The sayings of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace be upon him)
"Help your brother whether he is an oppressor or an oppressed," A man said, "O Allah's Apostle! I will help him if he is oppressed, but if he is an oppressor, how shall I help him?" The Prophet said, "By preventing him from oppressing (others), for that is how to help him."
Sahih Bukhari Hadith No. 84 Book 85, Volumune 009 Narrated by Anas (r.a.)
Friday, May 29, 2009
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Haneyya's gov't urges Muslim FMs to declare Jerusalem capital of Palestine
[ 23/05/2009 - 09:38 PM ]
GAZA, (PIC)-- The democratically elected PA caretaker government of Premier Ismael Haneyya has called on Muslim foreign ministers to declare the occupied city of Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine, and urged them to bridle the Israeli activities in the city.
In a statement he issued and a copy of which was obtained by the PIC, Tahir Al-Nonu, the spokesman of the PA government, called on the Foreign Ministers of Islamic countries meeting in the Syrian capital Damascus to support the Palestinian people in Jerusalem against the Israeli schemes that aim at forcing and removing them out of the city.
"They [Palestinian Jerusalemites] need swift and decisive action from their Arab and Muslim brothers now more than any time else as the Israeli campaign to Judaize the city reached alarming levels", Nuno pointed out in the statement.
Nuno also invited the foreign ministers of the 57 Muslim countries to take clear and decisive decision to renovate and to rebuild the destroyed Mosques in the 1948-occupied Palestinian lands after the Zionist occupation demolished tens of them, and turned many of them into casinos and nightclubs.
"We should all work together to preserve historic Muslim features that testify to the Palestinian people's rights in Palestine", Nuno underscored.
He said that Muslim foreign ministers should immediately layout the practical mechanisms to implement their decision to lift the siege on Gaza Strip, inviting them to visit the Gaza Strip so as to see for themselves the adverse repercussions, and the aggravated suffering of the Palestinian people as a result of the Israeli war on Gaza last January.
Furthermore, Nuno stressed that it is about time for the Muslim countries to start the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip, and to rebuild what the Zionist occupation has destroyed.
Finally, Nuno urged the convening ministers to support the Egyptian efforts to restore the Palestinian national unity, and to achieve the national reconciliation, and not to deal with the "illegitimate" government of Salam Fayyadh that was installed by Abbas against the will of the Palestinian people, and through an undemocratic process.
Page Top
Comments
GAZA, (PIC)-- The democratically elected PA caretaker government of Premier Ismael Haneyya has called on Muslim foreign ministers to declare the occupied city of Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine, and urged them to bridle the Israeli activities in the city.
In a statement he issued and a copy of which was obtained by the PIC, Tahir Al-Nonu, the spokesman of the PA government, called on the Foreign Ministers of Islamic countries meeting in the Syrian capital Damascus to support the Palestinian people in Jerusalem against the Israeli schemes that aim at forcing and removing them out of the city.
"They [Palestinian Jerusalemites] need swift and decisive action from their Arab and Muslim brothers now more than any time else as the Israeli campaign to Judaize the city reached alarming levels", Nuno pointed out in the statement.
Nuno also invited the foreign ministers of the 57 Muslim countries to take clear and decisive decision to renovate and to rebuild the destroyed Mosques in the 1948-occupied Palestinian lands after the Zionist occupation demolished tens of them, and turned many of them into casinos and nightclubs.
"We should all work together to preserve historic Muslim features that testify to the Palestinian people's rights in Palestine", Nuno underscored.
He said that Muslim foreign ministers should immediately layout the practical mechanisms to implement their decision to lift the siege on Gaza Strip, inviting them to visit the Gaza Strip so as to see for themselves the adverse repercussions, and the aggravated suffering of the Palestinian people as a result of the Israeli war on Gaza last January.
Furthermore, Nuno stressed that it is about time for the Muslim countries to start the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip, and to rebuild what the Zionist occupation has destroyed.
Finally, Nuno urged the convening ministers to support the Egyptian efforts to restore the Palestinian national unity, and to achieve the national reconciliation, and not to deal with the "illegitimate" government of Salam Fayyadh that was installed by Abbas against the will of the Palestinian people, and through an undemocratic process.
Page Top
Comments
Friday, May 22, 2009
Internet Threatened by Censorship, Secret Surveillance, and Cybersecurity Laws
By Stephen Lendman
(The Intelligence Daily) -- At a time of corporate dominated media, a free and open Internet is democracy's last chance to preserve our First Amendment rights without which all others are threatened. Activists call it Net Neutrality. Media scholar Robert McChesney says without it "the Internet would start to look like cable TV (with a) handful of massive companies (controlling) content" enough to have veto power over what's allowed and what it costs. Progressive web sites and writers would be marginalized or suppressed, and content systematically filtered or banned.
Media reform activists have drawn a line in the sand. Net Neutrality must be defended at all costs. Preserving a viable, independent, free and open Internet (and the media overall) is essential to a functioning democracy, but the forces aligned against it are formidable, daunting, relentless, and reprehensible. Some past challenges suggest future ones ahead.
Censorship Attempts to Curtail Free Expression
The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Nonetheless, Congress and state legislatures have repeatedly tried to censor free speech, allegedly regarded as indecent, obscene, hateful, terrorist-related, or harmful to minors. However, the Supreme Court, in a number of decisions, ruled that the government may not regulate free expression, only its manner such as when it violates the right to privacy "in an essentially intolerable manner" - a huge hurtle to overcome, including online, because viewers are protected by simply "averting (one's) eyes (Cohen v. California - 1971)."
In 1998, the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) passed, but was blocked by federal courts as an infringement of free speech and therefore unconstitutional and unenforceable. In 1999, the law was struck down at the Appellate Court level, but it stayed on the books. In 2002, the Supreme Court reviewed the ruling and returned the case for reconsideration. It remained blocked. Then in March 2003, the Appellate Court again ruled it unconstitutional on the grounds that it would hinder protected adult speech that's likely what it was about in the first place.
Other litigation followed at the District and Appellate levels until on January 21, 2009, the Supreme Court killed COPA by refusing to hear appeals to affirm it. The Electronic Frontier Foundation put it this way: "After 10 Years, an Infamous Internet-Censorship Act is Finally Dead." At least that's the hope, but censorship attempts never die. They just reinvent themselves in new forms made all the easier when powerful corporate interests and their congressional allies support them.
In 2000, the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) became law, and the Supreme Court upheld it - to regulate online content deemed "indecent (or) harmful to minors." The law requires schools, libraries and other public institutions to install blocking software to prevent minors from having access to it.
In 2006, the Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA) passed the House but not the Senate. It also would have mandated schools, libraries and other public institutions to prevent minors from accessing "commercial social networking websites (and) chat rooms."
Its language was broad enough to apply also to sites like Amazon, Yahoo, Wikipedia and others and would have made the FCC a gatekeeper/censor. As the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act, the law was reintroduced in the Senate in January 2007 but never passed.
In February 1996, the Communications Decency Act (CDA) was passed - to regulate alleged indecent and obscene online content in violation of the First Amendment. Under the law, classic fiction would be banned as well as any material deemed offensive. In June, 1996, a three-judge federal panel partially struck it down for restricting adult free speech. In June 1997, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court ruling in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union.
The Act was Title V of the 1996 Telecommunications Act titled Broadcast Obscenity and Violence that applied broadcast standards to the Internet. Under Section 230, Internet services operators aren't considered publishers and thus have no liability for the words of third parties using their services.
In 2003, Congress amended CDA by removing struck down indecency provisions. In 2005, a three-judge Southern District of New York panel rejected Barbara Nitke's obscenity provisions CDA challenge (in Nitke, et al v. Ashcroft). The Supreme Court upheld the decision.
In 2005, the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act (VAWDOJRA) became law - and another blow to online free speech by prohibiting "any device (like a modem) or software that can be used to originate....(anonymous or other) communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the internet" for the alleged purpose of harassment, even if only vigorous constitutional debate was intended or ordinary free speech.
In October 2007, the House passed the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act called "the thought crime prevention bill." It was introduced in the Senate, referred to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, but never voted on or passed.
If it ever becomes law in its present form, it will establish a commission and Center for Excellence to study and act against "thought criminals" (including online ones) for alleged acts of "violent radicalization (and) homegrown terrorism" defined as follows:
-- "violent radicalization (to mean) adopting or promoting an extremist belief system (to facilitate) ideologically based violence to advance political, religious or social change;"
-- "homegrown terrorism (to mean) the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any (US) possession to intimidate or coerce the (US) government, the civilian population....or any segment thereof (to further) political or social objectives."
In other words, this law, if passed, will criminalize whatever the government wishes to include under the above two categories, including constitutionally protected speech online or elsewhere.
Another ongoing censorship issue involves craigslist - a worldwide online community network featuring classified ads for "jobs, housing, for sale, personals, services, local community, and events."
On May 5, South Carolina Attorney (AG) General Henry McMaster notified its CEO, Jim Buckmaster, that unless an "erotic services" section is removed in 10 days, "craigslist management may be subject to criminal investigation and prosecution." Other AGs in Rhode Island, Illinois, and Connecticut issued similar threats even though all of them are baseless.
Previous courts have held that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) protects "interactive computer service" providers like craigslist and lets them be self-regulating and free from liability. The law clearly states that they shouldn't be responsible for third party content because they didn't do enough to comply with individual State standards that may violate the First Amendment and federal law.
In craigslist's case, it's gone way beyond its legal obligations. In November 2008, it agreed to technical and policy changes to curb the use of its site for illegal purposes by third parties, including requiring telephone and credit card verification for "erotic services" ads to reject ones deemed illegal.
Earlier, craigslist screened out 90% of these ads. Nonetheless, it's being unfairly targeted by AGs interpreting Section 230 and First Amendment rights as they please. Federal law, however, protects craigslist, but not against ambitious AGs harassment for their own political advantage and self-interest.
On May 20, craigslist announced that it filed suit against South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster seeking "declaratory relief and a restraining order with respect to criminal charges he has repeatedly threatened against craigslist and its executives." Craigslist is on solid footing. It's in full compliance with the law, but McMaster's persistent threats forced it to sue in federal court.
These and numerous other congressional and other attempts aim to censor protected speech, including online. Expect more of this ahead, some legislation to be enacted, at times upheld by the courts, and, as a result, our liberties to be chipped away incrementally and lost - unless a line in the sand is drawn and defended by enough of the committed to do it.
On February 29, 2008, one skirmish turned out successfully when a federal judge let the anonymous whistle-blowing WikiLeaks resume operations after a week earlier ordering its US hosting company and domain registrar (Dynadot) to shut down and lock out its site. In his reconsidered ruling, District Judge Jeffrey White conceded he was having second thoughts regarding "serious questions of prior restraint (and) possible violations of the First Amendment." He added that "the court does not want to be a part of any order that is not constitutional." Even so, one triumph doesn't mean victory. The struggle for unimpeded free speech continues.
Secret Unconstitutional Surveillance, Including Online Data Mining
The right to privacy is sacred even though no constitutional provision specifically mandates it. Nonetheless, the First Amendment guarantees free and open speech and beliefs. The Third Amendment the privacy of our homes against demands to be used to house soldiers. The Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination and privacy of our personal information.
Also, the Ninth Amendment states that the "enumeration of certain (of the Bill of) rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court held that the Constitution protects privacy in a case affirming the right to use contraceptives and that banning them violated the "right to marital privacy."
In Justice Arthur Goldberg's concurring opinion, he cited the Ninth Amendment in defense of the ruling. Earlier High Courts also affirmed the constitutional right of privacy on matters of marriage, child rearing, procreation, education, termination of medical treatment, possessing and viewing pornography, abortion, and more as well as overall privacy protection.
The 14th Amendment's "liberty" clause also relates to privacy by stating: "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...." Courts have broadened the meaning of "liberty" to include personal, political and social rights and privileges. Thus, invasion of private spaces is unconstitutional.
In Olmstead v. US (1928), Justice Louis Brandeis stated:
"The makers of our Constitution understood the need to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness, and the protections guaranteed by this are much broader in scope, and include the right to life and an inviolate personality -- the right to be left alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. The principle underlying the Fourth and Fifth Amendments is protection against invasions of the sanctities of a man's home and privacies of life. This is a recognition of the significance of man's spiritual nature, his feelings, and his intellect."
George Bush institutionalized lawless spying invasions of privacy on Americans and others. Barack Obama continues the practice under the same federal agencies, including the FBI, CIA, Pentagon and NSA. On April 15, The New York Times headlined: "Officials Say US Wiretaps Exceeded Law."
It cited the NSA's practice in recent months of intercepting private emails and phone calls of Americans "on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year...." Briefed intelligence officials and lawyers called it "significant and systematic....overcollection" in violation of the law.
The Justice Department acknowledged the problem but said it was resolved. For its part, the NSA said its "intelligence operations, including programs for collection and analysis, are in strict accordance with US laws and regulations." The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, in overall charge, downplayed the The Times story, referred to "inadvertent mistakes," and claimed efforts were immediately implemented to correct them.
Nonetheless, the issue remains unsettled, and new details reveal earlier domestic surveillance, including wiretapping a congressional member without court approval, and systematically doing it against many American citizens.
Tom Burghardt writes often on these issues for various publications, web sites, and his Antifascist Calling blog...."Exploring the shadowlands of the corporate police state." In calling "Spying on Americans: 'Business as Usual' under Obama," he reported that working cooperatively with private corporations, the NSA collects vast amounts of "transactional data such as credit card purchases, bank transactions and travel itineraries....sold to (the agency) by corporate freebooters." It's then data-mined for "suspicious patterns," a practice begun pre-9/11 but expanded greatly since then.
More than just financial transactions are monitored. According to investigative journalist Christopher Ketchum, "as many as '8 million Americans are now listed (as) secret enemies....who could face detention under martial law (and subjected) to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning" and possible internment.
Nothing under Obama has changed in spite of serious privacy, civil liberties, and other constitutional issues. Director Rod Beckstrom of DHS' Cyber Security Center resigned in March because of NSA's "greater role in guarding the government's computer systems" and its concentrated power without checks and balances.
According to Electronic Frontier Foundation's senior staff attorney Kevin Bankston: Obama's "Justice Department (is continuing) the Bush administration's cover-up of the National Security Agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans, and insisting that the much-publicized warrantless wiretapping program is still a 'secret' that cannot be reviewed by the courts...." because doing so would harm national security.
Worse still is the DOJ's assertion that the US government is immune from illegal spying litigation even when in violation of federal privacy statutes, an unprecedented claim exceeding the Bush administration citing "sovereign immunity." Obama is going Bush one better by saying the Patriot Act immunizes the government from being sued under surveillance provisions of the Wiretap Act, Stored Communications Act, and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's (FISA) enhanced warrantless wiretapping powers in cooperation with complicit telecom providers. In other words, Obama's DOJ absolves itself and its corporate allies of accountability under existing federal statutes that prohibit illegal spying on Americans.
On April 26, Burghhardt reported that "The Pentagon's Cyber Command Formidable Infrastructure arrayed against the American People" will be headed by the NSA's director, Lt. General Keith Alexander, to protect the military's networks from hacker attacks, especially from countries like China and Russia. How this will "affect civilian computer networks is unclear. However, situating" it alongside NSA at Fort Meade, MD "should set alarm bells ringing (because of NSA's) potential for (greater) abuse....given (its) role in illegal domestic surveillance....(and its) tremendous technical capabilities."
"As a Pentagon agency, NSA has positioned itself to seize near total control over the country's electronic infrastructure, thereby exerting an intolerable influence--and chilling effect-- over the nation's political life." Recent history shows that "NSA and their partners at CIA, FBI, et. al. have targeted political dissidents," including anti-war protesters, environmentalists, and others for their activism and beliefs. Greater NSA powers will "transform 'cybersecurity' into a euphemism for keeping the rabble in line (and) achieving 'full spectrum dominance' via 'Cyberspace Offensive Counter-Operations.' "
Directed against ordinary Americans, democratic freedoms will be severely compromised. No matter as "the Obama administration (prepares) to hand control of the nation's electronic infrastructure over to a (rogue) agency" - with General Alexander telling the House Armed Services subcommittee that America needs a digital warfare force for defensive and offensive cyber operations. More resources are required to do it, not for public security, but for imperial conquest and containing dissent at home - in violation of constitutional freedoms and international law.
In a follow-up May 4 article, Burghardt explored the secret, unaccountable world of FBI data mining through its Investigative Data Warehouse (IDW) containing over a billion documents, including many on US citizens. They come from our personal records and history, including what's obtainable online through illegal spying.
According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) Kurt Opsahl, "The IDW includes more than four times as many documents as the Library of Congress, and the FBI has asked for millions of dollars to data-mine this warehouse, using unproven science in an attempt to predict future crimes from past behavior." This illegal spying violates our constitutional right to privacy and endangers our freedom by generating unsubstantiated threats based on pure supposition.
Besides the FBI, it's virtually certain that other, perhaps all 16, government intelligence agencies conduct similar spying illegally, and as such, endanger everyone's freedom.
Earlier on July 14, 2008, an ACLU press release headlined: "Terrorist Watch List Hits One Million Names" based on government reported figures. They include: "Members of Congress, nuns, war heros and other 'suspicious characters' (like anti-war and environmental activists)....trapped in the Kafkaesque clutches of this list, with little hope of escape."
According to the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Program director, Barry Steinhardt, this data base represents "what's wrong with this administration's approach to security: it's unfair, out-of-control, a waste of resources, treats the rights of the innocent as an afterthought, and is a very real impediment in the lives of millions of (people) in this country. Putting a million names on a watch list is a guarantee (it) will do more harm than good" besides being ineffective to catch real criminals.
Given the current scope and intent of FBI data mining, with millions under surveillance, its potential for abuse far exceeds where it stood less than a year ago - because the Obama administration supports it. No longer is anything about us private, including:
-- all our financial transactions and records;
-- every check written;
-- every credit card or other electronic purchase;
-- our complete medical history;
-- every plane, train, bus or ship itinerary;
-- our phone records and conversations; and
-- every computer key stroke.
Our entire private world is now public - if spy snoops decide to invade it.
Key Internet-based companies, like Google, do it routinely - the company UK-based Privacy International ranked worst in its September 2007 "Race to the Bottom" report. It stated:
"....throughout our research we have found numerous deficiencies and hostilities in Google's approach to privacy that go well beyond those of other organizations." It tops them all "as an endemic threat to privacy. This is in part due to the diversity and specificity of Google's product range and the ability of the company to share extracted data between these tools, and in part due to Google's market dominance and the sheer size of its user base."
It's also unmatched in "its aggressive use of invasive or potentially invasive technologies and techniques." It's able to "deep-drill into the minutiae of a user's life and lifestyle choices" irresponsibly. Its attitude toward privacy is blatantly hostile at worst and benignly ambivalent at best. Specifically:
-- Google retains a large amount of user information with no limitation on its subsequent use or disclosure and with no chance for users to delete or withdraw it;
-- it retains all "search strings and associated IP-addresses and time stamps for at least 18 to 24 months (retention) and does not provide users with an expungement option;"
-- it has other personal information, including hobbies, employment, addresses, phone numbers, and more, and retains it even after users delete their profiles;
-- it "collects all search results entered through Google Toolbar and identifies all Google Toolbar users with a unique cookie that allows Google to track the user's web movement;" it also retains information indefinitely with no expungement option;
-- it doesn't follow OECD Privacy Guidelines and EU data protection law provisions;
-- users have no option to edit or delete obtained records and information about them; and
-- they can't access log information generated through various Google services, such as Google Maps, Video, Talk, Reader, or Blogger.
In 2004, Google also acquired the CIA-linked company Keyhole, Inc., that has a worldwide 3-D spy-in-the-sky images database. Its software provides a virtual fly-over and zoom-in capability to within a one-foot resolution. It's supported by In-Q-Tel, a venture capital CIA-funded firm that "identif(ies) and invest(s) in companies developing cutting-edge information technologies that serve United States national security interests."
In 2003, its CEO, John Hanke, said: "Keyhole's strategic relationship with In-Q-Tel means that the Intelligence Community can now benefit from the massive scalability and high performance of the Keyhole enterprise solution."
In 2006, former CIA clandestine services case officer, Robert Steele, said:
"I am quite positive that Google is taking money and direction from my old colleague Dr. Rick Steinheiser in the Office of Research and Development at CIA, and that Google has done at least one major prototype effort focused on foreign terrorists which produced largely worthless data....I think (Google is) stupid to be playing with CIA, which cannot keep a secret and is more likely to waste time and money than actually produce anything useful."
On April 29, Willem Buiter's Maverecon site headlined "Gagging on Google" and said:
"Google is to privacy and respect for intellectual property rights what the Taliban are to women's rights and civil liberties: a daunting threat that must be fought relentlessly by all those who value privacy and the right to exercise, within the limits of the law, control over the uses made by others of their intellectual property."
This company should be rigorously regulated, "and if necessary, broken up or put out of business." With about half the global internet search market, it threatens enhanced "corporate or even official Big Brotherism."
For example, Google Street View, an addition to Google Maps, "provides panoram(ic) images visible from street level in cities around the world. The cameras record details of residents' lives" on all sorts of personal matters that no one should be able to snoop on, then save, without permission, for whatever purposes.
The company also invades our privacy through tracking cookies or "third-party persistent cookies" to assist interest-based advertising, a practice known as behavioral targeting. In the wrong hands, this information can be used "to put a commercial squeeze on people, but also to extort and blackmail them." And in government hands, it enhances "a pretty effective and very nasty police state."
Can Google be trusted to use this information responsibly? "Of course not." It's a business run by "amoral capitalists," out to make as much money as possible by any means necessary. Google and other Internet search engines "should not be trusted because they cannot be trusted." However, because of its size and dominance, Google is "the new evil empire of the internet," a "Leviathan" that must be tamed.
Cybersecurity Legislation
On April 1, two bills endangering a free and open Internet were introduced in the Senate:
-- S. 773: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 "to ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communications, to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes, to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses against disruption, and for other purposes."
S. 773 was then referred to the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and thus far not voted on.
-- S. 778: A bill to establish, within the Executive Office of the President, the Office of National Cybersecurity Advisor (aka czar). The bill was referred to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and not yet voted on.
Accompanying information said Senators Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe introduced the legislation to address:
"our country's unacceptable vulnerability to massive cyber crime, global cyber espionage, and cyber attacks that could cripple our critical infrastructure."
We presently face cyber espionage threats, they said, as well as "another great vulnerability....to our private sector critical infrastructure - banking, utilities, air/rail/auto traffic control, telecommunications - from disruptive cyber attacks that could literally shut down our way of life."
"This proposed legislation will bring new high-level governmental attention to develop a fully integrated, thoroughly coordinated, public-private partnership to our cyber security efforts in the 21st century" through what's unstated - government affecting our private lives by threatening the viability of a free and open Internet.
During a March Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing, Senator Rockefeller said that we'd all be better off if the Internet was never invented. His precise words were: "Would it have been better if we'd never have invented the Internet and had to use paper and pencil or whatever!" Left unsaid was that without a free and open Internet, few alternatives for getting real news and information would exist, at least with the ease and free accessibility that computers can provide.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation's Jennifer Granick expressed alarm about the risk of "giving the federal government unprecedented power over the Internet without necessarily improving security in the ways that matter most. (These bills) should be opposed or radically amended."
Here's what they'll do:
-- federalize critical infrastructure security, including banks, telecommunications and energy, shifting power away from providers and users to Washington;
-- give "the president unfettered authority to shut down Internet traffic in (whatever he calls) an emergency and disconnect critical infrastructure systems on national security grounds....;"
-- potentially "cripple privacy and security in one fell swoop" through one provision (alone) empowering the Commerce Secretary to "have access to all relevant data concerning (critical infrastructure) networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access...."
In other words, the Commerce Department will be empowered to access "all relevant data" - without privacy safeguards or judicial review. As a result, constitutionally protected private information statutory protections will be lost - guaranteed under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Privacy Protection Act, and financial privacy regulations.
Another provision mandates a feasibility study for an identity management and authentication program that would sidestep "appropriate civil liberties and privacy protections."
At issue is what role should the federal government play in cybersecurity? How much power should it have? Can it dismiss constitutional protections, and what, in fact, can enhance cybersecurity without endangering our freedoms? S. 773 and 778, as now written, "make matters worse by weakening existing privacy safeguards (without) address(ing) the real problems of security."
In late February, Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, told the House Intelligence Committee that the NSA, not DHS, should be in charge of cybersecurity even though it has a "trust handicap" to overcome because of its illegal spying:
"I think there is a great deal of distrust of the National Security Agency and the intelligence community in general playing a role outside of the very narrowly circumscribed role because of some of the history of the FISA issue in years past...." So Blair asked the committee's leadership to find a way to instill public confidence.
On February 9, Obama appointed Melissa Hathaway to be Acting Senior Director for Cyberspace for the National Security and Homeland Security Councils - in charge of a 60-day interagency cybersecurity review, now completed.
On April 21, NSA/Chief Central Security Service director, General Alexander, told RSA Conference security participants that "The NSA does not want to run cybersecurity for the government. We need partnerships with others. The DHS has a big part, you do, and our partners in academia. It's one network and we all have to work together....The NSA can offer technology assistance to team members. That's our role."
But someone has to be in charge. It may or may not be NSA, but no matter. At issue is our constitutional freedoms. Any infringement on them must be challenged and stopped.
Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
(The Intelligence Daily) -- At a time of corporate dominated media, a free and open Internet is democracy's last chance to preserve our First Amendment rights without which all others are threatened. Activists call it Net Neutrality. Media scholar Robert McChesney says without it "the Internet would start to look like cable TV (with a) handful of massive companies (controlling) content" enough to have veto power over what's allowed and what it costs. Progressive web sites and writers would be marginalized or suppressed, and content systematically filtered or banned.
Media reform activists have drawn a line in the sand. Net Neutrality must be defended at all costs. Preserving a viable, independent, free and open Internet (and the media overall) is essential to a functioning democracy, but the forces aligned against it are formidable, daunting, relentless, and reprehensible. Some past challenges suggest future ones ahead.
Censorship Attempts to Curtail Free Expression
The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Nonetheless, Congress and state legislatures have repeatedly tried to censor free speech, allegedly regarded as indecent, obscene, hateful, terrorist-related, or harmful to minors. However, the Supreme Court, in a number of decisions, ruled that the government may not regulate free expression, only its manner such as when it violates the right to privacy "in an essentially intolerable manner" - a huge hurtle to overcome, including online, because viewers are protected by simply "averting (one's) eyes (Cohen v. California - 1971)."
In 1998, the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) passed, but was blocked by federal courts as an infringement of free speech and therefore unconstitutional and unenforceable. In 1999, the law was struck down at the Appellate Court level, but it stayed on the books. In 2002, the Supreme Court reviewed the ruling and returned the case for reconsideration. It remained blocked. Then in March 2003, the Appellate Court again ruled it unconstitutional on the grounds that it would hinder protected adult speech that's likely what it was about in the first place.
Other litigation followed at the District and Appellate levels until on January 21, 2009, the Supreme Court killed COPA by refusing to hear appeals to affirm it. The Electronic Frontier Foundation put it this way: "After 10 Years, an Infamous Internet-Censorship Act is Finally Dead." At least that's the hope, but censorship attempts never die. They just reinvent themselves in new forms made all the easier when powerful corporate interests and their congressional allies support them.
In 2000, the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) became law, and the Supreme Court upheld it - to regulate online content deemed "indecent (or) harmful to minors." The law requires schools, libraries and other public institutions to install blocking software to prevent minors from having access to it.
In 2006, the Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA) passed the House but not the Senate. It also would have mandated schools, libraries and other public institutions to prevent minors from accessing "commercial social networking websites (and) chat rooms."
Its language was broad enough to apply also to sites like Amazon, Yahoo, Wikipedia and others and would have made the FCC a gatekeeper/censor. As the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act, the law was reintroduced in the Senate in January 2007 but never passed.
In February 1996, the Communications Decency Act (CDA) was passed - to regulate alleged indecent and obscene online content in violation of the First Amendment. Under the law, classic fiction would be banned as well as any material deemed offensive. In June, 1996, a three-judge federal panel partially struck it down for restricting adult free speech. In June 1997, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court ruling in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union.
The Act was Title V of the 1996 Telecommunications Act titled Broadcast Obscenity and Violence that applied broadcast standards to the Internet. Under Section 230, Internet services operators aren't considered publishers and thus have no liability for the words of third parties using their services.
In 2003, Congress amended CDA by removing struck down indecency provisions. In 2005, a three-judge Southern District of New York panel rejected Barbara Nitke's obscenity provisions CDA challenge (in Nitke, et al v. Ashcroft). The Supreme Court upheld the decision.
In 2005, the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act (VAWDOJRA) became law - and another blow to online free speech by prohibiting "any device (like a modem) or software that can be used to originate....(anonymous or other) communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the internet" for the alleged purpose of harassment, even if only vigorous constitutional debate was intended or ordinary free speech.
In October 2007, the House passed the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act called "the thought crime prevention bill." It was introduced in the Senate, referred to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, but never voted on or passed.
If it ever becomes law in its present form, it will establish a commission and Center for Excellence to study and act against "thought criminals" (including online ones) for alleged acts of "violent radicalization (and) homegrown terrorism" defined as follows:
-- "violent radicalization (to mean) adopting or promoting an extremist belief system (to facilitate) ideologically based violence to advance political, religious or social change;"
-- "homegrown terrorism (to mean) the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any (US) possession to intimidate or coerce the (US) government, the civilian population....or any segment thereof (to further) political or social objectives."
In other words, this law, if passed, will criminalize whatever the government wishes to include under the above two categories, including constitutionally protected speech online or elsewhere.
Another ongoing censorship issue involves craigslist - a worldwide online community network featuring classified ads for "jobs, housing, for sale, personals, services, local community, and events."
On May 5, South Carolina Attorney (AG) General Henry McMaster notified its CEO, Jim Buckmaster, that unless an "erotic services" section is removed in 10 days, "craigslist management may be subject to criminal investigation and prosecution." Other AGs in Rhode Island, Illinois, and Connecticut issued similar threats even though all of them are baseless.
Previous courts have held that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) protects "interactive computer service" providers like craigslist and lets them be self-regulating and free from liability. The law clearly states that they shouldn't be responsible for third party content because they didn't do enough to comply with individual State standards that may violate the First Amendment and federal law.
In craigslist's case, it's gone way beyond its legal obligations. In November 2008, it agreed to technical and policy changes to curb the use of its site for illegal purposes by third parties, including requiring telephone and credit card verification for "erotic services" ads to reject ones deemed illegal.
Earlier, craigslist screened out 90% of these ads. Nonetheless, it's being unfairly targeted by AGs interpreting Section 230 and First Amendment rights as they please. Federal law, however, protects craigslist, but not against ambitious AGs harassment for their own political advantage and self-interest.
On May 20, craigslist announced that it filed suit against South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster seeking "declaratory relief and a restraining order with respect to criminal charges he has repeatedly threatened against craigslist and its executives." Craigslist is on solid footing. It's in full compliance with the law, but McMaster's persistent threats forced it to sue in federal court.
These and numerous other congressional and other attempts aim to censor protected speech, including online. Expect more of this ahead, some legislation to be enacted, at times upheld by the courts, and, as a result, our liberties to be chipped away incrementally and lost - unless a line in the sand is drawn and defended by enough of the committed to do it.
On February 29, 2008, one skirmish turned out successfully when a federal judge let the anonymous whistle-blowing WikiLeaks resume operations after a week earlier ordering its US hosting company and domain registrar (Dynadot) to shut down and lock out its site. In his reconsidered ruling, District Judge Jeffrey White conceded he was having second thoughts regarding "serious questions of prior restraint (and) possible violations of the First Amendment." He added that "the court does not want to be a part of any order that is not constitutional." Even so, one triumph doesn't mean victory. The struggle for unimpeded free speech continues.
Secret Unconstitutional Surveillance, Including Online Data Mining
The right to privacy is sacred even though no constitutional provision specifically mandates it. Nonetheless, the First Amendment guarantees free and open speech and beliefs. The Third Amendment the privacy of our homes against demands to be used to house soldiers. The Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination and privacy of our personal information.
Also, the Ninth Amendment states that the "enumeration of certain (of the Bill of) rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people." In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court held that the Constitution protects privacy in a case affirming the right to use contraceptives and that banning them violated the "right to marital privacy."
In Justice Arthur Goldberg's concurring opinion, he cited the Ninth Amendment in defense of the ruling. Earlier High Courts also affirmed the constitutional right of privacy on matters of marriage, child rearing, procreation, education, termination of medical treatment, possessing and viewing pornography, abortion, and more as well as overall privacy protection.
The 14th Amendment's "liberty" clause also relates to privacy by stating: "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...." Courts have broadened the meaning of "liberty" to include personal, political and social rights and privileges. Thus, invasion of private spaces is unconstitutional.
In Olmstead v. US (1928), Justice Louis Brandeis stated:
"The makers of our Constitution understood the need to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness, and the protections guaranteed by this are much broader in scope, and include the right to life and an inviolate personality -- the right to be left alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. The principle underlying the Fourth and Fifth Amendments is protection against invasions of the sanctities of a man's home and privacies of life. This is a recognition of the significance of man's spiritual nature, his feelings, and his intellect."
George Bush institutionalized lawless spying invasions of privacy on Americans and others. Barack Obama continues the practice under the same federal agencies, including the FBI, CIA, Pentagon and NSA. On April 15, The New York Times headlined: "Officials Say US Wiretaps Exceeded Law."
It cited the NSA's practice in recent months of intercepting private emails and phone calls of Americans "on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year...." Briefed intelligence officials and lawyers called it "significant and systematic....overcollection" in violation of the law.
The Justice Department acknowledged the problem but said it was resolved. For its part, the NSA said its "intelligence operations, including programs for collection and analysis, are in strict accordance with US laws and regulations." The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, in overall charge, downplayed the The Times story, referred to "inadvertent mistakes," and claimed efforts were immediately implemented to correct them.
Nonetheless, the issue remains unsettled, and new details reveal earlier domestic surveillance, including wiretapping a congressional member without court approval, and systematically doing it against many American citizens.
Tom Burghardt writes often on these issues for various publications, web sites, and his Antifascist Calling blog...."Exploring the shadowlands of the corporate police state." In calling "Spying on Americans: 'Business as Usual' under Obama," he reported that working cooperatively with private corporations, the NSA collects vast amounts of "transactional data such as credit card purchases, bank transactions and travel itineraries....sold to (the agency) by corporate freebooters." It's then data-mined for "suspicious patterns," a practice begun pre-9/11 but expanded greatly since then.
More than just financial transactions are monitored. According to investigative journalist Christopher Ketchum, "as many as '8 million Americans are now listed (as) secret enemies....who could face detention under martial law (and subjected) to everything from heightened surveillance and tracking to direct questioning" and possible internment.
Nothing under Obama has changed in spite of serious privacy, civil liberties, and other constitutional issues. Director Rod Beckstrom of DHS' Cyber Security Center resigned in March because of NSA's "greater role in guarding the government's computer systems" and its concentrated power without checks and balances.
According to Electronic Frontier Foundation's senior staff attorney Kevin Bankston: Obama's "Justice Department (is continuing) the Bush administration's cover-up of the National Security Agency's dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans, and insisting that the much-publicized warrantless wiretapping program is still a 'secret' that cannot be reviewed by the courts...." because doing so would harm national security.
Worse still is the DOJ's assertion that the US government is immune from illegal spying litigation even when in violation of federal privacy statutes, an unprecedented claim exceeding the Bush administration citing "sovereign immunity." Obama is going Bush one better by saying the Patriot Act immunizes the government from being sued under surveillance provisions of the Wiretap Act, Stored Communications Act, and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's (FISA) enhanced warrantless wiretapping powers in cooperation with complicit telecom providers. In other words, Obama's DOJ absolves itself and its corporate allies of accountability under existing federal statutes that prohibit illegal spying on Americans.
On April 26, Burghhardt reported that "The Pentagon's Cyber Command Formidable Infrastructure arrayed against the American People" will be headed by the NSA's director, Lt. General Keith Alexander, to protect the military's networks from hacker attacks, especially from countries like China and Russia. How this will "affect civilian computer networks is unclear. However, situating" it alongside NSA at Fort Meade, MD "should set alarm bells ringing (because of NSA's) potential for (greater) abuse....given (its) role in illegal domestic surveillance....(and its) tremendous technical capabilities."
"As a Pentagon agency, NSA has positioned itself to seize near total control over the country's electronic infrastructure, thereby exerting an intolerable influence--and chilling effect-- over the nation's political life." Recent history shows that "NSA and their partners at CIA, FBI, et. al. have targeted political dissidents," including anti-war protesters, environmentalists, and others for their activism and beliefs. Greater NSA powers will "transform 'cybersecurity' into a euphemism for keeping the rabble in line (and) achieving 'full spectrum dominance' via 'Cyberspace Offensive Counter-Operations.' "
Directed against ordinary Americans, democratic freedoms will be severely compromised. No matter as "the Obama administration (prepares) to hand control of the nation's electronic infrastructure over to a (rogue) agency" - with General Alexander telling the House Armed Services subcommittee that America needs a digital warfare force for defensive and offensive cyber operations. More resources are required to do it, not for public security, but for imperial conquest and containing dissent at home - in violation of constitutional freedoms and international law.
In a follow-up May 4 article, Burghardt explored the secret, unaccountable world of FBI data mining through its Investigative Data Warehouse (IDW) containing over a billion documents, including many on US citizens. They come from our personal records and history, including what's obtainable online through illegal spying.
According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) Kurt Opsahl, "The IDW includes more than four times as many documents as the Library of Congress, and the FBI has asked for millions of dollars to data-mine this warehouse, using unproven science in an attempt to predict future crimes from past behavior." This illegal spying violates our constitutional right to privacy and endangers our freedom by generating unsubstantiated threats based on pure supposition.
Besides the FBI, it's virtually certain that other, perhaps all 16, government intelligence agencies conduct similar spying illegally, and as such, endanger everyone's freedom.
Earlier on July 14, 2008, an ACLU press release headlined: "Terrorist Watch List Hits One Million Names" based on government reported figures. They include: "Members of Congress, nuns, war heros and other 'suspicious characters' (like anti-war and environmental activists)....trapped in the Kafkaesque clutches of this list, with little hope of escape."
According to the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Program director, Barry Steinhardt, this data base represents "what's wrong with this administration's approach to security: it's unfair, out-of-control, a waste of resources, treats the rights of the innocent as an afterthought, and is a very real impediment in the lives of millions of (people) in this country. Putting a million names on a watch list is a guarantee (it) will do more harm than good" besides being ineffective to catch real criminals.
Given the current scope and intent of FBI data mining, with millions under surveillance, its potential for abuse far exceeds where it stood less than a year ago - because the Obama administration supports it. No longer is anything about us private, including:
-- all our financial transactions and records;
-- every check written;
-- every credit card or other electronic purchase;
-- our complete medical history;
-- every plane, train, bus or ship itinerary;
-- our phone records and conversations; and
-- every computer key stroke.
Our entire private world is now public - if spy snoops decide to invade it.
Key Internet-based companies, like Google, do it routinely - the company UK-based Privacy International ranked worst in its September 2007 "Race to the Bottom" report. It stated:
"....throughout our research we have found numerous deficiencies and hostilities in Google's approach to privacy that go well beyond those of other organizations." It tops them all "as an endemic threat to privacy. This is in part due to the diversity and specificity of Google's product range and the ability of the company to share extracted data between these tools, and in part due to Google's market dominance and the sheer size of its user base."
It's also unmatched in "its aggressive use of invasive or potentially invasive technologies and techniques." It's able to "deep-drill into the minutiae of a user's life and lifestyle choices" irresponsibly. Its attitude toward privacy is blatantly hostile at worst and benignly ambivalent at best. Specifically:
-- Google retains a large amount of user information with no limitation on its subsequent use or disclosure and with no chance for users to delete or withdraw it;
-- it retains all "search strings and associated IP-addresses and time stamps for at least 18 to 24 months (retention) and does not provide users with an expungement option;"
-- it has other personal information, including hobbies, employment, addresses, phone numbers, and more, and retains it even after users delete their profiles;
-- it "collects all search results entered through Google Toolbar and identifies all Google Toolbar users with a unique cookie that allows Google to track the user's web movement;" it also retains information indefinitely with no expungement option;
-- it doesn't follow OECD Privacy Guidelines and EU data protection law provisions;
-- users have no option to edit or delete obtained records and information about them; and
-- they can't access log information generated through various Google services, such as Google Maps, Video, Talk, Reader, or Blogger.
In 2004, Google also acquired the CIA-linked company Keyhole, Inc., that has a worldwide 3-D spy-in-the-sky images database. Its software provides a virtual fly-over and zoom-in capability to within a one-foot resolution. It's supported by In-Q-Tel, a venture capital CIA-funded firm that "identif(ies) and invest(s) in companies developing cutting-edge information technologies that serve United States national security interests."
In 2003, its CEO, John Hanke, said: "Keyhole's strategic relationship with In-Q-Tel means that the Intelligence Community can now benefit from the massive scalability and high performance of the Keyhole enterprise solution."
In 2006, former CIA clandestine services case officer, Robert Steele, said:
"I am quite positive that Google is taking money and direction from my old colleague Dr. Rick Steinheiser in the Office of Research and Development at CIA, and that Google has done at least one major prototype effort focused on foreign terrorists which produced largely worthless data....I think (Google is) stupid to be playing with CIA, which cannot keep a secret and is more likely to waste time and money than actually produce anything useful."
On April 29, Willem Buiter's Maverecon site headlined "Gagging on Google" and said:
"Google is to privacy and respect for intellectual property rights what the Taliban are to women's rights and civil liberties: a daunting threat that must be fought relentlessly by all those who value privacy and the right to exercise, within the limits of the law, control over the uses made by others of their intellectual property."
This company should be rigorously regulated, "and if necessary, broken up or put out of business." With about half the global internet search market, it threatens enhanced "corporate or even official Big Brotherism."
For example, Google Street View, an addition to Google Maps, "provides panoram(ic) images visible from street level in cities around the world. The cameras record details of residents' lives" on all sorts of personal matters that no one should be able to snoop on, then save, without permission, for whatever purposes.
The company also invades our privacy through tracking cookies or "third-party persistent cookies" to assist interest-based advertising, a practice known as behavioral targeting. In the wrong hands, this information can be used "to put a commercial squeeze on people, but also to extort and blackmail them." And in government hands, it enhances "a pretty effective and very nasty police state."
Can Google be trusted to use this information responsibly? "Of course not." It's a business run by "amoral capitalists," out to make as much money as possible by any means necessary. Google and other Internet search engines "should not be trusted because they cannot be trusted." However, because of its size and dominance, Google is "the new evil empire of the internet," a "Leviathan" that must be tamed.
Cybersecurity Legislation
On April 1, two bills endangering a free and open Internet were introduced in the Senate:
-- S. 773: Cybersecurity Act of 2009 "to ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communications, to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes, to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses against disruption, and for other purposes."
S. 773 was then referred to the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and thus far not voted on.
-- S. 778: A bill to establish, within the Executive Office of the President, the Office of National Cybersecurity Advisor (aka czar). The bill was referred to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and not yet voted on.
Accompanying information said Senators Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe introduced the legislation to address:
"our country's unacceptable vulnerability to massive cyber crime, global cyber espionage, and cyber attacks that could cripple our critical infrastructure."
We presently face cyber espionage threats, they said, as well as "another great vulnerability....to our private sector critical infrastructure - banking, utilities, air/rail/auto traffic control, telecommunications - from disruptive cyber attacks that could literally shut down our way of life."
"This proposed legislation will bring new high-level governmental attention to develop a fully integrated, thoroughly coordinated, public-private partnership to our cyber security efforts in the 21st century" through what's unstated - government affecting our private lives by threatening the viability of a free and open Internet.
During a March Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing, Senator Rockefeller said that we'd all be better off if the Internet was never invented. His precise words were: "Would it have been better if we'd never have invented the Internet and had to use paper and pencil or whatever!" Left unsaid was that without a free and open Internet, few alternatives for getting real news and information would exist, at least with the ease and free accessibility that computers can provide.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation's Jennifer Granick expressed alarm about the risk of "giving the federal government unprecedented power over the Internet without necessarily improving security in the ways that matter most. (These bills) should be opposed or radically amended."
Here's what they'll do:
-- federalize critical infrastructure security, including banks, telecommunications and energy, shifting power away from providers and users to Washington;
-- give "the president unfettered authority to shut down Internet traffic in (whatever he calls) an emergency and disconnect critical infrastructure systems on national security grounds....;"
-- potentially "cripple privacy and security in one fell swoop" through one provision (alone) empowering the Commerce Secretary to "have access to all relevant data concerning (critical infrastructure) networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access...."
In other words, the Commerce Department will be empowered to access "all relevant data" - without privacy safeguards or judicial review. As a result, constitutionally protected private information statutory protections will be lost - guaranteed under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Privacy Protection Act, and financial privacy regulations.
Another provision mandates a feasibility study for an identity management and authentication program that would sidestep "appropriate civil liberties and privacy protections."
At issue is what role should the federal government play in cybersecurity? How much power should it have? Can it dismiss constitutional protections, and what, in fact, can enhance cybersecurity without endangering our freedoms? S. 773 and 778, as now written, "make matters worse by weakening existing privacy safeguards (without) address(ing) the real problems of security."
In late February, Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, told the House Intelligence Committee that the NSA, not DHS, should be in charge of cybersecurity even though it has a "trust handicap" to overcome because of its illegal spying:
"I think there is a great deal of distrust of the National Security Agency and the intelligence community in general playing a role outside of the very narrowly circumscribed role because of some of the history of the FISA issue in years past...." So Blair asked the committee's leadership to find a way to instill public confidence.
On February 9, Obama appointed Melissa Hathaway to be Acting Senior Director for Cyberspace for the National Security and Homeland Security Councils - in charge of a 60-day interagency cybersecurity review, now completed.
On April 21, NSA/Chief Central Security Service director, General Alexander, told RSA Conference security participants that "The NSA does not want to run cybersecurity for the government. We need partnerships with others. The DHS has a big part, you do, and our partners in academia. It's one network and we all have to work together....The NSA can offer technology assistance to team members. That's our role."
But someone has to be in charge. It may or may not be NSA, but no matter. At issue is our constitutional freedoms. Any infringement on them must be challenged and stopped.
Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Islamic Politics - The way forward for the Muslim Ummah
The MPs’ expenses scandal exposes corruption of democracy
The serialisation of how British MP’s have been playing the system and exploiting the taxpayer has exposed the systemic corruption within the capitalist democratic system. Like the big bankers before them, MPs have been busy serving themselves rather than serving the people. These events should serve as a reminder to us in the West that entering this corrupt political system is not the way forward for the community. Rather the Muslim community should engage with the wider society with a view to carrying the Dawah of Islam.
The crisis in confidence in the political system is not an isolated problem. It is coupled to a wider collapse in confidence in the west’s ideology – Capitalism. The economic crisis and collapse of the financial system, Britain’s broken society, wider social breakdown, and human rights abuses committed as part of the war on terror are also symptoms of this ideological decay – they are all linked to the values of capitalism: excess, greed, individualism and materialism.
So what should the Muslim community do?
Firstly, we must look beyond this failed model instead of blindly following it. If once naive people saw some benefit in it they must now realise that it is not only fundamentally defective but it corrupts those who work within the system. We must abandon calls to participate in this political system.
Secondly, we must look at this situation and reflect upon what Allah (swt) has commanded and prohibited us in political life. To join or support secular political parties – whether they are nationalistic, socialist, communist, Baathist, Liberal, Labour or Conservative - is forbidden by Islam. To support a law making process outside of the Shariah of Allah (swt) is prohibited. This is in regards to man-made laws generally but especially in the capitalist system that has taken money as its criteria for deciding what is right and wrong – lawful and unlawful.
“The hukm rests with none but Allah.” [Translated meaning of Quran Surah 12:40]
إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلاَّ لِلّهِ
“Those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed, then they are the fasiqoon (wrongdoers)” [Translated meaning of Quran Surah 5:47]
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
This means we should support the call for a radical alternative in the Muslim world. The rulers in our countries have for decades emulated these Western politicians. Have we seen anything other than corruption, exploitation and treachery from such rulers? The Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said: “Every traitor will have a flag on the Day of Judgement that will be raised as high as his treachery. There is no treachery greater than that of the leader of the masses”.
The Muslim world now needs a new politics and new leadership based on the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam). This is the politics of the Khilafah State:
1. Where laws are from the Shariah and so cannot be manipulated by the rulers
2. Where authority is with the people who elect the ruler
3. Where there are defined structures of accountability
4. Where politics is considered worship to Allah (swt) by serving the people, not exploiting the people, which is the bedrock of politics and economics in the West.
Furthermore in the West, instead of foolishly following this failed system we have to find ways to build our communities and engage with society independent of these corrupt politicians and parties – not voting for them or becoming part of them. A united community, that is not dependent on them for handouts, can engage and present its ideas and viewpoints to all of society with more credibility and effectiveness.
We must work to prevent our own community becoming engulfed by the secular capitalist values that promote individualism, greed and excess. Instead, we must actively promote the noble Islamic values – including consciousness of Allah (swt), decent morals and strong families and communities - amongst ourselves, and to the wider society.
For now, more than ever, the world is looking for an alternative to the disaster of Capitalism’s economic, political and social system. It is the Muslim community that needs to show them this alternative, and invite people to this.
“Call unto the way of your Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the better way.” [Translated meaning of the Quran Surah 16:125]
ادْعُ إِلِى سَبِيلِ رَبِّكَ بِالْحِكْمَةِ وَالْمَوْعِظَةِ الْحَسَنَةِ وَجَادِلْهُم بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ
Hizb ut-Tahrir
The serialisation of how British MP’s have been playing the system and exploiting the taxpayer has exposed the systemic corruption within the capitalist democratic system. Like the big bankers before them, MPs have been busy serving themselves rather than serving the people. These events should serve as a reminder to us in the West that entering this corrupt political system is not the way forward for the community. Rather the Muslim community should engage with the wider society with a view to carrying the Dawah of Islam.
The crisis in confidence in the political system is not an isolated problem. It is coupled to a wider collapse in confidence in the west’s ideology – Capitalism. The economic crisis and collapse of the financial system, Britain’s broken society, wider social breakdown, and human rights abuses committed as part of the war on terror are also symptoms of this ideological decay – they are all linked to the values of capitalism: excess, greed, individualism and materialism.
So what should the Muslim community do?
Firstly, we must look beyond this failed model instead of blindly following it. If once naive people saw some benefit in it they must now realise that it is not only fundamentally defective but it corrupts those who work within the system. We must abandon calls to participate in this political system.
Secondly, we must look at this situation and reflect upon what Allah (swt) has commanded and prohibited us in political life. To join or support secular political parties – whether they are nationalistic, socialist, communist, Baathist, Liberal, Labour or Conservative - is forbidden by Islam. To support a law making process outside of the Shariah of Allah (swt) is prohibited. This is in regards to man-made laws generally but especially in the capitalist system that has taken money as its criteria for deciding what is right and wrong – lawful and unlawful.
“The hukm rests with none but Allah.” [Translated meaning of Quran Surah 12:40]
إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلاَّ لِلّهِ
“Those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed, then they are the fasiqoon (wrongdoers)” [Translated meaning of Quran Surah 5:47]
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
This means we should support the call for a radical alternative in the Muslim world. The rulers in our countries have for decades emulated these Western politicians. Have we seen anything other than corruption, exploitation and treachery from such rulers? The Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said: “Every traitor will have a flag on the Day of Judgement that will be raised as high as his treachery. There is no treachery greater than that of the leader of the masses”.
The Muslim world now needs a new politics and new leadership based on the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam). This is the politics of the Khilafah State:
1. Where laws are from the Shariah and so cannot be manipulated by the rulers
2. Where authority is with the people who elect the ruler
3. Where there are defined structures of accountability
4. Where politics is considered worship to Allah (swt) by serving the people, not exploiting the people, which is the bedrock of politics and economics in the West.
Furthermore in the West, instead of foolishly following this failed system we have to find ways to build our communities and engage with society independent of these corrupt politicians and parties – not voting for them or becoming part of them. A united community, that is not dependent on them for handouts, can engage and present its ideas and viewpoints to all of society with more credibility and effectiveness.
We must work to prevent our own community becoming engulfed by the secular capitalist values that promote individualism, greed and excess. Instead, we must actively promote the noble Islamic values – including consciousness of Allah (swt), decent morals and strong families and communities - amongst ourselves, and to the wider society.
For now, more than ever, the world is looking for an alternative to the disaster of Capitalism’s economic, political and social system. It is the Muslim community that needs to show them this alternative, and invite people to this.
“Call unto the way of your Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the better way.” [Translated meaning of the Quran Surah 16:125]
ادْعُ إِلِى سَبِيلِ رَبِّكَ بِالْحِكْمَةِ وَالْمَوْعِظَةِ الْحَسَنَةِ وَجَادِلْهُم بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ
Hizb ut-Tahrir
Friday, May 15, 2009
Khutbah: Corruption
Friday, 15 May 2009
bribery.jpgAddressing the ongoing corruption scandal
[OPENING DUA]
إن الحمد لله نحمده و نستعينه و نستغفره و نعود بالله من شرور أنفسنا و سيئات أعمالنا من يهده الله فلا مضل له و من يضلل فلا هادي له و اشهد إلا اله إلا الله و حده لا شريك له و اشهد أن محمد عبده و رسوله
(يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ حَقَّ تُقَاتِهِ وَلَا تَمُوتُنَّ إِلَّا وَأَنْتُمْ مُسْلِمُونَ)
(يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ اتَّقُوا رَبَّكُمُ الَّذِي خَلَقَكُمْ مِنْ نَفْسٍ وَاحِدَةٍ وَخَلَقَ مِنْهَا زَوْجَهَا وَبَثَّ مِنْهُمَا رِجَالًا كَثِيرًا وَنِسَاءً وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ الَّذِي تَسَاءَلُونَ بِهِ وَالْأَرْحَامَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَيْكُمْ رَقِيبًا)
"يا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَقُولُوا قَوْلًا سَدِيدًا يُصْلِحْ لَكُمْ أَعْمَالَكُمْ وَيَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ ذُنُوبَكُمْ وَمَنْ يُطِعِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ فَازَ فَوْزًا عَظِيمًا"
أما بعد
[TEXT OF FIRST KHUTBAH]
O you who Believe, Allah has told us in His Book
وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ مَنْ إِنْ تَأْمَنْهُ بِقِنْطَارٍ يُؤَدِّهِ إِلَيْكَ وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ إِنْ تَأْمَنْهُ بِدِينَارٍ لَا يُؤَدِّهِ إِلَيْكَ إِلَّا مَا دُمْتَ عَلَيْهِ قَائِمًا ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَالُوا لَيْسَ عَلَيْنَا فِي الْأُمِّيِّينَ سَبِيلٌ وَيَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ (75) بَلَى مَنْ أَوْفَى بِعَهْدِهِ وَاتَّقَى فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُتَّقِينَ (76)
Among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) is he who, if entrusted with a Qintar (a great amount of wealth, etc.), will readily pay it back; and among them there is he who, if entrusted with a single silver coin, will not repay it unless you constantly stand demanding, because they say: "There is no blame on us to betray and take the properties of the illiterates" But they tell a lie against Allâh while they know it. (75) Yes, whoever fulfils his pledge and fears Allâh much; verily, then Allâh loves those who are Al-Muttaqûn (3:75-76)
My dear brothers in Islam, when we look around at what has been happening in the last week or so regarding the expenses crisis that has engulfed the political arena in the UK, we should not be surprised.
We should not be surprised that the people have become so disillusioned with their politicians here, that they are turning away from the so called democratic process and institutions in disgust.
We should not be surprised that no one believes a word that is uttered from the mouths of those they elected to represent them, to represent their interests, to take care of their affairs, since it has been proven that there is endemic corruption and greed amongst them. We should not be surprised at the widespread resignation to the current situation, since this is simply a confirmation of what everyone already knew; that the whole system here is broken.
Previously we heard about the ‘cash for honours’ scandal, my dear brothers, where investigations were undertaken after people were given titles and honours soon after donating large sums of money to the leaders of this country, courting them in their yachts and mansions.
Previously we heard about the ‘cash for questions’ scandals, where it was shown that certain politicians took money to ask specific questions in parliament, democracy for sale. This was no surprise, since anyone who studies the Western systems will see that while they promote their politics as a voice for the people it is in reality controlled by large vested interests who are able to lobby and influence the politicians. This is evidenced by the cosy relationship between the British government and the Banking sector, where tax payers money was used to reward the failure of their colleagues and associates in Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and others.
Previously we saw the investigations into bribery with respect to large military contracts between the British and its client regimes, which were cancelled, supposedly for security purposes but in reality to protect the interests of both regimes.
Previously we heard that MPs employed their wives, sons, daughters and mistresses in their offices, some of them doing no work for the salary, all to maximize the profits they could gain from their position.
This is no surprise brothers, since the problem is not that those individual politicians are corrupt, or that the expenses system in the parliament is wrong and needs to be fixed, it is much more fundamental than that.
As Allah has told us - and among them there is he who, if entrusted with a single silver coin, will not repay it unless you constantly stand demanding, because they say: "There is no blame on us to betray and take the properties of the illiterates”.
Allah has informed us about the People of the Book, that amongst them are people who cannot be trusted with a single silver coin because they feel they are more entitled to it than the illiterates, than those worse off than them. If this is true about some of the People of the Book, then what about those today my dear brothers who are People of the Pound and Dollar rather than People of the Book?
And look how we are told the only way to get the one coin back off them – is to stand over them constantly demanding it from them – imagine brothers, this expenses issues has only come to light after a long period of time where the parliament tried its best to block the information coming out, at every turn they tried to use their laws and influence to prevent the release of this information under the so called Freedom of Information Act. And in the end – it has only come to light because of someone elses greed, someone who sold the CD of expenses illegally to a national newspaper for hundreds of thousands of pounds!
Those people who believe in nothing except wealth, all they seek in life is money and possessions, success for them is defined by how much material things they can amass. They feel no accountability to anyone except their own greed. This is not unique to politicians, this is a societal value that they all hold today – from the unemployed man up to the richest banker – each one looks to get as much they can for themselves with no regard for anyone else. So the bankers did nothing illegal, but they acted in a greedy and corrupt manner seeking to maximize their profits. The MPs on the whole have done nothing illegal according to the letter of their manufactured laws, but have acted in a greedy and corrupt manner seeking to maximize their profits. Who has suffered in both cases? The average man, the man on the street, the normal taxpayer, who can do nothing except to look on and wish that if he was in the same position he would also be able to get whatever he desires, because that is what the society has taught him.
What do you expect the MPs to do brothers? Are they not part of this society? Isn’t their greed just a mirror on the society and its values? Of course they will act in the same way as the rest of society, its something natural and to be expected. This is why you will find that the American system brothers is even more broken and more corrupt and greedy than here, where becoming a politician is a career choice that will lead to millions of dollars, and they have no shame in admitting that.
This is not a problem with the details of the rules brothers, this is not some small issue that can be repaired with a plaster, in the same way that their failed economic system cannot be repaired by merely tinkering with the rules, and as their economic system is destined to collapse after collapse until it is fundamentally changed, until the society embraces a different set of values, and replaces their system with a totally different system that reflects those values, their problems will continue.
إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُغَيِّرُ مَا بِقَوۡمٍ حَتَّىٰ يُغَيِّرُواْ مَا بِأَنفُسِہِمۡ
Verily! Allâh will not change the condition of a people as long as they do not change their state themselves [13:11]
[TEXT OF SECOND KHUTBAH]
إن الحمد لله و اشهد إلا اله إلا الله و حده لا شريك له و اشهد أن محمد عبده و رسوله
At this time brothers, day after day we are witnessing the failure of the Western systems, not just the failure of their leadership of humanity that has destroyed much of the world as a result of their greed, but even the failure of their ability to look after their own people.
And yet our political leaders in the Muslim world remain enthralled by the Western politics and the Western politicians, and follow them in everything they do except in a more crude and ugly fashion.
The hidden corruption and greed here is open in our countries.
The hidden abuse of peoples rights and dignity is hidden here and open in our countries,
The politicians here hide their failure and unsuitability to lead, whereas this is open in our countries.
The politicians here demand, and our leaders follow, even the demand to abuse and kill their own people.
And our Prophet, peace and blessing be upon him said
إنما أخاف على أمتي الأئمة المضلين
I fear for my Umma, astray leaders (who will lead them astray) (Tirmidhi)
Islam is the only solution for the world at this time and any time, it is only the values of Islam which engenders within its leaders that sense of responsibility and fear, because the leadership is considered a trust and not an opportunity for personal benefit.
Our Prophet told us
إنكم ستحرصون على الإمارة وإنها ستكون ندامة وحسرة يوم القيامة فنعمت المرضعة وبئست الفاطمة
You are eager for leadership and it is truly a regret and a sorrow on the day of judgment, what a good wet nurse and what an evil weaner (Ibn Hibban)
And he said to Abu Dharr when he sought a position of leadership among the people
يَا أَبَا ذَرٍّ إِنَّكَ ضَعِيفٌ وَإِنَّهَا أَمَانَةٌ وَإِنَّهَا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ خِزْىٌ وَنَدَامَةٌ إِلاَّ مَنْ أَخَذَهَا بِحَقِّهَا وَأَدَّى الَّذِى عَلَيْهِ فِيهَا
O Abu Dhar, you are weak and authority is a trust, and on the Day of Resurrection it is a cause of humiliation and sorrow except for him who fulfills its obligations and (properly) discharges the duties thereon (Muslim)
Ruling is a position of great responsibility and comes with great accountability on the day of judgment, so any Muslim who takes such a responsibility understands that he will not answer to the letter of the law, or to the media, or to public opinion, but rather he will answer to the One who Knows and Sees everything, that is Allah. And such a mentality produces the most upstanding individual, and we see that amongst us today, where any practicing Muslim even with all the suspicion on them from the media, will be considered as the most trustworthy in their workplace because of their principles and integrity.
Ruling for us is a trust with Allah, not a career to benefit ourselves. When we look at the examples of the leaders throughout Islamic history, you do not find a parallel to the Islamic nation in terms of the general integrity of its rulers, their accountability and strictness with the wealth of the ummah they were made responsible over.
Once the Prophet (pbuh) appointed a man to collect zakah from Muslims. When he returned, he divided the collected money into two parts and said, “This part is for you, and this part was given to me as a present”. The Prophet (pbuh) got angry, then he stood up, praising Allah and said, “I employ people from you to perform a task to which Allah appointed. And here comes a man who says, ‘This part is for you and this was given to me. If this man sat in his house, would he expect to be given any present? By Allah who has full authority over my soul, if a man takes anything illegally, on the Day of Judgement he will carry it on his neck.”
Umar heard that the famous Sad ibn Abi Waqqas was building a palace at Kufa. Umar sent Mohamed ibn Maslamah to deal with the situation. On reaching Kufa, Mohamed promptly burnt the palace down. ‘Umar also confiscated some of the wealth of ‘Amir ibn al-As when he was governor of Egypt. He wrote to him saying "Let me remind you that I am sending Mohamed ibn Maslamah to you to help you distribute your wealth. Accommodate him and forgive any harshness of his towards you."
When Umar asked another of his governors, Saeed bin ‘Ameer about a complaint from the people he was ruling over "I asked what other complaints they had, and they said: 'One day every month, he does not come out to us at all.' The reply was “Ameer ul-Mumineen, I have no servant, and no clothing save that which I am wearing. I wash it by hand once a month, and it takes it a whole day to dry so that I can put it on and go out again.”
This was the sense of responsibility, accountability, and carefulness in the early generations.
But this was not just amongst the early generations; we have the examples of many ulama accounting the rulers throughout the time, such as Imaam Nawawi account Sultan Baybirs for seeking to impose more taxes for the sake of Jihad – because he felt he had not used enough of his own wealth to justify more taxes on the people.
This is because a society based upon Islam and ruled by Islam produces Islamic personalities, in the same way that this society based upon materialist interests and ruled by a system that protects those interests produces materialistic people concerned only about themselves.
The Islamic mentality is built upon our aqeeda – which tells us
لاَ إِيمَانَ لِمَنْ لاَ أَمَانَةَ لَهُ وَلاَ دِينَ لِمَنْ لاَ عَهْدَ لَهُ
No Imaan for whoever cannot be left with a trust and no deen for whoever does not fulfil their contracts (Bayhaqi)
At this time when people are questioning their system, their values upon which their system is based, as Muslims we must present to them the only alternative that will save humanity not just in the next life but also in this life as well.
Isn’t it enough to see the failure of their way of life, my dear brothers, to give us the confidence and encouragement to refuse to be intimidated to conforming and integrating into their failed system, and to refuse to be intimidated to conforming and adopting their failed values?
And isn’t this failure enough my dear brothers that we demand of our failed politicians in the Muslim lands, who continue to follow these people even into the holes of Lizards, to either adopt the Islamic aqeeda, its values and implement its systems, or to step aside and leave it to those sincere Muslims in the ummah who wish to stand for Islam and for the Deen of Allah and to be Witnesses onto Mankind.
بارك الله لي ولكم في القرآن والسنة، ونفعنا بما فيها من الآيات والحكمة. أقول قولي هذا وأستغفر الله تعالى لي ولكم
[CLOSING DUA]
bribery.jpgAddressing the ongoing corruption scandal
[OPENING DUA]
إن الحمد لله نحمده و نستعينه و نستغفره و نعود بالله من شرور أنفسنا و سيئات أعمالنا من يهده الله فلا مضل له و من يضلل فلا هادي له و اشهد إلا اله إلا الله و حده لا شريك له و اشهد أن محمد عبده و رسوله
(يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ حَقَّ تُقَاتِهِ وَلَا تَمُوتُنَّ إِلَّا وَأَنْتُمْ مُسْلِمُونَ)
(يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ اتَّقُوا رَبَّكُمُ الَّذِي خَلَقَكُمْ مِنْ نَفْسٍ وَاحِدَةٍ وَخَلَقَ مِنْهَا زَوْجَهَا وَبَثَّ مِنْهُمَا رِجَالًا كَثِيرًا وَنِسَاءً وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ الَّذِي تَسَاءَلُونَ بِهِ وَالْأَرْحَامَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَيْكُمْ رَقِيبًا)
"يا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَقُولُوا قَوْلًا سَدِيدًا يُصْلِحْ لَكُمْ أَعْمَالَكُمْ وَيَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ ذُنُوبَكُمْ وَمَنْ يُطِعِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ فَازَ فَوْزًا عَظِيمًا"
أما بعد
[TEXT OF FIRST KHUTBAH]
O you who Believe, Allah has told us in His Book
وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ مَنْ إِنْ تَأْمَنْهُ بِقِنْطَارٍ يُؤَدِّهِ إِلَيْكَ وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ إِنْ تَأْمَنْهُ بِدِينَارٍ لَا يُؤَدِّهِ إِلَيْكَ إِلَّا مَا دُمْتَ عَلَيْهِ قَائِمًا ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَالُوا لَيْسَ عَلَيْنَا فِي الْأُمِّيِّينَ سَبِيلٌ وَيَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ (75) بَلَى مَنْ أَوْفَى بِعَهْدِهِ وَاتَّقَى فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُتَّقِينَ (76)
Among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) is he who, if entrusted with a Qintar (a great amount of wealth, etc.), will readily pay it back; and among them there is he who, if entrusted with a single silver coin, will not repay it unless you constantly stand demanding, because they say: "There is no blame on us to betray and take the properties of the illiterates" But they tell a lie against Allâh while they know it. (75) Yes, whoever fulfils his pledge and fears Allâh much; verily, then Allâh loves those who are Al-Muttaqûn (3:75-76)
My dear brothers in Islam, when we look around at what has been happening in the last week or so regarding the expenses crisis that has engulfed the political arena in the UK, we should not be surprised.
We should not be surprised that the people have become so disillusioned with their politicians here, that they are turning away from the so called democratic process and institutions in disgust.
We should not be surprised that no one believes a word that is uttered from the mouths of those they elected to represent them, to represent their interests, to take care of their affairs, since it has been proven that there is endemic corruption and greed amongst them. We should not be surprised at the widespread resignation to the current situation, since this is simply a confirmation of what everyone already knew; that the whole system here is broken.
Previously we heard about the ‘cash for honours’ scandal, my dear brothers, where investigations were undertaken after people were given titles and honours soon after donating large sums of money to the leaders of this country, courting them in their yachts and mansions.
Previously we heard about the ‘cash for questions’ scandals, where it was shown that certain politicians took money to ask specific questions in parliament, democracy for sale. This was no surprise, since anyone who studies the Western systems will see that while they promote their politics as a voice for the people it is in reality controlled by large vested interests who are able to lobby and influence the politicians. This is evidenced by the cosy relationship between the British government and the Banking sector, where tax payers money was used to reward the failure of their colleagues and associates in Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and others.
Previously we saw the investigations into bribery with respect to large military contracts between the British and its client regimes, which were cancelled, supposedly for security purposes but in reality to protect the interests of both regimes.
Previously we heard that MPs employed their wives, sons, daughters and mistresses in their offices, some of them doing no work for the salary, all to maximize the profits they could gain from their position.
This is no surprise brothers, since the problem is not that those individual politicians are corrupt, or that the expenses system in the parliament is wrong and needs to be fixed, it is much more fundamental than that.
As Allah has told us - and among them there is he who, if entrusted with a single silver coin, will not repay it unless you constantly stand demanding, because they say: "There is no blame on us to betray and take the properties of the illiterates”.
Allah has informed us about the People of the Book, that amongst them are people who cannot be trusted with a single silver coin because they feel they are more entitled to it than the illiterates, than those worse off than them. If this is true about some of the People of the Book, then what about those today my dear brothers who are People of the Pound and Dollar rather than People of the Book?
And look how we are told the only way to get the one coin back off them – is to stand over them constantly demanding it from them – imagine brothers, this expenses issues has only come to light after a long period of time where the parliament tried its best to block the information coming out, at every turn they tried to use their laws and influence to prevent the release of this information under the so called Freedom of Information Act. And in the end – it has only come to light because of someone elses greed, someone who sold the CD of expenses illegally to a national newspaper for hundreds of thousands of pounds!
Those people who believe in nothing except wealth, all they seek in life is money and possessions, success for them is defined by how much material things they can amass. They feel no accountability to anyone except their own greed. This is not unique to politicians, this is a societal value that they all hold today – from the unemployed man up to the richest banker – each one looks to get as much they can for themselves with no regard for anyone else. So the bankers did nothing illegal, but they acted in a greedy and corrupt manner seeking to maximize their profits. The MPs on the whole have done nothing illegal according to the letter of their manufactured laws, but have acted in a greedy and corrupt manner seeking to maximize their profits. Who has suffered in both cases? The average man, the man on the street, the normal taxpayer, who can do nothing except to look on and wish that if he was in the same position he would also be able to get whatever he desires, because that is what the society has taught him.
What do you expect the MPs to do brothers? Are they not part of this society? Isn’t their greed just a mirror on the society and its values? Of course they will act in the same way as the rest of society, its something natural and to be expected. This is why you will find that the American system brothers is even more broken and more corrupt and greedy than here, where becoming a politician is a career choice that will lead to millions of dollars, and they have no shame in admitting that.
This is not a problem with the details of the rules brothers, this is not some small issue that can be repaired with a plaster, in the same way that their failed economic system cannot be repaired by merely tinkering with the rules, and as their economic system is destined to collapse after collapse until it is fundamentally changed, until the society embraces a different set of values, and replaces their system with a totally different system that reflects those values, their problems will continue.
إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُغَيِّرُ مَا بِقَوۡمٍ حَتَّىٰ يُغَيِّرُواْ مَا بِأَنفُسِہِمۡ
Verily! Allâh will not change the condition of a people as long as they do not change their state themselves [13:11]
[TEXT OF SECOND KHUTBAH]
إن الحمد لله و اشهد إلا اله إلا الله و حده لا شريك له و اشهد أن محمد عبده و رسوله
At this time brothers, day after day we are witnessing the failure of the Western systems, not just the failure of their leadership of humanity that has destroyed much of the world as a result of their greed, but even the failure of their ability to look after their own people.
And yet our political leaders in the Muslim world remain enthralled by the Western politics and the Western politicians, and follow them in everything they do except in a more crude and ugly fashion.
The hidden corruption and greed here is open in our countries.
The hidden abuse of peoples rights and dignity is hidden here and open in our countries,
The politicians here hide their failure and unsuitability to lead, whereas this is open in our countries.
The politicians here demand, and our leaders follow, even the demand to abuse and kill their own people.
And our Prophet, peace and blessing be upon him said
إنما أخاف على أمتي الأئمة المضلين
I fear for my Umma, astray leaders (who will lead them astray) (Tirmidhi)
Islam is the only solution for the world at this time and any time, it is only the values of Islam which engenders within its leaders that sense of responsibility and fear, because the leadership is considered a trust and not an opportunity for personal benefit.
Our Prophet told us
إنكم ستحرصون على الإمارة وإنها ستكون ندامة وحسرة يوم القيامة فنعمت المرضعة وبئست الفاطمة
You are eager for leadership and it is truly a regret and a sorrow on the day of judgment, what a good wet nurse and what an evil weaner (Ibn Hibban)
And he said to Abu Dharr when he sought a position of leadership among the people
يَا أَبَا ذَرٍّ إِنَّكَ ضَعِيفٌ وَإِنَّهَا أَمَانَةٌ وَإِنَّهَا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ خِزْىٌ وَنَدَامَةٌ إِلاَّ مَنْ أَخَذَهَا بِحَقِّهَا وَأَدَّى الَّذِى عَلَيْهِ فِيهَا
O Abu Dhar, you are weak and authority is a trust, and on the Day of Resurrection it is a cause of humiliation and sorrow except for him who fulfills its obligations and (properly) discharges the duties thereon (Muslim)
Ruling is a position of great responsibility and comes with great accountability on the day of judgment, so any Muslim who takes such a responsibility understands that he will not answer to the letter of the law, or to the media, or to public opinion, but rather he will answer to the One who Knows and Sees everything, that is Allah. And such a mentality produces the most upstanding individual, and we see that amongst us today, where any practicing Muslim even with all the suspicion on them from the media, will be considered as the most trustworthy in their workplace because of their principles and integrity.
Ruling for us is a trust with Allah, not a career to benefit ourselves. When we look at the examples of the leaders throughout Islamic history, you do not find a parallel to the Islamic nation in terms of the general integrity of its rulers, their accountability and strictness with the wealth of the ummah they were made responsible over.
Once the Prophet (pbuh) appointed a man to collect zakah from Muslims. When he returned, he divided the collected money into two parts and said, “This part is for you, and this part was given to me as a present”. The Prophet (pbuh) got angry, then he stood up, praising Allah and said, “I employ people from you to perform a task to which Allah appointed. And here comes a man who says, ‘This part is for you and this was given to me. If this man sat in his house, would he expect to be given any present? By Allah who has full authority over my soul, if a man takes anything illegally, on the Day of Judgement he will carry it on his neck.”
Umar heard that the famous Sad ibn Abi Waqqas was building a palace at Kufa. Umar sent Mohamed ibn Maslamah to deal with the situation. On reaching Kufa, Mohamed promptly burnt the palace down. ‘Umar also confiscated some of the wealth of ‘Amir ibn al-As when he was governor of Egypt. He wrote to him saying "Let me remind you that I am sending Mohamed ibn Maslamah to you to help you distribute your wealth. Accommodate him and forgive any harshness of his towards you."
When Umar asked another of his governors, Saeed bin ‘Ameer about a complaint from the people he was ruling over "I asked what other complaints they had, and they said: 'One day every month, he does not come out to us at all.' The reply was “Ameer ul-Mumineen, I have no servant, and no clothing save that which I am wearing. I wash it by hand once a month, and it takes it a whole day to dry so that I can put it on and go out again.”
This was the sense of responsibility, accountability, and carefulness in the early generations.
But this was not just amongst the early generations; we have the examples of many ulama accounting the rulers throughout the time, such as Imaam Nawawi account Sultan Baybirs for seeking to impose more taxes for the sake of Jihad – because he felt he had not used enough of his own wealth to justify more taxes on the people.
This is because a society based upon Islam and ruled by Islam produces Islamic personalities, in the same way that this society based upon materialist interests and ruled by a system that protects those interests produces materialistic people concerned only about themselves.
The Islamic mentality is built upon our aqeeda – which tells us
لاَ إِيمَانَ لِمَنْ لاَ أَمَانَةَ لَهُ وَلاَ دِينَ لِمَنْ لاَ عَهْدَ لَهُ
No Imaan for whoever cannot be left with a trust and no deen for whoever does not fulfil their contracts (Bayhaqi)
At this time when people are questioning their system, their values upon which their system is based, as Muslims we must present to them the only alternative that will save humanity not just in the next life but also in this life as well.
Isn’t it enough to see the failure of their way of life, my dear brothers, to give us the confidence and encouragement to refuse to be intimidated to conforming and integrating into their failed system, and to refuse to be intimidated to conforming and adopting their failed values?
And isn’t this failure enough my dear brothers that we demand of our failed politicians in the Muslim lands, who continue to follow these people even into the holes of Lizards, to either adopt the Islamic aqeeda, its values and implement its systems, or to step aside and leave it to those sincere Muslims in the ummah who wish to stand for Islam and for the Deen of Allah and to be Witnesses onto Mankind.
بارك الله لي ولكم في القرآن والسنة، ونفعنا بما فيها من الآيات والحكمة. أقول قولي هذا وأستغفر الله تعالى لي ولكم
[CLOSING DUA]
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Tafsir of Al-Baqarah verse 272, Nafaqah (spending)
“Not upon you is their guidance, but Allah guides whom He wills. And whatever you spend in good, it is for yourselves, when you spend not except seeking Allah's sake. And whatever you spend in good, it will be repaid to you in full, and you shall not be wronged.” [TMQ Al-Baqarah:272]
لَيْسَ عَلَيْكَ هُدَاهُمْ وَلَكِنَّ اللَّهَ يَهْدِي مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَمَا تُنْفِقُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَلِأَنْفُسِكُمْ وَمَا تُنْفِقُونَ إِلَّا ابْتِغَاءَ وَجْهِ اللَّهِ وَمَا تُنْفِقُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ يُوَفَّ إِلَيْكُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ لَا تُظْلَمُون
Taken from the book «Taysir fi usool at-tafsir» by the scholar of usul al-fiqh, the leader of Hizb ut-Tahrir, Sheikh Ata bin Khalil Abu Rashta
The verse continues about spending, but during it Allah mentions part of the verse as if it has no relation to spending. It is known that in the language of the Arabs that the most clear (faseeh) Arab would not have his words disorganised, so if during his speech he began a part unconnected to what was before or what comes after, then it was intended, but the speaker had concealed the link between this part and the rest of the speech, not making it appear explicitly, so as to encourage pausing there to go deep into it to discover its meaning, and so drawing attention to it with this rhetorical style.
This verse is like that, as what preceded it is about spending and what follows it is about spending, with the apparent meaning of the words about other than that. So, the focus is on it as we pause to discover the link and consider it deeply, as intended by Allah the glorified.
Contemplation of this verse shows that we do not have to force the people onto guidance and entering Islam. That is not in our capability, rather Allah guides whom He wills.
As for us, we call to Islam and command what is good and censure what is bad. If they respond, then it is a favour from Allah, as Allah alone is capable of guiding all people.
(وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَآتَيْنَا كُلَّ نَفْسٍ هُدَاهَا) “And if We had willed, surely We would have given every person his guidance.” [As-Sajdah:13]
Contemplation of this meaning makes one wonder now about the link between this part of the verse with what is before, which is about spending, and with what came after, which is also about spending.
If man worried about guiding their loved ones and the embracing Islam of relatives or friends, it would push him to pressure them and force them to enter Islam, and to use money as a method to do that. So, if he used to provide for them, then he could prevent their maintenance in order to get them to become Muslim or make Islam a condition for provisions. Therefore, Allah prohibited Muslims from using maintenance as a method of coercion for relatives or those with whom they have a relationship to enter Islam.
Pausing to consider the verse benefits us in two ways:
First: entering Islam, or guidance, needs conviction, satisfaction and choice and not duress and coercion.
Second: not to exploit the maintenance of relatives or those with whom there is a relationship to coerce people to convert to Islam.
This is confirmed by what some of the sahabah narrated of the cause for this verse’s revelation: Ibn Jarir extracted by way of Ibn Abbas - may Allah be pleased with them both – that he said: "They - the Muslims – used not to يرضخون their relatives of the idol worshippers, so Allah sent down (لَيْسَ عَلَيْكَ هُدَاهُمْ وَلَكِنَّ اللَّهَ يَهْدِي مَنْ يَشَاءُ) (Not upon you is their guidance, but Allah guides whom He wills.)". يرضخون: to give something of their money, i.e. they did not spend on their relatives as they were polytheists until they become Muslims.
In another account from Ibn Abbas - may Allah be pleased with him – he said: "Some people from the Ansar had in-laws and relations with the tribe of QurayDha and an-NaDir, and they were cautious to give sadaqah, wanting them to become Muslims, so (لَيْسَ عَلَيْكَ هُدَاهُمْ) (Not upon you is their guidance) was sent down."
'Give sadaqah' as it comes in the story means keeping relations and maintenance; because charity is worship and draws one closer to Allah and is not allowed for non-Muslims.
Also, Ibn Jarir extracted by way of Said bin Jubayr: they were cautious to give something of their money to the polytheists from their relatives until it was revealed: (لَيْسَ عَلَيْكَ هُدَاهُمْ وَلَكِنَّ اللَّهَ يَهْدِي مَنْ يَشَاءُ) (Not upon you is their guidance, but Allah guides whom He wills).
Qurtubi mentioned that some of mufassireen said Asmaa’ bint Abi Bakr as-Siddeeq wanted to keep relations with her grandfather, Abu Fahafah, and then declined to do that as he was a non-Muslim, so the verse was sent down about that.
Thus, the context of the verses continue with one format, with the focus on not using maintenance or preventing it to compel people to enter into Islam.
It is worth mentioning that not forcing people to enter into Islam does not mean not forcing them to submit to the shar’iah rules, nor the non-application of the shar’iah rules on them by the Islamic State, as that is obligatory. We have stated that in the tafseer of the verse (لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ) (no compulsion in religion) [al-Baqarah:256 ], so refer to it.
Then Allah completes His verse about spending, so He explains other rules about spending. It came already that Allah explained that spending must be free of harm and any expectation of returning the favour, and not be to show off, and is not ill-gotten money.
In this verse Allah shows that for the one who spends, the best is for him, as he is the one who is rewarded for it and redeemed in this world and the Hereafter and in particular, as he spent it wanting Allah’s pleasure. (لَيْسَ عَلَيْكَ هُدَاهُمْ) (Not upon you is their guidance).
The address is to the Prophet (saw), and it is an address to his ummah as well. The meaning is: You are not charged with forcing them to guidance.
The meaning of charging (at-takleef) comes from (عَلَيْكَ) (upon you). Guidance: Islam.
(وَلَكِنَّ اللَّهَ يَهْدِي مَنْ يَشَاءُ) (But, Allah guides whom He wills), that is to say that Allah is capable of guiding all the people, but the wisdom of the Almighty required leaving them to choose:(فَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ ءَامَنَ وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ كَفَرَ) (From them is he who believes and from them is he who disbelieves) [Al-Baqarah:253]
(وَمَا تُنْفِقُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَلِأَنْفُسِكُمْ) (And whatever you spend in good, it is for yourselves)
‘What’ Ma (مَا) puts a condition, while ‘From’ min (مِنْ) means ‘a part’, i.e. a part of goodness. ‘Goodness’ khair (خَيْرٍ) is money, because al-khair, if it is connected to spending, then it means the money, whereas if it is not connected to it, then it does not necessarily mean money, rather it could come about other than it:
(فَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ خَيْرًا يَرَهُ) (So, whoever does an atom’s weight of good khair will see it) [Al-Zalzalah:7]
(فَلِأَنْفُسِكُمْ) (it is for yourselves) i.e. it is for yourselves and none but you will benefit from it in the next life. The letter Fa ف introduces the conditioned thing (jawab ash-shart).
(وَمَا تُنْفِقُونَ إِلَّا ابْتِغَاءَ وَجْهِ اللَّه) (And you are not spending except desiring Allah’s pleasure) i.e. the reward is for yourselves as you are in the state of desiring Allah’s pleasure.
(وَمَا تُنْفِقُونَ) (And you are not spending) i.e. you do not spend. The wa و introduces the state/situation (Haal) with the whole sentence being the situation itself. (i.e. the state of desiring Allah’s pleasure) (ابْتِغَاءَ) (desiring) is maf’ool li-ajlihi, which is the reason for which an action is done.
(وَجْهِ اللَّهِ) (literally: Allah’s face) is an expression used to mean Allah Himself, and in this usage it means the pure sincerity to Allah. So the saying (in Arabic): I did this for Zayd’s sake
(فعلت هذا لأجل زيد) carries the meaning that you did it for Zayd alone, or that you did it for Zayd and for other than Zayd, i.e. that this expression (لأجل) contains the meaning of sharing. However, if you said (in Arabic): I did this for Zayd’s face (فعلته لوجه زيد), it was purely for Zayd alone.
Thus, (ابْتِغَاءَ وَجْهِ اللَّهِ) (desiring Allah’s pleasure) i.e. purely for Allah alone.
(وَمَا تُنْفِقُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ يُوَفَّ إِلَيْكُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ لَا تُظْلَمُونَ) (And whatever you spend in good, it will be repaid to you in full, and you shall not be wronged) is an explanation for the conditional sentence
(وَمَا تُنْفِقُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَلِأَنْفُسِكُمْ) (And whatever you spend in good, it is for yourselves) i.e. an explanation of (لأنفسكم) (for yourselves) that you will be recompensed in this life and the next, without being wronged, i.e. without neglecting anything of the recompense, as Allah is al-Muwafi and the best of judges, in this life with the blessing of money, and in the next life with great reward.
“اللهم اجعل لمنفق خلفاً ولممسك تلفاً” “O Allah, make for the spender succession and for the withholder ruin” (Al-Bukhari and Muslim) as the Messenger of Allah (saw) said.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Pope Benedict XVI entered the Mosque with his shoes
Pope Benedict XVI did not remove his shoes to visit the largest mosque in Jordan, in Amman Saturday, as organizers had planned a special course that (according to them) does not require removing them, said the press spokesman of the Vatican , Father Federico Lombardi.
*
Father Lombardi was asked at a press conference that the pope had his shoes on his feet during the visit of the Mosque ‘El Hussein bin Talal’ in Amman, while it is generally required to remove his shoes when entering a mosque.
Benedict XVI was prepared to remove them but his escorts have taken a special course and did not asked him to do so, he explained. He said that it should in no way be interpreted as a sign of disrespect to Islam.
*
Father Lombardi was asked at a press conference that the pope had his shoes on his feet during the visit of the Mosque ‘El Hussein bin Talal’ in Amman, while it is generally required to remove his shoes when entering a mosque.
Benedict XVI was prepared to remove them but his escorts have taken a special course and did not asked him to do so, he explained. He said that it should in no way be interpreted as a sign of disrespect to Islam.
Saturday, May 09, 2009
Nothing wrong being a ‘radical Muslim’ | Pakistan Daily
“The global war on terror cannot be won through counterterrorism alone…The immediate war goal must be to destroy militant Islam and the ultimate war goal the modernization of Islam,” - Dr. Daniel Pipes, the famous anti-Islam Jewish expert on Islam, writing in The Jerusalem Post, April 6, 2004.
The term “radical” has been applied to many people, who were considered threat to western colonization, such as Nelson Mandela, Rev. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, Sayyid Qutb, Dr. Ali Shari’ati (the Shia Qutb), Sayyid Maududi, Imam Khomeini, and others. However, now this term is being associated with any Muslim who dare to criticize foreign powers occupying tradionally Muslim lands espectially the Zionist regime in Jewish occupied Palestine. The western historians never called Nazis as “Judeo-Christian radicals” or IRA as “Catholic radicals” or the Jewish terrorist groups which killed tens of thousands of Palestinian natives - as “Jew radicals”.
Historically, many of Biblical prophets were “radicals” for challenging the status quo and taught against the corrupt and racist ruling classes - such as Abraham, Lot, Moses, Jesus - and of course the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), who became “the living example of progressive, emancipatory radicalism,” - as decribed by Michael Hart in his book, ‘The 100″.
The western governments, Jewish lobby groups and Christian Zionist organizations are investing hundreds of millions dollars each year to find and project the so-called “moderate Muslims”; fund Islamophobe intellectuals and dozens of anti-Islam think tanks (Rand, Ford Foundation, Asia Foundation, etc.), and the Jewish-controlled mass-media of course. Interestingly, to be a “moderate Muslim” too, has some limitations.
For example, Dr. Tariq Ramadan 46, found it the hard way in 2004 when he was declared as threat to “the US security” for criticizing his fellow Jewish ‘liberal intellectuals’, Dr. Bernard Lewis, Dr. Bernard-Henry Levy, Dr. Daniel Pipes, and Dr. Bernard Kouchner - for defending Israel, right or wrong. The Geneva-born Tariq is the maternal grandson of the founder of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, Imam Hasan al-Bana (martyred in 1948). The “moderate Muslim” was on his way to take-up his teaching appointment at the University of Notre Dam (Indiana), begining August 25, 2004. Tariq Ramadan used to be a darling of Jewish media for saying: “The 7th century Medina model of Islamic State is not only a dream. It is a lie.” Tariq also consider Shari’ah’s capital punishments as “inhumane”! Tariq’s other distorted views of Islam can be read in the interview he gave to Rosemary Bechler, Open Democracy, July 14, 2004.
Dr. Tariq Ramadan also maintained a distance from his elder brother, Hani Ramadan, a French school teacher, who is known for his so-called “radical” Islamic views. Hani wrote an article in the major French newspaper, Le Monde, to explain why Islam has such a zero tolerance for adultery and that it followed the Jewish biblical punishments of stoning to death a woman found guilty of committing adultery, for which Hani was suspended for teaching in the school.
Islam clearly prohibits a ‘pre-planned’ violence against civilians and acts of terror. However, terrorism and radicalism are two completely different things. It all depends who is using these terms. For the foreign occupiers of Muslim lands - all resistance to their occupation is considered as terrorism. Similarly, every Muslim who is proud to be following the Islamic Shari’ah (which doesn’t divide Islam into two independent spheres, one for the mosque and the other for the State - as is the case in Judaism and Christianity), is labeled as a “radical” or “terrorist” or “Jihadi”.
Islam is the religion of “the middle way” - “Thus have We made you an Ummah of the middle way, that ye might be witness over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourself,” - Holy Qur’an 2:143. However, Islamic message do challenges the institutionalized injustices, inhumanity, immorality, greed, and other evils in the world by establishing a new social order built on bonds of ethics, justice and trust. Islam rejects all forms of racism, caste system, all forms of oppression, usury, abuse of laws for the ‘chosen ones’ and dehumanization of man on the basis of colour, nationality and religion. All these principles are considered “radical”, especially in the societies controlled by the Zionist-controlled-governments (ZOG).
So, in conclusion, the next time some jerk call you “a radical Muslim”; don’t apologize, be proud.
There can never be peace in the world without justice. Everyone, including Muslims, need justice. But justice cannot be achieved without effort, both intellectual and physical. It involves challenging the power of the corrupt and greedy world elites, who do see Islam as a “radical” threat to their political, economic and cultural domination.
The term “radical” has been applied to many people, who were considered threat to western colonization, such as Nelson Mandela, Rev. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, Sayyid Qutb, Dr. Ali Shari’ati (the Shia Qutb), Sayyid Maududi, Imam Khomeini, and others. However, now this term is being associated with any Muslim who dare to criticize foreign powers occupying tradionally Muslim lands espectially the Zionist regime in Jewish occupied Palestine. The western historians never called Nazis as “Judeo-Christian radicals” or IRA as “Catholic radicals” or the Jewish terrorist groups which killed tens of thousands of Palestinian natives - as “Jew radicals”.
Historically, many of Biblical prophets were “radicals” for challenging the status quo and taught against the corrupt and racist ruling classes - such as Abraham, Lot, Moses, Jesus - and of course the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), who became “the living example of progressive, emancipatory radicalism,” - as decribed by Michael Hart in his book, ‘The 100″.
The western governments, Jewish lobby groups and Christian Zionist organizations are investing hundreds of millions dollars each year to find and project the so-called “moderate Muslims”; fund Islamophobe intellectuals and dozens of anti-Islam think tanks (Rand, Ford Foundation, Asia Foundation, etc.), and the Jewish-controlled mass-media of course. Interestingly, to be a “moderate Muslim” too, has some limitations.
For example, Dr. Tariq Ramadan 46, found it the hard way in 2004 when he was declared as threat to “the US security” for criticizing his fellow Jewish ‘liberal intellectuals’, Dr. Bernard Lewis, Dr. Bernard-Henry Levy, Dr. Daniel Pipes, and Dr. Bernard Kouchner - for defending Israel, right or wrong. The Geneva-born Tariq is the maternal grandson of the founder of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, Imam Hasan al-Bana (martyred in 1948). The “moderate Muslim” was on his way to take-up his teaching appointment at the University of Notre Dam (Indiana), begining August 25, 2004. Tariq Ramadan used to be a darling of Jewish media for saying: “The 7th century Medina model of Islamic State is not only a dream. It is a lie.” Tariq also consider Shari’ah’s capital punishments as “inhumane”! Tariq’s other distorted views of Islam can be read in the interview he gave to Rosemary Bechler, Open Democracy, July 14, 2004.
Dr. Tariq Ramadan also maintained a distance from his elder brother, Hani Ramadan, a French school teacher, who is known for his so-called “radical” Islamic views. Hani wrote an article in the major French newspaper, Le Monde, to explain why Islam has such a zero tolerance for adultery and that it followed the Jewish biblical punishments of stoning to death a woman found guilty of committing adultery, for which Hani was suspended for teaching in the school.
Islam clearly prohibits a ‘pre-planned’ violence against civilians and acts of terror. However, terrorism and radicalism are two completely different things. It all depends who is using these terms. For the foreign occupiers of Muslim lands - all resistance to their occupation is considered as terrorism. Similarly, every Muslim who is proud to be following the Islamic Shari’ah (which doesn’t divide Islam into two independent spheres, one for the mosque and the other for the State - as is the case in Judaism and Christianity), is labeled as a “radical” or “terrorist” or “Jihadi”.
Islam is the religion of “the middle way” - “Thus have We made you an Ummah of the middle way, that ye might be witness over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over yourself,” - Holy Qur’an 2:143. However, Islamic message do challenges the institutionalized injustices, inhumanity, immorality, greed, and other evils in the world by establishing a new social order built on bonds of ethics, justice and trust. Islam rejects all forms of racism, caste system, all forms of oppression, usury, abuse of laws for the ‘chosen ones’ and dehumanization of man on the basis of colour, nationality and religion. All these principles are considered “radical”, especially in the societies controlled by the Zionist-controlled-governments (ZOG).
So, in conclusion, the next time some jerk call you “a radical Muslim”; don’t apologize, be proud.
There can never be peace in the world without justice. Everyone, including Muslims, need justice. But justice cannot be achieved without effort, both intellectual and physical. It involves challenging the power of the corrupt and greedy world elites, who do see Islam as a “radical” threat to their political, economic and cultural domination.
Friday, May 08, 2009
Changing societies is a work of the highest order in Islam. It is the work of Prophets.
Changing societies is a work of the highest order in Islam. It is the work of Prophets. It is the work of transforming societies rife with corruption, immorality, ignorance and injustice to becoming societies of justice, moral elevation, knowledge and integrity. If we observe the life of the Messenger of Allah (saw) with a bird’s eye view, so as not to miss the wood for the trees, we see that this is exactly what he worked for and achieved. He was chosen as a prophet and given his mission at a time when Makkah was drowned in all sorts of vices with only a small minority knowing and worshipping Allah correctly. By the time he (saw) finished, 23 years on, thousands of people had embraced Islam - which was implemented in the form of a state in Madinah - and the foundations for a global Islamic civilisation had been firmly laid.
It is a well-known tenet of the Islamic creed that no more Prophets will succeed the Messenger of Allah (saw). Therefore his task of implementing the deen and spreading it, in the way he (saw) did it, passes on to the Ummah. Certainly this is easier said than done. We know how hard changing aspects of one’s own life (individual change) can be. We can understand therefore that the notion of societal or collective change can be overwhelming at first thought. In reality however, it is more than achievable, on condition that those undertaking the endeavour understand the true nature of societal change and how it is brought about.
The recent Israeli onslaught in Gaza is just another example of the dire state the Ummah finds herself in and highlights the vital need for change. By the grace of Allah the overwhelming opinion in the Ummah now is that the required change is towards Islam and away from kufr, be it in the form of secularism, socialism or liberalism. Yet there is still much difference about how that change is to be brought about. Underlying the method adopted by many groups and individuals is the implicit understanding that societal change is only possible when all the individuals in any given society or collective, or a majority at least, change first. In this short piece we discuss this notion in order to clarify its reality, which is that it is an incorrect idea and is to the detriment of the desired objective.
No change until we all change?
One of the speakers at a recent Muslim gathering for Gaza, after describing the bad situation prevailing in Gaza, proclaimed towards the end of his speech, “...and there is no change until we don’t change....there will be no change until each and every one of us lives a moral and ethical life.”
The notion that we must initiate change for positive change to occur is fundamentally important. It is established from the saying of Allah in surah al-Ra’d that, “Indeed Allah does not change a people until they change what is within themselves” as well as the many verses in the Qur’an which note that the support and victory of Allah comes to the true believers, those who are characterised with taqwa and righteous deeds. However to draw the conclusion from this that everyone (or even a large majority) must change for the collective to undergo change is incorrect. It is a conception that goes against historical reality and textual evidence.
Historically it has never been the case that most, let alone all, of the individuals of a society have changed first to be followed by collective change, be it economic progress, or a spiritual and political advancement. Rather it has always been the case that a small minority has led the collective to greener pastures, as it were.
The Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution, to take an example of economic/scientific progress, was propelled by a small band of intellectuals, thinkers and philosophers. They were able to convince just enough of the common people as needed to propagate their call, and then just enough of those in influential positions to implement the changes. As for the masses of Europe, they did naught but adapt to the change which came their way like a storm that hits without warning.
In our own history we see the same essential process. No prophet was able to convince all his people, even with the clear signs they brought. They were only ever able to win the hearts and minds of a small minority, with whose help, followed by victory from Allah, they were able to establish their call and implement the deen.
The Messenger of Allah (saw) himself was only able to win a couple of hundred people after thirteen years of da’wah in Makkah (and that the best da’wah possible). On mass, the Makkan people rejected him, and its leaders forced him out. With this small band of believers, whilst undergoing much persecution and false propaganda, he (saw) sought the nusrah (material support) from the tribes of Arabia, and when Allah willed, He sent it in the form of the leaders of two tribes from Madinah. Thus he (saw) reached a position of power and authority with a relatively small following, and from that position he was then able to implement the deen and spread it like a wild fire.
As for the textual perspective, what is relevant here are the many verses of the Qur’an in which Allah speaks about the provision of His support and victory (nusrah) to the believers, the indication of all of which is that Allah will give the nusrah to those who adopt certain qualities, with no requirement that everyone do so. This is not to say that everyone adopting these qualities is not an ideal, but that the persistence of some on bad qualities does not deprive those who do respond to the call of Allah from His support and victory. For example, Allah says in surah al-Nur,
“Allah has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will of a surety, grant them in the land, succession in power, as He granted it to those before them;…” (24:55)
Here Allah the Exalted emphasises his promise to give the believers of succession in power and authority. This promise carries two conditions: i) belief; and ii) the commission of righteous deeds. In other words, the sincere Muslims who have taqwa and persevere in their servitude to Allah will be granted authority in the land. There is no third condition that everyone be like this. Rather it is ‘those among you (O people)’ who are like this. This point is further apparent in the historical comparison. The mention of ‘as He granted it to those before them’ is a reference to Bani Isra’eel and how Allah granted them succession to power, and we know well that there were many amongst Bani Isra’eel who were not of the qualities mentioned in the verse, yet Bani Isra’eel was still granted the victory from Allah on the back of those who did have these qualities.
Similarly Allah says in surah al-Hajj,
“Allah will certainly aid those who aid Him (i.e. His cause)” (22:40)
And in the well-known verse in surah Muhammad Allah says,
“O you who believe, if you help (the cause of) Allah, He will help you and make firm your feet.” (47:7)
Again in both these verses the condition for attaining the aid of Allah is aiding His deen, not that for anyone to get that aid, everyone has to do so. Further if we accept this premise we effectively say that those people who are true to their covenant with Allah are deprived of the promised reward due to the actions of others. The fallacy of this was detailed in an earlier piece entitled ‘Gaza: punishment of trial?’
Hence there should be no doubt about the invalidity of the idea that the majority of individuals must change first for collective change to occur. It contradicts both historical reality, and is unsupported by textual evidence. Furthermore, it only arises when we begin on the premise of the incorrect conception of what society is and how it changes.
Misconceiving the reality of societal change
Another verse famous upon the tongues in relation to this topic of change and revival is the saying of Allah, “Indeed, Allah does not change that which is in a people until they change what is within themselves” (al-Ra’d: 11). However the meaning of this verse is not, as some use it, that change will not occur in society or people until all the individuals change. Rather it is that change will not occur until the society changes what is in it (i.e. that which comprises it), which includes the individuals but is not limited to them. There is a subtle but extremely important distinction between these two meanings.
Of importance in the ayah is that the object of the verb (change) is the qawm, not the individual. The qawm [nation/society] is different to the fard [individual] and even afrad, a collection of individuals. Qawm, in the Arabic language, refers to a nation or people. It is more than a mere collection of individuals in that it is a collection of individuals whom a common thought or idea binds together as they live with each other, under various systems of communal organisation (economic, political, social, judicial), to the fulfilment of the common goals of everyday life, which at its most fundamental level is the satisfaction of human needs and instincts. In brief then, society is defined not merely as a collection of individuals but as the collection of individuals, the thoughts and emotions which bind them, and the systems implemented upon them through various societal institutions.
Thus is it important to appreciate that whilst the implicit meaning [mafhum] of the ayah can be used as a proof that Allah will not change the condition of an individual until that individual works to change himself, the explicit [mantuq] subject matter of the ayah is not this, but rather it is the issue of collective change in society, not individual change.
This comprehensive understanding of qawm is indeed important because the ayah moves on to say that the change must be of ‘ma bi anfusihim’, that is, that which is within themselves, where the ‘ma’ is general [‘aam] and so includes everything that comprises the qawm. Thus the rendered meaning is that Allah (swt) has decreed that He (swt) will not change the situation of any qawm until they all collectively change all that is within themselves – the individuals, their thoughts and emotions, and the systems implemented in that society. For Islamic revival of course, the requirement is Islamic thoughts and emotions, and Islamic systems.
We see this, societal as opposed to individualistic, understanding in the tafsir of the classical mufassireen. Imam al-Qurtubi, for example, says in his tafsir of this ayah:
“Allah informs in this ayah that he does not change what is in a qawm until change takes place from them, whether it be from them, or from their leaders, or from he who is from them by a cause… So the meaning of this ayah is not that a punishment will not befall the individual except if he commits a sin. Rather, (the meaning is) afflictions may well befall due to the sins of other, as he (saw) said - (when) he was asked, “will we be destroyed whilst the righteous are amongst us?” He (saw) said, ‘Yes, if the corruption/sin increases (excessively).’” (9:294)
To use this verse, as some unfortunately do, to say that we should only concentrate on ourselves and not deal with societal or Ummah-level issues is a gross misinterpretation of the ayah.
The importance of changing societal institutions
The systems implemented in a society are not only an inherent make-up of that society but are a part with significant influence. The societal institutions which implement these political, economic, social, legal and judicial systems necessarily have a considerable impact. This is because these institutions set the framework within which the society operates. The political system legislates laws and institutes policy which sets the direction of the society in all walks of life. Thus it is arguably the most influential institution. It decides on social policy, things like the legality of alcohol, the limits of inter-gender relationships, and homosexuality. It decides on economic policy, things like the legality of interest, the economic objectives sought in the society, and the legal means of acquiring wealth and its disposal. It decides also, importantly, on educational policy, which in turn determines the mainstream ideas and concepts held in society as mass education indoctrinates generation after generation with one set of beliefs and ideals or another.
Thus the level of influence the state in particular, and other societal institutions in general, have should be obvious. If one person drinks alcohol the negative effects of it are limited to him, or at most his family and friends, but if alcohol is allowed and widely available throughout society and its consumption is encouraged the whole society is subjected to its perils. If two parties engage in a riba contract the effects of it are limited to them, but if riba is legal and widely available in society, nay the sole means of acquiring loans, again the entire society is subject to its harmful consequences. The same applies to literally hundreds of other things.
This influence and importance of the ruling authority on the people at large was expressed quite clearly by many of the Companions, who were the generation of Muslims most knowledgeable of Islam and its essence. Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), the one described by the Prophet as the distinguisher between truth and falsehood (al-Faruq), said,
“By Allah, what Allah protects and prevents by the ruler is greater than what he protects and prevents by the Qur'an.” (al-Khateeb, Tarikh al-Baghdad; Kanz al-Ummal, narration no. 14284)
In a narration related by al-Bukhari on the authority of Qays ibn Abi Hazim,
Abu Bakr (ra) entered on a woman from the people of Ahmas named Zainab. She said, "Until when will we stay on this good matter (Islam) which Allah brought after the times of ignorance?" Abu Bakr said, "As long as your rulers straighten you on it." (Ibn al-Athir, Jami' al-Usul, hadith no. 2067)
Abdullah ibn Umar (ra) said,
“The people in the Ummah will not suffer even if they were oppressors and sinful, if the rulers were guided and were guiding. But the people will suffer and perish even if they were guided and were guiding if the rulers were oppressors and sinful.” (Abu Nu'aym, Hilyat al-Awliya')
Hence there should be no doubt about the significant degree of influence societal institutions have on people.
We appreciate this point better when we contemplate the case of the people of Makkah, who on mass rejected the Prophet (saw) over the thirteen years he spent there. Yet only ten years later when he came to conquer Makkah from Madinah, the very same people submitted and embraced Islam on mass, and went on to become of the best Muslims to ever live.
But what was the difference? Did the Prophet (saw) come with a new message the second time round? No! It was the same simple message conveyed by the same prophet. The only difference was that the first time he was calling from a position of relative weakness as an individual with a few followers, whilst the second time he had the backing of a state apparatus with all its avenues of influence. He implemented Islam upon the people and they all saw it in its comprehensiveness whilst being subject to the fruits of its systems. This shows us the enormous effect societal institutions have.
Another aspect of Islamic fiqh which shows the important role of societal institutions is that of foreign policy. The prime objective of the foreign policy of the Islamic State is conveying Islam to other nations and peoples. The established practice in this regard is that once the Islamic State is established the primary means of conveying Islam is by spreading the domain of Islamic rule whereby the targeted society/nation is sought to be brought under Islamic rule. Once Islam is in authority it can be implemented in its entirety and the people can see it truly for what it is. Whether they adopt Islam as individuals is then left up to them.
This model was established by the Messenger of Allah (saw) who, having established the Islamic State in Madinah, initiated contact with neighbouring nations not by sending individuals to call individuals to Islam (in what may be called grass-roots da’wah), but by sending emissaries to the rulers of these nations. In the letters he sent to them he gave them three options: i) adopt Islam and rule by it, ii) reject Islam (in their individual capacity), submit to its authority and pay the jizyah, or iii) prepare for war, whereby that authority will be taken by force.
This model of foreign policy demonstrates two important points in the context of this discussion,
1. Whilst individuals are to be left at the mere conveyance of the Islamic message, and can never be forced to adopt Islam, the same is not true for societies, which, if they resist submitting to the Islamic authority, will be forced to do so as per the command of Allah relayed in verse 29 of surah al-Tawbah.
2. There is a difference in approach between establishing the Islamic State (changing the first society) and expanding it to include other nations (changing subsequent societies). The former is relatively a more a bottom-up approach, whilst the latter is very much top-down. In effect the latter is an approach of moving into a society through acquisition of political authority, changing the societal institutions and working from there to effect a change across the society as whole, including its individuals. As such it shows that changing the institutions leads to changing the people, not the other way around.
It was this very approach whereby the Companions took Islamic civilisation from the desserts of Arabia to as far as India in the East and Spain in the West, with astounding success. Therefore the importance of changing societal institutions and of appreciating their vast influence on society cannot be understated.
In the same vein, when we observe the Ummah today and see that many of her sons and daughters are not up scratch with regards to adhering to the commands and prohibitions of Allah, we must appreciate that a major cause of this is the kufr systems they live under. This point is not to offer an excuse for those who are not fulfilling their basic Islamic obligations, but it is to appreciate the reality of the situation. Further, it is to note that this effect of societal institutions is natural and unavoidable.
Therefore, those who claim that the people must all change before we obtain the victory from Allah - and are thereby able to change the societal institutions from a position of political authority - fall into a circularity whose fallacious nature is obvious. In other words, for the people to positively change on mass requires change of the societal institutions, and change of the societal institutions requires assuming political authority, which requires the nusrah and victory from Allah. Thus the nusrah is required for the people to change on the mass level. To say that the people must all first change to get the nusrah brings us into a fallacious circularity, proving the incorrectness of this last supposed requirement.
Conclusion
Societal change is indeed an overwhelming task but it is more than achievable if we understand the true nature of society and of societal change. Historical precedent as well as Islamic textual evidence shows that it is incorrect to presume that all or the majority of people must change first for the collective to change. The positive change in individuals on mass is not a condition for obtaining the nusrah of Allah but a result of it. Its condition is a sufficient number (a minority with respect to the whole) of disciplined and well-cultured souls who diligently follow the path traversed by the Messenger of Allah in changing society, exclusively in obedience to Allah and purely to seek His pleasure. For them awaits victory and authority in this life and the best of abode amongst the Prophets and the righteous in Paradise in the hereafter. May Allah make us of them.
It is a well-known tenet of the Islamic creed that no more Prophets will succeed the Messenger of Allah (saw). Therefore his task of implementing the deen and spreading it, in the way he (saw) did it, passes on to the Ummah. Certainly this is easier said than done. We know how hard changing aspects of one’s own life (individual change) can be. We can understand therefore that the notion of societal or collective change can be overwhelming at first thought. In reality however, it is more than achievable, on condition that those undertaking the endeavour understand the true nature of societal change and how it is brought about.
The recent Israeli onslaught in Gaza is just another example of the dire state the Ummah finds herself in and highlights the vital need for change. By the grace of Allah the overwhelming opinion in the Ummah now is that the required change is towards Islam and away from kufr, be it in the form of secularism, socialism or liberalism. Yet there is still much difference about how that change is to be brought about. Underlying the method adopted by many groups and individuals is the implicit understanding that societal change is only possible when all the individuals in any given society or collective, or a majority at least, change first. In this short piece we discuss this notion in order to clarify its reality, which is that it is an incorrect idea and is to the detriment of the desired objective.
No change until we all change?
One of the speakers at a recent Muslim gathering for Gaza, after describing the bad situation prevailing in Gaza, proclaimed towards the end of his speech, “...and there is no change until we don’t change....there will be no change until each and every one of us lives a moral and ethical life.”
The notion that we must initiate change for positive change to occur is fundamentally important. It is established from the saying of Allah in surah al-Ra’d that, “Indeed Allah does not change a people until they change what is within themselves” as well as the many verses in the Qur’an which note that the support and victory of Allah comes to the true believers, those who are characterised with taqwa and righteous deeds. However to draw the conclusion from this that everyone (or even a large majority) must change for the collective to undergo change is incorrect. It is a conception that goes against historical reality and textual evidence.
Historically it has never been the case that most, let alone all, of the individuals of a society have changed first to be followed by collective change, be it economic progress, or a spiritual and political advancement. Rather it has always been the case that a small minority has led the collective to greener pastures, as it were.
The Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution, to take an example of economic/scientific progress, was propelled by a small band of intellectuals, thinkers and philosophers. They were able to convince just enough of the common people as needed to propagate their call, and then just enough of those in influential positions to implement the changes. As for the masses of Europe, they did naught but adapt to the change which came their way like a storm that hits without warning.
In our own history we see the same essential process. No prophet was able to convince all his people, even with the clear signs they brought. They were only ever able to win the hearts and minds of a small minority, with whose help, followed by victory from Allah, they were able to establish their call and implement the deen.
The Messenger of Allah (saw) himself was only able to win a couple of hundred people after thirteen years of da’wah in Makkah (and that the best da’wah possible). On mass, the Makkan people rejected him, and its leaders forced him out. With this small band of believers, whilst undergoing much persecution and false propaganda, he (saw) sought the nusrah (material support) from the tribes of Arabia, and when Allah willed, He sent it in the form of the leaders of two tribes from Madinah. Thus he (saw) reached a position of power and authority with a relatively small following, and from that position he was then able to implement the deen and spread it like a wild fire.
As for the textual perspective, what is relevant here are the many verses of the Qur’an in which Allah speaks about the provision of His support and victory (nusrah) to the believers, the indication of all of which is that Allah will give the nusrah to those who adopt certain qualities, with no requirement that everyone do so. This is not to say that everyone adopting these qualities is not an ideal, but that the persistence of some on bad qualities does not deprive those who do respond to the call of Allah from His support and victory. For example, Allah says in surah al-Nur,
“Allah has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will of a surety, grant them in the land, succession in power, as He granted it to those before them;…” (24:55)
Here Allah the Exalted emphasises his promise to give the believers of succession in power and authority. This promise carries two conditions: i) belief; and ii) the commission of righteous deeds. In other words, the sincere Muslims who have taqwa and persevere in their servitude to Allah will be granted authority in the land. There is no third condition that everyone be like this. Rather it is ‘those among you (O people)’ who are like this. This point is further apparent in the historical comparison. The mention of ‘as He granted it to those before them’ is a reference to Bani Isra’eel and how Allah granted them succession to power, and we know well that there were many amongst Bani Isra’eel who were not of the qualities mentioned in the verse, yet Bani Isra’eel was still granted the victory from Allah on the back of those who did have these qualities.
Similarly Allah says in surah al-Hajj,
“Allah will certainly aid those who aid Him (i.e. His cause)” (22:40)
And in the well-known verse in surah Muhammad Allah says,
“O you who believe, if you help (the cause of) Allah, He will help you and make firm your feet.” (47:7)
Again in both these verses the condition for attaining the aid of Allah is aiding His deen, not that for anyone to get that aid, everyone has to do so. Further if we accept this premise we effectively say that those people who are true to their covenant with Allah are deprived of the promised reward due to the actions of others. The fallacy of this was detailed in an earlier piece entitled ‘Gaza: punishment of trial?’
Hence there should be no doubt about the invalidity of the idea that the majority of individuals must change first for collective change to occur. It contradicts both historical reality, and is unsupported by textual evidence. Furthermore, it only arises when we begin on the premise of the incorrect conception of what society is and how it changes.
Misconceiving the reality of societal change
Another verse famous upon the tongues in relation to this topic of change and revival is the saying of Allah, “Indeed, Allah does not change that which is in a people until they change what is within themselves” (al-Ra’d: 11). However the meaning of this verse is not, as some use it, that change will not occur in society or people until all the individuals change. Rather it is that change will not occur until the society changes what is in it (i.e. that which comprises it), which includes the individuals but is not limited to them. There is a subtle but extremely important distinction between these two meanings.
Of importance in the ayah is that the object of the verb (change) is the qawm, not the individual. The qawm [nation/society] is different to the fard [individual] and even afrad, a collection of individuals. Qawm, in the Arabic language, refers to a nation or people. It is more than a mere collection of individuals in that it is a collection of individuals whom a common thought or idea binds together as they live with each other, under various systems of communal organisation (economic, political, social, judicial), to the fulfilment of the common goals of everyday life, which at its most fundamental level is the satisfaction of human needs and instincts. In brief then, society is defined not merely as a collection of individuals but as the collection of individuals, the thoughts and emotions which bind them, and the systems implemented upon them through various societal institutions.
Thus is it important to appreciate that whilst the implicit meaning [mafhum] of the ayah can be used as a proof that Allah will not change the condition of an individual until that individual works to change himself, the explicit [mantuq] subject matter of the ayah is not this, but rather it is the issue of collective change in society, not individual change.
This comprehensive understanding of qawm is indeed important because the ayah moves on to say that the change must be of ‘ma bi anfusihim’, that is, that which is within themselves, where the ‘ma’ is general [‘aam] and so includes everything that comprises the qawm. Thus the rendered meaning is that Allah (swt) has decreed that He (swt) will not change the situation of any qawm until they all collectively change all that is within themselves – the individuals, their thoughts and emotions, and the systems implemented in that society. For Islamic revival of course, the requirement is Islamic thoughts and emotions, and Islamic systems.
We see this, societal as opposed to individualistic, understanding in the tafsir of the classical mufassireen. Imam al-Qurtubi, for example, says in his tafsir of this ayah:
“Allah informs in this ayah that he does not change what is in a qawm until change takes place from them, whether it be from them, or from their leaders, or from he who is from them by a cause… So the meaning of this ayah is not that a punishment will not befall the individual except if he commits a sin. Rather, (the meaning is) afflictions may well befall due to the sins of other, as he (saw) said - (when) he was asked, “will we be destroyed whilst the righteous are amongst us?” He (saw) said, ‘Yes, if the corruption/sin increases (excessively).’” (9:294)
To use this verse, as some unfortunately do, to say that we should only concentrate on ourselves and not deal with societal or Ummah-level issues is a gross misinterpretation of the ayah.
The importance of changing societal institutions
The systems implemented in a society are not only an inherent make-up of that society but are a part with significant influence. The societal institutions which implement these political, economic, social, legal and judicial systems necessarily have a considerable impact. This is because these institutions set the framework within which the society operates. The political system legislates laws and institutes policy which sets the direction of the society in all walks of life. Thus it is arguably the most influential institution. It decides on social policy, things like the legality of alcohol, the limits of inter-gender relationships, and homosexuality. It decides on economic policy, things like the legality of interest, the economic objectives sought in the society, and the legal means of acquiring wealth and its disposal. It decides also, importantly, on educational policy, which in turn determines the mainstream ideas and concepts held in society as mass education indoctrinates generation after generation with one set of beliefs and ideals or another.
Thus the level of influence the state in particular, and other societal institutions in general, have should be obvious. If one person drinks alcohol the negative effects of it are limited to him, or at most his family and friends, but if alcohol is allowed and widely available throughout society and its consumption is encouraged the whole society is subjected to its perils. If two parties engage in a riba contract the effects of it are limited to them, but if riba is legal and widely available in society, nay the sole means of acquiring loans, again the entire society is subject to its harmful consequences. The same applies to literally hundreds of other things.
This influence and importance of the ruling authority on the people at large was expressed quite clearly by many of the Companions, who were the generation of Muslims most knowledgeable of Islam and its essence. Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), the one described by the Prophet as the distinguisher between truth and falsehood (al-Faruq), said,
“By Allah, what Allah protects and prevents by the ruler is greater than what he protects and prevents by the Qur'an.” (al-Khateeb, Tarikh al-Baghdad; Kanz al-Ummal, narration no. 14284)
In a narration related by al-Bukhari on the authority of Qays ibn Abi Hazim,
Abu Bakr (ra) entered on a woman from the people of Ahmas named Zainab. She said, "Until when will we stay on this good matter (Islam) which Allah brought after the times of ignorance?" Abu Bakr said, "As long as your rulers straighten you on it." (Ibn al-Athir, Jami' al-Usul, hadith no. 2067)
Abdullah ibn Umar (ra) said,
“The people in the Ummah will not suffer even if they were oppressors and sinful, if the rulers were guided and were guiding. But the people will suffer and perish even if they were guided and were guiding if the rulers were oppressors and sinful.” (Abu Nu'aym, Hilyat al-Awliya')
Hence there should be no doubt about the significant degree of influence societal institutions have on people.
We appreciate this point better when we contemplate the case of the people of Makkah, who on mass rejected the Prophet (saw) over the thirteen years he spent there. Yet only ten years later when he came to conquer Makkah from Madinah, the very same people submitted and embraced Islam on mass, and went on to become of the best Muslims to ever live.
But what was the difference? Did the Prophet (saw) come with a new message the second time round? No! It was the same simple message conveyed by the same prophet. The only difference was that the first time he was calling from a position of relative weakness as an individual with a few followers, whilst the second time he had the backing of a state apparatus with all its avenues of influence. He implemented Islam upon the people and they all saw it in its comprehensiveness whilst being subject to the fruits of its systems. This shows us the enormous effect societal institutions have.
Another aspect of Islamic fiqh which shows the important role of societal institutions is that of foreign policy. The prime objective of the foreign policy of the Islamic State is conveying Islam to other nations and peoples. The established practice in this regard is that once the Islamic State is established the primary means of conveying Islam is by spreading the domain of Islamic rule whereby the targeted society/nation is sought to be brought under Islamic rule. Once Islam is in authority it can be implemented in its entirety and the people can see it truly for what it is. Whether they adopt Islam as individuals is then left up to them.
This model was established by the Messenger of Allah (saw) who, having established the Islamic State in Madinah, initiated contact with neighbouring nations not by sending individuals to call individuals to Islam (in what may be called grass-roots da’wah), but by sending emissaries to the rulers of these nations. In the letters he sent to them he gave them three options: i) adopt Islam and rule by it, ii) reject Islam (in their individual capacity), submit to its authority and pay the jizyah, or iii) prepare for war, whereby that authority will be taken by force.
This model of foreign policy demonstrates two important points in the context of this discussion,
1. Whilst individuals are to be left at the mere conveyance of the Islamic message, and can never be forced to adopt Islam, the same is not true for societies, which, if they resist submitting to the Islamic authority, will be forced to do so as per the command of Allah relayed in verse 29 of surah al-Tawbah.
2. There is a difference in approach between establishing the Islamic State (changing the first society) and expanding it to include other nations (changing subsequent societies). The former is relatively a more a bottom-up approach, whilst the latter is very much top-down. In effect the latter is an approach of moving into a society through acquisition of political authority, changing the societal institutions and working from there to effect a change across the society as whole, including its individuals. As such it shows that changing the institutions leads to changing the people, not the other way around.
It was this very approach whereby the Companions took Islamic civilisation from the desserts of Arabia to as far as India in the East and Spain in the West, with astounding success. Therefore the importance of changing societal institutions and of appreciating their vast influence on society cannot be understated.
In the same vein, when we observe the Ummah today and see that many of her sons and daughters are not up scratch with regards to adhering to the commands and prohibitions of Allah, we must appreciate that a major cause of this is the kufr systems they live under. This point is not to offer an excuse for those who are not fulfilling their basic Islamic obligations, but it is to appreciate the reality of the situation. Further, it is to note that this effect of societal institutions is natural and unavoidable.
Therefore, those who claim that the people must all change before we obtain the victory from Allah - and are thereby able to change the societal institutions from a position of political authority - fall into a circularity whose fallacious nature is obvious. In other words, for the people to positively change on mass requires change of the societal institutions, and change of the societal institutions requires assuming political authority, which requires the nusrah and victory from Allah. Thus the nusrah is required for the people to change on the mass level. To say that the people must all first change to get the nusrah brings us into a fallacious circularity, proving the incorrectness of this last supposed requirement.
Conclusion
Societal change is indeed an overwhelming task but it is more than achievable if we understand the true nature of society and of societal change. Historical precedent as well as Islamic textual evidence shows that it is incorrect to presume that all or the majority of people must change first for the collective to change. The positive change in individuals on mass is not a condition for obtaining the nusrah of Allah but a result of it. Its condition is a sufficient number (a minority with respect to the whole) of disciplined and well-cultured souls who diligently follow the path traversed by the Messenger of Allah in changing society, exclusively in obedience to Allah and purely to seek His pleasure. For them awaits victory and authority in this life and the best of abode amongst the Prophets and the righteous in Paradise in the hereafter. May Allah make us of them.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Giving Sadaqa
As salam u alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barqatuhu
Hope you are well by the grace and the Blessings of Almighty Allah
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wa sallam said, "There is a Sadaqa to be given for every joint of the human body; and for every day on which the sun rises there is a reward of a Sadaqa (i.e. charitable gift) for the one who establishes justice among people."
Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 49 :: Hadith 870
Huzur sallallahu alaihi wa sallam ne farmaya jab koi shaksh kuch piye toh usmain phoonk na maare
Bukhari
Lets learn one beautiful name of Allah with meaning today InshaAllah
75. Al-Akhir : The Last
May Allah guide us all to the straight path
Ameen
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
French Muslim Women: Daring to Take it to Court? *
By Yassir Louati
Muslim women take their cases to court.
After years of heated debate on the French political scene, the French Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin administration pushed for a law banning "visible religious signs in public schools" in 2004. The law in itself was only a cover up for a clear prohibition of the Islamic veil or hijab worn by either French citizens or residents.
Whether the law is enforced or latent remains unclear. Despite the argument brought forward by all administrations since 2004, Muslim women have not been “protected” –as many MP’s have argued- by this law but rather, have been urged to choose between their education and their religious beliefs. In other words, they have to choose between an active social life and exclusion.
The French public opinion was only relieved by the vote and implementation of such law. Companies followed the government’s lead and began denying employment to veiled Muslim women and firing those few who still managed to find a job.
Years later, the law has raised the question of how can Muslim women fulfill their potential if even the corporate world has been eager to implement the "anti-veil" law as it is often referred to. For instance, many women have been asked to choose between their jobs and the veil pushing others to hide their beliefs in order to be hired or keep their jobs.
Seeking Assistance
The anti veil hysteria has virtually faced no opposition in the non Muslim sector in France. Not one single political party dared to go against the trend and failure of official Muslim organizations to raise their voices and be heard by the government has left the French Muslim community helpless, and the protagonists of the law feeling powerful.
Cases of ridiculous implementation of the so called "anti-hijab law" currently range from being unable to attend driving lessons as it happened in the Seine Saint Denis Department (North Side of Paris) where a young Muslim woman was asked to "find a another training school"; to banks denying access to their veiled clients as the famous BNP PARIBAS branch in Fontenay Aux Roses, Hauts de Seine Department blocked the doors on its client due to their "visible religious sign."
Having found no official assistance from either the French government or official Muslim organizations, the French Muslims are more and more rising up and taking their cases to court by themselves.
It is a general trend that has been reported by the French Observatory on Islamophobia (CCIF).
A case has become a reference for most Muslim women that have been discriminated against. In 2002, Dalila Tahri won her case against her employer who had laid her off because of her Muslim veil. Despite the pressure, she took it to court and won the right to be rehired and get all her lost salaries.
Other most notable cases include Samia Said, PhD, who had been denied access to English classes she had been attending since October 2008. The school manager stated the fact that her veil was prohibited by the law in his school. However, Mrs. Said’s lawyer argued that "this is an erroneous interpretation of the law and an attempt to extend the March 2004 law which was meant to public schools students."
Can 2,500 Signatures Help?
In Toulouse, Southwest of France, a young researcher has been laid off by the Paul Sabatier University, again because of her "hijab." The University stated that because she was on a government contract, her wearing the Islamic veil is not acceptable. Others would argue again that she is not a student in a public school and that the law does not apply to higher education institutions.
Sabrina has managed to gather 2,500 signatures of support and her case is being considered.
In its 2008 report, the CCIF concludes that there is a rise in Islamic veil related trials. French Muslims are more than fed up with the hidden official discrimination. Younger generations are no longer shy or scared to stand up for their rights and it is expected to see more cases being brought up to court.
France’s Muslim population accounts for around 5 million people and for the past 10 years, it has been noted that there is a massive return to Islam as a way of life. The increase in the number of mosques and the many Muslim oriented projects such as schools and community services spread throughout the country are perhaps a sign that despite the pressure, Muslims a firmly establishing themselves as citizens like any other.
Are you a French Muslim woman? Do you consider your veil an obstacle to having an active and productive live? Do you consider "the court option" as a last resort for overcoming your challenges?
* This contribution is one of the contributions sent by our readers. IslamOnline.net (IOL)'s European Muslims Page would like to invite you to share your ideas on European Muslims' daily challenges and opportunities with IOL's audience. If you are interested to have your feedbacks published on IOL, you can send them via euro_muslims@iolteam.comand we will contact you back for more details.
Yassir Louati is a French Muslim freelance writer, you may contact him via euro_muslims@iolteam.com
Muslim women take their cases to court.
After years of heated debate on the French political scene, the French Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin administration pushed for a law banning "visible religious signs in public schools" in 2004. The law in itself was only a cover up for a clear prohibition of the Islamic veil or hijab worn by either French citizens or residents.
Whether the law is enforced or latent remains unclear. Despite the argument brought forward by all administrations since 2004, Muslim women have not been “protected” –as many MP’s have argued- by this law but rather, have been urged to choose between their education and their religious beliefs. In other words, they have to choose between an active social life and exclusion.
The French public opinion was only relieved by the vote and implementation of such law. Companies followed the government’s lead and began denying employment to veiled Muslim women and firing those few who still managed to find a job.
Years later, the law has raised the question of how can Muslim women fulfill their potential if even the corporate world has been eager to implement the "anti-veil" law as it is often referred to. For instance, many women have been asked to choose between their jobs and the veil pushing others to hide their beliefs in order to be hired or keep their jobs.
Seeking Assistance
The anti veil hysteria has virtually faced no opposition in the non Muslim sector in France. Not one single political party dared to go against the trend and failure of official Muslim organizations to raise their voices and be heard by the government has left the French Muslim community helpless, and the protagonists of the law feeling powerful.
Cases of ridiculous implementation of the so called "anti-hijab law" currently range from being unable to attend driving lessons as it happened in the Seine Saint Denis Department (North Side of Paris) where a young Muslim woman was asked to "find a another training school"; to banks denying access to their veiled clients as the famous BNP PARIBAS branch in Fontenay Aux Roses, Hauts de Seine Department blocked the doors on its client due to their "visible religious sign."
Having found no official assistance from either the French government or official Muslim organizations, the French Muslims are more and more rising up and taking their cases to court by themselves.
It is a general trend that has been reported by the French Observatory on Islamophobia (CCIF).
A case has become a reference for most Muslim women that have been discriminated against. In 2002, Dalila Tahri won her case against her employer who had laid her off because of her Muslim veil. Despite the pressure, she took it to court and won the right to be rehired and get all her lost salaries.
Other most notable cases include Samia Said, PhD, who had been denied access to English classes she had been attending since October 2008. The school manager stated the fact that her veil was prohibited by the law in his school. However, Mrs. Said’s lawyer argued that "this is an erroneous interpretation of the law and an attempt to extend the March 2004 law which was meant to public schools students."
Can 2,500 Signatures Help?
In Toulouse, Southwest of France, a young researcher has been laid off by the Paul Sabatier University, again because of her "hijab." The University stated that because she was on a government contract, her wearing the Islamic veil is not acceptable. Others would argue again that she is not a student in a public school and that the law does not apply to higher education institutions.
Sabrina has managed to gather 2,500 signatures of support and her case is being considered.
In its 2008 report, the CCIF concludes that there is a rise in Islamic veil related trials. French Muslims are more than fed up with the hidden official discrimination. Younger generations are no longer shy or scared to stand up for their rights and it is expected to see more cases being brought up to court.
France’s Muslim population accounts for around 5 million people and for the past 10 years, it has been noted that there is a massive return to Islam as a way of life. The increase in the number of mosques and the many Muslim oriented projects such as schools and community services spread throughout the country are perhaps a sign that despite the pressure, Muslims a firmly establishing themselves as citizens like any other.
Are you a French Muslim woman? Do you consider your veil an obstacle to having an active and productive live? Do you consider "the court option" as a last resort for overcoming your challenges?
* This contribution is one of the contributions sent by our readers. IslamOnline.net (IOL)'s European Muslims Page would like to invite you to share your ideas on European Muslims' daily challenges and opportunities with IOL's audience. If you are interested to have your feedbacks published on IOL, you can send them via euro_muslims@iolteam.comand we will contact you back for more details.
Yassir Louati is a French Muslim freelance writer, you may contact him via euro_muslims@iolteam.com
Friday, May 01, 2009
Seeking Knowledge by Shaykh Ali at-Tuwayjari حفظه الله
BENEFITS OF SEEKING KNOWLEDGE
The Shaykh حفظه الله started off by praising Allaah سبحانه وتعالى and sending the salaat and salaam upon the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. He said that on this day, the sixth day of the second month which is the month of Safar in the year 1428, which is a Saturday, we begin this lecture and Inshaa Allaah after the lecture we will answer questions.
The lecture that I would like to deliver will be about “Urging Students to Seek Knowledge”. I invite all my brothers and all the Muslims at large to benefit from the Seminar that brother Zahid just spoke about. It is a seminar whose fruits have been seen before and its benefits have been witnessed before. Allaah سبحانه وتعالى has made it easy for Major Scholars to participate in such a seminar and it is rare indeed for so many of the Major Scholars to participate and gather together in one seminar. This is from the bounty of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى upon us and upon those who organize this seminar. So I encourage all Muslims to register for this seminar and to participate in it because a Muslim needs to have Fiqh of his religion – he needs to understand his religion.
The Shaykh حفظه الله went on to say that there is a lot of evidence from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah showing the virtues of knowledge.
VIRTUES OF SEEKING KNOWLEDGE MENTIONED IN THE QUR’AAN
From them is a saying of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى that:
يَرْفَعِ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنكُمْ وَالَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْعِلْمَ دَرَجَاتٍ
{…Allâh will exalt in degree those of you who believe, and those who have been granted knowledge...} [Al-Mujaadilah 58:11]
Allaah سبحانه وتعالى clarifies in this verse that He will raise the Believers in levels, those of them who were given knowledge will be raised many levels and high levels. Another verse is the saying of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى:
قُلْ هَلْ يَسْتَوِي الَّذِينَ يَعْلَمُونَ وَالَّذِينَ لا يَعْلَمُونَ إِنَّمَا يَتَذَكَّرُ أُوْلُوا الْأَلْبَابِ
{…..Say: "Are those who know equal to those who know not?" It is only men of understanding who will remember
(i.e. get a lesson from Allâh's Signs and Verses). } [Az-Zumar 39:9]
If you realize, there was no response to this question as the aim of this question is affirmation. There was a question to which a response did not come after it, why? Because this is an issue that no one differs in, there is no differing between anyone or any two people that ‘those who know are not equal to those who do not know.’
Another saying of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى is:
إِنَّمَا يَخْشَى اللَّهَ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ الْعُلَمَاءُ
{…It is only those who have knowledge among His slaves that fear Allâh…} [Fatir 35:28]
And what is khashyah (خشية)? Khashyah is the fear of someone you know. So if fear comes together with knowing the one you fear, then this is called khashyah. The `Ulamaa’ are those who best know Allaah سبحانه وتعالى and His Capability. This is why Allaah سبحانه وتعالى described them as having khashyah of Him سبحانه وتعالى .
VIRTUES OF SEEKING KNOWLEDGE MENTIONED IN THE SUNNAH
As for the Sunnah, then there are many different evidences showing the virtues of knowledge. From amongst them is the saying of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم "Whoever Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wants good for, He gives him fiqh (understanding) of the Deen.”[1]. Here the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم clarified that those whom Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wishes good for, He gives them understanding of the religion. This is the person that Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wishes good for, the one who has understanding of Deen. Also from the understanding of this hadeeth is that ‘those whom Allaah سبحانه وتعالى does not wish good for, then He does not give them understanding in the religion’. So he حفظه الله advises everybody to be keen in seeking knowledge and gaining understanding in the religion in order to be from those whom Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wishes good for.
In another hadeeth, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “Whoever traverses a path in order to gain knowledge, then Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will make the path to Jannah easy for him.”[2]. So if you go to a masjid for a lecture or a class, then it is as though you are going towards Jannah i.e. you are going on a path towards Jannah, this is a great virtue of Knowledge.
At-Tabaraani narrated a hadeeth by Abu Umaamah that the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “Whoever comes to a masjid and he did not come to the masjid except with the intention that he would learn something good or teach something good, he will be given the reward of someone who performed hajj.”[3]. Look at this great virtue, just look at this great reward, whoever goes to the masjid to learn, Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will give him the reward of a hajj – of a person who went to Makkah and made tawaaf (circumambulation) around the Ka’bah and he made sa’ee (walking between Safa and Marwah) as well as the rest of the rituals of hajj. Whoever goes to a masjid to seek knowledge will be given this same reward.
In another hadeeth, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “The student of knowledge (or the seeker of knowledge), everything will ask forgiveness for him even the fish in the ocean.”[4]. Another great virtue is that everything asks forgiveness for the Student of Knowledge, even the fish that are in the ocean. This is due to their being pleased with what he seeks i.e. knowledge. This is another great virtue of knowledge and the seekers of knowledge.
In another hadeeth, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “There is not a people who gather in a house from the houses of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى (a masjid) to recite the Book of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى or study it except that calmness will descend upon them and mercy would cover them and they would be surrounded by the angels and Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will mention them with good to those near to Him.”[5]. The Shaykh حفظه الله mentioned that the scholars Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمهم الله held the opinion that this does not only refer to a masjid, but any place – whether in a classroom or at home, i.e. whoever gathers together in order to study or recite the Book of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى, they will gain this reward. Take a look at this reward, sakeenah which is a great calmness will encompass them, and the angels will descend and surround them with their wings, and they will be in the Mercy of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى. Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will bestow mercy upon them and He would mention them with good, to those close to Him in the Heavens. This is an evidence of the virtues of seeking knowledge, and the khayr (خير - good) which is obtained by those who seek it.
Another hadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم in clarifying the virtues of the gatherings where knowledge is sought, is that it is a reason for the forgiving of sins. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said that “Allaah سبحانه وتعالى would say at the end of the gathering of those who gathered to gain knowledge, ‘Get up! You have been forgiven.’ The malaaikah (angels) would say ‘O Allaah سبحانه وتعالى there was a servant of yours who only came to that gathering because of a need – he only wanted a person in that gathering.’ Allaah سبحانه وتعالى would respond ‘I have forgiven him as well.’”[6]. This is because in such a virtuous gathering whoever gathers with them cannot be denied. The Shaykh حفظه الله repeated, ‘whoever gathers with such a virtuous gathering will not be denied.’ He will be given the same reward and he will be forgiven.
SUMMARY
This is the summary of what I wanted to speak about, ‘The virtues of gaining Knowledge’, so I advise you to be keen upon gaining knowledge.
The most important thing, O servant of Allaah, is for you to learn is the Qur’aan. You should read the Qur’aan and you should memorize whatever Allaah سبحانه وتعالى makes easy for you to memorize; and you should learn the meanings of the speech of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى. You should learn the meanings of the Qur’aan because it is the speech of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى and it is guidance, and it is light, and it is a cure, it is the cure for diseases and it is the cure for ignorance.
I also advise you to learn the Sunnah, to learn the hadeeth (sayings) of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه و سلم.
I advise you to learn the ‘Aqeedah, to learn Tawheed in order that you may worship Allaah سبحانه وتعالى with sure knowledge and to single out Allaah alone with worship; and in order that you may know Shirk, and beware of Shirk whether it is minor or major because it nullifies your worship.
I also advise you to learn Fiqh and the Sharee’ah – the Legislation of Islaam.
And I advise you to participate in this upcoming Seminar, to attend and be keen on participating in it, and attending in order to learn the matters of your Religion because you shall indeed taste death.
Indeed you shall die one day, and nothing shall benefit you when you meet Allaah سبحانه وتعالى except beneficial knowledge and righteous actions. Nothing else will benefit you, so do not meet Allaah سبحانه وتعالى whilst you have shortcomings in this regard because this is not good for you and no one has the capability to bear the torment of Allaah. However, you are still in a position where you have time, there is still time where you have an opportunity to learn the Religion of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى and to learn to worship Allaah سبحانه وتعالى. This includes learning about your prayers, your fasting, your zakaat, your hajj and the Islaamic Legislations. I ask Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to grant you success in knowledge. This is where the Shaykh حفظه الله ended.
Questions & Answers
1. Question: I am in a situation where my mother is married to a man who doesn’t treat women properly. He often marries others and divorces them without reason. He mistreats my mother’s children and speaks ill of us to others. We advised him but he didn't pay attention to us. What is your advice to him and to us because I don’t want to be with my mother when he is around?
Answer: Firstly you should be keen on advising him and it should be clarified to him that what he is doing is impermissible and he should be reminded of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى. If he does not accept advice from you then try and get someone else to advise him, someone who he respects or someone who he may accept advice from such as the Imaam of a masjid or the principal of a school or anyone he respects.
As for your not liking to be around your mother when he is around, then in this issue the benefits should be examined. If there is a greater benefit in staying with your mother when he is present then you should stay and be patient. However, if there is harm in staying with them at that time, then perhaps it is better for you to leave. In any case you should examine the harms and the benefits involved and you should do what brings benefit – whether to you, your mother or all of you. At the same time you should keep making du’aa (supplication) for him, that Allaah سبحانه وتعالى guides him to the haqq (truth) Inshaa Allaah.
2. Question: Is it permissible to make du’aa in English whilst in sujood? Would the prayer be valid or can du’aa in English only be performed in nawaafil (supererogatory) prayer and not in faraa’id (obligatory) prayer?
Answer: Baarak Allaahu Feek, may Allaah سبحانه وتعالى bless you. Be keen on memorizing the authentic supplications in Arabic because the salaah (the prayer) is the second pillar of Islaam. So you should be keen on this and if you were keen on memorizing these supplications in Arabic you would be able to do so by the permission of Allaah. This is because these supplications whether in sujood or rukoo’ are easier for you than memorizing the Faatihah or memorizing any other verse or chapter from the Noble Qur’aan. So this is what I advise you to do, be keen on memorizing the authentic supplications in Arabic, whether it is in your waajib (obligatory) prayers or the prayers that are considered to be sunnah. However, outside the salaah, you may call upon Allaah سبحانه وتعالى in whichever language you wish. But I still advise you to use the Arabic language and use the authentic supplications because the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم was given the ability to say a few words which have great meaning.
3. Question: What is the ruling concerning the adhaan – is it obligatory to do it in one’s house if there is a regular jamaa’ah (congregation)? Also, is it obligatory to do it at college if there is a regular jamaa’ah?
Answer: The Shaykh حفظه الله said that some of the scholars hold the opinion that the adhaan is fard kifaayah i.e. a collective obligation. This means that if some of the Muslims carry it out, the obligation is absolved from the rest of them, meaning that the rest of the Muslims do not have to carry it out. So if some of the Muslims in a particular country call the adhaan then it is enough.
However, some other scholars hold the opinion that whenever a group of Muslims want to establish the prayer they must call the adhaan, especially in countries like Britain or the likes where the masaajid are few. Their evidence is a hadeeth which was authentically reported upon the authority of Maalik bin al-Huwayrith that the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, what means, “If you intend to establish the prayer then one of you should call the adhaan and the older of you should lead the prayer.”[7]. Even though there were only two of them, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم still encouraged them to call the adhaan and for the older one to lead the prayer.
So it is a sunnah for you to call the adhaan whenever you want to establish the prayer, especially in the case where there are few masaajid around and you cannot hear the adhaan, then you should call the adhaan.
4. Question: A person stated that if you understand the Arabic language and you have the books of the Salaf and their explanations, you do not need have contact with the `Ulamaa’. What is the ruling on this?
Answer: This statement that I have just heard, has some errors, it is not correct. A book cannot take the place of a Shaykh. Yes, you can benefit from the book but you cannot have the book take the place of the Shaykh. So as far as reading a book to know the words that the `Ulamaa’ may use, then is okay for you to continue doing so. However, you must call the `Ulamaa’ and ask them about what is confusing to you. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “It may be that a person who carries understanding of the religion (who carries Fiqh) is not a Faqeeh (i.e. he does not really understand), and it maybe that a person who receives that knowledge has a better understanding than the one who gave him that knowledge.”[8].
Gaining knowledge has a path that should be followed; there is a way or a method in gaining knowledge. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم taught the Sahaabah (his Companions), the companions taught the Taabi’oon (the generation after the Companions) and the Taabi’oon taught those who were after them, up until this time of ours. Knowledge has been taken from those above and passed down to those below, so knowledge is a golden chain – everyone at the bottom (at a lower level) taking from those who were above them. It has been said in the past, ‘Whoever takes his books as his Shaykh, his mistakes will be more than the time he is correct.’
Especially in this time of ours, when Allaah سبحانه وتعالى has made easy the gaining of knowledge; for example, through the internet where you can hear the lectures of the Kibaarul `Ulamaa’ (the Senior Scholars) while you are at home; even whilst you are laying down you can hear lectures of the `Ulamaa’ such as Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, Shaykl al-Albaani, the Grand Mufti, Shaykh al-Fawzaan and others, as from this blessed site albaseerah.org and from its seminars. So I advise you to be keen on seeking knowledge from the `Ulamaa’ because if you do not, you will have many mistakes and you will slip many times.
5. Question: My brother lacks in some acts of worship, I advise him but he does not listen, how can I save him or how should I deal with him?
Answer: You should keep advising him and you shouldn’t give up on him and you shouldn’t suffice by advising him only one time. Rather you should keep advising him time and time again. You should supplicate to Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to guide him and you should seek the aid of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى in such a case and then seek the aid of his friends, his teachers, the Imaam of the masjid, or whoever has a high status with your brother in order for them to also advise him. You should continue to advise him because you are upon good whilst you are doing so, and you should be patient with him and Inshaa Allaah, Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will guide him and you should keep supplicating and asking Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to guide him and Inshaa Allaah he would be guided.
6. Question: This is a question regarding a present, which was given to a family with a saying ‘this gift shall be a reward for your efforts’, and the gift was accepted. After a period of time the family returned the present with questioning: “How was it again, for your efforts?” What shall the person do, shall he take back the gift he has given to the family?
Answer: The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم clarified that it is not permissible for anyone to take back a gift that he has given to someone; it is not permissible for him to take it back. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “Whoever takes back a gift that he has given to someone is like a dog who vomited and then ate what he vomited.”[9]. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم clarified that the person who takes back his gift is like that dog, the dog that vomits then comes back and eats what he threw up. This is evidence of how terrible such a thing is.
As for yourself, if taking back this gift has a benefit and there won’t be difficulty in taking it back then you could do so because the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم used to accept gifts. However, if you feel that there is harm in doing so – that it may cause animosity between you and whoever was given the gift, or there might be something that might cut off your relations, then you should not accept it. So it is up to you, if you see that there is benefit in taking the gift then take it, and if you see there is harm in taking the gift, then do not take it.
7. Question: A Muslim was selling mobile phones and in the contract it stated that the customers would receive full reimbursement. I assisted in acquiring customers and the same contract applied, then the supplier disappeared and many customers are demanding their money back. How do I deal with this situation?
Answer: The Shaykh حفظه الله responded by saying that the principle in dealing (business dealings) is a saying of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم that: “The believers are true to whatever they say (to whatever conditions), except the condition that makes something that is haraam (impermissible) halaal (permissible), or a condition that make something which is halaal haraam.”[10] Since he gave them these cell phones with the condition that he would return their money to them, then he is held responsible. But I do not understand how this could be – how would the seller benefit if he is going to sell them cell phones and then give all them their money back? I do not understand how this could be. This is why I think that this issue should be taken to the rightful authorities who would be the Major Scholars, and they should study the issue and then give a verdict concerning this. But as I said, the principle is that a Muslim or believer is responsible for whatever conditions he sets. However, I still do not understand how this could be and if this is actually a transaction of buying and selling or not. Maybe the questioner should clarify exactly what he means and then take the question to Kibaarul-`Ulamaa’ (Senior Scholars) and they will issue a verdict concerning it. The Shaykh حفظه الله said “Do not take a verdict from me, do not consider this to be a verdict, clarify your question and take it back to Kibaarul-`Ulamaa’.” In other words the Shaykh حفظه الله is not responsible for this issue or giving a verdict on this issue.
8. Question: My husband is staying in another city for boxing training. When I went to visit, there was a non-Muslim woman in one of the rooms. She says that she lives there and my husband says “No, she doesn’t live there.” I don’t trust him. Please advise me.
Answer: If your husband is a Muslim who establishes the prayer, then you should advise him. You should start with this, by advising him concerning this issue and you should also advise him concerning his profession. You should advise him to find a legislated mean of provision, because this isn’t legislated, it is a danger and Allaah سبحانه وتعالى says:
وَلا تَقْتُلُوا أَنْفُسَكُمْ
{….do not kill yourselves….} [An-Nisaa 4:29]
Also, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “Do not harm and do not be harmed.”[11]. So if he accepts your advice and if he had a relationship with this woman he leaves off this relationship and makes tawbah (sincere repentance), then tawbah nullifies whatever was before it. However, if he had a relationship with this woman and he is persistent upon it, then it is your right to ask him for a divorce. But advise him if he is a Muslim who establishes the prayer; and keep advising him, and if he makes tawbah then Alhumdulillaah it is accepted Inshaa Allaah; but if he is persistent, then it is your right to ask for a divorce.
I ask Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to grant us beneficial knowledge and righteous actions and I ask Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to bless the organizers of this telelink, to bless their efforts and to make them from the callers to the truth and the supporters of the truth; and I ask Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to put these actions of ours in our scales of good deeds when we meet Him; and our last words are in praise of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى, the Lord of the Worlds, and may the salaat and salaam be upon the final Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and his family and companions.
References
[1] Reported in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree Kitaabul-'Ilm as a chapter heading (#13) and also as hadeeth (#71). Also reported in Kitaab Al-khams (Imposing the fifth) (#2948).
من يرد الله به خيرا يفقهه في الدين
[2] Reported by At-Tirmidhee (#2784), Kitaab al-‘Ilm ‘an Rasoolillah صلى الله عليه وسلم (The knowledge from the Prophet (May peace and blessings be upon Him)). Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says Saheeh in Saheeh al-Jaami’ (#6298).
من سلك طريقا يلتمس فيه علما سهل الله له طريقا إلى الجنة
[3] Reference Pending
[4] With the following wording, Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says Saheeh in Saheeh al-Jaami’ (#3753).
صاحب العلم يستغفر له كل شيء حتى الحوت في البحر
[5] Reported in Saheeh Muslim as part of a longer hadeeth in Kitaab Adh-Dhikr wad-Du’aa wat-Tawbah wal-Istighfaar (Book of Remembrance of Allaah, Supplication, Repentance and Seeking Forgiveness) (#2699) with the wording:
ما اجتمع قوم في بيت من بيوت الله، يتلون كتاب الله، ويتدارسونه بينهم، إلا نزلت عليهم السكينة، وغشيتهم الرحمة وحفتهم الملائكة، وذكرهم الله فيمن عنده
[6] The wording mentioned by the Shaykh حفظه الله was found in 2 separate hadeeth. The first part is mentioned in the Musnad of Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله (#12476) as follows. Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says Saheeh in Silsilah as-Saheehah 5/245 (#2210).
ما من قوم اجتمعوا يذكرون الله لا يريدون بذلك الا وجهه الا ناداهم مناد من السماء ان قوموا مغفورا لكم قد بدلت سيئاتكم حسنات
The second part is mentioned with the following wording as part of a longer hadeeth in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, Kitaab ad-Da’waat (#6045).
إن لله ملائكة يطوفون في الطرق يلتمسون أهل الذكر، فإذا وجدوا قوما يذكرون الله تنادوا: هلمُّوا إلى حاجتكم…….قال: فيقول: فأشهدكم أني قد غفرت لهم. قال: يقول ملك من الملائكة: فيهم فلان ليس منهم، إنما جاء لحاجة. قال: هم الجلساء لا يشقى بهم جليسهم
[7] Reported in Saheeh Muslim, Kitaab al-Massajid wal-mawaadi’ as-Salaah (The Mosques and the Places of Worship) (#674), and with a similar wording in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, Kitaab al-Jihaad was-Siyar (#2693).
إذا حضرت الصلاة فأذنا. ثم أقيما وليؤمكما أكبركما
[8] With the following wording it occurs as part of a longer hadeeth which Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says is Saheeh in Silsilah as-Saheehah 1/760 (#404).
رب حامل فقه ليس بفقيه ورب حامل فقه إلى من هو أفقه منه
[9] Reported with the following wording in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, Kitaab al-Hibah wa Fadlihaa (The Book of Gifts and its virtue) (#2449). Also (#2478, 2479, 6574) and in Saheeh Muslim, Kitaab al-Hibaat (Book of Gifts) (#1622).
العائد في هبته كالكلب، يقيء ثم يعود في قيئه
[10] Reported in Sunan At-Tirmidhee with the following wording as part of a hadeeth in Kitaab al-Ahkaam from Rasulillaah صلى الله عليه وسلم) (The book of the Rulings that came from the messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم) (#1363). Shaykh al-Albaaneeرحمه الله says it is Saheeh in Jaami’ at-Tirmidhee 3/634 (#1352).
المسلمون على شروطهم إلا شرطا حرم حلالا أو أحل حراما
[11] Reported in Sunan Ibn Maajah, Kitaab al-Ahkaam (The Book of Rulings) 2/784 (#2340, #2341). Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says Saheeh in Saheeh al-Jaami’ (#7517).
لا ضرر ولا ضرار
Last edited by s_ali : October 25th, 2008 at 14:03. Reason: Formatting changes
Reply With Quote
The Shaykh حفظه الله started off by praising Allaah سبحانه وتعالى and sending the salaat and salaam upon the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم. He said that on this day, the sixth day of the second month which is the month of Safar in the year 1428, which is a Saturday, we begin this lecture and Inshaa Allaah after the lecture we will answer questions.
The lecture that I would like to deliver will be about “Urging Students to Seek Knowledge”. I invite all my brothers and all the Muslims at large to benefit from the Seminar that brother Zahid just spoke about. It is a seminar whose fruits have been seen before and its benefits have been witnessed before. Allaah سبحانه وتعالى has made it easy for Major Scholars to participate in such a seminar and it is rare indeed for so many of the Major Scholars to participate and gather together in one seminar. This is from the bounty of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى upon us and upon those who organize this seminar. So I encourage all Muslims to register for this seminar and to participate in it because a Muslim needs to have Fiqh of his religion – he needs to understand his religion.
The Shaykh حفظه الله went on to say that there is a lot of evidence from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah showing the virtues of knowledge.
VIRTUES OF SEEKING KNOWLEDGE MENTIONED IN THE QUR’AAN
From them is a saying of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى that:
يَرْفَعِ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنكُمْ وَالَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْعِلْمَ دَرَجَاتٍ
{…Allâh will exalt in degree those of you who believe, and those who have been granted knowledge...} [Al-Mujaadilah 58:11]
Allaah سبحانه وتعالى clarifies in this verse that He will raise the Believers in levels, those of them who were given knowledge will be raised many levels and high levels. Another verse is the saying of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى:
قُلْ هَلْ يَسْتَوِي الَّذِينَ يَعْلَمُونَ وَالَّذِينَ لا يَعْلَمُونَ إِنَّمَا يَتَذَكَّرُ أُوْلُوا الْأَلْبَابِ
{…..Say: "Are those who know equal to those who know not?" It is only men of understanding who will remember
(i.e. get a lesson from Allâh's Signs and Verses). } [Az-Zumar 39:9]
If you realize, there was no response to this question as the aim of this question is affirmation. There was a question to which a response did not come after it, why? Because this is an issue that no one differs in, there is no differing between anyone or any two people that ‘those who know are not equal to those who do not know.’
Another saying of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى is:
إِنَّمَا يَخْشَى اللَّهَ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ الْعُلَمَاءُ
{…It is only those who have knowledge among His slaves that fear Allâh…} [Fatir 35:28]
And what is khashyah (خشية)? Khashyah is the fear of someone you know. So if fear comes together with knowing the one you fear, then this is called khashyah. The `Ulamaa’ are those who best know Allaah سبحانه وتعالى and His Capability. This is why Allaah سبحانه وتعالى described them as having khashyah of Him سبحانه وتعالى .
VIRTUES OF SEEKING KNOWLEDGE MENTIONED IN THE SUNNAH
As for the Sunnah, then there are many different evidences showing the virtues of knowledge. From amongst them is the saying of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم "Whoever Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wants good for, He gives him fiqh (understanding) of the Deen.”[1]. Here the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم clarified that those whom Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wishes good for, He gives them understanding of the religion. This is the person that Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wishes good for, the one who has understanding of Deen. Also from the understanding of this hadeeth is that ‘those whom Allaah سبحانه وتعالى does not wish good for, then He does not give them understanding in the religion’. So he حفظه الله advises everybody to be keen in seeking knowledge and gaining understanding in the religion in order to be from those whom Allaah سبحانه وتعالى wishes good for.
In another hadeeth, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “Whoever traverses a path in order to gain knowledge, then Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will make the path to Jannah easy for him.”[2]. So if you go to a masjid for a lecture or a class, then it is as though you are going towards Jannah i.e. you are going on a path towards Jannah, this is a great virtue of Knowledge.
At-Tabaraani narrated a hadeeth by Abu Umaamah that the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “Whoever comes to a masjid and he did not come to the masjid except with the intention that he would learn something good or teach something good, he will be given the reward of someone who performed hajj.”[3]. Look at this great virtue, just look at this great reward, whoever goes to the masjid to learn, Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will give him the reward of a hajj – of a person who went to Makkah and made tawaaf (circumambulation) around the Ka’bah and he made sa’ee (walking between Safa and Marwah) as well as the rest of the rituals of hajj. Whoever goes to a masjid to seek knowledge will be given this same reward.
In another hadeeth, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “The student of knowledge (or the seeker of knowledge), everything will ask forgiveness for him even the fish in the ocean.”[4]. Another great virtue is that everything asks forgiveness for the Student of Knowledge, even the fish that are in the ocean. This is due to their being pleased with what he seeks i.e. knowledge. This is another great virtue of knowledge and the seekers of knowledge.
In another hadeeth, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “There is not a people who gather in a house from the houses of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى (a masjid) to recite the Book of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى or study it except that calmness will descend upon them and mercy would cover them and they would be surrounded by the angels and Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will mention them with good to those near to Him.”[5]. The Shaykh حفظه الله mentioned that the scholars Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمهم الله held the opinion that this does not only refer to a masjid, but any place – whether in a classroom or at home, i.e. whoever gathers together in order to study or recite the Book of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى, they will gain this reward. Take a look at this reward, sakeenah which is a great calmness will encompass them, and the angels will descend and surround them with their wings, and they will be in the Mercy of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى. Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will bestow mercy upon them and He would mention them with good, to those close to Him in the Heavens. This is an evidence of the virtues of seeking knowledge, and the khayr (خير - good) which is obtained by those who seek it.
Another hadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم in clarifying the virtues of the gatherings where knowledge is sought, is that it is a reason for the forgiving of sins. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said that “Allaah سبحانه وتعالى would say at the end of the gathering of those who gathered to gain knowledge, ‘Get up! You have been forgiven.’ The malaaikah (angels) would say ‘O Allaah سبحانه وتعالى there was a servant of yours who only came to that gathering because of a need – he only wanted a person in that gathering.’ Allaah سبحانه وتعالى would respond ‘I have forgiven him as well.’”[6]. This is because in such a virtuous gathering whoever gathers with them cannot be denied. The Shaykh حفظه الله repeated, ‘whoever gathers with such a virtuous gathering will not be denied.’ He will be given the same reward and he will be forgiven.
SUMMARY
This is the summary of what I wanted to speak about, ‘The virtues of gaining Knowledge’, so I advise you to be keen upon gaining knowledge.
The most important thing, O servant of Allaah, is for you to learn is the Qur’aan. You should read the Qur’aan and you should memorize whatever Allaah سبحانه وتعالى makes easy for you to memorize; and you should learn the meanings of the speech of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى. You should learn the meanings of the Qur’aan because it is the speech of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى and it is guidance, and it is light, and it is a cure, it is the cure for diseases and it is the cure for ignorance.
I also advise you to learn the Sunnah, to learn the hadeeth (sayings) of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه و سلم.
I advise you to learn the ‘Aqeedah, to learn Tawheed in order that you may worship Allaah سبحانه وتعالى with sure knowledge and to single out Allaah alone with worship; and in order that you may know Shirk, and beware of Shirk whether it is minor or major because it nullifies your worship.
I also advise you to learn Fiqh and the Sharee’ah – the Legislation of Islaam.
And I advise you to participate in this upcoming Seminar, to attend and be keen on participating in it, and attending in order to learn the matters of your Religion because you shall indeed taste death.
Indeed you shall die one day, and nothing shall benefit you when you meet Allaah سبحانه وتعالى except beneficial knowledge and righteous actions. Nothing else will benefit you, so do not meet Allaah سبحانه وتعالى whilst you have shortcomings in this regard because this is not good for you and no one has the capability to bear the torment of Allaah. However, you are still in a position where you have time, there is still time where you have an opportunity to learn the Religion of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى and to learn to worship Allaah سبحانه وتعالى. This includes learning about your prayers, your fasting, your zakaat, your hajj and the Islaamic Legislations. I ask Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to grant you success in knowledge. This is where the Shaykh حفظه الله ended.
Questions & Answers
1. Question: I am in a situation where my mother is married to a man who doesn’t treat women properly. He often marries others and divorces them without reason. He mistreats my mother’s children and speaks ill of us to others. We advised him but he didn't pay attention to us. What is your advice to him and to us because I don’t want to be with my mother when he is around?
Answer: Firstly you should be keen on advising him and it should be clarified to him that what he is doing is impermissible and he should be reminded of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى. If he does not accept advice from you then try and get someone else to advise him, someone who he respects or someone who he may accept advice from such as the Imaam of a masjid or the principal of a school or anyone he respects.
As for your not liking to be around your mother when he is around, then in this issue the benefits should be examined. If there is a greater benefit in staying with your mother when he is present then you should stay and be patient. However, if there is harm in staying with them at that time, then perhaps it is better for you to leave. In any case you should examine the harms and the benefits involved and you should do what brings benefit – whether to you, your mother or all of you. At the same time you should keep making du’aa (supplication) for him, that Allaah سبحانه وتعالى guides him to the haqq (truth) Inshaa Allaah.
2. Question: Is it permissible to make du’aa in English whilst in sujood? Would the prayer be valid or can du’aa in English only be performed in nawaafil (supererogatory) prayer and not in faraa’id (obligatory) prayer?
Answer: Baarak Allaahu Feek, may Allaah سبحانه وتعالى bless you. Be keen on memorizing the authentic supplications in Arabic because the salaah (the prayer) is the second pillar of Islaam. So you should be keen on this and if you were keen on memorizing these supplications in Arabic you would be able to do so by the permission of Allaah. This is because these supplications whether in sujood or rukoo’ are easier for you than memorizing the Faatihah or memorizing any other verse or chapter from the Noble Qur’aan. So this is what I advise you to do, be keen on memorizing the authentic supplications in Arabic, whether it is in your waajib (obligatory) prayers or the prayers that are considered to be sunnah. However, outside the salaah, you may call upon Allaah سبحانه وتعالى in whichever language you wish. But I still advise you to use the Arabic language and use the authentic supplications because the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم was given the ability to say a few words which have great meaning.
3. Question: What is the ruling concerning the adhaan – is it obligatory to do it in one’s house if there is a regular jamaa’ah (congregation)? Also, is it obligatory to do it at college if there is a regular jamaa’ah?
Answer: The Shaykh حفظه الله said that some of the scholars hold the opinion that the adhaan is fard kifaayah i.e. a collective obligation. This means that if some of the Muslims carry it out, the obligation is absolved from the rest of them, meaning that the rest of the Muslims do not have to carry it out. So if some of the Muslims in a particular country call the adhaan then it is enough.
However, some other scholars hold the opinion that whenever a group of Muslims want to establish the prayer they must call the adhaan, especially in countries like Britain or the likes where the masaajid are few. Their evidence is a hadeeth which was authentically reported upon the authority of Maalik bin al-Huwayrith that the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, what means, “If you intend to establish the prayer then one of you should call the adhaan and the older of you should lead the prayer.”[7]. Even though there were only two of them, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم still encouraged them to call the adhaan and for the older one to lead the prayer.
So it is a sunnah for you to call the adhaan whenever you want to establish the prayer, especially in the case where there are few masaajid around and you cannot hear the adhaan, then you should call the adhaan.
4. Question: A person stated that if you understand the Arabic language and you have the books of the Salaf and their explanations, you do not need have contact with the `Ulamaa’. What is the ruling on this?
Answer: This statement that I have just heard, has some errors, it is not correct. A book cannot take the place of a Shaykh. Yes, you can benefit from the book but you cannot have the book take the place of the Shaykh. So as far as reading a book to know the words that the `Ulamaa’ may use, then is okay for you to continue doing so. However, you must call the `Ulamaa’ and ask them about what is confusing to you. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “It may be that a person who carries understanding of the religion (who carries Fiqh) is not a Faqeeh (i.e. he does not really understand), and it maybe that a person who receives that knowledge has a better understanding than the one who gave him that knowledge.”[8].
Gaining knowledge has a path that should be followed; there is a way or a method in gaining knowledge. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم taught the Sahaabah (his Companions), the companions taught the Taabi’oon (the generation after the Companions) and the Taabi’oon taught those who were after them, up until this time of ours. Knowledge has been taken from those above and passed down to those below, so knowledge is a golden chain – everyone at the bottom (at a lower level) taking from those who were above them. It has been said in the past, ‘Whoever takes his books as his Shaykh, his mistakes will be more than the time he is correct.’
Especially in this time of ours, when Allaah سبحانه وتعالى has made easy the gaining of knowledge; for example, through the internet where you can hear the lectures of the Kibaarul `Ulamaa’ (the Senior Scholars) while you are at home; even whilst you are laying down you can hear lectures of the `Ulamaa’ such as Shaykh Ibn Baaz, Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, Shaykl al-Albaani, the Grand Mufti, Shaykh al-Fawzaan and others, as from this blessed site albaseerah.org and from its seminars. So I advise you to be keen on seeking knowledge from the `Ulamaa’ because if you do not, you will have many mistakes and you will slip many times.
5. Question: My brother lacks in some acts of worship, I advise him but he does not listen, how can I save him or how should I deal with him?
Answer: You should keep advising him and you shouldn’t give up on him and you shouldn’t suffice by advising him only one time. Rather you should keep advising him time and time again. You should supplicate to Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to guide him and you should seek the aid of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى in such a case and then seek the aid of his friends, his teachers, the Imaam of the masjid, or whoever has a high status with your brother in order for them to also advise him. You should continue to advise him because you are upon good whilst you are doing so, and you should be patient with him and Inshaa Allaah, Allaah سبحانه وتعالى will guide him and you should keep supplicating and asking Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to guide him and Inshaa Allaah he would be guided.
6. Question: This is a question regarding a present, which was given to a family with a saying ‘this gift shall be a reward for your efforts’, and the gift was accepted. After a period of time the family returned the present with questioning: “How was it again, for your efforts?” What shall the person do, shall he take back the gift he has given to the family?
Answer: The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم clarified that it is not permissible for anyone to take back a gift that he has given to someone; it is not permissible for him to take it back. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “Whoever takes back a gift that he has given to someone is like a dog who vomited and then ate what he vomited.”[9]. The Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم clarified that the person who takes back his gift is like that dog, the dog that vomits then comes back and eats what he threw up. This is evidence of how terrible such a thing is.
As for yourself, if taking back this gift has a benefit and there won’t be difficulty in taking it back then you could do so because the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم used to accept gifts. However, if you feel that there is harm in doing so – that it may cause animosity between you and whoever was given the gift, or there might be something that might cut off your relations, then you should not accept it. So it is up to you, if you see that there is benefit in taking the gift then take it, and if you see there is harm in taking the gift, then do not take it.
7. Question: A Muslim was selling mobile phones and in the contract it stated that the customers would receive full reimbursement. I assisted in acquiring customers and the same contract applied, then the supplier disappeared and many customers are demanding their money back. How do I deal with this situation?
Answer: The Shaykh حفظه الله responded by saying that the principle in dealing (business dealings) is a saying of the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم that: “The believers are true to whatever they say (to whatever conditions), except the condition that makes something that is haraam (impermissible) halaal (permissible), or a condition that make something which is halaal haraam.”[10] Since he gave them these cell phones with the condition that he would return their money to them, then he is held responsible. But I do not understand how this could be – how would the seller benefit if he is going to sell them cell phones and then give all them their money back? I do not understand how this could be. This is why I think that this issue should be taken to the rightful authorities who would be the Major Scholars, and they should study the issue and then give a verdict concerning this. But as I said, the principle is that a Muslim or believer is responsible for whatever conditions he sets. However, I still do not understand how this could be and if this is actually a transaction of buying and selling or not. Maybe the questioner should clarify exactly what he means and then take the question to Kibaarul-`Ulamaa’ (Senior Scholars) and they will issue a verdict concerning it. The Shaykh حفظه الله said “Do not take a verdict from me, do not consider this to be a verdict, clarify your question and take it back to Kibaarul-`Ulamaa’.” In other words the Shaykh حفظه الله is not responsible for this issue or giving a verdict on this issue.
8. Question: My husband is staying in another city for boxing training. When I went to visit, there was a non-Muslim woman in one of the rooms. She says that she lives there and my husband says “No, she doesn’t live there.” I don’t trust him. Please advise me.
Answer: If your husband is a Muslim who establishes the prayer, then you should advise him. You should start with this, by advising him concerning this issue and you should also advise him concerning his profession. You should advise him to find a legislated mean of provision, because this isn’t legislated, it is a danger and Allaah سبحانه وتعالى says:
وَلا تَقْتُلُوا أَنْفُسَكُمْ
{….do not kill yourselves….} [An-Nisaa 4:29]
Also, the Messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “Do not harm and do not be harmed.”[11]. So if he accepts your advice and if he had a relationship with this woman he leaves off this relationship and makes tawbah (sincere repentance), then tawbah nullifies whatever was before it. However, if he had a relationship with this woman and he is persistent upon it, then it is your right to ask him for a divorce. But advise him if he is a Muslim who establishes the prayer; and keep advising him, and if he makes tawbah then Alhumdulillaah it is accepted Inshaa Allaah; but if he is persistent, then it is your right to ask for a divorce.
I ask Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to grant us beneficial knowledge and righteous actions and I ask Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to bless the organizers of this telelink, to bless their efforts and to make them from the callers to the truth and the supporters of the truth; and I ask Allaah سبحانه وتعالى to put these actions of ours in our scales of good deeds when we meet Him; and our last words are in praise of Allaah سبحانه وتعالى, the Lord of the Worlds, and may the salaat and salaam be upon the final Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and his family and companions.
References
[1] Reported in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree Kitaabul-'Ilm as a chapter heading (#13) and also as hadeeth (#71). Also reported in Kitaab Al-khams (Imposing the fifth) (#2948).
من يرد الله به خيرا يفقهه في الدين
[2] Reported by At-Tirmidhee (#2784), Kitaab al-‘Ilm ‘an Rasoolillah صلى الله عليه وسلم (The knowledge from the Prophet (May peace and blessings be upon Him)). Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says Saheeh in Saheeh al-Jaami’ (#6298).
من سلك طريقا يلتمس فيه علما سهل الله له طريقا إلى الجنة
[3] Reference Pending
[4] With the following wording, Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says Saheeh in Saheeh al-Jaami’ (#3753).
صاحب العلم يستغفر له كل شيء حتى الحوت في البحر
[5] Reported in Saheeh Muslim as part of a longer hadeeth in Kitaab Adh-Dhikr wad-Du’aa wat-Tawbah wal-Istighfaar (Book of Remembrance of Allaah, Supplication, Repentance and Seeking Forgiveness) (#2699) with the wording:
ما اجتمع قوم في بيت من بيوت الله، يتلون كتاب الله، ويتدارسونه بينهم، إلا نزلت عليهم السكينة، وغشيتهم الرحمة وحفتهم الملائكة، وذكرهم الله فيمن عنده
[6] The wording mentioned by the Shaykh حفظه الله was found in 2 separate hadeeth. The first part is mentioned in the Musnad of Imaam Ahmad رحمه الله (#12476) as follows. Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says Saheeh in Silsilah as-Saheehah 5/245 (#2210).
ما من قوم اجتمعوا يذكرون الله لا يريدون بذلك الا وجهه الا ناداهم مناد من السماء ان قوموا مغفورا لكم قد بدلت سيئاتكم حسنات
The second part is mentioned with the following wording as part of a longer hadeeth in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, Kitaab ad-Da’waat (#6045).
إن لله ملائكة يطوفون في الطرق يلتمسون أهل الذكر، فإذا وجدوا قوما يذكرون الله تنادوا: هلمُّوا إلى حاجتكم…….قال: فيقول: فأشهدكم أني قد غفرت لهم. قال: يقول ملك من الملائكة: فيهم فلان ليس منهم، إنما جاء لحاجة. قال: هم الجلساء لا يشقى بهم جليسهم
[7] Reported in Saheeh Muslim, Kitaab al-Massajid wal-mawaadi’ as-Salaah (The Mosques and the Places of Worship) (#674), and with a similar wording in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, Kitaab al-Jihaad was-Siyar (#2693).
إذا حضرت الصلاة فأذنا. ثم أقيما وليؤمكما أكبركما
[8] With the following wording it occurs as part of a longer hadeeth which Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says is Saheeh in Silsilah as-Saheehah 1/760 (#404).
رب حامل فقه ليس بفقيه ورب حامل فقه إلى من هو أفقه منه
[9] Reported with the following wording in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, Kitaab al-Hibah wa Fadlihaa (The Book of Gifts and its virtue) (#2449). Also (#2478, 2479, 6574) and in Saheeh Muslim, Kitaab al-Hibaat (Book of Gifts) (#1622).
العائد في هبته كالكلب، يقيء ثم يعود في قيئه
[10] Reported in Sunan At-Tirmidhee with the following wording as part of a hadeeth in Kitaab al-Ahkaam from Rasulillaah صلى الله عليه وسلم) (The book of the Rulings that came from the messenger of Allaah صلى الله عليه وسلم) (#1363). Shaykh al-Albaaneeرحمه الله says it is Saheeh in Jaami’ at-Tirmidhee 3/634 (#1352).
المسلمون على شروطهم إلا شرطا حرم حلالا أو أحل حراما
[11] Reported in Sunan Ibn Maajah, Kitaab al-Ahkaam (The Book of Rulings) 2/784 (#2340, #2341). Shaykh al-Albaanee رحمه الله says Saheeh in Saheeh al-Jaami’ (#7517).
لا ضرر ولا ضرار
Last edited by s_ali : October 25th, 2008 at 14:03. Reason: Formatting changes
Reply With Quote
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Stumble It!
