-
Q&A: The Scope of Military Developments in Yemen
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
The Scope of Military Developments in Yemen
(Translated)Question:
“On Friday, the chiefs of staff of the armed forces of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan met in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, within the framework of the Mecca Agreement for Joint Defense, to discuss security developments and threats facing the Kingdom…” (Al Jazeera, 26/9/2026). This meeting remained undisclosed until the Houthis seized control of all or most of Yemen’s western coast without any intervention from Saudi Arabia or even America. In fact, Trump declared that the Houthis had promised not to attack American ships in the Red Sea, and therefore the US would not intervene! And so it was. For days, the Houthis have been advancing easily on the western coast. On 11/9/2026, it was announced that the Houthi group had completed its control of Bab al-Mandab during an offensive that lasted only a few days. The group managed to seize Hays, al-Khawkhah, al-Mukha and its port, reaching Bab al-Mandab and Mayyun Island (Perim).
How did this happen so easily? Why didn’t Saudi Arabia and its tripartite coalition intervene? And why didn’t America intervene, given that it declares itself against Iran’s proxies, of which the Houthis are a major one? America even announced that it had been in direct contact with the Houthi group. The group admitted on 20/9/2026, to contacting America. What is America’s plan regarding this group linked to Iran?
Answer:
To clarify matters, let’s examine the following:
1- The international conflict in Yemen has been raging since the early 1960’s. It is embodied by the former colonial power of Yemen, Britain, and the neocolonial power, America. Each colonial power has its regional and local proxies. Britain’s influence over Yemen was consolidated through its agents, primarily Ali Abdullah Saleh, from 1978 until 2011, followed by Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi. Subsequently, America instructed its Saudi agent to intervene in Yemen, leading to the launch of Operation Decisive Storm and the establishment of the so-called “Coalition to Support Legitimacy,” led by Saudi Arabia, in 2015. However, this was in reality to support the Houthi group. We mentioned this in our publication dated 28/3/2015: “America has supported the Houthis through Iran with weapons so that they are able to dominate Yemen by force. She realizes that the political medium in Yemen is dominated by Britain’s men. Thus, the Houthis thought they had the power to dominate Yemen. They besieged the president to force him to give them what they sought for the laws they had issued. He would agree, then delay in implementation…until they imposed house arrest on him but he escaped, moving to Aden. They pursued him there, but he escaped again.”
2- Then, the UAE, Britain’s agent, infiltrated the aforementioned coalition established by Saudi Arabia under the pretext of saving Yemen. It liberated numerous areas in southern Yemen from Houthi control and strengthened the influence of Britain and its local agents. It reached Hodeidah, the Houthis’ vital port, and nearly seized it, intending to then advance on Sana’a. However, America mobilized international public opinion against it under the guise of humanitarian concerns and convened the Sweden conference, which resulted in a ceasefire in Hodeidah and the withdrawal of the UAE’s forces and militias, led by Tariq Saleh. The city’s security remained in the hands of the Houthis. We mentioned this in our Answer to a Question issued on December 20/12/2018: “Britain knew that the backbone of the Houthis is Iran’s support. After the closure of Sanaa airport and the control of the southern ports, the port of Hodeidah became the only semi-Iranian artery to support the Houthis. This is why the UAE went to Hodeidah to control it. Attitudes and battles around Hodeidah were facing a major US rejection under humanitarian pretext, and that the port of Hodeidah provides Yemen with aid to millions of Yemenis as if America had a consideration for humanity. It trampled with its agents in Syria under the United Nations with the siege of the suffocating cities and with explosive barrels. But it wanted to find justification to keep the port of Hodeidah open to Iranian military support…” End Quote.
3- In 2022, Saudi Arabia announced the formation of a Yemeni Presidential Leadership Council headed by Rashad al-Alimi, replacing President Hadi on 7/4/2022, when he transferred all his powers to the Council. Prior to this, on 2/4/2022, the warring parties had agreed to a two-month, extendable ceasefire in Yemen, which went into effect on the same day. The United Nations and the United States welcomed the sudden truce and called for its extension. Although most of the council members were former British men, America, through Saudi Arabia, was able to win over the head of the council, Al-Alimi, to its side, even though he was a follower of the British, as he had held senior political positions since the time of former Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh. However, his residence in Saudi Arabia and his heavy reliance on what Saudi Arabia provides in terms of financial and security support, all of this gave Saudi Arabia a strong way to influence him, which has developed recently. As for the rest of the council members, most of them were followers of the United Arab Emirates, i.e., the British.
We said in response to a Question and Answer dated 20/4/2022: “It is noted that all members of the Presidential Leadership Council are backed by the UAE and the group of President Hadi himself, so the active opinion in the council is subordinate to Britain.” End Quote. Thus, the truce, this decision, and the formation of the council were all done with American and British agreement, and the agents and those orbiting in the orbit are subject to this agreement. In all cases, this agreement is not permanent, but only until the circumstances that called for this agreement change!
4- And that’s what happened. At the end of 2025, the forces of the Southern Transitional Council (STC) in Yemen, led by Aidarus al-Zubaidi, a member of the Presidential Council and backed by the UAE, deployed their forces in Hadramawt and al-Mahra. The situation became very complicated, and on 30/12/2025, the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen announced a limited military operation targeting weapons and armored vehicles that had arrived from the UAE at the port of Mukalla in Hadramawt Governorate. The threats continued until the UAE “submitted” and announced the withdrawal of its forces from Yemen. Saudi Arabia continued to threaten and warn the UAE’s allies in Yemen (the STC led by Aidarus al-Zubaidi) to leave Hadramawt and al-Mahra. The STC forces then began to withdraw. Al-Zubaidi fled to Abu Dhabi via Somaliland on January 8, 2026!
5- It appears that the recent events on the western coast—specifically, the Houthi takeover of Hays, Khokha, Mocha and its port, Mayyun Island, and the remaining Yemeni islands in the southern Red Sea, extending to Bab al-Mandab, on September 3rd and 11th—resemble the events of 2018 when the UAE and its local allies were expelled from Hodeidah. They also resemble the events of late 2025 and early 2026 when the UAE and its allies were expelled from Hadramawt and Al-Mahra. I say this is similar because, through the Houthi operation, America sought to undermine British influence in Yemen by targeting its agents on the western coast. This was where the so-called “National Resistance, with its core elements of the Republican Guard” were, led by Tariq Saleh, which was sponsored and protected by the UAE at the behest of its British patron. This ultimately led to the fall of Mocha and the Khalid military base on the Red Sea coast, completing the Houthis’ control over the entire coastline.
The fall of Mocha on 10/9/2026, dealt a severe blow to the leader of this resistance, Tariq Saleh, the British agent and nephew of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, a British agent and is supported by the UAE. This was another step in eliminating British agents, following the defeat of their other agent, Aidarus al-Zubaidi, who was forced to flee to the UAE. After analysing this step, it is likely that Saudi Arabia managed to infiltrate its own agents into the Republican Guard, who then withdrew from their positions in their areas on the western coast on Saudi orders. This confused the British forces within the Guard, led by Tariq Saleh, forcing him to order his troops to withdraw from all positions in the city. This came after he was subjected, as revealed in audio recordings published online, to what he described as “betrayals from within”—referring to the Saudi-backed factions within the Guard—and what he called “betrayal by our brothers”—referring to Saudi Arabia itself, which did not intervene to support him or counter the Houthi movements. After all this, the Houthis entered these areas without resistance, just as they had previously entered Sana’a without resistance!
6- Further evidence of this is that Saudi Arabia has not activated the joint tripartite alliance, nor has it requested its partners in this alliance—Pakistan and Türkiye —to intervene. This confirms its complicity and its unwillingness to take serious action against the Houthis. This is because America, which was behind the formation of this alliance, has not requested its activation or intervention against the Houthis, even as they target areas within Saudi Arabia! Türkiye and Pakistan have merely issued condemnations and insincere statements expressing their readiness to help. Moreover, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) did not approach them or make any appeals to them, waiting until the entire western coast of Yemen, or most of it, fell under Houthi control before convening the Mecca-based alliance to discuss assisting Saudi Arabia against the Houthi attacks!
“On Friday, the chiefs of staff of the armed forces of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan met in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, within the framework of the Mecca Agreement for Joint Defense, to discuss security developments and threats facing the Kingdom. The Saudi Ministry of Defense stated that the meeting addressed strengthening intelligence and military cooperation and integrating capabilities to enhance deterrence and collective defense. According to the Ministry, the chiefs of staff reviewed the security situation and condemned the attacks targeting Makkah Al Mukarramah and civilian infrastructure in the Kingdom. The parties to the agreement strongly affirmed their commitment to collective defense, reflecting the three countries’ determination to defend the security, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.” (Al Jazeera, 26/9/2026). Therefore, it is meeting that took place after the Houthis consolidated their control over the western coast of Yemen!
7- Furthermore, America did not intervene or strike the Houthis, despite repeatedly declaring that it is targeting Iran’s proxies. It did not ask Saudi Arabia to strike them, nor did it request that Saudi Arabia activate the tripartite alliance, even though it has taken strong measures against other Iranian proxies in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon. Although the Houthis are a powerful Iranian proxy in Yemen, America and Saudi Arabia did not take decisive action as they do with other Iranian proxies. They did not move to prevent the Houthis from seizing control of Yemen’s western coast! Their complicity in this matter is clear to everyone. Reuters reported on 13/9/2016, citing three sources, that “…US President Trump had a telephone conversation with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman,” describing him as “…a good friend of mine, and I can just say everything is gonna work out fine and dandy. It’s gonna be very good.” This means that Trump is behind this complicity because everything will be fine and very good—that is, as America wants, and the outcome will be in its favour! This is further confirmed by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s visit to Saudi Arabia and his meeting with its ruler, MBS, during the Houthi’s advance on the western coast, and his statement on 8/9/2026: “We have a very strong defense agreement with Saudi Arabia, and we will live up to our commitments in that agreement,” and are watching those events closely. The American official is thus declaring that the US is closely monitoring events, meaning that it is fully aware of everything that is happening!
8- To confirm this, America rejected the Yemeni government’s request for military intervention. On 21/9/2026, Reuters mentioned, “Two of the sources, one Yemeni and one Western, said Trump had made no direct pledge of military support during the call. Yemeni President Rashad al-Alimi requested US support for his Saudi-backed government in its fight against the Houthis, who this month took key areas along the Bab al-Mandeb strait in a lightning offensive.” Trump also reportedly stated, “The Houthis called us and they don’t want to fight with us…and would much prefer not having us involved… and they’re letting most ships go through.” (Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, 13/9/2026).
On 16/9/2026, Reuters quoted five sources as saying that “US officials met representatives of Yemen’s Houthis in Oman over the weekend, five sources familiar with the matter said, days after the Iran-backed militia seized a strategic stretch of the Red Sea coast in a sweeping offensive that routed Saudi-backed forces. The meeting, which has not been made public, was held at the US Embassy in Muscat, three of the sources said on the condition of anonymity. Two sources said that Oman’s government, a longtime regional mediator, helped organise the meeting. One of the sources, a Yemeni, said the militia group also said they would not attack Israeli ships or any commercial vessels, except those belonging to Saudi Arabia. According to two of the sources, the US side was represented by embassy personnel. One of those sources said the Houthi delegation included a senior official based in Muscat who is under US sanctions, Mohammad Abdulsalam. Another source confirmed Abdulsalam’s presence along with that of another senior Houthi official, Abdelmalik al-Ajiri.” END QUOTE.
On 20/9/2026, Mohamed al-Bukhaiti, a member of the Houthi political bureau, has confessed in a Zoom interview with the American Associated Press from Sana’a that indirect contacts had taken place between his group and America through Oman. He said the group informed the Trump administration that it did not intend to target the US or its vessels in the Red Sea and the Bab al-Mandab Strait, and that its current operation was directed against Saudi Arabia. He added that Washington had contacted the group as its forces advanced along Yemen’s western coast and reached areas overlooking the Bab al-Mandab Strait. All of this indicates that what transpired was orchestrated by America, and that the Houthi group knowingly participated in this plan!
9- Reflecting on the past and ongoing Houthi attacks on Yemen’s western coast, and the fact that the Houthis are on the verge of seizing control of the entire coastline, yet neither America nor Saudi Arabia is intervening to aid the Yemeni government in Aden, despite the fact that the Houthi attacks have also affected it too. In addition to the meetings between Houthi representatives and the Americans in Muscat, the capital of Oman, and the aforementioned statements regarding America’s non-intervention in responding to the Houthi attacks on the western coast despite the Aden government’s request, all of this indicates that the Houthi occupation of most of Yemen’s western coast is with American and Saudi approval. This appears to be driven by three objectives:
First: To involve the Houthis in governing Yemen and grant them a primary role in the government, thereby gradually removing British agents from power in Yemen, especially since not all of the British-backed figures in Yemen have been eliminated; some remain within and around the Presidential Council.
Second: This matter is a means of enticing the regime in Iran and paving the way for a more lenient stance towards America, as was evident in the American-Iranian meetings in New York, as well as in the presentation of the Iranian plan by the Iranian president and foreign minister, who expected Trump’s approval so that Iran would return to the orbit (of America), but Trump, in his arrogance, rejected it because he still insists that Iran be merely a subordinate agent state.
Third: It is a strategic fighter’s pause, as America faces midterm elections in about a month, and the electoral process necessitates a de-escalation of tensions, particularly the military conflict, until the elections conclude.
It appears that these three objectives, individually or collectively, explain the lack of a decisive response from America and Saudi Arabia to the Houthi takeover of Yemen’s western coast, which subsequently allowed the Houthis to seize control of the coast with ease!
10- Thus, we see the Anglo-American conflict raging in Yemen, but waged through regional and local proxies. Its people are the fuel for this conflict, suffering immensely for decades. These proxies care little for the people, prioritizing their own self-interest. Therefore, Yemen’s salvation lies only in eliminating these instruments that enable the warring colonial powers to maintain their presence and extend their influence. This can only be achieved through the establishment of the Khilafah Rashidah (rightly guided Caliphate) on the method of the Prophethood, promised by Allah (swt): [وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ] “Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good that He will certainly make them successors in the land” [TMQ An-Nur: 55]. And was the glad-tiding of Allah’s Messenger (saw): «ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةٌ عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ» “Then there will a Khilafah on the method of Prophethood.” (Narrated by Ahmad, Al-Tayalisi, and Al-Bazzar).
Therefore, we call upon the people of Yemen, whom the Messenger of Allah (saw) praised by saying: «الْإِيمَانُ يَمَانٍ هَا هُنَا» “Belief is Yemenite, it is here” (Narrated by Al-Bukhari). And his saying (saw): «الْفِقْهُ يَمَانٍ وَالْحِكْمَةُ يَمَانِيَةٌ» “The understanding (of the faith) is that of the Yemenites and wisdom is that of the Yemenites.” (Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim).
We call upon them to support us in Hizb ut Tahrir so that we may all work together to fulfill the promise of Allah, Al Qawi Al Aziz, and the glad tiding of His Messenger (saw), so that we may be victorious in both worlds, and that is the great victory.
15 Rabi Al-Akhar 1448 AH
27/9/2026 CE -
Q&A: Sources of Tafsir
Answer to Question
Sources of Tafsir
To: Saidi Ali
(Translated)Question:
In the name of Allah, and peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah, his family, his companions, and those who follow him.
Our esteemed Sheikh, Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
I pray to Allah for your success and guidance in all the good you bring to the Muslim Ummah, and I hope that your journey will be crowned with victory and empowerment through the fulfilment of Allah’s promise and the glad tidings of His Prophet (saw).
Our esteemed Sheikh: In the book “The Islamic Personality Volume 1” (Arabic edition p. 296) under the section “Sources of Tafsir,” the following is stated:
“As for the tafsīr transmitted from the Messenger (saw), even if authentic, it is considered part of the Hadith. It is not considered as tafsīr since it is a legislative text like the Qur’ān; where it is known that the tafsīrs are not considered as legislative text”
What is stated on page 296 considers the Hadith a source of tafsir, but what is stated on page 301 denies that the Hadith is tafsir… It seems as though the two statements are opposites and seem contradictory, this is unclear to me. Please clarify this confusion and explain the matter: Is the Hadith considered tafsir, or does it not fall under that category?
Thank you very much
Your brother, Ali Al-Saidi – Tunisia
Answer:
Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
My brother, a careful examination of what is mentioned in the book “The Islamic Personality Volume 1”, (Arabic p. 360) under the heading “Sources of Tafsir” and what is mentioned in the same book, p. 366, under the heading “The Ummah’s need today for Mufassirin ” reveals that there is no contradiction between these two passages. To clarify this, I will explain the following:
First: It was stated in “The Sources of Tafsir”: [The word “sources of Tafsīr” does not mean the disciplines the mufassirun used to rely on when explaining the Qur’ān according to the idea they carried such as tawheed, jurisprudence (fiqh), rhetorics (balaagha), history etc. These are not the sources of tafsīr. Rather, they are matters which had an effect on the mufassir which led him to lean towards a specific matter in tafsīr. What is intended by ‘sources of tafsīr’ are the authoritative sources that the mufassirun quoted. What they quoted they wrote down in their tafsīrs, irrespective of their orientation in tafsīr. If we study the sources of tafsīr we find that they are confined to three:
1- Tafsīr which has been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (saw) such as the narration that the Messenger (saw) said: «الصَّلَاةُ الْوُسْطَى صَلَاةُ الْعَصْرِ» “The median prayer (salat al-wusta) is the afternoon prayer (salat al-‘asr)” [Reported By tirmidhi]
2- One of the sources of tafsīr is the opinion (ra’y) or what is termed as Ijtihād in tafsīr. This is because the mufassir knows the speech of the Arabs and their mannerisms in the spoken language. He knows the Arabic expressions and their meanings by being acquainted with the same thing in jahili poetry, prose etc. And he familiarises himself with what he finds to be correct from the cause of revelation of a verse. Using these tools …
3- The israiliyyat. This is because certain Jews and Christians had entered the fold of Islam. Among them were scholars of the Torah and Bible. Amongst them most of the Jews that entered were dishonest because the Jews hated and loathed the Muslims more than the Christians. From the Jews many scholars of Jewish fables infiltrated the Muslims. They entered the tafsīr of the Qur’ān to supplement the explanation of the Qur’ān…] End Quote
As you can see, the issue here concerns the sources of interpretation used by the mufassirin, and there are three sources, as explained above.
Secondly: what was mentioned in “The Islamic Personality Volume 1”, page 366, under the heading “The Ummah’s need today for Mufassirin” clarifies the reality of these sources among the mufassirin in terms of their soundness and error. It explains that the first source, which they call “tafsir transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (saw)” is truly not called tafsir, but rather a collection of Hadiths of the Messenger (saw). This is because tafsir is the Ijtihad of the mufasir, while transmission from the Messenger (saw) is neither tafsir nor Ijtihad, but rather a Hadith of the Messenger (saw), a revelation from Allah Al Aziz Al Hakim. This is clear at the beginning of this chapter, where it states:
[Therefore, the style has to be such that it awakens desire and love in the Muslims first, let alone in anyone else for reading tafaseers as an intellectual book which is deep and enlightened. In addition to that, the path followed by mufasssirin in the age which followed the translation of the books of philosophy and being affected by them and in the age of decline which came after the Crusades led to the presence of tafsīrs for which much effort was expended in giving attention to things which did not constitute tafsīr and had no relationship to the verses of the Qur’ān. Not to mention the israliiyyat that accumulated until it became a third source of tafsīr for the mufassirin. It is imperative that the tafsīr of the Qur’ān should proceed according to the Sahabah’s ways of tafsīr in terms of Ijtihād in understanding the Qur’ān seeking the aid of the tafsīrs of the Sahabah that have been transmitted. As for the tafsīr transmitted from the Messenger (saw), even if authentic, it is considered part of the Hadith. It is not considered as tafsīr since it is a legislative text like the Qur’ān; where it is known that the tafsīrs are not considered as legislative text] End Quote.
What is included under this chapter is to clarify the correct understanding on tafsir based on what was followed by the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) in terms of correct Ijtihad in the tafsir of the verses of Allah (swt). As for what has been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (saw), it should be included under the category of Hadiths, not under the category of ijtihad. There is a difference between the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (saw), which is divinely revealed, and the ijtihad of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), which is the domain of ijtihad.
I hope this is sufficient. And Allah Knows Best and is Most Wise.
Your Brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah4 Rabi al-Akhar 1448 AH
16 September 2026 CE -
Q&A: Creation, Meaning Bringing Something Into Existence From Nothing
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
Creation, Meaning Bringing Something Into Existence From Nothing
To: Mahmoud Sanqart
(Translated)Question:
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Our honourable Shiekh, I greet you with the greetings of Islam,
Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
I ask Allah to protect and support you, to grant you victory soon, and to restore to the Ummah its glory, dignity, and unity, lost a century ago… Our esteemed Sheikh, in the book “Islamic Verdict (Shariah Rulings) on: Cloning…” by Sheikh Abdul Qadeem Zaloum, may Allah have mercy on him, on page two, it states:
[The concise laws and precise system confirm the obligatory existence of the Creator, who is the Organizer, Perfector, Almighty, and All Wise. Allah (swt) says:
[إِنَّا كُلَّ شَيْءٍ خَلَقْنَاهُ بِقَدَرٍ]
“And We created everything according to a precise measure” [Al-Qamar: 49] Allah (swt) says:
[وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيراً]
“He has created everything and has measured it exactly according to its due measurements” [Al-Furqan: 2]. This means that He (swt) created everything in a precise manner, and made it such that it is equipped to fulfil its needs. It was a creation made with wisdom, and with exact measure. It was not a creation without measured determination. This creation was made out of nothing, because creation (khalq) is making things of nothing, and not made from what already exists. Making something out of existing matters is not considered an act of creation.” End Quote.
He (may Allah have mercy on him) limited the concept of creation to bringing something into existence from nothing, but by examining many verses in the Book of Allah (swt), such as His saying:
[خَلَقَ الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍ]
“…created humans from a clinging clot” [Al-‘Alaq: 2]. And His (swt) saying:
[وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ سُلَالَةٍ مِّن طِينٍ]
“And indeed, We created humankind from an extract of clay” [Al-Mu’minun: 12]. And His (swt) saying:
[خَلَقَ الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ صَلْصَالٍ كَالْفَخَّارِ]
“He created humankind from ˹sounding˺ clay like pottery” [Ar-Rahman: 14] And His (swt) saying:
[وَخَلَقَ الْجَانَّ مِنْ مَارِجٍ مِنْ نَارٍ]
“…and created jinn from a ˹smokeless˺ flame of fire” [Ar-Rahman: 15]. And other verses in which Allah (swt) mentions creation from what already exists—is creation exclusively bringing something into existence from nothing? And how can this concept be reconciled with the content of the verses that mention creation from what already exists?
I hope you can clarify this for me, and may Allah reward you the best of reward.
Answer:
Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh, May Allah bless you for your kind prayer, and we pray for you with the good.
1- Creation has multiple meanings in the language. It comes with the meaning of bringing into existence from nothing, and inventing something without a previous example. It comes with the meaning of estimation, and it comes with the meaning of making. It is stated in Lisan al-Arab: [(Khalq “Creation”). And among the attributes of Allah (swt) are the Creator (Al-Khaliq) and the Originator (Khalaq) … And creation in the language of the Arabs is inventing something according to an example that has not been preceded. And everything that Allah created, He originated without a previous example. Indeed, to Him belongs the creation and the command. Blessed is Allah, the best of creators. Abu Bakr ibn al-Anbari said: The word “Khalq (creation)” in Arabic has two meanings. One is bringing something into existence according to a pre-existing model, and the other is precise measurement (Taqdeer), Allah created something, meaning He brought it into being after it did not exist. And His Almighty saying:
[يخلُقكم في بطون أُمهاتكم خَلْقاً من بعد خَلق في ظُلمات ثلاث]
“He creates you in the wombs of your mothers, creation after creation, in three darknesses,” [Az-Zumar: 6] means He creates you as sperm, then as a clot, then as a lump of flesh, then as bones, then He clothes the bones with flesh, then He shapes you and breathes the soul into you. That is the meaning of “creation after creation, in three darknesses”: in the womb, the uterus, and the placenta. It has also been said that it refers to the loins, the uterus, and the womb. [End quote]
Creation is: bringing into existence (all things after they did not exist), and it is: Taqdeer (precise measurement), and it is: (inventing something according to a model that has not been preceded)
The intended meaning is determined by context and evidence indicated.
2- The context in the book on cloning is that of creation, meaning bringing something into existence from nothing. It states:
“These immense scientific developments and their applications, which were achieved through advanced technology, point to the greatness of Allah (swt), His Might, His Wisdom, and the perfection of His creation. These matters evidence that Allah (swt) is their Creator. They also indicate that they were not created by mere coincidence, because they follow a precise order and specific laws that control and regulate them. In addition, they have properties that are both appropriate to their use and the purpose of their creation. All of this shows that these matters could not have been created by chance, because coincidence does not bring about such concise laws and such a precise system. The concise laws and precise system confirm the obligatory existence of the Creator, who is the Organizer, Perfector, Almighty, and All Wise. Allah (swt) says:
[إِنَّا كُلَّ شَيْءٍ خَلَقْنَاهُ بِقَدَرٍ]
“And We created everything according to a precise measure” [Al-Qamar: 49].Allah (swt) says:
[وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيراً]
“He has created everything and has measured it exactly according to its due measurements” [Al-Furqan: 2].
This means that He (swt) created everything in a precise manner, and made it such that it is equipped to fulfil its needs. It was a creation made with wisdom, and with exact measure. It was not a creation without measured determination. This creation was made out of nothing, because creation (Khalq) is making things of nothing, and not made from what already exists. Making something out of existing matters is not considered an act of creation.” End Quote.
3- The entire discussion revolves around creation in the sense of bringing something into existence from nothing, because it speaks of things not existing by chance, but having a Creator who created them, that is, brought them into existence from nothing, and established a precise system for them… even the verses cited as evidence indicate creation from nothing:
[إِنَّا كُلَّ شَيْءٍ خَلَقْنَاهُ بِقَدَرٍ]
“And We created everything according to a precise measure” [Al-Qamar: 49].Allah (swt) says:
[وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيراً]
“He has created everything and has measured it exactly according to its due measurements” [Al-Furqan: 2].
The discussion in these noble verses is about everything. The verses state that Allah (swt) created everything, and this means that nothing exists except that it was created. That is, things did not exist, and then Allah (swt) created them, that is, He brought them into existence after they did not exist. This is because the phrase “everything” encompasses all things. His statement regarding the book “Cloning”: [This creation was made out of nothing, because creation (Khalq) is making things of nothing, and not made from what already exists. Making something out of existing matters is not considered an act of creation] is a correct and appropriate statement, especially in this context.
4- As for the verses mentioned in the question
[خَلَقَ الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍ]
“…created humans from a clinging clot” [Al-‘Alaq: 2]
[وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ سُلَالَةٍ مِّن طِينٍ]
“And indeed, We created humankind from an extract of clay” [Al-Mu’minun: 12]
[خَلَقَ الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ صَلْصَالٍ كَالْفَخَّارِ]
“He created humankind from ˹sounding˺ clay like pottery” [Ar-Rahman: 14]
[وَخَلَقَ الْجَانَّ مِنْ مَارِجٍ مِنْ نَارٍ]
“…and created jinn from a ˹smokeless˺ flame of fire” [Ar-Rahman: 15].
These are about the stages of creation:
a- For example, the verses that speak about the creation of Adam, peace be upon him, describe the stages of his creation. He was created from dust, where Allah, the Exalted, made this dust into clay, then it became like black mud, then it became like pottery, then He breathed into him of His spirit. In the Tafseer of Al-Qurtubi, it says: [His saying, the Exalted:
(He created man) (خلق الإنسان), after He, the Exalted, mentioned the creation of the macrocosm of the heavens and the earth, and what they contain of evidence of His Oneness and power, He mentioned the creation of the microcosm, saying: (He created man) (خلق الإنسان), by the consensus of the scholars of interpretation, meaning Adam. (From pottery like clay) (من صلصال كالفخار) Pottery is dry clay that makes a sound when it is baked. It was said: It is clay mixed with sand. And it was said: It is putrid clay, from the root meaning “to putrefy,” as has been mentioned in (Al-Hijr). And He said here: (From pottery like clay) (من صلصال كالفخار), and He said there: (From pottery, from black mud) (من صلصال من حمأ مسنون). And He said: (Indeed, We created them from sticky clay) (إنا خلقناهم من طين لازب)He said: “Like Adam, He created him from dust.” (كمثل آدم خلقه من تراب) This is consistent in meaning, because he took some of the earth’s dust and kneaded it until it became clay, then it moved and became like black mud, then it moved and became like pottery].
But this does not mean in any way that there is no creation from nothing. So where did the dust from which Adam, peace be upon him, was created come from? Did not Allah (swt) create it from nothing? Then how did the dust become flesh and blood? Is this not creation from nothing? Then where did life come from after Allah (swt) breathed into him of His spirit? Is not the spirit from the creation of Allah?! What came in the noble verses that speak about the creation of Adam, peace be upon him, is a description of the stages of his creation, and it is not understood from them that Adam was not created from nothing.
b- Similarly, the verses that speak of the creation of the jinn describe the stages of their creation, stating that they were created from fire, and then Allah transformed them into jinn for a reason known only to Him. In Al-Qurtubi’s Tafseer, it says:
[وَخَلَقَ الْجَانَّ مِنْ مَارِجٍ مِنْ نَارٍ]
[“And He created the jinn from a smokeless flame of fire” Al-Hasan said: The jinn is Iblis, who is the father of the jinn. It was also said: Al jan is one of the jinn, and the marij is the flame, according to Ibn Abbas, who said: Allah created the jinn from pure fire. And it was also narrated from him that it was created from the tongue of the fire that is at its tip when it is ablaze. Al-Layth said: “Al-Marj is a bright flame with intense heat…” Ibn Abbas said it is the flame that rises above the fire, its red, yellow, and green hues mingling together. A similar interpretation was given by Mujahid, and all these meanings are close in meaning. Al-Jawhari said in his Sihah: “And ‘Marj min nar’ is a smokeless fire from which the jinn were created.”]. The fire from which the jinn were created was created by Allah, the Exalted, and brought into existence after it had not existed. Then He created the jinn from it and provided them with the means of life. All of this is from the actions of Allah, the Exalted, after the jinn had not existed… The fact that the creation of the jinn went through stages does not mean that Allah did not create them from nothing.
c- Even His (swt) saying:
[خَلَقَ الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍ]
“…created humans from a clinging clot” [Al-‘Alaq: 2]. This does not imply that Allah did not create man from nothing. The embryo originates from the sperm of the man and the egg of the woman, and Allah transformed them into flesh and bone, then breathed life into them… All of this is ultimately from Allah, the Exalted, for He is the One who brought it all into existence according to a precise system He created after it had not existed… In reality, it is creation from nothing… And what is mentioned in this noble verse:
[خَلَقَ الْإِنسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍ]
“…created humans from a clinging clot” [Al-‘Alaq: 2].
And similar verses describe the stages of His creation, not the origin of His creation… Rather, other verses provide more details about the stages of His creation, such as the Allah’s (swt) saying:
[وَلَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنْسَانَ مِنْ سُلَالَةٍ مِنْ طِينٍ * ثُمَّ جَعَلْنَاهُ نُطْفَةً فِي قَرَارٍ مَكِينٍ * ثُمَّ خَلَقْنَا النُّطْفَةَ عَلَقَةً فَخَلَقْنَا الْعَلَقَةَ مُضْغَةً فَخَلَقْنَا الْمُضْغَةَ عِظَاماً فَكَسَوْنَا الْعِظَامَ لَحْماً ثُمَّ أَنْشَأْنَاهُ خَلْقاً آخَرَ فَتَبَارَكَ اللَّهُ أَحْسَنُ الْخَالِقِينَ]
“And indeed, We created humankind from an extract of clay * then placed each ˹human˺ as a sperm-drop in a secure place * then We developed the drop into a clinging clot, then developed the clot into a lump ˹of flesh˺, then developed the lump into bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, then We brought it into being as a new creation. So Blessed is Allah, the Best of Creators” [Al-Mu’minun: 12-14].
Allah (swt) is the Creator of everything from its beginning to its end, and His words suffice in this regard:
[إِنَّا كُلَّ شَيْءٍ خَلَقْنَاهُ بِقَدَرٍ]
“And We created everything according to a precise measure” [Al-Qamar: 49]. Allah (swt) says:
[وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيراً]
“He has created everything and has measured it exactly according to its due measurements” [Al-Furqan: 2].
Thus, if we examine the Quranic verses that speak of Allah’s creation of creatures, we find that they include the idea of creation from nothingness. This is the origin of creation, and the basis of our saying about Allah (swt) that He is the Creator. It does not harm to mention in the texts that Allah created something from something else, because the first thing and the second thing are both creations of Allah.
[وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيراً]
“He has created everything and has measured it exactly according to its due measurements” [Al-Furqan: 2].
Ultimately, all creation were created by Him, the Exalted. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds.
I hope this answer is sufficient. And Allah Knows Best and is Most Wise
In conclusion, I send you my greetings and make kind duaa for you.
Your Brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah24 Rabi’ Al-Awwal 1448 AH
6/9/2026 CE -
Q&A: The Meaning of Talfiq and Following Schools of Thought
Answer to Question
The Meaning of Talfiq and Following Schools of Thought
To: Abu Alan
(Translated)Question:
Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
I ask Allah (swt) first to grant you lasting good health and to protect you and your family.
I would like to ask the following questions:
1- Is adhering to a specific school of thought obligatory for Muslims, or not?
2- What is meant by Talfiq of different schools of thought? And is someone who does not adhere to a specific school considered to be engaging in Talfiq of different schools of thought?
3- What is Hizb ut Tahrir’s opinion on this matter?
4- I discussed this issue with someone and told him that the obligation for a Muslim is to act according to the rulings of Islamic law, not to adhere to a specific school of thought, and that adhering to a school of thought is merely one way to act according to the rulings of Shariah. Is this statement correct in your view?
I kindly request your answer so that the matter becomes clear to me and put my heart at peace. May Allah reward you abundantly for your response.
Wa Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
Answer:
Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
First, may Allah bless you for your kind prayer, and we pray with goodness for you.
As for your questions, the answers are found in details in the book, “The Islamic Personality, Volume 1”, in the chapter: “Migrating From One Mujtahid to Another”, pages 241-243 (Word file- Arabic):
[Migrating From One Mujtahid to Another
Allah (swt) has not ordered us to follow any mujtahid, imam or madhhab, rather He (swt) ordered us to adopt the hukm Shar’i. He (swt) ordered us to adopt what the Messenger (saw) brought and to abstain from what He (saw) has forbidden us. He (swt) said:
[وَمَا آتَاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَمَا نَهَاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانْتَهُوا]
“And whatsoever the Messenger gives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it)” [TMQ Al-Hashr: 7]. Therefore, the Sharī’ah does not deem it right for us to follow the people, only to follow the rules of Allah (swt). However, the reality of Taqlīd has led the Muslims to follow the rules of certain mujtahids whom they have assigned as imams for themselves and they made the rules these mujtahids have deduced by their Ijtihād as a madhhab for themselves. So the Shafi’is, Hanafis, Malikis, Hanbalis, Ja’faris, Zaidis, etc., have an actual presence amongst the Muslims. Even though these people follow the Sharī’ah rules which have been deduced by these mujtahids, their action is legitimate because it constitutes following a Sharī’ah rule. As for if they followed the mujtahid as a person and not his deduction, then their action is not lawful and what they follow is not considered a Sharī’ah rule. This is because it is a statement of a person which is not from the orders and prohibitions of Allah (swt) which have been brought to us by the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (saw). Consequently, all those who follow madhhabs must understand that they are following only the rules of Allah (swt) which have been deduced by those imams. If they have a contrary understanding then they will be answerable to Allah (swt) for leaving the rules of Allah (swt) and following people who are themselves the servants of Allah (swt).
This is from the perspective of following the rules of a madhhab. As for leaving these rules, it has to be examined. If someone adopted a hukm but has not acted upon it yet, then he has the right to leave it and adopt another hukm based on one of the preponderant qualifications which is linked to seeking the pleasure of Allah (swt). If he, in actuality, practised it, then this hukm has become the rule of Allah (swt) with respect to him. It is not permitted for him to leave it and adopt another hukm except when the second hukm is linked with an evidence and the first hukm is not linked to an evidence or if it was proven to him by way of learning that the evidence of the second hukm is stronger than the first and he is convinced of that. In that case, it is incumbent on him to leave the first hukm. This is because his conviction and trust in the Sharī’ah evidence has made it the rule of Allah (swt) with respect to him. This is analogous to the mujtahid; when he finds an evidence stronger than the evidence from which he deduced the hukm, then he must leave the previous opinion and adopt the new opinion due to the strength of the evidence. In any other situation, it is not allowed for the muqallid to leave the hukm he had followed and adopt a different hukm after he had already acted according to the first hukm.
As for making Taqlīd to another mujtahid for another hukm, that is permitted due to the ijma’ of the Sahabah which has taken place on allowing the muqallid to seek legal verdicts from any learned person in an issue. As for when the muqallid selects a madhhab such as the madhhab of Shafi’i or Ja’far for example, and he says; I follow his madhhab and adhere to it, there are some details for this: he is not allowed to follow any other mujtahid in a mas’alah (issue/matter) he has already practised according to the madhhab he is following; while any issues he had not acted upon previously, he is allowed to follow other mujtahidin in those issues.
However, it should be made clear that the mas’alah for which it is allowed for him to leave the hukm that he has been following for another hukm, it is stipulated that the mas’alah should be separate from other matters, and that leaving it does not entail infringement of other Sharī’ah rules. As for when the mas’alah is connected to other masa’il (plural of mas’alah), then it is not allowed for him to leave it unless he leaves all the masa’il connected to it, because they are all considered as one mas’alah. For instance; if the mas’alah was a condition in another hukm, or one of the pillars (arkan) of a complete action such as the prayer (salah), wudu (ablution) and pillars (arkan) of the Salah. Thus, it is not correct for a Shafi’i to follow Abu Hanifah’s opinion that touching the women does not invalidate the wudu and continue praying according to the madhhab of al-Shafi’i. It is not right for him to follow the one who takes the opinion that constantly moving in prayer (to whatever extent this may be) does not invalidate the prayer or that the recitation of the Fatihah is not one of the pillars of prayer and then he continues to pray as a muqallid of the one who holds the opinion that constantly moving in prayer does invalidate it or that the Fatihah is one of the pillars of the prayer. The hukm one is allowed to leave is that whose relinquishment does not affect the actions which are undertaken according to other Sharī’ah rules.] End of quote.
This text answers your questions in details. To further clarify, we mention the following:
1- A Muslim is not obligated to follow a specific school of thought. Rather, he is obligated to follow the Islamic Shariah ruling regardless of the scholar (Mujtahid) who derived it. If he is certain that the opinion of a particular scholar is the correct Islamic Shariah ruling and the most likely to be correct, then he must follow it. However, the blind follower is unable to determine the most likely correct opinion by studying the evidence due to a lack of the necessary research tools. Therefore, his decision is based on general criteria such as trust in the scholar or his greater knowledge and piety, etc. If he believes that al-Shafi’i is more knowledgeable than others and that his opinion, in general, is closest to the truth, then he should adopt al-Shafi’i’s opinion, and so on.
2- A Muslim may follow a particular school of thought in all issues (masa’il). This was common among Muslims in the past, though it is less so now. However, it is not permissible for him to be biased about his school and follow it in every matter, even if it contradicts Islamic Shariah evidence. If it becomes clear to him that the opinion of another school of thought on a particular matter has stronger evidence, he should not remain in that matter clinging to his first school out of bias and stubbornness, because Islamic law does not command him to follow a specific scholar or school of thought, but rather commands him to follow the Islamic Shariah ruling.
3- As for the blind follower, it is safer for him to follow a specific school of thought and adhere to it in all issues, because the blind follower is not qualified to reason, and taking from different schools of thought can lead to contradictions, overlaps, and problems. Therefore, the blind follower is advised to follow a specific school of thought, especially in countries where that school is prevalent, such as the Shafi’i school in Egypt or the Maliki school in Morocco.
4- The term “Talfiq” is used in more than one sense, but two meanings are most prominent:
a) Taking the opinions of multiple scholars (Mujtahids) on a single issue, such as taking one scholar’s opinion regarding one part of the issue and the opinion of another scholar on another part of the same issue, thus arriving at a composite ruling that is not held by either of the first or second scholars. Therefore, acting according to this composite ruling is invalid according to both scholars… Talfiq in this sense is explained in the text quoted from the book, “The Islamic Personality,” as impermissible according to the party’s view:
[However, it should be made clear that the mas’alah for which it is allowed for him to leave the hukm that he has been following for another hukm, it is stipulated that the mas’alah should be separate from other matters, and that leaving it does not entail infringement of other Sharī’ah rules. As for when the mas’alah is connected to other masa’il (plural of mas’alah), then it is not allowed for him to leave it unless he leaves all the masa’il connected to it, because they are all considered as one mas’alah. For instance; if the mas’alah was a condition in another hukm, or one of the pillars (arkan) of a complete action such as the prayer (salah), wudu (ablution) and pillars (arkan) of the Salah. Thus, it is not correct for a Shafi’i to follow Abu Hanifah’s opinion that touching the women does not invalidate the wudu and continue praying according to the madhhab of al-Shafi’i. It is not right for him to follow the one who takes the opinion that constantly moving in prayer (to whatever extent this may be) does not invalidate the prayer or that the recitation of the Fatihah is not one of the pillars of prayer and then he continues to pray as a muqallid of the one who holds the opinion that constantly moving in prayer does invalidate it or that the Fatihah is one of the pillars of the prayer. The hukm one is allowed to leave is that whose relinquishment does not affect the actions which are undertaken according to other Sharī’ah rules.] End Quote.
b) Taking a separate issue from a different school of thought than the one designated by the follower, such as following Al-Shafi’i in prayer and then taking the opinion of the Hanbalis in Hajj… Talfiq in this sense is permissible with details as mentioned above in the text quoted from the book “The Islamic Personality, Volume One”:
[This is from the perspective of following the rules of a madhhab. As for leaving these rules, it has to be examined. If someone adopted a hukm but has not acted upon it yet, then he has the right to leave it and adopt another hukm based on one of the preponderant qualifications which is linked to seeking the pleasure of Allah (swt). If he, in actuality, practised it, then this hukm has become the rule of Allah (swt) with respect to him. It is not permitted for him to leave it and adopt another hukm except when the second hukm is linked with an evidence and the first hukm is not linked to an evidence or if it was proven to him by way of learning that the evidence of the second hukm is stronger than the first and he is convinced of that. In that case, it is incumbent on him to leave the first hukm. This is because his conviction and trust in the Sharī’ah evidence has made it the rule of Allah (swt) with respect to him. This is analogous to the mujtahid; when he finds an evidence stronger than the evidence from which he deduced the hukm, then he must leave the previous opinion and adopt the new opinion due to the strength of the evidence. In any other situation, it is not allowed for the muqallid to leave the hukm he had followed and adopt a different hukm after he had already acted according to the first hukm.
As for making Taqlīd to another mujtahid for another hukm, that is permitted due to the ijma’ of the Sahabah which has taken place on allowing the muqallid to seek legal verdicts from any learned person in an issue. As for when the muqallid selects a madhhab such as the madhhab of Shafi’i or Ja’far for example, and he says; I follow his madhhab and adhere to it, there are some details for this: he is not allowed to follow any other mujtahid in a mas’alah (issue/matter) he has already practised according to the madhhab he is following; while any issues he had not acted upon previously, he is allowed to follow other mujtahidin in those issues.] End Quote.
Thus, reflecting on the text quoted from the book, “The Islamic Personality,” answers all your questions.
Your Brother,|
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah15 Rabi Al-Awal 1448 AH
Corresponding to 28/8/2026 CE -
Let us Abandon Fatalism and Passiveness
Throughout the Muslim World, the Muslims are living under an era of persecution because of their Deen. They witness those who are calling to Islam facing immense persecution. The persecution is to the extent that the regimes do not shy from persecuting the elderly, the ill or the women. Matters have come to a point where the regimes are exposed in their deviation from the Deen of Islam. Indeed, it is the time to strive upon truth in order to end the Fitnah unleashed by the rulers.
However, instead, some Muslims keep distance from the struggle for the Deen, saying that, “This time of Fitna is in the Knowledge of Allah ﷻ, so let us leave it to Him.” They then become paralyzed by fatalism, remaining passive before all the tyranny they witness. They become spectators to the struggle between the advocates of Khilafah and the tyrants, rather than active participants, giving their full share to end the rule of tyranny. So the journalist who can write regarding the oppression, does not lift his pen. The alim (scholar) who can give Khutbah in support of the call for the Khilafah, does not speak. The human rights activists who can raise the case of the oppressed, turn away. And the army officer who can grant Nussrah to stop the tyrants at the height of their tyranny, declines to do so. However, they have fallen into error and exposed themselves to sin, because the Knowledge of Allah ﷻ is not an excuse for inaction.
Indeed, all that has happened, is happening and will happen to the Ummah is already in the Knowledge of Allah ﷻ. Allah ﷻ said,
﴿وَعِنْدَهُ مَفَاتِحُ الْغَيْبِ لاَ يَعْلَمُهَا إِلاَّ هُوَ وَيَعْلَمُ مَا فِي الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ وَمَا تَسْقُطُ مِنْ وَرَقَةٍ إِلاَّ يَعْلَمُهَا وَلاَ حَبَّةٍ فِي ظُلُمَاتِ الأَرْضِ وَلاَ رَطْبٍ وَلاَ يَابِسٍ إِلاَّ فِي كِتَابٍ مُبِينٍ﴾
“With Him are the keys of the Unseen, the treasures that none knows but He. He knows whatever there is on the earth and in the sea. Not a leaf falls but with His knowledge: There is not a grain in the darkness (or depths) of the earth, nor any thing fresh or dry (green or withered), but is (Written) in a Clear Book (to those who can read).” [Al-An’aam 6:59]
The Clear Book (كتاب مبين Kitaabun Mubeen) mentioned in the Aayah is the Protected Tablet (اللوح المحفوظ al-LauH ul-MaHfooDH). It comes as confirmation to His saying,
﴿إِلاَّ يَعْلَمُهَا﴾
‘that none knows but He’.
Thus, it is a Metonymy (كناية Kinaayah) about the ‘Ilm of Allah ﷻ.
The Messenger of Allah ﷺ ensured that the first generation, the best of all generations, never used the Knowledge of Allah swt as an excuse for inaction. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ ordered the Muslims to undertake good actions at all times and forbade them from using the Knowledge of Allah ﷻ as an excuse for inaction. Bukhari narrated that `Ali (ra) said: We were in the company of the Prophet ﷺ and he said,
«مَا مِنْكُمْ مِنْ أَحَدٍ إِلاَّ وَقَدْ كُتِبَ مَقْعَدُهُ مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ وَمَقْعَدُهُ مِنَ النَّارِ»
“There is none among you but has his place Written for him, either in Paradise or in the Hell-Fire.”
We said, “O Allah’s Messenger ﷺ! Shall we depend (on this fact and give up work)?” He replied,
«لاَ، اعْمَلُوا فَكُلٌّ مُيَسَّرٌ»
“No! Carry on doing good deeds, for everybody will find easy (to do) such deeds as will lead him to his Known place.”
Then the Prophet ﷻ recited,
﴿فَأَمَّا مَنْ أَعْطَىٰ وَاتَّقَىٰ (5) وَصَدَّقَ بِالْحُسْنَىٰ (6) فَسَنُيَسِّرُهُ لِلْيُسْرَىٰ (7) وَأَمَّا مَن بَخِلَ وَاسْتَغْنَىٰ (8) وَكَذَّبَ بِالْحُسْنَىٰ (9) فَسَنُيَسِّرُهُ لِلْعُسْرَى ﴾
“As for him who gives (in charity) and keeps his duty to Allah (5) And believes in the Best reward (6) We will ease him towards ease (7) And as for the one who is stingy, indifferent (8) and staunchly denies the finest reward (9) and we will ease him towards hardship.” [Surah al-Layl 92:5-10].”
Thus, Iman (belief) in the Knowledge of Allah ﷻ does not mean depending on it, because al-Qadar and Kitaabah, i.e. the Knowledge of Allah, are not known to any creature without His grant, so on what does man have to depend to decide whether he acts or does not act? The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said to the one who asked him, should not we depend? No, i.e. he ﷺ forbade him from depending. Moreover, he ﷺ was not satisfied with that alone and insisted as well: ﴾اعْمَلُوا﴿ ‘Work’, i.e. he ordered him to action. Thus his Forbiddance (نهي Nahee) from depending (on the Knowledge of Allah ﷻ) and his Command (أمر Amr) of working is Explicit Evidence (دليل صريح Daleel SareeH) for not linking the action with the Knowledge of Allah ﷻ.
So, when Allah ﷻ granted the Messenger of Allah ﷺ glad tidings of the time of security in Yemen, after the time of great hardship in Makkah, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ did not allow the Muslims to depend on that knowledge and stop acting to ensure the dominance of the Deen. It is narrated by Khabab bin al-Arat, who was persecuted severely, “We complained to Allah’s Messenger ﷺ (of the persecution inflicted on us by the infidels) while he was sitting in the shade of the Ka`ba, leaning over his Burd (i.e. covering sheet). We said to him, “Would you seek help for us? Would you pray to Allah for us? He ﷺ said,
«كَانَ الرَّجُلُ فِيمَنْ قَبْلَكُمْ يُحْفَرُ لَهُ فِي الأَرْضِ فَيُجْعَلُ فِيهِ، فَيُجَاءُ بِالْمِنْشَارِ، فَيُوضَعُ عَلَى رَأْسِهِ فَيُشَقُّ بِاثْنَتَيْنِ، وَمَا يَصُدُّهُ ذَلِكَ عَنْ دِينِهِ، وَيُمْشَطُ بِأَمْشَاطِ الْحَدِيدِ، مَا دُونَ لَحْمِهِ مِنْ عَظْمٍ أَوْ عَصَبٍ، وَمَا يَصُدُّهُ ذَلِكَ عَنْ دِينِهِ، وَاللَّهِ لَيُتِمَّنَّ هَذَا الأَمْرَ حَتَّى يَسِيرَ الرَّاكِبُ مِنْ صَنْعَاءَ إِلَى حَضْرَمَوْتَ، لاَ يَخَافُ إِلاَّ اللَّهَ أَوِ الذِّئْبَ عَلَى غَنَمِهِ، وَلَكِنَّكُمْ تَسْتَعْجِلُونَ»
“Among the nations before you a (believing) man would be put in a ditch that was dug for him, and a saw would be put over his head and he would be cut into two pieces; yet that (torture) would not make him give up his religion. His body would be combed with iron combs that would remove his flesh from the bones and nerves, yet that would not make him abandon his religion. By Allah, this religion (i.e. Islam) will prevail till a traveler from Sana (in Yemen) to Hadrarmaut will fear none but Allah, or a wolf as regards his sheep, but you (people) are hasty.”
So, this Knowledge of Allah ﷻ granted to The Messenger of Allah ﷺ about a time of security in Yemen, was not used in as an excuse for the Companions to abandoning striving to establish Islam in the face of persecution. No, they were patient, they strove and they were victorious. Thus, they raised their voices for Islam, they granted the Nussrah to establish Islam and they waged Jihad in the Way of Allah swt to ensure the dominance of Islam.
Similarly, regarding our time of persecution, The Messenger of Allah ﷺ was granted glad tidings of the return of the Khilafah before the return of the Mehdi. It was narrated by Umm Salamah (r.a) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said,
«يَكُونُ اخْتِلَافٌ عِنْدَ مَوْتِ خَلِيفَةٍ فَيَخْرُجُ رَجُلٌ مِنْ بَنِي هَاشِمٍ، فَيَأْتِي مَكَّةَ، فَيَسْتَخْرِجُهُ النَّاسُ مِنْ بَيْتِهِ وَهُوَ كَارِهٌ فَيُبَايِعُونَهُ بَيْنَ الرُّكْنِ وَالْمَقَامِ، فَيُجَهَّزُ إِلَيْهِ جَيْشٌ مِنَ الشَّامِ، حَتَّى إِذَا كَانُوا بِالْبَيْدَاءِ خُسِفَ بِهِمْ، فَيَأْتِيهِ عَصَائِبُ الْعِرَاقِ وَأَبْدَالُ الشَّامِ، وَيَنْشَأُ رَجُلٌ بِالشَّامِ، وَأَخْوَالُهُ كَلْبٌ فَيُجَهَّزُ إِلَيْهِ جَيْشٌ، فَيَهْزِمُهُمُ اللَّهُ، فَتَكُونُ الدَّبْرَةُ عَلَيْهِمْ، فَذَلِكَ يَوْمُ كَلْبٍ، الْخَائِبُ: مَنْ خَابَ مِنْ غَنِيمَةِ كَلْبٍ، فَيَسْتَفْتِحُ الْكُنُوزَ، وَيُقِسِّمُ الْأَمْوَالَ، وَيُلْقِي الْإِسْلَامُ بِجِرَانِهِ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ، فَيَعِيشُ بِذَلِكَ سَبْعَ سِنِينَ أَوْ قَالَ: تِسْعَ سِنِينَ»
“Disagreement will occur at the death of a Khaleefah, and a man of Bani Hashim will flee to Makkah and some of the people of Makkah will come to him and will bring him out against his will, and they will pledge allegiance to him between the corner (Black Stone) and the Maqam. An army will be sent against him from Ash-Shaam, which will be swallowed up by the earth in Al-Baida. When the people see that, the devoted worshippers (Abdaal) from Ash-Shaam and the best people (Asaa’ib) from Al-Iraq will come to him and pledge allegiance to him. Then there will arise a man in Ash-Sham whose maternal uncles belong to Kalb and send against them an expeditionary force which will be overcome by them, and that is the expedition of Kalb. The real loser will be the one who does not receive the booty of Kalb. He will divide the wealth and Islam will become established on earth and he will remain for seven years, or he ﷺ said nine years.” (Reported by al-Tabarani in al-Awsat, and al-Haythami mentioned it in Majma’ al-Zawaid, and said, “the transmitters are sound and authentic.”) The narrators of the hadeeth and its commentary agree that the Khaleefah mentioned in this hadeeth is al-Mahdi. For at the beginning of the hadeeth, he ﷺ said:
«اخْتِلَافٌ عِنْدَ مَوْتِ خَلِيفَةٍ»
“Disagreement will occur at the death of a Khaleefah”, meaning that the Khilafah exists before the appearance of Imam Mahdi.
So, how are we to take this glad tidings in our time? Does this mean that the Dawah Carrier can abandon the call and become silent? Or the Alim, human rights activist and journalist decline their support for the Khilafah project? Or the army officer turn away from his duty to grant Nussrah (Material Support)? No, by no means, no! O Muslims, The Messenger of Allah warned us of a time when corruption will spread in a time of Fitna. However, he ﷺ also pointed to those who will be blessed with the pleasure of Allah ﷻ even in that time. This is proven by the hadith of Sahl b. Sa’d as-Saa’idi (ra) who said that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said,
«بدأ الإسلام غريباً وسيعود غريباً كما بدأ فطوبى للغرباء قالوا يا رسول الله ومن الغرباء؟ قال الذين يصلحون عند فساد الناس»
“Islam began as something strange, and it shall return to being something strange, so give glad tidings to the strangers.” It was asked, “Who are those strangers, O Messenger of Allah?” He replied, “Those that correct the sunnah when the people become corrupt.” This is the narration of at-Tabaraani in his al-Kabeer. And in the narration in al-Awsat as-Sagheer we have: «يصلحون إذا فسد الناس» “They correct the people when (izaa) they become corrupt.” The word ‘إذا’ (when) is used for that which comes in the future. This indicates that the corruption will occur after the time of the Companions (ra). So let us abandon fatalism and passiveness. Let us perform our duties so that we may be of those who witness the glad tidings and earn the good pleasure of Allah ﷻ.
-
Q&A: The Saudi-Turkish-Pakistani Tripartite Alliance
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
The Saudi-Turkish-Pakistani Tripartite Alliance
(Translated)Question:
On August 18, 2026, Al Arabiya.net reported that Trump welcomed the tripartite agreement between Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia: “US President Donald Trump welcomed the signing of the Mecca Agreement for Joint Defense by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, describing the move as significant, bold, and extremely important, while also praising the security coordination between Middle Eastern countries and their move towards strengthening their joint defense capabilities…” Al Arabiya.net had published on 17/8/2026: “Trump added via the Truth Social platform that he was “Very happy to see that Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan have recently, and finally, signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement. It shows how the Middle East is coming together…” Prior to that, on Friday, 7/8/2026, the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) announced on its website: “HRH the Crown Prince, the President of Türkiye, and the Prime Minister of Pakistan signed the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement, reflecting the three states’ shared commitment to further strengthening their collective security and to promoting peace, security, and stability in the region and beyond, in pursuit of a secure and prosperous future.”
The question now is: What are the dimensions and implications of this agreement signed by these three countries? Is it an alliance to fight aggressors against Muslim lands, such as the Jewish entity? Or is it simply to support Saudi Arabia against Iran, especially given the tense situation in the Gulf? Furthermore, why did America not announce its support for this agreement until ten days later, even though these three countries are loyal to America, and it is unlikely they would have agreed without its approval? In short, what is the purpose of this agreement? May Allah reward you with the good.
Answer:
To clarify the answer, let us review the following:
1- The Saudi Press Agency (SPA) published on Friday, 7/8/2026: “HRH the Crown Prince, the President of Türkiye, and the Prime Minister of Pakistan signed the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement, reflecting the three states’ shared commitment to further strengthening their collective security and to promoting peace, security, and stability in the region and beyond, in pursuit of a secure and prosperous future.” The agency stated that the joint statement signed after the meeting held in Makkah on Friday stipulates that: “The agreement is intended to strengthen collective deterrence against any act of aggression, and stipulates that any armed attack against any one of the three states shall be regarded as an attack against them all. It further provides for the enhancement of all aspects of defense cooperation among the three states.” This agreement stipulates that it is a joint military alliance between major regional powers to deter any aggression against any of them. However, it implicitly declares that it has no connection to any aggression against other Muslim countries and will not intervene to repel it!
2- This is why, the Jewish entity has not shown any reaction, because it realizes that this agreement or this alliance does not threaten it. It should be noted that each of the three countries that signed the agreement, if they were sincere, would know that they are capable of threatening this entity and eliminating it, not standing idly by while it destroys Gaza, killing and wounding hundreds of thousands of its inhabitants, displacing millions after demolishing their homes, committing the most heinous crimes, and leaving its people to die of hunger and thirst, ravaged by disease and torn apart by wounds. And it continues its crimes, yet these countries have not taken any action, neither collectively nor individually, to stop these crimes. Furthermore, similar crimes have been committed in the West Bank, where hordes of settlers, protected by their soldiers, spread corruption throughout the land, destroying crops and livestock, killing, wounding, imprisoning, seizing land, expelling its inhabitants, and demolishing their homes. Indeed, the content of this tripartite alliance is open to the Jewish entity, according to its text! Turkish President Erdoğan stated “The agreement does not target any country and is open to the participation of all brotherly countries seeking peace, prosperity and stability in our region.” He did not explicitly exclude the Jewish entity, leaving the matter ambiguous—a clear reassurance to the Jewish entity. Turkey recognizes this entity and has not severed diplomatic or trade relations with it, even as it perpetrates brutal massacres in Gaza and occupies areas under the pretext of security areas!
3- Similar to the Turkish president’s statement, Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Public Diplomacy, Dr. Rayed Krimly [Qarmali], stated on the X platform on 7/8/2026: “It does not constitute a threat to the security of any country in the region, nor does it represent an escalation of tensions between any two states.” Saudi Arabia calls for the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside the Jewish state and explicitly declares its support for the two-state solution! In other words, the Saudi official wants to convey that this alliance is not directed against the Jewish entity. Likewise, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif wrote on the X platform on 7/8/2026, describing the agreement as “historic” and stating that it “will be a shield of peace for future generations and will bring prosperity to the three countries.” This implies that the agreement is not for war against aggressors but rather a peace initiative! Furthermore, the Pakistani Foreign Ministry confirmed that “the Mecca Agreement aims to strengthen collective deterrence against any aggression and stipulates that any armed attack on one of the three countries is considered an attack on all three.” (Euronews, 7/8/2026). That is, the goal of America’s agents and followers in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey signing this agreement has nothing to do with fighting the Jews, despite their occupation of the Blessed Land and their perpetration of successive crimes in the first of the two Qiblas!
4- The summit’s final statement declared that “the agreement aims to strengthen joint deterrence and develop defense cooperation among the three countries,” stipulating that any armed attack on one of the signatory states is considered an attack on all. The statement added that the agreement is based on “historical ties” and shared strategic interests among the three countries and aims to enhance security and stability in the region and the world (BBC, 7/8/2026). However, the only country among the three currently under attack is Saudi Arabia, and these attacks originate from Iran. Considering this, the true meaning behind the three countries’ statements becomes clear. Turkish Foreign Minister Fidan hinted at the agreement’s objective, stating that “no common threat was identified within the Mecca Agreement, while emphasizing that ‘any country that does not attack us will not be a target for us’” (CNN Arabic, 9/8/2026). The meaning of his statement is that if Iran attacks—which it is indeed doing—it will become a target for Turkey, according to what is understood from his statement. In another statement, Fidan attempted to improve the agreement’s objectives by claiming it aims to ensure stability in the region, but he misspoke, and said: [“Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey are not expansionist states, considering the agreement “the most important step that will bring lasting stability to this region, whose name has been associated with instability for the past hundred years since the Ottoman State withdrew from it.” (CNN Arabic, 8/8/2026)]. However, this official is afraid to speak the truth as it is. His statement that the Ottoman Empire withdrew from the region is merely a way of avoiding angering the kafir (disbelieving) states by revealing the truth: that the kafir states, along with their Arab and Turkish agents, conspired against the Ottoman Empire in World War I to overthrow the Khilafah (Caliphate). These states then began to wreak havoc in the Islamic world, seeking out their agents and installing them as kings and presidents, and targeting the elite, labeling them as extremists and terrorists, and imprisoning them. Chaos and instability prevailed because the Islamic Ummah rejects and resists the actions of the kafir states. Thus, Fidan said, “…since the withdrawal of the Ottoman Empire,” instead of saying, “…since the conspiring of the kafir states and the traitorous Arabs and Turks against the Ottoman Caliphate to overthrow it.” He did not say that for fear of angering those countries! May Allah fight them, how they are deluded.
5- As for why America didn’t announce any reaction to this agreement until ten days later, if it were not in its interest, it would have opposed it immediately. It seems that America did not want to appear to be behind the agreement by immediately endorsing it, as this would diminish its political appeal. It would appear that the agreement was dictated by America, thus undermining the position of its three agents. It is worth noting that these three countries tried to use the agreement to demonstrate their concern for their sovereignty and their freedom to stand up to those who attack them. This is why America bided time… and then Trump began endorsing the agreement, expressing his happiness with it, and praising the leaders of the three countries!
Therefore, it was states as reported by Al Arabiya Net on18/8/2026, that, (US President Donald Trump welcomed the signing of the Mecca Agreement for Joint Defense by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, describing the move as significant, bold, and extremely important. He also praised the security coordination among Middle Eastern countries and their move towards strengthening their joint defense capabilities). Al Arabiya Net had previously reported on 17/8/2026, that (Trump added via Truth Social that he was “Very happy to see that Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan have recently, and finally, signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement. It shows how the Middle East is coming together, and how Countries will finally be able to defend themselves in a more meaningful way.”)
This explains Trump’s delay in offering praise and support. Otherwise, the three countries are loyal to America, whether they are agent states like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, which are strategic partners of America outside of NATO, or countries orbiting America like Turkey, which is a NATO member alongside it.
6- America wants these three countries, allied to it, to play a specific role in the region, particularly against Iran and the Muslim populations of the region. After the signing of a memorandum of understanding between Iranian President Pezeshkian and his American counterpart Trump on 18/6/2026, via video conference, America has thus far been unable to achieve its objectives, and negotiations remain stalled. America wants to use these major regional powers as tools against Iran! Thereby encircling it with neighbouring countries allied with the US. Trump assumes that this will force Iran to soften its stance and accept his terms, thus ensuring his party’s survival in the upcoming midterm elections. In this context, Republican Congressman Joe Wilson commented on his X platform on 8/8/2026, regarding this agreement, stating: “The mutual defense pact of Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, and Pakistan is another achievement of @POTUS promoting stability, peace, and prosperity in the Middle East…” Michael Ratney, the former US ambassador to Riyadh, also believes that, [America views the agreement as enhancing regional security and enabling it to address Iran’s ongoing aggression. He argues that the Mecca Agreement helps protect the entire region, believing that US President Trump sees the tripartite alliance as a means to support him and promote stability (Al-Arabiya.net, 18/8/2026)]. All of this indicates that America is behind this agreement and that it represents a success for its president, Trump. Therefore, America mobilized these three allied countries to the agreement, to use them as a tool of indirect pressure against Iran.
7- Turkey, as a NATO member, is committed to defending its members, including the United States. Can it act against its commitments? On the contrary, it would act in accordance to its loyalty to America. This is why its President, Erdoğan, was keen to mend the rift within the alliance, particularly between America and Europe, and worked to strengthen it. He hosted its leaders, at the top was Trump, in Ankara on July 7th and 8th, 2026. He welcomed Trump at the airport and then hosted him at the presidential palace in Ankara, holding a bilateral meeting before the NATO summit. The reception demonstrated the depth of the friendship and affection between the two. During this visit, Trump stated: “And frankly, if it (NATO) weren’t held in Turkey, where my friend happens to be a very strong leader, a very strong, uh, person, uh, it’s possible that I wouldn’t have attended.” He praised Turkey’s stance of not aligning with Iran. Therefore, Erdoğan’s participation in an alliance with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan is part of his loyalty to America and his commitment to NATO.
8- From a contrasting perspective, statements emanating from Tehran indicate that Iran has understood that it is the target of the new defense agreement between Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. In the first Iranian comment on the agreement, [Ebrahim Rezaei, a member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee in the Iranian Parliament, stated on X: “The Saudis must realize that a ‘paper agreement’ with Turkey and Pakistan will not bring them security, just as decades of unilateral reliance on the Americans failed to achieve it.” He added, addressing the Saudis: “Change your policies so you don’t have to beg others for security.” (CNN Arabic, 7/8/2026)]. Then, as reported by Al-Quds Al-Arabi Newspaper on 9/8/2026, Iranian newspapers strongly attacked this agreement. Kayhan Newspaper, affiliated with the office of the Iranian Supreme Leader, considered that the goal of this tripartite agreement was (to confront the Yemeni resistance, Ansar Allah, Iran, and the axis of resistance). Similarly, Tasnim News Agency, close to the Revolutionary Guard, said, “that Saudi Arabia, after realizing the futility of relying on the United States to guarantee its security, resorted, instead of changing its strategy, to expanding its policy of “buying security” by pumping money into Turkey and Pakistan through the tripartite agreement in Mecca, to secure itself against the responses of the Resistance Front””. This clarifies what Iran sees as the goals of this agreement between the three countries, and that it is a tool of pressure used by America against Iran.
9- In origin is for the three countries—Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan—and the rest of the Muslim world to be one nation in one state, under the rule of a single Khaleefah (caliph) who rules according to the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw), not separate, independent states forming alliances on behalf of colonial powers and joining coalitions established by them. Allah (swt) has commanded in clear verses to hold fast to His rope, and He (swt) has forbidden division and the fragmentation of the land into separate states. He (swt) has categorically forbidden allegiance to the kuffar (disbelievers) and working on their behalf, and He has forbidden ruling by anything other than what He (swt) has revealed, considering such actions to be kufr (disbelief), injustice, transgression, or all of these combined. Allah (swt) has promised in His Noble Book the return of the Khilafah Rashidah (rightly guided Caliphate).
[وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَى لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْناً يَعْبُدُونَنِي لَا يُشْرِكُونَ بِي شَيْئاً وَمَنْ كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ]
“Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good that He will certainly make them successors in the land, as He did with those before them; and will surely establish for them their faith which He has chosen for them; and will indeed change their fear into security—˹provided that˺ they worship Me, associating nothing with Me. But whoever disbelieves after this ˹promise˺, it is they who will be the rebellious” [An-Nur: 55].
Likewise, the Messenger of Allah (saw) gave glad tidings of the end of this oppressive rule that exists in these three countries and all other Islamic countries, and then the return of the Khilafah (Caliphate). He (saw) said:
«…ثُمَّ تَكُونُ مُلْكاً جَبْرِيَّةً فَتَكُونُ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ تَكُونَ، ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا، ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةً عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ. ثُمَّ سَكَتَ»
“…Then there will be oppressive rule (ملكًا جبرية) for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah upon the Prophetic method.’ Then he (saw) was silent.” [Narrated by Ahmad]
The Khilafah will return, Allah willing. However, Allah (swt) has decreed that angels will not descend from heaven to establish the Khilafah for us while we sit idly by. Rather, we must work, strive, and exert ourselves, seeking truthfulness and sincerity in all our actions. Then be assured of the fulfillment of the promise of Allah (swt) and the glad tidings of His Messenger (saw). All of this is evident in the life of the Messenger of Allah (saw). This is what the Messenger of Allah (saw) did, and this is how his Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) followed his example. This is how we must be, and Allah’s victory will undoubtedly come, by His permission.
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بنَصْرِ اللَّهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ]
“And on that day the believers will rejoice * at the victory willed by Allah. He gives victory to whoever He wills. For He is the Almighty, Most Merciful” [Ar-Rum: 4-5]
-
Q&A: The Heart, Meaning the Mind
Answer to Question
The Heart, Meaning the Mind
To: Muhammad Amin
(Translated)Question:
Assalamu’alaikum, our respected Amir.
I would like to ask the following question:
In both the Qur’an and the Hadith, the words Qalb (heart) and Qulub (hearts) are frequently used in relation to the activity of thinking. For example: [أَفَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَتَكُونَ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ يَعْقِلُونَ بِهَا] “Have they not travelled through the land so that they may have hearts with which they reason?” [Al-Hajj: 46].
Why is this so? Is not the centre of thinking the brain, together with the existence of facts that are perceived through the senses, as we have learned in Hizb? In fact, this is also what is established scientifically.
Therefore, how should we understand the meaning of the words Qalb and Qulub in relation to the process of thinking?
I would like to express my jazaakumullahu khairan for your willingness to answer my question.
Answer:
Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatulah Wa Barakatuh
The word “heart” refers to the known organ in the body… but this is not its only meaning; it also has other meanings, including the “mind,” which can be understood from the context and surrounding indicators:
1- In Lisan al-Arab (by Ibn Manzur al-Afriqi al-Misri):
“The heart is a morsel of flesh attached by the aorta.” Ibn Saidah: “The heart, Qalb/Fouad is masculine,” as stated by al-Lihyani. The plural is aqlub and qulub, the first being from al-Lihyani, and Allah’s saying: [نَزَلَ به الرُّوحُ الأَمِينُ * على قَلْبك] “…Which the trustworthy spirit ˹Gabriel˺ brought down * into your heart ˹O Prophet˺” [Ash-Shu’ara: 193-194]. Al-Zajjaj said: Its meaning is that Gabriel, peace be upon him, brought it down to you, and your heart retained it and it remained firm, so you will never forget it. The heart may also be used to refer to the mind, as Al-Farra’ said regarding the verse: [إِن في ذلك لَذِكْرى لمن كان له قَلْبٌ] “Surely in this is a reminder for whoever has a ˹mindful˺ heart” [Qaf: 37]. That is: intellect. Al-Farra’ said: It is permissible in Arabic to say, “You have no heart,” and “Your heart is not with you,” meaning, “Your intellect is not with you, and where has your heart gone?” meaning, “Where has your intellect gone?” Others said: It is for one who has a heart, meaning understanding and reflection. And it was narrated from the Prophet (saw) that he said: «أَتاكم أَهل اليَمن هم أَرَقُّ قلوباً وأَلْيَنُ أَفْئِدَةً» “The people of the Yemen have come to you. -They have the tenderest minds and gentlest hearts.” He described hearts as tender and minds as gentle, as if the heart were more specific than the mind in usage…]
2- In Al-Sahah fi al-Lughah (by Al-Jawhari):
[The heart, Qalb: the fouad, and it may be used to refer to the heart. Al-Farra’ said regarding the Allah’s (swt) saying: [إنَّ في ذلك لَذِكرى لمن كانَ له قَلْبٌ] “Surely in this is a reminder for whoever has a ˹mindful˺ heart” [Qaf: 37]. That is the mind…]
3- And in Al-Qamus Al-Muhit (by Al-Fayruzabadi):
[Qalabah: He turned it over, changed its direction, away from its face. Like the words Aqlabahu and Qalabahu. To target his heart, fouad, means, he turns it over, turns the face to the back, that is to turn it over…
And the heart, Qalb: is the fouad, or more specific than that. The intellect, the essence of everything… And with a dhamma (Arabic accent mark): a woman’s bracelet, and a white snake, …]
I hope this is sufficient, and Allah Knows Best and is Most Wise.
Your Brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah30 Safar 1448 AH
13 August 2026 CE -
Q&A: Iraq and the Fate of Pro-Iranian Factions
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
Iraq and the Fate of Pro-Iranian Factions
(Translated)Question:
Asharq Al-Awsat published on its website on 4 August 2026: “The Iraqi government finds itself facing a highly sensitive equation, experiencing political and security paralysis between Washington’s demands to disarm the factions and the deeply entrenched Iranian influence within Iraqi political, security, and economic institutions. The Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) had announced on 29/7/2026, that at least 20 PMF members were killed and 32 others wounded in attacks launched by American and Saudi fighter jets targeting official PMF headquarters in several Iraqi provinces.” (Asharq Al-Awsat, 4/8/2026). “The United States and Saudi Arabia had launched a joint attack on what they claimed were sites belonging to Iranian-backed militias in Iraq.” (Al-Hurra, 31/7/2026). This was carried out after Prime Minister Ali Faleh al-Zaidi returned from an official visit to the United States! What is behind all of the above at this particular time? Has America’s grip on Iraq tightened even further?
Answer:
To clarify these questions, let’s examine the following:
1- With the American occupation of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, America dealt a decisive blow to the Iraqi regime / Ba’athist regime and those behind it, namely British influence in the entire region. However, British influence continued to thrive through Saudi Arabia. Former Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal was outspoken in his criticism of American policy in Iraq, stating that the areas occupied by America were being handed over to Iran. But with the death of the British agent King Abdullah in 2015 and the ascension of American agents Salman and his son Mohammed (MBS) to power in Saudi Arabia, America dealt a fatal blow to British influence in the region. All that remained for the British were the Gulf States and Jordan. They are all small states with no power to oppose the American influence, and incapable of even causing disruption! Thus, America became the de facto power in the region.
2- American policy in its war on Islam under the pretext of terrorism necessitated the sectarian division of the Muslim world. In line with this policy, Iran became a sectarian center, mirroring the other sectarian center, Saudi Arabia. This policy also required expanding Iran’s role in the region, a role that included penetrating Iraq and building influence there under the shadow of the American occupation, as well as its influence through sectarian groups in Yemen and Lebanon, and its sectarian extension into Syria and elsewhere. America remained in dire need of this Iranian role.
3- With the end of America’s need for Iran in Syria, Iran’s role as defined by American policy came to an end, and it was asked to withdraw. Indeed, Iran began to withdraw from Syria and immediately pulled its forces out. It did not participate in the war against the Jewish entity, despite the assassination of its party leaders in Lebanon. However, it refused to back down on its nuclear program. Then, the Jewish entity launched a war against it in 2025, and Iran found itself biting its lip in regret for not fighting “when the white bull was eaten”—that is, immediately after the events of October 7th, 2023—but rather contenting itself with the role of its party in Lebanon. Therefore, the war in 2025, and the subsequent rounds led by America and its close ally the Jewish entity, represented a policy of eliminating the Iranian role in the region. Iraqi groups loyal to Tehran began fighting alongside it, launching missiles and drones against American targets in Iraq and some Gulf States. Here, America insisted on eliminating the Iranian role in Iraq as part of the new Trump administration’s policy to reduce Iran to a subordinate state and diminish its regional role if possible. Therefore, the driving force behind the current political developments in Iraq is Trump’s policy of eliminating the Iranian influence in Iraq.
4- America, which occupied Iraq in 2003 and established a sectarian political system that granted Iran significant influence, now seeks to end this situation. It wants Iraqi governments to reorient themselves as an Arab state, not sectarian one, meaning severing ties with Iran and normalizing relations with the Gulf States and other Arab countries. All of this is part of a broader effort to counter Iranian influence in Iraq or eliminate its presence altogether. The US has imposed sanctions on Iranian gas supplies to Iraq, urging Baghdad to seek non-Iranian alternatives. Since Iraq’s proposed alternative was Turkmen gas, which would have to transit through Iran, America rejected it. The US also refused to allow Iraq to import electricity from Iran: [The United States ended the sanctions waiver that allowed Iraq to purchase electricity from neighboring Iran, in line with President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” policy on Tehran. (Al Jazeera Net, 9/3/2025)]. Prior to this, the US also imposed sanctions on any Iraqi entity conducting dollar transactions with Iran: [The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, citing US officials, that the United States has banned 14 Iraqi banks from conducting dollar transactions. The newspaper report stated that the ban, imposed by the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, is part of a broader campaign against the transfer of US currency to Iran. (Al-Quds Al-Arabi, 19/7/2023)].
5- On the other hand, the United States is demanding that the Iraqi government clamp down on pro-Iranian groups and exclude them from the government: [Sources revealed that the United States threatened senior Iraqi politicians with sanctions that could affect the Iraqi state itself, including the potential targeting of its most important financial lifeline—oil revenues deposited in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York—if armed groups supported by Iran are included in the next Iraqi government. According to four sources who spoke to Reuters, this warning is one of the strongest examples so far of US President Donald Trump’s campaign to reduce the influence of groups linked to Iran within Iraq. (Sky News Arabia, 23/1/2026)]. In a move indicating the Iraqi government’s compliance with US directives, it announced its neutrality in the ongoing conflict with Iran. This neutrality means that it does not side with Iran; otherwise, the US military would be using Iraqi territory to strike Iran and Iraqi groups loyal to Iran, as well as to encourage the Jewish entity to establish military bases, as revealed by some newspapers: [Following previous reports about the existence of an Israeli base on Iraqi soil, a report in The New York Times revealed that “Israel” had established a second secret military base in the western desert of Iraq. (Deutsche Welle, 18/5/2026)].
6- Then America began to openly interfere in who heads the government. Despite Maliki being a loyal American agent and ruled Iraq with a firm American grip during the occupation, the Trump administration openly opposed his re-election as Prime Minister of Iraq. Trump said: “Last time Maliki was in power, the Country descended into poverty and total chaos. That should not be allowed to happen again. Because of his insane policies and ideologies, if elected, the United States of America will no longer help Iraq.” (Sky News Arabia, 29/1/2026). [Maliki had been nominated by the largest political bloc in the Iraqi parliament to head the government. (Al Arabiya, 14/2/2026)]. Despite his protests, Maliki, along with other Iraqis, was unable to overcome Trump’s insistence: [In response to threats from US President Donald Trump, former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki affirmed on Wednesday his rejection of “blatant American interference in Iraq’s internal affairs,” considering it a “violation of his country’s sovereignty.” In protest against Trump’s statements, hundreds demonstrated in Baghdad near the Green Zone, where the US embassy is located. (France 24, 28/1/2026)]. Thus, Trump’s statements unequivocally revealed the true nature of America’s dealings with agent states and its agents. Indeed, Maliki was rejected, and on 27/4/2026, the appointment of a figure acceptable to America took place, Ali al-Zaidi. This reveals that Iranian influence in Iraq is extremely fragile, not even reaching the level of influence itself. Rather, it was America that provided Iran with space and facilitated its actions in Iraq to implement its policies.
7- When America sought to end this role, it began demanding that the Iraqi government disarm these groups and set deadlines for doing so, just as it was demanding of Lebanon regarding the Lebanese-Iranian party. Indeed, two Iraqi groups agreed to disarm: [In early June, fighters from the Peace Brigades (Saraya al-Salam), militias loyal to the Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, gathered in Samarra to hand over their weapons to the Iraqi government. This disarmament process represented the group’s withdrawal from the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), a powerful alliance comprised mostly of Shiite militias, operating both inside and outside the Iraqi state. Thousands of Peace Brigades fighters were the first to withdraw from this alliance, and they were not the last: Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, another powerful militia, also announced their withdrawal from the PMF. Several prominent Iranian-backed militias remain firmly committed to serving Tehran’s interests in Iraq and the wider region. However, the split of the PMF constitutes a real blow to Iran. (Independent Arabia 12/7/2026)]. The state sets a deadline for the surrender of weapons: [Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi said on Tuesday that his country would not allow any entity to bear arms outside the framework of the state after the end of September. During his meeting with US President Donald Trump at the White House, al-Zaidi emphasized that his government’s approach is based on restricting weapons to official security forces. (Sky News Arabia,14/7/2026)]. Therefore, the political developments in Iraq today are linked to the US policy of eliminating Iran’s former role and influence in Iraq. America’s success in this regard appears significant, not only in terms of military and political pressure on Iraq but also in the financial situation. Iraqi oil revenues are transferred to an account in the US Treasury, so the Iraqi government cannot pay its employees’ salaries without the US Treasury’s approval!
8- One issue remains: the campaign to expose corruption and corrupt individuals in Iraq. This campaign can only be directed against those linked to Iran in Iraq, threatening them with it. Although it has affected others, the Iraqi regime, which America built to be a model of democracy in the region, is riddled with corruption from top to bottom, making it the most corrupt of all these regimes. [The Iraqi government, in its latest statements, says that it has arrested 21 officials so far, accused of involvement in cases of financial and administrative corruption, while a number of other wanted individuals remain at large… Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi confirmed, during a cabinet meeting, that the government is continuing to combat corruption and recover public funds… Economist Abdul Rahman al-Mashhadani, in an interview with Al Jazeera Net, estimates the economic cost of financial and political corruption in Iraq at more than one trillion dollars, noting that a large portion of the looted funds has been integrated into foreign economies. (Al Jazeera Net, 3/7/2026)].
9- Thus, after the Iraqi president appointed Ali al-Zaidi as prime minister, the list of American demands, according to Al-Sharq TV on 10/5/2026, included taking practical measures to remove Iranian influence from the Iraqi government and disarming armed factions. Indeed, al-Zaidi began implementing the American demands: [The dismissals and extensive changes made by Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi in sensitive security and economic institutions, after his meeting with US envoy Tom Barrack and prior to his anticipated visit to Washington, sparked controversy regarding whether his “measures” were a step to reassert state authority or a response to pressure targeting the influence of factions close to Iran. (Al Jazeera Net, 19/6/2026)]. Then, political developments in Iraq accelerated: [The Iraqi capital, Baghdad, witnessed an unprecedented security operation in the Green Zone, where Iraqi elite forces arrested 47 officials, including 12 current members of parliament, on corruption charges, on the orders of Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi. The campaign ousted the Deputy Oil Minister, Ali Maarij, who was subject to US sanctions. (BBC 30/6/2026)].
10- Thus, it becomes clear that political influence in Iraq is purely American influence. America rejected the nomination of the Coordination Framework, which is described as loyal to Iran, of Nouri al-Maliki, and imposed on it the nomination of Ali al-Zaidi. The Coordination Framework did so. Then it ordered al-Zaidi to remove these groups and disarm them, even though only a few days had passed since his appointment. He actually began to do so, and then he launched an anti-corruption campaign. Therefore, the anti-corruption campaign is a sword hanging over the loyalists of Iran in Iraq, even if it affects other officials, as it is difficult to find an official in Iraq who is free from corruption. It is as if al-Zaidi’s government, and behind it America, is threatening the armed factions, the groups loyal to Iran, and the officials with the necessity of implementing the state’s orders quickly, and in case of delay, corruption files await them, and these are large files. Without this connection, the anti-corruption campaign cannot be understood in a political system that America built corrupt in all its aspects.
11- As for what some believe—that Iraq is trying to balance American and Iranian influence, citing Ali al-Zaidi’s visit to the White House on 13/7/2026, where he was warmly received by President Trump, followed by his visit to Tehran on 23/7/2026—and also: [According to a report published by Axios, al-Zaidi insisted on proceeding with his official visit to the United States despite Iranian attempts to cancel it, before meeting with President Donald Trump at the White House. The report also noted that the Iraqi Prime Minister attended the funeral of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei a few days prior, before traveling to Washington, in a scene reflecting the balance Baghdad is trying to maintain in its relations with both Tehran and Washington. (Al-Arabiya,16/7/2026)], this balancing act is far from reality. Nothing demonstrates the reality of American influence in Iraq more clearly than the American military presence since 2003. Many officials speak of the withdrawal of American forces, only to discover later that they are still present and capable of striking even Iraqi factions, as they have been doing with helicopters. During the war on Iran, this indicates the proximity of the airports from which the attacks originated, as well as America’s facilitation of the establishment of temporary military bases by the Jewish entity in Iraq to launch attacks on Iran. Furthermore, Iraqi oil revenues are deposited into a special account in the US Treasury by various importing countries. America then funds the Iraqi government to the level of its compliance with US policy. Today, the US demands that the Iraqi government respond quickly by removing Iranian influence from the government and dismissing officials with ties to Iran, even those considered loyal US agents, such as Nouri al-Maliki. The US also pressured the Coordination Framework, described as loyal to Iran, to nominate al-Zaidi, only to then incite al-Zaidi to turn against them (the Coordination Factions). What the US urgently demands of al-Zaidi’s government today is the disarmament of armed factions linked to the Revolutionary Guard who carry out operations against the US. The Iraqi government has set a deadline of 30/9/2026, for these factions to surrender their weapons. This means the government will be using its security forces to attack Iraqis according to instructions issued by Washington! Trump boasts of influence and plunder in Iraq, claiming the government is sufficient to protect his country’s interests. [Trump said during his meeting with al-Zaidi in the Oval Office: “We don’t think we need the military there anymore,” adding, “The oil companies are all going in now and they’re doing partnerships with Iraq, and they’re getting along very well.” (AP News, Independent Arabia, 15/7/2026)]. Thus, America uses its proxies to advance its interests!
12- In conclusion, it is truly painful that Iraq, once the center of the Khilafah (Caliphate), whose Caliph said to the Roman Emperor “The answer is what you see, not what you hear” and then mobilized the Muslim armies and taught him a lesson that brought him back to his senses. This country is now run by America, not only politically, but also because America holds Iraq’s money. The Iraqi government cannot pay its employees’ salaries unless America agrees to release some of its funds! Truly, this is a great sin and a grave crime. Allah (swt) has spoken the truth regarding these regimes:
[سَيُصِيبُ الَّذِينَ أَجْرَمُوا صَغَارٌ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ وَعَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ بِمَا كَانُوا يَمْكُرُونَ]
“The wicked will soon be overwhelmed by humiliation from Allah and a severe punishment for their evil plots” [Al-An’am: 124].
The Ummah will not be saved from this humiliation unless it restores its Khilafah Rashidah (rightly guided Caliphate) by giving support to Hizb ut Tahrir, the pioneer that does not lie to its people. Only then will Allah’s promise be fulfilled.
[وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْض..]
“Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good that He will certainly make them successors in the land” [An-Nur: 55]. And then the glad tidings of the Messenger of Allah (saw) will be fulfilled after this oppressive rule under which we live. Hudhayfah said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
«… ثُمَّ تَكُونُ مُلْكاً جَبْرِيَّةً فَتَكُونُ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ تَكُونَ ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةً عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ ثُمَّ سَكَتَ»
“… Then there will be oppressive rule (ملكًا جبرية) for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah on the method of Prophethood.’ Then he (saw) was silent.” Then Allah’s victory will be achieved.
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيم]
“And on that day the believers will rejoice * at the victory willed by Allah. He gives victory to whoever He wills. For He is the Almighty, Most Merciful” [Ar-Rum: 4-5]
22 Safar 1448 AH
5 August 2026 CE -
Q&A: The Situation in Sudan and the American Objectives
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
The Situation in Sudan and the American Objectives
(Translated)Question:
“The battles between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces militia have recently reached their peak in North Kordofan State in south-central Sudan…” (Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, 28/7/2026). The fighting continues after more than three years, especially after the Rapid Support Forces seized control of El Fasher on 26/10/2025, and the army withdrew from it. The American proposal presented by US Envoy Massad Boulos on 20/6/2026, for a three-month truce, did not alleviate the escalation of these battles. So, where are things heading in Sudan? What does America aim to achieve with its proposed solution? And is it possible to achieve it soon? May Allah reward you with the good.
Answer:
To clarify the answers to the questions above, we will review the following:
1– The Rapid Support Forces signed the Sudanese Constitutional Charter on 22/2/2025, in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi. Subsequently, the Sudanese Founding Alliance (Tasees) was officially established. This alliance (coalition) announced on Saturday, 26/7/2025, the formation of a parallel government to the official authorities in the country. “The alliance’s spokesperson, Alaa El-Din Naqd, announced from Nyala, the capital of South Darfur State, in a statement via the X platform, that the alliance’s leadership body held a meeting and decided to form a presidential council consisting of 15 members, headed by the commander of the Rapid Support Forces, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), with the head of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North, Abdel Aziz al-Hilu, as his deputy, and Mohamed Hassan al-Taishi as prime minister.” (Al-Jazirah, 27/7/2025)
2– On 26/11/2025, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) announced their control of El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur State in western Sudan, which they had been besieging since May 2024. The city holds strategic importance due to its location on the borders with Libya, Chad, and the western cities of the Darfur region. Also, it is the administrative and political capital. Its capture carries symbolic weight, not to mention its historical significance as the capital of the Darfur Sultanate (1604-1874), further enhancing its symbolic value in the narrative of the parallel “Sudanese Founding Alliance” (Tasees) government. (The RSF announced on Sunday that they had seized control of El Fasher, which had been under siege for over a year. This development means that the RSF has consolidated its control over all five Darfur states, and the country has effectively been divided into two parts: an eastern region under the control of the Sudanese army, and a western region under the control of the RSF.” (Al Jazeera, 28/10/2025). El Fasher was the only one of the five Darfur states that the RSF had not yet captured.
3- Thus, following the Rapid Support Forces’ takeover of Darfur, America’s long-planned scheme to separate Darfur from Sudan was realized. The Sudanese army contributed to this outcome by announcing its withdrawal from the city under the pretext of preventing systematic destruction and the killing of civilians, while it is well known that it handed the city over to the RSF on the instructions or at the behest of America to implement this plan. We clarified this clearly in our “Answer to a Question” issued on 3/11/2025, which stated:
[Further evidence of America’s gathering of its two agents’ delegations in Washington is this: (A diplomatic official confirmed yesterday, Thursday, that the Quartet (the United States, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt) would meet today in Washington with representatives of the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces to push both sides toward a three-month humanitarian truce. He said the goal was “to exert unified pressure to solidify the ceasefire and allow humanitarian aid to reach civilians,” Al-Arabiya, 24/10/2025]. This means that the timing of the RSF storming of El Fasher and the Sudanese army’s evacuation of it, coinciding with the Washington meeting, leaves no doubt that the decision to hand over the strategic city to the RSF was made in Washington and that the two Sudanese parties immediately began implementing it on the ground, i.e., two days later, with the outcome achieved on the third day.]. End Quote.
4- Following the Rapid Support Forces’ takeover of El Fasher on 26/10/2025, the parallel government’s Presidential Council announced on 1/6/2026, decisions concerning a unified national army, security, defense, and intelligence services, aimed at organizing the management of national security and defense files during the transitional period (Sky News Arabia, 1/6/2026). All of this demonstrates that the US had been planning for a long time to hand over El Fasher to the RSF. It appears they were simply waiting for the suitable time and circumstances. It is clear from all of this that the US is pursuing a carefully orchestrated strategy to divide Sudan by building a state on the ground, step by step, through the Nairobi Charter, the declaration of the parallel government, ministerial appointments, and decisions regarding the army and intelligence services. First, the constitutional structure of the entity to be established in the west was paved with the Nairobi Charter, then it announced to the world the political institutionalization of this entity through the formation of the parallel government headed by Hemedti and the appointment of Al-Taishi as Prime Minister, followed by decisions of the ministries and the banking system. All that remained was to move the parallel government, whose capital is Nyala, to El-Fasher, which has symbolic importance and still constitutes the administrative and political capital of the state.
5- Then, on 20/6/2026, a new American proposal emerged through the US President’s Special Envoy for Arab and African Affairs, Massad Boulos, calling for acceptance of the status quo. His updated paper to the Sudanese government proposed a comprehensive and immediate 90-day nationwide humanitarian truce to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to those in need, protect civilians, and repair infrastructure, facilities, and public services. The paper also proposed “the establishment of a UN mechanism, with the participation of the African Union and the League of Arab States, to support limited military withdrawals that would facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid, protect civilians, create conditions for the return of displaced persons, and establish a coordination committee to oversee the implementation of the agreement, along with mechanisms for monitoring and resolving any disputes that might arise during the truce.” The paper also called “for using the truce period to negotiate a permanent ceasefire and initiate a civilian-led transition process.” It calls for “negotiating a permanent ceasefire and related security arrangements, including steps for troop withdrawals and redeployments where necessary, prioritizing North Darfur and North Kordofan states in the first phase, in accordance with the UN mechanism, alongside implementing disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration programs, assembling forces in camps, and other related measures.” The document also stipulates “maintaining a unified national army accountable to an independent, elected civilian government, and deploying international observers based on the UN mechanism.”
6- The truce included in the American proposal, under the pretext of delivering humanitarian aid, when conducted with separatist rebel group like the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), it recognizes their entity and accepts what they do. Similarly, when the document speaks of “security arrangements, including steps for withdrawal and redeployment of forces,” it confirms the continued presence of the RSF and avoids any mention of dismantling or ending their existence. In fact, it implicitly calls for their continued presence when it calls for their redeployment. This equates the national army with those seeking to dismantle it, such as the RSF. The document also calls for “limited military withdrawals” under the pretext of “facilitating the delivery of humanitarian aid, protecting civilians, and creating conditions for the return of displaced persons,” which confirms the preservation of these forces without their dissolution. In this paper, it affirms the legitimacy of the existence and dominance of the Rapid Support Forces when it calls for “a comprehensive and immediate nationwide humanitarian truce for 90 days” and when it calls for “using the truce period to negotiate a permanent ceasefire and to begin a transition process led by a civilian authority.” It does not refer to the RSF as separatist and rebel forces, but rather acknowledges their separatist government to divide Sudan.
It should be noted that the latest American proposal is not a new initiative but rather a revival of the proposal previously advanced by the Quartet—comprising the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates—on 12 September 2025. The proposal calls for a three-month humanitarian truce as a pathway toward a permanent ceasefire.
7–The Sudanese response to the latest US proposal, issued on 20/6/2026, was delivered on 25/7/2026. Details of the response were published later. Al Jazeera network on 10/7/2026, citing official Sudanese sources reported the response of the government to the latest American proposal. These sources said that the response: “reaffirmed the government’s commitment to ending the war through negotiations and establishing a 90-day humanitarian truce, contingent upon the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) withdrawing from all cities they have controlled since 11/5/2023” which is the date of the signing of the Jeddah Declaration by the two parties under US-Saudi sponsorship. The response also included: “guarantees for Sudan’s unity and territorial integrity, the preservation of the Sudanese Armed Forces as a unified national army, the integration of all military formations within it, an end to foreign interference in Sudanese affairs, and a halt to the provision of weapons and mercenaries to the RSF.” The second part of the Sudanese government’s response included; the withdrawal of the Rapid Support Forces from cities and their regrouping in designated locations in three phases: the first phase, to be implemented within 30 days; includes withdrawal from the Blue Nile region, North Kordofan state, and North, Central West Darfur. The second phase will begin 30 days after the completion of the first.
This involves the RSF withdrawing from cities in West Kordofan and South Darfur states. The third phase, to begin 30 days after the second, it includes withdrawal from East and South Kordofan states. The assembly point was designated as Kauda, the stronghold of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N) led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu, which is allied with the RSF. The third part of the response: “included details of the political process through a comprehensive Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue leading to a civilian transitional government that would remain in power until free and fair elections were held.” The Sudanese government’s demand for the RSF to withdraw from the cities it seized and then redeploy to specific locations effectively acknowledges its existence and prevents its dismantling and elimination. It should be noted that the RSF will not easily comply with the government’s demands for withdrawal or negotiations; otherwise, it would not have rebelled, committed atrocities, perpetrated the crimes it committed, and caused the displacement of millions. The only way to resolve the matter is to decisively eliminate the RSF through military force.
8- Upon examining this plan, announced by Massad Boulos, Trump’s senior advisor on Arab and African affairs, on June 20th in Cairo, it becomes clear that these ceasefire plans, and those preceding them, actually serve the US plan to separate Darfur from Sudan. In other words, the plans presented by the US so far aim at two things: first, to portray the RSF as a parallel political entity with an administrative structure and a political program, capable of participating in the negotiations’ table; and second, is the United State aims to completely block the Sudanese army’s recapture of El Fasher and consolidate Hemedti’s control over it through these ceasefire agreements. Therefore, it is essential to view the ceasefire proposals put forward by the US, whether through Massad Boulos personally or through the Quartet, from this perspective: i.e., the gradual preparation for completing the separation of Darfur and linking the issue of negotiations to other conflict zones. Just as the US took its time in separating South Sudan, it is doing the same here! As for the humanitarian crisis in Sudan mentioned in the proposal, it is of no concern to the US or Trump!
9- To consolidate its control over Darfur, the Rapid Support Forces escalated their attacks beyond Darfur, specifically in the three Kordofan states that separate eastern Sudan, including the capital Khartoum, from the five Darfur states now under RSF control. There, warplanes launched airstrikes against RSF positions in several cities and villages to force them to abandon their offensive on El Obeid, the capital of North Kordofan state. It appears that the RSF’s attacks in Kordofan and its attempt to seize El Obeid are aimed at removing the conflict from areas under its control in the Darfur and divert attention away from them causing people to forget about them. The RSF is fighting in other areas, not its primary objective. A similar situation occurred in Blue Nile State on the Ethiopian border, where the Sudanese army announced on 10/7/2026 on its X platform its control over the areas of Deim Saad and Yara in Blue Nile State, in the southeast of the country, after foiling an attack launched by the RSF and the Sudan People’s Liberation.
Movement-North (SPLM-N). This followed its recapture of the strategic city of Kurmuk in Blue Nile State. Thus, it appears that fighting will continue in other areas to solidify the RSF control over all of Darfur, and that Darfur is not subject to negotiation for its return to the government, but rather negotiations will focus on the other areas where fighting is taking place! For this reason, the city of El Obeid has been witnessing violent attacks for weeks. The United Nations warned last May of escalating attacks in the Kordofan region, which claimed the lives of at least 880 civilians between January and April 2026. The Deputy Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Nazhat Shameem Khan, warned during a briefing to the UN Security Council on 16/7/2026, that: The most serious international crimes may be about to occur in El Obeid, the capital of North Kordofan State in southern Sudan. “It is for this Council and all States, to act now, to prevent further atrocities, to take responsibility and ensure that those likely to suffer yet again from what is unfolding are given protection,” she said…” (Anadolu Agency, 16/7/2026). While the duty is to preserve the unity of Sudan and defend every part of it. However, focusing on the Kordofan states while neglecting the Darfur states and failing to demand that the army liberate them from the separatist RSF is tantamount to accepting the separation of Darfur and remaining silent about it, while focusing on other states! Therefore, the fighting is escalating in those areas: “Battles between the Sudanese army and the RSF militia have recently reached their peak in North Kordofan State in south-central Sudan…” (Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, 28/7/2026). Thus, battles continue here and there outside the Darfur states, and the army continues fighting in those areas until the time comes to sign an agreement, at which point negotiations will focus on the withdrawal of these forces from areas outside Darfur, and Darfur will remain separated!
10- In conclusion, we reiterate to you, our people in Sudan, our appeal which we have made to you more than once, sincerely and devotedly to Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw), asking Allah that this appeal may be well heard and answered, and Allah is the Guardian of the righteous:
O our People in the Sudan of the great Islam… The Sudan of Dongola Mosque, the first mosque built by the first Muslims in Sudan… The Sudan of the great Islamic conquest during the era of Caliph Othman, may Allah be pleased with him, where he ordered the governor of Egypt to bring the light of Islam to Sudan, so he sent the soldiers of Islam led by Abdullah Ibn Abi Al-Sarh, and the conquest took place in the year 31 AH. Thus Islam spread rapidly, with Allah’s favour, until it filled all of Sudan: from its north to its south and from its east to its west… Then it continued during the era of the Muslim caliphs… O our people in Sudan, the fighting (Mujahid) Sudan against the British since the year 1896 until the middle of World War I, in 1916, when the strong, pious hero, Ali bin Dinar, the governor of Darfur, was martyred, that scholar and Mujahid who was credited with repairing the meeqat of Medinah and the people of Ash-Sham, Dhul-Hulaifa, and constructing wells of water for the pilgrims, which are called after him to this day, Abyar Ali.
O People of Sudan: we call on you to remedy the matter before regret becomes of no use. and stop this fighting between the conflicting parties, and give support to Hizb ut Tahrir to establish the Khilafah Rashidah (Rightly Guided Caliphate), in it is the honour for Islam and the Muslims and the humiliation of the kufr and the kuffar (disbelief and disbelievers); and gaining of Allah’s pleasure is greater.
[إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَذِكْرَى لِمَنْ كَانَ لَهُ قَلْبٌ أَوْ أَلْقَى السَّمْعَ وَهُوَ شَهِيدٌ]
“Indeed in that is a reminder for whoever has a heart or who listens while he is present [in mind]” [Qaf: 37]
Thus, Sudan returns strong and powerful through Islam, with the banner of Al U’qab flying high, the banner of “There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah:
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيم]
“And on that day the believers will rejoice * at the victory willed by Allah. He gives victory to whoever He wills. For He is the Almighty, Most Merciful” [Ar-Rum: 4-5]
15 Safar 1448 AH
29/7/2026 CE -
Q&A: Defining the Nafs Linguistically and Technically, and What is Meant by Its Death During Sleep
Answer to Question
Defining the Nafs Linguistically and Technically, and What is Meant by Its Death During Sleep
To: Abi Arif
(Translated)Question:
To the esteemed Sheikh: Sheikh Ata bin Khalil Abu al-Rashtah, Ameer of Hizb ut Tahrir, may Allah protect him.
Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatulah Wa Barakatuh,
Our esteemed Sheikh, our teacher, our leader, and our Ameer, whom Allah has honoured, we ask Allah (swt) that you and your noble family may always be in good health, well-being, and blessings, and under the protection and care of Allah (swt). Ameen.
Furthermore, I apologize in advance, as I would like to ask about one matter, which is as follows:
I have found in the books of the eminent scholar Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani, may Allah have mercy on him, the use of the terms: Aql (intellect) and Aqliya (mentality), especially in discussions of the Islamic personality. Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani defined both terms clearly, and in fact, he defined Aql (intellect) first before defining Aqliya (mentality).
However, I did not find a definition of the nafs in the books of Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani, especially in his discussions of the Islamic personality. Rather, I found him defining the disposition (Nafsiyyah)directly.
My question is: What is Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani’s definition of the Nafs—if he has one? Or, what is your esteemed view on the definition and true nature of the Nafs? Is it correct to understand the Nafs as the vital energy?
May Allah reward you for your answer, and we ask Allah (swt) to reward you for all your good deeds with the best reward in this world and the hereafter. Ameen, O Lord of the Worlds
Wa Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatulah Wa Barakatuh
Your brother, Muhammad Arif Billah (Bogor, Indonesia)
I apologize, but I have another question:
Allah (swt) mentions in the Noble Quran that He takes the Nafs during sleep. What is meant by the death of the Nafs during sleep? Does this mean that the Nafs includes the mind’s energy, organic needs, and instincts, which seem to be suspended or “dead” during sleep? May Allah reward you abundantly!
Answer:
Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
Firstly: Yes, there is no specific definition of the word “Nafs” in our books because it is a shared term, and its meanings vary depending on the qareenah (contextual evidence) in which it is used. As for the “disposition,” it is a technical term that has a meaning that accompanies its usage.
To clarify this regarding shared terms, it is mentioned in the section on “The Islamic Personality Volume 3” (Arabic page 164) under the chapter on Shared Meanings:
[A shared term is one where a word is assigned to two different meanings, initially insofar as they are such. A shared term is one assigned to each of two or more meanings, such as the word ‘ayn’ (eye) for the organ of sight, the female slave, and gold, and the word ‘ruh’ (spirit) for the secret of life, the perception of connection with Allah, and Jibreel, and other such shared terms… Shared terms exist in the Arabic language. Abu al-Hasan al-Basri said: “Linguists have used the word “qur’” to refer to both purity and menstruation, which are opposites, thus indicating the existence of shared terms in the language.” It has also occurred in the Glorious Quran, as in the verse: [ثَلَاثَةَ قُرُوءٍ] “Three menstrual periods” and the verse:
[وَاللَّيْلِ إِذَا عَسْعَسَ] “By the night when it darkens”, meaning when it approaches and departs, thus it is shared between the approach and departure of the night. This indicates that shared terms exist in the Arabic language…
Therefore, determining the meaning of a shared term and assigning it to one of its meanings requires qareenah (contextual evidence). It must have a qareenah (contextual evidence) that clarifies the intended meaning.]
The qareenah (contextual evidence) is necessary in determining one of the meanings of the shared term. Thus, with regard to the word (Nafs), it appears with meanings according to the qareenah (contextual evidence), and among these meanings are:
First: The Hadith of Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw), said:
»أَلَمْ تَرَوْا الْإِنْسَانَ إِذَا مَاتَ شَخَصَ بَصَرُهُ؟ قَالُوا: بَلَى، قَالَ: فَذَلِكَ حِينَ يَتْبَعُ بَصَرُهُ نَفْسَهُ«
“Did you not see when the man died and his eyes were fixedly open? He (Abu Huraira) said: Yes. He (saw) said: It is due to the fact that when (the soul leaves the body) his eyesight follows the soul”.
In this Hadith, the sight follows the Nafs. The word Nafs here needs qareenah (contextual evidence) to clarify its meaning, and the qareenah (contextual evidence) is found in the Hadith of Umm Salamah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) entered upon Abu Salamah and his eyes had been opened, so he closed them, then he said:
«إِنَّ الرُّوحَ إِذَا قُبِضَ تَبِعَهُ الْبَصَرُ»
“When the Ruh (soul) is taken, the sight follows it.”
In this Hadith, the sight follows the Ruh (soul), and both Hadiths were narrated by Muslim… This means that the Nafs that the sight follows at death is the Ruh (soul), as mentioned in the Hadith of Umm Salamah, that the sight follows the Ruh (soul), meaning that the Ruh and the Nafs are one and the same.
Secondly: In Lisan al-Arab 6/233, regarding the meaning of the Nafs:
[1- The word “Nafs” is used to refer to the entire human being, as in the expression “I have three Anfus,” and as in the verse of Allah (swt):
[أَنْ تَقُولَ نَفْسٌ يَا حَسْرَتَا عَلَى مَا فَرَّطْتُ فِي جَنْبِ اللَّهِ]
“so that no ˹sinful˺ soul will say ˹on Judgment Day˺, ‘Woe to me for neglecting ˹my duties towards˺ Allah, while ridiculing ˹the truth˺” [Az-Zumar: 56]
2-And the Nafs is blood… and Al Nafs Al Ain, Al Nafis Al Aa’in, Al Nais Al Aa’in, Al Manfoos Al Ma’yoon, Al Nufus Al iyoon, is one who sets his sights on people’s wealth to seize it. Ma Anfasahu is how intense is his eye! This is according to Al-Lihyani. And it is said, “So-and-so was “Nafas” afflicted by the evil eye,” and “Nafastuk bi nafs” is “I afflicted you with the evil eye,” if you afflict him with the evil eye.
3-The term “Tanafasna” and “Tanafsna feeh” means: we envied each other and raced each other over it, and in the Holy Quran:
[وَفِي ذَلِكَ فَلْيَتَنَافَسِ الْمُتَنَافِسُونَ]
“So let whoever aspires to this strive ˹diligently˺” [Al-Mutaffifin: 26] That is, and in that let those who desire, follow through. And in the Hadith of Al-Mughirah, he is exhausted after competing, meaning that competition and rivalry over something made him sick.
And in the Hadith,
«…فَوَاللَّهِ لَا الْفَقْرَ أَخْشَى عَلَيْكُمْ وَلَكِنْ أَخَشَى عَلَيْكُمْ أَنْ تُبْسَطَ عَلَيْكُمْ الدُّنْيَا كَمَا بُسِطَتْ عَلَى مَنْ كَانَ قَبْلَكُمْ فَتَنَافَسُوهَا كَمَا تَنَافَسُوهَا وَتُهْلِكَكُمْ كَمَا أَهْلَكَتْهُمْ»
“By Allah, I am not afraid of your poverty but I am afraid that you will lead a life of luxury as past nations did, whereupon you will compete with each other for it, as they competed for it, and it will destroy you as it destroyed them.” It is from competition, desire for something, and exclusivity…] [End of quote from Lisan al-Arab.q]
As you can see, the meaning of “Nafs” requires qareenah (contextual evidence) within the text. There are other meanings for “Nafs” and its derivatives, each of which also requires qareenah (contextual evidence)
Thus, we haven’t defined the meaning of “Nafs” specifically because its meaning depends on the qareenah (contextual evidence). The meaning varies depending on the qareenah (contextual evidence) within the same text or in another text.
Secondly, regarding your question about the meaning of the verse,
[اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنْفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَى عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَى إِلَى أَجَلٍ مُسَمًّى إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ]
“It is˺ Allah ˹Who˺ calls back the souls ˹of people˺ upon their death as well as ˹the souls˺ of the living during their sleep. Then He keeps those for whom He has ordained death, and releases the others until ˹their˺ appointed time. Surely in this are signs for people who reflect” [Az-Zumar: 42] I outweigh that the meaning is that Allah, the Exalted, takes the Nafs when it dies, taking away all aspects of life. Similarly, He takes the Nafs during sleep, taking away their freedom of movement, discernment, and action, etc
For further clarification, I will mention what is stated in some books of tafseer and some books of linguistics:
1- It is stated in Al-Qurtubi’s interpretation – Surah Az-Zumar (39) – Verse 42:
[اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنْفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَى عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَى إِلَى أَجَلٍ مُسَمًّى إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ]
“It is˺ Allah ˹Who˺ calls back the souls ˹of people˺ upon their death as well as ˹the souls˺ of the living during their sleep. Then He keeps those for whom He has ordained death, and releases the others until ˹their˺ appointed time. Surely in this are signs for people who reflect” [Az-Zumar: 42].
It contains four issues: The first is the saying of Allah:
[اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنْفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا]
“It is˺ Allah ˹Who˺ calls back the souls ˹of people˺ upon their death” That is, He takes them when their appointed times have expired.
[وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا]
“As well as ˹the souls˺ of the living during their sleep”. There is disagreement on this point. It has been said that He (swt) takes them away from their actions while their souls remain in their bodies.
[فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَى عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَى]
“Then He keeps those for whom He has ordained death, and releases the others” And it is the one that is asleep, so He (swt) releases it to act until its appointed time of death. Ibn Isa said… And Saeed bin Jubayr said: Indeed, Allah takes the souls of the dead when they die, and the souls of the living when they sleep, and they recognize each other as much as Allah wills them to recognize each other.
[فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَى عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَى]
“Then He keeps those for whom He has ordained death, and releases the others” That is, he returns it. And on the authority of the Prophet (saw), he said: «كَمَا تَنَامُونَ فَكَذَلِكَ تَمُوتُونَ وَكَمَا تُوقَظُونَ فَكَذَلِكَ تُبْعَثُونَ»“Just as you sleep, you will die, and just as you are awakened, you will be resurrected.” And Umar said: “Sleep is the brother of death.” It was narrated in a Hadith (marfoo’) traced back to the Prophet (saw) on the authority of Jabir ibn Abdullah, it was said: “O Messenger of Allah, do the people of Paradise sleep?” He said: «لَا، النَّوْمُ أَخُو الْمَوْتِ وَالْجَنَّةُ لَا مَوْتَ فِيهَا»“No, sleep is the brother of death, and there is no death in Paradise.” [Reported by Ad-Daraqutni…]
In conclusion:
A- We did not specify the meaning of “Nafs” because its meaning is dependent on qareenah (contextual evidence). The meaning varies depending on the qareenah (contextual evidence) within the same text or another text.
B- I find it most preponderant that the meaning of the noble verse:
[اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنْفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا وَالَّتِي لَمْ تَمُتْ فِي مَنَامِهَا فَيُمْسِكُ الَّتِي قَضَى عَلَيْهَا الْمَوْتَ وَيُرْسِلُ الْأُخْرَى إِلَى أَجَلٍ مُسَمًّى إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ]
“It is˺ Allah ˹Who˺ calls back the souls ˹of people˺ upon their death as well as ˹the souls˺ of the living during their sleep. Then He keeps those for whom He has ordained death, and releases the others until ˹their˺ appointed time. Surely in this are signs for people who reflect” [Az-Zumar: 42], is that Allah, the Exalted, takes the Nafs when it dies, taking away all aspects of life. Similarly, He takes the Nafs during sleep, taking away their freedom of movement, discernment, and action, etc.
This is what I see to be the most likely understanding regarding this matter, and Allah Knows Best and is Most Wise.
Your Brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah14 Safar 1448 AH
28/7/2026 CEThe Link to the Answer from the Ameer’s Facebook page
