The Lord says in Holy Quran: O ye who believe! When the call is heard for the prayer of the day of congregation, haste unto remembrance of Allah and leave your trading. That is better for you if ye did but know. And when the prayer is ended, then disperse in the land and seek of Allah's bounty, and remember Allah much, that ye may be successful. (Surah Al Jummah - Chapter 62 The Friday Verse 9 and 10) - Friday 21 September 2012 Friday which was designated by the government to demonstrate love of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) and condemn the anti-Islam video produced in the US by some extremists was hijacked by our home-grown extremists who turned it into a day of unbridled violence, killings, arson and robbery. At least 23 people were killed and over 200 injured and violence in some places continued till late in the night. The internal security system virtually collapsed, giving way to tens of thousands of violent protesters to rule the streets in several cities, from Peshawar and Islamabad to Lahore and Karachi, burn down shops, cinema houses and police vehicles, and ransack whatever else that came in the way. For most part of the day it was complete anarchy in several cities, including the federal capital, leaving a trail of death and destruction in large parts of the country. Highly charged, and in places armed and well-equipped, the protesters tore down barricades, removed or overturned huge containers that had been put up by the authorities to block main thoroughfares, and to protect government buildings and diplomatic compounds, and set ablaze government and private property. Within a matter of a few hours it became quite evident that the ill-equipped and poorly trained, and perhaps ill-motivated, police force was not in a position to push back the violent protesters. The extensive use of tear gas and rubber bullets proved futile as in many cases the riot police had to take the beating with protesters throwing back the tear gas canisters and stones at them. As violence intensified in places like Peshawar and Karachi, riot police first fired live ammunition in the air, and then at places directly into the crowd. In Peshawar and Karachi, and some other places, several bystanders and journalists got trapped as protesters and police clashed, using bricks, stones, tear gas and even live ammunition. There were deaths and injuries on both sides, with a number of people, including member of a television crew, becoming victim of this madness.
Saudi Arabia is also an Islamic country and more Islamic than Innovative and Polytheist Islamic Country like Pakistan. Suadi Grand Mufti says this,
RIYADH: The Kingdom’s Grand Mufti, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Asheikh, yesterday denounced attacks on diplomats and embassies as un-Islamic after deadly protests against a US-made anti-Islam film swept the Middle East. At the same time, he called on the international community to take steps to criminalize any act of abusing great prophets and messengers such as Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them). In a statement issued yesterday, Al-Asheikh also appealed to world Muslims to react to any attempt to denigrate Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) by strictly adhering to the values advocated by the Prophet (pbuh) instead of unleashing violence against innocent people, the SPA reported. “Condemnation of the attempts to abuse the Prophet (pbuh) should be within the Law of Allah and Sunnah of the Prophet. The Muslims should not shed the blood of innocent people, or vandalize properties or of public institutions,” the Grand Mufti said. The mufti said the hatred of Islam through such movies would not harm the great personality of the Prophet (pbuh) or any aspect of Islam but would only backfire on the people who spread venomous ideas. "Such animosity only helps in spreading the glory of the Prophet (pbuh) with greater vigor,” he said. The mufti also warned that the enemies of the Prophet (pbuh) and Muslims achieve their goals when Muslims resort to violence. “Muslim rage is playing into the hands of their enemies when Muslims attack innocent people and set fire to public or private institutions. Such acts, in fact, damage the image of Islam, a situation the enemies of Islam seeks to create. Such acts go against the teachings of the Prophet (pbuh) and are deplorable,” the mufti said, while reminding the faithful that all Muslims are willing to sacrifice their lives and properties for the cause of their dear Prophet (pbuh).
“The goal of those who abuse Islam and Muslims is to divert the energy of Muslims from building their nations and efforts for unity and development,” the mufti warned.
Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal yesterday reiterated the Kingdom’s strong disapproval of the film and also stressed the principles of interfaith dialogue in a telephone talk with the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The prince condemned the attack on the US diplomatic missions. Meanwhile, the Taleban claimed responsibility for an attack on a base that killed two American Marines, saying it was a response to the film. Hundreds of Muslims took to the streets of Sydney, some throwing rocks and bottles in clashes with police. Police stormed into Cairo’s Tahrir Square and rounded up hundreds of people early yesterday after four days of clashes and demands from protesters for the US ambassador’s expulsion. Libyan authorities said they had identified 50 people who were involved in the attack in which Ambassador Christopher Stevens died. REFERENCE: Grand Mufti denounces violence against embassies ARAB NEWS Sunday 16 September 2012 http://www.arabnews.com/saudi-arabia/grand-mufti-denounces-violence-against-embassies
Every year, the French celebrate July 14, as their national day in remembrance of the day when the people of Paris revolted against a corrupt and despotic government. It led to a revolution which not only transformed France but impacted the whole world. The French are proud of the revolution and have since remained a paradigm for other nations to change old and corrupt systems. Doubtlessly, it inspired revolutionaries and radicals throughout the world to learn lessons from. In Pakistan, people and politicians both talk about a revolution being the only solution that will eradicate corruption and bring about a change in the country. The French revolution was a product of enlightened ideas generated by French philosophers as reflected in all three phases of the revolution. The first phase (1789 to 1792) was known as the period of constitutional monarchy. During this period, the National Assembly passed radical laws to change the French society politically, socially and culturally including the Declaration of Rights of men and citizens, which guaranteed freedom of expression, worship, protection of private property, and full citizenship rights for the Jews. The major concern of this period being liberty, although women were excluded from these human rights.
Dr. Mubarak Ali Addressing the topic at University of Central Punjab, Lahore May 23rd, 2012
A feminist activist Olympe de Gouges protested and published a booklet on declaration of the rights of women. It created the concept of one nation of which all citizens of France became a part of. Education which was previously controlled by the church became nationalised. The church lost its influence and now came under state control. The moderate first phase came to an end when Jacobin, the most famous and influential political club came into power. Their emphasis was not so much on liberty as on social equality and the purification of the whole society from corrupt and obsolete tradition. To eliminate all traces of the old regime, they adopted the policy of purging. The guillotine was introduced to France and all those who opposed the revolution including the king and queen were executed. It is estimated that nearly 40,000 were guillotined; Robespierre being the last victim.
During this period (1792 to 1794), the Jacobin tried to convert France to becoming a completely secular country by ending the church domination. The French Republican calendar was introduced to represent an era of liberty. The third phase (1794 to 1799) ended the terror of the Jacobin and brought peace and order. This period emphasised Fraternity, the third slogan of the French revolution. In 1799, Napoleon staged a coup d’état, installed himself as First Consul and assumed political power. This changed the character of the revolution from universalism to nationalism. The French revolutionary and Napoleonic wars between 1792 and 1815 ranged France against shifting alliances of other European powers producing a brief French hegemony over most of Europe. In 1815, at Waterloo in Belgium, Napoleon Bonaparte was defeated at the hands of the Duke of Wellington, bringing an end to the Napoleonic era of European history which led to the restoration of monarchy in France. However, the characters of the old regime failed to crush the spirit of revolution. This opened a debate between the conservatives and progressives on political, social and cultural issues. The revolution was welcomed by the intellectuals of Europe who wanted to change their political system. It created two groups; the conservatives and the progressives or liberals.
The main spokesman of the conservative ideas was Edmund Burke. He expressed his hostility in ‘Reflections on the Revolution in France’ (1790), emphasising the dangers of mob rule, fearing that the Revolution’s fervour was destroying the French society and discontinuing a historical process. He believed that society should be changed by evolutionary reform and not through sudden change. The progressives on the other hand argued that revolution was the only solution to change centuries old traditions and institutions. To achieve liberty, equality, and fraternity, people could not wait for long. In Pakistan, only the bloody aspect of the French revolution is discussed to punish the aristocracy. We overlooked that secular rights were granted to all citizens irrespective of their religion caste and ethnicity while feudalism and all privileges of the upper classes were abolished. The revolution granted human rights and assured freedom of worship and expression. By eliminating religious obscurantism, it established tolerance. The legacy of the French revolution is rich, if Pakistan wants to replicate it but all aspects of the Revolution should be understood thoroughly. REFERENCE: Past Present: The inside story by Mubarak Ali http://dawn.com/2012/07/15/past-present-the-inside-story/
"It is also related by Ibn Sa'ad in Tabaqaatul Kubraa A group of Muslims came to al Hasan al Basree (d.110H) seeking a verdict to rebel against al Hajjaaj. So they said, "O Abu Sa'eed! What do you say about fighting this oppressor who has unlawfully spilt blood and unlawfully taken wealth and did this and that?" So al Hasan said, "I hold that he should not be fought. If this is the punishment from Allah (Ta'aala), then you will not be able to remove it with your swords. If this is a trial from Allah (Ta'aala), then be patient until Allah's Judgement comes, and He is the best of Judges." So they left Al Hasan, disagreed with him and rebelled against al Hajjaaj - so al Hajjaaj killed them all. Hajjaaj wasath Thaqafee, and is well known. Adh Dhahabee said in Siyar A'lamin Nubalaa at the end of his biography, "We revile him and do not love him, rather we hate him for Allah (Ta'aala). He had some good deeds, but they are drowned in the ocean of his sins, and his affair is for Allah!" About them al Hasan used to say, "If the people had patience, when they were being tested by their unjust ruler, it will not be long before Allah (Ta'aala) will give them a way out. However, they always rush for their swords, so they are left to their swords. By Allah! Not even for a single day did they bring about any good."It is related by Ibn Sa’d in at-Tabaqaat, and by Ibn Abee Haatim in his Tafseer."
Libya is said to be a Muslim (predominantly Sunni and follow Maliki and Sha'afai Schools of thought) and during all this "Anarchy" following was completely forgotten "(strictly Muslim point of view) - And in the Sunan of An-Nasaa’ee, on the authority of ‘Abdullaah ibn ‘Amr, (radhi-yallaahu 'anhu), the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) said: The cessation of the dunyaa (world) is less significant to Allaah than the killing of a single Muslim man (i.e. person) And one day, Ibn ‘Umar looked to the House, or the Ka'bah, and said: "How great you are, and how great is your sanctity, and the believer is even greater in sanctity to Allaah than you"
First, it is not allowable to torture the living or mutilate the dead, even if they are non-Muslims. In the hadith of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), when he was sending Hamzah Al-Aslami on an expedition, he instructed him saying: "If you find so-and-so, kill him. But never kill him by burning, for none uses fire in torturing except the One Who created it (i.e., Allah)." (Reported by Abu Dawud)
Mutilation of the dead bodies is prohibited: Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) prohibited to mutilate the dead bodies. (Sahih Muslim)
Narrated By Ibn 'Umar : During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children. (Bukhari)
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that a son of Kab ibn Malik (Malik believed that ibn Shihab said it was Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab) said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and children. He said that one of the men fighting had said, 'The wife of ibn Abi Huqayq began screaming and I repeatedly raised my sword against her. Then I would remember the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so I would stop. Had it not been for that, we would have been rid of her.'" (Muwatta Imam Malik)
Narrated By Ibn 'Umar : During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children. (Bukhari)
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that a son of Kab ibn Malik (Malik believed that ibn Shihab said it was Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab) said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and children. He said that one of the men fighting had said, 'The wife of ibn Abi Huqayq began screaming and I repeatedly raised my sword against her. Then I would remember the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so I would stop. Had it not been for that, we would have been rid of her.'" (Muwatta Imam Malik)
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that a son of Kab ibn Malik (Malik believed that ibn Shihab said it was Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab) said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and children. He said that one of the men fighting had said, 'The wife of ibn Abi Huqayq began screaming and I repeatedly raised my sword against her. Then I would remember the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so I would stop. Had it not been for that, we would have been rid of her.'" (Muwatta Imam Malik)
Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Abu Bakr as-Siddiq was sending armies to ash-Sham. He went for a walk with Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan who was the commander of one of the battalions. It is claimed that Yazid said to Abu Bakr, "Will you ride or shall I get down?" Abu Bakr said, "I will not ride and you will not get down. I intend these steps of mine to be in the way of Allah."
"I advise you ten things| Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly." (Muwatta Imam Malik)
In another hadith, Safwan ibn `Assal said: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) sent us on an expedition and said: “Move under the protection of Allah and for the sake of Allah. Fight those who disbelieve in Allah but never mutilate (the dead).” (Reported by Ibn Majah)
Narrated By 'Abdullah : During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah's Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children. (Bukhari)
Then Abu Bakr advised Yazid, "You will find a people who claim to have totally given themselves to Allah. Leave them to what they claim to have given themselves. You will find a people who have shaved the middle of their heads, strike what they have shaved with the sword.
Libya: Before and After Anarchy
I wonder what humanity has stooped down to when I see people jubilating and celebrating the death of a man. Fine you don’t like Qadhafi, fine he was a tyrant in your opinion, and fine, he might have ruled with an iron hand, but he sir, was a human being. It was a 42 year long rule of Qadhafi that not only increased the literacy rate, but the economy and wellbeing of his country. Libya was a peaceful country and its economy one of the strongest in the continent of Africa. It was also one of the only voices of reason that supported the Statehood of Palestine. The so called revolution of the people of Libya took 6 months compared to less than 20 days of Egypt or Tunisia which happened in a matter of days as well. Why? If Qadhafi was really such a despotic murderer, why did half the country support him? Why did it take months of aerial bombardment by the international police called Nato? Because it was not a people’s revolution, it was the western fueled and funded Libyans by the West in an attempt to bring into a power a group that is friendly to their agenda. While whole cities and towns fought and gave their lives for Colonel Muammar Qadhafi, they were subject to international sanctions and a freeze on Libyan assets. It was not a revolution; it was a perfect example of “divide and rule” on the people of Libya – so swiftly executed that it has yet to strike Libyans, “what now?” The Libyans not only took Qadhafi from themselves, they took their own stability and prosperity that was present to date. With inflation that was less than 1 per cent and a GDP growth rate the soared above 10 per cent in 2010, it is undeniable that the reforms and planning of the Libyan economy was better than many countries of the same size and regime. REFERENCE: Celebrating a death BY SIDDIQUE HUMAYUN ON OCTOBER 24TH, 2011 http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/24/celebrating-a-death.html
When the Taliban were about to enter Kabul Ahmad Shah Massoud offered Najibullah twice to flee Kabul. Najibullah refused believing the Taliban would spare his life. General Tokhi, who was with Dr. Najibullah until the day before his torture and murder, wrote that when three people came to both Dr. Najibullah and General Tokhi and asked them to come with them to flee Kabul, they rejected the offer after losing their trust in Ahmad Shah Massoud who knowingly fired rockets at the UN compound where Najibullah and Tokhi had taken refuge. This proved to be a fatal mistake. Najibullah was at the UN compound when the Taliban soldiers came for him on September 27, 1996. He was castrated and his fingers were broken, before the Taliban dragged him to death behind a truck in the streets. His blood-soaked body was hanged from a traffic light. His brother Shahpur Ahmadzai was also with him throughout this whole ordeal at the UN compound, and was shot to death. REFERENCES: "President of hell: Hamid Karzai's battle to govern post-war, post-Taliban Afghanistan". The Times. "Flashback: When the Taliban took Kabul". BBC..
On this date in 1996, the man who once ruled ruled Afghanistan under the aegis of a superpower succumbed to the tender mercies of his country’s fundamentalist insurgency. Mohammad Najibullah was the last president of the Soviet-backed Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. Unfortunately for Najibullah, he was on the job when Moscow decided to throw in the towel on the Soviet-Afghan War. After losing the subsequent civil war, the former President was trapped for a nervous few years in Kabul — blocked from joining his family in flight to India by the offices of former Soviet client and present-day American client Abdul Rashid Dostum. When Kabul finally surrendered to the Taliban in 1996, the hated onetime Communist viceroy — whose stepping-stone to that post was heading the hated Afghan secret police — had a problem. At the instigation of future Taliban second-in-command Mohammad Rabbani, Najibullah and his brother were hauled out of the U.N. compound where they had taken refuge, publicly beaten, tortured and castrated, and strung up on a traffic barricade. There was a new sheriff in town. REFERENCE: 1996: Dr. Mohammad Najibullah September 27th, 2009 http://www.executedtoday.com/2009/09/27/1996-dr-mohammad-najibullah/
For "Alleged Islamic Revolutionaries in Jamat-e-Islami and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf"
Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah on Rebellion Against the Rulers and A Discussion of the Khurooj Made By the Early Salaf Source: Minhaaj us-Sunnah (4/527)
"QUOTE"
All praise is due to Allaah and may the prayers and peace be upon the Messenger. To proceed:
These are some words of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah that are worthy of being written in gold, as they are far reaching, explain the great wisdom contained in the Sharee’ah commands concerning those in authority, and expose what is with the contemporary groups of destruction, from the Khawaarij and other than them, who bring about nothing but mischief and corruption, in the name of rectification.
The Shaykh, Fawzee al-Atharee, in his excellent book, “Irshaad ul-Anaam Ilaa Kaifiyyat Naseehat il-Hukkaam”, quotes the following statement of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, from his Minhaaj us-Sunnah (4/527-):
“For verily Allaah the Exalted sent His Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) for the attainment of the benefits and perfection of them, and for the negation of the harmful things and their reduction. And when one of the khaleefahs took authority, such as Zaid and ‘Abdul-Malik and al-Mansoor and others, then either it was said: It is obligatory to prevent him from this authority and to fight him until someone else is given authority - as is held by those who consider it rightful to use the sword.
And this view is corrupt, for the corruption in this is greater than the benefit. And there is hardly anyone who revolted against a leader with authority except that what arose from his action of evil, was actually greater than whatever good came from it, such as those who rebelled against Yazeed in Madeenah, or like Ibn al-Ash’at1who revolted against ‘Abdul-Malik in ‘Iraaq, or like Ibn al-Mihlab also, who revolted against his son in Khurasaan, and like those who revolted against al-Mansoor in Madeenah and Basrah, and the likes of them.
And their goal is that they are victorious or they are defeated, then their rule (dominion) ceases, and so they do not have any end-result. For Abdullaah bin Alee and Abu Muslim, they are the ones who killed a great number of people, and both of them were killed by Abu Ja’far al-Mansoor. And as for the people of [the occurrence of] al-Harrah (in Madinah) and Ibn al-Ash’at and Ibn al-Mihlab, and others, then they were defeated, and their associates were also defeated. So they never established the deen and nor did they allow the dunyaa (worldly life) to remain (as it was)And Allaah, the Exalted, does not order something on account of which rectification of the deen and the dunyaa is not attained – even if the one who does that is from the Awliyaa of Allaah, the Pious ones (Muttaqeen), and from the People of Paradise.
For they are not more superior than Aa’ishah and Talhah and az-Zubair and others, and alongside (what they did), they did not praise what they fell into of fighting, and the likes of these are of greater rank and position in the sight of Allaah, and of better intention than those besides them…
And al-Hasan al-Basri used to say, “Verily al-Hajjaaj is a punishment of Allaah, so do not repel the punishment of Allaah with your hands, but you must (repel it) with humility and submission”.
And the most superior of the Muslims (from the early Muslims) used to forbid revolting and fighting in the times of tribulation, such as ‘Abdullaah ibn ‘Umar and Sa’eed bin al-Musayyab, and ‘Alee bin al-Hasan and others, all of them used to forbid, during the year of Harrah, from the revolt against Yazeed, and just as al-Hasan al-Basree and Mujaahid and others used to forbid from revolt during the tribulation of Ibn al-Ash’at.
And it is for this reason that it is firmly established with Ahl us-Sunnah to abandon fighting in times of tribulation due to the authentic ahaadeeth that are established from the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), and they began to mention this matter in the course of (authoring their works) on their aqeedah, and they would command with patience towards the oppression of the leaders, and the abandonment of fighting against them – even if a fair portion of the people of knowledge fought against them during the tribulation…
And whoever reflects upon the authentic ahaadeeth that are established from the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) concerning this topic, and also considers with the consideration of those with insight and deep knowledge, will know that that which the Prophetic Texts have come with is from the best of all affairs.
And for this reason, when al-Husayn (radiallaahu anhu) desired to revolt against the people of ‘Iraaq, they wrote many letters to him, as has been indicated by the people of knowledge, such as Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbaas, ‘Abu Bakr bin Abdur-Rahmaan bin al-Haarith bin Hishaam, that he should not revolt, and their overwhelming belief was that he would be killed… and they were actually desiring to give sincere advice to him, and were seeking what was beneficial and better for him, and for the Muslims in general, and Allaah and His Messenger, verily, they only command with rectitude, not with corruption. However, the opinion can sometimes be correct and can sometimes be wrong.
So it has become clear that the correct affair was what they had said, and there was not to be found in the revolt any rectification or benefit for the deen and nor for the dunyaa. Rather, those oppressive wrongdoers were able to overcome the grandson of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) until they killed him as one oppressed, a martyr. And in his revolt and his fighting (against them) was such corruption and mischief that would not have occurred had he sat and remained in his own town.
For whatever he intended of the attainment of good and repelling of evil, then nothing from it occurred. Rather, only evil increased by his revolt and his fighting, and the goodness diminished on account of that. And that was also the cause of a great deal of evil, and the killing of Husayn itself was what brought about the tribulations, just as the killing of ‘Uthmaan was from that which brought about tribulations.
And all of this is what explains that whatever the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has commanded of patience towards the tyranny of the Rulers and abandonment of fighting against them and revolting against them, that this is of the most beneficial and rectifying of affairs, in both this life and the next, and that whoever opposes this deliberately, or due to an error, then no rectification is attained by his action, rather only corruption.
And for this reason the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) praised al-Hasan with his saying, “Verily, this son of mine is a leader (sayyid) and Allaah will bring about reconciliation through him between two great factions from amongst the Muslims”, but he did not praise anyone on account of fighting in the time of tribulation, and nor on account of revolting against the leaders, and nor on account of withholding from obedience, or separating from the Jamaa’ah.
And the ahaadeeth of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) that are established in the Saheeh, all of them indicate this... and this explains that the reconciliation between the two parties was praised and was loved by Allaah and His Messenger, and that what was done by al-Hasan in bringing this about was from the greatest of his excellencies and his stations, on account of which the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) praised him. And if fighting had been obligatory or reccommended - and the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) never praised anyone for the abandonment of that which is obligatory or reccommended - and for this reason the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) did not praise anyone on account of what happened of fighting on the Day of the Camel, and Siffeen, let alone what occurred in Madinah on the Day of Harrah, and whatever happened in Makkah in the besieging of Ibn az-Zubayr, and what happened in the fitnah of Ibn al-Ash'at and Ibn al-Mihlab and other such tribulations.
Rather, it has been successively narrated (tawaatara) from him that he commanded fighting against the Khawaarij, the Renegades, those whom the Chief of the Believers fought against, Alee bin Abee Taalib (radiallaahu anhu), at Nahrawaan, after they had revolted against him at Harooraa. For the narrations (sunan) from the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) were in abundance (i.e. spread, known) concerning the fighting against them (the Khawaarij), and when Alee (radiyallaahu anhu) fought against them, he rejoiced with fighting against them, and he also narrated the hadeeth concerning them, and the Companions also agreed upon fighting them.
And similarly the people of knowledge after them, this fighting (against the Khawaarij) was not like the fighting of the people of the Camel and Siffeen and other than them, from those matters in which no text of Ijmaa' has come, and neither any praise of the noble ones who entered into it. Rather, they were remorseful about it, and also returned (i.e. recanted) from it.
And this hadeeth (i.e. concerning al-Hasan) is from the signs of the Prophethood of our Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), when he mentioned about al-Hasan whatever he mentioned, and praised him for what he praised him. So whatever he mentioned and whatever he praised was in agreement with the truth that actually occurred after more than 30 years... as occurs in the authentic hadiths, and also despite what has been reported about them in the hadeeth of Abu Umaamah, collected by at-Tirmidhi and others that they are “the most evil of those who are killed under the sky and how excellent is the one killed by them”. Meaning that they are more harmful to the Muslims than others, for there are none which are more harmful to the Muslims than them, neither the Jews and nor the Christians. For they strived to kill every Muslim who did not agree with their view , declaring the blood of the Muslims, their wealth, and the slaying of their children to be lawful, while making takfir of them. And they considered this to be worship, due to their ignorance and their innovation that caused to stray…”
Minhaj us-Sunnah 5/248.
Ibn Hubairah concerning the hadeeth of Abu Sa’eed al-Khudree, “In this hadeeth is proof that fighting the Khawarij comes before fighting the pagans, mushrikeen. And the wisdom in that is that in fighting against them is a preservation of the capital of Islaam, whereas in fighting the people of Shirk there is the seeking of increase (in capital). So preserving the capital comes first.” Fath ul-Bari 12/301.
‘Asim bin Shumaikh said, “So I saw him – meaning Abu Sa’eed al-Khudree (who reported the hadith about the killing of the Khawarij) – after he had grown old and when his hands began to tremble, saying, ‘Fighting them – meaning the Khawarij – is greater to me than fighting an equal number of the Turks”. Ibn Abi Shaybah 15/305 and Musnad Ahmad 3/33. And fighting the Khawaarij is in all times, and it is obligatory to repel them, by way of the pen, tongue or sword as they will never cease to emerge until in the midst of the last of them appears the Dajjaal. The Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, “A group will appear reciting the Qur’aan, it will not pass beyond their throats, every time a group appears, it is to be cut off, until the Dajjaal appears within them”. (Reported by Ibn Maajah and it is Hasan. And see Silsilat ul-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah of al-Albaanee, no. 2455).
And the two main features of the Khawaarij are takfir by way of major sins and adopting revolt and rebellion as a methodology of reform. And a new band of Khawaarij has emerged in contemporary times under the influence of teachings, doctrines and works of their pole and axis, Aal Qutb – who have aided in the proliferation of the aqeedah and manhaj of the Khawaarij.
And this very thing is the actual wisdom that the legislator (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) was attempting to bring about and nurture in his prohibition of revolting against the rulers, and he taught abandonment of fighting in times of fitnah - even if those who fell into this considered that their intent is to enjoin the good and forbid the evil.
And it is actually from this angle (i.e. intending the enjoining of good and forbidding of evil) that the Khawaarij made lawful the (raising of the) sword against the people of the qiblah, until they killed Alee and others from the Muslims. And similarly, those who agreed with them in revolting against the Rulers, with the sword, in general terms - such as the Mu'tazilah, the Zaydiyyah, and the Fuqahaa (Jurists), and others. Such as those who revolted alongside Muhammad bin Abdullaah bin Abdullaah bin Hasan bin Husayn, and his brother, Ibraaheem bin Abdullaah bin Hasan bin Husayn and others.
For the people of the religion are from the likes of these (i.e. those who revolted), but they err from two angles:
The first: That what they considered to be from the deen is not actually from the deen, such as the viewpoint of the Khawaarij and other than them from the people of desires. For they believe in an opinion that is an error and an innovation, and then they fight the people over it. Rather, they declare as disbelievers those who oppose them. Hence, they become errant in their opinion and also in fighting those who opppose them, or making takfir of them and cursing them.
And this is the condition of the People of Desires in general, such as the Jahmiyyah who called the people to the rejection of the realities of the Beautiful Names of Allaah, and His Lofty Attributes. They say: Verily, He does not have speech except the speech which He created in others (besides Himself), and that He will not be seen, and other such things. And they also put the people to trial, when some of the rulers inclined towards them (i.e. towards the Jahmiyyah), and so they would punish whoever would oppose them in their opinion, either with death, or with imprisonment, or with banishment and prevention of sustenance. And the Jahmiyyah did this on more than one occasion (in history), and Allaah supports His believing Servants against them.
And the Rafidah are more evil than them, when they gain authority, for they are loyal to the Kuffaar and aid them, and they show enmity towards all those from the Muslims who do not agree with their viewpoint. Similarly, those who have something within them of innovations, either the innovation of the Hulooliyyah. .. or the innovation of the Negators (of the Attributes) or those who exaggerate in affirmation (of the Attributes), or the innovation of the Qadariyyah, or that of Irjaa', or other than that. You will find him believing in corrupt beliefs, and then declare as a disbeliever or curse whoever opposed him. And the Khawaarij Renegades are the Imaams of all of these in making takfeer of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah and in fighting them.
The second:
The one who fights based upon his belief in a viewpoint to which he calls the one who opposes the Sunnah and Jamaa'ah, such as the People of the Camel, and Siffeen, and al-Harrah, and al-Jamaajim and others. However, he thinks that the desired rectification and benefit will be attained by way of this fighting, but this fighting attains no such thing. Rather, the corruption and harm becomes greater, much more than what it was initially. And then what the legislator (i.e. the Prophet) actually indicates and direct towards (of what entails true rectitude) finally becomes clear to them at the end of the affair.
And from that which is desirable to be known is that the causes of these tribulation are actually mixed, shared. For certain states and conditions come over the hearts that prevent them from knowing the truth and desiring it, and thus they resemble the state of Jaahiliyyah. Since, in Jaahiliyyah there was no knowledge of the truth and nor the desiring of this truth. And then Islaam came with beneficial knowledge and the righteous action, which is the knowledge of the truth, and desiring it.
So it is agreed that some of the rulers commit oppression by way of monopoly, control (i.e. being authoritarian and misappropriating) , and then the souls do not show patience over his oppression. And it is not possible for them to repel his oppression except by what is even greater corruption than it (i.e. his oppression). However, for the sake of the love of a person, so that his due legal right can be given, and that oppression can be repelled from him, he does not look at (and consider) the general corruption, mischief that would arise on account of his action.
And for this reason the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Verily, you will face hardship, so have patience until you meet me at the Hawd”, and it is likewise established in the Saheeh, that he said, “Upon a Muslim is to hear and obey, in times of difficulty and in ease, in the disliked things (to which one disapproves of) and in likeable things (to which one shows zeal), and when he preference is given (to other than him)”.
For the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) ordered the Muslims that they should be patient when they are controlled, monopolised (in oppression), and that they should obey those who in charge of their affairs, even if they (the rulers) give preference to themselves over them (the subjects), and that they should not contend for authority. And many of those who revolted against those in authority, or the vast majority of them, then they revolted so that they may contend with them (for authority), alongside their misappropriation, monopoly, over them, so they did not show patience upon this... and the one who fights remains thinking that he is only fighting him so that there is no more fitnah and so that the deen, all of it is for Allaah, and yet the greatest of that which actually motivated him (mobilised him) was seeking his portion, either of leadership, or of wealth.
Just as Allaah, the Exalted said, “If they are given part thereof (of alms), they are pleased, but if they are not given thereof, behold! They are enraged!” (At- Tawbah 9:58) and in the Saheeh from the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) that he said, “There are three whom Allaah will not speak to, nor look at on the Day of Judgement, and nor will he purify them, and they will have a tormenting punishment.. . and a man who gives the pledge of allegiance to a leader (imaam)
and he does not do so except for the sake of the world, if he is given from it, he is pleased, and if he is prevented from it, he is enraged...” And he ordered having patience upon their misappropriation, and prohibited fighting against them, and contending with them (for authority), alongside their oppression. Because the corruption, mischief that arises from fighting during fitnah, is greater than the corruption in the oppression of those in authority.
Thus, the lighter of two evils is not to be removed by the greater of the two. And whoever reflects upon the Qur'aan and the Sunnah that is established from Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and considers it will find it to be in agreement with what he finds in his own soul.”
FAISALABAD - Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf Chairman Imran Khan has rapped political leaders of the country, alleging they were flouting public mandate. “I cannot make any alliance with (PML-N chief) Nawaz Sharif or (PPP Co-chairman) Asif Ali Zardari,” he said while addressing a function at the District Bar Association here Monday. Earlier, he spoke to a big procession at Iqbal Park Dhobhi Ghat. He alleged that the PML-N and PPP parties deposited lots of money in foreign banks. “President Zardari openly says he is leader of swindlers and no one can compete him, Imran said.Alleging politicians were living like prince, he raised question as to how they can talk about public betterment. He claimed that Zardari was a dacoit and Nawaz was a thief. “The PML-Q and MQM are greedy for power while JUI-F issues remarks against the US for winning public support, the PTI chief said. “Pakistan ranks 10th among failed states while the rulers are busy ruining its image,” Imran said, adding that in the past, Arab students came to Pakistan for studies but they were afraid of visiting the country now. He said whenever MQM left the coalition, innocent people were killed in Karachi and later Rehman Malik visited the Sindh’s capital on special plane and MQM returned while the blood of innocents went in vein. He said the PPP and PML-N would face public wrath in the next general election. “The PML-N alleges me that I am a politician of ISI but Nawaz better knows who made IJI,” Imran said, adding that if court preceded the case of Asghar Khan than entire nation would know who took plots in Lahore and distributed among MPAs. He said the country faced a loss of $70 billion in the so-called war against terrorism while it received only $20 billion aid. He demanded that the apex court should open the case of Asghar Khan to expose the politicians working on the payroll of agencies. He said no society could advance without justice and the people preferred justice to food, clothes and shelter. He said his party would establish an LHC branch in the district if it came to power. REFERENCE: Imran blasts political leaders By: Ahmad Kamal Nizami | Published: July 26, 2011 http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Regional/Lahore/26-Jul-2011/Imran-blasts-political-leaders
Excerpts General Pervez Musharraf dealing with Imran Khan
"Imran Khan told a press conference that he had discussed with the CE the forthcoming local bodies election as well as the devolution plan. He said that he had expressed his party's reservations over the holding of local bodies election on a non-party basis, and election of the district and tehsil Nazims indirectly. He had asked the CE to make the casting of vote obligatory for all citizens, and ban private transport to carry voters to the polling booths. Indirect election of the district and tehsil Nazims would give way to horse-trading, he said. In certain countries, he said, casting of vote was compulsory for all citizens, and in India only government transport was allowed on the polling day. "I also put the issues of rising unemployment and sky-rocketing inflation before the CE," Imran Khan said, adding that he had called for a comprehensive strategy to tackle these issues. He said he had conveyed to the CE that people were restive about the slow accountability process. AFP adds: Imran Khan said he believed that the government would restore democracy by October 12, 2002, as mandated by the Supreme Court. "There is no indication that the government is deviating from the time-frame set by the Supreme Court," he said. Imran Khan hit out at political parties opposing the government's anti-corruption campaign, saying they wanted to cover up the "loot and plunder" of their leadership." REFERENCE: Imran Khan expelled from the Opposition Alliance 14 Oct 2000 The CE picked up Imran today right after the GDA kicks him out. Coincidence?? http://www.dawn.com/2000/08/26/top1.htm http://www.paklinks.com/gs/pakistan-affairs/21382-imran-khan-expelled-from-the-opposition-alliance.html
A person is known by the company he keep and I am talking about Imran Khan
A blast from the past read the names in All Pakistan Democratic Movement: ISLAMABAD: The All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM) on Tuesday decided to launch a campaign against the January 8 elections after Eidul Azha. The decision was taken at the national conference of the alliance held here under the chairmanship of APDM Convener Mahmood Khan Achakzai. President of Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) and Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) chief Qazi Hussain Ahmad, Chairman Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan, Dr. Qadir Magsi, Dr. Abdul Hayee Baloch, Abid Hassan Minto, Ghulam Mustafa Khar, Rasul Bakhsh Palejo, Hamid Khan, Hamid Gul and others attended the conference. APDM to launch poll boycott drive after Eid Wednesday December 19, 2007 (0902 PST) http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?195670
Politics is about public and masses and a person is known by the company he keeps.
Those who attended the meeting also included Ghulam Ahmad Bilour, Dr Abdul Hayee Baloch, Dr Qadir Magsi, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, Rasul Baksh Palejo, Syed Muhammad Bilal, Abid Hassan Minto, Nawaz Gondal, Hamid Gul, Abdul Majeed Hazarvi, Mian Muhammad Aslam, Dr Tariq Fazal Chaudhry, Chaudhry Tanvir, Sardar Naseem, Nawaz Gondal, Abul Khair Zubair, Zahid Khan and others. APDM announces polls boycott Sets four-day deadline for acceptance of demands Sunday, November 25, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/print3.asp?id=11362 The All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM) name was ok but what Hamid Gul was doing in it???? Should we forget Nazir Abbasi, Thori Phatak, Military Operation in Moro, K N Shah, Mehar, Dadu and Lakhat during MRD Days, above all should we forget Hamid Gul’s proverbial hate towards Sindhis. [Introduction of Hamid Gul: Hamid Gul callling Baitullah Mehsud and Faqir Muhammad “Mujahids” http://criticalppp.com/archives/20304
Lt Gen (retd) Hameed Gul told The News that like Ms Bhutto, Maulana Fazl has also cut a deal with the Americans and was playing a dubious political role as per the script written by the US. He said that in the All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM) meeting, Hafiz Hussain Ahmad had assured the opposition leaders that the Maulana had given his assent to the resignation move. Benazir, Fazl doing US bidding Sunday, September 23, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/print3.asp?id=10263 General Hamid Gul [APDM] was saying that Benazir Bhutto was an American Agent whereas read Dr Qadir Magsi [APDM] says — HYDERABAD, Jan 7: The Sindh Taraqi Pasand Party chairman, Dr Qadir Magsi, has said that PPP leader Benazir Bhutto was the symbol of federation and her murder was ‘tantamount to murder of Pakistan,’ adding that Pakistan has now become alien for Sindhis. HYDERABAD: Benazir was symbol of federation, says Magsi Bureau Report January 08, 2008 http://www.dawn.com/2008/01/08/local19.htm
Role of Jang Group [do keep in mind that Jang always incite Clash and Fasad] Human Memory is short and in case of Liars Reporters/Journalists of Pakistan i.e. Mr. Shaheen Sehbai and Mr. Ansar Abbasi it is proven beoynd doubt that Allah snatch Memory from Liars because in the above news Jang Groups quotes and Intelligence Agency Report [read table story] whereas both of these Journalists indulged in Yellow Journalism to the core had themselves running an Election Campaign for Mr Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry by filing reports about the same Sindhi Nationalists, read How Mr. Shaheen and Mr. Ansar incited Ethnic Hate themselves through Daily Jang/The News International and GEO TV. Jang Group/Express News VS Sindhi Community. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2010/04/jang-groupexpress-news-vs-sindhi.html How Jang Group does that? GEO TV’s Tickers & Shaheen Sehbai incite MQM-PPP Clash. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2010/01/geo-tvs-tickers-shaheen-sehbai-incite.html
He was upset about questions asked about Nabeela Shah, a worker of his party whose father had accused Magsi of having exploited her and killed her in 1996. The host said that his party had claimed in 1998 that she was alive and living with her lover. Dr Magsi said that Nabeela belonged to his party but she left it and got married but this marriage had not worked and she had got a divorce. He said he was never formally charged with her murder. HYDERABAD: Syed Naseer Hussain Shah, father of Nabeela Shah, on the second day of his token hunger strike in front of the Hyderabad Press Club appealed to Abdul Sattar Edhi to guard the body of his daughter till it was exhumed and reburied in Khairpur. He claimed that it was the indifferent attitude of the government which had forced him to observe hunger strike. Speaking to journalists, Nasser Shah said he feared that Magsi’s men might dig up the body buried by the Edhi volunteers in Mochko Goth graveyard and hide it. He also criticised the role of ‘A Police’ Khairpur for not acting on the FIR in which STPP chief Dr Qadir Magsi and two others had been nominated as accused of murdering his daughter Nabeela Shah. Dr Qadir Magsi made good his escape from his long march after the publication of the photos of Nabeela Shah’s body in some newspapers. He added that this step of Dr Magsi had proved that he was the real killer of his daughter. He claimed that if the agencies were not backing him, Dr Qadir Magsi would have been arrested before taking part in his long march. - THATTA, March 21: The body of a Sindhi literary figure, Nabeela Shah (27), was identified by her relatives who visited Edhi centre and a police station here on Saturday. The victim had been missing since May 29, 1996, and her father, Syed Naseer Hussain Shah, at a recent news conference at Hyderabad Press Club, had alleged that Dr Qadir Magsi, chairman of the Sindh Taraqqi Pasand Party, was involved in the affair. He had claimed that she had gone with Dr Magsi when he visited her home in Khairpur on May 28, 1996, and that her whereabouts were not known since then. Dr Magsi and other STPP leaders have rejected the allegation, saying the whole story had been concocted to sabotage the party’s long march, started on Saturday from Sukkur, and to defame the party chairman. REFERENCES: Nabeela’s murder confirmed DAWN / NEWS International, Karachi 22 March 1998 Sunday 22 Ziqa’ad 1418 http://www.karachipage.com/news/mar98/032298.txt Edhi asked to protect Nabeela Shah’s body DAWN / NEWS International, Karachi 30 March 1998 Monday 01 Zilhaj 1418 http://www.karachipage.com/news/mar98/033098.txt SECOND OPINION: Dr Qadir Magsi reveals himself —Khaled Ahmed’s TV Review Tuesday, October 26, 2004 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_26-10-2004_pg3_3
Mr. Imran Khan is a Sunni Adult Muslim therefore he should know about Issuing Fatwa of Takfeer on Kalima Reciting Muslims.
"QUOTE"
Whoever offers prayers as we do and turns his face to our Qiblah and eats the animal slaughtered by us, he is a Muslim for whom is the covenant of Allah and the covenant of the Messenger of Allah; so do not violate Allah's covenant." [Sahih Bukhari]
``Ibn Umar related that the Holy Prophet said: If a Muslim calls another kafir, then if he is a kafir let it be so; otherwise, he [the caller] is himself a kafir.''(Sunnan Abu Dawood)
``Abu Zarr reported that the Holy Prophet said: No man accuses another man of being a sinner, or of being a kafir, but it reflects back on him if the other is not as he called him.''(Bukhari)
``Withhold [your tongues] from those who say `There is no god but Allah' --- do not call them kafir. Whoever calls a reciter of `There is no god but Allah' as a kafir, is nearer to being a kafir himself.'' (Tabarani, reported from Abdullah Ibn Omar)
If the above Hadiths do not satisfy then read this!
Usaamah bin Zaid reported,
“Allaah’s Messenger sent us towards Al-Huruqa, and in the morning we attacked them and defeated them. I and an Ansari man followed a man from among them and when we overwhelmed him, he said, “La ilaha illal-Lah.” On hearing that, the Ansari man stopped, but I killed him by stabbing him with my spear. When we returned, the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) came to know about that and he said:
"O Usaamah! Did you kill him after he had said “La ilaha ilal-Lah?” I said, “But he said so only to save himself.” He kept on repeating that so often that I wished I had not embraced Islaam before that day. [Agreed upon, and this is the wording of Bukhari]
and in another version in Sahih Muslim about the same incident:
``Did you tear open his heart to see what was in it?'' [Muslim]
"UNQUOTE"
Khawarij:
"QUOTE"
The very first sect to split away from the main body of the Muslims. They will remain in the Ummah till they fight alongside Dajjal against this Ummah.
The Khawaarij are a sect which came out to kill 'Alee ibn Abee Taalib (radhi-yallaahu 'anhu) concerning the issue of Ruling/ leadership.
Their chosen path was one of distancing themselves from 'Uthmaan ibn 'Affaan and 'Alee ibn Abee Taalib (radhi-yallaahu 'anhumaa), and condoning walking out against the Imaam (leader) and seeking to overthrow him if he opposes the Sunnah. Likewise, they would make takfeer (render someone a kaafir) of anyone who commits a major sin and claim that he will forever abide in the Fire of Hell.
Ash-Shahrastaanee defines them as: ((Anyone who walks out against (seeking to overthrow) the true appointed Imaam (leader) upon whose leadership the Jamaa'ah is in agreement is called a Khaarijee. This is the case, despite whether the walking out (against the Imaam) occurred in the days of the Rightly-Guided Khulafaa. or other than them from the Taabi'een)).
And some of the pious predecessors used to call all those who practiced Islaam based upon their desires as Khawaarij.
The Khawaarij were the first sect to appear in the history of Islaam, splitting up into more than 20 different sub-sects. However, it is said that the major sub-sects of the Khawaarij are seven:
1) al-Mahkamah al-Oolaa;
2) al-Azaariqah;
3) an-Najdaat;
4) ath-Thu'aalabah;
5) al-'Ajaaridah;
6) al-Abaadhiyyah;
7) as-Safriyyah.
Some of the other sub-sects include:
1) al-Ibaathiyyah;
2) ash-Shamraakhiyyah;
3) as-Salaydiyyah;
4) as-Sirriyyah;
5) al-'Azriyyah;
6) al-'Ajradiyyah;
7) ash-Shakkiyyah;
8) al-Fadhaliyyah;
9) al-Bayhasiyyah;
10) al-'Atwiyyah;
11) al-Fadeekiyyah;
12) al-Ja'diyyah;
13) ash-Shaybiyyah;
14) al-Hurooriyyah;
15) al-Khamariyyah;
16) ash-Sharaah.
The reason which has led to me to include this chapter [within the book] is that I have observed many of these biased [partisans] accusing Shaikh Ibn Baz, Shaikh al-Albani, and Shaikh Ibn‘Uthaimin of Irja’. The reason for this accusation is that these shaikhs have explained the meaning of the verse ‘and whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed…’ in the detailed manner that is well known to the Salaf, and because they do not perform takfir in an unrestricted absolute manner[1]. And also because they prohibit rebellion against the oppressive rulers amongst the Muslims. And even if they were to see clear and manifest kufr (disbelief) they would still prohibit it if the ability to do so did not exist and any Shari’ah benefit could not be realised.
Therefore I say:
ONE: The saying or the ruling of coming out against the rulers in rebellion is in actual fact the madhhab (methodology) of the Murji’ah, for Ibn Shahin has narrated from [Sufyan] ath-Thawree that he said, "The Murji’ah hold it permissible to use the sword against the people of the Qiblah (muslims in general)." [2]
He also reports that it was said to Ibn al-Mubarak, "Do you hold the view of Irja’?" He replied, "How can I be a Murji’ when I do not hold it permissible to come out with the sword (against the Muslims)." [3]
Further, as-Sabuni (d.449) narrates with an authentic chain of narration going back to Ahmad bin Sa’id ar-Ribati that he said, "’Abdullah bin Tahir said to me, ‘O Ahmad, certainly, you (people) have hatred of those (meaning the Murji’ah) based on ignorance, and I have hatred of them based upon knowledge. Firstly, they do not believe that obedience is due to the ruler…’". [4]
I say: Do not these texts prove clearly that they (i.e. Safar al-Hawali, Salman al-Awdah, Ali bin Haj, etc.) are the Murji’ah in truth and that our Scholars previously mentioned are free from that!
An important observation: And the strange matter is that Safar al-Hawali does not understand this clear connection between the Murji’ah and the Khawarij. He said, "As has been reported from Imam Ahmad a statement whose meaning is difficult to understand and this is his statement: ‘Verily the Khawarij, they are the Murji’ah’".! And then he comes with a blow that is unbearable, he says, "Explaining this statement to refer to the Irja’ of the Companions is possible"!!![5]
I say: If he had followed up the previous narrations he would have known that it is not difficult to understand the connection between the Murji’ah and the Khawarij in rebelling against the leaders.
And there should be no surprise for that matter that Irja’ should appear and spread shortly after rebellion. Qatadah said, "[The innovation of] Irja occurred after the trial of Ibn al-‘Ash’at (one of the proponents of the Khawarij)". [6]
Other evidences to show that these people are upon (the innovated belief of Irja’) include:
TWO: That they do not except themselves from having perfect iman and what follows on from that – even if one of them explicitly states that he is following the methodology of the Salaf. Do you not observe that they say, "the Shahid Hassan al-Banna…" and "the Shahid Sayyid Qutb"? And if it was said to them, "If describing them as Shahid was something obligatory within the movement, something they could not avoid saying, then the least they should do is to add "Insha’allah (if Allah wills)".
Al-Bukhari has included in the Book of Jihad within his Sahih a chapter in which he said, "Chapter: It is not to be said that so and so is a shahid" and he mentioned the various proofs for that. And this has been requested from continuously and repeatedly but they become haughty and disdainful, saying instead, "You belittle and jihad and ridicule the information and news pertaining to the worldly matters!!"
I also say concerning this refusal to make except oneself (or others from having perfecting iman or from having been guaranteed Paradise etc.) that ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Mahdi – may Allah have mercy upon him – said, "The basis of Irja’ is to not except oneself (or others from having perfect iman or from being guaranteed Paradise etc.)" [7]
THREE: Going back to the original discussion (in this treatise) I say: The angle and direction that the very first Murji’ah came from was their great veneration of iman and their belittlement of sin and disobedience (i.e. that they do not affect a persons iman) and they considered it unlikely or an exaggeration that a person’s iman could be destroyed by sins. Therefore, they stated, "No sin can harm in the presence of iman"! It was from this that there misguidance occurred.
As for these people of today, then their angle and direction is to venerate politics such that everyone who is with them in their movement then he is a person of loyalty. And if a person has understanding of the movement [its aims and means etc.] then no sin can affect a person, even if it is committing shirk with the Lord of all the worlds!!! Do you not see how their chiefs and main organisers fall into the greatest of sins and yet they do not move on account of shame (for the religion). Their shame is only for their party and their movement!! Do you not see how they become alarmed and shocked if Shaikh ‘Abdul-‘Aziz bin Baz and Shaikh al-Albani both say that going into a bloody battle with the Jews should be abandoned and instead attention should be given to strengthening the Muslims first [before engaging in a battle in which they would get slaughtered without any doubt]. And this is a fatwa from true and real mujtahidoon (i.e. those qualified to
give verdicts on such affairs).
However, when one of their movement leaders makes a mistake, then it is an obligation within their movement to lower the eyes and not to notice it, regardless of how hideous and disgraceful it might be.
And how frequently do they give rulings regarding the shedding of blood and the taking of property and then proceed to shed it in vain. If they had actually reached the level of being students of knowledge, then this would be the best that could be thought of them.
Take this Ali bin Haj (Algeria) for example, he gives a verdict for the killing of thousands of Muslims and the expulsion of those that remain and also for the disturbance and frightening of secure townships (which are safe and sound). And likewise whatever he says in praise and commendation of democracy and other such things that we have just quoted from him. So along with all of this no one criticises him, in their view, except a (government) agent!!
And before him, Sayyid Qutb reviled and rebuked some of the Prophets of Allah the Most High, and also censured some of the Companions who had been guaranteed Paradise. He also considers that the shari’ah politics are embodied in Socialism. There are many other things which have been explained in detail by Shaikh Rabi’ al-Madkhali in his most recent books, and Shaikh al-Albani said about him, "Verily, the carrier of the flag of the science of criticism and appraisal today, in this era is our brother, Dr. Rabi’ and those who refute him do not refute him upon the basis of knowledge ever, and the knowledge is actually with him…". So this is a testimony for Shaikh Rabi’ from a specialist in the field itself![8]
Then comes along this Turabi with his claim of this so called Islamic State in Sudan and who organises conferences in order to unite all the religions, and in order to commend and praise the religion of the grave worshippers and also in order to erect a very large number of churches, which were not be found even in the secularist state before his time. [And who calls for free mixing between men and women in society, and seeks to repel and remove the prescribed punishments of the Shari’ah (hudud)].
And then there is the ease that they (the political activists) give to the Afghanis, such that they do not change anything from the religion of the grave worshippers and heresies. Rather, they fight against the People of Tawhid in defence of the Taaghoots (of these grave worshippers etc.)! And their plot and conspiracy against the leadership of Kunar al-Islaamiyyah is not distant in our memories!! And this town was the only in Afghanistan that was established upon Tawhid, and in which prayer was established in the best of manners and the hudood likewise. And there was no other town known for waging a war against intoxicants like this one. But then the state of the Ikhwan ul-Muslimoon came along, and it but left them enraged and mad, until they waged war against it and assassinated its amir, the Salafi Shaikh, Jameel ur-Rahmaan – may Allaah have mercy upon him. So they combined the greatest of sins absolutely, Shirk and the killing of a soul without due
right.
So there is all of this and much more and yet it does not harm their faith! And it does not cause their leadership to be lost! But rather, woe to the one who even thinks about criticising them, since he is reviling the corroborators of jihad. In fact, they have raised high their hopes – alongside these disgraces and innovations that reach the level of kufr – that the Islamic State that should be aspired to is the on that is in Afghanistan and Sudan!! As occurs in the cassette of Salman al-Awdah, "Why do they fear Islam". Yet the affair is not like that as Allaah the Most High has said:
It will not be in accordance with your desires (Muslims), nor those of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians). Whosoever works evil, will have the recompense thereof, and he will not find any protector or helper besides Allâh. An-Nisa - 4:123
It is for this reason that some of the People of Knowledge have considered them to be amongst the Extreme Murji’ah, because the Murji’ah venerated Eemaan, and it is a pillar of the religion. But as for these, then they venerate a part of the many parts of the religion, which is Politics, alongside their knowledge that their form of politics is not exempt from being mixed with Socialism and Democracy. This is well known to whoever has come across the books of Sayyid Qutb and others similar to him. Rather, say in short, "This is the fiqh of the innovated [modernist] movement". The Murji’ah did not negate the harm caused to a person of faith due to shirk that he commits, they acknowledged that alongside kufr, no good deed can benefit. But as for these [contemporaries], then they intercede for the scholars, even if they spoke with clear and manifest kufr!!!
FOUR: This issue is followed by another issue in relation to the Murj’iah and that is their absence of clarifying the Sunnah to the people, and their abandonment of refuting the Innovators. Ibn Taymiyyah – may Allaah have mercy upon him – said, after speaking about the people of takfir:
"And in the face of those who perform takfir in falsehood are a people who do not know the aqidah of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah as it truly should be known, or they know some of it but are ignorant of some of it. Yet whatever they do know of it, they do not always explain it to the people but conceal it[9]. And they do not forbid the innovations that oppose the Book and the Sunnah[10], nor do they rebuke the People of Innovations and neither do they punish them[11]. In fact, they may even criticise absolutely any talk of the Sunnah and the fundamental principles of the religion [i.e. Tawhid etc.][12]. Or they may accommodate everyone, with all their varying madhhabs[13]… This approach has overcome many of the Murji’ah, some of the Jurists, Sufis and Philosophers. And both of these two approaches (i.e. that of the Takfiris and the Murji’ah and those with them) are deviant, and outside the [confines of the] Book and the Sunnah." [14]
And no two people will differ with each other that this is one of the greatest of foundations that the religion of the political activists revolves around. And is there anyone to reject their [well known] principle, "Let us excuse each other in that which we differ and let us work together in that which we agree upon"!! And I have explained in a previous footnote – from the words of Hasan al-Banna – that they actually mean every type of difference, i.e. absolutely! They say this because if they began to reject and refute the People of Innovation, they would lose many of their followers, those whom they extend further in their misguidance.
But then they do not just limit this to the People of Innovation, rather they extend it to the People of Kufr. It has already preceded in the words of the Ikhwan ul-Muslimeen their satisfaction with being in brotherhood with the Christians, in fact even requesting this from the Christians, as I have quoted from the words of Hasan al-Banna and Qardawi who states that there is no dispute concerning the religion between us and the Jews!! Then what after this!!? [15]
So these are four principles in which they agree with the Murji’ah. So who amongst the people are more worthy of being described with Irja’?! Is not this saying true concerning them:
Notes
[1] And to give some illustrations of the methodology of the Khawarij in the words of the modern day political activists and reformers:
Sayyid Qutb, the mentor and leader of the neo-Kharijites, whose writings and works are the spring and fountain of today’s political activists said (Zilal 2/1057): "And mankind has apostatised [by turning] to the worship of the servants [of Allaah] and to the oppression of the religions. And they have turned away from ‘Laa ilaaha illallaaha’ (the declaration) – even if a small party from them remain repeating ‘Laa ilaaha illallaah’ upon the minarets without actually understanding its meaning and intending its meaning, yet he repeats it without rejecting the legislative Hakimiyah that the servants have claimed for themselves".
And he says further "Except that mankind has returned to the Jahiliyyah (of the first times) and it has apostatised from ‘Laa ilaaha illallaaha’, having given to those servants the specific characteristics of Uluhiyyah and has not considered the Tawhid of Allaah and has not given exclusive loyalty to Him"
And then he follows this with, "The whole of mankind, including those who repeat from the minarets, in the eastern and western parts of the world, the words ‘Laa ilaaha illallaaha’, without any [consideration of] meaning or reality, then they are the most sinful of people and will be the most severely punished on the day of Judgement because they have apostatised by turning to the worship of the servants (of Allaah)."!!???
And how strange it is and how baffling it is that the Qutubiyyah, Surooriyyah, Khawarij of the Era, do not shudder at the fact that the application of their own principles would render their mentor and leader Sayyid Qutb an apostate!!! Do they not see that he has mocked and reviled the Kaleem of Allaah, Musa (alaihis salaam) as well as the most notable of the Companions of Allaah. He describes Musa (alaihis salaam) as " excitable, impetuous, highly strung and temperamental" (Tasweer al-Fannee p.154) and he says further, "Lets leave him at this point (of history) and return to him at a later stage of his life, after ten years, and perhaps he has calmed down and has is now composed and at ease with himself" and he continues, "Then lets leave him for a while so that we can see what the passing of time has done to this highly strung youth"!!!.
And do they not see that Shaikh Bin Baaz – rahimahullaah – upon hearing the words of Sayyid Qutb being read out to him stated, that "Mockery of the Prophets is apostasy on its own". [During a lesson of Shaikh ‘Abdul - ‘Azeez ibn Baaz - hafizahullaah - in his house in Rayaad: 1413H, ‘Minhaajus-Sunnah tapes of ar-Rayaad]. So will these newly-arisen foolish minded ones proclaim with the might of their tongues that Sayyid Qutb apostatised by these words of his??!!
Hence, they are the Murji’ah in truth since innovations and calamities such as those of Qutb, Mawdudi, Turabi and others do not harm faith in the view of these activists.
Salman Awdah said in his cassette, "Jalsah ala ar-Rasif" about the singer who openly commits fisq, "Allaah will not forgive him! Unless he repents, because the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) ruled that he will not be forgiven [saying] ‘All of my Ummah will be forgiven’ …! This is because they are apostates [murtaddoon] due to this act of theirs!![*]… This is apostasy from Islam!! This one will abide eternally in the fire – and refuge is with Allaah -, unless he repents!! Why? This is because they do not believe in the saying of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, "And do not come near to zina (fornication or adultery), verily it is an obscenity and an evil way indeed" Allaah is watchful over you! The one who acknowledges that zina is unlawful and an obscenity and which angers Allaah, would he then boast (about his sin) in front of the people?! In front of millions, or many thousands of people?! … A believer would never do this!…"
[*] The manhaj of the Khawarij, pure and clear. Awdah does not even leave room for himself to manoeuvre out of this, his words being clear, that such people are apostates on account of a sin alone.
Aa’id al-Qarnee said, on p.335 of ‘al-Misk wal-‘Anbar’, "And this – meaning intoxicants - are the greatest of those things by which Allaah is disobeyed upon His earth!!"??[**]
[**] And is this greater than the greatest of calamities of Turabi? And the government of Sudan, which in the view of these foolish-minded newcomers is the model of an Islamic State??!! Is it greater than the kufr, shirk and bid’ah to be found in this so called Islamic State?? Is it greater than the shirk of the grave worshippers of Afghanistan?!
And Safar al-Hawali said at the end of the first side and the beginning of the second side of his cassette, ‘Duroos ut-Tahawiyyah (2/272), "This metropolitan is like a hotel in one of the Gulf States, Dubai…In this hotel – there is one who says, openly proclaiming – there are drinks in this hotel, which they call spiritual drinks, meaning that khumoor (various types of intoxicants) are presented in relation to what is available (in the hotel) of amusements and videos etc. - So this is an open and clear call – and all the people present are happy with this – that contain images that establish that they… - and refuge is from Allaah – have mixed dancing and nakedness along with the consumption of khamr (intoxicants). We seek refuge in Allaah from this kufr, because declaring what Allaah the Blessed and Exalted has made unlawful to be lawful (istihlaal) is without doubt, clear and open kufr!!!"
I say: Reflect carefully! He has already presented this image of open sinfulness and then he called the reason or motive behind it "istihlaal". And then built upon this he quickly moved onto the ruling of takfir, a ruling in which he leaves no room for interpreting this action as "the lesser kufr" (kufr doona kufr), saying, "[it is] clear and open kufr (kufr sareeh). And the great mistake and blunder of these people concerning the issue of "istihlaal" is what has made them graze in the madhhab of the Khawarij. And if this is not so, then what is the difference between this sin and others. And is it impossible to find a sinful person in the earth who does not invite his associate or friend to partake in his sinfulness?! It certainly does grieve us that this is the explanation of Aqidatut-Tahawiyyah!
And we see that Aa’id al-Qarni’s methodology is the same when he made some recantations from some of his serious blunders stating, "Fourteen: I had said in a cassette, ‘Whoever makes it obligatory upon the people that he should be an Ikhwani or a Salafi or a Tablighi or a Sururi, then his repentance should be sought. Either he repents or he is to be killed.’ This is an error that emanated from me and I seek Allaah’s forgiveness from it. What I meant was that whoever did that, then he has legislated (into the religion). However, it is an error regardless and I pardon myself from it. I believe that the madhhab of the Salaf is the correct madhhab and it is the one that is obligatory for the people to follow, to be guided by it and to traverse its path." [refer to al-Ajwibah al-Mufidah of Jamal bin Harith]. So will al-Qarnee then apply his principle to the many thousands if not hundreds of thousands of partisans who have made it obligatory to be a Hanafi, or a Maliki, or a Shafi’i? And who have declared it haram to choose from each of the madhhabs. Will he rule that every single one of them has legislated into the religion and has such has become an apostate and renegade? May Allaah kill this unlicensed desire and ignorance!!
And Shaikh al-Albani was asked concerning the book, "Dhahiratul-Irjaa fil-Fikr al-Islami" of Safar al-Hawali, and in this book takfir is performed on account of certain sins! He replied, "I gave my viewpoint on a matter about thirty or so years ago when I used to be in the [Isamic] University (of Madinah) and I was asked in a gathering about my opinion on Jamaa’at ut-Tabligh. So I said on that day, ‘They are the Sufis of this era’. And now it has occurred to me that I should say about this Jamaa’ah who have emerged in the present times and who have opposed the Salaf, I say here, in accordance with the statement of al-Hafidh adh-Dhahabi: They have opposed the Salaf in much of the issues of manhaj, and it is befitting that I label them the Khawarij of the era. And this resembles their emergence at the current time – in which we read their statements – because they, in reality, their words take the direction and objective of that of the Khawarij in performing takfir of the one who commits major sins. And perhaps I should say, this is either due to ignorance on their behalf or due to devised plot!! And I say this in light of [the statement of Allaah], "Let not the hatred of a people make you depart from justice. Be just and fair and that is closer to taqaa". I do not know whether they say that every major sin takes one outside the fold of Islaam! However, they always revolve around certain major sins but remain silent or just pass by other major sins! And for this reason I do not see that we should make this label absolute, and that we should say, ‘They are Khawarj’, except from certain aspects. And this is the justice that we have been ordered to abide by…" [The Cassette:The Surooriyyah are the Khawarij of the Era, end of the first side].
[2] Laalikaa’ee in Usul ul-I’tiqad [no.1834]
[3]Al-Kitab ul-Latif [no. 17]
[4] Aqidat us-Salaf wa Ashabul-Hadith [109]
[5] Dhahirat ul-Irjaa (1/361)
[6] Reported by Abdullah bin Ahmad in as-Sunnah (644), al-Khallaal in as-Sunnah (1230), Ibn al-A’rabi in his Mu’jam (714), Abul-Qasim al-Baghawi in al-Ja’diyat (1061), Ibn Battah in al-Ibanah (1235), al-Lalikaa’ee in Usul ul-I’tiqad (1841) and it is Hasan.
[7] Reported by al-Khallaal in as-Sunnah (1061), al-Aajurree in ash-Sharee’ah (p.139) and others. Something similar is also reported by Ibn Shahin in al-Kitab al-Latif (16) and al-Lalikaa’ee in Usul ul-I’tiqad (1835). The apparent disconnection in the chain of its Athar does not do it any damage since something similar to it has come with a connected and saheeh chain in Tahdhib ul-Aathar of at-Tabari (1519) and something similar has also been mentioned from Sufyan. Refer to al-Hilyah of Abu Nu’aym (7/33) and al-Abaateel of Jawzjaani (42).
[8] The cassette "Manhaj al-Muwaazanaat" by Tasjeelaat at-Tayyibah of Medinah an-Nabawiyyah.
[9] Just like some from the Ikhwan ul-Muslimeen who were nurtured upon Salafiyyah but their hizbiyyah prevents them from clarifying and explaining the Salafi aqidah and which orders them with partisanship to a particular madhhab and which also prevents them from showing the people from looking at what is in the other madhhabs of the Sunnah. This is because this would cause a split in the ranks according to their philosophy!
[10] Refer to the words of Hasan al-Banna in Mudhakkiraat ad-Da’wah wad-Daa’iyah (p.64-65) concerning the necessity of remaining silent about the well known differences in the issues of aqidah such as the gatherings of the various Sufi orders, tawassul through the righteous, and making supplications through the dead! And he says at the end of it, "And the Muslims have differed over these matters for hundreds of years, and they will never cease to differ. And Allaah, the Blessed and Most High is pleased with love (amongst ourselves) and unity."!!
[11] Such as the Ikhwan who say, "We criticise the innovation but we do not rebuke the one who commits it (or brings it)! And we dislike the innovation, but we do not hate its doer!!"
[12] Such as the Ikhwan who say, "Speaking about the Sunnah is trivial. And speaking about the Names of Allaah and His Attributes is [but] philosophy and it is a waste of time"!!
[13] Such as the Ikhwan, for you will "Consider them to be united, yet their hearts are dispersed, separated" since amongst them are the Sufis with all their different tariqahs, the Ash’ari, the Maturidi, the Rafidi, the Jahmi and the Mu’tazili.
[14] Majmu’ ul-Fatawa (16/427) and refer to Bada’i ut-Tafsir of Ibn al-Qayyim (5/548)
[15] As for Ikhwan ul-Mufliseen, then they stated in al-Mujtama’ (dated 30th Dhil Qa’dah 1415), "Our position with respect to our brothers, the Christians in Egypt and the Arab world is clear and one that is quite old and well known: What is due to them is what is due to us and what is binding upon them is what is binding upon us. They are our partners in this land. In our long struggle in this land, they are our brethren and they have every right in the land, both the material and the spiritual, religious or political… and whoever states anything other than this then we are free of him and of what he says"!!!
And they also made the Islamic Shura council as a sister to the democracy of the Kuffar, saying, "And when Shura has its own special meaning in the view of Islam, then it is in essence equivalent to the rules of democracy (nidham al-demoqratee)".
And this declaration of theirs also contains a request to the government to abide by the secular laws, not the Shari’ah. They said, "With the persistence of the Ikhwaan in requesting the government that it should not face harshness with harshness, and that it should adhere to the secular rules and judgements (akham al-qanoon wal-qadaa)."
Rather, they are satisfied and pleased with this for themselves as they stated further, "However they (the Ikhwan), continued and persisted in their adherence to the secular constitution and laws (ahkam ad-dustoor wal-qanoon)…."
And they did not say this out of taqiyah (dissimulation), but rather out of satisfaction, as they themselves have witnessed against their own souls stating further, "And the [underlying] issue in all of this, is not political and nor a manoeuvre, but it is an issue of religion and creed (din wa aqidah), and upon which the Ikhwan will meet their Lord, "The day that wealth and sons shall not benefit. Except he who comes with a sound and pure heart"
And then there is the statement of Hasan al-Banna, "And I affirm here that our dispute with the Jews is not one concerning the religion because the Quran has encouraged us to befriend them and be cordial with them. And Islam is Shari’ah for humankind before it is a Shari’ah for a specific group of people. And it has praised them (the Jews) and has placed agreement between us and them, "And do not dispute with the People of the Book except by that which is best". And when the Noble Quran touches upon the issue of the Jews it does so from an economic and legal point of view…"!!! [Ikhwan ul-Musilmoon, Ahdaath Sana’at Tarikh (1/409-410)]
And Qaradawi says, in addition to enormity of al-Banna, "We do not fight the Jews for the sake of aqidah (i.e. religion)!! We are fighting against them for the sake of land!! We do not fight them because they are Kuffar!! We fight them because they have occupied our land and have taken it without due right" [Ar-Raayah, 4696 Wednesday, 24th Sha’ban 1415]
Introduction
Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said: If it is said: If absolute Iman includes all that Allah and His Messenger commanded, then, if some of the Iman diminishes, the sinners must be charged with unbelief as the Kharjites claimed, or abide forever in Hell and be deprived of Iman, as the Mu’tazilites claimed. The claims of the Kharijites and the Mu’tazilites were more erroneous than the claims of the Murji’ites. For there is a group among the Murji'ites who were considered good and praiseworthy people. However, the Kharijites and the Mu’tazilites were condemned by the consensus of the Orthodox Muslim community. It is said: It should be known that the views of Mu’tazilites and Kharijites, with which none of the Orthodox Muslims agreed, implied that the people who committed major sins would abide forever in Hell. This claim was one of the important innovations because the Companions and Successors of the Prophet (pbuh), their followers, and all religious Muslims agreed that whoever has an atom's weight of Iman in his heart will not abide forever in Hell. They also agreed that our Prophet (pbuh) would be among those who would intercede to seek Allah's permission for His intercession for the major sinners from his community. Indeed, both Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari relate that the Prophet (pbuh) said: "Every prophet is allowed one answered prayer. As for me, I delayed my request in order to intercede for my community on Judgment Day."
Shaikh al-Albani , asked concerning the book, "Dhahiratul-Irjaa fil-Fikr al-Islami" of Safar al-Hawali, and in this book takfir is performed on account of certain sins, replied:
"I gave my viewpoint on a matter about thirty or so years ago when I used to be in the [Isamic] University (of Madinah) and I was asked in a gathering about my opinion on Jamaa’at ut-Tabligh. So I said on that day, ‘They are the Sufis of this era’. And now it has occurred to me that I should say about this Jamaa’ah who have emerged in the present times and who have opposed the Salaf, I say here, in accordance with the statement of al-Hafidh adh-Dhahabi: They have opposed the Salaf in much of the issues of manhaj, and it is befitting that I label them the Khawarij of the era. And this resembles their emergence at the current time – in which we read their statements – because they, in reality, their words take the direction and objective of that of the Khawarij in performing takfir of the one who commits major sins. And perhaps I should say, this is either due to ignorance on their behalf or due to devised plot!! And I say this in light of [the statement of Allaah], "Let not the hatred of a people make you depart from justice. Be just and fair and that is closer to taqaa". I do not know whether they say that every major sin takes one outside the fold of Islaam! However, they always revolve around certain major sins but remain silent or just pass by other major sins! And for this reason I do not see that we should make this label absolute, and that we should say, ‘They are Khawarj’, except from certain aspects. And this is the justice that we have been ordered to abide by…" [The Cassette:The Surooriyyah are the Khawarij of the Era, end of the first side].
The Text
A person might say, "Why do you always talk about the Mu’tazilah, the Jahmiyyah, the Zanadiqah (Heretics), the Ash’aris, the Khawarij and the Murji’ah? And why do you always mention them whenever you mention the issues of aqidah? Yet these sects have passed and their adherents are now under the soil and as it as said: ‘Time has eaten and drunk over it’, [hence] there is not real need for this?
We say – and with Allaah lies success -:
Yes, these sects existed in the past and their founders and adherents have indeed passed away in the generations that have passed. However, their ideas and beliefs themselves have not ceased to exist. Rather, their followers and those affected by them are present in our very midst. Hence, their aqidah and their ideas have transferred from generation to generation and there are those who revive and give strength to such ideas [in subsequent generations].
As for the aqidah of the Mu’tazilah, then it still exists. In fact is spread far and wide amongst many of those who attach themselves to Islaam. And the Shi’ah, with all their variant groups – even the Zaidiyyah – are upon the aqidah of I’tizal.
As for the Ash’aris then this is a sect that has a significant presence amongst the main bulk of the Muslims today.
As for Irja’ (the Murji’ah) then that too is present. The Hanafis consider Imaan to consist only of assent (tasdiq) and speech without including actions into the definition of Imaan. Despite the fact that this Irja’ is not as severe as that of the Ahl ul-Kalaam, [nevertheless it is still Irja’].
As for the Heretics (amongst those who believe in Wahdatul Wujood, the Unity of Existence, and others) then they too are present, since the followers of Ibn Arabi at-Taa’ee are present and they are the Extremist Sufis.
And built upon this, whenever we talk about these sects, we do not talk about bones that have rotten and turned to dust. However, we talk about sects that are present amongst the Muslims today. This is a matter that will not remain hidden to any student of knowledge. Only those people find fault with us – and our mentioning of these sects – who do not know the true realities, or who desire to cause confusion amongst the people and spread false beliefs.
Hence, it is necessary for one to ask before he finds fault. This is the short answer, otherwise this topic is vast indeed and Allah knows best.
And some examples can be given to make clear that these destructive ideas are still present and that they have carriers and promoters:
ONE: Sayyid Qutb said in Dhilal ul-Qur’an (4/2328), "The Qur’an is apparent, [part of the] created (kawniyyah), like the Earth and Heavens."
And this is stating that the Qur’an is create, the saying of the Jahmiyyah and others.
TWO: He also says, in explanation of Surah Ikhlas (Qul Huwallaahu Ahad): "Verily it is a single existence, and there is no other reality save that of His, and there is no true and real existence save His - and every other existing thing then its existence is an extension of His existence ... and when this perception becomes firmly established, the one which sees nothing in existence except the reality of Allaah..." [Dhilal (6/4002)]
This is the aqidah of Wahdat ul-Wujood of the Extremist Sufis.
He said in his Dhilaal (6/4008): "And the Aahaad hadeeth are not to be taken in the matters of aqeedah, the source is the Qur'aan - and something being mutawaatir is a condition [that has to be fulfilled] in accepting hadeeth in the issues of belief..."
And this is the aqidah of the Mu’tazilah, Ash’aris and other strayers.
And he says in Dhilal (2/1057) "The whole of mankind, including those who repeat from the minarets, in the eastern and western parts of the world, the words ‘Laa ilaaha illallaaha’, without any [consideration of] meaning or reality, then they are the most sinful of people and will be the most severely punished on the day of Judgement because they have apostatised by turning to the worship of the servants (of Allaah)."
And this is the belief of the Khawarij, save that Sayyid Qutb has gone further, exceeded all bounds and performed takfir of the whole Ummah in one sweeping statement!! And this is confirmed by Yoosuf al-Qardaawi in his book - The Priorities of the Islamic Movement (p.110) where he explains that those books of Sayyid Qutb appeared in which Qutb performs takfeer of all societies and in which he announces a destructive jihaad against the whole of mankind.
THREE: Muhammad Qutb says, "Certainly, the matter requires that the people be called afresh to Islaam. Not so because they – in this time – refuse to say with their mouths, ‘Laa ilaaha ilallaaha Muhammad Rasoolullaah’, as the people use to refuse to say it in the very first strangeness [i.e. the call of the Prophet Muhammad]. But [more so] because – in this time – reject the principle requirement of ‘Laa ilaaha illallaaha’ and that is judging to the Shari’ah of Allaah" [Waqi’una al-Mu’asir (p.29)].
I say: This is takfir of everyone in general. And if this is not the case then how can he pass the judgement that they have refused the judgement of Allaah? And how can he make a resemblance between them and the very first Jahiliyyah before the advent of Islaam? All without making any distinction or exception for those who do judge to the Shari’ah of Allaah and who do not have any statute except the Book of Allaah.
And this type of generalisation occurs very frequently from these writers. It is as if they do not acknowledge the presence of an Islamic state in the heart of the Arabian peninsula and also the presence of Muslims in other states amongst the Ahl ul-Hadith and others who are the helpers of the Sunnah and the way of the Salaf.
And it is also strange that such people – or at least some of them – actually live in this Islamic country when they make statements like these, in which there are dangerous elements of confusion for the readers. The unsuspecting readers are made to think that there is not be found a single Islamic state today which utters ‘Laa ilaaha ilallaaha’ and which acts in accordance with its requirements, and which judges to the Shari’ah. And that no individuals or groups from the People of Tawhid are to be found on the face of the earth. This is only a deception of their behalf and a means of causing others to stray and be confused.
Let the student of knowledge therefore, be vigilant of this idea that is spread by many of these writers, may Allaah guide them.
FOUR: One of those who ascribes himself to the da’wah (Salman al-Awdah) states, "And from publicising one’s sin is that a person boasts about his disobedience in front of his friends. He begins to proclaim that he did such and such. And then he begins to count off a list of sins. Such a one will not be forgiven!! Unless he repents, because the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) has judged over him that he will not be forgiven, ‘All of my Ummah will be forgiven…’. And filthier and more grave than this is that some of them will say, ‘I have unlawful relationships’, and ‘I have female friends’ and ‘I have {certain types of) magazines’. Such as person is satisfied with sinfulness. And some of them record their sin on tape and describe how they become deranged by a youthful girl and how they committed unlawful intercourse with her. And this is apostasy from Islaam. Such a one will remain eternally in the Hellfire! Unless he repents."
[Cassette: Jalsah ala ar-Rasif].
And about the singers who distribute their cassettes amongst the youth and which invite the youth to lowly acts, he says, "I am at perfect ease (of conviction) that the one who does this, the least that can be said about him is that he belittles sin. And there is no doubt that belittling sin – especially when it is a major sin and its unlawfulness is agreed upon – is disbelief (kufr) in Allaah. So there is no doubt concerning the likes of these people that this act of theirs is apostasy from Islaam. I say this and my heart is tranquil and at perfect ease with it" [Cassette: Ash-Shabaab, As’ilah wa Mushkilaat]
I say: Certainly takfir and considering the divulgence and spreading of sin amongst the people by way of certain types of media to be a belittlement of sin that constitutes disbelief (kufr), shows the great boldness and courage towards making takfir on account of a major sin. It shows the lack of fearfulness and piety. And this is the methodology of the Khawarij, in that they perform takfir on account of major sins.
And what this person has mentioned about informing others about sins and the various evil connections that sinful people have, then it can be considered plausible, not absolutely the case (as this caller has portrayed) that it is due to istihlaal (declaring the sin to be lawful as a matter of belief). It is possible that ignorance could be the reason behind this evil act. And in such as case admonishment is desirable, not absolute takfir. This is the way of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.
Belittlement (of sin) is not the same as mockery (istihzaa). Everyone who commits a sin, whether a major or minor sin, then he did not commit except after considering it to be minor and having belittled it. Hence the one who belittles sin is not the same as the one who mocks and jests.
FIVE: And yet another one (Nasir al-Umar) says: "The imagination that the evils present in our society are just sins? Many people now imagine that [involvement with] usury is only a sin or a major sin, and that intoxicants and drugs are merely sins, that bribery is a sin or one of the major sins. … No my brothers! I have investigated this matter and it has become clear to me now that many of the people in our society have declared usury to be lawful – and refuge is from Allaah!! Do you know that in the usurious banks in our country there are more than a million people. Allaah is over you. Do all of those millions know that usury is unlawful and that they have only committed this act while it is just a sin? No, by Allaah!! Due to the spread and abundance of sin, the great danger present is that many have declared (istahalloo) these major sins – and refuge is with Allaah" [Cassette: Taweed Awwalan].
I say the same as what I said for the previous examples.
However this statement is more damaging to the one who expressed it in my view and understanding. This is because he said, in exaggeration of the danger, that the various acts of disobedience that take place in the society such as taking usury, consuming intoxicants and acts of bribery, that all of that is not merely a sin or a major sin. And he swore and oath by Allaah over this.
And this resolute [judgement] that the one who commits these sins is one who declares them to be permissible as a matter of belief (mustahill), without actually having heard from someone that he has clearly stated that usury is lawful, that bribery is lawful, that intoxicants and drugs are lawful - resolving oneself upon takfir (of an individual) without having heard any of these expressions, or testifying to istihlaal for him (i.e. his having declared it permissible as a matter of belief), out of mere plausibility, is a clear evidence of the lack of piety and fearfulness and the lack of any concern of this takfiri. And this is the methodology of the Khawarij and the Mu’tazilah.
And my advice to him and his likes is to recant from this type of explication which is dangerous to themselves, before anyone else, and to returning to the truth is better than wallowing in falsehood.
SIX: And yet another one of them – a Doctor in Aqidah (Safar al-Hawali) says, "In this hotel – in every openness – there are drinks, meaning that drinks are presented in relation to what is available… So this is a clear invitation to the consumption of intoxicants and there is [mixed] dancing and nakedness, alongside the consumption of intoxicants. We seek refuge in Allaah from this disbelief (kufr), because declaring what Allaah the Blessed and Exalted has made unlawful to be lawful (istihlaal) is without doubt, clear and open kufr" And he also says in one of his books, "And kufr (disbelief) and heresy (ilhad) has appeared in our midst, and evil has been spread in our districts and invitation is made to fornication on our radios, televisions and we have declared usury to be lawful."
And all of this was extracted and printed in the form of a book – with a variety of different names – ‘Kashf ul-Ghummah an Ulamaa il-Ummah’ in Pakistan, ‘Wa’d Kissinger’ in America and ‘Haqa’iq Hawla Ahdath ul-Khalij’ in Egypt.
I say: You will see that the one who uttered these words has taken it upon himself to say that we have declared usury to be lawful along with other matters that are linked to it. Yet we – by the praise of Allaah – have not declared usury to be permissible and neither has our society. Nor do we consider the mere spread of intoxicants in certain regions to be disbelief that expels from the religion of Islaam. Rather, that with which we worship Allaah with is that the matters which have been mentioned by those who ascribe themselves to the da’wah are all acts of disobedience and sin and not kufr. Rather, all of that is kufr doona kufr, the lesser disbelief, meaning that there are certain acts of disobedience and major sins which negate the presence of perfect and complete Imaan for the one who commits them. But they do not negate the very basis of Imaan, as the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, "A fornicator does not fornicate while he fornicates and remain a believer (at that moment in time) and nor does a thief steal when he steals and remain a believer (at that moment in time)…" to the end of the hadith.
And there is no doubt that the Imaan that has been negated here is the perfect and complete Imaan. We ask Allaah – the Most High – that he grants us success in our religion and guides those and their likes to the truth.
My dear brother and sister reader – O one who has come to the Salafi methodology:
After these examples of the various [astray] ideas found in some of the callers of today, let alone the youth who have been deluded by them, who sit in front of these callers and take from them ideas and beliefs that destroy the Salafi aqidah, after all this you will say: Why should we not speak about the sects which have passed and yet their aqidah remains and their deviation is present in our midst?
So reflect – may Allaah grant you success – about the importance of the dawah of Tawhid, acting upon it and warning against all of the sects, in every time and place, and returning to the methodology of the Salaf us-Salih in light of the Book and the Sunnah – and Allaah knows best. [Courtesy: Abdul Malik Ahmad Ibn al-Mubarak ar-Ramadani and Jamal bin Farihan al-Harithi and Talbees-e-Iblees by Ibn-e-Jawzi]
“The judgement of apostasy and expelling someone from the religion is only appropriate for the people of knowledge who are firmly grounded in knowledge, and they are the judges in the various Sharee’ah law courts, and those who are able of giving legal verdicts. And this is just like the other matters, and it is not the right of every person, or from the right of those who are learning, or those who ascribe themselves to knowledge, but who have deficiency in understanding. It is not appropriate for them to make judgements of apostasy (upon others). Since, mischief will arise from this, and sometimes a Muslim might be judged as an apostate but he is not actually so. And the takfir of a Muslim who has not committed one of the nullifications of Islaam contains great danger. Whoever says to his brother “O Kaafir” or “O Faasiq”, and he is not like that, then the words will fall back upon the one who said them. Hence, the ones who actually judge with apostasy are the legislative judges and those who are able and fit for giving legal verdicts. And as for those who enforce the judgements they are the leaders of the Muslims (wullaat al-amr). As for whatever is other than this, then it is mere confusion.”
“Meting out the punishments is only appropriate for the leader of the Muslims and it is not for every person to establish the punishment, since confusion, and corruption necessarily follows from this, and also the cutting off of the society, tribulations and provocations occur. Establishing the punishments is appropriate (i.e. befits only) to the Muslim leader. The Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Pardon each other for the punishments that are between you, but when the execution of the punishment reaches the [authority of the] Sultaan, then Allaah curses both the one who seeks intercession and the one who grants the intercession [i.e. to revoke the punishment]”. And from the responsibilities of the Sultaan in Islaam, and from those matters that befit him is the establishment of the punishments after they have been established legislatively, via the Sharee’ah law courts, upon the one who fell into the crime for which the legislator has designated a specific punishment, such as for stealing. So what has been said is that establishing the punishments (i.e. meting them out) is from the rights of the Sultaan, and when the Muslims do not have a Sultaan amongst them, then they should just suffice with commanding the good and forbidding the evil, and calling to Allaah, the Might and Majestic, with wisdom, good admonition and arguing with that which is best. And it is not permissible for individuals (in the society) to establish the hudood, since that, as we have mentioned, will bring about chaos, and also provocations, and tribulations will arise, and this contains greater corruption than it contains rectification. And from amongst the Sharee’ah principles that are submitted to is, “Repelling the harmful things takes precedence over bringing about the beneficial things”. FURTHER REFERENCES/READING: The Takfiris make unlicensed Takfeer of Governments and scholars and call the common-folk to bloody revolution as a way to remove such governments and establish Islaamic Law. http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/downloads/pdf/MSC060006.pdf
