِ اللّهِ

وَيَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللّهِ الْكَذِبَ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ



{ and verily, among them is a party who distort the Book with their tongues (while they read it) , so that you may think it is from the Book, but it is not from the Book, and they say, “This is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah; and they speak a lie against Allah while they know it.} [3:78].


Imam ibn Al-Qayyim said, “The origin of Kufr and Shirk comes from saying about Allah without knowledge, which is one of the most prohibited acts in the Sight of Allah. It produces the most harmful effects, because it entails lying with regards to Allah and describing Him with what is not appropriate. This also entails changing and altering Allah’s religion, denying what He has approved while approving what He has denied, implementing what He has rejected while rejecting what He has commanded to be carried out, hating those who are His loyalists while taking His enemies as loyal friends, detesting what He loves while loving what He hates, and describing Him with what is not appropriate with regards to His Attributes, Speech and Actions.”


Allah has forbidden us from following our lusts and desires, and declared that doing so is not the path of the believers, but instead is the path of the disbelievers and the heretics. Allah said about such people, what translated means,


أَفَرَأَيْتَ مَنِ اتَّخَذَ إِلَهَهُ هَوَاهُ


Have you seen him who takes his own lust (vain desires) as his ilah (god)? [45:23].

The Salaf used to call those who follow the sayings that contradict the Quran and Sunnah and those who innovate in the religion, “Ahlu Al- Ahwa’,” meaning the people who follow the desires.

This is because such people discard the Quran and Sunnah and what they legislate, and instead follow their opinions and desires and depend on them.

They have even made their desires and lusts as the indisputable source of legislation, and declared that the Texts of the Quran and Sunnah do not necessarily lead to certain and clear rulings.

They thus accept the Texts only if they are in harmony with their opinions and desires, and they reject the rest or alter their meanings in the manner they see fit.

The Messenger of Allaah said,


إياكم والغلو في الدين، فإنما أهلك من كان قبلكم الغلو في الدين


"Beware of extremism in religion, for it is extremism in religion that destroyed those who were before you." (Ahmad and An-Nasaaee)

Imaam Maalik said,


ينبغي للمرء أن لا يتكلم إلا فيما أحاط به خيرًا، فقد كان رسول الله وهو إمام المسلمين وسيد العالمين يُسأل في الشيء، فما يجيب حتى يأتيه الوحي من السماء


“It is incumbent upon a person not to speak on an issue until he knows everything about it. Even the Messenger of Allaah who is the leader of all Muslims would not answer a question posed to him until he received a revelation to that effect from Heaven.”

Asking the people of knowledge


فَاسْأَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ


Ask the people of knowledge if you do not know. ( 16:43)

The Shaykh ‘Allaamah Saalih Al-Fawzaan was asked:


هل أسامة بن لادن ومن تبعه من قوله وأيدهم على مذهبهم يُعتبرون من الخوارج؟


Is Bin Laden and those who follow his views and promote his beliefs considered to be from the (deviant sect known as the) Khawaarij?

He responded:


عندكم قاعدة أن الذي يخرج على ولي الأمر أنه من الخوارج سواء أسامة بن لادن أو غيره، اللي يخرج على ولاة أمور المسلمين هذا من الخوارج .


There is a (well known) principle, and this is that everyone who rebels against those in authority is considered to be from the Khawaarij, whether this is Bin Laden or anyone else. Anyone who rebels against the Muslim leaders is deemed to be from the Khawaarij.

1427/2/5 in the lesson ‘The Explanation of the Creed'

Question: Are those who carry the ideology of the Khawarij present today?

Answer: Far removed is Allah from all imperfections! And that which is happening today, is it not from the actions of the Khawarij? And it is declaring the Muslims to be disbelievers, and more severe than that is the killing of the Muslims and transgressing against them through terrorist activities. And this is the Manhaj of the Khawarij, it comprises of three aspects:

Firstly - Takfir of the Muslims.

Secondly - Disobedience to the ruler.

Thirdly - Making permissible the blood of the Muslims.

This is the Manhaj of the Khawarij, and even if a person believed it in his heart and did not speak (with any of it) or did not act out any of it, he would still become a Khariji in his belief and opinion, which he did not express openly.

Shaykh Salih al-Fawazan

Al-Ijaabaat al-Muhimmah fee Mashaakil il-Mudlahimmah, compiled by Muhammad bin Fahd al-Husayn.

Translated by Abul-Irbaad Abid Zargar

Question: Is the one who makes Takfir of the rulers and encourages the Muslims to revolt against their rulers, to be considered from the Khawarij?

Answer: This is the Madhhab of the Khawarij. When an individual holds it permissible to revolt against the Muslim rulers, and more severe than that is to declare them to be disbelievers. This is the Madhhab of the Khawarij.

Shaykh Salih al-Fawazan

Al-Ijaabaat al-Muhimmah fee Mashaakil il-Mudlahimmah, compiled by Muhammad bin Fahad al-Husayn.

Translated by Abul-Irbaad Abid Zargar

Question: What is our position towards those who make Takfir of the Muslim rulers today, generally and in detail? Are they (those who make Takfir of the rulers) considered to be from the Khawarij?

Answer: Those who declare the Muslim rulers to be disbelievers in general, then these are from the most extreme of the Khawarij because they do not exclude anyone and give the ruling of disbelief to all the Muslims rulers. So this is most severe form of the Madhhab of the Khawarij, because they generalized (the declaration of disbelief).

Shaykh Saleh al-Fawazan

Al-Ijaabaat al-Muhimmah fee Mashaakil il-Mudlahimmah” by Muhammad bin Fahad al-Husayn

Translated by Abul-Irbaad Abid Zargar

Question: What is your advice to those who say that this country fights the deen and restricts the du’aat?

Answer: Since the Saudi state began, it has been aiding the deen and its people, and it was not set up except on this foundation.

And now it aids the Muslims in every place with financial help, building Islamic centers and masajid, sending du’aat, printing books foremost amongst them - the Noble Qur’an, opening centers of learning and Shari’ah colleges, and also it rules by the Islamic Shari’ah and has an independent body for enjoining good and forbidding evil in every town.

And all of that is a proof that this state aids Islam and its people, and it is a thorn in the throats of the hypocrites and the people of evil and splitting.

And Allah will aid His deen even if the mushrikun and those of evil intentions hate it.

And we do not say that this state is perfect in every way and that it doesn’t have any mistakes.

Mistakes occur from everyone, but we ask Allah to aid us in rectifying the mistakes.

And if the one who said this looked at himself he would find mistakes in himself which would prevent him from speaking about others and he would be ashamed to look at the people. Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan


إِنَّمَا جَزَاءُ الَّذِينَ يُحَارِبُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَسْعَوْنَ فِي الأَرْضِ فَسَادًا

أَنْ يُقَتَّلُوا أَوْ يُصَلَّبُوا أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُمْ مِنْ خِلافٍ أَوْ يُنفَوْا مِنْ الأَرْضِ

ذَلِكَ لَهُمْ خِزْيٌ فِي الدُّنيَا وَلَهُمْ فِي الآخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ




“The recompense of those who wage war against Allaah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.” (Al-Maaidah 5:33)

HISTORY OF KHAWAARIJ

Al-Khawarij is plural for “Kharij”, meaning one who rebels against the acknowledged Muslim ruler whom Islam obliges every Muslim to obey and not rebel against.

This definition of Al- Khawarij, which is taken from Islamic terminology, has become a trademark for the twelve thousand Muslims who rebelled against Caliph Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, and this includes all the groups that followed their way of understanding the religion.

These groups have since been known as “Al-Khawarij” even though they carried different names.

Among those groups are: Al- Muh’akkimah, Ash- Sharat, Al- ‘Haroriyyah, An- Nawa-sib, and Al- Mariqhah.

Al-Khawarij are the people whom the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, mentioned when he said, what translated means, “A group will go astray during a time of division between Muslims. The closest among the adversaries (the side of Ali bin Abi Talib and the side of Mu’awiyah) to the Truth will kill them (the deviant group, Al-Khawarij).”

Also, the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, said regarding a man who once accused him of injustice, “From among the offspring of this man there will rise a people who will read the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats (meaning it will not enter their hearts). They will kill Muslims and spare Idol-worshippers. They will deviate from Islam (as fast and clean) as an arrow pierces the game. If I live to witness their appearance, I will kill them as the people of ‘Aad (whom Allah utterly destroyed and annihilated because of their disbelief) were killed.” [Al-Bukhari & Muslim].

He further said, “Just before the end of time, young, idiotic people will rise. They will say words similar to (the good words) of the best people. They will recite the Quran, but it will not go beyond their throats. They will deviate from the religion as fast as an arrow pierces the game. If you meet them, kill them, for killing them will bring about a reward from Allah on the Day of Resurrection for whoever kills them.” [Al-Bukhari & Muslim].

The companions of the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, were unanimous in their decision to fight Al-Khawarij. Also, the majority of the scholars of Islam state that it is an obligation to fight them.

Soon after they appeared as a distinct group, Al-Khawarij divided into seven groups, among them Al- Muh’akkimah who fought Ali bin Abi Talib.

Al-Khawarij accused Ali of Kufr and announced their animosity towards him. They departed to Haroraa’ and chose two men as their leaders, one to lead them in prayer and the other to lead their forces in battle. When Ali realized the danger posed by these people, he sent Abdullah Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, to debate them and expose their erroneous ways. Ibn Abbas argued with them and refuted the arguments supporting the positions they took. Many of them abandoned the camp of Al-’Haroriyyah and rejoined the camp of Caliph Ali bin Abi Talib.

However, their leaders and those who remained with them refused to abandon their rebellion against the righteous Khalifah, Ali. They announced that their campaign of war against their adversaries will continue. Ali bin Abi Talib then decided to meet them himself.

He called upon them to rejoin the ranks of the Khalifah and abandon their deviant ways. He also refuted their arguments and nullified their misguided way of understanding the religion.

However, they persisted in their defiance of the Khalifah and camped their forces at the area of An-Nahrawan.

On their way to An-Nahrawan, Al-Khawarij met Abdullah -- the son of Khabbab bin Al-Aratt, a noble companion of the Messenger Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, and seized him. They asked him, “Who are you?” He replied, “I am Abdullah bin Khabbab, the companion of the Messenger Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam.” They said, “Narrate to us a Hadith you heard from your father who related it to the Messenger Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam.” He said, “I heard my father say, ‘The Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, said, ‘There will be a Fitnah (calamity and division) in which those who sit idle are better than those who walk, and those who walk are better than those who rush. Therefore, whoever has no choice but to kill or be killed, let him be killed and let him not be the killer.’” They asked him, “What do you say regarding Abu Bakr and Umar?” Abdullah said good words of praise regarding them. They said, “What do you say with
regards to At- Ta’hkim (when Ali and Mu’awiyah reverted to some of the companions to judge between them in their dispute, according to the Quran and Sunnah)?”

He said, “I say that Ali has better knowledge in the Book of Allah, is more careful with the religion, and has more wisdom than you!” They said, “You do not follow the Truth and Guidance. Rather, you follow men according to their fame.” They then said to him, “This Quran (which you carry) around your neck commands us to kill you.” He said, “Whoever the Quran preserves his life, you preserve his life in turn.

And whoever the Quran sheds his blood, give him death in turn.” Then, they brought Abdullah bin Khabbab closer to the river, and one of them, Musmi’ bin Qhadali, slit his throat. Then, they entered his house and killed his children and also his wife, who was pregnant, and slit open her stomach.

When Ali bin Talib heard what Al-Khawarij did to Abdullah bin Khabbab and his family, he led an expedition of four thousand soldiers to arrest those who committed this atrocity. When he reached their area, he asked them to deliver those who killed Abdullah. They said to Ali’s emissary, “We all killed him. And, furthermore, if we catch you (meaning

Ali) we will kill you too.” Then, Ali prepared to fight them.

But before the battle commenced, he asked them, “What do you dislike as regards my matter?” They said, “We hate that you, when we fought with you on the Day (incident) of Al-Jamal, allowed for us their (the side of ‘Aaishah, Tal’hah, and Az-Zubair) possessions after we defeated them but did not allow us to seize their women and children as slaves. Why did you allow us to shed their blood and seize their possessions but not their women and children?” Ali said, “I only allowed you to seize their possession in return for their looting the Muslim treasury in the city of Basrah before I came to meet them (to convince them to end their rebellion). As for their women and children, they did not fight against us and they, therefore, still enjoyed the rights of Muslims who live in the Islamic state. Also, if I had allowed their women for you, who among you would have liked to take ‘Aaishah (the Prophet’s wife) as his share?” They became ashamed
and silent.

Thereafter, Ali refuted all their arguments and, as a consequence, eight thousand of them rejoined his camp. However, four thousand of them insisted on fighting, led by Abdullah bin Wahb Ar-Rasibi and Thu Al-Khuwaysirah (also known as Thu Ath-Thadiyyah), whose name was Hurqus bin Zaid.

Soon afterwards, the battle between Ali and Al-Khawarij commenced, and Ali’s army defeated and killed them all except nine people.

After the battle ended, Ali ordered his soldiers to search for Thu Ath- Thadiyyah, who was then found among the dead. Ali then said, “Allah and His Messenger have said the truth,” because before he passed away, the Prophet Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam had told Ali that he should search for Thu Ath-Thadiyyah among the dead when he meets these rebels.

This sect of Al-Khawarij, also known as Al-Mu’hakkimah, considers Uthman, Ali, ‘Aaishah, Tal’hah, and Az-Zubair as Kuffar. They also oblige the removal or assassination of the Muslim ruler who does not agree with their way of understanding the religion.

Furthermore, they accept the Muslim Ummah being leaderless, allow shedding the blood of the women and children of their adversaries, consider those who fall into major sins as Kuffar, and prohibit marrying the women of those who do not follow them, because they consider them also as Kuffar.

Also, among the sub-sects of Al-Khawarij is Al-Bayhasiyyah. They are the followers of Abu Bayhas, Al- Haytham bin Jabir. They claim that knowledge is only knowing Allah and what the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, was sent with. They consider whoever falls into an action not knowing if it permissible or forbidden as Kafir, since he lacks the “knowledge”.

Al-Azariqhah is another Khawarij sub-sect. They are the followers of Nafi’ bin Al-Azraqh who was known as Abu Rashid. When he first appeared, he rebelled against Abdullah bin Az-Zubayr -- a companion of the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam. Many people from Oman and Al-Yamamah also joined Nafi’. They later moved to Persia and took over the area of Al- Ahwaz after they killed Abdullah bin Az-Zubayr’s deputy in that area. They soon controlled Al-Ahwaz and adjacent areas in Persia.

As is the case with other deviant sects, Al-Azariqhah consider their adversaries as Kuffar. They consider those who join their ranks as believers and all others who do not as Kuffar. Yet, they believe that whoever joins their ranks must first be tested to prove his allegiance by ordering him to kill a Muslim captive. Otherwise, he would be killed himself. Also, Al- Azariqhah permit killing the women and children of their adversaries and consider those adversaries to be bound to dwell in Hell for eternity along with their women and children. They also consider the areas that do not join them to be areas of Kufr. Furthermore, they abandon stoning the adulterer, compel women to pray and fast while in their menses, consider Muslims who commit major sins as Kuffar, and allow shedding the blood of Muslims who do not join their ranks. Yet, they prohibit shedding the blood of Jews and Christians who live under Muslim control!

This is just as the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhi Wasallam, described them that, “They kill Muslims and spare idol-worshippers.” Also, Al-Azariqhah would cut the hand and arm of the thief, while Islam commands cutting the thief’s hand only from the wrist. They also claim that the Ayah,

And of mankind there is he whose speech may please you (O Mohammad) in this worldly life.[2:204], describes Ali bin Abi Talib, and that the Ayah,

And of mankind is he who would sell himself, seeking the Pleasure of Allah. [2:207], describes Ibn Muljim, the cursed criminal who killed Ali, may Allah be pleased with him.

Najdah bin Amir was the leader of yet another Khawarij subsect called “An-Najdaat”, which established its stronghold in Al-Yamamah. They believe that it is an act of Kufr to consider as Kuffar those followers who could not physically join their forces. They also believe that those who agree with their beliefs will not enter Hell, and if they are punished in Hell, it will be because of their other sins and not because they joined their sect. They also give their loyalty to their followers who fall into major sins but consider insisting on committing minor sins as Kufr. Furthermore, they do not consider those who persist on committing major sins as Kuffar. In addition, they allow shedding the blood of their neighbors as well as their adversaries.

Another sub-sect of Al- Khawarij is As-Safriyyah, followers of Ziyad bin Al-Asfar. This group does not consider as Kuffar those who believe in their way but do not join their ranks. Also, they do not consider the children of their adversaries as Kuffar or that they will abide in Hell forever. They differ, however, on whether those who commit major sins are Kuffar or not. Some of them consider such sinners as Kuffar. Others, on the other hand, disagree, except in the case of those caught committing major sins and are thus punished for these sins by the rulers.Some of them claim that major sins that have prescribed punishment will not cause whoever commits them to become a Kafir, while actions that do not have a prescribed punishments, such as abandoning the obligatory prayer or Az-Zakat, will cause one to become a Kafir. They also allow women to assume leadership positions.

Another Khawarij sub-sect, “Al-Ajaridah”, are followers of Al- Karim bin Ajrad. This group disowns their own children before they reach the age of puberty. After the child becomes an adult, they oblige calling him unto Islam and teaching him matters of the religion. They do not allow shedding the blood of Ahlu As- Sunnah except if they meet them in battle. They also consider those who commit major sins as Kuffar.

Ath-Tha’alibah is yet another Khawarij sub-sect. This group was started by Tha’labah bin Mashkan, who used to be a follower of the Ajaridah before he started his own sect. This group later divided into six sects, the first being the followers of Tha’labah himself who persisted on his path. As for those who formed their own sects after they were followers of Ath-Tha’alibah, they include Al- Ma’badiyyah, followers of Ma’bad bin Abdurra’hman, who declare other Tha’alibah as Kuffar and who used to take Az-Zakat due on the possessions of their rich slaves. They also include Al-Akhnasiyyah, followers of Al- Akhnas bin Qays, who differed with Ath-Tha’alibah when they hesitated to call those who might appear to be disbelievers, yet conceal their Islam, as Kuffar. These sects also include followers of Rashid At-Tawsi, who were called Ar-Rashidiyyah. This sect disowned all those who disagree with them. There is also Al-Mukarramiyyah, followers of
Abu Mukarram Al-’Ijli. This group considers those who fall into major sins as Kuffar because they are ignorant about Allah.Again, this group also considers those who disagree with them as Kuffar, and their adversaries from among Ath- Tha’alibah considered them Kuffar in turn. The sixth Tha’alibah sub-sect was called Ash-Shaybaniyyah, followers of Shayban bin Salam. This is the sect which Abu Muslim Al-Khurasani, the leader of the Abbasid armies, fought and defeated, killing Shayban and capturing the rest of his followers. This was the end of Ath- Tha’alibah who denied Allah’s Attributes and also resembled Allah with the creation.

Another major sub-sect of Al-Khawarij is the one still known as “Al- Ibadhiyyah”, who are the followers of Abdullah bin Ibadh Al-Murri. He permitted Al-Ibadhiyyah to marry women from Ahlu As-Sunnah and accepted the testimony of Ahlu As- Sunnah even against the Ibadhiyyah Themselves because they consider that the general name of Islam still bonds them together.

This group only allowed the shedding the blood of Ahlu As-Sunnah in battle. They fell into confusion when they considered their adversaries as Kuffar (disbelievers), but not Mushrikeen (polytheist).

Al-Ibadhiyyah also divided into six sects.

The first is Al-Yazidiyyah, followers of Yazid bin Anas who claimed that another Prophet will be sent for non-Arabs and that his law will replace Prophet Mohammad’s Law. They also claimed that Arabs who attest that there is no god except Allah and that Mohammad is His Messenger are believers even if they do not actually embrace and abide by Islamic laws. Therefore, according to this false claim, Arab Jews and Christians are considered believers if they only declare the Shahadatayn (the Testimony) with their tongues.

The second sub-sect of Al- Ibadhyyah is known as Al-Hafsiyyah, followers of Al-Hafs bin Abi Al- Miqdam. They claim that belief is merely knowing Allah and that this suffices if one disbelieves in the Prophets, the angels, Paradise, Hell, Resurrection, and Reckoning. They consider those who know Allah to be saved from Shirk even if they commit all types of major sins.

The third Ibadhi sub-sect is known as Al-’Harithiyyah, followers of Al-’Harith bin Yazid. This sect denies Predestination and Allah’s Will and condones acts of worship that are not meant for the sake of Allah. The last three Ibadhi sub-sects are Al- Ibrahimiyyah, Al-Maymoniyyah, and Al-Waqifiyyah.

We have shown how this deviant sect, Al-Khawarij, divided among themselves, and we also clarified the major beliefs of different Khawarij sub-sects.

From this short summary of their beliefs and practices, we now know the imminent danger of their beliefs, many of which still flourish among ignorant Muslims in the present time.

The beliefs of Al-Khawarij have always been and still pose grave danger to Islam and Muslims.

We ask Allah for protection and safety from the misguided beliefs of Al-Khawarij and their likes, for He is the All-Hearer and the only One Who fulfills the Du’aa’.

THE GREAT DEBATE of Ibn Abbas’s

The story of Ibn Abbas’s (May Allah be pleased with him and his Father) debate against them is in the Mustadrik of Hakam (2/150-152) in an authentic chain and upon the conditions of acceptance of Imam Muslim.

In it is the statement of Ibn Abbas:


أتيتُكم من عند صحابة النَّبيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم من المهاجرين والأنصار، لأبلِّغكم ما يقولون،المخبرون بما يقولون، فعليهم نزل القرآن، وهم أعلمُ بالوحي منكم، وفيهم أنزل، وليس فيكم منهم أحد


“I come to you from the Companions of the Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) from amongst the Muhajireen and Ansaar to inform you of what they say. They were present when the Qur’an was revealed, and they are more knowledgeable about the revelation than you are and were present at its descending, and not a single one of you is from them. So some of them said: لا تخاصموا قريشاً Do not dispute with a person from the Quraish because

Allah says: بَلْ هُمْ قَوْمٌ خَصِمُونَ But they are a quarrelsome people Ibn Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him and his Father) said:



وأتيتُ قوماً لم أرَ قوماً قطُّ أشدَّ اجتهاداً منهم، مسهمة وجوههم من السَّهر، كأنَّ أيديهم وركبهم تثنى عليهم، فمضى من حضر



“I never saw a people striving harder in doing deeds. Their faces were marked with lines from abstaining from sleep. It was as if their hands and knees praised them.

So those who were present proceeded, and some of them said,


لنكلِّمنَّه ولننظرنَّ ما يقول



“By Allah we will speak to him and debate what he says”I asked:


أخبروني ماذا نقمتم على ابن عمِّ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وصهره والمهاجرين والأنصار؟


“Why do you have resentment against the cousin of the Messenger of Allah ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) his in-laws, the Muhajireen and Ansaar? They said:” (because of) ثلاثاً Three things” I asked: ما هنَّ؟ “What are they?”

They said: أمَّا إحداهنَّ فإنَّه حكم الرِّجالَ في أمر الله، “As for the first one it is that he made men arbitrators in the matters of Allah. And Allah said:


إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلاَّ لِلّهِ Verily! The decision rests only with Allah [Yusuf: 67]


I said: هذه واحدة “ This is one” And they said:


ولَم يسْب ولَم يغنَم، فلئن كان الذي قاتل كفَّاراً لقد حلَّ سبيُهم وغنيمتهم،

ولئن كانوا مؤمنين ما حلَّ قتالُهم



“As for the other, it is that he fought and did not take captives or booty of war. If the ones being fought are disbelievers, then indeed it is permissible to take them captive and take the booty of war, and if they were believers it would not be permissible to fight them.


I said: هذه ثنتان، فما الثالثة؟ “ That’s two, so what is the third one?”



They said: إنَّه مَحا نفسَه من أمير المؤمنين، فهو أمير الكافرين “He wiped out the title of ‘Amir al-Mu’mineen’ for himself, so he is the Amir of the disbelievers.”



I said: أعندكم سوى هذا؟ “Do you have anything others than these? They said: حسبنا هذا “ This suffices us” So I said to them:



أرأيتم إن قرأت عليكم من كتاب الله ومن سنَّة نبيِّه صلى الله عليه وسلم

ما يُردُّ به قولُكم أتَرضَون؟



“If I read of the Qur’an and Sunnah that which refutes these claims, will you be pleased? They said: نعم! “Yes” So I said:


أمَّا قولكم: حكَّم الرِّجال في أمر الله، فأنا أقرأ عليكم ما قد رُدَّ حكمُه إلى الرِّجال في ثمن ربع درهم، في أرنب ونحوها من الصيد


As for your statement: ‘A man has arbitrated in the matter of Allah’, I will read to you what has given the power of arbitration to men concerning a killed rabbit and the likes of that which is hunted which price is worth a quarter of a dirham. Allah says:


:(( يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَقْتُلُواْ الصَّيْدَ وَأَنتُمْ حُرُمٌ ))

إلى قوله: (( يَحْكُمُ بِهِ ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ ))،


O you who believe! Kill not game while you are in a state of Ihram (for Hajj or 'Umrah), and whosoever of you kills it intentionally, the penalty is an offering, brought to the Ka'bah, of an eatable animal (i.e. sheep, goat, cow, etc.) equivalent to the one he killed, as adjudged by two just men among you; [Maidah: 95]


فنشدتكم الله: أحُكم الرِّجال في أرنب ونحوها من الصيد أفضل أم حكمهم في دمائهم وصلاح ذات بينهم؟!

وأن تعلموا أنَّ الله لو شاء لَحَكم ولَم يُصيِّر ذلك إلى الرِّجال، وفي المرأة وزوجها




I ask you by Allah, is the arbitration of men concerning a rabbit and its like of hunted animals better than their arbitration regarding bloodshed and reconciliation between themselves? And you are aware that if Allah wished he would have decided the matters himself and not left it to men. And concerning a woman and her husband Allah says:


وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ شِقَاقَ بَيْنِهِمَا فَابْعَثُواْ حَكَماً مِّنْ أَهْلِهِ وَحَكَماً مِّنْ أَهْلِهَا إِن يُرِيدَا إِصْلاَحاً يُوَفِّقِ اللّهُ بَيْنَهُمَا



"If you fear separation between them, appoint an arbitrator from his family and from her family; if they both wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation" [Nis’aa: 35]


فجعل الله حكم الرِّجال سنة مأمونة، أخَرَجتُ من هذه؟



So Allah has made the judgement of men a reliable Sunnah. Have I convinced you on this?” They replied: : نعم! “Yes” (I said to them):


قاتَل ولم يسْب ولم يغنم، أَتَسبُون أمَّكم عائشة، ثمَّ تستحلُّون منها ما يُستحلُّ من غيرها؟!

فلئن فعلتم لقد كفرتُم، وهي أمُّكم، ولئن قلتُم: ليست أمَّنا لقد كفرتُم



Regarding your saying ‘You fought them, but did not seize their booty nor capture them,’ Can you capture your Mother 'Aisha then make permissible concerning her what is permissibility concerning other female slaves.

If you say that she can be captured and treated like any of the other female slaves, you have surely committed disbelief, because she is your mother. If you say that ‘she is not our mother’ than you have also committed disbelief, for Allah says:


النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَى بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنفُسِهِمْ وَأَزْوَاجُهُ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ



The Prophet is closer to the believers than their ownselves, and his wives are their (believers') mothers (as regards respect and marriage). [Ahzab: 6]


فأنتم تدورون بين ضلالَتين، أيّهما صرتُم إليها صرتُم إلى ضلالة، فنظر بعضُهم إلى بعض،


You are thus hovering between two deviations. Whichever one you go towards, you go towards misguidance.”


So some of them began to look at each other.I asked: أخرجتُ من هذه؟ “Have I convinced you?” They replied: نعم! “ Yes” (I said to them):


مَحا اسمَه من أمير المؤمنين، فأنا آتيكم بمَن ترضَون وأريكم، قد سمعتُم أنَّ النَّبيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يوم الحُديبية كاتَبَ سُهيل بن عمرو وأبا سفيان بن حرب،

فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لأمير المؤمنين

اكتب يا علي: هذا ما اصطلح عليه محمد رسول الله، فقال المشركون:

لا والله! لو نعلم أنَّك رسول الله ما قاتلناك،

فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : اللَّهم إنَّك تعلمُ أنِّي رسول الله، اكتب يا علي:

هذا ما اصطلح عليه محمد بن عبد الله، فوالله لرسول الله خيرٌ من علي،

وما أخرجه من النبوة حين محا نفسَه




And as for your statement that he wiped out the title of ‘Amir al- Mu’mineen’ for himself, I will show and bring you proof by one whom you are pleased with. I heard on the Day of Hudaybiyyah, when the treaty was being drafted by Suhail bin Amr and Abu Sufyan bin Harb, the Messenger of Allah ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) say to the Amir ul Mu’mineen: "Write O’ 'Ali: ‘This is what has been agreed upon by Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah’." The Mushrikeen objected to this saying: "No, By Allah, if we believed that you were the Messenger of Allah, we would not have fought you." Upon this, the Messenger of Allah ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) said: O’ Allah you know that I am the Messenger of Allah. Write O’ Ali ‘This is what has been agreed upon by Muhammad bin Abdullah.’ …For I swear by Allah that the Messenger of Allah ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) is better than Ali, and erasing his title did not remove his
Prophethood.

Abdullah Bin Abbas (May Allah be Pleased with him and his Father) said:


: فرجع من القوم ألفان وقُتل سائرُهم على ضلالة


So (after this), two-thousand of them (the Khawaarij) returned to the truth and the rest of them were killed upon falsehood.

THERE IS ENOUGH BENEFIT FOR ANYONE WHO HAS INTELLECT.

Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said,


فإن عامة ضلال أهل البدع كان بهذا السبب، فإنهم صاروا يحملون كلام الله ورسوله على ما يدعون أنه دال عليه، وليس الأمر كذلك



“Majority of innovations have their roots in misunderstanding of Islaamic texts, for those who established innovations had wrongful perception of the Word of Allaah which they used to back up their innovations.”

The scholars say,


من اتباع المتشابهات الأخذ بالمطلقات قبل النظر في مقيِّداتها، أو في العمومات من غير تأمل في مخصِّصاتها، وكذلك العكس بأن يكون النص مقيدًا فيُطلق، أو خاصًا فيُعمّ بالرأي من غير دليل سواه، فإن هذا المسلك رميٌ في عماية واتباع للهوى بالدليل، وحينئذ فالخلل في هذه المسالك الاجتهادية يوقع في أخطاء فاحشة عقائدية وفرعية


“It is part of following the ambiguous evidences to take to absolute evidences before looking at its restricted aspects or to take to general rules and disregard its particular aspects like making particularized or restricted evidence a general or unrestricted one or vice versa without any tangible evidences. This may cause grave mistakes.

For instance, the Khawaarij who revolted against ‘Alee said, “There is no judge save Allaah”, misinterpreting the Word of Allaah, “The judgement is but Allaah’s.” They thereby gave this verse a wrong meaning.

The Khawaarij sect was later influenced by scholastic theology and its principles became very close to those of the Jahmite and Mu’tazilite sects.

They center upon the following matters:

(1) Imputing kufr upon ‘Ali, ‘Uthmaan and other sahaabah ﻦﻴﻌﻤﺟأ ﻢﻬﻨﻋ ﷲا ﻲﺿر .

(2) The right to rebel and fight the Muslim rulers who may err or sin.

(3) Justifying the rebellion and fight against disobedient Muslims (rulers and/or ruled) and that it is permissible for them to secede from the general body of the Muslims.

(4) They believe that the Qur’aan is created. However, the Qur’aan is the literal Word of Allaah Who uttered it in letter and sound and which He Spoke to Jibreel عليه وسلم , directly without a mediator, and who then brought it down to the Prophet Muhammad ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ). The Qur’aan is neither the word of Jib reel nor the word of Prophet Muhammad ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ).

(5) They distort the meanings of Allaah’s Attributes by resorting to figurative interpretation.

(6) Like the twelver Shee’ites and other deviant sects, they deny that the believers will see Allaah on the Day of Resurrection. This contradicts what is asserted in the Qur’aan and authentic sunnah .

(7) Imputing kufr on the Muslims who commit major sins.

(8) The majority of the Khawaarij deny the actual punishment in the grave that Allaah inflicts upon those who deserve it.

(9) They speak ill about the scholars الطعنُ في العلماء See the incident with Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم and Ibn Abbaas, how they treated them, this is the common amongst the mis-guided youths of today, ignorant, foolish in understanding.

The aforementioned are some of the major characteristics of the Khawaarij.

I intended to give the reader some background about this very dangerous sect and which has influenced many Muslim groups and parties in our times leading to bloodshed in many parts of the Muslim World. The bloody confrontations are hard to stop in some places and that has distorted the view of Islam in many parts of the world. The truth, however, is emerging and will inshaa’ Allaah completely emerge on the hands of the true followers of Islam who are working hard to correct this problem with the good word without compromising the ‘aqeedah nor the manhaj . We should be able to present the truth without imitating the kufaar and their ways. In this respect, the words of Imaam Maalik ) ﷲا ﻪﻤﺣر ( are remembered: “Nothing will benefit this ummah to come except that which benefited its early generations .” Related by Imaam Ibn ‘Abdil-Barr in At-Tamheed (23:1).

This refers to the correct creed, methodology and righteous deeds. Another point of benefit is that the Muslim should be aware that the principles of many of these sects are still alive and propagated by certain individuals and/or groups, and accordingly the believer must be cautious

And what shows the danger of extremism and deviation from the truth and staying away from what Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah is upon, is the statement of the Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) from the Hadith of Jabir (May Allah be pleased with him):


إنَّ أخوفَ ما أخاف عليكم رجل قرأ القرآن،

حتى إذا رُئيت بهجته عليه وكان ردءاً للإسلام،

انسلخ منه ونبذه وراء ظهره، وسعى على جاره بالسيف ورماه بالشرك،

قلت: يا نبيَّ الله! أيُّهما أولى بالشرك: الرامي أو المرمي؟ قال: بل الرامي




Indeed what I fear most for you is that a man reads the Qur’an until magnificence is seen upon him and he is a support for Islam and it is withdrawn from him and he throws it behind his back and strives against his neighbor with the sword and he accusing him of shirk. I said O’ Prophet of Allah, which one is more worthy of (the accusation of) shirk, the accuser or the accused? He said: The accuser . [Collected by Imam Al-Bukhari in his Taarikh and Abu Ya’ala and Ibn Hibban and Al-Bazaar. See Sahih Al-Albani 3201]

The Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) said:


ومَن خرج على أمَّتي يضرب برَّها وفاجرَها، ولا يتحاش من مؤمنها،

ولا يفي لذي عهد عهدَه،فليس منِّي ولستُ منه


“Whoever rebels against my Ummah and fights the righteous and unrighteous of them, does not avoid its believers and does not fulfill his obligation to whom he has a contract, then they are not from me and I am not from them . [Muslim 1848]

Ibn Al-Qayyim said,


نهيُ النبيِّ عن قتال الأمراء والخروج على الأئمة وإن ظلموا أو جاروا ما أقاموا الصلاة، سدًّا لذريعة الفسادِ العظيم والشرِّ الكثير بقتالهم كما هو الواقع، فإنّه حصل بسبب قتالهم والخروج عليهم أضعافُ أضعافِ ما هم عليه، والأمّة في بقايا تلك الشرور إلى الآن



"The Prophet forbidden taking arms against the rulers and revolting against them even if they were unjust as long as long as they established prayers. He said this in order to prevent great corruption and evil that could emanate from taking arms against them.

The reality has shown that taking arms and revolting against them had brought harm and evil that that was much greater than their corruption."

While speaking about undesirability of forbidding vices if that could lead to a greater vice he said,


ومن تأمّل ما جرى على الإسلام في الفِتن الكبار والصِّغار رآها مِن إضاعةِ هذا الأصلِ وهو إنكار المنكر إذا كان يترتّب عليه ما هو أنكرُ منه، ومِن عدم الصبر على المنكَر،

فيُطلَب إزالتُه، فيتولّدُ منه ما هو أكبر منه




"Like revolting against kings and rulers, for this is the foundation of all evils and calamities. If one reflects over what happened to Islaam during minor and major crises one will realize that it caused by the negligence of this very principle."

‘Umar said,


إنا لا ننتصر على عدوّنا بعددٍ ولا عدة، وإنما ننتصر بطاعتنا لله ومعصيتهم له، فإن عصينا الله فقد استوينا وإياهم في المعصية، وكان لهم الفضل علينا


“We do not defeat our enemy through our great numbers and or sophisticated ammunitions, we defeat them through our obedience to Allaah and our enemies’ disobedience to Him. But when we disobey Allaah, we become like them in sins and they will then defeat us.”

REMOVING DOUBTS

Question: As you know, there are a number of ahaadeeth concerning how Muslims are to deal with the Muslim rulers, including the sinful and oppressive rulers.How would you respond to the one who claims that these ahaadeeth are concerning the khaleefah of the Muslims, not the various leaders, kings, or prime ministers of today?

The Answer: This Shubuha (misconception) that the Ahaadeeth of obedience to the Rulers are restricted to the general Khaleefah (greater Imaam) is, al-hamdulillah , already answered by the scholars of Islaam. Here are some of their statements:

1- Sh. Al-Islam Ibn Taymeyah ( rahimahullaah) said: "The sunnah is that the Muslims have one Imaam and the rest are his deputies. Suppose, however, the Ummah abandoned this due to a sin from some part of it and incapacity from the rest or for a reason other than that and which led to having number of Imaams, then it is binding upon each Imaam to establish the Hudood (prescribed punishments) and fulfill the rights (of people)." [Majmoo' al- Fataawaa, 35/175-176].

2- Imaam Ash-Shawkaani ( rahimahullaah) said: "In Principle, all Muslims should have one Imaam. However, after the spread of Islam and the expansion of its territories and their remoteness, it is known that in each region there became a ruler or Imaam and so with the rest of the regions, none of them having authority to command and forbid in the other regions... So the presence of various (multiple) Imaams and Rulers is of no harm, and it is binding to obey each one of them after giving him the bay'ah (pledge of allegiance) in the region in which his commands and prohibitions are executed therein. And similarly in the case of the one in charge of another region. And it is not obligatory upon the people of the other regions to obey him, nor to be under his governorship due to the remoteness of the regions..."

Then he said: "You should know this, since it is fitting to the Sharee'ah Foundations, and in full agreement to what is indicated by the evidences. And turn down what is being said in opposition to this, since the difference between the condition of the early Islamic wilaayah (administrative governship) and its state nowadays is clearer than the sun during the day." [Imaam Ash-Shawkaani in As- Sayelul Jarraar, 4/512].

3- Sh. Imaam Muhammad bin 'Abdil Wahaab ( rahimahullaah) said:

"The Imaams from each Madh-hab are unanimous that whoever overtakes a country or countries (seizes power) is entitled to assume the same rulership as the Imaam in ALL affairs. Were it not so, the affairs of this worldly life would not be upright. And for a long time, since before the time of Imaam Ahmad ( rahimahullaah) and until our time, people were not in agreement upon one Imaam, and they have no account of a scholar stating that the validity of (the applicability) of any of the rulings (of sharee'ah) is conditional upon the presence of the Greater Imaam ." [In Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah, 7/239].

4- Al-'Allaamah (esteemed scholar) As-San'aani ( rahimahullaah) said in his explanation of the hadeeth of Abu Hurairah ( radiya Allaahu 'anhu), raised to the Prophet ( _ : salllaallaahu 'aleihi was-sallam):

"One who defected from obedience (to the Amir) and separated from the main body of the Muslims - if he died in that state - would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya (i. e. would not die as a Muslim). [Saheeh Muslim, Book 20, # 4555, English Translation] that the "obedience" is the obedience to the Khaleefah upon whom there isagreement, and it seems that what is intended is the khaleefah on any region from the regions, since people were not on agreement on a single khaleefah over the entire Islamic lands since the Abbasid Rule. Rather each region became independent under a ruler running its affairs. And if we carry the hadeeth to apply only to one khaleefah upon whom the Muslims are unanimous then its (the hadeeth) benefit would be diminished.

And that the saying (in the hadeeth) "and separated from the main body of the Muslims," means: separated from the Jamaa'ah who agreed upon an Imaam under whom their body and affairs are organized, their world is united, and their protection from their enemy is achieved."

So, it becomes clear that negating the validity of governership on separate Muslim states leads to evil in the sense that its sets the stage for rebellion against the rulers, and this is forbidden in Islaam even if the ruler is an oppressor as this constitutes the creed of ahl-us-Sunnah .

And Allaah Knows Best.

May Allaah, the Most High, guide me, you, and all Muslims to abide by the way of the Salaf and make us from those who relate the unclear matters to the clear so that they reach that which is clear and pleasing to Allaah.

Shaykh `Alee al-Faqeehee on The Ways Used By the Khawaarij To Incite the Youth

Shaykh `Alee bin Naasir al-Faqeehee explained that what is said regarding the excellence of these miracles (karaamaat), then that is amongst the ways of stirring up the youth and he also said:

Verily, the ideology of the Khawaarij which is exemplified in declaring the Islamic societies to be disbelieving (societies) has not ceased to spread, and it has its callers and those who organise for it to be spread.

It is spread using these means by way of the Internet and the callers (to this ideology) spread it amongst the youth (in order) to employ their religious zeal. This is done by spreading what they claim to be miracles of the mujaahideen, and this is amongst the ways of stirring up the youth and using their zeal.

It is for this reason that they approach them from the avenue of their religion, and there has come in a hadeeth of Abu Bakr for a hadeeth of `Alee bin Abee Taalib (radiyAllaahu `anhu) in description of the Khawaarij - and Ibn Hajr has related it in the explanation of the hadeeth - "Then Satan will come to them from the avenue of their religion". And this is happening today, because what is spread on the World Wide Web is from unknown (unidentified) people, not known for knowledge and nor for religion.

And all of that (is done) in order to stir up the youth from the angle of their religion. The likes of this is not befitting for an intelligent person in that he turns to an unknown ignoramus (on the Internet), and such a one could be a plant (placed) by certain orientations who have goals that are enmitous to Islaam and which are not openly announced to the people.

And when we notify the youth of the likes of this (affair), we do not (at the same time) reject the miracles of the Awliyaa (pious friends of Allaah), rather these affairs are established and they are from the creed of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa`ah.

And we do not also reject what Islaam and the Muslims are subjected to by its enemies. These affairs are well-known, and it is obligatory upon every Muslim to do what he is able towards this. However, Jihaad in the path of Allaah has conditions and rulings, and it is the Scholars and the Jurists of the religion who explain all of that .

About the Book:

This is a complete translation of the small booklet “Al-Masaa’il-ul-Muntaqaat min Sifaat al-Khawaarij-ul-Ghulaat” [Selected Examples from the Characteristics of the Extremist Khawaarij] compiled and prepared by a student of knowledge, ‘Aadil bin ‘Alee Al-Furaydaan, and reviewed and examined by Shaikh Saalih bin Fawzaan Al-Fawzaan and Shaikh Muhammad bin ‘Abdir-Rahmaan Al-Khumayyis.


In this treatise, the author briefly touches upon the definition, history, and characteristics of the Khawaarij, one of the first and most dangerous sects in Islamic history whose effects and ideologies continue to exist up to today and will remain until the Final Hour. The majority of the treatise is dedicated to outlining the major and distinguishing attributes of the Khawaarij, which the author counts at 58.


It is important to study and be aware of these attributes so that one may avoid characterizing himself with them and thus fall into the ranks of the Khawaarij. This is from the perspective of learning evil in order to avoid it. And it is also beneficial since today, the ways and ideologies of the Khawaarij are prevalent, as can be seen in terrorist acts, suicide missions, assassinations and political strife. So by understanding the characteristics of the Khawaarij, the reader will be able to identify the perpetrators of such crimes, acknowledge their remoteness from Islaam and the fact that they are indeed from the extremist Khawaarij.

"UNQUOTE"