Parliament
is a place of Shirk and Kufr, it is not allowed for the Muslims to be
part of it, nor to participate in it – whether by being an MP or by
being a candidate, collecting votes to be part of it – nor to be an
elector for somebody who wishes to join with it, nor to be a worker to
maintain it, nor a chef to cook for the people involved with it, nor to
be an employee working in any job or position whether administrative or
any other service in it.
That
is because it is a Taaghout, a place of legislation and issuing laws
and ruling by different than what Allah has revealed. That is because
the original basis of the parliament and democracy is the concept of
‘the ruling of the people, by the people, for the people’; that the
people are the ones to legislate via their representatives (i.e. the
Members of Parliament).
This is in contradiction to the very essence of Islam (i.e. Al Tawheed), the exclusivity of Almighty Allah in all of his names and attributes, the exclusivity in His rights and actions; parliament contradicts and opposes the exclusivity of Allah by ruling and making legislation, by commanding and forbidding when Allah (swt) says,
“The ruling and legislating is for none but Allah.” [6: 57 & 12:40]
Allah did not say in this ayah that “the ruling is for none but the people”, this is the right of Allah (swt) alone and He (swt) says,
“Do they seek the ruling of Jahiliyyah? And who is better than Allah as a legislator for people who have certainty?” [5: 50]
And Allah (swt) says,
“Allah does not associate with his right of ruling/legislation anybody.” [18: 26]
Allah does not associate in his legislation, neither the people nor the parliament nor anybody else. As for the claim by those who say, that ‘the origin of democracy is a form of consultation (Shura),’ we say that this claim is one of three: either (i) a lie and a fabrication, (ii) or it is ignorance, (iii) or it is misguidance.
This is in contradiction to the very essence of Islam (i.e. Al Tawheed), the exclusivity of Almighty Allah in all of his names and attributes, the exclusivity in His rights and actions; parliament contradicts and opposes the exclusivity of Allah by ruling and making legislation, by commanding and forbidding when Allah (swt) says,
“The ruling and legislating is for none but Allah.” [6: 57 & 12:40]
Allah did not say in this ayah that “the ruling is for none but the people”, this is the right of Allah (swt) alone and He (swt) says,
“Do they seek the ruling of Jahiliyyah? And who is better than Allah as a legislator for people who have certainty?” [5: 50]
And Allah (swt) says,
“Allah does not associate with his right of ruling/legislation anybody.” [18: 26]
Allah does not associate in his legislation, neither the people nor the parliament nor anybody else. As for the claim by those who say, that ‘the origin of democracy is a form of consultation (Shura),’ we say that this claim is one of three: either (i) a lie and a fabrication, (ii) or it is ignorance, (iii) or it is misguidance.
This is because democracy is not based on the legitimate consultation, rather it is based on legislation; the MPs consult each other in every matter, – whether that is a matter open for consultation or not open (i.e. they will consult even regarding what is clear cut, e.g. the prohibition of alcohol or adultery) – in order to legislate a rule, that is the reality of the very function of Parliament.
As for the verdict of the people who enter into and participate in parliament, they are as follows,
(1) Anyone who participates in parliament and legislates a law that
contradicts the shari’ah or he consents for a resolution or a law that
contradicts the shari’ah, or votes for it or participates in a
referendum for any law that contradicts the shari’ah, that is a Mushrik
Kafir that is not excused by ignorance or by interpretation or by the
claim of seeking any benefit. Allah (swt) says,
“Do they have partners who legislate for them a Deen for which they never had permission from Allah?” [Shura: 21]
And Allah (swt) says,
“Do not associate with Allah’s legislation anybody” [18:26]
And,
“The ruling is for none but Allah” [6: 57]
(2) Anyone who enters into parliament and gives an oath to respect the man-made constitution and rules, which are non-Islamic – knowing full well what is within the constitution from clear contradictions to the Shari’ah – that is clear Kufr (rejection of his/her faith) and apostasy, whether he was serious in his oath or not serious, whether it was beneficial or otherwise, he has committed the Kufr action knowingly and intentionally. This form of oath is equivalent to the oath that used to be given by the MPs of the parliament of Quraish in the time of Muhammad (saw), who would give an oath to respect Al Laat and Al Uzzah (names of idols that they used to elevate and swear by it).
(3) If he/she did not give any oath to respect the constitution and man-made law nor did he participate in any legislation nor in any form of referendum that contradicts the Shari’ah, rather he rejects openly and votes against it, rejecting the right for any MPs to legislate, the least to be said about that person is that he is misguided, deviant from the guidance of changing and reforming in accordance to the method of the Messenger Muhammad (saws). Therefore, he is not an apostate but he is deviant and misguided because he chose the way of Shirk, misguidance and apostasy as a way for Da’wah, change and reform, the way of falsehood and misguidance and not the way of Haq, Allah (swt) says,
“That is Allah, your Lord in truth, what is there instead of the truth, except the misguidance? How then are you turned away?” [Yunus: 32]
Muhammad Mursi stood in elections claiming to seek Shari’ah gradually through democracy.
(4) Some people argue that participating in the Kufr parliament is only in order to take it as a platform to call to the Deen of Allah and for the benefit of Islam and the Muslim community. They claim that in order for them to enter, they must ally with the secular people and parties or with the Kufr groups/parties (e.g. Labour, conservative, liberal democrat or respect party etc) in order to gain a political position, claiming that he does so only for the sake of Allah and Da’wah and not for the sake of committing Shirk.
This is one of the arguments that they put forward, to use any means to benefit the Da’wah or for the interests of the people, claiming that they are doing good deeds. That is completely false, misguided and a deviation because of the following contradictions with the Shari’ah:
(i) Allah (swt) says,
“By your lord, we will account all that they do, so call openly whatever I ordered you and turn away from the mushrikeen, Allah is enough to deal with the mockers.” [Hijr: 92-94]
This ayah carries a prohibition from compromising with the Mushrikeen for any political gain or in order to gain some benefit or even for the sake of Da’wah; that is because the ayah was in the sequence of proclaiming the truth openly even if they offer you material gain.
(ii) Allah (swt) forbade us from refraining from the shari’ah for any reason, in Surah Al An’am, Allah (swt) says,
“Follow what has been revealed to you from your lord, there is no one worthy to be followed, obeyed or worshipped except him and turn away from the Mushrikeen.” [6: 106]
The words “turn away from the mushrikeen” is general and is not restricted when faced with any potential benefit or interests.
(iii) It is a deviation to say, ‘I can do anything or everything in order to convey the truth or for the sake of benefit and interest’ under the pretext of ‘the aims justifies the means’, that is complete falsehood as Allah (swt) says,
“Do not obey the one whose heart is misguided from our guidance (revelation) he follows his desires while all his deeds were wasted, say: all the truth is from your Lord, either you believe or you disbelieve, verily we destined for the disbelievers the hellfire.” [18: 28-29]
It is evident in this ayah, that Allah ordered him to speak the truth while carrying Da’wah, even if the consequences were opposite to his interests, in this case he should stay on Haq outside the parliament, even if there are interests to be gained by entering with them.
(iv) Moreover, in Surah Baqarah, Allah (swt) says,
“Al Fitnah is greater than killing,” [2: 217]
And,
“Al Fitnah is stronger than the killing” [2: 191]
Ibn Katheer in his Tafseer of these verses, quoted Abu aaliyah, Mujahid, Ikrimah, Sa’eed ibn Jubair, Al Dahhaq, Qatada, Al Rabee’ ibn Anas and others saying:
“Al Shirk is stronger than the killing”
Verily, the fitnah is the Kufr and the Shirk and it is not allowed for the Muslims to be a part of it, the Muslim should never compromise with the Kufr or the Shirk for the sake of any interest or benefit. The greatest scholars of Islam like Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Maalik, Imam Shafi’i and Imam Ahmed, Sheikh ul Islam ibn Taymiyyah and Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab all said,
“If the people of the cities and the village fought each other until all of them were killed, it will be easier (less harm) than to agree together to appoint one Taaghout to rule by what contradicts the Shari’ah of Islam.”
Furthermore, the principle of ‘bringing benefit and preventing harm’ is based entirely on what the Shari’ah defined and recognises as benefit and what the Shari’ah defined and recognises to be harm or hardship, not at all what the mind or ration has defined.
Furthermore, the issue of compulsion to commit haram in Islam has a pre-requisite condition that the harm must be established beforehand in order for the compelled person not to be considered a transgressor nor rebellious against the Islamic rules, Allah (swt) says,
“It has been forbidden for you the dead meat, the pork and whatever the name of other than Allah has been mentioned over it, and whoever has had compulsion without rebellion or transgression, he has no sin.”
This verse is the principle of compulsion and has a clear condition that the harm of the hunger must have already reached the person as a pre-requisite before he/she can eat what is ordinarily unlawful in order to survive. That is further conditioned that he cannot continue in eating that by transgression or out of rebellion, he eats only what is necessary to survive.
Further still, there is a big difference between the one who was starving because of the absence of lawful food and so he eats unlawful food, and the person who goes to the parliament who is not under any compulsion whatsoever, rather he is involving in apostasy with his own free choice without to be compelled to do so. So where is the indication from the permissibility of the dead meat for the starving person, that anyone can enter into the Kufr parliament and legislate law under the claim that they know what is the interests of the Da’wah (as if they know better than Allah)? Allah (swt) says,
“Say: do you know better than Allah? … Who is more oppressor than the one who conceals the testimony that Allah gave him? Allah is aware of everything that you do.” [2: 40]
As for the principle of Duress, which does permits the Muslim to say or do Kufr, however there is a pre-requisite condition to utilise that permit that the duress must be a matter of life and death or of direct bodily harm and with the condition that his heart was full of Imaan. Allah (swt) says,
“Whoever declares Kufr in Allah after he believed except the one who declares Kufr after duress but his heart was full of Imaan, but whoever finds ease in Kufr, theirs is the anger of Allah, and they will have a terrible punishment.” [16: 106]
These are the only circumstances that is considered duress, it is only either a threat of life and death or bodily harm that permits them to say or do Kufr, so where is the evidence to say or commit Kufr without duress with only the claim of gaining interests for Muslims and for the Da’wah?
Verily the corruption of Shari’ah TV on Channel 4 and Islam channel and the ignorant so-called Imams of MCB is clear. What they say and do and the road that they are taking to justify participation in the elections and to become candidates for Parliament or to vote for the Kufr, that is the road of innovation and misguidance, the road compromise and humiliation, it contradicts to the teaching of Muhammad (saws) and to the consensus of his companions and the pious predecessors, it is enough to read the seerah of our beloved Messenger Muhammad (saws) as reported by ibn Hisham, when the Quraish sent to him (saws), Utbah to strike a deal, Jaabir ibn Abdullah narrated that,
“Utbah ibn rabee’ah came from the Quraish, and said to the messenger (saws), “O Muhammad, you divided our society, defamed our way of life, insulted our parent’s and our lords and gods, you exposed us among the Arabs, O man, if what you seek from your call is authority, we will contract you to be our chief (i.e. to be prime minister) and if what you seek is to have a noble position, we will grant you a position over us (i.e. head of parliament, minister or MP) and if what you seek is to be king, we will make you a king (i.e. to be king of England or president of USA).” Muhammad (saws) rejected and recited the beginning of Surah Fussilat, “Haa meem, it is revealed from Al Rahman Al Raheem, it is a book that we elaborated its verses, and recited it in Arabic for people to comprehend, as a warning and glad tidings but many turn their backs and listen not to you, they say ‘our heart rejects what you call us to and our ears are blocked and between you and us is a partition, so ask, ‘what do you want, we will give it to you, act, and we will also act,’ say: I am a human like you, it has been revealed to my that our lord is one lord, so take the straight path to Him and seek forgiveness from him and dare the Mushrikeen, who do not pay zakat, and in the hereafter they are Kafireen.” [Fussilat: 1-6]
These Ayaat were revealed to Muhammad (Saw) to counter their argument, they offered to him, positions, money and much benefit for the sake to have him compromise his deen that is based on the Tawheed and giving up all Kufr and Taaghout and to oppose it’s systems and to attack it and declaring baraa’a (dissociation) from it.”
By Allah, what if this offer had been given to those deviant Muslims who have weak Imaan and weak hearts? If it was offered to them positions and to enter into parliament, they would be willing, every one of them and they would be ready to compromise everything to do so.
Further evidence that exposes the false claim of ‘interests’ that MCB and the ‘Islam channel’ call for is reported in the Seerah of ibn Ishaaq and ibn Hishaam vol.1. It is narrated that the messenger (saws) offered Islam to a group of people from the tribes of Banu Aamir Al Sa’sa’a, they said to him as a condition to accept the deen,
“Do you see if we pledge to you to follow what you call us to, then Allah grants you authority over all those who disagree with you and then you pass away, will we have any share of authority after you? The Prophet (saws) said, “that matter is in the hands of Allah, he grants it to whoever he wishes.” Then they refused to believe in him (saws),” [Seerah for ibn Ishaaq and ibn Hishaam]
In this case, the mushrikeen pledged to accept him to be the leader in order to share power with him and have a rota, that he leads and then they lead after him, to have an alliance similar to the way the Muslims nowadays ally with the Kufr parties, yet the Prophet (saws) refused. Verily, if this offer was given to MCB, they would compromise everything and accept.
In Addition, it is also reported in the Seerah of ibn Ishaaq, that the delegation of Banu Thaqeef, when they came to the messenger (saws) embracing Islam, they requested him to allow them to keep their idols until Islam entered into the hearts of the masses, he (saws) rejected completely to allow them for even a single moment despite the fact that allowing them to keep the idols had some clear benefit for the Da’wah, increasing the Muslims and would have ensured greater security from apostasy and change. Despite all of this potential benefit, the Prophet (saws) rejected to compromise.
So how will Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Jamati Islam and similar groups and their followers face Allah on the day of Judgement while they offered themselves to the parliaments and the Kufr way of life? This is very different from the above examples where the Kuffar had offered themselves to Islam and had wanted only to retain some of their Jahiliyyah, and yet the Prophet (saws) still rejected.
It is also reported by Al Imaam Al Baihaqi in the book of Al Dalaa’il vol.1 that Imam Al Suyaani in his book Al Seerah p204, told the story of Banu Sheebaan bin Tha’labah. When the Prophet (saws) offered the deen to them, they promised him to protect him and his call from the Arabs but they refused to protect him (saw) from the Persians, the Prophet (saws) said to them directly,
“This Deen of Allah will never be supported except by the one who wants to protect it from all sides.”
The Prophet (saws) rejected their offer, despite the fact that there is such a clear benefit for the Muslims to protected from at least one enemy, yet he did not compromise the call even though they has not asked to retain any Shirk or Kufr, rather to do something permissible to maintain support on one side. They wanted to have walaa’ (alliance) to the Prophet (saws) and the Persians and to have baraa’a (disassociation) from the Arabs. Despite the clear potential benefit in their offer, the Prophet (saws) rejected completely rather than compromise any part of the Deen.
It is reported in Saheeh Muslim, in the chapter of Al Fadaa’il Al Sahabah, Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas said,
“We were with the Prophet (saws) and we were 6 people, the mushrikeen said to the messenger, “throw these people away from you and keep distance from them and we will support you.” Allah sent down an ayah ordering him (saws), “do not throw out those who call their Lord day and night, seeking his pleasure, do not bother about what they offer to you, nor will you be accounted because of them and if you throw them out you will be an oppressors…“ [6: 52]
Verily, if the British or any other government asked MCB, CAIR or other deviant moderates to denounce the Du’aat or certain Muslims, or to stop them from coming to the Masjid for some political gain or interest, they would hurry to sell out the entire Muslim community despite the fact that it is clearly forbidden in the above ayah. They offered Muhammad (saws) to have a parliament with them if he threw out only 6 people, yet the Prophet (saws) rejected despite the clear potential benefit, however if the government asked MCB to denounce 6 Muslims, they would do so and even denounce many more for their sake.
And,
“The ruling is for none but Allah” [6: 57]
(2) Anyone who enters into parliament and gives an oath to respect the man-made constitution and rules, which are non-Islamic – knowing full well what is within the constitution from clear contradictions to the Shari’ah – that is clear Kufr (rejection of his/her faith) and apostasy, whether he was serious in his oath or not serious, whether it was beneficial or otherwise, he has committed the Kufr action knowingly and intentionally. This form of oath is equivalent to the oath that used to be given by the MPs of the parliament of Quraish in the time of Muhammad (saw), who would give an oath to respect Al Laat and Al Uzzah (names of idols that they used to elevate and swear by it).
(3) If he/she did not give any oath to respect the constitution and man-made law nor did he participate in any legislation nor in any form of referendum that contradicts the Shari’ah, rather he rejects openly and votes against it, rejecting the right for any MPs to legislate, the least to be said about that person is that he is misguided, deviant from the guidance of changing and reforming in accordance to the method of the Messenger Muhammad (saws). Therefore, he is not an apostate but he is deviant and misguided because he chose the way of Shirk, misguidance and apostasy as a way for Da’wah, change and reform, the way of falsehood and misguidance and not the way of Haq, Allah (swt) says,
“That is Allah, your Lord in truth, what is there instead of the truth, except the misguidance? How then are you turned away?” [Yunus: 32]
Muhammad Mursi stood in elections claiming to seek Shari’ah gradually through democracy.
(4) Some people argue that participating in the Kufr parliament is only in order to take it as a platform to call to the Deen of Allah and for the benefit of Islam and the Muslim community. They claim that in order for them to enter, they must ally with the secular people and parties or with the Kufr groups/parties (e.g. Labour, conservative, liberal democrat or respect party etc) in order to gain a political position, claiming that he does so only for the sake of Allah and Da’wah and not for the sake of committing Shirk.
This is one of the arguments that they put forward, to use any means to benefit the Da’wah or for the interests of the people, claiming that they are doing good deeds. That is completely false, misguided and a deviation because of the following contradictions with the Shari’ah:
(i) Allah (swt) says,
“By your lord, we will account all that they do, so call openly whatever I ordered you and turn away from the mushrikeen, Allah is enough to deal with the mockers.” [Hijr: 92-94]
This ayah carries a prohibition from compromising with the Mushrikeen for any political gain or in order to gain some benefit or even for the sake of Da’wah; that is because the ayah was in the sequence of proclaiming the truth openly even if they offer you material gain.
(ii) Allah (swt) forbade us from refraining from the shari’ah for any reason, in Surah Al An’am, Allah (swt) says,
“Follow what has been revealed to you from your lord, there is no one worthy to be followed, obeyed or worshipped except him and turn away from the Mushrikeen.” [6: 106]
The words “turn away from the mushrikeen” is general and is not restricted when faced with any potential benefit or interests.
(iii) It is a deviation to say, ‘I can do anything or everything in order to convey the truth or for the sake of benefit and interest’ under the pretext of ‘the aims justifies the means’, that is complete falsehood as Allah (swt) says,
“Do not obey the one whose heart is misguided from our guidance (revelation) he follows his desires while all his deeds were wasted, say: all the truth is from your Lord, either you believe or you disbelieve, verily we destined for the disbelievers the hellfire.” [18: 28-29]
It is evident in this ayah, that Allah ordered him to speak the truth while carrying Da’wah, even if the consequences were opposite to his interests, in this case he should stay on Haq outside the parliament, even if there are interests to be gained by entering with them.
(iv) Moreover, in Surah Baqarah, Allah (swt) says,
“Al Fitnah is greater than killing,” [2: 217]
And,
“Al Fitnah is stronger than the killing” [2: 191]
Ibn Katheer in his Tafseer of these verses, quoted Abu aaliyah, Mujahid, Ikrimah, Sa’eed ibn Jubair, Al Dahhaq, Qatada, Al Rabee’ ibn Anas and others saying:
“Al Shirk is stronger than the killing”
Verily, the fitnah is the Kufr and the Shirk and it is not allowed for the Muslims to be a part of it, the Muslim should never compromise with the Kufr or the Shirk for the sake of any interest or benefit. The greatest scholars of Islam like Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Maalik, Imam Shafi’i and Imam Ahmed, Sheikh ul Islam ibn Taymiyyah and Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab all said,
“If the people of the cities and the village fought each other until all of them were killed, it will be easier (less harm) than to agree together to appoint one Taaghout to rule by what contradicts the Shari’ah of Islam.”
Furthermore, the principle of ‘bringing benefit and preventing harm’ is based entirely on what the Shari’ah defined and recognises as benefit and what the Shari’ah defined and recognises to be harm or hardship, not at all what the mind or ration has defined.
Furthermore, the issue of compulsion to commit haram in Islam has a pre-requisite condition that the harm must be established beforehand in order for the compelled person not to be considered a transgressor nor rebellious against the Islamic rules, Allah (swt) says,
“It has been forbidden for you the dead meat, the pork and whatever the name of other than Allah has been mentioned over it, and whoever has had compulsion without rebellion or transgression, he has no sin.”
This verse is the principle of compulsion and has a clear condition that the harm of the hunger must have already reached the person as a pre-requisite before he/she can eat what is ordinarily unlawful in order to survive. That is further conditioned that he cannot continue in eating that by transgression or out of rebellion, he eats only what is necessary to survive.
Further still, there is a big difference between the one who was starving because of the absence of lawful food and so he eats unlawful food, and the person who goes to the parliament who is not under any compulsion whatsoever, rather he is involving in apostasy with his own free choice without to be compelled to do so. So where is the indication from the permissibility of the dead meat for the starving person, that anyone can enter into the Kufr parliament and legislate law under the claim that they know what is the interests of the Da’wah (as if they know better than Allah)? Allah (swt) says,
“Say: do you know better than Allah? … Who is more oppressor than the one who conceals the testimony that Allah gave him? Allah is aware of everything that you do.” [2: 40]
As for the principle of Duress, which does permits the Muslim to say or do Kufr, however there is a pre-requisite condition to utilise that permit that the duress must be a matter of life and death or of direct bodily harm and with the condition that his heart was full of Imaan. Allah (swt) says,
“Whoever declares Kufr in Allah after he believed except the one who declares Kufr after duress but his heart was full of Imaan, but whoever finds ease in Kufr, theirs is the anger of Allah, and they will have a terrible punishment.” [16: 106]
These are the only circumstances that is considered duress, it is only either a threat of life and death or bodily harm that permits them to say or do Kufr, so where is the evidence to say or commit Kufr without duress with only the claim of gaining interests for Muslims and for the Da’wah?
Verily the corruption of Shari’ah TV on Channel 4 and Islam channel and the ignorant so-called Imams of MCB is clear. What they say and do and the road that they are taking to justify participation in the elections and to become candidates for Parliament or to vote for the Kufr, that is the road of innovation and misguidance, the road compromise and humiliation, it contradicts to the teaching of Muhammad (saws) and to the consensus of his companions and the pious predecessors, it is enough to read the seerah of our beloved Messenger Muhammad (saws) as reported by ibn Hisham, when the Quraish sent to him (saws), Utbah to strike a deal, Jaabir ibn Abdullah narrated that,
“Utbah ibn rabee’ah came from the Quraish, and said to the messenger (saws), “O Muhammad, you divided our society, defamed our way of life, insulted our parent’s and our lords and gods, you exposed us among the Arabs, O man, if what you seek from your call is authority, we will contract you to be our chief (i.e. to be prime minister) and if what you seek is to have a noble position, we will grant you a position over us (i.e. head of parliament, minister or MP) and if what you seek is to be king, we will make you a king (i.e. to be king of England or president of USA).” Muhammad (saws) rejected and recited the beginning of Surah Fussilat, “Haa meem, it is revealed from Al Rahman Al Raheem, it is a book that we elaborated its verses, and recited it in Arabic for people to comprehend, as a warning and glad tidings but many turn their backs and listen not to you, they say ‘our heart rejects what you call us to and our ears are blocked and between you and us is a partition, so ask, ‘what do you want, we will give it to you, act, and we will also act,’ say: I am a human like you, it has been revealed to my that our lord is one lord, so take the straight path to Him and seek forgiveness from him and dare the Mushrikeen, who do not pay zakat, and in the hereafter they are Kafireen.” [Fussilat: 1-6]
These Ayaat were revealed to Muhammad (Saw) to counter their argument, they offered to him, positions, money and much benefit for the sake to have him compromise his deen that is based on the Tawheed and giving up all Kufr and Taaghout and to oppose it’s systems and to attack it and declaring baraa’a (dissociation) from it.”
By Allah, what if this offer had been given to those deviant Muslims who have weak Imaan and weak hearts? If it was offered to them positions and to enter into parliament, they would be willing, every one of them and they would be ready to compromise everything to do so.
Further evidence that exposes the false claim of ‘interests’ that MCB and the ‘Islam channel’ call for is reported in the Seerah of ibn Ishaaq and ibn Hishaam vol.1. It is narrated that the messenger (saws) offered Islam to a group of people from the tribes of Banu Aamir Al Sa’sa’a, they said to him as a condition to accept the deen,
“Do you see if we pledge to you to follow what you call us to, then Allah grants you authority over all those who disagree with you and then you pass away, will we have any share of authority after you? The Prophet (saws) said, “that matter is in the hands of Allah, he grants it to whoever he wishes.” Then they refused to believe in him (saws),” [Seerah for ibn Ishaaq and ibn Hishaam]
In this case, the mushrikeen pledged to accept him to be the leader in order to share power with him and have a rota, that he leads and then they lead after him, to have an alliance similar to the way the Muslims nowadays ally with the Kufr parties, yet the Prophet (saws) refused. Verily, if this offer was given to MCB, they would compromise everything and accept.
In Addition, it is also reported in the Seerah of ibn Ishaaq, that the delegation of Banu Thaqeef, when they came to the messenger (saws) embracing Islam, they requested him to allow them to keep their idols until Islam entered into the hearts of the masses, he (saws) rejected completely to allow them for even a single moment despite the fact that allowing them to keep the idols had some clear benefit for the Da’wah, increasing the Muslims and would have ensured greater security from apostasy and change. Despite all of this potential benefit, the Prophet (saws) rejected to compromise.
So how will Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Jamati Islam and similar groups and their followers face Allah on the day of Judgement while they offered themselves to the parliaments and the Kufr way of life? This is very different from the above examples where the Kuffar had offered themselves to Islam and had wanted only to retain some of their Jahiliyyah, and yet the Prophet (saws) still rejected.
It is also reported by Al Imaam Al Baihaqi in the book of Al Dalaa’il vol.1 that Imam Al Suyaani in his book Al Seerah p204, told the story of Banu Sheebaan bin Tha’labah. When the Prophet (saws) offered the deen to them, they promised him to protect him and his call from the Arabs but they refused to protect him (saw) from the Persians, the Prophet (saws) said to them directly,
“This Deen of Allah will never be supported except by the one who wants to protect it from all sides.”
The Prophet (saws) rejected their offer, despite the fact that there is such a clear benefit for the Muslims to protected from at least one enemy, yet he did not compromise the call even though they has not asked to retain any Shirk or Kufr, rather to do something permissible to maintain support on one side. They wanted to have walaa’ (alliance) to the Prophet (saws) and the Persians and to have baraa’a (disassociation) from the Arabs. Despite the clear potential benefit in their offer, the Prophet (saws) rejected completely rather than compromise any part of the Deen.
It is reported in Saheeh Muslim, in the chapter of Al Fadaa’il Al Sahabah, Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas said,
“We were with the Prophet (saws) and we were 6 people, the mushrikeen said to the messenger, “throw these people away from you and keep distance from them and we will support you.” Allah sent down an ayah ordering him (saws), “do not throw out those who call their Lord day and night, seeking his pleasure, do not bother about what they offer to you, nor will you be accounted because of them and if you throw them out you will be an oppressors…“ [6: 52]
Verily, if the British or any other government asked MCB, CAIR or other deviant moderates to denounce the Du’aat or certain Muslims, or to stop them from coming to the Masjid for some political gain or interest, they would hurry to sell out the entire Muslim community despite the fact that it is clearly forbidden in the above ayah. They offered Muhammad (saws) to have a parliament with them if he threw out only 6 people, yet the Prophet (saws) rejected despite the clear potential benefit, however if the government asked MCB to denounce 6 Muslims, they would do so and even denounce many more for their sake.
It is narrated that Abdullah ibn Umm Maktum came to the Prophet (saws), he was blind and he said to him,
“O Muhammad, guide me,” The Prophet (saws) at that time had some men from the leaders of Quraish with him and so he started to turn away from the blind man and went to the leaders, Allah revealed, “He frowned and turned away when the blind man came to him, how do you know, he could become better …” [80: 1-3].” [Jami’ Al Saheeh v1 p398]
And in Surah Kahf, Allah (swt) says to the messenger,
“And recite what Allah has revealed to you in the books, there will be no change or defamation in the books, and you will find no refuge except in Him (swt). stand firm with those who call their lord day and night seeking his pleasure, do not turn away from them seeking the worldly benefit, and “Do not obey the one whose heart is misguided from our guidance (revelation) he follows his desires while all his deeds were wasted, say: all the truth is from your Lord, either you believe or you disbelieve, verily we destined for the disbelievers the hellfire.” [18: 27-29]
If to compromise a Muslim for the interests of the entire deen was not permitted, so how can we compromise the entire deen for the sake of some lesser worldly interests? In fact, the very cause of the Hijrah was for the sake of the deen, if the Prophet (saws) thought that the benefit and interests of the Muslims was to compromise with the government, he would never grant them permission to migrate, rather he would have told them to stay and conceal their Deen and to compromise.
As mentioned, one of the arguments that people use to enter into parliament is that ‘it is a form of Da’wah’. However, we will say that not every means is acceptable to give Da’wah, because the only means that are acceptable is that which pleases Allah (swt) in accordance to the Sunnah of Muhammad (saws), who said,
“Allah is Tayyib (good), and does not accept anything except if it is tayyib (good).”
So how can the Kufr and Shirk of parliament be the correct means to give Da’wah? It is reported in the fattawa of ibn Taymiyyah, v11 p620, he was asked about a famous sheikh from the Ashaa’ira. He used to gather people and use drums with some permissible poetry in order to encourage the people committing big sins (kabaa’ir) to come and listen, some of them came and started to repent and practise Islam, they asked if it was permissible. Sheikh ul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said,
“…verily, what Allah will guide with it the misguided and lead with it the astray and forgive with it the sinner must be based on what the messenger (saws) has been sent with, this sheikh has targeted for those who commit sin to repent and to practise by following that innovated method, that indicates that this sheikh is jahil on the shari’ah method, that with it any disobedience will be repented from, because the Prophet (saw)s and his companions and the Tabi’een used to call to those who are even more evil than those sinners, but using the method of the Shari’ah which was sufficient from Allah, instead of going to an innovated method. Therefore it is not allowed for this sheikh to adopt any haram or disliked or even permissible method as an obedience to become closer to Allah and that is only the action of someone misguided, transgressor with the consensus of the Muslim scholars.”
If listening to a nasheed with some drums, adopted as a method to invite a sinner to Islam and for him to repent and become practising is a matter of innovation or haram for ibn Taymiyyah, then what about the actions that are Kufr or Shirk such as voting and legislation? How can it possibly become a method to establish Allah’s deen?
We know very well how there is a consensus of the scholars of the salaf that it is forbidden to accept the hadith Da’eef or fabricated Ahadith even if it has beneficial outcomes to bring people to Islam and practise better, yet it is prohibited to utilise it despite the benefit that it may have for our Da’wah. There is also consensus that it is forbidden to promote innovators who engage in innovation (e.g. milad un nabi, khitim, 40 days khuruj, eating at charity dinners etc) despite all the potential benefit it may have to Da’wah and despite how many people may come to learn because of it and even become guided from it.
It has been reported that Sheikh ul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said in his Fattawa v18 p476,
“Verily, the Shirk, and to attribute to Allah without knowledge and all forms of unlawful sexual acts, sayings and transactions, whether the inner and the outer, and the oppression cannot contain any form of interest or benefit, whatever is forbidden upon every person in every situation such as Shirk, Kufr or oppression or unlawful sexual acts, or to refer ahkaam to Allah that he never legislated, nothing is permissible from it under the pretexts of interest and benefit. That is because Allah (swt) says, “verily, Allah forbade the unlawful sexual acts and transactions, whatever was hidden or apparent, and any form of rebellion without Haq and to associate with Allah that which He never revealed, or to attribute to Allah what you do not have knowledge, all of this is forbidden.” [7: 33] All these are forbidden amongst all people, in all religions and all anbiyaa have been sent with it’s prohibition, and nothing is permissible from it ever, whether before Islam or after Islam, and none of these can be taken by permit for any interest or benefit for the Deen or for the Dunya.”
This verse is evidence that we should not listen to those who try to push the ideas of personal interpretation and opinion, even if he claims to do good deeds and claims to do what is beneficial for the Da’wah and the Muslims. Bearing in mind that the Shirk and Kufr by itself is something evil and an insult to Allah, so how can the road to Shirk be a way to call to Allah and benefit Islam or Muslims?
Sheikh ul Islam Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab has a fatwa against the reminders, he was asked about the Friday reminders (Al Tazkeeru bi Jumu’ah) who used to make noise with an object every Friday, so that the people knew the day and so that nobody will miss Salatul Jumu’ah, some of them started to make nasheed and walk in the streets, Ahmed Shaakir narrated that Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab said,
“Ibn Saanih asked me about Al Tazkeeru bi jumu’ah, it is an innovation, if they say that some people do not know if it is Friday except with it, then the messenger (saws) knows better than us and knows the benefit of the ummah better than all of you and the Sunnah is the adhan for jumu’ah, anything else is innovation.”
So how can going to prliament, which is at best an innovation be permitted to benefit the Muslims? I ask Allah to guide us to the truth and keep us away from the path of falsehood and those who call for it. Allahumma Ameen!
“O Muhammad, guide me,” The Prophet (saws) at that time had some men from the leaders of Quraish with him and so he started to turn away from the blind man and went to the leaders, Allah revealed, “He frowned and turned away when the blind man came to him, how do you know, he could become better …” [80: 1-3].” [Jami’ Al Saheeh v1 p398]
And in Surah Kahf, Allah (swt) says to the messenger,
“And recite what Allah has revealed to you in the books, there will be no change or defamation in the books, and you will find no refuge except in Him (swt). stand firm with those who call their lord day and night seeking his pleasure, do not turn away from them seeking the worldly benefit, and “Do not obey the one whose heart is misguided from our guidance (revelation) he follows his desires while all his deeds were wasted, say: all the truth is from your Lord, either you believe or you disbelieve, verily we destined for the disbelievers the hellfire.” [18: 27-29]
If to compromise a Muslim for the interests of the entire deen was not permitted, so how can we compromise the entire deen for the sake of some lesser worldly interests? In fact, the very cause of the Hijrah was for the sake of the deen, if the Prophet (saws) thought that the benefit and interests of the Muslims was to compromise with the government, he would never grant them permission to migrate, rather he would have told them to stay and conceal their Deen and to compromise.
As mentioned, one of the arguments that people use to enter into parliament is that ‘it is a form of Da’wah’. However, we will say that not every means is acceptable to give Da’wah, because the only means that are acceptable is that which pleases Allah (swt) in accordance to the Sunnah of Muhammad (saws), who said,
“Allah is Tayyib (good), and does not accept anything except if it is tayyib (good).”
So how can the Kufr and Shirk of parliament be the correct means to give Da’wah? It is reported in the fattawa of ibn Taymiyyah, v11 p620, he was asked about a famous sheikh from the Ashaa’ira. He used to gather people and use drums with some permissible poetry in order to encourage the people committing big sins (kabaa’ir) to come and listen, some of them came and started to repent and practise Islam, they asked if it was permissible. Sheikh ul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said,
“…verily, what Allah will guide with it the misguided and lead with it the astray and forgive with it the sinner must be based on what the messenger (saws) has been sent with, this sheikh has targeted for those who commit sin to repent and to practise by following that innovated method, that indicates that this sheikh is jahil on the shari’ah method, that with it any disobedience will be repented from, because the Prophet (saw)s and his companions and the Tabi’een used to call to those who are even more evil than those sinners, but using the method of the Shari’ah which was sufficient from Allah, instead of going to an innovated method. Therefore it is not allowed for this sheikh to adopt any haram or disliked or even permissible method as an obedience to become closer to Allah and that is only the action of someone misguided, transgressor with the consensus of the Muslim scholars.”
If listening to a nasheed with some drums, adopted as a method to invite a sinner to Islam and for him to repent and become practising is a matter of innovation or haram for ibn Taymiyyah, then what about the actions that are Kufr or Shirk such as voting and legislation? How can it possibly become a method to establish Allah’s deen?
We know very well how there is a consensus of the scholars of the salaf that it is forbidden to accept the hadith Da’eef or fabricated Ahadith even if it has beneficial outcomes to bring people to Islam and practise better, yet it is prohibited to utilise it despite the benefit that it may have for our Da’wah. There is also consensus that it is forbidden to promote innovators who engage in innovation (e.g. milad un nabi, khitim, 40 days khuruj, eating at charity dinners etc) despite all the potential benefit it may have to Da’wah and despite how many people may come to learn because of it and even become guided from it.
It has been reported that Sheikh ul Islam ibn Taymiyyah said in his Fattawa v18 p476,
“Verily, the Shirk, and to attribute to Allah without knowledge and all forms of unlawful sexual acts, sayings and transactions, whether the inner and the outer, and the oppression cannot contain any form of interest or benefit, whatever is forbidden upon every person in every situation such as Shirk, Kufr or oppression or unlawful sexual acts, or to refer ahkaam to Allah that he never legislated, nothing is permissible from it under the pretexts of interest and benefit. That is because Allah (swt) says, “verily, Allah forbade the unlawful sexual acts and transactions, whatever was hidden or apparent, and any form of rebellion without Haq and to associate with Allah that which He never revealed, or to attribute to Allah what you do not have knowledge, all of this is forbidden.” [7: 33] All these are forbidden amongst all people, in all religions and all anbiyaa have been sent with it’s prohibition, and nothing is permissible from it ever, whether before Islam or after Islam, and none of these can be taken by permit for any interest or benefit for the Deen or for the Dunya.”
This verse is evidence that we should not listen to those who try to push the ideas of personal interpretation and opinion, even if he claims to do good deeds and claims to do what is beneficial for the Da’wah and the Muslims. Bearing in mind that the Shirk and Kufr by itself is something evil and an insult to Allah, so how can the road to Shirk be a way to call to Allah and benefit Islam or Muslims?
Sheikh ul Islam Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab has a fatwa against the reminders, he was asked about the Friday reminders (Al Tazkeeru bi Jumu’ah) who used to make noise with an object every Friday, so that the people knew the day and so that nobody will miss Salatul Jumu’ah, some of them started to make nasheed and walk in the streets, Ahmed Shaakir narrated that Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab said,
“Ibn Saanih asked me about Al Tazkeeru bi jumu’ah, it is an innovation, if they say that some people do not know if it is Friday except with it, then the messenger (saws) knows better than us and knows the benefit of the ummah better than all of you and the Sunnah is the adhan for jumu’ah, anything else is innovation.”
So how can going to prliament, which is at best an innovation be permitted to benefit the Muslims? I ask Allah to guide us to the truth and keep us away from the path of falsehood and those who call for it. Allahumma Ameen!
Written by Ustadh Abu Baraa' (hafidhahUllah)
No comments:
Post a Comment