| I am a Daddy! |
[Sep. 6th, 2005|08:46 pm] |
Allahu Akbar!
I am a daddy.
More later insha Allah.... |
|
|
| Just to Update For Those that are Interested... |
[Feb. 24th, 2005|09:41 am] |
I know I haven't updated in a long time, but when something important happens, I guess I should here.
I am currently working on my second script and I pray that it will be finished (Insha Allah) in less than two months. Won't give too much detail about it but racism will be the underlying theme in the script.
My work schedule will set me back a few days/weeks, but I insist on working hard to get this finished as soon as possible.
I pray that Allah grants me success in this project! |
|
|
| Participation in the Political System |
[Sep. 13th, 2004|11:40 pm] |
PARTICIPATION IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM:
Introduction:
During the latter half of this century, the Muslim Ummah has been trying to revive itself from its current situation. Many Muslims and Muslim groups are trying to create the change using various means and styles. The concept of participating in the system, or changing the existing situation by using the current political institutions and systems, has become the dominant means in attempting to change the Ummah's situation. This concept has become so thoroughly entrenched in the minds of the Muslims that many of them refuse to recognize or consider any other alternative.
It is agreed upon unanimously by all Muslims that Islam is the only solution, not only to the problems of the Muslim Ummah but to the problems of the world. The Muslims also agree upon that Islam must be established through the methodology of the Prophet (saw). When the issue of how the Prophet (saw) carried the Daw'ah and established Islam is raised, the confusion begins. Changing the system from within, participating within the system, joining the current status quo, have all come to represent the major political styles of the mainstream Muslim Ummah, and many Muslims believe that the Prophet (saw) used this method to change his situation and establish Islam.
The Muslim Ummah has the obligation before Allah (swt) to supervise the affairs of humanity:
"Thus We have made you a just (and the best) Ummah, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you." [TMQ 2:143] "You are the best Ummah ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'ruf (Islam and all that Islam has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (Kufr and all that Islam has forbidden) and you believe in Allah." [TMQ 3:110]
For the Muslims to execute this responsibility, they must establish Islam and bring the Akham Shar'iyah into existence. To change their situation, the Muslims must understand how to bring Islam to the implementation level, which implies understanding the Seerah of the Prophet (saw) and the message of Islam itself. The Muslims today believe they can change their situation by casting more votes at the ballot boxes, holding more rallies and protests, increasing their numbers, patching, up the current systems with a bits and pieces of the Ahkam Shar'iyah, writing more letters to the international community, or having a few "Islamists" in a parliament or congress. There is no way to expect the Ummah to reestablish Islam by any other method other than the Islamic method, and there is no way for the Ummah to establish, implement, and propagate a message that it does not understand. How the Ummah proceeds to revive itself reflects its understanding of Islam itself, the ideas and concepts it carries, and the reference it adopts. With this in mind, the issue of participating within the current political system, and all that this concept entails, must be addressed from the Islamic perspective.
PARTICIPATION IN THE SYSTEM DEFINED:
( Read more... ) |
|
|
| Intellectual Leadership in Islam (Part Three) |
[Sep. 12th, 2004|02:57 pm] |
To summarise three ideologies exist in the world, Capitalism,
Socialism and the third ideology is Islam. Each of these ideologies
has its own doctrine from which a system emanates, a measure for man's
actions, a particular view of society, and a method to implement the
system.
As for `aqeedah the Communist ideology holds that matter is the origin
of things and that all things emanate from is by means of
materialistic evolving i.e. dialectic materialism.
The Capitalist ideology believes that religion must be separated from
life which results in the separation of religion from the state.
Hence, the Capitalists don't discuss the issue whether a Creator
exists or not, they merely discuss the point which says that the
Creator has no right to interfere in the life regardless of whether
his existence is acknowledged or not. Consequently, those
acknowledging the existence of a Creator and those who deny it are
equal in the Capitalist doctrine which is the separation of religion
from life.
As for Islam, it believes that Allah (swt) created everything in
existence and that He (swt) sent prophets and messengers with His
(swt) deen to human beings, and that man will account for his actions
on the Day of Judgement. Therefore, Islam's `aqeedah is the belief
(Iman) in Allah (swt), His angels, His books, His messengers, and the
Qadaa and Qadar, the good and bad of which are from Allah (swt).
However, regarding the manner in which the system emanates from the
doctrine, Communism maintains that the system is taken from the tools
of production, thus the feudal system was the product of the dominant
mode of production in the feudal society, namely the axe. The
evolution of society to Capitalism made machinery become the tool of
production, thus the Capitalist system is taken from this mode of
production through dialectic materialism. Capitalism in separating
religion from life, maintains that it is man who sets the system for
this life based upon his situation. Islam considers that Allah (swt)
has assigned a system for man to proceed in this life. He (swt) has
sent Muhammad (saw) with this system which was revealed to him (saw)
and man must follow it. Hence, a Muslim studies the problem and
deduces its solution from the Quran and the Sunnah.
As the measure for actions, Communism considers materialism, i.e. the
materialistic system, so as matter evolves so does the measure.
Capitalism considers the measure to be benefit, and on this basis,
actions are evaluated. Islam considers the halal and the haram as the
measure, i.e. the commands of Allah (swt). Accordingly, the halal is
performed and the haram shunned; the measure neither evolves nor
changes, nor is it influenced by benefit, and thus it is only the
Shari`ah which governs.
As for society Communism considers it consisting of a whole unit
comprising of earth, modes of production, nature, and man which all
are considered to be matter. When nature and its content evolve man
evolves with it, thus the society evolves. Consequently, society is
subjugated to evolving materialism. Therefore, man has to only bring
forth the contradictions to promote this evolutionary process. When
the society evolves the individual evolves with it and thus man
revolves with the society like a spoke in a wheel.
Capitalism views society as composed of individuals. Hence, if the
individual's affairs are managed the society's affairs will be
managed. Care is therefore, only given to the individual while the
government acts only on the individual's behalf. Consequently, this
ideology is individualistic.
Islam views the `aqeedah as the basis of society. This `aqeedah
includes its thoughts, sentiments and the system which emanates from
it. Thus, the Islamic society is brought into being when the Islamic
thoughts and sentiments dominate and the Islamic system is implemented
among the people.
( Read more... ) |
|
|
| Intellectual Leadership in Islam (Part Two) |
[Sep. 8th, 2004|03:23 pm] |
If we examine the ideologies that exist in the world, we will find
only three: Capitalism, Communism and Islam. The first two ideologies
are implemented by states, while Islam is not carried by a state, but
rather by individuals within different peoples, nevertheless it is
internationally existent in the whole globe.
Capitalism is based upon the separation of religion from life. This
idea constitutes its doctrine, its ideological leadership and its
intellectual basis. According to this intellectual basis man lays the
system for life and it is necessary to preserve for man the following
types of freedom: freedom of belief, freedom of opinion, freedom of
ownership and personal freedom. The Capitalist economic system has
arisen out of the freedom of ownership and capitalism has become the
most prominent feature that has sprung out from the doctrine of this
ideology. Thus, this ideology is called Capitalism named after its
most prominent aspect.
As for democracy, which is ascribed to this ideology, it stems from
man laying his own system. The people are therefore, the source of
authority. They determine the structure and function of the system,
employ the ruler to govern them, and take away the authority from the
ruler when they want to and establish for him the laws they like. This
is because ruling is a contract between the people and the ruler to
rule according to a system people choose to be applied.
Though democracy is a part of capitalism, it is less prominent than
the economic system. Because the Capitalist economy in the West
influences the government to the extent that the Capitalists are
effectively the real rulers in the Capitalist countries which
implement Capitalism. Moreover, democracy is not limited to this
ideology, since the Communists also claim to be democratic and pretend
that governing belongs to the people. It is therefore more accurate to
call this ideology the Capitalist Ideology or Capitalism.
This ideology emerged when the emperors and kings of Europe and Russia
were using religion as a means to exploit the people, transgress
against them and suck their blood. The clergy was used as an
instrument for this. There arose, as a result of the oppression, a
bloody struggle in which the philosophers and thinkers went as far as
denying religion. While, others acknowledged religion but called for
its separation from life. Eventually, the opinion of the majority of
the philosophers and thinkers settled on one idea, the separation of
religion from life. It naturally resulted in the separation of
religion from the state. Thus, the opinion settled on avoiding the
discussion of religion, whether in denial or recognition, and instead
confined discussion to the necessity of separating religion from life.
This notion constituted a compromise between the clergy, on the one
hand, who sought to control everything in the name of religion, and
the philosophers and thinkers, on the other hand, who denied religion
and theocracy. Therefore, this idea does not deny religion nor does it
allow it to interfere in the life, instead it just separates it from
life. Consequently, the doctrine which was embraced by the West is the
separation of religion from life, and this doctrine is the
intellectual basis upon which all thoughts are built, the basis for
the intellectual direction of man and his viewpoint in life. It is the
basis for solving all of life's problems. It is the intellectual
leadership carried and propagated in the world by the West.
The separation of religion from life implicitly recognises religion,
and by doing so, it recognises that there is a Creator of the
universe, man and life, and that there will be a Day of Resurrection.
Since, these are the origins of religion as a religion. It provides an
idea about the universe, man, life, and what preceded this life and
what is to follow it because it didn't deny the existence of religion.
When it claimed the separation of life from religion it actually
confirmed its implicit existence. Therefore it proved the existence of
religion and gave the idea that there is no relationship between this
life with what preceded it and with what is to follow it, and that
religion is a mere relationship between the individual and his
Creator. Accordingly, this doctrine (separation of religion from
life), by its all inclusive concept, constitutes a comprehensive idea
about the universe, man and life. Thus capitalism, by this
explanation, is an ideology like any other.
( Read more... ) |
|
|
| Thinking Process |
[Aug. 29th, 2004|06:45 pm] |
THINKING PROCESS
It was mentioned before that the process of thinking occurs when one or more of the senses falls upon a subject matter, which is then transferred to the brain and linked to previous information about that subject matter. After the linking with previous information and a judgement is made, that the process of thinking has occurred. Therefore, the necessary components of thought can be summarized as: a subject or subject matter, the senses, the able brain, and previous information. If there is an absence of any of these components, it is impossible for a thought to take place. We can illustrate this process by discussing a book written in the chinese language. If this book were being read by a person who had no clue about the structure, syntax, or even letters of the chinese language, it would be impossible for him to discern anything whatsoever from the contents of the book. There is a subject matter (the book itself), the sense of sight falls on the letters of the book and the images of the lettering is transferred to the brain. However, since there is no previous information regarding the chinese language, no thought can be generated regarding the contents of the book.
Today, humans get previous information from each other. The question however is where did the first man get his previous information from? This question is answered by the Quran, with the story of Adam (as). Allah the exalted informs us-in translation:
"And He taught Adam all the names, then He showed then to the angels, saying: Inform Me of the names of these if you are truthful. They said: Be glorified! We have no knowledge except what you have taught us, Indeed you are the Knower, the Wise. He said: O Adam, inform them of their names, then He said: Didn't I tell you I know the secret of the heavens and the earth?"
So the Creator of the universe stated that He was the one who gave the first man, our father Adam, the previous information (names of everything). Today in the West, the scientists and scholars, are still at a loss in determining the mind, and its components. Thus, it is not uncommon to find articles in Time Magazine, or documentaries on public broadcast television, wondering, debating, or speculating upon the mind. The Communists came closest to determining the mind. They claimed that the mind was a reflection of matter on the brain, and they ruled out altogether the role of previous information. This was nesessary for them since admitting the need for previous information to think is ultimately submitting to a Creator. Since communism is based on materialism, and it's evolution, thereby dismissing the role of a Creator, the previous information also had to be dismissed. The communist theory about the mind is also invalid because the brain does not have any ability to reflect information. It is not at all like a mirror, nor does it act like one, as they have defind it. So it is incorrect to say that the brain reflects information. Secondly, this hypothesis was put only to substantiate another hypothesis called Materialism or material evolution. In the West, after the industrial revolution and the use of the scientific method of thinking which led to the success of the industrial revolution, the western scientists and scholars began to depend solely on the scientific way of thinking in all aspects of life. Science and the scientific method of thinking was not ristricted to the physical and material sciences like physics, chemistry and thermodynamics, but went to cover fields like psychology, sociology, and anthropology. While the scientific method of thinking is valid in chemistry, astronomy and physics, it is invalid in psychology and sociology. The scientific method revolves around discarding any previous opinions about the subject being analyzed, then studying the object, taking it out of it's natural environment,observing its qualities and aspects, and then deriving formulas or conclusions based on the analyzed properties.
With regard to psychology, sociology, and any other science related to people, the scientific method is invalid because the behavior of people is controlled by their believed- in thoughts. So observing the actions of people with the intent of deriving conclusions or making generalizations may well lead to error. Without studying the thoughts which led to the action, or the creed and point of view of life which specified the thought, any conclusion that is derived is doubtful. Also it is not possible for emotions like fear, or greed to be placed under a microscope. One cannot study the components of the instincts, or isolate their location in the human body. Also this method cannot be used in policy analysis or in deriving divine rules. Consequently, the scientific method is limited to the areas and aspects that it can study i.e. the tangible matter. Western scientists and scholars, nonetheless use this method in all areas. This method is also an invalid method to be used in arriving at the Ultimate Conclusion. The Creator himself cannot be put under the scalpel or disector of the biologist, and consequently, this method is limited with regard to arriving at the Ultimate Conclusion.
For example,Rashad Khalifa tried to use the scientific method in relation to the Islamic Aqeedah. He denied some ayats of the Quran, since it did not conform to his theory of the number 19. After this he claimed that he was a messenger, saying that Allah took a covenant from all the messengers, about his messengership.(We seek refuge in Allah from believing this). It must be understood that the Quran is not a math book, a physics book, or a biological book. The messenger of Allah (saaws) encouraged the people to study and observe in the laboratories. However, when it came to halal and haram, the human mind had no say in their legislation. We find other muslims, overloading, stretching, and contorting certain ayats to conform to certain biological findings and astronomical breakthroughs. For example, the ayat from Surat-ur-Rahman where Allah says-in translation: "O company of Jinns and Humans, if you can get out of the heavens and earth, then do so, but you cannot do it except with an authority (sultan)." (Surah Rahman: 33)
( Read more... ) |
|
|
| Intellectual Leadership in Islam (Part One) |
[Aug. 29th, 2004|04:34 pm] |
Whenever the level of thinking declines, the wataniyah (patriotic bond) amongst people arises. It arises in a land to which they are attached. The survival instinct pushes them to defend themselves and the land they live on and automatically leads to the patriotic bond. This patriotic bond is the weakest
and lowest level of bond, it is present amongst animals and birds as well as human beings.
It manifests itself in an emotional manner and is necessary in the event of a foreign aggression against the land, either when attacked or occupied. The patriotic bond never arises when the land is safe from aggression. It ceases when the foreigner is repelled or banished from the homeland. Therefore, this bond is primitive.
Moreover, when the thinking level is narrow, the qawmiyah (nationalism) arises. It is similar to a family bond though in a broader sense. Once the survival instinct is deeply rooted in the individual it manifests towards the inclination to dominate others. The inclination to dominate is individualistic in a man of low intellect. However, as the individuals horizon broadens his inclination to dominate widens, thus his attempts to dominate increases from
his family, then to his people in the homeland and once that is achieved the dominance of his people over all other people becomes the objective. The struggle for dominance creates internal feuds amongst the members of the family. Hence, when the dominance within the family is settled then the feud
transfers to a feud between his family and other families until the dominance is settled in favour of one family or a group of people from different families. In the end, the conflict arises between his people and others for dominance and achieving a high standard of living.
Racialism prevails amongst the people sharing this bond who are subject to whims and selfishness. Consequently, it is an inhumane bond and it remains exposed to internal feuds if it is not preoccupied with external conflicts.
Therefore, the patriotic bond is unsuitable for the following three reasons:
( Read more... ) |
|
|
| The Way to Belief |
[Aug. 25th, 2004|03:35 pm] |
The Way to Belief
Man revives according to what he carries in terms of thought about life, the universe and man, and about their relationship, as a whole, with what preceded life and what comes after it. Hence, in order for man to progress, it is necessary to radically and comprehensively change his current thought and generate another thought for him, because it is the thought that generates the concepts about things and concentrates them. Man shapes his behaviour in life according to his concepts about it. Hence, man's concepts about a person he likes shapes his behaviour towards that person and in contrast with his behaviour towards a person he hates as well as towards whom he holds the concepts of hate, and also in contrast with his behaviour towards a person he does not know nor holds any concepts about. So, human behaviour is linked to mans concepts and when we wish to change the behaviour of the declined man and make it a refined behaviour, it is imperative to change his concepts first. Allah (swt) says:
"Allah does not change the circumstances of any people until they have
changed what is within themselves." [TMQ 13:11]
The only way to change man's concepts is by establishing the thought about life on earth in order to set up the correct concepts about it. The thoughts about life on earth will not be established in a productive manner in one's mind unless the thought about the universe, man, life, and about the reality before and after life, and the current life's relationship with what is before and after it is set up. This can be achieved by giving a comprehensive thought about the universe, man and life, because this is the intellectual basis upon which all ideas about life are built. Giving this comprehensive thought about these matters is the solution to man's greatest problem. Once this problem is solved all other problems are solved, because all other problems are either partial compared to the main problem or ramifications of it. This solution wouldn't lead to the correct progress, unless it is a sound solution which is compatible with man's innate nature and which convinces the mind and thus fills the heart with tranquillity.
The true solution cannot be reached except through an illuminated thinking process about the universe, man and life. Consequently, those who yearn for progress and ways of intellectual ascension must first solve this problem in a correct manner by means of illuminated thought. This solution is none other than the `aqeedah which serves as the intellectual basis upon which every thought generated about behaviour in life and about its systems is built.
Islam turned to the greatest problem of man and solved it in a manner that agrees with his nature, convinces his mind, and fills his heart with tranquillity. Islam made the intellectual acceptance of this solution a condition for embracing it. Therefore, Islam is built upon one basis, i.e., the `aqeedah, which states there is a Creator behind the universe, man, and life on earth, there is a creator who created them all and created everything: He is Allah. And that this Creator created everything out of nothing. His existence is compulsory and He is not created - otherwise, He wouldn't be a Creator. His being a Creator makes it necessary that He is not created and that His
existence is imperative because all things depend for their existence on Him and He does not depend on anything.
The things which are comprehensible to the mind, man, life, and the universe, are limited, weak, imperfect, it is imperative for them to have a Creator. Man is limited, because he grows in every aspect (intellectually and physically) to a certain limit that he cannot surpass. Life is limited, because it manifests itself only in individuals and ends with the individual. The universe is limited, because it is the sum of celestial bodies, and each body is limited, and the sum of limited things is irrefutably limited. Thus, man, life, and the universe are definitely limited. When we ponder on the limited things, we see that they are not azaly (eternal - having no beginning or end), otherwise they could not be limited, and therefore, they must be created by something else, which is the Creator of man, life and the universe? This Creator, is either created by someone else, created himself, or eternal and self-subsistent. It is absolutely false that he is created by someone else, because if so this entity would be limited and could not be
rationally considered as the Creator. As for being self created, the
ramification of which would be simultaneously being created by himself and creating himself. This is simply absurd. Hence, the creator whose existence is imperative must be eternal and
self-subsistent. He is Allah.
( Read more... ) |
|
|
New Community on Islam ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif) learn_islam |
[Aug. 11th, 2004|06:34 pm] |
Welcome to a new community on Islam!
LJ Portal for Islamic Information
A community specifically designed for giving and recieving daw'ah to muslims and non-muslims. This community is focused on discussion and debate. For further clarification check out the community info page.
Muslims and non-muslims from all backgrounds are welcome!
Please visit: learn_islam |
|
|
| Political Awareness |
[Jul. 28th, 2004|10:59 pm] |
The Islamic state is an ideological state. It's main function is to carry the Islamic call to the world. Therefore, it must have international standing and be able to influence international relations. Consequently, the political concepts that are carried by politicians must be those related to international politics. They must not have concepts linked to regional or local politics alone. In other words, the politicians, being Muslims, must carry political concepts from an international angle and not from a local or regional angle alone. Therefore, as their state is an Islamic state, they have no choice but to enjoy complete political awareness. So, as Muslims, and as their state is the Islamic state, whose fundamental function is to carry the Islamic call to the world, it is mandatory for them to possess not only political awareness but that this awareness must be complete.
Political awareness does not only mean awareness of political and international situations, political events, or simply keeping up with international politics and actions, although these are required for it to be complete, but Political awareness means viewing the world from a particular angle. For Muslims, the particular angle is the Islamic Aqeedah, namely La Ilaha illa Allah Muhammadur Rasoolullah. Allah's Messenger said: "I was commanded to fight the people until they say La Ilaha ill Allah, Muhammadur Rasoolullah. If they say it, they will secure from me their blood and wealth except for what is rightfully due". This is political awareness, viewing the world without a particular angle is shallowness, and not political awareness. Furthermore restricting oneself to the local or regional domain is frivolity, and not political awareness. Political awareness cannot be achieved unless two elements are present; the entire world must be the domain of ones view and secondly this view must emanate from a particular angle, whether this angle is a specific ideology, thought, benefit or anything else.
This is the reality of political awareness. Naturally for the Muslim, the particular angle is the Islamic Aqeedah. Since this is the reality of political awareness, it becomes mandatory on the politician to engage in struggle to formulate a specific concept about life for man as a man in every place. Carrying this concept is the foremost responsibility to be carried on the politically aware persons shoulders. For him there will be no rest until he has exerted his utmost in establishing it.
( Read more... ) |
|
|
| Married to Aishah :-) |
[Jul. 18th, 2004|08:44 pm] |
I'm so blessed to me married (once again) to Aishah. Under the most amazing circumstances we're together again and I'm so happy that Allah answered my prayers and blessed me with a great smart, pious, beautiful, etc., Muslim wife that makes me so proud.
I'm beyond happy. Too happy for words to describe.
I love Aishah so much. |
|
|
| Off-Topic: I'm Married |
[Jul. 16th, 2004|11:57 am] |
To all those who are concerned:
AlHamdulillah, I am married once again. :-) |
|
|
| Muslims of `Ilm al-Kalam |
[May. 26th, 2004|05:26 pm] |
In this article we will look more closely into the study by Muslims of Ilm al
Kalam (Science of Discourse, discussion regarding the Creator, his attributes
based on intellect and Greek logic) and how it was divergent from the
understanding of the Sahabah (raa).
Within a few decades of Muhammad (saaw)'s death, Islam had liberated most of
the lands in the Near East, the whole of North Africa, Spain, and had
penetrated into France. The defeat of the Muslims by Charles Martel at Tours in
AD 732 curbed Islam's expansion into western Europe.
Although the Islamic Society, in the 2nd century of Hijrah, was strong and
thriving, certain Muslims began translating Greek philosophy into Arabic. All
of this was done under the pretense of countering the thinking of the
non-Muslims who came under Islam as new lands were being liberated. Their goal
was to reconcile the Islamic tenets with Greek thoughts and Christian beliefs
and exhibit their universality. These philosophers mingled reasoning with
revelation and sought to harmonize Greek philosophy with the Islamic ideology
and attempted to borrow their discussions and debates on the attributes of
Allah (swt).
The outcome of this was the emergence of the socalled Islamic philosophy and
"Islamic philosophers" like Ibn Sina, al Farabi, al Kindi, Ibn Rushd. All of
them were heavily stung by Greek philosophy. They quoted and studied Socrates,
Plato, Aristotle, etc., in the same breath that one would find Muslims drawing
passages from the Qur'an. They perceived these forebears to possess
extraordinary intellectual powers and considered their works as profound. They
flattered themselves with the thought that they would honor themselves by
questioning even the truth. They indulged and contended on issues like: the
eternity of the world, the everlasting nature of the world, the denial of the
Divine attributes, the impossibility of the annihilation of the human souls,
the denial of resurrection, and the belief that the Creator knows only the
universals and not the particulars.
In the same century, the Muslim Ummah saw the unfortunate birth of Ilm al Kalam
and the scholars who studied this subject. Ilm al Kalam was the theological
debate on Aqeedah issues and attributes of the Creator in conjunction with
logical (aql) arguments borrowed from the Greeks.
Islam encourages individuals to discuss things around us to arrive at a
concrete conclusion in the Unicity of Allah (swt) as a Creator and as the
Supreme. However, once this Islamic Aqeedah is adopted, the Qur'an discusses
the attributes and we believe in these attributes without discussing how He
(swt) has acquired these attributes.
The role of intellect (Aql) is to establish the correct Aqeedah, understand the
Wahy (revelation) as a reference, and to extract rulings from the sources
(Qur'an & Sunnah). It is not meant for passing a judgment on the text or
debating the attributes of Allah (swt). The human intellect is totally helpless
in understanding the attributes of Allah (swt) because it cannot perceive Allah
(swt). While it can perceive the existence of Allah (swt). Unfortunately, these
scholars of Ilm al Kalam began to debate and discuss these attributes by
intellect (Aql).
The major problem and mistake of these scholars was that they first studied
Greek philosophy in great detail and vigor. After this they debated, analyzed,
and established their opinions. The last step in this faulty intellectual
exercise was to probe the Qur'an and Sunnah for support of their established
opinions.
These futile attempts led to the establishment of certain groups who were more
concerned with enforcing their opinions and thoughts on the Ummah. In the case
of Khalifa Al Mamoun, he tried to impose the opinions of Al Mu'tazilla on the
masses. Unfortunately, these attempts penetrated the society and entangled the
Ummah on issues that were never important and never discussed by the Sahaba
(raa). In addition, other schools of Kalam came to existence like Al
Qadariyyah, Al Jabriyyah, Al Khawarij, and Al Ash'ari.
These opinions and thoughts caused tremendous disturbances in the Muslim Ummah.
It subsequently became heavily distracted by these debates and never fully came
out of this turmoil with a complete and correct understanding of Islam. The
complete and correct understanding that the Sahabah (raa) had acquired, from
the Prophet (saaw).
Why did not the Sahabah (raa) not encounter the same debates and problems as
the ones encountered by the above mentioned individuals ?
The Sahabah (raa) never indulged in these futile arguments and debates. Instead
we witnessed their implementation and propagation of Islam to the far reaches
of the world. Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali (raa), and others were the closest
companions of the Prophet (saaw). Yet we never read or hear of any debates on
the attributes of Allah (swt) or in other philosophical issues. This was due to
the busying of themselves in the implementation of Islam and the custody of the
people's affairs. They had greater concern for maintaining the correct
methodology of understanding Islam which they acquired from the Prophet (saaw).
They could not afford to sit around and debate on hair-splitting philosophies
and the idly contemplate on the attributes of Allah (swt).
They clearly saw that the road to victory, i.e. paradise, lies in the
application of laws and regulations and abiding by it as prescribed by Allah
(swt) in the Qur'an and Sunnah. Although they questioned every action as to
whether it was haram or halal, they refrained from discussing the theological
aspects of the revelation. To them it did not matter. What did matter to them
was the applicability and the implementation of the Shariah.
They did not approach the Qur'an for the purpose of intellectual exercise, nor
for the purpose literacy of taste or imaginative enjoyment. None of them came
to the Qur'an to increase his knowledge for the sake of knowledge itself. They
rather turned to the Qur'an to find out what the Almighty Creator had
prescribed for him and for the Ummah at large to implement.
They expanded their individual knowledge and the Ummah's as well by performing
ijtihad, qiyas,... and not by involving themselves in philosophical debates. In
fact, the Prophet (saaw) warned them and the Muslim Ummah of seeking loopholes
in rulings and arguing over futile issues. He warned the Ummah of the Jews and
Christians who had involved themselves with these debates. One such example was
the debate between the Jews and Christians on the gender of the Angels.
The Sahabah (raa) realized that the Muslims held a unique advantage of having
the Qur'an and the Sunnah. They were to rule and judge among men on the basis
of the Revealed Word.
" O you who have attained the faith ! Be ever steadfast in your devotion to
Allah, bearing witness to the truth in all equity; and never let the hatred of
anyone lead you into the sin of deviating from justice. Be just; that is nearer
to taqwa, and fear Allah for Allah is well acquainted with all that you do. " (
Al Mai'dah, 8) |
|
|
| Modernizing History |
[May. 6th, 2004|05:08 pm] |
"All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the
pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the
power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and
base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith
of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ!"
With these closing words Pope Urban II launched the first crusades against the
Muslims in 1095. At the Council of Clermont he called on the Christians to
fight "the enemies of the Lord" in the East and to restore the land of
Palestine to the rule of Christianity. However, his present-day successor Pope
John Paul II, in an unprecedented volte-face apologised for the Crusades and
sought God's forgiveness for the sins of Roman Catholics through the ages. In
March 2000 in one of the celebrations marking the beginning of the new
Christian millennium he stated, "We are asking pardon... for the use of
violence that some have committed in the service of truth...". The phrase
"violence in the service of truth" is an often-used reference to the treatment
meted out to heretics during the Inquisition, the Crusades, and forced
conversions of native peoples.
In a similar case in March 1998, President Clinton on a trip to Uganda
acknowledged that the United States was wrong to benefit from slavery. He said
the U.S. had not always done the right thing by Africa, and that perhaps its
worst sin had been that of neglect and ignorance. The President was taking
tentative steps towards what seemed like a public apology for America's role in
the slave trade.
In November of the same year (1998), numerous cases concerning the treatment of
prisoners of war (PoWs) by the Japanese began to surface in the media. Several
war veterans from various countries like America, the Netherlands and Britain
have been demanding monetary compensation from the Japanese for the suffering
they endured in the PoW camps. The veterans filed lawsuits and started legal
proceedings against the Japanese government and even against some business
firms like Nippon Steel.
The common thread running through these seemingly disparate events is the
drastic reassessment of past events, an effort to right some historical wrongs.
Countries, peoples and societies who look back into their past are being forced
to re-evaluate it in a different light. What was once acceptable and right has
now become unacceptable and wrong. That which was praiseworthy has now become
deplorable and vice versa. Yesterday's freedom fighters are now considered
today's terrorists. Nations that develop nuclear warheads in this age run the
risk of being isolated when a few decades ago it was the measure of advanced
nations. Invading and colonising a country was quite acceptable in the 19th
century, whereas any nation entertaining such notions today is carpet-bombed
and strangled with international sanctions. And the list of historical
reassessments goes on...
So, why does this occur, why does the perception of right and wrong keep
shifting and changing? We are told that man is constantly learning from his
mistakes, that we are becoming more responsible and mature in our outlook. The
advocates of this view highlight principles like democracy, freedom and human
rights which they claim have become de facto standards of human decency
replacing dictatorships, suppression and crimes against humanity as proof of
mans conceptual progression.
This view is false as it assumes the acceptance of specific Western values and
norms as the universal standards of right and wrong. The fact of the matter is
constantly changing criteria of right and wrong is a phenomenon only peculiar
to man made viewpoints. Since the West discarded religion and adopted
secularism it has glorified the limited mind of man and overestimated its
capability to the point of elevating it to the level of Lawmaker. Herein lies
the explanation of the inconsistence of criteria and the reason for the West's
need to constantly re-evaluate history. Rules and laws of any society reflect
the perception of what is considered good and praiseworthy or what is regarded
as reprehensible and blameworthy. Therefore, when the limited mind of man is
assigned the authority to dictate what is right and wrong the rules and laws it
gives rise to share this limited nature of the mind and its shortcomings. In
effect, when society decides to change its mind about certain things, the rules
and regulations are altered to reflect this change. For instance, if the
overwhelming British public opinion is for the legalisation of cannabis the
government may have no choice but to legalise it. The inevitable result is
legislative contradiction and the meaninglessness of justice as it becomes
relative within man-made systems. Issues previously considered as criminal will
become legal and acceptable and vice versa. Little wonder then that the Pope
under pressure from the secular onslaught, felt compelled to apologise for what
is now considered a crime sanctioned by the Church against humanity.
For justice to have any meaning it must be free from relativity and subjection
to continuous re-examination. This means the rules and laws governing the
affairs of mankind should have fixed criteria that don't fluctuate. It is quite
obvious the man-made systems of the West are incapable of delivering this
solution. Only Islam, as a complete system, possesses these qualities. The
rules and regulations of Islam do not change over time because they do not
originate from the limited mind of man; they are legislated by his Creator,
Allah (swt).
"The rule is to none but Allah." (TMQ 6:57)
Since man is unable to attribute the qualities of right and wrong to actions
with certainty, Islam absolved him of this responsibility. Islam made the halal
and haram permanent criteria. Whatever Islam designates as good and acceptable
or bad and unacceptable shall remain so for all times and places. Therefore,
reviewing Islamic history in light of contemporary changes with a view to
correct the Shari'ah rules for faults or apologise for their application is
unnecessary and preposterous to say the least.
Nevertheless, the kuffar would like nothing much than for us to adopt their
corrupt viewpoint in such matters. On the 23rd of September 2000 the US
congress made a move to pass a bill, sponsored by the Armenian community in
America to press Turkey for financial compensation and the return of provinces
granted to Armenia in 1919 but which were later recaptured as Armenia fell to
the Soviet Army. Likewise, on the 18th of January 2001 the lower house of the
French parliament unanimously approved a bill which attempts to label with
genocide the 1915 quelling of the Armenian nationalistic rebellion by the
Uthmani Khilafah against its authority.
Under no circumstances should Muslims make an apology or express regret for
applying Islam. It was through the application of Islam that the vast numbers
of humanity came under the shade and mercy of this deen, turning them into this
distinguished Ummah.
"Verily you are the best Ummah brought unto mankind, enjoining the right,
forbidding the evil and believing in Allah." [3:110]
Acknowledgement of this foul idea could amount to accepting to condemn what the
Messenger of Allah (saw) and his Sahabah (ra) accomplished. The kuffar would
have us call into question their noble deeds. They desire that we denounce the
expulsion of the jews from the Arabian Peninsula by the Messenger of Allah
(saw) and from Jerusalem by Khaleefah Umar (ra), even though this remains valid
to this day despite Yasser Arafat's efforts to the contrary.
A study of the history of Islam reveals that the world experienced under the
leadership of Islam such peace and justice modern man can only imagine. The
Islamic Ummah has no reason to rectify its magnificent history. It is the West
that has unleashed incalculable misery upon humanity that has cause for
concern. |
|
|
| Molding People |
[Apr. 24th, 2004|02:16 pm] |
The Messenger of Allah died following the entire Arabian Peninsula embracing
Islam and extinguishing the folly of polytheism. The peninsula became an
Islamic land ruled solely according to the Islamic `Aqeedah and the systems
that emanated from it. He (saaw) died only after Allah (swt) had perfected the
Deen, completed His favor unto the Muslims and chose for them Islam as their
Deen, but not before he (saaw) had begun to invite the neighboring nations and
peoples to Islam by sending envoys to their kings and rulers as well as by
dispatching expeditions to raid the Roman frontiers of Mu'tah and Tabuk.
After his death, the Khulafa' al-Rashidun continued the Islamic expansion.
Iraq was inhabited by a mixture of Arabs and Persians who professed the faiths
of the Christians, Mazdakyya and Zaradashtyya. This was the first territory of
the Persian Empire to be liberated, followed by Persia itself and al-Sham.
Persia was inhabited by Persians, Jews and Christians under Persian rule, while
al-Sham was a Roman colony where the predominantly Roman-Christian culture was
accompanied by Syrians, Armenians, Jews, and Arabs. Egypt was liberated
afterwards, and a mixture of Egyptians, Jews, and Romans too inhabited it.
Later the Berber region of North Africa was annexed to it.
During the Ummayads, Sind, Khawariz, Samarqand, and eventually Al-Andalus, were
co-opted by the Islamic State. All of these countries varied in the nationality
of their peoples, their language, their religion, traditions, customs, laws and
culture. They naturally differed from each other in mentality and attitude,
making the process of molding these countries together and uniting them into a
single Ummah adopting the same Deen, language, and culture, a colossal task.
Only Islam accomplished this tremendous achievement through the Islamic State
that served as a vehicle for the implementation of the Islamic way of life.
Once the banner of Islam had engulfed those people and ruled them, they quickly
embraced the Islamic belief and consolidated themselves into a single Ummah.
This feat was due to the effect of the Islamic rule and the Islamic `Aqeedah.
Many factors led to the successful molding of these disparate peoples into one
Ummah, the most important of which were:
( Read more... ) |
|
|
| The Khilafah Is The Only State That Guarantees The Security And Privacy Of Its Citizens |
[Apr. 16th, 2004|05:46 pm] |
The Khilafah Is The Only State That Guarantees The Security And Privacy Of Its Citizens
Much of the West's twentieth century focused on the threat of Communism and the
"Big Brother" it would create. The fear was indoctrinated that individual
privacy and human rights would be eroded, as the state became all knowing all
powerful. Although Communism died a death, it transpires that "Big Brother" was
with us for much of the twentieth century, on a scale that dictators can only
dream of. Big Brother does exist and its creator is none other than the
capitalist West and nobody, not even its own citizens are protected from its
spying eyes.
Immediately following the Second World War, in 1947, the governments of the
United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand signed a
National Security pact known as the "Quadripartite", or "United Kingdom -
United States" (UKUSA) agreement.
Under the terms of the agreement, the five nations carved up the earth into
five spheres of influence, and each country was assigned particular signals
intelligence (SIGINT) targets (Britain, for example, was responsible for
intercepting the Chinese, through its Hong Kong listening post, while the U.S.
was given other responsibilities to cover from its listening posts in Taiwan,
Japan and Korea).
The strongest alliance within the UKUSA relationship is the one between the
U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), and Britain's Government Communications
Headquarters (GCHQ). The most important facility in the alliance is Menwith
Hill, in the north of England. With two dozen radomes and a vast computer
operations facility, the base has the capacity to eavesdrop on vast chunks of
the communications spectrum. With the creation of Intelsat and digital
telecommunications, Menwith and other stations developed the capability to
eavesdrop on an extensive scale on fax, telex and voice messages. It is widely
believed that Menwith Hill has around 40,000 lines connected to it, through
which access could be gained to much of European and Soviet communications.
In 1998, evidence emerged that the NSA in collusion with the British Government
has created the means to intercept almost every fax, email and telephone call
within the European Union. Furthermore the NSA has a mandate of eavesdropping
on the world's communications networks for the benefit of the United States. In
doing so, it has built a vast spying operation that reaches into the telephone
systems of nearly every country on earth. Its operations are so secret that
this activity, occurs without any accountability, and without any legal basis.
This grid of supercomputers is known as ECHELON, and is also capable of
scanning vast areas of the communications spectrum to detect keywords. Although
messages are not analysed for overall content, daily reports provide data that
assists intelligence agencies to determine what to target.
In May 1999, the European Parliament approved laws, which forced all
telecommunications companies in Europe to make their equipment "wiretap
friendly", effectively making them agents of the State. In doing so, the
Parliament has laid the foundations for a massive eavesdropping system capable
of intercepting all mobile phones, Internet communications; fax messages and
pagers throughout Europe. The system (the documents for which were named
ENFOPOL) will be aided by a "subject tagging" system capable of tracking
targets wherever they travel. Known as the 'International User Requirements for
Interception' (IUR), the tagging system, which is currently being designed,
will create a data processing and transmission network which involves not only
the names, addresses and phone numbers of targets and associates, but email
addresses, credit card details, PINs and passwords. The system will also merge
mobile phone data to create a comprehensive geographic location tracking
system.
Furthermore a secret plan by U.S. and E.U. authorities came to light in 1999 to
create a "seamless" web of telecommunications surveillance across all national
boundaries.
These Capitalist nations having indoctrinated their people with the false
philosophies of freedom and human rights are now increasingly criticised by
their own citizens, as the people demand their man-given right to privacy. This
demand has further intensified as Britain and America push ISP's to install
"black boxes" that will monitor all email and internet traffic. Yet in many of
the so-called democratic countries privacy is not explicitly recognized in the
constitution, such as the United States, Ireland and India. All this shows that
even where countries recognize a right of privacy in their constitution
including rights of inviolability of the home - this nothing more than a sham.
All of the above is testimony to the fact that human beings whether under a
communist regime or capitalist have no real safeguards against being spied
upon. In fact the only ideology that guarantees its citizens the right to
privacy is Islam as implemented in the Islamic State - Al Khilafah. Under Islam
the role of surveillance is limited to the sphere of monitoring the enemies of
Islam.
Islam has forbidden the violation of people's sanctities, honours, monies and
dignities, the violation of their houses' sanctities. The Messenger of Allah
(SAW) said: All things of a Muslim are inviolable for his brother in belief:
His blood, his wealth and his honour.
He (SAW) said on the sanctity of the houses: If a person were to cast a glance
in your house without permission and you hit him with a stone and gouged out
his eyes, there would be no harm for you.
It has been reported on the authority of Sahl Ibnu Sa'ad Al-Sa'idi that a man
once peeped through the hole of the door of the Messenger of Allah (SAW), the
Messenger of Allah (SAW) was at the time scratching his head with a fork. When
Allah's Messenger saw him, he said: If I were to know that you had been peeping
through the door, I would have thrust that into your eyes. And Allah's
Messenger said: Allah has prescribed seeking permission because of protection
against glance. He (SAW) also said: He who peers into his brothers' house
without his permission it is as if he destroyed him. Islam has also forbidden
spying on the Muslims, watching them, chasing them and gathering news about
them. It has also forbidden the Muslim from being a spy on the Muslims. The
Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: Avoid suspicion, for suspicion is the gravest
lie in talk, and do not be inquisitive about one another and do not spy about
one another.
And he (SAW) also said: O you people who believed with your tongues, and Iman
is yet to enter your hearts, do not talks behind the Muslims' backs, and do not
follow their Awras, for he who follows the Awras of the Muslims Allah would
follow his, and he whom Allah follows his Awra, He would also scandalise him
even in his own home.
Therefore the ahadith forbid the Muslims from spying against the Muslims, it
also forbid from following their Awras and warn that he who follows the Auras
of the Muslims, Allah will follow his Auras and will scandalise him. Other
ahadith have been reported forbidding the Muslims from working for the
intelligence agencies to spy on the Muslims.
And likewise, it is forbidden to spy on the citizens from the people of the
Dhimma (non-muslim citizen of the State), for they are equal to the Muslims in
terms of fairness. And the Messenger of Allah (SAW) ordered that the Dhimmies
should be treated nicely and forbade harming them, he (SAW) said: He who harms
a Dhimmi, it would be as if he harmed me. The ahadith, although they were
general about the unlawfulness of spying, they however exclude the spying
against the belligerent disbelievers. Spying against the belligerent
disbelievers is not forbidden, but an obligation; the Islamic state must
practice it, this is so because the Messenger of Allah (SAW) sent Abdullah Ibnu
Jahsh and a group of eight from the Muhajireen, to Nakhla between Al-Taif and
Makkah to monitor the movements of Quraysh and gather news about them. Spying
against the disbelieving enemy is a matter that the Islamic armed forces and
the Islamic state cannot do without.
To spy on the disbelieving enemies is a duty that the Islamic state must
perform. It is also its duty to have a counter intelligence service to combat
any spying on it by the disbelievers. This is so because Bukhari reported on
the authority of Salma Ibnu-l- Akwa' who said: The Messenger of Allah (SAW)
encountered a spy while on a journey; he sat among some of his companions
talking and then he sneaked away. Upon this the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said:
Go after him and kill him. So I beat everyone to him and I killed him, so the
Messenger of Allah (SAW) gave me the booty of that spy. Ahmed related the
incident concerning Furat Ibnu Hayyan, and said that the Messenger of Allah
(SAW) ordered his killing, he was a Dhimmi and a spy for Abu Sufyan and an ally
to a man from the Ansar; he passed by a circle of the Ansar and said: I am a
Muslim. A man from the Ansar said: O Messenger of Allah he says that he is a
Muslim. The Messenger of Allah (SAW) replied: There are men among you whom we
measure according to their belief, and Furat Ibnu Hayyan is one of them.
Bukhari reported on the authority of Ali who said: The Messenger of Allah (SAW)
sent me together with Al-Zubayr and Al-Muqdad Ibnul Aswad and said: Go forth
until you reach the garden of Khakh, you will find a Tha'ina (a woman riding a
camel) who is carrying a document, so take it off her. So we set off riding at
high speed until we reached the garden, we caught up with the Tha'ina and said
to her: Get the document out. She said: I have no document. We said: Get it out
or else. So she got it out of her braid and we brought it back to the Messenger
of Allah (SAW).
All this indicates that it is forbidden for the Islamic state to set up an
intelligence system to spy against the citizens, Muslims and non-Muslims alike,
it also indicates that it is forbidden to harm them. However it is the duty of
the state to establish to set up an intelligence service in order to spy
against the Kuffar and gather information about them, and to combat the
espionage they carry out against the state. |
|
|
| The West celebrates the dishonouring of women |
[Apr. 13th, 2004|11:43 am] |
(first posted in the year 2000)
United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan June 5 opened a special session of
the General Assembly "Women 2000: Gender, Equality, Development and Peace for
the 21st Century" with the statement, "not only do women belong on this planet,
but the future of this planet depends on women"
The week-long session opened with a formal meeting in the General Assembly Hall
but quickly spilled out into the plazas, universities, and other public
buildings in New York City as more than 10,000 people -- delegates representing
the 188 UN member states including many Muslim countries as well as 1,250
private non-governmental organisations (NGOs) -- began gathering to discuss so
called "women's advancements" in twelve areas identified in the "Platform
for Action" adopted at the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995.
"Five years ago, delegates and NGOs went to Beijing to right wrongs and promote
rights, to show that when women suffer injustice, we all suffer, that when
women are empowered, we are all better off," Annan said.
This meeting will review how far countries have progressed in implementing the
UN's agenda of secular feminist gender relations, population control, sexual
rights (including gay rights) since 1995.
So in reality this meeting will be to review how far the Kuffar have got in
dishonouring the women of the world including our sisters and mothers in the
Islamic lands. We must look at this conference from the angle of how far have
they got in their war against Allah (swt) and his Messenger (saw)?
( Read more... ) |
|
|
| Do We Need To Change the Fiqh? |
[Apr. 5th, 2004|07:26 pm] |
Do we need to change the Fiqh, due to the fact that we live in the U.S.?
Many Muslims believe that environment by itself has impact on Fiqh to the level
that Fiqh can be changed regarding the very same issue due to the environment.
In the January/February, 2000 issue of "Islamic Horizon", there was an article
with the title: "Muslim Americans Need Their Own Outlook". The article
addresses many vital and important issues that are worth being discussed with
comprehensive awareness and understanding. Here, we will address one salient
point that was mentioned in the article.
In order to emphasize the need to study the environment and its impact upon
Fiqh, the article points out that Imam Shafi`i changed his Fiqh on account of
his migrating from one environment and situation to another. Here is what the
article states:
"Imam Shafi`i developed his school in Baghdad, where he wrote his famous
treatises in Fiqh and Usul. However, upon leaving Baghdad and settling in
Egypt, he altered his opinion on all but 13 issues, on account of the changed
environment and situation. Even in Usul al Fiqh, he changed his views on
issues such as Madhab al Sahabi. In this case, it was only a change of
environment between two Muslim states, Baghdad and Egypt."
Prior to addressing this assertion, we need to emphasize that in order to
understanding any issue, the Hukm Shar`i related to that issue must be
understood. Otherwise, different ahkam may be applied. In fact, the process of
Ijtihad requires three steps: understanding the issue itself; studying the text
related to the issue; and deriving the Hukm from the related text.
Understanding the environment is part of the process of understanding the
issue. There is no Mujtahid that has claimed otherwise. Different issues demand
different ahkam, simply because each Hukm is meant to address a specific issue.
Sometimes similarities exist in the ahkam, although they relate to different
issues such as prayer and fasting: both are different, yet both are mandatory.
When one needs to study the prayer, he must distinguish it from fasting.
Sometimes, the hukm changes due to the change in the situation and the change
in the issue itself. As an example: it is obligatory for women to pray. This is
the original rule. However, a woman is prohibited from praying during her
menses. In this case, there is no change in the original hukm. Due to the fact
there is a new situation, there is another hukm that relates to this new
situation. Otherwise, we see that the same woman, who cannot pray or fast, must
make up the fasts that were missed and does not have to make up the prayers
that she missed. This means that the change is due to the text itself and it
cannot be merely due to the change in the situation. The impact of changing the
situation is restricted in one point: once the Mujtahid finds out that the
situation or issue changed, then he should look for other evidences that may be
applied to the new situation.
Regarding the issue of Imam Shafi`i, arguing that the change in the Fiqh of
Imam Shafi was on the account of the changed environment needs to be proven and
there is no such evidence telling us that Shafi`i simply changed his Fiqh
solely for this reason. On the contrary, studying the life of Imam Shafi`i
points up otherwise.
It is well known fact that Imam Shafi`i traveled much and was exposed to many
schools of Fiqh. First, he was lived in Makkah, where he studied Fiqh under two
great: Muslim Bin Khalid al Zingi and Sufian Bin Uyaynah. Subsequently, he
moved to Madinah where he met Imam Malik and was exposed to his Fiqh. Imam
Malik belonged to the school of Hadeeth. Imam Shafi`i then moved to Baghdad
where he met Mohammad Bin al Hassan and others from the Hanafi school. He also
met other scholars. The Hanafi school of Fiqh was known as part of the Ra'y
tradition. Later, he returned to Makkah and again to Baghdad and kept shuttling
between Makkah and Baghdad. Finally, he moved to Egypt in the year 204 (A.H.)
where he died. One scholar summarized the impact upon his thought of being
exposed to these different traditions by stating: "He grasped the knowledge of
Ahl ul Hadeeth and Ahl ul Ra'y. He utilized all of this and then he laid
down Usul."
The most important book Imam Shafi`i produced was Ar Risalah in the field of
Usul ul Fiqh. Imam Shafi`i wrote this book twice. According to Shaykh Mohammad
Shakir, who published Ar Risalah, the first edition was written in 195 (A.H.)
while he was in Baghdad after meeting Abdur Rahman Bin Mahdi (a well known
scholar of Hadeeth). Unfortunately, this old edition of Ar Risalah is not found
yet although scholars mentioned that and referred to it. The new edition of Ar
Risalah was written in Egypt in which Imam Shafi`i completely changed his
method of Ijtihad. However, saying that Imam Shafi`i changed his opinion
regarding Madhab al Sahabi is considered by a recent scholar as "wrong". Dr.
Muhammad Baltaji in his book Manahij ul Tashree al Islami fil Qarn al Thani
al Hijri (The Methods of Islamic Fiqh During the Second Century of Hijrah)
discussed this issue in a very critical and profound way. He concluded that
Imam Shafi`i never completely denied nor accepted Madhab al Sahabi. He
mentioned that Imam Shafi`i used to accept its contents within specific
parameters. He refuses it only if it contradicts the Sunnah. (One can read this
in details in Volume 2, pages746-755 of Dr. Baltaji's book). Thus, its not
accurate to generalize and posit that Imam Shafi`i changed his opinion
regarding this matter.
The question is: why did Imam Shafi`i change his Fiqh? Was it on the account of
changing the environment? Was it because he moved from one Islamic state to
another according to the claim of the article? (We do not want here to address
the mistake of referring to Baghdad and Egypt at that time as two separate
states, since all people know very well that it was just one state and not 2.
The issue now is not this).
Imam Shafi`i did not change his Usul al Fiqh because of geographically moving
from one place to another. The change in the method has nothing to do with the
change of environment. Changing the method is related to the change in the way
of thinking, which characterizes Imam Shafi`i's change. As it is clear from his
life, prior to Egypt, Imam Shafi`i was exposed to two schools of Fiqh. He
wrote his first edition of Al Risalah and later, matured in his thinking and
settled on the second edition of Al Risalah. In Egypt, Imam Shafi`i was
exposed to the Fiqh of Imam Laith Bin Sad. Imam Laith died in 175 A.H. He was
in Egypt but he traveled to Baghdad in which he met Abu Hanifa himself and had
a chance to meet Ibn Shihab al Zuhri, Nafi` and others. Imam Bin Hajr says
that: "The knowledge of the Tabi`een ended with Laith". Imam Laith also had
the chance to meet Imam Malik. In fact, Laith was the Shaykh of Imam Malik
himself. Thus, in Egypt, Imam Shafi had a chance to be exposed to the Fiqh of
Laith. Shafi`i came to Egypt fourteen years after the death of Imam Laith.
This means that the influence of Imam Laith was still strong in Egypt. Thus,
one can say that this exposure matured Imam Shafi`i and thus, his entire
method underwent change. Asserting that the environment changed Imam Shafi`i
is very vague and baseless. What is meant be the environment? Is it the soil of
Egypt? Is it its Nile? Is it the Pyramids? Is it the way of life? The physical
environment has nothing to do with all of this. The way of life both in Egypt
and Baghdad was the same. All were living the Islamic way of life in the same
era. The differences in some customs practiced in one area, do not make the
environment different and thus, do not change the entire A new custom in a new
area, may oblige a Mujtahid to study and arrive at a new rule for a certain
custom, since he never faced that custom before. However, a rule for an issue,
which is facing the people in Baghdad and the Hukm applied for the people in
Baghdad should be exactly the same for the people in Egypt. Riba is Haram in
both Egypt and Baghdad. The change in the environment does not make Riba
allowed in Egypt while it was prohibited in Baghdad.
In order to create impact in the minds of the people, the article claimed that
Imam Shafi`i moved from One State to another. This misleads the reader as if we
are talking about moving from Arabia in the seventh century to Europe today
where a big difference exists. . The fact of the matter is that both, Baghdad
and Egypt were part of ONE State, they were not two states. There was no
visible difference between Baghdad and Egypt at that time. The only difference
is the existence of Imam Laith in Egypt who was by himself effected by many
schools of Fiqh. Imam Shafi`i before arriving in Egypt was exposed to School of
Madinah and School of Kufah (In Iraq). But in Egypt he had a chance to get
exposed to another school of Laith. This affected the maturity of Imam
Shafi`i.
In conclusion, the notion that Imam Shafi`i changed his Fiqh on the account of
changing the environment must be nullified. |
|
|
| From Dawn to Dusk in Black August |
[Apr. 3rd, 2004|07:20 pm] |
The sun rises in a land rife with blessings
A heart that was shaped into a flower
A flower whose radiance only brought brightness
To the lives she touched and changed forever
I was blessed to have her touch my life
When the day in August was young
She was Muslim in a world of immorality
She was a Hijaabi in a world of nakedness
She was an intellectual in a world of ignorance
She was pregnant and eager to bring new life to this world
But the day was long and the month was longer
And the brightness got darker and darker
The whispers of those who wanted to darken her bright day
Got louder and louder
Then soon the loudness led to shouting and now she took heed in the shouts
Shouts of abortion
Shouts of leaving the only thing that brought morality and total devotion to the Creator
Dusk was approaching and the sky was cloudy
Heavy rain pours as the tears from the heavens tried to rinse what has happened
From a month named August that was already bright with the sun's rays
Rays that emitted the beauty of piety, compassion and love
To a month named month that ended in darkness from which it brought impiety, apathy and now death of an innocent soul
The dawn of light was Islam
And the darkness of dusk was all that she choose after Islam
From dawn to dusk in Black August |
|
|
| The Miraculous Transformation of a Beauty Unmatched; A Fad Doesn't Cause Miracles |
[Mar. 23rd, 2004|10:07 am] |
Confused to enlightened,
Immoral to moral,
Simple to intellectual,
Selfish to selfless,
Unfeeling to compassionate,
Pro-choice to pro-life,
Only the Guidance of God called Islam can cause such a miraculous transformation;
It wasn't a fad like the others, because fads don't make transformations miraculous,
One religion and belief after the other couldn't change her,
Because these things weren't from God,
But when she came across the one belief and religion that did come from God,
Only that changed her,
Now her role as a servant of God made her serve the Creator not created;
A beauty of unmatched quality can only come from a person who is serving her Creator in the way He wants her to serve Him,
A woman who changed so much from what she was to what she is for the Pleasure of God,
Nothing can come close to such beauty that is everlasting is knows no boundaries of race or age;
We will ultimately learn from our mistakes,
The mistake of going from enlightened to confused,
From moral to immoral,
From intellectual to simple,
From selfless to selfish,
From compassionate to unfeeling,
Nothing good can come from ugliness,
Not ugliness in appearance,
But an ugliness that can lead a person to lose morality,
Destroy an innocent life,
Submit to desires of the created,
Lose the spirituality and intellectuality that made her a beauty unmatched;
But like a rose rising from the ashes,
The ashes of ugliness can fall off and we will once see the beauty of unmatched quality appear again,
But only she can decide to place the seed of the rose and water herself to rise and be a beauty of unmatched quality,
Because God won't change her condition unless she changes herself,
Hopefully the next spring we will smell and see the beauty of this rose,
The beauty of unmatched quality needs to bloom again with the blessing of:
"There is no god but God and Muhammad is the Messenger of God"
Then the miraculous transformation will begin.... |
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
| |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
soulfulwriter's journal