In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate
Madness and Muffling Falsehood
There are few times when someone can be astonished by falsehood and madness in the same instant; but the writer must admit that the Mardin fatwa is just one such case.
That this ruling is being quoted as a substantiation for global capitulation to world powers would almost be humourous except for the grave nature of the situation in front of this and the rulings in the Revealed Law that are at stake.
The Background of the Conference on the Fatwa
We will allow the organisers of this conference to explain themselves what the purpose was behind their meeting:
This conference was organized by the Global Centre for Renewal and Guidance and Canopus Consulting in partnership with Mardin Artuklu University in order to discuss the rules of issuing fatwas in general and the implications of the Mardin fatwa in particular. The following issues were examined:
1. Understanding the Mardin fatwa in Context: The Era and its Ambiguities
2. The Historical Significance of the Fatwa
3. The Categorization of an Abode from an Historical Viewpoint and in Light of Globalization and Modern Communication
4. Understanding Jihad: The Conditions of Armed Combat and its Rules of Engagement—as defined by Ibn Taymiyya and the UN Charter
5. Concepts of peace and coexistence in Islamic thought
Please keep in mind that the organisers were the
a. Global Centre for Renewal and Guidance (the organisation that brought the false contract that Salafiyyah and Muslim Orthodoxy were one using deception in order to trick some of the august names into signing it),
b. Canopus Consulting (a consultancy company with several patents in real time search engines, financial and banking platforms, BPM and Enterprise Management and Natural Language Processing) and
c. Mardin Artuklu University (A Secular University that despite “the scarf issue” is still in good graces with the ultra nationalist Turkish government, second only the United States in its’ virulent hatred and love for the corruption and taming of all faith)
We would like to remind the reader that according to daily Milliyet, Turkey’s Religious Affairs Directorate refused to directly organise the conference, citing two principal reasons:
It said it is groundless to blame all post-Sept. 11 violence on Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyah’s fatwa when political, social and economic reasons also play a major role, and that no one in Anatolia or the rest of the Islamic world remembers a fatwa, or Islamic legal opinion, issued seven centuries ago.
The Subject of the Conference
The conference was purported to be centred around the fatwa that Imam Taqi ud-Din Ahmad ibn `Abdul Halim ibn `Abdus-Salam ibn Taymiyyah al-Hanbali gave regarding what was called the land of Mardin.
This local area had been overrun by the Tatars and was snatched out of the hands of Muslim governance not long after the Tatars devoured Baghdad in 656 AH (AD 1258), which began with the murder of our grand shaikh, Imam Yahya as-Sarsari (d. 656 AH).
The army and the populace, although Muslim, was now in the hands of the Tatars. Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah, along with a huge swath of other Muslim scholars, had ruled that the Tatars, due to their lukewarm entrance into Islam and piecemeal interpretation of Islam, were not Muslims in actuality.
Tatar continuation of shamanism, their judgement by their pagan code book al-Yasiq rather than Revealed Law, the reverence still showed to Genghis and Hulughu Khan, ancestor worship ceremonies (not unlike idolatrous practices that take place at Japanese O-Bon Festivals today or at Shinto shrines across that recently devastated country) made a large number of scholars come to the same rulings as that of the aforementioned Imam.
A letter was sent to the Imam regarding the people and his judgement in the matter. He answered that the people and army members helping the Tatars and those living under them were neither in Dar ul-Kufr or Dar ul-Islam.
They were not in Dar ul-Kufr as the people there were Muslims and so was the army but they were not in Dar ul-Islam as they were in rebellion to the government and were now under governance of Al-Yasiq.
By some Herculean feat, the conference members have concluded that this particular ruling for a peculiar place in time under these circumstances should be used as a blueprint for their vision of world peace, which we shall see shortly. Whether or not their opinions are correct will be decided in the coming lines in judgement of their claims.
They have decided to make reference to Imams Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah and Shams ud-Din Ibn Muflih, may Allah have mercy on both of them, and now we will have to be sure whether or not they understand the content or even the subject of what they are referring to in the conference.
The Significance of the Conference
There is a striking resemblance between this particular conference and the Vatican II Council. I ask that the reader examines carefully before condemning the words that I have said.
I also ask that any potential reader goes through the entire document twice to atleast have a clear understanding of what I am referring to and if he or she disagrees at the very least they will understand the context of these weighty words.
The First Vatican Council, convened by Pope Pius IX on 28 June 1868 and ended on 20 October 1870, was roundly accepted by all serious Catholic scholars for its’ stridency in maintaining the precepts of the Catholic Church (particularly the Roman rite, in distinction to the other seven rites).
There were major upheavals during that time that pushed the Papacy to the brink of captivity as the country of Italy was facing the twin terrors of conquest and secularism (referred to then as modernism).
What was required was a re-statement of their faith to bring peace to Catholics. This is precisely what was done by Pope Pius IX. He unashamedly affirmed Catholic dogma.
Then we come to the Second Vatican Council, opened by Pope John XXIII on 11 October 1962 and closed by Pope Paul VI on 8 December 1965. What occurred in this time had not been expected by the Catholics faithful in their church.
Massive reforms that included a shift away from the Bible being the inspired and inerrant word of God, the Church being the sole source of doctrine and the Mass being permitted in the vernacular and even reworked with the assistance of Protestant ministers (which up until the Second Vatican Council were dismissed as heretics, their sacraments being unacceptable and other churches also being referred to as schismatics) and other trials abounded in the new council.
Now examine some of what has been going on in the English speaking countries since the 11 September 2001 attacks. Those responsible for the current councils held no First Vatican.
There was no re-affirmation and insistence on principles of the faith (if anything there was a backing away, as can be seen by the deceptive A Common Word). We have received Second Vatican moves only.
The difference between the Second Vatican Council and the “Vaticanisation Project” of the Muslims is that those at the council were at the highest levels of leadership in the church and they chose to re-write their religion. This is the not the case with the Muslims.
Those headed towards secularism are by and large not scholars, but “spokesmen” or “da`iis,” or even “traditionalists.” The scholars among them are few, thus dismantling their arguments should be fairly easy when looking at our task versus traditionalist Catholics and Sedevacantists who have their work cut out for them.
The text A Common Word was the first conclave by Vaticananisation enthusiasts. Some of the names on there are quite august, but in asking those around some of the scholars, I found that there was a preparation project that did not give many of these scholars (who are Arabic speaking) the full and uncut falsehood in that document.
They thus signed a text that was misrepresented to them. Those that would like to know this for a surety should read both the Arabic and English forms of the text, consult the people that asked Shaikh Al-Bouti and he affirmed a totally different statement than what is in English; there was also Sunni Forum Question and Answer archives where some brothers bravely brought up this deception.
The second conclave is now the Mardin Conference. Muslim Orthodoxy, exclusively in the English language, must act now to preserve Orthodox principles. This must be done and the scholars have been informed of this affair.
The writer at one point is going to make a number of assertions and statements with quotes and the reader is asked to check these quotes from some of the great minds of this Ummah.
We shall not allow Muslims in the English speaking world to have a Woodstock moment and be put into the position of asking, “What is truth? I mean, kufr could be one thing to me and another to you.” No, this is wrong. This is patently false.
The Truth is One and can be known. There are scholars who were the Successors of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and they are to be followed. This is highly significant and should trigger reflection from any thoughtful Muslim.
Due to the nature of this discussion, the Revealed Law is being discussed; and with this being the case, only scholars may speak or make reference to it.
Therefore the writer will make reference primarily to the writings of the two Imams mentioned above (both of whom are mujtahid murajjih or level three mujtahids) and no one below a level four (i.e. Imams Mansur al-Buhuti, Taqi ud-Din al-Futuhi and Musa al-Hajjawi, may Allah have mercy on all of them).
Those who spoke at the event in Mardin were the following:
Mustafa Ceric – stated as grand mufti of Bosnia, he is much different to our dear shaikh Mahmud Smilovec, who actually fought and was uncompromising towards the Serbian genocides. Ceric is a regular figure and signatory that can be traced to the Assisi Delegation, the World Parliament on World Religions (he took part in a world prayer day with shamanists, Catholics and such to pray for world peace),
A Common Word Between Us (a document designed to nullify the rulings on punishing apostates and also canopying cults within the fold of Muslim Orthodoxy that was sent to the arch deceiver and protector of child molesters, Pope Benedict XVI and other Christian leaders) and numerous other spiritually despicable events.
He remarked after the conference that, “Most ulema [Islamic scholars] have a problem.” “They know the classical texts very well, but they don’t know the contemporary world that much.”
“Today the world is so different,” he said. “The Bosnian Muslims who took refuge in European countries such as Sweden found there the rights and privileges that they would not exactly find in Muslim countries.”
“There is no such thing as an Islamic state,” Ceric told journalists. “There are only states that provide justice, freedom and security and those that do not.”
Prof. Dr. Aref Ali Nayed – Founder and Director of Kalam Research and Media (KRM). He currently lectures on Islamic Theology, Logic and Spirituality at the restored Uthman Pasha Madrasa in Tripoli, Libya and supervises Graduate Students at the Islamic Call College there.
He is Senior Advisor to the Cambridge Inter-Faith Programme, and Fellow of the Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute in Jordan. He was Professor at the Pontifical Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies (Rome), and the International Institute for Islamic Thought and Civilization (Malaysia).
He studied Engineering (B.Sc.(Eng.)), Philosophy of Science (M.A.), and Hermeneutics (Ph.D.) at the University of Iowa and the University of Guelph.
He also studied, as a special student, at the University of Toronto and the Pontifical Gregorian University. His forthcoming book is: Operational Hermeneutics and Vatican Engagements: A Muslim Theologian’s Journey in Muslim-Catholic Dialogue.
Memorable quotes from him inciting Muslims to embraces secularism include, “A liberal, welcoming environment, in which a Muslim can freely practice his religion, is an environment that offers an abode of peace,” he said.
Nayed added that Muslims may well be supportive of such a “liberal secularism,” which he said is different from the “French-Revolution-like secularisms that are anti-religious.”
Dr. Abdullah Nasseef – Known as the Chair of Trustees, GCRG and is President of the World Muslim Congress. Having being awarded a doctorate in geology from Leeds University in 1971, he went on to take a position as a professor in geology at King Abdul Aziz University, where he currently teaches. Abdullah Nasseef is a member of many organizations and institutes around the world.
As he has no standing in the Revealed Law as a judge, jurist or expounder as mentioned, we may excuse him from use as a proof, both in and of himself or even referring to texts. A geologist is not a theologian.
Ahmet Özel – referred to as an Associate professor at the Centre for Islamic Studies (ISAM). Ahmet’s doctorate dissertation was written on The Concept of Territory in Islamic Jurisprudence: Dar el-Islam – Dar el-Harb.
Between 1983-1985 he worked as an Islamic jurisprudence professor at Antalya Religious Education Centre of The Presidency of Religious Affairs where muftis and preachers are given a higher education to further their capacities.
Apart from being an accomplished author, editor and redactor for the Encyclopedia of Islam, he is also the deputy director for Encyclopedia of Islam, a member of the Executive Board, the deputy director of the Encyclopedia of Islam Research Board and a member of the Islamic Jurisprudence Academic Board.
Among his numerous publications, professor Ahmet has authored 151 entries in The Centre for Islamic Studies’ Encyclopedia of Islam (Istanbul), 146 entries in ALECSO’s Encyclopedia of Prominent Arab and Muslim Scientists and Literary Authors and 11 entries about Turkish poets who wrote poems in Arabic in Al Babtain Dictionary of Contemporary Arab Poets (Kuwait).
Again, this is another individual with no mentioned grounding in the Revealed Law, so we are not duty bound to pay him heed in matters of the Principles of Faith.
Dr. Hani `Abdush-Shakur – referred to as a Shariah Scholar from Mecca. An expert in Islamic legal theory, especially in its modern application, he is currently Associate Professor at the Islamic Studies department of the King Abdul Aziz University.
A member of several Islamic organisations and an active contributor at many academic and public forums, he has also been serving as Imam at the Jami al-Harthi (Mecca) since 1994.
Although he was mentioned with his details, we have no knowledge whether or not he has studied comparative fiqh, so we will leave it on the assumption that he has indeed studied the matter.
Dr. Muhammed Uzair Shams – he is referred to as an outstanding scholar and specialist editor of Islamic manuscripts. He studied at the famous Jami’a Salafiyya in Banaras, Medina University and the Umm al-Qura University in Mecca. He completed his postgraduate and doctoral studies in Mecca. He has served at many libraries and help made manuscript catalogues.
With experience in manuscripts for over twenty years, he has become a point of reference for students and professors across the Muslim world. He has edited over seventeen texts, some of which are authored by Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah.
Indeed, he has specialised in numerous manuscripts, however this does not mean anyone is a scholar of the topic. His expertise in manuscripts will be quite important but in the realm of Revealed Law he will have no weight and further to this studying with and being in the institute of higher learning for cultists (Salafiyyah) is also a great danger to be avoided.
Dr. ‘Abd al-Wahhab ibn Nasir at-Turayri – he is former Professor of the Faculty of Islamic Theology of Imam Muhammed ibn Sa’ud University in Riyadh and Academic Director of the IslamToday Website. He is part of the Shariah Advisory Board to Banks He lectures regularly at Academic Institutes in Qatar and Kuwait and frequently writes in Saudi newspapers.
Please remember that Islam Today is the brainchild of now disgraced Salafi firebrand Salman al-`Awdah, who in the ‘90s was calling for a radical overthrow but upon threat of lengthy jail time underwent a ‘moment of clarity.’ Old lectures by him such as, Al-Islam wal-Hizbiyyah can still be heard, with him threatening king and country.
This individual Turayri is also on the same advisory boards that have allowed interest bearing loans and the legal fiction of allowable mortgages.
Professor Ahmad Abidi – stated as a graduate of the University of Tehran. He teaches doctoral students the sciences of Philosophy and Hadith. He has written over 10 books about Philosophy, Wisdom and Utterance, and has written 7 scientific and research articles and more then 100 articles on a number of subjects.
We have no texts or information on his knowledge of comparative fiqh, Akhbari/Usuli or that of the Sunnis. We shall have to examine the manuscript to evaluate the matter.
Shaykh Ayedh bin Saad ad-Dosari – he is billed as a Lecturer at King Saud University and a specialist in creed (aqidah) and Comparative Religion. He has a strong interest in the heritage of Ibn Taymiyya and has written a number of books and research papers on this and related subjects, including “Ibn Taymiyya and the Other”. Al-Dosari has contributed to numerous discussion programmes related to this area, and continues to undertake research.
Shaykh Habib ‘Ali al-Jifri – he is stated as having been born in Jeddah, hailing from an illustrious family from Hadhramawt, an ancient and majestic part of Yemen. He is Founder of the ‘Tabah Foundation for Islamic Studies and Research’ based in the United Arab Emirates.
He is also a lecturer at Dar al-Mustafa, Tarim, an educational institute established for the study of traditional Islamic sciences. Habib ‘Ali is continually invited to lecture in many countries across the globe and appears regularly on a variety of network television and radio programs.
We were not given any information about Shaykh Mohamed El Moctar Ould M’Balle so we were unable to report anything on him or give a biography. That something so monumental as this has occurred and for one of the key note speakers we had no information is unfortunate and actually quite strange.
Shaykh ‘Abdallah bin Bayyah – he is said to have had a long and distinguished scholarly career. Having served as a judge (qadi) in the Ministry of Justice in Mauritania, he later moved on to become one of the vice-presidents of the first president of Mauritania.
He was also the head of the Shari`ah section in the court of appeals, moving later to become appointed to the position of High Authority for Religious Affairs for the Republic’s highest office.
In the years that followed, he served as the minister of National Guidance and as the Permanent Secretary of the People’s Party of Mauritania. Presently, Shaykh ‘Abdallah has emerged as one of the leading authorities of the science pertaining to the legal rulings that relate to Muslims living as minority communities among non-Muslims (fiqh al-‘aqaliyat).
How he could be an expert in this field which has newly been invented about a place he has never lived, resided, been born in or schooled in does not seemed tenable. He is a close friend of a good Shaikh, Muhammad Fu’ad al-Barazi, known more famously for his takfir on the rulers in Syria and throughout the Muslim world.
He has lived in Denmark ever since. There is no doubt that Shaikh Bin Bayyah is a judge and scholar as we know the most about him through Shaikh Al-Barazi; but again we have no knowledge of how strong he is in comparative fiqh and who he might have gained this knowledge from.
We do know that Shaikh al-Barazi studied with Shaikh Muhammad Abu Zahra (Hanafi), Shaikh Muhammad `Abdul-Latif as-Subki (Hanbali) and the Ghumari brothers, thus his knowledge of comparative fiqh is quite exhaustive.
We say this as we need to compare Shaikh Bin Bayyah to scholars of the same calibre to have an accurate picture and that Shaikh Bin Bayyah is from Mauritania and the sole madhhab of the country is the Maliki madhhab.
Furthermore, Shaikhs Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan al-Buti, Wahbah az-Zuhaili, Isma`il ibn Badran and Salih ash-Shami have not heard of these matters and do not endorse them either.
He currently lives in Jeddah where he teaches juristic methodology, Qur’anic commentary, and Arabic as a professor at King Abdul Aziz University. Shaykh ‘Abdallah is the Executive President of the Global Centre for Renewal and Guidance (GCRG).I have taken most of the text on the signatories from their very own website on the Mardin Fatwa while the words in italics are my own.
The Actual Text of the Fatwa
Now that the Preamble has been completed, we then want to head to our next section, which is the text of the fatwa.
وسئل رحمه الله عن بلد [ماردين] هل هي بلد حرب أم بلد سلم؟ وهل يجب على المسلم المقيم بها الهجرة إلى بلاد الإسلام أم لا؟ وإذا وجبت عليه الهجرة ولم يهاجر، وساعد أعداء المسلمين بنفسه أو ماله، هل يأثم في ذلك؟ وهل يأثم من رماه بالنفاق وسبه به أم لا؟ فأجاب: الحمد لله. دماء المسلمين وأموالهم محرمة حيث كانوا في [ماردين] أو غيرها. وإعانة الخارجين عن شريعة دين الإسلام محرمة، سواء كانوا أهل [ماردين]، أو غيرهم. والمقيم بها إن كان عاجزًا عن إقامة دينه، وجبت الهجرة عليه. وإلا استحبت ولم تجب.
ومساعدتهم لعدو المسلمين بالأنفس والأموال محرمة عليهم، ويجب عليهم الامتناع من ذلك، بأي طريق أمكنهم، من تغيب، أو تعريض، أو مصانعة. فإذا لم يمكن إلا بالهجرة، تعينت. ولا يحل سبهم عمومًا ورميهم بالنفاق، بل السب والرمي بالنفاق يقع على الصفات المذكورة في الكتاب والسنة، فيدخل فيها بعض أهل [ماردين] وغيرهم. وأما كونها دار حرب أو سلم، فهي مركبة: فيها المعنيان، ليست بمنزلة دار السلم التي تجري عليها أحكام الإسلام، لكون جندها مسلمين. ولا بمنزلة دار الحرب التي أهلها كفار، بل هي قسم ثالث يعامل المسلم فيها بما يستحقه، ويقاتل الخارج عن شريعة الإسلام بما يستحقه.
Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (661-728 AH), may Allah have mercy upon him, was asked about the city of Mardin.
Is this a land of war or a land of peace? Is it compulsory for the Muslim resident there to make hijrah to a land of Islam or not?
In the case that hijrah is compulsory for him and he does not do it and he helps the enemies of the Muslims with his person or his wealth, is he sinning in that matter? Is the one who would curse such a person or say he is guilty of nifaq committing a sin or not?
Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah her mercy on him, answered the following:
“Praise be to Allah, the blood and wealth of the Muslims is considered sacred whether they are in the city of Mardin or somewhere else. Assisting those rebelling against the Revealed Law of the Religion of Islam is not permissible, whether it is the people of Mardin or someone else besides them. The one that is a resident there and unable to manifest his religion is required to make hijrah while if he cannot it is praiseworthy but not compulsory.
Their assisting the enemies of the Muslims with themselves or their wealth is not permissible and it is compulsory for them to prevent that by any means possible for them, whether it be staying away, rejection or stratagem related to it;
So in the event that there is no other option but hijrah, then that one is obliged to do so; but it is not permissible for someone to curse them or accuse them of nifaq in totality. The reason for this is that cursing and nifaq are present in the Book and the Sunnah according to specifically mentioned principles. Some of the people of Mardin and others fall within that ruling.
As far as it being Dar ul-Harb or Dar ul-Islam, it has a plurality in which it possesses both rulings. It is not Dar ul-Islam in which the rulings of Islam are to be held over that city although its’ army are Muslims; but it is also not Dar ul-Harb in which its’ people are unbelievers.
The city belongs to the third category. The Muslim is dealt with according to what he deserves and the one who rebels and goes out of the Revealed Law of Islam is fought according to what he deserves.”
Majmu`a Fatawa, vol.28, pp. 240-241.
This is the actual text of the fatwa. Imam Ibn Muflih, may Allah be pleased with him, who was a student of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah, quoted the same statement from his teacher. However he also quoted in context regarding the discussion regarding Dar ul-Islam or Dar ul-Kufr. Look at what the Imam said,
“Every abode in which the laws of the Muslims are dominant over it is known as Dar ul-Islam; and if the laws of the unbelievers are dominant over a land, then it is Dar ul-Kufr and there is no other abode besides these mentioned. Shaikh Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah was asked about the city of Mardin: ‘Is it a Dar ul-Harb or a Dar ul-Islam?’
He replied, ‘There is a plurality and it possesses some of both rulings. It is not Dar ul-Islam in which the laws of Islam are over it although the army there is Muslim; but it is also not Dar ul-Harb in which the people are unbelievers. It belongs to a third category.
The Muslim is dealt with according to what he deserves and the one who has rebelled and gone out of the Revealed Law of Islam is dealt with according to what he deserves.’ The predominant position is the first one which was mentioned by Al-Qadi Abu Ya`la and the other companions in the school. And Allah knows best.” Al-Adab ush-Shar`iyyah wal-Minah il-Mar`iyyah, vol.1, pp. 191-192.
Method of Examination
As the signatories and shaikhs Mustafa Ceric, Hani `Abdush-Shakur, `Abdul Wahhab ibn Nasir at-Turayri, Ayedh bin Saad ad-Dosari, Habib `Ali al-Jifri, Mohamed El-Moctar Ould M’Balle and `Abdullah Bin Bayyah stated that they will be,
“…making more effort in revising, editing, and exploring the legacy of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya – may Allah have mercy on him – and the legacy of exemplary scholars, with respect to their impact on the Muslim world and what is hoped to be gained from a sound and correct understanding of their respective legacies in terms of guiding and directing both the general public and specialists…”
We shall be using him and quoting him to be sure that the context is valid. If they have approved the use of his writings, then we intend to put them forward for people to take hold of in their full context.
It is also of importance to know whether or not he in his historical context would have even accepted these signatories, their ideas or the conclusions drawn from this conference.
Commentary on the Mardin Fatwa by the Above Signatories
We will therefore be treating the position of the signatories and start from the relevant passages from the beginning to the end, which yields some 11 points. The words of the conference appear in italics while the comments and words of the Imams appear in bold. We begin with:
A Peace Summit Conference: (Mardin: the Abode of Peace) was convened in the Turkish city of Mardin at the Artuklu University campus on Saturday and Sunday (27-28 March 2010) under the auspices of the Global Centre for Renewal and Guidance (GCRG – based in London) in cooperation with Canopus Consulting (based in Bristol) and sponsored by Artuklu University.
Point 1: One of the most glaring errors is the insistence of calling the conference the Abode of Peace. This is a misnomer and leaves the reader to assume that Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah advances Mardin as Dar ul-Islam. Let the reader return to the actual text of the fatwa of the Imam, who did not make any such reference.
Further to this, Imam Shams ud-Din Ibn Muflih al-Maqdisi, may Allah have mercy on him, said that the correct position was the opposite of that of his teacher, Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah.
So then why are these organisers taking a shadh and nadir opinion in the school and applying it when the mu`tamad authorities have said otherwise?
Participating in the conference was a group of renowned Muslim scholars,
Besides the shaikhs Habib `Ali al-Jifri and `Abdullah bin Bayyah, who are these renowned Muslim scholars?
who brought with them diverse and relevant specializations. They gathered in order to collectively study one of the most important (classical juridical) foundations of the relations between Muslims and fellow human beings, namely: the (classical juridical) classification of ‘abodes’ (diyar), as Islamically conceived,
Were all four madhhabs represented, particularly the one being utilised? No, this actually didn’t happen. The entire Persian Gulf, northern Syria belongs to this madhhab and they have authorities (maraji`), so why they would fail to go to them remains a mystery.
And other related topics such as jihad, loyalty and enmity, citizenship, and migration (to non Muslim territories).
Point 2: The signatories have rightly made the link that all these matters are impacted by their position. This will be seen later in the text as well.
They selected this juridical conceptual distinction because of its’ importance in the grounding of peaceful and harmonious co-existence and cooperation for good and justice between Muslims and non-Muslims,
Is this even the subject of the fatwa that was written by Imam Taqi ud-Din ibn Taymiyyah? Dear reader, please go and read the text of the fatwa again.
The organisers chose as the main research theme for the conference the legal edict (fatwa) passed by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya concerning the classification of the city of Mardin during his lifetime. The edict was chosen because of the significant intellectual, civilisational, symbolic meaning that it holds.
I ask the reading with honesty: does he or she have any idea what the signatories are talking about in using this huge barrage of words? Or are the readers being dazzled with science?
The point of it is that Ibn Taymiyya, in his classification of the city of Mardin – through his deep understanding of the Shari’ah and keen insight and awareness of the context in which he lived – went beyond the classification that was common amongst past Muslim jurists: Dividing territories into an Abode of Islam (in which the primary state is peace), an Abode of Kufr (Unbelief) (in which the primary state is war) and an Abode of ‘Ahd (Covenant) (in which the primary state is truce), amongst other divisions that they had stipulated.
Point 3: Again, this is wrong. Read the statement by Imam Ibn Muflih on what is Dar ul-Kufr and Dar ul-Islam. The Imam says, “Every abode in which the laws of the Muslims are dominant over it is known as Dar ul-Islam; and if the laws of the unbelievers are dominant over a land, then it is Dar ul-Kufr and there is no other abode besides these mentioned.”
The Imam then stated the mu’tamad or depended upon position, “The predominant position is the first one which was mentioned by Al-Qadi Abu Ya`la and the other companions in the school. And Allah knows best.” Al-Adab ush-Shar`iyyah wal-Minah il-Mar`iyyah, vol.1, pp. 191-192.
This is the position of the Hanbalis and there is none other. Also, there were no three abodes. There were only two. This was the only designation. The same was said by Imam `Ala’ ud-Din Al-Mardawi (please see al-Insaf, vol.4, pp. 121-123): “Dar ul-Harb is any land in which the laws of kufr are dominant over it.”
Point 4: There is no third land or abode. Dar ul-Kufr has its’ subdivisions like Dar ul-Harb and such while Dar ul-Islam has its’ subdivisions (Even Dar ul-Baghi is a subdivision of Dar ul-Islam as the people are implementing Islam, just there is a point where the exited from the rule of the khalifah or representatives.
Scholars mentioned that this happened between the Uncle of the Believers, Mu`awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, may Allah be pleased with him in his Dar ul-Baghi in Sham and that of `Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, in his Dar ul-Islam in Iraq and other realms). Let the reader not be confused by any foolishness in this regard.
His fatwa is one that is exceptional in its’ formulation and that, to a large degree, addresses a similar context to our time, a political state of the world that is different from the one encountered by past jurists, and which had formed the bases for the particular way in which they had classified territories.
Yes, it is precisely the same as our state today. We as Muslims are facing a ravaging from the enemies of faith and something has to be done to deal with it. Let us remember the context of the fatwa about Mardin.
It was over run by the Tatars and subjugated. The people who were there in Mardin – the army and the masses – had the option to either leave or stay; but the Imam said that those who had the ability had to stay as it not Dar ul-Kufr (its’ people being unbelievers) but it was not Dar ul-Islam (where the laws of Islam are dominant) either?
Why was this? What did Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah say about the Tatars? Let us read the words of the Imam:
“According the madhhab of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, what is the position about fighting those who stopped paying the zakah if they fight the Imam? Are these people unbelievers even if they admit the fact that they have to pay the zakah? The Imam has two opinions on this matter. In one ruling he said that they were unbelievers.
But in another ruling he said that they were not. The understanding of this is that the Companions and the Imams after them have agreed with unanimity that the people who hindered the zakah are to be fought, even if they pray five times a day, fast the month of Ramadan.
Those kinds of people have no acceptable excuse for their evil actions. It was for this reason that they were called apostates. They stopped paying the zakah, even though they admitted that they should pay the zakah as commanded by Allah.
The Tatars and those like them are worse in their having abandoned Islam and the Revealed Law and Islam than the people who stopped paying the zakah, the Khawarij and the people of Ta’if who refused to give up usury.
Whoever has doubts about fighting the Tatars, such a one is one of the most ignorant people of Islam. When you see the Tatars, you should kill them. This is even if among them are those who do not want to fight. This is the Consensus of the Muslims.
This case is similar to that of the uncle of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him at the Battle of Badr when he said, ‘I was forced to come out with them!’ The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, ‘On the outward you were against us and your inward is left between you and Allah.’ “
Majmu`a Fatawa, vol.28, pp. 413-415
So it is this understanding that the Imam, Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah gave his rulings by and understood.
Muslims are now bound by international treaties through which security and peace have been achieved for the entire humanity, and in which they enjoy safety and security, with respect to their property, integrity and homelands. Consequently, Muslims are interacting with others in unprecedented ways: politically, socially and economically.
Point 5: This is not how Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah felt about the Tatars in his time. Indeed, he has no respect for their rule and laws, despite being outnumbered and outgunned by their superior numbers. The Tatars ruled half of the then known world, killed 40 million Chinese people and 2 million Muslims in Baghdad and surrounding suburbs in one day.
The Tatars, always ready for action, used to sleep sitting up on their horses and then ride off in the morning, the skulls of their enemies bouncing from their saddles where they had been connected together with femur and lower spinal column bones from their victims.
Yet the Imam did not shrink from his obligation. Shaikh Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah said,
“We state that any group that departs from the apparent and indisputable Revealed Law of Islam that have been handed down concurrently without interruption, then it is incumbent to fight that group; and this is Consensus according to the Imams of the Muslims, in spite of the fact that the group may be saying the two testimonies of faith.
If they say the two testimonies of faith, but abstain from the five daily prayers, then they must be fought until they pray. If they abstain from paying the zakah, the Muslims must fight them until they pay the zakah.
In similar fashion, if they abstain from fasting the month of Ramadan or pilgrimage to the Ancient House of Allah or refuse to prohibit the perversions and abominations against the religion such as adultery, gambling, drinking and other things forbidden by the Revealed Law, they are to be fought.
If they refuse to enforce and implement the laws of the Qur’an and Sunnah that are linked to life, property, honour, management of worldly affairs and other such things, or if they abstain from enjoining good, forbidding evil and fighting the unbelievers until they embrace Islam or pay the jizyah in submission they are to be fought.
If they introduce innovations in the religion contrary to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and the practice of the early generations and Imams of the Ummah, doing such things as tarnishing or negating the Names, Verses and Signs and Attributes of Allah, rejecting the Pre-Ordainment or Destiny, rejecting the manner in which the Muslim Ummah have behaved in the days of the Rightly Guided Successors or slandering the foremost of the emigrants and helpers or those who faithfully followed in their footsteps, they are to be fought.
If they fight the Muslims in order to force them to submit to them in the abandonment of the Revealed Law and all other similar cases, Allah says concerning this affair,
Fight them until there is no more tribulation and the Religion is for Allah Alone. Surat ul-Anfal (8), ayah 39
In every case where the religion is in part for Allah and in part for others, it is necessary for the Muslims to fight such a group until all the religion is for Allah. Allah has said,
You who believe! Fear Allah and leave the remainder of usury if you are believers; but if you do not, then take notice of war from Allah and His Messenger. Surat ul-Baqarah (2), ayat 278-279
This verse was sent down about the people of Ta’if, who had embraced Islam, prayed, fasted, but they still dealt in usury. The verse commanded the believers to leave the remainder of usury owed to them and that if they failed to do this, they would be the enemies of Allah and His Messenger.
Usury was the last sin to be prohibited in the Qur’an, even though the money involved is obtained through mutual consent of the parties concerned. If a person refusing to stop usury is deemed to be at war with Allah and His Messenger, what is to be said of those who leave a great portion of the laws of Islam or most of it, such as in the case of the Tatars?” Majmu`a Fatawa, vol.28, pp. 510-512
Imam Isma`il ibn Kathir, may Allah have mercy on him, a student of Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah and a Shafi`ii jurist, makes the following remarks about the legal code of the Tatars, what they were doing and what must be done regarding them:
“Genghis Khan has his book, Al-Yasiq; but most of it differs and contradicts the Revealed Law of Allah and His Books. When Genghis Khan died in the year 624 AH, they placed him in an iron basin and suspended it between two mountains and left him them. His book Al-Yasiq is two large volumes in size, it is carried on a camel.”
Imam Ibn Kathir says about what is promulgated in the book, al-Yasiq:
“This all differs with the Revealed Law which Allah sent down to His Messengers. Whoever leaves the decisive and clear Revealed Law which was sent down to Muhammad ibn `Abdullah, the Seal of the Prophets, then seeks to make judgement by an abrogated law instead of his Revealed Law, such a one becomes an unbeliever.
What then is the case of those who are not ruled by an abrogated Law but al-Yasiq, which is then given precedence over the Revealed Law of Muhammad? Indeed, whoever does that is an unbeliever by the Consensus of the Muslims.” Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah, vol.13, pp. 118-121.
Contemporary jurists also need to review the classical classifications of abodes because there is a real need for a sound Islamic and legal vision that does not violate Islamic religious texts, is in harmony with the higher objectives of the Shari’ah, and engages our contemporary context.
Why should there be a review if Consensus has been established? The Hanbalis have been quoted in this regard. The scholars of the others schools are of the same position regarding Dar ul-Islam and Dar ul-Kufr. To try something differently would be to resort to a “rolling ijma`” of sorts, in which nothing is really ever agreed upon. This is a lie.
Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah says this about the Tatars of his time, their legal systems and the obligation to fight wickedness in Majmu`a Fatawa, vol.35, pp. 373-374:
“Whenever the scholar follows the judgement of the ruler and leaves off his knowledge, in contradiction to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, such a scholar an unbeliever, an apostate who deserves to be punished in this life and the Hereafter.
This rule can also be applied with regard to a group of scholars who joined the Tatars due to their fear of the Tatars and the fact that they wanted to take benefit from them. Those scholars made the excuse that some of the Tatars were saying the testimony of faith and that they were Muslims.
Allah has said,
Alif Lam Mim Sad. A Book sent down to you, so that you have no concern about it in your heart. This is in order that you might warn and be a reminder to the believers. Follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord and do not follow as protectors and helpers those besides Him. Little is it that you remember. Surat ul-A`raf (7), ayat 1-3
And even if this scholar is captured, put behind bars and tortured to leave what Allah has taught him from His Book, he should be patient with that. If he leaves all that and follows the ruler, then he is one of the people that have been condemned by Allah. If he is harmed in the cause of Allah, he should be patient. This is the Sunnah that Allah has wanted and taken from the Prophets and the people who follow the Prophets.
Alif Lam Mim. Do they think that they will be left along because they say, ‘We believe,’ and will not be tested? Indeed We tested those before who were before them. Allah will certainly make it known those who are truthful and those who are liars. Allah will indeed make it known who are the liars.” Surat ul-`Ankabut (29), ayat 1-3.
Are we to declare the world Dar ul-Islam even though we are vastly outnumbered and we need to exercise “hikmah” and re-examine issues that are Consensus? We will take Imam Isma`il ibn Kathir, a student of Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah, who said the following,
“Allah denounces the one who left from the judgment of the universal law that is established on every good and forbids every evil. It is the true justice that has no equal to the mere ideas, sheer desires and corruptions which men made without any established evidence from the Revealed Law of Allah.
Just as the people in the Age of Ignorance judged by other laws from their astray ideas and sheer desires, the Tatars also judged from the royal policies taken from their king, Genghis Khan.
It is he who concocted and made up for them a collected text from their judgements that were put together from several Revealed Laws, such as Judaism, Christianity, Islam and others.
In the book of Genghis Khan are a great many judgements taken only from his barbarous thinking and desire. Then it came to be a followed law among his sons and they preferred it to the legislation of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.
So whoever should do that, then this one has become an unbeliever and it is compulsory to fight this one until he returns to the judgement of Allah and His Messenger. So no one other than He should judge or legislate in any matter, be it small or large.” Tafsir ul-Qur’an il-`Azim, vol.2, pp. 65-67
The classification of abodes in Islamic jurisprudence was a classification based on ijtihad (juristic reasoning) that was necessitated by the circumstances of the Muslim world then, and the nature of the international relations prevalent at that time.
Point 6: Utterly false in so many ways that the quote itself could have books written about it. The first thing we need to do is look at the antiquity of this term.
Some people have said that this is not a term from the antiquity of the first three generations, who the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah said about them,
“The best generation is my generation, then those who come next, then those who come next.” Collected by Imam Muslim and classed by him as authentic.
Whatever they understood of the faith would be sacrosanct and whatever is besides that is rejected. If these words (or their realities) cannot be traced to the earliest of generations, then it can be dismissed from our lexicon. Let us examine some points that may be able to assist us in our endeavour.
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him, was once asked about getting married in Dar ul-Harb. He replied, “It does not please me to do such a thing and that he should marry a Muslim women there, unless he is in hardship and he gets married out of fear of fornication; but he is not to seek children from the union.” Masa’il ul-Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, pp. 252-253.
Please notice that the heading of Marriage in Dar ul-Harb is present in manuscript form in this copy and also in the documents where he discussed the matter with his son and first successor, Imam Salih al-Baghdadi, may Allah be pleased with him.
Imam Salih al-Baghdadi asked his father, “There is a man that enters Dar ul-Harb to do some sort of commerce or transactions. Is he allowed to marry any of their women?”
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said, “No, this is disliked.” Masa’il ul-Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.1, pp. 394-395
The fact that he used the expression in a current fashion displays that it was known and in currency among the tabi`un, which is a reference to their teachers, who were the students of the Companions.
As for this being ijtihad, the use of the words Dar ul-Harb/Kufr and such is the ijtihad but it has been agreed upon by the first three generations by there being no opposition so it is Consensus.
Further to this, the words and their meanings were current, so how can someone come and do a new ijma`? Is there a “rolling ijma`” similar to the fake and counterfeit quoted ijma` on smoking being disliked.
The individual that could believe such things must examine matters clearly so not to deceive himself or others.
However, circumstances have changed now: The existence of recognized international treaties, which consider as crimes wars that do not involve repelling aggression or resisting occupation; the emergence of civil states which guarantee, on the whole, religions, ethnic and national rights, have necessitated declaring instead, the entire world as a place of tolerance and peaceful co-existence between all religions, groups and factions in the context of establishing common good and justice among people, and wherein they enjoy safety and security with respect to their wealth, habitations and integrity.
This is what the Shari’ah has been affirming and acknowledging, and to which it has been inviting humanity, ever since the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) migrated to Madina and concluded the first treaty/peace agreements that guaranteed mutual and harmonious co-existence between the factions and various ethnic/race groups in a framework of justice and common/shared interest.
Point 7: This is a statement that if carried to its’ conclusion is actually kufr. Understand well that the writer is not saying that the drafters or signatories are unbelievers. Rather, he is saying that if the statement is taken and carried to its’ conclusion then it is kufr. We will endeavour to explain why.
In the first paragraph above, notice how the signatories have declared that it is now necessitated (made it wajib) declaring instead, the entire world as a place of tolerance and peaceful co-existence between all religions. This would mean that the whole planet is now Dar ul-Islam. This belief negates the following points of faith and facts:
a. The coming of Imam Mahdi, peace be upon him.
The coming of the Imam Mahdi has been prophesied. He was described by the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, as coming to “fill the world with justice and righteousness when it was full with oppression, tyranny and wickedness.” Collected by Imam Abu Dawud in his Sunan and classed by him as authentic.
If we accept this hadith then we need to ask some questions. Did we miss the coming of Imam Mahdi al-Muntadhir, peace be upon him, and the era of righteousness and justice came? Did we fail to identify him? Were we blissfully unaware of his arrival?
If the answer to these questions is no, then the only option is to deny that this era is the one that is awaited and that peace and justice are the order throughout the day. The False Messiah has promised similar things and the persecution shall be massive in regards to the believers.
b. The Second Advent of the Messiah, the Prophet `Isa ibn Maryam, peace be upon him.
The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “That `Isa, peace be upon him, shall descend before the Day of Resurrection as a just Imam and Righteous Judge.” This narration was quoted by Imam Muslim in his Al-Jami` us-Sahih and classed as authentic.
In the same narrations, he is mentioned as defeating and killing the False Messiah. However, if the above text is true, we have either missed his advent or the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, lied. As both of these options cannot be correct, the third is that the signatories are wrong; and it is to this position that we shall cling.
c. Jihad in the Cause of Allah
Remember the word of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, “Three things are from the foundation of the faith: 1) abstaining from who said that there is no god but Allah, 2) we do not declare him an unbeliever for a given sin, nor expel him from Islam for a given action. And jihad is extant since Allah, Mighty and Majestic, sent me until the last of my Ummah will fight the False Messiah. It is not nullified by the corruption of a leader or the justness of a leader 3) and faith in that which is destined.” This is collected by Imam Abu Dawud in his Sunan, Book of Jihad, under the chapter of Fighting Alongside the Tyrannical Imams and classed by him as authentic.
I have underlined the relevant parts for the consideration of the reader. There is no time where jihad can be nullified until the Day of Resurrection. The Victorious Group is always in the Earth, fighting for the cause of Allah.
They are not petitioning for the cause of Allah, making da`awah for the sake of Allah, doing khuruj for the sake of Allah, they are fighting for the sake of Allah.
The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, has said, “There will always be a group from this Ummah fighting for the truth and aided, and whoever opposes and leaves them will not harm them until the affair of Allah is established.” Collected by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal in his Musnad, vol.16, pp. 293-294 and classed by him as authentic.
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah have mercy on him, and others say that this group is headed and composed of the scholars of the Ummah; but notice that the fighting has not been negated.
The fact that the Victorious Group shall fight the False Messiah (not pamphlet him, kiss his ring or bow to him or sit in banquets with him) is proof that there is some sort of combat, warfare occurring (in other words, yes there is violence exercised).
This is another divinely revealed principle that is being trampled upon by carrying this document to its’ logical end. The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said of Hijrah, “Hijrah does not cease until repentance ceases. Repentance does not cease until the sun rises from the West.” Collected by Imam Abu Dawud in his Sunan and classed by him as authentic.
Sa`id and others also narrate that the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “Hijrah does not cease as long as there is jihad.”
It is these points that we must understand in order to properly frame hijrah in its’ context. We now want to look at what the scholars of Muslim Orthodoxy have to say about this affair.
Imam Mar`ii ibn Yusuf al-Karmi (d. 1033 AH), one of the great depended upon sources for the school, said the following about Hijrah: “Hijrah is compulsory for the one who is unable to manifest his religion in a land where the laws of kufr or of astray innovations dominate. If he is able to manifest his religion, then it is still the sunnah to make hijrah from that land.” Dalil ut-Talib Li-Nail il-Ma’arib, pp. 161-162.
Imam `Abdul Qadir at-Taghlabi ash-Shaibani (d. 1133 AH), says in commentary of these words, “So hijrah is compulsory, this means that he is to leave from Dar ul-Kufr to Dar ul-Islam and this is for every one that is not able to manifest his religion in a land where the laws of kufr or astray innovations dominate. These astray innovations include things such as the innovation of the Shi`ah or the Mu`tazilah.
This is a must for him as standing by the command of the religion is compulsory on the one who is able to do so. Yes, for a surety hijrah is from the necessities of the religion and completes the affair and is compulsory for whoever cannot manifest his religion except by doing this action; it is compulsory and it becomes compulsory if one is able to make hijrah.
If one is able to manifest his religion in the place where he is in while the laws of kufr of astray innovation dominate, then the hijrah for that person is sunnah.” Nail ul-Ma’arib, pp. 145-145.
These divinely revealed principles by examining the above have been negated if followed to their conclusion.
The second paragraph is just as grotesque in describing that the current state of affairs is how Allah in His Revealed Law is pleased to have it. Really? Is Allah pleased for His Shari`ah to call to: two European Civil Wars (falsely called WWI and II), Vietnam,
Cambodia, Granada, Korea, nuclear testing that has scarred millions, the Palestinian catastrophe, the extermination of 40 million Muslims in China, 12 million in the Hitler rampages, 30 million and more during Stalinism and 300,000 and more in the rebellions against the Spanish and Americans in the Philippines,
the Danube River and Bangladesh being poisoned by factories dumping arsenic, the West Coast of the United States being the gang capital of the world with a death toll of 20,000 between 1988-1992, the extermination of 95% of the 100 million pre-European arrival to North America,
the 1 million Hutus and Tutsis killed in Rwanda in the 1980s, the 300,000 Muslims slaughtered in Burma in the 1980s, the death of some 2 million people in Iraq from 1990-2004 and still counting due to invasion, 2 million martyrs killed by Communists from the years 1979-1989,
legalised marriages between men and boys, parents and “consenting children,” people marrying animals, the horrible civil wars in Liberia, Congo, Chad, Cameron and East Timor among other names, the death of 37,000,000 in trench warfare in the First European Civil War, the dead of 55,000,000 in the Second European Civil War, the 50,000 Tibetan Muslims displaced upon Chinese Communist invasion,
the rape gangs and murder of 3,000+ believers in Srebrenica in the Balkans, the Albanian massacres of the beginning of past century, one nation consuming 60% of the world’s natural resources while only being 2% of the global population,
the Hanford and Chernobyl disasters, an abortion mill that kills some 2 million or more children a year. Is this why Allah sent the Revealed Law and what it was sent for in the first instance?
Amongst the priorities of Muslims scholars and Islamic academic institutions should be the analysis and assessment of ideas that breed extremism, takfir (labeling fellow Muslims as unbelievers) and violence in the name of Islam.
Part 8: Are they broaching the possibility of targeting the Victorious Group and the rightly guided scholars who make the pronouncements by alerting the authorities? We certainly hope not as this could be something that harms them in this life and the Hereafter.
Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Ummah’s religious scholars to condemn all forms of violent attempts-to-change or violent protest, within or outside, Muslim societies. Such condemnations must be clear, explicit, and be a true manifestation of real courage-in-speaking-the-truth, so as to eliminate any confusion or ambiguity.
Point 9: They have just nullified and stopped jihad, the coming of the Messiah and the Mahdi, peace be upon both of them, the coming of both of them being heralded by massive conflict and the overthrow of the order of the world at that time.
The validation, authorization, and execution of this particular type of jihad is granted by the Shari`ah to only those who lead the community (actual heads of states). This is because such a decision of war is a political decision with major repercussions and consequences.
Point 10: What about when the Tatars murdered the last khalifah in Baghdad in 656 AH? Who ordered jihad 4 years later when there were no temporal rulers? The same people that had always commanded it in the past:
the Qadis, the Wisemen, the Inheritors of the Scholars. It was not secular rulers of states ruling by false legislation, but the scholars who are the Guardians of Islam.
Hence, it is not for a Muslim individual or Muslim group to announce and declare war, or engage in combative jihad, whimsically and on their own. This restriction is vital for preventing much evil from occurring, and for truly upholding Islamic religious texts to this matter.
Point 11: This is a blatant and tragic lie and is necessitates the leaving of jihad as a way of self defense. We say to fear Allah and for the reader to abandon these words and return to the mu`tamad words of the upright scholars and the maraji` of today.
As usual our greatest people of harm do their most damage when wearing their frocks of Islam and the robes of righteousness. It is only when trying to accommodate unbelievers that they have on their Sunday best.
Afterall, we need to use “hikmah” with the unbelievers and give “da`awah” to the believers. There are a number of things that will come from this new conclave that we want to warn the reader of in advance:
1. Believers that go to help the Ummah in whatever physical capacity will be turned in to the authorities of the governments in the English speaking countries.
2. Those who speak against this movement will also be jailed or atleast ostracised. As their figures become more secular, one will see them conducting homosexual marriages (as one of our imams on the West Coast tried to and was rebuffed with violence and broken masjid doors), having school dances and prom nights at the masjids (as was done in San Francisco and Oakland).
3. These same figures or representatives shall start to appear on television, allowing themselves to be mocked for the sake of “greater inclusion.” This minstrel show will lead to great hatred of Muslims.
4. This movement will declare it not just valid (as Yusuf al-Qaradawi did) but compulsory to fight in the armies of these countries and for good measure pledge allegiance, salute the flag and even have ROTC officers at Muslim schools (as happened on the East Coast in 2007 but was slowed when brothers got physical).
5. Abortion, sex before marriage, homosexuality, establishing Revealed Law, will become “secondary” and “personal issues” (as one imam in Seattle tried to tell us and he was boycotted by large segments of the community).
6. Open conferences and symposiums will be held on whether or not one can be a Muslim and refuse belief in the Qur’an and Sunnah and whether or not we can “judge them” (this already happened in 1996 with the Al-Fatiha movement and was bolstered by the incidents surrounding Amina Wadud).
7. There will be much more of a conspicuous appearance of female imams, homosexual imams, scandals involving child abuse in the masjid (three of these cases happened in London in 1999 so its’ already beginning to catch up with the 15 that happened in the US in 1994).
8. There will be a break between this group, which is “conservative” and other even more radical elements that are “reform” but in reality secular and this will leave the vast majority of Muslim Orthodoxy in these countries in peril.
9. As both these conservative and reform groups converge upon the target of amalgamation, when believers from these groups travel or go places outside of their countries, they will find that their marriages, professions of faith, Islamic documents and such will be rejected by the rest of the 1 billion and more Muslims who can’t see any signs of Islam.
(this happened to Jerry Seinfeld, a reform Jew, who more than 10 years ago went to visit Israel but had complications as the Orthodox Jewish Rabbinate did not accept his Judaism or that of America, which is reform. He therefore had a lot of explaining to do and most of the Rabbis on the panel classed him and others like him as non-Jews).
Please also notice the sparse number of texts and evidences quoted from the scholars for this wretched scrap of paper. If this is what years of scholarship leads you to, then it should be no surprise that there is so much apostasy in English speaking countries where Muslims reside; but more is to come.
I ask the reader to brace him or herself for the creeping kufr that is coming. If you would like to fully understand the reality of what is coming, you should look into the Second Vatican Council and then look at what events shaped the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church thereafter. Open your eyes and prepare for a long fight.
You must start to build alternatives to these diseased institutions that currently exist. If you do not, you only have yourself to blame in the end. Keep close to the scholars and the scholars of the madhhabs and be stubborn about it.
Abandon all shades of falsehood and Allah will bless you. And we ask Allah for His Succour and Strength in times of kufr and darkness when we are tested with Shaitan, his allies, cowardly believers and secularists. Amin.
And with Allah is every success,
brother in Islam,
Al-Hajj Abu Ja`far al-Hanbali